Perhaps a Divorce Is In Order

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Major B, Jun 15, 2003.

  1. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since there are many of us who would like to discuss Bible versions without having to deal with the whole KJV-MV argument and the associated idiocies, I propose that we have a separate forum for the KJV-MV threads, and banish forever that species of argument from this forum.
     
  2. mesly

    mesly
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen!
     
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Little history: When the BB began in June 2000, there were only a coupla forums. When a subject was raised again and again, it was decided to have a separate forum for that topic . . so folks could choose to go there OR choose to ignore it.

    Like - Calvinism, Creationism, Theology
    and
    Versions

    SO . . we are NOT going to subdivide Versions, since there would not be much to talk about if there was a KJV (whatever revision) Forum that was a love fest for Jacobeans, and a MV (whichever preferred) that would not have much to talk about and no one to fuss with.

    MY ADVICE - If you feel like MV'ers are heretics or that Onlies are bibliolaters, come by and read the same-old-same-old.

    If not? AVOID THIS FORUM! I did for a year and am back only because of being asked to help moderate it. It stinks up the BB and for 99%, we are better off avoiding it like a skunk crossing the road. :rolleyes:

    And, of course, it is ALL THE FAULT OF THE ________ (fill in your preference) [​IMG]
     
  4. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Several years ago I set up a discussion board for discussion focused on Bible versions (I have since handed the reigns over to others). I had two main forums: one where topics dealing with KJV-onlyism were not allowed, and another forum where they were. Everyone was welcome in both, and it allowed discussions about version/translation issues to take place in the first forum without worry they would degenerate into the typical KJV-only merry-go-round debates. The second forum was still the busiest though. [​IMG] It worked out really good, and still operates in this format without problem.
     
  5. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    I still don't see what all the fuss is about, I have the Holy Bible and the MV's have a book. I'm settled, stedfast and secure in the Word of God. [​IMG] :eek: [​IMG] :D [​IMG] :eek: [​IMG]

    Post Script: [​IMG]
     
  6. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, Bob, I have no big bone to pick with either side. I'd just like to be able to talk about versions and translations without the nonsense; I will definitely take your advice. The post just before this one illustrates why.
     
  7. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yep. It's called God's Word [​IMG]
     
  8. Ben W

    Ben W
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,868
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem as I see it with the KJVO stuff is that the discussions degenerate into name calling or rude remarks within one page. Which is really lame. :rolleyes:

    I think that threads concerned with KJVO should have to be done like the Creation / Evolution forum and checked prior to being made public. Some threads that have gone on in here on KJVO are worse in conduct than on an Athiesm forum, yet no doubt there are people who are proud of that. [​IMG]
     
  9. go2church

    go2church
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    Glad that there won't be another needless division. Just wish you would have applied this rule before you started the "Fundamentalist (but we really mean Dispensationalist) Forum"
     
  10. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    The best thing that can happen is for the rules to be enforced strictly and without bias, and that is happening. In the last week, 3 BB members have been banned and 1 suspended for consistent rule violations, particularly as occuring here in the BVT forum.

    Be warned folks. The garbage isn't going to be tolerated. I suggest each of you refer to the BB rules and the BVT posting guidelines.
     
  11. go2church

    go2church
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    OOOh I'm shaking!!!
     
  12. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Brother GotoChurch, you've been around a while, so I hope that that was really in jest. :D Usually a silly icon :rolleyes: can help show the spirit [​IMG] of your comment even when folks can't hear the tone of voice. :eek:

    If not, we have a vote for a suspension. I'll give you a chance to change your comment or show it was in humor.

    And I'm not joking. :mad:
     
  13. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    Dr. Bob,
    I do not understand your previous post. Surely, you are not saying that if someone, like the poster you are referring to, shows a dislike for this new method of rule enforcement and expresses this belief without using profanity or being vulgar that they are in danger of being suspended.

    What's next the thought police?
     
  14. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    i think this current batch of moderators much more evenhanded than about a year ago, when posts were mysteriously snipped n threatening PMs sent out.

    it's just shameful to sneer at the ref when cautioned; yet in this case, u see the ref giving a second chance, to use an emoticon/icon to correct an *attitude.*

    don't worry, u missed the thot police by a year!

    ;)
     
  15. Harald

    Harald
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Messages:
    578
    Likes Received:
    0
  16. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    Forever,
    I will agree that it has improved over what it was a year ago with this group of moderators. I think that, overall, they do an excellent job. This is just one place where I think that threatening to suspend someone because of a silly comment is, shall I say, extreme. [​IMG]
     
  17. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Terry, the post in question is a violation of the user's agreement every BB member signs to get membership, along with rules 2 and 3.
     
  18. go2church

    go2church
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
  19. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Terry, Moderators are trying diligently to keep order and civility on the BB without become too overbearing.

    When a reaction comes of cynical defiance or (hopefully form the icons given by go2) humorous tongue-in-cheek, we must respond. If it's fun, we repond with a chuckle like you do! But if not . .

    This is not an unmoderated food-fight or free-for-all. He does not have to be vulgar or profane to show a defiant and not-gonna-listen-to-you attitude.

    Spanked my kids when they were "mouthy". But I agree, it is a fine line, and I don't want to jump on a poster just because I'm having a rough day and might be thin-skinned. Appreciate the good reminder.
     

Share This Page

Loading...