liberalism

I knew we would all be gay as soon
as Jonny came marching home again

 

Maybe you're confusing us with this guy (click here) (James 2:3)

 

"Ok, fine. You guys are gay.",Providential

Here we go again! The KJVO name calling has officially started! Hold your children back from the PC it might get Ruckman ugly! <---LOL

Gay? How so? Are you using the real meaning or the slander meaning of the word gay?

natters,

I'm still rolling! Good one!

 

I see that some people know even less about the Democratic Party than they do about KJO far rightwing ultra-liberalism. A Republican President named Hoover sold the United States to the devil and F. D. R. snatched it away from him. If it were not for F. D. R. your last meal, if you got on at all, would have been in a soup kitchen sponsored by the Roman Catholic Church. And if some Godly IFB Pastors don’t start to worker harder to save our IFB churches from the far right-wing ultra-liberalism of KJO, we will soon see a greater chasm in our Baptist churches than we do in the U.S. Congress today.

 

Amity wrote,

Amity,

I don’t know about your church, but in my church we agree with H. L. Mencken that words like “shoot” and “heck” are profanity and unsuitable for polite conversation even in bars and pool halls, and most certainly on Christian message boards, and I am a little too conservative to not be offended by those who are so liberal with their language. Perhaps if you would change over to a more conservative translation of the Bible that does not take such liberties with our English language, you would develop a taste for clean, wholesome speech.

 

Right wing ultra-liberalism?


I about fell out of my chair!
That is a good one Craig.

Stop it! STOP! Yer killing me!

HARDEE HAR HAR HAR!

In HIS service;
Jim

 

David J said:

"Here we go again! The KJVO name calling has officially started! Hold your children back from the PC it might get Ruckman ugly! <---LOL
Gay? How so? Are you using the real meaning or the slander meaning of the word gay?"

Thank you David, for reacting exactly as I thought some might, when a pejorative term is used to describe you, the first impression is quite insulting isn't it? Calling us liberals is every bit as insulting and inaccurate. The little explanations others have given defending this slander is idiotic.

You see, you don't know how I meant it do you? You assume it was meant to insult.

Nay, It was mean to INSTRUCT you all how stupid and insulting this thread really is, and why defending the slander of calling KJV people liberals needs to stop, it is sinful.

 

I am a KJV person and no one has called me a liberal, and I don't feel insulted or sinned against.

 

Providential,

I don't agree with your post using "gay" simply because that can be taken as slander. It was negative and uncalled for on this forum.

I believe that you can do better than that my brother.

Now as for a liberal goes to define the KJVO doctrine, KJVOism is very liberal.

1. It has no scripture to stand upon

2. It is against traditional Baptist views.

3. It relies upon revisionist history and the distortion of facts.

4. Many KJVOist claims every edition of the KJV is perfect while ignoring the KJV has gone through many changes.

5. Double standards are a must for KJVOism to live.

6. KJVO leadership like Ruckman (the man who see a 10 foot tall black lipped AC) Riplinger (told many lies in her books, Mrs. "god" "and" who claimed that God was the author of NABV and she was the secretary, Sam Gipp (who can't figure out the Lucifer means star of the morning or morning star), etc... hold to some very liberal views and/or heretical views. Many KJVO supporters ignore and pardon Ruckman, Riplinger, and Hyles but if they were MV users the same KJVOist that pardon them would scream and cry about their heresies and lies. We would have KJVO authors writing books about these heresies if the origin was from a MV user.

7. KJVOism ignores what the AV1611 translators said in the Message to the Reader. KJVOism ignores the marginal notes in the AV1611.

8. KJVOism ignores the fact that the AV1611 contained the Apocrypha. Some KJVOist go as far as to even lie about it.

9. KJVOism covers a multitude of sins and heresies as long as the person is a KJVO. The same pardon is not given to W&H and Bruce Metzger.

10. Many KJVOist blindly follow the leadership without questioning the sources. They simply parrot what they hear and read. *They just follow Ruckman’s lies about the LXX while never searching the well documented facts. It’s not hard to research the facts.

*Please note that not every KJVO is guilty of this.

11. KJVOism was started by a SDA and pushed forward by two dishonest Baptist. Fuller tried to hide the fact Wilkinson was a SDA and Fuller did not give credit to those he qouted like the Prophetess of SDAism. The movement was started in darkness and deception.

I could go on but you get the point. Without compromising something KJVOism would crumble beneath its own double standards and methods used to condemn *MV and the people who use them.

*I’m only referring to the extreme type of KJVOist

I’m not attacking anyone here but I am hoping that KJVOist here will research and think about what I’m saying.

In Christ,

David J

[ February 04, 2005, 03:40 PM: Message edited by: David J ]

 

DavidJ:
Thanks for the clarification at least.
You at least state that the "extreme" are 'such and so'. I am still unconvinced that KJVo are liberal. Simply because we reject the reasons given, and we reject the sources given for refuting our stand. Much the same way the other side rejects our authorities for making the stand.
Interesting how that works huh?
One side says "Our guys say (this)."
The other side says "Well, OUR guys say (that)."
And ne'er the 'twain shall meet, this side of heaven.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Hi Jim,

I'm a bit curious who you (i.e., specifically you) mean by "our authorities." Would you care to enlighten me regarding this specific matter?

CBTS

 

Isn't it a little silly to talk about plagarism in Bible translations? Assuming the same Greek/Hebrew texts are used and the translators are worthy of the name all such translations should be essentially identical, particularly if the language has not changed.

 

Hi Jim,

I'm a bit curious who you (i.e., specifically you) mean by "our authorities." Would you care to enlighten me regarding this specific matter?

CBTS

</font>[/QUOTE]_________________________________________________

Craig;
Frankly, NO I would not care to enlighten you on this matter. That horse has been ridden to death.
You know fairly well that the conflict as I outlined it is true.
Therefore I see no need nor have any desire to jump on that horsee again.
Thanks for the offer though!
In HIS service;
jim

 

Does your comment apply to Gail Riplinger?

Gail Riplinger wrote: "Every new version has plagiarized this and many other succinct KJV
word" (IN AWE OF THY WORD, p. 279).

Gail Riplinger wrote: "The NKJV's only match was stolen from the KJV" (IN AWE, p. 381).

Riplinger accused new versions of plagiarizing or stealing words from the KJV while ignoring the fact that the KJV took even more words from the earlier English Bibles of which it was a revision.

 

I did not post the remark about being you guys being gay to insult anyone. There is no malice in me. I already explained that I did it to show you why calling us liberal is offensive and inaccurate. Today liberal means left wing, anti-God, anti-authority, pro abortion, pro gay, left wing whacko.

It doesn't matter what it meant 200 years, today it is a great insult to be a Christan and called that by another believer.

Now if you don't understand this, my second explanation, I can't help you guys. This thread is uncalled for and stupid.

 

Perhaps you can send me a private message to enlighten me as to whom you personally believe to be authorities who support KJOism. We don’t have to argue about this, I just want to know who these people are that you are talking about.

I have NO idea what you are talking about.

Leave out the horse and just tell me the names of the people whom you are talking about.

 

Lacy
"Next to your computer you have a copy of scripture that absolutely rocked history like no other version,"
"
Dr. Bob has a copy of the Vulgate there as well?

Brother Ed
"My pastor is a conservative religiously
not a religious liberal.
My pastor is a liberal politically
not a political conservative.
Ain't that wierd? "
"
Makes perfect sense to me.

James_Newman
"I'm sure that Catholics would consider salvation by grace alone to be liberal."
"
Not persé, there are plenty (very influential) RC theologians who hold to that notion. Saint Augustinus anyone.

 

Providential: "Today liberal means left wing, anti-God, anti-authority, pro abortion, pro gay, left wing whacko.

It doesn't matter what it meant 200 years, today it is a great insult to be a Christan and called that by another believer."

Exactly the same argument i use to promote the
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) over the
KJV1769. Strange that 200+ years makes a difference
over one specific word but not over a whole set of
words. Of course it makes a difference.

I think i may need to go unstraighten my bowels

 

Ed go ahead.

I am not against true updating of the archaisms in the KJV. What sane man would be? But so far, the Christian(and the apostate Christian "scholarly" world within Christendom) has been TOTALLY RECKLESS and destructive in attitude and actions. They can go fly a kite.

I have not looked at the Holman version. Is it based on the TR?

I understand that the KJV-21 is a true "updating" of the English, that was careful and respectful of the Grand Old Version. It only comes in paragraph form, and I don't like some of the fonts. They need to publish it in a verse by verse format.

 

[non-Baptist post snipped]

[ February 07, 2005, 10:16 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob ]