"Fun" with a group of KJV 1611 onlyists

  • Thread starter Thread starter MVH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JRJ26,
Welcome to the insanity!!! I am registered as miko33. The only reason I even stay is for the off chance that someone who may be lurking at that forum, with doubts about his/her faith in the Church, may see Catholics defend their faith. Perhaps those of us there may make someone think twice before joining their cult.

The second reason I stay is to practice apologetics. I am new to it, but would like to become a lot better at it. I am learning a lot about defending the faith. In fact, I have learned more about the Catholic Church and other protestant denominations in the process. For example, I did not know that founders of the reformation were so “Catholic”. Interesting…
 
mvh, the insanity really does provide some humor for my evening,lol. sigh, the things people believe…

genesis, hahahahaha, that was funny. Imagine the response if you posted that there…(i would do it if I planned on not visiting it anymore.).
 
40.png
DaveBj:
Does their Bible have the deuterocanonicals in it?

No?

Then it’s not a 1611 KJV; it’s most likely a 4th revision of ?1769? (haven’t had a chance to look up the year).

1611-KJV-onlyests don’t have a clue about that.

DaveBj
Click to expand...
dave, did you start the thread on “How’d we get the KJV”? lol, i bet they’re all rushing to check various anti-Catholic websites to see how to respond. If only they had the “views” column,haha.
 
FWIW, whenever I see a KJVOist spouting vituperation, I distinctly hear the voice of Peter Ruckman. He’s the primary source for this weird KJV doctrine, and many who follow the doctrine also imitate Ruckman’s language. He was using such language all by himself at one time, but over the decades he has spun off a horde of imitators who think that it is a sign of loyalty to Christ to savagely insult everyone who differs from them.

Most Fundamentalists shun these vicious people. Some of us rebuke them, but that’s like kicking the fence at a barking dog (except that the dog will probably be more reasonable).
 
Argh, that site always causes my blood pressure to reach stroke status, so try to avoid it.

I always have to laugh at the KJV only folks. As someone who is decsended from one of the translators, I just shake my head. It’s a translation of a translation. It ain’t perfect. :rolleyes:

and SSV, thanks for that example. Just what was needed. :clapping:
 
LOLOLOL, LMAO

"Quote:
JRJ26
Registered User
Posts: 8
(8/2/05 10:42 pm)
Reply | Edit | Del Re: How’d we get the KJV?​

Didn’t God hand down the original Bible as the KJV? I always thought someone found the original golden plates of the Bible(KJV) buried in the ground…oh wait, that’s Mormonism,sorry

JRJ26;
One more, just one more Catholic Smart Mouth Childish no nothin remark
and you will not post here again
Understood ???
"

WOW. I’m not sure how to respond to it without a “catholic smart mouth childish no(sic) nothin remark”…hahahaha, sigh, sometimes I’m too smart for my own good…j/k.
 
Hi all!

Cairisti, you’re welcome.

Here’s another moral-lurking-in-a-textual-ambiguity-that-the-KJV-bumbles:

Genesis 44:22 (part of Judah’s plea to Joseph) says:
“…for if he should leave his father, he will die.”
Click to expand...
(Versions such as the KJV, NKJV & RSV which read, “…for if he should leave his father, his father will die,” are wrong. The original Hebrew (v’azav et aviv va’met is ambiguous & does not specify who would die; the translation I have given is more accurate.)

Some of our Sages interpret this passage metaphorically and say that if we leave our Father in Heaven (as a Jew, I would say, our Father in Heaven whose Torah is the source of all life, see Deuteronomy 32:46-47), then we will die.

Be well!

ssv 👋
 
My few encounters with the KJV Onlyists have convinced me that they are too involved with their own little world of confusion, that they can’t bother with the facts…
I mentioned to one that I have my grandmother’s Dutch Bible…He asked me if it was a King James…
I only wish this was a joke.
Good luck to those brave souls who take on this lot. They are indeed a cult. I fear for their souls, considering the hatred, bigotry, & pride they flaunt…
 
40.png
MVH:
I found this site that had a forum that was bashing Catholics terribly. Being very new to apologetics, I signed up to defend my faith. It was quite a frustrating experience to say the least.
Click to expand...
I know what you mean, some of us have been reading that site for years. The best and brightest Catholics get banned or leave because their evidence is ingnored/ridiculed/twisted or called ‘UNBIBLICAL’.
It wasn’t so much that I became discouraged, it was more along the lines that they just would not look at what you wrote so much as attacked the messanger every time something was written that they don’t agree with.
Click to expand...
Standard Operating Proceedure.
Has anyone here ever dealt with a KJV onlyist (1611 only to boot) regarding apoligetics?
Click to expand...
There has always been a KJV only hint lurking there, but now any ‘Bible quote’ MUST be from the KJB.
My sign on was miko33
Click to expand...
Read your posts, you did OK.

Kotton
 
40.png
MVH:
I found this site that had a forum that was bashing Catholics terribly. Being very new to apologetics, I signed up to defend my faith. It was quite a frustrating experience to say the least. It wasn’t so much that I became discouraged, it was more along the lines that they just would not look at what you wrote so much as attacked the messanger every time something was written that they don’t agree with.

Has anyone here ever dealt with a KJV onlyist (1611 only to boot) regarding apoligetics? I would be interested to read about your experiences (as well as if you made any headway) with these types of people.

For those interested, the site I was at was:

p197.ezboard.com/fformercatholicsforchristfrm1

My sign on was miko33
Click to expand...
I work in a mainly protestant book store (even after reverting back to the RCC). I’ve only encountered one man who was staunch KJV only. He yelled at me for not carrying more items that had KJV quotes on them. He also yelled at me for carrying other versions of the bible and was totally appalled that we had a few Catholic bibles. I found him intriguing. It didn’t matter to him that I wasn’t the buyer, owner, manager, nothing. I should not allow this heresy into the store. I sincerely questioned his beliefs, not to belittle him but to try and understand where he was coming from. I couldn’t make heads or tails over what he believed.

A few weeks after this incident my husband was with his brother downtown with the video camera just taking shots of the area that was being worked on. They came home and showed me the video they took of some crazy guy on the street corner. It was the customer from the store. He was screaming at passers by about the dangers of hellfire if they don’t get saved, waving his big bible around while the other person he was with stood quietly praying (I assume). The cops came and told him to wrap it up, the stores were complaining about his being there, he tried witnessing to the cops but of course they didn’t stand for it.

99% of the police in my city are RC.

That’s my story.

Oh, I did meet the pastor of this guy’s church eventually. TOTALLY different from what the zealot was like. But then again once under the power of the HS, I bet he preaches hellfire and damnation…
 
Former Catholics For Christ… where to begin?

I’ve been posting over there for several years under the user name “Former Protestant For Christ”, a name which they accused of being hateful and demonic.

Sometimes I post there to hopefully help even just one of these people question their false stereotypes and groundless assumptions. Other times I just troll for amusement purposes only. Often times I have to leave for a while to keep from getting uncharitable.

Deborah1611, one of the moderators over there, once told me that the reason God gave His only inspired Word in King James English was obvious:

“Sheesh, Frank, obviouly God wrote the Bible in English because it’s the easiest language to understand! Have you ever heard people speaking those other silly languages? They talk too fast and you can’t understand a word they are saying! Sheesh! My grandson is only 3 and he can already understand English!”

That is almost a direct quote. It was several years ago. Anyway, how does one deal with ignorance on this level?

For fun while you are over there, remember this list of dialogue rules I put together and post over there from time to time:

General Rules of Catholic / “Bible Christian” Dialogue
  1. Catholics must refrain from using derogatory names for Christians of other denominations. Catholics may be called any name you like.
  2. When a Catholic quotes Scripture, it will be considered “out of context”.
    When a Bible Christian quotes Scripture, it will be considered “God’s interpretation”.
  3. Catholics do not have the right to explain the meaning and context of Scripture verses.
    Bible Christians reserve the right to explain the meaning and context of Scripture verses.
  4. Whenever a Catholic’s understanding of a particular doctrine or Scripture is different than a Bible Christian’s understanding, it is the general policy that the Catholic is rejecting God’s Holy Word.
  5. Catholics are not allowed, at any time, to employ the rules of logic.
    Bible Christians are allowed to fallaciously employ the rules of logic when they believe it benefits their argument.
  6. If a Catholic either asks a difficult question or points out a fallacious argument of a Bible Christian, we will revert to rule #4 and determine that the Catholic is rejecting God’s Holy Word.
  7. Although Catholics accept and cherish the Bible as God’s holy, inspired, WRITTEN Word, they will henceforth be referred to as “Bible Rejecters”.
  8. Under no circumstances will a Catholic be allowed to speak in an insulting manner concerning Bible Christian doctrines or beliefs. Since Catholic doctrines and beliefs are so obviously erroneous and anti-Christian, insulting comments about them seem only natural.
  9. It will be assumed that all Catholics apologists have a hidden agenda.
  10. The sins of individual Catholics in the world will be considered evidence for the apostasy of ALL Catholics. The sins of individual Bible Christians in the world will be considered the sins of individual Bible Christians.
  11. When someone who loves the Catholic Church explains the Church’s teachings, it will be assumed that their explanation is skewed and biased. When someone who hates the Catholic Church explains the Church’s teachings, it will be assumed that their explanation is authoritative and unbiased.
  12. Books written by pro-Catholic authors will be considered dubious and orchestrated deceptions. Books written by anti-Catholic authors will be considered the result of careful, scholarly research.
  13. All historical evidence is strictly prohibited unless it seems to promote Bible Christian beliefs.
  14. Scriptures that literally support Catholic beliefs will be understood metaphorically.
    Scriptures that metaphorically support Catholic beliefs will be understood literally.
  15. Bible Christians are freely permitted to violate the law of non-contradiction (A and not A cannot both be true at the same time and in the same sense), especially if the contradiction seems to prove Catholicism wrong.
  16. The writings of early Church Fathers and pre-Reformation theologians will be considered “the dribble of feeble-minded men”-- unless a particular quote seems to suggest a Bible Christian belief.
  17. When the doctrines of Reformation leaders oppose Catholic doctrines, said leaders will be considered “heroes of God’s Word”. When the doctrines of Reformation leaders oppose present-day Bible Christian doctrines, said leaders will be considered “still under the influence of Rome”.
  18. If one Bible Christian disagrees on doctrine with another Bible Christian, he too will be considered a “Bible Rejecter”, unless, of course, he is condemning Catholicism, in which case he will be considered a “true brother in Christ”.
 
Hello Frank,

Welcome aboard! I saw they renamed you to “Former Pretender for Christ.” :rolleyes:

Just out of curiosity, how in the world have you managed to stay on that board? It looks like Catholics are booted as soon as they open their mouths over there. Do they just keep you around as their “token Catholic?” Someone to beat up on when there are no new members on whom they can vent their frustrations? 😉

After reading Deborah’s posts over there, I can well believe that she said that about English. You are right. How do you begin to approach ignorance that profound?

My youngest daughter was a year old when we moved to Italy for three years - by the time we left, she spoke English and Italian and understood the Sicilian dialect spoken by our dearest friends. (Italian heavily influenced by Arabic, Latin and Spanish - so much so that it’s not easily recognizable as Italian)

So I guess my daughter was a prodigy compared to her 3-year old grandson? No! It’s because the facility for learning languages is strongest just after birth and slowly declines in most people until they are about seven. A child will naturally learn to speak the languages to which they are exposed during those years. A child raised in a bi-lingual or tri-lingual home will switch between languages with ease and think in all languages.

Thanks very much for the rules - always good to have a road map. 😉
 
I would not waste my time over there. First of all you are casting pearls to the swine. Second someone from this forum went over there and picked up a bunch of spy ware in their computer.
 
40.png
Cairisti:
Argh, that site always causes my blood pressure to reach stroke status, so try to avoid it.

I always have to laugh at the KJV only folks. As someone who is decsended from one of the translators, I just shake my head. It’s a translation of a translation. It ain’t perfect. :rolleyes:

and SSV, thanks for that example. Just what was needed. :clapping:
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, these KJV-only folks give a very good Bible a very bad name. The KJV is (or certainly was in its day) a very fine translation. I frequently quote it because there are passages that render the Greek better than some of our more “correct” versions.

From which translator are you descended?
 
Ummm, if they’re going by the KJV 1611 only, shouldn’t the KJV 1611 *tell them *to go by the KJV 1611 only? Otherwise, aren’t they going by something *outside *the KJV 1611?

Frank, loved your rules! I hope you don’t mind that I printed them up for my notebook of Internet Humor. Please consider it an honor–not much makes it into there.
 
Thanks, Elizabeth.

I don’t know how I don’t get banned over there. Maybe because of my post count. I’ve been visiting there for several years. I actually started a thread a few weeks ago entitled, “Please Ban Me!” I think it almost worked as reverse-psychology. Some of the moderators said they wouldn’t ban me since I *wanted * to get banned…

Don’t worry, I’ve got some names for them too. I always call KJB Only, one of the moderators, “KGB Only”. I don’t think he’s ever noticed the difference…

Kay Cee,

thanks for the kind words. Please enjoy the rule list.
 
40.png
mercygate:
Unfortunately, these KJV-only folks give a very good Bible a very bad name.
From which translator are you descended?
Click to expand...
I do think that the KJV does make the English language sound beautiful. 😃

And according to my late great-auntie, Gerard Beekman was a translator. 🙂 (And yes, his grandkids ended up in NYC 😃 )
 
Frank Hogrebe:
Deborah1611, one of the moderators over there, once told me that the reason God gave His only inspired Word in King James English was obvious:
"… They talk too fast and you can’t understand a word they are saying! Sheesh! My grandson is only 3 and he can already understand English!"
Click to expand...
English is the easiest to understand, but his reasoning is the hardest to understand. when I was 2 I can understand Chinese and Chinese is spoken much slower than English. does that make Chinese the easiest language?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top