Maestroh
26th April 2008, 10:01 AM
I made a mistake, and I will now have to face the consequences.
About two weeks ago, I was on YouTube responding to some different things when a particular poster went after me. Those of you who know YT know that you only have 500 characters to state something, and those threads are easy to get lost inside of trying to figure out who's being addressed. So I challenged a particular KJV Onlyist to a debate.
The mistake is not the position; it is quite easy to demonstrate the KJV Only position is fraught with double standards to everyone except perhaps the advocate. However, I'm now finding out that the
KJV Onlyist is a Riplinger-type, not the Waite-Fuller-Cloud type. So I will probably be accused of picking
on someone who is an easy target. Please note that I did not know that at the time, which is understandable - most of them use the same vocabulary and despite various nuances, there is a difference between being a KJVO advocate, a KJV advocate, and a TR-MT advocate.
One more thing: despite the claims of Waite and Ruckman that their positions are 'different,' they are
only different in DEGREE, not KIND. Waite refuses to acknowledge the KJV has any errors as does Ruckman. The only difference is that Waite does not call his KJV 'advanced revelvation.' But he may as well! If the TR disagrees with the KJV at a point, he sides with the KJV, and he opts for a TR (1894) that didn't even exist in 1611 to be his 'Greek text.'
But I will now suffer the consequences.
Just waiting to hear back from a mod.
About two weeks ago, I was on YouTube responding to some different things when a particular poster went after me. Those of you who know YT know that you only have 500 characters to state something, and those threads are easy to get lost inside of trying to figure out who's being addressed. So I challenged a particular KJV Onlyist to a debate.
The mistake is not the position; it is quite easy to demonstrate the KJV Only position is fraught with double standards to everyone except perhaps the advocate. However, I'm now finding out that the
KJV Onlyist is a Riplinger-type, not the Waite-Fuller-Cloud type. So I will probably be accused of picking
on someone who is an easy target. Please note that I did not know that at the time, which is understandable - most of them use the same vocabulary and despite various nuances, there is a difference between being a KJVO advocate, a KJV advocate, and a TR-MT advocate.
One more thing: despite the claims of Waite and Ruckman that their positions are 'different,' they are
only different in DEGREE, not KIND. Waite refuses to acknowledge the KJV has any errors as does Ruckman. The only difference is that Waite does not call his KJV 'advanced revelvation.' But he may as well! If the TR disagrees with the KJV at a point, he sides with the KJV, and he opts for a TR (1894) that didn't even exist in 1611 to be his 'Greek text.'
But I will now suffer the consequences.
Just waiting to hear back from a mod.