Is KJVO a mental disorder?

bibleprotector said:
I could explain the prophecy of Psalm 12 entirely, and you will have some excuse about the passage being restricted to David's time.
Click to expand...

If this was about the Reformation, then I would expect to see undeniable truths IN this passage.

This is not a problem about us not understanding the passage. The problem lies with you.

False teachers always claim their opponents are not spiritual enough to understand.

The problem is you are not BIBLICAL enough to prove!
 
And for his next trick, we'll learn how Santa and Satan are the same entity!
 
FSSL said:
If this was about the Reformation, then I would expect to see undeniable truths IN this passage.
Click to expand...

It is more about Infidelity. But of course you don't SEE the truth of that interpretation in this passage. Whenever God was promising to rise on behalf of the poor, lied at folks, somehow it doesn't apply to this time.

FSSL said:
This is not a problem about us not understanding the passage. The problem lies with you.
Click to expand...

No, the problem lies with you. Your method of explaining away Scripture is wrong.

FSSL said:
False teachers always claim their opponents are not spiritual enough to understand.
Click to expand...

The Bible actually said you would know them by their fruits. I am encouraging belief in the Bible, belief in the Reformation, rejection of Infidelity and so therefore my fruits cannot be bad.

FSSL said:
The problem is you are not BIBLICAL enough to prove!
Click to expand...

The problem is that you have equated the word "BIBLICAL" to mean modernism. When you say "BIBLICAL", you mean, modernistic, you mean, God's truth is not fully here in English which we understand, you mean we have to go to the Hebrew and Greek language, you mean foisting present day meanings onto those languages. You mean locking the Bible to some meaning back in those days, which you make up today. And so, what you laud as learned, scholarly, academic, and "BIBLICAL" is in fact reprehensible abomination, for it doubts the power of God, rejects the perfection of Scripture as presently manifest, and fights against the idea that Bible speaks to and about and powerfully today about today.
 
My so-called modernism does not...
... attempt to claim Psalm 12 is about the Reformation
... attempt to interpret 12.7 with a double-meaning.
... does not rely on demogaugery to debate

When you come here and tell us we will not understand because we have a lack of spirituality to understand your private interpretation... it does give us a chuckle.

You cannot allow the KJV to speak for itself. What kind of protection can a guy like you offer a Bible where he twists and foists alien ideas on it?
 
FSSL said:
You cannot allow the KJV to speak for itself. What kind of protection can a guy like you offer a Bible where he twists and foists alien ideas on it?
Click to expand...

This is the exact response that I expected you would give. And now all that is remaining is how you will explain away the meaning as not being a prophecy, but just having a meaning to the time it was written, to the original author/audience.
 
I will provide an exegetical analysis of this passage by my day's end.

I will show you how to protect the word from the intrusion of false ideas.
 
FSSL said:
... does not rely on demogaugery to debate
Click to expand...

That is, of course, exactly the kind of accusation the passage prophesied the prideful would make against genuine believers. When it said "puff", you have done it in exact fulfilment of Bible prophecy, puffing about how superior your interpretation is over my view.

This is real reason why you cannot let the prophecy be true, because it does indeed convince your conscience.
 
[quote author=bibleprotector]The Bible actually said you would know them by their fruits. I am encouraging belief in the Bible, belief in the Reformation, rejection of Infidelity and so therefore my fruits cannot be bad.[/quote]

Oh please. That's not even what Jesus was talking about.  Have you provided groceries to a hungry family?  Have you bought clothes for their children?  Do your neighbours call you when they need money,  babysitters,  a vehicle,  or whatever because they know you'll stop doing whatever it was you were doing to help them?  Have you made legitimate sacrifices so someone can have?  Have you ever humbled yourself so others can be built up? 

Those are the kinds of fruit that display a life of faith in the Christ.
 
FSSL said:
I will provide an exegetical analysis of this passage by my day's end.
Click to expand...

I suspect, and by your use of the terminology of "exegetical analysis", that you mean to cast doubt upon the Scripture, to explain it away, to make it of none effect.

FSSL said:
I will show you how to protect the word from the intrusion of false ideas.
Click to expand...

Then it better be by uplifting the Word and Spirit, not by following after the patterns of Fairbairn, Tenney, Mickelsen, Ramm, Stuart & Fee etc.
 
rsc2a said:
Those are the kinds of fruit that display a life of faith in the Christ.
Click to expand...

While I agree with charity, your view seems to be of a different denominational background. You seem to be advocating social justice, which is quite a different concept to Biblical faith (e.g. Mark 11:23).
 
And you are advocating for apostasy while discounting the needy mentioned in the very chapter you are discussing.

You might want to try reading Mark again.  "Rise up and walk" seems to be pretty close to "Your sins are forgiven".

As far as denomination, just put me in the "What would Jesus have us do" camp. Seems he's a lot more concerned with feeding hungry people than Bible versions.
 
rsc2a said:
"Rise up and walk" seems to be pretty close to "Your sins are forgiven".
Click to expand...

Sounds like unbelief to me (i.e. that you doubt the real meaning of Mark 11:23, and seem to imply a non-literal meaning to the healing of the lame which is nowhere in context ... Luke 5:23). The fig tree had no fruits on it and Jesus cursed it. Literally. And also it is symbolic of what happened to Israel under the Romans.
 
rsc2a said:
Seems he's a lot more concerned with feeding hungry people than Bible versions.
Click to expand...

More false doctrine.

Job 23:12 Neither have I gone back from the commandment of his lips; I have esteemed the words of his mouth more than my necessary food.

Lu 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Mt 6:31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
Mt 6:32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.
Mt 6:33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Mt 15:32 Then Jesus called his disciples unto him, and said, I have compassion on the multitude, because they continue with me now three days, and have nothing to eat: and I will not send them away fasting, lest they faint in the way.

In that last example Jesus and the people cared more about teaching than eating. The provision of food was secondary to the Word.
 
bibleprotector said:
The Reformation was not made up by me.
Click to expand...

No one said it was. You, however, are responsible for your own interpretations of the Bible.
 
bibleprotector said:
I could explain the prophecy of Psalm 12 entirely
Click to expand...

Well, that was certainly inept.

Which one of us was it that complained about foisting one's own interpretation on the Scriptures?

Oh, yeah. You.
 
bibleprotector said:
This is the exact response that I expected you would give.
Click to expand...

That only proves that you know how your ideas will be met.

Which makes you not merely inept, but mendacious.
 
Seems you haven't actually read Mark:

And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, “Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, “Why do you question these things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your bed and walk’? But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he said to the paralytic— “I say to you, rise, pick up your bed, and go home.”
 
The capricious interpretations of Bibleprotector once again..

Now he complains about a text being too far away when recently he tries to convince us that an OT text explained a NT text.

How can anyone debate someone who makes up things as he goes?
 
Surely it is too far away.  I mean it's the same book,  the same author and a whole two or three pages away in my Bible.  :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top