230 thoughts on “The Best Way to Burn Your Bible”

  1. Ignorant of the contents and unable to discern truth, the superstitious pagan attacks and burns anything that does not perfectly align to their narrowly defined religious standards.

    1. Only reason he’s got a Bible to worship is that the bishops of the Catholic and Orthodox churces (they were one and the same back then) prevented the Shirley MacLaines of their day from rewriting it in their own image back when years AD were in the low three digits.

  2. He looks just like Mountain Man on “Deliverance” when he said, “Now let’s you just drop them pants.”

    1. This guy is the perfect example of why the prohibitions of Leviticus 18 v 1-18 are there.

  3. I’m seriously frightened by all the kooks out there (including “progressive Christians”)who believe this book, KJV or not, is seriously God’s perfect word. Have you READ the whole book? Have you studied the origins of it? Do you know how it was put together? Do you know there was a lot forged, left out, changed, etc??? Are you aware of the contradictions? We have GOOGLE people!!! It’s not 1990 or even 2000. We have more TRUTH about history at our fingertips than ever before! Don’t be afraid of the TRUTH!!! It’s scary, but everything you’ve been told to believe just might not be so. Deal with it.

    1. Huh?, I happen to agree with your general premise that the bible we have in hand (whatever version) is more than likely not the perfect Word of God, that there are disagreements, copyist errors, etc. in the extant manuscripts, that human beings simply wrote what they believed, some in good faith, some politically/nationalistically/self motivated, some parts of it more true than other parts, and so on. But your alarmist call-out is probably not going to win you many hearers. This is something individuals have to work through for themselves.

      Some will choose to believe in spite of everything, and that’s ok so long as they temper some of the bible’s extremism, in my view.

      Some will reject it all. I see this as an unappealing opposite extreme, since it supposes that none of the spiritual experiences recorded in the bible are worth anything. But I can see the reasons, and respect an honest doubter.

      Some will reject some of it, retain other parts, and try to just make sense of the whole mess the best they can (my own take, at the moment).

      What I’m trying to say is that there are sincere, thinking people on all sides of this issue, and your multiplication of exclamation points, capitalizations, and haranguing tone is probably not going to sway anyone one way or the other.

      At any rate, I like you. Perhaps you might consider sharing some of the facts you have found about the bible, rather than just insisting that we “kooks” GOOGLE it. At least some civil discussion might result, which is always a good thing, no?

      1. I hear ya. I just get angry about the lies I’ve been told my whole life, and then I CAP everything and use too many explanation points!!!!

        1. I understand. I guess I’m over the anger by now, but I still remember how it felt to question everything I once thought was true and find much of it lacking. There are probably less healthy ways to deal with the ANGER than the overuse of caps and exclamation points!!!

        2. I’m there. I get very angry about all the lies I have been told. I get angrier when I realize the hold those lies *still* have on me and on my loved ones.

          I may not CAP everything. But I can use some pretty cutting words. Slice and dice as in a verbal kitchen!

          I also seethe at the fact that it is impossible to sift the lies from the truth. The same messengers tell lies and truths together. Is salvation “once-saved-always-saved”? If so, why don’t the messengers of salvation ACT saved? (Okay, I CAPPED that one!). Can those who tell lies as they do also bring to people the Word of Life? How does one know what to believe or not to believe?

          I am almost at the point of washing my hands of the whole business. Not quite there yet. But it seems to me that the purveyors of “salvation” are marketing a product that either they haven’t used or doesn’t work.

          And it seems to me that the purveyors of “salvation” must be atheists as well, at least functionally. They don’t really believe in “getting right” or in “turning from sin.” They don’t believe that God judges sin (because they indulge in it too freely!). They discount the things of grace that Christ said as if it was for another time, but the words of judgment and prejudice from the Old Testament are heartily embraced — so they can apply them to others.

          So yes, I feel your anger. I don’t know that I can ever get past it.

    2. Huh, I understand where you are saying. I believe many Christians have not actually read the whole bible. Also, people can read the bible in different ways. One way is to read it devotionally and just accept everything in it is factual and accept whatever your minister tells you to believe about it. Another way is to approach the bible as collection of books and try to understand how it was assembled and how it fits into the context of the times it was written. Last year I tried to read the bible from cover to cover. It is hard to do. I made it to the Psalms and stopped. I took notes as I read and made honest comments about how the text I was reading was presenting the nature of God and morality. God comes across as rather petty and cruel and morality portrayed is not what we would accept today. I am going to try to continue to read through the bible eventually. If the bible was the literal word of an all knowing, loving, and powerful God, wouldn’t it be easier to read and wouldn’t it portray a better morality. Frankly, the God presented in Christian churches does not seem to be the God presented in the bible (slavery, genocide, women as property, extreme punishment for normal human behavior, and so forth.).

      1. JWyatt, like a good fundy I’ve read the bible all the way through. Numerous times. My take: The good parts are quite good. The bad parts are pretty bad. Reader discretion is advised.

        1. Just curious-how long did it take to read the whole bible? Did you read it straight through? Or did you read a section here and there and eventually you read the whole bible? Also, when you started to read a book in the bible, did you read a scholarly introduction to it (like they have in the Oxford Annotated Study Bible)?

          I think everyone, especially those who say they believe the bible is the foundation of their faith and morality should at least try to read the whole bible. I suspect, but can not prove it, that many people who go on and on about how great the bible is and how they support biblical morality and marriage, have never actually read the whole bible. It is hard to read the whole bible-I started at the beginning and read straight through and after about six months, I only made it to the middle of the Psalms. Stopping to write comments and questions about the passages as I read them, slowed me down.

        2. Huh?, a friend sent me the link to the Awkward Moments Bible a few weeks ago. What I found interesting is that many Christians find it offensive–yet it is actual passages from the bible, illustrated for clarity. The writer does make clear that it is not suitable for children!

          JWyatt, I used to follow several year-long bible reading plans. Sometimes straight through from cover to cover. There’s a chronological plan, that tries to order the reading by time in history. I did that once. The one I had most success with split the daily reading between Old and New Testaments. Having a planned reading schedule helped keep me motivated. That, and the thought that I was making God happy; or perhaps better, the fear that God would be unhappy with me if I didn’t read, kept me going through the hard times. 😀

          In addition to this through-the-year kind of reading, which for me amounted to skimming, I also had a daily in-depth reading plan. Here there was no pressure to get on with it. I chose a book based on my own interest and took as much time as I wished, reading commentaries, intros, etc. Reading the bible in a year only involves about 5 chapters a day. But for most people, busy with life, reading in depth like you are attempting is going to take longer than a year. Just keep plugging away at it. There are unexpected rewards from getting through it all. 🙂

  4. Wow.

    “I’m not just burning these Bibles because I’m an idiot.”

    Well, he IS an idiot. He is an idolater. And he will never change.

    This was the sort of nonsense I grew up with, the KJV-onlyism. Moving away from it cost me my family. My sister called me a heretic for having a NASV Bible, one my wife got me for a wedding present. And when challenged to prove that there was a difference in the meaning of the things she said was corrupt, she ran away screaming that I was trying to destroy her faith.

    I used to be a KJV-only-every-other-version-is-a-perversion believer. I thank the Lord that Bob Jones University showed me differently and helped me begin my path toward being a liberal!

    1. Amen to that. I’ve been moving steadily left since graduating from BJU 33 years ago.

    2. What I love is how the IFB won’t take their theology from a woman, until Gail Riplinger writes a book about New Age Bible versions. Then they take it just fine. Gail does’t even have a degree in theology or in New Testament languages when she wrote her book. She was under qualified as an expert, so she fit right in with the IFB scholars and all their fake Divinity degrees and so forth!

  5. You know what the guy’s combination of hat, beard, and round glasses reminds me of?


    With that beard and hat, he looks so much like all those stills of “al-Qaeda Number Twos” you see in the news about drone strikes.

  6. I get so tired of the KJV only idol worshipers! It gets so old watching these morons carry out their abject stupidity! Sorry I am a school teacher and the burning of any book pisses me off! I was raised to treat all books with reverence, especially Bibles, ANY BIBLES! I use the ESV but still have KJV’s but I would never burn them just because I don’t want to use the KJV any more! Thank you Jesus for delivering me from the IFB CULT! Forgive my rants guys, but this touches a nerve with me big time! This is how you get to book burnings and goose stepping, by turning off your mind like this idiot! 😡

  7. These new PerVersions do indeed change God’s word! I looked up my life verse, 1 Thessalonians 5:22, in an NIV my cousin owned once. Would you believe that they changed it so it no longer supports the holy doctrine of separation! Instead is says something about “kinds of evil.” There is only one kind of evil, and that is sin! If you believed in the Jesus I call my Lord and Savior you would know such things, because the same spirit that guides me would guide you.

      1. I Thessalonians 5:22 ESV: abstain from every kind of evil.
        I Thessalonians 5:22 NIV: reject every kind of evil.
        I Thessalonians 5:22 NASB: abstain from every form of evil.
        I Thessalonians 5:22 NKJV: abstain from every form of evil.
        I Thessalonians 5:22 NRSV: abstain from every form of evil.
        I Thessalonians 5:22 KJV: Abstain from all appearance of evil.

        Why is the KJV admonition just to avaoid the appearance of evil, and not evil itself. All of the other versions listed here talk about avoiding all kinds and forms of evil. I will say I think the admonition in the ESV, NIV, NRSV, NASB are all stronger than the ole King Jimmy! Perhaps the reason you prefer the KJV version is because it focuses on the outword rather than the inward just like the IFB do? Sorry I’ll keep my ESV version of this verse, it is stronger, better worded, and much more applicable than the KJV. IMHO

        1. Actually, I looked the passage up last night in context. 1 Thess. 5 is the closing chapter of a book written to a new church, giving instructions on the Christian life and especially reaffirming proper doctrine in the face of false teachers.

          1 Thess. 5:20-22
          20 Do not treat prophecies with contempt 21 but test them all; hold on to what is good, 22 reject every kind of evil.

          So in that context, it would be specifically about rejecting false or evil teachings, while holding on to that which is good and right. Though the more general interpretation of holding on to the good and rejecting the evil could also work, and is scripturally sound anyway.

        2. JeseC
          I just was comparing the one verse the other poster was talking about. Of course all Scripture must be read an understood in context! I get that 100% now that I have left fundyland. I just think the admonition to avoid evil is stronger in the “apostate” versions than the KJV if you are just looking at v. 22 by itself.

        3. At the very least, you certainly can’t get “don’t drink alcohol or anything that might look like alcohol” out of it.

          ProudFundamentalist is a local Poe, though…

        4. From Wikipedia:

          Poe’s law, named after its author Nathan Poe, is an Internet adage reflecting the idea that without a clear indication of the author’s intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism.[1]

        5. So calling it a “Poe” means it’s someone parodying a fundamentalist, rather than an actual fundamentalist.

          (Am I the only one who took a while to figure out the noun form from the law?)

    1. ^
      I’m calling Poe.

      Due to the late hour, probably west coast Poe. Good to hear from you again, P-F.

    2. PF,
      Yeah, I’m going to have to call Poe on this one. At first I was like Wut? And then I was like No Way. And then I was like Oh I See What You Did There. Nice shot though. 😀

  8. derp
    another bald bj grad got to it before me. I’m typing slowly this early in the morning.

  9. {eyeroll} Not just at the stupidity but at the total waste of time drilling through a book. Just pull out the pages and use them as kindling to burn the cover.
    Dumbass. 👿

    1. True, but there’s something morbidly fun about drilling holes in the book like this; I’m surprised he didn’t start messing around with a chainsaw. Men do have to play with their toys. 🙄

      1. 😆
        “The only real difference
        between men and boys,
        Is the size and the price
        of what they call toys.”

        1. Same thing with girls and women. Have you looked at the upper-end sewing machines lately? It makes the price of *my* toys look insignificant!

          “But honey! Look at all the embroidery it does!”

          It does, indeed!

        2. Meh. I don’t have any use for those fancy machines. All of the fancy stitches and feet… the more bells and whistles, the more things to break. And repairs on those thing will make you blanch. As expensive as car repairs.

          My 20 year old ordinary machine has been in the shop *once*. Needle broke and got jammed inside. They dug it out, reset the timing, and I’m good to go. Hundred bucks.

      1. Somehow I don’t htink he’s thought that far ahead. He’s going to walk to Nattick and find the Twinkee factory like Peter Griffin did after Y2K.

  10. This guy could be drilling straight through the name of Jesus, but all he’s concerned with is making a legalistic statement.

  11. I love how he says the NIV and the KJV are not the same Bible. Really genius, do tell! I also love when he says I am not some hillbilly that doesn’t know what I’m talking about, even though he is in the middle of the hills and acting like a total rube! If you love Jesus you’ll love his word the KJB because it was good enough for the Apostle Paul and its good enough for me! I suppose no one from the time of Christ until 1611 has received the gift of salvation because they didn’t have God’s real Word the KJV? I’m sorry, but you extrapolate this kind of thinking out to its logical conclusions you end up drinking Kool-Aid in South America with Jim Jones! Darrell I am so sorry to be so harsh about this, but the KJV Only debate is one of the most ridiculous, stupid, and nonsensical debates the IFB ever came up with! By their own definition of a cult (definition given while I was at PCC 1992-1994) anything that takes Christ and adds to it is a cult! Hello IFB by your own definition you are a CULT! You take Christ and add KJV Only, music rules, dress rules, MOG worship, and church loyalty in order to be a Christian. Sorry hard to take after awhile!

      1. And would you like to know how often God thought that the Law should be read to His illiterate people?

        Read Deuteronomy 31:10-13 for the answer. This little factoid should be brought up whenever someone says you should have daily Bible reading!

  12. We’ve seen a lot of stupid here, as well as a lot of offensive. But I have to say that watching this deluded heretic run a drill through God’s Word had to be one of the worst videos I’ve seen in a long while. I have no words for how angry I felt.

  13. Who’d have thought that reading John 3:16 out of the NIV would send a person’s soul to hell because they read it out of the wrong Bible!

    Makes God to be petty and vindictive.

  14. For those you who grew in an IFB church, you may be aware of this, but I found it interesting that this statement in is the preface of the 1611 KJV: so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can beno lesse then presumption. Therfore as S. Augustine saith, that varietie of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversitie of signification and sense in the margine, where the text is not so cleare, must needes doe good, yea is necessary, as we are perswaded.

    Is this statement disregarded or considered erroneous because it’s not actually part of the biblical text or what do they do with such a statement from the translators?

    1. Isn’t that a wonderful statement?

      And that is why you will never see the KJV-fundies ever printing it or pointing out that such an introduction from the translators exists.

      Because the answer to your question is that they ignore it. To them it does not exist. Many actually don’t know of its existence, but those that do never mention it. Remember, ignorance is the solution in their thinking. They indeed see it the better thing to be “unlearned and ignorant men.”

      There are lots of fundy avoidance tactics, too, should they ever get clobbered with the statement publicly and find no way to not deal with it. They can accuse you of bad faith, of taking the statement out of context, or all sorts of things.

      But thanks for mentioning it!

    2. It’s utterly ignored. I grew up in a KJV-only home, and I never knew that the translators had said ANYTHING.

      1. The original KJV 1611 had margins with other words where there were variations in text so that the reader could choose for himself the meaning he/she thought worked best.

  15. It would have been more scriptural if, after the piercing of hands and feet, that The Word had been crucified rather than burned at the stake.

Comments are closed.