Sadly, the RTC community continues to push the narrative that anyone who uses a King James Version or affirms the Confessional Texts are somehow in the same class of people as Ruckmanites. This is not only an example of the poisoning the well fallacy, but of bearing false witness. Both seem to be acceptable tactics among some of the Christians who affirm RTC. Now while this has been dealt with in a previous post “Are You a KJVO?“, I think it is worth dealing with again via the Reductio Ad Absurdum.
Murder, according to Scripture deserves the death penalty at the hands of the civil magistrate when one is found guilty of it. So let’s suppose that Drs. Gonzales & Ward are accused of murder. During their trial, multiple witness are brought forth testifying that they were seen murdering two people. They are then convicted of 1st degree murder. How should they be sentenced? Well, if it is acceptable to call people who prefer the AV over other English translations and those who affirm the Confessional View of Scripture, KJVOs, a term which can only rightly be applied to Ruckmanites, then Drs. Gonzales & Ward should be executed by the civil magistrate for killing two house flies. At this point, if you’re a reasonable person, you should be outraged at the idea of redefining murder to include the killing of house flies. But this is the type of reasoning that RTC advocates engage in when they label anyone other than Ruckmanites with the term KJVO. Why do they do this? It is a subtle implication that those of us affirming the historic, orthodox, and reformed view of Scripture are in some way heretics as the same sort as Ruckmanites. And if we’re heretics, we can then be dismissed without them having to address our arguments. Arguments which they cannot deal with without first admitting that their view is inconsistent with that of the Reformers.