BBB:The ACID Test Modern apostate fundamentalists like Robert Sumner, Hymers, Hutson, Hobbs, Hudson, Horton, and Huckleberry Hound, have been having a time of it lately, trying to stem the rising tide of Biblical scholarship that has assailed them in the last couple of years, and overthrown their "Christian scholarship." We give you here an acid test that was put together in the laboratory by Cmdr. Robert E. Long, United States Coast Guard, retired. This gentleman has had some correspondence with Bobby Scumner, Hymers, Waite, Bob Jones, Hutson, and others, and here is what he says. (The following was sent directly to Gary Hudson, the young man we recently hired to do our proofreading for us, at twenty dollars a book.) "Your work `Why I Left Ruckmanism' gives no evidence that you started with a Biblical basis or principle to prove the AV is in need of correction. Hence, my comment and observation that it was "unbiblical and without substance." I have already given sixteen reasons for believing the AV is the preserved word in the English language, plus numerous references to scripture explaining the supporting overwhelming evidence. I have not been able to get anyone that holds your position to comment on them or to correct my hypothesis I set forth to answer the question at hand. I am open to correction, and have requested to be corrected where I was wrong. But again, I insist on Bible references in accordance with 2 Timothy 3:16 before accepting correction. It should be known that you, nor anyone that agrees with your position (that God has given His word in the Hebrew and Greek languages only), which Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 disprove, has provided even one verse of scripture for the base of your approach to the question." Isn't it amazing? Here these little pipsqueaks like Sumner, Hymers, and Hudson run around the country talking about challenging people and nobody dare taking them on. They have been sacked so many times it would take you twenty minutes to get the potatoes out of the bags. Brother Long goes on to say, "Scholarship and intellectualism alone will never answer a spiritual question satisfactorily, nor should you ever derive doctrine apart from scripture, as you have apparently done. Why not start by searching the scriptures, English or Greek, and then support your conclusion with scholarship, and when you cannot reconcile the two, simply believe the Bible with no concern for those that say you are "anti-intellectual." Do not neglect the fact that God will require an element of faith with any spiritual discernment." Oh, Brother Long has their number. They are more afraid of being called "anti-intellectuals" than they are of dying and going to hell or facing Christ at the Judgment Seat. He continues, "Now here is the additional overwhelming evidence you asked for. God has already answered the question and it really does not matter what you or I believe. This is what God Himself has to say about His word. 1. His word nourishes the soul (scripture). 2. His word has no copyright privileges (scripture). 3. His word quickens (scripture). 4. His word is a lamp (scripture). 5. His word is right (scripture). 6. His word keeps you from sin (scripture). 7. His word is true (scripture). 8. His word is a joy and rejoicing to the heart (scripture). 9. His word is a shield (scripture). 10. His word is upright, and truth (scripture). 11. His word stands (scripture)." And then in addition to that, Brother Long has included one or two verses after each of these points, "God's words are magnified, gracious, sound, profitable, for our learning, holy, cleansing, faithful, able to save, sure, incorruptible, and alive." He then says, "if a text does not meet all these requirements, then it should not be preached. The fruit of the text will tell you whether the Holy Spirit is bearing witness to it, and I might add that we have no authority to preach anything less than the word of God, and that anything less carries no authority. Does the AV qualify from a strictly Biblical point of view to be the word of God? Does the Holy Spirit of God bear witness to the AV? Is not the answer an overwhelming yes? This will be my last plea for your prayerful consideration. I am requesting that you please take a fresh and serious re-evaluation of your doctrine." Then Brother Long sent five questions to Hymers, Sumner, Waite, Combs, Bob Jones and Curtis Hutson. "1. Does the Authorized Version as we have it today, and as it stands alone, contain any doctrinal error? Yes or no. 2. Does the Authorized Version as we have it today meet the requirements of the aforementioned scripture references? Yes or no. 3. Do the Greek and Hebrew texts that you believe are the "preserved" word of God meet the requirements of the same verses of scripture? Yes or no. 4. Am I right to require Biblical references for your position and doctrine? Yes or no. 5. Do you preach and teach the Authorized Version? Yes or no. Simply circle your answer. Clarification with scripture references is desired but if you feel it not necessary, I will accept your answers without them. This request is also kindly made to those gentlemen sent copies." There it is. You say will you publish those answers when Brother Long gets them back? No we won't. You say why? Because he won't get them back. I have never known an Alexandrian in my life that can answer a clear cut question, yes or no, where that question dealt with final authority. Alexandrians are pragmatic humanists, every one of them, they are anarchists at heart, and when it comes to the matter of absolute authority, which Brother Long has put to them, they will not face the issue, for they are their own authority, they are their own gods, as we have demonstrated over, and over, and over again.