382 thoughts on “KJV Singles Website!”

  1. 2 things: 1 – NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! and 2 – You can have sex without getting married (now let the hate start).

  2. If I were to put a profile up there it would read something like this.

    “I have found FREEDOM in Christ and I usually wear what I want, do what I want and listen to what I want. Don’t ask me to cook for you or iron your shirts, and don’t expect me to go with you to hand out tracts. I will NOT be birthin’ any babies for you and probably won’t even want to have sex unless you have been kind to me throughout the day. I am a 12 point Calvinist. Check me out on facebook and twitter.”
    (Wouldn’t want any of them to actually try to date me!)

  3. I just noticed more than one young lady whose profile pic does not include her face. One speculates why:
    1. She is extremely modest (shamefaced?) and trying not to show off?
    2. She has a face for radio?
    3. The photo does show her figure, and that is all that matters?
    4. ???

    1. No, this is an easy one. She either doesn’t have a digital camera, or has no idea how to attach a pic. My cousin wasn’t allowed to use the computer for so long (because of the sin of the interwebs) that she was clueless when it came to even the easy stuff. I set up her fb account for her 🙄

      1. I looked again, and the users who did this had submitted multiple photos, several close-ups of the face, then one or two farther away, full body, but no head. They were nice looking enough, nothing to hide. Maybe the body shots were to prove they weren’t lying about their weight? They were also both Filipino. (Filipina?) Maybe this is a cultural thing?

    2. I’m just kinda T-O’d right now cause she hasn’t even sent me a full body shot yet

  4. Is “Mark” one of ours? Granted British conservatives are different than American conservatives, but that picture just doesn’t seem to match the site. . .

    And the picture REALLY doesn’t seem to match his “about me” section. . .

  5. Can somebody explain the reference to 1 Corinthians 7:1-9? It doesn’t say anything about appearance or whether that is a good way to judge a prospective mate. It’s just a grudging acknowledgement that people are going to have sex, so it might as well be with their spouse. It seems completely tangential to the appropriateness of the photo guidelines.

  6. A few of the thoughts kept coming to mind:
    1)Isn’t Fundy U the “proper” place to meet a Home Ec. major. Sorry, I meant prospective spouse. Or are these the homeUNschooled who can’t get accepted to any type school?
    2) Don’t these guys realize there is a difference in a spouse and a mating partner?
    3) Good thing honesty isn’t part of the user agreement. There is no way some of these profiles are anywhere near the weight given in the spec sheet. No camera adds that many pounds.

      1. I think the admission requirements are:

        Currently breathing

        Able to pay college bill

        Will do as we say without question or complaint

        1. A rejection letter from the University of Phoenix might prove you are academically qualified as well. 😉

      2. To get into WCBC, I think you have to submit a recommendation letter from your pastor. I just remember that because one of my fundy friends had to get one. Which made me think that I could never get into WCBC because my Pastor’s assessment of me (even when I was high on kool-aid) was that it wasn’t clear that God had called me to full-time ministry and I needed to work on having a daily walk with God.

    2. If you don’t live near/can’t get into FU, you can always do the Bill Gothard institute thing. Or maybe one of those corespondent Bible college-things.

  9. I’m laughing hysterically! As someone who did meet her hubby on one of those OTHER christian websites littered with the unsaved, this is just positively hilarious. As they say in the South, “ahh, bless his heart.”

  10. Oh my goodness, this is so good and rich. http://kingjamesbiblesingles.wall.fm/user/JosephDearing

    I’ll tell you the worst up front: (Let the mocking begin!)

    I can’t afford to feed you, so you’ll have to have your own job.
    But since that’s the case, I won’t expect you to do all the household “chores” yourself. I don’t even mind doing all the cooking if you don’t like to.

    I live in a small apartment with very low rent, so I’ll never move!
    I’m unashamedly cheap. (Matthew 8:20, 1 Timothy 2:9)
    My favorite shirt was 25 cents at a yard sale.
    I always buy stuff on sale.
    BUT I spare no expense for church ministries (Mark 12:41-44,
    John 12:3), cleanliness, and physical health. (1 Corinthians 9:27)

    2. I saw that one too. Isn’t it awful?

      Expected, though, ’cause his best friend and employer is the infamous David Grice.

    3. Have y’all checked out his “statement of faith”, yet? I think I have lost about 50 or more brain cells trying to understand what he is not saying! Complete with Geo-centric Universe, and tons of misquoted “rightly divided” Bible references. If I was his pastor, he would be fired and up for church discipline this coming Sunday!!!!! 😆

      2. Geocentric Universe?

        Not only is he determined to be perpetually broke, but he’s as dumb as a box of rocks too…a really small box.

    4. That’s calcium boy! Darrell posted a video of him rapping about being fundy. He ripped off an Eminem song. EPIC!!!

  11. Oh my GOSH! These are AWESOME! This website will probably now actually have a chance of becoming large enough to be noticed. Just think of the service you are doing for all those lonely KJVOnlyers. All those Lonely Onlies. You guys are sooooo GREAT!

    1. Sadly, they seem to have caught on. Imagine the roller coaster of emotion this day brought these KJVO freaks: pleased surprise at first, then actual excitement that the dating site is catching on at last, then slight puzzlement, and at last, dawning suspicion. I am pretty sure that the use of the classic dating site word, “anal,” made the lightbulb click on… This was so hilarious, my gut hurts from laughing. 😆

      1. yeah, they are gonna freak on that one, but I thinks Natalie is gonna get some serious inquiries…LOL!

    1. If he is as interesting in person as he is on this video, he’ll likely be a charter member of this dating site for a long, long time.

  13. OH MY GOODNESS! Josiah Jacobias Jefferson, I am laughing and laughing at your profile. Nice work, sir! I hope you get all of the KJBO tail you’re looking for and more!

      3. I made mine under the name curtis. I made it sound pretty legit, but ended with, must be into a little anal. I’m deleted 🙁

  18. This guy sound very pleasant…if only I wasn’t married I could have him!!!….oh wait….I’m the opposite of all those things he lists….damn!! “I hate calvinista. I wish they would just be wiped off the face of the planet. I want a wife who loves the KJB 1611 unedited (who is jesus who is the word) and would never read the damnable blasphemous whorish nkjv, nasb, and defiantly not the esv or the message. If you are a feminist, communist, or lordship salvation person stay away. If you want to work instead of staying home with our 5 (or more) children stay away. dress modestly. Remember we can talk about things but what I say GOES! I am the leader of the house hold. cooking skills required. I wouldn’t dare marry a women who cannot cook, clean, and all the other things that a good WIFE should do. again reiterate NO CALVINISTS ALLOWED! in love James

      1. You mean my dream man is fictional? Say it isn’t so! 😀 Sadly I’ve known a few who would actually post something to that extreme. God bless the day I got the hell out or you just might be seeing my profile on there!

  22. Anyone recognize the books in the background, the ones near the top right, with similar-looking spines in a range of colors?

  23. I can’t imagine anything worse than being a fundy single. Relationship is built on trust, too bad fundies are conditioned to distrust just about everyone, “bring a gun and meet with your pastor”

  24. I call fake on “Mark”. The long hair negates his so called belief in the KJV’s infallibility and “supernatural powers”.

  26. I think they read this website. Cuz I don’t think mine was too bad however I got suspended. I sounded like a real fundy 😎

  27. The home page has been edited to add:
    “Submitted user profiles are screened to help filter out pranks. You will be notified by email when your profile has been approved, usually within 2 days.”
    and,
    “For your profile picture, please use a photo of YOURSELF with your face clearly visible.”

  28. As a Christian, a woman, and one whose mission is to love people “from the inside out” and motivate others to do the same…I find that whole “appearance” paragraph on the dating site not only particularly offensive but damaging to the name of Christ. 👿

    I’m not saying appearance doesn’t matter at all. I mean, in dating you’re generally looking for your future spouse (shocker, I know), and you’ll (presumably!) want to have sex with that person. And if you’re not at all physically attracted to them…well, yeah, that could be a problem.

    BUT! Should it be at or near the top of one’s list of desired qualities? I think not. Especially as Christians, it behooves us to look beyond the surface, to focus on the heart. (Wait…this is fundies; what am I thinking? 🙄 ) Anyway, guess what: when you do that, an attraction can grow from there…one the comes to include the outside. I know. It happened to me.

    I’ve written more on how much appearance matters here.

    To act like it IS a super-important factor, to call (presumably!) other Christians “delusional” for daring to think that fellow Christians just might be a little less shallow, to assume that it applies only to women…ASSININE. 👿

    And yes…the I Corinthians 7 passage has NOTHING to do with appearance. Since it’s talking about how each spouse “has authority over” (NIV 😀 ) the other’s body and about not depriving each other, I think what the dating site’s creator is saying, is: It’s your duty, woman, to be attractive so I’ll want to have sex with you, after all I ‘own’ your body, and you’re not supposed to deprive me. 👿 👿 👿

    2. Believe me Connie, ALL men are sexual freaks who like sex every day. Sad to say, this isn’t just a fundy or non-fundy issue. ALL men are sick freaks who like sex. I divorced my husband over 20 years ago and have not looked back. I don’t know why any woman would actually WANT to date and actually look forward to marriage. To me, that’s sick, sick, thinking.

      1. So, are ALL women prudes who don’t like sex? You make it sound like ONLY men like sex, and women hate it. I don’t think you will find many who agree with that.

      2. Actually, to give you WAY too much info about me. HF says my sex drive is like a guy’s, and he’s convinced that I’m going to kill him one day with it.

        This might make me not the norm, but oh well.

      3. I don’t think someone who likes/wants to have sex every day is a freak or unnatural. Who ever decided that every day was too much??? Most people in the beginning of a healthy loving marriage/relationship do have sex every day. Now if the person is using the other as an object and there is no emotional connection then that could feel wrong and too much, but in general healthy loving couples should have sex every day!! It’s usually interpersonal/relational baggage that ruins a couple’s sex life. And if the one partner doesn’t make sure the other gets fullfilled. It is perfectly normal to enjoy sex every day, what’s not to like? “No, sorry, I don’t feel like having a mind-blowing orgasm or two today dear, but thanks anyway????” 🙄

      4. @Sheila, I wasn’t talking about the frequency with which men want sex (I was talking about the apparent fundy attitude toward it and towards women about it), but since you mentioned it, I know for a fact that there are not only many women who LOVE sex (witness Natalie and my comments here 😈 ) but also that there are many women who want it MORE often than their husbands. It seems to me that you’re assuming all men are like your ex-husband, which I’m certain is not the case. And I find it sad that you think wanting to date and looking forward to marriage is sick. I hope for your sake that you’re able to work toward healing and a healthier view of men.

        And just so you know, I have my own “view of men” issues to resolve–abusive father, abusive male peers in my past, and the list goes on. So by no means am I speaking as having arrived. May we both find healing….

      5. I don’t see how wanting something God created as good between a husband and wife makes someone a sick freak?

      6. I agree that pulling that verse out to argue that a woman must be pretty is sick. I agree that almost all fundy men are sick like that. And I agree that we live in a society that encourages all men to be like that. But not all men are like that (ironically men who claim to be feminists are pretty fair/respectful/human). I feel sorry for any woman who is left with no pleasant experience to counter the negative stereotypes that many men enjoy reinforcing for themselves. 😥 Patriarchal men, yes. They tend to be sex freaks who view women as property and objects to gratify them. But there are some men who view women as equal human beings and treat them as such. They have sexual desires (as most human beings do), but they consider their partner’s needs just as important. I hope that you meet someone like that some day.

  29. I’m waiting for someone to create a profile and use an existing photo from another profile – think of all the fun with “you’re a fake!” “No I’m not! It’s me, and YOU’RE a fake!”

  30. Have you checked out what happens when you click “Leave” on the Terms of Use landing page? The website behind it is a piece of work in itself.

    1. I expressly like the “Old Fashioned Midi Hymns”. I guess you could consider midis to be old technology, though.

      I was disappointed that the link to the Did The Catholics Give Us The Bible is an error page. I wanted to see what they had to say.

      Did you notice all the Dr.s who write for the site? Very impressive. I think I’ll flaunt my PhD today. (Post Hole Digger) maybe even add it to my name here.
      UncleWilver, PhD (Post Hole Digger)–what do you think?

        2. Evidently they are familiar with Jonah’s fame. (Probably from doing “research” so they would know better what sins and evil lusts they needed to preach about)
          So POST IT HERE!!! (Please?)

  33. So where is Camp Meeting Girl on this one? I would have thought that she and Dr. Phil Armenik would have had much to say about such a sanctified, sanctimonious, single’s site.

  35. When you hit “Leave” at the dating web site, the page it takes you to is simply incredible. In the cartoon in the center, the family is eating dinner on a tablecloth made of the U.S. Constitution. Once again, the direct tie between American patriotism and fundamentalism boggles the mind…. 😯

    1. Oops, sorry, the cartoon changes every few minutes. My, how techno-advanced. The rest of the page is a fascinating read, fascinating meaning, Thank God I am OUT of that!!! 🙄

  37. “I believe the King James Bible is the infallible word of God. (The English words in the KJB are supernatural and completely without error.)” Seriously?

    1. Does that include the English word ‘wine’? Not to mention ‘unicorn’ ‘dragon’ ‘basilisk’ and ‘cockatrice’.

  39. I would like to request a replay of all the fake profiles, here on SFL. I was disappointed to miss them by the time I got there. Not that I didn’t laugh just as heartily at the people taking themselves all too seriously as I would have the satire. It seems our liberated posters proved to be too great a temptation for the weaker brethren/sistren looking for fellow fundy passion.

  40. I asked them why I was deleted and they sent me this message, assuradly some of these mistakes are obvious I just thought they would never find out lol

    “Well, you’re email address has the name “Weston $$$$$$” attached to it, yet your KJBS profile says your name is James, so apparently you lied about your name.

    Your email address is “monergism rocks”. The definition I read of monergism seems to indicate it is a calvinist doctrine if I read it correctly.

    That, and the parody-like wording of your “About me” section, (ie. “I HATE calvinists”, etc.) leads me to believe you are a calvinist yourself trying to infiltrate the site, or you are just a prankster trying to make us look bad by putting crazy and hateful sounding things on it.

    For the record, neither I, nor any real Bible-believers I know, “hate” calvinists. We hate calvinism, not the calvinists.”

    2. I thought that God hates fags? That’s the prime Calvinist doctrine that I and most others are aware of.

      1. That would be westboro baptist church….. and alot of fundie churches. Not attached to calvinism what so ever.

        1. In all humility, your comment is totally off base. You couldn’t make a more inaccurate comment if you tried. WBC is FULL of Calvinism. In fact, my theory is that it is precisely their Calvinism which drives them. No, I’m not being a “flamer.” If you look at any film documentaries of them you’ll find that they are FULL of Calvinistic thinking. They pepper their language with phrases such as “God ordained (so and so) to behave in (such and such) a way.” They have TULIP logos in their church. Sorry, but in all seriousness, they are a prime example of Calvinism to its drawn out conclusion. I realize this thread wasn’t about Calvinism, but your comment was too far off base that I couldn’t ignore it. It may have been an innocent error, but still an error nevertheless.

        2. IFB’s and WBC are both baptists….. So I am guessing that the REAL reason here is because they are baptists not calvinists.See really your line of logic is no better then the fundies. Out on a rabbit chase that really leads you no where. This post was not about calvinism. I would suggest leaving this matter where you have little expertise.

        3. MY comment stated that fundies are not attached to Calvinism whatsoever. Of course WBC considers itself Calvinistic. But I garentee you that since John Calvin to now not one Calvinist would vouch for their heinous acts. The fact is WBC is not apart of this post. Just to add to my last post.

  41. These are some interesting quotes I found (keeping in mind that I can’t always tell the difference between a fake profile and a real one):

    “…a woman who understands that in Jesus’ own words, to look at a woman & lust is adultery in the heart, she understands the practical brilliance of this, & would by faith live by that standard.”

    How is that standard for women? Doesn’t it say that if a MAN looks upon a woman and lusts after her, its adultery? Doesn’t that make it a standard for him? Oh, wait, I forgot. If a man lusts, its either because his wife isn’t fulfilling his needs, or the woman he lusts after is not dressed modestly. Its always her fault, never his. 🙄 (for the record, I am aware that the principle of lust being adultery applies to women as well) This guy then goes on to admit that he has 2 children of his own out of wedlock. I guess that that was her fault.

    “In a spouse I am looking for a beautiful woman who is saved.”

    Wow, such depth. Yet another guy with 2 children out of wedlock (though he tries to excuse it by saying it was before he was saved).

    I pray that “Floyd DeWayne Brothwell” is a fake profile… or that Floyd has since been institutionalized. One or the other. 😮

    Same goes for Dave. “I like chick tracts.” Seriously? Who puts tract preferences in a dating profile?

    I’m also amused by the couple of 19-year-old preacher boys who apparently think that they are quite a catch! Its a mark of so many fundy boys that they have great expectations for their prospective wives, yet very few for themselves. The preacher boys are the worst! 🙄

    1. It’s so you know that book isn’t an NIV, NASB, NKJV, or something worse, like a black hardcover version of “The Joy of Sex”. If it wasn’t clearly labelled, we could accuse him of all kinds of evil.

    2. In the same vein of utter transparency in order to avoid all appearance of evil, maybe he should paste a label on HIMSELF too.

  45. I dont have time right now but so excited to read the thread on this gem….HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA there has got to be two members on that site him and the site creator. To good to leave alone!!!

Comments are closed.