#2 In AWE of Thy Word

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Ed Edwards, Oct 26, 2004.

  1. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I see some 14,000 posts have been pruned
    from this Bible Version Forum and relegated
    to the archives for 2004.

    This Topic is for discussion of the
    specifics of:

    Gail Riplinger's 2003 Book:

    title: In AWE of Thy Word

    Subtitle: Understanding the King James Bible:
    It's Mystery & History Letter by letter.

    click here --&gt; In AWE of Thy Word &lt;-- click here

    "This book shows how the words of the
    King James Bible are the same word
    meanings and sounds
    across languages,
    across cultures and across time.
    No other Bible is like it!"

    I think i know where this is going:
    the letter placement is divine and inerrant.
    So now you can feel free* to use your equidistant
    spacing Bible code program(s) on the English Version.
    The Bible becomes trivialized as a divining mechanism [​IMG]

    *or, you can use mine for $100 :D
     
  2. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,154
    Likes Received:
    322
    I looked over the chapter summaries and from what I can see it's more of the same KJVO hokum designed to extract $$$ from her clones and devotees (after all she is "God's secretary").

    IMO, it is a series of illogical and unscriptural conclusions based upon a kernel of truth verified with pious urban legends concerning Tertullian, Erasmus, King Henry 8th, Gildas, Bede, Asser, William of Malmesbury, The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, John Foxe, etc.

    For the kernals of truth, buy it if you don't mind giving her a reason to continue her enterpise and raking in the bucks.

    HankD
     
  3. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    In her new book, Gail Riplinger makes use of the 1599 Nuremberg Polyglot edited by Elias Hutter (1554-1605?). Riplinger claimed that
    "It [this Polyglot] demonstrates the perfect agreement of the English King James Bible with all pure Bibles from other languages" (p. 1048).

    However, Riplinger seems to have ignored some important information about this Polyglot. Darlow and Moule noted: "The value of this polyglot in twelve languages is seriously discounted by the fact that the editor did not hesitate to translate and insert in some versions missing passages which he found in others. In the Syriac version he even supplied the missing books 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation, and the Pericope de adultera. It is fair, however, to state that he calls attention in the prefactory matter to his insertions. But this admission does not cover all Hutter's changes" (HISTORICAL CATALOGUE OF THE PRINTED EDITIONS OF HOLY SCRIPTURES, Vol. II, pp. 15-16).

    The English New Testament in this Polyglott
    was an edition of the Geneva Bible, and it would also not be in perfect agreement with the KJV.
     
  4. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,154
    Likes Received:
    322
    What happened to "Things which are different are not the same"?

    HankD
     
  5. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the typical double standard,
    this refers to the KJVs v. MVs arguments
    NOT to intra-KJVs arguments. :eek:
     
  6. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    From the comic book doctrine source
    with regards to IN AWE:
    "This book shows how the words of the King James Bible
    are the same word meanings and sounds across languages,
    across cultures and across time.
    No other Bible is like it! The King James Bible is
    made up of words and sounds
    that make you understand the feeling behind the words.
    And King James words are very similar to words
    used in other language Bibles."

    One thing i've got for the comic book doctrine,
    they are so far away from any meaningful concepts
    that one can barely argue with it.
    IF that statement has any meaning, it is that words
    are used to convey ideas. But if that was it's true
    meaning, then the KJVO concepts would all fall to the
    side. Otherwise, the statement is illiterate
    biblobabble.
     
  7. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,074
    Likes Received:
    102
    " And King James words are very similar to words
    used in other language Bibles."

    Like Russian, Chinese and Algonquin? I suppose she's got some proof for that ...

    Ed, why can't you just admit that your favorite home economist has mastered textual criticism and is now a full-fledge philologist? (You don't get too many chances to use that word on the Internet.)
     
  8. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    p. 708:

    "During the 14th and 15th centuries many
    words were introduced into English from Latin.
    How can Rome being evil speak goodthings?
    Out of the abundance of their evil heart their mouth
    pours out poison like:
    antichrist, pope, priest, scribe, scorpion,
    conspiracy, relic, idol, demon,
    lunatic, Lucifer, fever, ulcer, cancer,
    nervous, and martyr.
    "

    What nonsense is this?
    She selects "evil" words and overlooks
    perfectly good words? This is so like taking
    candy from a baby. It is not good to fool the
    febleminded like this.

    She aludes to these verses:

    Mt 12:34 (KJV1769):
    O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

    Lu 6:45 (KJV1769):
    A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

    Matthew 12:34 (HCSB):
    Brood of vipers! How can you speak good things
    when you are evil? For the mouth speaks
    from the overflow of the heart.

    Luke 6:45 (HCSB):
    A good man produces good out of the good storeroom
    of his heart, and an evil man produces evil out
    of the evil storeroom. For his mouth speaks
    from the overflow of the heart.

    "heart" comes from Latin
    "generation" comes from Latin

    These verses could not exist in the KJV without
    the Latin derived GOOD terms.
    So what she says here on page 708
    is absurd ("absurd" comes from the Latin).
     
  9. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting,
    philologist" is derived from the Latin [​IMG]

    I can't admit because i have an attitude.
    Speaking of attitude, can you pray for me?
    I've got to go wednesday and visit my
    dermatologist. He gets his liquid helium
    spray can up to my skin
    and he has an attitude on my skin :(
     
  10. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,074
    Likes Received:
    102
    You got it.
     
  11. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanx!!!
     
  12. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,074
    Likes Received:
    102
    BTW, I may have to buy a copy of Ripper's book if I want to find out why "heart" is from Latin and not Old English.
     
  13. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    In her new book, Riplinger claimed: "The previous Bishops' Bible (c1568-1611) was no less perfect, pure, and true than the KJV" (p. 17).

    She wrote: "The KJV translators generally followed the grammatical elements and word order (syntax) of the Bishops' Bible. This was their foundation and they seldom varied from it" (p. 132).

    After claiming that she had done a "word-for-word collation of earlier English Bibles with the KJV" (p. 17) and a "word-for-word analysis" (p. 18), she wrote: "The words that differ in the early English Bibles are pure synonyms" (p. 859).

    While it is true that the Bishops' Bible was the
    English foundation for the KJV, it is not true
    that the KJV translators "seldom varied from it."
    Thankfully, in many places the KJV translators did not follow some of the poor renderings in the Bishops' Bible. Nevertheless, there are at least a few places where the KJV kept a "poorer" rendering from the Bishops' Bible when it could have kept a more accurate one from one of the other earlier English Bibles.
     
  14. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you, Brother Logos 1650.
    Unline many readers of Riplinger, i do
    check references. So your AWE references
    check out. That is basicly what she said.

    She also on page 17 gives a list of
    seven spiritual (see page 18) things
    "The fine-tuning done by the KJV translators
    was done to magnify (original in red)
    the following qualities:

    (word bullets used, i'm not using word
    so i'll use a dash)
    - Intensify meter
    - Add alliteration
    - Secure brevity
    - Ensure continuity
    - Introduce a separate-from-sinners' vocabulary
    - Polish the synchronization of letter sounds,
    syllabication, and syntax to enhance
    memorization, comprehension, and
    parasympathetic rhythms"

    I think this is a lot of babble. I'll check
    it with my English teacher friends.
     
  15. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    My wife is an English major with
    Secondary Education. She taught in public
    schools for 7-years.
    My pastor got an English major and a
    History major at the Oklahoma Baptist
    University (OBU).
    Yes, I know some English teachers.
    Personally i'm a math oriented person.

    Consider my past post.
    If the Bishop's Bible was "perfect,
    pure, and true" why did it need
    "fine-tuning" (AKA: enhancement)?
    Can the perfect be made perfecter?

    Another question.
    Assume all these seven things are
    added to the KJV. Why don't KJVO chuches
    teach about this beauty in their churches?
    Quite frankly i didn't run into it until
    my present pastor.

    This teaching of Gail's contradicts
    the typical co-teaching of KJVO churches
    that there is something evil about education.
    Like my native American friend says:
    Pale face woman speak with two tongues" :(
     
  16. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    According to Riplinger, was this addition
    at John 18:13 ["And Annas sent Christ bound unto Caiaphas the high priest"] in the Bishops' Bible
    a perfect, pure rendering? The KJV translators
    made it a marginal note in the 1611.

    At the end of Jeremiah 50:28, the Bishops' Bible added: "yea, a voice of them that cry against Babylon."

    There are several other such additions in the Bishops' Bible. The KJV kept the addition in the Bishops' Bible at John 8:6 ["as though he heard them not"].

    Is the Bishops' Bible's rendering at Ecclesiastes 11:1 perfect {"Lay thy bread upton wet faces"]? Is this rendering "pure synonyms"?
     
  17. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,154
    Likes Received:
    322
    Yes, in KJVO double-speak all things are possible.

    Things which are different can be the same, errors can be inspired, etc.

    HankD
     
  18. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    In her new book, Riplinger wrote: "The KJV gives the perfect definition of all its own words" (p. 65).

    Can KJV-only posters provide these perfect definitions for every one of the words in the KJV?
     
  19. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,154
    Likes Received:
    322
    The King James translators disagree and would say that she is being presumptuous.
    But what do they know better than Gail, especially about their own work?

    HankD
     
  20. paulsfocus

    paulsfocus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    0

    Really :eek: they told you that :confused:
    Who's the one being presumptuous?
     

Share This Page

Loading...