1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

An open letter to Gail Riplinger

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by stilllearning, Oct 30, 2008.

Top Posters
Page 1 of 4
  1. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello G.A. Riplinger

    I am relatively new to the internet, which explains why this thank you letter, hadn’t been sent earlier.

    Recently, after discovering all the “Christian” discussion forums on the internet, I was very surprised at the reactions that I was receiving from others, when I would even mention my love for the KJV. I soon discovered that I was going to have to take a stand, for the Bible.

    The reason for this letter, is to give you “a word of encouragement”, for the stand that you have taken in this area. The personal attacks that Sarah Palin has received, are nothing compared to the attacks that have been launched against you.

    I won’t go on and on about it, but I just wanted to say “thank you”, and to let you know, that I am praying for you, that the Lord would strengthen you, in this “battle” for His Word.
     
    #1 stilllearning, Oct 30, 2008
  2. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    :rolleyes:

    Oh yeah, FTR, I almost forgot to mention a couple of things.

    I too, am a Bible user (mostly King James versions, BTW) and also a 'Bible defender' who "take(s) a stand, for the Bible", an NT majority text-ist defender (which is incidentally, not the same thing as a TR-ist (despite the number of times this inaccuracy is repeated that the two are identical), so I do prefer and believe that generally the MT is the correct text, and I happen to be one of the very few on the Baptist Boardwho will actually refer to Dr. Gail A. Riplinger by her conferred title.

    However, any and/or all that does not happen to equate to "good scholarship" in the positions Dr. Riplinger usually advocates, nor does any and/or all of it overcome historic and/or factual inaccuracies, the pointing(s) out of which, does not constitute one of the implied so-called "personal attacks".

    Nor is it a "personal attack" to suggest that your own language, by the pejorative phrasing, amounts to an attack on my own postion (since I do not happen to be an "only-est" of any flavor, except that I am not able to read two different versions, editions, or translations at the same time, under any circumstances), or that of others of a different position than that of yours, that are just as convinced, dedicated and vigorous about 'defending the Bible' as are you.

    "Taking a stand for the Bible" does not equal to taking a stand for any particular version, edition, language, or whatever, when a different copy or edition is completely excluded, as I have pointed out before. Nor does any 'selective interpretation' of historical and Biblical facts, equal "taking a stand."

    Ed
     
    #2 EdSutton, Oct 30, 2008
  3. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since we're speaking the truth in love here, maybe someone should relay to "Dr." Riplinger the importance of her telling the truth, and how some people find her attacks against the Word of God repulsive.

    Hope that didn't dampen her spirits any.
     
    #3 rbell, Oct 30, 2008
  4. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    GAR should stick to teaching Industrial and Environmental Design since her doctorate is in that subject. She has 0, zip, no, none, nada theological training. She does, however, have an honorary doctorate from that paragon of IFB theological studies: Hyles-Anderson College.
     
    #4 Mexdeaf, Oct 30, 2008
  5. sag38

    sag38 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,395
    Likes Received:
    2
    The supposed attacks against her are not attacks. They are legitimate criticisms. Fact is that much of what she says, at best, are stretches of the truth.
     
    #5 sag38, Oct 30, 2008
  6. Alive in Christ

    Alive in Christ New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, I had no idea who Gail Riplinger was when I came upon this thread.

    But this...from her website...is all I need to know...

    .

    Oh. Another King James Only'er. :BangHead:


    http://www.avpublications.com/avnew/home.html


    :godisgood:
     
    #6 Alive in Christ, Oct 30, 2008
  7. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, Dr. Gail A. Riplinger's only doctorate is the one awarded by Hyles-Anderson College. She has a B.A. in Interior Design, an M.A. in Home Economics, and an M.F.A. in Art, all of which were earned at Kent State University.

    One might note that I made no reference to how well I personally regard Dr. Gail A. Riplinger, the Doctorate awarded, nor Hyles-Anderson College. I consider all the above irrelevant to the respect shown by my form of address.

    The fact that I personally would not attend Hyles-Anderson College, were that option available to me, and I were a college student, is also likewise irrelevant. I would and do give the same official respect to any an all institutions, from the best academics to what I consider the worst, in that regard, regardless of the personal esteem in which I hold an institution. I can differ and disagree what is taught completely, without making any such "put-downs," even if, in my own mind, an institution or individual has well earned and even deserves such disdain.

    Ed
     
    #7 EdSutton, Oct 30, 2008
  8. Dale-c

    Dale-c Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well spoken Ed.

    In short Riplinger's work needs to be examined in light of the facts she presents. Whether they are true or false and not on the basis of her credentials.

    A liar yesterday who earns a degree today will not have his lies turned to truth tomorrow.
     
    #8 Dale-c, Oct 30, 2008
  9. tinytim

    tinytim <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    I also want to publically thank Ms. Riplinger... she along with her fellow brother, Mr. Ruckman have done more good to the body of Christ than they know.

    Through their outrageous claims they have shown the lengths KJVO extremists will go to prove they are wrong...

    They lie, scheme and twist scripture.... allowing those of us that fight this type of hermeneutics to prove that God can use any scripture he wants.

    So thank you "Dr" "God and" Riplinger... You make the truth shine brighter by comparing it to your heretical doctrines!
     
    #9 tinytim, Oct 30, 2008
  10. IFB Mole

    IFB Mole New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    197
    Likes Received:
    0
    Still learning

    Is someone that isn't a radical KJVOnlyite NOT a Bible defender? You seem to equate a Bible defender as one that defends the Anglican revision of previous English translations. I defend the Word of God too, as all Christians do. I defend the Bible, but I don't limit that Bible to a revision of previous English Bibles by a bunch of hand-picked Anglican priests by King Jimmy.
     
    #10 IFB Mole, Oct 30, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2008
  11. Dale-c

    Dale-c Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    This makes me wonder what would happen if one were to make the same arguments as the KJV people do but were to only insert another translation such as the Geneva Bible?
    In fact if you were to use the Geneva, you would have even more ammo. I have seen people do this.

    Or you could also use a modern version like the NASB.
    You could use the same verses and everything to prove a "Geneva only" or "NASB Only" position.
     
    #11 Dale-c, Oct 30, 2008
  12. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    My only complaint with Mrs.Riplinger, is that she seems to think that she can read people’s minds.
    i.e. (She thinks she knows “why”, those men changed the Bible the way they did.)
    -And only they, know the real reasons behind, what they did.-
    --------------------------------------------------
    As for her lack of education:
    How much education does it take, to point out all the changes being made in the Bible?
     
    #12 stilllearning, Oct 31, 2008
  13. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi IFB Mole

    I see where you are coming from.

    But the way I look at it, all this talk about, “a bunch of hand-picked Anglican priests by King Jimmy”, is just a bunch of “mis-information” put out by all those who hate the KJV.

    I figure, that is even 10% of what is being said about the KJV, were true, then how in the world, have so many Christians(like myself), been deceived for so long a time.

    And if any of what they say about the KJV was true, than why is God so wonderfully blessing my study of it.
    -Certainly, the LORD would guide me to another Bible!-

    But He hasn’t!
     
    #13 stilllearning, Oct 31, 2008
  14. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    I agree. A lot of support for the KJVO stance can be thought out and presented in a manner which could draw people into it.

    Riplinger and Ruckman use such outlandish arguments that they hurt the cause of those who truly believe their own onlyism doctrine.

    If I were KJVO I would run from R&R as fast as I could. They would hurt my cause.
     
    #14 NaasPreacher (C4K), Oct 31, 2008
  15. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,363
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "Still Learning", it's time ya learned the straight skinny about Riplinger:

    http://www.avpublications.org/

    I hope ya check various sources to verify the accuracy of the info in this site. I have.
     
    #15 robycop3, Oct 31, 2008
  16. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ed,

    Thanks for setting me straight. Well spoken.:thumbs:
     
    #16 Mexdeaf, Oct 31, 2008
  17. Dale-c

    Dale-c Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    The way you look at it? The way you "look" at it needs to be determined by the facts as they are. Have you verified that the KJV was NOT a more or less Anglican translation? The above quote is a but oversimplified but they certainly were not independent baptists either.



    Have you verified that even 10% is true?
    And I might ask, 10% of what? 10% of the textual variation? Perhaps but why do you assume that the KJV is the standard?
    10% of the personal attacks against the translators?

    I am not sure what "they say about the KJV" what I say about the KJV is that it is an excellent translation of the the inspired Word of God in the English language that God has used for many years, just as he is using other translations such as the ESV, NASB, NKJV and NIV et al.


    And what would He have to do in your opinion to lead you to another "Bible"? If the facts are not enough to show you that the KJV is not the only valid translation of the Word of God then the problem is with you.

    I do like your nickname.
    Keep learning.
    I used to believe as you. I did not change overnight.
    God bless you as you continue to study :)
     
    #17 Dale-c, Oct 31, 2008
  18. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi robycop3

    I had recently ran across the website myself, and as it said, “Read this first”, I clicked on the “Reason For Exposing Gail Riplinger”:

    -Here are my observations.-

    This is a very interesting and telling document.
    --------------------------------------------------
    The first charge against Mrs.Riplinger, is that she lied about the differences she pointed out in other Bibles......
    I have noticed this myself(as I looked through her book), and here is what I think has happened.
    (The publishers of the NASB, have also read her book, and therefore, they made some changes to there Bible:)
    -After all, they hold the copyright to it, and they can do whatever they want to it.-

    Now this suspicion of mine, would be easy to check out.
    (It was first published, in 1971)
    -If someone could find a copy of the NASB published in 1971, and check to see what Isaiah 26:3 says.-

    Until we do this, we can’t really call her a liar!
    --------------------------------------------------
    Next, this document tells us, that we shouldn’t listen to her claims, because she might be lying about other aspects of her life..........

    Since when is “vagueness”, a lie.

    NOTE: Please don’t get me wrong, I am not here to defend her(or anybody):
    -I am simply pointing out how much of an smear campaign this seems to be.-
    --------------------------------------------------
    Next we see, that these people were really motivated......

    Are they saying, that a divorced person, can not be used by the LORD?!?!
    --------------------------------------------------
    My favorite part:

    One of the most troubling charges that I have heard about Mrs.Riplinger, is that she believes in “Double Inspiration”;
    -This troubles me, because this is a False teaching, that a lot of people attribute to Peter S. Ruckman.-

    If indeed this turns out to be the truth, than my opinion of Mrs.Riplinger, will change.

    This document, claims to identify Mrs.Riplinger with this false teaching........

    This is the only connection that they have found, between Mrs.Riplinger and Ruckman!

    By the way, this is what a smear campaign looks like.
    --------------------------------------------------
    Next, they keep building, upon what they have already said, and conclude.......

    Here we have it;
    Proof, that she is a liar:
    “Waite replied that his wife had recently spoken with Riplinger concerning the information and that Riplinger had denied she was ever divorced.”

    --------------------------------------------------
    Now please understand.

    I am “still learning”, but what I see in this document, seems to support my charges, that Mrs.Riplinger, is the target of unfair attacks, simply because she is KJVO.
     
    #18 stilllearning, Oct 31, 2008
  19. tinytim

    tinytim <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Stilllearning, Ms. Riplinger has been discussed and proven to be a liar countless times on this board...

    Here is a list of threads that she has been the subject of...
    Please take your time and examine each one.. especially the ones where we critique her videos...

    This link will take you to all her threads
    http://www.baptistboard.com/search.php?searchid=495614

    I am trusting that you are still learning and really want the truth... you will find it in these threads.
     
    #19 tinytim, Oct 31, 2008
  20. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi Dale-c

    Nice to hear from you.

    Your first statement......
    Well, “facts”, are hard to come by sometimes.
    Here is an example.

    This is what has been said about the fathers of all the new Bible versions......
    Now, are these “facts”?

    If I could find 100 people, that would back them up, would that make them factual?

    Note: This paragraph comes from......
    http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/hort.htm
    --------------------------------------------------
    Now I know, that there are some who would disagree my statement, that Westcott & Hort, are the fathers of “all” the new Bible versions.

    But this seems to be the “fact”.
    (If not based upon their manuscript, every new Bible has been “influence” by it.)

    Note: The reason we know this to be a “fact”, is because if anybody tried to put out a new Bible, without considering the work of Westcott & Hort, they would be ridiculed as “anti-intellectual”, and their Bible would not be published!
    --------------------------------------------------
    Next you responded to my statement..........
    And you said.......
    Well, I am talking about all the things that are being said about the KJV, in an effort to stop people from trusting it.

    Punch up “KJV controversy”, and see how many hits you get.

    And yes. Every attack that I have studied out, I have verified to be false.
    --------------------------------------------------
    Next you responded to my statement......
    And you said........
    I can’t understand why anybody that believes “the KJV is an excellent translation of the inspired Word of God in the English language”, would also use the ESV, NASB, NKJV and NIV.

    What can you get from these other Bibles, that you can’t get from the KJV?
    --------------------------------------------------
    Finally you said........
    What facts are you talking about?
     
    #20 stilllearning, Oct 31, 2008
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 1 of 4
Loading...