In AWE of Thy Word

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Ed Edwards, Jun 5, 2004.

  1. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gail Riplinger's New 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 :(

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

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Look at this lie:
    "KJV translators, as youths, were eyewitnesses of an era when men would rather be burned at the stake than deny one word of the English Bible — even dying to defend the Bible's built-in dictionary!"

    Well, i guess it is half true/half lie -- but aren't they all.
    This statement fails to mention that the "KJV translators, as youths,
    were eyewitnesses" because they were on the side that did
    the burning
    :(
     
  3. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    "No Bible word is safe from the stain of those
    who dip their pens in the dark world of Greek
    and Hebrew lexicons. Anyone with a lexicon can
    spray its ink graffiti on any page of the Holy Bible,
    using the hot air generated by liberal lexicon authors."

    [​IMG]

    BTW, does anybody know what a lexicon
    might be?
     
  4. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Deuteronomy 18:10-12 (KJV1769):

    There shall not be found among you any one that maketh
    his son or his daughter to pass through the fire,
    or that useth divination, or an observer of times,
    or an enchanter, or a witch, 11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer
    .
    12 For all that do these things are an abomination
    unto the LORD: and because of these abominations
    the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.

    OR, much easier to understand:

    Deuteronomy 18:10-12 (HCSB):

    For example, never sacrifice your son or daughter as a burnt offering.
    And do not let your people practice fortune-telling
    or sorcery, or allow them to interpret omens,
    or engage in witchcraft,
    11 or cast spells, or function as mediums or psychics,
    or call forth the spirits of the dead.

    12 Anyone who does these things is an object of horror
    and disgust to the LORD. It is because the other nations
    have done these things that the LORD your God will
    drive them out ahead of you.

    Fortune telling (or divination) from the letters and words
    of the Bible itself would be exceptionally onus
    before God, it is strictly prohibited.
     
  5. rsr

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

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,079
    Likes Received:
    103
    To be fair, Ed, this is Chick talking, which means it's an ellipsis of an ellipsis of an ellipsis, by which you can make practically any written source say anything (which Riplinger has done.)

    But I thought these interesting:

    "The KJV's words are like 'the Word,' Jesus Christ, who is "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher..." (Heb. 7:26)."

    "The NKJV, NIV, TNIV, HCSB, ESV, and NASB are bound together, like the thorns plaited on Jesus' brow, to pierce the name JESUS (e.g. Acts 3:13, 26, 4:27, 30, 7:45; Heb. 4:8) and completely remove the name JEHOVAH from their pages. Worse yet, unbelieving German lexicon editors and new version margins (e.g. HCSB, KJV-ER) incorrectly replace the name JEHOVAH with Yahweh, an off-shoot of the pagan Canaanite god, Yaho."

    Of the KJV translators: "God said, "I have not spoken in secret," in lexicons hidden on scholars' bookshelves, but "in the volume of the book" in "other tongues," such as English (Isa. 45:19, Heb. 10:7). The phrase, "in the Greek" and "in the Hebrew" is too often immediately followed by echoes from the "bottomless pit," warns Rev. 9:11. Unlike today's editors, the KJV translators' final authorities were Bibles, not lexicons. They saw the KJV as the final "perfected" and "finished" English Bible. "Satan," they warned, benefited from "various editions."

    She's got chutzpah, anyway.
     
  6. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    I have always wondered about Satan being behind Ruckman and Gail and Jack Chick, et al. Not only has their pernicious and evil "doctrine" divided Christianity (or at least a small part of it), but has led to a whole sect of "bibliolaters".

    Is "demonic" to strong a word? Or at least influenced as "doctrine of demons"??
     
  7. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    Satan is not behind Ruckman, Riplinger, or Chick. It is positively medieval to think that insanity is caused by demon possession! :D
     
  8. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Wonder about you, too, skan. [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Seriously, I don't think I'm the only one to see the "only sect" as a schizmatic sub-group that is harming fundamentalism.

    Dr. Bob-the Lion-Hearted
     
  9. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    I too see the KJOVs are a sub-group of fundamentalists who are harming to position of historic fundamentalists. But, even though they are a sub group, they are still fundamentalists. [​IMG]
     
  10. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ed Edwards announced:

    Gail Riplinger's New Book:

    Thanky you, that's all I needed to know!
     
  11. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey, i bought a copy,
    should be to me in 14-20 days.

    I'm a student of comic theology :D
     
  12. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    I figure if I want a copy, the used ones should be hitting the stores in a few months. [​IMG]
     
  13. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    In this case is "hitting" to be taken
    literally or as a metaphor? [​IMG]
     
  14. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    There are many kinds of fundamentalists—Christian fundamentalists, Islamic fundamentalists, KJO fundamentalists, and many others.
     
  15. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    Once again you have stooped to the fallacy of "guilt by association." KJVOs are both Christian and fundamental. Get over it and get on with your life. Trying to link them to Modernism and now removing them from the realm of Christianity and placing them in the box occupied by non-believers such as Islamics is simply dishonest.
     
  16. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I got my copy of
    IN AWE OF THY WORD (AVPubs, 2003)
    by G.A. Riplinger today
    in the mail

    Took me 3.2 minutes to find this deception
    on page 722. Took me longer than
    that to type it up.

    Luke 11:54 "Laying wait for him, and
    seeking to catch something out
    of his mouth, THAT THEY MIGHT
    ACCUSE HIM
    ."

    "NKVJ note" "OMIT"

    Well it is true, but deceptive.
    The phrase "THAT THEY MIGHT ACCUSE HIM"
    is NOT in the New King James Version (NKJV)
    note -- it is in the NKJV text.
    After teh nKJV entry it says:

    "Jehovah Witness Version" "OMIT"

    So it is trying to deceive us that
    the New KJV is, like the Jehovah Witness
    Version, omitting "THAT THEY MIGHT
    ACCUSE HIM". But the nKJV does not
    omit "THAT THEY MIGHT ACCUSE HIM".

    Luke 11:54 (NIV):
    waiting to catch him in something he might say

    The subject of the sentence is obvious
    from the previous verse, and is the
    referrant of "they" in the KJV.

    S.Luke XI:54 (KJV1611):

    Laying wait for him, and seeking
    to catch something out of his mouth,
    that they might accuse him.


    Note the meaning of the two versions
    are the same. It is deceptive to say
    that "THAT THEY MIGHT
    ACCUSE HIM" is missing. The NIV phrase
    says the same thing in different words
    and has the same meaning.

    Some guys (defined in v. 53) were
    listening to Jesus so they might trap
    Him in His words. Note how very like
    these bad people, G.A. Riplinger is,
    she reads MY BIBLE that she might
    accuse it. I find that UGLY.

    I have nothing but the highest praise
    for the King James Version, 1769 edition
    (KJV1769) which she uses. Why does she
    denigerate my Bible? The NIV is my Bible.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. Marcia

    Marcia
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    From Riplinger's new book:
    This and other excerpts I read there is worthy of the Twilight Zone. How sad to see this. :(
     
  18. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just chose a passage at random out of the KJV and tried to read it out loud, tapping my foot to the accented syllables. Needless to say, there's nothing "equally proportioned" about them at all.
     
  19. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh forget that.
    How about self-defining words?

    dEVIL - see, it defines itself
    demon - doesn't define itself

    Guess which the KJV uses and which
    the Nasty Infidel's Venom (NIV) uses [​IMG]

    I note my Bible, the HCSB uses "devil"
    32 times but the KJV1769 has it 57 times
    (in the New Testament). Obviously the
    KJV1769 is twice as "dEVIL" as
    the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) [​IMG]
     
  20. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can't wait to get it. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...