Another Riplinger video...

Ed: // ... but nothing is said about the KJV1611 using small 'h'
in the 'holy Spirit' unlike the KJV1769 which uses
a capital 'H' in 'Holy Spirit'.//

Salamander: //A typo doesn't equal a different word.//

Tee Hee, do a word search. Some typo. In 89 verses
the KJV1611 Edition has 'holy Spirit'
but the KJV1769 Edition has 'Holy Spirit'.

So does this count as one typo in the KJV1611 Edition
or 89 typos?
So does this error as one error in the KJV1611 Edition
or 89 errors?

 

1 John 5:13 (NKJV = New King James Version)

13 These things I have written to
you who believe in the name of the Son of God,
that you may know that you have eternal life,* and that
you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

Footnotes:
*. 1 John 5:13 NU-Text omits the rest of this verse.

Interesting, damning a version that trys to make some
sense out of the repetition error in the Majority Texts (MTs).

 

Amen, Brother Ed! Preach it!

 

The next verse mentioned by Mrs. Riplinger is Ecclesiastes 5:20 where the KJV has "God answereth [him]" and the NKJV has "God keeps him busy". She feels that this substitution is indicitive of a 'works salvation' being promoted by the NKJV. Here is both versions of the verse in context (Ecclesiastes 5:19-20)--

Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; this [is] the gift of God.
For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answereth [him] in the joy of his heart. (KJV)

As for every man to whom God has given riches and wealth, and given him power to eat of it, to receive his heritage and rejoice in his labor--this is the gift of God.
For he will not dwell unduly on the days of his life, because God keeps him busy with the joy of his heart. (NKJV)​

The KJV word "answereth" represents the underlying Hebrew 'anah (Strong's #6031) which seems to have a broad and/or unclear meaning; Strong's says in part that it means "to depress literally or figuratively, transitive or intransitive in various applications" and has the "idea of looking down or browbeating". Thayer's says in part that it means "to be occupied, be busied with, or to afflict, oppress, humble, be afflicted, be bowed down".

The KJV translates this word as "afflict" 50 times, "humble" 11 times, "force" 5 times, but also "exercised", "sing", "Leannoth", "troubled", "weakened", and 11 other miscellaneous words (84 total). Evidently, the occurrence in Ecclesiastes 5:20 is the only time it is rendered "answereth" in the KJV.

It seems that there is a possibly related Hebrew word (Strong's #6030, but spelled the same) which is the word that the KJV standardly translates as "answer" (242 times of 329 occurrences).

Interestingly, the Septuagint has no text for this verse. Some other versions have--

People who do this rarely look with sorrow on the past, for God has given them reasons for joy. (NLT)

He seldom reflects on the days of his life, because God keeps him occupied with gladness of heart. (NIV)

For he will not much remember the days of his life because God keeps him occupied with joy in his heart. (ESV)

For he will not often consider the years of his life, because God keeps him occupied with the gladness of his heart. (NASB) ​

John Gill writes concerning this phrase: "he calls upon God for a blessing on his labours, asks of him his daily food, and desires what may be proper and sufficient for him, or what he judges is necessary and convenient; and God answers his prayers and petitions, and good wishes, by filling his heart with food and gladness; and giving him that cheerfulness of spirit, and thankfulness of heart, in the enjoyment of every blessing; and especially if along with it he lifts up the light of his countenance, and grants him joy in the Holy Ghost; he will go on so pleasantly and comfortably as to forget all his former troubles; and it will dissipate his doubts and fears about how he shall live for the future."

Robert Jamieson writes that "God answers his prayers in giving him 'power' to enjoy his blessings. GESENIUS and Vulgate translate, "For God (so) occupies him with joy," &c., that he thinks not much of the shortness and sorrows of life." (Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible)

I seem to be slightly more than half way through this video.

 

G. A. Riplinger now makes her final statements of the first lecture of this video. Unfirtunately she does not make this last assertion clearly. She fails to name a book, chapter, or verse reference. Several times she begins a statement, but then quickly says something else, and never completes the original point. So, I am assuming that she was referring to 1 Corinthian 1:18 (or either 2 Corinthians 2:15) where the KJV has "are saved" and the NKJV has "are being saved". Looking at the context of 1 Corthinians 1:17-19 in the KJV now--

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. ​

Almost every version I looked at has "are being saved" or similar wording including: AMP, NET, ALT, NASB, NIV, NLT, ESV, and Young's. Supporting the KJV rendering of "are saved" was Darby and Rheims (ironically, she accuses the NKJV of Catholic teaching here).

The word in English "saved" is a form of the Greek verb sozo (Strong's #4982) which means to save, keep safe and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction. It can to save a suffering one from perishing (like one suffering from disease, to make well, heal, restore to health) and/or to preserve one who is in danger of destruction (rescue). A beautiful picture of salvation. The KJV translates it primarily as "save" (93 times), but also "make whole" (9 times), "heal" (3), "be whole" (2), and three other words (110 total).

David Guzik says that "the verb tenses of are perishing and are being saved are significant. They both describe a work in progress. Each of us is definitely moving in one of those two directions."

A. T. Robertson writes concerning this phrase that it is in "sharp contrast to those that are perishing and same construction with the articular participle. No reason for the change of pronouns in English. This present passive participle is again timeless. Salvation is described by Paul as a thing done in the past, 'we were saved' (Romans 8:24), as a present state, 'ye have been saved' ( 2:5), as a process, 'ye are being saved' (1 Corinthians 15:2), as a future result, 'thou shalt be saved' (Romans 10:9 )."

Marvin Vincent in his NT Word Studies has "literally that are perishing... The present participle denotes process: they who are on the way to destruction. Compare 2 Corinthians 2:15. And also concerning the Greek translated 'which are saved'... "being saved: in process of salvation."

Alexander Maclaren writes that "instead of reading ‘them that perish’ and ‘us which are saved,’ we ought to read ‘them that are perishing,’ and ‘us which are being saved.’ That is to say, the Apostle represents the two contrasted conditions, not so much as fixed states, either present or future, but rather as processes which are going on, and are manifestly, in the present, incomplete."

Albert Barnes writes that "this stands opposed to 'them that perish.' It refers, doubtless, to Christians, as being saved from the power and condemnation of sin; and as having a prospect of eternal salvation in the world to come."

Robert Jamieson claims that "rather, 'them that are perishing,' namely, by preferring human 'wisdom of words' to the doctrine of the 'cross of Christ.' It is not the final state that is referred to; but, 'them that are in the way of perishing.' So also in 2 Corinthians 2:15, 16."

Riplinger says that this became an issue when dealing with her students at Kent State concerning their eternal security. But even she states that "are saved" in the Greek verb means "a past action that continues into the future". She would have her audience to believe that there is no place in the NKJV where the phrase "are saved" is used, which is untrue (see 1 Corinthians 15:2, Revelation 21:24 in the NKJV).

 

I see no one rushing to GAR's defense. I even gave the URL of this thread to another board, whose members include admirers of her and Ruckman.

 

If they ain't Russian, maybe they are Finnish(d)?

 

Shirley not!

 

It is an applicable typesetters preference, not a "mistake" as you'd like to claim. Besides, it works both ways, it is not a different word.

 

"believe on" isn't the same as "believe in".

"On" has the conotation of continuance and moving forward in this context and is better fit to make the doctrine very clear.

 

Don't know, and you admit you don't either, but the reference is certainly applicable.

You're accusing her without her being present in this situation, maybe at other times as well, so don't act upon your presumption without the facts.

 

We neen no presumption to accuse her over what she's written and what she's said as recorded on videos. They're a matter of public record that anyone can see.

 

Amen! Additionally, any man over whom she has
usurped authority and whom she teaches, that comes
to this board as a Baptist, should feel
free to counter the allegations against her.

 

Know any King James only people who would believe that a woman should teach in a congregation? I do not know of any who believe that a woman should teach in their congregation. Yet they will listen to her. Amazing how people who say they believe the Bible and then go against their own theology.

 

Focus

I'm a little perplexed at some of the attitudes and statements I've noticed regarding brothers and sisters in Christ, who are standing up for the scriptures. I thought "Baptists" stood solidly on the authority of the scripture. It has been established long ago, that everyone of the "new versions" are (attack on Bible deleted) of the God-blessed text. How can someone copyright the scriptures? (Hint: $$$$$) For all of the Hebrew & Greek worshippers: do you read, study, memorize, preach, teach, and lead people to Christ out of the TR or Hebrew? Why not? What do you carry and use daily - an English Bible? Why? If the Hebrew & Greek are the God-blessed languages, what are you using an inferior version for? What language do you pray (if you pray) to God in - English? Why not Hebrew & Greek? Here's the clincher - what language does God speak to you in? I'll bet it's NOT Hebrew & Greek!
Just think of the people that could be won to Christ out of the scriptures, while people are sitting around blogging and arguing over something The Lord settled long ago! If I read many of the posts here, and was a lost man, I don't think I'd want the salvation you've got (if you've got it). Looking at many of the posts, I would think that most of the people were either not born again or were jesuit change agents seeking to destroy the faith of real blood-bought Baptists in the scriptures. Hammering people's character for making some unintended oral or written errors, instead of taking an honest look at the material being presented, is an old jesuit trick, called "character assasination." (Bill Clinton and Jesse Jackson call themselves baptists! Why don't you "pound them" for awhile?:godisgood: :godisgood: ) 100 years ago, there was no question about what the Holy Bible was or where to get a copy of it. My Bible says "by their fruits" you'll know them." Compare the spiritual fruit of the Holy Bible for the last several hundred years (Protestant reformation, Welsh revival, Billy Sunday, etc) with any fruit from the Hebrew, Greek, or modern versions, and I think you'll see a huge difference. The koine Greek language died out over 800 years ago - any lexicons, commentaries, interlinears, or other "helps" have been edited by lost unitarians, using the classic Greek! I think if many of you realized what a blessing we have in the Holy Bible, and looked at how many people gave their lives so that we might have a copy of it, you'd get over these little pitiful, petty attempts at denigrating the scriptures.

 

Welcome to the BB , MS . I calculated you were in 90% error in your post . I'l let others point out your misconceptions .

First , I want you to list all those lost Unitarian scholars .

You said that "100 years ago , there was no question about what the Holy Bible was or where to get a copy of it ." Aside from the diversity of languages in which the Bible was translated at that time --I assume you mean an English translation . Well , many evangelicals and soon-to-be-called Fundamentalists were using the 1901 American Standard Version . It was said at the time to be the most accurate version in the English language . Many notable , respected preachers/authors/scholars were using it .

BTW , the Welsh Revival was a pale reflection of the deeper Great Awakening , 2nd Awakening , and the 1959 Revival .

Billy Sunday of the 19teens -30's is not to be compared to Whitefield , Nettleton or Spurgeon -- only contrasted .

 

Mongol Servant: //It has been established long ago, that
everyone of the "new versions" are serious corruptions
of the God-blessed text. ... petty attempts
at denigrating the scriptures.//

Excuse me, sir or mam, but you just denigrated my scripture.
And I won't be sitting by idle while you do it.

This whole Versions/translations Forum has repeated
over and over the that the new versions, those 8 versions
before the KJVs, and those 22 King James Versions
are all the 'God-blessed text'.

It has NOT been established that there is anything
wrong with the Bibles I've used ten years or more:
NIV and nKJV. And if the Lord taries I'll use my
HCSB = Christian Standard Bible (Holman, 2003).

 

Sad

Rip & Ed

Still got your head stuck in the sand - ya missed it, dude - ya missed it!

:tonofbricks:

 

Mongol Servant:I'm a little perplexed at some of the attitudes and statements I've noticed regarding brothers and sisters in Christ, who are standing up for the scriptures.

GAR isn't standing up for the Scriptures...she's standing up for a man-made false doctrine about one English version of the Scriptures...a doctrine on which she depends upon to sell her boox & keep her livin' large.


I thought "Baptists" stood solidly on the authority of the scripture.

And we DO...and not on versionism.


It has been established long ago, that everyone of the "new versions" are serious corruptions of the God-blessed text.

No, it hasn't been ESTABLISHED...it's only been GUESSED AT by some ill-informed and misguided "scholars".


How can someone copyright the scriptures?

The makers of a TRANSLATION of the scriptures can easily copyright it. Please name an English version in common use that's not copyrighted at least in part. Hint: the KJV is still copyrighted in England. That copyright assures me I have an unedited edition.

(Hint: $$$$$) For all of the Hebrew & Greek worshippers: do you read, study, memorize, preach, teach, and lead people to Christ out of the TR or Hebrew? Why not? What do you carry and use daily - an English Bible? Why? If the Hebrew & Greek are the God-blessed languages, what are you using an inferior version for? What language do you pray (if you pray) to God in - English? Why not Hebrew & Greek? Here's the clincher - what language does God speak to you in? I'll bet it's NOT Hebrew & Greek!

However, EVERY authentic English Bible translation is made from the Hebrew, Aramaic, & Koine Greek manuscripts.

Just think of the people that could be won to Christ out of the scriptures, while people are sitting around blogging and arguing over something The Lord settled long ago!

The Lord causes/allows the languages to change over time. When He gave His word to man, He spoke them to His writers in THEIR languages, the languages he had given them.

If I read many of the posts here, and was a lost man, I don't think I'd want the salvation you've got (if you've got it). Looking at many of the posts, I would think that most of the people were either not born again or were jesuit change agents seeking to destroy the faith of real blood-bought Baptists in the scriptures.

That's because you're closed to the TRUTH that God didn't retire in 1611, nor is He limited to any one translation of His word in any of the languages He's chosen for man to use. Do YOU teach Mongols about God in English? Or do you use Khalka(sic), Russian, Turcic, or whatever the local language is?

Hammering people's character for making some unintended oral or written errors, instead of taking an honest look at the material being presented, is an old jesuit trick, called "character assasination."

Have you viewed the GAR videos? Have you read her boox? As I said above, all one need do is lay any of her boox beside the work of an author whom she's quoting to see the deliberate misquote. THESE ARE NOT UNINTENDED ERRORS...THESE ARE DELIBERATE MISQUOTES!!!!!


(Bill Clinton and Jesse Jackson call themselves baptists! Why don't you "pound them" for awhile? )

As public figures, their hypocrisy speaks for itself. For that matter, GAR is a public figure also, and her hypocrisy speaks for itself.

100 years ago, there was no question about what the Holy Bible was or where to get a copy of it.

And there's still no question...but there's a better selection of versions now.

My Bible says "by their fruits" you'll know them." Compare the spiritual fruit of the Holy Bible for the last several hundred years (Protestant reformation, Welsh revival, Billy Sunday, etc) with any fruit from the Hebrew, Greek, or modern versions, and I think you'll see a huge difference. The koine Greek language died out over 800 years ago - any lexicons, commentaries, interlinears, or other "helps" have been edited by lost unitarians, using the classic Greek! I think if many of you realized what a blessing we have in the Holy Bible, and looked at how many people gave their lives so that we might have a copy of it, you'd get over these little pitiful, petty attempts at denigrating the scriptures.

Is YOUR Bible translated from the Hebrew, Greek, & Aramaic mss or not? If not, how are ya justified to call it a Holy Bible? Do you use Mongol-language Bibles? If so, are they translated from the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic? If they're translated from another translation in another language, then they're inferior to a translation made directly from the old mss, as some more essence of the original is lost every time a translation is used to make another translation in another language.

The subject of this thread is a GAR video. Please restrict your comments on this thread to that subject, & start a new thread if ya wish to defend the false versionism myth. And while you're at it, please post some SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for this doctrine, or it'll remain false.

 

Credentials?? Would that be a fair question?? Perhaps from one with a total of two posts vs. one who has 11,500+, and another with 1300+ posts?? I'd say they have established some, anyway.

But anywho, Welcme to the BB! Ya' might wanna' make sure you have your hardhat on! :tonofbricks:

Oh, BTW, the Lord did setttle the "language issue" of Scripture long ago, I'll agree! Almost two millenia ago, in fact! It is Hebrew, Chaldee/Aramaic and Greek, and has been for well over 1900 years!

And I fully agree that we have a blessing in today's world with the translations in our own 'native' languages.

(You might wish to check out this post. http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38464 )

Mine happens to be English. That way, I can 'rely' on the work of the many humble, honest, and sincere believers (excepting 'rigged' versions in places such as the NWT, etc.), who have done all the translation work into English from the days of Cadmaeon, Alfred, Wyclif, et.al., all the way through to today's newest 'updates' into more modern English. And the versions easily available to me, are mostly all or were copywrited, as another said, (with the possible exceptions of the Darby, the YLT, and the 'pirated' American editions of the KJV from the still copywrited number of the KJV English editions), including the KJV and the version I use, the NKJV.

Back to the 'movie'!

Ed