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!

The NIV: part two

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by KJVBibleThumper, Sep 7, 2004.

Top Posters
Page 1 of 4
  1. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Im sorry the other topic was closed before I got in my responses(I wanted to yesturday as I promised but I had to take a church hike up to Glacier Park and I got back so late thatI couldnt get on.)
    Robycop3 here is my answer to you:
    Your response to my list of authors is suspect as you offered no evidence whatsoever to support it and futhurmore I am wondering just how many of these books you have read or if you are just saying what other people have said?
    And I am studying every reference I can get my hands on and if you can recomend some that support your view I will do my best to get my hands on them. [​IMG]
    As I am home-schooled I have more time then public schooled people to study this out and I am not afraid to do it.
    If you would please post say a chapter of ripplinger and say why its wrong then I will be happy to debate it with you. The same goes for Gipp and any other author that is KJVO that I posted. if you do this then we can have a nice debate over it. [​IMG] [​IMG]
    In Christ,
    KJVBibleThumper
     
    #1 KJVBibleThumper, Sep 7, 2004
  2. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thumper,

    Gipp isn't too bad. Riplinger on the other hand is awful! She takes quotes out of context and at times completely misrepresents the point of the authors she quotes. Although I disagree with Gipp I haven't found him academically dishonest.
     
    #2 Charles Meadows, Sep 7, 2004
  3. superdave

    superdave New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,055
    Likes Received:
    0
    This Horse is dead and rotten.

    Where the NIV agrees with the autographs it is the word of God. See I Tim 3:16 for the proof
     
    #3 superdave, Sep 7, 2004
  4. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    DeclarHim your post asking whether or not I am going to answer them pointed out to me that I havnt been. I do appologise for that and I will try and answer as many as possible as soon as I can. As the other topic is closed and I havnt been able to figure out how to quote from one thread to another I will not be able to answer point for point like I like to,
    sorry.
    When you say that the KJV translators inclused the Approcripha in their dailly reading could you show me some proof on that please? The same goes for saying that a KJV translator was a drunk.
    As for your saying that on the first page you refuted my whole paper, you didnt, basicly what you did is pick on the authors and select chapters to answer. You did not answer all of the chapters and nobody addressed all the verses the NIV removes from the KJV.
    Your saying on page 5 that its a "typical KJVO dodge" saying that all we say is "thats what they always say" is wrong, I will answer with facts as I get time and they are NOT legit sayings as if the NIV commitee didnt know that she was a lesbian then they couldnt read, see, or hear.
    As for saying that the KJV doesnt mention "sodomite" it does in De. 23:17. And the NIV says "homosexual offenders" which doesnt condemn homosexuality it just says not to "offend".
    As for King James being a believere that kings were divinely appointed that was the prevelent belief in the day. More on that as I get time.
    I think thats everything.
    In Christ,
    KJVBiblethumper
     
    #4 KJVBibleThumper, Sep 7, 2004
  5. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    I beg to differ brother, I think she shoots straight in what she says but since you think different why dont you post quotes from her and disprove them?
     
    #5 KJVBibleThumper, Sep 7, 2004
  6. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    I dont see any proof here on that please show me.
     
    #6 KJVBibleThumper, Sep 7, 2004
  7. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thumper,

    Just a few Riplingerisms:

    Riplinger's reference to Westcott and Hort: "Readings of Aleph and B should be accepted as the true readings..."

    What Westcott and Hort ACTUALLY said: "Readings of Aleph and B should be accepted as the true readings until strong internal evidence is found to the contrary, and that no reading of Aleph/B can be rejected absolutely, though it is sometimes right to place them only on an alternative footing, especially where they receive no support from Versions or Fathers."

    from "Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek, Hendrickson Publishers 1882, Peabody, Mass.

    Riplinger quoting Dr Edwin Palmer: "There are few clear and decisive texts that declare Jesus is God."

    What Dr Palmer ACTUALLY said: "John 1:18, as inspired by the Holy Spirit, is one of those few clear and decisive texts that declar Jesus is God. But, without fault of its own, the KJV, following inferior manuscripts, altered what the Holy Spirit said through John, calling Jesus "Son".

    And there are many more.

    Gail is NOT one you want to read. Even if you are KJVO you should read honest authors and not just ones who believe similarly to you!

    These references, while originally from the above mentioned works were quoted from "The King James Only Controversy" by J. R. White.
     
    #7 Charles Meadows, Sep 7, 2004
  8. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Look in the front of the KJV1611
    Look at October
    Look at 6 Oct
    The reading for the morning prayer
    is Jubit (i.e. Judith), a book
    in the Apocrypha.

    The early readers of the KJV
    were encouraged to read the Apocrypha
    during the year.

    Here is a look at IN AWE OF THY
    WORD by Gail Riplinger:

    IN AWE OF THY WORD
     
    #8 Ed Edwards, Sep 7, 2004
  9. Ransom

    Ransom Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    1
    #9 Ransom, Sep 7, 2004
  10. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Funny that so many ifb'ers would blindly follow Ruckman, Gipp and Gail. All of them have such faults as to be disqualified from ministry, but are followed as gurus.

    Peter is on his 3rd wife. He would not be welcome to speak in any Baptist church I know, but . . .

    Gail is a woman whose education is in home economics, but . . .

    Gipp - I have a list somewhere I'll try to find - has so many lies in his book that he should not be believed, but . . .
     
    #10 Dr. Bob, Sep 8, 2004
  11. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Notice the inclusion of reading from the Book of Wisdome for example:

    http://www.ccel.org/bible/kjv/preface/tabkal.htm

    Have you looked at a 1611KJV Thumper?
     
    #11 NaasPreacher (C4K), Sep 8, 2004
  12. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Most "onlies" try to quickly distance themselves from the inclusion of the apocrypha, saying NO ONE considered it part of the Bible.

    But in their Bible Reading and Prayer Calendar, I see the Anglican Version translators:
    June 29th readings from Ecclesiasticus
    July 25th readings from Eccelsiasticus
    Aug 24th readings from Ecclesiasticus
    Oct 6th readings from Judith
    Nov 21st readings from Baruch

    NO ONE believed it to be part of the Bible . . except the AV translators. Hmmm.
     
    #12 Dr. Bob, Sep 8, 2004
  13. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you Bro. Ed, Bro. C4K and Dr. Bob [​IMG] for helping me in this point as I do not own a 1611 KJV but just read websites that offer bits of the version.

    1cross+3nails=4given [​IMG]
     
    #13 DeclareHim, Sep 8, 2004
  14. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
     
    #14 DeclareHim, Sep 8, 2004
  15. AVL1984

    AVL1984 <img src=../ubb/avl1984.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    7,506
    Likes Received:
    62
    Faith:
    Baptist
    LOL...please, Dr. Bob! Don't confuse the youngster with the facts. It is obvious he hasn't studied out the issues and is being sucked in hook, line and sinker into the kjVERSION ONLY line of conditioning. [​IMG] Most of the problems he brings up were addressed in the other thread, but he has summarily dismissed the evidence, as most kjVERSION Only's do. :rolleyes:

    AVL1984 [​IMG]
     
    #15 AVL1984, Sep 8, 2004
  16. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    KJVBT, I don't have time this AM to go into a lot, but I assure you I've read every word of every one of those books, with the exception of Riplinger's latest trash, "In Awe Of Thy Word".

    But here's something to keep ya busy today: Please read the thread, "The Gipper Shoulda Stuck to Football" on Page #5 of the archives. This should show you something about Gipp. If you don't believe what's written there, please feel free to check out the facts posted, from an independent source.
     
    #16 robycop3, Sep 8, 2004
  17. mioque

    mioque New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Ok but what does "abusers of themselves with mankind" mean"
    ''
    Those who &lt;edited for taste by moderator&gt;...

    Many interpreters in the past few centuries did read it that way....


    &lt;Edited simply for good taste on a family forum. The poster has kindly offered to PM the translation to those who are curious. Simply PM the poster&gt;

    [ September 08, 2004, 07:02 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]
     
    #17 mioque, Sep 8, 2004
  18. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ransom,

    I had onlt read a thing or two by Gipp - maybe I was being too kind!

    :eek: [​IMG]
     
    #18 Charles Meadows, Sep 8, 2004
  19. David J

    David J New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Examples of G.(god) A(and) Riplinger's deceptions:

    http://www.kamon-design.com/NABV.htm#New%20Age

    http://www.kjvonly.org/james/may_reviews.htm

    http://www.kjvonly.org/other/gail_riplinger.htm

    Even if you don't agree with these men it is hard to disagree with the evidence against Riplinger.


    Ever wonder why I write G.(god and) Riplinger?

    With reference to her use of "G.A. Riplinger," the January/February 1994 The End Times and Victorious Living newsletter contains an article by Gail about why she wrote NABV. Keeping in mind her claim that God "gave" her "acrostic algebra," note her own words:

    Daily during the six years needed for this investigation, the Lord miraculously brought the needed materials and resources - much like the ravens fed Elijah. Each discovery was not the result of effort on my part, but of the directed hand of God - so much so that I hesitated to even put my name on the book. Consequently, I used G.A. Riplinger, which signifies to me, God and Riplinger - God as author and Riplinger as secretary.
     
    #19 David J, Sep 8, 2004
  20. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just wanted to say thank you all for the information you have posted. I will decline to comment on it until I can study it out at which time I will post my response.
    In Christ,
    KJVBibleThumper
     
    #20 KJVBibleThumper, Sep 8, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 1 of 4
Loading...