Riplinger on Hebrews 4:8 - KJV-Only - Live Forums - Bible Versions Discussion Board - Message Board - Yuku

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Riplinger on Hebrews 4:8

Author	Comment
brandpluckt	Riplinger on Hebrews 4:8	Lead	[-]
Posts: 276 (08/18/2009 19:54:58) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Tags : riplinger, hazmat The "Strict and Particular" Blog points out this Riplinger error: http://strictandparticular.blogspot.com/ "She insists that Heb 4.18 refers to the pre-incarnate Jesus (P. 201), not to Joshua." She needs to check a copy of the 1611 footnotes (like she failed to do so in Rom 6:17). Riplinger stated that, "The KJB is the only Bible which accurately translates, instead of 'interprets' that word in that verse. (Ibid, p. 201) The footnote in the 1611 KJV margin says Jesus: "That is, Ioshua." If she keeps this up, only she will be infallible. Ken Willy "Come to the Dark Side"
Armchair Scholar		#1	[-]
Posts: 1128 (08/18/2009 20:24:54) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Riplinger denies the KJV has footnotes. She only sells KJVs that are devoid of notes. How convenient, eh? What I want to know is WHY did the KJV translators translate/transliterate it Joshua instead of Jesus? Didn't they realize that in about 400 years it would cause a real headache with KJOs? Her next book just might be about how infallible she is.
mko		#2	[-]
Posts: 640 (08/19/2009 00:30:37) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Not just a river in Egypt. Any scan of a 1611 will show copious footnotes, mb more than even on an NIV or RSV. "Things don't happen together by coincidence, without the hand of God guiding them. Like, say, your ex-girlfriend hunting you down for a date the minute you give up on love, with an eye on the altar."
steelmaker		#3	[-]
Posts: 2012 (08/19/2009 02:01:47) Registered User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Here's a review of her latest book that Scott Mc Clare found: Hazardous Materials "robycop3 - The avowed enemy of ALL man-made doctrines of worship!"
Wes Cottonhort		#4	[-]
Posts: 45 (08/19/2009 04:32:51) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Now, see I disagree with that review on one minor point; I've never been annoyed by the preacher who tells me what the Bible "really" says in Greek. I have been annoyed by the Preacher who tells me we don't need the Greek because we have exactly what the Greek says "right here in the King James."
forcyncia	MY CONTENTION FROM THE BEGINNING	#5	[-]
Posts: 30 (08/19/2009 11:10:09) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	I said this from the very beginning, and now I present it in print from steelmaker's link https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8960380041268592011&postID=8884730384462369132&page=1 Strict and Particular - An Eccentric Baptist View Wednesday, August 19, 2009 Her Hazardous Materials This is it, the review of G.A. Riplinger's Hazardous Materials (Ararat VA, AV Publications) Pp. 1200 The ad hominem fallacy looms large in this book. Rather than arguing against the materials themselves, she spends most of her time attacking the men involved. One suspects this to be because she simply lacks the ability in the original languages to argue any other way. Now y'all know I said that. So I won't go into my usual lengthy and probably redundant reply probably. (those laughs are RE: me btw) In conclusion, to those who wish to defend the exclusive use of the King James Bible (please note the word exclusive), I would say: get yourselves a better champion. The woman is quite unreliable as a source of factual information. I have discovered that she has a devoted following who will jump down your throat if you dare to say anything against her, but will in no wise object to her making the foulest of accusations against others. This ought not to be so, my friends. Despite her own claims, Gail Riplinger is not an inspired prophet of God, she is a fallible human being, and a very dirty writer. I do not believe in burning books, but if I did, I should burn this one first. This says it all - folks. Why do they fight with their backs to the wall for the absolute perfection of the AV1611 , but do not deem it necessary to practice the perfect words therein? forcyncia John 15:12 - "This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you."
77		#6	[-]
Posts: 847 (08/19/2009 13:47:21) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	forcyncia: "Why do they fight with their backs to the wall for the absolute perfection of the AV1611 " 77: Gee, you'd think if the AV was "absolutely perfect," that they'd all agree on which revision of the unrevised AV is "the one," wouldn't you? "Truly, good Christian reader, we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one of a good one ... but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principle good one, not justly to be expected against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark."
Armchair Scholar		#7	[-]
Posts: 1129 (08/19/2009 21:16:37) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	>>>"This says it all - folks. Why do they fight with their backs to the wall for the absolute perfection of the AV1611 , but do not deem it necessary to practice the perfect words therein?" You mean, you expect them to actually read their Bible??

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Quick Reply

Rules Page