New Riplinger Book Released, Hazardous Materials: Greek and Hebrew Study Dangers

[awgamblin1987]

The only reason G. Ripplinger discourages the use of the Strong's, etc. is because it would only reveal the crock she peddles.

[edwardpf123]

Amen and amen!

[godzilla323]

I guess she will never debate James White anymore. She got owned! Ive never read so much vile disgusting misrepresentation of the facts as I did with her book. Put hey I guess there is a short supply of toilet paper some were. Thanks Gail I need a good laugh you false prophet you

[chosen1atWork]

@godzilla323 look up calciumboy's "errors in Pilinger's book NewAgeBibleVersions"

[CautiousSaint]

New Age Bible Versions does not prove anything...and neither does its sequel. It's just Gail Riplinger making more money off suckers who keep her in business.

[godiz4u]

You my friend are deceived and dangerous for propagating such blatant heresy as Riplinger spews forth. She has been proven to be a liar and anyone with any study of the facts know that the stuff she says is totally bogus and in error. The problem is is that KJVers don't really care about truth, they just prop up an outdated version of the bible as their god. This is true idolatry!!! Too bad all those people over the first 1700 years are in hell because they didn't use the good ol' KJV.

[chosen1atWork]

@godiz4u ... they had the groundworks of the KJV and not the 'catholic' version that is leading you and so many others to hell (as you say). Calling someone a liar is not the same and proving them a liar. that is typical liberal tactics. The KJV is truer to the greek and far easier to read.. and it doesnt leave anything out like the NIV and others. When I read the bible, I want to read all of it, not just the 'edited' version.

[vedinthorn]

@chosen1atWork Is it truer to the Greek in Revelation 16:5?

[fishslab]

@godiz4u If you read any of her books or watched any of lectures, you would know that she doesn't believe that people who didn't/don't use the KJV went/will go to hell. You are the deceived one, sir.

[parisreidhead]

good job bro!

[lesg07]

i like the way my bible is just fine

[callofchrist]

What is so dangerous about studying the Greek or Hebrew ?

Even those who did the earliest English translations of the Bible did so! Why was it not dangerous for them and is dangerous for us now? Is God's Word in the original languages radioactive now or something? lol

[chosen1atWork]

@callofchrist what is dangerous about studying greek? i guess it depends on who's greek you are studying... if the different 'versions' of greek are 'modified' from the original into something else (a clue would be the copyright... if it is copy right, it is different enough to be something different). kind of like the revisionist history being taught in schools now. that is what is dangerous.

[callofchrist]

@chosen1atWork That is absolutely ridiculous!

We have Greek MSS of the NT, so we need to study those. Tell me what the "correct" Greek is and what your methods are of determining that. 

[chosen1atWork]

@callofchrist ... nothing is wrong with studying greek.. as i said before, it depends on who's greek you are studying! the greek of the niv and many of the new 'versions' that carry a copy write because they have been 'altered' to be different (hence the ability to get a copy write.. you cannot get a copy wright just on a paraphrase).not to mention basing their 'bible' on texts found from known gnostic texts to the exclusion of the majority text. This is the basis of the KJV only movement.

[chosen1atWork]

@callofchrist .. If a translation is based on the majority text, then it is acceptable and will conform to the KJV, unlike the other (so called) translations which are based on known gnostic versions. You obviously have not read her book or checked the facts.

[CRoadwarrior]

I would not trust anything Gail says. She has been proved dishonest and lacking scholarship. God gave us the Bible in the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, not English. I would suggest you check you what Dr. James White had to say regarding her claims.

[tapotsnm]

Well of course!!!

I guess those people who studied ancient languages and theology at some of the most renowned universities, obviously dont know their ass from their elbow.

Im quite confident that a person with a bachelor degree in Interior Design and a master degree in Home Economics is better suited for this job. After all, knowing how to fold laundry is truly an academic achievement. And shes only up to her third husband, so obviously she excelled in keeping a happy Christian home.

[mandemonic63]

Tapotsnm:

You should win a reward for summarizing the foolishness of KJVonly and G Rip-off-linger in one paragraph.

Good job! I am coming close to posting a NASB only video to mock these crazy freaks.

[tapotsnm]

Hahaha, thanks :-)

Looking forward to seeing that video. It's seems I can't subsribe to your channel. Please keep me up to date, will you?

[mandemonic63]

I am not taking subscriptions at the moment. But maybe in the future.

God Bless,

John 1:12-13: As many as received Him [Jesus Christ], to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

[fishslab]

Does studying a topic at a renown university necessarily imply that the student will be correct in his assessments? I think not. Consider Keynes who advocated inflation as solution to economic woes. Mises and Hayek both showed Keynesi and his proponents (most of academic America) to be wrong. And look at where we are today because of Keynesianism. The same logic applies to other subjects as well. The majority is not always right.

[tapotsnm]

No and I never said it did! That's why we have peer review. And science doesn't offer ultimate truths, it is a self-correcting system that is always criticizing, reflecting and most importantly always questioning.

And no they did not proof Keynes wrong. Don't know if you know this but the debate is still going on today. And the current crisis (thanks mainly to economic libertarianism and NOT Keynesianism which ended between 70's and 80's) is responsible for a resurgence of Keynes theories.

[tapotsnm]

But no matter what your take on economics is. You are comparing some of the brightest academics with a woman who has not one credible thesis to add to her name. A woman who is making some of the most ridiculous claims in a field for which she isnt qualified, by any means. She studied home economics for crying out loud! Its like comparing Einstein with Martha Steward. No matter how unpopular scientific critique may be, if it can withstand academic scrutiny, it will live to see another day.

[tapotsnm]

But it never becomes a valid theory just because its a popular one.

To jump back to Keynes. In academic circles Keynes theories have always been scrutinized, like is custom practice in science. Only socialites and politicians put them on pedestals without asking further questions. This woman is hailed by those who want her theory to be true, yet there are no expert in this field who give her theory even the least credibility. Now why is that you think?

[tapotsnm]

It's not a monumental work just because you want it to be so.

This woman isn't an expert just because her work adheres to what you want to believe to be true.

So you're absolutely right. Popularity doesn't equal integrity, credibility or truth.

But I think in this case, you yourself are blinded by your own opinion and convictions.

[fishslab]

Please show me this alleged "economic libertarianism". Reagan was a big government guy who failed to cut the scope and size of government.  Even pro-government health care Mitt Romney admitted this in the 2008 presidential debates. In 1971, Nixon annexed the link to the dollar with gold and declared "We are all Keynesians now". I suppose you consider that an act of libertarianism.

[tapotsnm]

Sorry? Reagan was a big government guy? His entire campaign was focused on less regulation and less government. I believe his slogan was "we'll get the government of your backs". Together with Thatcher he reformed the banking system which gave banks more freedom than ever before, causing a financial boom in the mid eighties leading up to the big failure today where there are so many complicated financial products that even most experts and market regulators don't understand them anymore.

[tapotsnm]

I should know, I have a masters degree in economics and work at one of the biggest banks in the world.

No one in their right mind could or would argue that the last 3 decades were completely dedicated to economic liberatianism.

And by the way, both Thatcher and Reagan were greatly influenced by Mises and Hayek.

[fishslab]

My point is that anyone can learn a subject with enough commitment. It is not necessary to attend a university to be versed in a topic. So, if you disagree with Riplinger, debate the subject not her "credentials".

[tapotsnm]

Anyone can learn a subject with enough commitment. Look at Einstein. Big difference however, Einsteins points were confirmed by peer review and stood the test.

And no science doesn't work that way. Riplinger is the one presenting a lousy thesis, she needs to provide the proof on an academic level. Not the other way around.

You may not like how science works, but that's a whole different topic. If Riplinger wants her story to be labeled as scientific she should adhere to the rules of science

[callofchrist]

@fishslab Credentials do sometimes have a bearing. I would want to make sure that medical questions were answered by those that had medical degrees, not Joe at the barber shop. I would also expect that issues of Biblical MSS Transmission would be handled by those who actually have studied these things in greater depth than a biased person like Riplinger.

@ chosen1atWork: don't assume what I have read or know. I recommend you check out Metzger's "Transmission of the New Testament Text" .

[FearOfaBlackChannel]

@callofchrist : I agree.Does it occur to anyone that disinformation&misinformation is a two way street& that this book may equally be intended to discourage thorough investigation &research? EG: Project BLUE BOOK was intended to discourage UFO research by offically "explaining" it. "Instead of the pure word of God." If there is no reliable way of interpreting the BIble then wouldn't that mean that there is NO "pure" word of God that anyone is aware of besides what is believed?

[FearOfaBlackChannel]

I generally don't see the point of reading 1200 pages of material more or less intended to convince me not to look into things for myself. It makes no difference whether or not the ppl or the material the author refers are innacurate or contrived or not. There is a saying that goes "The only stupid questions are questions left unasked." I'd be pretty stupid then to dismiss a mass information soley on the "say so" of one individual.