Your dispute should be what James White said in his book about King James only. Why would you expect James White to reply to you anyway? People in the public debate arena just do not have time to respond to everyone that emails them. On second thought don’t dispute anything here your way off topic. Just send me my million.

James White on Riplinger’s books – http://bible.org/article/why-respond-gail-riplinger

I know what the Bible says about woman having a head over them we have been on this topic before, Frank. You say woman cannot teach men but it seems they can when it pleases you. There is not much difference between a Bible study in your church led by a woman and a Bible study on some forum led by a woman. Why are you listening too her if you think woman should not be teaching men? Never mind, don’t answer.

There are exceptions but woman just are not rational thinkers like men and they often get off track and into emotionalism. Now if there is a head to keep them on track they can be allowed to teach but who is the head of Riplinger when she is teaching her narrow minded view all over the radio?

Frank, when you were 15 people people were probably educated to read. You are well aware of the problems in the public school system of today but you conveniently ignore it when it suits you. The facts are that most kids in our public schools would have a hard time getting through any translation of the Bible at all, yet the King James. Some of the words in the King James have completely different meaning today. I have known Baby Christians with doctorates that have had a hard time with the King James.

Also for a man that says he understood the King James at 15 years old, many of your comments sure show lack of basic biblical understanding.

The New King James has information that was not available to those that translated the KJV. It also reads better and corrects most of the known errors in the King James Bible. By the way, what version of the King James are you even talking about?. There have been many revisions of the KJV because of known errors?

I often quote form the KJV as well. It is the most widely used version in English and it is very poetic. It is also free software. I see you also left a lot of soul winning names that you like to drop out of your list. Like John McAuthur what version of the Bible does he prefer to use? What version does Hal Lindsey like? I would think it would be the ASV. How in your mind did Gail Riplinger become a big soul winner? Do you really think arguing about translations is winning souls?

Because good people use the KJV does not mean that the other versions are corrupt and “New age”. Nobody is putting down the KJV it is a good translation. But no English translation of the Bible can be perfect.

You say the NKJV even corrupts the verse “for the love of money is the root of all evil” it does not corrupt it, it just contains a variation of the meaning. My KJV says “For the love of money is a root of all “kinds” of evil and the “kinds” is in italics meaning that the word is implied it is not in the Greek.

That verse is some powerful example of New Age corruption, Frank. What damning differences between the two version!!! One version says the love of money is the root of all evil and the other says the love of money is a root of evil. The point is best said in the ASV “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil”: or how about Young’s Literal Translation “for a root of all the evils is the love of money”. I think a donkey would get the point.

Frankly Frank, I am tired of you getting on my threads and changing every topic to one of your latest brain farts. Start sticking to the post topics or take it elsewhere. Or else send me the million buck and I will even create your very own blog for you. I can’t make anyone read it though..

The Bible explicitly states men are to be the head of the church, as the man is to be the head of the household, as Christ is the head of the body of Christ. There is Godly order in everything. That DOES NOT mean that women cannot instruct other women in a Bible study or Sunday school class, etc., etc.

Your long post is yet another example to you not being open-minded to other information. If you do more research, you will see that the NKJV is nowhere near as accurate as the KJV. As for not being able to comprehend the KJV, that arguement is really ridiculous. I easily understood it when I was saved at the age of 15. Are there some old-english words that take a little getting used to? Yes. But they are nothing that anyone that can read cannot understand, even for a child.

All I can tell you is that soul-winning modern-day Christians that are on fire for the Lord such as Dr. Gail Riplinger, Dr. William Grady, Ray Yungen, Roger Oakland, and many others read and quote only from the KJV.

The NKJV even corrupts this verse in the KJV: It changes “for the love of money is the root of all evil” to: “for the love of money is the source of all kinds of evil.” The meaning change is obvious. There are many more watered-down verses, but to save space I’ll leave it at that.

I often use sarcasm to try to make wooden headed people see the truth. I know you are only saying what you hear from others but what you say is often unbalanced because you apparently get most of your information by listening to those who are selling something and giving a very narrow one sided view. That is why in a court of law there is always a defense. There are always too sides to any controversy and you need to hear them both to find out the truth.

I am not even against woman teaching in church but we already know that you are, but since she is saying what you want to hear she she is okay because she is not teaching men in your church? It is like the woman at “Lifeway” teaching most of the Sunday school classes in Southern Baptist Churches but since they are doing it long distance everything is hunky dory with people that would never let a woman teach a class to men in their church?? If people want to take everything said in the New Testament in a literal wooden sense they at least need to be consistent about it.

By the way, I never even said the differences in meaning she mentioned are incorrect. All I really said is that she went through the translations selectively cherry picking passages that supports what she wants but does not address the problems with her downing all other translations and other manuscripts. All the experts on the panels that translated the passages are always wrong and she is always right? Who made her the top authority above all else on language translations? She supports King James as if this translation was handed down by Moses.

Here is what James White has to say about this Interior decorator that passes herself off as a Bible translation scholar but cannot even read Hebrew or Greek or get her facts straight.

http://bible.org/article/why-respond-gail-riplinger

I will tell you flat out that the New King James is a better translation even if some think they see a new age symbol on its cover. So is the American standard if you want a more direct word for word translation. Here is a review of a book that refutes what Riplinger says. Perhaps you should obtain and read the book and get a view from someone that will rattle your King James only wooden cage.

http://www.svchapel.org/resources/book-reviews/2-bible-study/629-the-king-james-only-controversy-by-james-r-white

I know that some well known people are concerned about certain passages in certain modern versions but I think you are also putting works in their mouth. I serious doubt if Roger Oakland and Dr. Gary Gilley teach King James Only and if I am wrong about that document it..

So, Ray Yungen that came out of the New Age only reads the KJV. Good for him. It is a good translation. However, it is a huge leap reading into that, that other Bible versions are therefore, “New Age”.

The books you mentioned talk about many things that are really wrong in the churches and they might mention books like “The Message” and some modern versions but these books you mention are not promoting King James Only. You are pretty good at throwing titles and links around here, but do you even read them yourself? Give some quotes that say they believe in King James only.

I know unbelievers read this blog but believers like you that are misleading them are my main concern. They need to understand salvation by grace through faith and not get burdened by those promoting wooden legalism. You want people who are not even in Christ yet to read a Old English version that they will hardly comprehend? Why do you think newer versions were written? It was not some satanic conspiracy as some claim. It was to make the written word understandable to a modern generation that no longer speaks in King James English. Why not take your wooden thinking to the full extreme and tell unbelievers they need to learn the Bible in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic from the dead sea scrolls?

There are many many more verses that I could show that use New Age terminology. She is not the only one writing about such. More off the top of my head is Gary Gilley and Ray Yungen, and Roger Oakland. Ray Yungen, in particular, only reads the KJV having been saved after coming out of the New Age Movement after his own comparisons of the modern versions.

Put your hatred aside and read “A Time of Departing” or “This Little Church Stayed Home.” One thing I have noticed is that when someone (anyone) offers you information that counters your personal beliefs on this blog, you resort to insults (wooden fundamentalist…).

Remember, there are unbelievers reading this blog also !

Yes, there is every indication from Scripture that the Bride will be removed prior to Daniel’s 70th Week. There’s also every indication that Daniel’s 70th begins after the events described in Ezekiel 38/39. The best evidence for this is found in Ezekiel 39:25-29 where the abundant past-tense references abound and the focus from that point forward is once again on Israel and not the Bride(Church):

“Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: ‘Now I will bring back the captives of Jacob, and have mercy on the whole house of Israel; and I will be jealous for My holy name— after they have borne their shame, and all their unfaithfulness in which they were unfaithful to Me, when they dwelt safely in their own land and no one made them afraid. When I have brought them back from the peoples and gathered them out of their enemies’ lands, and I am hallowed in them in the sight of many nations, then they shall know that I am the LORD their God, who sent them into captivity among the nations, but also brought them back to their land, and left none of them captive any longer. And I will not hide My face from them anymore; for I shall have poured out My Spirit on the house of Israel,’ says the Lord GOD.”

There is something called common English usage. Just because people in New Age put their own usage on common English does not make a Christian translation usage “New Age”. You could probably search through various translations of “War and Peace” and find what you think are “New Age” terms. Does that make War and Peace “New Age”?

There are some problems in the wording of some modern translations for sure, that does not make them “New Age” . There are errors in the KJ as well and in all translations. “The Message” is often given as an example by KJ only people as a prime example of a “New Age” Bible, but like I said, “The Message” is not a Bible at all. It is a bad paraphrase written by someone who does buy into certain New Age concepts..

For example, many modern versions of the Bible use the New Age term “divine nature” in place of “Godhead. (Such as Acts 17:29) Thus changing the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (which is the Godhead) from what it should have been translated as. As I know you are aware, the Message is the worst of these modern versions. I could go on and on about the thousands of changes, even to John 3:16 by some of these versions.

To say that they “generally do not exist” is an assumption that I would hope you would look into. We can all continue to learn more.

There are some paraphrases of the Bible like “the Message” that seem to qualify as containing some new age thought, but they are not Bibles. When I hear people in bible studies quoting from “The Message” like it was the Bible I now either say something to the group or depart from them..