A Question regarding KJVO

Does that include the NWT or the intentionally progressivist translations (e.g.,"Our heavenly parent" or "Our Father-Mother in heaven") ?

 

The website for the 1602 KJV in Spanish has nothing to do with Gail as far as being on the translation team, it is a work by the
Iglesia Bautista Bíblica la Gracia (Grace Bible Baptist Church) in Monterrey.

Here is their site.....
Home | Valera 1602 Org

To my knowledge Gail was not involved with this translation.

 

Okay, thanks for the website, but that is what I was referring to. It has her essay, "Catholics Changing God's Name." She's not qualified in any way, shape of form to comment on Bible translation. She does not have the education, the experience, or the knowledge to do so.

So, why do you promote her with her essay on your website (if that is yours)? She is completely unreliable in translation matters. I have her book, New Age Bible Versions. The very title is ridiculous, as if Man could take God's eternal, powerful Word and somehow make it a New Age document. One can oppose modern translations without suchlike.

In the second century, Marcion edited the NT to fit his antisemitism, but all he could do was delete anything he thought was Jewish. The Bible was too powerful for him. I could give many other such examples from translation history, English, Japanese, or Chinese.

 

You are mis-representing my website. Nowhere does my website ‘promote’ Gail nor her book. The page you are referring to says, “The History of this Debate.” I even have Dr. James White’s book ‘the King James Only Controversy’ on the same page showing how the KJV debate has developed since the 90s.

As far as any promotion, if you had read my book, you would have known that I said, “I do not agree with everything Gail teaches, but there are some revealing facts in her book that are overlooked by the scholars who focus only on the disputable parts” (The King James Only Debate p.149).

So, what started with recommending the Spanish KJV, the 1602 Purified Valera, which has ZERO critical text readings, you responded by casting the first stone at another Christians mistakes in life, my website, and recommending a Spanish version that has critical text readings.

At least now we all know where we both stand.

Nevertheless, let blessings and forgiveness reign in our hearts.

Bro. Mike

 

By having her essay on your website, without any caveats, you are promoting her. Any uninformed person who sees that essay with no caveats can think, "Oh, this Riplinger must be a good author. I'll see what else she has written."

That's ambiguous. So what do you disagree with her about? Half of what she wrote? 10% of what she wrote? Only 10% of what she wrote? Without any caveats expressed, you certainly are promoting her work.

No, I am not just "casting the first stone at another Christians (sic) mistakes in life," I am exposing a false teacher, a woman preacher who has deceived many of my independent Baptist brethren. If you care about truth (I assume you do), you will delete her essay from your website.

And by the way, her two divorces are not just "mistakes in life," and her lying about the divorces to Waite and others, they are sin.

No, you have no idea where I stand. As far as I know, we've never interacted before.

And zeal for the truth of God's Word.

 

@Michael Hollner:

I just looked at your book on Amazon, and on p. 6 you say, "I am not a Baptist." So what are you doing on this Baptist debate board?

 

As I said before, what started off with me recommending the Spanish KJV, the 1602 Purified Valera, which has ZERO critical text readings, you got off on a tangent about Gail Riplinger and her divorce(s). Yes, divorce is a sin, and IF we do sin, God has mercy and forgives all our sins according to scripture. I am sure you would agree with that.

Therefore, to close out my thoughts on this. For anyone wanting a Spanish KJV without any critical text readings I recommend the 1602 Purified Valera.

If you cannot resist talking about Gail Riplinger and are hung up on her, perhaps start a thread about Gail Riplinger. I might even get in on it and respond.

If your ever on furlough and come to Florida, look me up and I will buy you lunch at the Japanese Steak House, and we can talk face to face.

Blessings.....

Bro. Mike

 

Read the context of the paragraph. My current affiliations are in Baptist churches and with Baptist preachers yet I am non-denominational.

 

That is your non-objective opinion. Because you make subjective claims is not sound evidence that they are actually true. Even all KJV-only advocates do not agree with your opinion.

KJV-only advocates are actually divided over which Spanish Bible to recommend with different groups or individuals recommending a different Spanish Bible. KJV-only missionaries to Spanish-speaking countries may use several varying Spanish Bibles.

 

She is pretty much the same though as any other Kjvo!

 

It's not a "tangent" to expose a false teacher, it is obedience to the Word of God. I'm a fundamentalist, and thus believe in standing up against errors of all kinds. Fundamentalists who support Riplinger or have her in to preach are disobeying the Bible, which says, "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence" (1 Tim. 2:12).

Again, I stand for revival theology: soul winning, mass evangelism, both individual and corporate prayer, confession and forsaking of sin, walking with God daily. When did Gail Riplinger ever encourage soul winning and revival? I've never read in her works of her winning a soul to Christ, spending much time in prayer, or anything else that revival means. I consider it far more important to obey the KJV than to defend it. As I tell my students: "The Bible is a sword, and you don't defend a sword, you fight with it."

Thanks for the kind invitation. After 33 years, we actually retired from the field of Japan in 2012, and I now teach Greek, Missions, Bible translation, etc., in a Bible college and seminary.

 

I did so over in the Bible Versions and Translation forum.

 

English is my 3rd language, I grew up with the Arabic SVD 1865 Bible.
I wouldn't take their Bible away, but when it comes to doctrinal teachings, I would point out the KJB reading to them.
Been doing that in 3 languages for years.

 

Would not using the KJV as superior to their Bible translation concerning doctrine be in effect taking their Bible away? At least, are you not in effect undermining the authority of their Bible translation by appealing to the KJV reading as supposedly superior to their translation's rendering?

 

Ask yourself the same regarding ancient Greek and Hebrew.

 

Fluent in Arabic, French, and English.
Conversational Italian.

I don't belittle Americans for speaking only English. When your nation is the most powerful and one of the most numerous in the world, you don't need to learn other tongues the way an immigrant must.

 

The huge and important difference is the truth that the preserved Scriptures in the original languages are the proper standard and greater authority for the making and trying of all Bible translations.

An English Bible translation in 1611 is not the proper standard and greater authority for the making and trying of all Bible translations. You are appealing to the wrong standard to evaluate or try other Bible translations.