Books & Bibles
Entertainment
Fashion & Jewelry
Gifts & Giving
Home Decor & Accents
Kitchen & Gourmet
Beauty & Health
Specialty Stores
|
|
|
|
|
|
Which Bible Is Gods Word?
| Our Price |
$ 11.40
|
|
| Retail Value |
$ 12.95 |
|
| You Save |
$ 1.55 (12%) |
|
| Item Number |
593529 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item Description...
Overview
Which Bible is God's Word? answers 44 frequently asked questions about the corrupt modern bible versions and the pure Authorized King James Bible, such as:
How do the new versions change the gospel and destroy basic Christian doctrines such as the deity of Christ and the Trinity?
How do new versions support New Age, Catholic, and liberal views? What man, who "laid the groundwork" for the NASB has renounced it? What NIV stylist admits she is a lesbian?
What is wrong with the New King James (NKJV), KJ21, and others which claim to merely update the KJV?
Why isn't it safe to define words using Bible software, interlinears or Greek and Hebrew lexicons, like Strong's Concordance? |
Item Specifications...
Pages 174
Dimensions: Length: 8.3" Width: 5.4" Height: 0.5"
Weight: 0.5 lbs.
Binding Softcover
Publisher A.V. Publishing
ISBN 0963584588
EAN 9780963584588
|
Availability 6 units.
Availability accurate as of May 27, 2012 01:32.
Usually ships within one to two business days from Johnson City, TN.
Orders shipping to an address other than a confirmed Credit Card / Paypal Billing address may incur and additional processing delay.
|
Product Categories
Similar Products
Reviews - What do our customers think?
 | Excellent information on the King James Bible Sep 1, 2009 |
I'll never use a modern English Bible again after reading this book. NIV, NASV, etc, nothing compares to the King James Bible.
Excellent, thanks to the author!
| | |  | Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. (Luke 12:1) Nov 21, 2005 |
Before I commence with this review, let me first write that I like and use the KJV, NASB and occasionally the NIV but I think all three have their shortcomings.
I read up to page 18 of this book by Riplinger. On page 17 and 18, she claims that the version of the Lord's prayer in Luke 11:2 in the NIV and NASB is from Marcion's version of the Gospel of Luke. Riplinger brands Marcion as a "heretic," on account of the writings of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Tertullian.
Her branding of Marcion as a heretic immediately made me suspicious that she was basing her argument on Catholic orthodoxy. And after some research, lo and behold, I was right. See for example, Ray Embry's account of Marcion which you can find online. Marcion appears to be more in line with modern Protestantism than his critics, in that Marcion emphasizes the need for a "personal God" whom a believer has a relationship with. This concept is alien to the "traditionalist" sects who emphasize ritual, and it is hardly surprising that they misinterpret Marcion as believing in two gods.
So conclusion: Riplinger, in arguing for the KJV, is actually arguing in favor of Catholic orthodoxy, which is ironic, since both Riplinger and the Catholic church advocate extra-biblical traditions and rebuke anyone who do not adhere to tradition. In the case of Riplinger, her tradition is that only the KJV is acceptable and that anything which contradicts it is heresy. The KJV bible is lifted to the status of an idol.
Further along in her argument, she claims that the Lords prayer of Luke 11:2 in the new versions are as the occultist Madame Blavatsky (who is the inspiration for much of the philosophy behind the "Star Wars" movies) says it is, a "prayer to Lucifer," quoting Riplinger.
First of all, Ms. Riplinger best hope she is right when she says the aforementioned prayer is actually a prayer to Lucifer. Lest she be sinning against the Holy Spirit, as the Pharisees were doing when they claimed Jesus "casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils." (Luke 11:15)
Secondly, there are many who interpret the Harlot in Rev. 17:5 as the Catholic Church, which is not entirely unfounded (although I am not sold on the idea), given Rev. 17:9 where John writes that there are seven hills upon which the harlot sits, and Rome has seven hills. Further, "kings of the earth have committed fornication with her..." (Rev. 18:3) Anyway, if this reasoning is correct, then Riplingers argument of NIV and NASB versions of the Lord's Prayer in Luke 11:2 is completely turned on it's head.
Thirdly, on page 5, Riplinger answers her critics accusations of her flawed scholarship with the statement: "truth is independent of who presents it." I suppose that even if Marcion is a heretic, then he does not enjoy a similar, benefit-of-the-doubt?
Lastly, why is Riplinger taking Madame Blavatsky's word at face value when the latter claims the Marcion version of the prayer is a prayer to Lucifer? If Blavatsky is evil (and I think she is) then why is Riplinger relying on Blavatsky for her argument?
Riplinger's book does make one important point however, and for this reason she gets 1 star. On p. 9, especially, where she compares the complexity of the text between the KJV and NIV versions. The explanation for the necessity of the creation of the NIV was that the level of English needed to be brought to a lower grade level than in the KJV, making the Bible more accessible to English-speaking people. Nevertheless, there are some places where the NIV uses sophisticated language, e.g. Ephesians 4:16 where "supporting ligament" is used in the NIV instead of the more simple "joint" in the KJV. I've noticed these anomalies before and it makes me question what the actual motive for writing the NIV is. My suspicion is further compounded by the presence of the TNIV, which was allegedly created by the same committee which came up the with the NIV (according to James Dobson). The TNIV is what I would call a "politically correct" version, which IMHO, clearly violates Rev. 22:18 and 19 when John warns not to remove or add to scripture. I shudder to think of what will be written in the CRTNIV! (Contemporary Revised Today's New International Version)
In summary, I think this book is a mean-spirited diatribe and I think that Riplinger needs to ask herself whether she really is immersed in the spirit of Christ. If I had to bet, in answer to the question on page 12 of her book, I'd bet more people were saved through the "new versions" of the Bible than Riplinger's book. In fact, I'd even bet some were led astray by this book, and Riplinger needs to heed that "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones." (Luke 17:1) | | | | Great Bible Q&A Book Aug 16, 2005 |
| This book does an excellent job of answering questions about Bible manuscripts, Bible versions, the superiority of the KJV, etc. A very good book to learn the basics about the various versions of the Bible. | | | | Increadible accuracy and truth, infallbel facts! Jul 19, 2005 |
| I read these articles, and seeing everyone is split with 1 star or 5 stars i looked into it. I sat down and looked at the NIV and KJV, i looked at the word spirit, consistently throughout the NIV it perverts the holy spirit by saying it's a figment of our emotions, a part of our imagination. These new versions truly do pervert the word of God, theyer blasphemous, it's truly evident. You don't need to go to the manuscript evidence for this to be evident, just sit down and compare topics and see what the versions show. These new age versions always pervert the words, they put in words that aren't even synonymous in place of other words. They imply lots of things, mainly showing that the spirit is a figment of emotion, imagination, its true blasphemy. Stick to the KJV only, don't be mislead, be open minded, do your reaserch yourself, you will see the facts, the KJV is truly the word of God. | | | | Should be zero stars Mar 17, 2004 |
| Gail Riplinger, one of the "leaders" in the King James Only movement has been thoroughly discredited by evangelical scholars due to her sloppy scholarship and truly abyssmal use of "citations". She has no experience in the original languages, and while she does indeed teach on the college level, her teaching is in the field of FINE ARTS -- and NOT THEOLOGY! To call her positions heterodox would be generous. Give this one a miss. | | | Write your own review about Which Bible Is Gods Word?
|
|
(0 Items)
