Posts Tagged ‘james white’

The following article is taken from Blind Guides by G.A. Riplinger. Blind Guides is a scholarly and detailed response to the crtiques of Hunt, McMahon, Lalonde, Cloud, Morey, White, Hanagraaff, House, Passantinos, and others concerning Riplinger's New Age Bible Versions. Shows the dishonesty and complete disregard for the truth in the attack on the King James Bible. Very good reading.Used by permission.


Blind Guides and New Age Bible Versions is available from:

A.V. Publications
P.O. Box 280
Ararat, VA 24053


G.A. Riplinger's Response to James White's Criticism of New Age Bible Versions ==================================================================



"Mrs. Riplinger never once mentions the fact that many of her confident statements about Westcott and Hort being 'spiritualists' are based upon pure speculation on her part…she is not referring in her statements to B.F. Westcott, the textual critic, but to W.W. Westcott, a London mortician…Did Mrs. Riplinger ever note this on Action 60's? Did she ever say, 'Now, what I'm saying about Westcott and Hort is in fact merely speculation on my part? No, she made her assertions directly and without qualifications."

Read the rest of this entry »

G.A. Riplinger's Response to James White's Criticism of New Age Bible Versions ==================================================================


White lies once again. His headlong rush through the material under discussion has ended in a charge of reckless driving. He accelerates through every caution light, flying past critical words and entire quotes! Hoping his traveling companions won't notice or hear the siren, he turns up the radio ranting–"gross misrepresentation," "dishonesty," and "egregious error." His 'white lies' given to the arresting officer are recorded here (and in heaven).

I quoted Westcott and Hort as saying,

"[R]eadings of Aleph and B should be accepted as true readings…[They] stand far above all documents…[are] very pure…excellent…immune from corruption."

White cites this quote and concludes the following.





"Anyone reading this material would be led to believe that Westcott and Hort held a very radical view of the Greek manuscripts Aleph and B."


Officer: White takes three pages setting up and demolishing this straw man. If he had carefully read the entire page and knew the jargon of the textual critics, he could have saved himself much embarrassment. To foster his misrepresentation, White does three things.

Read the rest of this entry »

G.A. Riplinger's Response to James White's Criticism of New Age Bible Versions ==================================================================


White's doom is his penchant for making statements without adequate research or proof. He bleats, "Her degrees, her teaching, and her writing are all in one area…Her field of study is not at all related to the Bible, history or any type of linguistics or textual study."


He's wrong about the teaching.
He's wrong about the degrees.
He's wrong about the history.
He's wrong about the linguistics.
He's wrong about the writing.


He will have a difficult time convincing Harvard and Cornell or the University which awarded my M.F.A., or my ten or so history professors at the graduate and undergraduate levels. He will find it equally difficult to persuade the employer who hired me as a linguistic expert, teaching Greek speaking students English as a second language. (Or the Japanese, Russian, Italian, Spanish or Serbo-Croatian students which followed.) Students from six different majors will also testify to White's lack of research.

Jim likes to play word games. He lost with Vanna White, let's see how he does with Jeopardy!


"Who was trained in law, yet designed the building on the reverse side of the nickel, gave us our finest English translation of the Greek Aeschyles and Sophocles, wrote The Dictionary of Indian Dialects and invented the swivel chair, storm window and dumb waiter?"


Read the rest of this entry »

G.A. Riplinger's Response to James White's Criticism of New Age Bible Versions ==================================================================


Scanning I John 4:2,3 in a new version will show how their wording fits precisely into the New Age One World Religion.


              NIV                            KJV
This is how you can recognize     Hereby know ye the Spirit of God:
the Spirit of God: Every spirit   Every spirit that confesseth that
that acknowledges that Jesus      Jesus Christ is come in the flesh
Christ has come in the flesh      is of God: And every spirit that
is from God, but every spirit     confesseth not that Jesus Christ
that does not acknowledge Jesus   is come in the flesh is not of God:
is not from God. This is the      and this is that spirit of antichrist...
spirit of antichrist...                                    I John 4:2-3

The MAIN tenet of the New World Religion is TOLERANCE for the religious beliefs of others. Therefore Christians may still believe that "Jesus Christ is come in the flesh" as stated in verse 2 above. BUT the broad way forbids that we say that one who "confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God." Therefore, I John 4:2 can stand with little alteration. BUT, I John 4:3 MUST change to conform to the unjudgmental broad way. "Christ is come in the flesh" must be removed. All New World Religion advocates will "acknowledge Jesus."

Read the rest of this entry »

G.A. Riplinger's Response to James White's Criticism of New Age Bible Versions ==================================================================



"[T]he angel of the bottomless pit…hath his name Apollyon, [destruction]." Rev. 9:11


White's newsletter is called Pros Apoligian. There is a fine line between a 'defence' of one's beliefs and destroying the hearer's ear. (Mark 14:47) White crosses the line with the 666 mobius logo he now uses to terminate letters and his choice of reference works to correct the KJV and New Age Bible Versions. His Greek lexicon library comes from the enemy camp. He must be totally unaware that the lexicon he uses, Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, was written by a UNITARIAN. Thayer spent his entire life trying to prove that the Trinity does not exist and that Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are not God.

So, where does Mr. White go to prove that my defence of the KJV's "Godhead" (Rom. 1:20, Col. 2:9, Acts 17:29) is wrong? You guessed it: Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon!! The publisher's preface even gives a warning cautioning readers to be alert regarding alterations and verses dealing with the deity of Christ. There are four very strong verses on the Trinity in the KJV. Thayer manages to dissolve all of them. White follows this blind leader of the blind and says,


"Thayer's lexicon says 'deity…theotes, theiotes: theot'. deity differs from 'theiot'. divinity, as essence differs from quality or attribute. This bit of information is vital" (Pros Apoligian, Vol. 2, Issue 2)


Read the rest of this entry »

G.A. Riplinger's Response to James White's Criticism of New Age Bible Versions ==================================================================


White claims "the deity of Christ" is undermined in the KJV in Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. He must be unaware of the following:


Titus 2:13

1.) All Greek texts have the wording of the KJV. None render it as the new versions do.

2.) The Granville Sharp theory he cites is just that, a theory. It does not require that the Greek word order be changed, or commas added, but simply states that one person, not two, are presented here.

3.) The same grammatical construction is used to express the deity of the Father "God and our Father") in Gal. 1:4, 1 Thes. 1:3, and Phil. 4:20. The O.T. uses such construction frequently (i.e. Is. 45:21, a just God and a Saviour, and Gen. 49:25).

4.) New versions omit the definite article "the" great God, seen in all Greek texts. He is the great God, but is only our Saviour since we believe in him.

5.) The spelling of 'Saviour' as "Savior" denies his deity. See Webster's distinction between a "savior" ("one who saves") (it could be anyone) and the 'Saviour' "Jesus Christ the Redeemer". (The move from a seven letter word, the Bible's number for perfection, to a six letter word, the Bible's number for man, is a downhill move.)

2 Peter 1:1

1.) The Textus Receptus (Elzevir) reads "our Saviour." (See footnote in Berry's Stephen's interlinear.)

2.) P. 371 of New Age Bible Versions quotes Lewis Foster, an NIV editor, confessing WHY they really insert Christ's deity here and omit it nearly 100 other places.

3.) White pretends the KJV says "our God and our Savior, Jesus Christ" in Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. The KJV has only one "our," no comma, and spells Saviour correctly.




Read the rest of this entry »

G.A. Riplinger's Response to James White's Criticism of New Age Bible Versions ==================================================================



"Woe unto you, scribes…Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel…Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Woe unto you, scribes…" Matt. 23:23-29


Oh how God must wish such Pharisees would strain out the bats in their new versions, as energetically as they try to strain at my gnats.

In a herculean effort to find something wrong with a book that finds SO MUCH truly wrong with his own new versions, White has resorted to inflating typographical and proofreading errors in the early printings. He describes such human error as "grossly dishonest." Pickpockets tend to think everyone who bumps into them is trying to pick their pocket. Psychologists call this projection. Only someone who lied themselves would assume that simple transcriptural errors, common in any written material (including the critics'), were intentional lies.

Read the rest of this entry »

A Critique of James R. White's book

By Dr. Thomas D. Holland, Th. D. (Email:

Justification by faith was the birth cry of the Protestant Reformation. The essential word for men like Luther was faith, which has its roots and life in the living word of God (Rom. 10:17). Today, however, the essential word seems to be justification. Men seek to justify their actions and systems of belief, often at the cost of truth and consistency.

Those who believe the King James Bible to be the preserved word of God for the English speaking people will find no friend in the writings of James R. White and his recent book, "The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust the Modern Translations?" (Bethany House Publishers 1995). White seeks to justify the use of modern versions such as the NIV and NASV while attacking those who hold to the Authorized Version as the word of God.

It would take a volume to answer all White's objections to the King James Bible and those who believe it. Those criticisms have all been addressed in the writings of those White opposes. However, some points of justification require further examination. The number of contradictions, straw man arguments, and false information is astounding. So are the number of endorsements his book has received by those who view it as "scholarly and accurate," as quoted by Dr. Bruce Metzger, editor of the United Bible Society's Greek text (the basic text for the NIV and TEV). Such endorsements are understandable considering supporters are themselves translators and editors of modern Greek texts.

Read the rest of this entry »

Log In

Font Controller