Riplinger/Elipses and The Epistle of Barnabas
*******
Here is material that I found by some follow named Bob DeWaay,and my answer to this scholarship.
bob@twincityfellowship.com
I found this site that was acusing Gail of some imbelishment.So I thought to
check up on it to see if those things were so.Being a good Berean,I checked
it out like some jokers like to scream about.So,I did.And wow,what a
joke.False acusations are on the other side instead,completely.Now before
the opposers rage in fury and stomp their fingers on the computer extra hard
as if using a hammer and chizzel,allow me to show scholars of this board
proper honesty.
Here is the false acusation by the site called "twincities fellowship"
.
Twisted Quotations
New Age Bible Versions by G. A. Riplinger could serve as a handbook for
misuse of quotations and faulty logic. It contains misused ellipses (those .
. . ). She uses omissions to make authors say the opposite of what they
meant. For example, in her attempt to slander an early Greek manuscript, she
notes that it was found with a copy of the Epistle of Barnabas. She then
quotes Barnabas, "Satan . . . is Lord" (Ch. 1 : 2 0 Here is the what the
Epistle of Barnabas actually says: "There are two ways of doctrine and
authority, the one of light, and the other of darkness. But there is a great
difference between these two ways. For over one are stationed the
light-bringing angels of God, but over the other the angels of Satan. And He
indeed (i.e., God) is Lord for ever and ever, but he (i.e. Satan) is prince
of the time of iniquity."21 Riplinger has twisted the passage to say the
opposite of what was being said by the misuse of ellipses. This is not an
isolated incident.Quote]
*******
It could serve as a handbook of misquotations,eh?We shall see.
Riplinger says about The Epistle of Barnabus,that
"This apocraphal book sits between the book of Revelation and The Shepherd
of Hermas in manuscript Aleph [Sinaiticus].It is written in the same
handwritting as the rest of Aleph,by someone who apparently believed it to
be inspired.Lightfoot,as translator,makes the following comments reguarding
this 'epistle'.
1]"The author is an uncompromising antagonist of Judaism."
2]"The author believed the ordinances [of] circumcision and the
Sabbath...were never intended to be observed,but had a ...mystical
significance."
3]It was written in Alexandria...[and]cited by Origen and Clement."
Then she compares its teachings to that of New Age.
On the third point,under Doctrine of New Age and Apostate Christianity she
has this;
3. II Corinthians 4:4 says Satan is the "god[small g ]of this world." I
Corinthians 8:5 says "[T]here be gods many and lords many."I Timothy 6:15
says Jesus Christ is "Lord of lords" [small l for false 'lords'].Satan can
never be Lord[capitalL].
Beside this statement is the proof from The Epistle of Barnabas.
3."Satan...is Lord."[Ch 18]
*******
See!The acuser lied about Riplingers work,all the way.
First he falsly acuses her of missquotasions and elipses.
Then the writter says she tries to slander Aleph.But it was Lightfoot giving
the Proof.He made sure to omitt that.
Next,he conveniently omitts Lightfoot as the source at all.
And then he has the unmittigated gall to say;
"This is what it really says."
Then he goes on to missquote Lightfoot all together,and uses some other
translation,instead of Lightfoot's,that Riplinger was refering to.
His fake quote;
"...And He indeed (i.e., God) is Lord for ever and ever, but he (i.e. Satan)
is prince of the time of iniquity."
Lightfoot's quote;
18."But let us pass on to another lesson and teaching.There are two ways of
teaching and of power,the one of light and the other of darkness;and there
is a great difference between the two ways. For on the one are stationed the
light-giving angels of God,on the other the angels of Satan.
And the one is Lord from all eternity and unto all eternity,wheras the
other is Lord of the season of iniquity that now is."
*******
See how Lightfoot uses CAPITAL "L" for lord?
NOT [ei.Satan]is prince..
He is guilty of twisting instead of Riplinger.
Look at his statement;
Riplinger has twisted the passage to say the opposite of what was being said
by the misuse of ellipses. This is not an isolated incident.Quote]
*******
Nothing could be further from the truth,That is out and out liying.He lied
at every point.She did not make it say the opposite.She even gave three
scriptures to prove the thing out.
3. II Corinthians 4:4 says Satan is the "god[small g ]of this world." I
Corinthians 8:5 says "[T]here be gods many and lords many."I Timothy 6:15
says Jesus Christ is "Lord of lords" [small l for false 'lords'].Satan can
never be Lord[capital L ].
*******
Gail Riplinger proved her point and made the point.The other fellow tried to
prove too much.When you prove too much you in fact prove nothing at all.He
infact did not prove enough to make his point.When you do not prove
enough,you in fact prove nothing at all.
Maybe he was hoping nobody would call his bluff?
It appears that the jealous venom of Satan's goal,clouded this man's
judgement.Most likely he has no infallible Bible that he can touch,see or
read,to boot.
Not an isolated incident eh?He was proven wrong on his very creme de la
creme,choice of the many.
*******
Let us be honest.
NASV,Riplinger,pgs 579,580
Apostolic Fathers,J.B.Lightfoot,pg.285
Issue 41 KJO,twin cities fellowship
Relentless for Christ Jesus and his words,
Holy Bible
Thy word is truth.
John17:17
*******
Here is material that I found by some follow named Bob DeWaay,and my answer to this scholarship.
bob@twincityfellowship.com
I found this site that was acusing Gail of some imbelishment.So I thought to
check up on it to see if those things were so.Being a good Berean,I checked
it out like some jokers like to scream about.So,I did.And wow,what a
joke.False acusations are on the other side instead,completely.Now before
the opposers rage in fury and stomp their fingers on the computer extra hard
as if using a hammer and chizzel,allow me to show scholars of this board
proper honesty.
Here is the false acusation by the site called "twincities fellowship"
.
Twisted Quotations
New Age Bible Versions by G. A. Riplinger could serve as a handbook for
misuse of quotations and faulty logic. It contains misused ellipses (those .
. . ). She uses omissions to make authors say the opposite of what they
meant. For example, in her attempt to slander an early Greek manuscript, she
notes that it was found with a copy of the Epistle of Barnabas. She then
quotes Barnabas, "Satan . . . is Lord" (Ch. 1 : 2 0 Here is the what the
Epistle of Barnabas actually says: "There are two ways of doctrine and
authority, the one of light, and the other of darkness. But there is a great
difference between these two ways. For over one are stationed the
light-bringing angels of God, but over the other the angels of Satan. And He
indeed (i.e., God) is Lord for ever and ever, but he (i.e. Satan) is prince
of the time of iniquity."21 Riplinger has twisted the passage to say the
opposite of what was being said by the misuse of ellipses. This is not an
isolated incident.Quote]
*******
It could serve as a handbook of misquotations,eh?We shall see.
Riplinger says about The Epistle of Barnabus,that
"This apocraphal book sits between the book of Revelation and The Shepherd
of Hermas in manuscript Aleph [Sinaiticus].It is written in the same
handwritting as the rest of Aleph,by someone who apparently believed it to
be inspired.Lightfoot,as translator,makes the following comments reguarding
this 'epistle'.
1]"The author is an uncompromising antagonist of Judaism."
2]"The author believed the ordinances [of] circumcision and the
Sabbath...were never intended to be observed,but had a ...mystical
significance."
3]It was written in Alexandria...[and]cited by Origen and Clement."
Then she compares its teachings to that of New Age.
On the third point,under Doctrine of New Age and Apostate Christianity she
has this;
3. II Corinthians 4:4 says Satan is the "god[small g ]of this world." I
Corinthians 8:5 says "[T]here be gods many and lords many."I Timothy 6:15
says Jesus Christ is "Lord of lords" [small l for false 'lords'].Satan can
never be Lord[capitalL].
Beside this statement is the proof from The Epistle of Barnabas.
3."Satan...is Lord."[Ch 18]
*******
See!The acuser lied about Riplingers work,all the way.
First he falsly acuses her of missquotasions and elipses.
Then the writter says she tries to slander Aleph.But it was Lightfoot giving
the Proof.He made sure to omitt that.
Next,he conveniently omitts Lightfoot as the source at all.
And then he has the unmittigated gall to say;
"This is what it really says."
Then he goes on to missquote Lightfoot all together,and uses some other
translation,instead of Lightfoot's,that Riplinger was refering to.
His fake quote;
"...And He indeed (i.e., God) is Lord for ever and ever, but he (i.e. Satan)
is prince of the time of iniquity."
Lightfoot's quote;
18."But let us pass on to another lesson and teaching.There are two ways of
teaching and of power,the one of light and the other of darkness;and there
is a great difference between the two ways. For on the one are stationed the
light-giving angels of God,on the other the angels of Satan.
And the one is Lord from all eternity and unto all eternity,wheras the
other is Lord of the season of iniquity that now is."
*******
See how Lightfoot uses CAPITAL "L" for lord?
NOT [ei.Satan]is prince..
He is guilty of twisting instead of Riplinger.
Look at his statement;
Riplinger has twisted the passage to say the opposite of what was being said
by the misuse of ellipses. This is not an isolated incident.Quote]
*******
Nothing could be further from the truth,That is out and out liying.He lied
at every point.She did not make it say the opposite.She even gave three
scriptures to prove the thing out.
3. II Corinthians 4:4 says Satan is the "god[small g ]of this world." I
Corinthians 8:5 says "[T]here be gods many and lords many."I Timothy 6:15
says Jesus Christ is "Lord of lords" [small l for false 'lords'].Satan can
never be Lord[capital L ].
*******
Gail Riplinger proved her point and made the point.The other fellow tried to
prove too much.When you prove too much you in fact prove nothing at all.He
infact did not prove enough to make his point.When you do not prove
enough,you in fact prove nothing at all.
Maybe he was hoping nobody would call his bluff?
It appears that the jealous venom of Satan's goal,clouded this man's
judgement.Most likely he has no infallible Bible that he can touch,see or
read,to boot.
Not an isolated incident eh?He was proven wrong on his very creme de la
creme,choice of the many.
*******
Let us be honest.
NASV,Riplinger,pgs 579,580
Apostolic Fathers,J.B.Lightfoot,pg.285
Issue 41 KJO,twin cities fellowship
Relentless for Christ Jesus and his words,
Holy Bible
Thy word is truth.
John17:17
