Top critical review
56 of 81 people found this helpful
Wake up positive reviewers!! You can't be serious!
on July 8, 2001
It's baffling how such poor logic and misinformation can convince so many people. This reflects a deep malaise in Christendom, where people are disobeying what Christ called "The greatest commandment", i.e. "love God with all your ... mind." E.g.
* P. 149: Riplinger indulges in acrostic algebra to prove that the letters of the New International Version and the New American Standard Bible (which she conveniently abbreviates NASV to fit her "equation") minus the abbreviation for Authorized Version equate to "sin". As a reductio ad absurdum, the Passantinos did the same trick with seven modern versions, subtracted the letters KJV, and were left with "Christ". So by Riplinger's own "reasoning", the modern versions must affirm Christ!
* P. 232, Riplinger writes, "Watch out for the letter 's' -- sin, Satan, Sodom, Saul (had to be changed to Paul). The added 's' here is the hiss of the serpent." At first, I thought this was a signal that that her book was an April Fool's joke, but sadly all indications are that she's totally serious. What about salvation, Saviour, sanctification, Stephen, Sarah, to say nothing about sober, which ironically Riplinger commends the KJV for using (p. 174)?!
* P. 231: the "Five Points" of Calvinism form a Satanic pentagram! Whatever your views about Calvinism and Arminianism, this numerological quackery is no way to argue -- the Bible alone must be the basis for deciding the truth. Riplinger also fails to realise that the Five Points of Calvinism were a *response* by the Synod of Dordt to the Five Points of Arminianism in the "Remonstrance". To be consistent, Riplinger would equally have to brand the Five Points of Arminianism as a Satanic pentagram.
Other reviewers have noted much of the misinformation in this book, and in my own reviews of both pro- and anti- KJV-only books I've explained many of the issues involved. So there's little need for me to document many other errors. Also, this has already been done so well by James White in his book and his Alpha and Omega site. My challenge for future positive reviewers is to explain why we should take her in the slightest bit seriously with just those three examples I've raised above.