KFLCC / New Age Bible Versions - Gail Riplinger

64 gruce Metzger, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Greek Palaeography (Oxford* Oxford University Press, 1981), pp. 66, 68; also see E.G. Turner s Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World, p. 108; Anzeiger des phil-hist Klasse der Osterheichischen Akademie aer Wissenschaften, 1960, No. 4, pp. 12-23; New Dimensions in New Testament Study eds. Richard N. Longenecker and Merrill C. Tenney (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1974), p. 30. 65 A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, p. 358. 66 New Dimension in New Testament Study, p. 28. Fee ignores the all too obvious facts and choose to posit that Origen could not have been involved because he did not have the type of "mind" required. ^ Gunther Zuntz, The Textofthe Epistles (London: Oxford University Press, 1953), p. 152. 68 D.A. Carlson, The King James Version Debate (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1979), p. 27. 69 Erwin W. Lutzer, Coming to Grips with The Antichrist's New Age Roots (Chicago: Moody Press, 1990), p. 12. 70 A General Survey on the History of the Canon of the New Testament, p. 47. 71 Dave Hunt, What Ever Happened to Heaven (Eugene, Oregon: Harvest HousePublishers, 1988), p. 11. 72 A General Survey on the History of the Canon of the New Testament, p. 428. 73 Trevor Ravenscroft, The Spear of Destiny {York Beach, Me.: Weiser, 1982), p.64. See also Inman: Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism, p. 84 for the Church of Rome's involvement. 74 What Ever Happened to Heaven, p. 115. 75 The History of Heresy, p. 45; A General Survey, pp. 414,416,419. 76 Ibid., p. 426. 77 Ibid., p. 398. 78 fra Price, The Ancestory of the English Bible, p. 70 as quoted in Which Bible, p. 3. 79 Bruce Metzger, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981), p. 77; see also Wilhelm Bousset, Texte and Untersuchungen as cited in Harnack’s Textual Studies in the New Testament, 1894, p. 45. 80 Kenneth L. Barker (ed.), The NIV: The Making of a Contemporary Translation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), pp. 50, 89. 81 F.J.A. Hort, The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988), p. 264; first printed by Harper Brothers, New York, 1882. 82 D.A. Carlson, The King James Version Debate, p. 53. 83 The NIV: The Making of a Contemporary Translation, p. 89. 84 The Septuagint, Zondervan Publishing Co., 1970, (Samuel Bagster and Sons, London). 85 The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, p. 309. 86 Ibid. 87 The Septuagint (LXX) cannot be the word of God for several other reasons: 1. Tt contains apocryphal books such as Tobit, The Prayer of Manasses, Second Esdras, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruck, I and II Maccabee; there are also additions to Esther and Daniel. Jesus never quoted the Apocrypha and the Jews rejected it also.

2. The "fable" of its origin states that it was written under orders of the king of Egypt (Ptolemy) around 250 B.C. by 72 Jews. The word Septuagint, however, means 70. The "fable" further states that six Jews from each of the twelve tribes wrote it. However, only the tribe of Levi were permitted by God to write the scriptures (I Chronicles 16:4). 3. Any Jew living in or returning to Egypt was in direct disobedience to God's command in Deuteronomy 17:16. "But he shall not. . .cause the people to return to Egypt forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you. Ye shall henceforth return no more that way." 4. Origen's six column Old Testament, the Hexapla, parallels O.T. versions by Theodotian, Symmachus, and Aquilla, all three Gnostic occultists.