Yvonne S. Waite. July 9-14, 2009

Transcription

1 Yvonne S. Waite 900 Park Avenue, Collingswood, New Jersey Church Phone: Cell Phone: July 9-14, 2009 DEAR GAIL, This is a serious letter from me to you. It is not a letter that I enjoy writing, but I feel that I must. I am not trying to hurt you, but may. Perhaps you have taken care of these matters, as you are doing with the Landmark Anchor issue. If you have corrected them. please send me the corrections so I will have them. Your recent defense of the truth by you in regards to the Landmark Anchor has pushed me into the following truths that need to be corrected as diligently as you are seeking Landmark s correction. PART- I THE LANDMARK ANCHOR ERROR Your recent to my husband concerning the ARTICLE WITH YOUR NAME ON IT THAT YOU DID NOT WRITE in the latest LANDMARK ANCHOR has prompted me to write this letter. I commend you in this instance for pursuing the truth. Jesus said that the truth shall make you free. For someone to write such an article, pretending to be you, is inexcusable! Truth is very important in the Lord s work! You should go after the forger with hammer and tongs! I am glad to see you have corrected this lie! We readers still do not know who wrote, it or where the editor of that paper found it. Maybe you know by now. But, that is not the subject I am writing to you about today. My interest in the LANDMARK subject was YOUR DESIRE FOR THE TRUTH TO BE TOLD! This letter, I am writing today, is not easy for me to write. I have postponed it for months. but your LANDMARK ANCHOR has prompted me to put away any hesitation in writing you! PART-II THE BACK-TRANSLATED QUOTE ERROR

2 2 The first subject concerns something you wrote about our oldest son, D. A. Waite, Jr. In one of your recent writings, YOU SAID that Don, Jr. wrote of Scrivener s assignment to backwards translate the KJB. (Your words!) You gave a footnote from The Doctored New Testament. He never wrote that footnote the way you said he wrote it.! You have misrepresented him! You used him! You gave the footnote, to your untrue statement, from the first copy-machine book done in That was rolled off on the copy machine and bound by hand a year prior to its final publication in a HARDBACK edition. So, when one looks up page I, footnote 5 (the last line in the 2003 edition), one is baffled because page I is on the TITLE PAGE of the published hardback book (published in 2003) is different. Would you please correct your statements. Thank you. WAITE, JR. NEVER WROTE WHAT YOU CLAIM Our son did not say, OR EVER WRITE what you said he wrote. What have you done? You have written a book, A LITTLE LEAVEN, and in chapter 18, you are pretending to quote from the copy-machine-book- page I. But your words are false! You claimed the footnote said something THAT IT DID NOT SAY!! Either you were in a hurry, or you were having one of your autoimmune system attacks, or you deliberately misrepresented our son s view for the sake of your argument. You are much too smart a woman to make such an error innocently. YOU USED HIM! WHAT DOES THE FOOTNOTE ACTUALLY SAY? The footnote, written by D. A. Waite, Jr, wrote the following: In those KJV portions with no known Greek support, Scrivener (a man of textual integrity) let the readings of Beza s 1598 Greek NT stand (p. 655). He refused to backwards translate from Latin to Greek! HOW IN THE WORLD COULD YOU DEDUCE THAT OUR SON SAID THAT SCRIVENER, IN HIS ORIGINAL EDITION OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT, BACKWARD TRANSLATED HIS TEXTUS RECEPTUS GREEK TEXT FROM ENGLISH TO GREEK? H-O-W???? HOW COULD YOU POSTULATE? How? How? How? I could postulate, but I will not. Your FALSE WORDS stand on their own. The sad fact is that very few will look this footnote up especially in an edition of THE DOCTORED NEW TESTAMENT that is not offered anymore at THE BIBLE FOR TODAY! D. A. WAITE, JR. MISQUOTED ON SCRIVENER S BACKWARDS TRANSLATING

3 3 You have not only misquoted Don, Jr.; but you have interpreted his words in a completely inverted manner. He NEVER SAID that Scrivener s assignment was to backwards translate the KJB ALL HE SAID WAS THAT SCRIVENER REFUSED TO BACKWARDS TRANSLATE FROM LATIN TO GREEK! How could you put such false words in his mouth? YOU DO NOT WANT OTHERS TO PUT FALSE WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH A LA LANDMARK!! YOU know how YOU feel! Our son said NOTHING about Scrivener back- translating from English to Greek. Nothing! YOU USED HIM! YOUR CRITICS ARE RIGHT! I have read some of the criticism that people have of you. One of them is that you change the meaning of the quotes you give in your book. The ones I read about were your quotes in the NEW AGE BIBLE VERSIONS. They said that you would begin a quote one place, put in ellipses, and continue the quote from another part of the paragraph or another part of the book. This type of quoting causes a completely different meaning than a quote made in the proper manner. Now that I see how you have completely; mangled Don, Jr. s words with your twisted interpretation of those words, I get what your critics were getting at. YOU ARE MUCH TOO SMART OF A WOMAN NOT TO KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING!!!! Apparently, YOU so desperately want to prove your view of the King James Version being inspired, that you have twisted an honest person s words to support your view. Shame on you for being so dishonest! YOU USED HIM! SCRIVENER NEVER BACKWARDS TRANSLATED! Just to reiterate your error. I asked Don, Jr. about this back translating statement you said he wrote. He said HE NEVER SAID OR WROTE THAT--EVER! He doesn t believe it so why would he write it? He said it was not in the DOCTORED NEW TESTAMENT! It is not in either the 2002 or 2003 editions! My eyes can see this. Our son has written me a letter saying so. I will enclose you a copy. You, who have people lie about you right and left, should know the damage such a slip of the pen can bring. Your pen has slipped big time! YOU USED HIM! YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE LIED ABOUT In the light of the Micky Carter faux pas, I hope that you will correct this error speedily. You are so upset over the LANDMARK ANCHOR article that you have written the brethren to inform them that you did not write it. AV PUBLICATIONS CORP. wrote on July 4, 2009 the following:...but as you know the enemy would love to misrepresent the views of anyone who has a reasoned view of inspiration and he has done a star spangled job with this fiasco. YET, YOU ARE WILLING TO TELL A FALSEHOOD ABOUT DON, JR. JUST TO SATISFY ONE OF YOU THEORIES! When you have corrected this backwards translating comment, please send me a copy so I can pass it on to our son and to others so, we are able to answer his critics. Also insert the correction in your writing on the subject. You know what it is like to be lied about!

4 4 PART- III THE DIVORCE/REMARRIAGE CONFUSION The next reason I am writing you is serious indeed. We have been sitting on the following startling, problem-news for months! If you remember, sometime in the recent past, I called you on the phone asking you about the rumors, as well as the copies of marriage licenses that have been circulating by (fast-mail) and USA MAIL (slow-mail) to us. Perhaps, when I called you (OCTOBER 24, 2007), we did not have the copies of the marriage licenses. These letters, that came to us, claimed that Gail Riplinger was married twice before, and divorced twice before marrying her present husband. I am sure you remember this call. How many people called you personally to see if those marriage/divorce statements were true? All I know is that I did. I absolutely believed you! YOU USED ME! ONLY ONE HUSBAND EVER! I PHONED YOU IMMEDIATELY TO FIND OUT THE TRUTH. My husband came on the phone also. I asked you if you had ever been married before. You assured me that you had not ever been married to anyone but Mike Riplinger. (Perhaps I asked the question in a wrong way that you could answer honestly without telling me the truth.) I remember asking, Have YOU ever had another husband beside your present husband? You ASSURED ME that Mike was your ONLY husband EVER! SERIOUS CHARGES AGAINST GAIL RIPLINGER As you recall, there were serious charges that you were married two times before your present marriage to Mike Riplinger. I wanted to know the truth! I didn t care what you said. I just wanted to know the truth. You assured us that you had never been married to anyone EVER except your present husband. I believed you! My husband believed you! Others believed you because you said so. YOU USED US! TOO BUSY TO DEFEND THE MARRIAGE QUESTIONS I ENCOURAGED YOU TO DEFEND YOURSELF. (You are defending yourself now in regard to the LANDMARK ANCHOR.) You said that you were too busy. You were doing some kind of language translation, as well as other projects. You could not come down from the wall and defend yourself. Yet, you are upset over the LANDMARK article! You are not too busy to defend that problem! It didn t seem to matter to you that these rumors about your three marriages were flying around the internet. I said to my husband, If someone were spreading falsehoods about me that I d been married and divorced before, and it was not true, I would defend myself! I could not understand how you could be so apparently unconcerned over such gossip. (I have only been married once and never divorced. I would be very upset over such false charges) YOU USED US! PLENTY OF TIME FOR ANOTHER MATTER So I was very surprised to see that you were defending yourself with this Mickey Carter error! (Not that I don t think you should object and defend this falsehood. I do.) To me being accused

5 5 of THREE MARRIAGES and TWO DIVORCES is worse than having someone falsely claim that I had authored a published article that I had not written. I would be mortified if someone said I was married before and divorced, when I am not! THE WAITES BELIEVED YOU WE BELIEVED YOU! Isn t that what people do? We defended you in this marriage lie! We told people that the marriage licence copies were fraudulent. There were several things crossed out on the copies. It was easy to believe that someone was pulling a fast one on you. You inferred this. You told us all about the lies told about you on a certain web site. WE BELIEVED YOU! YOU SAID YOU HAD TWO SISTERS You said they were wrong. You proved their error because they did not mention that you had sisters. You said the truth was you had two sisters. We used the two sister knowledge when defending you. Later a friend told me that one of your parents was married before and had children probably the two sisters. I can t exactly remember, but I think they were your father s daughters. Maybe. So the sisters you have would be half-sisters. Also, there is something about your parents being divorced. I think that you grew up with your mother. A QUESTION CONCERNING MANY MARRIAGES Soon after our phone conversation, my husband had a good-sized-meeting in the Princeton, New Jersey, area. It was streamed around the world. This was January 10-11, Questions came in from around the world! One question came from a man whose name we recognized. (You probably would know it, too.) He asked about this Riplinger-marriage issue. With assurance, my husband answered the question, telling the man and those listening in that room--and all viewing over the world--that MRS. RIPLINGER SAID SHE HAD BEEN MARRIED ONLY ONCE! That was truth for us! YOU HAD SAID IT! WE BELIEVED YOU! YOU USED US! PART-IV PEOPLE SAID DR, WAITE WAS LYING THEN FOLK CAME FROM OUT OF THE WOOD WORK. THEY BEGAN TO CHARGE MY HUSBAND WITH FALSEHOOD! THEY SENT HIM COPIES OF YOUR THREE MARRIAGE LICENCES, etc. They appeared to yoke Dr. Waite as part of the Riplinger conspiracy to cover-up your marriages and divorces! One man challenged my husband to send to the state of Ohio and get the documentation himself. THIS HE DID! Little was crossed out of those certified copies of the Ohio marriage licenses that he paid for. We still tended to believe you. AFTER ALL, YOU WOULD NOT LIE ABOUT SUCH A THING. WOULD YOU? WE BELIEVED YOU! PEOPLE BEGGED DR. WAITE TO INVESTIGATE As I am writing to you, I have reviewed some correspondence that Dr. Waite had received from a man begging my husband to believe the information he sent him concerning your many marriages. I read my husband s words defending you. IT SICKENS ME THAT WE BELIEVED YOUR LIE!

6 6 Since that correspondence, we have been investigating. It appears that we have been hoodwinked by you. It is sad that you are hiding behind pretense instead of fact. Why can t you tell the truth? WE BELIEVED YOU! YOU USED US! PART-V AN UNEXPECTED INFORMATION SOURCE Unexpectedly, word came to us from someone (a very reliable someone) who had done some personal investigation on those thrice-marriages and twice-divorces accusations. The truth was coming to us slowly and then in an avalanche of facts! This man is a very reliable source well respected in his field! HE HAD NO REASON TO LIE!! You may have met him--probably not. Previous to his investigation, he had ed Dr. Waite with the marriage/divorce news that he had received just as many people had. My husband had told our friend it was not true. HAD NOT MRS. RIPLINGER SAID IT WAS NOT TRUE? Would she lie? You had denied this charge with your own lips to us? From your mouth to our ears! WE BELIEVED YOU! YOU USED US! SOMEONE KNEW YOU AS MRS. KALEDA One time, this friend drove to an adjoining state. While there, He met a man who knew you as GAIL KALEDA. I believe I remember that he told me that you lived with Frank, your second husband, in a trailer near Kent University. This acquaintance of our friend knew you then. He knew you to be a part of the student/teacher on-campus Bible study discussion group. He said that you taught and wrote several self-published textbooks using the KALEDA name. (I believe there are six books under the Kaleda name.) We were told that, at first, you were in a Pentecostal-type church, but, as I understand it, FRANK KALEDA did not like all the loud emotionalism, etc. of that group and started to attend a less energetic church. I think it was a Baptist Church not sure. A PICTURE OF YOU ON YOUR SECOND WEDDING DAY In the providence of God, we have two snap-shot pictures of you and Frank on what we have been told was your wedding day. You were much younger than you are now. You look lovely and happy. Who wouldn t look lovely on her wedding day? We sent a copy of these pictures to our friend. We thought he could show it to his acquaintance and verify if it really was you. He did not have to take the pictures for verification to his acquaintance because the man (Frank) in your wedding pictures is the Frank, and the woman in the pictures is you. If I recall, our friend had seen a picture of Frank previously. Our friend recognized the people in the pictures--you and Frank. Also, I was told by our friend that according to his acquaintance your daughter is a spitting image of you in your younger years. ORIGINAL OWNER OF PICTURES SAID IT WAS YOU The truth is that we didn t really have to have our friend s verification that the pictures were of you because we received the pictures from someone who knew it was you and Frank. We just wanted to double-check. This whole thing is very upsetting to me. How could you lie to us? How could you lie to everyone who trusted you. JUST TELL THE TRUTH! WE BELIEVED YOU!! THE ACQUAINTANCE KNEW YOU WELL

7 7 SECOND HUSBAND DIED IN A FIRE The acquaintance knew you very well. He does not want to be named (in fact our friend is protecting the acquaintance s name). He does not want to be involved by name. Our friend has seen a picture of Frank (or Franklin) from his Warren High School yearbook. It is the exact man that is in the wedding picture with you. As you may or may not know, FRANK KALEDA died in a fire after you were divorced. He was drunk, sitting in a chair, and smoking. The chair caught fire from the cigarette. A sad ending to someone you must have loved very much at one time because you married him. THE WAITES HAVE SPOKEN TO A WITNESS ANOTHER FRIEND HAS, TOO We have witnesses, too, who know that you were married to Frank Kaleda. We have talked with the witness and to someone who has spoken to the witness. We have spoken to the witness. The witness knows you were married to FRANK KALEDA, too. There is no denying this evidence. It is very sad to me that you would deny this truth.. (I know you were previously married before marrying Frank. All of this discovery is so unnecessary if only you would tell the truth! I DON T CARE HOW MANY TIMES YOU HAVE BEEN MARRIED. IT IS NOT MY LIFE, NOR MY AFFAIR, You have made it my affair because you have lied to me. I came to you for THE TRUTH. You could not tell the truth. Why? When you told us a boldfaced lie that you never were married before EVER! it becomes my business. We TOLD THE TRUTH ABOUT YOU, only to discover we were TELLING YOUR LIE! WE BELIEVED YOU. YOU USED US! INTERNET SITES YOKE DR. WAITE WITH YOUR LIE I had not paid any attention to any INTERNET SITES concerning you. I had no idea, until I began this letter and my husband looked up something on the internet, that people were linking-up my husband with you. They were making fun of him for revising your history. This writer was referring to my husband s answer at the Princeton meeting in 2008 to the question concerning your many marriages and two divorces. WE DIDN T KNOW YOU LIED TO US I ask you, how were my husband and I to know that you were lying to us? Now that I have seen WITH MY OWN EYES how you lied about our son, Don, Jr s saying Scrivener s task was to backward translate the KJV, I AM THINKING THAT PREVARICATION COMES NATURALLY TO YOU! We believed you and you lied to us concerning all of your marriages and two divorces. What gain is there to that? You used us! PREVARICATION COMES NATURALLY TO YOU As I am writing this today, the thought has come to me that maybe your present husband did not know of your two marriages. We have known a woman who was married happily to a man who never knew his wife had been previously married. In my opinion, your marriage/ divorce deception is worse than the LANDMARK article! My opinion, is nothing in this situation. It is YOUR TRUTH that counts! Why aren t you as riled up about this lie as you are about the LANDMARK ANCHOR article? WHY?

8 8 PART-VI WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO? So now, Gail WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THIS KNOWLEDGE? (We have two file folders full of information on this subject that we have had for months and months.) I have been lied to by you. My husband has been lied to. You told my husband and me that you had NEVER been married before. We have the CERTIFIED COPIES of CERTIFIED MARRIAGE CERTIFICATES from the state of Ohio that my husband paid for himself. We did not want to believe them. Providentially, this friend of ours, who was doing his own investigation, discovered a man who knew you as MRS. FRANKLIN ALEX KALEDA. From what I read, Frank was verbally and physically abusive to you. Was that true? We have another friend who knows a person who knows that you were married to Frank. I HAVE TALKED WITH THAT PERSON. We have two pictures of YOU on your wedding day to Frank. I have talked with the person who sent the pictures! I really couldn t believe you would lie to us! Why? What does your present husband and daughter think of all this cover-up? Maybe you have deceived them. They believed you! You have used them! GAIL LUDWIG LATESSA You see, we made our own investigation after learning of the testimony of the acquaintance. Some day we will learn more about your life as MRS. TERRY EDWARD LATESSA, your first husband. We have some information. I have been told that he is still living. It must have been difficult living with him. Marriage is for better or worse. Exposing this information is not a pleasant job for me. I do not relish doing this. Information comes to us! WILL FUNDAMENTALISTS FORGIVE YOUR LIES? I presume, you have denied these other marriages because you have felt it would hinder your work on the KJB, etc. I can think of no other reason for such deception except for the second possible reason that Mike Riplinger and your daughter do not know. I know that there are very few fundamentalists (who support you now) who would be comfortable with your many marriages and divorces. Dr. Ruckman is comfortable with them, I am sure having at least three marriages himself. (Some in the ministry are divorced and remarried; but even they do not lie about it.) I will not conjecture in any other areas--although I could. Lately I have been reading that preachers are lining up with your view of the Inspiration of the King James Bible. Will their faces be red when they realize your marriage and divorce history? Many of those already know the charges and support you. Many have been criticized for lining up with a woman. Now they will be more embarrassed than ever because of the marriages and divorces of that woman. The best thing for you to do is to come clean and tell the truth. YOU SHOULD BE THE ONE TO MAKE IT PUBLIC I have been holding back on informing you of our findings for months. I have told no one except the ones who have up-dated us on the truth. We have not made it public YET!!! We have had the proof for months! Your about the Landmark article lit a fire in my bone to put this truth

9 9 out in the open. It is not pleasant to write you. I FEEL THAT I MUST TELL YOU WHAT HAS COME TO US! What will happen after this? I suppose it is up to you. You should be the one who reveals the truth--not me. I MUST CONFESS, THAT THE MORE I WRITE ABOUT THIS LIE AND SEE IT IN BLACK & WHITE, I FEEL I MUST RELEASE THIS INFORMATION. It has taken me much longer to write this letter than I thought it would. That is why I am sending you it via PDF, as well as a slow mail letter. I want you to get it soon! People attack my husband because he defended your alleged one marriage. IT HAS TURNED OUT THAT THE ATTACKERS ARE CORRECT. This made my husband a bearer of a lie a fellow conspirator. It made him wrong because he believed your lie. He believed you and repeated your lie as his truth. This has made him to be a prevaricator and a part of your cover up! YOUR DECEPTION WAS AN UNKIND, UNCHRISTIAN THING TO DO! That is how it is with sin. The cover-up is worse than the truth. What are we to do? What would you do? Think of the people you have written about, trying to expose them for one thing or another. YOU SHOWED NO MERCY ON THEM! What next? COME CLEAN Personally, I am very disappointed that you have not been up-front with this situation. I do not know if your work will be hindered. People are very forgiving. They forget. You have a huge following. You have opened the eyes of many to the Version issue. (Your defense is in a different direction than my husband s. That is not the subject of this letter.) Please come out and tell the truth on your personal life. The truth will set you free! PART-VII THE DBS IS MEETING SOON The DEAN BURGON SOCIETY is meeting in Chicago in about seven days (July 22-23, 2009). It would not surprise me if your marriage/divorce question would be asked there. What kind of answer should be given? The DBS WOMEN meet, too, on July 22 from ten o clock to noon. Lord willing all public meetings will be streamed around the world. In fact, I am seriously considering exposing this LIE to the women on Wednesday morning. We have a full agenda and I am not sure there will be time. I do not want to be the bearer of bad news; but somehow this denial/cover-up of yours, as to your former marriages and divorces, has to be brought out in the open before more people, like Dr. Waite and I, believe you In believing you, we have been painted with the same brush of prevarication that you use. I have not made up my mind as to speaking about it yet, but I seem to be coming to the conclusion, after writing all this out in black and white, that it is a necessary thing to do. As I told you before, we have been sitting on all the above since last year and the beginning of this year depending of the part of the news that has been uncovered I keep asking myself, What would the prophets do?

10 10 I close this letter with a sadness in my soul. In God s wise care, Yvonne S. Waite P.S. I decided to write out this information in a letter, instead of calling on the phone, so that you can see it in black and white, and understand the severity of the situation. Because I ve been sitting on these things for so long, probably I will make this letter public soon. I must say since writing all this on these pages, I have been struck with awfulness of these untruths. Sad to say, I no longer believe much of anything you say. ENCLOSURES #1. A A Little Leaven, B Bad RV Origin of Scriveners Greek TR #2. B personal February 10, 2009 letter from D. A. Waite, Jr. regarding Scrivener s backward translating. #3. C Three MARRIAGE RECORDS C-1 Latessa, C-2 Kaleda, C-3 Riplinger #4. D Two wedding pictures of Gail Anne Ludwig Latessa Kaleda and Franklin Alex Kaleda. D-1 & D-2 #5, E A copy (one page) of BIBLE VERSION DISCUSSION BOARD It is on Waite s Historical Revisionism, dated 2/11/08

11

12

13 February 10, 2009 Dear Mom and Dad, I have attached a PDF copy of the first 39 pages (pages i-xxxix) of the Doctored New Testament. You can search in vain for the bogus statements attributed to me and to Dr. Scrivener. They simply don t exist. Nowhere in the Doctored New Testament or in anything else I have ever written or said can a fair-minded person with even a rudimentary grasp of the English language find support for this statement: Dr. Scrivener s assignment was to backwards translate the KJB. In footnote 2 from page xiv of The Doctored New Testament, one can find these words: In those KJV portions with no known Greek support, Scrivener let the readings of Beza s 1598 Greek NT stand (page 655, last paragraph). He did not backwards translate from Latin to Greek. Please re-read these words VERY CAREFULLY and then answer the following questions: (1) To whom does the He refer? (2) What is the difference between saying He did NOT backwards translate and saying He DID backwards translate? (3) What is the difference between Latin and KJV English? (4) What is the difference between translating from Latin to Greek and translating from KJV English to Greek? (5) What does it mean to backwards translate? The facts are clear. Dr. Scrivener REFUSED to backwards translate from KJV English or from any other language in preparing his Greek New Testament, originally designed for COMPARISON PURPOSES. A fair-minded person will read my words and those of Dr. Scrivener and make a goodfaith effort to understand them properly. Love, Don

14

15

16

17

18

19

20 ABOUT THE TWO PICTURES I have two pictures of Gail Anne [now Riplinger] and her second husband, Frank Kaleda, after they were pronounced man and wife on their wedding day. I have not included these pictures in this report. The man and the woman in the pictures have both been identified by reliable sources as Gail Anne [now Riplinger] and Frank Kaleda. There is no doubt whatever that these are the two people in the picture. Part of the left arm the person who had apparently just performed the wedding ceremony is shown as well as a part of a book that was being held. Out of respect for the person who gave the pictures, I sent them only to Gail Riplinger herself and to the researchers for identification purposes only.

21