Exposing!! The Corrupt Counterfeit (NIV) Bible, Verses That Have Been Tamped With!!

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

WithinReason

Active member
Feb 21, 2020
598
63
28
A lot of people quote the early church fathers without realizing other things that they said.
I do not primarily cite any so-called ecf (easily confused (theologically) fellows) for their theology, though in certain instances I might show a train of thought through the centuries which is based on solid scripture foundation (it does happen in certain occasions, see), such as here - 7000 Year Plan Of The Everlasting Gospel – Bible & Historical Quotations (PDF)

Yet, even so, my previous response of:

"Cyprian is cited as one who cited the text in consideration. What Cyprian taught about said verse or other verses is irrelevant. The evidence shows that the verse existed in Cyprian's time as exists in the KJB. I do not cite Cyprian for his theology, but for the relevance of the citation from scripture that he had available to him, as others."​

can in no way be read to mean, "The logic is that if Cyprian cited it, then it is scripture."

Thus my response as it was.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
10,582
4,063
113
So if 1 John 5:7 was added, it was added before the time of Cyprian. Yes?
Why are you assuming it was added, rather than believing it was deliberately omitted? Read the passage and see if it makes sense without that verse. Furthermore, is it consistent with Matthew 28:19 (A CLEAR STATEMENT OF THE TRINITY), and other passages? If so then it was not added.

John is comparing and contrasting three witnesses in Heaven vs three witnesses on earth. That is totally removed from modern bible versions gratuitously, even though the heavenly witness is even more critical than the earthly witness:

NIV
6
This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

KJV
6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
7 For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.


Because the Holy Spirit is God, and is also Truth, He bears witness both in Heaven and in earth.

It is significant that the Catholic scholar Jerome included this verse in the Latin Vulgate, which means that it was present in the Greek manuscripts before him around 400 AD. Which means that it was in the Old Latin manuscripts from before Jerome. Therefore it is also found in the Vulgate and the Catholic Douay-Rheims translation.

[6] This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ: not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit which testifieth, that Christ is the truth.
Hic est, qui venit per aquam et sanguinem, Jesus Christus : non in aqua solum, sed in aqua et sanguine. Et Spiritus est, qui testificatur quoniam Christus est veritas.
[Note: Here Jerome has Christ as the Truth, but it makes no difference]

[7] And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.
Quoniam tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in caelo : Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus : et hi tres unum sunt.


[8] And there are three that give testimony on earth: the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three are one.
Et tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in terra : spiritus, et aqua, et sanguis : et hi tres unum sunt.
 

WithinReason

Active member
Feb 21, 2020
598
63
28
John is comparing and contrasting three witnesses in Heaven vs three witnesses on earth
Correct. As there needs to be two or three witnesses, and such that there are two places (Heaven and Earth), then two or three in each, and thus Two Great combined witnesses agree.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
12,872
6,930
113
Furthermore, is it consistent with Matthew 28:19 (A CLEAR STATEMENT OF THE TRINITY), and other passages? If so then it was not added.
Your "logic" is not logical. By your reasoning, anyone could add anything they like to Scripture as long as it was consistent with extant Scripture. The verse has a checkered history and is simply not accepted as Scripture by all believers.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
7,989
890
113
And this would apply to all the Early Church Fathers. They all may not have had sound doctrine, but the only thing which is relevant in "Patristic Quotations" (a major source of confirmation for the traditional or Received Text) is what was quoted. Dean John William Burgon personally researched all the Patristic Quotations and determined that the majority supported the TR. He also personally research all the Lectionaries (lesson-books) of the Greek Orthodox Church, and arrived at the same conclusion.

Cyprian quoted 1 John 5:7, but there were many others who were also familiar with this verse and quoted it. We may not know why it is absent from the majority of manuscripts, but that it is genuine Scripture is borne out by quite a few sources. The Council of Carthage had 400 African bishops who all agreed that the Johannine Comma (1 John 5:7) was Scripture, and this is what their spokesman Eugenius said:
“. . .and in order that we may teach until now, more clearly than light, that the Holy Spirit is now one divinity with the Father and the Son, it is proved by the evangelist John, for he says, 'there are three which bear testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.

The real issue which Christians should focus on is why are the critics and the modern bibles so anxious to prove that this is not Scripture? Both the internal and external evidence confirm that it is Scripture, but only the KJV has this verse. All the more reason to stick with the Authorized Version.
In the following, I don't mean to be argumentative in any way. Rather, just talking about how the same piece of evidence can be used in different directions.


The decision of the council at Carthage can be used to show that 1 John 5:7 is scripture. Or it can be used to show how once an addition is made, it is very difficult to remove it.
 

Brandnewday

Active member
Mar 5, 2020
445
117
43
The Apostles preached from the word of God (OT), even from Acts at Pentecost. There were many scribes that recorded what they said on various occasions, both amongst themselves and outside of themselves.

Mat_21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

Mat_22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Luk 4:16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.
Luk 4:17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
Luk 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
Luk 4:19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
Luk 4:20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
Luk 4:21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

Luk_24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Luk_24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

Luk_24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

Joh_5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Act_1:16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.

Act 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;

Act 2:25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:

Act_8:32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:

Act_8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.

Act_17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

Act_17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Act_18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.

Rom_4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

Rom_9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

Rom_10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Rom_11:2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,

Rom_15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

Rom_16:26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

1Co_15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

1Co_15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Gal_3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

Gal_3:22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

Gal_4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

1Ti_5:18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

2Ti_3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti_3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Jas_2:8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:

Jas_2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

Jas_4:5 Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?

1Pe_1:16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

1Pe_2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.

2Pe_1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

2Pe_3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Mar_12:32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:

Act_4:5 And it came to pass on the morrow, that their rulers, and elders, and scribes,

Act_6:12 And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council,

Act_23:9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.
Isn't there some fella here that claims the old testament is obsolete?
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
7,989
890
113
I do not primarily cite any so-called ecf (easily confused (theologically) fellows) for their theology, though in certain instances I might show a train of thought through the centuries which is based on solid scripture foundation (it does happen in certain occasions, see), such as here - 7000 Year Plan Of The Everlasting Gospel – Bible & Historical Quotations (PDF)

Yet, even so, my previous response of:

"Cyprian is cited as one who cited the text in consideration. What Cyprian taught about said verse or other verses is irrelevant. The evidence shows that the verse existed in Cyprian's time as exists in the KJB. I do not cite Cyprian for his theology, but for the relevance of the citation from scripture that he had available to him, as others."​

can in no way be read to mean, "The logic is that if Cyprian cited it, then it is scripture."

Thus my response as it was.
So if 1 John 5:7 was added, it was added before the time of Cyprian. Yes?
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
10,582
4,063
113
Your "logic" is not logical. By your reasoning, anyone could add anything they like to Scripture as long as it was consistent with extant Scripture. The verse has a checkered history and is simply not accepted as Scripture by all believers.
Your last statement is false and misleading, since you are repeating was modern scholars have claimed to support their opposition.

If you knew anything about the history of the written Word your would know that:

(a) the Hebrew scribes were EXTREMELY METICULOUS in copying the Scriptures, and even went so far as to count the letters,
(b) because of this tradition Christ declared the Hebrew Tanakh as "all the Scriptures" without hesitation,
(c) the apostles and evangelists were all Jews and fully understand that no extraneous words could be added to Scripture, therefore Peter (a very strict Jew) equated all of Paul's letters with Scripture,
(d) the apostle John (another Jew) placed a solemn warning at the end of Revelation to prevent anyone from gratuitously adding to the Word of God.

In view of this genuine Christians did not tamper with the Word of God. However Gnostic heretics mutilated the Scriptures. But careless transcribers are also responsible for many errors and omissions.

Regarding 1 John 5:7 Jerome in the third century wrote that "irresponsible" transcribers omitted it in the Greek and Latin, although it was found in most of the Old Latin manuscripts (dating from the 2nd century thus copied from the Greek). Also there are only 12 Greek manuscripts before the 9th century which omit this verse. The others are later, and would therefore be copies of copies. The point to note is that it is found in the Vulgate, which is about the same age as the corrupted Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.
 

Brandnewday

Active member
Mar 5, 2020
445
117
43
Your insults only reflect on you.
You may wish to take a dose of your own medicine there boy. Your insults only reflect on you.

And to be clear on my part, I'm not insulting you. I'm making the observation that you aren't able to have a decent conversation without belittling my opinion. You appear not to comprehend what I said. Instead of admitting that, or asking me to be more clear for your ability to understand, you make some sarcastic remark. That's a very long non-answer, sadly.
I take you to be one that likes to posture as a know it all. And what you don't know and can't respond to intelligently, or even in good character, admit you don't know something, you throw barbs and sarcasm as a reply instead. That's really the sign of a young mind. Or one that isn't as studied as some of the folks here who seem to have a genuine interest in the bible and in civil conversation.
Maybe you act the way you do because you don't fit in.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
12,872
6,930
113
Your last statement is false and misleading, since you are repeating was modern scholars have claimed to support their opposition.

If you knew anything about the history of the written Word your would know that:
My last statement was perfectly accurate and not at all misleading. Maybe you should consider that all the effort you put in to supporting your view is done precisely because of the truth of my statement. :)
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
12,872
6,930
113
You may wish to take a dose of your own medicine there boy. Your insults only reflect on you.

And to be clear on my part, I'm not insulting you. I'm making the observation that you aren't able to have a decent conversation without belittling my opinion. You appear not to comprehend what I said. Instead of admitting that, or asking me to be more clear for your ability to understand, you make some sarcastic remark. That's a very long non-answer, sadly.
I take you to be one that likes to posture as a know it all. And what you don't know and can't respond to intelligently, or even in good character, admit you don't know something, you throw barbs and sarcasm as a reply instead. That's really the sign of a young mind. Or one that isn't as studied as some of the folks here who seem to have a genuine interest in the bible and in civil conversation.
Maybe you act the way you do because you don't fit in.
Your insults only reflect on you.
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
5,194
608
113
You may wish to take a dose of your own medicine there boy. Your insults only reflect on you.

And to be clear on my part, I'm not insulting you. I'm making the observation that you aren't able to have a decent conversation without belittling my opinion. You appear not to comprehend what I said. Instead of admitting that, or asking me to be more clear for your ability to understand, you make some sarcastic remark. That's a very long non-answer, sadly.
I take you to be one that likes to posture as a know it all. And what you don't know and can't respond to intelligently, or even in good character, admit you don't know something, you throw barbs and sarcasm as a reply instead. That's really the sign of a young mind. Or one that isn't as studied as some of the folks here who seem to have a genuine interest in the bible and in civil conversation.
Maybe you act the way you do because you don't fit in.
Maybe YOU should listen more, and talk a little less... your assumptions about Dino are absolutely false. He's been fitting in just fine around here for quite a few years now....
His statement about your long answer rings true. Perhaps you would like to back up, and re-state what you were trying to say.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
2,650
532
113
Is God's word also not subject to change?

Yes.

Where?

In heaven.
Yes I believe in the preservation of God's word, but where did you get the information, that God preserve his word in heaven? Is it in heaven or under heaven?

Thanks
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
7,989
890
113
Yes I believe in the preservation of God's word, but where did you get the information, that God preserve his word in heaven? Is it in heaven or under heaven?

Thanks
Hi fredoheaven,

It's my understanding of this verse

Psalm 119: 89 <LAMED> For ever, O Lord, your word is fixed in heaven.

Fixed, settled, preserved. Forever.
But why does the psalmist say in heaven? The implication I read in that is that God's word is not fixed settled preserved here on Earth. Not absolutely, not every word.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
7,989
890
113
The evidence shows that the verse existed in Cyprian's time as exists in the KJB
So if 1 John 5:7 was added, it was added before the time of Cyprian. Yes?
A similar question, were any additions or omissions made by any ancient copyists?


I think the obvious answer would be yes, that's why the ancient manuscripts don't all match.


Were many of the additions and omissions made in the very early copies? I would think so.


The process of identifying which documents were scripture took time. There were questions about which documents were written by apostles and which were forgeries, for example. So copies may have been made by people thinking they were just copying an important document, but not something that was scripture.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
7,989
890
113
Let us try this in reverse, and have your answers appear in their own conclusion.

Do you believe that scripture (God's word) is self-defining, as in self-interpreting? Or do you believe you need something which is not God's word to define God's word?

Do you believe that scripture (God's word) can ever be contradictory with itself? (If a true contradiction is found, would the truly contradictory passages be scripture or not scripture?)

Do you believe that the men that were inspired of God, that wrote what we have in scripture, makes scripture (God's word) inspired of God, even the Holy Ghost/Spirit?

Do you believe that scripture (God's word) is preserved of God? If so, in whole or in part? If in part, which part/s?

Do you believe that a translation of scripture (God's word; ie, from Hebrew to Greek, Greek to English, etc) is also scripture?
Hi WithinReason,

Did I answer your questions with enough details, or do you want longer answers?