I want the truth , no beating around the bush
- Thread starter lookingforthetruth
- Start date
-
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.
I am afraid your are misinformed regarding the appearance of the comma in the early Latin mss. Metzger notes that the earliest place we find the Comma cited as an actual part of the text of the Epistle of 1 John is in Liber apologeticus by either Priscillian or Instantius. The Liber apologeticus is a fourth-century Latin document.
C
So, basically, the Christian Bible is corrupt and that [A]llah, that god thing of the Qur'an who has no son, sent an uncorrupted book down to us. Are you supposing that we are to abandon the new Covenant which was made under Jesus the Christ and listen to Allah's messenger?
It does not sound like you are really looking for Truth but to draw away from the Truth. You have been most wrongly lead, but are you really opened to criticism to draw you from that path?
It does not sound like you are really looking for Truth but to draw away from the Truth. You have been most wrongly lead, but are you really opened to criticism to draw you from that path?
Last edited:
(The Complete Jewish Bible) 1 John 5:7 There are three witnesses - 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood - and these three are in agreement.
At His death Jesus gave up the Spirit, and water and blood flowed from His side wound obtained by the spear. Without having those three, death is the consequence.
1 John 5:7-8 (KJV)
[SUP]7 [/SUP]For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
[SUP]8 [/SUP]And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
At His death Jesus gave up the Spirit, and water and blood flowed from His side wound obtained by the spear. Without having those three, death is the consequence.
1 John 5:7-8 (KJV)
[SUP]7 [/SUP]For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
[SUP]8 [/SUP]And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
Last edited:
B
...yeah, something was brewing in the 3rd-4th centuries, and it wasn't Tea at Boston Harbor...
Frankly, studying the history of the early Gnostics and the overall politics of the Roman Empire until its collapse in relationship to the NT doctrine can be quite insightful to a Christian anchored on the most precious faith in Jesus Christ.
Consider this, why do you suppose,
a) 100% of original NT manuscripts covering the first 3 hundred AD years were destroyed within that epoch?
b) 100% of NT apostles and early Church saints fervently rejected Gnosticism?
c) 100% of NT manuscripts found south of Jerusalem compromise doctrine compared to manuscripts preserved in Latin or Byzantine Greek?
Frankly, studying the history of the early Gnostics and the overall politics of the Roman Empire until its collapse in relationship to the NT doctrine can be quite insightful to a Christian anchored on the most precious faith in Jesus Christ.
Consider this, why do you suppose,
a) 100% of original NT manuscripts covering the first 3 hundred AD years were destroyed within that epoch?
b) 100% of NT apostles and early Church saints fervently rejected Gnosticism?
c) 100% of NT manuscripts found south of Jerusalem compromise doctrine compared to manuscripts preserved in Latin or Byzantine Greek?
C
Ring.....Ring.....
That thing they call god is no more purified then his children who desire to rid the world of Jehovah's and Christ's followers. They who drink of that poison do indeed drink from the Lie. The Son, who is denied by that demonic thing, will be the One who shall stand upon that snake's head.
P.S. Love the banana phone
That thing they call god is no more purified then his children who desire to rid the world of Jehovah's and Christ's followers. They who drink of that poison do indeed drink from the Lie. The Son, who is denied by that demonic thing, will be the One who shall stand upon that snake's head.
P.S. Love the banana phone
B
Well, Just-me, my dear brother, here's the riddle which bugs me:
I adamantly refuse to believe that in the 19th Century a "correct" Holy New Testament was suddenly "discovered" in a pit for burning trash at an abandoned Orthodox Greek monastery in the middle of nowhere, Egyptian desert, found by a German fellow who was sponsored by a Russian (the tzar) during a time a forger travelled the region was selling fake manuscripts he has made.
The entire loot has never been laboratory-dated because... ...well, they paid "bunches of money" (as my little one says), and all the museums and publishing companies making a dollar from these "reliable" NT have all lawyered-up: the money flow is too great to compromise with the truth.
So, the question remains: why would the "Majority Texts" NT known to all Christendom for 19 centuries are suddenly getting verses removed? ...just saying.
I adamantly refuse to believe that in the 19th Century a "correct" Holy New Testament was suddenly "discovered" in a pit for burning trash at an abandoned Orthodox Greek monastery in the middle of nowhere, Egyptian desert, found by a German fellow who was sponsored by a Russian (the tzar) during a time a forger travelled the region was selling fake manuscripts he has made.
The entire loot has never been laboratory-dated because... ...well, they paid "bunches of money" (as my little one says), and all the museums and publishing companies making a dollar from these "reliable" NT have all lawyered-up: the money flow is too great to compromise with the truth.
So, the question remains: why would the "Majority Texts" NT known to all Christendom for 19 centuries are suddenly getting verses removed? ...just saying.
B
Would you agree that there is documented evidence that early Christians were hated, persecuted and murdered by government officials (Roman Empire mentality)?
It's reasonable to me to believe that original manuscripts of the NT were compromised as were the lives of Christian martyrs. Consequently, reliable copies for those original manuscripts became a necessity among the Churches, which at the time were not the salad bowl denominations we have today.
Well, the Gnostics believed that physical matter (the body) was evil, but the spirit in humans was good. Therefore, the Gnostics taught that Jesus was not God because He was a man, hence not divine. That would make sense why Gnostics would want only certain parchments of NT and not preserve the entire scroll.
This is where I find it reasonable to believe why most of John's Letters are hardly around the first 400 years.
I suppose we are talking about how God has supreme power to preserve His Holy Word that it may be written upon our hearts. Why would you and I no longer have a need to read 1 John 5:7 when in former years it was written upon our hearts?
It's reasonable to me to believe that original manuscripts of the NT were compromised as were the lives of Christian martyrs. Consequently, reliable copies for those original manuscripts became a necessity among the Churches, which at the time were not the salad bowl denominations we have today.
Well, the Gnostics believed that physical matter (the body) was evil, but the spirit in humans was good. Therefore, the Gnostics taught that Jesus was not God because He was a man, hence not divine. That would make sense why Gnostics would want only certain parchments of NT and not preserve the entire scroll.
This is where I find it reasonable to believe why most of John's Letters are hardly around the first 400 years.
OldHermit said:
This assumes the Byzantine text has to be the standard by which all other texts are measured.
Why would that not be a good idea? After all, the Byzantine Texts are 5th century. Would you not treasure a 5th century Bible in Koine Greek?
As far as the Latin text is concerned, these were merely other translations of the original language and cannot be used as a standard of comparrison. True. Yet, which would you prefer: a complete 4th century Latin Vulgate, or pieces of 3rd century Greek parchments from Egypt?
Why would that not be a good idea? After all, the Byzantine Texts are 5th century. Would you not treasure a 5th century Bible in Koine Greek?
As far as the Latin text is concerned, these were merely other translations of the original language and cannot be used as a standard of comparrison. True. Yet, which would you prefer: a complete 4th century Latin Vulgate, or pieces of 3rd century Greek parchments from Egypt?
Last edited:
Unquestionably
Compromised might be too strong a word. There are obvious variations in Greek mss that occurred for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with intentional misrepresentation.
Yes, I understand Gnostic theology. To suggest that Gnostics were the behind mss manipulation would be hard to prove. Rather than manipulating the Christian writings they created their own "gospel" accounts.
What are you basing this on? If you are talking about complete complete mss you are correct. However fragment mss of John's writings exist that date as early the second and perhaps even the first century.
I suppose we are talking about how God has supreme power to preserve His Holy Word that it may be written upon our hearts. Why would you and I no longer have a need to read 1 John 5:7 when in former years it was written upon our hearts?
Very true. One can never dismiss the involvement of God from the preservation of his Word in reliable content through the centuries. The one thing that cannot be denied is the fact that the quote of verse seven was well known even in the third and fourth centuries. The verse may well be authentic but we simply do not have early enough mss evidence to prove it. If at some point a mss of 1 John containing the comma reading were discovered from say the third or forth century, this would offer much stronger mss authority to verse seven.
Last edited:
So what did jesus mean when he said to his apostles in John 14:20 ""In that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. " So if Jesus is god and the apostles are in god and god is in them how many gods are there are now ? 15? No wait as the wait you put it 15 persons as one god .... 1 corinthians 14:33"For god is not the author of confusion"
I'd never use such a strong word as "proof", but it could be evidence. However, I'm fairly sure that the trinity was a commonly believed concept before the KJV was produced, so what you're implying is probably not true.
Here's better evidence of tampering to "fix" the old manuscripts -- removal of fantasy creatures. The KJV bible mentions unicorns, satyrs, dragons, and cockatrices. These words were all sanitized from newer versions into names of beasts that actually exist. Was the KJV wrong? Clearly someone thought so, and of course no one defends the existence of these obviously fictional creatures (the cockatrice, for instance, is a half-snake, half-chicken born from the egg of a male chicken).
Here's better evidence of tampering to "fix" the old manuscripts -- removal of fantasy creatures. The KJV bible mentions unicorns, satyrs, dragons, and cockatrices. These words were all sanitized from newer versions into names of beasts that actually exist. Was the KJV wrong? Clearly someone thought so, and of course no one defends the existence of these obviously fictional creatures (the cockatrice, for instance, is a half-snake, half-chicken born from the egg of a male chicken).
The bible isn't for the gentiles that's why god let it become corrupted.Jesus said " 12"I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13"But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears," what is jesus talking about if he told you everything you needed? the people of israel were an "evil and adulterous generation" who didn't deserve the complete word of god.
According to Wikipedia the KJV was started in 1604 and finished in 1611. The NIV was originally published in the 1970's, and recently updated in 2011. I get it that Wiki might not be correct on some issues, but do you think their information could be so far off? I wonder why those learned men of the KJV didn't know about the "earlier" manuscript(s)?
Me? Personally? Any time a version tries to cut out the Trinity, should be carefully scrutinized.
Want the truth? Must go to a Higher Authority.
Me? Personally? Any time a version tries to cut out the Trinity, should be carefully scrutinized.
Want the truth? Must go to a Higher Authority.