Readers,

Unfortunately this forum closed due to maintence problems with the server.

If you are interested in continuing a discussion, you can go to this board:

http://p221.ezboard.com/bthechristianforum

The Christian Forum

Or try our URL Forwarder www.bluespun.com

www.Bluespun.com

This was our back up board, but now we all relocated here.

Hope to see you there! All links lead to the same place!

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@gmail.com), November 28, 2005.

7. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), August 10, 2004

Answers

Trinity Verse.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), August 10, 2004.

And that is found..in which versions?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 10, 2004.

I know Elpidio won't like that verse :) Expect to hear how it doesn't belong in the bible.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 10, 2004.

If I quoted it as a Bible verse, its KJV, unless otherwise noted...

AND Elp is sadly not alone, a lot of Modern Bibles, based on the Critical text ( wescott and Hort's idea) so Elpidio will have some credibility thanks to Modern scholars.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), August 10, 2004.

Oddly, the Douay-Rheims also has it...

And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.

Youngs Literal Version as well.

7 because three are who are testifying [in the heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these -- the three -- are one;

Modern KJV has it.

7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.

But world english doesnt.

7 It is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth.

-- (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), August 10, 2004.

Curiously, why would that be "odd", Zarove?

(Zarove: "Oddly, the Douay-Rheims also has it... ")

My understanding is that the Catholic Church was responsible in documenting the Trinity theology.

...........................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 10, 2004.

eh, rod, READ Your HISTORY BOOK man! The Early Church was NOT Romanist!

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 10, 2004.

Side note:

My OWN brother has a 1950's edition of the Douay-Rheims Bible. I've only browsed through it once very quickly. My OWN brother is willing to SELL it to me for $50.00...my OWN brother...I tell you!

I guess I'll just give him the $50., but something doesn't quite sit right....my OWN brother!

.........................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 10, 2004.

David

The operative word was "documenting". In other words, they documented what was already theologically beleived. I didn't say that the Catholic Church divined the theology; they "documented" it in a Book.

.....................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 10, 2004.

1 John 5:7-8 in 17 versions.

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), August 10, 2004.

Thanks for doing the work for us again Emily :)

I noticed this footnote:

not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century

Is this true, and is it referring to the phrase "the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one" ?

Maybe this is what Elpidio's argument is based on.

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 11, 2004.

Its not entirely honest. It IS Found in the Latin Vulgate. Likewise, several Aramaic texts possess it. Further, some Greek texts DO have it in them before the 16th century.

I will show evidence before tomorrow ends.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), August 11, 2004.

It seems you guys are becoming like me. You can read my mind before I post !!! David and Ian in the past. Now is David, Andy, Zarove,...

Thanks to Emily for doing the search.

Yes, as Andy points out, in the footnotes its is said there are no manuscripts in Greek (before 1000 AD) who have this verse.

One footnote reads: 5:8 NU-Text and M-Text omit the words from in heaven (verse 7) through on earth (verse 8). Only four or five very late manuscripts contain these words in Greek.

Now, Zarove points out that is found in some late Vulgate manuscripts. That's true also.

This is one of many interpolated Trinity verses found in the New Testament.

One subtle one is I Timothy 3:15. In Greek Os=he, or who is written the same as theos=God when theos=God is abbreviated. The only difference is a line through the middle making it a theta.

So it could say God was manifested in the flesh, or he, or who was manifested in the flesh.

Unfortunately for them, some old translations, including the Vulgate also say he/who.

The most famous trinitarian one is Matthew 28:19. It reads baptizing them in the name of the father and the son and the holy Spirit. It is not hard to prove is a change in a preposition. En(with) became kai (and) a conjuction.

According to Acts 19:5-6, followers of John were baptized in the name of Jesus. Paul's explanation was that John's baptism with water was for repentance only. Paul lays his hands on them and they receive the Holy Spirit.

Acts 11:16 also mentions that Jesus had said that John baptized with water but they would be baptized with the Holy Spirit.

According to Acts 2:3-4 the first time this happened was after Jesus resurrection during Pentecost (Hebrew Shavuot), about 50 days after his crucifixion. It is described as tonges of fire.

But according to John 20:23 Jesus breathed on them the Holy Spirit on Sunday, his resurrection day. So John 20:23 is an interpolation because John 16:7 states that Jesus must go for the Paraclete (Holy Spirit) to come. This implies Jesus is not the Holy Spirit.

So what is then the Holy Spirit and the preposition that was changed: According to Mark 1:10 the Spirit of God desceded on Jesus in the form of a dove,same as Matthew 3:16. This implies the Spirit is not Jesus. We know already people were baptized in the name of Jesus.

So what preposition was changed : Matthew 3:11 gives the clue. Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire:

In Greek the word is en .

With this clue, then Matthew 28:19 could really say:

Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son with the Holy Ghost:

This implies then, that Baptism not only was in Jesus name but also in God's name where people received the Holy Spirit. This makes the Holy Spirit God Yahweh's power.

Thus, there is no Trinity.

The Christian Yahwist

The Man of Yahweh

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), August 11, 2004.

Problem is that it was referred to, as Scripture, as early as 200 AD, when Tertulian wrote his Apology Against Praxeas.Cyprian of Carthage likewise quoted the passage in around 250 AD.

In 398, St. Augustine quoted it in "De Trinitate"...

It obviously enjoyed at least some antiquity... at least to the Third Century AD.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), August 11, 2004.

I'm saying that 1 John 5:7 was known to Tertulian, and cyprian, and Augustine...they all quoted it...

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), August 11, 2004.

From this Book The Greek New Testament, I John 5:7-8 omit the words

Complete Bibles known as Codices written in Capital Greek letters (Uncials) S (also called aleph or Sinaiticus)IV century ,A V century (Alexandrinus), B IV century (Vaticanus),K IX century,Psi VIII century, Other Uncials: 049 X cent.,048 V Cent.,056 X cent.,0142 X century,33 IX,81 year 1044,88 XII,104 year 1087,181 XI,326 XII,330 XII,436 XI,451 XI,614 XIII,630 XIV,945 XI,1241 XII ,1505 year 1084,1739 X,1877 XIV,1881XIV,2127 XII,2412 XII,2492 XIII,2495 XIV,

Translations:Itala Ar, Syriac p,h, Coptic Sa, bo. armenian,Etiopian,Arabic, Slavonian,

Church Fathers: Ireneus,Clement, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, Cyprian, Dionysius, Hilary, Lucifer, Athanasius, Basil, Faustinus, Jerome, Chrysostom, Gregory-Nazianzus, Ambrose, Didymus, Epiphanius, Augustine, Cyril,

Who has it in one form or another. Minuscules Greek Letters (small letters, longhand)61 XVI, 88 margin XII, 629 XIV, 636 XV margin, 918 XVI,

Translations: Itala m, Itala c, dem,div, m, p,q,Vulgate Clementine

Church Fathers: Varimadum, Priscillian, Cassian, Pseudo-Vigilus, Pseudo-Athanasius, Fulgentius, Ansbert.

In conclusion, Zarove,this passage is a Medieval interpolation. The older ones don't have it.

I don't have a link to this book. I bought it in 1981. It is the New Testament in Greek by Kurt Aland, Matthew Black... Pubblished by the United Bible Societies, Third Edition 1975. It was printed in Germany.

It is an edition for translators. So I can see which Greek documents or translations differ in what passages. So it has a lot of variants.

The Christian Yahwist

The Man of Yahweh

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), August 12, 2004.

Try looking for it, David.

It will be good reading if you can find it. I learned to read it one Summer while while I picked grapes in Fresno. I was 19. I needed money for college. So I left L.A. for that place .

The Christian Yahwist

The Man of Yahweh

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), August 12, 2004.

Its in the Antiochian line, not he Alexandrian, o of COURSE, Aleph and Sinaiticus, and Vaticanus, don't have it, their part fo the 50 ordered bY Constantine, and are the ORIGIN of the corrupt line.

The line became corrupt because Constantine wanted 5 Bibles by a certain date, no two yet discovered for that batch of 50 100% agree with each other!!!

Yet, at the same time, the Antiochian line ( Used by the Eastern Orthodox church, by the way) and the Vulgate ( The western Church) BOTH have this verse by at LEAST 600 AD, and, since it is quoted or alluded to by Augustine and Tertulian, some copies they had access to ALSO had them!!!

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), August 12, 2004.

Hwers is an artilce for you Elpidio

http://www.geocities.com/riversoflife21c/comma.html#_Early_Manuscripts

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), August 12, 2004.

Thanks for the link, Zarove. It complements what I typed.

I am familiar with most of those texts.

What the author of this article is trying to do is listed here in his own words:

So can we accept the testimony of the Latin Church over the Greek? Can we accept this passage on the basis of the Vulgate and the Old Latin, even though it is absent from the Greek tradition? I allow Nolan to reply:

If this verse be received, it must be admitted on the single testimony of the Western Church, as far at least as respects the external evidence. And though it may seem unwarrantable to set aside the authority of the Greek Church, and pay exclusive respect to the Latin, where a question arises on the authenticity of a passage which properly belongs to the text of the former; yet when the doctrine inculcated in that passage is taken into account, there may be good reason for giving even a preference to the Western Church over that of the Eastern. The former was uncorrupted by the heresy of the Arians, who rejected the doctrine of the passage in question; the latter was wholly resigned to that heresy for at least forty years, while the Western Church retained its purity.

This man thinks The Greek Church cannot be trusted. They were corrupted by the Arians!!!! Yeah, right!!!

After all. Zarove, wasn't the Church born in Jerusalem,now Israel? Weren't followers of Jesus first called Christians at Antioch, now in Turkey by the border with Syria?

It was Pope Victor the first to corrupt the Church when in AD 190 he tried to force all Christians to celebrate Easter on the first Sunday after Spring. Those in the east celebrated Passover(easter) on the 14th day of the month of Abib later known as Nisan.

It was the Egyptians and Romans the first to say Jesus was God!!!

It is like the Africanized killer bees. The further away you move from Brazil, the less they resemble the original ones which escaped.

It is time to bring out the original Church beliefs!!!

The Christian Yahwist

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), August 12, 2004.

Thank you Zarove for mentioning the early Johannine Comma evidences. Cyprian is very powerful. Tertullian is a bit less clear. In addition the introduction to the canonical epistles of the Vulgate specifically mentions the verse. Eugenius at the Council of Carthage in North Africa referenced the verse 415 A.D. Prisicillian as well. And there are a number of other early church writer references, and some Old Latin manuscripts.

Generally rather crafty language is used to hide all these references, which are very discomfiting to any theory of late introduction of the Comma.

Shalom, Steven Avery Queens, NY http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/

-- Steven Avery (schmuel@escape.com), March 10, 2005.

Here is another thread about the same topic.

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00BJSo

.........

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), March 10, 2005.

The Scriptures themselves reveal that Jesus is God:

Jesus said of His body, "Destroy this Temple, and I will raise it again in three days" (John 2:19,21).

Our ressurected Lord assured doubting Thomas by asking him to examine His hands for the nail prints and to touch His side where He was wounded. "Look at My hands and My feet. It is I Myself! Touch Me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have" (Luke 24:39). He ate food (verse 43). (I also note: Doesn't the Bible say that God raised Jesus from the dead? Romans 6:4:4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.)

Jesus said of His body, "Destroy this Temple, and I will raise it again in three days."

Oh wait--it was the Holy Spirit: (Romans 8:11: And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.)

That must be so confusing to those who deny Jesus is God and that God is a triune God.

"I lay down My life--only to take it up again...I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again" (John 10:17-18)

This begs the question...Did God give this authority to another being, even though God said He would never give it to another? Or is it more likely that God is remaining true to Himself, because He and Jesus are One, and God is not actually giving His power to another?

Son of God/Immanuel/God with us

Matt 1:20-23:

But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins. All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel"--which means, "God with us." *************************************************

Philippians 2:5-11

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death-- even death on a cross! Therefore God exhalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

*********************************************

As True God, Jesus claims his Divinity

John 8:58:

"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

****************************************************

John 10:24-30:

The Jews gathered around him saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my father's name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. I and the Father are one."

Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many miracles from the Father. For which one of these do you stone me?" "We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

**********************************

John 14:6:

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."

Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."

Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father?" ....... I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because [I am going to the Father. And I will do] whatever you ask in my name, so that the son may bring glory to the Father. [You may ask me] anything in my name, and I will do it."

Who answers prayers??

-- (faith01@myway.com), March 11, 2005.

Oh darn--forgot to close that thing again

Bold off?

-- (faith01@myway.com), March 11, 2005.