• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Let's Talk About Hell (3)

Status
Not open for further replies.

theWaris1

Seeking
Apr 21, 2011
593
26
The Obamanation
✟30,903.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Not only did He speak greek and aramaic but hebrew as well....
Jesus was mainly a minister of the circumcision and spoke in synagogues, are you suggesting he spoke aramaic and not hebrew? Mammon is also a greek word "mamonas" so it's not just aramaic, he could have been speaking greek on the sermon on the mount. My point being that Christ spoke many languages at different times. So putting a bible into aramaic would only suit a small fraction of the society. Especially the gentiles who were hellenists and romans (greek speaking). A bible in this language would go farther than any other Bible. And because it is the largest language you have more words to describe the facts of God's word. You really have no arguments here that the Bible was originally in greek. All the old manuscripts are greek and belong to the westcott hort family alexandrian I believe.
No I'm not suggesting Christ spoke in Aramaic instead of Hebrew but the scripture plainly shows he spoke Aramaic here in the English translations. Are you blind? Do you read what is written before you? Evidently not.

No not all manuscripts are in Greek.

You really have no arguments here that the Bible was originally in greek.
True because I have not been argument that the bile was in Greek. You can't even keep your own thoughts straight.


sorry brother, you got a lot to learn
this is a waste of time.. > unsubscribing now

Shlama(peace)
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
does the aramaic contain 1 john 5:7-9? the "johannian comma" perhaps the only trinity verse in the Bible contained in a single verse? From what I can read on line it says "the spirit the water and the blood, and these three are truth" much different than the greek receptus.
 
Upvote 0

theWaris1

Seeking
Apr 21, 2011
593
26
The Obamanation
✟30,903.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I have yet to see a koine text that you speak of? Which is it, I have never heard of it. They are referred to as alexandrian and byzantine.

as far as the contradiction geisler has this to say:

MATTHEW 1:17—How many generations were listed between the captivity and Christ, 14 or 13?
PROBLEM: Matthew says the generations “from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ are fourteen generations” (1:17). However, he lists only 13 names after the captivity is counted. So, which is correct, 13 or 14 ?
SOLUTION: Both are correct. Jeconiah is counted in both lists, since he lived both before and after the captivity. So, there are literally 14 names listed “from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ,” just as Matthew says. There are also literally 14 names listed between David and the captivity, just as Matthew claims (Matt. 1:6–12). There is no error in the text at all.

Geisler, Norman L. ; Howe, Thomas A.: When Critics Ask : A Popular Handbook on Bible Difficulties. Wheaton, Ill. : Victor Books, 1992, S. 326
one man doesnt' fill the spot of an entire generation. It's the only thing the pro-Greek camp could come up with since they were to blind to see that there may have been another language that was the primacy.

Scholars don't even care to discuss anything outside of what they think is proven to be true.

Let the ignorant remain ignorant > so-called Scholars
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No I'm not suggesting Christ spoke in Aramaic instead of Hebrew but the scripture plainly shows he spoke Aramaic here in the English translations. Are you blind? Do you read what is written before you? Evidently not.

No not all manuscripts are in Greek.

True because I have not been argument that the bile was in Greek. You can't even keep your own thoughts straight.


sorry brother, you got a lot to learn
this is a waste of time.. > unsubscribing now

Shlama(peace)

from
Why the New Testament was Written in Greek, Not Hebrew

Earliest New Testament Fragments in GREEK!

Scholars have long denied the veracity of the New Testament Scriptures, claiming that the earliest gospels were not eye-witness accounts of Christ and His life, but were written some one hundred years afterward, or about the middle of the second century, and were based on hearsay, myth, fable, and oral stories which had been passed down. Thus many scholars have regarded the very words of Christ, as recorded in the gospels, as "suspect."

Astonishing as it may seem, however, bits of papyrus in an Oxford University library puts the lie to the cherished theories of unbelieving, skeptical scholars! Three scraps of text of the gospel of Matthew, inscribed in Greek, have traditionally been believed to have been written in the late second century. But German papyrus expert Carsten Thiede has published a paper arguing that these fragments kept at Oxford's Magdalen College very likely represent an actual EYE WITNESS ACCOUNT of the life of Jesus!

The London Times reported that the evidence on an early form of writing paper was a potentially "important breakthrough in biblical scholarship, on a level with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947" (Los Angeles Times, Dec.25, 1994, "Gospel Fragments in Britain May Be Contemporary Account of Life of Jesus Christ, p.A42).

Some scholars have questioned the accuracy of the New Testament as historical, believing that the earliest texts were written long after the actual events described. However, careful new analysis by Professor Thiede has dated the fragments to the middle of the first century, thereby indicating that they are evidence that the Matthew Gospel was written only a generation after the crucifixion, or even earlier! Says William Tuohy of the Los Angeles Times, "Parts of the New Testament may have been written by men who actually knew Christ, rather than authors recounting a 2nd-Century version of an oral tradition."

The Magdalen fragments have been at the Oxford college since 1901. Little work has been done on them since 1953 when they were last edited by biblical scholars. But earlier this year, Thiede visited Oxford and inspected the papyrus. He concluded,

"The Magdalen fragment now appears to belong to a style of handwriting that was current in the 1st Century A.D., and that slowly petered out around the mid-1st Century. Even a hesitant approach to questions of dating would therefore seem to justify a date in the 1st Century, about 100 years earlier than previously thought."

The lines on the fragments are from Matthew 26 and include the oldest written reference to Mary Magdalene and the betrayal of Christ by Judas. This fragment, written soon after the death of Christ, in the first century, is written in the Greek language, putting in the trash compacter once and for all the notion that the apostles did not speak or write Greek!

This new discovery by Professor Carsten Thiede, a papyrus expert, will provoke controversy among scholars, if not even dismay and consternation on the part of disbelievers and skeptics. His discovery is strong evidence that the gospel accounts regarding the life of Jesus Christ are accurate, and reliable historical documents.

The Magdalene fragment from the Gospel of Matthew has been identified as coming from a document dated to the middle of the first century A.D. -- during the very lives of the apostles! This fragment is written in GREEK, and could even be a fragment from an original monograph written by the apostle Matthew himself! This amazing new discovery is powerful evidence, obviously, that the writer, evidently the apostle Matthew, was very familiar with the Greek language and was capable of writing intelligently in it.

Furthermore, it is interesting to note that some of the disciples of Christ had Greek names -- Andrew, Philip, Simon (a Grecized form of the Hebrew Sim on), Levi/Matthew, a tax collector. It is possible that many Greek terms preserved in the New Testament may be there because they were originally uttered in Greek. One such word is "Sanhedron," which comes from the Greek synedrion. It is of Greek, not Hebrew, derivation, and was the common term used for the Jewish high court.

A word often used by Jesus, "hypocrite," in describing the Pharisees and Sadducees, comes from the Greek word hypokrites, a compound word with the Greek preposition hypo for "under" and krites, meaning "judgment." This form is wholly lacking in Semitic languages. The word hypokrites basically means, "one who answers" (i.e., one who always has an answer, or excuse), but came to mean over time not only "expounder" or "interpreter," but "orator," "actor," stage actor, or one who spoke from behind a dramatic mask on stage. From this it came to mean "pretender," "dissembler." But this Greek word, so familiar in the denunciations of Christ, has no counterpart in Hebrew or Aramaic.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
one man doesnt' fill the spot of an entire generation. It's the only thing the pro-Greek camp could come up with since they were to blind to see that there may have been another language that was the primacy.

Scholars don't even care to discuss anything outside of what they think is proven to be true.

Let the ignorant remain ignorant > so-called Scholars

looks like the peshitta is missing the johannian comma (ijohn5:7-9)
 
Upvote 0

theWaris1

Seeking
Apr 21, 2011
593
26
The Obamanation
✟30,903.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
looks like the peshitta is missing the johannian comma (ijohn5:7-9)

Why is that a problem since it wasn't added until after 1522?


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Comma Johanneum is a comma (a short clause) contained in most translations of the First Epistle of John published from 1522 until the latter part of the nineteenth century, owing to the widespread use of the third edition of the Textus Receptus (TR) as the sole source for translation.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Why is that a problem since it wasn't added until after 1522?


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Comma Johanneum is a comma (a short clause) contained in most translations of the First Epistle of John published from 1522 until the latter part of the nineteenth century, owing to the widespread use of the third edition of the Textus Receptus (TR) as the sole source for translation.

1 John 5:7-9 (trinity verse) in early christian writings


Priscillian (380 AD) bishop of Avilain in Liber Apologeticus: (This quote as given by A.E. Brooke from Schepps- Vienna Corpus, xviii) "As John says "and there are three which give testimony on earth, the water, the flesh, the blood, and these three are in one, and there are three which give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one in Christ Jesus.""

and cyprian (one who quoted copiously and textually in the 3rd Century)

"The Lord says "I and the Father are one" and likewise it is written of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. "And these three are one.""


168 A.D. Theophilus used the word "trinity" in his letter to Autolycus. Written in Greek. Theophilus became bishop of Antioch.

177 A.D. A writing in Greek---Anti-Nicene Fathers Apologia of Athenagoras presented to Roman emperors. "Who, then, would not be ashamed to hear men speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and who declare both their distinction in order."

215 A.D. (25:1; CC2, 1195) Tertullian. Adversus Praxean per RB "And so the connection of the Father, and the Son, and of the Paraclete makes three cohering entities, one cohering from the other, which three are one entity" refers to the unity of their substance, not to the oneness of their number.

250 A.D. The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translation of the Writings of the Church Fathers down to A.D. 325 CYPRIAN. De catholicae ecclesiae unitate. (CSEL 3:215) The LORD says "I and the Father are one" and likewise it is written of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. "And these three are one." NOTE: Cyprian is regarded as one "who quotes copiously and textually." Further, the interpolation "In Christo Jesu" does not yet appear. note: Cyprian also quoted Acts 8:37

385 A.D. GREGORY OF NAZANZIUS Theological Orations, His fifth oration was "On the Holy Spirit"

390A.D. JEROME prologue to the Canonical Epistles "si ab interpretibus fideliter in latinum eloquium verterentur nec ambiguitatem legentibus facerent nec trinitatis unitate in prima joannis epistola positum legimus, in qua etiam, trium tantummodo vocabula hoc est aquae, sanguinis et spiritus in ipsa sua editione ponentes et patris verbique ac aspiritus testimoninum omittentes, in quo maxime et fides catholica roboratur, et patris et filii et spirtus sancti una divinitatis substantia comprobatur." note: this manuscript also included Acts 8:37
 
Upvote 0

theWaris1

Seeking
Apr 21, 2011
593
26
The Obamanation
✟30,903.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
1 John 5:7-9 (trinity verse) in early christian writings


"The Lord says "I and the Father are one" and likewise it is written of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. "And these three are one.""


168 A.D. Theophilus used the word "trinity" in his letter to Autolycus. Written in Greek. Theophilus became bishop of Antioch.

177 A.D. A writing in Greek---Anti-Nicene Fathers Apologia of Athenagoras presented to Roman emperors. "Who, then, would not be ashamed to hear men speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and who declare both their distinction in order."

215 A.D. (25:1; CC2, 1195) Tertullian. Adversus Praxean per RB "And so the connection of the Father, and the Son, and of the Paraclete makes three cohering entities, one cohering from the other, which three are one entity" refers to the unity of their substance, not to the oneness of their number.

250 A.D. The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translation of the Writings of the Church Fathers down to A.D. 325 CYPRIAN. De catholicae ecclesiae unitate. (CSEL 3:215) The LORD says "I and the Father are one" and likewise it is written of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. "And these three are one." NOTE: Cyprian is regarded as one "who quotes copiously and textually." Further, the interpolation "In Christo Jesu" does not yet appear. note: Cyprian also quoted Acts 8:37
this wasn't part of the debate.. Simply because a few men from long ago thought the trinity was biblical is no reason to insert things into scripture. You really proved nothing with all this and have went off topic but we'll shall look at it if you like. It's unimportant to me what a group of Catholic influenced people thought or what the Pope tells the church is factual. Rome was Pagan early on and merged their beliefs into Christianity making it a harlet.

Ancient religions of Babylon were big on a Trinity and the Mother and Son worship as well as many other Catholic ideas including the Nuns and other rituals.

this is the literal translation: Grey was Added in 1522.
1Jn 5:7 because three are who are testifying in the heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these--the three--are one;
1Jn 5:8 and three are who are testifying in the earth
,
the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are into the one.


Below is the way it read previously.

/... because three are who are testifying in the heaven, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are into the one.

Notice the Spirit, the Water and the Blood are the three that are united as one but the trinity was added later.


Am I a heretic for not being concerned with a Trinity?
If I don't believe or find it relevant should I be stoned?
I'm I still a child of God if I don't recognize a Trinity?

There are 7 spirits of God... which one makes the trinity and which ones don't?
.
 
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟105,748.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
1 John 5:7-9 (trinity verse) in early christian writings Priscillian (380 AD) bishop of Avilain in Liber Apologeticus: (This quote as given by A.E. Brooke from Schepps- Vienna Corpus, xviii) "As John says "and there are three which give testimony on earth, the water, the flesh, the blood, and these three are in one, and there are three which give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one in Christ Jesus."
You did not give your source for your quotes!

From the Vulgate, then, it seems that the Comma was translated into Greek and inserted into some printed editions of the Greek text, and in a handful of late Greek manuscripts. All scholars consider it to be spurious, and it is not included in modern critical editions of the Greek text, or in the English versions based upon them.

For example, the English Standard Version reads:
For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.

The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate.




Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript. The eight manuscripts are as follows:
  • 61: codex Montfortianus, dating from the early sixteenth century.
  • 88: a variant reading in a sixteenth century hand, added to the fourteenth-century codex Regius of Naples.
  • 221: a variant reading added to a tenth-century manuscript in the Bodleian Library at Oxford.
  • 429: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Wolfenbüttel.
  • 629: a fourteenth or fifteenth century manuscript in the Vatican.
  • 636: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Naples.
  • 918: a sixteenth-century manuscript at the Escorial, Spain.
  • 2318: an eighteenth-century manuscript, influenced by the Clementine Vulgate, at Bucharest, Rumania.
(2) The passage is quoted by none of the Greek Fathers, who, had they known it, would most certainly have employed it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and Arian).

Its first appearance in Greek is in a Greek version of the (Latin) Acts of the Lateran Council in 1215.

(3) The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus [copied before a.d. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first hand of codex Vallicellianus [ninth century]).

The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as a part of the actual text of the Epistle is in a fourth century Latin treatise entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower Bishop Instantius.

Apparently the gloss arose when the original passage was understood to symbolize the Trinity (through the mention of three witnesses: the Spirit, the water, and the blood), an interpretation that may have been written first as a marginal note that afterwards found its way into the text.

In the fifth century the gloss was quoted by Latin Fathers in North Africa and Italy as part of the text of the Epistle, and from the sixth century onwards it is found more and more frequently in manuscripts of the Old Latin and of the Vulgate.

In these various witnesses the wording of the passage differs in several particulars. (For examples of other intrusions into the Latin text of 1 John, see 2.17; 4.3; 5.6, and 20.)
The Johannine Comma
Pre-16th century Greek manuscripts and translations

In fact, they only appear in the text of four late medieval manuscripts. They seem to have originated as a marginal note added to certain Latin manuscripts during the middle ages, which was eventually incorporated into the text of most of the later Vulgate manuscripts."

The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate. Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript."
Johannine Comma - Theopedia, an encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity

For more information see Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, pp. 101

1 John 2:17 "God, even He that abideth of old): a true comment, which Cyprian and Lucifer have added to the text without support of Greek manuscripts. JFB

1 John 4:3 and every spirit that confesses not Jesus is not of God; and this is the spirit of antichrist, of which you have heard that it comes, and now is in the world already.
(omitting "is come in the flesh.")JFB;
Codex Sinaiticus

1 John 5:6 This is he that came through water and blood, Jesus Christ: not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood; and it is the Spirit that testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.
Greek, "not IN the water only, but IN the water and IN (so oldest manuscripts add) the blood.")JFB;
Codex Sinaiticus

20
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
(oldest manuscripts read, "(so) that we know)JFB;
Codex Sinaiticus

We know, however, that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding, that we know him that is true; and we are in him that is true, in his Son Jesus Christ: This is the true God and life eternal.
Codex Sinaiticus


 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
if cyprian who was known for being a copious writer, quotes a verse from 1 john that has the comma in it. What, did He make it up then? What about the other quotes of the comma? Did all those guys from the first and second centuries make up this scripture or was it in the originals and lost?
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You did not give your source for your quotes!

From the Vulgate, then, it seems that the Comma was translated into Greek and inserted into some printed editions of the Greek text, and in a handful of late Greek manuscripts. All scholars consider it to be spurious, and it is not included in modern critical editions of the Greek text, or in the English versions based upon them.

For example, the English Standard Version reads:
For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.

The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate.




Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript. The eight manuscripts are as follows:
  • 61: codex Montfortianus, dating from the early sixteenth century.
  • 88: a variant reading in a sixteenth century hand, added to the fourteenth-century codex Regius of Naples.
  • 221: a variant reading added to a tenth-century manuscript in the Bodleian Library at Oxford.
  • 429: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Wolfenbüttel.
  • 629: a fourteenth or fifteenth century manuscript in the Vatican.
  • 636: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Naples.
  • 918: a sixteenth-century manuscript at the Escorial, Spain.
  • 2318: an eighteenth-century manuscript, influenced by the Clementine Vulgate, at Bucharest, Rumania.
(2) The passage is quoted by none of the Greek Fathers, who, had they known it, would most certainly have employed it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and Arian).

Its first appearance in Greek is in a Greek version of the (Latin) Acts of the Lateran Council in 1215.

(3) The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus [copied before a.d. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first hand of codex Vallicellianus [ninth century]).

The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as a part of the actual text of the Epistle is in a fourth century Latin treatise entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower Bishop Instantius.

Apparently the gloss arose when the original passage was understood to symbolize the Trinity (through the mention of three witnesses: the Spirit, the water, and the blood), an interpretation that may have been written first as a marginal note that afterwards found its way into the text.

In the fifth century the gloss was quoted by Latin Fathers in North Africa and Italy as part of the text of the Epistle, and from the sixth century onwards it is found more and more frequently in manuscripts of the Old Latin and of the Vulgate.

In these various witnesses the wording of the passage differs in several particulars. (For examples of other intrusions into the Latin text of 1 John, see 2.17; 4.3; 5.6, and 20.)
The Johannine Comma
Pre-16th century Greek manuscripts and translations

In fact, they only appear in the text of four late medieval manuscripts. They seem to have originated as a marginal note added to certain Latin manuscripts during the middle ages, which was eventually incorporated into the text of most of the later Vulgate manuscripts."

The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate. Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript."
Johannine Comma - Theopedia, an encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity

For more information see Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, pp. 101

1 John 2:17 "God, even He that abideth of old): a true comment, which Cyprian and Lucifer have added to the text without support of Greek manuscripts. JFB

1 John 4:3 and every spirit that confesses not Jesus is not of God; and this is the spirit of antichrist, of which you have heard that it comes, and now is in the world already.
(omitting "is come in the flesh.")JFB;
Codex Sinaiticus

1 John 5:6 This is he that came through water and blood, Jesus Christ: not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood; and it is the Spirit that testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.
Greek, "not IN the water only, but IN the water and IN (so oldest manuscripts add) the blood.")JFB;
Codex Sinaiticus

20
And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
(oldest manuscripts read, "(so) that we know)JFB;
Codex Sinaiticus

We know, however, that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding, that we know him that is true; and we are in him that is true, in his Son Jesus Christ: This is the true God and life eternal.
Codex Sinaiticus



there are manuscripts that DO contain the comma listed here:

1john57
 
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟105,748.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
if cyprian who was known for being a copious writer, quotes a verse from 1 john that has the comma in it. What, did He make it up then? What about the other quotes of the comma? Did all those guys from the first and second centuries make up this scripture or was it in the originals and lost?
First of all you did not give any source for what you copied, and it was not lost, nor is it contained in the OLDEST Manuscripts.

The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus [copied before a.d. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first hand of codex Vallicellianus [ninth century]).

The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as a part of the actual text of the Epistle is in a fourth century Latin treatise entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower Bishop Instantius.


Apparently the gloss arose when the original passage was understood to symbolize the Trinity (through the mention of three witnesses: the Spirit, the water, and the blood), an interpretation that may have been written first as a marginal note that afterwards found its way into the text.
 
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟105,748.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
there are manuscripts that DO contain the comma listed here:1john57
I checked your reference and who is Jerome Cathelain? Those are LATIN and the others are copies of the Vulgate or Latin.

The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions(Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus [copied before a.d. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first hand of codex Vallicellianus [ninth century]).

The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as a part of the actual text of the Epistle is in a fourth century Latin treatise entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower Bishop Instantius.


The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate.Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript. The eight manuscripts are as follows:
  • 61: codex Montfortianus, dating from the early sixteenth century.
  • 88: a variant reading in a sixteenth century hand, added to the fourteenth-century codex Regius of Naples.
  • 221: a variant reading added to a tenth-century manuscript in the Bodleian Library at Oxford.
  • 429: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Wolfenbüttel.
  • 629: a fourteenth or fifteenth century manuscript in the Vatican.
  • 636: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Naples.
  • 918: a sixteenth-century manuscript at the Escorial, Spain.
  • 2318: an eighteenth-century manuscript, influenced by the Clementine Vulgate, at Bucharest, Rumania.
(2) The passage is quoted by none of the Greek Fathers, who, had they known it, would most certainly have employed it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and Arian).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I checked your reference and those are LATIN and the others are copies of the Vulgate or Latin.

The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions(Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus [copied before a.d. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first hand of codex Vallicellianus [ninth century]).

The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as a part of the actual text of the Epistle is in a fourth century Latin treatise entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower Bishop Instantius.

The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate.Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript. The eight manuscripts are as follows:
  • 61: codex Montfortianus, dating from the early sixteenth century.
  • 88: a variant reading in a sixteenth century hand, added to the fourteenth-century codex Regius of Naples.
  • 221: a variant reading added to a tenth-century manuscript in the Bodleian Library at Oxford.
  • 429: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Wolfenbüttel.
  • 629: a fourteenth or fifteenth century manuscript in the Vatican.
  • 636: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Naples.
  • 918: a sixteenth-century manuscript at the Escorial, Spain.
  • 2318: an eighteenth-century manuscript, influenced by the Clementine Vulgate, at Bucharest, Rumania.
(2) The passage is quoted by none of the Greek Fathers, who, had they known it, would most certainly have employed it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and Arian).

well it goes back to the third century not the 15th, and that was my point. The textus receptus has it as well you forgot.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
First of all you did not give any source for what you copied, and it was not lost, nor is it contained in the OLDEST Manuscripts.

The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus [copied before a.d. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first hand of codex Vallicellianus [ninth century]).

The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as a part of the actual text of the Epistle is in a fourth century Latin treatise entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower Bishop Instantius.


Apparently the gloss arose when the original passage was understood to symbolize the Trinity (through the mention of three witnesses: the Spirit, the water, and the blood), an interpretation that may have been written first as a marginal note that afterwards found its way into the text.

no the earliest is cyprian I am not sure if wikipedia is the best source for this information. I already voted on that link sent earlier from wikipedia as a bad source of information.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
latin version in 250 A.D. over a hundred years before PRISCILLIAN

The LORD says "I and the Father are one" and likewise it is written of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. "And these three are one." NOTE: Cyprian is regarded as one "who quotes copiously and textually."

so what did cyprian who quotes copiosly and textually just make up the portion of the comma "and these three are one." Because that would be obsurd. Also what about all the other quotes.

Anchor Bible included this text in 450 A.D.

wycliff Bible had this verse

Acts of lateran counsel had this verse

Mazarin Bible had this verse

Pre Lutheran Bible in German had it.
 
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟105,748.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
latin version in 250 A.D. over a hundred years before PRISCILLIAN

The LORD says "I and the Father are one" and likewise it is written of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. "And these three are one." NOTE: Cyprian is regarded as one "who quotes copiously and textually."

so what did cyprian who quotes copiosly and textually just make up the portion of the comma "and these three are one." Because that would be obsurd. Also what about all the other quotes.

Anchor Bible included this text in 450 A.D.

wycliff Bible had this verse

Acts of lateran counsel had this verse

Mazarin Bible had this verse

Pre Lutheran Bible in German had it.
All Latin copies of the Vulgar Textus Receptus which is what the KJV is based on.

Textus Receptus (Latin: "received text") is the name subsequently given to the succession of printed Greek texts of the New Testament which constituted the translation base for the original German Luther Bible, for the translation of the New Testament into English by William Tyndale, the King James Version, and for most other Reformation-era New Testament translations throughout Western and Central Europe

The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions(Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46]

Who is Jerome Cathelain?
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I checked your reference and who is Jerome Cathelain? Those are LATIN and the others are copies of the Vulgate or Latin.

The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions(Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus [copied before a.d. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first hand of codex Vallicellianus [ninth century]).

The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as a part of the actual text of the Epistle is in a fourth century Latin treatise entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower Bishop Instantius.


The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate.Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript. The eight manuscripts are as follows:
  • 61: codex Montfortianus, dating from the early sixteenth century.
  • 88: a variant reading in a sixteenth century hand, added to the fourteenth-century codex Regius of Naples.
  • 221: a variant reading added to a tenth-century manuscript in the Bodleian Library at Oxford.
  • 429: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Wolfenbüttel.
  • 629: a fourteenth or fifteenth century manuscript in the Vatican.
  • 636: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Naples.
  • 918: a sixteenth-century manuscript at the Escorial, Spain.
  • 2318: an eighteenth-century manuscript, influenced by the Clementine Vulgate, at Bucharest, Rumania.
(2) The passage is quoted by none of the Greek Fathers, who, had they known it, would most certainly have employed it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and Arian).

Greek mss that contain the passage in the text itself:

61 - Dublin, Trinity College, Ms. 30
629 - Vatican Library, Ottob. Gr. 298
918 - Escorial E.I. 5
2318 - Bucharest, Romania. Akad., 318
2473 - Athens, National Library

more greek information
Defense of the Johannine Comma
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟55,673.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
only 501 or so manuscripts out of the five thousand that we have in greek contained 1 john chapter 5. So if eight contain the reference then nearly 1 percent of the manuscripts that contain 1 john have the reference. This means that nearly 1 percent must be corrupted. And that cyprian lied. Which is very hard to swallow.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

he-man

he-man
Oct 28, 2010
8,891
301
usa
✟105,748.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Greek mss that contain the passage in the text itself:

61 - Dublin, Trinity College, Ms. 30
629 - Vatican Library, Ottob. Gr. 298
918 - Escorial E.I. 5
2318 - Bucharest, Romania. Akad., 318
2473 - Athens, National Library

more greek information
Defense of the Johannine Comma
I guess you do not know your Centuries? Do you know the difference between minuscule and Uncial? Look, No spaces, No paragraphs, No chapters, and No verses: ΟΙΑΔΕΛΦΟΙΚΑΙΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΣΕΝΗΜΕΡΑΙΣ
http://www.nativlang.com/greek-language/ancient-greek-writing.php#h32

Minuscule 61 (in the Gregory-Aland numbering; Soden's δ 603), known as Codex Montfortianus, Erasmus named it Codex Britannicus, is a Greek minuscule manuscript of the New Testament on paper. Dated to the early 16th century, though a 15th century date is possible on paleographic grounds

The Greek text of the Gospels and Acts of this codex is a representative of the Byzantine text-type, Aland placed it n Category V.

It was the first Greek manuscript discovered that contains the Comma Johanneum in 1 John 5:7-8. It was copied from a 10th century manuscript at Lincoln College, Oxford, that did not have the Comma. The Comma was inserted from the Latin.
Bart D. Ehrman identified this reading as
Orthodox corrupt reading

Bart D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1993, p. 60.

F. H. A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament (George Bell & Sons: London, 1894), vol. 1, p. 200.

Bruce M. Metzger, Bart D. Ehrman, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, (Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 86.

629 – XIV Century – Vatican Library, Ottob. Gr. 298 629 contains the Acts, Catholics, and Pauline epistles entire. Greek/Latin diglot (the Latin is a typical late vulgate text).

918 XVI Century – Escorial, Σ. I. 5. cursive manuscript does contain 1John 5:7

2318 XVIII Century – Bucharest, Romania, Akad, 318 (234)

2473 XVII Century- Athens, National Library Taphu 545

NT Manuscripts 501-1000

it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46]
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.