It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by autowrench
What is the KJB based upon? You act as if scholars dont have the Textus Receptus or the LXX. Lol. Bacon wasnt over a thousand years old. Sorry to disappoint.
Forget the English versions bro, go back to the Greek!!!edit on 12-5-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)
Might be time for the Christians to Tell the World "Forgive Us Jesus for we have Sinned Against You."
It is the only way out of the corner.
Originally posted by autowrench
I have always said if there was a Jesus, and he did come back here, he would not be a happy camper, in fact he would be righteously angry at what his followers have been doing in his name for 2000 years.
Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by MagnumOpus
Oh, I responded. See he never mentioned that he read Greek. But what you say just bolsters it all a little more......how much longer will Christians believe in such a book? Humanity doesn't need a book to tell them what to do either. Just follow your Heart, you will be OK.
It was at this stage that Constantine made his momentous suggestion. Might not the relationship of Son to Father be expressed by the term homoousios ("of the same substance"). Its use, however, by the Sabellian bishops of Libya had been condemned by Dionysius of Alexandria in the 260s, and, in a different sense, its use by Paul of Samosata had been condemned by the Council of Antioch in 268. It was thus a "loaded" word as well as being unscriptural. Why Constantine put it forward we do not know. The possibility is that once again he was prompted by Hosius, and he may have been using it as a "translation" of the traditional view held in the West, that the Trinity was composed of "Three Persons in one substance," without inquiring further into the meaning of these terms. The Emperor had spoken, and no one dared touch the creed during his lifetime. The great majority of the Eastern bishops found themselves in a false position.
The only way G-d's people are going to come out of mystery Babylon is to come out of Trinitarian doctrine that has made the Son like an incarnate god, much as Tammuz was the incarnation of Baal. Yeshua never came to usurp G-d's throne. Yeshua came to glorify G-d and His throne among G-d's people.
The Forgery Of 1 John 5:7
For the story of how the spurious words came to be included in the Textus Receptus, see any critical commentary on 1 John, or Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, pp. 101 f.; cf. also Ezra Abbot, "I. John v. 7 and Luther's German Bible," in The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays (Boston, 1888), pp. 458�463." (Bruce Metzger - Textual Commentary Of The Greek New Testament - Second Edition: 1994 - Pages 647-649).
Another Bible scholar named Bart Ehrman in this lecture affirmed that when the 1st scholar to put together a printed Greek New Testament (Erasmus was his name, & he was from Rotterdam, who lived from 1466-1536), in the year 1516, he compiled the New Testament in Greek, but never included the verse because it wasn't in the earliest manuscripts. The Latin theologians went ballistic, and according to a story the circulated, Erasmus said: "Look, it's not in any if the previous Greek manuscripts." The theologians said: "Yes, but it is part of the church's doctrine, so we need to include it in there, otherwise you would have got rid of the trinity." Erasmus said: "If you can produce a Greek manuscript which has it in it, I'll include it in my next edition." And so, the theologians produced a Greek manuscript, by adding the verse in, themselves. When the theologians copied the Latin, they took the verse which was in Latin, translated it back into Greek, and stuck it at 1 John 5:7, and Erasmus was true to his word, and included that in his next edition of the Bible. It was on the basis of that Greek edition that the KJV is based off of.
Even so, 1 John was written a few centuries before the fabricated verse ever existed (Harris, Stephen L, Understanding the Bible (Palo Alto: Mayfield, 1985) 1 John - Pg. 355-356). Hence, this verse wasn't confirmed by any of the writers of 1 John nor any writers of the Bible. So, there is no divinely inspired textual variants of this verse as some Christian may claim. This background information on this forgery went undetected for 100's of years within the Christian community.
Late manuscripts of 1 John 5:7 are certainly not God-breathed since theologians had to get this verse in, to prove the Trinity! Why else would they try to get this verse in the Bible, if they believed the trinity was already explicitly taught? Because it wasn't, and they needed this verse to seal the deal. For Biblical inerrantists who are King James Onlyists, this would be a big problem for them. Christians have said regarding 1 John 5:7:
"In fact, most Christian scholars believe that this verse (1 John 5:7) on the Trinity was not in the original text that God inspired, since it scarcely appears in any manuscript before the fifteenth century." (Norman L. Geisler & Abdul Saleeb - Answering Islam: The Crescent In Light Of The Cross - Baker Books, 2002 - Page 310).
"This part is NOT PART OF THE INSPIRED TEXT." (John MacArthur - 1-3 John: NT Commentary - Moody Publishers - Page 196).
We have seen how Christian scholars themselves have agreed that 1 John 5:7, the most significant verse in the New Testament to depict the Trinity, was inserted into the text and not part of the original. Hence, with this “Trinitarian” verse being confirmed as a fabrication, where is the justification for the Trinitarian beliefs held by Christians today?
God is not a Trinity
The word “Trinity” can be found nowhere in the Bible. It is completely incongruous with scriptural understanding of God. God is not three persons. There is only one God and it is the Father. Jesus says: “salvation is of the Jews.” (John 4:22). Salvation is neither of the Romans nor of the Italians. The Trinity is an unscriptural concept, smuggled into Christendom under Roman Constantine by cloak-and-dagger means.
The fact is, the Aramaic and Pe#ta were altered and revised over and over through the ages, and when the Aramaic was finally delivered to Europe in the 18th Century, it was not in any way close to the original Aramaic. The altering of the "original" Aramaic was done by the people in the Middle East, not Germany. Furthermore; the oldest Aramaic text is only dated to about 450 AD. This was before Constantine had taken power in a big way, so the claim is that it predates the Roman Western texts. The problem is, the Aramaic text was the text of the Nestorians, and eventually, the Eastern Catholic Church.
"Misquoting Jesus: Scribes Who Altered Scripture and Readers Who May Never Know," a textual criticism of Biblical manuscript tampering by Bart Ehrman, Professor or Religious Studies of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Originally posted by SpearMint
5) Why did God create dinosaurs and so many other organisms before humans existed? It was hundreds of millions of years before we came about. Practice? Or were we just lucky to be the surviving race?