1 John 5:7 KJV Is Original Scripture

I agree.
But again, they don't stay there.

They have the Spirit to teach them and correct them.
They are not left to the devices of unbelieving men, because the Lord loves them and watches over them with care.

Respectfully, you seem unwilling to believe that my position was arrived at through careful study of the situation and the belief that I know where to find Scriptural truth.
In other words, that I've already justly applied that truth to the subject.

We can agree to disagree, but you're not going to change my mind with mountains of quotes by "textual critics" whose current M.O. seems to me to be a never-ending search for what is already right in front of them and has been since this whole "merry-go-round" started...

God's word.

 

Again, and with respect,
Mysticism has absolutely nothing to do with it and I suggest no such thing

But I have an honest question since I'm picking up on something that I'm not sure is there in this discussion:
It seems to me that you doubt that there is such a thing as the Holy Spirit, and that He can and does lead ( Romans 8:9-16 ) and comfort God's people...

Would you please clarify?

 

A God-controlled view of translation ( as opposed to a mystical view ) and preservation that results in a trustworthy Bible consisting of all of His precious words that they can actually hold in their hands,
is what I believe in.

What I strongly condemn is the parallel idea that two completely different collated Greek texts ( the "TR" and the "CT"/ NA / UBS ) are both the word of God and are being used, by God.

Rather, I hold that one set of texts is being used, and has been used, by God as part of His promise to preserve and keep His words through all generations for His people...
and one is being used and has been used by professing believers ( and worse, outright unbelievers who don't care about more than simply making money off Christians ) who have been deceived into thinking that they don't already have His inspired words that they can trust and hold in their hands.

To me, modern textual criticism is not, and has never been, interested in producing a higher standard for God's word.

The evidence of the past 150 years or so clearly shows another agenda...
That agenda is nothing more than a concentrated effort to tear down and replace with an inferior set of texts (and resulting myriads of translations, especially in English), God's every word, and to try and deceive His children into thinking that they need "the newest and best", when the reality of it is that they already have what they absolutely need.

In other words, I see that many of today's scholars keep promising to deliver a better Bible...
But that promise isn't being kept, by and large.
The proof of much of that is in the fact that so many, especially nowadays, have been led to believe that 1 John 5:7 ( and Acts of the Apostles 8:37 and many more ) is not God's word;
I maintain that it is, and always will be.

With that said,
I've decided that this will be my final reply to you in this thread whether or not you choose to answer the above posts.
I came to see a long time ago that we do not agree on this subject,
and it seems to me that further discussion of it is ultimately of no real value to either of us.


I wish you well, sir, and may the Lord bless you in many ways.

 

@Hark :
My apologies to you sir, for dominating your thread.

This is a passionate subject for me, and when I do reply to threads in this section, I tend to get carried away in those replies.
I'll step back now, and let others offer their observations and opinions.

Thank you for the privilege of posting here.

 

NO Greek text used today though is perfect copty of the original text, and despite that truth, the CT/MT/TR are all very close, and there are NO areas of doctrines where any of them would disagree on!

 

Much more reasons to see it as not being part of the original greek text!

 

Please read
Wallace on the Comma Johanneum at 1 John 5.7

 

Martin Luther's German Bible is on the KJV-only view's tree of good Bibles or pure stream of Bibles. All the editions of Luther's German Bible published during Luther's lifetime did not include 1 John 5:7, and it was not added to it until 1575. Preserved Smith reported that 1 John 5:7 was first placed in the German Bible in 1575 (Age of Reformation, p. 570). Glenn Conjurske pointed out that Luther omitted 1 John 5:7 from the revised edition of the Latin Vulgate that he published in 1529 (Olde Paths, March, 1997, p. 72).

Would it be suggested that Martin Luther did not believe in the deity of Christ or in the Trinity because his German Bible translation did not include 1 John 5:7? Evidently Martin Luther did not find that there was any compelling case for including it.

For over 50 years (from 1522 until 1575), German-speaking believers read Luther's German Bible, which did not have 1 John 5:7, and so far as I know it did not lead them to deny the deity of Christ or the Trinity.

 

That could be considered a biased, unreliable source since it is extremely KJV-only and since it will make claims that are not true.

 

He was much closer to the time period then we are, so should know if there was a good textual reason to n ot include it!

 

Totally non scholarly source!

 

He would have included if he thought the textual evidence supported it!

 

Do not think that refers to the Kjv though!