ESV?

Read my thread

 

since I like reading I will read it. Which link are you referring to?

 

The Text of the Gospels: First John 5:7 and Greek Manuscripts

Here are the very few manuscripts in Greek that have the extra words from the Latin. They were all made from Latin manuscripts. In other words under Latin influence . over 500 Greek manuscripts do not have the words from the Latin. Please read from real scholars.

The Text of the Gospels: First John 5:7 and Greek Manuscripts

 

Do you personally know any Greek grammar?

 

See #27

 

In Dean Burgon's book The Revision Revised he writes in Latin (p.483). The English translation would be : "If so few manuscripts are sufficient to establish such illegitimate readings, one can oppose so many weighty things (both of evidence and of arguments), that obviously nothing will be left in the serious matter of a true and a false standard, and the text of the New Testament in general will be entirely uncertain and doubtful."

 

This has been pointed out. Greek grammar is not even relevant to whether or not a word is included in the Greek.

 

Did you know that the Modern Language Bible which was published in 1969, has more inclusive language than the ESV?

 

I skimmed through it what you have yet to deal with is the fact that your rendering does not show up until the 1500s and is mostly in marginal notes.

 

shows your acute lack of understanding of Greek grammar!

God the Holy Spirit is the Author of the Holy Bible, and not humans. There can be no problems with the Greek grammar because of this fact. It is very clear to those who can grasp Greek grammar (which seems not many on here!), they will see that the grammar of this passage demands that the words, "μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατὴρ ὁ λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν", are all part of the Original text.

Regardless of what the Likes of Wallace and Metzger might say, as they are very much wrong here!

 

when you understand Greek grammar, read again what I have written, and you might just understand. It is clear that at the present, you do not understand Greek grammar, or else you could not write silly comments as this!

 

[/ Quote] Why does it not show up until the 1500s? Why do you shirk away from that?

 

1 John 5:6, ". . . And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. . . ." is being referred to as the witness of God in 1 John 5:9-10, ". . . If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: . . . He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: . . ." The gloss of the 1 John 5:7 add "witness . . . in heaven . . ." is in error.

 

The NKJV is to be preferred over the deeply flawed ESV. Take a look at Revelation 13:8. The ESV deliberately mistranslated the verse, changing "from or since" the foundation of the world to read "before." That should tell you all you need to know, they alter the text to conform to man-made doctrine.

 

That "man made" doctrine you refer to holds up even the way the NKJV translates it so I'm not really sure what your complaint is.

 

Words have meaning. "Apo" means out of or out from and points to origin. From or since the foundation of the world refers to the interval since creation, not before creation. Honest and accurate translations are to be preferred over those that alter the translation to harmonize with man-made doctrine.

 

It is the same Van. It points to a singular point in time before you and I were born, before Paul was born, before all of us were born that God chose. Period. It changes nothing no matter how ridiculous of an argument you want to make about it because you don't like the truth of it.

 

Utter nonsense, arguing over absurdity for the purpose of obfuscation. Since the foundation of the world does not point only to a time before you and I were born, it includes now and to the end of the age!!!

The level of ignorance among the naysayers is manifest, folks. Accordingly they hurl false charges like "you don't like the truth of it."

 

Nope. You are wrong Van and you always dig yourself a hole.

67.131 ἐκl; ἀπόh: markers of the extent of time from a point in the past—‘since, from.’
ἐκl: εἶδεν ἄνθρωπον τυφλὸν ἐκ γενετῆς ‘he saw a man who had been blind from birth’ Jn 9:1.
ἀπόh: ἐσώθη ἡ γυνὴ ἀπὸ τῆς ὥρας ἐκείνης ‘the woman became well from that moment’ Mt 9:22; τρίτην ταύτην ἡμέραν ἄγει ἀφ̓ οὗ ταῦτα ἐγἐνετο ‘this is now the third day since these things happened’ Lk 24:21.
Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), 645.

 

Can you believe this idiotic argument. Did I say the interval did not start in the past? Nope.
Obfuscation on display. Did this "scholar" say when the interval ended? Nope
Obfuscation on display.

Here is what I actually said, "Since the foundation of the world does not point only to a time before you and I were born, it includes now and to the end of the age!!!"

The ESV is deeply flawed as demonstrated by the deliberate mistranslation of Revelation 13:8.