Only the Originals Are Inspired

[Yeshua1]

1 John 5:7! The Holy Trinity

The Trinity is still well supported in my Nas!

 

[SavedByGrace]

The World English Bible is your best bet: World English Bible. It is based on the Majority Text of Hodges and Farstad, which is very close to the Byzantine Textform of Robinson and Pierpont, my go-to Greek text. There is a committee working on a translation from the Byz., but they are not very far along yet. (I was asked to join the effort, but then they figured my translation philosophy was not quite theirs--long story. I might have turned them down anyway, since what we need are missionary translations into 3,000 languages, and that is where my heart is.)

the WEB fails in 1 John 5:7, where the Greek of the context it is in, shows that these words MUST be part of the original Autograph of the Apostle John!

 

[SavedByGrace]

The 1611 translators were guided in same fashion as those of the Nas and Nkjv teams were!

The NAS, no, as they used inferior NT Greek text, by those who did not have a high regard for the Authority of the Holy Bible!

 

[SavedByGrace]

The Trinity is still well supported in my Nas!

in ONE verse, and as clear as 1 John 5:7?

 

[SavedByGrace]

The early Church father, Cyprian, who knew both Latin and Greek, and died about A.D.258, wrote:

“Dicit Dominus, Ego et Pater unum sumus; et iterum de Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto scriptum est: 'Et tres unum sunt.'” (Treatise I:6).

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

Tertullian, about the same time, who also knew Latin and Greek, wrote:

"Ita connexus Patris in Filio et Filii in Paracleto, tres efficit coharentes, alterum ex altere, qui tres unum sunt, non unus, quomodo dictum est, Ego et Pater unum sumus." (Against Praxeas XXV).

"Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent persons, one from the other, which three are one, not one [person], as it is said, "I and my Father are One.""

WHERE else other than 1 John 5:7, did they read this?

 

[Yeshua1]

The NAS, no, as they used inferior NT Greek text, by those who did not have a high regard for the Authority of the Holy Bible!

Every member of the Nas translation team holds to the Verbal plenary Inspiration of the Bible, and are even more biblical in doctrines then 1611 Anglican team!

 

[Yeshua1]

in ONE verse, and as clear as 1 John 5:7?

Yes

 

[SGO]

"Given by inspiration" is one word in Greek, the singular adjective θεόπνευστος (theopneustos), meaning, "breathed out by God," or, "the breath of God." This word is what is called a hapax legomenon, a word used only once in the NT. It is used nowhere in secular Greek, and only used in Christian writings long after Paul, so it is probably a word invented by Paul.

Now think about it. The word for "breathed out" is singular, one time. If you breathe "I love you" into your spouse's ear, how many times is that? If you say it again sometime, is that not a separate sentence? If God breathed out the words of Scripture, it was one time. So Paul was referring to the original mss in this statement.

How about Peter;
mounds of evidence
when talking about Paul

"As also in all his epistles,
speaking in them of these things:
in which are some things hard to be understood,
which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest,
as they do also the other scriptures,
unto their own destruction."
2 Peter 3:16

 

[SavedByGrace]

Yes

where?

 

[John of Japan]

How about Peter;
mounds of evidence
when talking about Paul

"As also in all his epistles,
speaking in them of these things:
in which are some things hard to be understood,
which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest,
as they do also the other scriptures,
unto their own destruction."
2 Peter 3:16

I'm not sure what your point is here.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Every member of the Nas translation team holds to the Verbal plenary Inspiration of the Bible, and are even more biblical in doctrines then 1611 Anglican team!

regardless the Greek text that they used, that of Nestle/Aland, the Novum Testamentum Graece, is far inferior

 

[John of Japan]

the WEB fails in 1 John 5:7, where the Greek of the context it is in, shows that these words MUST be part of the original Autograph of the Apostle John!

Okay. I'm familiar with the arguments. What grammar are you speaking of specifically here?

 

[SGO]

I'm not sure what your point is here.

Peter called Paul's writings scripture. (See recent exchange with SavedByGrace.)

 

[SavedByGrace]

Okay. I'm familiar with the arguments. What grammar are you speaking of specifically here?

"τρεῖς οἱ μαρτυροῦντες, masculine though Πνεῦμα, ὕδωρ, and αἷμα are all neuter". In verse 8 we have the use of the Greek article, "το εν εισιν", where even the great Greek scholar, Thomas Fanshaw Middleton, admitted in his work, "The Doctrine of the Greek Article: Applied to the Criticism and the Illustration of the New Testament", is a problem. The use of the article here is for "renewed mention", referring back to verse 7, "εν". etc

 

[SGO]

I contest any charge that the Hebrew Bible that was used by Jesus Christ, and the NT writers, were just mere "copies" at the time. I have no doubt the the LXX was NOT used by either the Lord when quoting from the OT, or any of the NT writers.

If they weren't just plain old copies were they "inspired copies"?

 

[SavedByGrace]

If they weren't just plain old copies were they "inspired copies"?

no, Jesus and the NT writers used the Hebrew original OT.

 

[Yeshua1]

where?

Matthew 28:19

 

[SavedByGrace]

Matthew 28:19

yes, but not in clear words as 1 John 5:7. like 1 Timothy 3:16 "God" for a clear text on the Deity/Incarnation of Jesus.

 

[Yeshua1]

no, Jesus and the NT writers used the Hebrew original OT.

That was the inspired text!

 

[SGO]

no, Jesus and the NT writers used the Hebrew original OT.

"The original OT"?

Do you mean the original inspired scripture?