Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What problem? | 1 John 5:7 | justanotherchristian | 98630 | ||
1 John 5:6-8 (KJV) This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear record 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. I have removed the challenged text - look at how it reads. In order to avoid this embarrasing "gaff", some translations remove the entire verse, but even then, you end up with an awkward expression. The bare fact (admitted) that there is a 4th century quotation proves that the verse did not originate in the 10th century (as some claim). I have a more extensive article on why 1 John 5:7 cannot be excluded without harm to the Bible that I can send to you, but it is too large for this forum message service. Please write to me at jac@jacglobal.net and I can e-mail the article to you (it was not written by me). BY THE WAY - the same "source" that deletes the Johanine Comma also delets the Doxology from the Lord's Prayer..... this is definitely one of those situations where if you give up that inch, you are going to lose the mile... justanotherchristian www.apostasynow.com |
||||||
2 | Why is it only found in 4 manuscripts? | 1 John 5:7 | Morant61 | 98699 | ||
Greetings Justanotherchristian! One quick problem, if I may! The first part of v. 8 is also part of the disputed text. In your response as to why leaving the disputed text of v. 7 out, you arbitrarily leave the rest of the disputed text in and then use it as evidence that the first part should remain. The fact that the first quote appears in the 4th century only affirms that the spurious reading was older than the tenth century - originally. However, it does not provide support that the reading is original since the fact remains that the reading only occurs in 4 manuscripts (2 of which have the reading written in the margin), none of which are older than the 10th century. So, allow me to ask: If the reading were original, why is it not found in any of the thousands of manuscripts before the 10th century? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
3 | Why is it only found in 4 manuscripts? | 1 John 5:7 | Morant61 | 98704 | ||
... |
||||||