1 John 5:7

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by BrianT, Jul 18, 2002.

  1. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    What most closely describes your thoughts on 1 John 5:7? If none of the answers appeal to you, simply leave some comments that better explain your position.
     
  2. tyndale1946

    tyndale1946
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,179
    Likes Received:
    226
    First of all Brian T I want to know what is the validity of this post?... You other brethren must know something I am not privy to or I would answer the poll. I never knew this to be a bone of contention among the translators and really wouldn't care if it was or not. I take I John 5:7 as it is as should all of us that read the KJV! What the other translators do with it in there others versions I don't care. To nit pick as you brethren are doing seems to a favorite past time I don't understand!... To me your post is nonsense!... Brother Glen :confused:
     
  3. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Really? As polls go, it was better thought out than most of the ones that get posted here.
     
  4. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Glenn,

    I was simply interested to know how different people saw the issue of 1 John 5:7. From reading your post, you should have answered the fourth option.

    Brian
     
  5. presbuteros

    presbuteros
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is no way 1 John 5:7 was in the original autographs. Any defence of that is wishful thinking and utterly futile. [​IMG]
     
  6. DocCas

    DocCas
    Expand Collapse
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2000
    Messages:
    4,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Read "History of the Debate Over 1 John 5:7-8" by Michael Maynard. He shows that historically the inclusion of the comma was viewed as far from "wishful thinking" or "utterly futile." [​IMG]
     
  7. Pastork

    Pastork
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2002
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    DocCas,

    I would be very interested in reading the Maynard article. Could you tell me where to find it? Thanks!

    Pastork
     
  8. presbuteros

    presbuteros
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Ad hominem well poisoning deleted] defends 1 John 5:7 as part of the original text. The MSS evidence is laughable.

    Any attempted defence by a non-scholar is nothing but an attempt to prove what one has already presupposed to be true. In any of the defences I have read (and these were far from scholarly), the approach was not even remotely objective. Their mind was made up, and they are not to be confused with the facts. [​IMG]

    [Moderator: Let's leave the name calling, ad hominem, and personalities at the door when we come in.]

    [ September 07, 2002, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: DocCas ]
     
  9. presbuteros

    presbuteros
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    0
    Could we please have the credentials of Mr. Maynard? Where are his degrees from? Is he a true expert in the field of textual criticism, and is he recognized as such by his colleagues in the educational world (assuming he has some)? What Journals has he been published in? If he has published any books, who was the publisher? Are they well known and respected or some small independent outfit?

    In other words, why should we take the time to read another article or book on this subject when what is available is self-refuting? Is this guy worth our time, or is he another individual with just the right amount of knowledge [Ad hominem well poisoning deleted]?

    [Moderator: Again, let's keep this discussion on a Christian level.]

    [ September 07, 2002, 03:54 PM: Message edited by: DocCas ]
     
  10. Ernie Brazee

    Ernie Brazee
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="/ernie.JPG">

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2001
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why is it so hard for some to just believe the Word of God the way it is written?

    Who today has a special revelation from God to tell us that what He has given us is no longer valid?

    I am just an ignorant child of God who believes God promised to preserve his Word and even dumber to believe He could and did do it!! [​IMG]
     
  11. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who doesn't believe 1 John 5:7? The poll is about whether it was originally penned by John or not, not about the truth it contains.
     
  12. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,139
    Likes Received:
    320
    The 1 John 5:7 witnesses are the old Itala, the Latin vulgate, the Latin Fathers from Cyprian (some also claim Tertullian) onward with a few late Greek miniscules.

    I believe it is part of the inspired Word of God.
    My view is that very early on it was left out of the Greek copied text due to a scribal blunder (but preserved in the old latin translation).
    God has always preserved it in spite of the protests of men against it.

    It has always been part of the Bible of the martyrs (The old Itala, The Waldensian Bible, the KJV).

    My opinion of course, and no judgment(s) against those who believe otherwise.

    HankD
     
  13. Ernie Brazee

    Ernie Brazee
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="/ernie.JPG">

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2001
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    0
    ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????If 1 John 5:7 wasn't written by John then it was added later, thus making the Word of God of none effect, as it was tampered with man. Of course it was penned by John, who is to determine what an author penned, unless we are going to pick apart the Bible verse by verse tossing out what someone doesn't like. Then what do we have left? :confused: :confused:
     
  14. DocCas

    DocCas
    Expand Collapse
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2000
    Messages:
    4,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Michael Maynard earned an AAS in Engineering Technology (Magna Cum Laude) from Phoenix College, 1986, BA in Greek/Latin/German from Arizona State University, 1989. As a graduate student he studied classical philolgy at the University of Arizona where the Classics Department awareded him an appointment as Graduate Assistant in Teaching Classics (1989-1990). He received the Herman Weinel Scholarship which enabled him to do research at the University of Leipzig, Germany in the summer of 1990, and engaged in Graduate Studies in Textual Criticism under Dr. Walter Thiele at University of Tubingen, Germany. He then returned to the US and applied to the Graduate Library School in Tucson, Arizona, which is one of only 51 schools out of over 300 nationwide to be accredited by the American Library Association. This school admits only 5% of those who apply. He earned his Master of Library Science degree from University of Arizona in 1992. Among his other linguistic accomplishments are graduate study in French, German, Latin, Hebrew, Syriac, as well as both Koine and Classical Greek. Mr. Maynard's book is published by Comma Publications of Tempe, Arizona, with an ISBN number of 1-886971-05-6.

    It is a history of the comma controversy resulting from several years of original research in the libraries of Europe.
     
  15. Pastork

    Pastork
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2002
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Touche! And thanks for the additional information on the book.

    Pastork
     
  16. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, the word of God is still very effectual. [​IMG]
     
  17. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,139
    Likes Received:
    320
  18. presbuteros

    presbuteros
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would like to apologize for the spirit of my last posts. It was uncivil and unchristian. I have had to deal with a very divisive KJV only advocate in our church. He has now left, but continues to visit other members and bring them his literature. I let my emotions get in the way of my Christianity.

    The whole issue is actually not a big deal to me. I like and use the NIV. I also like the KJV. I have my preferences, as do others. It is the divisive spirit of the debate (which I myself regrettably demonstarted earlier) that I don't like.

    Again, I apologize for my spirit in the last posts.

    But, I still don;t think 1 Jn.5:7 was in the original text ;)
     
  19. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,139
    Likes Received:
    320
    Thanks Bro.

    HankD
     

Share This Page

Loading...