1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Heretick or Divisive?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Will J. Kinney, Jan 30, 2004.

  1. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,851
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I really don't know to respond to someone who has gone out of his way to make a stupid statement, then try to cover it up with attacks, then wants to hide behind some inane icon when called on it.

    You've been called, and you have no coherent response other than to attack the orthodoxy of other posters.

    Well, I suppose anything could be written that would reflect God's truth — a tract, an essay, an inscription on a Bible — but that doesn't make it Scripture.

    You apparently have a view low view of Scripture, since you think we are free to add to it at will.

    I do not understand how you can be KJVO and espouse this silliness. Perhaps your fellow KJVOs will disown you.


    But have a nice day.

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  2. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    II Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
    4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
     
  3. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    En Garde
     
  4. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,851
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Against what?
     
  5. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Here's the pitch! High fly ball into right field, where's Brian? Well there he is way over there in left out field with the leftoutfielder! What's he doing way over there?
    ;)
     
  6. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,851
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths."

    2 Timothy 4: 3-4, English Standard Version

    Better English, at that.
     
  7. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,851
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It would help if you would at least try to make sense.

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    As usual, a certain party declines
    to cite the reference so the rest of us
    can check (as a Borean) the Holy Scripture.

    II.Timothie IIII:3-4 (KJV1611):

    For the time will come when they
    will not endure sound doctrine, but after
    their owne lusts shall they heape to
    themselves teachers, hauing itching
    eares:
    4. And they shall turne away their
    eares from the trueth, and shall
    be turned vnto fables.


    Nope, it isn't the Real King James Version.
    Must be some [snip] Modern Version (MV) :confused:

    [ February 01, 2004, 11:05 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob Griffin ]
     
  9. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    I believe it is fully permissable to pen inspriation into words comprising scripture. I don't see where you are the ruler over scripture or the mss you adhere to, especially those tainted with several contradictions and none really agreeing.

    How about the facts that the passage in I John 5:7,8 relate the truth? Isn't that why we have a Bible? to know truth?
    </font>[/QUOTE]Scripture is God's Word, not yours mixed in with His.
     
  10. BrianT

    BrianT New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why not put the text of 1 John 5:7 somewhere else instead? Why not say "Jesus is the second person of the Trinity" in John 3:16? Why not say "God is love" in John 1:1? Why not sprinkle a few dozen "Jesus is Lord"s throughout the NT?

    Why not add the "Holy Spirit" to Acts 4:25 in the KJV, like the NIV does? Why not add "through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages" to Jude 1:25? How can you object to adding "The LORD is faithful to all his promises and loving toward all he has made." to Psa 145:13?
     
  11. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    What is the time frame for the esv? Is the verbal phrase "is coming" continuous action and not yet acheived?

    Better English? Hah!

    Again the superiority of the KJB, "will come" denotes a future time from that present time, guess what? That time is most readily detectable from 1870 to present!
     
  12. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Alright,Ed, give me the website you keep copy and pasting from.
     
  13. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Still running around in leftoutfield looking for the ball, Brian? er, the Word of God?

    I got satisfied when Jesus saved my soul, and gave me a Bible! The AV 1611 KJB. (Uh, I caught the ball) :D
     
  14. tinytim

    tinytim <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    QS = "What is the time frame for the esv? Is the verbal phrase "is coming" continuous action and not yet acheived?

    Better English? Hah!

    Again the superiority of the KJB, "will come" denotes a future time from that present time, guess what? That time is most readily detectable from 1870 to present!"

    Will someone explain to QS that the phrase
    "is coming" and the phrase "will come" means the same thing in English. There both future.

    QS are you going to apologize to your cohorts of KJVOnlyism for stating that it is ok to add to the Word of God?
     
  15. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,851
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I have decided that no one can explain anything to him and it is a waste of effort to even attempt it.
     
  16. tinytim

    tinytim <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    maybe that's why God said to admonish some only one time. God knew that some would waste our time with senseless arguments.
     
  17. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    According to my dictionary "is" is 3rd pers. sing. pres. indic. of be.
     
  18. Will J. Kinney

    Joined:
    May 15, 2001
    Messages:
    759
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Baptist
    gb, you really should update your information on 1 John 5:7. A lot of the things you have stated are not true, and many more are entirely misleading.

    You might consider this.

    And These Three Are One

    1 John 5:7 is the clearest verse in the Bible regarding the Holy Trinity, yet it is missing in many modern versions like the NIV, NASB, RSV, NRSV and Jehovah witness versions.

    Those who say this verse is not part of Holy Scripture will often say it is not found in the majority of Greek manuscripts and for this reason it should not be included in the Bible.

    It is true that the words "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth" are not found in the majority of remaining Greek manuscripts. However there is very much and weighty evidence for its inclusion.

    Those who argue that it is not in the majority of texts are being totally inconsistent when they bring up this argument. Most of the people like James White and Daniel B. Wallace who use this majority argument, do not care one bit for the majority of texts and what they might read. They themselves follow the UBS text of Westcott and Hort which itself departs from the majority readings in literally thousands of places.

    It should be noted too that Michael Maynard significantly points out that there are only 5 remaining Greek manuscripts that even contain the epistle of 1 John in whole or in part that date from the 7th century or before. That is a whole lot of time to have past by with only 5 partial Greek witnesses that remain today.

    Sure, there are a few minority readings in the King James Bible, but for every one in the KJB there are at least 20 minority readings found in the NASB, NIV, RSV, and that is no exaggeration.

    Another very common objection to 1 John 5:7 is the allegation that Erasmus said he would include the verse if he found a Greek manuscript that contained it. Then almost made to order, hot off the presses, one appeared.

    Bruce Metzger who was partly responsible for propagating this urban myth at least had the integrity to retract this false accusation in the 3rd edition of his book. Here is the exact quote from Mr. Metzger himself.

    "What is said on p. 101 above about Erasmus' promise to include the Comma Johanneum if one Greek manuscript were found that contained it, and his subsequent suspicion that MS 61 was written expressly to force him to do so, needs to be corrected in the light of the research of H. J. DeJonge, a specialist in Erasmian studies who finds no explicit evidence that supports this frequently made assertion." Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of The New Testament, 3rd Edition, p 291 fn 2.

    What then is the evidence for 1 John 5:7? It is found in several Greek texts; it is quoted by several church fathers and is found in many ancient versions of the Bible.

    The Greek texts include 629 (fourteenth century), 61 (sixteenth century), 918 (sixteenth century), 2473 (seventeenth century), and 2318 (eighteenth century). It is also in the margins of 221 (tenth century), 635 (eleventh century), 88 (twelveth century), 429 (fourteenth century), and 636 (fifteenth century).

    It is also important to note that most of the Greek copies that have existed throughout history are no longer with us today. Several well known Christians mention Greek texts that contained 1 John 5:7 that existed in their days centuries ago. Among these are Theodore Beza, John Calvin and Stephanus. Beza remarks that the reading of 1 John 5:7 is found in many of their manuscripts, Calvin likewise says it is found in "the most approved copies" and Stephanus, who in 1550 printed the Greek text that bears his name, mentioned that of the 16 copies he had 9 of them contained 1 John 5:7. John Gill, who also believed in the inspiration of this verse, likewise mentions in his commentary that nine of Stephanus' sixteen manuscripts contained this verse. There was a time in history when over 50% of the providentially available Greek manuscripts contained the reading found in the King James Bible.

    When Cardinal Ximenes planned to print his Polyglot in 1502 he included 1 John 5:7-8. He stated that he had taken care to secure a number of Greek manuscripts; and he described some of these as very "ancient codices" sent to Spain from Rome. Why haven't the manuscript detectives given us a complete list of these "ancient codices"? They must have contained 1 John 5:7. Ximenes printed the verse.

    A Trail of Evidence

    We find mention of 1 John 5:7, from about 200 AD through the 1500s. Here is a useful timeline of references to this verse:

    200 AD Tertullian quoted the verse in his Apology, Against Praxeas

    250 AD Cyprian of Carthage, wrote, "And again, of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost it is written: "And the three are One" in his On The Lapsed, On the Novatians. Note that Cyprian is quoting and says "it is written, And the three are One." He lived from 180 to 250 A.D. and the scriptures he had at that time contained the verse in question. This is at least 100 years before anything we have today in the Greek copies. If it wasn't part of Holy Scripture, then where did he get it?

    350 AD Priscillian referred to it [Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Academia Litterarum Vindobonensis, vol. xviii, p. 6.]

    350 AD Idacius Clarus referred to it [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina by Migne, vol. 62, col. 359.]

    350 AD Athanasius referred to it in his De Incarnatione

    380 AD Priscillian in Liber Apologeticus quotes "and there are three which give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one in Christ Jesus."

    398 AD Aurelius Augustine used it to defend Trinitarianism in De Trinitate against the heresy of Sabellianism

    415 AD Council of Carthage. The contested verse (1 John 5:7) is quoted at the Council of Carthage (415 A. D.) by Eugenius, who drew up the confession of faith for the "orthodox." It reads with the King James. How did 350 prelates in 415 A.D. take a verse to be orthodox that wasn't in the Bible? It had to exist there from the beginning. It was quoted as "Pater, VERBUM, et Spiritus Sanctus".

    450-530 AD. Several orthodox African writers quoted the verse when defending the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals. These writers are:

         A) Vigilius Tapensis in "Three Witnesses in Heaven"

         B) Victor Vitensis in his Historia persecutionis [Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Academia Litterarum Vindobonensis, vol. vii, p. 60.]

         C) Fulgentius in "The Three Heavenly Witnesses" [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina by Migne, vol. 65, col. 500.]

    500 AD Cassiodorus cited it [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina by Migne, vol. 70, col. 1373.]

    527 AD Fulgentius in Contra Arianos stated: "Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in caelo. Pater, Verbum et Spiritus, et tres unum sunt."

    550 AD The "Speculum" has it [The Speculum is a treatise that contains some good Old Latin scriptures.]

    636 AD Isidor of Seville quotes the verse as it stands in the KJB.

    750 AD Wianburgensis referred to it

    800 AD Jerome's Vulgate has it [It was not in Jerome's original Vulgate, but was brought in about 800 AD from good Old Latin manuscripts.]

    157-1400 AD. Waldensian (that is, Vaudois) Bibles have the verse.

    Now the "Waldensian," or "Vaudois" Bibles stretch from about 157 to the 1400s AD. The fact is, according to John Calvin's successor Theodore Beza, that the Vaudois received the Scriptures from missionaries of Antioch of Syria in the 120s AD and finished translating it into their Latin language by 157 AD. This Bible was passed down from generation, until the Reformation of the 1500s, when the Protestants translated the Vaudois Bible into French, Italian, etc. This Bible carries heavy weight when finding out what God really said. Theodore Beza, John Wesley and Johnathan Edwards believed, as most of the Reformers, that the Vaudois were the descendants of the true Christians, and that they preserved the Christian faith for the Bible-believing Christians today.

    Many critics of this passage like to say that 1 John 5:7 occurs in no ancient language version except the Latin. Well, not only is the passage found in the Latin Vulgate, but it is also in some Old Latin manuscripts, and the Old Latin dates from around 200 A.D. This is 150 years before anything we have in Greek copies. In addition to this, the newest UBS critical text has now admitted that it is found in some Armenian manuscripts.

    The first printed edition of the Armenian Bible was published in 1666 by Bishop Uscan. It contains 1 John 5:7. Also Giles Guthier, using two Syriac manuscripts published an edition at Hamburg in 1664. This edition places the passage in the text. And the first printed Georgian Bible, published at Moscow in 1743 contains 1 John 5:7.

    Dr. Schrivener mentions a "few recent" Slavonic manuscripts as having the passage.(Jack Moorman, "When the KJV departs from the majority text" 2nd. edition.)

    Internal Evidence

    Dr. Thomas Holland, who recently wrote "Crowned with Glory", a very good book which defends the King James Bible, states: "The strongest evidence, however, is found in the Greek text itself. Looking at 1 John 5:8, there are three nouns which, in Greek, stand in the neuter (Spirit, water, and blood). However, they are followed by a participle that is masculine. The Greek phrase here is oi marturountes (who bare witness). Those who know the Greek language understand this to be poor grammar if left to stand on its own. Even more noticeably, verse six has the same participle but stands in the neuter (Gk.: to marturoun). Why are three neuter nouns supported with a masculine participle? The answer is found if we include verse seven. There we have two masculine nouns (Father and Son) followed by a neuter noun (Spirit). The verse also has the Greek masculine participle oi marturountes. With this clause introducing verse eight, it is very proper for the participle in verse eight to be masculine, because of the masculine nouns in verse seven. But if verse seven were not there it would become improper Greek grammar."

    Michael Maynard, M.L.S. in his 382 page book "A History of the Debate over 1 John 5:7-8" quotes from Gregory of Nazianzus (390 AD) who remarks concerning this verse in his Theological Orations: . . . "he has not been consistent in the way he has happened upon his terms; for after using Three in the masculine gender he adds three words which are neuter, contrary to the definitions and laws which you and your grammarians have laid down. For what is the difference between putting a masculine Three first, and then adding One and One and One in the neuter, or after a masculine One and One and One to use the Three not in the masculine but in the neuter, which you yourselves disclaim in the case of Deity?"

    Mr. Maynard concludes: "Thus Gregory of Nazianzus objected to the omission of 1 John 5:7."

    It is clear that Gregory recognized the inconsistency with Greek grammar if all we have are verses six and eight without verse seven.

    Other scholars have recognized the same thing. This was the argument of Robert Dabney of Union Theological Seminary in his book, “The Doctrinal Various Readings of the New Testament Greek” (1891).

    Bishop Middleton in his book, “Doctrine of the Greek Article,” argues that verse seven must be a part of the text according to the Greek structure of the passage.

    Even in the famous commentary by Matthew Henry, there is a note stating that we must have verse seven if we are to have proper Greek in verse eight.

    Dr. Edward F. Hills argues the same grammatical points in defending the legitimacy of 1 John 5:7 in his book "The King James Version Defended" on pages 211-212.

    Dr. Gaussen in his famous book "The Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures" uses the same grammatical argument and concludes: "Remove it, and the grammar becomes incoherent."

    There is another argument based on internal evidence that anyone can clearly see just by reading the Holy Bible in English. This has to do with the spiritual significance of numbers. We all know how significant the number 7 is, representing the spiritual perfections of the Godhead.

    There are many highly significant words or titles that are found either 7 times or in combinations of 7 only in the King James Bible. Words like Son of man (49x4) Son of God (49 or 7x7 in the New Testament), Most High (49), Jesus Christ (196 or 49x4), Word of God (49), My Beloved Son (7 times), It is written (63 or 7x9 in N.T.), Firstborn (7), Kingdom of God (70), Holy Spirit (7 in the KJB), Church (77), Worshippers (7) and only when 1 John 5:7 is included does the title referring to Jesus Christ as the Word occur 7 times.

    It is found in John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

    John 1:14 "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us..."

    1 John 1:1 "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life."

    1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

    Revelation 19:13 "And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God."

    If you are looking to scholars to settle the issue for you, there will never be any certainty at all. Those who criticize the King James Bible as being just another fallible book, riddled with errors, have nothing sure and certain to give you in its place. They set themselves up as the final authority but they constantly differ among themselves. It is like playing "scholar poker". "Well, my scholars can beat your scholars." No, they can't. I'll see your scholars and raise you two more."

    They may say that Dr. So and So went to Dallas Theological Whatever and he doesn't believe 1 John 5:7 should be in the bible. Well, on the other hand, there are many learned men with just as much knowledge who absolutely believe 1 John 5:7 belongs in the Holy Bible.

    Here is just a partial list of those who contended for the authenticity of this verse.

    Cyprian - 250 AD, Priscillian -385 AD, Jerome 420 AD, Fulgentius, Cassiodorus, Isidore of Seville, Jaqub of Edessa, Thomas Aquinas, John Wycliffe, Desiderus Erasmus, Lopez de Zuniga, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, Cipriano de Valera, John Owen, Francis Turretin, John Gill, Matthew Henry, Andrew Fuller, Thomas F. Middleton, Luis Gaussen, Frederick Nolan, Robert L. Dabney, Herman C. Hoskier, George Ricker Berry, Edward F. Hills, David Otis Fuller, Thomas Holland, Michael Maynard and Donald A. Waite.

    "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one" is found in 10 remaining Greek manuscripts, at least 4 Old Latin manuscripts, is quoted or referred to by at least 8 church fathers, is in some ancient versions like the Syriac, Armenian and Slavic versions, in the Waldensian Bibles from 157 AD till the time of the Reformation, is in thousands of Vulgate Latin manuscripts, is in the Spanish Reina Valera used throughout the entire Spanish speaking world today, the Italian Diodati, the Russian, Portuguese, pre and post Lutheran German bibles, and all English versions till 1881.

    It is important to note too that the Greek Orthodox Church's New Testament contains 1 John 5:7 both in the ancient and in the Modern Greek versions.

    Either God has been faithful to preserve His pure words with nothing added or He has failed and the scholars of today who do not believe any Bible on this earth is the perfect word of God are right. You decide.

    Will Kinney
     
  19. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Will: "Either God has been faithful to preserve His
    pure words with nothing added or He has failed and
    the scholars of today who do not believe any Bible on this earth
    is the perfect word of God are right. You decide."

    Ok, I decided; it is a false dicotomy.

    [​IMG]
     
  20. tinytim

    tinytim <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Will, would you agree with QS in saying it is ok to add words to the text if those words improve a doctrine?

    And QS, here is your quote again, just so you wont say I misquoted you.

    "I wouldn't call this example of "adding" words, but only clarity to confirm and establish Doctrine. It is O.K. to confirm and establish the Doctrine of the Trinity isn't it?"

    Will, If a verse is not in the text, and someone puts it in there, wouldn't that be adding?
     
Loading...