MY REVERT & REBUTTAL IS SOMETIMES IN CAPS AND MOSTLY UNDERLINED FOR SEPARATION FROM YOUR CONTENT: (I just noticed now that Quora does not support Underlining)
There are people on
Quora who love to argue. So I just delete their answers or ignore them. However
since you persist - here is some evidence:
GOD REVEALS HIMSELF IN
THE BIBLE:
Most religions portray
God as a lonely old unknown who is lost on cloud 9, and oblivious of the confusion
he has caused down below!
Sir Stephen,
You are making an ACCUSATION that the Almighty is the CAUSE OF THE CONFUSION ON
EARTH BELOW. I am not answering this. Proceeding to explain how false the
Trinity Teaching is.
However we Christians
have a 'God of Love' who is CONTINUOUSLY REVEALING HIMSELF to us. He REACHES
OUT to even the most undeserving and wretched. His CONTROL extents to the
insignificant sparrow (Luke 12:6) and the hairs on our
head (Luke 12:7) - from the vast cosmos to the nano
particle. When Sarah laughed in her heart our God heard it! He first revealed
Himself publicly through the Prophets. He has now become our best friend (John
15:15), who we can call upon and depend on for literally
everything:
OKAY.
‘God the Father’ reaches out to us in the ‘OLD
TESTAMENT’ and has a ‘thunderous voice’ (Exodus 20:18-20, John
12:29). He also made appearances in the 'New Testament' - Matthew
3:17, John 12:28, Matthew 17:5, Matthew 14:27.
‘Jesus’ reveals
Himself in the form of 'man', and comes to us in the ‘GOSPELS’ – His voice is
like ‘many waters’ (Ezekiel 43:2, Revelation 1:15, Revelation 19:6,
2 Esdras 6:17). He also probably appeared in the Old Testament
in Genesis 32:24-28, Genesis 18:1-2, Joshua 5:13, Daniel 3:25 and
appoints Saul as the 'Apostle to the Gentiles' in the Church Age - Acts
9:4-6.
OKAY.
Finally the ‘Holy
Spirit’ generally appears as an ‘Non-Consuming Fire’, and with a voice like a
‘Soft whisper’ (1 Kings 19:12). He is with us in this
final ‘CHURCH AGE’ (Acts 2:1-4). He is likely to have
revealed Himself in the Old Testament in - Exodus 3:2, Exodus 13:21,
1 Kings 19:12, and accompanies the Israelites through the
wilderness into the Promised Land (Exodus 13:21). He is
also in the Gospels in Luke 3:22 (also see Matthew
3:16). He accompanies the Church of Jesus (Matthew 16:16-19;
Acts 2:1-4), and till date reveals God to us (John
14:26).
God has offered to
adopt us as His children (Ephesians 1:5, Romans 8:15, Romans 9:26,
Galatians 3:26) and to prepare a room in His mansion (John
14:2-3) - what more can we ask for???
Revelation 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock:
if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will
sup with him, and he with me.
OKAY
TILL HERE.
THE HOLY TRINITY
REVEALED - SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE:
First
and Foremost. If the Trinity teaching was SO VERY
IMPORTANT, then we would have found the word TRINITY in the Hebrew, Greek and
Aramaic original languages of the Bible. The word TRINITY does not exist or
appear even POST TRANSLATION in any language of the world. Not in English too.
THE 'THREE PERSONS IN
ONE GOD' IS EVIDENT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING AND CONFIRMED THROUGH THE
SCRIPTURES:
THREE
PERSONS IN ONE GOD. This so CLEAR statement of the
Trinity, is NOT at all found anywhere in the Holy Scriptures from Genesis till
Revelation.
SOURCE OF BELOW INFORMATION IS FROM CATHOLIC CHURCH
WEBSITE: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm
THE
ABOVE RESOURCE IS THE OFFICIAL AND AUTHORIZED CATHOLIC ENCLYCOPEDIA OF THE
ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.
CAPS ARE INTRODUCED BY ME FOR EMPHASIS AND
ATTENTION. OK. Let’s Proceed.
The
dogma of the Trinity
The Trinity is the
term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion — the truth that in the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from
another.
THUS, IN THE WORDS OF THE ATHANASIAN CREED: "the Father
is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." In this Trinity of Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds by an eternal procession from the Father and
the Son. Yet, notwithstanding this difference
as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all
alike are uncreated and omnipotent. This, the Church teaches, is the revelation regarding God's nature which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came upon earth to deliver to the
world: and which she proposes to man as the foundation of her whole dogmatic system.
DENZIL’S
NOTE: THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA WEBSITE SINCERELY
AND HONESTLY ADMITS THAT TRINITY TEACHING IS AN ATHANASIAN CREED. THEY DID NOT SAY IT WAS BIBLICAL DOCTRINE. THANKS
TO THAT.
What
is Athanasian Creed?
Athanasian Creed
Whosoever
will be saved , before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic
Faith. Which Faith
except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity,
neither
confounding
the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father,
another of
the
Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son,
and of the Holy
Ghost,
is all one, the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is,
such is the Son, and
such is the Holy Ghost.
The
Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father
incomprehensible, the
Son
incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the
Son eternal, and
the Holy Ghost eternal.
And
yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal. As also there are not three
incomprehensibles, nor
three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible.
So
likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty.
And yet they are
not three Almighties, but one Almighty.
So
the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are
not three Gods, but
one
God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And
yet not three
Lords, but one Lord.
For
like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by
himself to be both
God
and Lord, So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, There be three
Gods, or three
Lords.
The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the
Father alone, not
made,
nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son,
neither made, nor
created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
So
there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy
Ghost, not three Holy
Ghosts.
And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other; none is greater, or less
than another; But the
whole
three Persons are co-eternal together and co-equal. So that in all things, as
is aforesaid, the Unity
in
Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be
saved is must think
thus of the Trinity.
Furthermore,
it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the
Incarnation of our
Lord
Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our
Lord Jesus Christ, the
Son
of God, is God and Man; God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before
the worlds; and Man
of
the substance of his Mother, born in the world; Perfect God and perfect Man, of
a reasonable soul
and human flesh subsisting.
Equal
to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father, as touching
his manhood;
Who,
although he be God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ; One, not by
conversion of the
Godhead
into flesh but by taking of the Manhood into God; One altogether; not by
confusion of
Substance,
but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God
and Man is
one
Christ; Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the
third day from the dead.
He
ascended into heaven, he sitteth at the right hand of the Father, God Almighty,
from whence he will
come
to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with
their bodies and
shall
give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into
life everlasting; and
they
that have done evil into everlasting fire.
This is the
Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.
The Athanasian Creed, also
called the Pseudo-Athanasian Creed and sometimes known
as Quicunque Vult (or Quicumque Vult)
which is both its Latin name and opening words meaning
"Whosoever wishes", is a Christian statement of belief focused on Trinitarian doctrine and Christology. The creed has been used by Christian
churches since the sixth century. It is the first creed in which the equality
of the three persons of the Trinity is explicitly stated.
ATHANASIAN CREED = WHOSOEVER WISHES
WOW: Instead of seeing and understanding
and following the WISHES OF FATHER YAHWEH AND SON YESHUA, the Catholic Church
Trinity Teaching is based on WHOSOEVER WISHES. WOW AGAIN.
The creed has been used by Christian churches since the sixth century.
600 YEARS AFTER CHRIST RETURNING BACK TO
HEAVEN, THIS TRINITY TEACHING STARTED GAINING FOOTHOLD IN SO CALLED CHRISTIAN
CHURCHES.
ATHANASIAN CREED, NOT BIBLE SCRIPTURE CONTINUED BELOW
In Scripture there is as yet no single term by
which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The
word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a
translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about
A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom (To Autolycus II.15). The term may, of course, have been
in use before his time.
THANKS
TO ATHANASIAN CREED FOR BEING HONEST AND SINCERE AGAIN:
1. In Scripture there is as yet no single term by
which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together.
2. The word trias (of
which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found
in Theophilus of
Antioch about A.D. 180.
3. The term MAY, of course, have been in use
before his time.
ATHANASIAN CREED, NOT BIBLE SCRIPTURE CONTINUED BELOW
Afterwards it appears
in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian (On Pudicity 21). In the next century the word is in
general use. It is found in many passages of Origen ("In Ps. xvii", 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of Origen's pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes pisteos composed
between 260 and 270, he writes:
There is therefore
nothing created, nothing subject to
another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it
once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has
never been without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable
and unalterable forever (P.G., X, 986).
PLEASE NOTE AND CATCH THE POINT:
The Athanasian Creed admits, that the word,
“Trinity” comes into GENERAL USE another Century or another 100 years after
Theophilus of Antioch of 180 A.D.
In the next century the word is in general use.
It is manifest that
a dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine revelation. When the fact of revelation, understood in its full sense as the
speech of God to man, is no longer admitted, the rejection of the doctrine follows as a necessary consequence. For this reason it
has no place in the Liberal Protestantism of today. The writers of this
school contend that the doctrine of the Trinity, as professed by
the Church, is not contained in
the New Testament, but that it was
first formulated in the second century and received final approbation in the
fourth, as the result of the Arian and Macedonian controversies. In view of this
assertion it is necessary to consider in some detail the
evidence afforded by Holy Scripture. Attempts have been
made recently to apply the more extreme theories of comparative religion to the doctrine of the Trinity, and to account
for it by an imaginary law of nature compelling men to group the objects of their worship in threes. It
seems needless to give more than a reference to these extravagant views, which
serious thinkers of every school reject as destitute of foundation.
SEE WHAT THE ATHANASIAN CREED SAYS ON THE ORIGINS OF
THE TRINITY TEACHING. YOU DO NOT EVEN NEED GOD’S BIBLE. THE TRINITY TEACHING
WHICH IS PART OF THE ATHANASIAN CREED TELLS THE FACTS OF TRINITY:
The writers of this
school contend that the doctrine of the Trinity, as professed by the Church, is not contained in the New Testament, but that it was first formulated in the second century
and received final approbation in the fourth, as the result of the Arian and Macedonian controversies.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word (JESUS -
INFINITE, ADEQUATE, COMPLETE AND PERFECT WORD), and the Word was with God (GOD
THE FATHER), and the Word was God (JESUS = GOD). 2 The same
was in the beginning with God (JESUS WAS WITH GOD THE FATHER FROM THE VERY
BEGINNING). 3 All things were made by Him (JESUS), and without
Him was not anything made that was made. 14 And the Word was
made flesh (JESUS INCARNATE), and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the
glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. TO BE READ WITH - Genesis 1:1 In
the beginning God (GOD THE FATHER) created the heaven and the earth. 2 And
the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the
deep. And the Spirit of God (HOLY SPIRIT) moved upon the face of the waters.
ABOUT JOHN 1:1
Trinity Proof
Text. John and the Beginning. (John 1:1)
JOHN 1:1
VERY IMPORTANT
NOTE:
The 66 little books of the Bible have been directly
inspired and authored by Almighty God Yahweh. No argument on this. But please
be aware, that the actual autographa (original writings of these all 66 little
books called the Bible) do NOT exist today. Not even 1 Original book of the
Bible has been found by Archaeologist’s till date today.
All the original hand written and God inspired 66
books of the Bible have totally disappeared from the face of the earth. Why? No
one knows. Let’s say only God knows. But he has not disclosed this facet of the
truth. The Bible does not answer this question directly, Neighter does it throw
any light on its disappearance. So always remember when any Confusion or
Complication or Contradiction appears in God’s holy and sacred words, most of
the times it gets clear on comparing the earliest copies of the Holy Writ in
Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek languages.
Inadvertently or Ignorantly or even due to human
Imperfections and many times due to direct Intervention, humans have either
added or removed something or some word or some flavor or have added some
emphasis to God’s Holy Word in the many translations and versions of the Holy
Bible.
Even Almighty God Yahweh (YHWH) knew this was bound
to happen in the distant future hence the warning and curse at Revelation
22:18, 19. - New Living Translation “And if anyone removes any of the words
from this book of prophecy, God will remove that person's share in the tree of
life and in the holy city that are described in this book.”
MANY MODERN CHURCHES ARE USING SOME OLD OR NEW
VERSION OR TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. THESE ARE ALL NOT 100% FREE FROM
BIAS, HUMAN ERROR, TYPOGRAPHICAL, GRAMMATICAL & TRANSLATION MISTAKES. THIS
IS THE CAUSE OF CREATING DOCTRINES BASED ON TRANSLATIONS AND NOT ON THE
ORIGINAL EXISTING COPIES OF THE HOLY BIBLE THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE TO US IN HEBREW,
GREEK AND ARAMAIC.FOR CENTURIES WE WERE FORCED TO ACCEPT THE SO CALLED SCHOLARS
AND BIBLE LANGUAGE TRANSLATORS, AS WE WERE AT THEIR MERCY. WE HAD TO TRUST THEM.
᾿ΕνIn ἀρχῇbeginning ἦνwas ὁthe Word, καὶand ὁthe
λόγοςWord ἦνwas πρὸςtoward τὸνthe God, καὶand θεὸςgod ἦνwas ὁthe λόγος.Word.
In the Beginning there was WORD (JESUS) and the
WORD was WITH GOD (with the Father) and the WORD was GOD...- John 1:1
New International Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God.
There were no complete Bibles in the English
language before the 14th century. John Wycliffe (c. 1320-1384) was mainly
responsible for the first such English Bible.
Now PLEASE NOTE,
the above scripture quoted at John 1:1 is NOT the exact and actual GOD BREATHED
or GOD INSPIRED word and thought as was communicated by the Original Inspired
writer in Greek Language.
Now in 2021,
thanks to an Information Explosion and Prophet Daniel’s prophetic words coming
true;
New Living
Translation
But you, Daniel, keep this prophecy a secret; seal
up the book until the time of the end, when many will rush here and there, and
knowledge will increase." Daniel 12:4
The primary application of "knowledge
increased" is in reference to people understanding the prophecies of the
book of Daniel, however, many Bible scholars believe that this prophecy also
applies to an increasing knowledge of science, medicine, travel, and
technology. We are living in "The Information Age" making this sign
seem even more obvious. Even the most skeptical mind must admit that knowledge
is exploding in all directions. It is said that 80% percent of the world's
total knowledge has been brought forth in the last decade and that 90% percent
of all the scientists who have ever lived are alive today.
Today thanks to the Internet, the Information
Highway one can have access to unlimited books, Online libraries, literature
and even to Interlinear Translations of the Greek New Testament with a word to
word translation in English for us to; TO CHECK AND MAKE SURE if the English
Translators of any Versions have been really accurate and faithful to the WORD
TO WORD rendering of God’s Holy words and thoughts.
Nouns are words that describe people, places, or
things. Here are some English nouns: book, person, chewing-gum, country,
county, city, road, field, justice, peace, language, concept, man, woman, god,
programmer, linguist. In the first lesson, we learned a few Greek nouns:
Articles are
those little words in front of the noun.
In English, there are two articles: "the" is the definite article,
and "a" is the indefinite article. Greek has only one article - since
there are 24 forms for it, they couldn't afford a second one. The Greek article
is definite, and it is often translated "the", but it functions very
differently from the English "the".
PLEASE NOTE:
·
Original Greek text lacks the article (in English, ‘the’) before the
Greek word for ‘god’ (which is ‘theos’).
·
Hence in some modern translations, at Luke 20:6 is translated as, ‘John
was a prophet.’ That is because the Greek text lacks the article.”
There is no single translation that will clear up
the confusion. Because all of the Translations and Versions in English language
and all other languages to have, “Human Introduced Flaws” while translating
from the “Original Copies of God’s Word”.
One of the best all-around translations I have by
personal taste found is the New American, but for specific Greek texts Wilson's
Diaglott is helpful. I also like the Concordant Literal version.
JOHN 1:1
Some translations say " ... and the Word was
God.” But, the word for word in the original Greek does not say it exactly as
it was translated in the those versions.
Take a look at
the Diaglott version for instance:
John 1:1
"In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was
the Word.
1:2 This was in a beginning with the God."
Also look at John 1:18 and compare the New America
with the King James:
NAS John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the
only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
KJV John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the
only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
What do you
conclude? If God (Theos, the Almighty Father) always
existed, how can He be begotten? Is the word "God" or
"god"(mighty one - can refer to Jesus)?
Look at Acts
28:6
"Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down
dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to
him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god."
Why is the same
word from John 1:1 translated here as "a god”?
As many Bible
students are aware, the words "a" and
"an" (called indefinite articles) do not exist in the Greek language.
If one wished to say "I saw a tree," in Greek it would be "I saw
tree" and everyone would know the intent is "a" tree. Therefore
a translator would automatically supply it. This is done everywhere in the New
Testament where the English word "a" or "an" appears.
So in John 1:1.
The text actually says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with the God, and the Word was [a?] God." Should the translator supply the
intended "a" or not?
That is the
question. Contrary to many vocal claims on this issue, it
is a sound and reasonable thing to do. C. H. Dodd, driving force of the NEB,
acknowledges "As a word-for-word translation it cannot be faulted."
(Technical Papers for the Bible
Translator, 28, Jan. 1977, page).
Notice that the translators of the King James
Version had no hesitation in using "a god" in Acts 28:6 where the
context makes it obvious. (It also belongs in John 10:33, as the logic of
Jesus' reply shows.)
A very good reason for adding "a" in John
1:1 is John 1:18, but the point is hidden in the King James Version. Today it
is generally acknowledged that the better, earlier Greek manuscripts of this
verse refer to Jesus as "the only begotten god" (see the NASB for
example).
John there says no one has ever seen
"God," but "the only begotten god, which is in the bosom of the
Father," has appeared to declare what God is about. First it is clear that
by "God" John means "the Father." Second it is clear that
John has two gods in mind -- God himself, the unseen, and the son of God,
Jesus, who in his own right is also a mighty being, "a god." Since
John 1:18 distinguishes two mighty beings, it is apparent that John 1:1 also
distinguishes two mighty beings.
REMEMBER IN THE
BEGINNING I MENTIONED THAT THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE ORIGINAL BIBLE
LANGUAGES WAS TRANSLATED ONLY IN 14TH CENTURY
WHAT IF RECENT ARCHEOLOGICAL DISCOVERIES HAVE FOUND
THE EARLIEST COPIES OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT?
What are the
sahidic Coptic language translations of New Testament writings?
The Sahidic Coptic editions of the Greek New
Testament were some of the earliest translations of the Greek of the New
Testament. Coptic is not a widely known language these days—even among scholars
of the New Testament. The Sahidic Coptic New Testament in English helps bridge
the gap by providing a convenient English translation of the Coptic New
Testament.
Sahidic was the leading dialect of pre-Islamic
Coptic, and is the dialect in which most known Coptic texts are written. The
first written instances of the dialect occurred around 300 A.D., including
translations of Biblical texts.
No one doubts the Sahidic Coptic version is among
the most important of the early translations of the original Greek New Testament.
Most scholars place the Sahidic Coptic translation no later than the fourth
century and as early as the second (the same century of our earliest existing
Greek manuscript of the New Testament: P52).
As such, the Sahidic Coptic manuscripts comprise a rich
deposit of empirical evidence. They tell us what the early Greek texts might
have looked like. They tell us how the Copts understood the text at the time of
translation. In fact, the Sahidic Coptic translation was primarily intended to
proclaim the gospel throughout Egypt where the Copts lived. This, then, was the
text some of the earliest Christian missionaries used to first share the gospel
in Egypt.
Fortunately, knowledge of this Sahidic Coptic
evidence is not new. Unfortunately, popular-level access to legitimate New
Testament scholarship on it is new. In fact, 2011 marks the first year a major
academic publisher—Oxford University Press—published a work devoted solely to
the Sahidic Coptic version’s varying uses of the Coptic word for “god.”
What about our
controversial text, John 1:1c? So far, the
best way to understand the Copts’ use of the indefinite article is that they
were making an interpretive, qualitative distinction. This distinction was to
describe the qualities of whatever god/entity was being referenced by the
speaker, author, or both. Thus, the Maltese population in Acts 28:6 were saying
Paul possessed the qualities of “a god.” This fits well with how the Copts were
probably understanding the text: descriptively. The population was not calling
Paul a false god or a lesser divine god. Instead, the population was describing
him as one characterized as having the qualities of “god” as they understood
the gods.
Likewise, the
best understanding of 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is that the author is referring to
the qualities of the Christian God, even though the “man of lawlessness” is not
the Christian God. As one scholar put it, “It is
therefore preferable to understand the characterization as of someone who is so
self-aggrandizing that he vaunts himself against all gods whatsoever, perceived
or real.”3 Again, this complements how the Copts probably understood the text:
descriptively. The “man of lawlessness” will not exult himself as a false god
or a lesser divine god, but as one claiming the qualities of “god” (in this
case, the Christian God).
The same
category easily applies to John 1:1c. This
qualitative/descriptive understanding makes the best sense within the opening
of John’s Gospel. The Copts understood John to mean “the Word” possesses the
same qualities as the Christian God.
It is interesting to note that the Coptic language
was spoken in Egypt in the centuries immediately following Jesus' earthly
ministry, and the Sahidic dialect was an early literary form of the language. A
significant fact concerning the Coptic language is that, unlike the Greek, it
used an indefinite article ("a" or "an" in English).
The Sahidic Coptic translation DOES USE an
indefinite article with the word 'god' in the final part of John 1:1 and when
rendered into modern English, the translation reads: 'And
the Word was a god.'
KATA IѠϨANNHС
The Coptic Gospel of John 1:1-14
Digitalized and Translated by Lance Jenott (2003)
According to the Coptic text in G. Horner, The
Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect, vol. III (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1911-1924) pp.2-4.
1:1 ϨΝ
ΤЄϨΟΥЄΙΤЄ ΝЄϤϢΟΟΠ ΝϬΙΠϢΑϪЄ, ΑΥѠ ΠϢΑϪЄ
ΝЄϤϢΟΟΠ ΝΝΑϨΡΜ ΠΝΟΥΤЄ. ΑΥѠ ΝЄΥΝΟΥΤЄ ΠЄ ΠϢΑϪЄ
In the beginning existed the Word, and the Word
existed with God, and the Word was a God.
NOW LET US DO A
SIMPLE EXERCISE
Here below is
copy pasted the John 1:1 from the Greek Language. The English words of John 1:1
is translated from these Greek words:
᾿Εν ἀρχῇ
ἦν ὁ λόγος,
καὶ ὁ λόγος
ἦν πρὸς τὸν
θεόν, καὶ θεὸς
ἦν ὁ
1. Open your Google Search
Engine.
2. Type Greek to English
Language Translation
3. In the Greek Box, carefully
copy paste the above 16 Original Greek words of John 1:1
4. Remember there has to be
SPACE between each of the above 16 words.
5. See for yourself, WITH
WIDE OPEN EYES, what Google Translator which is a POWERFUL TRANSLATION TOOL (a
machine), Not a human who can cheat. See how it translates John 1:1 from Greek
to English.
Copy pasted
here, the result of Google Translation of John 1:1 from Greek to English:
This Google
Greek to English Translation was done today at 10:20 AM, Friday the 09th
July 2021:
Greek Text as it
is at John 1:1
᾿Εν ἀρχῇ ἦν
ὁ λόγος, καὶ
ὁ λόγος ἦν
πρὸς τὸν θεόν,
καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ
Greek Transliteration
in English
᾿En archí ín
o lógos, kaí
o lógos ín
prós tón theón,
kaí theós ín o
Greek
Translation in English
In the beginning
the word, and the word to the god, and the divine
Many accurate
Bible translations that render the ending of John 1:1 are shown below:
1808:
“and the word was a god.” The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the
Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.
1864:
“and a god was the word.” The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by
Benjamin Wilson.
1928:
“and the Word was a divine being.” La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon
Jean, by Maurice Goguel.
1935:
“and the Word was divine.” The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith
and E. J. Goodspeed.
1946:
“and of a divine kind was the Word.” Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme.
1958:
“and the Word was a God.” The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.
1975:
“and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes,
by Siegfried Schulz.
1978:
“and godlike kind was the Logos.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes
Schneider.
BACK TO YOUR
WORDS BELOW:
Genesis 1:26 And God said,
Let US make man in our image, after our likeness, (TRINITY IS DISCUSSING MAN'S
CREATION –
EISEGESIS: Eisegesis, which is
the interpretation of a passage based on a subjective, non-analytical reading.
The word Eisegesis literally means “to lead into,” which means the interpreter
injects his own ideas into the text or scripture or word of Elohim, making it
mean whatever he or she wants the outcome of the answer to be.
EXEGESIS: The opposite
approach to Scripture is Exegesis which is the exposition or explanation of a
text based on a careful, objective analysis. The word exegesis literally means
“to lead out of.” That means that the interpreter is led to his conclusions by
following the text or scripture of Elohim’s word. This is also called in Latin
as, SOLA SCRIPTURA meaning, Let SCRIPTURE INTERPRET SCRIPTURE.
Sir Stephen, By Self Assumption and
Pre Conceived Ideas that God is 3 in 1, you are committing EISEGESIS which is
“TO LEAD INTO”. You are LEADING from OUTSIDE THE HOLY SCRIPTURE INTO IT by
saying that US of Genesis 1:26 is 3. How did you come to know that it is 3 Only
and not 2 or MORE?
Thereafter perhaps the
'FATHER' provided a ‘MIND’, the 'HOLY SPIRIT' our ‘BODY’ – both of which are
very limited, and get exhausted quickly. Perhaps 'JESUS' gave us our ‘HEART’,
which grows stronger with use. Our heart is thus our link to the 'Holy Trinity'
which may the reason why Jesus was incarnate).
"Let Us Make Man in Our Image"
(Gen. 1:26)
Before
we discuss the above-quoted use of plural pronouns by Yahweh at Gen. 1:26, we
must fully understand the use of the word "through" (dia in
NT Greek) and Yeshua' role in the creation of man.
The
Bible tells us that Yeshua was the very first creation by Yahweh God (Yahweh
became the Father at that point). Being the first (and
only direct) creation by Yahweh makes Yeshua "the firstborn of
all creation" (Col. 1:15), and the beginning of the
creation of God" (Rev. 3:14), and "the only-begotten Son"
of God (1 John 4:9).
Furthermore,
Yahweh made all the rest of creation through Yeshua, his
firstborn Son who is the Master Worker. The proper understanding of the NT
Greek word dia ("through") clearly tells the
whole story.
To illustrate: Suppose the one
all-powerful ruler of the land decided to build a nice little palace out in the
wilderness. He sends for his servant, the Master Worker, and commands him to
build that palace. The King provides whatever materials are necessary for the
Master Worker and tells him in great detail exactly how he wants it built.
The
Master Worker sends for the chief stone mason, the chief carpenter, the chief
artist, etc., tells them what their assignments are, and oversees their work.
It
is clear that the king built the palace through his servant
the Master Worker. It was at the command (and because of the will) of the King
that the palace was created through the Master Worker (also through the stone
mason, through the carpenter, etc.). This does not mean the King and his
servant both together, somehow, make up a mysterious two-in-one King!
The
fact that both the King and his servant, the Master Worker,
built the palace can be clearly explained by the word "through."
The King built the palace through his servant, the Master
Worker. There is no mystery here. The King can properly say, "I built
that palace;" the Master Worker can properly say, "I built
that palace;" and even the stone mason can properly say, "I built
that palace." The word "through" can clear up any possible
confusion there might be from these apparently conflicting statements.
Certainly
the carpenter, stone mason, and even the Master Worker would not, in any way,
intend to hint that they were equally the King! That honor can go only to the
one person whose command and will caused the
palace to be built. Certainly the faithful Master Worker would say, "not
by my will but by your will, O King." -
Luke 22:42, John 4:34.
We
can see that, in the ultimate sense of "source" or
"originator," there is only one person whose
will, command, design, and supply of building materials allow him to be called
"the only one who created the palace." - See the Beginning -
Wisdom - Firstborn study.
Notice
how "through" solves any possible confusion in the following
Scriptures. Even though the Law was spoken of as "the Law of Yahweh"
- 1 Chron. 16:40, and "the law of the God of heaven" - Ezra 7:12, and
we are specifically told "there is only one Lawgiver
..." - James 4:12, NASB, we still see another person
"giving the law"! Is that person, then, also equally God?
Yes,
the inspired scriptures also tell us, "Did not Moses give
you the law?" - John 7:19 NASB. And the same "Law
of Yahweh" is also called "the Law of Moses"
- Malachi 4:4. Must we conclude then, Trinitarian-style, that Moses is Yahweh
the God of heaven? Of course not!
Even
if we were unable to figure it out on our own, Scriptures such as John 1:17
("The law was given [from God] through [dia] Moses")
clearly explain it.
The
Greek word dia is a "primary preposition denoting
the channel of an act; through"[see note
at end] - Strong's Exhaustive Concordance,
#1223. There should be no confusion when Paul says:
"I
will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has
accomplished through [dia] me in leading the
Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done" - Ro. 15:18 NIV.
Certainly
no one is so dense as to say: "This Scripture shows that Christ has
caused the Gentiles to obey God. And Paul, by his words and deeds,
has caused those same Gentiles to obey God. Therefore, Paul IS Christ!"
Even if we were gullible enough to fall for this type of dishonest argument,
surely we would understand what was intended here by Paul simply by his use of
the word dia ("through")!
Because
of the many changes in the English language in the last 400 years, the English
rendering for dia in the King James Version is
frequently misleading in modern English. What was translated "of" in
the Elizabethan English of the KJV may mean "by" in
modern English. And what was translated "by" in the KJV may
mean "through" today. (Of course "by" sometimes includes
the meaning of "through.")
For
example, the meaning intended by the KJV translators is shown
in modern translations of Matt. 1:22 as "spoken by the
Lord through the prophet." - NASB. However,
in the English of 1611, that very same meaning was expressed by these words:
"spoken of the Lord by the
prophet." - KJV. This has a very different meaning in today's
English. It sounds to us today as if the KJV were saying that
something was spoken about the Lord by the
prophet. This is not what was intended in the language of 1611. - see any
modern translation.
Keeping
in mind, then, the clear distinction shown by the word dia ("through"
in modern English) and the example of the king whose will and
spoken command caused the palace to be created, carefully
analyze the following scriptures:
Ps.
33:6, 8, 9 - "By the word of Yahweh were the heavens
made" "For he spake, and it was done; He commanded,
and it stood fast." - ASV. Also see Ps. 103:20, 21.
Ps.
148:5 - "Let them praise the name of Yahweh; for he commanded,
and they were created." - ASV.
Rev.
4:11 - "because of thy will [the will of the Lord God
Almighty who is seated on the throne when Yeshua, the Lamb, approaches him
(5:6, 7)] they were, and were created." - ASV.
Malachi
2:10 - "Have we not all one Father? Hath not one God created
us?"
Acts
4:27 - "Thy holy servant Yeshua" - Yeshua is the
Father's servant.
Rev.
3:14 - "[Yeshua] the beginning of the creation of
God." - ASV.
Prov. 8:22-30 - "Yahweh
[Yahweh] created me when his purpose first unfolded, before
the oldest of his works." And, "I was by his side, a Master Craftsman
['Master Workman' - ASV], delighting him day
after day." - Jerusalem Bible (JB).
This scripture (Ps. 8:22-30) has been understood to represent
"Wisdom" as the pre-existent Yeshua Christ by the majority of
Christians since (at least) the time of the Apostle Paul. - See the Beginning -
Wisdom - Firstborn study.
Col. 1:15, 16 - "He is
the image of the unseen God ['no man has ever seen God' - John
1:18] and the first-born of all creation ... all things were
created through [dia] him and for him."
- JB.
1 Cor. 8:6 - "yet for
us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist,
and one Lord, Yeshua Christ, through [dia] whom
are all things and through whom we exist." - RSV
Even
the Trinitarian The New International Dictionary of New Testament
Theology, 1986, Zondervan, (which attempts to show that "Sometimes
... dia seems to express ... the sole cause"
and "may be emphasizing the agency, rather than the
mediator") has to admit: "On the other hand, in 1 Cor. 8:6 the
function of God the Father as the source of
creation is distinguished from Christ's role as mediator of
creation." - p. 1182, Vol. 3.
John 1:3, 10 - "through [dia] him
[the Word] all things came to be ..." and "He was in the world that
had its being through [dia] him." - JB.
We
see, then, that just as all things must go up to God
(the head of Yeshua - 1 Cor. 11:3) through Yeshua
(man's head - 1 Cor. 11:3), so too all things have come down from God through Yeshua.
So how does Gen. 1:26 ("Let us make man
in our image") provide any real evidence for a
three-in-one God? (Does Is. 1:18 prove Jews are God?)
Isn't it obvious
at Gen. 1:26 that Yahweh was speaking to his Master Worker, the first-born of
all creation (and, possibly, to the rest of the angels also), who were also
made in God's image, before commanding him to make man? It is still
Yahweh God alone who created man through his Master Workman, Yeshua!
ALSO SEE Genesis 11:7 Come, let US go down and there confuse their
language,... - where the Holy Trinity discusses the 'Tower of Babel'.
AGAIN AND AGAIN
REPEATEDLY YOU ARE INTRODUCING THE WORD TRINITY FROM OUTSIDE THE BIBLE,
CORRUPTING THE HOLY AND SACRED WORD OF YAHWEH.
In all of his Infinite Wisdom Almighty Creator and Father Yahweh did not use or
introduce word TRINITY at all. But you and your Catholic Church through the
Athanasian Creed, push the word Trinity at Genesis 11:7 too.
·
Yeshua (Jesus) was always REPRESENTING as an Angel of the
LORD Yahweh, starting from after Adam’s Sin till when Revelation 21 is
fulfilled and the same situation of Garden of Eden will be re-created with God
Yahweh TABERNACLE (Tenting or Living) with Holy and Pure Humankind all over
again.
·
During the crossing of the Red Sea, who was that Cloud
and Fire? Why was the crossing of the Red Sea LIKENED to as Water Baptism?
1
Corinthians 10:1
Moreover,
brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were
under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
1
Corinthians 10:2
And
were all BAPTIZED unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
1
Corinthians 10:3
And
did all eat the same spiritual meat;
1
Corinthians 10:4
And
did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock
that followed them: and that ROCK WAS MESSIAH. (Jesus Christ)
BACK TO YOUR WORDS SIR STEPHEN:
Matthew 3:16 As soon as Jesus
was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened,
and he saw the Spirit of God (HOLY SPIRIT) descending like a dove and alighting
on him. 17 And a voice
from heaven (GOD THE FATHER) said, “This is my Son (GOD THE FATHER ADMITTING HE
IS THE GODHEAD AND JESUS IS HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON), whom I love; with him
(JESUS) I (GOD THE FATHER) am well pleased.”
OH
MY GOODNESS. MAY YAHWEH FORGIVE YOU FOR YOU SURELY DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE
DONE ABOVE:
Revelation 22:18
For
I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book,
If any man shall add unto these things, Elohim shall add unto him the plagues
that are written in this book:
Revelation 22:19
And
if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, Elohim
shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and
from the things which are written in this book.
Matthew 3:16
And
Yahshua, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo,
the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of Yahweh descending like
a dove, and
lighting upon him:
Did the Holy Spirit Descend LIKE a Dove or
AS a Dove? (Luke 3:22; Mt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; John 1:32-34)
So at the time of Jesus’ baptism a materialized bird, a dove, did indeed descend
from the sky and rest upon Jesus. That something material was observed is
apparent from the words of John the Baptist as recorded at John 1:32-34. “I
viewed the spirit coming down as a dove out of heaven, and it remained
upon him. Even I did not know him, but the very One who sent me to baptize
in water said to me, ‘Whoever it is upon whom you see the spirit coming down
and remaining, this is the one that baptizes in holy spirit.’ And I have seen
it, and I have borne witness that this one is the Son of God.”
The purpose of this materialized dove coming down was to convince John the
Baptist that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by means of
his sense of sight. It therefore had to be just as real to his eyes as were the
words, “This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved,” to his sense of
hearing, to his ears. (Matt. 3:17)
This representation of the Holy Spirit as a dove calls to mind the
manifestation of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, as recorded at Acts 2:1-4. At
that time it took the form of “tongues as if of fire” that became visible and
rested upon each one of the 120 present in that upper room in Jerusalem. Of
course, these were not burning flames, but “tongues as if of
fire,” otherwise they would have burned the ones upon whom they rested. Yet
they were something that was truly observable; just as were the flames that
Moses saw at the thornbush at the time Jehovah God called and commissioned him
to deliver his people from bondage. (Ex. 3:2)
What the Manifestations of the Holy Spirit Tell Us
The manifestations of the Holy Spirit are important in that they reveal
the nature of the Holy Spirit. Notice that only once is the Holy Spirit
manifested in the Bible as a living creature: a "dove" not a person.
It is especially significant that the Holy Spirit is never shown in the form of
a person since it is often described as a thing (e.g., being poured out or given out
in portions; Numbers 11:17; Acts 2:17, 18, 33). (See: The Holy Spirit is an "it" that
can be distributed into portions; Search
For Bible Truths)
The way that the Bible uses the term "holy spirit" indicates that it
is God's active force that He uses to accomplish a variety of His purposes.
(Genesis 1:2; 2 Corinthians 4:7; Acts 2:1-4)
Many historians and Bible scholars (most of them Trinitarians) freely admit
this. For example: "On the whole, the New Testament, like the Old, speaks
of the Spirit as a divine energy or power." - A
Catholic Dictionary.
And An
Encyclopedia of Religion agrees:
"In the New
Testament there is no direct suggestion of the Trinity. The Spirit is conceived
as an IMPERSONAL POWER by which God effects his will through Christ." - p.
344, Virgilius Ferm, 1945 ed.
BACK TO YOUR WORDS SIR STEPHEN:
And a voice from
heaven (GOD THE FATHER) said, “This is my Son (GOD THE FATHER ADMITTING HE IS
THE GODHEAD AND JESUS IS HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON), whom I love; with him (JESUS)
I (GOD THE FATHER) am well pleased.”
ADMITTING HE IS THE GODHEAD.
Sir Stephen, Please do not play with
God’s word. NOW AGAIN JUST LIKE TRINITY WORD, NOW YOU ARE INTRODUCING ANOTHER
EXTERNAL AND NON BIBLICAL WORD CALLED GODHEAD. The Father Yahweh did not use
the word GODHEAD at Matthew 3:16.
Luke 9:35 A voice came
(FATHER) from the cloud (HOLY SPIRIT), saying, “This is my Son (JESUS), whom I
have chosen; listen to him.”
NOTE - For Cloud as
symbolic of The Holy Spirit also see Exodus 40:34; 1 Kings 8:10.
SIR STEPHEN ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE, THE HOLY SPIRIT OF YAHWEH DOES NOT HAVE AN
IDENTIFYING SEPARATE NAME LIKE THE FATHER YAHWEH OR THE SON YESHUA.
BUT ACCORDING TO THE TRINITY TEACHING, ALL THE THREE IDENTITIES THAT IS FATHER IS
ALMIGHTY GOD, SON IS ALMITGHTY GOD AND HOLY SPIRIT IS ALMIGHTY GOD. TRINITY
TEACHES THAT ALL THREE ARE PERSONS AND GODS AND CO-EQUAL IN EVERYTHING AT ALL
TIMES.
FALSE PAGAN, EXTERNAL CREED TEACHING. NOT FOUND IN THE BIBLE. According to the Trinity teaching, with Trinity members all being co-equal, then even the Holy Spirit should have had a name. THE HOLY SPIRIT DOES NOT HAVE A NAME.
JESUS SPOKE OF THE HOLY TRINITY:
SO
SAYETH OR INTERPRETH SIR STEPHEN
Matthew 28:19 Therefore
go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father
and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.
And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
SEE FOR
YOURSELF. What is the name of the Holy Spirit? So what does
IN THE NAME OF mean. It means in the Authority of the Father and in the
Authority of the Son and the Authority of the Holy Spirit.
FOR EXAMPLE MODERN DAY PHRASE:
In HEAVENS NAME Sir Stephen do not force pagan and
unholy and false Trinity in the Bible.
So now is there really a Heavens name. NO. NOT AT
ALL. It’s a Phrase. In Heavens name means In Heavens Authority.
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.
New International Version
For there are three that testify:
New Living Translation
So we have these three witnesses—
English Standard Version
For there are three that testify:
Berean Study Bible
For there are three that testify:
Berean Literal Bible
For there are three bearing testimony:
New American Standard Bible
For there are three that testify:
NASB 1995
For there are three that testify:
NASB 1977
And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because
the Spirit is the truth.
NASB 1977
And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because
the Spirit is the truth.
Amplified Bible
For there are three witnesses:
Christian Standard Bible
For there are three that testify:
Holman Christian Standard Bible
For there are three that testify:
American Standard Version
And it is the Spirit that beareth witness,
because the Spirit is the truth.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And The Spirit testifies because The Spirit is
the truth.
Contemporary English Version
In fact, there are three who tell about it.
English Revised Version
And it is the Spirit that beareth witness,
because the Spirit is the truth.
Good News Translation
There are three witnesses:
GOD'S WORD® Translation
There are three witnesses:
International Standard Version
For there are three witnesses —
NET Bible
For there are three that testify,
New Heart English Bible
For there are three who testify:
Weymouth New Testament
For there are three that give testimony-- the
Spirit, the water, and the blood;
World English Bible
For there are three who testify:
1 John 5:7 and the King James Version and
other Corrupted or Wrong English Translations which Catholic Church loves to
use to support its false teachings:
The King
James Version (A. D. 1611) says at 1 Jn 5:7: "For there are three
that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these
three are one."
Of course even this would not mean the three are the one God as
trinitarians want. The word for "one" here is in the neuter form, hen, which
cannot mean "one God" since "God" is always in
the masculine form in NT Greek, and grammatically adjectives (such as
"one") applied to it must also be masculine (heis, masculine
form).
NT Greek words meaning "one":
- hen is the neuter form for "one."
- heis is the masculine form for "one."
- mia is the feminine form for "one."
When the neuter "one" (hen) is applied to persons, it
means "one thing." In other words they have become united
in something such as "purpose," "will," etc.
That is why Jesus prays to the Father "that they [Jesus' followers] may
be one [hen, neuter] just as we
are one [hen - neuter]." - Jn 17:22. Jesus,
the Father, and Jesus' followers are all one [hen, neuter] in
something. Of course they are all united in the Father's will and
purpose!
Even though Christians have one will with Jesus and the Father, it certainly is
not their wills which dominate; it is the will of the Father which
they make their will also. And Jesus, too, subordinates his will to that of the Father so
that, therefore, their will and purpose become one: the Father's alone. ("Father,
if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be
done." - Luke 22:42, NIV. cf. Mark 14:36.)
There is no way that Jesus would pray at Jn 17:22 that Christians may be one
"just as we (Jesus and the Father) are one" if he were
truly God. In that case he would be praying that these Christians
become "equally God" with him and the Father!
But even more important is the fact that John did not write the words found at
1 Jn 5:7 in the KJV! And we must consider why Trinitarian
scholars and copyists felt compelled to add it to the Holy
Scriptures.
The only other Bibles which include this passage that I am aware of are the
Catholic Douay Version (A. D. 1609), the New Life
Version (1993), the New King James Version (1982), and
the King James II Version (1982). These last two are modern
translations which have as their stated purpose the preservation of the text
and traditions of the King James Version and which, therefore,
translate from the discredited Received Text.
Of these four Bibles the KJIIV at
least indicates the unscriptural addition of 1 John 5:7 by writing it in all
italics. And buried in the Preface is the admission that 1 Jn 5:7 (among
others) is not to be accepted as true Scripture.
The New Life Version, however, claims to put an asterisk (*) to
mark words or passages which are "missing in some of the early
writings." And it does so in such passages as Mark 16:9-20 and John
8:1-11, but it does not do so at 1 Jn 5:7.
Since Greek was the "universal language" at the time the New
Testament writers wrote and for many years thereafter, the earliest copies of
the manuscripts of the New Testament were most often written in Koine Greek.
Therefore the very best manuscripts (and the oldest) of New Testament writings
in existence today are the most ancient (4th and 5th century) Greek manuscripts.
These early Greek manuscripts were later translated into various other
languages, including Latin. Although Bible translators often compare these
ancient Greek manuscripts with NT manuscripts of other languages, they nearly
always translate from a text that was composed from the oldest and best Greek manuscripts.
Highly respected Trinitarian scholar, minister (Trinity Church),
Professor (University of Glasgow and Marburg University), author (The Daily
Study Bible Series, etc.), and Bible translator Dr. William Barclay states
the following about this passage:
Note on 1 John 5:7
"In the Authorized
Version [KJV] there is a verse which we have altogether omitted [in
Barclay's NT translation]. It reads, "For there are three that bear record
in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost; and these three are
one."
"The Revised Version
omits this verse, and does not even mention it in the margin, and none of the
newer translations include it. It is quite certain that it does not
belong to the original text.
"The
facts are as follows. First, it does not occur
in any Greek manuscript earlier than the 14th century. The great manuscripts
belong to the 3rd and 4th centuries [most scholars date them to the 4th and 5th
centuries], and it occurs in none of them. None of the great early fathers of
the Church knew it. Jerome's original version of the [Latin] Vulgate does not
include it. The first person to quote it is a Spanish heretic called
Priscillian who died in A. D. 385. Thereafter it crept gradually into the Latin
texts of the New Testament although, as we have seen, it did not gain an entry
to the Greek manuscripts.
"How then did it get
into the text? Originally it must have been a scribal gloss or comment in the
margin. Since it seemed to offer good scriptural evidence for the
doctrine of the Trinity [and since there was no good scriptural
evidence for this new doctrine introduced by the Roman church in 325 A. D.],
through time it came to be accepted by theologians as part of the text,
especially in those early days of scholarship before the great manuscripts were
discovered. [More likely it was written in the margin of an
existing manuscript with the intention that future Trinitarian
copyists actually add it to all new copies. - RDB.]
"But how did it
last, and how did it come to be in the Authorized [King James] Version? The
first Greek testament to be published was that of Erasmus in 1516. Erasmus was
a great scholar and, knowing that this verse was not in the original
text, he did not include it in his first edition. By this time, however,
theologians [Trinitarians, of course] were using the verse. It had, for
instance, been printed in the Latin Vulgate of 1514. Erasmus was therefore
criticized for omitting it. His answer was that if anyone could show him a
Greek manuscript which had the words in it, he would print them in his next
edition. Someone did produce a very late and very bad text in which the verse
did occur in Greek; and Erasmus, true to his word but very much against his
judgment and his will, printed the verse in his 1522 edition.
"The next step was
that in 1550 Stephanus printed his great edition of the Greek New Testament.
This 1550 edition of Stephanus was called - he gave it that name himself
- The Received Text, and it was the basis of the Authorized Version
[KJV] and of the Greek text for centuries to come. That is how this
verse got into the Authorized Version. There is, of course, nothing wrong with
it [if the trinity were really true as Trinitarians like Barclay
himself want!]; but modern scholarship has made it quite certain that John did
not write it and that it is a much later commentary on, and addition to, his
words; and that is why all modern translations omit it." - pp.
110-111, The Letters of John and Jude, The Daily Study Bible
Series, Revised Edition, The Westminster Press, 1976. [Material in brackets and
emphasis added by me.]
Highly respected (and highly Trinitarian) New Testament Bible
scholar Dr. A. T. Robertson writes:
"For there are three
who bear witness (hoti treis eisin hoi marturountes). At this point the Latin Vulgate gives the
words in the Textus Receptus [Received Text], found in no Greek MS.
[Manuscript] save two late cursives (162 in the Vatican Library of the
fifteenth century, 34 of the sixteenth century [1520
A.D.] in Trinity College, Dublin). Jerome [famed trinitarian, 342-420 A.
D.] did not have it. Cyprian applies the language of the
Trinity [ ? - - see UBS Commentary below] and Priscillian [excommunicated
380 A. D., executed 385 A. D.] has it. Erasmus did not have it in his first edition,
but rashly offered to insert it [in his next edition of 1522]
if a single Greek MS. had it and [ms.] 34 [1520 A.D.] was produced with
the insertion, as if made to order. The spurious addition
is: en toi ouranoi ho pater, ho logos kai to hagion pneuma kai houtoi
hoi treis hen eisin kai treis eisin hoi marturountes en tei gei (in
heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and the three are one. And
there are three that bear witness in earth). The last clause belongs to verse
8. The fact and the doctrine of the Trinity do not depend on this spurious addition."
- p. 240, Vol. VI, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Broadman
Press, 1960.
The highly respected (and trinitarian) United Bible Societies
has published a commentary on the New Testament text. It discusses 1 John 5:5-7
as follows]:
"After marturountes "bearing
witness"] the Textus Receptus [Received Text] adds the following: en
to ourano, o Pater, o Logos, kai to Agion Pneuma kai outoi oi treis en eisi.
(8) kai treis eisin oi marturountes en te ge. That these words
are spurious and have no right to stand in the New Testament
is certain in the light of the following considerations.
"(A)
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE. (1) The passage is absent from every known Greek
manuscript except four, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a
translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate. These four manuscripts
are ms. 61 [this is ms. 34 in the earlier numbering system used by Robertson
above], a sixteenth century manuscript formerly at Oxford, now at Dublin; ms.
88, a twelfth century manuscript at Naples, which has the passage written in
the margin by a modern hand; ms. 629 [ms. 162, Robertson], a fourteenth or
fifteenth century manuscript in the Vatican; and ms. 635, an eleventh century
manuscript which has the passage written in the margin by a seventeenth
century hand.
"(2) The passage is
quoted by none of the Greek Fathers, who, had they known it, would most
certainly have employed it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and
Arian [certainly at the Nicene Council of 325]). Its first appearance in Greek
is in a Greek version of the (Latin) Acts of the Lateran Council in 1215.
"(3) The passage is
absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac,
Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not
found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form
(Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as
issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied A. D. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus
[copied before A. D. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first hand
of codex Vercellensis [ninth century]).
"The earliest
instance of the passage is in a fourth century Latin treatise
entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to
the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower
Bishop Instantius. ....
"(B)
INTERNAL PROBABILITIES. (1) As regards transcriptional probability,
if the passage were original, no good reason can be found to account for its
omission, either accidentally or intentionally, by copyists of hundreds of
Greek manuscripts, and by translators of ancient versions.
"(2) As regards
intrinsic probability, the passage makes an awkward break in the sense." -
pp. 716-718, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament,
United Bible Societies, 1971.
Notice the comments concerning this disputed passage found in the respected
trinitarian reference work, The Expositor's Greek Testament:
It says in a note for 1 John 5:7 (as found in the Received Text and
the KJV):
"A Latin interpolation, certainly spurious. (I)
Found in no Gk. MS. [Greek Manuscript] except two late
minuscules - 162 (Vatican), 15th c., the Lat. Vg. [Latin Vulgate] Version with
a Gk. text adapted thereto; 34 (Trin. Coll., Dublin), 16th c. (2) Quoted
by none of the Gk Fathers. Had they known it, they would have
employed it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and Arian [325 A.D.]).
(3) Found in none of the early versions - in Vg. but not as it [originally]
left the hands of St. Jerome." - p. 195, Vol. 5, Eerdmans Publishing Co.
The very trinitarian Zondervan Publishing House has published
a book by trinitarian scholars Dr. Sakae Kubo and Prof. Walter
Specht entitled So Many Versions? It is an examination and
critique of the most popular Bible translations of the 20th century. In the
chapter devoted to the New King James Version [NKJV] this book
says:
"In the original printing of the NKJV, the famous
Trinitarian passage in 1 John 5:7-8a had the only textual footnote - one that
advised the reader that these words "Are from the Latin Bible, although
three Greek mss. [manuscripts] from the fifteenth century and later also
contain them" (the note has since been revised to read "four or five
very late Greek manuscripts...."). It is well known that the first and
second editions of Erasmus's Greek New Testament lacked this passage because he
did not find it in any Greek manuscripts available to him. He was so certain
that it was a recent addition to the text that when he was criticized for not
including it he promised to insert it in his next edition if anyone could
produce a single [Greek] manuscript that contained it. Such a manuscript (Codex
Montfortianus, #61 of the sixteenth century) was finally shown
him in England, and he kept his promise in his third edition of 1522 [the
early sixteenth century]. But this passage clearly had no
place in the autograph [actual writings by John] of John's first epistle."
- pp. 293-294.
So, even those who finally added this spurious text to the English Bible
translations knew it was not written by John! But, even with many revisions and
thousands of changes to the KJV, this trinitarian tampering with
the word of God has remained for nearly 400 years!
The trinitarian authors of So Many Versions? (who were very
biased in favor of trinitarian interpretations in other parts of their book)
were so upset by this modern Bible's use of clearly spurious passages such as
this that they continued:
"The brochure advertising this revision [the NKJV] gives as
the purpose of the project "to preserve and improve the purity of the King
James Version." To improve the purity would surely include the removal
from the text of any scribal additions that were not a part of the autographs
[original writing]. No devout reader of the Bible wants any portion of the sacred
text as penned by the original authors removed. But neither should he
want later additions, in which some passages have crept into the text,
published as part of the Word of God." - p. 294, So Many
Versions?, Zondervan Publ., 1983 ed.
I find that my more recent copy of the NKJV does not even
contain the note that So Many Versions? mentioned above. There
is no indication whatsoever in my New King James Version, Thomas
Nelson Publishers, #412B that 1 John 5:7 is anything but the original inspired writing!
And, yet, the publishers and editors found room for many other notes and
references in this same copy (see Hosea 1:6, 9, for example.) They also found
room to furnish an explanation of the symbol they used on the title page:
"Title page logo:The triquetra (from a Latin word meaning
'three-cornered') is an ancient symbol for the Trinity. It comprises three
interwoven arcs, distinct yet equal and inseparable, symbolizing that the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct yet equal Persons and indivisibly
One God." - p. ii.
I also see that my trinitarian-edited and published King James Version, Collins
Press, 1955 (with center column of notes and references) also gives no
indication whatsoever of the clear, spurious nature of 1 John 5:7! This is in
spite of the fact that the original translators of 1611, themselves, and all
the many revisers for the last 380 years have known that this
verse was not added to the scriptures until many hundred years after John wrote
this letter. Even the earlier English Bibles on which the KJV was
based (and from which much was copied) did not include this spurious
passage.
Trinitarian scholar Robert Young [Young's Analytical Concordance of the
Bible; Young's Literal Translation of the Bible; etc.] writes in
his Concise Critical Commentary:
"These words are wanting [lacking] in all the Greek MSS except two, in all
the oldest Ancient Versions, and in all the quotations of v.
6-8 in the ancient Fathers before A.D. 475" - Note for 1 John 5:7, Baker
Book House, 1977.
Noted Lutheran scholar and Bible translator, William F. Beck (trinitarian, of
course) states in a footnote for 1 John 5:7 in his The New Testament in
the Language of Today, 1964 printing:
"Our oldest manuscripts do not have vv. 7b-8a: "in heaven: the Father,
the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three
testifying on earth." Early in the 16th century an editor translated these
words from Latin manuscripts and inserted them in his Greek New Testament.
Erasmus took them from this Greek New Testament and inserted them in the third
edition (1522) of his Greek New Testament. Luther used the text prepared by
Erasmus. But even though the inserted words taught the Trinity, Luther
ruled them out and never had them in his translation. In 1550 Bugenhagen
objected to these words "on account of the truth." In 1574 [about 30
years after Luther's death] Feyerabend, a printer, added them to
Luther's text, and in 1596 [in spite of the fact that scholars knew it
was spurious] they appeared in the Wittenberg copies. They were not in
Tyndale's or Coverdale's Bible or in the Great Bible [which were used
by the KJV translators, and often copied nearly verbatim by
them]."
The
following modern trinitarian Bibles do not include the
spurious words found in the KJV at 1 Jn 5:7: Revised
Standard Version; New Revised Standard Version; American Standard Version; New
International Version; New American Standard Bible; Living Bible; Good News
Bible; New English Bible; Revised English Bible; New American Bible (1970
and 1991 editions); Jerusalem Bible; New Jerusalem Bible; Modern
Language Bible; Holy Bible: Easy-to-Read Version; An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed);
and translations by Moffatt; C. B. Williams; William Beck; Phillips; Rotherham;
Lamsa; Byington; Barclay; etc.
Edward Gibbon (1737-1794), "one of the greatest historians who ever
lived" explains the reason for the removal of 1 Jn 5:7 (as found in KJV) from
most modern Bibles:
"Of all the manuscripts now extant, above fourscore in number, some of
which are more than 1200 years old, the orthodox copies of the Vatican, of the
Complutensian editors, of Robert Stephens are becoming invisible; and the two
manuscripts of Dublin and Berlin are unworthy to form an exception...In the eleventh and twelfth centuries, the
Bibles were corrected by LanFrank, Archbishop of Canterbury, and by Nicholas, a
cardinal and librarian of the Roman church, secundum Ortodoxam fidem.
Notwithstanding these corrections, the passage is still wanting in twenty-five
Latin manuscripts, the oldest and fairest; two qualities seldom united, except
in manuscripts....The three witnesses have been established in our Greek
Testaments by the prudence of Erasmus; the honest bigotry of the Complutensian
editors; the typographical fraud, or error, of Robert Stephens in the placing
of a crotchet and the deliberate falsehood, or strange misapprehension, of
Theodore Beza." - Decline and fall of the Roman Empire, IV, Edward Gibbon, p. 418.
Gibbon was defended in his findings by his noted contemporary, British scholar
Richard Porson who also published conclusive proofs that the verse of 1 John
5:7 as found in the KJV was only first inserted by the Church
into a few Latin texts around 400 C.E. - Secrets of
Mount Sinai, James Bentley, pp. 30-33).
Regarding Porson's clear proof, Gibbon
later said:
"His structures are founded in argument, enriched with learning, and
enlivened with wit, and his adversary neither deserves nor finds any quarter at
his hands. The evidence of the three heavenly witnesses would now be rejected
in any court of justice; but prejudice is blind, authority is deaf, and our
vulgar Bibles will ever be polluted by this spurious text."
To this day, the Bible in the hands of the majority of Christians, the King
James Version (KJV), also known as the Authorized Version (AV),
still unhesitatingly includes this verse as the "inspired" word of
God (often without so much as a note to inform the reader that nearly all
respected scholars of Christendom acknowledge it as a non-scriptural late
addition by uninspired trinitarian copyists).
also tells us:
Peake's Commentary on the Bible:
"The famous interpolation after 'three witnesses' is not printed even
in RSV, and rightly. It cites the heavenly testimony of the Father,
the logos, and the Holy Spirit, but is never used in the early
Trinitarian controversies. No respectable Greek MS contains it. Appearing
first in a late 4th-cent. Latin text, it entered the Vulgate and finally the NT
of Erasmus."]]
WHY
did trinitarian copyists and scholars think it necessary to construct this
"scripture" and actually add it to the Holy Scriptures? What, then,
does this tell us about the evaluation of the rest of the "evidence"
for a trinity by these very same trinitarians? Isn't this most terrible,
blasphemous action by them actually an admission that the rest of the
"evidence" for a 3-in-one God is completely inadequate? Why else
would they do such a desperate, terrible thing?
WHAT
does this tell us about those men who first constructed the "trinity
doctrine" and forced it on an unwilling Roman Church in 325 A. D. at the
Nicene Council? (See HIST and CREEDS study papers.)
WHYdo so many trinitarians feel it necessary to "preserve"
this clearly dishonest King James Version tradition in not
only the most-used King James Version itself (which has been
revised many times with thousands of changes
in its 400-year history while still leaving this spurious verse), but even in
at least three modern translations (NKJV, KJIIV, NLV)?
BACK TO YOUR WORDS SIR STEPHEN:
CONFIRMATION OF THE HOLY TRINITY AFTER THE GOSPELS:
Acts 2:33 Exalted to the right hand of God , he
(JESUS) has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured
out what you now see and hear.
Acts 10:38 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and
power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the
power of the devil, because God was with him.
2 Corinthians 13:14 May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ,
and the love of God (the Father), and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with
you all.
Galatians 4:6 Because you are his sons, God sent the
Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father.”
Ephesians 1:17 I keep asking that the God of our Lord
Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and
revelation, so that you may know him better.
Ephesians 2:18 For through him (Jesus) we both have
access to the Father by one Spirit.
1 Peter 1:2 who have been chosen according to the
foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to
be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood:
Jude 20 But you, dear friends, by building
yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, 21 keep yourselves in God’s love
as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal
life.
TO ANSWER ALL THE ABOVE SCRIPTURE
QUOTATIONS LET ME PUT FORTH A MAJOR PROBLEM IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH:
The Roman Catholic Church uses the ATHANASIAN CREED from
outside the Bible to introduce the non-existing word and Trinity teaching in
the Bible.
PROBLEM BECOMES MEGA
WORSE:
The Roman Catholic Official Teaching documented in many of
its documents and writings say that the POPE is ALMIGHTY GOD ON EARTH. So now
from 3 Gods the Roman Catholic Church NOW HAS A FOURTH HUMAN WHO CALLS AND
DECLARES HIMSELF AS ALMIGHTY GOD ON EARTH. SEE THE PROOF OF THE CATHOLIC QUOTED
SOURCES BELOW:
SO NOW SIR STEPHEN FROM A TRIUNE (3 IN 1) TRINITY GOD,
NOW YOU HAVE PROGRESSED TOWARDS A FOURNITY GOD.
https://amazingdiscoveries.org/R-Pope_Rome_blasphemy_power_Jesus