₦airaland Forum

ospido:
Can you identify the true religion?

Which religion bases all its teachings on God’s Word, honors God’s name, and proclaims God’s Kingdom as mankind’s only hope? Which group practices love and shuns war? What do you think?​—Read 1 John 3:10-12.
Conclusion
The person who belongs to the Christian denomination that practice all 5 points above is my fellow believer.

So are other denominations practiced all these 5 points or only JWs?

Whether am a Church goer or not I'll keep it to my chest.

The clergy, their laity, the religious leaders and the Church itself are the ones that usually refer to themselves as CHRISTENDOM. That word does not originate from us. Believe me. And it is not a scriptural terminology.

Is THEOCRACY a scriptural terminology?

I told you earlier that Jehovah's Witnesses do not judge.

This is pure lies...

Why do they say they're the ONLY TRUE CHRISTIANS doing the will of Jehovah?

Rather, Jesus is the judge appointed by Jehovah (Acts 17:31). He will judge everyone including you and i.

So you know this but you join your organization to condemn everyone who doesn't belong to your organization as enemy of Jehovah.

And judgment will start in the "house of God." (1 Peter 4:17-19).

The Phrase "House of God" here does mean House of Jehovah or another God?

because I don't know why judgement will start from House of God (Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's witnesses) when everyone there are already doing His will.

Or should we say, the HOUSE OF GOD means everybody who is named with the name of Christ which Apostle Paul admonishes them to depart from iniquity.

While false religion will be judged adversely. See also Revelation 17:1-18; 18:4-24. Note that this woman here depict not a literal woman but false religion who commits spiritual immorality with the kings of the earth. Meaning they fuse religion with politics. God frowns at this (James 4:4). Rev.18:4 says we should "get out of her."

When, where and how will this judgement take place because you people only talk about Armageddon!

Maximus69:
Never mind, at least we know that there are many other versions of the scriptures that omitted this verse in question.

So why don't you hold this other versions as more accurate and reliable like NWT?

Then go and make all of them to agree with the KJV nah!

Rather it should be stop calling it SPURIOUS TEXT just because other versions said so.

Jehovah's Witnesses have published our own Bible translation and that's what we've been working on for decades now. It has helped us to cultivate LOVE, JOY and PEACE throughout all the congregations of JWs globally.
I think we're OK with that Sir!

Stale....

When people quote 1 John 5:7 as a support for Trinity many critics of the doctrine of Trinity will quickly reject it and say it's a spurious text, which isn't suppose to be part of the Holy scripture. That's why any translations that contain the text are considered to be fraud and inaccurate.

So, the question we can ask is: Should 1 John 5:7 be included in the Bible we have today?

The Text is called "The Johannine Comma (also known as the Comma Johanneum or the Heavenly Witnesses)."

Truly some translators rejected it while some added it which resulted from different view of scholarship; for instance, "Bruce M. Metzger said that if the Johannine Comma were original, there is no good reason to account for its omission, either accidentally or intentionally, by copyists of hundreds of Greek manuscripts and by translators of ancient versions (Bruce M. Metzger. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Second Edition. 1994, p. 647-649.).

Metzger statement means since the early Greek manuscripts don't have the COMMA then it can't be original part of the Apostle John writings.

After critical study of different scholarly opinion on why the COMMA shouldn't be part of the Scripture, we came up with three (3) views which are:

1. The COMMA was not found in any Ancient Greek Manuscripts: This view holds that ancient manuscripts are more accurate and reliable than the later manuscripts.

2. The COMMA was only found in the late medieval manuscripts: This views holds that since the COMMA exists only in the late manuscripts then it must be a later insertion by "OVERZEALOUS TRINITARIAN" or by a TRINITARIAN for the support of Trinity.

3. The Majority Vs Minority: This views holds that there are 5000+ Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, manuscripts which contain 1 John 5 are limited to about 480 manuscripts.  Although the majority of these manuscripts lacks the Comma . Of the about 480 manuscripts of 1 John 5, only 12 of these manuscripts are from before the 10th century (Nestle-Aland: Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th revised edition (2006)):

01 (4th century)

A (5th century)

B (4th century)

K (9th century)

L (8th century)

P (9th century)

Ψ (9th century)

048 (5th century)

049 (9th century)

056 (10th century)

0142 (10th century)

0296 (6th century)

The rest of the 480 manuscripts are minuscules from after the 10th century, the average being from around the 12th century.

Since the critics arguments are within these three views then we can proceed to address each of this in light of evidence before us.

Maximus69:
Alright i've heard you!

Now it's time to put more light on the whole issue!

TATIME:
Your hatred for JWs is blurring your senses more and more!

Says the fake elder

Before they publish the New Word Translation of the Holy Scriptures JWs make use of the KJV,

So you agree with KJV at that time that "Jesus is God" John 1:1 and 1 John 5:7 is true that "they're three witnesses...and they are one" or you selected KJV as you like bah?

yet there are several versions that omitted this verse.

So why are you not using "this other versions"?

So are you now saying the interpreters of these other versions are all Jehovah's Witnesses?

No! but JWs cling to this erroneous belief as a strong support for their doctrine and the essence of this thread is to show that NWT and "this other versions" are wrong for rejecting 1 John 5:7 in their translations.

Maximus69:
Never mind, interested persons will surely come and make related comments!

I am not!

For your information, this thread was indirectly created for JWs because they're the ones who lack the full knowledge about the COMMA because the organization has withheld a lot of information about it from them. Simply because the moment JWs accept COMMA the basis of their doctrines shattered.

That was why you shouted in surprise "That's impossible..." when I told you the text already in used before the Council of Nicaea.

The only interested persons here are JWs who need to know the truth about the COMMA so that they can see how the organization has deceived them.

Maximus69:
Let's see how many of your cohorts who aren't hypocrite like JWs that will come and say a thing here, thank God the thread is not about JWs.
So if you don't value those who have interest in spiritual things, at least you should be able to ignore them and search for those better than them!

How does this relate to the thread

Janosky:
I challenge you to name one scribe who copied the Bible from its original manuscript to the ones discovered today

So how do you know it was added?

Anyways, you can visit this thread for more about the COMMA

https://www.nairaland.com/6032299/johannine-comma-1-john-5

DappaD:
Emusan is looking for who to spoonfeed him

You're the one who needed to be spoonfeed because you only knew that the text first appeared at the council of Nicea when it's already in used before that time.

And just like I asked,

If Watchtower didn't know the text has been in used long before fourth century, we can then ask, what else they didn't know other than information provided here?

Maximus69:
Simply quote, you're waiting for who will tell you how it was inserted shey?

I didn't wait for anyone, rather you're the one who didn't know how it was inserted.

Rather my point still stands, it was already in use before the council of Nicea.

I stand by my word that it was never part of the scriptures before the time of the council Sir!

If it was never part of the scripture, that's why I asked, how come people quote or alluded to it before the council of Nicea?

Since you requested for a proof, all you have to do is to sit and relax then wait for your proof.

Just like I said, the lies that has been sold to you is that it was inserted during the council of Nicea, so any evidence of it being used before that time should tell you what could possibly happen to the text.

DappaD:
That was before I did further research.

“In the fourth century C.E., in a Latin treatise, an overzealous advocate of Trinitarianism evidently included the words “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy spirit; and these three are one” as if these were a quotation from 1 John 5:7. Later that passage was put right into the text of a Latin Bible manuscript.”

Source — ‘The Word of God Endures Forever’ The Watchtower, October 1, 1997

OK I've seen where you added time to it.

Just like my reply to your brother above, the text COMMA has been in existence and in used before fourth Century which makes the information provided by Watchtower inaccurate.

If Watchtower didn't know the text has been in used ling before fourth century, we can then ask, what else they didn't know other than information provided here?

DappaD:
Oga that interpolation was added in the scriptures by trinitarians. You call it lies, yet it's not only one source that's disputing that falsehood.

That's why I said, the Trinitarian who added it doesn't have name.

What time was it added?

There are other several spurious additions to the scriptures. Two of which are
1. The additional verses at Mark 16. Old reliable manuscripts ended at verse 8. Other translators added verses 9-20 as seen in the KJV Bible.

The spurious addition I'm even talking about is from the same 1 John 5 not even from another which your own translation still have while rejecting 1 John 5 :7

2. A good number of ancient and authoritative manuscripts skip verses found at John 7:53 – 8:11. All them KJV and NIV translators then manufactured those scriptures and added it in the Bible for reasons known to them.
Older, reliable manuscripts start John 8 at verse 12.

But NIV also rejected the COMMA

Also, text not found in one place doesn't mean it/they wasn't/didn't there in the first place. Which is the basis for this thread.

Maximus69:
That's impossible. Before the council all the texts were exactly as written and copies from the first century. So there is no way anyone could have inserted any addition earlier than the 325 ad when the council sat.
But if you have any proof that it was there before 325 ad, i'm willing to learn more!

I didn't say it was inserted earlier than council of Nicea but PEOPLE ARE USING THE TEXT BEFORE THE COUNCIL OF NICEA which nullified you assertion that the text only first appeared during the council of Nicea.

Which then leads us to how people get familiar with such a text if its origin not yet known?

Of course, many references of people who quoted or alluded to the text will be provided here when I'm done collating people opinions about their understanding of the COMMA!

DappaD:
That was before I did further research.

“In the fourth century C.E., in a Latin treatise, an overzealous advocate of Trinitarianism evidently included the words “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy spirit; and these three are one” as if these were a quotation from 1 John 5:7. Later that passage was put right into the text of a Latin Bible manuscript.”

Source — ‘The Word of God Endures Forever’ The Watchtower, October 1, 1997

Smile.....

Just like I said, a lot of you don't know anything about the Comma apart from the lies you're being told.

So who is this OVERZEALOUS TRINITARIAN?

Doesn't the person have name?

What time was it added?

If these questions can be answered, then we'll know where we're going.

So are you now denying that there are no OTHER SPURIOUS PASSAGES apart from 1 John 5:7 in the Bible?

Maximus69:
YES!

So how come many prominent Christian writers who live long before the council of Nicea quoted and alluded to the same text?

DappaD:
1. The screenshot I shared said it was Erasmus, a so-called ‘Christian’ scholar who added it to his Bible in the year 1522 before other translators picked it up – including King James.

But the text has been known before that time and even appeared in the oldest Latin Manuscript of 4th Century.

ATTENTION! ATTENTION!! ATTENTION!!!

I want to draw your attention to the same screenshot you first shared.

The last statement in that screenshot read:

"It was not always included in the first printed Latin translation of the Bible, but the editors of sixto-Clementine Vulgate (1592) chose to print it [1John 5:7] along with a number of other SPURIOUS PASSAGES"

If you can recall, your first post on this thread started with "A spurious addition to the Holy Scriptures...

Now from the statement above, there are OTHER SPURIOUS PASSAGES not only 1 John 5:7

Do you know some of these SPURIOUS PASSAGES are in the same 1 John 5 which many translations including your NWT which refused to have 1 John 5:7 still have till today?

But as we just started on this, I'll leave that to another time.

2. When compared with more reliable ancient manuscripts, those additions weren't found — particularly when compared with the Masoretes scrolls.

Now what you called more RELIABLE manuscripts also has some omittions which can only be traced to the other manuscripts you're talking about and these omittions still exist in the same translations that rejected the COMMA.

This shows that many people who rejected the COMMA don't know much about it rather than the lies they have been told that it's a spurious addition.

Janosky:
Bros, The EVIDENCES full ground yakata... This is one of them in the screenshot

The evidences full ground but you couldn't tell us WHO ADDED IT.

DappaD:
1. Yes it was fraudulently included. Usual Catholic Church propaganda — King James also added the interpolation in his Bible.

By who? At least the fraudulent inclusion should be traced to someone or group or year

2. What wasn't there in the first place can't be omitted.

You mean it wasn't in the any known manuscripts or what?

Maximus69:
It's the Council of Nicaea under the chairmanship of Emperor Constantine!
That's when so many pagan philosophies were added to believe of the church!

Now we're going somewhere!

Which means the text didn't appear in any written or book before the council of Nicea took place, right?

DappaD:
I won't spoonfeed you lol.
You're going to have to learn how to do research

I've done my research and I've never seen or read anywhere about WHO ADDED IT!

Now, if you know the person who added it, kindly provide the name with the link here

DappaD:
I think just typing those words ‘Comma Johannine’ on Google would bring up several websites you can check on.

Since you have done that and got your answer, now answer my question in a simpler form!

Who added it? Very simple

Maximus69:
YES it was!

The question is, who added it?

DappaD:
A spurious addition to the Holy Scriptures just so Trinitarians can carry on in their folly.
Verse 6 acts as a precedent of what to expect at the later verses.

Who added it?

1 John 5:7 in the KJV contains these words called the Johannine Comma (also known as the Comma Johanneum or the Heavenly Witnesses). 

Why this verse was not found in some translations today:

Was it fraudulent inserted?

OR

Was omitted from Ancient Greek?

Janosky:
Bros, go & find out for yourself.
Stop waiting for awoof

So we're brother now! Anyways, that's for another day.

In all my research, no evidence tends towards how it was inserted rather, why it was omitted.

If you have any strong support for how it was inserted or who inserted it. Bring it out!

SonyaSpence:
I honestly don't like replying to topics like these but your presentation shows you've gone a step ahead, to compare and you've noted the differences.

I'll urge you to make further research on that bible verse by checking bible translations made before the fifteenth century when that scrupulous text was introduced into that verse to support the " trinity doctrine".

This is a keyword that can help your research.
"Comma Johanneum"

Search that keyword and you'll find the truth.

Who introduced the text unto that verse?

rottennaija:
You mean questions that chokes you?

You really got him there!

You can see how he used style boycotted my post with lie of I don't want to argue with you because my two questions really held him down.

But see the person who claimed he doesn't want to argue dragging the thread to 4 pages now!

achorladey:
Awake November 22 1984.......What makes a religion right is its total adherence to God’s Word. Whether our religion meets this criterion or not can only be determined by open-mindedly comparing it with the Bible.

That's what they always claim but scrutinizing their belief with Bible one can see how those beliefs fall short of Biblical standards.

Imagine him saying, John 6 where Christ was talking about eating His flesh and drinking His blood has nothing to do with The Lord's Supper, simply because from Christ own statement it's evident that anyone who doesn't eat it will not have eternal life and won't be resurrected on the last day.

DappaD:
Okay!

It's obvious that JWs don't adhere to Bible standards strictly.

DappaD:
I said I wasn't going to continue in arguments and I meant it. This is my last reply to you.

That was the reason I told you to pull down the thread from beginning.

You said from the Opening Page that, "...as such they hate Jehovah's Witnesses for adhering to Bible standards strictly."

If Jws adheres to Bible standards strictly, why are you doing what isn't in the Bible?

Abraham didn't claim to be God's friend. Jehovah God himself called Abraham his friend — Isaiah 41:8

Thank God you admit Abraham didn't CLAIM to be God's friend, as God Himself is the one who called him His friend but what you're doing today is CLAIMING TO BE GOD'S FRIEND when God Himself has CALLED US HIS CHILDREN.

As for who partakes in the Lord's Evening meal, again, the Bible, it's message and context is to be understood.
Jehovah for his part, had a covenant with ancient Israel (Exodus 19:5,6) and he made them into a nation of priests as at then.
Jesus in the same way made a covenant with his disciples and other anointed Christians for them to rule as kings and priests in God's Kingdom over the whole earth. (Luke 22:29, 1Peter 2:9, Revelation 1:6, 5:9,10, 20:6) .
These anointed Christians have the seal of God on their foreheads and they make up a spiritual Israel which number a total of 144,000(Revelation 7:4-8 ) . They are the only ones who will go to heaven to rule as kings and priests over the earth (Revelation 20:6). Jesus himself called the ones to rule in God's Kingdom ‘little flock’ so it is only rightly so that they number an actual 144,000(Luke 12:32, 22:28-30, Hebrews 12:28, Revelation 1:6, 5:9,10, 7:4-8, 14:1-3)

Let me repeat what your own organization says again so that you can see that The Lord's Supper is connected to that John 6:53-57

This is what your own organization says "The unleavened bread and red wine served at the Memorial are emblems, or symbols, of Christ’s flesh and blood. They are not miraculously changed into or mixed with his literal flesh and blood, as some feel."

This was the same flesh and blood Christ talked about in John 6

You already know you don't have eternal life and you won't be resurrected on the last day since you don't eat and drink Christ's body and blood.

Next time instead of repeating my moniker and my post after quoting my entire post, simply enclosed each of my post with [.quote] ..... [/.quote]

NOTE: Don't put that dot(.) in the first & last quote

DappaD:
Can't someone be a friend to his father?
Jehovah is our Father because he created us (Isaiah 64:8 )

OK

We are also friends of Father Jehovah because we genuinely love him and obey his commandments. (1John 5:3)

The verse you quoted doesn't correlate with your statement.

Take Abraham for example, he was called a friend of his Father Jehovah because he listened and obeyed Jehovah — Genesis 15:6, 22:18, Isaiah 41:8, James 2:23.

The key phrase is what I underlined...

Abraham was CALLED not that Abraham claimed to be friend of God.

What Christians are to be CALLED is Child of God John 1:12

By the way, those your anointed persons who are children of God means they are not obeying and listening to Jehovah, that's why they are only children of God and not friends of Jehovah.

Context must be taken into consideration.
At John 6:53-55, Jesus wasn't talking about them eating his flesh and drinking his blood literally. He wasn't even talking about the Lord's evening meal. He was simply explaining that for anyone to have everlasting life, that person must exercise faith in the sacrifice that he made when he offered up his perfect human body(which represents the flesh) and poured out his lifeblood(which represents the blood).

The @underlined is enough to show everyone that you really lack scriptural understanding.

This is what your own organization says "The unleavened bread and red wine served at the Memorial are emblems, or symbols, of Christ’s flesh and blood. They are not miraculously changed into or mixed with his literal flesh and blood, as some feel."

So if Christ had said ""53... “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.

Definitely, you have no life in you and Christ won't resurrect you on the last day.

Enough with this spiteful attitude of yours and just ask your questions.

Enough of your ignorance by claiming you don't want to argue when you're started doing that.

DappaD:
Jehovah's Witnesses strive to please and honour their heavenly Father Jehovah

If truly Jehovah is your Heavenly Father, why are you not His child rather than calling yourself friend of Jehovah?

and to imitate Jesus' way of life.

Jesus said in John 6:53-55 "53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. NIV

NOTICE the @underlined, now that you don't eat Jesus flesh and drink Jesus blood it means you don't have eternal life and Jesus won't raise you up in the last day.

How can you justify this?

***** DISCLAIMER: I didn't come here for arguments. I'll ignore anyone trying to put up an argument. *****

You've already started the argument.

Instead of ignoring people, it's better you pull down the thread first.