₦airaland Forum

Scholar8200:
I wonder!

Who does the highlighted refer to?

Who died on the cross?

I WASNT AT ALL MISTAKEN WE I STARTED MY WRITTEN AS THUS:

WORDWORLD:
Anas09, 4evergod3, wilgrea7, thesixthsense,yorhmienerd,cummando,scholar8200,malvisguy212,DavidtheGreek.............
WAS IT ONLY THE HOLY BIBLE, YOU GUYS WERE READING WHEN YOU WERE IN SCHOOL? HOW CAN YOU ALL REALLY BE THIS INTELLECTUALLY MALNURISHED?

I already know that MOST of you suffer from INTELLECTUAL MALNUTRITION due to the BUY-BULL you are always reading. When you read the WRONG book and always you cant help but become intellectually DEFICIENT.


*****DO YOUR RESEARCH. If you got the brains to comprehend?

WHAT WE ARE TELLING YOU CHRISTIANS IS THAT THERE ARE LIES, UPON LIES, UPON LIES INVENTED AND RUBBISHED ON JESUS CHRIST IN THE BOOK OF LIES CALLED THE BUY-BULL.
Do you comprehend? I have written in ENGLISH and not ARABIC Ooooooooooo! Biko!!!

You Christians are so IMMERSED in the MIRE OF FALSEHOODS, IN THE BOOK OF FALLACY OF COMPOSITION, THE HOLY BIBLE WHICH IS AT ALL NOT HOLY. OTHER WISE CHRISTIANS WON'T BE CLINGING IT UNDER THEIR STINKING ARM PITS ON THEIR WAY TO THE CLUB HOUSE EVERY SUNDAY. I SEE THIS ALL THE TIME. IF YOU HAVE NEVER NOTICED BECOME OBSERVANT AS FROM HENCE FORTH. YOU CAN'T MISS IT.
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the father, the word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one". 1st Epistle of John 5:7. THAT IS THE VERSE OF CORRUPTION AND HAS BEING RECENTLY UPROOTED FROM THE HOLY BIBLE CHARGING IT WITH FALSEHOOD.

Scholar8200:
I wonder!

Who does the highlighted refer to?

Who died on the cross?

I WASNT AT ALL MISTAKEN WHEN I WROTE ALL THOSE ABOUT THE CHRISTIAN LOW I/Q.

Yet its all Pretentious. WHO THE FOOL IS IT THAT BELIEVES THAT GOD BECAME MAN AND THEN THIS GOD DIED.

HOW CAN GOD DIE. SCHOLAR COME TO YOUR SENSE GOD HAS GIVEN YOU A BRAIN USE IT PLEASE. AND ENCOURAGE YOUR FELLOW TO DO THE SAME.

WHO OR WHAT EVER IT IS THAT DIED ON THAT CROSS BY THE NAME JESUS ACCORDING TO BIBLE STORY IS NOT GOD. THE FACT THAT HE DIED KILL THAT IDEOLOGY.

ITS A SICK IDEOLOGY FOR SICK PEOPLE. WAKE UP AND GET CURED BEFORE ITS TOO LATE. DO NOT WAIT UNTIL AFTER YOU DIE BEFORE YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THAT GOD CANNOT DIE.

WORDWORLD:
The message of ALLAH in the GLORIOUS QURAN this:

"O People of the Book! Commit no excess in your religion: NOR SAY OF GOD AUGHT BUT THE TRUTH. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) A PROPHET OF GOD, and HIS WORD, which he bestowed on Mary, and a SPIRIT proceeding from HIM: so believe in GOD and HIS prophets. Say not "TRINITY": desist: it will be better for you: for GOD IS ONE GOD: GLORY TO HIM: (far Exalted is He) above having a son. TO HIM BELONGS ALL THINGS IN THE HEAVENS AND ON EARTH. AND ENOUGH IS GOD AS A DISPOSER OF AFFAIRS" Quran 4: 171

how blind you are, did the quran just call jesus spirit from God ? Please, provide a single verse in the quran were such title is given to any prophet.

The words used in Surah 4:171 are ruhun-
minhu, “a Spirit from him.” Thus, the Qur’an
clearly describes the human, Jesus, as a Spirit
from God himself. With Jesus being the only
exception, no humans are ever depicted as
such. However, no attempt is made to explain
this absolutely unique statement of belief in the Qur’an. Yet, the Qur’an strongly supports the Christian belief that Jesus was a pre-existing Spirit creature who took on a human form. Surah 4:171 presupposes that Jesus existed before he was conceived by a virgin-woman.

For the Qur’an to identify Jesus as a Spirit from God who was committed to Mary indicates that he was with God even before he was given to her. It is the closest the Qur’an comes to admitting the pre-existence of Jesus before his conception on earth. The lack of any explanation of its significance, however, suggests that Muhammad heard and adopted Christian teachings and titles applying to Jesus without understanding them or seeing their ominous implications that Jesus was more than a prophet. Jesus was a Spirit before he came to earth as a human. The Bible, in no uncertain term, testifies to this divine truth:
John 16:28: “I came out from the Father and have come into the world. Further, I am leaving the world and am going my way to the Father.”
If Jesus was spoken in Qur’an as “The Word of God” and as “A Spirit from God” then these two statements would make Jesus more than a prophet because no man can be called by such titles. Such titles would be appropriate only for the one who is the unique Son of God.

malvisguy212:
For the Qur’an to identify Jesus as a Spirit from
God who was committed to Mary indicates that
he was with God even before he was given to
her. It is the closest the Qur’an comes to
admitting the pre-existence of Jesus before
his conception on earth. The lack of any
explanation of its significance, however,
suggests that Muhammad heard and adopted
Christian teachings and titles applying to Jesus
without understanding them or seeing their
ominous implications that Jesus was more than
a prophet. Jesus was a Spirit before he came to
earth as a human. The Bible, in no uncertain
term, testifies to this divine truth:

John 16:28: “I came out from the Father
and have come into the world. Further, I am
leaving the world and am going my way to
the Father.”

If Jesus was spoken in Qur’an as “The Word of
God” and as “A Spirit from God” then these
two statements would make Jesus more than a
prophet because no man can be called by such
titles. Such titles would be appropriate only for
the one who is the unique Son of God.

YOU GUYS IMBECILI-TY HAVE NOT BOUNDS. THE INTRO TO MY WRITE UP SAYS IT ALL. THAT YOU ARE ALL SUFFERING FROM INTELLECTUAL MALNUTRITION.

ARE YOU TRYING TO PUT WORDS IN GOD'S MOUTH?

DID THE QURAN CALL JESSUS GOD OR SON OF GOD DESPITE ALL THOSE QUALITIES BESTOWED ON HIM BY HIS LORD. FOR THE RECORDS.

WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IS NOT EVEN THE GOSPEL OF JESUS? ITS SOME JIM-JAM-JAGA-JOGO WRITTEN BY SOME LAGA-LOGE-MUSKIES.

THE FACT THAT YOU SEE THOSE QUALITIES REPEATED IN THE QURAN TELLS YOU ABOUT THE SOURCE. WHICH IS GOD!!!

CAN GOD DIE? AM ASKING YOU. CAN A GOD DIE. THAT IS THE ONE TRUE QUALITY THAT MAKES IT A FALLACY TO ASSUME JESUS TO BE GOD ACCORDING TO THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.

WHO EVER IT WAS WHO DIED ON THAT CROSS CRYING LIKE A WOMAN IS NOT AND CAN NEVER BE GOD. ALL OTHER ATTRIBUTES HIGHLIGHTED IN THE QURAN STILL DOESNT MAKE JESUS GOD.

PLEASE TELL ME CAN GOD DIE? WHO DEAD ON THAT CROSS?

INFACT MUSLIMS SHOULD BE THE ONES WORSHIPING JESUS IF ONLY ISLAM WAS BUILT ON IRRATIONAL DOGMA. THE QURAN SAID THE MAN DID NOT DIE, GOD RAISED HIM UP. WHY ARE WE NOT WORSHIPING JESUS. BECAUSE WE ARE NOT FOOLS LIKE YOU.

Sahih Muslim, Volume 4, pg 1261:
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger
(saw) as saying: The satan touches every
son of Adam on the day when his
mother gives birth to him with the
exception of Mary and her son.

Why should Jesus be the only man who is without sin among mankind? The Qur’an admits his sinlessness but gives us no reason for it. Something is not right somewhere, the quran don't want its reader to know the truth, how can jesus be call the Word of God, the spirit of God and He is sinless in the quran without given us reason ? We can only
comprehend this if we understand the full
significance of Jesus’ role in God’s purpose. We
will also appreciate why all these unique
features are vested in one man. Since the
Qur’an does not reveal what made Jesus so
unique, we need to go to the Bible for the
answer.


Both the Qur’an and the Bible tell us very clearly that Jesus had no human father. We must therefore ask ourselves this vital question, “Since Jesus is addressed as a ‘SON’ by the angel Gabriel both in the Qur’an (Surah 19:19) and in the Bible (Luke 1:35), WHOSE SON IS HE?”. Is it Mary’s? In Surah 19:19, the angel Gabriel said to Mary: “I am only a messenger of thy Lord, to announce to thee the" GIFT OF A HOLY SON" Here, Gabriel refers to a son who was to be given as a “gift” by God to Mary. Since the
Qur’an makes it very clear that the son is a gift
from God, it shows that Mary was only the
recipient of that gift. She is not the source of that
gift but God. The gift belongs to God. The gift
was a son. Therefore, the son belongs to
God which means the son was His or His son.
In other words, God’s son. This testifies to the
Gospel truth that Jesus is the Son of God.

1st Epistle of John 5:7 has recently been UPROOTED from the HOLY BIBLE and CHOPPED into PEICES.

Seriously and for the sake of knowledge, is the above statement true?

Anas09, 4evergod3, wilgrea7, thesixthsense,yorhmienerd,cummando,scholar8200,malvisguy212,DavidtheGreek

Guys please your sincere answer

yazach:
1st Epistle of John 5:7 has recently been UPROOTED from the HOLY BIBLE and CHOPPED into PEICES.

Seriously and for the sake of knowledge, is the above statement true?

Anas09, 4evergod3, wilgrea7, thesixthsense,yorhmienerd,cummando,scholar8200,malvisguy212,DavidtheGreek

Guys please your sincere answer

i never heard of such.. my electronic bible still has it.. if anybody is trying to remove it from the bible then its probably people who are trying to fight the trinity

yazach:
1st Epistle of John 5:7 has recently been UPROOTED from the HOLY BIBLE and CHOPPED into PEICES.

Seriously and for the sake of knowledge, is the above statement true?

Anas09, 4evergod3, wilgrea7, thesixthsense,yorhmienerd,cummando,scholar8200,malvisguy212,DavidtheGreek

Guys please your sincere answer

[b]
In order to answer your question we need to take a look at some historical truths and facts.
During the early growth of the Christian church, ministers (whether saved or not) wrote down doctrines that they said were Christian and Biblical. Starting after the death of the apostles (about 100 AD) many people taught the lie that Jesus was not God the Son and Son of God, or that Jesus became God at His baptism, or the false doctrine that the Holy Spirit was not God or was not eternal.

The growing religion that became known as Roman Catholic, after many debates eventually agreed on the doctrine of the Trinity. So they had no reason to remove 1 John 5:7 from their Bibles, since it supported what they taught.

But the Greek Eastern Orthodox religion was combating a heresy called "Sabellianism," and would have found it easier to combat the heresy by simply removing the troubling passage from their Bibles.

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

200 AD Tertullian wrote "which three are one" based on the verse in his Against Praxeas, chapter 25.
250 AD Cyprian of Carthage, wrote, "And again, of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost it is written: "And the three are One" in his On The Lapsed, On the Novatians.
350 AD Priscillian referred to it [Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum)
350 AD Idacius Clarus referred to it [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina)
350 AD Athanasius referred to it in his De Incarnatione
398 AD Aurelius Augustine used it to defend Trinitarianism in De Trinitate against the heresy of Sabellianism
415 AD Council of Carthage appealed to 1 John 5:7 when debating the Arian belief (Arians didn't believe in the deity of Jesus Christ)
450-530 AD Several orthodox African writers quoted the verse when defending the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals. These writers are:

A) Vigilius Tapensis in "Three Witnesses in Heaven"
B) Victor Vitensis in his Historia persecutionis
C) Fulgentius in "The Three Heavenly Witnesses"

500 AD Cassiodorus cited it [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus)
550 AD Old Latin ms r has it
550 AD The "Speculum" has it [The Speculum is a treatise that contains some good Old Latin scriptures.]
750 AD Wianburgensis referred to it
800 AD Jerome's Vulgate has it [It was not in Jerome's original Vulgate, but was brought in about 800 AD from good Old Latin manuscripts.]
1000s AD miniscule 635 has it
1150 AD minuscule ms 88 in the margin
1300s AD miniscule 629 has it
157-1400 AD Waldensian (that is, Vaudois) Bibles have the verse
1500 AD ms 61 has the verse
Even Nestle's 26th edition Greek New Testament, based upon the corrupt Alexandrian text, admits that these and other important manuscripts have the verse:

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

The evidence of history shows us that the Roman Catholic religion was relentless in its effort to destroy the Vaudois and their Bible. It took them until the 1650s to finish their hateful attacks. But the Vaudois were successful in preserving God's words to the days of the Reformation.

Now we have to ask ourselves a question: Who had the most to gain by adding to or taking away from the Bible? Did the Vaudois, who were being killed for having their Bibles, have anything to gain by adding to or taking from the words of God? Compromise is what the Roman religion wanted! Had the Vaudois just followed the popes, their lives would have been much easier. But they counted the cost. This was not politics; it was their life and soul. They above all people would not want to change a single letter of the words they received from Antioch of Syria. And they paid for this with their lives.

The Reformation itself owes a lot to these Christians in the French Alps. They not only preserved the Scriptures, but they show to what lengths God would go to keep his promise (Psalm 12:6-7).


[size=15pt]Psalm 12:6-7King James Version (KJV)

6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
[/size]

And that's only part of the story about the preservation of God's words. So 1st John 5:7 is intact.[/b]

yazach:
1st Epistle of John 5:7 has recently been UPROOTED from the HOLY BIBLE and CHOPPED into PEICES.

Seriously and for the sake of knowledge, is the above statement true?

Anas09, 4evergod3, wilgrea7, thesixthsense,yorhmienerd,cummando,scholar8200,malvisguy212,DavidtheGreek

Guys please your sincere answer

There was a discussion on it already

Kindly click here

WORDWORLD:
YOU GUYS IMBECILI-TY HAVE NOT BOUNDS. THE INTRO TO MY WRITE UP SAYS IT ALL. THAT YOU ARE ALL SUFFERING FROM INTELLECTUAL MALNUTRITION.

ARE YOU TRYING TO PUT WORDS IN GOD'S MOUTH?

DID THE QURAN CALL JESSUS GOD OR SON OF GOD DESPITE ALL THOSE QUALITIES BESTOWED ON HIM BY HIS LORD. FOR THE RECORDS.

WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IS NOT EVEN THE GOSPEL OF JESUS? ITS SOME JIM-JAM-JAGA-JOGO WRITTEN BY SOME LAGA-LOGE-MUSKIES.

THE FACT THAT YOU SEE THOSE QUALITIES REPEATED IN THE QURAN TELLS YOU ABOUT THE SOURCE. WHICH IS GOD!!!

CAN GOD DIE? AM ASKING YOU. CAN A GOD DIE. THAT IS THE ONE TRUE QUALITY THAT MAKES IT A FALLACY TO ASSUME JESUS TO BE GOD ACCORDING TO THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.

WHO EVER IT WAS WHO DIED ON THAT CROSS CRYING LIKE A WOMAN IS NOT AND CAN NEVER BE GOD. ALL OTHER ATTRIBUTES HIGHLIGHTED IN THE QURAN STILL DOESNT MAKE JESUS GOD.

PLEASE TELL ME CAN GOD DIE? WHO DEAD ON THAT CROSS?

INFACT MUSLIMS SHOULD BE THE ONES WORSHIPING JESUS IF ONLY ISLAM WAS BUILT ON IRRATIONAL DOGMA. THE QURAN SAID THE MAN DID NOT DIE, GOD RAISED HIM UP. WHY ARE WE NOT WORSHIPING JESUS. BECAUSE WE ARE NOT FOOLS LIKE YOU.

So a Quran writen in Arabic by people who were not witnesses to the life of Jesus and who only heard stories of it and which came 600yrs after Jesus left is now the authority that refutes the Bible?

You claim your Quran declares that jesus did not die and was taken into heaven alive....Let me even follow your line of thought a bit......

You believe Jesus did not die and went to heaven alive...You believe Jesus performed miracles which even your quran attests to..... You also believe muhammad died and was buried and remains dead as documented in your quran...you also believe he died of poisoning and that he performed no single miracle as documented by your quran....

Yet the same Quran claims that muhammad was greater than Jesus even with all it has testified about both jesus and mohammad?

if not the Nairaland id a faceless forum I would have easily taken you for a 10yr old going by your line of reasoning. Heck even a 10 yr old would have asked a simple question like HOW IS THIS EVEN POSSIBLE WITH BOTH COMPARISONS?

But alas you have been zombified so you know or see nothing else indeed cannot.

The way your Quran did a comparative analysid of Jesus vs Muhammed is like comparing SUPERMAN (Jesus) with DANNY DAVITO (Muhammad) in strenght and origin.

Your brain is there...Use it.

WORDWORLD:
I WASNT AT ALL MISTAKEN WE I STARTED MY WRITTEN AS THUS:



I WASNT AT ALL MISTAKEN WHEN I WROTE ALL THOSE ABOUT THE CHRISTIAN LOW I/Q.

Yet its all Pretentious. WHO THE FOOL IS IT THAT BELIEVES THAT GOD BECAME MAN AND THEN THIS GOD DIED.

HOW CAN GOD DIE. SCHOLAR COME TO YOUR SENSE GOD HAS GIVEN YOU A BRAIN USE IT PLEASE. AND ENCOURAGE YOUR FELLOW TO DO THE SAME.

WHO OR WHAT EVER IT IS THAT DIED ON THAT CROSS BY THE NAME JESUS ACCORDING TO BIBLE STORY IS NOT GOD. THE FACT THAT HE DIED KILL THAT IDEOLOGY.

ITS A SICK IDEOLOGY FOR SICK PEOPLE. WAKE UP AND GET CURED BEFORE ITS TOO LATE. DO NOT WAIT UNTIL AFTER YOU DIE BEFORE YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THAT GOD CANNOT DIE.

. "..., I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight."

Luke 10:21

* modified above*

WORDWORLD you lack manners, typical of an extremist. But because of the fine cultured Muslims I've known, I won't attribute your lunacy to Islam. Not today.

Have you never been told that writing in capitals signify shouting?? and there is good etiquette even on online forums? why then would you start a discussion (uncivilized as can be) by shouting all over the place. Don't you even know it's harder to read?

If Islam allowed exposure to a fraction of scrutiny it would have been extinct way before the 19th century. But you guys kill and maim as your book commands just to keep and propagate your religion. A lot of us know about the dark side of Islam, we see it everyday even, but would rather not talk about it.

So continue displaying your Boko Haram tendencies. It's a free world. express yourself. My religion is free - I can leave anytime I want, I wish you can say that as well.

By the way, I didn't bother reading all your nonsense as you have shown once again that you really need help from a psychiatrist; and next time, only mention me when you can pretend to be sane.

TheSixthSense:
Have you never been told that writing in capitals signify shouting?? and there is good etiquette even on online forums? why then would you start a discussion (uncivilized as can be) by shouting all over the place. Don't you even know it's harder to read?

I fully agree with the above even though I'm a neutral

Wilgrea7:
i never heard of such.. my electronic bible still has it.. if anybody is trying to remove it from the bible then its probably people who are trying to fight the trinity

But it is not found in: REVISE STANDARD VERSION REVISE STANDARD VERSION (RSV) AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, THE NEW ENGLISH BIBLE, THE PHILIPS MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE

Well, maybe there are different types of bible, and anther one is that of your electronic version

Thanks

4everGod:
[b]
In order to answer your question we need to take a look at some historical truths and facts.
During the early growth of the Christian church, ministers (whether saved or not) wrote down doctrines that they said were Christian and Biblical. Starting after the death of the apostles (about 100 AD) many people taught the lie that Jesus was not God the Son and Son of God, or that Jesus became God at His baptism, or the false doctrine that the Holy Spirit was not God or was not eternal.

The growing religion that became known as Roman Catholic, after many debates eventually agreed on the doctrine of the Trinity. So they had no reason to remove 1 John 5:7 from their Bibles, since it supported what they taught.

But the Greek Eastern Orthodox religion was combating a heresy called "Sabellianism," and would have found it easier to combat the heresy by simply removing the troubling passage from their Bibles.

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

200 AD Tertullian wrote "which three are one" based on the verse in his Against Praxeas, chapter 25.
250 AD Cyprian of Carthage, wrote, "And again, of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost it is written: "And the three are One" in his On The Lapsed, On the Novatians.
350 AD Priscillian referred to it [Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum)
350 AD Idacius Clarus referred to it [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina)
350 AD Athanasius referred to it in his De Incarnatione
398 AD Aurelius Augustine used it to defend Trinitarianism in De Trinitate against the heresy of Sabellianism
415 AD Council of Carthage appealed to 1 John 5:7 when debating the Arian belief (Arians didn't believe in the deity of Jesus Christ)
450-530 AD Several orthodox African writers quoted the verse when defending the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals. These writers are:

A) Vigilius Tapensis in "Three Witnesses in Heaven"
B) Victor Vitensis in his Historia persecutionis
C) Fulgentius in "The Three Heavenly Witnesses"

500 AD Cassiodorus cited it [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus)
550 AD Old Latin ms r has it
550 AD The "Speculum" has it [The Speculum is a treatise that contains some good Old Latin scriptures.]
750 AD Wianburgensis referred to it
800 AD Jerome's Vulgate has it [It was not in Jerome's original Vulgate, but was brought in about 800 AD from good Old Latin manuscripts.]
1000s AD miniscule 635 has it
1150 AD minuscule ms 88 in the margin
1300s AD miniscule 629 has it
157-1400 AD Waldensian (that is, Vaudois) Bibles have the verse
1500 AD ms 61 has the verse
Even Nestle's 26th edition Greek New Testament, based upon the corrupt Alexandrian text, admits that these and other important manuscripts have the verse:

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

The evidence of history shows us that the Roman Catholic religion was relentless in its effort to destroy the Vaudois and their Bible. It took them until the 1650s to finish their hateful attacks. But the Vaudois were successful in preserving God's words to the days of the Reformation.

Now we have to ask ourselves a question: Who had the most to gain by adding to or taking away from the Bible? Did the Vaudois, who were being killed for having their Bibles, have anything to gain by adding to or taking from the words of God? Compromise is what the Roman religion wanted! Had the Vaudois just followed the popes, their lives would have been much easier. But they counted the cost. This was not politics; it was their life and soul. They above all people would not want to change a single letter of the words they received from Antioch of Syria. And they paid for this with their lives.

The Reformation itself owes a lot to these Christians in the French Alps. They not only preserved the Scriptures, but they show to what lengths God would go to keep his promise (Psalm 12:6-7).


[size=15pt]Psalm 12:6-7King James Version (KJV)

6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
[/size]

And that's only part of the story about the preservation of God's words. So 1st John 5:7 is intact.[/b]

Chaiiii, there is God o!!
You mean word God is being playing around like leader ball,
with this your post, bible can not be word of God but word of Man

yazach:
Chaiiii, there is God o!! You mean word God is being playing around like leader ball, with this your post, bible can not be word of God but word of Man

so with all you read there this is what you deduced? Chaii

hopefulLandlord:
There was a discussion on it already

Kindly click here

I open the discussion but it only deepen my belief that Bible can never be word of God but Word of Men which give chance for revising it.

How can word of God be revised

yazach:
Chaiiii, there is God o!!
You mean word God is being playing around like leader ball,
with this your post, bible can not be word of God but word of Man

another opinion of yours. Only the Truth will attract such opposition.


The father of lies doth not his fiery arrows spend,

On that that achieves his deceptive end.

Scholar8200:
another opinion of yours. Only the Truth will attract such opposition.


The father of lies doth not his fiery arrows spend,

On that that achieves his deceptive end.

so only truth can be attacked?

what kinda fallacy is this?

hopefulLandlord:
so only truth can be attacked?

what kinda fallacy is this?

with as much ferocity and subtlety, YES!

yazach:
But it is not found in: REVISE STANDARD VERSION REVISE STANDARD VERSION (RSV) AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, THE NEW ENGLISH BIBLE, THE PHILIPS MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE

Well, maybe there are different types of bible, and anther one is that of your electronic version

Thanks

yeah. i agree with you sir. people always try to either interpret verses wrongly to suit them or remove a verse they know they can't live with

yazach:
1st Epistle of John 5:7 has recently been UPROOTED from the HOLY BIBLE and CHOPPED into PEICES.

Seriously and for the sake of knowledge, is the above statement true?

Anas09, 4evergod3, wilgrea7, thesixthsense,yorhmienerd,cummando,scholar8200,malvisguy212,DavidtheGreek

Guys please your sincere answer

Mr Muslim, read what 4everGod responded to you and stop being hell bent on grobbing in ignorance.

Scholar8200:
with as much ferocity and subtlety, YES!

so anything that's being attacked with ferocity and subtlety is definitely true

do you fully agree with this statement?

yazach:
But it is not found in: REVISE STANDARD VERSION REVISE STANDARD VERSION (RSV) AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, THE NEW ENGLISH BIBLE, THE PHILIPS MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE

Well, maybe there are different types of bible, and anther one is that of your electronic version

Thanks

Do you realise that there are at least 5 to 10 different types of Quran?

Wait I will open a thread about that shortly and expose your supposed PERFECT QURAN there.

All the words of God in the bible are true and preserved. I suggest you read this link below and also read the Bible commentary after it.

http://biblehub.com/1_john/5-7.htm

hopefulLandlord:
There was a discussion on it already

Kindly click here

Yea, Yazach follow the link and go and get really busted. Go and watch real men discuss. Go on.

I don't know. I never knew about the controversy surrounding it. Although, I understood the trinity scripturally without the verse. Anyone that reads the Bible and cannot tell that Jesus Christ is God then there really has to be something wrong somewhere. And God is One.

yazach:
1st Epistle of John 5:7 has recently been UPROOTED from the HOLY BIBLE and CHOPPED into PEICES.

Seriously and for the sake of knowledge, is the above statement true?

Anas09, 4evergod3, wilgrea7, thesixthsense,yorhmienerd,cummando,scholar8200,malvisguy212,DavidtheGreek

Guys please your sincere answer

Very correct. Even the Quran points to Jesus Christ as the Son of God but the arabs would never accept that a jew would become their God. Not in their lifetime. So they exalt Mohammed the Arabian prophet as the greatest then they teach their uneducated adherents like the ones in Nigeria who do not understand Arabic, even when they eventually understand they would have already been indoctrinated. Also imply that Arabic is the language of God, and Saudi Arabia is where God is.

malvisguy212:
Sahih Muslim, Volume 4, pg 1261:
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger
(saw) as saying: The satan touches every
son of Adam on the day when his
mother gives birth to him with the
exception of Mary and her son.

Why should Jesus be the only man who is without sin among mankind? The Qur’an admits his sinlessness but gives us no reason for it. Something is not right somewhere, the quran don't want its reader to know the truth, how can jesus be call the Word of God, the spirit of God and He is sinless in the quran without given us reason ? We can only
comprehend this if we understand the full
significance of Jesus’ role in God’s purpose. We
will also appreciate why all these unique
features are vested in one man. Since the
Qur’an does not reveal what made Jesus so
unique, we need to go to the Bible for the
answer.


Both the Qur’an and the Bible tell us very clearly that Jesus had no human father. We must therefore ask ourselves this vital question, “Since Jesus is addressed as a ‘SON’ by the angel Gabriel both in the Qur’an (Surah 19:19) and in the Bible (Luke 1:35), WHOSE SON IS HE?”. Is it Mary’s? In Surah 19:19, the angel Gabriel said to Mary: “I am only a messenger of thy Lord, to announce to thee the" GIFT OF A HOLY SON" Here, Gabriel refers to a son who was to be given as a “gift” by God to Mary. Since the
Qur’an makes it very clear that the son is a gift
from God, it shows that Mary was only the
recipient of that gift. She is not the source of that
gift but God. The gift belongs to God. The gift
was a son. Therefore, the son belongs to
God which means the son was His or His son.
In other words, God’s son. This testifies to the
Gospel truth that Jesus is the Son of God.

hopefulLandlord:
so anything that's being attacked with ferocity and subtlety is definitely true

do you fully agree with this statement?

this is a sly way of taking my statements out of their context. Perhaps you may give an example of one of your 'anythings' that has being so attacked with such purpose and subtlety as the Truth has been.

Scholar8200:
this is a sly way of taking my statements out of their context. Perhaps you may give an example of one of your 'anythings' that has being so attacked with such purpose and subtlety as the Truth has been.

that is a simple yes/no question but the aim has been achieved

I could detect from your reply that there are "exceptions" to that

we can both agree that something being attacked ferociously doesn't make it "true"