Is YOUR church doctrinal statement ONE with SATAN?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
This verse is speaking of Jesus coming in a flesh and blood body. The water is water of the womb, the blood is his flesh and blood body.

This is the Spirit that testified that the one that came in flesh and blood is the Messiah.

The womb of Mary and the blood of Jesus and the Holy Spirit ARE NOT ONE! You're quoting antichrist Vaticanus garbage manuscripts. And your Greek version is coming from the same antichrist Vaticanus garbage manuscripts.

Can't you see how SCREWED UP those verses you posted are. It's pure garbage!
The water is not the water from the womb. It's the baptism.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
You don't read verse 7 in a vacuum alone, you read it in context with vs 4,5,&6. Verses four, five and six are punctuated by verse seven as a synopsis. So it wouldn't make sense if he changed subjects and verse 7, which starts out with the word, for. Starting a sentence with the word for is similar to starting the sentence with therefore or even because.
Now if we assume that the scriptures are inspired by the holy Spirit, then we also have to assume that the holy Spirit understands language structures, and also understood the written language structures that would come in the future.
So what is left except that this is another example of King James having his own views shoehorned into the scriptures.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
This verse is speaking of Jesus coming in a flesh and blood body. The water is water of the womb, the blood is his flesh and blood body.

This is the Spirit that testified that the one that came in flesh and blood is the Messiah.

The womb of Mary and the blood of Jesus and the Holy Spirit ARE NOT ONE! You're quoting antichrist Vaticanus garbage manuscripts. And your Greek version is coming from the same antichrist Vaticanus garbage manuscripts.

Can't you see how SCREWED UP those verses you posted are. It's pure garbage!



How are they screwed up when they were inspired by the Holy Spirit?
The KJV is a translation, where LITERALLY NOTHING is inspired by the Holy Spirit!
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
This verse is speaking of Jesus coming in a flesh and blood body. The water is water of the womb, the blood is his flesh and blood body.

This is the Spirit that testified that the one that came in flesh and blood is the Messiah.

The womb of Mary and the blood of Jesus and the Holy Spirit ARE NOT ONE! You're quoting antichrist Vaticanus garbage manuscripts. And your Greek version is coming from the same antichrist Vaticanus garbage manuscripts.

Can't you see how SCREWED UP those verses you posted are. It's pure garbage!


BTW, 1 John 5:6-8 is supposed to be WHO Jesus is.

Blood and Water came out from His side when He was pierced and the Holy Spirit all represented Christ.
How do you come up with the WOMB?
You are so far off base, no wonder you think the KJV Bible is solid gold :ROFL:
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
The water is not the water from the womb. It's the baptism.
Let's look at if from Biker's Greek text.

So we have a guy who is GOING TO come, but he hasn't came yet, but he's coming through water and blood similar to the way ALL BABIES ARE BORN. So is this verse maybe about the baptism of the not yet come Antichrist? What are your thoughts?

Seriously are you really going to stand by this BLATANTLY heretical translation and asinine statement that the water is baptism? I would bet my last pay check that you will stand behind it.


Greek:
6 This is He Who is coming through water and blood and spirit - Jesus Christ - not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood. And the spirit it is which is testifying, for the spirit is the truth,
7 seeing that three there are that are testifying,
8 the spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are for the one thing."
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,114
965
113
READ MY POST THIS TIME! WE ARE COMPARING VERSE 7 OF THE KJV TO THE ORIGINAL ARAMAIC/GREEK/LATIN VULGATE.

THE KJV DOES NOT MATCH THE OTHER 3 AT ALL. THE OTHER DO NOT MENTION IN HEAVEN/FATHER/SON/HOLY SPIRIT.

and to prove you have no idea what you're saying here, JESUS did not bear record of Himself. He said the Father would and the Holy Spirit. But the KJV claims Jesus did hahahahaha MORONS!


PAY SPECIFIC ATTENTION TO VERSE 7:

From the KJV:
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.


Now, look at verse 7 in the Aramaic, the Greek, the Latin Vulgate which are all at least 1,100 years OLDER than and written BEFORE the KJV:

1 John 5:6-8
Aramaic:
ܗܢܘ ܕܐܬܐ ܒܝܕ ܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ ܝܫܘܥ ܡܫܝܚܐ ܠܐ ܗܘܐ ܒܡܝܐ ܒܠܚܘܕ ܐܠܐ ܒܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ
6 This is The One who came by means of The Water and The Blood; Eshu Meshikha {Yeshua, The Anointed One}. It wasn't of The Water alone, but rather, by The Water and The Blood.

ܘܪܘܚܐ ܡܣܗܕܐ ܕܗܝ ܪܘܚܐ ܐܝܬܝܗ ܫܪܪܐ
7 And The Rukha {The Spirit} testifies; because that One, The Rukha {The Spirit}, is The Truth.

ܘܐܝܬܝܗܘܢ ܬܠܬܐ ܣܗܕܝܢ ܪܘܚܐ ܘܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ ܘܬܠܬܝܗܘܢ ܒܚܕ ܐܢܘܢ
8 And there are three testifying: The Rukha {The Spirit}, and The Water, and The Blood. And these three are in One.
^
nowhere is the Father-Son-Holy Spirit listed like the English add in.


Greek:
6 This is He Who is coming through water and blood and spirit - Jesus Christ - not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood. And the spirit it is which is testifying, for the spirit is the truth,
7 seeing that three there are that are testifying,
8 the spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are for the one thing."
^
nowhere is the Father-Son-Holy Spirit listed like the English add in.


Latin Vulgate:
6 hic est qui venit per aquam et sanguinem Iesus Christus non in aqua solum sed in aqua et sanguine et Spiritus est qui testificatur quoniam Christus est veritas

This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ: not by water only but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit which testifieth that Christ is the truth.

7 quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant

And there are Three who give testimony

8 Spiritus et aqua et sanguis et tres unum sunt

the spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one.
^
nowhere is the Father-Son-Holy Spirit listed like the English add in.


If these Manuscripts came before the KJV, why doesn't the KJV say specifically the same thing from what it was translated from?




In verse 7, the older versions do not mention Heaven/Father/Son/Holy Spirit like the KJV.

So, if the KJV was using these to translate from, how did the KJV writers come up with Heaven/Father/Son/Holy Spirit when the OLDER versions do not mention anything of the sort?
Umm, not even the KJV used the "Father-Son-Holy Spirit', Father/Son/Holy Spirit." It must be paid attention that the Johaninne Comma as used in the KJV is the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
Umm, not even the KJV used the "Father-Son-Holy Spirit', Father/Son/Holy Spirit." It must be paid attention that the Johaninne Comma as used in the KJV is the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:



True, but you cannot split hairs when we discuss between Jesus/Son/Word since the same writer of 1 John defined Him in the Gospel of John.

Either way, the KJV could even appear to be claiming that the WORD and Jesus are not the same by having the WORD be in Heaven as a witness of Jesus on Earth simultaneously. But in the bottom line truth of the matter, we know that even in the form of Jesus, He was always the WORD. And since Jesus was on Earth, so was the WORD since the WORD is Jesus.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
Either way, the KJV could even appear to be claiming that the WORD and Jesus are not the same by having the WORD be in Heaven as a witness of Jesus on Earth simultaneously.

Fredo,
Do you believe the WORD and Jesus are different , not the same Being?

Because how verse 7 of 1 John 5 reads, one could easily conclude the KJV is claiming these are different Beings with 1 in Heaven at same time the other is on Earth. And then specifically calling out that the WORD is being a Witness to Jesus like they are different and separate individuals.

Talk about absolute Heresy to the ultimate max!
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,114
965
113
READ MY POST THIS TIME! WE ARE COMPARING VERSE 7 OF THE KJV TO THE ORIGINAL ARAMAIC/GREEK/LATIN VULGATE.

THE KJV DOES NOT MATCH THE OTHER 3 AT ALL. THE OTHER DO NOT MENTION IN HEAVEN/FATHER/SON/HOLY SPIRIT.

and to prove you have no idea what you're saying here, JESUS did not bear record of Himself. He said the Father would and the Holy Spirit. But the KJV claims Jesus did hahahahaha MORONS!


PAY SPECIFIC ATTENTION TO VERSE 7:

From the KJV:
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.


Now, look at verse 7 in the Aramaic, the Greek, the Latin Vulgate which are all at least 1,100 years OLDER than and written BEFORE the KJV:

1 John 5:6-8
Aramaic:
ܗܢܘ ܕܐܬܐ ܒܝܕ ܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ ܝܫܘܥ ܡܫܝܚܐ ܠܐ ܗܘܐ ܒܡܝܐ ܒܠܚܘܕ ܐܠܐ ܒܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ
6 This is The One who came by means of The Water and The Blood; Eshu Meshikha {Yeshua, The Anointed One}. It wasn't of The Water alone, but rather, by The Water and The Blood.

ܘܪܘܚܐ ܡܣܗܕܐ ܕܗܝ ܪܘܚܐ ܐܝܬܝܗ ܫܪܪܐ
7 And The Rukha {The Spirit} testifies; because that One, The Rukha {The Spirit}, is The Truth.

ܘܐܝܬܝܗܘܢ ܬܠܬܐ ܣܗܕܝܢ ܪܘܚܐ ܘܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ ܘܬܠܬܝܗܘܢ ܒܚܕ ܐܢܘܢ
8 And there are three testifying: The Rukha {The Spirit}, and The Water, and The Blood. And these three are in One.
^
nowhere is the Father-Son-Holy Spirit listed like the English add in.
Hi Biker,

You need to fix first the antiquity of your so called Aramaic Bible. Even Critical Scholars Bruce Metzger who had literally examine the Yonan Codex had to disagree with the dating of the said Codex. Accordingly, the the codex is of 7th Ce. and not first Ce. AD as spoken by Christ and the Apostles and that makes a spot on.

https://www.sbl-site.org/assets/pdfs/Yonan.pdf
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,114
965
113
True, but you cannot split hairs when we discuss between Jesus/Son/Word since the same writer of 1 John defined Him in the Gospel of John.

Either way, the KJV could even appear to be claiming that the WORD and Jesus are not the same by having the WORD be in Heaven as a witness of Jesus on Earth simultaneously. But in the bottom line truth of the matter, we know that even in the form of Jesus, He was always the WORD. And since Jesus was on Earth, so was the WORD since the WORD is Jesus.
I think you need to have first see the views of the others before going to a some sort of bias judgment as a friendly advice, however I cannot insist my firm belief that 1 John 5:7 is part of the Bible.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,114
965
113
True, but you cannot split hairs when we discuss between Jesus/Son/Word since the same writer of 1 John defined Him in the Gospel of John.

Either way, the KJV could even appear to be claiming that the WORD and Jesus are not the same by having the WORD be in Heaven as a witness of Jesus on Earth simultaneously. But in the bottom line truth of the matter, we know that even in the form of Jesus, He was always the WORD. And since Jesus was on Earth, so was the WORD since the WORD is Jesus.
The KJV confirms very well that Jesus is the Word! My claim is technically different...
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,114
965
113
Latin Vulgate:
6 hic est qui venit per aquam et sanguinem Iesus Christus non in aqua solum sed in aqua et sanguine et Spiritus est qui testificatur quoniam Christus est veritas

This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ: not by water only but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit which testifieth that Christ is the truth.

7 quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant

And there are Three who give testimony

8 Spiritus et aqua et sanguis et tres unum sunt

the spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one.
^
nowhere is the Father-Son-Holy Spirit listed like the English add in.


If these Manuscripts came before the KJV, why doesn't the KJV say specifically the same thing from what it was translated from?




In verse 7, the older versions do not mention Heaven/Father/Son/Holy Spirit like the KJV.

So, if the KJV was using these to translate from, how did the KJV writers come up with Heaven/Father/Son/Holy Spirit when the OLDER versions do not mention anything of the sort?
If i have to pay attention, your Latin Vulgate is somewhat misleading. When one speaks of the Latin Vulgata scholars are in reference to the Jeromes 4th ce works or translation and the fact is it has the Comma. http://www.latinvulgate.com/

55Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?quis est qui vincit mundum nisi qui credit quoniam Iesus est Filius Dei56This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ: not by water only but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit which testifieth that Christ is the truth.hic est qui venit per aquam et sanguinem Iesus Christus non in aqua solum sed in aqua et sanguine et Spiritus est qui testificatur quoniam Christus est veritas57And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in caelo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus. Et hi tres unum sunt.58And there are three that give testimony on earth: the spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one.Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra: Spiritus et aqua et sanguis et tres unum sunt
My friendly advis/ce, need to check your info. first.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
Let's look at if from Biker's Greek text.

So we have a guy who is GOING TO come, but he hasn't came yet, but he's coming through water and blood similar to the way ALL BABIES ARE BORN. So is this verse maybe about the baptism of the not yet come Antichrist? What are your thoughts?

Seriously are you really going to stand by this BLATANTLY heretical translation and asinine statement that the water is baptism? I would bet my last pay check that you will stand behind it.


Greek:
6 This is He Who is coming through water and blood and spirit - Jesus Christ - not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood. And the spirit it is which is testifying, for the spirit is the truth,
7 seeing that three there are that are testifying,
8 the spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are for the one thing."
It's not talking about birth. It's talking about he who over comes. You don't overcome by birth. Back up to verse 4.
Now what did Jesus do before he started his ministry? Got baptized.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
It's not talking about birth. It's talking about he who over comes. You don't overcome by birth. Back up to verse 4.
Now what did Jesus do before he started his ministry? Got baptized.
I can lead you to water but I can't make you drink.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,181
3,701
113
I can lead you to water but I can't make you drink.
I know you have, but have you ever thought about how lost people, the people of this world, views the Christian faith? I’ve talked with a few. They think Christians can’t agree on what God has said as they look on the hundreds of different versions of the Bible. And there’s a new one coming out each month. The Bible of the month club...lost people understand what the average believer fails to see.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
Hi Biker,

You need to fix first the antiquity of your so called Aramaic Bible. Even Critical Scholars Bruce Metzger who had literally examine the Yonan Codex had to disagree with the dating of the said Codex. Accordingly, the the codex is of 7th Ce. and not first Ce. AD as spoken by Christ and the Apostles and that makes a spot on.

https://www.sbl-site.org/assets/pdfs/Yonan.pdf


I am aware of that but what I am using consists of 4 total Codex. They all just happen to confirm one another.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
I think you need to have first see the views of the others before going to a some sort of bias judgment as a friendly advice, however I cannot insist my firm belief that 1 John 5:7 is part of the Bible.


This is why I used the multiple versions to show that most claim same view except the KJV.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
If i have to pay attention, your Latin Vulgate is somewhat misleading. When one speaks of the Latin Vulgata scholars are in reference to the Jeromes 4th ce works or translation and the fact is it has the Comma. http://www.latinvulgate.com/

55Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?quis est qui vincit mundum nisi qui credit quoniam Iesus est Filius Dei56This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ: not by water only but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit which testifieth that Christ is the truth.hic est qui venit per aquam et sanguinem Iesus Christus non in aqua solum sed in aqua et sanguine et Spiritus est qui testificatur quoniam Christus est veritas57And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in caelo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus. Et hi tres unum sunt.58And there are three that give testimony on earth: the spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one.Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra: Spiritus et aqua et sanguis et tres unum sunt
My friendly advis/ce, need to check your info. first.


What you've copied pasted were the later add ins.
Those are indicated by (...).
This is why I have what I copy/pasted because it was the original.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
I know you have, but have you ever thought about how lost people, the people of this world, views the Christian faith? I’ve talked with a few. They think Christians can’t agree on what God has said as they look on the hundreds of different versions of the Bible. And there’s a new one coming out each month. The Bible of the month club...lost people understand what the average believer fails to see.
They make excuses. We know that all of the Bibles say the same thing (with exception to Mormon and jw and other cults that actually do change the message) That translation and interpretation does not change the word of God, and his spirit speaks to us when we read the written word, which is why the men who did the translation and interpretation of the KJV actually stated as much in the preface of their own work.
We know that though there are some textual differences (due mostly to the metamorphosis that language goes through over time) they don't change the message or the context.
Ironically us Christian's will point to those who disagree with us on some minor point and say, "your" the reason the lost don't believe, when we know thats not true. The truth is that they don't believe because they reject because of their sin nature.
That argument is a spin off of the Chuck Finney, revivalist, gospel sales pitch, decision theology, error.