What's new
ChristianForums.net

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses

Proof of Trinity

Edward

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
12,432
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
Ran across this "accidently" today. My eyes just fell on it...

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

Randy

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
2,000
Christian
Yes
Ran across this "accidently" today. My eyes just fell on it...

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

Father
One in the Son per Jesus=>Its the Father in me doing His work
Holy Spirit=>Fathers Spirit *Spirit of the Sovereign Lord" (it is One God in all)

One God; One Lord; One Spirit

The Holy Spirit bears witness. What He hears. And any intercession that the Spirit does for us is in accordance with the will of the mind of the Spirit.

God is Spirit per Jesus.

And if you can accept it we are spirit in the tent of the body.

Randy
 

Jesse Stone

Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2014
Messages
122
Christian
No
1 John 5:7
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one./(KJV)

Seems pretty straightforward, doesn't it? Why is there still a discussion about the Trinity? How can there be any doubt that the Trinity is true? This is in both the KJV and the NKJV, both translated from a Byzantine text. But not in modern translations translated from the Alexandrian text (e.g., ESV, NASB, NIV).

Why does the Majority text and Wilbur Pickerings translation, both Byzantine text not have this portion? Yet the New Testament used by the Eastern Orthodox has this text?

And here's an interesting phenomena. Why does the Catholic Latin Vulgate on which the Douay version is translated have this text, while their new Latin Vulgate on which the NAB is translated does not?

Any interested party should check out the history of how that text was not in the first edition of the Greek text of Erasmus, then added in the next edition, then out again in the edition following that.

KJV Onlyists of course think the text is legitimate. At least I think they do. Not sure after having a top KJV Onlyist deny another part of the KJV.

A lot of intrigue concerning this verse.
 

Edward

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
12,432
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
Father
One in the Son per Jesus=>Its the Father in me doing His work
Holy Spirit=>Fathers Spirit *Spirit of the Sovereign Lord" (it is One God in all)

One God; One Lord; One Spirit

The Holy Spirit bears witness. What He hears. And any intercession that the Spirit does for us is in accordance with the will of the mind of the Spirit.

God is Spirit per Jesus.

And if you can accept it we are spirit in the tent of the body.

Randy

Makes sense to me. And that we are spirit in the tent of the body? Yes. Exactly. The way that I heard one Pastor explain it is that we used to be spirit/soul/body, and that after the fall we are now body/soul/spirit, from outside going in. We used to see the spirit first, then fell, now we see the body first, except those few whose light doth shine...which is to say, they are a new man and rearranged so to speak. People see their spirit. He's probably not far off.

It sounds like mumbo jumbo at first, but if you think about it...this makes sense and is significant.
 

Edward

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
12,432
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
Seems pretty straightforward, doesn't it? Why is there still a discussion about the Trinity? How can there be any doubt that the Trinity is true? This is in both the KJV and the NKJV, both translated from a Byzantine text. But not in modern translations translated from the Alexandrian text (e.g., ESV, NASB, NIV).

Why does the Majority text and Wilbur Pickerings translation, both Byzantine text not have this portion? Yet the New Testament used by the Eastern Orthodox has this text?

And here's an interesting phenomena. Why does the Catholic Latin Vulgate on which the Douay version is translated have this text, while their new Latin Vulgate on which the NAB is translated does not?

Any interested party should check out the history of how that text was not in the first edition of the Greek text of Erasmus, then added in the next edition, then out again in the edition following that.

KJV Onlyists of course think the text is legitimate. At least I think they do. Not sure after having a top KJV Onlyist deny another part of the KJV.

A lot of intrigue concerning this verse.


It is straightforward. And of course they will conceal it so that people will not know these things. :sad
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
293
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#643 (p. 33) in response to #633 (p. 32)

Rick W. wrote:

"New International Reader’s Version (NIRV): “Your throne is the very throne of God.”

That's not what it says.

New International Reader's Version (NIRV)

“You are God. Your throne will last for ever and ever.
Your kingdom will be ruled by what is right.
……………………………….......

I wanted to reply to this but have been blocked from posting for the last month.

You are absolutely right, and as soon as I checked it out, I corrected it on both my blog and in my original computer file.

You see, Heb. 1:8 is a quote of Ps. 45:6. So in my complete study I quoted the scholars and translations of Heb. 1:8 first and then, in the second part, listed scholars and translations of Ps. 45:6.

The NIRV quote belonged in the second part (Ps. 45:6), but not in the first.

My mistake and I’m grateful that it was pointed out so I could correct it!
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
293
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
Seems pretty straightforward, doesn't it? Why is there still a discussion about the Trinity? How can there be any doubt that the Trinity is true? This is in both the KJV and the NKJV, both translated from a Byzantine text. But not in modern translations translated from the Alexandrian text (e.g., ESV, NASB, NIV).

Why does the Majority text and Wilbur Pickerings translation, both Byzantine text not have this portion? Yet the New Testament used by the Eastern Orthodox has this text?

And here's an interesting phenomena. Why does the Catholic Latin Vulgate on which the Douay version is translated have this text, while their new Latin Vulgate on which the NAB is translated does not?

Any interested party should check out the history of how that text was not in the first edition of the Greek text of Erasmus, then added in the next edition, then out again in the edition following that.

KJV Onlyists of course think the text is legitimate. At least I think they do. Not sure after having a top KJV Onlyist deny another part of the KJV.

A lot of intrigue concerning this verse.
.................................

Excerpts from my 1Jn57 study:

1 John 5:7 (KJV text)

Dr. William Barclay :

“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.” - pp. 110-111, The Letters of John and Jude, The Daily Study Bible Series, Revised Edition, The Westminster Press, 1976.

Noted Trinitarian scholar Daniel B. Wallace admits the same:

https://bible.org/article/textual-problem-1-john-57-8#_ftnref3

You will also find the same information admitted by the following Trinitarian scholars: Dr. A.T. Robertson; The UBS (pp. 716-718, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, United Bible Societies, 1971).

Even The Expositor's Greek Testament 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 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.
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
26,575
Gender
Male
.................................

Excerpts from my 1Jn57 study:

1 John 5:7 (KJV text)

Dr. William Barclay :

“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.” - pp. 110-111, The Letters of John and Jude, The Daily Study Bible Series, Revised Edition, The Westminster Press, 1976.

Noted Trinitarian scholar Daniel B. Wallace admits the same:

https://bible.org/article/textual-problem-1-john-57-8#_ftnref3

You will also find the same information admitted by the following Trinitarian scholars: Dr. A.T. Robertson; The UBS (pp. 716-718, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, United Bible Societies, 1971).

Even The Expositor's Greek Testament 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 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.

Here's a question.

Do you confess Jesus Christ as Lord (YHWH)?
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
293
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
YHWH is clearly called the Father in a number of Israelite personal names such as Abijah. Scripture clearly states that YHWH is the Father. For example, Is. 64:8: "But now, O Jehovah, thou art our Father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand." - ASV.

But Scripture does not clearly state that the Son is YHWH. Nor do any Israelite names mean anything like the Son (or Messiah, or Firstborn, etc.) is YHWH.
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
26,575
Gender
Male
YHWH is clearly called the Father in a number of Israelite personal names such as Abijah. Scripture clearly states that YHWH is the Father. For example, Is. 64:8: "But now, O Jehovah, thou art our Father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand." - ASV.

But Scripture does not clearly state that the Son is YHWH. Nor do any Israelite names mean anything like the Son (or Messiah, or Firstborn, etc.) is YHWH.

I didn't and wouldn't call God Jehovah!


Is that a Yes or No?

Do you confess Jesus Christ is Lord [YHWH]?

No explanation, just an answer.


JLB
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
293
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
I believe my 2 posts above are clear enough. Jesus is never clearly called YHWH. The Father is.
 

By Grace

Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
1,526
Christian
Yes
Ran across this "accidently" today. My eyes just fell on it...

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

Do you know that this "Johannine comma" is an insertion into the original text? If your Bible is annotated, it wil come with a mentioning somewhere that "verses 7 & 8 are not in some of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts."?

While everything in it is true, it is most often attributed to an exuberant scribe, who when hearing the rest of what went before this (being dictated in a room of other scribes), then wrote in a marginal note. Others seeing it as a marginal note then transcribed what the exuberant scribe wrote into the text of their manuscripts.

BTW that is NOT a slam at the inerrancy of Scriptures.
 

By Grace

Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
1,526
Christian
Yes
I didn't and wouldn't call God Jehovah!
JLB

The reason we have "Jehovah" as a name is that it is Germanic in origin, Since there is no Y sound as in "you" in German, they adapted the yod, in the Tetragrammaton of the 4 Hebrew words that only and always mean God.

Here is a question for you: In Genesis 1, who did the creating?
Was it God the Father, or God the Son?

Don't read this below until after you have made a choice

Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Not meant to stir up controversy, just fun,
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
26,575
Gender
Male
The reason we have "Jehovah" as a name is that it is Germanic in origin, Since there is no Y sound as in "you" in German, they adapted the yod, in the Tetragrammaton of the 4 Hebrew words that only and always mean God.

Here is a question for you: In Genesis 1, who did the creating?
Was it God the Father, or God the Son?

Don't read this below until after you have made a choice

Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Not meant to stir up controversy, just fun,

God the Holy Spirit did the creating.

God the Son expressed the Fathers will as His Word to create.


JLB
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
26,575
Gender
Male
The reason we have "Jehovah" as a name is that it is Germanic in origin, Since there is no Y sound as in "you" in German, they adapted the yod, in the Tetragrammaton of the 4 Hebrew words that only and always mean God.

Here is a question for you: In Genesis 1, who did the creating?
Was it God the Father, or God the Son?

Don't read this below until after you have made a choice

Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Not meant to stir up controversy, just fun,

So is Jehovah a German word?

Why would there be a German word in an English Bible who's original language is Hebrew.

I read English. My Bible is in English.

Lord is how YHWH is rendered in English.

Later, some Christian translators mistakenly combined the vowels of “Adonay” with the consonants of “YHWH” producing the word “YaHoWaH.” When the Scriptures were translated into German during the Reformation, the word was transliterated into the German pronunciation, which pronounces “Y” as an English “J” and pronounces “W” as an English “V” — or “Jahovah.” Then in the early 17th century when the Scriptures were being translated into English with the help of some of the German translations, the word was again transliterated as “Jehovah,” and this unfortunate accident has carried over into many modern English translations.

The term is now recognized by all proficient Bible scholars to be a late hybrid form, a translation error, that was never used by the Jews.



Webster's Collegiate Dictionary:

“Jehovah — False reading of the Hebrew YAHWEH.”
(“Jehovah,” Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1973 ed.)

Encyclopedia Americana:

“Jehovah — erroneous form of the name of the G-d of Israel.”
(Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 16., 1972 ed.)

Encyclopedia Britannica:

“The Masoretes who from the 6th to the 10th century worked to reproduce the original text of the Hebrew Bible replaced the vowels of the name YHWH with the vowel signs of Adonai or Elohim. Thus the artificial name Jehovah came into being.”
(“Yahweh,” The New Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 12, 1993 ed.)

The Jewish Encyclopedia:

“Jehovah — a mispronunciation of the Hebrew YHWH the name of G-d. This pronunciation is grammatically impossible.”
(“Jehovah,” The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 7, 1904 ed.)

The New Jewish Encyclopedia:

“It is clear that the word Jehovah is an artificial composite.”
(“Jehovah,” The New Jewish Encyclopedia, 1962 ed.)


The Jewish Encyclopedia states that YHWH is "the distinctive personal name of the God of Israel", and describes the form "Jehovah" as "a philological impossibility".


JLB
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
26,575
Gender
Male
Jesus is the Name of the Lord!

Jesus is the Name above all names!

If you need to add some letters to yhwh add these-


YHWH = yehowshuwa = Jesus


Hebrews 4:8 - KJV


8] For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.


Hebrews 4:8 – nkjv


8] For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.


Jesus is Lord.

Jesus is YHWH!

10 "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn. Zechariah 12:10



JLB
 

By Grace

Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
1,526
Christian
Yes
So is Jehovah a German word?

Why would there be a German word in an English Bible who's original language is Hebrew.

I did not really want to get into all this, but because Germanic scholars "ruled" the theology in the 1800s, many others adopted their usage of the "J" sound for the yod in Hebrew when they read the text in Hebrew

I read English. My Bible is in English.
Me too. But you asked about it, and I gave you the answer. I an sorry that the answer may have upset you, but it is the truth.

Lord is how YHWH is rendered in English.
and when the Germans read their Bible they used the term, Jehovah. There is essentially no difference.

Later, some Christian translators mistakenly combined the vowels of “Adonay” with the consonants of “YHWH” producing the word “YaHoWaH.” When the Scriptures were translated into German during the Reformation, the word was transliterated into the German pronunciation, which pronounces “Y” as an English “J” and pronounces “W” as an English “V” — or “Jahovah.” Then in the early 17th century when the Scriptures were being translated into English with the help of some of the German translations, the word was again transliterated as “Jehovah,” and this unfortunate accident has carried over into many modern English translations.

The term is now recognized by all proficient Bible scholars to be a late hybrid form, a translation error, that was never used by the Jews.

I am glad that you verified what I stated.


The Jewish Encyclopedia
“Jehovah — a mispronunciation of the Hebrew YHWH the name of G-d. This pronunciation is grammatically impossible.”
(“Jehovah,” The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 7, 1904 ed.)

The New Jewish Encyclopedia:

“It is clear that the word Jehovah is an artificial composite.”
(“Jehovah,” The New Jewish Encyclopedia, 1962 ed.)


The Jewish Encyclopedia states that YHWH is "the distinctive personal name of the God of Israel", and describes the form "Jehovah" as "a philological impossibility".
JLB

By definition, the Jewish people do not accept that Jesus is Messiah. That is why they have their position.

Before I forget, that Hebrew name of the book of the Bible we call "Joshuah" is also the same name base as the name of "Jesus"?

Hope this helps your understanding!
 

By Grace

Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
1,526
Christian
Yes
God the Holy Spirit did the creating.
God the Son expressed the Fathers will as His Word to create.
JLB

That is not what the Bible says here:

Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?​
.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but the facts are objective, and we need to cling to the facts as they are expressed in the Bible.
 
H

His_nee (Jeff)

Guest
I believe my 2 posts above are clear enough. Jesus is never clearly called YHWH. The Father is.

YHWH is clearly called the Father in a number of Israelite personal names such as Abijah. Scripture clearly states that YHWH is the Father. For example, Is. 64:8: "But now, O Jehovah, thou art our Father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand." - ASV.

But Scripture does not clearly state that the Son is YHWH. Nor do any Israelite names mean anything like the Son (or Messiah, or Firstborn, etc.) is YHWH.

I would if scripture actually said it. It does not.

correct. as in agreement with this site's 'owners'? about this, on the "about us" page for this site ::: copied
"We believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised Messiah, born of a virgin, totally without sin, God in human flesh, the One Who died on the cross for our sins, was buried, rose again from the dead on the third day, and ascended to the right hand of the Father in heaven, where He now intercedes for us who believe in Him."

i.e. as is clear from Scripture, "ascended to the right hand of the Father in heaven, " - Yeshua is not Yhwh in other words.
and "where He (Yeshua) now intercedes for us who believe in Him" Yeshua intercedes for us, with Yhwh. really simple.
 
Top