Three in One (1Jo 5:7)?

[culi26]

1John 5:7 So there are three witnesses [b]in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are One.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pURTMFARm3s

This verse you may found in the following versions of the Bible:

King James Version
Amplified Bible
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition
New Life Version
Worldwide English
Wycliffe Bible
Young's Literal Translation

This verse was considered as a fabrication and is left out in the following versions of the Bible:

GOD'S WORD Translation
New American Standard Bible
American Standard Version
English Standard Version
English Standard Version Anglicised
Common English Bible
Complete Jewish Bible
Contemporary English Version
Darby Translation
Easy-to read-version
Good News Translation
Holman Christian Standard Bible
J.B.Fhillips New Testament
Lexham English Bible
The Message
Mounce Reverse Interlinear New Testament
New Century Version
New International Reader's Version
New International Version
New International Version 1984
New International Version UK
New Living Translation
Today's New International Version

The only verse indicating trinity (the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are one) has been removed from the bible by 32 scholars of the bible in the Revised Standard Version among many other verses as fabrication after they realized that these verses do not exist in the most ancient manuscript and as such there is not a single verse indicating Trinity anymore in the complete bible.

Please read article in the following address:

http://www.christadelphianbooks.org/agora/art_less/t15.html

[Richard Amiel McGough]

1John 5:7 So there are three witnesses [B]in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are One.

The only verse indicating trinity (the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are one) has been removed from the bible by 32 scholars of the bible in the Revised Standard Version among many other verses as fabrication after they realized that these verses do not exist in the most ancient manuscript and as such there is not a single verse indicating Trinity anymore in the complete bible.

Please read article in the following address:

http://www.christadelphianbooks.org/agora/art_less/t15.html
Hey there culi26,

That verse is not the "only verse indicating a trinity" - it's just the most explicit one. If you knew anything of the Bible and the history of Christianity, you would know how the doctrine developed and why. For example, there are many verses that say Jesus is the Creator and the Lord and that every knee would bend to his name. Things like that imply that he is God. But God is one! Hence the doctrine of the Trinity which explicitly states that God is ONE but within the ONE GOD there are three persons. That might not make sense, but it's the best they could do with the Biblical data.

You really should NOT try to debunk the Bible using textual criticism because that will backfire on you when your opponents apply the same techniques to the Quran. Here are the basic facts of the history of the Quran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_Qur%27an):


The compilation of the Qur'an (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran) spanned several decades and forms an important part of early Islamic history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_history). Muslims believe it began in the year 610 when Gabriel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel) (Arabic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language): جبريل, Jibrīl or جبرائيل Jibrāʾīl) appeared to prophet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophets_in_Islam) Muhammad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad) in the cave (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave) Hira (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hira) near Mecca (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mecca), reciting to him the first verses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayat) of the Sura (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sura) Iqra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iqra) (al-`Alaq), thus beginning the revelation of the Qur'an. Throughout his life, Muhammad continued to have revelations until before his death in 632.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_Qur%27an#cite_note-0) Muslim and non-Muslim scholars alike disagree on whether the Prophet compiled the Qur'an during his lifetime or if this task began with the first caliph Abu Bakr as-Siddiq (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakr) (632-634). Once the Qur'an was compiled, due to the unanimity of the sources, Muslims agree that the Qur'an we see today was canonized by Uthman ibn Affan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uthman_ibn_Affan) (653-656). Upon the canonization of the Qur'an, Uthman had the other codices that existed at the time destroyed and burnt. Due to this, it has become difficult for scholars to look at the different codices from before the canonization because no manuscripts remain and all that is left is varying accounts from different historians. Even though Uthman canonized the Qur'an during his reign in 653-656, variations still remained in the Qur'an, which can be seen in the early manuscripts of the Umayyad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_dynasty) and Abbasid Dynasties (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_dynasty).[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_Qur%27an#cite_note-Leaman_2006_130.E2.80.93131-1)

Due to varying historical documents, controversy is seen amongst scholars as to whether the Uthmanic codex we have before us today is authentic and complete. Most Muslim scholars believe the Uthmanic Qur'an is what was revealed to the Prophet in its entirety, while others believe verses were removed and other codices of the Qur'an are more absolute.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_Qur%27an#cite_note-al-Kur.27an-2)

Some scholars debate the validity of the collection of the Qur'an as a whole. It is questioned as to whether the Qur'an ever existed in its entirety during Muhammad’s or Uthman’s time. Traditionalist scholars accept much of early Muslim literature, albeit with a grain of salt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grain_of_salt), while skeptics reject this literature in its entirety.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_Qur%27an#cite_note-3) Both these views are generally opposed by Muslim academia. The text of the Qur'an used today is taken from one of the seven variant readings chosen by Ibn Mujahid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Mujahid) (he reported there were fourteen) in the 10th century and published as the Royal Cairo edition by King Fuad of Egypt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuad_I_of_Egypt) in 1924.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_Qur%27an#cite_note-4)

As you can see, the problems with the Quran are a thousand times worse than the Bible because the early documents with the textual variations were destroyed, so no one now can tell what was made up, what was wrongly inserted, and what really belongs there. The Bible rests on a much firmer foundation.

And there is another reason you should avoid textual criticism as a means of "debunking" the Bible. IT DOESN'T WORK! Sure, you can cast doubt on the Bible as the Word of God because of textual variations, but you can't solve the fundamental contradiction that lies in the heart of the Quran. I'm talking about the fact that Allah said he gave the Torah to the Jews and the Gospel (Injil) to Jesus. But the Torah and the Gospel contradict the Quran! So what's a good Muslim to do? Make up the idea that the Torah and the Gospel were totally corrupted! Good plan ... but it doesn't work because of the science of textual criticism. We have too many ancient manuscripts that PROVE that the primary points which contradict the Quran have existed in the Bible from the beginning. I'm talking about the crucifixion of Christ and the fact that the Gospel declares he is the Son of God. It is simply impossible to assert that these were added later as "corruptions."

I trust you can see why you should not have brought up textual criticism. It proves that the Quran contains a fundamental contradiction which means that the Quran is false. Sorry.

You really should not have tried to attack the Bible using textual criticism. It stirs up a nest of facts that will sting every Muslim like hornets. For example, many scholars are :eek: AFRAID :eek: to even study the Quran because the brainwashed Islamist robots will stab them, kill them, and throw them out windows! Please think about this. It is the truth. Why is the whole world in mortal fear of fundamentalist Islam? Here's an article you might find enlightening [source (http://www.corkscrew-balloon.com/02/03/1bkk/04b.html)]:





Scholars Scrutinize the Koran's Origin

A Promise of Moist Virgins or Dried Fruit?

New York Times (and International Herald Tribune), March 4, 2002 (http://www.corkscrew-balloon.com/02/03/1bkk/index.html#04)
http://www.corkscrew-balloon.com/img/colorbar.gif


Scholars Are Quietly Offering New Theories of the Koran
By ALEXANDER STILLE


To Muslims the Koran is the very word of God, who spoke through the Angel Gabriel to Muhammad: "This book is not to be doubted," the Koran declares unequivocally at its beginning. Scholars and writers in Islamic countries who have ignored that warning have sometimes found themselves the target of death threats and violence, sending a chill through universities around the world.

Yet despite the fear, a handful of experts have been quietly investigating the origins of the Koran, offering radically new theories about the text's meaning and the rise of Islam.

Christoph Luxenberg, a scholar of ancient Semitic languages in Germany, argues that the Koran has been misread and mistranslated for centuries.

His work, based on the earliest copies of the Koran, maintains that parts of Islam's holy book are derived from pre-existing Christian Aramaic texts that were misinterpreted by later Islamic scholars who prepared the editions of the Koran commonly read today.

So, for example, the virgins who are supposedly awaiting good Islamic martyrs as their reward in paradise are in reality "white raisins" of crystal clarity rather than fair maidens.

Christoph Luxenberg, however, is a pseudonym, and his scholarly tome The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran had trouble finding a publisher, although it is considered a major new work by several leading scholars in the field. Verlag Das Arabische Buch in Berlin ultimately published the book.

The caution is not surprising. Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses received a fatwa because it appeared to mock Muhammad. The Egyptian novelist Naguib Mahfouz was stabbed because one of his books was thought to be irreligious. And when the Arab scholar Suliman Bashear argued that Islam developed as a religion gradually rather than emerging fully formed from the mouth of the Prophet, he was injured after being thrown from a second-story window by his students at the University of Nablus in the West Bank. Even many broad-minded liberal Muslims become upset when the historical veracity and authenticity of the Koran is questioned.

The reverberations have affected non-Muslim scholars in Western countries. "Between fear and political correctness, it's not possible to say anything other than sugary nonsense about Islam," said one scholar at an American university who asked not to be named, referring to the threatened violence as well as the widespread reluctance on United States college campuses to criticize other cultures.

While scriptural interpretation may seem like a remote and innocuous activity, close textual study of Jewish and Christian scripture played no small role in loosening the Church's domination on the intellectual and cultural life of Europe, and paving the way for unfettered secular thought. "The Muslims have the benefit of hindsight of the European experience, and they know very well that once you start questioning the holy scriptures, you don't know where it will stop," the scholar explained.

The touchiness about questioning the Koran predates the latest rise of Islamic militancy. As long ago as 1977, John Wansbrough of the School of Oriental and African Studies in London wrote that subjecting the Koran to "analysis by the instruments and techniques of biblical criticism is virtually unknown."

Mr. Wansbrough insisted that the text of the Koran appeared to be a composite of different voices or texts compiled over dozens if not hundreds of years. After all, scholars agree that there is no evidence of the Koran until 691 — 59 years after Muhammad's death — when the Dome of the Rock mosque in Jerusalem was built, carrying several Koranic inscriptions.

These inscriptions differ to some degree from the version of the Koran that has been handed down through the centuries, suggesting, scholars say, that the Koran may have still been evolving in the last decade of the seventh century. Moreover, much of what we know as Islam — the lives and sayings of the Prophet — is based on texts from between 130 and 300 years after Muhammad's death.


You can read more here: http://www.corkscrew-balloon.com/02/03/1bkk/04b.html

[culi26]

Hey there culi26,

That verse is not the "only verse indicating a trinity" - it's just the most explicit one. If you knew anything of the Bible and the history of Christianity, you would know how the doctrine developed and why. For example, there are many verses that say Jesus is the Creator and the Lord and that every knee would bend to his name. Things like that imply that he is God.

So, how can somebody say now THESE THREE ARE ONE?
The only one indicating the Trinity IS CONSIDERED AS A FABRICATION by christian scholars, because they couldn't find this verse in old manuscripts!
That means there is(actually was) only one verse where the three persons are mentioned and those three are ONE.

But if they say The three work as One(as some of them do), that's something else!

The Father is the brain, the son is the body and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit- this was so stupid phrase, sorry for my words!
Than even I can consider myself as a trinity, because i have brain, body and the spirit! And if I would try to explain to the people this they for sure would consider me as A CRAZY man!



But God is one! Hence the doctrine of the Trinity which explicitly states that God is ONE but within the ONE GOD there are three persons. That might not make sense, but it's the best they could do with the Biblical data.

Does it make sense? For somebody it does! It is a matter of the belief!

But what about Jehovah? Who is Jehovah? If Jehovah is The God, than does this mean that The Father, the son and the holy spirit are inside the Jehovah himself? Or how?


You really should NOT try to debunk the Bible using textual criticism because that will backfire on you when your opponents apply the same techniques to the Quran. Here are the basic facts of the history of the Quran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_Qur%27an):

Read it and learn: http://www.renaissance.com.pk/febqur20.htm


As you can see, the problems with the Quran are a thousand times worse than the Bible because the early documents with the textual variations were destroyed, so no one now can tell what was made up, what was wrongly inserted, and what really belongs there. The Bible rests on a much firmer foundation.

I didn't see nothing! Maybe because we have different eyes!


I trust you can see why you should not have brought up textual criticism. It proves that the Quran contains a fundamental contradiction which means that the Quran is false. Sorry.

If the Quran is False why you're sorry about that! Or you feel sorry for me?
Stop feeling sorry for me or for the Muslims!

Anyway you don't believe in the Bible or the Quran! But, not all the people are smart like you!

Christians believe the Bible is the Word of God and Muslims in other side for the Quran! Till the second coming of Jesus(pbuh) we will try to call each-other in our religion! Who will have more success only God knows!
So, the only hope is when God will send for the second time his messenger Jesus(pbuh)!

If you want to comment and show me some proves that I'm wrong you're welcome, but if you want to show that the Quran is False than please start a topic about that!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

So, how can somebody say now THESE THREE ARE ONE?
The only one indicating the Trinity IS CONSIDERED AS A FABRICATION by christian scholars, because they couldn't find this verse in old manuscripts!
That means there is(actually was) only one verse where the three persons are mentioned and those three are ONE.

They say that because it is what they think the uncontested verses say. The fact that one verse is contested says nothing about the reasons for the doctrine of the Trinity. On the contrary, one of the reasons that verse is contested is because it was not used in early arguments about the Trinity which they take to imply it wasn't in the Bible back then. This shows that the doctrine of the Trinity was developed from the other verses and that some scribe inserted it either accidentally (perhaps accidentally including a side-note into the actual text) or deliberately (after the doctrine had already been developed). In either case, it only proves that the doctrine developed independently of that verse and your logic fails.



But if they say The three work as One(as some of them do), that's something else!

The Father is the brain, the son is the body and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit- this was so stupid phrase, sorry for my words!
Than even I can consider myself as a trinity, because i have brain, body and the spirit! And if I would try to explain to the people this they for sure would consider me as A CRAZY man!

Yes, there are many misunderstandings about the Bible in the common populace. The same is true for the Quran, so your point is moot.



Does it make sense? For somebody it does! It is a matter of the belief!

Exactly. But it is a belief derived from interpreting the Bible. Simple as that.



But what about Jehovah? Who is Jehovah? If Jehovah is The God, than does this mean that The Father, the son and the holy spirit are inside the Jehovah himself? Or how?

You would have to do some serious research into the history of the doctrine to understand such questions.




As you can see, the problems with the Quran are a thousand times worse than the Bible because the early documents with the textual variations were destroyed, so no one now can tell what was made up, what was wrongly inserted, and what really belongs there. The Bible rests on a much firmer foundation.
I didn't see nothing! Maybe because we have different eyes!

I can't help it if you are blind to the facts of your own religion.



If the Quran is False why you're sorry about that! Or you feel sorry for me?
Stop feeling sorry for me or for the Muslims!

Yes, I am sorry for anyone who holds to false beliefs that trap their minds. I don't think I'll be changing on this point.



Anyway you don't believe in the Bible or the Quran! But, not all the people are smart like you!

It has nothing to do with being "smart." All you need to do is open your eyes to reality and accept the facts. Stop living in a fantasy world of false beliefs that contradict reality. It will be much better for you.



Christians believe the Bible is the Word of God and Muslims in other side for the Quran! Till the second coming of Jesus(pbuh) we will try to call each-other in our religion! Who will have more success only God knows!
So, the only hope is when God will send for the second time his messenger Jesus(pbuh)!

The Quran is just a remix of Bible stories. And it gets many things wrong. And worse, it contains gross misunderstandings of what the Bible actually says. So how could anyone believe it?