Search results

Well if the New World Translation is "an uncorrupted translation" as you claim, then perhaps we should all be using the NWT?! ;)

The context of 1 John 3 (WEB): 1) See how great a love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God! For this cause the world doesn’t know us, because it didn’t know him. 2) Beloved, now we are children of God, and it is not yet revealed what we will be. But we know...

1 Corinthians 3:16) Don’t you know that you are a temple of God, and that God’s Spirit lives in you? 2 Corinthians 6:16) What agreement has a temple of God with idols? For you are a temple of the living God. Even as God said, “I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God...

Why have you cluttered up this thread with all that non-Biblical nonsense about an imaginary Trinity? It adds nothing to the discussion about Matthew 28:19 being a corrupted verse, corrupted by someone who believed in the Trinity and was trying to add something to the Scriptures to support his...

Matthew 16:18 says: I also tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my assembly, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. There is absolutely nothing in that verse to hint at a Trinity. It is Jesus saying that on this foundation, what Peter had just said, he will...

Thank you for your informative, helpful, Bible based contributions to our understanding (not!). :rolleyes:

Well Peter tells us (2 Peter 1:4, WEB): by which he has granted to us his precious and exceedingly great promises; that through these you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world by lust. and likewise John confirms it in 1 John 3:2...

You seem to be saying that the God of Abraham was a different god to the God of Isaac, and there was a third different God of Jacob. Your're right - that doesn't make any sense! Surely your equation should be: Elohim Abraham = Elohim Issac = Elohim Jacob = Echad Elohim = Yahweh There's no...

John 1:1 mentions God and the Word, and that the Word was with God, so obviously (otherwise it makes no sense) the Word was not God! Either way, just two entities are mentioned, so you can't make a Trinity out of that. Exodus 3:15 (WEB) says: God said moreover to Moses, “You shall tell the...

Wikipedia says that the Didache was anonymous, and "may have been compiled in its present form as late as 150, although a date closer to the end of the first century seems more probable to many", so it was not written by the Apostles. "The work was considered by some Church Fathers to be a part...

Jesus said, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth" (John 17:17).

Yes, theology certainly has changed over the years, just as the Apostle Paul foretold would happen (2 Thessalonians 2:3, KJV): ... that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, ... The doctrine of the trinity was a big falling away from the truth (apostasy)! Christians were...

I don't think that anybody has commented in this thread that all the writings of Eusebius where he quotes Matthew 28:19 have all been corrupted. I think you must be getting confused.

The TorahResource writer was obviously ignorant of the writings of Eusebius, who was an early witness that Matthew 28:19 did exist without the tripartiite phrase!

It does not say, 'In the name of Jesus, I command you to be baptised', it says: Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, ... The written evidence would suggest otherwise.

It would only be logical to question every verse in Matthew if you thought that every verse had been altered. But I'm only talking about one verse, so no, I don't think it's logical to dismiss all of the book just because one sentence has been altered. But we need to be aware of it and take it...

Why do you think it is rubbish? You need to realise that the English translations of the Bible that we have are not perfect. I'm sure you must be aware that 1 John 5:7 (KJV) was a corrupted verse, so why can't other verses also be corrupted? Here's what the Cambridge Bible Notes says about 1...

I didn't say that the verse was corrupted hundreds of years after Nicaea, I said it was corrupted sometime (probably soon) after Nicaea. The whole point of my first post (#1) was to explain how every Greek copy of Matthew we have had access to has been copied from the corrupted version(s), with...

Well it seems that what was attributed to the Catholic Encyclopedia II was actually meant to be for Britannica Encyclopedia 11TH edition. I think it's a bit complex, and difficult to deduce that "The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy...

:D I meant preserved in that we have copies of all books of the Bible, even if we don't have copies that are thousand of years old. The Israelites did a very good job of copying the words of the Old Testament Scriptures accurately. Christians, however, have not been so fastidious, and there...