They are correct. You just fail to see it because you have been programmed by a cult
Is the New World Translation a valid version of the Bible?
- Thread starter Jack
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Yeah I remember, you think all of our Bibles are wrong and YOU right! And you're a Bible Language expert.
PS95
Well-Known Member
This is funny Mono. It's a grammar issue so clearly scholars would be the ones to ask. You presume they are stupid? Or are ALL lying in some big conspiracy? lol This is one instance where we have to look to them who have the education and the Spirit of God in them.
Arm chair scholars should really sit on the bleachers.
We need to accept what the scriptures say and not what makes sense to us.
Well, there is still some place for the criticism of scholars, that is fine. But the issue is that, the grammar rules and word translations MonoBiblical privately invented, is not making sense, it creates unintelligible mess. Even in the writings of John, who tried to use as simple Greek as possible.
Therefore, it is obviously erroneous.
Last edited:
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
"There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within."
"Do you know who I am." Polycarp calmly replied, "I do know you. You're the firstborn of satan" (Irenaeus, Against Heresies III:3:4 B).
Same verse.
"Do you know who I am." Polycarp calmly replied, "I do know you. You're the firstborn of satan" (Irenaeus, Against Heresies III:3:4 B).
Same verse.
The last sentence is not from Against Heresies, but from the Martyrdom of Polycarp and Polycarp was addressing the proconsul who threatened him during the trial.
What are you even trying to say?
CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, III.3 (St. Irenaeus)
Featuring the Church Fathers, Catholic Encyclopedia, Summa Theologica and more.
Ireneus claims Polycarp said these ridiculous things, though he believed them gullibly.
OK, according to the text Polycarp said that to Marcion, you left out the context (the text between) in your quotation.CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, III.3 (St. Irenaeus)
Featuring the Church Fathers, Catholic Encyclopedia, Summa Theologica and more.www.newadvent.org
Ireneus claims Polycarp said these ridiculous things, though he believed them gullibly.
I am still not sure what is your point, though. What is ridiculous about these things? And how does it relate to the Greek of John?
PS95
Well-Known Member
Of course, however I'm not new on the block. I began learning Koine Grk many years ago due to confusion abt John 1:1- having been raised a Jw and rejecting them for other reasons, I wanted to understand which was correct. Grammar doesn't win it there.
But Mono has his very own religion as you must have noticed. I have no idea what he is saying at this point either- I've been baffled for a while now.. I'm just waiting. Just as confused as you are since it comes out of him in dribs and drabbles..
PS95
Well-Known Member
I'm aware of all of that. Cerinthus reminds me quite a bit of JWs teachings. I was really surprised to see how much in common they share.
What is the point you are trying to make? Why the hedging?
Polycarp has more in common with the JWs than the Cerinthus known as Valentinus. My point is that Polycarp didn't have the authority to say the things that he did. John did not exist on earth when Valentinus came to Rome, and to call Marcion the firstborn of Satan implies Marcion was intimate with Satan, which is also silly.
Last edited:
PS95
Well-Known Member
That's absurd. lol --Sounds like perhaps you need some schoolin on what jws actually teach.
when I was studying Cerinthus- I sure did not have jws in my mind- they sure kept popping into my head as I learned though!
Cerinthus is the father of Gnostics - many don't realize that. He is who John addressed.
Valentinus didnt show up til the mid 2nd century- Irenaeus speaks of Valentinus as the first who transformed the doctrines of the Gnostic "Heresy" to a peculiar doctrinal system of his own.
I'm not following you here..
Nowhere in the NT is the Cerinthus mentioned. And it is Cerdo who seems to be the first gnostic Rome.
He didn't know the apostle John, and Marcion never exhibited anything supernatural. However, Polycarp was unitarian, and Irenaeus only knew of him through-- it seems, Ignatius of Antioch.
PS95
Well-Known Member
Of course he isn't named in the NT. None of them are named. Cerinthus absolutely pre-dated Cerdo. Cerdo was 1st half of 2nd century.
Cerinthus lived when John lived. You seem mixed up.
Dates can be very sketchy, and there was more than one gnostic who was a Cerinthus or a Merinthus. Cerdo was probably the first Cerinthus. Valentinus was one, since Polycarp knew of his followers, and he didn't want to mention his human name.
Last edited:
PS95
Well-Known Member
Ok wow- I don't know where you get this stuff.. Iraneus spoke about BOTH men and they lived at different times--
Cerinthus lived 50-100 BC and Iraneus mentions him and JOHN.
Cerdo lived in the 1st half of the 2nd century- So Iraneus would have known that Cerdo could not have known John..
"Cerdo was one who took his system from the followers of Simon, and came to live at Rome in the time of Hyginus, who held the ninth place in the episcopal succession from the apostles downwards. He taught that the God proclaimed by the law and the prophets was not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the former was known, but the latter unknown; while the one also was righteous, but the other benevolent."
Iraneus XXVII - doctrines of Cerdo.
I think maybe it's that they share a C and an E in their names that is confusing you.
Similar threads
