Quietfire Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 Hi Pham, I just need some clarification on this particular verse in the Catholic Bible vs. the NIV bible. I will type it as it appears in both with footnotes: Catholic: The Holy Bible 7 And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, And these three are one. 8 And there are three that give testimony on earth: the Spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one. *Ver. 8. [i]The spirit and the water and the blood.[/i] As the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, all bear witness to Christ's divinity; so the [i]spirit,[/i] which he yielded up, crying out with a loud viice upon the cross: and the water and blood that issued from his side, bear witness to his humanity and [i]are one;[/i] that is, all agree in one testimony. NIV: 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood: and the three are in agreement. *Ver 7,8. Late manuscripts of the Vulgate [i]testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.[/i] *Ver 8. [i]And there are three that testify on earth: the[/i] (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century) Ok ready. Some claim that the reference in the Catholic Bible (1Jn 5:7) is a documented proven forgery. Probably because of the NIV's statement (*Ver 7,8) to get them going. And they (the "some claim") were generous in providing me with a link to prove thier claim. I have not checked this link out, when I clicked on it, it was [i]by them, for them.[/i] And I have a problem with that, since it screams Jehovahs Witness (for lack of a better analogy. my apologies.) There is obviously a difference between these two (2) translations...why? If the claim is that its a forgery, before I get my brain into more of a grinder, could someone just show me proof that it isnt? Thanks and PEACE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeWeStCoNvErT Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 OK clarificcation what translation is the catholic bible in?(there are several different translation (RSV bieng the best in my opinion )but neways maybe i can clear this up for you if you get back to me pax, Joyce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted May 1, 2004 Author Share Posted May 1, 2004 ok, Im here Maybe its the way of your wording but I am a bit confused... [quote]OK clarificcation what translation is the catholic bible in?(there are several different translation (RSV bieng the best in my opinion )but neways maybe i can clear this up for you if you get back to me[/quote] maybe a rephrase? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thicke Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 My copy of the RSV-CE (Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition) has the following for 1 John 5:6-8: [quote]6 This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only, but with the blood. 7 And the Spirit is the witness because the Spirit gives truth. 8 There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree.[/quote] While at the same time, the RSV (non-Catholic) has the following: [quote]6 This is the one who came by water and blood--Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.[/quote] The Douay-Rheims has the following: [quote]6 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 And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one. 8 And there are three that give testimony on earth: the spirit, and the water and the blood. And these three are one.[/quote] The Vulgate has the following: [quote]6 Hic est, qui venit per aquam et sanguinem, Jesus Christus : non in aqua solum, sed in aqua et sanguine. Et spiritus est, qui testificatur, quoniam Christus est veritas. 7 Quoniam tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in cælo : Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus : et hi tres unum sunt. 8 Et tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in terra : Spiritus, et aqua, et sanguis : et hi tres unum sunt.[/quote] Then, the King James (definitely not Catholic) has the following: [quote]6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. [/quote] It looks to me that there is a discrepancy in the verse numbering, not in the translation, as all of these translations still get the same message across... Which Catholic translation are you using (i.e. RSV-CE, NAB, Douay-Rhiems, etc.)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted May 1, 2004 Author Share Posted May 1, 2004 Catholic Bible - 1943- Translated from the latin vulgate and diligently compared with the Hebrew, Greek and other edition in divers languages (the old testament was first published by the english college at douay, a.d. 1609 and the new testament was first published by the english college at rheims, ad 1582.) with notes by bishop challoner and the encyclical letter "the study of the holy scriptures" by Pope leo XIII and a preface by Rev. william H Mcclellan, S.J. -woodstock college, Md. Also an appendix containing an historical chronological index, a table of references, maps and other helpful matters. the douay bible house, new york 1943. (thank goodnes for cutting and pasting!) P.S. on the cover it does say "The Holy Bible" and below reads "Douay" hope that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thicke Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 [quote name='Quietfire' date='May 1 2004, 11:35 AM'] Catholic Bible - 1943- Translated from the latin vulgate and diligently compared with the Hebrew, Greek and other edition in divers languages (the old testament was first published by the english college at douay, a.d. 1609 and the new testament was first published by the english college at rheims, ad 1582.) with notes by bishop challoner and the encyclical letter "the study of the holy scriptures" by Pope leo XIII and a preface by Rev. william H Mcclellan, S.J. -woodstock college, Md. Also an appendix containing an historical chronological index, a table of references, maps and other helpful matters. the douay bible house, new york 1943. (thank goodnes for cutting and pasting!) P.S. on the cover it does say "The Holy Bible" and below reads "Douay" hope that helps. [/quote] I'm not sure if that one is Douay-Rheims or Douay-Challoner. Anybody else know? Quietfire, did I gave you an adequate answer to your question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 wata about the NAB Bible ? thats what i have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted May 1, 2004 Author Share Posted May 1, 2004 (edited) I understand. I have been told many times that I tend to miss the point when I attempt to explain or ask a question. so I will make it as simple as I can. these are NOT my words....... [quote]This is a documented proven forgery >>> 1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.[/quote] they are saying that what is in that verse is a forgery and there is proof of it. They gave me a website( and the rest is in my original statement at the top of the page) PEACE Edited May 1, 2004 by Quietfire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted May 1, 2004 Author Share Posted May 1, 2004 BUMP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thicke Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 Oh got 'cha, sorry, I was so worried about parts mis arranged in the verse numbering I missed that Trinitarian formula was gone from some translations. I'm stumped, anyone else know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thicke Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 I did find this: [url="http://www.tegart.com/brian/bible/kjvonly/doug/1john5_7.html"]http://www.tegart.com/brian/bible/kjvonly/doug/1john5_7.html[/url] It is Protestant and slanted to the KJV. If someone is trying to disprove the Trinity to you, I would suggest studding the following links: [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/God_in_Three_Persons.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/God_in_Three_Persons.asp[/url] [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Trinity.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/Trinity.asp[/url] And oh course since it sounds like you deal with Jehovah's Wittinesses a lot, take a look at these: [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/noncatholic_groups.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/noncatholic_groups.asp[/url] Just below astrology and reincarnation under non-Christian groups is a list of links for JW's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katholikos Posted May 2, 2004 Share Posted May 2, 2004 Quietfire, One of the realtively unknown facts of Christianity (to average Christians) is that there are no originals of the biblical writings. None. Zero. Zip. All we have are copies. The earliest copies in the original biblical language of the New Testament (Greek) date from the fourth century. There are translations into Syriac, Old Latin, and Coptic from the second century. And lots of fragments, but these are also copies. The original "autographs" were written by Catholics, to Catholics, and for Catholics. All of the existing copies were made by Catholics. There are variations in all the texts. Why any Protestant accepts these writings as the Word of God since they written and then copied by Catholics is beyond my understanding. If they don't trust the Church, why do they trust what she wrote? I think some "expert" is blowing smoke in your face when they speak about "forgeries." The first "forgery" known to have been committed in Scripture was when Martin Luther added the word "only" to Romans 3:28. Variations in the biblical text were a natural occurrence in the copying process. The originals disagree in the details also. Ave Cor Mariae, Likos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted May 2, 2004 Author Share Posted May 2, 2004 [quote]undefinedThis is a documented proven forgery >>> 1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.[/quote] [quote]undefinedI think some "expert" is blowing smoke in your face when they speak about "forgeries."[/quote] I think thier 'claim' is that this is nowhere written. That it was added by the church. Therefore it would be a 'forgery'. The debate was over the trinity. I will honestly admit that I dont understand it all myself, but I also admit that that doesnt mean I should dismiss it either. I guess the hardest part is the Holy Ghost, or Spirit. I see the point about the Father and Son for the most part. As stupid as this may sound hear me out... God the Father showed himself to Moses, even if it was his back with his hand covering Moses' eyes to block the view of Our Fathers face (lest he die) It was still 'evidence', at least to me. No need to go farther. Jesus was of the flesh, spoke TO his Father, couldnt be talking to himself with that understanding, they are one....God the Son. Still kindof stumped on the Holy Spirit. HE descended as or like a dove, Jesus stated he will send another (would that imply a separate person?) It just confuses me a bit. I guess because the bible 'shows' me the physical of God and Jesus, its easier for my mind to grasp it. Like I 'saw' the person of God and the person of Jesus. I just need to 'see' the person of the Holy Spirit, and can HE move of his own accord or is he subordinate of the Father and Son. Peace.. qf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted May 2, 2004 Author Share Posted May 2, 2004 oh, and the copy of my bible shows that passage but is it in any newer catholic bibles. I think mine is outdated...its pre Vatican II I guess I need a new one. But which one or two or three. I like to cross reference with different ones. But I would rather have the ABSOLUTE BEST NUMBER ONE CATHOLIC HOLY BIBLE first, then get others. thanks, peace. qf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katholikos Posted May 3, 2004 Share Posted May 3, 2004 The Christian belief in the Trinity is not based on any one text in the Bible. The Trinity was defined at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. Read the Nicene Creed. This is the defining doctrine for Christianity. Those who do not believe in the Trinity are not Christian. True, original Christian doctrine was not based on reading the NT but on the teaching of the Apostles. The NT confirms our beliefs, but it is not their source. The NT is not a textbook in Christianity. It can't be read that way. How much training have you had in the biblical languages? In history? In the culture(s) of the ancient Holy Land? In exegetics? Would you try to interpret a text in astrophysics or astronomy without any training? These are questions for you to consider, not answer. Sounds like you're playing with fire, quietfire. Understanding the Bible requires a teacher with the authority to teach -- the Catholic Church is the only authority. She wrote the NT and is its only rightful interpreter. JMJ Likos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now