Another huge L for Trinity Christian copers.

childishkillah

childishkillah

I love all and everything.
Joined
Sep 25, 2024
Posts
2,195
Reputation
3,263
Whenever people bring up the Trinity in the New Testament, they often point to a passage in the First Letter of John, chapter 5, verses 7 to 8. It’s usually quoted like this:

"For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood; and these three agree as one."

ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ
μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ
οὐρανῷ ὁ πατήρ ὁ
λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν

At first glance, this sounds like the clearest reference to the Trinity in the whole Bible. But the truth is that this text was never part of the original letter. Scholars call this addition the Comma Johanneum, which is just a fancy name for a sentence someone inserted later on.

If you look at the earliest Greek manuscripts, you can see it doesn’t belong there. For example:

Codex Sinaiticus, from the 4th century, doesn’t mention the Father, the Word, or the Holy Spirit giving witness in heaven. This section is completely missing.

Codex Vaticanus, also from the 4th century, doesn’t have it either. The place where it would be is simply blank.

In the rare Greek manuscripts where it does appear like Minuscule 221, written more than a thousand years after the original it shows up only in the margin. Someone added it by hand much later.

It’s obvious that this passage is not authentic, but was put in to support the idea of the Trinity, which was controversial and far from universally accepted in the early church. The honest thing for modern Bible publishers would be to clearly note that this sentence is a later addition, or simply remove it so people aren’t misled.

This example shows something deeper: the Christian scriptures have not been well preserved . Verses have been added, changed, or left out over the centuries. This is exactly what the Qur’an warns about. In the second chapter Al-Baqarah, verse 79.

فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ الْكِتَابَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَـٰذَا مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۖ فَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ

"Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, “This is from God,” so they can sell it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they earn."

The Comma Johanneum is a perfect example—people wrote it in and claimed it came from God.

As for the Trinity itself, it’s an idea that doesn’t fit with the pure monotheism taught by the prophets. Jesus never clearly said he was God, nor did he preach that God is three persons. Only HUMANS, church leaders built up complex arguments and forced this doctrine into Christian belief. But no matter how many councils or debates tried to justify it, the concept remains a human invention, not a divine truth.

In the end, this passage doesn’t prove the Trinity. Instead, it shows how far some people were willing to go to defend a teaching that was never part of the original message.
 
  • +1
Reactions: ForSKJ, Alias!, Volksstaffel and 3 others
Dnrd but i agree the troonity is retarded
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: throwaway5028 and childishkillah
Whenever people bring up the Trinity in the New Testament, they often point to a passage in the First Letter of John, chapter 5, verses 7 to 8. It’s usually quoted like this:

"For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood; and these three agree as one."

ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ
μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ
οὐρανῷ ὁ πατήρ ὁ
λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν

At first glance, this sounds like the clearest reference to the Trinity in the whole Bible. But the truth is that this text was never part of the original letter. Scholars call this addition the Comma Johanneum, which is just a fancy name for a sentence someone inserted later on.

If you look at the earliest Greek manuscripts, you can see it doesn’t belong there. For example:

Codex Sinaiticus, from the 4th century, doesn’t mention the Father, the Word, or the Holy Spirit giving witness in heaven. This section is completely missing.

Codex Vaticanus, also from the 4th century, doesn’t have it either. The place where it would be is simply blank.

In the rare Greek manuscripts where it does appear like Minuscule 221, written more than a thousand years after the original it shows up only in the margin. Someone added it by hand much later.

It’s obvious that this passage is not authentic, but was put in to support the idea of the Trinity, which was controversial and far from universally accepted in the early church. The honest thing for modern Bible publishers would be to clearly note that this sentence is a later addition, or simply remove it so people aren’t misled.

This example shows something deeper: the Christian scriptures have not been well preserved . Verses have been added, changed, or left out over the centuries. This is exactly what the Qur’an warns about. In the second chapter Al-Baqarah, verse 79.

فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ الْكِتَابَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَـٰذَا مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۖ فَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ

"Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, “This is from God,” so they can sell it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they earn."

The Comma Johanneum is a perfect example—people wrote it in and claimed it came from God.

As for the Trinity itself, it’s an idea that doesn’t fit with the pure monotheism taught by the prophets. Jesus never clearly said he was God, nor did he preach that God is three persons. Only HUMANS, church leaders built up complex arguments and forced this doctrine into Christian belief. But no matter how many councils or debates tried to justify it, the concept remains a human invention, not a divine truth.

In the end, this passage doesn’t prove the Trinity. Instead, it shows how far some people were willing to go to defend a teaching that was never part of the original message.
Dnr failed thread. 1 John 7:8 is not spekainf about the trinity you retard, it’s also only found in LATIN manuscripts not Greek ones and is just an scribal error but it isn’t the trinity it’s speaking about how the blood water and spirit are what makes a Christian one once baptised but it’s likely an LATIN scribal addition by mistake. The fact we know this Doesn’t disprove the trinity as the trinity isn’t based off one verse you fucking retard and once again the GREEK MANUSCRIPTS are the oldest and what we go off not the Latin which is what YOUR GOING OFF BECAUSE YOUR A GAY FAGGOT LIKE ALLAH AND MOHAMMED.


Allah is a gay boy with arms legs feet etc


Skip to 1:20


lol your god is a fuckin abomination. Oh and I want everybody on this thread to realise, this thread and the other mohammedSHIT who liked his comment both follow a pedophile man who allowed rape and raped a 9 year old girl and used to snort like a camel when he’d get revelation this same man sucked on his grandsons tounge (hassan) and washed himself in dirty water


These are the people attacking the trinity :hnghn::hnghn::hnghn::hnghn:
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: Asiangymmax
JPEG image
 
  • +1
Reactions: childishkillah and Proex
Dnr failed thread


Allah is a gay boy with arms legs feet etc


Skip to 1:30


lol your god is a fuckin abomination. Oh and I want everybody on this thread to realise, this thread and the other mohammedSHIT who liked his comment both follow a pedophile man who allowed rape and raped a 9 year old girl and used to snort like a camel when he’d get revelation this same man sucked on his grandsons tounge (hassan) and washed himself in dirty water


These are the people attacking the trinity :hnghn::hnghn::hnghn::hnghn:

Nigga you worship human
 
  • +1
Reactions: MiserableMan
Whenever people bring up the Trinity in the New Testament, they often point to a passage in the First Letter of John, chapter 5, verses 7 to 8. It’s usually quoted like this:

"For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood; and these three agree as one."

ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ
μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ
οὐρανῷ ὁ πατήρ ὁ
λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν

At first glance, this sounds like the clearest reference to the Trinity in the whole Bible. But the truth is that this text was never part of the original letter. Scholars call this addition the Comma Johanneum, which is just a fancy name for a sentence someone inserted later on.

If you look at the earliest Greek manuscripts, you can see it doesn’t belong there. For example:

Codex Sinaiticus, from the 4th century, doesn’t mention the Father, the Word, or the Holy Spirit giving witness in heaven. This section is completely missing.

Codex Vaticanus, also from the 4th century, doesn’t have it either. The place where it would be is simply blank.

In the rare Greek manuscripts where it does appear like Minuscule 221, written more than a thousand years after the original it shows up only in the margin. Someone added it by hand much later.

It’s obvious that this passage is not authentic, but was put in to support the idea of the Trinity, which was controversial and far from universally accepted in the early church. The honest thing for modern Bible publishers would be to clearly note that this sentence is a later addition, or simply remove it so people aren’t misled.

This example shows something deeper: the Christian scriptures have not been well preserved . Verses have been added, changed, or left out over the centuries. This is exactly what the Qur’an warns about. In the second chapter Al-Baqarah, verse 79.

فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ الْكِتَابَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَـٰذَا مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۖ فَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ

"Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, “This is from God,” so they can sell it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they earn."

The Comma Johanneum is a perfect example—people wrote it in and claimed it came from God.

As for the Trinity itself, it’s an idea that doesn’t fit with the pure monotheism taught by the prophets. Jesus never clearly said he was God, nor did he preach that God is three persons. Only HUMANS, church leaders built up complex arguments and forced this doctrine into Christian belief. But no matter how many councils or debates tried to justify it, the concept remains a human invention, not a divine truth.

In the end, this passage doesn’t prove the Trinity. Instead, it shows how far some people were willing to go to defend a teaching that was never part of the original message.
Akhi you can debunk it without being disrespectful
 
  • JFL
Reactions: childishkillah
Bruh do you really need to reignite 1700 year old religious controversies? This was already settled before the advent of Islam
 
  • +1
Reactions: PrinceLuenLeoncur
Nigga you worship human
Nigga you worship an Aldrich monstrosity. Learn your place

Your prophet is a faggot who kissed men’s ribs and a pedo
 
Whenever people bring up the Trinity in the New Testament, they often point to a passage in the First Letter of John, chapter 5, verses 7 to 8. It’s usually quoted like this:

"For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood; and these three agree as one."

ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ
μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ
οὐρανῷ ὁ πατήρ ὁ
λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν

At first glance, this sounds like the clearest reference to the Trinity in the whole Bible. But the truth is that this text was never part of the original letter. Scholars call this addition the Comma Johanneum, which is just a fancy name for a sentence someone inserted later on.

If you look at the earliest Greek manuscripts, you can see it doesn’t belong there. For example:

Codex Sinaiticus, from the 4th century, doesn’t mention the Father, the Word, or the Holy Spirit giving witness in heaven. This section is completely missing.

Codex Vaticanus, also from the 4th century, doesn’t have it either. The place where it would be is simply blank.

In the rare Greek manuscripts where it does appear like Minuscule 221, written more than a thousand years after the original it shows up only in the margin. Someone added it by hand much later.

It’s obvious that this passage is not authentic, but was put in to support the idea of the Trinity, which was controversial and far from universally accepted in the early church. The honest thing for modern Bible publishers would be to clearly note that this sentence is a later addition, or simply remove it so people aren’t misled.

This example shows something deeper: the Christian scriptures have not been well preserved . Verses have been added, changed, or left out over the centuries. This is exactly what the Qur’an warns about. In the second chapter Al-Baqarah, verse 79.

فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ الْكِتَابَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَـٰذَا مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۖ فَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ

"Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, “This is from God,” so they can sell it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they earn."

The Comma Johanneum is a perfect example—people wrote it in and claimed it came from God.

As for the Trinity itself, it’s an idea that doesn’t fit with the pure monotheism taught by the prophets. Jesus never clearly said he was God, nor did he preach that God is three persons. Only HUMANS, church leaders built up complex arguments and forced this doctrine into Christian belief. But no matter how many councils or debates tried to justify it, the concept remains a human invention, not a divine truth.

In the end, this passage doesn’t prove the Trinity. Instead, it shows how far some people were willing to go to defend a teaching that was never part of the original message.
God is triune, it has been said since Genesis
 
  • +1
Reactions: PrinceLuenLeoncur
Bruh do you really need to reignite 1700 year old religious controversies? This was already settled before the advent of Islam
Muslims lose sleep at night knowing their argument were All refuted 2k years before


It must hurt but their entire RELGION is built upon mine being wrong so they have to beat a dead horse that has already been debunked. I feel sorry for them but their future is eternal hellfire :lul::lul::lul::lul::lul:
 
  • +1
Reactions: Restitutor Orbis
Whenever people bring up the Trinity in the New Testament, they often point to a passage in the First Letter of John, chapter 5, verses 7 to 8. It’s usually quoted like this:

"For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood; and these three agree as one."

ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ
μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ
οὐρανῷ ὁ πατήρ ὁ
λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν

At first glance, this sounds like the clearest reference to the Trinity in the whole Bible. But the truth is that this text was never part of the original letter. Scholars call this addition the Comma Johanneum, which is just a fancy name for a sentence someone inserted later on.

If you look at the earliest Greek manuscripts, you can see it doesn’t belong there. For example:

Codex Sinaiticus, from the 4th century, doesn’t mention the Father, the Word, or the Holy Spirit giving witness in heaven. This section is completely missing.

Codex Vaticanus, also from the 4th century, doesn’t have it either. The place where it would be is simply blank.

In the rare Greek manuscripts where it does appear like Minuscule 221, written more than a thousand years after the original it shows up only in the margin. Someone added it by hand much later.

It’s obvious that this passage is not authentic, but was put in to support the idea of the Trinity, which was controversial and far from universally accepted in the early church. The honest thing for modern Bible publishers would be to clearly note that this sentence is a later addition, or simply remove it so people aren’t misled.

This example shows something deeper: the Christian scriptures have not been well preserved . Verses have been added, changed, or left out over the centuries. This is exactly what the Qur’an warns about. In the second chapter Al-Baqarah, verse 79.

فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ الْكِتَابَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَـٰذَا مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۖ فَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ

"Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, “This is from God,” so they can sell it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they earn."

The Comma Johanneum is a perfect example—people wrote it in and claimed it came from God.

As for the Trinity itself, it’s an idea that doesn’t fit with the pure monotheism taught by the prophets. Jesus never clearly said he was God, nor did he preach that God is three persons. Only HUMANS, church leaders built up complex arguments and forced this doctrine into Christian belief. But no matter how many councils or debates tried to justify it, the concept remains a human invention, not a divine truth.

In the end, this passage doesn’t prove the Trinity. Instead, it shows how far some people were willing to go to defend a teaching that was never part of the original message.
I always hated the trinity. The God head doctrine was better.
 
  • +1
Reactions: childishkillah
Enter the ignore forevermore
Hahahaha I legit was a Christian convert once, Christianity is such a weak religion any mockery of Christ will shatter your faith, I felt like a mad man believing in this shit, it's like veganism but religious
 
Whenever people bring up the Trinity in the New Testament, they often point to a passage in the First Letter of John, chapter 5, verses 7 to 8. It’s usually quoted like this:

"For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood; and these three agree as one."

ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ
μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ
οὐρανῷ ὁ πατήρ ὁ
λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν

At first glance, this sounds like the clearest reference to the Trinity in the whole Bible. But the truth is that this text was never part of the original letter. Scholars call this addition the Comma Johanneum, which is just a fancy name for a sentence someone inserted later on.

If you look at the earliest Greek manuscripts, you can see it doesn’t belong there. For example:

Codex Sinaiticus, from the 4th century, doesn’t mention the Father, the Word, or the Holy Spirit giving witness in heaven. This section is completely missing.

Codex Vaticanus, also from the 4th century, doesn’t have it either. The place where it would be is simply blank.

In the rare Greek manuscripts where it does appear like Minuscule 221, written more than a thousand years after the original it shows up only in the margin. Someone added it by hand much later.

It’s obvious that this passage is not authentic, but was put in to support the idea of the Trinity, which was controversial and far from universally accepted in the early church. The honest thing for modern Bible publishers would be to clearly note that this sentence is a later addition, or simply remove it so people aren’t misled.

This example shows something deeper: the Christian scriptures have not been well preserved . Verses have been added, changed, or left out over the centuries. This is exactly what the Qur’an warns about. In the second chapter Al-Baqarah, verse 79.

فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ الْكِتَابَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَـٰذَا مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۖ فَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ

"Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, “This is from God,” so they can sell it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they earn."

The Comma Johanneum is a perfect example—people wrote it in and claimed it came from God.

As for the Trinity itself, it’s an idea that doesn’t fit with the pure monotheism taught by the prophets. Jesus never clearly said he was God, nor did he preach that God is three persons. Only HUMANS, church leaders built up complex arguments and forced this doctrine into Christian belief. But no matter how many councils or debates tried to justify it, the concept remains a human invention, not a divine truth.

In the end, this passage doesn’t prove the Trinity. Instead, it shows how far some people were willing to go to defend a teaching that was never part of the original message.

stop wasting your time on that and read Sprenlger and Evola
 
  • +1
Reactions: childishkillah
:lul:
1 John 7:8 is not spekainf about the trinity you retard, it’s also only found in LATIN manuscripts not Greek ones
Straight up lies again. I literally aforementioned the letter in Greek. But I'm not surprised, last time your monkey brain confused Greek with Arabic.
And here is a Greek text with that addition.

Screenshot 20250714 143846 Gallery


Have you even read the thread? :feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:
it’s likely an LATIN scribal addition by mistake.
If you've ever read a scribal text from that period, you'd know that errors were crossed out. It's a clear addition you dumb nigger.

Skip to 1:20


lol your god is a fuckin abomination. Oh and I want everybody on this thread to realise, this thread and the other mohammedSHIT who liked his comment both follow a pedophile man who allowed rape and raped a 9 year old girl and used to snort like a camel when he’d get revelation this same man sucked on his grandsons tounge (hassan) and washed himself in dirty water


These are the people attacking the trinity :hnghn::hnghn::hnghn::hnghn:

Dnw owned nigger ramblings.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20250714-143846_Gallery.jpg
    Screenshot_20250714-143846_Gallery.jpg
    221.6 KB · Views: 0
Bruh do you really need to reignite 1700 year old religious controversies? This was already settled before the advent of Islam
The first additions found date back to texts from the 10th century, Moronic nigger.
 
Muslims lose sleep at night knowing their argument were All refuted 2k years before


It must hurt but their entire RELGION is built upon mine being wrong so they have to beat a dead horse that has already been debunked. I feel sorry for them but their future is eternal hellfire :lul::lul::lul::lul::lul:
Every time I have dialectically violated you, almost all of your arguments were based on literal lies.
 
:lul:

Straight up lies again. I literally aforementioned the letter in Greek. But I'm not surprised, last time your monkey brain confused Greek with Arabic.
And here is a Greek text with that addition.

View attachment 3918606

Have you even read the thread? :feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:

If you've ever read a scribal text from that period, you'd know that errors were crossed out. It's a clear addition you dumb nigger.

Dnw owned nigger ramblings.
You dumbass your speaking about the codex montforticus by Erasmus which is a high medieval manuscript made by Him to placate the faggot Roman Catholics which had the Johannine comma. This isn’t found in any other manuscript before that’s the point I made so if anything this supports my argument. @Asiangymmax see how the Mohammeden arguments always fail miserably WOMP WOMP for GAYhammodens, daily reminder moahmmed got fucked in the ass in the night off the Djinn by the Al-Zutt men who had him good


Another fail from the resident pedophile follower Mohammed abahu mohamed ir-irijeeeeem

May the accursed Mohammed and his followers rest in shit

May your demon god be cast into the lake of fire on the day of judgement he will be screaming like a bitch and I promise I’ll be there or piss on Mohammed and Allahs heads
 
  • +1
Reactions: Asiangymmax
Every time I have dialectically violated you, almost all of your arguments were based on literal lies.
You lost every engagement we have had. Sit down abdool I rape you every time we debate you lose and the whole Fourm sees it and laughs at you and your ummah which I humiliate like the gaymhammodens you are
 
You dumbass your speaking about the codex montforticus by Erasmus which is a high medieval manuscript made by Him to placate the faggot Roman Catholics which had the Johannine comma. This isn’t found in any other manuscript before that’s the point I made so if anything this supports my argument. @Asiangymmax see how the Mohammeden arguments always fail miserably WOMP WOMP for GAYhammodens, daily reminder moahmmed got fucked in the ass in the night off the Djinn by the Al-Zutt men who had him good


Another fail from the resident pedophile follower Mohammed abahu mohamed ir-irijeeeeem

May the accursed Mohammed and his followers rest in shit

May your demon god be cast into the lake of fire on the day of judgement he will be screaming like a bitch and I promise I’ll be there or piss on Mohammed and Allahs heads
No nigger Codex Monrforticus is Minuscules 61, the pic is Minuscules 221. And even more, Where tf did you get that? Codex Montforticus does not have a clear author. Stop lying nigger, You are coming across as a retarded and lying nigger, without lies you are simply incapable of matching my IQ.
 
Last edited:
You lost every engagement we have had. Sit down abdool I rape you every time we debate you lose and the whole Fourm sees it and laughs at you and your ummah which I humiliate like the gaymhammodens you are
Yeah like when you give you the W cause "I edited my reply with a dumbfuck thing that doesn't add a shieeet to my argument cuz I'm a dumb nigger and SHIEEEEETTTTTTT"
 
No nigger Codex Monrforticus is Minuscules 61, the pic is Minuscules 221. And even more, Where tf did you get that? Codex Montforticus does not have a clear author. Stop lying nigger, You are coming across as a retarded and lying nigger, without lies you are simply incapable of matching my IQ.
It does it’s Eurasmus you fucking idiot that’s montforticus 61 you can google this shit you fucking donut

the KJV (about the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost) is called the Comma Johanneum, and it does not appear in the earliest Greek manuscripts — including major ones like Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. It shows up only in a few late manuscripts, mostly from the 14th century onward (e.g. Minuscule 221, from the 10th or 12th century, but with a marginal note). It’s a later addition and marginal gloss so it was imported from LATIN as I said before you dickhead which is proven as it appears in the Vulgate and not much in the Greek

And once again your whole thread is fake gay and stupid


No doctrine relies solely on this verse. The Trinity is grounded in many passages (e.g. Matthew 28:19, John 1:1, John 14:26), not just 1 John 5:7. But keep using this as your crutch you pedophile following faggot


Islam has its own textual issues. For instance, KOO RAN manuscripts (like Ṣanʿāʾ palimpsest) show variants and erasures. And the Qur’an has no textual apparatus like the Bible, so Muslims often accept the Uthmanic recension without critical investigation which is a flaw on their end but what do we expect from Low IQ troggies.

Yeah like when you give you the W cause "I edited my reply with a dumbfuck thing that doesn't add a shieeet to my argument cuz I'm a dumb nigger and SHIEEEEETTTTTTT"
Oh you mean like how you’re too stupid to refute my comment so you dry like a fagggot for example here? Ima place you on my ignore your too low IQ I refuted you brutally even on your own thread
 
It does it’s Eurasmus you fucking idiot that’s montforticus 61 you can google this shit you fucking donut
Not a single source.
The KJV (about the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost) is called the Comma Johanneum, and it does not appear in the earliest Greek manuscripts — including major ones like Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. It shows up only in a few late manuscripts, mostly from the 14th century onward (e.g. Minuscule 221, from the 10th or 12th century, but with a marginal note).
Yeah that's literally what is in my thread lol.
It shows up only in a few late manuscripts, mostly from the 14th century onward (e.g. Minuscule 221, from the 10th or 12th century, but with a marginal note). It’s a later addition and marginal gloss so it was imported from LATIN as I said before you dickhead which is proven as it appears in the Vulgate and not much in the Greek
It’s also only found in LATIN manuscripts not Greek ones and is just an scribal error but it isn’t the trinity
This is named intelectual dishonesty in debates.
 

Similar threads

Сигма Бой
Replies
27
Views
284
Сигма Бой
Сигма Бой
Terrorizer512
LifeFuel Dance
Replies
1
Views
104
Сигма Бой
Сигма Бой

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top