Replies

How about rather we do it this way. We start with the 66 books that no one has ever been able to prove contain errors. Then, if any other books considered have proven to have any error whatsoever we determine those to be not divinely inspired and discard them as from the deceiver.

Only if you can get your hands on the originals. Would you not admit that the Comma Johanneum, added later, changed things considerably? How about the baptismal formula in Matthew 28? The earliest copies do not contain the Trinitarian formula. Does that mean error?

>> Only if you can get your hands on the originals.<<

Why would I need to do that? No one has proven any errors in the 66 books we have now.

>> Would you not admit that the Comma Johanneum, added later, changed things considerably?<<

No, I wouldn’t admit that. There are enough corroborating passages that support it. John 10:30 and many others support those verses so I see no change or contradiction from other scripture.

>> How about the baptismal formula in Matthew 28?<<

What about it?

>> The earliest copies do not contain the Trinitarian formula. Does that mean error?

Like I said, “in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God”. I don’t think you understood my post earlier. I said take the current 66 books which have never been proven to have any errors or inconsistencies and compare all other information to those 66 books.