Only the LORD God has seen God the FATHER
the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.
But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe.
You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.
But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.
Verse please... that says.... what you posted....
"Only the LORD God has seen God the FATHER"
Wow.... now your making up verses... How sad.... Does your pastor know of your evil deeds?
You make up scripture like the past....
KJV 1Jo 5:7 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.
That these words are spurious and have no right to stand in the New Testament is certain in the light of the following considerations.
External Evidence. (1) the passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from the late recension of the Latin Vulgate. Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript.
The eight manuscripts are as follows:
61: codex Montfortianus, dating from the early 16th century.
88.v.r. a variant reading in a 16th century hand, added to the 14th century codex Regius of Naples
221 v.r. a variant reading added to a 10th century manuscript in the Bobleian Library at Oxford.
429 v.r. a variant reading added to a 16th century manuscript at Wolfenbuttel.
636 v.r. a variant reading added to a 16th century manuscript at Naples.
918: a 16th century manuscript at the Escorial, Spain.
2318: an 18th century manuscript, influenced by the Clementine Vulgate, at Bucharest Romania.
(2)
The passage is quoted by none of the Greek Fathers, who had they known it, would most certainly have employed it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and Arian). Its first appearance in Greek is in a Greek version of the (Latin) Acts of the Lateran Council in 1215.
(3)
The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic). Except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the old Latin in its earliest form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied A.D. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus [copied before A.D. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first-hand of codex Vallicellianus [ninth century]).
The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as part of the actual text of the Episcopal is in a fourth century Latin treaties entitled
Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4.), attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower Bishop Instantius. Apparently the gloss arose when the original passage was understood to symbolize the Trinity (though the mention of the three witnesses: the Spirit, the water, and the blood), an interpretation that may have been written first as a marginal note that afterwards found its way into the text. In the fifth century the gloss was quoted by Latin fathers in north Africa and Italy as part of the text of the Epistle, and from the sixth century onwards is found more and more frequently in manuscripts of the old Latin and of the Vulgate. In these various witnesses the wording of the passage differs in several particulars.
(B) Internal Probabilities. (1) As regards transcriptional probability, if the passage were original, no good reason can be found to account for its omission, either accidentally or intentionally, by copyists of hundreds of Greek manuscripts, and by translators of ancient versions.
This is why you fail....
