How many religions came from America?

[Wootah]

Is it evidence for or against religions if they came from America?

For instance Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses. Are there more? Scientology. Any more?

I would argue it is evidence against the religion because America has quite literally nothing the to do with the Bible. What other evidence flows from a religion coming from America?

[kjw47]

The gospels themselves weren't devil inspired. Errors translated in to fit false council teachings were devil inspired. The biggest being John 1:1-- In the old Greek lexicons, the true God is called Ho Theos in the 2nd line, the word called Plain Theos in the last line, clearly showing a difference, the only other occurrence in the NT where that occurs is 2 Cor 4:4--satan called plain Theos, God called Ho Theos--the translating rule is the same in both places-thus-a god small g belongs in the last line at John 1:1 just like to satan-god at 2 Cor.
In 1822 a Greek scholar A.Kneeland translated the NT, He compared Greek to English side by side to prove to the world-a god is correct, 19 other translations had a god, 3 had was divine. All rejected by trinity clergys because that truth exposes them as false religions.

I don't believe in trinity either....... OK, are these differences the only differences between your gospels and others?
That would leave many many contradictions which your gospels do still have.

No there are other errors to try and make it show Jesus is God as well. One proven error--Out of the Catholic Archives back in the 60,s or 70,s--proof was brought out that-The spirit, water and blood are the 3 witness bearers, Catholicism had the Father, son, and holy spirit in that passage, that carried into all translations until the proof was brought out. But those werent allowed back in the archives for exposing that truth. Many translations have changed to the truth in that spot. Many more would have been found if the search was allowed to continue. Only those trying to mislead ones by satans will would put errors in over Gods truth.

[kjw47]

Jesus was never arrested but the 1 time.

Yes...... definitely for busting up the temple currency bazaar and picketing the temple courts. He and his were very angry about temople corruption.

Back in those days, one had to sacrifice birds and animals for their sins.

For petty conditions and acts, yes, but scores of crimes carried the death penalty, kjw47.

The money changers were selling birds, cows in Gods temple, that is what Jesus disliked. Making profit in Gods holy temple, profaning his Fathers name. John 2:14-16)

No, you've got that wrong. The money changers were not selling animals in the temple, they were changing any outside currencies in to temple currency, and they were deceiving the people during those transactions.

The stalls selling sacrificial birds and animals were on a brilliant scam as well. I reckon that the priests were condemning sacrificial lambs etc brought to the temple by the people as imperfect, so the a temple lamb had to be purchased at a rip-off price. The condemned lamb would have to be left somewhere and could be recovered later for the priests to sell as perfect...... that's a big guess I'm making but it was bound to be something like that.

Even today with so many tight controls the money changing services at airports and ship ports need to be tested very carefully for cheating. It's easy to scam some people who need to change currencies.

He didnt get arrested for that occurrence, only after Judas sold him was he arrested.

[kjw47]

The gospels themselves weren't devil inspired. Errors translated in to fit false council teachings were devil inspired. The biggest being John 1:1-

There is a naughty addition in Mark 1:1 as well.
You mentioned the gospel of John........ after arriving in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday Jesus spoke with the people and answered questions, and then he went and hid to get away from them. That isn't what we read in other gospels, though.

John clearly didn't want there to be any mention of Jesus causing trouble in the Temple (that last week) so that didn't happen in his gospel, instead he had Jesus causing trouble in the Temple the week after that wedding in Cana. So many differences.

I doubt they are contradictions.

[kjw47]

It is no different if your child asks you for $$ to go buy a new computer and you give it to her and she goes and purchases it. In the same sense you bought the computer because it was your $$ used.

The English ambiguity that you're relying on about the "sense" of who did they buying doesn't exist in the Greek of Acts 1:18. When Judas ἐκτήσατο the χωρίον, it means that he did the exchange himself in contradiction to Matthew's story.

"Did you or your child actually go to the store and buy the new computer?" "My child did."

That's the "sense" of Acts 1:18.

You are incorrect about it.

[kjw47]

He didnt have to write about a rope, Matthew did.

He didn't "have to write about a rope" because it wasn't part of Luke's story. In the same way, Matthew "didn't have to write about" exploding guts because it wasn't part of his story.

The rest of your post isnt reality.

There's neither Tyrannosaurus rex nor broken rope in either story. What's your rule or criterion for adding your own details to a story and then believing they were there all along?

God inspired the words of his bible. Some may think there are contradictions as you see them. But those that know and Love God knows there are reasons for the way God does things unseen by mortal thinking. There are those that trust God and those looking for excuses not to--they are the rebels being rooted out of entering Gods kingdom. We all must choose with our free will where we stand.

[Difflugia]

You are incorrect about it.

Really? Explain it to me. Maybe these will help:

[kjw47]

You are incorrect about it.

Really? Explain it to me. Maybe these will help:

There is conflict in everything--in 1822 a Greek scholar, using trinity translated Greek Lexicons translated the NT, A.Kneeland, he compared Greek and English side by side to prove to the world-a god is correct in the last line at John 1:1, the way its written in the Greek lexicons. 19 other translations had a god, 3 had was divine-All rejected by trinity clergys because truth exposes them as false religions.

[Difflugia]

There is conflict in everything--in 1822 a Greek scholar, using trinity translated Greek Lexicons translated the NT, A.Kneeland, he compared Greek and English side by side to prove to the world-a god is correct in the last line at John 1:1, the way its written in the Greek lexicons. 19 other translations had a god, 3 had was divine-All rejected by trinity clergys because truth exposes them as false religions.

Ah, yes. The last refuge of the apologist. "Maybe it means something other than what it actually does." I mean, it's possible, right?

[kjw47]

There is conflict in everything--in 1822 a Greek scholar, using trinity translated Greek Lexicons translated the NT, A.Kneeland, he compared Greek and English side by side to prove to the world-a god is correct in the last line at John 1:1, the way its written in the Greek lexicons. 19 other translations had a god, 3 had was divine-All rejected by trinity clergys because truth exposes them as false religions.

Ah, yes. The last refuge of the apologist. "Maybe it means something other than what it actually does." I mean, it's possible, right?

I share facts-- Facts expose the darkness.

[Difflugia]

I share facts-- Facts expose the darkness.

You've badly misspelled "hopeful, but groundless speculations." When you've finished with you're misplaced bravado, perhaps you'd like to get on with explaining why I'm wrong.

On a related note, does Reasoning from the Scriptures mention that one should take the last word at all cost, even if a Witness has nothing new to say? That seems to be a pattern.