So, all right, I'm just seeing if there's any really good questions that we, sorry that
we don't have time to get to all of them, folks.
One says, what's the controversy about First John 5-7?
I mean, obviously that's a textual issue, you know, with, I don't know if you want
to get into the weeds on the fact of why they think it's not there, but I don't really
care why they don't think it's in their text.
Yeah, I mean, there's lots of evidence for First John 5-7.
There's a difference between the majority Greek text and the textus receptus.
Usually those end up being the same thing, but there are places where the textus receptus
does not follow the majority, and the philosophy behind the majority text is that they only
look at the Greek evidence, whereas the textus receptus also looks at evidence in other languages.
So you have First John 5-7 not being in the majority of Greek texts, but it's in thousands
and thousands and thousands of Latin texts.
It's in other languages, and you have writers quoting First John 5-7, you know, all the
way back.
Because people will be like, there's no Greek text of First John 5-7 before, you know, whatever
year they claim, the year 1300 or the year 1100 or the year 1500 or whatever.
But the thing is, depending on what claim they're making, but you can find First John
5-7 quoted by preachers that are preaching from First John 5-7, or hymns that are, you
know, using First John 5-7.
So that's evidence that it was there.
If they're, like, here's what's so funny.
John Chrysostom, preacher from, you know, around 1600 years ago, John Chrysostom preached
verse by verse through lots of the New Testament.
And so there's a lot of stuff that they're saying, oh, you know, the oldest stuff says
it's not, you know, there's no Greek manuscript from back then that says it.
But yet when John Chrysostom is preaching verse by verse, if you look at what he's preaching,
he's going with Texas Receptus stuff.
And so shouldn't that count as evidence of, that should count as evidence from the fourth
century AD, fourth century AD, this verse was there, this wording was there, because
John Chrysostom is preaching through it verse by verse, and he reads it.
But they don't always take that evidence into account, because they don't consider
that a Greek manuscript.
But if a guy's preaching through the Bible and he uses a verse, then it had to, he can't
use it if it isn't there.
Well, they just added not to a verse earlier we're talking about, so.
This is true.
Yeah.