T
Part 9: Riders of the Wrecking Machine: I John 5: 7-8 The Trinity
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Trinity" is not found in scripture." The early church father Tertullian (about 160 to 220 AD at Carthage) first used the word.
The New Testament states in a few verses that there is the Father,
the Son and the Holy Spirit. But the issue has been over I John 5:
7-8 which is one of the most disputed pair of verses in the New Testament.
I John 5: 7-8: Textus Receptus Greek: oti treis eisin oi marturountes
en to ourano o pater o logo kai to agion pneuma kai outoi oi trei en
eisin 8 kai treis eisin oi marturountes en te ge to pneuma kai to udor
kai to aima kai oi treis ei to en eisin
I John 5: 7-8: Westcott-Hort Greek: oti treis eisin oi marturountes
8 to pneuma kai to udor kai to aima kai oi treis ei to en eisin
Even if you can't read Greek, you can see that the Westcott-Hort text
leaves out many words.
I John 5: 7-8: King James Version: "For there are three that bear
record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these
three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the
spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."
I John 5: 7-8 in the American Standard Version: "And it is the Spirit
that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are
three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and
the three agree in one."
Its not real clear in the American Standard Version that I John 5:
7-8 is talking about the Trinity, which is the Father, the Son and
the Holy Spirit. In the King James Version Christ is called the Word.
The Revised Standard version just says "There are three that testify.
the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three agree."
The NIV says "For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water
and the blood: and the three are in agreement."
And the Douay-Rheims says: " And there are three who give testimony
in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three
are one. And there are three that give testimony on earth: the
spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three are one."
The Catholic Douay-Rheims agrees with the Textus Receptus and King
James. But don't think that this agreement has any significance for
that Church being true to the Lord and his word. Young's Literal
Translation and the Green translation both have the full wording of
the Textus Receptus and King James.
Its interesting that the Douay-Rheims has a clearer statement of the
doctrine of the trinity than the modern translations from
Westcott-Hort.
But the problem is that
the King James wording for I John 5: 7-8 is said by the followers of
Westcot-Hort not to exist in early Greek texts. The NIV Study Bible
says that I John 5:7 "...is not found in any Greek manuscript or New
Testament translation prior to the 16th century."
This below is taken from:
http://www.fundamentalbiblechurch.org/Foundation/fbcdoesa.htm
"It is not true that I John 5:7 is absent in all pre-16th century
Greek manuscripts and New Testament translations. The text is found
in eight extant Greek manuscripts, and five of them are dated before
the 16th century (Greek miniscules 88, 221, 429, 629, 636).
Furthermore, there is abundant support for I John 5:7f from the Latin
translations. There are at least 8000 extant Latin manuscripts, and
many of them contain 1 John 5:7; the really important ones being the
Old Latin, which church fathers such as Tertullian (AD 155-220) and
Cyprian (AD 200-258) used. Now, out of the very few Old Latin
manuscripts with the fifth chapter of First John, at least four of
them contain the Comma. Since these Latin versions were derived from
the Greek New Testament, there is reason to believe that I John 5:7
has very early Greek attestation, hitherto lost."
Jerome, who created the Catholic Latin Vulgate complains in his work
Prologue to the Canonical Epistles that the complete wording of I
John 5:7 was taken out of Greek manuscripts which he had seen. He
says:
"Irresponsible translators left out this testimony in the Greek codices."
On Defense of the Johannine Comma
it says ", conditions were favourable for the Greek witness to have
been altered by Arian heretics in the 4th century who sought to
expunge the overt Trinitarian witness of the Comma...It is very well
possible that even the Byzantine tradition was corrupted by the Arian
heretics of the East in the 4th-5th centuries, and that the Eastern
Emperors such as Constantius who came under the Arian heresy
consciously sought to remove the Comma from the witness of the Greek
scriptures of the East. This could answer the question why the Comma
is missing from the bulk of the Greek manuscript tradition, but yet is
evidenced in other traditions such as those of the Old Latin and the
Syriac."
Arianism - from Arius - said that Jesus Christ was a created being and
not God, and so the Arians in the early church period were
anti-trinitarians.
Frederic G. Kenyon in his 1936 book, The Story of the Bible (page
110), says that in creating his Latin Vulgate, Jerome used both the
Alexandarian Greek texts, such as the Vaticanus, and the Old Latin
texts. Probably the full Textus Receptus wording of I John 5: 7-8 got
in some versions of the Vulgate from the Old Latin texts, if not at
the time Jerome created his Vulgate, then at a somewhat later time.
Scholars of the Bible, though generally not those who are followers
of Westcott and Hort, say that the complete Textus Receptus wording of
I John 5: 7-8 is found in at least two eighth century Greek texts, the
Wizanburgensis and the Basiliensis.
"The existence of Wizanburgensis from the 8th century lends credit to
this idea, since it demonstrates in a concrete manner that
Comma-containing Greek manuscripts existed at least that far back..."
(Defense of the Johannine Comma)
Basiliensis is now kept at Basel, Switzerland Codex Basiliensis
(E/07). Eighth century according to
Uncial Script And
Wizanburgensis is in the the Dublin University Library.
In his commentary on I John 5: 7 John Gill says of the mention of
the text by early church fathers that it is cited "... by Fulgentius ,
in the beginning of the "sixth" century, against the Arians, without
any scruple or hesitation; and Jerome, as before observed, has it in
his translation made in the latter end of the "fourth" century; and it
is cited by Athanasius about the year 350; and before him by Cyprian
, in the middle, of the "third" century, about the year 250; and is
referred to by Tertullian about, the year 200;"
Athenagorus - who lived in the second century, about 177AD - says "The
Holy Spirit Himself also, which operates in the prophets, we assert to
be an effluence of God, flowing from Him, and returning back again
like a beam of the sun. Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men
who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy
Spirit, and who declare both their power in union and their
distinction in order, called atheists?" This is in: Athenagorus, Plea
for the Christians.
Athenagorus talks about the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and
says they are three separate persons but are in union, a statement
that sounds a lot likje that in I John 5: 7. He also refers to the Son
as the Word. Remember that I John 5: 7 calls Christ the Word.
Tertullian in about 215 AD in Adversus Praxeas has a lot to say about
the Trinity. He has many partial quotes of New Testament verses. In
his book, Adversus Praxeas (Against Praxeas ), Chapter Twenty-Five, he
says "'And so the
connection of the Father, and the Son, and of the Paraclete [Holy Spirit]
makes three cohering entities, one cohering from the other, which
three are one entity' refers to the unity of their substance, not the
oneness of their number." He apparently does not directly quote I John 5: 7-8.
See: ANF03. Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
"which three are one entity" sounds like I John 5: 7
Cyprian, another North African bishop, cites the verse in about 250 AD saying:
" The Lord says, 'I and the Father are one;' and again it is written
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 'And these
three are one.'"55 (55) - Cyprian, De Unit. Eccl., cap. vi
On the web site http://home.carolina.rr.com/theshuecrew/wallace.html
it says "Since Cyprian wrote the disputed passage in Latin I feel it
necessary to list Cyprian's words in Latin. Cyprian wrote, "Dicit
dominus, Ego et pater unum sumus (John x. 30), et iterum de Patre, et
Filio, et Spiritu Sancto scriptum est, Et tres unum sunt." (The Lord
says, "I and the Father are One," and again, of the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost it is written: "And the three are One."). This Latin
reading is important when you compare it to the Old Latin reading of 1
John 5:7; "Quoniam tres sunt, gui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater,
Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus: et hi tres unum sunt." Cyprian clearly
says that it is written of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost--"And the
three are One." His Latin matches the Old Latin reading identically
with the exception of 'hi'...There is no other verse that expressly
states that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are 'three in one' outside
of 1 John 5:7." The "Old Latin" text is not Jerome's Vulgate, but an
earlier Latin Bible used by the Waldenses and others in Europe.
This is apparently from the Treatises of Cyprian who lived from about
200 to 258 AD. He is saying that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are
one, not meaning that the Godhead is made up only of one person, but
that the three persons of the Godhead are united in agreement. The
statement of the NIV that the Spirit, the water and the blood are in
agreement is not nearly as clear that it is referring to the Father,
the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Finally, Augustine (354-430 AD) says "I would not have thee mistake
that place in the epistle of John the apostle where he saith, "There
are three witnesses: the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and the
three are one." Lest haply thou say that the Spirit and the water and
the blood are diverse substances, and yet it is said, "the three are
one:" ."60 (60) - Augustine, Contra Maximinium, Lib. II, cap. xxii.3;
Augustine was more clearly a Catholic than Polycarp, Ignatius,
Irenaeus or Tertullian, and I would not recommend some of Augustine's
teachings. But we can still use his testimony in his time about the
existence of the full Textus Receptus wording of I John 5: 7-8.
The shortening of I John 5: 7-8 in the Westcott-Hort Greek text of
1881 down to an unclear statement about the Spirit, the water and the
blood being in agreement may be consistent with second and third
century AD gnostic doctrines about Jesus Christ. Many gnostics
thought that the Christ was an Aeon created by the Eternal Father, who
was a spirit, but not the God of the Bible. Arius specifically
taught that Christ was a created being and not God.
We don't have proof that gnostics or followers of Arius changed the
wording of I John 5:
7-8. But there are many other omissions and changes in the
Westcott-Hort Greek text that seem to agree with gnostic theology.
The more verse changes we find that are in agreement with
gnosticism the more support there is for the idea of gnostic changes
in the Bible. But the followers of Westcott and Hort will probably
not accept that as decisive proof. Neither would they accept as
decisive
proof quotes of Scripture by early Church fathers or very early texts
that the wordings of the Textus Receptus go back to the second or
first centuries or to the originals written by the apostles.
The most decisive proof that the King James Version and the Greek
Textus Receptus are accepted by God as his word is the fruit these
two texts have created since Erasmus published his first edition of
the Textus Receptus in 1516 and the King James Version came out in
1611.
I John 5: 7-8 is not the only statement of the Trinity in the New
Testament. There are some verses other than I John 5: 7-8 that say
there is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, such as:
Matthew 28: 19: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost."
John 15: 26: "But when the Comforter (the Holy Spirit) is come, whom
I (Jesus) will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of
truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me."
Matthew 3: 16-17: "and Jesus, when he was baptized, went up
straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto
him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting
upon him: and to a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son,
in whom I am well pleased." It is the Father who is speaking here
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Trinity" is not found in scripture." The early church father Tertullian (about 160 to 220 AD at Carthage) first used the word.
The New Testament states in a few verses that there is the Father,
the Son and the Holy Spirit. But the issue has been over I John 5:
7-8 which is one of the most disputed pair of verses in the New Testament.
I John 5: 7-8: Textus Receptus Greek: oti treis eisin oi marturountes
en to ourano o pater o logo kai to agion pneuma kai outoi oi trei en
eisin 8 kai treis eisin oi marturountes en te ge to pneuma kai to udor
kai to aima kai oi treis ei to en eisin
I John 5: 7-8: Westcott-Hort Greek: oti treis eisin oi marturountes
8 to pneuma kai to udor kai to aima kai oi treis ei to en eisin
Even if you can't read Greek, you can see that the Westcott-Hort text
leaves out many words.
I John 5: 7-8: King James Version: "For there are three that bear
record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these
three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the
spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."
I John 5: 7-8 in the American Standard Version: "And it is the Spirit
that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are
three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and
the three agree in one."
Its not real clear in the American Standard Version that I John 5:
7-8 is talking about the Trinity, which is the Father, the Son and
the Holy Spirit. In the King James Version Christ is called the Word.
The Revised Standard version just says "There are three that testify.
the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three agree."
The NIV says "For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water
and the blood: and the three are in agreement."
And the Douay-Rheims says: " And there are three who give testimony
in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three
are one. And there are three that give testimony on earth: the
spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three are one."
The Catholic Douay-Rheims agrees with the Textus Receptus and King
James. But don't think that this agreement has any significance for
that Church being true to the Lord and his word. Young's Literal
Translation and the Green translation both have the full wording of
the Textus Receptus and King James.
Its interesting that the Douay-Rheims has a clearer statement of the
doctrine of the trinity than the modern translations from
Westcott-Hort.
But the problem is that
the King James wording for I John 5: 7-8 is said by the followers of
Westcot-Hort not to exist in early Greek texts. The NIV Study Bible
says that I John 5:7 "...is not found in any Greek manuscript or New
Testament translation prior to the 16th century."
This below is taken from:
http://www.fundamentalbiblechurch.org/Foundation/fbcdoesa.htm
"It is not true that I John 5:7 is absent in all pre-16th century
Greek manuscripts and New Testament translations. The text is found
in eight extant Greek manuscripts, and five of them are dated before
the 16th century (Greek miniscules 88, 221, 429, 629, 636).
Furthermore, there is abundant support for I John 5:7f from the Latin
translations. There are at least 8000 extant Latin manuscripts, and
many of them contain 1 John 5:7; the really important ones being the
Old Latin, which church fathers such as Tertullian (AD 155-220) and
Cyprian (AD 200-258) used. Now, out of the very few Old Latin
manuscripts with the fifth chapter of First John, at least four of
them contain the Comma. Since these Latin versions were derived from
the Greek New Testament, there is reason to believe that I John 5:7
has very early Greek attestation, hitherto lost."
Jerome, who created the Catholic Latin Vulgate complains in his work
Prologue to the Canonical Epistles that the complete wording of I
John 5:7 was taken out of Greek manuscripts which he had seen. He
says:
"Irresponsible translators left out this testimony in the Greek codices."
On Defense of the Johannine Comma
it says ", conditions were favourable for the Greek witness to have
been altered by Arian heretics in the 4th century who sought to
expunge the overt Trinitarian witness of the Comma...It is very well
possible that even the Byzantine tradition was corrupted by the Arian
heretics of the East in the 4th-5th centuries, and that the Eastern
Emperors such as Constantius who came under the Arian heresy
consciously sought to remove the Comma from the witness of the Greek
scriptures of the East. This could answer the question why the Comma
is missing from the bulk of the Greek manuscript tradition, but yet is
evidenced in other traditions such as those of the Old Latin and the
Syriac."
Arianism - from Arius - said that Jesus Christ was a created being and
not God, and so the Arians in the early church period were
anti-trinitarians.
Frederic G. Kenyon in his 1936 book, The Story of the Bible (page
110), says that in creating his Latin Vulgate, Jerome used both the
Alexandarian Greek texts, such as the Vaticanus, and the Old Latin
texts. Probably the full Textus Receptus wording of I John 5: 7-8 got
in some versions of the Vulgate from the Old Latin texts, if not at
the time Jerome created his Vulgate, then at a somewhat later time.
Scholars of the Bible, though generally not those who are followers
of Westcott and Hort, say that the complete Textus Receptus wording of
I John 5: 7-8 is found in at least two eighth century Greek texts, the
Wizanburgensis and the Basiliensis.
"The existence of Wizanburgensis from the 8th century lends credit to
this idea, since it demonstrates in a concrete manner that
Comma-containing Greek manuscripts existed at least that far back..."
(Defense of the Johannine Comma)
Basiliensis is now kept at Basel, Switzerland Codex Basiliensis
(E/07). Eighth century according to
Uncial Script And
Wizanburgensis is in the the Dublin University Library.
In his commentary on I John 5: 7 John Gill says of the mention of
the text by early church fathers that it is cited "... by Fulgentius ,
in the beginning of the "sixth" century, against the Arians, without
any scruple or hesitation; and Jerome, as before observed, has it in
his translation made in the latter end of the "fourth" century; and it
is cited by Athanasius about the year 350; and before him by Cyprian
, in the middle, of the "third" century, about the year 250; and is
referred to by Tertullian about, the year 200;"
Athenagorus - who lived in the second century, about 177AD - says "The
Holy Spirit Himself also, which operates in the prophets, we assert to
be an effluence of God, flowing from Him, and returning back again
like a beam of the sun. Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men
who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy
Spirit, and who declare both their power in union and their
distinction in order, called atheists?" This is in: Athenagorus, Plea
for the Christians.
Athenagorus talks about the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and
says they are three separate persons but are in union, a statement
that sounds a lot likje that in I John 5: 7. He also refers to the Son
as the Word. Remember that I John 5: 7 calls Christ the Word.
Tertullian in about 215 AD in Adversus Praxeas has a lot to say about
the Trinity. He has many partial quotes of New Testament verses. In
his book, Adversus Praxeas (Against Praxeas ), Chapter Twenty-Five, he
says "'And so the
connection of the Father, and the Son, and of the Paraclete [Holy Spirit]
makes three cohering entities, one cohering from the other, which
three are one entity' refers to the unity of their substance, not the
oneness of their number." He apparently does not directly quote I John 5: 7-8.
See: ANF03. Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
"which three are one entity" sounds like I John 5: 7
Cyprian, another North African bishop, cites the verse in about 250 AD saying:
" The Lord says, 'I and the Father are one;' and again it is written
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 'And these
three are one.'"55 (55) - Cyprian, De Unit. Eccl., cap. vi
On the web site http://home.carolina.rr.com/theshuecrew/wallace.html
it says "Since Cyprian wrote the disputed passage in Latin I feel it
necessary to list Cyprian's words in Latin. Cyprian wrote, "Dicit
dominus, Ego et pater unum sumus (John x. 30), et iterum de Patre, et
Filio, et Spiritu Sancto scriptum est, Et tres unum sunt." (The Lord
says, "I and the Father are One," and again, of the Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost it is written: "And the three are One."). This Latin
reading is important when you compare it to the Old Latin reading of 1
John 5:7; "Quoniam tres sunt, gui testimonium dant in coelo: Pater,
Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus: et hi tres unum sunt." Cyprian clearly
says that it is written of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost--"And the
three are One." His Latin matches the Old Latin reading identically
with the exception of 'hi'...There is no other verse that expressly
states that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are 'three in one' outside
of 1 John 5:7." The "Old Latin" text is not Jerome's Vulgate, but an
earlier Latin Bible used by the Waldenses and others in Europe.
This is apparently from the Treatises of Cyprian who lived from about
200 to 258 AD. He is saying that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are
one, not meaning that the Godhead is made up only of one person, but
that the three persons of the Godhead are united in agreement. The
statement of the NIV that the Spirit, the water and the blood are in
agreement is not nearly as clear that it is referring to the Father,
the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Finally, Augustine (354-430 AD) says "I would not have thee mistake
that place in the epistle of John the apostle where he saith, "There
are three witnesses: the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and the
three are one." Lest haply thou say that the Spirit and the water and
the blood are diverse substances, and yet it is said, "the three are
one:" ."60 (60) - Augustine, Contra Maximinium, Lib. II, cap. xxii.3;
Augustine was more clearly a Catholic than Polycarp, Ignatius,
Irenaeus or Tertullian, and I would not recommend some of Augustine's
teachings. But we can still use his testimony in his time about the
existence of the full Textus Receptus wording of I John 5: 7-8.
The shortening of I John 5: 7-8 in the Westcott-Hort Greek text of
1881 down to an unclear statement about the Spirit, the water and the
blood being in agreement may be consistent with second and third
century AD gnostic doctrines about Jesus Christ. Many gnostics
thought that the Christ was an Aeon created by the Eternal Father, who
was a spirit, but not the God of the Bible. Arius specifically
taught that Christ was a created being and not God.
We don't have proof that gnostics or followers of Arius changed the
wording of I John 5:
7-8. But there are many other omissions and changes in the
Westcott-Hort Greek text that seem to agree with gnostic theology.
The more verse changes we find that are in agreement with
gnosticism the more support there is for the idea of gnostic changes
in the Bible. But the followers of Westcott and Hort will probably
not accept that as decisive proof. Neither would they accept as
decisive
proof quotes of Scripture by early Church fathers or very early texts
that the wordings of the Textus Receptus go back to the second or
first centuries or to the originals written by the apostles.
The most decisive proof that the King James Version and the Greek
Textus Receptus are accepted by God as his word is the fruit these
two texts have created since Erasmus published his first edition of
the Textus Receptus in 1516 and the King James Version came out in
1611.
I John 5: 7-8 is not the only statement of the Trinity in the New
Testament. There are some verses other than I John 5: 7-8 that say
there is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, such as:
Matthew 28: 19: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost."
John 15: 26: "But when the Comforter (the Holy Spirit) is come, whom
I (Jesus) will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of
truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me."
Matthew 3: 16-17: "and Jesus, when he was baptized, went up
straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto
him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting
upon him: and to a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son,
in whom I am well pleased." It is the Father who is speaking here
[/FONT]
