He who does not love Me does not keep My words. (John 14:24).
I have compiled the following reference material for your use. Please contact me if you find any errors or have any information you would like to share.
|p66||Chester Beatty||ca. 200||only begotten God||Found near Nag Hammadi, Egypt|
|p75||Bodmer||ca. 250||only begotten God||Found in Egypt|
|B||Codex Vaticanus||ca. 300||only begotten God||Alexandrian|
|Aleph||Codex Sinaiticus||ca. 350||only begotten God||Found at Mount Sinai.|
|A||Codex Alexandrius||ca. 450||only begotten Son||Byzantine|
Syriac||ca. 450||only begotten Son|
1. Early Fathers
| ||only begotten God
only begotten Son
Clement of Alexandria, writing in the early 200's in his Stromata (V, 12), apears to have "only-begotten God," but he also has "only-begotten Son" in the same document (I, 26) and his The Instructor has "only-begotten Son" (I,3) suggesting that the line which reads "only-begotten God" in the Stromata could be a copy corruption, or vice versa. Origen has "only-begotten Son" in Against Celsus (II, 71) but "only begotten God" in his Commentary on John (II, 24).. Tertullian around 212 A.D. has "only-begotten Son" in Against Praxeas (VIII; XV). In the later 200's, Archelaus in his Disputation with the Heresiarch Manicheus, still has "only-begotten Son" (XXXII). Hippolytus has "only-begotten Son" in Against Noetus (V). All these men were writing before Nicea and the development of Trinitarian doctrines. Alexandrius who writes against the Arius and the Arian heresy never mentions it but has "only-begotten Son." The ante-Nicene texts which have only-begotten" God seem to also be confined to one locality - Alexandria - where Platonism and Gnosticism flourished. So we can see here a very serious problem with this passage. Either the texts of the Bible were later miscopied and/or corrupted, or the texts of these church fathers were later corrupted with an interpolation to meet a new doctrine and/or a later corrupted Bible text.