Comma Johanneum Commentary ...
• ApostolicReformation • Counterfeit Revival • CounterfeitRevivalRoots • FalseDoctrines • FirstPersonFaith&HealingWhere'sTheEvidence>WilliamDembski • New Wine Deception • SpiritOfErrorExaminingTheSpostolicPropheticMovement (WordPress) • ThirdWaveDoctrines (DeceptionInTheChurch) •
Todd Bentley > Forums & Links • Todd Bentley On Angelfire • vja4HimGuestbook • What Does The Bible Say About
False Prophets and False Teachers? •
• ArticlesCollection
• CousinAbeLincoln •
GrandpaMathewsHomestead • RickCountryman
• ShipleyDiary
•
•
BibleArticles
• Bible
Stuff • Bible
Teachers • BigMan
• BigValleyGrace
• Birding
• Blogs
• CelebrateRecovery
• CelebrateRecoveryBigValleyGraceModesto
• CelebrateRecoveryShelterCoveModesto
• Christian
Adventures • Christian
Music • Clubs-Events-Forums • Computers
• Creation
Evidence • Creationism
• Dara's
Home Page • Devotions
• Education
• Family History • Firestream
• Favorite
Books
• InternetRadio
• Lenny's Music Page
• LittleEmo
• MyFavoriteMusic • MySpace
• MySpaceBlogs
• Natural
History • PaulHarvey
• RickCountryman
• Rock4Jesus
• ThisDayInHistory
• Travels
•
•
AndrewsEducation&Research
•
Andrews Family
History • Andrews
Genealogy • Andrews Unknown
Pictures Page One • Andrews Unknown
Pictures Page Two • Shipley
Diary • Shipley - Lincoln
Connection •
Surnames links • Please
take a look at my unknown pictures pages. I'm hoping that
somebody will recognize someone in the pictures and help to identify
some of the unknown people/pictures, and connect with other cousins and
interested researchers. Thanks!
1 John 5:7-8 (New American
Standard Bible) 7For there are three that testify: 8the Spirit and the
water and the blood; and the three are in agreement
1 John 5:7-8 (New International Version) 7For there are three that
testify: 8the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in
agreement.
1 John 5:7 (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.
Vern, I feel the issue with the 1 John passage is more an issue of
history than heresy. And yet many good men feel strongly that the
passage belongs in the Bible as noted in the King James Version and to
not include it in that exact text is bordering on heresy.
As I understand it most of the conflict and dispute has to do with the
doctrine of the Trinity. Too many act as if the entire doctrine
of the Trinity depends on those texts and nothing could be further from
the truth. In fact it would be very dangerous to construct a
theology and try to defend a doctrine on one isolated passage.
That defies all principles of hermeneutics.
Take a look at this instruction and see what you think.
For the last few hundred years, textual scholars have accepted that
these two verses were corrupted in the 16th century due to church
pressure. However, the removal of the extra language does not challenge
the doctrine of the Trinity, which is presented throughout scripture in
numerous places. In addition, it’s interesting to note that
although this scripture declaring the Trinity first appeared in 1522
AD, the Council of Constantinople affirmed the Trinity doctrine in 381
AD (without need for it).
This reading, the Comma Johanneum, has been known in the
English-speaking world through the King James translation. However, the
evidence—both external and internal—is decidedly against
its authenticity.
This longer reading is found only in eight late manuscripts, four of
which have the words in a marginal note. Most of these manuscripts
originate from the 16th century; the earliest manuscript, codex 221
(10th century), includes the reading in a marginal note which was added
sometime after the original composition. Thus, there is no sure
evidence of this reading in any Greek manuscript until the 1500s; each
such reading was apparently composed after Erasmus’ Greek NT was
published in 1516. Indeed, the reading appears in no Greek witness of
any kind (either manuscript, patristic, or Greek translation of some
other version) until AD 1215. This is all the more significant, since
many a Greek Father would have loved such a reading, for it so
succinctly affirms the doctrine of the Trinity. The reading seems to
have arisen in a fourth century Latin homily in which the text was
allegorized to refer to members of the Trinity. From there, it made its
way into copies of the Latin Vulgate, the text used by the Roman
Catholic Church.
The Trinitarian formula (known as the Comma Johanneum) made its way
into the third edition of Erasmus’ Greek NT (1522) because of
pressure from the Catholic Church. After his first edition appeared
(1516), there arose such a furor over the absence of the Comma that
Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the
Comma because he found no Greek manuscripts that included it. Once one
was produced Erasmus apparently felt obliged to include the reading. He
became aware of this manuscript sometime between May of 1520 and
September of 1521. In his annotations to his third edition he does not
protest the rendering now in his text, as though it were made to order;
but he does defend himself from the charge of indolence, noting that he
had taken care to find whatever manuscripts he could for the production
of his Greek New Testament. In the final analysis, Erasmus probably
altered the text because of political-theological-economic concerns: he
did not want his reputation ruined, nor his Novum Instrumentum to go
unsold.
Modern advocates of the Textus Receptus and KJV generally argue for the
inclusion of the Comma Johanneum on the basis of heretical motivation
by scribes who did not include it. But these same scribes elsewhere
include thoroughly orthodox readings—even in places where the
TR/Byzantine manuscripts lack them. Further, these KJV advocates argue
theologically from the position of divine preservation: since this
verse is in the TR, it must be original. But this approach is circular,
presupposing as it does that the TR = the original text. Further, it
puts these Protestant proponents in the awkward and self-contradictory
position of having to affirm that the Roman Catholic humanist, Erasmus,
was just as inspired as the apostles, for on several occasions he
invented readings—due either to carelessness or lack of Greek
manuscripts (in particular, for the last six verses of Revelation
Erasmus had to back-translate from Latin to Greek).
In reality, the issue is history, not heresy: How can one argue that
the Comma Johanneum must go back to the original text when it did not
appear until the 16th century in any Greek manuscripts? Such a stance
does not do justice to the gospel: Significantly, the German
translation done by Luther was based on Erasmus’ second edition
(1519) and lacked the Comma. But the KJV translators, basing their work
principally on Theodore Beza’s 10th edition of the Greek NT
(1598), a work which itself was fundamentally based on Erasmus’
third and later editions popularized the Comma for the English-speaking
world. Thus, the Comma Johanneum has been a battleground for
English-speaking Christians more than for others.
Unfortunately, for many, the Comma and other similar passages have
become such emotional baggage that is dragged around whenever the Bible
is read that a knee-jerk reaction and ad hominem argumentation becomes
the first and only way that they can process this issue. Sadly, neither
empirical evidence nor reason can dissuade them from their views. The
irony is that their very clinging to tradition at all costs (namely, of
an outmoded translation which, though a literary monument in its day,
is now like a Model T on the Autobahn) emulates Roman Catholicism in
its regard for tradition. If the King James translators knew that this
would be the result nearly four hundred years after the completion of
their work, they’d be writhing in their graves.
Please contact if you have further questions or just want to talk more.
Your friend on the journey
Pastor Dave Marston
vja4HimGuestbook
Thanks
for
visiting the Andrews Education & Research New Home
Page
You are visitor number ....
pins and brooches
This
page was created with Nvu ~ Wednesday, January 3, 2007 -- Last updated Friday, August 8, 2008
Send
your comment to
>> Webmaster
Andrews Research & Education
website ALWAYS UNDER CONSTRUCTION !
visit again
soon
! Thanks!
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
