Comma Johanneum - Whats your position?

[firedragon]

It's in the NET, which is my normal go-to version:

No its not.

It's also in the NIV, which us popular with Evangelicals:

No its not.

In fact, doing a quick (and definitely not exhaustive) spot-check, it was in every one of a half-dozen versions I just looked at.

Strange.

 

[firedragon]

Yes, and they all have footnotes saying it's not found in any of the Greek manuscripts.

Actually sis, the NIV or the NET do not have this verse at all.

 

[Rival]

Actually sis, the NIV or the NET do not have this verse at all.

True, but even the verses he showed on the site had footnotes mentioning the basic scholarship here. I'm just not invested in this discussion anymore lol.

 

[Teritos]

Work from the second century? Please do provide some manuscripts that no one has ever known yet.

This is gonna be a historical find. Will be waiting.

Sorry, I meant third century.
A North African bishop quotes the Comma Johannneum in 250 AD, see,
The Lord says, 'I and the Father are one,' and likewise it is written concerning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 'And these three are one'.
Cyprian, About the Unity of the Catholic Church, Chapter 6

It seems that the Comma Johanneum was at least in the Bibles from the third century, from where else could he quote that?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think you should the read the OP again and respond.

Anyway, which Bible is it a part of? Not the earliest. So please show this verse in the Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus. Go ahead. Thanks.

As I just touched on with @Rival, it's at least in the NET, NIV, CEV, NLT, NRSV, KJV, etc.

If you aren't familiar with it, maybe some Googling would help you.

You see, a forgery is something someone forgers and pretends it was someone else's work.

Forgery is when a person attempts to defraud by creating a fake item to pass off as genuine.

- was the intent of the author to defraud?
- is the interpolation "fake"?
- is the thing it's trying to be passed off as "genuine"?

For it to be a forgery, the answers to all of these questions have to be "yes." Are they? It's not clear to me.

Well, open your mind for discussion.

A document like 1st John is generally accepted to be anonymous amongst scholars. In fact, all the Johannine works are amongst others. If you want, you could call them "dubious", its your wish.

The authorship *is* dubious.

But even if the authorship is anonymous, if someone inserts a verse that was not there in for a millennium or more then pretended it belongs there, it is a forgery.

Again: only if the intent is to defraud, and only if the original article was genuine.

Anyway so is your position that its not a forgery? No worries.

My position is that any reasonable criteria that could be used to dismiss the Comma Johanneum as a "forgery", consistently applied, would also dismiss other large chunks of the Bible.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, and they all have footnotes saying it's not found in any of the Greek manuscripts.

... which is different from what you said: that it wasn't there except as a footnote.

 

[Rival]

It's like people don't know what the Comma Johanneum is and why it's an issue.

"These extra words are generally absent from the Greek manuscripts. In fact, they only appear in the text of four late medieval manuscripts. They seem to have originated as a marginal note added to certain Latin manuscripts during the middle ages, which was eventually incorporated into the text of most of the later Vulgate manuscripts." ^1

"The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate. Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript." (Ibid.)

Johannine Comma | Theopedia

 

[Rival]

NIV:
6This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7For there are three that testify: 8the a Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

Not there.

ESV:
6This is he who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7For there are three that testify: 8the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.

Not there.

NAS:
6This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not [e]with the water only, but [f]with the water and [g]with the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7For there are three that testify: 8[h]the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

Not there.

HCSB:
6 Jesus Christ—He is the One who came by water and blood, not by water only, but by water and by blood. And the Spirit is the One who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood—and these three are in agreement.

Not there.

NET:
6Jesus Christ is the one who came by water and blood – not by the water only, but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7For there are three that testify, 8the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three are in agreement.

Not there.

RSV:
6 This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. 7 And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8 There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree.

Not there.

It's in the NKJV:

6 This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.

 

[firedragon]

True, but even the verses he showed on the site had footnotes mentioning the basic scholarship here. I'm just not invested in this discussion anymore lol.

Haha. No worries. I didnt go to the website. I It so happens that most of us have read these Bibles in and out.

Cheers sis. Have a great day.

 

[firedragon]

Sorry, I meant third century.
A North African bishop quotes the Comma Johannneum in 250 AD, see,
The Lord says, 'I and the Father are one,' and likewise it is written concerning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 'And these three are one'.
Cyprian, About the Unity of the Catholic Church, Chapter 6

It seems that the Comma Johanneum was at least in the Bibles from the third century, from where else could he quote that?

Please name a NT manuscript that has the Comma Johanneum.

If some priest quoted it early, then it suddenly appeared a 1000 years later, that means someone copied it into the text from the priest.

So please show the manuscript.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Well, everyone probably knows that Erasmus didnt have the Comma Johanneum but then due to some kind of pressure included it in his second work, thus the tradition of the Johannine Comma. 1st John 5:7.

Being the only explicit and concise verse in the entire bible that has the modern day trinity in a nutshell, there are still those who refuse to let go of this verse. The topic is not about the doctrine whatsoever, it is about this verse.

Some of the apologetics to hold onto this verse has been that "why would any one forge a verse when the doctrine exists?". I think that sentence is weird by itself because assumed purpose of including this verse in the first place in the Textus Receptus was because there was no other verse that explicitly supported the doctrine in a nutshell. Also, this is an absolutely confirmation bias.

The reasoning is, "though the earlier manuscripts didnt have this verse, since the doctrine existed, it cannot be a forgery".

Well, there are many other issues as well that have very very similar answers. Nevertheless, what is your position on the comma johanneum? Do you think it was a forgery, not part of the bible, or do you believe it was not a forgery, and is indeed part of the Bible?

It an interpolation and mistranslation based on the translators misunderstanding of the original text.

 

[firedragon]

As I just touched on with @Rival, it's at least in the NET, NIV, CEV, NLT, NRSV, KJV, etc.

If you aren't familiar with it, maybe some Googling would help you.

Not necessary. Very familiar naturally. You are just wrong. Maybe you are not aware of the subject of the OP. So please do some "googling" as you said on the subject.

Forgery is when a person attempts to defraud by creating a fake item to pass off as genuine.

Exactly. You nailed it.

- was the intent of the author to defraud?
- is the interpolation "fake"?
- is the thing it's trying to be passed off as "genuine"?

All answers "yes".

Again: only if the intent is to defraud, and only if the original article was genuine.

I thought you had already stipulated your criteria above. Now you added more. I think you just wish to argue about something and you are finding any excuse to do so.

My position is that any reasonable criteria that could be used to dismiss the Comma Johanneum as a "forgery", consistently applied, would also dismiss other large chunks of the Bible.

But this thread is about the Comma Johanneum.

 

[firedragon]

It an interpolation and mistranslation based on the translators misunderstanding of the original text.

Please quote a manuscript that someone mistranslated and what the original text was and how someone could mistranslate it so stupendously.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is not the only verse or even passage added to the Bible. One scholar that I listened to had a hypothesis that such additions started out as margin notes and then eventually other scribes thought that it was part of the original text and "added it back in". One example, and this is merely the first sources and not the best one, is that of the adulterous woman brought in front of Jesus:

One of Jesus’ Most Famous Lines Wasn’t in Original Gospels

In fact there is one version where Jesus looks up from his writing and says "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." At that point a single stone comes arching up from the crowd and hits the lady in the middle of her forehead dropping her. Jesus goes back to his writing and say "You know Mom, sometimes you really **** me off."

 

[RestlessSoul]

Creative interpretation.

Always the best kind.

 

[McBell]

Yes, and they all have footnotes saying it's not found in any of the Greek manuscripts.

1 John 5:7
(AFV) And it is the Spirit that bears witness because the Spirit is the truth.

(ASV) And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth.

(BBE) And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is true.

(Bishops) For there are three which beare recorde in heauen, the father, the worde, and the holy ghost, and these three are one.

(Darby) For they that bear witness are three:

(DRB) And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.

(EMTV) For there are three that bear witness:

(ERV) So there are three witnesses that tell us about Jesus:

(Geneva) For there are three, which beare recorde in heauen, the Father, the Worde, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(GNB) There are three witnesses:

(ISV) For there are three witnesses—

(KJV) For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(KJV+) ForG3754 there areG1526 threeG5140 that bear recordG3140 inG1722 heaven,G3772 theG3588 Father,G3962 theG3588 Word,G3056 andG2532 theG3588 HolyG40 Ghost:G4151 andG2532 theseG3778 threeG5140 areG1526 one.G1520

(KJV-1611) For there are three that beare record in heauen, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(KJVA) For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(KJV-BRG) For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(LEB) For there are three that testify,

(LITV) For there are three bearing witness in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.

(LSV) because [there] are three who are testifying [[in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one;

(MKJV) For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.

(RV) And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth.

(TLV) For there are three that testify—

(TPT) So we have these three constant witnesses giving their evidence:

(TS2009) Because there are three who bear witness: Footnote: As per early Gk. text. Later MSS contain additions. See Explanatory Notes, ‘Comma Johanneum’.

(WEB) For there are three who testify:

(WEBA) For there are three who testify:

(Webster) For there are three that bear testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one

(Weymouth) For there are three that give testimony-- the Spirit, the water, and the blood;

(Williams) Omitted Text.

(YLT) because three are who are testifying in the heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these—the three—are one;
​

Of all the English(ish) versions in my Bible software, only one (TS2009) of the 15 (16 if you count the Weymouth version) which do not have the addition in question has a footnote...

​

 

[firedragon]

1 John 5:7
(AFV) And it is the Spirit that bears witness because the Spirit is the truth.

(ASV) And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth.

(BBE) And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is true.

(Bishops) For there are three which beare recorde in heauen, the father, the worde, and the holy ghost, and these three are one.

(Darby) For they that bear witness are three:

(DRB) And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.

(EMTV) For there are three that bear witness:

(ERV) So there are three witnesses that tell us about Jesus:

(Geneva) For there are three, which beare recorde in heauen, the Father, the Worde, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(GNB) There are three witnesses:

(ISV) For there are three witnesses—

(KJV) For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(KJV+) ForG3754 there areG1526 threeG5140 that bear recordG3140 inG1722 heaven,G3772 theG3588 Father,G3962 theG3588 Word,G3056 andG2532 theG3588 HolyG40 Ghost:G4151 andG2532 theseG3778 threeG5140 areG1526 one.G1520

(KJV-1611) For there are three that beare record in heauen, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(KJVA) For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(KJV-BRG) For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(LEB) For there are three that testify,

(LITV) For there are three bearing witness in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.

(LSV) because [there] are three who are testifying [[in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one;

(MKJV) For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.

(RV) And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth.

(TLV) For there are three that testify—

(TPT) So we have these three constant witnesses giving their evidence:

(TS2009) Because there are three who bear witness: Footnote: As per early Gk. text. Later MSS contain additions. See Explanatory Notes, ‘Comma Johanneum’.

(WEB) For there are three who testify:

(WEBA) For there are three who testify:

(Webster) For there are three that bear testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one

(Weymouth) For there are three that give testimony-- the Spirit, the water, and the blood;

(Williams) Omitted Text.

(YLT) because three are who are testifying in the heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these—the three—are one;
​

Of all the English(ish) versions in my Bible software, only one (TS2009) of the 15 (16 if you count the Weymouth version) which do not have the addition in question has a footnote...

​

I think you missed the OP.

 

[McBell]

I think you missed the OP.

I think you missed the post the post you quoted is in reply to...

 

[RestlessSoul]

If you took the three Epistles of John out of the New Testament in their entirety, what impact would it have on the whole? Very little, I’d suggest. A point of religious dogma might be lost; giving those so inclined one less thing to argue about.

Christ’s message - okay, Jesus’ message - is contained in the Gospels isn’t it? The rest of the New Testament is of historical interest only, I’d argue. Apart from Revelations, which is majestic, inspired, and for the most part utterly incomprehensible - one of my favourite books in the Bible, but not really somewhere I’d go for spiritual guidance.

It seems to me that Christians and others have spent centuries arguing over the nature of the messenger, while completely ignoring the message. Which for this agnostic lapsed Catholic boils down to these verses.

These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy may remain in you, and that your joy might be full.
This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

-John 15:11-12

 

[firedragon]

I think you missed the post the post you quoted is in reply to...

I am so sorry. I will go back and review your post once more.

You see mate. Old age.