Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98543 | ||
justanotherchristian - While your concern is understandable, perhaps its to the credit of the NASB translators to acknowledge their marginal notation on 1 John 5:8: "A few late mss. add...in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth, the Spirit..." ..... The NKJV, although it includes the disputed passage in the text, carries this note in the margin: "NU, M omit the words from 'in heaven' (v.7) through 'on earth' (v.8.) Only 4 or 5 very late mss. contain these words in Greek." ..... The annotation on this verse in the Believer's Study Bible (Nelson), which uses the NKJV text, reads as follows: "The words from 'in heaven' (v.7) through 'on earth' (v.8) are only found in a few Greek manuscripts, none dating earlier than the fourteenth century. Furthermore, the passage is not quoted by any of the Greek church fathers. The textual data suggest that these words were absent from the original letter." ..... My comment: This verse is not crucial to the doctrine of the Trinity, because Scripture provides ample support elsewhere in passages that are free of textual dispute. If this verse in John's epistle were the key verse in all Scripture to support the doctrine of the Trinity, and this verse in serious question of being spurious, then Trinitarians would be hard pressed to prove their doctrine. But, of course, this is not the case. ..... This much we know: The verse is not in conflict with any other part of Scripture. But, at the same time, it does suffer from weak textual support. In both cases, I believe the NKJV translators were justified in including it in the text, because it appeared in the manuscript from which they were translating and, conversely, so were the NASB translators justified in omitting it, because it did not appear in the manuscript they were following. Additionally, also in both cases, the translators were careful to note in the margin the reasons for handling it as they did. In neither case do I feel that the NKJV or the NASB translators were tampering with the text but were, on the contrary, being as honest and as forthright as is humanly possible to render into English a work as transparent of the manuscripts as their scholarship and language skills could afford. --Hank | ||||||
2 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | DarcyA | 98557 | ||
I thought that verse in the KJV was not scripture. I heard that they think it was someone that was translating the KJV put it there as a side note and some how got copied and that it is not found in any manuscript. | ||||||
3 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | Morant61 | 98560 | ||
Greetings DarcyA! Here is something I have previously posted on this topic. I thought you might find it helpful! ************************************* I'm sure you already know the story behind the Comma Johanneum, but for those on the forum who don't, I thought I would share a little about the history. 1 John 5:7 was found in the Vulgate when Erasmus began work on his critical Greek text. However, Erasmus could not find any Greek text which contained the verse. So, he left it out. This infuriated powers that be, so Erasmus promised that he would included it in future editions of his text if he could find even one Greek text which included it. Amazingly, one appeared with the Comma Johanneum written into the margin. Many believe that the Greek manuscript had been produced on demand by a Franciscan friar named Froy at Oxford in 1520. Since that time, many more Greek manuscripts have been found. Thus far, only 3 out of thousands include the verse. Of these three, one is a 12th century manuscript which includes the verse in the margin in a 17th century hand. One is a 16th century manscript. One is a 14th century manuscript. Even the Latin Vulgate does not include the verse before 800 a.d. The oldest known citation of the Comma is in a 4th century Latin work called "Liber apologeticus". Therefore, you are entirely correct. This verse was not part of the orignal text of 1 John! ************************************* Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | DarcyA | 98580 | ||
Thank you Tim. In Christ, Darcy |
||||||