WHY 1 John 5.7-8 is in THE BIBLE WWHYHY 1 John 5.7-8 is in TTHEHE BIBLEBIBLE Product Code: A102 ISBN 978-1-86228-029-8 © Trinitarian Bible Society 1993, 2012 Registered Charity No. England 233082, Scotland SC038379 www.tbsbibles.org 2M/12/12 WHY 1 JOHN 5.7-8 IS IN THE BIBLE 6Th is is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. n recent months several of the in their writings. Th e purpose of this Society’s supporters have written article is to allow these men to address Iasking about the inclusion of this issue and give their reasons for the 1 John 5.7–8, the so-called Johannine inclusion of the Johannine Comma. Comma (the passage in bold in the above quotation), in the Bible. Th ese All around us is scholarly argument supporters have found versions which against the inclusion of this passage. omit the passage without mention;1 they As John Stott says of verse 7, have found writers who argue against the inclusion of the passage;2 they have Th e whole of this must be found preachers who avoid the passage regarded as a gloss, as must the in order to avoid the controversy. words in earth in verse 8… Th e Th ese supporters believe the passage words do not occur in any Greek rightly belongs in the Scriptures, as MS, version or quotation before the does the Society, as did the writers of fi ft eenth century. Th ey fi rst appear the Westminster Confession of Faith3 in an obscure fourth-century Latin and as have godly men throughout the MS and found their way into the centuries. Th ree of these men, whose AV because Erasmus reluctantly infl uential works span three centuries— included them in the third edition of Matthew Henry, R. L. Dabney and his text. Th ey are rightly absent even Edward Hills—upheld this passage from the margin of RV and RSV.4 1 Why 1 John 5.7-8 is in Th e Bible Princeton Th eological Seminary 16th century. ‘Th e oldest known citation Greek scholar B. M. Metzger states that of the Comma is in a fourth-century Latin treatise entitled Liber apologeticus.’ 7 a manuscript of the entire New Testament dating from the late Edward Hills admits that there is fi ft eenth or early sixteenth century not as much Greek manuscript support …is the fi rst Greek manuscript for this passage as there is for many discovered which contains the other passages in the New Testament. passage relating to the Th ree However, there is an abundance of Heavenly Witnesses (1 John v.7–8).5 other ancient manuscript evidence in support of the passage. As Hills says, In the face of such statements, how ‘Th e fi rst undisputed citations of the can one argue for the inclusion of the Johannine comma occur in the writing passage? But there are ample scholarly of two 4th-century Spanish bishops… reasons for the inclusion of 1 John In the 5th century the Johannine 5.7–8, and ample scholarly men who comma was quoted by several orthodox have given those reasons. Th us we quote African writers to defend the doctrine works of three of these men. Much of of the Trinity against the gainsaying this information is reproduced verbatim of the Vandals, who…were fanatically from their writings and will be technical attached to the Arian heresy’. ‘Evidence in nature; however, the reader should for the early existence of the Johannine be able to follow the main points of the comma is found in the Latin versions position and will fi nd blessing in these and in the writings of the Latin Church men’s comments on the Word of God. Fathers’. Among these is Cyprian (c. 250) and Cassiodorus (480–570), TEXTUAL EVIDENCE as well as an Old Latin manuscript of the 5th or 6th century, and in the FOR INCLUSION Speculum, a treatise which contains an Old Latin text. It is also found in First, it must be stated that Metzger’s the great mass of the later Vulgate statement, at fi rst glance, might make manuscripts and in the Clementine one believe that 1 John 5.7–8 does not edition of the Vulgate.8 appear in any writings before 1500. However, MS61 was the fi rst Greek manuscript discovered which contains INTERNAL EVIDENCE the passage. It is not the earliest FOR INCLUSION manuscript containing the passage; it was merely the fi rst manuscript found In the 17th century the framers of which contained the passage.6 Metzger the Westminster Confession of Faith later admits that the Johannine Comma accepted the inclusion of 1 John 5.7–8 also appears in manuscripts from the and used it to defend the doctrine of the 12th century, the 14th century and the Trinity. Others, believing the passage 2 Why 1 John 5.7-8 is in Th e Bible to be Scripture, have given internal too like a…repetition of what was evidence for the inclusion of the included in v. 6… Th is does not passage. Th is evidence, which comes assign near so noble an introduction from the passage itself, has been cited of these three witnesses as our throughout the centuries in defence present reading does. of the passage and of the Trinity which it supports. (2.) It is observed that many copies read that distinctive clause, upon the earth: Th ere are three that Th e 18th century: bear record upon the earth. Now Matthew Henry this bears a visible opposition to some witness or witnesses Matthew Henry (1662–1714), elsewhere, and therefore we are the Welsh Nonconformist Bible told, by the adversaries of the commentator, ‘was a faithful, humble, devout, orthodox minister of the text, that this clause must be gospel, a loving pastor of souls, and a supposed to be omitted in most wise spiritual father. [He was] famous books that want v. 7. But it should for his Exposition of the Old and New for the same reason be so in all. Testaments, now commonly known as Take we v. 6… It would not now Matthew Henry’s Commentaries… naturally and properly be added, Th e value of his Commentaries lies not For there are three that bear in their critical, but in their practical record on earth, unless we should and devotional emphasis’.9 Henry10 suppose that the apostle would tell was not unconcerned about the Greek us that all the witnesses are such manuscript support of 1 John 5.7–8, as are on earth, when yet he would but regarding it he says, ‘It is alleged assure us that one is infallibly true, that many old Greek manuscripts have or even truth itself. it not. We shall not here enter into the (3.) It is observed that there is controversy. It should seem that the a variety of reading even in the critics are not agreed what manuscripts Greek text… have it and what not; nor do they suffi ciently inform us of the integrity (4.) Th e seventh verse is very and value of the manuscripts they agreeable to the style and the peruse… But let the judicious collators theology of our apostle… It is of copies manage that business. Th ere most suitable then to the diction are some rational surmises that seem to and to the gospel of this apostle 11 support the present text and reading’. thus to mention the Holy Ghost as In this regard, Henry gives several a witness for Jesus Christ. Th en, ‘rational surmises’: (5.) It was far more easy for a (1.) If we [delete] v. 7, [v. 8] looks transcriber, by turning away his 3 Why 1 John 5.7-8 is in Th e Bible eye, or by the obscurity of the copy, the credentials the Saviour brings it being obliterated or defaced on with him, and of the evidences the top or bottom of a page, or of our Christianity, that is to be worn away in such materials as found, I think, in the book of God, the ancients had to write upon, upon which single account, even to lose and omit the page, than waiving the doctrine of the divine for an interpolator to devise and Trinity, the text is worthy of all insert it. He must be very bold acceptation.12 and impudent who could hope to escape detection and shame; and ‘Having these rational grounds on profane too, who durst venture to our side’, Henry says, ‘we proceed’.13 make an addition to a supposed He than continues with a discussion sacred book. And, of the passage itself with its ‘trinity of heavenly witnesses’,14 ending this (6.) It can scarcely be supposed section by stating that ‘Th ese three that, when the apostle is witnesses (being more diff erent than representing the Christian’s faith the three former) are not so properly in overcoming the world, and said to be one as to be for one, to be for the foundation it relies upon in one and the same purpose and cause, adhering to Jesus Christ, and the or to agree in one, in one and the same various testimony that was given thing among themselves, and in the to Jesus Christ in the world, he same testimony with those who bear should omit the supreme testimony record from heaven’.15 that attended him, especially when we consider that he meant to infer, as he does (v.