The absence of the Trinity in early manuscripts of 1 John 5:7

[jmt356]

1 John 5:7 in the KJV states as follows:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

However, 1 John 5:7 in the ASV and RSV omits the text found in the KJV. It states instead:
"It is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth."

Does the KJV or the ASV and RSV follow the earliest manuscript copies of 1 John 5:7? If it is the ASV And RSV, then how did the doctrine of the Trinity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit wind up in the KJV and doesn’t its absence from the earliest manuscripts impugn the validity of the doctrine of the Trinity?

 

[stovebolts]

1 John 5:7 in the KJV states as follows:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

However, 1 John 5:7 in the ASV and RSV omits the text found in the KJV. It states instead:
"It is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth."

Does the KJV or the ASV and RSV follow the earliest manuscript copies of 1 John 5:7? If it is the ASV And RSV, then how did the doctrine of the Trinity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit wind up in the KJV and doesn’t its absence from the earliest manuscripts impugn the validity of the doctrine of the Trinity?

For the ASV, this is a great starting point.

Westcott and Hort - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Here is a great starting point for the KJV.

King James Version - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This could be a very interesting conversation.

 

[jmt356]

StoveBolts,
I do not see how the first link you posted to the Westcott-Hort is relevant to the ASV nor do I see how the second link you posted to the KJV is relevant to my question about the discrepancy in 1 John 5:7 between the KJV and other English translations, including the ASV, RSV and NIV. There is undeniably a major discrepancy between these translations, with the KJV essentially adding in an entire verse on the Trinity (a major element of Christian doctrine) that does not exist in other translations.

The editors of the NIV recognized this discrepancy. The footnote to 1 John 5:7 in the NIV Study Bible states:

"At the end of this verse, some older English versions add the words found in the NIV text note. But the addition is not found in any Greek manuscript or NT translation prior to the 16th century."

The NIV text note for verses 7 and 8 states:

"Late manuscripts of the Vulgate: testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century)"

I am disturbed by the fact that the editors of the KJV, a major translation that many Christians rely upon, saw it fit to add a verse to their translation that substantively impacts Christian doctrine, even though the verse in question is absent from the early Greek manuscripts.

 

[for_his_glory]

Here is a website that might help explain the difference between the KJV, RSV, ASV

gotquestions.org/What is the American Standard Version.

 

[stovebolts]

StoveBolts,
I do not see how the first link you posted to the Westcott-Hort is relevant to the ASV nor do I see how the second link you posted to the KJV is relevant to my question about the discrepancy in 1 John 5:7 between the KJV and other English translations, including the ASV, RSV and NIV. There is undeniably a major discrepancy between these translations, with the KJV essentially adding in an entire verse on the Trinity (a major element of Christian doctrine) that does not exist in other translations.


I am disturbed by the fact that the editors of the KJV, a major translation that many Christians rely upon, saw it fit to add a verse to their translation that substantively impacts Christian doctrine, even though the verse in question is absent from the early Greek manuscripts.

Hi JMT.
The links explain how the versions were translated and what they used as their source which is where the differences come from as the ASV was based on the work of Wescott & Hort.

American Standard Version - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[JLB]

StoveBolts,
I do not see how the first link you posted to the Westcott-Hort is relevant to the ASV nor do I see how the second link you posted to the KJV is relevant to my question about the discrepancy in 1 John 5:7 between the KJV and other English translations, including the ASV, RSV and NIV. There is undeniably a major discrepancy between these translations, with the KJV essentially adding in an entire verse on the Trinity (a major element of Christian doctrine) that does not exist in other translations.

The editors of the NIV recognized this discrepancy. The footnote to 1 John 5:7 in the NIV Study Bible states:

"At the end of this verse, some older English versions add the words found in the NIV text note. But the addition is not found in any Greek manuscript or NT translation prior to the 16th century."

The NIV text note for verses 7 and 8 states:

"Late manuscripts of the Vulgate: testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century)"

I am disturbed by the fact that the editors of the KJV, a major translation that many Christians rely upon, saw it fit to add a verse to their translation that substantively impacts Christian doctrine, even though the verse in question is absent from the early Greek manuscripts.

Ok. So let’s just use scripture to see if the concept of Godhead, or Trinity is a biblical concept or not.


I believe we all agree that God the Father is God.

Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of
God the Father. Philippians 2:9-11


So the next question is.... Is Jesus Christ God?


I will wait for your reply before I continue.





JLB

 

[jmt356]

StoveBolts, for_his_glory,

I am aware that there are differences in the manuscripts that the KJV and other English translations of the Bible are based upon. But here, the fundamental problem is that there is not a single Greek manuscript that contains the text “there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one,” which is found in 1 John 5:7 of the KJV and which is largely the scriptural basis for the doctrine of the Trinity. I find the following very disturbing:

• The editors of the KJV felt at liberty to introduce a verse that existed no where in the original Greek manuscripts; and
• The verse that largely forms the basis of the doctrine of the Trinity was casually inserted into the Bible by the editors of the KJV, despite having no support for the verse in the earliest biblical manuscripts.

Moreover, I find this fact impugns the general reliability of our translations of the Bible.

JLB:

Jesus is God in the ontological and metaphysical sense (i.e., in essence), not in the coterminous, mathematical sense whereby Jesus “equals” or is identical to God in every possible way. Rather, Jesus and God are one in essence, even while God remains made of up three persons and Jesus is the manifestation of the godhead in human form.

 

[stovebolts]

I am disturbed by the fact that the editors of the KJV, a major translation that many Christians rely upon, saw it fit to add a verse to their translation that substantively impacts Christian doctrine, even though the verse in question is absent from the early Greek manuscripts.

The KJV did not Willy Nilly add a verse, which is why I posted the links I did. The KJV used the Latin Vulgate As well as some Greek texts for their translation where the ASV used the earliest Greek texts available.

to properly trace the differences really requires study.

 

[stovebolts]

• The editors of the KJV felt at liberty to introduce a verse that existed no where in the original Greek manuscripts; and
• The verse that largely forms the basis of the doctrine of the Trinity was casually inserted into the Bible by the editors of the KJV, despite having no support for the verse in the earliest biblical manuscripts.

I’m not so sure this is entirely true. Let me try and explain and if I get something wrong, I’m open for correction.

it is my limited understanding that the KJV pulled heavily from the Latin Vulgate where the ASV pulled heavily off Wescott and Hort who was meticulous with the oldest Greek texts.

The KJV was completed in 1611 and Wescott and Hort finished in the late 1800’s and the ASV shortly after about 1901.

When we look at the doctrine of the a Trinity, we see it in the early church and Constitine pulls together a special council to hammer the doctrine out. At that time Latin was the primary language for the western church, so we see scripture being translated into Latin (Jerome helped)which is where the Latin Vulgate derives and became the official translation for the western church. This all happens 3rd and 4th centuries.

The history of how the KJV came about in the late 16th century and into the early 17th century was very political as it was aimed to counter Calvinism which was infused into the Gutenberg Bible, which I assume your aware of. At that time, the Latin Vulgate was highly respected within modern Christianity which is why I assume the translators of the KJV pulled heavily from the Vulgate. Also, the comprehensive Work Wescott and Hort compiled in the late 1800’s was not available to the KJV translators who needed an English translation based on a text (Latin Vulgate) that at that time and space in history was widely used and trusted by the laymen And most importantly, the clergy.

In summary, you will find the KJV did an excellent job translating the authoritative Latin Vulgate of its day. You will find the ‘addition‘ your talking about In the Vulgate which stems back to the fourth century.

 

[stovebolts]

Jesus is God in the ontological and metaphysical sense (i.e., in essence), not in the coterminous, mathematical sense whereby Jesus “equals” or is identical to God in every possible way. Rather, Jesus and God are one in essence, even while God remains made of up three persons and Jesus is the manifestation of the godhead in human form.

Amen

 

[JLB]

Jesus is God in the ontological and metaphysical sense (i.e., in essence), not in the coterminous, mathematical sense whereby Jesus “equals” or is identical to God in every possible way. Rather, Jesus and God are one in essence, even while God remains made of up three persons and Jesus is the manifestation of the godhead in human form.

Do you believe Jesus as God, created all things?

The heavens and the earth?


JLB

 

[for_his_glory]

KJV 1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

The Jerusalem Bible 1 John 5:7, 8 so that there are three witnesses, the spirit, the water and the blood and all three of them agree.

ASV 1 John 5:7 And it is the Spirit that bearth witness, because the Spirit is truth

RSV 1 John 5:7 And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is truth.



God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit as all three coequal Gods Spirit.

Scriptures that reference Jesus being referred to as God:
John 1:1-14; John 10:30; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8, 9; 1 John 5:7, 8, 20; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 3:17; 13:14; Isaiah 9:6; 44:6; Luke 1:35; Matthew 1:23; 28:19; John 14:16, 17; Genesis 1:1, 2 (cross reference John 1:1-14); 1 Corinthians 12:4-6; Ephesians 4:4-6; Colossians 1:15-17; John 14:9-11; Philippians 2:5-8; Rev 1:8

Scriptures that reference the Holy Spirit as being God:
Psalms 139:7, 8; John 14:17; 16:13; Isaiah 40:13; 1 Corinthians 2:10, 11; Zechariah 4:6; Luke 1:35; Ephesians 4:4-6; Romans 5:5; 1 Corinthians 6:19; Ephesians 1:13; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; Titus 3:5; 2 Peter 1:21; Jude 1:20

IMO I think every modern English translation to date takes away from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek from 1200BC through the first century. Many translations since that time written in many languages up to the early English language. Throughout the centuries of English translations definitions of many words have changed as one English word can have various meanings which leads up to the modern translations today that have tried to simplify the scriptures, but can add a different meaning to the original.

Is the teaching of the Trinity truly not found in the Greek manuscripts, or is it that all 5,800 manuscripts were not all search out? That is a question to ponder concerning what the Bible teaches.

 

[for_his_glory]

1. God is Spirit, John 4:24, not flesh and blood and in the OT either spoke directly to the prophets or by angels and also various objects like a burning bush or an ass for example. Between the OT and NT God was silent towards Israel as when they returned to Israel from the Babylonian captivity they came back as merchants and not shepherds as they were disobedient to God going after other gods, Book of Malachi.

2. Jesus being the very Spirit of God before the foundation of the world as He and the Father are one was prophesied by the Prophets in the OT and spoken of by John the baptist in the NT as John being the forerunner of Christ calling all to repent. As foretold Christ did come as the word of God made flesh (skin, bone, blood) to be that light that shines in darkness. He came as redeemer Savior through Gods grace as Christ is our faith that all can repent of their sins and have eternal life with the Father to all who will believe in Him as Lord and Savior. John 1:1-4; 1 Peter 1:13-21

3. After the sacrifice of Christ God raised Him from the grave and as He had to ascend back up to heaven the promise was that He would never leave us or forsake us as when He ascended He sent down the Holy Spirit (Spirit of God) to indwell all who will believe in Christ and His finished works on the cross. In the OT Gods Spirit fell on them for a time and purpose under heaven. Now we are indwelled with that power and authority through Gods grace that the Holy Spirit now works in us and through us teaching all things God wants us to learn. All three are Spiritual and Spiritual awaking in us to know the will of God and walk in His statures. John 16:7-15

Ephesians 4: 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

1 John 5:6 This 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. 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word (Jesus), and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

 

[Butch5]

1 John 5:7 in the KJV states as follows:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

However, 1 John 5:7 in the ASV and RSV omits the text found in the KJV. It states instead:
"It is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth."

Does the KJV or the ASV and RSV follow the earliest manuscript copies of 1 John 5:7? If it is the ASV And RSV, then how did the doctrine of the Trinity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit wind up in the KJV and doesn’t its absence from the earliest manuscripts impugn the validity of the doctrine of the Trinity?

The Johannine Comma, (1 John 5:7) doesn't appear until the later centuries. Many think it was a note in a column that got copied into the text.

 

[stovebolts]

The Johannine Comma, (1 John 5:7) doesn't appear until the later centuries. Many think it was a note in a column that got copied into the text.

That actually makes since. We know that the KJV pulled heavily from the Latin Vulgate which just happened to be written at the same time the early church was hammering out the doctrine Trinity about the third and fourth centuries.

 

[Butch5]

That actually makes since. We know that the KJV pulled heavily from the Latin Vulgate which just happened to be written at the same time the early church was hammering out the doctrine Trinity about the third and fourth centuries.

A lot of people think this verse puts an end to the question. However, it's not found in the earliest manuscripts. But, even if it was it still wouldn't necessarily prove the Trinity doctrine because it could mean that they are united. Saying multiple people are one usually refers to them being unified.

 

[stovebolts]

A lot of people think this verse puts an end to the question. However, it's not found in the earliest manuscripts. But, even if it was it still wouldn't necessarily prove the Trinity doctrine because it could mean that they are united. Saying multiple people are one usually refers to them being unified.

Hmm, I've never really understood the need to prove the Trinity. I do understand a few of the differing views within the Trinity but personally, I see "One" as unified in perfect harmony.

 

[Butch5]

Hmm, I've never really understood the need to prove the Trinity. I do understand a few of the differing views within the Trinity but personally, I see "One" as unified in perfect harmony.

The modern understanding of the doctrine, three co-equal, co-eternal, persons comes from around the 5th century. It can be seen in the Athanasian Creed. This concept wasn't held in the beginning.

 

[stovebolts]

The modern understanding of the doctrine, three co-equal, co-eternal, persons comes from around the 5th century. It can be seen in the Athanasian Creed. This concept wasn't held in the beginning.

I just read that Creed. Honestly, it's been years since I've read the Creed's.
But your right, most, including myself view the Trinity in this lense, although I couldn't be as bold to state a few things as boldly as they have. Push come to shove I do what the Coptics did.... I just let those who feel the need to battle it out do their thing.

Isn't it ironic how something like the idea of the Trinity could cause so much division.

 

[Butch5]

I just read that Creed. Honestly, it's been years since I've read the Creed's.
But your right, most, including myself view the Trinity in this lense, although I couldn't be as bold to state a few things as boldly as they have. Push come to shove I do what the Coptics did.... I just let those who feel the need to battle it out do their thing.

Isn't it ironic how something like the idea of the Trinity could cause so much division.

Yeah. I think the reason for this is like we see in that creed. If you dont beleive what's in the Creed you can't saved. People still say things like that today. I've been told u6f you dont believe in the Trinity you can't be saved. Yet these same people acknowledge that the word trinity isn't in the Bible. They say it was a doctrine worked out over time. If that's case then how were the the first believers saved? They believe in a Trinity because they knew nothing of it. So the people who claim this have a contradiction within their belief system.

If we look at the early creeds we can see that they didn't hold to a, three, coequal, coeternal, persons concept.