~Oh, My, The Father, Word and Spirit don't agree~

[Pastor Keith]

I am reading Alister McGrath's, newest book "Christianity's Dangerous Idea".

On page 32, he is describing the formation of Jerome's Latin Vulgate, he points out that up to the point of his translation certain passages in the Catholic translation were assumed to be scripture, when in fact they weren't.

One such passage was 1 John 5:7-8

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.

He discovered in doing his Greek Translation that this passage was added after the 8th Century, most likely a commentary on the previous verses that a scribe took to be a passage of scripture.

I think for some this is old news, but I enjoyed discovering it and having a notable scholar point out this undermines a traditional cardinal doctrine of traditional Evangelicalism, the Trinity.

Anyway, while I am starting the book, I will report any other notable items.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith

I am reading Alister McGrath's, newest book "Christianity's Dangerous Idea".

On page 32, he is describing the formation of Jerome's Latin Vulgate, he points out that up to the point of his translation certain passages in the Catholic translation were assumed to be scripture, when in fact they weren't.

One such passage was 1 John 5:7-8

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.

He discovered in doing his Greek Translation that this passage was added after the 8th Century, most likely a commentary on the previous verses that a scribe took to be a passage of scripture.

I think for some this is old news, but I enjoyed discovering it and having a notable scholar point out this undermines a traditional cardinal doctrine of traditional Evangelicalism, the Trinity.

Anyway, while I am starting the book, I will report any other notable items.

Funny thing, that scripture always pointed to the Oneness of God whenever I read it.

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Funny thing, that scripture always pointed to the Oneness of God whenever I read it.

Nope, should have never been in there.

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith

Nope, should have never been in there.

I have heard something similar about Matthew 28:19 as well.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith

as one.
...
I think for some this is old news, but I enjoyed discovering it and having a notable scholar point out this undermines a traditional cardinal doctrine of traditional Evangelicalism, the Trinity.
...

I don't know that 1 John 5:7 supports the doctrine of the trinity.
It could be taken as a support of the doctrine of oneness.

Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept 1 John 5:7 because it supports the deity of Christ. Modernists would also leave 1 John 5:7 out because it supports the deity of Christ. The late Gordon Magee believed that 1 John 5:7 was not really "Scripture" because, in his mind, it supported the doctrine of the trinity. He also believed Matthew 28:19 as it currently appears in our Bibles was a corruption of an earlier text.

It always bothers me to see folks "delete" something out of what we have accepted as "Scripture" for years. I think of King Jehoiakim and his pen knife and fire.

I think even most Oneness folks will admit that the word "one" in English can mean a numerical one as in we each have only "one" stomach or heaart, or it can mean "united" as in husband and wife being "one." We would say there is only "one" true church but we would also say that all the members are "one." We say that there is only "one" true God but we also say that our God is "one."

[KWSS1976]

So cannot use that portion of scripture anymore to proof oneness..LOL

[shawndell]

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith

I am reading Alister McGrath's, newest book "Christianity's Dangerous Idea".

On page 32, he is describing the formation of Jerome's Latin Vulgate, he points out that up to the point of his translation certain passages in the Catholic translation were assumed to be scripture, when in fact they weren't.

One such passage was 1 John 5:7-8

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.

He discovered in doing his Greek Translation that this passage was added after the 8th Century, most likely a commentary on the previous verses that a scribe took to be a passage of scripture.

I think for some this is old news, but I enjoyed discovering it and having a notable scholar point out this undermines a traditional cardinal doctrine of traditional Evangelicalism, the Trinity.

Anyway, while I am starting the book, I will report any other notable items.

So what passage was suposed to be in its place or what was the passage suposed to say?

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith

I am reading Alister McGrath's, newest book "Christianity's Dangerous Idea".

On page 32, he is describing the formation of Jerome's Latin Vulgate, he points out that up to the point of his translation certain passages in the Catholic translation were assumed to be scripture, when in fact they weren't.

One such passage was 1 John 5:7-8

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.

He discovered in doing his Greek Translation that this passage was added after the 8th Century, most likely a commentary on the previous verses that a scribe took to be a passage of scripture.

I think for some this is old news, but I enjoyed discovering it and having a notable scholar point out this undermines a traditional cardinal doctrine of traditional Evangelicalism, the Trinity.

Anyway, while I am starting the book, I will report any other notable items.

You are correct Erasmus did not find it in his Greek manuscripts, which simply read: "There are three that bear witness; the Spirit, the water, and the blood, and these three are one." He was then accused of tampering with the text in an attempt to eliminate the doctrine of the Trinity and to devalue it corollary, the doctrine of the full divinity of Christ. Under pressure he added it back in his next edition, after a Greek manuscript was produced with the verse in it, it of course was a fraud, but it gave Erasmus and out and he caved.

[Sam]

The argument about different Bible versions is not new.

Below are three versions of the same verse of Scripture.

The first is from the King James Version. The second is from a quote by Justin Martyr. The third is from a prayer which quotes the psalm on a Coptic Church website. This prayer is still in use today by Coptic Christians.

The quote from the writings of Justin Martyr was probably written from Ephesus shortly after the Bar-Kochba rebellion of 132-135 A.D. He is addressing a Jew named Trypho and he accuses the Jews who did not accept Jesus as Messiah of deleting something in their version of the Scriptures that they were using. Justin Martyr, a Christian writer, quotes from the Septuagint Bible, sometimes called the LXX. The LXX was a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek begun around 282 B.C. by 70 or 72 Jewish translators. The reason for the translation was because the old Hebrew language was not in popular use but had been replaced by Aramaic and Greek. Jews who had been disbursed all over the Roman Empire could more easily read the Greek translation. The LXX was used by the early Church quite often. This is one reason why Old Testament quotes in our New Testament are some times different than they currently read if you check them out in our Old Testament. Our Old Testament is based on the Hebrew (Masoretic) version but the early Christian writers used the Greek (LXX) version.

This Psalm, which is number 95 in the LXX but number 96 in the King James Bible, exalts our God above the heathen gods. Our God is called Lord (Greek Kurios) in the LXX and is called LORD (Hebrew Jehovah or YHWH) in the KJV. Note that verse 10 states that God (the Lord or Jehovah) reigns "from the tree." The tree is seen as a reference to the cross. This was used as a proof text by early Christians to prove that the God of the Hebrews, the LORD Jehovah Himself, had come to earth as Jesus and even though He had been crucified was reigning triumphantly.

The Coptic Church denomination has its headquarters in Egypt. History/tradition says that the Church is the result of St. Mark (author of the Gospel) evangelization in Egypt. The Church organization or denomination that still exists there today traces its history back to the first century.

Here are the different versions of the verse.

10 Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously.(KJV)

10 Say among the Gentiles, the Lord has reigned from the tree. For he has established the world, which will not be moved; He will judge the people with justice. (LXX as quoted by Justin Martyr)

10 Say among the nations, “The Lord reigned on a wood: for He has established the world that it shall not be moved: He will judge the peoples in righteousness.”
(from the Coptic Church site)

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by Sam

I don't know that 1 John 5:7 supports the doctrine of the trinity.
It could be taken as a support of the doctrine of oneness.

Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept 1 John 5:7 because it supports the deity of Christ. Modernists would also leave 1 John 5:7 out because it supports the deity of Christ. The late Gordon Magee believed that 1 John 5:7 was not really "Scripture" because, in his mind, it supported the doctrine of the trinity. He also believed Matthew 28:19 as it currently appears in our Bibles was a corruption of an earlier text.

It always bothers me to see folks "delete" something out of what we have accepted as "Scripture" for years. I think of King Jehoiakim and his pen knife and fire.

I think even most Oneness folks will admit that the word "one" in English can mean a numerical one as in we each have only "one" stomach or heaart, or it can mean "united" as in husband and wife being "one." We would say there is only "one" true church but we would also say that all the members are "one." We say that there is only "one" true God but we also say that our God is "one."

I have always felt scripture doesn't need help, let it stand alone. This goes very every doctrine.

McGrath felt it to be undermining and damaging to those of the Trinitarian Persuasion.