Comma Johanneum - Revision history

Nick: Redirecting to Johannine Comma

2020-04-24T08:41:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:41, 24 April 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	#REDIRECT [[~~Johanneum~~ Comma]]		#REDIRECT [[Johannine Comma]]

Nick: Redirecting to Johanneum Comma

2020-04-18T10:21:04Z

Redirecting to Johanneum Comma

Show changes

KJV: Template:Donate

2019-02-05T12:06:53Z

Template:Donate

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:06, 5 February 2019
Line 281:		Line 281:
	* [http://www.1john57.com/1john57.htm A complete list of New Testament manuscripts that verify 1 John 5:7]		* [http://www.1john57.com/1john57.htm A complete list of New Testament manuscripts that verify 1 John 5:7]
	* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma_Johanneum Wikipedia Article on Comma Johanneum]		* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma_Johanneum Wikipedia Article on Comma Johanneum]

			{{Donate}}

Nick at 11:12, 17 August 2016

2016-08-17T11:12:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:12, 17 August 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The Comma Johanneum is a [[Comma (rhetoric)\|comma]] (a short clause) contained in most translations of the [[First Epistle of John]] This text is variously referred to as the ''Comma Johanneum'', the ''Johannine Comma'', the ''Heavenly Witnesses'', ''1 John 5:7'' or ''1 John v:7''. The question of the authenticity of the verse, with the phrase:		The Comma Johanneum is a [[Comma (rhetoric)\|comma]] (a short clause) contained in most translations of the [[First Epistle of John]] This text is variously referred to as the ''Comma Johanneum'', the ''Johannine Comma'', the ''Heavenly Witnesses'', ''[[1 John 5:7]]'' or ''1 John v:7''. The question of the authenticity of the verse, with the phrase:
	:there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.		:there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.
	has been a major subject of debate from the 1500s to today. The debate on [[1 John 5:7]] has also been a primary focus of discussions on the integrity of the New Testament documents and scribal fealty to the Bible text. The varying doctrinal and Christological interpetations of the verse have been a major part of these debates.		has been a major subject of debate from the 1500s to today. The debate on [[1 John 5:7]] has also been a primary focus of discussions on the integrity of the New Testament documents and scribal fealty to the Bible text. The varying doctrinal and Christological interpetations of the verse have been a major part of these debates.

Nick: /* Support for the Comma */

2016-02-04T14:22:27Z

Support for the Comma

Show changes

Nick: /* Frederick von Nolan= */

2015-12-18T15:54:54Z

Frederick von Nolan=

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:54, 18 December 2015
Line 164:		Line 164:
	:"As to the old Latin interpreter, it is certain it is to be seen in many [[Latin]] manuscripts of an early date, and stands in the [[Latin Vulgate\|Vulgate Latin]] edition of the [[London Polyglot Bible]]: and the Latin translation, which bears the name of [[Jerome\|Jerom[e]]] ([[382 AD]]), has it, and who, in an epistle of his to Eustochium, prefixed to his translation of these canonical epistles, complains of the omission of it by unfaithful interpreters."		:"As to the old Latin interpreter, it is certain it is to be seen in many [[Latin]] manuscripts of an early date, and stands in the [[Latin Vulgate\|Vulgate Latin]] edition of the [[London Polyglot Bible]]: and the Latin translation, which bears the name of [[Jerome\|Jerom[e]]] ([[382 AD]]), has it, and who, in an epistle of his to Eustochium, prefixed to his translation of these canonical epistles, complains of the omission of it by unfaithful interpreters."

	==[[Frederick von Nolan]]===		===[[Frederick von Nolan]]===

	:"'instead of "the Father, Word, and Spirit,' the remaining passage would have been direct concessions to the Gnostics and Sabellians, who, in denying the personal difference of the Father and the Son, were equally obnoxious to those avowed adversaries, the Catholics and the Arians. Nor did the orthodox require these verses for the support of their cause; they had other passages which would accomplish all that they could effect; and without their aid, they maintained and established their tenents."<sup>3<\sup>		:"'instead of "the Father, Word, and Spirit,' the remaining passage would have been direct concessions to the Gnostics and Sabellians, who, in denying the personal difference of the Father and the Son, were equally obnoxious to those avowed adversaries, the Catholics and the Arians. Nor did the orthodox require these verses for the support of their cause; they had other passages which would accomplish all that they could effect; and without their aid, they maintained and established their tenents."<sup>3<\sup>

Nick: /* Omissions */

2015-12-18T15:54:35Z

Omissions

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:54, 18 December 2015
Line 153:		Line 153:
	:The genuineness of I. John, v. 7, then, is here maintained, not to secure a proof-text of the doctrine of the Trinity, but to preserve the integrity of Holy Scripture. As a proof-text it would be less important than many others if it were wholly unquestioned. But as a part of Holy Scripture it is to be defended with all diligence ... it is rather the integrity of Holy Scripture than the doctrine of the Trinity that is involved in the question of the genuineness of I. John, v. 7 ...<sup>[]</sup>		:The genuineness of I. John, v. 7, then, is here maintained, not to secure a proof-text of the doctrine of the Trinity, but to preserve the integrity of Holy Scripture. As a proof-text it would be less important than many others if it were wholly unquestioned. But as a part of Holy Scripture it is to be defended with all diligence ... it is rather the integrity of Holy Scripture than the doctrine of the Trinity that is involved in the question of the genuineness of I. John, v. 7 ...<sup>[]</sup>

	==~~Omissions~~==		==Support for the Comma==
	[[1 John 5:7]] appears is the large majority of reformation bibles, but is lacking in most modern versions.		[[1 John 5:7]] appears is the large majority of reformation bibles, but is lacking in most modern versions.

	[[John Calvin]] ([[10 July]] [[1509 AD\|1509]] – [[27 May]] [[1564 AD\|1564]])- "However, the passage flows better when this clause is added, and as I see that '''''IT IS FOUND IN THE BEST AND MOST APPROVED COPIES''''', I am inclined to receive it as the true reading."		===[[John Calvin]]===

	[[~~John Gill~~]] ~~(23 de novembro de~~ [[~~1697~~ AD\|~~1697~~]] ~~- 14 Outubro~~ [[~~1771 AD\|1771~~]]~~)- commenting on~~ [[~~1 John 5:7~~]] - "~~As to~~ the ~~old Latin interpreter, it is certain it~~ is ~~to be seen in many [[Latin]] manuscripts of an early date~~, and ~~stands in the [[Latin Vulgate\|Vulgate Latin]] edition of the [[London Polyglot Bible]]: and the Latin translation~~, ~~which bears the name of [[Jerome\|Jerom[e]]] ([[382 AD]]), has~~ it~~, and who, in an epistle of his to Eustochium, prefixed to his translation of these canonical epistles, complains of~~ the ~~omission of it by unfaithful interpreters~~."		([[10 July]] [[1509 AD\|1509]] – [[27 May]] [[1564 AD\|1564]])- "However, the passage flows better when this clause is added, and as I see that '''''IT IS FOUND IN THE BEST AND MOST APPROVED COPIES''''', I am inclined to receive it as the true reading."

	[[Frederick von Nolan]] ~~stated in 1815 concrning the Comma:~~		===[[John Gill]]===

			:"As to the old Latin interpreter, it is certain it is to be seen in many [[Latin]] manuscripts of an early date, and stands in the [[Latin Vulgate\|Vulgate Latin]] edition of the [[London Polyglot Bible]]: and the Latin translation, which bears the name of [[Jerome\|Jerom[e]]] ([[382 AD]]), has it, and who, in an epistle of his to Eustochium, prefixed to his translation of these canonical epistles, complains of the omission of it by unfaithful interpreters."

			==[[Frederick von Nolan]]===

	:"'instead of "the Father, Word, and Spirit,' the remaining passage would have been direct concessions to the Gnostics and Sabellians, who, in denying the personal difference of the Father and the Son, were equally obnoxious to those avowed adversaries, the Catholics and the Arians. Nor did the orthodox require these verses for the support of their cause; they had other passages which would accomplish all that they could effect; and without their aid, they maintained and established their tenents."<sup>3<\sup>		:"'instead of "the Father, Word, and Spirit,' the remaining passage would have been direct concessions to the Gnostics and Sabellians, who, in denying the personal difference of the Father and the Son, were equally obnoxious to those avowed adversaries, the Catholics and the Arians. Nor did the orthodox require these verses for the support of their cause; they had other passages which would accomplish all that they could effect; and without their aid, they maintained and established their tenents."<sup>3<\sup>

Nick: /* Omissions */

2015-12-18T15:52:48Z

Omissions

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:52, 18 December 2015
Line 159:		Line 159:

	[[John Gill]] (23 de novembro de [[1697 AD\|1697]] - 14 Outubro [[1771 AD\|1771]])- commenting on [[1 John 5:7]] - "As to the old Latin interpreter, it is certain it is to be seen in many [[Latin]] manuscripts of an early date, and stands in the [[Latin Vulgate\|Vulgate Latin]] edition of the [[London Polyglot Bible]]: and the Latin translation, which bears the name of [[Jerome\|Jerom[e]]] ([[382 AD]]), has it, and who, in an epistle of his to Eustochium, prefixed to his translation of these canonical epistles, complains of the omission of it by unfaithful interpreters."		[[John Gill]] (23 de novembro de [[1697 AD\|1697]] - 14 Outubro [[1771 AD\|1771]])- commenting on [[1 John 5:7]] - "As to the old Latin interpreter, it is certain it is to be seen in many [[Latin]] manuscripts of an early date, and stands in the [[Latin Vulgate\|Vulgate Latin]] edition of the [[London Polyglot Bible]]: and the Latin translation, which bears the name of [[Jerome\|Jerom[e]]] ([[382 AD]]), has it, and who, in an epistle of his to Eustochium, prefixed to his translation of these canonical epistles, complains of the omission of it by unfaithful interpreters."

			[[Frederick von Nolan]] stated in 1815 concrning the Comma:

			:"'instead of "the Father, Word, and Spirit,' the remaining passage would have been direct concessions to the Gnostics and Sabellians, who, in denying the personal difference of the Father and the Son, were equally obnoxious to those avowed adversaries, the Catholics and the Arians. Nor did the orthodox require these verses for the support of their cause; they had other passages which would accomplish all that they could effect; and without their aid, they maintained and established their tenents."<sup>3<\sup>

			Nolan gives two reasons why [[1 John 5:7]] is seemingly scanty in reference to quotations from the church fathers: One - The passage in I John 5:7 is among those like [[1 Timothy 3:16]] and Acts 20:28 that have all been tampered with in the manuscript tradition, all three having to do with the deity of Christ as "God." Two - That the major reason for not quoting [[1 John 5:7]] was based on its wording, chiefly, purporting Jesus Christ as the "Word" instead of the "Son." Hence, with the Sabellian heresy being debated that Jesus Christ is the Father with no distinction, [[1 John 5:7]] would further propagate that notion. Therefore it wasn't quoted.

	==Manuscript Evidence==		==Manuscript Evidence==

Nick: /* History of modern study */

2013-01-25T10:00:57Z

History of modern study

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:00, 25 January 2013
Line 169:		Line 169:

	==History of modern study==		==History of modern study==
	[[Image:GRIESBACH_1859_New_Testament_JOHANNEUM_COMMA.png\|[http://books.google.com/books?id=gf42AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA531 Hē Kainē Diathēkē 1859], with [[Johann Jakob Griesbach\|Griesbach's]] text of the ''New Testament''. The English note is from the 1859 editor, with reasons for omitting the Comma Johanneum.]]		[[Image:GRIESBACH_1859_New_Testament_JOHANNEUM_COMMA.png\|200px\|thumb\|[http://books.google.com/books?id=gf42AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA531 Hē Kainē Diathēkē 1859], with [[Johann Jakob Griesbach\|Griesbach's]] text of the ''New Testament''. The English note is from the 1859 editor, with reasons for omitting the Comma Johanneum.]]

	==See Also==		==See Also==

Nick: /* See Also */

2013-01-25T09:49:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:49, 25 January 2013
Line 167:		Line 167:

	It is also found in the Ulmensis manuscript (AD 850), and Codex pal Legionensis (AD 650). It is found in the German manuscript The Augsburger Bibelhandschrift (2 Cod 3)(AD 1350).		It is also found in the Ulmensis manuscript (AD 850), and Codex pal Legionensis (AD 650). It is found in the German manuscript The Augsburger Bibelhandschrift (2 Cod 3)(AD 1350).

			==History of modern study==
			[[Image:GRIESBACH_1859_New_Testament_JOHANNEUM_COMMA.png\|[http://books.google.com/books?id=gf42AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA531 Hē Kainē Diathēkē 1859], with [[Johann Jakob Griesbach\|Griesbach's]] text of the ''New Testament''. The English note is from the 1859 editor, with reasons for omitting the Comma Johanneum.]]

	==See Also==		==See Also==