Johannine Comma - Revision history

Nick: /* Bibles that include or omit the comma */

2026-08-07T11:16:21Z

Bibles that include or omit the comma

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:16, 7 August 2026
Line 56:		Line 56:

	Owing to the widespread use of the [[Textus Receptus]] ([[TR]]) as the principal source-language text for Bible editions, with the widespread use of the Geneva and then the [[Authorized Version]], the Comma is contained in most Bible editions and printings published from [[1522 AD\|1522]] until the latter part of the nineteenth century.		Owing to the widespread use of the [[Textus Receptus]] ([[TR]]) as the principal source-language text for Bible editions, with the widespread use of the Geneva and then the [[Authorized Version]], the Comma is contained in most Bible editions and printings published from [[1522 AD\|1522]] until the latter part of the nineteenth century.


	==Support for the Comma==		==Support for the Comma==

Nick: /* Papyrus 9 */

2026-08-07T11:14:56Z

Papyrus 9

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:14, 7 August 2026
Line 41:		Line 41:
	==[[Papyrus 9]]==		==[[Papyrus 9]]==
	The oldest Greek manuscript we have of [[1 John]] is 2nd-3rd century A.D.. [[Image:C3945eee4633c095c5059f9a67aca5f7.png]]<sup>[[Papyrus 9\|9]]</sup> which is an Oxyrhynchus Papyrus fragment 402 (P. Oxy. 402; Inv. 3736). It only contains [[1 John 4:11]]-[[1 John 4:12\|12]], [[1 John 4:14\|14]]-[[1 John 4:17\|17]] and thus does not contain the section containing 1 John 5:7-8.		The oldest Greek manuscript we have of [[1 John]] is 2nd-3rd century A.D.. [[Image:C3945eee4633c095c5059f9a67aca5f7.png]]<sup>[[Papyrus 9\|9]]</sup> which is an Oxyrhynchus Papyrus fragment 402 (P. Oxy. 402; Inv. 3736). It only contains [[1 John 4:11]]-[[1 John 4:12\|12]], [[1 John 4:14\|14]]-[[1 John 4:17\|17]] and thus does not contain the section containing 1 John 5:7-8.


	==Bibles that include or omit the comma==		==Bibles that include or omit the comma==

Nick: /* Comma Johanneum displayed in Greek, Latin, and English */

2026-08-07T11:14:44Z

Comma Johanneum displayed in Greek, Latin, and English

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:14, 7 August 2026
Line 37:		Line 37:
	:8. the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.		:8. the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

	~~Although technically the Comma refers to text that overlaps verses 7 and 8, it is common to refer to the text as verse seven, or [[1 John 5:7]].~~ In versions without the Comma the verse ordering depends on the version. Most common is the method used by the [[NASB]], which has the phrase "For...testify" as verse 7 and the rest "the Spirit...in agreement" as verse 8. The [[ASV]] and the [[ERV]] bring part of the traditional verse 6 down as verse 7. Weymouth splits the verses in another fashion.		In versions without the Comma the verse ordering depends on the version. Most common is the method used by the [[NASB]], which has the phrase "For...testify" as verse 7 and the rest "the Spirit...in agreement" as verse 8. The [[ASV]] and the [[ERV]] bring part of the traditional verse 6 down as verse 7. Weymouth splits the verses in another fashion.


	==[[Papyrus 9]]==		==[[Papyrus 9]]==

Nick at 11:13, 7 August 2026

2026-08-07T11:13:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:13, 7 August 2026
Line 4:		Line 4:
	:''See Also [[Index of Johannine Comma articles]]'', ''[[1 John 5:7]]'' & ''[[1 John 5:8]]''.		:''See Also [[Index of Johannine Comma articles]]'', ''[[1 John 5:7]]'' & ''[[1 John 5:8]]''.

	The Johannine Comma (Latin: Comma Johanneum, "Johannine Clause") is a textual variant found in 1 John 5:7–8. The passage appears in the Textus Receptus, the King James Version, the Latin Vulgate, and numerous historical editions of the New Testament, but is absent from the majority of extant Greek manuscripts.		The Johannine Comma (Latin: ''Comma Johanneum'', "Johannine Clause") is a textual variant found in at 1 John 5:7–8 in the [[First Epistle of John]]. The passage appears in the [[Textus Receptus]], the [[King James Version]], the [[Latin Vulgate]], and numerous historical editions of the New Testament, but is absent from the majority of extant Greek manuscripts although only three manuscripts before 850 AD have the 1 John 5:7–8 section, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrinus.

	The passage is commonly known as the Johannine Comma, the Comma Johanneum, the Heavenly Witnesses, or the Three Heavenly Witnesses. Although frequently identified simply as "1 John 5:7", the textual issue extends across both verses 7 and 8.		The passage is commonly known as the Johannine Comma, the Comma Johanneum, the Heavenly Witnesses, or the Three Heavenly Witnesses. Although frequently identified simply as "1 John 5:7", the textual issue extends across both verses 7 and 8.
Line 10:		Line 10:
	The authenticity of the Johannine Comma has been debated continuously since the sixteenth century and remains one of the most discussed textual variants in New Testament studies. The debate touches upon manuscript evidence, textual criticism, translation history, patristic citations, the preservation of Scripture, and the doctrine of the Trinity.		The authenticity of the Johannine Comma has been debated continuously since the sixteenth century and remains one of the most discussed textual variants in New Testament studies. The debate touches upon manuscript evidence, textual criticism, translation history, patristic citations, the preservation of Scripture, and the doctrine of the Trinity.

	Modern critical scholars generally regard the Comma as a later interpolation, citing its absence from most Greek manuscripts and ~~early~~ eastern versions. Defenders of the passage argue for its authenticity on the basis of Latin manuscript evidence, early church citations, grammatical considerations, historical testimony, and theories explaining its disappearance from portions of the Greek manuscript tradition.		Modern critical scholars generally regard the Comma as a later interpolation, citing its absence from most extant Greek manuscripts and eastern versions. Defenders of the passage argue for its authenticity on the basis of Latin manuscript evidence, early church citations, grammatical considerations, historical testimony, and theories explaining its disappearance from portions of the Greek manuscript tradition.

	Because of its theological significance and its influence on the history of Bible translation, the Johannine Comma has generated an extensive scholarly literature spanning more than five centuries and remains a focal point in discussions concerning the text of the New Testament.		Because of its theological significance and its influence on the history of Bible translation, the Johannine Comma has generated an extensive scholarly literature spanning more than five centuries and remains a focal point in discussions concerning the text of the New Testament.


	==Comma Johanneum displayed in Greek, Latin, and English==		==Comma Johanneum displayed in Greek, Latin, and English==

Nick: /* Roman Catholics */

2026-06-16T09:52:52Z

Roman Catholics

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:52, 16 June 2026
Line 440:		Line 440:
	:7. (Three which giue testimonie.) An expresse place for the distinction of three persons, & the vnitie of nature and essence in the B. Trinitie: against the Arians and other like Heretikes, who haue in diuers ages found them selues so pressed with these plaine Scriptures, that they haue (as it is thought) altered and corrupted the text both in Greeke and Latin many waies: euen as the Protestants handle those textes that make against them. But because we are not now troubled with Arianisme so much as with Caluinisme, we neede not stand vpon the varietie of readings or expositions of this passage. See S. Hierom in his epistle put before the 7 Canonical or Catholike Epistles.([https://archive.org/details/1610A.d.DouayOldTestament1582A.d.RheimsNewTestament_176 New Testament Page 687])		:7. (Three which giue testimonie.) An expresse place for the distinction of three persons, & the vnitie of nature and essence in the B. Trinitie: against the Arians and other like Heretikes, who haue in diuers ages found them selues so pressed with these plaine Scriptures, that they haue (as it is thought) altered and corrupted the text both in Greeke and Latin many waies: euen as the Protestants handle those textes that make against them. But because we are not now troubled with Arianisme so much as with Caluinisme, we neede not stand vpon the varietie of readings or expositions of this passage. See S. Hierom in his epistle put before the 7 Canonical or Catholike Epistles.([https://archive.org/details/1610A.d.DouayOldTestament1582A.d.RheimsNewTestament_176 New Testament Page 687])

	Cornelius a Lapide (d. [[1637 AD]]):		Cornelius a Lapide (d. [[1637 AD]]) has:
	"S. Jerome (Pref. in Epist. Canon.) observes that this verse had been erased by unbelievers, i.e. the Arians, from some Greek copies. Therefore it is not found in the Syriac, Clement of Alexandria, Bede, åcumenius, and some others. It is, however, the constant reading of the Latin Bibles, and the more correct Greek MSS. and of many of the ancients, SS. Athanasius, Augustine, Jerome, Cyprian, the Lateran Council, at which Greeks were present. Therefore it is certain that these words are to be taken as canonical Scripture." [http://www.catholicapologetics.info/scripture/newtestament/1john5.htm]		:"S. Jerome (Pref. in Epist. Canon.) observes that this verse had been erased by unbelievers, i.e. the Arians, from some Greek copies. Therefore it is not found in the Syriac, Clement of Alexandria, Bede, åcumenius, and some others. It is, however, the constant reading of the Latin Bibles, and the more correct Greek MSS. and of many of the ancients, SS. Athanasius, Augustine, Jerome, Cyprian, the Lateran Council, at which Greeks were present. Therefore it is certain that these words are to be taken as canonical Scripture." [http://www.catholicapologetics.info/scripture/newtestament/1john5.htm]

	The [[1649 AD\|1649]] Douay Catechism reads:		The [[1649 AD\|1649]] Douay Catechism reads:

Nick: /* Roman Catholics */

2026-06-16T09:52:15Z

Roman Catholics

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:52, 16 June 2026
Line 435:		Line 435:
	====Roman Catholics====		====Roman Catholics====
	The [[1599 AD\|1599]] [[Jakub Wujek Bible]] (Translated from Polish):		The [[1599 AD\|1599]] [[Jakub Wujek Bible]] (Translated from Polish):
	:The [Non Trinitarian] Anabaptists cast doubt on this whole verse, saying that it was not in the old Greek books, because some ancient writers do not mention it. But for us, more important is the testimony of the universal Church, which openly reads these words at the altar on Low Sunday (Dominica in Albis). This same passage is cited by St. Cyprian, in De Unitate Ecclesiae; Athanasius in Book 1 to Theophilus and also in his disputation with Arius at the Council of Nicaea; Pope Hyginus in his first letter; Pope John II in his letter to Valerius; St. Jerome in the prologue to the Canonical Epistles; Idacius in his book against Varimundus; Eugenius of Carthage as cited by Victor in Book 2 of the Vandal Persecution; and Fulgentius in Contra Objectiones Arianorum. Thus, we have the clear Word of God against the Arians and Samosatenes, about the distinction of the three divine Persons and their unity in divinity and nature: that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three Persons, and yet one God."		:The [Non Trinitarian] Anabaptists cast doubt on this whole verse, saying that it was not in the old Greek books, because some ancient writers do not mention it. But for us, more important is the testimony of the universal Church, which openly reads these words at the altar on Low Sunday (Dominica in Albis). This same passage is cited by St. Cyprian, in De Unitate Ecclesiae; Athanasius in Book 1 to Theophilus and also in his disputation with Arius at the Council of Nicaea; Pope Hyginus in his first letter; Pope John II in his letter to Valerius; St. Jerome in the prologue to the Canonical Epistles; Idacius in his book against Varimundus; Eugenius of Carthage as cited by Victor in Book 2 of the Vandal Persecution; and Fulgentius in Contra Objectiones Arianorum. Thus, we have the clear Word of God against the Arians and Samosatenes, about the distinction of the three divine Persons and their unity in divinity and nature: that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three Persons, and yet one God." ([https://archive.org/details/biblia-lacinsko-polska-t.-4-1887_202205/page/750/mode/1up Page 751])
	([https://archive.org/details/biblia-lacinsko-polska-t.-4-1887_202205/page/750/mode/1up Page 751])

	The original [[1610 AD\|1610]] Douai-Rheims says:		The original [[1610 AD\|1610]] Douai-Rheims says:
	:7. (Three which giue testimonie.) An expresse place for the distinction of three persons, & the vnitie of nature and essence in the B. Trinitie: against the Arians and other like Heretikes, who haue in diuers ages found them selues so pressed with these plaine Scriptures, that they haue (as it is thought) altered and corrupted the text both in Greeke and Latin many waies: euen as the Protestants handle those textes that make against them. But because we are not now troubled with Arianisme so much as with Caluinisme, we neede not stand vpon the varietie of readings or expositions of this passage. See S. Hierom in his epistle put before the 7 Canonical or Catholike Epistles. ([https://archive.org/details/1610A.d.DouayOldTestament1582A.d.RheimsNewTestament_176 New Testament Page 687])		:7. (Three which giue testimonie.) An expresse place for the distinction of three persons, & the vnitie of nature and essence in the B. Trinitie: against the Arians and other like Heretikes, who haue in diuers ages found them selues so pressed with these plaine Scriptures, that they haue (as it is thought) altered and corrupted the text both in Greeke and Latin many waies: euen as the Protestants handle those textes that make against them. But because we are not now troubled with Arianisme so much as with Caluinisme, we neede not stand vpon the varietie of readings or expositions of this passage. See S. Hierom in his epistle put before the 7 Canonical or Catholike Epistles.([https://archive.org/details/1610A.d.DouayOldTestament1582A.d.RheimsNewTestament_176 New Testament Page 687])

	Cornelius a Lapide (d. [[1637 AD]]):		Cornelius a Lapide (d. [[1637 AD]]):

Nick: /* Roman Catholics */

2026-06-16T09:48:45Z

Roman Catholics

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:48, 16 June 2026
Line 434:		Line 434:

	====Roman Catholics====		====Roman Catholics====
			The [[1599 AD\|1599]] [[Jakub Wujek Bible]] (Translated from Polish):
			:The [Non Trinitarian] Anabaptists cast doubt on this whole verse, saying that it was not in the old Greek books, because some ancient writers do not mention it. But for us, more important is the testimony of the universal Church, which openly reads these words at the altar on Low Sunday (Dominica in Albis). This same passage is cited by St. Cyprian, in De Unitate Ecclesiae; Athanasius in Book 1 to Theophilus and also in his disputation with Arius at the Council of Nicaea; Pope Hyginus in his first letter; Pope John II in his letter to Valerius; St. Jerome in the prologue to the Canonical Epistles; Idacius in his book against Varimundus; Eugenius of Carthage as cited by Victor in Book 2 of the Vandal Persecution; and Fulgentius in Contra Objectiones Arianorum. Thus, we have the clear Word of God against the Arians and Samosatenes, about the distinction of the three divine Persons and their unity in divinity and nature: that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three Persons, and yet one God."
			([https://archive.org/details/biblia-lacinsko-polska-t.-4-1887_202205/page/750/mode/1up Page 751])

			The original [[1610 AD\|1610]] Douai-Rheims says:
			:7. (Three which giue testimonie.) An expresse place for the distinction of three persons, & the vnitie of nature and essence in the B. Trinitie: against the Arians and other like Heretikes, who haue in diuers ages found them selues so pressed with these plaine Scriptures, that they haue (as it is thought) altered and corrupted the text both in Greeke and Latin many waies: euen as the Protestants handle those textes that make against them. But because we are not now troubled with Arianisme so much as with Caluinisme, we neede not stand vpon the varietie of readings or expositions of this passage. See S. Hierom in his epistle put before the 7 Canonical or Catholike Epistles. ([https://archive.org/details/1610A.d.DouayOldTestament1582A.d.RheimsNewTestament_176 New Testament Page 687])

			Cornelius a Lapide (d. [[1637 AD]]):
			"S. Jerome (Pref. in Epist. Canon.) observes that this verse had been erased by unbelievers, i.e. the Arians, from some Greek copies. Therefore it is not found in the Syriac, Clement of Alexandria, Bede, åcumenius, and some others. It is, however, the constant reading of the Latin Bibles, and the more correct Greek MSS. and of many of the ancients, SS. Athanasius, Augustine, Jerome, Cyprian, the Lateran Council, at which Greeks were present. Therefore it is certain that these words are to be taken as canonical Scripture." [http://www.catholicapologetics.info/scripture/newtestament/1john5.htm]

			The [[1649 AD\|1649]] Douay Catechism reads:

			:Q. 7. What means the unity and trinity of God?

			:A. It means, that in God there is but one only divine nature or essence, and that in the same one and divine nature there
			are three persons, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

			:Q. 8. How show you that?

			:A. Out of John, v. 7. There are three that give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these
			three are one." [https://archive.org/stream/The1649DouayCatechismTubervilleHenryD.D.4515/The%201649%20Douay%20Catechism%20-%20Tuberville%2C%20Henry%2C%20D.D._4515_djvu.txt]

			Haydock's Commentary (1859) quotes from [[Robert Witham]] (d. [[1738 AD]]) and said:
			:"The Socinians object that this verse is wanting in many Greek manuscripts; and even Erasmus in one edition, and Mr. Simon in his Critics, have questioned it, or rejected it, as a false reading, but without any sufficient proofs and grounds, as hath been shewn by many learned Catholics, and also by Protestant writers, who receive in their translations this verse as canonical. It is easy to account for the omission of this verse; for as both the seventh and eighth verse begin and end with the same words, this gave occasion to the oversight and omission of the transcribers, whereas it is not credible that such a whole verse could be added. And that it was only by the mistake and oversight of transcribers may further appear, because we find part of the seventh verse, to wit, and these three are one, cited by Tertullian, lib. contra Praxeam. chap. xxiii. p. 515. Ed. Rig. and twice by St. Cyprian, Epist. 73. ad Jubaianum. p. 125. Ed. Rig. in the Oxford Edition, p. 310. and in his Treatise de Unit. Ecclesiĉ, p. 181. Ed. Rigal. and in the Oxford Ed. p. 79, where also Dr. Fell defends this verse of St. John to be genuine. Tertullian and St. Cyprian wrote long before the dispute with the Arians. The Socinians also object that this passage is not brought by St. Athanasius and some other fathers against the Arians, which they could scarce have omitted had they read this verse, but this only proves that this omission had happened in some manuscripts in their time, or, as some conjecture, that the Arians had corrupted some copies. St. Fulgentius made use of it against the Arians, and also others about that time. See the Benedictines of St. Maur against Mr. Simon, in the first tome of St. Jerome, p. 1670. Both Catholics and Protestants, after a diligent examination, have received this verse, which is found in the best manuscripts. See Greek Testament at Amsterdam, in the year 1711.[A.D. 1711.]" [https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_annotations-on-the-new-t_1730_2/page/431/mode/1up]

	On January 13, 1897, the Holy Office (now known as the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith) issued this decree:		On January 13, 1897, the Holy Office (now known as the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith) issued this decree:

Nick at 00:55, 8 June 2026

2026-06-08T00:55:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:55, 8 June 2026
Line 639:		Line 639:
	* [https://johanninecomma.blogspot.com/ Johannine Comma Blogspot]		* [https://johanninecomma.blogspot.com/ Johannine Comma Blogspot]
	* [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ef-024cmt3wC&pg=PA148&lpg=PA148&dq=is%20there%20a%20grammatical%20solecism%20at%201%20John%205%3A7&source=bl&ots=Pq8hirSgA5&sig=ACfU3U3ikigcYTRDGI8NJeeixarhNi-YPw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjWr6nMhaLvAhUijuYKHU61DS84ChDoATAJegQIBhAC&fbclid=IwAR3csGCnWm7t_3gYjufatBhYZKtExxFmrr6Bkm1_C09SBa9tmQqxtMBWkIc#v=onepage&q&f=false A Treatise on the Trinity; in which it is demonstrated that there are Three Persons, or hypostases, in the Godhead, all co-eternal, co-equal, and co-essential, etc] Robert CRAIG (A.M., of Frescati.)		* [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ef-024cmt3wC&pg=PA148&lpg=PA148&dq=is%20there%20a%20grammatical%20solecism%20at%201%20John%205%3A7&source=bl&ots=Pq8hirSgA5&sig=ACfU3U3ikigcYTRDGI8NJeeixarhNi-YPw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjWr6nMhaLvAhUijuYKHU61DS84ChDoATAJegQIBhAC&fbclid=IwAR3csGCnWm7t_3gYjufatBhYZKtExxFmrr6Bkm1_C09SBa9tmQqxtMBWkIc#v=onepage&q&f=false A Treatise on the Trinity; in which it is demonstrated that there are Three Persons, or hypostases, in the Godhead, all co-eternal, co-equal, and co-essential, etc] Robert CRAIG (A.M., of Frescati.)
			* [https://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9390 Sryiac Information on 1 John 5:7]

	{{Article Index Johannine Comma}}		{{Article Index Johannine Comma}}
	{{Donate}}		{{Donate}}

Nick at 23:35, 5 June 2026

2026-06-05T23:35:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:35, 5 June 2026
Line 13:		Line 13:

	Because of its theological significance and its influence on the history of Bible translation, the Johannine Comma has generated an extensive scholarly literature spanning more than five centuries and remains a focal point in discussions concerning the text of the New Testament.		Because of its theological significance and its influence on the history of Bible translation, the Johannine Comma has generated an extensive scholarly literature spanning more than five centuries and remains a focal point in discussions concerning the text of the New Testament.


	A multitude of books have been devoted to the comma, including: ''[https://archive.org/details/a619527000burguoft/page/n6/mode/2up A Vindication of I John V, 7 from the Objections of M. Griesbach]'' by [[Thomas Burgess]] ([[1821 AD\|1821]], London); ''Das Comma Ioanneum: Auf Seine Hewrkunft Untersucht'' The Johannine Comma, an examination of its origin by Karl Künstle (1905, Frieburg, Switz.); ''[https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=coo1.ark:/13960/t8rb7mk5d Letters to Mr. Archdeacon George Travis in answer to his Defence of the Three Heavenly Witnesses]'' by [[Richard Porson]] ([[1790 AD\|1790]], London); ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=yXIsAAAAYAAJA A New Plea for the Authenticity of the Text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses or Porson's Letters to Travis Eclectically Examined]'' by Rev. [[Charles Forster]] ([[1867 AD\|1867]], London), ''[https://archive.org/details/memoircontrover01ormegoog/page/n8/mode/2up Memoir of The Controversy respecting the Three Heavenly Witnesses, I John V.7]'' ˈ by 'Criticus' [Rev. William Orme] (1830, London), reprinted (1872, Boston, "a new edition, with notes and an appendix by [[Ezra Abbot]]" ); and ''The Three Witnesses – the disputed text in St. John, considerations new and old'' by Henry T. Armfield (1893, London); and many more.<sup>[2]</sup>


Line 616:		Line 613:
	:“For there are three who testify:” (World English Bible)		:“For there are three who testify:” (World English Bible)

			==Books==

			A multitude of books have been devoted to the comma, including:

			''[https://archive.org/details/a619527000burguoft/page/n6/mode/2up A Vindication of I John V, 7 from the Objections of M. Griesbach]'' by [[Thomas Burgess]] ([[1821 AD\|1821]], London); ''Das Comma Ioanneum: Auf Seine Hewrkunft Untersucht'' The Johannine Comma, an examination of its origin by Karl Künstle (1905, Frieburg, Switz.); ''[https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=coo1.ark:/13960/t8rb7mk5d Letters to Mr. Archdeacon George Travis in answer to his Defence of the Three Heavenly Witnesses]'' by [[Richard Porson]] ([[1790 AD\|1790]], London); ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=yXIsAAAAYAAJA A New Plea for the Authenticity of the Text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses or Porson's Letters to Travis Eclectically Examined]'' by Rev. [[Charles Forster]] ([[1867 AD\|1867]], London), ''[https://archive.org/details/memoircontrover01ormegoog/page/n8/mode/2up Memoir of The Controversy respecting the Three Heavenly Witnesses, I John V.7]'' ˈ by 'Criticus' [Rev. William Orme] (1830, London), reprinted (1872, Boston, "a new edition, with notes and an appendix by [[Ezra Abbot]]" ); and ''The Three Witnesses – the disputed text in St. John, considerations new and old'' by Henry T. Armfield (1893, London); and many more.<sup>[2]</sup>

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

Nick at 23:34, 5 June 2026

2026-06-05T23:34:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:34, 5 June 2026
Line 4:		Line 4:
	:''See Also [[Index of Johannine Comma articles]]'', ''[[1 John 5:7]]'' & ''[[1 John 5:8]]''.		:''See Also [[Index of Johannine Comma articles]]'', ''[[1 John 5:7]]'' & ''[[1 John 5:8]]''.

	The Johannine Comma (Latin:''Comma Johanneum'') is ~~the name of [[Comma (rhetoric)\|~~a ~~short clause~~ in ~~Ancient Greek rhetoric]], from comma (κόμμα komma, plural κόμματα kommata) and written by~~ John~~, making it "Johannine" or "Johanneum", which is contained~~ in the [[Textus Receptus~~]] readings~~ of the ~~[[First Epistle~~ of ~~John]]~~.		The Johannine Comma (Latin: Comma Johanneum, "Johannine Clause") is a textual variant found in 1 John 5:7–8. The passage appears in the Textus Receptus, the King James Version, the Latin Vulgate, and numerous historical editions of the New Testament, but is absent from the majority of extant Greek manuscripts.

	~~This text~~ is ~~variously referred to~~ as the ''Comma ~~Johanneum''~~, the ~~''Johannine~~ Comma'', the ''Heavenly Witnesses'', ~~''three~~ Heavenly Witnesses~~'', ''[[~~1 John 5:7~~]]''~~, ~~''1 John v~~. ~~7''~~, ~~or ''one John~~ five ~~verse seven'', although technically it involves verse 8 also~~.		The passage is commonly known as the Johannine Comma, the Comma Johanneum, the Heavenly Witnesses, or the Three Heavenly Witnesses. Although frequently identified simply as "1 John 5:7", the textual issue extends across both verses 7 and 8.

			The authenticity of the Johannine Comma has been debated continuously since the sixteenth century and remains one of the most discussed textual variants in New Testament studies. The debate touches upon manuscript evidence, textual criticism, translation history, patristic citations, the preservation of Scripture, and the doctrine of the Trinity.

			Modern critical scholars generally regard the Comma as a later interpolation, citing its absence from most Greek manuscripts and early eastern versions. Defenders of the passage argue for its authenticity on the basis of Latin manuscript evidence, early church citations, grammatical considerations, historical testimony, and theories explaining its disappearance from portions of the Greek manuscript tradition.

			Because of its theological significance and its influence on the history of Bible translation, the Johannine Comma has generated an extensive scholarly literature spanning more than five centuries and remains a focal point in discussions concerning the text of the New Testament.

	The question of the authenticity of the comma has been a major subject of debate from the early 1500s to today. The debate on [[1 John 5:7]]-[[1 John 5:8\|8]] 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. Some claim that the verse is an [[Interpolation (manuscripts)\|Interpolation]] as the comma dropped out of most manuscripts copies of the Greek Byzantine tradition, while others defending the verse due to Latin versional evidence, early church writings, and grammatical consistency.

	A multitude of books have been devoted to the comma, including: ''[https://archive.org/details/a619527000burguoft/page/n6/mode/2up A Vindication of I John V, 7 from the Objections of M. Griesbach]'' by [[Thomas Burgess]] ([[1821 AD\|1821]], London); ''Das Comma Ioanneum: Auf Seine Hewrkunft Untersucht'' The Johannine Comma, an examination of its origin by Karl Künstle (1905, Frieburg, Switz.); ''[https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=coo1.ark:/13960/t8rb7mk5d Letters to Mr. Archdeacon George Travis in answer to his Defence of the Three Heavenly Witnesses]'' by [[Richard Porson]] ([[1790 AD\|1790]], London); ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=yXIsAAAAYAAJA A New Plea for the Authenticity of the Text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses or Porson's Letters to Travis Eclectically Examined]'' by Rev. [[Charles Forster]] ([[1867 AD\|1867]], London), ''[https://archive.org/details/memoircontrover01ormegoog/page/n8/mode/2up Memoir of The Controversy respecting the Three Heavenly Witnesses, I John V.7]'' ˈ by 'Criticus' [Rev. William Orme] (1830, London), reprinted (1872, Boston, "a new edition, with notes and an appendix by [[Ezra Abbot]]" ); and ''The Three Witnesses – the disputed text in St. John, considerations new and old'' by Henry T. Armfield (1893, London); and many more.<sup>[2]</sup>		A multitude of books have been devoted to the comma, including: ''[https://archive.org/details/a619527000burguoft/page/n6/mode/2up A Vindication of I John V, 7 from the Objections of M. Griesbach]'' by [[Thomas Burgess]] ([[1821 AD\|1821]], London); ''Das Comma Ioanneum: Auf Seine Hewrkunft Untersucht'' The Johannine Comma, an examination of its origin by Karl Künstle (1905, Frieburg, Switz.); ''[https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=coo1.ark:/13960/t8rb7mk5d Letters to Mr. Archdeacon George Travis in answer to his Defence of the Three Heavenly Witnesses]'' by [[Richard Porson]] ([[1790 AD\|1790]], London); ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=yXIsAAAAYAAJA A New Plea for the Authenticity of the Text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses or Porson's Letters to Travis Eclectically Examined]'' by Rev. [[Charles Forster]] ([[1867 AD\|1867]], London), ''[https://archive.org/details/memoircontrover01ormegoog/page/n8/mode/2up Memoir of The Controversy respecting the Three Heavenly Witnesses, I John V.7]'' ˈ by 'Criticus' [Rev. William Orme] (1830, London), reprinted (1872, Boston, "a new edition, with notes and an appendix by [[Ezra Abbot]]" ); and ''The Three Witnesses – the disputed text in St. John, considerations new and old'' by Henry T. Armfield (1893, London); and many more.<sup>[2]</sup>