Johannine Comma and Complutensian Polyglot - Revision history

Nick at 13:22, 14 June 2026

2026-06-14T13:22:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:22, 14 June 2026
Line 101:		Line 101:
	==See also==		==See also==
	* [[Codex Complutensis I]]		* [[Codex Complutensis I]]

			==External Links==

			* [https://standardsacredtext.com/2022/03/24/1-john-57-the-1514-complutension-polyglot-and-its-detractors/ 1 John 5:7, the 1514 Complutension Polyglot, and its Detractors]

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

Nick at 11:45, 9 June 2026

2026-06-09T11:45:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:45, 9 June 2026
Line 29:		Line 29:

	==Jerome's Prologue==		==Jerome's Prologue==
			[[Image:1 john 5 7 complutensian polyglot Jeromes Prologue.JPG\|300px\|thumb\|right\|[[1 John 5:7]] in the [[1514 AD\|1514]] [[Complutensian Polyglot Bible]] Preface to the General Epistles]]
	Before the General Epistles the text has Jerome's Prologue where he warns of unfaithful translators omitting the 'Father, Word, and Spirit'.		Before the General Epistles the text has Jerome's Prologue where he warns of unfaithful translators omitting the 'Father, Word, and Spirit'.

Nick: /* The Use of the Comma */

2026-06-09T11:44:35Z

The Use of the Comma

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:44, 9 June 2026
Line 27:		Line 27:

	:'For Greek copies indeed we are indebted to [Pope Leo X], who sent us most kindly from the Apostolic Library very ancient codices, both of the Old and New Testament, which have aided us in this undertaking.'” (cited by Metzger, Text of the New Testament, p. 97; emphasis added.)<sup>[2]</sup>		:'For Greek copies indeed we are indebted to [Pope Leo X], who sent us most kindly from the Apostolic Library very ancient codices, both of the Old and New Testament, which have aided us in this undertaking.'” (cited by Metzger, Text of the New Testament, p. 97; emphasis added.)<sup>[2]</sup>

			==Jerome's Prologue==
			Before the General Epistles the text has Jerome's Prologue where he warns of unfaithful translators omitting the 'Father, Word, and Spirit'.

	==Footnote on the heavenly witnesses==		==Footnote on the heavenly witnesses==

Nick: /* Evanson] */

2026-06-09T11:41:32Z

Evanson]

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:41, 9 June 2026
Line 79:		Line 79:
	[https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/peter-gurry-confusion-and-error-on-the-heavenly-witnesses.1702/]		[https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/peter-gurry-confusion-and-error-on-the-heavenly-witnesses.1702/]

	==Evanson]==		==Evanson==
	:...the Printed Editions of the Greek New Testament ...First in honor stands that stupendous and magnificent monument, the Complutensian Polyglott of Ximenes, which contains the "Princeps" Edition of the Greek Testament. Every "Princeps" Edition is prima facie evidence of the Readings in contemporary or antecedent Manuscripts. The Complutensian reads 1 John 5:7: therefore that verse stood in the Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament then existing and consulted by the Editors. Those Greek Manuscripts, we are assured by the Editors, were the most ancient, [PAGE xviii] and the most valuable which could then be procured from the best public or private Collections in the world. The munificent Patron and Projector of that Work spared no expense or toil and employed the ablest Scholars and Critics of the day in its completion. Its authority was held equivalent to that of the most authentic and ancient Greek Manuscripts then extant (as even Michaelis admits). It was referred to as the ultimate appeal from every subsequent Printed Edition; and it remained in the undisputed possession of that preeminence, throughout all Christendeom, for nearly one hundred and fifty years, during the brightest days of the Reformation. (William Alleyn Evanson, "Translator's Introduction" in New Criticisms on the Celebrated Text, 1 John V. 7, 1829, p. xvii-xviii)		:...the Printed Editions of the Greek New Testament ...First in honor stands that stupendous and magnificent monument, the Complutensian Polyglott of Ximenes, which contains the "Princeps" Edition of the Greek Testament. Every "Princeps" Edition is prima facie evidence of the Readings in contemporary or antecedent Manuscripts. The Complutensian reads 1 John 5:7: therefore that verse stood in the Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament then existing and consulted by the Editors. Those Greek Manuscripts, we are assured by the Editors, were the most ancient, [PAGE xviii] and the most valuable which could then be procured from the best public or private Collections in the world. The munificent Patron and Projector of that Work spared no expense or toil and employed the ablest Scholars and Critics of the day in its completion. Its authority was held equivalent to that of the most authentic and ancient Greek Manuscripts then extant (as even Michaelis admits). It was referred to as the ultimate appeal from every subsequent Printed Edition; and it remained in the undisputed possession of that preeminence, throughout all Christendeom, for nearly one hundred and fifty years, during the brightest days of the Reformation. (William Alleyn Evanson, "Translator's Introduction" in New Criticisms on the Celebrated Text, 1 John V. 7, 1829, p. xvii-xviii)

Nick: /* Evanson] */

2026-06-09T11:41:21Z

Evanson]

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:41, 9 June 2026
Line 80:		Line 80:

	==Evanson]==		==Evanson]==
	:...the Printed Editions of the Greek New Testament ...First in honor stands that stupendous and		:...the Printed Editions of the Greek New Testament ...First in honor stands that stupendous and magnificent monument, the Complutensian Polyglott of Ximenes, which contains the "Princeps" Edition of the Greek Testament. Every "Princeps" Edition is prima facie evidence of the Readings in contemporary or antecedent Manuscripts. The Complutensian reads 1 John 5:7: therefore that verse stood in the Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament then existing and consulted by the Editors. Those Greek Manuscripts, we are assured by the Editors, were the most ancient, [PAGE xviii] and the most valuable which could then be procured from the best public or private Collections in the world. The munificent Patron and Projector of that Work spared no expense or toil and employed the ablest Scholars and Critics of the day in its completion. Its authority was held equivalent to that of the most authentic and ancient Greek Manuscripts then extant (as even Michaelis admits). It was referred to as the ultimate appeal from every subsequent Printed Edition; and it remained in the undisputed possession of that preeminence, throughout all Christendeom, for nearly one hundred and fifty years, during the brightest days of the Reformation. (William Alleyn Evanson, "Translator's Introduction" in New Criticisms on the Celebrated Text, 1 John V. 7, 1829, p. xvii-xviii)
	magnificent monument, the Complutensian Polyglott of Ximenes, which contains the "Princeps" Edition of the Greek Testament. Every "Princeps" Edition is prima facie evidence of the Readings in contemporary or antecedent Manuscripts. The Complutensian reads 1 John 5:7: therefore that verse stood in the Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament then existing and consulted by the Editors. Those Greek Manuscripts, we are assured by the Editors, were the most ancient, [PAGE xviii] and the most valuable which could then be procured from the best public or private Collections in the world. The munificent Patron and Projector of that Work spared no expense or toil and employed the ablest Scholars and Critics of the day in its completion. Its authority was held equivalent to that of the most authentic and ancient Greek Manuscripts then extant (as even Michaelis admits). It was referred to as the ultimate appeal from every subsequent Printed Edition; and it remained in the undisputed possession of that preeminence, throughout all Christendeom, for nearly one hundred and fifty years, during the brightest days of the Reformation. (William Alleyn Evanson, "Translator's Introduction" in New Criticisms on the Celebrated Text, 1 John V. 7, 1829, p. xvii-xviii)

	:...The Manuscripts employed by the Complutensian Editors have not yet been discovered, being either destroyed in the great conflagration of the Escurial [PAGE xxvii] 1671, or disposed of by some ignorant or dishonest Librarian, or concealed in the Library at Alcala, or possibly in the Vatican at Rome, under the apprehension of their proving unfavourable to the authority of the Vulgate; therefore, until the materials, on which a negative testimony can be admitted, be very considerably augmented in number and authenticity, the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the disputed clause, must be allowed to preponderate under this head also. (William Alleyn Evanson, "Translator's Introduction" in New Criticisms on the Celebrated Text, 1 John V. 7, 1829, p. xxvi-xxvii)		:...The Manuscripts employed by the Complutensian Editors have not yet been discovered, being either destroyed in the great conflagration of the Escurial [PAGE xxvii] 1671, or disposed of by some ignorant or dishonest Librarian, or concealed in the Library at Alcala, or possibly in the Vatican at Rome, under the apprehension of their proving unfavourable to the authority of the Vulgate; therefore, until the materials, on which a negative testimony can be admitted, be very considerably augmented in number and authenticity, the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the disputed clause, must be allowed to preponderate under this head also. (William Alleyn Evanson, "Translator's Introduction" in New Criticisms on the Celebrated Text, 1 John V. 7, 1829, p. xxvi-xxvii)

	:Much stress has been laid on the Marginal Note annexed to 1 John 5:7,8 in the [PAGE xxv]		:Much stress has been laid on the Marginal Note annexed to 1 John 5:7,8 in the [PAGE xxv] Complutensian New Testament, as if it implied that the Editors had no Greek manuscript authority for inserting the seventh verse. Really nothing but a predetermination not to see, could have obscured the obvious purport of that Note (in the eyes of the “Anti-Complutensians”). Its plain and palpable intent is, not to account for the insertion of 1 John 5:7, but to vindicate the omission of the latter clause of 1 John 5:8 "these three agree in one" (Greek: οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι), which corresponds to the Latin "these three are one" (Latin: Hi tres unum sunt); - an omission, which affords amongst many other evidences, and incontestable proof that the Editors had no intention of forming the Greek Text on the Vulgate, or elevating the authority of the Latin Version above that of the Original Greek Text. (William Alleyn Evanson, "Translator's
	Complutensian New Testament, as if it implied that the Editors had no Greek manuscript authority for inserting the seventh verse. Really nothing but a predetermination not to see, could have obscured the obvious purport of that Note (in the eyes of the “Anti-Complutensians”). Its plain and palpable intent is, not to account for the insertion of 1 John 5:7, but to vindicate the omission of the latter clause of 1 John 5:8 "these three agree in one" (Greek: οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι), which corresponds to the Latin "these three are one" (Latin: Hi tres unum sunt); - an omission, which affords amongst many other evidences, and incontestable proof that the Editors had no intention of forming the Greek Text on the Vulgate, or elevating the authority of the Latin Version above that of the Original Greek Text. (William Alleyn Evanson, "Translator's		Introduction" in New Criticisms on the Celebrated Text, 1 John V. 7, 1829, p. xxiv-xxv) Sistine Vulgate (1590 AD)
	Introduction" in New Criticisms on the Celebrated Text, 1 John V. 7, 1829, p. xxiv-xxv)
	Sistine Vulgate (1590 AD)

	==References==		==References==

Nick: /* The Second Decretal of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) */

2021-09-04T05:48:20Z

The Second Decretal of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:48, 4 September 2021
Line 71:		Line 71:
	In [[1527 AD\|1527]] [[Juan de Vergara\|Juan Vergara]] refers to the matter in a letter to Erasmus, recalling that "Cardinal Cisneros, the founder of the Complutensian university, . . . had the most wonderful esteem for you and was keen on enjoying your company" (Ep. 1814:459-61).		In [[1527 AD\|1527]] [[Juan de Vergara\|Juan Vergara]] refers to the matter in a letter to Erasmus, recalling that "Cardinal Cisneros, the founder of the Complutensian university, . . . had the most wonderful esteem for you and was keen on enjoying your company" (Ep. 1814:459-61).

	Steven Avery stated ~~thsat~~: "Joachim did not reject the heavenly witnesses. He was accused of Arianism because his (correct, majority) Latin text had two 'tres unum sunt'. Easier for the unity of consent/agreement interp e.g. Calvin as opposed to the interp of the unity of essence (ontological)." [https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/peter-gurry-confusion-and-error-on-the-heavenly-witnesses.1702/]		Steven Avery stated that:

			:"Joachim did not reject the heavenly witnesses. He was accused of Arianism because his (correct, majority) Latin text had two 'tres unum sunt'. Easier for the unity of consent/agreement interp e.g. Calvin as opposed to the interp of the unity of essence (ontological)."

			:Joachim's text was the standard Latin combination of the heavenly and earthly witnesses, where both end with tres unum sunt. Aquinas embraced a textual corruption where the early witnesses did not have the phrase, in order to more easily allow a unity of essence interpretation.

			[https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/peter-gurry-confusion-and-error-on-the-heavenly-witnesses.1702/]

	==Evanson]==		==Evanson]==

Nick: /* The Second Decretal of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) */

2021-09-04T05:34:41Z

The Second Decretal of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:34, 4 September 2021
Line 70:		Line 70:

	In [[1527 AD\|1527]] [[Juan de Vergara\|Juan Vergara]] refers to the matter in a letter to Erasmus, recalling that "Cardinal Cisneros, the founder of the Complutensian university, . . . had the most wonderful esteem for you and was keen on enjoying your company" (Ep. 1814:459-61).		In [[1527 AD\|1527]] [[Juan de Vergara\|Juan Vergara]] refers to the matter in a letter to Erasmus, recalling that "Cardinal Cisneros, the founder of the Complutensian university, . . . had the most wonderful esteem for you and was keen on enjoying your company" (Ep. 1814:459-61).

			Steven Avery stated thsat: "Joachim did not reject the heavenly witnesses. He was accused of Arianism because his (correct, majority) Latin text had two 'tres unum sunt'. Easier for the unity of consent/agreement interp e.g. Calvin as opposed to the interp of the unity of essence (ontological)." [https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/peter-gurry-confusion-and-error-on-the-heavenly-witnesses.1702/]

	==Evanson]==		==Evanson]==

Nick at 05:23, 4 September 2021

2021-09-04T05:23:03Z

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 :7 ότι τρεις εισίν οι μαρτυρούντες '''<u>ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσι. 8 καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οι μαρτυρούντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς</u>''' το πνεύμα και το ύδωρ και το αίμα ('omits' καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσι)
 :7 Quonium tres sunt oooo ooo qui testimonium dant '''<u>in celo: pater: verbum: et spiritus sanctus: & hi ooo oo tres unum sunt. 8 Et tres sunt qui oooo testimoniuʒ dant in terra:</u>''' Spiritus agua & sanguis.
 ==The Use of the Comma==
@@ Line 33: / Line 37: @@
 :“Saint Thomas, in his exposition of the second Decretal concerning the Most High Trinity and the Catholic faith, treating of this passage, ‘There are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit,’ in opposition to the Abbot Jochim, uses precisely the following language: — And to teach the unity of the three persons it is subjoined, And these three are one; which is said on account of their unity of essence. But Joachim, wishing perversely to refer this to a unity of affection and agreement, alleged the text that follows it. For it is immediately subjoined, And there are three that bear witness on earth, namely, the Spirit, the water, and the blood. And in some books it is added, And these three are one. But this is not contained in the true copies, but is said to have been added by the Arian heretics to prevent the text that precedes from being correctly understood as relating to the unity of essence of the three persons.’ — Thus the blessed Thomas, as above referred to.”<sup>[4]</sup>
 ==Joachim and the Fourth Council of the Lateran==
@@ Line 60: / Line 70: @@
 In [[1527 AD|1527]] [[Juan de Vergara|Juan Vergara]] refers to the matter in a letter to Erasmus, recalling that "Cardinal Cisneros, the founder of the Complutensian university, . . . had the most wonderful esteem for you and was keen on enjoying your company" (Ep. 1814:459-61).
 ==References==

Nick: /* References */

2021-09-04T04:35:34Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:35, 4 September 2021
Line 68:		Line 68:
	* 5. As explained by Thomas Joseph Lamy, [https://books.google.com/books?id=EAPOAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA478 ''American Ecclesiastical Review''], The Decision of the Holy Office, 1897, pp. 478–479.		* 5. As explained by Thomas Joseph Lamy, [https://books.google.com/books?id=EAPOAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA478 ''American Ecclesiastical Review''], The Decision of the Holy Office, 1897, pp. 478–479.
	* 6. [https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum12-2.htm Fourth Lateran Council (1215)]		* 6. [https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum12-2.htm Fourth Lateran Council (1215)]

			==See also==
			* [[Codex Complutensis I]]

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

Nick: /* Revered by Cisneros */

2021-09-04T04:30:20Z

Revered by Cisneros

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:30, 4 September 2021
Line 50:		Line 50:
	:When, therefore, the Truth prays to the Father for those faithful to him, saying I wish that they may be one in us just as we are one, this word one means for the faithful a union of love in grace, and for the divine persons a unity of identity in nature, as the Truth says elsewhere, You must be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect {2} , as if he were to say more plainly, You must be perfect in the perfection of grace, just as your Father is perfect in the perfection that is his by nature, each in his own way. For between creator and creature there can be noted no similarity so great that a greater dissimilarity cannot be seen between them. If anyone therefore ventures to defend or approve the opinion or doctrine of the aforesaid Joachim on this matter, let him be refuted by all as a heretic. By this, however, we do not intend anything to the detriment of the monastery of Fiore, which Joachim founded, because there both the instruction is according to rule and the observance is healthy; especially since Joachim ordered all his writings to be handed over to us, to be approved or corrected according to the judgment of the apostolic see. He dictated a letter, which he signed with his own hand, in which he firmly confesses that he holds the faith held by the Roman church, which is by God’s plan the mother and mistress of all the faithful.<sup>[6]</sup>		:When, therefore, the Truth prays to the Father for those faithful to him, saying I wish that they may be one in us just as we are one, this word one means for the faithful a union of love in grace, and for the divine persons a unity of identity in nature, as the Truth says elsewhere, You must be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect {2} , as if he were to say more plainly, You must be perfect in the perfection of grace, just as your Father is perfect in the perfection that is his by nature, each in his own way. For between creator and creature there can be noted no similarity so great that a greater dissimilarity cannot be seen between them. If anyone therefore ventures to defend or approve the opinion or doctrine of the aforesaid Joachim on this matter, let him be refuted by all as a heretic. By this, however, we do not intend anything to the detriment of the monastery of Fiore, which Joachim founded, because there both the instruction is according to rule and the observance is healthy; especially since Joachim ordered all his writings to be handed over to us, to be approved or corrected according to the judgment of the apostolic see. He dictated a letter, which he signed with his own hand, in which he firmly confesses that he holds the faith held by the Roman church, which is by God’s plan the mother and mistress of all the faithful.<sup>[6]</sup>

	====Revered by Cisneros====		====Erasmus was Revered by Cisneros====
	[[Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros]], who funded the [[Complutensian Polyglot]] tried to recruit Erasmus to work on the project twice. In November [[1516 AD\|1516]] the abbot of Husillos wrote to Cisneros, praising Erasmus' [[Novum Instrumentum omne]], his first edition of the New Testament, which had just been printed by Froben press. The abbot praised Erasmus as a good theologian, knowledgeable in Greek and Hebrew, and an elegant Latin stylist. He suggested to [[Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros\|Cisneros]] that he employ Erasmus to work on the [[Complutensian Polyglot]] project:		[[Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros]], who funded the [[Complutensian Polyglot]] tried to recruit Erasmus to work on the project twice. In November [[1516 AD\|1516]] the abbot of Husillos wrote to Cisneros, praising Erasmus' [[Novum Instrumentum omne]], his first edition of the New Testament, which had just been printed by Froben press. The abbot praised Erasmus as a good theologian, knowledgeable in Greek and Hebrew, and an elegant Latin stylist. He suggested to [[Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros\|Cisneros]] that he employ Erasmus to work on the [[Complutensian Polyglot]] project: