Revelation 16:5

From Textus Receptus

(Difference between revisions)

Current revision

New Testament Revelation 16
Revelation 16:1 Revelation 16:2 Revelation 16:3 Revelation 16:4 Revelation 16:5 Revelation 16:6 Revelation 16:7 Revelation 16:8 Revelation 16:9 Revelation 16:10 Revelation 16:11 Revelation 16:12 Revelation 16:13 Revelation 16:14 Revelation 16:15 Revelation 16:16 Revelation 16:17 Revelation 16:18 Revelation 16:19 Revelation 16:20 Revelation 16:21

New book available with irrefutable evidence for the reading in the TR and KJV. Revelation 16:5 and the Triadic Declaration - A defense of the reading of “shalt be” in the Authorized Version

ΑΠΟΚΑΛΥΨΙΣ ΙΩΑΝΝΟΥ 16:5 Καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ Ὁ ὢν, καὶ Ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας.

(Textus Receptus, Novum Testamentum, Theodore Beza, 5th major edition. Geneva. 1598)

Revelation 16:5 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus.

(King James Version, Pure Cambridge Edition 1900)

Revelation 16:5 And I heard the angel of the waters saying: “You are righteous, O Lord, who is and was and will be, because You have judged these things.

(King James Version 2016 Edition, 2016) - buy the revised and updated printed 2023 Edition New Testament here

Interlinear

Strong's	Greek	Pronunciation	KJV 1611	KJV 1900	KJV 2023	Parts of speech	Case	Tense	Number	Gender	Person	Voice	Mood
2532	καὶ	kahee	and	and	and	Conjunction	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
191	ἤκουσα	ak-oo'-sah	I heard	I heard	I heard	Verb	-	Aorist	Singular	-	1st	Active	Indicative
3588	τοῦ	too	the	the	the	Article	Genitive	-	Singular	Masculine	-	-	-
32	ἀγγέλου	ang’-el-oo	angel	angel	angel	Noun	-	-	Masculine	-	-	-	-
3588	τῶν	toon	of the	of the	of the	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
5204	ὑδάτων	hoo’-da-toon	waters	waters	waters	Noun	-	-	Neuter	-	-	-	-
3004	λέγοντος,	leg’-on-tos	say,	say,	say,	Verb	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
1342	Δίκαιος,	dik’-ah-yos	righteous,	righteous,	righteous,	Adjective	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
2962	Κύριε,	koo’-ree-e	O Lord,	O Lord,	O Lord,	Noun	-	-	Masculine	-	-	-	-
1510	εἶ	ee	art	art	is	Verb	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
3588	ὁ	ho	which	which	who	Article	Nominative	-	Singular	Masculine	-	-	-
1510	ὢν	oon	-	-	-	Verb	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
2532	καὶ	kahee	and	and	and	Conjunction	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
3588	ὁ	ho	the	the	the	Article	Nominative	-	Singular	Masculine	-	-	-
2258	ἦν	ane	wast	wast	was	Verb	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
2532	καὶ	kahee	and	and	and	Conjunction	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
3588	ὁ	ho	-	-	-	Article	Nominative	-	Singular	Masculine	-	-	-
2071	ἐσόμενος,	es’-om-en-os	shalt be,	shalt be,	will be,	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
3754	ὅτι	hot’-ee	because	because	because	Conjunction	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
5023	ταῦτα	too’-ta	thus	thus	these things	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
2919	ἔκρινας	eh-kree’-nas	thou hast iudged	thou hast judged	you have judged	Verb	-	-	-	-	-	-	-

Commentary

O Lord

Manuscripts Underlying Lord

Book of Armagh

The Latin Book of Armagh of 807 AD has the reading Kurie (Lord) in Latin in Nomen Sacrum form.[1].

The Latin Book of Armagh (Codex Ardmachanus, Liber Ardmachanus, Canon of Patrick) of 807 AD has the reading Kurie (Lord) in Latin in Nomen Sacrum form, dne:

et audivi anguelum aq^uarum dicentem iustus es dne qui es et qui eras scs ꝗ ħ iudicasti

The Latin, ‘Domine (masculine singular vocative noun, from Dominus)’. Migne (Latin Writers Series) (1846 Paris Edition), PATROLOGIA, Vol. 29, p. 863 (B. Joannis Apostoli Apocalypse, Cap. XVI, D) (Latin).

(See Also Q with stroke and H with stroke.) The word LORD is found in the Latin Book of Armagh, Minuscule 2344, some other Latin copies, the Coptic Boharic and Ethiopic versions.

LORD is also the reading of Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549 the Geneva Bible 1587, KJB, NKJV, Young's, Webster's 1833 translation, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Italian Diodati, Spanish Reina Valera, and Green's Literal KJV. It was also found in the previous Catholic translations like the Douay-Rheims and the Douay of 1950.

The NASB, NIV, ESV, RSV all omit the word LORD, along with the more modern Vatican versions like the St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985.

Uncial 051

The uncial manuscript 051 does not have Lord in the main text.

Uncial 051 is dated paleographically to the 10th century. It was formerly said to have Kurios in the main text, but on further examination, this is not correct. [10]

Minuscule 2344

Κύριε is the reading in the Textus Receptus editions. The Greek Minuscule 2344 (Coislin 18) from the 11th century has this reading. [11] & [12] Minuscule 2344 says:

και ηκουσα του αγγε

ου των υδατων λεγοντος· δικαιος ει

κε· ο ων και ο ην· ο οσιος· οτι ταυτα ε

κρινας·

Pre 1611 English Bibles

1395 [And the thridde aungel… seide,] Just art thou, Lord, that art, and that were hooli, that demest these thingis; (Wycliffe)
1526 And I herde an angell saye: lorde which arte and wast thou arte ryghteous and holy because thou hast geve soche iudgmentes (Tyndale)
1535 And I herde an angel saye: LORDE which art and wast, thou art righteous and holy, because thou hast geue soche iudgmentes, (Coverdale)
1557 And I heard the Angel of the waters say, Lord, thou art iust, Which art, and Which wast: and Holy, because thou hast iudged these things. (Geneva)
1568 And I hearde the angell of the waters say: Lorde, which art, and wast, thou art ryghteous & holy, because thou hast geuen such iudgementes: (Bishop’s)

Lord in Ethiopic

Brian Walton has the reading in his Polyglot Bible in Ethiopic

The 1549 Ethiopic has እግዚአ Lord here.

The Angel was quoting Psalm 119:137

Elijah Hutter Psalm 119:137 Hebrew and Greek

Elijah Hutter Psalm 119:137 Latin and German

Revelation 16:5 & 7 have similarities with Psalm 119:137. In Rev 16, verse 5 is echoed by verse 7.

Psalm 119

¹³⁷ TZADDI. Righteous art thou, O LORD, and upright are thy judgments.

Revelation 16

⁵ And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus.
⁶ For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.
⁷ And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments.

Similarities in Greek:

¹³⁷ Δίκαιος εἶ κύριε· καὶ εὐθὴς ἡ κρίσις σου· (Hutter)

⁵...Δίκαιος, κύριε, εἶ (^{LORD >}ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος^{< LORD}), ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας·

⁷...Ναί κύριε (^{LORD >}ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ^{< LORD}) ἀληθιναὶ καὶ δίκαιαι αἱ κρίσεις σου

Similarities in Latin:

¹³⁷ Iustus es Domine: & recta judicia tua. (Hutter)

⁵ ...Iustus es Domine, (^{LORD >}Qui es, & Qui eras Qui eris^{< LORD}), quod haec iudicaris (Beza 1598)

⁷ ...Etiam Domine (^{LORD >}Deus omnipotens^{< LORD}) vera sunt & iusta iudicia tua. (Beza 1598)

Psalm 119:137	Revelation 16:5	Revelation 16:7
Righteous art thou	Thou art righteous	true and righteous
O LORD (Jehovah)	O Lord (which art, and wast, and shalt be)	Lord God Almighty
and upright are thy judgments	because thou hast judged thus	true and righteous are thy judgments

and shalt be

"ὁ ἐσόμενος" was inserted into the the main body of text in printed editions of the Textus Receptus by Theodore Beza in his 1582 edition. This replaced the usual reading of “ὁ ὅσιος” (holy). There are about 200 Greek manuscripts in existence containing Revelation 16:5, but “ὁ ἐσόμενος” (shalt be) is lacking in all of them and the reading “ὁ ὅσιος” (holy) prevails. But only 4 manuscripts of Revelation 16:5 exist from before the 10th century and the 3 earliest witnesses of Revelation 16:5 do not even agree. When one understands the nature of Nomina Sacra and the elucidated meaning of Jehovah and I AM in the triadic declaration of “which art, and wast, and shalt be”, being the most significant and Sacred Name of God in the New Testament, then one can clearly see the why “holy” (sacred) had been formerly placed into the text, being the purest form of the five triadic declarations in Revelation and why Beza saw “shalt be” as the original reading.

To understand the reasoning behind this, consider:

Jesus, who “is to come/shalt be”, is Jehovah.
I AM also means “who was, and is, and shall be”.
I AM in English bible versions shows “shalt be” is a reasonable reading.
Most commentaries concerning the Triadic Declaration relate it to Jehovah and I AM.
The Triadic Declaration is the original Holy Name of God.
The entire Triadic Declaration is nominative (a name) with its own Strong’s number 3801.
The “holy” in the manuscripts is a form of Nomina Sacra (sacra meaning holy or sacred).
The Ethiopic Bible of 1549 has “shalt be”.
P47 has the “and” that Beza pointed to, which was going on to fulfill the Triad.
In the 3rd century Clement of Alexandria speaking of Jehovah used “esomenos” knowing the correct NT reading of Revelation 16:5.
In the 4th century Gregory of Nyssa calls Christ the “esomenos”.
Jerome's Vulage had “shalt be” in the Triadic Declaration according to Wordsworth's Latin.
In the 8th century Beatus of Liébana has “shalt be” in his text and his copy of a 4th century commentary.
In the 9th century Haimo Halberstadensis has “shalt be” in his Latin commentary, exactly how Jerome has it.
Desiderius Erasmus has the Triadic Declaration in Rev 16:5 as “ἐρχόμενος” (not ἐσόμενος) in his Annotations in all five editions.
Luther, Coverdale, and Calvin had “will be” for “I AM” in Exodus 3:14.
Hutter has “shalt be” in his Hebrew edition with “is to come” in his Greek.
The NT Hebrew of Hutter in Revelation 16:5 is akin to Hava “to be/shalt be”.
The 1560 Geneva notes at Exodus 3:14 has “shalbe” for I AM.
John Calvin defined Jehovah and I AM as the Triadic Declaration.
Theodore Beza explained in his 1582 footnote that the Triadic Declaration appears when Jehovah (Lord) appears in Revelation.
The KJV translators did not slavishly follow Beza (see John 8:6; Acts 16:7) but chose to adopt “shalt be” knowing that Beza was correct.
The KJV translators left no note or italic (in 1 John 2:23 they placed the reading in italics to show minority reading) showing they did not consider it a minority.
The Dutch Statenvertaling also independently chose the reading and left no italic or footnote.

Early Greek corruption

The earliest witnesses to Rev 16:5 read:

ο ων και ος ην και οσιος (Papyrus 47 3rd Century)

ο ων και ο ην ο οσιος (Sinaiticus fourth century ^{Although this has been hotly contested Sinaiticus.net})

ο ων και ο ην οσιος (Alexandrinus fifth-century)

The phrase gets shorter with the passage of time. We can see from these three early witnesses that corruption set in early. “Lord” is also missing in some mss, yet is present in many Reformation Bibles. This is reflected in modern versions, but none seem to follow the "and" of Papyrus 47; for example:

ESV: Just are you, O Holy One, who is and who was

NIV: You are just in these judgments, you who are and who were, the Holy One

Many who support the Critical Text of the New Testament reject this reading on the grounds that it has been claimed to be a conjectural emendation, but many of the same will accept readings which have no manuscript support in Acts 16:12 and 2 Peter 3:10 which appear in the NA/UBS 28 Edition. When it is claimed that the KJV corrupted the text, critics call it call it conjectural emendation, but when the NIV, ESV, or printed Greek text alters the message they call it functional non-equivalence. With the system of Westcott and Hort, you don't have to do much thinking. If B is supposedly the best manuscript, then you just go along with B as Westcott and Hort did. If Aleph goes along with B then it has to be right. After they had decided manuscript B was the best, they made their "canons of textual criticism" to corroborate B in every instance. They say the shortest is the best because B is the shortest. They say the most difficult reading is the best because B is the most difficult. They say the one that explains the rest is the best because B explains the rest. This reasoning also accounts for the difficult reading of “ὁ ὅσιος” accepted here as it is clearly the harder reading to have “and holy” or “the holy one”, since it seems out of step with other places in Revelation. The reading of “and holy” or “the holy one” is awkward and is also an necessary repeat of the use of the phrase “Thou art righteous, O Lord.”

Early Latin corruption

Jerome confirmed that there were a number of various Latin editions of the New Testament which differed in both translation and content before and around 405 AD (when Jerome finished his Vulgate). Most of these we do not have. John Wordsworth revealed (who edited and footnoted a three volume critical edition of the New Testament in Latin) the like phrase in Revelation 1:4 "which is, and which was, and which is to come;" sometimes is rendered in Latin as "qui est et qui fuisti et futurus es" instead of the Vulgate "qui est et qui erat et qui uenturus est." (John Wordsworth, Nouum Testamentum Latine, vol.3, 422 and 424.) So we can see there have been different Latin translations of the verses involved. Primasius, Bishop of Hadrumetum, wrote a commentary on Revelation around 552 AD and used the Latin word "pius" instead of "sanctus." [13]

Many manuscripts destroyed

A few readings in finalized Textus Receptus editions, contrary to normally having a vast majority, have very little Greek manuscript support, likely reflecting an inability of believers to renew and preserve true manuscripts due to widespread persecution & martyrdom in early centuries; persecution occurred in the 3rd century, under Roman emperor Decius, and destruction of scripture copies was a major goal of vicious empire-wide persecution in the early 4th century by Diocletian & Galerius, who sent out Roman soldiers to destroy all text copies; this persecution was concentrated in the eastern empire where the Traditional Text, the ancestor of the Textus Receptus, was the standard.

Zeus

A similar pattern of phrasing is used of the Greek god Zeus by Pausanias (2nd century AD) in his Description of Greece where it is:

"Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται."

The phrase is noted as "familiar to Hellenic readers ... in the song of doves at Dodona (Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἔστιν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται) or in the titles of Asclepius and Athene." However, the form in the NT is that of the nominative phrasing (a name designation of both the Father and Christ), as opposed to the assertion here. Also, the NT form emphasizes the "one who is coming."

Ethiopic Version

Ethiopic is also known as Aethiopic, Abyssinian, and at times, Indianic. It is a Sematic language like Hebrew, Syriac, or Arabic. The Ethiopic bible clearly has the reading equivalent to shalt be at Revelation 16:5. many have questioned about other aspects of 16:5 and the other Triadic Declarations also. Here they are below:

1548/49 Ethiopic Bible

Revelation 1.4 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible [2].

Revelation 1:4

Revelation 1.8 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible [3].

Revelation 1:8

Revelation 4.8 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible [4].

Revelation 4:8

Revelation 11.17 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible [5].

Revelation 11:17

Revelation 16.5 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible

Revelation 16:5

Brian Walton has the reading in his Polyglot Bible in Ethiopic

Brian Walton has the Ethiopic reading in his Polyglot Bible translated into Latin

Richard Brett

King James Translator Richard Brett was well versed in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldaic (Aramaic), Arabic, and Ethiopian.

Brian Walton and Ethiopic

Brian Walton (1600 – 1661) was an English priest, divine and scholar. He published a massive polyglot between 1654 and 1657 in nine languages: Hebrew, Chaldee, Samaritan, Syriac, Arabic, Persian, Ethiopic, Greek and Latin. Among his collaborators were James Ussher, John Lightfoot and Edward Pococke, Edmund Castell, Abraham Wheelocke and Patrick Young, Thomas Hyde and Thomas Greaves. It has been considered as the last and most scholarly ever printed.

In Revelation 16:5 his 1549 Ethiopian (Known today as Amharic, and formerly as Ge'ez) version has a Latin translation with the words:

Justus es Domine, et rectus qui fuisti et eris,..

Eris is a Latin Verb that is the second-person singular future active indicative of sum "you will be"

The five Triadic Declarations in Brian Walton's printing of the 1549 Ethiopic :.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 1:4 :.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 1:8 :.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 4:8 :.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ..Revelation 11:17 :.....ዘሀሎከ ወትሄሉ....Revelation 16:5

.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 1:4

.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 1:8

.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 4:8

.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ..Revelation 11:17

.....ዘሀሎከ ወትሄሉ....Revelation 16:5

The final form has ዘሀሎከ not ዘሀሎ, and ወትሄሉ not ወይሄሉ. The ወትሄሉ is translated in 2 John here as "shall be" or "will be" in many bibles.

It is interesting that in a modern Ethiopic translation of Exodus 3:14 it uses ዘሀሎ (za-hallo) for I am.

14 ወይቤሎ ፡ እግዚአብሔር ፡ አነ ፡ ውእቱ ፡ ዘሀሎ ፡ ወይቤሎ ፡ ከመዝ ፡ ትብሎሙ ፡ ለደቂቀ ፡ እስራኤል ፡ ዘሀሎ ፡ ፈነወኒ ፡ ኀቤክሙ ። [14]

At times ዘሀሎ (za-hallo) can be translated as "I was" (this translation can be seen here https://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/s14173.pdf):

See also Garima Gospels

Arabic

Arabic bible in the 1657 London Polyglot of Walton at Revelation 16:5

Latin translation of the Arabic bible in the 1657 London Polyglot of Walton at Revelation 16:5

The Arabic bible in the 1657 London Polyglot of Brian Walton at Revelation 16:5 has an accompanying Latin translation which says:

Æterne

Which means the eternal. This was also the translation used in several French editions, and links to I AM, Jehovah, and is a summery of who wast, art, and shalt be.

Papyrus 47

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 3rd century Manuscript Papyrus 47 which reads: "...KAI OC HN KAI OCIOC (...and which wast and holy one)"

A close up of the Kai Osios in Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 3rd century Manuscript Papyrus 47

The oldest Greek text of Revelation P 47 is from the 3rd century and contains this passage, has a textual variant. It contains the “and” in the verse. One must ask, “and…” what? What was P47 going on to read? Beza has pointed out that in the manuscript for the Latin Vulgate, the text was foolish and divisional because of the “and” but the same issue occurs in P47 but modern critics reject the early Papyrus reading here as it once again caused the sentence to be foolish and divisional.

The methodology of modern textual critics is to follow the "oldest and best" manuscripts. But if they followed the “and” in P47 here they would end up with reading like this:

“Righteous art Thou, the Being One, AND the One who was, AND the Holy One.”

Papyrus 47 is slightly worn, the Greek text which Beza used was greatly worn. This is so noted by Beza himself in his footnote on Revelation 16:5.

Septuagint

The word ἐσόμενος appears in the LXX (most probably Origen's work):

Job 15:14 τίς γὰρ ὢν βροτός, ὅτι ἔσται ἄμεμπτος, ἢ ὡς ἐσόμενος δίκαιος γεννητὸς γυναικός;

Job 15:14 What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?

Clement of Alexandria

Clement of Alexandria (3rd century) referred to God as "ο εσομενος" in The Stromata, Book V, 6:

"ἀτὰρ καὶ τὸ τετράγραμμον ὄνομα τὸ μυστικόν, ὃ περιέκειντο οἷς μόνοις τὸ ἄδυτον βάσιμον ἦν· λέγεται δὲ Ἰαού, ὃ μεθερμηνεύεται ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος."

"Further, the mystic name of four letters which was affixed to those alone to whom the adytum was accessible, is called Jave, which is interpreted, “Who is and shall be.”" (Christian Classics Ethereal Library)

Gregory of Nyssa

Gregory of Nyssa in the 4th century referred to Christ as "ο εσομενος" in On the Baptism of Christ:

"Κοσμήτωρ δὲ πάντως τῆς νύμφης ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ ὢν καὶ πρόων καὶ ἐσόμενος͵ εὐλογητὸς νῦν καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων͵ ἀμήν."

"And verily the Adorner of the bride is Christ, Who is, and was, and shall be, blessed now and for evermore. Amen."

Priscillian of Avila

Priscillian of Avila in the 4th century wrote in Latin:

Ipse est enim qui fuit, est et futurus est et uisus a saeculis "verbum caro factus inhabitauit in nobis" (Jn 1:14)

He is that who was, is and shall be, and appeared as "the Word" from eternity, "was made flesh, dwelled in us," (Jn 1:14)

Context

[PAGE 32]

Tractatus I

Priscilliani Liber Apologeticus

Esti fides nostra nullis uitae offendiculis inpedita securum catholicae dispositionis iter tendens ad deum libera sit, tamen quia zabolica obtrectatione

pulsata in eo quod percutitur plus probatur, gloriosum nobis uidimus, beatissimi sacerdotes, ut non redarguente conscientia, quamuis frequentibus libellis locuti fidem nostram hereticorum omnium docmata damnauerimus et libello fratrum nostrorum Tiberiani, Asarbi et ceterorum, ,cum quibus nobis una fides et unus est sensus, cuncta docmata quae contra Christum uideantur esse damnata sint et probata quae pro Christo, tamen etiam nunc, quia id uultis, sicut scribtum est "parati semper ad confessionem omni poscenti no rationem de fide et spe quae est in nobis" (1 Pet 3:15) tacere noluimus, quod iubetis. Etenim confessione repetita licet in oculis uestris sit omne quod uiuimus et constituti in fidei luce nulla "tenebrosae conuersationis" (cf. Is 9:12) secreta sectemur, non abnuimus tamen, ut etiam ignorantibus nos satisfieret, ne quis in nos credens male alteris inueniabili edrrore peccaret, non ecusantes quin "ostenderemus ore quod credebamus in corde." (cf. Rom 10:10) Quamuis enim gloriari in his quae fuimus non oporteat, tamen non ita obscuro editi ad saeculum loco aut insipientes uocati sumus, ut fides Christi et eruditio credendi mortem nobis potius adferre potuerit quam salutem. Ad haec enim, ut ipsi nouistis, peractis omnibus humanae uitae experiementis et malorum nostrorum conuersationibus repudiatis tamquam in portum securae quietis intrauimus. Agnoscentes enim quoniam "nemo misi ex aqua et spiritu sancto renatus ascenderet in regna caelorum," (Jn 3:5) "castificauimus animas nostras ad obaudiendum fidei per spiritum" (1 Pet 1:22) "repudiatis prioris uitae desideriis," (1 Pet 1:14) "in quibus erubescebamus," (Rom 6:21) ad innouatae iter gratiae simbolum atolicae obseruationis acceptimus, quod tenemus, ut intrantes lauacrum, redemptionem corporis nostri, et "baptizati in Christo induti Christum" (Gal 3:27) inanem saeculi gloriam respuentes ipisi uni uitam nostram sicut dedimus dederemus, qui peccatorum remissione concessa passus ipse pro nobis et redemptionem animis nostris praestitit et salutem. Quis enim est qui legens scribturas et "unam fidem unum baptisma unum deum" (Eph 4:5-6) credens hereticorum dogmatat stulta non damnet, qui, dum uolunt humanis conparare diuina, diuidunt unitam in dei uirtute substantiam et magnitudinem Christi tripertito ecclesiae fonte uenerabilem Binionitarum scelere partiuntur, cum scribtum sit: "ego sum deus et non est alius praeter me iustus" (Is 45:21) et "saluator non est praeter me," (Hos 13:14) et: "eo primus et ego posthaec et praeter me non est deus," (Is 44:6) "quis sicut ego?" (Is 44:7) item alibi: "ego sum et ante me non fuit alius, et post me non erit similis mihi; ego deus et non est praeter me qui saluos faciat;" (Is 43:10-11) et iterum Moyse dicente: "dominus deus noster deus unus est," (Deut 6:4) Hieremias ait: "hic est deus noster nec reputabitur alius absque eum qui inuenit omnem uiam sapientiae et dedit eam Iacob puero suo et Istrahel dilecto suo; posthaec in terris uisus est et cum hominibus conuersatus est." (Baruch 3:36-38) Ipse est enim qui fuit, est et futurus est et uisus a saeculis "verbum caro factus inhabitauit in nobis" (Jn 1:14) et crucifixus deuicta morte uitae heres effectus est ac tertia die resurgens factus futuri forma spem nostrac resurrectionis ostendit et ascendens in caelos uenientibus ad se iter construit "totus in patre et pater in ipso," (cf. Jn 14:11) ut manifestaretur quod scribtum est: "gloria in excelsis deo et pax hominibus in terra bonae uoluntatis," (Lk 2:14) sicut Iohannes ait: "tria sunt quae testimonium dicunt in terra: aqua, caro et sanguis et haec tria in unum sunt, et tria sunt quae testimonium dicunt in caelo: pater, uerbum et spiritus et haec tria unum sunt in Christo Iesu." (I Jn 5:8,7)

Translation:

Tractate I

Priscillian's Apologetical Book (Priscilliani Liber Apologeticus)

Collated editions: Priscilliani quae supersunt,

ed. G. Schepss,

CSEL 18 (Vienna, 1889), 3-33

Even though our faith which is hindered by no obstacle and attains the safe route of catholic order leading to God is free, on the other hand, since it is

afflicted by the calumny of the devil and is more clearly proven to be worthy in fact that it is oppressed, we saw that it would have been glorious to us, most blessed priests - although we condemned the doctrines of all the heretics by declaring our faith in numerous writings, and by the book of our brothers Tiberianus, Asarbus, and all the others, with whom we share a single faith and a single opinion, all the doctrines which appeared to be against Christ were condemned, and those which appeared to be in support of Christ were praised, now too, nevertheless, since you want this, namely that, as is written, "we are always ready to confess to anyone who demands from us the principles concerning the faith and the hope, which is in us' (1 Pet 3:15) - to decide not to pass over what you command, as our conscience is irrepreshensible. Therefore, even though all that we lived and established in the light of faith is before your eyes, [and] we pursue no secret "of dark ways of life" (cf. Is 9:12), we did not say no to a repeated confession, so that we might satisfy the ignorant as well, lest someone, having malicious ideas about the others, might commit an unforgivable sin against us, as we do not refuse "to confirm with our mouth what we believed with our heart." (cf. Rom 10:10) Even though, in fact, it is not opportune to glory in what we have been, yet we were not taken to the world from such an obscure place or were called [so] foolish, that the faith in Christ and the awareness of believing might bring us death instead of salvation. Indeed into these things, as you yourselves know, after accomplishing all the experiences of life and rejecting any indulgence in our evils, we entered as into a harbour of safe quietness. Knowing that "nobody, if he has not been born again of water and Holy Spirit, will enter the kingdoms of the heavens," (Jn 3:5) "we have purified our souls to obey the faith through the Spirit," (1 Pet 1:22) and after rejecting "the former desires of life" (1 Pet 1:14) "of which we are ashamed," (Rom 6:21) we received the symbol of catholic observance leading to the path of renewed grace, which we follow so that, by entering the bath, redemption of our body, and "being baptized in Christ and clothed with Christ," (Gal 3:27) we may, after casting off the empty glory of the world, give our life, as we have already given it, to the one himself who suffered for us after conceding the remission of sins, and granted redemption and salvation to our souls. For who is that who, reading the Scriptures and believing "in one faith, one baptism, one God," (Eph 4:5-6) does not condemn the foolish doctrines of the heretics who, while they want to put divine things in the same class with the human, divide the substance united in the power of God and break up the venerable greatness of Christ in the tripartite foundation of the church with the crime of the Binionites, because it was written: "I am God and there is no other who is just but me," (Is 45:21) and "there is no savior besides me," (Hos 13:14) and "I am the first and I am after this and besides me there is no god;" (Is 44:6) [and] "who is like me?;" (Is 44:7) and likewise in another passage: "I am and before me there was no other and after me there shall be no similar to me; I am God and besides me there is nobody who may save;" (Is 43:10-11) and Moses says again: "The Lord is our God, the only God," (Deut 6:4) and Jeremiah declares: "this is our Lord and no other but him shall be considered, who found all the way of wisdom and gave it to Jacob his servant and to Israel his beloved; after this he was seen on earth and lived with men"? (Baruch 3:36-38) He is that who was, is and shall be, and appeared as "the Word" from eternity, "was made flesh, dwelled in us and," (Jn 1:14) after being crucified, since death had been conquered, was made heir of life; and by rising on the third day, as he was made the type of future, he showed the hope of our resurrection, and by scending to the heavens he built the path for those who came to him, while he was "all in the Fathers and the Father in him," (cf. Jn 14:11) so that what was written might be manifested: "Glory to God in the highest peace on earth to people of good will;" (Lk 2:14) [and] as John says: "There are three who testify on earth, the water, the flesh, and the blood, and these three are in one, and there are three who testify in heaven, the Fathers, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one in Jesus Christ." (1 Jn 5:8,7)

Priscillian and Marco Conti. Priscillian of Avila: The Complete Works. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print. Amazon [www.amazon.com/Priscillian-Avila-Complete-Oxford-Christian/dp/0199567379]

Gregory of Nazianzus

Gregory of Nazianzus (329-390 AD) has in his Oration 41 the allusion:

ἦν μὲν ἀεὶ, καὶ ἔστι, καὶ ἔσται

Translated as:

then, always existed, and exists, and always will exist.

In context:

Τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ἦν μὲν ἀεὶ, καὶ ἔστι, καὶ ἔσται, οὔτε ἀρξάμενον , οὔτε παυσόμενον, ἀλλ' ἀεὶ Πατρὶ καὶ Υἱῷ συντεταγμένον, καὶ συναριθμού μενον· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἔπρεπεν ἐλλείπειν ποτὲ, ἢ Υἱὸν Πα τρὶ, ἢ Πνεῦμα Υἱῷ.

Translated as:

The Holy Ghost, then, always existed, and exists, and always will exist. He neither had a beginning, nor will He have an end; but He was everlastingly ranged with and numbered with the Father and the Son.

This is clearly speaking of the eternality of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Ghost:

then, always existed, (wast)

and exists, (art)

and always will exist. (shalt be)

Translated by Charles Gordon Browne and James Edward Swallow. From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 7. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1894.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. >>www.newadvent.org/fathers/310241.htm

Migne Graeca PG 36, 441-442 [441B] >>books.google.com/books?id=7fMUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA411#v=onepage&q&f=false

Epiphanius of Salamis

Epiphanius of Salamis says He who was and is and always exists

Epiphanius of Salamis (Greek: Ἐπιφάνιος; c. 310–320 – 403) was bishop of Salamis, Cyprus, at the end of the 4th century.He was born in Palestine and spent a considerable part of his life there, gives Ἰά (Ia) and Ἰάβε (pronounced at that time /ja'vε/) and explains Ἰάβε as meaning He who was and is and always exists.

ὁ ὢν Κύριος Ἰάβε, ὅς ἦν καὶ ἔστι καὶ ἀει ὢν.

The LORD JEHOVAH He who was and is and always exists.

Latin: Adonai qui est Dominus: Jabe, qui erat, et est, et semper exsistit;

(https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ixcRAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=true) Epiphanius, Panarion, I, iii, 40, in P.G., XLI, col. 685

Basil of Caesarea

Basil of Caesarea (The Great) (329-379 AD) has a reference to the Triadic Declaration in Eunomium Book 5:

μὴ γὰρ ὅ τι οὐκ ἔστιν. Ὃ γάρ ἐστιν, ἦν, καὶ ἔστι, καὶ ἔσται ἀεί· καὶ τοῖς πᾶσι τὸ εἶναι δωρεῖται, ὡς φύσει ὢν Θεός.

For what it “is," it was, and it is, and it will always be, and it gives the being [existence] to everyone, because it is He Who Is by nature.

In context:

Εἰ γὰρ αὐτῷ τῷ παναγίῳ Θεῷ τὰ περὶ αὐτοῦ ἀπιστοῦσι· πῶς τῶν προφητῶν αὐτοῦ ἢ ἀποστόλων ἀκούσωσι, λεγόν των ἐν θείαις Γραφαῖς τὰ περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῶν εἰς αὐτὸν μελλόντων ἐλπίζειν; Πιστεῦσαι γὰρ δεῖ τὸν προσερχόμενον τῷ Θεῷ, ὅτι ἔστι. Πιστεῦσαι· μὴ γὰρ ἀπίστως περιεργάζεσθαι ὅ τί ἐστιν· μὴ γὰρ ὅ τι οὐκ ἔστιν. Ὃ γάρ ἐστιν, ἦν, καὶ ἔστι, καὶ ἔσται ἀεί· καὶ τοῖς πᾶσι τὸ εἶναι δωρεῖται, ὡς φύσει ὢν Θεός.

because if we refuse to to believe in the God three times holy himself, when he speaks of him, how could one then lend a docile ear to his prophets or his apostles, when, in the holy scriptures, they speak of him or of those who owe hope in him? "For he who comes to God must believe that he is" [Hebr., Xi, 6]. Pay attention to these words: they are as absolute as they are formal: it is necessary that the one who seeks God "believe that he is", and certainly not that he searches with an incredulous curiosity "what it is", for not not to say what it is not. For what it “is," it was, and it is, and it will always be, and it gives the being [existence] to everyone, because it is He Who Is by nature.

The latin in the text below has:

Quod enim est, erat, et est, et erit semper

That is, was and is and always will be

Migne Grace PG 29 751-752 PDF p. 70

Sahidic

Jerome

Jerome confirmed that there were a number of various Latin editions of the New Testament which differed in both translation and content before and around 405 AD (when Jerome finished his Vulgate). Most of these we do not have today. John Wordsworth revealed (who edited and footnoted a three volume critical edition of the New Testament in Latin) the like phrase in Revelation 1:4 “which is, and which was, and which is to come;” sometimes is rendered in Latin as “qui est et qui fuisti et futurus es” instead of the Vulgate “qui est et qui erat et qui venturus est.” (John Wordsworth, Nouum Testamentum Latine, vol.3, 422 and 424.)

Note that Wordsworth assumed that the quote was from Revelation 1:4, but it reads just like Beatus whom we shall examine soon. Jerome said in Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi epistulae:

sic et mille annorum spatia apud te, qui semper es et futurus es et fuisti…

translated as

Even so, for a thousand year period, you were, and you are, and you shall be, …

Jerome has the exact reading of “shall be”.

Tyconius

The commentary of Revelation in 380 AD was translated by Beatus of Liebana (786 AD) in his commentary of Revelation which uses the Latin phrase: "qui fuisti et futures es" See #Beatus of Liebana

Primasius

Primasius, Bishop of Hadrumetum, wrote a commentary on Revelation around 552 AD and used the Latin word "pius" instead of "sanctus." They mean the same, but it does reveal yet another variance in the text.

Alcuin

Alcuin of York (735 – 19 May 804 AD) was an English scholar, clergyman, poet and teacher from York, Northumbria. He was the student of Archbishop Ecgbert at York. At the invitation of Charlemagne, he became a leading scholar and teacher at the Carolingian court, where he remained a figure in the 780s and '90s. He wrote:[15]

Dominator Domine Deus omnipotens, qui es Trinitas una, Pater in Filio, Filius in Patre, cum Spiritu sancto: qui es semper in omnibus, et eras ante omnia, et eris super omnia Deus benedictus in saecula.

Translated as

Sovereign Lord God almighty, who art Trinity together, the Father in the Son, the Son in the Father, with the holy Spirit: who art always in all things, and wast before all things, and shalt be God over all things blessed forever.

This represented the exact formula of Revelation 16:5:

who art always in all things,

and wast before all things,

and shalt be God over all things blessed forever.

In the Latin:

Beza's Latin text reads

Qui es, & Qui eras, & Qui eris,

qui es semper in omnibus,

et eras ante omnia,

et eris super omnia Deus benedictus in saecula.

Beatus of Liébana

Beatus of Liébana (786 AD) in a commentary of Revelation uses the Latin phrase: "qui fuisti et futures es" when he was making a compilation of the work of Tyconius, who wrote his commentary on Revelation around 380 AD. [16]

It is unknown to us whether Beza knew of the Beatus/Tyconius reference, or that there were other such references that he simply did not mention. In the age of Beza, the Reformation Bible scholars were very deep readers of the early church writers. If Beza did know of it, then it would be wrong to call this a conjectural emendation, since that reference would source as one of the oldest extant on Revelation 16:5. On the other hand, if the Beatus/Tyconius reference was discovered later, and was unknown to Theodore Beza, then this later discovery can be seen as a truly remarkable confirmation of the strength of his textual thinking on Revelation 16:5.

Wordsworth also points out that in Revelation 16:5, Beatus of Liebana (who compiled a commentary on the book of Revelation) uses the Latin phrase "qui fuisti et futures es." This gives some additional evidence for the Greek reading by Beza. Beatus compiled his commentary in 786 AD. Furthermore, Beatus was not writing his own commentary. Instead he was making a compilation and thus preserving the work of Tyconius, who wrote his commentary on Revelation around 380 AD (Aland and Aland, 211 and 216. Altaner, 437. Wordsword, 533.). So, it would seem that as early as 786, and possibly even as early as 380, their was an Old Latin text which read as Beza's Greek text does.

Haymo of Halberstadt

(From KJV Today)

[6].

The text from "dicentem" to "eris" translated into English is:

"[Saying: Thou art just, who were holy.] In past times it is used here for three times, that is, for the past, present, and future. Who were holy, are and shall be just."

There are two interesting features of this commentary. First, the quotation from the biblical text, [dicentem: Justus es qui eras sanctus.] is not Beza's conjectured reading. However, it is neither the reading found in the existing manuscripts nor in the Vulgate. The reading, being translated, "You are just, who were holy" is missing the clause, "and who are" (Latin: "& qui es"). The Vulgate reads, "dicentem iustus es qui es et qui eras sanctus".

Second, the commentary includes the sentence, "Who were holy, are and shall be just", using the verbs, "eras", "es" and "eris". The association of "justice" with the past, present and future only occurs at Beza's Revelation 16:5. The previous triadic declarations at 1:4, 1:8, 4:8 and 11:17 do not associate the formula with God's "justice". Haimo's commentary text carries the sense of Beza's Latin translation of his 1598 Greek Textus Receptus, which reads, "Justus es, Domine, Qui es, & Qui eras, & Qui eris". Beza chose "eris" as the translation of "εσομενος" (shalt be), which is also the Latin word in Haimo's commentary. Haimo used "eris" (shalt be) for the future rather than "venturus est" (is to come) despite the previous occurrences of the formula in Revelation 1:4, 1:8 and 4:8 in the Vulgate having "venturus est" as the future.

It appears as though the original commentary included the biblical text as conjectured by Beza, and whoever compiled the present edition of the commentary took the commentary section from the original commentary and took the biblical text from a faulty version of the Vulgate.

Thomas Aquinas

In Commentary on the Book On the Divine Names of Blessed Denys In librum B. Dionysii De divinis nominibus expositio, it says in section 661:

Deinde, cum dicit: propter hoc etc., infert conclusionem ex dictis; et dicit quod, propter hoc quod Deus est principium omnibus, in sacra Scriptura ipse Deus qui vere praeexistit omnibus, multipliciter laudatur secundum omnem rationem existentium. Dicitur enim de eo, quod erat et est et futurus est, per quod intelligitur quod factum est, idest praeteritum et quod fit, idest praesens et quod fiet, idest futurum. (Marietti)

Translated as:

Then when he says, and on account of this, from the eloquences, he infers a conclusion from the things said; and he says that, on account of this: that God is the principle of all things, in Sacred Scripture God himself who truly preexists all things is praised in many ways according to every ratio of existing things. For there is said of him what was and is and shall be, through which there is understood what has been made, that is, the past; and what is made, that is, the present; and what shall be made, that is, the future. (Hannon)

[17]

Lorenzo Valla

Lorenzo Valla has:

Iustus es domine qui es & qui eras Sanctus: quia haec iudicasti. graece est: ut superius admonui: erat non eras: quasi dicatur tu domine, is qui est & qui erat qui sanctus, neque enim graece sanctus refertur ad erat ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν ὁ ἅγιος.

Translated as (Google Translate):

You are just, Lord, who are you and who were holy, because you have judged these things. it is in Greek: as I reminded above: it was not you were: as if it were said, Lord, he who is and who was who is holy, for in Greek the holy is not referred to erat ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν ὁ ἅγιος.

Erasmus

ὁ ὢν, ὁ ἦν ὁ ἐρχόμενος at Revealtion 16:5 in Erasmus' 1535 Annotations

The five editions of Erasmus in the Annotations have the reading of ὁ ἐρχόμενος.

Qui es, & qui eras.) Quanquam interpres mutauit perfonam, tamen to tidem syllabis dictu est, quibus superius, qui est, qui erat, qui venturus est, ὁ ὢν, ὁ ἦν ὁ ἐρχόμενος.

Translated as:

Thou, who art, and who wast, the.) Although interpreter changed from, however to flow with the list mentioned above, who is, who was, who is to come, ὁ ὢν, ὁ ἦν ὁ ἐρχόμενος.

Erasmus' 1535 Annotations

In the dedication to Pope Leo X in his Novum Instrumentum omne, Erasmus said:

“I have added annotations of my own, in order in the first place to show the reader what changes I have made, and why; second, to disentangle and explain anything that may be complicated, ambiguous, or obscure.”

Erasmus included καὶ ὁ ὅσιος in his main text, but he clearly expressed doubt as to the authenticity of the reading in his annotations. The annotations are like a running commentary for the biblical text and reveal Erasmus’ aims and methods. Erasmus was always striving for a faithful text that was understandable and correct to the Greek. Annotations revealed so much more than the one-sided meaning in the text.

Early English Bibles

The earlier English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision did not have “and shalt be“ at this verse. Tyndale's New Testament, Coverdale’s Bible, Matthew's Bible, Great Bible, Whittingham's New Testament, and the Geneva Bible all have "holy" while the Bishops’ Bible has “holy one.”

Theodore Beza

Translations of Beza's Note

Jan Krans:

TurretinFan:

KJV Today Website:

Jeff Riddle:

Steven Boyce's Smithsonian friend:

Footnote at Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1598 New Testament of Beza

See Also Revelation 16:5 Beza 1598

Beza was the first to place the reading into the main part of the text in 1582. Theodorus Beza, Novum D. N. Iesu Christi testamentum, sive Novum Foedus (Geneva: Henricus Stephanus, 31582)

In Beza’s hand copy (b305); p. 647), ὁ ὅσιος is underlined, and ὁ ἐσόμενος entered in the margin.

Beza himself comments on this change in a marginal note of his Greek New Testament:

"Et Qui eris, και ο εσομενος": The usual publication is "και ο οσιος," which shows a division, contrary to the whole phrase which is foolish, distorting what is put forth in scripture. The Vulgate, however, whether it is articulately correct or not, is not proper in making the change to "οσιος, Sanctus," since a section (of the text) has worn away the part after "και," which would be absolutely necessary in connecting "δικαιος" and "οσιος." But with John there remains a completeness where the name of Jehovah (the Lord) is used, just as we have said before, 1:4; he always uses the three closely together, therefore it is certainly "και ο εσομενος," for why would he pass over it in this place? And so without doubting the genuine writing in this ancient manuscript, I faithfully restored in the good book what was certainly there, "ο εσομενος." So why not truthfully, with good reason, write "ο ερχομενος" as before in four other places, namely 1:4 and 8; likewise in 4:3 and 11:17, because the point is the just Christ shall come away from there and bring them into being: in this way he will in fact appear sitting in judgment and exercising his just and eternal decrees.

(Theodore Beza, Nouum Sive Nouum Foedus Iesu Christi, 1588. Translated into English from the Latin footnote.)^[1]

Although Daniel Wallace is flawed many levels concerning his understanding of textual criticism, he provides this excellent example that fits here:

“Imagine we came across an early manuscript copy of the Constitution of the United States, and the preamble said, “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect onion …” If we were to see that line, we would know that “union” was the original word, not “onion”.”

Theodore Beza was a world class expert in the Greek language. Having provided so much material on the bible, from translating the French bible, Geneva Bible, Geneva French, including many Greek editions, commentaries, dictionaries, and so much literature on the biblical text for so many years, I would suggest that Beza's familiarity with the text and with similar issues, demonstrated to him that this was an error and to reject his reading one should firstly show that they are on the same level of scholarship as Beza, or the KJV translators to provide an adequate refutation.

A break up of Beza's comment

Beza Annotations of 1594 at Revelation 16:5 in Latin which is identical to the footnote at Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1598 New Testament of Beza

Beza noted that :

"Et Qui eris, και ο εσομενος": The usual publication is "και ο οσιος,"

So Beza was well aware that the of majority of readings were "και ο οσιος," but he goes on to give several reasons as to why this reading caused grammatical problems. Although Beza is silent concerning sources, this does not mean that he was not influenced by any, such as the minority Latin textual variant, as there are two Latin commentaries with readings of Revelation 16:5 which agree with Beza in referring to the future aspect of God. He goes on:

which shows a division, contrary to the whole phrase which is foolish, distorting what is put forth in scripture.

Based on the style of the author, John, Beza saw that the correct reading was shalt be not Holy or Holy One John uses holy one only once in 1 John 2:20 and he used a different Greek word ἁγίου. With additional kai in Papyrus 47 it causes the sentence to be nonsensical without the change. The kai gives weight to Beza's correction.

Beza saw this erroneous pattern below:

.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:4

.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:8

.....ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 4:8

.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος·..Revelation 11:17

.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὅσιος...........Revelation 16:5

So he adapted his text to flow with the formula of John:

.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:4

.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:8

.....ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 4:8

.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος·..Revelation 11:17

.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος....Revelation 16:5

Beza claims that the reading caused a division between the words and that it made the reading "foolish, distorting what is put forth in scripture."

The foolish and divisional reading is demonstrated in English versions:

1395 [And the thridde aungel… seide,] Just art thou, Lord, that art, and that were hooli, that demest these thingis; (Wycliffe)
1526 And I herde an angell saye: lorde which arte and wast thou arte ryghteous and holy because thou hast geve soche iudgmentes (Tyndale)
1535 And I herde an angel saye: LORDE which art and wast, thou art righteous and holy, because thou hast geue soche iudgmentes, (Coverdale)
1557 And I heard the Angel of the waters say, Lord, thou art iust, Which art, and Which wast: and Holy, because thou hast iudged these things. (Geneva)
1568 And I hearde the angell of the waters say: Lorde, which art, and wast, thou art ryghteous & holy, because thou hast geuen such iudgementes: (Bishop’s)

So as we can see, early English versions were very perplexed as to how to translate και ο οσιος.

Beza replaces illogical language in all earlier Greek texts/manuscripts that read who art and who wast and the holy one (no verb); the holy one interrupts the continuity of reference to God's eternality, and omits a logical third verb. Beza’s rendering speaks of eternal God of the past, present & future, as expected of a true reading, and in accord with Rev.1:4, Rev.1:8, 1:18, 4:8, & 11:17. All 5 of the Revelation verses present the obvious expected future aspect of God's eternality.

The triadic declaration occurs five times in the Textus Receptus, all in Revelation as follows:

Revelation 1:4: ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος

Δʹ Ἰωάννης ταῖς ἑπτὰ ἐκκλησίαις ταῖς ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ τοῦ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἑπτὰ πνευμάτων ἃ ἐστιν ἐνώπιον τοῦ θρόνου αὐτοῦ

Revelation 1:8: ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος

Ηʹ Ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ Α καὶ τὸ Ω ἀρχὴ καὶ τέλος λέγει ὁ κύριος ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ὁ παντοκράτωρ

Revelation 4:8: ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος

Ηʹ καὶ τέσσαρα ζῷα ἓν καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸ εἴχον ἀνὰ πτέρυγας ἕξ κυκλόθεν καὶ ἔσωθεν γέμοντα ὀφθαλμῶν καὶ ἀνάπαυσιν οὐκ ἔχουσιν ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς λέγοντα, Ἅγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος

Revelation 11:17: ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος

λέγοντες Εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι κύριε ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, ὅτι εἴληφας τὴν δύναμίν σου τὴν μεγάλην καὶ ἐβασίλευσας

The phrase ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος is directly related to the eternal name of God.

Also noteworthy

Revelation 1:18: καὶ ὁ ζῶν καὶ ἐγενόμην νεκρὸς καὶ ἰδού, ζῶν εἰμι εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων

καὶ ὁ ζῶν καὶ ἐγενόμην νεκρὸς καὶ ἰδού, ζῶν εἰμι εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν· καὶ ἔχω τὰς κλεῖς τοῦ ᾅδου καὶ τοῦ θανάτου

This phrase ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος (one who is, was, and is to come) is used to create a unique identification, along with the other phrases of Alpha/Omega, first/last, beginning/end, each as identity names for the "oneness" of the Father and the Son who is the express image of God the Father (Heb 1:3). So God the Father through the Son is also ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, just as the Son is also Jehovah.

Rev 1:4 is a reference from John, 1:8 from Jesus, 4:8 the four living creatures, and 11:17 from the 24 elders of v.16).

I AM

Beza stated:

But with John there remains a completeness where the name of Jehovah (the Lord) is used, just as we have said before, 1:4; he always uses the three closely together, therefore it is certainly "και ο εσομενος," for why would he pass over it in this place?

The phrase in the Revelation is John's expansion of 'ehyeh asher 'ehyeh ('I am who I am') from Exodus 3:14. In Exodus 3 God identified Himself to Moses as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and gave Moses His name:

'ehyeh asher 'ehyeh (אהיה אשר אהיה)

This is usually translated as something like ' I AM THAT I AM' (KJV) literally 'I am who I am', though some arguments have been made for 'I will be who I will be'. Later writers would expand or adjust God's self-declaration when bringing it into another language.

The Aramaic Targum Pseudo-Jonathan of Exodus 3.14 translates it into a present-future state of being:

I am he who is and who will be

In Deuteronomy 32:29 of Targum Pseudo-Jonathan later has a present-past-future state of being:

I am he who is and who was, and I am who I will be [18]

This latter paraphrase is identical in shape to what we see in the Revelation.

Both the Septuagint and Philo (Life of Moses 1.75, written early-first century) translate the phrase in Exodus 3.14 into Greek as:

egō eimi ho ōn (ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν)

This may be translated as either 'I am the one', or 'I am he who is'. The phrasing 'ο ων' is identical to the first part of the phrase found in the Revelation.

With this information above, it's highly probable John's phrase common phrase 'ο ων και ο ην και ο ερχομενος/ἐσόμενος' was intended to be a translation or expansion on God's self-identification in Exodus 3.14 as Beza pointed out.

Between the original Hebrew phrase, and the Aramaic and Greek translations, the focus is on God's state of 'being': he is, he was, he will be. In the original narrative of Exodus 3, this leads into the revelation of God's own name, Jehovah, which has been suggested by scholars to come from the Hebrew verb 'to be'.

Most of the verses containing the triadic declarations in Revelation do not say God is, was, and will be, it says that God is, was, and is to come. The third verb isn't about God's state of being, but is an action in itself. Revelation 16:5 is the purest form of the formula.

Revelation 4.8 has an order of past-present-future. John puts the past tense first, because this occurrence's context is the creation of the world in verse 11.

He no doubt has in mind those many Old Testament prophetic passages which announce God will 'come' to save and judge (e.g. Ps. 96:13; 98:9; Isa. 40:10; 66:15; Zech. 14:5), and which early Christians understood to refer to his eschatological coming to fulfill his final purpose for the world, a coming they identified with the parousia of Jesus Christ.

The future-tense verb in John's earlier phrasing is the verb 'to come', not 'to be'. Revelation 16:5 is a declaration that God exists present, past, and future. The earlier future tense of 'is to come' is mostly eschatological.

Jesus referred to Himself as "the I AM", which has the connotation of being: He always was, and is and always will be" or 'always IS' (John 8:56-59 KJV; Exodus 3:6,11; John 10:30), which is similar in meaning to He that "was and is and will be" also the Alpha and Omega etc.

I AM

Exodus 3:14-15 I AM KJV 1611

אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה‎ • ('ehyé 'asher 'ehyé) m

An epithet of God, usually translated as "I Am That I Am" or "I Am Who I Am", literally meaning "I Will Be What I Will Be"

The Book of Exodus, chapter 3 verse 14; translation from JPS Tanakh 1917:

‏וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם׃‎‎

vayomer ’elohim ’el-mosheh, ’ehyeh ’asher ’ehyeh; vayomer, koh tomar livnei yisra’él, ’ehyeh shelachani ’aleikhem

God said to Moses, "i am that i am" and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, i am sent me to you."

The word ehyé (אֶהְיֶה the first-person singular future of הָיָה‎ hayá, 'to be') appears 3 times in this verse:

‏וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם׃

Victor P. Hamilton suggests "some legitimate translations ...: (1) 'I am who I am'; (2) 'I am who I was'; (3) 'I am who I shall be'; (4) 'I was who I am'; (5) 'I was who I was'; (6) 'I was who I shall be'; (7) 'I shall be who I am'; (8) 'I shall be who I was'; (9) 'I shall be who I shall be'."

Jehovah is thought to be an archaic third-person singular of the imperfective aspect of the verb "to be" (i.e., "[He] is/was/will be"). This agrees with the passage in Exodus where God names himself as "I Will Be What I Will Be" using the first-person singular imperfective aspect, open to interpretation as present tense ("I am what I am"), future ("I shall be what I shall be"), or imperfect ("I used to be what I used to be").

Yehovah [יְהוָֹה] meant “He will be, is, & was” & formed from Hebrew letters of verb which meant “Is” [היה]:

Ye [י] of Yihyeh [יִהְיֶה] “He will be”

Hov [הו] of Hoveh [הוֶה] “He is”

Ah [ָה] of Hayah [הָיָה] “He was”

Chiastic structure

The pattern is also a Chiastic structure:

A.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:4

B.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:8

C.....ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 4:8

B.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος·..Revelation 11:17

A.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος....Revelation 16:5

In English:

A.....which is, and which was, and which is to come Revelation 1:4

B.....which is, and which was, and which is to come Revelation 1:8

C.....which was, and is, and is to come Revelation 4:8

B.....which art, and wast, and art to come Revelation 11:17

A.....which art, and wast, and shalt be Revelation 16:5

Showing the tenses:

A.....present tense, past tense, future tense Revelation 1:4

B.....present tense, past tense, future tense Revelation 1:8

C.....past tense, present tense, future tense Revelation 4:8

B.....present tense, past tense, future tense Revelation 11:17

A.....present tense, past tense, future tense Revelation 16:5

Ancient Manuscript

"And so without doubting the genuine writing in this ancient manuscript, I faithfully restored in the good book what was certainly there"

The Triadic Declaration at Revelation 16.5 in the 1605 French Bible of Beza

David Pareus on Beza's notes at Revelation 16:5 ... Bezas who fhalt be ( as Beza hath brought to light out of an ancient manifcript ) . though it commonly be read , and holy as cohering with the foregoing...[7].

Spanish

The 1865 Spanish bible reads "shall be" whereas the 1569 and 1602 have el Santo, "holy":

1569 Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Señor, tú eres justo, que eres y que eras el Santo, porque has juzgado estas cosas; (Sagradas Escrituras)

1602 Y oí al Angel de las aguas, que dezía: Señor, tu eres justo, *que eres, y que eras, y Santo, porque haz juzgado estas cosas, (Valera)

1865 Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Tú eres justo, oh Señor, que eres, y que eras, y que serás, porque has juzgado así:

2013 Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, oh Señor, que eres y que eras, y serás, porque has juzgado así. (Reina–Valera Gomez)

John Calvin

Speaking in defense of the Hebrew etymology of Jehovah against a pagan one, Calvin also noted in his Commentary on Genesis:

Consequently, it is to be traced to “a Hebrew etymology.” We need not follow him into the discussion on the right pronunciation of the word, and the use of the vowel points belonging to , (Adonai); it may suffice to state, that he deduces the name (Jehovah,) from the future of the verb or , to be. Hence the meaning of the appellation may be expressed in the words, “He who is to be (for ever).” This derivation of the name Jehovah he regards as being confirmed “by all the passages of Scripture, in which a derivation of the name is either expressly given or simply hinted.” And, beginning with the Book of Revelation, at the title ὁ ὡν καὶ ὁ ἤν καὶ ὁ ερχόμενος, “who is, and was, and is to come,” he goes upward through the sacred volume, quoting the passages which bear upon the question, till he comes to the important passage in Exodus in. 13-16, in which God declares his name to be, “I am that I am.” “Everything created,” he adds, “remains not like itself, but is continually changing under circumstances, God only, because he is the being, is always the same; and because he is always the same, is the being.” Commentary on Genesis - At the first mention of Jehovah is Genesis 2

Elias Hutter

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1599 The Nuremberg Polyglot of Elias Hutter

Renown linguist Elias Hutter who produced the The Nuremberg Polyglot a New Testament Polyglot in twelve languages of 1599, has a similar reading to Beza in Revelation 16:5:

Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, δίκαιος, κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· (Novum Testamentum Domini: nostri: Iesu. Christi. Syriacè, Ebraicè, Graecè, Latinè, Germanicè, Bohemicè, Italicè, Hispanicè, Gallicè, Anglicè, Danicè, Polonicè. 2 vols. Edited by Elias Hutter and Jacob Coler.)

Hutter has “ἐρχόμενος while Beza has “ἐσόμενος. Hutter’s ἐρχόμενος translates as “is to come” (see Revelation 1:4) while ἐσόμενος means “shalt be”, or “will be”.

The reading ἐρχόμενος is found in the Greek text. Hutter’s Hebrew and the French (“qui seras” instead of “qui est à venir”) rather reflect Beza’s 1582 reading of ἐσόμενος & “shalt be”.

Immanuel Tremellius

Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1639 Biblia Sacra of Immanuel Tremellius

Immanuel Tremellius, who was an expert in Hebrew, Syriac and many other middle eastern languages, co authored books with Beza.

King James Translators

The Preface to the Authorized Version reads:

“With the former translations diligently compared and revised.”

This would have included the Ethiopic text of 1549 that contained the equivalent of esomenos.

The translators felt there was good reason to insert these words though it ran counter to certain external evidence. They left no marginal note, nor was the word in italics, showing the confidence they had in Beza's choice.

Johannes Piscator

In 1613 Johannes Piscator wrote:

Pro ὅσιος omnino legendum videtur ἐσόμενος, i. e. Futurus: si quis consideret rem ipsam, et descriptiones Dei similes supra cap. 1.v.4. et 8. item cap. 4.v.8. et cap. 11.v.17. ubi pro ἐσόμενος habetur ἐρχομένος. Cuius rei ratio probabilis affertur haec, quod illic sermo sit de Deo ut iudice venturo, hic autem ut de exsequente iudicia sua, idque in aeternum.

Johannes Piscator, Commentarii in omnes libros Novi Testamenti, antehac separatim editi: nunc vero in unum volumen collecti (Herborn: Corvinus, 11613)

5. Angelum aquarum ] Sive angelum illum tertium qui phialam suam effuderat in fontes aquarum : sive alium aliquem angelum cuftodia aquarum prafectum. llle Ens, & ille Erat, & ille Sanctus ] ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὅσιος. Pro, ὅσιος omnino legendum videtur ἐσόμενος, id est, Futurus: si quis consideret rem ipsam & descriptiones Dei similes suprà cap. 1. v. 4. & 8. item cap. 4. v. 8. & cap. 11 vers. 17. ubi pro ἐσόμενος habetur ἐρχόμενος. Cujus rei ratio probabilis affertur hac, quòd illic sermo sit de Deo ut judice venturo hic autem ut de exsequente judicia sua, idꝗ in aternum. Quòd hæc judicasti ] Quòd has plagas, sive hanc plagam (nempe tertiam) bominibus istis immisisti.

Angelum aquarum ] "The angel of the waters" – Either that third angel who poured out his vial upon the fountains of waters: or some other angel appointed as the guardian of the waters. Ille Ens, & ille Erat, & ille Sanctus ] ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὅσιος. For, ὅσιος it seems that ἐσόμενος should be read, that is, the Future: if one considers the matter itself and similar descriptions of God above in chapter 1, verse 4, & 8. Also chapter 4, verse 8, & chapter 11 verse 17. where for ἐσόμενος is read ἐρχόμενος. The probable reason for this is suggested here, because there the discourse is about God as the coming judge, but here as executing his judgments, and that forever. Quòd hæc judicasti ] "Because you have judged these things" – Because you have sent these plagues, or this plague (namely the third) upon these people. [19] [20]

David Pareus

Revelation 16:5 in the 1618 In Apocalypsin of David Pareus

David Pareus was a German theologian who wrote In Apocalypsin in 1618. On page cc. 820–821.

DOMINE, QUI ES] Aliquoties sprásic Deum verum, imó Christum descriptserat : nisi quod pro καὶ ἐρχόμενος (quod supra suit) hic dicit ὁ ἐσόμενος qui eris, ut quidem Beza ex vetusto codice ms. restituit : cum vulgo legatur, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ut cohæreant δίκαιος ὁ ὅσιος iustus & Sanctus, h. e. purus ab omni injustitia. Discamus igitur judicia Dei sancta adorare potius, quā sugillare ut inista, licet causas eorum satis non assequamur.

Translated as:

LORD, WHO IS] Several times he spoke of the true God, instead of describing Christ: except that instead of καὶ ἐρχόμενος (which follows above) he says here ὁ ἐσόμενος who are you, as indeed Beza from the old codex ms. restores it: when it is commonly read, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, so that δίκαιος ὁ ὅσιος just and holy may be consistent, h. e. pure from all unrighteousness. Let us learn, then, to adore the holy judgments of God, rather than seal them up as iniquity, even though we do not sufficiently understand their causes. (Google Translate)

Elzevirs

Elzevirs’ 1624 Greek

Elzevirs’ 1633 Greek

The 1624 edition of the Elzevirs’ Greek text has “ὅσιος” but after much scholarly consideration the latter 1633 Elzevir text changed to the Beza reading of “ἐσόμενος”, “shalt be”. Bullinger indicated that 1624 edition of the Elzevirs’ Greek text has “the holy one” at this verse (Lexicon, p. 689). Scrivener mentions that the 1633 Elzevir has the Beza reading of “esomenos”, “shalt be”

xvi. 5. ἐσόμενος (for ὅσιος), a bold variation of Beza’s last three editions, is adopted in the Authorized Version and the Elzevir text of 1633. [21]

Dutch Statenvertaling

Revelation 16:5 in Dutch in the 1637 Statenvertaling bible

The Dutch version of 1637 is renown to be the equivalent of the King James Version. The 1611 King James Version and the 1637 Dutch Statenvertaling were the two premier bible translations in Europe. Both translated ἐσόμενος without any marginal notes, which means that the scholars were unanimous and absolutely certain about the reading of ἐσόμενος. It has the reading of Beza here:

En ik hoorde den engel der wateren zeggen: Gij zijt rechtvaardig, Heere! Die is, en Die was, en Die zijn zal, dat Gij dit geoordeeld hebt;

Translated to read:

And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord! Who is and who was and who will be, because thou hast judged;

Exodus 3.14 in the Dutch bible

Exodus 3:14-15 in Dutch in the 1637 Statenvertaling bible

14Ende Godt seyde tot Mose, 18ICK SAL ZIIN DIE ICK ZIIN SAL: Oock seyde hy, Alsoo sult ghy tot de kinderen Israëls seggen, ICK SAL ZIIN heeft my tot u lieden gesonden.

15Doe seyde Godt voorder tot Mose, Aldus sult ghy tot de kinderen Israëls seggen, 19De HEERE uwer vaderen Godt, de Godt Abrahams, de Godt Isaacs, ende de Godt Iacobs, heeft my tot u lieden gesonden: dat is mijn name eeuwichlick, ende 20dat is mijn gedachtenisse 21van geslachte tot geslachte.

[v14] 18And. ick ben die ick ben, ofte, Ick sal zijn die ick was, komende in den gront over een met den naem Iehova. Dit beteeckent, dat Godt, die Mose sondt, eeuwich is in wesen, getrouw in sijne beloften, ende almogende in der selver uytvoeringe. Verg. Apocal. 1.4, 8. ende 16.15. Hebr. 13.8.

[v15] 19Siet Gen. 2. op vers 4.

20Als of Godt seyde, By desen name salmen mijner altijt gedachtich wesen. siet Psal. 135. Hos. 12.5.13. ende 107.13. And. Dit is mijn gedenck-teecken tot aller tijt.

21Hebr. tot geslachte des geslachtes.

Brian Walton

Brian Walton (1600 – 1661) was an English priest, divine and scholar. He published a massive polyglot between 1654 and 1657 in nine languages: Hebrew, Chaldee, Samaritan, Syriac, Arabic, Persian, Ethiopic, Greek and Latin. Among his collaborators were James Ussher, John Lightfoot and Edward Pococke, Edmund Castell, Abraham Wheelocke and Patrick Young, Thomas Hyde and Thomas Greaves. It has been considered as the last and most scholarly ever printed.

In Revelation 16:5 his Ethiopian (Known today as Ahmaric, and formerly as Ge'ez) version has a Latin translation with the words:

Erasmus Schmidius

In 1658 Erasmus Schmidius wrote:

Verba haec, [καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος] hisce signis ( ) inclusa, non leguntur in omnibus Codicibus. Restituta autem sunt a Beza, ex vetusto bonae fidei manuscripto. Videturque haec restitutio necessaria, quandoquidem Iohannes reliquis omnibus locis, ubi Iehovae nomen periphrastice circumscribit, addere consuevit tertium, ὁ ἐρχόμενος: neque apparet causa, cur hic praetereundum fuisset. Causa vero, cur hic non scribatur, ὁ ἐρχόμενος, ut supra quater factum, nempe Apoc. 1.4.8, 4.8, 11.17, Sed ἐσόμενος: Bezae haec videtur. Quia ibi de Christo ut Iudice venturo agitur: In hac vero visione proponitur, ut iam in tribunali sedens, et iudicium exercens.

Translated as (Google Translate):

These words, [καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος] enclosed in these signs ( ), are not read in all the Codes. But they were restored by Beza, from an ancient manuscript of good faith. And it seems that this restoration is necessary, since John used to add a third, ὁ ἐρχόμενος, to all the other places where he circumscribes Jehovah's name periphrastically: there is no reason why it should have been omitted here. But the reason why it is not written here, ὁ ἐρχόμενος, as was done four times above, namely Apoc. 1.4.8, 4.8, 11.17, But ἐσόμενος: This seems to Bezae. Because there Christ is spoken of as the coming Judge: in this true vision he is presented as already sitting on the tribunal, and exercising judgment.

Erasmus Schmidius, Versio Novi Testamenti nova, ad Graecam veritatem emendata, et notae ac animadversiones in idem: quibus partim mutatae alicubi Versionis redditur ratio, partim alia necessaria monentur. Accedit sacer contextus Graecus, cum Versione veteri: nec non Index Rerum et Verborum locupletissimus (Nuremberg: Michael Endter, 1658)

Wilhelm's A Brakel

17th century Dutch reformed theologian Wilhelm's A Brakel's "The Christian's Reasonable Service" volume 1 pg.84 has the following:

In Revelation 1:4 and 16:5 the apostle John translates the name Jehovah as follows: 'Him which is, and which was, and which is to come.' This one word has reference primarily to being or essence, while having the chronological connotation of past, present, and future." [22]

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible

The 1685 Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible has:

Thou art righteous. O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus; acknowledging the Lord’s justice and righteousness in such destruction.

Isaac Newton

Isaac Newton in 1693 wrote that Erasmus has ἐρχόμενος in his notes:

ib καὶ ὁ ἦν, ὁ ὅσιος Compl. Areth. Steph 15. \Covil 2/ Lat. In \Covil 1. 2, deest ὁ ante ὅσιος, in/ Alex deest ὁ ἦν.

καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος Erasm. \Syr. Primas/ At in Notis Erasmus pro ὅσιος legit ἐρχόμενος

καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος Bezæ codex antiquus.

καὶ ὃς ἦν ὄσις Covil 1.

The underlined translates as:

"At the Notes Erasmus for ὅσιος read ἐρχόμενος"

'Variantes Lectiones Apocalypticae' (version 1)

Johann Jakob Wettstein

Revelation 16:5 in Wettstein's Novi Testamenti Graeci

In 1730 Johann Jakob Wettstein seems to think the reading goes back to Johannes Piscator, not Theodore Beza, which is false:

Johann Jakob Wettstein, Prolegomena ad Novi Testamenti Graeci editionem accuratissimam, e vetustissimis codd. MSS. denuo procurandam; in quibus agitur de codd. MSS. N. Testamenti, Scriptoribus Graecis qui N. Testamento usi sunt, versionibus veteribus, editionibus prioribus, et claris interpretibus; et proponuntur animadversiones et cautiones ad examen variarum lectionum N. T. necessariae (Amsterdam: Wettstein & Smith, 1730)

Johann Albrecht Bengel

A critical note about Revelation 16:5 by Johann Albrecht Bengel in his Novum testamentum of 1734

In 1734 Johann Albrecht Bengel rejected Beza’s reading in his Η Καινη Διαθηκη

Johann Albrecht Bengel Η Καινη Διαθηκη. Novum Testamentum Graecum ita adornatum ut textus probatarum editionum medullam margo variantium lectionum in suas classes distributarum locorumque parallelorum delectum apparatus subiunctus criseos sacrae Millianae praesertim compendium, limam, supplementum ac fructum exhibeat inserviente Jo. Alberto Bengelio (Tübingen: Cotta, 1734)

ὁ ὅσιος] sanctus (pro pius) Lat. Ex allit. ad sanguinem sanctorum. ὁ ἅγιος Valla, at, ;;& qui es pius, habet Primafius. καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος Beza: ex vetusto, ut ait, bona fidei ms. codice. nec tamen nihil dedisse conjecturæ videtur. cur enim in nullo alio Apocalypseos loco illum codicem annotationes Bezæ memorant? aut cur Rob. Stephani margo nil hoc loco variat? Bezam tamen sequitur H. Stephanus, Pareus, Piscator, Amama: ac plenius. adhibita parenthesi, (καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος,) καὶ ὅσιος E. Schmidii textus habet. Sed Bezam reprehendit Marckius ad h. 1. & gravius Zeltnerus in Diss. de Evangelio Tetragrammato p. 29. καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, Eliæ Hutteri substituit editio: eandemque lectionem Revius & Marckius adscribunt Erasmo, annotatione ejus, quæ illud ὁ ἐρχόμενος ut superius dictum citat, non satis inspecta.

Translated as (Google Translate):

ὁ ὅσιος] holy (for pious) Lat. From allit to the blood of the saints ὁ ἅγιος Valla, but, ;;& who art pious, says Primatius. καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος Beza: from the old, as he says, good faith ms. code and yet he seems to have given no conjecture. for why in no other place in the Apocalypse do the annotations of Beza mention that codex? or why Rob. Stephen Margo nothing changes at this point? Beza, however, is followed by H. Stephanus, Pareus, Piscator, Amama: and more fully. parentheses are used, (καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος,) καὶ ὅσιος, the text of E. Schmidius has. But Marcius criticizes Beza at h. 1. and more seriously Zeltnerus in Diss. on the Gospel Tetragrammaton p. 29. καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, Eliæ Hutter's edition replaces it: and Revius and Marcius ascribe the same reading to Erasmus, with his annotation, which quotes that ὁ ἐρχόμενος, as stated above, not sufficiently inspected.

Bengel also had:

Rev 16:5. [178] Ὁ ὢ καὶ ὁ ἦν, which art and which wast) See on ch. Rev 11:17, and comp. D. Lang. Comm. Apoc. f. 188.-ὁ ὅσιος) Others put καὶ before ὁ, or for ὁ, or omit καὶ ὁ.[179] Sound exegesis often distinguishes the pearls of a genuine reading from the filth of various readings: and Wolf excellently compares with this the passage, ch. Rev 1:8, ΚΎΡΙΟς Ὁ ΘΕῸς, Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἮΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἘΡΧΌΜΕΝΟς, Ὁ ΠΑΝΤΟΚΡΆΤΩΡ. It will also be profitable to have brought forward another, ch. Rev 4:8 : ἍΓΙΟς, ἍΓΙΟς, ἍΓΙΟς, ΚΎΡΙΟς Ὁ ΘΕῸς Ὁ ΠΑΝΤΟΚΡΆΤΩΡ, Ὁ ἮΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἘΡΧΌΜΕΝΟς. There is a very great resemblance between those two passages and this passage, which is thus: ΔΊΚΑΙΟς ΕἾ, Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἮΝ, Ὁ ὍΣΙΟς. The subject there is, ΚΎΡΙΟς Ὁ ΘΕῸς Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἮΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἘΡΧΌΜΕΝΟς· here, in the vocative case, Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἮΝ. The epithet belonging to the subject is there, Ὁ ΠΑΝΤΟΚΡΆΤΩΡ· here, in the same case, Ὁ ὍΣΙΟς· in both places without the particle ΚΑῚ. The predicate there, ch. Rev 4:8, is ἍΓΙΟς· here ΔΊΚΑΙΟς. For the sentence is not to be thus construed, ΔΊΚΑΙΟς ΚΑῚ ὍΣΙΟς since there are many intervening words in the text. At the commencement and at the close of the Apocalypse the Lord is called Ὁ ΠΑΝΤΟΚΡΆΤΩΡ, the Almighty; here, where judgments show themselves, He is called ὁ ὅσιος, the Holy. First of all He is praised on account of His Might, lest in the time of His patience He should appear to have no strength, whereas in the end He is about to display enough of Might; afterwards He is praised for His Grace, when retribution commences. Might and Grace are alike assigned to the Lord in Psa 62:11-12. The epithet ὅσιος answers to the Hebrew חסיד, and signifies gracious, in an active or a passive sense. God exhibits His own grace in all His works, and He receives gratitude [the attribution of grace] from all saints. [178] τοῦ θηρίου, of the beast) Therefore the vial of the first angel will be the first mark [“character,” characterism] of the beast.-V. g. [179] Engl. Vers, has “which art, and wast, and shalt be” (omitting ὅσιος, and substituting καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος or ἐρχόμενος). ABC Vulg. support ὅσιος. h has et qui es pius. Rec. Text has καὶ ὁ ὅσιος.-E.[23]

Johann Christoph Wolf

In 1735 Johann Christoph Wolf traced the reading to Beza, but doubts Beza’s reference claims.

Johann Christoph Wolf, Curae philologicae et criticae in SS. Apostolorum Jacobi Petri Judae et Joannis epistolas huiusque Apocal. Accedunt in calce quaedam ex Photii Amphilochiis adhuc non editis cum interpretatione Latina et notis (Hamburg: Kisner, 11735)

Lodewijk Caspar Valckenaer & Gerhard Fleischer

A critical note about Revelation 16:5 by Lodewijk Caspar Valckenaer & Gerhard Fleischer in 1808

In 1808 the book Ludovici Caspari Valckenaerii Opuscula philologica, critica, oratoria, nunc primum coniunctim edita. Accedunt indices. Tomus 1.-2., Volume 1 had:

Apocal. c. XVI, 5, in istis,

ὁ ὢν, καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος·

legendum, και ά ἐσόμενος, pro ὅσιος, suspicati

sunt Piscator et Beza: vera suspicio visa fuit Bel-

gis Interpretibus; dederunt enim:

die is, ende die was, ende die zyn sal.

Suam, up puto, coniecturam expresserunt

eiusdem

Pieper & Van Seldam

A critical note about Revelation 16:5 by Pieper & Van Seldam in 1833

In the 1833 book Commentationes Latinae Tertiae Classis Instituti Regii Belgici by Pieper & Van Seldam, 1833 it has:

John Gill

John Gill's 1776 Exposition of the Bible says;

The Alexandrian copy, and most others, and the Vulgate Latin and Syriac versions, read "holy", instead of "shalt be"; for the purity and holiness of Christ will be seen in the judgments which he will exercise, as follows:

because thou hast judged thus; or "these things"; or "them", as the Ethiopic version reads; that is, has brought these judgments upon the men signified by rivers and fountains, and made great havoc and slaughter of them, expressed by their becoming blood; the justice of which appears from the following reason. (p. 183)

John Gill says concerning Revelation 1:4:

But rather this is to be understood of the first Person, of God the Father; and the phrases are expressive both of his eternity, he being God from everlasting to everlasting; and of his immutability, he being now what he always was, and will be what he now is, and ever was, without any variableness, or shadow of turning: they are a periphrasis, and an explanation of the word "Jehovah", which includes all tenses, past, present, and to come.

Reginald Heber

Reginald Heber (1783-1826) wrote a famous hymn inspired by Revelation 16:5 in the KJV.

"Which wert and art, and evermore shalt be!"

John Wordsworth

Dr. John Wordsworth (who edited and footnoted a three volume critical edition of the New Testament in Latin) pointed out that the like phrase in Revelation 1:4 "which is, and which was, and which is to come;" sometimes is rendered in Latin as "qui est et qui fuisti et futurus es" instead of the Vulgate "qui est et qui erat et qui uenturus est." (John Wordsworth, Nouum Testamentum Latine, vol.3, 422 and 424.)

Wordsworth also points out that in Revelation 16:5, Beatus of Liebana (who compiled a commentary on the book of Revelation) uses the Latin phrase "qui fuisti et futures es." This gives some additional evidence for the Greek reading by Beza (although he apparently drew his conclusion for other reasons). Beatus compiled his commentary in 786 AD. Furthermore, Beatus was not writing his own commentary. Instead he was making a compilation and thus preserving the work of Tyconius, who wrote his commentary on Revelation around 380 AD (Aland and Aland, 211 and 216. Altaner, 437. Wordsword, 533.). So, it would seem that as early as 786, and possibly even as early as 380, their was an Old Latin text which read as Beza's Greek text does.^[24]

Edward King

1800 footnote by Edward King

in Morsels of Criticism: Tending to Illustrate Some Few Passages in the Holy Scriptures, Upon Philosophical Principles and an Enlarged View of Things by Edward King, he has in a footnote:

The Alexandrian Manuscript has οσιος: and therefore I have thus translated this verse. But Theodore Beza says he found ὁ ἐσόμενος, instead of ὁ ὅσιος, in an ancient manuscript of good authority; and therefore prefers the translating it more consistently with three other passages in the Book of Revelations, Who wast, and who art, and who art to come [for shall be]. The other passages are, ch. i. ver. 4.; ch. iv. ver. 8.; and ch. xi. ver. 17. And a consistency with them in this place does indeed render the expression more sublime. But either way the general description and intimation in the prophecy is the fame. [25]

Noah Webster

The 1833 Webster version has:

And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, who art, and wast, and wilt be, because thou hast judged thus. (Websters)

Jodocus Heringa

Heringa is opposed to the reading, but points out, against Valckenaer (s31330), Beza’s reference to a manuscript. For Kluit see s31925. Heringa, Disputatio de Valckenaerii sententia (1835), 17:

c. XVI. 5. Καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος. Ende Die zijn sal. Complutenses, erasmus et stephanus, ediderant, quod omnes agnoscunt versiones, et codices Gr. fere omnes: καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, estque ea lectio, ab elzeviriis recepta, huic loco valde apta. Recte igitur eam, in I. et II. editione, secutus fuerat beza: sed in III. IV. et V. eius in locum substituit lectionem a piscatore et belgis praelatam, hac addita annotatione: Legitur vulgo καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ostendente articulo, praeter omnem loquendi morem, depravatam esse scripturam. Vulgata vero, sive articulum legit, seu non legit, nihilo rectius vertit ὅσιος, sanctus, male extrita particula καί, prorsus necessaria, ut δίκαιος et ὅσιος connectantur. Sed quum Johannes reliquis omnibus locis, ubi Jehovae nomen explicat, sicuti diximus supra, I. 4. addere consueverit tertium, nempe καὶ Ὁ ἐρχόμενος, cur istud h. l. praeteriisset? Itaque ambigere non possum, quin germana sit scriptura, quam ex vetusto bonae fidei manus. codice restitui, nempe Ὁ ἐσόμενος.

Haec beza, quibus vero hodie nemini persuadebitur. Nec persuasum fuit rolando, qui Graece scripsit: καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, Belg. en die heylige. Eamque germanam lectionem, in veteri quoque belg. versione expressam, in notis cominemorant belgae, Intelligitur autem e bezae annotatione, alteram lectionem, unius codicis auctoritate , non autem, ut valckenaerio visum fuit, (p. 334.) nuda coniectura, assumtam esse a nostratibus. Cf. kluit, p. 703.

Google Translate:

c. 16 5. Καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος. Ende Die zijn sal The Complutenses, Erasmus and Stephen, had published what they all recognize as versions and codices of Gr. almost all: καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, and that reading, accepted by the Elzevirians, is very suitable for this passage. Correct it, therefore, in I. and II. edition, had been followed by Beza: but in III. IV. and his V. substitutes in its place the reading preferred by the fisherman and the Belgians, with this additional annotation: It is commonly read καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, showing that the article, apart from all manner of speaking, is a corrupted writing. But the Vulgate, whether it reads the article or not, renders it no more correctly ὅσιος, holy, the particle καί being badly extracted, absolutely necessary to connect δίκαιος and ὅσιος. But when John, in all the other places where he explains the name of Jehovah, as we said above, 1.4, is wont to add a third, namely καὶ Ὁ ἐρχόμενος, why this h. l. had passed? Therefore I cannot be sure that the writing is authentic, but from an ancient hand of good faith. the code was restored, namely Ὁ ἐσόμενος.

These bezas, of which no one will be persuaded today. Nor was he persuaded by the roll, who wrote in Greek: καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, Belg. en die heylige And the same genuine reading, also in the old Belg. The Belgians commemorated the version expressed in the notes, but it is understood from the Beza annotation that the second reading, on the authority of a single codex, was not, as Valckenaerius thought, (p. 334.) a bare conjecture, assumed by our people. Cf. kluit, p. 703.

Syriac

1849 Syriac

The apostolical acts & epistles: from the Peschito, or ancient Syriac. To which are added, the remaining epistles, & the Book of Revelation, after a later Syrian text - Longman, Brown, Green, & Longmans, 1849 - 508 pages

In the 1728 in the Commentaria In Apocalypsim B. Joannis Apostoli: In quo multa tractantur de Sacrosancta Eucharistia, de Beatissima Virgine Maria, ... Volume 2 of Commentaria In Apocalypsim B. Joannis Apostoli: In quo multa tractantur de Sacrosancta Eucharistia, de Beatissima Virgine Maria, João ¬da Sylveira

1728 Syriac

Syriacus. Justus es ille, qui est, & qui erat, & prius, vel indulgens, quia judicasti.

qui est, & qui erat, & prius,

translates as

who is, and who was, and first,

William Francis Wilkinson, William Webster

in the 1861 The Greek Testament: The Epistles and the Apocalypse of William Francis Wilkinson and William Webster, it says:

δίκαιος] Just art thou, the being that wast, and art, and the Holy One, seeing thou executest these judgments. A. V. has 'and shalt be;' reading ὁ ἐσόμενος from Beza on insufficient authority. ἔδωκας] thou gavest; but Alex. has δέδωκας, thou hast given. αἷμα πιείν] i.e. they should destroy one another in wars and massacres.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible

The 1870 Albert Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible says:

Which art, and wast, and shalt be - That is, who art eternal - existing now; who hast existed in all past time; and who will exist ever onward. See the notes on Revelation 1:8. The reason why this attribute of God is here referred to, seems to be that the mind of the angel adverts to it in the changes and desolations that were occurring around him. In such overturnings among people - such revolutions of kingdoms - such desolations of war - the mind naturally turns to one who is unchanging; to one whose throne is from everlasting to everlasting.

Willem Christiaan van Manen

In 1880 Willem Christiaan van Manen followed the error of Wettstein by attributing the reading to Piscator.

Willem Christiaan van Manen, Conjecturaal-kritiek toegepast op den tekst van de Schriften des Nieuwen Testaments (VRNGG n.s. 9.1; Haarlem: Bohn, 1880)

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

The 1871 Unabridged Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible says:

And shalt be. 'Aleph (') A B C, Vulgate, Andreas, for this clause, read, '(which art and wast) holy' [ hosios (Greek #3741) for ho (Greek #3588) esomenos]. The Lord is no longer He that shall be, for He is come in vengeance; therefore the third of the three clauses, Revelation 1:4; Revelation 1:8; Revelation 4:8, is here, and in Revelation 11:17, omitted.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges

The 1896 Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges says:

ὁ ὤν καὶ ὁ ἦν. Without ὁ ἐρχόμενος, as in Revelation 11:17. A. V[571] “Which art and wast and shalt be,” a noteworthy translator’s error.

ὁ ὄσιος, see on Revelation 15:4. If the article be inserted we have two Divine Names, the Eternal, the Holy; if it be omitted we have an interesting parallelism:

Righteous art Thou the Eternal,

Holy for this Thy judgement.

Perhaps the latter gives the preferable sense: it is certainly supported by the best MSS., though we have none good enough to decide whether a letter has been left out or doubled by mistake.

The Expositor's Greek Testament

The Expositor's Greek Testament of 1897 has:

Revelation 16:5. ὅσιος and δίκαιος are used together of God in hieratic inscriptions of dedication throughout Asia Minor, possibly under Jewish influence. δίκαιος, often a title of messiah (see on Revelation 3:1 and Beer’s note on En. xxxviii. 2), is reserved here for God. Retribution is the outcome of God’s intense holiness or majesty (cf. Revelation 6:10, Revelation 15:4) asserting itself on behalf of his people (Revelation 15:3, Revelation 19:2, cf. Revelation 3:7) and in self-vindication.

Scrivener

In his 1873 Cambridge Paragraph Bible, Scrivener mentions that the 1633 Elzevir has the Beza reading of “esomenos”, “shalt be”

xvi. 5. ἐσόμενος (for ὅσιος), a bold variation of Beza’s last three editions, is adopted in the Authorized Version and the Elzevir text of 1633. [26]

Although Scrivener was not a staunch KJV or TR defender, he shows respect for Beza's textual choice by his statement that it is a “bold variation” in a sense where Scrivener looked at the whole Beza quote, including the analyis of the Johannine usage throughout the book and the difficulties of the usual variations, and thought Beza's reasoning was excellent. Although Scrivener would not go so far as to comment as to which he directly preferred, the fact that he never modified the text here in Greek or English or in any of his own works as he did in other cases e.g. on Hebrews 10:23 or “strain out a gnat” shows respect for the reading.

Franz Ludwig Tscharner and Samuel Leemann

Dissertatio philologico-theologica de lectione: audi Israel [27]

3801

In Strong's concordance and most others that use the numbering system, 3801 is the number for "ὁ ὢν καί ὁ ἦν καί ὁ ἐρχόμενος"

3801

Strong's has:

A phrase combining G3588 with the present participle and imperfect of G1510 and the present participle of G2064 by means of G2532; the one being and the one that was and the one coming, that is, the Eternal, as a divine epithet of Christ. (Each "and" (G2532) was ommited from the phrase because of limited space.):—which art (is, was), and (which) wast (is, was), and art (is) to come (shalt be).

Strong's (Greek Dictionary of the New Testament)

Greek Word Study has:

3801 ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ho on kai ho en kai ho erchomenos

{ho own kahee ho ane kahee ho er-khom'-en-os}

a phrase combining G3588 with the present participle and imperfect of G1510 and the present participle of G2064 by means of G2532; TDNT - n/a; phrase

Greek Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar)

Thayer has:

1) He who is, and was, and is coming

Thayer's (New Testament Greek-English Lexicon)

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

The 1878 Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible says:

O Lord — omitted by A, B, C, Vulgate, Syriac, Coptic, and Andreas.

and shalt be — A, B, C, Vulgate, and Andreas for this clause read, “(which art and wast) holy.” The Lord is now no longer He that shall come, for He is come in vengeance and therefore the third of the three clauses found in Revelation 1:4, Revelation 1:8; Revelation 4:8 is here and in Revelation 11:17 omitted.

Young's Literal Translation

The Young's Literal Translation retains "shalt be" with:

and I heard the messenger of the waters, saying, `righteous, O Lord, art Thou, who art, and who wast, and who shalt be, because these things Thou didst judge,

Hermann C. Hoskier

Revelation 16.5 Hermann C. Hoskier Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse

Revelation 16.5 Hermann C. Hoskier Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse (cont')

Hermann C. Hoskier, in his Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse, examined 200 Greek mss. At Revelation 16:5 he found the "et eris" reading in Beatus of Liebana, and the "et futurus es" reading in the 1548/49 Ethiopic Bible.

Hoskier

Hoskier mentions the Ethiopic reading

In addition to the early commentaries on the book of Revelation in Latin, the reading found in Revelation 16:5 "and shalt be" is also that of the early Ethiopian Version. The early 20th century textual critic Herman Hoskier cited the Ethiopic version as containing the phrase "and shalt be" in Revelation 16:5. This information is found in Hoskier's 'Concerning the Text of the Apocalypse: Collation of All Existing Available Greek Documents with the Standard Text of Stephen's Third Edition Together with the Testimony of the Versions, Commentaries and Fathers', 2 volumes, London: Bernard Quaritch, 1929.

Ethiopic version as cited by Herman Hoskier in Latin:

"...Justus es, Domine, et Rectus qui fuisti et eris".

Translation of Ethiopic from Latin =

"Just thou art, and Righteous that was and will be".:

King James Version

"Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be...":

Justus es, - thou art righteous

Domine, - O Lord

et - and

Rectus qui - ruler of all that

fuisti - thou hast been

et - and

eris - thou shalt be

Edward F. Hills

According to Edward F. Hills, this KJV rendering “shalt be” came from a conjectural emendation interjected into the Greek text by Beza (Believing Bible Study, pp. 205-206). Hills acknowledged that Theodore Beza introduced two conjectural emendations in his edition of the Textus Receptus with two of them kept in the KJV, one of them at Revelation 16:5 shalt be instead of holy. (KJV Defended, p. 208).

Like Calvin, Beza introduced a few conjectural emendations into his New Testament text. In the providence of God, however, only two of these were perpetuated in the King James Version, namely, Romans 7:6 that being dead wherein instead of being dead to that wherein, and Revelation 16:5 shalt be instead of holy. In the development of the Textus Receptus the influence of the common faith kept conjectural emendation down to a minimum. ^[3]

Edward Hills identified the KJV reading at Revelation 16:5 as “certainly erroneous” and as a “conjectural emendation by Beza” (Believing Bible Study, p. 83).

Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament

Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament:

Which art and which wast (ο ων και ο ην — ho ōn kai ho ēn). See this peculiar idiom for God‘s eternity with ο — ho as relative before ην — ēn in Revelation 1:4, Revelation 1:8; Revelation 4:8, but without ο ερχομενος — ho erchomenos (the coming on, the one who is to be) there for the future as in Revelation 11:17.

Thou Holy One (ο οσιος — ho hosios). Nominative form, but vocative case, as often. Note both δικαιος — dikaios and οσιος — hosios applied to God as in Revelation 3:1; Revelation 15:3.

New King James Version

The New King James Version (NKJV) at Revelation 16:5 has:

5 And I heard the angel of the waters saying:

“You are righteous, O Lord,^a

The One who is and who was and who is to be,^b

Because You have judged these things.

Footnotes:

^aNU-Text and M-Text omit O Lord.

NU-Text and M-Text read who was, the Holy One.

The NKJV followed modern versions with the Holy One, but omitted "holy". This addition can be seen when we compare it with the KJV below:

And I heard the angel of the waters saying: You are righteous, O Lord, the One who is and who was and who is to be, because You have judged these things. (NKJV)
And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, (omit) which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus. (KJV)

When we examine modern readings both pre and post NKJV, we can see the similar pattern of the Holy One being in front of the Triadic Declaration:

..."You are just in these judgments, O Holy One, you who are and who were;... (New International Version)
...“You are just, O Holy One, who is and who always was,... (New Living Translation)
...“Just are you, O Holy One, who is and who was,... (English Standard Version)
...You are just, the Holy One, who is and who was,... (Christian Standard Bible)
...“Righteous are You, O Holy One, who is and who was,... (Berean Study Bible)

Whereas many others have it afterwards:

..."Righteous are You the One being, and having been, O holy One,... (Berean Literal Bible)
..."Righteous art Thou, who art and wast, the holy One,... (Weymouth New Testament)
..."Righteous are You, who are and who were, O Holy One,... (New American Standard Bible)

This is clearly seen in the comparison between the ESV and CSB, with the NKJV:

...O Holy One, who is and who was... (ESV)
...the Holy One, who is and who was... (CSB)
...the (Omit) One who is and who was... (NKJV)

D. A. Waite

D. A. Waite says that modern English versions are theologically deficient at Revelation 16:5 for the removal of "and shalt be" (Defending the KJB, p. 170). Waite wrote:

“The removal of ‘and shalt be’ puts in doubt the eternal future of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is certainly a matter of doctrine and theology” (p. 170).

Jack Moorman

Jack Moorman, in his, Hodges/Farstad “Majority” Text Refuted By Evidence (also titled, When the King James Departs from the “Majority Text”), says,

The King James reading is in harmony with the four other places in Revelation where this phrase is found.

1:4 “him which is, and which was, and which is to come”

1:8 “the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty”

4:8 “Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come”

11:17 “Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come”

"The KJV reading is in harmony with the four other places in Revelation where this phrase is found…. Indeed Christ is the Holy One, but in the Scriptures of the Apostle John the title is found only once (1 John. 2:20), and there, a totally different Greek word is used. The Preface to the Authorised Version reads: “with the former translations diligently compared and revised”. The translators must have felt there was good reason to insert these words though it ran counter to much external evidence. They obviously did not believe the charge made today that Beza inserted it on the basis of conjectural emendation. They knew that they were translating the Word of God, and so do we. The logic of faith should lead us to see God’s guiding providence in a passage such as this." —

Jack Moorman in When the KJV Departs from the So-Called Majority Text (Bible for Today: 1988), pg. 102.

[28]

William W. Combs

William W. Combs maintained in 1999:

“The words ‘shalt be,’ should actually read ‘holy one’—‘Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, the holy one.…’ This error came into the kjv because, as we noted earlier, the translators mainly used Beza’s Greek NT (1598). Beza simply speculated (guessed), without any evidence whatsoever, that the correct reading was ‘shall be’ (ἐσόμενος) instead of ‘holy one’ (ὅσιος). All previous editions of the TR (i.e., Erasmus, Stephanus) and all previous English Bibles (i.e., Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew’s Bible, Great Bible, Geneva Bible, Bishops’ Bible) read ‘holy one’ (ὅσιος). There is no manuscript evidence whatsoever for the kjv’s ‘shalt be.’ It is an indisputable error.” (Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal, Fall, 1999, p. 156).

Thomas Holland

"Two things should be stated before continuing. One, as confirmed by Jerome, there were a number of various Latin editions of the New Testament which differed in both translation and content before and around 405 AD (when Jerome finished his Vulgate). Most of these we do not have. Two, as pointed out by Dr. John Wordsworth (who edited and footnoted a three volume critical edition of the New Testament in Latin) the like phrase in Revelation 1:4 "which is, and which was, and which is to come;" sometimes is rendered in Latin as "qui est et qui fuisti et futurus es" instead of the Vulgate "qui est et qui erat et qui uenturus est." (John Wordsworth, Nouum Testamentum Latine, vol.3, 422 and 424.)"

"Wordsworth also points out that in Revelation 16:5, Beatus of Liebana (who compiled a commentary on the book of Revelation) uses the Latin phrase "qui fuisti et futures es." This gives some additional evidence for the Greek reading by Beza (although he apparently drew his conclusion for other reasons). Beatus compiled his commentary in 786 AD. Furthermore, Beatus was not writing his own commentary. Instead he was making a compilation and thus preserving the work of Tyconius, who wrote his commentary on Revelation around 380 AD (Aland and Aland, 211 and 216. Altaner, 437. Wordsword, 533.). So, it would seem that as early as 786, and possibly even as early as 380, their was an Old Latin text which read as Beza's Greek text does."

"It should be noted that none of the early English versions, nor the foreign translations, read as does the Authorized Version. However, they do not read as most modern versions do either. Instead they read somewhere in between using both the "and" with "holy." The New King James Version follows the reading of the Authorized Version." (wilderness-cry.net)

Will Kinney

See Also Revelation 16:5 "and shalt be" by Will Kinney

"The King James Bible translators did not slavishly follow Beza’s Greek text, but after much prayer, study and comparison, did include Beza’s reading of “and shalt be” in Revelation 16:5. We do not know what other Greek texts the KJB translators possessed at that time that may have helped them in their decisions. They then passed this reading on to future generations in the greatest Bible ever written. Since God has clearly placed His mark of divine approval upon the KJB throughout the last 400 years, I trust that He providentially guided the translators to give us His true words."

Robert L Thomas

Robert L Thomas, Professor of New Testament at The Master’s Seminary, citing Swete commented,

"Taking hosios as parallel with dikaios creates an intolerable harshness, however, and taking the adjective as a predicate adjective with ho on and ho en breaks the pattern of the Apocalypse in not assigning the expression a predicate nominative or adjective.Apocalypse of St. John: the Greek text with introd., notes and indices – Henry Barclay Swete (1906 2nd edtion)

As another note, for completion, in page 194 Swete mentions the unusualness of “Holy” as a title for LORD in the NT. And the one place where it is used (Rev 15:5) it it far more simply part of an adjectival phrase, not as a title, which is easy for use to see.

In his commentary Thomas has:

Ὁ ω῍ν καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ἐσόμενος [Ho ōn kai ho ēn, kai esomenos] , the one who is and the “he was,” and the one to be. This unusual construction is likely a Hebraism. For a discussion of a closely-related grammatical phrase, see commentary on Revelation 1:4. Here, the future tense participle is based on the verb ειμι [eimi] , “to be,” whereas in Revelation Rev. 1:4+ it is based on the verb ἐρχομαι [erchomai] , “to come.” There, the emphasis is on His impending arrival. Here, upon his eternality. Most other manuscripts, including the majority of those in the MT text family and the NU text, have ὁ ο῝σιος [ho hosios] , “the holy,” instead of ἐσόμενος [esomenos] , “the one to be.”

Bullinger

Bullinger indicated that 1624 edition of the Elzevirs’ Greek text has “the holy one” at this verse (Lexicon, p. 689).

Walter Scott

In his commentary on the book of Revelation, Walter Scott asserted that the KJV’s rendering “shalt be” was an unnecessary interpolation and that the KJV omitted the title “holy One” (p. 326).

Bruce Metzger

Bruce Metzger defines this term as,

The classical method of textual criticism . . . If the only reading, or each of several variant readings, which the documents of a text supply is impossible or incomprehensible, the editor's only remaining resource is to conjecture what the original reading must have been. A typical emendation involves the removal of an anomaly. It must not be overlooked, however, that though some anomalies are the result of corruption in the transmission of the text, other anomalies may have been either intended or tolerated by the author himself. Before resorting to conjectural emendation, therefore, the critic must be so thoroughly acquainted with the style and thought of his author that he cannot but judge a certain anomaly to be foreign to the author's intention. (Metzger, The Text Of The New Testament, 182.)

From this, we learn the following.

1). Conjectural emendation is a classical method of textual criticism often used in every translation or Greek text when there is question about the authenticity of a particular passage of scripture.

2). There should be more than one variant in the passage in question.

3). The variant in question contextually should fit and should be in agreement with the style of the writer.

James White

James White said in his book:

“Beza did introduce…“conjectural emendations,” that is, changes made to the text without any evidence from the manuscripts. A few of these changes made it into the KJV, the most famous being Revelation 16:5, “O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be” rather than the actual reading, “who art and who wast, O Holy one.” (King James Only Controversy, first edition, p. 63).

In a note on his criticism of Revelation 16:5 in the KJV, White states on p 86 that:

“The KJV Only advocate who asserts the verbal plenary inspiration of the King James Version has to believe that Theodore Beza, the successor of John Calvin, as strong a proponent of “Calvinism” as has ever lived (certain KJV Only advocates such as Peter Ruckman are strongly anti-Reformed), was divinely inspired to make the change without any manuscript support at all.”

In 2002, on the Ankerburg show White said:

“But to Dr. Strouse, what about places where those King James translators followed conjectural emendations?

Theodore Beza, for example, in Revelation 16:5 looked at the Greek text and all the Greek texts say the same thing, but he didn’t like the way it went. And so he changed the word “holy” to the future form of the verb “to be,” sort of, to make it nice and poetic and rhythmic. And your King James this day reads that way, even though there’s not a question about it on anyone’s part as to what that passage actually reads. Why should I take Theodore Beza’s conjectural emendation where he decides a reading on the basis of what he likes and say that the mass of Christians believe this when nobody before Theodore Beza ever had the idea that Revelation 16:5 read that way? Why should I believe that?” The King James Controversy Revisited - 2002, on the Ankerberg show, with Dr. Kenneth Barker, Dr. Don Wilkins, Dr. Daniel B. Wallace, Dr. James White, Dr. Samuel Gipp, Dr. Thomas Strouse, Dr. Joseph Chambers.

James White claimed:

“Every Greek text--not just Alexandrian texts, but all Greek texts, Majority Text, the Byzantine text, every manuscript, the entire manuscript tradition--reads ‘O Holy One,‘ containing the Greek phrase ‘ho hosios’” (second edition, p. 237).

Peter Ruckman

Peter Ruckman commented in response to James White concerning Revelation 16:5:

“Since White wrote his book to justify the sins of the NIV and NASV committees, do you think he was actually worried about “shalt be” in Revelation 16:5? You see the “and” in the verse was found in an early papyrus (P 47): “and…” what? The NIV and the NASV and Nestle and Aland and Hort had to get rid of the earliest papyrus this time. It was an embarrassment because it messed up their sentence. If they had followed their profession (“the oldest and best, etc.) they would have had to give you this: “Righteous art Thou, the Being One, AND the One who was, AND the Holy One.” That is one awkward, cockeyed clause, so the “and” (“kai” in the papyrus) had to be dropped. Something originally followed that last “and,” and it certainly was not “the Holy One.” Undoubtedly, “in the original” (a famous, worn-out, Alexandrian cliché) it read “the One being, and the One who was, AND the One who shall be…

“Now, that is a conjecture, but it is a conjecture in the light of early Greek manuscript evidence that was discarded by Mr Nestle and Mr White. He and his buddies had to violate their own standards to get rid of the AV reading. Standard Operating Procedure in the Cult…

“They never waste their time on any text like they waste it on the English text of 1611. That is the one they hate…

“For those of you who think I am “overstepping” myself: Who inserted “nailed” into Acts 2:23 without being able to find one nail within one hundred verses of the verse (NASV)? There is not one Greek manuscript extant that says “nail” or “nails” or “nailing” or “nailed.” But it doesn’t bother any Alexandrian except in Revelation 16:5 in an AV. Remarkable, isn’t it?…

“We would judge White’s extant Greek texts on Revelation 16:5 to be defective, in regards to “shalt be,” and this is apparent from the rejected “kai” in Papyrus 47. Why trade in absolute truth for a defective Greek manuscript? The truth is the Lord (vs. 5) had THREE lives (confirmed in Revelation 1:8, 8:8) and the “kai” (and) is found in both those passages. Someone messed with Revelation 16:5 in the Greek texts. It wasn’t the AV translators…”

J. I. Mombert

J. I. Mombert listed Revelation 16:5 as one of the places where he asserted ignorantly that “the reading of the A. V. is supported by no known Greek manuscript whatever, but rests on an error of Erasmus or Beza” (Hand-book, p. 389).

Samuel Tregelles

In 1844, Samuel Tregelles maintained that the reading adopted by Beza at Revelation 16:5 “is not found in any known MS” (Book of Revelation in Greek, p. xxxv)

Jonathan Stonis

Jonathan Stonis asserted that Theodore Beza “modified the Traditional Text against manuscript evidence by dropping the words, ’Holy One’ and replacing them with ’to be’” (Juror’s Verdict, p. 60).

F. C. Cook

In an edition of the KJV with commentary as edited by F. C. Cook and printed in 1881, William Lee in his introduction to the book of Revelation referred to “the conjectural reading of Beza’s last three editions” at Revelation 16:5 (Vol. IV, p. 463).

Walter Scott

In his commentary on the book of Revelation, Walter Scott said that the KJV’s rendering “shalt be” was an unnecessary interpolation and that the KJV omitted the title “holy One” (p. 326).

Jeffrey Khoo

Jeffrey Khoo wrote the following about the above words of Beza [29]:

Besides the ancient Greek manuscript that Beza had, it ought to be noted that Beatus of Liebana in the eighth century, in his compilation of commentaries on the Book of Revelation has the Latin phrase, qui fuisti et futures es, for Revelation 16:5 which was found in the commentary of Tyconius which goes back to the fourth century. It is entirely possible that there were either early Greek manuscripts or Old Latin versions as early as the fourth century which contained the reading esomenos.

It is also significant to note that the reading hosios preferred by Combs is a harder reading. Robert L Thomas, Professor of New Testament at The Master’s Seminary, citing Swete commented,

"Taking hosios as parallel with dikaios creates an intolerable harshness, however, and taking the adjective as a predicate adjective with ho on and ho en breaks the pattern of the Apocalypse in not assigning the expression a predicate nominative or adjective."

We note that the reading ho esomenos, the future participle of eimi in its masculine, singular, nominative form with the definite article fits well the pattern of the Apocalypse and functions well as an adjectival participle to describe dikaios—the Righteous One who shall soon come to judge a most wicked world.

Although it is admitted that ho esomenos is not the reading found in the Majority Text, we are wont to agree with Hills that such minority readings "seem to have been placed in the Greek TR by the direction of God’s special providence and therefore are to be retained." It is also admitted that the reading of ho hosios in Stephen’s edition of the TR differs from Beza’s ho esomenos. So what do we do with the rare occasions when the several editions of the TR differ from one another? Hills replied,

The answer to this question is easy. We are guided by the common faith. Hence we favor that form of the Textus Receptus upon which more than any other God, working providentially, has placed the stamp of His approval, namely, the King James Version, or, more precisely the Greek text underlying the King James Version.

Bible Protector

In the Appendix B of Receiving the King James Bible Only by By Matthew Verschuur states:

APPENDIX B

There are a few rare occasions where the King James Bible has a so-called “minority reading”. This means that the King James Bible has something which is different to almost all available copies.

It is useful to mention one as a case study, to show how the King James Bible is not wrong in such a case. The example is the reading “and shalt be” at Revelation 16:5, in opposition to nearly every other copy and translation, which has, “holy one”.

The background is that when Beza was printing the New Testament in Greek, he reasoned that Revelation 16:5 should actually read according to the pattern established at other verses in Revelation which give a past, present and future (Revelation 1:4, 1:8, 4:8 and 11:17).

The King James Bible translators followed Beza’s Greek on this point, and did not give any indication in the margin that there was any issue here. Thus, we can easily see that it was their deliberate decision to accept that “and shalt be” was correct.

Most or all available handwritten copies had “holy one”, but there are relatively few copies of Revelation, and there is no certain knowledge of very early copies. It follows that a copying mistake was made early, one which persisted to the point where all available copies no longer contained the true reading, until it was restored by Beza. The fact that Beza’s correction was recognised to be true shows that what would otherwise be a “lost reading” was actually restored and was printed in English in 1611.

Elijah Hixson

In December 2019, Elijah Hixson wrote an article for the ECT blog titled Fact-checking Versional Support for the ECM and the textus receptus in which he examines the Ethiopic readings in Revelation 16:5.

New World Translation

2013 I heard the angel over the waters say: “You, the One who is and who was, 'the loyal One', are righteous, for you have issued these judgments, New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (2013 Revision)

The Triadic Declaration

(Unfinished work in progress may be innacurate)

Text	Other	Present	Past	Future	Holy	Other
Book of Armagh	-	qui es	et qui eras	(omit)	scs	-
Ethiopic 1548/49	-	(omit)	qui fuisti	et eris,	(omit)	-
Beza 1598	-	εἶ Ὁ ὢν,	καὶ Ὁ ἦν,	καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος,	(omit)	-
KJV 1611	-	which art,	and wast,	and shalt be	(omit)	-
Dutch 1637	-	Die is,	en Die was,	en Die zijn zal,	(omit)	-
Martin 1744	-	QUI ES,	QUI ÉTAIS,	et QUI SERAS	(omit)	-

Ecclesiastes 1:9

Ecclesiastes 1:9 says in the KJV:

The thing that hath been it is that which shall be and that which is done is that which shall be done and there is no new thing under the sun.

מַה־שֶּֽׁהָיָה֙ ה֣וּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶ֔ה וּמַה־שֶּׁנַּֽעֲשָׂ֔ה ה֖וּא שֶׁיֵּעָשֶׂ֑ה וְאֵ֥ין כָּל־חָדָ֖שׁ תַּ֥חַת הַשָּֽׁמֶשׁ׃

Mah shehayah hu sheyihyeh — What has been, is what will be… and there is nothing new under the sun.”

what

has been (še-hā-yāh)

is

what will be (še-yih-yeh,)

Greek

Textus Receptus

Complutensian Polyglot

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1514 Complutensian Polyglot

1514 καὶ ἤκουσα / τοῦ ἀγγέλου / τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος. Δίκαιος ευο ὢν, καὶ / ὁ ἦν / ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας, (Complutensian Polyglot)

Aldine

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1518 Greek New Testament of Aldine

Cephaleus

1524 (Wolf Cephaleus. Printed in Strassburg)

Desiderius Erasmus

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1516 Greek New Testament of Erasmus

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1519 Greek New Testament of Erasmus

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1522 Greek New Testament of Erasmus

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1550 Greek New Testament of Stephanus

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1565 Greek New Testament of Beza

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1589 New Testament of Beza

Footnote at Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1589 New Testament of Beza

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1598 New Testament of Beza

1516 καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου λέγοντος, δΐκαιος κύριε εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας, (Novum Instrumentum omne)
1519 καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου, λέγοντος, δίκαιος κύρϊε εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας,(Erasmus 2nd)
1522 καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου, λέγοντος, δίκαιος Κύριε εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας, (Novum Testamentum omne)
1527 (Erasmus 4th)
1535 (Erasmus 5th)

Colinæus

1534 (Colinæus)

Stephanus (Robert Estienne)

1546 (Robert Estienne (Stephanus) 1st)
1549 (Robert Estienne (Stephanus) 2nd)
1550 καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος Δίκαιος Κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας (Robert Estienne (Stephanus) 3rd - Editio Regia)
1551 καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος Δίκαιος Κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας (Robert Estienne (Stephanus) 4th)

Theodore Beza

1565 Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν, καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας. (Beza 1st)
1565 (Beza Octavo 1st)
1567 (Beza Octavo 2nd)
1580 (Beza Octavo 3rd)
1582 (Beza 2nd)
1588 Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ, ὁ ὢν, καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας. (Beza 3rd)
1590 (Beza Octavo 4th)
1598 καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· (Beza 4th)

See Also Revelation 16:5 Beza 1598

1604 (Beza Octavo 5th)

Elias Hutter

1599 Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, δίκαιος, κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· (The Nuremberg Polyglot, by Elias Hutter published in Nuremberg).

Elzevir

Elzevirs’ 1624 Greek

Elzevirs’ 1633 Greek

1624 Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος· Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ, ὁ ὢν, καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· (Elzevir)
1633 Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος· Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ, ὁ ὢν, καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· (Elzevir)
1641 (Elzevir)

Scholz

1841 Scholz)

Scrivener

1894 καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· (F. H. A. Scrivener , The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text followed in the Authorised Version - Cambridge University Press).

Other Greek

Revelation 16:5 in the Greek Codex Sinaiticus

και ]ηκουσα του αγγελου των υδατων λεγοντος δικαιος ει ο ων και ος ην και οσιος̣ οτι ταυτα εκρινας (Papyrus 47) Papyrus 47 conatins "και"

Erasmus 1522 and Stephanus 1550 also have "kai," and this was before P47 was known to scholars, so there was more than just "one manuscript standing out.

16:5 txt ὁ ὅσιος א P 051 ƒ052 922 2053mg copsa RP NA28 ‖ ὅσιος A C 046 1611 Beat ‖ καὶ ὅσιος ⁴⁷ 1841 2040 2329 ‖ καὶ ὁ ὅσιος 1006 1828 2053txt 2062 (Prim) ‖ καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος 2037 TR ‖ omit copbo ‖ hiat 2050

καί ἀκούω ὁ ἄγγελος ὁ ὕδωρ λέγω δίκαιος εἰμί ὁ εἰμί καί ὁ εἰμί ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι οὗτος κρίνω Tischendorf 8th Edition

1881 Καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος Δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας, Westcott and Hort

1904 Καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος· Δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· Greek Orthodox Church

1904 Καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος Δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, ὁ Ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας, (Nestle)

2000 (Byzantine/Majority Text)

English Versions

Revelation 16:5 in the 1611 King James Version

Image:Revelation 16 5 English Hexapla 1841.JPG

Revelation 16:5 in Greek in the 1841 English Hexapla

1395 [And the thridde aungel... seide,] Just art thou, Lord, that art, and that were hooli, that demest these thingis; (Wycliffe)

1526 And I herde an angell saye: lorde which arte and wast thou arte ryghteous and holy because thou hast geve soche iudgmentes (Tyndale)

Revelation 16:5 in Tyndale's 1535 Middleburch imprint

1535 And I herde an angel saye: LORDE which art and wast, thou art righteous and holy, because thou hast geue soche iudgmentes, (Coverdale)

Revelation 16:5 in the 1537 Matthew Bible

1540 And I herde an Angell saye: Lorde, whych arte and wast, thou arte ryghteous & holy, because thou hast geuen soche iudgementes, (Great Bible)(Coverdale)

1549 And I heard an angel say: Lord which art & wast, thou art rightuous & holy, because thou hast geuen such iudgementes, (Matthew's Bible by John Rogers)

Revelation 16:5 in the 1560 Geneva Bible

1557 And I heard the Angel of the waters say, Lord, thou art iust, Which art, and Which wast: and Holy, because thou hast iudged these things. (Geneva)

1568 And I hearde the angell of the waters say: Lorde, which art, and wast, thou art ryghteous & holy, because thou hast geuen such iudgementes: (Bishops')

Revelation 16:5 in the 1568 Bishops' Bible

1611 And I heard the Angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast iudged thus: (King James Version)

1833 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, who art, and wast, and wilt be, because thou hast judged thus. (Websters)

1851 And I heard the angel of the waters say: Righteous art thou, who art and who wast, and art holy; because thou hast done this judgment. (Murdock Translation by James Murdock)

1898 and I heard the messenger of the waters, saying, `righteous, O Lord, art Thou, who art, and who wast, and who shalt be, because these things Thou didst judge, (Young's Literal Translation)

1900 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus. (King James Version, Pure Cambridge Edition 1900)

1982 And I heard the angel of the waters saying: 'You are righteous, O Lord, The One who is and who was and who is to be, Because You have judged these things. (New King James Version)

Foreign Language Translations

Afrikaans

1933 J. D. du Toit, E. E. van Rooyen, J. D. Kestell, H. C. M. Fourie, and BB Keet (Ta Biblia Ta Logia)
1953
1982 Paraphrase - Die Lewende Bybel, Christelike Uitgewersmaatskappy (CUM)
1982 South African Bible Society - E. P. Groenewald, A. H. van Zyl, P. A. Verhoef, J. L. Helberg, and W. Kempen
2001 The Nuwe Wêreld-vertaling van die Heilige Skrif is an Afrikaans translation of the 1984 English translation of the Bible by the Watchtower Society.
2002 Die Boodskap
2002 DieBybel@Kinders.co.za - Gert Prinsloo, Phil Botha, Willem Boshoff, Hennie Stander, Dirk Human, Stephan Joubert, and Jan van der Watt.
2006 The Nuwe Lewende Vertaling (literally "New Living Translation")
2008 Bybel vir Almal - South African Bible Society, Bart Oberholzer, Bernard Combrink, Hermie van Zyl, Francois Tolmie, Christo van der Merwe, Rocco Hough en Elmine Roux.
2014 Direct Translation, South African Bible Society
2014 Afrikaans Standard Version, CUM Books

Akan

Albanian

Dhe dëgjova engjëllin e ujërave duke thënë: Ti je i drejtë, o Zot, që je që ishe dhe që do të vish, i Shenjti që gjykoi këto gjëra.

Amharic

Amharic bible of 1988 at Revelation 16:5

1988

Amuzgo de Guerrero

1999

Arabic

Arabic bible in the 1657 London Polyglot of Walton at Revelation 16:5

Latin translation of the Arabic bible in the 1657 London Polyglot of Walton at Revelation 16:5

1988
1516
1591
1616
1622
1657 (Waltons Polyglot)
1671 Biblia Arabica. de propaganda fide. Arabic and Latin Bible printed in Rome by Abraham Ecchellensis and Louis Maracci
وسمعت ملاك المياه يقول عادل انت ايها الكائن والذي كان والذي يكون لانك حكمت هكذا.(Arabic Smith & Van Dyke)

Aramaic/Syriac

(Aramaic Peshitta)

Armenian

Լսեցի ջուրերուն հրեշտակը՝ որ կ՚ըսէր. «Արդա՛ր ես, դուն՝ որ ես եւ որ էիր, ու սո՛ւրբ ես՝ որ ա՛յսպէս դատեցիր,

Basque

1571
Eta ençun neçan vretaco Aingueruä, cioela, Iusto aiz Iauna, Aicena eta Incena eta Saindua: ceren gauça hauc iugeatu baitituc: (Navarro-Labourdin)

Bulgarian

1940 (1940 Bulgarian Bible)
И чух ангела на водите да казва: Праведен си Ти, Пресвети, Който си, и Който си бил, загдето си отсъдил така;

Cebuano

Ug nadungog ko ang manolunda sa katubigan nga nag-ingon, Husto ikaw niining imong mga paghukom, ikaw nga mao ang sa karon ug ang sa kagahapon, O Balaan.

Cherokee

1860 Cherokee New Testament (CHR)

Chinese

接着，我听见那位统管众水的天使说：“今在、昔在的圣者啊，你是公义的，因为你判定了这些事, (Chinese Union Version (Simplified))
接著，我聽見那位統管眾水的天使說：「今在、昔在的聖者啊，你是公義的，因為你判定了這些事，(Chinese Union Version (Traditional))

Coptic

2006 ⲀⲒⲤⲰⲦⲘ ⲈⲠⲀⲄⲄⲈⲖⲞⲤ ⲚⲘⲘⲞⲞⲨ ⲈϤϪⲰ ⲘⲘⲞⲤ ϪⲈ ⲚⲦⲔ ⲞⲨⲆⲒⲔⲀⲒⲞⲤ ⲠⲈⲦϢⲞⲞⲠ ⲀⲨⲰ ⲠⲈⲦⲈ ⲚⲈϤϢⲞⲞⲠ ⲠⲠⲈⲦⲞⲨⲀⲀⲂ ϪⲈ ⲀⲔⲔⲢⲒⲚⲈ ⲚⲚⲀⲒ Sahidic Coptic

Croatian

1563 The Glagolitic New Testament 1562/1563
I začujem anđela voda gdje govori: Pravedan si, Ti koji jesi i koji bijaše, Sveti, što si tako dosudio!

Czech

1613 I slyšel jsem anděla vod, řkoucího: Spravedlivý jsi, Pane, Kterýž jsi, a Kterýž jsi byl, a Svatý, žes to usoudil. bible of Kralice

Danish

Og jeg hørte Vandenes Engel sige: Retfærdig er du, som er, og som var, du hellige, fordi du har fældet denne Dom;

Dutch

1528 Ende ic hebbe gehoort een engel der wateren, seggende. Ghi zijt rechtuerdicht Heer, die daer is, ende die daer was heylich. Want ghi dit geordeelt hebt
1542 ende ic hoorde den engel, seggende. HERE, ghi sijt gerecht, die daer sijt, ende die daer was, ende heylich, dat ghi dat gheoordeelt hebt,
1548 Ende ick heb ghehoort den enghel der wateren segghende, Ghy sijt rectuerdich Heere die sijt, ende die waert heylich, dat ghy dit gheordeelt hebt,
1560 Ende ick hoorde den Enghel segghen: Heere, ghy zijt rechtueerdich, die daer is, ende die daer was, ende heylich, dat ghy sulcx gheordeelt hebt.
1562 Ende ick hoorde den Engel der wateren segghen: Du bist rechtueerdich Heere, die Is, ende die Was, ende heylich, om dat du dit geoordeelt hebst.
1637 En ik hoorde den engel der wateren zeggen: Gij zijt rechtvaardig, Heere! Die is, en Die was, en Die zijn zal, dat Gij dit geoordeeld hebt;

Esperanto

Kaj mi auxdis la angxelon de la akvoj dirantan:Justa estas Vi, la estanta kaj estinta, la Sanktulo, cxar Vi tiele jugxis;

Finnish

1619
1776 Ja minä kuulin vetten enkelin sanovan: Herra, sinä olet vanhurskas, joka olet, ja joka oli, ja pyhä, ettäs nämät tuomitsit;
1938

French

Revelation 16.5 French Bible d'Olivétan of 1535

Le Nouveau Testament, c'est à dire la nouvelle alliance de nostre Seigneur et seul Sauveur Jesus Christ, tant en latin qu'en francois : les deux translations [...]. [Genève] : [Simon Du Bosc & Guillaume Guéroult], 1555

(-1554)

Revelation 16.5 in the 1605 French Bible

1605

Revelation 16:5 in the French New Testament of 1644 of Giovanni Diodati[8].

1644 Et i’ouï l’Ange des eaus, disait, Tu es juste, ô Seigneur, qui es, et qui estios, & qui es le Saint, en ce que tu as fait ces iugements.(Giovanni Diodati)
1744 Et j'entendis l'ange des eaux, qui disait: Tu es juste, Seigneur, qui ES, et QUI ÉTAIS, et QUI SERAS saint, parce que tu as exercé ces jugements. (Ostervald)
1744 Et j'entendis l'Ange des eaux, qui disait : Seigneur, QUI ES, QUI ÉTAIS, et QUI SERAS, tu es juste, parce que tu as fait un tel jugement. (Martin)
Et j'entendis l'ange des eaux, disant: Tu es juste, toi qui es et qui étais, le Saint, parce que tu as ainsi jugé; (Darby)
1864 (Augustin Crampon)
1910 Et j'entendis l'ange des eaux qui disait: Tu es juste, toi qui es, et qui étais; tu es saint, parce que tu as exercé ce jugement. (Louis Segond)
2006 Et j’entendis l’ange des eaux dire: Tu es droit, Ô Seigneur, qui es, et étais, et seras, parce que tu as jugé ainsi. (King James Française)

German

1545 Und ich horte den Angel der Wasser sagen: herr, du bist gerecht, der da ist und der da war, und heilig, dab du solches geurteilt hast (Luther 1545)
1871 Und ich hörte den Engel der Wasser sagen: Du bist gerecht, der da ist und der da war, der Heilige, (O. Fromme) daß du also gerichtet (O. geurteilt) hast. (Elberfelder 1871)
1899 Und ich hörte den Engel der Wasser sagen: gerecht bist du, der da ist und der da war, der Heilige, daß du so gerichtet;Textbibel
1912 Und ich hörte den Engel der Wasser sagen: HERR, du bist gerecht, der da ist und der da war, und heilig, daß du solches geurteilt hast, (Luther 1912)

Greek

1904 Καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος· Δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· (Greek Orthodox (B. Antoniades))
Modern Greek (Trinitarian Bible Society)

Hungarian

És hallám, hogy a vizek angyala ezt mondja vala: Igaz vagy Uram, a ki vagy és a ki valál, te Szent, hogy ezeket ítélted;

Indonesian

Lalu aku dengar malaekat segala air itu mengatakan, "Adillah Engkau, Yang ada, dan Yang sudah sedia ada, dan Yang kudus, oleh sebab Engkau sudah menjatuhkan hukum yang demikian,

Italian

1490 Italian

1649 Ed io udii l’angelo delle acque, che diceva: Tu sei giusto, o Signore, che sei, e che eri, che sei il Santo, d’aver fatti questi giudicii.
1927 E udii l’angelo delle acque che diceva: Sei giusto, tu che sei e che eri, tu, il Santo, per aver così giudicato. (Riveduta Bible)
Allora udii l'angelo delle acque che diceva: tu, il Santo, poiché così hai giudicato.

Japanese

1928 (Naoji Nagai)

Kabyle

Sliɣ i lmelk iḥekkmen ɣef waman yeqqaṛ : Ay Imqeddes, a Bab n lḥeqq, kečč yellan si zik, yellan ass-a, tḥekkmeḍ s lḥeqq.

Khmer

1928

Korean

내가 들으니 물을 차지한 천사가 가로되 `전에도 계셨고 시방도 계신 거룩하신 이여 이렇게 심판하시니 의로우시도다

Latin

Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1516 New Testament of Erasmus

Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1522 New Testament of Erasmus

Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1565 New Testament of Beza

Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1589 New Testament of Beza

Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1598 New Testament of Beza

et audivi angelum aquarum dicentem iustus es qui es et qui eras sanctus quia haec iudicasti (Vulgate)
1516 et audivi angelum dicentem iustus es domine, qui es, & qui eras sanctus, quia hoc iudicasti (Erasmus)
1527 (Erasmus 1527)
1527 (Erasmus Vulgate 1527)
1565 (Beza)
1565 (Beza Vulgate)
1598 (Beza)
1598 (Beza Vulgate)

Latvian

Un es dzirdēju ūdens eņģeli sakām: Taisnīgs Tu esi, Kungs, kas Tu esi un kas biji svēts, un kas tā tiesāji.

Lithuanian

Ir išgirdau vandenų angelą sakant: “Teisus Tu, o Viešpatie, kuris esi ir kuris buvai, šventas, kad taip teisi.

Maori

1833
1837
1858
1868 (Formal translation based on the Greek 'Received Text': Trinitarian Bible Society)
1833
1952
A ka rongo ahau i te anahera o nga wai e mea ana, Tika tonu koe, e te Ariki, tenei koe inaianei, i mua ano koe, ko te Mea Tapu hoki koe, nau hoki enei whakawa:

Norwegian

1930 Og jeg hørte engelen over vannene si: Rettferdig er du som er og som var, du hellige, at du har dømt således; Det Norsk Bibelselskap (1930)

Pidgin

1996 (Pidgin King Jems)

Portugese

E ouvi o anjo das águas dizer: Justo és tu, que és e que eras, o Santo; porque julgaste estas coisas;
2012 Então, ouvi o anjo responsável pelas águas declarar: “Tu és Justo, Tu, o Santo, que és e que eras, porquanto julgaste estes crimes;Bíblia King James Atualizada Português

Romanian

1551 (Slavic-Romanian Gospel)
1561 (Coresi's Gospel)
1570 (The Braşov Psalm Book) Psalms Only
1582 (Palia from Orăştie)
1648 (The New Testament of Alba Iulia)
1688 (Biblia de la Bucureşti - Bucharest Bible)
1911 (Nitzulescu - British and Foreign Bible Society)
1921 (Cornilescu)
1924 (Cornilescu - British and Foreign Bible Society)
1989 (Gute Botschaft Verlag)
2010 Şi am auzit pe îngerul apelor spunând: Drept eşti tu, Doamne, care eşti, care erai şi care vei fi, pentru că ai judecat astfel. (Biblia Traducerea Fidela în limba română - based upon the Textus Receptus / King James Version)
2013 (Biblia Traducerea Fidela în limba română - based upon the Textus Receptus / King James Version)
2014 (Biblia Traducerea Fidela în limba română - based upon the Textus Receptus / King James Version)
2014 (Cornilescu 90th anniversary definitive edition - British and Foreign Bible Society)

Russian

1876 И услышал я Ангела вод, который говорил: праведен Ты, Господи, Который еси и был, и свят, потому что так судил; (RUSV)

Transliteration: I uslyshal ya Angela vod, kotoryy govoril: praveden Ty, Gospodi, Kotoryy yesi i byl, i svyat, potomu chto tak sudil;

Russian Transliteration of the Greek

Revelation 16:5 in the Ostrog Bible of 1581

Revelation 16:5 in the Ostrog Bible Reprint of 1663

1757 И слышах Ангела воднаго глаголюща: праведен еси, Господи, сый и Иже бе, и преподобн, яко сия судил еси: 1757 Church Slavonic Elizabeth Bible

Revelation 16:5 in the Slavic Bible Elizabethan edition of 1900

1900 Slavic Bible Elizabethan edition 1900.

Sanskrit

1851

Shuar

Nuyß suntar Entsß Wßinniua nuna chichamen antukmajai. "Uuntß, amek ti penker Yus asam J·tikiame. Yßunchusha tuke Puj· asam ti Shφiraitme.

Spanish

See Also Bible translations (Spanish)

1543 (Francisco de Enzinas New Testament)
1556 (Juan Perez de Pineda New Testament and book of Psalms)
1569 Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Señor, tú eres justo, que eres y que eras el Santo, porque has juzgado estas cosas; (Sagradas Escrituras)
1602 Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, Oh Señor, que eres y que eras, y que serás, porque has juzgado estas cosas:
1814 Valera Revision
1817 Valera Revision
1831 Valera Revision
1862 Valera Revision
1865 Valera Revision (American Bible Society Revisión)
1869 Valera Revision
1909 Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, oh Señor, que eres y que eras, el Santo, porque has juzgado estas cosas: (Reina Valera)
1960 (Eugene Nida )
1987 Translation from English. Publisher: Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.
1994 Nuevo Testamento versión Recobro
1997 Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, el que eres, y el que eras, oh Santo, porque has juzgado estas cosas; (La Biblia de las Américas) (©1997)
1999 Nueva Versión Internacional (NVI)
2002 (1602 Purificada)
2005 Oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: "Justo eres Tú, el que eres, y el que eras, oh Santo, porque has juzgado estas cosas; Las citas bíblicas son tomadas Nueva Biblia de los Hispanos © 2005 by The Lockman Foundation, La Habra, Calif,
2009 Santa Biblia: Reina-Valera
2011 Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, oh Señor, que eres y que eras, y serás, porque has juzgado así. (Reina Valera Gómez)

Swahili

Nikamsikia malaika msimamizi wa maji akisema, "Ewe mtakatifu, Uliyeko na uliyekuwako! Wewe ni mwenye haki katika hukumu hii uliyotoa.

Swedish

1917 Och jag hörde vattnens ängel säga: »Rättfärdig är du, du som är och som var, du helige, som har dömt så.BIBELN eller DEN HELIGA SKRIFT -- innehållande -- NYA TESTAMENTETS KANONISKA BÖCKER -- i överensstämmelse med den av KONUNGEN ÅR 1917 -- This is release 3.7 from Projekt Runeberg (http://www.lysator.liu.se/runeberg/) of the Bible. That release was made 1999-04-09. It contains the full text of the Bible, and all of it has been spell-checked. -- gillade och stadfästa översättningen

Syriac

Revelation 16:5 in the 1886 Syriac New Testament

1555 Johann Albrecht Widmanstadt
1645 G. Sionita (Paris Polyglot, 1645).
1657 B. Walton (London Polyglot, 1657).
1823 S. Lee (1823)
1852 Urmia edition (1852)
1913 Joseph de Qelayta/Trinitarian Bible Society (1913).
1892 Mosul edition (1887–92)
1851 Beirut (1951)

Tagalog

1905 At narinig ko ang anghel ng tubig na nagsasabi, Matuwid ka, na ngayon at nang nakaraan, Oh Banal, sapagka't humatol ka na gayon; (Ang Dating Biblia 1905)

Thai

และข้าพเจ้าได้ยินทูตสวรรค์แห่งน้ำร้องว่า "ข้าแต่องค์พระผู้เป็นเจ้า ผู้ดำรงอยู่บัดนี้ และผู้ได้ทรงดำรงอยู่ในกาลก่อน และผู้จะทรงดำรงอยู่ในอนาคต พระองค์ทรงเป็นผู้ชอบธรรม เพราะพระองค์ทรงพิพากษาอย่างนั้น (Thai KJV)

Turkish

Sulardan sorumlu meleğin şöyle dediğini işittim: ‹‹Var olan, var olmuş olan kutsal Tanrı! Bu yargılarında adilsin.

Ukrainian

І почув я Ангола вод, який говорив: Ти праведний, що Ти є й що Ти був, і святий, що Ти це присудив! Translated by P. Kulish -- Published in 1871.

Uma

Oti toe, ku'epe mala'eka to mpokuasai ue mpo'uli': Oo Pue' Alata'ala to moroli', to ria ami' -moko ngkai lomo' -na pai' to bate ria-ko wae lau, Monoa' lia pehuku' -nu tetu-e. The New Testament in Uma. Central Sulawest, Indonesia. Copyright (c) 1996, Indonesian Bible Society

Urdu

1878 (Hindustani Roman Script)
1938 (Urdu Revised Version. British and Foreign Bible Society, 1938)
2016 (Urdu Bible)

Vietnamese

1934 (Vietnamese Bible) (VIET)
Tôi nghe thiên sứ của nước nói rằng: Hỡi Đấng Hiện Có, Đã Có, tức là Đấng Thánh, Ngài là công bình, vì Ngài đã phán xét thể nầy;

Welsh

1567 (William Salesbury, printed in 1567 by Humphrey Toy)

Revelation 16:5 in the 1588 Welsh Bible[9].

1588 (William Morgan)
1620 Ac mi a glywais angel y dyfroedd yn dywedyd, Cyfiawn, O Arglwydd, ydwyt ti, yr hwn wyt, a'r hwn oeddit, a'r hwn a fyddi; oblegid barnu ohonot y pethau hyn. (William Morgan)
1824
1988 (New Welsh Bible)
2004
2011 (beibl.net 2011 by Arfon Jones)

Commentaries

Verse specific

Range specific

Chapter specific

Dummelow's Commentary

Darby's Synopsis

Hole's Commentary

Gaebelein's Annotated

The Pulpit Commentaries

References

1. As cited in Thomas Holland, "Manuscript Evidence," http://www.purewords.org/kjb1611/html/rev16_5.htm
2. When the King James Departs from the “Majority Text” (p. 102) (Hodges/Farstad “Majority” Text Refuted By Evidence) Moorman’s book available at http://www.biblefortoday.org/search.asp search for item #1617.
3. Edward F. Hills, The King James Version Defended, p. 208

Marginal References

Psalm 119:137

External Links

Esomenos

Supportive

Critical

Nick Sayers article and James White's Dividing Line and subsequent videos (2019)

Textual Criticism and the TR Live from CBTS Live From Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary James discusses the issues surrounding the idea of Textual Criticism and the Textus Receptus.
Examining James White's recent teaching about Revelation 16:5 Part 1 by Nick Sayers James White dedicated a Dividing Line in an attempt to debunk comments made on twitter defending the Revelation 16:5 reading of 'shalt be' in the King James Version .
Examining James White's recent teaching about Revelation 16:5 Part 2 by Nick Sayers James White dedicated a Dividing Line in an attempt to debunk comments made on twitter defending the Revelation 16:5 reading of 'shalt be' in the King James Version.
Revelation 16:5 is correct in the King James Bible by Bible Protector There are a few rare occasions where the King James Bible has a so-called “minority reading”. This means that the King James Bible has something which is different to almost all available copies.
WM 114: James White, the TR, and Revelation 16:5 by Jeff Riddle
WM 117: Conjectural Emendation, White, Beza, and Rev 16:5

The King James Version 2023 Edition New Testament is now complete and in print format here.

Internal Links

Old Testament - New Testament KJV 1900

New Testament KJV 2016

Scrivener's 1894 Textus Receptus

2016 Urdu New Testament (TR Based)

Russian Synodal Version (TR Based)

Reina Valera Gómez Spanish (TR Based)

Marginal Notes in the 1611 Authorized Version

Revelation 16:5
1 John 5:7
Desiderius Erasmus
Textus Receptus
191 Variations in Scrivener’s 1881 Greek New Testament from Beza's 1598 Textus Receptus
Books Many Scanned
Agros Church

Ephesians 3:9

Why We Should Not Passover Easter 1, 2, & 3

Will Kinney

List of TR/KJV based foreign bibles

List of New Testament minuscules

List of New Testament lectionaries

List of New Testament Papyri

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 · 36 · 37 · 38 · 39 · 40 · 41 · 42 · 43 · 44 · 45 · 46 · 47 · 48 · 49 · 50 · 51 · 52 · 53 · 54 · 55 · 56 · 57 · 58 · 59 · 60 · 61 · 62 · 63 · 64 · 65 · 66 · 67 · 68 · 69 · 70 · 71 · 72 · 73 · 74 · 75 · 76 · 77 · 78 · 79 · 80 · 81 · 82 · 83 · 84 · 85 · 86 · 87 · 88 · 89 · 90 · 91 · 92 · 93 · 94 · 95 · 96 · 97 · 98 · 99 · 100 · 101 · 102 · 103 · 104 · 105 · 106 · 107 · 108 · 109 · 110 · 111 · 112 · 113 · 114 · 115 · 116 · 117 · 118 · 119 · 120 · 121 · 122 · 123 · 124 · 125 · 126 · 127 · 128 · 129 · 130 · 131 · 132 · 133 · 134 · 135 · 136 · 137 · 138 · 139 · 140 ·

List of New Testament minuscules

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 · 36 · 37 · 38 · 39 · 40 · 41 · 42 · 43 · 44 · 45 · 46 · 47 · 48 · 49 · 50 · 51 · 52 · 53 · 54 · 55 · 56 · 57 · 58 · 59 · 60 · 61 · 62 · 63 · 64 · 65 · 66 · 67 · 68 · 69 · 70 · 71 · 72 · 73 · 74 · 75 · 76 · 77 · 78 · 79 · 80 · 81 · 82 · 83 · 84 · 85 · 86 · 87 · 88 · 89 · 90 · 91 · 92 · 93 · 94 · 95 · 96 · 97 · 98 · 99 · 100 · 101 · 102 · 103 · 104 · 105 · 106 · 107 · 108 · 109 · 110 · 111 · 112 · 113 · 114 · 115 · 116 · 117 · 118 · 119 · 120 · 121 · 122 · 123 · 124 · 125 · 126 · 127 · 128 · 129 · 130 · 131 · 132 · 133 · 134 · 135 · 136 · 137 · 138 · 139 · 140 · 141 · 142 · 143 · 144 · 145 · 146 · 147 · 148 · 149 · 150 · 151 · 152 · 153 · 154 · 155 · 156 · 157 · 158 · 159 · 160 · 161 · 162 · 163 · 164 · 165 · 166 · 167 · 168 · 169 · 170 · 171 · 172 · 173 · 174 · 175 · 176 · 177 · 178 · 179 · 180 · 181 · 182 · 183 · 184 · 185 · 186 · 187 · 188 · 189 · 190 · 191 · 192 · 193 · 194 · 195 · 196 · 197 · 198 · 199 · 200 · 201 · 202 · 203 · 204 · 205 · 206 · 207 · 208 · 209 · 210 · 211 · 212 · 213 · 214 · 215 · 216 · 217 · 218 · 219 · 220 · 221 · 222 · 223 · 224 · 225 · 226 · 227 · 228 · 229 · 230 · 231 · 232 · 233 · 234 · 235 · 236 · 237 · 238 · 239 · 240 · 241 · 242 · 243 · 244 · 245 · 246 · 247 · 248 · 249 · 250 · 251 · 252 · 253 · 254 · 255 · 256 · 257 · 258 · 259 · 260 · 261 · 262 · 263 · 264 · 265 · 266 · 267 · 268 · 269 · 270 · 271 · 272 · 273 · 274 · 275 · 276 · 277 · 278 · 279 · 280 · 281 · 282 · 283 · 284 · 285 · 286 · 287 · 288 · 289 · 290 · 291 · 292 · 293 · 294 · 295 · 296 · 297 · 298 · 299 · 300 · 301 · 302 · 303 · 304 · 305 · 306 · 307 · 308 · 309 · 310 · 311 · 312 · 313 · 314 · 315 · 316 · 317 · 318 · 319 · 320 · 321 · 322 · 323 · 324 · 325 · 326 · 327 · 328 · 329 · 330 · 331 · 332 · 333 · 334 · 335 · 336 · 337 · 338 · 339 · 340 · 341 · 342 · 343 · 344 · 345 · 346 · 347 · 348 · 349 · 350 · 351 · 352 · 353 · 354 · 355 · 356 · 357 · 358 · 359 · 360 · 361 · 362 · 363 · 364 · 365 · 366 · 367 · 368 · 369 · 370 · 371 · 372 · 373 · 374 · 375 · 376 · 377 · 378 · 379 · 380 · 381 · 382 · 383 · 384 · 385 · 386 · 387 · 388 · 389 · 390 · 391 · 392 · 393 · 394 · 395 · 396 · 397 · 398 · 399 · 400 · 401 · 402 · 403 · 404 · 405 · 406 · 407 · 408 · 409 · 410 · 411 · 412 · 413 · 414 · 415 · 416 · 417 · 418 · 419 · 420 · 421 · 422 · 423 · 424 · 425 · 426 · 427 · 428 · 429 · 430 · 431 · 432 · 433 · 434 · 435 · 436 · 437 · 438 · 439 · 440 · 441 · 442 · 443 · 444 · 445 · 446 · 447 · 448 · 449 · 450 · 451 · 452 · 453 · 454 · 455 · 456 · 457 · 458 · 459 · 460 · 461 · 462 · 463 · 464 · 465 · 466 · 467 · 468 · 469 · 470 · 471 · 472 · 473 · 474 · 475 · 476 · 477 · 478 · 479 · 480 · 481 · 482 · 483 · 484 · 485 · 486 · 487 · 488 · 489 · 490 · 491 · 492 · 493 · 494 · 495 · 496 · 497 · 498 · 499 · 500 · 501 · 502 · 503 · 504 · 505 · 506 · 507 · 543 · 544 · 565 · 566 · 579 · 585 · 614 · 639 · 653 · 654 · 655 · 656 · 657 · 658 · 659 · 660 · 661 · 669 · 676 · 685 · 700 · 798 · 823 · 824 · 825 · 826 · 827 · 828 · 829 · 830 · 831 · 876 · 891 · 892 · 893 · 1071 · 1143 · 1152 · 1241 · 1253 · 1423 · 1424 · 1432 · 1582 · 1739 · 1780 · 1813 · 1834 · 2050 · 2053 · 2059 · 2060 · 2061 · 2062 · 2174 · 2268 · 2344 · 2423 · 2427 · 2437 · 2444 · 2445 · 2446 · 2460 · 2464 · 2491 · 2495 · 2612 · 2613 · 2614 · 2615 · 2616 · 2641 · 2754 · 2755 · 2756 · 2757 · 2766 · 2767 · 2768 · 2793 · 2802 · 2803 · 2804 · 2805 · 2806 · 2807 · 2808 · 2809 · 2810 · 2811 · 2812 · 2813 · 2814 · 2815 · 2816 · 2817 · 2818 · 2819 · 2820 · 2821 · 2855 · 2856 · 2857 · 2858 · 2859 · 2860 · 2861 · 2862 · 2863 · 2881 · 2882 · 2907 · 2965 ·

List of New Testament uncials

01 · 02 · 03 · 04 · 05 · 06 · 07 · 08 · 09 · 010 · 011 · 012 · 013 · 014 · 015 · 016 · 017 · 018 · 019 · 020 · 021 · 022 · 023 · 024 · 025 · 026 · 027 · 028 · 029 · 030 · 031 · 032 · 033 · 034 · 035 · 036 · 037 · 038 · 039 · 040 · 041 · 042 · 043 · 044 · 045 · 046 · 047 · 048 · 049 · 050 · 051 · 052 · 053 · 054 · 055 · 056 · 057 · 058 · 059 · 060 · 061 · 062 · 063 · 064 · 065 · 066 · 067 · 068 · 069 · 070 · 071 · 072 · 073 · 074 · 075 · 076 · 077 · 078 · 079 · 080 · 081 · 082 · 083 · 084 · 085 · 086 · 087 · 088 · 089 · 090 · 091 · 092 · 093 · 094 · 095 · 096 · 097 · 098 · 099 · 0100 · 0101 · 0102 · 0103 · 0104 · 0105 · 0106 · 0107 · 0108 · 0109 · 0110 · 0111 · 0112 · 0113 · 0114 · 0115 · 0116 · 0117 · 0118 · 0119 · 0120 · 0121 · 0122 · 0123 · 0124 · 0125 · 0126 · 0127 · 0128 · 0129 · 0130 · 0131 · 0132 · 0134 · 0135 · 0136 · 0137 · 0138 · 0139 · 0140 · 0141 · 0142 · 0143 · 0144 · 0145 · 0146 · 0147 · 0148 · 0149 · 0150 · 0151 · 0152 · 0153 · 0154 · 0155 · 0156 · 0157 · 0158 · 0159 · 0160 · 0161 · 0162 · 0163 · 0164 · 0165 · 0166 · 0167 · 0168 · 0169 · 0170 · 0171 · 0172 · 0173 · 0174 · 0175 · 0176 · 0177 · 0178 · 0179 · 0180 · 0181 · 0182 · 0183 · 0184 · 0185 · 0186 · 0187 · 0188 · 0189 · 0190 · 0191 · 0192 · 0193 · 0194 · 0195 · 0196 · 0197 · 0198 · 0199 · 0200 · 0201 · 0202 · 0203 · 0204 · 0205 · 0206 · 0207 · 0208 · 0209 · 0210 · 0211 · 0212 · 0213 · 0214 · 0215 · 0216 · 0217 · 0218 · 0219 · 0220 · 0221 · 0222 · 0223 · 0224 · 0225 · 0226 · 0227 · 0228 · 0229 · 0230 · 0231 · 0232 · 0234 · 0235 · 0236 · 0237 · 0238 · 0239 · 0240 · 0241 · 0242 · 0243 · 0244 · 0245 · 0246 · 0247 · 0248 · 0249 · 0250 · 0251 · 0252 · 0253 · 0254 · 0255 · 0256 · 0257 · 0258 · 0259 · 0260 · 0261 · 0262 · 0263 · 0264 · 0265 · 0266 · 0267 · 0268 · 0269 · 0270 · 0271 · 0272 · 0273 · 0274 · 0275 · 0276 · 0277 · 0278 · 0279 · 0280 · 0281 · 0282 · 0283 · 0284 · 0285 · 0286 · 0287 · 0288 · 0289 · 0290 · 0291 · 0292 · 0293 · 0294 · 0295 · 0296 · 0297 · 0298 · 0299 · 0300 · 0301 · 0302 · 0303 · 0304 · 0305 · 0306 · 0307 · 0308 · 0309 · 0310 · 0311 · 0312 · 0313 · 0314 · 0315 · 0316 · 0317 · 0318 · 0319 · 0320 · 0321 · 0322 · 0323 ·

List of New Testament lectionaries

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 25b · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 · 36 · 37 · 38 · 39 · 40 · 41 · 42 · 43 · 44 · 45 · 46 · 47 · 48 · 49 · 50 · 51 · 52 · 53 · 54 · 55 · 56 · 57 · 58 · 59 · 60 · 61 · 62 · 63 · 64 · 65 · 66 · 67 · 68 · 69 · 70 · 71 · 72 · 73 · 74 · 75 · 76 · 77 · 78 · 79 · 80 · 81 · 82 · 83 · 84 · 85 · 86 · 87 · 88 · 89 · 90 · 91 · 92 · 93 · 94 · 95 · 96 · 97 · 98 · 99 · 100 · 101 · 102 · 103 · 104 · 105 · 106 · 107 · 108 · 109 · 110 · 111 · 112 · 113 · 114 · 115 · 116 · 117 · 118 · 119 · 120 · 121 · 122 · 123 · 124 · 125 · 126 · 127 · 128 · 129 · 130 · 131 · 132 · 133 · 134 · 135 · 136 · 137 · 138 · 139 · 140 · 141 · 142 · 143 · 144 · 145 · 146 · 147 · 148 · 149 · 150 · 151 · 152 · 153 · 154 · 155 · 156 · 157 · 158 · 159 · 160 · 161 · 162 · 163 · 164 · 165 · 166 · 167 · 168 · 169 · 170 · 171 · 172 · 173 · 174 · 175 · 176 · 177 · 178 · 179 · 180 · 181 · 182 · 183 · 184 · 185 · 186 · 187 · 188 · 189 · 190 · 191 · 192 · 193 · 194 · 195 · 196 · 197 · 198 · 199 · 200 · 201 · 202 · 203 · 204 · 205 · 206a · 206b · 207 · 208 · 209 · 210 · 211 · 212 · 213 · 214 · 215 · 216 · 217 · 218 · 219 · 220 · 221 · 222 · 223 · 224 · 225 · 226 · 227 · 228 · 229 · 230 · 231 · 232 · 233 · 234 · 235 · 236 · 237 · 238 · 239 · 240 · 241 · 242 · 243 · 244 · 245 · 246 · 247 · 248 · 249 · 250 · 251 · 252 · 253 · 254 · 255 · 256 · 257 · 258 · 259 · 260 · 261 · 262 · 263 · 264 · 265 · 266 · 267 · 268 · 269 · 270 · 271 · 272 · 273 · 274 · 275 · 276 · 277 · 278 · 279 · 280 · 281 · 282 · 283 · 284 · 285 · 286 · 287 · 288 · 289 · 290 · 291 · 292 · 293 · 294 · 295 · 296 · 297 · 298 · 299 · 300 · 301 · 302 · 303 · 304 · 305 · 306 · 307 · 308 · 309 · 310 · 311 · 312 · 313 · 314 · 315 · 316 · 317 · 318 · 319 · 320 · 321 · 322 · 323 · 324 · 325 · 326 · 327 · 328 · 329 · 330 · 331 · 332 · 368 · 449 · 451 · 501 · 502 · 542 · 560 · 561 · 562 · 563 · 564 · 648 · 649 · 809 · 965 · 1033 · 1358 · 1386 · 1491 · 1423 · 1561 · 1575 · 1598 · 1599 · 1602 · 1604 · 1614 · 1619 · 1623 · 1637 · 1681 · 1682 · 1683 · 1684 · 1685 · 1686 · 1691 · 1813 · 1839 · 1965 · 1966 · 1967 · 2005 · 2137 · 2138 · 2139 · 2140 · 2141 · 2142 · 2143 · 2144 · 2145 · 2164 · 2208 · 2210 · 2211 · 2260 · 2261 · 2263 · 2264 · 2265 · 2266 · 2267 · 2276 · 2307 · 2321 · 2352 · 2404 · 2405 · 2406 · 2411 · 2412 ·

New book available with irrefutable evidence for the reading in the TR and KJV.

Revelation 16:5 and the Triadic Declaration - A defense of the reading of “shalt be” in the Authorized Version

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-[[Image:Revelation 16 5 KJV.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in the [[1611 AD|1611]] [[King James Version]]]]
+{{Verses in Revelation 16}}
-'''Revelation 16:5''' [[2532|And]] [[191|I heard]] [[3588|the]] [[32|angel]] [[3588|of the]] [[5204|waters]] [[3004|say]], [[1488|Thou art]] [[1342|righteous]], [[2962|O Lord]], [[3588|which]] [[5607|art]], [[2532|and]] [[2258|wast]], [[2532|and]] [[2071|shalt be]], [[3754|because]] [[2919|thou hast judged]] [[5023|thus]].
-====Textus Receptus====
+<center>New book available with irrefutable evidence for the reading in the TR and KJV.</center>
-[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Complutensian Polyglot.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1514 AD|1514]] [[Complutensian Polyglot]]]]
-[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Erasmus 1516.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1516 AD|1516]] Greek New Testament of Erasmus]]
-[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Stephanus 1550.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1550 AD|1550]] Greek New Testament of Stephanus]]
-[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Stephanus 1550 Margin.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] Margin in [[Greek]] in the [[1550 AD|1550]] Greek New Testament of Stephanus]]
-[[Image:Revelation 16 5Beza 1565.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1565 AD|1565]] Greek New Testament of Beza]]
-[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Beza 1598.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1598 AD|1598]] New Testament of Beza]]
-[[Image:Revelation 16 5 English Hexapla 1841.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1841 AD|1841]] English Hexapla]]
-* [[1514 AD|1514]] καὶ ἤκουσα / τοῦ ἀγγέλου / τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος. Δίκαιος ευο ὢν, καὶ / ὁ ἦν / ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας, ([[Complutensian Polyglot]])
+<center>[http://theoldpathspublications.com/Pages/Authors/Sayers.htm Revelation 16:5 and the Triadic Declaration - A defense of the reading of “shalt be” in the Authorized Version]</center>
-* [[1516 AD|1516]] (Erasmus 1st)
-* [[1519 AD|1519]] (Erasmus 2nd)
-* [[1522 AD|1522]] (Erasmus 3rd)
-* [[1527 AD|1527]] (Erasmus 4th)
-* [[1535 AD|1535]] (Erasmus 5th)
-* [[1546 AD|1546]] (Stephanus 1st)
-* [[1549 AD|1549]] (Stephanus 2nd)
-* [[1550 AD|1550]] καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος Δίκαιος Κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας (Stephanus 3rd)
-* [[1551 AD|1551]] (Stephanus 4th)
-* [[1565 AD|1565]] (Beza 1st)
-* [[1565 AD|1565]] (Beza Octavo 1st)
-* [[1567 AD|1567]] (Beza Octavo 2nd)
-* [[1580 AD|1580]] (Beza Octavo 3rd)
-* [[1582 AD|1582]] (Beza 2nd)
-* [[1588 AD|1588]] (Beza 3rd)
-* [[1590 AD|1590]] (Beza Octavo 4th)
-* [[1598 AD|1598]] καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· [[Revelation 16:5 Beza 1598]] ([[Theodore Beza|Beza]])
-* [[1604 AD|1604]] (Beza Octavo 5th)
-* [[1624 AD|1624]] (Elzevir)
-* [[1633 AD|1633]] (Elzevir)
-* [[1641 AD|1641]] (Elzevir)
-* [[1841 AD|1841]] [[Johann Martin Augustin Scholz|Scholz]])
-* [[1894 AD|1894]] (Scrivener)
-* [[2000 AD|2000]] (Byzantine/Majority Text)
-P47 is slightly worn, the Greek text which Beza used was greatly worn. This is so noted by Beza himself in his footnote on Revelation 16:5 as he gives reason for his conjectural emendation. ([http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Revelation_16:5#Theodore_Beza See Below ] )
+----
-Erasmus 1522 and Stephanus 1550 also have "kai," and this was before P47 was known to scholars, so there was more than just "one manuscript standing out.
-==Other Greek==
+* '''[[Revelation 16:5 Greek NT: Beza's Textus Receptus (1598)|ΑΠΟΚΑΛΥΨΙΣ ΙΩΑΝΝΟΥ 16:5]]''' [[2532|Καὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]] [[3588|τῶν]] [[5204|ὑδάτων]] [[3004|λέγοντος]], [[1342|Δίκαιος]], [[2962|Κύριε]], [[1510|εἶ]] [[3588|Ὁ]] [[1510|ὢν]], [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|Ὁ]] [[2258|ἦν]], [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[2071|ἐσόμενος]], [[3754|ὅτι]] [[5023|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]].
-[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Sinaiticus.JPG|200px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in the Greek [[Codex Sinaiticus]]]]
-* [[250 AD|250]] και ηκουσα του αγγελου των υδατων λεγοντος δικαιος ει ο ων και ος ην και οσιος̣ οτι ταυτα εκρινας ([[Papyrus 47]]) Papyrus 47 conatins "και"
-* καί ἀκούω ὁ ἄγγελος ὁ ὕδωρ λέγω δίκαιος εἰμί ὁ εἰμί καί ὁ εἰμί ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι οὗτος κρίνω Tischendorf 8th Ed
-* καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας Westcott / Hort, UBS4
-==English Versions==
+{{Textus Receptus 1598 Footer}}
-* [[1395 AD|1395]] [And the thridde aungel... seide,] Just art thou, Lord, that art, and that were hooli, that demest these thingis; (Wycliffe)
+* '''Revelation 16:5''' [[2532|And]] [[191|I heard]] [[3588|the]] [[32|angel]] [[3588|of the]] [[5204|waters]] [[3004|say]], [[1488|Thou art]] [[1342|righteous]], [[2962|O Lord]], [[3588|which]] [[5607|art]], [[2532|and]] [[2258|wast]], [[2532|and]] [[2071|shalt be]], [[3754|because]] [[2919|thou hast judged]] [[5023|thus]].
-* [[1526 AD|1526]] And I herde an angell saye: lorde which arte and wast thou arte ryghteous and holy because thou hast geve soche iudgmentes (Tyndale)
+{{King James Version Pure Cambridge Edition Footer}}
-* [[1535 AD|1535]] And I herde an angel saye: LORDE which art and wast, thou art righteous and holy, because thou hast geue soche iudgmentes, (Coverdale)
+* '''[[Revelation 16:5 King James Version 2016|Revelation 16:5]] '''[[2532|And]] [[191|I heard]] [[3588|the]] [[32|angel]] [[3588|of the]] [[5204|waters]] [[3004|saying]]: “[[1488|You are]] [[1342|righteous]], [[2962|O Lord]], [[3588|who]] [[5607|is]] [[2532|and]] [[2258|was]] [[2532|and]] [[2071|will be]], [[3754|because]] [[2919|You have judged]] [[5023|these things]].
-* [[1540 AD|1540]] And I herde an Angell saye: Lorde, whych arte and wast, thou arte ryghteous & holy, because thou hast geuen soche iudgementes, (Great Bible)(Coverdale)
+{{King James Version 2016 Edition}}
+==Interlinear==
+{|border=1 cellpadding=5 style="text-align:left; border-collapse: collapse;
+|-
+!|[[Portal:Bible_Concordance|Strong's]]
+!|Greek
+!|Pronunciation
+!|[[KJV 1611]]
+!|[[KJV 1900]]
+!|{{KJV 2016}}
+!|Parts of speech
+!|Case
+!|Tense
+!|Number
+!|Gender
+!|Person
+!|Voice
+!|Mood
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|καὶ]]
+|valign=top align=left|''kahee''
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|and]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|and]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|and]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Conjunction]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[191]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[191|ἤκουσα]]
+|valign=top align=left|''ak-oo'-sah''
+|valign=top align=left|[[191|I heard]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[191|I heard]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[191|I heard]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Verb]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Aorist]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Singular]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[1st]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Active]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Indicative]]
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|τοῦ]]
+|valign=top align=left|''too''
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|the]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|the]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|the]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Article]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Genitive]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Singular]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Masculine]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[32]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[32|ἀγγέλου]]
+|valign=top align=left|''ang’-el-oo''
+|valign=top align=left|[[32|angel]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[32|angel]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[32|angel]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Noun]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Masculine]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|τῶν]]
+|valign=top align=left|''toon''
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|of the]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|of the]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|of the]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[5204]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[5204|ὑδάτων]]
+|valign=top align=left|''hoo’-da-toon''
+|valign=top align=left|[[5204|waters]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[5204|waters]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[5204|waters]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Noun]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Neuter]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[3004]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3004|λέγοντος]],
+|valign=top align=left|''leg’-on-tos''
+|valign=top align=left|[[3004|say]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[3004|say]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[3004|say]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[Verb]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[1342]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[1342|Δίκαιος]],
+|valign=top align=left|''dik’-ah-yos''
+|valign=top align=left|[[1342|righteous]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[1342|righteous]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[1342|righteous]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[Adjective]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[2962]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2962|Κύριε]],
+|valign=top align=left|''koo’-ree-e''
+|valign=top align=left|[[2962|O Lord]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[2962|O Lord]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[2962|O Lord]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[Noun]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Masculine]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[1510]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[1510|εἶ]]
+|valign=top align=left|''ee''
+|valign=top align=left|[[1510|art]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[1510|art]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[1510|is]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Verb]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|ὁ]]
+|valign=top align=left|''ho''
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|which]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|which]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|who]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Article]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Nominative]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Singular]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Masculine]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[1510]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[1510|ὢν]]
+|valign=top align=left|''oon''
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Verb]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|καὶ]]
+|valign=top align=left|''kahee''
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|and]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|and]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|and]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Conjunction]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|ὁ]]
+|valign=top align=left|''ho''
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|the]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|the]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|the]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Article]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Nominative]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Singular]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Masculine]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[2258]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2258|ἦν]]
+|valign=top align=left|''ane''
+|valign=top align=left|[[2258|wast]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2258|wast]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2258|was]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Verb]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|καὶ]]
+|valign=top align=left|''kahee''
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|and]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|and]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2532|and]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Conjunction]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3588|ὁ]]
+|valign=top align=left|''ho''
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Article]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Nominative]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[Singular]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Masculine]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[2071]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2071|ἐσόμενος]],
+|valign=top align=left|''es’-om-en-os''
+|valign=top align=left|[[2071|shalt be]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[2071|shalt be]],
+|valign=top align=left|[[2071|will be]],
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[3754]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3754|ὅτι]]
+|valign=top align=left|''hot’-ee''
+|valign=top align=left|[[3754|because]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3754|because]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[3754|because]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Conjunction]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[5023]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[5023|ταῦτα]]
+|valign=top align=left|''too’-ta''
+|valign=top align=left|[[5023|thus]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[5023|thus]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[5023|these things]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|[[2919]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2919|ἔκρινας]]
+|valign=top align=left|''eh-kree’-nas''
+|valign=top align=left|[[2919|thou hast iudged]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2919|thou hast judged]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[2919|you have judged]]
+|valign=top align=left|[[Verb]]
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|}
-* [[1549 AD|1549]] And I heard an angel say: Lord which art & wast, thou art rightuous & holy, because thou hast geuen such iudgementes, (Matthew's Bible by John Rogers)
+==Commentary==
+==O Lord==
+===Manuscripts Underlying Lord===
+====[[Book of Armagh]]====
+[[Image:Revelation_16.5_Book_of_Armagh_807.jpg|thumb|300px|right|The Latin [[Book of Armagh]] of [[807 AD]] has the reading ''Kurie'' (Lord) in Latin in [[Nomina Sacra|Nomen Sacrum]] form.[https://digitalcollections.tcd.ie/concern/works/3j333696h?locale=en].]]
+The Latin [[Book of Armagh]] (Codex Ardmachanus, Liber Ardmachanus, Canon of Patrick) of [[807 AD]] has the reading ''Kurie''  (Lord) in Latin in [[Nomina Sacra|Nomen Sacrum]] form, <span style="text-decoration: overline">dne</span>:
-* [[1557 AD|1557]] And I heard the Angel of the waters say, Lord, thou art iust, Which art, and Which wast: and Holy, because thou hast iudged these things. (Geneva)
+et audivi anguelum aq<sup>u</sup>arum dicentem iustus es '''<u><span style="text-decoration: overline">dne</span></u>''' qui es et qui eras <span style="text-decoration: overline">scs</span> ꝗ ħ iudicasti
-* [[1568 AD|1568]] And I hearde the angell of the waters say: Lorde, which art, and wast, thou art ryghteous & holy, because thou hast geuen such iudgementes: (Bishop’s)
+The Latin, ‘Domine (masculine singular vocative noun, from Dominus)’. <small>Migne (Latin Writers Series) (1846 Paris Edition), PATROLOGIA, Vol. 29, p. 863 (B. Joannis Apostoli Apocalypse, Cap. XVI, D) (Latin).</small>
-* [[1833 AD|1833]] And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, who art, and wast, and wilt be, because thou hast judged thus. (Websters)
+(''See Also'' [[Q with stroke]] and [[H with stroke]].)
+The word LORD is found in the Latin [[Book of Armagh]], [[Minuscule 2344]], some other Latin copies, the Coptic Boharic and Ethiopic versions.
-* [[1851 AD|1851]] And I heard the angel of the waters say: Righteous art thou, who art and who wast, and art holy; because thou hast done this judgment. (Murdock Translation by James Murdock)
+LORD is also the reading of Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549 the Geneva Bible 1587, KJB, NKJV, Young's, Webster's 1833 translation, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Italian Diodati, Spanish Reina Valera, and Green's Literal KJV. It was also found in the previous Catholic translations like the Douay-Rheims and the Douay of 1950.
-* [[1898 AD|1898]] and I heard the messenger of the waters, saying, `righteous, O Lord, art Thou, who art, and who wast, and who shalt be, because these things Thou didst judge, (Young's Literal Translation)
+The NASB, NIV, ESV, RSV all omit the word LORD, along with the more modern Vatican versions like the St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985.
-* [[1982 AD|1982]] And I heard the angel of the waters saying: 'You are righteous, O Lord, The One who is and who was and who is to be, Because You have judged these things. ([[New King James Version]])
+====[[Uncial 051]]====
+[[Image:Revelation_16.5_Uncial_051.jpg|thumb|300px|right|The uncial manuscript 051 does not have Lord in the main text.]]
+Uncial 051 is dated paleographically to the 10th century. It was formerly said to have Kurios in the main text, but on further examination, this is not correct. [http://intf.uni-muenster.de/vmr/NTVMR/ListeHandschriften.php]
-==Foreign Language Translations==
+====[[Minuscule 2344]]====
+[[2962|Κύριε]] is the reading in the [[Textus Receptus]] editions. The Greek [[Minuscule 2344]] (Coislin 18) from the 11th century has this reading. [https://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/community/vmr/api/transcript/get/?docID=32344&pageID=1210&format=html&userName=Apokalypse+Edition] & [http://library.mibckerala.org/lms_frame/eBook/%5BAnthony_C._Garland%5D_A_Testimony_of_Jesus_Christ_(BookFi.org)_4.pdf] [[Minuscule 2344]] says:
+:και ηκουσα του αγγε
+:ου των υδατων λεγοντος· δικαιος ει
+:'''<u>κε</u>'''· ο ων και ο ην· ο οσιος· οτι ταυτα ε
+:κρινας·
-====Albanian====
+====Pre 1611 English Bibles====
+* 1395 [And the thridde aungel… seide,] Just art thou, '''<u>Lord</u>''', that art, and that were hooli, that demest these thingis; (Wycliffe)
+* 1526 And I herde an angell saye: '''<u>lorde</u>''' which arte and wast thou arte ryghteous and holy because thou hast geve soche iudgmentes (Tyndale)
+* 1535 And I herde an angel saye: '''<u>LORDE</u>''' which art and wast, thou art righteous and holy, because thou hast geue soche iudgmentes, (Coverdale)
+* 1557 And I heard the Angel of the waters say, '''<u>Lord</u>''', thou art iust, Which art, and Which wast: and Holy, because thou hast iudged these things. (Geneva)
+* 1568 And I hearde the angell of the waters say: '''<u>Lorde</u>''', which art, and wast, thou art ryghteous & holy, because thou hast geuen such iudgementes: (Bishop’s)
-* Dhe dëgjova engjëllin e ujërave duke thënë: ''Ti je i drejtë, o Zot, që je që ishe dhe që do të vish, i Shenjti që gjykoi këto gjëra.
+====Lord in Ethiopic====
+[[Image:Walton Polyglot Bible Revelation 16.5 Ethiopic.jpg|right|300px|thumb|[[Brian Walton (bishop)|Brian Walton]] has the reading in his Polyglot Bible in Ethiopic]]
+The 1549 Ethiopic has እግዚአ Lord here.
-====Armenian====
+====The Angel was quoting [[Psalm 119:137]]====
+[[Image:Elijah Hutter Psalm 119.137 Hebrew and Greek.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Elijah Hutter Psalm 119:137 Hebrew and Greek]]
+[[Image:Elijah Hutter Psalm 119.137 Latin and German.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Elijah Hutter Psalm 119:137 Latin and German]]
+Revelation 16:5 & [[Revelation 16:7|7]] have similarities with [[Psalm 119:137]]. In Rev 16, verse 5 is echoed by verse 7.
-Լսեցի ջուրերուն հրեշտակը՝ որ կ՚ըսէր. «Արդա՛ր ես, դուն՝ որ ես եւ որ էիր, ու սո՛ւրբ ես՝ որ ա՛յսպէս դատեցիր,
+Psalm 119
-====Arabic====
+*<sup>137</sup> TZADDI. '''<u>Righteous art thou, O LORD, and upright are thy judgments.</u>'''
-====Basque====
+Revelation 16
-* Eta ençun neçan vretaco Aingueruä, cioela, Iusto aiz Iauna, Aicena eta Incena eta Saindua: ceren gauça hauc iugeatu baitituc: (Navarro-Labourdin)
+*<sup>5</sup> And I heard the angel of the waters say, '''<u>Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus</u>'''.
+*<sup>6</sup> For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.
+*<sup>7</sup> And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, '''<u>Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments</u>'''.
-====Bulgarian====
+Similarities in Greek:
-* И чух ангела на водите да казва: Праведен си Ти, Пресвети, Който си, и Който си бил, загдето си отсъдил така;
+:<sup>137</sup> '''<u>Δίκαιος εἶ κύριε· καὶ</u>''' εὐθὴς '''<u>ἡ κρίσις σου</u>'''· (Hutter)
-====Czech====
+:<sup>5</sup>...'''<u>Δίκαιος, κύριε, εἶ</u>''' '''<u>(<sup>LORD ></sup>ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος<sup>< LORD</sup>)</u>''', ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας·
+:<sup>7</sup>...Ναί '''<u>κύριε</u>''' '''<u>(<sup>LORD ></sup>ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ<sup>< LORD</sup>)</u>''' ἀληθιναὶ '''<u>καὶ δίκαιαι</u>''' αἱ '''<u>κρίσεις σου</u>'''
-* [[1613 AD|1613]] Nebo tři jsou, kteříž svědectví vydávají na nebi: Otec, Slovo, a Duch Svatý, a ti tři jedno jsou. [[bible of Kralice]]
+Similarities in Latin:
-====Croatian====
+:<sup>137</sup> '''<u>Iustus es Domine</u>''': & recta '''<u>judicia tua</u>'''. (Hutter)
-* I začujem anđela voda gdje govori: Pravedan si, Ti koji jesi i koji bijaše, Sveti, što si tako dosudio!
+:<sup>5</sup> ...'''<u>Iustus es Domine</u>''', '''<u>(<sup>LORD ></sup>Qui es, & Qui eras Qui eris<sup>< LORD</sup>)</u>''', quod haec iudicaris (Beza 1598)
+:<sup>7</sup> ...Etiam '''<u>Domine</u>''' '''<u>(<sup>LORD ></sup>Deus omnipotens<sup>< LORD</sup>)</u>''' vera ''sunt'' & '''<u>iusta iudicia tua</u>'''. (Beza 1598)
-====French====
-* [[1744 AD|1744]] Et j'entendis l'ange des eaux, qui disait: Tu es juste, Seigneur, QUI ES, et QUI ÉTAIS, et QUI SERAS saint, parce que tu as exercé ces jugements. (Ostervald)
+{|border=1 cellpadding=5 style="text-align:center; border-collapse: collapse;
+|-
+!|<center>Psalm 119:137</center>
+!|<center>Revelation 16:5</center>
+!|<center>Revelation 16:7</center>
+|-
+|<center>Righteous art thou</center>
+|<center>Thou art righteous</center>
+|<center>true and righteous</center>
+|-
+|<center>O LORD (Jehovah)</center>
+|<center>O Lord (which art, and wast, and shalt be)</center>
+|<center>Lord God Almighty</center>
+|-
+|<center>and upright are thy judgments</center>
+|<center>because thou hast judged thus</center>
+|<center>true and righteous are thy judgments</center>
+|-
+|}
-* [[1744 AD|1744]] Et j'entendis l'Ange des eaux, qui disait : Seigneur, QUI ES, QUI ÉTAIS, et QUI SERAS, tu es juste, parce que tu as fait un tel jugement. (Martin)
+==and shalt be==
+"[[3588|ὁ]] [[2071|ἐσόμενος]]" was inserted into the the main body of text in printed editions of the [[Textus Receptus]] by [[Theodore Beza]] in his [[1582 AD|1582]] edition. This replaced the usual reading of “ὁ ὅσιος” (holy).
+There are about 200 Greek manuscripts in existence containing Revelation 16:5, but “[[3588|ὁ]] [[2071|ἐσόμενος]]” (shalt be) is lacking in all of them and the reading “ὁ ὅσιος” (holy) prevails. But only 4 manuscripts of Revelation 16:5 exist from before the 10th century and the 3 earliest witnesses of Revelation 16:5 do not even agree. When one understands the nature of [[Nomina Sacra]] and the elucidated meaning of [[Jehovah]] and [[I AM]] in the [[Triadic declaration|triadic declaration]] of “which art, and wast, and shalt be”, being the most significant and Sacred Name of God in the [[New Testament]], then one can clearly see the why “holy” (''sacred'') had been formerly placed into the text, being the purest form of the five triadic declarations in Revelation and why Beza saw “shalt be” as the original reading.
-* Et j'entendis l'ange des eaux, disant: Tu es juste, toi qui es et qui étais, le Saint, parce que tu as ainsi jugé; (Darby)
+To understand the reasoning behind this, consider:
+* Jesus, who “is to come/shalt be”, is Jehovah.
+* I AM also means “who was, and is, and shall be”.
+* I AM in English bible versions shows “shalt be” is a reasonable reading.
+* Most commentaries concerning the Triadic Declaration relate it to Jehovah and I AM.
+* The Triadic Declaration is the original Holy Name of God.
+* The entire Triadic Declaration is ''nominative'' (a name) with its own Strong’s number [[3801]].
+* The “holy” in the manuscripts is a form of Nomina Sacra (sacra meaning holy or sacred).
+* The Ethiopic Bible of 1549 has “shalt be”.
+* P47 has the “and” that Beza pointed to, which was going on to fulfill the Triad.
+* In the 3rd century Clement of Alexandria speaking of Jehovah used “esomenos” knowing the correct NT reading of Revelation 16:5.
+* In the 4th century Gregory of Nyssa calls Christ the “esomenos”.
+* Jerome's Vulage had “shalt be” in the Triadic Declaration according to Wordsworth's Latin.
+* In the 8th century Beatus of Liébana has “shalt be” in his text and his copy of a 4th century commentary.
+* In the 9th century Haimo Halberstadensis has “shalt be” in his Latin commentary, exactly how Jerome has it.
+* Desiderius Erasmus has the Triadic Declaration in Rev 16:5 as “ἐρχόμενος” (not ἐσόμενος) in his Annotations in all five editions.
+* Luther, Coverdale, and Calvin had “will be” for “I AM” in [[Exodus 3:14]].
+* Hutter has “shalt be” in his Hebrew edition with “is to come” in his Greek.
+* The NT Hebrew of Hutter in Revelation 16:5 is akin to Hava “to be/shalt be”.
+* The 1560 Geneva notes at Exodus 3:14 has “shalbe” for I AM.
+* John Calvin defined Jehovah and I AM as the Triadic Declaration.
+* Theodore Beza explained in his 1582 footnote that the Triadic Declaration appears when Jehovah (Lord) appears in Revelation.
+* The KJV translators did not slavishly follow Beza (see [[John 8:6]]; [[Acts 16:7]]) but chose to adopt “shalt be” knowing that Beza was correct.
+* The KJV translators left no note or italic (in [[1 John 2:23]] they placed the reading in italics to show minority reading) showing they did not consider it a minority.
+* The Dutch Statenvertaling also independently chose the reading and left no italic or footnote.
-* [[1864 AD|1864]] (Augustin Crampon)
+;Early Greek corruption
+The earliest witnesses to Rev 16:5 read:
+:ο ων και ος ην και οσιος ([[Papyrus 47]] 3rd Century)
+:ο ων και ο ην ο οσιος (Sinaiticus fourth century <sup>''Although this has been hotly contested [[Sinaiticus.net]]''</sup>)
+:ο ων και ο ην οσιος (Alexandrinus fifth-century)
-* [[1910 AD|1910]] (Louis Segond)
+The phrase gets shorter with the passage of time. We can see from these three early witnesses that corruption set in early. “Lord” is also missing in some mss, yet is present in many Reformation Bibles. This is reflected in modern versions, but none seem to follow the "and" of [[Papyrus 47]]; for example:
-====German====
+:[[ESV]]: Just are you, '''<u>O Holy One</u>''', who is and who was
+:[[NIV]]: You are just in these judgments, you who are and who were, '''<u>the Holy One</u>'''
-* [[1545 AD|1545]] Und ich horte den Angel der Wasser sagen: herr, du bist gerecht, der da ist und der da war, und heilig, dab du solches geurteilt hast (Luther)
+Many who support the Critical Text of the New Testament reject this reading on the grounds that it has been claimed to be a conjectural emendation, but many of the same will accept readings which have no manuscript support in [[Acts 16:12]] and [[2 Peter 3:10]] which appear in the NA/UBS 28 Edition. When it is claimed that the KJV corrupted the text, critics call it call it conjectural emendation, but when the NIV, ESV, or printed Greek text alters the message they call it functional non-equivalence. With the system of Westcott and Hort, you don't have to do much thinking. If B is supposedly the best manuscript, then you just go along with B as Westcott and Hort did. If Aleph goes along with B then it has to be right. After they had decided manuscript B was the best, they made their "canons of textual criticism" to corroborate B in every instance. They say the shortest is the best because B is the shortest. They say the most difficult reading is the best because B is the most difficult. They say the one that explains the rest is the best because B explains the rest. This reasoning also accounts for the difficult reading of “ὁ ὅσιος” accepted here as it is clearly the harder reading to have “and holy” or “the holy one”, since it seems out of step with other places in Revelation. The reading of “and holy” or “the holy one” is awkward and is also an necessary repeat of the use of the phrase “Thou art righteous, O Lord.”
-* [[1871]] Und ich hörte den Engel der Wasser sagen: Du bist gerecht, der da ist und der da war, der Heilige, (O. Fromme) daß du also gerichtet (O. geurteilt) hast. (Elberfelder)
+;Early Latin corruption
+[[Jerome]] confirmed that there were a number of various Latin editions of the [[New Testament]] which differed in both translation and content before and around [[405 AD]] (when [[Jerome]] finished his [[Vulgate]]). Most of these we do not have. [[John Wordsworth]] revealed (who edited and footnoted a three volume critical edition of the New Testament in Latin) the like phrase in Revelation 1:4 "which is, and which was, and which is to come;" sometimes is rendered in Latin as "qui est et qui fuisti et futurus es" instead of the Vulgate "qui est et qui erat et qui uenturus est." (John Wordsworth, Nouum Testamentum Latine, vol.3, 422 and 424.) So we can see there have been different Latin translations of the verses involved. Primasius, Bishop of Hadrumetum, wrote a commentary on Revelation around 552 AD and used the Latin word "pius" instead of "sanctus." [https://archive.org/details/nouumtestamentum03whit/page/424/mode/1up]
-====Italian====
+;Many manuscripts destroyed
+A few readings in finalized [[Textus Receptus]] editions, contrary to normally having a vast majority, have very little Greek manuscript support, likely reflecting an inability of believers to renew and preserve true manuscripts due to widespread persecution & martyrdom in early centuries; persecution occurred in the 3rd century, under Roman emperor Decius, and destruction of scripture copies was a major goal of vicious empire-wide persecution in the early 4th century by Diocletian & Galerius, who sent out Roman soldiers to destroy all text copies; this persecution was concentrated in the eastern empire where the Traditional Text, the ancestor of the [[Textus Receptus]], was the standard.
-* [[1927 AD|1927]] E udii l’angelo delle acque che diceva: Sei giusto, tu che sei e che eri, tu, il Santo, per aver così giudicato. (Riveduta Bible)
+====Zeus====
+A similar pattern of phrasing is used of the Greek god Zeus by Pausanias (2nd century AD) in his Description of Greece where it is:
+:"Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται."
-====Latin====
+The phrase is noted as "familiar to Hellenic readers ... in the song of doves at Dodona (Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἔστιν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται) or in the titles of Asclepius and Athene." However, the form in the NT is that of the nominative phrasing (a name designation of both the Father and Christ), as opposed to the assertion here. Also, the NT form emphasizes the "one who is coming."
-* et audivi angelum aquarum dicentem iustus es qui es et qui eras sanctus quia haec iudicasti ([[Vulgate]])
+====Ethiopic Version====
+Ethiopic is also known as Aethiopic, Abyssinian, and at times, Indianic. It is a Sematic language like Hebrew, Syriac, or Arabic. The Ethiopic bible clearly has the reading equivalent to shalt be at Revelation 16:5. many have questioned about other aspects of 16:5 and the other Triadic Declarations also. Here they are below:
-====Russian====
+:1548/49 Ethiopic Bible
+[[Image:Revelation 1.4 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Revelation 1.4 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible [https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_KPNa9Mc5gjYC/page/n251/mode/1up?view=theater].]]
-* [[1876 AD|1876]] И услышал я Ангела вод, который говорил: праведен Ты, Господи, Который еси и был, и свят, потому что так судил; (RUSV)
+Revelation 1:4
-* Russian Transliteration of the Greek
+[[Image:Revelation 1.8 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Revelation 1.8 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible [https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_KPNa9Mc5gjYC/page/n251/mode/1up?view=theater].]]
-* (Church Slavonic)
+Revelation 1:8
-==[[Theodore Beza]]==
+[[Image:Revelation 4.8 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Revelation 4.8 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible [https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_KPNa9Mc5gjYC/page/n255/mode/1up?view=theater].]]
+Revelation 4:8
+[[Image:Revelation 11.17 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Revelation 11.17 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible [https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_KPNa9Mc5gjYC/page/n262/mode/1up?view=theater].]]
+Revelation 11:17
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Revelation 16.5 1548-49 Ethiopic Bible]]
+Revelation 16:5
+[[Image:Walton Polyglot Bible Revelation 16.5 Ethiopic.jpg|right|300px|thumb|[[Brian Walton (bishop)|Brian Walton]] has the reading in his Polyglot Bible in Ethiopic]]
+[[Image:Walton Polyglot Bible Revelation 16.5 Ethiopic Latin Translation.jpg|right|300px|thumb|[[Brian Walton (bishop)|Brian Walton]] has the Ethiopic reading in his Polyglot Bible translated into Latin]]
+;[[Richard Brett]]
+King James Translator [[Richard Brett]] was well versed in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldaic (Aramaic), Arabic, and Ethiopian.
+;Brian Walton and Ethiopic
+[[Brian Walton]] ([[1600 AD|1600]] – [[1661 AD|1661]]) was an English priest, divine and scholar. He published a massive [[polyglot]] between 1654 and 1657 in nine languages: [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]], [[Chaldee]], [[Samaritan]], [[Syriac language|Syriac]], [[Arabic language|Arabic]], [[Persian language|Persian]], [[Ethiopic]], [[Greek language|Greek]] and [[Latin]]. Among his collaborators were [[James Ussher]], [[John Lightfoot]] and [[Edward Pococke]], [[Edmund Castell]], [[Abraham Wheelocke]] and [[Patrick Young]], [[Thomas Hyde]] and [[Thomas Greaves (orientalist)|Thomas Greaves]]. It has been considered as the last and most scholarly ever printed.
+In Revelation 16:5 his [[1549 AD|1549]] Ethiopian (Known today as Amharic, and formerly as Ge'ez) version has a Latin translation with the words:
+:Justus es Domine, et rectus qui fuisti et eris,..
+Eris is a Latin Verb that is the second-person singular future active indicative of sum "you will be"
+[[Image:Walton Polyglot Bible Revelation 1.4-1.8-4.8-11.17-16.5 Ethiopic.jpg|right|300px|thumb|The five Triadic Declarations in [[Brian Walton (bishop)|Brian Walton]]'s printing of the 1549 Ethiopic
+:.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 1:4
+:.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 1:8
+:.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 4:8
+:.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ..Revelation 11:17
+:.....ዘሀሎከ ወትሄሉ....Revelation 16:5]]
+:.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 1:4
+:.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 1:8
+:.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ...Revelation 4:8
+:.....ዘሀሎ ወይሄሉ..Revelation 11:17
+:.....ዘሀሎከ ወትሄሉ....Revelation 16:5
+The final form has ዘሀሎከ not ዘሀሎ, and ወትሄሉ not ወይሄሉ. The ወትሄሉ  is translated in 2 John [http://mermru.com/bibles/51/671/verses/ here] as "shall be" or "will be" in many bibles.
+It is interesting that in a modern Ethiopic translation of Exodus 3:14 it uses ዘሀሎ (''za-hallo'') for I am.
+:14 ወይቤሎ ፡ እግዚአብሔር ፡ አነ ፡ ውእቱ ፡ ዘሀሎ ፡ ወይቤሎ ፡ ከመዝ ፡ ትብሎሙ ፡ ለደቂቀ ፡ እስራኤል ፡ ዘሀሎ ፡ ፈነወኒ ፡ ኀቤክሙ ። [https://www.bible.promo/chapters.php?id=10053&pid=4&tid=1&bid=39]
+At times ዘሀሎ (''za-hallo'') can be translated as "I was" (this translation can be seen here https://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/s14173.pdf):
+:''See also [[Garima Gospels]]''
+====[[Arabic]]====
+[[Image:Arabic Revelation 16.5 1657.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Arabic bible in the 1657 London Polyglot of Walton at Revelation 16:5]]
+[[Image:Arabic Revelation 16.5 1657 Latin.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Latin translation of the Arabic bible in the 1657 London Polyglot of Walton at Revelation 16:5]]
+The Arabic bible in the [[1657 AD|1657]] [[London Polyglot]] of [[Brian Walton]] at Revelation 16:5 has an accompanying [[Latin]] translation which says:
+:Æterne
+Which means the eternal. This was also the translation used in several French editions, and links to I AM, Jehovah, and is a summery of who wast, art, and shalt be.
+====Papyrus 47====
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Papyrus 47.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Revelation 16:5 in [[Greek]] in the 3rd century Manuscript [[Papyrus 47]] which reads: "...KAI OC HN KAI OCIOC (...and which wast and holy one)"]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Papyrus 47 close up.JPG|300px|thumb|right|A close up of the Kai Osios in Revelation 16:5 in [[Greek]] in the 3rd century Manuscript [[Papyrus 47]]]]
+The oldest Greek text of Revelation P 47 is from the 3rd century and contains this passage, has a textual variant. It contains the “and” in the verse. One must ask, “and…” what? What was P47 going on to read? Beza has pointed out that in the manuscript for the [[Latin Vulgate]], the text was foolish and divisional because of the “and” but the same issue occurs in P47 but modern critics reject the early Papyrus reading here as it once again caused the sentence to be foolish and divisional.
+The methodology of modern textual critics is to follow the "oldest and best" manuscripts. But if they followed the “and” in P47 here they would end up with reading like this:
+:“Righteous art Thou, the Being One, AND the One who was, AND ''the Holy One.''”
+[[Papyrus 47]] is slightly worn, the Greek text which Beza used was greatly worn. This is so noted by Beza himself in his footnote on Revelation 16:5.
+====Septuagint====
+The word ἐσόμενος appears in the [[LXX]] (most probably Origen's work):
+:[[Job 15:14]] τίς γὰρ ὢν βροτός, ὅτι ἔσται ἄμεμπτος, ἢ ὡς <u>ἐσόμενος</u> δίκαιος γεννητὸς γυναικός;
+:[[Job 15:14]] What ''is'' man, that he <u>should be</u> clean? and ''he which is'' born of a woman, that he should be righteous?
+====Clement of Alexandria====
+Clement of Alexandria (3rd century) referred to God as "ο εσομενος" in The Stromata, Book V, 6:
+:"ἀτὰρ καὶ τὸ τετράγραμμον ὄνομα τὸ μυστικόν, ὃ περιέκειντο οἷς μόνοις τὸ ἄδυτον βάσιμον ἦν· λέγεται δὲ Ἰαού, ὃ μεθερμηνεύεται ὁ ὢν <u>'''καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος'''</u>."
+:"Further, the mystic name of four letters which was affixed to those alone to whom the adytum was accessible, is called Jave, which is interpreted, “Who is <u>'''and shall be'''</u>.”" (Christian Classics Ethereal Library)
+====[[Gregory of Nyssa]]====
+[[Gregory of Nyssa]] in the 4th century referred to Christ as "ο εσομενος" in On the Baptism of Christ:
+:"Κοσμήτωρ δὲ πάντως τῆς νύμφης ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ ὢν καὶ πρόων <u>καὶ ἐσόμενος</u>͵ εὐλογητὸς νῦν καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων͵ ἀμήν."
+:"And verily the Adorner of the bride is Christ, Who is, and was, <u>and shall be</u>, blessed now and for evermore. Amen."
+====[[Priscillian of Avila]]====
+[[Priscillian of Avila]] in the 4th century wrote in Latin:
+:Ipse est enim qui fuit, est '''<u>et futurus est</u>''' et uisus a saeculis "verbum caro factus inhabitauit in nobis" (Jn 1:14)
+:He is that who was, is '''<u>and shall be</u>''', and appeared as "the Word" from eternity, "was made flesh, dwelled in us," (Jn 1:14)
+Context
+:[PAGE 32]
+:Tractatus I
+:Priscilliani Liber Apologeticus
+::Esti fides nostra nullis uitae offendiculis inpedita securum catholicae dispositionis iter tendens ad deum libera sit, tamen quia zabolica obtrectatione
+pulsata in eo quod percutitur plus probatur, gloriosum nobis uidimus, beatissimi sacerdotes, ut non redarguente conscientia, quamuis frequentibus libellis locuti fidem nostram hereticorum omnium docmata damnauerimus et libello fratrum nostrorum Tiberiani, Asarbi et ceterorum, ,cum quibus nobis una fides et unus est sensus, cuncta docmata quae contra Christum uideantur esse damnata sint et probata quae pro Christo, tamen etiam nunc, quia id uultis, sicut
+scribtum est "parati semper ad confessionem omni poscenti no rationem de fide et spe quae est in nobis" (1 Pet 3:15) tacere noluimus, quod iubetis. Etenim confessione repetita licet in oculis uestris sit omne quod uiuimus et constituti in fidei luce nulla "tenebrosae conuersationis" (cf. Is 9:12) secreta sectemur, non abnuimus tamen, ut etiam ignorantibus nos satisfieret, ne quis in nos credens male alteris inueniabili edrrore peccaret, non ecusantes quin "ostenderemus ore quod credebamus in corde." (cf. Rom 10:10) Quamuis enim gloriari in his quae fuimus non oporteat, tamen non ita obscuro editi ad saeculum loco aut insipientes uocati sumus, ut fides Christi et eruditio credendi mortem nobis potius adferre potuerit quam salutem. Ad haec enim, ut ipsi nouistis, peractis omnibus humanae uitae experiementis et malorum nostrorum conuersationibus repudiatis tamquam in portum securae quietis intrauimus. Agnoscentes enim
+quoniam "nemo misi ex aqua et spiritu sancto renatus ascenderet in regna caelorum," (Jn 3:5) "castificauimus animas nostras ad obaudiendum fidei per spiritum" (1 Pet 1:22) "repudiatis prioris uitae desideriis," (1 Pet 1:14) "in quibus erubescebamus," (Rom 6:21) ad innouatae iter gratiae simbolum atolicae obseruationis acceptimus, quod tenemus, ut intrantes lauacrum, redemptionem corporis nostri, et "baptizati in Christo induti Christum" (Gal 3:27) inanem saeculi gloriam respuentes ipisi uni uitam nostram sicut dedimus dederemus, qui peccatorum remissione concessa passus ipse pro nobis et redemptionem animis nostris praestitit et salutem. Quis enim est qui legens scribturas et "unam fidem unum baptisma unum deum" (Eph 4:5-6) credens hereticorum dogmatat stulta non damnet, qui, dum uolunt humanis conparare diuina, diuidunt unitam in dei uirtute substantiam et magnitudinem Christi tripertito ecclesiae fonte uenerabilem Binionitarum scelere partiuntur, cum scribtum sit: "ego sum deus et non est alius praeter me iustus" (Is 45:21) et "saluator non est praeter me," (Hos 13:14) et: "eo primus et ego posthaec et praeter me non est deus," (Is 44:6) "quis sicut ego?" (Is 44:7) item alibi: "ego sum et ante me non fuit alius, et post me non erit similis mihi; ego deus et non est praeter me qui saluos faciat;" (Is 43:10-11) et iterum Moyse dicente: "dominus deus noster deus unus est," (Deut 6:4) Hieremias ait: "hic est deus noster nec reputabitur alius absque eum qui inuenit omnem uiam sapientiae et dedit eam Iacob puero suo et Istrahel dilecto suo; posthaec in terris uisus est et cum hominibus conuersatus est." (Baruch 3:36-38) Ipse est enim qui fuit, est et futurus est et uisus a saeculis "verbum caro factus inhabitauit in nobis" (Jn 1:14) et crucifixus deuicta morte uitae heres effectus est ac tertia die resurgens factus futuri forma spem nostrac resurrectionis ostendit et ascendens in caelos uenientibus ad se iter construit "totus in patre et pater in ipso," (cf. Jn 14:11) ut manifestaretur quod scribtum est: "gloria in excelsis deo et pax hominibus in terra bonae uoluntatis," (Lk 2:14) sicut Iohannes ait: "tria sunt quae testimonium dicunt in terra: aqua, caro et sanguis et haec tria in unum sunt, et tria sunt quae testimonium dicunt in caelo: pater, uerbum et spiritus et haec tria unum sunt in Christo Iesu." (I Jn 5:8,7)
+Translation:
+:Tractate I
+:Priscillian's Apologetical Book (Priscilliani Liber Apologeticus)
+:Collated editions: Priscilliani quae supersunt,
+:ed. G. Schepss,
+:CSEL 18 (Vienna, 1889), 3-33
+::Even though our faith which is hindered by no obstacle and attains the safe route of catholic order leading to God is free, on the other hand, since it is
+afflicted by the calumny of the devil and is more clearly proven to be worthy in fact that it is oppressed, we saw that it would have been glorious to us,
+most blessed priests - although we condemned the doctrines of all the heretics by declaring our faith in numerous writings, and by the book of our
+brothers Tiberianus, Asarbus, and all the others, with whom we share a single faith and a single opinion, all the doctrines which appeared to be against
+Christ were condemned, and those which appeared to be in support of Christ were praised, now too, nevertheless, since you want this, namely that, as is
+written, "we are always ready to confess to anyone who demands from us the principles concerning the faith and the hope, which is in us' (1 Pet 3:15) - to decide not to pass over what you command, as our conscience is irrepreshensible. Therefore, even though all that we lived and established in the light of faith is before your eyes, [and] we pursue no secret "of dark ways of life" (cf. Is 9:12), we did not say no to a repeated confession, so that we might satisfy the ignorant as well, lest someone, having malicious ideas about the others, might commit an unforgivable sin against us, as we do not refuse "to confirm with our mouth what we believed with our heart." (cf. Rom 10:10) Even though, in fact, it is not opportune to glory in what we have been, yet we were not taken to the world from such an obscure place or were called [so] foolish, that the faith in Christ and the awareness of believing might bring us death instead of salvation. Indeed into these things, as you yourselves know, after accomplishing all the experiences of life and rejecting any indulgence in our evils, we entered as into a harbour of safe quietness. Knowing that "nobody, if he has not been born again of water and Holy Spirit, will enter the kingdoms of the heavens," (Jn 3:5) "we have purified our souls to obey the faith through the Spirit," (1 Pet 1:22) and after rejecting "the former desires of life" (1 Pet 1:14) "of which we are ashamed," (Rom 6:21) we received the symbol of catholic observance leading to the path of renewed grace, which we
+follow so that, by entering the bath, redemption of our body, and "being baptized in Christ and clothed with Christ," (Gal 3:27) we may, after casting off the empty glory of the world, give our life, as we have already given it, to the one himself who suffered for us after conceding the remission of sins, and granted redemption and salvation to our souls. For who is that who, reading the Scriptures and believing "in one faith, one baptism, one God," (Eph 4:5-6) does not condemn the foolish doctrines of the heretics who, while they want to put divine things in the same class with the human, divide the substance united in the power of God and break up the venerable greatness of Christ in the tripartite foundation of the church with the crime of the Binionites, because it was written: "I am God and there is no other who is just but me," (Is 45:21) and "there is no savior besides me," (Hos 13:14) and "I am the first and I am after this and besides me there is no god;" (Is 44:6) [and] "who is like me?;" (Is 44:7) and likewise in another passage: "I am and before me there was no other and after me there shall be no similar to me; I am God and besides me there is nobody who may save;" (Is 43:10-11) and Moses says again: "The Lord is our God, the only God," (Deut 6:4) and Jeremiah declares: "this is our Lord and no other but him shall be considered, who found all the way of wisdom and gave it to Jacob his servant and to Israel his beloved; after this he was seen on earth and lived with men"? (Baruch 3:36-38) He is that who
+was, is and shall be, and appeared as "the Word" from eternity, "was made flesh, dwelled in us and," (Jn 1:14) after being crucified, since death had been
+conquered, was made heir of life; and by rising on the third day, as he was made the type of future, he showed the hope of our resurrection, and by scending
+to the heavens he built the path for those who came to him, while he was "all in the Fathers and the Father in him," (cf. Jn 14:11) so that what was written might be manifested: "Glory to God in the highest peace on earth to people of good will;" (Lk 2:14) [and] as John says: "There are three who testify on earth, the water, the flesh, and the blood, and these three are in one, and there are three who testify in heaven, the Fathers, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one in Jesus Christ." (1 Jn 5:8,7)
+<small>Priscillian and Marco Conti. Priscillian of Avila: The Complete Works. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.</small>
+Amazon [www.amazon.com/Priscillian-Avila-Complete-Oxford-Christian/dp/0199567379]
+====[[Gregory of Nazianzus]]====
+[[Gregory of Nazianzus]] ([[329 AD|329]]-[[390 AD]]) has in his Oration 41 the allusion:
+:ἦν μὲν ἀεὶ, καὶ ἔστι, καὶ ἔσται
+Translated as:
+:then, always existed, and exists, and always will exist.
+In context:
+:Τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ἦν μὲν ἀεὶ, καὶ ἔστι, καὶ ἔσται, οὔτε ἀρξάμενον , οὔτε παυσόμενον, ἀλλ' ἀεὶ Πατρὶ καὶ Υἱῷ συντεταγμένον, καὶ συναριθμού μενον· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἔπρεπεν ἐλλείπειν ποτὲ, ἢ Υἱὸν Πα τρὶ, ἢ Πνεῦμα Υἱῷ.
+Translated as:
+:The Holy Ghost, then, always existed, and exists, and always will exist. He neither had a beginning, nor will He have an end; but He was everlastingly ranged with and numbered with the Father and the Son.
+This is clearly speaking of the eternality of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Ghost:
+:then, always existed, (wast)
+:and exists, (art)
+:and always will exist. (shalt be)
+Translated by Charles Gordon Browne and James Edward Swallow. From Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 7. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1894.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.
+>>www.newadvent.org/fathers/310241.htm
+Migne Graeca PG 36, 441-442 [441B]
+>>books.google.com/books?id=7fMUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA411#v=onepage&q&f=false
+====Epiphanius of Salamis====
+[[Image:Epiphanius of Salamis tetragrammaton.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Epiphanius of Salamis says He who was and is and always exists]]
+[[Epiphanius of Salamis]] (Greek: Ἐπιφάνιος; c. 310–320 – 403) was bishop of Salamis, Cyprus, at the end of the 4th century.He was born in Palestine and spent a considerable part of his life there, gives Ἰά (Ia) and Ἰάβε (pronounced at that time /ja'vε/) and explains Ἰάβε as meaning He who was and is and always exists.
+:ὁ ὢν Κύριος Ἰάβε, ὅς ἦν καὶ ἔστι καὶ ἀει ὢν.
+:The LORD JEHOVAH He who was and is and always exists.
+Latin: Adonai qui est Dominus: Jabe, qui erat, et est, et semper exsistit;
+(https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ixcRAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=true) Epiphanius, Panarion, I, iii, 40, in P.G., XLI, col. 685
+====[[Basil of Caesarea]]====
+Basil of Caesarea (The Great) (329-379 AD) has a reference to the Triadic Declaration in Eunomium Book 5:
+:μὴ γὰρ ὅ τι οὐκ ἔστιν. '''<u>Ὃ γάρ ἐστιν, ἦν, καὶ ἔστι, καὶ ἔσται ἀεί·</u>''' καὶ τοῖς πᾶσι τὸ εἶναι δωρεῖται, ὡς φύσει ὢν Θεός.
+:'''<u>For what it “is," it was, and it is, and it will always be</u>''', and it gives the being [existence] to everyone, because it is He Who Is by nature.
+In context:
+:Εἰ γὰρ αὐτῷ τῷ παναγίῳ Θεῷ τὰ περὶ αὐτοῦ ἀπιστοῦσι· πῶς τῶν προφητῶν αὐτοῦ ἢ ἀποστόλων ἀκούσωσι, λεγόν των ἐν θείαις Γραφαῖς τὰ περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῶν εἰς αὐτὸν μελλόντων ἐλπίζειν; Πιστεῦσαι γὰρ δεῖ τὸν προσερχόμενον τῷ Θεῷ, ὅτι ἔστι. Πιστεῦσαι· μὴ γὰρ ἀπίστως περιεργάζεσθαι ὅ τί ἐστιν· μὴ γὰρ ὅ τι οὐκ ἔστιν. '''<u>Ὃ γάρ ἐστιν, ἦν, καὶ ἔστι, καὶ ἔσται ἀεί·</u>''' καὶ τοῖς πᾶσι τὸ εἶναι δωρεῖται, ὡς φύσει ὢν Θεός.
+:because if we refuse to to believe in the God three times holy himself, when he speaks of him, how could one then lend a docile ear to his prophets or his apostles, when, in the holy scriptures, they speak of him or of those who owe hope in him? "For he who comes to God must believe that he is" [Hebr., Xi, 6]. Pay attention to these words: they are as absolute as they are formal: it is necessary that the one who seeks God "believe that he is", and certainly not that he searches with an incredulous curiosity "what it is", for not not to say what it is not. '''<u>For what it “is," it was, and it is, and it will always be</u>''', and it gives the being [existence] to everyone, because it is He Who Is by nature.
+The latin in the text below has:
+:Quod enim est, erat, et est, et erit semper
+:That is, was and is and always will be
+<small>[https://books.google.com.au/books?id=OQ8RAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA684&hl=en&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=true Migne Grace PG 29 751-752 PDF p. 70] </small>
+====Sahidic====
+====Jerome====
+Jerome confirmed that there were a number of various Latin editions of the New Testament which differed in both translation and content before and around 405 AD (when Jerome finished his Vulgate). Most of these we do not have today. John Wordsworth revealed (who edited and footnoted a three volume critical edition of the New Testament in Latin) the like phrase in Revelation 1:4 “which is, and which was, and which is to come;” sometimes is rendered in Latin as “qui est et qui fuisti et futurus es” instead of the Vulgate “qui est et qui erat et qui venturus est.” (John Wordsworth, Nouum Testamentum Latine, vol.3, 422 and 424.)
+Note that Wordsworth assumed that the quote was from Revelation 1:4, but it reads just like Beatus whom we shall examine soon. Jerome said in Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi epistulae:
+:sic et mille annorum spatia apud te, qui semper es et futurus es et fuisti…
+translated as
+:Even so, for a thousand year period, you were, and you are, and you shall be, …
+Jerome has the exact reading of “shall be”.
+====[[Tyconius]]====
+The commentary of Revelation  in [[380 AD]] was translated by [[Beatus of Liebana]] ([[786 AD]]) in his commentary of Revelation which uses the Latin phrase: "qui fuisti '''<u>et futures es</u>'''" ''See [[#Beatus of Liebana]]''
+====Primasius====
+Primasius, Bishop of Hadrumetum, wrote a commentary on Revelation around 552 AD and used the Latin word "pius" instead of "sanctus." They mean the same, but it does reveal yet another variance in the text.
+====Alcuin====
+Alcuin of York (735 – 19 May 804 AD) was an English scholar, clergyman, poet and teacher from York, Northumbria. He was the student of Archbishop Ecgbert at York. At the invitation of Charlemagne, he became a leading scholar and teacher at the Carolingian court, where he remained a figure in the 780s and '90s. He wrote:[http://www.mlat.uzh.ch/MLS/xfromcc.php?tabelle=Alcuinus_cps2&rumpfid=Alcuinus_cps2,%20Officia%20per%20ferias,%20%20%20%20p87&id=Alcuinus_cps2,%20Officia%20per%20ferias,%20%20%20%20p87,%20%20%20%20%20%201&level=99&level9798=&satz=1&hilite_id=Alcuinus_cps2,%20Officia%20per%20ferias,%20%20%20%20p87,%20%20%20%20%20%201&string=Et!Qui!eris&binary=&corpus=&target=&lang=0&home=&von=suchergebnis&hide_apparatus=1&inframe=1&jumpto=1#1]
+:Dominator Domine Deus omnipotens, qui es Trinitas una, Pater in Filio, Filius in Patre, cum Spiritu sancto: '''<u>qui es</u>''' semper in omnibus, '''<u>et eras</u>''' ante omnia, '''<u>et eris</u>''' super omnia Deus benedictus in saecula.
+Translated as
+:Sovereign Lord God almighty, who art Trinity together, the Father in the Son, the Son in the Father, with the holy Spirit: '''<u>who art</u>''' always in all things, '''<u>and wast</u>''' before all things, '''<u>and shalt be</u>''' God over all things blessed forever.
+This represented the exact formula of Revelation 16:5:
+:'''<u>who art</u>''' always in all things,
+:'''<u>and wast</u>''' before all things,
+:'''<u>and shalt be</u>''' God over all things blessed forever.
+In the Latin:
+Beza's Latin text reads
+:Qui es, & Qui eras, & Qui eris,
+:'''<u>qui es</u>''' semper in omnibus,
+:'''<u>et eras</u>''' ante omnia,
+:'''<u>et eris</u>''' super omnia Deus benedictus in saecula.
+====[[Beatus of Liébana]]====
+[[Beatus of Liébana]] ([[786 AD]]) in a commentary of Revelation uses the Latin phrase: "qui fuisti '''<u>et futures es</u>'''" when he was making a compilation of the work of Tyconius, who wrote his commentary on Revelation around [[380 AD]]. [http://bdh-rd.bne.es/viewer.vm?id=0000051522]
+It is unknown to us whether Beza knew of the Beatus/Tyconius reference, or that there were other such references that he simply did not mention. In the age of Beza, the Reformation Bible scholars were very deep readers of the early church writers. If Beza did know of it, then it would be wrong to call this a conjectural emendation, since that reference would source as one of the oldest extant on Revelation 16:5. On the other hand, if the Beatus/Tyconius reference was discovered later, and was unknown to Theodore Beza, then this later discovery can be seen as a truly remarkable confirmation of the strength of his textual thinking on Revelation 16:5.
+Wordsworth also points out that in Revelation 16:5, Beatus of Liebana (who compiled a commentary on the book of Revelation) uses the Latin phrase "qui fuisti '''<u>et futures es</u>'''." This gives some additional evidence for the Greek reading by Beza. Beatus compiled his commentary in 786 AD. Furthermore, Beatus was not writing his own commentary. Instead he was making a compilation and thus preserving the work of Tyconius, who wrote his commentary on Revelation around 380 AD (Aland and Aland, 211 and 216. Altaner, 437. Wordsword, 533.). So, it would seem that as early as 786, and possibly even as early as 380, their was an Old Latin text which read as Beza's Greek text does.
+====[[Haymo of Halberstadt]]====
+''(From KJV Today)''
+[[Image: KJV Today Pic Haimo Halberstadensis Rev 16.5.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[https://books.googleusercontent.com/books/content?req=AKW5QadHg7wP0y46pcIpqHCRobCd-O1pb2rvaaYwkYj5o-ki0se769saIRStL2-sCYyzTCUnZxrpyEZUhXbRP2VSYJjMYwbueWxCiMkZ9KmRHNSwUxmAL0cCLi3cJDSa5GwlUNxeoBstDN_xSLBol3nFUncGLmKARvv6lDHeV7cWzXMNH7d9YcofujKli3JUtYJjaf8pWkvX0JmD0jYH9krN3AgPgVqrYT-VM-cGzyBLvcAqCcWbT23tjby9HBN0HEQ-l7yI_MgTKxWmTEOTa-nF44kuvF-GZinWkeSR5xLdljz7BwYHYME].]]
+The text from "dicentem" to "eris" translated into English is:
+"[Saying: Thou art just, who were holy.] In past times it is used here for three times, that is, for the past, present, and future.  Who were holy, are and shall be just."
+There are two interesting features of this commentary.  First, the quotation from the biblical text, [dicentem: Justus es qui eras sanctus.] is not Beza's conjectured reading. However, it is neither the reading found in the existing manuscripts nor in the Vulgate.  The reading, being translated, "You are just, who were holy" is missing the clause, "and who are" (Latin: "& qui es").  The Vulgate reads, "dicentem iustus es qui es et qui eras sanctus".
+Second, the commentary includes the sentence, "Who were holy, are and shall be just", using the verbs, "eras", "es" and "eris".  The association of "justice" with the past, present and future only occurs at Beza's Revelation 16:5.  The previous triadic declarations at 1:4, 1:8, 4:8 and 11:17 do not associate the formula with God's "justice".  Haimo's commentary text carries the sense of Beza's Latin translation of his 1598 Greek Textus Receptus, which reads, "Justus es, Domine, Qui es, & Qui eras, & Qui eris".  Beza chose "eris" as the translation of "εσομενος" (shalt be), which is also the Latin word in Haimo's commentary.  Haimo used "eris" (shalt be) for the future rather than "venturus est" (is to come) despite the previous occurrences of the formula in Revelation 1:4, 1:8 and 4:8 in the Vulgate having "venturus est" as the future.
+It appears as though the original commentary included the biblical text as conjectured by Beza, and whoever compiled the present edition of the commentary took the commentary section from the original commentary and took the biblical text from a faulty version of the Vulgate.
+====Thomas Aquinas====
+In Commentary on the Book On the Divine Names of Blessed Denys ''In librum B. Dionysii De divinis nominibus expositio'', it says in section 661:
+:Deinde, cum dicit: propter hoc etc., infert conclusionem ex dictis; et dicit quod, propter hoc quod Deus est principium omnibus, in sacra Scriptura ipse Deus qui vere praeexistit omnibus, multipliciter laudatur secundum omnem rationem existentium. Dicitur enim de eo, quod erat et est et futurus est, per quod intelligitur quod factum est, idest praeteritum et quod fit, idest praesens et quod fiet, idest futurum. (Marietti)
+Translated as:
+:Then when he says, and on account of this, from the eloquences, he infers a conclusion from the things said; and he says that, on account of this: that God is the principle of all things, in Sacred Scripture God himself who truly preexists all things is praised in many ways according to every ratio of existing things. For there is said of him '''<u>what was and is and shall be</u>''', through which there is understood what has been made, that is, the past; and what is made, that is, the present; and what shall be made, that is, the future. (Hannon)
+[https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~DeDivNom.C5.L2.42]
+====Lorenzo Valla====
+Lorenzo Valla has:
+:Iustus es domine qui es & qui eras Sanctus: quia haec iudicasti. graece est: ut superius admonui: erat non eras: quasi dicatur tu domine, is qui est & qui erat qui sanctus, neque enim graece sanctus refertur ad erat ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν ὁ ἅγιος.
+Translated as (Google Translate):
+:You are just, Lord, who are you and who were holy, because you have judged these things. it is in Greek: as I reminded above: it was not you were: as if it were said, Lord, he who is and who was who is holy, for in Greek the holy is not referred to erat ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν ὁ ἅγιος.
+====Erasmus====
+[[Image: Revelation 16.5 Erasmus Annotationes Greek.jpg|thumb|300px|right|ὁ ὢν, ὁ ἦν ὁ '''<u>ἐρχόμενος</u>''' at Revealtion 16:5 in Erasmus' [[1535 AD|1535]] Annotations]]
+The five editions of Erasmus in the Annotations have the reading of ὁ ἐρχόμενος.
+:Qui es, & qui eras.) Quanquam interpres mutauit perfonam, tamen to tidem syllabis dictu est, quibus superius, qui est, qui erat, qui venturus est, ὁ ὢν, ὁ ἦν '''<u>ὁ ἐρχόμενος</u>'''.
+Translated as:
+:Thou, who art, and who wast, the.) Although interpreter changed from, however to flow with the list mentioned above, who is, who was, who is to come, ὁ ὢν, ὁ ἦν '''<u>ὁ ἐρχόμενος</u>'''.
+<small>Erasmus' [[1535 AD|1535]] Annotations</small>
+In the dedication to Pope Leo X in his Novum Instrumentum omne, Erasmus said:
+:“I have added annotations of my own, in order in the first place to show the reader what changes I have made, and why; second, to disentangle and explain anything that may be complicated, ambiguous, or obscure.”
+Erasmus included καὶ ὁ ὅσιος in his main text, but he clearly expressed doubt as to the authenticity of the reading in his annotations. The annotations are like a running commentary for the biblical text and reveal Erasmus’ aims and methods. Erasmus was always striving for a faithful text that was understandable and correct to the Greek. Annotations revealed so much more than the one-sided meaning in the text.
+====Early English Bibles====
+The earlier English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision did not have “and shalt be“ at this verse. Tyndale's New Testament, Coverdale’s Bible, Matthew's Bible, Great Bible, Whittingham's New Testament, and the Geneva Bible all have "holy" while the Bishops’ Bible has “holy one.”
+====[[Theodore Beza]]====
+===Translations of Beza's Note===
+Jan Krans:
+TurretinFan:
+KJV Today Website:
+Jeff Riddle:
+Steven Boyce's Smithsonian friend:
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Beza 1598 Footnote.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Footnote at [[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Latin]] in the [[1598 AD|1598]] New Testament of Beza]]
+''See Also [[Revelation 16:5 Beza 1598]]''
+Beza was the first to place the reading into the main part of the text in 1582. <small>Theodorus Beza, Novum D. N. Iesu Christi testamentum, sive Novum Foedus (Geneva: Henricus Stephanus, 31582)</small>
+In Beza’s hand copy (b305); p. 647), ὁ ὅσιος is underlined, and ὁ ἐσόμενος entered in the margin.
 [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] himself comments on this change in a marginal note of his [[Greek]] [[New Testament]]:
+:"Et Qui eris, και ο εσομενος": The usual publication is "και ο οσιος," which shows a division, contrary to the whole phrase which is foolish, distorting what is put forth in scripture. The Vulgate, however, whether it is articulately correct or not, is not proper in making the change to "οσιος, Sanctus," since a section (of the text) has worn away the part after "και," which would be absolutely necessary in connecting "δικαιος" and "οσιος." But with John there remains a completeness where the name of Jehovah (the Lord) is used, just as we have said before, 1:4; he always uses the three closely together, therefore it is certainly "και ο εσομενος," for why would he pass over it in this place? And so without doubting the genuine writing in this ancient manuscript, I faithfully restored in the good book what was certainly there, "ο εσομενος." So why not truthfully, with good reason, write "ο ερχομενος" as before in four other places, namely 1:4 and 8; likewise in 4:3 and 11:17, because the point is the just Christ shall come away from there and bring them into being: in this way he will in fact appear sitting in judgment and exercising his just and eternal decrees.
-:"''And shall be''": The usual publication is "''holy one''," which shows a division, contrary to the whole phrase which is foolish, distorting what is put forth in scripture. The [[Latin Vulgate|Vulgate]], however, whether it is articulately correct or not, is not proper in making the change to "''holy''," since a section (of the text) has worn away the part after "''and''," which would be absolutely necessary in connecting "''righteous''" and "''holy one''." But with [[St. John the Apostle|John]] there remains a completeness where the name of [[Jehovah]] (the Lord) is used, just as we have said before, [[Revelation 1:4|1:4]]; he always uses the three closely together, therefore it is certainly "''and shall be''," for why would he pass over it in this place? And so without doubting the genuine writing in this ancient manuscript, I faithfully restored in the good book what was certainly there, "''shall be''." So why not truthfully, with good reason, write "''which is to come''" as before in four other places, namely [[Revelation 1:4|1:4]] and [[Revelation 1:8|8]]; likewise in [[Revelation 4:3|4:3]] and [[Revelation 11:17|11:17]], because the point is the just Christ shall come away from there and bring them into being: in this way he will in fact appear setting in judgment and exercising his just and eternal decrees.
+''([[Theodore Beza]], Nouum Sive Nouum Foedus Iesu Christi, [[1588 AD|1588]]. Translated into [[English]] from the [[Latin]] footnote.)''<sup>[1]</sup>
-'''([[Theodore Beza]], Nouum Sive Nouum Foedus Iesu Christi, [[1589 AD|1589]]. Translated into [[English]] from the [[Latin]] footnote.)'''
+Although [[Daniel Wallace]] is flawed many levels concerning his understanding of [[Textual criticism|textual criticism]], he provides this excellent example that fits here:
-Notice [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] said:
+:“Imagine we came across an early manuscript copy of the Constitution of the United States, and the preamble said, “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect onion …” If we were to see that line, we would know that “union” was the original word, not “onion”.”
-::"And so without doubting the genuine writing '''in this ancient manuscript''', I faithfully restored in the good book what was certainly there"
+[[Theodore Beza]] was a world class expert in the [[Greek language]]. Having provided so much material on the bible, from translating the French bible, Geneva Bible, Geneva French, including many Greek editions, commentaries, dictionaries, and so much literature on the biblical text for so many years, I would suggest that Beza's familiarity with the text and with similar issues, demonstrated to him that this was an error and to reject his reading one should firstly show that they are on the same level of scholarship as Beza, or the KJV translators to provide an adequate refutation.
-[[Jeffrey Khoo]] wrote the following about the above words of [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] [http://www.febc.edu.sg/BBVol15_2c.htm]:
+;A break up of Beza's comment
+[[Image:Beza Annotations 1594 Rev 16.5.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Beza Annotations of 1594 at [[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Latin]] which is identical to the footnote at Revelation 16:5 in Latin in the 1598 New Testament of Beza]]
+[[Theodore Beza|Beza]] noted that :
-Besides the ancient Greek manuscript that [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] had, it ought to be noted that Beatus of Liebana in the eighth century, in his compilation of commentaries on the Book of Revelation has the Latin phrase, qui fuisti et futures es, for Revelation 16:5 which was found in the commentary of Tyconius which goes back to the fourth century.51 It is entirely possible that there were either early Greek manuscripts or Old Latin versions as early as the fourth century which contained the reading esomenos.
+:"Et Qui eris, και ο εσομενος": The usual publication is "και ο οσιος,"
-It is also significant to note that the reading hosios preferred by Combs is a harder reading. Robert L Thomas, Professor of [[New Testament]] at The Master’s Seminary, citing Swete commented,
+So Beza was well aware that the of majority of readings were "και ο οσιος," but he goes on to give several reasons as to why this reading caused grammatical problems. Although Beza is silent concerning sources, this does not mean that he was not influenced by any, such as the minority Latin textual variant, as there are two Latin commentaries with readings of Revelation 16:5 which agree with [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] in referring to the future aspect of God. He goes on:
-::"Taking hosios as parallel with dikaios creates an intolerable harshness, however, and taking the adjective as a predicate adjective with ho on and ho en breaks the pattern of the Apocalypse in not assigning the expression a predicate nominative or adjective."
+:which shows a division, contrary to the whole phrase which is foolish, distorting what is put forth in scripture.
-We note that the reading ho esomenos, the future participle of eimi in its masculine, singular, nominative form with the definite article fits well the pattern of the Apocalypse and functions well as an adjectival participle to describe dikaios—the Righteous One who shall soon come to judge a most wicked world.
+Based on the style of the author, John, [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] saw that the correct reading was ''shalt be'' not ''Holy'' or ''Holy One'' John uses ''holy one'' only once in [[1 John 2:20]] and he used a different Greek word [[ἁγίου]]. With additional ''kai'' in [[Papyrus 47]] it causes the sentence to be nonsensical without the change. The ''kai'' gives weight to Beza's correction.
-Although it is admitted that ho esomenos is not the reading found in the Majority Text, we are wont to agree with Hills that such minority readings "seem to have been placed in the Greek [[Textus Receptus|TR]] by the direction of God’s special providence and therefore are to be retained."53 It is also admitted that the reading of ho hosios in Stephen’s edition of the TR differs from [[Theodore Beza|Beza]]’s ho esomenos. So what do we do with the rare occasions when the several editions of the TR differ from one another? Hills replied,
+Beza saw this erroneous pattern below:
-The answer to this question is easy. We are guided by the common faith. Hence we favor that form of the [[Textus Receptus]] upon which more than any other God, working providentially, has placed the stamp of His approval, namely, the [[King James Version]], or, more precisely the [[Greek]] text underlying the [[King James Version]].
+::.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:4
+::.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:8
+::.....ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 4:8
+::.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος·..Revelation 11:17
+::.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν <u>καὶ ὁ ὅσιος</u>...........Revelation 16:5
-==[[D. A. Waite]]==
+So he adapted his text to flow with the formula of John:
-[[D. A. Waite]] says that modern English versions are theologically deficient at Revelation 16:5 for the removal of "and shalt be" (Defending the KJB, p. 170). Waite wrote: “The removal of ‘and shalt be’ puts in doubt the eternal future of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is certainly a matter of doctrine and theology” (p. 170).
+::.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν  καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:4
+::.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν  καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:8
+::.....ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν  καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 4:8
+::.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν  καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος·..Revelation 11:17
+::.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, <u>καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος</u>....Revelation 16:5
-==John Wordsworth==
+Beza claims that the reading caused a division between the words and that it made the reading "foolish, distorting what is put forth in scripture."''
+The foolish and divisional reading is demonstrated in English versions:
+* [[1395 AD|1395]] [And the thridde aungel… seide,] Just art thou, Lord, that art, '''<u>and that were hooli,</u>''' that demest these thingis; (Wycliffe)
+* [[1526 AD|1526]] And I herde an angell saye: lorde which arte and wast '''<u>thou arte ryghteous and holy</u>''' because thou hast geve soche iudgmentes (Tyndale)
+* [[1535 AD|1535]] And I herde an angel saye: LORDE which art and wast, '''<u>thou art righteous and holy,</u>''' because thou hast geue soche iudgmentes, (Coverdale)
+* [[1557 AD|1557]] And I heard the Angel of the waters say, Lord, thou art iust, '''<u>Which art, and Which wast: and Holy</u>''', because thou hast iudged these things. (Geneva)
+* [[1568 AD|1568]] And I hearde the angell of the waters say: Lorde, which art, and wast, '''<u>thou art ryghteous & holy,</u>''' because thou hast geuen such iudgementes: (Bishop’s)
+So as we can see, early English versions were very perplexed as to how to translate και ο οσιος.
+Beza replaces illogical language in all earlier Greek texts/manuscripts that read ''who art and who wast and the holy one'' (no verb); ''the holy one'' interrupts the continuity of reference to God's eternality, and omits a logical third verb. Beza’s rendering speaks of eternal God of the past, present & future, as expected of a true reading, and in accord with Rev.1:4, Rev.1:8, 1:18, 4:8, & 11:17. All 5 of the Revelation verses present the obvious expected future aspect of God's eternality.
+The triadic declaration occurs five times in the [[Textus Receptus]], all in Revelation as follows:
+* [[Revelation 1:4]]: ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος
+:Δʹ Ἰωάννης ταῖς ἑπτὰ ἐκκλησίαις ταῖς ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ τοῦ '''<u>ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος</u>''' καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἑπτὰ πνευμάτων ἃ ἐστιν ἐνώπιον τοῦ θρόνου αὐτοῦ
+* [[Revelation 1:8]]: ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος
+:Ηʹ Ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ Α καὶ τὸ Ω ἀρχὴ καὶ τέλος λέγει ὁ κύριος '''<u>ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος</u>''' ὁ παντοκράτωρ
+* [[Revelation 4:8]]: ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος
+:Ηʹ καὶ τέσσαρα ζῷα ἓν καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸ εἴχον ἀνὰ πτέρυγας ἕξ κυκλόθεν καὶ ἔσωθεν γέμοντα ὀφθαλμῶν καὶ ἀνάπαυσιν οὐκ ἔχουσιν ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς λέγοντα, Ἅγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ '''<u>ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος</u>'''
+* [[Revelation 11:17]]: ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος
+:λέγοντες Εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι κύριε ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ '''<u>ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος</u>''', ὅτι εἴληφας τὴν δύναμίν σου τὴν μεγάλην καὶ ἐβασίλευσας
+The phrase ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος is directly related to the eternal name of God.
+;Also noteworthy
+* [[Revelation 1:18]]: καὶ ὁ ζῶν καὶ ἐγενόμην νεκρὸς καὶ ἰδού, ζῶν εἰμι εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων
+:καὶ ὁ ζῶν καὶ ἐγενόμην νεκρὸς καὶ ἰδού, ζῶν εἰμι εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν· καὶ ἔχω τὰς κλεῖς τοῦ ᾅδου καὶ τοῦ θανάτου
+This phrase ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος (one who is, was, and is to come) is used to create a unique identification, along with the other phrases of Alpha/Omega, first/last, beginning/end, each as identity names for the "oneness" of the Father and the Son who is the express image of God the Father (Heb 1:3). So God the Father through the Son is also ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, just as the Son is also Jehovah.
+Rev 1:4 is a reference from John, 1:8 from Jesus, 4:8 the four living creatures, and 11:17 from the 24 elders of v.16).
+;I AM
+Beza stated:
+:But with John there remains a completeness where the name of Jehovah (the Lord) is used, just as we have said before, 1:4; he always uses the three closely together, therefore it is certainly "και ο εσομενος," for why would he pass over it in this place?
+The phrase in the Revelation is John's expansion of 'ehyeh asher 'ehyeh ('I am who I am') from Exodus 3:14. In Exodus 3 God identified Himself to Moses as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and gave Moses His name:
+:'ehyeh asher 'ehyeh (אהיה אשר אהיה)
+This is usually translated as something like ' I AM THAT I AM' (KJV) literally 'I am who I am', though some arguments have been made for 'I will be who I will be'. Later writers would expand or adjust God's self-declaration when bringing it into another language.
+The Aramaic Targum Pseudo-Jonathan of Exodus 3.14 translates it into a present-future state of being:
+:I am he who is and '''<u>who will be</u>'''
+In [[Deuteronomy 32:29]] of Targum Pseudo-Jonathan later has a present-past-future state of being:
+I am he who is and who was, and '''<u>I am who I will be</u>''' [http://cal1.cn.huc.edu/showtargum.php?bookname=05&chapter=32&verse=29&Peshitta=&Sam= ]
+This latter paraphrase is identical in shape to what we see in the Revelation.
+Both the Septuagint and Philo (Life of Moses 1.75, written early-first century) translate the phrase in Exodus 3.14 into Greek as:
+:egō eimi ho ōn (ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν)
+This may be translated as either 'I am the one', or 'I am he who is'. The phrasing 'ο ων' is identical to the first part of the phrase found in the Revelation.
+With this information above, it's highly probable John's phrase common phrase 'ο ων και ο ην και ο ερχομενος/ἐσόμενος' was intended to be a translation or expansion on God's self-identification in Exodus 3.14 as Beza pointed out.
+Between the original Hebrew phrase, and the Aramaic and Greek translations, the focus is on God's state of 'being': he is, he was, ''he will be''. In the original narrative of Exodus 3, this leads into the revelation of God's own name, [[Jehovah]], which has been suggested by scholars to come from the Hebrew verb 'to be'.
+Most of the verses containing the triadic declarations in Revelation do not say God is, was, and ''will be'', it says that God is, was, and ''is to come''. The third verb isn't about God's state of being, but is an action in itself. Revelation 16:5 is the purest form of the formula.
+Revelation 4.8 has an order of past-present-future. John puts the past tense first, because this occurrence's context is the creation of the world in verse 11.
+He no doubt has in mind those many Old Testament prophetic passages which announce God will 'come' to save and judge (e.g. Ps. 96:13; 98:9; Isa. 40:10; 66:15; Zech. 14:5), and which early Christians understood to refer to his eschatological coming to fulfill his final purpose for the world, a coming they identified with the parousia of Jesus Christ.
+The future-tense verb in John's earlier phrasing is the verb 'to come', not 'to be'. Revelation 16:5 is a declaration that God exists present, past, and future. The earlier future tense of 'is to come' is mostly eschatological.
+Jesus referred to Himself as "the I AM", which has the connotation of being: He always was, and is and always will be" or 'always IS' (John 8:56-59 KJV; Exodus 3:6,11; John 10:30), which is similar in meaning to He that "was and is and will be" also the Alpha and Omega etc.
+====I AM====
+[[Image:Exodus 3.14-15 I AM KJV 1611.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Exodus 3:14-15 I AM KJV 1611]]
+אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה‎ • ('ehyé 'asher 'ehyé) m
+:An epithet of God, usually translated as "I Am That I Am" or "I Am Who I Am", literally meaning "I Will Be What I Will Be"
+The Book of Exodus, chapter 3 verse 14; translation from JPS Tanakh 1917:
+:‏וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם׃‎‎
+:vayomer ’elohim ’el-mosheh, ’ehyeh ’asher ’ehyeh; vayomer, koh tomar livnei yisra’él, ’ehyeh shelachani ’aleikhem
+:God said to Moses, "i am that i am" and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, i am sent me to you."
+The word ehyé (אֶהְיֶה the ''first-person singular future'' of הָיָה‎ ''hayá'',  'to be') appears 3 times in this verse:
+:‏וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה '''אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה''' אֲשֶׁ֣ר '''אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה''' וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל '''אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה''' שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם׃
+Victor P. Hamilton suggests "some legitimate translations ...: (1) 'I am who I am'; (2) 'I am who I was'; (3) 'I am who I shall be'; (4) 'I was who I am'; (5) 'I was who I was'; (6) 'I was who I shall be'; (7) 'I shall be who I am'; (8) 'I shall be who I was'; (9) 'I shall be who I shall be'."
+Jehovah is thought to be an archaic third-person singular of the imperfective aspect of the verb "to be" (i.e., "[He] is/was/will be"). This agrees with the passage in Exodus where God names himself as "I Will Be What I Will Be" using the first-person singular imperfective aspect, open to interpretation as present tense ("I am what I am"), future ("I shall be what I shall be"), or imperfect ("I used to be what I used to be").
+Yehovah [יְהוָֹה] meant “He will be, is, & was” & formed from Hebrew letters of verb which meant “Is” [היה]:
+:Ye [י] of Yihyeh [יִהְיֶה] “He will be”
+:Hov [הו] of Hoveh [הוֶה] “He is”
+:Ah [ָה] of Hayah [הָיָה] “He was”
+====[[Chiastic structure]]====
+The pattern is also a [[Chiastic structure]]:
+:A.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν  καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:4
+::B.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν  καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 1:8
+:::C.....ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν  καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος...Revelation 4:8
+::B.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν  καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος·..Revelation 11:17
+:A.....ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος....Revelation 16:5
+In English:
+:A.....which is, and which was, and which is to come Revelation 1:4
+::B.....which is, and which was, and which is to come Revelation 1:8
+:::C.....which was, and is, and is to come Revelation 4:8
+::B.....which art, and wast, and art to come Revelation 11:17
+:A.....which art, and wast, and shalt be Revelation 16:5
+Showing the tenses:
+:A.....present tense, past tense, future tense Revelation 1:4
+::B.....present tense, past tense, future tense Revelation 1:8
+:::C.....'''past''' tense, '''present''' tense, '''future''' tense Revelation 4:8
+::B.....present tense, past tense, future tense Revelation 11:17
+:A.....present tense, past tense, future tense Revelation 16:5
+====Ancient Manuscript====
+:"And so without doubting the genuine writing <u>in this ancient manuscript</u>, I faithfully restored in the good book what was certainly there"
+[[image:Revelation 16.5 French Bible 1605.jpg|thumb|right|300px|The Triadic Declaration at Revelation 16.5 in the 1605 French Bible of Beza]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Commentary David Pareus.JPG|300px|thumb|right|David Pareus on Beza's notes at Revelation 16:5 ... Bezas who fhalt be ( as Beza hath brought to light out of an ancient manifcript ) . though it commonly be read , and holy as cohering with the foregoing...[https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ueqEoMZPcmoC&lpg=RA1-PA384&ots=K5yHVsLbuF&dq=%22hath%20brought%20to%20light%20out%20of%20an%20ancient%22&pg=RA1-PA384#v=onepage&q&f=false].]]
+====Spanish====
+The 1865 Spanish bible reads "shall be" whereas the 1569 and 1602 have el Santo, "holy":
+:[[1569 AD|1569]] Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Señor, tú eres justo, que eres y que eras <u>el Santo</u>, porque has juzgado estas cosas; (Sagradas Escrituras)
+:[[1602 AD|1602]] Y oí al Angel de las aguas, que dezía: Señor, tu eres justo, *que eres, y que eras, <u>y Santo</u>, porque haz juzgado estas cosas, (Valera)
+:[[1865 AD|1865]] Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Tú eres justo, oh Señor, que eres, y que eras, <u>y que serás</u>, porque has juzgado así:
+:[[2013 AD|2013]] Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, oh Señor, que eres y que eras, <u>y serás</u>, porque has juzgado así. (Reina–Valera Gomez)
+====John Calvin====
+Speaking in defense of the Hebrew etymology of Jehovah against a pagan one, Calvin also noted in his Commentary on Genesis:
+:Consequently, it is to be traced to “a Hebrew etymology.” We need not follow him into the discussion on the right pronunciation of the word, and the use of the vowel points belonging to , (Adonai); it may suffice to state, that he deduces the name (Jehovah,) from the future of the verb or , to be. Hence the meaning of the appellation may be expressed in the words, “He who is to be (for ever).” This derivation of the name Jehovah he regards as being confirmed “by all the passages of Scripture, in which a derivation of the name is either expressly given or simply hinted.” And, beginning with the Book of Revelation, at the title ὁ ὡν καὶ ὁ ἤν καὶ ὁ ερχόμενος, “who is, and was, and is to come,” he goes upward through the sacred volume, quoting the passages which bear upon the question, till he comes to the important passage in Exodus in. 13-16, in which God declares his name to be, “I am that I am.” “Everything created,” he adds, “remains not like itself, but is continually changing under circumstances, God only, because he is the being, is always the same; and because he is always the same, is the being.” <small>Commentary on Genesis - At the first mention of Jehovah is Genesis 2</small>
+====[[Elias Hutter]]====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Nuremburg Polyglot.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1599 AD|1599]] The Nuremberg Polyglot of [[Elias Hutter]]]]
+Renown linguist [[Elias Hutter]] who produced the [[The Nuremberg Polyglot]] a New Testament Polyglot in twelve languages of [[1599 AD|1599]], has a similar reading to Beza in Revelation 16:5:
+:Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, δίκαιος, κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ '''<u>ὁ ἐρχόμενος</u>''', ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· <small>(''Novum Testamentum Domini: nostri: Iesu. Christi. Syriacè, Ebraicè, Graecè, Latinè, Germanicè, Bohemicè, Italicè, Hispanicè, Gallicè, Anglicè, Danicè, Polonicè. 2 vols. Edited by Elias Hutter and Jacob Coler.'')</small>
+Hutter has “ἐρχόμενος while Beza has “ἐσόμενος. Hutter’s ἐρχόμενος translates as “is to come” (see [[Revelation 1:4]]) while ἐσόμενος means “shalt be”, or “will be”.
+The reading ἐρχόμενος is found in the Greek text. Hutter’s Hebrew and the French (“qui seras” instead of “qui est à venir”) rather reflect Beza’s 1582 reading of ἐσόμενος & “shalt be”.
+====Immanuel Tremellius====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Immanuel Tremellius Latin.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Latin]] in the [[1639 AD|1639]] Biblia Sacra of Immanuel Tremellius]]
+[[Immanuel Tremellius]], who was an expert in Hebrew, Syriac and many other middle eastern languages, co authored books with Beza.
+====King James Translators====
+The Preface to the Authorized Version reads:
+:“With the former translations diligently compared and revised.”
+This would have included the Ethiopic text of 1549 that contained the equivalent of esomenos.
+The translators felt there was good reason to insert these words though it ran counter to certain external evidence. They left no marginal note, nor was the word in italics, showing the confidence they had in Beza's choice.
+====Johannes Piscator====
+In [[1613 AD|1613]] Johannes Piscator wrote:
+:Pro ὅσιος omnino legendum videtur ἐσόμενος, i. e. Futurus: si quis consideret rem ipsam, et descriptiones Dei similes supra cap. 1.v.4. et 8. item cap. 4.v.8. et cap. 11.v.17. ubi pro ἐσόμενος habetur ἐρχομένος. Cuius rei ratio probabilis affertur haec, quod illic sermo sit de Deo ut iudice venturo, hic autem ut de exsequente iudicia sua, idque in aeternum.
+<small>Johannes Piscator, Commentarii in omnes libros Novi Testamenti, antehac separatim editi: nunc vero in unum volumen collecti (Herborn: Corvinus, 11613)</small>
+:5. Angelum aquarum ] Sive angelum illum tertium qui phialam suam effuderat in fontes aquarum : sive alium aliquem angelum cuftodia aquarum prafectum. llle Ens, & ille Erat, & ille Sanctus ] ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὅσιος. Pro, ὅσιος omnino legendum videtur ἐσόμενος, id est, Futurus: si quis consideret rem ipsam & descriptiones Dei similes suprà cap. 1. v. 4. & 8. item cap. 4. v. 8. & cap. 11 vers. 17. ubi pro ἐσόμενος habetur ἐρχόμενος. Cujus rei ratio probabilis affertur hac, quòd illic sermo sit de Deo ut judice venturo hic autem ut de exsequente judicia sua, idꝗ in aternum. Quòd hæc judicasti ] Quòd has plagas, sive hanc plagam (nempe tertiam) bominibus istis immisisti.
+:Angelum aquarum ] "The angel of the waters" – Either that third angel who poured out his vial upon the fountains of waters: or some other angel appointed as the guardian of the waters. Ille Ens, & ille Erat, & ille Sanctus ] ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὅσιος. For, ὅσιος it seems that ἐσόμενος should be read, that is, the Future: if one considers the matter itself and similar descriptions of God above in chapter 1, verse 4, & 8. Also chapter 4, verse 8, & chapter 11 verse 17. where for ἐσόμενος is read ἐρχόμενος. The probable reason for this is suggested here, because there the discourse is about God as the coming judge, but here as executing his judgments, and that forever. Quòd hæc judicasti ] "Because you have judged these things" – Because you have sent these plagues, or this plague (namely the third) upon these people. [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Johan_Piscatoris_Commentarii_in_omnes_li/rYip2eX6U6AC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA821&printsec=frontcover] [https://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2023/11/piscators-comments-at-revelation-165.html]
+====David Pareus====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 David Pareus 1618.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in the [[1618 AD|1618]]  ''[https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ZzdBAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false In Apocalypsin]'' of David Pareus]]
+[[David Pareus]] was a German theologian who wrote ''[https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ZzdBAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false In Apocalypsin]'' in  [[1618 AD|1618]]. On page cc. [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ZzdBAAAAcAAJ&pg=RA5-PA819#v=onepage&q&f=false 820–821].
+:DOMINE, QUI ES] Aliquoties sprásic Deum verum, imó Christum descriptserat : nisi quod pro καὶ ἐρχόμενος (quod supra suit) hic dicit ὁ ἐσόμενος ''qui eris'', ut quidem ''Beza'' ex vetusto codice ms. restituit : cum vulgo legatur, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ut cohæreant δίκαιος ὁ ὅσιος ''iustus & Sanctus'', h. e. purus ab omni injustitia. Discamus igitur judicia Dei sancta adorare potius, quā sugillare ut inista, licet causas eorum satis non assequamur.
+Translated as:
+:LORD, WHO IS] Several times he spoke of the true God, instead of describing Christ: except that instead of καὶ ἐρχόμενος (which follows above) he says here ὁ ἐσόμενος who are you, as indeed Beza from the old codex ms. restores it: when it is commonly read, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, so that δίκαιος ὁ ὅσιος just and holy may be consistent, h. e. pure from all unrighteousness. Let us learn, then, to adore the holy judgments of God, rather than seal them up as iniquity, even though we do not sufficiently understand their causes. (Google Translate)
+====Elzevirs====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Elzevirs 1624.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Elzevirs’ 1624 Greek]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Elzevirs 1633.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Elzevirs’ 1633 Greek]]
+The 1624 edition of the Elzevirs’ Greek text has “ὅσιος”  but after much scholarly consideration the latter 1633 Elzevir text changed to the Beza reading of “ἐσόμενος”, “shalt be”.
+Bullinger indicated that 1624 edition of the Elzevirs’ Greek text has “the holy one” at this verse (Lexicon, p. 689). Scrivener mentions that the 1633 Elzevir has the Beza reading of “esomenos”, “shalt be”
+:xvi. 5. ἐσόμενος (for ὅσιος), a bold variation of Beza’s last three editions, is adopted in the Authorized Version and the Elzevir text of 1633. [https://books.google.com.pk/books?id=KW8TuSNhBcMC&pg=PA257&redir_esc=y]
+====Dutch Statenvertaling====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Dutch Statenvertaling.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Dutch]] in the [[1637 AD|1637]] Statenvertaling bible]]
+The Dutch version of [[1637 AD|1637]] is renown to be the equivalent of the King James Version. The 1611 King James Version and the 1637 Dutch Statenvertaling were the two premier bible translations in Europe. Both translated ἐσόμενος without any marginal notes, which means that the scholars were unanimous and absolutely certain about the reading of ἐσόμενος. It has the reading of Beza here:
+:En ik hoorde den engel der wateren zeggen: Gij zijt rechtvaardig, Heere! Die is, en Die was, '''<u>en Die zijn zal</u>''', dat Gij dit geoordeeld hebt;
+Translated to read:
+:And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord! Who is and who was '''<u>and who will be</u>''', because thou hast judged;
+;Exodus 3.14 in the Dutch bible
+[[Image:Exodus 3.14-15 Dutch Statenvertaling.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Exodus 3:14-15 in [[Dutch]] in the [[1637 AD|1637]] Statenvertaling bible]]
+:14Ende Godt seyde tot Mose, 18ICK SAL ZIIN DIE ICK ZIIN SAL: Oock seyde hy, Alsoo sult ghy tot de kinderen Israëls seggen, ICK SAL ZIIN heeft my tot u lieden gesonden.
+:15Doe seyde Godt voorder tot Mose, Aldus sult ghy tot de kinderen Israëls seggen, 19De HEERE uwer vaderen Godt, de Godt Abrahams, de Godt Isaacs, ende de Godt Iacobs, heeft my tot u lieden gesonden: dat is mijn name eeuwichlick, ende 20dat is mijn gedachtenisse 21van geslachte tot geslachte.
+::[v14] 18And. ick ben die ick ben, ofte, Ick sal zijn die ick was, komende in den gront over een met den naem Iehova. Dit beteeckent, dat Godt, die Mose sondt, eeuwich is in wesen, getrouw in sijne beloften, ende almogende in der selver uytvoeringe. Verg. '''Apocal. 1.4, 8. ende 16.15'''. Hebr. 13.8.
+::[v15] 19Siet Gen. 2. op vers 4.
+::20Als of Godt seyde, By desen name salmen mijner altijt gedachtich wesen. siet Psal. 135. Hos. 12.5.13. ende 107.13. And. Dit is mijn gedenck-teecken tot aller tijt.
+::21Hebr. tot geslachte des geslachtes.
+====Brian Walton====
+Brian Walton (1600 – 1661) was an English priest, divine and scholar. He published a massive polyglot between 1654 and 1657 in nine languages: [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]], [[Chaldee]], [[Samaritan]], [[Syriac language|Syriac]], [[Arabic language|Arabic]], [[Persian language|Persian]], [[Ethiopic]], [[Greek language|Greek]] and [[Latin]]. Among his collaborators were [[James Ussher]], [[John Lightfoot]] and [[Edward Pococke]], [[Edmund Castell]], [[Abraham Wheelocke]] and [[Patrick Young]], [[Thomas Hyde]] and [[Thomas Greaves (orientalist)|Thomas Greaves]]. It has been considered as the last and most scholarly ever printed.
+In Revelation 16:5 his Ethiopian (Known today as Ahmaric, and formerly as Ge'ez) version has a Latin translation with the words:
+====Erasmus Schmidius====
+In [[1658 AD|1658]] Erasmus Schmidius wrote:
+:Verba haec, [καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος] hisce signis ( ) inclusa, non leguntur in omnibus Codicibus. Restituta autem sunt a Beza, ex vetusto bonae fidei manuscripto. Videturque haec restitutio necessaria, quandoquidem Iohannes reliquis omnibus locis, ubi Iehovae nomen periphrastice circumscribit, addere consuevit tertium, ὁ ἐρχόμενος: neque apparet causa, cur hic praetereundum fuisset. Causa vero, cur hic non scribatur, ὁ ἐρχόμενος, ut supra quater factum, nempe Apoc. 1.4.8, 4.8, 11.17, Sed ἐσόμενος: Bezae haec videtur. Quia ibi de Christo ut Iudice venturo agitur: In hac vero visione proponitur, ut iam in tribunali sedens, et iudicium exercens.
+Translated as (Google Translate):
+:These words, [καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος] enclosed in these signs ( ), are not read in all the Codes. But they were restored by Beza, from an ancient manuscript of good faith. And it seems that this restoration is necessary, since John used to add a third, ὁ ἐρχόμενος, to all the other places where he circumscribes Jehovah's name periphrastically: there is no reason why it should have been omitted here. But the reason why it is not written here, ὁ ἐρχόμενος, as was done four times above, namely Apoc. 1.4.8, 4.8, 11.17, But ἐσόμενος: This seems to Bezae. Because there Christ is spoken of as the coming Judge: in this true vision he is presented as already sitting on the tribunal, and exercising judgment.
+<small>Erasmus Schmidius, Versio Novi Testamenti nova, ad Graecam veritatem emendata, et notae ac animadversiones in idem: quibus partim mutatae alicubi Versionis redditur ratio, partim alia necessaria monentur. Accedit sacer contextus Graecus, cum Versione veteri: nec non Index Rerum et Verborum locupletissimus (Nuremberg: Michael Endter, 1658)</small>
+==== Wilhelm's A Brakel ====
+th century Dutch reformed theologian Wilhelm's A Brakel's "The Christian's Reasonable Service" volume 1 pg.84 has the following:
+:In Revelation 1:4 and 16:5 the apostle John translates the name Jehovah as follows: 'Him which is, and which was, and which is to come.' This one word has reference primarily to being or essence, while having the chronological connotation of past, present, and future." [https://www.monergism.com/perfections-god-ebook#:~:text=In%20Rev%201%3A4%20and,past%2C%20present%2C%20and%20future.]
+====Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible====
+The 1685 Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible has:
+:Thou art righteous. O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus; acknowledging the Lord’s justice and righteousness in such destruction.
+====Isaac Newton====
+Isaac Newton in 1693 wrote that Erasmus has ἐρχόμενος in his notes:
+:ib καὶ ὁ ἦν, ὁ ὅσιος Compl. Areth. Steph 15. \Covil 2/ Lat. In \Covil 1. 2, deest ὁ ante ὅσιος, in/ Alex deest ὁ ἦν.
+:καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος Erasm. \Syr. Primas/ '''<u>At in Notis Erasmus pro ὅσιος legit ἐρχόμενος</u>'''
+:καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος Bezæ codex antiquus.
+:καὶ ὃς ἦν ὄσις Covil 1.
+The underlined translates as:
+:"'''<u>At the Notes Erasmus for ὅσιος read ἐρχόμενος</u>'''"
+<small>[http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/view/texts/normalized/THEM00288 'Variantes Lectiones Apocalypticae' (version 1)]</small>
+====Johann Jakob Wettstein====
+[[Image:Wettstein Revelation 16.5 note.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in Wettstein's Novi Testamenti Graeci]]
+In [[1730 AD|1730]] Johann Jakob Wettstein seems to think the reading goes back to [[Johannes Piscator]], not [[Theodore Beza]], which is false:
+<small>Johann Jakob Wettstein, Prolegomena ad Novi Testamenti Graeci editionem accuratissimam, e vetustissimis codd. MSS. denuo procurandam; in quibus agitur de codd. MSS. N. Testamenti, Scriptoribus Graecis qui N. Testamento usi sunt, versionibus veteribus, editionibus prioribus, et claris interpretibus; et proponuntur animadversiones et cautiones ad examen variarum lectionum N. T. necessariae (Amsterdam: Wettstein & Smith, 1730) </small>
+====Johann Albrecht Bengel====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Bengal Novum testamentum 1734.jpg|300px|thumb|right|A critical note about Revelation 16:5 by [[Johann Albrecht Bengel]] in his Novum testamentum of 1734]]
+In [[1734 AD|1734]] Johann Albrecht Bengel rejected Beza’s reading in his Η Καινη Διαθηκη
+<small>[[Johann Albrecht Bengel]] Η Καινη Διαθηκη. Novum Testamentum Graecum ita adornatum ut textus probatarum editionum medullam margo variantium lectionum in suas classes distributarum locorumque parallelorum delectum apparatus subiunctus criseos sacrae Millianae praesertim compendium, limam, supplementum ac fructum exhibeat inserviente Jo. Alberto Bengelio (Tübingen: Cotta, 1734)</small>
+:''ὁ ὅσιος''] ''sanctus'' (pro pius) ''Lat''. Ex allit. ad ''sanguinem sanctorum''. ''ὁ ἅγιος'' ''Valla'', at, ;;& qui es pius'', habet Primafius. ''καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος'' ''Beza: ex vetusto'', ut ait, ''bona fidei ms. codice.'' nec tamen nihil dedisse conjecturæ videtur. cur enim in nullo alio Apocalypseos loco illum codicem annotationes Bezæ memorant? aut cur Rob. Stephani margo nil hoc loco variat? Bezam tamen sequitur ''H. Stephanus'', ''Pareus'', ''Piscator'', ''Amama:'' ac plenius. adhibita parenthesi, (''καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος'',) ''καὶ  ὅσιος'' E. Schmidii textus habet. Sed Bezam reprehendit ''Marckius'' ad h. 1. & gravius ''Zeltnerus'' in Diss. de Evangelio Tetragrammato p. 29. ''καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος'', ''Eliæ Hutteri'' substituit editio: eandemque lectionem Revius & Marckius adscribunt Erasmo, annotatione ejus, quæ illud ''ὁ ἐρχόμενος'' ut superius dictum citat, non satis inspecta.
+Translated as (Google Translate):
+:ὁ ὅσιος] holy (for pious) Lat. From allit to the blood of the saints ὁ ἅγιος Valla, but, ;;& who art pious, says Primatius. καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος Beza: from the old, as he says, good faith ms. code and yet he seems to have given no conjecture. for why in no other place in the Apocalypse do the annotations of Beza mention that codex? or why Rob. Stephen Margo nothing changes at this point? Beza, however, is followed by H. Stephanus, Pareus, Piscator, Amama: and more fully. parentheses are used, (καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος,) καὶ ὅσιος, the text of E. Schmidius has. But Marcius criticizes Beza at h. 1. and more seriously Zeltnerus in Diss. on the Gospel Tetragrammaton p. 29. καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, Eliæ Hutter's edition replaces it: and Revius and Marcius ascribe the same reading to Erasmus, with his annotation, which quotes that ὁ ἐρχόμενος, as stated above, not sufficiently inspected.
+Bengel also had:
+:Rev 16:5. [178] Ὁ ὢ καὶ ὁ ἦν, which art and which wast) See on ch. Rev 11:17, and comp. D. Lang. Comm. Apoc. f. 188.-ὁ ὅσιος) Others put καὶ before ὁ, or for ὁ, or omit καὶ ὁ.[179] Sound exegesis often distinguishes the pearls of a genuine reading from the filth of various readings: and Wolf excellently compares with this the passage, ch. Rev 1:8, ΚΎΡΙΟς Ὁ ΘΕῸς, Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἮΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἘΡΧΌΜΕΝΟς, Ὁ ΠΑΝΤΟΚΡΆΤΩΡ. It will also be profitable to have brought forward another, ch. Rev 4:8 : ἍΓΙΟς, ἍΓΙΟς, ἍΓΙΟς, ΚΎΡΙΟς Ὁ ΘΕῸς Ὁ ΠΑΝΤΟΚΡΆΤΩΡ, Ὁ ἮΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἘΡΧΌΜΕΝΟς. There is a very great resemblance between those two passages and this passage, which is thus: ΔΊΚΑΙΟς ΕἾ, Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἮΝ, Ὁ ὍΣΙΟς. The subject there is, ΚΎΡΙΟς Ὁ ΘΕῸς Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἮΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἘΡΧΌΜΕΝΟς· here, in the vocative case, Ὁ ὪΝ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἮΝ. The epithet belonging to the subject is there, Ὁ ΠΑΝΤΟΚΡΆΤΩΡ· here, in the same case, Ὁ ὍΣΙΟς· in both places without the particle ΚΑῚ. The predicate there, ch. Rev 4:8, is ἍΓΙΟς· here ΔΊΚΑΙΟς. For the sentence is not to be thus construed, ΔΊΚΑΙΟς ΚΑῚ ὍΣΙΟς since there are many intervening words in the text. At the commencement and at the close of the Apocalypse the Lord is called Ὁ ΠΑΝΤΟΚΡΆΤΩΡ, the Almighty; here, where judgments show themselves, He is called ὁ ὅσιος, the Holy. First of all He is praised on account of His Might, lest in the time of His patience He should appear to have no strength, whereas in the end He is about to display enough of Might; afterwards He is praised for His Grace, when retribution commences. Might and Grace are alike assigned to the Lord in Psa 62:11-12. The epithet ὅσιος answers to the Hebrew חסיד, and signifies gracious, in an active or a passive sense. God exhibits His own grace in all His works, and He receives gratitude [the attribution of grace] from all saints. [178] τοῦ θηρίου, of the beast) Therefore the vial of the first angel will be the first mark [“character,” characterism] of the beast.-V. g. [179] Engl. Vers, has “which art, and wast, and shalt be” (omitting ὅσιος, and substituting καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος or ἐρχόμενος). ABC Vulg. support ὅσιος. h has et qui es pius. Rec. Text has καὶ ὁ ὅσιος.-E.[https://www.bibliatodo.com/en/bible-commentary/?v=Matthews1537&co=bengel-johann-albrecht-gnomon-of-the-nt&l=revelation&cap=16]
+====Johann Christoph Wolf====
+In 1735 Johann Christoph Wolf traced the reading to Beza, but doubts Beza’s reference claims.
+<small>Johann Christoph Wolf, Curae philologicae et criticae in SS. Apostolorum Jacobi Petri Judae et Joannis epistolas huiusque Apocal. Accedunt in calce quaedam ex Photii Amphilochiis adhuc non editis cum interpretatione Latina et notis (Hamburg: Kisner, 11735)</small>
+====Lodewijk Caspar Valckenaer & Gerhard Fleischer====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 1808 Lodewijk Caspar Valckenaer Gerhard Fleischer.jpg|300px|thumb|right|A critical note about Revelation 16:5 by Lodewijk Caspar Valckenaer & Gerhard Fleischer in 1808]]
+In [[1808 AD|1808]] the book [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=Y3AV0k6dfaEC&pg=SL1-PA41&lpg=SL1-PA41&dq=%E1%BC%90%CF%83%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%B5%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82+piscator&source=bl&ots=8TEi5dTljN&sig=ACfU3U0VQSAxt1l-UDGiB5Bmh3OIW82w0Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjDkt3NuMTnAhWG6nMBHcKSBkMQ6AEwAXoECBoQAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false Ludovici Caspari Valckenaerii Opuscula philologica, critica, oratoria, nunc primum coniunctim edita. Accedunt indices. Tomus 1.-2., Volume 1] had:
+:::''Apocal''. c. XVI, 5, in istis,
+::::''ὁ ὢν, καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος·''
+:legendum, ''και ά ἐσόμενος'', pro ''ὅσιος'', suspicati
+:sunt ''Piscator'' et ''Beza:'' vera suspicio visa fuit Bel-
+:gis Interpretibus; dederunt enim:
+::''die is, ende die was, ende die zyn sal.''
+:::Suam, up puto, coniecturam expresserunt
+:eiusdem
+====Pieper & Van Seldam====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 1833 Pieper Van Seldam.JPG|300px|thumb|right|A critical note about Revelation 16:5 by Pieper & Van Seldam in 1833]]
+In the 1833 book [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=WOE-AAAAcAAJ&pg=RA9-PA17&lpg=RA9-PA17&dq=%22%E1%BC%90%CF%83%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%B5%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82%22+beza&source=bl&ots=LoWKtYWZOh&sig=ACfU3U0zVCHvo4RRd7Pupt1Vq885-orOAQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi9zfnVv8TnAhXcIbcAHeGlDbcQ6AEwBHoECCMQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22%E1%BC%90%CF%83%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%B5%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82%22%20beza&f=false Commentationes Latinae Tertiae Classis Instituti Regii Belgici] by Pieper & Van Seldam, 1833 it has:
+====John Gill====
+[[John Gill]]'s [[1776 AD|1776]] Exposition of the Bible says;
+:''The Alexandrian copy, and most others, and the [[Latin Vulgate|Vulgate Latin]] and [[Syriac]] versions, read "holy", instead of "shalt be"; for the purity and holiness of Christ will be seen in the judgments which he will exercise, as follows:
+::because thou hast judged thus; or "these things"; or "them", as the [[Ethiopic]] version reads; that is, has brought these judgments upon the men signified by rivers and fountains, and made great havoc and slaughter of them, expressed by their becoming blood; the justice of which appears from the following reason.'' <small>(p. 183)</small>
+John Gill says concerning [[Revelation 1:4]]:
+:But rather this is to be understood of the first Person, of God the Father; and the phrases are expressive both of his eternity, he being God from everlasting to everlasting; and of his immutability, he being now what he always was, and will be what he now is, and ever was, without any variableness, or shadow of turning: they are a periphrasis, and an explanation of the word "Jehovah", which includes all tenses, past, present, and to come.
+====Reginald Heber====
+Reginald Heber (1783-1826) wrote a famous hymn inspired by Revelation 16:5 in the KJV.
+:"Which wert and art, and evermore shalt be!"
+====John Wordsworth====
 Dr. John Wordsworth (who edited and footnoted a three volume critical edition of the [[New Testament]] in [[Latin]]) pointed out that the like phrase in [[Revelation 1:4]] "which is, and which was, and which is to come;" sometimes is rendered in Latin as "qui est et qui fuisti et futurus es" instead of the [[Vulgate]] "qui est et qui erat et qui uenturus est." (John Wordsworth, Nouum Testamentum Latine, vol.3, 422 and 424.)
-Wordsworth also points out that in Revelation 16:5, Beatus of Liebana (who compiled a commentary on the book of Revelation) uses the Latin phrase "''qui fuisti et futures es''." This gives some additional evidence for the [[Greek]] reading by [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] (although he apparently drew his conclusion for other reasons). Beatus compiled his commentary in [[786 AD]]. Furthermore, Beatus was not writing his own commentary. Instead he was making a compilation and thus preserving the work of Tyconius, who wrote his commentary on Revelation around [[380 AD]] (Aland and Aland, 211 and 216. Altaner, 437. Wordsword, 533.). So, it would seem that as early as [[786 AD|786]], and possibly even as early as [[380 AD|380]], their was an Old [[Latin]] text which read as [[Theodore Beza|Beza]]'s [[Greek]] text does.
+Wordsworth also points out that in Revelation 16:5, Beatus of Liebana (who compiled a commentary on the book of Revelation) uses the Latin phrase "''qui fuisti et futures es''." This gives some additional evidence for the [[Greek]] reading by [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] (although he apparently drew his conclusion for other reasons). Beatus compiled his commentary in [[786 AD]]. Furthermore, Beatus was not writing his own commentary. Instead he was making a compilation and thus preserving the work of Tyconius, who wrote his commentary on Revelation around [[380 AD]] (Aland and Aland, 211 and 216. Altaner, 437. Wordsword, 533.). So, it would seem that as early as [[786 AD|786]], and possibly even as early as [[380 AD|380]], their was an Old [[Latin]] text which read as [[Theodore Beza|Beza]]'s [[Greek]] text does.<sup>[http://prophets-see-all.tripod.com/46612.htm]</sup>
-==[[Will Kinney]]==
+====Edward King====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Edward King.jpg|right|300px|thumb|1800 footnote by Edward King]]
+in ''Morsels of Criticism: Tending to Illustrate Some Few Passages in the Holy Scriptures, Upon Philosophical Principles and an Enlarged View of Things'' by Edward King, he has in a footnote:
+:The Alexandrian Manuscript has ''οσιος'': and therefore I have thus translated this verse. But Theodore Beza says he found ''ὁ ἐσόμενος'', instead of ''ὁ ὅσιος'', in an ancient manuscript of good authority; and therefore prefers the translating it more consistently with three other passages in the Book of Revelations, ''Who wast, and who art, and who art to come'' [''for shall be'']. The other passages are, ch. i. ver. 4.; ch. iv. ver. 8.; and ch. xi. ver. 17. And a consistency with them in this place does indeed render the expression more sublime. But either way the general description and intimation in the prophecy is the fame. [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=SaUCAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA159-IA9&lpg=PA159-IA9&dq=%22%E1%BC%90%CF%83%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%B5%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82%22+%22beza%22&source=bl&ots=IHkp0Ym800&sig=ACfU3U0uqDDeoFBESdGgAtt18OushicSBg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiig_iw1O2CAxXehlYBHbweDIwQ6AF6BAh-EAM#v=onepage&q=%22%E1%BC%90%CF%83%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%B5%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82%22%20%22beza%22&f=false]
+====[[Noah Webster]]====
+The [[1833 AD|1833]] Webster version has:
+:And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, who art, and wast, '''<u>and wilt be</u>''', because thou hast judged thus. (Websters)
+====Jodocus Heringa====
+Heringa is opposed to the reading, but points out, against Valckenaer (s31330), Beza’s reference to a manuscript. For Kluit see s31925. Heringa, Disputatio de Valckenaerii sententia (1835), 17:
+:c. XVI. 5. Καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος. Ende Die zijn sal. Complutenses, erasmus et stephanus, ediderant, quod omnes agnoscunt versiones, et codices Gr. fere omnes: καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, estque ea lectio, ab elzeviriis recepta, huic loco valde apta. Recte igitur eam, in I. et II. editione, secutus fuerat beza: sed in III. IV. et V. eius in locum substituit lectionem a piscatore et belgis praelatam, hac addita annotatione: Legitur vulgo καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ostendente articulo, praeter omnem loquendi morem, depravatam esse scripturam. Vulgata vero, sive articulum legit, seu non legit, nihilo rectius vertit ὅσιος, sanctus, male extrita particula καί, prorsus necessaria, ut δίκαιος et ὅσιος connectantur. Sed quum Johannes reliquis omnibus locis, ubi Jehovae nomen explicat, sicuti diximus supra, I. 4. addere consueverit tertium, nempe καὶ Ὁ ἐρχόμενος, cur istud h. l. praeteriisset? Itaque ambigere non possum, quin germana sit scriptura, quam ex vetusto bonae fidei manus. codice restitui, nempe Ὁ ἐσόμενος.
+:Haec beza, quibus vero hodie nemini persuadebitur. Nec persuasum fuit rolando, qui Graece scripsit: καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, Belg. en die heylige. Eamque germanam lectionem, in veteri quoque belg. versione expressam, in notis cominemorant belgae, Intelligitur autem e bezae annotatione, alteram lectionem, unius codicis auctoritate , non autem, ut valckenaerio visum fuit, (p. 334.) nuda coniectura, assumtam esse a nostratibus. Cf. kluit, p. 703.
+Google Translate:
+:c. 16 5. Καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος. Ende Die zijn sal The Complutenses, Erasmus and Stephen, had published what they all recognize as versions and codices of Gr. almost all: καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, and that reading, accepted by the Elzevirians, is very suitable for this passage. Correct it, therefore, in I. and II. edition, had been followed by Beza: but in III. IV. and his V. substitutes in its place the reading preferred by the fisherman and the Belgians, with this additional annotation: It is commonly read καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, showing that the article, apart from all manner of speaking, is a corrupted writing. But the Vulgate, whether it reads the article or not, renders it no more correctly ὅσιος, holy, the particle καί being badly extracted, absolutely necessary to connect δίκαιος and ὅσιος. But when John, in all the other places where he explains the name of Jehovah, as we said above, 1.4, is wont to add a third, namely καὶ Ὁ ἐρχόμενος, why this h. l. had passed? Therefore I cannot be sure that the writing is authentic, but from an ancient hand of good faith. the code was restored, namely Ὁ ἐσόμενος.
+: These bezas, of which no one will be persuaded today. Nor was he persuaded by the roll, who wrote in Greek: καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, Belg. en die heylige And the same genuine reading, also in the old Belg. The Belgians commemorated the version expressed in the notes, but it is understood from the Beza annotation that the second reading, on the authority of a single codex, was not, as Valckenaerius thought, (p. 334.) a bare conjecture, assumed by our people. Cf. kluit, p. 703.
+====Syriac====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Syriac 1849.jpg|right|300px|thumb|1849 Syriac]]
+The apostolical acts & epistles: from the Peschito, or ancient Syriac. To which are added, the remaining epistles, & the Book of Revelation, after a later Syrian text - Longman, Brown, Green, & Longmans, 1849 - 508 pages
+In the 1728 in the Commentaria In Apocalypsim B. Joannis Apostoli: In quo multa tractantur de Sacrosancta Eucharistia, de Beatissima Virgine Maria, ...
+Volume 2 of Commentaria In Apocalypsim B. Joannis Apostoli: In quo multa tractantur de Sacrosancta Eucharistia, de Beatissima Virgine Maria, João ¬da Sylveira
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Syriac quote 1728.jpg|right|300px|thumb|1728 Syriac]]
+:Syriacus.   Justus es ille, '''<u>qui est, & qui erat, & prius,</u>''' vel indulgens, quia judicasti.
+:qui est, & qui erat, & prius,
+translates as
+:who is, and who was, and first,
+====William Francis Wilkinson, William Webster====
+in the 1861 ''The Greek Testament: The Epistles and the Apocalypse'' of William Francis Wilkinson and William Webster, it says:
+δίκαιος] Just art thou, the being that wast, and art, and the Holy One, seeing thou executest these judgments. A. V. has 'and shalt be;' reading ὁ ἐσόμενος from Beza on insufficient authority. ἔδωκας] thou gavest; but Alex. has δέδωκας, thou hast given. αἷμα πιείν] i.e. they should destroy one another in wars and massacres.
+====Albert Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible====
+The 1870 Albert Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible says:
+:Which art, and wast, and shalt be - That is, who art eternal - existing now; who hast existed in all past time; and who will exist ever onward. See the notes on Revelation 1:8. The reason why this attribute of God is here referred to, seems to be that the mind of the angel adverts to it in the changes and desolations that were occurring around him. In such overturnings among people - such revolutions of kingdoms - such desolations of war - the mind naturally turns to one who is unchanging; to one whose throne is from everlasting to everlasting.
+====Willem Christiaan van Manen====
+In [[1880 AD|1880]] Willem Christiaan van Manen followed the error of Wettstein by attributing the reading to Piscator.
+<small>Willem Christiaan van Manen, Conjecturaal-kritiek toegepast op den tekst van de Schriften des Nieuwen Testaments (VRNGG n.s. 9.1; Haarlem: Bohn, 1880)</small>
+====Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible====
+The 1871 Unabridged Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible says:
+:And shalt be. 'Aleph (') A B C, Vulgate, Andreas, for this clause, read, '(which art and wast) holy' [ hosios (Greek #3741) for ho (Greek #3588) esomenos]. The Lord is no longer He that shall be, for He is come in vengeance; therefore the third of the three clauses, Revelation 1:4; Revelation 1:8; Revelation 4:8, is here, and in Revelation 11:17, omitted.
+====Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges====
+The 1896 Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges says:
+:ὁ ὤν καὶ ὁ ἦν. Without ὁ ἐρχόμενος, as in Revelation 11:17. A. V[571] “Which art and wast and shalt be,” a noteworthy translator’s error.
+:ὁ ὄσιος, see on Revelation 15:4. If the article be inserted we have two Divine Names, the Eternal, the Holy; if it be omitted we have an interesting parallelism:
+::Righteous art Thou the Eternal,
+::Holy for this Thy judgement.
+:Perhaps the latter gives the preferable sense: it is certainly supported by the best MSS., though we have none good enough to decide whether a letter has been left out or doubled by mistake.
+====The Expositor's Greek Testament====
+The Expositor's Greek Testament of 1897 has:
+:Revelation 16:5. ὅσιος and δίκαιος are used together of God in hieratic inscriptions of dedication throughout Asia Minor, possibly under Jewish influence. δίκαιος, often a title of messiah (see on Revelation 3:1 and Beer’s note on En. xxxviii. 2), is reserved here for God. Retribution is the outcome of God’s intense holiness or majesty (cf. Revelation 6:10, Revelation 15:4) asserting itself on behalf of his people (Revelation 15:3, Revelation 19:2, cf. Revelation 3:7) and in self-vindication.
+====Scrivener====
+In his 1873 Cambridge Paragraph Bible, Scrivener mentions that the 1633 Elzevir has the Beza reading of “esomenos”, “shalt be”
+:xvi. 5. ἐσόμενος (for ὅσιος), a bold variation of Beza’s last three editions, is adopted in the Authorized Version and the Elzevir text of 1633. [https://books.google.com.pk/books?id=KW8TuSNhBcMC&pg=PA257&redir_esc=y]
+Although Scrivener was not a staunch KJV or TR defender, he shows respect for Beza's textual choice by his statement that it is a “bold variation” in a sense where Scrivener looked at the whole Beza quote, including the analyis of the Johannine usage throughout the book and the difficulties of the usual variations, and thought Beza's reasoning was excellent. Although Scrivener would not go so far as to comment as to which he directly preferred, the fact that he never modified the text here in Greek or English or in any of his own works as he did in other cases e.g. on Hebrews 10:23 or “strain out a gnat” shows respect for the reading.
+====Franz Ludwig Tscharner and Samuel Leemann ====
+Dissertatio philologico-theologica de lectione: audi Israel
+[https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Dissertatio_philologico_theologica_de_le/L9TyTAiF-gUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22%E1%BC%90%CF%83%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%B5%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82%22+%22beza%22&pg=PP9&printsec=frontcover]
+====[[3801]]====
+In Strong's concordance and most others that use the numbering system, [[3801]] is the number for "ὁ ὢν καί ὁ ἦν καί ὁ ἐρχόμενος"
+[http://www.thekingsbible.com/BibleStrongsNumber.aspx?stgno=G3801 3801]
+Strong's has:
+:A phrase combining G3588 with the present participle and imperfect of G1510 and the present participle of G2064 by means of G2532; the one being and the one that was and the one coming, that is, the Eternal, as a divine epithet of Christ. (Each "and" (G2532) was ommited from the phrase because of limited space.):—which art (is, was), and (which) wast (is, was), and art (is) to come (shalt be).
+<small>Strong's (Greek Dictionary of the New Testament)</small>
+Greek Word Study has:
+:3801 ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ho on kai ho en kai ho erchomenos
+::{ho own kahee ho ane kahee ho er-khom'-en-os}
+:a phrase combining G3588 with the present participle and imperfect of G1510 and the present participle of G2064 by means of G2532; TDNT - n/a; phrase
+<small>Greek Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar)</small>
+Thayer has:
+:1) He who is, and was, and is coming
+<small>Thayer's (New Testament Greek-English Lexicon)</small>
+====Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible====
+The 1878 Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible says:
+:O Lord — omitted by A, B, C, Vulgate, Syriac, Coptic, and Andreas.
+:and shalt be — A, B, C, Vulgate, and Andreas for this clause read, “(which art and wast) holy.” The Lord is now no longer He that shall come, for He is come in vengeance and therefore the third of the three clauses found in Revelation 1:4, Revelation 1:8; Revelation 4:8 is here and in Revelation 11:17 omitted.
+====Young's Literal Translation====
+The [[Young's Literal Translation]] retains "shalt be" with:
+:and I heard the messenger of the waters, saying, `righteous, O Lord, art Thou, who art, and who wast, and who shalt be, because these things Thou didst judge,
+====Hermann C. Hoskier====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Hermann C. Hoskier Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse a.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Revelation 16.5 Hermann C. Hoskier Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Hermann C. Hoskier Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse b.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Revelation 16.5 Hermann C. Hoskier Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse (cont')]]
+Hermann C. Hoskier, in his ''Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse'', examined 200 Greek mss. At Revelation 16:5 he found the "et eris" reading in Beatus of Liebana, and the "et futurus es" reading in the 1548/49 Ethiopic Bible.
+;Hoskier
+[[Image:Hoskier Notes on Revelation 16.5.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Hoskier mentions the Ethiopic reading]]
+In addition to the early commentaries on the book of Revelation in Latin, the reading found in Revelation 16:5 "and shalt be" is also that of the early Ethiopian Version. The early 20th century textual critic Herman Hoskier cited the Ethiopic version as containing the phrase "and shalt be" in Revelation 16:5. This information is found in Hoskier's 'Concerning the Text of the Apocalypse: Collation of All Existing Available Greek Documents with the Standard Text of Stephen's Third Edition Together with the Testimony of the Versions, Commentaries and Fathers', 2 volumes, London: Bernard Quaritch, 1929.
+Ethiopic version as cited by Herman Hoskier in Latin:
+:"...Justus es, Domine, et Rectus qui fuisti et eris".
+Translation of Ethiopic from Latin =
+:"Just thou art, and Righteous that was '''<u>and will be</u>'''".:
+King James Version
+:"Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, '''<u>and shalt be</u>'''...":
+:Justus es, - thou art righteous
+:Domine, - O Lord
+:et - and
+:Rectus qui - ruler of all that
+:fuisti - thou hast been
+:et - and
+:eris - thou shalt be
+====Edward F. Hills====
+According to Edward F. Hills, this [[KJV]] rendering “shalt be” came from a conjectural emendation interjected into the Greek text by [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] (Believing Bible Study, pp. 205-206). Hills acknowledged that [[Theodore Beza]] introduced two conjectural emendations in his edition of the [[Textus Receptus]] with two of them kept in the KJV, one of them at Revelation 16:5 shalt be instead of holy. (KJV Defended, p. 208).
+:''Like [[John Calvin|Calvin]], [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] introduced a few conjectural emendations into his [[New Testament]] text. In the providence of God, however, only two of these were perpetuated in the [[King James Version]], namely, [[Romans 7:6]] that being dead wherein instead of being dead to that wherein, and Revelation 16:5 shalt be instead of holy. In the development of the Textus Receptus the influence of the common faith kept conjectural emendation down to a minimum.'' <sup>[3]</sup>
+Edward Hills identified the [[KJV]] reading at Revelation 16:5 as “certainly erroneous” and as a “conjectural emendation by [[Theodore Beza|Beza]]” (Believing Bible Study, p. 83).
+====Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament====
+Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament:
+:Which art and which wast (ο ων και ο ην — ho ōn kai ho ēn). See this peculiar idiom for God‘s eternity with ο — ho as relative before ην — ēn in Revelation 1:4, Revelation 1:8; Revelation 4:8, but without ο ερχομενος — ho erchomenos (the coming on, the one who is to be) there for the future as in Revelation 11:17.
+:Thou Holy One (ο οσιος — ho hosios). Nominative form, but vocative case, as often. Note both δικαιος — dikaios and οσιος — hosios applied to God as in Revelation 3:1; Revelation 15:3.
+====[[New King James Version]]====
+The [[New King James Version]] ([[NKJV]]) at Revelation 16:5 has:
+:5 And I heard the angel of the waters saying:
+::“You are righteous, O Lord,<sup>''a''</sup>
+::The One who is and who was and who is to be,<sup>''b''</sup>
+::Because You have judged these things.
+Footnotes:
+::<sup>''a''</sup>NU-Text and M-Text omit ''O Lord''.
+::NU-Text and M-Text read who was, ''the Holy One''.
+The NKJV followed modern versions with '''the Holy One''', but omitted "holy". This addition can be seen when we compare it with the KJV below:
+:* And I heard the angel of the waters saying: You are righteous, O Lord, '''<u>the One</u>''' who is and who was and who is to be, because You have judged these things. ([[NKJV]])
+:* And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, '''<u>(omit)</u>''' which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus. ([[KJV]])
+When we examine modern readings both pre and post NKJV, we can see the similar pattern of the Holy One being in front of the Triadic Declaration:
+:* ..."You are just in these judgments, '''<u>O Holy One</u>''', you who are and who were;... (New International Version)
+:*...“You are just, '''<u>O Holy One</u>''', who is and who always was,... (New Living Translation)
+:*...“Just are you, '''<u>O Holy One</u>''', who is and who was,... (English Standard Version)
+:*...You are just, '''<u>the Holy One</u>''', who is and who was,... (Christian Standard Bible)
+:*...“Righteous are You, '''<u>O Holy One</u>''', who is and who was,... (Berean Study Bible)
+Whereas many others have it afterwards:
+:*..."Righteous are You the One being, and having been, '''<u>O holy One</u>''',... (Berean Literal Bible)
+:*..."Righteous art Thou, who art and wast, '''<u>the holy One</u>''',... (Weymouth New Testament)
+:*..."Righteous are You, who are and who were, '''<u>O Holy One</u>''',... (New American Standard Bible)
+This is clearly seen in the comparison between the ESV and CSB, with the NKJV:
+:*...'''<u>O Holy One</u>''', who is and who was... (ESV)
+:*...'''<u>the Holy One</u>''', who is and who was... (CSB)
+:*...'''<u>the (Omit) One</u>''' who is and who was... (NKJV)
+====[[D. A. Waite]]====
+[[D. A. Waite]] says that modern English versions are theologically deficient at Revelation 16:5 for the removal of "and shalt be" (Defending the KJB, p. 170). Waite wrote:
+:“The removal of ‘and shalt be’ puts in doubt the eternal future of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is certainly a matter of doctrine and theology” (p. 170).
+====[[Jack Moorman]]====
+Jack Moorman, in his, Hodges/Farstad “Majority” Text Refuted By Evidence (also titled, When the King James Departs from the “Majority Text”), says,
+:The King James reading is in harmony with the four other places in Revelation where this phrase is found.
+:[[Revelation 1:4|1:4]] “him which is, and which was, and which is to come”
+:[[Revelation 1:8|1:8]] “the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty”
+:[[Revelation 4:8|4:8]] “Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come”
+:[[Revelation 11:17|11:17]] “Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come”
+:"The [[KJV]] reading is in harmony with the four other places in [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] where this phrase is found…. Indeed Christ is the Holy One, but in the Scriptures of the [[St. John the Apostle|Apostle John]] the title is found only once ([[1 John 2:20|1 John. 2:20]]), and there, a totally different Greek word is used. The Preface to the [[Authorised Version]] reads: “with the former translations diligently compared and revised”. The translators must have felt there was good reason to insert these words though it ran counter to much external evidence. They obviously did not believe the charge made today that [[Theodore  Beza|Beza]] inserted it on the basis of conjectural emendation. They knew that they were translating the Word of God, and so do we. The logic of faith should lead us to see God’s guiding providence in a passage such as this." —
+[[Jack Moorman]] in ''When the KJV Departs from the So-Called Majority Text'' ([[Bible for Today]]: [[1988 AD|1988]]), pg. 102.
+[http://faithsaves.net/majority-text-moorman/]
+====William W. Combs====
+William W. Combs maintained in 1999:
+:“The words ‘shalt be,’ should actually read ‘holy one’—‘Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, the holy one.…’ This error came into the kjv because, as we noted earlier, the translators mainly used Beza’s Greek NT (1598). Beza simply speculated (guessed), without any evidence whatsoever, that the correct reading was ‘shall be’ (ἐσόμενος) instead of ‘holy one’ (ὅσιος). All previous editions of the TR (i.e., Erasmus, Stephanus) and all previous English Bibles (i.e., Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew’s Bible, Great Bible, Geneva Bible, Bishops’ Bible) read ‘holy one’ (ὅσιος). There is no manuscript evidence whatsoever for the kjv’s ‘shalt be.’ It is an indisputable error.”  (Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal, Fall, 1999, p. 156).
+====Thomas Holland====
+:''"Two things should be stated before continuing. One, as confirmed by Jerome, there were a number of various Latin editions of the New Testament which differed in both translation and content before and around 405 AD (when Jerome finished his Vulgate). Most of these we do not have. Two, as pointed out by Dr. John Wordsworth (who edited and footnoted a three volume critical edition of the New Testament in Latin) the like phrase in Revelation 1:4 "which is, and which was, and which is to come;" sometimes is rendered in Latin as "qui est et qui fuisti et futurus es" instead of the Vulgate "qui est et qui erat et qui uenturus est." (John Wordsworth, Nouum Testamentum Latine, vol.3, 422 and 424.)"''
+:''"Wordsworth also points out that in Revelation 16:5, Beatus of Liebana (who compiled a commentary on the book of Revelation) uses the Latin phrase "qui fuisti et futures es." This gives some additional evidence for the Greek reading by Beza (although he apparently drew his conclusion for other reasons). Beatus compiled his commentary in 786 AD. Furthermore, Beatus was not writing his own commentary. Instead he was making a compilation and thus preserving the work of Tyconius, who wrote his commentary on Revelation around 380 AD (Aland and Aland, 211 and 216. Altaner, 437. Wordsword, 533.). So, it would seem that as early as 786, and possibly even as early as 380, their was an Old Latin text which read as Beza's Greek text does."''
+:''"It should be noted that none of the early English versions, nor the foreign translations, read as does the Authorized Version. However, they do not read as most modern versions do either. Instead they read somewhere in between using both the "and" with "holy." The New King James Version follows the reading of the Authorized Version."'' ([https://web.archive.org/web/20120913124331/http://wilderness-cry.net:80/bible_study/courses/mssevidence/lesson10.html wilderness-cry.net])
+====[[Will Kinney]]====
 * See Also ''[[Article: Revelation 16:5 "and shalt be" by Will Kinney|Revelation 16:5 "and shalt be"]] by [[Will Kinney]]''
@@ Line 175: / Line 1,383: @@
 :"The King James Bible translators did not slavishly follow Beza’s Greek text, but after much prayer, study and comparison, did include Beza’s reading of “and shalt be” in Revelation 16:5. We do not know what other Greek texts the KJB translators possessed at that time that may have helped them in their decisions. They then passed this reading on to future generations in the greatest Bible ever written. Since God has clearly placed His mark of divine approval upon the KJB throughout the last 400 years, I trust that He providentially guided the translators to give us His true words."
-==[[Jack Moorman]]==
+====Robert L Thomas====
+Robert L Thomas, Professor of New Testament at The Master’s Seminary, citing Swete commented,
+:"Taking hosios as parallel with dikaios creates an intolerable harshness, however, and taking the adjective as a predicate adjective with ho on and ho en breaks the pattern of the Apocalypse in not assigning the expression a predicate nominative or adjective.<small>[http://books.google.com/books?id=ay8aAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR202The Apocalypse of St. John: the Greek text with introd., notes and indices – Henry Barclay Swete (1906 2nd edtion)]</small>
-[[Jack Moorman]]:
+As another note, for completion, in page 194 Swete mentions the unusualness of “Holy” as a title for LORD in the NT. And the one place where it is used (Rev 15:5) it it far more simply part of an adjectival phrase, not as a title, which is easy for use to see.
-:"The KJV reading is in harmony with the four other places in Revelation where this phrase is found…. Indeed Christ is the Holy One, but in the Scriptures of the Apostle John the title is found only once (1 John. 2:20), and there, a totally different Greek word is used. The Preface to the Authorised Version reads: “with the former translations diligently compared and revised”. The translators must have felt there was good reason to insert these words though it ran counter to much external evidence. They obviously did not believe the charge made today that Beza inserted it on the basis of conjectural emendation. They knew that they were translating the Word of God, and so do we. The logic of faith should lead us to see God’s guiding providence in a passage such as this." —
-[[Jack Moorman]] in ''When the KJV Departs from the So-Called Majority Text'' ([[Bible for Today]]: [[1988 AD|1988]]), pg. 102.
-==Edward F. Hills==
+In his commentary Thomas has:
+:Ὁ ω῍ν καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ἐσόμενος [Ho ōn kai ho ēn, kai esomenos] , the one who is and the “he was,” and the one to be. This unusual construction is likely a Hebraism. For a discussion of a closely-related grammatical phrase, see commentary on Revelation 1:4. Here, the future tense participle is based on the verb ειμι [eimi] , “to be,” whereas in Revelation Rev. 1:4+ it is based on the verb ἐρχομαι [erchomai] , “to come.” There, the emphasis is on His impending arrival. Here, upon his eternality. Most other manuscripts, including the majority of those in the MT text family and the NU text, have ὁ ο῝σιος [ho hosios] , “the holy,” instead of ἐσόμενος [esomenos] , “the one to be.”
-According to Edward F. Hills, this [[KJV]] rendering “shalt be” came from a conjectural emendation interjected into the Greek text by [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] (Believing Bible Study, pp. 205-206). Hills again acknowledged that [[Theodore Beza]] introduced a few conjectural emendations in his edition of the [[Textus Receptus]] with two of them kept in the KJV, one of them at Revelation 16:5 shalt be instead of holy.
+====Bullinger====
+Bullinger indicated that [[1624 AD|1624]] edition of the Elzevirs’ Greek text has “the holy one” at this verse (Lexicon, p. 689).
-:''Like [[John Calvin|Calvin]], [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] introduced a few conjectural emendations into his [[New Testament]] text. In the providence of God, however, only two of these were perpetuated in the [[King James Version]], namely, [[Romans 7:6]] that being dead wherein instead of being dead to that wherein, and Revelation 16:5 shalt be instead of holy. In the development of the Textus Receptus the influence of the common faith kept conjectural emendation down to a minimum.'' <sup>[1]</sup>
+====Walter Scott====
-Edward Hills identified the [[KJV]] reading at Revelation 16:5 as “certainly erroneous” and as a “conjectural emendation by [[Theodore Beza|Beza]]” (Believing Bible Study, p. 83).
+In his commentary on the book of Revelation, Walter Scott asserted that the KJV’s rendering “shalt be” was an unnecessary interpolation and that the KJV omitted the title “holy One” (p. 326).
-==William W. Combs==
+====[[Bruce Metzger]]====
-William W. Combs maintained: “[[Theodore Beza|Beza]] simply speculated (guessed), without any evidence whatsoever, that the correct reading was ‘shall be’ instead of ‘holy one’” (Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal, Fall, 1999, p. 156).
+[[Bruce Metzger]] defines this term as,
-==J. I. Mombert==
+:''The classical method of textual criticism . . . If the only reading, or each of several variant readings, which the documents of a text supply is impossible or incomprehensible, the editor's only remaining resource is to conjecture what the original reading must have been. A typical emendation involves the removal of an anomaly. It must not be overlooked, however, that though some anomalies are the result of corruption in the transmission of the text, other anomalies may have been either intended or tolerated by the author himself. Before resorting to conjectural emendation, therefore, the critic must be so thoroughly acquainted with the style and thought of his author that he cannot but judge a certain anomaly to be foreign to the author's intention.'' ([[Bruce Metzger|Metzger]], The Text Of The New Testament, 182.)
-J. I. Mombert listed Revelation 16:5 as one of the places where he maintained that “the reading of the [[AV|A. V.]] is supported by no known Greek manuscript whatever, but rests on an error of Erasmus or [[Theodore Beza|Beza]]” (Hand-book, p. 389).
+From this, we learn the following.
-==Bullinger==
+:'''1)'''. Conjectural emendation is a classical method of textual criticism often used in every translation or Greek text when there is question about the authenticity of a particular passage of scripture.
-Bullinger indicated that [[1624 AD|1624]] edition of the Elzevirs’ Greek text has “the holy one” at this verse (Lexicon, p. 689). In his commentary on the book of Revelation, Walter Scott asserted that the KJV’s rendering “shalt be” was an unnecessary interpolation and that the KJV omitted the title “holy One” (p. 326).
+:'''2)'''. There should be more than one variant in the passage in question.
-==Bruce Metzger==
+:'''3)'''. The variant in question contextually should fit and should be in agreement with the style of the writer.
-Bruce Metzger defines this term as,
+====[[James White]]====
+[[James White]] said in his book:
+:“Beza did introduce…“conjectural emendations,” that is, changes made to the text without any evidence from the manuscripts. A few of these changes made it into the KJV, the most famous being Revelation 16:5, “O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be” rather than the actual reading, “who art and who wast, O Holy one.” (King James Only Controversy, first edition, p. 63).
-:''The classical method of textual criticism . . . If the only reading, or each of several variant readings, which the documents of a text supply is impossible or incomprehensible, the editor's only remaining resource is to conjecture what the original reading must have been. A typical emendation involves the removal of an anomaly. It must not be overlooked, however, that though some anomalies are the result of corruption in the transmission of the text, other anomalies may have been either intended or tolerated by the author himself. Before resorting to conjectural emendation, therefore, the critic must be so thoroughly acquainted with the style and thought of his author that he cannot but judge a certain anomaly to be foreign to the author's intention.'' (Metzger, The Text Of The New Testament, 182.)
+In a note on his criticism of Revelation 16:5 in the KJV, White states on p 86 that:
+:“The KJV Only advocate who asserts the verbal plenary inspiration of the King James Version has to believe that [[Theodore Beza]], the successor of [[John Calvin]], as strong a proponent of “Calvinism” as has ever lived (certain KJV Only advocates such as [[Peter Ruckman]] are strongly anti-Reformed), was divinely inspired to make the change without any manuscript support at all.”
-From this, we learn the following.
+In 2002, on the Ankerburg show White said:
+:“But to Dr. Strouse, what about places where those King James translators followed conjectural emendations?
+:Theodore Beza, for example, in Revelation 16:5 looked at the Greek text and '''<u>all the Greek texts say the same thing</u>''', but he didn’t like the way it went. And so he changed the word “holy” to the future form of the verb “to be,” sort of, '''<u>to make it nice and poetic and rhythmic</u>'''. And your King James this day reads that way, even though there’s not a question about it on anyone’s part as to what that passage actually reads. Why should I take Theodore Beza’s '''<u>conjectural emendation where he decides a reading on the basis of what he likes</u>''' and say that the mass of Christians believe this when '''<u>nobody before Theodore Beza ever had the idea that Revelation 16:5 read that way</u>'''? Why should I believe that?” <small>The King James Controversy Revisited - 2002, on the Ankerberg show, with Dr. Kenneth Barker, Dr. Don Wilkins, Dr. Daniel B. Wallace, Dr. James White, Dr. Samuel Gipp, Dr. Thomas Strouse, Dr. Joseph Chambers.</small>
-:1). Conjectural emendation is a classical method of textual criticism often used in every translation or Greek text when there is question about the authenticity of a particular passage of scripture.
+James White claimed:
+:“Every Greek text--not just Alexandrian texts, but all Greek texts, Majority Text, the Byzantine text, every manuscript, the entire manuscript tradition--reads ‘O Holy One,‘ containing the Greek phrase ‘ho hosios’” (second edition, p. 237).
-:2). There should be more than one variant in the passage in question.
+====[[Peter Ruckman]]====
+[[Peter Ruckman]] commented in response to [[James White]] concerning Revelation 16:5:
+:“Since White wrote his book to justify the sins of the [[NIV]] and [[NASV]] committees, do you think he was actually worried about “shalt be” in Revelation 16:5? You see the “and” in the verse was found in an early papyrus (P 47): “and…” what? The NIV and the NASV and Nestle and Aland and Hort had to get rid of the earliest papyrus this time. It was an embarrassment because it messed up their sentence. If they had followed their profession (“the oldest and best, etc.) they would have had to give you this: “Righteous art Thou, the Being One, AND the One who was, AND the Holy One.” That is one awkward, cockeyed clause, so the “and” (“kai” in the papyrus) had to be dropped. Something originally followed that last “and,” and it certainly was not “the Holy One.” Undoubtedly, “in the original” (a famous, worn-out, Alexandrian cliché) it read “the One being, and the One who was, AND the One who shall be…
-:3). The variant in question contextually should fit and should be in agreement with the style of the writer.
+:“Now, that is a conjecture, but it is a conjecture in the light of early Greek manuscript evidence that was discarded by Mr Nestle and Mr White. He and his buddies had to violate their own standards to get rid of the AV reading. Standard Operating Procedure in the Cult…
-==John Gill==
+:“They never waste their time on any text like they waste it on the English text of 1611. That is the one they hate…
-John Gill's Exposition of the Bible says;
+:“For those of you who think I am “overstepping” myself: Who inserted “nailed” into Acts 2:23 without being able to find one nail within one hundred verses of the verse (NASV)? There is not one Greek manuscript extant that says “nail” or “nails” or “nailing” or “nailed.” But it doesn’t bother any Alexandrian except in Revelation 16:5 in an AV. Remarkable, isn’t it?…
-:''The Alexandrian copy, and most others, and the Vulgate Latin and Syriac versions, read "holy", instead of "shalt be"; for the purity and holiness of Christ will be seen in the judgments which he will exercise, as follows:
+:“We would judge White’s extant Greek texts on Revelation 16:5 to be defective, in regards to “shalt be,” and this is apparent from the rejected “kai” in Papyrus 47. Why trade in absolute truth for a defective Greek manuscript? The truth is the Lord (vs. 5) had THREE lives (confirmed in Revelation 1:8, 8:8) and the “kai” (and) is found in both those passages. Someone messed with Revelation 16:5 in the Greek texts. It wasn’t the AV translators…”
-:because thou hast judged thus; or "these things"; or "them", as the Ethiopic version reads; that is, has brought these judgments upon the men signified by rivers and fountains, and made great havoc and slaughter of them, expressed by their becoming blood; the justice of which appears from the following reason.''
+====J. I. Mombert====
+J. I. Mombert listed Revelation 16:5 as one of the places where he asserted ignorantly that “the reading of the A. V. is supported by no known Greek manuscript whatever, but rests on an error of Erasmus or Beza” (Hand-book, p. 389).
-==See Also==
+====Samuel Tregelles====
+In 1844, Samuel Tregelles maintained that the reading adopted by Beza at Revelation 16:5 “is not found in any known MS” (Book of Revelation in Greek, p. xxxv)
+====Jonathan Stonis====
+Jonathan Stonis asserted that Theodore Beza “modified the Traditional Text against manuscript evidence by dropping the words, ’Holy One’ and replacing them with ’to be’” (Juror’s Verdict, p. 60).
+====F. C. Cook====
+In an edition of the KJV with commentary as edited by F. C. Cook and printed in 1881, William Lee in his introduction to the book of Revelation referred to “the conjectural reading of Beza’s last three editions” at Revelation 16:5 (Vol. IV, p. 463).
+====Walter Scott====
+In his commentary on the book of Revelation, Walter Scott said that the KJV’s rendering “shalt be” was an unnecessary interpolation and that the KJV omitted the title “holy One” (p. 326).
+====[[Jeffrey Khoo]]====
+[[Jeffrey Khoo]] wrote the following about the above words of [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] [http://www.febc.edu.sg/BBVol15_2c.htm]:
+:Besides the ancient Greek manuscript that [[Theodore Beza|Beza]] had, it ought to be noted that Beatus of Liebana in the eighth century, in his compilation of commentaries on the Book of Revelation has the Latin phrase, qui fuisti et futures es, for Revelation 16:5 which was found in the commentary of Tyconius which goes back to the fourth century. It is entirely possible that there were either early Greek manuscripts or Old Latin versions as early as the fourth century which contained the reading esomenos.
+:It is also significant to note that the reading hosios preferred by Combs is a harder reading. Robert L Thomas, Professor of [[New Testament]] at The Master’s Seminary, citing Swete commented,
+::"Taking hosios as parallel with dikaios creates an intolerable harshness, however, and taking the adjective as a predicate adjective with ho on and ho en breaks the pattern of the Apocalypse in not assigning the expression a predicate nominative or adjective."
+:We note that the reading ho esomenos, the future participle of eimi in its masculine, singular, nominative form with the definite article fits well the pattern of the Apocalypse and functions well as an adjectival participle to describe dikaios—the Righteous One who shall soon come to judge a most wicked world.
+:Although it is admitted that ho esomenos is not the reading found in the Majority Text, we are wont to agree with Hills that such minority readings "seem to have been placed in the Greek [[Textus Receptus|TR]] by the direction of God’s special providence and therefore are to be retained." It is also admitted that the reading of ho hosios in Stephen’s edition of the TR differs from [[Theodore Beza|Beza]]’s ho esomenos. So what do we do with the rare occasions when the several editions of the TR differ from one another? Hills replied,
+:The answer to this question is easy. We are guided by the common faith. Hence we favor that form of the [[Textus Receptus]] upon which more than any other God, working providentially, has placed the stamp of His approval, namely, the [[King James Version]], or, more precisely the [[Greek]] text underlying the [[King James Version]].
+====Bible Protector====
+In the Appendix B of ''Receiving the King James Bible Only'' by By Matthew Verschuur states:
+:APPENDIX B
+:There are a few rare occasions where the King James Bible has a so-called “minority reading”. This means that the King James Bible has something which is different to almost all available copies.
+:It is useful to mention one as a case study, to show how the King James Bible is not wrong in such a case. The example is the reading “and shalt be” at Revelation 16:5, in opposition to nearly every other copy and translation, which has, “holy one”.
+:The background is that when Beza was printing the New Testament in Greek, he reasoned that Revelation 16:5 should actually read according to the pattern established at other verses in Revelation which give a past, present and future (Revelation 1:4, 1:8, 4:8 and 11:17).
+:The King James Bible translators followed Beza’s Greek on this point, and did not give any indication in the margin that there was any issue here. Thus, we can easily see that it was their deliberate decision to accept that “and shalt be” was correct.
+:Most or all available handwritten copies had “holy one”, but there are relatively few copies of Revelation, and there is no certain knowledge of very early copies. It follows that a copying mistake was made early, one which persisted to the point where all available copies no longer contained the true reading, until it was restored by Beza. The fact that Beza’s correction was recognised to be true shows that what would otherwise be a “lost reading” was actually restored and was printed in English in 1611.
+====[[Elijah Hixson]]====
+In December 2019, [[Elijah Hixson]] wrote an article for the ECT blog titled [http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2019/12/fact-checking-versional-support-for-ecm.html Fact-checking Versional Support for the ECM and the textus receptus] in which he examines the Ethiopic readings in Revelation 16:5.
+====New World Translation====
+* [[2013 AD|2013]] I heard the angel over the waters say: “You, the One who is and who was, ''''<u>the loyal One</u>'''', are righteous, for you have issued these judgments, <small>New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (2013 Revision)</small>
+====The Triadic Declaration====
+(Unfinished work in progress may be innacurate)
+{|border=1 cellpadding=5 style="text-align:left; border-collapse: collapse;
+|-
+!|Text
+!|Other
+!|Present
+!|Past
+!|Future
+!|Holy
+!|Other
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|'''Book of Armagh'''
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|qui es
+|valign=top align=left|et qui eras
+|valign=top align=left|(omit)
+|valign=top align=left|<span style="text-decoration: overline">scs</span>
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|'''Ethiopic 1548/49'''
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|(omit)
+|valign=top align=left|qui fuisti
+|valign=top align=left|et eris,
+|valign=top align=left|(omit)
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|'''Beza 1598'''
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|εἶ Ὁ ὢν,
+|valign=top align=left|καὶ Ὁ ἦν,
+|valign=top align=left|καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος,
+|valign=top align=left|(omit)
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|'''KJV 1611'''
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|which art,
+|valign=top align=left|and wast,
+|valign=top align=left|and shalt be
+|valign=top align=left|(omit)
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|'''Dutch 1637'''
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|Die is,
+|valign=top align=left|en Die was,
+|valign=top align=left|en Die zijn zal,
+|valign=top align=left|(omit)
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|'''Martin 1744'''
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|valign=top align=left|QUI ES,
+|valign=top align=left|QUI ÉTAIS,
+|valign=top align=left|et QUI SERAS
+|valign=top align=left|(omit)
+|valign=top align=left|-
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|-
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|valign=top align=left|
+|-
+|}
+====Ecclesiastes 1:9====
+Ecclesiastes 1:9 says in the KJV:
+:The thing that hath been it is that which shall be and that which is done is that which shall be done and there is no new thing under the sun.
+:<Big>מַה־שֶּֽׁהָיָה֙ ה֣וּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶ֔ה וּמַה־שֶּׁנַּֽעֲשָׂ֔ה ה֖וּא שֶׁיֵּעָשֶׂ֑ה וְאֵ֥ין כָּל־חָדָ֖שׁ תַּ֥חַת הַשָּֽׁמֶשׁ׃</Big>
+Mah shehayah hu sheyihyeh — What has been, is what will be… and there is nothing new under the sun.”
+:what
+:'''has been''' (še-hā-yāh)
+:is
+:'''what will be''' (še-yih-yeh,)
+==Greek==
+====Textus Receptus====
+====[[Complutensian Polyglot]]====
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Complutensian Polyglot.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1514 AD|1514]] [[Complutensian Polyglot]]]]
+* [[1514 AD|1514]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] / [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]] / [[3588|τῶν]] [[5204|ὑδάτων]] [[3004|λέγοντος]]. [[1342|Δίκαιος]] [[ευο]] [[1510|ὢν]], [[2532|καὶ]] / [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ἦν]] / [[3588|ὁ]] [[3741|ὅσιος]], [[3754|ὅτι]] [[3778|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]], {{Template: Complutensian Polyglot Footer}}
+<small>''See Also [[Revelation 16:5 Complutensian Polyglot 1514]]''</small>
+====[[Aldine]]====
+<small>Revelation 16:5 in [[Greek]] in the [[1518 AD|1518]] Greek New Testament of [[Aldine]]</small>
+====Cephaleus====
+* [[1524 AD|1524]] <small>(Wolf Cephaleus. Printed in Strassburg)</small>
+====[[Desiderius Erasmus]]====
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Erasmus 1516.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1516 AD|1516]] Greek New Testament of Erasmus]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Erasmus 1519.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1519 AD|1519]] Greek New Testament of Erasmus]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Erasmus 1522.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1522 AD|1522]] Greek New Testament of Erasmus]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Stephanus 1550.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1550 AD|1550]] Greek New Testament of Stephanus]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Beza 1565.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1565 AD|1565]] Greek New Testament of Beza]]
+[[Image:Revelation_16_5_Beza_1589.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1589 AD|1589]] New Testament of Beza]]
+[[Image:Revelation_16_5_Beza_1589 Footnote.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Footnote at [[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Latin]] in the [[1589 AD|1589]] New Testament of Beza]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Beza 1598.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Greek]] in the [[1598 AD|1598]] New Testament of Beza]]
+* [[1516 AD|1516]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]] [[3004|λέγοντος]], [[1342|δΐκαιος]] [[2962|κύριε]] [[1510|εἶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ὢν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ἦν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[3741|ὅσιος]], [[3754|ὅτι]] [[3778|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]], <small>([[Novum Instrumentum omne]])</small>
+* [[1519 AD|1519]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]], [[3004|λέγοντος]], [[1342|δίκαιος]] [[2962|κύρϊε]] [[1510|εἶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ὢν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ἦν]], [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[3741|ὅσιος]], [[3754|ὅτι]] [[3778|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]],<small>(Erasmus 2nd)</small>
+* [[1522 AD|1522]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]], [[3004|λέγοντος]], [[1342|δίκαιος]] [[2962|Κύριε]] [[1510|εἶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ὢν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ἦν]], [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[3741|ὅσιος]], [[3754|ὅτι]] [[3778|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]], <small>([[Novum Testamentum omne]])</small>
+* [[1527 AD|1527]] <small>(Erasmus 4th)</small>
+* [[1535 AD|1535]] <small>(Erasmus 5th)</small>
+====Colinæus====
+* [[1534 AD|1534]] <small>(Colinæus)</small>
+====Stephanus ([[Robert Estienne]])====
+* [[1546 AD|1546]] <small>([[Robert Estienne]] (Stephanus) 1st)</small>
+* [[1549 AD|1549]] <small>([[Robert Estienne]] (Stephanus) 2nd)</small>
+* [[1550 AD|1550]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]] [[3588|τῶν]] [[5204|ὑδάτων]] [[3004|λέγοντος]] [[1342|Δίκαιος]] [[2962|Κύριε]], [[1510|εἶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ὢν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ἦν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[3741|ὅσιος]] [[3754|ὅτι]] [[3778|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]] <small>([[Robert Estienne]] (Stephanus) 3rd -  [[Editio Regia]])</small>
+* [[1551 AD|1551]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]] [[3588|τῶν]] [[5204|ὑδάτων]] [[3004|λέγοντος]] [[1342|Δίκαιος]] [[2962|Κύριε]], [[1510|εἶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ὢν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ἦν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[3741|ὅσιος]] [[3754|ὅτι]] [[3778|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]] <small>([[Robert Estienne]] (Stephanus) 4th)</small>
+====[[Theodore Beza]]====
+* [[1565 AD|1565]] [[2532|Kαὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]] [[3588|τῶν]] [[5204|ὑδάτων]] [[3004|λέγοντος]], [[1342|Δίκαιος]], [[2962|Κύριε]], [[1510|εἶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ὢν]], [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[2258|ἦν]], [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[3741|ὅσιος]], [[3754|ὅτι]]  [[5023|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]]. <small>(Beza 1st)</small>
+* [[1565 AD|1565]] <small>(Beza Octavo 1st)</small>
+* [[1567 AD|1567]] <small>(Beza Octavo 2nd)</small>
+* [[1580 AD|1580]] <small>(Beza Octavo 3rd)</small>
+* [[1582 AD|1582]] <small>(Beza 2nd)</small>
+* [[1588 AD|1588]] [[2532|Kαὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]] [[3588|τῶν]] [[5204|ὑδάτων]] [[3004|λέγοντος]], [[1342|Δίκαιος]], [[2962|Κύριε]], [[1510|εἶ]], [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ὢν]], [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[2258|ἦν]], [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[2071|ἐσόμενος]], [[3754|ὅτι]] [[5023|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]]. <small>(Beza 3rd)</small>
+* [[1590 AD|1590]] <small>(Beza Octavo 4th)</small>
+* [[1598 AD|1598]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[191|ἤκουσα]] [[3588|τοῦ]] [[32|ἀγγέλου]] [[3588|τῶν]] [[5204|ὑδάτων]] [[3004|λέγοντος]], [[1342|Δίκαιος]], [[2962|Κύριε]], [[1510|εἶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[1510|ὢν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[2258|ἦν]] [[2532|καὶ]] [[3588|ὁ]] [[2071|ἐσόμενος]], [[3754|ὅτι]] [[5023|ταῦτα]] [[2919|ἔκρινας]]· <small>(Beza 4th)</small>
+''See Also [[Revelation 16:5 Beza 1598]]''
+* [[1604 AD|1604]] <small>(Beza Octavo 5th)</small>
+====[[Elias Hutter]]====
+* [[1599 AD|1599]] Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, δίκαιος, κύριε, εἶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· {{The The Nuremberg Polyglot 1599}}
+====[[House of Elzevir|Elzevir]]====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Elzevirs 1624.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Elzevirs’ 1624 Greek]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Elzevirs 1633.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Elzevirs’ 1633 Greek]]
+* [[1624 AD|1624]] Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος· Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ, ὁ ὢν, καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· <small>(Elzevir)</small>
+* [[1633 AD|1633]] Kαὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος· Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ, ὁ ὢν, καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· <small>(Elzevir)</small>
+* [[1641 AD|1641]] <small>(Elzevir)</small>
+====Scholz====
+* [[1841 AD|1841]] <small>[[Johann Martin Augustin Scholz|Scholz]])</small>
+====Scrivener====
+* [[1894 AD|1894]] καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος, Δίκαιος, Κύριε, εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· {{Scrivener Footnote}}
+====Other Greek====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Sinaiticus.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in the Greek [[Codex Sinaiticus]]]]
+*  [[2532|και]] [[191|]ηκουσα]] [[3588|του]] [[32|αγγελου]] των υδατων [[3004|λεγοντος]] δικαιος ει ο ων και ος ην και οσιος̣ οτι ταυτα εκρινας ([[Papyrus 47]]) Papyrus 47 conatins "και"
+Erasmus [[1522 AD|1522]] and Stephanus [[1550 AD|1550]] also have "[[2532|kai]]," and this was before P47 was known to scholars, so there was more than just "one manuscript standing out.
+:5 txt ὁ ὅσιος א P 051 ƒ052 922 2053mg copsa RP NA28 ‖ ὅσιος A C 046 1611 Beat ‖ καὶ ὅσιος ⁴⁷ 1841 2040 2329 ‖ καὶ ὁ ὅσιος 1006 1828 2053txt 2062 (Prim) ‖ καὶ ὁ ἐσόμενος 2037 TR ‖ omit copbo ‖ hiat 2050
+* [[2532|καί]] ἀκούω ὁ [[32|ἄγγελος]] ὁ ὕδωρ λέγω δίκαιος εἰμί ὁ εἰμί [[2532|καί]] ὁ εἰμί ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι οὗτος κρίνω <small>Tischendorf 8th Edition</small>
+* [[1881 AD|1881]] [[2532|Καὶ]] ἤκουσα τοῦ [[32|ἀγγέλου]] τῶν [[5204|ὑδάτων]] λέγοντος Δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν [[2532|καὶ]] ὁ ἦν, ὁ ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας, <small>Westcott and Hort</small>
+* [[1904 AD|1904]] Καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος· Δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· <small>Greek Orthodox Church</small>
+* [[1904 AD|1904]] [[2532|Καὶ]] ἤκουσα τοῦ [[32|ἀγγέλου]] τῶν [[5204|ὑδάτων]] λέγοντος Δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν [[2532|καὶ]] ὁ ἦν, ὁ Ὅσιος, ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας, <small>(Nestle)</small>
+* [[2000 AD|2000]] (Byzantine/Majority Text)
+==English Versions==
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 KJV.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in the [[1611 AD|1611]] [[King James Version]]]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 English Hexapla 1841.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Revelation 16:5 in [[Greek]] in the [[1841 AD|1841]] English Hexapla]]
+* [[1395 AD|1395]] [And the thridde aungel... seide,] Just art thou, Lord, that art, and that were hooli, that demest these thingis; ([[Wycliffe's Bible|Wycliffe]])
+* [[1526 AD|1526]] And I herde an angell saye: lorde which arte and wast thou arte ryghteous and holy because thou hast geve soche iudgmentes (Tyndale)
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5  Tyndale 1535.JPG|thumb|right|300px|<small>Revelation 16:5 in Tyndale's 1535 Middleburch imprint</small>]]
+* [[1535 AD|1535]] And I herde an angel saye: LORDE which art and wast, thou art righteous and holy, because thou hast geue soche iudgmentes, (Coverdale)
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Matthew 1537.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Revelation 16:5 in the [[1537 AD|1537]] [[Matthew Bible]]]]
+* [[1540 AD|1540]] And I herde an Angell saye: Lorde, whych arte and wast, thou arte ryghteous & holy, because thou hast geuen soche iudgementes, (Great Bible)(Coverdale)
+* [[1549 AD|1549]] And I heard an angel say: Lord which art & wast, thou art rightuous & holy, because thou hast geuen such iudgementes, (Matthew's Bible by John Rogers)
+[[Image:Revelation_16_5_Geneva_1560.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in the [[1560 AD|1560]] [[Geneva Bible]]]]
+* [[1557 AD|1557]] And I heard the Angel of the waters say, Lord, thou art iust, Which art, and Which wast: and Holy, because thou hast iudged these things. (Geneva)
+* [[1568 AD|1568]] And I hearde the angell of the waters say: Lorde, which art, and wast, thou art ryghteous & holy, because thou hast geuen such iudgementes: (Bishops')
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Bishops.JPG|300px|thumb|right|Revelation 16:5 in the [[1568 AD|1568]] [[Bishops' Bible]]]]
+* [[1611 AD|1611]] And I heard the Angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast iudged thus: <small>([[King James Version]])</small>
+* [[1833 AD|1833]] And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, who art, and wast, and wilt be, because thou hast judged thus. (Websters)
+* [[1851 AD|1851]] And I heard the angel of the waters say: Righteous art thou, who art and who wast, and art holy; because thou hast done this judgment. (Murdock Translation by James Murdock)
+* [[1898 AD|1898]] and I heard the messenger of the waters, saying, `righteous, O Lord, art Thou, who art, and who wast, and who shalt be, because these things Thou didst judge, (Young's Literal Translation)
+* [[1900 AD|1900]] [[2532|And]] [[191|I heard]] [[3588|the]] [[32|angel]] [[3588|of the]] [[5204|waters]] [[3004|say]], [[1488|Thou art]] [[1342|righteous]], [[2962|O Lord]], [[3588|which]] [[5607|art]], [[2532|and]] [[2258|wast]], [[2532|and]] [[2071|shalt be]], [[3754|because]] [[2919|thou hast judged]] [[5023|thus]]. <small>''([[King James Version]], [[Pure Cambridge Edition]] [[1900 AD|1900]])''</small>
+* [[1982 AD|1982]] And I heard the angel of the waters saying: 'You are righteous, O Lord, The One who is and who was and who is to be, Because You have judged these things. ([[New King James Version]])
+==Foreign Language Translations==
+''See also [[Bible translations into Afrikaans]]''
+====[[Afrikaans]]====
+* [[1933 AD|1933]] <small>J. D. du Toit, E. E. van Rooyen, J. D. Kestell, H. C. M. Fourie, and BB Keet</small> (Ta Biblia Ta Logia)
+* [[1953 AD|1953]]
+* [[1982 AD|1982]] <small>Paraphrase - Die Lewende Bybel, Christelike Uitgewersmaatskappy (CUM)</small>
+* [[1982 AD|1982]] <small>South African Bible Society - E. P. Groenewald, A. H. van Zyl, P. A. Verhoef, J. L. Helberg, and W. Kempen</small>
+* [[1983 AD|1983]] <small>© Bybelgenootskap van Suid Afrika </small>
+* [[2001 AD|2001]] <small>The Nuwe Wêreld-vertaling van die Heilige Skrif is an Afrikaans translation of the 1984 English translation of the Bible by the Watchtower Society.</small>
+* [[2002 AD|2002]] Die Boodskap
+* [[2002 AD|2002]] <small>DieBybel@Kinders.co.za - Gert Prinsloo, Phil Botha, Willem Boshoff, Hennie Stander, Dirk Human, Stephan Joubert, and Jan van der Watt.</small>
+* [[2006 AD|2006]] <small>The Nuwe Lewende Vertaling (literally "New Living Translation")</small>
+* [[2008 AD|2008]] <small>Bybel vir Almal - South African Bible Society,  Bart Oberholzer, Bernard Combrink, Hermie van Zyl, Francois Tolmie, Christo van der Merwe, Rocco Hough en Elmine Roux.</small>
+* [[2014 AD|2014]] <small>Direct Translation, South African Bible Society</small>
+* [[2014 AD|2014]] <small>Afrikaans Standard Version, CUM Books</small>
+====[[Akan]]====
+====Albanian====
+* Dhe dëgjova engjëllin e ujërave duke thënë: ''Ti je i drejtë, o Zot, që je që ishe dhe që do të vish, i Shenjti që gjykoi këto gjëra.
+====Amharic====
+[[Image:Amharic Revelation 16.5 1988.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Amharic bible of 1988 at Revelation 16:5]]
+* [[1988 AD|1988]]
+====[[Amuzgo de Guerrero]]====
+* [[1973 AD|1973]] <small>Amuzgo de Guerrero (AMU) Copyright © 1973, 1999 by La Liga Biblica</small>
+* [[1999 AD|1999]]
+====Arabic====
+[[Image:Arabic Revelation 16.5 1657.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Arabic bible in the 1657 London Polyglot of Walton at Revelation 16:5]]
+[[Image:Arabic Revelation 16.5 1657 Latin.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Latin translation of the Arabic bible in the 1657 London Polyglot of Walton at Revelation 16:5]]
+* [[1988 AD|1988]]
+* [[1516 AD|1516]]
+* [[1591 AD|1591]]
+* [[1616 AD|1616]]
+* [[1622 AD|1622]]
+* [[1657 AD|1657]] (Waltons Polyglot)
+* [[1671 AD|1671]] <small>Biblia Arabica. de propaganda fide. Arabic and Latin Bible printed in Rome by [[Abraham Ecchellensis]] and [[Louis Maracci]]</small>
+* <big>وسمعت ملاك المياه يقول عادل انت ايها الكائن والذي كان والذي يكون لانك حكمت هكذا.</big><small>(Arabic Smith & Van Dyke)</small>
+* [[1988 AD|1988]] <small>Arabic Life Application Bible (ALAB) Copyright © 1988 by Biblica</small>
+* [[2009 AD|2009]] <small>Arabic Bible: Easy-to-Read Version (ERV-AR) Copyright © 2009 by World Bible Translation Center</small>
+====[[Aramaic]]/[[Syriac]]====
+* <big></big><small>(Aramaic Peshitta)</small>
+====[[Armenian]]====
+Լսեցի ջուրերուն հրեշտակը՝ որ կ՚ըսէր. «Արդա՛ր ես, դուն՝ որ ես եւ որ էիր, ու սո՛ւրբ ես՝ որ ա՛յսպէս դատեցիր,
+====Basque====
+* [[1571]]
+* Eta ençun neçan vretaco Aingueruä, cioela, Iusto aiz Iauna, Aicena eta Incena eta Saindua: ceren gauça hauc iugeatu baitituc: (Navarro-Labourdin)
+====Bulgarian====
+* [[1940 AD|1940]] (1940 Bulgarian Bible)
+* И чух ангела на водите да казва: Праведен си Ти, Пресвети, Който си, и Който си бил, загдето си отсъдил така;
+====Cebuano====
+* Ug nadungog ko ang manolunda sa katubigan nga nag-ingon, Husto ikaw niining imong mga paghukom, ikaw nga mao ang sa karon ug ang sa kagahapon, O Balaan.
+====[[Cherokee]]====
+* [[1860 AD|1860]] Cherokee New Testament (CHR)
+====[[Chinese]]====
+* 接着，我听见那位统管众水的天使说：“今在、昔在的圣者啊，你是公义的，因为你判定了这些事, <small>(Chinese Union Version (Simplified))</small>
+* 接著，我聽見那位統管眾水的天使說：「今在、昔在的聖者啊，你是公義的，因為你判定了這些事，<small>(Chinese Union Version (Traditional))</small>
+====Coptic====
+* [[2006 AD|2006]] ⲀⲒⲤⲰⲦⲘ ⲈⲠⲀⲄⲄⲈⲖⲞⲤ ⲚⲘⲘⲞⲞⲨ ⲈϤϪⲰ ⲘⲘⲞⲤ ϪⲈ ⲚⲦⲔ ⲞⲨⲆⲒⲔⲀⲒⲞⲤ ⲠⲈⲦϢⲞⲞⲠ ⲀⲨⲰ ⲠⲈⲦⲈ ⲚⲈϤϢⲞⲞⲠ ⲠⲠⲈⲦⲞⲨⲀⲀⲂ ϪⲈ ⲀⲔⲔⲢⲒⲚⲈ ⲚⲚⲀⲒ  Sahidic Coptic
+====Croatian====
+* [[1563 AD|1563]] <small>The Glagolitic New Testament 1562/1563</small>
+* I začujem anđela voda gdje govori: Pravedan si, Ti koji jesi i koji bijaše, Sveti, što si tako dosudio!
+====Czech====
+* [[1613 AD|1613]] I slyšel jsem anděla vod, řkoucího: Spravedlivý jsi, Pane, Kterýž jsi, a Kterýž jsi byl, a Svatý, žes to usoudil. [[bible of Kralice]]
+====[[Danish]]====
+* Og jeg hørte Vandenes Engel sige: Retfærdig er du, som er, og som var, du hellige, fordi du har fældet denne Dom;
+====[[Dutch]]====
+* [[1528 AD|1528]] Ende ic hebbe gehoort een engel der wateren, seggende. Ghi zijt rechtuerdicht Heer, die daer is, ende die daer was heylich. Want ghi dit geordeelt hebt
+* [[1542 AD|1542]] ende ic hoorde den engel, seggende. HERE, ghi sijt gerecht, die daer sijt, ende die daer was, ende heylich, dat ghi dat gheoordeelt hebt,
+* [[1548 AD|1548]] Ende ick heb ghehoort den enghel der wateren segghende, Ghy sijt rectuerdich Heere die sijt, ende die waert heylich, dat ghy dit gheordeelt hebt,
+* [[1560 AD|1560]] Ende ick hoorde den Enghel segghen: Heere, ghy zijt rechtueerdich, die daer is, ende die daer was, ende heylich, dat ghy sulcx gheordeelt hebt.
+* [[1562 AD|1562]] Ende ick hoorde den Engel der wateren segghen: Du bist rechtueerdich Heere, die Is, ende die Was, ende heylich, om dat du dit geoordeelt hebst.
+* [[1637 AD|1637]] En ik hoorde den engel der wateren zeggen: Gij zijt rechtvaardig, Heere! Die is, en Die was, en Die zijn zal, dat Gij dit geoordeeld hebt;
+====[[Esperanto]]====
+* Kaj mi auxdis la angxelon de la akvoj dirantan:Justa estas Vi, la estanta kaj estinta, la Sanktulo, cxar Vi tiele jugxis;
+====[[Finnish]]====
+* [[1619 AD|1619]]
+* [[1776 AD|1776]] Ja minä kuulin vetten enkelin sanovan: Herra, sinä olet vanhurskas, joka olet, ja joka oli, ja pyhä, ettäs nämät tuomitsit;
+* [[1938 AD|1938]]
+====French====
+[[image:Revelation 16.5 French Bible d'Olivétan.jpg|thumb|right|250px|Revelation 16.5 French Bible d'Olivétan of 1535]]
+[[image:Le Nouveau Testament L'Apocalypse 16.5.jpg|thumb|right|250px| Le Nouveau Testament, c'est à dire la nouvelle alliance de nostre Seigneur et seul Sauveur Jesus Christ, tant en latin qu'en francois : les deux translations [...]. [Genève] : [Simon Du Bosc & Guillaume Guéroult], 1555]](-1554)
+[[image:Revelation 16.5 French Bible 1605.jpg|thumb|right|250px|Revelation 16.5 in the 1605 French Bible]]
+* [[1605 AD|1605]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 1644 Giovanni Diodati French.jpg|thumb|right|250px|<small>Revelation 16:5 in the [[French]] [[New Testament]] of [[1644 AD|1644]] of Giovanni Diodati</small>[https://www.e-rara.ch/zut/content/zoom/14703176].]]
+* [[1644 AD|1644]] Et i’ouï l’Ange des eaus, disait, Tu es juste, ô Seigneur, qui es, et qui estios, & ''qui es'' le Saint, en ce que tu as fait ces iugements.<small>([[Giovanni Diodati]])</small>
+* [[1744 AD|1744]] Et j'entendis l'ange des eaux, qui disait: Tu es juste, Seigneur, qui ES, et QUI ÉTAIS, et QUI SERAS saint, parce que tu as exercé ces jugements. (Ostervald)
+* [[1744 AD|1744]] Et j'entendis l'Ange des eaux, qui disait : Seigneur, QUI ES, QUI ÉTAIS, et QUI SERAS, tu es juste, parce que tu as fait un tel jugement. (Martin)
+* Et j'entendis l'ange des eaux, disant: Tu es juste, toi qui es et qui étais, le Saint, parce que tu as ainsi jugé; (Darby)
+* [[1864 AD|1864]] (Augustin Crampon)
+* [[1910 AD|1910]] Et j'entendis l'ange des eaux qui disait: Tu es juste, toi qui es, et qui étais; tu es saint, parce que tu as exercé ce jugement. (Louis Segond)
+* [[2006 AD|2006]] Et j’entendis l’ange des eaux dire: Tu es droit, Ô Seigneur, qui es, et étais, et seras, parce que tu as jugé ainsi. ([[King James Française]])
+====German====
+* [[1545 AD|1545]] Und ich horte den Angel der Wasser sagen: herr, du bist gerecht, der da ist und der da war, und heilig, dab du solches geurteilt hast <small>(Luther 1545)</small>
+* [[1871]] Und ich hörte den Engel der Wasser sagen: Du bist gerecht, der da ist und der da war, der Heilige, (O. Fromme) daß du also gerichtet (O. geurteilt) hast. <small>(Elberfelder 1871)</small>
+* [[1899 AD|1899]] Und ich hörte den Engel der Wasser sagen: gerecht bist du, der da ist und der da war, der Heilige, daß du so gerichtet;<small>Textbibel</small>
+* [[1912 AD|1912]] Und ich hörte den Engel der Wasser sagen: HERR, du bist gerecht, der da ist und der da war, und heilig, daß du solches geurteilt hast, <small>(Luther 1912)</small>
+====[[Greek]]====
+* [[1904 AD|1904]] Καὶ ἤκουσα τοῦ ἀγγέλου τῶν ὑδάτων λέγοντος· Δίκαιος εἶ, ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν, ὁ ὅσιος ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας· <small>(Greek Orthodox (B. Antoniades))</small>
+* Modern Greek <small>(Trinitarian Bible Society)</small>
+====[[Hungarian]]====
+*  És hallám, hogy a vizek angyala ezt mondja vala: Igaz vagy Uram, a ki vagy és a ki valál, te Szent, hogy ezeket ítélted;
+====[[Indonesian]]====
+* Lalu aku dengar malaekat segala air itu mengatakan, "Adillah Engkau, Yang ada, dan Yang sudah sedia ada, dan Yang kudus, oleh sebab Engkau sudah menjatuhkan hukum yang demikian,
+====Italian====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Italian 1490.jpg|right|300px|thumb|1490 Italian]]
+* [[1649 AD|1649]] Ed io udii l’angelo delle acque, che diceva: Tu sei giusto, o Signore, che sei, e che eri, che sei il Santo, d’aver fatti questi giudicii.
+* [[1927 AD|1927]] E udii l’angelo delle acque che diceva: Sei giusto, tu che sei e che eri, tu, il Santo, per aver così giudicato. (Riveduta Bible)
+* Allora udii l'angelo delle acque che diceva: tu, il Santo, poiché così hai giudicato.
+====[[Japanese]]====
+* [[1928 AD|1928]] <small>([[Naoji Nagai]])</small>
+====[[Kabyle]]====
+* Sliɣ i lmelk iḥekkmen ɣef waman yeqqaṛ : Ay Imqeddes, a Bab n lḥeqq, kečč yellan si zik, yellan ass-a, tḥekkmeḍ s lḥeqq.
+====Khmer====
+* [[1928 AD|1928]]
+====Korean====
+* 내가 들으니 물을 차지한 천사가 가로되 `전에도 계셨고 시방도 계신 거룩하신 이여 이렇게 심판하시니 의로우시도다
+====Latin====
+[[Image:Revelation_16_5_Erasmus_1516_Latin.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Latin]] in the [[1516 AD|1516]] New Testament of Erasmus]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Erasmus 1522 Latin.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Latin]] in the [[1522 AD|1522]] New Testament of Erasmus]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Beza 1565 Latin.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Latin]] in the [[1565 AD|1565]] New Testament of Beza]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Beza 1589 Latin.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Latin]] in the [[1589 AD|1589]] New Testament of Beza]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16 5 Beza 1598 Latin.JPG|300px|thumb|right|[[Revelation 16:5]] in [[Latin]] in the [[1598 AD|1598]] New Testament of Beza]]
+* et audivi angelum aquarum dicentem iustus es qui es et qui eras sanctus quia haec iudicasti ([[Vulgate]])
+* [[1516 AD|1516]] et audivi angelum dicentem iustus es domine, qui es, & qui eras sanctus, quia hoc iudicasti ([[Erasmus]])
+* [[1527 AD|1527]] <small>(Erasmus 1527)</small>
+* [[1527 AD|1527]] <small>(Erasmus Vulgate 1527)</small>
+* [[1565 AD|1565]] (Beza)
+* [[1565 AD|1565]] (Beza Vulgate)
+* [[1598 AD|1598]] (Beza)
+* [[1598 AD|1598]] (Beza Vulgate)
+====[[Latvian]]====
+* Un es dzirdēju ūdens eņģeli sakām: Taisnīgs Tu esi, Kungs, kas Tu esi un kas biji svēts, un kas tā tiesāji.
+====[[Lithuanian]]====
+* Ir išgirdau vandenų angelą sakant: “Teisus Tu, o Viešpatie, kuris esi ir kuris buvai, šventas, kad taip teisi.
+====[[Maori]]====
+* [[1833 AD|1833]]
+* [[1837 AD|1837]]
+* [[1858 AD|1858]]
+* [[1868 AD|1868]] (Formal translation based on the Greek 'Received Text': [[Trinitarian Bible Society]])
+* [[1833 AD|1833]]
+* [[1952 AD|1952]]
+* A ka rongo ahau i te anahera o nga wai e mea ana, Tika tonu koe, e te Ariki, tenei koe inaianei, i mua ano koe, ko te Mea Tapu hoki koe, nau hoki enei whakawa:
+====[[Norwegian]]====
+* [[1930 AD|1930]] Og jeg hørte engelen over vannene si: Rettferdig er du som er og som var, du hellige, at du har dømt således; <small>Det Norsk Bibelselskap (1930)</small>
+====[[Pidgin]]====
+* [[1996 AD|1996]] <small>(Pidgin King Jems)</small>
+====[[Portugese]]====
+* E ouvi o anjo das águas dizer: Justo és tu, que és e que eras, o Santo; porque julgaste estas coisas;
+* [[2012 AD|2012]] Então, ouvi o anjo responsável pelas águas declarar: “Tu és Justo, Tu, o Santo, que és e que eras, porquanto julgaste estes crimes;<small>Bíblia King James Atualizada Português</small>
+====Romanian====
+* [[1551 AD|1551]] <small>(Slavic-Romanian Gospel)</small>
+* [[1561 AD|1561]] <small>([[Coresi]]'s Gospel)</small>
+* [[1570 AD|1570]] <small>(The Braşov Psalm Book) Psalms Only</small>
+* [[1582 AD|1582]] <small>(Palia from Orăştie)</small>
+* [[1648 AD|1648]] <small>(The New Testament of Alba Iulia)</small>
+* [[1688 AD|1688]] <small>([[Biblia de la Bucureşti]] - Bucharest Bible)</small>
+* [[1911 AD|1911]] <small>(Nitzulescu - [[British and Foreign Bible Society]])</small>
+* [[1921 AD|1921]] <small>(Cornilescu)</small>
+* [[1924 AD|1924]] <small>(Cornilescu - [[British and Foreign Bible Society]])</small>
+* [[1989 AD|1989]] <small>(Gute Botschaft Verlag)</small>
+* [[2010 AD|2010]] Şi am auzit pe îngerul apelor spunând: Drept eşti tu, Doamne, care eşti, care erai şi care vei fi, pentru că ai judecat astfel. <small>(Biblia Traducerea Fidela în limba română - based upon the [[Textus Receptus]] / [[King James Version]])</small>
+* [[2013 AD|2013]] <small>(Biblia Traducerea Fidela în limba română - based upon the [[Textus Receptus]] / [[King James Version]])</small>
+* [[2014 AD|2014]] <small>(Biblia Traducerea Fidela în limba română - based upon the [[Textus Receptus]] / [[King James Version]])</small>
+* [[2014 AD|2014]] <small>(Cornilescu 90th anniversary definitive edition - [[British and Foreign Bible Society]])</small>
+====Russian====
+* [[1876 AD|1876]] И услышал я Ангела вод, который говорил: праведен Ты, Господи, Который еси и был, и свят, потому что так судил; (RUSV)
+Transliteration: I uslyshal ya Angela vod, kotoryy govoril: praveden Ty, Gospodi, Kotoryy yesi i byl, i svyat, potomu chto tak sudil;
+* Russian Transliteration of the Greek
+[[Image:Ostrog Bible Revelation 16.5.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Revelation 16:5 in the Ostrog Bible of [[1581 AD|1581]]]]
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Ostrog Reprint 1663.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Revelation 16:5 in the Ostrog Bible Reprint of [[1663 AD|1663]]]]
+* [[1757 AD|1757]] И слышах Ангела воднаго глаголюща: праведен еси, Господи, сый и Иже бе, и преподобн, яко сия судил еси: <small>1757 Church Slavonic Elizabeth Bible</small>
+[[Image:Slavic Bible Elizabethan edition Revelation 16.5.jpg|thumb|300px|right|Revelation 16:5 in the Slavic Bible Elizabethan edition of [[1900 AD|1900]]]]
+* [[1900 AD|1900]] <small>Slavic Bible Elizabethan edition 1900.</small>
+====Sanskrit====
+* [[1851 AD|1851]]
+====Shuar====
+* Nuyß suntar Entsß Wßinniua nuna chichamen antukmajai. "Uuntß, amek ti penker Yus asam J·tikiame. Yßunchusha tuke Puj· asam ti Shφiraitme.
+====Spanish====
+''See Also [[Bible translations (Spanish)]]''
+* [[1543 AD|1543]] <small>([[Francisco de Enzinas]] New Testament)</small>
+* [[1556 AD|1556]] (Juan Perez de Pineda New Testament and book of Psalms)
+* [[1569 AD|1569]] Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Señor, tú eres justo, que eres y que eras el Santo, porque has juzgado estas cosas; (Sagradas Escrituras)
+* [[1602 AD|1602]] Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, Oh Señor, que eres y que eras, y que serás, porque has juzgado estas cosas:
+* [[1814 AD|1814]] <small>Valera Revision</small>
+* [[1817 AD|1817]] <small>Valera Revision</small>
+* [[1831 AD|1831]] <small>Valera Revision</small>
+* [[1862 AD|1862]] <small>Valera Revision</small>
+* [[1865 AD|1865]] <small>Valera Revision (American Bible Society</small>  Revisión)
+* [[1869 AD|1869]] <small>Valera Revision</small>
+* [[1909 AD|1909]] Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, oh Señor, que eres y que eras, el Santo, porque has juzgado estas cosas: <small>(Reina Valera)</small>
+* [[1960 AD|1960]] <small>(Eugene Nida )</small>
+* [[1987 AD|1987]] <small>Translation from English. Publisher: Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.</small>
+* [[1994 AD|1994]] Nuevo Testamento versión Recobro
+* [[1997 AD|1997]] Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, el que eres, y el que eras, oh Santo, porque has juzgado estas cosas; <small>(La Biblia de las Américas) (©1997)</small>
+* [[1999 AD|1999]] <small>Nueva Versión Internacional (NVI)</small>
+* [[2002 AD|2002]] <small>(1602 Purificada)</small>
+* [[2005 AD|2005]] Oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: "Justo eres Tú, el que eres, y el que eras, oh Santo, porque has juzgado estas cosas; <small>Las citas bíblicas son tomadas Nueva Biblia de los Hispanos © 2005 by The Lockman Foundation, La Habra, Calif,</small>
+* [[2009 AD|2009]] <small>Santa Biblia: Reina-Valera</small>
+* [[2011 AD|2011]] Y oí al ángel de las aguas, que decía: Justo eres tú, oh Señor, que eres y que eras, y serás, porque has juzgado así. <small>([[Reina Valera Gómez]])</small>
+====[[Swahili]]====
+* Nikamsikia malaika msimamizi wa maji akisema, "Ewe mtakatifu, Uliyeko na uliyekuwako! Wewe ni mwenye haki katika hukumu hii uliyotoa.
+====Swedish====
+* [[1917 AD|1917]] Och jag hörde vattnens ängel säga: »Rättfärdig är du, du som är och som var, du helige, som har dömt så.<small>BIBELN eller DEN HELIGA SKRIFT -- innehållande -- NYA TESTAMENTETS KANONISKA BÖCKER -- i överensstämmelse med den av KONUNGEN ÅR 1917 -- This is release 3.7 from Projekt Runeberg (http://www.lysator.liu.se/runeberg/) of the Bible. That release was made 1999-04-09. It contains the full text of the Bible, and all of it has been spell-checked. -- gillade och stadfästa översättningen</small>
+====Syriac====
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 1886 Syriac NT.jpg|thumb|right|300px|<small>Revelation 16:5 in the [[1886 AD|1886]] Syriac New Testament</small>]]
+* [[1555 AD|1555]] Johann Albrecht Widmanstadt
+* [[1645 AD|1645]] G. Sionita (Paris Polyglot, 1645).
+* [[1657 AD|1657]] B. Walton (London Polyglot, 1657).
+* [[1823 AD|1823]] S. Lee (1823)
+* [[1852 AD|1852]] Urmia edition (1852)
+* [[1913 AD|1913]] Joseph de Qelayta/Trinitarian Bible Society (1913).
+* [[1892 AD|1892]] Mosul edition (1887–92)
+* [[1851 AD|1851]] Beirut (1951)
+====[[Tagalog]]====
+* [[1905 AD|1905]] At narinig ko ang anghel ng tubig na nagsasabi, Matuwid ka, na ngayon at nang nakaraan, Oh Banal, sapagka't humatol ka na gayon; <small>(Ang Dating Biblia 1905)</small>
+====Thai====
+* และข้าพเจ้าได้ยินทูตสวรรค์แห่งน้ำร้องว่า "ข้าแต่องค์พระผู้เป็นเจ้า ผู้ดำรงอยู่บัดนี้ และผู้ได้ทรงดำรงอยู่ในกาลก่อน และผู้จะทรงดำรงอยู่ในอนาคต พระองค์ทรงเป็นผู้ชอบธรรม เพราะพระองค์ทรงพิพากษาอย่างนั้น <small>(Thai KJV)</small>
+====[[Turkish]]====
+* Sulardan sorumlu meleğin şöyle dediğini işittim: ‹‹Var olan, var olmuş olan kutsal Tanrı! Bu yargılarında adilsin.
+====[[Ukrainian]]====
+* І почув я Ангола вод, який говорив: Ти праведний, що Ти є й що Ти був, і святий, що Ти це присудив! <small>Translated by P. Kulish -- Published in 1871.</small>
+====Uma====
+* Oti toe, ku'epe mala'eka to mpokuasai ue mpo'uli': Oo Pue' Alata'ala to moroli', to ria ami' -moko ngkai lomo' -na pai' to bate ria-ko wae lau, Monoa' lia pehuku' -nu tetu-e. <small>The New Testament in Uma. Central Sulawest, Indonesia. Copyright (c) 1996, Indonesian Bible Society</small>
+====[[Urdu]]====
+* [[1878 AD|1878]] (Hindustani Roman Script)
+* [[1938 AD|1938]] (Urdu Revised Version. [[British and Foreign Bible Society]], 1938)
+* [[2016 AD|2016]] (Urdu Bible)
+====[[Vietnamese]]====
+* [[1934 AD|1934]] <small>(Vietnamese Bible) (VIET)</small>
+* Tôi nghe thiên sứ của nước nói rằng: Hỡi Đấng Hiện Có, Đã Có, tức là Đấng Thánh, Ngài là công bình, vì Ngài đã phán xét thể nầy;
+====[[Welsh]]====
+* [[1567 AD|1567]] (William Salesbury, printed in 1567 by Humphrey Toy)
+[[Image:Revelation 16.5 Welsh 1588.JPG|300px|thumb|right|250px|Revelation 16:5 in the [[1588 AD|1588]] Welsh Bible[https://www.library.wales/discover-learn/digital-exhibitions/printed-material/1588-welsh-bible#?c=&m=&s=&cv=1111&xywh=29%2C310%2C1754%2C921].]]
+* [[1588 AD|1588]] ([[William Morgan]])
+* [[1620 AD|1620]] Ac mi a glywais angel y dyfroedd yn dywedyd, Cyfiawn, O Arglwydd, ydwyt ti, yr hwn wyt, a'r hwn oeddit, a'r hwn a fyddi; oblegid barnu ohonot y pethau hyn. ([[William Morgan]])
+* [[1824 AD|1824]]
+* [[1988 AD|1988]] ([[New Welsh Bible]])
+* [[2004 AD|2004]]
+* [[2011 AD|2011]] (beibl.net 2011 by [[Arfon Jones]])
+==Commentaries==
+{{Commentaries}}
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Abbott's Illustrated New Testament|Abbott's Illustrated New Testament]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Adam Clarke Commentary|Adam Clarke Commentary]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Henry Alford's Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary|Henry Alford's Greek]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible|Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Calvin's Commentary on the Bible|Calvin's Commentary on the Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges|Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Justin Edwards' Family Bible New Testament|Justin Edwards' Family Bible New Testament]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible|John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Geneva Study Bible|Geneva Study Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary|Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Heinrich Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament|Heinrich Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Johann Albrecht Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament|Johann Albrecht Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible|Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 John Lightfoot's Commentary on the Gospels|John Lightfoot's Commentary on the Gospels]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 John Trapp Complete Commentary|John Trapp Complete Commentary]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 The Popular Commentary by Paul E. Kretzmann|The Popular Commentary by Paul E. Kretzmann]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible|Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 People's New Testament|People's New Testament]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament|Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible|Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 The Fourfold Gospel|The Fourfold Gospel]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Treasury of Scripture Knowledge|Treasury of Scripture Knowledge]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Vincent's Word Studies|Vincent's Word Studies]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament|Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Wesley's Explanatory Notes|Wesley's Explanatory Notes]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5-17 F.B. Meyer's 'Through the Bible' Commentary|F.B. Meyer's 'Through the Bible' Commentary]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 James Gray's Concise Bible Commentary|James Gray's Concise Bible Commentary]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible|Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on the Bible|Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on the Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 John Dummelow's Commentary on the Bible|John Dummelow's Commentary on the Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Darby's Synopsis of the Whole Bible|Darby's Synopsis of the Whole Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 F. B. Hole's Old and New Testament Commentary|F. B. Hole's Old and New Testament Commentary]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Arno Gaebelein's Annotated Bible|Arno Gaebelein's Annotated Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Ironside's Notes on Selected Books|Ironside's Notes on Selected Books]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 L. M. Grant's Commentary on the Bible|L. M. Grant's Commentary on the Bible]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Sermon Bible Commentary|Sermon Bible Commentary]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 The Pulpit Commentaries|The Pulpit Commentaries]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Scofield Reference Notes#Revelation 16:5|Scofield Reference Notes]]
+==See also==
+* [[Revelation 16:5 and the Triadic Declaration - A defense of the reading of “shalt be” in the Authorized Version]]
 * [[Revelation 16:5 And Shalt Be]]
 * [[Article: Revelation 16:5 "and shalt be" by Will Kinney|Revelation 16:5 "and shalt be"]] by [[Will Kinney]]
 * [[Conjecture (textual criticism)]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Beza 1589]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Beza 1598]]
+* [[Revelation 16:5 Timeline]]
+* [[Tetragrammaton]]
+* [[Nomina Sacra]]
+* [[Papyrus 47]]
+* [[I am (biblical term)]]
+* [[Exodus 3:14]]
+* [[Jehovah]]
 ==References==
-* 1. Edward F. Hills, The King James Version Defended, p. 208
+* 1. As cited in Thomas Holland, "Manuscript Evidence," http://www.purewords.org/kjb1611/html/rev16_5.htm
+* 2. When the King James Departs from the “Majority Text” (p. 102) (Hodges/Farstad “Majority” Text Refuted By Evidence) Moorman’s book available at http://www.biblefortoday.org/search.asp search for item #1617.
+* 3. Edward F. Hills, The King James Version Defended, p. 208
+==Marginal References==
+* [[Psalm 119:137]]
 ==External Links==
+* [https://www.amazon.com/s?k=9781733331586&ref=nb_sb_noss Revelation 16:5 and the Triadic Declaration - A defense of the reading of “shalt be” in the Authorized Version]
+* [http://www.textusreceptusbibles.com/Interlinear/66016005 Textus Receptus Bibles, Revelation 16:5]
+* [http://biblehub.com/revelation/16-5.htm Bible Hub Revelation 16:5]
+* [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Revelation-16-5/ King James Bible Online Revelation 16:5]
-===Supportive===
+====Esomenos====
+;Supportive
+* [http://textusreceptusbibles.blogspot.com/2016/09/beza-vindicated_1.html?m=1 Blog on Revelation 16:5 - Beza Vindicated]
+* [http://textusreceptusbibles.blogspot.com/2016/09/other-scholars-who-reject.html Blog on Revelation 16:5 - Other scholars who reject ὅσιος]
 * [http://brandplucked.webs.com/rev165shaltbe5810us.htm Revelation 16:5] by [[Will Kinney]]
 * [http://sites.google.com/site/kjvtoday/home/translation-issues/shalt-be-or-holy-one-in-revelation-165 Beza and Revelation 16:5] by [[KJV Today]]
+* [http://www.febc.edu.sg/BBVol15_2c.htm Far Eastern Bible College article on by Revelation 16:5] by [[Jeffrey Khoo]]
+* [http://www.kjvtextualtechnology.com/essay-2---deleted.php Essay 2 Inerrancy & Greek Manuscript Variance: An Introduction to the Topic] by  Dr. L. Bednar
+* [http://bibloscope.com/content/textual-considerations http://bibloscope.com/content/textual-considerations Textual Considerations]
+* [http://www.tbsbibles.org/pdf_reports/187-1.pdf#page=27 Trinitarian Bible Society on the James White / Jack Moorman debate]
-===Critical===
+;Critical
 * [http://www.bibleone.org/Article.aspx?channel=1&article=33 Revelation 16:5]
 * [http://kjvodebate.wordpress.com/2009/08/27/testing-the-textus-receptus-rev-165/ Testing the Textus Receptus: Rev. 16:5]
 * [http://www.lectionist.org/wwsb/Revelation/16/5.html Study Helps]
+* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7lDlOEOyTc Discussed King James Onlyism Part 1, Revelation 16:5, Revelation 11:17] by [[Jeremy Menicucci]]
+* [http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2019/12/fact-checking-versional-support-for-ecm.html Fact-checking Versional Support for the ECM and the textus receptus] by [[Elijah Hixson]]
+* [https://vimeo.com/342503741 Revelation 16:5 from Daily Dose of Greek]
+;Nick Sayers article and James White's Dividing Line and subsequent videos (2019)
+* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoxQHN_iTJQ Textual Criticism and the TR Live from CBTS] Live From Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary James discusses the issues surrounding the idea of Textual Criticism and the Textus Receptus.
+* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqNWlMGclK0 Examining James White's recent teaching about Revelation 16:5 Part 1] by [[Nick Sayers]] James White dedicated a Dividing Line in an attempt to debunk comments made on twitter defending the Revelation 16:5 reading of 'shalt be' in the King James Version .
+* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGVWkS3RNeM Examining James White's recent teaching about Revelation 16:5 Part 2] by [[Nick Sayers]] James White dedicated a Dividing Line in an attempt to debunk comments made on twitter defending the Revelation 16:5 reading of 'shalt be' in the King James Version.
+* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpF6n_Ie4tw Revelation 16:5 is correct in the King James Bible] by [[Bible Protector]] There are a few rare occasions where the King James Bible has a so-called “minority reading”. This means that the King James Bible has something which is different to almost all available copies.
+* [http://www.jeffriddle.net/2019/01/wm-114-james-white-tr-and-revelation-165.html WM 114: James White, the TR, and Revelation 16:5] by [[Jeff Riddle]]
+* [http://www.jeffriddle.net/2019/02/wm-117-conjectural-emendation-white.html WM 117: Conjectural Emendation, White, Beza, and Rev 16:5]
+[[Category:Johannine literature]]
+[[Category:Book of Revelation chapters|16]]
+{{Donate}}
+{{Books of the New Testament}}

Revelation 16:5

From Textus Receptus

Current revision

Contents

Interlinear

Commentary

O Lord

Manuscripts Underlying Lord

Pre 1611 English Bibles

Lord in Ethiopic

The Angel was quoting Psalm 119:137

and shalt be

Zeus

Ethiopic Version

Papyrus 47

Septuagint

Clement of Alexandria

Epiphanius of Salamis

Sahidic

Jerome

Primasius

Alcuin

Thomas Aquinas

Lorenzo Valla

Erasmus

Early English Bibles

Translations of Beza's Note

I AM

Ancient Manuscript

Spanish

John Calvin

Immanuel Tremellius

King James Translators

Johannes Piscator

David Pareus

Elzevirs

Dutch Statenvertaling

Brian Walton

Erasmus Schmidius

Wilhelm's A Brakel

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible

Isaac Newton

Johann Jakob Wettstein

Johann Albrecht Bengel

Johann Christoph Wolf

Lodewijk Caspar Valckenaer & Gerhard Fleischer

Pieper & Van Seldam

John Gill

Reginald Heber

John Wordsworth

Edward King

Jodocus Heringa

Syriac

William Francis Wilkinson, William Webster

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible

Willem Christiaan van Manen

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges

The Expositor's Greek Testament

Scrivener

Franz Ludwig Tscharner and Samuel Leemann

Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Young's Literal Translation

Hermann C. Hoskier

Edward F. Hills

Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament

William W. Combs

Thomas Holland

Robert L Thomas

Bullinger

Walter Scott

J. I. Mombert

Samuel Tregelles

Jonathan Stonis

F. C. Cook

Walter Scott

Bible Protector

New World Translation

The Triadic Declaration

Ecclesiastes 1:9