Bearing Witness to the Truth | 1 John 5:6-8

Let's turn over to our Bibles once again to the letter of 1st John chapter 5 1st

John chapter 5 and this time we're going to begin in verse 5 1st

John 5 5 God's Word says Who is the one who overcomes the world but he who believes that Jesus is the

Son of God This is the one who came by water and blood Jesus Christ not with the water only but with the water and with the blood

It is the Spirit who bears witness because the Spirit is the truth For there are three witness

There are three that bear witness the Spirit and the water and the blood and the three are in agreement

This is God's Word. Amen So I Made a slight adjustment to the sermon title for today

It's bearing witness to the truth bearing witness to the truth that's what this sermon is about and I'm also going to do a deep dive into what's known as the

Johannine comma and Much of this is which is all tied together and related by By what a witness is all about biblically

So we saw last Lord's Day that The one who came is none other is none other than Jesus the

Christ the Son of God Amen, the one true God the eternal divine

Son of God the Father not a creation Not a not a natural

He wasn't He didn't come into existence. He always was the logos was

God who came to us in water and in blood in water and in blood and We saw to that verse 6

Here focuses on the beginning and end of Christ's ministry on the earth

Right his baptism and his death those are bookends their bookends in Christ's ministry and And they are pointed to by the synecdoches of water and blood the parts that refer to the whole water referring to the baptism and the blood referring to his death on the cross

We saw too that it is the blood that makes atonement by the life Putting something to death by shedding its blood so that someone else can live

It's a vicarious atonement or sacrifice a propitiation for sin a satisfaction of punishment and wrath

Amen, so now Continuing on to the last part of verse 6

It is the Spirit who bears witness because the Spirit is the truth.

The Spirit is the truth Now notice a key word there obviously is witness

Witness the word witness there in the Greek is where we get the word martyr from martyr and So what does it mean then that the

Spirit of God bears witness? What does that mean? And Gordon Clark's commentary is very very helpful here

He says the word witness is a participle Meaning he who witnesses he who witnesses in a court trial a certain man

Or a woman is called a witness the witness gives his testimony his testimony

He recounts something He swears to its truth he swears to its veracity or its truth

Here the Holy Spirit is the one who witnesses and he does so because he himself is the truth

Amen he is the truth remember that God is truth

Jesus Christ is wisdom logos the truth and The spirit is none other than the spirit of truth

That is what so irritates the irrational and the neo -orthodox and the pietist who make truth some kind of emotional encounter

Irrational just something much like Emil Bruner did or Soren Kierkegaard did the

Dane the Danish theologian who talked about an infinitely irrational passion

It's not about the external what but the n -word how it's not about what you're worshiping, but how you do it

How intensely do you do it? So you can be a Satanist and as long as you're passionate about being a

Satanist You can be more in the truth than a Christian who is not as passionate that's the absurdity of what this kind of theology leads to and That's not what

God teaches us because he is a God of truth turn with me in the letter to the

Romans chapter 8 verse 15 as we See more as to what scripture speaks to regarding the

Spirit of God testifying in Romans chapter 8 verse 15

God's Word speaks to us for you

Believers have not received a spirit of slavery or of bondage

Leading to fear again But you have received the spirit of adoption as sons the

Holy Spirit by whom we cry out Abba Father Father God the

Spirit Himself testifies testifies with with our spirit

That we are children of God and if children also heirs

Heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ if indeed we suffer with him

So that we may also be glorified with him Amen so this very powerfully tells us a profound truth

We God doesn't leave us to our own devices to figure out if we belong to him or not

God gives to us his his own spirit and his own spirit

Testifies with our own spirit that we belong to him that we have been adopted.

That's a beautiful promise Amen, that's a beautiful promise from the Lord God Himself and similarly our

Baptist confession of faith says in chapter 1 that we may be influenced and persuaded by the testimony of the

Church of God to hold a high and reverent regard for the Holy Scriptures Moreover the glory of its contents the efficacy of its doctrine the majesty of its style

The agreement among all its parts the expanse of the whole which is to give all glory to God The full revelation it gives of the only way for salvation

Together with many other incomparable excellencies. I'm come it's complete perfection all these arguments provide

Abundant evidence that it is indeed the Word of God yet not withstanding this our full persuasion and assurance of its infallible truth and divine authority comes from None other than the inward work of the

Holy Spirit bearing witness Bearing witness by and with the word in our hearts in our minds

The heart is the mind primarily according to Scripture It's not by some mystical irrational emotional

Experiential encounter like they often like to say it is by belief in the truth

By belief in the truth just like Jesus said in his high priestly prayer in John 17 17

Sanctify them in the truth thy word is the truth

God is truth Therefore his word is truth because God by nature is truth

So this is what? God is all about He's all about this.

So he bears witness because the Spirit is himself true and the truth and the truth now this this this reminds me of one of my university professors who he taught a it was a religious studies class and He claimed that the

Bible It may contain nuggets of truth here and there But that wasn't it's not its primary focus.

The primary focus of the Bible is not the truth its stories its stories and lessons and and and myths that are

Doesn't really matter whether it's true or not. That's not relevant. What's relevant is what they point to or what they're teaching us and You hear this a lot from liberal or unbelieving

Scholars professors even so -called Christians who will claim this is how they try to explain away

Genesis they deny the six -day creation of Genesis and they'll say well, it's you know, it's it's poetic language it's it doesn't really you know,

God can use evolution to take to to bring about creation even though flatly contradicts the

Genesis account and You have false teachers like Tim Keller and members of the bio logos and Francis Collins all these guys that Teach these falsehoods and they contradict the scriptures

Like our confession says the the God is not the author of confusion. He doesn't contradict himself why because he is a

God of truth Amen, he is a God of truth. So you often hear brilliant men and women and scholars saying very false and foolish things like this

Because what sayeth the scriptures beloved we just we just saw that the

Spirit of God Contrary to what these people say the Spirit of God is the truth because the

Spirit is the truth period No, ifs no ands no, buts no.

Yeah, but it's poetic. Yeah, but it's metaphorical. No The Spirit is literally the truth and bears witness to nothing but the truth

That's why he bears witness He is a true witness to the truth and nothing but the truth

Psalm 31 5 Says into your hand I commit my spirit

Remember when Jesus said those words when he was expiring on the cross Into thy hands

I commit my spirit. You have ransomed me. Oh Yahweh God of what of lies of myths of stories.

No God of truth Lord God of truth

Amen That is hallelujah. Amen Here King David the psalmist entrusts his spirit to God acknowledging him as the one and only

God of truth a testament to God's reliability and to the trustworthiness of all his words and his promises all his words and his promises

I love how we read also from today's

In the psalm psalm 119 how he repeatedly says Psalm 119 142 your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness and your law is what truth your law is truth thy word is truth the sum of thy word is

Nothing, but the truth So, how can these people say that well that it's not so much about whether it's true or not.

What are you talking about? You clearly haven't read the Bible or you don't believe it

You're you're contradicting the plain teaching. This doesn't take a theology degree to figure it out

It's plain Old and New Testaments. What is God concerned with?

What is God a God of a God of truth? Turn with me to the book of Isaiah the prophet

Isaiah 65 Isaiah 65 verse 15 We will see another powerful statement from God himself

Isaiah chapter 50 65 verse 15 God's Word says the

Lord himself says You will leave your name for a curse to my chosen ones and Lord Yahweh will put you to death

But my slaves will be called by another name because he who is blessed in the earth will be blessed by the

God of what of truth and he who swears in the earth will swear by The God of what the

God of truth Because the former distresses are forgotten and because they are hidden from my sight

Amen There's a double emphasis there an emphatic repetition that God is the

God of truth It's in the law. It's in the Psalms. It's in the prophets. It's everywhere and it's in the

New Testament as we will see shortly This verse like many others recognizes

God as The truth and the God of truth and again exercising the analogy of Scripture It is says repeatedly.

He is God and there is no other there is no other God. All the other gods are lies

Because there is only one true God like the Bible says one true

God and his unique son The Messiah Jesus Christ the

Righteous so This God is the truth the

God of truth by whom people swear and bless themselves indicating his supreme authority and the certainty the truthfulness of his words his law of truth

Amen, and then the Gospel of John Remember the Gospel of John chapter 14.

This is a memory verse. We should all have this verse memorized verses 5 and 6

Thomas said to Christ Lord, we do not know where you are going.

How do we know the way and what does Jesus say to him?

I am the way and the truth and the life

Eternal life no one comes to the father, but through me and this is so powerful so powerful and yes, there's a sense in which

When Jesus or God says that he is the truth It means that he is the source of all truth.

He is Wisdom he is the truth because he contains the truth all truth.

He is a source of it and Everything he says is true. This is one thing if anything bothers liberals

Emotionalist pietist even though they may sound pious and they make you know, they may be very they may very well be

Christians but they are very Shallow in their understanding that the truth is by definition

Truth is by definition Propositional you will hear them say truth

What it's not about belief in a creed but about trust in a person they try to make it all mystical

It's not about trust believing a creed but trusting a person see they try to make it more personal

It's like but how do you know who Jesus is? It's by trusting the right creed the right propositions

The right sentences and declarations proclamations about who

Christ is Because truth is by definition propositional

Propositional it is a declarative sentence

Sentences it is doctrinal. It is intellectual Belonging to the mind the heart

They'll try to say, you know, oh it's Trust in a person.

They try to make it something else and That is nonsense. That is absurdity that the

Bible and God himself rebukes repeatedly all throughout the scriptures God is a

God of truth and for you to know the truth to know Jesus Christ You must believe his words

What did Jesus say? My words are spirit and life. So what me we must believe are the propositions

That Jesus Christ taught in his word That is what

Christianity is all about that is why God put it in a book for us to read and absorb and preach and understand and hear and believe

It's it's not about giving us ecstatic visions and things. Yes Sure Those things happen

But those visions even those visions were meant to portray or to relay a message from God to be communicated and understood rationally

Consistently, this is what God is all about Take note of this

Later on to for the rest of this passage because the Apostle will continue to draw this out Truth then is the ultimate primary concern and Claim of God.

What are we saved by? belief in his truth

It is the primary concern and claim of God and of all his word

It is his very nature for it is impossible for God to what?

to lie Amen, and we who have taken refuge in him would have strong encouragement to take hold of the hope set before us in God's promises a

True hope Sound hope why is it true? Why is it sound what why is this?

Something that we can take encouragement and refuge in because it is true.

You can't take refuge in a lie a Lie is not true That's why we can't trust lies or believe lies because they lead us to error and sin and self -deception there's no refuge in the in lies and by God's grace the

Spirit bears witness with us that we He causes us to believe the truth

Regenerates us our wicked sinful nature regenerates our

Minds and causes us to believe the truth like Scripture says Praise God all glory be to God Now us from Hebrews 6 18

Now that we come to a very important aspect of this passage this verse specifically the next

Verses 7 through 8. I want to read it again in the legacy standard version

So verse 6 it is a spirit who bears witness because the spirit is the truth for there are three that bear witness the

Spirit and the water and the blood and the three are in agreement. The three agree as one in other words now

Pay careful attention here because some Bible translations include additional words

Known as the Johan in comma or in Latin known as the comma Johan Ian Johan in meaning for the

Apostle John So in the New King James for example

You will find verse 7 says this For there are three that bear witness in Heaven the

Father the Word and the Holy Spirit and these three are one And there are three that bear witness on earth

The spirit the water and the blood and these three agree as one so it adds extra witnesses there

Heavenly witnesses and earthly witnesses on earth and they all agree

So which version is correct? is the modern textual version correct, which removes which doesn't have those or the

King James Family tradition that includes these extra words. What is which one is correct?

How do we know? How do we know that? and this brings me to my past In my previous years when

I was younger in the faith, I was persuaded by King James only ism and this this frankly is it can be a very dangerous thing because we have to be very careful with these movements because oftentimes you will find that they rewrite history or they deny history or they

They don't speak. It's not true what their arguments are not true. They are false And they'll make claims like I used to I used to preach this

I used to share this with folks and I had my King James Bible Defender said and everything. I was hardcore.

I was all -in and You know, I used to say things like All the other

I actually convinced my wife in college to throw away all her Bibles that weren't King James and She had trust with issues with me after that, but we worked it out eventually we

They I used to say like all these other Bible versions are they're corrupt because they remove verses they remove

The Trinity they remove the Trinity from the Bible How dare they right they they remove

Several verses and they change them and all this stuff and It's based on assumptions about The underlying

Greek text of the New Testament and the Hebrew of the Old Testament So This is we have to examine this carefully because this is very common today there's a lot of cult -like movements and false movements that we have to watch out for and Because this passage in particular is one of the most controversial textual variants of the

New Testament Because it deals with a weighty issue, it's the issue of the

Trinity right the doctrine of the Trinity So there is some controversy a lot of controversy behind it

Even though we will find that there really shouldn't be in a sense

Now what is the textual variant? I've mentioned this before some time ago a textual variant are

Textual variants are places in biblical manuscripts Okay copies of the scriptures

Where there is a difference between the texts between the same passage or verse or word or in the

Bible? Oftentimes they're spelling differences or word order differences but the vast majority of these textual variants or Differences are not viable meaning that they do not affect the actual meaning of the text

So you'll find liberal scholars and Muslims and people who deny the scriptures they'll say well there look at all

There's hundreds of thousands of variants. It's like yeah, but Like not even 1 % of them make any difference

Not even 1 % So they're very misleading only not even 1 % of them of all textual variants are

Actually viable meaning that they change the meaning or there's a different meaning or sense of what it says

And even those differences those 1 % differences do not affect the actual doctrines of Scripture Like this one this one teaches the

Trinity. Okay There's other passages that teach the Trinity. We don't lose the

Trinity by not having that verse But it's there and it teaches the

Trinity. Okay, great so and some of the other main major variants are the longer ending of Mark the

Gospel of Mark and The pericope adultery which is the story of adultery in the latter part of John chapter 7

The woman caught in adultery those are the biggest variants, but they're they don't affect any doctrine

So this is an amazing testament to God's omnipotent providence Governing and preserving the scriptures for us.

It's an amazing testimony to his truth, which I preached on the previous series on scripture alone

So this question will require us to dig into some history and church history and textual criticism a lot of churches neglect us, but we cannot avoid it because the liberals the the cults

These King James only is the these the Muslims they're all going to go there So we need to be prepared and other

Christians I have misunderstandings of this a lot of Christians have no idea what this is about Let it not be so among us beloved.

We cannot be ignorant of these things because they are dealing with the very foundation of our faith of the scriptures the ultimate authority of Our faith in life the scriptures it behooves us to know then how the scriptures came about and How do we?

Choose how do we know how do we determine what variants are correct? So I'm going to need to refer to some solid reliable sources to explain these things because it is a complex advanced field of study

This does require advanced training and learning and knowledges and in textual criticism

Which is very difficult very difficult to do it is not easy and a lot of these

Christians who may they may have Good good. They may have good intentions

They don't realize oftentimes that this is a very complicated subject and it requires expertise acquire skills

Many skills to know how to decipher ancient texts that are very hard to read even if you know the ancient languages

It requires a lot of skill to do these things properly So that you don't end up doing what

Jehovah's Witnesses do and they corrupt the Bible because none of the translators were translators they corrupted it because none of them were trained in the languages and They imposed their own agenda into the translation the mistranslation

This is no trivial matter So what is

Textual criticism then I kind of already explained it just now rip, and if you remember the sermon series that I preached on scripture alone,

I Refer to the tens of thousands of Biblical Old and New Testament manuscripts ancient ones in Greek and Hebrew and in several languages

Syriac Targum Latin and so on All of those manuscripts

Textual criticism is the study of those thousands and tens of thousands of various manuscript

Witnesses they're called witnesses very fittingly

Witnesses to the scriptures Yet another example of how these things bear witness, okay?

These because things can bear witness it's not just it's not just The it's not just people that bear witness that's very important to understand

Things can bear witness as well Which we saw the water and the blood

The baptism and the death of Christ bearing witness to the Son of God Being who he says he is so We can have

We the the manuscript copies ancient versions and medieval manuscripts all of these things are all witnesses that Bear witness to the truth of the scriptures because they are the scriptures

They bear witness to the truth of it. That's very important to understand

Beloved so Pastor Colin Smith says this very helpful

Explanation in his introductory series to textual criticism. I recommend that you check that out.

It's included in the sermon notes He says he explains that textual criticism is of the most critical importance for the

Christian Church Most critical importance for the Christian Church for the Christian the text under examination is

God's words communicated through men and to men to us

If these words are inspired are breathed out by God Then it is of paramount importance of supreme importance that the

Christian know exactly which words God intended

The God -breathed authors to write right Indeed the question of what the pastor is going to preach to his congregation in terms of the biblical text should drive the

Christian textual critic to pursue excellence in this field of study We need to know what

God's Word is. Amen Because there's different variants out there. We need to know what the words of God are.

There is almost unanimous Unanimous certainty that given the quantity and quality of New Testament manuscripts that have been preserved throughout the world and We're talking tens of thousands beloved over 25 almost 30 ,000

New Testament witnesses tens of thousands of Old Testament witnesses over 6 ,000

Greek manuscripts of the New Testament of the original language beloved

These manuscripts that have been preserved whether entire Bibles or small fragments within all of these

Manuscripts the exact wording of the original New Testament text has been preserved it has been the work of the textual critic is to sift through the manuscripts and To determine the best to the best of his ability given the evidence available the witnesses available the

Manuscripts which ones contain the original words of God? Are they all contained in one manuscript a family of related manuscripts or perhaps a lot of extremely diverse?

manuscripts and by diverse There's very little diversity in most in though the manuscripts the manuscripts all agree in over 85 % the major variants like I mentioned are stories or statements that don't affect really the meaning of the the context or of the doctrines of Scripture Rightly understood so This is a pot.

It's One of the scholars that I'll also refer to Daniel Wallace He's also a textual critic and that's not a bad thing a textual critic is just somebody who engages in this work who tries to?

Determine what? the original Variants are because there's differences and we can't ignore those differences.

Okay. It's not a bad thing. That's a good thing That means that we have a crossword puzzles

Say you have a crossword puzzle of 500 pieces You have a crossword puzzle of 600 pieces and you need to determine which ones are the original ones.

That's what we have We have the original pieces We just need to determine which ones are the original ones we know we have them

And we have that certainty and we can tell that's the science of in study of textual criticism

That helps us to determine which readings are Authentic which ones are original which ones are more ancient and more closely attest to the original

Because we don't have the originals anymore. We only have the copies But these copies are faithful witnesses

Amen to its truth and we can know that because they have been preserved

Tenaciously through God's providence and they say the same thing that they said

Thousands of years ago. It's amazing It's amazing no other work of antiquity

Comes even close to this like I mentioned in the previous series I encourage you to check that out if you want to review those amazing testimonies

So what is the textual support for the Johan in comma then for these extra words about the

Trinity in first John 5 7? What support is there in these witnesses?

Are there ancient witnesses that attest to these words? first of all before we get to that is the

Johan in comma a sound expression of Trinitarian and biblical theology What does it say?

We saw that it says there are three that bear witness in heaven the

Father the Word and the Holy Spirit and these three are one and There are three that bear witness on earth the spirit the water and the blood

So there's nothing false about that. Amen that this is a true statement

This is a true statement although bearing in mind That the three divine persons of the

Trinity are Not necessarily the only witnesses in heaven okay, and Also, the

Holy Spirit is not the only divine person of the Trinity that bears witness on the earth

So as long as we don't understand it in exclusive terms there are other witnesses besides what these extra words say that the

Johan in comma states and In order to prove that let's go to the gospel of Matthew chapter 17

The gospel of Matthew chapter 17. I think you'll enjoy seeing this beloved as we bring about Harmonize these things together by the analogy of Scripture So it says there are three that bear witness in heaven and three that bear witness on earth but notice here in the gospel of Matthew verse chapter 17,

I'll start in verse 1 and Six days later Jesus brought with him

Peter and James and John his brother and led them up on a high mountain by themselves and he was transfigured before them and his face shone like the

Sun and his garments became white as light and behold who appeared

Moses and Elijah appeared to them taking talking with Him with Jesus.

Where did they come from? They came from heaven right

What were they doing? Talking with Christ and bearing witness to the

Son Verse 4 and Peter answered and said to Jesus Lord It is good for us to be here

If you wish I will make three booths or tabernacles here one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah They appeared they literally appeared with Christ and the transfiguration

From heaven, okay While Peter was still speaking behold a bright cloud overshadowed them all and behold a voice out of the cloud said

This is my beloved Son with whom I am well pleased Listen to him who is speaking

God the Father and When the disciples heard this they fell on their faces terrified

Terrified of what what was going on? The voice from heaven was

God the Father bearing witness to the Son to listen to him on earth right

The Father was bearing witness on earth Beloved not just in heaven, but on the earth

Just like he did in his baptism The voice cried out and said this is my beloved

Son in whom I am well pleased once again and Jesus verse 7 and Jesus came to them and touched them and said get up and do not be afraid and lifting up their eyes

They saw no one except Jesus himself alone Wow, what an amazing passage

Imagine being there Imagine being there What do we see here both?

Moses and Elijah were other additional heavenly witnesses

Bearing witness to the Son on the earth Okay, uh, so it's not just the spirit and the blood and the

Water that bear witness on the earth. There were multiple witnesses on the earth including

Moses and Elijah Who appeared with Christ? But not only them

Not only them beloved Remember also the entire heavenly host of angels at Christ's birth in the

Gospel of Luke remember chapter 2 When suddenly there appeared with the angel who did what who announced

Christ's birth? on where the earth to Mary a multitude of the heavenly host

Praising God and saying glory to God in the highest and peace on earth among men with whom he is pleased

What were they all doing? Bearing witness to the Son just like the spirit and the water his baptism and the blood his death amen

The multiplicity of heavenly and earthly witnesses beloved witnesses on in heaven and on the earth and Not only that But the divine

Son of God also himself the second person of the triune Godhead Jesus Christ bears witness of himself on Earth through his works and his miracles and his prophetic and typological

Fulfillments, what does he tell them? Do not put if you don't believe me believe the works because the works do what they bear witness of the

Son Christ himself bears witness on the earth not not not just the spirit and not just Yeah, not just a spirit that's

There's multiple the entire Godhead bears witness on the earth

So And of like I mentioned already like we saw

God the Father himself Also bears witness to his own unique only begotten

Son on earth several times in his in Christ's baptism when he announced

This is my beloved Son in whom he is well pleased and in the transfiguration when he says Listen to him.

He bore witness to Christ on the earth Objectively and and so much so that it terrified the

Apostles The witness of God the Father on the earth

Terrified the Apostles and they fell on their faces. Amen Now aside from all of this amazing

Events and witnesses that is not the main issue here This is not the main issue of 1st

John 5 7 through 8 that the jaw the Johan in common. The main issue is is

The verse are these verses authentic Were they the original words of the

God -breathed Apostle? That's what we need to find out Now in order to figure

Determine this help us to make wise Decisions on this I want to quote from The Bible scholar and textual critic

Daniel Wallace. He is a very conservative Bible scholar and critic

Textual critic and he is also the founder and executive director of the Center for the study of New Testament manuscripts

It is an excellent website. You can see all those copies ancient copies. He copies of the scriptures online

And you can see just how difficult it is to read them for you with your own eyes It is not an easy thing to do

Is it but it is a we have them we have thousands of them catalogued

Amazing through the work of these men like Daniel Wallace and the technology advancements to Daniel Wallace says and and that's not to say that I agree with him on everything

He has some views that I don't necessarily agree with but nevertheless He says some very sound and true things with respect to these matters

It can be safely said He says that there are no there are no

Greek New Testament manuscripts which have the Johan in comma dated to the first millennium

AD What does that mean That means that there is not a single

Greek manuscript Within the first thousand years old that is within the first 1 ,000 years

That has this Johan in comma not a single one within actually the first 1 ,300 years so what he said is an understatement

Okay in fact the earliest

Greek manuscript that has the Johan in comma is a Latin Greek manuscript dated to 1362 one the year 1362 that's the latter part of the medieval age

Okay, this is not an ancient manuscript. This is a medieval a late medieval manuscript at that and most of them

Which they're not many are late like this This is the earliest one.

Okay, take note of that Further only nine

Late Manuscripts half of which are not even Greek ones. Okay Versus hundreds of manuscripts of first John.

There's over 500 Manuscripts of first John and only half. I mean only nine of them

Contain this Johan in comma half of which are not even in Greek ranging from the 4th century on On really it's the 5th century the 400s is

Rare hardly a confidence builder that the comma the Johan in comma is authentic. This is not this is not

Hardly any support for this at all That's what these manuscripts help us to figure out

This is how the work of textual criticism helps us to determine was this authentic or was this added later

Later on much many years later hundreds of years later So out of over the out of the over 500 manuscripts of first John only nine late

Manuscripts contain the Johan in comma Half of which are Greek the other half are like they're mostly in Latin They're not even original languages

Their translations so Bruce Metzger another very highly influential

Bible scholar translator and textual critic Whom Daniel Wallace? Describes as a fine godly conservative scholar

Although his view of biblical authority is not quite the same as many other evangelicals

So again, we may not agree with these men on everything But nevertheless they have very these men are highly skilled and trained in the languages and the manuscript

Evaluation. What does he have to say the passage the

Johan in comma is Quoted by none of the Greek fathers.

None of them. None of the ancient church quotes it none of them Who had they known it would most certainly have enjoyed it and employed it in the

Trinitarian controversies and heresies Like Sabellianism and Arianism, which is modalism you know that that God is only one person and not three persons or that Arianism where Jesus where areas denied that Christ was

God truly God Its first appearance Notice these words carefully that Metzger says its first appearance in Greek appearance

Not manuscript in appearance in Greek is in a

Greek version of the Latin Acts of the Lateran Council in 1215

It's not even a manuscript It's not a textual manuscript of The Bible of 1st

John It comes from a Lateran Council that from Church Council document the passage is absent from the manuscripts of Every single ancient version that we have

Extant and Known and discovered the Syriac the Coptic the

Armenian the Ethiopic the Arabic the Slavonic None of them contain the

Johannine comma except for some Latin ones a handful a small handful of Latin ones at that and It is not found in the old

Latin in its entire in its early form That is the form of Tertullian Cyprian and Augustan or in the

Vulgate the Latin Vulgate as Issued by Jerome, so it's not even found in the better Latin versions

Of these early church leaders and translators

Jerome is the one who translated the Bible into Latin the Latin Vulgate. It's not there and so The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as a part of the actual text of the epistle

Is not even in a manuscript it's in a fourth century Latin treatise entitled

Liber apologetic is or it's Latin for apologetic book basically

Attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian who died about 385

AD or to his follower Bishop instantius So this is earliest case was quoted by a heretic

Ironically Apparently the gloss So gloss means that it's an interpretation

It's not original. It's an interpretation that was added it arose when the original passage was understood to symbolize the

Trinity Through the mention of three witnesses So it makes sense that some church some church leaders early church leaders may have alluded to this passage because it contains

Three witnesses and they all agree as one So obviously the Trinity is three in one so they may try to draw parallels from that passage

Even though the those words the Johan in comma weren't there but the gloss probably arose from that because of what the original actually states

That there are three witnesses the spirit the water and the blood and they all agree as one just as God has three persons and one

God an Interpretation that may have been written first as a marginal note

That afterwards found its way into the text and this is similar to like the

Amplified Bible Which I often use and I highly recommend to you all the Amplified Bible has inline commentary.

That's bracketed It's not original but it's like a commentary that expands on what the original text says.

That's what that's how it originated It was an expansion of the original text like an interpretation or a commentary a gloss in other words

In the 5th century the 400s the gloss was quoted by Latin fathers in North Africa and It in North Africa and Italy as part of the text of the

Epistle and from the 6th century onwards It is found more and more frequently in manuscripts of the old

Latin and of the Vulgate in Those later versions in these various witnesses the wording of the passage differs in several

Particulars, so they're not even the same wording and You can tell that a lot of these variant readings are not original when they have a lot of very different renderings or or Versions this is very similar to the longer ending a mark.

There's there's like five different Versions of the longer ending a mark. There's a shorter ending. There's a longer ending

They're different endings and it's not all this. It's very different that gives you that helps us to realize that okay

Somebody probably added this stuff later on trying to explain something or to finish or to close something out so Even the

New King James translators who kept this in there in the version in the New King James version

Acknowledged the lack of support for the Johan in comma In a textual note on this passage they say the

Nestle Allen United Bible Society text which is the modern critical text that includes all the different manuscripts that we have and it uses that to determine the original text and the majority text

Okay, the majority text is the text that contains The readings of most of the manuscripts

That's one view or school of textual criticism criticism that says what most of them say is likely the original neither one of those texts

They have a slightly different methods for determining what was original neither one contains the words of The Johan in comma neither one

Only and these are encompassing thousands of manuscripts remember that tens of thousands

Okay, they don't contain them Only four or five very late manuscripts contain these words in Greek like we saw and they admit this

So then to sum up the matter beloved. I hope you're enjoying this is very important stuff

There's a very helpful summary here from the net Bible, which is also a very helpful Translation it contains very helpful textual notes like this one

It says and by the way, Daniel Wallace is the main the main editor of the net Bible modern advocates of the

Textus receptus, which is Latin for received text. This is the underlying Greek text of the

King James versions Okay Which were edited by Erasmus Stephanus and Beza in the time of the

Reformation So these advocates so basically

King James only is these these folks and those varieties of people who think that the King James Bible Is either the best translation or the only translation of the

Bible that is valid These folks generally argue for the inclusion of the of the

Johan in comma on the basis of fact Heretical motivation by scribes who did not include it.

So they're saying that these monks had nefarious Motives to take out the

Trinity from the Bible however, these same scribes elsewhere include

Thoroughly Orthodox readings about the same thing even in places where the text is receptus or the

Byzantine manuscripts Which are which are also pointing to the received text don't have them so that doesn't make any sense see, this is where they start contradicting history and Church history and the witnesses that we have

Further these advocates argue theologically from the position of divine preservation

Since this verse is in the received text. It must therefore be original

But that's That is circular reasoning They're presupposing that the received text is the original text without looking at the ancient manuscripts that we do have

You're you're putting the heart but car before the horse. You can't do that without seeing what the ancient manuscripts say and You find that they don't say it the early church didn't have them and didn't use them

That's beyond confirmation none of the manuscripts that we have The vow the best ones have them.

Most of them don't have them at all and the early church never used them

What more confirmation do you need they'll also say that oh, well It's possible that there's other manuscripts that we haven't discovered that contain this

Johan in comma, it's possible that there may be some here and there and elsewhere or maybe they got lost from the manuscripts that we have

That beloved is called Speculation there's no basis for it.

In fact, everything that history and the textual evidence that we do have Directly contradicts it.

Okay. This is why this is important to understand so that we would not be deceived by foolish and false

Arguments, okay They the the note continues here very helpfully

In reality the issue is history not heresy

Not you know claims of heresy that are not Substantiated by history

How can one argue that the Johan in comma goes back to the original text

Yet does not appear until the 14th century the 1300s like we saw in any

Greek manuscript whatsoever and that form that the King James Version has is

Significantly different from what is actually printed in the received text the Greek version

The wording of the received text is not found in any Greek manuscript until guess how late until the 16th century until the 1500s

Erasmus did not even he did not include it in his first two editions of the received text

He's the one who compiled the Greek received text that the King James is based on because he said there's no witnesses for it

There's no manuscripts for it And he made a comment saying if I can if somebody can produce one then

I'll put it in there So what happens some monk? Dutifully produced it which he probably translated from a

Latin version from a Latin Vulgate a later Latin Vulgate version into Greek And that's how it made its way in there

It's from the 1500 from the 1500s this is not

I Hope this is clear for all of us They continue such a stance does not do justice to the gospel or to truth or to history or to reality faith must be rooted in history and not just in history, but in reality in truth and In the words of truth and in the

God of truth and in how God uses History to Providentially preserve his words.

It's not like they say The reality is very different and we cannot turn a blind eye to the blatant reality that the textual witnesses speak to Significantly also the

German translation of Luther was based on Erasmus second edition of the received text in 1519 and it didn't have the

Johan in comma either We again because Erasmus didn't have a manuscript for it but the

King James translators basing their work principally on Theodore Beza's Edition of the

Greek New Testament a work which itself was fundamentally based on Erasmus third and later editions as well as Stephanus's editions

Popularized the comma the Johan in comma for the English -speaking world. This is an

English This issue is more of an English Translation issue because of this history because of this history in the church

The thus the comma the Johan in comma has been a battleground for English -speaking

Christians more than for others It's not really as much of an issue in other translational translations outside of the

English Now Speaking of battlegrounds.

I want to close us out with these very wise and helpful words from James White the

Christian apologist James White who very helpfully sums up the the danger of misunderstanding this or believing false revisionist history and propaganda from these movements and I'm going to quote from His excellent book the

King James only controversy. I have a copy here. You're welcome to take it home if you like It's an excellent book and it's also a very helpful introduction to the study of textual criticism

This is the book that helped me to convince me out to Realize the falsehood and the absurdity of the

King James only ism He says this if indeed the

Johan in comma was a part of the original writing of the Apostle John in 1st

John We are forced to conclude that entire passages rich in theological meaning

Like the Trinity can disappear Can disappear from the

Greek manuscript tradition without leaving a single trace of it of the evidence for it in Reality, the

King James only advocates are arguing for a radical viewpoint on the

New Testament text, which is actually very liberal a Viewpoint that utterly denies the tenacity of it

The pressure of the persistence and preservation of it because they're saying it's not because it's not there

So they're saying somebody took it out. It disappeared. They have to say those things because they have to defend it in their version

Even liberal scholars will admit the outstanding purity of the New Testament text and the validity of the belief in the tenacity of that text of the of the preservation of that text here we find

Otherwise very conservative people Who defend the King James Version joining arms with the most destructive liberal critics in presenting a theory?

regarding the New Testament text that in reality destroys undermines and undercuts the very basis upon which we can have confidence and Certainty that we still have the original words of Paul or John or the

Bible Surely this is not their intention But in their rush to defend what is obviously a later addition to the text that entered into the

King James Version by unusual circumstances with Erasmus and the monk and all those other things

They have had to adopt a position that does this very thing it undermines the

Bible itself It's you okay.

So then I guess Dan Brown was right in his Da Vinci code that Constantine edited the

Bible Took all this stuff out of it That's what they're saying.

That's what did what their position entails What what then do we make of all of this beloved?

Just like the Apostles repeatedly state in the scriptures. I Would not have you to be ignorant brethren

I love how the King James puts it and I'm not saying that the King James Version is not the Word of God the King James Version is the

Word of God. There's only minor differences there Between that version and the more updated textual versions that have more manuscript witnesses

That are much better attested much more ancient thousands more

They're all it's the Word of God It's all the Word of God There may be a few added words there that were glosses

But it still contains the Word of God So I Would not have you to be ignorant like the

Apostle said beloved about these important matters that affect the life and doctrine of the church and of our very foundation of the truth the words of God and our understanding of and trust in God's providence in preserving his words and his holy word

Amen Textual criticism is a good and necessary discipline therefore

Which enables us to know exactly what words God wrote down and preserved for us

Other religions don't have this beloved the Quran. They edited the

Quran and burned a bunch of other Differences there was a revision in the medieval ages and Now we they don't know we don't really know if which one was authentic which one was more original, but we have

So many manuscripts that we can tell which one strayed. That's the beauty of it

We can tell which one straightaway which one's different and these oddities Like the

Johan in comma helps us to see look none of them have this so we can tell it. Yeah, it was added later

And We can therefore confidently say that the Apostle John did not breathe out the

Johan in comma by God But is a later interpretation by Christians About the

Trinity that found its way back into the manuscript copies and mainly Latin translations of John's letter beloved

That's the beauty of all of this We can have confidence. This is a good thing.

It's not a bad thing that we have Variant readings of the text because those variants help us to determine the original ones

That's what's so amazing. It seems counterintuitive, but that's the beauty of all of this beloved. Let us rejoice in God's Providence and preserving his words through these thousands and thousands of manuscripts beloved

Let us rejoice and take heart that we have God's words. We have them and they haven't changed

They have not changed how do we know because this manuscript witnesses all attest to that reality

Such that even the liberals have no way around it Let us bow our heads in a closing word of prayer now

Our precious gracious Heavenly Father. We thank you Lord for this beautiful Testimony multiple that tens of thousands of testimonies

Lord in your providential Preservation of your very

Breathe out words father the words that you gave to the Apostles and the prophets of old

To write down for us and preserve for us So amazing is your truth and your and the preservation of it father

Help us sort to understand these things and to seek to give us a desire for The truth of these matters father to seek to understand them as best as we can according to your words according to the

Testimony of the early church as well and of the people that you've used in history

To preserve and to translate for us your words father. We thank you for all of these multiplicity of witnesses in heaven on earth in these manuscripts in The prophets and Moses Elijah and Christ in your spirit and you father with your thundering voice

Crying out and declaring from heaven on earth that your son is your beloved son

Christ Jesus the Savior of the world and Who satisfies all our

Punishments deserve worthy of your wrath. We thank you father for these blessings

And we thank you and we ask these things in Jesus mighty precious name. Amen Thank you for listening to the sermons of thorn crown covenant

Baptist Church where the Bible alone and the Bible in its entirety Has applied to all of faith and life.

We strive to be biblical reformed historic confessional loving discerning

Christians who evangelize Stand firm in and earnestly contend for the Christian faith

If you're looking for a church in the El Paso, Texas area or for more information about our church Sermons and ministries such as Semper Ephraim on the radio and thorn crown network podcast

Please contact us at thorn crown ministries calm and may the mercy peace and love of our triune