Bearing Witness to the Truth | 1 John 5:6-8
No description available
Transcript
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