The phrase “there are three that bear record” comes from 1 John 5:7 in the King James Version of the Bible. This verse has been the subject of much debate and controversy over the years. Here is the verse:
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” (1 John 5:7 KJV)
This verse is not found in most modern Bible translations because it does not appear in the earliest Greek manuscripts of 1 John. Most scholars believe it was not originally part of John’s first epistle, but was added later by a copyist. This addition is known as the Johannine Comma.
There are a few key issues and questions surrounding this verse:
- Is it an authentic part of Scripture, or was it added later?
- What are the textual and historical evidence for and against it?
- What theological implications does this verse have?
- How has it been interpreted and understood throughout church history?
Let’s explore each of these issues in more detail:
Is 1 John 5:7 authentic Scripture?
As mentioned, most modern English Bibles do not contain this verse, including the ESV, NIV, NASB, NRSV, and others. It is omitted because it does not appear in any Greek manuscripts until the Middle Ages. The verse is absent from the writings of early church fathers who quote from 1 John extensively, including Tertullian, Cyprian, and Augustine. None acknowledge its existence, even in controversies over the Trinity where it would have provided useful support.
The verse is first cited in a Fourth Century Latin treatise called Liber Apologeticus by the Spanish heretic Priscillian. It appears in some Old Latin manuscripts of 1 John dating to the Fifth and Sixth Centuries AD. The first Greek manuscript containing the Comma dates to the 15th Century.
Most scholars conclude that this evidence suggests the Johannine Comma was not original to 1 John, but was added centuries later as a scribal gloss or commentary. It made its way into the Latin Vulgate and eventually into the Greek manuscript tradition, being incorporated into the first printed editions of the New Testament, including the Textus Receptus used by the KJV translators.
Evidence for and against authenticity
The main evidence against the Comma’s authenticity is its absence from all Greek manuscripts before the late Middle Ages. But some argue that direct testimony from Cyprian and Priscillian demonstrate it was cited very early. Some also claim ancient Bible translations like the Old Latin and Vulgate contain it, proving its early existence. However, others counter that these translations were themselves corrupt and incorporated non-original readings as the text was copied over time.
Defenders of the Johannine Comma point to some indirect evidence from the writings of early church fathers and even heretics that imply knowledge of the Trinity text. For example, some see veiled references to 1 John 5:7 in Tertullian’s writings against Praxeas or in the notorious heretic Sabellius. But most scholars see these as inconclusive allusions and weak evidence for the verse itself.
Arguments also swirl around the internal evidence within 1 John itself. Some claim the flow of thought in 1 John 5 requires the Comma to make coherent sense. Others see it as an awkward intrusion that interrupts the theme of faith’s victory over the world. But judging internal evidence is highly subjective, so scholars weigh external manuscript support more heavily.
Theological implications
If part of inspired Scripture, 1 John 5:7 has monumental importance in supporting the doctrine of the Trinity. It directly states the unity of Father, Son, and Spirit as “one.” But if not original, it has no doctrinal authority. The Trinity can be derived from other clearer passages.
For Trinitarians, the Comma affirms the deity and personal distinction of the Father, Son, and Spirit. It bolsters the ontological Trinity over merely economic conceptions. But critics counter the verse reflects later theological controversies rather than the apostle John’s thought.
Some consider the passage useful in refuting heresies like modalism if given inspired status. Supporters have also seen it as an important prooftext in theological debates over Socinianism and Arianism. But most scholars today see it as a later scribal gloss with no real authority in early Trinitarian controversies.
Interpretation history
The Johannine Comma has a fascinating interpretation history and was quite controversial in its early stages.
Writers like Cyprian, Priscillian, Athanasius, Augustine, and many other church fathers made no mention of the verse even when it would have aided Trinitarian arguments. Erasmus omitted it from early Greek New Testament editions due to lack of manuscript evidence.
However, supporters like Cassiodorus, the Venerable Bede, Peter Lombard, and Thomas Aquinas referenced it as authoritative Scripture. Some claim the Carolingian Emperors pressured the church to accept the verse’s authenticity. It was included in the influential Vulgate translation and later printed Textus Receptus used by the KJV translators.
Reformation leaders were divided on the issue. Luther affirmed the Comma while Calvin questioned its authenticity. So debate continued into the modern era. Under textual criticism, most scholars since the 19th Century have rejected it as scribal addition. But some traditionalists still defend its legitimacy on historical, theological, and translation grounds.
So in summary, the status and interpretation of 1 John 5:7 has been widely disputed throughout church history and remains controversial today.
Key Points of Debate
To summarize the major points of debate surrounding 1 John 5:7:
- Is it original to John’s letter or a later addition?
- Why is there no explicit testimony to it in early church history?
- How should internal evidence be weighed regarding style and context?
- Does the textual manuscript evidence support or reject it?
- How significant are potential allusions or citations in early writers?
- What role did it play in early Trinitarian controversies?
- Did theological pressures influence opinions on it historically?
- How did its presence in the Vulgate and Textus Receptus shape views?
- What are the implications if it is authentic or not original?
- How have translators and scholars viewed it over the centuries?
There are thoughtful points on both sides of this debate. In the end, one’s view of the textual evidence and the nature of the biblical documents leads to different conclusions. But regardless of one’s position, 1 John 5:7 continues to provoke discussion on the Trinity, the textual tradition, and the doctrine of biblical inspiration.
Current Scholarly Consensus
Despite some minority dissent, the broad scholarly consensus today across translations, denominations, and theological spectrums is that 1 John 5:7 was not original to John’s letter but was added later:
- Nearly all recent Bible translations have omitted it.
- No major textual apparatus like the UBS, Nestle-Aland, or modern critical editions include it.
- The standard Greek texts and critical commentaries overwhelmingly reject it as non-Johannine.
- Many early church fathers omit evidence it existed.
- The manuscripts containing it are late and trace dependencies suspect.
- Internal considerations are subjective but often see it as an intrusion.
For these reasons, the extensive evidence is seen to weigh against authenticity. All things considered, most scholars conclude the Johannine Comma is very likely a later scribal addition to the text.
Of course, there are dissenting voices who appeal to alternate manuscript traditions or make theological and historical arguments for inclusion. But these remain minority perspectives without wide support among scholars.
So in summary, while debated, there is broad scholarly consensus the Johannine Comma of 1 John 5:7 is not original based on the preponderance of evidence.
Final Thoughts
The Johannine Comma raises complex questions about the reliability of Scripture, the history of interpretation, and the development of doctrine. There are thoughtful points on both sides.
Perhaps the bigger lesson is how to approach such difficult texts with wisdom and humility. Christians of all persuasions acknowledge the imperfect transmission of the biblical texts as passed down through the centuries. But they continue studying original sources and consulting textual evidence with hearts open to the Spirit’s guidance.
Though disputed, many verses still anchor shared faith in Father, Son and Spirit, and the hope of eternal life promised to those who believe. The Trinity may remain shrouded in mystery, but can be embraced in simple trust. For God’s word transcends particular verses, pointing to divine truths that all Scripture seeks to reveal.
