Why 1 John 5:7-8 Is Missing From Older Manuscripts

[JesusIs4Me]

The first sentence is highly suspect. What is the basis for saying the Majority Text is not based on the Majority Text? The Majority Text is made up of more than 5000 copies. It is also known as the Textus Receptus and the Antioch Text. The Minority Text is made up of 45 manuscripts also known as the Alexandrian Text. Which is why it is called 'minority'.

He did continue to explain after the first sentence.

…" The last person to try to find the differences between the majority of Greek manuscripts, Dr. Von Soden, did not collate more than 400 of the more than 5,000 Greek texts. In other words, what is commonly called the "Majority" Greek text is not a collation of the majority of manuscripts at all."

And then he explained why only a few Greek manuscripts had 1 John 5:7-8 in it.

"The "Majority" Greek text is also the main Greek text used by the Eastern Orthodox religion. They had a vested interest in changing (or deleting) some texts. More on this in a moment."

"1 John itself is not in a large number of extant Greek manuscripts"

Then th explanation for why the Eastern Orthodox had a vested interest to remove 1 John 5:7-8.

"The growing religion that became known as Roman Catholic, after many debates eventually agreed on the doctrine of the Trinity. So they had no reason to remove 1 John 5:7 from their Bibles, since it supported what they taught.

But the Greek Eastern Orthodox religion was combating a heresy called "Sabellianism," and would have found it easier to combat the heresy by simply removing the troubling passage from their Bibles."

Second, (1 John 5:7) is found in some Greek manuscripts.

True. I believe that was stated.

It is not only found in some Greek manuscripts, but it is also found in the Old Latin versions which date at around 157 A.D. Which makes them far older than the oldest present day Greek manuscript.

That one about Old Latin in 157 A.D. has been inferred indirectly here at the bottom of that page at that site.

"
The Vaudois

Now the "Waldensian," or "Vaudois" Bibles stretch from about 157 to the 1400s AD. The fact is, according to John Calvin's successor Theodore Beza, that the Vaudois received the Scriptures from missionaries of Antioch of Syria in the 120s AD and finished translating it into their Latin language by 157 AD. This Bible was passed down from generation, until the Reformation of the 1500s, when the Protestants translated the Vaudois Bible into French, Italian, etc. This Bible carries heavy weight when finding out what God really said. John Wesley and Jonathan Edwards believed, as most of the Reformers, that the Vaudois were the descendants of the true Christians, and that they preserved the Christian faith for the Bible-believing Christians today. "

The Minority texts, from which your modern Bibles come from, are at odds in several places with the Majortiy Text, from where the King James Version comes from. But the majority texts, of which there are some 60 Old Latin manuscripts, usually agree with the King James Version.

Quantrill

I believe I read somewhere that they could not get 2 to agree among those 45 Alexandrian manuscripts and yet modern Bibles prefer to go to that for a reliable source? At least that is my understanding of the situation.

Thank you for sharing.

 

[Quantrill]

He did continue to explain after the first sentence.

…" The last person to try to find the differences between the majority of Greek manuscripts, Dr. Von Soden, did not collate more than 400 of the more than 5,000 Greek texts. In other words, what is commonly called the "Majority" Greek text is not a collation of the majority of manuscripts at all."

And then he explained why only a few Greek manuscripts had 1 John 5:7-8 in it.

"The "Majority" Greek text is also the main Greek text used by the Eastern Orthodox religion. They had a vested interest in changing (or deleting) some texts. More on this in a moment."

"1 John itself is not in a large number of extant Greek manuscripts"

Then th explanation for why the Eastern Orthodox had a vested interest to remove 1 John 5:7-8.

"The growing religion that became known as Roman Catholic, after many debates eventually agreed on the doctrine of the Trinity. So they had no reason to remove 1 John 5:7 from their Bibles, since it supported what they taught.

But the Greek Eastern Orthodox religion was combating a heresy called "Sabellianism," and would have found it easier to combat the heresy by simply removing the troubling passage from their Bibles."



True. I believe that was stated.



That one about Old Latin in 157 A.D. has been inferred indirectly here at the bottom of that page at that site.

"
The Vaudois

Now the "Waldensian," or "Vaudois" Bibles stretch from about 157 to the 1400s AD. The fact is, according to John Calvin's successor Theodore Beza, that the Vaudois received the Scriptures from missionaries of Antioch of Syria in the 120s AD and finished translating it into their Latin language by 157 AD. This Bible was passed down from generation, until the Reformation of the 1500s, when the Protestants translated the Vaudois Bible into French, Italian, etc. This Bible carries heavy weight when finding out what God really said. John Wesley and Jonathan Edwards believed, as most of the Reformers, that the Vaudois were the descendants of the true Christians, and that they preserved the Christian faith for the Bible-believing Christians today. "



I believe I read somewhere that they could not get 2 to agree among those 45 Alexandrian manuscripts and yet modern Bibles prefer to go to that for a reliable source? At least that is my understanding of the situation.

Thank you for sharing.

You have the Majority Text which is so called because it uses the majority of the manuscripts, and copies, and versions, etc. The Minority Text is so called because it uses a minority of manuscripts, , copies, versions etc. Plus, the Minority Text depends heavily on only the three main Alexandrian manuscripts. The Vatican, the Sinaitic, and the Alexandrian.

Yes these are older, but older isn't always better. And Alexandria Egypt was prone to the blending of Old Testament Bible with Greek philosophy. And they were prone to include apocryphal books as Scripture as well. These have been rejected by the Jews in Israel. The bottom line is the less manuscripts and copies, and versions you use to compare to, the more likely you will have a flaw. The more you use, the more likely you will get it right. And the King James Version, is based on the Majority of texts available.

Modern Bibles are based on the Minority Text which is why they have changed so much in the Bible.

Most modern versions either omit or give a note saying these certain passages are not found in the oldest manuscripts. (Matt. 17:21, 18:11, 23:14) (Mark 7:16, 9:44-46, 11:26, 15:28) (Luke 9:55-56, 17:36, 23:17) (John 5:3b-4) (Acts 8:37, 9:5-6, 15:34, 24:6-8, 28:29) (Rom. 16:24) (1 John 5:7-8) There are 61 existant Old Latin manuscripts which include all of these. And these agree with the King James Version, which comes from the Majority Text. [Old Latin and King James Bible www.scionofzion.com]

The importance of the Old Latin is that it is a translation of a copy that is earlier than the Alexandrian Texts. And it agrees with the King James Version.

Quantrill