1 John 5:7 - Revision history

Nick at 09:20, 5 January 2026

2026-01-05T09:20:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:20, 5 January 2026
Line 1,756:		Line 1,756:
	:* [[1594 AD\|1594]]: <small>the Annotationes printed separately: [https://www.e-rara.ch/gep_g/content/zoom/1095196 e-rara].</small>		:* [[1594 AD\|1594]]: <small>the Annotationes printed separately: [https://www.e-rara.ch/gep_g/content/zoom/1095196 e-rara].</small>

	* '''5'''. [[1598 AD\|1598]] [[3754\|Ὅτι]] [[5140\|τρεῖς]] [[1526\|εἰσιν]] [[3588\|οἱ]] [[3140\|\|μαρτυροῦντες]] [[1722\|ἐν]] [[3588\|τῷ]] [[3772\|οὐρανῷ]], [[3588\|ὁ]] [[3962\|πατήρ]], [[3588\|ὁ]] [[3056\|λόγος]], [[2532\|καὶ]] [[3588\|τὸ]] [[40\|ἅγιον]] [[4151\|Πνεῦμα]]· [[2532\|καὶ]] [[3778\|οὗτοι]] [[3588\|οἱ]] [[5140\|τρεῖς]] [[1520\|ἕν]] [[1526\|εἰσι]]· ([[Theodore Beza\|Beza]])		* '''5'''. [[1598 AD\|1598]] [[3754\|Ὅτι]] [[5140\|τρεῖς]] [[1526\|εἰσιν]] [[3588\|οἱ]] [[3140\|μαρτυροῦντες]] [[1722\|ἐν]] [[3588\|τῷ]] [[3772\|οὐρανῷ]], [[3588\|ὁ]] [[3962\|πατήρ]], [[3588\|ὁ]] [[3056\|λόγος]], [[2532\|καὶ]] [[3588\|τὸ]] [[40\|ἅγιον]] [[4151\|Πνεῦμα]]· [[2532\|καὶ]] [[3778\|οὗτοι]] [[3588\|οἱ]] [[5140\|τρεῖς]] [[1520\|ἕν]] [[1526\|εἰσι]]· ([[Theodore Beza\|Beza]])
	[[Image:1_John_5_7_Beza_1598.JPG\|300px\|thumb\|right\|[[1 John 5:7]] in the [[1598 AD\|1598]] Greek New Testament of [[Theodore Beza]]]]		[[Image:1_John_5_7_Beza_1598.JPG\|300px\|thumb\|right\|[[1 John 5:7]] in the [[1598 AD\|1598]] Greek New Testament of [[Theodore Beza]]]]
	:* [[1604 AD\|1604]] <small>[https://books.google.com.au/books?id=NhY-AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA11-IA8#v=onepage&q&f=false Minor edition]</small>		:* [[1604 AD\|1604]] <small>[https://books.google.com.au/books?id=NhY-AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA11-IA8#v=onepage&q&f=false Minor edition]</small>

Nick: /* Dionysius of Alexandria */

2026-01-04T09:32:44Z

Dionysius of Alexandria

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:32, 4 January 2026
Line 524:		Line 524:

	====Dionysius of Alexandria====		====Dionysius of Alexandria====
	Dionysius of Alexandria stated that John's letter was "perfect Greek", thus showing that there was no solecism in the text, which points to his text having the Comma in it.		Dionysius of Alexandria (d. 265 AD) stated that John's letter was "perfect Greek", thus showing that there was no solecism in the text, which points to his text having the Comma in it. Dionysius had written a commentary comparing the Book of Revelation to John's letter & Gospel and wrote specifically on the presence of solecisims in the Book of Revelation. He noted the complete absence of such grammatical errors in John's gospel and his letter. He also has allusions to the Heavenly Witnesses verse in his writings. (Dionysius of Alexandria, Epistolae II Dionysii Episcopi ad SS
			Dionysium. Fragmenta. Migne Latin, PL 5.128A-B).

	====Cyprian of Carthage====		====Cyprian of Carthage====

Nick: /* Dionysius of Alexandria */

2026-01-04T09:26:21Z

Dionysius of Alexandria

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:26, 4 January 2026
Line 524:		Line 524:

	====Dionysius of Alexandria====		====Dionysius of Alexandria====
	Dionysius of Alexandria stated that John's letter was "perfect Greek", thus showing that there was no solecism in the text, which points to having the Comma in it.		Dionysius of Alexandria stated that John's letter was "perfect Greek", thus showing that there was no solecism in the text, which points to his text having the Comma in it.

	====Cyprian of Carthage====		====Cyprian of Carthage====

Nick: /* Origen */

2026-01-04T09:13:41Z

Origen

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:13, 4 January 2026
Line 522:		Line 522:
	====Origen====		====Origen====
	''See Main Article: [[Johannine Comma and Origen]]''		''See Main Article: [[Johannine Comma and Origen]]''

			====Dionysius of Alexandria====
			Dionysius of Alexandria stated that John's letter was "perfect Greek", thus showing that there was no solecism in the text, which points to having the Comma in it.

	====Cyprian of Carthage====		====Cyprian of Carthage====

Nick at 20:40, 2 January 2026

2026-01-02T20:40:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:40, 2 January 2026
Line 1,151:		Line 1,151:
	:WHATSOEVER is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. '''<u>For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.</u>''' If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.		:WHATSOEVER is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. '''<u>For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.</u>''' If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
	:[The First Sunday after Easter. The Epistle. 1 St. John 5. 4]		:[The First Sunday after Easter. The Epistle. 1 St. John 5. 4]

			====Gottfried Wegner====
			* [https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb10673756?q=%CE%BB%CF%8C%CE%B3%CE%BF%CF%82&page=,1 Wegner, Gottfried: Vindicatio Testimonii, Trium Testium In Coelo, I. Joh. V. commate 7.]

	====John Wesley====		====John Wesley====

Nick at 08:52, 13 November 2025

2025-11-13T08:52:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:52, 13 November 2025
Line 500:		Line 500:

	====Athenagoras====		====Athenagoras====
			:''See also [[Johannine Comma and Athenagoras of Athens]]''
	Athenagoras of Athens (ca. AD 130-190) said:		Athenagoras of Athens (ca. AD 130-190) said:

Nick: /* Papyrus 9 */

2025-11-12T10:41:40Z

Papyrus 9

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:41, 12 November 2025
Line 498:		Line 498:

	:• [Elliott] In the East the earliest unambiguous patristic attestation to the Acts of John is in Eusebius (HE 3. 25. 6 (Schwartz GCS 9.2, pp. 252f.)) who condemns the Acts of John (and of Andrew) as heretical. Epiphanius (adv. Haer. 2. 47. 1 (Holl, GCS 31, p. 216)) notes that the Acts of John (and of Andrew and of Thomas) were used by encratite groups. The Manichaean Psalm Book used it as part of a Manichaean corpus of Acts1 about AD 340 (according to C. R. C. Allberry). Western attestation includes Augustine (Ep. 237 (253) to Ceretius, ed. A. Goldbacher, CSEL 57 (Vienna and Leipzig, 1911), pp. 526–32) who cites in Latin some ten lines of the Hymn of Christ, which Ceretius claims to have found circulating as an independent text among the Priscillianists. The Acts were also mentioned by Innocent I (Ep. 6. 7, PL 20, col. 502) and by Turribius of Astorga (Ep. ad Idacium et Ceponium 5, PL 54, cols. 693–5). The Acts in Latin were also obviously known to the editor of the Virtutes Johannis in the collection of Pseudo‐Abdias. The Acts were therefore known by the fourth century as a sectarian work and used by, among others, Priscillianists. (Elliott, J. K. (ed.), "The Acts of John" in The Apocryphal New Testament: A Collection of Apocryphal Christian Literature in an English Translation, 2003, p. 303.)		:• [Elliott] In the East the earliest unambiguous patristic attestation to the Acts of John is in Eusebius (HE 3. 25. 6 (Schwartz GCS 9.2, pp. 252f.)) who condemns the Acts of John (and of Andrew) as heretical. Epiphanius (adv. Haer. 2. 47. 1 (Holl, GCS 31, p. 216)) notes that the Acts of John (and of Andrew and of Thomas) were used by encratite groups. The Manichaean Psalm Book used it as part of a Manichaean corpus of Acts1 about AD 340 (according to C. R. C. Allberry). Western attestation includes Augustine (Ep. 237 (253) to Ceretius, ed. A. Goldbacher, CSEL 57 (Vienna and Leipzig, 1911), pp. 526–32) who cites in Latin some ten lines of the Hymn of Christ, which Ceretius claims to have found circulating as an independent text among the Priscillianists. The Acts were also mentioned by Innocent I (Ep. 6. 7, PL 20, col. 502) and by Turribius of Astorga (Ep. ad Idacium et Ceponium 5, PL 54, cols. 693–5). The Acts in Latin were also obviously known to the editor of the Virtutes Johannis in the collection of Pseudo‐Abdias. The Acts were therefore known by the fourth century as a sectarian work and used by, among others, Priscillianists. (Elliott, J. K. (ed.), "The Acts of John" in The Apocryphal New Testament: A Collection of Apocryphal Christian Literature in an English Translation, 2003, p. 303.)

			====Athenagoras====
			Athenagoras of Athens (ca. AD 130-190) said:

			“That we are not atheists, therefore, seeing that we acknowledge one God, uncreated, eternal, invisible, impassible, incomprehensible, illimitable, who is apprehended by the understanding only and the reason, who is encompassed by light, and beauty, and spirit, and power ineffable, by whom the universe has been created through His Logos, and set in order, and is kept in being — I have sufficiently demonstrated. [I say His Logos], for we acknowledge also a Son of God. Nor let any one think it ridiculous that God should have a Son. For though the poets, in their fictions, represent the gods as no better than men, our mode of thinking is not the same as theirs, concerning either God the Father or the Son. But the Son of God is the Logos of the Father, in idea and in operation; for after the pattern of Him and by Him were all things made, the Father and the Son being one. And, the Son being in the Father and the Father in the Son, in oneness and power of spirit, the understanding and reason (νοῦς καὶ λόγος) of the Father is the Son of God. But if, in your surpassing intelligence, it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by the Son, I will state briefly that He is the first product of the Father, not as having been brought into existence (for from the beginning, God, who is the eternal mind [νοῦς], had the Logos in Himself, being from eternity instinct with Logos [λογικός]); but inasmuch as He came forth to be the idea and energizing power of all material things, which lay like a nature without attributes, and an inactive earth, the grosser particles being mixed up with the lighter. The prophetic Spirit also agrees with our statements. The Lord, it says, made me, the beginning of His ways to His works. Proverbs 8:22 The Holy Spirit Himself also, which operates in the prophets, we assert to be an effluence of God, flowing from Him, and returning back again like a beam of the sun. Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and who declare both their power in union and their distinction in order, called atheists? Nor is our teaching in what relates to the divine nature confined to these points; but we recognise also a multitude of angels and ministers, whom God the Maker and Framer of the world distributed and appointed to their several posts by His Logos, to occupy themselves about the elements, and the heavens, and the world, and the things in it, and the goodly ordering of them all.” (Athenagoras, A Plea for Christians, Chapter 10—The Christians Worship the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, Online version)

			“Are, then, those who consider life to be comprised in this, Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die, and who regard death as a deep sleep and forgetfulness (sleep and death, twin brothers), to be accounted pious; while men who reckon the present life of very small worth indeed, and who are conducted to the future life by this one thing alone, that they know God and His Logos [John 17:3], what is the oneness of the Son with the Father, what the communion of the Father with the Son, what is the Spirit, what is the unity of these three, the Spirit, the Son, the Father, and their distinction in unity;…” (Ibid. Chapter 12—Consequent Absurdity of the Charge of Atheism, Online version)

			“For, as we acknowledge '''<u>a God, and a Son His Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in essence — the Father, the Son, the Spirit</u>''', because the Son is the Intelligence, Reason, Wisdom of the Father, and the Spirit an effluence, as light from fire;…” (Ibid. Chapter 24—Concerning Angels and Giants, Online version)

	====[[Papyrus 9]]====		====[[Papyrus 9]]====

Nick at 07:48, 12 November 2025

2025-11-12T07:48:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:48, 12 November 2025
Line 2,136:		Line 2,136:
	* http://www.studytoanswer.net/bibleversions/1john5n7.html		* http://www.studytoanswer.net/bibleversions/1john5n7.html
	* http://fpgm.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/IJohn5.7.pdf (PDF)		* http://fpgm.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/IJohn5.7.pdf (PDF)
			* [https://archive.org/details/a-history-of-the-debate-over-1-john-5-7-8-by-michael-maynard/page/102/mode/1up A History Of The Debate Over 1 John 5,7-8] by [[Michael Maynard]]
	* [http://solascriptura-tt.org/Bibliologia-PreservacaoTT/1Jn5-7-Ruckman.htm Does 1 John 5:7 belong in the Bible?] by [[Peter Ruckman]]		* [http://solascriptura-tt.org/Bibliologia-PreservacaoTT/1Jn5-7-Ruckman.htm Does 1 John 5:7 belong in the Bible?] by [[Peter Ruckman]]
	* [http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2010/04/richard-muller-and-history-of.html Richard Muller and the History of the Preservation of Scripture pt. 1]		* [http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2010/04/richard-muller-and-history-of.html Richard Muller and the History of the Preservation of Scripture pt. 1]

Nick at 07:45, 12 November 2025

2025-11-12T07:45:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:45, 12 November 2025
Line 2,142:		Line 2,142:
	* [http://www.jeffriddle.net/2020/01/wm-149-hixson-cj-and-roman-catholic.html WM 149: Hixson, the CJ, and Roman Catholic Provenance] Word Magazine by [[Jeff Riddle]]		* [http://www.jeffriddle.net/2020/01/wm-149-hixson-cj-and-roman-catholic.html WM 149: Hixson, the CJ, and Roman Catholic Provenance] Word Magazine by [[Jeff Riddle]]
	* [https://youngtextlessreformed.com/2020/01/16/1-john-57-and-modern-criticism/ 1 John 5:7 and Modern Criticism] Article on the ''The Young, Textless, and Reformed'' blog by [[Taylor Desoto]]		* [https://youngtextlessreformed.com/2020/01/16/1-john-57-and-modern-criticism/ 1 John 5:7 and Modern Criticism] Article on the ''The Young, Textless, and Reformed'' blog by [[Taylor Desoto]]
			* [https://archive.org/details/johannine-comma/mode/1up 2024 Online Book on the Comma] by Valtteri Lahti

	====Critical====		====Critical====

Nick: /* Eucherius of Lyons */

2025-11-01T20:06:33Z

Eucherius of Lyons

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:06, 1 November 2025
Line 691:		Line 691:

	====Eucherius of Lyons====		====Eucherius of Lyons====
	Eucherius of Lyons (434 A.D.) in a tract that is ~~titled ‘Formulae Spiritualis Intelligentiae’~~, ~~verses 7 & 8 are quoted~~.		Eucherius of Lyons (434 A.D.) -- “... in a tract, called Formulae Spiritualis Intelligentiae, c. 11, para. 3, 4. sets down both the seventh and eighth verses of the fifth chapter of St. John’s first epistle, in the same order as our printed editions have them, precluding thereby the common cavil, that the seventh verse is only a mystical explication of the eighth” (Twells, II, p. 135).

	====Contra Varimadum Arianum====		====Contra Varimadum Arianum====

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:20, 5 January 2026
Line 1,756:		Line 1,756:
	:* [[1594 AD\|1594]]: <small>the Annotationes printed separately: [https://www.e-rara.ch/gep_g/content/zoom/1095196 e-rara].</small>		:* [[1594 AD\|1594]]: <small>the Annotationes printed separately: [https://www.e-rara.ch/gep_g/content/zoom/1095196 e-rara].</small>

	* '''5'''. [[1598 AD\|1598]] [[3754\|Ὅτι]] [[5140\|τρεῖς]] [[1526\|εἰσιν]] [[3588\|οἱ]] [[3140\|\|μαρτυροῦντες]] [[1722\|ἐν]] [[3588\|τῷ]] [[3772\|οὐρανῷ]], [[3588\|ὁ]] [[3962\|πατήρ]], [[3588\|ὁ]] [[3056\|λόγος]], [[2532\|καὶ]] [[3588\|τὸ]] [[40\|ἅγιον]] [[4151\|Πνεῦμα]]· [[2532\|καὶ]] [[3778\|οὗτοι]] [[3588\|οἱ]] [[5140\|τρεῖς]] [[1520\|ἕν]] [[1526\|εἰσι]]· ([[Theodore Beza\|Beza]])		* '''5'''. [[1598 AD\|1598]] [[3754\|Ὅτι]] [[5140\|τρεῖς]] [[1526\|εἰσιν]] [[3588\|οἱ]] [[3140\|μαρτυροῦντες]] [[1722\|ἐν]] [[3588\|τῷ]] [[3772\|οὐρανῷ]], [[3588\|ὁ]] [[3962\|πατήρ]], [[3588\|ὁ]] [[3056\|λόγος]], [[2532\|καὶ]] [[3588\|τὸ]] [[40\|ἅγιον]] [[4151\|Πνεῦμα]]· [[2532\|καὶ]] [[3778\|οὗτοι]] [[3588\|οἱ]] [[5140\|τρεῖς]] [[1520\|ἕν]] [[1526\|εἰσι]]· ([[Theodore Beza\|Beza]])
	[[Image:1_John_5_7_Beza_1598.JPG\|300px\|thumb\|right\|[[1 John 5:7]] in the [[1598 AD\|1598]] Greek New Testament of [[Theodore Beza]]]]		[[Image:1_John_5_7_Beza_1598.JPG\|300px\|thumb\|right\|[[1 John 5:7]] in the [[1598 AD\|1598]] Greek New Testament of [[Theodore Beza]]]]
	:* [[1604 AD\|1604]] <small>[https://books.google.com.au/books?id=NhY-AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA11-IA8#v=onepage&q&f=false Minor edition]</small>		:* [[1604 AD\|1604]] <small>[https://books.google.com.au/books?id=NhY-AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA11-IA8#v=onepage&q&f=false Minor edition]</small>