Answers | To Your Questions About the Bible, Theology and Christian Living

First John 5:7 in the King James Version is such a great proof-text for the Trinity. Why is it not found in newer versions?

When you read 1 John 5:7 in the KJV it does seem like a great proof-text for the Trinity. It reads, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”

Newer versions omit that wording.

So why would Christians omit wording that helps prove the Trinity? (1) Those words are not authentic, and (2) There is plenty of proof for the Trinity without them. We don’t need to use spurious words to authenticate the doctrine.

Scholar F.F. Bruce explained it well in his excellent book History of the Bible in English:

They [the words of 1 John 5:7 as found in the KJV] first appear in the writing of a Spanish Christian leader named Priscillian, who was executed for heresy in A.D. 385. Later they made their way into copies of the Latin text of the Bible. When Erasmus prepared his printed edition of the Greek Testament, he rightly left those words out, but was attacked for this by people who felt that the passage was a valuable proof-text for the doctrine of the Trinity. He replied (rather incautiously) that if he could be shown any Greek manuscript which contained the words, he would include them in his next edition. Unfortunately, a Greek manuscript not more than some twenty years old was produced in which the words appeared: they had been translated into Greek from Latin. Of course, the fact that the only Greek manuscript exhibiting the words belonged to the sixteenth century was in itself an argument against their authenticity, but Erasmus had given his promise, and so in his 1522 edition he included the passage. (Today one or two other very late Greek manuscripts are known to contain the passage; all others omit it.)

[New York: Oxford University Press, 1978 (third edition), pp. 141-2]

Ken Horn

Read Full Post »

When was the first publication of red letters for the words of Jesus Christ? Why are the words of the Lord God, the Holy Spirit, or the Angel of the Lord in the O.T. not also given a special color?

In 1899, Louis Klopsch, editor of The Christian Herald read Luke 22:20 and was struck by the words “This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.” Because of the symbolism of the blood, Dr. Klopsch wondered if the words of the Lord might effectively be printed in red: “Why not a red-letter Bible with the red words to be those of our Lord?” He sought counsel from his pastor, T. DeWitt Talmage, of Brooklyn Temple. Talmage encouraged him and the first red-letter New Testaments were printed in 1901.

Red was applied to all the words of Jesus, including those quoted by others in the Bible, but not in the Old Testament theophanies (or appearances of Christ before He came to earth in flesh).

The first printing quickly sold out and red-letter Bibles have been immensely popular ever since.

Ken Horn

Read Full Post »

My professor says it is a fact that the Bible is full of errors and contradictions. Why should I read such a faulty book?

My Harvard professor said Exodus 37:17-24, which describes sevenfold lamps, was in error because such lamps did not exist in Moses’ time. Later I took part in an archaeological expedition in Dothan in Israel and watched workmen uncover a sevenfold lamp dating from 1400 B.C., right from Moses’ time.

Critics once said the Hittites never existed because the Greeks and Egyptians didn’t mention them. Then a whole Hittite civilization was discovered. The Greeks and Egyptians did mention them but got the name so twisted no one recognized it. The Bible had it right.

That did not satisfy the critics. They said, “That may be true, but the Horites are fiction.” Others said Sargon never existed. Some even said King David never existed. But Horites were proved to be the same as Hurrians. Sargon’s palace has been excavated. Recently, an ancient inscription was discovered that mentions David’s name and kingdom.

Again and again the Bible has been proved true. It is the critics who are in error due to their unbelief and insufficient knowledge.

Other supposed errors include chronological difficulties caused because the Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks and Romans all used different systems of measuring time or dating. One cause of apparent contradictions is that one passage may use round numbers; another may give the exact figure, depending on the purpose of the writer.

Most of the errors critics talk about are copyists’ errors. Because the books of the Bible were copied by hand it was easy to make spelling mistakes, misread a word, or leave out a word or a line. By comparing the many ancient copies that have been discovered, scholars can determine the original reading in the vast majority of cases. These cases where we can’t be sure are mostly differences in spelling or word order. None of them affect the teachings of the Bible in any way.

Remember also that the Bible uses everyday language because it was written for the common people, not for scientists. Actually, scientific language did not develop until modern times. Most of us still use the language of appearance, just as the Bible does. Who says, “What a beautiful earthset,” even though we know that it is the earth’s turning that causes the sunset?

The Bible is a wonderful revelation of God and His plan. It will not lead us astray.

For more on this subject, see Bible Doctrines by Menzies and Horton (Logion Press). Visit the original Web page.

Stanley M. Horton

Read Full Post »