ta paper [a]

8/6/2019 TA Paper [A]

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ta-paper-a 1/3

Hovis 1

Kristi Hovis

McClain

RBLA 423

April 19, 2010

Textual Criticism According to UBS Categories: [A]

1 John 5:7-8

The text included in UBS4 is certainly original. The two other readings do not maintain

validity against evaluation of internal and external evidence.

External Evidence

The fraudulent alternative Latin reading and its subsequent Greek text lack substantial

manuscript support from all the text types as well as reliable witnesses. These readings are later

than the accepted UBS text and were likely first circulated in Latin versions—only eight Greek

manuscripts use the additional text (Metzger 716), all being minuscules. According to

manuscripts discovered to date, early church fathers and ancient versions, with the exception of a

few Vulgate and an Armenian version, do not employ them. Based on external evidence alone,

the accepted text of 1 John 5:7-8 with its early and reliable witnesses (e.g., Codex Sinaiticus and

Codex Vaticanus) is well established.

Internal Evidence

In examining the accepted text, the verses correspond well with the context, style, and

vocabulary of the entire chapter and Johannine writing. In Chapter 5, John explains the

testimony of Jesus’ divine sonship by three witnesses: the water, blood, and the Spirit. Saying

that these three testify and are in agreement gives support to John’s argument that those who

believe can find their assurance of eternal life in Christ. Here the water represents Jesus’

8/6/2019 TA Paper [A]


Hovis 2

baptism, the blood His atoning sacrifice, and the Spirit the seal of salvation that makes the truth

known because He is truth (v. 7). In this sense, the Spirit is the revealer of the revelation of

Jesus Christ, upholds the gospel perfectly, and in conjunction with the Word grows and

transforms the believers born of God, thus serving as a sure testimony of Jesus’ divinity. The

passage, including vv. 7-8 of UBS, is repetitious in its thought and vocabulary, a norm for John.

The Greek reading, which is nearly identical to the Latin apart from clause order and the

phrase “in Christ Jesus,” was likely translated from the Latin. The additional clauses (known as

the Johannine Comma or Comma Johanneum) originally say, “which testify in the heaven, the

Father the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these the three one are. and three are the ones which

testify in the earth, the Spirit and the water and the blood.” They reveal a Trinitarian bias on

behalf of those who argued for their inclusion. The text agrees with Johannine theology but does

not fit the immediate context. Furthermore, its use of a[gion pneu/ma occurs infrequently in

John’s writings. If the translators wanted their counterfeit text to appear legitimate (i.e.,

original), they should have taken the context and John’s writing style into consideration.

Regarding the Latin reading, Erasmus had agreed to include it in his Latin N.T.

translation (eventually Textus Receptus) of the Greek text if such a reading were in Greek

manuscripts. Those who pushed for its inclusion delivered the Greek evidence, and Erasmus

kept his word, knowing the manuscripts were fabricated. This reading became more and more

prevalent in later Latin versions (Metzger 716) and appears in eight minuscules and the modern

versions developed from them. In conclusion, this variant has no more credibility than a gossip.

8/6/2019 TA Paper [A]


Hovis 3

Works Cited

Aland, Kurt, Barbara Aland, et al. The Greek New Testament. 4th rev. ed. New York: United

Bible Societies, 2004.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. New York: United

Bible Societies, 1971/ 2nd rev. ed. 2005.

ta paper [a]

Documents