Did 1 John 5:7 accidently make its way into the KJV?

8 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    1st JOHN 5:7.

    .

    .

    Comes from the REAL Bibles held by the Antioch descended Christians.

    .

    .

    . ACTS 11:26.

    .

    .

    When Killer Constantine took Rome, he asked Pope Eusebius to give him 50 Bibles. He had the choice of using the manuscripts of the poor, ragtag Greek Christians, or those compiled by literally ball-less Origen Adamantius of Alexandria, the Great Centre of Philosophical Learnedness.

    .

    .

    Origen was a follower of Arius, who is the patron saint of Jehovah's Witlesses (sic!), who did not believe that Jesus was equal to God.

    .

    .

    Therefore Origen summarily removed it.

    .

    .

    The Eusebius Bible became the basis of Roman Catholic translations, despite their necessary belief in "The Trinity of The Godhead," because THEIR version is God, The Queen of Heaven, and The Son of God- from Babylonian Religious Belief.

    .

    .

    It would just kill them on several levels to admit that the Protestants had a better Bible than they did, so they invented the impossible story of the "marginal gloss:" Some Bible transcriber jotted 1st John 5:7 in a margin as a commentary to 1st John 5:8, and a later transcriber thought it was part of the text, and fitted it in.

    .

    .

    Only a brainwashed Roman Catholic, with threat of excommunication and death hanging over them on the one hand, and indoctroinated hatred for Protestants, believing them liars and sloppy on the other hand, could believe and accept such a story.

    .

    .

    Only England had the freedom to choose the Antioch manuscripts- anyone else Tried and Failed- or rather Tried and Died.

    .

    .

    I would take the word of peaceful paupers over that of murdering rich guys, who fought BLOODY WARS-OF-AGGRESSION to get rid of the English Protestants, and other Christians any day!

    .

    .

    I take it, MATTHEW, that you have the opposite inclination, yes?

    Source(s): . . SABOTAGE? by Jack T. Chick.
  • CF
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    Because some scribes failed to stick loyally to God’s Word, entire sections of spurious verses have crept into the “Received Text,” on which the King James Version is based. These verses were added to the original inspired text. Among such are John 8:1-11 and Mark 16:9-20. Another example of a spurious passage is found at 1 John 5:7, 8. Here the words “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” seem to support the Trinity. But research has revealed that these words were added by a dishonest scribe more than 1,000 years after the writing of the inspired Scriptures was completed.

    Source(s): w82 3/15 Loyally Advocating the Word of God
  • Becky
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    That is not what I have for John 5:7. Here it is:

    John 5:7

    New International Version (NIV)

    7 “Sir,” the invalid replied, “I have no one to help me into the pool when the water is stirred. While I am trying to get in, someone else goes down ahead of me.”

    Why would this be an accident? I don't see any accident. If we start calling some things in the Bible an "accident," everything in the Bible is then questionable as an "accident." Nothing is there by accident.

  • 7 years ago

    The oldest available Bible manuscripts say:

    “For there are three witness bearers,

    the spirit and the water and the blood, and the three are in agreement.”—1John 5:7, 8.

    This rendering is in agreement with the Greek texts by C. Tischendorf; Westcott and Hort; Augustinus Merk; José María Bover; United Bible Societies; and, Nestle-Aland.

    HOWEVER, after “witness bearers” the cursive mss No. 61 and No. 629 and Vgc

    **ADD** the words:

    “in heaven, the Father, the Word and the holy spirit; and these three are one.

    And there are three witness bearers on earth.”

    These words are **OMITTED** by אABVgSyh,p.

    .

    Source(s): "New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures—With References" - "Three Witness Bearers" http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1001060097?q=th...
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 7 years ago

    If you look at the arguments during the council of Nicaea

    No one used that scripture to support the trinity doctrine, because at that time those words did not exist, in what was available.

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    No, it was on purpose, by the Roman Catholics, to support their false Trinity god's.

    the Trinitarian baptism in the book of Matthew was also purposely added, the bible says to baptize in the name of Jesus Christ (book of Acts),

  • E
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. ( John 5:7 )

    NO it says what it means and means what it says....and it is there for a purpose as ALL Scripture which was given BY GOD.

  • 7 years ago

    no it did not accidentally make its way into the bible

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.