Hi Sevryn,
Sevryn45 wrote:This is a weak argument my friend, for 2 reasons.
1. It is quoted in the writings of Church fathers dating from around 200 A.D.
Incorrect. It is not quoted by
any church father
ever.
2. the Waldensian (Vaudois) Bibles (in latin) go as far back as 159 A.D. and contain this verse. The Vaudois received the Scriptures from missionaries of Antioch in Syria in 120 A.D. and they were subsequently translated into Latin.
Well that's proof enough that you yourself, are the one who needs to go and do some research of your own and learn about these groups:
- The Waldenses didn't use a Latin version - Peter Valde translated the Bible into the French language, that was a major thrust of his reforms, to actually place the Scriptures in the hands of the common people, in their own language.
- The Waldenses and the Vaudois were two different groups, in any case.
- The Vaudois Bibles are traceable to a textual tradition which originates with the Itala (the 'Old Latin' version), it's true. However, the Itala itself underwent textual development as it was copied. The Itala used by the Vaudois was definitely not the earliest version of the Itala, which dates to the 2nd century AD. The Itala used by the Vaudois was a later recension, which differed textually from the earliest versions, and included 1 John 5:7 as a spurious interpolation.
- The Vaudois didn't use a Bible in Latin which 'goes back as far as 159 AD and contains this verse', the Vaudois used a defective recension of the Itala (which didn't even have a good Old Testament text to start with), and which contains later textual corruption.
- So the Vaudois actually used a corrupted recension which didn't go back further than the 5th century, which was when the Comma found it's way into the Itala, and which postdates the best Greek manuscripts, which omit the Comma, and which have a demonstrable textual history extending back to the 1st century.
He relies on a ASSERTION that it was never in the origional Greek Manuscripts.
No he doesn't. He relies on clear manuscript evidence.
Interesting to see that Cyprian quotes "father,
son and Holy Spirit" rather than "Father,
word and Holy Spirit" then isn't it?! What is more, if this verse was genuine, then why was it never used at the church councils of Nicea and Constantinople in order to prove the Trinity?