I John 5:7
Ever since the 2nd to 4th Centuries the attacks on the Diety of Christ and the Holy Trinity have taken place. There can be no greater example of this than in I John 5:7 where modern per-versions of the Bible remove this great verse or place it in margins. It started with the "Arians", who believed in a heretical view of Jesus and denied His Deity.
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word,
and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one". I John 5:7 KJV
This page is devoted to this verse and will display the overwheling evidence for the KJV reading. For starters, we shall direct you to our short video below to begin weighing the evidence from the Greek and Latin Manuscripts. Then more below + the Church Fathers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyprians's quote of I John 5:7 in 250 A.D.
Cyprian clearly quotes I John 5:7 verbatum in 250 A.D. and yet scholars still refuse to acknowledge this. The critics who attempt to challenge the reality of this being a quotation of the Comma are merely allowing their predisposition against the verse to overtake their reasoning faculties. Very sad!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tertullian references I John 5:7 in 199 A.D.!
While Tertullian here quotes John 10:30 so as to elucidate the point he makes about the unity of essence, and not of number, among the Persons of the Godhead, his language concerning all three Persons is strikingly particular to that found in I John 5:7. He quotes "these three are", and then clarifies that the "one" is a one of substance and essence, not person. Quite clearly, this is a reference to the Comma. What is important to keep in mind, also, is that Against Praxeas is a work specifically designed to explain and defend the doctrine of the Trinity against Sabellianism, which is why Tertullian takes pains to note the unity is one of essence and not of person. Thus, it's use nearly a century and a half before the Trinitarian controversies (during which the supposed silence of the patristics on the verse is said to suggest that they did not know of the verse) to defend the doctrine of the Trinity is remarkable in itself, as it shows that the verse DID find witness and was employed on this very subject. Notice he also says, "as it is put" saying basically the same as "it is written" of which Cyprian clearly says.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evidence of an Ancient Old Latin Manuscript dated to the 4th-5th Century.
"The Codex Cavensis" or " the La Cava Bible"
Rev. Charles Forster B.D. (1848-1895)! Dr. Forster's research on Codex Cavensis, the La Cava MS, flys in the face of modern scholarship in their attempts to deny any link to Ancient witnesses, (ancient being prior to the 10th Century). After a long study of the manuscript and comparing it to other 3rd-5th Century Manuscripts, a date of 509 came up, but with some side notes it was also taken back to the days of the Arians in the 2nd-4th Centuries!
Ladies and Gentlemen, do we see a pattern here? Even back in 1867 we see scholars will do anything they can do to make any manuscript more modern if their presuppositions disfavor a verse of scripture, such as this one in I John 5:7. They have become so dis-honest that even their modern Greek Apparatuses such as Nestle's NA/27, NA/28 are not only "omitting" words in scriptures, but "omitting" references to ancient witnesses in their own apparatuses. It's a big scam folks.
Now if we are to agree with Rev. Forster that the evidence "would almost lead us to believe" that this Codex was during the Arian controversy, that could pre-date Codex Vaticanus (350A.D.) as an ancient Greek witness that leaves the verse out. However! Even in Codex Vaticanus (see the evidence below) you will notice "umlauts" or two small dots at I John 5:6-8 which signifies a textual variation. And the only variation during the 2nd-4th Centuries was the verse in question. Either way folks, with 9500 out of 10,000 Latin Witnesses, of which all Latin originates from the Old Latin of 157 A.D., the evidence is in favor of the King James Bible. Compare that with only 0.01% or 12 Greek witnesses prior to the 10th Century that leaves the verse out. Can you connect the dots?
"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".
I John 5:9 KJV
Are you going to believe the witness of men, or the witness of God? It's your choice!
Below is Dr. Alexander Souter's Apparatus showing "L", a consensus for ii (?) - iii-iv century Latin witnesses for I John 5:7.
Below is the evidence with Jerome questioning the removal of I John 5:7 by "unfaithful scribes" in his intro to Codex Fuldensis!
