Featured A few of my KJV mark ups.

It is far more likely that it was not in their exemplars. When scribes deleted text, it was accidental.

 

Highly unlikely. The scribes had theological reservations, so they removed what in their minds was a theologically confusing situation.

 

Why didn't people just stick with the Reader's Digest 'Bible', instead of pretending these are 'Bibles' versions?

"The modern critical text that forms the basis for nearly all modern versions omits the equivalent of the entire books of 1st and 2nd Peter."

"thou shalt not bear false witness"

"A note before we get started...

"Critics commonly charge that the traditional Bible text used by believers for 1800 years adds material and that we should be thankful for Westcott and Hort who came along in the 19th century to restore the text of the New Testament that had been corrupt for 1800 years and during the entire reformation. This charge is of course made against evidence to the contrary, as you will find if you research the text lines (read other articles on this website). Further, it is interesting to note that one of these verses is this:

Romans 13:9: "For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

"The phrase "thou shalt not bear false witness" is missing from the modern critical text (and therefor most modern versions). Now I ask you: is it reasonable to assume that a scribe added a self-incriminating phrase to the passage? Isn't it more likely that "those who corrupt the word of God" (2 Cor. 2:17, KJV) removed the phrase which indicted them?"

Westcott and Hort's Magic Marker Binge!
(Part 1: Matthew - John)

Westcott and Hort's Magic Marker Binge!
(Part 2: Acts - Revelation)

Including O.P.; 1 John 5:7-8, Acts of the Apostles 9:5-6, 1 Peter 2:2

 

Footnote from NET on the "to salvation" ending of 1 Peter 2:1
6tc The Byzantine text lacks εἰς σωτηρίαν (ei" swthrian, “to salvation”), while the words are found in the earliest and best witnesses (Ě72 א A B C K P Ψ 33 81 630 1241 1505 1739 al latt sy co). Not only is the longer reading superior externally, but since the notion of growing up [in]to salvation would have seemed theologically objectionable, it is easy to see why some scribes would omit it.

The idea of growing up to salvation is simply to go from a recently saved, new, infant Christ to a mature Christian by study and application of God's word.

 

(??)

Here are some posts on I John 5:7, whether here or there, with regard to these posts, above.

I John 5:7, 1 John 5:7 by Thomas Golda

"While this verse is not found in the majority of Greek manuscripts,
it is found in a minority (10 total, out of about 500 that contain I John 5)

"The Greek texts include 629 (fourteenth century), 61 (sixteenth century), 918 (sixteenth century), 2473 (seventeenth century), and 2318 (eighteenth century).

"It is also in the margins of 221 (tenth century), 635 (eleventh century), 88 (twelfth century), 429 (fourteenth century), and 636 (fifteenth century)

I John 5:7, Additional Information Supporting 1 John 5:7
by Thomas Golda

I John 5:7 "While the External evidence for the inclusion of I John 5:7 is ancient and overwhelming (see posts above), once we get the answer to, "why would anyone (or another influence) find it so important to leave out?", it gives us the clinger.

"There are groups that would find that leaving out anything to do with the Trinity, as essential (JWs), the way Modern bibles have done to the word, "GODHEAD", however, the Trinity is bearing record in Heaven, before the whole Universe, to more than their being the GODHEAD".

 

While the 'Mark-throughs' are strikes through the text, these posts give 448 of the scripture portions of the worst ommissions shown, so we can see what words are missing.

Pretty important words, it seems to me.

"Some examples of the importance of not using an unreliable text and an unsound translation approach are here: (not to mention less than desirable translators):

"From: 448 Reasons We Cannot Trust Any Modern Bible Version!

"These are 448 egregious omissions in the modern versions.

"Did they/ do they have it out for The Lord?

"They remove the Trinity in I John 5:7, the only three occurrences of the "GODHEAD", the Name Jesus Christ, over and over, 'Lord', 'God', 'the blood', that Jesus was 'the only begotten son', etc., etc.

"What could go wrong?

"What will they delete next time?

"We better be glad we even have a copy of God's Word!"

And before we get too upset, ask yourself why certain postings here on the BB seem to always omit these words, too (??) (or, at least, don't include them).

Are they out of vogue to use? ”holy”, ” forever”, ”begotten”, ”sanctified”, ”I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last:", etc., etc. (??)

Matthew: Don't cut the baby (DCTB) vs Cut the baby (CTB).

Mark, Luke, John: Don't cut the baby (DCTB) vs Cut the baby (CTB).

Acts - Galatians: Don't cut the baby (DCTB) vs Cut the baby (CTB).

Ephesians - Revelation: Don't cut the baby (DCTB) vs Cut the baby (CTB).

 

No, incorrect! It is far, far more likely that a scribe after writting "thou shalt not steal", looked away and when his eyes came back to the page fixed on " thou shalt not covet" accidentally skipping The phrase "thou shalt not bear false witness".

The scribes eyes accidentally jumped "thou shalt" to the next "thou shalt".

 

Scribes did no such thing. Or else every difficult passage would have been deleted.

 

Romans 13:9

from: Romans 13:9

"Affected Teachings"

"This is another one of those deletions in which no reason is given as to why it was removed. However, the name of Origen does appear beside the commentary in the UBS 4th Edition of the Greek. Origen was a pagan and not a Christian and had much to do with the corruption of the true Antiochan manuscripts. Romans 13:9 is a borrowed quotation from the episode of the rich young ruler from Matthew 19:19 when Jesus told him that he would have to keep the commandments to inherit eternal life.

"The commandments Jesus gave this ruler were part of the Decalogue which deals with each other. The first four deals with our relationship to God and the other six deals with our relationship to each other.

"Why they would leave out “Thou shalt not bear false witness” is another mystery. They keep the other ones in and delete this one which makes no sense and as I have already stated, there is no reason given as to why this was done. It was just another attack on the words of the Lord Jesus Christ. It just shows how untrustworthy the modern versions are since they follow the corruptions of the second-century Alexandrian Gnostics."

Textus Receptus - Traditional Text

to gar ou moiceuseiV ou joneuseiV ou kleyeiV ou yeudomarturhseiV ouk epiqumhseiV kai ei tiV etera entolh en toutw tw logw anakejalaioutai en tw agaphseiV ton plhsion sou wV eauton

Hort-Westcott - Critical Text

to gar ou moiceuseiV ou joneuseiV ou kleyeiV ouk epiqumhseiV kai ei tiV etera entolh en tw logw toutw anakejalaioutai [en tw] agaphseiV ton plhsion sou wV seauton

Corrupted Manuscripts
This verse is corrupted in the following manuscripts:

A 02 - Alexandrinus - Fifth century
B 03 - Vaticanus - Fourth century
D 06 - Paris: Claromontanus - Sixth century
L 020 - Ninth century
33 (Minuscule) - Ninth Century

Manuscripts which agree with the Textus Receptus for this verse.

Byzantine Text (450-1450 A.D.)
Aleph 01 - Sinaiticus - Nineteenth Century Counterfeit
P 025 - Ninth century
Psi 044 - Eight/Ninth/ century

Published Critical Greek Texts with Corruptions
that Omit “Thou shalt not bear false witness”

Greisbach, Johann - 1805
Lachmann, Karl - 1842
Tischendorf, Constantine - 1869
Tregelles, Samuel - 1857
Alford, Henry - 1849 revised in 1871
Wordsworth, Christopher - 1856 revised in 1870
Westcott and Hort - 1881
Weiss, Bernhard - 1894
Nestle - 1927 as revised in seventeenth edition in 1941
Nestle-Aland - 1979 - Twenty Sixth Edition
Nestle-Aland - 1993 - Twenty Seventh Edition
United Bible Societies - 1983 - Fourth Edition
Von Soden, Freiherr - 1902
Hodges and Farstad - Majority Text 1982 as corrected in 1985

Romans 13:9

(KJV) For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

(1611 KJV) For this, Thou shalt not commit adulterie, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steale, Thou shalt not beare false witnesse, Thou shalt not couet: and if there be any other commandement, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe.

(1587 Geneva Bible) For this, Thou shalt not commit adulterie, Thou shalt not kil, Thou shalt not steale, Thou shalt not beare false witnes, Thou shalt not couet: and if there be any other commaundement, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, euen in this, Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe.

(Tyndale 1526) For these commaundementes: Thou shalt not comit advoutry: Thou shalt not kyll: Thou shalt not steale: Thou shalt not beare false witnes: Thou shalt not desyre and so forth (yf there be eny other comaundement) they are all comprehended in this sayinge: Love thyne neghbour as thy selfe.

Counterfeit Versions

(CSB) The commandments, Do not commit adultery; do not murder; do not steal; do not covet; and any other commandment, are summed up by this commandment: Love your neighbor as yourself.

(NIV) The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet, "and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself."

(NASV) For this, "YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, YOU SHALL NOT MURDER, YOU SHALL NOT STEAL, YOU SHALL NOT COVET," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

(ESV) The commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

(1901 ASV) For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not covet, and if there be any other commandment, it is summed up in this word, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

(HCSB) The commandments: You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not covet, and if there is any other commandment—all are summed up by this: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

(RSV) The commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this sentence, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

(NAB-Roman Catholic) The commandments, "You shall not commit adultery; you shall not kill; you shall not steal; you shall not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this saying, (namely) "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

(NWT-Jehovah’s Witnesses) For the [law code], “You must not commit adultery, You must not murder, You must not steal, You must not covet,” and whatever other commandment there is, is summed up in this word, namely, “You must love your neighbor as yourself.”

 

1 John 5:7-8

from: 1 John 5:7-8

"Affected Teachings"

"The mutilation of 1 John 5:7-8 in the second century was an attack upon the Trinity. The rejection of the Trinity is alive and well today in the Jehovah’s Witnesses camp and is alive and well in the modern versions which agree totally with their New World Translation.

"Trinitarian theology is totally disbelieved by the Gnostics and many cult groups including the Jews. For any Theologian, Pastor, or Christian to endorse a version that attacks the Trinity, means they too disbelieve the Trinity or else they would not be defending the Gnostic view.

"These verses are the most hotly contested by the modern version proponents simply because they disregard all the evidence that is available. This section of Scripture has been named the “Johannine Comma.”

"1 John 5:7-8 is as much a part of the original autographs as Jesus Himself was. Therefore, we can claim these verses as authentic without hesitation."

History

Aleph - Sinaiticus - Nineteenth-Century Counterfeit
B - Vaticanus - Fourth Century
A - Alexandrinus - Fifth Century

"These three manuscripts are the primary manuscripts where 1 John 5:7-8 have been corrupted. There are many other later manuscripts that are ancillary to these three because they were copied from them. Like begets like and when you copy from a corrupted manuscript the lineage of corruption will continue.

"1 John 5:7-8 has been attacked by the pro-modern version crowd as being a scribal addition later on in years. However, 1 John 5:7-8 is found in the Old Latin Vulgate and Greek Vulgate (90-150 A.D.), plus the Syriac Peshiito (150 A.D.) It is also found in many first-century church lectionaries.

"Lectionaries were used in churches for readings and liturgy for church services especially for special days of the year. They are akin to the responsive readings which we find in today’s hymn books. Tatian’s Diatesseron which was a harmony of the four gospels written about 150 A.D. When Taitian was writing the book of John, he referenced 1 John 5:7 which proves that 1 John 5:7 antedates Vaticanus, by 200 years, where the verse is omitted.

"Dr. John Overall, who was one of the King James translators was a scholar in the teachings of the early Church Fathers. His contribution concerning 1 John 5:7 was vital since manuscript evidence was lacking because of the Alexandrian school where it was mutilated. He knew that the early church fathers had referenced those verses quite frequently.

"The modern version proponents only look to Vaticanus and Sinaiticus as their authorities and reject the massive amount of other evidence such as the church lectionaries.

"If 1 John 5:7-8 did not exist in the originals, then how could they have been quoted by the church fathers if it was non-existent?

"A simple question of logic.

"Erasmus was a Greek scholar who was used of the Lord mightily as a precursor to the Reformation. He printed a Greek New Testament in 1516 and the Reformation took place in 1517. There is no such thing as a coincidence in the Kingdom of God, only a God-incident.

"Now Erasmus in reference to 1 John 5:7 originally did not want to include that portion unless a Greek manuscript could be found as evidence of its authenticity. He claimed that Greek manuscripts and even some Latin manuscripts did not have this verse in it. In due time Erasmus was presented with Codex Montfortianus (Manuscript #61) which is in Dublin, Ireland, Codex Britannicus which both contained 1 John 5:7 and with this proof, he confidently placed these verses in his third edition of the Greek in 1522 and his last one in 1535.

"Erasmus died in 1536 but God had set the stage for the translation of the final true Bible in the English language which would be used of Christians until the Lord returned on the last day.

"Some of the other evidence where 1 John 5:7-8 can be found are as follows:
"John Calvin in his Institutes of the Christian Religion (mid 16th Century) in Book 3, Chapter 1, section 1 mentions 1 John 5:7-8 without any doubt.

"Some Syriac Peshitto manuscripts, The Syriac Edition at Hamburg, Bishop Uscan’s Armenian Bible, the Armenian Edition of John Zohrob, the first printed Georgian Bible.
Early Latin witnesses include:

1) Tertullian who died in 220 A.D.
2) Cyprian of Carthage who died in 258 A.D.
3) Priscillan who died in 358 A.D.
4) The Speculum - Fifth century
5) A creed called Esposito Fidei - Fifth or sixth century
6) Old Latin - Fifth or sixth century
7) A Confession of Faith of Eugenius, Bishop of Carthage (484 A.D.)
8) Cassiodoris of Italy (480-570 A.D.)
"The 12 Old Latin MSS came from a study by Jesse Boyd in 1999. He said:
“In addition to the aforementioned favorable evidence, the Comma can be traced back through the Waldensian Church to the translation of the Old Italic in the 2nd century. Moreover, in the 7th century, at least 12 Old Latin mss contain the passage; at least 21 in the 8th century, and at least 189 in the 9th century. Over 6,000 Old Latin manuscripts remained unexamined to this day.”
"The evidence is overwhelming for the authenticity of 1 John 5:7-8. Keep in mind that it was Origen who was the father of the false manuscripts who removed this verse as he did verses like Acts 8:37 and Luke 24:40.

"The Alexandrian school was no friend of the true manuscripts which were taken from Antioch and mutilated according to Gnostic beliefs."

con't

 

Textus Receptus - Traditional Text

1 John 5:7 oti treiV eisin oi marturounteV en tw ouranw o pathr o logoV kai to agion pneuma kai outoi oi treiV en eisin

1 John 5:8 kai treiV eisin oi marturounteV en th gh to pneuma kai to udwr kai to aima kai oi treiV eiV to en eisin

Hort Westcott - Critical Text

1 John 5:7 oti treiV eisin oi marturounteV

1 John 5:8 to pneuma kai to udwr kai to aima kai oi treiV eiV to en eisin

Corrupted Manuscripts
These verses are corrupted in the following manuscripts:
Omits “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. {8} And there are three that bear witness in earth

Byzantine Text (450-1450 A.D.)
Aleph 01 - Sinaiticus - Nineteenth Century Counterfeit
A 02 - Alexandrinus - Fifth century
B 03 - Vaticanus - Fourth century
K 018 - Ninth century
L 020 - Ninth century
P 025 - Ninth century
Psi 044 - Eight/Ninth/ century
33 (Minuscule) - Ninth Century
048 - Fifth century

Manuscripts that agree with the Textus Receptus for this verse

Stephanus (1550 A.D.)
Beza (1598 A.D.)
61 - Sixteenth century
88 - Twelfth century
221 - Tenth century
429 - Fourteenth century
629 - Fourteenth century
535 - Twelfth century
635 - Eleventh century
636 - Eleventh Century
918 - Sixteenth century
2318 - Eighteenth century

Published Critical Greek Texts with Corruptions
Omits “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. {8} And there are three that bear witness in earth

Greisbach, Johann - 1805
Lachmann, Karl - 1842
Tischendorf, Constantine - 1869
Tregelles, Samuel - 1857
Alford, Henry - 1849 revised in 1871
Wordsworth, Christopher - 1856 revised in 1870
Westcott and Hort - 1881
Weiss, Bernhard - 1894
Nestle - 1927 as revised in seventeenth edition in 1941
Nestle-Aland - 1979 - Twenty Sixth Edition
Nestle-Aland - 1993 - Twenty Seventh Edition
United Bible Societies - 1983 - Fourth Edition
Von Soden, Freiherr - 1902
Hodges and Farstad - Majority Text 1982 as corrected in 1985

1 John 5:7-8

(KJV) For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. {8} And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

(1611 KJV) For there are three that beare record in heauen, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one. {8} And there are three that beare witnesse in earth, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one.

(1568 Bishops Bible) For there are three which beare recorde in heauen, the father, the worde, and the holy ghost, and these three are one. {8} And there are three which beare recorde in earth, the spirite, and water, and blood, and these three agree in one.

(1587 Geneva Bible) For there are three, which beare recorde in heauen, the Father, the Worde, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one. {8} And there are three, which beare record in the earth, the spirit, and the water and the blood: and these three agree in one.

Counterfeit Versions

(CSB) For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood — and these three are in agreement.

(NIV) 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

(NASV) 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

(ESV) 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.

(CEV) 7 In fact, there are three who tell about it. 8 They are the Spirit, the water, and the blood, and they all agree.

(1901 ASV) 7 And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. {8} For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and the three agree in one.

(HCSB) 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood —and these three are in agreement

(RSV) [7] And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. [8] There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree.

(NAB-Roman Catholic) 7 So there are three that testify, 8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood, and the three are of one accord.

(NWT) 7 For there are three witness bearers, 8 the spirit and the water and the blood, and the three are in agreement.

(NKJV) Footnote - NU-Text and M-Text omit the words from in heaven (verse 7) through on earth (verse 8). Only four or five very late manuscripts contain these words in Greek.

(The NKJV is a notorious version with their doubt-casting footnotes which have the same devastating effect as if they just mutilated the text itself. Do you see they claim only 4 or 5 late manuscripts have the verse in them? We saw a lot more evidence than 4 or 5 which means they are deceiving their readers which means the NKJV also qualifies as a false version.)

 

It is ironic that your posts, while pointing out that some Greek manuscripts missed "Thou shalt not give false witness" because of accidental eye skip, is full of false witnesses.

Your post's are full of false witnesses. You should try to fact check your sources sometimes. Then you would not be guilty of passing along false witness at times.

 

No, it was intentional.

It's funny when you word it "When scribes deleted [the] text, it was accidental." When one deletes, it is removed. It is redacted in contemporary parlance.

 

You're suuure about this 'eye slip' thing, huh?

Did you want to say something?

 

Nope. The Trinity is not what they are witnessing to.

The Eternal Sovereign Triune Creator Godhead is testifying before the Universe and 'God and everybody' what is in I John 5:9-13;

9 "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.

10 "He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

11 "And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

12 "He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

13 "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."

THAT is why this is so important to The Dragon, that Old Serpent, to get rid of it IF he could. He can't though, can he?

 

Do you apply the same exact measures/standards to the KJV which in effect omits, removes, or deletes many original-language words of Scripture in its underlying texts since it gives no English rendering for them in the text of its verses although it sometimes gave one in the 1611 marginal notes?

Do you pretend that the KJV is a literal, word-for-word, every-word translation when it is not?

A Bible translation including the KJV does not take the actual same or identical original-language words that were given by inspiration of God and preserve them unaltered or unchanged and without any additions of men and without any omissions.

 

The 1611 edition of the KJV has some of the same type textual notes so do you make the same misleading accusation against it or do you demonstrate your use of double standards?

 

I use my Textual Commentary now and then, when there is a question.