ESV?

He who breaks the peace and the concord of Christ, does so in opposition to Christ; he who gathereth elsewhere than in the Church, scatters the Church of Christ. The Lord says, “I and the Father are one;” and again it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, “And these three are one.”5
Cyprian of Carthage, “On the Unity of the Church,” in Fathers of the Third Century: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Novatian, Appendix, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, trans. Robert Ernest Wallis, vol. 5, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1886), 423.

 

so Cyprian clearly refers NOT to verse 8, but 7!

Dr Frederick Scrivener, who , though he did not accept the text of 1 John 5:7 as being that of the Apostle, had this to say of the evidence of Cyprian. “It is surely safer and more candid to admit that Cyprian read ver. 7 in his copies, than to resort to the explanation of Facundus [vi], that the holy Bishop was merely putting on ver.8 a spiritual meaning” (A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, vol. II, p.405)

 

Yet verse 8 is what he quotes....

 

why don't you take a look at the Latin I have quoted, and then show HOW he could have quoted verse 8?

 

LOL bc the actual part of the statement that is a quote comes from verse 8 directly.

 

@SavedByGrace you also need to look at the fact that the comma statement comes out of nowhere in the context of the whole, it makes no sense for it to be there.

 

All scholars and learned people know that the words do not belong there and intrusion from the Latin Vulgate. The only ones that don't know better are King James onlyist and apparently yourself. The coma has no chance whatsoever to be original. Your loyalty to the words are only theological. It is clear even reading an English that they are an intrusion they were inserted by Latin scribes. They are not in the oldest Latin editions but are added more and more as time goes by.

 

Nothing to do with theology. I have shown beyond any doubt that the Greek grammar from verses 6 to 10 says that the words are part of the original Letter. If anyone can prove this wrong, please feel free to

 

Maybe to your mind

 

The grammar shows that it was part of the original that is the most ridiculous statement ever.

 

No, it's that way to anyone who actually reads the context of the whole passage.

 

You do not know Greek better than all Greek scholars and all Greek scribes throughout history. Are all Greek scholars and all as in every ancient Greek scribe wrong and you are right?

 

Did you read the link I posted earlier

 

don't need to. It's irrelevant.

 

Now you are talking nonsense

 

The Textual Problem in 1 John 5:7-8 | Bible.org

 

Because you know that your knowledge of Greek grammar will not be able to prove it wrong

 

Wallace is WRONG

 

it's so laughable. Again, the grammar has nothing to do with it. The fact is it was never in the original. It doesn't show up in manuscripts to the 1500s. Manuscripts that have it, and most of them have it as a marginal note. It was not in the original.

 

prove it.