I have many KJV Only brothers in Christ who deny they were included in the original KJV which is not true. It was included and later with the next edition decided to remove them and this is the KJV we have now following the 5 revisions.
It’s just like the Johanine Comma, there was no reason to include it, but for reasons unknown Erasmus decided to include it.
Personally, I don’t think they are inspired (not that my opinion matters. lol!) and they seem more like extra-biblical literature.
God bless you brother!
Erasmus had very good reasons to include the verse. He was only using the Greek texts that he had direct access to, which meant that for his first couple revisions he was forced to use deficient texts that omitted it. When he had a Greek text that included the verse the situation was entirely different.
There are some factors to consider here:
- The verse is well supported by quotes from early fathers and writings, including Cyprian, Priscillian, and the Varimadum (dated 285, 385, and 380 A.D. respectively).
- Tertullian references the verse far earlier than this in 213 A.D. in his writing “Against Praxaes” and from the context of the writing, it seems that Tertullian’s theological opponents used the verse as well. Tertullian was arguing against their reading of the verse, so why would he do this if he could simply argue that the reading was not authentic?
- Jerome complained about a tendency in his scribes to omit the verse from their copies when they were constructing the Latin Vulgate. How could he do this if the verse did not exist when he spoke?
- The verse is well preserved in the early Latin copies, and although it has suffered omission in most surviving Greek manuscripts, it has survived in enough of them to provide a reading for consideration as a possible legitimate minority text. Sometimes minority texts are legitimate.
- There are reasonable explanations reasons why the verse could have suffered omission in the majority of Greek texts. Not only does the passage in 1 John seem repetitive which the scribal eye could inadvertently omit, but the Arians (and even others) would have been glad to have removed this verse on purpose.
- When comparing the only two possibilities from the surviving Greek texts, the majority reading (lacking verse 7) is grammatically incorrect. This was even specifically observed by Gregory of Nizianus, who commented on the unusual structure of three neuter nouns being supported by a male participle. On the other hand, the minority reading that includes verse 7 is grammatically correct, which lends great support to its authenticity.
No other alternative Greek text of 1 John has come forward that solves this grammatical problem. Grammar is the “check sum” of written language. The majority text that lacks verse seven fails this “check sum” test.
- The chapter does not even make much sense with verse 7 omitted. Why would John say that “the witness of God is greater” than the “witness of men” if he had not just previously described the “witness of God?” This is a classification called “internal evidence” and is synonymous as if you heard a “skip” in an audio recording. The recording without the “skip” is more likely to be legitimate.
This particular verse seems to be a “hot button topic” among many. Unfortunately, few actually research this, and the most guilty are those claiming to be the “scholars” who typically misrepresent the issue and ignore whole classes of evidence. Another faction are those who are vehemently oppose the deity of Christ (the reading is favorable to both Trinity and Oneness models of God, but stands in contradiction to other perspectives.)
Bible commentator Adam Clarke gives false information on this section, saying that it is scarcely supported by the Latin. Bible commentator Matthew Henry has a section on the internal evidence supporting the verse, and John Gill speaks of the external evidence (early Fathers, grammar, and so forth.) The verse was included in the Douay-Rheims Bible and the English tradition of William Tyndale through the King James Version.
1Jn 5:7-9 Douay-Rheims Bible
(7) And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.
(8) And there are three that give testimony on earth: the spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one.
(9) If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater. For this is the testimony of God, which is greater, because he hath testified of his Son.
1Jn 5:7-9 King James Version
(7) 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.
(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.
Regardless of whether your “King James Only” brethren are able to aptly defend the verse or not, there are great many reasons to rule in favor of its authenticity, and very few (majority text of the Greek, ignoring the Latin) to reason in favor of its omission, and there is no evidence for the conspiracy theory that has been constructed to justify removing this verse.
- It is cited by the early Fathers and writings,
- it is well documented in the Latin,
- it has survived in some Greek texts,
- the grammar of the Greek demands it,
- and the immediate context insists upon it.
For the record, I wanted to make a mention that the question of the legitimate of the Apocryphal Books and 1 John 5:7 are in different arenas. The inclusion or exclusion of one does not affect the other.
