[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
regard to Metzger s blanket generalization of the Syriac version. Tremellius translated
the Comma from Greek into Syriac and placed it in the margin of his codex, as most
modern accounts boldly announce, but he left a blank space in the text where the passage
142
Maynard, 15-16. For a specific identification of these five Syriac editions, one should consult page
51* of the UBS4.
143
Jaqub of Edessa, On the Holy (Eucharistic) Mysteries, translated by R.E. Brown in The Anchor
Bible; Epistles of John (New York: Doubleday and Co., 1982), 778.
Corruption Unveiled 62
should appear.144 Modern scholars such as Scrivener and Metzger will not mention this.
If Tremellius was so sure about the spuriousness of the verse, why did he take the time to
translate it? Better yet, why did he place it in the margin, hesitate to disturb the verse
numbering, and leave a blank space for it? Tremellius must have been aware of its
presence in the Syriac tradition. He himself wrote:
But because it was omitted not only in the printed version, but only in the manuscript Heidelberg
codex, nor was read in all the old Greek codices, I did not dare to insert it into the text. So in
order that there might not be a disturbance of the verses, and so that their numbers may correspond
to the numbers on the verses of the Greek text, I have passed from the sixth to the eighth verse.145
As Maynard correctly concludes:
How often is a blank space provided for 1 John v.7f in an English translation today, let alone a
Greek edition? The four questions together could indicate that Tremellius must have had doubts.
His actions are not in accord with his words. Perhaps, with a blank space, he wanted not only to
retain the correspondence with numbers but to ensure that a future Syriac editor would not
overlook this spot. (Modern editors do not hesitate over a disturbance of the verses. They
merely split verse six in half.)146
Another Syriac edition worthy of consideration is Gutbier s Lexicon Syricum
concerdatntiale omnes N.T. Syriaci which appeared in 1664. This version contains the
Comma as well as Acts 8:37, another non-majority reading from the Textus Receptus that
is always omitted by modern scholars, including the UBS editors. Also, of notable
importance, is the fact that the Old Syriac has Textus Receptus readings for Matthew
6:13; Luke 2:33; 23:42; and John 9:35, against the UBS4.147 It is very possible that the
Syriac also agreed with the Textus Receptus on its rendering of I John 5:7-8 as well.
After all, as Maynard shows, several indexes include numerous Syriac manuscripts as
containing the fifth chapter of I John, some even dating back to the sixth century.
144
Maynard, 96.
145
Tremellius words were provided and translated by Rykle Borger into German in Das Comma
Johanneum in der Peschitta, in Novum Testamentum XXXIX, 3 (1987) 280-284. Michael Maynard, in
turn, translated Borger s German into English (A History of the Debate Over 1 John 5:7-8 , 95).
146
Maynard, 96.
147
Ruckman, James White s Seven Errors in the King James Bible--Errors 6 & 7, 3.
Corruption Unveiled 63
Unfortunately, these have been neglected, and it remains unknown as to whether or not
they contain the Comma.148 Therefore, Metzger cannot legitimately claim that the
passage is not found in the Old Syriac version, especially since he has obviously not
evaluated all the evidence. Jaqub of Edessa, Tremellius, and Gutbier had to get the
Comma from somewhere.
Metzger s presentation of the evidence from the Old Latin Version is misleading.
Metzger also says that the Comma does not appear in the Old Latin in its earliest form
(Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustine). This too, is a deceptive statement, for both Tertullian
(ca. 200 A.D) and Cyprian (ca. 250) cite or make an allusion to the passage. If they did
not have it in their Latin manuscripts, where did they get it from? Tertullian is not cited
as a witness to the Comma in the critical apparatus of the UBS4. However, less than a
century after the death of John the Apostle (possibly as early as A.D. 200), Tertullian
wrote:
. . .which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons--the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but
in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power,
inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.149
This is a clear reference to the teaching found in the Comma. Athanasius (ca. A.D. 350)
is likewise not mentioned in the criticus apparaticus. However, according to R.E.
Brown, Athanasius quotes the passage at least three times in his works.150 Around A.D.
250, Cyprian wrote, 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. 151 Cyprian,
148
Maynard, 334-339
149
Tertullian, Against Praxeas, II-- Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1971), 3: 598.
150
R.E. Brown, The Anchor Bible; Epistles of John (New York: Doubleday and Co., 1982), 782.
151
Cyprian, De catholicae ecclesiae unitae (CSEL 3:215)--Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translation of the
Writings of the Church Fathers down to A.D. 325 (New York: Charles Scribner s Sons, 1926), 5:423.
Corruption Unveiled 64
less than two hundred years after the writing of I John, is quoting the Johannine Comma.
He must have got it from the Old Latin which is pretty early in spite of what Metzger
says, for even he admits that Our information concerning the Old Latin translation of the
New Testament is very defective . . . 152
The Old Latin translations of the New Testament are very important in establishing the
authenticity of I John 5:7-8, for Latin was the major language up through the Middle
Ages. The Old Latin is not the same as the Latin of Jerome s Vulgate, which by the way,
does include the Comma. The Old Latin predates the Vulgate text and is found well into
the Middle Ages. Did the Old Latin consistently contain the Johannine Comma? For the
answer to this question, one must turn to the Tepl Codex, a fourteenth century manuscript
written in Middle High German. This Codex is significant because the Tepl Codex
actually predates a pre-Jerome text from a non-Vulgate MS, w. 153 Metzger
acknowledges that w contains Old Latin readings in Acts and the Catholic Epistles. 154
It comes as no surprise that the Tepl contains the Comma exactly as it is found in the
Textus Receptus. As Maynard argues, its text has a remarkable longevity into the 15th
century. This indicates that German MSS ought not to be dismissed as mere copies of
Latin Vulgate MSS. 155 According to Elliot, the Tepl comes from the Old Latin and has
its affinity with w (an Old Latin manuscript from the 15th century).156 Latin manuscript
w is dated to the 15th century while the Tepl is dated to the 14th. Had this been reversed,
the German Tepl would be regarded with much less value. But, as it is, this Codex
152
Bruce Metzger, The Early Versions of the New Testament Text; Their Origin, Transmission, and
Limitations (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977), 285.
153
Maynard, 62.
154
Metzger, Early Versions, 304.
155
Maynard, 62.
156
J. K. Elliot, Old Latin MSS in NT Editions, in A Survey of Manuscripts Used in Editions of the
Greek New Testament (New York: E. J. Brill, 1987), 280.
Corruption Unveiled 65
actually predates a pre-Jerome Latin text (w). The Tepl and the Old Lain manuscripts
together provide pre-Reformation support for non-majority readings of the Authorized
Version. 157 The Tepl not only contains I John 5:7-8 as it is found in the Textus
Receptus, but Acts 8:37; 9:5-6; and 15:34, all of which are omitted in the UBS4.
The Old Latin from which the Tepl descended is also found in the manuscripts of the [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]