In Further Proof of the Authenticity of 1 Jn 5v7

By | 2016-06-16T15:58:47+00:00 June 16th, 2016|0 Comments


THE controversy respecting the authenticity of 1 John v. 7- originated from Erasmus's omission of the verse in his first and second editions of the Greek Testament. It was omitted by him, because it was not
contained in the MSS. from which he printed those editions ; but it was extant in the Latin Version ; nor had its authenticity ever been questioned, before the omission of it by Erasmus, and his defence of his editions. It was however restored to the text by him in his third edition, on the authority of a manuscript found in England, which contained the verse.


From that time to the present, the verse has been rejected as spurious, or defended as authentic, according to the different views, which have been taken of it and of its evidences by learned men, both unbelievers in the doctrine of the verse and believers. In the sixteenth century its chief opponents were Socinus, Blandrata, and the Fratres Poloni ; its defenders, Ley, Beza, Bellarmine, and Sixtus Senensis. In the seventeenth century its authenticity was denied by Sandius and Simon, and asserted by Gerhardus, Hammond, Bull and Grabe.  In the eighteenth century the verse was maintained by Mill and Bengelius, and opposed by Wetstein, Griesbach, and Mr. Porson, the Vindication of whose Letters to Archdeacon Travis by Crito Cantabrigiensis has given occasion to the following Tract.


About the Author:

I hold to the historic Confessional view of Scripture as found in Chapter 1 of the WCF/2LBCF. I reject Restorationist Textual Criticism and affirm Preservationist Textual Criticism

Leave A Comment