Follow Up: Codex Montfortianus, Erasmus, and 1 John 5:7

By | 2016-11-03T19:41:35+00:00 June 17th, 2016|Categories: Comma Johanneum, Confessional Textual View, Erasmus, Erasmus Myths, Greek Language, Post Slider on Main Page|Tags: , , , , , , |

In a previous article I addressed the issue of Codex Montfortianus and Erasmus and showed that the so called “British” Codex that Erasmus used could not be Codex Montfortianus.  I was pleased to find out that Dr. White responded to my article during his Dividing Line on June 16.  However, his comments were not as helpful as I had hoped.  He has completely missed the point of my post and did not address […]

NT Manuscripts Made to Order (Erasmus and I Jn5.7)

By | 2016-11-03T19:41:35+00:00 June 15th, 2016|Categories: Comma Johanneum, Erasmus, Erasmus Myths, Greek Language, history, Home Page Slider, Post Slider on Main Page, Textual Criticism|Tags: , , , , , |

It is commonly known that Erasmus did not include a large section of 1 John 5:7 in the 1st and 2nd Editions of his Greek New Testament.  This is the so called Comma Johanneum,  “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” (KJV) Despite being accepted as Scripture by Christians for millenia, Erasmus did not include it because he could not […]

A Short Response to James White

By | 2017-05-01T05:48:00+00:00 June 13th, 2016|Categories: Confessional Textual View, Home Page Slider, James White, Post Slider on Main Page, Preservationist Textual Criticism, Textual Criticism|Tags: , , , , , , |

Faulty Facts and Assumptions

On Thursday, June 9th, James White posted in the Reformed Pub about the Comma Johanneum.  Like most of Mr. White’s previous interactions with those of us that hold to the Confessional view of Scripture, Mr. White failed to understand the key difference between our position and his, he then claimed victory, and did a Dividing Line episode engaging in ad hominems.  This time however he was called out for his […]

Five Considerations About Arguments Based on Stylistic Differences

By | 2016-11-03T19:41:40+00:00 June 6th, 2016|Categories: Pericope de Adulterae, Post Slider on Main Page, Textual Criticism|Tags: , , , |

How should we think about arguments against the traditional human authorship of a certain passage or book of Scripture based on style and word choice, such as this one by Bart Ehrman: “its writing style is very different from what we find in the rest of John (including the stories immediately before and after); and it includes a large number of words and phrases that are otherwise alien to the Gospel” (Misquoting Jesus, […]

Four Reasons to Reject the Floating Tradition Argument Against the Pericope Adulterae

By | 2016-11-03T19:41:40+00:00 May 20th, 2016|Categories: Home Page Slider, Pericope de Adulterae, Post Slider on Main Page, Textual Criticism|Tags: , |

The “floating tradition” argument against the authenticity of the Pericope Adulterae (PA), John 7:53-8:11, is summarized well by Bruce Metzger in 1964, “The pericope is obviously a piece of floating tradition which circulated in certain parts of the Western Church. It was subsequently inserted into various manuscripts at various places” (Text Of The New Testament, pg. 320). The argument attempts to capitalize on the fact that the woman caught in adultery […]

The Apostles and Prophets: Secretaries of the Holy Ghost

By | 2016-11-03T19:41:40+00:00 May 16th, 2016|Categories: Confessional Textual View, Home Page Slider, Inspiration, Organic Inspiration, Post Slider on Main Page, Reformed Inspiration|Tags: , , , , , , , , |

“The Scripture is the Word of God written in a language fit for the Church by men immediately called to be the Clerkes, or Secretaries of the Holy Ghost, 2 Peter 1:21: ‘For prophecie came not in old time by the will of man, but the holy men of God spake as they were carried and mooved by the holy Ghost.‘”

William Perkins, Works, 2:647.

Orthodox Christians all affirm that every word of Scripture has been completely […]