Hi:

The Commentary produced by the Anchor Bible has a whole appendix devoted to the Comma deletist position in their volume on 1 John. They have amassed every argument they could find in order to prove the non-existence of the Comma. It is also quite hostile in its tone.

Metzger's points above have been answered quite comprehensively in books, and here at other threads. Here is a brief summary:

1) The lack of Greek manuscripts: So what? The Critical text includes as authoritative some readings that have even less of a Greek textual witness than the Comma. Matthew 11:19, for example, is changed in the CT on the basis of only Three Greek mss. Metzger does not mention Codex Wizenburgensis (Sp? - I am doing this from memory). Which, according to R.L. Dabney, "Lachman says is of the 8th Century." Why the omission? Finally, if the Critical Text is going to use passages that hold to minority readings, then their argument that this particular minority reading is invalid because it is a minority reading is counter-intuitive.

2) That it is not quoted by the early Greek Fathers is not an argument against the Comma. Everyone knows that the early Greek church was almost overrun by Arianism. We should expect that scribes hostile to the Trinity will dispute the passage, and seek to edit it out. Also, the controversy was concerning the Persons of the Trinity. The Arians/Modalists held that there was only one Person, and three "modes" in which this one Person expressed himself: Father, Son, and Spirit. The Orthodox held to One Divine Essence and Three distinct Persons in the Godhead. The Comma in reading "These three are one" could be interpreted from a modalistic viewpoint.

So, one can easily imagine the Early Church Fathers not using this particular passage in their arguments for Orthodoxy for the following two reasons: 1. They did not want to get into a long-winded debate about the inclusion of a disputed passage when there is clear testimony elsewhere. 2. If they did cite it, then they would have to explain why it refers to Three Persons and not three modes. Therefore, citing the passage would produce more controversy than it would solve.

Also, the Comma was cited at the Council of Carthage (circa 400 AD) and was used to support the doctrine of the Trinity - over 400 pastors (bishops) attended this Council from all over the Roman Empire. That Comma-deletists do not cite this information is indicative of a bias on their part.

3) This is just plain wrong: John Gill's Commentary on 1 John 5:7,8 points out that all (or the majority) of the ancient versions held the Comma. I am at Seminary now, and I do not have my copy of Gill's Commentary handy. The Comma was in the Waldensian Bible which Calvin refers to as among the "best copies" when he includes the Comma in his Commentary on the passage. The Waldensians used a varient of the Old Latin Bible of which Augustine said was the most exact copy of his time. The famous statement that Jerome makes concerning the Comma, "Irresponsible translators left out this testimony," is upheld as a genuine statement by Calvin as well.

Concerning his "internal probabliities" the first has been answered above (briefly). The second is disputed, and, consequently, does not carry much weight. Dabney, for example, points out that deleting the Comma produces an inconsistency in the text that cannot be resolved. Calvin also points out that the passage "flows better" with the Comma included.

Quite frankly, I do not believe that any argumentation on either side will convince one of the authenticity of the Comma. I believe that arguments can and should be used. However, the final arbiter of the Scriptures is not "scholarship" or "personal opinions," but the Spirit of God who works by and with the Word of God in our hearts. Consequently, I believe that the Comma was rendered delibertly vague as a means of testing your faith: Are you going to believe "scholars," or, are you going to believe the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit?

Grace and Peace,

Rob

__________________
In Essentials Unity, in non-Essentials Liberty, in all things Charity.

Robert Paul Wieland
Springs Reformed Presbyterian Church
Colorado Springs, CO RPCNA
Student at Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Pittsburgh PA
Never be afraid to do something new. Remember, amateurs built the Ark, but professionals built the Titanic.