Does 1 John 5:7,8 prove that there is a trinity,
or that Jesus is Yahweh (Jehovah)?
:
"For there are three that bear record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth,] the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."
(Words in brackets are spurious! They are not retained by any manuscripts of earlier date than the seventh century and are not in the Revised Version. One hundred and twelve of the oldest manuscripts do not retain them. Trinity thus loses its supposed main Scriptural support.)
This is the only passage in the whole Bible that gives any color to the trinity or "oneness" doctrines. However, the bracketed portion (see above) of this passage is almost universally recognized as an interpolation. It first crept into the Greek text in the fourteenth century. It is true that some late Latin, Vulgate MSS., copied not more than five centuries before, do contain it. This interpolation was first inserted into some Vulgate manuscript and was therefrom in the fourteenth century translated into the first Greek text having it. Had this text been in the Bible when the trinitarian controversies were going on, in the fourth to the eighth centuries, certainly the trinitarians who were hard pressed by their opponents to produce such a text, would have used it as a proof text. But none of them ever so used it, for the good reason that it was then not in the Bible. It doubtless crept into the Latin text by a copyist taking it from the margin, where it was written by somebody as his comment on the text, and inserting it into the Latin text itself, from which, as just said, it was first translated into a Greek manuscript in the fourteenth century. The next Greek manuscript that contains it is from the fifteenth century.
Additionally, Ivan Pain, who was a trinitarian, gave added testimony that the portion in question does not belong through his Biblical numerics. More than likely Panin, being a trinitarian, would like to have proved the portion as genuine with Biblical numerics, but could not do so; thus he came to the conlcusion that it must be spurious. Regarding Biblical Numerics, see: Epiphany Studies in the Scriptures, Volume 12 (1949, by Paul S. L. Johnson), pages 603-632, available from Laymen's Home Missionary Movement, P.O. Box 679, Chester Springs, PA 19425.
Regarding 1 John 5:7,8, Paul S. L. Johnson states: "Assuming that this text were genuine, it would not prove that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God; for the Greek word for 'one' here is 'hen,' and is neuter; and the masculine word Theos (Greek God) cannot be supplied after it; for the Greek word for one in that case would have to be heis (masculine for one). Nor can the Greek word for being (ousia) be supplied after it, because ousia is feminine, which would require the feminine of one, mia. If the passage were genuine we would have to supply a neuter noun, e.g., like pneuma (disposition), after hen in this text even as we have to do so in John 10:30: 'My Father and I are one' (hen) disposition. It could not be theos (God) or ousia (Being), which would respectively require the masculine heis and the feminine mia." -- Ephiphany Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. I - God, page 477.
The Father, Son, and holy spirit are one in disposition, one in heart, mind, and will; but not one God. The Bible nowhere states that there are three persons in one God. Nor does it ever say that there is a being called God who is more than one person. In the Bible, one person IS one personal being, and one personal being IS one person always, and never more than one.
It was Satan who, in producing a counterfeit for everything in the Bible, counterfeited the true God as one Being composed of three persons. This unbiblical, unreasonable and unfactual distinction between the words *person* and *being* when referring to a personal being should be avoided. It is surely an error invented by Satan to deceive -- a work of darkness, a self-contradiction, which no one can understand or explain, while Bible doctrines are all explainable and understandable.
Additionally, we might say, if the logic were valid that the Father's, Son's and holy spirit's oneness in John 5:7,8 must be that of being, we would have to say that Paul and Appolos were one being (1 Corinthians 3:6-8)! Of course they were two separate beings. Hen being used of them in 1 Corinthians 3:8 (not mia, which would be necessary to agree with the feminine ousia, being) proves that their oneness was not one of being but of spirit, disposition (Acts 4:32; 1 Corinthians 1:10; Ephesians 4:3-6,13; Philippians 1:27; 2:2; 4:2) Hence 1 John 5:7,8 does not by the Greek word hen prove that the Father, Son and holy spirit are one being any more than 1 Corinthians 3:8 proves by the word hen that Paul and Apollos were one being; but the same word and form of that word, proving Paul and Apollos to one in heart, mind and will, gives presumptive evidence that the same word and form that word in John 10:30 proves the same of the Father and Son.
But we have more than presumptive proof of this. When Jesus prayed (John 17:11,21,22) that all of the saints may be one (hen, not heis, nor mia) he did not pray that they be all one being, which would be nonsense, but that their unity may be one in mind, heart and will. Since the oneness for which He prayed for them was not a oneness of being, the oneness between Him and the Father cannot be that of being, because Jesus in John 17:11,22 prays that the oneness for which He prayed on their behalf be patterned after the oneness that exists between the Father and himself: "That they may be one as we are." Hence the oneness between the Father and Jesus is not one of being, but one of mind, heart and will. Moreoever Jesus defines this oneness in verse 21 as follows: "that they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me [Yahweh was in Jesus by his holy spirit, disposition, (John 14:17,20) and I in thee [Jesus was in the Father (John 14:10,11,20) by accepting and keeping the Father as his head, i.e,, by his being and remaining in the consecrated attitude. (1 Corinthians 3:23; 11:3 are passages that also strongly prove Jesus' inferiority to the Father, and the Father's being the Supreme Being)], that [thus the Father and the Son, by their spirit, disposition, being in them and they by their spirit of consecration, being in them (1 John 5:20; Colossians 3:3; 1 Corinthians 12:12,13] they also may be one in us . . . that they may be one, even as we are one." Thus these verses prove that the same kind of oneness as exists between the saints, also exists between the Father and Son and vice versa. Therefore, since the oneness that exists between the saints is not one of being, but one of heart, mind, and will, the oneness that exists between the Father and Sons is not one of being, but one of will, heart, and mind.
Futhermore, if the Father and the Son were but one being, they could not be the two beings bearing required witness, as John 8:17,18 says they were, since the law required at least two different beings to be witnesses sufficient to establish a matter. But since they gave sufficient witness, they must be two beings. Therefore their oneness is not that of being -- for they are two beings. It must be that of mind, heart and will. Accordingly, John 10:30 does not prove the Son's equality with the Father. Rather, it proves the Son's subordination to the Father. John 17:21, which shows the kind of unity that exists between them to be connected with the Son's being in the Father, implies that the Father is the Son's head that the Son is His in the sense that believers are Christ's, in subordination to him. Thus Jesus must be subordinate to the Father (1 Corinthians 3:23; 11:3), even as the headship of Christ makes the Church subordinate to Christ (Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:22,23; 4:15; 5:23,24, compared with Colossians 3:19).
The above was adapted from the book entitled GOD (1938, by Paul S. L. Johnson), pages 476-478, 516-518, available from Laymen's Home Missionary Movement, P.O. Box 679, Chester Springs, PA 19425.
For more information about the trinity and oneness doctrines, see: Related Books:
PLEASE NOTE: The following books are given as sources of more information on the above topic. The opinions and conclusions given in the books are those of the author(s) and does not necessarily reflect our conclusions.
Concepts of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by Matthew Alfs
Amazon's Description: Subtitled "A Classification and Description of the Trinitarian and Non-Trinitarian Theologies Existent Within Christendom," this is a theological and historical handbook of how the variety of Christian denominations have defined and viewed God the Father, Christ the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit. Detailed and penetrating, it demonstrates how Christendom's many denominations and sects have differed and even powerfully clashed in explicating this so-called "central doctrine of the Christian faith," often with heated verbal sparring and sometimes by inflicting physical violence on opposers. Objective in tone, which is rare for a work of this sort, this careful study encourages the reader to draw his or her own conclusions. Unlike apologetic works, which often quote what critics say about variant denominational theologies, this work allows the plethora of denominations to speak for themselves. The author further solicited comments from many denominational headquarters to clarify and expand upon material from their available published works. It can truly be said that no stone has been left unturned in order to provide the reader with full and complete coverage of the subject. Includes 355 references and a detailed index. Sturdy libary binding, brown cloth with gold-embossed ccover illustration. 104pp.