Truth Magazine

By Hoyt H. Houchen

Faith is the need of the hour. From the pen of John we read, “For whatsoever is begotten of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that hath overcome the world, even our faith” (1 Jn. 5:4). In a world of doubt and unbelief, a world of atheism, infidelity, and agnosticism, the emphasis upon faith is most timely. We need faith in ourselves, in our country, in our fellow man, but more important and basic to everything, is the need for our faith in God. This indeed is the victory of the Christian as he strives to please God in a society where sin is rampant.

That faith is essential to salvation, no Bible believer denies. Many are the passages in the New Testament which teach that we are saved by faith (Mk. 16:16; Jn. 3:16, 18, 36; Acts 16:31; Rom. 5:1; Heb. 11:6 etc.). The issue that divides us in the religious world is not whether we are saved by faith, but rather, “What is faith and at what point is one saved by faith?” We can well ask, “By what kind of faith is the believer saved?” This the real issue.

In their efforts to prove their doctrine of “faith only” the idea that one is saved the moment he believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (and without any further acts of obedience), denominationalists turn to passages in the New Testament which only mention faith. Their conclusion is that salvation is by faith only.

This study is confined to a few specific texts in the epistle of First John which are relied upon to prove the doctrine of “faith only.” The first passage in the epistle in which the exercise of faith is mentioned is:

1 John 3:23

“And this is his commandment, that we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, even as he gave us commandment.” This verse teaches faith, but it does not teach “faith only.” It is significant, in the first place, that John is addressing Christians. This faith is to be active in the life of God’s children as it continues to work through love (Gal. 5:6). Faith and practice, two inseparable conditions for becoming a Christian, are also essential after one has become a Christian. The “faith only” adherents fail to recognize faith as a work (Jn. 6:29); it is not man’s work, but the work of God in that He provided it as a necessary condition for man’s salvation. Faith works through love. Jesus said in His discourse to His disciples, “If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments” (Jn. 14:15). John wrote in his first epistle, “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments . . .” (1 Jn. 5:3). All through this epistle, the author urges his readers to love one another (2:10; 3:11, 13 etc.). This love, which is continuous, is prompted by belief. One can not believe without loving, nor love without believing. Belief and love go hand in hand. Since love is the keeping of God’s commandments, as we have seen (1 Jn. 5:3), therefore to believe is not merely acknowledging Jesus Christ, but submitting to the other necessary conditions of salvation. These conditions are repentance (Acts 17:30), a confession that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (Acts 8:37), and baptism for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). To believe in the name of Jesus Christ is to believe in all that is revealed about Christ, to accept Him for what He is and for all that He does. Those who rely upon 1 Jn. 3:23 as a proof text for “faith only” fail to consider the fact that John is writing to Christians, and they also miss the point of what is involved in belief.

1 John 5:1

“Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God . . . .” The advocates of “faith only” contend that this verse teaches that one is saved before he is baptized. Again, as in all of these faith passages in John’s first epistle, he is addressing Christians, not aliens. John was dealing with a problem. Some denied the deity of Christ by denying that Jesus was the Christ. Others denied His humanity by denying that Christ was Jesus. Still others believed that the fleshly body of Christ was only a phantom. John was showing who was the genuine child of God. The true child of God would confess that Jesus is the Christ (1 Jn. 4:2, 3). He thereby acknowledged both His deity and His humanity. By confessing that Jesus came in the flesh, he also acknowledged His reality. So, in this passage a line of demarcation is drawn between true believers and heretics. John was not giving a condition for becoming a child of God, in the first place. He was simply pointing out who is the real child of God in contrast to the one who merely claimed to be.

An interesting consideration at this point is the dilemma in which the “faith only” adherents place themselves. We have already observed that John is addressing those already baptized – Christians. But the believer is not the only one who is said to be begotten of God. In this same epistle John declares that, “everyone that loveth is begotten of God” (1 Jn. 4:7). The apostle tells us that whoever believes is begotten of God (1 Jn. 5:1) and everyone who loves is begotten of God (1 Jn. 4:7). If 1 Jn. 5:1 teaches that one who believes is saved before he is baptized, then we simply ask, which comes first – faith or love? If faith comes first and one is begotten of God the moment he believes, then he is begotten of God before he loves God. If love comes first then one is begotten of God before he believes. The argument is made that because one believes before he is baptized and the one that believes is born of indestructible God, therefore one is born of God before he is baptized. But the same argument would prove that one is born before he loves, or he is born before he believes. The argument proves too much, and what proves too much does not prove anything.

Who is the one begotten of God? Other statements in this first epistle reveal to us that the one who is begotten of God is not the one who only believes without any further acts of obedience. We have already seen that the one who loves is begotten of God (4:7). We consider other statements. “He that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also” (2:23). “Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God” (4:3). “Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God” (4:15). “He that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him” (3:24). “And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar and the truth is not in him (2:3, 4). “Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous” (3:7).

By summing up the foregoing statements we learn who is saved or born of God. (1) He is the one who believes, (2) the one who loves, (3) the one who acknowledges or confesses Christ, (4) the one who keeps the commandments of God and (5) the one who does righteousness. These statements are all found in the same book. Will the “faith only” advocates who use 1 John 5:1 as a proof text of who is born of God, accept these other verses also? They are found in the same epistle.

Faith includes obedience. “But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith apart from works is barren? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, in that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar? Thou seest that faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect; and the scripture was fulfilled which saith, And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness; and he was called the friend of God. Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith. And in like manner was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works, in that she received the messengers, and sent them another way? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, even so faith apart from works is dead” (Jas. 2:20-26). So, saving faith is obedient faith. Since faith without works is barren – unfruitful, it follows that the faith referred to in 1 John 5:1 is an obedient faith – a faith that takes God at His word and does what God says to do and in the way that God says to do it.

1 John 5:4

“For whatsoever is begotten of God overcometh the world: and this the victory that hath overcome the world, even our faith.” Again, John is addressing Christians. Here he is encouraging them in the midst of their hardships. In spite of these, they will conquer their foes by faith. “Faith is the Victory,” and as we sing this song, we are reminded of the words in 1 John 5:4. This verse does not hint the idea, much less teach the doctrine, that one is saved when he believes and that before baptism.

1 John 5:5

“And who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus Christ is the Son of God?” The proposition is that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Again, John is not presenting a condition before ON is a child of God. He is pointing out that the true child of God is the one who believes this proposition. He confesses both the humanity (Jesus) and the deity (the Son of God). Here is the conqueror of the world in contrast to the one who denies the truth that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Thus, this verse does not teach that one is saved by “faith only.”

1 John 5:10

“He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in him: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he hath not believed in the witness that God hath borne concerning his Son.” When one refuses to believe God’s testimony upon any matter, it makes God a liar. How much then does it do so when one refuses to believe God’s testimony about His own Son? God declared Jesus to be the Son of God (Matt. 3:17; 17:5 etc.). To disbelieve that Jesus is the Son of God is to discredit the witness who is God Himself. John is not teaching here, nor anywhere else, that we are saved by “faith only.”

1 John 5:13

“These things have I written unto you, that you malt have eternal life, even unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God.” Again, in this text, as in all others which mention faith or belief, those who believe and teach “faith only” must prove that the faith or belief is separate and apart from any other act of obedience. This they cannot do. Those who are assured of eternal life are those who continue to believe all that Jesus is and does. Eternal life is conditional – dependent upon a continued faith or belief on the name of the Son of God. To conclude that one is saved by “faith only” before baptism is a mere assumption without proof. It is a complete removal of faith from the context of the entire epistle, and an ignorance of what is involved in faith.

Conclusion

The saved believer is the baptized believer. Luke records the conversion of the jailor in Acts 16. He asked the important question, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (vs. 30). They commanded him, “Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved” (vs. 31). They then spoke the word of the Lord to him” (vs. 32). Faith is produced by the preaching of the word (Rom. 10:17), so they preached to him so that he could believe. He then took them the same hour of the night, washed their stripes and was baptized. “And he brought them up into his house, and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, with all his house, having believed in God” (vs. 34). Notice the phrase: “having believed in God.” His belief was consummated by his acts of obedience – repentance and baptism. Here is a plain example that the saved believer is the baptized believer.

All conditions of salvation must be summed up and accepted as a whole. Those who believe that salvation is by “faith only” make the fatal mistake of basing their doctrine upon passages which mention faith without considering passages which mention other conditions. When they see a verse that mentions “faith” they assume that it means “faith only.” They fail to realize that all conditions must be accepted as a whole. Repentance saves (Acts 2:38), a confession that Jesus Christ is the Son of God saves (Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:10), and baptism saves (1 Pet. 3:21).

We have examined the so-called “faith only” texts in 1 John and not one of them teaches the doctrine of “faith only.” There is not a passage in the Bible that teaches it. When all will acknowledge that truth is harmonious and that it must be derived by considering all passages upon a given subject, much division and confusion will be eliminated.

Truth is the most valuable commodity on the market today because the salvation of the human soul is dependent upon it. With open hearts may we ever seek it, obey it, and live by it.

QUESTIONS

1. Why is faith important? What is the issue of faith?
2. What is the significance of faith and love in 1 Jn. 3:23?
3. What does it mean to believe in the name of Jesus Christ?
4. What is the problem with which John is dealing in 1 Jn. 5:1?
5. How do “faith only” adherents place themselves in a dilemma with regard to faith and love?
6. Name some other things by which we are said to be begotten.
7. Prove that faith includes obedience.
8. What kind of believer is the saved believer?
9. What is the basic error of those who teach “faith only”?
10. What principle of interpretation will eliminate confusion and division?

Guardian of Truth XXV: 15, pp. 227-230
April 9, 1981

By Johnny Stringer

The idea that one can maintain his relationship with God and continue to be counted righteous in God’s sight, even while he is persisting in sin, is patently false. In the verses under consideration in this article, John makes clear the necessity of living righteously, not sinfully.

Abiding In Christ Involves Not Sinning

In verse 6 the apostle writes, “Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not.” Does this mean that he never commits a single act of sin? No, it cannot mean that, for this would contradict John’s teaching in 1 John 1:7-2:2, where he teaches that all of us sin at times. These verses show that even the one who walks in the light sins occasionally, so that he must be cleansed by the blood of Christ. The one who walks in the light, therefore, is not one who never commits an act of sin; rather, he is one whose general walk is in accordance with God’s word, and who, when he does occasionally sin, renounces it, seeking God’s pardon on God’s terms so as to be cleansed.

Since John’s statement cannot mean that the one who abides in Christ never commits a single act of sin, it must mean that sinning is not his way of life. Greek scholars confirm this conclusion. They affirm that the verb used by John denotes habitual action, not a single act of sin. The famous B.F. Wescott says, “It describes a character, `a prevailing habit.’ ” John’s meaning might be illustrated by the statement, “I do not drive fast.” When I make that statement, I mean that I do not make a practice of driving fast, but this does not rule out the possibility that I might drive fast in an exceptional situation, such as an emergency trip to the doctor.

The one who abides in Christ, then, does not continue in sin; sin is not his way of life. If he occasionally commits a sin in a time of weakness, he does not persist in it; rather, with a penitent heart he seeks God’s forgiveness on God’s terms (Acts 8:22; 1 John 1:9). It is clear, therefore, that the one who persists in sin is out of Christ. One simply cannot persist in sin and maintain his relationship with Christ. This point is reaffirmed in 1 John 3:24. The significance of this point is obvious in view of the declaration, “Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord” (Rev. 14:3). In order to die in the Lord, we must first live in the Lord; but those who live in sin are out of the Lord, hence will not enjoy the blessings that will come to those who die in Him.

Persistent Sinner Does Not See or Know Jesus

Continuing in verse 6 to show the necessity of not practicing sin, John asserts, “Whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.” Again, the verb “sinneth” denotes habitual action, so that John is speaking of the one who continues in sin, not the one who commits a sin on an exceptional occasion and then corrects it: Perhaps this was written in reply to those who claimed to have special insight and knowledge and a special relationship with Jesus, yet persisted in sinfulness. Their claims were false.

Does this mean that one who has ever at any point in the past seen or known Jesus will simply never go into a life of sin? Does it mean that if one goes into a life of sin, his sinfulness is proof that he never really knew Jesus in the first place? No, this cannot be the meaning, for such an interpretation would contradict other passages such as 2 Pet. 2:20-22. In that passage Peter speaks of those who have known Jesus and thereby escaped the pollutions of the world, yet have returned to a life of sin, so that their latter end is worse than the beginning. Peter thus pictures some who live in sin even though they have known Jesus in the past.

We must conclude, therefore, that when John says they haven’t known or seen Him, he must mean that they haven’t continued to know or see Him. This conclusion is verified by the testimony of Greek scholars regarding the verbs used in this verse. They are in the perfect tense. Concerning this tense, Marshall says, “The Greek perfect can generally be taken as represented by an English present: a past action continuing in its effect down to the present, in contrast to an action wholly in the past” (The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, p. vii). Machen states, “The Greek perfect tense denotes the present state resultant upon a past action” (New Testament Greek for Beginners, p. 187). Machen goes on to say that the perfect tense is never used unless the past action had a permanent result. John’s usage of the perfect tense, therefore, proves that he does not mean that the habitual sinner has never at any time seen or known Jesus; he means that the sinner has not continued to see or know Him. In commenting on this verse, the eminent Greek scholar B.F. Wescott says, “The point regarded is present and not past . . . . It deals with the actual state of the man. Past sight and past knowledge cease to be unless they go forward” (The Epistles of St. John, p. 104).

Must Do Righteousness

In verse 7 John affirms, “Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.” We have learned that the persistent sinner is out of Christ and has not continued to see or know Jesus. Here we learn that he is not regarded as righteous in God’s sight. It is the man that does righteousness that God regards as righteous.

Doing righteousness in this verse does not have reference to sinless perfection. As we have already discussed, all of us sin on occasion, and there are provisions for forgiveness (1 John 1:7-2:1). Doing righteousness is the same as walking in the light, the meaning of which we have already explained. The one who does righteousness is the same as the one that sinneth not (v. 6). As explained in our discussion of that verse, the reference is to a general way of life. His way of life is not to sin, but to live righteously; and when he does occasionally sin, he does not persist in it, but penitently turns from it and seeks God’s forgiveness (Acts 8:22; 1 John 1:9). The one who lives such a generally righteous life is counted righteous, not because he has lived a perfectly righteous life, but because of the forgiveness that one receives who does not persist in unrighteous conduct, but meets God’s conditions to be pardoned of his occasional sins (1 John 1:7-9).

Note that John says not to let any man deceive us about this matter. John recognized the danger of being deceived by false teachers who would lead us to believe that we can persist in unrighteous, sinful actions, and still be regarded as righteous in God’s sight. There are those today who would deceive us into believing that pernicious error, even among our own brethren. We have brethren who tell us that we stand righteous in God’s sight, not through doing righteousness, but through having the perfect righteousness of Christ imputed to us – that is, through receiving credit for the perfectly righteous life that Christ lived. This means that when God looks at us He will not see certain sins in which we impenitently persist, and which we refuse to correct; rather, he will see the righteous life that Christ lived, and give us credit for His righteousness. Don’t you believe it! According to John, it is the one who does righteousness -not the one who persists in some unrighteous actions but gets credit for our Lord’s righteousness – that stands righteous in God’s sight.

Summing up these verses, the one who persists in sin is in a tragic position. He is out of Christ, he doesn’t see or know Jesus, and he is not regarded as righteous in God’s sight.

QUESTIONS

1. According to v. 6, the one who abides in Christ does not ever commit an act of sin. True or False
2. One who persists impenitently in sin is out of Christ. True or False
3. What verse shows the importance of being in Christ when we die?
4. What kind of action is denoted by the verb “sinneth” in v. 6?
5. Give a passage which contradicts the idea that if one lives a life of sin, his sinfulness proves he never really knew Jesus in the first place.
6. The tense which John used in v. 6 for the verbs “seen” and “known” proves that the ones who live in sin have never at any time seen or known Jesus. True or False
7. Who is righteous in God’s sight?
8. Doing righteousness denotes sinless perfection. True or False
9. Doing righteousness is the same as walking in the light. True or False
10. Choose either (a) or (b) as the correct ending to the sentence. The one who does righteousness is righteous because (a) he lives a perfectly righteous life, (b) he is forgiven his sins.
11. What false theory is being promoted regarding how one becomes righteous in God’s sight?

Guardian of Truth XXV: 15, pp. 226-227
April 9, 1981

By Bill Cavender

“And this is the message which we have heard from him and announce unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him and walk in the darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: but if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (1 John 1:5-7).

Understanding the meaning of words we use in speaking and writing is always a great part of the task we have in correctly conveying our thoughts to others. God conveyed His thoughts to us (revelation) in words chosen by the Holy Spirit (inspiration) that His will and truth might be adequately and accurately transmitted from His mind to ours (2 Pet. 2:20-21). Paul said, “But unto us God revealed them through the spirit . . . which things also we speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Spirit teacheth; combining spiritual things with spiritual words” (1 Cor. 2:10-13).

Three key words above are worthy of our definition and study. They are “walk,” “light” and “fellowship.” Understanding them in their use here, and in other Scriptures, will contribute to our comprehension of God’s truth and aid in recognition of various errors taught by men contrary to God’s revealed will.

Our first word is “walk,” defined by W.E. Vine as “signifying the whole round of the activities of the individual life of the believer.” Paul, by the Spirit, wrote, “As therefore ye received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and builded up in him, and established in your faith, even as ye were taught, abounding in thanksgiving” (Col. 2:6-7). The believer arises from immersion for the remission of sins, having crucified our old man and destroyed the body of sin in baptism, to “walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:3-7). Our faith in our Father, leading to obeying the gospel of Christ, is produced by hearing the word of God (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 18:8; Rom. 1:16-17; 10:17). We then spend the remainder of our life walking by faith and not by sight (2 Car. 5:7; Heb. 11:1-6).

The Christian is to walk in the truth, after the commandments of the Lord. John wrote to the elect lady, “I rejoice greatly that I have found certain of thy children walking in truth, even as we received commandment from the Father. . . and this is love, that we should walk after his commandments. This is the commandment even as ye heard from the beginning, that ye should walk in it” (2 John 4, 6; John 14:21). Walking in God’s truth is “walking in the light” and “walking by faith.” Faith in God is produced only by the word of God, His truth. Any departure from the revealed truth of God, any addition to or subtraction from the truth, and any substitution of error for the truth brings upon one doing such things the disapproval and anathemas of God and separation from Him (1 Tim. 4:1-6; Heb. 3:12; Rev. 22:18-19; Gal. 1:6-10; 2 John 9-11). One cannot please God and walk in error, in sin, in craftiness and in the wisdom of men (Heb. 11:6; Eph. 4:17; 2 Cor. 4:1-7; 1 Cor. 3:3).

Our second word, “light,” is defined “to give light, expressing light as seen by the eye, and, metaphorically, as reaching the mind . . . light is a luminous emanation, from certain bodies, which enables the eye to discern form and color. Light requires an organ adapted for its reception. . .” (Vine). The organ of the body designed by God to receive physical light is the eye (Matt. 6:22). The spirit of man, created in God’s image, is that part of man designed by God to receive spiritual and moral instruction, which is the light and truth provided by God, revealed in the Scriptures (Gen. 1:26-27; Heb. 12:9; 2 Pet. 1:12-21; Psa. 119:105).

Jesus Christ, our Savior, the only begotten Son of God, came into the world to dispense spiritual light and life. Life in the material universe does not exist apart from the light God has created, and spiritual life cannot exist separate and apart from Jesus, “the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:8-9). “God . . . hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son” whose original and rightful abode is to dwell “in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see. . .” (Heb. 1:1-2; 1 Tim. 6:15). The Son of God is “the way, the truth and the life,” “the light of the world,” and to all people who sit in the darkness of sin and the shadow of death is He that great Light which “is sprung up” (John 14:6; 3:19; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35-36, 46; Acts 13:47; Matt. 4:12-16).

Light, truth and life in God through Christ are coextensive (Col. 3:1-4). There is no forgiveness, salvation and fellowship with God except through Jesus and the truth He taught, which truth was completed by the Spirit-directed apostles of Jesus (John 8:21, 24; 14:26; Eph. 1:3-7; 2 Tim. 1:9-I 1). To abide in the revealed truth of God is to “walk in the light,” and to depart from the truth in any particular is to “transgress, and abide not in the doctrine of Christ.” Such a one “hath not God” (1 John 1:6-7; 2 John 9-11). There is no such thing as believing in Christ, walking with God, being approved of God, etc., if we are not strictly and sincerely doing His will taught in His word (Luke 6:46; Matt. 7-?1-23; Jas. 1:22-25).

The third key word of our text is “fellowship,” defined by W.E. Vine as “communion, sharing in common, communicate, partaker, partnership,” etc. It is through the word of God, the gospel, the truth, that we are called into fellowship with God through Christ. Paul said, “God is faithful, through whom ye were called into the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor. 1:9). The method of this calling was “through our gospel” (2 Thess. 2:13-15; 1 Cor. 4:15; Jas. 1:18). Our souls are purified, we are born again, we are saved and have become God’s children through faith when we believe the truth and submit to its demands in obedience (1 Pet. 1:22-25; John 3:3-5; 3:36; 1 Cor. 15:1-4; Eph. 1:3-14; Jas. 1:21).

Fellowship involves various facets of worship, work and service as authorized by commands, approved examples and necessary inferences in the New Testament. Believers engaged in true worship to God through Jesus have fellowship with Christ and with each other (John 4:23-24; 1 Cor. 10:14-22; Acts 2:42). Those who are taught the truth are to have fellowship with those who teach the truth (Gal. 6:6; Phil. 4:15-18; 2 Cor. 11:8-9). Brethren who are able are to supply the needs of the poor among the saints, thus having fellowship one with the other (Rom. 12:13; Heb. 13:16; Rom. 15:25-33). We have fellowship with the Holy Spirit by abiding in the truth He has revealed from the mind of God through the apostles (2 Cor. 13:14; 1 Cor. 2:6-16; Phil. 2:1). We have fellowship with Jesus when we suffer for the truth’s sake (1 Pet. 4:13; Phil. 3:10; Rom. 8:16-17).

We have no fellowship with God in Christ when we walk in the darkness of sin and error; when we are jointpartakers in human denominationalism, Catholicism, and/or any churches and institutions of men, originating in the wisdom of men; when we are eating, drinking, partying, engaging in recreation and social activities; and when we are participants in any venture, program or project unauthorized in the New Testament. Religious people are freely mis-using and abusing the word “fellowship” in trying to make it authorize and give respectability to many fads, fashions and fancies being promoted by and participated in by people who know not the truth of God revealed in the New Testament.

For over thirty years now, many churches of Christ have been rushing headlong into sectarianism and denominationalism. They are leaving the faith, the light of God’s word, for the darkness of the errors of men. They are walking in the wisdom and foolishness of men rather than in the revelation of the wisdom of God. They are forsaking the fellowship taught and established in and through God’s truth for the communion of the devil, of denorninationalism, of worldliness, sin, and the modernism of the social gospel.

Of all people who ever lived, our brethren in this century should have been the last on earth to accept again the centralizing of churches, their work and funds, under such centralized agencies as “sponsoring churches,” “overseeing elderships,” and “boards of directors.” We who have taught and been taught the growth and development of organized Catholicism through the centuries until a Pope ruled in Rome; we who have been taught of the development and growth of the Christian Church of the nineteenth century; we who have been taught the errors of denominational organizations, conventions, synods, associations and councils; we who have been taught the autonomy, independence and equality of each congregation of Christ under its own elders, to do its own work, to carry on its own worship, to attend to its own members by way of teaching and discipline, etc. (Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28; Phil. 1:1; 1 Pet. 5:2-3); we should have been the last religious people on earth to accept missionary and benevolent societies supported by churches, such programs of centralization as The Herald of Truth and World Radio, and church-subsidized centralized agencies as Boles Home, Tennessee Childrens’ Home, David Lipscomb College, Freed-Hardeman College, etc.

The problem was and is basicly threefold: our brethren were not that well taught, having their faith in the wisdom and preferences of men; most of them did not and do not really care (as has generally been the case, Lam. 1:1-12) whether a practice was scripturally authorized or not; and many of the preachers, elders and teachers who spoke strongly on congregational autonomy and independence were hypocritical, did not really believe the truth, and sold it out for the sake of personal gain, glory, self-aggrandizement and advantage.

The host of problems faced by churches of Christ at the present time is the result of brethren of a generation ago not walking in the light, in the truth of God’s word. Only the truth can keep us from error if we respect it, and only the truth can sanctify and save us as we walk in it. Centralized programs, church-maintained institutions, the charismatic-tongue-speaking movement, divorce and remarriage, immorality, worldliness, the introduction of mechanical instruments of music into worship, the gracefellowship-unity movement of Ketcherside and Garrett and Fudge, the affiliation and association with human denominations, the social gospel with its church kitchens and parties and ball teams and joy buses, are all the doctrines and commandments of men, human traditions and opinions exalted to matters of “the faith” by their advocates. Brethren and churches have drifted and are drifting away from God’s light and truth, and the pattern of things divine made known to us in the New Testament.

Each of us should dedicate ourselves anew to walking with God in the light of His word and truth. Our fellowship with Him in Christ is not in darkness but in light and truth. Our fellowship with each other is in His kingdom and truth (1 Pet. 2:5-9; Col. 1:13-14; 1 John 1:5-7; 2 John 9-11). Those who abide not in the truth eventually “go out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us” (1 John 2:19; 2 Thess. 2:10-12). When brethren are not of the same mind, heart, mouth and faith, division is inevitable (1 Cor. 1:10; Phil 2:1-4, 14-16). Truth divides and separates those who do not abide in it, just as it unites in loving fellowship those who walk by faith, in the light of God’s revealed word.

QUESTIONS

1. How do we have fellowship with God and the cleansing of the blood of Christ?
2. How did God reveal His mind and thoughts to the apostle?
3. How do we walk in the light, in the truth, and by faith?
4. When we arise from baptism, in what do we walk?
5. What is the result in our relationship with God when we depart from the truth?
6. Who is that true Light who lighteth every man in the world?
7. Can one have light and life in Christ separate and apart from the word of God?
8. How are we called into the fellowship of God through Christ?
9. What are some scriptural areas of fellowship taught in God’s word?
10. What are some areas of false and unscriptural fellowship?

Guardian of Truth XXV: 14, pp. 219-221
April 2, 1981

By Mike Willis

The proliferation of new translations and the usage of such translations by brethren have caused us to become more aware of variant readings of the Greek manuscripts than in previous years. Those who have studied 1 John 5:7-8 in a Bible class recently have probably noticed the difference in the reading of the King James Version and that of most later translations; in case you have not noticed the different readings, I will reproduce the reading of the King James Version (AV) and the New American Standard Bible (NASB).

AV

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 record in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three are one.

NASB

For there are three that bear witness, the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

The italicized section in the AV is not found in the NASB or any other recent translation, except in a marginal note to indicate that it is not found in the best manuscripts of the New Testament.

However, let us examine this verse to see how it came to be in our Bible. In a preliminary note, let me make these following observations:

1. The original manuscripts were inspired of God. Let us remember that the original manuscripts were what were inspired of God. We are not obligated to defend as inspired any errors which have crept into the text of the New Testament through transmission. Hence, one is not denying the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures when he examines the textual evidence to discover whether or not a given reading was in the original documents.

2. The text of the New Testament is reliable. Neither am I trying to undermine one’s confidence in the texts of the New Testament in this article. The uniform testimony of all textual critics is that the texts of the New Testament are completely reliable. Typical of such comments are those reproduced below by the mentioned textual scholars:

In the New Testament in particular it is difficult to escape an exaggerated impression as to the proportion which the words subject to variation bear to the whole text, and also, in most cases, as to their intrinsic importance. It is not superfluous therefore to state explicitly that the great bulk of the words of the New Testament stand out above all discriminative processes of criticism, because they are free from variation, and need only to be transcribed. Much too of the variation which it is necessary to record has only an antiquarian interest, except in so far as it supplies evidence as to the history of textual transmission, or as to the characteristics of some document or group of documents. The whole area of variation between readings that have ever been admitted, or are likely to be ever admitted, into any printed texts is comparatively small; and a large part of it is due merely to differences between the early uncritical editions and the texts formed within the last half-century with the help of the priceless documentary evidence brought to light in recent times. A small fraction of the gross residue of disputed words alone remains after the application of the improved methods of criticism won from the experience of nearly two centuries of investigation and discussion. If comparative trivialities, such as changes of order, the insertion or omission of the article with proper names, and the like, are set aside, the words in our opinion still subject to doubt can hardly amount to more than a thousandth part of the whole New Testament (Brooke Foss Wescott and Fenton John Anthony Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek, pp. 564-565).

Similar statements affirming the reliability of the New Testament documents can be found in any standard reference book on the subject! Hence, the documents of the New Testament can be trusted as relaying to us a good copy of the original document.

This statement, however, does not deny that there are some verses which need to be examined as to the correct reading of the text or even whether or not they belong to the text. “Only 400 or so of the 150,000 variants materially affect the sense, and of these perhaps 50 are of real significance. But no essential teaching of the New Testament is greatly affected by them” (Ira Price, The Ancestry of Our English Bible, p. 222). Our examination of 1 John 5:7-8 is unique in that it is one of the major textual variants in the New Testament.

3. The discovery of manuscripts has assisted textual criticism. The last two hundred years have brought to light many major texts of the New Testament to be used in textual criticism. All of the major texts used in reconstructing the original text have been discovered since the AV of 1611 was printed, hence, the contribution of the science of textual criticism with a methodology of the critical text have all come since the AV was released. Every new papyrus manuscript unearthed or discovered assists us in producing a more accurate copy of the New Testament.

Two Different Greek Texts

Perhaps one is wondering why these two readings appear in 1 John 5:7-8. The answer is that the AV was based on one Greek text known as the Textus Receptus and the NASB (and all later translations) are based on a critical text (the text usually followed is the Westcott and Hort text with variations being noted). The text used by the AV was called the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus was compiled by Erasmus and printed in 1516. Whereas the modern critical text is the base of the examination of literally thousands of manuscripts, Erasmus’ text was based on only eight or nine Greek manuscripts (of the Byzantine family of texts). In the early editions of Erasmus’ work, the reading which appears more nearly resembles that of the critical text than that of the AV. For this, his text was criticized. We shall see later what happened. First, however, let us detail the differences in the two texts and the texts supporting each reading.

The AV is based on this Greek text: marturountes en to hourano, ho pater ho logos kai to hagion pneuma, kai houtoi hoi treis hen eisin. kai treis eisin hoi marturountes en to ge, to pneuma kai to hudor kai to haima (“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 are one”). This Greek text is found in the following documents:

61 – a sixteenth century minuscule text

629 – a fourteenth century minuscule text

88 – the reading appears in the margin of this twelfth century text

429 – the reading appears in the margin of this 14-15 century text

636 – a fifteenth century minuscule text

918 – a sixteenth century minuscule text

221 – the reading appears in the margin of this tenth century text

One notices that this reading is supported by very late texts; none of the major uncial or papyrus texts support this reading.

On the other hand, the critical text behind the NASB reading is as follows: hoti treis eisin hoi marturountes, to pneuma kai to hudor kai to haima, kai hoi treis eis to hen eisin “For there are three that bear witness, the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement”). This textual reading is supported by too many texts to be mentioned; however, the major texts supporting it are as follows:

Aleph – a fourth century uncial text

A – Alexandrinus is a fifth century uncial text

B – Vaticanus is a fourth century uncial text

048 – a fifth century uncial text

In addition to these major texts, numbers of minuscule texts from the ninth century on read the same way; here are a few of them: 81, 88, 104, 181, 326, 330, 436, 451, 614, 630, 945, 1241, 1505, 1739, 1877, 1881, 2127, 2412, 2492, 2495, etc.

The textual support for the critical text is so overwhelmingly against that of the Textus Receptus that virtually no one questions but that the AV reflects an insertion into the holy text. The reading receives an “A” rating on a scale which uses “A” to signify that the text is virtually certain.

How did the reading ever get into the AV in the first place? That is a rather interesting story in itself. The first two editions of Erasmus’ text (which later came to be known as the Textus Receptus) did not contain the reading.

Among the criticisms levelled at Erasmus one of the most serious appeared to be the charge of Stunica, one of the editors of Ximenes’ Complutensian Polygot, that his text lacked part of the final chapter of 1 John, namely the Trinitarian statement concerning `the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth’ (1 John v. 7-8, King James version). Erasmus replied that he had not found any Greek manuscript containing these words, though he had in the meanwhile examined several others besides those on which he relied when first preparing his text. In an unguarded moment Erasmus promised that he would insert the Comma Johanneum, as it is called, in future editions if a single Greek manuscript could be found that contained the passage. At length such a copy was found – or was made to order! As it now appears, the Greek manuscript had probably been written in Oxford about 1520 by a Franciscan friar named Froy (or Roy), who took the disputed words from the Latin Vulgate. Erasmus stood by his promise and inserted the passage in his third edition (1522), but he indicates in a lengthy footnote his suspicions that the manuscript had been prepared expressly in order to confute him . . .

. . . The Comma probably originated as a piece of allegorical exegesis of the three witnesses and may have been written as a marginal gloss in a Latin manuscript of 1 John, whence it was taken into the text of the Old Latin Bible during the fifth century. The passage does not appear in manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate before about 800 A.D. (Bruce Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, pp. 101-102).

Apparently, this text was prepared especially for Erasmus. Known as manuscript 61 (Ms. 61), this manuscript was described by Metzger as follows:

This manuscript of the entire New Testament, dating from the late fifteeneth or early sixteenth century, now at Trinity College, Dublin, has more importance historically than intrinsically. It is the first Greek manuscript discovered which contains the passage relating to the Three Heavenly Witnesses (I John v. 7-8). It was on the basis of this single, late witness that Erasmus was compelled to insert this certainly spurious passage into the text of 1 John. The manuscript, which is remarkably fresh and clean throughout (except for the two pages containing 1 John v, which are soiled from repeated examination of this passage), gives every appearance of having been produced expressly for the purpose of confuting Erasmus (Ibid., p. 62).

However, because this text was produced, Erasmus included the reading in the third edition of his Greek text which was the text used for translating the AV. In this manner, the passage was included in the King James Version of the Bible. In the Companion To The Revised Version of the English New Testament, Alexander Roberts commented, “No defender of the genuineness of 1 John (5: 7, 8), will probably arise in the future. The controversy regarding the passage is finished, and will never be renewed” (p. 71).

An Accurate Text

The thousands of Greek manuscripts, both uncial and minuscule, allow us to examine the text of the New Testament in greater detail than any other ancient book can be examined. Texts from distinctly different families of manuscripts exist which make it possible for us to examine exactly what the original documents state. With no exceptions, the textual critics are universally willing to admit that the text of the New Testament is extremely well preserved and that we can rest assured that we have an accurate copy of the documents as they came from the pens of the inspired men. Peter said, “. . . the word of the Lord endureth for ever” (1 Pet. 1:25); modern textual critics are compelled to admit that it has at least endured to this present time.

Can We Still Believe In Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

Someone else might be asking whether or not we can still believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit if 1 John 5:7-8 does not really belong in our New Testaments. We most assuredly can. The following passages demonstrate that other New Testament passages, which are not textually suspect, teach the existence of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit; read them for yourself.

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Matt. 28:19).

But when the Comforter (the Holy Spirit-mw) is come, whom I (Jesus-mw) will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me (Jn. 14:26).

And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: and to a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased (Matt. 3:16-17).

Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus Christ’s sake, and for the love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God for me (Rom. 15:30).

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen (2 Cor. 13:14).

There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all (Eph. 4:4-6).

How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will (Heb. 2:3-4).

For through him (Jesus-mw) we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father (Eph. 2:18).

. . . how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power . . . . (Acts 10:38).

There are several other passages which could be cited to demonstrate that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit compose the Godhead; however, these are sufficient to demonstrate that admitting that 1 John 5:7-8 are not in the text of the Scripture (as they appear in the AV) will not alter any doctrines which we are presently teaching. We simply must go to other texts to prove this for this text was invented by Catholics to defend the doctrine of the Trinity.

QUESTIONS

1. Compare the King James Version of 1 John 5:7-8 with at least five other translations, including if possible the following versions: American Standard Version (1901), Revised Standard Version, New American Standard Bible, and New International Version.
2. What do scholars say about the state of preservation of the text of the New Testament? Are the -New Testament documents reliable?
3. What did God say about preserving of the text of Scripture?
4. What is the Textus Receptus? On how many Greek texts was it based?
5. What is the critical text of Wescott and Hart? On how many texts approximately is it based?
6. What are the dates of the Greek manuscripts which support the reading of the AV in 1 John 5:7-8?
7. What are the dates of the Greek manuscripts which support the reading of the NASB in 1 John 5:7-8?
8. What is important about Ms. 61?
9. Cite passages to show that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit compose the Godhead.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 14, pp. 216-218
April 2, 1981