Category Archives: I John 5:7

These Three Are One (Part III)

The New Testament clearly teaches these facts: The Father is God (John 6:27; I Pet. 1:2). But Jesus is also identified as God (John 1:1-3; 20:28; cf. also, e.g., John 12:37-40; Is. 6:1-10). And the Holy Spirit is also identified as God (Acts 5:3,4; II Cor. 3:17; cf. Psalm 139:7). However, the Father is never identified with Jesus or the Holy Spirit, nor is Jesus ever identified with either the Father or the Holy Spirit, nor is the Holy Spirit ever identified with either the Father or the Son.1 There are three divine Persons in one God. This is what the Bible teaches, though we may not fully comprehend it.

No analogy is ever perfect but when I think of ways to explain the relationship of the three Persons of the Godhead I think of few analogies. First, I think of a triangle. A triangle consists of three sides, three vertices (the points at which the sides meet) and three angles. If you do not have these three parts, you do not have a triangle. Yet, they make up only one triangle. Another analogy that is often used is an egg. An egg has three parts: The shell, the white and the yoke. The three parts make up only one egg, yet each part is the egg. You cook the yolk and not the shell, but you still say you cooked an egg. Another analogy might be a musical chord. A chord consists of three distinct notes that harmonize to create one unified sound. Each note is fully present, yet together they form a single musical entity. Finally, I think of our own human nature. We have a body, soul and spirit. We are a triad, as it were. In fact, we are created in the image of God. Now none of these analogies are perfect because the triune Godhead is unique, but they do help to visualize in our own minds what can be very difficult concept to grasp, namely, God’s triune nature.

The best thing we can do is to look at the scriptures which either explicitly state or are consistent with the verses given above. Let’s begin with Jesus’ baptism. The Bible tells us that Jesus approached John the Baptist to be baptized (Matt. 3). Immediately after He was baptized, as He was stepping up out of the water (Mark 1:10), the heavens opened and the Spirit of God descended in a bodily shape like a dove and the voice of God spoke from Heaven, saying, This is my Beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased (Matt. 3:16,17). There are three distinct Persons in this account. There is the Father, the Spirit, appearing as a dove, and, Jesus. They are in three, separate locations. The Father is in Heaven. The Son is in the Jordan river and the Spirit is moving from Heaven to where the Son is. The Father speaks from Heaven identifying Jesus as His Son, in Whom He is well pleased. The Holy Spirit is seen descending and lighting upon Jesus and remaining there, thus indicating His distinction from the Son (John 1:33).

Another instance worthy of note, is the Great Commission. In giving the great commission (Matt. 28:18-20), Jesus commanded baptism. Notice how Jesus expressed this command. “And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen” (Matthew 28:18-20). Jesus commanded baptism on the authority of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. In doing this, Jesus placed the Son and the Spirit on an equal level of authority with the Father.

When we think of the nature of the Spirit described in the scriptures, we should realize that the Spirit has “personhood.” That is, He has traits that indicates He is an individual with will, rationality and feelings. The Holy Spirit is always spoken of as an He, not an it. The Holy Spirit can be grieved (Eph. 4:30), He has the potential of being lied to (Acts 5:3), He can be vexed (Is. 63:10), He has intention and is responsive to human action (Is. 63:10), He speaks (Acts 13:2), He teaches (John 14:26), He testifies (John 15:26), He strives (Gen. 6:3), He commands (Acts 8:28), He intercedes (Rom. 8:26), He sends workers (Acts 13:4), He calls (Rev. 22:17), and He works (I Cor. 12:11), etc. We will delve more into the nature of the Spirit at a later time in greater depth but for now it is important to note that He is not a force, but a person, separate from the Father, yet God. He has all the attributes of deity, including omnipotence (Luke 1:35; Rom. 15:19 ), omnipresence (Ps. 139:7-13) and omniscience (I Cor. 2:10 ), just as does the Father and Son.

Jesus stated that when He went back to the Father, that the Holy Spirit would be sent to the apostles. “But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me” (John 15:26). This statement of Jesus’ clearly identifies three Persons of equal divine status but with different work. After Jesus completed His work here and He returned to the Father, He would send the Spirit of Truth from the Father to the apostles. The Spirit would then testify of Jesus to and through the apostles (John14:26:16:3, etc).

Another instance of the triune nature of the Godhead being mentioned is found in Paul’s three-fold blessing in II Cor. 13:14. Much like the three-fold formulas found in the Old Testament discussed in a previous installment, Paul includes all three Persons of the Godhead in his blessing. “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen” (II Corinthians 13:14). In this three-fold formula, Paul places each of the three on an equal footing while differentiating their separate works.

John’s symbolic description of God’s throne in the Revelation also gives a glimpse of the triune nature of God. In this vision, John saw One that sat on a glorious, heavenly throne (4:2). This is presumably God, the Father. Before the throne were seven lamps, which are said to be the seven Spirits of God (4:5). This is a symbolic way of representing the Holy Spirit. Also in the midst of the throne stood a lamb as if it had been slain (5:6) which is an obvious reference to the Son (Is. 53; John 1:36; I Pet. 1:19,20; Heb. 12:2, etc.). So we have in John’s vision all three Persons of the Godhead symbolically represented. Furthermore, we have the three-fold praise directed toward the throne, Holy, Holy, Holy (4:8).

Besides these texts there are many other passages which reference all three Persons of the Godhead in some way. This site lists 58 Triadic passages and answers some objections to them. There are other sites which provide passages which support the triune nature of God. It is a doctrine clearly taught in scripture, but it is not always easy to grasp all that it entails.

“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (I John 5:7).

Eric L. Padgett

Endnotes

  1. There are certain exceptions to this (Is. 9:6, e.g.) but they do negate the overall tenor of this point, that the divine Persons of the Godhead are separate from each other while all being God. Each of those passages need to be examined more closely and independently to understand them more fully.

These Three Are One (Part 1)

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one (I John 5:7).1

As we have seen, there is but one God. And yet, the Bible clearly teaches here and in the totality of its revelation that there are three Persons in the Godhead, or, in one God. The common word for this is the Trinity. Though that word is not explicitly found in scripture, the idea is there from the first verses to the last chapter of the Bible. While Moses (and Adam and Abraham and all other saints mentioned in scripture) may not have understood the triune nature of God, he speaks to it often, as do other Old Testament authors. In this installment, we will focus on one particular passage and then broaden our scope to cover more of the Old Testament landscape.

The very first verse of the Bible teaches so much. One very interesting aspect of this verse is that the word translated God, elohim, is plural. It literally means “gods.” This is the word translated most often in scripture as “God.” It is true that Hebrew sometimes uses the plural of some words to intensify the meaning. But it’s not the word elohim alone that is significant. It’s the connection of the plural noun “elohim” to the singular verb “created” (bara) that makes it so unique. In Biblical Hebrew, standard grammar demands that a singular noun govern a singular verb and a plural noun govern a plural verb.2 Moses was an educated man (Acts 7:22) and would not have made such a simple mistake as to confuse number grammatically. The text could literally be translated, “In the beginning, the gods He created…” To be grammatically correct, the text should read either “God He created” or “gods they created.”

Grammatically, there are no parallels in Hebrew to this construction which is consistently used in the Old Testament. There are instances of collective, plural nouns receiving the action of a masculine, singular verb (i.e., mayim and shamayim, Gen. 1:1, 7), but this is very different from the use in the elohim passages. And it wasn’t only Moses. Nearly every Old Testament book uses elohim and very often it is connected to a singular verb (i.e., II Chron. 26:7). The use of a singular verb with the plural elohim in scripture is not a mistake, it is intentional and suggests the idea of the Trinity. Furthermore, it is a testament to the inspiration of the scriptures that Hebrew authors and other persons in scriptures across the centuries and from various backgrounds utilized the same grammatical peculiarity in referring to deity. This, in itself, is astonishing.

A further support of this view is that Genesis1:26 contains the statement, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26). This grammatical structure indicates a plurality of Persons. Some say God was using the majestic “we.” But God does not use the majestic “we” in other important passages, (ie., Ex. 20 “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me…”). Others say He was speaking to the angels. But angels are created beings and were not of the same nature as God. We are not made in the image of angels (Psalm 8:5;Heb. 2:7-9). It is better to take this as referring to the three Divine Persons of the Godhead. So from the very first verse of the Bible, and from the first chapter elsewhere, we are given a glimpse of the triune nature of God.

It is a glimpse. A foreshadowing of a truth more fully revealed in the New Testament. This is not unusual. Various prophecies, types and metaphors arising from the various tabernacle services and utensils and other forms of Old Testament worship revealed in parts the coming redemptive work of Messiah. These things were not fully understood until the Holy Spirit revealed them clearly in the New Testament. As Paul explained, “Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit” (Ephesians 3:5). And so it is with the triune nature of God. What was hinted at and suggested in the Old Testament regarding the nature of God, is now more fully revealed in the New Tesament.

Accordingly, we have also in connection with Genesis 1:1 the New Testament commentary on this passage in John 1:1-3. John says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” John clearly intends to comment and elaborate upon the Genesis text. While John’s purpose may have been to combat certain false doctrines regarding Jesus’ nature, he nevertheless corroborates the view that Genesis 1:1 is meant to encompass the triune nature of the Godhead.

John’s statement is just as unique as the Genesis passage. John states the Word was both with God and was God. Now, in our world and reality it is not possible to both be with and be the same thing. I am myself. I am not with myself, not in any sense about which we normally speak (unless we speak in euphemistic way, i.e., we might say someone is beside himself). But both of these things were true of the Word Who became flesh (John 1:18). He was with God and He was God. This explains how God could say, “Let us make man in our image and after our likeness…” (Gen. 1:26). God the Father was speaking to at least the Second Person of the Godhead, the Logos or Word. John emphasizes this once again in his first general epistle ( I John 1:1-3).

Even standing on its own, it seems to me to be clear that the use of the plural elohim with a singular masculine verb in Genesis 1:1 (and throughout the Old Testament) is speaking to, at the very least, a plurality of the singular God and, in its fullest revelation, the triune nature of the Godhead. We have not even touched upon the fact that Spirit of God is explicitly mentioned in the Text as a separate quantity (Gen. 1:3). More will be said about the Spirit in future installments. And more will be said about other Old Testament passages that add to the doctrine of the triune Nature of God.

Endnotes

  1. I know this verse is controversial with many. However, I hold it to be sacred scripture. You may find part of my reason for holding it thus here (https://mtvchurchofchrist.org/wp/?p=594). Just because many do not find it authoritative, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be used in defense of the truth it states. I will not let other Christian’s skepticism of this verse dictate my use of it any more than I would let modernists skeptics doubts of other passages limit my use of them. I have found that many merely follow what they have been told rather than do their own research and come to their own conclusions, unfortunately.
  2. ”A good command of Hebrew also requires proficiency in using grammatical gender and number correctly, as nouns, verbs, and adjectives are all gendered and must agree in terms of number.” from https://www.hebrewpod101.com/blog/2021/03/18/hebrew-grammar-overview/#2; A Concise Hebrew Grammar Guide

Eric L. Padgett

Does I John 5:7 Belong in the Bible?

Recently an individual engaged me in a very brief discussion about the reliability of the King James Version of the Bible. His argument was that the Greek text behind the King James Version was inferior to the Greek texts which underlie most of the modern versions. Besides his confident affirmations of the same, and his claim that he had studied Greek (“In the future, I would suggest not arguing with me about textual criticism. This is an area I know very well. I minored in Greek in college.”), he argued that “The Wescott Hort (sic) set of manuscripts is superior to the Byzantine family, which produced the Textus Receptus.”

The one proof that he offered was I John 5:7. He wrote, “How do I know that? 1 John 5:7. Almost all of that verse is not in the original. John didn’t write it. You won’t find any church father quoting that verse to prove the Trinity. It didn’t exist when the church fathers were around.” Therefore, he argued, the text behind the KJV is inferior because it includes this verse.

First, I pointed out that his reasoning was circular. He claimed that the Westcott and Hort set of manuscripts (i.e., Alexandrian Text Type) was superior to the Byzantine Text Type because I John 5:7, which is found in the Textus Receptus, was not in the “original” and “John didn’t write it.” But how he knows they are not in the “original” and that John didn’t write them is because the Westcott and Hort texts don’t have them! This is circular reasoning.

Second, concerning the claim that no church father quoted the verse to prove the “Trinity,” consider the following. Cyprian, who became the “bishop” of Carthage, lived from 200 to 258 A.D. He wrote in his Treatises (1:6): “The Lord says, ‘I and the Father are one;’3117 and again it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, ‘And these three are one.’3118” You can find this at the Christian Classics Ethereal Library . I left the citations in this quote from the  CCEL because they give the citation for 3118 as “1 John v.7.” They, themselves, say it refers to I John 5:7 and that Cyprian was quoting from it.

Does Cyprian cite this verse to “prove the trinity”? He is arguing the purity and unity of the church based on the nature of God’s unity. In the very next sentence he writes: “And does any one believe that this unity which thus comes from the divine strength and coheres in celestial sacraments, can be divided in the Church…” Certainly he is talking about “divine unity.”

Furthermore, this citation in Latin predates the Greek texts of Alexandrian Text Type. (The Codices Vaticanus and Alexandrinus date to the fourth century and the Codex Sianaticus dates the fifth century while Cyprian wrote in the third.) Since the autographs were originally written in Greek, then this quote from scripture in Latin probably had to have a Greek source that predated it, making that reading even older than the Cyprian quote.

Codex Vaticanus, by the way, indicates in the margin that there was a textual irregularity or variant here of which the scribe was aware. Obviously, the hand that wrote the Codex Vaticanus was aware of an alternative reading for the verse but did not include it.

Some argue that Tertullian refers to this passage in the following: “Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are one essence, not one Person, as it is said, “I and my Father are One,”8116 in respect of unity of substance not singularity of number.” (Tertullian). Tertullian may or may not have reference to I John 5:7 specifically, but what he writes certainly contains the element of that verse in question, “These three are one.” This expression in scripture is unique to I John 5:7.

Athanasius (296 – 373) quotes this verse and specifically states that John said “these three are one,” which is clearly a quote from I John 5:7. “Pros de toutois pasin Ioannes phaskei, Kai oi treis to ev eisen.” Find this quote here. See lines [01557] and [01558].  Translated to English, this is “In addition to all these, John affirms, ‘and these three are one'” (translation by KJV Today)

Commentator John Gill observes: “it is cited by Athanasius (a) about the year 350; and before him by Cyprian (b), in the middle, of the “third” century, about the year 250; and is referred to by Tertullian (c) about, the year 200; and which was within a “hundred” years, or little more, of the writing of the epistle; which may be enough to satisfy anyone of the genuineness of this passage; and besides, there never was any dispute about it till Erasmus left it out in the first edition of his translation of the New Testament; and yet he himself, upon the credit of the old British copy before mentioned, put it into another edition of his translation.”

Several other ancient authorities refer or allude to this passage as authentic and original, as well.

How, then, did it come to be removed from scripture in so many Greek manuscripts?

In his Prologue to the Canonical Epistles Jerome (c. 347 – 420) states that there were many trying to alter the passage contrary to the truth of faith. “Just as these are properly understood and so translated faithfully by interpreters into Latin without leaving ambiguity for the readers nor [allowing] the variety of genres to conflict, especially in that text where we read the unity of the trinity is placed in the first letter of John, where much error has occurred at the hands of unfaithful translators contrary to the truth of faith, who have kept just the three words water, blood and spirit in this edition omitting mention of Father, Word and Spirit in which especially the catholic faith is strengthened and the unity of substance of Father, Son and Holy Spirit is attested.”

Matthew Henry suggests that “It was far more easy for a transcriber, by turning away his eye, or by the obscurity of the copy, it being obliterated or defaced on the top or bottom of a page, or worn away in such materials as the ancients had to write upon, to lose and omit the passage, than for an interpolator to devise and insert it. He must be very bold and impudent who could hope to escape detection and shame; and profane too, who durst venture to make an addition to a supposed sacred book.”

Much more could be written and has been by others. The truth is that God’s word has been preserved (Psalm 12:6,7). We can trust Jesus’ promise that heaven and earth shall pass away but His words would not pass away (Matt. 24:35).

By the way, the individual with whom I was discussing this issue abruptly ended the discussion and removed the dialogue from his Facebook page, citing my evidence as too flimsy.

Eric L. Padgett