Have you been looking forward to this article on the six worst textual variants? Just before the corresponding talk at the GWW conference, I experienced both anticipation and dread. Asking questions about personally important topics is often uncomfortable. But, it is vital to know the truth.
Last time we noted that Scripture is both 100% inspired by God and 100% written by people. Unfortunately, however, it is often difficult to determine what the original manuscripts actually said. There are lots of copies and lots of variants, providing textual critics with lots of work. Most of the manuscript variants are pretty minor, being obvious errors in copying or use of synonyms. But then there are the BIG SIX, the most notorious variants contained within the New Testament, where what is in our Bible may not be true to the original text.
John 5:3-4
The first of the notorious variants is found in John 5, where we are told about Jesus healing a paralyzed man who was lying by a pool at the Sheep Gate. Interestingly, in 1896, a mineral spring was found at that location. So far, so good. But then, Jn 5:3-4 says “Here a great number of disabled people used to lie—the blind, the lame, the paralyzed —and they waited for the moving of the waters. From time to time an angel of the Lord would come down and stir up the waters. The first one into the pool after each such disturbance would be cured of whatever disease they had.” The italicized part is not found in the oldest manuscripts. Evidently, some scribe thought insertion of an explanation of the context of the passage was necessary. Does removal of 3b and 4 change the meaning of the passage? Not really. Whew! One down; five to go.
1 Ti 3:16
The second notorious variant is in 1 Ti 3:16.
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
The italicized part is under debate. Some manuscripts say “He.” Others say “God” and others say “Which.” Normal practice in those days was to start a poem with a pronoun, so it is likely the original said, “He.” Does it matter? Well, who else but Jesus was manifested in the flesh etc. until He was taken up in glory? The meaning of the passage isn’t changed.
Jn 1:18
The third variant the Dr. Wallace addressed is found in Jn 1:18, No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. Here some manuscripts say “the only One” and others “the only Son.” When the Greek is contracted, as was often done, the words for God and for Son only vary in one letter. No doubt this helped create the confusion. Apparently, the “only” part may help explain the passage since the Greek word refers to only produced, created or begotten. We know from the rest of Scripture that Jesus is at the Father’s side and has made Him known. Therefore, whereas we may not know what the original text said, we have a pretty good idea of what it meant. The variant doesn’t add to or detract from the Scripture message.
1 Jn 5:7-8
The fourth notorious variant is found in 1 Jn 5:7-8. “For there are three that testify: “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth” the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.” This reading used to be considered helpful because it was a proof text for the existence of the Trinity. The problem is that the italicized part is not found in early manuscripts. Moreover, it is only found in the margin of the page in half of the later ones. Therefore, although the part about Father, Son and Holy Spirit is found in the King James Bible, it is not included in modern translations. No worries. There is plenty of evidence for the Trinity in the rest of Scripture. No essential doctrines are affected.
Mk 16:9-20
Mk 16:9-20 has been used to justify all kind of weird practices by various churches. But it is a later addition to the text, not being found in early manuscripts. So, if you have a desire to drink poison or pick up snakes with your hands, you cannot justify it based on Scripture. Similarly, one cannot use this passage to justify the claim that a person who lacks the gift of tongues, healing or exorcism isn’t a believer. In my opinion, no loss!
Jn 7:53-8:11
Now we come to the worst of the worst: the most notorious of all New Testament Scriptural variants. You remember the story about the woman caught in adultery who was brought to Jesus? How He told the crowd that those without sin should cast the first stone? Yup. I hate to tell you that textual critics think Jn 7:53-8:11 is a later addition. The problem is that, although this passage has a ring of authenticity, it pops up in different places in different manuscripts, sometimes after John 21 and sometimes after Luke 21 or Luke 24. It is written in Luke’s style and may represent a later addition of a true story. It is not found in the earliest manuscripts. Now, there is no doubt that this stinks. But, does it change anything? Does it make Jesus less merciful? Less clever? Less our Savior? No. Does it change any theological principle or essential doctrine? No. Does it change the Gospel message? No. None of the variants do. Breath a sigh of relief!
But, wait. Have you ever noticed that the description of an incident in one gospel may differ significantly from the description of same incident related in a different gospel? Or that one gospel may mention several witnesses, but another only one of them? Or that one gospel gives different last words for Jesus than another? What’s with that? Even if we believe we have reliable copies of what the gospel writers wrote, how do we know they wrote accurately? Next time…