Link: The Comma Johanneum
Bill Mounce discusses the evidence that the added trinitarian formula in 1 John 5:7-8 is not original. This is a summary of well-known evidence, not breaking new ground, but is one of the clearest presentations I’ve seen.
Similar Posts
Updating my Bible Version Selection Tool
ByhenryI have made two major changes to my Bible Version Selection Tool. The first is a new domain. It is now at MyBibleVersion.com. When I found that domain name available, I couldn’t resist paying the few dollars it cost to get it. Second, I’ve created a simplified version. The new page has drop down box…
Translating Psalm 46
ByhenryOne of the things I find difficult to present to lay audiences is the range of options that a translator has in dealing with any passage. In particular poetry offers may options. One is not presented with just a couple of binary yes/no choices; rather, one is presented with a huge range of options, each…
Retraction on NIV2011 Update
ByhenryWith an tip of the hat to Peter Kirk, I withdraw objections to the NIV2011 update project. Peter in turn links to this NIV 2011 FAQ. My objection to the update hinged on the idea that the TNIV was being bypassed in favor of going back to the 1984 NIV. I saw (and still see)…
KJV Only: Anatomy of an Argument
ByhenryRecently I’ve talked a fair amount about using numbers as a means to dress up lies and make them look more respectable. I even discussed the issue in a Sunday School class I was invited to teach last Sunday, using the various ways in which grocery (or any) prices and sales can be stated and…
My Favored Translation Method
ByhenryJohn Hobbins divided translations into two classes in a recent post. Which do you prefer: (1) a translation that makes sense on its own, without off-site explanation, or (2) a translation that is a head-scratcher until an explanation is given which clears things up, and even then leaves you wondering if you have it right?…
Dynamic and Cognitive Equivalence
ByhenryPaul Helm of Helm’s Deep tries to take a philosophers approach to a discussion of dynamic equivalence in translation, and does not do a good job. My primary complaint is that, in apparently trying to clarify definitions of different translation procedures he fails to define the term he uses most, cognitive equivalence, while seeming to…