Can One Verse Change a Doctrine?


Can words taken out of one
Bible verse change an entire doctrine -the doctrine that Jesus Christ is God? According to Jesuit-educated
Norman Geisler, “…none of these (variant readings) affect any
basic doctrine of the Christian faith.” But let me tell you about Russell. Hi, I’m David Daniels
from Chick Publications. Back in the 80s, it seemed that
everybody went to Bible studies. I did, too, even though I was
full-time in Bible college. I just couldn’t get enough. Neither could Russell. First, he was drawn to a Bible study,
at a time when they said Jesus was coming back. Of course, He didn’t, and that should
come as no surprise to you. But people started
coming up with excuses for why Jesus didn’t return.
Some said the doctrine was right, but the year was wrong.
In my case, one of those prophetic magazines said
(well, it actually rewrote) a date that was vital in the calculation process,
when He didn’t return “on schedule.” It was something like that
in Russell’s group, too. Only he was bolder
and split apart and and started his own Bible study. In my Bible college, they pushed the
1901 American Standard Version (ASV), published by Thomas Nelson.
They said it was way better than the King James,
and way more scholarly. The original English one
that came before the ASV was the English Revised Version
(1881), also from Thomas Nelson, using Westcott and Hort’s Greek text. Well, Russell loved
the Revised Version. And he loved that scholarship. But he trusted those scholars and
their pick-and-choose Bible version more than God’s preserved words in
English, the tried and tested and proved for hundreds of years
King James Bible. He trusted those scholars so much that
he abandoned the doctrine that Jesus Christ is God,
because of what was in one verse. You find that hard to believe? Wait till you hear
the rest of the story. I had to dig, but I found his words
on the subject about that exact passage.
Listen for yourself: “The only text in Scripture which
was ever claimed to prove, or affirm, that the Father, Son and Spirit
are one, is a portion of 1 John 5:7, 8. This … is acknowledged by all
Trinitarians to be a ‘forgery.’ So undisputable is this, that the
translators of the ‘Revised Version’ … omit the clause
without note or comment….” Now you and I know
there are many scriptures that taken together testify to the fact
that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are God
and one God. The Father is God, the Son is God,
and the Holy Ghost is God. Yet the Father is not the Son,
the Son is not the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost is not the Father. But only one passage
brings it all together: 1 John 5:7-8. Here it in a real Bible,
the King James Bible: “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.” But in the gutted Revised Version
it says this: “And it is the Spirit that
beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth.
For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water,
and the blood: and the three agree in one.” They stuck part of verse 6 in verse 7,
took out most of verse 7 and part of verse 8. Poof! Away goes the Trinity! Russell said it himself.
He dropped the Trinity because of that one passage.
So did his students. And I’m not talking ten,
or hundreds, or thousands. I’m talking millions of people
through the years. Can words removed from a verse
remove an important doctrine? YES!
Ask Russell. Of course, Russell is dead now.
But his organization isn’t. Oh, and Russell isn’t his first name.
It’s his last name. And his Bible study split up into
so many groups that his successor decided to give it a new name, based
on the American Standard Version rewrite of Isaiah 43:10: You know them today as …
the Jehovah’s Witnesses. God bless you, and have a wonderful day.

25 thoughts on “Can One Verse Change a Doctrine?

  1. The ONLY thing the JWs got right is their non participation of our Stoopid Pagan holidays…even that's false…cause they R NOT HOLY DAYS:(

  2. Excellent video Brother David! It's really sad how so many people have been duped into thinking that the new Bible versions aren't dangerous. I thank the Lord for opening my eyes and I thank him for using you to tell people here. God bless you and your ministry!

  3. Charles Taze Russell was a Freemason involved in spiritism. As soon as their prophecies failed, that is when the Bible Student movement broke apart. God says to not fear prophets whose prophecies do not come to pass, that prophet has spoken erroneously and will die. (Paraphrased from Deuteronomy ch18 v22 & v22).

    What may not be well known is that this spiritualist group has its roots in the Theosophical Society, and if the names Blavatsky or Maitreya sound familiar then good. If not, I would suggest taking a closer look at that group and two people. Blavatsky pretty much started the movement, or at least popularized it. She hated the King James Version, and pretty much says as much. What is more interesting, however, is that she supports the Westcott and Hort version (and those based on it) over anything else.

    Hitler was an avid reading and believer of Blavatsky. This "doctrine" is making it into the main-stream, being disguised as other things. The belief that Jesus and Satan are brothers, which is clearly a heretical view if Jesus is God (meaning not created!), are shared by both the Theosophical Society and Gnostics who support "christian" doctrines. Of those groups that support these doctrines, is Freemasonry.

    Charles Taze Russell was a Freemason. The connections are too clear to be otherwise. Things like this one verse concerning the deity of Jesus allow for all sorts of spiritual darkness. Words suddenly mean whatever they are interpreted to mean, so that the bible fits their doctrine. Hence their need for a Westcott and Hort.

    It's not crazy if it's true. I just want to know what it means.

  4. Not convinced. Even if we assume 1 John 5:7 to be authentic Scripture, it does not say that the Father, Word and Spirit are one God or being. Judging from the context the oneness spoken of is in regard to their testimony.

    I myself am no Trinitarian yet I am quite sure that you claim to base your doctrine of the Trinity upon more evidence than simply 1 John 5:7 (even though you perhaps consider it to be your primary evidence.). If so, how is the doctrine changed?

  5. Moreover, if that verse is über-essential for the Trinity doctrine, how come it was never appealed to during Nicaea, Ephesus or Chalcedon? The Trinitarians obviously felt that they had enough Scriptural proofs for their position even without 1 John 5:7.

  6. Jesus (pbuh) is not God in the old manuscripts. …the question is can 1 verse be add on to make him God?..not if you kept the old books around

  7. So Jesus is God is he?  How come in the following verses we are told that Jesus has a God? John 20:17, 1 Peter 1:3, 2 Cor. 1:3, 2 Cor. 11:31, Ephesians 1:3, Ephesians 1:17. So either there are two Gods, or Jesus is not God. In Cor. 8:6 we are told; there is to us but one God, the Father. God is our father, and is also the Father of Jesus.

  8. So Jesus is God is he? How come Jesus called himself  " Son of man " over and over again? How come he`s also called the " Son of God " over 40 times? So is God then the Son of God? And is God then the Son of man at the same time? Jesus never claimed to be equal with God, because in John 8:28 he says, …..and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father has taught me, I  speak these things.

  9. I had to watch this one twice before I understood how you were weaving two timelines together. Good message. I started out with the NASB but recently decided to try reading the KJV. At first I thought there was no way I could make sense of the Old English but very quickly I got used to it and then grew to like it very much. Your videos helped get me interested in the KJV so I thank you. God bless you!

  10. No Bible believing scholar–meaning those who actually believe in the inerrancy of scripture–will actually push RSV. It's a very early attempt of textual criticism that can't really be trusted.
    That does not make the case though, for your take on the comma johanneum. This verse is not found in any Greek manuscript earlier than 1400. It is found in Latin, and in different forms (similar words, that is) through the centuries, but never in Greek. It is interesting to note as well, that the early church NEVER depended on the comma johanneum for defending the trinity. The trinity was a doctrine that they defended using not one verse, but the consistency of Scripture.
    There is no proof whatsoever to show that the comma johanneum was part of the original greek, yet there is EVERY proof to suggest it to be a latter addition, and that it was maybe meant as a comment, or a note. Also, if you're KJV only, then you need to recognize that the first three editions of Erasmus' TR. In fact, Erasmus only added that text, because of the Church's pressure to include it, since they had grown accustomed to to the Latin text.
    Now, if we are going to say that the comma johanneum actually was deleted as early as the 1st century, we have to say that the New Testament text can be so terribly corrupted for 1500 years, and that all the church that came before that, languished for lack of doctrine, since their text was corrupted.

  11. MOST ABUSED DOCTRINE. ONCE SAVE IS ALWAYS SAVED. A BAPTIST PASTOR SAID IN A YOU TUBE, THAT ONCE HE ACCEPTED JESUS, HE IS SAVED AND EVEN IF HE WILL KILL HIS MOM-IN-LAW, HE WILL STILL BE SAVED.

  12. WORST, MOST CHRISTIANS DIE OF HEART DISEASES, KIDNEY FAILUREs, ETC FOR EATING BLOOD, PORK, AND ANIMAL FATS. THE NASB AND THE NIV AND MANY OTHER TRANSLATIONS, INSERTED THIS PHRASE IN MARK 7:19 "In Saying this, Jesus declared all food clean". ALL TRUE FOLLOWERS OF LORD JESUS/YESHUA WAKE UP. WE ARE BEING FOOLED BY THESE THESE PASTORS IN WOLF'S CLOTHING WHO TEACH WRONGLY.THEY EVEN TEACH THAT THE SABBATH IS NOW A SUNDAY OR ANY DAY IN SEVEN.

  13. You don’t have to accept the pagan trinity to acknowledge Jesus is God. I don’t, and I know that he is the I AM.

    These three are one. One God one savior one spirit of God
    Is this not the original doctrine of the apostles!?

  14. Wow! I can’t believe an entire CULT (Jehovah’s Witnesses) has its roots in ONE missing verse! I did not know this. Thank you for your fascinating work, brother Daniel! To God be the glory.

  15. I guess you don’t know that Oneness Pentecostals predominantly use the King James version yet they reject the Trinity as a false Roman Catholic doctrine? 1 John 5:7 actually teaches God is One, that’s why.

  16. I used to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses, thankfully I am not one of them any longer. So I knew 'who' you were talking about from the beginning of this video. BTW the King James is the only Bible I trust and what got me out of that organization.

  17. I just came across your channel maybe a couple weeks ago, and you should definitely make more videos I think you would have a very large following and I love your teaching, May God bless your ministry, I am looking forward to your next video

  18. My NKJV which many have derided as just another modern erroneous version is as true and correct as KJV regarding 1John 5:7,8.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *