The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Change in NRSVue text note on 1 John 5:7

The controversy over 1 John 5:7 will continue to the end of time. There are good arguments for its inclusion or exclusion on both sides. In my view, it doesn't matter since the doctrine of the trinity does not depend upon this one isolated passage but rather its perspicuity obvious and thus the doctrine of the Trinity is clearly taught in Scripture throughout the OT and NT. I take the same perspective in regard to the endless debates on the TR and other textual evidences (p.s. The KJV Only argument is specious on its face and not worthy of anyone's serious consideration). NOT ONE doctrine is omitted from either source materials but they are in full agreement. What people should be far more concerned is what TRANSLATION method is used for non-original languages. There are two schools of thought; Formal Equivalence and Dynamic :Equivalence. The Formal Equivalence is incontrovertibly the one which is faithful to the Scripture itself, i.e., every jot and tittle is important and must be faithfully translated as much as it is possible to each particular language. The Dynamic Equivalence method holds that the "meaning" of a text is most important. Even the average person if the/she ponders this statement non-critically can see clearly that a "meaning" is only derived from the individual words and the grammar with which it was originally written.