Without Controversy...God Was Manifest in The Flesh

“14 These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: 15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.” (1 Timothy 3)

Paul writes, “without controversy”, but since the Revised Version in 1881 removed the reading, “θ̅Ο̅”, and substituted it with, “OC”, it has become a major Controversy! These are the contracted forms of the Greek words, “θεὸς” and “ὃς”, in English, God and who. The English reading as found in Versions like NIV, “He Who”, is not correct, as there it no “He” in the Greek.

Before looking at the external textual evidence of the Greek manuscripts and Church Fathers, etc, the internal Greek grammar is an important place to start. With the reading “θεὸς”, which is without any doubt, the original the Apostle Paul wrote, there are no problems with the Greek grammar. However, when we read the corrupted reading, “ὃς”, we do have a grammatical problem. “ὃς” is a relative, and must have an antecedent, to agree with. But there is no antecedent in the masculine gender, for it to agree with! Interestingly, of the Latin Church Fathers who do quote this passage, they all use “ὅ” (which), which is the neuter relative, which does agree grammatically with, “τὸ μυστήριον”, which is also neuter. This difficulty in the grammar, is also admitted to by Dr Charles Ellicott, who was the chairman of the committee, for the 1881 Version:

“Recent investigations have shown, however, beyond controversy that the oldest MSS., with scarcely an exception, contain the more difficult reading, ΘC (“He who”). The Greek pronoun thus rendered is simply a relative to an omitted but easily-inferred antecedent—viz., Christ. Possibly the difficulty in the construction is due to the fact of the whole verse being a fragment of an ancient Christian hymn, embodying a confession of faith” (commentary on 1 Timothy)

Firstly, why would Paul “omit” antecedent? Secondly, if, as Dr Ellicott suggests, that it is “Christ”, then why did not Paul simply say so? Thirdly, to try to solve this difficulty, we have yet more speculation, that these words were from a hymn, which Paul used. Again, without any evidence!

When we restore the original reading “θεὸς”, God is the subject, and there is no problem with any grammar or anything, except with those who have a difficulty with accepting that Jesus Christ is called GOD, which also seems to trouble some who call themselves “Evangelicals”!

The testimony of the Greek manuscripts, dates only from the 4th century AD, which is the Codex Sinaiticus. The reading in this Mss is ὃς. The Codex Alexandrinus, which is the 5th century, is often claimed to also read ὃς. However, over 30 years ago, I personally examined this original Mss in London, with the aid of a powerful microscope, and have no doubt that it read originally θεὸς. This Mss was first collated by Patrick Young between 1628-1652, who said that it clearly read θεὸς. Just a few years later, in 1657, when Brian Walton published his Greek New Testament, he also read θεὸς.

The oldest Version on the New Testament, is the Old Latin, which is from the 2nd century, reads ὅ (which), as do the Latin Church Fathers.

By far the strongest, and oldest evidence, is from the quotations made by the Greek Church Fathers, who clearly read θεὸς.

As early as Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch (AD 35-107), the reading θεὸς was the original in 1 Timothy 3:16. In at least 2 places in his Letter to the Ephesians, he writes: “God come in the flesh” (εν σαρκι γενομενοϛ Θεοϛ; Loeb Classical Library, The Apostolic Fathers, Vol. 1, chapter 7, pp. 226, 227); and in chapter 19, “God became manifest in a human way” (Θεου ανθρωπινωϛ ϕανερουμενου, ibid, pp. 238, 239). Clearly references to 1 Timothy 3:16. In chapter 1 of this Letter, Ignatius writes, "εν αιματι Θεου", (by the blood of God). This can only have been a reference to Acts 20:28, “Church of God, which He purchased by His own blood”.

In the next century, we have the theologian Hippolytus (170-236), in his work against the heretic, Noetus, write:

“And even as He was preached then, in the same manner also did He come and manifest Himself, being by the Virgin and the Holy Spirit made a new man; for in that He had the heavenly (nature) of the Father, as the Word and the earthly (nature), as taking to Himself the flesh from the old Adam by the medium of the Virgin, He now, coming forth into the world, was manifested as God in a body, coming forth too as a perfect man. For it was not in mere appearance or by conversion, but in truth, that He became man.” (ANF05. Fathers of the Third Century, sec, 17)

Here there are a number of Bible verses referred to. “by the Virgin and the Holy Spirit”, from Luke 1:35. “as the Word”, from John 1:1. “taking to Himself the flesh from the old Adam”, from 1 Corinthians 15:45-48. “was manifested as God in a body”, from 1 Timothy 3:16. “not in mere appearance or by conversion, but in truth, that He became man”, from 1 John 4:3; 2 John 7.

Not only do we have the early testimony of Ignatius, and Hippolytus, for the reading "Θεοϛ", (a) Gregory Thaumaturgus (213-270); (b) Didymus (313-398); (c) Gregory of Nyssa (330-395), who quotes this text 22 times with Θεοϛ!; (d) Chrysostom (347-407); (e) Cyril Alex. (died 444); (f) Theodoret (393-458); (g) Apollinarius (310-390, heretic!). Here, we have the testimony of writers (all Greek) from the first, to the fifth century, who found Θεοϛ in their copies of 1 Timothy 3:16! The heretic Origen (185-254), who taught that Jesus Christ was a created being, is the earliest quote of ὃς, though in a Latin translation of his work.

The Greek New Testaments of Erasmus (1519); Robert Estienne (1550); Theodore Beza (1598); Elzevir (1624); Johann Jakob Wettstein (1751-52); John Mill (1814) read Θεοϛ. As do William Tyndale (1534); Coverdale (1535); Matthew's (1537); Great Bible (1539); Bishops Bible (1568); Geneva Bible (1560) King James (1611). Wycliffe (1382), followed the Latin Vulgate, and reads, “that thing that”. Between 1775-7, the German scholar, Johann Griesbach, published his critical Greek New Testament, which was against the Textus Receptus. He adopted the reading ὃς, which is the first Greek NT to use this reading. Before this time, two other Germans, Martin Luther (1545), and Johann Albrecht Bengel (1742), read, “Gott”(God).

On the committee of the 1881 Revised Version, was a Dr G Vance Smith, who was minister of S. Saviour's Gate Chapel, York. Not only did he deny the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, but also the Inspiration of Holy Scriptures. Further, on the reading Θεοϛ, in 1 Timothy 3:16, he wrote:

“The old reading is pronounced untenable by the Revisers, as it has long been known to be by all careful students of the New Testament.... It is in truth another example of the facility with which ancient copiers could introduce the word God into their manuscripts,—a reading which was the natural result of the growing tendency in early Christian times ... to look upon the humble Teacher as the incarnate Word, and therefore as ‘God manifested in the flesh’ ” (as quoted by John Burgon in is work, The Revision Revised)

When we, who claim to be Bible-believing Evangelicals, allow workers of the enemy of the Truth of Scripture, to be involved in translating, we can expect that the devil will have his way to some extent. The statement of Dr Vance Smith on the Deity of Jesus Christ, shows his complete disregard to what the Bible actually teaches.

 

None of this does anything to refute the evidence that I have given for the reading God.

 

Not the first time that Wallace is wrong

 

if you know about Greek grammar, you will see that they only reading that is without any problems or difficulty, is θεὸς. Even Dr Ellicott admits that ὸς has problems with the grammar. I see no where in what Wallace says that is of any use, as he speculates with others, that the words in 1 Timothy 3:16, are from a hymn. This is unproven and only used by those who cannot otherwise account for the problems with the Greek grammar, with either ὸς or ὅ. The evidence of the Church fathers in the Greek, shows beyond any doubt that θεὸς is what Paul did write. Dr Burgon who is a million times a greater textual scholar than Wallace, has demonstrated in his verse on this text, that there is no doubt as to what the original reading is. Over 100 years later, no one has been able to disprove what he has written. Wallace is but a boy compared to Burgon! The revision revised : three articles reprinted from the 'Quarterly review' : I. The new Geek text. II. The new English version. III. Westcott and Hort's new textual theory ; to which is added a reply to Bishop Ellicott's pamphlet in defence of the revisers and their Greek text of the New Testament : Burgon, John William, 1813-1888 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Now disprove John Burgon, if you can!

 

What proof?