Repugnant ditheism incorporated into corrupted manuscripts -

the heretical implications of a defiled reading of John 1.18



Dirty water

Is your Bible like this water?

1     No man hath seen God at any time;

2     the only begotten Son [god]

3     which is in the bosom of the Father,

4     He hath declared Him.

 θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε ο μονογενης υιος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο
θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε
[ο]* μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο
* The definite article is absent in many MSS.

The square bracketed reading ' the only begotten god' is found for example in Papyrus fragment 66 (Geneva), Codex Aleph (Sinaiticus), Codex B (Vaticanus), the Peshitta (an ancient Aramaic translation of the NT), Harclean marginal readings of Aramaic version, and Bohairic Coptic readings. (British and Foreign Bible Society, Critical apparatus, 2nd edition, 1958, London)

Modern translations that include 'the only begotten god' include the NIV, NASV, ESV, New KJV (margin), and many of the United Bible Societies translations.

'No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.' NASB © 1995 Lockman Foundation.

Fenton John Anthony Hort of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, defended this corruption in his dual dissertations on the text in 1876, published by Macmillan and Co., Cambridge and London.  Dr Hort is properly charged with several heresies, among them sympathy for Arianism and a frank denial of penal substitution.

The expression 'the only begotten god' would be unique in all John's writings, betrays the context of John's Prologue and would be a unique and glaringly heretical witness as we reason below. It likely results from yet another example of the extraordinary poor and mistake laden Greek of the scribes of Aleph and Vaticanus. John Burgon arraigns Hort, along with the other RV translators, of also being disingenuous by translating the phrase as 'God only begotten', even if these corrupt manuscripts were accurate, which they are certainly not, then the true sense would have been 'the only begotten God', with or without the article, in the Revision Revised, p.182. 

To turn the Messiah into a little god, a second begotten deity, like the Jehovah's Witnesses, is to shatter the First Commandment, 'Thou shalt have no other gods before Me' (lit. before My face). 
Jesus the Messiah partakes of true, eternal and full Deity, being the only begotten Son of the Father - One Eternal God, with the Spirit, mysteriously revealed in Three Persons.

'Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.'

'Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.'
Isaiah 44.6,8

Some direct implications:

Dirty water

Who hath formed a god, or molten a graven image that is profitable for nothing?  (Isa.44.10)


Ministry of God's Word
Evolution   Rome     EU
Islam/ The Satanic verses
The land of Israel
Christian anti-Semitism