The Book and Letters of John Corrupted
As there are spurious portions inserted in the Books of Matthew and
Luke, so there are in the Book of John.
The Angel at the Bethesda Pool
In the Gospel of John, it is recorded:
“In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt,
withered, waiting for the moving of the water. For an angel went down
at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever
then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole
of whatsoever disease he had” (John 5:3-4).
Let me ask some questions regarding this passage. Do you believe the
story here? Have you never wondered about the strangeness of it? Does
God dangle the carrot or play ‘cat-and-mouse’ or tease the
weak and helpless? Does He take pleasure in watching physically handicapped
people awkwardly trying to jostle their way to the pool to get healed,
where only the fastest one wins?
Did you know that the words “waiting for the moving” in
verse 3, and all of verse 4 are not found in the more original manuscripts?
This was a piece of superstition inserted by some unbelieving scoundrel.
It is the stuff of a carnal perception of Jesus Christ. It is the stuff
of Lourdes, Fatima, and Catholic occultish heresy.
Consider God’s character, if you know anything of Him. Would He
do such a thing? Does He display similar cruelty and callousness anywhere
else in Scripture? This is a contradiction of the testimony of
the Scriptures concerning the character of God.
Yes, He judges; yes, He destroys; He does not toy with men, however;
He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, and He is no sadist.
Translations based on the oldest available manuscripts omit portion
of verse 3 and all of verse 4. The NIV commentary explains, “Verse
4 was doubtless inserted by a later copyist to explain why people waited
the pool in large numbers.” This may be the reason people
were waiting by the pool, inasmuch as the people visiting there could
have had a superstition about an angelic visitation, but stating there
is false, for the reasons cited. The copyist didn’t heed the admonition
found in both Old and New Testaments:
“Every word of God is pure: He is a shield unto them that put
their trust in Him. Add you not unto His words, lest He reprove you,
and you be found a liar” (Proverbs 30:5-6).
“You shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither
shall you diminish ought from it, that you may keep the commandments
of the LORD your God which I command you” (Deuteronomy 4:2).
“For I testify unto every man who hears the words of the prophecy
of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto
him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take
away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away
his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from
the things which are written in this book” (Revelation 22:18-19).
Has not this copyist done much harm? Yes, he has, both to himself and
to his readers. Nevertheless, we are all tried. As Paul said to some
“For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are
approved may be made manifest among you” (1 Corinthians 11:19).
Think about it. This threefold (heavenly) admonition is only there because
the possibility exists that one can add or take from His Word. Any possibility
for evil that has existed has been fulfilled, according to the purpose
and wisdom of God Who creates all things (Isaiah 45:5-7) and has subjected
all to vanity (Romans 8:20-21).
Now here's a “Catch 22” if there ever was one! The Bible
is to be believed as the Word of God. This Word of God warns against
adding to, or subtracting from, its words. Which means it is possible
to do, otherwise it is a vain warning and the Bible is not perfect
after all. So then men, disregarding the solemn admonition of the Bible,
add to it or subtract from it, and we, by God's grace and discernment,
must now watch out for imperfections in a perfect Bible.
If we were to
grant Bibliolaters that the Bible is complete and perfect, how could
they deny that men’s words could be added to, or subtracted
from, the Bible, as it warns against such? And, clearly, the Bible
proves itself reliable in counsel because men have, in fact, altered
the Lord is the only escape route here, is He not?
Bibliolaters, our own preferred version declares your folly! Do you
not contradict yourselves, saying the Bible is complete and
Take that passage of John 5 in context of the entire Bible testimony.
Be honest. “Examine yourselves whether you be in the faith.” Stop
being unbelieving, idolatrous fools; repent; begin to believe the Lord
Jesus Christ, and not some fictional character, some angel of light coming
in His Name!
The Three Witnesses of First John
“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” (1 John 5:7-8).
Did you know that the latter part of verse 7 and the first part of verse
8 were not found in any Greek manuscripts before the 16th Century? (The
words that were not originally there are those in red.) That portion
is said to have come from the Latin copies and the Catholic Vulgate.
My NIV commentary says, “At the end of verse
7, some older English versions add the words found in the NIV text
note. But the addition is
not found in any Greek manuscript or NT translation prior to the 16th
If that is so, where do the KJV and other versions get off, adding to
the original Word of God? Are the translators justified? If your answer
is “yes,” then you must allow that the Catholic Church may
also have the right to include the Apocrypha and its “sacred traditions,” and
change the Law of God, as they did in changing the Sabbath to Sunday,
when the Bible gives no support whatsoever for this.
The passage ought to read:
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Spirit, and
the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one” (1 John
Are the King James Bible and other translations perfect? I do not think
What is wrong with the added doctrine in this instance? Plenty. It is
the preaching of a triune
God, a doctrine of the Catholic Church inherited
from pagan mythology. It is a carnal description and understanding of
God that serves the power and tyranny of man.
There is only one Lord, one God, one faith, one baptism. To break God
into three individuals is a tactic that dilutes and destroys His singular
authority and majesty. In the ensuing confusion, power is transferred
to corrupt man, the self-appointed “keeper of the secrets” of
God. Corruption and death follow. And this is in your “perfect” Bible.
There are several other, though far less significantly questionable,
portions in the Gospel of John (speaking primarily of the KJV and other
Textus Receptus-based versions) with which we have not troubled ourselves.
As well, we have addressed John 7:53-8:11, which is not found in the
most original or “more reliable” manuscripts, but our take
on this portion may surprise you: The Woman Caught in Adultery - Did
It Really Happen?