Johannine Comma and Gregory of Nazianzus

From Textus Receptus

Gregory of Nazianzus (c. 329 – January 25 - 389 or 390) (also known as Gregory the Theologian or Gregory Nazianzen) was a 4th-century Archbishop of Constantinople. He is widely considered the most accomplished rhetorical stylist of the patristic age. As a classically trained orator and philosopher he infused Hellenism into the early church, establishing the paradigm of Byzantine theologians and church officials.

Gregory made a significant impact on the shape of Trinitarian theology among both Greek- and Latin-speaking theologians, and he is remembered as the "Trinitarian Theologian". Much of his theological work continues to influence modern theologians, especially in regard to the relationship among the three Persons of the Trinity. Along with the two brothers Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa, he is known as one of the Cappadocian Fathers.

Oration 31 - The Fifth Theological Oration. On the Holy Spirit, XIX

18. You say things of one essence are counted together, but those which are not consubstantial are reckoned one by one. Where did you get this from? From what teachers of dogma or mythology? Do you not know that every number expresses the quantity of what is included under it, and not the nature of the things? But I am so old-fashioned — or perhaps I should say so unlearned — as to use the word “three” of that number of things, even if they are of a different nature, and to use one and one and one in a different way of so many units, even if they are united in essence, looking not so much at the things themselves as at the quantity of the things in respect of which the emuneration is made. But since you hold so very close to the letter (although you are contending against the letter), pray take your demonstrations from this source. There are in the book of Proverbs three things which go well: a lion, a goat, and a ****; and to these is added a fourth: a king making a speech before the people, 22 to pass over the other sets of four which are there counted up, although things of various natures. And I find in Moses two cherubim counted singly.23 But now, in your technology, could either the former thin gs be called three, when they differ so greatly in their nature, or the latter be treated as units, when they are so closely connected and of one name? For if I were to speak of God and Mammon as two masters, 24 reckoned under one head, when they are so very different from each other, I should probably be still more laughed at for such a connumeration.

19. But to my mind, he says ,25 those things are said to be connumerated and of the same essence of which the names also correspond, as three men, or three gods, but not three this and that. What does this concession amount to? It is suitable to one laying down the law as to names, not to one who is asserting the truth. For I also will assert that Peter and James and John are not three or consubstantial, so long as I cannot say three Peters, or three Jameses, or three Johns; for what you have reserved for common names we demand also for proper names, in accordance with your arrangement; or else you will be unfair in not conceding to others what you assume for yourself.

What about John, then, when in his Catholic Epistle he says that there are three that bear witness, the Spirit and the water and the blood? 26 Do you think he is talking nonsense? First, because he has ventured to reckon under one numeral things which are not consubstantial, though you say this ought to be done only in the case of things which are consubstantial. For who would assert that these are consubstantial? Secondly, because he has not been consistent in the way he has happened upon his terms; for after using three in the masculine gender he adds three words which are neuter, contrary to the definitions and laws which you and your grammarians have laid down.

For what is the difference between putting a masculine three first, and then adding one and one and one in the neuter, or after a masculine one and one and one to use the three not in the masculine but in the neuter, which you yourself disclaim in the case of deity? What have you to say about the crab, which may mean either an animal or an instrument or a constellation? And what about the dog, now terrestrial, now aquatic, now celestial? Do you not see that three crabs or dogs are spoken of? Why, of course it is so. Well, then, are they therefore of one substance? None but a fool would say that. So you see how completely your argument from connumeration has broken down, and is refuted by all these instances. For if things that are of one substance are not always counted under one numeral, things not of one substance are thus counted, and the pronunciation of the name once for all is used in both cases, what advantage do you gain towards your doctrine?

22 Prov. 30:29.
23 Ex. 25:19; 37:8.
24 Matt. 6:24.
25 I.e., Gregory’s Macedonian opponent, elsewhere addressed in the second person.
26. I John 5:8

Pure Bible Forum Christology Of The Later Fathers The Library Of Christian Classics Volume Iii Google by Edward Rochie Hardy (1908-1981) Rochie discusses the 'Macedonian opponent' and gives footnotes in p. 302-207 that identifies references to:

Proverbs 30:29-31 ²⁹ There be three things which go well, yea, four are comely in going: ³⁰ A lion which is strongest among beasts, and turneth not away for any; ³¹ A greyhound; an he goat also; and a king, against whom there is no rising up.
Matthew 6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Exodus 25:19 And make one cherub on the one end, and the other cherub on the other end: even of the mercy seat shall ye make the cherubims on the two ends thereof.
Exodus 37:8 One cherub on the end on this side, and another cherub on the other end on that side: out of the mercy seat made he the cherubims on the two ends thereof.
Roman s 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
2 Corinthians 13:14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.

Tim Dunkin

In 2010, when less information was available than today, Tim Dunkin in his book Setting the Record Straight on I John 5:7-8 wrote:

While it seems that Gregory himself does not know of the Comma, it is also apparent that those with whom he was discussing the passage recognized a grammatical error that is present in the text if the Comma is not included. Knittel notes both the objection to verse 8 offered by Gregory's opponents on the basis of the grammatical solecism introduced by the deletion of the Comma, as well as Gregory's attempt to get around the problem by an effected indifference to the problem. He writes,

"And what says the venerable Greek bishop in reply? He says, "It is indifferent to me whether we say treis or tria, in speaking of things of the neuter gender. Yet, surely, the Linguists of his day would scarcely have conceded that point to him. Neither Gregory, nor any other Greek, as far as I know, confirms this rule by their style of writing. Neither can we attempt to call the treis marturountes, a Hellenism: at least, St. John has distinctly shewn, that he cannot be liable to such an imputation in the present instance; nor, indeed, throughout his First Epistle."79

Knittel's argument is simply that despite Gregory's indifference, no knowledgeable Greek writer in that day would actually have believed the argument Gregory makes. Gregory's indifference appears to be more intended to turn aside an argument from his opponents through denigration, rather than by an appeal to reason or fact. Gregory himself, as well as other Greek writers (including John himself), did not make the sort of grammatical error introduced into the Johannine text by the deletion of the Comma. Far from being discovered "lately" by Robert Dabney (as certain Critical Text supporters on various internet forums have tried to claim), recognition of the grammatical difficulty for the Critical text supporter in this passage was recognized by a Greek-speaking patristic writer over sixteen centuries ago, though he apparently did not know what to make of it.

79 F.A. Knittel, New Criticisms of the Celebrated Text 1 John v. 7, Ed. Trans. W.A. Evanson, p. 208

James Snapp Jr and DeSoto

James Snapp Jr said of Taylor DeSoto in First John 5:7 and Greek Manuscripts:

Furthermore, Mr. DeSoto misrepresents the evidence when he states that “Jerome and Nazianzes comment on it.” By “Jerome” he appears to mean the author of the Preface to the Canonical Epistles – an author who (as I have already pointed out) used the transposed form of First John 5:8. And by saying that “Gregory of Nazianzes comments on it,” he seems to be referring to the statement by Gregory of Nazianzus where, after stating that John says “that there are three that bear witness, the Spirit and the water and the blood” – as we find verse 8 in most manuscripts, without the phrase “on earth” – he bring up a frivolous objection from a posited grammarian only in order to tear it down, stating “You see how completely your argument from con-numeration has completely broken down, and is refuted by all these instances,” and he goes on from there – not once citing any part of the Comma Johanneum.

It is simply false to claim that Gregory of Nazianzus commented on the Comma Johanneum. He did not do so. Furthermore, in the very next chapter of his composition, Gregory of Nazianzus refers to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, without referencing the Comma Johanneum.

Johannine Comma and Gregory of Nazianzus

From Textus Receptus

Oration 31 - The Fifth Theological Oration. On the Holy Spirit, XIX

Tim Dunkin

James Snapp Jr and DeSoto

Views

Personal tools

Navigation

Search

Toolbox