Johannine Comma and Jean Hardouin

From Textus Receptus

Jean Hardouin (1646-1729) refers to the grammatical issues in both verse 7 and 8 several years before Eugenios Voulgaris. This was noted by John Black 1783-1855. Eugenius argued for the Greek reading which contained the comma, but both Hardouin (a Jesuit) and Black were proponents of the Latin text, and attacked the Greek text for being a grammatical mess. The issues pointed out do not apply to the Textus Receptus reading, but to the text with the comma omitted. Hardouin felt that "a verse which re-translated into Latin becomes grammatically correct", in which he exalted the Latin over the Greek. While Black was against the comma, Hardouin defended it.

Jean Hardouin 1 John 5

The pic below is the John Black section and verse 7 and 8 from Jean Hardouin enlarged

From verse 7 section ( 8 is in pic)

"Et tres sunt non tria dixit. Unde etiam verisimile fit, scripsisse Joannem ista Latine: quo in idiomate cum sint Spiritus et Sanguis generis masculini, licuit ei masculino genere numerum exprimere quern efficiunt, etiam cum aqua quae feminei est... Nam si Graece tantum Apostolus scriberet; cum sint et .....et .... neutrius generis, non tres sive .. sed .. sive .. diceret.. ex hac autem observatione intelligeimus, id quod ex aliis locis pariter deprehendimus, editionem Latinam hujus espitolae esse primigeniam, ab ipsomet Joanne Apostolo mira diligentia et accuratione conscriptam, non item Graecam, qualis nunc est ... Latina, prout ea legimus, verba scripserit ipse [Joannes] manu sua, vel ore dictaverit, vel ab amanuensi certe translata ipse probaverit.

Translation:

"And there are three things are not said. And so it is likely the case, to have written to John in Latin: the Spirit and the Blood of the males, which, since they are written in the language, it was allowed to him to express the male gender, the number of which is made up, even when the female is ... For, if the water, which in Greek so great an apostle was to write, since they are of the neuter gender, and ..... and ...., .. not to say that three or .. or .. but .. it will be understood from this observation, that which is from the same time in other places, we discover that the edition of the Latin espitolae of this to be in the original, written by the very same John the Apostle, with a wonderful diligence and accuracy, but not Greek, as it now is ... Latina, in so far as we read, he wrote the words of the [John] the hand of his own, either in direct, he transferred to or from the at least amanuensi approved.

Joannis Harduini e Societate Jesu Commentarius in Novum Testamentum: accedit ejusdem auctoris lucubratio, in cujus prima parte ostenditur Cepham a Paulo reprehensum, Petrum non esse, in altera parte, Joannis Apostoli de Sanctissima Trinitate locus explanatur 1741

Palaeoromaica: Or Historical and Philological Disquisitions, Inquiring: Whether the Helvenistic Style is Not Latin-Greek? by John Black 1822

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 · 36 · 37 · 38 · 39 · 40 · 41 · 42 · 43 · 44 · 45 · 46 · 47 · 48 · 49 · 50 · 51 · 52 · 53 · 54 · 55 · 56 · 57 · 58 · 59 · 60 · 61 · 62 · 63 · 64 · 65 · 66 · 67 · 68 · 69 · 70 · 71 · 72 · 73 · 74 · 75 · 76 · 77 · 78 · 79 · 80 · 81 · 82 · 83 · 84 · 85 · 86 · 87 · 88 · 89 · 90 · 91 · 92 · 93 · 94 · 95 · 96 · 97 · 98 · 99 · 100 · 101 · 102 · 103 · 104 · 105 · 106 · 107 · 108 · 109 · 110 · 111 · 112 · 113 · 114 · 115 · 116 · 117 · 118 · 119 · 120 · 121 · 122 · 123 · 124 · 125 · 126 · 127 · 128 · 129 · 130 · 131 · 132 · 133 · 134 · 135 · 136 · 137 · 138 · 139 · 140 ·