Some thoughts on 1 John 5:6

1 John 5:6 - This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

What meaneth “he that came by water and blood”?

The meaning of “by water and blood” (δι’ ὕδατος καὶ αἵματος): Is related to his coming (v. 6). Therefore, historical over symbolic interpretation.[i] Was witnessed by the Spirit (vs. 6, 8). Was witnessed by man (the lesser witness, v. 9). John the Baptist was a witness of the baptism (Matthew 3:16-17; John 1:32-24). John the Apostle was a witness of the crucifixion (John 19:25-27; 1 John 1:2-3). The Spirit of God gives testimony to both.

“By water” refers to the first act of Jesus’s public earthly ministry by baptism in the Jordan by John the Baptist (Mark 1:1, 9-11). At his baptism in water, he received the testimony of the Spirit, and well as the Father’s testimony of his divine Sonship. Compare 1 John 5:5, “believeth that Jesus is the Son of God,” with John 1:32-34 (as well as 1 John 5:9).[ii]

Luke 12:50 connects the ideas of baptism and death, his suffering and death a coming baptism Jesus is yet to be baptized with.

“By blood” refers to the finish of Jesus’s personal earthly ministry by shedding his blood in death on the cross (John 19:30). He came by the blood of his cross (cf. Colossians 1:20; Hebrews 9:12-14) Commentator Henry Alford wrote, “But these past facts in the Lord’s life are this abiding testimony to us, by virtue of the permanent application to us of their cleansing and atoning power.”[iii] See Acts 5:50-32.[iv] Additionally the resurrection is a witness of the Spirit to the approved ministry and death of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God (cf. Romans 1:4; 8:11).[v]

---

[i] he that came/ ἐστιν ὁ ἐλθὼν is past tense (aorist active) referring to an historical event.
[ii] In memory of and corresponding to this witness is the Spirit-led immersion in water (1 Cor. 12:13) which is instituted as the initiatory rite for believers identifying with Christ.
[iii] The New Testament for English Readers, Volume II, Henry Alford. London: Rivingtons, 1872, p. 909. “They represent,—the water, the baptism of water which the Lord Himself underwent, and instituted for His followers,—the blood, the baptism of blood which He Himself underwent, and instituted for his followers. And it is equally impossible to sever from these words the historical accompaniments and associations which arise on their mention” (p. 908).

[iv] True faith (1 John 5:4-5) is rooted and grounded in real events that changed the course of history – Jesus lived a sinless life, died on the cross for sinners, and rose again for their justification. It was witnessed by both men and the Holy Spirit. The men have died, but left their witness in the inspired record. The Holy Spirit is alive and actively witnesses in the world and the hearts of men.

[v] With Romans 8:11, cf. also John 10:17-18. Regarding the Holy Ghost and the crucifixion, consider the presence of the Spirit at work in convicting the thief (Luke 23:42-43) and the centurion (Mark 15:29). Cf. Luke 23:46.

Some interesting connections of blood and water; though not necessarily shedding light on the text, interesting nevertheless.

• God turned the waters of the Nile and Egypt into blood, Exodus 7; Psalm 105:29.
• The blood of a bird and running water associated with cleansing the house of a leper, Leviticus 14.
• God made the Moabites see his miraculous water as if it were blood, 2 Kings 3:22.
• Pilate washed his hands in water to signify his claim that he was innocent of the blood of Jesus, Matthew 27:24.
• Blood and water came from Jesus’s side when pierced by the spear, John 19:34.
• The two witnesses had power to turn water into blood, Revelation 11:6.
• The third angel’s vial turned water into blood, Revelation 16:4.

Kept by the power of God

“Who are kept by the power of God, through faith unto salvation.” 1 Peter 1:5

Blessed Spirit! the merciful scripture of the evening answers the important question. They who are kept, “are kept by the power of God, through faith unto salvation.” Here is the solution of the whole subject. With what humbleness of soul, then, ought every child of God to fall down before the throne of grace, under the deepest sense of distinguishing love, in the consciousness that it is divine restraint, and not creature merit, which maketh all the difference. Help me, Lord, to go humble all my days, in this view, and let it be my morning thought, as well as my midday and evening meditation, that I am kept by thy power, through faith unto salvation. Almighty Father, help me to be living upon thy faithfulness in the covenant of grace, established and sealed as it is in the blood of thy dear Son, that “thou wilt not” turn away from me to do me good; and that thou wilt put thy fear in my heart, that shall not depart from thee. – Jeremiah 32:40.

Robert Hawker (1753-1827)

The LORD Reigns Over All

The following metrical psalm is based on the 93rd Psalm. There are many versions with similar words, and I am unsure of the original. The following version was sung at the “Psalm Roar” at St George’s Church, Shrewsbury, England. This psalm exalts the majesty and might of the reigning Lord. His testimonies are sure, and the holiness of his house is everlasting.

According to Matthew Henry, this psalm teaches: The Lord reigns gloriously (v. 1), powerfully (v. 1), eternally (v. 2), triumphantly (vs. 3-4), in truth and holiness (v. 5).

1. The Lord is King, his throne endures
Majestic in his height.
The Lord is robed in majesty
And armed with strength and might.

2. The world is founded firm and sure
Removed it cannot be.
Your throne is strong, and You are God
From all eternity.

3. The floods, O Lord, have lifted up,
Have lifted up their voice;
The floods have lifted up their waves
And make a mighty noise.

4. The Lord, enthroned on high, is strong
More powerful is he
Than thunder of the ocean’s waves
Or breakers of the sea.

5. Your royal statutes, Lord, stand firm,
unchanging is your word.
And holiness adorns your house
For endless days, O Lord.

St George’s Church paired the psalm for a nice combination with The Sacred Harp tune Northfield (No. 155). Northfield was composed in 1800 by the American composer Jeremiah Ingalls.

In other words, beginning with ign-

• ign- prefix. (Latin) Fire.
• ignatia, noun. Dried ripe seeds of the plant Strychnos ignatia (St. Ignatius’s Bean), used as a homeopathic remedy.
• igneous, adjective. (Geology) Produced under conditions involving intense heat; for example, rocks of volcanic origin or rocks crystallized from molten magma.
• ignescent, adjective. Emitting sparks of fire (as certain stones when struck with steel); bursting into flame.
• ignify, verb. (rare) To form into fire; to turn into fire.
• ignimbrite, noun. (Petrology) A fine-grained volcanic rock consisting mainly of welded shards of feldspar and quartz.
• ignition, noun. The act or fact of igniting (i.e., setting on fire); a means or device for igniting.
• ignoble, adjective. Of low character, base; of low quality; inferior; not noble, of humble descent or rank.
• ignominious, adjective. Marked by or attended with ignominy (i.e., disgrace, shame, contempt); contemptible.
• ignoramus, noun. An extremely ignorant person; simpleton,
• ignorant, adjective. Lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned; lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact; uninformed.
• ignore, verb. To refrain from noticing or recognizing; overlook, neglect.

17th Century Geneva Bible Printings

The Holy Bible, That Is, the Holy Scriptures Contained in the Old and New Testament.

The links below are to scans of 17th-century printings of the Geneva Bible, published at Google Books and Archive.org. Some are partial, some have bad pages, etc. Nevertheless, they can be useful research tools.

• 1603, Robert Barker, London
• 1606, Robert Barker, London
• 1610, Thomas Stafford, Amsterdam
• 1615, Robert Barker, London
• 1616, Robert Barker, London
• 1633, Thomas Crafoorth, Amsterdam

Paul speaks

Acts 21:37-40 Paul speaks to the captain, then to the crowd

Verses 37-38: As Paul is being led away, he asks the captain for an audience with him. (ελληνιστι γινωσκεις) “Canst thou speak Greek,” the captain asks? Yes, and Paul can speak Hebrew as well! See verse 40 and 22:2. The captain is surprised that Paul speaks fluent Greek, and that he is not who he assumed him to be. Perhaps based on what he thought he heard in the shouts of the crowd, and/or perhaps based on his knowledge of recent past events in Jerusalem, the captain thought this man was a leader from Egypt who had created an uproar leading a company of murderers, and which Egyptian was still on the loose.[1] He now realizes he is mistaken.

Verse 39: Paul explains who he is – I am a Jew (not an Egyptian), from the important city of Tarsus (no mean city; a litotes, figure of speech) in Cilicia. He does not yet clarify that he is a free Roman citizen, perhaps holding that in reserve for when it is needed. He then solicits the chief captain that he be allowed to address the crowd.

Verse 40: The captain agreed, giving him permission to speak. Paul stood on the stairs of the castle. When he beckoned with his hand to the people, it got their attention and they began to quieten down to see what he would say. When the silence broke out, Paul began to address them. He spoke to them in the Hebrew language. The crowd initially was intrigued.

The last verse of the chapter ends with a comma, leading forward to the record of the speech Paul will make from the stairs to the people of Jerusalem.

---

[1] This may be the same person who Josephus described coming out of Egypt claiming to be a prophet, and who drew a multitude of followers to himself. He and his followers were routed by Felix’s soldiers, but the Egyptian escaped. Antiquities, Book XX, 8.6; Wars, Book II, 13.5. This is the same Felix who is mentioned as governor in Acts 23, so it is the right time frame. The numbers of people given by Josephus vary from the biblical account, as well as his own accounts in Antiquities and Wars. Regardless, we can rely on the accuracy the Spirit-inspired account given by Luke., while concluding Josephus might have got part of his record right.

Arthur Farstad and the NKJV

This is an interesting version of the history of the New King James Version by Edwin Blum, the man who took over the Holman Christian Standard Bible project upon the death of Arthur Farstad, who was originally in charge of it. In an interview with Will Lee (December 19, 2007), Blum stated:

“[Arthur Farstad] and Zane Hodges published their own critical text. But they made a distinction between the Textus Receptus (TR) and the MT. So they published this critical text with Thomas Nelson and there were two editions done of it, so he was interested in the MT tradition, not necessarily the TR which was the translation that the KJV was based on. So when he was working on the NKJV, he wanted to change the text in about 260 places that he felt the KJV text did not represent the MT. In other words, he made a distinction between TR, the Byzantine tradition and the critical text. And they did publish an interlinear, and each time there’s a variant reading, down at the bottom it will say, ‘Critical Text,’ ‘TR,’ or ‘MT,’ so you’ll be able to tell which is which. But the people who were backing the NKJV did not want to do any textual critical changes. So he was not too happy with that.”

Blum’s comments make it sound like they got further into the translation process (than I had thought) before Farstad’s “Majority Text” aspirations for the NKJV were shut down. This seems a bit different than the general face painted on this picture. There is a comment by Farstad about this in an unpublished paper, which seems to accurately intersect with the statement by Blum.

“Originally it was planned to use the Majority Text for the NKJV, not the TR used in the KJV. This was changed near the end of the project. Strangely enough, the one who talked Thomas Nelson into not using the Majority Text was Zane Hodges himself. (He was not, however, on the translation team.) Zane argued that a version should not be based on a Greek text that had not been on the market for a few years to allow time for scholarly appraisal. Also, many felt that this updating of the classic KJV should not introduce another Greek text, like the English Revised had done in 1881 before the Westcott-Hort text (also 1881) had a chance to be evaluated.”

Arthur Farstad wrote the above statement in “Why I Became a Majority Text Advocate,” which is an “Unpublished paper by Arthur L. Farstad when he was at Dallas Seminary.” It is posted on the Dean Bible Ministries website of Robert L. Dean, Jr.

Oops, the NKJV

... did it again. For a Bible that highlights “King James Version” in its own name, it does an inordinate amount of conforming to other versions instead of the King James Version. Notice Isaiah 18:2.

• AKJV: that sendeth ambassadors by the sea, even in vessels of bulrushes upon the waters, saying, Go, ye swift messengers, to a nation scattered and peeled, to a people terrible from their beginning hitherto; a nation meted out and trodden down, whose land the rivers have spoiled!
• NKJV: Which sends ambassadors by sea, Even in vessels of reed on the waters, saying, “Go, swift messengers, to a nation tall and smooth of skin, To a people terrible from their beginning onward, A nation powerful and treading down, Whose land the rivers divide.”
• NASB: Which sends messengers by the sea, Even in papyrus vessels on the surface of the waters. Go, swift messengers, to a nation tall and smooth, To a people feared far and wide, A powerful and oppressive nation Whose land the rivers divide.

The NET Bible note says: 

Isaiah 18:2 tn The precise meaning of the qualifying terms is uncertain. מְמֻשָּׁךְ (m^emushakh) appears to be a Pual participle from the verb מָשַׁךְ (mashakh, “to draw, extend”). Lexicographers theorize that it here refers to people who “stretch out,” as it were, or are tall. See BDB 604 s.v. מָשַׁךְ, and HALOT 645-46 s.v. משׁךְ. מוֹרָט (morat) is taken as a Pual participle from מָרַט (marat), which can mean “to pull out [hair],” in the Qal, “become bald” in the Niphal, and “be wiped clean” in the Pual. Lexicographers theorize that the word here refers to people with bare, or smooth, skin. See BDB 598-99 s.v. מָרַט, and HALOT 634-35 s.v. מרט. These proposed meanings, which are based on etymological speculation, must be regarded as tentative.

In contrast to the modern fad of meaning, notice for example, that Hebraist John Gill takes the idea of “scattered” or “drawn out” meaning as “spread over a large tract of ground, as Ethiopia was.” The 1611 King James margin has: “|| Or, outspread and polished”.

Notice in its explanation and defense of its translation “of tall, smooth-skinned people,” the NET Bible uses the words “uncertain,” “appears to be,” “theorize,” “proposed,” “speculation,” and “tentative.”

NKJV edition claims:

“…the translators and editors of the present work have not pursued a goal of innovation…”

“…special care has also been taken in the present edition to preserve the work of precision which is the legacy of the 1611 translators…”

“…A special feature of the New King James Version is its conformity to the thought flow of the 1611 Bible…”

My point here is that, once again, the NKJV is not what it claims to be, and did not do what it claims to do. If they were dealing with a speculative, theoretical, tentative issue, they could have opted to stick with the King James tradition. They did not.