In this post I will be citing from specific reformed sources for the express purpose of showing how these reformed authorities accepted the textual veracity of passages found in the Received Text (Textus Receptus), which is the collated Greek text employed by the King James Version translators in producing their English translation of the [N]ew [T]estament writings.

These are the verses which modern textual critics call into question due to their preferring or prioritizing specific papyri, which were only discovered during the 19^th and 20^th centuries, and/or Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. These so-called scholars mistakenly assume that these copies are more reliable simply because they are closer in time to the composition of the original NT books.

I cite the texts in question for the benefit of the readers.

MARK 16:9-20

“Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven demons.She went and told those who had been with Him, as they mourned and wept.And when they heard that He was alive and had been seen by her, they did not believe. After that, He appeared in another form to two of them as they walked and went into the country. And they went and told it to the rest, but they did not believe them either. Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen.And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.’ So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs. Amen.” New King James Version (NKJV)

JOHN 7:53-8:11

“And everyone went to his own house. But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Now early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people came to Him; and He sat down and taught them. Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst,they said to Him, ‘Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?’This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear. So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, ‘He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.’ And again He stooped down and wrote on the ground.Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.When Jesus had raised Himself up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, ‘Woman, where are those accusers of yours? Has no one condemned you?’ She said, ‘No one, Lord.’ And Jesus said to her, ‘Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.’” NKJV

ACTS 8:37

“Then Philip said, ‘If you believe with all your heart, you may.’ And he answered and said, ‘I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.’” NKJV

1 John 5:7

“For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.” NKJV

With the foregoing in view, I now turn my attention to the statements of some of the reformers and the reformed confessions. All emphasis will be mine.

JOHN CALVIN

I believe that Jesus Christ. As baptism is grounded in Christ, and as the truth and force thereof is contained there, so the eunuch setteth Christ alone before his eyes. The eunuch knew before that there was one God, who had made the covenant with Abraham, who gave the law by the hand of Moses, which separated one people from the other nations, who promised Christ, through whom he would be merciful to the world. Now he confesseth that Jesus Christ is that Redeemer of the world, and theSon of God; under which title he comprehendeth briefly all those things which the Scripture attributeth to Christ. This is the perfect faith whereof Philip spake of late, which receiveth Christ, both as he was promised in times past, and also showed at length, and that with the earnest affection of the heart, as Paul will not have this faith to be feigned. Whosoever hath not this when he is grown up, in vain doth he boast of the baptism of his infancy. For to this end doth Christ admit infants by baptism, that so soon as the capacity of their age shall suffer, they may addict themselves to be his disciples, and that being baptized with the Holy Ghost, they may comprehend, with the understanding of faith, his power which baptism doth prefigure. (Calvin’s Commentaries, Acts, Chapter 8)

7. There are three than bear record in heaven The whole of this verse has been by some omitted. Jerome thinks that this has happened through design rather than through mistake, and that indeed only on the part of the Latins. But as even the Greek copies do not agree, I dare not assert any thing on the subject. Since, however, the passage flows better when this clause is added, and as I see that it is found in the best and most approved copies, I am inclined to receive it as the true reading.

And the meaning would be, that God, in order to confirm most abundantly our faith in Christ, testifies in three ways that we ought to acquiesce in him. For as our faith acknowledges three persons in the one divine essence, so it is called in so really ways to Christ that it may rest on him.

When he says, These three are one, he refers not to essence, but on the contrary to consent; as though he had said that the Father and his eternal Word and Spirit harmoniously testify the same thing respecting Christ. Hence some copies have εἰς ἓν, “for one.” But though you read ἓν εἰσιν, as in other copies, yet there is no doubt but that the Father, the Word and the Spirit are said to be one, in the same sense in which afterwards the blood and the water and the Spirit are said to agree in one.

But as the Spirit, who is one witness, is mentioned twice, it seems to be an unnecessary repetition. To this I reply, that since he testifies of Christ in various ways, a twofold testimony is fitly ascribed to him. For the Father, together with his eternal Wisdom and Spirit, declares Jesus to be the Christ as it were authoritatively, then, in this ease, the sole majesty of the deity is to be considered by us.

But as the Spirit, dwelling in our hearts, is an earnest, a pledge, and a seal, to confirm that decree, so he thus again speaks on earth by his grace.

But inasmuch as all do not receive this reading, I will therefore so expound what follows, as though the Apostle referred to the witnesses only on the earth. (Calvin’s Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles https://ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom45/calcom45.v.vi.ii.html)

JOHN GILL

Verse 37

And Philip said, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest,…. Intimating, that if he did not believe, he had no right to that ordinance; though he was a proselyte to the Jewish religion, a serious and devout man, and was employed in a religious way, when Philip came up to him, and was very desirous of being instructed in the knowledge of divine things; and yet notwithstanding all this, he had no right to the ordinance of baptism, unless he had faith in Christ, and made a profession of it; nor would Philip administer it to him without it; from whence it appears, that faith in Christ, and a profession of it, are necessary prerequisites to baptism: and this faith should not be a mere historical and temporary faith, nor a feigned one, but a believing in Christ with the heart unto righteousness; or such a faith by which a soul relinquishes its own righteousness, and looks and goes unto Christ for righteousness, life, and salvation, and rests and relies upon him for them; and it should be a believing in him with the whole heart, which does not design a strong faith, or a full assurance of faith, but an hearty, sincere, and unfeigned one, though it may be but weak, and very imperfect. And that this is necessary to baptism is manifest, because without this it is impossible to please God; nor can submission and obedience to it be acceptable to him: nor indeed can the ordinance be grateful and pleasing to unbelievers; for though it is a command that is not grievous, and a yoke that is easy, yet it is only so to them that believe; nor can any other see to the end of this ordinance, or behold the burial, and resurrection of Christ represented by it, or be baptized into his death, and partake of the benefits of it; and besides, whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God: which though a short, is a very comprehensive summary of the articles of faith respecting the person, offices, and grace of Christ; as that he is a divine person, truly and properly God, the only begotten of the Father, of the same nature with him, and equal to him; that he existed from all eternity, as a divine person with him, and distinct from him; and that he is the Christ, the anointed of God, to be prophet, priest, and King; and is Jesus, the only Saviour of lost sinners, in whom he trusted and depended alone for righteousness, life, and salvation.

This whole verse is wanting in the Alexandrian copy, and in five of Beza’s copies, and in the Syriac and Ethiopic versions; but stands in the Vulgate Latin and Arabic versions, and in the Complutensian edition; and, as Beza observes, ought by no means to be expunged, since it contains so clear a confession of faith required of persons to be baptized, which was used in the truly apostolic times. (Gill’s Exposition of the Whole Bible, Acts, Chapter 8)

Verse 7

The genuineness of this text has been called in question by some, because it is wanting in the Syriac version, as it also is in the Arabic and Ethiopic versions; and because the old Latin interpreter has it not; and it is not to be found in many Greek manuscripts; nor cited by many of the ancient fathers, even by such who wrote against the Arians, when it might have been of great service to them: to all which it may be replied, that

As to the Syriac version, which is the most ancient, and of the greatest consequence, it is but a version, and a defective one. The history of the adulterous woman in the eighth of John, the second epistle of Peter, the second and third epistles of John, the epistle of Jude, and the book of the Revelations, were formerly wanting in it, till restored from Bishop Usher’s copy by De Dieu and Dr. Pocock, and who also, from an eastern copy, has supplied this version with this text.

As to the old Latin interpreter, it is certain it is to be seen in many Latin manuscripts of an early date, and stands in the Vulgate Latin edition of the London Polyglot Bible: and the Latin translation, which bears the name of Jerom[e], has it, and who, in an epistle of his to Eustochium, prefixed to his translation of these canonical epistles, complains of the omission of it by unfaithful interpreters.

And as to its being wanting in some Greek manuscripts, as the Alexandrian, and others, it need only be said, that it is to be found in many others; it is in an old British copy, and in the Complutensian edition, the compilers of which made use of various copies; and out of sixteen ancient copies of Robert Stephens’s, nine of them had it: and as to its not being cited by some of the ancient fathers, this can be no sufficient proof of the spuriousness of it, since it might be in the original copy, though not in the copies used by them, through the carelessness or unfaithfulness of transcribers; or it might be in their copies, and yet not cited by them, they having Scriptures enough without it, to defend the doctrine of the Trinity, and the divinity of Christ.

And yet, after all, certain it is, that it is cited by many of them; by Fulgentius^z, in the beginning of the “sixth” century, against the Arians, without any scruple or hesitation; and Jerom[e], as before observed, has it in his translation made in the latter end of the “fourth” century; and it is cited by Athanasius about the year 350; and before him by Cyprian, in the middle, of the “third” century, about the year 250; and is referred to by Tertullian about, the year 200; and which was within a “hundred” years, or little more, of the writing of the epistle; which may be enough to satisfy anyone of the genuineness of this passage; and besides, there never was any dispute about it till Erasmus left it out in the first edition of his translation of the New Testament; and yet he himself, upon the credit of the old British copy before mentioned, put it into another edition of his translation…

and these three are one; which is to be understood, not only of their unity and agreement in their testimony, they testifying of the same thing, the sonship of Christ; but of their unity in essence or nature, they being the one God. So that, this passage holds forth and asserts the unity of God, a trinity of persons in the Godhead, the proper deity of each person, and their distinct personality, the unity of essence in that they are one; a trinity of persons in that they are three, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and are neither more nor fewer; the deity of each person, for otherwise their testimony would not be the testimony of God, as in 1 John 5:9; and their distinct personality; for were they not three distinct persons, they could not be three testifiers, or three that bare record.

This being a proper place, I shall insert the faith of the ancient Jews concerning the doctrine of the Trinity; and the rather, as it agrees with the apostle’s doctrine in words and language, as well as in matter. They call the three Persons in the Godhead three degrees: they say^d,

“Jehovah, Elohenu (our God), Jehovah, Deuteronomy 6:4; these are the three degrees with respect to this sublime mystery, in the beginning Elohim, or God, created, Genesis 1:1, c.”

And these three, they say, though they are distinct, yet are one, as appears by what follows^e:

“come see the mystery of the word there are three degrees, and every degree is by itself, yet they are all one, and are bound together in one, and one is not separated from the other.”

Again, it is said^f,

“this is the unity of Jehovah the first, Elohenu, Jehovah, lo, all of them are one, and therefore: called one; lo, the three names are as if they were one, and therefore are called one, and they are one; but by the revelation of the Holy Spirit it is made known, and they by the sight of the eye may be known, דתלתא אלין אחד, “that these three are one“: and this is the mystery of the voice which is heard; the voice is one, and there are three things, fire, and Spirit, and water, and all of them are one in the mystery of the voice, and they are but one: so here, Jehovah, Elohenu, Jehovah, they are one, the three, גוונין, forms, modes, or things, which are one.”

Once more^g,

“there are two, and one is joined unto them, and they are three; and when the three are one, he says to them, these are the two names which Israel heard, Jehovah, Jehovah, and Elohenu is joined unto them, and it is the seal of the ring of truth; and when they are joined as one, they are one in one unity.”

And this they illustrate by the three names of the soul of man^h;

“the three powers are all of them one, the soul, spirit, and breath, they are joined as one, and they are one; and all is according to the mode of the sublime mystery,”

meaning the Trinity.

“Says R. Isaacⁱ worthy are the righteous in this world, and in the world to come, for lo, the whole of them is holy, their body is holy, their soul is holy, their Spirit is holy, their breath is holy, holy are these three degrees “according to the form above”.–Come see these three degrees cleave together as one, the soul, Spirit, and breath.”

The three first Sephirot, or numbers, in the Cabalistic tree, intend the three divine Persons; the first is called the chief crown, and first glory, which essence no creature can comprehend^k, and designs the Father, John 1:18; the second is called wisdom, and the intelligence illuminating, the crown of the creation, the brightness of equal unity, who is exalted above every head; and he is called, by the Cabalists, the second glory^l; see 1 Corinthians 1:24 Hebrews 1:3. This is the Son of God: the third is called understanding sanctifying, and is the foundation of ancient wisdom, which is called the worker of faith; and he is the parent of faith, and from his power faith flows^m; and this is the Holy Spirit; see 1 Peter 1:2. Now they sayⁿ that these three first numbers are intellectual, and are not מדות, “properties”, or “attributes”, as the other seven are. R. Simeon ben Jochai says^o,

“of the three superior numbers it is said, Psalms 62:11, “God hath spoken once, twice have I heard this”; one and two, lo the superior numbers of whom it is said, one, one, one, three ones, and this is the mystery of Psalms 62:11.”

Says R. Judah Levi^p,

“behold the mystery of the numberer, the number, and the numbered; in the bosom of God it is one thing, in the bosom of man three; because he weighs with his understanding, and speaks with his mouth, and writes with his hand.”

It was usual with the ancient Jews to introduce Jehovah speaking, or doing anything, in this form, I and my house of judgment; and it is a rule with them, that wherever it is said, “and Jehovah”, he and his house or judgment are intended^q; and Jarchi frequently makes use of this phrase to explain texts where a plurality in the Godhead is intended, as Genesis 1:26; and it is to be observed, that a house of judgment, or a sanhedrim, among the Jews, never consisted of less than three. They also had used to write the word “Jehovah” with three “Jods”, in the form of a triangle,

י

י י

as representing the three divine Persons: one of their more modern^r writers has this observation on the blessing of the priest in Numbers 6:24:

“these three verses begin with a “Jod”, in reference to the three “Jods” which we write in the room of the name, (i.e. Jehovah,) for they have respect to the three superior things.”

z Respons. contr. Arian. obj. 10. & de Trinitate, c. 4.

a Contr. Arium, p. 109.

b De Unitate Eccles. p. 255. & in Ep. 73. ad Jubajan, p. 184.

c Contr. Praxeam, c. 25.

d Zohar in Gen. fol. 1. 3.

e Ib. in Lev. fol. 27. 2.

f Ib. in Exod. fol. 18. 3, 4.

g lb. in Numb. fol. 67. 3.

h lb. in Exod. fol. 73. 4.

i lb. in Lev. fol. 29. 2.

k Sepher Jetzira, Semit. 1.

l Sepher Jetzira, Semit. 2.

m Ib. Semit. 3.

n R. Menachem apud Rittangel. in Jetzira, p. 193.

o Tikkune Zohar apud ib. p. 64. p Apud ib. p. 38.

q Zohar in Gen. fol. 48. 4. Jarchi in Gen. xix. 24. Vid. T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 6. 1. & Gloss. in ib. & Sanhedrin, fol. 3. 2.

r R. Abraham Seba in Tzeror Hammor, fol. 113. 2. (Ibid., 1 John, Chapter 5)

FRANCIS TURRETIN

There is no truth that the Hebrew edition of the Old Testament and the Greek edition of the New Testament are said to be mutilated; nor can the argument used by our opponents prove it.

Not the history of the adulteress (John 8:1-11), for although it is lacking in the Syriac version, it is found in all the Greek manuscripts.

Not 1 John 5:7, for although some formerly called it into question and heretics now do, yet all the Greek copies have it, as Sixtus Senensis acknowledges: “they have been the words of never-doubted truth, and contained in all the Greek copies from the very times of the apostles.” (Bibliotheca sancta, [1575], 2:298).

Not Mark 16 which may have been wanting in several copies in the time of Jerome (as he asserts); but now it occurs in all, even in the Syriac version, and is clearly necessary to complete the history of the resurrection of Christ. (Institutes of Elenctic Theology, Volume I, Second Topic, Question XI, Paragraph X)

Here’s what Sixtus Senensis states:

Ad vero, quod impii Anabaptistae, ac Servetani de verbis illis, quae in quinto capite primae Ioannis adiecta contendunt, respondemus, ea verba apud Catholicos indubitate semper veritatis fuisse, & in omnibus Graecis exmplaribus ab ipsis Apostolorum temporibus lecta: nec opus est quicquam de ipsorum perpetua integritate, synceritateque dubitare, cum Iginus Papa primus, inducat ea adversus Haereticos, tanquam invictum pro summa Trinitate testimonium. Sic enim in epistola ad omnes Christi fideles scribit: Et iterum ipse Ionnes Evangelista ad Parthos scribens ait: Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in caelo, Pater, Verbum, & Spiritum Sanctus, & hi tres unum sunt. Quin & sancta mater Ecclesia testimonium istud quotannis per octavam Paschae in sacris mysteriis, ut ex vera & germana eiusdem Evanelistae Epistola decantat. Nec Hieronymus usquan dixit, illud in codicibus Graecis Ecclesiae Catholicae defuisse, immo in Prologo Canonicarum ad Eustochium, conqueritur, haec verba ab infidelibus, & Haereticis translatoribus in Latinum versa non fuisse, cum passim in Graecis voluminibus legerentur, haec verba ab infidelibus, & Haereticis translatoribus in Latinum versa non fuisse, cum passim in Graecis voluminibus legerentur, haec enim sunt Hieronymi eo in Prologo verba: 

Quae scilicet Epistolae, si ut ab eis, hoc est, Graecis authoribus, digesta sunt, ita quoque ab interpretibus fideliter verterentur in Latinum eloquium, nec ambiguitatem legentibus facerent, nec sermonum sese varietas impugnaret, illo praecipuem loco, ubide unitate Trinitatis, in prima Ioannis epistola positum legimus, in quo etiam ab infidelibus translatoribus multum erratum esse a fidei veritate comperimus, trium tantummodo vocabula, hoc est Aquae, Sanguinu, & Spiritus, in ipsa sua editione ponentibus, & Patris, Verbique, ac Spiritus Sancti, testimonium omittentibus, in quo maxime & fides Catholica roberator, & Patris, & Filii, & Spritus Sancti in una Divinitatis substantia comprobatur.

Hec Hieronymus.

Quod autem ex prima Erasmi traductione adijciunt, nihil nos movet viti huius Authoritatas, cuius non paucas sententias nuper catholica Ecclesia damnavit, cum ea verba in Graecis exemplaribus ut ostendimus, semper fuerint, & nunc quoque in nostris Graecis codicbus palam in hunc modum legantur, τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες, εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, πατήρ, λόγος, καὶ Πνεῦμα Ἅγιον καὶ οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν Et ipsem et Erasmus in Annotationibus suis fateatur, haec eadem verba, haberi in pervetustis Graecis exemplaribus Britanniae, Hispaniae ac Rhodi.

To the truth, regarding the words that the impious Anabaptists and followers of Servetus contend have been added to the fifth chapter of the first Epistle of John, we respond that these words have always been undoubted truth among Catholics, and read in all Greek copies since the times of the Apostles themselves. There is no need to doubt their perpetual integrity and sincerity, since Pope Eugene I used them against heretics, as an invincible testimony for the supreme Trinity. Thus, he writes in his letter to all the faithful of Christ: ‘And again, John the Evangelist himself writing to the Parthians says: There are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.‘ Moreover, the holy mother Church chants this testimony every year during the octave of Easter in the sacred mysteries, as from the true and genuine Epistle of the same Evangelist. Nor did Jerome ever say that it was missing in the Greek codices of the Catholic Church; on the contrary, in the Prologue to the Canonical [Epistles] to Eustochium, he complains that these words were not translated into Latin by unfaithful and heretical translators, although they were widely read in the Greek volumes. These are the words of Jerome in that Prologue:

‘Which Epistles, if as they are composed by their Greek authors, were also faithfully translated by interpreters into the Latin language, they would not cause ambiguity to the readers, nor would the variety of words conflict with each other, especially in that principal place, where we read of the unity of the Trinity, in the first Epistle of John, in which we also find that much error has been made by unfaithful translators far from the truth of faith, only placing three words, that is, Water, Blood, and Spirit, in their own edition, and omitting the testimony of the Father, and of the Word, and of the Holy Ghost, in which the Catholic faith is particularly strengthened, and the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are proved to be in one substance of the Divinity.‘

Thus Jerome.

As for what they add from the first translation of Erasmus, it does not move us because of this Author’s authority, whose not a few sentences the Catholic Church has recently condemned, since as we have shown, those words have always been in the Greek copies, and are now also plainly read in our Greek codices in this manner: τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες, εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, πατήρ, λόγος, καὶ Πνεῦμα Ἅγιον καὶ οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν. And even Erasmus himself admits in his Annotations that these same words are found in very ancient Greek copies of Britain, Spain, and Rhodes. (Bibliotheca Sancta A F. Sixtus Senensis, Liber Septimus, p. 599)

1647 WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH

3. In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost,^a The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father;^b the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son.^c

a. Mat 3:16-17; 28:19; 2 Cor 13:14; 1 John 5:7. • b. John 1:14, 18. • c. John 15:26; Gal 4:6. (Chapter II – Of God, and of the Holy Trinity)

4. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ,^a but also the infants of one or both believing parents are to be baptized.^b

a. Mark 16:15-16; Acts 8:37-38. • b. Gen 17:7, 9 with Gal 3:9, 14 and Col 2:11-12 and Acts 2:38-39 and Rom 4:11-12; Mat 28:19; Mark 10:13-16; Luke 18:15; 1 Cor 7:14. (Chapter XXVIII – Of Baptism)

1689 LONDON BAPTIST CONFESSION OF FAITH

PARAGRAPH 3

In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word or Son, and Holy Spirit,²⁷ of one substance, power, and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided:²⁸ the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father;²⁹ the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son;³⁰ all infinite, without beginning, therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties and personal relations; which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our communion with God, and comfortable dependence on Him.

27 1 John 5:7; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14

28 Exod. 3:14; John 14:11; I Cor. 8:6

29 John 1:14,18

30 John 15:26; Gal. 4:6 (Of God and the Holy Trinity)

PARAGRAPH 2

Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance.⁴

4 Mark 16:16; Acts 8:36–37, 2:41, 8:12, 18:8 (Of Baptism)

FURTHER READING

Acts 8:37 – Sorting out the Evidence

ACTS 8:37 AND BAPTISMAL CONFESSION

Luke 23:34a – Answering the Apologists (Part 1)

Luke 23:34a – Answering the Apologists (Part 2)

A renowned NT textual scholar and critic of Christianity’s defense of the veracity of Luke 23:34

• Uncategorized