if the God of the Bible is a trinity then you shouldn't have to change the Bible in order to prove it right then why do we see Alexandrian scribes to Byzantine copious to Latin translators a pattern of textual corruption by trinitarians to support the Trinity and of course these would be the standard for the English translations like the Wcliffe the Tendale and the King James version which all reveal a host of issues from varants to outright corruptions and in this video we're going to cover seven times Trinitarians change the Bible in order to support the Trinity be sure to like this video if you enjoy it and subscribe if you haven't now you probably know 1 Timothy 3:16 by heart which reads "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness God was manifested in the flesh." But what if I told you that the earliest and most reliable manuscripts like Codex Vaticanis and Codex Citicus read who was manifest in the flesh and not God folks the difference between who and God is not trivial because it changes the subject entirely bruce Mezer writes "The reading Theos either arose accidentally or deliberately either to supply a substantive for the following six verbs or with less probability to provide greater dogmatic precision." Now of course it's possible that this was not intentional but friends this period of history is filled with debates with councils and creeds and it wasn't like today if you lost a debate you could be excommunicated from the church or even killed and therefore it's so reasonable that they were under immense pressure to find and maybe even invent proof texts in order to win these very debates think about it change just one simple pronoun and the debate over the incarnation is over amongst all English translations it is the King James version who essentially alone translates this as God but now let's look at a second example where it looks like the King James version has the better reading and this is so important because it's not merely looking at the oldest or most reliable manuscripts but also other criteria that we have to talk about in order to be objective john 1:18 no one has ever seen God but the one and only son who is himself God esv says "No one has ever seen God the only God who is at the father's side." The Berean literal Bible says the only begotten God but the King James version says the only begotten son who is in the bosom of the father he is declared him it is true that the term the only begotten God does appear in some of the earliest manuscripts however there are many reasons to believe that this is not the original for starters every one of those texts reading Theos is of the Alexandrian text type and it's during this period in Alexandria that there was the debate over high christologology virtually every other textual tradition including the Western the Byzantine the Cecarian including secondary Alexandrian text all read hoist or the sun a large number of church fathers such as Arrenaeus Clement and Tertullian all quote this passage as reading son honestly even the author of John himself speaks of Jesus being the only begotten son and so it's odd that this text reads this way and its inclusion likely represents a doctrinal effort to portray Jesus as ontologically divine which was critical to the evolving trinitarian Christology all right now let's check out a passage that doesn't seek to change our understanding of Jesus in the New Testament but rather the way we see him in the Old in the Epistle of Jude we have a verse that says Jesus delivered the people out of Egypt and this is what is set forth in the oldest manuscripts however there's a popular variant of the same verse which reads "The Lord saved a people out of the land of Egypt." And this is also represented in some early manuscripts and the reason why there's good evidence to believe this is the original reading is number one every passage in the Old Testament says Lord exodus 12:51 says "On that very day the Lord brought the Israelites out of the land of Egypt i am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt i am the Lord who brought you out of the land of Egypt." So virtually all scripture except for this passage says that the Lord brought them out of Egypt using as well the help of the angel who bore his name and if Jude is drawing from this it's quite obvious he would use Lord because that's what it says secondly in the dictionary of early Christian beliefs a phenomenal reference work on the church fathers I looked up Jude and found that two church fathers do mention that Jude wrote an epistle proving that they had access to it and for people like Origin or Justin Martyr who theorized that the son was the angel of the Lord most certainly would have cited this if they had it in their version of Jude folks many scholars believe that this textual variant is likely an alteration in effort of aiding the evolving highristologology of the day all right these first three examples are highly debated even to this day so why don't we take a look at three notable mentions where virtually nobody disagrees and we're just supposed to forget about the earliest and most reliable manuscripts of Titus 3:6 read "Through Jesus Christ our Savior but some late manuscripts read through Jesus Christ our God and Savior." This slight addition of God shifts the meaning dramatically doesn't it from Jesus as God's agent he uses to save us to God himself the earliest Greek manuscripts like Codex Citicus Vaticanis Alexandrinus do not contain God in this verse hebrews 13:20 most English translations say through our Lord Jesus but yet there are others that say through our God Jesus again the earliest Greek manuscripts say our Lord and it's only later Latin manuscripts which read our God john 19:40 where it says they took the body of Jesus you know like most English translations say well in CEX Alexandrianis some scribe thought you know this should really say the body of God obviously to support trinitarian Christologology it is possible that some of these were mistakes but it's just unlikely i think Bartman hits it on the head where he says that you know many of these scribes didn't just translate the text they interpreted it and sometimes their interpretations became the text they represent a theological evolution based on the pressures in culture and debates of their day i mean even if they did say God it's not like that would really be a problem for the Unitarian position but we can't just overlook that like we either speak the truth and shame the devil or we don't if your belief is true you shouldn't have to be changing things in order to support your position all right and now finally let's get to what is probably the most egregious and obvious trinitarian corruption in all of the holy scriptures called the Johannine comma if you look in most English translations like the ESV or the NIV you are going to see there are three that bear witness in heaven the water the spirit and the blood this is what is represented in virtually all the earliest Greek manuscripts oh look how they changed this in the King James version it reads "There are three that bear record in heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost." In these three are one entirely different this reading only appears in the latest Latin manuscripts and textual critics from across the spectrum all agree that this is a later addition in absolute corruption that the translators added in order to support the doctrine of the trinity and trinitarians basically just want us to forget about this but we have to bring this up because trinitarians have historically changed the text in order to support the trinity and groups like the Catholic Church have suppressed the truth historically for corruptions like the Johannine Kama why is it that like all of the main discrepancies are all surrounding trinitarianism we must all ask ourselves for a doctrine as significant as the Trinity is it really justified can it truly live on with integrity based on controversial disputed passages like these in pursuit of the truth every single one of us must question even our most cherished assumptions and we must remember that our loyalty lies to God that our faith is in his son Jesus Christ not to any edictal authority not to any particular church father counsel or creed if that's not our source our foundation then truly the greatest threat to scripture to the truth is not outsiders and non-Christian no it's internal Christians changing the Bible to fit their own theology and that does it for this video thanks so much for watching let me know what you think in the comments about these passages or any others that you have in mind be sure to like the video subscribe if you haven't share it with someone who will enjoy it folks help the truth go viral