Simon Brown.

Join me on this journey. Let's seek the truth together! 💡 Proverbs 8:34-36 Blessed is the man who hears me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at my door posts. For whoever finds me finds life, and will obtain favor from Yahweh. But he who sins against me wrongs his own soul. All those who hate me love death.” Psalm 84: 11 For Yahweh God is a sun and a shield. Yahweh will give grace and glory. He withholds no good thing from those who walk blamelessly. 12 Yahweh of Armies, blessed is the man who trusts in you. 1 John 5:5 Now who is the one overcoming the world, except the one believing that Jesus is the Son of God.
Showing posts with label Codex Sinaiticus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Codex Sinaiticus. Show all posts

Sunday, 23 August 2026

Quick Facts: Jude 1:5 – Who Saved Israel Out of Egypt, the Lord or Jesus?

 

Quick Facts Jude 1:5 study comparing the disputed Greek readings Lord and Jesus with Codex Sinaiticus and Exodus 12:51 identifying Yahweh as Israel’s deliverer.

A detailed Bible research infographic examining the textual variant in Jude 1:5 between “Lord” and “Jesus.” It compares ancient manuscript evidence, Codex Sinaiticus, Bible translations and textual scholarship with Exodus 12:51, which explicitly identifies Yahweh as the One who brought Israel out of Egypt.

QUICK FACTS: JUDE 1:5

WHO SAVED ISRAEL OUT OF EGYPT — THE LORD OR JESUS?

Jude 1:5 contains a genuine and important textual variant.

Some modern Bible translations read “Jesus”, while others read “the Lord.” Because the difference can affect how the verse is understood theologically, this is a passage where we should follow the example of the Bereans:

Acts 17:11 — Berean Literal Bible

“...receiving the word with all readiness, every day examining the Scriptures, whether these things were so.”

So rather than beginning with a doctrine, let's examine the evidence.


TWO DIFFERENT READINGS OF JUDE 1:5

Some modern translations essentially read:

“JESUS...SAVED A PEOPLE OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT.”

The ESV, for example, uses “Jesus.”

This reading has naturally been used as evidence that Jesus personally existed before His human birth and was active during the Exodus.

But many other translations have:

“THE LORD”

rather than:

“JESUS.”

So which reading did Jude originally write?


THE GREEK MANUSCRIPTS DO NOT ALL AGREE

This point is extremely important.

The textual evidence for Jude 1:5 contains several readings, principally:

Ἰησοῦς — Iēsous — “Jesus”

and:

κύριος — kyrios — “Lord”

There are also other manuscript variations.

Therefore, we should not claim that “Jesus” was simply invented by modern translators. There really are ancient Greek witnesses supporting that reading.

At the same time, “Lord” is also an ancient manuscript reading.

This makes Jude 1:5 a genuine textual-critical question rather than a case where every ancient manuscript says “Lord” and modern translators simply changed it to “Jesus.”

That distinction makes our argument much stronger because we're presenting the evidence accurately.


WHAT ABOUT CODEX SINAITICUS?

One particularly important witness is Codex Sinaiticus, one of our oldest surviving Greek biblical manuscripts.

In Jude 1:5, Sinaiticus supports the reading:

κύριος — LORD

rather than:

Ἰησοῦς — JESUS.

That is significant evidence for the “Lord” reading.

But Sinaiticus alone cannot determine the original wording. Other important ancient witnesses support “Jesus.”

So we must look beyond one manuscript.


EVEN TEXTUAL SCHOLARS HAVE DISAGREED

The history of the critical Greek New Testament demonstrates just how difficult this verse is.

Earlier editions of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament preferred “Lord.”

The more recent Nestle-Aland 28th edition instead prints “Jesus.”

Bruce Metzger reported that the textual committee had previously preferred “Lord”, even though “Jesus” had very strong manuscript support.

Metzger himself actually argued that normal textual-critical principles favored “Jesus.”

This is important because it means the evidence is more complicated than simply saying:

“LORD IS THE ORIGINAL AND JESUS IS A FALSE TRINITARIAN TRANSLATION.”

There is a real textual dispute.

But that still leaves us with another extremely important question.


EVEN IF JUDE WROTE “LORD,” WHO SAVED ISRAEL?

For that answer, we can go directly back to the Exodus account itself.

Exodus 12:51 — World English Bible

“It happened the same day, that Yahweh brought the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt by their armies.”

Who does Exodus explicitly identify?

YAHWEH.

This is not an inference from Jude.

This is the Exodus narrative itself.

Yahweh brought Israel out of Egypt.


THE OLD TESTAMENT REPEATS THIS

The same truth appears repeatedly.

Exodus 20:2

“I am Yahweh your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.”

And again:

Deuteronomy 5:6

“I am Yahweh your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.”

The identity of Israel's deliverer is therefore explicit:

YAHWEH, THE GOD OF ISRAEL.

That is the biblical background against which Jude 1:5 must be interpreted.


SO WHAT HAPPENS IF JUDE ORIGINALLY SAID “THE LORD”?

Then Jude's statement fits the Old Testament account naturally:

JUDE:

The Lord saved the people out of Egypt.

EXODUS:

Yahweh brought the children of Israel out of Egypt.

The identification is straightforward:

THE LORD = YAHWEH

in reference to the Exodus deliverance.


BUT WHAT IF “JESUS” IS ACTUALLY THE ORIGINAL READING?

This is the harder question, and it should not be avoided.

If Ἰησοῦς (“Jesus”) is original, then Jude 1:5 becomes genuine evidence used by scholars who believe Jude identifies Jesus with the divine Lord active in Israel's Exodus.

That would be a serious argument for pre-existence.

However, one disputed textual variant should not be interpreted in isolation from the rest of Scripture.

We would still need to ask how this reading relates to the explicit Old Testament statements that:

YAHWEH DELIVERED ISRAEL.

And we would need to examine whether Jude intended to identify Jesus personally with Yahweh, whether “Jesus” arose through textual transmission, or whether some other explanation best accounts for the evidence.

The manuscript question must therefore come before building doctrine upon the verse.


JUDE'S NORMAL WAY OF NAMING JESUS IS ALSO INTERESTING

Elsewhere in Jude, the writer normally uses expressions such as:

“JESUS CHRIST”

rather than simply “Jesus.”

That observation was one of the considerations historically raised in discussions over the reading of Jude 1:5.

It does not prove that “Jesus” cannot be original.

But it is legitimate internal evidence to consider alongside the manuscripts.


SIR ANTHONY BUZZARD'S VIEW

Bible teacher Sir Anthony Buzzard argued in correspondence concerning this passage that “the Lord” should be preferred.

His argument included the fact that Exodus explicitly identifies YHWH as the One who delivered Israel and that Jude elsewhere normally says “Jesus Christ.”

His conclusion was therefore that Jude 1:5 should not be used to identify Jesus as the Yahweh who brought Israel out of Egypt.

That represents one side of the textual and theological debate.

Other textual scholars, including Metzger in his personal dissent, have preferred “Jesus.”

So readers should know that serious scholars have disagreed over this verse.


THIS IS WHY ACTS 17:11 MATTERS

We should not choose “Jesus” merely because it supports the pre-existence or deity of Christ.

But neither should we choose “Lord” merely because it supports a Unitarian interpretation.

Instead:

EXAMINE THE MANUSCRIPTS.

EXAMINE THE CONTEXT.

EXAMINE THE OLD TESTAMENT SOURCE.

EXAMINE THE REST OF SCRIPTURE.

That is exactly the Berean approach.


THE UNDISPUTED FACT

Whatever conclusion we reach about the original reading of Jude 1:5, one statement is beyond dispute:

Exodus 12:51 says:

“YAHWEH BROUGHT THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT.”

The Old Testament repeatedly identifies Yahweh as Israel's deliverer.

Therefore, anyone using the variant “Jesus” in Jude 1:5 as a proof text must explain how that reading relates to those explicit statements.

It cannot simply be assumed that:

“Jude says Jesus; therefore Jesus is Yahweh.”

That is a theological conclusion that requires further argument.


QUICK FACT CONCLUSION

Jude 1:5 is not as simple as some presentations make it appear.

There is an ancient textual variation:

JESUS

versus:

THE LORD.

Codex Sinaiticus supports:

THE LORD.

Other ancient witnesses support:

JESUS.

Earlier critical Greek editions preferred Lord, while the current Nestle-Aland text prefers Jesus.

Therefore, the strongest case is not to pretend the manuscript dispute doesn't exist.

Instead, return to the Scriptures Jude was referring to.

And there we find:

Exodus 12:51

“YAHWEH BROUGHT THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT.”

So before anyone uses Jude 1:5 to prove that Jesus personally existed during the Exodus—or that Jesus is Yahweh—we should first establish which reading Jude originally wrote and then interpret that reading in harmony with the biblical context.

DON'T BUILD A MAJOR DOCTRINE ON A DISPUTED WORD WITHOUT FIRST EXAMINING THE EVIDENCE.

That is not unbelief.

THAT IS BEING A BEREAN.


OLD RESEARCH ARTICLE

The Translations of Jude 1:5 — Who Saved Israel Out of Egypt: The Lord or Jesus?

https://wwwrealdiscoveriesorg-simon.blogspot.com/2020/09/the-false-translations-of-jude-15-who.html

Research by Simon Brown
wwwrealdiscoveriesorg-simon.blogspot.com

Hebrews 1:10 – Did God Really Say to the Son, “You Laid the Foundation of the Earth”?


Sunday, 16 August 2026

1 Timothy 3:16 – “God Was Manifest in the Flesh” or “He Who”?

 

1 Timothy 3:16 infographic comparing the KJV phrase “God was manifest in the flesh” with the Greek ὃς (hos), meaning “who” or “he who,” using Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus and Greek manuscript evidence.

This detailed infographic examines the textual variant in 1 Timothy 3:16. It compares the King James Bible reading “God was manifest in the flesh” with the Greek reading ὃς (hos), meaning “who” or “he who,” and presents evidence from Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Greek lexicons, interlinear texts and Colossians 1:15.

QUICK FACTS: 1 TIMOTHY 3:16

DOES THE ORIGINAL GREEK REALLY SAY “GOD WAS MANIFESTED IN THE FLESH”?

Some Bible translations of 1 Timothy 3:16 contain a striking statement:

“God was manifest in the flesh.”
— 1 Timothy 3:16, KJV

At first glance, this appears to be powerful evidence that Paul directly identified Jesus as God manifested in human flesh.

But there is a major textual problem.

The earliest and strongest Greek manuscript evidence does not read θεός (theos), “God.”

Instead, the reading accepted in most modern critical Greek texts is:

ὃς — “WHO” / “HE WHO”

That difference is extremely important.

The question is therefore not what later theology says the verse means.

The question is:

WHAT DID THE GREEK TEXT ACTUALLY SAY?


THE TEXTUAL VARIANT

There are several ancient readings of 1 Timothy 3:16.

The two most important for this discussion are:

θεός — THEOS — “GOD”

and

ὃς — HOS — “WHO”

The KJV follows the reading θεός, producing:

“God was manifest in the flesh.”

However, the critical Greek text followed by most modern scholars reads:

ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί

Literally:

“Who was revealed/manifested in flesh.”

The person described by the passage is understood to be Christ, but the Greek text itself does not call Him θεός — God at this point.

That is the crucial distinction.


QUICK FACT NO. 1

THE WORD “GOD” IS NOT IN THE CRITICAL GREEK TEXT

Look at the Greek text and lexicons.

The word appearing at the beginning of the statement is:

ὃς

Strong's Greek 3739.

It is a relative pronoun meaning:

“who”

It is NOT:

θεός

the Greek word meaning:

“God.”

Therefore, when 1 Timothy 3:16 is reconstructed with the reading ὃς, Paul does not actually write:

“God was manifested in flesh.”

He writes:

“Who was manifested in flesh…”

This is not a small translation difference.

The underlying Greek word itself is different.


QUICK FACT NO. 2

CODEX SINAITICUS SUPPORTS “WHO,” NOT “GOD”

This becomes particularly important when we examine ancient manuscripts.

Codex Sinaiticus, one of our oldest surviving substantially complete Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, supports the reading:

ὃς — WHO

not:

θεός — GOD

Therefore, Sinaiticus does not provide the statement:

“God was manifested in the flesh.”

The manuscript instead supports the relative pronoun “who.”

This is strong evidence that the familiar KJV wording cannot simply be assumed to represent the earliest recoverable form of the text.


QUICK FACT NO. 3

CODEX EPHRAEMI RESCRIPTUS PROVIDES FASCINATING EVIDENCE

Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus is especially interesting in the history of this textual variant.

The manuscript has traditionally been cited as evidence that an earlier reading was subsequently altered so that it could be read as θεός — “God.”

This matters because the abbreviated manuscript form for θεός could visually resemble ΟΣ, particularly when additional strokes were added.

Bruce Metzger discussed this famous textual problem in his Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament.

The manuscript evidence led the UBS critical text to prefer:

ὃς — “WHO”

rather than:

θεός — “GOD.”

Whatever theological conclusions someone ultimately reaches about Jesus, textual criticism must first establish what the author most probably wrote.

And the strongest critical-text tradition does not put the word “God” here.


QUICK FACT NO. 4

COMPARE COLOSSIANS 1:15

There is an easy way to understand the Greek word ὃς.

Look at another passage written by Paul:

COLOSSIANS 1:15

The Greek begins:

ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου…

Meaning:

“Who is the image of the invisible God…”

Here again we find the relative pronoun:

ὅς — “WHO”

Nobody needs to translate ὅς in Colossians 1:15 as “God.”

In fact, the verse immediately distinguishes the person described by “who” from God, whose image He is.

This helps demonstrate something very simple:

ὅς / ὃς DOES NOT MEAN “GOD.”

The Greek word for God is:

θεός

These are different Greek words.


SO HOW DID “GOD” ENTER SOME BIBLES?

This is where we need to be careful.

It is historically inaccurate to say that all modern Trinitarian translations read “God was manifested in the flesh.”

In fact, many major modern translations reject the KJV's “God” reading precisely because modern textual criticism considers ὃς (“who”) better supported.

The KJV and some translations based upon the later Byzantine/Textus Receptus tradition contain “God.”

Other translations follow the earlier manuscript evidence and translate the passage along the lines of:

“He who was manifested in the flesh…”

or:

“He appeared in the flesh…”

Therefore, the real issue is not simply:

Trinitarian Bible versus Unitarian Bible.

The deeper issue is:

WHICH GREEK READING IS EARLIEST AND BEST SUPPORTED?

And that is exactly the sort of question every serious Bible student should ask.


DOES THIS VERSE CALL JESUS GOD?

If ὃς is the original reading, the answer is straightforward:

NO.

1 Timothy 3:16 describes Christ, but it does not explicitly call Christ θεός — God.

There is an enormous difference between saying:

Christ was manifested in flesh

and saying:

God was manifested in flesh.

The first identifies the person being described.

The second adds an explicit identification of that person as God.

That explicit identification disappears when θεός is removed from the text.


THIS ALSO FITS PAUL'S CLEAR LANGUAGE ELSEWHERE

Rather than building doctrine upon a disputed textual variant, we should compare Paul's undisputed statements.

Paul writes:

“Yet to us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through Him.”
— 1 Corinthians 8:6, BLB

Notice Paul's distinction:

ONE GOD — THE FATHER

and

ONE LORD — JESUS CHRIST

Paul also writes:

“For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”
— 1 Timothy 2:5, BLB

This statement occurs in the very same letter.

Paul identifies:

one God

and then distinguishes from that God:

the man Christ Jesus, God's mediator.

Whatever interpretation we ultimately adopt, these undisputed passages deserve enormous weight when interpreting a disputed reading in 1 Timothy 3:16.


GOD IS NOT A MAN

The Old Testament makes another important statement:

“God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent.”
— Numbers 23:19

Jesus repeatedly called Himself:

THE SON OF MAN

and the New Testament repeatedly identifies Him as God's Son.

This is why we should not casually turn a disputed manuscript reading into a declaration that Paul wrote:

“GOD BECAME A MAN.”

First we must establish whether Paul actually used the word God.

The earliest manuscript evidence gives us very serious reason to conclude that he did not.


WHAT ABOUT TRINITARIAN COMMENTARIES?

Some historic Trinitarian commentators naturally interpreted the KJV/Textus Receptus wording theologically.

Matthew Henry, for example, discusses the passage as:

“God was manifest in the flesh.”

The Geneva tradition similarly interpreted the verse through the reading “God.”

But commentary is not manuscript evidence.

A commentator can only interpret the text placed before him.

Therefore, the question must go one step further:

WAS “GOD” ACTUALLY WHAT PAUL WROTE?

That is where textual criticism becomes essential.


AN IMPORTANT CORRECTION

I want this research to be as accurate as possible.

It would be too strong to claim that we can prove that a particular Trinitarian scribe deliberately changed 1 Timothy 3:16 specifically to invent the Trinity.

The manuscript evidence demonstrates a textual alteration/variant involving ὃς and θεός.

Whether every alteration was deliberate, accidental, or doctrinally motivated is a separate historical question.

Bruce Metzger himself discussed both accidental and deliberate possibilities.

Therefore, the strongest argument is not:

“WE KNOW EXACTLY WHO CHANGED IT AND WHY.”

The strongest demonstrable argument is:

THE READING “GOD” IS NOT THE READING PREFERRED BY THE EARLIEST AND STRONGEST MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE.

That fact alone is significant.

We do not need to exaggerate the evidence.


WHAT HAVE WE DISCOVERED?

The evidence can be summarized very simply:

1. Some later Greek manuscripts read θεός — “God.”

2. The Textus Receptus adopted that reading.

3. The KJV therefore translated:

“God was manifest in the flesh.”

4. Important earlier manuscript evidence supports ὃς — “who.”

5. Modern critical Greek editions therefore generally print ὃς, not θεός.

6. Consequently, 1 Timothy 3:16 cannot safely be used as proof that Paul explicitly called Jesus God.

That final point is the heart of this Quick Facts investigation.


THE BEREAN TEST

Acts records something wonderful about the Bereans:

“Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, who received the word with all readiness, every day examining the Scriptures, whether these things were so.”
— Acts 17:11, BLB

That is the approach I want to follow.

Don't believe something merely because a Unitarian says it.

Don't believe something merely because a Trinitarian says it.

Don't believe something merely because an English Bible translation prints it.

CHECK THE EVIDENCE.

Compare the manuscripts.

Examine the Greek.

Compare Scripture with Scripture.

And then decide what you believe.


FINAL CONCLUSION

Does the strongest early textual evidence for 1 Timothy 3:16 say:

“GOD WAS MANIFESTED IN THE FLESH”?

NO.

The critical Greek reading is:

ὃς — “WHO”

not:

θεός — “GOD.”

Therefore, whatever someone believes about the Trinity from other passages, 1 Timothy 3:16 should not be presented as an undisputed statement in which Paul explicitly calls Jesus “God.”

That claim depends upon a disputed later textual reading.

And once the earlier Greek evidence is examined, the supposed statement:

“GOD WAS MANIFESTED IN THE FLESH”

is no longer the secure proof-text it first appeared to be.

Paul's undisputed teaching remains extraordinarily clear:

“Yet to us there is one God, the Father…”
— 1 Corinthians 8:6, BLB

and:

“For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”
— 1 Timothy 2:5, BLB

That is why 1 Timothy 3:16 deserves to be studied from the Greek manuscripts themselves rather than used as a shortcut to establish a doctrine.

Research by Simon Brown

wwwrealdiscoveriesorg-simon.blogspot.com

Related articles:

1 Timothy 3:16 infographic comparing the KJV phrase “God was manifest in the flesh” with the Greek ὃς (hos), meaning “who” or “he who,” using Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus and Greek manuscript evidence.

Tuesday, 4 August 2026

Acts 20:28 – What Does the Original Greek Really Say?

 

Acts 20:28 Quick Facts infographic examining the original Greek, manuscript evidence, Bible translations, and textual variations in Acts 20:28.

This Quick Facts study explores Acts 20:28 by comparing the original Greek text, Codex Sinaiticus, modern Bible translations, and manuscript evidence. Learn why many translations include footnotes and why careful examination of the text is essential before drawing conclusions.


Acts 20:28 — Quick Facts

Do All Greek Manuscripts Really Say "God Purchased the Church with His Own Blood"?

One of the verses frequently cited in support of the doctrine that Jesus is God is Acts 20:28. But does the manuscript evidence really support that conclusion?

Quick Facts

  • The manuscripts of Acts 20:28 contain textual variations, including readings such as "church of God" and "church of the Lord."

  • Several modern Bible translations include footnotes informing readers that different ancient manuscripts preserve different readings.

  • Some translations also render the verse:

    "the church of God, which he obtained with the blood of his own Son,"
    or include this understanding in the footnotes.

  • The Greek expression τοῦ ἰδίου (tou idiou) literally means "of his own" and can be understood as referring to his own Son, depending on the context.

  • Because of these manuscript differences, many Bible scholars acknowledge that Acts 20:28 is a textually disputed passage.

  • The Codex Sinaiticus contains the reading "God" (Θεοῦ), while other manuscripts contain "Lord." This is one reason why modern translations often include explanatory footnotes.

Why the Footnotes Matter

Before building a doctrine on Acts 20:28, always read the translator's footnotes.

Acts 20:28 Quick Facts infographic examining the original Greek, manuscript evidence, Bible translations, and textual variations in Acts 20:28.

Acts 20:28 Quick Facts infographic examining the original Greek, manuscript evidence, Bible translations, and textual variations in Acts 20:28.

Many readers never notice that Bible translators themselves acknowledge alternative manuscript readings and possible translations.

What Does This Mean?

Acts 20:28 is one of several passages where the manuscript evidence is not entirely uniform. For that reason, the verse should be studied carefully alongside its textual notes, the original Greek, and the wider teaching of Scripture before using it as proof of any doctrine.

"Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica... examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so." — Acts 17:11