# 1 John 2:23 in the Authorised Version



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 2, 2018)

My KJV Bible translates 1 John 2:23 as follows:
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: _[but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also_. 

Does anyone know why they put the last half of the verse in italics and the 'but' in brackets?

Modern translations do not do this so I understand it is not a textual variant.


----------



## Parmenas (Feb 2, 2018)

My TBS Windsor Text Bible reads:

Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: _but_ he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

It seems your copy is flawed. Brackets, in electronic media, usually indicate omitted italicization.


----------



## Beezer (Feb 2, 2018)

I just checked some of my KJV Bibles and the "[_but_]" appears in the Oxford text blocks and also in my Reformation Heritage KJV Study Bible, but not in any of the TBS editions. Interesting.

_[Edit: I just checked a large print family edition KJV that Cambridge printed for TBS and it includes [but]. The Westminster and Windsor TBS omits it.]_


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Feb 3, 2018)

It seems the [but] is considered added even to the italicized portion, and to be considered added only for grammatical reasons, whereas the italicized were included because even the translators were divided as to their genuineness (I do realize that the italicized are not really under discussion here, but thought it pertinent and of interest!). Two views on the matter:

Will Kinney (I know some may abhor his KJVO stance, but he _is_ a good scholar).

And from the Presbyterian Magazine, Vol 7, 1857:

Reactions: Informative 4 | Edifying 1


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Feb 4, 2018)

Thank you Steve. The comments made sense. Interesting that no modern translations (including the NKJV) make any mention of a textual variant.


Jerusalem Blade said:


> Will Kinney (I know some may abhor his KJVO stance, but he _is_ a good scholar).


I see he responds to a number of James White's arguments on his website. Perhaps he could be a suitable scholar to debate James White on the Received Text vs the Critical Text.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Feb 5, 2018)

Stephen, they have debated, though I don't recall if it was in person and filmed or via phone, as well as in print. It wasn't a formal debate (or debates), and not irenic. I didn't care for it.

Reactions: Sad 1


----------

