Short answer
Yes. Some words that make Jesus look divine are missing from the oldest copies of the Bible. The clearest is 1 John 5:7, the only verse that calls the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost one. Only a handful of late Greek copies have it (the scholar Bruce Metzger counted eight). In Acts 8:37 an Ethiopian says, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The oldest copies do not have that verse. The words "the Son of God" in Mark 1:1 were not in one of the two oldest Greek Bibles as first written. Each of these makes Jesus look more divine, and each is missing from the oldest copies, or from one of them. Islam's answer is simple: Jesus was a great prophet and servant of God (﷾), and God (﷾) is One.
Full explanation
The Trinity verse: 1 John 5:7
The King James Version prints a verse that names the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost as three that are one. It is the only verse in the Bible that says this. Bruce Metzger, an American scholar of the 20th century, was a leading expert on the New Testament's Greek manuscripts (hand-copied Greek texts). He reports that these words are in no Greek manuscript except eight late ones. Four of those eight have the words only in the margin. The modern public-domain translation on this site, like most modern Bibles, leaves the words out.
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”
“For there are three who testify:”
On 1 John 5:7-8, reports that the words about the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit are absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight late ones, four of which have them written in the margin as a later addition; that no Greek church father quotes them; and that every ancient translation except the Latin lacks them.
The Ethiopian's confession: Acts 8:37
In the King James Version, the Ethiopian official says he believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God before he is baptised. The oldest manuscripts do not have this verse, as Metzger shows. Many modern Bibles go from verse 36 to verse 38 and keep verse 37 only in a footnote.
“And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
The World English Bible, the modern public-domain translation on this site, goes straight from Acts 8:36 to 8:38. It has no verse 37. The verse is missing from the oldest Greek copies and from most Greek manuscripts.
On Acts 8:37, judges the verse a later addition. It is missing from the oldest witnesses, among them papyri 45 and 74 and the codices Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus and Ephraemi, and there is no reason a scribe would have left it out had it been original. He suggests a confession of faith used at baptism was written in the margin and later copied into the text.
"The Son of God" in the first line of Mark
Mark's Gospel opens by calling Jesus the Son of God. Codex Sinaiticus is one of the two oldest nearly complete Greek Bibles (a codex is a hand-copied book, here from the fourth century). Its scribe did not write those words in Mark 1:1 at first. From 1975 the standard Greek text printed the words in square brackets as doubtful. The reason was that the shorter reading is very old and scribes tended to lengthen titles. The newest critical edition (2021) has taken the brackets off. Even so, the oldest form of Mark's first line may not have had the title.
“The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;”
On Mark 1:1, reports that the words "Son of God" are missing from Codex Sinaiticus as its scribe first wrote it, from Codex Koridethi and a few other witnesses, and from quotations in Origen. He allows that the gap may be a copying slip, but because the shorter reading is very old and scribes were prone to expand titles, the committee printed the words in square brackets.
Argues that in the second and third centuries scribes who held what became orthodox belief sometimes changed the texts they copied so that the texts supported their view of Christ more clearly, including his divinity. He treats the words 'Son of God' in Mark 1:1 as one such addition.
| Passage | The words | What the evidence shows |
|---|---|---|
| 1 John 5:7 | “the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” | In no Greek manuscript except eight late ones, four of them in the margin. Most modern Bibles leave it out. |
| Acts 8:37 | “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” | Not in the oldest manuscripts. Many modern Bibles keep it only in a footnote. |
| Mark 1:1 | “the Son of God” | Missing from Codex Sinaiticus, one of the two oldest nearly complete Greek Bibles, as its scribe first wrote it. |
A manuscript is a handwritten copy. In each case the words missing from the oldest copies, or from one of them, are words that make Jesus look more divine.
What the centurion said
Mark, Matthew and Luke all report what the Roman centurion (an army officer) said at the cross. In Mark and Matthew he calls Jesus the Son of God. In Luke, who used Mark's Gospel as a source, he calls Jesus a righteous man. Luke did not keep the title. In the Bible the title does not by itself make anyone God: Luke's own family tree calls Adam the son of God.
“And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.”
“Now when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified God, saying, Certainly this was a righteous man.”
“Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.”
The classic statement of the view most New Testament scholars still hold: Mark was written first, and Matthew and Luke both used Mark as a source, taking over most of its material, often word for word and in the same order.
“Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.”
The ending of Mark
The last twelve verses of Mark include a promise that believers will take up snakes and drink deadly poison unharmed. Those verses are missing from the two oldest Greek manuscripts. Eusebius and Jerome, two church writers of the fourth century, said the passage was absent from almost all the Greek copies they knew. Nearly every modern Bible puts these verses in brackets or adds a note. So a whole passage can be missing from the earliest copies and still be printed in the Bible.
“And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”
On the ending of Mark, reports that verses 9-20 are missing from the two oldest Greek manuscripts, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and from some early translations; that Clement of Alexandria and Origen show no knowledge of them; and that Eusebius and Jerome say the passage was absent from almost all the Greek copies they knew.
What Christians say about the text
Christians hold that the New Testament has been copied faithfully. Where the oldest copies lack words, modern Bibles say so openly in their notes. Christians say no belief depends on any single verse. They point out that Mark calls Jesus the Son of God elsewhere in his Gospel.
“And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God.”
What the Bible and the Qur'an say about scribes
Scribes were the men who copied books by hand. The prophet Jeremiah told his own people that the false pen of the scribes had turned the law into a lie. The Qur'an states that some people wrote the Book with their own hands and said it was from God (﷾). It also says some twist the Book with their tongues, so that what is not part of it sounds as if it were.
““ ‘How do you say, “We are wise, and Yahweh’s law is with us?” But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made that a lie.”
“Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.”
“There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, "That is from Allah," but it is not from Allah: It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!”
Verse by verse
1 John 5:7 — First Epistle of John, chapter 5, verse 7
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”
Cited for
Here the Bible states the Trinity plainly: three in heaven, and these three are one.
The response
The words are in no Greek manuscript except eight late ones, four of them in the margin. Modern Bibles, including the ones most Christians read, leave them out.
Where it lands — The one verse that states the Trinity is found in no Greek manuscript except eight late ones.
Mark 3:11 — Gospel of Mark, chapter 3, verse 11
“And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God.”
Cited for
Mark calls Jesus the Son of God elsewhere, so the doubtful words in Mark 1:1 change nothing.
The response
One of the two oldest Greek Bibles was first written without this title in Mark's first line, so the line cannot be waved away. And in the Bible "son of God" does not by itself mean God (﷾): Luke's own family tree calls Adam the son of God.
Where it lands — The oldest form of Mark's first line may not call Jesus the Son of God at all. In the Bible's own usage the title does not by itself make anyone God.
Perspectives
Mainstream Christian
The New Testament text is well preserved. The few doubtful passages are marked in modern Bibles. The belief that Jesus is the Son of God rests on many passages, not on any one verse.
Even without Mark 1:1, Mark's Gospel calls Jesus the Son of God. So no belief depends on the disputed words.
Rebuttal
Mark does use the title elsewhere, for example when the unclean spirits cry it out in 3:11. But in the Bible "son of God" does not by itself mean God (﷾). Luke's own family tree calls Adam the son of God.
The Islamic perspective
The three passages on this page run the same way. Each of 1 John 5:7, Acts 8:37 and the title in Mark 1:1 makes Jesus look more divine. The Qur'an warned that people wrote scripture with their own hands.
Only one verse names the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost as one. It is found in no Greek manuscript except eight late ones.
Acts 8:37, the Ethiopian's confession that Jesus is the Son of God, is missing from the oldest manuscripts.
"The Son of God" in Mark 1:1 is missing from Codex Sinaiticus as first written. For decades the standard Greek text printed the words in brackets as doubtful.
Mark has the centurion call Jesus the Son of God. Luke, at the same moment, has him call Jesus a righteous man.
The scholar Bart Ehrman argues that early scribes sometimes changed the text they copied. They did so to support their view of Christ, including his divinity.
The Qur'an holds that people wrote scripture with their own hands and said it was from God (﷾).