In an attempt to defend your heresy I’m sure you grasp on to that which supports your position rather than thoroughly research the subject. Nothing before the 14th century you say? Well, let’s see where it shows up.
Cyprian (200-258AD) used it.
Priscillian 350 AD, a Spanish bishop quotes I John 5:7,8.
Idacius Clarus 360 AD, who opposed Priscillian quotes it.
Varimadum 380 AD.
Cassiodorus 485 AD.
Cassian 435 AD.
Victor Vita 489 AD.
Jerome 450 AD.
Fulgentius 533 AD.
Ps. Vigilius 484 AD.
Ansbert 660 AD.
Perhaps early manuscripts that included it would help you.
Old Syriac 170 AD.
Old Latin 200 AD, in North Africa and Italy.
Italic 4th and 5th century. – Italic • Monacensis 7th century.
Italic • Speculum 9th century.
Latin Vulgate 4th, 5th century.
Not before the 14th century ey? Time and time again documented proofs of your errors on multiple subjects have been produced yet you persist. It might be time you take your poorly researched views to a different and less educated forum.
Maybe the rest of us should just step back and watch while you and your congregation restore the Constitution. You can do that by yourselves, right?
Rubbish.
My statement is 100% true, and your "documented proofs" prove it.
The reason most New Testament translations do not include the words you've quoted is because no Greek manuscripts before the 14th century contain them.
Indeed, when they finally do begin turning up in Greek manuscripts, it is as translations from Latin.
So, it should give you pause, CynicalBear, to realize that the only specifically Trinitarian language in the entire New Testament is disputed at best, and rejected by most biblical scholars.
That's why I am here to ask your forbearance and respect for Christians who see it much as our Founders did.