This is an old question, but ought the title be edited to remove the reference to doctrine, since the question isn't actually about doctrine? Something like, "Why was 1 John 5:7-8, found in the KJV, kept in the NKJV when it is believed to be inauthentic?"

@user2479 I see your answer to this question. I wonder how reliable is the commentary of Rashi.

@MarkEdward I think that would be an improvement, you should go ahead and edit it.

^^^ but that's because the verse numbers were decided when the clause was thought to be original isn't it?

@Davïd Good catch.

@PaulVargas Much more reliable than most of the modern commentaries(IMO). Rashi's Commentary certainly represents "post-Mishnah thought", yet he was well respected in his time and was even consulted by many of the Christian theologians of his day.

@PaulVargas I compared his response to Keil and Delitzsch's Commentary, which both examine the Hebrew text and concluded that the K & D's was 'slanted' by theology. Rashi's provided an answer from the text, which appears in the Hebrew Bible(not the KJV) and provided understanding which was supported by the context of the passage.

@PaulVargas (Lastly) I have heard a number of 'spiritualized' explanations for "strange fire", most of which involve worshipping God in some unorthodox means or protocol. While there may be an element of that in their response, the text doesn't support it; they were exercising their priestly office when it happened. Therefore, "strange fire" must involve something apparent which God made an example of to Moses and Aaron. Rashi's Commentary provided that explanation.

> You must not offer strange incense on it, nor burnt offering, nor meal offering, and you must not pour out a drink offering on it. (Exodus 30:9 NET)

^^^ What do you think of this verse?

@PaulVargas Exactly as it is written. Interestingly, the "Rashi" calls strange 'borrowed'-it may have something to do with the Hebrew text. God certainly ordained His purposes in worship, and the priests were to communicate that to the people. The 'strange' had more to do with not honoring God, than missing a step, or nuance in the performance of their duties.

@Caleb As I think you know, I'm a bit of an editor junkie. Of all the *buntu available editors, Textadept loads like lightning and offers some of the keybinding ease of use of GVim. Hmmm... That just reminded me of this pic attached to this comment.

@Davïd I had a lot of trouble finding an editor that would open a 15Gb text file the other day - ended up using 'less' for Win32 - do you know any free editors that handle files that large (ie don't load the whole file into memory).

^^^ Seen that one?

@Davïd I somehow missed that comment. I think there is a way to fix the mixed RTL/LTR thing in gvim but it's been a while since I've played with it. Atom certainly has some compelling things going for it.

Got a new work order just now. It's a fix for a fundamentally broken program. Urgent. "Dance band on the Titanic, singing nearer my God to thee. The iceberg's off the starboard bow, Won't you dance with me."

Oh, and this just chaps my hide! In the email description: "I’ve tried for the last two weeks to start signing off on phase 4 of 2288 in NPPDS, but can’t get it to work." NOW they want it in two days! Haven't mentioned this problem before this afternoon.

> Hear, O LORD, and have mercy on me! O LORD, deliver me!" ­— Psa 30:10 NET