Cyprian and Old Latin glosses

[Steven Avery]

Bill Brown thesis:

A fourth problem lies in the fact that Latin copies of 1 John offer “support for a whole set of readings that have little or no attestation in Greek.”27 Brooke provides a listing of various “explanatory glosses” given by Augustine and Cyprian as well as some glosses found in the Speculum. 28 Cyprian glosses the texts of 1 John 2:9; 29 2:16; 30 and 4:3 31 Cyprian’s tendency to gloss the text combined with the problems evaluating patristic citations suggest the tentative possibility that: 1) Cyprian is the source of the Comma-, or 2) Cyprian demonstrates the process that gave rise to it.32 The fact that a quotation is found in his writings does not necessarily mean it was drawn from the text of the New Testament. It must be remembered that the Vulgate was commissioned because there were so many variant readings in the Old Latin as early as the third century.33
p. 33-34

27 Brown, Epistles of John, 129-130.1. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1978), 236, lists other interpolations in the Latin text of 1 John, including 2:17,4:3, 5:6, and 5:20.

28 A. E. Brooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (New York: Scribners & Sons, 1912), 198. Cf. also Armfield, Three Witnesses, 109.

29 Cyprian adds homicida est et.

30 Cyprian adds ex concupiscentia saeculi.

31 Cyprian adds sed est de antichristi spiritu. In addition to these readings that are glossed by Cyprian, he shares some common readings with Augustine (2:17), the Speculum (2:23), and Priscillian (2:23).

32 Brown, Epistles of John, 784.

=============================================

Bill Brown is mixing up two elements:

1) There were phrases (glosses) in the Old Latin text that are not in the Greek text
2) The claim that Cyprian invented glosses, and thus may have invented the heavenly witnesses verse

================================

The actual quote from Brooke is about (1)

A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles (1912)
Alan England Brooke
https://books.google.com/books?id=SdkpIJiJN7IC&pg=PA198

The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments (1912)
https://books.google.com/books?id=_ekYAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA198

The evidence adduced also confirms the view that the tendency to add interpretative and explanatory glosses to the text of the
Epistle is both widespread and dates back to early times.

================================

We see that Bill Brown tries to make it appear that the reference is to new explanatory glosses by Cyprian and Augustine, rather than what they read in their Old Latin Bibles.

There is no real evidence for the second claim.

==========================

29 Cyprian adds homicida est et.
1 John 2:9

30 Cyprian adds ex concupiscentia saeculi.
1 John 2:16

31 Cyprian adds sed est de antichristi spiritu. In addition to these readings that are glossed by Cyprian, he shares some common readings with Augustine (2:17), the Speculum (2:23), and Priscillian (2:23).
1 John 4:3

32 Brown, Epistles of John, 784.

==========================

1 John 2:16 (AV)
For all that is in the world,
the lust of the flesh,
and the lust of the eyes,
and the pride of life,
is not of the Father,
but is of the world.

1 John 2:17 (AV)
And the world passeth away,
and the lust thereof:
but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

==========================

1 John 2:16
Plummer
https://books.google.com/books?id=5oENLvJhcokC&pg=PA182

https://books.google.com/books?id=8...gJEAM#v=onepage&q="ex concupiscentia"&f=false


https://books.google.com/books?id=86VfDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA19

ex concupiscentia saeculi. is simply a variant for "but is of the world"

Vulgate
16 quoniam omne quod est in mundo, concupiscentia carnis est, et concupiscentia oculorum, et superbia vitae: quae non est ex Patre, sed ex mundo est.

The difference is exceedingly minor.
Best explanation, simply a variant that was in the Cyprian text.

==========================

1 John 4:3 (AV)
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God:
and this is that spirit of antichrist,
whereof ye have heard that it should come;
and even now already is it in the world.

2 John 7 (AV)
For many deceivers are entered into the world,
who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.
This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

sed est de antichristi spiritu

Vulgate
et omnis spiritus qui solvit Jesum, ex Deo non est, et hic est antichristus, de quo audistis quoniam venit, et nunc jam in mundo est.

https://books.google.com/books?id=jO0OAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA514

Cyprian (Testim. 2.8) qui autem negat in carne venisse de Deo non est sed est de antichristi spiritu, were probably moulded by the passage in the second epistle.
https://books.google.com/books?id=T0F7XYcJb4AC&pg=PA164

This looks like simply a minor variant including a different order of the verse.

LaParola
http://www.laparola.net/greco/index.php?rif1=69&rif2=4:3

==========================

1 John 2:9 (AV)
He that saith he is in the light,
and hateth his brother,
is in darkness even until now.

1 John 2:11 (AV)
But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness,
and knoweth not whither he goeth,
because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.

Qui dicit se in luce esse, et fratrem suum odit, in tenebris est usque adhuc.

He who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that
every murderer has no life remaining within him.

S. Thasci Caecili Cypriani Opera omnia

books.google.com