early controversy on Matthew Ch. 1 & 2 - ebionite issues - John Williams answered by Johann Casper Velthusen

Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Williams is before Priestley, this is mentioned by
Theodore Letis
From Lower Criticism to Higher Criticism: Joseph Priestley and the use of Conjectural Emendation -

Letis says Williams first edition was anonymous

A Free Enquiry into the authenticity of the first and second chapters St. Matthew's Gospel. - Second edition (1771)
John Williams
https://books.google.com/books?id=c_T0PkjDkkoC&pg=PA42
p. 42 on virgin birth

The Authenticity of the First and Second Chapters of St. Matthew's Gospel , Vindicated: in Answer to a Treatise, Intitled, A Free Enquiry Into the Authenticity, &c answer to John Williams (1771)
John Caspar Velthusen
https://books.google.com/books?id=WJphAAAAcAAJ
http://books.google.com/books?id=QoB3ngEACAAJ
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Letis
1634475216383.png

27 Williams, Free Enquiry, pp. 42-43.

1634475356987.png

these chapters contain scarcely any thing but what is attended
with almost inexplicable difficulties. 32


32 Ibid., p. 163. Whether Williams believed what he was saying, or simply did
not want to risk drawing the conclusions that both orthodox and non-orthodox
alike would naturally be forced to come to, can only be guessed at
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top