https://archive.org/details/threewitnessesdi00armf/page/69/mode/1up
p. 69
who is it from
Weak on Prologue
Henry Hammond - before Arianism
Hammond ok on Prologuez
Selden
Barlow
Sandius attack uses Possevinus - following Perkins and James Rivetus
Sylvestre Grabe shows it is in Papal issues
Bishop Fell - 1682 - also Prologue disappearing from editions
Bishop Bull - Vitensis - Fulgentius
Amelote
Simon back to Fulgentius
Fulgentius quote with Cyprian Facundus
Travis
p. 87
AD 484 Council of Carthage
p. 88
Codd Voss. 3, Lambeth and Ebor
Simon Porson mystical
Mill
p. 96
Grabe Bull
"While thus the authenticity of the verse
•was defended in this country, abroad Simon
found antagonists in Ittigius, Martianay,
Maius, and Kettncr; but into the contro-
versy, as carried on there, it is unnecessary
for us to enter.
p. 98
Emlyn - Whiston Clarke Newton
DuPin
p. 105
p. 110
David Martin
Smallbrooke
Clarke Nelson Knight
p. 118 - 119
Abraham Taylor - good summary of controversy - good on allegory nonsense
As opponents of the verse he mentions Simon, Le Clerc, Dr. Clarke, and Ernlyn; on the other side, Dr. Smith, in his “Discussion against Simon ;”Dr. Grabe, in his “ Notes on Bishop Bull" Dr. Mill, M. Van Maestricht, M. Ketner, M. Rogier, Dr. Jenkyn, M. Martin, Dr. Calamy, Dr. Knight, Mr. May,
Bishop Smallbrooke, and Mr. Wade.
Bentley - note Jerome study p. 122 - mocked Porson - layman
Wetstein
Bishop Monk
p. 131
p. 133
Mace -
Twells (Martin except Prologue and Cassiodorus)
p. 137 exc Cyprian quote
Sosipater
Newton
Benson on Emlyn and Cyprian quoting scripture
Griesbach
the words, “ tres unuin sunt,” Wetstein simply
remarks, “ ex Tertulliano.” Then follow in
chronological order Marcus Celedensis, Marius
Victorinas Afer [a.d. 362], Eucherius [a.d.
434], Vigilius of Tapsum [a.d. 484], and then
Fulgentius [a.d. 507]. In the passage from
Bowyer
Montanists
Gibbon
p. 165
“ De Patre et Filio et Spiritu Sancto scriptum
est, ‘ Et tres unum sunt/ ”
For, “ in truth,” we are told on the other
hand, “ the allegorical interpretations of the
Scripture, given by the ancient writers are so
numerous that it would be endless to pursue
them.” “ We know that they employed it
without scruple in all points, whether of doc-
trine or morals.” Then follows, as in Gries-
bach, the objection of Bengelius, that St.
Cyprian at least was not thus given to allegory;
and, in disproof of his assertion, the two in-
stances, which Griesbach had quoted, of our
Lord’s coat, and of the hours of prayer. The
fact which Porson remarks, that the former
passage follows the quotation from i John v.
is certainly no help to the cause, as it brings
into more striking contrast the manner of re-
ference in the two cases. Nor will Whitby,
to whom Porson refers, following again in the
train of Emlyn, supply any parallel instance.
But “ Cyprian is elsewhere negligent in quot-
ing,” says Porson. In proof of this we have
the citations which Emlyn and Benson had
referred to, from Matt. vi. 13, and Rev. xix. 10,
to which is added 1 John ii. 17, in which
Cyprian five times adds the words, “ As Cod
remains for ever.” Travis, in answer to Benson,
had argued that in Matt. vi. 13, the reading
objected to was not the only, and might not
be the genuine, reading of the passage in
Cyprian, and that in Rev. xix. 10, Cyprian
had most probably a different reading; so that
in all probability, “ the version from whence
Cyprian drew his quotations was the old
Italic, and that it read the words now in ques-
tion as Cyprian has quoted them.” Porson
considers the first of these citations, in which
he endeavours to show that the present text
of Cyprian is right, and that, in adopting the
166 THE THREE WITNESSES.
gloss, “ ne nos patiaris induci in tentationem,”
instead of the genuine reading, he was probably
deceived by an imperfect recollection of Ter-
tullian, bis master; in like manner, as in the
Council at Carthage, sec. 6, be had quoted St.
John iii. 6, with the spurious addition borrowed
from Tertullian de Came Christi, sec. iS.
But all this is nothing to the purpose. For
in the case before us there is no negligence
in quotation; the words, “ hi tres unuin
sunt,” it is admitted on all bands, are the
exact words of Scripture. In the two cases
of supposed quotation from Tertullian there
is the same verbal accuracy.zzzzzzzzzzz
Jones
Burgess - Turton - Quarterly Review
Wisemanz
p. 198 END OF APPENDIX TWO
========================
Foster ?
