This statement is not accurate. It's in the GNV at least as early as the 1580 edition. The 1557 edition had a different translation, "Looking for that blessed hope, and notable appearing of the glorie of the myghty God, which is of our Sauiour Iesvs Christ.”1599 had many new notes.
Your margin note has no visibility before 1599.
This statement by the author here is both wrong and irresponsible. If it is as he says, that ἡμῶν "specificates" (i.e., makes definite) a noun in such a construction, "and therefore renders the insertion of the article unnecessary," far more problems are created then merely explaining away passages that refer to Christ's Deity.Concessions of Trinitarian Authors p. 268
ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ ἡμῶν καὶ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (1 Thess. 3:11)
"Now God himself and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ" (AV)
The AV speaks of two persons, not three or four. The "Sharp" construction, ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ ἡμῶν, refers to the Father as "God and our Father." And then after, Paul distinguishes a new subject by inserting the article before κύριος ("Lord").
If it is as is written above, according to the theory of that author, then there are four persons spoken of here: (1) God, (2) Father, (3) Lord, and (4) Jesus Christ. And if the pronoun makes what precedes it "definite" (which it does not), the article both before θεὸς and before κύριος would be absolutely unnecessary. So the whole point above is nonsense.
You encounter a similar problem in 2 Thess. 2:16:
Αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς καὶ ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ ἡμῶν
"Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father" (AV)
Both subjects have the article, despite the presence of ἡμῶν. So this manner of reasoning by the author above creates more problems than it purports to solve. The scriptures would be broken in very many instances like this, just to prevent one passage from being read as it is among the Greeks, testifying of the Deity of Christ.