communion with him, and to believe in him, that they walk | an affectionate spirit pervades the whole, except in those in the light and not in darkness (i. 5—7.), that is, in holiness passages where the apostle exposes and reprehends hypocrites and not in sin; that they walk as Christ walked (ii. 6.); and and false teachers, whose dangerous practices and tenets he that they keep the commandments, and especially abound in exposes in such a faithful, plain, and even authoritative mansincere brotherly love towards each other. (ii. 4. 9–11. iii. ner, as may serve to illustrate the reason why our Saviour 10—24. iv. 20, 21. v. 1-3.) This rational and Christian gave him, together with his brother James, the appellation spirit, the apostle enforces upon the best principles, and with of Boanerges, or sons of thunder. (Mark iii. 17.) the strongest arguments, derived from the love of God and VI. Before we conclude this section, it may be proper to of Christ; showing the utter insufficiency of faith, and the notice the controversy respecting the clauses in 1 John v. 7, mere external profession of religion, without the accompa- 8. concerning the Heavenly Witnesses, which has for nearly nying evidence of a holy life and conduct.

four centuries divided the opinions of learned men, and which Thirdly, to help forward and to provoke real Christians to the majority of biblical critics now abandon as spurious. As communion with God and the Lord Jesus Christ (i. 3, 4.); to the limits assigned to this discussion are necessarily confined, constancy in the true faith, against all that seduced them (ii. we shall briefly state the evidence for and against its genu24–28.); to purity and holiness of life (ii. 1. iii. 3—13.),' ineness. and that those who believe on the name of the Son of God, may In the Textus Receptus, or received Greek Text of the New know that they have eternal life. (v. 13.).

Testament, the seventh and eighth verses of the fifth chapter V. Heidegger, Van Til, Pritius, Moldenhawer, Langius, of this Epistle are as follows :and other analysts of Scripture, have each suggested different

Οτι τρεις εισιν οι μαρτυρουντες [εν τω ουρανω ο Πατήρ, ο Λογος, και το tabular synopses of this Epistle, with a view to illustrate its ágcov Tive peto art cito ci rpaus tv son. Και τρεις εισιν οι μαρτυρούντες εν divisions and to show the bearings of the apostle's ar- τη γη] το πνευμα, και το ύδωρ, και το αίμα και οι τρεις εις το εν εισι. guments. Extreme prolixity and extreme brevity charac

In the Vulgate Latin, and our authorized English version, terize their respective schemes. The following synopsis, however, it is hoped, will

be found to show the leading di- they run thus : visions of the Epistle or treatise with sufficient perspicuity Quoniam tres sunt qui testimo- For there are three that bear re.

cord sin heaven, the Father, the and conciseness. It consists of six sections, besides the nium dant sin cælo, Pater, Verbum,

et Spiritus Sanctus: et hi tres unum Word, and the Holy Ghost; and conclusion, which is a recapitulation of the whole.

sunt. Et tres sunt qui testimonium these three are one. And there are

dant in terra :) spiritus, et aqua, et three that bear witness in earth,] Sect. 1. asserts the true divinity and humanity of Christ, in sanguis : et hi tres in unum suni. the spirit, and the water, and the opposition to the false teachers, and urges the union of faith

blood; and these three agree in one. and holiness of life as absolutely necessary to enable Chris- The disputed passage is included between the brackets. tians to enjoy communion with God. (i. 1–7.)

The decision of the controversy depends partly upon the Sect. 2. shows that all have sinned, and explains the doc- Greek manuscripts, partly upon the ancient versions, and

trine of Christ's propitiation. (i. 8—10. ii. 1, 2.) Whence partly upon the quotations which occur in the writings of the the apostle takes occasion to illustrate the marks of true ancient fathers. faith; viz. obeying his commandments and sincere love of the brethren ; and shows that the love of the world is incon- AGAINST THE GENUINENESS OF THE CONTROVERTED PASSAGE,

IT IS URGED, sistent with the love of God. (ii. 3—17.) Sect. 3. asserts Jesus to be the same person with Christ, in

1. That this clause is not to be found in a single Greek opposition to the false teachers who denied it. (ii. 18—29.) manuscript written before the sitteenth century. Sect. 4. On the privileges of true believers, and their conse

Of all the manuscripts hitherto discovered and collated which quent happiness and duties, and the marks by which they if we deduct several that are either mutilated or imperfect in this

contain this Epistle, amounting to one hundred und forty-nine,2 are known to be “the sons of God.” (ii.) Sect. 5. Contains criteria by which to distinguish Antichrist place, it will be found that four only have the text, and two of

and false Christians, with an exhortation to brotherly love. these are absolutely of no authority; yiz. (iv.)

1. The Codex Guelpherbytanus, which is evidently a manu

script of the seventeenth century, for it contains the Latin trans$i. A mark to know one sort of Antichrist,—the not confessing that lation of Beza, written by the same hand, and consequently is of

Christ came in the flesh. (iv. 1-3.)
S ii. Criteria for distinguishing false Christians; viz.

no use whatever in sacred criticism. (l.) Love of the world. (1–6.)

2. The Codex Ravianus or Berolinensis, which is obviously (2.) Want of brotherly love. (7-12.) (3.) Denying Christ to be the true Son of God. (13—15.)

a forgery; it is for the most part only a transcript of the Greek sili. A recommendation of brotherly love, from the consideration of the text in the Complutensian Polyglott, printed in 1514, with some love of God in giving his Son for sinners. (16–21.)

various readings from Stephens's third edition ; and the remainSect. 6. shows the connection between faith in Christ, rege- der (from Mark v. 20. to the end of Saint John's Gospel and

neration, love to God and his children, obedience to his Rom. i.--vi. and xiii. xvi.) is a copy of the same edition, with commandments, and victory over the world; and that Jesus some various readings taken partly from Stephens's margin, and Christ is truly the Son of God, able to save us, and to hear partly from the Complutensian Polyglott. 3 the prayers we make for ourselves and others. (v. 1—16.)

3. The Codex Britannicus, as it was called by Erasmus, now The conclusion, which is a summary of the preceding treatise, better known by the appellation of the Codex Montfortii,

Montshows that a sinful life is inconsistent with true Christianity; fortianus, or Dublinensis, which is preserved in Trinity College asserts the divinity of Christ ; and cautions believers against Library, Dublin. A fac-simile of it is annexed. idolatry. (v. 17–21.)

In this number are now, for the first time, comprised one of the manu. The preceding is an outline of this admirable Epistle; scripts collated by Dr. Scholz, and three manuscripts in the archiepiscopal which being designed to promote right principles of doctrine from the Greek islands by the late Professor Carlyle. (See a notice of and practical piety in conduct, abounds, more than any book them in our first volume.) The information, that the disputed clause does of the New Testament, with criteria by which Christians not exist in these MSS. was communicated to the author, with equal may soberly examine themselves whether they be in the faith. to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury: (2 Cor. xiii. 5.)

3 See this proved in Griesbach's Symbola Criticæ, pars i. p. clxxxi. and The style of this Epistle is pure, clear, and flowing; and especially in Pappelbaum's Codices Manuscripti Raviani Examen, 8vo. Ber.

lin, 1796. Bishop Marsh has given a very valuable extract from Pappel.

baum's treatise, with remarks, in the Appendix to his Letters to Mr. 1 Roberts's Clavis Bibliorum, p. 827.

Archdeacon Travis, pp. 241-252.

su spesilová nopties
pouir Ev The oma tup, dolos, Kairmation
Kai aur a Jás,

Jás, é gou: Ivaí opér gov oi papri
counter in the ma, vd wp, Kai acua; 4 the
μαρρών των αγίων λαμβανομένη και μαρτύρια του
νέων είν, εάν εαν και μαρτύρία τον

Torerooli αίμαρρηκε περί του ιού αυτού.

The passage, divested of its contractions, runs thus :- the manuscripts of the Vulgate written before the thirteenth cen.

tury."2 Such are the internal evidences against the authority of OTI TPS'S BIGIO MPTU ρρυντες" εν τω ουρανω, πατήρ, λογος, Και πνευμα άγιον,

the Codex Montfortianus; nor are the external evidences, foundΚαι ούτοι οι τρεις, εν εισι: Και τρεις εισιν οι μαρτυ

ed on its date, more weighty. Dr. Adam Clarke indeed assigns ρουντες εν τη γη, πνευμα, υδωρ, και αιμα και την μαρτυρι αν ανθρωπων λαμβανομεν, και μαρτυρία του

it to the fourteenth, or even to the thirteenth century (which latθεου μειζων εστιν, οτι αυτη εστιν η μαρτυρία του θεου, οτι

ter date is adopted by Bishop Burgess); but as there is reason με μαρτυρηκε περι του υιου αυτου.

to believe, that in the thirteenth century the seventh verse was The Codex Britannicus is described by Erasmus as a latinizing extant in a great majority of the copies of the Latin Vulgate, a manuscript : and that this charge is well founded we have shown Greek manuscript of that age may easily have been interpolated in the first! volume of this work. If any additional evidence from those copies. Michaelis refers the Codex Montfortianus to were wanting, it is furnished in the passage just given ; which the sixteenth century; and Bishop Marsh, after Griesbach, to the is written in such Greek as manifestly betrays a translation from fifteenth or sixteenth century; that is, subsequently to the inventhe Latin. It will be observed, that the article is omitted be- tion of the art of printing. Other learned men have observed, fore the words expressive of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, be- that the form of the letters is the same with that of our printed cause there is no article in the Latin, and it occurred not to the Greek Testaments, with accents and spirits: so that it may postranslator that the usual Greek was o Tratne, o 2070s, TS TVeupe z. sibly have been written subsequently to the invention of printHe has also ev in gn, for e7i tns zus, because he found in terra. ing. The close of the fifteenth century, therefore, is the most He has likewise omitted x 14 cl TPE ELS TO EV #52V, which is wanting probable date. Conceding, however, every advantage that can in many Latin manuscripts; because the Lateran council, held be claimed for this manuscript by its most strenuous advocates, in 1215, had rejected it through polemical motives. The omis. it is still modern: and the testimony of a witness, of so excepsion of this clause at the end of the eighth verse is a proof, not tionable an internal character, can be of no value in opposition only that the writer of the Codex Montfortianus copied from the to all other evidence. Vulgate, because no ancient Greek manuscript omits the clause 4. The Codex Ottobonianus, 298. in the Vatican Library, is in that place; but also that he copied even from modern tran- the only other manuscript, in which the disputed clause is to be scripts of the Vulgate, because this final clause is found in all found, as appears in the following fac-simile :

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

It is worthy of remark that this manuscript has ato tou cupavcu | the Codex Montfortianus; and the absence of the article (as in FROM heaven, instead of ey TW opryw in heaven, and do tus g.us that manuscript) before the words expressive of Father, Son, FROM earth, instead of ev th gu on earth, which words occur in and Holy Ghost, manifestly indicates the Latin origin of the

Codex Ottobonianus; which has further been altered in many 1 See

Vol. I. Part I. Chap. III. Sect. II. $ 4. ii. No. 61. 2 Michaelis, vol . ii. part i. p. 286. part ii

. p. 762: The late learned Pro places to make it agree with the Latin Vulgate. And as this fessor Porson objected to the Codex Montfortianus the badness of its manuscript is stated to have been written in the fifteenth century, Greek, particularly the omission of the articles. In reply to his conclusions, this late date, in addition to the very doubtful internal evidence Bishop Burgess adduced several passages from the New Testament, and which it affords, renders its testimony of no force whatever. from some Greek fathers, in which the article is similarly omitted; whence he deduces an argument for the genuineness of the reading of the Codex It is a remarkable circumstance, which confirms the arguMontfortianus. His examples are given at length in his own words, and ment against the genuineness of the clause in question, that refuted by a learned member of the University of Cambridge, under the in those manuscripts which have it not, there is no erasure signature of Crito Cantabrigiensis,” in his vindication of the Literary in this part, or the slightest indication of any kind of deCharacter of the late Professor Porson, pp. 12–29. (Cambridge, 1827.) 3 Benson on the Epistles, vol. ii. p. 640.

ficiency. - At least, we may presume, that it is the only other manuscript which contains the disputed clause : since Prof. Scholz states, that he has ex

2. This clause is wanting in the earliest and best critical amined the MSS. in the Royal Library at Paris, and the Libraries at Flo- editions of the Greek Testament. rence, Milan, and Rome, also in Greece and Palestine. If he had discovered any other manuscript in which the disputed clause appears, he would most 6 Scholz, Biblische-Kritische Reise, p. 105. See a further account of the assuredly have communicated some notice of it to the public.

Codex Ottobonianus in Vol. I. Part I. Chap. III. Sect. II. $5. I

It is not printed in Erasınus's first edition, published in 1516, | but (as he says) “ to avoid calumny."? It is found indeed in the nor in his second edition, in 1519; nor in the editions of Aldus, Greek text, and in the Vulgate Latin version of the Compluten1518; Gerbelius, 1521; Cephalæus, 1524; and of Colinæus, 1534. sian Polyglott, of which a fac-simile is given in the annexed Erasmus, it is true, inserted it in his third edition published in engraving, which is accurately copied from the exemplar pre1522, on the faith of the Codex Britannicus or Montfortianus served in the library of Sion College, London. above mentioned,—not from any conviction of its genuineness,

bórri Tpais'ten = σίμου μαρτυρουμτες"εμ Τω*ουρανώ, ο α THP?Kalor noyosikau To'áylove wpłýua , "Kai

οι*Τρεις εις Το εμειδί *και“Τρείς και εισίμιοι°ααρ τυρούρτες επίσης θγης. Τοθωμεύμα'καντο και λώρ και το αίμα τεν Την μαρτυρίαν Πωμ°αν θρωσωμο λαμβάνομεμ, Η μαρτυρία

του Θεού tucijwp"COTIV. ÓTİ'AÚTH’EO Tipih'uaptvpía Tov *Θεού Ήμομεάαρτύρηκε περίσουνιού-αντού, .

Omeresahmt wo oo
Eguí'testímomm'omtmm*celo; opater.
a verbum:fetffpiritus fanctus: browoo

ynum sunt.Et tresoluntequi pooo
testimoniurz' Santfisterra:fpās: kaqua
(2[anguis," Si°testimonium” bomnúrme
faccipimus:"testimonium deixawowo
mainstest,* 2ñ boc esta testimoniuz 00

deiq8 maig (:'qur'testificata dest' deffilio

*suo. On this fac-simile it is to be observed, 1. That the first five , it is in the margin of this text. In 1 Cor. xv. there is noticed in lines, both of the Greek and Latin, are at the top of the opposite this margin a notable variation in the Greek reading. In Matt. page to that on which the other four lines are found; and 2. That vi. 13., where they, in their edition, recede from the Greek copies the alphabetical letters, intermingled with the Greek text, refer i and correct it by the Latin, they make a marginal note to justo the corresponding words in the Latin text, which is printed tify their doing so. And so here, where the testimony of the in a parallel column in the Complutensian edition, and marked Three in heaven' is generally wanting in the Greek copies, they with the same letters, in order to ascertain more easily the corres- make a third marginal note, to secure themselves from being ponding Greek and Latin words. As the size of our page does blamed for printing it. Now, in such a case as this, there is no not admit of the Greek and Latin texts being disposed in parallel question but they would make the best defence they could; and columns, they are necessarily placed one below the other. yet they do not tell of any various lections in the Greek manti

But the Complutensian Polyglott, however rare and valuable scripts, nor produce any one Greek manuscript on their side, but in other respects, is in this case of no authority beyond that of have recourse to the authority of Thomas Aquinas.”—“Thomas, any common Greek Testament, any further than it is supported say they, in treating of the three which bear witness in heaven, by ancient MSS. The editors of the Complutensian Greek teaches, that the words. these Three are one,' are subjoined for Testament, indeed, profess to have followed the best and most insinuating the unity of the Essence of the Three Persons. ancient manuscripts of the Vatican : but in that age copies, two And whereas one Joachim interpreted this unity to be only 'ove or three hundred years old, were considered as ancient. It is, and consent, it being thus said of the Spirit, Water, and Blood, however, most certain that they did not consult the celebrated in some copies, that these Three are one :' Thomas replied, that Codex Vaticanus, which is reputed to be one of the most ancient this clause is not extant in the true copies, but was added by the MSS. if it be not the most ancient manuscript extant (for that Arians for perverting the sense.” Thus far, this annotation. manuscript has not the disputed clause); and that they have not “ Now this plainly respects the Latin copies (for Aquinas una only departed from its readings in many places, but have also derstood not Greek), and therefore part of the design of this varied from the order of things in point of time and place. Wet- annotation is to set right the Latin reading. But this is not the stein, Semler, and Griesbach are unanimously of opinion that the MSS. used by the Complutensian editors were neither ancient Mace's Greek

and English edition, 1729, in that

of Harwood, 1776, in whose

1 Among modern editions of note, the disputed clause is omitted in nor valuable: for they scarcely ever consent with the most an- edition the text of the epistles represents the Clermont manuscript; Matcient copies or fathers, except in conjunction with modern copies, thæi, 1782-88; and Griesbach, 1774-5, and the various subsequent editions. and they almost always agree with the modern copies where in 1797 ; of Tittman, in 1820; of Vater, in 1824; of Goeschen, 1832; and of these differ from the more ancient. Because the Complutensian Bloomfield, 1832; this

clause is included between brackets. editors admitted the disputed passage into their text of the New brary) of the original of the marginal note above alluded to: -"Sanctus Testament, it has been supposed that they found it in their MSS.; Thomas, in expositione secunde decretalis de suma trinitate et fide catholica, but it is more probable, that they inserted it upon the authority tractans istum passum contra abbatem Joachim, ut tres sunt qui testimo of the Latin Vulgate Version. For,

nium dant in cælo, pater, verbum, et spiritus sanctus: dicit ad literam,

verba sequentia. Et ad insinuandam unitatem trium personarum subditur, (1.) In the first place, It is not usual_indeed it forms no et hii tres unum sunt. Quod quidem dicitur propter essentie unitatem. part of the plan of the Complutensian edition—to insert notes Sed hoc Joachim perverse trahere volens, ad unitatem charitatis et conin the margin of the Greek text. Not more than three instances tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra s. [i. e. scilicet) spiritus: aqua: et of such notes occur thròughout this edition : "and therefore,” sanguis. Et in quibusdam libris

additur; et hii tres unum sunt. Sed hoc as Sir Isaac Newton has forcibly argued," there must be some in veris exemplaribus non habetur : sed dicitur esse appositum ab here thing extraordinary, and that in respect of the Greek, because | unitate essentie trium personarum. Hec beatus Thomas ubi supra."

main design. For so the annotation should have been set in the celebrity to his gloss; and in a short time it was generally margin of the Latin version. Its being set in the margin of the adopted. It appeared, indeed, under different forms; but it was Greek text shows, that its main design is to justify the Greek by still the gloss of Augustine, though variously modified. The the Latin thus rectified and confirmed. Now to make Thomas gloss having once obtained credit in the Latin church, the posthus, in a few words, do all the work, was very artificial : and in sessors of Latin manuscripts began to note it in the margin, by Spain, where Thomas is of apostolical authority, it might pass for the side of the eighth verse. Hence the oldest of those Latin a very judicious and substantial defence of the printed Greek. manuscripts, which have the passage in the margin, have it in a But to us, Thomas Aquinas is no apostle. We are seeking for different hand from that of the text. In later manuscripts we the authority of Greek manuscripts."

find margin and text in the same hand; for transcribers did not (2.) Secondly, We have a further proof that this text was not venture immediately to move it into the body of the text, though extant in Greek, but was inserted from the Latin Vulgate (and in some manuscripts it is interlined, but interlined by a later consequently translated into Greek), in the fact that when Stu- hand. After the eighth century the insertion became general. nica, one of the four editors of the Complutensian Polyglott, on For Latin manuscripts written after that period have generally, censuring Erasmus for omitting it, was challenged by him to though not always, the passage in the body of the text. Further, produce his authority for inserting it, he never appealed to when the seventh verse made its first appearance in the Latin Greek manuscripts. On the contrary, he affirmed that the Greek manuscripts, it appeared in as many different forms, as there copies were corrupt, but that the Latin contained the very truth.2 were forms to the gloss upon the eighth verse. And though it Now this declaration is of great importance; as it amounts to a now precedes the eighth verse, it followed the eighth verse, at confession that none of the manuscripts procured for that edition its first insertion, as a gloss would naturally follow the text upon by the great influence of Cardinal Ximenes contained the dis- which it was made." puted passage.

Many mauuscripts of the Vulgate version, and also the printed 3. It is contained in the manuscripts of no other ancient ver- text, even that of Pope Clement VIII., have the final clause of sion besides the Latin.3

the eighth verse, tres unum sunt, which is manifestly a corruption It is wanting in the manuscripts of the Old Syriac

version, final clause. Some add, in Christo Jesu ; some read Filius

from the homoioteleuton,9 TPEILEE: while others omit that executed at the beginning of the second, if not in the first cen- instead of Verbum; some omit Sanctus; others transpose tury;' and also in those of the Philoxenian Syriac, a version made in the fifth century. It is wanting in the manuscripts of quoniam and et ; and the more ancient of those, which have the the Coptic, a version in the dialect anciently spoken in Lower passage, put the eighth verse before the seventh. This unEgypt, which is referred to the fifth century; and in those of the certainty and fluctuation is, itself, a most suspicious mark of inSahidic, a version in the dialect anciently spoken in Upper that the seventh verse originated in a Latin gloss upon the eighth

terpolation. “ It is not, therefore, a matter of mere conjecture, Egypt, which is considered as having been made in the second century. It is wanting in the manuscripts of the Ethiopic ver

verse : it is an historical fact, supported by evidence which cannot sion, executed in the fourth century; and in those of the Arme

be resisted.”10 nian version, which is referred to the end of the fourth or the

5. The clause in question is not ONCE quoted in the genuine beginning of the fifth century. It is wanting in all the manu- works of any one of the Greek Fathers, or early Ecclesiastiscripts of all the known Arabic versions; and it is absent from cul Writers, even in those places where we should most exal the manuscripts of the Sclavonic or old Russian version, pect it.. executed in the ninth century.

For instance, it does not occur in the Exposition of Faith 4. Not all the manuscripts, even of the Latin version, contain printed with the works of Justin Martyr, nor in the works of this clause, which is wanting in the most ancient manuscripts Irenæus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Hippolytus against Noëtus, of that version.

Dionysius Alexandrinus in the epistle addressed to Paul of of Christian antiquity, and, generally speaking, as a good and faith- ander or Alexandria, the author of the "Synopsis of Scripture, The Vulgate Latin version is justly valued as an important relic Samosata, Athanasius, Didymus, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Gre

gory of Nyssa, Epiphanius, Cæsarius, Chrysostom, Proclus, Alexful translation : but, in its passage from the fifth to the fifteenth Andreas Cæsariensis, Joannes Damascenus, Elias Cretensis, Gercentury, it has undergone many corruptions and interpolations. manus of Constantinople, Oecumenius, Theophylact

, Euthymius The disputed clause does not appear in any manuscripts written Zigabenus, Nicetas, in six different catene cited by Simon, and before the tenth century; It is wanting in considerably more one cited by Matthæi, nor in the Greek Scholia of various manuthan forty of the oldest Latin manuscripts ;' in others it occurs only in the margin ; and in others it is interlined by a later hand. of them wrote professedly on the Trinity, the Deity of Christ,

scripts. 11 But the bare silence of these writers is not all. Many “ At the end of the fourth century, the celebrated Latin Father and of the Holy Spirit; their unity, equality, consubstantiality, Augustine, who wrote ten treatises on the first Epistle of Saint &c.: and in order to prove these points, they diligently examined John, in all of which we seek in vain for the seventh verse of the the entire Bible; and, in particular, they have frequently cited Gifth chapter, was induced in his controversy with Maximin to the preceding verse, as well as that which immediately follows. compose a gloss upon the eighth verse. Augustine gives it pro- “ The manuscripts which were used by Irenæus and Clement fessedly as a gloss upon the words of the eighith verse, and shows of Alexandria could not have been written later than the second by his own reasoning that the seventh verse did not then exist." century. The manuscripts used by Origen could not have been The high character of Augustine in the Latin church soon gave written later than the third century. The manuscripts used by

the Greek fathers, who attended the Nicene council, could not 1 Sir Isaac Newton's History of Two Texts. (1 Joha v. 7, 8. and 1 Tim. have been written later than the fourth century. In this manner iii. 16.) Works, vol. v. pp. 520–522. Sir Isaac Newton's Works, vol. v. pp. 522, 523.

we may prove that the Greek manuscripts, in every century, • The expression,"manuscripts of all other versions,” is here design, were destitute of the passage, until we come to the period edly used: for the disputed clause has been inserted in some printed editions of the Syriac and Armenian rersions, in opposition to the Syriac and Armenian manuscripts. See Bp. Marsh's Letters to Archdeacon Tra. 1 The various forms, in which the seventh verse made its first appear. vis. Preface, notes 8, 9, 10, 11.; and also Mr. Oxlee's Three Letters to the ance in the Latin Mas, may be seen on consulting the notes of Erasmus, Rev. F. Nolan, pp. 130, 131.

Mill, and Sabatier, to 1 John v. 7. Simon, Hist. des Versions, chap. ix. and We are informed by Dr. Buchanan, that it is not to be found in a Porson's 6th Letter. Peschito or Syriac manuscript which belonged to the Syrian church in 3 Bengelii Appar. Crit. pp. 467. ed. 2da. It is so placed also by Vigilius India above a thousand years, nor in any copy of the Syriac Scriptures Tapsensis, who quotes thus: Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibeni in terra, which he had seen. (Christ. Researches in Asia, p. 118.) This manuscript aqua, sanguis, et caro; et tres in nobis sunt: et tres sunt qui testimoniun is now in the Public Library at Cambridge. Nor is it in any of the ancient perhibent in coelo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus, ei hi tres unum Byriac MSS. brought from the East by the late Mr. Rich, which are presunt. Bishop Marsh's

Lectures, part vi. pp. 19–22. served in the British Museum.

· That is, the recurrence of the same word at the end of two contiguous & Marsh's Letters to Travis, Preface, p. xi. note.

6 Augustine, in his Treatise contra Maximinum Arianum, lib. ii. cap. 22. 10 Bishop Marsh's Lectures, part vi. p. 22. Bishop Burgess bas endea. (tom. viii. col. 725. ed. Benedict), thus quotes the words of the eighth voured to obviate the above very forcible arguments by stating that, verse: "Tres sunt testes, spiritus, et aqua, et sanguis; et tres unum although the seventh verse is wanting in some of the "more ancient" manusunt." He then makes various remarks on the words, spiritus, aqua, san. scripts, yet it is found in some of the "most ancient," for instance, in the guis, and proceeds thus : "Si vero ea, quæ his significata sunt velimus Vauxcelles Bible of the eighth century, and in three MSS. containing the inquirere, non absurde occurit ipsa Trinitas, quæ unus, solus, verus, Catholic Epistles, which are in the library at Verona, of the same century, summes est Deus, Pater et Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus, de quibus verissime in one of which the eighth verse is wanting. (Vindlication of 1 John v. 7. dici potuit, "Tres sunt testes et tres únum sunt: ut nomine spiritûs sig. p. 54.) But his observations are shown to be inapplicable by "Crito Can. nificatum accipiamus Deum Patrem-nomine autem sanguinis Filium-et tabrigiensis." Vindication of Porson's Literary Character, pp. 138. el seg nomine aquæ Spiritum Sanctum." The gloss which Augustine here puts 11 In the sixth volume of the Christian Observer, for 1807, pp. 285-289. on the eighth verse, very clearly shows, that he knew nothing of the there is a neat abstract, with English translations, of the principal passages seventh verse, which appears also from the fact that he has never quoted of the most eminent Greek fathers, who must have quoted the disputed

clause, had it been extant in their copies of the New Testament. VOL. II.



that verse.

person in the Old Testament from the ascription to him of a particular person to be intended, while others understand it the attributes, the works, and the homage, which are peculiar figuratively, as of the church. The ancient commentators to the Deity-and from those numerous and important re- supposed it to be figurative, but most of the modern commenlations, which he is affirmed in Scripture to sustain towards tators and critics understand it literally, though they do not his holy and universal church, and towards each of its true agree in their literal interpretation. Archbishop Newcome, - members. “ There are," to adopt the deliberate judgment Wakefield, Macknight, and the venerable translators of our of Griesbach, "so many arguments for the true Deity of authorized version, make Exaextu to be an adjective, and render Christ, that I see not how it can be called in question; the the inscription " To the elect (or excellent, or chosen) Lady;" divine authority of Scripture being granted, and just rules of the Vulgate version, Calmet, and others, consider Exzenta to interpretation acknowledged. The exordium of Saint John's be a proper name, and translate it “ To the Lady Electa;" Gospel, in particular, is so perspicuous and above all exception, J. B. Carpzov, Schleusner, and Rosenmüller take Kupiz to be that it NEVER can be overturned by the daring attacks of inter- a proper name, and the Epistle to be addressed to Cyria, or oreters and critics, and taken away from the defenders of the Kyria, the Elect, and Michaelis conjectures Kupis to be an truth."1

ellipsis of Kupise Exxxnold, which, among the ancient Greeks, signified an assembly of the people held at a stated timc, and was held at Athens three times in every month; and

that, since the sacred writers adopted the term Exxandiz froin SECTION VI.

its civil use among the Greeks, Kυρια Εκκλησια might here

mean the stated assembly of the Christians, held every SunON THE SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES OF JOHN. day; and thus τη εκλεκτη κυρια, with εκκλησια understood, would I. Genuineness, authenticity, and date of these Epistles.-II. signify, “To the elect church or community which comes The second Epistle, to whom addressed.III. Its scope.- together on Sundays.” He admits, however, that he knows IV. The third Epistle, to whom addressed.-V. Its scope. does not think that this explanation can be very easily esta

not of any instance of such ellipsis; and Bishop Middleton -VI. Observations on this Epistle.

blished. Of these various hypotheses, the most probable 1. ALTHOUGH, in the fourth century, when Eusebius wrote opinion is that which considers the Epistle as addressed to his ecclesiastical history, these two Epistles were classed the Lady Electa, who is supposed to have been an eminent among the Aytinez opusya or books which were received by the Christian matron: what confirms this opinion is, that the majority of Christians (though some doubts were entertained | Greek article is absent, which would have been absolutely by others respecting their authenticity), yet testimonies are necessary if the inscription had been “To the elect Lady," or not wanting to prove that they were both known and received to “ Kyria the Elect.' as genuine productions of the apostle John. The second III. The second Epistle of John is an epitome of the first, Epistle is cited by Irenæus, and received by Clement of and touches, in few words, on the same points. The “ Lady Alexandria. Origen mentions all three Epistles, though he Electa” is commended for her virtuous and religious educasays that the second and third were not allowed to be genuine tion of her children; and is exhorted to abide in the doctrine by all persons. Dionysius of Alexandria mentions them as of Christ, to persevere in the truth, and carefully to avoid the being ascribed to St. John. The second Epistle was quoted delusions of false teachers. But chiefly the apostle beseeches by Alexander bishop of Alexandria ; and all three Epistles this Christian matron to practise the great and indispensable were received by Athanasius, by Cyril of Jerusalem, by Epi- commandment of Christian love and charity. phanius, Jerome (a few of whose contemporaries doubted the IV. The Third EPISTLE of John is addressed to a converted authenticity of these Epistles), Rufinus, and almost every Gentile, a respectable member of some Christian church, subsequent writer of note. They are not, indeed, received called Caius; but who he was is extremely uncertain, as in the Syrian churches; but the thoughts and style are so there are three persons of this name mentioned in the New similar to those of the first Epistle, that almost all critics Testament, viz. 1. Gaius of Corinth (1 Cor. i. 14.); whom attribute them to the author of the first Epistle, namely, John; Paul calls his "host, and the host of the whole church" and they were, in all probability, written about the same time (Rom. xvi. 23.); 2. Gaius, a native of Macedonia, who acas that Epistle, viz. a. D. 68 or 69. Consequently these companied Paul, and spent some time with him at Ephesus Epistles could not have been written by John the elder, a (Acts xix. 29.); 3. Caius of Derbe (Acts xx. 4.), who also member of the Ephesian church, as some of the fathers, and was a fellow-traveller of Paul. Michaelis and most modern also some modern critics, have imagined. Various reasons critics suppose the person to whom this Epistle was addresshave been assigned why these two Epistles were noted to be the Caius of Corinth, as hospitality was a leading received earlier into the canon. Michaelis is disposed to feature in his character. His hospitable temper, particularly think that doubt was excited concerning their genuineness towards the ministers of the Gospel, is strongly marked in the by the address, in which the author neither calls himself fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth verses of this Epistle. John, nor assumes the title of an apostle, but simply names V. The Scope of this Epistle is to commend his steadfasthimself the elder” (é aper Butepec); as Saint Peter (i. ch. v. ness in the faith and his general hospitality, especially to the 1.) styles himself a " fellow elder” (oupe peysutepcs), which ministers of Christ; to caution him against the ambitious title, after Peter's death, the apostle John might with great and turbulent practices of Diotrephes, and to recommend propriety assume, as being the only remaining apostle. It Demetrius to his friendship; referring what he further had is, however; most probable that, being letters to private to say to a personal interview. persons, they had for a considerable time been kept in the VI. Commentators are by no means agreed who this Diopossession of the families to whom they were originally sent, trephes was. Bede, Erasmus, Michaelis, and others, suppose and were not discovered till long after the apostle's decease, him to have been the author of a new seet, and that, as he and after the death of the persons to whom they had been delivered false doctrines, he objected to those who propagated addressed. When first discovered, all the immediate the true faith. Grotius, Le Clerc, and Beausobre imagined vouchers for their genuineness were necessarily gone; and that he was a Gentile convert who would not receive Jewish the church of Christ, ever on its guard against imposture, Christians. But it is most probable that he was an ambitious particularly in relation to writings professing to be the work elder or bishop in the church of which Gaius was a member, of apostles, hesitated to receive them into the number of and that, having been converted from Judaism, he opposed canonical Scriptures, until it was fully ascertained that they the admission of the Gentiles, and set himself up as the were divinely inspired.

head of a party in opposition to the apostles. If (as we sup11. Considerable uncertainty prevails respecting the person pose) the Gaius to whom this Epistle was addressed was to whom the second Epistle was addressed, some conjecturing the generous "host of the church at Corinth," it is possible

that this Diotrephes might have been the leading opponent of 1 Atque sunt profecto tam multa et luculenta argumenta et Scripturæ Saint Paul in that city, whom he forbore to name out of depossim quomodo, concessà Scripturæ Sacræ divinâ auctoritate et admissis licacy, though he censured his conduct. See 1 Cor. iii. 3 justis interpretandi regulis, dogma hoc in dubium à quoquam vocari posse. 5. iv. 6., &c. In primis locus ille, Joh. i. 1, 2, 3., tam perspicuus est, atque omnibus exceptionibus major, ut neque interpretum, neque criticorum audacibus

Demetrius, who is so highly commended by the apostle in conatibus UNQUAM everti atque veritatis defensorinis eripi possit. Nov. Test. tom. ii. Præf. pp. viii. ix. Halæ, 1775.

* As the Syriac name Martha is of the same import as Kuper, Carpzov . See the references to the above-named fathers in Dr. Lardner's Works, conjectured that this epistle was addressed to the sister of Lazarus, and • Dr. Mill, and after him Dr. Lardner, observe, that, of the thirteen verses cution of the church which followed the

martyrdom of Stephen, for the composing the second Epistle, eight are to be found in the first either in secu of her person. The conjecture is ingenious, but is not supported sense or in expression.

b any authority. Epist. Cath. Septenarius, p. 185

« ElőzőTovább »