[15:1] Dr. Lightfoot is mistaken in his ingenious conjecture of my
having been misled by the "nur" of Credner; but so scrupulous a critic
might have mentioned that I not only refer to Credner for this argument,
but also to _De Wette_, who has "... dass er _nie_ Joh. dem Tauefer wie
der Synoptiker den Beinamen [Greek: ho Baptistes] giebt" (_Einl. N.T._
p. 230), and to _Bleek_, who says, "nicht ein einziges Mal" (_Beitraege_,
p. 178, and _Einl. N.T._ p. 150), which could not be misread.
[16:1] _Contemporary Review_, December, p. 15; _Essays on S.R._ p. 21 f.
[16:2] Clem. Alex. _Strom._ vii. 17-106. Dr. Westcott gives the above
reference, but does not quote the passage.
[16:3] Dr. Westcott quotes the passage relative to Matthias.
[17:1] _Canon_, p. 255 f.
[17:2] The same remarks apply to the two passages, pointed out by
Tischendorf, from Clement of Alexandria and Epiphanius.
[18:1] Luthardt, _Der Johann. Ursprung des viert. Evang._ 1874, p. 85 f.
[19:1] _Strom._ vii. 17, Sec. 106.
[19:2] _Canon_, p. 255.
[19:3] _Contemporary Review_, December, p. 16 [_Essays_, p. 22].
[20:1] _Contemporary Review_, December, p. 8 [_ibid._ p. 11].
[21:1] _Contemporary Review_, p. 8 [_ibid._ p. 11].
[21:2] _A Crit. History of Chr. Lit. and Doctrine_, i. 184 f. I do not
refer to the numerous authors who enforce this view.
Pages:
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248