- The American Church Review
- The three witnesses, the disputed text in st. John
- A Critical Dissertation Upon the 7th Verse of the 5th Chapter of St. John's First Epistle
- Reply to a Vindication of the Literary Character of Professor Porson, by Crito Cantabrigiensis
- In Defense of the Authenticity of 1 John 5:7
- Francis Turretin's Disputatio Theologica
- The Genuineness of the Text of 1 John 5:7
- A New Plea
- Letters to Edward Gibbon by George Travis
- The British Critic, Vol IV, 1794
- The British Magazine
- New criticisms on the celebrated text, I Jn5:7
- JCR: Vol. 12, No. 02
- In Further Proof of the Authenticity of 1 Jn 5v7
- Pious Annotations Upon the Holy Bible
- The printed Hebrew text of the OT vindicated
- A Treatise of the Corruption of Scripture by Rome
- Divine Authority of the New Testament
- A Scholastical History of the Canon
- Exercitations Divine
- R.L. Dabney's Discussions
- Revised Version of the 1st 3 Gospels Considered
- 13 Sermons concerning the Doctrine of the Trinity
- A Vindication of 1 John, v. 7
- Further Proof of the Authenticity of 1 John, v. 7
- An Introduction to the Controversy on the Disputed Verse of St. John
- The Divine Triunity
- William Twisse's The Scripture's Sufficiency
- Select Works of Robert Rollock Vols 1 & 2
- On Holy Scriptures from Elenctic Theology Vol 1to 3
- From Sacred Text to Religious Text
- Disputations on Holy Scripture
- The King James Version Defended
Excerpt:
PREFACE
THE TRANSLATOR.
ONE of the most powerful Opponents of the authenticity of 1 John V. 7., among the German Critics of the 18th century, was Dr. Semler*, in his "Historical Collections ;" quoted by Michaelis in his Introduction to the New Testament (Vol. IV. p. 425. Eng. Tr.)—" To Semler's arguments," says Michaelis, " Knittel has made some learned and specious objections, in his 'New Criticisms:' but, specious and learned as they are, they have not convinced me that Semler is mistaken."
This character of Knittel's Work, by an opponent of the controverted verse, excited an earnest wish, repeatedly expressed in the course of the controversy on the verse, that the English Reader might be put in possession of it, by a Translation from the German. In a former passage of his "Introduction" (p. 413), though Michaelis pronounces that Knittel has " totally failed" in his defence of the verse, yet he allows that the "New Criticisms" is "a valuable Work, and that much useful information may be deduced from it." Knittel was indeed one of the most learned, experienced, and judicious Critics of his day; and I am persuaded, that, when he is allowed to speak for himself, the decision which Michaelis has so authoritatively pronounced against his conclusions, will not be so readily admitted. I confidently anticipate, that a patient and impartial perusal of the following " Criticisms" will remove many inveterate prepossessions against the authenticity of the disputed Text; while the clear, judicious, and masterly chain of inductive reasoning which they develope, will give the force of demonstration to the conclusion legitimately deduced; viz. that 1 John V. 7. is, in very deed, an integral and aboriginal Text of Holy Scripture.
* Semler is the person to whom Knittel repeatedly alludes, as "a certain Doctor," "a Doctor of Upper Saxony," "a Pastoralist," &c &c. See pp. 27, 28, 29. 77. 113. 212.