Steven Avery
Administrator
Some defend the writings as being 1st century (e.g. John Peck quotes the section from John Parker).
Dionysius the Areopagite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_the_Areopagite
PBF - Dionysius the Areopagite info
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...ng-evidences-rome-alexandria-areopagite.1152/
Facebook - Patristics for Protestants
https://www.facebook.com/groups/884609654958164/permalink/3460525557366548/
Are the Writings of Dionysius the Areopagite Genuine?
By Rev. John Parker (1895)
https://preachersinstitute.com/2012/10/12/are-the-writings-of-dionysius-the-areopagite-genuine/
============================
Dionysius the Areopagite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_the_Areopagite
PBF - Dionysius the Areopagite info
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...ng-evidences-rome-alexandria-areopagite.1152/
Facebook - Patristics for Protestants
https://www.facebook.com/groups/884609654958164/permalink/3460525557366548/
Are the Writings of Dionysius the Areopagite Genuine?
https://preachersinstitute.com/2012/10/12/are-the-writings-of-dionysius-the-areopagite-genuine/
============================
A treatise of dogmatic theology
by Robert Owen (1820-1902)
https://archive.org/stream/atreatisedogmat00owengoog#page/n152/mode/2up
... the controverted passage, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.” I say “with diffidence ” because its genuineness is questioned ; it being supposed from its too direct testimony to have been fabricated by some of those injudicious Christians, who in the fourth century published the Divine Hierarchy of Dionysius the Areopagite and similar works with the hope of benefiting the cause of Orthodoxy. But it may be doubted at least whether the assumed benefit is so obvious; for the passage in question might easily be perverted to a Sabellian sense. And the testimony of S. Jerome is deserving of respect; who, in the Prologue to the Canonical Epistles, complains of unfaithfal translators omitting it in their editions.
The footnote gives Tertullian and the two Cyprian sections, concluding
See Mabillon. in Appendice ad Liturgiam Gallicanam, pp. 476, 77
https://books.google.com/books?id=dNtIAQAAMAAJ&pg=PR6WORKS AGAINST GENUINENESS.
Launoy, 1660.
Dailld, 1666.
Montet, 1S48.
Hipler, 1861.
Nirschl, 1888, Histpolit Blatter, p. 172—184, and p. 257-270*.
John Parker
Last edited: