Daniel is referring mostly to the shoddy handling of verse supporters, but here I will include many other references
EPILOGUE:
The Johannine comma and the claims of Evangelical Fundamentalism
RGA p. 297
"culminated in Michael Maynard's ... not on rational principles ... appeal to providence"
Heide 2006 attacks Maynard 62, 65, 72, 75
..
merely to defend the omission of the Comma in Barbara Aland's edition.”46p. 274
New Testament!”50 Despite the violence of Maynard’s rhetoric and the hundreds
of errors and fallacies that litter his work, his book is widely praised and
constantly cited by other fundamentalists.51
biblefortoday on Maynard and Thiele on Cyprian
Fannin praises Maynard
Edward Freer Hills
1984
Many of those who support the authenticity of the comma argue that its omission
creates an unacceptable solecism in the grammar of the passage. Edward F. Hills,
the most learned of modem defenders of the comma, concluded: “it is not
impossible that the Johannine comma was one of those few true readings of the
Latin Vulgate not occurring in the Traditional Greek Text but incorporated into
the Textus Receptus under the guiding providence of God. In these rare
instances God called upon the usage of the Latin-speaking Church to correct the
usage of the Greek speaking Church.”1 p. 13
receptus is right, and that is that. Likewise, Edward F. Hills argued: “Erasmus,
Stephanus, Beza, and the Elzevirs, were providentially guided” in a number of
ways, in the first instance “by the manuscripts which God in His providence had
made available to them."11
ago. Influential fundamentalists like Edward F. Hills, Jack Moorman and Peter
Ruckman do little but spread error about the aims and achievements of biblical
criticism, suggesting that the critical rejection of the comma is part of a
conspiracy to deceive the honest bible believer. What is worse, the
(James) Keith Elliott vs. Harold Greenlee
Jack A. Moorman - conspiracy .. Metzger - "dubious argument from grammar"!
Moorman has not read the studies of Bludau, Ktinstle, Cipolla, del Alamo, Ayuso,
Thiele, Wachtel, de Jonge or Levine.) ... scholars like Henk Jan de Jonge and Walter Thiele have been co-opted by
Scriptural literalists as supporters of their cause, quite against the grain of their arguments.49
=============
The 20th century starts with a focus on Dyson Hague, who was not even a heavenly witnesses defender, he was simply giving salient criticism of the unbelieving German higher criticism
Benjamin Wilkinson -
RGA - missing
David W. Daniels on Erasmus p. 301
Jeffrey Khoo on Metzger p. 301 on manuscripts (no Drexler error?)
Timothy W. Dunkin was corrected in 2010 ? - "Waite ... 10 other manuscripts" #635 Wizanburgensis ... Lectionaries
contra Metzger and Aland
John Hinton
Ruckman "historical fairy tale" about Erasmus
Thomas Holland
blessedquietness.com
John W. Lea - Josh McDowell - Shakespeare uncertain and corrupt
not defenders
C. Blakemore Evans
Matt Slick
Robert Knox - 1950 edition - p. 294
Meehan
Jasper James Ray
RGA - p. 300
However, the last half-century or so has seen a resurgence of fundamentalism and conservatism worldwide, accompanied by a renewed defence of the
textus receptus.14 This movement
first made itself visible in Jasper J. Ray’s
God wrote only one Bible (1955), still widely quoted by many conservatives. Although Ray admitted that the Authorised Version has some inaccuracies that might be corrected, he also claimed that salvation is only to be found through reading translations based on the
textus receptus.15 The renewal of enthusiasm for the textus receptus led to the foundation of the Dean Burgon Society in 1978 (which espouses a far more optimistic attitude towards the accuracy of the
textus receptus than its eponymous patron) and the Majority Text Society in 1989.16
14 See Thuesen, 1999, for an analysis of this movement.
15 Ray, 1955, 122, cit. Kutilek, 2001, 45, 54. As Beacham and Bauder, 2001, 18, point out, not all fundamentalists insist on the supremacy of the Authorised Version. It is not my intention to identify all conservative biblical scholars who engage in the objective textual study of the bible
with those who reject biblical criticism on doctrinal grounds. For example, two recent editions of the Majority Text by conservative scholars (
Hodges and Farstad, 1982/1985; Robinson and Pierpont, 2005) follow the evidence of the manuscripts instead of doctrine in their omission of the comma. I can only concur with Douglas Kutilek’s review of Maynard, 1995:
http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/kutilek_debate_over_ john.htm, and with the conclusions of Daniel Wallace.
16 See
Wallace, 1996.
RGA - p. 310
The resurgent biblical literalism of the last half-century, which has
injected the question of the comma with new life, is driven by an aggressively conservative view of Scripture which rejects biblical criticism as a conspiracy against the truth. This
retrograde movement likewise undermines empirical science while
advocating Creation Science and Intelligent Design, and promotes a conservative social order in which pressing issues of social justice are publicly denounced as abominations, and are actively opposed through the mobilisation of the religious right. The question of the comma is thus not merely a dusty chapter in the annals of biblical scholarship, but a microcosm of the religious tensions in which we find ourselves right now.
William Hoyt p. 298-299 per Pierson and Marsden
Wayland Hoyt
Hal Lindsey
Presbyterian General Assembly - five points of fundamentalism - Marsden
The Fundamentals - Dyson Hague -
"good sense ... prejudice" "revived the anxiety.." "defiant resistance towards professional Biblical scholarship ... heritage of a German professor who lived some four centuries previously" "run out of steam by the 1950s"
An examination of The Fundamentals reveals that its basic impulse is anti-
rationalistic and ultimately anti-intellectual: “No expert scholarship can settle
David Fuller
Michael Maynard
contras
Kunstle errors on Prologue
Caspar Rene Gregory - 1907 - outburst against Vatican-
Brandscheid/Branscheidt - p. 293
Joseph Pohle - 1911 on the 1897 Vatican Biblical Commission decision - p. 292 (1996 book by
O'Connell)
--- review of 1927 changes from Vatican - Julius
Dopfner
Denzinger - p. 294 (only gives the 2001 pub date)
Naud (quote) faith vs. understanding
Figueiredo (quote)
August Bludau - p. 292
Loisy ?
Ayuso on Latin mss. (after Martin and Berger)
Thiele
Aland and
Borger on Syriac
Nova Vulgata p. 295 - stupid "vindicated" quote
to the critical apparatus.120 The present-day “official” Roman-Catholic bible in Latin, the Nova Vulgata (1979), does not include the Johannine comma, because it renders the Greek text of the Nestle-Aland edition. After more than four and a
half centuries, Erasmus’ initial judgment on the Johannine comma had been vindicated.
Daniel Wallace
Heide - TR not majority
Doug Kutilek
Metzger - apparatus
von Soden Nestle
Burgon
Leonard and Smith on some non-Biblical manuscripts - p. 304
Scofield Reference Bible - "no real authority ... inserted"
==================
1845 John Leland
