P. 55-17-(5) read the greater part. P. 7. L. 6. deie, decoraing to Epiphanius, and to the end of the fentence. P. gg. 1. 6. () read that there may be God, the word, alliem, man. P. 216. L 12. For sur Lord, read the Lord. P. 11. 10. read, In this age the table on which it was amuraia was called the mytical table, and Theophilus, ta wrum Forum If the epifle be genuine) writes, fays, that the My atera, St. For this last correction, I am obliged to the writer of the Critical Review; and I shall be thankful to any of my readers for the notice of any other overfight, from which a work of this extent could not be expected to be exempt. N. B. A copy of these corrections will be given to the pur chuters of De liidery, A CATALOGUE A CATALOGUE of the principal Ecclefiaftical Writers, &c. after the Apoftolic Age, with the Time when they flourished, chiefly from Cave's Hiftoria Literaria. The different Opinions of Dr. HORSLEY and Dr. PRIESTLEY, briefly stated. THAT my readers may more eafily form a clear and comprehenfive idea of the nature and extent of this controverfy, I fhall, in this place, briefly ftate the principal articles on which Dr. Horley and myself hold different opinions. 1. Dr. Horfley infifts upon it, that the faith of the primitive chriftian church must have been trinitarian, because that doctrine appears in the writings of Barnabas and Ignatius. I fay that, admitting these works to be genuine in the main, they bear evident marks of interpolation with refpect to this very fubject, and therefore the conclufion is not juft. 2. Dr. Horfley fays, that thofe who are called Ebionites, did not exift in the age of the apoftles, and alfo that, though they believed the fimple humanity of Christ, they probably held fome myfterious exaltation of his nature after his afcenfion, which made him the object of prayer to them. I fay the Ebionites certainly existed in the time of the apoftles, and that this notion of their holding fuch an exaltation of his nature, as to make him the object of prayer, is highly improbable. |