^{page 453 note 1} The Authorship and Historical Character of the Fourth Gospel, pp. 289, 290.

^{page 453 note 2} Expositor, Jan. 1890, pp. 20, 21.

^{page 453 note 3} The two Greek translations represent two different readings in the original.

^{page 453 note 4} Compare the Dialogue with Trypho 14 and 32.

^{page 454 note 1} P. 594 &c. At pp. 605, 6 Dr. Salmon uses the following words, referring to the possible use of this earlier version by the author of the Apocalypse. Have they no applicability to the Gospel? ‘It may be said that St. John was not under the necessity of using any version, and could have translated for himself from the Chaldee. And so, no doubt, he could. And yet, I think nothing but a strong preconceived opinion that St. John could have used no other version than the Chisian (that is, the LXX.) would prevent the conclusion from being drawn that he actually does use a different version’ (Historical Introduction to the New Testament, Fourth Edition).