You are on page 1of 292

iK>T^**^'-%w

^J

^[ ^'<^^

THE WORDS

THE NEW TESTAMENT.

EDINBURGH

PRINTED BY MUIR AND PATERSON

FOR
T.

AND

T.

CLARK.
CO.

LONDON,
DUBLIN,

HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND

JOHN ROBERTSON AND

CO.

NEW YORK,

SCRIBNER, WELFORD, AND ARMSTRONG.

THE WORDS

THE NEW TESTAMENT,


AS ALTERED BY TItANSMISSIOJV AND ASCERTAINED

BY MODERN

CRITICISM.

FOR POPULAR

USE,

EEV.

WILLIAM MILLIGAN,
AND

D.D,

PROFESSOR OF DIVIUITT AND BIBLICAL CRITICISM, ABERDEEN;

EEV. ALEX. EOBEETS, D.D.


PROFESSOR OF HUMANITY,
ST.

ANDREWS.

EDi:^rBUEGH:
T.

AND

T.

CLAEK,

38
1873.

GEOEGE STEEET.

PREFACE.

The

following pages are

meant

to

supply what the

writers believe to be a strongly felt want.

While many

useful manuals exist, fitted to convey to general readers

an acquaintance with the outlines of such sciences as


Astronomy, Geology, or Botany, scarcely anything of
the kind has been attempted in connexion with the
science
treatises

of

Biblical

Criticism.

Not a few valuable


;

have indeed been issued on the subject

but

these are of

by

far too technical a character to

meet the
to pro-

wants of the public

at large.

They appeal only

fessed scholars or to those

who

are supposed to have

already a considerable

amount

of information. of highly

The

consequence

is

that multitudes

intelligent

men who

are well versed in the leading principles

and

results of other sciences,

know very

little

of the objects,
It is to

methods, or achievements of sacred criticism.

meet the wants of such that the present volume has

vi

Preface.

been prepared; and the writers trust that what they

have been enabled to state will be


teresting

felt to

be both in-

and important, without the use of language

unsuited to the general reader.

The prospect which the

British public have of soon


is

obtaining a revised version of the Sacred Scriptures

naturally attracting more than ordinary attention to the


topics handled in this work.

Many

of the changes of

the Authorized Version

made

in that revision

must be
It

founded on previous changes of the Greek

text.

seems desirable that the great body of educated persons

who

are watching with so lively of

an interest the pro-

ceedings

the
at

New

Testament Eevision Company,

now
the

sitting

Westminster, but

who have
for

neither
entering

necessary

time

nor

acquirements

deeply into the studies of the Biblical

critic,

should

yet be able to form to themselves an intelligent idea of


the need of a revision of the text, of the principles on

which

it

should be conducted, and of the results that


it.

may be

expected from

They

will thus be in a better

position than they can be at present for judging of the

merits of the revision


It is not indeed to

when

it

appears.

be supposed that a correct impreswill contain can be

sion of

what the revised translation

gathered from anything here said.

Even the readings

Preface.
for whicli the writers

vii

have expressed a preference will

doubtless

differ

in

numerous

instances

from

those

adopted by the Eevision Company; while that Com-

pany must certainly introduce

into of

the

text

many
The

more changes than those spoken


writers of this book

by them.

must be understood

to deal only

with the principles of textual criticism that appear to


themselves to be correct
;

and

for the opinions indicated

they alone are responsible.


It

may

be proper to add that the

first

part of this

work has been written by Professor Eoberts, the second

by Professor Milligan.
duction
;

The

third part

is

a joint pro-

Professor Milligan treating the texts referred

to in the Gospels

and Acts of the Apostles, Professor

Eoberts those in the other books of the

New Testament.

\st

May

1873.

CONTENTS.

PAET
CHAP.
I.

riEST.

THE FACTS OF THE CASE.


PAGE

Causes of Various Readings in the

New Testament,
.

II.

Nature and Amount of the Yarious Readings,


Existing Manuscripts of the

18 26
47

III.

New

Testament,

IV. Ancient Versions of the

New

Testament,

...
Testament
by.

V. Quotations from the Books of the

New

Ancient "Writers,
VI. Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism,

60
67

PAET SECOKD.
MODE OF DEALING WITH THE
I.

FACTS.
83 89
95
101

Introductory,
First Step in Classification,

II.

III.

Second Step in

Classification,

... ... ...


I.,

IV. Third Step in Classification. Part

....

V. Third Step in Classification. Part II

109

X
CHAP.

Contents.

VI. General Eesult of Classification,


VII.

116
121

The Principle

of Grouping,

VIII. Determination of the Text.

IX.

Part L, Determination of the Text. Part

129
138 148

11.

X. General Summary,

PAKT THIED.
RESULTS.
I.

Effect produced

by Textual Criticism upon important


Testament,
of
.

Texts of the
IT.

New

155

Effect produced

by Textual Criticism upon the Text


its

the

New

Testament in

Successive Books,

173

PART

FIEST.

THE FACTS OF THE CASE,

PART

FIRST.

THE FACTS OF THE CASE.

CHAPTEE

I.

CAUSES OF VARIOUS READINGS IN THE

NEW

TESTAMENT.

[HE autographs
This being

of

the sacred writers

have

long since disappeared or perished.


so,

there

is,

of necessity, scope

for critical researches in connection

with the

text of the

New

Testament.

Unless God had continued

from age to age to exercise a miraculous care over the

harmony with the usual course of His Providence nothing could be more certain than that slight alterations and errors would
original text
totally out of

a thing

creep

into

it

with the lapse of time.

Even

at

the

present day

it is

a matter of extreme difficulty to get

a work printed with absolute accuracy.


spite of all the care

Probably, in

which has been taken, there never

yet was an edition of the Scriptures published in any

language which

did not

contain

some

errors.

The

curious misprints which have occurred in some of the

most carefully watched editions are well known to

all

Causes of Various Readings in the

New

Testament.

that have devoted any attention to this subject, and

serve to prove

how

difficult, if

not impossible,

it

is

to

secure unblemished correctness in passing the Scriptures

through the

press.

Xow,

if this is

the case even in the days of printing,

much more must the liability to error have existed when copies of the New Testament could be multiplied only by transcription. Every one who has much copying work to do feels how very difficult it is, for any
considerable time, to preserve perfect accuracy.

The

mind can
stances,
itself

scarcely be drilled into fulfilling that merely


is

mechanical process which


it

all that, in

such circum-

is

called to

accomplish.
it;

It v:ill exercise

about the subject before

and thus, instead of


transcription,
it

rigidly copying the


apt,

document under
then, to allow
its

is

every

now and
is

own thoughts

or

fancies to find a place


instance, that one

upon the page.


The

Suppose, for

transcribing a sentence which ends


first

with the words


the sentence
is

"

twenty centuries."

part of

perhaps copied with

literal

accuracy;
is

but, while the fact stated at the close of the period

retained

in

the
it

memory, a change in the mode


that,

of

expressing

has been unconsciously effected in the


transcriber, so
sets

mind
In

of the

instead of writing
years."

"twenty centuries," he
this

down "two thousand


of a

way

the very intelligence

copyist will
substi-

sometimes betray him into mistakes.


tute one

He may

synonymous word

for another, or

exchange a

name which occurs in the document before him for another name by which the individual referred to is

Causes of Various Readings in the

New

Testament,

known in history. Thus, instead of "king "he may write "sovereign" or "monarch;" for "Hildebrand" he may substitute " Gregory VIL*;" in place of "Lord Bacon" he may be led to say "Lord Verulam,"
equally well

and so
being

on,

the

danger of falling into such mistakes

all

the greater the farther a transcriber rises

above the character of a mere copying-machine and


is

himself possessed of knowledge and intelligence.


This general remark will, of
itself,

account for not a

few of those variations which are found in Manuscripts


of the

New

Testament.

Again and again has a word or


to the

phrase been slipped in by the transcriber which had

no existence in his copy, but which was due

working of his own mind on the subject before him.

On

this

ground we easily explain,

for

example, the
into the text
original copy,

frequent introduction of our Lord's

name

where a simple pronoun existed in the


or where the nominative

was

left to
viii.

be supplied from

the context.
in a vast

Thus, at

Mark

1,

John

vi.

14,

and

number

of other passages,

we

find Jesus

where

He

is

the correct reading.

On

the same ground

we
One

account for those differences in the order of words

which are often


just as the

to be

found in the manuscripts.

will read " Jesus Christ,"

and another

"

Christ Jesus,"

names happened

to present themselves to

the minds of transcribers.

And

there are other readings

of considerably greater interest

which are probably


AVe

to

be traced to the same cause.


xxv. 6 for an example.

may

refer to Matt,
is,

The true reading there

"Behold the bridegroom;" the reading which has crept

Causes of Various Readings in the


is,

New

Testament.

into the text

"Behold the bridegroom cometh;" and


risk of mistake,

we may, without much

ascribe this

addition simply to the working of the

mind
i.

of a copyist
29, the in-

on the passage before him.


sertion of

So, at

Luke
while

"when she saw him "

will be naturally
;

enough
26

accounted for on the same ground


it

we

feel that
viii.

would be scarcely possible

to transcribe Eorn.

without interpolating the words "for us," which are


nevertheless destitute of any adequate authority.
illustrations

These

would, in

may suffice to show how various readings many cases, arise, not from any intention on
the subject which happened for

the part of transcribers, but simply from the exercise


of their

own minds on

the time to engage their consideration.

But, in multitudes of other cases, the various readings

must be ascribed
Several motives

to intention

on the part of

transcribers.

may

be detected as having influenced

them

in the alterations

which they introduced

into the

text of the

New

Testament.
difficult

For one thing, many passages which presented


constructions
forms.

have been changed to the more usual


cases, the copyist

In such

has either naturally

glided into the style of expression with which he was


familiar,

or has supposed that his predecessor in the

work
his

of transcription
correct.
;

had made a mistake which


fertile

it

was

duty to

This has been a very

source

of various readings

and, in dealing with cases of the

kind referred

to.

Biblical critics have laid

down

the rule

that an obscure expression, or a harsh and ungrammati-

Causes of Various Readings in the


cal construction, is generally to

New

Testament.

be chosen as probably
is

the correct reading, rather than another which


or familiar

clear,
first

and

correct.

It

may seem

strange at

that such a principle should be adopted

that a reading
difiiculty.

which

it

is

almost impossible to construe or interpret

should be preferred to one which presents no

But the reason


sion

is

obvious.

A transcriber was

much more

likely to supplant

an obscure or unintelligible expresto follow the

by one

that

was usual and easy than

opposite course.

He

was far more strongly tempted to

consider the rugged idiom or the unaccustomed phrase


before

him an

error

which had crept into the manuscript

from which he copied, than to change what was common

and

intelligible into

hensible.

what was unusual and incompreOf course occasions might occur on which,

from carelessness or oversight, a transcriber would render


a sentence obscure or ungrammatical which was clear

and correct in

his

exemplar

but

it is

manifest that, so

far as intentional alteration

was concerned, the tempta-

tion all lay in the opposite direction.

familiar illustration of the

manner in which various

readings would originate, as just indicated,

may be found
Again and

in a reference to the text of Shakespeare.

again have words or phrases which were not understood

by

editors

been changed into forms with which they were


as yielding a satis-

familiar,

and which they regarded

factory sense.

The

text of our great dramatist has thus

been loaded with numerous expressions which we are


perfectly certain he never wrote.
It is only

through

much

labour,

and by means

of a thorough study of

Causes of Various Readings in the

New

Testament.

the contemporary Elizabethan literature, that Shakes-

pearian critics are gradually succeeding in extruding


those erroneous readings which have, for the sake of

apparently greater clearness, been foisted into the text


of their author,

and in restoring, with tolerable

certainty,

the genuine text.

We

can easily conceive that, while

this process of rectification is pursued, it should

some-

times happen, in regard to the works of Shakespeare, as


in the case of the

New

Testament, that readings have to


is

be sacrificed with which one

loath to part.

Suppose,

for instance, our highest critical authorities should

com3,

bine against Theobald's famous emendation in Scene

Act

II.

of
is

King Henry
In that

V.

They might

insist

that

evidence

decidedly in favour of the old folio reading


case,

of the passage.

we

could not resign with-

out regret what has been deemed such an exquisite

touch of nature,
that
"

when we

are told of the dying Falstaff


fields."

he babbled of green

Yet,

if it

became the
is

settled

judgment

of critics that the

phrase referred to

simply a happy guess, and was never written by Shakespeare, every reasonable

man would

give

it

up, however

prosaic or unintelligible
in
its place.

might be the words substituted


matter of regret to have to

So
1

it

may be
iii.

accept at
exhortation
"

Pet.

the

somewhat commonplace
the beautiful precept

"Be humble"
still, if

for

Be

courteous," which stands in our present Authorized

Version.

But

authority so determine,

we must

not hesitate.

There

may
is

often be an artificial beauty

about

error,

but there

always an inestimable precious-

ness in truth.

Causes of Varioits Readings in the

New

Testament.
of the

9
in

The following examples may be given

way

which various readings have arisen in the text of the

New
to

Testament, from a desire on the part of the copyists


difficulties.
is it

remove or lessen
is,

At

Matt. xvi. 11 the

true reading

"

How

that ye do not understand


?

that I spake not to you concerning bread


of the leaven of the Pharisees

But beware

and Sadducees."

The

imperative in the second clause of this verse being either

not liked or not understood, the passage has, in defiance


of all authority, been
it

made

to

run as follows
it

"

How

is

that ye do not understand that I spake

not to you

concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of


the Pharisees and of the Sadducees ?"
the true reading
of Tyre,
is, "

At Mark

vii.

31

And

again, going from the borders

He came

through Sidon unto the Sea of Galilee,


But, in

through the midst of the borders of Decapolis."

order to escape the fancied difficulty involved in the

long circuit which these words describe as having been

made by
follows
:

Christ, the verse has


"

been altered to read as

and Sidon,

And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre He came unto the Sea of Galilee, through the
At Luke
" xiv. 5 the
is,

midst of the coasts of Decapolis."


true reading in all probability

And He

said unto

them.

Which

of

you

shall

have

a son or

an ox fallen

into a well,

and will not straightway draw him out on


Here, however, the word "son" was

the sabbath day ?"

deemed

unsuitable, as not being consistent with the


less to the greater,

supposed argument from the


therefore changed into
xiii. 15),

and was

" ass "

(which

so that the verse runs thus

"Which

is

found at chap,
of

you

10 Causes of Varioiis Headings in


shall

the

New
pit,

Testament.

have an ass or an ox fallen into a

and will not

straightway pull him out on the sabbath day ?"

Under the same head may properly be ranked some


of those additions which have been of the
viii. 1.

made

to the true text


at

New
is

Testament.

An

example occurs

Eom.

The genuine reading


therefore
are in Christ Jesus."
it

in that passage is simply,

"

There

now no condemnation
The longer

to

them

which
is

this statement

considered the more

will be felt an admirably satis-

factory

conclusion to the previous reasoning of the

Apostle.
fied

But many copyists seem


its

to

have been

dissatis-

with

brevity and simplicity.

They desiderated

the introduction of the personal and practical element,

and therefore (although the argument of the Apostle


words,
spirit."

is

thus anticipated and obscured) inserted from verse 4 the

"who walk not


desire

after the iiesh,

but after the

To the same
correct

on the part of transcribers

to

and improve the text before them are unquestion-

ably to be ascribed

many of those

various readings which

occur in the Book of Eevelation.


all

As

is

well

known

to

acquainted with
is

the original, that portion of the

New
is

Testament

remarkable for the number of ungramit

matical expressions which

contains.

There

no

great difficulty in suggesting satisfactory reasons, historical

and psychological,
is

why

this should

be the

case.

But

it

evident what a temptation to correct was thus

presented to transcribers.

The very respect and

affection

which may be entertained

for a writer will lead to the

wish that as few blemishes as possible should appear in

Causes of Various Readings in the


his works.

New

Testament. 11

These blemishes will be made the subject


if

of earnest regret, and will,


carefully removed.

opportunity

is offered,

be

Who
Hurd

can doubt, for instance, the


pointing out obscurities

pain which Bishop

felt in

and

inelei^ancies in the text of his favourite

Addison

Never did
heart,

editor

more love
justly,

or esteem his author than


dilates

did the worthy bishop.

He

with his whole

and most
"

on the "purity and grace of

expression

displayed by Addison.

Yet every now and

then a word or a whole sentence occurs which offends


the taste of the bishop, and which he wishes had been
different

from what

it is.

Now,

this

same

feeling existed
writers,

in the

minds of transcribers towards the sacred


to replace
correct.

and led them in many cases

an inaccurate

form of expression by another which was

Hence

alterations for the sake of grammar have been introduced

into the

Greek text

at Eev.
effect

ii.

20,

iv. 1,

&c.

but such

changes are without

upon the English Version.


parallel passages

There must also be noticed under this head the

numerous

cases in

which

have been
These

made

verbally to correspond with one another.

cases are, of course,

most frequent in the Gospels.


ix.

Thus
ii.

the true reading both at Matt.


is,

13 and

Mark

17

" I

came not
V.

to call the righteous, but sinners."

Both

passages, however, have been conformed to the text of

Luke

32, so that in all three Gospels


to call the righteous,

we
to

read,

"I

came not
as was'to

but sinners
far

repentance."

Such cases of harmonizing, though


be found in the Epistles.

more common,

have been expected, in the Gospels,

may

also

Thus

1 Tim.

i.

17 has been

12 Causes of Various Readings in the Neio Testament.

made
word
ized

to

conform to Eom.

xvi.

27 by the insertion of the

" wise."

As

the epithet " only " occurs before

God

in both passages, the two doxologies have been harmon-

by the

interpolation of the missing " wise " in the

passage in Timothy, which ought to be read, " Unto the

King
ever.
is

eternal

[or,

" of

the ages

"],

the incorruptible, the

invisible, the only

God, be honour and glory for ever and


of such changes in the text

Amen."

The reason

happily so evident that corruptions of the kind referred

to cause little trouble to Biblical critics.

\
There
is
still

another cause of

various readings

which

falls

under the head of intention on the part of


it

transcribers; but

is

of so grave a character as to

demand
to

special

and separate consideration.


it is

We

refer

the changes which,

supposed, have in some

cases been

made on

the text from doctrinal views or

predilections.

We

rejoice to believe that there is

no necessity
in the

for

ascribing

many

of the various readings


cause.

New
seem

Testament to
to

this

The ancient

copyists

have done their work with the utmost

sincerity.

Perhaps every one of the readings which have sometimes been attributed to doctrinal bias admits of being
explained on grounds which imply no suspicion of bad
faith

on the part of the transcribers.

Still,

there are
exists

certain passages in

which the variation which

may

possibly have been due to the dogmatic opinions

held by various transcribers, and to some of the chief


of these

we

shall

now

briefly direct attention.

Causes of Various Eeadings in the JVeiv Testament. 13


It

need not be said

how

often a single
;

word

carries

in

its

bosom an important doctrine

and, bearing this


strong, accord-

in mind,

we

shall easily

understand
copyist,

how

ing to the bias of the

may have

been the

temptation to tamper with the text.


controversy between
the

Thus, the whole

Church Catholic

and

the

Arians or the Socinians


the reading which
is

may

be said to be involved in

to be adopted at
it

Acts xx.

28.

If

we

are to read that verse as


"

stands in our Authorized

English Version,

Feed the Church of God which

He

hath purchased with His own blood," there can no


longer be the slightest doubt as to the supreme divinity
of our Eedeemer.

But then ancient authority

is

greatly
is

divided on the point as to whether or not God


the correct expression; and
to read the verse thus

here

"Teed

many modern

critics prefer

the Church of the Lord

which

He

hath purchased with His own blood;" a

statement which cannot be held decisive, one


another, of the controversy in question.^

way

or

The same remarks apply to the alternative readings found at John i. 18. Some copies read that verse as in our common Version " No man hath seen God at any

time: the only begotten Son, which

is

in the

bosom

of

the Father,

He

hath declared Him."

have the verse as follows

'*No man

But many
in the

others
at

hath seen God


is

any time

the only begotten God, which

bosom

of the Father,

He

hath declared Him."

The important

1 This passage and those that follow are referred to at present they will be found discussed simply for the sake of illustration afterwards in Parts Second and Third.
;

14 Causes of Various Readings in

the

New

Testament.

doctrinal inference to be derived from the latter reading


is

too obvious to require remark.

Again,

it

is

evident liow the famous passage, around

which such controversy has raged, 1 John v. 7, 8 (" in heaven, the Fatlier, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and
these three are one.

witness in earth"),
text

And there are three that bear may have been introduced into the
order
to

without authority, in

give

fancied

support to the doctrine of the Trinity.

On

the other

hand,

it

has been urged that the Arians

may have

designedly omitted the passage, from


truth which
it

their dislike to the


set forth.

seems so manifestly to
less

As

specimen of the

celebrated passages in
to
3.

which doctrinal considerations are thought affected readings, we may refer to Heb. i.
latter part of that verse is read

have

The

follows

"When
is

by modern

critics as

He had made

a purification of sins.

He
And

sat
it

down on

the right hand of Majesty on high."

thought that the insertion of "our" before

was due to a desire on the part of some transcribers to show that the sins for which He suffered
" sins "

were not His own.


There only remains to be noticed, as another cause of
various readings in the
of oversight
or

New

Testament, the occurrence

mistake on the part of transcribers.

This

may

be illustrated by a reference to several par-

ticulars.

very frequent cause of error was found in those


like

words of

ending which occurred in the manuscripts.

Causes of Various Readings in the

New

Testament. 15

Suppose, for the sake of illustration, that a transcriber


is

copying a passage in which the word

" disciples " is

read at the end of two successive verses.


scribes the first verse,

He

tran-

and then, looking up from his


no part of
the

work
lights

to the

copy before him, his eye unfortunately


verse,

upon the end of the second


has
yet

which

been written.

He

sees

word

"disciples" which his pen has just traced; and, not

perceiving that the second verse in which

it

occurs

still

remains untranscribed, he proceeds with his work, and


leaves out that verse altogether.
fruitful

This has been a very

source

of error in

manuscripts of the

New

Testament.
xii.

For an example we
is

may

refer to Matt.

46.

That verse

entirely omitted in
for a

some excelIt

lent manuscripts.

And,

very obvious reason.

ends in the Greek with exactly the same w^ord as the


preceding verse,

and has thus, in some

cases,

been

altogether overlooked

by

transcribers.

Similar mistakes

abound

in the manuscripts.

Again, one word was often mistaken for another

which strongly resembled

it.

This

error

frequently

occurs even in printed books at the present day.

We

have seen "humour" substituted

for

"human," and

"antimonies" standing where "antinomies" was intended.

Now,
word
4 we

in

Greek there

is

only the difference of


" edification "

a single letter between the

word meaning

and

the
i.

meaning "dispensation."

Hence,

at

1 Tim.

find in the Authorized Version "godly


is

edifying which
"

in faith," instead of the true reading,


is

God's dispensation which

in faith."

Copyists have

"

16 Causes of Various Readings in the


also

New

Testament.

sometimes confounded the Greek


for

for "

they took

with the Greek

"they

cast," the

two words con-

sisting of exactly the

same

letters

with a very slight

difference of arrangement.

Errors have also arisen from the


characteristic of the

style

of writing

most ancient manuscripts.

These

are written throughout in uncial or capital letters, without

division

or

interpunction.

Hence a

different

sense

from the true one might sometimes be attached by


copyists to the words.

The following

illustration

may
any
or

be

given:

If
"

we

write

NOWHEEE

without

separation between the letters, either


"

"now here"

no where

may

be understood to be the words in-

tended.

In like manner, some various readings have

arisen in the
exists

New

Testament from the possibility which


passages of dividing the Greek in

in

several

different ways,

and from one of these being preferred

by one transcriber and another by another.


Lastly,

some important various readings have arisen

from transcribers admitting glosses and marginal notes


into the text.

Examples

of this

kind are furnished in

the insertion of these words at


for the

John

v.

3, 4,

"waiting

moving

of the water.

Eor an angel went down

at a certain

season into the pool, and troubled the


first,

water: whosoever then


water, stepped
in,

after the troubling of the

was made whole

of

whatsoever disease
viii.

he had;" and in the insertion of Acts


Philip said. If thou believest with
all

37,

"And

thine heart, thou


I believe that
first

mayest.

And he
is

answered and

said,

Jesus Christ

the Son of God."

The

of these

Causes of Various Readings in the Neiu Testament. 17

passages was probably a marginal gloss explanatory of

the popular belief on

tlie

subject referred

to,

and

tlie

second a regular baptismal formula

both

in course of

time finding their

way

into the text.

Doxologies too

were apt

to creep in

from the constant use made of them


;

in the services of the Church

and various

particulars,

having once obtained a place on the margin of the


manuscripts,
selves into

by and by succeeded
the
text.

in intruding them-

This

fact

has

led

Biblical

critics to

adopt as another great general principle by


are influenced in seeking to
restore the

which they

genuine words of the


cases,
longer,

New

Testament
is

that, in

most
form
the

the shorter reading


as

to

be preferred to the
probability, the

having been, in

all

which the text exhibited


sacred writers.

in

the

autograph of

K
CHAPTEE
11.

NATUEE AND AMOUNT OF THE VARIOUS READINGS.


S the result of those causes enumerated and
explained in the preceding
Chapter, and

perhaps of some other minor influences, the

amount
of the
startling at first to

of variation existing in manuscripts


is

'New Testament
be

very great.

It is not a little

told, as Biblical critics

do

tell us,

that there are no fewer than 150,000 various readings

within the compass of the


has, of course,

New

Testament.

This fact

been laid hold of by the enemies of divine


at times

revelation,
friends.

and has

caused no small alarm to

its

Like geology in our

own

day, Biblical criti-

cism was formerly appealed to by one class as destructive


of the authority of the

New

Testament, and was feared


class as being really

and discountenanced by another

hostile to the interests of sacred truth.

As

a specimen of the one class,

we may

refer to

Collins,

one of the English Deists of the

last century.

In his book entitled Discourse of Freetliinking, published


in

1713, he

endeavoured to

throw

discredit

Nature and Amount of

the

Various Readings.

19

upon the

New

Testament from the great variety of readits

ings which existed in


doctrines which
it

text.

Uncertainty as to the

tanght was represented as being the


Freethinkers, as Collins alleged, w^ere

necessary result.

thus absolved from the duty of paying any regard to the


claims of revelation.

They might

safely, according to

him, ignore the very existence of the


until its friends agreed

New

Testament,
as to the

among themselves
line

genuine

text.

The same

of

argument has been

followed by some sceptical writers in more recent times,

though, for very sufficient reasons, which will soon be

brought forward,

it

is

rarely adopted

by any

intelligent

reasoners at the present day.

As specimens

of the other class referred

to,

we may
It forms

mention the names of Drs. Owen and Whitby.


a grievous blot on the

memory

of the former that he


his friends

assailed the very learned Brian

Walton and

in such language of vituperation for having

employed

their " unwilling leisure," after being deprived of their

livings

under the Commonwealth, in cultivating the

science of sacred criticism, and bringing to light the

discrepancies

the

New

which existed among the manuscripts of Testament. In venturing to deal with this

subject, the great Puritan only displayed his

own

ignor-

ance and narrowness of comprehension.

be said regarding Whitby in the assault

The same may which he made


This learned
all

on the

New

Testament of Dr. John


in 1707,

Mill.

work appeared

and was distinguished from


it

the editions which had preceded


various readings which
it

by the number

of
it

contained.

On

this

ground

20

Nature and Amount of

the

Various Beadings.
its autlior

was attacked by Dr. Whitby, and


of liaviiig rendered

was accused
j:)?^(?ccmows.

the text of Scripture

The obvious

fact

was overlooked that Mill had not

invented the variations, but simply revealed

them

and,

instead of the honour which should have been paid to


that illustrious scholar for his painstaking labour of
thirty years

on the sacred
to load

text, a

most unworthy attempt


obloquy, and to

was made
weakening

his

memory with
work
the

represent his life-long


instead
of

as having tended to the

support of

the

cause of

divine revelation.
Drs.

Owen and Whitby,


it

in their sincere

and zealous

but unintelligent attempts to defend Scripture against a


fancied danger to which
ately,

was exposed, have, unfortunThere have been

proved the types of not a few equally earnest but


even down to our own day,

short-sighted friends of the Bible.


those,

ever ready to tremble for the

Word

of

who have been God when conSuch persons

fronted with the discoveries of science.


forget that
it

it is

high treason to the truth to doubt that

will survive every assault


;

which can be made against


to abuse instead of arguto

it

while, in their ardent but narrow-minded zeal, they

have sometimes had recourse


ment, and

have thus given an advantage

their

opponents, which no discovery,


scientific,

critical, philosophical, or

could ever have furnished.


to

When we come
tioned,

examine the matter, we find that

the vast array of various readings which has been men-

and which appears

at first sight so formidable,

loses all

power

to discompose the Christian,

and even

Nature and Amount of

the

Various Headings.

21

becomes to him a source of congratulation and

rejoicing.

At

least nine out of every ten of these readings are of

They involve the mere substitution of one synonymous word for another; or the use of a compound instead of a simple term or
no practical importance whatsoever.
;

a change of the order in which different words or clauses


are to be read
;

and have thus scarcely any perceptible

influence on the

meaning of the

text.

Sometimes, for
is

example, in one manuscript, one Greek word


the copulative conjunction
different,

used for

and, w^hile in

a second a
is

but perfectly synonymous, particle

employed,

and in a third the word

may

be wanting altogether.

Sometimes our Lord


under the name
of at the

is
;

in one manuscript referred to

of Jesus

while in a second
;

same place
;

as Christ

in a third

styled Jesus Christ

and in a fourth

He is spoken He may be He may be menand are

tioned as Christ Jesus.

These are specimens of by far

the greater

number

of the various readings,

enough

to

show how unimportant they


and how
little

are in general

to our faith as Christians,

reason there

is

either for the unbeliever to boast, or the believer to fear,

on account of the mere number of them which have been


collected.

We may
illustrious

here cite the words of one of the greatest

scholars and critics that

England ever produced.

The
text

Eichard Bentley thus writes in his reply to


:

the

work

of Collins above mentioned

" The real

of the sacred writers does not

now
'Tis

(since the originals


edition,

have been so long


but
is

lost) lie in

any manuscript or

dispersed in

them

all.

competently exact

22

Nature and Amount of

the

Various Readings.

indeed in the worst manuscript

now
as

extant;

nor

is

one

article of faith or

moral precept either perverted or


as
will,

choose choose awkwardly you the worst by out of the whole lump of readings." And again Make your 30,000 (various readings)
lost in

them

design,
"

as

many sum
:

more,
all

if

number
better

of copies can ever reach that


to

the
is

knowing and

serious

reader,

who

thereby more richly furnished to select

what he
sinistrous

sees genuine.

But even put them


fool,

into the

hands of a knave or a

and

yet,

with the most


not
extin-

and

absurd

choice,

he

shall

guish the light of any one chapter, nor so disguise


Christianity,

but

that

every feature of

it

will

still

be the same."^

The truth

of the matter

is,

as has

been hinted, that

it

constitutes the security of our faith as Christians, that

such a vast collection of various readings could possibly

have been formed.


to exert a miraculous as to preserve
it

Unless

God had deemed

it

proper

power over the


all risk of

New

Testament, so
error,

from

change and

the

only

way

in

which

He

could bestow upon us the means

of discovering the true text

was by furnishing us in His


sources
it.

Providence with

many

different

to

which we
in other
;

might repair in seeking


cases.

to ascertain
for

As

in

He has left room here the many manuscripts of


(all

human

industry

and
still

the

New
we

Testament

extant

of course

more ancient than the date

of the

general employment of printing)

are presented with


to

^ Remarks upon a late Discourse of Freethinking, in a Letter F. H., D.D., hy PMleleutherus Lipsiensis, Part i. 32.

Nature and Amount of

the

Various Readings.
is

23

the field on which our diligence

to

be exercised in

seeking to recover the very words of evangelists and


apostles.

The multitude

of manuscripts

of necessity

increases the

number
is

of various readings, but in that

very number

found the assurance that our labour in

seeking after the original text shall not be in vain.

This point will be


ing illustrations.

made abundantly plain by

the follow-

There are some of the classical writers in the printed


editions of

whose works not a

single various reading is

to be found.

And
Nay
for

do scholars rejoice on that account,

or

is

the text therefore to be regarded as free from


?
:

corruption

the very opposite


instance,
to

is

the

case.

With

respect,

the

Eoman

historian

Yelleius Paterculus,
script of his

we

are told that only one

manu-

work has ever been

discovered.

Accord-

ingly,

no varieties of reading are to be found in the

published editions of Paterculus, except what conjecture

may have
hopeless

introduced.

But the consequence


is

is

that

the text of his

narrative

in

state

of the

most
totally

confusion.

Many
simply

parts
for

of

it

are

unintelligible,

and,

want

of

additional

manuscripts to furnish different

readings,

no means

whatever exist of letting in any light upon the obscurities

which abound.
is

Again, only one ancient manuscript


scholars

known

to

which contains the

last six

books

(xi.-xvi.) of

the Annals of Tacitus.

The

result is that the text of

these books remains in the most corrupt and mutilated


state.

The only way

of repairing

and restoring

it is

by

24

Nature and Amount of

the

Various Readings.

the exercise of conjectural criticism.


for this is still found,

Abundant scope
judgment or

and every fresh editor indulges in


be carefully noted that

some attempts
fancy suggests.

at emendation, just as his

Now,

let

it

conjectural criticism is entirely banished

from the

field

of the
all

New

Testament.

And why ?
is

Simply because
for
it.

sober critics feel that there

no need

The

wealth at their
the sacred text

command
extant

in the multitude of copies of


is

still

so enormous,
effort,

and the means


no one would

of ascertaining,
ings, is

by painstaking

the genuine read-

so

ample and

satisfactory, that

have a chance of being listened to at the present day

who

should propose to introduce any conjectural emenIt matters not

dation into the Scriptures.


or plausible
is

how ingenious
There
with the text
this principle

any such conjecture might appear.


for it in dealing

neither

room nor need


Testament.

of the

New

So deeply fixed
critics,

is

in

the minds of Biblical

that were

any one
and the

simply to suggest, in connection with a single word of


Scripture, that the region of fact should be left

realm of imagination entered, he would, by so doing, be


felt

and declared to have excluded himself from among

the

number

of those

who have

a right to be heard

upon

the subject.

It will be seen, then, that the very fact of our possess-

ing so

many

varieties of reading in the

books of the

New
have
itself

Testament, implies the vast resources which


at

we
is

command

for ascertaining the true text,

and

a reason for gratitude to that gracious Providence

Nature and Amount of

the

Various Readings.

25

which has thus preserved


ing,

to us the

means

of discover-

through diligent inquiry, what were

the

exact

words

which "holy men

of

old"

employed,

when

they spoke and wrote "as they were moved by the

Holy Ghost."

CHAPTEE

III

EXISTING MANUSCRIPTS OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.
whence various readto

[HE

three great sources

ings are derived, and

which we must

repair in seeking to fix the genuine text


of Scripture, are
:

(1) the

manuscripts of the
;

New

Testament

versions

known to exist down to us come which have


still

(2) the ancient


;

and

(3) those

quotations from the sacred books which occur in the

works of ancient

writers.

No

one of these guides to a


trusted.

knowledge of the original text can be implicitly

Even the most valuable manuscripts contain important and obvious errors. The best versions also have at
times mistaken the sense of the original, and are therefore to

be used with care and discrimination.


of those quotations of Scripture

And

very

many

which occur

in the writings of the Fathers have been loosely made,

memory having been

trusted to for giving the substance

of the passage quoted, while the exact words of the

sacred text were not sought to be preserved.

Illustra-

tions of the various kinds of errors thus indicated will

be given in the sequel.

Existing Manuscripts of the Neio Testament

27

The most
criticism
is,

direct

and important source of textual


still

of course, that furnished in

existing

To a description of the and available manuscripts. most valuable of these the present Chapter will be
devoted.

The manuscripts
and

of the

New

Testament have been


as

divided into two classes,

which are known

Uncials

Cursives, according to the

manner

in

which they

are written.

The Uncials

are so called because they


letters.

are written throughout in


sives, again,

Greek capital

The Curof writing

correspond more with the


use

mode

in

common

among

ourselves, having capitals only at

the beginning of sentences or paragraphs, and being

otherwise written in small characters.

The Uncials

are

more

ancient, and, of course,

much

less

numerous than

the Cursives.

The

line betv/een the

two may be drawn


that date

about the tenth century; and while existing manuscripts


of the

New

Testament anterior

to

can be

counted only by tens, those belonging to the period


extending from the tenth to the sixteenth century are
to be

reckoned by hundreds.
to

As Ave rise the number


appeal

an antiquity beyond the tenth century,

of manuscripts to

which we can make


In addition
to

becomes rapidly diminished.

of the

some precious fragments, there are only five manuscripts New Testament having any pretension to comTo a brief

pleteness that can be assigned to so ancient a date as

between the fourth and the sixth century.

account of these most interesting and valuable transcripts

28

Existing Manuscrvpts of the

New

Testameoit.

of the

New

Testament what remains of the present


could let his eye rest upon the yellow

Chapter will be given.

And who

parchments in which the sacred words of our Lord and

His disciples have been preserved in these ancient


documents, without having emotions of no ordinary

kind excited within him

Long have the hands which

traced these antique characters mouldered into dust.

Before the darkness of the mediaeval ages had obscured


the
glory of ancient literature and civilisation were

some of them written.

Beyond

all

the struggles of

modern times
cession,

beyond

all

the changes flowing, in suc-

from the breaking up of the

Eoman Empire, the

domination of ecclesiastical Home, the religious and


intellectual

emancipation of individuals and nations

effected

by the Eeformation

are

we

carried

by the

inspection of any one of these witnesses to our faith as


Christians.

While thrones have been overturned, and

empires have been founded; while learning has died

and been buried, and again enjoyed a happy resurrection while the tide of conquest has surged from shore
;

to

shore,

and one nation


earth,

after

another become the

leading people upon

it

has pleased

God
made

to

preserve in these perishable pages the record of His love


to

man, and of the provision which


It is

He

has

for

the salvation of sinners.


that
of'

with a kind of reverence


still

we

gaze upon these faded yet

legible transcripts

the word of God.

We

find in

them the very same


as are contained in

counsels, instructions,

and promises,

those printed copies of the Bible with which

we

are all

Existing Manuscri^pts of the Nevj Testament.


familiar
;

29

but there seems

a.

solemnity about their utterIt is


if

ances which can belong to no modern volume.

almost

felt,

while lingering over their contents, as

we

actually listened to the voice of John, or Peter, or Paul

and, far removed from the stormy contentions of those


rival sects

which have risen up in the modern Christian

world, were privileged to hear, as within the solemn


silence of

some vast

cathedral, or under the quietude of


life.

starlit sky,

the words of eternal

We

draw

near,

therefore, with a

kind of awe as well as

interest, to

inspect
spared,
us.

those
if,

treasures of this kind

which time has


is

on any occasion, such a privilege


if,

afforded

And

as

must be the

case with most,

we never

have an opportunity of actually looking with our own


eyes on these precious documents,

we cannot but be
before

glad

to

have them, as

it

were, brought

us

through the descriptions of them which have been


given by the faithful and diligent pens of
critics.

textual

It is usual

among

Biblical scholars to distinguish the

ancient manuscripts of the

New

of the letters of the alphabet.

Testament by the use The designations thus

given them have been accepted throughout Christendom,

and furnish an easy


reference.

as

well

as

concise

means

of

A, OR THE AlEXANDKIAN CoDEX.


This manuscript
is

preserved in the British Museum,


of

and constitutes one

the

most

precious

literary

treasures belonging to our country.

As

in the case

30

Existing Manuscripts of the

New

Testament.
is

of the other ancient manuscripts, very little of its history.


It has

known

been in this country since the

year 1628, having been sent, in that year, through the

English ambassador in Turkey, as a present to Charles

I.

from

Cyril,

then Patriarch of Constantinople.

short

account of the previous history of the manuscript was


also transmitted
first

by

Cyril,

and
from

is

still

prefixed to its
that

volume.

We

learn

this

notice

the
is

manuscript was wTitten by one named Thecla,


described as having suffered

who martyrdom, but when

or

where

is

utterly

unknown.

It has

been supposed, from

some

peculiarities in the orthography, that

Egypt was

the country in which the manuscript was written, but


this is a point exceedingly doubtful.

There need be no

question, however, that

it

was brought by Cyril from


account,
it

Alexandria;

and,

on

this

is

generally

spoken of as the Codex Alexandrinus, or Alexandrian


Manuscript.
Several considerations lead us to the conclusion that
this

manuscript

is

not less than 1400 years old, belongfifth

ing to a date about the middle of the

century.

As
The

already stated,

it

is

written throughout in capital

letters,

and

this of itself is a

mark

of high antiquity.

letters are in general

of uniform size, the excep-

tions being at the

commencement
is

of a

new

section,

where a larger character


at the

used,

and in

places, chiefly

end of

lines,

in wdiich the transcriber, being

pressed for space, has

made use

of smaller letters.

Another indication of the very ancient date of the


manuscript
is

found in the fact that no division occurs


Existing Manuscripts of the

New

Testament.

31

between the words

and

that, except at the close of the

sentences or paragraphs, no punctuation exists.


peculiarity,

This

common

to all the

most ancient manuscripts,

causes at

first

no small

difficulty to the reader.

Every
of the

one will understand this by glancing at the following


familiar verse, given

in English

in imitation

fashion followed in Greek

by the early uncial manuscripts.

INTHEBEGINNINGWASTHEWOEDANDTHE WOEDWASWITHGODANDTHEWOEDWASGOD.
John
i.

1.

The
seem

eye,
it

it is

will be

felt,

requires considerable practice

before

able readily to separate words


Avriting,

which

all

to

run together in the

and which are only

to be distinguished

by a

familiar acquaintance with the

language and by the sense of the passage.

In addition

to these

marks

of great antiquity, there

are other features presented


script

by the Alexandrian manuit

which lead us

to assign

to the date that has


it

been above suggested.


contain those

One
of

of these is that

does not

divisions

the Acts

and Epistles

generally ascribed to Euthalius, Bishop of Sulce, and

corresponding in effect to our modern chapters, which

came

into

common

use about the middle of the

fifth

century.

This fact pretty plainly indicates that the

manuscript must have been written before the date


just mentioned.

On

the other hand, as the manuscript

does contain both the

Ammonian
modes

sections

and the

Eusebian canons
text,

earlier

of dividing the sacred

which date respectively from the third and fourth

32

Existing Manuscripts of the

New

Testament
for it

centuries

we are thus precluded from claiming


mark
is,

any

considerably higher age than that which has been


Anotlier

stated.

of the antiquity of the Alexandrian


it

manuscript

that

comprises the Epistle of Clement This

amono- the canonical books.


referred to

Clement,

who

is

by the Apostle Paul


iv.

in his Epistle to the

Philippians (chap.

4) in

terms of high commentlie

dation, wrote, about the


epistle to

end of

first

century, an

the Corinthians, which was,

for a considerable

time, held
It is a

by many

cliurches as of canonical authority.

very beautiful composition, breathing throughout

a spirit of Gospel love and holiness, but disfigured

by

some
ting

fantastical interpretations of Scripture,

and admit-

some superstitious and erroneous


with
the
inspired
it

notions.
is

Comand

pared

writings,

it

feeble

unimpressive, and

niakes no claim to speak with the

authority pertaining to

the word of God.


its

But from
Bishop of

the high position occupied by

author, as one of the


as

most esteemed friends of

St.

Paul, and

Eome,

it

secured for a time great respect, and was,


first

during the
part of the

few centuries, read in Testament Canon.

many

churches as

New

This fact accounts

for its being

found in the Alexandrian Codex (which we


passing contains the sole copy of the
to
exist),

may remark in Epistle known


manuscript.

and confirms the opinion,

formed on other grounds, as to the antiquity of that


All considerations indeed
the form of the
letters,

whether those arising from


method
of writing, the

the

marginal references, the order in which the books are

Existing Manuscripts of the Neiu Testament.


arranged, or the contents of the manuscript

33
to-

lead us

the conclusion stated above, that in this precious docu-

ment we have

a copy of the
fall

New

Testament written
of the

about the time of the

of the

Eoman Empire

West

and that thus, more lasting than the sovereignty

established

of Eome 753 B.C. to the subversion of the

by Eomulus, which, dating from the foundation Empire towards


of our faith has already braved

the end of the fifth century, had survived about 1200


years, this

monument

the ravages of time for nearly a millennium and a half:

we are sure that now, under the watchful care of the librarians of the British Museum, it will be preserved as
while
far as possible

from further alteration or injury, and will


for the gratification

be handed down

and delight of

succeeding generations.

The manuscript
complete.
first

just described

is,

upon the whole, very

It is preserved in four quarto volumes, the

three of

which contain the Septuagint Version of

the Old Testament nearly entire.

The fourth volume, emfor

bracing the

New

Testament, has unfortunately suffered

more.

St.

Matthew's Gospel begins with the Greek

"Go ye
lost.

out," in chap. xxv. 6, all that precedes


St.

having been

In

John's Gospel, two leaves have perished,


"

which had included the text from the words


man," chap.
viii.

that a

vi.

50, to the

words

"

thou sayest," chap,

52.

Again, three leaves have disappeared from the


St.

second Epistle of

Paul to the Corinthians, embracing


iv.

the text from these words, " I believed," chap.


the words
" of

13, to

me," chap.

xii. 6.

With
is

these exceptions,

the text of the

New

Testament

complete.

34

Existing Manuscripts of the Neio Testament.

It only remains to be noticed further

with respect to

the Alexandrian manuscript, that a facsimile edition of

New Testament portion of it was published in 1799 by Dr. Woide, and that the Old Testament was issued
the
in like

manner

in 1816-28 under the care of Mr. Baber.

These truly magnificent works

may

be consulted at any

time by those having access to the reading-room of the

Museum, and
is,

furnish,

upon the whole, a very

fair
itself

representation of the original.


of course, jealously guarded
;

The manuscript
but a volume of

it is

to

be seen under glass on any of the days on which the

Museum

is

open to the public, and


all

may

worthily attract

the attention of

that have, at

any time, an oppor-

tunity of inspecting the literary treasures belonging to


that great national institution.

B, OR THE

Vatican Codex.

The manuscript known as B is still more interesting and precious than that which has already been described.
It is preserved in the

Vatican Library at Eome, and

is,

on that account, generally referred to as the Codex Vaticanus, or Vatican Manuscript.

Scarcely anything

is

known
library

of its external history.

We
or

are sure that for the

last four
;

hundred years
but

it

has belonged to the Papal

how

it

was procured,

whence

it

came, no

one has been able to determine.


fine

It is WTitten

on very

parchment, in capital

letters,

which bear a remarkof the manuscripts disis

able resemblance to those in

some

covered at Herculaneum.
suggest
its

This one fact


all

enough to

high antiquity, and

the other

phenomena

Existing Manuscripts of the


whicli
is
it

New

Testament.

35
It

presents are in favour of this conclusion.

probably at least a century older than the Alexandrian


;

manuscript

and

it

has,

until

lately,

been deemed

altogether without a rival, in point both of age


value,

and

among

existing manuscripts of the

New Testament.
by the strange
is

The
history

intrinsic interest attaching to this precious docu-

ment has been not

little

increased

which has attended

it.

There

an element of
sciences,

romance in Biblical criticism as in other


this

and

comes out very strongly in connection with the


It

Vatican manuscript.
prison at

has been kept very close in


greatest
difficulty

its

Eome.

The

has been
it.

experienced by scholars in getting even a look of

Once indeed,
for ever

or rather twice,
its cage,

it

seemed likely

to escape

from

and

to

be fully displayed to the

eager

eyes of Biblical

critics.

Among many
was carried by
;

other

treasures, literary

and

artistic, it

ISTapoleon

to Paris during his career of

triumph

and some friends

of sacred science

had then an opportunity of inspecting


But, on the downfall of the great
to the

and describing
conqueror,
it

it.

was restored

Pope

and, without

having been examined by any thoroughly competent


critic, it fell

once more under the jealous guardianship

of the authorities at

Eome.

An

edition of

it

was often

promised, but the hopes thus excited were, from time to


time, disappointed.

Amid

the revolutionary troubles of 1848,


to flee

when

the

Pope was compelled


script

from Eome, expectation was

again raised to a high pitch that this precious

manu-

would become more accessible

to

the learned


36
Existing Manuscripts of the
it

New

Testament.

world than

had ever been

before.

But fortune was


restored,

once more adverse.

His Holiness was speedily

and, with his return, hope was again extinguished.

At

length,

in

1857,

Biblical

scholars throughout

Christendom were excited by the intelligence that a


transcript of the Vatican manuscript
to be published.

was immediately
to

Cardinal Wiseman, in his work entitled

" Recollections of the last

Four Popes," took occasion

refer to

this matter,

and announced the edition

pre-

pared by the late Cardinal Mai and revised by others

whom
death
It

the Papal government had appointed after his


as being ready for
:

immediate publication.
its

came

but deep was the disappointment which

character immediately caused.


transcript

Instead of that accurate


it

which had been promised,

was found that


uncritical pro-

the work was full of errors.


cesses

The most
its

had been followed in

preparation.

Numerous
the least

passages had

even been inserted without

authority from the manuscript.


little

The publication was


bitterness of

more than what some scholars in the


disappointment styled
to
it

their

according

Bomc.
all

So, after all

a copy of the BiUe the efforts which had

been made,

the labour which had been expended,

and

all

the expectations which had been cherished,


still

students of the sacred text were


reliable

left

without a

copy of the queen of

all

the manuscripts of the

New

Testament.

After the date of Mai's edition, several scholars were


successful in obtaining a look of the Vatican manuscript.

,But in most cases, they scarcely obtained more than

Existing Manuscripts of the

New

Testament

37

a glimpse.

Sometimes they were permitted

to glance
at other
collation,

at tlie manuscript, but not

examine

it;

and

times

tliey

had scarcely begun the work of


of access to the manuscript

when liberty

was withdrawn.

Tischendorf, however,

was somewhat more fortunate


It

in this matter than other scholars.

seemed indeed,

at

one time, as

if

we should

obtain a full collation of the


it.

manuscript through his labours in connection with

But disappointment yet again was experienced.


of unlimited access to the manuscript,
at
it

Instead

which seemed
only for

first

to

have been granted him in February 1866,


it

turned out that he was allowed to use

some forty hours.

Admirably was the time employed.


named, he examined aU the
doubtful; he
first

Within the

brief period

passages in the

New

Testament in which the readings of


still

the manuscript were

made

a full colla:

tion of nearly the whole of the

three Gospels

and he

copied in facsimile some twenty pages of the manuscript.

Subsequent

events

have

explained

and

perhaps

justified the arrest thus


dorf.

put upon the labours of Tischenat the time that a fac-

The Pope assured him


edition

simile

of the manuscript

be published.
the

was just about to And, in accordance with this promise,


in 1868 from the Papal press at
to be able to

work did come out


Pleasing
is it

Ptome.

add that
desired.

this edition

seems to leave nothing more to be


large volumes, the
first

It is in five

four containing the Septuagint Ver-

sion of the Old Testament,

and the
one

last

comprising what
ideal

remains of the
Pio

New

Testament.

The

aimed

at in

ISTono's edition, as this

may

be called, was very

38

Existing Manuscripts of the

New

Testament.

different

from that adopted by Cardinal Mai, being


less

nothing

than to reproduce the very "form,

lines,

letters, strokes,

marks

"

of the manuscript itself

This

high standard appears to have been scrupulously ad-

hered to throughout.

The

editors

were two eminent


;

Biblical scholars, Vercellone


to

and Cozza
care

and they seem

have done

all

that

human

and erudition could

effect to present to the

world a faithful representation of

the famous Vatican manuscript.


It will

not be the least of

the

glories

of

Pio

ISTono's pontificate, that,

under his auspices, a facsimile

edition of this precious

document has

at length

been

presented to the world.

And, considering how nobly the


fulfilled,

assurance given to Tischendorf has been

we

readily forgive the hindrances which were placed in the

way
to

of that

indefatigable
after

explorer,

when he sought
It

copy page

page of the manuscript.


of giving
it

was

right that the

honour

to the world should

belong to the Papal court.

We

hail with gratitude the

boon conferred on textual criticism by the splendid and


apparently most satisfactory edition of 1868
rejoice
;

and we

that

critics

will

no longer be thwarted or

tantalized in their efforts to obtain an accurate acquaint-

ance with the contents of one of the most valuable


witnesses to the genuine text of the

New

Testament.

C,

OK THE Codex of Ephraem.

We

find in this manuscript


its

some features of
a palimpsest,

interest
is,

peculiarly

own.

It

is

that

manuscript containing two different works, the one

Existing Manuscripts of the


written over the other.
price of parchment,
it

New

Testament.

39

Owing

to the scarcity

and high

was not unusual

for writers of the

Middle Ages to have recourse to such an expedient.


Often in this

way

did they sacrifice some valuable work,

in order to find material on

which

to inscribe a

monkish

legend or an ecclesiastical writing of very secondary


importance.

Some

of

the

masterpieces

of ancient
literary

eloquence have been discovered under

the

lumber thus superinduced upon them.

strange per-

versity of taste seems to have seized these mediaeval


transcribers,

when they buried such works

as those of

Cicero beneath the barbarous jargon of some subtle disputant, or the mystical speculations of some reputed saint.

In regard to the manuscript under consideration,


is

it

one of the writings of the Syrian hymnologist and

theologian

Ephraem
of the
is

that had been chosen to overlay

the

text

New

Testament.

On

this

account,

the manuscript

generally spoken of as the

Codex

Ephracmi, when not referred to simply under the designation of C.


in Paris.
It is preserved in the
it

National Librar}^

was brought into France by Catherine de Medici, and that it previously belonged to Cardinal Eidolfi, nephew of Pope Leo X.
Its history

AVe know that

cannot be traced with any certainty to a


date.

more remote

But Tischendorf has conjectured,


it is

with great probability, that

one of the manuscripts

which were obtained by Andrew Lascaris, who, on


the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, was sent
into the East

by Lorenzo de Medici

to collect

any such

ancient writings as had escaped their ravages.


40
Existing Manuscripts of the

New

Testament.

A lengthened
this

period elapsed before the true value of

manuscript was discovered.

Not

until near the

end

of the seventeenth century did

any one observe the sacred

text under the more recent transcript of the treatise of

Ephraem.

But when the discovery was


Every
effort

at last

made by
to restore

Allix, scholars soon recognised the vast importance of the

treasure thus unveiled.

was made

the ancient waiting, and at length,

by the

aid of a

chemical preparation, this was done with great success.

In the year 1834 a particular tincture was applied to


the parchment, which has had the effect of greatly discolouring
it,

but has, at the same time, rendered

much
Testa-

of the original writing legible,

which could not be de-

ciphered before.

Nearly two-thirds of the

New

ment, along with portions of the Greek translation of


the Old Testament, are preserved in this manuscript.

So

far as it goes,

is

a most valuable aid to the textual


care,

critic.

It

had evidently been written with great


and

comparing favourably in this respect with the Alexandrian or even the Vatican manuscript
;

it

un-

doubtedly belongs to a date not much, if anything, below


the early part of the fifth century.
.

D, OE THE Codex of Beza.


There
class
is

yet another Biblical manuscript of the


it is

first

which

the honour of our country to possess

that know^n as D, or the Codex Bezce, preserved in the

University of Cambridge.

As

its

name

indicates, this

manuscript was formerly the property of the celebrated

Eeformer Beza.

It

was presented by him in the year

Existing Manuscripts of the

New
still

Testament.
possess
it.

41
Before

1581

to tlie
it

Academic body who


had been
in.

that date,
years,
us,

the hands of Beza about twenty


as

and was obtained by him,


tlie

he himself

tells

during

French civil wars of the sixteenth century,


St.

having then been found in the Monastery of


at Lyons.

Irenseus

We

cannot trace

its

history farther back, but


it

the palaeographic and other internal indications which


presents have led scholars pretty generally to ascribe
to the sixth century.

it

It is the least valuable of all the

manuscripts yet noticed.

Only the Gospels and Acts in


it.

Greek and Latin are preserved in

There are also

many

manifest corruptions and interpolations


its text. Still,

which
strong
critics.

have been introduced into

from the unit

doubted antiquity of the manuscript,

has

claims on the careful consideration of Biblical


It

was published in facsimile


spirit of the

at

the expense of the


;

University of Cambridge in 1793

and in accordance
it,

with the Liberal

body who possess

the

manuscript has often been examined and employed by


critical editors of the

New

Testament.

b^,

OR THE Codex Sinaiticus.

Until very recently, the four manuscripts


scribed were all the very ancient copies of

now

de-

any considerto exist.

able portion of the

New

Testament known

But some years ago the learned world received the


very unexpected but most agreeable intelligence that
a manuscript had been found supposed to be as ancient
as the

Codex Vaticanus, and more complete

tlxan

any
is

one previously known.

The

story of

its

discovery

42

Existing Manuscripts of the

New

Testament
be regarded as

curious,

and may, in some

particulars,

romantic.
First of all, forty- three leaves of the manuscript were ob-

tained in 1844.

Professor Tischendorf was travelling in

the East during that year in quest of ancient manuscripts.

While
his

at the

convent of

St.

Catharine on

eye was one day caught by a

Mount Sinai, number of vellum

leaves intended to be used in lighting the stove.

He

picked these out from a heap of other papers destined


for the

same purpose, and soon perceived that they conIt did not require

tained portions of the Septuagint Version of the Old

Testament.

his practised eyes to convince

much examination from him of the great antiquity


no time in securing them.
easily induced to part

of the fragments

and he

lost

But though the monks had been


they resolutely refused to

with these stray leaves in utter ignorance of their value,


let

him

see

any more

of the

work

to

which they belonged, now that he had told


it

them
tury.

that

was probably

as ancient as the fourth cen-

Accordingly, on his return to Europe, he pubthe portion he had procured (embracing the

lished

entire books of Esther

and ^ehemiah, with some portions

of 1 Chronicles and Jeremiah) under the title of Codex

Frederico-Augustanns, that designation being adopted

because he had obtained these fragments while travelling under the auspices of his

own monarch,

Frederick

Augustus of Saxony.
Tischendorf was once more at the same monastery in
1853, and did not forget to inquire after the precious

manuscript of which he had discovered some traces in

Existing Manuscripts of the


1844.

New

Testament.
it.

43

But

lie

could learn nothing regarding


it

As

was afterwards found,


in the interval
this,
;

had been seen by two

visitors

but Tischendorf, knowing nothing of

concluded that, in some


all

way

or other,

it

had

dis-

appeared, and abandoned


respecting
it.

hope of ever hearing more

But he was,

for the third time, at the

convent of

St.

Catharine in the early part of the year 1859.

And there,
j

on the 4th of February, his grand discovery was made.

He had

put into his hands by the steward of the con-

vent a manuscript which he at once recognised as the


long-sought treasure.

The communication

in

which

Professor Tischendorf conveyed the intelligence of this

inestimable discovery to Biblical scholars in Europe,

bore evidence of the emotion which

it

had excited in

his

own

heart,

and of the devout eagerness with which he

set himself to

examine

its

contents.

Having glanced

over the work, he immediately took pen in hand, and,


insensible to fatigue, he, that very night, copied out of
it

the Epistle of Barnabas in full

an apocryphal writing
then been

belonging to the early part of the second century, the


first

portion of which had not

till

known

in

the original Greek to

modern

scholars.

Soon afterwards,
he by and by

Tischendorf succeeded in obtaining permission to copy


the whole manuscript, while, better
still,

persuaded the brethren of

St.

Catharine to present the

precious document as a fitting and dutiful offering to


their great

head and patron Jhe Emperor of Eussia.


it

Ac-

cordingly,
II.,

was without delay transmitted

to

Alexander
St.

and

is

now

preserved in the Imperial Library at

44

Existing Manuscripts of the

New
it,

Testament.
consisting of 300

Petersburg.
copies,

splendid edition of

was published in 1862,


with other
less

as a suitable

memorial

of

tlie

thousandth anniversary of the empire of the Czars


expensive and smaller copies,

and
are

these,

now

in the possession of various learned

men and
manu-

public bodies throughout the world.

Every internal mark presented by the


script points, in the estimation

Sinaitic

of the

most eminent
fifth,

palaeographers, to the fourth, or at latest the


as the time

century,

when

it

was

written.

It is thus

perhaps as

old as the Vatican manuscript, and has even been sup-

posed, on some not improbable grounds, to be one of the


fifty

copies

of

Scripture

which Eusebius, Bishop of

Csesarea, prepared in a.d. 331,

by order

of the

Emperor

Constan tine,

for the use of his new capital, Constantinople.

Be

this as

it

may, the Sinaitic manuscript has one great


all

and undoubted advantage over


manuscripts, in containing the

the other ancient

New Testament complete.


defective throughout the
also in several

The Alexandrian manuscript


greater part of
St.

is

Matthew's Gospel, and

other places.

The Vatican manuscript wants the Epistle

to Philemon, the Pastoral Epistles, the latter part of the

Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Apocalypse.


of

The Codex

Ephraem

is still

more defective

while, as has been

already noticed, the Codex of Beza contains only the

Gospels and Acts in the original Greek, along with a


Latin translation.
the whole of the

But the

Sinaitic

Codex comprises

New

Testament without a single omisBarnabas, and a part of

sion, as well as the Epistle of

the Greek text of the writings of

Hermas

(also

belonging


Existing Manuscripts of the
to the second century)

New

Testament.

45

works

wliich,

up

to the discovery

of this unspeakably precious manuscrij^t, had been


as a

known

whole only through an early Latin version.

It is unnecessary for our present

purpose to give a

detailed account of

any of the other manuscripts of the


of

New

Testament.

The number
:

them yet discovered

has been computed as follows

Uncials (4th to 10th century)


Cursives (10th to 15th century)

127
1456 1583

Such
ment.

is

the manuscript wealth as yet available to

scholars for determining the true text of the


Tt is a deeply interesting question
'

New

Testa-

whether or

not there

is

reason to hope that other discoveries similar

to that of Tischendorf still

remain to be made.

For our

own

part,

we cannot

help believing that such

may be

the case.

When
is

it is

remembered that

a great part of

Herculan-eum
preserved in

yet unexplored, and that there

may

be

its

hidden chambers not only some works

of the classical writers,

which scholars have long mourned


themit is

as lost, but perhaps copies of the Sacred Scriptures


sekves, dating

almost from the apostolic age


also, that there are

when

remembered
scripts,

supposed

still

to be in

existence at Constantinople vast multitudes of

manu-

which have never been examined since the over-

throw of the Eastern Empire by the Turks in 1453

when

it is

remembered further

that, scattered throusfh

the Oriental monasteries, there

may

yet be treasures the


46
Existing Manuscripts of the

New

Testament.

existence of which no scholar has hitherto suspected


it

does not seem unreasonable to believe that Providence us discoveries that will at once

may still have in store for


fill

our minds with astonishment and our hearts with

delight, while they


text,

tend more and more to purify the


"

and confirm the authority, of that and abideth


for ever."
i

Word which

liveth
1

See, in connection
art.

Works,

with the hope above expressed, De Quincey's on Richo.rd BentUy (note), and Sir Henry Holland's

Recollections of Past Life, p. 123.

^
CHAPTEE
ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE

lY.

NEW

TESTAMENT.

jN

this chapter

we

are to glance at the second

source

of textual criticism formerly

men-

tioned

the

ancient versions

of the

New
to

Testament
our

which

have

come

down

own

day.
at once that valuable aid will often

It

must be evident

be available from this source for determining the true


text of the

New

Testament.

made

at a date considerably

Some of the versions were more ancient than can be

assigned to any manuscript at present

known
era.^

to exist.

They thus furnish proof regarding the prevailing


Scripture at a very early period of our

text of

But unfortunately there


claimed for the versions,
regarded.

are several considerations

which detract from the value which might be justly


if their
it

antiquity only w^ere

For one thing,

is

clear that they,


itself,

no

less

than the Greek

New

Testament

were

liable to

corruption with the lapse of time.


^

False readings might

The comparative value


,to

of versions as testimonies to the text will in Part Second, Chap. II.

be found again referred

48

Ancient Versions of

the

New

Testament

dreep into translations as easily as into the original


so that, in

order

to

feel

any confidence while using

them

for

the purpose of textual criticism,


believe

we must
still

have. good reason to

that they

are

in

our hands in the genuine form which


possessed.

they at

first

Moreover, as the idioms or natural characters of


ferent languages vary so

dif-

much,

it

would obviously be

very often precarious, and sometimes certainly erroneous,


to infer

from a version the exact words which stood in

the original.

With

regard, however, to the genuineness

or the spuriousness of clauses, verses,

and paragraphs,
most

versions

may

justly be regarded (so far as unrevised


to later texts) as furnishing

and unaccommodated
valuable evidence.

Again,

it is

obvious that even the best versions

may

sometimes have mistaken the meaning of the Greek,

and thus may tend only


due discrimination.
to

to mislead unless

used with

Errors of the kind referred to are


if

be found in every translation, and would,


critic

they

escaped notice, lead the textual

entirely astray.

Suppose, in illustration, that a doubt were to arise as to

one particular Greek phrase used in Acts


that

iii.

19,

and
were

the

present

authorized
tlie

English
point.

version

appealed to for evidence on

these words ascribed to the Apostle

We
may

there find

"

Eepent ye therebe blotted

fore, and be converted, that your sins

out, iclien the times of refreshing shall

come from the

presence

of the

Lord."

Now

this

rendering would

suggest a totally false idea of the original.

No

scholar

Ancient Versio7is of the

New

Testament.

49
English

would ever dream of any

sucli equivalent for tlie

word "when"

as

here

stands

in the

original.

The
It

passage furnishes a case of sheer mistranslation.

should be rendered

"

Eepent ye

therefore,

and be con-

verted, that your sins

times of refreshing
Lord, and that

may be blotted out, in order that may come from the presence of the He may send Jesus, the Christ, which

before was appointed for you," the regimen of the phrase


translated " in order that" being continued into the fol-

lowing, verse.

The passage

as it stands in our English

Version would thus be a hindrance, instead of a help, to


the discovery of the original text.

This example will

perhaps be sufficient to show that, whatever

may

be

the antiquity and general merits of a translation of the

New

Testament,

it

must be used with caution in the


another and more serious drawback
ancient versions as

service of textual criticism.

But there
There

is still

on the value of
is

%e

now

considered.

reason to believe that some of the best of

them
but

have not come down to us in their original have been, more or


less,

state,

conformed to

later texts

which

had obtained ascendancy in the Church.


which was prevalent
at the time

They can

thus only be regarded as bearing testimony to the text

when

the revision took

place, although the version itself


ancient."

may

be

much more

Of

course, the farther that critics can go in

the

way

of restoring the original text of the translation,


its

the greater does


sacred text.

value become as a witness to the

With

these preliminary remarks,

we now

proceed to give a brief account of those versions of the

60

Ancient Versions of the

New

Testament.

New

Testament

wliicli are of

most importance in the

department of textual

criticism.

Syriac Versions.

A Syriac version

of the

New Testament,

and probably
Eusebius

also of the Old, existed in the second century.

expresses himself in a
this,

way which seems

clearly to

imply

and

the fact is

generally admitted

by modern
that
it

scholars.

The most important

of the Syriac versions

is

"known as the Peshito, or Simple.

As

a translation

may
side

claim high rank, being generally very exact in

its

renderings

equally free from slavish


on the

literality

on the one

and

loose paraphrase

other.

As

an authority for the text of the

Greek

New
it

Testa-

ment, the Peshito would be possessed of transcendent

importance were

we warranted

in regarding

in its

present state as truly representative of the Syriac text


of the second century.

But there
not the case.

is

too good ground for

believing that such


to

is

The version appears

have undergone revision in the course of the fourth cen-

tury,

and

to

have been conformed to the text which had

by

that time

become generally prevalent in the Church.


from

This

suspicion, or rather certainty, prevents us


its

urging

authority with confidence in the settlement of


It contains, for
is

disputed readings.

example, the doxo-

logy to the Lord's Prayer, which


ancient authorities
;

wanting in so

many
most

and could we be sure that the ver-

sion possessed that clause from the beginning, a

weighty testimony would be obtained in favour of the

Ancient Versions of
genuineness of the words.

the

Neiv Testament.

51

But no more authority can)


for
it,

with certainty be claimed

so far as our present


a(

knowledge of the version extends, than belongs to


witness of the fourth century.

One

of the greatest services


to the cause of
criti-

which any Biblical scholar could render

textual criticism in our day would be to prepare a


cal

and trustworthy edition of the Peshito.


purpose

It is

under-

stood that manuscripts of the version are available in

numbers amply

sufficient for this

and we can-

not but deeply regret that such an edition was not

brought out before the Eevision of our Authorized


Version, at present in progress, was commenced.

A second
loxenian.
It

Syriac version

is

that

known

as the Plii-

was produced
of

at the instance of Philoxenus,

who was Bishop

Mabug

or Hierapolis in Eastern

Syria from a.d. 488 to a.d.


revised in A.D. 616 by
of Hierapolis.

518.

This version was

Thomas
also

of Harkei, also Bishop

Hence

it is

known
it is

as the Harclean.

It is in this latter

form that the work is almost exclusively


a translation,
of a very wretched

known

to us.

As
is

character, being

marked by

a servile adherence to the

Greek, which

totally destructive of the Syriac idiom.

But

this very circumstance constitutes its value as


critic.

an

auxiliary to the textual

By

its

close

and even

absurd adherence to the Greek we can infer exactly the


readings of that text which the translator had before

him.

It also

possesses various

readings

from older

Greek manuscripts in the margin

a
it

fact

which adds

much
great

to its value.

We

learn from

very clearly

how

was the amount

of deflection from the text of the

52

Ancient Versions of the Neio Testament.

New

Testament as

presented

in

the
at the

most ancient
time when
it

authorities

which had taken place

was formed.

Two
cited

other recensions of the sacred text are sometimes


critics as

by

independent Syriac versions

named

respectively the Jerusalem- Syriac and the Karkaphensian.

They

are of comparatively little importance.


of a Syriac version of the Gospels,

Some fragments
differing

from those already described, were discovered

by Dr. Cureton among the Syrian manuscripts brought

by Archdeacon Tattam from the Mtrian monasteries,


and now in the British Museum.
version was published in 1858, and
Curetonian.
Its text is

This fragmentary
is

known

as the

undoubtedly ancient, and on

that account interesting and valuable.


it

As

a translation

ranks low, having often, in the grossest way, mis-

taken the meaning of the original Greek.

Latin Versions.
It is generally agreed

by

scholars at the present day

that the

first

Latin version of the


Italy,

New

Testament

was made, not in

but in Africa.

This statement

may

naturally surprise those

who
first

are not famiiliar with

the linguistic

condition

of Italy

in

the

generations

immediately following the

promulgation of the

Gospel
that
it

They might
would be
felt

conclude,' as a matter of course,

necessary to translate the sacred


Italy.

books into Latin for the use of the inhabitants of

But we have the amplest evidence that no such necessity did in reality exist.

Greek was then a famiHar

Ancient Versions of the

New

Testament.

53

language tlirougliout that country.


following abundantly prove that

Sucli facts as the

such was the

case.

The Apostle Paul


Greek.
language.

(a.d.

58) wrote to the


(a.d.

Eomans

in

Clement of

Eome

97) wrote in the same

Ignatius (a.d. 107), like Paul, addressed the

Ptoman Christians in Greek.

Justin Martyr (about A.D.

150), although long resident in Ptome, composed his two

Apologies to the Emperor in Greek.

From

these,

and

many

similar facts

which might be quoted,^ we conclude

that no need would be felt in the earliest times for

a translation of the
to

New

Testament into Latin in order

meet the

necessities of the inhabitants of Italy.

Accordingly, the version


or "

known

as the Vetus Latina,


Its

Old Latin," had


is

its

origin in Northern Africa.

history

altogether

unknown.

But we

find

it

used by

the Latin translator of Irenaeus towards the close of the

second century, and by TertuUian a

little later.

Several

good manuscripts of this version

still exist,

dating from

the fourth onwards to the eleventh century.

This old Latin version was revised by Jerome, one of


the most learned of the Fathers, towards the close of the
fourth century.
translation
copies.

His principal object was

to

conform the

more accurately

to the text of the best

Greek

But he

also sought to

improve the character of


barbarisms by exclassical usage,

the version.
pressions

He

replaced

many

more in accordance with

and

in multitudes of passages gave a closer and more satisfactory rendering of the original.
^

See Roberts' Discussions on the Gospels, part

i.

chap.

ii.

and Max

Miiller's Lectures

on Language, First

Series, pp. 90-100.

54

Ancient Versions of the


is

New

Testament.
revision of Scrip-

As

always the case with a

new

ture, it

was only by slow degrees that the work of


Latin.

Jerome took the place of the Old


for the

Two

centuries
Partiality

elapsed before this result was accomplished.

old familiar words, and prejudice against the

new, thus for a long period prevented the


acceptance of the improved translation.

general

But, as cannot

but happen at
vailed.

last,

superior excellence at length pre-

From about

the end of the sixth century, the

version of Jerome
gate,

became the acknowledged Latin Vulat the present day.

and substantially remains so

Just as Tyndale's translation of the Bible into English


will continue the basis of every version of the Scriptures into our language
till

the end of time, whatever

may

be
so

the changes and improvements which are introduced, the work of Jerome
still

constitutes the substance of the

Latin Bible, notwithstanding the revisions to which


it

has been subjected.

Many

errors, of course,

crept

into the text in the course of the

Middle Ages, and when


prepared

the art of printing came into general use, the necessity


of having

some

trustworthy

edition

was

strongly

felt.

One was accordingly brought out under


Sixtus

the

auspices of Pope
title

V. in 1590, and to

it

the

" Authentic

"

was

assigned.

But

this edition

was soon discovered to be very incorrect, and another was issued by Clement VIII. in 1592. The Sixtine
and Clementine editions of the Yulgate differ widely between themselves, but neither can be regarded as
furnishing a satisfactory text.
It is

much

to be re-

gretted that such a valuable manuscript as the Codex

Ancient Versions of

the

New

Testament.
a.d.

55
541,

Amiatinus, which dates from about the year

and presents an admirable transcript of the text of


Jerome, was not made nse of in the preparation of
either of the Papal editions.

These early Latin versions of the ISTew Testament are


of

much

value in the determination of the text.

They

in general adhere with great closeness to the Greek,

the very order of the words in the original being, as far


as possible, retained.
still

They thus bear testimony, where

in their primitive condition, to the text of the


it

New

Testament as

existed in a very remote antiquity.

Egyptian Versions.
There are two complete Egyptian versions of the

New
lohitic

Testament available

for the purposes of textual

criticism.

These are known respectively as the MemThere are also some fragments

and the Thebaic.

which pass under the name of the Basmuric.

We

are in utter ignorance as to the history of the

Egyptian versions.

But

it

is

certain that the

two are
speak of
derived
as it

wholly independent of each

other.

Before this fact was


to

known. Biblical scholars were accustomed


the
Co^ptic as

the version of

all

Egypt

name

from Coptos, an ancient city in

Upper Egypt.

But

has been proved that the translations current in Lower

and Upper Egypt are

totally distinct, the versions are

now
It

distinguished as above.
is

well ascertained that two

dialects prevailed

in Egypt in the centuries which immediately followed

the general promulgation of the Gospel.

One

of these

56

Ancient Versions of the


in use in

New

Testament.
called,

was

Lower Egypt, and was

from the

capital of the country, the Memphitic.

The other was


like

employed in Upper Egypt, and was in


denominated from the chief town of the
Thebaic.

manner
the

district

Versions of the

New

Testament in these

dialects

im-

questionably existed in the fourth century, and probably

long before.

No

doubt Egypt, like the rest of the


at the

civilized world,

was thoroughly Ilelleni'^


so that the

com-

mencement
Egypt at But

of our era,

Greek Testament
original, in

would be generally understood in the


least,

Lower

and no need would be

felt for

a translation.

this state of things did not continue;

and we have

every reason to believe that the Thebaic version of the

New

Testament, prevalent in Upper Egypt, was formed

not later than the third century, and was followed by


the Memphitic at no distant date.

These version^ have

been

as yet too little studied to

be greatly available for


Doubtless, as scholar-

the purposes of textual criticism.


ship extends
its

triumphs, good use of them will yet be

made.

The Basmuric fragments present a


moulded upon the Thebaic.
in

text

evidently

They

are valuable only as

supplying evidence as to the text in some small portions

which the Thebaic no longer

exists.

The Gothic Version.


This
of the
is

a very interesting and not unimportant version

New

Testament, though, unfortunately,


state.

it

has not

yet been found in a complete

It

was made by

Ancient Versions of the


Ulpliilas,

New

Testament.

57

who

"became Bishop of the Goths in A.D. 348.


visit to

He had

adopted Arianism, and died while on a


(a.d.

Constantinople

388),

wdiither

he had gone to

defend his creed.

But no

trace of his doctrinal views


ii.

appears in his great work, except at Philip,

6,

where

he substitutes

likeness to

God

for equality

with God.
is

The most celebrated manuscript


Codex Argenteus, or
" Silver

of this version

the

Manuscript," preserved in
its

the University of Upsala.

This manuscript derives


its

name from
written

the fact that

large uncial letters

are

in. silver

throughout,

except those at the


It

beginning of sections, which are in gold.

was sent

to

Stockholm from Prague when


to the

this latter city surrendered

Swedes in 1G48.

The date

of the manuscript is
It

probably about the beginning of the sixth century.

now
some

contains only fragments

of the

Gospels in the^

following order
others)

(common

to it

with Manuscript

and

Matthew, John, Luke, Mark.


it

As
it is

the Gothic version dates from the fourth century,

another witness to the text then prevalent in the

Church.
directly

There can be no doubt that

was formed
contains.
it

from the Greek, as

is

indicated

by peculiar conit

structions,

and by the very mistakes wMcli

Its readings are of great

weight in passages where

supports those of the more ancient authorities.

The Armenian Veesion.


The Armenian Christians seem, for a considerable have had no Bible which could be called distheir own.

period, to

tinctively

Up

to the

fifth

century, they

58

Ancient Versions of

the

New

Testament.

appear to have been dependent on the Syriac version.

At

length, in a.d.
at the

431, two native scholars,

who had
;

been present

Council of Ephesus, brought back

with them a copy of the Scriptures in Greek

and

from that a translation was made into the Armenian


language.

As was

to

be expected, the Syriac Peshito


is

had an influence which


ceptible over this version.

in

some places very per-

In
it

its

more modern form,

as

published by Uscan in 1666,

has also been suspected

of having been conformed to the Latin, but there seems

no good ground

for this su]Dposition.

As

Dr. Tregelles

has remarked, " Coincidence of reading does not prove


Latinizing to be a well-founded charge."

Textual criticism has not as yet made


the Armenian version
;

much

use of

and both
it

its

date and character

prevent us from regarding

as of

much

importance.

The tEthiopic Version


-^thiopic was formerly the language of Abyssinia, but

has

now been superseded by


It is

a more modern dialect

called the Amharic.

connected with the Syriac,


of the Semitic family of
to Chris-

Arabic, and other


languages.
tianity

members

The Abyssinians were converted

by Frumentius

in the fourth century, but

no ver-

sion of the sacred writings seems to have been


into their language
till

made

a considerably later date

per-

haps in the sixth or seventh century.

The JEthiopic version

of the

New

Testament was

evidently formed from the Greek, but by one

who had
language.

no very accurate acquaintance with

that

Ancient Versions of the


Till a

New

Testament.

59

more exact edition has been issued than we yet

possess, little use can be

made
;

of the ^^thiopic in the

service of textual criticism

and even were such an

edition produced, the version itself


to possess anything

was formed too


of the

late

more than secondary importance.

The remaining ancient versions

New

Testa-

ment have
remark.
follows,

too little critical weight to call for detailed

We

simply note their

supposed dates
:

as

Georgian Version
:

(sixth century)
:

Arabic Ver-

sions (most ancient, eighth century)

Slavonic Version

(ninth century)

Anglo-Saxon versions (from the Latin,


:

eighth to eleventh century)

Persic Versions (from the

Syriac and Greek, fourteenth century).


like

Other versions,
merit as

the

English,

thougli

possessing great

translations,

and though derived immediately from the

Greek, are by far too modern to possess any authority


in the settlement of the original text.

CHAPTEE

V.

QUOTATIONS FROM THE BOOKS OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT BY

ANCIENT WEITERS.

VEEY
era
;

copious Cliristiaii literature has de-

scended to us from the early centuries of our

and nothing

is

more

characteristic of

that literature than the frequency and ful-

ness with which passages of the Sacred Scriptures are


cited.

It

has been said with truth that, had the ISTew


it

Testament as a volume perished, the substance of

could easily have been recovered from the quotations

which

lie

imbedded in the writings of authors who lived

before the date of the


in A.D. 325.

Mcene

or first General Council,

The evidence
the
first

as to the original

text

of Scripture

which may thus be

collected from the extant


is,

works of

Christian Fathers

so far as

it

goes,

more

ancient than can be derived from either manuscripts or


versions.

Our most venerable manuscripts

of the

New

Testament cannot, as we have seen, be dated farther

back than the fourth century, while the

earliest versions

are to be ascribed probably to the middle of the second.

Quotations from the Boohs of the Neio Testament.

61

But in

tliose writers

who

are

known

as the " Apostolic

Fathers,"

we

possess witnesses to the text of the

New
it)

Testament

(so far as

they can be shown to quote


if it

at

a period which borders upon, the apostolic age


itself.

does not even touch,

There

are,

however, several considerations which de-

tract seriously

from the value which might thus at

first

seem

to belong to patristic citations in the determina-

tion of the primitive text of the


chief of these

New
is

Testament.
follows.-^

The

may

be briefly stated as

The text

of such early writers

itself

not unfre-

quently doubtful.

Those manuscripts of their w^orks


to us are of a comparatively

which have come down

modern

date.

Few

of

them reach higher than the tenth


is

century;

and in some cases not more than a single

copy of a particular author

known

to exist.

We

are

thus at times very uncertain as to the genuine readings


of the original
;

and there

is

not unfrequently cause to

suspect that, in the course of ages, the text has suffered

from changes, intentional or unintentional, introduced

by

transcribers.

Again, as v/as natural, ere the written word assumed


that paramount importance which

was by and by
the quotations

re-

cognised as of right belonging to

it,

made
of

from

tlie

New

Testament by the early Christian writers

are often far from verbally accurate.

At times some

them seem

to be

mingled with the oral form in which

1 This part of the subject will be found more fully noticed when the comparative value of quotations as testimonies to the text is spoken of in Part Second, Chap. II.

62

Quotations from the Books of the

they had been transmitted.


loose

They
as

are often given in a

and confused way just

memory
moment

suggested, or

have a special turn assigned them according as the

argument of the writer

for the

required.

It

must he remembered

in regard to this whole subject,


facilities

that these ancient authors had no such


reference as are furnished
into chapters

of

by our modern Bibles divided

and

verses.

To

verify a quotation would,

in their case, often have implied lengthened search

and

irksome labour.
to trust for the

Tliey were thus very strongly tempted

most part

to their general

knowledge of

Scripture in

making

their citations.

Moreover, in multitudes of cases, slight verbal changes

would become current in


of their being erroneous.

familiar quotations of the

New

Testament, without giving rise to the slightest suspicion

The way in which our own

English Bible

is

often misquoted might supply us with

many an

illustration.

Perhaps there are few preachers,

though familiar during a long course of years with that


book, but have fallen into the habit of less or more
altering,

adding

to,

or.

deducting from, particular texts


as, " If

in their citations.

In such a passage
faithful

we

confess

our
sins,

sins,

He

is

and just

to

forgive

us our

and

to cleanse us

from all unrighteousness," one

may

be in the habit of substituting iniquity for unrighteousness,

and never dream that he

is

in error.

All are fami-

liar

with the addition so commonly made to our Lord's

promise

"

Where two

or three are gathered together in

my
its

name, there
fulfilment
is

am

I in the midst of

them"

when,

as

pleaded for in prayer, the words are

Neiv Testament hy Ancient Writers.

63

appended
"

" to bless

us and to do us good."
to

Nothing

is

more common than

hear the declaration quoted,

The blood

of Jesus

Christ cleanseth

from
;

all

sin,"

instead of the " cleanseth ws" of the original

and every
" I

one must have heard 2 Tim.

i.

12 quoted

as,

know
and

in luhom I have believed," &c., although the passage


really stands thus

"I

know wliom
is

I have believed,

am

persuaded that
to

He

able to keep that

which I have

committed

Him

against that day."


is

For various reasons, then, there

good ground

for

acquiescing in the judgment of Dr. Scrivener on the


point in question,

when he

says

"

On

the whole, scripare of


so

tural quotations from ecclesiastical writers

much

less consideration

than ancient translations, that


safely

where they are

single

and unsupported they may

be disregarded altogether.

An exiprcss citation, however,


first

by

a really careful Father of the

four or five cen-

turies (as Origen for example), if supported

by manuversions,

script authority,

and countenanced by the best


favours."
^

claims our respectful attention, and powerfully vindicates

the reading which


It

it

may

be interesting and useful

if

we

subjoin a

list

of the principal writers

whose works are available

for

the textual criticism of the

New

Testament, with the

approximate dates at which they composed their writings,

and the names of their most important works

still

extant.

Clement of Rome.

He wrote an
Criticism of the

epistle to the Corin-

thians about A.D. 97.


^

This epistle has come

down
p. 284.

to

Introduction

to the

New

Testament,

64

Quotations from the Books of the


It is contained in the

us in a single manuscript only.

Alexandrian manuscript of the


Ignatius of Antioch.

New

Testament.

He
It

is

supposed to have written

number

of short epistles in a.d. 107.

Barnahas.

An

epistle of

very early date bears the

name

of Barnabas.

was probably written about


a short epistle,

A.D. 130.

Bolycarp of Sm.yrna.
extant, about ad. 150.

He wrote

still

Justin Martyr.

Justin wrote two

''

Apologies" for

the Christians, which were severally addressed to the

emperors Antoninus Pius and Aurelius.


a
"

He

also wrote

Dialogue with Trypho a Jew."

Some

other writings

are doubtfully ascribed to him.

a.d. 150.

Tatian.

He wrote a number of works, but


This
an
is

only one,

his "Discourse to the Greeks," is extant.

A.D. 166.

Athenagoras.
short works

elegant writer has left us

two

"Apology," and a "Treatise on the

Eesurrection."

a.d. 170.

Iren^us.

One of the most important works of Christhe long treatise of Irenseus, " Against
a.d. 189.

tian antiquity

Heresies."

Clement of Alexandria.
"

His chief works extant


author.

are,

Hortatory Address to the Greeks," the


" Miscellanies."

" Teacher,"

and the

a.d. 200.

Tertullian.
cipal

A very voluminous
"

His prin-

works extant are an

Apology," and a treatise

" Against Marcion."


A.D. 210.

He

quotes from the Old Latin.

Hippolytus.

Only fragments of his works are extant:

New

Testament hy Ancient Writers.


is liis

65

the most important


A.D. 230.

" Eefutation of all Heresies."

Origen.
Fathers.
still

By

far the

most learned of the Ante-Mcene


from his pen, in whole or in
part,

Many works

exist,

and are very valuable

for the purposes of

textual criticism.
" Commentaries/'

We may
and

name

his

" Homilies,"
A.D.

treatise "

Against Celsus."

240.

Gregory Tliaiimaturgiis.

His

"

Panegyric on Origen,"

"Paraphrase of Ecclesiastes,"
works, have come

and some other short


a.d. 250.

down

to us.

Cypeian.

very

important

writer.

His

extant

works are his "Epistles" and "Treatises"


history,

all

most

valuable for the light they shed on early ecclesiastical


as well as for the
a.d. 252.

aid they give in

textual

criticism,

Methodius.

He
lost.

wrote a large work "Against Por-

phyry,"

now

We

still

possess his " Feast of the


A.D. 260.

Ten

Virgins,"

and some other remains.


treatise

Arnohiv.s.

come down

His to Ladantius The


us.

"Against the Gentiles" has

a.d. 300.

"

Christian Cicero."

His principal
a.d. 310.

extant work

is

the "Divine Institutions."

EuSEBius OF C^SAEEA
history."
still exist.

"

The Father

of ecclesiastical

Besides his " History," several works of his


A.D. 330.

Athanasius.

The

famous opponent of Arianism.


treatises,
letters,

His works consist of


A.D. 370.

and speeches.

Ujphraem Syrus.

Syrian theologian and hymnologist.


E

66

Quotations from the Books of the

New

Testament.
&c.,

His works, consisting of homilies, commentaries,

are specially useful in the criticism of the Syriac versions.


A.D. 370.

Epiphanius of Cyprus.

His chief works are "Against By


far the

Heresies," and a treatise expounding the doctrine of the


Trinity,
a.d. 400.

Chrysostom of Antioch.
of the Fathers.
taries, letters,

most eloquent

His works consist of sermons, commentreatises.

and

A.D. 405.

Jeeome,

or

HiERONYMUS.

very learned writer.


epistles,

His extant works consist of commentaries,


treatises.

and His

A.D. 410.

Augustine.

The best known


of

of all the Fathers.

extant works are very numerous.


"Confessions," ''City

name his God," " Eetractations," Comtreatises

We may

mentary on the Psalms, and


controversy.
It is hardly
A.D. 420.

on the Pelagian

worth while,

for our present purpose, to

name any

later writers.

CHAPTEE

VI.

SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF MODERN BIBLICAL CRITICISM.

|HEEE

are few epochs in the history of the

world more memorable than

that which
of the

marks the printing and publishing


first

Greek

New

Testament.

As long as
it

the

Word
very

of

God was

confined to manuscripts,

could come

into the hands only of a few,

and might be explained

much
all

as traditional prejudice

had

fixed.

Very

profound was the ignorance of the Scriptures which per-

vaded

ranks previous to the great intellectual and

spiritual revolution

which took place about the beginning

of the sixteenth century.

Many of the clergy had never


;

seen a copy of the whole Bible

and the great majority

them could not read a word The extracts which were read
of

of the original languages.

in the Breviary day

by

day were generally regarded by the


ing the entire

priests as constitut-

Word

of

God

and even these were, in

many

cases, repeated

without being understood

with-

out conveying the slightest glimmering of Gospel-truth


to the understanding, or producing the least impression

on the conscience or the

heart.


68 Sketch of
the History of

Modern

Biblical Criticism.

While

this

was the
it is

condition

of

the

professed

teachers of the people,

needless to say

how

dense

was the ignorance which prevailed among


themselves.

the people

Indeed,

when we

glance at the state of


it

Christendom towards the close of the Middle Ages,

seems almost miraculous that so great a change speedily


passed over
it.

Looking

at

Europe

for a century pre-

vious to the appearing of Luther,


similar to that

we

gaze upon a scene

which the prophet witnessed, when he which was


full

was

set

down

in the midst of the valley


as

of bones,

and when,
open

he

declares, " there


lo
!

were very

many

in the

valley,

and

they were very dry."

Judging by mere human probability, the speedy awakening and disenthralment of Christendom seemed then as
hopeless as to the natural eye must have appeared the
resuscitation of these mournful relics of once living men.

Only a

spirit of faith living in the heart of

Ezekiel pre-

vented him from at once replying in the negative, when


the startling question
"
fell

upon

his ears
?

from heaven
only a similar
close of the

Son

of

man, can these bones

live

"

And

spirit

could have led any one about the

fourteenth century to anticipate that marvellous mental

and

spiritual

awakening which, ere

little

more than a

hundred years had elapsed, was


out the whole Christian world.

to take place through-

But when the

set

time for the accomplishment of


effects great results

His purposes has come, God often


within a very limited period.

Soon did a mighty

change pass over that scene of desolation and death on

which the prophet looked.

The profound

stillness

was

Sketch of the History of

Modern

Biblical Criticism. 69

broken; and sound and movement


the great transformation about to

the harbingers of occur were perceived;


which
seer, there started

until at length, in strikincj contrast to the scene


at first lay before the

view of the

up

from that valley of death a vast multitude of living

men

" the breath,"


lived,

says Ezekiel,

"

came

into them,

and they

and stood up on

their feet,

an exceeding
change

great army."

Now, such

also appears the mightiness of the

which passed over the Christian world within the period


that has been mentioned.

And when we

inquire into

the causes which, under God, led to this great and


blessed revolution,

we

find, as is often

the case in the

accomplishment of Heaven's designs, that there was a


wonderful working together of various agencies and

means
of
all,

in order to give rise to the desired result.

Chief

we

note the invention of the art


effect of this,

of printing,

and then, as a necessary

the publication of

the great literary treasures which had descended from


antiquity.
It

was impossible that these works could be

sent forth to the world, without rousing the

human
had so
have

mind

from that state of stagnation in which


remains of antiquity would, of

it

long been sunk.


classical

But while the dissemination of the


itself,

given birth to a mental activity which must have been,


in a large degree, fatal to the claims of superstition, and

must have led many


fetters in

to.

throw

off

those intellectual

which the human soul had so long been bound,


needed to
initiate

something more was


revival of spiritual life

that

great

which

is

the most characteristic

70 Sketch of

the

History of Modern Biblical Criticism.

feature of the Eeformation.

The heathen
it

writers might

be sufficient to destroy, but


to construct.

required the sacred writers


fall,

Superstition might

yet Christianity,

in

its

apostolic

form,

might not be established.

blank scepticism might take the place of a long-dominant


credulity.

The

fear of

Erasmus

that, "

with the study

of ancient literature, ancient

paganism would reappear,"

might be realized

and, as has happened in other cases,

men might

then rush from the slavish acceptance of

grovelling superstitions to a bold and impious denial of

the most certain and sacred scriptural truths.

From

this

danger Christendom was saved, as

it

only

could be saved, by the general circulation of the inspired

Word
The

of God.

Without

this the Eeformation, in its

best and

highest sense, would have been impossible.

Scriptures alone could form a foundation on


Christianity might

which

the fabric of primitive


raised
;

anew be
interest to

and hence there attaches the deepest


first

the printing and publishing of the

Greek I^ew

Testament

the issue through the press of that precious


to bear fresh life

volume which was

and peace, instruc-

tion and salvation, to the world.

The
printed

first

portions

of

the

Greek Testament ever


Virgin

were the songs of the


from
the

Mary and
St.

Zacharias,

opening chapter of

Luke's

Gospel.

These were appended to a Greek edition of

the Psalms which appeared at Venice in the year 1486.

A
It

considerable period elapsed before any attempt


to print
till

was

made

and publish the whole


1,516

New

Testament.

was not

year so memorable on other

Sketch of the History of

Modern

Biblical Criticism.

71

accounts

that

Erasmus gave

his first edition to the

world, and thus did more to facilitate the triumph of

Luther in his arduous struggle than could, in any other


way, have been accomplished.
Although, however, the
^

New

Testament of Erasmus

was the
printed,

first

one actually published, there was another


strictly

some few years previously, under


It is

Eomish
so

influences.

somewhat remarkable that Spain,

intolerant

until

recent years of the free circulation

of the Bible, has the honour of being the country in

which an edition of the Sacred Scriptures was


printed.

first

About the beginning

of the sixteenth century,

the able and accomplished


to prepare a Polyglott Bible
;

Cardinal Ximenes began

and the work was

finished,

so far as regards the printing of the

New

Testament,
prepara-

before

Erasmus had even begun

to

make any

tions for his edition.

Some

years, however,

were allowed

to pass before this great to

work

of

Ximenes was authorized


as the
it

be published.

It is

known

Complutensian'

edition,

from the place at which

appeared

ComThere

plutum being the Latin name


are

of Alcala in Spain.

now

hardly any means of ascertaining wliat were

the manuscripts used in the preparation of this

New

Testament.

They seem

to

have been of no great value,

for its readings rarely agree, in controverted passages,

with those of the most ancient authorities formerly described.

Moreover,

it

has been strongly contended by

some, though as stoutly denied by others, that the

Complutensian editors allowed an undue influence in


their

work

to the Latin Vulgate,

which has always been

72 Sketch of
so
higlily

the

History of Modern Biblical Criticism.


tlie

esteemed by
certainly,

Cliurcli

of
"be

Eome.

Some

countenance,
suspicion,

seems

to

given to this

by a curious remark and comparison wliicb


Their
as the

they make in their preface to the Old Testament.


plan was
to print the Latin in the central
it

column

place of honour, and to surround

on either side by the


,

Septuagint Greek and the original Hebrew,


to this,

Eeferring
he-

they compare the Vulgate to Christ crucified


tioo

tween the

thieves Q)

the

one, thief

being the Greek

Church, which was denounced as being heretical, and the


other thief being the nation of the Jews,

whom

they

accused
it

of having corrupted the

Hebrew

as often as

differed

from the Latin.


text,

The

Complutensian

although the

first

ever

printed, has

had but small influence on subsequent

editions of the

New

Testament.

It possesses therefore

comparatively

little interest at

the present day, and will

probably never again be reprinted.

Very
editions

different has

it

proved wdth the edition published


all

by Erasmus.

That has been the basis of


Scriptures

the ordinary
since

of the

which have

been
it

published, from generation to generation.


heen derived in substance our

From

has

own Authorized English


a point of the

Testament.

It

is,

therefore,

deepest

interest to us to ascertain

on what

critical authority th,e

edition of

Erasmus

rests.

And on

investigating this

matter,

we

are led both to acknowledge the gracious


past,

working of Divine Providence in the

and

to see

what

is

our

own

manifest duty at the present day.


that our Authorized Version was

When we remember

Sketch of the History of

Modem

Biblical Criticism.

73

formed more than 250 years ago, and that then not one
of those ancient and precious manuscripts

which have
of

been described
criticism,

was available

for

the

purposes
lest

Bible

we might well known to us from

entertain the fear

the

infancy should prove to be

seriously misleading, as having been formed from a very

erroneous text.

And when we

ask what
first,

luere

the

manuscripts which Erasmus employed at

and what

those were which the editors immediately following


tised, till

him
was
have
o

what

is

known

as the " Eeceived

Text
to

"

produced,

we

find that our apprehensions


It

seem

but too good foundation.

was not

for long^that the for

ample materials which we now


hands of Biblical
for a century,

possess

fixing

accurately the true readings of Scripture


scholars.

came

into the

Erasmus, and his followers!

had but a few modern manuscripts which

they could consult in preparing their editions of the

New

Testament.

They were such

as

happened

to

be

within their reach; and these were of a character on

which no great reliance could be placed.


meagre were
the
resources

To show how
it

of Erasmus,

may

be

mentioned that he had only a single manuscript of the


Apocalypse, and that even the one which he possessed

was not complete.


edition

part

of the

New
it

Testament
first

would thus have been


tion from the Latin. jecturally retranslated

altoo^ether

wanting in his

had he not ventured

to

supply

by

transla-

He
it

took the Vulgate, and conIt thus

into Greek.

happens
Testaso
far

that, in the ordinary editions of the

Greek

New

ment,

there

are

words

still

existing,

which

74 Sketch of

the

History of Modern Biblical Criticism.

from resting on any manuscript authority, or having

any claim

to

be regarded as inspired, were plainly

and confessedly inserted in the text from mere conjecture.

Yet, notwithstanding this, and


of
it,

all

the more on account

the

common

text of the

Greek

New

Testament

excites our deepest

wonder and admiration.

We cannot
Although
to

but regard it as a kind of Providential miracle.


so

much

has been done since

it

was formed

throw
at

light
first

upon the true text


unaffected.

of Scripture, that
al]

which was

adopted remains, for almost

practical purposes,

totally

God has never

interfered with

human

liberty, yet it is impossible to look

back upon

the history of the Bible, and especially on the point

now

under consideration, without being struck with the

manner

in

which

He

has continually watched over His


truly

own holy Word.

We may

and thankfully say that


" in a

He led Erasmus
knew

and his followers

way which they

not," so as to secure a substantial accuracy in those

transcripts of the
to the world.

New

Testament which they presented


after

Many have come


;

them, and devoted

their lives to the discovery

and publication of sacred


Biblical

manuscripts

but largely as the stores of

criticism have

been increased since their day, the


almost the same
as

New
it

Testament remains practically


in the
first editions.

was
:

Changes have indeed been made

doubts respecting numerous passages have been started


fluctuations have taken place in the opinions of scholars
as to the true reading in a

few important texts


its

but,

upon

the whole, criticism, even in

most rigorous

exercise, has

Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticisvi. 75

not demanded any great or material alterations in the


text.

This
all

is

a very comforting and satisfactory thought to


it is

the friends of Scripture, yet

surely not one which

should lead them to undervalue the labours of those

who
The

devote their time and strength to critical pursuits.


object of such students
is

to discover

and present

to the Christian world, in as pure a form as possible,

that message which our Heavenly Father has addressed


to

His children upon

earth.

The more

loyal

and loving

our hearts are towards Him, the more will

incumbent duty

to

we feel it our encourage, in every way we can, those


for their

scholarly studies

which have

end the noble


have crept into

purpose of freeing the Scriptures from every taint of


error that

may, through human

iufirmity,

their text,
it

and restoring that text

to the

form which

exhibited in the autographs of the sacred writers.

Let
is

it

be remembered

also, that to

such investigations
justly place in our
all

due the confidence which we

may

Bibles, as they

have been familiar to us


little

our days

and

that,

however

the labours of sacred critics


it

may
is

be heard of by the Christian world at large, yet


these that the faith and comfort of
all

to

believers are to

be ascribed.

By

these there

is

a wall of defence

drawn

around the Bible of the humblest worshipper.

By these

the enemies of divine truth are prevented from makiug


that assault upon the hopes of the Christian community,

which they would not defer


least

for a

moment had they

the

chance of being successful.

By the

labour of some

scholar whose

name perhaps few have

ever heard

who

76 Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism.


sits

buried

among books and manuscripts which most


think repellent and unedifying,. and whose

men would
life is

spent in pursuits which


as

many in

their haste

might
in

stigmatize

useless

by

his

labours,

Christians

general are protected from the assertion or insinuation


that the passage of Scripture
their hearts has

which may have cheered

no valid claim to be regarded as the

Honour then to those who are wearing health and strength away in the noble work of ascerof God.

Word

taining and elucidating the true text of Scripture!

As
as

much

as the missionary

who
seals

leaves

home and kindred


heathen
:

to bear the glad tidings of salvation to the

truly as the martyr

who

with his blood the

testi-

mony he
the
last

has borne for Christ


of God,

are these men doing the


at

work

and earning the reward which will


His good and faithful servants.

be given to

all

But

for

them, the message which the missionary bears might


at as a fable;

be scoffed

but for them, the faith for

which the martyr


sion;

dies

might be ridiculed as a delu-

but for them, the Gospel which the minister

preaches might be laughed at as the offspring of


credulity or imposture
;

human
be

and therefore
and

to

them be given

that honour which

is

their due,

let those services

acknowledged and appreciated which are rendered by


them, not to a
sect, a

church, or a nation merely, but to

mankind
but

at large,

and by which not only the present,


under most deep and true

all future ages, are laid

and lasting

obligations.

On

looking back upon the history of sacred criticism

Sketch of the History of


'

Modern
it is

Biblical Criticism. 77

since the days of Erasmus,

pleasing to discover that

some of the very


country.

first

and most eminent men who

devoted themselves to such studies belonged to our


After Beza's editions of the

own

New
till

Testament,

which appeared towards the


tury, little

close of the sixteenth cen-

was done

in textual criticism

the publica-

tion of Walton's Polyglott in the year 1657.

This great

work contained
to that text

a collection of various readings from


it still

numerous important manuscripts, though

adhered

which had now acquired a kind


Ignorance

of prescripit

tive right,

and which, in the opinion of many,


is

was

sacrilegious to touch.

often as irritable

as

it

is

clamorous

and learning must, not unfreproved in the case now before

quently, sustain a severe conflict before its conclusions


are accepted.
If there is
is

Thus

it

us.
it

any duty plainly incumbent on Christians,

surely to see that they possess the

Word

of

God

in as

pure a form as Providence has placed within their power.

And when new


far higher value
first

manuscripts were brought to

light, of a

than those which had been used in the


it

printed editions of the IS'ew Testament,

might
dis-

have been expected that some gratitude would be


played to those scholars

who had

discovered them, and


to the Christian

who

sought by their aid to present

world a closer approximation to the genuine text of


Scripture.

But

as has

happened in many similar

cases,

and

as will doubtless

happen

again, very different

was

the result.

Men

allowed their
all

own

notions of expe-

diency to outweigh

considerations of truth and duty.


its

The

established text with all

corruptions was clung

78 Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism.


to,

in preference to that wliicli had so greatly superior


;

claims to acceptance

and those scholars who ventured

to call attention to the various readings furnished

by

newly-discovered manuscripts, instead of being thanked


for their

pains,

were

(as

we

formerly saw)

branded

as

the

enemies of revelation,

future ages, however,

have acknowledged the value of those labours which were


at
first

so

much

decried;
will

and the names


ever be names

of
of

Walton,

Mill,

and Bentley

which England
pursuit of
textual criticism.

will be proud in connection with the

sacred learning

and the advancement of

After this period, the glory of devotedness to Biblical


science

passed away from Britain, and rested on a


is

country to which the whole Christian world


the deepest obligation.

now under
deplore

However much we may


faith
it is

some of the phases which both


assumed in Germany,
but

and unbelief have

fair that

we should

also

acknowledge the incalculable service which German


scholarship has rendered to the cause of divine truth.

In regard, more especially,

to the text of Scripture, the


to

names
tioned

of Beugel

and Griesbach need only

be men-

in order to suggest

former labours of

how much we owe to the Continental critics. Nor have German


list

scholars ceased to toil in our behalf at the present day.

Not

to

weary the reader with a long

of names,

we may

simply mention that of Tischendorf, who has had the honour of finding more manuscripts of the

New

Testament

than any other labourer in this

field,

and whose previous

discoveries have (as formerly described) all been sur-

Sketch of the History of

Modern

Biblical Criticism. 79

passed and crowned by his bringing to light a manuscript

which

carries ns

back

at least to the days


it

of

Augustine and Jerome, and whose worth


possible to overestimate.
It is gratifying to

is

scarcely

be able to add that our own country

has recently been reoccupying the honourable position

which she formerly held in the department of textual


criticism.

No

labourers in this field have ever surpassed

Dr. Tregelles and Dr. Scrivener in the zeal, diligence,

and painstaking accuracy with which they have devoted


their lives to this study.

Others

also,

like the late

lamented Dean Alford, have done much to give a stimulus to such pursuits.

There are not a few cheering eviis

dences that a taste for the study of textual criticism


reviving in our country
;

and

if this taste is

duly fostered
the happiest

and properly
results.

directed,

we may augur from

it

The

New

Testament llevision Company, now


at

sitting

periodically

Westminster, of necessity give their


to the settlement of the true text. to discharge.

most careful attention


This
It
is

the very

first

duty which they have

would be vain

to

make an improved

translation,

how-

ever excellent,

if

that were founded on

a corrupt or

uncertain text.

The primary aim


patient,

therefore of the

Com-

pany

is,

by the most

and even anxious, weighing

of all available evidence, to


to certainty as can be

make as near an approach made with respect to the genuine


If English readers of the
first

text of the

New

Testament.

new

version feel startled at

by finding words

or

clauses omitted to

which they have been long accustomed,

80

ShetcJi

of the History of

Modem

Biblical Criticism.
to a

and changes of translation introduced owing


of reading

change

which has been adopted in the Greek, they


has been

may

rest assured that not a single alteration

adopted without the most serious deliberation, or from

any other motive than the earnest


inspired

desire of

making the

nearest possible approach to the primitive form of that

Word which God


feet,

has given us to be " a lamp

unto our

and a

light unto our path."

PART SECOND.
MODE OF DEALING WITH THE
FACTS.

PART SECOND.
MODE OF DEALING WITH THE EACTS.

CHAPTER

I.

INTRODUCTORY.

HE

facts of the case are

now

before us, and

we are next met by the inquiry, What are we to do with them ? What are the principles
that are to guide us in selecting from the
great mass of various readings in existence those

which

we may have
It is

best reason to suppose were the original


?

words of the inspired penmen

too generally imagined that


all.

we have no

prin-

ciples at

Even

intelligent persons are frequently


criti-

under the impression that the science of textual


cism
is

a mere collection of undigested facts, that the

textual critic has no fixed laws to regulate his procedure,

that he works at random, and that the text eventually

constructed by

him

is

the result of arbitrary hypothesis


It will
;

or unregulated caprice.

be our

effort to

show

that this

is

not the case

and

that,

whatever uncertainty
subject,

may

still rest

upon some parts of our

enough

is

84

Introductory.
to

known

make

it

strictly

a science.

We

shall en-

deavour so to look at the task we have in hand as


gradually to draw a line with ever-increasing closeness

around the correct readings of which we are


It has

in search.

been already stated that there are three sources

from which these readings are to be derived, manuscripts,


versions, and citations

from Scripture in the writings of

the early Fathers of the Church.


believe that
all

Had we
Looking

reason to

these authorities ^vere of equal value


at

our course would be a simple one.


so

them

as

many witnesses, each entitled to the same degree of credit, we should simply reckon up the number upon
opposing sides of the point at issue, and pronounce our
verdict according to the numerical majority.

Such a
different

state of things, however, is never exhibited in a court of


justice.

The value

of evidence there given


differs.

by

witnesses very materially

opportunities of observation than others.

Some have had better Some have

made
good.

a better use of opportunities in themselves equally

One

is

better able than another to give his evi-

dence in a
statements

clear, distinct,

and

intelligible

manner.

made by one accord

better than those

The made
All

by

others with circumstances already

known

to us.

these things affect the value of evidence.


of a judge" to attend to them,

It is the

duty

and he

may

often have to

decide the case before


instead of the many.

him by the evidence of the few Hence tlie legal maxim, than

which there

is

none more thoroughly established, that

testimonies are to be weighed, not numbered.

The same

princi]3le

comes into

operation

in

the

Introductory.

85

inquiry with which

we

are engaged.

One

of the first

things that strikes the student of the text of the

New

Testament

is

the degree to which the

many

witnesses

that have something to say regarding

it differ

from one

another in the points

now

mentioned.

They have not


for

had the same opportunities of observation,


belongs to a period

one

much

nearer that at which the


;

Apostles wrote than another

and

this,

though,

when

taken by

itself,

by no means conclusive as to the higher


is

value of his evidence,


its

yet at

first

sight something in

favour.

They have not made the same use


good
;

of oppor-

tunities equally

for

one of two

who

lived in the

same

acje

mav have

obtained his information from sources

manifestly inferior to those that were employed by his

contemporary.

The same pains have not been taken by


;

them

to ascertain the facts

for

one

may show
first

that he

has yielded without further inquiry to a

impression,
it

while another has looked into the matter, viewed

from different

sides,

argued
careful

it

with himself,

and made

up

his

mind

after

and anxious
one

deliberation.

Finally, they

may

not give evidence with the same direct


;

bearing on the point at issue

for

may

speak to us

in the original language of the

New

Testament, another
translation.

throusjh the

more uncertain medium of a

It is clear then that

merely to number our witnesses


distinguish

will

not do.

separate values.

We must We must
said

between

their

arrange and classify them.


it

Before proceeding further

may

be well to illustrate

what has now been

by an example.
first

We

take two

interesting various readings in the

few verses of

86
tlie

Introductory.

sixth chapter of the Gospel of


first

St.

Matthew.

In our

English version of the


read, "
to

verse of that cliapter

we

Take heed that ye do not your alms before men,

be seen of them," and again at the close of the fourth,

the sixth, and the eighteenth verses,


"

we

find the clause,

And

thy Fatlier, which

seetli in

secret, shall

reward

thee openly."

In

all

these cases the words of the Eng-

lish Bible are a faithful rendering of the standard


text.

Greek

Many

manuscripts and other authorities, how1,

ever, read in v.

"

Take

lieed that

ye do not your

righteousness before men," and at the close of each of

the three other verses referred to they omit the word


" openly."

Which

is

correct

Of which have we most

reason to think that


as originally spoken

it

gives the form of the sentences

by onr Lord and written by the


to

Evangelist

Were we

be guided by the number of

witnesses on either side,

we should

at once

have to

determine in favour of the received text.


giving

The number
compara-

evidence

on

its

behalf vastly preponderates.


is

The number
tively small.

in favour of the other readings

Yet

it is

conceivable that,

if

justice is to

be done, the smaller number


consideration

may

be entitled to more

than the
it.

larger,

and that the verdict


it

should be with

In point of fact

really proves to
;

be

so.

All editors of note come to this conclusion

and

English readers
their

who have
see,
v.

Alford's

New

Testament in

hands will

on turning up the passage, that he


1,

reads without remark in

"

But take heed

tliat

ye

do not your righteousness before men," and that at the


close of verses

4 and

G he brackets the " openly," while at

Introductory.

87
soon to explain
it

the end of

v.

18 he omits

it.

It is too

the grounds of this judgment.

We

advert to
it

only as

a fact

but to confirm

its

correctness

may
"

be

said,

that the force and

meaning of these verses are brought


clearer light.

by

it

into a

much

The word

alms" in

V. 1

confines our attention to the first illustration of the


spirit

outward and hypocritical


almsf^ivinsj.

spoken of by our Lord,


to all
first

The word "ric^hteousness" extends


;

the three, almsgiving, prayer, and fasting

and the

verse of the chapter becomes a general precept, finding


its illustration

not in one only but in each of these.

The omission
importance.

of the

word "openly"

is

of even greater

Its insertion spoils the

whole meaning of

the passage, leading us to think that the promise of the

Saviour

is

that, if w^e

serve

God

in secret, that is

sincerely, without pretence or show, for

His own sake

and not

for the sake of

human

applause, then

God

will

reward us even in this world, in the very sight and presence of those

who gave

us no credit for piety,


it.

who

per-

haps condemned us for the want of


is

No

such lesson

intended

our Saviour designing only to teach us

that,

however men

may

despise the spirit of


is

humble

piety and honour ostentation, there

Another and a
condemn.
us.

Higher who

will

judge us justly, even that Tather in


secret.

heaven who seeth in

Men may
is

He

will "requite" or rather

"recompense"

No

selfish

thought of earthly triumph over foes

thus allowed to

mingle with our hope of reward.


selfishness of spirit

In purity and un-

we

anticipate only the approbation

of our Father in heaven.

88
These examples

Introductory.

may
itself

suffice to

show how much a de-

cision in favour of a minority of witnesses

may

after-

wards commend
judgment.

to the

spiritually

enlightened

If so, they answer the

end

for

which they

are at present quoted.

They

will confirm to our

minds
this

the necessity of such a classification of our witnesses


as that to

which reference has been made.

To

classification

we now

proceed.

CHAPTEE

11.

FIRST STEP IN CLASSIFICATION.

iT

has been said that the three classes of


witnesses to which

we have

to appeal for

the determination of the true text of the

New
Greek

Testament, are

manuscripts of

the

text, translations into other

languages made from

that text, and citations in the Fathers of the Church.

We

have

first

to

make

a comparative estimate of these

three classes.

Of the three
and
1.

it

will appear that

we must
text.

look
For,

first

chiefly to manuscripts of the

Greek

As

to

citations in

the writings of the Fathers,

these labour in

many

respects under the

same and even


of the

greater defects than those that have to be contended

with in the case of manuscripts.

The works

Fathers, like the Sacred Writings themselves, were

com-

posed centuries before the art of printing was known.

The autographs have long


doubted
error

since perished.

It

cannot be

that, in their transcription, all the liabilities to

which

affected

the transcription of the inspired


exist,

autographs would not only

but would exist in

90

First Step in Classification.


force.

even greater

No

such profound reverence was


It

entertained for

them

as for Scripture.

was no such
all

labour of earnest and loving zeal to copy them, with


those marks of interest which
still testify

to the anxiety

manifested by the copyists of the Sacred Books to do their

work
felt

faithfully

and

well.

No

such scruples would be

by a copyist

in altering the text that


is

was beneath

his eye.

Nay, there

every reason to think that he


his very reverence for Scrip-

would often be tempted by


ture to alter

what he

read.

quotation given by a

Father, let us suppose, was different from


scriber found in the manuscripts

what the

tran-

he was himself accus-

tomed

to reverence as divine.

How natural the supposijustice,

tion that the Father

had quoted wrong, and that

both to the Bible and to him, required that the error

should be corrected.
Fathers,

Add to

tliis

that, in the case of the

we

possess,

with one or two exceptions, no

manuscripts reacliing so near the time when their books

were written as in the case of the


that even the whole

New

Testament, and

amount

of our manuscripts of their


will be at once observed

writings

is

but small, and

it

that, if it be difficult to
it

determine the text of Scripture,


difficult to

must often be

still

more

determine that of
life

those Fathers, the early era of whose

renders their

testimony in this matter of peculiar value.


This however
is

not

all.

Even supposing

that

we

could determine exactly what an early Christian Father

gave as a citation from Scripture, the question would


still

remain.

Has

Scripture in that citation been ade?

quately represented

In very

many

cases

it

would be

First Step in Classification.

impossible to affirm this with confidence.

The Fathers

were not unfrequently extremely loose in their quotations from Scripture.

Whether
and
so
to turn

it

was that they pos;

sessed

little critical skill


it difficult

were careless

or that

they found

up the passage they were


that,

quoting in the

rolls

which were then in use; or


still

depending largely on a
less particular

living tradition,

they were
;

about written words than

we

are

whatall

may have been the cause and causes now mentioned tended more or
ever

probably

the

less to the result

they were often


a

satisfied if

they gave the meaning of


to

passage

without

seeming

concern

themselves

whether or not they quoted with


the same Father
ferent
is

literal exactness.

Nay,
dif-

found to quote the same text in

ways

in different parts of his writings.

Numerous
It is a
i.

examples of
of the

this

may

be met with in any

critical edition

New

Testament.

We
is

refer only to one.

question of very great importance whether in

Mark

we should
" as it is

read " as

it

written in the prophets," or

written in Isaiah the proj)het," and the evidence

of Iren?eus, a writer of the second half of the second

century, would be here of peculiar value.

That Father

quotes the text at one time in the one form, at another


in the other.

The value
very high.

of patristic citations

is

indeed sometimes

It

may happen

that

New

Testament passages

are cited with the express intention of giving the words

of the orioiual, that the whole course of

tlie

writer's

argument may be dependent on the


particular

fact that

he found a

word

in the text before him, or that he

may

92

First Step in Classification.


tlie

even discuss

merits of different readings, and de-

liberately give the preference to one.

In such cases the

value of citations
degree,

is

so great that they

become

to a large

in a

manner

to be afterwards considered

by

us, tests of the

value of those manuscripts in which

similar or different readings occur.

But
it

this is not their

general character.

Neither ought

to be forgotten that

they

may

often be useful as corroborative authorities.


of themselves they
;

The weight which they have not


receive from
tlieir

may
and,

agreement with other witnesses

agreeing with them, they


It

may

confirm their evidence.


all

must be obvious, how^ever, from


in

that has been said,

that the higliest position that can be assigned to citations

general

is

that of being subsidiary aids in


of

fixing

the true reading

disputed passages.
circle is

First

authorities tliey are not.


it

Our

narrower than

was.
2.

As

to versions, or translations of the

Greek text

into other languages, their value in bearing testimony to

the general purity and integrity of the fonn in which the

New

Testament has come down to us cannot be too


is it

higbty spohen of; nor

possible to admire too

much

the providential arrangement which led to the Bible's

being early translated into


that
its corru]:)tion, to

many

different tongues, so
if

any large extent, became almost,


That, however,
is

not altogether, an impossibility.


the point with which
desire
to

not

we
is

are at present dealing.

We
to

know what
It

the relation

of versions

manuscripts in fixing particular words or clauses of the

Greek

text.

cannot be doubted for a

moment

that,

First Step in Classification.

93
is

just as in the case of citations, their position


ordinate.

sub-

At once the

old difficulty meets us.

What
its

is

the true

text of the version itself?

Exposed in

early con-

dition to all the mischances that befell the. sacred text,

the recovery of the original text of the one

may

be a

problem hardly

less difficult of solution

than the re;

covery of the original text of the other

while,

in

addition to a deterioration arising from the unavoidable


infirmities of copyists,

we

are exposed to the highly

probable danger that the transcriber of a version would


often be tempted to correct
it

by the authority

of the

Greek text that he possessed.


that

Again, even supposing


its

we have
be that

the version in

original condition,

it

may

it is

in a language widely different in its


;

genius from the Greek

that a translator
;

was anxious
if

to be elegant rather than accurate

that,

even

desirous

to be accurate, he mistook the sense of the

words that

he translated.

On the
are

other hand,

it

some points
is

in regard

must not be forgotten that there to which the evidence of

versions

entitled to the greatest weight.

The
It

preis

sence or absence of whole clauses, for example,


point to which they can clearly testify. frequently happened that they were

not un-

made with such an

excessive literalness that, disregarding the idiom of their

own

tongue, they followed the order and construction of

the words in their original, or simply transferred Greek

words
selves.

to their

own page

in the letters used

by them-

In such cases their bearing on any question at

94
issue
is direct.

First Step in Classification.

We liave versions
was

too belonging to parts

of the world widely removed from one another, so that


collusion
of testimony

impossible.

Finally,

it

greatly heightens our sense of their importance,

when we
Not-

remember

that

some of them
however,

Avere

made

at

an age long

anterior to the date of our oldest manuscripts.

withstanding

this,

it

must be evident that the


is

use of versions in the critical emendation of the text

encompassed with
sions

difficulties peculiarly its

own.
it

Verhas
the

may

preserve a true reading long before

been

discovered in

any

Greek

manuscript, as

Vulgate preserved the


to

fine reading of

Luke

ii.

14, "

Glory

God

in the highest,

and on earth peace among men of


is,

His good pleasure," that


loved.

among men whom He hath


aid in settling disfirst

They may be a powerful


;

puted texts
authorities.

but they cannot be depended on as

Our

circle

has again been narrowed.


authorities

We

are thus for

first

thrown back upon

manuscripts of the Greek text

itself,

upon documents
it

professing to give us directly that text as

stood in

the infancy of the Christian Church.

Other readings
find

than those presented there we


citations,

may

in

patristic

or

we may

infer

from versions; but the

instances

must be

rare indeed, if they are even in

any

case to be regarded as legitimate, Avhen

we draw

a read-

ing from any other source than a Greek manuscript.

CHAPTEE

III.

SECOND STEP IN CLASSIFICATION.

[jT

the

point

now

reached

we have
Greek

only

manuscripts before us as the primal source

whence the readings

of the

New

Testament are to be drawn.


have laid citations and versions entirely
shall

Not that we
aside.

We

have by and by to return to them when the


is

whole evidence in any particular case


into account.
classifying

to be taken

But, in the meantime, while engaged in


witnesses,

our

we have

seen

reason

to

believe that they do not occupy the

first

rank.

Greek

manuscripts alone do that.

These, however, are exquite possible that they

tremely numerous, and

it

is

may

not

all

be of the same value.


?

Can anything be
question,
it it

done then towards classifying them

In endeavouring to answer

this

is

of

importance to bear distinctly in mind what

is

that

we are

in search

of.

It is the original,

and therefore the


therefore, at first
it

most ancient
in date, the

text.

It

might seem,

sight that the nearer any manuscripts approach to

more valuable wiU they be; and

that,

96

Second Step in

Classificatioii.

inasmucli as the Tincial manuscripts, whose distinction

from the cursive


our oldest group,
placing

is

already known to our we should be justified

readers, are

in

at once

our dependence mainly upon them.

Here,

however,

we

are

met by the important

fact that there is

a very great difference between the oldness of a


script and the oldness of
its text.

manuact

The mechanical
what
is

of writing, and the substance of

written,
so

may
were
ori-

belong to very different dates.

It

would not be

we

dealing only with original compositions.

An

gfinal

book belongs in substance


its

as well as

form to the
If

exact period at which

author lived and wrote.

we

know

the date of the form,

we know

also that of the

substance.

But we

are

now

occupied, not with originals

but with copies, and other considerations play their part.

cursive

manuscript written, for

example, in

the

eleventh century,

may

quite well present to us a text

belonging to the fourth, or perhaps even an earlier century.


It

might be one of the manuscripts of that


lost,

centur}^,
it

now
is

from which

it

was

copied.

Whether

was

so

to be determined by considerations of which


if

we have
have
its

not yet spoken; but


it

there be good ground

for believing tliat

was

so, it is clear

that

it is

not to

value diminished by the unimportant circumit is

stance that

written in cursive, not in uncial,

letters.

No

doubt

if

a witness present himself to us in uncial


for the

clothing,

we have
is

most

part,

though not even


is

then

always, reason to believe

both that he

old and

that his text

old; whereas, in the case of one


it is

who

appears in cursive clothing,

a matter for inquiry

Second Step in Classification.

97

whether, though the fashion of his garb be modern, the


substance of the garb, in other words the text
itself,

may

not be as old as in the former case.

Still

the out-

ward appearance

of the witness is not decisive.


style in

We

must dismiss the idea that the


worthlessness.

which a manu-

script is written is conclusive either as to its value or


its

Have we then any means


upon the principle
of

of classifying our witnesses


less ancientness of text
?

more or

A little
have
;

consideration of the matter will


and,

show us that we

when we have done


place,

it,

a second step in

classification will

have been gained.

In the
uncial

first

we can

separate our most ancient

manuscripts from

the

rest,

and

determine
text.

from them the general character of an ancient

What

is

in

them

testifies to

the state of the text in


old.

their day,

and must be old simply because they are

We

can then institute a comparison between this text


If,

and that of our more modern manuscripts.


so, it

in doing

can be shown that there

is

a very great resem-

blance,

and that the various readings presented, not-

withstanding this resemblance, by the moderns, can

only be accounted for by the supposition that they existed in the

Church
at once

at a very early period,

and that they


its

have no connection with the mere flux of time and


changes,

we

pronounce these modern manuscripts

to be old in text

though not in

lettering.

If,

on the

other hand, the differences are obviously produced, not

by the

faithful

handing down of other ancient readings,

but by that gradual process of change, sometimes more

98

Second Step in Classification.


less conscious,

sometimes

which

is

inseparable from rediffer in

peated copyings, especially where the copyists


training and taste,

we must

regard the manuscripts con-

taining these differences as modern, not only in form but


in text.

Now

it is

often possible to trace differences of

this latter class.

We

can almost see the process of

change going on, alterations finding their way into the


text,

roughnesses

softened down,

difficulties

cleared

away, anomalous turns of language removed, the whole


character of the text becoming different from

what

it

was.

Wherever

this

can be done, we have gained the


are in search
of.

line of demarcation
titled to

we

We

are en-

say that manuscripts upon which such changes

have been produced are not so worthy of reliance as


those

by which the changes have been escaped.


said,

In the second place, we can go even further than has

now been
cision
it

and can determine with

still

greater preus,

whether the text of any manuscript before


is

be

uncial or cursive,

ancient or not.

We

know from
more

entirely independent testimony, of a kind to be


fully spoken of

when we

reach our next point,

how

certain passages of Scripture were read in ancient times.

By

these

we can

test our witnesses.

One comes

before

us with

all

the appearance of antiquity.

We

ask him,

How do
us
as,

you read such and such passages ?


supposition,
;

If he

answer

by the

we know
But
if

that they were read

in ancient times

well.

It is so far at least a proof that

he

is

what he claims

to be.

he answer us as

we

know

that they were read only in

modern not

in ancient

times,

we

at once say,

You

do not sustain your profes-

Second Step in Classification.


sion;

99

you look

as if

you belonged

to tlie Fathers; in

reality,

you are one of

their late descendants.


all

Again,

one comes before us with


modern.

the appearance of being a


test.

We

apply the same


is

He may show

that,

so far as our

main purpose

concerned, he belongs to a

remote antiquity.

In the third place, such a separation as that of which

we have been speaking has

actually been
all.

made

in

certain cases with the consent of

Inquirers differ

as to the value they attach to the classes thus separated

from each
exist.

other.

They do not deny that the


text,

classes

There are modern manuscripts which

all

allow

to possess

an ancient

and

to be in this respect dis-

tinguished from the great mass of their fellows.


It is

no doubt possible that even manuscripts, not

exhibiting

what may be

called

an ancient text upon the

whole,

may

occasionally preserve an apostolic

word or

phrase that

somehow
is

or other has dropped out of their

more ancient companions.

That they have preserved


obvious, for in

much

that

apostolic

is

much

all

our

witnesses agree, and that must be apostolic.


therefore have preserved more.

They may
to

The

difficulty is

make sure that they have done so. No agreement among themselves can be sufficient to convince us, for they may have been led astray by some common cause. No mere number witnessing the same thing can be of the least avail. Unless we are satisfied that each individual of the number would be a good witness though he stood alone, the mere bringing them together as a They multitude may disturb, but cannot convince.

100

Second Step in Classification.


their title to be heard
;

must prove

and appearances
differ

being certainly against them, inasmuch as they

from our older witnesses, we are entitled to ask that the


proof they offer us shall be unambiguous and weighty.

Thus then we have taken another


fruitful of results.

step,

and one most


fact,

It is a

demonstrated

that the

great mass of manuscripts belonging to the later centuries


of the Christian

Church cannot stand the

tests of

which
they

we have been

speaking.

We

shall not say that

are therefore to be put wholly aside, but certainly they


are not primary authorities.

Our

circle

has again been

greatly narrowed.

CHAPTER

IV.

THIRD STEP IN CLASSIFICATION.

PART

I.

|Y the process of classification hitherto pursued

we have been
the

enabled to diminish greatly

number

of our primary witnesses to the

Greek text of the


evidence

New

Testament.

We
text,

have also been able to secure that

all

those to whose

we

are chiefly to attend have


its

an ancient
It
;

a text at least ancient in

general character.

may
it

be thought that this should be enough for us

but

must be borne

in

mind

that the oldest of our manuscripts


first

does not go back to a point of time older than the

half of the fourth century, and that the texts therefore


hitherto mainly used

by us take us only

to that date, a

date three centuries later than that at which the sacred

autographs were written.

This indeed would be a


if

matter of no consequence

two conditions
fulfilled.

affecting the

question before us could be

First,

had we
Testa-

reason to believe that, up to the period to which our


oldest manuscripts belong, the text of the

New

ment had remained pure and

free

from
its

error,

then those

witnesses, bearing testimony to

condition in their

102

Third Step in
day,

Classification.

own

would

at the

same time

testify to

what

it

was
and

in the days of the Apostles.

Secondly, were our wit-

nesses agreed in their testimony,

we should

at once

without further difficulty be able to determine the precise

words that were read by them as Scripture, and a

very strong presumption would be given in their behalf.


Unfortunately neither of these two conditions
plied with.
is

com-

As
the

to the

first,

we know
its

that the text of the

New

Testament, so far from having continued pure during


first

three centuries of

existence,

had

fallen into

a state of remarkable confusion long before that period


expired.

Several circumstances combine to

show

this.

The

differences

among- our ancient witnesses themselves,


to,

a point as yet only alluded

and

to be

immediately
fact.

spoken of more

fully, are a clear


its

proof of the

Had

the text been preserved in

original condition they

could not

all at

once have exhibited the diversity that


It

we

actually

meet with.

was one

at the first

it

would have been one then.


century,

Again, although

we have

no manuscripts older than the early part of the fourth

we have

translations of the

New

Testament
earlier,

made

into other languages nearly


it

two centuries

together with quotations from

embodied in writings
;

of the Fathers belonging to as remote an age


translations

and these

and quotations leave no doubt

that,

when

they were made, very

many

passages were read in their

particular districts quite otherwise than

our oldest manuscripts.

Still further,

we find them in we can see from

the works of the early Fathers of the Church that they

Third Step in

Classification.

103

were often greatly perplexed by the variety of readings


that

came under

their notice.

They speak

of

it

con-

tinually,

and often in tones of much hesitation and

doubt.
others.

They They

refer to manuscripts

even then older than

describe

accurate than others.


fully falsifying

some manuscripts as being more They blame opponents for wilThey discuss the probabilities the text.
In
short,

of different

claims.

they find themselves

largely compelled to pursue the

same course of argu-

ment pursued by
Finally,

Biblical critics at the present day.

we have

the express testimony of some of the

most learned of their number, of some who devoted

much
point.

pains to the study of the text upon this very

We

shall refer only to two, the

most learned, the


flourished in the

most

critical of

them

all,

one of

whom
19,

third century, the other in the fourth.

The

first,

Origen,

commenting upon Matt.


falsely

xix.

where words occur


" It

thought by him to be corrupt, says,

might

appear madness in

me

to consider these

words as an

addition to the text, were there not also in

many

other

things such a variety in the copies of the Gospels, that


neither

do those of

Matthew
is

correspond with one

another nor with those of the other Evangelists.

But
great,

now

the

diversity

of copies

become truly

whether through the carelessness of the copyists or


through the wilful daring of those who are occupied in
correcting

what

is

copied, or through those again


their

who
judg-

venture to

make improvements upon

own

ment, sometimes addimr, and at other times


out."

blottinor

The second, Jerome,

says, in his epistle to

Pope

104

Third Step in

Classification.

Damasus,
texts, let

" If confidence is to

be placed in the Latin


;

them

tell

ns in which

for the texts are almost

as

numerous

as the copies."

It is true that

Jerome

is

here speaking of the Latin texts, but the simple fact


that they were thus corrupt
is

evidence enough that the

variations in different manuscripts of the original

must

have been

great.

To what causes

this corruption of the text about the


is

beginning of the fourth century

to be ascribed

it

would be extremely

difficult to say.

The

natural, the

inevitable causes spoken of in the former part of this

work, undoubtedly contributed to


themselves,
fact,

it,

but they are not of

by any means, a
It

sufficient explanation.

The

however, without going into

this, is sufficient for

our present purpose.


serious difficulty

evidently presents a very

the merits of
age.

when we would proceed to estimate our ancient witnesses who belong to that
.

When we

The second examine our ancient

difficulty alluded to

is

not less great.

witnesses,

we

find that

they are very far indeed from being unanimous in the


testimony given by them.
variance with one another.

They

are

constantly

at

We

take one or

two of
for a

them

that seem to approach most closely;

and

time, as

we

travel with them,

we

find nothing but a

delightful
diverge.

harmony
First

of statement.

All at once they

the one and then the other joins a

different group.

But attachment

to the

new companions

does not continue long.


appears.

Divergence from them speedily

And

so they go on in ever-varying combina-

Third Step in
tions, till the

Classification.

105

impression

is

apt to be produced on us

that anything like a well-grounded verdict on our part


is

impossible.

And

so

it

would

be,

were

all

our ancient authorities

regarded by us as equally worthy of reliance.


there cannot be a greater mistake than to think

But
so.

Two

manuscripts of the fourth century

may
as

differ

from

each other in worth quite as


sixteenth.

much

two of the
in the

All the main causes that operate in bringing

about a distinction in the latter operate also


former
case.

The old were copies

like the young.

They

may have been

copied from bad originals.

They may
cannot be

have been carelessly copied.

Age

alone

accepted as decisive of their value.


that

It will thus

be seen

we

are brought back to the point from which

we

started in this chapter.

The two conditions that would


effort to discriminate

have saved us from any

between

our ancient witnesses cannot be complied with.

Nothing

remains but that


relative value,

we make up

our minds as to their


to them.

and the weight to be attached

Here one of the most interesting and important problems connected with our inquiry opens
oti

our view.

How
text
?

shall

we

decide between the conflicting claims

of manuscripts all presenting so far at least an ancient

We

shall explain the principle of the process to

be resorted

to,

and

shall then confirm

and

illustrate it in

a separate chapter

by one

or

two examples.

The

great fact to be borne in

mind

is this,

that

we

have in early versions of the

New
it

Testament, and
in the writings of

especially in early quotations from

106

Third Step in

Classification.

the Churcli Fathers, evidence as to the manner in which


a large

number

of important texts were read at a date

much more remote than


ing manuscripts.
free

that of the oldest of our existtrue that this evidence


is

It

is

not

from the influences that have weakened the

effect

of the evidence of our manuscripts themselves.

The

text of translations and of quotations has been affected

by time

as well as their text.

The

editions of

them

that have been published are not unfrequently far from

being so critical and correct as to entitle them to be


confidently relied on.

We may

often be as uncertain as

to the readings they presented at the

time when the

manuscripts containing them appeared, for they too

were once known only in that form, as we are with


regard to the readings

we would deduce from


Testament
itself.

the

manuscripts of the

New

Still, after

making
sufficient

all

allowance for these chances of

error,

amount

of certainty remains to enable us to

come
a

to a definite conclusion as to the

manner

in

which
at a

large

number

of important texts

were read,

date long anterior to that from which any manuscript

evidence has come


to the sources

down

to us.

But we are not confined


which

now referred

to for the certainty of

we

speak.

Other considerations come also into play.


as to the original reading of the texts

Arguments
selecting

we

are

may
is

be drawn from the general verdict of

manuscript authority regarding them; for although that


authority
later
it

than the evidence of early versions

and quotations,

may

often carry us back,

by way

of confirmation, to

what these testify.

Internal evidence

Third Step in
too,

Classification.

107

springing from such things as the context of the

passage, the style of the writer, or the analogy of Scripture,

may be taken into


settle

account.

Each

of these has

some

weight,

and forms a legitimate part of the proof by


with ourselves the manner in which the
first

which we
century,

texts we have fixed on were read in the


if

or second

not at the very


;

first.

We

establish these
as that

readings then

and pursuing the same course

already indicated in the last chapter, only

now with
of

much

greater minuteness and particularity than were


test

then necessary, we

by means

of

them the value


it is

each of the ancient manuscripts in our hands.


contain
is

If it
it

them
If
it

in the form

we

expect

a proof that

good.

do not contain them in that form


of inferior value.

we

con-

clude that
It will

it is

be at once seen that the principle now adthoroughly sound, and that, not only in so

vocated

is

far as it applies to the reading of the particular texts

that have been under examination, but in relation to the

general value of each of our manuscripts as a whole.

Upon
doubt.

the

first

of tliese
all

two points there can be no

We

used

available evidence in settling the

reading of our characteristic texts, and the judgment


of the single manuscript

we

are examining will, if


if it

it

dissent from that evidence, not disturb,


it,

agree with

will confirm our conclusion.

But the second point


it

is

equally indisputable

for surely

will not be denied

that proved value in regard to a

number
is

of texts,

and

these characteristic and important ones,

a fair test of

the value of a manuscript in general.

Proved veracity

108
in a witness

Tliird Step in Classification.

upon many points

is

a reason

should not only believe

him upon

these points,

why we but why

we

should accept him as a generally credible witness.


this,

Let us refuse to acknowledge

and a fundamental

law of evidence

is

overthrown.

CHAPTEE

V.

THIKD STEP IN CLASSIFICATION.

PART

II.

have explained the principle by which the


relative value of ancient

manuscripts,
is

all

possessing great claims on our regard,

to

be tested, and
or

we proceed now

to give ane

two

illustrations of the process.


first

Let us take

a test to
vi. 4, "

which reference has been


thy Father, which seeth

already made, Matt.

And

in secret, shall reward thee openly."


is

The word "openly"


but
it

found

in

several

ancient manuscripts,

is

omitted in three of the most ancient.


necessary that

It is evidently

we

should

know whether

the former or

the latter are most worthy of our confidence before

we

venture to decide between them.

Now

in connection

with this text


doing
so.

it

happens that we have the means of

One

of the

most celebrated of the Fathers

directed his particular attention to the question whether

the word " openly " should stand in the text or not, and at
last

excluded

it

on the ground

that,
it

though found in

many
the

Latin translations of his day,

was not found in


earlier in

Greek manuscripts, which were

date.

110

Third Step in
is

Classification.

This testimony

very strong.

We

turn to

t"he

most
to us,

ancient Greek manuscripts that have

come down
It is also

and the word


in

is

not found in them.

wanting
citations

two or three important

translations,

and in

of the text given

by

several of the Fathers.

Farther, as

already pointed out in a previous chapter, the insertion


of the

word mars the sense

of the passage,

and leads

to

a different idea from that which our

Lord evidently
it is

intended to convey.

In these circumstances
that "

an

easy conclusion from the evidence


to be omitted.

openly

"

ought

That, however,

is

not what

we have
Our
abunthe
old

at present in view.

We

rather lay aside one of the

ancient manuscripts testifying to the omission.


verdict on this point will not be affected.

There

is

dant evidence without

it.

omission should be made.

We determine fully that We then take up the


not, the
far,

manuscript laid aside, and as yet supposed to be unexamined.

Has

it,

or has

it

word

It

wants

it.

Thus we have a proof


course go but a
little

so

though one text will of


on
in

way

in such an inquiry, that that


relied

manuscript

is right,

and more worthy of being

than any manuscript, even though an ancient one,

which the word


Again,
V. 22.

occurs.

we

take another very interesting text, Matt.


of our English Bibles
is
is,

The reading

"

But I

say unto you. That whosoever

angry with his brother

without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment."

Now we know

from the express testimony of the two

most celebrated critical Fathers of the Early Church,


that the words " without a cause" were not found in the

Third Step in

Classification.

Ill

best manuscripts then existing, and that in their opinion,


therefore, they ought to be excluded.
scripts," says
"

In some manuis

one of them, "'without a cause'

added;

but, in the true ones, the sentence is


clusive,

made

quite ex-

and anger

is

completely taken away.

'Without

a cause/ therefore, ought to be banished from the text."

"But some think," says the what we

other, "that

we may be
it is said,

angry reasonably, improperly adding 'without a cause'


to
'

find in the Gospel, according as


is

whosoever

angry with his brother shall be in danger

of the judgment,' for

some read

'

whosoever

is

angry

with his brother without a cause.'"

As

before, this
is

testimony that the phrase should be omitted


strong.

very

With

all their

varied learning and great oppor-

tunities, these Fathers

had considered the matter, and


decision.

come
is

to a clear

and unhesitating

The phrase
of the
is

also

wanting in two of our oldest manuscripts, in


valuable
translations,

several

and

in

others

Fathers besides the two


also against
it.

now

cited.

Internal evidence

So soon as we have reason to doubt the


presence,

propriety of

its

we

see that

it

has

all

the

appearance of a word inserted to avoid the apparent


harshness of the precept without
original portion of Scripture,
it
it
;

while, if

it

was an

is

very

difficult to give

satisfactory reasons for the removal, the difficulty of the

passage being thereby unquestionably increased.


the other hand, the precept,
striking
if

On
is

we omit

the phrase,

in

harmony with the

at first sight sharp, extreme,

almost paradoxical character of various other precepts of


the Sermon on the Mount.

Although, therefore,

we do

112

Third Step in

Classification.

find the phrase in a


this case

good

many

uncials, including in

one of the oldest, in the great mass of cursives,

in

several versions
it

and Fathers,

it

is

not difficult to

decide that

ought to go out of the


is

text.

As

before,

however, that

not what

we have

at present in view.

We

rather lay aside one of the ancient manuscripts

testifying to the omission, if possible,


sible, the same one as before.

and

it is

here pos-

Our

verdict on the point of


is

omission will not be affected.

There

abundant

evi-

dence without

it.

should be made.
laid aside,

We determine fully that the omission We then take up the old manuscript
to

and as yet supposed

be unexamined, has

it,

or has it not, the

them.

words (one word in Greek) ? It wants Thus we have again so far a proof that that manuscript is right, and worthy of being relied on.

We take still another text


thew,
xxviii. 9, "

from the Gospel of

St.

Mat-

And
the

as they

went

to tell

His

disciples,

behold, Jesus

met them,

saying, All hail.

And they came


The
are found

and held
words
in
to

Him by

feet,

and worshipped Him."


tell

here, " as

they went to

His

disciples,"

some uncial manuscripts, but not in others. know upon which of these we may most

rely.

We desire We

pursue therefore exactly the same process as before.


Several of the Fathers bear distinct witness to the fact
that these words should not be there, and so do two of

our most ancient manuscripts


testing being in the

(the

one that

we

are

meanwhile

laid aside), together

with

many
to

other important authorities.


is

So

far therefore as

that point
a

concerned

we can without

difficulty

come

conclusion.

The words have no

right to their

Third Step in
position in the text.

Classification.

113

We
it

turn up the manuscript under


it

examination.

Does

have, or does

want, them

It

wants them.

The conclusion

as to its trustworthiness

drawn
again.

in the

two previous instances must be drawn


interesting passage from
It occurs in the account

Once more, we take a very


the Gospel of
St.

John,

vi. 11.

given by that Apostle of the multiplying of the bread,


"

And

JesLis

took the loaves

and when

He had

given

thanks,
to

He

distributed to the disciples, and the disciples

them

that were set down."


;

Such

is

the reading of

some

of our authorities

but others, omitting a portion

of the sentence, read, "

when He had given


were
set doAvn."

And Jesus took the loaves, and thanks. He distributed to them that
difference,
it

The

will be observed, is

that, according to the latter reading, Jesus directly dis-

tributes the bread Himself; that, according to the former,

He does it by means
all

of

His

disciples.

Now we
all

find that

the most important versions, and

the most trust-

worthy Fathers who allude


support the
first

to the verse, so decidedly

of these

two views, that we can have


it.

no hesitation in adopting
"

The verse ought

to read,

He

distributed to

them

that were set

down."
are

We
;

return to the particular manuscript

we

testing.

How

does the case stand with

it ?

It

wants the words

and we have fresh confirmation of

its value.

One

other example taken from the Epistles


list.

may

fitly

close this

We take 1 Cor.

vi.

20, " Therefore glorify

God

in your body, and in your spirit,

which
tlie

are God's."

We

can establish without the use of

manuscript

114
with
wliicli
"

Third

Stejp

in Classification.

we

are dealing, that all the words here

met
in
It

with after

hody " have no

right to a place in the text,

which ought
your body."

to read simply, " therefore glorify

God

We

turn to our manuscript as before.

wants the words, and we are strengthened in our old


conclusion.

The same process has

to be applied to each of our

ancient manuscripts in succession, testing each by the

mode
been

in

which

it

reads texts whose true reading


it.

we have
it

able to ascertain without

In proportion as
;

agrees with
as it differs

them

its

value
it

is

enhanced

in proportion

from them

is

diminished.

In the

five

texts

now

selected one manuscript


It is certainly

was found

to stand

the test of each.


five texts

more valuable,

so far as

can help us to a conclusion, than one that could


all.

stand the test only twice, or thrice, or not at

The

illustrations

now given ought

sufficiently to ex-

plain the general nature of the method resorted to for

the purpose of determining the point that


before us.

we have had

How we

are to arrange

and

classify those an-

cient manu.scripts that unfortunately so often differ from

one another.

of the very large

Our illustrations convey of course no idea number of texts to which the process must
come
to.

be applied, or of the complications that have often to be

met

before a final decision can be

Yet enough
the

ought to have been said to show


text of Scripture

that,

when critics of

make an
it

alteration in the standard text

they do not make


about.

at

random.

They know what they are


by which they can

By long,

laborious, anxious study they have been

able to establish certain principles

Tlm^d Step in

Classification.

115

decide as to the character of the witnesses before

them
upon

and they

are thus prepared for giving their verdict

the whole case in the calm judicial spirit of a judge upon

the bench.

The
the

effect also of

the procedure

now advocated upon


It is a

the mass of our materials for judging of the true text of

New

Testament will be

at once apparent.

fact admitting of

no contradiction, that the number even


but small.

of our ancient manuscripts capable of standing well the


test of

which we have been speaking

is

We

have to add to them indeed those of our modern manuscripts that pass

with equal credit through the

trial, for

we have
for our

already seen that in such an event the modern


is,

manuscript

as

having an ancient

text, to

be ranked

purpose along with the ancients themselves.


is

Again, however, this number

not great.

Both ancients

and moderns together, able


are but

to vindicate their rioiit to


list

occupy the highest place in the

of tested manuscripts,

few in number.
still

Our

circle of

primary authorities

has been

more narrowed.

CHAPTEE

VI.

GENERAL RESULT OF CLASSIFICATION.

EFOKE
"US

proceeding further,

it

will be well for


to consider

to pause for a

moment, and
reached.

the result that

we have

We

have

been endeavouring so to
nesses to the text of the

classify our wit-

New

Testament that we'

may

distinguish their various merits, not putting aiiy of

them
what
have
pos-

absolutely aside, but arranging

them according

to

seem

their different degrees of credibility.


this too

We
if

been doing
sible,

with the view of narrowing,


so

our circle

of primary authorities,

that

we

may

not lose ourselves in what would otlierwise be a

labyrinth of confusion, through whose windings

we have

no clue to guide

us.

We

have seen that versions and

quotations are less valuable than manuscripts of the text;


that manuscripts possessing an

ancient text have a

greater claim on our attention than those

whose text

is

comparatively modern
script possess, as

although

if

modern manudo,

some of them actually


its

an ancient

type of text, the mere fact of


does not detract from

being modern in form

its value.

For the purpose that

General Result of Classification.

117
its

we have

in

hand

it is

really ancient,

and must take

place along witli those that are so


substance.

both in form and in

We

have also seen that we are in possession


certain

of a principle

by which we can determine that

even of the ancients are better witnesses than others,


because they have preserved for us readings that

we

have independent authority


at the nearest date to the

for believing to

have existed

time of the Apostles, as to


at
all.

which we have any evidence

The

result of the

principles

now

advocated

is

so

important; and at the same time so unexpected, that


necessary to pause over
it

it is

for a

moment, and

to see

whether, in the presence of that result,


to abide

we

are prepared

by our

conclusion.

The

result is that, notwith-

standing the enormous mass of evidence that

we have in

our hands as to the text of the

New

Testament, our

primary authorities are reduced to a very small number.


It is

an admitted

fact,

in

particular

with regard to

manuscripts on which, as
is

we have

seen, our

dependence

mainly to be placed, that by

far the larger part of tliem

do present a text differing to no inconsiderable degree

from that found in the few to which we have urged that


a decided preference should be given.
therefore taken to this result.
it

Formidable objection

is

It is pleaded that the resolution to follow

up

in the

actual construction of the text

is

unfair to the

great
side.

numerical preponderance of witnesses on the other


It is

conceded that character, not number, should prevail


is,

but the number against our few


so very considerable that
it

in the present instance,

is

supposed to require a

118

General Result of Classification.

certain modification of a principle usually sound.


is

There
long

against us a unanimity so extensive and so

continued that,

when

it

is

described even in language

against which no charge of exaggeration can be brought,


it is

apt to leave an almost ineffaceable impression on


a

many
If

mind

that

we ought

to defer to

it

more than we

have done.

we

reflect

upon the matter


is

for

an instant we shall
is

see that the idea thus entertained

distinctly to be

repudiated.

It

true that our witnesses


;

stand by

hundreds on the one side


the other.

by

tens, or rather units,

on

If then w^e have reason to believe that the


latter,

former are as good as the

their evidence will


to

probably be, as

su.rely

it

ought

be,

conclusive.

Numbers, in such a
the

case, it

would be
it

entirely out of the

question to disregard.

But

can hardly be said that


great,

presence

of

numbers,

however

makes us
inquiry
witness
as
here.

independent of investigating quality.


that

In no

we can engage exposed to so many


us,

in

is

the character of a

deteriorating influences

We must

satisfy ourselves therefore

whether each, as he

comes before

has suffered in this

way

or not.

The

mere assertion of any individual among them taken by itself is nothing, and multiply nothing by hundreds we
have
It
still

nothing.

in

may be this way

urged indeed that

we

are entitled to speak

only on condition that

we can show

that

this

majority of our witnesses have no independent

character, that they gathered their information

from the

few, that they corrupted

it

in the process,

and that we

General Result of Classification.

119

can learn

all

we wish

to

know from

the lips of those to

whom
lies

they in the
to

first

instance deferred.
of the kind.

No

obligation

on us

show anything
npon
to

We are

by no

means

called

to prove that these witnesses,

who

come
small

to us in crowds, derived their information

from the
attach

number

whom we

are

disposed
as

to

supreme importance.
There

Their value

witnesses

may

have been affected by many other circumstances besides


that.

may have been

collusion

among them.
led,

Without deliberate collusion they may have been


the same utterances.

under the pressure of the same powerful authority, to

They may have


in which,

all

sprung from
to peculiar

some one region of the world

owing

circumstances, some one, and that an imperfect, form of

the text had gained supremacy.


possible.

These things are

at least

Whether they have


inquiry.

actually happened or not

demands

We are entitled to
must be
If

say that the credi-

bility of all our witnesses

tried

by

tests

which

every judge applies.

they stand the test they must be


they cannot.

listened to, but escape


It is a

it

matter of no weight whatever then in the present


it

question that

so

happens

that,

by the process we have


The textual

been pursuing, the great majority of our manuscripts


have ultimately
critic is

to

rank lower than the few.


it

not to blame that

should be

so.

When

he

begins his labours he has no preference for an ancient

over a modern, or for one ancient over another.


first

His
has

impression would probably be rather in favour of

the great majority of modern manuscripts.

He

been accustomed to the readings which they supply.

120

General Result of Classification.


jSnds

He

them

easier,

smoother, less perplexing in the


their

forms and constructions of

words.

But
is

the
far

determination of the text of the

New

Testament

too important, far too sacred a thing, to permit


rest in

him

to

what

is

familiar

and

easy.
is true.

He must

ascertain to
it is

the best of his ability what

Therefore

that

he

is

bound

to test the value of every


all

witness
is

who

comes before him, of


him.

the evidence that


predilections

offered

Whatever
follow

his

own

might be he

must
result

the

course

suggested

by reason
"

and

experience as legitimate, knowing well that, though the

may
is

not be what he himself would wish,

the

foolishness of

God

is

wiser than men, and the weakness

of

God

stronger than men."

CHAPTEE

VII.

THE PRINCIPLE OF GEOUPING,

to the point

now reached by

us

we have

been speaking almost wholly of manuscripts


of the
to
quiries, that

Greek N'ew Testament, those witnesses


at the outset of our in-

which we saw,

we can
fusion.

classify

we must mainly defer. We have found that them, and that we can thus introduce
first

order where at

there seemed to be nothing but conto arrange these

Have we then now simply

manuscripts upon the plan laid down, and to take from


the best of them the text that they contain
?

It

would

be so were they the only authorities with which we have


to deal,

and did the path by which they lead us carry

us back as far as the time

when

the sacred autographs


is

were penned.

But neither

of these

the case.

We
Kew

have already seen that we have translations of the

Testament and quotations from


us

it

in the writings of the

Fathers more ancient than any manuscript possessed by


;

and we have seen

also that at the point at

which

our manuscripts stop we are not only three centuries

from the age of the Apostles, but that between us and

122

The Principle of Grouping.

tliem there lies a period

when

there

was no small confor ns, therefore,

fusion of the text.

Nothing remains

except to recall our other witnesses, that

we may hear
it is

what they
neglected.

also

have to say;

for,

although

true

that they are not primary authorities, they

may

not be

Is not this, however, to re-introduce, at least

to a large extent, the old confusion

which we persuaded
first

ourselves

we had
if it

escaped
so.

At

sight

it

almost
too

seems as

were

But the phenomenon


to see if there

is far

interesting, far too important, to permit us to be easily

discouraged

and we look about

is

nothing

else to help us in estimating the value of our evidence

when
but in

it is

presented to us, not in one of

its

parts only,

all its parts.

We turn, then, again to the differences of readings that


we have
before us about the beginning of the fourth
century, and

we

are

met by the

fact that groups of these

differences appear to

have been prevalent in some parts

of the Christian world

more than in
exist

others.

There

is

by no means unmingled
in

confusion, a total
;

want of order
is

the varieties that


to

but there

certain

method according
themselves.

which the differences distribute


it

Thus, for example,

is

found that in

Gaul, Italy,

and Africa there

is

a type of variation

seemingly different from that which prevails at Alexandria or Constantinople; that at Constantinople there
is

a type of text bearing a

marked resemblance
arises.

to

what

was read by the Fathers who


Syria.

flourished at Antioch in

The question immediately

Do
?

the facts
If they

bear out the correctness of this impression

The Principle of Grouping.


do, it

123

can hardly

fail to
it is

have an important bearing on


clear that, given

our inquiry, because

two contend-

ing readings of a text, the one having the best claim on

our acceptance will be the one which has maintained


place in the greatest

its

number

of districts,

notwithstand-

ing the tendency of these districts to introduce changes


of their own.
it

Its

permanence amidst
shows
its vitality

so

much around
;

that

was

shifting

and powxr

and

even

if it

has not been accepted everywhere, the more

widespread the diffusion, in other words, the greater the

permanence, the greater the power.

We

must look
It

then at this matter somewhat more closely.


described as the principle of grouping.

may

be

Had

the copies of the sacred autographs been con-

fined to one district there

would probably have been no


to

scope for

this,

and no need

make any such

attempt.
arise

The materials and the need

of grouping both

when

these copies are taken into other lands, are tranit

scribed there, and are dispersed, partly


original,

may

be in the
of

but mainly in translations.


differ

The inhabitants

one country
taste, in

from those of another in thought, in

manner

of expression, in occasional choice of


their language
is

words, even

when

the same.

These

differences are strengthened


is

when

a different language

spoken.

The words

of one tongue often fail to cover

exactly the same field of thought as those of another

and when we have

to reason

backwards from a Syriac,

an Egyptian, or a Latin translation to a Greek sentence,


it

may

well happen that

we

shall not always be led to

precisely the

same

result.

124

Tlie Principle of

Grouping,

This, however,

is

not

all.

The circumstances amidst


In one there

which the work

of transcription is undertaken in dif-

ferent countries also differ.

may

be but

a small demand, and the


leisurely, slowly,

work may be gone about


spirit.

and in a scholarly
larger,

In another

the

demand may be much


be no bad
faith.

and there may be


its

greater haste and

imperfection in

supply.

There

may

All

may

be done in the strictest

honour, and with the most sincere desire to produce


faithful copies or accurate translations of the original.

The

influences leading to change

may work
;

quite uncon-

sciously in the

minds

of the transcribers or translators.

The important

fact is that

they are there

and that

it is

as impossible to be altogether free

from them as

it is

for

a succession of scribes in the same country to exhibit a


perfect
to

immunity from those


frailty, that

errors of transcription,

due

human

were formerly taken notice of and


In different
districts

illustrated.

The

effect is obvious.

of the world different groups of errors will

become pre-

valent,

and the manuscripts, versions, or quotations conThus, for

taining the texts erroneously copied will present a certain

family resemblance to
ii.

one another.

example, in John

3,

in the account of the miracle at


"

Cana of Galilee, we read,


or, as it

And when tliey wanted wine,"


literally translated,

might be more simply and


failed,

"

And when wine


we
was

the mother of Jesus saith unto

him. They have no wine."


authorities
"

In several of our important


words, the following,

find, instead of these

And

they had no wine, because the wine of the marfinished.

riage feast

Then the mother

of Jesus saith

Tlie Principle

of Groujping.

125

unto him, They have no

^\"ine."

We

do not so

much

ask at present which of these two readings deserves the


preference.

We
It

observe rather that the authority for

the latter

is,

with the exception of one Greek manuscript,

wholly Latin.

was mainly confined

to those parts of

the world where the Latin tongue was spoken.

It

had

no hold either of the Syriac or the Greek East.


It is not indeed to

be thought that the grouping


strictly

now
our

referred

to

can be

carried

through

all

authorities as to
definitely assign

the text

of Scripture.

We

cannot
Neither

them

all to particular families.

manuscripts nor translations were confined to any one


region of the Church.

They passed from country

to

country and from city to city through that interchange


of letters, books, and visits

which forms one of the

most interesting characteristics of the early Christians.

Mixed manuscripts thus came


scripts

into existence

manu-

showing traces of

different districts,

and bridging

over the gulf that would otherwise have separated them.

Yet in very many cases the

lines of demarcation are

sufficiently distinct to entitle the critic to

speak of

dif-

ferent styles of text corresponding to different regions of the Church.

Let us proceed to the bearing of what has


said.
1.

now been

It is highly

important in the following respects.


place,
is

In the

first

mere mtmier of manuscripts


of comparatively little

belonging to any group


because, whatever the

moment;

number

of such manuscripts, they

mainly

testify to the

one manuscript the head of the

local family

from which they sprang, and that head of

126
tlie

The Principle of Grouping.


family can only count as one.
to think that

Wherever, therefore,
a group of authori-

we have reason
ties,

we have

that group

must count

as one stream of evidence,

without reference to the number of individuals of which


it is
2.

composed.

In the second place, the greater the number of

streams of evidence flowing from different quarters of


the world and testifying to the same reading, the more
likely
is

that reading to be correct.

This

is

something

entirely different
scripts, of

from the number of individual manu-

which one stream may exhibit many more

than another.
is

The evidence of all flowing in each stream


;

taken as a whole

and then the more streams we have


on their surface
It is clear

of the

same character the greater the confidence with


infer that the reading floating

which we
that
is

comes from the head fountain of the waters.


it

must be
"

so.

How
?

do

we know
the

that any reading


all

absolutely correct

By

confluence of

our

streams.

In the beginning was the Word, and the

Word was
is it

with God, and the

Word was

God."

What

that assures us that this sublime opening of the


St.

Gospel of

John
?

really
it

came from the pen

of the beat
all

loved disciple times read.

That

was everywhere and


to

In every region of the earth


they stand.

which a

manuscript of the Gospel was taken these words were


copied from
it

exactly

as

Gaul, Italy,

Africa, Alexandria, Palestine, Syria, Constantinople, all

read them as

we

read

them now.

Many

another text in

the same Gospel underwent great and different changes.

These words underwent none

and the only possible ex-

The
planation
grapli.
is,

Princijple of Grouping.
tlie

127

that tliey existed in

Apostle's auto-

The same

principle leads to the just preference


to one, for

of

two agreeing streams of evidence


is

that

agreement

a testimony to the fact that, at a date antext, the reading

terior to the

decay and corruption of the

given was more widely spread abroad than any other

with which

it

has to contend.

The only probable explanis

ation again of this diffusion

that the reading

came

from the

original,

and possessed

sufficient

power

to resist

the influences that were producing change.

Let us illustrate what has been said by a reading in

John

i.

51.

There we find the Saviour saying, in our

English version, "Verily, verily, I say unto you. Hereafter," or rather,

From
Man."

henceforth "ye shall see heaven

opened, and the angels of

upon the Son

of

God ascending and descending The words " From henceforth "
Greek manuscripts, in

are found in one of the leading

several other uncials, in the whole family of manuscripts

of a later date,

whose headquarters were the Byzantine

Empire, in two Latin versions of a later type than the


earliest, in

the Syriac, and in two or three of the later

Fathers.

At

the best, therefore,

if

read at

all

in early

times, they were read only in Syria, nople,

and in Constanti-

which was dependent upon

it.

On

the other hand,

the words are omitted in three of the oldest and most

valuable Greek manuscripts, in


sions, in the version of

all

the best Latin verin the

Lower Egypt,

Armenian

and ^thiopic

versions,

and in some of the most valuable

patristic writings that

we

possess.

We

have thus one


rest,

region of the Church alone against all the

and that

128

The

Princi^ple of Gronping.

the region where

we know from

other evidence that

manuscripts underwent most change in the hands of


hasty,
if

not imperfectly informed scribes.

There can be
is

no doubt that the reading of the verse without them


the true reading of what the Saviour said
;

although,

if

number
is

of individual manuscripts were to be considered,


It

the majority in their favour would be overwhelming.

worth while to observe

cover without
tion got their

that, in this case, we can dismuch difficulty how the words in quesway into the text. The scribe had in his

mind the language of Jesus in Matt. xxvi. 64, "Jesus nevertheless, I say unto saith unto him. Thou hast said you. Hereafter," or as it should be, From henceforth "ye
:

shall see the

Son of

Man

sitting

on the right hand of

power, and coming in the clouds of heaven."


verses have a great similarity of tone.
"

The two

From hence;

forth" was

met with

in the last
first

and most familiar one


less familiar.

it

easily slipped into the

and

We
all

add only, in conclusion, upon

this point, that it

does not matter, though, as in the example

now
to

given,

the individuals in each of the groups which har-

monize upon the whole do not bear witness


accept as true.

what we
to

That so many of them do agree has


for,

be accounted

and the only explanation being that

in each case they had

drawn the reading from some

common
borne

progenitor, the fact that these progenitors in

different regions of the

world had, at a
is

much

earlier date,

the

same testimony,

a presumption of the
represent the one

strongest kind that they correctly


original.

CHAPTER VIII
DETEEMINATION OF THE TEXT.

PART

I..

UR

witnesses are

now

classified

and grouped,

and we have to turn

to the interesting
all

and

important task, to which


hitherto said

that has been

has been preparatory,

the

hearing of the evidence, and the determination, by means


of of
it,

of those words in

which we are

to find the light

life.

At the point at which we stand it is to be observed, that we suppose ourselves to be absolutely ignorant of
the words of the
position of one

New

Testament.

We

are not in the

who has
is

that volume in his hands, and


its

who, having heard that the reading of some of


sages
is

pas-

disputed,

about to examine a number of

witnesses as to what they have to say upon that point.

For more than two centuries

after the

Reformation,

indeed down to the third decade of the present century,


this

Testament.

was the position of successive The "Received Text,"

editors of the
as it

New
had

was

called,

acquired such authority, that the utmost they ventured


to attempt

was

to

make such emendations upon

it

as

130 seemed
to

Determination of the Text.

be required by the ever-increasing knowledge

of manuscripts greatest advance

and other sources of evidence.

The

made by any

of

them was

to ask, Is

there reason to depart from the ordinary reading, and, if

there was, to

make

that departure without hesitation

At

the date, however, of which

we have

spoken, one of

the most distinguished of the noble band of scholars

who have devoted

themselves to inquiries connected

with our present subject, Professor Lachmann of Berlin,


took another and decisive step.
question. Is there

He

started with the

any reason

to depart, not
'

from the

Eeceived Text, but from the readings that are best


established
?

His predecessors might have shown their

modesty by adopting no new reading they were unable


to defend.
It escaped their notice, according to him,
to

that

it

was unreasonable

admit any reading at

all into

the text, evidence of whose value they had not obtained.

They, in short, had made the "Eeceived Text"

their point of departure.

He would

gather his whole

He threw it wholly aside. New Testament text from


them
alone.
just, is

the original witnesses, and from

This principle, undoubtedly


accepted,

now

universally

and hence the

interest

and importance of the

we have reached. From the witnesses whom we suppose to be before us, the whole text of our New
point that

Testament

is

to be gathered.

In estimating the value of their evidence certain


principles or rules of judging

must be taken

into account.

They may be conveniently divided


Internal.

into External

and

Determination of the Text.

131

I.

Principles of External Evidence.'


first
is,

1.

The

and simplest principle by


that,

wliicli

we

are

to be guided

where

all

our authorities agree, the


It is needless

evidence must be accepted as conclusive.


to enlarge

upon

this principle,

which can admit

of

no

dispute.

Depending upon these

authorities alone for

our text,

we have

obviously no alternative but to accept


to be correct.

what they with one voice proclaim

So

much

of the

New

Testament

is

guaranteed to us upon

this principle that the disputed parts

form only an ex-

ceedingly small portion of the whole.


2.

Witnesses thoroughly tested in the manner pre-

viously explained are entitled to a hearing in every case equally respectful.


It

may

be true that an ancient

manuscript possesses a certain advantage over a modern


one in that, having been
less frequently copied, it

has

probably escaped some of the changes which the mere


act of copying
fore,
is

certain to introduce.

Wherever, there-

the departure of a recent manuscript from the read-

ing of the older appears to be owing to frequency of


transcription, the latter ought to be deferred to.

But

when the difference seems to have no connection with


this source of error,

when
to

the variation

is

so distinct

that

it

must be held

have belonged

to the

manuscript
it is

from which the more recent one was copied,


sible to allow that the greater age of

impos-

an opponent shall
favour.

alone decide the controversy in

its

We
tests

have
with

tested the one as well as the other

by the

which we

started as

the best and most trustworthy that

132

Determination of the Text.

could be devised.
stood the
test,

The one
is

as well as the other has

and

therefore not to be undervalued

because

it

letters, or

may be written in cursive rather than uncial may be marked by numerals rather than the
The
it

capital letters of the alphabet.


is

principle of the rule

evidently indisputable, but


it

is

not unnecessary to
to.

point out that

ought to be adhered

Any

one con-

sulting the critical apparatus, the lists of authorities,

found in a

critical edition of the


is

New

Testament, will

soon learn that he

in constant danger of ascribing

undue weight

to manuscripts that

have only a higher


that of

antiquity or a more imposing notation than

many
3.

others to

commend

them.

In manuscripts thus tested the element of number

is

an important consideration.

For

it

will be observed

that

we

liave

not

now number
fit

versus authority,

the

multitude against the "

though few."

By

the sup-

position all have been proved credible witnesses,

and
than

although even then there will be


stances leading us to think one
another, yet to put

many minute
more

circum-

credible

number out

of view altogether were

to neglect the principles of evidence

upon which

judicial

questions are settled every day.


4.

But,

Mere number

of the witnesses in general, without


is

regard to the fact of their being or not being tested,

of

no weight whatever.
unanimity
all

We

have already seen that the


their

coming forward of many in


without compunction.
5.

numbers and with

their

may be the very best reason for rejecting them


and

The

relative weight of manuscripts, versions,

Determination of the Text.


citations

133
it

must be duly observed. However true


latter

may be
test in

that

by the

two branches of evidence we


first, it

no small degree the value of the

is

not the less


first
is,

true that as a general branch of evidence the

when attested, entitled to the preference even over those by which it has been tried. The circumstance, however, that it is tried by them shows that there are certain cases in which they may claim to bear away the palm. Such cases must be carefully adverted to, and errors must be distinguished into their different classes, as for example of addition or omission, when we would know
the special value attaching to each of our three great
classes of authorities.
6.

"^

In judging of the balance of evidence, great imporis to

tance

be attached to the meeting of different streams


is,

of evidence, to the concurrence, that

of authorities

from different quarters of the world,


in favour of the

to the

combination

same reading

of such groups as were

previously described.
7.

It is not to be forgotten that if

any of these groups

combine in favour of what we have reason to suppose


to be the

more ancient text, their verdict must be accepted

as conclusive.

We

have already seen that the simple


prove
it

fact that a reading is ancient does not

to be

good.
is all.

It

may

be a presumption in

its

favour, but that

But when, being thus

ancient,

it is

supported by
;

authorities from different quarters of the world

in other

words,

when a group of authorities unite in favour of what we can otherwise prove to be ancient, we have
exactly the
consideration

added that was wanting

to

134
prove that
it

Determination of the Text.

was not only ancient but


was owing
to its vitality;

correct.

The

wide diffusion of the ancient reading


that" diffusion
is

is

established;

and

vitality

best explained

by the supposition

of originality

and

truth.

We

have now pointed out what seem to us the most


Other writers

important principles of external evidence.

have sometimes given


a different order.
edit a text of the

others, or

have arranged them in

Indeed most

critics

who endeavour
to

to

New
it

Testament have

some extent
few

at least rules or principles of their own.

Before passing on

may be well

to illustrate in a

sentences the application, in part at least, of the rules

now

laid

down.
first,

We

take a strong case

the famous text regarding

the three heavenly witnesses in 1


in our English Version

John

v. 7, 8.

As read

we

find these words, a portion of

which we

shall enclose in brackets,

"For there are three

that bear record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and

the Holy Ghost

and these

thr'ee are one.

And

there

are three that bear witness in earth], the spirit,

and the
in

water, and the blood;

and these three agree in one."

The question

is.

Whether the words enclosed by us

brackets are genuine, or whether the text ought not


rather simply to read, "For there are three that bear
record, the spirit, the water,

and the blood, and these

three agree in one."

With

the

exception of two manuscripts, the one

belonging to the fifteenth, and the other to the sixteenth


century, the whole

body of Greek manuscript evidence

Determination of the Text.


rejects the bracketed

135
These

words in the above verses.


do not stand the
to be
tests

two manuscripts
alone they can be

also

by which
regard.

shown

worthy of much

Manuscript evidence could not be more decisive.


turn to versions.

We

The suspicious words

are wanting in
all

every version except the Vulgate, nearly


scripts of

the

manudo so

which exhibit them, those

failing to

being however generally recognized as the oldest and


best.

Even where

given, too, they are given with very


;

considerable variations

and such variations

are always

a proof of the doubtfulness of the authorities whence


the words were taken.
as decided as that of

The evidence

of versions is here

Greek manuscripts.

Lastly,

we
is

look at citations from the Fathers.

No Greek

Father

known
which

to quote the passage, while several of the

most

important, in arguing on the subject of the Trinity, to


it

has so direct a relation, refer both to what

precedes and to what follows, but do not


slightest allusion to the disputed words.

make

the

Nothing could

more
them.

clearly

show that they were unacquainted with


only

The most ancient and eminent Latin Fathers


it is

have likewise no knowledge of the words, and


in some of the later and
are discovered.

more unimportant that they


of citations clearly ac-

The evidence

companies that of manuscripts and versions.

In a case such as this


been
said, that all

it is

obvious too, from what has

our streams of evidence combine,

and that even in point of numbers the vast majority of


the witnesses, including every one proved and tested, are

on one

side.

The application

of every rule or principle

136

Determination of

the Text.

of External Evidence leads to the exclusion of the dis-

puted words.

We
with

take another case, Acts

viii.

37.

In our English
he answered

Version we read,
all

"And

Philip said, If thou helievest

thine heart, thou mayest.

And

and

said, I believe that


is.

Jesus

is

the Son of God."

The

question

Whether these words ought


it ?

to stand in the

text, or to

be excluded from

They

are

wanting in four out of the

five chief witnesses


:

described in the earlier part of this book

of the fifth

nothing can be

said,

that portion of the manuscript


lost.

having been unfortunately


in a large

They

are wanting also

number

of other manuscripts.

They

are

found in one uncial manuscript alone, although in a


considerable

number

of

cursives.
;

The case

is

by no

means

so decided as the last

but our principles hardly

admit of any other conclusion than one unfavourable to


the presence of the words.
verse
is

We

turn to versions.

The

wanting in the best codices of the Vulgate, in


versions, in the versions of both
It is
its

two Syriac

Upper and
found in a

Lower Egypt, and in the ^thiopic.


codex of the Vulgate as well as in

printed text, in

one of the Syriac versions, though there


asterisk,

marked with an
first

and in the Armenian.


is

Our

conclusion
confirmed.

unfavourable to the verse


Lastly,

thus so far

we

look at citations
to one or

from the Fathers.

The
re-

verse

was known
any

two of the Latin Fathers,


it

but we have positive


cognized in
that
of

assurance that
the
writings
until of

was not
to

Greek Fathers
one

have reached

us,

we come

who

Determination of the Text.


flourished in the eleventh,

137

and another who belongs to


it

the twelfth century.

That

should appear in the

writings of the former need not surprise us,

when we

remember that the Latin versions


for the words.

are the chief authority

That
is

it

should be wanting in the writit

ings of the latter

strong confirmatory evidence that

was unknown in Greek.

Here

again, therefore,

the

evidence of citations leads to the same conclusion as


that of manuscripts and versions.

The argument however


quite so strong as in the

is

not in the present instance

last.

We
is

ask therefore with

more

interest

than then, "What


?

the teaching of our

groups of witnesses

In one

district of the

world only

does the verse appear to have been read,


district

and that a

where we know from other evidence that there


to interpolate.

was a strong tendency


fore deliver the

Our groups

there-

same sentence as our individual witnesses.


of tested witnesses

Finally, the

number

against

the

words

is

greater than that


as a whole,

upon

their side.

We

sum

up the evidence

and there can be no doubt

that the verdict ought to be for the exclusion of the verse.

CHAPTEE

TX.

DETERMINATION OF THE TEXT.

PART

II.

RAVING

considered those principles of Ex-

ternal Evidence

by which the various


it

read-

ings of Scripture are to be judged,

remains

for us to turn our thoughts to those prin-

ciples of Internal

Evidence which are neither

less neces-

sary nor important.


II.

Principles of Internal Evidence.

Were

the External Evidence on behalf of a parti-

cular reading in every case complete and satisfactory,

we

should have
it.

little

occasion to depend on anything but


at once

The contest would


other.

be settled by an over-

whelming balance of testimony, either on the one side or


on the
It is rare,

however, to find this in any dis-

puted reading of much interest or importance.

There

is

then almost always a decided difference of testimony.

Weighty arguments on their right to have a place in the text are urged by different claimants, and the
balance of external authority
equal.
is

not unfrequently nearly

The

application

of

Internal

Evidence thus

becomes indispensable.

Determination of the Text.

139

It is so in that ordinary administration of law, tlie

processes of which, as

we have

seen, afford the "best


critic

analogy to the course which the Biblical


pursue.

has to

judge can rarely,

if ever,

settle a dispute

between two parties by external evidence


the

alone.

It is

mind

that sees, and not the eye.


;

It is the

mind

that hears, and not the ear


in

and according

to the light

which

different assertions present themselves to the

judge's

mind

will be the

judgment that he forms.

The
and

probabilities of the case,

and the internal coherence of


;

the narrative, must always influence his decision


his verdict
is

to

be viewed as the hypothesis that takes


all

up and explains
dispute.

the

phenomena connected with the


on

It is true that this necessity of reasoning

probabilities

may

often degenerate into

mere subjec-

tivity or wilfulness,

and that a judge may carry out

some theory
at

of his

own

in such a
facts
skill.
;

manner

as to set
lies

naught well-established

but therein

the
tact,

highest trial of the judge's


ability,

Therein judicial

genius prove their infinite superiority to mere

mechanical administration.
rules,

For ten men who can learn


to a case before

and apply them with accuracy

them,

we may be
fire

thankful to find one who, not acting

apart from rule, can yet stand superior to rule, and can

mould, in the
facts

of his

own

genius, both the external

and the internal probabilities into one harmonious


It is the

whole.

same in the

criticism of the text of


is

Scripture.

External evidence

not only valuable


;

it

forms the very ground of our proceedings


us the facts of which

it sets

before

we

are to judge.

But then we


140
Determination of the Text.

must judge.
giving

The danger
to
;

to wliicli to

we

are exposed of

way

prepossessions,

subjective feelings,

must be met

and in the establishing of sound general


sound mind,
lies

principles, in the cultivation of a


critic's

the

power.

This

much

at least is certain, that

no

editor of the one,

Greek text
it

of the

New

Testament, except

who gave

distinctly to be understood that his

aim was

special

and provisional in

its

character, has

attempted to construct his text upon grounds of external


authority alone.

Over and above such grounds, the


been always found to be
Evidence then we
are the following:

resort to internal evidence has

necessary.

To these

principles of Internal

now
1.

proceed.

The more important


is

That reading

to

be preferred which seems to

have suggested the


easy to

others, or out of

which

it

is

most

suppose that
is

the

others

would

arise.

The

reason of the rule

obvious.

By

the supposition

we

have two or three different readings of a passage, with


external evidence not sufficiently precise to remove all

doubt as to which the preference


object

is

due.
as

Our
far

first

must evidently be

to determine

as

we

can their history, in other words, to ask


severally arose.

how they

In doing so

it is

reasonable to conclude
origin of the
Thu's,

that the reading


others
for
is

by whose existence the

most

easily explained is the correct one.

example
i.

In John

37 we have three readings consisting in

three different arrangements of the

same words.

One

of

these gives the

translation

of

our English Version,

Determination of

the Text.

141

"And

the two disciples heard

Him

speak, and they


translation, "

followed Jesus."

Another gives the

And

His two disciples heard


Jesus."

Him

speak, and they followed

The

third puts the

pronoun in such a position


is

in the Greek that the meaning

ambiguous

it

might
of the

be either of the two just mentioned.


three

Which
to

may

be best regarded as the parent of the other


first
;

two

Not the
is

for there

was nothing

make

scribe naturally slip into the second, while the ambiguity

of the third

precisely
it

what he would

avoid.

Not the

second, for with

before
it

him

a scribe would be under


first,

no temptation

to

change

to the

and

as before, the
it.

ambiguity of the third would prevent his thinking of

The
case.

third,

however, at once meets the necessities of the


is

It
it

ambiguous.
first light,

One

scribe

therefore,

who

viewed

in the

put down the words in the

order there given.

second

light,

pression of

Another, who viewed it in the made the order correspond to his imThe third then is most probably the sense.

the true reading.

Another

illustration

of this rule

is

taken by Dr.
Tim.
iii.

Davidson from the celebrated text in


it is
it

16,

and

so suitable to the purpose that

we

shall again use


first

here.

Three readings meet us in the

clause of
is

that verse, that of our English version, " Great

the

mystery of godliness, God was manifest in the


rather, "

flesh," or

was manifested
;

in flesh ;" "

who was

manifested

in flesh

"

"

which was manifested in


no doubt strong, but

flesh."

The

external evidence in favour of one of these rather than

the others

is

it

is

not so over-

"

142

Determination of the Text.


as to

whelming
apply?
reading.

make us independent
ask then,

of the probabilities

of the case.

We

How

does our present rule

Let us suppose that


It is difficult to
is

"God" was

the original

imagine how, with a reading


strict

the sense of which


teaching of the

in

conformity with the

New

Testament, a scribe should think of


it

substituting " who," which,

will be observed,
It
is

is

then

a relative without
difficult

an antecedent.

still

more

to

imagine

how

the important word "

God

could pass into the neuter relative "which."

The word
this latter

"mystery" no doubt supplies an antecedent in


case,

but the change


Again,

is

too great to have been

made

inad-

vertently.

let

us suppose that "which" was the

original, it could neither pass easily into

"who" without
"

an antecedent while

itself

has one, nor into

God," which
Finally,

involves a change of the greatest magnitude.


let

us suppose that the original reading was

"

who."

We

see at once, even without taking into account culars connected with the style of writing

some

parti-

which greatly

strengthen the inference,

how

it

could pass into " God."


to be "the great to express
it.

"God manifest

in flesh"
It

was known

mystery of godliness."

was most natural

In the hands of another scribe "who" might pass with equal ease into "which." The change of one letter only was
involved, the sense

was not

altered,

an antecedent was
fail to

obtained where the want of one could not

be

felt.

"Who"
two,
is

therefore, as giving rise

most simply to the other

the true reading.

It is interesting to observe in

connection with this case, that, after long and keen discussions, scholars are

now

generally agreed that even

Determination of the Text.


external evidence,

143

when

at least

those authorities whose high importance

we depend mainly on we have advo-

cated in these pages, leads to the same conclusion.

We

have thus our confidence in the soundness of what has

been said both as to them and as

to our present rule

much
2.

strengthened.

A second most important and universally recognized


is

rule of Internal Evidence


is to

that the more difficult reading

be preferred to the more easy.

The

critic,

(Bengel),

not less distinguished for his piety than his talents,


first
it

who

suggested this rule, has himself said that he regards

as but one application of the far wider principle, that


difficult

good is

and

evil easy of attainment.

The reason
more likely
an

of the rule is obvious.


to substitute

scribe

was

far

an easy

for a difficult

than a

difficult for

easy reading.

In speaking in the

earlier part of this

volume

of the causes of various readings, allusion

was
to

made

to the point

now

before us.

But

if,

as then ex-

plained, a scribe

was apt in copying a manuscript

substitute a simple for a hard expression, the converse

must hold good


illustrate

that, in restoring the true text in cases of


is

dispute, the hard

entitled to the preference.

Let us

what has been


of
different

said

by one

or

two simple

examples

classes

belonging to the one

general principle.
(1)

A
vii.

reading at

first

sight obscure

is

to be preferred

to one that is plain

and

easily understood.

Thus, in
"

John

39,

we

read in our English Version,

Eor the

Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified." It wiU be observed that the word

144
"^iven"
is

Determination of the Text.


in italic letters, showing that
it

did not exist

in the Greek text from which our version was taken, and

many most
word

important authorities present this

as

the

true reading.

Many

others however add


to decide

the

Greek

for " given,"

and we have

between them.

Our present rule comes to our aid. When we read without the "given" the text is much more difficult to understand than

when we

read with
it if

it.

A
it

scribe, therefore,

was

less likely to

omit

he found

in the text before

him than

to insert it if it
it

was not

there.

The conclusion
exist.
is

is that in the original

probably did not

(2)

A reading presenting

a historical difficulty
difficulty is

to

be

preferred to one from

which the

removed.

Mark ii. 26, we David, "how he entered


Thus, in
authorities, however,

read in our English Bibles of


into the house of

God

in the

days of Abiathar the high-priest."

Various important

omit these

last

words altogether,

while others, retaining them, substitute the word "priest"


for
" high-priest."

Both changes obviate the serious


this j)assage
life

difficulty arising

from a comparison of

with
here

1 Samuel

xxi. 1,
is

where the incident in David's

referred to
to

related in the words,


priest."

"Then came David


Precisely on that

Nob, to Ahimelech the

ground, however, are these authorities to be suspected.

scribe

knowing the
if

difficulty

would be much more

ready to omit them


to insert
(3)

they had a place in his text than

them

if

they had not.


one Gospel which seems to convey
of

A reading in

a sense different from that

a parallel passage

in

another Gospel

is to

be preferred to one which makes

Determination of the Text.


the two Gospels strictly harmonize.

145
in Matt. ix.

Thus

13

we

read, "

Eor I

am not come to
The
last

call the righteous,

but

sinners to repentance."

two words, however,


Shall

" to repentance," are frequently omitted.

we we

read

them, or shall

we

not?

Looking

at the (j^uestion for the


liave

present only in the light of Internal Evidence,


to consider that the

words are found

in

the

parallel

passage,

Luke

v.

37,
is,

where they are certainly genuine.

The

probability
into St.

that from that text they found their

way

Matthew.

We
dence.
3.

notice only one additional rule of Internal Evi-

The

style of writing

characteristic of particular

writers, or

what we know Thus


"

of their

modes

of thought, is to

be taken into account in judging of the various readings


of their text.
in

John
it

xiii.

24 we read in our

Authorized Version,

Simon Peter

therefore beckoned to

him

that

lie

should ask
is

spake."

But there

who much

should be of

whom He
therefore
it is

authority for Greek words

that give us the translation,

"Simon Peter

beckoneth to him, and saith to him. Tell us who

of

whom He
St.

speaketh."

The former reading


optative.

requires the

verb "should be" to be in the Greek optative mood; but

John never uses the

It is not likely there-

fore that

he would depart on the present occasion from

his usual practice:

and the

last of the

two readings
its

mentioned
support.

thus

finds

corroborative

evidence in

Or, let us take an

example in which mode of thought

rather than merely literary style becomes the object oi

146
consideration.

Determination of the Text.

John

vi.

11, formerly

considered in

another aspect, will supply an illustration.


there, it will

The question
to represent

be remembered,

is

as to the omission of

certain words, the effect of omitting

which is

Jesus Himself as distributing the bread to the multitude, while the

common

reading brings in the intervention of

the disciples.
is

It is disputed

which

of these

two readings

tlie

right one.
S.

Let us bear in mind that the great

object of

John's Gospel is to set forth the glory of the

Eedeemer, to present

Him

to

us in

His single and


all

unapproachable majesty as the Giver of


are at once led to conclude that the

good, and

we

reading which
correct.

favours this idea


needless to do

is

most likely to be

It is
is
is

more than say that

either

reading

equally consistent with the facts of the case.

There

simply a slight difference in the point of view from

which the writer speaks.


Other
rules
of

Internal Evidence

are

given

by

different writers

additional to those

now

mentioned.

But even were they of more value than they are, we have
said

enough

to

convey to our readers an impression of

the character of that part of the

New

Testament

critic's

work
It

that

is

now

before us.

has only to be observed, in conclusion, regarding

these rules, that each

may may

easily be

pushed too

far,

and

may

be used by the

critic to

reach his conclusion with

too great rapidity.

It

well happen in

many

a case

that the reading which seems most naturally to present


itself to

us as the parent of the others

is

not really so
of

that the plain reading

may have been, by the ignorance

Dete7'mination of the Text.

147

some

scribe,

transformed into the obscure instead of the


;

obscure into the plain


torical difficulty

that from the same cause a his-

may have found its way into a copy when


;

there was none in the original

tliat parallel

passages
differ,

which

really correspond

may have been brought to


may
at times use a

instead of parallels that differ having been brought to

correspond

that a writer

method

of

expression different from his

common
us.

one.

All these

things are possible, and the too rigid application of any

one rule might thus easily betray


learned
is

The lesson

to be

one of caution, and that probabilities must be


if

balanced one against another


a conclusion on
Finally,
it

we would hope

to reach

all sides

capable of defence.

has to be noted that rules such as those

we
to

have been considering must never be so applied as


overbear External Evidence.
cases,

They

are not guides in all

but helps in cases of

difficulty.

They

aid in

determining our scales to one side rather than another,

when, but

for

them, the balance would be too equally

poised or too uncertain.

needed, they often

Even when not absolutely confirm the verdict drawn forth by


;

External Evidence alone

and, in doing so, leave no

doubt upon our minds that we have the very words


before us in which the

Almighty revealed His

will to

man.

CHAPTEE

X.

GENERAL SUMMARY.
|]Sr

the two previous chapters

we have

con-

sidered the leading principles or rules

by
us,

which we are

to be guided in estimating the

weight due to the evidence laid before


with respect to disputed readings of the
ment,
subject.
1.

New

Testa-

One

or

two general remarks may

fitly close

the

Such

definite principles as those that

have been

laid

down

are absolutely essential to the right prose-

cution of the task of which

we have been
is

speaking.

No

task can be

named

in

which there

greater danger

of hasty or

haphazard judgments, of judgments founded


or determined

upon prejudice

by

inclination.

And

cer-

tainly none can be


to

named

in

which we are more bound

avoid with the utmost care every influence of the

kind, and to

come

to our conclusion only

by

steps, every

one of which has been taken with the utmost deliberation,

and in a way that we


are not arbitrary.

feel ourselves able to defend.

Our They

rules are a valuable aid in enabling us to do so.

They

are founded

upon a wide

Genercd Summary.

149
ac-

induction of particulars.
cordino" to

They shape themselves

reason and the nature of the case.

The

knowledo-e of them thus directs us to a hioher and more


correct exercise of our powers than

we
fall.

could have

made

without them.
into

We

are taught to avoid

many

mistakes
gain the

which we might otherwise


and even where

We

feeling of security that belongs not to instinct but to

intelligence

ou.r rules

are insufficient

of themselves to lead us to our verdict, they indicate


certain principles

which the

verdict,

when we reach

it,

must not contravene.


2.

They

are not to be thought of only as individual

rules, to

be applied one at one time and another at


It

another, in an outward and formal manner.

may
our

often happen, no doubt, that one

is

sufficient for

But the instances are far more frequent where purpose. many or even all of them must be applied. They must be held therefore in combination. They must thoroughly
penetrate and pervade the

mind, so as to exercise a

modifying and restraining influence upon each other,

and

to

be ready for use, either singly or in ever-varying

combinations, according to the nature of each particular


case.

Nothing indeed will force


of the textual
critic

itself

more upon the mind


Testament, as he

of the

New

pursues his labours, than the impossibility of coming to


a satisfactory conclusion in innumerable cases of dispute

by the mere reckoning up


evidence
is

of witnesses, or such

mere

calculations of probability as formal rules supply.

The

so large in quantity, the witnesses that agree

150

General

Summary.

as to one text so often differ as to another, the internal

considerations that
different minds,

must be taken

into account strike


at different

and even the same mind

times, in such a different way, that anything like a fixed

mechanical application of rules will be found in practice


to

be impossible.
itself.

Every particular case needs Every witness needs


to

to

be

considered in

be weighed

not simply as a whole but in the particular book in

which the text under examination


balanced by
opposite.

occurs.

Every

sug-

gestion arising from internal probabilities needs to be


its

The history

of all the changes

that have taken place on

the original reading

must

as far

as possible be discovered, so that that original reading,

when decided
problem,
so

on, shall contain in itself a solution of the

How

what was one

at the first

came

to

assume

many
All

varying forms in different countries and at the


scribes.

hands of successive

this, it is evident,

demands extensive knowledge,

great calmness and impartiality of judgment, and the tact

which,

when

not a happy natural endowment, can be

gained only by long practical experience.

In point of

fact, accordingly, successful editors of the text of the

New
the

Testament have been very few in number.


of formal rule they

Had

work been one

would have been

many; but the demands which it makes are so great that a comparatively small number have attempted it, and
of these only one or
3.

two have gained a

lasting fame.

Yet

it

does not follow that the ordinary minister

of the Gospel, the student of divinity, or even the cul-

tivated private

Christian,

ought to leave the whole

General Summary.

151

matter of decidino- on the text of the


the hands of the few

New

Testament in
it

who can

devote to

the whole
is

labour of their
to accomplish

lives,

and

feel that

even that

too little

what they undertake.

Where we cannot

discover

of others.

we may yet follow with delight the discoveries Where w^e cannot make original suggestions made
to us.

we can

in a great degree estimate the value of sugges-

tions that are

the steps of an intricate

Where we cannot combine proposition, we can judge of the


us.

accuracy of the combination set before

We

can

analyze where we cannot create, and verify where

we

cannot produce.

In so doing,

we
by
;

share at least some


creative

part of the pleasure experienced


enter into fellowship with
principles

them

we
;

learn to

upon which

they work
off",

we know the and we catch,


minds
;

although

it

may

be afar
is

some of the gleams of


It is a

their

inspiration.

Nor

our imperfect knowledge without

even a wholesome influence upon them.


to

check
It

what might otherwise be

their

onesidedness.
toil.

spurs

them

to exertion

and rewards their

No
work

mistake therefore can be greater than to think


cannot do
all in

that, because the private Christian

the
If,

of textual criticism, he should do


its

nothing.

by studying

resources, its aims,

and

its principles,
it is

he

gain no more than the conviction that


science, the gain will

really a
botli

be of the highest advantage

to himself

and

to the

Church of

Christ.

With

this

confidence

we now proceed

to the third

and

last division

of our subject.

PART THIRD.
RESULTS.

PART THIRD.
RESULTS.

CHAPTEE
TEXTS OF THE

I.

EFFECT PRODUCED BY TEXTUAL CRITICISM UPON IMPORTANT

NEW

TESTAMENT.

jAVING examined
the text
of the
it

the principles upon which

New

Testament

is

to be

determined,
readers
if

may

be satisfactory to

our

portant results which


principles.

For this

we set before them the most imHow from an application of these purpose, we shall, in the first place,
and
shall briefly discuss the

direct attention to a

few texts peculiarly interesting on

doctrinal or other grounds,

readings which in these cases seem to have the best claim


to be accepted.

To

this the present chapter will be de-

voted.

We shall then, in the chapter which follows, pass


New
Testament,

successively through the books of the

and
all

note in each chapter, without entering into argument,


the changes of any importance which require to be
in the received text.

made

Our

readers will thus have

before tliem the leading " results " of textual criticism.

156

Effect 'produced hj Textual Criticism

upon

Matthew
In the
text, "
is

xi. 19.

last clause of this verse


is justified

we read

in the received

But Wisdom

of her children,"

and

this

the undoubted reading in the parallel passage in


35, except that the

Luke

vii.

word

" all " is inserted there,

"

But Wisdom

is justified

of all her children."

In the

passage before us, however, a very important variation


claims attention, " But

Wisdom

is justified

of " or "

by

her works."
reading
is

The evidence

in favour of the received

strong

as corrected

by a

later hand, all


all later

uncial manuscripts except two, nearly


scripts,

manu-

most of the old Latin versions, the Vulgate, the

Curetonian Syriac, the Gothic, and the Armenian as


edited.

Two

or three Fathers also bear similar testiit is

mony, although in the case of the two most ancient


doubtful whether their quotations
the Gospel of
St.

may not

be taken from

Luke.

On

the other side

we have
cursive

two uncial manuscripts, and these the most ancient

and valuable possessed by us


"

b^

and B, one

manuscript, together with the testimony of Jerome that

works

"

was found in some


versions.

of the Gospels in his day,


its codices,

the Coptic, Syriac, Armenian in

^thiopic,

and Persic

The mass

of evidence

may therefore
But various

be said to be in favour of the

common

text.

important considerations have to be taken into account.


(1.)

Constant experience shows that a reading supported by


^^

and

B together
is

is

not to be set aside,

except on very strong grounds.


(2.)

The point before us

one to which versions can

Imjyortcmt Texts of the

New

Testament.

157
of

bear valuable testimony,

and the balance


is

evidence from this source


(3.)

in favour of "works."
is

The reading
interesting.

of the ^thiox^ic codices


It

loeculiarly

combines the two,

" of

her works

and

of her children," evidently in the

circumfirst

stances a composite reading of which the

part

is

]nost probably the foundation.


rule, that a

(4) The well-established

reading in one

Gospel different from that of the parallel passage'


in another Gospel
is

more
is

likely to be
in favour of
'*

correct

than one exactly similar,


(5.)

works." ^

The equally well-established


difficult
is

rule that the

more
If

to be
to

preferred to

the more easy


conclusion.
it is

reading

leads

the

same

" children "

were the original reading,


"

not
If

easy to account for a change to


"

works."

works

"

were the

original, the substitution of

" children "


(6.)

can at once be understood.^


is

In the sense thus afforded there


jectionable.

nothing ob-

Those who see here a doctrine

similar to that of a sinner's justification


fail to

by works,

notice that
is

it is

not a sinner but heavenly


of,

wisdom that
theological

spoken

as well as the fact that


is

the Greek verb to justify


sense

never used in

its

with the Greek

preposition

found in this verse.


that
"

On

the other hand, to say

Wisdom

striking

passage.
1

is justified of her works" is in harmony with the whole tone of the The life of Jesus and the life of John
p. 144.
2

Comp.

conip. p. 143.


158
Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon

are both

among

the works of

Wisdom

acting

differently in different circumstances;

and by
to every

both

is

Wisdom

justified,

commended
what she
is

open
(7.)

eye, vindicated as being

really
if

is.

What
verb

has been last said

strengthened,

we

observe that the correct translation of the Greek


is "

was" not

" is justified,"

carrying us back

in thought to the

moment when Wisdom's works


when
the children of

were planned, and not leading us to think only


of the present instant,

God

approve what the children of the world cannot

comprehend.

We
"

decide therefore in favour of the reading,

But Wisdom was

justified of her works."

Mark

hi. 29.
St.

We
In
iii.

take next a text from the Gospel of


29,

Mark.

we

read in the received version, " But he that


for-

shall

blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never


is

giveness, but

in danger of eternal damnation."


or

The
is

reading "damnation"

rather

"judgment" here
C,

supported by

and by a corrector of

by

several

other uncials, by the mass of cursives, by the Syriac, and by two valuable manuscripts representing, or nearly so, On the other hand the the Latin as revised by Jerome. " "judgment" instead of by b^, B, by is read sin" word

one or two other uncials, and cursives with an ancient


text,

gate,
it

by the old Latin versions except one, by the Vuland manuscripts representing Jerome's revision of

except one, by the Coptic, Armenian, and Gothic, and

Important Texts of

the

New

Testament.

159

by one

or

two Fathers both in the East and in the West.


at first sight

The evidence seems

more equally divided

than in our last example.

But

again, as there, several

considerations have to be taken into account.


(1.)

We
and

have the same important conjunction of

b^

as

met us

in the last case, but backed


of uncials.

here by a larger
(2.)

number

Another word

for " sin,"

applying to sin in

its

more general character rather than


offence, is

as a particular

found in C

(as appears),

D, and two or

three cursives, thus showinfy that the reading " sin"


w^as both well
(3.)

known and

felt to

be

difficult.

The evidence
widespread,
is

of versions, both in favour of " sin."

numerous and
unques-

(4.)

The

difficulty of the reading

"sin"

is

tionably greater than that of the reading " judg-

ment

gradation

much so, that we seem to see the by which it passed out of the text; first, the more general word for " sin" being suId;

"

so

stituted for that denoting a specific act of sin,

and then "judgment" coming in


the reading " sin."
(5.)
^

as easier

still.

This consideration lends strong probability to

It

may

be asked,
?

eternal sin

What is the meaning of an The answer most probably is, a sin

never to be blotted out, and a sense

not, let it

be observed, actual words

is

thus <^iven comina;

much more
Matt.
xii.

near that of the parallel passage in

32 than
1

we

should otherwise possess.


p. 143.

Comp.


160
Effect jprodiiced hy Textual Criticism

upon

We
"

decide therefore in favour of the reading,

But he that

shall

blaspheme against the Holy Ghost


is

hath never forgiveness, but

guilty of an eternal sin."

Luke

ii.

14.
St.

We take

next a text in the Gospel of

Luke.
is

The
given

song of the heavenly host at the birth of Jesus

by that Evangelist
"

in

ii.

14, in the following

words;

Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good

will towards men."

But there

is

another reading which


It is difficult to

greatly changes the aspect of the verse.

render

it

in English, but literally rendered,

and we conit

tent ourselves with such a rendering for the present,


will

run

"

Glory to

God

in the highest,

and on earth

peace among

men

of good pleasure" or

"good

will."

Tlie evidence in favour of the received reading is several

uncial manuscripts,
into
IJ^

among which

are readings introduced


it

and

B by

later correctors, as

would seem

all

cursive manuscripts, the Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and

JEthiopic versions, and a considerable

number
first

of the

Greek Fathers.
most important

On

the other side


b^,

we

have four of the


two, though

uncials,

B, A, D, the

afterwards corrected, having so read in their original


form,

the

old

Latin,

the

Vulgate, and the

Gothic

versions, together with at least

two very ancient and

important Fathers, one belonging to the West the other


to the East.

Such

is

the evidence;

how

shall

we

decide
(1.)

Our two most important manuscripts

are here

supported by other ancient authority; and so


Important Texts of
the

New

Testament.

161

much
them.
(2.)

greater, therefore, is the

weight due to

On

the other hand,


is

The evidence of versions ing commonly received. The important


and
he
critical

in favour of the read-

(3.)

fact

meets us that the most learned

Greek Father of early Christianity


the reading not received, but that
it,

not only

knew

argues

from

and depends upon

it,

in

establishing a point he has in view.


(4.)

The long

rejected reading is

by much the more

difficult of the two.

We

can see at once

how

transcriber of the Greek should have substituted

the one

now

familiar to us for the other.

How

the contrary course should have been taken by

any

it is

most

difficult to conceive.

These considerations lead to the conclusion that the


received reading
its place.
is

to

be rejected and the other put into


said. Is

It
?

may

be

not the parallelism thus


It
is

destroyed

We

answer, No.

preserved.

The
is

Greek has only two members, not

three.

There

no

copula between the two which are generally considered


to

be the second and the third members of the group.


"

The word
parts,

and " divides the whole sentence into


broken.

its

and unless what follows that word can be gathered


is

into one clause the parallelism

The new

reading enables us to do so

and, bearing in
is

mind

that

"good will"
virtue,

or ''good pleasure" here

not a

human

but the Divine benevolence or love, the merciful

purpose of

God towards His


:

people, the passage as a

whole will run

162
"

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon

Glory to God, in the highest,

and

On

earth peace, in

men whom

in

His good pleasure

He

hath chosen."

John

i.

18.

From
Bible, "

the

Gospel of
i.

St.

John we

select the

very

important text,

18.

There we read in our English


;

No man

hath seen God at any time


is

the only

begotten Son, which

in the

bosom

of the Father,

He

hath declared Him."


itself to

Another reading, however, presents

our notice in the substitution of the word

"

God"

for the

word "Son," together with the dropping


"

of the definite article before " only begotten," thus giving

us the text in the form,

No man

time; an (or the) only begotten

hath seen God God which is

at

any

in the

bosom

of the Father hath declared

Him."

For the received text we have the authority of A,


a late corrector of C, and several other uncials, almost
all cursives, several of

the old Latin versions, the Vul-

gate, the Curetonian, the Philoxenian,

and the Jerusalem

Syriac, the

Armenian, and one edition of the ^thiopic,


For the reading
"

the old Latin interpreter of Irenasus, Origen, and several


other Greek and Latin Fathers.

God "

we have

the authority of ^, B, the original hand of C,

another highly important uncial not spoken of in our


previous pages, one cursive with an ancient text, the

Coptic version, the

common

Syriac version as edited by

two

different scholars, one edition of the ^thiopic, the

I^tin

interpreter

of Irenseus in other passages tlian


Tniportant Texts of the Neiu Testament.

163

those referred to under the previous head, Origen also


in other passages than those spoken
especially Greek, Fathers,
of,

and

several,

among whom we
school.
it is

find Arius

and writers of the Valentinian


In
(1.)

reviewinjTj this

evidence

to be observed
is

That the weight of manuscript authority


cidedly in favour of the reading
"

de-

God."

(2.)

That versions

testify to a

wider range of this

reading than of the other in the early Church.


(3.)

That the Fathers cannot be implicitly relied on,


as the

more important
sides.

of

them may be quoted


is

on both
(4.)

That, notwithstanding this, there


distinctness
"

a degree of
to

and precision in their references

God," as the reading, that

we do

not find in

their references to " Son."


(5.)

Besides this,

it

was quite natural that they should


''

often speak of

the only begotten Son," for the

term
It
"

"

Son" was that commonly used of Jesus.


so natural that they should speak of
is

was not

the only begotten God," for the language


itself,

not
w^as

only strange in

but the term

''

God"

commonly used
expression at

of the Father.

It is impossible

therefore to account for their use of this latter


all

unless they were thoroughly


"

satisfied that it

was the true reading.

Son"

was
and
"
(G.)

to

their ariTument

them the appropriate designation of Jesus, is, that this "Son" is called
in the passage of St.
is

God"

John now

before us.

This argument

strengthened by the fact that

1G4

Effect ])rod\iced ly Textual Criticism

upon

the Valentinian heretics read " God," a circumstance which would tend to
suspicious of
it

make

the Church

unless convinced that the read-

ing was correct.


(7.)

It is to

be noticed that there were other variations

of the reading

known

besides that which

we

are

considering, such as " the only begotten

Son of

God," "the only begotten Son God," "the only be

gotten."
to

These variations unquestionably point


as the original

"God"

and fundamental reading,

that out of which, and the difficulties connected


witli which,
((S.)

they would most naturally

arise.-^

"

God"

is

by much the more

difficult

of the

two readings.
"

We

can at once understand


it.

how

Son" should be substituted for

It is almost

impossible to conceive

how

the contrary substiif it

tution could take place.

Or,

be thought that

the variation began in the m^argin and from

thence passed into the text,


culty

we see without diffihow "God" being supposed to be in the


"Son" should be placed
gloss,

latter,

in the former as
"

an explanatory

but not
if "

how

God" should
originally

be put into the margin


in the text.
\).)

Son" were

Lastly, the internal evidence

is

very strongly in

favour of reading

"

God."

It is the constant

tendency of

St.

John

to return at intervals to

what he had placed at the beginning of a section or passage, or to what had been the leading
thought upon which he had been dwelling.
1

The

Comp.

p. 140.

hwportant Texts of
18th verse of the
to his Gospel,

the

New

Testament.

165

first
is

chapter closes the prelude

and

exactly the place, therefore,


to

where we might expect

meet with such a


had had
his

summary.

But
of

in that prelude he

mind
that
is

fixed

on two points, that in Jesus we have

Word

God which

is

God, and that Jesus

the only begotten of the Father.

Now,

then,

as

he draws

all

the sublime statements of this

prelude to his Gospel to a close, he sums them

up

in the words, "


;

No man

hath seen God at

any time

the only begotten

God which

is

in

the bosom of the Father hath declared

Him."

We

accept this as the true reading of this most

important verse.

Acts

xx. 28. of the Gospels,

Having examined a text from each


shall

we

now

take one from the Acts of the Apostles, and

thereafter note one or

two more from the other books of

the
(jf

New
St.

Testament.
at

We

take Acts xx. 28, the words


urges the elders
of.

Paul
" to

Miletus,

when he
blood."

Ephesus

feed the

Church of God, which


"

He
"

hatli

purchased with His

own

Instead of

God,"

however, not a few authorities read


the following
is

the Lord," and

the evidence.
"

For the reading


manuscripts,

the Lord

"

three important ancient


uncial,

one

additional

good

many

cursives, the Egyptian,

and one of the Syriac versions,

the

Armenian

version,

and a considerable number of


"

Fathers.

For the reading

God" our two most important


166
uncials
Effect

produced hy Textucd Criticism upon


cursives, the Vulgate, the

and B, and several


to

best codices testifying

the Vulgate as revised by

Jerome, the Philoxenian Syriac,

and a considerable
"

number
God,"
"

of Fathers.

It is to

be noticed also that varia-

tions such as the following

meet us
"

The Lord and


" Christ,"

God and

the Lord,"
"

the Lord God,"

and in one Latin version

Jesus Christ."

This state of
:

the evidence seems to warrant the remarks


(1.)

That the most valuable manuscript evidence


undoubtedly in favour of the reading
"

is

God."

(2.)

Evidence from versions


for if

is

about equally divided;

on the one side we have the Egyptian


on the other we have the Latin as

versions,

revised
(3.)

by Jerome.
of Fathers
it

The evidence
divided,
"

is

also
to

about equalb^
support
of

although

leans

the

God."

We
the
is

have here evidently a case in which, considering


of variations that

number
is

have

arisen,

much weight
the
others

due

to the rule explained, p. 140, that the reading

which
is

most probably the parent of


ane.

all

also

most probably the true


all

We

add, therefore,
are
"

(4) That

the variations noted

by us
" "

much
than
"

more
from

likely to
"

have sprung from


Supposing

God

the Lord."

the Lord

to

have been the original reading we cannot under-

how " and God " should have been added. If " God " were the original we can easily understand how changes should have been introduced to soften such an expression as " God, who
stand


Imrportant Texts of the

New

Testament.

167

purchased with His


this

own

blood."

In proof of

we

find that a Latin interpreter of the

Greek
latter,

Ignatius
"

changes an expression of the

the blood of
"
;

God "

into

''

the blood of Christ

God

and

further, that the Latin translator of

Irenseus

makes use

of the reading "the Lord,"

while the course of his argument leads to the


inference that he had "

God "

before

him
"

in his

Greek.
(5.)

The expression

" the

Church

of

God

is

one

common
(6.)

in St.

Paul's

Epistles, but

he never

speaks of " the Church of the Lord."

The reading
than

"

God

" is

" the Lord,"

a much more difficult one when we look at the words

immediately following.

These considerations lead to the adoption of the read-

ing
"

The Church

of God,

which

He

hath purchased with

His own blood."


EOM.
V. 1.

By the change
ized Version.

of a single letter in the Greek,

we
For

here

read "let us have," instead of

"we

have/'in the Authoras follows


:

The evidence stands


C,

" let

us have" A, B,

D, ^,

etc.,

the earliest versions,

Augustine, Chrysostom, Theodoret, and


the Fathers.
uncials,

many

others of

For "we have" two or three second-rate


inferior versions,

some

and a few of the Fathers.


is

The preponderance of authority


as follows

therefore distinctly in

favour of the former reading, and the verse should run


:


168
Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon


being justified by
faith, let

" Therefore,

us have peace

with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."

EOM.
It has

VIII. 1.

been previously observed that the


is

last clause

of this verse
inferior

an interpolation.

For

it

there are

some
late

uncials, a

few Fathers, and one or two


it

versions.

Against

there are B, C, D, ^,

etc.,

Augustine,

Cyril, Athanasius,

and others of the Fathers, with some


is

versions.
clause,

The evidence
tlierefore

thus clearly against


:

the

and the verse should read thus


is

"There

now no condemnation

to

them

which are

in Christ Jesus."

Eph.

i.

1.

The question here

is,

whether or not the words


It is

" in

Ephesus" are genuine.

no easy matter

to decide.

On the
is
^^,

one hand, the great mass of authorities of all kinds


:

in favour of the words

on the other hand,

and

the two most ancient manuscripts, are against them.

Basil the Great,

who lived

in the fourth century, declares

that they were wanting in ancient copies of the

New
form,

Testament in his day.


of the Fathers to the

There are some other statements

same

effect, so

that

we can

in the present state of the evidence, no very decided

judgment on

either side.

It is certainly
St.

somewhat

diffi-

cult to understand

how

Paul could have written an


to the

epistle specially addressed

church at Ephesus,
to

and yet make not a single personal allusion

any in
If

the place where he had lived and laboured so long.


Imijortant Texts of the

New

Testament.
is,

169

the epistle be regarded as encyclical


to circulate

that

as intended

among the

several churches of Asia Minor,

that difficulty will be removed, and the opening verse


will read thus
" Paul,
:

an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the will of God,

to those that are saints,

and

to the faithful in Christ

Jesus."

Heb.

ii.

9.

A singular various
stead of the words
scripts

reading occurs in this verse.


the grace of

In-

"by

God" some manu"

and a number of the early Fathers read

without"

or " apart from God."

Origen, in the third century,

knew

both readings, but the latter seems to have been the

dominant one,
grace of
doret,

as

he expounds

it,

and says that

"

by the

God" was found only "in some copies." Theoin the fifth century, knew of no other reading
is

than " without God," and the same


the Fathers.
strong, there
Still,

true of others of
is

although patristic evidence

here
in-

seem good reasons, both external and

ternal, for adhering to the

common

text.

All the manu"

scripts

and versions of most weight are in favour of


is

by
"

the grace of God," and this expression

in analogy

with the
rests

rest of Scripture,

whereas

" apart

from God

on but weak manuscript authority, and seems

totally unlike

any statement

to be

met with elsewhere

in Scripture.

This verse therefore will stand as in the received


text.


170
Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon

1 Pet.

III.

15.

A
God.

very interesting and important various reading


viz.,

occurs in this verse,

the substitution of Christ for


it

In favour of the text as

stands there are a few


in support of the

uncials,

and one or two Fathers, but


etc.,

reading Christ v/e have A, B, C, ^,

the best versions,

and several of the Fathers.


therefore,
text.
for,

There can be no doubt,

that a change should here be that change


is

made

in the

And
as

of the greatest importance,

the

Apostle here applies to


is

Christ

language

which in the Old Testament


ence to Jehovah (see

made use

of with refer-

Isa. viii. 13),

he clearly suggests

the supreme Godhead of our Eedeemer.


then, will stand thus
"
:

The

clause

But

sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts."

Jo PIN

II.

23.

This verse stands in the Authorized Version as follows


"

Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the


\hut'\

Father:

he

that achnowledgeth the

Son hath

the

Father
it is

also!'

By

the use of italics in the second clause

suggested that the words rest on doubtful or insuffi-

cient authority.

But (with the exception


in

of the initial

hut) textual criticism has fully

demonstrated their gen-

uineness.

They are omitted

some uncial manuscripts,

but. are found in A, B, C, N, in the versions, and in

Clement, Oriqen, and others of the Fathers.

The verse

then should, without any hesitation, be read as follows:


''

AVhosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the


Important Texts of
Father
also."
;

the

Neio Testament.

IVl

he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father

John

iii.

1.

A remarkable
this verse.

addition should be
"

Against the addition

made to and we

the text in
are " there

are

two or three

uncials, the Coptic version,

and one or

two Fathers.

But

in favour of the addition there are

A, B, C, ^, with Augustine and others of the Fathers.

The addition

therefore

should,

on

all

sound

critical

principles, certainly be

made, and the verse will accord-

ingly stand thus


"

Behold,

what manner
us, that

of

love

the

Father

hath

bestowed upon

we should be
:

called children of

God

and we are [such]


it

therefore the world


not."

knoweth

us not, because

knew Him
1

John

v. 13.

This verse reads very strangely in the


"

common

text

These things have

I written

unto you that believe on

the

name

of the
life,

Son of God; that ye may know that ye


and that ye may believe on the name
Eeaders of the epistle are thus
first

have eternal
of the

Son of God."

declared to do in the
to

clause

what they

are exhorted

do in the

last.

But the balance


it

of authority
it

seems

against the verse as

stands.
;

For

there are one or


it

two uncials and a few Fathers

against

there are B, ^,

the Syriac versions, and some of the. Fathers.


peculiar.
It omits the clause " that believe

A is

here

on the name

of the

Son of God."

But, in accordance with the evi-


172
Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism.

dence just stated, we shonld probably read the verse


thus,
"

These things have

T written
life,

unto you, that ye

may

know name

that ye have eternal


of the

ye who believe on the

Son of God."
Eev.
xvii. 8.

The two last

clauses of this verse

seem
"

flatly to contra-

dict each other in the

common
is

text.

The beast that


and they that

thou sawest was, and


the bottomless
pit,

not

and

shall ascend out of


:

and go into perdition

dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names w^ere not


written in the book of
world,
life

from the foundation of the


is not,

when they behold


is."

the beast that was, and

and yet

There

is

hardly any evidence whatever for

this paradoxical reading.

and

^?
is

combine against
also confirmed

it,

and support the following, which


23atristic

by

authority

"The
perdition

beast that thou sawest was, and

is

not; and

shall ascend out of the bottomless pit,


;

and goeth into


shall wonder,

and they that dwell on the earth

whose names are not written in the book


the foundation of the world,
that he w^as, and
is

of life from

when they behold


shall [again] be."

the beast,

not,

and

CHAPTEE
OF THE

II.

EFFECT PRODUCED BY TEXTUAL CRITICISM UPON THE TEXT

NEW TESTAMENT

IN ITS SUCCESSIVE BOOKS.

ilAVING

pointed out the manner in whicli the

principles of textual criticism explained in

the earlier chapters of this book are to be

applied to a few of the more important texts


(jf

the

New

Testament,

we

shall

now endeavour

to coneffect

vey to our readers some impression of the general


to be to the

expected from the application of these principles

New Testament

as a whole.

It will

be impossible

to note every

change of text that ought legitimately to

follow from our premisses, and


trifling that

many

of

them
first

are so

the English reader, especially on

making

acquaintance with the subject, cannot be expected to


take

much

interest in them.

We

shall confine ourselves

therefore to such changes as really affect the

meaning of

the original.

Gospel of
Chap.
V.
i.

St.

Matthew.
of interest in this chapter

The only change


is

25.

in v. 25, where, speaking of the

mother of our

174

Effect proditcecl hy Textual Criticism

upon

the

Lord, the Evangelist ought to be


" till

made

to say

she brought forth a son," not

" till

she

brought forth her first-born son."


Chap.
ii.

The second chapter


18

in like

manner
"

aftbrds

only one change needing to be noted, for in


V.

18.

V.

tlie

words

"

lamentation and

ought to

be omitted, and the text, thus making a nearer

approach

to

the language

of

the
there

prophet,
a voice

should read, "In

Eama was

heard, weeping and great mourning."

Chap.

iii.

The changes
for notice.

of the third chapter do not call

Chap.

iv.

And

the same remark applies to those of

the fourth.

Chap.
V.

V.

In the

fifth

chapter

we ought

to

read

v.
is

22.

22, omitting " without cause," "

whosoever

anojry with his brother shall be in danoer of the


V.
V.

27.

judgment."

In

v.

27 the words
omitted.

"

by them
In
v.

of

32.

old time " ought

to be

32,

where our present text gives us


to

"

causeth her

commit

adultery,"

we should

find, " causetli

adultery to
"

be

committed

upon

her,"
is,

or

causeth her to suffer adultery," that

treat-

eth her as though she were an adulteress.


?.

In

44.

V.

44 several clauses

are to be omitted,
"

and

the reading ought to be,

but I say unto you,

Love your enemies, and pray for them whicli


V.

47.

persecute you."

In

v.

47, for the words " do

not even the publicans,"

we ought
?

to read "

do

not even the heathen the same


1

"

And,

finally,

Comp.

p. 110.

Text of the
V.

New

Testawent in

its successive

Books.

175

48.

in V. 48

we ought

to be instructed to be perfect,
is

not as our "

Father which
is

in heaven," but

as our " heavenly Father

perfect."
first

Chap.
V.

vi.

In the sixth chapter the


meets us
is

change that
"

1,

that of

v. 1,

"

Take heed that ye do


your ahns
v. 4, 6, 18,

not your rigliteousness


V.

"

instead of

4, 6,

before men."

Next, at the end of


i

18,
V.

we have
the

to

omit the word "openly."

Then, in
v. 12,

12.

fifth petition of

the Lord's prayer in

we must read we forgive our


V.

" as

we have
;

forgiven," not " as

debtors

"

while the doxology of

13.

the prayer

in v. 13, " for

Thine

is

the kingdom,

and the power, and the

must be
V.

left out.

Amen," The only other change in


glory, for ever.

33.

this chapter calling for notice is that of v. 33,

where,
do, in

when we

read the verse, as

we ought

to

immediate connection with the preceding


is

one, the true reading

much more
"

beautiful

than
first

tliat of

our English Version,

But seek ye

His kingdom and His righteousness."

Chap.

vii.

In the seventh chapter only one change of


importance meets
us.

It

occurs in the last


will run, "

?;.

29.

verse of the chapter,

which

For

He

taught them as one having authority, and not


as their scribes."

Chap.
V.

viii.

In the eighth chapter the reading of

v. 1(1

10.

becomes much more emphatic than


" Verily, I

as it stands,

say unto you,

With no man
faitli."

in Israel

have

found so great
Comp. pp.

The

grateful

feelings of St. Peter's mother-in-law are


1

more

86, 109.

176

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism

icpo7i the

fully brought out


V.
?,'.

when we
In
v.

read, as

we ought
Him,"

15.

to do, in v. 15, that " she ministered unto

25.

instead of " them."

25 the true reading,


us

omitting

" us,"

sets

before

much more
And in v. 31
is

graphically the quick alarmed cry of the disti

31.

ciples,

"Lord, save;

we

perish."

the subjection of the devils to our Lord

more pointed when we

find

them

saying, as

the true text requires, not " suffer us to go

away," but " send us away into the herd of


swine."

Chap.
V.

ix.

In the ninth chapter the following changes

8.

may

be noted as worthy of regard.


"

In

v.

for the
V.

marvelling"
"

of the multitudes

we
13

13.

ought to read

they were afraid."

In

v.

the words of our Lord are simply, " for I

came
In

not to call the righteous, but sinners."^


V.

35.

V.

35 the words "among the people," which


to

might limit our Lord's miracles of mercy

the theocratic nation, have no right to claim


V.

36.

their place.

And

in

v.

36 the reading
give

" be-

cause they fainted"

will

way

to

one

more
"

suitable to the circumstances of the case,

because they were distressed."

Chap.
V.

X.

In the tenth chapter,


the reading,

v.

4 ought

to present

4.

"Simon
In

the zealot" not


v.

"Simon
is

V.

23.

the Canaanite."

23 the true reading


" flee

not the

" flee

ye into another," but

ye into
in

next,"

thus bringing out the


disciples

mode

which the persecuted


^

were in their

Comp.

p. 144.

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Books.

177

flight

not so

selves, as rather

labour, that

much to seek safety for themnew and successive fields of they might thus go over as many
should come.
" if

as possible of the cities of Israel before the


V.

25.

Son of

Man
is

In

v.

25 the true
" if

reading

not

they have called," but

they have surnamed the master of the house


Beelzebub."
Chap.
V. 2.

xi.

In the eleventh chapter the mention of

"two"

of John's disciples in

v.

2 ought to be

omitted, for
V.

we

are only told that

John sent

19.

"by
fied

his disciples."
is,

In

v.

19 the statement

of the true text

not that "

of her children,"

Wisdom is justibut that "Wisdom is


;"^

V.

23.

justified

by her works
if

and in

v.
is

23 the
greatly

graphic force of the Saviour's appeal

heightened
the best

we

read,

with what appears to be

authenticated text, interrogatively,

''And thou, Capernaum, shalt thou be exalted to

heaven
Chap.
V. 6.

Thou shalt be brought down to


little
is

hell."

xii.

In the twelfth chapter


portance
necessary.

change of imv.

We
is

note only in

the substitution of the neuter for the masculine,

not " in this place


" that
;"

one greater than


is

the temple," but


V. 8.
V.

which

greater than

the temple
"

is

here

in v. 8

the omission of

35.

even

"

and in

v.

35 the substitution of
for

"out of his good treasure"

"out of the

good treasure of the heart," a change by which


^

Comp.

p. 156.

178

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon

the

the contrast between the good and the evil

man
Chap.
xiii.

is

more

distinctly brought to view.


little

In the thirteenth chapter also


needed.

change

is
V.

The words
v. 9,

" to

hear"

are to be

9.

omitted in
"

and the verse ought to read

V.

22.

He

that hath ears let

him
In

hear."

In
"

v.

22

" the care of this


V.

world" ought to give way to


v.

34.

"

the care of the world."

34

and with-

out a parable spake


to be read "
V.

He
In

not unto them" ought

and without a parable spake


v.

He
for

43.

nothing unto them."


has to be

43 the same change


9
;

made

as in v.

and

lastly,

V.

55.

" Joses" in v. 55

we ought

to read

"Joseph;"

a reading of no small interest in connection

with an inquiry that cannot be entered upon


here,
as to

the personality of

James
in our

the

writer of the Epistle of

James

New

Testament canon.
i"-

Chap. xiv.
V.

In the fourteenth chapter two


v. 12,

slight changes

12.

meet us in

where

" the corpse " ought to

be substituted
-y.

for " the body,"


it."

and
"

"

buried

25.

him

" for "

buried

In

v.

25
for

Jesus came
"

unto them
V.

" is better
;

vouched

than

Jesus

30.

went unto them


" boisterous "

"

and in

v.

30 the word

ought to be omitted.

Chap. XV.
V. 1.

In the fifteenth chapter a slight change of


reading ought to be
instead
of "

Pharisees,

made in v. 1, giving us, Then came to Jesus scribes and which were of Jerusalem," " Then
from Jerusalem, Pharisees and

come

to Jesus

"

Text of the Neio Testament in


V. 6.

its successive

Books. 179
v. 6

scribes."

The omission

of

some words in

supplies the reading "


father," instead of

He shall not honour his " And honour not his father
and again in

or his mother, he shall he free ;"


V. 8.

V.

8 another omission of
" This people

some words gives us

simply
V.

honoureth

me

with their

14.

lips,

but their heart


to read

is far

from me."

In

v.

14

we ought
V.

"

they be blind leaders,"

rather than
17.

"they be blind leaders of the


v.

blind;" and in

17 "not"

falls to

be sub-

stituted for " not yet."

Chap. xvi.
V. 3.

In the sixteenth chapter the words


v.

"

ye

hypocrites " of

3 have properly no place in

the text, nor the description of Jonah as " the


vv. 4, 8.

prophet
"

"

in v. 4.

In

v.

we ought
"
v.

to read

because ye have no bread," and not


In

because
13, for

V.

13.

ye have brought no bread."


"

Whom

do

men

say that I the Son of

am ?"
V.
V.

the true text gives us,

Man "Who do men say


In
;

20.

that the Son of


"

Man

is

"

v.

20 the word
v.

26.

Jesus

"

ou^ht to be omitted

and in
is

26,

"for what shall a

man

be profited ?"
is

better

established than " for

what

man

profited ?"

Chap. xvii.
V. 4.

In the seventeenth chapter the words of

Peter in

v. 4 are much more characteristic when we adopt the true text not ''let us make here," but " I will make here three tabernacles."

V.
V.

11.

In
In

V.
V.

11 the word "first" ought to go out.

20.

20

we

are to read " because of your little


;

faith" rather than " because of your unbelief

180
V.

Effect

produced hj Textual Criticism upon


v.

the

21.

and the wliole of

21,

"Howbeit

tliis

kind

goeth not out but by prayer and

fasting," is to

be omitted.
Chap,
'yv.

xviii.
V.

In the eighteenth chapter the whole of


11 ought to disappear; and in
v.

11,15.

15 the

precept of our Lord receives far greater breadth

'0.

29. 35.

V.

by the omission of the words " against thee," an omission demanded by the evidence. In V. 29 we ought also to omit "at his feet;" and V. 35 ought to close with the word " brother,"
" if

ye forgive not every one his brother."


first

Chap. xix.
V.

In the nineteenth chapter the

change

17.

of importance that meets us is at v. 17, which ought to be read, " Why askest thou me con-

cerning that which


that
V.

is

good

There

is

one

is

good.

But

if

thou wouldest enter into

20.

life

keep the commandments."

In

v.

20 the

words
V.

"from

my
v.

youth up"

ought to be

29.

omitted; and in

29 the words "or wife."


last clause of

Chap. XX.
'0.

In the twentieth chapter the


V.

7.

7 ought to have no place in the text, " and


is

whatsoever

right, that

shall

ye receive;"
to the last

and the same observation applies


'0.

16.
19.

clause of

v.

16, " for


v.

many be

called,

but few

V.

chosen."

In
"

19 the true reading supplies

the words

and the third day


"

He

shall

be

raised up," rather than


V.

and the third day

22.

He

In v. 22 we ought to shall rise again." omit the words " and to be baptized with the

baptism that I

am

baptized with," a remark

Text of the
V.

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs. 181
v.

23.

applying also to the similar clause in

23.

vv. 26, 27.

In vv. 26, 27 the imperative form


ought to be changed for
the
;"

" let

him be"
form

future

V.

34.

" shall

be

and in

v. 34,

instead of reading of

the blind

men

just healed that " their eyes

received sight,"

we ought

to read " they re-

ceived their sight."

Chap. xxi.
V.

In the twenty-first chapter one change only


v.

38.

need be noted, where in


are

38 the husbandmen
let

made
let

to exclaim, "

Come,

us kill him,

and
Chap. xxii.
V.

us keep his inheritance."

In the twenty-second chapter we ought to


v. 13,

13.

read in

with the omission of a few words


text, "
etc.

from the present


V.

Bind him hand and


In
v.

23.

foot,

and cast him,"

23

we

are not

told of "Sadducees

which

say," as if the pursect,

pose were to describe the tenets of the

but of

"

Sadducees saying," the remark being


gives, "

confined to the particular persons introduced


V.

40.

to us.

In

V.

40 the true text


;

on these

two commandments hangeth the whole law


V.

44.

and the prophets


" till I

"

and in

v.

44 the words

given as a quotation from the 110th Psalm are,

put thine enemies under thy

feet."

Chap,
V. 5.

xxiii.

In the twenty-third chapter the word "for"


v. 5

ought to -tre inserted in

before "they

make
8 the

V. 7.

broad their phylacteries."

In
;

v.

7 "Eabbi"
v.

V. 8.

ought to be read only once

and in
In

words "even Christ" have to be omitted.


vv. 14, 17.

The
17 we

whole of

v.

14 ought to go

out.

v.

182

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon

the

ought to read not of the temple " whicli sanctifieth,"


V.

but of the temple " which hath sancti;

19.

tied the gold


"

"

and

lastly, in v.

19 the words
text.

ye fools" have no claim to be in the


" in v. 7

Chap. XX iv.
V. 7.
V.

In the twenty-fourth chapter the words

"

and pestilences
V.

have to be

left out.

17.

In

17 we ought to read, not of taking "any-

thing," but of taking " the things " out of the


V.

28.
36.

house.

At the beginning
;

of v. 28 " for "

must

V.

be omitted

and the

latter part of v.

36 ought

to read, " no, not the angels of heaven, neither

the Son, but the Father only."

Chap. XXV.
V. 3.
V. 6.

In the twenty -fifth chapter the word

" for "


v. 3.

ought to be inserted at the beginning of

In

V.

6 the

word

"

cometh " has

to be omitted

after " bridegroom,"^


t;.

and the same remark has

13.

to be

made

of the last words of v. 13,

which
In
v.

properly closes with the word " hour."


V.

31.

31
"

we ought

to read
;"

simply of "angels," not


v.

V.

41.

holy angels

and the words of

41 are not

"depart from me, ye cursed," but "depart from

me, accursed."
Chap. xxvi.
V. 3.
V.

In the twenty-sixth chapter there


v. 3.

is

no

mention of "the scribes" in

In

v.

26

we
not

26. 27.

ought to read that Jesus took a

" loaf,"

V.
V.

"bread;" in
" the

v.

27 that
v.

He

took "a cup," not

28.

cup

"

and in

28 that

He
as

spoke only

of the "testament," or rather covenant, "in His


blood," without describing
^

it

"new."

In

Comp.

p.

5.

Text of the Neio Testament in


'0.

its successive

Books. 183

43.

V.

43 the change to be made

is

important, as

throwing light on the feelings of the disciples


at the

solemn moment referred

to, for

we

ou2;ht

to read that Jesus

asleep,"

"came again and found them not that He " came and found them
;

asleep again
V.

"

their sleep
first.

had most probably


In
In
v.

55.

continued from the


"

55 the words
v.

V.
-y.

59.
65.

with you" have to be omitted; and in


v.

59

the words " and elders."


of the high priest

65 the horror

comes out more forcibly

when we

notice that the last clause of the verse

ought to read, "behold,


the," rather
V.

now ye have heard


v.

than

" His,

blasphemy;" and in
St.

74.

74 the true reading tells us not that


began
to " curse,"

Peter

but that he " began to bind

himself under a curse," or "to affirm upon oath."


Chav. xxvii.
V. 2.
V.

In the twenty-seventh chapter the name


v.

"Pontius" prefixed in
be dropped.
of the text
is

2 to "Pilate" has to

5.

In

v.

5 an important emendation
" in the

found in the change of

temple" into "into the temple."


the temple here alluded to
into
is

The part
might
w^ithin

of

the Holy place,


enter.

which none but the

priests

Judas therefore could not be

"the

temple," but in his remorse and

despair he

rushed to the entrance and cast into the sacred


in closure his ill-gotten gains, the price of his
V.
'0.

23.

Eedeemer's blood.
substituted
for "

In

v.

23 "he" ought to be
;"

34. 35.

the governor

and in

v.

34

v..

"wine"

for "vinegar."

The

w^hole of v. 35,

184

Effect

p-oduced hy Textual Criticism upon


be omitted
people
is

the

after " casting lots," lias to


V.

and in

42.

V.

42 the scornful cry of

tlie

enhanced

by the true
Israel,"
V.

reading, not " if

He
"

be the King of
of Israel."

but simply

"He

is

the

King

64.

Finally, in v.

64 the words

by night " have

no proper
Chap, xxviii.
to
V. 2.
V.

place.

In the twenty-eighth chapter the changes


few.

which attention need be called are


in V. 9 the words " as they
disciples;"^

In

V.

2 the words " from the door " are to be left


;

9.

out

went

to tell

V.

20.

His

and in v. 20 the word "Amen."


St.

Gospel of
Chap.
V. 2.
i.

Mark.

In the
read in

first

chapter of this Gospel


it is
it is

we must

v.

2 for " as

written in the prowritten in Isaiah the

phets " the words "as

prophet," while the two last words of the verse,


V.

11.

"before Thee,"
" in

must be omitted.

In

v.

11

Thee

V.

14.

" in

am well pleased," takes the place of whom I am well pleased." In v. 14 we


I
" the

find the interesting expression " the Gospel of

God," instead of
V.

Gospel of the kingdom


first

24.

of God."

In

v.

24 the

words of the

man

with the unclean


V.

spirit, "

Let us alone," have


v.

27.

no proper place in the text; and in

27 the

changes to be made on the original lend a

power and vividness

to the
it,

description

not

otherwise possessed by
their

when

the people in

amazement
1

are represented as exclaimp. 112.

Comp.

Text of the

New

Testament in

its

successive Books.

185

ing, "

What

authority
spirits,

is this ? A new teaching With commandeth He even the unclean


!

and they do obey him."


spoken of in
27
lent to

Chap.
V.

ii.

In the second chapter a graphicness similar


to that
i.

7.

is

v. 7,

when

we
V.

read, as required

by the evidence,
?

"

Why

doth this
16.

man thus
we ought

speak

He

blasphemeth."

In

V.

16

to iind the singular expres-

sion,

throwing fresh light upon the different

parties then existing in Jerusalem, "

and when
eat," etc.

the scribes of the Pharisees saw


V.
V.

him

17.

In

V.

17 the two
left out.

last words,

"to repentance,"

20.

must be
receive

In

v.

20 our Lord's words


the true reading,
;

new emphasis by
"
is

''

in

that day

instead of " in those days " and the


applicable to the best authen-

same remark
V.

22.

ticated text of v. 22,

where we ought

to read,

not

"

and the wine

is spilled,

and the bottles

will be marred," but "


V.

and the wine perisheth,

26.

and the

bottles."

Finally, v, 26 is rendered
correct reading, " in the
priest."
is
^

more
days
Chap.
V.
iii.

definite

by the

when Abiathar was high


little
v.

In the third chapter

change

needed.

15.

We

note only that in


is

15 the power of cast-

ing out devils


V.

alone spoken of in the true

18.

text; that in v. 18
zealot," not of

we

are told of "

Simon the

"Simon the Canaanite;" and that

V.

29.

in

V.

29 our Lord's words are not, that he


is

who
"in

blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost


1

Comp,

p. 144.

186

Effect

produced hy Textual C^^iticism iqoon the


is

danger of eternal damnation," but that he


" guilty of

an eternal

sin."

Chap.
V. V.

iv.

In the fourth chapter we are told in In


10 the true reading

v.

1 not

1.

only of "a great "but of "a very great multitude."


V. is

10.

valuable in

its

bear-

ing upon the fragmentary nature of our Gospels,

"asked of Him the parables," not


V.

''the parable."

12.

In

V.

12

we ought to

read, not "lest at

any time

they should be converted, and their sins should

be forgiven them," but, with a special reference


to the point

immediately in hand,

" lest at
it

any

time they should be converted, and


V.

should

40.

be forgiven them."
not "

In

v.

40 we ought to read,
?

How

is it

that ye have no faith

" but,

"Have ye
Chap.
V.

not yet faith ?"


chapter the changes that require

In the
to

fifth

be made are few and unimportant.

We

V.

18.

mention only
us that the
"

that, at v. 18, the Evangelist tells

man just cured came to our Lord not when He was come into," as " when so much He was entering into the ship;" and that at
'0.

36.

V.

36 the relation of one another


is

all

the parties spoken of

to

better brought out

by

attend-

ing to what appears to have been the original

statement of

the

Evangelist,

"

but

Jesus^

heeding not the word that was spoken, saith

unto the
Chap.
V. 2.

ruler," etc.
v.

vi.

In the sixth chapter a true reading in


brings

out

more
1

clearly
p. 158.

that

effect

of our

Comp.

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs. 187
it

Lord's words on the people,


characteristic in St.
liar

upon which

is

emphasis, not "

Mark to dwell with a pecumany hearing," but " the


were astonished."

many
17.

hearing

Him

In

v.

11.
15.

11 the latter

half,

from "verily I say unto you,"

V.

ought to be omitted.
is

The

difficulty of v.

15
;"

at once

removed by reading with the

correct

text, " It is a

prophet as one of the prophets

and the
'0.

still

greater difficulty of the second

20.

last clause of v.

20

is

equally removed, while the

strangely mingled elements in the character of

Herod
out,

are at the

same time powerfully brought

when we read, not " and when he heard Him he did many things," but, as we ought to read, " and when he heard Him he was greatly
V.

38,

perplexed."

In

v.

38 the love of graphic delin-

eation so characteristic of St. Mark, receives


fresh illustration

made
not
Cha2').
V. 4.

of the copula

by the omission falling to be between "go " and " see,"


but " go,
see."
v.

"

go and

see,"

vii.

In the seventh chapter the close of


ought to read simply
" as the

washing of cups,
mention of

and

pots,

and brasen

vessels," all

" tables "


V.

being omitted.

The

latter half of v.

3.

8 ought likewise to be omitted, the verse clos-

ing with "the tradition


V.

of men."
"

At the
"

12.

beginning of

v.

12 the word
it

and

has no

claim to be in the text, and


that,

will be observed
itself

by omitting
V.

it, v.

12 will so connect

with

11 as to render the louo: clause in ita-

188

Effect ijrodiiced hy Textual Criticism


lies at tlie close of

upon

the

the latter verse unnecessary.


;

V.
V.

16.
19.

The whole
V.

of

v.

16 wants authority

and in

19

our Lord's words

end with the word

" draught," after

which the Evangelist makes


" this

the striking and beautiful

he has recorded,
meats clean."
Chap.
viii.

He

comment upon what said, making all

In the eighth chapter any changes required

are
V.

few and unimportant.


In
V.

The

chief are as

21.

follows.

21 the question of our Lord

ought to have the simpler form, "


V.

Do

ye not

26.

yet understand
to be omitted,

"

In

v.

26 the

last clause falls

and the charge of Jesus


cured
while
is
v.

to the

man whom he had


V.

only

"

do not even

37.

go into the town

;"

37, connected with

the preceding verse by


assigns a reason
as

" for "

instead of " or,"

why

the whole world should,


soul,

compared with the


"
for his soul ?"

be spoken of as

valueless,

For what shall a man give in


change

exchange
Chap.
ix.

In the ninth chapter the


quired
is

first

re-

one that
it

may

justly be regretted,

depriving us as
sions of St.

does of one of those expres-

Mark by which

the graphicness of
It occurs
"

his style of narrative is illustrated.


V. 3.

in

V. 3,

where the words


is

" as

snow

must be
ought

omitted, and the loss


sated for
to be
V.

only partially compen-

by the

fact that the

word

" so "

inserted before white, " so as

no

fuller

on

19.

earth can so white them."

In

v.

19 the words

Text of the Nexo Testament in

its successive

Books. 189

of our Lord ought to appear as an answer not

only to the father of the child but to the whole


assemblage, "
V.

He
In

answereth them," not

"

him,
re-

20.

and

saith."

v.

20 the proper reading


" tare
;"

V.

23.

we must " In greatly." 23 we gain by tare him v. read noting the correct words even more than we
quires a stronger

word than

lost in V. 3.

The word
" is

" believe " goes out,

and

" if

thou canst
;

not the direct language

of Jesus

it

is

the taking
" if

up on the part
" in

of

Jesus of the father's


preceding verse.

thou canst
v.

the

The
all

father says,
;"

22, "if
replies,

thou canst do anything


" If
V.

then Jesus

thou canst

things are possible unto

24.

him

that believeth."

In In

v.

24, however,

we

again lose something by the loss of "with


V.

26. 29.

tears "

and
"

" Lord."

v.

26

V.
V. V.

read
to

" the

many "

instead of "

we ought to many ;" in v. 29


42 to insert
verses, v.
v.

42.

omit

and fasting ;" in


go out wholly

v.

44.

"great" before "millstone."

Two

44

vv.

46, 47.

and
last

v, 46,

and in

47 the

word

of the verse, "

fire,"

must be omitted.

Chap.
V.
V.

X.

In the tenth chapter only one or two changes

21. 29.

need be noted.

In

v.

21 the words " take


left out.

up the
correct

cross " are to

be

In

v.

29 the

reading presents

us with a slightly

different order in the

mention of the relatives


" or wife,"
v.

there spoken
V.

of,

while one of them,

50.

has to be altogether omitted.

In

50 we

ought to find

St.

Mark's more graphic touch

190

Effect

produced ly Textual Criticism tqyon

the

in the words, "

and

he, casting

away

his gar-

ment, leapt up, and came to Jesus."


Chap.
V. 8.

xi.

In the eleventh chapter the word


requires to be substituted in
v.

" fields "

8 for " trees,"

and thus
the

its

true rendering can be given to

Greek word
and

translated

in

our version

" branches."

That word properly applies to


true sense
is

leaves,

its

much more

suitable

to the act described.

To have thrown down

branches in the path of the ass on which our

Lord was riding could only have checked


V.

its

10.

progress.

In
''

v.

10

the words
V.
V.

in the

we ought to name of the

read without
Lord."

In

v.

24.
26.

24

it

is

not

" believe that

ye receive," but
;"

" believe that

ye received them

and

v.

26

ought to be omitted.
Chap.
V. 4.

xii.

In the twelfth chapter the true reading of

v,

him they wounded on the head and handled shamefully."


4
is

simpler than in our text, " and

V.

22.
23.

So also in
In
V.

v.

22, "

and the seven


is

left

no seed."
cor-

V.

23 the tautology

removed by the
"

rect reading,
V.

which omits
v.

when they
itself,

shall

27.

rise

;"

and in

27 the increased terseness of

the true text at once


-y.

commends

"ye

31.

greatly err."

In
is

v.

31 a certain amount of
as

embarrassment
the two

removed by omitting,

we

ought to do, any mention of likeness between

commandments spoken
"

of,

and by
In
v.

reading only " and the second


V.

is this."

33.

33 the words

and with

all

the soul " go out

Text of the Neio Testament in


V.

its successive

Boohs. 191
is

43.

and in

v.

43 the vividness of the picture


they which have

preserved by our finding in the best authenticated text, not "


" all
all

cast,"

but

they which are casting into the treasury."

Chap.
V.

xiii.

In the thirteenth chapter a slight change in


v.

3.

the reading of

3 affords a fresh illustration


It is not " Peter,

of the character of St. Peter.

and James, and John, and Andrew asked him


privately," but "Peter asked
V.

him

privately,

8.

and James, and John, and Andrew."

In

v.

the copulas ought to be omitted, together with the words " and troubles," the true readins^ of the verse giving us in English, " For nation
shall
rise
;

against

nation,

kingdom
In

against

kingdom
v.

there shall be earthquakes in divers


v.

11.

places

there shall be famines."

11 the

abuse so often

made
is

of the precept of Jesus

contained there,

greatly obviated

by the
do
"

omission which should be


V.

made

of " neither

14.

ye premeditate."
of

In

v.

14 the words

spoken

by Daniel the prophet" are


v.

to be left out
" flight " in

V.

18.

and in

18 there
to

is

no mention of

what appears
that
it

be

the true text, "

and pray ye

be not in the winter."


is

Chap. xiv.

In the fourteenth chapter the word "for"


substituted for "

to be
vv. 2, 9.
V.
V.

but" at the be^inninq- of


"this,"

V. 2,

and in V. 9 "the," not

ought to pre"
v.

22.

cede the word " gospel."

In

v.

22
;"

Take "

is

to

2o.
24.

be read instead of "Take, eat;" in


is

23 "a cup"
v.

V.

to be substituted for " the

cup

and in

24

192
V.

Effect ^produced hy Textual Criticism


tlie

upon
In

the

27.

word

"

new"

is to

be omitted.

v.

27 we In
v.

are to omit " because of


V.

me

this night."

40.

40 the correct reading has tlie


in
its

same importance

bearing npon the conduct of the disciples

as that
"

abeady noticed
;

at Matt. xxvi. 43, not


"

He

found them asleep again/' but


"

He

again

found them sleeping


is
V.

and the reason given


In
51

not merely that " their eyes were heavy," but


v.

51.

that they were "very heavy."


are to read
"

we

and they laid hold on him," instead


laid hold

of
V.

"and the young men


v.

on him;"
St.

70.

and in

70 the words of the bystanders to


" Galilean/' the

Peter close with


the verse,
"

remainder of
thereto,"

and thy speech agreeth

having no
Chap. XV.
V. 4.

sufficient authority.

In the

fifteenth chapter, the


"

words of Pilate

in V. 4 are not behold how witness against Thee/' but "

many things they how many things


8 the multitude

V. 8.

they accuse Thee

of."

In

v.

is not represented as " crying

aloud

"

but as

" going up," in all probability to the tribunal


V.

14.

upon which
is

Pilate

sat.
''

In

v.

14 "the more"
;"

to be

left
v.

out before

exceedingly

and the
v.

vv.

28,30. whole of

28

is

to

be omitted.

In

30 we
"

ought to read "save Thyself, coming down from


V.

45.

the cross
corpse
"

"

and in

v.

45 we are told of
body."
"

the
"

instead of " the

Chap. xvi.
V. 8.

In the sixteenth chapter the word


to

quickly

is

be omitted in

v.

8.

The whole

of the

vv. 9-20. following passage

from

v. 9 to

the end of the

Text of the Ncvj Testa7nent in


chaj)ter,

its successive

Books. 193

can hardly be regarded as a part of


St.

the original Gospel of

Mark.

It is rather

an addition that had been made

to it at a very

early age, but whether in the lifetime of the

Evangelist or not,

it

is

impossible to

say.
St.

Although, however, not from the pen of

Mark

himself,

it

was

so soon

and

so generally

recognised by the Church as possessed of canonical authority, that no hesitation need


felt at

be
it

allowing
it is,

it

to stand.

AVhen we have
it

where

the changes produced on

by the

application of the principles of textual criticism


are not sufficiently important to require notice.

Before leaving this Gospel


add, that
in
it

we have only
to

to

contains

many

narrative passages

which the present ought


;

be substituted
" straight-

for the j)ast tense

and that the word

way

"

or " immediately" has several times been

lost sight of in the text received

by us. Correcand

tion of the text on these

two points is important,


Mark.

as increasing the vividness of the narration, as illustrating the peculiarities of St.

Gospel of
Chaj).
V.
i.

St.

Luke.

In the

first

chapter of this Gospel the closv. 28,

28.

ing words of

"blessed art thou

V.
V.

29.

women," have
Elisabeth

to be omitted,

and in v.

among 29 when
"

42.

she saw him," as formerly noticed.^


is

In

v.

42

represented as speaking out with "a


1

See p.

6.

194

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism iqjon


ratlier

the

loud cry/'
V.

than with "a loud voice."

66.

In

Y.

66 the last words ought to be connected

with those going immediately before by the


substitution of " for indeed " for " and
'y.

;"

and in

75.

V.

75 the true expression

is

simpler than that

of the English version, " all our days " instead


of " all the days of our life."

Chap.
V. 5.

ii.

In the second chapter


V, 5 of

we ought
The

to read in

Mary
" his

"his betrothed" rather than of


angels' song
"

Mary
V.

espoused wife."

14.^,

in

V.

14 takes the interesting form,


in the highest,
of his

Glory to

God men
V.

and on earth peace among


i.e.

good pleasure,"
In
v.

among men

33.

whom He
list's

hath loved.^
is

33 the Evange-

statement

not that "Joseph and his

mother," but that " his father and mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of
V.

38.

him."

In

v.

38

''

God

"

ought to be substi-

tuted for " the Lord," and " the redemption of

Jerusalem
V.
V.

"

for

"

redemption in Jerusalem."
" in
spirit "

40.
43.

In

V.

40 the words
;

have

to

be omitted

and in

v.

43 a correction similar
made,
" his

to that in v. 33 has to be

parents

"

being substituted for


Chap.
fi'.

"

Joseph and his mother."


little

iii.

In the third chapter In


v. 10, 12, "

change need be
to read

10,12, noted.
14.
"

and 14 we ought
for "

what must we do
V.

what

shall
is

we

do."

V.

17.

In

17 the object of the "fan"

described

when we
1

read with the best authenticated


Coinp. pp. 94, 160.

Text of the

New

Testament in
is

its siieccssive

Boohs. 195
to

text, "
V.

whose fan
floor
;"

in

His hand, thoroughly


v.

19.

purge His
wife "
is

and in

19

*'

his brother's

better established than " his brother

Philip's wife."
Chcqo. iv.

In the fourth chapter


V.

it is

better to read in

u L
V. 2.
V. 4.

"in the wilderness," than "into tlie wilderness," and in v. 2 to omit " aftel-ward." In
1
V.

4 our Lord's reply


shall not live

to

Satan

is

simply " that

man

by bread

alone," the

words
"

that follow having no claim to their place in

the text.
V. 5.

No mention
v.

of a " high

mountain

.belongs to

5,

the simple statement being

that
V. 8.
V.
V.

"

the devil led

all

the

him up and showed him kingdoms/' etc. In v. 8 we must omit


for
;"

18.

"

Get thee behind me, Satan,


"

in v. 18 " to
v.

41. 43.

heal the broken-hearted;" and in

41 the
readino-

V.

word
than

Christ"

In

v.

43 the correct

gives us, " for therefore was I sent " rather


" for

therefore
fifth

am

I sent."

C%a2y. V.
vv.

In the

chapter the words " by him" in


;

15,17. v. 15 are to be omitted


to read " the

and in

v.

17 we ought
to
v.

his
/;.

power of the Lord was present healing them." The opening words of

30.
33.

V.

30 are "But the Pharisees and their scribes;" and in v. 33 by omitting " why do " we have a
statement made, not a question asked.

V.

36.

In v. 36 the changes requiring to be made lend a


fresh light altogether to the verse,

"and he
rendit

spake also a parable unto them


eth a piece from a

No man

new garment and

putteth

196

Effect iwodiiced hy Textual Criticism iqjon the

upon an
with the

old,

else

he will both rend the new,

and the piece from the new will not agree


old."
is

double mischief,

it

will be

observed,

thus spoken of by our Lord.

The

unnatural mixture destroys both the old and


the new, just
as,

in the next verse, the


perish.

new
In

wine
V.

is

spilled

and the old bottles


"

38.

V.

38 the words
to
"

and both are preserved,"


"

are

be omitted, and in like manner the


straightway
in
"
v.

39.

word

39.

Finally,

in
for

this last verse "


" better."

good

ought to be read

Chap.
V.

\i.

In the sixth chapter the


of V. 1,
*'

difficult

expression
first,"

1.

on the second sabbath after the

must yield to the more intelligible " on


V.

a sabbath

10.
17.

day."

In

v.

10

V.

as the other."
"

we ought to leave out " whole In v. 17 we have to substitute


for

a great

company"
In
v.

"the company" of His


"

V.

25
36.

disciples.

25 the word
" full."

now"
v.

has to be
the
to

V.

inserted

before

In

36

two
be

words
V,
V.

" therefore "


v.

and

" also "

have

42.

omitted, and in
V. " it

42 the word

" either."

In

48.

48 we must substitute in the

last clause,

was well

built " for "

it

was founded upon


last

a rock."

Chap.
V.

vii.

In the seventh chapter the


V. 10, " that

words of

10.

had been

sick,"

must be omitted.
disciples"

v.l^.
V.

In
for

V.

19.

11 we ought to read "His "many of His disciples." In v.


"

19 "to the

Lord

ought to be substituted

ibr " to Jesus,"

Text of the
V.
V.

New
v.

Testament in

its successive

Books. 197
"

22.

and in
In
V.

22 for ''Jesus
" for "

"

we should read

He."

28.

28

at the

beginning of the verse

goes out, and the words that follow, " I say

unto you,"

are, "
is

among

those that are born of

w^omen there
V.

not a greater than John."

In

38.

V.

38 the true text makes the meaning


at

clearer,

"
V. V.

and stood behind


42 the ^vords
v.
"

His

feet,

weeping."

In

42.
44.

V.

" Tell

me " must

be omitted

and in
"

44 the

correct text gives us only

with her hair

instead of " with the hairs of

her head."

Chap.

viii.
l:ie

In the eighth chapter


read for
"

"

unto them" ought to


v. 3,

vv. 3, 12.

unto him" in

and in

v.

12

"
V.

they that have heard"


V.

for "
"

they that hear."


to be read for

In

24

"

then he awoke

is

"then he arose." In vv. 26 and 37 "Gerasenes"


is

to

be substituted for
" for

"

Gadarenes," and in

v.

27

a long while had


clothes."

worn no
In
v.

clothes

"

for "

and ware no

45 the

last
"

clause,

"and

sayest thou,

Who
v.

touched

me ?
"

has to be omitted, and in


of o'ood comfort."

48 the words

be be

In

v.

52
;"

" for" ousjht to

inserted after "

Weep

not

and in

v.

54 the
all

clause relating to Christ's putting

them
"

out

has to be removed, for

we

read only,

and

He

took her by the hand and called, saying, Maid,


arise."

Chap.

ix.

In the ninth chapter we ought to read in


V. 1 "

vv. 1, 3.

He

called the twelve together."

In

v.

"

a staff" is to

be substituted for " staves."

In

198
V. 7. V.

Effect 2^Tod2iced hj Textual Criticism iqyon the

V.

7
V.

tlie

words "by him" are


readiiigr
"'

to

be omitted.

10.

In

10 the true
is

o of the last half of

the verse

only

and he took them, and

went
-z;.

aside privately into a city called Beth-

11.

saida."

In

v,

11 we are told, not that Jesus

"received/'
V.
V.

but that he

"welcomed" them.
Son.''
" is,"

35.

In

V.

35 the words spoken out of the cloud


This
is

48.

are, "

my

chosen

In

v.

48 the

last
V.

words
In

are,
v.

the same

not " shall be,"

49.

great.

49 the words of John imply not


"

so

much

that he succeeded in forbidding as


effort to

that he
V.

made the

forbid,

and we
is

50.

were forbidding him."

In

v.

50

"

you"

to

be twice substituted for "us" in the


V.

last clause

and in

v.

57 the word

"

Lord"
" to

is

to

be
"

left out.
is v.

In the tenth chapter


substituted for " on us
"

our feet

to be

in v. 11.

In

15

we

have the same change

made on Matt.

xi. 23,

to make as that already "And thou, Capernaum,

shalt thou be exalted to

heaven
In
v.

Thou

shalt

be thrust down to
read
" I "

hell."

19

we ought to
20 to
to

have given

" for " I give ;" in v.


;"

omit

rather" before " rejoice

and in v. 21

substitute " in the

Holy

Spirit" for "in spirit."

In

V.

35 the words " when he departed" have


to

no claim

be in the text

and in and
"

vv.

39 and

41 "the Lord's" and "the Lord" oucjht to


take the place of
Chap.
xi.

" Jesus' "

Jesus."

In the eleventh chapter, the form of the


Lord's prayer

must undergo considerable mo-

"

Teo:t

of the

New

Testament in
for

its successive

Books. 199
l)e

dification,
V.

several

clauses

ought to

2.

omitted

in v. 2, "
first

which

art in heaven/' to" our,"

gether with the


petition, "
V. 4.

word

and the third


4

Thy

will be done, as in heaven, so in

earth

"

while

we must
evil."

again omit in

v.

V.

29.

"but deliver us from


and

In an

v.

29

we ought
In
v.

to read " this generation is to

evil generation,"

omit "the prophet" after Jonas.

r.

34. 44.

34
eye

" thine eye " has to be substituted for " the


;

V.

"

and in

v.

44

"

scribes

and Pharisees,

hypocrites,"
V.

must be omitted.
"

The

Avords of

48.

Jesus in
"

v.

48 are simply

and ye

build," not

and ye build their sepulchres."


to be,
;"

The opening
that truly

V.

53.

words of verse 53 ought

"And when He
all

was come out from thence


V.

and

54.

belongs to

v.

54

is

" laying wait for

Him,

to

catch something out of His mouth."


Cha2J. xii.

In the twelfth chapter we ought to read


only
" fear

not

"

instead of " fear not therefore"


v.

vv.
V.

7,15. in
29.

V.

7; and in

15 to insert "all" before


v.

" covetousness."

In

29 ''And what ye shall

drink
V.

"

takes the place of " or

what ye
is

shall

31.

drink."

In

v.

31

"

His kingdom"
to be

to be sub" all

stituted for " the

kingdom
is

of God,"

and

before "these things"


'V.

omitted.

In

54.

v.

54 we ought to read
;

" in the

west" for "out

of the west "


V.

and the question of our Lord in


is it

56.

V.

56

is

"

How

that ye do not
?"

know how

to discern this
Clicijp.

time

xiii.

In the thirteenth chapter we ought to read

200
V. 3.
V.
V.

Effect prodticed hy Textual Criticism

wpon

the

in V. 3 "in like
V.
V.

manner"
for "

for "likewise;" in

15. 24.

15

"
"

ye hypocrites"
door
"

thou hypocrite

;"

in

24

for " gate," a reading

by which
than

the connection between that and the following


verse
V.

is

much more

clearly brought out

25.

it

would otherwise

be.

In

v.

25
v.

"

Lord" ought
31 the word

V.

31.

only to be read once.


"

In

hour"
35

is

to be substituted for "

day;" and in
is

V.

35.

V.

we

are to read

"your house

left

unto

you " without the addition


Chap. xiv.

of " desolate."

In the

fourteenth

chapter few
to be

changes

worthy of notice have


V. 3.

made.

At the
The
been

end of

v. 3

"or not" ought to be inserted -in


of Jesus there

the question
V.

recorded.
v.

5.

change of "ass" into


already noticed.^

"son" in
v.

5 has

V.
V.

10.
17.

In

10 "all" has to be
it

inserted before " them;" while in v. 17

has to

be omitted before "things."


V.

Lastly, increased

27.

force

is

given to

v.

27,

when we read
cross.

that the

follower of Jesus

must

bear, not " his " cross

merely, but " his

own "

Chap. XV.
V.

In the fifteenth chapter also few changes


are needed.
last clause, "

17.

In

v.

17 we ought to read in the

and

I perish here with

hunger

?"

V.
V.

22. 32.

In

V.

22 the word "quickly" ought to be added

to " bring forth ;"


" alive" is to

and in

v.

32

" again" after

be omitted.
also calls for little
is

Chap. xvi.

The sixteenth chapter

change.

The most important


^

probably that

Comp. page

9.

Text of the
V.

New

Testament in

its successive

Books. 201
to

9.

falling to

be made in
"

v. 9,

where we ought
but
" that

read not,
V.
V.

that

when ye

fail,"

when

18.

it fails."

In

v.

18 "he that" ought to be sub-

21.

stituted for " whosoever."

In

v.

21

we

are told

not of
V.

"

the crumbs" but

of " the things


;"

which
v.

26.

fell

from the rich man's table

and in

26

the last clause of the verse must be read,


that none

"

and

Chap. xvii.
V. 3. V. 4.
V. 9.

may pass from thence to us." In the seventeenth chapter " against thee"
;

is

to be omitted in v. o

" in a

day"
;

after the
"

second " seven times " in v.

and

him

trow not" after "commanded" in


in this last verse " that servant"

v. 9,

while

is also to

be

V.

21.
23.

changed into
second "lo"

" his

servant."

In

v.

21 the
v.

V.

has to be omitted; and


the

23

ought to have

simpler

reading,
;

" see

there or here," instead of " see here


V.

or see
''

33.

there."

In

v.

33 we are to read not


life."

to

save" but " to gain his

Chap,

xviii.

In the eighteenth chapter

we

shall notice

only two changes, but both important;


first

the
little

as

making
as

intelligible
it

what has

or no

meaning
in v.

stands, the second as add-

ing interesting emphasis to the words.


V.

The

7.

first is

7,

where

for the last clause,

"though
to read

He
"

bear long with them,"


is

we ought
Peter's

and

He long
is

suffering in their case ?"


28,

The

V.

28.

second
" Lo,

in

v.

where

words run,

we have

left

our

own and

followed thee."

Chaj). xix.

In the nineteenth chapter we ought to

202
V. 5.
V.

Effect

produced hj Tcdual Criticism upon


v.

the

omit " and saw him" in


other"
for
"

to read " tlie


;

20.

another"

in

v.

20

" if

these
"

V. 4:0.

shall" for "if these should"


" in this

in v.

40; and

day" instead
In
v.

of "

in this thy day

vv. 42, 45. in v. 42.

45 we are to read only " and

He went
C%a2:>.
V.

into the temple,

and began
"

to cast

out them that sold."


XX.

In the twentieth chapter


substituted for
last
"

a thing"
v.

is
3,

to be

one thing" in

The

words of
"

v. 13,

"when they
with

see him," are

to be left out.

The same
"

thincf is to o

be done

with
ye

come

in v. 14

"

Why

tempt

me

?" in v.
V.

23

and with the greater porwill then only read, "

tion of

30,

which

and
at

the second."

Lastly, in v.

40 the

''

and"

the beginning of the verse ought to give place


to "for."

Chap. xxi.
V. 6. V.

In the twenty-first chapter the word


."

"

here"
v.

ought to be inserted after

left "

in

8.

while ''therefore" in the last clause of

v.

V.

25.

ought to be omitted.
will run,

The

latter part of v.

25

when

the necessary textual correc-

tion has been made, " distress of nations in

perplexity at the roaring of sea and waves


V.

;"

36.

and in
ye

V.

36

we

shall

have to replace "that


"that ye

may be accounted worthy" by may prevail."


Chap>. xxii.
V.
V.

In the twenty-second chapter we are to


v.

14, 18.

omit the word "twelve" in 18 to insert


"

14; and in

v.

from henceforth " after "drink"

V.

204

Effect 'produced hy Tcxtucd Criticism tq)07i the

the Evangelist adds "and they stood sad."


V.

In

42.

V.

42 the words
"

"

and of an honeycomb
In
v.

"

have

V. 4:4:.

no just claim
Saviour says,

to be in the text.

44 the
;

These are
"

my

words,"
is

etc.

and

V. V.
V.

46.
49.
50.

in V. 46 he says,

Thus
etc.

it

written that

Christ should suffer,"


to
"

In

v.
v.

49 we ought
50 to read
;

omit "of Jerusalem;" in


" for " to

towards Bethany

Bethany

"

and in

V.

53.

v.

53 to omit

"

Amen."
St.

Gospel of
C%a2y.
V.
V.
i.

John.

In the

first

chapter of this Gospel


at the

we have
v.

to

16.

change "and"
" for."
"

beginning of
in
v.

16 into only

18.

The great change

18 of

" the

begotten Son
v.

into " the only begotten

God "

19.

has already been discussed.^


to read " sent unto

In

v.

19 we ought

Him from Jerusalem priests


24 the true reading, one emiSt.

V.

24.

andLevites." In

v.

nently characteristic of

John's tendency to

return back on the beginning of his statements,

seems to give
V.

us, "

And
In

they had been sent


v.

27.

from the Pharisees."


"

27 we are to read,

V.

28.

He that cometh after me, whose shoe's In v. 28 latchet I am not worthy to unloose."
even

"Bethany" must take the place of "Bethabara;"


V.

39.

in

V.

39 "ye shall see" of "see;" while the


" for " at

omission of

the beginning of the last


is

clause of this verse,

an

illustration

of a

change needing to be often made in


^

this Gospel,

Comp. page

162.

Text of the Neiu Testament in

its successive

Books.

205

the suppression of the copula,

when

a short

statement
V.

is

added

to

what went
"

before.

In
"
;

41.

V.

41 we ought to read, "Christ" instead of "the


;"

V.
V.

42.
51.
ii.

Christ

in

v.

42

"

John

instead of " Jona


^

and in

v.

51 to omit "hereafter."

CJiaj).

In the second chapter one change only need


be noted, that of
"

hath eaten

me up "

into

V.

17.
iii.

" shall eat

me up "
made
In
v.

in v. 17.

C%02).
V.

In the third chapter a very important change


has to be
in v. 13,
is

13.

where the

last

words

of the verse, "


i\

which
16

in heaven," ought to be

16.

omitted.

we

oug^ht to read, not "His,"


v.

V.

17.

but "the" only begotten Son;" and in


like

17 in

manner "the Son" takes the place


In
v.

of "his

?.".

25.

Son."

25

we

are told not of a question


disciples

between some of John's

and

''the

Jews," but of one between them and " a Jew."


Cha}'). iv.

In the fourth chapter two changes only


be mentioned, but both of them important.

may
The

V.

35.

first

occurs at

v.

35,

where the word "already"

ought to be transferred to the next verse,


bringing out far more beautifully the real force
of our Lord's words,
slight

which

will then run, a

change being made in the form of the

English present tense, " Lift up your eyes and


look on the
harvest
;

fields,

that they are white unto


is

already he that reapeth


fruit

receiving
eternal."

wages and gathering


V 42.

unto

life

The second change


1

is

at v. 42, where,

dropping

Comp.

p. 127.

206

Effect 'prodnccd hy Textual Criticism


tlie

upon

the

words

''

the Christ," the Samaritans only

say that they

know

that " this

is

indeed the

Savionr of the world."

Chap.

V.

In the
also to

fifth

chapter important changes have

be made.

Of the

first
v.

of these, the

V. 3.
V. 4.

omission of the last words of

and of the

whole of
next
is

V. 4,

we have
v.

already spoken.^

The

V.

16.

the omission in

v.

16 of " and sought to


"

V.
V.

30.

slay him."

Then in
"

30 we are to read
;

Him"
verse

44.

instead of " the Father " and, lastly, in v. 44,


"

from God only


ratlier to

at the close of the


"

ought
Chap.
V.

be

from the only One."

vi.

In the sixth chapter the interesting change


to be

11.

made on

v.

11 has been already noticed.^

The confusion
vv.

at present reigning in the pasis

22-24. sage, vv. 22-24,

dispelled

by one

or

two

slight

emendations of the
of "

text, leading to the

omission

when" in v. 22 and of " also " in v. 24. Let us make these, put out the brackets of v. 23,
and note that the "shipping" of v. 24 refers
"other boats" of
V.

to the

v.

23,

and

all is clear.

At

40.

the beginning of

v.

40

" for "

should be intro-

duced instead of
V.

" and,"

thus binding this verse

47.

to that

immediately preceding.

In

v.

47 the

words
V.
V.

"

on

me

"

have to be omitted, as also in


58 we ought to
;"

51.

V.

51 the words "which I will give" coming

58.

after the

word

flesh.

In

v.

read " the fathers " for "


V.

your fathers

and in

65.
^

v.

65 "the Father

"

instead of
^

"my

Father."

Comp. page 16.

Comp. pages

113, 146.

Text of
V.

llic

New

Testament in

its successive

Books. 207

69.

The confession

of v. 69 should run, "

and we

believe and are sure that thou art the

Holy

One
Chap.
V.
V.

of God."

yii.

In the seventh chapter the word "very"


before
"

26.
53.

Christ " in

v.

26 has to be omitted, ^s
v.

well as the whole of

53,

which forms the

opening verse of the story of the


in adultery.
C7ia2J. viii.

woman
most

taken

In the eighth chapter by

far the

interis

esting and important change to be

made

the

exclusion from the text of


of the
vv.

St.

John

of the story

woman taken in adultery, extending from


to the eleventh verse of the chapter.
to the object

1-11.

the
It

first

would be foreign

now

in

hand

to argue the question,

and

it is

enough

to say
all

that this conclusion

is at

length adopted by
is

textual

critics.

At
its

the same time there

so
is

much

reason to believe that the narrative

historical,

and
all

beauty

is

so great, that it

might with
V.

propriety be given in a note.

14
46.

In
be

V.

14 the

last

words of the verse ought

to

read, "

but ye

know
v.

not wdience I come, or


"

V.

whither I go."

In

46 the

and

"

before the
;

last half of the verse is to


V.

be omitted

and in

59.

V.

59 the same has to be said of the concluding

words, " going through the midst of them, and


so passed by."
Chajy. ix.
V.

In the ninth chapter the emendation of the


text

4.

by the best

authorities gives us in

v.

words beautifully pointing out the identifica-

"

208

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon the

tion of the

Eedeemer with His


of

people, "

We

must work" instead


V. 8.

works of

Him that

sent

"I must work the me." In v. 8 we have


for " blind
;

to substitute " a beggar"

"

and

^.11.

in
"

V.

11 to read simply

*'

Go

to

Siloam" for

Go

to the pool of Siloam."

Lastly, the im-

V.

35.

portant emendation has to be


" "

made

in v. 35,
?

Dost thou believe on the Son of


In the tenth chapter
"

Man
?

Dost thou believe on the Son of God

" "

for

Cliai-).

X.

when he

putteth

V. 4.

forth all his


"

own" has

to be read in v.

for

when he

putteth forth his

own

sheep."

In

V.

14.

V.

26.

and know my sheep, and am known of mine," must give way to *'and. know my sheep, and my sheep know me." In v. 26 " as I said
V. 14, "

unto you" at the end of the verse has to be


'V.

38.

omitted.

In

v.

38

"

understand"
"
;

is

to

be

substituted for

" believe

and

" I in the

Father"
Chap.
xi.

for " I in

Him."

In the eleventh chapter not

need be noted.
V.
r.

*'

22.

in V. 22 ought to
I

much change But I know that even now" be changed into " and now
31
"saying,
she goeth"
;

31.

know."

In

v.

gives place
V.

to "

supposing that she goeth


"

41.

and in

v.

41 the words
"

from the place where

the dead was laid

are to be omitted.

Chap.
V. 1. V. 7.

xii.

In the twelfth chapter the words " which

had been dead " in v. 1 ought to be The language of our Lord in v. 7 is not
the day of

left out.

" against
this,"

my

burying hath she kept

Text of the

New
''

Testament in

its successive

Boohs.

209

but
of
V.

that she

may keep
is

this against the

day

my
in

burying."
v.
;

In the words of the Evangeto be substituted for


to read " if

41.
47.

list

41
"

*'

because"
v.

V.

"

when

and

47 ought

any

man

hear

my sayings, and keep them not," instead of " if any man hear my words, and believe not."
In
the thirteenth chapter an important
v. 2,

Chap.
V. 2.

xiii.

emendation occurs in
read,

where we have
In
24 the

to

not

"

and

supper being ended,"


v.

but
state-

V.

24.

*'

supper having begun."


of the Evangelist

ment

is

more graphic than

in our English text.

It is that

Simon Peter
^
.

beckoned to John,
us

"

and saith unto him, Tell


speaketh."

who

it

is

of

whom He

The
v.

answer of Jesus to the beloved disciple in


i;.

26.

26 gains also by the true reading in graphic


power, "

He

it is

for

whom

I shall dip the sop,

and
Chap. xiv.

shall give it to him."


for
"

In the fourteenth chapter the word "

ought to be inserted before the


vv. 2, 4.
V.

last clause of

V.

and

v.

4 ought

to read, "

And

whither I
in other " the
"

12.

go,

ye know the way."


too

In
to

v. 12, as

passages

numerous

mention,

Father
V.

" takes the place of "


is

my

Father

and

16.

in V. 16 the verb " be "

to be substituted for

V.

28.

"abide."

In

v.

28 "because I go unto the


''

Father
?;.

"

ought to be read for

because I said,
v.

30.

I go unto the Father;"

and in

30 we are

told of " the prince of the world " rather than


of
''

the prince of this world."


1

Comp.

p. 145.

210

Effect

produced ly Textual Criticism upon the

Chap. XV.
V.

In the fifteenth chapter


stituted for

"

be

" is to

be snb-

11.

"remain"

in

v.

11,

and no other

change in this chapter need be noted.


Chap. xvi.
V.

In the sixteenth chapter we ought to read

16.

in V. 16

"A
a

little
little

while and ye see

me no

more

" for "

while and ye shall not se

me," and the last words of the verse, " because


V.

23.

I go to the Father," are to

be omitted.

In

v.

23

the change called for

is

important, for

we

ought to read
ask

"And

in

that day ye shall

me
it

nothing.

Verily, verily, I say unto you,


shall ask the Father,

Whatsoever ye
give

He

will

you

in

my

name."
last clause

Chap. xvii.
V. 4.

In the seventeenth chapter the

of V.

is

to

be read not with

its

verb in a

narrative tense, but in a participle, " having


finished the
-y.

work which Thou gavest me

to

11.

do."

In

V.

11 an important change in the

name " has to be introduced, Holy Father, keep them in Thy name which Thou hast given me," " name " belonging to the
connection of "
"

words that follow, not


V.

to those that precede to v. 12, "

12.

and the same remark applies


I
''

While
hast
"

was with them" (omitting *4n the world"),


I kept

them

in

Thy name which Thou

V.

20.

given me." In
is

v.

20 the present tense "believe

to

be substituted for the future "shall

V.

21.

believe;"

and in

v.

21

how wonderfully

is

the meaning of our Lord enhanced, and the

thought of the spiritual nature of His kingdom

deepened in

us,

when we

find

Him

praying

Text of the
for

New
His

Testament in
disciples,

its successive

Books. 211 of
tlie

as

the
''

condition

world's conviction, not

that they also

may be

one in us," but " that they also


that the world

may

be in us,

may

believe that

Thou hast

sent me."

Chap,

xviii.

In the eighteenth chapter we mention

only two changes that are demanded by the


evidence, but

how much
11

the text

is

improved

by them
V.

will be

at once manifest to every

11.

reader.

In

v.

we ought
;

to find not "

Put

up thy sword
V.

into the sheath," but "


"

Put up
20 we

20.

the sword into the sheath

and in

v.

ought

to read, not " in the temple, whither the

Jews
Chap. xix.

always resort," but "in the temple,


all

whither

the Jews resort."

In the nineteenth chapter the words " by

the law" are to be substituted for


vv.*l,Vj.

"by our

law"

in V. 7;

and in

v.

17 the true reading

gives us, "


V.

And He bearing His cross for HimIn


v. 20,

20.

self,

went

forth," etc.

instead of words

leading to the rendering of our English version, the best authenticated text supplies words that

ought to be translated "for the place of the


city

where Jesus was

crucified

was

nigh."
is

Chap. XX.
V.

In the twentieth chapter there


calliuGj for notice to
is

little
v.

16.

chamre

be made.

In

16

"Eabboni"
V.

said to
v.

be "in the Hebrew

19.

tongue;" and in
has to go out.

19 the word "assembled"


"

Chap. xxi.

In the twenty-first chapter " immediately

212
V. 3.

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon


;

the

ouglit to be omitted in v. 3
" in vv.

"

John"

to

be

vv.15,17. substituted for " Jonas


V.

15 and 17; and

25.

the word "


in the text.

Amen "

in v. 25 lias no claim to be

The Acts of the Apostles.


Chap.
V. 8. V.
i.

In the

first

chapter of this book the word


substituted in
v.

"my" ought to be
words
"

8 for

"unto
14 the

14.

me," thus giving us

"my witnesses."
to
is

In

v.

and supplication " are


15 "brethren"
to

be omitted

V.

15.

and in

V.

be substituted

for " disciples."

Chap.
V. 7.

ii.

In the second chapter the words " one to


another " are to be omitted in
in
v. v,

the word

m22,23. "also"
30.

22; and in
is

v.

23 "by the hand


for "

of the wicked "


V.

to

be substituted
v.

by

wicked hands."

In

30

we

are

to

read,

" Therefore being a prophet,

and knowing that


oath to him, that

God had sworn with an


of the fruit of his
V.

loins should sit

on

his

40.

throne."

In

v.

40

"

them
v.

"

ought to be added
is

V.

41.

after " exhort;"

and in

41 "gladly"

to

be

omitted.

Chap.
V.
V.

iii.

In the third chapter the shorter reading

11.

"he"

is

to be adopted in v. 11 for

"the lame
18 we are
all

18.

man which was


to read "

healed;" and in

v.

had showed by the mouth of

the

prophets that His Christ should


i;.

suffer."

In

20.
21.

V.

20

" appointed "

is

to be substituted for
is

V.

"preached."

In

v.

21 "all"

to

be omitted.

Text of the
V. V.

New

Testament in
first

its successive

Books. 213

22.
26.

In
**

V.

22 the

clause ought to read simply


;

Moses truly said

"

and in

v.

26

we

are to

leave out the

word

" Jesus."

Chap.
V. 8.
V. V.

iv.

In the fourth chapter we ought to read in


V.

8 simply of " elders,"

not of " elders of


is

17. 24.

Israel."

In

v.

17 "straitly"
first

to be omitted.

In

V.

24 the

words of the prayer there

given are " Lord, Thou which hast


V.

made

"

its

25.

words in

v.

25 have to be changed

into "

who

V.

27.

by the mouth of our father thy servant David by the Holy Ghost hast said;" and in v. 27, " in
this city" is to

be inserted after "x)f a truth."


is

V.

36.

Lastly, " Joses " in v. 36


"

to

be changed into
" in v. 5 is

Joseph."

Chajy. V.
V. 5. V. V.

In the
to run, "
tlie

fifth

chapter " these things

to be omitted.

The beginning

of v. 16 ought

16.

There came also the multitude from

23.

cities

round about Jerusalem."

In

v.

23

the words " truly " and " without" have no good

claim to be in the text

and the same remark


to be substituted
" for " over-

applies to the mention of " the high priest " in


vv. 24, 34. V. 24.

In

v.
;

34
"
v.

" "

men "
;

is

for " apostles


V. V.

overthrow them

39.

throw

it "

in

39

and

" the

name "

for "

His

41.
vi.

name

"

in

v. 41.

Chap.
V. 8.

In the sixth chapter two changes only need


be noted, that in
v.

8 Stephen

is

said to have

been
V.

full of

"grace and power" rather than of


;

13.

" faith
"

and power
"

"

and that in

v.

13 the word

blasphemous

has no proper place.

214
Chap.
V.

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon

the

vii.

In the seventh chapter we ought to read


in
V.

16.

16

"Emmor
Egypt
"

in

V.
V.

18.
22.

"Emmor,
add

the father of

Sychem" rather than Sychem;" in v. 18 to


;

" over

after " arose

"

in v.
;

22

to insert " his " before "


V.

words and deeds


" after "

" in
;

30.
37.

V. V.

30 to omit

" of the

Lord

angel

" in

V.
V.

37 to omit the
ye hear
"
;

last

words of the verse,


in v.

"

him

48.

shall

"

and

48 to read that the


is

Most High dwelleth not "in what


with hands

rather than " in temples

made made
10 of

with hands."
Chap.
V.

viii.

In the eighth chapter the words in

v.

10.

those

who gave heed


is is

to

Simon

are not, " This

man man
V.

the great power of God," but "This

what
"

is

called the great


" after "

power of God."
"

12.

In
to

V.

12

the things

preaching

ought

be omitted. 18

For "the Holy Ghost" in

V.

18.

V.

we

are to read "the Spirit;" for ''pray

V.

22.
37.
ix.

God"

in v.
V.

22 "pray the Lord;" and the

V.

whole of

37

is

to be omitted.^
last

Chap.

In the ninth chapter the


together with the
left
-first

words of
v.

v.

vv. 5, 6.

part of

6 are to be

out, so that

we
is

shall read '^I

am

Jesus

whom
V. V.

thou persecutest; but

arise," etc.

In

8.

V.

8 "nothing"
in v. 20

to be substituted for
for

"no

20.

man;"
in v.

"Jesus"

"Christ;" and

V.

31.

31

"the church"

for ''the churches,"

together with the corresponding change from " the plural to the singular in the verbs " edified

and

" multiplied."
1

Comp. pp.

16, 136.

Text of the

New

Testament in

its suceessive

Books. 215

Chap.
V. 6.

X.

In the tenth chapter the

last clause, of v. 6,

"he
is

shall tell thee

what thou oughtest


In
v.

to do,"

11.

to

be

left out.

11

we ought

to read

"

and saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel


let

descending as a great sheet, by four corners


V.

12.

down upon
is

the earth;" and in


all

v.

12 the vessel
of four-

described as containing "

manner

footed beasts, and creeping things of the earth,


V.

30.

and fowls

of heaven."

In

v.

30

we must
v.

read

"Four days ago


V.

until this
etc.

hour I was at the In


33 "of the
for " of the

33.

ninth hour praying,"

Lord"
V.

is v.

to

be substituted for "of God;"

48.

and in
Lord."

48 " of Jesus Christ"

Chap.

xi.

In the eleventh chapter the changes to be

made
Chap.
xii.

are hardly of a kind

demanding

special

notice for our present purpose.

In the twelfth chapter one change only need


be noted, that of
*'

to

Jerusalem"

for ''from

V.

25.

Jerusalem" in
xiii.

v. 25.

Chap.

In the thirteenth chapter an interesting


is

change, though the evidence


V.

somewhat

in-

18.

conclusive, should probably be

by the
vv. 19, 20.

substitution of "
for

made in v. 18 he bore them about as


he their manners."
to

a nurse"

" suffered

In vv. 19 and 20 the changes


"

be made lead

to a rendering considerably different

from that

of the authorized text,

and when he had


about

destroyed seven nations in Canaan, he gave

them

their land as

an inheritance

for

216

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon


;

the

four hundred and fifty years

and

after these

things he gave
V.

them judges
v.

until
to

Samuel the
42 we

26.

prophet."
for "

In

26 " us"

is

be substituted

V.

42.

you" in the

last clause.

In

v.

ought to read "


-y.

And when

they were going


v.

45.

out they besought," etc.; and in


tradicting

45 ''con-

and" has

to be omitted.
"

Chap. xiv.

In the fourteenth chapter

you"
"

substituted for " us "


V.

and

"

your

to be " " for our


is

17.

in V. 17.

Any

other changes requiring to be

made
Chap. XV.
v. 7.
'vv.

in this chapter are unimportant.


is

In the fifteenth chapter "you"


substituted for 8
is

to

be

"us"

in v. 7;

and
11

"

them '^^liT
to

8, 11. V.

to be Emitted.

In

v.

we ought

read simply " the Lord Jesus " without the


vv.Vj,!^. addition of " Christ."
to read

In

v.

17 and 18 we are
verse,

from the close of the former

"saith the Lord,


V.

Who made

these

things

23.

known from

the beginning."

In

v.

23 the

letter of the Council begins " the apostles and

the elders, (who are) brethren, send greeting."


V.

24.

In

V.

24 we have
after

first to

omit

"

which went
to read the

out"

"certain,"

and then
your In

latter part, " subverting


V.

souls, to
v.

whom
of

33.

we gave no

commission."

33 we ought

to read "those
V.

who had
"

sent
is

them" instead

34.

" the apostles


V.

and

v.

34
"

to be omitted.

In

u
V.

37.

37 we are told that

Barnabas wished," not

that he " determined to take with


40.

them John;"

and in

v.

40

it

is

"the grace of the Lord"

Text of the Neio Testament in


rather than "the

its successive

Boohs.
to

217

grace

of

God"

which

Paul
Chap. xvi.
V. 7.

is

recommended.
interesting

In the sixteenth chapter an


v.
7,

change has to he made in


Jesus suffered them not."

where we are
13 the writer

to read in the last clause, " but the spirit of


V.

13.

In

v.

of the narrative tells us of the place


river side to

by the
was

which they went

out, that it

one "where

w^ supposed
-

that there was a

place of prayer."
V.

The damsel possessed with


cries in v.

17.

the

spirit

of divination

17 that
" you,"

Paul and his companions show unto


not unto " us," the
V.

way

of salvation

and in

31.

V.

31 the language of Paul and Silas to the

jailer is "believe

on the Lord Jesus," rather


omit
after

than
Chajp. xvii.
V.

"

believe on the Lord Jesus Christ."


to

In the seventeenth chapter we are


"

5.

in V. 5 the words
" Jews."

which believed not "


of the

V.

26.

In

v.

26 two important changes have


first

to be made,

by the omission
''one,"
v.

word

"blood" after
V.

and then
is

of "before" after
to

27.

"times."

In

27 "God"

be substituted

for "the Lord."


Chaio. xviii.

In the eighteenth chapter an important

emendation of the text has to be introduced in


V. 5.

V.

5,

where we are
in

told,

not that Paul was

"pressed
V.

the

spirit,"

but that he was

21.

" earnestly occupied

with the word."


all

In

v.

21

the words " must

by

means keep

this feast

that Cometh at Jerusalem, but" are to be left out.

218

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon

the

Chap. xix.
V. 4. V, V.

In the nineteenth chapter, in


"

v. 4,

we

are to

read,

on Jesus
v.

"

rather

than

"

on Christ

33.

Jesus;" in

33 "they thrust," not "they drew,

37.

Alexander out of the multitude;" and in v. 37


" the town-clerk speaks of Diana not as " your

but as "our" goddess.


Chap. XX.
V. 4.

In the twentieth chapter the words


Asia
"

" into

are to be omitted in v.

4.

In

v.

7 the

word
V. 8.

"

we

" is to

be substituted for " the disfor "

ciples ;"

and again

they

" in v. 8.

In

v.

15 the evidence seems to require the omission


of a clause, for

whose introduction
difficult

into the

text

it

is

extremely

to

account,

"and
Chap, xxi.
V. 8.

tarried at Trogyllium."

In the twenty-first chapter we are to omit

''that
V.

were of Paul's company" in


glorified

v.

in

V. V.

20. 25.

20 to read, ''they
the Lord;"

God"
v.

for

"they

glorified

and in

25 to omit

" that they observe

no such thing, save only."


to

Chap. xxii.
??.

In the twenty-second chapter we ought


v. 9
;

9.

omit "and were afraid" in


death" in
v. 20.

as also

"unto

'yi;.20,30. his

In

v.

30 we ought to read,

"all the council" for "all their council."

Chap, xxiii.
V. 6.

In the twenty-third chapter an interesting


v. 6,

change has to be made in

"

the son of

Pharisees" for "the son of a Pharisee."


V. 9.

At

the

end of

v.

we

miss, in the received text, the

graphic and abrupt termination belonging to


the best authenticated text,
in

which

the

words

" let

us not fight against

God" do not

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive BooJcs.

219

occur, the cry of the scribes being only

"

We
are

find
V.

no

evil in this

man

but

if

a spirit or an
v.

12.

angel hatli spoken by


told

him

."

In

12

we

that

"the Jews," not "certain of the

Jews," banded together.


Chaj). xxiv.

In the twenty-fourth chapter the


v. 6,

latter

w.

6, 7.

part of
of
V. 8,

the whole of

v. 7,

and the

first

part

V. 8.

ought to be

left out, so that

we
v.

pass at

once from
V.

10.

examining

"whom we took" of whom " in v. 8.


is

in

v.

6 to

"by

In

10 "the

more" before "cheerfully"


V.

also to be left out;

24.

and in

v.

24, the

word

" Jesus " is to be

added

to "Christ."

Chap. XXV.

In the twenty-fifth chapter we are told not

of "the high priest," but of "the high priests"


vv. 2, 6.

in

V.

and in

v. 6,

not of "ten," but of "eight

or ten days."
Cha2:>.
V. 7. V.
-y.

xxvi.

In the twenty-sixth chapter we ought to


v. 7,

read in

"accused of Jews" rather than


;"

17.
21.

"accused of the Jews

in

v.

17 to omit "now;"
v. 7,

and in

v.

21 to omit, as was done in

the

definite article before "Jews."

Chap, xxvii.
V. 2.

In the twenty-seventh chapter the words


V.

pf

2 have to undergo

some change,

"

and

entering into a ship of Adramyttium, which

was about to
V. v.

sail
v.

to the coasts of Asia,

we
for

19. 34.

launched."

In

19 "they" has to be substiv.

tuted for "we;" and in


"faU."

34 "perish"
"

Chap, xxviii.

In the twenty-eighth chapter " we

has

220
V. V.

Effect

produced ly Textual Criticism upon


;

the

1.

to take tlie place of " tliey " in v. 1

and the

29.

whole of

v.

29 has to be

left out.

The Epistle to the Eomans.


Chap.
V.
i.

The only changes worth noticing in


chapter are that in
I
v.

this

16.

16

we should

read "For

am not ashamed of the gospel" instead of " For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ;" and
V.

31.
ii.

that in

v.

31,

"implacable" should be omitted.

Chap.

Instead

of the

words

"Behold, thou art


should read

called a Jew," in
if

v. 17, Ave

"But

thou art called a Jew."


is

No
if

other change of

importance
Chap.
'D.

required.
"

iii.

We should read
upon
all" in v.

But

the truth" instead

7.

of "For if the truth" in v. 7;

and the words "and

'0.

22.
iv.

22 should probably be omitted.


reading occurs in this

Chap.

A remarkable various
chapter.
authorities,

A, B, C, ^, with some other ancient


omit "not" in
v.

19, so that

we

should probably read " he considered his ow^n


body,

now become
etc.

dead," instead of " he con-

sidered not,"

Chap.
V. 1.

V.

Except the important change already noticed


as required in v. 1,

no alteration of consequence

is called for in this chapter.^

Chap.
V.

vi.

In
that

this chapter
"

we have simply
it

to notice
v.

11.

our Lord" should be omitted in

11

and that instead of "obey


V.

in the lusts

12.

thereof" in

v. 12,

we

should read "obey the

lusts thereof"
1

Comp.

p. 167.

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs. 221
is

Chap.
V. 6.

vii.

A
at V.

somewhat

interesting change

required

6.

Instead of " that being

dead wherein

we were held"
v.

the words should run

"we
that
flesh,

having died to that wherein w^e were held."


18.

V. 18 should read thus,

"For

know
in

there dwelleth not in me, that

is,

my

any good;
to

for to will is present


is

with me, but

perform that which

good

is not."

Chap.

viii.

The

correct reading of v. 1 has been already

spoken of^
i;.

We

should read

" helpeth our


v.

26.

infirmity" instead of "infirmities" in

2G,

and, as formerly noticed " for us " in the same


verse should be omitted."
^

Chap.

ix.

No

change calling for notice


should read " for them
;

is

required in

this chapter.

Chap.
V. 1.
V.

X.

We
text

"

instead of " for

Israel " in v. 1

and instead of the common

15.

in v. 15

there should be read,

"How
o-lail

beautiful are the feet of


tidings of peace,

them that

brincj

that bring glad tidings of

good things

" It is

somewhat d6ubtful whether


for
v. 17.

we
V.

should substitute "word of Christ"


of

17.
xi.

"word
in

God"
it is

in

Chap.
V. 6.

So, again,
V. 6, "

doubtful whether these words


of works,
is it is

but

if it is

no more

grace:
V.

otherwise work

no

more
v.

work"
22,
for

22.

should
"

not

be omitted.

At
"

toward thee, goodness " read


1

toward thee,

God's goodness."
Comp.
p. 168.
2

comp.

p.

6.


"

222
Chap.

Effect ^produced hy Textual Criticism


xii.

upon

the

The only thing


chapter
is

calling

for notice

in
"

this

that

we should probably read

But"

V.

20.

or
"

"Nay rather/' for "therefore" in v. 20, Nay rather, if thine enemy hunger, feed him."
Instead of " the powers that

Chap.
1).

xiii.

be

"

read

1.

" those that


"

be

" in v. 1,

and omit the clause


" in v. 9.

V. 9.

thou shalt not bear false witness


Instead of the words
rose,
"

Chap. xiv.

For to

this

end Christ

both died, and


V. 9.

and revived, that

He might
" in v. 9,

be Lord both of the dead and living


read simply
lived, that
"

For to

this

end Christ died and

He

might be Lord both of the dead


In
v. 10, for

V.

10.

and of the

living."

"judgment-

seat of Christ" read "judgment-seat of God."

Chap. XV.
V.
'y.

For " as Christ

also received us " read " as

7.

Christ also received


''

you
"

"

in v.

7.

Instead of
v.

8.

Now "

read " For

at the

beginning of

vv.

23,24.

and read as follows in


having had these

vv. 23, 24,

"But now
to

having no longer place in these parts, and

many

years a longing

come
V.

to
;

you, whenever

I take

my journey

into
for

29.

Spain for I hope to see you,"


" fulness of

etc.

In v. 29,

the blessing of the gospel of Christ"

read simply " fulness of the blessing of Christ."

Chap. xvi.
1).

Instead

of " first-fruits of Achaia "

read

5.

" first-fruits of Asia " in v. 5.

For " the churches

of Christ " read " all the churches of Christ


V. v.

16.

in V. 16.

Instead of the words "our Lord Jesus


"

18. 24.

Christ read

our Lord Christ" in


v.

v.

18: and

V.

probably omit

24

altogether.

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs.

223

The First Epistle to the Corinthians.


Chap.
V.
i.

In

this chapter, for " that I


" in v.

had baptized in

15. 20.

V.

15 read " that ye were my own name baptized in my name;" in v. 20, for "the wis-

dom
V.

of this world " read " the


for "require a
;

wisdom

of the

world;"
22.

sign" read "require.


"

signs " in v. 22
"

for "
"

unto the Greeks

read

V. V.

23. 29.
ii.

imto the Gentiles

in v.

23
"

for

" in

His

presence" read "before

God "

in v. 29.

Chap.
V.

Instead of " by His Spirit


Spirit" in
v.

read " by the

10.
13.
iii.

10; for "the Holy Ghost" read


v. 13.
is

V.

"the Spirit" in
For
in
is

Chap.
V. 5.

"

who then
?"

Paul, and
is

who is Apollos ?"


Paul
?

V. 5,

read " what then

and what

Apollos

Chap.
V. 2.

iv.

In

v.

2 insert " here " so as to read "

More{i.e.

over, it is required in

stewards here

on

V. 6.

earth) that a

man

be found faithful ;" in

v. 6,

instead of " that ye might learn in us not to

think of

men
is

above that which

is

written,"

read " that in us ye

may

learn this, not to go

beyond what
Chap.
V. 1. V. 7.

written."

V.

In

v. 1, for

"as not so
read " as
v.

much
is

as

the Gentiles

"

not even

named among among the

Gentiles;" in
stead of the

7 omit "therefore;" and in"

words

For even Christ our passFor our passfor us;"


''

over
over,
V. V.

is

sacrificed for us " read "

even Christ, was sacrificed


12
;

omit

12.

" also" in v.

and likewise omit

therefore"

13.

in

V. 13.

"

224
Chap.
V. 2.

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism ujpon


Insert "

the

vi.

Or"

at the beginning of v. 2,

and

read, "

Or do ye not know ;" and omit entirely

V.

20.

in V. 20 the words " and in your spirit,


are God's," reading the verse thus
;

"For

which
ye

were bought with a price therefore glorify God


in your body."
^

Chap.
V. 3.

vii.

Instead of the words "due benevolence" in


V.

3 read "her due;" for "that ye


;

may

give

yourselves to fasting and prayer


V. 5.

and come

together again" in
free for prayer,

v.

5 read, " that ye

may

be
;

and may be together again


"but"

instead of "for" read


V. 7. V.

at the beginning

of V. 7; for the words "the unbelieving wife is


sanctified

14.

by the husband" read


is

in

v.

14
the

"the unbelieving wife


the law" in
viii.

sanctified

in

(believing) brother ;" for " the wife is


V.

bound by
bound."

39.

v.

39 read simply

" a wife is

Chap,
V. 2.

In

v. 2, for

"think that he knoweth anything,


"

he knoweth nothing yet" read

think that he
not yet
;"

knoweth anything, he knoweth


V. 4.
V. 7.

it

in

V. 4, for "

none other God but one," read


7,

"

no

God but

one," in v.

for

"

some with con-

science of the idol," read, "

some through cus-

tom with the

idol,"

as the text supported

by
an

the oldest authorities.

Chap.

ix.

In

v. 1
?"

read, "

Am I not free
"

am

I not

vv. 1, 20.

apostle

in

v.

20 insert

not being myself

under the law," and read " to them that are


under the law, as under the law, not being
1

Comp.

p. 113.

Text of the
V.

New

Testament in

its successive

Books. 225

23.

myself under the law;" in


this "

v.

23, for

"And

read
V.

''

And

all things."

Chap.
vv.

X.

In

10 omit "also" and read, "as some

10,11. of

ensamples," read
V.
V.

them murmured ;" in v. 11, instead of "for "by way of figure:" in v.


v.

23.
24.

23 omit "for me," and read "all things are


lawful ;" in

24 omit
:

"

every man," and read

the verse thus


V.

" Let

no

man
;"

seek his own,


v.

28.

but his neighbour's good

in

28, omit the

words repeated from

v.

26, " for the earth is

the Lord's, and the fulness thereof."


C%a2x
xi.

We
liord's

give at length the solemn account of the

Supper contained in

this chapter, as it

should stand in the corrected text.

m 23-29. sage

vv. 23-29

wiU run

as follows:

The pas"For I

received from the Lord that which I also deli-

vered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, in the


night in which

He was

betrayed, took bread

and when

He

had given thanks,


is

He

brake

it,

and

said.

This

my body which is for

you: this

do in remembrance of me. After the same manner the cup


also, after

they had supped, saying.


this

This cup

is

the

new covenant in my blood:


it,

do, as oft as

ye drink

in

remembrance of me.
and drink
till

For as often as ye eat


come.

this bread,

the cup, ye shew forth the Lord's death

He

Wherefore, whosoever eateth the bread,

or drinketh the cup of the Lord, unworthily,


shall be guilty of the

body and the blood of

the Lord.

But

let

man examine himself, and

226

Effect ^produced hy Textual Criticism topon the

so let

him

eat of the bread,

and drink of the


he

cup.

For he that eateth and drinketh, eateth


to himself, should

and drinketh judgment


discern not the body."

Chap.
t'V. 2,

xii.

In

v.

2 insert " when," and read "

Ye know
12 omit
of the

12. that

when ye were
and read

Gentiles;" in
" all

v.

" one,"

the

members

body."

Chap.
V. 3.

xiii.

In

v. 3,

instead of the words " though I give

my body
boast,"

to

be burned," the oldest manuscripts

read "though I give

my

body that
There
is

may

which some

prefer.

just a

difference of one letter in the Greek.


Cha2y. xiv.
r. 18, 25.
V.

In

v.

18 omit "my," and read simply "I


v.

thank God;" in
the beginning
;

25 omit "and thus" at


v.

35.

in

35

instead

of

" for

women"
Chap. XV.
-y.

read "for a woman."


20,

In

v.

omit

"

and become," and read


first-fruits
is
;"

20.

" risen
4:4:,

from the dead, the

in v.

V. 4,4:.

Instcad of the words " There

a natu-

ral body,

and there

is

a spiritual body" read


is

" If there is
V.

a natural body, there


v.

also a

47.

spiritual

;"

in

47 omit the words

" the Lord,"

and read "the second


V.

man
"

is

from heaven;"
"

55.

in V. 55 substitute

"0

and read the verse


thy sting
Chap. xvi.
?

thus

death" for

grave,"

death,
is

where
?"

is

death,

where

thy victory

In

v. 7,

instead of " but I trust," read " for


in v. 22

w.

7, 22.

I trust;"
Christ,"

omit the words "Jesus

and read

" If

any

man

love not the

Lord, let

him

be," etc.

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Books.

227

The Second Epistle to the Corinthians.


Chap.
-zw.
i.

In

V.

12 for " simplicity and godly sincerity"

12,18. read "holiness

and godly sincerity;"

should be read as follows


ful,
V.

is

v.

18

"

But God

is faith-

that our
is

word

to

you

20.

V.

20

to

be read

thus "For

not yea and nay;"

how many

soever be the promises of God, in

Him

is

the
for

Yea
Chap.
V.

wherefore also by him

is

the

Amen,

glory unto
ii.

God by

us."

In

V.

10 read as follows

"to
also;

whom

ye

10.

forgive anything, I forgive

for indeed

what I have
thing, for

forgiven, if I have forgiven anyit

your sakes did I forgive

in the

person of Christ."

Chap.

iii.

Instead of the words " not in tables of stone,

but in fleshly tables of the heart," read

" not

on tables of
hearts."

stone,

but on fleshy tables, on

Chap.
V. 4.
V. 6.

iv.

Omit the words "imto them"


instead of the words in v.
6, "

in v. 4, and

read, "that the light should not shine forth;"

For God, who


"

commanded

the light to shine out of darkness,

hath shined in our hearts," read

For

it is

God

who
Chap.
V.

said.

The

light shall shine out of darkness,

that shined in our hearts."

In

v. 5

omit "also," and read

"who gave
v.

vv. 5, 12.

unto us the earnest of the Spirit;" in

12

omit
V.

" For,"

and read

"

we

are not

recommend-

17.

iiig;" in V.

17 omit "all," and read "behold

228
V. 21.

Effect ^produced hy Textual Criticism

upon

the

they are become new:" in

v.

21 omit "For,"

and read
etc.

"

Him who knew

not sin

He
v.

made,"

Chap.
V.

vi.

Instead of " and" read " or" in

14, " or

14.

what communion." No further change worthy


of notice
is

required in this chapter.

Chap.

vii.

Instead of the words " but that our care for

you in the sight of God might appear unto


V.

12.

you"
of

in V. 12, read

"but that your

zeal for us

might be made manifest unto you in the sight

God;"

for

the words "Therefore


:

we

are

comforted in your comfort


ingly the more joyed
V. 13.

yea,

and exceed-

we

for the joy of Titus,"

in V. 13, read " For this cause

we

are comforted,

but in our comfort we joyed the more exceedingly for the joy of Titus."

Chap.
V. 4.

viii.

Instead of the words

"

praying us with
receive the

much
and

entreaty that

we would

gift,

take upon us the fellowship of the ministering


to the saints"

in v. 4, read " Praying of us

with

much

entreaty the grace and the partici;

pation in the ministering to the saints


V.
v.

"

in v.

12.
19.

12 omit the words "a man," and read "that

which
"

it

hath
is

;"

in v. 19, instead of the words

which

administered by us to the glory of

the same Lord, and declaration of your ready

mind," read " which

is

administered by us to

the glory of the Lord, and to further our zeal."

Chap.
V. 4.

ix.

Omit the words


" in this

''

confident boasting " in


;"

v. 4,

and read

confidence

instead of " both

"

Text of the
V.

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs.

229

10.

minister and multiply" in minister and multiply."

v. 10,

read "shall

Chap.
V. 7.

X.

Omit the word


and read
is

"

Christ's" at the

end of

v. 7,

"

even so are we."

No

further change

required in this chapter.


Insert " the holiness" in
v. 3,

Chap.
V. 3.

xi.

and read

"

from

the simplicity and the holiness that are towards


Christ " for the words " no
;

man

shall stop

me

of this boasting in the regions of Achaia," in


V.

10.

V.

10, read " this boasting shall not

be shut

against

Chap.
V. 9.
V.

xii.

Omit

me in the " my" in

regions of Achaia."
v. 9,

and read

"

My grace

is

sufficient for thee, for strength is

made

perfect

11.

in weakness;" omit "in glorying" in v. 11,

and read

" I

am become
v.

a fool " for the words

"Again, think ye that we excuse ourselves


V. 19.

"Of a long time have ye been thinking that we excuse ourselves


unto you?" in
19, read

unto you."
Chap.
V. 4.

xiii.

Instead of

the

words

"

though
v. 4,

He was
read "for
;

crucified through

weakness" in
"

indeed
V. 7.

He was

crucified through
jSTow I

weakness

in V.

7, for

the words

pray to God,"

read "

Now we

pray to God."

The Epistle to the Galatians.


Chap.i.
V.
V.

Omit "for"
pleased

in v. 10,

and read "if I yet

10.

men;"
v. 18,

instead of the words ''to see

18.

Peter" in

read "to become acquainted

with Cephas."

"

230
Chap.
V.

Effect jproducecl ly Textual Criticism

upon

the

ii.

Instead of " But


V. 11,

11.

read " But

when Peter was come in," when Cephas was come; " for
all,

the words " I said unto Peter before tliem


If thou, being a Jew, livest after tlie

manner

of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews,


pellest
V.

why comCephas
do the
the

thou the Gentiles to live as do the


"

14.

Jews

in v. 14, read " I said unto


all,

before

them

If thou beino' a Jew, livest of Gentiles,

after the

manner
is

and not
"
?

as

Jews,

how

it

that thou

compellest

Gentiles to live as do the Jews

Chap.
V. 1.

iii.

Omit the words


the truth," and the verse as
"

" that

you should not obey


" in v. 1,

follows

among you
"

and read

foolish Galatians,

w^ho hath bewitched you, before w^hose eyes

Jesus Christ was evidently set forth crucified?"


instead of the words "the
V.
V.

man

that doeth

12.

17.

them in v. 12, read he that hath done them;" omit the w^ords "in Christ" in v. 17,
"

"

and read
V.

" the

covenant already confirmed by


v. 29,

29.

God

"

omit

"

and " in

and read

"

And if

ye be

Christ's,

then are ye Abraham's seed,

heirs according to the promise."

Chap.
V. 6.
V.

iv.

Instead of "your hearts" read " our hearts


in V. 6
V.
7,
;

omit the words " through Christ


"

" in

7,

and read

and

if

a son, also an heir

through God;" instead of the words,

"And
ye

my
V,

temptation which was in

my

flesh

14.

despised

not" in

v.

14,

read
flesh

"And your
ye despised

temptation which was in

my

Text of the
V.

New
"
;

Testament in

its successive

Books. 231
" these

24
26.

not

omit " the


are

" in v. 24,
:

and read
"

women
V.

two covenants

omit the words


"
is

" of us all" in v. 26,

and read

But Jerusalem
our mother."

which
Chap.
V. 1.

is

above
"

is free,

which

V.

In .v. 1 read
us free
:

For liberty Christ hath made


;

stand fast therefore, and be not en"

tangled again in the yoke of bondage


V.

for

16.

"Walk
by the
V. 19.
vi.

in the Spirit" in
Spirit
;

v.

16, read
"

"Walk

"

omit the word

adultery" in

V.

19.

Chap.
-y.

Instead of the words " neither circumcision


availeth anything"
in
v.

15.

15, read "neither

circumcision

is

anything."

The Epistle to the Ephesians.


Chap.
i.

The reading

in v. 1
"

was formerly noticed


wherein
"

^
:

instead of the words


V. 6.

He
in

hath made
v.

us accepted in the

Beloved

6,

read

"which He
18.

freely bestov/ed

upon us in the

Beloved;" for "the eyes of your understandV.

ing" in

v. 18,

read "the eyes of your heart,"


"

and omit
verse.

"

and

before "

what

"

in the

same

Chap.
V.
V.

ii.

Instead of " Himself" read "


insert
V. 19.

Him"

in v. 15

15.
19.
iii.

"

ye are

"

before " fellow-citizens " in

Chap.

Instead of the words "


tion

How
me

that

by

revela-

He made known
read
"
^

unto

the mystery" in

V. 3.

V. 3,

that

by

revelation the mystery


168.

was

Comp. page

232

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon


to
v.

the

made known
V. 8.

me;"
8,

for

"preach among the

Gentiles "

in

read " preach unto the

Gentiles;" instead of "fellowship of the

mysthe

9.

tery" in

v.

9,

read

" dispensation

of

mystery," and

omit the words


;

Christ" in the end of the verse


V.

"by Jesus omit " of our

14.

Lord Jesus Christ

" in v. 14,

and read simply

"For
21.

this cause

Father;" instead
V.

bow my knees unto the of "Unto Him be glory in

the church
"

by

Christ Jesus " in v. 21, read

Unto

Him

be the glory in the church and in

Christ Jesus."

Chap.
V.

iv.

Instead of "in you all" in

v.

6, 9,

read sim-

ply "in all;" omit "first" in

v.

and read

simply "descended into;" omit "other" in


V. 17,

and read

" as

the Gentiles walk."


v. 2,

Instead of "hath loved us" in

read

"hath loved you;"


V. 5,

insert
this

"being aware" in
;"

and read "For

know, being aware


9,

for "Spirit" substitute "light" in v.

and
for

read

"For the
"fear of

fruit
v.

of the
17, read
v.

light
"

is;"

"understanding" in
for

understand;"

God"
"

in

21,

read "fear of
v.

Christ;" omit the Avord


V.

"submitting" in

22.

22,

and read

wives to their
;"

own husbands,
v.

as unto the
V.

Lord

instead of the words " and


23, read

23.

he

is

the Saviour of the body" in

" Himself the Saviour of the

body;" instead
it

of " that
V.

He

might present

to

Himself a

27.

glorious church," in v. 27, read " that

He might

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Books.

233

Himself present to Himself the chnrcli


V.

glori;"

29.

ous

;"

for " the

Lord" in

v. 29,

read

*'

Christ

omit the words " of His flesh and of His bones"


V.

30.

in V. 30, and read simply, " because

we

are

members
Cha2i. vi.
V. 9.

of

His body."
"

Instead of the words

knowing that your


9,

Master

also

is

in heaven/' in v.

read

"

knowis

ing that both their Master and yours

in

heaven
V.

;"

for the w^ords

" asrainst

the rulers

12.

of the darkness of this world" in v. 12, read " against the rulers of this darkness."

The Epistle to the


Chap.
V. V.
i.

Philippians.
v.

Instead of "with the fruits" in

11, read
v.

11.

"with the
and read
17.

fruit;"

insert

"of God" in
of

14,

14.

" to speak the

word

God

;"

trans-

w. 16,

pose vv. 16, 17, and read "the one from love,

knowing that
Gospel
;

am

set for the defence of the

the other preach Christ, from con-

tentiousness, not sincerely,

thinking to raise
;"

up
V. 28.

affliction

to

my

bonds

instead of " but

to

you

of salvation" in v.

28,

read " but of

your salvation."
Chap),
V. 4.
V. 5.
ii.

Insert " also" in

v.

4,

and read

"

on the

things of others also;" for "let this


in

mind be
this

you" in

v.

5,

read "

all of

you have

mind
Chap.
V. 3.
iii.

in you."

Instead of the words " which worship


in the spirit" in v.
3,

God

read " which w^orship

in (or

"by") the

Spirit of

God;" instead of

234
V.

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon


v. 11,

the

11.

the words " of the dead " in

read ''from

the dead;" instead of the words, ''nevertheless,

whereto we have already attained,


rule, let

let

us

walk by the same


V. 16.

us

mind the same

thing

" in v. 16,

read " nevertheless, whereto

we have
[course]."

attained, let us

walk by the same

Chap.
V. 13.

iv.

Instead of the words " through Christ which

strengtheneth

me"

in v.

13, read
;

"through
be with
spirit."

Him
V.

which strengtheneth me

" for "

23.

you

all" in v. 23, read " be

with your

The Epistle to the Colossians.


Chap.
V. 6.
i.

Omit
"which
it is

"
is

and," and read as follows in

v.

6,

present with you, as in all the world;

bringing forth fruit and increasing even

V. 7.

as in

you

since," etc.

omit
;"

" also"

in v.

7,

and read
for us

" as

ye learned

and in the same

verse, instead of "


;

who

is

for you," read "


"

who

is V. 14.

"

omit " through His blood

in v.

14,

and read " In

whom we
read

have the redemp;

tion,
V.
V.

the remission of sins

"

for

" in
;

my
read

24. 28.

sufferings " in v. 24,


" perfect

" in sufferings

" for

in

Christ

Jesns "

in

v.

28,

" perfect in Christ."

Chap.

ii.

Omit "of the

sins" in v. 11,

and read "in


"

u
V.

11.

the putting off of the body of the flesh;" instead of " having forgiven

you

all trespasses

13.

in V. 13, read

"having forgiven us

all

our tres-

passes

;"

instead of the words " intruding into

"

Text of the Neiv Testament in


V.

its successive

Books.
v.

235
18,

18.

those things which he hath not seen" in

read " dwelling on (insisting on) the things

which he hath
Chap.
V.
iii.

seen."

Instead of " let the peace of

God

rule in

12.

your hearts" in

v.

1%

read "

let

the peace of

; Christ rule in your hearts " omit " and " in

V. 17.
V.

V. 17,

and read
;

" giving
"

thanks to God the


in v. 18,

18.

Father by him

omit

"own"

and
;

read " submit yourselves to your husbands


instead of " this is well pleasing to the
V.
V.

Lord"

20. 22.

in V. 20, read "this

is

well pleasing, in the

Lord

"

instead of " fearing

read "fearing the Lord;" omit


v.
V.

God" in v. 22, "and" in v.


(or

23.
24.

23,

and read "whatsoever ye do;" omit "for"

in V. 24,

and read "ye serve


;"

"serve ye")

the Lord Christ


V.

instead of "

But he that

25.
iv.

doeth

" in v. 25,

read " For he that doeth."

Chap.

Instead of the words " that ye


perfect

may

stand
in

and complete in
read "that ye

all

the will of

God"

V.

12.

V.

12,

may
you

stand perfect and

fully assured in all the will of


V.

God;"
in
v.

for "that

13.

he hath a great zeal


he hath

for

"

13,

" that

much

labour for you."

The First Epistle to the Thessalonians.


Chap.
V. 2.
i.

Omit the words " of you" simply " making mention

in
in

v. 2,

and read

our prayers."
notice in
this

No
Chap.
ii.

other

change

calls

for

chapter.

Insert

"And"

in v. 13, so as to read

"And

236
V. 13.
V.

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon the

for this cause;"

omit "Christ" in

v. 19,

and

19.
iii.

read "our Lord Jesus."

Chap.
V. 11. V. 13.

Omit again "Christ"


simply "our Lord Jesus
"Christ" in
v. 13,

in

v.

11,

and read

;" in like

manner, omit

and read simply "the coming

of our Lord Jesus."

Chap.
V. 1.

iv.

Insert "as ye also are walking" in

v. 1,

and

read "to please God, as ye also are walking, ye

would abound yet more


V. 13.

;"

for "

But
"

would

not" in
V.

v. 13,

read "But
v. 5,

we would

not."

Chap.
V. 5.

Insert " For" in


all."

and read

For ye are
in
this

ISTothing

else requires

notice

chapter.

The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians.


Chap.
V. V.
i.

Instead of the words " in


lieve" in
v. 10,

all

them that

be-

10. 12.

read "in
v. 12,

all

them that believed;"

omit "Christ" in
the

and read simply "that

name

of our

Lord Jesus
"
;"

may

be."
2,

Chap.
V. 2.

ii.

For

" the

day of Christ

in v.

read

"

the

day of the Lord


V. 4,

omit the words "as God" in

V. 4.

and

read, "so that


v. 8,

he sitteth;" instead of

V. 8.
V.

"the Lord" in
for

read "the Lord Jesus;"


v. 11,

11,

"God

shall send

them" in

read

"God
v. 12,

sendeth them."
Chap.
V. J2.
V.
iii.

For "by our Lord Jesus Christ" in


read "in the Lord Jesus Christ
;"

omit "and"

14.

in V. 14, and read " note that man, have no

company with him."

"

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs.

237

The First Epistle to Timothy.


Chap.
V. 2.
i.

For "God our Father" in


tlie

v. 2,

read "

God

Father;" no other change

calls for

remark
in

except those formerly mentioned.

Chap.

ii.

Nothing
chapter.

requires

to

be

noticed

this

Chap.
V.

iii.

Omit the words, "not greedy


in V.
3,

of filthy lucre"

3.

and read "no

striker,

but patient;" no

other change requires notice except the very

important one in
Chap.iY.
V. 6.

v.

16, formerly considered.^

Instead of "Jesus
"Christ Jesus
V. 12,

Christ" in

v.

6,

read

"
;

omit the words "in spirit" in


charity, in faith," etc. "
is

V.

12.

and read "in

Chap>. V.
V.

Omit the words


read simply " this

good and

"

in

v. '^5,'

and
;

5.

acceptable before
or " in v. 16,

God

V.

16.

probably omit "


" If

man

and read
;

any woman that believeth have widows


of

V.

21.

instead

"Jesus Christ"

in

v.

21,

read

" Christ Jesus."

Chap.
V. 5.

vi.

Omit the words


self " in v. 5,

" from such

withdraw thy-

and end the verse with "gain,"


is

("supposing that godliness


V.

means

of gain;")

12.

omit "also" in

v. 12,

and read simply "where-

unto thou wast called;" omit the words "the


V.
V.

17. 19.

living" in v. 17, and read simjjly "but in God;"

instead of " lay hold of -eternal

life "

in

v.

19,

read "lay hold of the true


1

life."

Comp.

p. 141.

238

Effect ^produced hy Textual Criticism

upon

the

The Second Epistle to Timothy.


Chap.i.
V. 1.

Instead of "Jesus
" Christ Jesus,"
V. 10.

Christ"

in

v.

1,

read

and make the same change in

V.

10.
ii.

Chap.

Instead of the words "

Thou

therefore en-

dure hardness,
V. 3.

as

good soldier of Jesus


;" for v.
7,

Christ " in

v. 3,

read " Endure afflictions with

me
V.

as a

good soldier of Christ Jesus

"the
read
for

7.

Lord give thee understanding" in

"the Lord shall give thee understanding;"


V.

11. 13.

" if

we deny him

"

in v. If, read "if

we

shall

V.

deny him;"
"for

insert

"for" in

v.

13,

and read
instead
of

he cannot deny himself;"


in
v.

V.

19.

"the name of Christ"

19, read

"the

v.

21.

name
read
iii.

of the Lord;" omit

"and"

in v. 21, and

" sanctified,

meet

for the master's use."

Chap.

No

change requires to be noted in

this

chapter.

Chap.
V. 1.

iv.

Omit "therefore"
Jesus (instead of

in v.

1,

and read

as fol-

lows, " I charge thee before


'

God and

Christ
'),

the Lord Jesus Christ

who

shall judge the quick

and the dead, and


(instead

by His appearing and His kingdom "


of " at
V.

His appearing
v.

").

For

" the

Lord

re-

14.

ward him," in
reward him."
of v. 18,

14, read
"

" the

Lord

shall

Omit

and "

at the beginning

V.

18.

and

read " the Lord."

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs.

239

The Epistle to
Chap.
V. 4.
i.

Titus.
v. 4,

Instead of " the Lord Jesus Christ," in


read
"

Christ Jesus."

Nothing more requires

to be noted in this chapter.


Cho2^.
ii.

Omit
with
"

" sincerity " in v. 7,


;"

and end the verse

vv. 7, 8.

gravity

for " to say of you/' in v. 8,


;"

read " to say of us


V.

instead of " our Saviour


13, read

13.

Jesus Christ," in
Christ Jesus."

v.

"our Saviour

Chap.

iii.

No

change required

in this chapter.

The Epistle to Philemon.


Instead of the words " and to our beloved
V. 2.

Apphia," in
ter."

v. 2,

read " and to Apphia our


"

sis-

V. 7.

Eor the words


''

Eor we have

"

in v. 7,

read
V.

Eor I had."
v.

Instead of the second " in

20.

the Lord," in

20, read " in Christ."

The Epistle to the Hebrews.


Chap.
i.

Instead of the words " a sceptre of righteousness


is

the sceptre of
etc.

Thy kingdom,"

in v.

vv. 8, 3.

8,

read

"

the sceptre,"

V. 3 of this chapter

was formerly noticed, and nothing else demands


our attention.^
Chajy.
V. 7.
ii.

Omit (probably) the words

"

and didst

set

Him

over the works of

Thy

hands," in
in
v.

v. 7.

V. 9.

The remarkable various reading


formerly considered.^
1

was

Eor the words "par2

Comp.

p. 14.

Comp.

p. 169.

240
V.

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon


v.

the

15.

takers of flesh and blood," in takers of blood and


flesli."

/^ 15/ read "par-

Chap.
V. 1.

iii.

Omit the word


simply
" the

"

Christ " in v.

1,

and read
unto

Apostle and High Priest of our

profession, Jesus."
V. 6.

Omit (perhaps)
and

" firm

the end," in
"

v.

6,

close the verse

with

hope."

Instead of the words, " your fathers


v. 9,

V.

9.

tempted me, proved me," in


fathers tempted

read " your

by proving

(me)."

Chap.

iv.

In

this chapter a

very remarkable various

reading occurs.
V. 2.

Instead of the

common

text,

"

but the word preached did not profit them,

not being mixed with faith in them that heard


it,"

in

V. 2,

we

are compelled

by greatly pre"

ponderating evidence to read,

but the word

of hearing did not profit them, since they were

not mingled by faith with those that heard

it."

Chap.
V. 4.

V.

Instead of the words


of God," in v. 4, read

"

but he that

is

called

"but being called of


calls for notice in this

God."
chapter.

Nothing more
"

Chap.
V.

vi.

Omit the words


and read
change
is

and laboar

of,"

in

v. 10,

10.

"

your work, and the love."

No

other

required.

Chap.
V. V.

vii.

Instead of the words


hood,"
in
v.

"concerning priest" after the order of

14.
21.

14,

read " concerning priests."

Omit (probably) the words


Melchizedek," in
v. 21,

and end the verse with

V.

26.

" for ever." "

Insert " also " in v. 26, and read


us."

For such an high priest also became

Text of the

New

Testament in
in v.

its successive

Boohs.

241

Chap.
V. 2.
V. 4.

viii.

Omit "and"

2,

and read "the Lord


v. 4, read, " If,

pitched, not man."


if

Instead of the words " For


there-

he were on earth," in
he were on earth
" priests,"
;"

fore,

in the

same verse omit


" there are those

the word
that
V.

and read

offer."

Instead of the words " teach

11.

every

every
V.

man his neighbour," in v. 11, read "teach man his feUow-citizen." Omit the words
iniquities," in v. 12,

12.

"

and their

and read sim" so also

ply " their sins will I remember no more."


Chaj). ix.
V.

Insert " also " in

v.

28,

and read

28.

the Christ."

Nothing

else calls for notice.


" in v. 8,

Cha'p. X.
^;.

Instead of " sacrifice and offering

8.

read "sacrifices and offerings."

Omit the words


" to

-y.

9.

"0

God," in

v. 9,

and read simply

do Thy
"

V.

15.

wiU."

Omit
lie

" before " in v. 15,

and read sim-

ply " after


V.

had

said."

For the words,


read
"

and

16.

in their minds," in

v. 16,

and in their

mind."
V.

Instead of
bonds," in

"

ye had compassion of
;"

me

34.

in

my

v. 34,

read " ye had compasin the

sion of those in bonds

same verse omit

the words "in heaven," and read, "knowing that

ye yourselves have a better and an enduring


substance."
V.

Instead of the w^ords "

38.

just shall live

by

faith," in v. 38,

Now the read " Now

my just
Cliap. xi.
V. 3.

one shall live by

faith."

Instead of the words " so that things which


are seen w^re not

made"

in v. 3, read " so that

that which
"

is

seenw^as not made;" instead of


for a city

For he looked

which hath founda-

242
V. 10.

Effect

produced hy TextvM Criticism upon the


v.

tions" in
city

10, read

"For he looked
;

for the

which hath the foundations


"
"

"

omit the
v.

V.

11.

words

and was delivered of a child" in

11,

and read simply


seed,
V. 13.

received strength to conceive


etc.
;

even when,"
" having

omit the words " and


v.

were persuaded of them" in


simply
greeted
seen"

13,

and read
afar,

them from
Egypt."

and

them;"

for "treasures in

Egypt" in

V.

26.
xii.

V. 26,

read

" treasures of

Chap.
V. 7.

Instead of the words " If ye endure chastening,"

in v.

7,

read

" It
;

is

for

chastisement
"

that ye are enduring " omit the words


V. 20.

or

thrust through with a dart" in

v.

20,

and end

the verse with " stoned."

Chap.
V. 9. V.

xiii.

Instead of the words " Be not carried ahout"


9,

in V.

read "

Be not

carried
v. 11,

away

"

omit

11.

the words " for sin" in


"

and read simply

hy the high

priest."

The Epistle of James.


Chap.
V. 12.
i.

Instead of the words " which the Lord hath

promised" in
mised."

v.

12,

read " which

He

pro-

A
"

very remarkable reading occurs


v.

V.

19.

in
"

this

chapter at
of the

19.

Instead of the
text,

wherefore

common

evidence

compels us to adopt another word which in


the Greek differs only Ly a single
letter,

hut

which
and

requires in English

some such version


omit the words

as the following,
let

"Know,

my beloved brethren,
;

every one,"

etc.

Text of the
V.

New

Testament in
in
v.

its successive

Boohs. 243

26.

"

among yoa"

26,

and read simply "If


and
poor

any one thinks."


Chap.
V. 3.
ii.

Omit the words


read simply
"

"

unto him" in
;

v.

3,

and say

" instead of " the

V. 5.
V.

of this world" in v. 5, read " the poor of the

Id.

world;"
"

omit

"and"
v. 18,

in

v.

13,

and read
;

mercy

rejoiceth

against judgment

"

omit

V.

18.

the word "thy" in

before ''works" and

"my" before me thy faith


thee
V.

"faith,"

and read simply "shew


;

without works

and

I will

show
see

faith

by
v.

my
24,

works

;"

omit the word

24.

"then" in
that."

and read simply "ye


"

Chap.
V. 5.

iii.

Instead of the words

Behold how great a


!"

matter a
"

little

fire

kindle th

in

v.

5,

read
kin-

Behold how great a forest a


"
!

little

fire

V. 6.

dleth
"

omit the word " so


is

" in v. 6,

and read

and the tongue


!

fire,

that world of ini-

quity The tongue is the one among our members which defileth the whole body,"
etc.
V. 8.
;

instead of the words "

it

is

an unruly

evil" in v. 8, read "it is a restless evil; " for

the words
V.

" so

can no fountain both yield


v.

12.

salt

water and fresh," in


salt

12, read " neither


;

can
V.
V.

water bring forth fresh


in
v. 16,

" insert

the

16.

word "also"
confusion;"

and read "there

also is
v.

17.

omit the word "and" in


"

17,

and read simply


hypocrisy."

without partiality, without

Chap.

iv.

Omit the word

"

yet

"

in v.

2,

and read

V.

"

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs. 245

towards) God."
V.

Omit the word

" pure," in v.

22.

22,

and read

" love

one another from the heart


" for ever "

fervently."
V.

Omit the words


"

in

23.

V.

23,

and read simply


Instead of
all

which

liveth

and

abideth."
V.

the glory of man,"

24.
ii.

in V. 24, read " all the glory thereof"


Insert the words " unto salvation " in
v. 2,

Chap.
V. 2.

and read
vation."

"

that ye

may grow

thereby unto

sal-

Instead of the words

" Christ also

suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye


V.

21.

should follow His steps," in

v. 21

read

"

Christ

also suffered for you, leaving

you an examj^le,
Instead of

that ye should follow His steps."


V.

25.

"

Tor ye were
Instead of

as sheep going astray," in v. 25,

read " For ye were going astray as sheep."

Chap.

tlie

words

"

be courteous," in
"

v. 8,

read " be humble."

Omit

knowing " in

v. 9,

and read
are."
V. 13,

" contrariwise

blessing, because
of,"

ye
in

Instead
read "
if

of " if

ye be followers
of."

ye be zealous
''

As formerly
v. 15,

noticed, instead of

the Lord God," in

read "the Lord Christ;"^ in the same verse omit


"
"

and

"

before

"

be

readj^,"

and read simply


meekness
and read

being ready;" in the same verse insert " but

after " in you,"


V.

and read
"

" but with


" in v.

20.

and

fear."

Omit

once

20,

simply

"

when

the longsuffering of

God was
and

waitiD2j."

Chap.
V. 3.

iv.

Omit the words


read simply "
^

" of our life," in v. 3,

For the time


170.

past."

Omit the

Comp. page

246

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon


'^

the

words
V.

on their part he
is

is evil

spoken

of, "but

14.

on your part he

glorified" in v. 14,

and end

the verse with the words " resteth


V. V.

upon you."
and

16.

For the words "on


"in
this

this behalf" in v. 16, read

19.

name."

Omit "as"

in v. 19,

read simply " unto a faithful Creator."


Chap.
V. 1.

V.

Insert " therefore " in v.


elders
therefore."

1,

and read

"

The

Omit the words


v. 2,

" taking

V. 2.

the oversight thereof" in


"

and read simply


is

Feed the

flock of

God which
etc.

among

you,
" be

not by constraint,"
V.

Omit the words

5.

subject"

in

v.

5,

and read "Likewise, ye

younger, submit yourselves unto the elder, yea,


V. 8.

all

one to another."
"

and read simply


V.

Omit "because" in v. 8, Be sober, be vigilant your


:

10.

adversary."
" you,"

Instead of

"us"

in

v. 10,

and read the verse


of all grace,

as follows

insert
"

But

the

God

who

called

you into His

eternal glory in Clirist Jesus, after ye have


suffered a little while, shall himself

make you

perfect, stablish, strengthen (settle) you."

The Second Epistle of Peter.


Chap.
V. 3.
i.

Instead of the words " hath called us to


glory and virtue
"

in v. 3,

read " called us by


Instead
"

His
V.

own

glory

and

virtue."

of

12.

" Wherefore I will not be negligent

in v. 12,

read " Wherefore I will take care

to."

Chap.
V. 2.

ii.

Instead of the words "

And many
"

shall fol2,

low their pernicious ways

in

v.

read

Text of the Nciu Testament in


"
V.

its successive

Boohs.

247

And many shall follow their licentioas ways."


" in v. 12,
''

12.

Instead of " shall utterly perish


" shall

read

even perish."

Instead of

covetous

V.

14
17.

practices " in v. 14, read " covetous practice."

Instead of the words " clouds that are carried


V.

with a tempest

'^

in

v. 17,

read " mists driven


" for ever " in
is

by a tempest
21.
22.

:"

probably omit

the same verse, and end with "


V. V.

reserved."

Insert " back

"

in v. 21, and read " to turn


"

back from."
and read

Omit the word


"

But

"

in

v.

22,

simply, " It is

happened."

Chap.

iii.

Instead of the words

and of the commandof the

ment
V. 2.

of us

the
v. 2,

apostles

Lord and

Saviour" in

read " and of the

ment
V.

of

the

Lord

and

commandSaviour by your
[their] scoffing."

apostles."
V. 3.

Insert the words "in scoffing" in

3,

and read "scoffers in


9,

V. 9.
V.

Instead of "us-ward" in v.

read "you- ward."

10.

Omit the words "in the night" in v. 10, and read simply "will come as a thief." Instead
of " in

V.

16.

which are" in

v. 16, insert for

the sake

of clearness "in which Epistles," as the read-

ing of the most ancient authorities requires.

The First Epistle of John.


Chap.
V.
i.

Insert " also " in

v. 3,

and read

" that

which

3.

we have
;

seen and heard declare


"

we unto you
4,

V. 4.

also

"

omit

unto you

"

in

v.

and read
etc.
''

simply
Chap.
ii.

" these things write

we, that,"
v.

Instead of " brethren"

in

7 read

be-

V.

Text of the Neiv Testament in

its successive

Books.

249

which we have wrought, but that we receive a


V. 8.

full

reward" in

v.

8,

read " that ye lose not

the things which ye have wrought, but that

ye receive a
V.

full

reward
"

"

instead of " whoso-

9.

ever transgresseth

in

v. 9,

read " whosoever

goeth forward

" in

the same verse omit the

words

'*

of Christ/'

and read simply

" in

the

doctrine, he hath both," etc.

The Third Epistle of John.


Instead of the words
V. 5.

"

whatsoever thou
v. 5,

doest to the brethren, and to strangers" in

read " whatsoever thou doest to the brethren,

and that though they are strangers


V, 7.

"
;

instead

of ''for his name's sake" in

v.

7,

read "for
"

the Name's sake


V. 9.

"

insert the Avord


" I

some-

thing" in
to the

v. 9,

and read

wrote something
"

church

;"

omit the second


" is of

but" in

v.

V.
V.

11.
12. 13.

11,

and read simply


" insert "

God, he that,"

etc.

instead of " ye

know "

in v. 12, read " thou


"

V.

knowest

unto thee

in v. 13, and

read " to write


t

unto thee."

The Epistle of Jude.


V. 1.

Instead of " sanctified by

God
3,

the Father,"
;

read " beloved by


V. 3.

God
;

the Father
v.

" for

"

of

the

common salvation" in common salvation " for


v.

read " of our

" denying the only

V, 4.

Lord God" in
Master
:

4,

read " denying the only


"

"

instead

of

how

that the

Lord,

250
V.

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon


v. 5,

the

5.

having saved" in

read

"

how

that Jesus,
"

having saved;"
verse
V.

and probably in the same


this "
v.

for

"

knew

read "

knew

all

12.

for "carried

about" in

12, read "carried


"

away
'y.

"

omit the words

among them "


;"

in

15.

V. 15,

and read simply

" all that are

ungodly

of all their ungodly deeds


V.

omit the word


the

25.

"

wise"

in

v.

25,

and

insert

words
to

"through Jesus Christ our Lord,"


read
the verse thus, " to the

so as

only

God our
be

Saviour, through Jesus Christ our Lord,


glory,

majesty,

dominion, and power;" and

instead of the words " both

now and

ever,"

read

"

before all time,

and now, and

for ever.

Amen."

The Book of Eevelation.


Chap.
V. 2.
i.

Instead of "
read
"

all

things that he saw


;

"

in v.

2,

whatsoever things he saw


5, 6, "

"

instead

vv. 5, 6.

of the words in vv.


us,

Unto him

that loved

and washed us from our sins in his

own

blood,

and hath made us kings and


;

priests

unto God and his Father

him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen," read " Unto him that loveth us, and washed us
to

from our

sins in

his

own

blood,

and hath
his

made us
for ever
V. 8.

a kingdom, priests unto

God and

Father, to

him be the
ever.

glory and the dominion

and

Amen;" omit

the words
v.
8,

"

the beginning and the ending " in

and

"

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs. 251

in the
stitute

same verse
" saith the

for " saith the

Lord" subas to read

Lord God," so
omit

thus, " I
V. 9.

am

the Alplia, saith the Lord


in v. 9;

God

;"

omit

"also"

"in the;"

for

"Jesus Christ" read simply "Jesus;" omit


" for "

and

" Christ," so as to

read the verse

thus, " I John, your brother,


in the tribulation

and companion

and kingdom and patient


isle

endurance in Jesus, was in the


called Patmos, on account of the

that

is

word

of God,

and the testimony of Jesus


" I
V.

"

omit the words,


first

am Alpha and Omega,

the

and the

11.

last" in v. 11; omit also the

words "which

are in Asia,"

and read thus, "saying, What


to Ephesus," etc.; omit

thou seest write in a book, and send to the


seven churches
V.
;

"unto

17.

me"
right

in v. 17,

and read simply "he

laid his
;

hand upon me,

saying, Tear not " omit

V.

18.

the word

"Amen"

in v. 18,
"
;

and read simply


the same
;

" evermore,

and have
" the

instead of the words


"

" keys of hell and of death


verse, read
V.

in

keys of death and of Hades

19.

insert " therefore " in v. 19,

and read
"

" write

therefore
V.

"

omit the words


v.

which

thou

20.

sawest

"

in

20,

and read "the seven candle-

sticks are," etc.

Chap.
V. 1.

ii.

Instead of the words "the church of Ephesus"


in
of
V. 1,

read " the church in Ephesus

;"

instead

"And

hast borne, and hast patience, and


"

V. 3,

for

my

name's sake hast laboured

in

v.

3,

252

Effect

prodMced hy Textual Criticism upon

the

read "
for
V.

And Thou

hast patience, and didst bear


;

my name's sake
V.
;

"

omit the word


" I will

"

quickly

"

5.

in

5,

and read simply,


omit the words
"

come unto
"

V. 7.

thee

"

" the
is

midst of

in v.

7,

and read simply,


V.

which

in the paradise of
v.

10,

God;"
read,
"

instead of

"Tear none of" in


"

10,

Fear not
"

omit the words

"

which

V.

15.

thing I hate
tanes,

in

v. 15,

and read
;

" the

Mcolai-

in

like

manner

"

insert
"

the word

V. V.

16.

" therefore " in v. 16,

and read

Eepent therev. 17,

17.

fore; " omit the

words "to eat" in

and

read simply

" will I

give of the hidden manna;"

" instead of " I have a few things against thee


V.

20.

in V. 20, read " I

have against thee


" in

"

instead

of " to teach

and seduce

the same verse,


;

read " ar^d she teacheth and seduceth


V.

"

instead

21.

of "

and she repented not

"

in v. 21, read

"and

she will not repent," reading the whole verse

thus

"
;

And

gave her time that she might


forni-

repent
V.

and she will not repent of her


"

24.

cation;" omit " and

in

v. 24,

and read simply

"But unto you


"

say,

unto the rest;" omit

and

" in

the same verse before " which."


"

Chap.
V.

iii.

Instead of " are ready to die


"

in

v. 2,

read

2.

were ready

to die ;" in the


" before "

same

verse, for
;

" before
V. 4.

God," read
in
V. 4,

my God

" insert
;

"

But

"

and read
omit

But thou hast

" in

the same
" in
V.

Averse,
;

" even,"

and read simply


that overcometh

Sardis " for "

He

that overcometh, the

5.

same"

in

v.

5,

read

"He


Text of the
V. 7.

New
;

Testament in

its successive

Boohs. 253
v.
7,

thus
"

"

for "

no

man
;

shutteth " in
"

read

no

man

shall sliut

omit

" Beliold " in v.

V.

11.

11,

and read simply, "I come quickly;"


read " the church in Laodicea."
in v.
2,

in-

stead of "the church of the Laodiceans" in


V.

14.
iv.

V. 14,

Chap.
V. 2.

Omit "immediately"
"I was
V.

and read simply


"they had" in
their heads
varieties of
:

in the spirit;" omit


"

V. 4.

4,

and read simply,

and on

crowns of gold."
V. 8.

Some remarkable
v.

reading occur in
"

reads as follows

Holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, holy,


;

Lord God Almighty


is
it

" in
;

" the word " holy

repeated nine times


is

in other manuscripts

found twice, six times; and in A, with


others,
it

most

occurs three times, which


;

is

probably correct
v.

instead of the words " they

11.

are

and

w^ere created" in v. 11, read ''they

were, and were created."

Chap.
V. 4.

V.

Instead of the words " to read the book


V. 4, read " to open the

"

in

book

" for

''

took the
it

V. 7.

book out of"


of "
;

in v. 7, read simply

"took

out
"
;

instead of " having every one of


" in v.
8,

them

V.

8.

harps

read " each having a harp

instead of the words "

made us unto our God


shall reign

kings and priests


V.

and we
"

on the

10.

earth

" in v.

10, read

made them unto our

God

a kingdom and priests, and they [shall]


;

reign on the earth

"

for "

And

the four and

twenty elders
V.

fell

down and worshipped


v. 14,

Him
read

14.

that liveth for ever and ever" in

254

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon the

simply, "
shipped."

And

tlie

elders fell

down and wor"

Chap.
V. 1.

vi.

Insert " seven " in

v.
;

1,

and read

opened
"

one of the seven seals


see "
*'

"

omit probably

and
"

in
;

the
"

same

verse,

and read simply


'*

Come
3, 5,

in like manner, omit


as before "
see,"

and see
"
;

in
in

-y.

3.

V.

and read
omit
"

Come

" so a^^ain,

V. 5.
V. 7.

V.

and
"

and read
"
;

"

Come
of

and
and

once jnore, onnt the same words in


read

v. 7,

simply

Come

instead

"

white

V.
V.

11. 12.
vii.

robes
"

" in v. 11,

read " a

white robe; " insert

whole
For
"

"

in

v. 12,

and read " the whole moon."


read " after
"

Chap.
V. 1.
V. 5.

" after these things " in v. 1,

this
"

omit the words


" in v. 5,

"

were sealed
"
"
;

after

Keuben
of

and read simply

Of the
and so

tribe

Eeuben, twelve thousand

throughout the passage; for


V. V.

"And

cried" in

10. 17.

V. 10,

read

"And they
"

cry;

"

instead of " living

fountains of waters

in v. 17, read "fountains

of the waters of life."

Chap.
V. 7.

Yiii.

Instead
"
;

of

the
v.

words,
7,

"The
"

first

angel
first

sounded
sounded

in
"

read

And
"
"

the

insert the

words

and the third


in the
trees
;

part of the earth was burnt

up

same
" for

verse before "


V.

and the third part of


v.

13.

"heard an angel" in
eagle."

13, read

"heard an
and read
like

Chap.
'0.

ix.

Omit the word


simply
"

"

only

"
;

in v.
"

4,

4.

but those

men

for

" tails

unto scorpions, and there w^ere stings in their

"

Text of the
V.

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs. 255

10.

tails " in v. 10,

read " tails like unto scorpions,


;

and
V.

[also]

stings

and in

tlieir tails

was

their

11.

power;"
"

omit
"
;

*'

And
"

"

in

v.

11,

and read
thousand
;

They have

omit

and

" after "

"

V.
V.

16.

in V. 16,

and read simply


v. 18,

" I "

heard

"

insert

18.

''plagues" in

and read

By

these three

plagues
V.

" for "

their

power

is

in their

mouth
is

"

19.

in

V. 19,

read " the power of the horses


"
;

in
"

their
V.

mouth

for "

nor of their fornication

21.

in V. 21, read

probably "nor of their wicked-

ness."

Chap.
V. 2.

X.

For
"

"

he had in his hand


;"

"

in v.

2,

read
in

having in his hand

omit

" their voices "

V.

v. 4,

and read " when the seven thunders spoke;


"

omit also

unto

me

"

in the

same

verse,

and

read simply "saying;" instead of "the mystery


V. 7.

of

God should be

finished " in v.
;

7,

read "the

mystery of God was finished


V.

"
"

instead of the
in
v. 11,

11.

words
"

"And

he said unto

me

read

And

they say unto me."


"

Chap.
V.

xi.

Omit the words


v. 1,

and the angel stood


"

"

in
"

1.

and read simply

saying

"

after

"rod;

V. 4.

instead of " before the

God

"

in v. 4, read

"before the Lord;" for "shall see their dead


bodies " in
v. 9,

read

"

look upon their dead

body;"

for "

and and

shall not suffer " in the


suffer not; " instead of

same
"they

verse, read "

that dwell
V.

upon the earth

shall rejoice over


v. 10,

10.

them, and make merry" in


that dwell

read "they

upon the earth

rejoice over them,

256

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon


;

the

and make merry


V.

"

for tlie

kingdoms of

this

15.

world world

" in v. 15,
;"

read "

The kingdom
"

of this
"

omit the words


*'

and

art to
art,

come

in

V.

17.
xii.

V. 17,

and read simply


"

which

and wast."

Chap.
V. 12.

Instead of " woe to the inhabiters of the


earth and of the sea
in
v. 12,

read simply

"woe
V.

to the" earth

and the sea;" omit "Christ"


"

17.

in V. 17,

and read simply

the testimony of

Jesus."

Chap.
V. 7.

xiii.

Instead of the words "

And
"

I stood

upon
read
;

the sand of the sea, and saw


"

in

v.

7,

And he

stood upon the sand of the sea

and

saw;" for "having seven heads and ten horns " in the same verse, read " having ten
I

horns and seven heads


V. 4.

"

instead of " which gave

power unto the beast

" in v. 4,

read " because


for "in blas-

he gave the power to the beast;"


V. 6.

phemy"

in

v. 6,

read "in blasphemies;" omit


verse,

"and" in the same

and read simply "his and peoples


"

tabernacle, those that;" insert "

v.l.
V.

in V.

7,

and read

" over all kindreds,

and

16.

peoples;" instead of "their foreheads" in

v. 16,

read " their forehead."

Chap.
V.

xiv.

Instead of "

1.

in V. 1, read "
for
"

And I looked, and lo, a Lamb" And I looked, and lo, the Lamb;"
in

having his Father's name written in


foreheads,"

their
"

the

same
" for

verse,

read

having his name and the name of his Father


;

written in their foreheads

"I heard the

voice of harpers harping with their harps" in

" " ;

Text of the
V. 2.

New

Testament in

its successive

Books.

257

V. 2,

read " the voice whicli I heard was as


;

that of harpers harping with their harps


for "

And

in their

mouth was found no

guile

for they are without fault before the throne


V. 5.

V.

8.

of God" in v. 5, read simply "And in their mouth was found no falsehood for they are blameless;" insert "a second" in v. 8, and
;

read
V. 9.

"And

there followed

another, a second
v.

angel;" in like manner read in


there followed

"And
; ;

them
is

another, a third angel

instead of " Here


V.

the patience of the saints


v. 12,

12.

here are they that keep" in


is

read " Here


;

the patience of the saints that keep " omit

V.

13.

''unto
ing,

me"
;

in v. 13,
"

and read simply "say" for


"

Write

instead of " and their works


verse, read

in the
V.

same
" the

their

works

15.

omit the words " for thee

in v. 15,
to reap."

and read

simply
Chap. XV.
V. 2.

time

is

come
"

Omit the words


2,

"

and over his mark" in and over


his image,

v.

and read simply

and

over the number,"


V. 3.
V.

etc.;

instead of *'thou

King

of saints" in v. 3, read
tions;"

'Hhou King of the nav. 5,

5.

omit "behold" in

and read simply

" I looked,

and the temple."


v. 1

Chap.
V. 1. V. 2.

XA/i.

Insert "seven" in

and read "pour out


v.

the seven vials."

For "upon the earth" in

2 read " unto the earth."


3,

Omit
the

*'

angel

" in v.

V. 3.

and read simply


3,

"And
v.
5,

second;" so
;

vv. 3, 4,
V.

again in vv.

4, etc.

throughout

omit the

5.

words

"0

Lord" in

and read simply

";

'258

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon

the

"

Thou

art rigliteous."

In the
text
is

latter part of

this verse, the


tion,

common
"

a mere fabrica-

and instead of

which

art,

and wast, and


"

shalt be, because," etc.


art
V. 6.

we should read

which
etc.

and wast the Holy One, because,"


" for " in v. 6,

omit

and read simply " they

are worthy."
V.

Instead of the words "

And

7.

heard another out of the altar say" in

v. 7,

read

''And I heard the


V.

altar saying;"
v. 14,

omit the

14.

words " the earth


simply " kings of

and of " in
17 read
in v. 1,

and read For


air."

the whole world."


**

V.

17.

" into the air" in v.

upon the

Chap. xvii.
V. 2.

Omit

" unto

me"

and read simply


v. 2,

"saying;", for the word " filthiness" in

read "impurities;" the reading to be adopted


v. 8.
'0.

in

V.

was formerly
and"

noticed.^
"

Omit
is

"

And

9.

in

V. 9,

and read simply


" five are fallen,

Here

the mind."

V.

10.

Omit

"

after fallen in v.

10,

and read
read " and

simply
v.

one

is."

Instead of

13.

the words "and shall give" in


oive."

v. 13,

Instead of "

And

the ten horns which


v. 16,

v.l^.

thou sawest upon the beast" in

read "and

the ten horns which thou sawest and the beast." Omit " and" in v. 1, and read simply Chap, xviii.
V. 1.
V.

"after these things;" omit "mightily" in

v. 2,

2.

and

read "

he cried with a strong voice."

In-

stead of "her sins have reached unto heaven"


V. h. V. 6.

in

V. 5,

read "her sins have cleaved together

even unto heaven."


1

Omit "you"
p. 172.

in v.

6,

and

Comp.

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs.

259

read simply, " Eepay

lier

even as she repaid."


judgeth
her."

Instead
V. 8. V.

of the words

"who
13,

her"
Insert

in

V. 8,

read "

who hath judged

13.

word "spice" in v. cinnamon, and spice, and


the

and read "and


Instead of
'^

odours."

V.

14.

the second " are departed from thee

in

v.

14,

read " are perished from thee."


verse, for

In the same

"thou shalt find them no more," read

"
v.

men

shall find

them no more."
in ships
"

Instead of
17,

17.

" all the

company

in v.

read

" every one that sails to

any

place."

Instead

of
V.

"thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and


" in v.

20.

prophets

20, read "

thou heaven, and

ye

saints,

and

apostles,

and prophets."
"

Omit

the words "of whatsoever craft he be" in


V.

22.

V.

22,

and read simply


in v.
1,

no craftsman shall

be found."
Cha/p. xix.
V. 1.

Omit "and"

and read "after these

things."

In the same verse insert the words

" as it were,"

and read " I heard

as it

were a

great voice."

In the same verse omit the

word
15.

" honour,"

and read the

" salvation,

and
In-

the glory, and the power are our God's."


V.

stead of "the fierceness and wrath" in

v. 15,

read " the fierceness of the wrath."

Instead

of " gather yourselves together unto the supper


V.

17.

of

God"
Omit
"

in v. 17, read "gather

yourselves

together with the great supper of God."


Cliap. XX.
V. 3.

and " before

" after "

in v. 3,

and
I

read simply

" after that."

Instead of "

and

260

Effect

produced hy Textual Criticism upon

the

saw the dead, small and


V.

great, stand before

12.

God"

in v. 12, read

"and

saw the dead,


;"

great and small, standing before the throne


V.

14.

insert the

words "the lake of

and read the verse thus

fire" in v.

14,

"

And
fire."

death and
fire.

Hades were
is

cast into the lake of

This

the second death, the lake of

Chap. xxi.
V. 2.
V. 3.

Omit the word


"

"

John "

in v. 2,
city
:"

and read
for " a " a

simply

and I saw the holy

great voice out of heaven " great voice out of

in v. 3, read
;

the throne

"

instead of

V. 5.

" true

and

faithful " in v. 5, read " faithful


all

and
7,

V. 7.

true

;"

for " shall inherit

things " in
"
;

v.

read
V. 9.

" shall inherit these things "

omit the
;"

words
"

unto

me "

in v.

9,

and read simply and read


;"

and there came one of the seven angels


v. 11,
:

'0.

11.

omit "and" before "her" in


simply
"
"

having the glory of God


three times in
v.

her light

V.

13.

insert "
"

and

13,

and read

On

the east three gates, and on the north

three gates, and on the south three gates, and

on the west three gates


V,

"

insert the
" the
;

word
twelve

14.

" twelve "

in v.

14,

and read
apostles

names
V.

of the twelve
to

"

instead of

15.

"

had a golden reed

measure

" in v. 15,

read
"
;

"
V.

had for a measure a golden reed


it "

to

measure

23.

instead of " shine in

in v. 23, read " shine


" of

on
V.

it

"
"

omit the words


in
v.

them which
"
;

are

24.

saved

24,

and read simply

And

the

nations shall walk

by the

light of it

" in the

Text of the

New

Testament in

its successive

Boohs. 261

same verse omit the words

'^

and honour," and


it."

read simply " bring their glory into


Cha][). xxii.
V. 1.

Omit the word " pure " in v. 1, and read simply '* And he shewed me a river " instead
;

of
V. 5.

"And
5,

there
"

shall

be no night

there,"

in V.

read

And

there shall be no more

night."
V. 6.

Instead of " and the Lord


" in v.
6,

God

of the

holy prophets

read " the Lord

God
"

of the spirits of the prophets."


V. 7.
'y.

Insert " and"

in V.

7,

and read

"

and behold."
" I

Omit "for

9.

in v. 9,

and read simply

am

thy feUow-ser-

vant."
i;.

A very important

correction falls to be

11.

made
that
is

in v. 11, where, instead of

"he that
"

is

righteous, let

righteous, let
''

him be righteous still," read he him do righteousness still."


v. 12,

V. 12.

Omit
I

and" in

and read simply "Behold,

come quickly ;"

in the

same verse, for " accord-

ing as his work shall be," read " according as


his
V.

work

is."

Instead of " the beginning and


first

13.

the end, the


"first

and the

last " in v. 13, read

and

last,

the beginning and the end."


to

Another very important correction requires


V.

14.

be made in

v. 14,

where, for

"

Blessed are they


" Blessed
" for "

that do His
are they that
V. V. V.

commandments," read

wash

their robes."

Omit
in

lb.

in V. 15,

and read simply "without are."


before
"

Omit
v.

17.
18.

"and"
Omit
in the

"whosoever will"

17.

"for

in v. 18,

and read simply "Itestify;"


add unto these
;"

same

verse, for " shall

things," read " shall

add unto them

for "

God

262

Effect ^produced hy Textual Criticism.

shall take

away his

part out of the book of


city,

life,

and out of the holy


V.

and from the things

19,

which are written in


"

this

book

" in v. 19, read

God
life

shall take

away

his part

from the tree

0^

and from the holy and

city,

which are
"
:

written in this book."


'y.

Omit the words

Even
come,

20

so " in v. 20,

read simply, "

Amen
all.

Lord Jesus."

Instead of "the grace of our

Lord Jesus Christ be with you


V.

Amen"

21.

in V. 21, read " the grace of the Lord Jesus be

with the

saints.

Amen."

MUm

AND PATERSON, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.

Date Due

^'i^im-m

as The^wo^ds^onle New Testament,


Library Theological Seminary-Speer

<

>:*i! ^

1012 00077 1255

'^mmi---m

W^mmM