The words of the New Testament, as altered by transmission and ascertained by modern criticism : for popular use
iK»>T^**^'-%w ^J ^[ ^'<^^ A \A — ^^^^■l^glOBl '■■^^ c^ t^. THE WORDS THE NEW TESTAMENT. EDINBURGH : PRINTED BY MUIR AND PATERSON FOR T. AND T. CLARK. LONDON, DUBLIN, NEW YORK, HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO. JOHN ROBERTSON AND CO. SCRIBNER, WELFORD, AND ARMSTRONG. THE WORDS THE NEW TESTAMENT, AS ALTERED BY TItANSMISSIOJV AND ASCERTAINED BY MODERN CRITICISM. FOR POPULAR USE, 7 EEV. WILLIAM MILLIGAN, D.D, PROFESSOR OF DIVIUITT AND BIBLICAL CRITICISM, ABERDEEN; AND EEV. ALEX. EOBEETS, D.D. PROFESSOR OF HUMANITY, ST. ANDREWS. EDi:^rBUEGH: T. AND T. CLAEK, 38 GEOEGE STEEET. 1873. 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 of Biblical Criticism. Not a few valuable treatises have indeed been issued on the subject ; but these are of by far too technical a character to meet the wants of the public at large. They appeal only to pro- fessed scholars or to those who are supposed to have already a considerable amount of information. The consequence is that multitudes of highly intelligent men who are well versed in the leading principles and results of other sciences, know very little of the objects, methods, or achievements of sacred criticism. It is to 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 felt to be both in- teresting and important, without the use of language unsuited to the general reader. The prospect which the British public have of soon obtaining a revised version of the Sacred Scriptures is 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 founded on previous changes of the Greek text. It seems desirable that the great body of educated persons who are watching with so lively an interest the pro- ceedings of the New Testament Eevision Company, now sitting at Westminster, but who have neither the necessary time nor acquirements for entering 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 may be expected from it. They will thus be in a better position than they can be at present for judging of the merits of the revision when it appears. It is not indeed to be supposed that a correct impres- sion of what the revised translation will contain can be gathered from anything here said. Even the readings Preface. vii for whicli the writers 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 the text many more changes than those spoken of by them. The writers of this book 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. The third part is a joint pro- duction ; 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 riEST. THE FACTS OF THE CASE. CHAP. PAGE I. Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament, . 3 II. Nature and Amount of the Yarious Readings, . . 18 III. Existing Manuscripts of the New Testament, . . 26 IV. Ancient Versions of the New Testament, ... 47 V. Quotations from the Books of the New Testament by- Ancient "Writers, 60 VI. Sketch of the History of Modern Biblical Criticism, . 67 PAET SECOKD. MODE OF DEALING WITH THE FACTS. I. Introductory, 83 II. First Step in Classification, ... ... 89 III. Second Step in Classification, ... . . 95 IV. Third Step in Classification.— Part I., .... 101 V. Third Step in Classification.— Part II 109 X Contents. CHAP. VI. General Eesult of Classification, VII. The Principle of Grouping,. VIII. Determination of the Text. — Part L, IX. Determination of the Text. — Part 11. X. General Summary, 116 121 129 138 148 PAKT THIED. RESULTS. I. Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon important Texts of the New Testament, 155 IT. Effect produced by Textual Criticism upon the Text of the New Testament in its 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 of the sacred writers have long since disappeared or perished. This being 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 original text — a thing totally out of harmony with the usual course of His Providence — nothing could be more certain than that slight alterations and errors would 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. Probably, in spite of all the care 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 4 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 copy- ing work to do feels how very difficult it is, for any considerable time, to preserve perfect accuracy. The mind can scarcely be drilled into fulfilling that merely mechanical process which is all that, in such circum- stances, it is called to accomplish. It v:ill exercise itself about the subject before it; and thus, instead of rigidly copying the document under transcription, it is apt, every now and then, to allow its own thoughts or fancies to find a place upon the page. Suppose, for instance, that one is transcribing a sentence which ends with the words " twenty centuries." The first part of the sentence is perhaps copied with literal accuracy; but, while the fact stated at the close of the period is retained in the memory, a change in the mode of expressing it has been unconsciously effected in the mind of the transcriber, so that, instead of writing "twenty centuries," he sets down "two thousand years." In this way the very intelligence of a copyist will sometimes betray him into mistakes. He may substi- tute one 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, 5 equally well 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," and so on, — the danger of falling into such mistakes being 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 phrase been slipped in by the transcriber which had no existence in his copy, but which was due to the working of his own mind on the subject before him. On this ground we easily explain, for example, the frequent introduction of our Lord's name into the text where a simple pronoun existed in the original copy, or where the nominative was left to be supplied from the context. Thus, at Mark viii. 1, John vi. 14, and in a vast number of other passages, we find Jesus where He is the correct reading. On the same ground we account for those differences in the order of words which are often to be found in the manuscripts. One will read " Jesus Christ," and another " Christ Jesus," just as the names happened to present themselves to the minds of transcribers. And there are other readings of considerably greater interest which are probably to be traced to the same cause. AVe may refer to Matt, xxv. 6 for an example. The true reading there is, "Behold the bridegroom;" the reading which has crept 6 Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. into the text is, "Behold the bridegroom cometh;" and we may, without much risk of mistake, ascribe this addition simply to the working of the mind of a copyist on the passage before him. So, at Luke i. 29, the in- sertion of "when she saw him " will be naturally enough accounted for on the same ground ; while we feel that it would be scarcely possible to transcribe Eorn. viii. 26 without interpolating the words "for us," which are nevertheless destitute of any adequate authority. These illustrations may suffice to show how various readings would, in many cases, arise, not from any intention on the part of transcribers, but simply from the exercise of their own minds on the subject which happened for the time to engage their consideration. But, in multitudes of other cases, the various readings must be ascribed to intention on the part of transcribers. Several motives may be detected as having influenced them in the alterations which they introduced into the text of the New Testament. For one thing, many passages which presented difficult constructions have been changed to the more usual forms. In such cases, the copyist has either naturally glided into the style of expression with which he was familiar, or has supposed that his predecessor in the work of transcription had made a mistake which it was his duty to correct. This has been a very fertile 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 New Testament. 7 cal construction, is generally to be chosen as probably the correct reading, rather than another which is clear, or familiar and correct. It may seem strange at first that such a principle should be adopted — that a reading which it is almost impossible to construe or interpret should be preferred to one which presents no difiiculty. But the reason is obvious. A transcriber was much more likely to supplant an obscure or unintelligible expres- sion by one that was usual and easy than to follow the 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 what was unusual and incompre- hensible. Of 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. A familiar illustration of the manner in which various readings would originate, as just indicated, may be found in a reference to the text of Shakespeare. Again and again have words or phrases which were not understood by editors been changed into forms with which they were familiar, and which they regarded as yielding a satis- 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 8 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 be sacrificed with which one is loath to part. Suppose, for instance, our highest critical authorities should com- bine against Theobald's famous emendation in Scene 3, Act II. of King Henry V. They might insist that evidence is decidedly in favour of the old folio reading of the passage. In that case, we could not resign with- out regret what has been deemed such an exquisite touch of nature, when we are told of the dying Falstaff that " he babbled of green fields." Yet, if it became the settled judgment of critics that the phrase referred to is simply a happy guess, and was never written by Shakes- peare, every reasonable man would give it up, however prosaic or unintelligible might be the words substituted in its place. So it may be matter of regret to have to accept at 1 Pet. iii. 8 the somewhat commonplace exhortation "Be humble" for the beautiful precept " Be courteous," which stands in our present Authorized Version. But still, if authority so determine, we must not hesitate. There may often be an artificial beauty about error, but there is always an inestimable precious- ness in truth. Causes of Varioits Readings in the New Testament. 9 The following examples may be given of the way in which various readings have arisen in the text of the New Testament, from a desire on the part of the copyists to remove or lessen difficulties. At Matt. xvi. 11 the true reading is, " How is it that ye do not understand that I spake not to you concerning bread ? But beware of the leaven of the Pharisees 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 made to run as follows — " How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees ?" At Mark vii. 31 the true reading is, " And again, going from the borders of Tyre, He came through Sidon unto the Sea of Galilee, through the midst of the borders of Decapolis." But, in order to escape the fancied difficulty involved in the long circuit which these words describe as having been made by Christ, the verse has been altered to read as follows : — " And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, He came unto the Sea of Galilee, through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis." At Luke xiv. 5 the true reading in all probability is, " 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 the sabbath day ?" Here, however, the word "son" was deemed unsuitable, as not being consistent with the supposed argument from the less to the greater, and was therefore changed into " ass " (which is found at chap, xiii. 15), so that the verse runs thus — "Which of you 10 Causes of Varioiis Headings in the New Testament. shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, 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 made to the true text of the New Testament. An example occurs at Eom. viii. 1. The genuine reading in that passage is simply, " There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus." The longer this statement is considered the more it will be felt an admirably satis- factory conclusion to the previous reasoning of the Apostle. But many copyists seem to have been dissatis- fied with its brevity and simplicity. They desiderated the introduction of the personal and practical element, and therefore (although the argument of the Apostle is thus anticipated and obscured) inserted from verse 4 the words, "who walk not after the iiesh, but after the spirit." To the same desire on the part of transcribers to correct and improve the text before them are unquestion- ably to be ascribed many of those various readings which occur in the Book of Eevelation. As is well known to all acquainted with the original, that portion of the New Testament is remarkable for the number of ungram- matical expressions which it contains. There is no great difficulty in suggesting satisfactory reasons, his- torical and psychological, why this should be the case. But it is 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 New Testament. 11 his works. These blemishes will be made the subject of earnest regret, and will, if opportunity is offered, be carefully removed. Who can doubt, for instance, the pain which Bishop Hurd felt in pointing out obscurities and inelei^ancies in the text of his favourite Addison ? Never did editor more love or esteem his author than did the worthy bishop. He dilates with his whole heart, and most justly, 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 in the minds of transcribers towards the sacred writers, and led them in many cases to replace an inaccurate form of expression by another which was correct. Hence alterations for the sake of grammar have been introduced into the Greek text at Eev. ii. 20, iv. 1, &c. ; but such changes are without effect upon the English Version. There must also be noticed under this head the numerous cases in which parallel passages have been made verbally to correspond with one another. These cases are, of course, most frequent in the Gospels. Thus the true reading both at Matt. ix. 13 and Mark ii. 17 is, " I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." Both passages, however, have been conformed to the text of Luke V. 32, so that in all three Gospels we read, "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." Such cases of harmonizing, though far more common, as was'to have been expected, in the Gospels, may also be found in the Epistles. Thus 1 Tim. i. 17 has been 12 Causes of Various Readings in the Neio Testament. made to conform to Eom. xvi. 27 by the insertion of the word " wise." As the epithet " only " occurs before God in both passages, the two doxologies have been harmon- ized by the interpolation of the missing " wise " in the passage in Timothy, which ought to be read, " Unto the King eternal [or, " of the ages "], the incorruptible, the invisible, the only God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen." The reason of such changes in the text is 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 transcribers; but it is of so grave a character as to demand special and separate consideration. We refer to the changes which, it is supposed, have in some cases been made on the text from doctrinal views or predilections. We rejoice to believe that there is no necessity for ascribing many of the various readings in the New Testament to this cause. The ancient copyists seem to have done their work with the utmost sincerity. Perhaps every one of the readings which have some- times 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 certain passages in which the variation which exists 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 in mind, we shall easily understand how strong, accord- ing to the bias of the copyist, may have been the temptation to tamper with the text. Thus, the whole controversy between the Church Catholic and the Arians or the Socinians may be said to be involved in the reading which is to be adopted at Acts xx. 28. If we are to read that verse as it 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 divided on the point as to whether or not God is here the correct expression; and many modern critics prefer to read the verse thus — "Teed the Church of the Lord which He hath purchased with His own blood;" a statement which cannot be held decisive, one way or another, of the controversy in question.^ 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." But many others have the verse as follows — '*No man hath seen God at any time : the only begotten God, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him." The important 1 This passage and those that follow are referred to at present simply for the sake of illustration ; they will be found discussed 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. And there are three that bear witness in earth"), may have been introduced into the text without authority, in order to give a 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 their dislike to the truth which it seems so manifestly to set forth. As a specimen of the less celebrated passages in which doctrinal considerations are thought to have affected readings, we may refer to Heb. i. 3. The latter part of that verse is read by modern critics as follows — "When He had made a purification of sins. He sat down on the right hand of Majesty on high." And it is thought that the insertion of "our" before " sins " was due to a desire on the part of some transcribers to show that the sins for which He suffered were not His own. There only remains to be noticed, as another cause of various readings in the New Testament, the occurrence of oversight or mistake on the part of transcribers. This may be illustrated by a reference to several par- ticulars. A very frequent cause of error was found in those words of like 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. He tran- scribes the first verse, and then, looking up from his work to the copy before him, his eye unfortunately lights upon the end of the second verse, no part of which has yet been written. He sees the 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. This has been a very fruitful source of error in manuscripts of the New Testament. For an example we may refer to Matt. xii. 46. That verse is entirely omitted in some excel- lent manuscripts. And, for a very obvious reason. It 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 in- tended. Now, in Greek there is only the difference of a single letter between the word meaning " edification " and the word meaning "dispensation." Hence, at 1 Tim. i. 4 we find in the Authorized Version "godly edifying which is in faith," instead of the true reading, " God's dispensation which is in faith." Copyists have 16 Causes of Various Readings in the New Testament. also sometimes confounded the Greek for " they took " with the Greek for "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 style of writing characteristic of the 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 be given: — If we write NOWHEEE without any separation between the letters, either "now here" or " no where " may be understood to be the words in- tended. In like manner, some various readings have arisen in the New Testament from the possibility which exists in several passages of dividing the Greek in 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 John v. 3, 4, "waiting for the moving of the water. Eor an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first, after the troubling of the water, stepped in, was made whole of whatsoever disease he had;" and in the insertion of Acts viii. 37, "And Philip said. If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The first 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, by and by succeeded in intruding them- selves into the text. This fact has led Biblical critics to adopt as another great general principle by which they are influenced in seeking to restore the genuine words of the New Testament — that, in most cases, the shorter reading is to be preferred to the longer, as having been, in all probability, the form which the text exhibited in the autograph of the sacred writers. V 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 variation existing in manuscripts of the 'New Testament is very great. It is not a little startling at first to be told, as Biblical critics do tell us, that there are no fewer than 150,000 various readings within the compass of the New Testament. This fact has, of course, been laid hold of by the enemies of divine revelation, and has at times caused no small alarm to its friends. 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 and discountenanced by another class as being really 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, pub- lished in 1713, he endeavoured to throw discredit Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. 19 upon the New Testament from the great variety of read- ings which existed in its text. Uncertainty as to the doctrines which it tanght was represented as being the necessary result. Freethinkers, as Collins alleged, w^ere 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 New Testament, until its friends agreed among themselves as to the genuine text. The same line 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 mention the names of Drs. Owen and Whitby. It forms a grievous blot on the memory of the former that he assailed the very learned Brian Walton and his friends 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 which existed among the manuscripts of the New Testament. In venturing to deal with this subject, the great Puritan only displayed his own ignor- ance and narrowness of comprehension. The same may be said regarding Whitby in the assault which he made on the New Testament of Dr. John Mill. This learned work appeared in 1707, and was distinguished from all the editions which had preceded it by the number of various readings which it contained. On this ground it 20 Nature and Amount of the Various Beadings. ^ was attacked by Dr. Whitby, and its autlior was accused of liaviiig rendered the text of Scripture j:)?^(?ccmows. 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 text, a most unworthy attempt was made to load his memory with obloquy, and to represent his life-long work as having tended to the weakening instead of the support of the cause of divine revelation. Drs. Owen and Whitby, in their sincere and zealous but unintelligent attempts to defend Scripture against a fancied danger to which it was exposed, have, unfortun- ately, proved the types of not a few equally earnest but short-sighted friends of the Bible. There have been those, even down to our own day, who have been ever ready to tremble for the Word of God when con- fronted with the discoveries of science. Such persons forget that it is high treason to the truth to doubt that it will survive every assault which can be made against it ; while, in their ardent but narrow-minded zeal, they have sometimes had recourse to abuse instead of argu- ment, and have thus given an advantage to their opponents, which no discovery, critical, philosophical, or scientific, could ever have furnished. When we come to examine the matter, we find that the vast array of various readings which has been men- tioned, 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 no practical importance whatsoever. They involve the mere substitution of one synonymous word for another; or the use of a compound instead of a simple term ; or 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 example, in one manuscript, one Greek word is used for the copulative conjunction and, w^hile in a second a different, but perfectly synonymous, particle is employed, and in a third the word may be wanting altogether. Sometimes our Lord is in one manuscript referred to under the name of Jesus ; while in a second He is spoken of at the same place as Christ ; in a third He may be styled Jesus Christ ; and in a fourth He may be men- tioned as Christ Jesus. These are specimens of by far the greater number of the various readings, and are enough to show how unimportant they are in general to our faith as Christians, and how little 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 here cite the words of one of the greatest scholars and critics that England ever produced. The illustrious Eichard Bentley thus writes in his reply to the work of Collins above mentioned : — " The real text of the sacred writers does not now (since the originals have been so long lost) lie in any manuscript or edition, but is dispersed in them all. 'Tis competently exact 22 Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. indeed in the worst manuscript now extant; nor is one article of faith or moral precept either perverted or lost in them — choose as awkwardly as you will, choose the worst by design, out of the whole lump of readings." And again : — " Make your 30,000 (various readings) as many more, if number of copies can ever reach that sum : all the better to a knowing and a serious reader, who is thereby more richly furnished to select what he sees genuine. But even put them into the hands of a knave or a fool, and yet, with the most sinistrous and absurd choice, he shall not extin- 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. Unless God had deemed it proper to exert a miraculous power over the New Testament, so as to preserve it from all risk of change and error, the only way in which He could bestow upon us the means of discovering the true text was by furnishing us in His Providence with many different sources to which we might repair in seeking to ascertain it. As in other cases. He has left room here for human industry ; and in the many manuscripts of the New Testament still extant (all of course more ancient than the date of the general employment of printing) we are presented with ^ Remarks upon a late Discourse of Freethinking, in a Letter to F. H., D.D., hy PMleleutherus Lipsiensis, Part i. § 32. Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. 23 the field on which our diligence is to be exercised in seeking to recover the very words of evangelists and apostles. The multitude of manuscripts of necessity increases the number of various readings, but in that very number is found the assurance that our labour in seeking after the original text shall not be in vain. This point will be made abundantly plain by the follow- ing illustrations. There are some of the classical writers in the printed editions of whose works not a single various reading is to be found. And do scholars rejoice on that account, or is the text therefore to be regarded as free from corruption ? Nay : the very opposite is the case. With respect, for instance, to the Eoman historian Yelleius Paterculus, we are told that only one manu- script of his 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 introduced. But the consequence is that the text of his narrative is in a state of the most hopeless confusion. Many parts of it are totally unintelligible, and, simply for want of additional manuscripts to furnish different readings, no means whatever exist of letting in any light upon the obscu- rities which abound. Again, only one ancient manuscript is known to scholars 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. Abundant scope for this is still found, and every fresh editor indulges in some attempts at emendation, just as his judgment or fancy suggests. Now, let it be carefully noted that conjectural criticism is entirely banished from the field of the New Testament. And why ? Simply because all sober critics feel that there is no need for it. The wealth at their command in the multitude of copies of the sacred text still extant is so enormous, and the means of ascertaining, by painstaking effort, the genuine read- ings, is so ample and satisfactory, that no one would have a chance of being listened to at the present day who should propose to introduce any conjectural emen- dation into the Scriptures. It matters not how ingenious or plausible any such conjecture might appear. There is neither room nor need for it in dealing with the text of the New Testament. So deeply fixed is this principle in the minds of Biblical critics, that were any one simply to suggest, in connection with a single word of Scripture, that the region of fact should be left and the 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 Testament, implies the vast resources which we have at command for ascertaining the true text, and is itself a reason for gratitude to that gracious Providence Nature and Amount of the Various Readings. 25 which has thus preserved to us the means of discover- ing, 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. [HE three great sources whence various read- ings are derived, and to which we must repair in seeking to fix the genuine text of Scripture, are : (1) the manuscripts of the New Testament still known to exist ; (2) the ancient versions which have come down to us ; and (3) those quotations from the sacred books which occur in the works of ancient writers. No one of these guides to a knowledge of the original text can be implicitly trusted. 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 there- fore to be used with care and discrimination. And very many of those quotations of Scripture 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 direct and important source of textual criticism is, of course, that furnished in still existing and available manuscripts. To a description of the most valuable of these the present Chapter will be devoted. The manuscripts of the New Testament have been divided into two classes, which are known as Uncials and Cursives, according to the manner in which they are written. The Uncials are so called because they are written throughout in Greek capital letters. The Cur- sives, again, correspond more with the mode of writing in common use 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 about the tenth century; and while existing manuscripts of the New Testament anterior to that date 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. As Ave rise to an antiquity beyond the tenth century, the number of manuscripts to which we can make appeal becomes rapidly diminished. In addition to some precious fragments, there are only five manuscripts of the New Testament having any pretension to com- pleteness that can be assigned to so ancient a date as between the fourth and the sixth century. To a brief account of these most interesting and valuable transcripts 28 Existing Manuscrvpts of the New Testameoit. of the New Testament what remains of the present Chapter will be given. And who could let his eye rest upon the yellow 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. 