| OCR Text |
Show G92 TITE MONOGENJSTS AND king J amos, nor upon tho antiquated "toxtus roceptus" of the old pri ntod Greek oxemplal';-but arc hencefol'ward to be made exclusively upon a Te:ct~ts 1·evisus that pending researches are combining to establish-some of tho slighter difrkultios in regard to which are manifested above in the various readiugs of one line of the Greek "Good Tidings." And, in order to substantiate what I have just said, that Romanist learning frequently agrees with tho most rigidly cxogcticnJ, a quotation from tho commentary of B1SliOP KEN1UOKDS3 will, in these United States, not fail to be respected:- Text, Acts XVII, 26-" And II hath made of one all mankind." Note, on MSS. and traditions, "5. G. P. 'of one blood.' Tho Vulgate reading is conformable to the Alexandrian and three other Manuscripts, as also to that used by Clement of Alexandria. The Coptic version agrees with it." Those who desire to pursue speculative guesses as to how, why, when, and by whom, the word rx.l'tJ.cx<ro> (blood) crept into tho Text, will readily :find, amid the works cited (sup1'a, note 546), some very learned and ingenious explanations, and more commentaries inexpressibly silly. None, however, can be discovered that satisfy, at one and the same time, the cxigenda of archroological, palroographical, and ethnological criticism. .As to tho first requirement: It was shown from IIENNEL DS4 that tho passage in question was not autographed by t. Paul himself, but proceeds from his secretary-the writer of Acts-probably author of tho llid Gospel, supposed to be "St. Luke." Tho learned and Reverend LoRD ARTIIUR IImw.EY judiciously remarks:-" There is also a peculiar difficulty in dealing with tho Scriptures in such matters, from our ignorance of the precise lirnits of inspimtion, and of the dcgl'eo of control exercised by the Holy Spirit over tho writers, compilers, and editors oftbe sacred books, in such matters as history, science, and the like. * * * It certainly docs not seem to have been tho purpose of inspiration to teach miraculously any arts or sciences, and therefore it should not bo deemed more derogatory to tho inspiration of St. Paul or St. Luke, that they were not beyond tho most learned of their contemporaries in the science of chronology, than it would be wore we to discover that St. Paul came short of modern F\kill in the art of tent-making, or that St. Luke had not all tho physiological knowledge attained by the most eminent physicians of our 11113 .Act1 of tht Apo1tlu, Now Yot·k, 8vo, 1861, p. 111. IN 'l'ypea of Mankind, p. 66(). TIIE POLYGENISTS. 5!)8 time." 555 Wbon, thoroforo, as in font· out of tho :five new-school commontatot ·s just cited, ~'O behold really learned and strictly orthodox Churchmen, our contemporaries, makino- such honest admissions a "Protestant dissenter" like myself~-whoso education has been deri\'' d ~rom totally .di~r'orent pursuits, in lands altogether foreign to their l.nsular asso01atwns~may legitimately re-examine Paulino subjects fJ:om ~he a.rchroolog1?al stand-point alone. II en co, the ou ly really lustoncal fact deduCible from all the above quotations is, that tho Greek word "blood," not being in tho MS. used by Cr.E:MENS Alexandrimts (A. D. 192-217), but occurring in that studied by ImmJEus (A. D. 140-202), tho intercalation was already made within say ]50 years after the unknown year of the demise of St. Luke. ~ow, any one who has inspected ancient Greek manuscripts and cp1gr~phy (I myself have only seem a few decades), knows very well that, lll the most archaic, the words run on, without divisious, in the same line "continu~ aerie." Of the ancient .Apostolic books extant we possess none written earlier that tho 5th-6th centuries of our era/56-that is, about 200 years later than Clemens and Irenrous or some 350 postoriot· to St. Luke; and in tho two most antiquo cocli~es, LXX Alexandrinus and Vaticanus, the word cxl'tJ.Mos docs not recur. No one either will pretend that St. Luke took down St. Paul's speech at tlte time; or that tho Evangelist used stenographic processes,-any more than claim that the "reporter" at Athens acloptod Morse's magnetic telegt·aph. lienee, neither tho erodibility of St. Paul, nor that of St. Luke, is involved in our debate. Tho simplest and most rational method of explaining why this word "blood" crept into the later Greek Texts,-into tho Latin it never clid -is seen upon rof{ecting how, some early Christian anchorite, devoutly poring over his MS. of Acts, had his attention arrested, whilst reading "and hath made of one," by a natural and impulsive quory-"one! one wltat ?" As a memento, he noted "cxl'tJ.cx<ros" on the margin of ltis exemplar; but unaccompanied by a note of interrogation"? "-because snch intmjectional signs wore not then invontod. ·within a generation or two afterwards, but before Ircnrous, some amanuensis, transcl'ibiug our anchorite's much-worn codex into Jess archaic calligraphy and orthography, mooting with al'tJ.cx'l'o> on tho margin, fi:mciod that the word had been accidentally omitted, out of the 'l'ext, by tl1e autecoclont scril>o. So tlJO latter, with no fraudulent intent, any more tLau our aforesaid anchorite, inserted tho Greek for "blood" in his own transcript; to the gladdening ofthe hearts of some pious readers ofEHglish, 666 The Grnealogies of ottr Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, ascertained in tlw Gospela of St. .Mattlltw aml St. Luke, &c., London, 8vo, 1853; pp. 241J, 266. 666 Types of Mankind, pp. 612, 714. 38 |
