CHAP. XXVII. On the Second General Epistle of Peter I. Genuineness, &c., 603. II. Date, 609. III. Scope and Synopsis, 609. CHAP. XXVIII. · On the First General Epistle of John - I. Genuineness, &c., 610. II. Date, 611. III. Persons addressed, 612. I. Genuineness, Authenticity, and Date, 616. II. Person addressed in the Second Epistle, 616. III. Its Scope, 617. IV. Person addressed in the Third Epistle, I. Different Hypotheses stated, 641. II. Hypothesis that the Evangelists copied from one another, 641. III. Hypothesis of One Primary Document, 645. IV. Hypo- thesis of many Documents, 651. V. Hypothesis of Oral Tradition, 657. VI. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL LIST OF SOME OF THE EDITIONS OF THE HOLY SECT. IV. — Principal Editions of the Greek New Testament Page 684 SECT. V. - Polyglott Bibles, &c. SECT. VI. — Ancient Versions of the Old and New Testaments § 1. Targums § 2. Ancient Greek versions English translations of the LXX. [iii.] Another Greek version § 3. Ancient Oriental versions 713 719 - 719 - 720 [i] The Septuagint - 720 - 726 [ii] Editions of Origen's Hexapla and Tetrapla - 726 - 731 INTRODUCTION ΤΟ THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. INTRODUCTION TO THE TEXTUAL CRITICISM AND STUDY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. CHAPTER I. THE OBJECTS PROPOSED IN AN INTRODUCTION TO TEXTUAL CRITICISM AND STUDY. A DISTINCT apprehension of the object proposed in any study is a needful preliminary: the definition of terms having been at first made once for all, may render it not necessary to enter into repeated explanations, and may save the trouble of frequently notifying the limitations of the subject under discussion, which may be sufficiently guarded by the broad principles laid down at first. By Textual Criticism it is, then, intended to denote all that relates to the condition of the text of the Greek Testament; to its history during the eighteen centuries through which it has been transmitted to us; to the sources of critical revision which we possess ; to the mode in which those sources have been applied, whether wholly or partially, by various editors; and the means by which the Biblical student may use his own judgment with regard to the transmitted sources of criticism, and to their application either to the sacred text at large or to individual passages. As a general definition, Textual Criticism may be stated to be that species of criticism which has to do with the ascertainment, as far as is practicable, of what it was that the writer of any ancient work actually wrote. The subjects with which a treatise on Textual Criticism is occupied, are those which relate to the communication of such information as shall enable the student to apprehend the principles on which textual evidence may be applied, and the form in which such evidence may be obtained. Many, indeed, there are who study the Bible, and who know its value, as conveying to them the revelation of the truth of God, who never would find it practicable for them to be investigators for themselves in the region of Textual Criticism; but that does not cause the subject to be to them devoid of interest, or (if they view it aright) of profit. For if they use the opportunities of study which are afforded them, they may be enabled, though never aspiring to the rank of critics themselves, to understand intelligently, and to use discriminately, those processes and results of critical study which others may bring before them. They may, by a very moderate exercise of diligence, be saved from either avoiding the subject altogether, as though it were involved to them in hopeless obscurity, or from simply adhering to the results which some real or supposed scholar may have brought forward. There are, indeed, those who regard textual critics as though their object was to affirm dogmatically that the reading of passages is such, and that this ought to be received on their assertion; and who suppose that critical studies are singularly barren of profitable results. This misapprehension is a fact, however strange it may seem to those who are better informed. And hence it is of importance to give, if possible, a more accurate and discriminating idea of what this department of criticism proposes. To take a simple illustration: in judicial proceedings in this country the jury are those whose business it is to weigh the evidence which may be produced, and to form if possible an accurate and discriminating conclusion. This is not the peculiar prerogative of a few official persons; but it is the function of those who are simply jurors. And it is in such a place that considerate Christian readers and students of Holy Scripture are placed. But the jury must decide according to evidence; and so, too, must those who are so intimately connected with the results of Textual Criticism. Now, in judicial inquiries the jury themselves may be very incompetent to collect the evidence, and to bring into prominent view the leading features, to show how the different portions are connected, and how link after link conducts to a certain end; and yet practically it is taken for granted that these things can be pointed out to them intelligibly by those who are competent, and that they may thus form a correct conclusion. Be it observed that this conclusion does not depend upon what any authority says that the evidence proves, but it springs from that which is either plain on the face, or which is shown to the jury to be the natural or necessary result. In this, as well as in many other processes of reasoning, moral as well as mathematical, the correctness of the conclusion flows forth by a kind of necessary inference. Now the real object of Textual Criticism is to enable the student or reader to form such a judgment as in the judicial proceedings referred to is the province of the jury. It is not to lead to blind acquiescence in the dictum of some one of admitted learning and abilities; but it is to lead to an intelligent apprehension why he has 1 Had not this been a fact, we should not hear the complaints of the proceedings of textual critics which too often appear, especially in religious periodicals. The name of textual critic is not rightly applied to him who seeks, by mere dogmatism, to require others to adopt his view of the reading of a passage. |