On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    ©«* . The story at full length is this : Birch ( see his Variae Lectiones in Acta Apost , Haun . 1798 , p . 49 ) , gave the Collations of the Vatican and other MSS . upon this verse , as

    follows , taking ( let it be always remembered ) the received text of Stephens as his basis , and designating the MS ., commonly called the Vatican , ( Griesbach ' s B ) by the appellation—Vat .

    1200-*• Acts xx . 2 fc : ® ea ] re Kvpie Vat . 367 . Barb . S 77 . ts xvpia Gea Ven . 10 . re icvpw koci © £ 8 Vat . 366 , 760 , 1160 , 1210 . Alex . Vat . 29 , &c . Lectionem textus habent . Vat . 1209 . —Laur . 1 Laur . S 2 . —Pint . IV . Vind . 1 , 34 , a prima , manu . Vind . S 6- tq this aiuaro $ ] re ot , i [ Aa , To <; re 1 & 8 , Vat . 367 , 1209 . "

    On printing the concluding volume of his work , which contains the Variae Lectiones ad textum Apoealypseos , Birch , through that extreme caution and accuracy , for which he is so justly celebrated , thought it his duty to tell

    the public exactly how the case rested , though he , in his own mind , had no doubt on the subject , nor Griesbach after him , and he there gives the passage which B . has quoted , and which , if he will allow me , I will take the

    liberty of asserting , is no retraction , but to be simply to the following effect : " I have in the former volume stated positively that the Vatican reads &ea ; but when I look over my papers which contain my Collations of this MS . 1 can find nothing at all about

    the reading &ae , or any other reading in this place , so that I cannot take upon myself to say with certainty what the MS . really contains . I have , however , scarcely any doubt that , if there had been , in thu place , any variation from the received text , (© £# , )

    I should have particularly observed it , because I always paid peculiar attention to this passage in every MS . I cannot tell , therefore , how the Vatican , 1209 , came to be inserted , but it is plain , from what I have stated , that I cannot speak positively on the subject , and that it must be struck out . "

    In this state Griesbach found the question , and having no doubt any more than Birch , that if there had been any variation from the received text , Se& 9 the Professor must have noticed it , he places the Vatican in his Appendix as supporting 0 * 0 $ but that

    Untitled Article

    every reader may judge for himself , he gives his authority for so doing by quoting Birch ' s last observations on the subject . Your Correspondent B . seems to have been led into his misconstruction

    of these observations , by not keeping in mind a most material fact , nam&ly , that &ea was the lectio , and any other reading the variotio , and has most ingeniously suggested an alteration of the text , which , to be sure , favours

    his object very well , but destroys the true reading of the passage . If he remembers that Sea was the reading of the text which Birch took for his basis , lie will see that when he says , " Si hie [ not / nee ] in codice nostro ohtinuisset ^ arietas lectionis , " he could

    never mean so to designate the standard to which he was referring all his Collations . This mistake , however , runs through B / s postscript , and under that delusion he gives his concluding paragraph . " As however we have got the manuscript examined by Professor Birch , and as he has not discovered

    this peculiar reading , I for one shall be content , upon his authority , to believe the word God is not to be found in this text , in the Vatican MS , Had the word been there , it is hardly possible , that the Professor should have

    overlooked it , or neglected to have noted so important a variation . " Every word of this passage , your readers will easily see , is fallacious . In the first place , it is unsupported by B / s own shewing . Even as he

    understands Birch , he expressly states , that he can say nothing positively either one way or another . In the next place , I should like to ask B ., when he talks of this " important variation , " what reading it is that he takes ® £ 8 to be called a variation from

    by Birch , or what , upon his way of interpreting the Professor , he supposes the reading of the Vatican to be ? Admitting his whole reasoning , I cannot see that it would make any thing in favour of Kvptov , the reading which the Improved Version and

    Griesbach adopt : it may still be Kvpiov teat ® £ &f 0 es koci Kvpiov , or any other equally objectionable reading- Before B . can shew that Birch calls 0 * e a variation , he must tell us Sy hat the Professor made his standard ; a point about which no one who lodka a *

    Untitled Article

    448 Reply to If . ' s Defence of the Note of the Improved Version on Actsxx . £ 8 .

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), July 2, 1818, page 448, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2478/page/40/