On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
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.
-
-
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
Isaac Newton has demonstrated the word Oco < r to be an interpo ^ iation , the original reading being o ; so that the genuine pas ** sag e runs ^ " — the mystery of godliness * which was manifest in the flesh /* The frarners of systems are very apt to fancy that a demonstration ^ which they wish to be one . Where
different readings occur , though it may not be easy mathematical ^ ly to demonstrate which is the true one , yet it appears to me tolerably good moral evidence of the spuriousness of a reading , if it produces grammatical nonsense . This is the case with the reading 5 . If it be the nominative case to the verb was martin
Jest , which it plainly is , then it must likewise be the nominative case to all the succeeding verbs . Now , though I can conceive how a mystery maybe preached unto the Gentiles and believed on in the world , I can frame no idea how a mystery can be received up'into glory , Wliat was received up into glory
was Christy not a mystery . A mysterious person may be received up ; but to say , that a mystery was seen of angels , and received up into glory , is to my own comprehension downright nonsense . We might as well 3 ay , that a doctrine was received up ; for what is a mystery , except a mysterious doctrine f Though I have £ iven this answer to J . M . I freely own , that I
have never heard of apy such reading as §' , which he says has been demonstrated to be the true one . The Alexandrine MS , indeed reads os which Griesbach prefers to © egs-, but which man * € : les the sense of the passage just as woefully as the 5 of J f M * For the masculine relative o $ cannot accord with the neuter
^ u / lr \ piovy the only antecedent therefore which we can find for it is crlvXof a pillar , in the preceding verse , except indeed we prefer bixos" a house . But how could the house of God , the pillar of the truth , be received up into glory ? In fact , this supv posed various reading O 2 is simply © 2 5 the abbreviated mode
¦ of writing © EOS , the central mark of the theta having been obliterated in so ancient a MS . as the Alexandrine by lapse of time . To this Griesbach ' s answer is ? that O 2 was more likely to be changed by an unskilful transcriber into € ) £ , than thereverse . Why his opinion is ? norc likely than the other , I cannot
conceive . It is manifest , that bv lapse of time , the diacritical jiiark of the theta lyiight . easily be erased ^ which vvpqld convert H into omicron ; while no lapse of time co'ild add to the onpicron the mark , which wouhl convert it into a theta . In addition to the internal evidence that neither o . t nor o can be the true
reading , inasmuch as they alike produce nonsense , even Griesbach himself brings sufficient external evidence to prove the genuine - * ness of the received reading ; Ow , J . JYL indeed asks withruufli
Untitled Article
522 The Clergyman ' s Answer to J * Jlf .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Oct. 2, 1807, page 522, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2385/page/14/
-