On this page
- Departments (1)
-
Text (3)
-
Untitled Article
-
REVIEW.
-
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
( 359 )
Review.
REVIEW .
Untitled Article
cc Still pleased to praise , yet not afraid to blame . —Pope .
Art . I . — Dr . Laurences Remarks upon GriesbacJis Classification , $ rc . [ Concluded from p . 241 . ] \ SOUND Biblical Critic is formed _ Zjfc ^ by experience , and habits of practical skill , rather than by theoretic rules . * This was . Griesbach ' s distinction , but has not belonged to his
censors . The subjects of which Dr . L . professes to treat in the fifth chapter of these Remarks , fyc . are intimated in the following table of it ' s contents : More correct mode of ascertaining the class of a manuscript . Comparison of A with Origen * With G or the Western text . Affinity of A to the Byzantine greater
than to the Western , or Alexandrine . He begins the chapter by speaking of his own endeavours " to prove , that Griesbach ' s mode of investigation is unsatisfactory , and his statement of the number of readings inaccurate . " Now
the Remarker ' s proof does not accord with his declaration . If we receive his account of his labours , he has done that generally and completely which , at the furthest , he has done but partially—in a single case , and with regard to one class of examples . Not deeming it sufficient however to overthrow error , without erecting an
accurate system on it ' s ruins , he attempts ^ to describe what appears to him " a more satisfactory mode of investigation 11 than that which Griesbach has prosecuted ! In making this attempt , he needlessly repeats doubts and fears which he had before expressed , and then says , 5 O , 51 , that error
" is most to he apprehended in GriesbacVs favourite text , the Alexandrine ; because , if it really be a distinct text , which [ adds Dr . L . ] I much doubt , it is the least complete of the three , the quotations of Origen , which are published in the Symbolae , being * only applicable to particular parts of the New Testament , and not to t the whole . ' We must here call the recollection of our readers to Griesbach ' s emphatic
* m $$ gem : , Biblioth : der bibliftch : LiteratV % , Baud . 2 b , 26 .
Untitled Article
language , * ' in the Symbolce : ' neutrius recensionis [ sc : Occid : et Alex : ] codex ullus ad nos pervenit , quin plurimis locis interpolatus sit . Nulli enim codici tantum deferimus ut lectiones ejus
quascunque probemus .- \ " A distinct text " is a characteristic text , not one which is absolutely pure . Nor do the readings of the Alexandrine edition occur solely in Origen , but are also found in Clement of Alexandria , and in other ancient Christian authors . f The Remarker , as though he designed to throw contempt on
Biblical Criticism , observes , p . 51 , note , that the manuscript A is commonly called the Alexandrine , because it was brought into England from Alexandria : but , " he subjoins , " even the knowledge of the country , in which it was originally written , is only aU tain able by conjecture . " If by conjecture he means the exercise of a sound
and well-informed understanding on the evidence presented , he is in the right , Michaelis considers it as " very probable" § that the Alexandrine M . S . € C was written in Egypt . " And his accomplished annotator thinks it " reasonable to suppose" that this codex was " really written" there . The conjectures of such individuals , are better than some men ' s proofs . 1
Dr . Laurence proceeds to " detail ' what he conceives " to be a more correct mode of ascertaining the relative classification of a manuscript , than that which Griesbach has adopted : and , in order to reduce his remarks to a moderate compass , he limits them to the classification of the manuscript A in the Epistles of Paul . That he may
likewise bring the Western text into some sort of comparison , he takes into consideration the readings of the Boer * nerian marked G . As however he merely numbers readings , and does not weigh them , we must be excused from accompanying him in his investigation . On the unsoundness of this principle of the
Re--f Tom . I . cxix . t Ib . I . xxvi . II . 241 > &c . § Introd ; to N . T . 1 % . 107 , 651
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), June 2, 1817, page 359, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2465/page/39/
-