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
Review- —Laurence on Griesbacli s Greek Testament , 363 i
Untitled Article
conceives , 86 , that this editor ' s " arrangement of classes is not intended to supersede , but to act in subordination fo , conjectural criticism . " He ought to have s ;\ id Hint it is not intended to supersede the { triplication of sound
critical principles to the contents of manuscripts- Griesbaeh ' s criticism was not conjectural . We have before exposed the impropriety of this language of the Remarker ' s , who is unable to overthrow t ) ie decisions of Griesbaeh in the two several examples of John vii . 8 . John i . 18 . In the former of these passages the editor substitutes ovx for o vrfjj
( eyu ; owrt jj ' cevafiztvev zt $ Tyv loqrr ^ v 7 < Z'Jlr v ) on high external authority , nnd , fa rther , on strong internal presumption ; the 0 V 7 tiv of the received text being borrowed , as is most probable , from the succeeding clause , where it indisputably occurs : in the other reading Q = o $ has no probability
whatever , but the reverse , it being indeed impossible to suppose that the sacred historian wrote , " no one hath seen God at any time : the only begotten God , who is in the bosom of the Father , he hath declared him "and the word Szg $ , for which Dr . L . appears to contend , being really a
gloss , and no various * reading . We are satisfied that in this latter instance the only critical question , as to the text , is , whether or not vi rjg should be omitted ? Griesbach retains the word : nnd we presume that it will not he in the Remarker ' s power to set aside the sentence . * On this head our readers will perhaps arrive at Hie same conclusion with ourselves when they have
carefully weighed Griesbach ' s rules of criticism , particularly the 1 st , 7 th , 8 th , 9 th , 10 th , 12 thv 13 th , and 14 th . * Dr . jLaurence chuses to be sceptical respecting the existence of " an Alexandrine text more valuable as well as more ancient than either the Bvzantine or the Western . " 88 . Now , in the first place , that there are
appropriate readings in the manuscripts and in the fathers usually denominated Alexandrine , cannot be fairly denied by those who are acquainted with the works of Griesbach : and the number of these readings is of far less conse quence than their nature ; it being difficult to explain their occurrence
* Prolcgoin . L 1 X—LX 1 X .
Untitled Article
unless we fefer them to a separate text . In the next place , * ' the possibility that manuscripts written in Alexandria might have boon adapted to the Latin text , " weighs nothing against this conclusion . All the texts
( recensioncs ) weje subject to mutilations and corruptions . Michaelis and Bishop Marsh believed in " the existence" of an Alexandrine edition , notwithstanding their concessions in
regard to the influence of Latinizing copies on Greek manuscripts in Alexandria . A falling man catches at a twig . Dr . L . is eager to represent a possibility as a fact . The Remarker indeed is aware , 91 , that his reflections " run counter to
public prejudice [ opinion ] , " 1 o the judgment of many whose literary talents conciliate his esteem , and whose critical acumen commands his respect . * ' But , in the republic of letters , " he says with great correctness , " no supremacy is admissible hut that of truth , and I flatter myself , " adds Dr . L .,
" that I possess the same claim to the candour of others , which Griesbacli has to mine /' What candour he lias shewn to Griesbach , let certain ' quotations that we have made from his Remarks , fy c * attest . That the authority of names should never be opposed to the
evidence and the demands of Truth , we agree with him in 1 bin king . What indication however is afforded by Dr . \ j . of his capacity of demolishing Ilie critical fabric of Griesbach ? And how unbecoming is the attempt to convert the effect of the Professor ' s modesty
into an argument against Ins system ! Griesbach declines to reason from materials which are not in his possession : and this cautious spirit is charged upon him as a fault ! Even the contending paragraph of the body of the Reinarker \ s pamphlet
insinuates accusations of Griesbach . Dr . Laurence is pleased to speak of ** an intricate and involved analysis /* and of " exalting possibilities into probabilities , and probabilities into certainties . " fie contrasts ' * the gambols of imagination" with " the soberer exertions of reason" and " wildly
wandering in the dark' * with < k walking in the broad light of day . " It is pleasant to observe how Dr . Laurence can point a period , after he has wearied himself and his readers * b y his
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), June 2, 1817, page 363, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2465/page/43/
-