from an angel. This, on the contrary, is an evident proof of God's protection, which was a manifeft token of our Saviour's innocency, and confequently of the truth of his divine miffion. From all thefe particulars it is plain, that the books of the New Testament have been conveyed down to us, without any other alteration but what is unavoidable in copies, made from old and worn-out manufcripts (x). 3. These various readings, if compared together, and with the printed copies, may be very ferviceable in helping ferviceable in helping us to difcover the true one, and alfo the word or expreflion ufed by the facred writers, as feveral able criticks have done with good fuccefs. Since the reftoration of learning, feveral authors have rendered this method of comparing the various readings very commodious and eafy, by fetting down the various readings in the editions they have given of the Greek Teftament (*). They feem even in these latter times to have over-done the matter. For it was needlefs to rank among the various readings, things that are visible blunders in the tranfcribers, words that have no meaning at all in any language, lame expreffions, fome little different particles which amount to the fame, and other things of the like nature (I). All this heap of rubbish serves only to fwell the bulk of a volume, to puzzle the reader, and to fright weak perfons, who are already in a confternation to fee fo many various readings published. There is a good deal of judgment and caution requifite in comparing the various readings, that we may not prefer the bad to the good. St. Auguftin (1) hath a very judicious obfervation upon this point. "There being," faith he, "fome little difference between the copies of the New Teftament, as is well known by thofe that are converfant in the facred writings, if we would be fatisfied of the authority of any various reading, we must confult the copies of the country from whence the doctrine was conveyed to us. If we meet alfo with fome variety between them we ought to prefer the greater number of manufcripts to the leffer, and the ancient to the modern. If there ftill remains any uncertainty, we must then have recourfe to the language from which the version was made." And whereas we have now greater advantages than they had at that time, we may therefore take more care to prevent our being mistaken (*). The knowledge of the eaftern languages being grown more common, the ancient verfions may be of great ufe to us, because they were made from very old manufcripts (+). It is (x) Dr. Mill's Proleg. Fol. xxx. xxxix. xl. alfo (*) The most famous men in this fort of learning have been Laurentius Valla, Erafmus, Lucas Brugenfis, Robert Stephens, Bp. Walton in the English Polyglot, Curcellæus, Bp. Fell, and laftly Dr. Mill in his edit. of the New Teftament printed at Oxford, 1707. (I) See Dr. Whitby's Examen Variar. Lect. Millii. (1) Aug. adv. Manich. 1. xi. c. 2. He is there fpeaking of the Italick verfion. (*) Dr. Pfaffius hath given very good rules upon this point, in his differta. tion concerning the various readings of the New Testament. (†) For instances of this, fee our notes on Jam, v. 12, 1 Pet. v. 13. 2 Pet. ii. 2. alfo proper to confult the fathers in thofe places where they have quoted paffages out of the New Teftament. But we must ufe a great deal of circumfpection and care in this particular, because the fathers frequently quoted paffages as they came to their minds, or elfe gave the fenfe of them, without fetting down the very words of fcripture, and fometimes alfo they borrowed out of falfe gofpels certain paffages, which having fome conformity with those that are found in ours, may be eafily miftaken for various readings, though they are not really fo. It is likewife neceffary often to confult the Hebrew text of the Old Teftament, in order to find out the true meaning or fpelling of fome words, efpecially of proper names. But we ought above all to render the verfion of the Seventy familiar to us, because the facred writers of the New Teftament have chiefly followed it in their quotations, as we have before obferved. By fuch means as thefe, and efpecially with the affiftance of the writings of fo many learned and pious perfons that have made the facred writings their particular ftudy, we may eafily extricate ourselves from all the objections and difficulties that may be raifed against the text of the New Teftament, efpecially if we do it with a defign of being informed and arriving at the truth, and not out of any cavilling and contradicting humour. Concerning the Chapters and Verfes of the New Testament. T HE ancients were wont to write or indite their compofures without breaking off between every word, neither did they divide them into fections, chapters, or verfes. And even in manufcripts of any confiderable antiquity, there are neither points nor accents. This, which to us may appear inconvenient, and is really fo, was not without its conveniencies. Men could not then be led into any mistakes by a wrong punctuation, as we often are at this day, and the reader ufed à greater application in order to difcover the meaning of his author, which is now frequently dark and intricate, because in moft manufcripts words and fentences are feparated which ought to have been joined, and thofe are joined which should have been feparated (*). There is indeed no manner of accent, or any other mark of diftinction in most of the manufcripts of the New Teftament, and this is even looked upon as a fign of antiquity. But thefe facred writings being read every funday, in the churches, they were for this purpose divided into fections, that the reader might know how far he was to read every (*) There are fome learned perfons, who, when they would find out the meaning of fome difficult Greek paffage, write it down at length, without leaving any diftinction between the words or letters; which is a very good method. VOL. III. T every funday (†). The books that were thus divided were called lectio naries, and the fections went under the name of titles (||), and chapters. In these lectionaries, there were yet other diftinctions (*), which were of ufe in quoting paffages, and comparing the gofpels together. The author of these fections is fuppofed to have been Ammonius of Alexandria, a writer of the second century, of whom mention hath been made elfewhere. His method was followed by Eufebius, who made ufe of it in compiling the ten canons he invented, wherein he fhews what particulars are recorded by all the Evangelifts, and what is mentioned only by one or two of them. As these canons are not in ufe at present, we think there is no occasion of giving an account of them here (a). The ancients were also wont to divide their books into verses, each of which contained only a line. There were no marks for this divifion in the text, but the number of lines was fet down at the end of the book, to fhew the bigness of the volume (b). Laftly, they used to reckon how many fentences there were in a treatise (c). It is not well known who was the author of the diftinction into chapters. It feems to have been done in the thirteenth century ($). The verfes were invented in the fixteenth century (d) by Robert Stephens, as we are told by Henry Stephens, his fon (e). This divifion of the chapters into verfes was found fo very convenient, that it hath been ufed in all the editions of the bible that have been made ever fince. It is notwithstanding attended with some inconveniencies. For, 1. The fenfe is often interrupted by this divifion, and fo the reader may hereby be led into miftakes, by fancying that every verfe compleats the fenfe. Inftances enough of this are to be met with the first moment we begin to read. 2. People are infenfibly come into this notion, that every verfe contains a mystery, or fome effential point, though there is frequently no more than fome incident or circumftance recorded in that place. 3. This hath proved the occafion of that wrong method which prevails among preachers. Which is, that the generality of them imagine that (+) In imitation of the Jews, who divided the law into perafim, or fections. (I) The titles were generally larger than the chapters. There are fome manuscripts, for instance, wherein St. Matthew's golp. hath 68 titles, and 355 chap. St. Mark's 48 titles, and 234 chap. St. Luke's 83 titles, and 342 chap. and St. John's 17 titles, and 231 chap. but thefe two words were often ufed promifcuoufly the one for the other. (*) Thefe diftinctions were in being in the time of Juftin the Martyr. They were called Pericopes, i. e. fections. p. m. 225. 233. 263. (a) You may fee them in Dr. Mill's edition of the New Testament, after the Prolegomena; and alfo in St. Jerom, who hath explained and prefixed them to his tranflation of the gospels. (b) This they called Sticometria (xoμsτgía.) (c) This was filed Rhefs, (gross) or word. (1) And, as is supposed, by Cardinal Hugo a Dominican, the author of the Arft concordance to the holy fcriptures. (d) Anno 1551. (e) in the preface to his Concordance of the New Teftament. that one verfe is fufficient to be the fubject of a fermon; but when they come to handle it, finding that it cannot furnish them with solid and inftructing reflexions enough, they are forced to go from their point, and in order to fill up their discourse, to difplay their wit and learning, which very often adminifter but little edification to their hearers, and is certainly contrary to the end of preaching. It is then much to be wifhed, that fome able hand would divide the chapters otherwise than they are at prefent. If the verses were fuffered to remain, they should be fo divided as to make always a compleat fense, though they happened to be upon that account either longer or fhorter than they now are. But perhaps it would after all be better to fupprefs the verfes intirely, and to divide the chapters into certain articles, which fhould contain fuch a number of verfes as compleats the fenfe. When any word or paffage of fcripture is quoted, it would be no great trouble to look over a whole article, which could not be very long. Add to all this, that such a method would be a vast ease to the memory, which cannot but be over-burdened with fuch a great number of verses as we are, upon occafion, obliged to remember. Befides, that we should hereby avoid the other inconveniencies that have been mentioned before (t). Of the Herefies that arofe in the Apoftolical Times. OTHING can be a greater help for the understanding of feveral places in the New Teftament, and particularly in the epiftles, than the having fome notion of the herefies or fects, which arofe in the time of the Apoftles. The word herefy (a), as ufed by ancient writers, properly fignifies no more than a fect. It was one of those words which had a good or bad meaning, according as they were placed. In the firft and original fenfe of this term it is, that Jofephus (b) calls the fect of the Pharifees a herefy, though he was himself a Pharifee. St. Paul had no defign of blaming this fect, [or heresy, as he styles (t) it] when he faid, that it was the ftricteft of all. It is very probable, that when those Jews that were at Rome gave the Chriftian religion the name of herefy (d), they understood this word in its general and indeterminate fignification, fince they expreffed a great regard for St. Paul, and even defired to hear him; however, this word is most commonly taken (†) For a full and exact account of the divifion of the fcriptures into chapters and verses, fee Dr. Prideaux's Connect. Part I. B. 5. under the year 446. (a) The word herefy is derived from a Greek verb, which fignifies to chufe. (c) dige. Acts xxvi. 5. (b) Jofeph. Antiq. (d) Acts xxviii. 22. , taken in an ill sense (*), and thus it is frequently used in the New Testa ment (e). The fathers of the church have almost always affixed an odious idea to it: thus St. Irenæus wrote five books against the hereticks. St. Hippolitus, difciple of Irenæus, made a collection of thirty-two herefies, as we learn from Photius (ƒ). Juftin Martyr mentions a treatife of his own writing (g), wherein he had confuted all the hereftes, and he offers to lay it before the emperor Antoninus. Tertullian compofed a book against the hereticks, which he entitled prefcriptions. If we will believe St. Epiphanius, there had been from the firft rife of Chriftianity down to his own times, no lefs than fourfcore herefies. It is true, this father is very apt to carry matters too far. St. Auguftin and several others have given catalogues of the Hereticks.. It is certain, that there arofe herefies, even in the time of the Apoftles, as is manifeft from the paffages juft before alledged, notwithstanding what fome ancient writers feem to have faid to the contrary (i). St. Paul, in his epiftles to Timothy and Titus, gives us plainly enough to understand, what was the character of the hereticks of thofe times: from whence we learn, 1. That these first herefies were broached by fome of thofe perfons that turned from Judaism to Chriftianity. 2. That they were profane and ridiculous fables, endless genealogies, queftions about words, which ferved only to raife quarrels and difputes, very per nicious doctrines which spread themselves, and eat like a canker. 3. That thofe hereticks were men of abominable principles. They were proud, crafty, hypocritical, mercenary, given to all forts of vices, and confequently felf-condemned (k). It is no wonder therefore that St. Paul orders fuch perfons to be avoided after the first or fecond admonition. 4. That they gave their tenets the fpecious name of knowledge, in Greek gnofis (*). From this word was the name of gnofticks derived, which Gnoflicks. was given to moft of the ancient hereticks in general, though they were divided into feveral branches. We do not find that the name of gnoflicks was known in the Apoftles' time, but it is very plain that their opinions were then in being (1). It is very probable, that they had borrowed their fyftem from the Jewish cabala (†), and that their cones (*) Like the word tyrannus, which, in its original fignification meant no more than a king, but was afterwards ufed to denote an ufurper, or an oppreffor. iii. (e) 1 Cor. xi. 19. Gal. v. 20. Tit. iii. 10. 2 Petr. ii. 1. 9. (*) This word denotes the understanding of the deep and myftical fenfes of fcripture. The Apoftles were perfect masters of this fort of knowledge; that which the hereticks pretended to, was but falfely fo called. 1 Tim. vi. 20, See our preface on that epistle. (1) Rom. i. 21. 1 Cor. viii. II. 1 Tim. vi. 20. (+) Cabala fignifies tradition, we have fpoken of it elsewhere. There were abundance of Plato's and Pythagoras's notions in the Jewish cabala. |