Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1881-05-29
SUNDAY, MAY %, 1881.
THE REVISED NE1Ss TEsTA-
hstNI.
An Abstract z E3a. sg!iI E'rDYe En-
TSst3iaHE.

Below IS an abstract Of the Com
panion to the Revised New Tests-
ment, hy r V. Alexander Roberts, d.
D., as tbs same appeared IN the { Il
cinrati Commercial 81 last Sunday
It was handed to us by Rev. 8. {.
Rankin. D. D, pastor Of the Church
Street NJ E. Church, Sou h, in this
city, who regards it as one of the
best presentations of the subject
that has been written. We publish
It in full, as fair presentation of
subject in which the whole Christian
world is now profoundly Interested:
THE IEED OF EEyIsI0S.
Changes IN the received version are ne
cessitateI by Il variety of causes. The first
lies III the condition Of the original text.
More copies Of the sacred volume than OF
ANY ether ancient writing have come to Us
in manuscript no fewer than /, 100 man
l.cripts of the New Testament are known
20 scholars OF our day. These manuscripts
are divided into two classes. according as
they are written in capitals or in small let
ters; the former being known as mclalS,
the latter rs Ourselves. The line between
(he two modes of writing runs somewhere
about the tenth century. Beyond that date
there are hut five copies of the New FIESTA
luent st all complete, which can be referred
TO Il higher antiquity. These range from
The fourth to the sixth centHry. They are
the Alexandr:an Ms, known to scholars as
\. now in the British museum, and as
signed TO the fifth century: the Vatican
Ms. III the Vatican library. known as b,
and dated III the fourth century; the
9;Dhraem MS, c., in the national library of
Paris palimpset regarded as OF date as
early ss that of il; the Beza MS. D., pre-
.enfed by Beza to the University of Cam
bridge. and generally referred to the sixth
century: and the Sinaitic Ms, or Aleph,
accidentaIi discovered III a basket by
Professor Tiscbend0rf in the convent of
St. Catharine Oh Mount Sinai This is as
.,f.ned to the fourth century, a little later
than r. The cursiYes are far more pumer-
.lBs. and some of them exceedingly y3lua-
iIe. though rs p whole, less important than
the uncjais. Besides these, are the ancient
versions of the New Testament such IS
the SyTiac the cid Latin, which Is the basis
of the vulgate of the Roman Church, the
Coptic and the Armenian.
Where the Transmission of the text was,
for 50 many centuries, dependent upon man
nal transcription innunerable errors must
necessarily nave crept IN. Hence we find
IN the various manuscripts aud versions Va
rietes of reading amounting 10 $50, o0J.
The Great majority Of these errors are o. 80
imDortapce: multitudes of them are mere
Photographed blunders. while others con-
sist merely in the substitution of one synO-
for M II, - r. a
without appreciabIe distinction of sense.
These differences are such as would be rep
resented IN English by the difference be,
tween he went forth and he went out;
1.-The enemy escaped" and the enemy
made their escape Paul. the Apostle, -
and the Apostle Paul The $50. 900 thus
reduce themselves to perhaps 400, which,
10 quote the words of Professor Abbott
involve Il difference Of meaning, often
yeYy slight, or the omission or addition of &
few words, sufficient to render them objects
OF some curiosity and interest while a few
exceptional cases among them may relatively
be called important. BGt our critical help.
are now so abundant that in a very larg,
majority of these important questions o
reading we are able to determine the trlt
text with q good degree of confidence
W lat remains doubtful we can afford Il
leave doubtful"
The so-called Received Text" from
which our authorized version was formed, il
compilation based almost entirely on the
labor, of Erasmus. But Erarmus had nc
documentary materials for publishing al
edition OF the Greek Testament which should
be either accurate or complete; and even
after Stephens and Beza had wrought on hi!
text, that text was still left in very unsat
isfactory state. Not one of the four mos
ancient MSS was then known to be in cx
istence, and the value of even !" Codex d v
was only partially understood. It viii thus
be seen that there was abundant room for
revised text as the basis Of revised version
of the New Testament, and according to tn
number and quality Of the changes made II
the original VIII be the number and quaGt,
OF the changes made in the revised transla
ton.
DIFFERENCES IN READINGS.
These arise from a variety of causes, at
tribated by DIR. Roberts-6rst, to mistake
NJ cOuyiSts For examine at l. Timothy /