122

Scripture. thew and the epistle to the Hebrews, which there is reason to believe were composed in the Syro-Chaldaic language, which in the New Testament is called HeLanguage brew. in which the New

posed.

123

Why the greatest part of it

in Creek.

Various reasons have been assigned why the greatest Testament part of the New Testament was written in Greek; but was com- the true reason is this, It was the language best understood both by writers and readers. Had St Paul written to a community in the Roman province of Africa, he might have written perhaps in Latin; but epistles to the inhabitants of Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, Philip is written pi, and Thessalonica, to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, from a native of Tarsus, could hardly be expected in any other language than Greek. The same may be said of the epistles of St Peter, which are addressed to the Christians of different countries, who had no other language in common than the Greek; and likewise of the epistles of St James, who wrote to Jews, that lived at a distance from Palestine, and were ignorant of Hebrew. The native language of St Luke, as well as of Theophilus, to whom he addressed bis gospel, and Acts of the apostles, appears to have been Greek; and that St John wrote his gospel in that language, and not in Hebrew, is by no means a matter of surprise, since he wrote at Ephesus.

iv, seet. 1. P. 101.

Michaelis, With respect to the epistle to the Romans, it may vol. i. chap. be asked indeed why St Paul did not write in Latin? Now, whoever proposes this question, must presuppose that St Paul was master of the Latin language in such a degree as to find no difficulty in writing it; a matter which remains to be proved. It is very probable that St Paul was acquainted with the Latin; but between understanding a language, and being able to write it, . there is a very material difference. As St Paul was a native of Tarsus, his native language was Greek; he had travelled during several years through countries in which no other language was spoken, and when he addressed the Roman centurion at Jerusalem, he spoke not Latin, but Greek. Is it extraordinary, then, that in writing to the inhabitants of Rome he should have used a language which was there so generally understood? It has been long remarked, that Greek was at that time as well known in Rome as French in any court of modern Europe; that according to Juvenal even the female sex made use of Greek as the language of familiarity and passion; and that in letters of friendship Greek words and phrases were introduced with greater freedom than French expressions in German letters, as appears from Cicero's epistles to Atticus, and from those of Augustus preserved in the works of Suetonius. To this must be added a material circumstance, that a great part of the Roman Christians consisted of native Jews, who were better acquainted with Greek than with Latin, as either they themselves or their ancestors had come from Greece, Asia Minor, or Egypt, in which Greek was the language of the country. At least they read the Bible in that language, as no Latin translation of the Old Testament at that time existed; and the Christian church at that period consisting chiefly of Jews, the heathen converts in Rome were of course under the necessity of accustoming themselves to the Greek language. In short, St Paul in his epistle to the Romans made use of a language in which alone those who were ignorant of Hebrew could read the Bible. What has been here advanced respecting the

epistle to the Romans is equally applicable to the Greek Scripture. of St Mark, on the supposition that it was written at Rome.

To the above arguments may be added the example of Josephus, who, as well as the apostles, was by birth a Jew. He even lived in Rome, which is more than can be said of St Paul and St Mark, who resided there only a certain time he was likewise younger than either; he came to Italy at an age which is highly suitable to the learning of a language, and previous to that period had spent several years in the Roman camp. The Jewish antiquities, the history of the Jewish war, and the account of his own life, he wrote undoubtedly with a view of their being read by the Romans; and yet he composed all these writings in Greek. He expresses his motive for writing his Greek account of the Jewish war in the following terms: "That having written in his native language (i. e. the Hebrew dialect at that time spoken) a history of the war, in order that Parthians, Babylonians, Arabians, Adiabenes, and the Jews beyond the Euphrates, might be informed of those events, he was now resolved to write for the Greeks and Romans, who had not been engaged in the campaigns, a more certain account than had hitherto been given." The motives which induced Josephus to write in Greek are fully as applicable to St Paul and St Mark.

Michaelis,

p. 111. 124

Michaelis has thus characterized the style of the New Testament. "The New Testament (says he) was writ- vol. i. ten in a language at that time common among the Jews, chap. iv. which may be named Hebraic Greek; the first traces sect. 3. of which we find in the translation of the LXX. "Every man acquainted with the Greek language, Is full of who had never heard of the New Testament, must im- Hebraisms, mediately perceive, on reading only a few lines, that the style is widely different from that of the classic authors. We find this character in all the books of the New Testament in a greater or less degree, but we must not therefore conclude that they possess an uniformity of style. The harshest Hebraisms, which extended even to grammatical errors in the government of cases, are the distinguishing marks of the book of Revelation; but they are accompanied with tokens of genius and poetical enthusiasm of which every reader must be sensible who has taste and feeling. There is no translation of it which is not read with pleasure even in the days of childhood; and the very faults of grammar are so happily placed as to produce an agreeable effect. The gospels of St Matthew and St Mark have strong marks of this Hebraic style; the former has harsher Hebraisms than the latter, the fault of which may be ascribed to the Greek translator, who has made too literal a version, and yet the gospel of St Mark is written in worse language, and in a manner that is less agreeable. The epistles of St James and St Jude are somewhat better; but even these are full of Hebraisms, and betray in other respects a certain Hebrew tone. St Luke has in several passages written pure and classic Greek, of which the first four verses of his gospel may be given as an instance: in the sequel, where he describes the actions of Christ, he has very harsh Hebraisms, yet the style is more agreeable than that of St Matthew or St Mark. In the Acts of the Apostles he is not free from Hebraisms, which he seems to have never studiously avoided; but his periods are more classically turned, and sometimes possess

beauty

and manner; that of our Saviour, and the sacred pen- Scripture man's. In their own character, they neither explain nor command, promise nor threaten, praise nor blame. They generally omit the names of our Lord's enemies; thus directing our hatred at the vices they committed, not at the persons. They never mention such persons without necessity; which is the case with the high-priest, Pilate, Herod, and Judas: the three first for the chronology, the fourth to do justice to the eleven.

Scripture. beauty devoid of art. St John has numerous, though not uncouth, Hebraisms both in his gospel and epistles; but he has written in a smooth and flowing language, and surpasses all the Jewish writers in the excellence of narrative. St Paul again is entirely different from them all; his style is indeed neglected and full of Hebraisms, but he has avoided the concise and verse-like construction of the Hebrew language, and has upon the whole a considerable share of the roundness of Grecian composition. It is evident that he was as perfectly acquainted with the Greek manner of expression as with the Hebrew, and he has introduced them alternately, as either the one or the other suggested itself the first, or was the best approved."

125 and fo

oms,

Michaelis has shown that the New Testament not reign idi- only contains Hebraisms but Rabbinisms, Syriasms, Chaldaisms, Arabisms, Latinisms, and Persian words, of which he has exhibited many specimens. To theologians, whose duty it certainly is to study the language of the New Testament with attention, we would strenuous. ly recommend the perusal of this work, which in the English translations is one of the most valuable accessions of scriptural criticism that has yet appeared. We speak of the English translation, which the large and judicious notes of Mr Marsh has rendered infinitely su perior to the original.

126 Peculiari

tion.

bell's Pre- ans.

To the observations which have been made respecting ties in the the language of the New Testament, a few remarks may composibe added concerning the peculiarities of the style and Dr Camp- manner of the sacred writers, particularly the historiThese remarks extend to the Old Testament as liminary well as to the New.-The first quality for which the tions to his sacred history is remarkable is simplicity in the strucTranslature of the sentences. The first five verses of Genesis tions of the furnish an example, which consist of eleven sentences. Gospels. The substantives are not attended by adjectives, nor the verbs by adverbs, no synonymas, no superlatives, no effort at expressing things in a bold, emphatical, or un

Disserta

common manner.

2. The second quality is simplicity of sentiment, particularly in the Pentateuch, arising from the very nature of the early and uncultivated state of society about which that book is conversant.

3. Simplicity of design. The subject of the narra'tive so engrosses the attention of the writer, that he himself is as nobody. He introduces nothing as from himself, no remarks, doubts, conjectures, or reasonings. Our Lord's biographers particularly excel in this quality. This quality of style we meet with in Xenophon and Cæsar.

The Evangelists may be ranked next to Genesis for simplicity of composition in the sentences. John and Matthew are distinguished for it more than Mark and Luke. But the sentiment is not so remarkable for simplicity in the Evangelist as the Pentateuch. The reasons of this difference are, 1. The state of the Jews was totally changed; their manners, customs, &c. split into factions both in religion and politics. 2. The object of our Lord's ministry, which is the great subject of the gospels, was to inculcate a doctrine and morality with which none of their systems perfectly coincided: besides, being constantly opposed by all the great men, the greater part of his history consists of instructions and disputes. 3. As it is occupied with what our Saviour said and what he did, this makes two distinctions of style

Herodias is, indeed, mentioned with dishonour; but her crime was a public one. On the other hand, all persons distinguished for any thing virtuous are carefully mentioned, Joseph of Arimathea, Nicodemus, Zaccheus, Bartimeus, Jairus, Lazarus, Mary, and Martha. They record their own faults (Peter's, Thomas's), nor do they make any merit of their confession. In one uniform strain they relate the most signal miracles and most ordinary facts.

From the narrative is excluded that quality of style which is called animation. Nothing that discovers passion in the writer, or is calculated to excite the passions of the reader. Every thing is directed to mend the heart.

But in the discourses and dialogues of our Saviour, the expression, without losing any thing of its simplicity, is often remarkable for spirit and energy. Respecting harmony and smoothness, qualities which only add an external polish to language, they had not the least solicitude.

As to elegance, there is an elegance which results from the use of such words as are most in use with those who are accounted fine writers, and from such arrangements in the words and clauses as have generally obtained their approbation. This is disclaimed by the sacred authors.

But there is an elegance of a superior order more nearly connected with the sentiment; and in this sort of elegance they are not deficient. In all the oriental languages great use is made of tropes, especially metaphors. When the metaphors employed bear a strong resemblance, they confer vivacity: if they be borrowed from objects which are naturally agreeable, beautiful, or attractive, they add also elegance. The Evangelists furnish us with many examples of this kind of vivacity and elegance. Our Lord borrows tropes from cornfields, vineyards, gardens, &c.

127

the New

As a valuable appendage to this part of our subject, Proper mewe shall subjoin Dr Campbell's method of studying the thod of books of the New Testament. This we offer to our studying readers as a beautiful instance of the judicious applica- Testament tion of philosophy to sacred studies. It is the same by analysis method of discovering truth by analysis and induction, and inducwhich was pursued by Sir Isaac Newton with such asto- tion. nishing success, which since his time has been uniformly practised in natural philosophy, and has been also applied to chemistry, to medicine, to natural history, and to the philosophy of mind, by the ingenious Dr Reid. This is the path of sound philosophy, which can alone lead to the discovery of truth. In following it, our progress may be slow, but it will be sure. If all theologians would steadily adhere to it, we might then entertain the pleasing hope of discarding for ever those absurd systems of religion which are founded on single passages and detached fragments of scripture, and of establishing opinions and doctrines on a solid foundation.

66 I.

Το

Scripture.

128

bell's me

"1. To get acquainted with each writer's style; to observe his manner of composition, both in sentences and paragraphs; to remark the words and phrases peculiar Dr Camp to him, and the peculiar application that he may somethod. Prel, times make of ordinary words; for there are few of those Dis. to the writers who have not their peculiarities in all the reGospels. spects now mentioned. This acquaintance with each can be attained only by the frequent and attentive reading of his works in his own language.

"2. To inquire into the character, the situation, and the office of the writer, the time, the place, and the occasion of his writing, and the people for whose immediate use he originally intended his work. Every one of these particulars will sometimes serve to elucidate expressions otherwise obscure or doubtful. This knowledge may in part be learned from a diligent and reiterated perusal of the book itself, and in part be gathered from what authentic, or at least probable, accounts have been transmitted to us concerning the compilement of the

canon.

66

3. The last general direction is, to consider the principal scope of the book, and the particulars chiefly observable in the method, by which the writer has purposed to execute his design. This direction is particularly applicable to the epistolary writings, especially those of Paul.

"4. If a particular word or phrase occur, which appears obscure, perhaps unintelligible, the first thing we ought to do, if satisfied that the reading is genuine, is to consult the context, to attend to the manner wherein the term is introduced, whether in a chain of reasoning or in a historical narration, in a description, or included in an exhortation or command. As the conclusion is inferred from the premisses, or as from two or more known truths a third unknown or unobserved before may fairly be deduced; so from such attention to the sentence in connection, the import of an expression, in itself obscure or ambiguous, will sometimes with moral certainty be discovered. This, however, will not always answer.

"5. If it do not, let the second consideration be, whether the term or phrase be one of the writer's peculiarities. If so, it comes naturally to be inquired, what is the acceptation in which he employs it in other places? If the sense cannot be precisely the same in the passage under review, perhaps, by an easy and natural metaphor or other trope, the common acceptation may give rise to one which perfectly suits the passage in question.Recourse to the other places wherein the word or phrase occurs in the same author is of considerable use, though the term should not be peculiar to him.

"6. But thirdly, if there should be nothing in the same writer that can enlighten the place, let recourse be had to the parallel passages, if there be any such, in the other sacred writers. By parallel passages, I mean those places, if the difficulty occur in history, wherein the same or a similar story, miracle, or event, is related; if in teaching or reasoning, those parts wherein the same argument or doctrine is treated, or the same parable propounded; and in moral lessons, those wherein the same class of duties is recommended: or, if the difficulty be found in a quotation from the Old Testament, let the parallel passage in the book referred to, both in the original Hebrew, and in the Greek version, be consulted.

66

7. But if in these there be found nothing that can Scripture. throw light on the expression of which we are in doubt, the fourth recourse is to all the places wherein the word or phrase occurs in the New Testament, and in the Septuagint version of the Old, adding to these the consideration of the import of the Hebrew or Chaldaic word, whose place it occupies, and the extent of signification, of which in different occurrences such Hebrew or Chaldaic term is susceptible.

"8. Perhaps the term in question is one of those which very rarely occur in the New Testament, or those called a yousva, only once read in Scripture, and not found at all in the translation of the Seventy. Several such words there are. There is then a necessity, in the fifth place, for recurring to the ordinary acceptation of the term in classical authors. This is one of those cases wherein the interpretation given by the earliest Greek fathers deserves particular notice. In this, however, I limit myself to those comments wherein they give a literal exposition of the sacred text, and do not run into vision and allegory."

129

The manuscripts of the New Testament are the na- Manutural source from which the genuine readings of the scripts of Greek Testament are to be drawn. The printed edi- the New tions are either copies of more ancient editions, or of Testament. manuscripts; and they have no further authority than as they correspond to the manuscripts from which they were originally taken. By manuscripts of the New Testament, we mean those only which were written before the invention of printing. The most ancient of these are lost, and there is no manuscript now extant older than the sixth century. Few contain the whole New Testament; some contain the four gospels; some the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles; and others the book of Revelation. The greatest number are those which contain the first part; those which have the second, or the first and second together, are likewise numerous; but those of the third are extremely few. It must be added also, that in many manuscripts those epistles are omitted whose divine authority was formerly doubted.

There are many manuscripts which have been examined only for a single text, such as 1 John v. 7. or at least for a very small number. Others have been examined from the beginning to the end, but not completely and in respect of all the readings. A third class consists of such as either have been, or are said to have been, completely and accurately collated. But this requires such phlegmatic patience, that we can hardly expect to find in critical catalogues all the various readings which have been only once collated. Wetstein, in collating many manuscripts anew, made discoveries which had entirely escaped the notice of his predecessors. The fourth class consists of such as have been completely and accurately collated more than once; but here also we are in danger of being led into error.When various readings are transferred from one critical edition to another, as from that of Gregory to Mill's edition, and from the latter to those of Bengel and Wetstein, the manuscripts must sometimes be falsely named, and various readings must frequently be omitted. And as Wetstein has marked by ciphers manuscripts that in former editions had been denoted by their initial letters, he could scarcely avoid substituting, in some cases, one figure instead of another. The fifth class, which is by far the most valuable, consists of such as

to us, in preference to all the other nations in Europe, Scripture. is noble and magnificent, and would certainly confer immortality on those men who would give it their patronage and assistance.

There are many ancient manuscripts, especially in Italy, which have never been collated, but lie still unexplored. Here is a field where much remains to be done. See Marsh's Notes to Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 643.

Michaelis has given a catalogue of ancient manuscripts, amounting in number to 292, to which he has added a short account of each. In this place we shall confine our observations to the most celebrated, the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts, which we have chiefly extracted from Michaelis.

Scriptures. have been printed word for word, and therefore form an original edition of the Greek Testament. We can boast but of a very few manuscripts of this kind. Hearne printed at Oxford, in 1715, the Acts of the Apostles in Greek and Latin from the Codex Laudianus 3.5 Knittel has annexed to his edition of Ulphilas, p. 53-118, a copy of two very ancient fragments preserved in the library of Wolfenbuttle; the one of the four Gospels in general, the other of St Luke and St John. Woide printed in 1786 the Codex Alexandrinus, a manuscript of great antiquity, which shall afterwards be more fully described; and the university of Cambridge has resolved to publish, in a similar manner, the Cod. Cant. I. or, as it is sometimes called, the Codex Bezæ, the care of which is intrusted to Dr Kipling, a publication which will be thankfully received by every friend to sacred criticism. It was the intention of the Abbé Spoletti, a few years ago, to publish the whole of the celebrated Codex Vaticanus; which would likewise have been a most valuable accession, since a more important manuscript is hardly to be found in all Europe. He delivered for this purpose a memorial to the pope; but the design was not put into execution, either because the pope refused his assent or the abbé abandoned it himself. See the Oriental Bible, vol. xxii. No 333. and vol. xxiii. N° 348.

130 Michaelis's

of taking an

manu-}

scripts, vol. ii. P 182.

"A very valuable library," says Michaelis, "might proposal be composed of the impressions of ancient manuscripts, impression which, though too expensive for a private person, should of ancient be admitted into every university collection, especially the Alexandrian and Cambridge manuscripts, to which I would add, if it were now possible to procure it, Hearne's edition of the Codex Laudianus 3. A plan of this sort could be executed only in England, by a private subscription, where a zeal is frequently displayed in literary undertakings that is unknown in other countries; and it were to be wished that the project were begun before length of time has rendered the manuscripts illegible, and the attempt therefore fruitless. Ten thousand pounds would go a great way towards the fulfilling of this request, if the learned themselves did not augment the difficulty of the undertaking, by adding their own critical remarks, and endeavouring thereby to recommend their publications, rather than by presenting to the public a faithful copy of the original. Should posterity be put in possession of faithful impressions of important manuscripts, an acquisition which would render the highest service to sacred criticism, all these editions of the New Testament should be regulated on the same plan as Hearne's edition of the Acts of the Apostles." It must be highly flattering to the patriotic spirit of an Englishman, to hear the encomiums which learned foreigners have so profusely bestowed on our liberality in supporting works of genius and learning and public utility. The plan which Michaelis proposes

131

drian ma

The Alexandrian manuscript consists of four volumes; Account of the three first of which contain the Old Testament, the the Alexan fourth the New Testament, together with the first Epi- nuscript. stle of Clement to the Corinthians, and a fragment of the second. In the New Testament, which alone is the object of our present inquiry, is wanting the beginning as far as Matthew xxv. 6, ὁ νυμφίος έρχεται; likewise fiom John vi. 50. to viii. 52. and from 2 Cor. iv. 13. to xii. 7. It must likewise be observed, that the Psalms are preceded by the epistle of Athanasius to Marcellinus, and followed by a catalogue, containing those which are to be used in prayer for each hour, both of the day and of the night; also by 14 hymns, partly apocryphal, partly biblical, the 11th of which is an hymn in praise of the Virgin Mary, entitled agortuyn magias Tns Deotoxy: further, the Hypotheses Eusebii are annexed to the Psalms, and his Canones to the Gospels. It is true, that this has no immediate reference to the New Testament, but may have influence in determining the antiquity of the manuscript itself.

It has neither accents nor marks of aspiration; it is written with capital, or, as they are called, uncial letters, and has very few abbreviations. There are no intervals between the words; but the sense of a passage is sometimes terminated by a point, and sometimes by a vacant space. Here arises a suspicion that the copyist did not understand Greek, because these marks are sometimes found even in the middle of a word, for instance Levit. v. 4. avoμos n for av oμoon, and Numb. xiii. 29. a Yons.

This manuscript was presented to Charles I. in 1628, by Cyrillus Lucaris patriarch of Constantinople. Cyrills himself has given the following account: "We know so much of this manuscript of the holy writings of the Old and New Testament, that Thecla an Egyptian lady of distinction (nobilis fæmina Ægyptia) wrote it with her own hand 1300 years ago (A)." She lived soon after the council of Nice. Her name was formerly at the end of the book; but when Christianity was subverted in Egypt by the errors of Mahomet, the books of the Christians suffered the same fate, and the name of Thecla