FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76  
77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   >>   >|  
hat savoured of provincial retention of Aeolian or Dorian pronunciations, wrote from unconscious bias [Greek: u] for [Greek: ou], transcribing [Greek: lusanti] for [Greek: lousanti] (unless he were not Greek scholar enough to understand the difference): and he was followed by others, especially such as, whether from their own prejudices or owing to sympathy with the scruples of other people, but at all events under the influence of a slavish literalism, hesitated about a passage as to which they did not rise to the spiritual height of the precious meaning really conveyed therein. Accordingly the three uncials, which of those that give the Apocalypse date nearest to the period of corruption, adopt [Greek: u], followed by nine cursives, the Harkleian Syriac, and the Armenian versions. On the other side, two uncials--viz. B^{2} of the eighth century and P of the ninth--the Vulgate, Bohairic, and Ethiopic, write [Greek: lousanti] and--what is most important--all the other cursives except the handful just mentioned, so far as examination has yet gone, form a barrier which forbids intrusion.] [An instance where an error from an Itacism has crept into the Textus Receptus may be seen in St. Luke xvi. 25. Some scribes needlessly changed [Greek: hode] into [Greek: hode], misinterpreting the letter which served often for both the long and the short [Greek: o], and thereby cast out some illustrative meaning, since Abraham meant to lay stress upon the enjoyment 'in his bosom' of comfort by Lazarus. The unanimity of the uncials, a majority of the cursives, the witness of the versions, that of the Fathers quote the place being uncertain, are sufficient to prove that [Greek: hode] is the genuine word.] [Again, in St. John xiii. 25, [Greek: houtos] has dropped out of many copies and so out of the Received Text because by an Itacism it was written [Greek: outos] in many manuscripts. Therefore [Greek: ekeinos outos] was thought to be a clear mistake, and the weaker word was accordingly omitted. No doubt Latins and others who did not understand Greek well considered also that [Greek: houtos] was redundant, and this was the cause of its being omitted in the Vulgate. But really [Greek: houtos], being sufficiently authenticated[115], is exactly in consonance with Greek usage and St. John's style[116], and adds considerably to the graphic character of the sacred narrative. St. John was reclining ([Greek: anakeimenos]) on his left arm over t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76  
77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

cursives

 

houtos

 

uncials

 

omitted

 

meaning

 
versions
 

Itacism

 

Vulgate

 

understand

 
lousanti

enjoyment

 
needlessly
 

graphic

 

stress

 

character

 

comfort

 

unanimity

 

majority

 

witness

 

Fathers


considerably

 

scribes

 

Lazarus

 

Abraham

 

anakeimenos

 

reclining

 

served

 

changed

 

misinterpreting

 

letter


illustrative

 
sacred
 

narrative

 

weaker

 

authenticated

 
mistake
 

ekeinos

 

thought

 

sufficiently

 

redundant


considered

 

Latins

 

Therefore

 

manuscripts

 

genuine

 

uncertain

 
sufficient
 

dropped

 

written

 

consonance