The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels
 By reading this book, The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels, you will have powerful
evidence to refute the false notion that the traditional received text was not present
until after the fifth or sixth centuries. You will see that the traditional received text
was from the beginning. It was from the very New Testament autographs and was copied and
re-copied by hand accurately from the beginning until the invention of printing when it
was made permanent.
This present book is another of Dean John William Burgon's masterpieces. It is loaded,
as are all of his books, with overwhelming evidence from manuscripts, lectionaries,
ancient versions, and church fathers. Dean Burgon does three things in this volume: (1) He
outlines his seven tests of Scriptural truth; (2) He proves the superiority of the
traditional received text; and (3) He shows the inferiority of Westcott and Hort's
favorite manuscripts-Vatican and Sinai, that is, B and Aleph. His arguments are powerful
and convincing!
You will want to order several copies of this book and distribute it widely! Order a
copy for you pastor, our church library, your missionaries, your favorite schools, and
your friends!
The text of this Burgon Reprint is based on a complete photographic reproduction of
Burgon's (posthumously published) 1896 Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels. The reprint
publisher has post-scripted Burgon's work with a thirty paged "Brief Summary of The
Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels Vindicated and Established" written by D. A.
Waite, Th.D, Ph.D.
The Author [This selection is taken from Chapter 12--Conclusion.] The Traditional Text
has now been traced, from the earliest years of Christianity of which any record of the
New Testament remains, to the period when it was enshrined in a large number of
carefully-written manuscripts in a main accord with one another. Proof has been given from
the writings of the early Fathers, that the idea that the Traditional Text arose in the
middle of the fourth century is a mere hallucination, prompted by only a partial
acquaintance with those writings.
And witness to the existence and predominance of that form of Text has been found in
the Peshitto Version and in the best of the Latin Versions, which themselves also have
been followed back to the beginning of the second century or the end of the first. We have
also discovered the truth, that the settlement of the Text, thought mainly made in the
fourth century, was not finally accomplished till the eighth century at the earliest; and
that the later Uncials, not the oldest, together with the cursives express, not singly,
not in small batches or companies, but in their main agreement, the decisions which had
grown up in the Church.
In so doing, attention has been paid to all the existing evidence: none has been
omitted. "Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus", has been the underlying
principle. The foundations of the building have been laid as deeply and as broadly as our
power could allow. No other course would be in consonance with scientific procedure.
The seven notes of truth have been made as comprehensive as possible. Antiquity,
number, variety, weight, continuity, context, and internal evidence, include all points of
view and all methods of examination, which are really sound.
The characters of the Vatican, Sinatic, and Bezan manuscripts have been shewn to be
bad, and the streams which led to their production from Syrio-Old-Latin and Alexandrian
sources to the temporary school of Caesarea have been traced and explained. It has been
also shewn to be probable that corruption began and took root even before the Gospels were
written.
The general conclusion which has grown upon our minds has been that the affections of
Christians have not been misdirected; that the strongest exercise of reason has proved
their instincts to have been sound and true; that the Text which we have used and loved
rests upon a vast and varied support; that the multiform record of Manuscripts, Versions,
and Fathers, is found to defend by large majorities in almost all instances those precious
words of Holy Writ, which have been called in question during the latter half of this
century.
We submit that it cannot be denied that we have presented a strong case, and naturally
we look to see what has been said against it, since except in some features it has been
before the World and the Church for some years. We submit that it has not received due
attention from opposing critics. If indeed the opinions of the other School had been
preceded by, or grounded upon, a searching examination, such as we have made in the case
of B and Aleph, of the vast mass of evidence upon which we rest,--if this great body of
testimony had been proved to be bad from overbalancing testimony or otherwise,--we should
have found reason for doubt, or even for a reversal of our decisions.
But Lachmann, Tregelles, and Tishendorf laid down principles chiefly, if not
exclusively, on the score of their intrinsic probability. Westcott and Hort built up their
own theory upon reasoning internal to it, without clearing the ground first by any careful
and detailed scrutiny. Besides which, all of them constructed their buildings before
travellers by railways and steamships had placed within their reach the larger part of the
materials which are now ready for use. [Several paragraphs have been omitted.]
We hear constantly the proclamation made in dogmatic tones that they are right: no
proof adequate to the strength of our contention has been worked out to shew that we are
wrong.
To conclude, the system which we advocate will be seen to contrast strikingly with that
which is upheld by the opposing school, in three general ways: I. We have with us width
and depth against the narrowness on their side. . . . II. We oppose facts to their
speculation . . . . III. Our opponents are gradually getting out of date: the world is
drifting away from them. Thousands of manuscripts have been added to the known stores
since Tichendorf formed his system, and Hort begin to theorize, and their handful of
favourite documents has become by comparison less and less.
Since the deaths of both of those eminent critics, the treasures dug up in Egypt and
elsewhere have put back the date of the science of paleography from the fourth century
after the Christian era to at least the third century before, and papyrus has sprung up
into unexpected prominence in the ancient and medieval history of writing. It is
discovered that there was no uncial period through which the genealogy of cursives has
necessarily passed. Old theories on those points must generally be reconstructed if they
are to tally with known facts.
But this accession of knowledge which puts our opponents in the wrong, has no effect on
us except to confirm our position with new proof. Indeed, we welcome the unlocking of the
all but boundless treasury of ancient wealth, since our theory, being as open as possible,
and resting upon the visible and real, remains not only uninjured but strengthened. If it
were to require any re-arrangement, that would be only a re-ordering of particulars, not
of our principles which are capacious enough to admit of any additions of materials of judgment. # 1159)
[
To order any
of our DBS
publications Please Click Here ]
|
