 |  |
uniformity or free itself completely from its own idiosyncracies; and that the danger of
unconscious caprice is inseparable from personal judgment" (page 17).
We do not wonder that the Dean continues:
"May we be permitted without offence to point out (not for the first time) that
`idiosyncracies' and `unconscious caprice' and the fancies of the `individual mind' can be
allowed no place whatever in a problem of such gravity and importance as the present."
It would be a weariness to most of our readers to continue with this theme. The theory
upon which Drs. Westcott and Hort worked to produce their Greek Text is unsound. It
depends upon assumptions and not evidences, and it arbitrarily sets up one or two MSS as
standards to the discrediting of widely distributed evidences of even earlier dates. The
reader who desires to pursue this subject further should read the Introduction written by
Dr. Hort, and then Dean Burgon's searching criticism. We are convinced that by the time
he has finished reading these, the additions and subtractions of the R.V. will weigh little
with him unless confirmed by other evidences.
This is all we aim at in this series. We are not pretending to teach the principles of
textual criticism, but simply to give sufficient evidence for accepting with extreme
caution the unsupported readings of the Vatican and Sinaitic MSS which underlie the
Text of the present Revised Version.