Since the art of printing has been in operation, there must be an agreement in all the copies and editions of the Scriptures. It was otherwise when all depended on the pen. A manuscript then, could easily have been formed according to the mind of the writer, and of those, for whose use the copy was designed. It might lie in such hands for ages, without being exposed to the critical eye of any one who would compare it with other manuscripts, or expose its inaccuracies to the world. As this may have been the case, the internal character of a given text is, the best evidence of its spuriousness or authenticity. On this ground, the passage in debate stands high, bearing the marks of divinity and agreement with the Scriptures in general; as has been largely proved in my discourses on the subject.

But my opponent proceeds to say of the Greek manuscripts, that two of them "are considered by the learned, as holding the first rank, in respect to age and correctness. These are called, the Vatican and Alexandrian manuscripts." He says, "the Vatican manuscript stands first, in point of seniority, and other circumstances, which give dignity to its character." Mr. Emlyn, however, who is a distinguished Anti-Trinitarian, gives the first rank to the Alexandrian copy, according to the authorities which I have consulted. The gentleman places the age of the Vatican manuscript very high-even up to the beginning of the third century: but, I think the evidence, on which this opinion is founded, is vague and uncertain, consisting principally in the conjectures of men who wish to give it weight on that account.

The author quoted by me, says "The most ancient Greek manuscript which is now known to exist, is the Alexandrian, for which, Wetstein, who seems to have considered the question with great attention, claims no higher

antiquity than the close of the fifth century." If this account is correct, it was made when Arianism was in the very zenith of its triumph; and made in the east, that very part of the world, where my opponent says, Arianism "more generally prevailed."

There is one circumstance, which greatly confirms me in the belief, that the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts, are of Arian origin and character; and that is, their reading of Rev. 1. 10, 11. In the English translation, St. John says in that passage-"I heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, what thou seest, write in a book." This passage is of as much importance in relation to the supreme Deity of Christ, as 1 John, 5. 7, is, in respect to the Trinity in unity; and they are both completely silenced by these manuscripts.

On this text, Dr. Doddridge says "It has done more than any other in the Bible, toward preventing me from giving in to that scheme, which would make our Lord Jesus Christ no more than a deified creature." · His remarks as to the effect of this passage on his own mind, shews its weight in supporting the proper Divinity of the Redeemer; and we see how completely these famous manuscripts enervate its force and eclipse its glory on that subject.

But the writers of these ancient manuscripts, in making them to read so contrary to our translation, have, I think, rendered their accuracy very suspicious.

Every reader may see at once, that the three first chapters in the book of Revelation, are very remarkable in the manner of their composition. There are seven churches addressed, in seven distinct epistles. In the commencement of each epistle, some of the names, perfections and operations of Christ are mentioned, to turn the

P

apostle's attention to his majesty, authority and glory. "To the angel," or minister" of the church of Ephesus,” he is directed to "write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden sandlesticks.-And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the First and the Last, which was dead and is alive. And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he who hath the sharp sword with two edges.-And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass.-And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars. And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth.-And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the beginning of the creation of God."

Can we imagine that our Lord would speak of himself in such a glorious manner, in each of these seven epistles, and yet, when he entered into conversation with St. John, respecting these churches in general, speak in the naked manner in which his address appears, in the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts; "saying" only, "what thou seest, write in a book:" without giving himself any distinguishing names, perfections, or operations? I really think, that, if 1 John, 5. 7, "bears the marks of forgery upon its very countenance;" Rev. 1. 11, "bears," in these. manuscripts, the visible "marks" of mutilation-a mutilation which leaves it divested of that glory and majesty, with which it is clothed in our translation-a mutilation

that destroys its consistency with the chapter in which it stands. In this case the iniquity of so forming these manuscripts, must appear with great clearness to every candid reader. We have no little reason to believe, that the gentleman's 109 Greek manuscripts, form an army, of which, the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts are the generals. If we may rely on the testimony of the Rev. Theophilus Lindsey, these manuscripts are deficient in most of the texts of primary importance, relating to the Trinity and the Deity of Christ.

In the view of what he has said, my opponent adds, "I submit it to you all, fellow Christians, and to every man's conscience, whether you do not see, in this event, the hand of Divine providence visibly stretched out to preserve the purity of his holy word from the corruptions of man, so ordering things that all the Greek manuscripts on earth should, with one accord, down to the days of the invention of printing, bear united and solemnly silent testimony against so absurd, contradictory and blasphemous an interpolation."

In what the gentleman has said, our reason and conscience are addressed in an awfully solemn manner.

But if we are in fact going in opposition to the dictates of our own mind, in adhering to the text in debate, we are exceedingly criminal, and are bound to acknowledge our guilt, and to rely on the spurious passage no more. Eyeing the providence of God in all events is, undoubtedly, a Christian's duty; and it is very becoming in my opponent, to express such a sense of the Divine hand, in preserving the Scriptures from human corruptions.

It is truly pleasing to hear the gentleman calling them "God's holy word;" but it is painful to hear him saying, that 1 John, 5. 7, is" an absurdity, a contradiction, an abomination," a "blasphemous" text, and "a vile interpo

lation," These charges, however, are very far from being just, whether the passage is spurious or genuine. He displays such a hostility to the doctrine contained in it, as should put us on our guard, as to his arguments against its authority. He says, "the hand of Divine providence" is against the passage; but we should remember, that providence is often deep and mysterious. Very wrong conclusions may be drawn from the dealings of providence. A sacred writer says, of God; "His way is in the sea, and his path in the great waters, and his footsteps are not known." Another exclaims, "How unsearchable are his judgments! and his ways past finding out." But, providence has preserved such an evidence of the authenticity of the disputed text, as induces Christians in general to receive it as a testimony of a Trinity of persons in the Godhead.

It may be placed in this situation, that the humble may believe, and the proud be left to think there is sufficient ground to reject it, and to renounce a doctrine, on which, salvation depends. Sinners in general, endeavor to support themselves in their unbelief, by reasoning in conformity to the feelings of their own hearts. Providence is concerned in hardening, as well as in softening the hearts of men. "The Lord of hosts" said to Isaiah, "Go and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and convert, and be healed." St. Paul says of some sinners, "Because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved; God shall send them strong delusion, that they may believe a lie: that, they all might be damned who believe not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."