( r6 )

XII. I Pet. I. 24. Kst/ mdou, Sbi'O, ccySr&OTry sssav rScs jgpla.

The new Text for dpZ-M?ra reads dwns. Dr.Mills y c Prol. 1209. judges that dvZr&nru was atfirst a marginal Explication of «Ws. But ’tisstrange the Doctor stiould determine at this Rate,when it is notorious, that dVs-^Tra is in the Ver-sion of the LXX Isa. xl. 6 . from which VersionSt. Peter took the present Citation. For theentire 7th Ver. * according to the Hebrew , isomitted by the LXX, as it is also in the Citationbefore us, which throughout is entirely in theOrder of the LXX, and agrees with that Versionwherever it varies from the Hebrew . Thus, be-sides what is already mentioned, the LXX andSt. Peter have dW$i«s whereas, according tothe Hebrew , it should be dvths dys. No Doubttherefore should be made, but that as St. Peter ,in every other Part of the Citation, adheres tothe LXX, so he originally had not

aulrs which is according to the HebreWy but notfound in any Copy of the LXX.

XIII. Pet), viii. 13. Ka} waff a, I vos dyfeAu

dp jjJKsy^cutvy^Ti.

For dy&Xv the new Text has dVs a Read-ing vouched for by six or seven MSS. the Vul-gar , Syriack and Æthiopick Versions, by Arethas ,

* Jerom Com. in EJai. takes Notice of this Omission in theLXX, and fays that it was either overlooked by the Interpre-ters, or else by the Copijls, because the two Verses ended withthe same Word. So early was it observed, that Omiflionswere owing to that Cause.

some