( 39 )

Way of speaking, that then universally obtainedin the Church.

X. Acts xi. 20. ’EAs^Ak* 7 reps tss 'EaaZwjsbsS,

The new Text, aster the Alexandrian MS. in-stead of 'EAAwsdf, reads '’EAAnra.s. And yetA£ts ix. 2 p. where the Editor had the very fameVoucher , he retains 'EAAnwsaw. Perhaps the ad-ditional Authority of the Vulgar , Arabick , Sy-riack and Æthiopick Versions, induced him toalter the Passage before us. But really these Ver-sions are of small Account in this Cafe. For theVulgar renders Grœcos , Acts vi. i. as well asActs xi. 20. And yet all the Greek Copies of Actsvi. i. have ‘EAA>msas: The Syriack also uses thefame Word in both Places; nor do the LatinTranslations of the other Versions make any Dif-ference. The Editor therefore had as muchReason to alter Acts ix. 29. as Acts xi. 20. In-deed there was no sufficient Cause to molest theold Text in either Place.

XI, Row. V. 7 . M&US y> »7r\p dis dmy

$VLvena,i.

For Sixdiit the Editor substitutes on the

single Authority of the Syriack Version, whichGrotius fays makes very good Sense. But in myOpinion, this Reading makes very poor Sense.For to say that no indifferent Person would laydown his Life for an ill Man, is a Truth too evi^dent to admit the Use of so weak a Negative aspohis. Besides, this Particle, wherever it occursin the New Testament , is never a direct Negative.It still implies the Thing spoken of to be done, orA possible