( 152 )

Passages explained. So that if it was an Interpola-tion. , it malt have been a wilful one, which ourAuthor himself, p. 933. affirms to be an absurdSupposition. Since therefore the Omission of thisPassage in many MSS and Versions, may be ac-counted for without supposing it spurious , and theInsertion of it in many others, is unaccountable,without supposing it genuine , the Advantage, inPoint of Likelihood, is evidently on the Side of theText. But our Author proceeds: “ The Authority“ upon which any Greek Text is founded, is only" the Authority of the Greek Fathers, and their“ Authority is founded upon that of the ancient“ Greek MSS." The former of these Assertionsis false both in Fact and Right* For there are ma-ny Greek Texts, which are not to be found in theGreek Fathers; and many others are differently ci-ted in different Greek Fathers; and even whenGreek Fathers cite Texts uniformly, Critics some-times see Cause to prefer the Readings of LatinFathers and Versions. But from this Proposition ,false as it is, the Annotator goes on boldly withhis Assumption. “ Now, fays he, all the Greek" Fathers, not one excepted; all the Greek MSS,“ the Iriso one only excepted; all the ancientVe r-" sions, the old Italick and St. Jeroms , the Sy-“ riac, the Arabic , the Æthiopic and the Coptic ;“ all the ancient Latin Fathers, and the molt an-" cient Latin MSS of the New Testament , do" unanimousty exclaim against this controverted“ Text.” Anjhv. From what has been alreadysaid it must evidently appear, that every Branchof this Asianption is false, not one excepted. Fornot one of the Greek Fathers exclaim against thisr Text,