i

COLLECTION
OF

ESSAYS AND TRACTS

I

CD

IN

= CM

THEOLOGY.

ICO
= 0)
iCD

BY JARED SPARKS.

CD

No. lY.
CO

Vo\

'^

fif 2^

OCTOBER,

1823.

CONTENTS.
SIR ISAAC

------

NEWTON,

Biographical notice,
History of two corruptions of scripture,

CHARLES BUTLER,

191

193
235
321

Historical outline of the controversy respecting

323
THE text ok the Three Heavenly Witnesses,

BOSTON
PUBLISHED BY

O.

CAMBRIDGE
University Press

13

CORNHILL.

Hilliard

1823.

EVERETT, NO.

& Metcalf.

SIR ISAAC

NEWTON'S

HISTORY
OF

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

NEWTON.

human race are recorded the

have shone as the ornawho
men,

In the annals of the

names of
ment and

a few

the boast of then- species,

whose wisdom

has muhiplied the triumphs and hastened the progress

of intellect, and whose genius has thrown a splendor
Of this fortunate number Newton
over the world.
stands at the head.

To

give a

extraordinary man, of his

life

full

and

account of

this

character, his dis-

coveries and their influence, would be to analyze

that

is

wonderful

in the

human mind,

all

to reveal the

deep things of nature, unfold the mechanism of the

universe, and enumerate the achievements of science
during the

last

century.

No

such arduous and ven-

here be undertaken, nor any thing

more than the outlines of a subject, whose compass

turesome task

is

so vast, and

Sir Isaac

will

whose objects are so elevated.

Newton was born

at

Woolsthorpe, near

Grantham, Lincolnshire, on the 25th of December,

1G42. In his early infancy he was extremely feeble,
and

httle

hope of

his

life

was entertained.

His

194

newtojSt.

father died three

months before he was born, and

accordingly the charge of the son devolved wholly

She spared no pains with his edu-

on the mother.

cation, and kept him under her own eye till he was
twelve years old, when she sent him to the public
school at Grantham.
He was boarded in the house

of an apothecary, whose brother was usher of the

school.

was here

that he

began to display the peculiar bent of his genius, and to give a presage of what
its future versatihty and power would
accomplish.
It

It

is

first

recorded of him, while at this school, that

more on practical mechanics, than

his thoughts ran

on

his regular exercises,

and that during the hours of

which the other boys devoted to play, he

was busy with hammers, saws, and hatchets, constructrecreation,

ing miniature models and machines of wood.

his first efforts

by water, and
the top.

was a wooden

Among

clock, kept in motion

hours on a dial-plate at
kites, to which were attached

telling the

He made

paper lanterns, and one of his favourite amusements

was

flying

them

in the night, to the consternation

the neighbouring inhabitants.

and other
and

is

He

articles of furniture for his

said to

of

fabricated tables
schoolfellows,

have invented and executed a vehicle

with four wheels, on which he could transport himself

from one place

The

to

another by turning a windlass.

motions of the heavenly bodies did not escape

his notice even at this period ; for he formed a dial

195

NEWTON.

of a curious construction, by fastening pegs in the

hours and

walls of the house, which indicated the

At

half hours of the day.

his fondness for these

first

to neglect his regular studies j

occupations caused him
but he had too much spirit quietly to look on while

other boys were gaining places above him, and he at

but a distinlength maintained not only a reputable,

guished standing in the school.

In the mean time his mother's second husband

needed the assistance of her

died, and as she

she took him

To

this

home

to

manage

business he was devoted for a year or two,

but with so

interest in the pursuit, that his

little

er soon found her agricultural concerns

ly

to

son,

the affairs of the farm.

flourish

moth-

were not

like-

was one part of his

Grantham market and dispose of
his

in

hands.

It

business to go to
the produce of the farm, but in executing this charge

he

is

neither to be

admired

for

applauded

for

love of his duties.

task of finding a purchaser and

his diligence, nor

The

making

important

a bargain,

he

usually entrusted to the enterprise of a servant, and

his

own

time was

passed

in

his

early

haunts

at

the apothecary's house, reading books, or planning

machines, till it was announced that the time of his
return had

arrived.

managed much
produce

at the

in the

itself

was

sale of

its

was neglected, or left to

while the mind of its nominal

market.

the care of others,

At home, the farm

same way as the
It

superintendent was invoking the genius of invention,

17*

196

NEWTON.

roaming the fields of philosophy, or exploring the

regions of hidden nature.

So unpromising were the prospects of making him

a farmer, that his mother resolved to yield to his
propensities,
scholar.

To

and put him in the way of being a

this end he was again sent to Grantham

At Grantham he resided nine months, and

was then entered at Trinity College, Cambridge, on
school.

the 5th of June, 1660, in the eighteenth year of his

In this situation, so favourable for drawing out
age.

and improving

his

pecuhar

talents,

his success

was

was not among the least

equal
fortunate circumstances to Newton, that Dr Barrow
was at that time fellow of Trinity College. With
to his advantages.

It

mathematical powers of the

highest order,

and

strong predilection for the natural sciences, this great

man would

not be long in discovering so bright a

which then began to dawn in his col-

genius as that
lege

and, with a modesty and good temper equal to

he would not be slow to encourage the

his greatness,

ardour with which the young student was animated,

it could advance his at-

nor to lend assistance where

tainments.

Barrow became not only

teacher, but his sincere friend

men

of his time,

who were

whose friendship was more

Newton's mind soon turned
of the

studies,

and

better able to teach, or

be desired.

to

favourite

his adviser

and few were the

into the

channel of his

and he read with avidity the works

modern geometers then

in

vogue, especially

197

NEWTorf.

and Wallis.
It is
Kepler, Descartes, Saunderson,
remarked of him, that he gave no time to the more
elementary books usually put into the hands of begimiers.

Euclid himself he studied but

partially, for

by a glance of the eye at the enunciation and diaof the

gram, he saw at once the process and result
demonstration.

The wide

distance,

which others are

forced to traverse with slow and painful steps, in their

entrance to the profound sciences of numbers and

Propogeometry, he passed over at a single stride.

sitions, which required elaborate demonstrations to
bring them out of the mists of doubt, and make them
evident to other minds, were to him self-evident truths.

With these endowments from

aids in his reach,
his

all

fact,

ate at the university

these on his side,

human

genius.

the last year of this period that he

was during
detected the

It

first

of
principles of the Fluxional Analysis,

be

we can

that while yet an undergradu-

he should conceive one of the

sublimest inventions of

will hereafter

with the

ought not to be surprised, that

mathematical attainments was un-

progress in
exampled ; but with

hardly reahze the

nature, and

we

which more

said.

He

took the degree of bachelor of arts in the year

16G4, at which time, and for some months after, he
appears to have been engaged in optical researches.

His attention was particularly occupied

to devise
is

known,

in

attempting

some method of improving telescopes and

;

that at this time he

it

had purchased a prism

NEWTON-

198

with the design of making experiments to try DescarThe next year after he was
tes' theory of colours.

graduated, these inquiries were interrupted, and he was

compelled to leave Cambridge on account of the
plague, and take refuge

at

his

own home

in

the

country.

In this retirement he spent nearly two years, and

natural to suppose, that a

is

mind

like

his,

it

with the

world of unexplored nature before him, would not be

It was during this season of seclusion, that he
idle.
caught the dawning hints of his great discovery of
gravitation, the origin of which is among the most
force of accident in de-

striking illustrations of the

veloping the genius, and swaying the opinions of men.

Newton was one day

garden, occupied
apple

fell

incident,

in

passing a solitary hour in a

philosophical musings,

from a tree near him.

it

and immediately called out

cause.

Trifling as

quickened the inquiring

Why

should

his

an

mind

apple

should any other body fall?

impelled, by what laws directed

was

this

of Newton,

to search for the

to the earth

fall

Why
it

spirit

when an

.''

what power is
These were the

By
?

questions, which he asked himself; and, although he

could not answer them, he was led into a train of reflections,

of

which ultimately carried him

human attainments.
The fact had been well

established, that on every

part of the earth's surface there

bodies to

fall

to the highest

to its centre,

is

and that

a tendency in
this

tendency

is

NEWTON.

199

not perceptibly diminished by ascending to different

elevations, as the tops of lofty buildings, and the

summits of high mountains. Why then should not

the power, which causes this gravitating tendency,
reach beyond the remotest points of the earth's surface

Why

bodies

.''

not to the moon, and the other celestial

And

why may not

if so,

their motions

be

in

some way influenced by this power, as well as the motions of bodies less distant from the centre of the
Not that it is necessary, that the tendency, or
should
force,
everywhere be the same ; for although it
is not sensibly diminished on any part of the earth's surearth

face, yet at a point so far distant as the

sibly

he

become weaker.

Pursuing

mooc, it may pos-

this train

of thought,

By comparirg the periods

of the planets, with their several distances from the
sun, he ascertained, that if they were actually held
in their orbits by a power like that of gravitation on
instituted a calculation.

the earth's surface, this

and decrease

power must act by a fixed law,

in proportion as the

squares of the dis-

tances of the gravitating bodies increase.

only remained to determine, whether a power,

acting by such a law, would keep the moon in its
It

orbit,

and produce

its

several motions.

through a rigorous computation, but

was unsuccess-

the results did not correspond with observation ;

did not appear that the moon was actuated by such a

ful
it

it

He went

and he was not encouraged to prosecute his

labours.
Hereafter it will be seen, however, that he

power

200

NEWTON.

was deceived, and

that

he had akeady discovered the

great law of the universe.

In the year 1667 Newton took his

degree of masof arts, and was elected fellow of his
college.

ter

About the same time he returned

two years he had been more or

to

Cambridge.

less

engaged

For
in his

optical experiments, although only at intervals during

his retirement.
His
was to

primary object

the telescope

and

to

accomplish

himself in grinding lenses of

al

improve
he employed
and parabolic-

this,

elliptical

forms, hoping thus to correct the indistinctness of

figure

produced by the aberration of rays

in passing

His attempts proved aborthrough a spherical lens.

tive, for, whatever figure he gave to his lens, the
image was still defective. Wearied with ill success,
he desisted from the labour of
and begrinding lenses,

took himself to experiments with his

In these
prism.
experiments he was struck with the oblong form of
the spectrum, and the
brilliancy of the colours which
it

exhibited.

light, in

He

look for granted, that the

rays of

passing through the prism, were equally rewhich case the spectrum ought to be circu-

fracted, in

was, nevertheless, invariably oblong.

He
observed, moreover, that the colours were regularly
arranged, the red uniformly appearing at one end,
and the violet at the other.
From these appearances
lar.

It

he drew the conclusion, that the

rays

in
passing through
the prism are not
equally refracted, but those com-

posing each colour are refracted in a different angle

NEWTON.

201

from those of any other colour, and are thus separatIt hence followed, that light is composed of

ed.

rays of as

many

different colours, as there are distinct

colours in the spectrum, and that the rays of each

in a certain

colour are refracted

is

This

uniform angle.

called the refrangibUity of light.

this great discovery to be

extensive
most
the
of
application, since
susceptible
it is
intimately concerned with all the phenomena of

Newton soon perceived

light

and colours.

He

discovered the mistake under

which he had laboured respecting the cause of the

imperfection of telescopes ; for he found by computation, that the different refrangibility of light contrib-

uted several hundred times more to produce this effect,

than refraction through a spherical lens.
Hence, if a
figure could

be so formed as

to correct the errors

refraction, the different refrangibility would

still

of

re-

main, and the image would scarcely be more distinct.

He despaired of conquering this double difficulty,

and resorted

for the

most convenient remedy

to the

He

applied himself to forming and polishing metallic concave mirrors with his
own hands, and finally constructed two telescopes of
principle of reflection.

this

description, the

first

of which

session of the

is

now

in the

This kind of

pos-

instru-

Royal Society.
ment received the name of the Newtonian telescope,
and was the foundation of all the great improvements

which have since been made.

In a letter to Oldenburg,

a plan of a refracting telescope was suggested

by

202

KEWTON.

Newton,

in

which the errors of

refrangibility

might be

corrected by passing the rays of hght through substances possessing different dispersive powers, so that
the refraction of one should be counteracted by the

But there

opposite refraction of another.

dence, that he carried

was not

hint

lost

it

refracting telesco^'.es
matic.

One

this

is

no

plan into execution.

evi-

The

has been so far improved, that

have been made perfectly achro-

of the most remarkable results of Newton's

discovery in

light,

was his explanation of the phenom-

He

ena of colours.
laid open, in a

rnalysed

the

rainbow.

He

most ingenious manner, the causes of

various colours in

all

natural objects.

By

a series of

curious experiments and philosophical deductions,

to the conclusic::, that there is a thin,

he was led

transparent covering on th? curfaces of bodies, in

is both refracted and reflected, produc-

which Hght

One colour
process different colours.
over
because
the
another,
configuration of
prevails
the particles on which light falls is such, as to absorb
ing

this

by

nearly

all

In almost

the rays except of one kind.

all

the fixed colours of opaque bodies, th3 three principal

properties of hght, refraction, reflection, and inflection, are
is

no

concerned.

light,

and

this

There

is

no colour where there

shows that colour

is

an accident,

and not a property inherent in matter. Newton has

In the language
explained its cause and its nature.
of a poet, he " untwisted

all

the shining robe of day,"

NEWTON.

203

words of a philosopher, who happily pursued the figure so beautifully started, " he made

and

in the

known

the texture of the magic garment, which na-

ture has so kindly spread over the surface of the

visible

world."*

In short, the science of optics

so completely renovated

was

by Newton, and established

on the principles of truth and reason, that he

be considered as having been

its

may

author.

While thus successfully going forward in the march

of discovery, his patron, Dr Barrow, had been appointed professor of mathematics at Cambridge.

But

1669, he concluded to resign his professorship,

as he wished to devote himself more
exclusively to
in

theology.

By
The

cessor.

much on

his desire

his leisure, that

some degree

Newton was made his sucnew office encroached so

duties of his

he was forced

to relax in

the intenseness with which he had pros-

ecuted his researches.

That he might, however,

complete what he had so successfully begun, he caused his optical inquiries to be the chief subject of his
lectures during the
raised to

the

years after he was

professor's chair, and thus gradually
first

three

his new discoveries into a

system.
Newton was elected a member of the Royal

matured

Soci-

time he was chosen, a teles1672,

sent
him
was
exhibited
for the inspection
by
cope
of the society.
So highly was it approved, that a
and, at the

ety in

resolution

was passed

Playfair's

18

Second

to

forward a description of

Dissertation, Part

II.

sect. 3.

it

204
to

NEWTON.

Huygens, the celebrated philosopher and

might be secured to

that the invention

its

optician,

true author.

In a letter read by Oldenburg shortly after to the

Society, Newton gave intimations of discoveries to
which he had been conducted in optics, and which

he proposed

to

learned body.

submit to the consideration of that

These proved

be no other, than
and colours, which he had
to

his new theory of light

At the earnest solicitation
never as yet made public.
of the Royal Society, his papers on these subjects

were immediately printed in their Transactions. Newton was now more than thirty years old, and had been
in developing the
of
nature, but this was the
profoundest mysteries
first occasion on which he had
appeared before the

employed

for

nearly

ten years

public as a writer.

His theory met with a chilling opposition from

almost every quarter, and he was so much disturbed
at the petulance and peevishness with which he was

by ignorance in the garb of pretended

knowledge, he was so much vexed by the narrowassailed

ness and jealousy of some, and the bitterness of others, that he sometimes repented of having jeopardized his peace by an unavailing attempt to enlighten
it
was so averse to

the world with truths, which

had cost him the patient labour

and mature. He was first attack-

receive, and w^hich

of years to

elicit

ed by Hooke, and then by Pardies, Gascoigne, Lucas, and other writers on the continent.
Being once

205

NEWTON.
it

enlisted,

did not accord with

his spirit to shrink

from the contest, and he replied promptly to every

animadversion from a respectahle source, which was

pubUshed against him.

over all opposition, and

He

was

at last

settled his theory

triumphant
on a basis

which has never been moved.

So

foreign

were such controversies from

his dis-

position and feehngs, that he absolutely refused to

publish his Optical Lectures, which were then ready
for the press ; nor did they see the hght till more
than thirty years afterwards.
In alluding to this
" I blamed
he
own

controversy,

for parting

my

says,

with so real a blessing

run after a shadow."

imprudence

as

This remark

my

quiet, to

sufficiently indi-

cates the reluctance with which he forced himself to

combat prejudice and passion.

mand

may

It

justly

com-

applause as the evidence of a pacific and

unassuming temper, but we can hardly be required
to

our

descend

to the

level of his

the splendid reality of which he

no more than a shadow.

other
science
set,

motives
;

than

love

He was
of

and notwithstanding

he had the

modesty in thinking
was in pursuit to be
conscious of no

truth,

and

his chagrin

zeal

for

at the out-

satisfaction of witnessing the gradual

reception of his theory by those most enhghtened, and

best qualified to understand

new

aspect to the

it, till

at length

it

gave

science of optics.

Twelve years had passed away

since the apple in

the garden had carried up his thoughts to the cause

206

NEWTON.

of the celestial motions,

resume

to

when he was

He

that subject.

Dr Hooke

again induced
received a letter from

concerning the kind of curve described by

a falling
body, subjected to the double influence of
the diurnal motion of the earth, and the
of

power

gravitation.

This

put Newton on new

letter

inquiries

nature of this description of curves, and

orompted him to retrace the steps of his former

into

the

calculations in regard to the

moon's motion.

The

he had been deceived by the old measurement

of the earth, which was essentially false ; making a
truth

is,

degree to consist of sixty EngHsh miles, whereas, by

the late and more accurate measurement of Picard, a

degree was ascertained to be sixty-nine miles and a

As Newton reckoned the moon's distance in

half.

semidiameters of the earth, and as the length of a

semidiameter depended on the length of a degree,
this difference gave rise to an enormous error, and

was the cause of his

By

new

failure

and discouragement.

calculation with corrected data, his most

He proved
sanguine hopes were more than realized.
with demonstrative accuracy, that the deflection of
the
to

moon towards

the earth

is

be on the supposition, that

precisely what
it is

it

ought

actuated by a force

operating inversely as the squares of the distances.

He then brought the other planets within his calculation, and found the same law to hold in them all.

Thus was accomplished

its

nature,

a discovery

more profound

more sublime

in its details,

more

in

difficult

207

NEVVTOK.

and more important in its results,

than any which has ever yielded to the force of indusThe law which governs the
try, or the light of genius.
in its demonstration,

heavens and the earth, the uniting principle of the

universe, the cement of nature, was detected, and its
rules of action developed

and made appKcable

highest purposes of science.

are not to understand, that

We

first,

who imagined

attraction

to the

Newton was

the

the existence of such a

between natural bodies.

power as
This was conjec-

tured long before, but no one had been able to prove

the fact.
It is not certain that the ancients had
any
distinct notions of a

power

like that

of gravity.

cretius, in his romantic account of the origin

and

Lufor-

mation of the world, has some fanciful allusions to a

kind of principle, which keeps the earth self-balanced

some
manner
in
the
the
motions
of
inexplicable
producing
stars.
But it is doubtful, after all, whether he supin the

centre of the imiverse, and operates in

poses these effects to be produced by an internal

Lupower of attraction, or an external pressure.*
cretius is mentioned, because he
to
allowed
be
may

have spoken the sense of the large and

flourishing
sect of the Epicureans, whose
he
defendphilosophy
ed with an ingenuity and
of
a better
eloquence worthy
subject.

Copernicus had some obscure notions of a gravitating principle In the earth, which he supposed to

De Rerum

Natura, Lib. V.

18*

208

NEWTON.

exist also in the stars

in their

ural

and planets, and preserve them

He

spherical forms.

appetency*

calls

it

a kind

Kepler went one step

of nat-

farther,

and

supposed that an attracting power not only existed in

the earth, but that it
might reach to the moon and
other planets, and that they might reciprocally attract
each other.
To such extravagant lengths did his

fancy lead him, that he even assigned to the planets

a sort of animating, self-directing principle, by which
they were endowed with a sympathy for one another
to make their way
Dr Hooke found out,

and enabled

through the regions

of space.

that if such a

as gravity

exists,

it

must act

in

power
to

proportion

the

distance of the body, and the quantity of matter.

From

this brief

sketch

it

appears, that the ancients

had no conception of a gravitating power ; that Copernicus supposed it to extend not beyond the body
of each planet ; that Kepler assigned to it a reciprocal influence

nothing of

its

among

the several planets, but

knew

nature or laws of action, and that

Dr

Hooke advanced

farther, but in estabUshing the existence of such a power, he went not beyond the

confines of probability.

two

essential

Newton's discovery embraces

particulars

first,

all

the

fact,

that

an

matter

;
secondly,
principle pervades
law by which this principle acts. Take these
away, and no conjectures about attraction could ever

attracting

the

'^

Equidem existimo gravitatem non aliud esse quam appetenquandam naturalem. De, Revol. C(rL Orb. Lib. I. Cap. 9

tiam

NEWTON.
be converted

But now

to a single practical use.

they are settled on

in

immovable

basis of

demon-

our hands the great

key of

tlie

stration,

they

nature.

Newton undoubtedly

put

could by what others had done

his

209

had

discoveries, they

profited

compared with
done nothing.

but,

as far as he

literally

They were tapers guiding the meridian sun

in

the

career of his glory.

With
a

this

law

new system

difficult

at

command, Newton constructed

He

of the world.

problems pertaining

solved the most

the motions of the

to

heavenly bodies, and explained the celestial phenomena in a manner at once simple and satisfactory.
In all his inquiries on these subjects, as well as on
every other, he rigidly pursued the

mode

of philoso-

or rather
phizing recommended by Lord Bacon
his own mode, as he made it peculiarly his own
by being the first, who reduced it to practice, and
;

gave it a prevalence in the world.

a fundamental axiom, that nothing

With him
is

to

it

was

be assumed

as a principle, which does not rest on observation or

experiment, and that no hypothesis is to be admitted
as estabhshing a fact.*

This axiom he never deserted, and hence the

profound investigations into which his sublime geomQuicquid enim ex phaenomenis non
canda

est

et

itatiim occultariun, seu

li

deducifiir, hypothesis vo-

hypotheses seu metaphysics, seu physics, seu qual-

locum nou kabent.

mechanics,

in

philosophia experiraenta-

Principia, Lib. III. Schot. General.

NEWTON.

210
etry carried him,

were clothed with the same

ty, as the results of

humble and obvious

certain-

calculations.

He

walked among the planets, and took their dimensions, and measured their periods, and ascertained
and influence on each other, with as
the ocean
security as the mariner traverses

their motions

much

and he went forward with equal

assurance, that he should not be deceived nor misled.
He explained the lunar irregularities, which had

with his compass

baffled

former

all

astronomers, he

suggested

and

demonstrated the true figure of the earth, solved the

of the equinoxperplexing problem of the precession
and extended
the
of
the
causes
illustrated
tides,
es,
his researches with brilliant success to the eccentric
orbits

and

The
these

erratic motions of the

comets.*

public intimation, which

first

discoveries,

was

in

Newton gave of

1G83, when he

sent

short paper
Royal Society containing a dozen
This
to the planetary motions.
propositions relating
who visitpaper attracted the attention of Dr Halley,
to the

ed Newton

at

Cambridge the year

following,

and

became fully acquainted with his novel and astonishing

attainn.ants in these high departments of astronomy.

No man was

better qualified to understand and es-

timate them, and he extorted a promise from Newton,

that he would make farther communications to the
*

Lorsque

la

p. 148.

ie vaste genie de Newton

Comttographie, par Pi7igr^, Tom. f.

comcte de 1680 parut,

mbrassoit I'univers entier.

NEWTON.
Royal Society.
ing,

Accordingly

211
subsequent meet-

at a

Dr Halley and Mr Paget were

appointed to cor-

him of

respond with Newlon, and remind

ise.

The consequence

his

prom-

he immediately
into a methodical

was, that

to arrange his materials

form, and on the ISth of April, 1686, he presented
to the Society the manuscript of the Philosophic

began

JVaturalis Principia Mathematica.

It

was put

to

press by order of the Royal Society under the superintendence of Dr Halley.

This great work, although

est efforts of

much

with so

human

make

it

to

its

the world believe what

stand, especially

when such

at first

greeted
deserved, and as it was

Its originality

were no doubt obstacles

to

ranks among the high-

genius, was not

applause as

destined to receive.

it

and profoundness
It is hard

success.
it

a faith

does not underis

met by preju-

dice on the one hand, and a spirit of jealousy on the

other.
Theory and observation harmonized so perfectly

in

this

constrained

system, that the more impartial were

in with the author's conclusions,

to fall

although they could not go with him to the depths of

But the power of old opinions was
geometry.

his

too strong to suffer the scales to drop from the eyes

Many there were in the higher

walks of science, who would see and confess nothing
it was their
pride to be sceptics as to the new phiof the multitude.

losophy.

They had ranged

themselves under the

popular standard of Ai'istotle and

Descartes

they

NEWTON.

212
dwelt

in a fairy land,

and could not descend from the

the humble sphere of demonstraregion of dreams to

and fact. So strong did the current set against

tion

Newton's philosophy, that Voltaire spoke truth, in

the opinion of Playfair, when he said that the Prin-

had not twenty advocates out of England at the

time of the author's death, notwithstanding it had
cipia

forty years before the public.

been nearly
in

And even

England, the Newtonian philosophy was not

for-

earlier
mally introduced into the universities at an
It made its way slowly, but surely.
period.

The schools astonished stood, but found it vain

To combat still with demonstration strong,
And, unawakened, dream beneath the blaze

Of truth.

When

the

ing abroad,

new philosophy had once gained

its

progress was

as rapid

as

it

a foot-

had been

It fortunately passed through

tardy in the outset.
the hands of a succession of men eminently qualified,
both by intellectual ascendency and mathematical

The fluxdeepest principles.

field
it was a
an
untrodden
ional analysis opened
;
magic wand in the grasp of the mathematician. Arm-

skill, to illustrate

its

this potent instrument, he interrogated nature

It
with an authority and success before unknown.
diffidark
or
was
that
all
let in a flood of light upon

ed with

The prodigious
in the philosophy of Newton.
achievements of Euler, Clairaut, D'Alembert, La

cuh

Grange, and

La

Place, conspire to give lustre to

21S

NEWTON.
Newton's fame, and certainly

to his discoveries.

La

Place, in particular, has gone up with the transcendental calculus to the summit of the Newtonian

have tended

system, and all

firmer foundation.

his lahours

to fix

it

on a

After having proved throughout

a law Uke that of gravitation,
that
his great work,
all the irregularities of
explains with rigid precision
the celestial motions, he concludes, that from this

circumstance, and the extreme simplicity of such a

law, we are authorized to believe it the law of
nature.*

Newton's discovery did not end here. It created

it was not limit-

the science of physical astronomy, but

The

ed to the compass of the heavens.

attraction pervades

the largest.
affinities,

sition

and

things, the smallest as well as

us into the mystery of chemical

us all that we know of the compo-

It lets

tells

of bodies, their texture, internal relations, and

other properties.
is

all

principle of

called

In this sphere of
attraction,

contiguous
not ostensibly observe the

its

influence,

and ahhough

same laws of

the case of remote bodies, yet there

is

it

it

does

action as in

reason to sup-

pose, that this deviation is caused by the figure, position, and other accidentsof the particles brought in contact.

Newton made many experiments with chemical

agents to try his theory, and he

is

allowed to have

discovered the principle on which the operations of

"

Mpchanique Celeste, Tom.

I.

Liv. 2. chap,

1.

214

NEWTON.

We

thus find him applying his

not
to
discovery
explain the machinery of the
only
universe, but to detect the method of penetrating the

chemistry depend.*

inmost recesses of nature, and bringing

hidden properties of things.
Serious objections were at
ry,

of

by Euler and some

its

said

first

to

offered to this theo-

others, from the circumstance

not accounting for the cause of attraction.

it

was the

the

light

They

scholastic notion of an occult

quality^

and that the whole system was no more than a revi-

To

val of the old, exploded philosophy.

tion

it

was only replied on Newton's

this objec-

part, that

he did

not pretend to have discovered the cause of gravity ;

and, moreover, that if such a discovery were made, it

would add nothing towards confirming the truth of

his theory.f
He was concerned with effects ; the
uniformity of these he called

a law

while this uni-

formity continues, the law will remain the same.

The

law is investigated in its operations, and while these

are subject to a fixed rule, nothing will be gained
And here, it may be
or lost by knowing the cause.
exemplified the pecuhar character of the
Newtonian philosophy, in which the causes of physic-

observed,

*
t
liis

is

Murray's Chemistry, Introduction,

Rationem vero harum

nondum

p. 20.

gravitatis proprietatum ex plia^nome-

potui deducere, et hypotheses non fingo. Princip.

Gen. And, after his discussion on contiguous at-

Lib. III. Schol.

" I
traction, he says,
scruple not to propose the principles of
tion above mentioned, they being of very general extent,
leave the causes to be found out."

Oplics, Queri/ 31.

moand

215

NEWTON.
al

events do not

come under

phenomena and laws of

consideration,

effects

till

the

are explained and

understood.

We
It

now come

to

speak of the fluxional analysis.

was remarked above,

this invention

occurred

that the
to

first

Newton

in

conception of

1663, a short

At

time before he received his bachelor's degree.

than slight

however, he attained to nothing more

improvements of Dr WaUis's treatise on

infinities.

It

this period,

us, that

was two years afterwards, as he tells

at the method of fluxions ; and

he arrived

even then he published nothing on the subject, but

contented himself with using the instrument, which

he had invented, solely as a means of advancing

his

studies in mathematics and philosophy.

Before

this

invention,

laboured under great

the

mixed mathematics

difficulties.

Problems were

perpetually occurring, especially on the properties of

curves and the phenomena of motion, which involved intricacies, that would yield to no powers of
calculation then known.
It was
frequently impossible so far to simplify the data, as to
subject tiiem
either to a geometrical or algebraical
process, and no

more than an

indefinite

be obtained.

The method

approximation
of fluxions

to truth

could

free

from

is

the most of these

sources of difficulty, and easily

accommodates itself to the conditions of abstruse problems.
It embraces all the relations of numbers and
quantity, and

19

may be

applied with equal advantage

216

NEWTON.

throughout the whole circle of the sciences.

It is

powerful aid to the researches of the philosopher,

and introduces him

to

knowledge,

to

those higher departments of

which he could never ascend without

assistance.

its

The

was

invention,
after

public notice, which

first

its

origin.

was the cause of

in

the

Newton gave of

this

Principia, twenty-four years

This dilatoriness

it

known

a long and sharp controversy.

Leib-

in

making

Germany, had already published several

in
which the principles of fluxions were clearpapers
ly laid down, and the mathematicians of the contiin

nitz,

nent claimed for him the honour of the invention.

The

contest

was carried on with warmth between

the partizans of these two illustrious philosophers,

till at
length the Royal Society appointed a committee to investigate the subject to the bottom.

report
that

it

was decided

in the

In their

most conclusive manner

Newton was

question

the original inventor, and the only

was, whether Leibnitz had seen any of

of Newton's papers, which might unfold to him the

This question has never been completely
mystery.

answered.

That Leibnitz had seen

in

London some

of Newton's mathematical papers in manuscript, is

certain ; but there is no good evidence of his having

derived any hints from them on this subject, nor any

Fontenelle considerpositive proof to the contrary.

ed Newton
the

as unquestionably

the

first

inventor,

and

French Academy of Sciences confessed the

217

NEWTON.

Play fair, and other English mathematicians

have conceded, that Leibnitz was the second invenNewton.
tor, ahhough many years after

same.*

This concession, whether well founded or not,detracts

no degree from Newton's glory, for nothing is more
certain, than that he invented and employed the calcuin

was known

any other person. It is

among the fortunate events connected with the progress of science, that the same mind, which detected

lus long before

it

to

the law of gravitation, should invent the only instru-

ment by which

law could be demonstrated, and

this

its

influence traced

To

this task the old

in the

motions of the universe.

geometry was not adequate.

In

the Principia, however, the author never uses directthe fluxional analysis.f

ly

Many

of his theorems

In the preface to the Elements of the Geometry of Infinities,

" M.
published by the Academy at Paris, 1727, it was stated that,
Newton trouva le premier ce marveilleux calcul ; M. Leibneitz
le publia le

tThe

premier."

principles of fluxions are explained in the

ma

Second Len^-

of the Second Book, but they do not enter into the

strations in the body of the work.

demon-

Newton was charged with having preferred the old geometry

own new analysis. The truth seems to be, however, that

to his

he preferred each

in its

proper place.

ssepius se repreiiendebat,

quod

res

Castiglione said of him,

mere geometricas algebraicis

rationibus tractavisset, et quod libro suo de algebra Arilhmcticac

Universalis titulum posuisset, melius asserens Cartesium suum de
re

eadem volumen

di.\isse

Geometriam, ut

sic

ostenderet hascom-

putationes subsidia tantum esse geometria; ad inveniendum. Dr

Winthrop, Professor of Mathematics at Harvard University, wrote

a tract to show that this representation is erroneous, and founded on a misrepresentation of a remark by Dr Pemberton in the

218

NEWTON.

and propositions were discovered, and

their

truth

but in communicating
;
by
these truths, he gives a decided preference to the
It is not so much his purpose to
synthetical mode.
established

this analysis

describe the process by which he comes to certain

results, as to make these results obvious to others ;

and

admit a question, whether the

profound researches of the French mathematicians
might not have done more to enlarge the bounds of
it

will

science,
plify

if

at

least

they had taken a httle more pains to sim-

and elucidate the achievements of

their

wonder-

working analysis, by the aids of the old geometry.

We have now briefly touched on Newton's three
great discoveries, the law of gravitation, the refranThese
gibility of light, and the fluxional analysis.
constituted the brightest era in the progress of

knowledge; they were destined

to

work an

human
entire

system of things, and to

raise a majestic and imperishable monument to the
revolution in the received

fame of their author. The study of the creation was

commenced on new principles, and prosecuted with
new success. Truth was called down from heaven
it beamed on the
to earth
inquirer's path, and
;

encouraged him

to

persevere

in

the

enterprize of

The

hiding places of nature, and many

discovery.
of the mysterious workings of omnipotence, became
familiar to mortals.
preface lo his

View of Newton's

rol. 44, for 1774; p. 531.

philosophy.

Gent. Magazine,

219

NEWTON.

Our

philosopher lived a retired Ufe at Cambridge,

to the duties of his professorship, and absorb-

devoted

Scarcely a single incident is known of him, unconnected with his immediate pursuits and discoveries, during the space of

ed

in

his favourite studies.

thirty years.

It is

mentioned as greatly

to his credit

and as an instance of his firmness of character, that

king James sent a mandamus to the university
confer the degree of master of arts on father

when
to

Francis, an ignorant Benedictine monk,

at

the head of those

who

was deemed an encroachment on the

to

what

privileges of

He

was among the delegates appointremonstrate to the high commission court, and

the university.

ed

Newton was

strenuously resisted

such was the earnestness with which their charge

was executed,

that the king thought

to enforce his

demand.

In 1688

it

expedient not

Newton was cho-

sen by the university a member of the convention

parliament, in which he held a seat till that body \v?s
dissolved.

Mr

Montague, at that time chancellor of the exchequer, and afterwards earl of Halifax, was educat-

same college with Newton, and contracted

ed

at the

for

him a warm and sincere

friendship.

The

work of a recoinage of money was about

place, and Montague wished

to profit

to

great

take

by the distin-

guished talents of his friend, as well as to elevate

to an office of dignity and emolument.
At the
the chancellor, the king
solicitation of
appointed

him

19*

220

NEWTON.

him warden of

the mint

in

1696, and three years

afterwards he was raised to the responsible post of

master of the mint.
This place yielded him an

annual income of nearly fifteen hundred pounds, and

His
it
during the remainder of his life.

he retained
services

and

were of high value

at all

in this important station,

times gave the fullest satisfaction.
appointed to his office in the mint, he made

When
Mr Whiston

deputy in the professorship of mathIn 1703

ematics, and allowed him the whole salary.
he resigned all his duties at Cambridge, and through
his

Whiston was elected his successor. In

same year Newton was chosen president of the

his influence

the

Royal Society, and two years afterwards the order

of knighthood was conferred on him by Queen

Anne

in consideration

of his extraordinary merit.

was not probable, that a mind hke Newton's

would suffer the labours of his new station to
drive him entirely from philosophical pursuits ; yet
we do not learn, that he did any thing more in this
It

work on Opics,
way, than to prepare for the press his
been nearly
had
which
and his Method of Fluxions,
The book on Optics
in readiness for many years.
1704, and is more diligently elabThe author
the Principia itself.
than
orated perhaps,
in
discoveries
his
on
value
seems to have set a peculiar

was published

in

and imbeing fully aware of their originality

exhibits a masterly example
His
work
portance.
optics,

of the

experimental philosophy, and

testifies

to the

221

NEAVTON.

splendid success, which may crown the efforts of

It was
genius when aided by persevering industry.
translated

author,

into

Latin,

by Dr Samuel

The

with the approbation of the

Clarke.

Queries appended to the treatise on

optics

deep and original thoughts

by which they are marked, and for the sagacity of
have been admired

their

for the

author in suggesting

many

probable results in

philosophy, which experiment and observation have

Some of them no doubt he had provsince verified.

apprehension, that they might not be

acceptable to a public not yet prepared for their
reception, induced him to employ this cautious methed, but his

He had been taught

of
experience, that truth is no welby the discipline
come guest when it comes in the garb of innovation,
od of making them known.

and that ignorance

is

easily dazzled

to blindness

by

the too sudden light of knowledge.

From

the time of publishing his Method of Fluxions, Newton gave himself but little to the study of

He
mathematics, unless for occasional amusement.
used to say, that " no old man loved mathematics
except

Dr

Wallis."

It

was

after this period that the

controversy with Leibnitz occurred, but in this he

was not personally engaged. It was carried on by
Dr Keill, and other English mathematicians. The
facility

with which he solved the famous problem sent

by Leibnitz

year 1715, as a challenge to the

a proof that neither the quickness of

in the

English nation,

is

NEWTON.

222
his genius, nor his

ed by neglect.

mathematical

At four o'clock

skill,

in the

was impairafternoon he

received the problem, as he was returning fatigued

from his labours in the mint. Before he went to bed
the solution

We

was completed.

may now speak

of the success with which the

capacious and grasping mind of Newton sought out

other treasures of knowledge.
As his early years
in reading the book of nature with the

were spent

scrutinizing eye of a philosopher,

him onward

so his declining

nobler pursuit of
unfolding the science of the moral world, and conThe ardour
templating the ways of God to man.

days carried

in the still

with which he measured

the

physical and visible

heavens, was not more fervent than that with v/hich

he inquired for the truths of the spiritual and invisiHe read the scriptures, pondered their meanble.
ing, illustrated

down

many

of their darker parts, and settled

into a firm belief of their divine origin

import.

In

many

and holy

respects he stood as high in the

rank of theologians as of philosophers.

The same

power of intellect was appHed with equal energy in

both characters ; and had not his briUiant discoveries
in the

former engrossed

the mind of
latter

station

man

is

all

would have elevated

among

the admiration of which

capable, his achievements in the

him

to

commanding

the most able and erudite divines.

person of eminence in the church, said of him in his

" he was the best divine and commen-

lifetime, that

NEWTON.

223

on the Bible he had ever met with." And it is

a remark of Dr Chalmers, that " we see in the theology of Newton, the very spirit and principle which
laioY

gave

all

its

stability,

and

all

its

sureness, to the phi-

He was

losophy of Newton."
sacred history, and had

deeply versed
himself master of

made

in
all

means of understanding the Scriptures.

His great work on Chronology had for one of its
main objects the verification of the writings of the Old

the external

Testament.

This work cost him the labour of many

was not published entire till after his death.

drawn from an immense fund of classical and

years, and
It is

ancient learning, and shows in the author an intimate

acquaintance with the poets, historians, and critics of

He begins with a historical sketch
former times.
of chronological science from

its

that the chronology of ancient

origin,

kingdoms

and proves
is

involved

in
the utmost uncertainty.
profane history
runs back to tradition, and then soon loses itself in

All

utter darkness.

The Europeans had no chronology

before the establishment of the Persian empire, and

the Greek antiquities are so full of fable, that no
reliance can be placed on

them

in fixing dates.

Greek chronologists were addicted to

instituted inaccurate modes of reckoning.
first

fiction,
It

The
and

has been

the foible of nations to refer their origin to as remote

a period as possible, and this vanity has usually shown

itself in

their

proportion to the obscurity, which hung about

early history.

It

was

so

in

Greece, and the

NEWTON.

224

Grecian writers have been guides to all future chroThe Romans depended on the Greeks for
nologists.
the chronology of the East, while in the history of their

own

nation, the accounts of dates

and times are not

worthy of credit, till the age of Alexander. And as

for western Europe in general, it had no chronology
the third and fourth centuries, and in

till

much

some

parts

later.

Out of

this chaos,

and certainty.

Newton undertook to bring light

has made it appear that the

He

Greek mode of reckoning was erroneous, and assigned to the Greek nation too high an antiquity.

On

a series of arguments estabhshed

by astronomical

calculations, in addition to various historical testimony,

he builds a system of chronology, widely different

from any, which learned moderns have deduced from
ancient writers.

general

to about

The

difference of time amounts in

three hundred years, and in

some

The same cautious

important events to much more.
and rigid mode of reasoning prevails throughout his
chronological treatise, as in his philosophical researches; the same exactness of logic, fertility of invention,

and sagacity

in detecting and combining the forcible

of
an
points
argument.
On the Grecian mythology he throws much light,

and with learned ingenuity traces the gods and minor

deities of Greece and Rome to the deified heroes of

He finds their origin at a much later period

Egypt.
than most writers, and discovers that various names

NEWTON.

225

have been multiplied from the same

work

original.

The

a cm'ious discussion concerning

the earth, the commencement
of
peopling
of towns, of agriculture, the arts and sciences, idol-

the

closes with

first

atrous worship, and

numerous other circumstances

which have grown out of the social

compact. The value which the author set upon this
treatise, may be estimated from the fact, that the
and

institutions,

than half of the

chapter, which constitutes more
whole work, he copied out eighteen times with his

first

He

own hand.

observes, that he

commenced

the

study of chronology and history while at Cambridge,

as a relaxation from his severer pursuits.
With all his horror of controversy he was again
driven into

it

her

civilities

Queen
years of his life.
her love of knowledge and

in the latter

Caroline, renowned
to

men

for

of literature and science, was

fond of conversing with Newton, and often expressed

her satisfaction, that it was her fortune to live in the

same age and country with such a man.

She had

caught glimpses of his new views of chronology, and

desired him to favour her with an abstract of his
system,
to

Abbe

of

its

tian

also, a copy was given

Venetian nobleman, on condition

At her request,
Coiiti, a

being kept secret.

betrayed his

trust

But the treacherous Veneafter

he arrived

in

Paris.

He procured the abstract to be translated into French

and published without the author's consent or knowlTo this translation notes were afiixed confutedge.

NEWTON.

226
its

ing

Newton was

positions.

so indignant at this

unworthy conduct of Conti, as well as the perfidy of

the translator, who pretended to have asked consent
to publish the

abstract, that

he wrote a reply

Philosophical Transactions, ahhough

now

in

the

in his eigh-

which was equally remarkable for the

of
its
argument, and the keenness of its rebuke.
power
The controversy was continued by Souciet on one
ty-third year,

side,

to

and

Dr Halley on

a close

till

about

the other, and

was not brought

the time of Newton's death.

Whiston wrote against the Chronology, and boasted

many years afterwards, that his objections were never
answered.

Another posthumous work of our author, was the

Observations on the Prophecies of Daniel, and the
These were left unfinished.
Apocalypse of St John.

The remarks on

Daniel are more matured than those

on the Apocalypse ; but on both they exhibit traces

of the same depth of learning and patience of inveswhich characterize the Chronology.
He
with an inquiry into the origin of the books of

tigation,
starts

the Old Testament,

and advances the theory, so

much

enlarged on of late, that the historical parts

are compiled from various written documents now
lost.

This he thinks particularly demonstrable of

The present
Genesis, and the books of the Kings.
number and arrangement of the Jewish scriptures
were not

settled

the Jews added

till

after the

the points,

Roman

captivity,

when

and committed

their

KEWTON.
ral traditions to writing in the

227

Talmud.

No

vari-

ous readings were preserved, and whatever errors had

crept into the text before this period cannot now be
repaired, except from

the version of the Seventy.

Daniel
at the head of the
places
prophetwriters, and considers his prophecies as a key to

Newton
ic

the interpretation of the others, and the foundation of

The

the christian religion.

periods foretold by

Dan-

accord so exactly with the times of the

ministry
and death of our Saviour, as to present the clearest
iel

possible evidence, that the prophet spoke the dictates

of divine inspiration.
The book of Daniel was

written by different persons ; the six first

chapters
are a collection of papers of a historical character
;
the six last only were written
and
these
Daniel,
by
at various times.

After a series of
preliminary observations to this
the author traces each of the
effect,

prophe-

cies

of

Daniel

to

verification

its

in

succeeding

The vision of the Four Beasts, and

Ten Horns of the fourth beast, he
explains with
events.

ticularity

the
par-

and immense erudition.

the Seventy
to the usual

The prophecy of
Weeks he translates anew, and, contrary
mode of interpretation, refers one clause

of It to the second
coming of Christ. His acquaintance with
chronology enabled him to apply the several parts of this remarkable
prophecy with great
exactness to the
events
to the Mesprincipal

siah, to the time of his

20

relating

birth, his death, the duration

228

NEWTON.

of his ministry, the wars of the Jews, and the ruin of

the Jewish nation.

His deductions from

and scriptural history he

fortifies

by

civil

and

astronomical

calculations.

In regard to the Apocalypse, it has been the prevaiUng opinion of learned men, that this book was
written later, than any other part of the Scriptures

but Newton assigns to

would seem

to hint that

Gospel, and at

all

it

to

be alluded

to

an earlier origin.

He

events before the general Epistles

of Peter, and that to the

it

it

was written before John's

Hebrews,

in those

as

Epistles.

he supposes
After a few

remarks on the authenticity of the Apocalypse, he

proceeds to explain some of its dark prophecies,
which, as he considers them to bear an intimate relation to the prophecies of Daniel, he interprets on
similar principles.

predict the

same

taken place.
ducts him to

Daniel and John

events,

many

in certain points

of which have already

In pursuing the parallel which conthis opinion, he dwells on the origin

and progress of the papal hierarchy.

courses on the prophecies are confined
dictions

which he believes

to

have

All his disto those pre-

been

fulfilled

he hazards no conjectures beyond the limits of evidence ; hence some parts of the Apocalypse he does
not touch, but leaves them to be unfolded in the order
of providence.

tract

by Newton,

entitled a History

JVotable Corruptions of Scripture, was

first

of

Two

publish-

229

NEWTON.
ed

1754.

in

copy was obtained from Holland,

which was among the papers formerly belonging to

Le Clerc, and deposited after his death in the Remonstrants'

1708,

Library

at

So

Amsterdam.

Le Clerc mentioned

this tract

in

early as

his preface

Kuster's edition of Mill's Testament; but he was

to

ignorant of
in

its

own

his

author, as

it

came

handwriting.

in

him from Locke

years afterwards

was written by Newton,

Holland was mutilated at the

Wetstein ascertained, that

and as the copy

to

Some
it

beginning and end, he apphed to the heirs of Newton to be favoured with a perfect
transcript from the

From

motives never explained, this request

was not granted, and the piece found its way to the
original.*

public in the imperfect state in which

Le

When

Clerc.

Horsley published

Newton's works, however,

it

was

left

by

an edition of

was printed from

a copy of the original manuscript then in the
possession of Dr Ekens.
It

the author's purpose in this treatise to

prove

is

the famous text of the

John

this tract

to

Three Heavenly Witnesses

be an interpolation, and

to

in

defend the Vul-

gate reading of the disputed passage in Timothy. f

Considering the early stage at which he took

up

and the comparatively unexplored region

through which he was compelled to pass, he has
this subject,

managed
*

his

argument with remarkable abihty and

Wetstenii Prolegomena,

t 1

John

V.

7;

Tim.

iii,

p. 185.

16.

230

NEWTONT.

success.

Fathers,

His knowledge of the Greek and Latin

theologians of the middle ages, and

the

the history of sacred learning, as

displayed in this
work, impresses the reader with amazement at the
universality of his

powers and attainments.

Notwith-

standing the length to which the controversy on the

text in John has since been carried, and the eminent

has called into action, very few weighty

particulars have been added to those first collected
talents

it

by Newton ; and it would have been no disparagement to the champions of the cause he sustained, if
they had manifested more willingness, than they have
done, to acknowledge their obligation for the aids
they have received from so illustrious a source.

Newton

left

many

writings on theological subjects,

which have not been pubhshed. Whiston mentions

a tract on the Rule of Faith, and one on the DominIn the catalogue of Newton's
arranged
manuscripts,
by order of his executors, we

ion of the CJergy.

an article on Comiptions of Scripture,

and another entitled Paradoxical Questions concernSeveral pieces are designated by
ing Athanasius.

iind noticed

the general

title

of Church Matters.

No

reason has

been assigned by the persons into whose hands these

papers have fallen, why they should be withheld
from the public.
duced them not

Horsley examined them, but

intro-

into his edition of the author's works.

has been supposed, and no doubt rightly, that the

in theoloopinions they express on certain doctrines

It

231

NEWTON.
as squared with the

ogy are not such

orthodox stan-

Whatever may have been the

mind must seriously regret, that the

dard of Horsley.
cause, every fair

man

Newton, on the
important subjects of rehgious truth and scriptural
interpretation, should be withheld from the world.
recorded thoughts of such a

as

Some of his pecuhar theological sentiments may

be discovered from his writings, and the testimony
of his friends.

Whiston

tells

us of his profound

knowledge of church history during the three first

centuries of the christian era, and of his having been
convinced by his study of this history, that the doctrine of the trinity

was introduced

into the christian

scheme many years after the time of the Apostles.*

The tenour of Newton's writings is in accordance
with this declaration, nor do they exhibit any evidence, that their author ever believed in a trinity.

The

charge against Horsley of having suppressed

because they were adverse to this doctrine,

his papers

has never been contradicted.

It

was

also the faith of Ne^^ton, that in early times

christian preachers

were

first

chosen by the people,

and then ordained by bishops, and that no person

could be ordained to the pastoral office over any

The

Present State of the Republic of Letter?, vol. III. p. 282.

work may he seen several other particulars concern-

In the satne

ing the theological opinions of

to the

comparative Moral

Doctrines, p. 367.

20*

Newton.

See also

An

Inquiry in-

Tendency of Unitarian and Trinitarian

232

NEWTON'.
till

congregation,

whom

he was

government seem

church

of

he had been elected by the people,

In this respect his views

to teach.*

to

have

approached

He did not
nearly to those of the Independents.
hold to the baptism of infants, but believed that all
ceremony should be sufficiently
and
understanding to receive reliage

the subjects of this

advanced

in

gious instruction. f

To theology and ecclesiastical history the leisure

hours of this great philosopher were devoted during
the last thirty years of his
fice in the

life.

The

duties of his of-

mint were arduous, but his habits of close

application to study, early

formed and long continued,

enabled him to penetrate deeply into those branches

of sacred knowledge, to which he at first applied for
relaxation and amusement.
Till his eightieth year his health

He

was then

afflicted

with a severe

was usually good.

illness, from which

,he never entirely recovered, although he went puncthrough the labours of his office till within a
tually

year of his death.

It has been said, that his mind became so

much

impaired in his advanced age, that he could not understand his own works ; but this is a mistake, as is
testified

by Pemberton.

In his last illness, and for

some time previously, Newton was attended by Dr

Mead, with whom he held such conversations as
Republic of Letters, vol.
i

Ibid. p. 280.

Ill, p.

281-

233

NEWTON.

proved him to have full possession of his faculties.

He died on the 20th of March, 1727, in the eightyfifth year of his age, and his remains were deposited
in

Westminster Abbey.
Plato thought, and others

have

the

indulged

dream,

as

wise

that there

as

Plato

chain

is

of inteUigences descending by a regular gradation

to the lowest.
If wisdom deceive

from the highest

not her children, and the vision of Plato be indeed

a reality,

who

will

deny

to

that portion of the scale,

Newton

rank

in

which the human race

is

the

first

Other philosophers have been

renowned for genius, acuteness, and power of intellect ; they have been quick to invent, and sagacious
destined to occupy

to discover the

more hidden phenomena of

nature,

and the deeper reasons of things. Other philosophers have shone as stars of the first magnitude in
the firmament of science

one happy discovery

in

they may have gone before the rest of mankind ; in

one endowment of nature they may have stood without an equal.

Such there have been, and they have

reflected glory on

the world

but in the blaze of

Newton's effulgence they are eclipsed and lost. All

the rare qualities, which singly measured the greatness of others, were combined in him, and contribut-

ed

their respective shares to raise

him

to the

emi-

nence he held, and sustain him there. To no being

whose destiny has been fixed among mortals, can be

more

justly

apphed the words of the sweetest poet

234

NEWTON.

that ever invoked the

philosophic inuse.

ton

may

it

truly

be

said, that he

Of New-

was one,

Qui genus humanutn ingetiio superavit, et omnes

Prsestinsit, stellas exortus uti Eetherius

Sol*

In private hfe he was mild and affable, peaceful

in his temper, gentle in his manners, and a lover of

little

into the world,

ready

among

Although he went out

he was social in his feelings, and

and retirement.

tranquillity

Humihty and modesty were

most striking virtues. He was without

in conversation.

his

arrogance or pretension, putting himself on a level

with other men, and ascribing whatever progress he

had made

knowledge wholly to his untiring industry

and patience. As he was a stranger to pride, so he
was free from any affected singularities. He was gen^
in

erous in his benefactions, and a patron of true worth

wherever

it

was found.

His religious

faith

was

settled

on the foundation of reason and the Scriptures

and strong ; he was a christian
piety was steady
',

behef and
ciples and

in practice.

his
in

la short, the balance of prin-

powers which marked the rare structure

of his mind, together with the unison in his philosoformed a perfect and wonphy, morals, and rehgion,
the
in
all
derful harmony
parts of his character.
Lucret. de Rerura Nat. Lib, IIL

v. 1056.

Alf

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT
OF

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF

LETTER TO A FRIEND.

IN A

SECTION

On
I.

the

I.

Text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses.

Since the discourses of some

raised in
text

SCRIPTURE.

of

Three

you

a curiosity of

late writers

have

knowing the truth of that

concerning the testimony of the

Heaven, 1 John v. 7, I have here sent you

scripture

in

an account of what the reading has been in all ages,

and by what steps it has been changed, so far as I
Ajid I have
can hitherto determine by records.

done

it

the

stand the

more

many

because to you, who underabuses which they of the Roman

freely,

church have put upon the world, it will scarce be

than is comungrateful to be convinced of one more

For ahhough the more learned

and quick-sighted men, as Luther, Erasmus, Bullinmonly believed.

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

236

some

ger, Grotius, and

would not dissemble

others,

knowledge, yet the generality are fond of the

their

place for

its

making

against

But

heresy.

whilst

we

exclaim against the pious frauds of the Roman church,

and make it a part of our religion to detect and re-

nounce

all

things of that kind,

we must acknowledge

a greater crime in us to favour such practices,

it

than

in

count

we

the Papists
for

they

we

so

much blame on

act according

that ac-

to their religion,

but

In the eastern nations, and for

contrary to ours.

a long time in the western, the faith subsisted without

this text ; and it is rather a danger to rehgion, than

an advantage, to m.ake it now lean upon a bruised

There cannot be better service done to the

reed.

truth, than to

fore,

it

of things spurious

and, there-

knowing your prudence, and calmness of temper,

am

my

purge

confident

mind

1 shall

plainly

not offend you by telling you

especially since

it

is

no

article

of

faith, no point of discipline, nothing but a criticism

concerning a text of scripture which I am going to

write about.
II.

First,

The
some

history of the corruption, in short,

of the Latins interpreted the

is this.

spirit,

wa-

and blood, of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,

Then Jerome, for the same end,
prove them one.

ter,

to

inserted the Trinity in express words into his version.

Out of him the Africans began

to allege

it

against

the Vandals, about sixty-four years after his death.

Afterwards the Latins noted his variations in the mar-

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

gins of their

books

and thence

it

creep into the text in transcribing,

the twelfth and

following

began at length
and that chiefly

to
in

when disputing
And when printing

centuries,

was revived by the schoolmen.

came

237

crept out of the Latin into the printed

Greek, against the authority of all the Greek MSS.
up,

it

and ancient versions

it

went soon

this history will

on both

and from the Venetian presses

Greece. Now the truth of

appear by considering the arguments

sides.

The arguments

III.

the

after into

Three

in

Heaven,

alleged for the testimony of

are the authorities of Cyprian,

Athanasius, and Jerome, and of

scripts,

'

and almost

all

many Greek manu-

the Latin ones.

IV. Cyprian's words run thus,*

"the Lord saith,
and the Father are one.'
And again of the

And
Son, and Holy Ghost it is written,
these Three are One.' "
The Socinians here deal
'

Father,

too injuriously with Cyprian, while they would have

this

another place

place corrupted ; for Cyprian

repeats almost the same thing. f

in

[" one baptized among heretics] be

of God, tell me, I pray, of what

made
God ?

Dicit

"
If,"

saith

he,

the temple
If of the

Dominus, Ego et Pater unum sumus et iterum de Patre

Sancto scriptum est, Et tres unum sunt. Cypr.
;

et Filio et Spiritu

de Unit. Eccles.
t

Si teraphiin

Sancti,

cum

tres

Dei factus

unum

sinf,

est,

quajso cujus Dei

quomodo

esse potest, qui ant Patris aut Filii inimicus

ad Jubaiamtm.

Si

Spiritus

Spiritus Sanctus plaeatus ei

est.

Cypr. Episl. 73,

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

238

since these Three are One, how can

be reconciled to him who is the
Ghost
Holy
"
These
enemy of either the Father or the Son f

Holy Ghost,
the

places of Cyprian being, in my opinion, genuine,

seem so apposite to prove the testimony of the Three
in Heaven, that I should never have suspected a mislake in

it,

could

but have reconciled

meet with of

it

with the

reading in the next

ignorance
the
Latins
of
both
Africa and Europe,
age, amongst
For had it been in
as well as among the Greeks.
I

this

Cyprian's Bible, the Latins of the next age, when

all the world was engaged in disputing about the
Trinity, and all arguments that could be thought of

and daily brought upon

could
never
have
been ignorant of a text,
the stage,
which in our age, now the dispute is over, is chiefly
In reconciHng this difficulty, I considinsisted upon.

were

diligently sought out,

only words of the text quoted

both places are, " And these Three

er, therefore, that the

by Cyprian
are

One

;"

in

which words may belong

verse as well as to the seventh.

to the

eighth

For Eucherius,*

bishop of Lion in France, and contemporary to St

Eucherius reads the text thus Tria sunt qua? testimonium peraqua, sanguis, et spiritus. And then adds tliis interpre:

hibent

tation, Plures hie ipsam, interprefationemystica,intelligunt Trin-

itatem

eo quod perfecta ipsa perhibeat testimonium Christo ;

;
quia ipse de se dicit, me dereliquerunt

aqua, Patrem indicans

fontem aquaj vivae

pa^sionis cruorem

sanguine, Christum deroonstrans, utique per

manifestans.
spiritu vero Sanctum Spiritum

Eiicher. de Quest. A". Test.

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

239

Austin, reading the text without the seventh verse,

us, that

tells

then understood the

many

spirit,

the

And
water, and the blood, to signify the Trinity.
St Austin* is one of those many ; as you may see in
his third book against Maximinus, where he tells us,
that " the
is the
for God is a
Father,

spirit

the water the

Holy Ghost,
them that

Christ gives to

in the

many

thirst

made

Son, for the word was

the opinion of

spirit

he

for

is

and the blood the

Now

flesh."

if it

was

western churches of those

times, that the spirit, the water, and

nified the

the water which

the blood, sig-

Son, and the Holy Ghost;

Father, the

plain that the testimony of Three in Heaven, in

express words, was not yet crept into their books ;
it is

and even whhout

Cyprian, or any

Sane

this testimony,

man

nolo in

falli te

et

dicas, spiritum

ne

tamen dictum
fallaris

hanc

aquam

esse, tres

enim

mus

inquirere

for

say of

Joannis Apostoli, ubi ait, " (res

sanguis, et tres unuin sunt ;" no forte

et

sanguinem diversas esse substantias,

Propter hoc admonui te,
quibus non quid sint, sed quid osten-

luium sunt.

sunt, in

dant, semper attenditur.

was obvious

epis(oI;i

sunt testes, spiritus, aqua, el

et

it

else of that opinion, to

Si

vero ea, qua3

non absurde occurrit

iiis

significata sunt, vcli-

ipsa Trinitas, quas unus, so-

summus est Deus, Pater et Fiiius et Spiritus Sanctus; de

quibus verissime dici potuit, tres sunt testes, et tres ununi sunt ;

lus,

nomine

Deum Patrem, (de Deo

adorando loquebatur Dominus, ubi ait, " spiritus est Deus); nomine aufemsangniiiis,Filium; quiaverbum caro factum est
nomine autem aqu;p, Spiritum Sanctum. Cum enim
ut

spiritAs significatuin acci|)ianuis

ipso quippe

rctur Jesus,

autem
D.

dicit

quam

daturus erat sitientibus,

de Spiritu,

Jlugiistin. cont.

quem

Maximinum.

21

ait

dea(|Uiiloque" lioc
evangelista;

accepturi erant credentes in eum."

Lib.

iii.

cap. xxii.

240

siK ISAAC Newton's history of

the Father, and Son, and

Holy Ghost,
'And these Three are One.' " And that

rian's

"

it is

this

written,

was Cyp-

meaning, Facundus,* an African bishop in the

is
my author ; for he tells us expressly,

sixth century,

the above mentioned place, under-

that Cyprian, in

stood

and blood,
Son, and Holy Ghost; and thence
affirming, that John said of the Father, Son, and Holy
"
Ghost, These Three are One." This at least may be
so, interpreting the spirit, water,

it

to be the Father,

gathered from

passage of Facundus, that some

this

in

those early ages interpreted Cyprian after this manner.

Nor do

understand

how any

of those

many who

Facundus, in tlie beginning of liis book to the Emperor Justinian, pro Defensione triuni Capituloruni Concilii Clialcedonensis,
recites the text after the

first

tinctly in these

de Patre

et

Filio et

timonium dant
sunt;"

in

words

significans

Spiritum Sanctum, Joan. vii.

he thus confirms

litlle after

quod

dixit,

Aut

si

forsan

Patrem,

tliis

dum

by Cj'prian's au-

interpretation

ipsi,

qui de verbo contendunt, in eo

" tres sunt

qui testificantur in terra,
unum sunt," Trinitatem nolunt

sanguis, et hi tres

ipsa verba quaj posuit, pro Apostolo

Numquid

dis-

aqua,et sanguis et hi tres unum

&ic. Joan. iv. 21. in aqui
And a
37, in sanguine vero Filium.

in terra, 'jiiritus,

spiritu

thority, saying,

manner of Cyprian, but more

Nam

Joannes Apostolus, in epistold sua,

" Tres
sunt, qui tesSpiritu Saucto sic dicit,
;

hi tres, qui

spiritus,
intelligi

aqua, et
secun-

Joanne respondeant.

in terra testificari, et qui

unum

esse dicun-

Quod tamen Jopossunt spiritus et aquae et sanguines dici

annis Apostoli testimonium B. Cyprianus Carthaginensis, antistes
et martyr, in epistola sive libro quem de Trinitate, immo de Uni.'

tur,

tatc Ecclesia3 scripsit,

intelligit; ait

enim,

de Patre, Filio, et Spiritu Saiicto dictum

Dominus, 'ego et Pater unum sumus ;' et

" dicit

'
iterum de Patre, Filio, et Spiritu Sancto scriptum est, et hi
"
ex
Facunil.
Lib.
i.
edit.
tres unum sunt.'
Sir7nondi, Parisp. 16;

ik, 1629.

241

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

water, and blood, for a type of the

man else, who was ignorant of the

took the

spirit,

Trinity

or any

in Heaven, as the churches

testimony of the Three
in the times of the Arian controversy generally were ;

could understand him otherwise.

And

even Cypri-

an's own words do plainly make for the interpreta"

For he does not say, the Father, the Word,
tion.

and the Holy Ghost," as it is now in the seventh verse ;

but " the Father, and Son, and Holy Ghost," as it is
in baptism
to derive

the

tried at
place from which they

the Trinity.

If

it

be pretended,

first

that the

by Cyprian are taken out of the seventh

than out of the eighth, because he
rather
verse,

words

cited

reads

not.

Hi

Trcs in

Unum

sunt, but

Hi

Tres

Unum sunt; I answer, that the Latins generally read,

Hi Tres Unum sunt, as well in the eighth verse, as in
as you may see in the newly cited places
the seventh
;

of St Austin and Facundus, and those of Ambrose,

Pope Leo, Beda, and Cassiodorus, which

in the present vulgar Latin.

follow,

and

So then the testimony

of Cyprian respects the eighth, or at least is as applicable to that verse as to the seventh, and therefore is
of no force for proving the truth of the seventh ; but,
on the contrary, for disproving it we have here the

testimony of Facundus, St Austin, Eucherius, and

For
those many others whom Eucherius mentions.
if

those of that age had

met with

it

they would never have understood

water, and the

in

their

the

books,

spirit,

the

blood, to be the three persons of the

Trinity, in order to prove

them one God.

242

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

V. These passages in Cyprian may receive further

light by a hke passage in Tertullian, from whence
Cyprian seems

known
lian's

to

have borrowed them

Tertullian his master.

The

connexion of the Father

the

in

for

it is

well

Cyprian was a great admirer of Tertulwritings, and read them frequently, calling
that

passage

in the

is this

;*

"

The

Son, and of the Son

makes three coherent ones from

which Three are One, (one thina;, not

Paraclete,

one another,
one person,) as

and the Father are One

said, 'I

it is

;'

denoting the unity of substance, not the singularity

of number."
Here, you see, Tertullian says not,
" the
Father, Word, and Holy Ghost," as the text
now has it, but " the Father, Son, and Paraclete ;"

nor cites any thing more of the text than these words,

" which Three are One."

Though this treatise against
St Praxeas be wholly spent in discoursing about the
Trinity, and

all

and

of St John, as

this text

texts of scripture are cited to prove

we now read

it,

it,

would have

been one of the most obvious and apposite to have been

cited at large, yet Tertullian could find no more obvious
words

One."
ty,

"

" these Three are

purpose than
These, therefore, he interprets of the Trini-

in

it

for

his

and enforces the interpretation by that other text,

and the Father are One ;" as if the phrase was

of the same importance in both places.

Connexiis

Patris in Filio, et Filii in Paracleto, tres efficit co-

haerentes, alterum ex altero,

quomodo dictum

"
est,

Ego

"
et

Unum sunt,"
Unum sumus ;"

qui Tres

Pater

unitatem, non adnumeri singularitatem.

Prax. c. 25.
tiae

(non Unus)
ad substan-

TeriuUian. luhers.

243

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

VI. So then

this interpretation

invented by the Montanists

seems

for giving

to

have been

countenance to

their Trinity.

For TertuUian was a Montanist when

he wrote

and

this

it

is

most Hkely that so corrupt

and forced an interpretation had its rise among a

sect of men accustomed to make bold with the ScripCyprianbeing used to itin his master's writings,
seems from thence to have dropt into his ; for this

tures.
it

gathered from the Hkeness between their

And by the disciples of these two great
citations.

may be
men,

it

many
in

seems

to

have been propagated among those

Latins, who, as Eucherius tells us, received

the next age, understanding

"
spirit,

water, and blood."

the Trinity

it

by the

For how, without the

countenance of some such authority, an interpretation so corrupt and strained should come to be received in that

age so generally,

do not under-

stand.

VII.
lian

And what

and Cyprian,

is

said of the testimony of Tertul-

may be much more

said of that in

the feigned disputation of Athanasius with Arius at

For there the words cited are only y.xi d
Nice.

r^m

7 'K uTiv,

and

these

Three are One

and they

are taken out of the seventh verse, without naming

the persons of the Trinity before them.
For the

Greeks interpreted " the spirit, water, and blood," of

the Trinity, as well as the Latins ; as is manifest
from the annotations they made on
margin of some of their manuscripts.

21*

this text

in

For Father

the
Si-

244

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

mon*

informs us that in one of the

MSS

in the library

of the king of France, marked number 2247, over

against these words,

'<>Tt

7^,t TO

u^mq xxt re

7rvsvf<,

Kxi

ro

Three that hear record \in

ter,

and

the blood

is

/^cc^rv^ovvrei

ce,in.x

earth,'\

there

7risvf*.x TO kyiov, xx)

oi

r^c7i el<riv

this

nxrifo, xui

,j'or

t^

there are

the spirit, the ivarare?-! t

remark,

eivToi

that

bxvtou,

is,

Holy Ghost, and the Father, and He of HimAnd in the same copy over against these
self.
words, t* o{ T^ui eli TO ev ii<ri, and these Three are
One ; this note is added, mrevTi f4.tx B-sory.i, J; B-iog,
One God.
This MS is
that is. One Deity,
the

about 500 years old.

VIII. Also in the margin of one of the

Monsieur Colbert's

library,

mon

is

tells

us there

these words,

a like

'5 -S-^s?, /^ii^

head; there are added,

rov eiyla
er,

^sorjn,

One God, One God-

t^d^rv^lct roZ ^soZ too 5rr^5 kxi

the testimony

Ghost.

the

sufficiently

in

of God, the FathThese

marginal notes
Holy
Greeks
used
to apply this
the
how
show

TTveZ/itxToi,

and

MSS,

number 871, father SiFor besides

remark.

text to the Trinity

and by consequence how the

is to be understood.
But

author of that disputation

I

should

writ

tell

you

also, that that disputation

by Athanasius, but by

was not

a later author, and there-

fore, as a spurious piece, uses not to

be much

ed upon.
* Critical
History of the New Testamrnt, chap.
f Suspicor verba h t~^ yri non extare in MS.

18.

insist-

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

IX.

Now

this

245

" the
mystical application of

spirit,

water, and blood," to signify the Trinity, seems to

me to have given occasion to somebody, either frau-

" the
Three in
testimony of
Heaven" in express words into the text, for proving
the Trinity ; or else to note it in the margin of his
dulently to insert the

book, by way of interpretation ; whence it might

afterwards creep into the text in transcribing.
And
the first upon record that inserted it, is Jerome ; if
the preface* to the
*

canonical epistles, w^iich goes

The whole preface runs thus;

Non

Incipit prologus in epistolas

ordo apud Graecos, qui integre sapiuiit,

fidemque rectam sectantur, epistolaruin septem, quae canonicee

canonicas.

ita est

nuncupantur, sicut in Latinis codicibus invenitur; ut quia Petrus

est primus in ordine apostolorum, primaj sint etiam ejus
epistola;

in

ordine ceterarum.

Sed

sicut evangelistas

dudunn

ad

Deo juvante,
dua Petri, tres

veritatis liaeain correximus, ita lias proprio ordini,

Est enim una earum prima Jacobi,

si sicut ab eis
digests sunt, ita quoin Latinum verterentur
eloquiura,

reddidimus.

Johannis, et Judae una. Quae

que ab interpretibus fideliter
iiec

ambiguilatem legentibus facerent, ncc sermonum sese varie-

tates impugnarent, illo praecipue loco ubi de Unitate Trinitatis in

primA Johannis

epistola,

positum legimus.

In quii etiam ab infide-

libus translatoribus multuni erratum esse a fidei veritate

compcrimus,

trium tantummodo vocabula, hoc est, aquae, sanguinis, et spiritOs,

in ipsd sua editione ponentibus ; et Patris,
Verbique, ac Spiritils testimonium omittentibus in quo maxime et fides catholica robora;

tur, et Patris

probatur.

ac

Filii et Spiriti^s

una

divinitatis

siibstautia

com-

In ceteris vero epistolis,

distet editio, lectoris

quantum a nostni aliorura

Sed tu, virgo Christi
judicio derelinquo.

dum a me impensius scripturae veritatem inqniris,

mcam quodammodo seuectutem invidorum dentibus corrodendam exponis, qui me falsarium, corruptoremque Sanctarum proEustochium,

nunciant Scripturarum. Sed ego, in tali opere, nee aemulorum

mcorum invidiam pertimesco, nee Sanctze Scripturae veritatem
posceniibus dencgabo.

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

246
under

his

not a

new

name, be

Foi whilst he composed

his.

translation of the

New

Testament, but

only corrected the ancient vulgar Latin, as learned

men

think,

haps

at

this

and among

first

testimony

emendations, written per-

his

the margin of his book, he inserted

in
;

he complains

in

the said preface,

how he was thereupon accused by some

of the Lat-

and makes answer, that

former Latin translators had much erred from the
ins for falsifying

scripture

" the

spirit, water, and blood,"

and omitting the testimony of " the
Heaven," whereby the Cathohc faith is

faith, in putting

only

in their edition,

Three

in

established.

he corrected
original

In this defence he seems to say, that

the vulgar Latin translation by the

Greek

text relies

X. But

and

this is the great

testimony the

upon.
whilst he confesses

it

was not

in the

Latin

before, and

accuses former translators of falsifying

the Scriptures in omitting it, he satifies us that it has
crept into the Latin since his time, and so cuts off all
the authority of the present vulgar Latin for justifying

And whilst he was accused by his contemporaries

of falsifying the Scriptures in inserting it, this accusation also confirms that he altered the public reading.
For had the reading been dubious before he made it so,
it.

no man would have charged him with falsification for

Also whilst, upon this accusafollowing either part.
tion,

he recommends the alteration by

for establishing the Catholic faith, this

its

usefulness

renders

it

the

247

TWO CORRUPTIONS OP SCRIPTURE.

more suspected

by discovering both the design of

his making it, and the ground of his hoping for success.
However, seeing he was thus accused by his

contemporaries,

it

he being called

examine

gives us just reason to

the business between

him and

we

to the bar,

And

his accusers.

so

are not to lay stress

own testimony for himself (for no man is a

witness in his own cause), but laying aside all prejuof
dicOj we ought, according to the ordinary rules
upon

his

examine the business between him and

justice, to

his accusers

XI.

They

by other witnesses.
that have been conversant

his writ-

in

a strange liberty which he takes in asings, observe

Many notable instances of this he has
serting things.

very fabulous lives of

Paul and Hilarion, not to mention what he has writWhence Erasmus said of
ten upon other occasions.
"
in
that
he
was
him,
frequently
affirming things,
violent and impudent, and often contrary to himBut I accuse him not. It is possible that he
self."*
left

us in composing those

might be sometimes imposed upon,

poraries accused him,

it is

or,

through inad-

Yet since

vertency, commit a mistake.

but just that

his

contem-

we

should

name, and hear

lay aside the prejudice of his great

the cause impartially between them.

*

Sicpe

rumque

numero

sibi

violentas,

constans.

parumque pudens,

Erasmi

Jlnnoiiilion. in

Vide etiam qute Erasmus contra

onyrao fusius

dixit.

Leum

in

sacpe varlus, pa

Johan.

v. 7.

hunc locum de Hier-

248

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

Now the witnesses between them are partly

the ancient translators of the Scriptures into the various languages ; partly the writers of his own age,
XII.

and of the ages next before and after him ; and partly the scribes who have copied out the Greek manuscripts of the Scriptures in all ages.

And

all

these

are against him.

For by the unanimous evidence

of

"
appear that the testimony of the

all

these,

Three
scripts,

it

will

Heaven" was wanting in the Greek manufrom whence Jerome, or whoever was the

in

author of that preface to the canonical epist?es, pretends to have borrowed it.

Xni. The

ancient interpreters which I cite as

witnesses against him, are chiefly the authors of the

ancient vulgar Latin, of the Syriac, and the iEthiopic versions.

For as he tells us, that the Latins omitted the testimony of " the

Three

in

Heaven"

in their

version before his time, so in the Syriac and jEthiopic

versions, (both which, from

count of them, are

much

bishop Walton's acancienter than Jerome's

time, being the versions which the oriental iEthiopic

nations received from the beginning, and generally

used, as the Latins did the vulgar Latin) that same
testimony is wanting to this day ; and the authors of

these three most ancient, most famous, and most receiv-

ed versions, by omitting it, are concurrent witnesses, that

they found it wan ting in the original Greek manuscripts
of their own times.
It is wanting also in other ancient versions

as in the

Egyptian Arabic, published

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

249

Walton's Polyglot ; in the Armenian version,''''

used, ever since Chrysostom's age, by the Armenian
in

nations

and

in

the Illyrican of Cyrillus, used in

Rascia, Bulgaria, Moldavia, Russia, Muscovy, and

other countries, which use the Sclavonic tongue.
In a copy of this version, f printed at Ostrobe (Ostrow) in Volhinia, in the year 1581, I have seen it

and one CamillusJ relates the same thing

;
out of ancient manuscripts of this version seen by him.
wanting

Father Simon notes

it

wanting also

in a certain ver-

French church, which, saith he, is at

old, and which was published by
Nor do I
a
Benedictine monk.
Mabillon,

sion of the

1000 years

least

father

know of any version wherein it is extant, except the

modern vulgar Latin, and such modern versions, of
the western nations, as have been influenced by

So

then,

and

by

the unanimous consent of

faithful interpreters

with,

who

doubtless

all

it.

the ancient

which we have hitherto met

made

use of the best manuscripts

Codex Armeniaciis ante 400 annos cxaratiis, qiiem vidi apiid

Ecclesia: Armeniaca;, quae Amstelodami coHi!<i(ur, locum ilium non legit. Sandius.Jlppend. Interpret. Paradox, in It. I.

Episcopum

tThe

printed Sclavonic version runs thus;

"Quia Tres sunt

qui testificantur, spiritus, et aqua, ct sanguis; et Tres

sunt.

in

Unum

Si testimonium, &ic."

^Testimonium Trium in Coelo non est in antiquissimis [llyricoet Ruthenorum codicibus ; quorum unum exemplar, a sex-

rum

centis fere annis manuscriptum, janipridom apud illustri.ssimuni

Gabrielem Chineum, terra" Bactrica; Dominum vidi, ct legi alterum manibus nostris teritur, fide et antiquitate sua nobile, Caviil;

Ivs de Jlntichrislo, Lib.

ii.

cap. 2. pag. 156.

250

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

"
they could get, the testimony of the Three
en" was not anciently in the Greek.

XIV. And

that

it

was neither

sions nor in the Greek, but

the

first

churches,

hinted above

in

Heav-

in the ancient

ver-

was wholly unknown

to

most certain by an argument

is

namely, that

in

all

that

vehement,

and

lasting controversy about the Trinity

in Jerome's time, and both before and long enough
" the Three in Heaven" was
after
this text of

universal,

it,

never once thought of.

It is now in
every body's
mouth, and accounted the main text for the business,

and would assuredly have been so too with them,

And yet it is not once
it been in their books.

had
to

be met with

in all

the disputes, epistles, orations,

and other writings of the Greeks and Latins (Alexder of Alexandria, Athanasius, the council of Sardica,

Nazianzen, Nyssen, Epiphanius, Chrysostom,

Basil,

Cyril, Theodoret, Hilary,

Ambrose, Austin, Victori-

nus Afer, Philastrius Brixiensis, Phaebedius Agennensis, Gregorius Baeticus, Faustinus Diaconus, Paschasius, Aruobius Junior, Cereahs,

times of those controversies

self,

if

his

version and

and others)

no, not in

preface

in

the

Jerome him-

to the canonical

be excepted. The writings of those times

and there is no arv^ery many, and copious
which
they do not urge
gument, or text of scripture,
epistles

were

That of St John's Gospel, " I and

again and again.
the Father are One," is every where inculcated,
but this of " the Three

in

Heaven" and

their being

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

'

One,"

is

no where

to

be met with,

till

251

when

at length,

ignorant ages came on, it began by degrees to

creep into the Latin copies out of Jerome's version.
So far are they from citing the testimony of " the
the

Three

Heaven," that, on the contrary, as often as

they have occasion to mention the place, they omit
and that too, as well after Jerome's age, as in,
it,
in

For Hesychius* cites the place thus ;

Jludi Johannem dicentem, Tria sunt qui testimoniand before

um

it.

prcebent, et

guis,

et

which

is

Tres

Unum

sunt, spiritus, et san-

The words

aqua.
never done, but

Heaven"

terra

in

in copies

he omits,

where " the Three

Cassiodorus, or whoever
wanting.
was the author of the Latin version of the discourse
in

is

of Clemens Alexandrinus on these epistles of St John,

reads

spiritus,

Beda,

Et

thus

it

et

Q^uia

aqua,

et

sanguis,

commentary on

in his

s])iritus est

qui

sunt,
et hi

Si testimonium,

But here

reads
terra.

thus

Unum

it,

as

And

first

epistle, ascribed to

Beda
if

the

this

The

Pope Eusebius,

authority of popes be valuable,

in Levit. Lib.

22

sunt.

doth, omitting only the words in

ii. c. 8.
post med.
Cassiodor. in Bibl. S. Pair. edit. Paris. 1389.

Hesych.

est

the words in terra, so

can gather from his commentary on

have been inserted by some later hand.

author of the

Tres

as I

text,

sunt.-\

it

sunt, qui testimonium dant in

terra, spiritus, aqua,

^c.

testijicantur,

Unum

quoniam Ckristus

et saiiguis, et

far

qui

Tres

the place, reads

testificaiur ,

Quoniam Tres

Veritas.

tres

253

SIR ISAAC Newton's history or

Pope Leo
the place

the Great, in his tenth epistle, thus cites

Et

spiritus est

qui iestificatur, quoniam

quia Tres sunt qui testimonium,

spiritus est Veritas ;

et

dant, spiritus.

book
the

aqua,

et

sanguis

Tres Untim

hi

et

St Ambrose, in the sixth chapter of his

sunt.

De

Spiritu Sancto, disputing

Three Persons,

Hi

says.

Tres

first

the unity of

for

Unum sunt,

Johan-

nes dixit, aqua, sanguis, et spiritus ; Unum in mysThis is all he could find of the
terio, non in natura.
text, while

he was disputing about the Trinity, and

he proves the unity of the persons by

the mystical unity of the spirit, water, and blood ;

therefore

of

those

interpreting

the

with

Trinity

Cyprian

eleventh chapter of his

Yea,
he
recites
the
text thus ; Per aquam
third book,
fully
et sanguinem venit Christus Jesus, non solum in aqua,

and others.

sed in aqua

quoniam

et

sanguine

spiritus

spiritus, aqua,

et

et

spiritus testimonium dat,

est Veritas.

sanguis

The

Christo Jesu.'^
rius,

the

in

like

Qiiia Tres sunt testes,

et hi

Tres

Unum

sunt in

reading of Facundus, Euchein the places cited above.

and St Austin, you have

These are Latins

as late, or later than

Jerome;

for Je-

rome did not prevail with the churches of his own time
" the Three in Heaven."
to receive the testimony of

And
his

for

them

to

know

testimony, was

XV. And

as

his version,

in effect to

See also Ambrose

iiiitiantiir,

in

Luc.

cap. 4.

it.

Greeks, Cyril of Alexandria

for the

reads the text without

mvsteriis

and not receive

condemn

this

testimony

xxii. 10,

and

in his

in

the xivtli

book De

iis

qui

253

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

book of
book

Thesaurus, cap. 5 ; and again in his first

Fide ad Reginas, a Uule after the middle ;

his

De

and so does CEcumenius, a

later

Greek,

in

his

com-

mentary on this place of St John's epistle. Also,

Didymus Alexandrinus, in his commentary on the
" the
and blood,"

same passage, reads,

spirit, water,
" the Three in Heaven
without mentioning
;" and so
he doth in his book of the Holy Ghost, where he
seems

to omit nothing that

he could

find for his pur-

pose ; and so doth Gregory Nazianzen in his xxxviitli

and also Niccoration concerning the Holy Ghost
;

tas in his

commentary on Gregory Nazianzen's xlivth

And here it is farther observable, that, as

had contended that " the Father, Son,
Eusebians
the
oration.

and Holy Ghost," were not to be connunieratcd,

because they were things of a difi:erent kind ; Nazianzen and Nicetas answer, that they may be connumerated, because St John connumerates three things
not consubstantial, namely, " the spirit, the water, and
the blood."
By the objection of the Eusebians, it
then appears that the testimony of " the Three in

Heaven" was

not in their books

and by the answer

it
is as evident, that it was not in
while they answer by instancing " the

of the Catholics
theirs

for

spirit, water, and blood," they could not have missed

of " the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost,"

had they been connumerated, and called one

words immediately before ; and to answer by
cing in these, would have been far

more

in

the

instan-

to their

pur-

254

SIR ISAAC

Newton's history of

pose, because
like

manner

it was the
very thing in question. In
the Eunomians, in
disputing against the

Cathohcs, had objected, that the Holy Ghost is nowhere in scripture conjoined with the Father and
the Son, except in the form of baptism ; which is as
"
as to say, that the
testimony of the Three in

much

Heaven" was not

whilst he

in their

books

and yet St Basil,*

very diligent in returning an answer to

them, and perplexes himself in citing places, which
are nothing to the purpose, does not produce this
text of " the Three in Heaven,"
though it be the
is

most obvious, and the only proper passage, had it

been then in the Scriptures ; and therefore he knew

The objection of the Eunomians, and

nothing of it.
the answer of the Cathohcs, sufficiently show that it
was

in the

books of neither party. Besides all this,

Pope Leo, mentioned above, was

the tenth epistle of

that very

famous

epistle

to

Flavian,

patriarch

of

Constantinople, against Eutyches, which went about

all the churches, both eastern and western,

through

being translated into Greek, and sent about in the

by Flavian.
west, and read
east

It

in

was generally applauded

the

in the

council of Chalcedon, and

there solemnly approved and subscribed by all the

bishops ; and in this epistle the text was thus cited ;

Et

spiritus est qui testijicatur,

Veritas
tus, et

quoniam Christus

est

quia Tres sunt qui testimonium dant, spiriet

And
sanguis ; et hi Tres Unum sunt.

aqua,

* Lib. V.
adversus

Eunomium,

sub finetn.

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

by putting

7rvsvfA.ct,

according to the Greek reading,

which

for Christus,

is still

the^ vulgar

thus translated by the Greeks

fjLot^TvpolJf iTTeiStj
el

Tfl

'X-VVf^ IcTTiv

< to

ij

So then we have

ed by the Pope, owned

>ci

was
^a

f'="T"'

yap

ffiii

ciifA*.

et<!'iv

x.cti

et

the reading, quot-

west, and

in the

it

Latin,

^rvstJjw*

Ai)'flf<af

fnxprvpouvTii, TO TTveufcx, ki to voap^

Tpe7i Ts ev siTi.

255

solemnly

subscribed in the east by the fourth general council,

and therefore it continued the public received reading in both the east and

west,

till

age of

after the

that council.

XVI. So then

the testimony of "the

Three

in

Heaven," which, in the times of these controversies,

would have been in every body's mouth, had it
been

books, was wholly unknown to the

churches of those ages.
All that they could find in
their

in

their

books was the testimony of "the water, the

spirit,

and the blood." Will you now say that the testimoof " the Three in Heaven" was razed out of

ny

books by the prevailing Arians

Yes, truly,
those Arians were crafty knaves, that could conspire
so cunningly and slily all the world over at once (as
their

.'*

at the

the
all

word of a Mithridates)

reign

of

the

men's books

in

Emperor
their

in

the

latter

Constantius,

hands, and

end of
to

correct

get

them

without being perceived ;

ay, and conjurors too, to do
without leaving any blot or chasm in their books,

it

whereby the knavery might be suspected and discovered

and

to

wipe away the memory of

22*

it

out of

all

256

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

men's brains, so that neither Athanasius, nor

any
body else, could afterwards remember that they had
ever seen

in their

it

own books

too,

consubstantial

books before

and out of their

when they turned

so that

to the

as

they generally did in the

west, soon after the death of Constantius, they could
then remember no more of it than any body else.

Well, then,

it

faith,

was out of

when he pretended
in

in

Jerome's age,

in

which

is

the point

we

consider that point also

inquire how, since
ies that

books

their

was

and when any body can show, that it

their books before, it may be pertinent to

are to prove

was

it

are

now

it

but

was

extant.

till

out,

it

we are only to
came into the cop-

then

For they

that,

without

proof, accuse the heretics of corrupting books, and

upon that pretence correct them at their pleasure

without the authority of ancient manuscripts, as some
learned men of the fourth and fifth centuries used to

by their own confession, and certainneed no other confutation. And therefore if this

do, are falsaries

ly

reading was once out, we are bound in justice to

believe, that it was out from the beginning ; unless
the razing of

it

out can be proved by

some

better

argument than that of pretence and clamour.

XVII. Will you now say, that Jerome followed

some copy different from any which the Greeks

were acquainted with ? This is to overthrow the
authority of his version by making him depart from
the received

Greek

and besides,

it

is

contrary to

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

what he himself seems

to represent

for in his

257
blam-

Greek

copies, but the Latin interpreters only, which were before his time, as if they
had varied from the received Greek, he represents

ing not the vulgar

that

he himself followed

He

it.

does not excuse

justify himself for reading differently from the

received Greek, to follow a private copy, but accuses

and

former interpreters, as
of " the Three in

if,

in leaving

out the testimony

Heaven," they had not followed

And therefore, since
the received Greek, as he did.
the Greeks

knew

nothing of this testimony, the au-

version sinks

thority of his

and that the rather,

he was

then accused of corrupting the

and
could
not
text,
persuade either the Greeks or

because

the Latins of those times to receive his reading

the Latins received

death

not

their

till

till

many
this

for

years after his

present age,

when

amongst them in printed books ;

not receiving it was plainly to approve the

the Venetians sent

and

it

and the Greeks not

it

accusation.

XVin. The
far discussed,

it

authority of this version being thus

remains, that

we consider

the author-

ity of the manuscripts, wherein we now read the

" the Three in Heaven."
And by
testimony of
the best inquiry that I have been able to make, it is

manuscripts of

wanting

in the

Latin.

For, as

Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, and

still

all

we have shown,

languages but the

that the iEthiopic,

Sclavonian versions,

in use in the several eastern nations, Ethiopia,

SSS

SIR ISAAC NEWTOiN's HISTORY OP

Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, Armenia, Muscovy, and

others, are strangers to this reading, and that

some

was anciently wanting also in the French ; so I

told by those who have been in
Turkey, that it
is
wanting to this day in the Greek manuscripts,
which have been brought from those parts into the
it

am

west

and that the Greeks, now that they have got

from the Venetians, when their

it

in print

manuscripts
are objected against it, pretend that the Arians razed
it out.
A reading to be found in no manuscripts
but the Latin, and not in the Latin before Jerome's

Jerome himself confesses, can be but of

age, as

authority

and

this authority sinks,

little

because we have

proved the reading spurious, by showing

was heretofore unknown, both to the western

already
that

it

and the eastern churches,

in the

times of the great

controversy about the Trinity.

further satisfaction,

we

shall

now

But, however, for

give

you an account

of the Latin and Greek manuscripts ; and show, first,

how, in the dark ages, it crept into the Latin manuscripts out of Jerome's version

and then how

ly crept out of the Latin into the printed

out the authority of

it

in

MSS

those

Greek, having never yet so

it

late-

Greek with-

who first published

much as seen it in

any Greek manuscript.

XIX. That

the

vulgar

Latin,

now

in

use,

is

mixture of the old vulgar Latin, and Jerome's version together, is the received opinion.
Few of these
manuscripts are above four or

five

hundred years

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

The

old.

generally have the testimony of

in Heaven ;" the oldest of all
usually

latest

" the Three

want

which shows that

it,

259

Erasmus notes

it

to

ones, one of which was

the other two

were

it

has crept in by degrees.

be wanting
at

in three

very ancient

in the

Pope's library at Rome,

Bruges ; and he adds, that in

another manuscript belonging to the library of the

Minorites in Antwerp, the testimony of " the Three
in

Heaven" was noted

hand.

in

the margin

Peter Cholinus notes

in

in

newer

the margin of his

Latin edition of the Scriptures, printed anno Christi

1543 and 1544,

that it was wanting in the most ancient

of
the
Dr Gilbert
manuscript
Tugurine library.
Burnet has lately, in the first letter of his travels,

noted

wanting in five other ones kept at Strasburg,

Zurich, and Basil ; one of which MSS. he reckons
about 1000 years old, and the other four about 800.
it

Father Simon has noted

it

w^anting in five others in the

king of France, Mons. Colbert, and

the Benedictines of the abbey of St Germain's.
An
libraries of the

ancient and diligent collator of

manuscripts, cited by
Lucas Brugensis by the name of Epanorthotes, notes
in general, that it was
wanting in the ancient Latin

Lucas himself, collating many Latin

manuscripts.
ones, notes it to be wanting in only five, that is, in
the

k\\

almost

Codex

all

old

ones

of them

he had,

new

Lobiensis written

Lucas

his

manuscripts being

For he praises* the

anno Christi 1084, and the

ones.

Brug. in cake annot.

SIR ISAAC neavton's history op

2G0

Codex Tornacensis

written

most ancient and venerable

used others

anno Christi 1105, as

and
;

for their antiquity

much more new,

of which a great

Codex

such as was the

ber was easily had ;

anuvs, written anno Christi 1432, that

but eight

The Lateran

years before the invention of printing.

council, collected

is,

num-

Buslidi-

under Innocerxt the Third, anno

Christi 1215, canon 2, mentions Joachim, the abbot,

quoting the text in these words

Johannis

epistolct Iegitur,(^uia

^uoniam

in canonicd

Tres sunt qui testimoni-

um dant in cceIo, Pater, et J^erbum, et Spiritus,

Tres Unum sunt ; statimque subjungitur Et

et

hi

Tres

sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus, aqua, et

sanguis, et Tres Unum sunt : sicut in codicibus qui-

busdam

invenitur.

This was written by Joachim*

papacy of Alexander the Third, that is, in

or before the year 1180, and therefore this reading
in

the

was then got but

into

some books

for

the words

quibusdam invenitur refer as well

words of Joachim, quoniam in canonicd

sicut in codicihus

to the

first

Johannis epistola legitur, as to the next statimque

subjungitur ; and more to the first than the next,

because the

first

some books,

as

part of the citation

was then but

ancient

in

manuscripts ;
appears by
but the second part was in almost all ; the words
Tres Unum sunt being in all the books which
wanted the testimony of " the Three in Heaven,"
and in most of those which had it ; though afterwards

Vide Matb. Paris Histor. Angl. A, D. 1179.

2G1

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

out in many,

left

when branded by

the schoohiien

for Arian.

XX. But

go to the original of the corruption.

Gregory the Great* writes, that Jerome's version was
in use in his time, and therefore no wonder if the
" the Three in Heaven"
testimony of
began to be
cited out of

to

it

Eugenius, bishop of Carthage,

before.

the seventh year of Hunneric, king of the

in

dals,

anno Christi 484,

in the

exhibited to the king, cited

far as I

can

find.

A while

it

summary of

the

after,

first

Van-

his faith

of any man, so

Fulgentius, another

African bishop, disputing against the same Vandals,

cited it again, and backed it with the forementioned
" the
place of Cyprian, applied to the testimony of

Three

And

Heaven."

so it is probable, that
by
of
that abused authority
Cyprian it began first in
Afric, in the disputes with the ignorant Vandals, to

get

in

some

credit

and thence

at length

crept into use.

occurs also frequently in Vigilius Tapsensis, another African bishop, contemporary to Fulgentius.
In

It

defence, some allege earlier writers ; namely,

of Pope Hyginus, the epistle of
first epistle
the book
of
II.
John
Idacius
Clarus
Pope
its

ihe

against

Deitate

Varimadus;
Trinitatis,

Chiffletius,

who

and

the

ascribed

to

De

unitd

Athanasius.

But

book

published the works of Victor Vitcn-

and Vigilius Tapsensis, sufficiently proves the

book against Varimadus to be this VigiUus's, and er-

sis

Vide Walton's Prolegomena,

x. 5.

262

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

To

roneously ascribed to Idacius.

he asserts

also the

book

De

the

two

same Vigilius

unitd Deitate Trinitatis.

Certainly Athanasius was not

its

author.

All the

epistles of Hyginus, except the beginning and the

end, and the first part of the epistle of Pope John,

wherein the testimony of " the Three

else than the

cited, are nothing

in

Heaven"

is

fragments of the

book against Varimadus, described word by word by

some forger of decretal epistles, as may appear by
So then Eugenius is the first upon
comparing them.
record that quotes

it.

XXI. But though he

set

it

on foot among the Af-

it became of
authority
in
the
the
revival
of
before
twelfth
learning
Europe
and thirteenth centuries. In those ages St Barnard,

ricans, yet I cannot find that

in

Joachim, and the Lateran council,

spread it abroad, and scribes began generally to insert it into the text ; but in such Latin manuscripts
the Schoolmen,

and European
times,

it is

XXII.

writers, as

are ancienter than those

scarce to be met with.

Now

that

it

was inserted

Latin out of Jerome's version,

manner how
to

be mixed.

is

into the vulgar

manifest by the

the vulgar Latin and that version

For

it is

came

agreed that the Latins, after

Jerome's version began to be of use, noted out of

it

in the margin of
and these the transcribers afterwards

his corrections of the vulgar Latin

their

books

inserted into the text.

By

this

means, the old Latin

has been so generally corrected, that

it

is

nowhere

263

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

to

be found sincere.

It is

Jerome

that

we now

read,

and not the old vulgar Latin ; and what wonder, if

" the Three in
in Jerome we read the testimony of

Heaven

For who

that inserted the rest of

Jerome

would leave out such a passage

this hath been taken to be ?

for the

f"

into the text,

Trinity, as

XXIII. But to put the question out of dispute,

there are footsteps of the insertion still remaining.
For in some old manuscripts, it has been found noted
in the

margin
such as ought

margin

in

others, the various

to arise,

into the text.

following varieties.

by transcribing

readings are
it

out of the

only mention the three

the manuscripts which have

I shall

Of

not the testimony of " the Three in Heaven," some

have the words in terra, in the eighth verse, but the

most want

it ;

which seems

to

proceed from hence,

some, before they allowed so great an addition

to the text, as the testimony of " the Three in Heavthat

en," noted only in terra in the margin of their books,

to be inserted into the
testimony of the spirit, water,
and blood.
Of the manuscripts which have the
" the Three in
testimony of
Heaven," some in the
eighth verse have

jEZi

Tres Unumsunt;

others not.

The

reason of this seems to be, that of those who

noted this testimony in the margin, some blotted out

Et

hi Tres

Unum

sunt in the eighth verse

according
to Jerome ; and others did not.
And, lastly, the
" the Three in
Heaven" is in most
testimony of

books

set before

33

the testimony

of " the Three in

264

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

earth ;" in some,

it is

old books, in which

third

and Hessehus

set after

it is

(if

so

Erasmus notes two

Lucas Brugensis a
misremember not) a fourth j

set after

and so Vigihus Tapsensis* sets

proceed from hence, that

to

it

after

which seems

was sometimes so

it

noted in the margin, that the reader or transcriber

knew

not whether

it

were

to

come before

or after.

Now

these discords in the Latin manuscripts, as they

detract from the autliority of the manuscripts, so they

confirm to us, that the old vulgar Latin has in these

things been tampered w^hh, and corrected by Jerome's
version.

XXIV.

In the next place, I am to show how, and

"
the
when,
testimony of the Three in Heaven" crept

Those who

out of the Latin into the Greek.

printed the

Greek testament,

first

did generally, in follow-

" the
ing their manuscripts, omit the testimony of

Three

in

ted in the
Christi

Spain ; for it was omitand second edition of Erasmus, anno

in

Heaven," except
first

1516 and 1519

at

in

the

edition of Francis

Venice by Aldus, anno Christi

Asulan, printed
1518 ; in that of Nicholas Gerbelius, printed
anau, anno Christi

of Wolfius
Christi
edition,

1524; and again

as Erasmus notes

Vigilius, libr.

tin

editis

and a

at

Hag-

in that

little after,

anno

Cephalius, printed at Strasburg,

Colinseus at
*

1521

Paris,

in
;

the Badian
1526,
and in that of Simon
in

anno Christi 1534.f

At

the

advers. Varitnadum, cap. 5.

exemplaribus nonnullis non legi ut in Aldincl et

Addo, nee in Grajco Testamento Gerbelii, Ha;

Badianfi editione.
ganoffi,

1521; nee

in Colinaji Parisiis edito.

Gomarv.sin

h.

I.

265

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

same time

it

was omitted

some

in

western languages, as
and
editions of Luther ;
editions

Latin

the

in

Tugurine

of Peter Chohnus, anno Christi 1543 and

The

1544.

editions of other

Saxon and German

in the

edition

first

in

" the Three

testimony of
Cardinal Ximenes, printed

Greek, which has the

Heaven," was

in

that of

at Complutum in Spain,
but
not
1515;
pubhshed before the year 1521.
The cardinal, in his edition, used the assistance of
in

several divines, which he called together to

Complu-

tum, there founding an university, anno Christi 1517,

or a little before.
Two of those divines were Antonius Nebrissensis and

Stunica.

For Stunica then

Complutum, and in the preface* to a

treatise he wrote against Erasmus, gives this testimoresided at

ny of himself;

"that he had spent some years in

Hebrew, Greek, and

reading the holy Scriptures in

Latin

and had

diligently collated the

Greek exemplars with

Latin

the

Hebrew and

copies."

This

book, displeasing the cardinal, was not printed till

after his death ; and then it came forth at Complu-

tum, anno Christi 1520.

*

Cum

prajscitim,

si

The

year before, one Lee,

quisriuam alius, ct iios quoque bis de rebus,

nostro quodatn jure, judicium ferre possumus. [Quippe] qui non

paucos annos in Sanctis scripturis Veteris elNovi Testamenti, Hebraice, Grajce, ct Latine pcrlegcndis

consumpscrimus

ca Grajcaque ipsa divinarum IJleraiura exemplaria

codicibus diligcutissime contulerimus.

Longa

ac Hebrai-

cum

Latin

igitur lectioiie

is

ac

esperientii jampridem edocfi, quantum tralationi Luic eccl^siasNovi Testament! dcfereiidnm sit, ni fnllor, optime novi. /fee

lica;

iilHnica inproan. lihri sni.

266

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

an Englishman, wrote also

against Erasmus ; and
both Stunica and Lee, amongst other things, reprehended him for omitting the testimony of " the Three
in
Heaven."
Afterwards Erasmus, finding the
Spaniards, and some others of the

Roman Church,

in a heat

testimony in his

against him, printed

this

anno Christi 1522, representing, "that

former editions he had printed the text as he

third edition,
in

his

manuscripts ; but now there being

found in England one manuscript which had the tesof " the Three in
he had inserted

found

in

it

his

Heaven,"

timony

according to that

manuscript

nies raised against him."

it,

for avoiding the

calum-

And so it continued in his

And at length Robert Ste-

two following editions.

phens, anno Christi 1550, reprinted Erasmus's edition, with some few alterations and various lections,
taken out of the Complutensian edition, and fifteen

Greek manuscripts, which he named

letters, ,

",

y.

an edition, and

y, S,

&ic.

after the

for the

he. putting x

^, i,

for the

numeral

Complutensi-

manuscripts

in

order ; and noting in the margin, that the testimony

of " the Three in Heaven" was wanting in the seven
manuscripts,
us, that

<?,

f,

C. ^^

he had read

Legit Hieronymus,
et

in Compliitensi

'>

it

legit

"^) 'V*

Whence Beza*

in the rest.

Erasmus

editione.

His words

Legimus

et

nos in non-

And

original and authority of the printed

editions.

Beza

in

hunc locum.

are.

in Britannico codice

nullis Roherti nostri veteribns libris.

tells

this is the

For

267

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

these are the editions ever since followed by

West

and of

late

the

years propagated by the Venetian

Greece

and nothing further, that

presses

into

know

has been discovered

of,

all

in

any manuscripts

I
in

favour of these editions.

XXV.

Now to

in the first place,

f)ull

ofF the vizard, I cannot but,

extremely complain of Beza's want

of modesty and caution in expressing himself.*

In

the preface to his annotations, describing what helps

he had in composing his first edition, he tells us,

" that he had the annotations of

Valla, Stapulensis,

and Erasmus, and the writings of the ancients and

moderns collated by himself; and out of Stephens's
library, the exemplar which Stephens had collated
about twenty-five

with
Avhich

were printed."

teen

for that

in his

manuscripts,

He

number he

almost

all

of

should have said sevenputs in other places, and

annotations cites no more.

So then he had

more manuscripts than Stephens

And this was all his furniture.
print.

the collations of two

has given us

The

in

manuscripts he does not here pretend

nor could he have them ; for they were not
Stephens's manuscripts, but belonged to several

to

original

have

hbraries in France

and

Italy.

The

manuscript S

'Non dcsiint, qui Bezam nimis audaccm fiiisse judlcanl, dum

a receptu Icctioiie sspius sine necessitate recedit ; et unius, interdum nuUius, codicis authoritate fietiis, praetoriam exercet potestatc.m, ex cotijecturis
lihifo.

mutando

Walton. Prolegom.

23*

et

interpolando textum sacrum pro

iv. sect. 15.

in Bihl. Polyglotl.

268

SIR ISAAC Newton's history op

Stephens himself never saw; but had only various

lections collected out of

his friends in Italy.

by

it

The

manuscripts v, ^, s, r, C, ?, /, n, were not Stephens's, but belonged to the library of the king of

whom

to

France,

six books,

own

his

6,

let,

Stephens was printer.

tQ, ly, tS, /r,

The

other

Stephens had not out of

for a time from

borrowed them

library, but

several places to collate, his friends studying to

pro-

mote the design of

his annotations,

his

And

edition.

when he would

yet

Beza

favour any text, cites

if

he

Geneva before

his

the collations of Stephens in such a manner, as

had the very

original manuscripts

And where Stephens

eyes.

lections, there

at

does not

he reckons, that

phens's collated books he read

So

in

cite various

in the text of
all

Ste-

the manuscripts.

Mark

vi. 11. where Stephens notes a certain

be wanting in the manuscript copies and
Beza saith, Hcec periodus in omnibus exemplaribus
Gracis legiiur, exceptis secundo et octavo. In the

in

period to
'<;,

Acts

xiii

lections,
turn

33. because Stephens had noted no various

Beza

affirms of the

Greek

text, Ita scrip-

invenimus in omnibus vetustis codicibus.

John

iv. 3.

where Stephens

Sic legitur in

omnibus

quidem mihi inspicere

is silent,

In

Beza speaks

Grcecis

licuit.

exemplaribus, qucs
In James i. 22. where

M,9Vflv,

Beza tells us of the word

again
E<ro in Omnibus nostris vetustis libris inveni.

And

so,

Stephens

is

silent,

where Stephens in the margin had noted

the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" to be want-

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

269

ing in seven manuscripts, he thinks that, in reading

the text of Stephen's collated book, he reads it in

and so tells us, Legimus et nos in nonnul;

the rest
lis

Roherti Stephani codicibus.

edition of his annotations.

first

This he did

in

the

Afterwards, when

he had got two real manuscripts, the Claromontan,

and that which at length he presented to the University

of Cambridge (in both which the canonical epis-

tles are

wanting

;)

in the epistle to his fourth edition,

reckoning up the books he then used, he put only

two, and the seventeen of Stephens ; and in
his fifth edition he writes summarily, that he used
in

these

nineteen manuscripts, joining with those two real ones

the collations of Stephens, as if in those he had sev-

which sufficiently explains his way

;
But whilst he had
of speaking in his annotations.
not the manuscripts themselves to read with his own
enteen others

eyes,
ing

it

was too hard and unwarrantable

to tells us,

Legirmis

et

way of speak-

nos in nonnuUis Roherti

Stephani codicibus; and therefore, in his later editions,

he corrects himself, and tells us only, that the reading
doth extare in nonnuUis

Stephani veterihus

libns.

Thus Beza argues from Stephens's book of collations;

and the same inference has been made by Lucas
Brugensis and others, ever since, from Stephens's
"
forementioned edition of that book.
For," say
"
they,
Stephens had fifteen manuscripts in all, and
found the testimony of the Three in Heaven' want'

ing but in seven

and therefore

it

was

in the

other

270
eight

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

;

and so being found

in

the greater part of his

manuscripts, has the authority of manuscripts on its

Thus they argue ; and this is the great ar-

side."

gument by which the printed Greek has

hitherto

been

justified.

XXVI. But if they please to consider the business a httle better, they will find themselves very
much

mistaken.

manuscripts

For though Stephens had fifteen

of them did not contain all

in all, yet all

Greek testament. Four of them, noted

the

y,

s-, <",

iS",

had each of them the four Gospels only. Two, noted

contained only the Gospels and the Acts of the
S,
71,

One, noted tT, contained the Apocalypse

One, noted <, had only the Apocalypse, with

Apostles.
only.

St Paul's

Epistles

the

to

Corinthians,

and Colossians.

Ephesians, Pliilippians,
seven, noted i^, . C' ^' '

'* 'V-

Gaiatians,

The

other

both

contained

St

Paul's Epistles and the canonical ones, besides some

other books ; namely, the manuscript C contained the
Epistles and

Gospels ; the manuscripts t, tx, ty, the

of the Apostles ; and the manuEpistles and Acts
And
e, 6, the Epistles, Gospels, and Acts.
^,
scripts
this

any one

may

gather,

by noting what manuscripts

book of

the various lections are cited out of, in every

the

New Testament.

For

in the various lections

canonical epistles, and those to the

ans, Gaiatians, Ephesians, Phihppians,

are found these seven manuscripts,

every wiiere cited, and no

of the

Romans, Corinthi<J^

and Colossians,

(^,

(.

i,

tx, ly^

more than these. The same

fWO CORRUPTIONS OP SCRIPTURE.

ulso,

and no more, are cited

271

the Epistles to the

in

Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and the Hebrews ;

one numeral error, whether of the scribe or typo-

grapher excepted.

Stephens therefore did collect

various lections of the Epistles out of only these seven

and in all these seven

manuscripts, ^, e, ^, 6, i, ix, ty
he found the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" to
be wanting ; as you may see noted in the margin of
;

his edition.

XXVn. And

that this testimony

was wanting

in all

Stephens's manuscripts, is apparent also by its being

generally wanting in the manuscripts which are now
extant in France.
For father Simon* tells us, " that
after a diligent

France, and
could not find

in

search in the Hbrary of the king of

that also of Monsieur Colbert, he

it

in

any one manuscript

though he

consulted seven manuscripts in the king's library, and

one in Colbert's." And because Stephens had some

of his various lections from Italy,

gentleman, who,

MSS

in

he found

was

that

in his travels,

will

add, that a

had consulted twelve

several libraries in Italy, assured

in

it

them

all.

One

wanting
most ancient and most famous

Pope's library, written

XXVIII.

me

that

of the twelve

MS

in the

in capital letters.

So then the authority of the printed

books

rests only upon the authority of the editions of

Erasmus and Cardinal Ximenes. But seeing that

Erasmus omitted
*

it

in his

two

Simon's Critical History of the

first

New

editions,

and

Test. chap, xviii.

in-

272

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

serted

it

unwillingly, against the authority of his

uscripts, in his three last

man-

the authority of these three

When Lee, upon Erasmus's

second
putting
edition, fell foul upon him
"
for leaving out the
testimony of the Three in Heavcan be none

at

forth

all.

his

en," Erasmus* answered, "that he had consulted

more than seven Greek
manuscripts, and found it

wanting in them all ; and that if he could have found

in any one
manuscript, he would have followed that

it

in favour of the Latin."

Hence

Erasmus out of England,

that

there, and thereupon to

he

it

was sent

notice

was

to

in a

manuscript
avoidf their calumnies, as

he printed it in his following

editions; notwithstanding that he suspected that manuscript to
be a new one, corrected by the Latin.
But
saith,

since,

inquiry, I cannot

upon

learn that they in

England
ever heard of any such
manuscript, but from Erasmus ; and since he was only told of such a manuscript, in
*

Dicam

septem

the time of the

controversy
raihi diversis

temporibus plura fuisse exemplaria quam

nee in ullo iiomm repertum, quod in

Grasca]

[scilicet

between him

nostris [scilicet Latinis] legitur.

Quod si contigisset unum exemplar, in quo fuisset, quod nos leginius, niminim illinc adjpcissem,

quod
feci

mus
+

in ca^teris aberat.

Id quia non coiitigit,

quod solum

indicavi quid in Grsecis codicibus minus esset.

contra Leum, in hunc locum.

Ex

lioc

igitur codice Britannico

dicebatur deesse

hunc

licuit,

Hcec Eras-

suspicor, ad

ne cui

sit

reposuimus, quod in nostris

ansa calumniandi. Quanquam et

Latinorum codices,

fuisse castigatum.

Postea-

quam enim concordiam inierunt cum ecclesi^ Remand, studuerunt et hfic in parte cum Romanis consentire. Ernsmi Jlnnotation. in

hunc locum

edilio lerlia, et
sequni.

273

TWO CORRUPTIONS OP SCRIPTURE.

and Lee, and never saw
to suspect, that

him by the Popish

good what he had

mony

ly,

himself;

clergy, to try

if

cannot forbear
trick put

upon
he would make

offered, the printing of the testi-

of " the Three

one Greek co

it

was nothing but a

it

in

Heaven" by

and thereby

to get

it

the authority of

into his edition.*

Greek manuscripts of the Scripture are things of value, and do not use to be thrown away ; and such a
" the Three in
manuscript for the testimony of
Heaven," would have made a greater noise than the
have done against it. Let those who have such
a manuscript, at length tell us where it is.

rest

XXIX.

So

also

let

them who

of cardinal Ximenes,

edition

tell

insist

upon the

us by what

manu-

this testimony ; or, at least, where

script he printed
such
manuscript of good note is to be seen ; for
any
take the liberty to believe, that he
till then I must

printed nothing else than a translation out of the

Latin, and that for these reasons.
First

New

because

the preface to his edition of the

Testament we are

printed after the

library
*

in

and

Versiculus

told, that this

these
Joan.

the cardinal

v. 7. in

non

reiieillur.

only

borrowedf

SyriacA, ul et vctustissimis Graecis

exemplaribus, noslro Alcxandrino,

contulimiis,

testament was

manuscripts taken out of the Pope's

11'alion.

aliis

manuscriptis Graecis, quos

Prolegomena, \\ii. 23, in Bihl,

Polyglott.

tAccivite Vatican^ Roma; Bibliothccii, bona cum Leonis X.

maximi veni&. As Gaspar Bellerus, in his epistle prefix-

pontificis

ed to

tiie

Quinquagcna of Antonius Nabrissensis, expresses

it.

274

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

thence, and therefore returned them back so soon as

was

edition

his

time

And

finished.

Caryophikis some

by the Pope's command,

after,

collating the

Vatican manuscripts, found the testimony of " the

Three in Heaven" wanting in them all. I do not
say but that the Cardinal had other manuscripts ; but
these were the chief, and the only ones he
thought

worth while to

Secondly

reader

tell his

of.

the marginal note in this

startle at

For it is beside the

place of the Cardinal's edition.
use of this edition, to put notes in the margin of the
Greek text. I have not found it done above thrice
in all this edition of the

that, in

Testament

and there-

be something extraordinary ; and

respect of the Greek, because it is in the

margin of
noted in

their

it

note, to justify

marginal

blamed
there

is

vi.

from

recede

xv.

there

variation

13.

the

in

is

the

where they,

Greek copies

by the Latin, they make a marginal

their doing so
and so here, where

in the

note,

Corinth,

notable

Matthew

In

" the
the testimony of
ly wanting

margin

edition,

and correct

In

text.

this

this

Greek reading.
in

New

there must

fore

Three

Greek
to

for printing

in

copies,

Heaven"

is

general-

they make

a third

secure
it.

themselves from being

Now in such a case as this,

no question but they would make the best

and yet they do not tell of the
;

defence they could

various lections in the

Greek manuscripts, nor pro-

duce any one Greek manuscript on

their

side,

but

275

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

The
run to the authority of Thomas Aquinas.*
Greek manuscripts have the text thus, " For there
are

Three

that bear record, the spirit,

water, and

tlie

In many of
the blood ; and these Three are One."
the Latin manuscripts, the words, " these Three are

One," are here omitted, and put only at the end

of the testimony of " the Three in Heaven," before
that of " the spirit, water, and blood ;" in others,
In the Comthey are put after both testimonies.
the
former
follow
plutensian edition, they
copies, and
justify their doing

"

Aquinas.

so,

by the authority of Thomas

"

Thomas," say

they,

Three which bear witness

the words

in treating

'

insinuating the

unity of the essence of the

And whereas one Joachim

Persons.

of the

Heaven, teaches, that

these Three are One' are subjoined for
in

this unity to

be only

and consent,

in love

Three

interpreted
it

being thus

The marginal note is this; Sanctus Thomas, in expositione

secundce decretalis de summaTrinitate et Fide Catholica, traclans
istum passum contra Abbatem Joachim, viz. " Trcs sunt qui testimonium dant in ctt'lo, I'ater, V'eibum,ct Spiritus Sanclus," dicit
" Et ad insinuandam unitatem triuni

ad literam verba sequentia.

personarum

subditur, et

'

hi

Tres

Unum

sunt

;'

quod quidem

dicitur

propter essential unitatem. Sed hoc Joachim perverse traliere

volens ad unitatem cliarilatis et consensus, indncebat consequeiitem auctoritatem. Nam subditur ibidem, t Tres sunt, qui tes

timonium dant
in

quibusdam

in veris

in terrA, sanctus

libris additur,

'

et

spiritus,

hi

Tres

aqua, et sanguis

Unum

sunt.'

;'

et

Sed hoc

exemplaribus non habetur; sed dicitur esse apposilum ab

ad perverlendum intellectum sanum auctorita-

Hffireticis Arianis
tis

tus

pra7missa3 de unitate essentiae

Thomas, ubi supra.

24

Trium Personarum."

Hepc Becr

276

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

said of the spirit, water, and blood, in

'

Three are One

these

some

Thomas repHed,

copies,

that

this

not extant in the true copies, but was

the
Arians for perverting the sense."
by

Jast clause

added

Thus

;'

is

far this annotation.

Now

this plainly respects

Thomas understood

the Latin copies, for

and therefore part of the design of

to set right the Latin reading.

not Greek,

this annotation is

But

this is

not the

main design. For so the annotation should have

been set in the margin of the Latin version. Its
being inserted
that

its

in the

margin of the Greek text shows,

main design

is

to justify the

Now

Latin thus rectified and confirmed.

Thomas
very

few words, do

thus, in a

artificial

and

in Spain,

Greek by

all

the

make
was

to

the work,

where Thomas

is

of

pass for a

very judicious
authority, might
and substantial defence of the printed Greek. But
We are
to us, Thomas Aquinas is no Apostle.
apostolic

seeking for the authority of Greek manuscripts.

third reason why I conceive the Compluten-

sian

tion

Greek

to

have been

from the Latin,

is,

Cardinal in this edition, and

Erasmus) w^hen,

in

Erasmus

not one
;

the Latin.

at that

his objections,

text of the testimony

cites

this

place

translaI

was one of the divines employed by the

told you,

he

in

because Stunica (who, as

time wrote against

he comes

to this

of " the Three in Heaven,"

Greek manuscript

for

it

against

but argues wholly from the authority of

On the contrary, he sets down, by way

271

TWO CORRUPTIONS OP SCRIPTURE.

reading of the Greek

and that of others,
manuscripts, as well as his own,

common

of concession, the

in these
Koti

words,

<>'''

TO v^uip. X.XI

TO

f'""'" '

f^^U
Mifix-

Kdi

y.x^7vpou'jr((;,

Tpc7i ili '

c'l

'^''

ro Trviuuce,

and

^'"^' ?

then condemns them altogether without exception ;

and justifies the Latin against them by the authority
"
"
of Jerome.
Know," saith he, that in this place
the

Greek manuscripts

but ours (that

itself,

is,

are most evidently corrupted

the Latin ones)

are translated

as they

contain the truth

from the

first

original

manifest by the prologue of St Jerome upon

And this prologue, which he
the Epistles, Sic."*

which

is

goes on to cite at length, and of which we gave you

an account above, is all he argues in favour of the
" the Three in Heaven."
Li other
testimony of
where
he
had
Greek
of
manuscripts
scripture,
places

on

he produces them readily.

his side,

salonians

ds

ii.

7. Ita

legitur, says

quidem

So

Thes-

he, in Gree-

In James i.
ego viderim.
Sciendimi in omnibus Greeds codicibus

IL

codicibus, qiios

saith,

hiclegi per

he

saith.

diphtkongum. In

discrepante,

Sciendum

k,c.

al)

v.

23.

exemplaribus quotquot sunt,

Latinis integer hie Jegcitur, neniinc
In
nescio cur Erasmus dixerit, fyc.

est,

hoc loco codices aperlissime esse corriiptos

iiisani,

ut

;i

))rimii

Ait eiiim, " Quae

si sictit

ab

origine U'aducti sunt,

quod ex prologo B. ilietonymi super

feste apparet.

quocjue

Thessalonians

in

nostras vero veritalem

Gontiuere

Cumin Greeds

eXiicXij^ov^ et

'

he

Tops.uig

epistolas

mani-

eis digestae sunt

i(;i

interpretibus fideliterin Latinura verterentureloquiura,"

II(ec iilunica in h.

locum. Ejus Liber exslal in Crilicor.

vol. ix\

278

SIR ISAAC

Newton's history of

Pliilipp. iv. 9.

Si quidem in omnibus, saith he, Gi'a-

cis

rxZrcc

codicibus,

GrcEci suit

qui agite

cum

hcec

qui

Xoylt^tc-^s

Trfccm-Ere

hie

used

neque

mendosos utriusque lingute codices,

commentaretur Erasmus, pcrlegit.
After
the manuscripts

when they make

Compkitensian edition,
and here he produces them
"
Erasmus
himself.

" that

nisi

in the

him

for

legitur

hoc loco, neque Latini,

manner does Stunica produce

this

for

libri,

too, but

Know,"

against

it

saith

is

he,

place the Greek manuscripts are most

In other places, if he hath but
evidently corrupted."
in this

one manuscript on

he produces it magificentRhodiensis in his discourses

his side,

ly enough ; as the Codex

upon 2 Corinthians ii. 3. James i. 22. 2 Peter ii. 2.
and other texts. Here he produces all the manuscripts against himself, without excepting so

one.

And hence Erasmus,

gloried

in

in his

answer

much

as

to Stunica,

the consent of the Spanish manuscripts

own

and Sanctius Caranza, another of the

Compkitensian divines, in his defence of Stunica,
written presently after, had nothing to reply in this
with his

point.

Neitlier could

Sepulveda, or the Spanish

monks who next undertook the controversy, find one

Greek manuscript, which here made against ErasNeither had Marchio Valesius better success,
though on that occasion he collated sixteen Greek
manuscripts, eight whereof belonged to the king of

mus.

Spain's library, and the other eight to other libraries

of Spain ; and he did it on purpose to collect out of

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

them whatever he could meet with

27^

in favour

of the

Neither did the reprinting

present vulgar
of the Complutensian Bible by Arias INIontanus produce the notice of any such manuscript ; though, on
Latin.

that

many

occasion,

Latin,

fetched

manuscripts, as well Greek as

from Complutum and other places,

were collated by Arias, Lucas Brugensis, Canter,

and others.

XXX.

So

then,

Complutensian

to

sum up

divines did

the argument, the

sometimes correct the

Greek by the Latin, without the

Greek manuscript, as appears by
^Matthew

13.

vi.

and therefore

"
testimony of the Three

in

authority of any
their

their

Heaven"

practice in

the

printing
is

no evidence

it
by a manuscript, but on the contraiy,
want of one, they contented themselves with the
authority of Thomas Aquinas ; and Stunica confess-

that they did

for

ed that they had none.

Nor has all the zeal for this
been able since to discover one either in Spain,

text

or any where else.

XXXL

And now you may understand whence

that the

is,

Complutensian

edition,

the pretended English

manuscript, set

mus
er

in his annotations, differ so

for the

down by Eras-

much from one

anoth-

Complutensian edition has the text thus

KXt TO uyioY
f^xprvpouvT^i

TirviZf^ei- Kcc'i ol

eTTi

The pretended

rr^

yjjj,

rpe^i < ra

ro w.Zf/.Xy

Ui

e\i

e/V/. x.xi rpsr, sitivoI

tcxi

ro uoa/p. kmi ra xifAX.

English manuscript thus

24-

it

and the reading of

ori

rper^

280

&IR ISAAC Newton's history of

(Icrtv e:

iu.etpTv^otJfrei

KUi ourot

01

iv

r^ owjav^,

V tls-iv,

rpui

jTveZf^a Kxt vSap, kx) uiy,x.

y,u\

TrccTt^p^

rp'.'i.

The

Xoyo^, nu)

TrvsZ/LtU.'

fA.ocprvpoZvrii Iv rfj y-^,

differences are too great

from the bare errors of scribes, and arise

rather from the various translations of the place, out

to spring

of Latin into Greek, by two several persons.

XXXII. But
discord,

whilst these two readings, by their

confute one another, the readings of the

Greek manuscripts by their agreement confirm

For Caryophilus, who, by
one another as much.
real

the

command

of

Pope Urban

the

the Vatican and other manuscripts,

Eighth, collated
borrowed out of

the principal libraries in Rome, found one common

" the
reading in them all, without the testimony of

Three

Heaven

you may see in those his

1G73
collations, printed
by Peter Possinus, in
the end of his Catena of the Greek Fathers upon
in

;"

as

in

He met

Mark.

with

V. 7.
Tpe7i

S.ii^.

thus;

Manuscripti octo (omnes nempe)

ro
fA.ctpTvpo7ivTei,

il^iv 01
x.a.)

01

versus hnjus

rpui eh 7o

in all

eight manuscripts

the Epistles, and notes their reading

'X'viuf^ct, y.ut

iWi.

Porro

upon
Joan,

legunt, "Or/

to leap,

totus

x.eti

ro

septirnus

capitis desideratur in octo manuscriptis

Thus Caryophilus.
XXXIII. The very same reading Erasmus,

codicibus Greeds, <^c.

annotations on this place, gives

scripts,

us of

which were more than seven

Stephens of
lections in

all

all
;

Only

the

in his

manu-

and so doth

any various
in Stewhich
comma,

his seven, without noting

them.

his

TWO CORRPUTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

phens's edition

is,

surely ^by mistake, set after

281
oZpxv^p,

The very same readis to be put in its right place.

ing does Stunica also, in his book against Erasmus, note
out of the manuscript he had seen in Spain, as was seen
above.

Nor does

in his collection

Valesius,

of the six-

teen Spanish manuscripts, note any various lections in

The same reading exactly have also the
this text.
in

manuscripts

England

and famous one

veyed
lished

namely, that most ancient

which was con-

in tlie king's library,

from Egypt through Greece, and puband the four

Walton's Polyglott Bible

thither
in

New

College, and that in

both
very old, and two in Lincoln
Magdalen College,
five
other ancient ones lately
four
or
and
College ;
collated at Oxford, in order to a new impression of

at

the

Oxford,

viz.

that in

Greek testament,

as I

am

The

informed.

very

same reading have also tiie three manuscripts of Monsieur Petavius Gachon, a senator of Paris, whose
various lections, collected by his son John Gachon,
were printed
tament, anno

in

the Oxford edition of the

Christi

1675.

New

Tes-

The same

reading,
published by Francis Asulan

without any variation,

is

in his edition, printed

anno Christi 1518, by Aldus

Venice, out of the manuscripts of those parts.

at

The

hundred years ago,

found in the manuscripts of Greece ; as you may
see in the text of his commentary on this epistle of St
The same reading also Cyril of Alexandria
John.

same reading QCcumenius,

met with

in the

six

manuscripts of Egypt, above eleven

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

282

hundred years ago

of the text

and

both

in his first

is

omitted

and

you may see

in his

citations

Thesaurus, hb. xiv.

cap. 5.

De

Fide ad Reginas ; excepting

of these two citations, the particle <5

book

that in the latter

And

as

in his

/^"xpTvpoZs-i

manuscripts of the

written for

'

same reading was

that the very

first

ages,

may be

the conformity of this reading

to

Kxprvpouvrei,

also

in

the

gathered from

all

the

ancient

versions.

XXXIV.

seen by what has been hitherto

testimony is not to be found in the Greek

It

said, that this

may be

manuscripts. Epanorthotes,* whom Lucas Brugensis

describes to be an ancient, accurate, full, and industrious collator of manuscripts, found

those he
h(SC

met

Nor have

other

wanting

In all

Epanorthotes, saith Lucas, deesse

antiquis Latinis annotat.

with.

eadem Greeds

it

libris, et

made

collators

Habuimus ab Hunnajo,

id

a further discovery

quod maximi facimus, MS Bibl.

quem Epanorthotem, aut cor-

correctorium ab incerto auctore,

rectorem fere vocamiis, magnri diligentid ac

fide

tOntexfi'm, se-

culo uli oportet antiquos nostrse editionis codices, eosqne cum

Hffibi'ffiis, Grsecis, et veterum Patrum commentariis sedulo collalos

qui liber ad Genesin

H(cc Lucas

nis scriptum,

pergit.

non

sit?

qui ad
el

7.

v\\\.

latius

a nobis descriptus

1 dixit hiinc
.

Dein, loco ex eo

pluribu-i forle composiium.

est.

librumnmUis ancilaio,

Ad quae dlci quid possit? An quod libro fidendum

Non hoc dit^et, qui evolverit quae namque a nostri

seculi scriptoribus ex

nes,

viii.

Gcnesia

MSS

omnes propemodum

in

examinatas derreheiidimus.

codicibus collectae sunt varise lectio-

eo comprrimus; et ad fontes fideliter

Scrip sit ha c Lvcas, anno 1579; wi-

de sequitur correcUrium ante dispulalionts Erasmicas de teslibus in

ckIo elaboratum esse.

TWO CORRUPTlO>fS OF SCRIPTURE.

283

Lee, Stunica, and the rest in England,

Flanders, France, and Italy, who conspired

to this day.

Spain,
against

Erasmus, could

find

scripts of those parts against

nothina;

him

if

in

the

manu-

that Phcenix

be

to somebody someexcepted, which once appeared

where in England, but could never since be seen.

Hessehus,* about the year 15G5, professor of divinion this place, ingenty at Louvain, in his commentary

manuuously confesses it w^anting in all the Greek

in
one
the
then
Spain,
known, except two,
scripts
other in England ;
meaning those by which
the Coraplutensian divines and Erasmus printed it.
Which two we have shown to be none at all ; unless
the

Since that time

one Annius dug up one in England.
besides the imagnothing further has been produced,

And yet I will not

inary books of dreaming Beza.
be found in some
say, but that it may hereafter
copies.

For

the Latins had

much

Greek

in the times

to

do

of the holy war,

in the East.

They were
made Latin

long united to the Greek church ; they

Antioch ; they reigned
patriarchs of Jerusalem and
at

the year
Constantinople over the Greeks from
* Hcssclius

ail ; Mantiscripti Gracci fere onines

Qiioniiim Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in ternulla factA
ra, si)iiitus, aqua, ct sanguis, et hi Tres Uiuim sunt;"
mentione triplicis testimonii de ccelo " Patris, Verbi, et Spiritus

sic se liabent

inhunc locum
"

Sancti." Dein codices aliter legenles describendo sic pergit ; IVostro

tempore duo Gra;ci codices inanuscripli reperti sunt; unus in
quoruu) uterque hoc loco testimoniAngiia, et alter in Hispauia
:

um habet

"Patris, Verbi, et Spiritus Sancti."

284

SIR ISAAC

Newton's iiisTORr of

and during
;
assembled
was
1215,
kingdom,
year
the Lateran council, consisting of four hundred and
fifteen bishops, Greeks and Latins together ; and
therein the testimony of " the Three in Heaven"
was quoted out of some of the Latin manuscripts, as
1204, for above

fifty

we

All which might occasion

you above.

told

years together

in the

this their

Greeks, as well as Latins, to note

books

their

and hence

transcribing.

For

this

is

it

insert

it

some

margins of

in the

into the text

in

most certain, that some

Greek manuscripts have been corrected by the

Such a book Erasmus* tells us, that he
Latin ones.
" once met
with, and

was such anoth-

that there

He

mony

suspected also that

out
of
which
he
printed the testiEngland,
of " the Three in Heaven," to be of the same

kind

though

er

in

book

the Pope's hbrary."

in

I rather

think

it

was none

at

all

un-

falsary of that age were at the pains to

Such
transcribe one or tvro of St Paul's Epistles.
less

some

another book was one of those, out of which Valesius

Whence

collected his various lections.

Mariana,

Hie obiter illnd incidit admonendum esse GrEecorum quosdara Novi Testanienti codices ad Latiiia exemplaria emendates.
Id factum est in fcedere Grsecorum cum Romana ecclesia ; quod
fcRilus testatum Bulla, (juse

dicitur

Anrea

visum

Pontif.

Verum ex

movere regulam.
menti.

his corrigere nostros est

enim

est

ad firmaiidaui concordiain pertinere. Et nos olim

codicem incidimus ; et talis adhuc dicitur a Iservari

et

hoc

in

hujusmodi

in

Bibliothec^

Lesbiam, ut aiunt, ad-

Erasmus ad Lcdorem. Editio ota

JVoii

Tesla-

into

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

285

whose hands the manuscript book of those

lec-

tions

fell, tells

tions

on the

us, that for that reason, in his annota-

New

Testament, he used those lections

And that Valesius

but sparingly and cautiously.
a
corrected
with
such
did meet
manuscript, appears
For

the lections themselves.

by

xviii.

17.

where the Greek reads

in the

Apocalypse
and the

t< roxev

Latin translates in locinn, and by the error of one

letter

Grecian has here corrected

and written
sius,

11.

fVi

A/,M,wi}v

taken out of

now have

the books

as

in lacum,

as

this.

this
in

it is

Again

where the Latin

it

some

book by the Latin,

the lections of Vale-

in the

translation, in

ix.

Apocalypse

expounding the

Apollyon, adds, Et Latine hahens

nomen exterminans ; Valesius notes the reading in
his Greek copy to be pMuxiri %&' o>,ttx |t^^(vv; ;

names Abaddon

which certainly

ei

is

a translation of the Latin.

the Apocalypse xxi. 12.

and some

ancient Latin copies,

far greater part of the

ans^ulos

So

Valesius, in

in the

Apocalypse

oy_,\H TraXXdZ

later

the

Tp

S).

the

iurha:.

magncc, and

Valesius, in
In

in later

and

in 1

his

Hebrews

in

is

the

manuxiii.

2.

copies, /?/aci/erMn^,

Peter

iii.

8. for t* St

by an error in fide, Valesius reads

These, and such like instances, ))ut

riMi- in fine, and

7ri?-it

rjesTxv

liut

present have

where the Greek

f^AxTnyyaii !/.iyuXy,i.

Valesius reads

xix. G.

and

at

manuscript, reads vv/5.

his

Latin,

for 'e>ix8ot,latuernni

angelos,

Latin copies

copies, tuba magna'.;

script, reads

Again, in

where the Greek has uyyixm,

286

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

the thing out of dispute.

Now, though Valesius
found not the testimony of "the Three in Heaven"
in this manuscript ; and Erasmus tells us, that he
never saw it in any Greek manuscript ; and, by consequence, not in that corrected one which fell into

his

hands

it

yet

may have

crept out of the Latin

some other books, not yet taken notice of ; and

even in some manuscripts, which, in other places,

into

have not been corrected

by the Latin, it may

been inserted by some of the Greek
bishops of the Lateran council, where the testimony
of " the Three in Heaven" was read.
And therepossibly have

fore

he that

shall hereafter

before he

meet with

it

in

any book,

the authority of that

insist

ought
upon
book, to examine whether it has not been corrected
first,

by the Latin; and whether

it

be ancienter than the

Lateran council, and empire of the Latins in Greece ;

for, if it be liable to either of these two exceptions, it

can signify nothing

XXXV.

to

it.

Having given you the history 'of the con-~

troversy, I shall

now confirm

the sense of the text

of " the Three in

easy, as

produce

all

that I have said

from

For, without the testimony

Heaven," the sense is good and
itself.

you may see by the following paraphrase

inserted in the text in a different character.

"

Who is he that overcometh the world,

but he that believeth that jesus is the son
OF GOD, that Son spoken of in the Psalms, where
lie saith,

'

Thou

art

my Son

this

day have

begot-

287

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

This

'

ten thee.'

is

he that,

the

after
in a

Jews had

mortal body, by

long expected him, came,

baptism of water, and then in an immortal one by
shedding his blood upon the cross, and rising again
first

not by water only, but by water

being the Son of God, as well by his

from the dead

and blood

resurrection from the

dead. Acts

33. as by his
35. And it
i,

xiii.

Luke
THE Spirit also that, together with the water
and blood, beareth witness of the truth of his
and so a
coming because the spirit is truth
fit and
For there are
unexceptionable witness.
Three that bear record of his comiug the
supernatural birth of the Virgin,

IS

Spirit, which he promised to send, and which was

shed forth upon us in the form of cloven tongues, and
in various

God

gifts
'

testified,

the baptism

This

is

my

of water, wherein

beloved Son

and the

shedding of his blood, accompanied with his resurrection, whereby he became the most faithful martyr
or witness of this truth.
spirit,

witnessing

One

Son of God
is

And these Three,

the b;;ptism, and passion of Christ,

strong

witnesses,

is

the

agree in

and the same thing, namely,

that the

come, and, therefore, their evidence

law requires but two consenting

for the

and here we have three.

And

if

we

receive the witness of men, the threefold witness OF GOD, which he bare of his Son, by declaring at his baptism,
raising

'

This

is

my

beloved Son

;'

him from the dead, and by pouring out

25

by
his

288

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

greater

spirit

on

more

readily received."

us, is

XXXVI. Thus
the argument

and therefore ought

be

the sense plain and natural, and

is

and strong

full

to

but, if

insert the

you

" the Three

testimony of

and

in heaven," you interrupt

For the whole design of the apostle

it.

spoil

men by

being here to prove to

" the Three

in

witness the truth of

would ask how the testimony of

heaven" makes to this purpose. If

Christ's coming,

testimony be not given to men, how does

prove to them the truth of Christ's coming ? If
their

be,

from

how

the

is

It

is

witnesses in heaven and in earth.

it

witnesses to us men, wherein

between

its

in earth ?
to

men,

purpose

witnessing
If, in

the

whom

to

first

mine what

If

is

it

the

difference

heaven, and its witnessing

case, it does not witness
witness

it

does

its

design of St John's
good sense of it, who are able.

make none.

If in both cases
lies

And to what
witnessing make to the
discourse ?
Let them make

doth

And how

.''

in

For

my

part, I

be said that we are not

scripture,

it

heaven distinguished
the same spirit which

in

testimony

on earth

that

it

and what

can

to deter-

by our private

not,

I confess it in
;
places not controverted ;
but in disputable places, I love to take up with what
It is the
I can best understand.
temper of the hot

judgments

and superstitious part of mankind, in matters of reliand for that

gion, ever to be fond of mysteries
;

reason,

to

like

best

what

they

understand

least.

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

2S9

Such men may use the apostle John as they please ;

I have that honour for him, as to beheve that he

but

wrote good sense ; and therefore take that sense to

his, which is the best ; especially since I am de-

be

fended

in

it

by so great

authority.

For

have on

Fourth General Council,

my
so
far
I
of
all the
as
churches in all
and,
know,
the
modern
Latin, and such others as
ages, except
have lately been influenced by them ; and that also
side the authority of the

of

the old versions, and

all

Greek manuscripts, and

and nothing against me, but the

;
of
Jerome, and the credulity and heat of
authority
ancient Latin ones

his follov.ers.

For

to

letting us

seen
first

tell

us of other manuscripts, without ever

know

in

^^hat

libraries

they were to be

to

;
pretend manuscripts, which, since their
discovery, could never be heard of ; nor were

then seen by persons whose names and

know

is

plainly

to

and ought not

to pass

The

tell

Spaniards

And

wc

any longer for plain dealing.

us plainly that they followed the

Latin, and by the authority of

"

credit

impose on the learned world,

these

Three

are

Thomas

left

in

out the

the eighth

One,"
by the Arians. And yet St Ambrose, St Austin, Eucherius, and other Latins, in the
clause,

verse, as inserted

Arian age, gathered the unity of the

Deity from
and
the
omission
of
it
is
;
now, by printing
it,
acknowledged to be an erroneous correction.
this clause

The

manuscript in England wanted the same clause,

290

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

and therefore, if there was any such MS, it was a corrected one,

like the

Spanish edition, and the manuscript

Erasmus, who printed the triple testiheaven by that English manuscript, never

of Valesius.

mony
saw

it

in

tells

sincerity

us

it

several occasions,

yet his

was a new one

and accused
for

it

pubhcly

suspected

its

in his writings

on

several years together

and

adversaries in England never answered his

accusation

never endeavoured

the world about

did not so

to satisfy

much

him and

as let us

know,
where the record might be consulted for confuting
him but, on the contrary, when they had got the
it

Trinity into his edition, threw by their manuscript,

And
if they had one, as an almanac out of date.

can such shuffling dealings

satisfy considering

men

Let manuscripts at length be produced, and freely

exposed to the sight of the learned world ; but let
such manuscripts be produced as are of authority ;
or else let it be confessed, that whilst Jerome pre-

tended to correct the Latin by the Greek, the Latins

have corrected both the Latin and the Greek by the
sole authority of Jerome.

TWO CORRUPTIONS OP SCRIPTURE.

SECTION
On

the

Text concerning

^91

II.

Mystery of Godliness

the

manifest in the Flesh,

What

1.

the Latins have done to the foregoing,

the Greeks have done to that of St Paul,

iii.

16.

For by changing

of godliness;
all

Timothy

ec, the abbrevia" Great is the

now
read,
mystery
they

tion of eo5,

as

into

GOD manifested

the churches for the

of
years, and the authors

in

first

all

the flesh."

Where-

four or five

hundred

the ancient versions,

" Great
Jerome, as well as the rest, read,
mystery of godliness, which was manifested
flesh."

For

this

the

is

is

the

in the

conunon reading of the

and Latin versions

to this day ;
Jerome's manuscripts having given him no occasion

Ethiopic, Syriac,

to correct the old vulgar Latin in this place.

Grotius

adds the Arabic, but the Egyptian Arabic version has

es
and so has the above mentioned Sclavonian
:

these two versions were

version of

Cyrillus

made

after the sixth century,

long

AV'^ith

ruption began.
the writers of the

and Latins.

For

for

wherein the cor-

the ancienter

first

they,

fiv^e

in

versions

centuries, both
all

their

agree

Greeks

discourses to

Son, never allege this text,

as
that I can find,
they would all have done, and
some of them frequently, had they read " God manifested in the flesh ;" and therefore they read .
Ter-

prove the Deity of the

25*

292

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

adversus

tullian

Praxeam, and

Cyprian

adversus

Judceos, industriously cite all the places where Christ

is called God, but have
Alexander
nothing of this.

of Alexandria, Athanasius, the

bishops of the council
of Sardica, Epiphanius, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen,

Gregory Nyssen, Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem,

Cyril of Alexandria, Cassian,

also

Hilary, Lucifer,

Ambrose, Austin, Phoebadius, Victorinus

Jerome,

Faustinus Diaconus, Pope Leo the Great,

Arnobius Junior, Cerealis, Vigilius Tapsensis, Fulgentius, wrote all of them in the fourth and fifth

Afer,

of the Son, and incarnation

and some of them largely, and in several
and yet I cannot find that they ever allege

centuries, for the deity

of

God

tracts

this text to

prove

once urges

it,* if

excepting that Gregory Nyssen

the passage crept not into him out

it,

of some marginal annotation.

hot

and

In

play
though now those
" God manifested
they that read
into

it

all

lasting Arian controversy,

;

the times of the

it

never came

disputes

are

over,

in the flesh," think

one of the most obvious and pertinent texts

for the

business.

n. The churches, therefore, of those ages were

absolute

contrary,

strangers to this reading.

their writers,

as often

as

For, on

the

they have any

occasion to cite the reading then in use, discover

that it was .
For though they cite it not to prove
Oi'at.

xi.

contra

Euuom.

TWO CORRUPTIONS OP SCRIPTURE.

293
and

the deity of the Son, yet in their commentaries,

sometimes

in other discourses,

particularly

brose,

or

Hilary,

whoever of

they produce

2. de

lib.

his

And
Am-

it.

Trinitale, and

contemporaries was the

author of the commentary on the Epistles, reads o

and so doth St Austin in Genesin ad liternm, hb. 5

and Beda

in his

commentary on

cites the reading of St Austin,

this text,

where he

and the author of the

commentary on the Epistles, ascribed to Jerome.

So also do Primasius and Sedulius in their commentaries

on

adversus
gilius

12
did

this

text;

Arium

Tapsensis,

lib. 3.

and Fulgentius,

Pope Leo

and Victo inus Afer,

adversus

c. 2.

the Great, epist. 20.

These ancient Latins

is

Vanmadum,

de Incarnatione

and Pope Gregory the Great,

" Great
ner,

lib.

1.

and Idacius Clarus, or rather Vi-

all cite

lib.

cap.

and so

ad Flavianum;

34. Moral, cap. 7.

the text after this

man-

the mystery of Godhness, which

was

manifested in the flesh ;" as the Latin manuscripts

of St Paul's Epistles generally have it to this day ;

and therefore

it

cannot be doubted, but that

this

hath

been the constant public reading of the Latin churches from the beginning.
So also one of the Arians
in

a homily, printed in Fulgentius's works, reads

and interprets it of the Son of God, who was born

of the Father ante secula ; and of the Virgin, in

And Fulgentius, in his answer

novissimo tempore.
to this homily, found no fault with the citation ; but on
the contrary, in his

first

book ad Trasimundum, cap.

294
6.

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

seems

the

to

have read and understood the text

after

same manner with other Latins.

III. Now, for the Greeks, I find indeed that

they
have changed the ancient reading of the text, not

in

only

the manuscripts of St Paul's Epistles,

also in other authors

ing

on

tary

the text

at

first.

this epistle,
;

hut

remain-

among them of what the

So in Chrysostom's commenthey have now gotten fes into

and yet by considering the commentary

satisfied that he read o.
For he nehher

am

itself, I

commentary, nor any where

in this

still

instances

sufficient

reading was

and yet there are

deity of Christ h'om this text

the

else, infers

nor expounds it, as

but with the Latins, who
;

they do who read -^05

read 0, understands by it Christ incarnate ; or, as he
expresses it, "Man made God, and God made
;

Man

;"

either

and so leaves

God

or

man.

at liberty

it

And

be taken

to

accordingly

in

for

one place

of his commentary he saith, ^E-puupaS)] Iv irxpx.f

^n/^mpIn anotlier place ; "AvdpaTroi atp^ri uvu-f^d^rfiroi,
yoi
kvfipuTToi avct>J,<p6>}. ix.}jpux,^v

ev x-or/uct, f^s6^ i f^av ei^ov

Man appeared without

up ; Man was preached in

oiuyysAci.

sin ;

received

the

seen amongst us hy angels.

ev c-apx), i^iKcciaSii ev Trveoy-oiri,

saith,

loas

world ; was

Instead of

&c. he

avTov

Man

((pxv'ipah

Man appeared

without sin; making Man the nominative case to these

and all the verbs which follow ; which certainly he

would not have done, had 5)5 been

case expressly in the text.

He

their nominative

might properly put

man

295

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

for

but not for e*?.

0,

for

uveifAxpTijToi

Gffls lSiY.xia6}t.

ehxcciaB-)}.

Neither could he have put

if he had read in his text

For what man of common sense would

God was made

sinless in and through the

said of Chrysostom will be
have
spirit
more evident, when I shall have shown you how

say, that
?

But what

afterwards, in the time of the Nestorian controversy,

all

os, without any dispute raised about

and how the Greeks have since cor-

parties read oor

the reading

rupted the text in Cyril's writings, and changed

into 95, as they

have done

and

in

Chrysostom's.
IV. And, first, that the Nestorians read is evident by some fragments of the orations or homihes
e<i

of Nestorius, sent by him to the Pope, and cited by

in the second book of his conflict

Arnobius Junior,

For there, in order to show what

was the opinion of Nestorius, and how he defended

with Serapion.

it,

he

cites

two of

tum

est

words

his orations in these

peperit sanctissima JMaria Deitatem

JVon peperit creatura

est.
scd peperit hominem Dcitatis ministrinn.

JVoncedlficavit Deiim, J^ei'bum, Spiritus Sanctus ;

ipsa,

natum

est,

de

Sjyiritu

Sancto

est.

que virgo templum ex virgine adijicovit.

post;

Qui perse natus

Luciphorum) Deus

mam

in

na-

de came, caro

Creatorem

ex

Kon

nam quod

est

est.

Deo honoramus.

Deus

quod

Deo

ita-

Et paulo

in utero (scilicet ante

Et paulo post Q^oTUnforEt in alia pra^dicatione ;

;

Spiritum divina separat natura, qui humaniiatem ejus

Quicquid ex Maria natum est, de Spiritik

ereavit.

296

SIR ISAAC

Sancto

est,

creatum

Newton's history of

qui ef secundum justitiam replevit, quod

hoc quod manifestatum est in carne^jus-

est ;

tificatum est

Which

in Spiritu.

last

language wherein Nestorius wrote

are,

words

in

the

those homilies,

i^pxveptiSij Iv a-xpxi- IS'iKcaeeSri Iv TrvsufAotrt,

V. Here you see

that Nestorius reads o expressly;

but
not only so,
absolutely excludes God from being
understood by it ; arguing, that the Virgin was not

because that thing which was manifested in

was justified in the spirit; or, as he ex-

5oroj5

the flesh,

pounds it, replenished by the spirit in righteousness,

and calling that thing which was manifested in the
flesh, a creature

Spiritus, saith he, secundum, justi-

tiam replevit \hoc^ quod creatum est; \jiempe^ hoc

manifestatum est in came, justijicatum est in

quod

Spiritu.

VI.

And now,

whilst he read the text after this

manner, and urged

one Vv^ould suspect,

thus against the deity of Christ,

that if this had not been the re-

it

ceived public reading in the Greek churches, his

adversaries would have fallen foul upon him, and

exclaimed against him

blasphemously saying
"
calls

the Scripture

And such an
made as great
troversy

in history.

it

for

falsifying

the text, and

was a created

God

manifested

thing,

which

in the flesh."

accusation as this would surely have

a noise as any

thing else in the con-

and yet I meet with nothing of this kind

His adversaries do not so much as tell

him, that ? was in the text.

They were

so far

297

TWO CORRUPTIONS OP SCRIPTURE.

from raising any controversy about the reading, that

they do not in the least correct him for it ; but

on the contrary they themselves, in their answers to

as he did ; and only laboured
his writings, read
'd,

to put another sense upon the

by Cassian and Cyril, the two princi-

by various disputations
text, as I find

pal

who

at that

VII.

time wrote against him.

John Cassian was

Chrysostom's scholar,
and his deacon and legate to the Pope and after
the banishment of Chrysostom, retired from Con;

Egypt, where he lived a

time, and then ended his days

stantinople into Syria and

monkish
in

life for

France.

who was
opinion,

At

some

that time, therefore,

when

Nestorius,

patriarch of Constantinople, broached his

and Cyril, the patriarch of Alexandria,

Nestorius sent a legacy to Rome with

copies of his orations, to let the Pope understand
the controversy ; and thereupon Leo the Great, who

opposed him

was then archdeacon of the Church of Rome, and

afterwards Pope, put Cassian, then in France, upon
writing this book, De Incarnatione Domini, against
Nestorius.

He

wrote

therefore, in the year 430,

it

For he wrote

as Baronius also reckons.

it

before

the condemnation of Nestorius in the council of

esus, as appears

now

extant only

by the book
in

Latin

design in writing was to

against Nestorius, and

Eph-

This book

is

but, considering that his

stir

that

itself.

up the Greek church

for

the

making great

impression upon them, he quotes Greek Fathers

at

298

SIR ISAAC Newton's history op

the end of his book, and concludes with an exhortation

to the citizens

that

what

he

of Constantinople, telhng them,

master Chrvsostom

For

languages.

Greek

and

it

am

his

he wrote

that

satisfied

saw them

Photius

more

is

from

had received

His other books were

Greek.

originally in

he

wrote

in

likely that they

in

it

both

eloquent

had

their

author's eloquent language from their author, and the

Latin from one of the Latins where he lived ; than

tise,*

when he comes

Now

be true.

that the contrary should

in this trea-

to consider the passage of

Nes-

which we gave you an account above out of Arnobius, he returns this answer

torius about this text, of

to

it

Jam prirnum enim

justitid repleverif,
vis

quod

hoc quod

tcstimonio comprobare,

came

justificatus

est

in

quod
Spiritu

a Spiritu

eum repletum

et

quia
hoc apostolico

dicat,

sensu etfurioso Spiritu loqcris.

vis

ais, JVestori,

creaturn est

apparuit in

utrumque /also

Quia

et hoc,

quod

esse justiiid, ideo ponis,

ut ostendas ejus vacuitatem, cui prastitam esse asseras

Et

adimpletionem.

justitice

hoc,

quod super hnc

re

apostolico testimonio uteris, divini testimonii ordinem

JVon enim

rationemque furaris.

ium

est,

tit

Quid enim

tu

id

ita

ah apostolo posi-

truncatum vitiatumque posuisti.

apostolus ait ?

Et manifeste magnum

sacramentum, quod manifestatum est in

Vides ergo, quod
carne, justificatum est in Spiritu.
est pietatis

mysterium pnetatis, vel sacra^nentum justificatum apos*

Libro septimo, cap.

18,

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

209

Thas far Cassian is not only readP or

but confuting INestorius by that reading.
whereas Nestorius said it was a creature which was
tolus prcedicavit,

ing

0,

Cassian

justified,

tells

him, that

if

would have found

wliole text, he

he had read the

that

Vides ergo,

mystery of godhness."

it

was " the

saith

he,

quod

mysterium pietatis justificatum apostolus prfsdicavit.

He does not say, Deum justificatum apostolus prcedicavit (as

been

in

he certainly would have done, had that

Bible,) but mysterium ; and so makes

his

mysterium, or, which is all one, its relative quod,

the nominative case to the verbs which follow.
In

another part of this treatise,

cites
te

est

magnum

iatum

cap. 12. Cassian

est in

pietatis sacramentum,

came,

Quod

^-c.

illud sacramentum,

Deus

lib. 5.

and interprets the text as follows

scilicet

Et

manifes-

quod manifes-

ergo

magnum est
in came?

est

quod manifestatum
natus in came, Deus visus in corpore,

qui utique sicut palam

est

manifestatus in came,

So you see
assumptus in gloria.
Nestorius and Cassian agree in reading i', but dif-

ita

palam

fer in

est

interpreting

it

creature, by reason of

the
its

one restraining
being justified

it

to

the other

God, by reason of its being a great

mystery, and assumed in glory.
VII3, In like manner
Cyril, the grand adversaof
in
his
three
books De Fide ad Imry
Nestorius,
restraining

it

to

Reginas, written against him in the

beginning of that controversy, did not reprehend

peratorem

et

26

300

SIR ISAAC

him, as

if

Newton's history of

he had cited the text

falsely,

but only

complained of his misinterpreting it ; telling him,

that he did not understand the
great mystery of
and
that
it was not a created
godliness,
thing, as he
thought, but the
for

Word

And,

text.

rem, sect. 7.
T5 ypatpdi'

first, in

his

he has

this
ro

fitire f^iv

fj XpirOV, 0? i(pUVSp6l6i]

Ye

or

err, saith he, not

Son of God

De

book

passage

(A.iyo(, rjj?

if

it

is

into

<i ;

rarert Xptrov,

understood

;.

uSirei

tua-i^stoc^ f^vrnpiov, TijTE-

knoiving the Sci-iptures,

is

Christ

plain that

the

he read

and, by

way

which

in

&C,

nor the

who was

By

spirit.

using one of

i'?,

MSS which, by understanding X/i/s-ov

turned
ing

u\xvZa-6e,

in the flesh, justified in

manifested
these

Fide ad Imperato-

CrxOKl. iS'lX.XiU@7j V 5ry'J^T<,

great mystery of godliness, that

this citation

and arguing

from the circumstances of the

this interpretation

for

f^vriipiev,

of interpretation, insert-

those

MSS

was

to

be

unless you will say that he turns 5

For had eas been in this

very hard.
said
have
H-^s-ipiev, ihtUi X^/s-v, 'i^
text, he would not
TTeVi
Xptroi l(pttn^u6y, putbut f^v^-vipiov, Gsoi,
i<pct.vipaih

in

oi,

which

is

tino- x^.f^ss,

not for

f^vripiov^

but for A?.

For

Xptrh, and

more plainly equipollent than Xpirci and t^vrnpiov.

And making Xpuci and t^v^^ptoy equipollent, he makes

605 are

/M,^5-/)'v

the nominative case to

>/'*^'

and therefore

Had he
read them joined in this text by the article .
left out that authenhave
never
would
he
read ^es,
tic

and demonstrative word, and by way of interpreFor this

for iv5-w/><e 5, written Xpiihv 05.

tation

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

301

to argue against Nestorius, but to spoil

was not

the

argument which lay before him. Neither would he

have gone on, as he does, within a few lines, to
recite the same text, putting Aoy by way of interpretation for
his bare

f^vT^i^iov

and

the

opinion, that

was here

be understood by

to

propound it as
Son of God

to

after

Word

or

this

the

mystery, and to

opinion, as needing proof out of

other texts of scripture, as he does after this man-

dispute for this his

ner ;* Moreover, saith he, in

tery of godliness

us from

God

is

nothing

Father

the

opinion, that mysthan he who came to

my

else

the

JVord,

was

xoho

For in taking the form of a

manifested in the flesh.
was horn of the holy God-bearing Firgin,
And then after many other things he at length
fyc

servant, he

in sect.

tery

is

23 and 24, concludes,

that " this divine

above our understanding

begotten,
tures, the

mys-

and that the only-

who

is God, and,
according to the ScripLord of all things, appeared to us, was

seen on earth, and became a man."

not the text

itself,

This he makes

but the interpretation thereof

from the preceding disputation, concludes

it

and

to

be

genuine.

IX. Again,

in

the

first

of his two treatises,

.

De

Fide ad Reginas, near the end, he cites the text,

and argues thus against the interpretation of Nesto* "E/
yaf
yi/iiv

rrif

Ik Qstu

eJj^j

iTigav

vecr^os Xoyoi,

ayias TaoSUou

ad Imperalorem,

xcci

eJfiix,)
i's

^toTOKOV,

Sect. 8,

ri to Trjs ilffiZucc;
(AUffrri^iiv, airoV

l^avEja^jj
fii^ipriv

ifa^xi.

TiyUnrai yk^ hoc

Ctfril. dc Fidr

Jsi/Xst; Xa/SeJv.

302

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

"

rius.

Who

is

" that
he," saith he,

in the flesh ?

Is

other than the

Word

it

manifested

is

not fully evident, that

God

of

Father

the

is

no

For

so

it

be a great mystery of godliness (which

was* manifested in the flesh) ; he was seen of anwill

that

ascending into heaven

gels,

the Gentiles

on
as

in the

God

by

world

born

he was preached to
he was beheved
5

the holy Apostles

;

but this not as a mere

and

in the flesh,

X. So

also in his

nas,f he

cites the

again

but

De Fide ad Regi-

second book,
place

man

our manner."

after

and then argues

upon it against the opinion of Nestorius after this

manner " If the word, being God, is said to become
a man, and yet continue what he was before, without
;

losing his deity, the mystery of godliness

doubt a very great one

but

if

without

is

Christ be a

mere

man, joined with God only in the parity of dignity

and power, (for this is mantained by some unlearned
men,) how

is

he manifested

in the flesh ?

Is

it

not

that every man is in the flesh, and cannot

otherwise be seen by any body ; how then was he

plain,

said

to

be seen of the holy angels

not also see us

What was

extraordinary in Christ,
a

man

as

we

are,

*
t

Section 33.

new

or

the angels saw him such

Thus

that

which

his reasons

in the flesh,

Codex Grscus hoc

For do they

and nothing more, &ic."

Cyril goes on to give

was manifested

if

there therefore

loco jam legit

why

was not a mere created

0C

pro

sensu perturbato*

303

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

Nestorious

man, as

Son

or

Word,

of

interpreted,

God

all

but

the

been very superfluous and impertinent,

then been expressly in the text.

XL

eternal

which would have

if

God had

Seeing therefore Nestorius alleged the text

to prove, that

it

was a created thing which was man-

ifested in the flesh

not answer that

it

and Cyril,

in confuting

was God expressly

him, did

in the text,

nor

any debate about the reading, but only put

another interpretation upon the text than Nestorius
had done ; arguing with Cassian, that in the text it
raise

was not

mere man,

as Nestorius contended, but a

and by consequence
Christ, or God the Son, which was manifested in
the flesh ; and labouring by divers other arguments
of godliness

mystery

great

to prove this interpretation,

cavil, that Cyril

the text

XII
who,

his

is

it

was a stranger

and read

And

in

i'^or ,

all this is

evident beyond

to '.

now

got

all

into

as Nestorius andCassian did.

further confirmed

commentary

by Photius,

on the Epistles not yet

published, relates that Cyril, in the 12th chapter of

his

Scholiums, read

to this reading
in

his

is

ItpuvepuiYi,

Cyril's

explanation

&;c.

and consonant

commentary upon the

of the

second

of the

text

twelve

Anathematisms, where he puts the question, Qidd

Apparuit in came ? And explains it by saying. Hoc est. Dei patris verhum caro
factum est, and concludes, that it is hency that we call
him God and Man. Whereas had &eli been in the
est igitur

quod

dicit,

26*

304

SIR ISAAC Newton's HiSTony of

text, it would have needed no interpretation ; nor

would he have put ^/yej for ??, in order to prove
that God was manifested in the flesh.
And yet in his

books ad Reginas, and in other writings, wherever he

quotes this text, the Greeks have since corrected itby
their corrected
manuscripts of St Paul's Epistles,

written 5 instead of

c ;

whence,

if

you would

and

truly

understand the Nestorian history, you must read

or o<- for eoc, in all Cyril's citations of this text.
XIII.

whilst Cyril read o or ?, and in the

of
the twelve chapters, or articles, quotexplanation
ed this text in the second article ; and this explana-

Now,

was recited by him in the council of Ephesus,

and approved by the council,* with an anathema at
the end of every article ; it is manifest that this

tion

and by consecouncil allowed the reading 05 or

;
authentic
and
that
or
was
the
05
public unconquence
troverted reading

till

after the times of this

council.

Nestorius and Cyril, the pitriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria, and the heads of the two

For

if

read
parties in this controversy,

0?

or

and their

writings went about amongst the eastern churches, and

were canvassed by the bishops and clergy without any
the reading ; and if Cyril read
dispute raised about
5

by the approbation of the council

that

the

the

conclusion

general

be granted us.

we make

uncontroverted

And

if

Concii. Ephes. par.

of

itself; I think
its

the authority
iii,

sub

being

reading, must

initio.

then

needs

of one of the

305

two CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

first

make any thing for the

we have that into the bargain.

four general councils

truth of the reading,

XIV.

Yet

Nestorian

the

whilst

brought the text into play, and

that

or

the

Word

made
was

a?

extremes, the one disputing

into

the interpretation

was a creature

God

controversy

the two parties ran

the other that

it

was

the prevalence of the latter party

orthodox opinion, that o or U
the
it
for
pass
God ; and so gave occasion to the Greeks
of

change the language of Christ into

that of God; and say, in their expositions of the
text, that God was manifested in the flesh, as I find
henceforward

Thodoret

and

dotl),

text itself;
inviting

to

them

do

to

length to write
o or
change of

at

the easy

it ;

and,

orthodox authentic reading,

if this

to

God
Co

in

the

into

Gc,

was become the

set right

the text in

Chrysostom, Cyiil, Theodoret, and wherever else

they found it, in their opinion, corrupted by heretics.

XV. And

man

the

the sacred text,

Constantinople,

that

first

began thus

to

alter

was Macedonius, the patriarch of

in

the beginning of the sixth century.

For the Emperor Anastasius banished him for corAt that time, the Greek church had been
rupting it.

Many
long divided about the council of Chalcedon.
who allowed the condemnation of Eutyches, rejected the council

by reason of

influence of the bishop of

its

decreeing, by the

Rome's

letter against

Eu-

only ex duabus naturis, which Eutyches allowed, but also in duabus

tyches, that Christ subsisted not

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

306
naturis

which language was new

to the

Greeks,

and by a great part of that church taken for Nestorianism.

For they understood, that as the body and
soul

made

the

nature of Christ

the nature of man, so

;

God and man made

assigning the

nature to the

person of Christ, as well as to all other things, and

not considering that in all compounds the several
parts

have also their several natures.

party endeavoured

to

Hence each

render the other suspected of

heresy ; as if they that were for the council secretly

favoured the Nestorians, and they that were against
'
For one party, in maintaining
it, the
Eutychians.

two

were thought

distinct natures in Christ,

of one person with Nestorius

the nature

to

deny
and the

other party, in opposing two distinct natures in him,

were thought to deny the truth of one of the natures

Both parties, therefore, to clear

with Eutyches.
themselves of those imputations, anathematised both
those heresies

ed

sense, as

of

and therefore whilst they thus

differ-

modes of speaking, they agreed in their

But the bishops
Evagrius well observes.

in their

Rome

and Alexandria being engaged against one

distracting the East

another, and for a long time

length the Emperor Zeno,

and
empire,
perhaps to secure it
quiet
of
the bishop of Rome,
from the encroachment

by these
to

disputes

at

his

who, by this verbal contest,* aspired to the name

and authority of universal bishop, sent about an
* Vide
Baroniuin,

anno 451

sect. 149, 150. 151,

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

307

henoticum, or pacificatory decree ; wherein he anthemaiised both Nestorius and Eutyches with their
followers on the one hand, and abrogated the Pope's
letter

and the council on the other

sor, Anastasius, for the

this

and

his succes-

same end, laboured

to

have

And Mace-

decree signed by all the bishops.

at first subscribed it ; but afterwards heading

donius
those

who

stood up for the council,* was, for corrupt-

ing the Scriptures in favour of his opinion, and such

other tilings as were laid to his charge, deposed and

But

banished, ann. C. 512. f

his

own

party,

which

length prevailed, defended him, as if oppressed

calumnies
and so received that reading for gen;
by
which
he
For how
had
uine,
put about among them.
at

what they reckon on

their side, Jerome well knew, when he recommended
the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" by its
ready are

all

parties to receive

and we have a notable instance of it in

when the churches, both eastern and western, received this testimony in a moment into their
Greek testaments, and still continue with great zeal

usefulness

the last age,

and passion

to

defend

against the authority of

XVI. But now

all

Flavian wa? banished

;

year before.

the

the

ancient

reading,

Greek manuscripts.

have told you the original of the

Evagriiis, lib. iii. cap. xxi. 44.

Marcellini Chronicon.

grius notes

for

it

in

Theodorus Lector,

lib.

ii.

and

the year of Antioch 561, as Eva-

and Macedonius was banished the same year, or the

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

308

tell you my author ; and he is

of the church of Carthage,
archdeacon
Liberatus,

corruption, I must

who

lived

in that

which he wrote
collected,

For

very age.

in the

as he saith

records, he delivers

his Breviary,

in

year 535, or soon

after,

preface, out of

in his

words

in these

and

Greek

Hoc

tempore
ah
Macedonius Constantinopolitanus episcopus
imperatore Anasiasio dicitur expulsus, tanquam evangelia
falsaret
paruit

maxhne

et

uhi

Grcecum,

hahet

Htmc enim

in spiritu.

hoc

qui

mutatd

literd

Quia ap-

illud apostoli dictum,

in carne, justificatum

mutasse,

est,

it

est

vertisse

in

mono syll ahum

id

et fecisse

ut esset Deus, apparuit per carnem.

Tanquam

severum
ergo cidpatus expeUitur per
omitted
here
letters
Greek
The
Monachum.jof
in
those
and
of
in
the
edition
second
Sunius,
are,

JVestorianus

the councils, thus inserted

monasyUahum Grcecum,
et fecisse

nem.

Cut

id

this

Uhi hahet

literd

mutatd

e's,

hoc

est qui,

in u, vertisse

Deus apparuit per carmade by

interpolation was surely

est,

ut esset,

in the sacred text before

conjecture ; for if was
the corruption, then or o was not in, and so could

not be changed into ^5

but

if eos

was not

not be brought in by this change.

tion therefore

to

is

in, it

The

inconsistent and spurious, and

have been occasioned by

Nestorianism here

straining to

could

interpola-

seems

make

out

the scribes for that end, J refer-

* Liberati Brev.
cap. xix.

tN. B. In Hincmari opusc.

Vide Baronii Annal. 510, sect. 9.

words < ew^

xxKiii. cap. 22. the

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

words ut

ring the

the

essei to the

^i

interpolator writing

sacred text

for

309
and then

Whereas they

ut.

should have referred ut esset to the words of Libera-

from the sacred text; Id est,

I had rather,

tus, thus distinguished

Deus apparuit per camera.

therefore, wave the conjecture of this
ut esset,

and

interpolator,

up the lacuna by the authority of an ancient

author, Hincmarus ; who above eight hundred years
fill

ago*

related the fact

manner

^uidam

out of Liberatus after this

ipsas Scripturas verbis

illicitis

im-

posturaverunt ; sicut Macedonius Constantinopolitanus episcopus, qui ah Anasiasio Imperatore, ideo a

civitate expulsus legitur,
et

quoniam falsavit evangelia ;

ilium apostoli locum, quod apparuit in carne, jus-

tificatum est in spiritu

literarum

et

per cognationem Grcscarum

Ubi enim

hoc modo mutando falsavit.

habuit, qui, hoc est oc, monosyllahum Grcecum, litera

mutatd o in , mutavit, et fecit 0c, id est, ut esset,

Deus apparuit per carnem; quapropter tanquam JVestorianus fuit expulsus.
He was banished therefore
changing the ancient reading (which in some

for

MSS
o)

was oc, as these authors have it, and in others

c. But whereas he is here represented

into

are in like

manner

referred to the sacred text

and somebody, to

make

out the sense, lias in their stead added ut npparerct to the

words of Liberatus, and written id npparerct, ut esset Deus, he

But the words

id nppareret

not being in Liberatus, must be struck

and supplied by setting the

words from the sacred text
out,

Hincmari opuscul.

comma after

id esscl, to part these

artic. xxxiii. cap. IS.

310

SIR ISAAC Newton's history op

a Nestorian, for doing

was banished

this,

the meaning

doctrine of two natures in Christ

accounted Nestorianism, though

human

Nestorius held only a

that

God,
in

spirit

the

is,

he

that

for corrupting the text in favour of the

Word, dwelt

the

a holy

human

man

nature.

which

it

was not

his

enemies

really so.

nature in Christ
in

this

and
the

as

nature,

and therefore interpreted

of
This doctrine Macedonius

anthematised, and maintained two natures in Christ;

and, for proving

God

this,

corrupted the text, and

made

This distinguishing
Christ into two natures was, by the enemies of Macedonius, accounted Nestorianism in another lan-

it

manifested in the flesh.

and

respect the historian saith, that

as a Nestorian for corrupting
the text, though he was not really of that opinion.

guage

in this

they banished

XVII. But

him

whilst

he

said

is

be banished as a

to

without explaining what is here

meant by a Nestorian, it looks like a trickish way of
speaking, used by his friends to ridicule the proceed-

Nestorian for

him

ings against

the crime

this,

as inconsistent

of falsation

as

if

perhaps to invert
Nestorian would

c into o. For they that read histowith

ry
judgment, will too often meet with such
and even in the very story of
trickish reports ;
rather change

meet with some other reports of the

Macedonius,

same kind.

For Macedonius having

in

his

keeping

the original acts of the council of Chalcedon, signed

by

that

emperor under

whom

it

was

called, and

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

deliver

to

refusing

Anastasius

some,

this

up

make

to

book
this

the

to

311

emperor

emperor perjured,

coming to the crown,

he had promised under his hand and oath, that he
would not act against the council of Chalcedon ;
and represented his subscribed promise to be the

distorted the story

as

at his

if,

book, which Macedonius refused to deliver back to

him.

Macedonius had got

his bishopric by being

and had subscribed
the
council
of
Chalcedon,
against

was

the henoticum* of Zeno, in which that council

anathematised

and

this

his friends, to stifle the

story of the

being objected against him,

accusation,

make

a contrary

when he came

to the
emperor
that
in
of
behalf
he
had
done
as
much
as
the
crown,
council.
Another report was,f " That the people
;

as

if,

all Egypt, great and small, bond

and monks, excepting only strangers,

of Alexandria and

and

free, priests

became about

this

time possessed with

evil spirits,

and being deprived of human speech, barked day

and night like dogs ; so that tliey were afterwards

jound with

iron chains,

and drawn

the church,

to

For they

that they might recover their heahh.

ate

hands and arms.

their

some of

And

an

then

all

angel

the

people, saying, that this

to
them
because
happened
they anathematised the

appeared
council

to

of

Chalcedon, and threatened,

should do so no more."

Again, we

Vide Annotatioiics Valesii in Evagr,

Victor Tuiiunonsis in Clironico.

27

are

k.c. lib.

that

they

told in his-

iii.

cap. 31.

312

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

" That the adversaries of

Macedonius produced certain boys in judgment to accuse both him

tory,*

and

when they
thembetook
off, they
Now if you
deposing him."

themselves of sodomy

but

that

found that his genitals were cut

selves to other arts for

can beheve that a eunuch had the beard and voice of

man

and that in a solemn council the great

;
of
the
East was thus accused and thus
patriarch
another

;
you must acknowledge,
were many bishops among the Greeks
who would not stick at as ill and shameless things,

acquitted, and yet deposed

that there

as corrupting the

a sham

Scriptures.

But

if

all

this

invented to discredit the council, the

need of

such shams, adds credit to their proceedings

demning him for a falsary.

XVIII. This council, if

be a

mistake not, sat

in

con-

first at

Constantinople, being that council which Theodorus

" a
calls
company of mercenary wretches ;" and

Nicephorus,

" a convention of
heretics, assembled

against Macedonius."

Upon their adding to thef

"
" thrice
holy" these words, who art crucified for us"
the people fell into a tumult ; and afterwards, when
Macedonius came

to

ing Macedonius.

In this tumult, which

be accused, they fell into a

" The time of
persecugreater tumult, crying out,
tion is at hand ; let no man desert the father ;" mean-

*
t

Evagrius,

Theodor.

cap. 44.

lib.
lib.

iii.
ii.

cap. 32.

Nicephor.

lib, xvi.

cap. 26

was

said

Evagr.

lib. iii;

TWO CORRUPTIONS OP SCRIPTURE.

be

313

up by the clergy of Constantinople,

of
the city were burnt, and the nobles
many parts
and emperor brought into the greatest danger ; in-

to

stirred

somuch

that the emperor was forced to proffer the

resignation of his empire, before he could quiet the
multitude.
Then seeing that, if Macedonius were

judged, the people would defend him, he caused him

to be carried
by force in the night to Chalcedon ;

and thence

Whence

into banishment, as

Chalcedon

to avoid the tumult,

For the

ceedings there.
in

Theodorus

writes.

removed

also to

the council

I gather, that

and

finish their

pro-

story of his being accused

judgment by boys, Nicephorus places after this

and all agree that he was condemned ; and
;

tumult

monks of

the

an epistle recorded by
Evagrius, say that Xenaias and Dioscorus, joined
with many bishops, banished him.
When his conPalestine,

in

demnation was sent him, signed by the emperor, he

asked, whether they that had condemned him, received the council of Chalcedon

and when they

;
him the sentence denied h, he replied,
Arians and Macedonians had sent me a book of

that brouglit

" If

condemnation, could
he stood upon the

receive

illegality

it .^"

So

that

it

of the council.

seems

The

next day one Timothy was made

bishop of Constantinople, and he sent about the condemnation of

Macedonius
ed.*
*

to

Whence

Theophanes,

all

the absent bishops to be subscrib-

think

p. 135.

it

will easily

be granted, that he

314

SIR ISAAC

was condemned

Newton's history gp

by the greatest part of

and
;
by consequence, that thegenuine reading was till then, by the churches of that
For had not the public reading
empire, accounted .
as a falsary

the eastern empire

then been

there could have been no colour for

pretending that he

XIX. About

changed

it

into

c.

six years after, Anastasius died,

and

and Justinian, set up the authorof the council of Chalcedon again, together with

his successors, Justin

ity

that of the

Pope over

versal bishop

Macedonius

the eastern churches, as uni-

and from that time the friends of

prevailing,

it is

probable, that in opposi-

which condemned him, and for

and
promoting
establishing the doctrine of two natures
in Christ, they received and spread
abroad the
tion

to the heretics,

reading 0c.

slept

till

XX.

But

again with

that fell

as for the authority of the

Rome

Phocas revived
told

in

Pope,

the Gothic wars, and

it.

you of several shams put about by the

friends of Macedonius, to

discredit the proceedings

of the council against him.

There

is

one which

notably confirms what has hitherto been said, and

makes it plain that his friends received his corruptions as

genuine scripture.

was banished

For whereas Macedonius

for corrupting the

New

Testament, his
friends retorted the crime upon the council, as if they had
taken upon them, under colour of purging the Scriptures from the corruptions of Macedonius, to correct
in

them whatever they thought the Apostles,

as un-

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

skilful

men and

I gather

about in

315
For

had written amiss.

idiots,

this

from an ironical report of this kind put

the West, and thus recorded by Victor

Messcdd

Tununensis.

J^.

C. consuUbus, Constanti-

nopoli,jiibente Anastasio Imperatore, sancta Evangelia, tanquam ab idiotis composita, reprehend untur et
" In the
of
emandantur that
jNIessala,

consulship

is,

the holy Gospels,

by the command of the emperor

Anastasius, were censured and corrected at Constan-

wrhten by Evangehsts that were idiots."

Here Victor errs in the year. For Messala was

tinople

as

if

consul anno Christi 506, that

banishment of JMacedonius.
uncertain

in

dates

of

six years before the

is,

But Victor

the years

for

he

is

very

places

the banishment of Macedonius in the consulship of

Avienus

502

and

about the Trisagium

anno Christi 513

pened

in

abovementioned

the
in

whereas

same year.

the

chronicle, that

tumult

the consulship of Probus,

all

these things hap-

For

the Scriptures

it
is
plain by this
were examined and

corrected about this time by a council at Constantinople, by the order of Anastasius ; and I meet with

no other council

to which this character can agree,

besides that which deposed Macedonius.
Now that
should
censure
and
correct
the
they
Gospels, as if

written
history

by idiots, is too plainly ironical to be true

and therefore it must be an abusive report,
;

invented and put about to ridicule and shame the

council, and

to

propagate the corruptions of

27*

Maco

316

SIR ISAAC Newton's history op

donius as the genuine apostolic reading of the ScrijJtures, which the council had rashly corrected.

XXI.

So then

the falsation

was

set

on foot

in

century, and is now of

about twelve hundred years standing and therefore
since it lay but in a letter, and so was more easily
the beginning of the

fifth

spread abroad in the Greek manuscripts than the

" the Three in Heaven" in the Latin
testimony of

ones

we need

wonder

not

if

scarce to be met with in any

now

extant

XXII.

and yet

it is

in

readers, that

all

^95

Greek manuscripts

some.

For though Beza

Greek manuscripts read

reading be

the old

tells
;

yet

us,
I

that

must

his manuscripts read

tell

all

the

Beza's

For he had

0.

no other manuscripts of the Epistles besides the

Claromontan ; and in this manuscript, as Morinus

by ocular inspection has since informed us, the

ancient reading was c ;* but yet in another hand,
and with other
out of the line

ink, the

and the

letter

letter o,

has been written

thickenedf to make

AliS rnanu et atramento, extra lineae serietn, addita est litera

0,

et

ambesa paululum O,

emendatio

facile

Biblicis, Lib.

i.

ut appareret signia.

conspicitur.

Exercitat.

ii.

Hac Morinus

cap. 4.

Sed praepostera

in ExercUationibiis

At Beza nobis

aliqua

iiividit,

ut ex ejus epistolA ad Academiatn Cantabrigiensem a Waltono

edita liquet ubi variantes aliquas lectiones celandas esse admonet.
;

Such is the reading in the defective edition

of 1754, as well as in the late edition of the entire essay from
which the present is reprinted; but the sense of the passage imt{|<'

Thickened."

" ambesa
paululum" in the preceding
expressed by
0.
En.]
note, a partial crasement of the letter
plies,

what

is

two Corruptions op scripture.

317

which instance shows

by
Va-

a C, appears

whom

the ancient reading

sufficiently

has been changed.

lesius also read in one of the Spanish manuscripts;

and so did the author of the Oxford edition of the

New

Testament, anno Christi 1675, in the manuscript of Lincoln College Library, which is the
oldest of the

The Alexandrian

Oxford manuscripts.

MS"*^ and one of Colbert's, and Cyril, c. 12. Scholi-

orum,

(teste

MS

Photio

com.

in

Epist.) read

oc.

So then there are some ancient Greek manuscripts

which read c, and others o ; but 1 do not hear of
any Latin ones, either ancient or modern, which
read Gti^.

XXIIL And

besides to read -'s makes the sense

obscure and difficult.

" that God was
said,

For how can

in

justified

it

the

properly be

spirit .^"

But

ducta cernitur tam lineola per nipdium

I.
Putat auO, qiiani virgiila siiperiia ut jam legatiir
lem Millius, lirieolas illas olim teniies t'uisse et piope evanidas, et

Alio atramentojam

literal

novo

deiii

atramento incrassatas

tiusloco, lineolce per raediuiri

ral,

set

diictas,

eo quod perluslralo attenquae primam aciem fuge-

ductus quosdam ac vestigia satis certa depreliendere visus e3pra^sertim ad partem sinistrani, qua; periiilieriam iiterre per-

tingit

luculeutiora multo liabiturus nisi obstante liturSquam dixit

hodierna lineolte

tam conspicua
alio

fuisse

ipsi

superinductA.

esset, ut uscpie

Veriim

si

nunc per medium

lineola aiitiquitus
linea;

crassioris,

quid opus esset, ut a

Sin olim tam evanida esset,

atramento superinducta?, cerni possit

illi superinductS incrassaretur.

ut cerni vix posset; mirum est, quod ejus ductus et vestigia satis

lineA

certa, per

medium

literse illius

Doceant verba evanida

fuisse, vel fateantur

OC

superinducta?, etiaranum appartnnt.

locis atiamento novo incrassata

aliis in

hie

mutatum

in

0C.

318

SIR ISAAC Newton's history of

to read

and interpret

o,

it

of Christ, as the ancient

Christians did, without restraining

makes

it

to his divinity,

For the promised and

the sense very easy.

long expected Messias, the hope of Israel, is to us

*'
And this mystery
the great mystery of godliness."
was at length manifested to the Jews from the time

of his baptism, and justified to be the.person

whom

they expected.

have now given you an account of the

corruption of the text, the sum of which is this ; the
difference between the Greek and the ancient ver-

XXIV.

sions puts

have

it

MSS,

corrupted their

and Ethiopians,

the

that either

past dispute,

their versions

Greeks

or the Latins, Syrians,

;

and

more reason-

it is

able to lay the fault upon the Greeks than

other three, for these considerations.

one nation to do

It

upon the
was easier

than for three to conspire.

It was easier to change a letter or two in the Greek,
In the Greek, the
than six words in the Latin.
for

sense

is

obscure

it

in the

versions, clear.

It

make

agreeable to the interest of the Greeks,

change, but against the interest of other
to

to

do

it ;

and men are never

was
the

nations

false to their interest.

reading was unknown in the times of the

Arian controversy ; but that of the versions then in

The Greek

Some Greek
use amongst both Greeks and Latins.
MSS render the Greek reading dubious; but those
of the versions hitherto collated

no signs of corruption

in

agree.

There are

the versions, hitherto dis-

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

covered

319

we have shewed you

when, on what occasion, and by whom,

but in the Greek

particularly

was corrupted.

the text

XXV.

know

not whether

you, that in the printed

there

is

an

De

epistle

For

reads 05.

be worth the while

it

works of Athanasius,
incarnatione verbi, which

to tell

Nestorian

this epistle relates to the

heresy, and so was written by a much later author

than Athanasius, and may also possibly have been

Chrysostom and
by the corrected texts of St John's Epistles.
have had so short a time to run my eye over au-

since corrected, like the works of

Cyril,
I

thors, that I cannot tell whether,

more passages about

occur pertinent
falsation
tion to

is

it

will

not be

thus far laid open, to

put upon them, and

XXVI. You

may

how

not hereafter

But

the argument.

to

should, I presume

upon further search,

this falsation

know what
to

see what freedom

if

difficult,

there

now

the

construc-

apply them.
I

have used

in this

discourse, and 1 hope you will interpret it candidly.

For if the ancient churches, in
and deciding

debating
the greatest mysteries of
religion, knew nothing of
these two texts, I understand not, why we should be
so fond of
whilst

it

is

them now the debates are over.

the character of an honest

man

And
to

be

pleased, and of a man of interest to be troubled at

the detection of frauds, and of both to run most into

those passions

when

the detection

is

made

plainest

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

320
I

hope

so

this letter will, to

much

the

one of your

more acceptable,

as

it

integrity,

makes

prove

a further

discovery than you have hitherto met with in commentators.

BUTLER'S

HISTORICAL OUTLINE.

HISTORICAL OUTLLVE
OF THE CONTROVERSY RESPECTING THE TEXT
OF THE

THREE HEAVENLY WITNESSES.

BY CHARLES BUTLER OF LINXOLn's

INN.

[The following comparative view of the arguments,

\vhich have been advanced on both sides in discuss1
John, v. 7. is taken from
ing the genuineness of

As corning
the Appendix to Butler's Hora BiblictB.
from a Roman Catholic and a Trinitarian, this article
to be free from any bias on the
must be
supposed

writer against the genuineness of the

seems, indeed, to have reviewed the suband to have given as
ject with great iinpartiality,
accurate an outline of the controversy through the
several stages of its progress, as the hmits he pres-

part of the
text.

He

cribed to himself would admh.

If in

some

instances

too brief for perspicuity, he has on the whole

contrived to embrace the most important points of

he

is

the discussion within

smaller compass than

any

other writer.]

The

genuineness of the verse of the Three Heavenly Witnesses, or 1 John v. 7. has engaged much of

28

324
the

butler's HISTomCAL OUTLIXE.

attention

centuries

of the

learned during the three

last

Mr. Herbert Marsh observes,

so that, as

" there

is
hardly a library in all Europe, from the
Vatican to the Bodleian, from Madrid to Moscow, in

which the manuscripts of the Greek Testament have

not been examined, in order to determine, whether

proceeded from the pen of St John ;" and,

Travis observes, " there are few subjects, in
the walks of philology or criticism, in which, one
it

as

really

Mr

question, as

simple

appears on a distant view, ex-

it

on a nearer approach, into so many

pands
comphcated branches, and covers so large a field of
historical and theological criticism."
itself,

The folio win

Some account

sheets

2:

mav be

found to contain,

of the state of the question ; II. Of

the history of the general admission of The Verse into the printed text ; III. And of the principal disI.

putes to which

it

has given rise

IV.

An

inquiry

whether the general sense of the text is affected by

the omission of The Verse ; V. Some account of
the argument in favour of
scription

against
scripts

it

from

its

Valla

VI.

from
VII.

its

Some
its

account of the arguments

absence from the Greek manu-

Of

the answers to those arguments,

supposed existence
VIII.

authenticity from pre-

From

its

in

the

manuscripts of

supposed existence

in

the

editors ; IX.. And

manuscripts of the Complutensian
in
the
existence
its
from
manuscripts used
supposed

by Robert Stephens

X. Some observations on

the

325

butler's historical outline.

argument arising on

not being inserted in the

its

Greek
Apostolos or Collection of Epistles read in the
Church ; XI. On its not being inserted in the orienversions

tal

most ancient
lence of

On

all

On

not being inserted in the

Latin manuscripts ; XIII. On the si-

XII.

the

its

Greek Fathers respecting

it

XIV.

the silence of the most ancient of the Latin Fath-

will then
respecting it ; XV. Some account
be given of what has been written respecting its

ers

first

introduction into the

Greek and Latin manu-

scripts.

other important topics for and

several
against the authenticity of The Verse ; and
of those which have been mentioned, lead to facts

There

are

many

and subjects which are not noticed in these sheets

but, what is noticed, \v\\\, perhaps, be found sufficient
;

to

shew the general turn and bearings of the contro-

versy.
I.

The

state of the question

as follows

is

Tcxtus Rcceptus, or received Greek text of

the 1st Epistle of St John, the 7th and 8th verses of
the fifth chapter are expressed in these words :

In the

Seventh Verse.
"Oti

rpd

Afiy5, Kit]

(~/v

c'l

f^uprvpoZyrti

TO a.yt6V TTViu/^x'

tv T&i

Kcti oiiToi Of

eupx\u,

Eighth Verse.

uSuj),

y.ui

TO Xiuof xeti

oi

Tpi7i ili

'To

Trcniip,

rpeli iv <V/,

tv fV<y,

326

butler's historical outline.

In the
vulgate, the verses are thus translated

7th.

Ouoniam

qui testimonium dant in

Sjriritus Sanctus : et hi tres

tres sunt,

Pater, Vei-bum,

et

ccelo ;

unum

sunt.

6tb.

Et

qui testimonium dant in terra

tres sunt,

tus, et

The
verse,

et

aqua,

question

Ki ouret

01

xi rpui ciTit

o't

'

pressed

if

it

text

spiri-

sunt.

iv

TJJ y>j,

to uyiov

x-xi

question be

in

stands properly, as

it

should stand

it

7rvsv(4.s6'

and the words,

in the 8th verse, are

If the passage

be spurious,

is

now ex"On rpu^

fcxprvpiZvrs^^ to TrViUtcx, kx\ ra hSup, kcci ra

BiTii

ei

T^ui iU TO

Latin,

Xoyoi,

TTXiiip,

fixprvpoZvrei

y.x)

n'l

unum

(i^!\ in the 7th verse,

genuine or spurious.
genuine, the

in

whether the whole of the 7th

is,

r^ouaxvi^

rpsTi

et hi tres

speak with greater accuracy, whether

or, to

the words,

sanguis

"

v /V;v,

(^uoniam

tres

in

tho

Greek

and

oiif/.'

in

the

sunt, qui testimonium dant

unum sunt."
IT. With
respect to the histohy of the general
ADMISSION OF THE VERSE INTO THE PRINTED TEXT
1. The first event, which deserves attention, is the
spiritus, et

aqua, et sanguis

et

lii

tres in

the Latin Vulgate :

what should
be understood by the Vulgate, in this place, will be
mentioned afterwards.
insertion of

2.

it

in

The second

is

Erasmus''s

insertion

of The

Verse, in his three last editions of the Greek Testa-

ment.

327

butler's historical outline.

Erasmus had the honour of behig the person who

published the first printed edition of the Greek New

He

Testament.

five

pubHshed

editions,

in

1516,

The Complutensian

1519, 1522, 1527, and 1535.

Polyglott was printed in 1517, and published in 1522.

In his edition of 1522, and in his two subsequent edi-

Erasmus

tions,

is

have conformed

to

supposed

his

Complutensian edition ;
edition of 1519 the most esteemed of

text, in different places, to the

makes

this

his

he published.

all

he did not
nesses.

insert

1516 and 1519,

The Verse of the Heavenly WitIn his editions of

This gave

rise to

a dispute between him and

Lee, an Englishman, and to a dispute between him

and the Spanish divines employed on the Compluten-

He promised to restore The Verse,

could be found in a single Greek manuscript.

sian Polyglott.
if it

the manuscript now

then
called
the Codex BritDublin,

Such a manuscript was found,

in Trinity College,

annicus, since called the

Codex Montfortianus

and,

consequence of this discovery, Erasmus inserted

The Verse in his edition of 1522, and retained it in

in

his

two subsequent

3.

The

editions.

third of these

events,

is

the insertion of

The Verse

in the Complutensian
That
Polyglott.
noble work was begun in 1502, completed in 1517,.

and published
4.

The

in

1522.

fourth of these events,

The Verse by Robert

tion of the

New

Stephens,

Testament,

28*

in

is

the insertion of

celebrated edi-

in his

1550

the text of

it,

328

butler's historical outline,

with a very few variations,

fifth

is

similar to that of the

Erasmus.

edition of

The fifth of these events, is the insertion of

The Verse mBeza's editions of the Greek Testament.
The first of his editions was pubhshed in 1565 he
5.

principally follows in

it,

the third edition of Robert

He printed other editions in 1576, 1582,

1589, and 1598 ; they do not contain every where the
same text, but in all of them. The Verse is inserted.
Stephens.

6. The
The Verse

sixth of these
in the

events,

is

the insertion of

Elzevir edition of the Greek

New

Testament.

Five several printers of the name and family of

Elzevir, are immortalized

by the successful labours

Lewis, the eldest of them, was a

of their presses.

printer of distinction

them, died

in

in

1505; Daniel, the

last

Their edition of the Greek Testament was

printed, at
third

Beza

Verse.

first

Leyden, in 1624 ; it was printed from the

of Robert Stephens
where it varies

edition

from that

of

1680.

edition,

it

follows, generally, the edition of

and, like each of those editions, contains

By

this edition, the text,

which had

The

fluctuat-

ed, in the preceding editions, acquired a consistency.

It

was followed,

in all

subsequent editions, and, on

deservedly acquired the appellation

of Editio Recepta : the editors of it are unknown.
that account,

it

7. The seventh of these events, is the insertion of

The Verse in the modern edition of Luther''s transla-

329

butler's historical outline.

Hon of the

New

From

Testament.

the translations

The
published by himself, he uniformly rejected it.
he
the
while
was
in
was
which
last edition,
press,
but was not quite finished till after his death,
was that of 1546. In that, as in all his former edi-

living,

tions,

it

is

Luther concludes

wholly absent.

his

what may be termed his

no
account, his translation
upon

preface to that edition, with

dying request, that,

The
should be ahered, in the slightest instance.
Verse, however, was inserted in the Frankfort ediand, for a time, inserted in some, and
;
other editions: but, since the beginning of

1574

tion of

rejected

in

17th century, with the exception of the Wittenin the ediberg edition of 1607, the insertion of it,

the

tions of Luther's translation, has

been general.

be added, that the principal printed

editions of the Greek New Testament since the Elze8. It should

vir,

are those of Mill, Bengel, IVetstein, and Gries'

The Verse

bach.

is

found

in the text

determined by the two

the two last, to be spurious.
it is

editors,

their

it

first,

To

to

of them

all

be genuine

the credit of

by

all

the

should be observed, that, notwithstanding

sentiments, they state, with equal

particular

candour and

fairness,

guments against The

the

arguments

for

and the ar-

Verse.

With respect to the principal disputes to

WHICH IT HAS GIVEN RISE
1. The first, is the dispute between Erasmus and
III.

Lee, and between Erasmus and the Editors of the

Comphitensian Polyglott.

330

bCtler's historical outline.

has been mentioned that Erasmus published

He
five editions of the Greek New Testament.
It

did not insert

The Verse

in the

two editions of 1516

this, he was reprehended, in the

severest terms, by Lee or Ley, an Enghsh divine

and 1519.

For

of some note, afterwards advanced, by Henry the

Eighth, to the archbishopric of York ; and by Stunica, a Spanish

divine,

employed on the Compluten-

In answer to them, he declared

sian Polyglott.

readiness to insert

The

if

Verse,

should be found to contain

his

a single manuscript

As The Verse was

it.

inserted in the Complutensian Polyglott, and ought

not to have been inserted in

it,

without the authority

of one or more manuscripts, Stunica was bound, in

honour, to produce such a manuscript ; but he pro-

duced none.

mus and Lee,

(For the controversy between Erassee Biirigni, Vie d^Erasme, 2 vol. 8vo.

Paris, 1757, 1 vol.

372-381

for the controversy

between Erasmus and Stunica, see the same work,

vol. 163-175 ; and for Stunica's attack and Eras-

mus's defence, see the Crit. Sac.

Codex

vii.
p. 1229.)
then
called the
Montfortianus,

At length, the
Codex Britannicus, now in
College, Dublin, was found

in his editions of

2.

of

the library of Trinity

to contain The Verse.

promise, Erasmus inserted

Verse in his edition of 1522; and retained it

In performance

The

Tom.

The second

The

of his

1527 and 1535.

dispute, respecting the authenticity

Verse, miay be considered to have begun

butler's historical oftline.

331

with Sandius the Arian, and to have continued,

the note respecting

voked

By

it,

Mr

in

till

Gibbon's History, pro-

a fresh dispute.

Sandius,

it

was pointedly attacked

cleus Historia. Ecclesiasticce,

in his

JVu-

Cosmopoli, 1G69, 8vo.

Col. 1676. 4to. and his Interprctationes

Paradox^

in

Johannem.
Its

authenticity

is

Mr

defended hy

Selden.

In his

de Sxjnedriis Ehrceorum, L. 2. C. 4. S. 4.
he sums up the arguments on each side of the question, and pronounces in favour of The Verse.
treatise

regular and able attack on

was made by Fath-

it

Simon, in his Histoire critique du Texte du JVouveau Testament, Rot. 1680. 4to. Part I. ch. 18;
er

Part

II.

ch. 9. and in several other parts of his writ-

ings.
It

found a zealous advocate

of the church of Utrecht.

in

Martin, the Pastor

it, he pub-

In support of

lished the following works.

Deux
verset 7

Dissertations

du

ch. v.

Critiques, la premiere sur le

de la premiere Epistre de St Jean,

"

//

authenticite de ce texte.

y a trois au

Ciel,^^

^c. dans laquelle on prouve

La second e sur le passage

de Joseph touchant Jesus Christ,

ce

passage

Examen

ou,

V on fait

voir que

point suppose. Utrecht, 1717, 6vo.

de la response de Monsieur Emlyn a la

n^ est

Dissertatioii Critique sur le verset 7

Epistre de St Jean.

du

ch. v. de la 1

Londres, 1719, Svo.

3S2

butler's historical outline.

La

verite du Texte de la
premiere Epistre cle St
Jean, v. 7. demontree par des preuves qui sont au dessus de toute exception,
prises du temoignage de VEglise Latine, et de
VEglise Grecque, et en particulier

dhm

manuscript du JVouveau Testament, trouve en

Par David Martin, Pasteur de VEglise a
Utrecht. Utrecht, 1721.

Irlande.

found an able adversary in Mr Thomas

Emfyn, an eminent presbyterian divine, whose suf-

The Verse

ferings for his religious principles,

must lament and reprobate

all

true christians

he attacked

it

in the

following works.

full inquiry into the original authority of that

text, 1

John,
1757.
1719,

An
1

v. 7.

ansiver to

John,

v. 7.

London. 1815, Svo.

Mr

Martin's

i-eprinted in

critical dissertation

on

London, 1709, Svo.

Reply to Mr .Martin'' s examination of the answer,

London, 1720.
Martin also met with an able adversary in Casar
de Missy, a native of Berlin, French preacher in the
Savoy, and French chaplain at St James's, the author

of

Four

Letters against the genuineness of the verse,

inserted in the 8th and 9th volumes
of the Journal

Britannique.
The Bible de Vence, published
middle of the last century, Tom.

at Paris,
xiii.

about the

p. 5. contains

a candid, learned, and sensible dissertation in favour

of The Verse.
The author cites in it, ICetneri Dis-

333

ibutler's historical outline.

sertatio hujus

Dissertatio

loci,

singularis

Roger^

Dissertatio Critico-Theologica, in hunc locum, PariSf

1713.

regular attack

upon The Verse was made by

Dr

Benson, a presbyterian divine, in his Parajphrase

of the, Gospels, 2 vol. 4to. 1756.
Sir Isaac JVewton is the author of a treatise against

The

the genuineness of
ance, under the
JVeivton

to

manuscript

Mr

title

Le

in the

Verse.

Two

perspicuity,

made

its

appear-

from Sir Isaac

Clerc,

volume of Dr Horsley's

late edi-

Newton's works.

are written with the

They

It

Letters

1754, reprinted from a

possession of Dr Ekins, dean of

Carlisle, in the fifth

tion of Sir Isaac

of

candour, and

force,

which might be expected from Sir Isaac

Newton.

The English opposition to The Verse, in this stage

of the controversy, is respectably closed by Mr Boivyer, the learned printer's Conjectures on the JVew
Testament, London, 4to. 1781.

The Verse had been the subject

Some mention of
controversy in Germany.
works
which
there
have
made their apprincipal

In the

of

mean

time,

much

the

pearance on this subject, may be found in the note

on St John's first Epistle, in Schviidius^s Historia
Vindicatio canonis sacri veteris novique
Testamenti, Lipsia, Svo. 1774. an excellent publica-

Antiqua

et

tion of the high

Lutheran school

mon, 2

Tubing(C, 1773

vol. 4 to.

in

BengeVs Gno-

and

in Michaclis^s

334

butler's historical outline.

Mr

Introduction to the JVew Testament, translated by

vol. 4. cA. 21.
Michaelis had, at

Herbert Marsh,
first,

declared himself an advocate for

his Vindicice

piurium

The

Testamenti adversus Whistonum

et

Verse,

in

Greed JVovi

lectionu/n codicis

ah eo latas leges

criticas, Halce, 1751 ; but, afterwards, became one

of its most powerful opposers, in his Historical and
Critical Collections, relative to what are called the

proof passages,

in dogmatic theology.

This leads

to the third
stage of the controversy.
In the 119th Note to the 37th Chapter of his History
of the Decline and Fall of the Roinan Empire, (3

3.

" The
545, 4to.) INIr Gibbon asserts, that
Three Witnesses have been established, in our Greek
vol. p.

Testament, by the prudence of Erasmus

the honest

bigotry of the Complutensian editors, the typographical fraud, or error, of Robert Stephens, in the placing

a crotchet

or the deliberate falsehood or strange mis-

apprehension of Theodore Beza."

This note was attacked by Mr Travis, Archdea-

con of Chester, in three letters, in the Gentleman's

He printed them, with two
Magazine of 1782.
others, in a separate

and reprinted the

five,

ditions, in octavo, in

Porson replied

publication, in quarto, in 1784,

with considerable further ad-

1786.

To

these,

Mr Professor

several letters, published

in

Gentleman's Magazine of 1788, 1789.

azine for January
ject,

1790, another

appeared from

Mr

Travis.

In the

letter,

Mr

in the

Mag-

on the sub-

Porson replied

335

butler's historical outline.

it, in the
jMagazine of the following month, and
soon afterwards, all Mr Person's Letters, with addi-

to

tions,

which increased

their

pubhshed in one octavo

ment of his uncommon
and

In 1794,

wit.

erudition,

Mr Travis
Mr

to twelve,

volume, an

with considerable additions

notice in them, of

number

eternal

critical

were

monu-

sagacity,

republished his letters,

he took no particular

Person's letters to him, but

professes to answer, one after another, the arguments

of other distinguished opponents of The Verse.
In

1795,

J\Ir

ters to

Mr

Travis,

Herbert Marsh published a series of

Travis, entitled Letters to

iii

vindication

of one of

notes to Michaelis's Introduction,

Mr

the

and

let-

Archdeacon
Translator's

in confirmation

of the opinion, that a Greek Manuscript now preserved in the public library of the University of Cambridge, is one of the seven, which are quoted by Robert Stephens, at 1

John

v. 7. with

an Appendix, con-

taining a review of Mr Travis's Collation of the

Greek
which he examined at Paris ; an extract

MSS

from Mr Pappelbaum's Treatise on the Berlin MS ;

and an Essay on the Origin and Object of the Vchsian readings.

By

the

Translator of Michaelis

Leipsig and London, 1795.

The principal object of Mr Marsh's
the

letters

was, as

to vindicate his assertion, in

one
expresses it,
of his notes to his translation of Michaelis's Introductitle

tion, that the

title

Greek manuscript referred

of his book,

29

is

to

in

the

one of the seven, which are quot-

336

butler's historical outline,

ed by Robert Stephens, at 1 John, v. 7 but his letabound with most learned, ingenious, and
profound remarks on almost every point, which comes
-,

ters

into consideration, in the discussion of the

genuine-

ness of

Mr

The

Verse.

Clarke has lately circulated among his friends,

an interesting pamphlet on the subject of The Verse,

with this title, Observations on the Text of the Three

Divine Witnesses, accompanied with a Plate, containing two very exact Fac-Similes of 1 John, Chap. v.
verse 7, 8, and 9, as they stand in the first Edition
of
the JVeiv Testament, printed at Compliitum, 1514,

and

Codex Montfortii, a JManuscript marked C.

97, in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin.
By
A. Clarice, Manchester, 1805.
It is to be
hoped he

in the

will put

it

into public circulation.

Such have been

troversy.

The

the principal stages of this con-

following

may be

found to contain a

view of the principal arguments used by the

combatants in support of their opinions.
distinct

iV. The first object of the inquiry is to ascertain

WHETHER THE GENERAL SENSE OR IMPORT OF THE

TEXT, IS ASSISTED OR INJURED, BY THE INSERTION

OR OMISSION OF The Verse. The ascertainment
of this

fact, will

estabHsh a strong argument for or

of the text.
This
against the internal evidence
the
verse
is
of
some
an inquiry
obscure,
nicety ;
susceptible

is
is

of more than one construction, and the

to
partisans of each opinion, have attempted
sense on it, which best suits their cause.

fix that

337

butler's historical outline.

This much must be granted,

to

not absohitely necessary

Whhout it, the text will stand
is

The Verse

that

is

sense of the text.

the

as

"

follows.

Who

he that overcometh the world, but he, who believThis is he, who
is the son of God ?

eth that Jesus

blood, even Jesus the Christ

came by water and

not,

by the water only, but by the water and th

And

blood.

the spirit

is

it is

the Spirit

Thus

truth.

witness, the

who witnessed

there are three

because

who bear

and the water, and the blood

Spirit,

and the three agree

Whatever be its

in

one."
construction, the sentence

right

is

complete and perfect

is

the person to

Jesus, the Christ,

in itself.

whom testimony

is

borne

the spirit,

the water, and the blood, are the witnesses bearing

Thus without further aid, the

testimony to him.
and
construction
meaning of the sentence are com-

The Verse

plete.

therefore

is

not essentially neces-

sary to the text.

V.
the

1.

first

Erasmus

attack on

has been stated to have

The

Verse.

At

that time,

madq
from

general insertion in the manuscript and printed

of tiio
copies of the Latin text, the universal opinion
its

Latin church was

in its favour.

The

text of these

and tempocopies had been adopted by the spiritual

ral courts, appealed to in disputes, taught in the
schools,

learned

and praised

men

Prcscrijjtion
in these

and commented

on by the

of every state, within the Latin pale.

therefore,

cases,

was

in

if
its

prescription be pleadable
favour.

338

butler's historical outline.

2. If

we

believe the opposers of

The

introduction of

Verse, was

spirituaUzation of the 8th verse

which became common

ers,

Verse gained

Httle

The

first

Verse, the

owing

the

to

by the African

fath-

4th century ; The

the 8th ; and was

in the
till

ground

It is
universally received for genuine in the 12th.
remarkable, that not the slightest vestige of opposition to it is discoverable in the works of those

which have reached us

times,

mates, that even a suspicion

the genuineness of
3.

Here

The

nothing, which

Verse.

communicant with the see of

the

takes a higher ground.

The

Anathema

Session 4, declared

inti-

had been entertained of

Rome

council

of

Trent,

"

who

should

to all,

not receive for holy and canonical, all and every

part of the books of the Old and New Testament,

had been accustomably read in the Catholic

Church, and as they stood in the old vulgate edi-

as they

and

tion ;"

in

the

sixth

session,

declared

" the

Vulgate to be authentic, and that no one should, on

any pretence, dare or presume to reject it."

Now, when the council of Trent made this decree. The Verse had long been accustomably read
in the catholic church, and long made a part in the
old vulgate edition

with the see of

those, therefore, in

communion

Rome, who now reject The

Verse,

fall

within the council's Anathema.

To
reply

these objectioas the adversaries of

;

The Verse

339

butler's historical oiJtline.

That

1st.

speaking,

the times of which

in

we

are

works of those times have reached

that no

now

there was httle of biblical criticism, and

us, in

which such an objection either would be made, or

would be noticed.
2dly. That, before too great a stress
insertion

in the

is laid

on

its

Vulgate, an accurate notion should

in these cases, by

be formed of the edition denoted,

the appellation of the Latin Vulgate.

does not

It

denote the edition, anterior to St Jerome, which,-

from

its

superior celebrity, was called

the Ancient

does not denote the edition published by

St Jerome ; it merely denotes that edition, which,

Italic

it

time of the council of Trent, was generally

in use ; and afterwards served as the
groundwork

at the

of the editions published, first by Sixtus Quintus,

afterwards by Clement the Eighth, and which last
edition

is

modern Vulgate ; that

partook more of the modern, than of

the archetype of the

this edition

ancient versions
in a

;
and, that standing by
matter of criticism, of no authority.

3dly.

To

suppose, that the

pronounced the Vulgate

and that no one was at
translation or exposition,

declaring
clare

it

council

itself,

it

is,

of Trent

be wholly free from error,

liberty to vary from it, in

to

In
going to an extreme.
to be authentic, the council did not de-

the Vulgate

to

is

be inspired or infallible ; the

it to be
inerrant, where the

council only pronounced

dogmata of

faith or

29*

morals are concerned.

In this

340

butler's historical outline.

decision, every

Roman

Catholic must acquiesce, as

he receives the scripture from the church, under her

authority, and vi^ith her interpretation ; but further
this, the council leaves the Vulgate in mere
matters of criticism, to the private judgment of every

than

individual.

To

this

was one of the ten

who

effect,

father

Salmeron,

who

disciples of St Ignatius, and

assisted at the council of Trent in the character
first

of one of the pope's theologians,

Abbe de Vence,

to

is

cited

have expressed himself

by the
in

tlie

third of his prolegomena.

In this stage of the argument, Bossuet takes very

high ground, in one of his letters to Leibnitz, publish-

ed by

Mr

Dutens, in his edition of Leibnitz's works ;

Bossuet seems to place the general

as, in that letter,

acquiescence of the Roman Cathohc church, in the

authenticity of The Verse, among the traditions

which the church receives, and the faithful are thereAs every thing which has
fore bound to adopt.
fallen from the pen of that great man, is important,

and the passage

in question is little

known,

it is

here

transcribed at length.

" J'avoue au
reste, Monsieur, ce que vous dites des
anciens exemplaires Grecs sur le passage, Tres Sunt,

mais vous s^avez aussi bien que raoi, que Partine doit pas etre pour
d'ailleurs etabli, non
etant
cela revoque en doute,

S/-C.

cle contenu dans ce passage

seulement par la Tradition des Eglises, mais encore

Vous s^avez aussi
par I'Ecriture tres eviderament.

341

butler's historical outline.

sans doute, que ce passage se trouve re^u dans tout

ce qui paroit manifeste, sans meme
I'Occident;

qu'en fait S.
dans une excel-

reraonter plus haut, par la production

Fulgence
lente

dans ses Ecrits, et

Confession de

foi

meme

presentee unanimement au

au Roi Huneric par toute I'Eglise d'Afrique. Ce

temoignage produit par un aussi grand Theologien,
par cette scavante Eglise, n'ayant point ete reproche par les heretiques, et au contraire etant conet

firme par le sang de tant de martyrs, et encore par

de miracles, dont cette Confession de foi fut

suivie, est une demonstration de la Tradition, du

tant

moins de toute I'Eglise d'Afrique, I'une des plus illusOn trouve meme dans S. Cyprien
tres du monde.
une

allusion manifeste a ce passage, qui a passe natu-

rellement dans notre Vulgate

et

confirme

la

Tradi-

Je suis, &tc.
tion de tout rOccident.
" J.
Benigne, Eveque de Meaux."
Such is the state of the argument, so far as the
authenticity of

The Verse depends on

in its favour,

prepossession,
the Greek original.
It

certainly imposes on

the

general

before the impression of

the

Verse, the obligation of attack.

adversaries of

The

The

following are

authenticity, and
arguments against
the principal anwers to them.
VI. They say, that there is hardly a library in
Europe, in which the Manuscripts of the Greek Tes-

their principal

its

tament have not been examined, in order to deter-

342

butler's historical

mine whether The Verse

pen of St John

OUTLIISTE:

proceeded from the

and that the result of this long and

laborious examination

is,

really

that of

the

all

Greek manu-

of which
scripts of the Cathohc Epistles, now extant,
more than a hundred have been quoted by name,

independently of those which have been quoted

the aggregate, (as where Dr Griesbach, Professor
Birch, or Professor Alter speak, at large, of all the
manuscripts they have seen), the passage has been

the Codex Montdiscovered in one manuscript only,

fortianus, which is neither of sufficient antiquity nor

of sufficient integrity, to be entitled to a voice in a

question of sacred criticism.
This, the advocates of

mit

but

The Verse

generally ad-

reply that, though no such manuscript be

existed formerly Greek manuscripts,

now extant, there

which contained The Verse, for which they cite

those, which were in the possession of Valla, the
Complutensian

editors,

and Robert Stephens.

VII. With respect to the manuscripts of Valla ;

the advocates of The Verse assert, that Valla had

seven Greek manuscripts of the 1st Epistle of St

John, and that all his manuscripts exhibited The
Verse.

They

observe, that

it

was

his plan to

in his annotations, those passages, in

gate receded
notice,

in

his

from the Greek

annotations, of the

mark,
which the Vul-

that

he takes no

omission of

The

Verse,
any of his manuscripts ; from which they
it was contained in them all.
that
infer,
in

butler's historical outline.

The

adversaries of

The Verse

reply,

343

that

we

are

ignorant of the number of manuscripts which Valla

used, and of his plan of annotation ; that, though it

be probable he had seven Greek manuscripts, which

exhibited St John's Gospel, ch. vii. v. 29. where
he expressly mentions that number of manuscripts,
it does not
appear, and it is highly improbable, he
should have the hke

of the

1st

number of Greek manuscripts

Epistle of

St John;

that

The Verse

might have been wanting in the Latin text, with

which he made his collation ; that he might studiously have

avoided a remark, which,

and the times

posed him
that

in

which he

to persecution

some or other of

lived,

that

it is

in the

country
might have exhighly probable

his manuscripts

quoted under different

contains The Verse, and

titles

that,

that

have been

no manuscript

of course, there

is

the

same

probability of none of his manuscripts having

contained it, as there is that we are now in possess-

ion of

some

or other

of his manuscripts.

these circumstances, the

infer, that

adversaries of

FroiA

The Verse

nothing near to a conclusion in

its

favour

can be drawn from his silence respecting the passage

in his manuscripts.
It is

observable that

Mr Archdeacon Travis objects

heavily to Erasmus, that,

when he was pressed by

Lee, with the contents of Valla's manuscripts, he

attempted to bear him down by other arguments,
but did not deny that

The Verse was

to

be found

in

344
the

butler's historical outline.

manuscripts of Valla, which manuscripts

the

archdeacon

But

asserts, were in Erasmus's possession.

the archdeacon appears to have been mistaken

in this supposition

Erasmus was

the editor of Val-

no where appears that he

commentary
was in possession of Valla's manuscripts, and he himbut

la's

',

it

the contrary.

self asserts

Such

of literature to Erasmus, that

eagerly rise in
is

his defence,

are the obligations

men

of letters should

whenever they think he

unjustly accused.

VIII. With respect to the manuscripts used

BY the CoiiPLUTENsiAN EDITORS ; The Polyglott

Alcala or Complutum, under the

Bible, printed
patronage, and at the expense of Cardinal Ximenes,
at

was begun

in

1502

the whole impression of

finished in 1517, and published in

tain that the cardinal

1522.

spared no expense

it

It is

in

was
cer-

procuring

whether he had any that were

The Verse
truly valuable, has been much doubted.
%as its place in this edition ; from which its advomanuscripts

but,

cates infer, that

it

was exhibited by

all,

or at least

the greatest part of the manuscripts used

Complutensian

editors.

the adversaries of

The

This inference
Verse.

They

is

by the

denied by

contend, that,

from the deference, which the Complutensian editors

had for the Vulgate, they were honestly persuaded,
that The Verse was genuine, and therefore inserted,

and thought themselves warranted in inserting in

their text, a translation of it from the Latin.
This^

345

butler's historical outline.

they say, appears clearly from the dispute between

the former in the bitterest
Stunica and Erasmus ;

terms, reproached the

The

Verse,

in his

with the omission of

latter

printed

edition

Erasmus, with

Stunica to produce a
equal vehemence, challenged
in
Greek manuscript
support of The Verse ;
single

Stunica did not cite

sisted

in

single

manuscript, but per-

the Latin.
urging the authority of

Mr Archdeacon Travis owns

This,

himself unable to account

for satisfactorily.

IX. With respect

To

to

Robert Stephens's manu-

of the case, to per;

explain
sons unacquainted with Stephens's celebrated edition

scripts

this part

Greek Testament, which gives rise to the

and which was the edition publishpresent question,
ed by him in 1550, it is necessary to observe that
of the

the text of

it is

a re-impression of the fifth edition of

Erasmus, with a few

alterations.

In the

margin,
the Complufrom
various
readings
quotes
Stephens

Greek manuscripts,
from the King's libraborrowed
were
which
of
eight
six were procured from various quarters, and

tensian edition, and from fifteen

ry,

one was collated

and the

fifteen

in Italy.

copies he

The Complutensian
denoted,

when he

text

cited

various readings from them, by the Greek numerals

The copy ', he quotes
far as fifteen.
'j ^'. y\ as
like
throughout the whole New Testament, because,
other printed editions, the Complutensian edition,

which

it

denotes, contains the whole.

Of his

fifteen

BUTLER

346

HISTORICAL OUTLINE.

in
manuscripts, he quotes some in one part, some
another ; but none throughout the whole New Testament. In the Cathohc Epistles, Stephens has quoted

only seven manuscripts, which he denotes by the

numerals S\ i. ^'. 6\ l. tA, ty', of which the four marked
^',

C'

',

three

6'

'>

were from the King's hbrary, and the other

iy\ were among the six which he had

<,

procured elsewhere. At the 1 John

ed passage stands thus in Stephens's
e "^uTifp, t
iio-i-

Xcyoi-, vmi

KXi rpui

etTiv ci

to aytov

wvry.ctoe,

/n^xorvpeuvref

iv

the disputtext, h rZ oupxf^,

v, 7.

x< outoi

ci

rpiti (*

Ttj yfj

Stephens has quoted the seven

with an obelus prefixed.
mentioned,
manuscripts just
In the margin,

according to his plan of annotation, when any

word or number of words is omitted in the quoted

Now,

manuscript, he expresses it by placing in his text, an

obelus before the first word, and a little crotchet in
the shape of a semicircle, and of the size of a comma, after the last word. At the place in question,
is set before , which precedes -f ovpavS,
and the semicircle immediately after oupxfc;^ 5 so that
"
by this notation the words r^ odpav^', and not the

the obelus

whole passage, are represented as absent from these

seven manuscripts.
But, as compositors are not inreference are frequently placed
of
and
marks
fallible,

wrong, through various accidents

in

printing,

this

Robert Stephens had not been pubhshed

many years, when Lucas Brugensis suspected, that
Stephens's compositor had here made a mistake, and
edition of

butler's historical outline.

that he ought to have
cu^v9, but after yij, that

set
is,

the

347

crotchet, not after

after the last

word of the

controverted passage, and not after the third ; for,

even in the sixteenth century it was well known, that

Greek manuscripts, in general, omitted the whole

passage ; but no one, either before or since the
time of Robert Stephens, has ever seen a Greek

the

manuscript which omitted the three first words only.

This, however, was not admitted by the advocates

of

The

Verse,

who

still

scripts, as authority, not

sage, but, what

necessity, for at

quoted these seven manuindeed for the whole pas-

of some importance in a case of

least three quarters of it.
About a
is

hundred years after the time of Lucas Brugensis,

Simon examined all the Greek manuscripts in the
library of the king of France, and found that not
only

"

T9 eipxv^^ but that

all

the following words, as

yv were absent from them all ; and, as

of
the
four out
seven, which Stephens has quoted at
1 John V. 7. had been borrowed from this
hbrary,
far as

y 'i?

though Simon did not attempt to determine what

particular four, he concluded, that Stephens's repat that passage was inaccurate.
To
argument, the patrons of Stephens's semicircle had recourse to the hypothesis, that the eight

resentation

evade

this

manuscripts, which, in the time of Robert Stephens,

belonged to the king's library, were no longer there,

and even that they were no longer in existence; a
position, which,

30

though wholly incapable of defence,

348
is

butler's historical outline.

indispensably necessary for those,

that the semicircle

scripts

which

still

is

set right,

exist,

who

both in Paris and

places, decide against them.

maintain,

because the manu-

From

this

in

other

untenable

they were driven, a few years afterwards, by

Long, who, in 1720, undertook to determine the

post,

Le

particular

eight

manuscripts, in the royal library,

which had been used by Robert Stephens, and consequently four out of the seven, which are quoted at
1

John

V. 7.

described

in

The eight manuscripts he imperfectly

the Journal des Sfavans for June 1720;

but he gave a more complete and accurate account

of them in the edition of his Bihliotheca Sacra, which

was published

in

1723, soon after the death of the

author.

From
circle

accuracy of Stephens's semibe given up, and his manuscripts,

this time, the

appeared

to

as evidence for the

authenticity of

The

Verse, ap-

be wholly abandoned. But, in 1791, Mr

peared
Archdeacon Travis took a journey to Paris, in order
to

compare Stephens's quotations from the eight

manuscripts, which he had borrowed from the royal
to

those
library, with the readings of

had

fixed, as the

phens.
his

own

eight,

on which

Le Long

which were used by Ste-

In this comparison, he found, according to

account, that the quotations made by R.

Stephens differed, so frequently, from the readings

in Le Long's manuscripts, as to warrant the inference, that these were not the eight, which Stephens

sutler's historical outline.

used.

The grounds

349

of his opinion, he mentions at

Mr GibMarsh.
Mr
by
of Mr Travis's last
the
to
publication
Previously
edition of his letters to Mr Gibbon, Mr Marsh in one
sixth edition of his letters to

length, in the

bon; they

have been attacked

of his notes to Michaelis, (Vol. II. p. 789), had informed the world, that he had found a Greek manuscript,

marked

. 6.

4.

in

the University of Cambridge,

the public library of

which he had discov-

ered to be the manuscript which Stephens had quoted

the mark, "/', and consequently, one of the seven

by

in Stephens's edition
manuscripts which are quoted
of 1550, at 1 John V. 7 ; and at the same time,

induced him to believe,

assigned the reasons, which
that the manuscript in question had been at Paris,

and that
Stephens
not only
including

it

was no other than the manuscript which

called
"

fi

ly'.

odpciv^,

t^ y^

Now,
but

and,

this

all

since

manuscript omits

the

following

words,

Stephens quotes

all

his seven manuscripts of the Catholic Epistles for the

same omission,

it

follows, that, as

one of them omit-

Of
ted the whole passage, the others did the same.
aware
well
the truth of this inference, Mr Travis was
;
and, in his last edition of his letters to

attacked

Mr

Marsh's arguments

identity of the manuscript

in

x. G. 4.

Mr

Gibbon,

support of the

and Stephens's

ly.

To this Mr
ters to

Mr

Herbert Marsh answered, by "his LetArchdeacon Travis, published in 1795."

350

butler's historical outline.

In this publication,

Mr Marsh

the

states

several

steps which led to the discovery of the identity of the

two manuscripts. He estabhshes it
by various proofs ;
and, by an application of an algebraical theorem to
the documents produced
by him, he shows, that the

favour of the identity of the

manuscripts
to the probability of the
contrary, as two nonillions
in

probabihty
is

This

to a unity.

is

one of the most curious instances

which have appeared, of the application of mathe-

matical calculation to a critical inquiry.

One of the
points, principally discussed by Mr Marsh, is, how
far

the inference, deduced from a general and re-

markable
scripts,

similarity, in favour of the identity of

is

cordances
in

all

manu-

counteracted by a certain number of disa consideration of the utmost importance,

of manuscripts

collations

but

Mr

Marsh's

abounds with other curious and important

remarks, and is a mine of recondite and useful bib-

treatise

lical erudition.

The

nature of this inquiry does not admit of more

than this general outline of that part of the controver-

from the subject of Robert StePersons to whom the subject

phens's manuscripts.
is new, would be surprised, in their investigation of
sy,

it,

which

arises

to find that

it

embraces so wide a

field

of inquiry.

Perhaps, nothing has contributed so much to the

accurate knowledge, which seems now to be obtain-

ed of the Greek text of the

discussions

to

which

The

New

Testament, as the
Verse has given rise.

351

butler's historical outline.

X. Tlie adversaries of The Verse continue the

observe that there are many Greek
attack
;

they

or the collection
manuscripts of the Apostolos,
of lessons, read in the Greek churches, from the

and which they call the Apostolos, to diswhich contains

tinguish it from the Lectionarium,
Now, they observe,
the lessons from the Gospels.
Epistles,

that

no one has been able

The Verse

to discover

a single manuscript apostolos.

The advocates of The Verse observe, that

be found

in the first

it is

in

to

the apostolos,
printed edition of

which appeared at Venice in 1602 ; but the adversaries of The Verse contend, that this does not afford
the

of

slightest

The

argument

in

favour of the authenticity

as, in all probability,

Verse,

printed from the modern Greek

had long found its way.

XI.

The

the lessons were

text, into

which

it

adversaries of The Verse further contend,

that it is wholly unknown to any of the

Oriental Versions which were made from the
TEXT, while

unknown
sion

in its original purity.

It is totally

manuscripts of the old Syriac verwanting in the new Syriac or Philoxenian

to the

it is

version,

was

it

which was made

sixth century,

in

the

beginning of the

and collated with Greek manuscripts

beginning of the seventh ; it is

wanting also in the Aiabic manuscripts, as well of the
at

Alexandria,

in the

version printed in the Polyglott, as in that published

30*

butler's historical outline.

352

by Erpenlus

is

it

wanting

in

the

the

Ethiopic,

Cophtic, the Sahidic, and the Ai-menian versions.

To this, the advocates of The Verse reply, that
all

Armenian, were made

those versions, except the

from the Syriac, which, they say,

description.

version

That we know

but that

The Verse

edition of that version,

1666

little

from which they

is

is

faulty

beyond

of the Armenian

contained in the

pubhshed

at

infer, that

first

Amsterdam, in
The Verse was

contained in the manuscript or manuscripts, from

which that edition was printed. We certainly know

little of the Armenian version ; but no one has actuVerse in any Arpretended to have seen The
ally

in the
manuscript ; and Professor Alter,
second volume of his edition of the Iliad, page 85,
" Pater Zohmentions his having been informed by

menian

rab

Armenus,

insula S.

Bibliothecarius Meghitarensium
that

Lazari Venetiis,"

in

having examined

many Armenian manuscripts, in the library of his

convent, he had not found The Verse in any one of
them.
XII.

The

adversaries of

The Verse contend

that

WANTING IN FORTY OF THE MOST ANCIENT

This, they
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE Latin VERSION.
IT IS

do not overbalance the authority

of those Latin manuscripts in which it is contained.
" BibIn 1743, Sabatier published, at Rheims,his

if
say, equipoises,

it

liorum sacrorum Latinae versiones antiquae, seu vetus

Ttalica, et ceterse

qusecunque

in codicibus

Manuscrip-

353

butler's historical outline.

tis

potuerunt, quae

reperiri

cum

vulgata Latina et

The object of the

textu Greco comparantur."
work is to restore the text of the ancient Itahc, by
cum

putting together the quotations of the Bible, in the

works of the ancient Fathers ; where none can be

found, Sabatier su})plies the

He

was so fortunate

chasm from

as to find, in

the works of St Augustin, a sufficient

tations, to

the Vulgate.
parts of

different

number of quo-

form the whole of the four

first

chapters,

and likewise the beginning of the fifth. But, when

he comes to the seventh verse, this very voluminous

who wrote

Father,

in

epistle

question, suddenly

immediately after
to

his

fills

deserts

this critical place,

assistance.

up, by

wrote

not less than ten treatises on the

him, though
he comes again

This chasm, therefore, Sabatier

a quotation from Vigilius Tapsensis,

at the

end of the

fifth

century.

The adversaries of The Verse urge,

the Greek Fathers have never quoted
XIII.

who

that

it, in

warmest disputes about the Trinity, which they

certainly would have done, if the passage had been
their

known

to them ; and this, they observe, is the more

remarkable, as they often quote and dwell upon the
sixth and eighth verses in succession, without once

mentioning or even slightly alluding to the seventh

This is one of the strongest parts of the
verse.

cause of the adversaries of

cates have

little

to reply to

no more, than that

The
it,

Verse.

except that

The Verse

Its
it

advo-

proves
did not exist in the

butler's historical outline.

354

Fathers used ; that many works

copies, which those
written by those Fathers, and many other works

same time, have not come down to us ;

The Verse might have been mentioned in

written at the

and that
all

some

or

or one of these.

The Verse urge the

same argument from the silence of the Latin
Fathers till the fourth century. Here, they
are met by the advocates of The Verse, who contend
XIV. The

adversaries of

The Verse

not quoted, it is expressly

referred to by several of the earhest Latin Fathers ;
TertuUian and St Cyprian. The adver-

that,

though

is

particularly

saries of the

Verse reply, that none of these passages

refer to the

seventh verse, but refer to the eighth

verse,

by mystically

interpreting the Spirit, the blood,

and the water, mentioned in that verse, of the FathGhost.

They dwell much
er, the Son, and the Holy

which he expressly
the blood, and the water, may

on a passage of St Augustin,
" the
says, that

Spirit,

in

be understood, without any absurdity, of the Father,

the Son, and the Holy Ghost," an expression, which,
most assuredly, St Augustin would never have used,
if

he had been aware of the seventh verse.

It is certain that The Verse is mentioned

Jerome's Preface

to the

Canonical Epistles

authenticity of these prefaces,

Erasmus,
dictine

given up by
monk, and almost
is

Dom
all

first

writers.

St

by
Bene-

suspected

Martianay, the

modern

in

but the

BUTLER'S HISTORICAL OUTLINE.

355

XV. The

adversaries of The Verse thus account

THE INTERPOLATION OF IT INTO THE TEXT OF
THE MANUSCRIPTS. The mystical mterpretation of
for

the 8th verse, which

some of the

fathers

was, as they allege, frequently inserted

mentaries, and sometimes

copies
text
it

by degrees

insensibly

at first,

sometimes

it

in

it

in

adopted,

in their

com-

margin of their

the

shd from the margin into the

to be considered as part of

it

came

appeared sometimes in one form, and

another, and was inserted sometimes

before, and sometimes after the eighth verse ; at

length the dignity of the subject gave it a precedence
over the eighth verse ; and thus it came to be con-

sidered as the seventh verse of the chapter.

Proba-

had gained a place in no manuscript, as part

of the text, till some time after the death of St Au-

bly

it

gustin

and the eighth century

as the era of

From

its final

may be

settlement in the

the Latin text

it

considered
Latin text.

was transplanted

into the

Greek.

At the general council of Lateran, held in

The
1215, The Verse was quoted from the Greek.

acts of the council, with the

quotation of the

were translated

gate,
to

into

Greek churches.

the

the

Greek

About

and

Vulsent

a century after

Greeks began to quote The Verse ;

Greek writers who have quoted it, are

this period, the

the

first

Manuel

CaUecas,

and Bryennius,
and

it

is

who

lived

in

the

fourteenth^

ivho lived in the fifteenth

century

observable, that,

when

the passage

first

356

BUTLER
in

appeared

many

HISTORICAL OUTLINE.

Greek,

different

pearance

it

shapes, as

when

it

under as

itself

presented

made

first

its

ap-

in Latin.

XVI. This, perhaps, may be considered an

out-

of the history of the controversy respecting this

celebrated Verse.
It has the merit of having rendered invaluable services to the biblical criticism of

line

the

sacred text.

It

has led to a minute discus-

sion of several curious and interesting topics of lite-

rary history, particularly the rules for judging of the

age of manuscripts, the nature of manuscript collations, the different merits of the principal editions of
the

Old and

New

Testament, the early versions of

them, and the characters of the different persons,

A full and
edited or pubhshed.

by whom they were

complete history of the controversy, which should

enter, at large, into all its particulars, would be an
invaluable acquisition to literature.

Considering Mr Archdeacon Travis was a mere

novice in biblical criticism, when he first engaged in
the controversy, he performed wonders
his misfortune to

The

combat with

but

it

was

giants.

which appears
argument
be satisfactorily answered, is its having a
place in the confession of faiih presented by the
Mr Porson has treated
African bishops to Huneric.
in its favour,

principal

not to

this

argument with abundance of wit

to deserve a

more

serious treatment.

sary to suppose, as

Mr

but

It is

it

seems

not neces-

Porson humourously says,

BUTI.ER

HISTORICAL OUTLINE.

357

hundred bishops had a Bible

his pocket, and the useful place doubled down.
there were such a number of copies exhibiting

that each of the four

in

If

The

Verse, as induced the bishops to adopt

it

into

the confession of faith, this fact would afford strong

ground

to contend, that

it

was inserted

in the copies

then generally in use.

This circumstance, therefore, may be thought to

deserve further investigation ;
and a more complete
examination of the manuscripts in the royal library

at Paris, is much to be desired ; in other respects

the topics of argument respecting the authenticity of
this celebrated

Verse, appear to have been exhausted.

END OF THE SECOND VOLUME.

CAMBRIDGE

PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, BY HILLIARD AND METCALF.

1823.

COLLECTION
OF

ESSAYS AND TRACTS

IN

THEOLOGY.
VOL.

II.

CONTENTS
OF

THE SECOND VOLUME.

DANIEL WHITBY.
-

Biographical notice.

......
LAST THOUGHTS.

Preface

SECT.

I.

Proofs from Scripture.^ that the JVature and Powers of

Christ were derived from the Father -

SECT.
The Scriptures teach

from

the Father,

that Christ is

may

the

a distinct Being
to

him

39

53

III.

be called

SECT.

On

33

II.

and subordinate

SECT.
In what Sense Christ

21

God

IV.

Faith necessary for Salvation

63

VI

CONTENTS.

SECT.

V.

Strange Consequences of the Doctrine that the Father,

Son, and Holy Spirit are one and the same Being

SECT.

85

VI.

Texts in the Gospel, which

Explanation of certain
have been supposed
Father and Son

to

prove

the Identity
-

SECT.

of

the

94

VII.
-

Texts in the Epistles considered

112

FRANCIS HARE.
Biographical notice

123

on the difficulties and discouragements

which attend the study of the scripTURES

143

SIR ISAAC
Biographical notice

NEWTON.
-

>

193

AN historical ACCOUNT OF TWO CORRUPTIONS

OF SCRIPTURE.
SECT.

On

the

Text of

the

I.

Three Heavenly Witnesses

235

CONTENTS.

SECT.

On

Vll

II.

Text concerning the Mystery of Godliness

manifest in the Flesh

the

291

CHALRES BUTLER.
HISTORICAL OUTLINE OF THE CONTROVERSY
RESPECTING THE TEXT OF THE THREE

HEAVENLY WITNESSES

323

AGENTS
FOR llECEIVING SUBSCUIPTIONS FOR
THIS COLLECTION
OF

ESSAYS AND TRACTS IN THEOLOGY.

PENNSYLVANIA.

MAINE.
Samuel Johnson

Portland,

Philadelphia, A. Small

MARYLAND.

NEW HAMPSHIRE
Portsmouth,
Concord,
Keene,

J.

W. Foster

J.

B. Moore

J. Prentiss

MASSACHUSETTS.
-T

Gushing k. Jlppleton

Henry Whipple
William Hilliard
C. Harris
Charles Williams

Cambridge,
Worcester,
Greenfield,
Northampton,

S. Butler

Springfield,

A. G. Tannatt

RHODE
Providence,

ISLAND.
Dana

George

JV.

Coale S^ Co.
G. Maxwell

J.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
Washington,
Georgetown,

Charles Whipple

Newburyport,Jj^^^^^,^,^^^
Salem,

E.

Baltimore,

P. Thompson

James Thomas

VIRGINIA.
Christopher Hall

Norfolk,
Richmond,

J.

H.

JVash'

NORTH CAROLINA.
Newbern,

Salmon Hall

Raleigh,
Fayetteville,

Joseph Gales
I.

M'Rea

SOUTH CAROLINA.
Charleston,
Columbia,

John Mill
W. Arthur

./.

GEORGIA.

CONNECTICUT.

New Haven,

Hoive

NEW
New

York,
Albany,
Canandaigua,
Utica,

&.

Spalding,

W. T. Williams
Savannah,
E. S/- H. Ely
Augusta,
Milledgeville, Ginn fy Curtis

YORK.

KENTUCKY.

Easlburn <^ Co.

E. F. Backus

J.

Lexington,

William G. Hunt

Lol'isville,

J. Collins, jr.

D. Bemis &, Co.

William Williams

J.

Mobile,

NEW
Trenton,

JERSEY.

Littlefield,

Davenport,Sf Co.

CANADA.

D. Fenton

ALABAMA.

Montreal,

H. H. Cunningham