the unconditional rejection of the peculiar and often varying order advocated by the very few Codexes,--a cordial acceptance of the order exhibited by every document in the world besides.
I will content myself with inviting attention to one or two samples of my meaning.

It has been made a question whether St.Luke (xxiv.

7) wrote,--[Greek: legon, Hoti dei ton huion tou anthropou paradothenai], as all the MSS.

in the world but four, all the Versions, and all the available Fathers'[340] evidence from A.D.150 downwards attest: or whether he wrote,--[Greek: legon ton huion tou anthropou hoti dei paradothenai], as [Symbol: Aleph]BCL,--and those four documents only--would have us believe?
[The point which first strikes a scholar is that there is in this reading a familiar classicism which is alien to the style of the Gospels, and which may be a symptom of an attempt on the part of some early critic who was seeking to bring them into agreement with ancient Greek models.] But surely also it is even obvious that the correspondence of those four Codexes in such a particular as this must needs be the result of their having derived the reading from one and the same original.

On the contrary, the agreement of all the rest in a trifling matter of detail like the present can be accounted for in only one way, viz., by presuming that they also have all been derived through various lines of descent from a single document: but _that_ document the autograph of the Evangelist.