philosophers, then he was a visionary, the greatest of all history. But, from the day when he began to preach "The kingdom of heaven is at hand," until now, his name has been a power in human thought and life; the kingdom has been in the world gathering individuals into itself, and vitalizing civilization with its divine ideas, a central force in the history of all enlightened and progressive nations. Therefore he was not a visionary.

But if Jesus was not a visionary, then he is man's Redeemer and Lord. Then, with more than the wonder of those who cried: "What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him?" we exclaim: "What manner of man is this, who rules amid the tumult of the ages, and the courses of human thought obey him, and the farthest progress of man is confessedly towards the realization of his idea?" He is man's Redeemer and Lord; his idea of his kingdom, by its existence on the earth, and by its perpetuation and power through the ages, is proof that it is from God and is destined to prevail.

The argument is now complete. The idea of a kingdom of God on earth and the prophecy of its realization are present in modern thought and among the forces that determine modern progress and civilization. The idea is so complete as a solution of the problem of man's history and destiny, so sufficient, if realized, to constitute the perfection. and blessedness of society, and as a conception of the ways of God with man so comprehensive and sublime, that in itself it demonstrates that it is from God. We then trace this grand conception back to the teaching of Jesus; we consider his preaching of it in its relation to the age in which he lived, in its relation to the antecedent history of human thought, both among the heathen and the Jews, and in its power in all subsequent human history. The conclusion is irresistible that the idea and prophecy of the kingdom of God existing as a power in the world's progress and civilization can be rationally accounted for only on the ground that it is from God and is destined to prevail.

In the nineteenth Psalm the law of God is compared to the sun and the stars. As these by shining declare their divine origin and the glory of God, so does God's law by its own perfection declare its divine origin and God's glory. Similar is the argument which has now been unfolded. God's kingdom, like the sun, must reveal itself and its divine glory by its own shining, by enlightening and vivifying the world. No one doubts that the modern astronomy will prevail through the world. Its principles and laws do but express the actual realities of the starry and solar systems. The more thoroughly the heavens are explored, the more complete must be the evidence that astronomy is true. So the doctrine of Christ's kingdom expresses the divine idea of redemption, which God in his administration of human affairs is constantly carrying out to its realization.

Human history, then, must contain and express the idea, and the study of human history must give proof of God's redeeming love, working in it to establish his kingdom of grace. His kingdom is progressive, like the growth of a mustard-seed. Therefore the argument is as yet incomplete. But every new generation, and especially every epoch in human progress, adds to its force. Already it is possible from the study of human history to construct an argument that history itself demands for its rational explanation the presence and power of God in it as a Redeemer establishing his kingdom. When in the future the kingdom shall possess the earth, then history itself will have proved the truth of Christ's claims, and God's redeeming grace and his kingdom will be as demonstrable from the facts of human history as the laws of astronomy are from the facts of the starry heavens.

We, then, on this new continent and in this distant age, acknowledge Jesus as the Christ, our Redeemer and Lord. With the thousand times ten thousand and thousands of thousands who in the ages past have loved him, and now praise him in heaven, with all the living of every kindred and people and tongue who now trust and serve him, we

bow before him, and join the great confession: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Him we behold a sorrowful man in the dimness of a faroff age and land, burdened and smitten by the power of sin, suffering for us, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. Him, we behold above the convulsions of the ages, the halo about his majestic head shining as the sun down all the tract of time, his voice speaking promise and peace amid the confusion of human affairs. Him, we behold seated on the right hand of majesty on high, all power given unto him in heaven and on earth, and on his head are many crowns. Him, we joyfully confess "King of kings and Lord of lords"; we offer the prayer which he has taught us: "Thy kingdom come"; we accept the command and the promise which he has given us: "Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you"; and, in the expectation that his kingdom shall fill the earth, we consecrate our lives to his service. And, entering into the joy of all the redeemed, with all who have tasted and seen that the Lord is gracious, we offer him our homage: "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing; for thou hast redeemed us to God out of every kindred and tongue and people and nation. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father, unto him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen."

ARTICLE V.

OUR LORD'S SACERDOTAL PRAYER-A NEW CRITICAL TEXT, DIGEST, AND TRANSLATION.

BY A. WELLINGTON TYLER, B.A., NEW YORK.

MOST appropriately the first productions of the new-born printing-press were copies of the scriptures: the earliest, indeed, the Latin, Bible of 1452, afterward the Hebrew of 1488, and early in the sixteenth century the Greek and Latin Polyglot of Cardinal Ximenes, known as the Complutensian from the place of its publication, and the Greek Testament of Erasmus, published at Basle. The fifth edition of the latter, published in 1535, with some modifications from Beza's editions, formed the basis of the present so-called Received Text. Very unfortunately, Erasmus prepared his first edition very hastily, in order to publish it in advance of the Complutensian, and not only did not seek out the best manuscripts he could have obtained, but was not faithful in the use of those he did have. Where there were gaps in his codices he supplied the missing portions by translating the Latin Vulgate, producing readings found in no known Greek manuscript. Thus weak is the critical authority of the Received Text.

Very little was accomplished toward constructing a truly critical text until the time of Griesbach, who announced those canons of criticism which have been substantially adopted by all revisers since. During the present century exceedingly rich treasures of ancient Greek manuscripts have been exhumed from the dust of ages, and our knowledge of those already in our possession so greatly increased, that our former acquaintance with some of the most valuable seems meagre indeed. In the faithful use of these ancient witnesses for the recovery of the original text, Tischendorf and Tregelles have acquired a world-wide renown.

The text presented herewith is an attempt in the same

direction with theirs, and was constructed before Tischendorf had issued the sixth part of his eighth edition, that containing this passage. The only change made since the reception of that part is the omission of σov in verse 17. But four readings are adopted in the text which have not fourth. century authority; and but six not supported by a majority of the five great manuscripts NABCD- and in three of these cases a majority of the five do not concur. (See Soon in verse 2.) The punctuation of many editions of the Greek Testament is very redundant; that of the text has been carefully revised, as has also been the accentuation. Conformably to the usage of the uncials, ν ἐφελκυστικὸν has been uniformly added in the text.

In uncial manuscript citations the digest, subjoined to the text, presents all contained in the latest editions of Alford, Tregelles, and Tischendorf; and a few citations found in neither of them. At the time our most venerable codices were transcribed, a very corrupt pronunciation of Greek had come into common use, and from similarity of sound there was constant confusion in writing, between a and e; eɩ and ɩ; n, and ei; n, ol and ບ ; o and ω, and in later times even e and ŋ. These fruitful causes of various readings, or itacisms, are illustrated in the digest, as well as several examples of the fatal homoioteleuton, or omission from similarity of ending, which has occasioned such grievous hiatus, even in our most valuable manuscripts. In the uncials, v at the end of a line was often denoted by a stroke over a vowel. As the addition of v might change the case, gender, or person, of a word, it is important to know by whom it was written. (See eуvæкā in verse 7.) Concerning the subjects glanced at in these preliminary remarks, full information may be found in Tregelles's Account of the Printed Text of the Greek Testament, Scrivener's Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, the latest English editions of Horne's Introduction, edited and enlarged by Tregelles, and in the Prolegomena to the critical Greek Testaments cited below.

The translation aims to represent the shades of thought