1.  The preservation of the primitive text of the gospels from all essential corruptions, additions, and mutilations has already been shown at some length (Part 1, Chap. 3).  The same line of argument applies substantially to the other books of the New Testament.  Though the text of different books varies in respect to purity, there is no ground for supposing that if we had the autographs of the evangelists and other sacred writers, they would present to us a gospel differing in any essential particular from that which we now possess.  We should see in them the same glorious Saviour, and the same holy system of doctrines and duties.

2.  But it has not pleased God to interpose in a miraculous way for the purpose of keeping the primitive text in a state of immaculate purity.  He has left it subject to those common influences which produce what are called various readings in all works that are perpetuated from age to age by transcription.  Compared indeed with any other ancient writings, the text of the New Testament has immensely the advantage in regard to uncorruptness of preservation and means of verification.  This arises from the early multiplication of copies, as well as from the high value attached by the primitive churches to their sacred books, and their consequent zeal for their uncorrupt preservation.  But the same multiplication of copies which constitutes a sure guarantee against essential mutilations and corruptions increases also the number of various readings.  Suppose, for example, that of two books equal in size the second has been, from the first, copied a hundred-fold oftener than the first.  It is plain that, while the means of ascertaining and verifying the true text of the second will abound, the number of variations among the different manuscripts will abound also.  The greater the number of copies, the greater will be the number of various readings, but this will make the true text not more but less uncertain; for by diligent collation a text may be produced which, though not absolutely immaculate, is very near to the primitive autograph, and which can be certainly known to agree with it in every essential respect.  God does not rain down upon men bread and raiment from heaven, as he could do with infinite ease; but he imposes upon them the necessity of gaining both by hard labor.  “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread” is the stern law.  God does not miraculously communicate to the missionary who goes to Syria or India or China a knowledge of the vernacular in his field of labor; but he must learn it by years of patient study.  And when he begins the work of translating, God does not keep him in a supernatural way from all errors.  He must find out and correct his errors by the diligent use of the means at his disposal.  Just so it is the will of God that we should have a pure text of the New Testament—­pure in a critical sense—­not without hard labor, but by years of patient toil in the study and collation of the abundant materials which his good providence has preserved for us.