xi. 27, 28. In his treatise, “On the Original Text of Acts xi. 27, 28” (_Berliner Sitz.-Berichte_, Heft 17), Harnack comes to the conclusion that the Western text here cannot be the original. xv. 20, 21. On Harnack’s examination of the Apostolic Decree, see Selbie in the _Expository Times_ for June 1899, p. 395. Harnack comes to the same results as Zahn, but draws the opposite conclusion from them. See above, p. 232 f. xvi. 6. The article is omitted before Γαλατικὴν χώραν by א A B C D minuscules. For this Blass, on the authority of p, which reads “Galatie regiones,” substitutes τὰς Γαλατικὰς χώρας = “vicos Galatiae.” On this see Zahn, _Einleitung_, i. 133. The omission of the article does not necessitate taking τὴν Φρυγίαν as an adjective (so Wendt^8); it might still be rendered “through Phrygia and Galatian territory.” xvii. 27. In my _Philologica Sacra_, p. 42, I say that it was easier to change τὸ θεῖον (β) into τὸν θεόν (α) than _vice versa_. To this Wendt replies in his eighth edition, p. 294, by saying, “In all probability offence was taken at the representation of God himself as an object of τὸ ψηλαφᾶν.” Yes, there is a considerable difference between Hector alive and Hector dead, and of the latter it could be truly said (_Iliad_, xxii. 372 f.): Ὧδε δέ τις εἴπεσκεν ἰδὼν ἐς πλησίον ἄλλον· Ὢ πόποι ἦ μάλα δὴ μαλακώτερος ἀμφαφάασθαι. But the θεῖον of which Paul speaks on the Areopagus is most assuredly no more and no less a _noli me tangere_ than the θεός. Among the witnesses in support of τὸ θεῖον is Clement of Alexandria. I can only repeat what Zahn says: “Whoever is careful to bear in mind that our earliest manuscripts are some two hundred years later than Marcion, Tatian, and Irenæus, and has any sense of the difference between naïve originality and a regularity due to liturgical, dogmatic, and stylistic considerations,” cannot but judge differently with respect to β.