But the question naturally arises, Have not earlier MSS. come to light, substantially confirming what we have in King James’ Version? The answer is, that there are now in existence about two thousand MSS. containing _parts_ of the New Testament, with about _one hundred and fifty thousand_ variations, mostly trivial, but some very important; but no scholar, orthodox or liberal, will dare to pretend that any of these date any farther back than the fourth or fifth century; and he would be a reckless man, feeling bound to lie for what he might regard as the truth, who would contradict the admission of Dr. Roberts, that there are only five copies of the New Testament, at all complete, of a greater antiquity than the tenth century, nor who would dare to question the statement of the Rev. George E. Merrell in his recent _Story of the Manuscripts_, that “there is a wide gap of almost three centuries between the original manuscripts of the evangelists and apostles and the earliest copies of their writings which have yet been discovered.” Whether there ever were _original_ manuscripts or _accurate_ copies are questions which it would be prudent to hold for consideration until we have made further investigations. When we reverently listen to our ministers as they expound the Word, and learnedly tell us how certain sentences should have been translated from the “original Greek,” let us not laugh in their faces, but respectfully ask them whether they do not know that there is _no original_ Greek Testament or any certified copy, and that all we know upon these matters is highly conjectural and wholly unauthenticated. The principal MSS. of the New Testament were unknown for a thousand years after the Christian era—to wit, those from which our “Authorized” New Testament was compiled—and their real origin cannot be traced, and even their accepted date is purely a matter of conjecture. The Alexandrian, Vatican, and Sinaitic MSS., supposed to date from the fourth and fifth centuries, are of uncertain and suspicious origin, and their date is a matter of simple guess by parties whose prepossessions would incline them to make them as ancient as possible. How easy it is for the best scholars to be imposed upon is shown from the fact that the experts of the British Museum would probably have been swindled by the recent Syrian forgery of the very ancient book of Deuteronomy but for the discovery of the fact by a French scholar that the “ancient document” was in fact only a year or two old, the product of a skilled copyist! The fact is, little or nothing is actually _known_ by historical and documentary verification of the origin or dates of the MSS. upon which our New Testament is based.