The Sentinel, 1881-06-10, Page 6THE REVISED SCRIPTURES.
Reasons for the Changes Made in the
ituthoFized Version.
- HOW INACCURACIES IN THE TEXT ORIGINATED.
Examples of the Improvements Made by
the Revisers.
li-O- cii.ttias IS THE iiTEREsT OF Ai Y PIRint.ili Hit
_ Side by Hide with the Revised New Testa-
ment, which has just been given to the
public, we have the "Conipaniou to the
Revised Version of the New Testament,
explaining the reasons for the changes
made ou the authorized yersiou, by Alex.
Roberts, D. 1)., Professor of Humanity, St.
Andrews, and- member of the English Now
Testament Company, with siippletneut by
it member of the American Committee of
Revision," and bearing the eudorsernent of
the ;Rev. T. W. Chainbers, D. D., also a
inetubet of the Atherican Committee.
Vroin this the statements of the following
article are drawu reapecting the changes
- made by the revisers :
Since some uncertainty and misunder-
standing prevail respecting the aim and
•lieope of this great undertaking, it should
be said -by way of preliminary that the
present work- is not a, new translation, but
a. revision of the received version: One of
the primary objects, therefore, has been to
• preserve intact the old, racy- flavor of the
King James version; l'he revision is;
moreover, not made in the interest of any
religious sect, of any class of theological or
•-ecclesiastical opinions,or of any reforma-
tory hobby. It is, neither an immersionist
' Biblenor a " temperance Bible," .but the
Bible as it hi, rendered into the English
tongue As accurately as can .be den° with
the aid- Of the .- accumulated learning
ef all the centuries. and of the. results of
that learning -as embodied in the _ thirte-en
• prinoipal " English Litranslations - since
"W-cliffe's, in the fourteenth - century.
' We cannet do better than repeat, the
-.statement of _ Dt.: Schaff; the : Chair -
:mad. of the- Ainerietin 'Peinirtittee- -ef
- Reviaion..-- The object is, 0.to adapt Rik
14er.4i9.'11to theilipreSent.itate oftlie• -
English language ' Witlthut changing 'the
_ - _i _lawn and vocabulary, k and- tothe-present
• standard of Biblical scholarship-whichhas
•_made- very - great advance- - since -z1011;
•--eapecially,duriOgtbe- last-- thirty--years,:in
- textual critieisin; Greek -and Hebrew philo-
• logy, -Biblical geography and-archicology..--
- A geod -Version .. is to bo Made -better a
- Clear and accurate ver, ion -clearer -and more
accurate ;- the 01(10;4, purest text is to be
•- "followed f, errors, obscurities and. ' icon.
, -aisteueiea are to be rerdoved ; imiformitYin
rendering Greek and Inebrew_ words and.
proper na,Mea to be sought. tri one_ 11,:cird.
the revision is to give;ruidiomatie English'
-the .neitreat possible ecjiiivalent for the
'original Word of God 4 -it- amine from the
inspired: organs of the-- Holy , .Spirit. *It
'aims -to. be the hest version - possible id the
-nineteenth century, aa'Aing.Taines' 'Version .
•-was-the best that. could. be Made in the
seveuteenth."
TILE NEED 0 REVISION.
- - Changes in the' i.e.-co iyed Version; excellent
as is, are .necessitat.ed. by a .-variety Of
- causes. The_firat-of thesc Ties in theCon-
ditieu of the Originalt xt. More cOpies. of
he
_tSacred- volume • han of -any other
- ancient.writing have dme toils...in Menu-
- script.- „ No fewer than 1;7602. manuscripts
of the New , Testament ._ are. known to.
._ , . . , .
scholars of our da- Y - hese Malunicripta
are divided into two classes, • according As•:
:,,they:are. written in ' Capitals or in small.
• -lettets,Ihefortner being known as.uncials,
. the:latter as•-:eu.tsives„ ;-The- line ; hetween.
'the two modes ofwriting runs somewhere
-
about :the tenth century.Beyondthat,
• date:there are but five i copies of the :New:
Testament at all coMplete; which, can be
...,r-eferred. to -6,-- higherl antignity.f.„ : These
' range: -from the fourth to the sixth -Century.
They aril the: Alexandrian -,MS.,, known to
scholars as A, now in t ell British Muileuni,
_ alid-aesignedtetne fitt 'Century ;- the. Vati-,
can- MS. in the Vatican Library,:known,iiii
B. and dated: in the fourth century -;_ the
-Ephraern. XS., C. in, the-. National Library
of Paris, a. palimpsest, regarded is of 'a date
as early as that of."„A l'i; the ,I3eza MS„ b.
•. presented by Beza to the University of -
- r Cambridge, and•generallY referred to intim
• sixth -century l' and; -the Sinaitier MS?, or
Aleph,-accidentally discovered-ina waste-
basket by ',Professor ITichendort • in the.
Codvent of - St.,- Catherine on Mt-. Sinai.:
This:,is assigned loft* fourth- century,• a
little -later:than II, - The cursives are: far
more numerous, I1114.001014 them :exceed.
-Ingly vaInabie„'though-„'. as a. *hold, lesa.
- iinportant -thauthennc,lada. BeSideStbeke,
Are the ancient versions of the New Testa-,
-.= Mont,: such as the-. Syriac, the old Latin,
. Which is the.basis -of 'the vulgate 'of- the-
---: -Rdman ChtirCh7;. the Coptic Coptie and: -the
. -earlier_ date- than can ibhe claimed. for any
•
known manuseript:::
• Where.-Lthe transtia-filion of the --Sacred-
text was, for so many Centuries; dependent-
!'
_ upon_ manual ...transcription, innumera.ble
' errors:Inuit necessarily hiti7e crept in...The-
. - -- + - • -
_ most hideliotind theory of inspiration,does'
. ---,,hot..- claim .that 'the Bible_ Was: divinely
- - -guarded: agiinit.theielit gene& we find -in
the :various- •manuseripts --and - versions'
varieties of reading. anfounting- to:150,00;
a fact which seems at first.aight fatal tO'all
[:
- certainty of - the . text, but vibieh - really
,connts- for much Less than it appears.- For
. -the great majority of these errors are of no
practical importance ;• Multitudes of them_
. are "'mere. Orthographies!) ' blunders, while
: others consiat merelYinithe substitution of
- _one syrionytifie for another,. or in a change-
" -rot order without appreifielleilistinctionof
Sense -....1: • • "- ,.. • -';'
arise from the unconscious working of the
copyist's mind on the passage. Few tran-
scribers were mere machines, and supple-
mentary expressions, due to the exercise of
their own mental powers, slipped in with-
out their perceiving it. Thus in Luke
xxiv. 53, our English Bibles read, " prais-
ing and blessing God," the " blessing "
having been added by the copyist, aud con-
sequently being omitted from the revised
version. The more intelligent the
transcriber the greater would be
the danger of such lapses. Some
various readings may have been due
to the doctrinal bias of the subscriber.
The ineertiou of the famous passage of the
three heavenly witnesses, I. John v. 7 and
s, may seem to have arisen from a desire
to vindicate the doctrine of the Trinity;
yut, on the other -hand, it may have been
a mere marginal gloss admitted inadvert-
ently into the text. In eikher case, it is
now rejected by common consent of
scholars and is therefore omitted from the
revised version. Notwithstanding the
strength of this temptation, it Beams to
have been very successfully •resisted and
there is reason to believe that few of these
alteruative readings can be ascribed to
prejudices or unfaithfulness. •
TIIE "ORIOINAL GREEK" TEXT. .
- It would take too long even to sunimarize
the history of the Greek text op which our
coinwoutEnglish version is founded. All
the editions of the Greek Testament which
influenced its text were founded on a
stnalP number of inferior and compara-
tively modern manuscripts, very imper-
fectly collated, and containing numerons
errors which a comparison With older and
better copies has since enabled Us to. dis-
cover and correct. In v. considerable nuni-
bir of cases, not indeed of groat impertauce,
the reading of the cowmen English version
is supported by no Greek manumcript what -
•ever,. but rests on an error of Erasmus or
13 eza and in more=than &thousand instances
ifidelity to the true text now ascertained
-requires a change in the cemehon verlion,
though ordinarily a slight one. At the
-time,- when our authorized version . Was
imide, not one, of " the four most ancient
manuseripti was kilo- yin to be existence.,
The ancient -versionahad not been exam
:careful: investigation ; had- been
Made into the teetirnopy:totheprimitive:
-text "liorne, by the 'lathers. .eriti-.
clsrri was in its infaney, the inateriala _for
it had'uot been gathered; the, principles of
theseienceliad not been atudied,:•and :the
labors of Mill, -.Bentley, Grienbach, Lech.:
mann,,Tischendoil Tregellei and other
great scholars to secure the purity of_the
Nov Testainent text were as - yet _unheard:
of; Under the_se citcumstandes-the revised
.version necessarily Mendes :Mae), Changee
due itti'aineLded:text, - _ • .
a:1118810N OF VARIOUS PASSAGES.
_
•.We new_preceed to notice S01310 import...,
ant changes. ririsinic from :textual errors;
The -first is oniisaion of. the-doxology:of
the -Lord's ••••prayer . Matthew vi., :13.
Textual- crities- -have long -since given this
hp. :ft- is not found . in -.ally df the -great
uncials which contain the passage,•and-, it.
is not.. noticed -by the. earliest fathers in.
their expositions . of the • Lord's '.prayer,
While the 'internal- evidence is. againstit,
since it interrupts the Context:" In favor -Of
it isthe fact ' that it occurs in melt of .the
ancient Versions; notably the: SYriae. :But
the, Syria,C, with some -other of the more
valuable versieds 'seems to have been con;
formed to the -Prevalent -text of the 'fourth
...century, and to exist no longer in its primi.
Alva pooditioni.So-that we cannot inalst en
authority- in support of the passage..
Besides, it does net exist in tho Latin vul
gate; it--vetyJ•important witness.- - -Its -
tion - the text „Must be ascribed to the:
habit of _terminating all liturgical Prayers
with ascription -praise, which, as. Dein-
- • • - -
Alford observes, "vvoulcl natirally suggest.
some Such 'en -ding; and make its insertion,
almeateertain in course of thiler," .. • -
- - The suggestion' made by Professor Light-
footin his admirable - essay on NeW Testa-
. en t R.e_vision publishedia 1871, iscarried
out:by, the revisers jn the caseof- two iong
and linportiint -passagesi• Mark
and John Proteasor; Lightfoot
.iipeake of thes-e: as belonging to a dais of
passages..,`,!.which touch -Christian - senti-
ment, -or history, :et -morals, and w:hich..are
affected by textnal:differencea." In treat-
ing. these besuggests that: they .he placed,
in bracket‘i for thepurposo of -showing,.not
indeed that ,they contain Untrue narratiVea,
but 'Wilt- evidence is againat their being-
recardedita integral portions of -the gospels •
in which they occur. ..- Against: the passage
at -the conclusion :of Mark are ...the facts
that it is _Wanting front the two Oldest
manuscripts, that important patristic'
authorities, testify that it was nOt written
by Mark per found thebeit-cOpies; and
that the style:is not thati of -the Evangelist,
seventeen -words 'occiirring Within twelve
verses .Whiela are' nowhere 'else used _by -
Mark. - Inlayer Of it is urged the itnpreba,
bility of Mark's '-abruptly " terminating his
narrative at Verse8, and that it is Cited. by-
irentninv id. the.. • second century, -which,
• hoWever, though it goes.far-t0 0013fit-111 its
Armenian, sepia of which -were- made it an
- - - - authority, doesnot prove, its authorship.. - -
The - passage,...in -John concerning.- .the
woman taken. in. adultery has ,long been. a
eattlegraundlor_expositore.- Concerning it,
it may he said generally that theincident
hermonizei perfectly With the:spirit and
dealing of Christ 4- that if it did not occur,
it mighthaVe-occurred, and that our Lords
treatment.- of the Case was just -what -We
should- expect from. -.Him,. Every- New
Testament reader, we think, would - be glacl
to haye-itaielinineziese.pirt beyond
Manuscript authority against it. It is.
mit fOund in, any: One Of tlIS -.'ffrot-tatp
unciale; norinthe -ancient versions ; .nor is
tbeir-evidende thatit*as-knewn to Origen;.
Chrysestorn and others of -early-fathers,
-Van many of the irianuscripts .whieh do
. i . - - -
contain t have at marked as doubtful: -• The
twits int:VI:dell-it has coiner down to US vary
-
greatly- •among themselves; it has:- no
connection With - the - :'context- - and
iti style differs totally from that
of • John:. : On . the :other hand, it found in An the' ancient: :uncial •P (Codex
BOLO) ; Jerome, in the foUrthoentury, tee -7.
tifieS• that It existed in , his days, in many
iiianuscripts, • both Greek and 2. Latin.
Augustine,. 'abOnt.• the same- date, charges
that, Some persona of weak faith had ex-
punged , it led it should , seem to. condone
-sin; and According to. Busebius, rapias, in
the early tieTt of the second century, was
familiar with it: ...In this state Of the evi,
denee.,...thereyietverehave not: felt justified
in -rejecting it from the text, but have in.
sorted it in brackets... - - - • -
the text in this manner Error would- also To the 'passage - 'John 7,8, - We have
-
HOW MISTAKES CREPT IN.
• SOipetiMee notes - written on the margins
of manuscripts :were,in- early versions,
inadvertently introducedinto thetext by
transcribers.. In the fifth chapter of John,
' for example, the 4th verse, about the anget,
troubling the pool of Bethesda'- at Certain
_ seasons., has been a great puzzle to - exposi-
tors. It will be found to have been omitted
" from the revised version, it having- been. a
, marginal explanation Which the copyist
' inserted in the text: Most of these errors
occur in the, Gospels. - The doxology of the
. Lord's, Prayer, now relented by the best
textual critics, probably found its way into
-
already alluded. "No defender of its
genuineness," says Dr. Roberts, "will pro-
bably arise in the future. But the literary
history to which it has given rise will not
be forgotten. A small library might be
formed of the books and pamphlets which
have been written for or against the words."
Sir Isaac Newton wrote against their gen-
uineness, and porson's letters to Arch-
deacon Travis, in 1788, virtually settled
the case against the passage. The revisers
have omitted it without a line even on the
margin to indicate that it had ever been
admitted to a place in the sacred text.
ABIENnmENTs or TRANsLATIoN.
We now come to the changes arising from
an 'amended translation. There are not
very many instances in which the author-
ized version has positively mistaken the
import of the original. The translators
turned to good account the labors of many
able predecessors; nevertheless they have
erred in some instances., For example, in
Matthew xiv. 8, the authorized version
says of the daughter of Herodias that she
asked for the Baptist's head, "being before
instructed of her mother." The trauslaters
were probably misled by .the " priemoutta "
of the vulgate ; but the preposition pro in
the Greek " probibastheisa" is not a pre-
position . of time, but of place ; meaning
not " previeusly," but " forward." Thus
oar version not only gives a false impres-
.sion, but blinds the reader to the faint
trace of a redeeming trait in Herodias,
which -made the wanton creature shrink
from the awful deed and require to be
urged on her mother. Hence the revision
rightly translates, She being putierward
by her mother." .
In Luke iii. 23, instead of Jesus began
to be about_ thirty years • of . age," .the
revisers read: "And Jesus -himself when
He -began (to teach) wits about thirty years
of age." In the account of the transfigura-
tion in Luke ix., the 32nd verse in the com-
mon version quite misrepresents the fact,
Peterand his companions were heavy with.
-sleep " aud .wlieu they were awake they
'saw. His glory;" which -conveys theimpres-
Side that they 8.11cm:imbed to their drowsi-
ness, whereas Luke states precisely the
contrary. which the revisers have correctly
:given•tlis: "Net ..having rein ained : awake,
they saw Hinglery," eta. '•
;:-In-John.X.•14-15,the reViserarestore the
couneetion -.between- the verses which, the
_autherized:version; destroyed:by the.. ren-
dering; -"I 'Ain the' good_ s heplierd; atd-know
Irriysheepand aru known of mine,-. -Asthe
Father--ktioWeths know 1 the
down tny life for the sheep:"
-Instead.of 7wliiehthe -revisionrune thus
41I am; the good shepherd; and-I-knoty mine-
-OWn,,and mine own know • ine;:reVen as the
Father -lineweth inc 'an d 1 know the Father;.
ancl'I lay down," ete. Thus _the revision
point ofthe SaviOur's words,-•
viz : that :the intiniacy•-• between Himself
and ilis diseiplesis like that .betweeri
self And the -Father.- He .litterethe satne
thought in -ais prayer for the - disoinles in
the, 17th of joint:: ."-.That .they inay be
even as . '
The revised translation of Actn-xxYi.- 28,
Which- the coninion version. renders, " Al.
poet then persuadest Mete be a Chriatiati,-7:-
will.kueek away the underpinning.,of many
elogeentr. hoinilies: Agrippa -did. not -mead
that he was se moved by.Patil"Sargiireents
:that he was alinost ready einbraee the:
_Christian faith. On Abe dontrtiry, his
Weeds- are - sarcastic; and.. their: general
1401180hi; as Dean Alford gives it::I. ant
fletsaeasily to be _Made a Christian .of • as
thou" supposist ;" you offer • a very scanty
_argument for So-great:a change as that from.
a • jowl& a 'Christian: The , revilers', ten;
doling -strikes us as _cluirtsy, though it is
correct ;_ "With but little persuasion -then
_wouldst fain Make: me -it Chriatian.".. •
:It seernS strange that. the translators: of
.the authorized Version couldhaVegainarked
the beautiful passage in Hebrews xi. 13, by
the -rendering:: ". These.- Tall. died in 'faith,
:not :having received.- the promises, but
having' seen them.-. afar -rsoff, and - Were
persuaded of them and embraced theth- and
:confessed:- that they were .strangere--an,d
pilgrims bia theearth.." In the first place,
the statement is partly -Contrary- to fact:
TheOld .Testitineut--, worthies: did - not
ernbrace.the, proiniseiy but only 'saw them-
'frem--e. distance.. In. the second place,: the
:word- rendered :0-pereuaded " has no place
in -the text, While the. :-,egnally plain mean-
ing the'Greeltaspasairienoi "Is "having
sainted greeted.":. The reviserSgive
it thus: Thew ...all died in faith-, not
having received .the promises, but having
:Seen thenand greetedithent from afar, and
-
having confessed .that they were -strangers
.:an-d_pilgrims On tlie.7:earth,", :-The: revision
thusr••tetutni . to ,--the „older: rendering • Of:
Wycliffe, Tyndale. and .• Crannier,- •ana.
:restores the beautiful image in -which the
Writer'S-.:thotight is ccinched of Seamen:
recognizing the headlands of. a -beloved
country ,and greeting:theta-from, a
-EliliOlis IN ORAMMAR--comiserse.
We
must deal briefly with the large -field
-epened:te the: -revisers. -by,,p40 numerous
grandmaticaF.errors of the authorized .Ver-
siorw Its translators Were aconstinned to
the use of the Latin langnage,.and'uneon;
scioutily limited the .retige r and •-eapagity-of
the. Greek bY the measure of tho Latin;
Epithet they began to fail: -in accuracy at
ths,point Where -the Latin reeas.ed. to run
parallel :with: the Greck. lience, as the.
Latinlangiiagehas ne.'definite article, they
overlooked: -itit-Inaportant funetien in the
Greek and- inserted* or omitted it-in-tbeir
translation Without regard to either pboo-
logimil.ortheolcigiCal''confiecfue 'peek'. • Thus,
forexample, they used the word -•"-Christ".
in'the four Gospels' without the article,
although toinstaneeof such ,niage occurs:
in -the narrative proper; -overlooking • the
fact thattlie Omission of the Tarticle would
irnply the recognition Of Christ as Messiah
in - the very times, -when such - recognition_
was at. hest partial' among
refusedbythe. Society of His
time. -ConseqUently,, in -:the -Evangelists'.
narratives -We :always end •Cliristoi,".
the :Christ, -who , might or :might • net be
JOSUR.
.CUANGES- IN TUE IATERARTT:STYLi. .
-Weinuat•pass-OVer the changes: necessi-
tated by the..faulty. -translations . of - the
Greek ,prepositions; not the least 'difficult -
part -of the - revisers' work, and 'notice the
correction of archaisms,. ainbignities, •and.
the rendering , of: proper names- and techni-
cal expreaSions. •,L
.- As has been already intimated-, noattempt
has been -Made to .rrioderniie the style of
thnauthorixedtversioo. Arohbishop,Trench -
heir justly °Mooed .that is good that
thephraseology of Scripture should net be
exactly that of our -bottle:Ion --life .'shOuld
. .
be removed from the -vulgarities and even
the familiarities of this, just as there is a
sense of fitness which dictates that the
architecture of a church should be different
from that of a house." The .reyisers have
therefore proceeded OU the principle that
every archaism which still continues gene-
rally intelligible should be left untouched.
Hence such forms as "hath," "whiles,"
" throughly," " holpen," etc., have . been
retained, and the relative " which " has
been allowed to stand, as in old
English, when the antecedent is
a pers6n. On the other hand, the
revisers have assumed that an ,archaiem
which has become obsolete, or has wholly
or mostly changed its meaning, tends to
impair the sense -and should be replaced
by a word generally intelligible. " Let"
now means " to permit "; but iu Romans
i. 13, IL Thessalonians ii. 7, it means
directly the opposite—to hinder. "Room,"
meaning to us " -apartment," is used in
Luke xvi. 10, for a seat. "Prevent,"
which -now means " to hinder," is used in
Matthew xvii. 25 in the sense of to antici-
pate. Similarly the authorized version has
"quick " for " living "; " conversation "
for " citizenship "; " damnation " for
" judgment "; " honest" for " honorable";
"affect " for " court "; " allow " for " ap-
prove "; " devotions " for" objects of wor-
thip." So of arahaic phrases. -The
revision has "Be not anx,ious for the
morrow," instead of "Take no thought,"
thus giving the idea which was represented
by " take thought" at the date of the
authorized versicin, but which it has' lost.
The most intelligent reader will scarcely
regret the change of" we took up our car-
riages and went up to Jerusalem" .:(Acts
xxi. 15) to "we took up our baggage "; or of
"we fetched- a compass " (Acts xxviii. 13)
to" we made a circuit."
INCONSISTENCIES cORREcTEn.
The authorized version presents the
most extraordinary inconsistency in the
matter of proper names.- -:,Inatead of . pre-,
serving one forie throughout for the same
-person, the forinis varied even in the same
books and chapters. -. "Mark" in.Acts
12; 25 and II. Timothy iv. 11; is "Marcus"
in Colossians iv. 10, Philernen..- 21111111 I,
Peter v, 13. "-Crete's ". in Acts ii. 11, is
6:Credal's " in Titus 1.11 "
Colossians iv. 14, is " Lucas" iii Philemou
24.:• Wo. havel.."- Jeremy:" at MattneWii,
17, but -" jeremias .,Matthew-:,.xvi.-14.--
Timothy." at.- II. :Corinthians but
Tinaothens:".. At Verse, 19'. of- the -same
chapter-, .In --Acts vii:_45-'and-HebreWS iv -8
.the natne Jesus 'stands in thel-authorized
Version' for Jash us, of -which it is the -Greek
form. The :substitution: -Of -.Joshua for -
Jesus in both these pastimes will relieVePlain
readers of:mil-eh Confusion... Se too we'fied
"Areopagus ": at Acts xvih 19; in: the
authorized ..version and only three Ve4ieS
after- thesanie spot is referredto as "-Mars
11111" aiid "..Judea of Watt ji. 1, appears
as ".• 'at Luke xxiii. 5 and 'Jelin vii.
1..it..nnea.ha.rdly be said:that.these
ciotis Variations disappear ni the revision.
AS _regards the -names of coies, weights
and measures to _which_ ',o,nr language -fur-
nishes no exactly:dor:responding words, the
revision has, for the -Most, part,.left them
unchanged. The term "Hades," denoting
theiriyisibler'w:o.rld, has been._ transplanted
from: Greek to English in -the revised
translation and substituted for " hell.", in
Several passages, as at Acts ii. 27.. The
latter word, so • entirely unsuitable in such
paeagges,'has, been r,reserved for the terna
Gehenna" in the- .
. .
The superior capacity Of • the Greek
language :for the:. expression of delicate
distinctions renders it impossible to.tepre-
Sent many•Of thesedistinetione.in English.
Iket th.eauthorized -: version SoinetinieS
obliterates • distinctions which :might be
made, In John • X:. 16, . for sinatance,we
i,eati in 'the authorized version: •" Other
sheep.I baVe which are .luit of this fold.
. :-There shall be 'ono fold and one:
shePherd.•;" thuizi- rendering two words,.
-". auto" and Pairone,".: by the_ -same-
. term,• fold." •- Therevision very _ properly •
"reads, in the second clause, " One flock,'
thus ringing out Christ's thought.which
contemplated --the _time: when the- strictly
inclosed fold of the Jaxvieh Church Should.
give- place to. the .2-. freedom of a . flock
With ono shepherd over •all.• '• Similarly the
revision restores .the di -a -Unction/ between
saectuary:" and "-teriaple '' at:Matthew
xxiii..--25 • between " children !! -and.
. _ .
•"-babes at IL .Corinthiaain. xVi,' 20.;
between. " bathe "- and "-.Wash " at John
10 ; 'between as' the_: sign of
the English future and ," verb
of volition; as in- I.' Tirnothy:vi: 9;.„ -where
the revision reads,- they that, desire to be
rich ;• also 7 between ". miracle's," -" signs"
and -_..powers.", : - - •
; EquallY-the authorizedversioh:runsinto.
the. opposite 'error, by needless differences
•in the rendering- Of the saino words. :In
..1101114,11F3 iv. it translates -44 logizernai," by
counfed .in V, 3, 5 ; ".reckon," • v. 4, -9.
• . _ . . • •. - • -
10 ; v.'.6, 8; II, 22,-23; 21. In
the .•satile-: -:1418 word
" epithumia ' .and its 'kindred . Verb is
translated by three different terms—lust,
covet, Conetipiscencewhile the revision
. _ - , .
renders all by "covet. - .The .advantage-of-
tinifer.mity in such eases is obvious.
, . - _ .
- -_.• ozSzatri. nESIILTs OF THE , .
•
Full 'judgmentgannet...he passed _ until
the -work have - been carefully gone
through as a whole; .but enough appears to
show that, apart from all objections w.hicbi.
may be raised, and -they will: doubtless be
:Many, the new revision is a great.:btion' to
English'..readernin the dorreetion. of se
many palpable errors, .the. de.)hflopittent Of
-so many shades of.. meaning, :and .-the
reinoVal.- of se -Many stumbling .
This is, beyond 'all: Others, 6.; ease:Where
Sontiinent and prejudice niustnot be suffered
to Stand in the Way of truth'. The One point
in:; the .eye Of every honest- Bible- reader
he, "What doesthe Original,Notd-Of
God .iiiitualli•say?!-':. atid to have that as-
elearlystated.as his own hinguagecan state
it. •-• After. :all,- the. Wender is that .7the
-changes. ere -so _few. When," says Dr..
Roberts, -" we .trace the parentage of our
.English :Bible; -and,vilien we see eirwhat a
slender:heals of authority :it rests, When_
we Confront with this the enormous wealth
of ',-material for settling the true 'Greek.
text which We possess- at the .present day,•
and the amount - :Of .labor.Whioh lias- been
expendedin applying them, We niight.well
ear that- •the _alterations reqiiiring:to.be
madeinthe Bible with which we have all
our days been 'familiar 'should: be of the
Most - revolutionary *character: r But such
is .- not: the oase. 1%/.0- -doctrine Of. :the
faith--; in - the slightest: :degree.
affeoted... - Pelee supports' -of import?
_
[ant doctrines may be removed, and
iltrue defences of them may be supplied, but
that is all. The Bible remains, for all
;practical purposes, totally unaffected.
iEnglish Christians now know the utmost
that Biblical science demands. No suspi-
lcion need in future haunt them that the
scriptural truths which they love are inse-
pure. More than this, every loyal Christian
'heart should surely rejoice to have access
in as pure a form as possible to the mes-
sage sent us by our Father in heaven. That
is the great positive work which has been
!aimed at by the New Testament Company,
and the fulfilment of which is presented in
the revised version. English readers of the
Scriptures have now the opportunity of
making themselves acquainted with the
New Testament in a form more nearly
representing the primitive text than they
ever had before."
RITUALD01.
Not to be Put Down—Altar Furniture and
Dress Again Discussed.
A London correspondent cables: The
-
question of altar furniture antl dress has
again come to the surface. The Ritualists
are not to be put down as easily as one
would think. Notwithstanding_the exam-
ples that were recently made of several of
their number who attempted to defy the
law, they return to the charge as full of
• fight as ever. Their position has been
pointedly and nakedly stated by John
Bright when appealed to to radii° his voice
in favor of toleration. He shortly told
them that if they. did . not like the rules
imposed Upon the Established Church by
law they should get out of it—an advice
them took unkindly. The simple truth is
that these Ritualists want to eat their cake
and have it too. They prize the loaves
and fishes of a. State Church, but seem to _
repudiate the conditions under which they -
are given. They are willing to pray for
the Queen and the aristocracy, a.nd to do
their best to convince the inultitude that
oth are divine appointments, and that it
lwill not be well for him hereafter who
upon earth, challenges the prerogatives of
he 0118 or encroaches uponthe privileges
Of the other, and all they ask in return is
hatthey be allowed to do this in the Way
hev. think best, and not in the manner
Fibrescribed by those who pay -them for doing
tr and who expect to receive the 'benefit of .
heir supplications.. The latest Contribution '
, a- the discussion is the motion of - the ,-
iBishop - of. . Manchester before the
Northern' - Convocation . -al --. York the - -
*Aber - day.- Bishop Fraser -proposes to
orm a new rubric . because the present
8 ambiguous. This is opposed by the
itualista, on the ground' that the- present
1
ne is..not ambiguous, though it. will bear
, nY" interpretation, that it is so worded ,
-ithat it allows any priest to do as he pleases :
u the matter of altar ornaments, 'vest,.
tnents, incense, candles; etc. This is the .
" eint Over which the Ritualists- and anti -
Ritualists - are now -,- contending. .• In this
fonnection it rimy:be interesting to remark
liliat out of 877 churches in thc. metropolis
t.liertj are 11 in which incense is -used, 53
li Which the 'seats are separated, 54 in :
hich there are altar lights, 234 in which '
he eastward position is. adopted, 53 in
hick candles are used on the altar, 35 111'
liie.h eucharistic vestments are in vogue,
19 in which there are floraldeeorations
find 317 with free seats, as against 17, 40, .
$6, 139, 37, 37, 213, and 240 -.respectively
_
ive years ago.
. -
)t.
The English- Church and the New terita•
• ment. • "
The "revised New Testament was laid
efore the Upper House of the Convocation
bf,Canterbury, and duly receiied, the Very,
ay that a copy was presented to the
ueen. The Bishop .of Gloucester and
ristol n2ade a statement regarding the
ork of the reviewers,' and the House
.nnanimously thanked His Lordship and
his colleagues for their labors In the Lower
lifouse a motion to thank the revisers was
ntested with SOMA bitterness. Archdeacon
Denison characterized the composition of •
the committee as" an abomination in the
'bight of God.". Sinee its appointment heha.d
always revoltedagainst this committee,
nd he was not going to perjure -his .
oul by according a single word of thanks
o its members. The Archdeacon of Bed-
ford was equally strong 111 -expression. • -
Icothing, he held, was more dangerous than
or the .Church, authorities . to throw in -
,their lot with heresy,schism and infidelity.
The• vete of thanks was carried by 75 to 8
votes, but the minorityhave not yet uttered
heir last word on the subject. . The secret •
f the trouble_ is, of course, the presence of _
enconformists on the committee. .The
hew translation it is noW thought; will be
repudiated by many of the clergymen of *
1.,he Established Churchbecauseitembodies --
he scholarship of.all'Protestantisna.
-
Stealing the Icriptureq. •
, . - _
.8ifeti-was4tie'Ragirriiisfi to "scoop" the. :
bther fellows that one western newspaper
tient a man adress the :Atlantic to steal an-, --
-fidvance. copy A the new New Testament
A.fter having tried in vain 'at the piablish./\.--'• •
.leg houses -he timed to •a- guileless country
15arsen, _who. had been :engaged_ in the -.
'vi-siOn, -haw. in his study •-a, -copy of the. -
ot
i
took, took its dim-. entiiens;. noted ite---bliii1='
eg and lettering and Went away to have a - .-
olume nianufactured Whieli .should be its .r
recuiesduplioate in appearance. .-He tried
urmg another interview to exchange the •
purious book foy. the genuine, but failed
t -. last.. -- .Boasting,: -on -.-his -lion:toward
oyage, of his plan, one . .of- the -party '
•emarked that it was :a pity he had not
!cured a--oopy - in _order that .410 might
iscoyer that an ancient legend,: 'Thou
halt -not steal,' had not been revised Out -.
fit" - -- . ' —
Tho. place of honor in tins* year's Faris •
aim .- has - been given to, Lord Ronald
ower'a ..-colossal -monument to Shakes.
ear& The hint of the poet appears hely*
t.owned by the figure of -•Tragedy, while
'hat of 'Comedy kneels in an Attitude of
41oratiOn. offering flowers. - -lin the lower ,
ierti are four life-size -figuresamlet, re -
resenting '2philesophy;-, Lady Iffaaboth, .
ragedy4 Henry V., history, and -Falstaff, •
• windy; Separating each are boldly ,con,
eived- scrolls with embleinatical -flowers
nd garlands.
;Mr. Filpurgeon --recently remarked with
rim humor -that :although he had reeeived .
any invitations to dinner at the Mansion
ouse-lie had never: gone but once,' and
hren days after he was seiSed
withstnall-
IPX..