The Star. SATURDAY. NOVEMBER 8, 1924. THE BIBLE IN TOPICAL ENGLISH.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17381, 8 November 1924, Page 8

The Star. SATURDAY. NOVEMBER 8, 1924. THE BIBLE IN TOPICAL ENGLISH.

It is a queer sort of task that has just been finished by Dr James MofTatt in his translation of the Bible into topical English, and it is hard to see what object it will serve now or hereafter, if there had been any demand for a new English Bible, the eight years that Dr Moffatt has spent on its production would be a trifling price to pay, but, unfortunately, the flippancy of much of its language must tend to discourage rather than encourage Bible reading in the student or even the casual reader. The IGII translation, indeed, has a beauty of style the loss of which cannot be anything but a loss to the world. “ How real a creation,” says Newman, '"how sui generis, is the style of Shakespeare, or of the Protestant Bible and Prayer Book, or of Pope, or of Gibbon, or of Johnson ! Even were the subject matter without meaning, though in truth the style cannot really be abstracted from the sense, still the style would, on that supposition, remain as perfect and original a work as Euclid s elements or a symphony of Beethoven. And, like music, it lias seized upon the public mind.” Newman did not live to sec the stark horror of some of the modern translations, but the subject has been dealt with by the lion. Stephen Coleridge in his charming book, “Betters to my Grandson on the Glory of English Prose.” Ife writes: “I do not know a better instance of a display of the difference between what is fine style and what is not, than may be made by putting side by side almost any sentence from the old authorised translation of the Bible and the same sentence from ‘The Bible in Modern Speech.’ I will just put two quotations side by side:—• • Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow, they toil not, neither do thev spin: and yet t say unto you. That even bolomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. • r „. irn ;l lesson from the wild lilies. Watch their growth. They neither toil nor spin: and yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his magnificence could array himself like one ot those.’ “There you feel." he writes, “the perfect harmony and balance C)f the old version and the miserable commonplaceness of the effort of these misguided modern men. Again:— ' Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ “This is mauled into: ■ Repent, he said, for the kingdom of the heavens is now close at hand.’ ” From time to time Ihc ambition lias seized men to improve on the Bible, in one form or another, and in this connection one is reminded of the remark of the young lady that whether David was inspired or not when be wrote the Psalms, she was quite sure that the men who wrote the metrical versions were inspired. A couple of lines that Borne to memory give an idea of the lengths to which these improvements may be carried: Ye fishes of the briny deep Your Maker’s praises spoilt,: Up from the deep ye codlings leap, .And was your tails about. II is only fair to say that Dr Moffatt takes very high ground in Id's justification for a modern translation, and does not fall into the error of supposing that the old version will not remain an English classic. But even in bis zeal for the essential truth of the message, m a form as close as possible to the original, bis attempts to sustain a popular and topical style have obviously led him into a maze from which many a man would consider himself lucky to escape in ch'htecn vears, much less eight. Yesterday’s cablegrams refer to the translation of the Old Testament, in winch the Creation “reads like a magazine story.” I util the volume reaches New Zealand it will be impossible to assess its value, but if it is anything like Dr Moffatt’s New Testament, it is not likclv to have a very warm welcome. '1 be instances given bv the lion. Stephen Coleridge are not Dr Moffatt s, but oven greater contrasts in style are to be found m Dr Moffatt’s New Testament, notably in bis very staccato version of the beautiful thirteenth chapter ot St. I aid s epistle to the Corinthians. And the variations m nearly everv case have no shadow of justification on the score of the puritv of the text. It is quite easy to believe as the Bond-on cablegrams say, that the freedom ot the new translation is likely to provoke world-wide controversy But most people will remain content with the Authorised Version, of which the Hon. Stephen Coleridge writes: “ When all else is lost we may be sure that the old Fmghsh version of the Bible w ill survive. ‘ Heaven and earth shall pass awav, hut my words shall not pass away Do not think it enough therefore, Antony, to hear it read badly and without intelligence or emotion, m little detached snippets, in church once a week. Bead it for yourself, and earn to rejoice in the perfect balance, harmony, and strength of its noble style.”