THE REVISED NEW TESTAMENT.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XV, Issue 4176, 2 July 1881, Page 2

THE REVISED NEW TESTAMENT.

(Auckland Stab.)

At length the long-expected volume Has reached us, and wo hasten to lay some account of it before our readers. We shall omit all allusions to the methods the revisers have pursued, And indeed all reference to the hi3tory and progress of the revision, for these points have been fully discussed many times during the past ten years. Our purpose is as far as possible to give information that will be new to the majority. The edition before us emanates from the Oxford University press, and is a clearly printed, neatly got up, royal 16mo volume of 420 pages. The text is not divided into verses, but into paragraphs, with, however, the old arrangement of chapters and verses indicated at the side for the sake of convenience.' At the commencement there is a long preface, unsigned, and dated 11th November last, which gives concisely the story of the movement which , led to the revision and the methods adopted. At the end is given a list of readings and' renderings which the American Committee have preferred. Quo* tationa from poetical books on the Old Testament are given as they should be in metrical form. Another feature is the number of valuable foot-notes in the book. These refer chiefly to alternative translations, and to textual questions very useful for those who have not the opportunity of consulting works on such subjects. As before, a number of words not contained in the original but necessary for the understanding of various passages are printed in italics. But this, it is scarcely necessary to aay, is a matter of intricacy and difficulty j and the tendency has been to diminish rather than to increase words ao distinguished. \Vith these introductory remarks we plunge at once in medias res. The first point to which we call attention consists in certain alterations in the text. Since the Authorised version of 1611 (to which we shall refer as A.V.) was issued important MSS have been discovered, those known before have been more accurately scrutinised and collated, and, in short, immense strides have been made in this branch of Biblical knowledge. Hence many alterations in the text were to be expected ; though it must be clearly understood such alterations though numerous are chiefly of the smallest importance. Still, as accuracy was the aim, they could not be neglected. We turn at once to the last chapter of St. Mark, where (v. 9 to end) is a passage omitted by two of the eldest MSS (the Sinaitic and Vatican) and rejected by those profound scholars Tischendorf and Alford. In the Revised edition it remains, but marked off from the context, the reason of which is explained in a note. Also clearly marked off and placed in brackets is the well-known story of the woman taken in adultrey (John vii 53 to ii 11). This again is not found in some of the olehst MSS. e.g., the Alexandrian, Vatican and Sinaitic ; aud Alford, Tischendorf, and Tregelles are in favor of its omission. Of course the well known passage (1 John, v 7 and 8) respecting the "heavenly witnesses," does not appear : it has no MSS authority to support it. Verse 59 of John viii now reads, "they took up stones therefore to cast at him ; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple." It will be noticed that the words "going through the midst of them, and so passed by," are omitted; the weight of evidence is against them though they are found in the Alexandrine Ms. and many others. .The passage about the angel and thp pool of Betnesda (John, v 4) has been much debated, and we find it left out of the R. E. There is some ancient evidence in its favor, however, as a footnote remarks. Luke xxi v- 12 (describing the running of Peter to Christ's tomb) is retained though some ancient authorities omit it, and Tischendorf would seen in favor of its rejection. There has been much differ- > ence of opinion over Matthew xxiii, 14 (denouncing woe on the Scribes and Pharisees) and we do not find it in the R.E. Another doubtful passage is a clause in Luke i, 28, " Bless* <1 art thou among women " spoken of the Virgin Mary. It finds no place in the R.E., thongh Griesbach, following the Alexandrine and numerous other ancient MSS., would have retained it. Another noticeable omission consists in the words (Actsix, s and 6), "It is hard for theeto kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him." The best scholars with one consent agree to this omission, which is clearly, justified by MSS authority. The words formed an early gloss, inserted to make the narrative of St Paul's conversion more c6mplete. We have not mentioned above all the important textual emendations whidji might be instanced, but these must suffice. (t We pass on to notice the course adopted by our revisers respecting archaic words, what they have retained and what rejected. Th« rule they followed is .stated to be this, no archaisms have been removed, except where either the'meaning of the words was not generally understood, or the nature of the expression led to some misapprehehsion: of the true sense of the passage. We find the relative "which" (now neuter, but masculine when the A.V. was published), retained in preference to " who." The American revisers, however* and in our humble judgment rightly, have decided in favor of the modern term. So far as we have seen the old forms " hath " and «_eth"in "sheweth," "saiieth," etc..) have undergone no change. The word " charger " i.e., a dish, is not altered in the story of the death of John the Baptist ; but '' charger " surely has no meaning for mod* em ears. " Damsel" is also retained, though now certainly an antiquated term.; The old but weft-understood phrase v 'Ijquick and dead " is rightly maintained. Turning to Eph. vi, 15, we expected to discover a change, but we are rather surprised to find none. We think that there is some obscurity about the words "preparation of the gospel of peace," and consider "readiness ' (as Dean Alford's Testament has it), would be an improvement. These are. evidences of the proper conservatism which has inspired the labours of the revisora throughout. To come to substitutions, however. For " glistering "(Luke ix, 29) we now read " dazzling >? ; for "wax" (Luke xy, 19), '.'grow," though in Hebrews xi, ,34, the oldjwj>rd is kept, alongside of another changS, however — " waxed mighty in war "; for " prevent " (meaning "anticipate"), we have m Matt, xviii, 25, " spake first unto him," and in I Thess. iv, 15, "precede," both of them necessary alterations.. In Romans i, 13, the A.V. reads "oftentimes l purposed to come unto you, but was let hitherto "; the R.E. has it "was hindered." The use of "let," in the sense of "hindrance," still survives in the common phrase "without Ipt Of hindrance." In II Thess! ii, 7, for "let "issubstituted "restrain." "Presently" and "by and by " have different meanings now from what they possessed in 1611, wjd consequently in Matt xxi, 19, xxyi, 53, xiii, 21, Luke xvii, 7, etic., we find them replaced by "immediately," "evennow,"and "straightway." The change, in the sense of the passages is however only apparent and not real. In St. Paul's journey- to Jerusalem, as narrated in the A.V. (Acts xxi, 15), the expression is used "we took up our carriages." Carriage in old English meant also " baggage, " and the Tatter word we find in the R.E. In Acts xiii,.. 7, etc, Sergius Paulus is described more accurately as "proconsul" of Cyprus instead of "deputy" as in the A.V. About the word translated " meat " in the A.V. pur Revisors do not appear! to have been consistent. In some places the modern "food " is substituted, while |in others the archaic form is retained (see Rom. - xiv, 15, Heb. .ix, 10, etc.) "Moat " hasnpw a restricted meaning being used only to signify " flesh, "and its old force isseeno^ljr in such term? as "green meat." In Acts xxvii, 27 we psed to have it "theshipmen deemed that they drew near to some.youn- x try ;" we now read the sailors surmised."" The first substitution is an improvement, but the latter not so judicious j the element of novelty thus introduced seems so sudden as to amount to an incongruity. But no doubt we shall soon' become reconciled with this as with other changes. • In Luke yii4 for " besought him instantly " is read I "besought him earnestly." ' ' • '. The. abovei instances tore enough to, convey aome notion ,as to, the extent of tjhe ohonges from antiquated to .modern diction which the English New Testament, has undergone ; we proceed to' point out a number of changes ia translation, The. reader cannot go far without meeting some new expression or turn of, phr&ae, wlych attraejs

his attention. We naturally turned to certain familiar passages where such alteration would be more noticeable. The Lords' Prayer (Matthew vi) is one of these. We find three changes worthy of mention. In* stead of " lead us not into temptation," the R.E. runs " bring us not into temptation ;" and for " deliver us from evil," " deliver us from the evil one." The latter change will, beyond_doubt;be-.a^«aiq»ri«e to many, for, as Alford points out, the Greek word is in the 'neuter gender. What is called the doxology of the prayer, viz., -I'for thine iV the left out. Sound r criticism demands this, for there is no trace of these words, admirable as they are, "in early times, in any family of MSS., or in any' expositors." Another passage among the first to be examined is the parable of the Prodigal Son. It is but little' changed 5 , the archaic " fain " still stands, and has ' not given way to " gladly." The me as one of thy hired servants." are omitted, the balance of -testimony being against them. * The narrative of St Paurs snipwreck is much improved in the R.E., and the force and vividness of the story as related in the Greek, becomes more evident. Perhaps few passages in the New Testament have been subject to more careful scrutiny than this. For "loosing thence " we now haye I ""weighed anchor;" for "under a certain island," " under the lee of a small island ;" for. "had much work to come by the boat," "were able with much difficulty to secure the boat ;" for " a certain creek with a shore," a " certain bay with a beach j" " for "hoisted up the mainsaiTto the wind," " hoisting up the foresail ;" for " hinder part, " " stern. A And other small alterations besides the abovte tend to make the narrative more graphic, clear and forcible than it was in the A.V. Doubtless a large section of Bible students will speedily turn tothose places in the A, V., where "dam* nation " and " hell "" occur. With regard to the latter word, the revisers appear to have been consistent in distinguishing between "Gehenna'? and '.'Hades." , Where the original has '/Hades." the revised edition reproduces it without translation (see Luke xvi 23, Jtfatt, xi 23, Rev. 1 18 t ' etc) ; and where 'M^ehenna "is the word in Greek, "hell" is placed as its equivalent in English, but with Greek in a marginal note (e.g. Matt v, 22, xxiii, 15, x2B, etic) -As to the word " damnation," (which was a decided blemish on the scholarship of .the old translators), we cannot find that it occurs once in the R.E : in place of it there are "condemnation" and /'judgment" (see Rom iii B,i Cor xi 29, 1 Tim,' v. 12, etc). In St Paul's famous address ti>, the assembled Athenians on the Hill, of Mars, there are two > noticeable .corrections The A. V. makes the politic; apostle commence with' an insult, ! for' telling them that they; were "too superstitious would be no less. We confess to being disappointed with the R.E. h»re, for it merely modifies and does not, entirely change. It reads, "Ye men of Athens, in ' allftmngs I perceive that ye are somewhat superstitious. " A foot note, hWevei 5 , suggests I*'1 *' religious " as an alternative for. 4t superstitious," and we think the ' foot " note has most evidence to support it. Further on in the speech there is the reference to the altar-inscrip-tion, which run in the R.^E 7 "To an unknown God." Here again th&' inargm proposes an alternative, "To the unknown God." Both translations hare found favorers among Biblical scholars, Many of our readers will be rather surprised H» learn that a text in favonr' with "preachera' tot a few has been so altered as to be' nearly unrecognisable We refer to Acts xxvi, 28, which reads in the A.V, " Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian." It has often been pointed out that' whatever the original may mean, and there is some doubt, it cannot mean this. Th 6 R.E, hai thla ana the next verse, v And Agrmpa ' laid unWPaul, iWith but little •persuasion tHott ■ Wotfldest fain make me a Christian. And Paufsaid, I would to God, that whether with Htfcle or with much, not thou only etc" r When, Paul was addressing Felix it is said 'in' the A. V. that the latter Mas a mistranslation which is • mr#~ rr emwided to " was terrified." In the Gospels we used often to read of the " ships " in which Christ traveled on the Lake of Galilee. As is well known, these were small undecked vessels ' prbpelled by oars, and so in the R.E. we find theni flroperly called " boats. ?> The" pillow "-bttiwfiidtf our Lord laid his weary head when heoneV fell asleep^ in one of these boats Was nortowny^ slmnberinducing support, but tne^l&r&leat&e*' boss on which the*, steersman sat j accotdrafgly it ' is called " the cushion "in the R»B. Instead of '" bottles,' in Luk v, 27, toe" more correct "wine-skins" is to-be found. We^'dpked to see if St. Paul's pathetic injunction^" remember my bonds, • had- .beefiJftlft^riSdf but we find it has not. We should have thought that the substitution of " chain " would have been more vivid.-' But'ifrOafcJ iv",'l£, there is a. change in this dii*feti«&3*,-liJ<sl»**Srai be welcomed* thepassiEg^nb^^tigihasVi^^bear branded on my body the marks of Jesus." Another example of more vivid; translation is (I Cor. ix, 27), "I Buffet my &oaV£and bring it into bondage; le^'b'y^an^means, after that I have preached to others, I myself should be rejected; 1 ' Somewhat similar to this in the matter of precision, is Gal. vi, 11, which. sUuds iuJtheJOUjxffixeyingasit should to the reader, the facts of St. Paul's faltering hand and failing eyesight : — " See with how large letters I have written unto you with mine' own : hand." l tAk Tirffwell known, John xiv, 18, ought to rea<% " I will not leave you; Orphans," for so the original has it. The R.E. has made a change here, putting "desolate" for "comfortless," but why not be mere thorough ? All through the famous "panegyric of charity" (1 Cor. xiii) for ' ' ohartty Y> ; has (been .substituted— not without mush .debate^ , .doubtless— the word "love,". ;v Qne t ,oth&h change in this chapter is worth Mentioning, (v 12), "For now we see/in a imirrorj" initead of "glass." " Mirror' 1 .has , also, nboen < jubstituted for " glass" in James .i,_ 24, v . A needed improvement is seen mi Jj^nee iii,^s^j which reads now "Behold how much wood is kindled by how small a fire!" For the word "candle" in Matt,v^ 15 and Mark iv. 21, will be found the mor4»"«xa£t^f lamp." jfln the rendering of the last clause'of John x, w l6, Dean Alford charges. thet^an^latora of thejA. V, with un« fairness ; jbe jaaya'they" wilftdis put "fold ** for "iook;^^ this is now set right'; '^.andih^iijwl become one flock, one shepherd.""' We notice that our present translators have hesitated to render the Greek rfo«fo«,:" slave"; but have re* tamed ''servant, ".placing, however, the alternative ", bondservant 7 Jn the margin. We had, expected, to' qa'v^pajid the expression M sat, at WeMi y dhknged^where necessary to the 1 more* literaV^recuned," but the alteration has noirbeen niadft, A footnote, however, points 1 - out in 6Xcfr,ca»" , tlmt the latter 1 is the meanij^of th^^rpe^.'.'