# The Emphasised Bible/Introduction

AN
EXPOSITORY INTRODUCTION
TO THE
EMPHASISED BIBLE.
CHAPTER I.
THE SPECIAL FEATURES OF THIS TRANSLATION.
That this purports to be an "Emphasised" Bible is naturally the first thing to be noticed. But as it seems desirable to devote an entire chapter to the subject of Emphasis, further discussion of this prominent characteristic may be conveniently deferred until it falls to be considered in due course. In the meantime there are other features which have grown up around this, which it will be of advantage to set forth in order.
1. The size of the page. It is with design that this has been made large; mainly for the purpose of bringing into one view connected portions, the constituent parts of which can be so much more easily grasped and remembered when readily seen in their relation to each other and to the whole, than when extended over several smaller pages. The familiar fifteenth chapter of the Gospel by Luke affords an excellent example; the whole chapter being here brought within two columns, in which its historical introduction and the three parables of which it is composed are at once taken in by the eye.
2. The varying indentations of the lines. These have been employed to serve several important purposes.
In the image of God created he him, Male and female created he them,—
then we know we are in the presence of Poesy—a most fitting place, surely, for her first appearance!
There the lawless cease from raging, And there the toilworn are at rest,"
is so plaintive as to be like a mother's lullaby over her sick child.
Another strain is touched when we read—
For a child hath been born to us, A son hath been given to us,—
in which it may be noted that this and not the current rhythm is undoubtedly the true one; since this it is which, closely following the Hebrew, throws the emphasis in the right place—on "child" and "son." There lies our hope—in Him! These samples will suffice to point to the thousands of instances of Parallelism which, in this translation, lie before the reader. The present is not the place for discussing the many varieties of Parallelism to be found in the Bible. The subject is necessarily familiar in all treatises on Hebrew poetry. Better, however, than the perusal of any printed treatise will be the collating and classifying of instances by each student for himself. He can label his samples at pleasure, as "synonymous," "antithetic," "recurrent," "progressive," and so forth, provided he correctly describe them. It is uncertain whether due attention has generally been given to what may be described as semi-parallelism, not infrequently to be found in Isaiah. Its presence is intimated in this Bible, either by a couple of responding extra capitals, as in the following:—
I am sated With ascending-offerings of rams, And the fat of fed beasts.
So have I sworn—Not to be vexed with thee, Nor to rebuke thee;
or, when space has required it, by an extra line bestowed upon it, sooner than do it an injustice. Thus—
And they shall call thee— The city of Yahweh, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel.
There is one especial form of Parallelism to which much interest attaches, if not by reason of any novelty in the attention given to it, yet at least by virtue of its inherently striking character and the help it occasionally renders to right reading and interpretation. Dr. R. Moulton terms it the Envelope arrangement of lines. Its simplest form is where the first line is responded to by the fourth, and the second is answered by the third. A single example will show what is meant:—
Let me see thy form, Let me hear thy voice,— For thy voice is sweet, And thy form comely.
Its bearing upon the correct reading of the original is seen in Isa. ix. 3; the much-needed emendation of which is reached by Dr. Ginsburg through a wholly independent process, dealing with questions of abbreviation and letter grouping. The result of his critical revision of the Hebrew text is strongly confirmed by the fact that thereby is produced this very special and beautiful form of parallelism:—
Thou hast increased the exultation. Thou hast made great the joy,— They joy before thee according to the joy of harvest, As men exult when they distribute spoil.
​How it touches exegesis may be discovered by turning to Mat. vii. 6; in explaining which we need no longer fear it as an undue liberty, to attribute to the "dogs" the "turning" and "tearing," and to the "swine" the "trampling underfoot."
She saith unto him— Yea, Lord! I have believed. That thou art the Christ, the Son of God,— He who into the world should come.
Thus saith Yahweh—
3. Varieties of type.—These have been but sparingly resorted to, partly on the score of economy, but chiefly because continual changes of type soon become annoying and even distressing to the eye. For these reasons Emphasis, in particular, has not been thus indicated. At the same time the discreet employment of other than the ordinary type has been made to answer a few very serviceable ends.
The voice of joy､ and the voice of gladness, The voice of the bridegroom､ and the voice of the bride,—
4. Section-headings, Footnotes, References, and Appendices.—These may be left to speak for themselves, when once two or three needful explanations have been offered.
CHAPTER II.
CONCERNING EMPHASIS
AS AUTHORITATIVELY INDICATED IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES.
1. "Strike, but hear me!" exclaimed an ancient orator to an infuriated mob; that is, "Strike, if you will; but hear me first." In reading aloud this citation, some little stress is instinctively laid on the two words "strike" and "hear," thereby assisting the ear to catch the plainly intended contrast. A few years since, the same saying was modified in sense by a change of emphasis. A trade strike was pending, when an illustrated paper, giving an imposing figure representing "Law," put beneath the figure the legend, "Strike, but hear me!" in this way not only investing the word "strike" with a modern significance, but suggesting, by the emphasis laid on the word "me," a timely contrast—as much as to say, "You have listened to other advisers: before you act on their counsel, hearken to me—consider whether your contemplated strike would be legal". This new point put into the old words would perhaps scarcely have been caught, even with the help of the symbolic figure of the cartoon, but for the outward and visible sign of emphasis attached to the closing word "me."
2. It is freely granted that context and circumstance, when known and considered, are in many cases alone sufficient to guide to correct emphasis, whether it be in ordinary ​literature or in the Bible. For example, the bold contrast made by Christ, in the Sermon on the Mount, between other teachers and himself would naturally prompt any reader of taste to lay stress on the pronoun "I" in the recurring formula—
Ye have heard that it hath been said . . . but I say unto you.
3. Context and circumstance, however, are not always sufficient, because not always clear. We have therefore to be thankful that our Public Versions of the Bible furnish further guidance in the matter of emphasis by means of Idiom. The words are frequently so arranged as by their very order to indicate where the stress should be placed. Thus, in the history of Joseph, where "the butler," in confessing his fault in forgetting Joseph, narrates the diverse fate of "the baker" and himself, he says—
And it came to pass, as he interpreted to us, so it was: me he restored unto mine office, and him he hanged.
In this sentence it is at once felt that the pronouns "me" and "him" are as certainly emphasised by their mere position as if they had been printed in capitals. So, again, where the Apostle Paul, after thanking God that he spake with tongues more than any of the Corinthian Christians, proceeds to say—
Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue,
it is easily seen from the context that the clause "in the church" governs the whole sentence, and should receive the leading stress. Nor is it by order of words alone that an emphatic idiom is constituted. Certain forms of circumlocution serve the same purpose:
But as for me, I shall behold thy face in righteousness,
is an altogether effective means of reproducing the force of the emphatic pronoun which opens the verse in the Hebrew. Or a simple repetition secures the result—
The living, the living, he shall praise thee, as I do this day.
Or a qualifying word of a manifestly emphasising force is employed, like "surely" in the following:—
In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die;
or "certainly" in this place—
Could we certainly know that he would say. Bring your brother down?
or "diligently" in this—
If thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the Lord thy God.
4. Yet, varied as is the Emphatic Idiom of our Public Versions and numerous as are the examples which meet us in which that indication of stress has been turned to most admirable account, the pity is that it has not been resorted to ten times more frequently than is the case. For, be it observed, the Emphatic Idiom of the English is but a faint and fitful reflex of the Emphatic Idiom of the Hebrew and Greek. This fact is wellknown to scholars, though scarcely dreamt of by the general Bible-reading public. A fact ​however it is, and one which can be substantiated just as conclusively as any law which governs language. The great point at present is that all this accession of force and guide to the sense is, in the Sacred Originals, secured simply by Idiom—order of words, fulness of expression, repetitions and the like—and is therefore both pervading and authoritative. It is "pervading": not, of course, as though all Scripture needed to be formally emphasised to the same degree—to imagine such a thing would be absurd; some styles of Sacred composition, instead of bristling with points, calmly flow on, keeping the even tenor of their way—but "pervading" in the satisfactory sense of being ever available when required. Whenever a point has to be made, a quiet contrast to be rather hinted at than expressed, a sharp and sudden home-thrust to be delivered. Idiom is at hand to accomplish it. From which, when the numberless living interests enshrined in the Bible are considered, it will be expected to follow—and follow it does—that a very large amount of indicated stress underlies almost every page of the Sacred Volume. And—does it need to be repeated?—Emphasis so conveyed is surely "authoritative": which is not the same thing as saying there is no room for misapprehension in this place or in that; nor is it the same as affirming that all scholars are absolutely agreed about every little point. But the emphasis is "authoritative," inasmuch as it is in the original—is a part of the original—is of the very spirit and essence of the original. And being in this way "authoritative," it is in all its main indications worthy of unspeakably more diligent heed in exposition than the most brilliant fancies of men who dream they may make what they please of Holy Writ. Sober students are bound by the laws of Grammar: they are equally bound by the laws of Emphasis.
5. It is one of the leading aims of The Emphasised Bible to do justice to the emphatic Idioms of the original tongues, and thereby place all earnest Bible readers, for practical purposes, on the same footing as that occupied by such as are familiar with Hebrew and Greek.
6. Mainly by Idiom has this been attempted. So that if all the artificial signs of Emphasis used in this Bible were swept away, an amount of Emphatic Idiom would remain far surpassing that to be found in any other version known to the Translator. Although emphatic inversion, for instance, is not infrequently discovered in our Public Versions: yet far more frequently and—if the expression may be pardoned—far more consistently does it appear in this translation. Take two examples out of thousands:
| A.V. | Wilt than break a leaf driven to and fro? |
| | And wilt thou pursue the dry stubble? |
| Em. B. | A driven leaf wilt thou cause to tremble? |
| | Or dry stubble wilt thou pursue? |
The latter rendering reproduces the idiom of the Hebrew, and therewith also most naturally shows where the primary stress should be laid.
| A.V. | And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them. |
| Em. B. | As soon as all his own he putteth forth |
| | Before them he moveth on. |
The Idiom, the Emphasis, is in the Greek. It would be endless to cite examples of all the various forms which the Original Idiom takes for the sake of conveying ​emphasis. Suffice it to say: that in this Bible these forms have been sacredly reproduced whenever possible—so long, that is, as the English remained easily intelligible and was not too constrained.
7. But Idiom alone would have been utterly inadequate to the attainment of the object in view. In many instances the endeavour to preserve in English the order of the words in the original would have resulted in obscurity; or, worse still, would have conveyed the very opposite of the meaning intended. In the following passage from the Book of Lamentations, it could have been wished that, for the sake of preserving the exact rhythm of the Hebrew, it had been perspicuous English to say—
For this cause hath sickened our heart, For these things have darkened our eyes;
inasmuch as there is some little weight naturally resting on the paired words (ending words in the Hebrew) "heart" and "eyes" which, if that position could have been preserved in English, would have secured a fine cadence and a satisfying ending to each line of the couplet. But the construction would in two or three ways have been ambiguous—in fact a wrong meaning to some of the terms would have been favoured. Therefore, inasmuch as a clear conveyance of the sense is rightly the first requirement, the Hebrew arrangement can only in part be followed, and we have to be content with some such approximation as this—
For this cause hath our heart´ sickened, For these things have our eyes´ darkened.
An acute accent on "heart´" and "eyes´" may be allowed as a slight compensation for loss of position; and, to anticipate for a moment, if our angular sign be then attached to the two opening phrases ("For this cause" and "For these things"), those words will be instinctively caught as adverbial clauses, strongly emphasised by their commanding position, and so gathering up into themselves the whole stream of the prophet's foregoing lament—
<For this cause> hath our heart´ sickenpd, <For these things> have our eyes´ darkened.
This illustration may stand for thousands, and evince beyond a doubt the impossibility of mechanically giving idiom for idiom in translation: hopeless obscurity would frequently be the inevitable result. And as a sufficient proof that in some cases idiom for idiom would cause the translation to express the very opposite meaning to its original, it is enough to cite one instance.
Elijah calleth this man
is the order of the words in the Greek; yet "this man" is the nominative (that is, the caller) and "Elijah" the objective (that is, the person [supposed to be] called upon) and the true rendering is—
This man calleth Elijah;
though rightfully a decided stress should be laid, where indicated, on "Elijah."
8. That, notwithstanding this risk of overdoing, a very free use of Emphatic Idiom has been made in this Bible will soon appear upon examination. Few sympathetic readers will complain of this. Such readers will perceive and bear in mind that inversions in the language of The Emphasised Bible are always intentional—always ​according to the original—always expressive. They will go on to observe that an inversion which at first seemed harsh, especially if incautiously read, soon commends itself when tastefully uttered. Finally, the Translator's purpose will be remembered. It is due to himself to confess that he has deemed himself privileged, and therefore has carried the process of imitating the inversions of the originals to a degree scarcely tolerable in any version designed for public use. It is quite true that the larger number of the inversions here ventured would, as he conceives, adorn any translation, and because of their apt reflection of the Hebrew or Greek he honestly thinks they possess strong claims on general adoption; but not all of them. Speaking approximately, possibly in one case out of ten the Editor of The Emphasised Bible would have himself shrunk back from what he has actually dared, if he had been so presumptuous as to think of producing a competitive translation. His aim throughout has been to form a Companion Version; and he respectfidly asks the measure of indulgence which that intention makes reasonable.
9. One thing at least is clear—namely, that English Idiom alone could never have expressed all the Emphasis enshrined in the originals. It follows that either numerous tokens of stress contained in the sacred tongues must have been lost, or else artificial means were necessary to give them effect. As for the best method of doing this, there is, of course, no accounting for individual preferences; and, given the necessity, some would have chosen varieties of type, not sufficiently considering, perhaps, how soon these annoy the eye when multiplied. Others, again, would have preferred the underscoring which was used in the first and second editions of the Translator's New Testament, unaware, probably, that the costliness of that method seemed prohibitive when thought of for the entire Bible. In favour of the plan nowadopted, suffice it to claim economy, elasticity, and effectiveness. The signs here employed practically cost nothing, since the compositor can pick up a sign of emphasis as easily as he can pick up a comma. The elasticity springs from the combination of diverse signs: for example, an interposed accent can appear in the midst of an already emphasised clause. And the effectiveness is quite as great as was desired, seeing that delicacy of touch was also wished, and even a fitness to be temporarily disregarded—a quality commended to all who find the marks in the least perplexing. Such persons as would have been better pleased with some heavier and more obtrusive style of emphasising will kindly bethink them, that stress is mostly quite effective if laid on one syllable of a word, one word in a clause, and so forth; and that all the guidance the eye requires is to be enabled to take in at a glance the beginning and ending of the word, the phrase, the clause within which the enhanced stress is to take effect.
10. One explanation further, and nothing will be needed for completing this chapter, beyond a few annotated examples and the synopsis at the end, which will be convenient for reference both to the scholar and to the learner. The explanation is this: Idiom alone, it may be thought, might have been trusted to convey a portion of the emphasis indicated in the original, and artificial signs might have been restricted to the conveyance of the rest; instead of which (it may be objected), in this Bible, the artificial signs, in point of fact, mostly accompany the idiom when present, as well as serve as a substitute for it when absent. In fact, however, it was difficult to draw the line, especially as, in many cases, the signs of emphasis served as a species of magnified punctuation, for which reason it seemed better to go through with them. Besides ​which, is it not sometimes welcome to hurried eyes to have pointed out to them what might have been discovered by unaided vision?
11. Now for a few Annotated Examples, before submitting which the hint is given that a glance at the Table of Signs placed at the end of this Introduction will here be found convenient.
Doth ||this|| cause |you| to stumble?
The A.V. rendering of this passage leaves much to be desired; partly because of the wrong impression which the word "offend" conveys, as though Jesus feared He had hurt His disciples' feelings to the degree of provoking their resentment; and partly because it leaves the point of the question uncertain. The R.V. obviates the wrong impression, by substituting "cause to stumble" for "offend," but it fails to bring out the fine point seen by laying a little stress on "you." "Doth THIS cause you to stumble"—you, My disciples, who might have known better? It is a clear case; for the Greek sets the noun governed before the verb that governs it (cp. post, Synopsis, A, b).
And he said､ I know not,<the keeper of my brother> am ||I||?]]
How the point of Cain's defence of his professed ignorance leaps to his lips! The arrangement, "Am I my brother's keeper?" is tameness itself in comparison.
<What is right､ what is right> shalt thou pursue.
In this place both A.V. and R.V. preserve the inversion which opens the verse, and for that we are thankful: "That which is altogether just shalt thou follow." But why not have given it with the greater simplicity and vivacity of the original?—ẓédhek ẓédhek tirdôf'—it is all there. And why not have given the full force of the verb "pursue"—"pursue" with determination, and not merely "follow" with halfheartedness or from a dull sense of duty?
Then thou scarest me with dreams, And <by visions> dost terrify me: So that my soul chooseth strangling, |Death| rather than these my bones.
Note here how parallelism and emphasis enhance the effect of each other. There being two synonymous couplets, constituting a duplicate expression for each thought (viz., first the Divine visitation, then the effect on the sufferer), emphasis steps in at the second line of each couplet, and strongly accentuates the closing word of the preceding line: "dreams—visions"; "strangling—death." Note also how well the sharp expression which the word "death" draws to itself, prepares the way for the lingering and piteous lament over "these my bones."
<Righteousness> I put on､ and it clothed me, <Like a robe and a turban> was my |justice|; <Eyes> became I to |the blind|, And <feet to the lame> was ||I||.
It would be difficult to name a passage more studded with the beauties of combined parallelism and emphasis than this. Observe that, here again, there are two couplets; then, that an emphatic inversion leads off in the first line of the first couplet—an accusative before its verb (Synopsis, A, b); next, that the thought of "clothing" oneself, given in the first line, is emphatically and rhetorically amplified in the second line, ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/22 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/23 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/24 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/25 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/26 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/27 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/28 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/29 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/30 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/31 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/32 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/33 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/34 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/35 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/36 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/37 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/38 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/39 ​Page:The Emphasised Bible - Vol 1.djvu/40
* ↑ 1 K. viii. ; 2 Ch. vi.
* ↑ Acts xxvi. 14-18.
* ↑ Gen. i. 27.
* ↑ Job iii. 17.
* ↑ Isa ix. 6.
* ↑ Isa. i. 11.
* ↑ Isa. liv. 9.
* ↑ Isa. lx. 14.
* ↑ In "The Bible as Literature."
* ↑ S.S. ii. 14.
* ↑ Isa. ix. 3.
* ↑ To these references may be added Job xxvii. 16, 17; Jer. ix. 4; x. 11; and especially Is. vi. 10, with Mat. xiii. 15, where the rhetorical movement is "heart—ears—eyes: eyes—ears—heart."
* ↑ Exo. xi.
* ↑ Jer, Eze., Hag. ii., Zech. ii., viii., x., and often.
* ↑ See, for examples, Psalms cvii. and cxxxvi.
* ↑ Exo. xx. 6; cp. Deu. v. 10.
* ↑ Exo. xxxiii. 17; xxxiv. 6, 7.
* ↑ Gal. iii. 16; Eph. iv. 9; Heb. ii. 11-14; iii. 5, 6; iv. 7; vii. 24; viii. l3; x. 10. 39; xii. 27; xiii. ll-l3.
* ↑ Mat. v. 22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44.
* ↑ Gen. xli. 13.
* ↑ 1 Cor. xiv. 19.
* ↑ Ps. xvii. 15.
* ↑ Isa. xxxviii. 19.
* ↑ Gen. ii. 17.
* ↑ Gen. xliii. 7.
* ↑ Deu. xxviii. 1.
* ↑ For an example of total neglect in A.V., and timid change in R.V., see Deu. vi. 13.
* ↑ Job xiii. 25.
* ↑ Jn. x. 4.
* ↑ Lam. v. 17.
* ↑ Mat. xxvii. 47.
* ↑ Jn. vi. 61.
* ↑ Gen. iv. 9.
* ↑ Deu. xvi. 20.
* ↑ Job vii. 14, 15.
* ↑ Job xxix. 14., 15.