The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-05-30


with brother Hague that it was, and that IL was the
only word by which they could obtain faithful
translation of b0pftzo. immense was not the word.
The Greek was first Latinized, and was translated
by Tertulian who first used tins0, and since iavo,
auo and mTeito but never merge or tmmogo, AZ
brother Tumbull had just said. All the Latin
writers, down to the sixth century, never once used
merge or sn'srgo TO translate this word. Finally,
| we had the ord bopf,smo, and in Jerome time
il intogeneral uso, and thence, probably, was
| introduced into Anglo-Saxon by Augustine. In
the four Gospels of Alfred, in 8i6, A. d., the word
"baptize'' occurs 1t was therefore, at least, 800
| years longer Incorporated in the language than
| immerse." Baptf.o meant TO dip in and take out
| for sacred purpose, and immense" simply con-
quoted from the Baptist Advoeats editedby the Rev.
Mr.. Wyccfi, the acknowledged organ of the board,
as follows" We have never published, and never
design TO publish Baptist Bible 1t should be un,
derstood we have always occupied this ground"
and asked how far this was consistent with the
subsequent action of the board. The present YER
sion had existed 2t0 years; We had lived upon its
blessed words it had found its home in the great
heart of Christendom, among English Christians
wherever they carried their beloved mother tongue.
DR.. lde then combated the fallacy Of Baptist, or
sayng-The church of Christ will not part with
this version. They will be guide through life;
when we lay on the death bed at our last hour,
that Bible, that abused, raduced yet faithful and
safe good old English Bible, shall pillow our heads,
and in its blessed words we will breathe out our
last prayer, " Lord Jesus seceive my spirit"
Deacon COLGATE, N. Y, briefly explained his
dsapprova of the resolution, and Of his conviction
OF the necessity Of new version.
DR.. WALLIS COVE followed on the same side, in
somewhat rambling argument; his remarks, in
many parts, exciting the expression OF strong dis
sent from many in the meeting AT one portion,
speaking of the defence of the word baptize, he
used the simie OF lame dog. (tiisses and sx-
citement.)
nation he felt at hearing the Bible so abused.
"What" said the reverend doctor, is il come TO
this-that beardless boy shall bully and abuse the
Bible" "a storm of Kisses here interrupted the
speaker, and, for some time, the meeting was in
state OF confusion.) AT length,
Rev. Mr.. WEsTcoTT, Saltwater, N. Y, trusted
personalities would be sedul0usly avoided. Briefly
he explained he favored the resolution, and opposed
new version, on grounds nearly similar to those
already urged. lie hoped, at least, whatever the
decision arrived at, that the subject would be set
tied kindly.
Rev Dr. CULVER, Boston, having offered an ap-
propriate prayer, the meeting adjourned till Thurs
dapy morning, at O'Clock, at the same place.
THURSDAY MORNING .-ADJoURNED MEETING.
The society again met yesterday morning, in
Mulberry street, at nine O'Clock. The attendance
on this occasion was somewhat thinner than on the
previous meetings, but the building was, with the
exception of the galleries, well filled The hour
for the commencement of business having arrived,
the meeting was opened with prayer by Rev. Mr.
Matthias, of Pennsylvania. The Secretary next
read letter from some brethren in Baltimore,
deploring the new version movement, and express
would be carried out. They also express their
mistaken desire for the prosperity Of this society
Documents were also read from Buffalo to the
same effect, and giving an account of meeting
held in that city in opposition to the version
remonstrance was also presented by Rev. DR..
Culver, from Boston.
The order of the day was next moved.
Rev. Mr.. GRAFTON, Massachusetts,, expressed
his great respect for the President and the members
of the board and was extremely sorry to be obliged
conscientiously to differ from them. He regretted
confident in the old fashioned Bible that had ex-
listed and comforted him during forty-fve years
Ho feared ii would have bad tendency in induc-
ing state of Indifference and disrespect for the
Holy Scriptures. He had heard with feelieg Of
horror, that at the previous meeting that Bible had
been compared TO a lame dog; he was shocked at
such language.
Dr. W. Cow explained that the smile he referred
10 was lame attempt to defend the of the word
"baptize."
Rev. Mr.. TUCKER said it was they who had OPP
posed the version which had been compared TO
lame dog. (Great excitement.)
Rev. Mr.. NEALR thought it was sufficient il Dr.
Cone disclaimed intending an offensive application.
II was, however, some minutes before the meet
ng had become nearly calm enough to allow the
speaker to proceed
Rev. Mr.. GRAFTON resumed and during the
remainder. of his speech, by happy mixture OF
humor and argument succeeded in dispelling the
unplessantnsss of this incident lie was of opinion
if the Bible left TO itself, without note
ment, il would convert all to the Baptist faith. Ills
remarks, IN the man, were recaaptniatory OF the
Rev. j. j. WooLsEY, Connecticut, said through
out the whole length of the land this subject was
cngrossng the attention OF all OF their dcnomina-
ton, ana the result of the discussion anxiously
awaited. lie had expressed his opinion in the
board, that this society was not the one TO secure
a translation without the concurrence Of other de-
nominations The rev. gentleman re-revewed in
the track of other speakers the meaning of bapfiso.
Rev. Mr. WEsTcoTr proposed that the fifteen
minute rule be suspended in favor Of one Of the
advocates for the new version TO allow OF full ex
position Of that side OF the question.
Rev. Mr. CEEsswE1I., Of Philadelphia was pro-
ceeding TO make some remarks as TO the general
relevancy with which the discussion was being
conducted, when the
PREsrpENr reminded the speaker that only MEM
bers Of the society could have the floor.
Rev. Mr.. CREsswELI,-if were not member
cir, should not have ppudence enough to be
here. The brother, however, gave way to
Rev. :. s. CUTTING, who was in favor OF the
resolution. lie would first touch upon the hstori-
cal positions in regard 10 the views OF his brethren
He asserted that King James had really very little
TO do with the version Of the scripture dedicated
him. IL could not be proved that the translators OF
that version had been confined or guided by any
rule in relation 10 ecclesiastical words. They
asked for Instructions, but IL is not known that
King James gave any reply. This version never
was impostd upon the people even IN King James's
reign, but Il came into use IN precisely The same
way that good version would NJ any time super
sede bad Should better version be presented
now IL would be preferred TO the present, just as Il
superseded the German version, and the Bishops
Bible in Jsmes's time. lie stated that a pamphlet
containing these facts, taken from Anderson's An
nails Of the English Bible, was for sale at the door.
A BRoITR-Thcre is a pamphlet on the other
side; you should advertise that at the same time.
O.aughter)
Rev. S. :. CUTTING resumed the genealogical
argument. and in speaking Of the English baptizc.
he stated that in early copy Of Chauccr so early
as 1861, fifty years before King lames's version,
written contemporaneously with Wyclfie, bdpfi-e
was often used, Firnifying to immerse.
Rev. q. II. JUDD next spoke IN opposition TO the
resolution and in favor of new version. lie read
an extremely able statement Of the arguments In
support of his view Of the subject, and taking up
end replying 20 many Of the arguments adduced on
the other side. II displayed throughout sound
| biblical knowledge, and clear reasoning. by the
indulgence, and az the motion Of the meeting, Rev.
Mr.. Judd spoke double the allotted In some
parts, the holiness Of an assertion or the warmth
Of an expression, called forth dissent that inter-
| rupted for some minutes; Notwithstanding, the
document generally. was listened to with profound
attention