Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1857-06-10


the printer with their name at the bottom of their
articles so that any one who demanded it could le-
ccivc it from the Editor, without requiring 1t
through the medium of the newspaper. When it
becomes us to sign our name TO any thing we say
or do, in public print, We will do So View stop
least We are thought to be too sarcastic, and say
this that though there are 81 emng contradictions
in the Bible, they do not affect in the least the
doctrines therein contained.
Mr.. Ednlonls says your correspondent is sadly
at fault. "Revision is older by several hundred
years than the political segment Of the Union to
which lie refers. Mr.. E. las mistaken us alto
gether. In our illusions we had no reference to
Tyndalc g. Firth Revision associations. We spoke
Of the Revision of the present day, in the nine
teenth century-the Revision of King James so
called improperly, for King James did not revise
any Scripture, but this is what it is called in our day
Again Mr.. E. saw no charge made against the
Bible Union at ALT was ,ainst the Revision OF
tho Scriptures. We are ry sorry we are at so
great loss, as to be unable to furnish our friend
Mr.. E. with any names from England or the North,
to establish what we assert, but we will come
home in our beloved old South Carolina, and give
names which are perhaps as good as England or
the North can furnish. Well Mr.. Norris Bap-
tst Preacher, and by the way gentleman and
christian too, says it is fearful undertaking and
quite out of order Mr.. Porter, a Methodist
Preacher of high rcpute and profound theologian,
a christian and gentleman, says il is treading on
sacred ground, and it would do for angels not men,
such an undertaking. We are informed by one Of
the members of the Baptist Church, that Mr..
Manly is bitterly opposed to it, and he is one that
stands No. with the Baptists, and very high in
this village as learned divine. One Of the sub
scribers to Mr. Els new Revision works in this
place, and member OF the Baptist Church, says
he has come to the conclusion to have nothing
more to do with it, together, with two Methodist
preachers, who give their decided opposition to
the plan under consideration. We could give
names for what we say, but we have taken this
liberty without advising them Of our intention so
to do. If necessary We will do it at some other
time. The persons who we have referance to, live
in our village, not in England, where but few, if
any one knows the fact or not of what their views
are on Revision of the scriptures.
will conclude this reply by saying We hope
Mr.. E. will furnish his readers with correct quo
tatons from the English Bible, not as it is in his
piece, incorrect We refer him to the Bible again
to see what it says. If a man cant quote correct
from his own mother tongue, the English, we hard
ly think him competent to quote from the original
Greek There is nothing said in the 7th chap. and
7th verse of Romans, about covetousness and in-
stead of but covetousncss," it is "or covetous-
ness" In Ephcsians 9th chap. and 3rd verse, and
in Deuteronomy 9th chap. and 10th verse, it reads
Eye" instead of "you" shalt not tempt, &C.
Genesis, I'd chap. and 9th verse, before it was in
the earth" is "before it grew" or in other words
it is transpositon-" before it was in the earth"
is entirely left out in the quotation.
Now, if the scriptures have been translated more
than once and mistakes occur, we hold they may
occur again, for if men make mistakes from plain
English quotations, what may they not do from
Greek But most of commentators say it is
seeming contradictions in the Bible not real; we
do not recollect Of hearing any person say 3d. but
infiels or scepticks. THE BIBLE.