New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-01-21

Ryyt.roS or Tx EssLHs BIBLE-A series OF
meetings is nov berg he'd in London, 10 dhcas the
inheritance OF revision. Two meetiogs are reported
mi, In the London pspers and Others 80 follow.
DIR ee pre- ded over the trst and the Hon Mr.. Hsy
wood, member Of Parliament over tue second, at 81
Martin Hall loJg- scre. DIR. Black. gentle nsn OF
extensive biblical requirements, addressed both Of
th.ss rne,tpcs and is 10 continue his public efforts
NJ Blacks first lecture devoted Ia critical ex-
81 instiop Of many Passages Ehca required snend'
uent He re'erred TO the great progress INSIDE IN olo'
TcA inv. stig sticps within the last 80 years and the
increased sdy snsZes tor Obtaining 81 accurate ryi'a
Of the text. His secODd lecture Sas introduced by
stating that the authorized version had rot gwen salts
faction and he proved his assertion by citing the mum
Der OF emeAdsiors sid comuent.tors that nsd %
pee ned since its publication. In hSl Dr. bisckwsh
ubsh@d nume OPS instances Of mis-trAosistion sone
were Injurious to the snd frequently TO the STYLE
but this writer admitted that in the main the sotoor
iztd II ,nslaion sithfu solid aud cIer la l'9i
John Wesley admitted the general excellence OF the
author zed vernon but said that in May instances 70
might have been msde better. 10 l15s, DIR. L0~th
printed out many inaccuracies 80 that the call Tor re-
vision was BY no means novelty IN biblical literature.
Having cred number Of instances 10 which scholars
had found fault with the Kings Bible, and published
ansatiops OF their OVID, thu lecturer proceeded TO
classify the various Transitions that had been at
tempted into seryc free, paraphrssuc and emsndsto
" pointed how some OF them were taken from
TIE original Hebrew from the ;, rise, and some
from II Septuagiut- BY careful cOmparis) On aud re-
vision Of these traDsaons and Of the various originals
from which they taken, our present version might
be very much improved IS it was curious fact that
msby sbupt gsts that occurred 10 the English version
might be supplied from the Syrisc which had no
doubt M en- taken from an or sinL since lost. Msny
excellent transsiious Of particular books bad been
made in whch u c variation ffOn the authorized ver-
sion was remark sble and OF the best translation
Of the Book Of job WAS made by ledy. Mrs. Smith,
sad wss published in 1871. Having quoted numerous
instances and extracts from the works of eminent
dvipes the lecturer oonteodet generally that ia ths
su,holzed version the character OF the Bible had not
been sufficiently attended ~, due distinction mtde
between the narrative, poetic and dramatic portions
PREFER and careful revision, keeping this in view,
would make the Bible not only good but favorue
book The call for revised translation WA No EN-
piriesl cry neither was it sectarsn agitation. Jews
Roman Catholics, Epi'cOpalisn., Dis,enters and Uni.
talians bad SILL BY the voices Of toe most learned meo
pronounced the present translation % be imperfect aud
al Joined in the call for revision. The last authority
which he should quote most IN 9xceptonsole
ore-that of DIR. Newcombe, Bishop Of Waterford
Who had in 1872 strongly urged the necessity OF new
translation. The lecture concluded with an enumers-
ton Of the rules which DIR Newcombe laid down for
the production Of proper and relisble translation Of
TIE Holy Scriptures Archdescon Allen, ona OF the
leads members of the High Church party in England
hiss declared himself advocate for revision OF the
Scriptures and urges the appointment Royal Com
mission of ten of the greatest scholars among the Bsh
cps as6 Professors OF the old Universities lie recon-
mends that every change agreed upon by ni1e men,
mers of the Commission shall be placed In the margin
OF the common versrn.