Des Arc citizen., 1860-03-14
For the Des Arc Citizen,]
 j. W. MOORE AND REVISION.

NIT. MOOTt III HIS StCuilu ait'SiS P scents this as his thrd objection: :" Be- cause we already have Bible translated at time and in circumstances infinitely more favorable to correctness and mpar- tialIly than that proposed by the Bible Union." He says, the transla,ors lived in the days of Bacon, Milton and Shaks- peare, and what thens Does fhis prove tbat Mey were scholars or that they were fitted for the work assigned thema Where do you find their " Novum Organums { Which one of them ever produced an !" Areopagitica,' or, which of them reared for himself such an imperishable monu- ment, as s. Paradise Lost"
 |" With pyramids and towers,
 From diamond quarries hewn and rocks of
 gold?" o
 Which of them ever gave to the world such a creation as Hamlet? What monu- ments of learning did these matchless scholars leave for posterity2 Truly, the alusion to the age of Shakespeare and M Millon, is anything but favorable to lhe greatest men that have lived "snce the beginning of ,ime,' to use the Parsons ambitious platilude. Ina, the time was favorable to impartialily" is a pure myth, unreal as a Barmecide feast. In what did this element of impartiali!y !" manifest itself? In any elemency or courtesy that the "royal pedant" or his myrmydons ever showed towards the Puruans? Does it show itself in the version they made? In rendering to Paska, I" Easter" instead of Passover" :" to sustain festival of the chureh2 "The circumstdnceS were not infinitely more favorable 10 correctness then than now. McWhorter, the author of " Yahveh Chust," says: "The Hebrew was but numerically understood in the time of our Transators," p Sl, commenting on 3 Sam: 23; Is. This passage, is so obscure in our version, as to be utterly meaningless to the ordinary reader" Again; "The number of interpotattons by our translaiors, shows lha, they could make no sense of the original, the text being to them inextricably confused Since Meir time, however, other manuscripts have been discovered which throw great light upon this passage.' "Our translators being ignordnf of the nature of Hebrew poetry have rendered it as if il were prose-" And as consequence, "poetic statements lull of significance, being often turned into incomprehensibie prose" N. w Taylor, D. D. Dwigh, Professors of Ddaclic Theology, Yale, says, in speak- ing of "pon,s confessedIy dark to our translators:" Il can hardly be supposed that the researches of scholars, for three centuries. have added nothing of value toward the elucidation of the Hebrew Scriptures in the shape Of new constructions and new facts, of which those wise and good men had they lived in our day. would not eagerly have availed themselves in their work. The only inn provementto to be desired would be. the clearing up. so far as possible, of dark or doubtful passages, the recti6calion of knopn errors. and the arrangement of poetry and prose. as they stand in the original Such a translation would give new impulse to the study of the Old Testament and would, we believe, hasten the time when 'the earth shall be full of the knoDtedge of YAHvEH, as the waters cover the sea-" Dr. Edward Robinson, says: "In the lapse of centuries and even of years. there is constant pro- gress in the observation and discovery of new facts and circumstances, bearing up- on the social and also the physical history of the Hebrews and other ancient nations. They all serve to enlarge the circle of biblical knowledge, they add 10 the ap- paratus and means of the interpreter and biblical harnionist, and often shed new light upon topics which were before dark or doubtful It may also be truly said, that in no former period perhaps, has there been accumulated greater amount of such facts and such progress than during the half century which has closed" l now notice singular paragraph and as false as singular e
 GA most wicked attempt has sometimes been made to induce the belief that this version, which is called King James,, simply because it was made during his reign, was, in great part, the work of that King-that he selected the translators-dictated to them it's character--paid them for its execution--is- sued it by his royal authority, and, in de-
 
 people. grosser or more malicious false hood was never inculcated. James was bad enough without telling lies to make him worse."
 Pray, Mir. Moore, tohat constitutes the " wckedness" of the alleged attempt 2 Is i, malicious" 10 attribute good work to a man! To say that the best version of the Bible ever made, was q in great part the work of that King" is mali cious !. MT. M. says, James was bad enough, but that revisionists make him worse by charging that he ordered a translation of the Bible to be made !! Grant. that the attempt has been made 10 induce the belief" mentioned. tc make a good version of the sacred Wri- tings, is 10 do good thing But for any one to say that good thing has been done is malicious and makes the man worse of whom affirmed either the paragraph quoted is very muddy or very silly. IL i worse than foolish, i, is almost entirely destitute of truth. First, MT. M. says that the version was called King James (. simply because it was made in hi
 reign" and that Il IS "a gross and mali to 1. AZ ro, that it uae |,