Cedar Falls gazette. [volume] (Cedar Falls, Iowa) 1860-1895, 1869-03-05
For tho Cedar Falls Gazette.
Light for- Inquirer"


Baptist Church, Cedar Falls, Iowa,
attempts to justify the Baptlsts for
withdrawing from the American
Bible Society. He says: ats de-
sign was declared at its organization
to, be the dissemination OF the Scrip
lures in the received versions, where
they exist, and of the most faithful
where they may be required" In
his subsequent remarks he cndeavors
to make out that the A. b. s. failed
to make good the original design. !"
We are led to inquire: "Who Is
this that darkeneth counsel by words
without knowledge pa Bro. NJ. does
not give; the language of the original
article. 1t is as follows: "fhis So
ciety shall be known by the name of
heAMERICAN BIBLE SOCIETY,
of which the sole object shall be to
encourage wide circulation of the
Holy Scriptures, without note or
comment. The only copies in the
English language, to be circulated by
the Society, shall be of the version
now in common use."
When the Society extended its la
bors into foreign fields, and was call
cd to appropriate funds to print the
Scriptures as translated into other
languages, the same general rule was
adopted. The principles of the Eng
fish Bible were to be followed, ct least
SO far as this, that the version should
be catholic, SO that all denominations
might use 1t as they do our English
Bible. 1t was never intended that
any translation should be made to
bend to the peculiarities of the Bap-
lists more than to any other religious
denomination connected with the
Society. Such was the original in :
tention; hut orr Baptist friends, at
least some of them, thought they
found it necessary to arrange for o
denominational Bible. Hence the
so.called american Bible Union. -
The title of this new organization is
Observation-Disclosures to make q
wrong impression. The leading
evangelical churches OF this country
have nothing to do with 1t, the Bap-
lists excepted.
We do not class Campbellites, Nor
mons, and those sects which deny
the Deity of Christ, among the evan
gelical churches of the country
That they are immersionists and
heartily cooperate with the Baptists
In the new version, We are not dis
posed to deny; yet even this may be
somewhat questionable.
Nevertheless 1t is not very modest
for such an organization to arrogate
to itself the appellstion, "TAe Anaeri-
can Bible Union" IL liz not only
contravening the facts, but mani
fest disrespect to the tims-honorcd
American Bible Society.
In the GAZETTE of the 10Th ult.,
under the caption "More Light for
Inquirer" Rev. D. n. Mason goes
on TO say: "Baptists have no more
reason for repudiating the common
version than other religious denom-
nations have" This IL a true say-
ing, and worthy of all acceptatlon.
Why then, my dear Bro, withdraw
from the American Bible Society,
and engage, "anguiblts Ell oedibas,n
with a separate organization, for tie
purpose of supplanting the common
version This Is done upon the
part of the Baptists, 1t seems, with
"no more reason for repudiating the
common version than other religious
denominations have" Is this an in.
timation that "other religious de-
nominations" should get up version
to harmonic with their peculiar
tenets? Such a course might appear
to relieve, at least to some extent, the
awkward position of our Baptist
friends, upon the principle that
misery loves company" but It
would eyentuate In the greatest
babel ever known among any people
in the history Of the world.
Language, especially the English,
is constantly undergoing changes.
Hence terms adapted to one period,
very frequently, are not readily COM
pretended when applied to the same
condition of things at q far more re-
mote period. In confirmation of this
we have many examples at hand.
Consequently, If IL were possible for
the several denominations to agree ut
this time on a translation, within
fifty years, beyond doubt, FESTIVE,
not to say bigoted, spirits would arise
and demand revision. Is proof OF
this required? Here it Is. Fifty
years ago the Baptists gave their full
Enforcement to the A. b. s., whose
object was To circulate the present
version without note or comment. -
In less than quarter of n century,
no less than mine denominations, -
(will Bro. NJ. please name them
when no advances to the superlatiue
degree of Light?) were urgent for a
revised edition of the Holy Scrip
lures. H
A tran slation IL work of human
agency, and as such may not be per-
feet. Does Bro. NJ, mean to maintain
that the new version was effected by
infallible men? He terms il "a pure
version" Again he says: "If it Is
possible to have a version of the
Holy Scriptures so pure that the
Preachers and s. s. Teachers will
have no need to, annul 1t or appeal
from it to the Greek and Hebrew
text, why not encourage it?" This
smacks little like the lofty preten-
sions of tho Hierarchs of Rome when
they speak of their "pure version"
We are free to admit that if.a per-
son Is determined to believe INNER
sion to be'the only scriptura1 mode
af Lnntisp, ho hoH Ialto- l. 60, -, r.