Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1881-06-04
The New Version.

The New Version.
The religious press treats the revised version
OF the New Testament with caution and dc.
elimination. The Presbyterian and Congrega-
tional journals are the most outspoken In ap-
proving It. The Baptist press is reticent,
several prominent papers either not finding
space or not having the inclination TO attempt
d CRITICAL estimate. The fact that certain Greek
words which are regarded as UNCONVENTIONAL
tests Of exceptional value are not translated in
the Baptist Way may account for this back
Nardness. The Baptist Weekly publishes In
prominent ~ pc letter In which DR.. Kendrick,
as represer tative OF the denomination In the
American committee, is asked to explain
now he could give his co. operation, endorse
revision OF the commcn version as this
learned 'unsectarian con- nittee" has made at
Rev. XIX, Is; where, "for the faithful render
Ing and sublime diction OF our fathers Bible.
he was CLOTHED with vesture dipped In
BLOOD. we are asked 20 substitute the lower ex-
preston and false reading Of this high crested
with blooc.' The veriest tyro In Greek knows
that 'oe6dmnenon' does not signify sprln-
kied, ana the most ordinary scholar who is at
all versed In teXtual CT .ticism knows that the
'ef'TdnttSiien07l' Of Orr1sen is not supported by
any adequate authority. DIR. Roberts, who In
volume OF over two bur dred pages, processes
10 give the reasons for tie changes made on the
authorized version. makes no mention whatever
OF this change" The Methodist press accepts
the new version as tho best that can be had
under the present conditions of scholarship
and civilization. The Unitarian view is ex
pressed by the Rev. Jas. Freeman Clarke al er
ills terse fashion: 1--WE have got rid OF good
deal OF chaff. but we have not got rid Of all
The Roman Catholic press disdains to criticise
IL, put contents itself with referring to it as
piece OF patch work. The press of the Protest
ant episcopal GluTch > in no haste to commit
itself. The Bread church element is naturally
more favorable to the new version than either
High or Low churchmen. Bishop Doane OF
q OIL oh ahyp N, hot
tne revision has made the Testament more
imperfect than 1t was when the first translators
got through with It," The following extracts
show the direction which religious criticism
Is taking:
This is. We may conclude, probably the best
New Testament take it altogether, that men
should now cease. Expositors should no Ion
ger present new readings or new renderings in
thelr commentaries, and preachers should no
more venture to correct the text, and to trouble
their hearers with fears tina, the Bible they
nave Is not worthy Of conference.-the Chris
tan Intelligence7.
patching an old garment until nothing of the
original one remained. 1t is not for us to crit.
ic Il, 1t. II such piece Of patchwork quilting
should not find fault with iJ.-The Table,.
What appear to be grave defects must be JUS
titled, or the indications are that. II adopted at
by small majority in the Bible societies ana
the denominat1ons-Th Christian Advocate.
Its publication Will punctuate new epoch in
Chr1steD dOm.-T7e Adr0nce
The publication OF this version will accustom
Ine people TO the idea that a translation of the
Blble is not the Bible Itself. The distinction
between the original and a translation once
liked In the popular mind. there Will be a de-
mand that the translation be brought still
nearer perfection; and very likely after this
revision has been discussed for five or ten
years. it will itself be revlsad.-yte National
Baptist.
1t is too much to assume that perfection has
csen reached In the revision: American
scholars will generally approve those sugges-
lions by the American Company which were
rejected by the British Company. And SOME
VIII regret that both companies were not more
bold and decisive In their work at many points.
But such an achievement as the revision will
lot soon be repeated: the present generation
must accept &c or nothlng-accept 1t, rather or
CONFESS failure to take one successful step In
the way OF progress Northern C1ristian Al.
rOcGte. "
The fruits OF two centuries OF careful con.
sclent1ous study may not be waived aside By
sneers, nor rendered valueess by the suyges-
tlons OF blind prejudice. Herald
IL ID probable that In attempting to give
some real loss In rythm and In grateful caden
ces. This we must overlook, perhaps. IL the
gam IN in eSac,ness prove to be real and great,
as we mink tt Will. -COngreQdtiOndlist
SO much OF the old familiar language remains
unaltered, that we shall not think Of 1t at ali
as new book, but as a new and revised
Seaciou, III WHICH, luo auIQOr expresses him.
sell more exactly and we are therefore enabled
70 understand him with LEGS effort and explain.
atloD. And II we do not mistake, we shall
learn TO prize u highly and express our graft
luce 10 ali who have contributed to so import
ant WoIk.-Centfal Christian Advocate
we nave at last the new version: what shall
we 90 with 1T? We answer unhesitattngly.
rake IT, use 1t In the pulpit, the Sunday-schoOi.
Inc FAMILY worship, private devotion. Let the
oid ana the new lie lovingly together: let each
cast ilght on the other; let time ard expert
ment determine which shall be the Bible OF the
1utuIe.-Ihe Christian Union.
NO denomination or sect Is to make any doc.
tr1nal capital out Of it-B,ktaLO Christian Al.
rOcG e.
1t is not revised version of the Bible which
is SO absolutely necessary as its translation
into lie by those who profess its teachings
The Je,cfsh Messenger.
In reading the revised New Testament It will
De well 10 remember that the question is not.
Wnetner you like 1t as well as the Old but
whether 1t Is more accurate las q translation.
And the presumption is that the reyisers are
right.until 1t Is proved that they are wrong
The Methodist.
The book is rev translation, equivalent to
commentary, but 1t Is not ACCOMPANIED with
authorities and references. This is due to the
view the authors had OF their own WORK. They
expected 1t to superSede and Danish the author
Ized version. It Is, to their mind revised
Version and the old version Is to become obso
lete. There ia a good deal of fallacy and of
begging the question In the title "Revised
Yersl0n.'-Th ChuTcInlan.