Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-06-04

AS0oS 4NVU VIII WAogC dSdihhb tuSLts dho ~
scholar of reputation could be found to
defend them nevertheless they have been
sbstinately retained, and preachers have
founded doctrines upon them, and apol-
ogists have written a small literature in
justification of them, and the churches
have been too conservative to realize that
adherence to falsehood is more in consonance
| with diabolic than with divine inspiration.
The revisers say that in their opinion this
question is settled but we shall be very
much surprised ii vigorous attempts are
| not made to reopen it, and we are very
certain that scores of preachers and scores
of thousands of laymen will continue to
cling to the old spurious passages, and will
repudiate the light which exposes their
falsity.
Among the minor though still interesting
innovations is the employment OF the word
"demon for devil in the authorized
version In the revised version the word
devil is reserved for those occasions
where Satan is meant, while ''demon is
used wherever possession is spoken Of
Thus we read Of casting out demons, .
instead of casting out devils. The
change may not seem to be important, but
it is more SO than it appears. The Greek
word damon does not signify what we IN.
derstand by devil" The damon might
be tutelary spirit might be an angel !;
was not at all necessarily an evil spirit.
Thus in the time of the events recounted
in the Gospels nothing was more common
than the ascription of supernatural powers
to all sorts of people. The Jewish world
especially lived in an atmosphere of thick
superstition. The performance of miracles
was looked upon as matter of
course. Nothing was too gross and
palpable falsehood TO find ready
! belief among the people. The
Apostles, and even Jesus himself,
believed that miracles could be worked
through the aid of other spirits than those
which they affected to control. The
heather gods in fact were regarded as
possessing large powers, and the early
| Christians believed in their supernatural
might only less than their peculiar
worshipers did. As regards the meaning
Of the word "demon," no less authority
than Cudworth employs it indifferently to
signify good and evil spirits. The infer
ence from ali these considerations is that
the reyisers have recognized the fact that
the writers of the gospels by no means
necessarily attributed the possession of
people and the performance of anti. Chris.
tian miracles to evil spirits, but that they
held the universe to be full of aerial in
mates, whose services could be procured
by magicians, or holy men, almost indif-
ferently.
The substitution of the word "hades''
for g he'll" has not been SO generally made
as was prematurely announced, though it
has been introduced sufficiently to confuse
the situation. The Greek word Gelenno
has been rendered "hell" almost uniform
ly, though it would have been far more in
accordance with faithful translation to have
simply printed it "Gehenna, since it is
very certain that the word used in the
original manuscripts did not bear the in
depreciation which has been put upon it
in later times. The revisers, however,
could not bring themselves to make gen.
eral change which would have struck so
deadly blow at the hopes OF Christian
| dom tor it is well known that ever since
the time of Chrysostom the churches have
held that one Of the greatest delights of
heaven will be the ever present spectacle of
the fortunes of the damned in hell. Now to
have abolished hell simply because the in
telligence of the more advanced minority
had outgrown it, seemed to the orthodox a
very dangerous proposition. We are
given to understand indeed that the Ameri-
can revisers would have been in
favor of the change, and we think
|
boldly renowned the doctrine OF endless
retribution. But the English revisers
could not be brought to consent to the
change altogether, and so it happens that
"hell is often used until the Apocalypse is
reached, and then "hades'' is substituted.
OF course, the term "hadesn has no
meaning for English-speaking peoples It
refers to Greek myth which represents
the dead as dwelling in a singularly dreary
and dismal sort OF Limbo. Hades, in fact,
is one Of the least poetic imaginations of a
poetical people, though no doubt it repre-
sents faithfully enough the extent of
Grecian popular thought at the time. To
introduce hades into the New Testament
is equivalent to the abandonment of hell,
| for it is well understood that hades is not
a place of endless punishment, that it has
| no lake of birthstone, and that it is not
inhabited by the devil and his angels. 1t
is indeed as far removedas possible from the
conception of Millions hell, and for all
practical purposes 1t ght as well have
been omitted for in this day it really has
no meaning or significance. The English
revisers, however, have by their hesita-
tion produced a kind Of conflict between.
hell and hades, the only possible outcome
of which can be to discredit both alike, and
to destroy all remaining belief in the for
mer. This perhaps is something to be
thankful for, but it is probably not exactly
what the revisers were aiming at.
Among the omissions which are cal
culated to attract particular attention is
that of John ", 4. 1t is in the story of
the impotent man and the pool of Be-
thesda. The verse in the authorized YER
sion is as follows: "For an angel went
"down at certain season into the pool,
"and troubled the water; whatsoever then