The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-11-23

the rule to render the Greek Aorist by
the English past tense, and that differ
ences of opinion will therefore constantly
arise with regard to particular passages !;
but that notwithstanding this admission
there is no denying that the Authorized
Version has frequently departed from the
strict grammatical meaning of the tense
not only without necessity, but even with
out excuse from the sense The sense
indeed, often receives detriment from this
carelessness, or this ill-judged liberality,
IN the treatment of the lenses. Thus at
Matt. ii Is, instead of 81 have called, -
we ought to read " I called" The refer
ence is to a definite historic fact in the
distant past At Acts xix: 2, it should
be " Did ye receive the Holy Ghost qOhen
ye 6elieUedP" instead of "Have We re-
ceived the Holy Ghost since we believed p
At 2 Peter i: IA, the Authorized Version
has missed the striking reference to the
scene presented in John xxi Is, 10, by
confounding an Aorist with Perfect.
The difference is between "hoth showed
me" and simply "Sheeoed me-" The
amended version reads, knowing that
the putting off of nay tabernacle cometh
swiftly, even as our Lord Jesus Christ
shee0ed me-" DIR. Roberts thinks the
mind is thus at once transported to the
shore of Gennessaret, and to the predic-
ton as to the manner of death by
which Peter should glorify God. This
may be little doubtful but if so it only
betrays the effectiveness of the English
tongue.
Again, Perfects are sometimes trans
lated as Aorists. The sense of l Cor. XIV:
4, is greatly marred in this way. The
Aorlst here is correctly rendered "was
buried" but the Perfect ought not to
have been rendered, in the Authorized
Version, "rose again" but "hath been
raised" So at John V: 33, we should
read, aye hare sent unto John, and he
hath borne witness to the truth" Nobody
needs to be informed that the rendering
IS often answers better to the sense in
English than has; and so of the Pre-
sent rendering in general. This is mat
ter of course, but it is fact that should
be recognized in this discussion as it is
recognized in both Versions-but not
enough recognized in the older one. Thus
at Matt. XIV 6, we read correctly in the
new Version, &C cry is made"
In Professor Nicholson's book entitled
Classic Revision of the Greek New Tes-
lament" much more space is given to
minute criticism of the Authorized Yer
sion than was practicable in work OF
the small dimensions and comprehensive
scope of the Companion. The skilled
reader would nevertheless be apt to like
Professor Roberts way of stating some
points better than he would Professor
Nicholsons. For example, Prof. Nichol-
son regularly translates the Imperfect OF
verb expressive Of any kind of doing.
Kept on doing" so and so. The simple
Gas contradistinguished from the para
phrastic) Imperfect will, however, even
with the ordinary meaning Of the tense,
not always bear such coarse handling.
In all Greek prose the descriptive tense
is constantly interchanged with the direct
historic tense inanimated, indeed in any
sort of narrative.
There are too, what the French call
natonceS, or delicate shades of meaning,
which often cannot be represented in
English, or may be suggested by cir
cumlocution. Thus at Matt. iii IA, the
word "fopbad" is justly replaced by the
roundabout expression aOould haze hin
dered" So too at Luke i: 10, "they
a0ou1d haze called him" is clearly better
than they called him." 1t might indeed
have been rendered "they were about to
call him" or even, perhaps, "they had
begun to call him" Multitudes of schol
ars have directed notice to the facts, that
at Luke V 6, the net twas" not "broken"
but only " breaking," and that at Luke
viii %, they "were" not " filled with
water" but only "yflJing."
There are, in brief, few respects in
which the Authorized Version shows