The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1882-01-04
For the Central Presbyterian.
The Best Commentary.


Whatever we may think of the Revised
Version of the New Testament as sub
stitute for the present Authorized Yer
sion, no intelligent person will perhaps
deny that it is the best, the most learned
and the cheapest commentary on the
Authorized Version which the present
age has produced The new will not re-
place the old for years. The Authorized
Version was many years in making its
way into general use. Texts were taken
from the Bishops Bible for nearly gen
Grafton after King James Version was
authorized to be read in churches. 1t
supplanteG the Bishops Bible and the
Geneva Version very slowly. The diff
culties in the way of the Revised Version
are much greater than those in the way
OF the Authorized Version. When King
James reigned, the English speaking peo-
pie dwelt in the British Isles. While his
translators worked, America was still un-
settled. His version had no such for
midable rival so deeply rooted in the
hearts of the people and the Judgment of
scholars. Then there were no denomina-
tlons, no sectarian barriers to hinder the
course of the New Version of 1911. If
1t took so many years for that new YER
sion to win its way amid small popula-
ton on two small islands, without any
formidable rival, without any denomina-
tlonal hlndrances, the people need have
no fears that the Revised Version of 1881
will replace the old for years to come.
1t is right that it should be so. There
is one thing harder than making re-
vision, and that is judging of it. And it
is still harder for those who do not read
the original tongue to judge of new re-
vision. First they must become &C
quainted with it, which is work of time !;
and then they will slowly and gradually
reach a conclusion. The process is ne
cessary and right. Those who have
formed the habit of judging doctrines by
the Scripture, will never consent to have
new version imposed upon them by
authority. And it is the right and duty
Of Gods people thus to exercise their
judgment.
The fear that they will be robbed of
King James Version is, therefore, base
less. No one would rob them if he
could. No one could rob them if he
would. Editions of the old version will
be printed for fifty years to come.
But, at the same time, although we like
the old best, and always will like it the
best, we must admit that the new has
been made from a Greek text which more
nearly corresponds with the exact words
used by evangelists and apostles than the
Greek text from which the old was made
We must admit that the new represents
more closely the force of the Greek words.
We cannot deny that it is the best help
that an English scholar has towards un-
derstanding the exact meaning of Christ
and his apostles.
Why, then, should not our Sunday
School teachers and scholars have this
help, this able commentary on the present
text? 1t will take but few lines to
print each lesson in the new version
To do 80 is no endorsement of the new
version as preferable to the old, as one
that should take the place of the old. If
the Publication Committee, for example,
should print the new version of each les
son, they would no more endorse or re-
commend it than they do the views Of
the lesson ezpositor. The new text
would be a great help towards under
standing the lesson. J. B. @.