The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1882-02-01
Our Contributors.
The Revised Version of the
New Testament.
No. IA.
BY REV. H. c. ALEXANDER, D. D.

No. Ia.
We were commenting on some of the
alleged inaccuracies (and infelicities) of
the Authorized Version arising out of
the failure to distinguish between differ
ent Greek words. Two distinct forms of
expression are at Cor. xiv: 20, trans
lated as if they were one and the same.
The one means edo not be children" Tor
little children'') the other, "Be We
babes"
Archbishop Trench had already point
ed out the necessity of sometimes taking
the word pals in the sense of servant
where the Authorized Version renders it
SON. 1t is, however, correctly rendered
servant in the Authorized Version at
Luke XIV; 26, and applied to the faithful
bond-slave of the Centurion whose faith
Jesus commended as so remarkable. The
same rendering of the word is given land
given with equal propriety) at Matt. viii
6. But in Acts Ill Is, &C. and iv: 81,
30; 1T is contended that the English
equivalent for the Greek term is, as in
the cases just referred to, SERVANT" and
not "son, or "child," as in the Author
lied Version. Trench's argument is
based on what he styles the inner har-
monies of the Old and the New Testa-
ment; and amounts to this, that where
ever we find large group of prophecies
In the Old, we should expect to find some
allusion to them in the New. But if the
places In question, in the book of Acts,
present Christ in the character of SON.
and not that of servant, we shall per-
haps look in vain for more than one pas
sage in the New Testament Matt. xii:
l8) which points back distinctly to such
wide contexts as Isaiah xiii: 90, xix:
(l-l2), lii: l3, lii: II, where the whole
burden of prediction has reference to that
mysterious parsonage who is denominated
" the servant of the Lord" "Israel my
servant, " " my servant whom I uphold. :"
1t must be admitted that these con-
texts in Isaiah are exceedingly difficult,
and seem to admit of variety of inter
probation: but on any sound view of them
the reasoning of the late Archbishop of
Dublin possesses ingenuity and force, and
IN the judgment of your correspondent
(Which is also that of the revisers) his
conclusion is just.
The two phrases the sacred writings"
(h0 hier0 gran1n1ota) and "the holv
Scriptures" (haj hagiai graphai) are rem
dered alike in our King James Bibles
2 Tim. iii; Is and 16, and Rom. i 2.
This is not apparently noticed in the
Companion, and is not important; but
there is shade of difference between the
expressions. The Scriptures are demon
mated sacred writings" because regard
ed and accepted as such by the theo-
cratic people; they are called "holy
Scriptures" because they were inspired
by the Holy Ghost.
There is distinction, also, in the Greek
between two words for knowledge" (and
their cognate verbs), which is lost sight
of in the older version. One of these de-
notes penetrating and accurate knowl-
edge. This fact is duly and beautifully
recognized in the Authorized Version at
Cor. vi: 9, by the rendering Gas un-
known, and yet a0eU kreoaom." This re-
cognition ought to have been more gen.
eral. Instances in point may be found
at Cor. xiii, and Eph. i: II.
So there are two verbs for keep. One
of these means to retain, preserve, or hold
carefully, the other means to guard
Thus John xvii IL, should be rendered,
" While 1 was with them in the world 1
kept them in thy name-those thou gavest
me I have guarded, and none of them is
lost but the son Of perdition."
There are four different words for "peo-
pie, in the Greek of the New Testament.
Two Of them are translated in the same
way in each Of the two versions. A third
is rendered "Gentiles," or nations,
and once (at Acts viii o people. 3"
The fourth is at John vii: %, and many
other places in the Authorized Version
also Though enormously rendered "peo-
pie" but in the revision is uniformly rem
dered Wrou1tituda " an5 Uro,1t;tndosU