The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1883-03-21

AS the old saying goes, cts long
lane that has no turning" The discus
sion of minute points of grammar and
lexicography led us up to broad con-
sideration of the version Judged upon its
general merits. This was introduced by
an examination of its alleged doctrinal
obliquity, and the result of this examina-
tion was on the whole favorable. After
yielding up nearly every other important
position under menace of the guns Of the
revisers, we were at first disposed to
make a determined stand for what we
regarded as the imperilled doctrine OF
inspiration and even after every expla-
nation had been made, and its force con-
ceded and the revisers exonerated from
the charge of malo tfdeS, or of intentional
heresy, the new rendering of 2 Tim. iii
16, was condemned as remote from the
natural meaning of the passage and as
leaving the sense of this great proof text
upon that vital point in a state OF pain
full uncertainty.
The time has now arrived for investi-
eating the broad question in relation to
the style. 1t has doubtless been sufi-
GENTLY apparent to the discerning reader
of these essays that the writer was con-
tent to allow the prevailing superiority
of the revision to the Authorized Yer
sion in innumerable minute particulars;
and also its characteristic superiority in
the rendering of the Greek moods and
lenses, and other matters of equal impor-
tance. Your contributor is now prepared
to go farther, and admit that if what is
wanted is an extremely literal transla-
ton, that shall present an exquisitely
exact verbal transcript of the original
and one in which the English idiom shall
be sacrificed to the Greek rather than the
Greek idiom sacrificed to the English,
then undoubtedly the work of the Vic
toriar scholars is to be greatly preferred
to those of King James 1t by no means
follows, though, that the substantial ex-
cellence Of the older version as a means
of conveying the sense of the inspired
evangelists and apostles is one whit di-
minished by that circumstance, and the
value of the work as a specimen of Eng
lish literature is of course proportionately
impaired.
This broad comparison of the transla-
tions must be determined on principles
that are already as fully settled as we
can reasonably hope that they ever will
be. The estimate that is set upon any
given version must depend upon the point
of view from which it is inspected, as
we'll as upon the use to which it is going
to be put. The world is full of all sorts
of versions, and versions of every degree
of literalness and freedom. Some (for
example the later Chaldee targums) are
so free as to be unworthy of the name of
versions, and indulge il such bold license
as would hardly accord even with the ex-
actions of the loosest paraphrase. Others
again (as for instance the Old Testament
versions of Aquila into Greek and of
Paul Of Tella into Syriac, and the Phil.
oxenian Cor Harclean) Syriac version Of
the New TESTAMENT are so slavishly lit
eral IN following the mere words Of the
original on the score of idiomatic trans
fusion, az to be worthless. Now for pur-
poses of textual criticism your slavishly
literal version is, when other things are
equal, vastly preferable not only to your