The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1883-01-17
For the Central Presbyterian.
The Revised Version of the New
Testament.
BY REV. H. c. ALEXANDER, D. D.
NJ %
NO. 20.

NO. 70.
One of your gifted and accomplished
writers (R R. H. has informed us that
a scholar whose prominence in Greek
was unquestioned in this State maintains
that the rendering of 9 Tim. iii 16, in
the new version is .defensible on strictly
grammatical principles. 1t would be as
tonishing if it was not Eighty-two Eton-
bred, Harrow-bred, University bred Eng
lish olergymen, commentators, and teach
ers, could hardly agree in palpable
point-blank blunder, such as this would
be, in the construction OF plain sentence
And yet as the words were first reported
to your present correspondent he saw no
escape from the conclusion that in their
translation of this celebrated text the
skilled revisers had, whether from acct
dent or of design, set all the laws OF ordi-
nary classic syntax at defiance. The
rendering according to that first report
was as follows: Every God Inspired
Scripture is also profitable" etc. In the
sentence Just given the adjective God-ln-
spired (THeopneu8toS) is taken attribu-
tiyely and can be taken in no other way
Such rendering, however, would be in
violation of the most elementary rules
affecting Greek syntax; for it requires
no learned don to tell us that for such
rendering the adjective (THeopneustoS)
in normal Greek must have the article
1t was so exceedingly clear, in the mean
while, that experts like Bishop Ellicott
and Bishop Lightfoot, and Canon West
colt and Canon Plumptre, could not have
been caught mapping on point like this,
that personal examination was made and
it was discovered that the revisers had
not been quoted with exactness. The
way the new version actually reads is
this: Every Scripture inspired of God
(is) also profitable" ETC. This rendering
is on the high authority of the Greek
professor cited by "R. R. H." pro-
nounced to be an entirely tenable one, so
far as mere grammar is concerned; al
though there is a gratifying addendum
to the effect that the distinguished Gre
clan on purely exegetical grounds on the
whole greatly preferred the rendering Of
King James. This is conceded. The
translation every" instead of all" is of
course justifable, though not on grounds
of grammatical necessity. The Greek
word (poS) wants the article, and thus
under the general rule should be distri-
butive rather than collective. 1t must
be borne in mind, however, that the
Greek term answering to Scripture,
(gophe) being often used like proper
noun, belongs to class of words that
frequently drop the article The older
rendering is thus indicated at least as
a perfectly defensible alternative. The
real hitch though Gas we saw a while ago.
is later on in the sentence The differ
enee certainly is small between saying,
all the soldiers were in place" and,
every soldier was in place" The really
anxious question is this What is tie
main predicate Of the sentence? Is il
that the whole Bible Cor every part of it,
is inspired or is it that every part OF
the Bible inspired is something eLseP The
danger is (and the magnitude Of the
jeopardy cannot be exaggerated if it
exists that with the older phraeeolopy
we seem to lose the declaration that the
Bible is Gods inspired word. This
would be loss Of incalculable moment
as this text is one of the two or three
sheet-anchors Of the doctrine Of the super
natural dictation Of the Scriptures.
The words as given by the revisers are
susceptible Of a variety Of constructions
Upon any view Of them, if they are &C.