Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1884-08-01

C>lNW'nt, anu no chdn.c VIII Or lUcQE'
porated that has mo- La, ibe approya OF
both Iodies. al some instances the British
cSisers have been more conservative than
the Americans, and where the latter think
their point Of sufficient importance it viii
appear in the appendix, aS was done IN the
case OF the revision Of the New Testament.
The labor Of the reyiscrs in both coun-
tries was given without compensation.
The necessary expenses OF the British com.
mlttoe were paid 10y the University presses;
those OF the American committee by voiun-
tary contributions under the direction Of
committee Of finance, Of which Hon. Ma
than Bishop, IL. D., was chairman.
Changes in the text Of the Old Testamcn!
VIII ne less marked than in tn revised
edition Of the New. In the revision OF the
latter the translatois were aided by a COM
parison Of authentic manuscripts discoy-
cred since the translation in 1911. They
were thus led to correct the Greek text,
| and consequently TO make alterations in the
! text Of the English revision. That they
might render the original with greater
| literalness they sometimes sacrificed ..,can-
| ties of phrase, even when the .ueaning WAS
| not affected.
In The work now in pless there will be
LITTLE or no occasion for complaint in this
regard. The difference between Hebrew
| and English idioms is such that 1t u not
nossille TO render with such verbal accu-
| racy from the Hebrew As can be done from
the Greek. Where, therefore, ole phrase
expresses the true meaning no change oc-
ours. Then, too, the public wish, especial
Nv in England, has pronounced against ali
ayoidable changes ia the old version.
Another powerful reason why radical
changes we've impossible is the Tact that
the original text Of the Old Testament re-
msins substantially the same ~ that used
by King James translators. With tue New
i Testament the case was different. The mis-
sion of the reyiscrs OF the Old Testament
hiss been not so much to ascertain the cDr-
rect text. but 70 find out the true meaning
OF The old text, the origin OF which Il lost
in antiquity. In this work they have
been assisted by the great advance made
in the knowledge OF the Hebrew IAN
eusge since King James time. In many in
stances the old translators wholly mlSJook
the meaning OF words, and they were igno-
rant Of much OF Hebrew grammar that is
now the common property OF scholars.
Thus the children OF Israel did not, a.
stated in Exodus, XII, 2, by divine direction
"borrow" OF the Egyptians what they
never intended 10 return, but they asked .
for and received gifts. In oth9 cases the
lenses Of verbs are confused and the Sc
quenoe OF thought contained in the text Is
lost in the translation. Possessive pro-
nouns are sometimes misplaced. Thus in
Psalms lix., II, God Of my mercy" should
be "my merciful God"
Much light has also been she'd on tbs
meaning Of words in the text by the study
OF Arabic and other Semitic languages
Since the excavations at Nlneyeh the study
OF these languages has made great pro
| gress. "SOme improvement in oul
translation may be expected, Also
says President Chase, OF Harvard, on'
OF the revisers of the New Testament
"from the greatly increased knpwiedg'
In recent times OF the ways ane
customs OF Oriental people and OF thu
geography, flora, and fauna OF the Bib,
| lands. The NEUROLOGICAL satyrs shout
be veritable goats; aud that fabulous beast
the unicorn, should nc longer sxalt hi
horn In the Bible, though he may continue
10 DO 20 on the royal arms OF England, bu
will doubtless give place TO The wild OK
the same Wild OK, or aras, which Caesar de
scribed In Germany, and which has beer