Bridgeton pioneer., 1885-06-04
THE REVISED OLD TESTAMENT.

49, ANA ASLSA VIII 4 Cd AIu Elm
The work of revision of the Old
Testament Scriptures which a learned
body of European and American schol-
ars has had in hand for several years,
has at last been completed. The first
chapter of Genesis as revised, was
printed in the metropolitan papers on
Sunday. The work of revision has
been very carefully and ably done, and
is creditable in all it's parts. None of
the chapters have been marred, but
many of them have been greatly i'm
proved. Scholarly criticism has pro-
nounced the work good, and it is safe
to say that it will stand the test of time.
This, with the revision of the New
Testament, which was finished a few
years since, is the first complete revi-
sion which has taken place since James
L., King of England, gave us the pres
ent Bible.
Rev. DIR. James Strong, of the Drew
Theological Seminary, a prominent
member of the American Revision
Committee, was interviewed by re-
porter, and gave very interesting ac-
count of the changes made in the va
rious chapters. Among other things
Dr. Strong said
ut must be remembered that our
business was to make a revision of the
accepted version. We were not to
make a new translation; we had no
nf q III Inr ofor Nhn
latter would undoubtedly be an excel
lent thing, but our work was not in
that direction-we were simply to re-
wise. 1t must also be kept in mind
that we had not the same difficulty
which confronted the New Testament
revisers-viz: The deciding between a
number of manuscripts and determin-
ing the relative Importance of each;
we had simply one text, the Masoretic,
which is the only accepted Hebrew
text, and we had to confine ourselves
to that
HAS any doctrine been modified or
changed?'
NO not in single instance. You
must remember that we were simply
torevise, and besides we certainly could
not read into the text what was not
there in the original. To be sure there
biguous, but they are equally ambigu-
GUS in the Hebrew. 1t evidently was
intentional and to attempt to clear up
this obscurity would be exceedingly
foolish. And then, too, any elucida-
ton of any misty texts would be purely
conjectural and out of place in Bible
for the people. And hence 1 Judge
that no religious body will be able to
strengthen its faith by any altered
doctrine in this revision of the Old
Testament"
What about the fgurative express
sions?"
I'm many cases they were modified,
but only when their meaning was OBJ
scure. Take for example the express
sion. son of a month, son of year,
how many would know what was
meant? and will it not be more readily
understood if we say, son a month
old, or year old? The beauty of
many of the figurative expressions have
been sacrificed to clearness. The Eng
lish idiom had to be accommodated in
many cases, and this made necessary a
number of changes. The general style
of the phraseology is, however, re-
tanned. The archaic mode of express
sion, which has come to be so familiar,
is maintained throughout, and page
after page will be read without the de-
lection of the slightest change, and yet
they are numerous, but are of such a
character as to escape notice. Another
class of changes which will be noticed
is the softening of harsh Hebraisms.
1t has long been apparent that such
alterations ought to be made. Many
of the Hebrew idioms were exceedingly
strong, and in the early revisions of the
nl1 Tocfo,n nj, ~, tJ,i, 1,a
ness was retained. In this revision it
has been our endeavor to tone these
expressions down and thus accommo-
date them to the English idiom. Not
that any doctrine has been toned down
at all, but merely the harsh Hebrew
expressions. Besides this it has been
our aim to drop all obsolete words from
the text, but at the same time to avoid
changing the wording of familiar pas
sages, we have retained many obsoles-
cent words.
"a striking line of changes has been
made in those passages of an indelicate
expression, of which so much has been
said by a certain class of individuals.
Many beautiful narratives in the old
versions were entirely spoiled by a
single phrase, now considered indie
cent. Take for example that singularly
Abigail, which by one sentence, was
rendered unfit to be read in public.
This has been revised in such a way by
perfectly permissible translation as
not to be noticed. This same thing has
been done in many instances and will
be appreciated. When, however, the
facts, and not the language, are indeli-
cate, as, for example, the story of Lots
daughters. in which not a single i'm
proper word is used, they have been
allowed to stand just as they were in
the text, and we had no right to ex-
clude them"
Was any attempt made to reconcile
the seeming contradictions of the
chronology of Kings and other books?'
NO; not the slightest. The Hebrew
text, in the matter of it's dates, is quite
plain, and we were compelled to give
an accurate translation of it. The only
change that was made was q conject-
ural emendation concerning Saul 1.
VIII in ha Am har