Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-05-14

ly people, to give up their old Bibles. To
them II would seem saerIlege, perhaps,
ana, while they would have nothing to
unlearn, the new book might never seem
natural TO them. But it is the coming
generation which Will adopt the revised
version. Our young ministers will go out
from Yale and from AndOyer thoroughly
versed in and governed by il, and its dis
semination throughout the land will be so
noted that not many years hence the lew
Bible will seem as old to the average per-
sons as the King James version does now.
The new version, complete as it Will be
presented, with the New Testament, is,
hold, one of the marked events in the his
tory of our world"
Prof. Day then spoke of the labors of
the undertaking, which, he said, had been
done by eminent bibiliophiles free of
charge, because it had been said that the
Gospel should be free. AS to the cause
which led to the revision, ne SAID that in
the 80 years which had elapsed since the
former revision of the Bible, known as the
King James version, much additional
light has been gained, and manuscript
evidence has been multiplied many fold
On the other hand, the editors of the King
james version possessed only small
number OF inferior and conn aratively
modern manuscripts, and those imper-
fectly cOllated. 1t was by reason of this
increased knowledge that the revision
has been made, and consequently on May
q, 1870, the COnvocatiOn If Canterbury APP
pointed a committee of Biblical scholars
of the Church of England to revise tor
public use the authorized version OF the
Bible, giving the committee power
to associate with them scholars Of
other denominations. In 1871. by in
yitation of the English revisers,
similar American committee was
formed, composed of distinguished
scholars Of all the evangelical denomina-
tiOns, and divided like the English COM
mittee, into two cOmpanies-One for the
Old Testament and one for the New. On
the American side were such men as
Prof. Day, T. d. Woolsey. Chancellor
Howard Crosby, d. D., the Rev. Dr.
Chambers, of New York, Profs. Krauth
and Hare, of Philadelphia, Profs. Greene
and Aiken, of Princeton, and Prof. w.
Henry Greene, d. D., LID. the two in
ternatiOnal committees have been en-
gagged in one and tue sdme work. The
labOrs of the English committee have
been submitted to the American commit
tee, and vice versa. No changes have
been made, except by two-thirds vote.
The active members Of the English COM
mittea have numbered tifty-two, of the
American Ommittee tWentv-Seven.
Prot. Day phasized the point that. as
the new Bible was the outcome of re-
searches OF the very highest knowledge
in restoring the scriptures to their teXtual
purity, TO the unlearned even more than
to the learned will the new version be
profitable. The meaning Of the Word
would be made clearer, and skepticism
will become disarmed. The changes made
are NOT fundamental. They touch moth
ing which is essential to Christianity. 1t
is a new revision, and not a new transla-
tiQn. In concluding, Prof. Day said that
another point which could not be brought
out too strongly was that the Bible read
ing public. While it might miss some OF
the beautifully flowing and favOrite pas
sages of the old Eaglsh version in the re-
vised version, should fleet that all rhe-
torical considerations should be put aside
for the one thing Of impol tance-that OF
having the truth aud the whole truth. He
aid not know whether the clergy of New
Haven used the revised New Testament,
but be did not think one Of them burst
preach contrary to the sense of the text
Of that volume. He was sure they used
it for reference constantly.