Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-05-30
FIXING UP TUE BIBLE.
American and English Committees
DO Not Agree.

DO NNob agree.
m NEW York, May 2G.-There is some
hing OF an international disturbance over
he revised Old Testament. The Ameri-
IAN company Of reyisers are displeased
L. the English company of revisers. This
ceiling arises from the breakage of mu-
nal agreement about the publication of
n HE work. 1t was clear u".'erstOod that
no copy should go Ge hands
| of the printers, save ..snuess of the
b committees, until the morning Of Nav II.
+ The Americans scrupulously kept This
81 COMPACT. They were fairly besie2ed by
81 journalists and others, who offered liberal
nav Tor articles or interviews containing
i PARTICULARS as to the alterations made in
4 The text; but they felt bound to diYuIge
4 no definite Information, and went no
further than to provide matter under I'M
doubted safeguards that it would not be
printed before the stipulated day.
The Euglshmen, however, unbOsomed
81 themselves three days beforehand. and
the cable brought cOpiOus dispatches on
8 the subject, so that most of the novelties
Of the revision were known prior to the
\ proper date The Americans feel espe-
8 cially sore because, when it was pointed
4 out that they might, with legal and moral
nrONIltLN.
United States-their share in the author
ship enabling them to do so-they decided,
after full discussion, that it would not be
unite Identified TO enter into anything
which resembled commercial arrange
ment.
THE UNIVERSITY PRESSES BLAMED.
''The project was considered both here
and in England" says Prof. George Z.
Day, the secretary of the American COM
q pany, land no objection was made in any
quarter to our right in the premises S, but
we thought it best to avoid the imputa-
ton of selfshness.v An inquiry bv cable
why and how the secrecy was prema-
turely broken has brought rather in
definite response, seeming to put the
blame on the University presses. which
published the book IN England. No such
charitable view is taken of the matter on
this side Of the water.
There is still more important disagree
ment between the English and American
revisers, however, for it relates to a
scriptural passage deemed of great con.
sequence to the doctrine of the resurrcc-
ton. This is the part of the nineteenth
chapter of Job, standing IN the King
James Bible thus:
For know that my Redeemer liveth, and
that He shall stand at the latter day upon the
earth; and though, after my skin, worms
destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall see
God, whom / shall see for myself, and mine
eyes behold, and not another.
When, in accordance with the method
Of procedure, the book of Job was sent in
printed slips from the Englishmen to the
Americans, the rendering was as follows:
But know that my Redeemer liveth,
And that He shall stand up at the last upon
the earth;
Aad after my skin hath been thus destroyed,
Yet from my flesh shall ! see God,
Whom / shall see for myself,
And mine eyes shall behold, and not another.
DISCUSSING THE TEXT.
In the ensuing monthly meeting of the
American revisers, each having prev-
4 ously had copy for consideration, nearly
s the whole session was devoted to a dis
y cussiOn of this familiar piece. 1t was at
& length agreed to recommend the following
8 form for adoption in the new version:
But as for me, know that my Redeemer
s And at last He shall stand upon the earth:
And after my skin, even this body is de-
stroyed,
Then. without nv flesh, shall 1 sec God.
When 1, even I, shall see on my side,
And mine eyes shall behold, and not as a
stranger.
1t win be seen that the differences are
not mere verbage, but have a distinct
81 bearing upon the doctrinal value of the
language. More of time and correspond
enee were spent on these few lines than
OF any other entire book in the Bible.
Learned arguments were exchanged, and
the controversy lasted through more than
two years. The Dean of Canterbury
wrote that as the passage had place in
the burial service of the Church OF Eng
land, and had thus become dear to Eng
ish Christians, it ought to be left as
nearly undisturbed as the cOnsci-
ences Of the revisers would permit.
Prof. Howard Osgood, who led the
Americans in this especial matter, held
firmly that its form in the old version con-
yeyed an incorrect doctrine. Neither
body would give way; but, as the Eng
llshmen had the final decision, the work
OF the Americans being advisory, the
hing appears in the published revision
Ike the second Of the above quotations.
This Is not satisfactory TO the Americans,
ana the likelihood is that an edition of the
Bible, containing this and other revisiOns
adopted by the Americans but rejected bv
the Englishmen, win be soon issued. The
preach caused by the premature issue in
London will greatly further such an en-
iOrnrfaa