Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1885-05-28
THE BIBLES NEW DRESS
A REHIEW OF THE REVISED .0LD
TESTAHfENT,
showing Some of she Most Imports
ANT Changes which Have Been
Made by ahe Beard of Isevisers.

aho icfihcu Dibib, CoHipflhiHB th6 NoW
Testament issued four years ago and the
recently completed revision of the Old
Testament, bound together, has by this
time been placed in the hands of thou
sands of American readers. The work of
revision has extended over period of IA
years, during which period 10 out of the
~ scholars originally composing the COM
pany have died. These learned men have
given their time and talents gratuitously
to the correction of the inperfections and
errors of former versions and to the pro-
duction of an English Bible which shall
be rs nearly ~ possible faithful repro
duction of the meaning of the original
Hebrew and Greek, while retaining 80
far as allowable the generally excellent
English of the King james translation.
The revised Old Testament opens thus
Sin the beginning God created the
heaven and the earth. And the earth was
waste and void and darkness was upon
the face of the deep: and the spirit of God
moved upon the face of the waters.
"And God said, Let there be light: and
there was light. And God saw the light,
that it was good and God divided the
light from the darkness. And God called
the light Day, and the darkness he called
Night. And there was evening and there
WINS morning, one day."
The first thing to strike the eye is its
total abandonment of the division
into chapters and verses, although the
notation is preserved in the margin. This
il very great gain. since the capitular
and versicular division is universally
recognized among students as annoying
and injurious. Nor is there any reason
why the Bible should be printed differ
emily from any other book. The next
thing the reader would notice is the print
ing of large portions of the volume in the
style of verse, a feature which extends
not only to the poetical books, dob,
Psalms, Proverbs, and Song of Solomon),
but also to smaller portions in other parts
of the volume, such rs the song of Moses
in Deuteronomy; the song of Hannah, in
l. Samuel, and the Prayer of Hnbakkuk.
The advantage of this custom is that,it
shows the reader the marked peculiarly
of Hebrew poetry ms consisting not in
rhyme nor in rythm, but in balanced
sentences and clauses, usually called
pEallelisms, one of which corresponds
to the other, either as repetition or as
antithesis or AS expansion. This peculi-
arity not only marks n passage aspootical,
but also renders no small aid in ascer-
tanning its meaning. Sometimes indeed,
vexed question in exegesis is deter
mined by the parallelism. Another thing
to arrest the Observers attention is the
smaller number of words printed in italic
letter, to show TINT they are added by
the trnnsntors in order to complete the
sense of n passage. These occur in tho
authorized version in many places where
they are not called for, the supplied word
being really implied in the form of the
original. In other cases, where supple
ment is actually necessary, there appea
to have been n constant endeayor to lessen
the number of words thus added rs much
rs possible. A comparison of the two re-
visions will make tlis plain in any part
of the volume.
IL is very evident that the Old Testa-
ment reyisers have been more conserya-
tive than those of tho New. Indeed. they
were by circumstances cut off from what
occasioned very many of tho changes in
the latter, viz, the state of the original
text. The Hebrew manuscripts, unlike
the Greek, exhibit very few variations,
and none Mt all that would require the
elimination of even verse or even n part
of verse. The Old Testament next was
settled by the so-called Massoretes
thousand years ago. There are places
where the alteration of some letters
makes considerable difference in the
meaning. But these are few, and rarely
of very great Importance. There are
some scholars who insist that the text
may be properly corrected by the mid of
the ancient versions, but the reyisers
determined to translate simply the
Hebrew Bible MS il is, of course making
n choice among the various readings which
its own margin presents. And in their
revision of the common version they were
not eager in all cases TO keep the exact
form of the original, but where the sense
was expressed with sufficient exactncss by
King James translators they suffered il
to stand, correcting il only where il was
erroneous, or ambiguous, or conveyed in
obsolete words, 80 That the book is not
new translation, but II revision, giving
the asGcrluincl results of modern scholar
ship.
This, however, will not prevent their
work from giving shock to many Eng
lish readers by occasional changes of
translation i'll passages more or less
familiar. Such II result, however pain
full, was unavoidable. TWAS truly learned
men that made the revision of 1911. But
since their day immense advances have
been mnde in sacred learning. Hebrew
grammar and leXicography, Biblical arch
pology and geography, the study of the
cognnte languages, and the entire realm
of philology hive been reyolutionized.
In the food of light which has thus been
shed upon the Hebrew text it follows, of
course, that points which before escaped
attention are now brought distinctly to
view. And there are changes TINT must
be made. Ono or two examples will
suffice. There is word occurring about
dozen times in the Old Testament which
is always rendered hypOclite, yet now no
scholar has the least doubt TINT this is in
correct and that the word should be ron
dered Ung0tiIy. And this fact makes IL
serious difference in the meaning of
several passages. So there is n word
which occurs about 40 times from Exodus
TO Micah, and is always translated g,U0e,
sometimes where it makes absolute non
sense, Ms ii. Kings, xxvI., 6, where it is
said TINT Josiah "brought ont the grove
from the house of the LOrd.n Nothing
is more certain than that the Hebrew
word denotes particular kind of idola-
trous image. As this image cannot be
exnctly defined, the word is transliterated
us 1Sltelqth, with n marginal note stating
its probable character. But all cases are
NOT, of this kind. There are many i'll re-
gard to which scholars nre divided, the
evidence being conflicting. Here the re-
visers have naturally and wisely given the
authorized version the benefit of the
doubt, and have refrained from any
change Examples mny be seen i'll two
passages in the former part OF Genesis,
one Eye's exclamation, (Iv., H. 81 have
gotten n man from the Lord; the other
the Lords utterance, (vI., 81 my spirit
shall not always strive with man." These
are repeated with u very slight variation
not affecting the sense. In other cases the
alterations are serious and useful.
In the second verse of the first chapter
of Genesis occurs u phrase which has
become almost proverbinl, "Hhe earth
was without form and void. This is made
to read ''waste and void," because the
chaos was not merely formless, but desc
late. So in tho fifth verse of the next
chapter the statement ''for the Lord, God
Ind not caused il to ram upon tho earth"
gives q reason that does not seem called
for by tho former part of the verse as II
stands in tho common version, but its
object becomes plnin when one reads the
revision, "And no plant of the field was
vet in the earth, and no herb of the field
had yet sprung up; for the Lord God,
&c. The sentence pronounced upon
Cain, "a fugitive and a vagabond shalt
thou be-" (rv, 12) is changed to "a fugi
tive and II wanderer," because this is al
that the original means, and oagtbond has
now come to indicate something more
than a wanderer. The statement in fol
lowing verse that God ''set mark upon
ro;,ii 10 chanued tn fiannOinted n sign