New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-02-08
TILE BIBLE II ENGLISH.

The appearance Of Professor Haupts new
translation OF the Bible IS n striking testimony
to the fact that multltudes Of plain people to-
day are becoming more or less familiar with
the questions underlying modern Biblical crit
icism. For generations English-speaking Chris
tians accepted the authorized version-which.
properly speaking, was never authorized except
by usage-as the complete and sufficient state
ment Of divine revelation. Indeed, it is not too
much to say that average Christians came to
look on II as the original record OF Gods mes
sage to man, and the verbal inspiration Of this
mountaineering translation from the ancient
manuscripts Of the Biblical books was prac-
tlcally assumed by both preachers and people.
This disposition to accept the King James trans
latlon rs the final authority was vastly strength
ened by the indispensable beauty. rhythm and
majesty OF its English. As n classic Of the
language 1t stamped itself ineffaceably on the
consciousness Of the race, and men Of leader
ship in every walk Of life found in it the noblest
and most convincing appeals to the heart and
the intellect of the people Under such cir
cumstances 1t is not strange that the authorized
version of the Bible became the final authority
in religion without any reference to the fact
whether It truly reflected the meaning Of the
original.
But different state of affairs exists to-day
The work during the last fifty years Of Biblical
scholars, critics and investigators has become
known outside of the small circle Of original
investigators. At first the churches violently OPP
posed what has come TO be known as the higher
criticism Of the Bible, a somewhat unfortunate
and misleading phrase. When In the cigh-
teenth century Astruc. the French physician,
published his celebrated book a copy Of which
is in the library Of the Union Seminary. Of this
city. declaring that the Pentateuch was COM
piled from various documents, bis theory was
promptly denounced rs untrue and his character
was assaed. Nevertheless, the documentary
theory Of the Pentaeuch and Of other books Of
the Old Testament has held it's own, until now
It is believed and taught by some of the most
eminent Christian scholars and commentators in
this country and Europe. What, however, is
more important, this and many other conclu-
slons Of Biblical criticism gained from study
OF the old manuscripts and from the recent dis
coverics Of archaeology have become popular
tied. They are referred 10 with more or less
approval In rellglous and secular journals, in
magazines and even In the pulpit. Nor are they
wholly unknown In Bible classes and Sunday
schools. The result Of all this Is that while the
authorized version Of the Bible still holds its
place in the popular affections. the belief has
become general that In some respects 1t does
not perfectly give the meaning Of the original.
More is known to-day about the original manu-
scripts Of the Bible and their relative value
than was known to the King James translators.
and many Of those who most prize the Bible
as the Word of God have felt that new trans
lation of the book by competent Christian schol-
ars would be helpful to them, even If it did not
displace the authorized version.
1t was In recognition Of this feeling that the
Revised Version Of 1882 was made. That YER
sion, however, was not so much an Independent
translation as a revision OF the authorized YER
sion, and, besides. as Professor John De Witt.
one Of the American committee OF translators,
shows in THE Independent" some of the valu-
able conclusions of the American committee
were not Incorporated In that version 1t was
finally agreed that these American preferences
should be withheld from publication for four
teen years, or until July 10. 1892 when, Pro-
fessor De Witt says, they will be published as
the American Revised Bible. The appearance
Of this translation will undoubtedly be an i'm
portant event in the religious world Prac-
tcally 1t will be the authorized version mod
ernized and corrected where corrections seem
desirable Professor Haupt's Polychrome Bible.
Of which three numbers have appeared, Is differ
ent in that it is an independent translation, with
out special reference to the authorized version
and made from a Hebrew and Greek text which
the editor and translators believe to be far more
accurate than the text from which the author
lied version was made.