-■ 
 
 w. 
 
 
 4^. 
 
 
 . ■* 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 ■^''-11 •■■'-' 
 
 '**: 
 
 
 
 
 ' '^'r 
 
 iV 
 
 j. • 
 
 
 <- 
 
 ■,1- 
 
 iHi' 
 
 ■**' 
 
 ^*^^ 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 ■/f^' 
 
 ) - 
 
 
 ANGLICAN CHURCH 
 OF CANADA 
 
 
 1 
 
 Wte 
 
 t^3, 
 
 GENERAL SYNOD 
 ARCHIVES 
 
 Church House 
 
 Toronto 
 
 
 -.t, 
 
 $ 
 
 :.i- 
 
 
 .■V* 
 
 ^■j ' 
 
. fc ii# i 
 
 f^ 03 W 
 
 -1^ 
 
 US2> 
 
 .>^ "* ■; » 
 
 
 CONSIDERATIONS 
 
 ON TE» 
 
 REVISED EDITION 
 
 OV TBB 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 i-"* 
 
 IN PART DELIVERED AT A CONFERENCE OF CaiBRGY 
 THE DIOCESB OF MONTREAL, ASSEMBLED 
 IN NOVEMBER, 1881, 
 
 BY 
 
 Rev. Canon R. W. NORMAN, M.A., D.C.L., 
 
 VrOK-OHANOKLLOR Of THE UNIVERSITY OF BiSHOP'S C<>Lt»C«, 
 
 Lennoxville. 
 
 
 THB GAZETTE PRINTINO COMPANy. 
 
 # 1881. 
 
 
 .%: 
 
 AliaJCAN CHURtH OF'IZAHADA 
 
vv 
 
CONSIDERATIONS 
 
 ON THE 
 
 REVISED EDITION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 IN PART DELIVERED AT A CONFERENCE OF CLERGY OF 
 
 THE DIOCESE OP MONTREAL, ASSEMBLED 
 
 IN NOVEMBER, 1881, 
 
 ■r 
 
 Rev. Canon R. W. NORMAN, M.A., D.C.L, 
 
 Vice-Chancellor OF THE Univfrsity op Bishop's College, 
 
 Lennoxvijle. 
 
 plc»ixtx;jcaX : 
 
 THE GAZETTE PRINTING COMPANY. 
 
 1881. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 At the request of a few friends I undertook some 
 months ago to add one more to the many written 
 opinions upon the Revised Edition of the New Testament. 
 I have devoted some time to the work, albeit the results 
 of that work seem scanty- I have, of course, consulted 
 all accessible authorities, but have devoted the greater 
 part of my time to the careful study and comparison of 
 the various texts which I possess. Since these sheets 
 have been in the printers' hands I have seen a notice of 
 an article in the Quarterly Review, the perusal of which 
 all scholars on this side of the Atlantic will await with 
 eagerness. I have also read with much interest an able 
 article in the "American Church Review," for October, from 
 the accomplished pen of Bishop Doane. This reached me 
 too late to be of service. I can only remark that I cannot 
 agree with the article taken as a whole. It seems difficult 
 for critics to take an impartial survey of this great ques- 
 tion. For any scholar to say of the New Edition " the 
 great mass of changes is either unimportant, valueless, 
 unmeaning, or unjust," is to me almost inconceivable. 
 
Revision must have come. There have been indications 
 of it for the last quarter of a century. The only thing to 
 be done was to pray and labour that the movement should 
 be guided aright. I may add that a portion of this 
 pamphlet was read as t» paper at a Diocesan Clerical Con- 
 ference recently held in. Montreal. The subject given me 
 w^as " Inspiration and Tve vision." I have made no subse- 
 quent changes, and tht opening sentences of the pamphlet 
 refer, as the reader will observe, to both these heads. I 
 have endeavoured to be comprehensive in my estimate of 
 this great work, and have striven to avoid both blind 
 prejudice on the one hand, and servile adhesion to mere 
 verbal fidelity, on the other. I must leave the result to 
 the verdict of the Christian public. 
 
EEVISED NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 -o- 
 
 The subject before us is so large, and my time is of 
 necessity so limited, that, in order not to be utterly super- 
 ficial, I can only attempt to enlarge on one head, touching 
 the other very lightly in a few preliminary remarks. 
 
 The truth of the Inspiration of Holy Writ underlies, 
 of course, the whole question, and imparts to it para- 
 mount importance. And yet the Church at large has 
 never exactly defined the meaning conveyed and the 
 extent covered by the term " Inspiration " (a). This very 
 abstention not only need not be regretted, but may be 
 due to the wisdom of God's guiding Providence. For 
 the Almighty, while revealing to us that the Scriptures 
 are His Word, has not communicated to us any precise 
 and specific account of the mode in which the work of 
 Inspiration was effected. Any theory concerning it, any 
 speculation as to its working, can be only a human deduc- 
 tion which cannot be laid down as an article of faith. 
 In the Nicene Creed we are taught to profess that the 
 Holy Grhost spake by the Prophets. To use the words of 
 Dr. Lee (6), " This confession not only defines the Inspira- 
 tion of the sacred writers to be the act of the Holy Grhost, 
 but it also lays down as a fundamental doctrine of Christi- 
 anity, that both the Old and New Testament have pro- 
 ceeded from the same source, and are alike Divine. That 
 to this latter truth the Article of the Creed chiefly refers, 
 admits of no doubt." The whole Bible is placed in our 
 hands as the Word of Grod ; we have no tests given us 
 beyond the general consent and acceptance of the Chris- 
 
 (a) There is a secondary sense of the word " Inspiratioa," which is in- 
 tended when the term is used in some of our Collects, and the hymn Veni 
 Creator. (6) See Inspiration of Holy Scripture, pp 74-75. 
 
6 
 
 tian Church, whereby to determine what is Divine and 
 what is not, and it would be perilous for us to invent any 
 such tests for ourselves. 
 
 It is the original Scripture that has been certified to be 
 Divine, and ot that original we may assuredly predicate 
 plenary Inspiration, and that to alter one word and even 
 one letter would be presumptuous and profane. But 
 whether the Holy Spirit watched over every word, 
 whether He guided the writer's pen with or without his 
 inner consciousness, on this we are not minutely in- 
 formed, and where no precise revelation has been granted, 
 we have no right to dogmatize. We may aver that the 
 sacred writers were not so much passive instruments in 
 the hands of the Holy G-host, as inspired penmen who, 
 while they were guided aright and protected from error, 
 were yet permitted to clothe the facts and truths which 
 they were empowered to teach, with illustrations and 
 imagery drawn from their own minds, their country, 
 their occupations. The human element in Scripture pos- 
 sesses a special interest of its own, and should never be 
 overlooked in our study of God's Word. But we have 
 never been told that translations of Scripture are Divine. 
 
 The Sacred Writings are subject to erroneous trans- 
 cription, and therefore it is not only lawful but incumbent 
 on us to scrutinize most carefully the MSS. of Scripture, 
 with a view to detect any interpolation by the hands of 
 copyists. * And this brings us naturally to the second 
 head, viz : — Revision. Was this necessary or desirable ? 
 We may thankfully at once admit that (to use another's 
 words) "if our own cherished and admirable English 
 version be in some points defective, it never will lead us 
 into any falsehood, though it may lead us short of the 
 whole truth." But I conceive that thoughtful and obser- 
 vant men will answer tlie above question in the affirm- 
 ative. Our venerable Authorized Version had been the 
 
 ♦ Trench on Authorised Version, p. 7. 
 
target at which all sorts of sharpshooters had discharged 
 their missiles. Romanists had spoken of it with con- 
 temptuous obloquy, because it certainly fails to support 
 their modern and erroneous peculiarities. A.lmost the only 
 noble and memorable exception to those aspersions, as far 
 as I am aware, is to be found in the writings of Dr. 
 Newman.* 
 
 He says, " certain masters of composition, as Shakspeare, 
 Milton and Pope, the writers of the Protestant Bible and 
 Prayer Book, have been the making of the English 
 language. How real a creation, how sui generis is the 
 style of Shakspeare or of the Protestant Bible or Prayer- 
 Book ! Even were the subject matter without meaning, 
 though in truth the style cannot really be abstracted from 
 the sense, still the style would, on that supposition, remain 
 as perfect and original a work as Euclid's Elements or a 
 Symphony of Beethoven. And like music, it has seized 
 upon the public mind , and the literature of England is 
 no longer a mere letter, printed in books, and shut up in 
 libraries, but it is a living voice, which has gone forth in 
 its expressions and its sentiments into the world of men, 
 which daily thrills upon our ears and syllables our 
 thoughts, which speaks to us through our correspondents, 
 and dictates when we put pen to paper." This passage is 
 melodious with the old ring. It is the praise of one, who 
 is himself a master of style, who is ever independent in 
 thought and candid in expression, and who cannot help 
 contrasting the vigour, freedom and poetry of our Author- 
 ized Version with the stilted classicisms of the Rheims and 
 Douay versions. 
 
 Freethinkers have done their best to magnify any in- 
 accuracies in the Authorized Version, either Old or New 
 Testament, and by obtruding such portions, the authenti- 
 city of which is at least doubtful, have tried to shake the 
 authority of the whole. It has been declared that the 
 
 ♦ Lectures on University Subjects, pp. 90 and 91. 
 
-8- 
 
 New Testament contains direct contradictions which 
 impair its authority, and even divines have been led to 
 concede the possibility of such contradictions. I do not 
 for a moment admit the existence of such contradictions 
 in the original. But such allegations have to be met. 
 Simple people, strong in faith, but not profound in eru- 
 dition, began to feel that the very foundations of their 
 religious belief were slipping away. They naturally said, 
 " if our English Bible, the treasure-house of comfort to so 
 many pious souls, is not to be trusted, where are we to 
 look for religious knowledge, and what are we to consider 
 as the revealed Word of Grod ? " Also, scholars, in their 
 anxiety to give the most strictly accurate rendering of 
 Hebrew or G-reek, as the case may be, and animated per- 
 chance by a semi-unconscious impulse to display their own 
 learning, were wont in the course of their sermons to 
 change, I will not always say to improve upon the English 
 text. 
 
 Thus, to allay fear and quell anxiety, it was desirable 
 that the work of revision should be undertaken as 
 promptly, and accomplished as expeditiously as the mag- 
 nitude of the task and the solemn responsibility connected 
 with it would admit of. 
 
 As far back as 1857 a new English version of St. John's 
 Grospel was published in England. It was the work of 
 five clergymen, all eminent for their scholarship. This 
 publication, as far as it went, should have satisfied Chris- 
 tian people that, in the case of a revised edition, the 
 doctrines of the faith, dear to all alike, learned or un- 
 learned, need not be affected, and that the only change 
 would be in the direction of greater critical accuracy. 
 Mr. Conybeare's rendering of St. Paul's Epistles, and 
 Bishop Ellicott's translations of the same, and Dean 
 Alford's version stand deservedly high. Bishop Words- 
 worth's Grreek text is perhaps the best, certainly one of 
 the best that we possess. Many other versions might be 
 cited, and without undervaluing, or giving the first place 
 
to any one, it seemed manifest that the work of thorough 
 revision had yet to be accomplished. 
 
 We have also received the first instalment of a work of 
 great value, viz. the four Gospels, a new translation, with 
 copious references, notes, dissertations, and analytical 
 harmony by the ReA^ J. B. McClellan. It is a monument 
 of patient and learned labour, the result of fifteen years 
 study. May the author be spared to complete his work. 
 
 Then again, the time seemed ripe for such an undertak- 
 ing. The translators of our Authorized Version laboured 
 under considerable difficulties. Books were scarce, the 
 age was not a critical one, and the text which they adopted 
 was specially defective in its version of the Apocalypse. 
 The translators of King James' Bible had but a scanty 
 supply of the three main sources of material for construct- 
 ing a Greek text, viz : Greek MSS. ancient versions in 
 various languages, and commentaries of the Fathers. 
 Beza's edition of 1598 was the groundwork of the Autho- 
 rized translation of the Apocalypse, Erasmus, the first 
 editor after the invention of printing, had only one MS. 
 of the Apocalypse, and +hat an imperfect one. Since his 
 time about a hundred MSS. of the Apocalypse have been 
 collected, some very ancient, as e.g. A., the Alexandrine, 4th 
 century ; Aleph., the Sinaitic, 4th century ; the Basilian, 
 (which only contains the Apocalypse) 6th century. A. 
 contains the New Testament nearly complete ; Aleph. 
 contains the New Testament complete, deducting errors of 
 omission ; B. (Vaticanus) has many omissions, notably that 
 of the Apocalypse, and the Basilian is appended as a supple- 
 ment in Mai's edition of Codex B. ; C, Palimpsest of 
 Ephraim, latter part of 5th century. The above are 
 the most ancient Greek MSS. known to exist. All 
 have been discovered since the publication of the 
 Authorized Version. Also the general advance in critical 
 scholarship during this century seemed to afford a very 
 favourable opportunity for the commencement of so deeply 
 important an undertaking. 
 
10 
 
 Then again, as to the composition of the body of re- 
 visers. It is well known that the compilers of King 
 James' Bible were all members of the Anglican Church. 
 This version has been lovingly accepted by all Protestant 
 bodies. The Church herself adopted it for public reading 
 in Divine Service, although as a matter of fact the version 
 has never received any formal Ecclesiastical or even Civil 
 sanction. It may, nevertheless, be said to have been sanc- 
 tioned by implication, when at the last revision of the 
 Prayer Book in 1662, the Epistles and Grospels were taken 
 from it. Previously they had been taken from the version 
 called the '^ishops' Bible. The Psalms and Canticles as we 
 have them still, are from an older version, Cranmer's Bible. 
 This was the first Bible appointed to be set up in churches. 
 It must be remembered that the Prayer Book of 1662 carries 
 with it the greatest possible weight of authority. It was 
 adopted by both houses of convocation of both Provinces, 
 and was sanctioned by both houses of Parliament. The 
 Genevan is perhaps the most original of the versions pub- 
 lished since the Reformation. The majority, in the main 
 follow Tyndal, who has been called the Prince of Transla- 
 tors. The Authorized Version was simply put forward by 
 the authority of the King and accepted by the church. 
 " Tempora mutantur." It was no doubt wise (in order to 
 make the revised edition a national work and to enlist the 
 sympathies of all Christian people) to invite the co-opera- 
 tion of Protestant bodies generally. We could hardly 
 expect them to accept an altered form of the Scriptures, 
 unless they were permitted to have a share in the prepara- 
 tion. Some may regret the presence on the committee of 
 a Unitarian member. In the rendering of Scripture, and 
 especially the Scriptures of the New Testament, something 
 more than mere sound scholarship should be looked for. 
 There should be a moral and spiritual as well as a critical 
 faculty. Also one who examines the living Word, as a 
 surgeon dissects an inanimate corpse, and one who places 
 the inspired record on a level with any other book, though 
 
^ 11 
 
 I do not apply this to Mr. Vance Smith, can hardly be said 
 to possess all the necessarj'- qualifications, be his intellec- 
 tual eminence what it may. However, a single member, 
 though very influential in himself, would not be likely to 
 overbalance the opinion, or change the decision of the 
 majority, who, being orthodox believers, would not lightly 
 accept any translation that would jeopardize the Christian 
 Faith. At the same time the comprehensiveness which 
 so conspicuously marked the selection of the committee, 
 would satisfy the public mind that no spirit of narrow 
 ecclesiasticism would be the ruling motive of their de- 
 cisions. Some, myself among the number, might in the 
 abstract have preferred that the original text of the Autho- 
 rized Version should have remained untouched, and that 
 emendations should have been inserted, as marginal or 
 foot notes. It is a most delicate and almost perilous task 
 to alter even ininutely those hallowed sentences, precious 
 to our forefathers and to ourselves, bound up with moments 
 of joy, with seasons of weariness and sorrow, and that 
 have proved helpful to many struggling souls in time of 
 temptation. We cannot but respect the prejudices of 
 those who feared the result of the most faithful revision 
 as a tampering with holy things. 
 
 But the plan which I should have preferred would have 
 increased the size of the volume and the cost of publica- 
 tion, which last it was specially desirable to keep as low 
 as possible. 
 
 It is no small praise to say of the Revised Edition that 
 it preserves so happily the archaic character which belongs 
 to the treasured Authorized Version. To quote Arch- 
 bishop Trench : " It is good that the phraseology of Scrip- 
 ture should not be exactly that of our common life ; should 
 be removed from the vulgarities, and even the familiarities 
 of this." The attempts to modernize the English Bible 
 
 would, if accepted, have been disastrous, and would have 
 shattered much of the reverence that now surrounds it. 
 
 Any one can see this for themselves by consulting Har- 
 
wood, Wemyss, Purver and Symonds. Their repulsiveness 
 in some cases, almost amounts to blasphemy. Patrick 
 also tried to improve on Scripture, of whom Macaulay 
 wittily remarks that " whoever could have made it better 
 no one could have made it longer." But, nevertheless, 
 once more to quote Archbishop Trench, " the more deeply 
 we are persuaded of the inspiration of Holy Scripture, 
 the more intolerant we shall be of any lets and hindrances 
 to the arriving at a perfect understanding of that which 
 the mouth of Grod has spoken." 
 
 The work, from which the above passages were taken, 
 was published in 1858. It is, like all the productions of 
 its learned author, scholarly and interesting, and it is as 
 appropriate now as at the time of its first appearance. 
 The Archbishop, then Dean of Westminster, foresaw and 
 foretold the dangers attending revision, and with great 
 clearness set forth the excellencies and blemishes of the 
 Authorized Version. No man was more competent to 
 speak upon the structure of the English tongue, past and 
 present, and the revisers appear to have followed in his 
 footsteps and to have profited by his suggestions. 
 
 The widespread interest which the Revised Edition has 
 aroused in countries where English is the vernacular 
 tongue is most remarkable. 
 
 While philosophy, so called, has been striving to sap 
 the authority of revelation, while unbelief has been carp- 
 ing at it, while pseudo-criticism has been attempting to 
 discover errors in it, while even some of the household of 
 faith have been casting stones at it, still the announcement 
 of the approaching publication of this long looked for 
 version attracted throngs to stores and shops. It was the 
 greatest literary excitement of the time. People flocked 
 with as much avidity to procure a copy of the written 
 Word, as if the Scriptures had been hitherto a sealed book 
 to them. This eagerness recalled the days of the Reforma- 
 tion. Supplies were soon exhausted, and it is said that 
 the proprietors of one newspaper in Chicago in the 
 
13 
 
 Western States had the whole book transmitted to Inem 
 by telegraph, for publication in their newspaper. Their 
 agent in New York arranged this as soon as the copies of 
 the Revised Edition arrived from England. Thus resi- 
 dents in Chicago could read the Revised New Testament in 
 the newspaper before the bound copies could be purchased 
 in their city. There is something repugnant to a sense of 
 reverence to see the Scriptures in the columns of a news- 
 paper. But this^ fact speaks volumes. It is far from 
 probable that shrewd business men would embark in so 
 costly and hazardous an enterprise, unless they believed 
 that the enormous circulation of their journal would in 
 part reimburse them for the outlay. It is surely gratify- 
 ing to know that the Scriptures have so strong a hold 
 upon the hearts and interest of the people. 
 
 We have been inundated with criticisms of the results 
 of this great and important undertaking. As it seems to 
 me, the verdict of many, whether in the way of praise or 
 blame, has been prematurely hasty. We should consider 
 how serious and solemn was the work, how great the 
 responsibility attaching to this eflPort to improve on the 
 beloved and venerated Authorized Version, by supplying 
 a translation still more accurate of what was hoped to be 
 a still more faithful reproduction of the Original, than 
 the Textus Receptus. 
 
 These distinguished Scholars and Divines had devoted 
 the prayers, thought and labour of eleven years to the 
 carrying on of the work. Was it then respectful to them, 
 and worthy of the subject, to pronounce a decision which 
 must have been arrived at after a very superficial and 
 hurried comparison of the two Versions ? Yet some 
 critics disposed of the matter in fewer hours than the 
 Revisers employed of years in completing their task. 
 
 As a preliminary to the study of the Revised Version, 
 everyone should peruse with careful attention the long 
 and exhaustive Preface. It is very able, and its tone and 
 temper are that of men who duly weighed the gravity of 
 
- 14 
 
 the work assigned to them. We therein read that to con- 
 struct a fresh G-reek Text, did not in the opinion of the 
 revisers lie within their province. =^ We nevertheless 
 possess two Grreek copies representing the Version agreed 
 to by the Committee, one published in Cambridge, and 
 the other at Oxford. Armed with this and with the two 
 English Versions, we can apply ourselves to the task of 
 comparative criticism. 
 
 The Oxford edition contains the alterations in the text, 
 and has the displaced readings at the foot of each page 
 
 The Cambridge pursues the opposite plan, although its 
 arrangement is more complicated. The text represents as 
 far as possible the Authorized Version, and the changes 
 adopted are placed at the foot of the page. 
 
 Archdeacon Palmer edited the Oxford volume, and the 
 well-known name of Dr. Scrivener signs the Preface of 
 the Cambridge edition. 
 
 The Greek Text as revised by those two distinguished 
 scholars, Drs. Westcott and Hort, is by some preferred 
 even to that adopted by the Revisers. From this opinion 
 I bejr leave to differ. Their version follows almost with- 
 out deviation the text of Codices Aleph and B. 
 
 A student will at once observe that the accepted text 
 excludes or alters several familiar passages.! On these I 
 have entered into detail in Appendix A and B. Reserv- 
 ing any expression of opinion as to the relative value of 
 the Greek Versions, I would gladly say that in the vast 
 majority of cases in which the Textus Receptus is in 
 agreement with the text adopted by the Revisers, the 
 version of the latter is the more accurate of the two. 
 This in itself is a great gain, and to an English reader, 
 
 *It did not fall withio our province to construct a continuous and complete 
 Greek Te.xt. — See Preface, p. 12. 
 
 tMatt. Ic, 25 v.; lie, 19 v.; 19 c., 17 v.; Mark 3 c. 29 v.; 7 c., 19 v.; Luke 1 c. 28 
 v.; 9 c, 54 and 55 v.; lie, 2 v.; 16 c, 9 v.; 23 c. Ifi v. ; 24 c, 17 v. ; John 5 c, 3 
 and 4 v.; Acts 10 c, 30 v.; 18 c, 21 v. ; 26 c, 28 and 29 v. ; 1 John 5 c, 7 v. ; etc , 
 etc. Also the last 12 verses in St. Mark, and the incident of the woman in 
 adultery in John 8 c, are printed distinct from the context. — (See Appendix A.) 
 
15 
 
 many obscure passages have been cleared up by the 
 patience, combined with the admirable scholarship, of the 
 Revising Committee. Their corrections may be said to 
 fall under seven heads. I. — Greater precision in the 
 translation of tenses, especially the Greek aorist and per- 
 fect. II. — The frequent insertion of the definite article, 
 the importance of vrhich on the score of correct rendering 
 can in some places hardly be exaggerated, and in which 
 respect the older translators were very lax. III. — The 
 expunging of words, the current meaning of which is no 
 longer the same as that which existed in the reign of 
 James I., and substitution of a more correct equivalent. 
 IV. — The retaining, as a rule, one English equivalent for 
 a frequently recurring Greek word. This was the very 
 opposite of the principle adopted by the older translators. 
 They deliberately and almost invariably avoided unifor- 
 mity in the rendering of a frequently recurring Greek 
 work. This itself is unfortunate, because the repetition 
 of a word is important, but it is a graver error to employ 
 for one Greek word an English word that strictly repre- 
 sents another Greek word. This is of frequent occur- 
 rence. The very richness and variety of their version 
 was enhanced and in a great measure brought about by 
 the use of various English equivalents for one Greek 
 term. The Revised Edition in this respect has gained 
 (and a most valuable gain it is) in point and accuracy 
 where it may have lost in variety of diction. V. — The 
 Revisers have bestowed great care upon the translation 
 of the Hellenistic genitive, itself a Hebraism, and which 
 has generally been paraphrased and weakened in the 
 Authorized Version, through the employment in its stead 
 of an adjective. VI. — Every reader will notice that the 
 Greek prepositions have received most careful attention 
 at the hands of the Revisers, and that the gain in the 
 way of clearness and depth of significance has been enor- 
 mous. VII. — Very great pains have been taken to give as 
 nearly as possible (due allowance being made for diflfer- 
 
16 
 
 ence of idiom) the exact English meaning of every word. 
 When we are dealing with a book which claims Divine 
 authority, I need not insist on the maintenance of such a 
 principle. . ^ 
 
 I propose now to give one or two illustrations of 
 each of these features. The difficulty lies in the selec- 
 tion, for there is an embarras de richesse in every case. 
 As regards No. I, in Luke 24 c, 37 v., instead of " supposed 
 that they had seen a spirit," the Revisers have " supposed 
 that they beheld a spirit,' for the Saviour stood before 
 them. Rev. 2 c, 4 v., "didst leave" for "hast left." 
 Rev. 2 c, 13 v., " didst not deny " for " hast not denied." 
 Rev. 3c., 4 v., "did not defile" for "have not defiled." 
 John 17 c, 3 v., " thou didst send " instead of " thou 
 hast sent ; " and 17 c, 12 v., " which thou hast given me " 
 instead of " thou gavest me." To any thoughtful reader, 
 especially to a scholar, these changes are an improvement. 
 
 II. — With reference to this head, I quote two instances 
 out of many, — 2 Thess. 2 c, 3 v., where " the falling away " 
 or final apostasy is much more forcible than " a falling 
 away ; " and 1 Tim. 2 c, 15 v., where " the childbcaring " 
 i. e. the Incarnation, gives wonderful and suggestive 
 teaching. 
 
 III. — On this head I give two instances, — Matt. 6 c, 
 25 v., and elsewhere, " be anxious for " instead of " take 
 thought for," and " trade with " for " occupy," Luke 
 19 c, 13 V. 
 
 IV. — The rendering htniug almost, if not quite uniformly 
 by •• straightway," (a) ?a'/ av by " speak," hpxtrtnu'^-mK, by "ruler 
 of feast " in both cases, 7rapoiKo<: by " sojourner," ,^imto^ gene- 
 rally by " righteous " instead of "just," diad^Kr/ generally by 
 *' covenant." 
 
 v.— Titus 2 c, 13 v., the " appearing of glory of our 
 Great God " for " glorious appearing." Phil. 3 c, 21 v., 
 "body of our humiliation" for "vile body." 2 Peter, 
 
 (a) It is translated "immediately" in Luke 21 c, 9 v, and to this no one 
 would object. 
 
IT 
 
 2 c, 15 v., " children of cursing " for " cursed children." 
 VI. — 1 Tim. 2 c, 15 v., " through the childbearing " 
 instead of " in childbearing." Matt. 23 c, 24 v., " strain 
 out the gnat " for " at a gnat." " Baptize into " for 
 "baptize in." 
 
 VII. — Luke 2 c. 8 v., " enrolment" for "taxing." John 
 5 c, 35 v., "lamp" for "light." "One flock " for "one 
 fold," John 10 c, end of 16 v. 
 
 The question must naturally suggest itself. — Will the 
 Revised Edition ultimately supplant the Authorized Ver- 
 sion ? Will this be the edition read in Churches and in 
 homes at times of family prayer, private meditation, and 
 ministrations to the sick and the sorrowing ? I can 
 scarcely think so. We must however remember that the 
 Bible Society intend to circulate the Revised Edition, and 
 that it is reported that the Methodist Body have approved 
 it. I have heard also that the Unitarian congrega- 
 tion in Montreal have introduced it. No one, of course, 
 anticipates an immediate universal change. The Old 
 Version could not be so quickly and easily displaced. 
 Nevertheless, the English reader wall derive immense help 
 from the use of the New Edition. It will serve as a 
 commentary, a book of reference, an interpreter in cases 
 of difficulty, and very many will thankfully so use it, 
 resting assured that it is in the main a more critically 
 accurate translation than the Authorized Version. But I 
 conceive that we have not yet done with the work of 
 Revision. Our next stage will be the reception of the 
 New Version of the Old Testament. When the whole 
 Bible reA'ised is in our hands, it will be for Christians 
 throughout the world to agree as to whether for public, 
 devotional, and general use, the new is preferable to the 
 old. The practical consensus of Protestant Christendom 
 is needed before such a decision could be arrived at. I 
 cannot but think that some further revision will be found 
 necessary, either in the direction of increased fidelity to 
 the original, or possibly in a return in some cases to the 
 
18 r 
 
 older version. Whatever defects the old translators 
 suffered from, either from partial lack of critical know- 
 ledge, or from paucity of MSS., they possessed one great 
 merit, and one which is universally acknowledged, i. c. 
 they were absolute masters of the English tongue. Their 
 translation has all the swing and freedom of an original, 
 and the rhythm of their sentences is generally most melo- 
 dious and poetical. What ( an be more perfect than the 
 account in St. Luke of the appearance of the Angels to 
 the Shepherds, or again, the Sermon on the Mount, or the 
 Parables, especially those of the Good Samaritan, and the 
 Prodigal Son, or the discourses in St. John, beginning 
 with the 14th Chapter, or the interview (related by St. 
 John) of the Saviour with Mary Magdalene after the 
 Resurrection? There is nothing in the English lansfuage 
 more grand and stately than the opening of the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews, or more exquisitely beautiful than 
 Hebrews, 11th chap., and 1 Thess. 4th chap., 13th to 18th 
 verses ; and Revelation, 18th chap., which describes the 
 lamentations over Babylon. But citations would be end- 
 less. The Revised Version is certainly inferior in smooth- 
 ress and musical cadence. It is in fact in some places 
 rough and almost clumsy. At times too the changes are 
 needless. The meaning is untouched, and the translation, 
 though following more exactly the Greek order, has a 
 harsh sound. Thus in Matt. 26th c, 22 and 25 v., '' Lord, 
 is it I ? " and " Master, is it I ? " are altered to the less 
 felicitous, "Is it I, Lord?" and -Is it I, Rabbi?" 
 Nothing is gained by the change. The meaning is iden- 
 tical, while the ear is a little offended by the alteration 
 in a very familiar and touching passage. Again in Matt. 
 22 c, 9 v., the translation " partings of the highw^ays " 
 is uncouth, and would convey little meaning to many. 
 The word ,Suin,^nvr might be left out or rendered more 
 intelligibly " outlets." 
 
 Again, although the word " Ami/jryiu " may be strictly trans- 
 lated " uncorruptness," yet the passage Ephes. 6 c, 84 v.» 
 
19 
 
 " Grrace be with all men that love our Lord Jesus Christ 
 in uncorruptness " sounds very rugged, and would not be 
 very intelligible to the ordinary reader. The old transla- 
 tion is far smoother, more easy to understand, and would 
 be quite near enough to the original for all practical 
 purposes. This runs " that love our Lord Jesus Christ in 
 sincerity." 
 
 I regret that the revisers have retained the translation 
 '= stood " in the account of St. Paul's conversion, in Acts 
 9 c, 7 V. ; 22 c, 9 v. ; 26 c, 14 v. ; la-aiiai means to remain 
 motionless or fixed in any position, whether erect or 
 recumbent. 
 
 It is said of Saul, in the Septuagint Version of 1 Sam. 
 28 c, 20 v., t-imv laniKUK i-i n/v y//v i.e. " He fell and 
 remained prone upon the earth." Again, the word iKovu 
 when followed by the accusative means to hear thoroughly, 
 when followed by the genitive, it signifies to hear in part, 
 to hear the sound of a human voice, but not to distinguish 
 the words spoken. 
 
 St. Luke displays his usual minute accuracy by saying, 
 Acts 9 c, 4 v., that St. Paul heard the Divine Voice and 
 therefore the words that were uttered, while his followers 
 did not hear the words (Acts 22 c, 9 v.) In these instances 
 the accusative case is employed. On the other hand in 
 Acts 9 c, 7 V. the attendants are said to have heard the 
 voice (genitive case) i.e. they heard a sound, but distin- 
 guished no words. This delicate and important distinction 
 is thus lost, both in the Authorized and Revised Versions, 
 and to the unlearned reader St. Luke seems to contradict 
 himself, because in one place he is made to say, that the 
 company at Damascus were all fallen to the earth, and in 
 another that they all stood, and again in one place that 
 they did not, and in another that they did, hear the Lord's 
 voice. 
 
 Again, in St. John 7 c, 8 v., we read that our Lord said, 
 " I go not up to this feast," nevertheless he afterwards 
 went, but secretly. I believe that the preponderance of 
 
20 
 
 OI'TU 
 
 authority is in favour of ;,Ih " not," rather than of 
 " not yet," and hence our Saviour appears to say one thing 
 and do another. The very idea is painful to every reverent 
 mind, however fully we may be assured that there is an 
 explanation for such apparent inconsistency. But the 
 difficulty disappears when wc recollect that the verb 
 uvu ,intvi.i generally means " to make a Journey in a public 
 procession." The Jews expected our Lord to do this, and 
 purposed to kill Him, if they detected Him as a member 
 of any ol the caravans going- up to the Paschal Feast. 
 He therefore refused to do this in company with His 
 followers, who were nearly as well known as Him- 
 self, and whose presence would have aided his de- 
 tection and capture. He did not court danger, but 
 later, secretly, perhaps in disguise, He went up to the 
 Holy City. It would have been better in this case to 
 have transposed the words in the text and the margin, in 
 accordance with the advice of the American Committee. 
 Again, :v,G7nw, " I believe," seems very often to have had a 
 technical meaning in the New Testament, after the Gos- 
 pels, and to mean to " profess publicly belief in the Lord." 
 This specially is true of the aorist. Thus -mnrn,,,: would 
 appear to 'mean ont^ who has made a public declaration of 
 faith in Christ. The com omitant act of Baptism would 
 be indicated by the preposition ;„_■, into, which our Lord 
 Himself used when he gave the commission to the Apostles. 
 " To believe in God " would probably be expressed by the 
 verb followed by im, that is to rest on God as the founda- 
 tion of one's faith. The revisers have failed to mark this 
 important distinction, and this is a loss to the English 
 reader. 
 
 Simon Magus did not believe in Christ. (Acts 8 c, 9 v.) 
 He, we may presume, had no saving belief, but was struck 
 by the Apostles' miracles, and hence made a public state- 
 ment of faith. On this profession he was baptized, though 
 he seems to have been entirely devoid of real inward faith. 
 Much valuable truth is rendered ambiguous, and the prac- 
 
21 
 
 tice of the early Christians obscured by this lack of pre- 
 cision in some instances, c/., Acts passim, Rom. 13 c, 11 v. ; 
 Ephes. 1 c, 13 V. 
 
 Again, in St. John (1 Ep. 3 c, 9 v.) where the Authorized 
 Version runs : " whosoever is born of God doth not com- 
 mit sin," the Revised Edition has '- whosoever is begotten 
 of God," etc. This change is a very slight improvement, 
 and does not remove the great difiiculty inherent in the 
 passage as translated. The word is yeyti'vi/itimc not yn-vr/ikig. 
 It must mean " whosoever having received the spiritual 
 birth, the Seed of the Holy Spirit implanted in him t.nd 
 retaining it, he does not commit sin, because he has not 
 forfeited grace." Again, -i-tvun Spirit, with the article, means 
 of course the third person of the Trinity, The noun with- 
 out the article appears to mean the gift of the Spirit in 
 man. Thus rrrti'/m aymr iu Acts 10 c, 1, 2, 3 vv., probably signi- 
 fies " holy inspiration." The disciples were asked whether 
 they had received this gift when they professed their be- 
 lief. Their reply was that they did not as much as hear 
 that there was any holy inspiration (to be had). They 
 could not be ignorant of the Holy Spirit. Hence the query 
 " unto what then were you baptized," and the answer 
 "unto John's baptism," which, as we know from the Bible 
 itself, conveyed no spiritual gift. This distinction throws 
 light on the obscure statement in St. John, 7 c, 39 v. In 
 both English versions we read " the Holy Ghost was not 
 yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified. It should 
 be noticed that there is no article with the word jrvevjua. The 
 Holy Spirit of course existed, but His special gift was not 
 yet granted, not being vouchsafed till the day of Pentecost 
 and subsequent to the Lord s ascent in glory. 
 
 Perhaps the two corrections which are most signally 
 valuable, and for which English-speaking Christians 
 should be most grateful for, are as follows : first, the substi- 
 tution of Hades for Hell, in several places, especially in 
 Luke 16 c, 23 V. ; Acts 2 c, 31 v., and Rev. 20 c, 13 14 vv. It 
 would occupy a very long space to demonstrate fully the 
 
22 
 
 mischievous error into which the popular signification of 
 the word Hell, originally a very fairly correct rendering of 
 Hades, has imported into the ideas of ordinary Christians. 
 Hades in the New Testament is the state of the departed, 
 unseen by us, as the term Hades signifies — Greenna is the 
 Greek word for the place of torment — Hell in the modern 
 sense. The second most conspicuous improvement is 
 " living creature " for " beast " in Rev. 4 c, and in other 
 places. All confusion between these counterparts of the 
 Cherubim in Ezekiel, symbols perchance of the four Evan- 
 gelists, and the two mysterious and awful Beasts in the 
 latter part of the Apocalypse is thus for ever done away. 
 Upon the changes in the Lord's Prayer in St. Matthew 
 there may be conflicting opinions. "Deliver us from 
 the evil one " is doubtless the more correct trans- 
 lation. Satan is the source of all evil in this world ; 
 nevertheless, in a secondary sense, we apply the 
 word to all which to our earthly eyes brings on 
 men misfortune and sorrow. Against this, [too, we have 
 a right to pray, but must leave the issue to God. I very 
 much doubt whether the change will ever supplant the 
 earlier form in our Prayer Book and books of private 
 devotion. The Doxology, though very ancient, was most 
 probably added after Apostolic days. It was therefore 
 right to exclude it, but that exclusion need not preclude 
 its use in public service and private or family prayer. I 
 think the alteration " bring us not into temptation " is 
 entirely uncalled for. It is scarcely, if at all, nearer the 
 original word siaev^yKyg than " lead ;" the change, unless im- 
 peratively required, seems like a rude profanation of a. 
 most sacred time-hallowed formula endeared by devotional 
 associations that extend almost from the cradle to the tomb. 
 St. Luke's version is painfully mutilated in the text. 
 The words of institution are somewhat altered, especially 
 in St. Paul's version (I Cor. lie. 24 v.) Any change, even 
 any modifications in phraseology so infinitely solemn, is 
 almost repulsive. But the adoption of the Revised edition 
 
23 
 
 would not necessitate any change however small in the 
 office of the Holy Communion. 
 
 There are few easier tasks than to find defects in any 
 human performance, especially that which has employed 
 many hands and minds. If I call attention to any deficien- 
 cies or blemishes, it is in a spirit the very antipodes of 
 fault-finding. My remarks are only the result of personal 
 investigation, and are penned under a sense of personal 
 humbleness and deep respect for those whose work I am 
 examining. The Revisers may be on the whole acquitted 
 of the charge of having ridden a hobby to the death in any 
 case, and this very fact may bring on them at the hands 
 of some critics the charge of inconsistency. But while 
 I laud highly their precise translation, where admissible, 
 of the perfect, aorist and imperfect, I think they should 
 have held their hands in the following instance : " Freely 
 ye received, freely give." (Matt. 10 c, 8 v.) The aorist here 
 has practically the force of the perfect. Grod's gifts are not 
 all given once for all. Not only does their effect abide 
 with us, but some are being constantly showered upon us. 
 This very fact is meant to inspire gratitude to the giver, and 
 a desire to emulate His bounty by assisting others. The 
 imperative " give " is also in the present tense, not the aorist, 
 and hence the charity of men should be a principle always 
 at work, and not an isolated act. This consideration fur- 
 nishes an additional reason for adhering to ihe rendering 
 in the Authorised Version. It was also surely unnecessary 
 to insert (Acts 4 c, 27 v.) " peoples of Israel " just because 
 the Grreek word was in the plural. The idea meant to be 
 conveyed was the composite character of the Ancient race. 
 Again, I fail to see the reason for the retention of the 
 obsolete expression " went about," in Acts 19 c, 29 v., when 
 it is rightly replaced by " seeking," as in Acts 21 c, 31 v., 
 and 26 c, 21 v. The G-reek verbs are different, but " went 
 about " is inapplicable to both. The first should be " took 
 in hand" or "undertook," or "attempted." It must 
 surely be by inadvertence that "<f should be translated 
 
24 
 
 " a man " in John 3 c, 4 and 5 vv. This blemish in 
 the Old Version, a blemish which many of us regret, 
 inasmuch as it has for ages been used as an argument 
 against Infant Baptism, is retained in the Revised Edition, 
 " Any one," an expression of general application, should 
 be substituted. 
 
 John 23 c, 24 v., " leaning back, as he was," is far 
 inferior to " lying on." 
 
 Acts 15 c, 23 v., " the elder brethren " is on more 
 grounds than one objectionable. 
 
 Gral. 4 c, 15 v., '• gratulation " is a word foreign to 
 Scripture usage. 
 
 Ephes. 5 c, 30 v. — The curtailment of this verse is to 
 be deprecated. 
 
 2 Tim., 3 c, 16 v. — " Every Scripture inspired of Grod," 
 etc., is open to grave objection, and in no way defen- 
 sible, as far as I can see, on critical grounds. 
 
 It is questionable whether the te(^hnical word (T7V£if>a as in 
 John 18 c. 3 v., and Acts 10 c. 1 v. should have been trans- 
 lated " band " as in the Authorized Version. But " cohort " 
 is in the margin, and that word reveals the treacherous 
 plans of Judas and the Priests, and their influence, most 
 likely through Pilate, on the Roman Grarrison. The 
 swords must have been borne by the Roman soldiers, 
 the staves or clubs by the multitude. The 6T?.a " weapons " 
 denote the armour of the disciplined soldier, and the 
 lanterns and torches were carried by troops when engaged 
 on a night expedition. It is well to observe that 
 St. Matthew, describing the betrayal, says of Judas 
 27 c, 49 V. Ka-F(pr/j/(7n> a.-r^r, I. c, " he kissed him ten- 
 derly," an awful aggravation of the crime. The Revised 
 Edition has "kissed him much." Again, in the latter 
 chapter. Acts 10 c, 33 v., the majority of the English read- 
 ers are probably unaware that the words " thou hast well 
 done " are equivalent to '• thou art welcome." This might 
 have been printed as a marginal note. Also, it is unfor- 
 tunate that " beckon with the hand" is used in Acts 12 c., 
 
25 
 
 17 v., and 21 c, 40 v. It conveys a wrong impression. The 
 Greek word means a downward movement to produce 
 silence, a different gesture from our meaning of the word 
 " beckon." 
 
 Once more, the mysterious words of our Lord on the 
 Cross : " My G-od, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ? " 
 seem inadequately translated by the English rendering. 
 
 Beautiful and instructive are the lessons which have 
 been drawn from this most unfathomable of our Lord's 
 last words. But our business is to know what exactly, at 
 such a moment, the Redeemer of men said. To begin with, 
 im ri means, " unto what purpose or object didst thou," etc. 
 Then the tense of the verb is the aorist. The expression 
 would seem to be " To what end didst Thou leave me 
 here behind among — (sinners — enemies.) — The words 
 were a fulfilment of prophecy, an exact quotation from 
 the Septuagint, and while they ask a question, are, as it 
 were, a laying before the Father the object of the scheme 
 for man's redemption. No desertion is necessarily implied, 
 but rather the permitting a loved Son to be left among 
 persecutors, without Divine interposition. Again, in St. 
 Matt. 26 c, 51 v., we find in both English versions that 
 Peter " stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and 
 struck a servant," etc. The original runs thus : " EK-eivai rtrv 
 
 Xelpo. anianaat Ttjv fidxaipav k.t.^. 
 
 Now, to stretch out the hand is not the action used for 
 drawing a sword. Indeed the very opposite gesture 
 would be employed. Also, the verb would scarcely signify 
 " drew the sword out of the scabbard," but rather " snatch- 
 ed it away from some one." It is quite conceivable that 
 when the detachment of the soldiers apprehended the 
 Saviour, they at the same time disarmed His followers. 
 Again, St. John, in his narrative of the Passion, supplies us 
 with some deeply interesting incidents not related by the 
 others. Fiom him we learn that Christ was with the 
 eleven in a walled or enclosed grove, for this is the mean- 
 
26 
 
 ing of x"piov, in which was the garden, Kf/7roc. From this He 
 emerged as the multitude drew near. To His calm and 
 dignified question, •' whom seek ye ?" they replied " Jesus 
 the Nazarene," the last word instinct with contempt. When 
 he said " I am he," they went backwards and fell to the 
 ground. Why this prostration and awe ? No one, as far as 
 I know, has ever explained this most striking and involun- 
 tary homage, except the Rev. Dr. Sewell, in his very sug- 
 gestive book " The Microscope of the New Testament." To 
 that book I am very much indebted for valuable assistance, 
 and for endorsation of many opinions of my own, formed 
 previous to its publication. Our Saviour on this occasion 
 said Eyi) t'lui, which can mean " I am," in other words, the 
 solemn and dread assertion of Deity. This would explain 
 their falling to the ground, moved by fear and perhaps by 
 horror. We all know the sentiments, which at other times 
 excited the minds of Jewish hearers, cf., Exodus 3 c, 3 v. ; 
 Mark 14 c, 62 v. ; John 1 c, 18 v. ; 3 c, 13 v. ; 4 c, 26 v. ; 8 c, 
 30, 58, 59 vv. Perhaps the Saviour used the words with 
 special emphasis to deter them at the last moment from 
 their impious design. When nothing befel them, and after 
 a repetition of question and answer, Christ used the words 
 in their more ordinary signification, the panic seems to 
 have passed away, and he was captured by his enemies. 
 I am at a loss to understand the reasons for the retention 
 of the word " rehearse." The sigiiitication of the term has 
 changed as far as general use is concerned, and yet the 
 Revisers have employed it for two different words. The 
 word " appoint " is also made to do duty for more than one 
 word, and is used in Acts 14 c, 2 3 vv., when " ordained " 
 as in A. V. i. e., in the ecclesiastical sense, would have 
 been more correct. 
 
 The Revisers generally retain the older form " entreat," 
 as in I These. 2 c, 2 v., " shamefully entreated," and 
 use " intreat " in the sense of " beseech," etc. I can- 
 not but think that it would have been better to substitute 
 " treat" for the former of the two significations. It is so 
 
27 
 
 used in one place, (Acts 27 c., 3 v.) and might have been 
 advantageously used in all. 
 
 The marginal notes in the Revised Edition are of great 
 service. They serve to explain two difficult passages (St. 
 John 16 c, 23 and 26 vv.) on the proper rendering 
 of which hangs at least one important truth. The 
 scholar will find the two different words uiriu and fpwrd<j 
 (both of which have been unwisely translated in both 
 versions by the one word " ask,") well explained in Trench, 
 " Greek Synonyms," pp. 164, 168. Also, it would have been 
 desirable if a note ^z'' been inserted explaining in Acts 
 28 c, 28 v., and I. Tim. 5 c, 3 v., and 17 v., that the word 
 " honour " means something more substantial than mere 
 esteem, but rather the token of such a sentiment in the 
 shape of a stipend or provision. The expression " for to 
 do a thing " is now a provincialism ; it is only as a rule to 
 be met with among persons of deficient education, and 
 would be corrected as indifferent Grammar in any Eno-lish 
 School. It has an awkward sound, and I rather laiiient 
 therefore that the Revisers have retained it at all, especially 
 as in two cases, (Luke 4 c, 16 v., Acts 4 c, 28 v.) they have 
 struck it out. Our Bibles should be models in everything. 
 The archaism, " which" not always used in the Revised 
 Version, is not open to the same objection, for it is rarely 
 heard, and its occurrence in the Lord's Prayer interposes 
 an objection to its removal from the text. But we should 
 not forget that a living language must change with time, 
 and the utmost legitimate veneration for a time-honoured 
 translation ought not to compel the retention of words not 
 current among educated people, and which in addition 
 would be noticed as mistakes in any other work. 
 
 It would have been well if the Revisers had pointed out 
 that in Heb. 9 c, 3 4 v., the term " wherein," the relative 
 pronoun, probably refers to the remoter antecedent 
 " Tabernacle " and not" Ark." This is a feature of Hebrew 
 and of Hellenistic Greek. 
 
 The same idiom is noticeable in Acts 11 c, 17 v., where 
 
28 
 
 the words " who believed " relate to the former antecedent 
 them, as indeed the Grreek text proves to any scholar. 
 
 Similarly in 1 Pet., 2c., 13 14 vv. the word " him " in the 
 14 V. refers back in all probability to " Lord " and not to 
 King, therein agreeing with the teaching of Rom. 13 c, 
 1 V. We might also have wished that the words (John 1 
 c, 18 V.) " No man hath seen Grod at any time ; the only 
 begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he 
 hath declared Him " — words so pregnant with important 
 truth, should have been unfolded in a marginal note. The 
 6 uv connected with the " I am " signifies surely " exi 4- 
 ing from eternity by Divine Power," and " which is " seems 
 a very inadequate rendering. Again, in 2 Tim. 1 c, 10 v. the 
 Authorized Version is followed, as far as the verb goes, by 
 the revisers, and St. Paul is made to say that Christ 
 "brought life and immortality to life through the Gospel," 
 as if there had been no revelation of a future to the saints of 
 old. But the verb means " made more plain," " threw a 
 brighter light upon " the future life. This is exactly what 
 Christianity did, but the old fathers did not look merely for 
 transitory promises. (See John 1 c, 19 v., I. Cor. 4 c, 5 v.) for 
 the same verb, and the 7th Art. Ch. of England. 
 
 St. Matt. 20 c, 23 v. The Revised is here an improve- 
 ment upon the Authorized Version, but it is not quite cor- 
 rect. It should run " is not mine to give but to those for 
 whom it has been prepared," etc. 
 
 It should be noticed that in the account of the burial and 
 resurrection of our Lord, the Revisers have translated 
 fivrifieiov (in St. Luke iivr,ua ) by tomb, and tu,}>o^ by sepulchre, 
 where the old translators were not equally particular. 
 The latter would perhaps mean the absolute fabric with 
 its doors, the former the whole excavation, including the 
 enclosure. Both hvjumeiov and ^ivfifm originally signify a memo- 
 rial, or place of a memorial. The Jews when (John 11 c, 
 31 V.) they said that Mary was going into the ixinfitiop of 
 
29 
 
 Lazarus, to weep there, did not mean that she was going 
 into the tomb, but to the enclosure outside it. 
 
 One of the most important words in the New Testa- 
 ment is TEAiu, to bring to a successful conclusion. The 
 nearest English equivalent is most likely "accom- 
 plish." It is a matter of regret that in perhaps the 
 most important instance in which the word occurs, viz., 
 when our Lord on the Cross said Te-kieaTah the Revisers 
 should have retained the word " finish," which is capable 
 of being misunderstood. Again, I regret that since a 
 revision was inevitable, the Revisers should have made no 
 change in Acts 13 c, 48 v. There, as in the Authorized 
 Version, we find that " as many as were ordained to eter- 
 nal life believed." Perhaps this rendering was influenced 
 by the Vulgate, as was the case in the cognate text. Acts 
 2 c, 42 V. The English Authorized Version in both passages 
 seems to favour Calvinism, but is faulty in both cases. The 
 Revisers have corrected the earlier error but retain the 
 later. This last means " They who ranged themselves on 
 the side of eternal life professed their faith." 
 
 The Vulgate should receive the honour paid to antiquity. 
 It is the most ancient Latin Version. It existed before St. 
 Jerome's time, and the old Testament was translated from 
 the Septuagint by an unknown author. Jerome made anew 
 version from the Hebrew, and the old version with Jerome's 
 emendations is now accepted by the Church of Rome. The 
 Vulgate of the New Testament is of high authority, and both 
 combined have Papal autho ity. It is still remarkable 
 that, in the case of two impoi tant texts, our translators 
 should have been in the case of every version, influ- 
 enced, to all appearance, by a Latin Bible, the authority of 
 which they did not recognize, and have been drawn away 
 from the meaning of the original GVeek. The revisers, 
 as we have seen, have made one correction, but have left 
 the other unchanged. 
 
 As the foregoing remarks have partaken of an adversely 
 critical character, it may be asked on what I base my 
 
30 
 
 opinion that the New Version is superior to the Old. I 
 would reply that I have, at the conclusion of this pamph- 
 let, inserted some, at all events, of the instances in which 
 that superiority is manifested. It would have been im- 
 possible to quote anything like the whole, and it will be 
 found that the excellencies of the revised edition far 
 outnumber its defects. If I may be allowed to express an 
 opinion, I think this superiority is most manifest in the 
 Acts of the Apostles, and particularly in the 27th chapter 
 of that most precious hook, which narrates St. Paul's 
 voyage. The Epistle to the Philippians is also admirably 
 done, while portions of St. John's Epistles are rather 
 clumsily translated. The Grospels as a whole, as revised, 
 are worthy of great praise. The greatest amount of 
 changes is to be found in the Epistles, and while the vast 
 majority of these are gains in the way of a«xuracy, that 
 gain is sometimes purchased at the cost of smoothness. 
 This is especially noticeable in the opening of the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews and the Epistles of St. Peter. Again, the 
 paragraph form will be a great help towards the due 
 understanding of the way in w^hich the several parts of a 
 book hang together. The coherence of St. Paul's argu- 
 ments, and the unity amidst intricacies of his Epistles, can 
 never be realised, if his writings are read according to the 
 chapter and verse plan. Moreover, the insertion of the 
 Hebrew instead of the G-reek form of Old Testament 
 names is an improvement, especially because it reminds 
 the reader of the connection of the two dispensations, and 
 that the one leads to the other. Also the printing the 
 quotations ircm the Old Testament in a detached and 
 rhythmical form is very wise. The attention of a reader is 
 thereby at once arrested, and he gains some little insight 
 into the structure of Hebrew poetry. 
 
 It has been claimed by some Jews and Unitarians 
 that the Revised Version weakens the cause of so- 
 called orthodox Christianity. Their assertions are based 
 on the idea that Codex Aleph and B possess such 
 
31 
 
 overwhelming authority that all versions must con- 
 form to one or both of them. I have endeavoured 
 though briefly, to show how unwarrantable is this pre- 
 sumption, and that although these ancient MSS. possess 
 much value, they are hot without serious defects. Chris- 
 tians need not be disheartened at the exclusion of the 
 Three Heavenly Witnesses in 1 John 5 c, 7 v. They are 
 not found in Codices A B. Gr. K. nor in the Cursive MSS., 
 nor in the best editions of the Ancient Versions, nor in 
 the Greek and Latin Fathers of the first four centuries. 
 The evidence against them is w^ell nigh overwhelming, 
 but the Ante-Nicene Fathers confuted Arianism without 
 the help of this passage, and the doctrine of the Trinity is 
 abundantly proved by other parts of Scripture, especially 
 by the Baptismal Commission (Matt. 28 c, 19 v.) 
 
 Also, admitting, simply for the sake of argument, the 
 alleged uncertainty as to the last 12 verses of St. Mark, the 
 truth of the Resurrection is clearly established by the 
 Gospels and New Testament generally. But these verses 
 were received by the Ancient Roman Church, for which 
 the Gospel was written, and the great mass of MSS. con- 
 tain them. 
 
 To lose the narrative of Christ's interview with the 
 woman taken in adultery would be a loss, but though in 
 all probability it was not written by St. John, and did not 
 form part of his Gospel, it is probably a true and beautiful 
 incident, which has come down to us from the primitive 
 Christians. It ought not to be considered, in the strict 
 sense, a part of Canonical Scripture. 
 
 I have before me an extract from the " Jewish "World," 
 which dwells on the injury which the Revised Edition is 
 likely to inflict on ordinary Christian people. The motive 
 of the writer is jirobably plain, viz : to undermine the 
 faith. But however strong our belief may be in the 
 infallibility of the original Scriptures, is that to prevent 
 our revising a translation ? I never read a more flagrant 
 instance of the logical fallacy entitled " petitio principii." 
 
82 
 
 No human work however can claim perfection, and the 
 revisers are far from asserting such a claim for the result 
 of their labours. It is not impossible, as I have stated 
 above, that before long another revision may be set on 
 foot. If I am correct, it may be that this new movement 
 may be retrogressive in character. In some few instances, 
 at all events, the Revised is inferior to the Authorized 
 Version, and it may be truly said of such that the old is 
 better. As an instance that further revision may be 
 needed I venture to draw attention to the following de- 
 fects. The word ,^po(///.)f is, translated " wise " as if it 
 were synonymous wiih a.,<jH,i: It should be " prudent." 
 The idea of wisdom is connected with goodness in Scrip- 
 ture. Wisdom is an attribute of God, but prudence may 
 be conjoined with moral evil. The Apostles were told to 
 be (ipovifjoi "prudent," not " wise as serpents," (Matt. 10 c, 
 16 V.) Again, the live Virgins were " prudent," but the 
 Revisers use the word " wise." In this instance pru- 
 dence was very akin to wisdom. But in the parable of the 
 unrighteous Steward he is said to have acted " wisely," 
 whereas it should be " prudently," opovim^,;. Then «Tro//«i is 
 translated "touch" except in Col. 2 c, 21 v., where it is 
 rightly rendered " handle," and thereby the order in the 
 earlier version is exactly reversed. Trench pointed this 
 out long ago in his Synonyms, and it would have been 
 desirable to use " grasp " or ' cling to " or " take hold of" 
 in every instance where aT-o/zn/ occurs. This would lend 
 increased vividness to John 20 c, 17 v. Also it is a pity 
 that " repent " is retained, as a translation of //er«/M//A'f in. 
 Matt. 27c., 3 V. Judas did not repent. He felt remorse and 
 sorrow, but not repentance. True repentance would 
 have brought him to God, and for that needful quality 
 the Greek word is always firravom i.e. change of mind. 
 In Matt. 9 c, 36 v., instead of " scattered," we should 
 insert " prostrate " or " lying down." In Matt. 14 c, 8 v., 
 it is said of the daughter of Herodias being " put forward 
 by her mother." This is not strong enough. It should 
 
38 
 
 be "urged forward." In Luke 14 c, 7 v., the proper 
 rendering of the imperfect " were choosing " is far move 
 forcible than "chose." In Acts 10 c, 12 v., the Grreek 
 means " all the four-footed beasts of the earth," and we 
 have no right to weaken or change the words. In 
 Acts 17 c, 23 v., the Revised " in ignorance " is better, 
 because more courteous than " ignorantly," but " un- 
 knowingly " would be better still, and would preserve 
 the important and most happy connexion with the 
 previous word " unknow^n." This prevalent feature in the 
 structure of the New Testament has generally been re- 
 cognized by the revisers. Gral. 1 c, 18 v , the Revised 
 "visit" is superior to the " see" of the A. V., but it fails 
 to attain the meaning of the original. I should prefer 
 "enquire of" Everyone will miss the beautiful verse 
 Acts 8 c, 37 v., but I fear that it is rightly omitted, 
 though the evidence is very conflicting. I cannot say the 
 same of the words " without a cause," Matt. 5 c, 22 v. 
 These words should have been retained. Also, though 
 the remark may seem heretical, I think it possible 
 that the Textus Receptus may in some respects com- 
 pare favourably with the text adopted, I believe, on a 
 vote by the Revisers. With all possible respect for so 
 illustrious a body of men, it is well known that some were 
 strongly biassed in favour of the Codices Aleph and B. 
 These are the two most ancient MSS. known to scholars. 
 They belong to the 4th Century. But they do not by any 
 means agree. Dean Burgon asserts, in his pamphlet on the 
 last twelve verses of St. Mark, that it would be easier to 
 find two consecutive verses in which they differ than 
 two consecutive verses in which they agree. Dr. 
 Scrivener tells us, that Codex B. leaves out words or whole 
 clauses no less than 2556 times. Tischendorf, on the 
 authority of Codex Aleph, expunges these most important 
 words " The Son of God," in Mark 1 c. 1 v. Also, there 
 are versions, in other tongues, still more ancient than these 
 
 two renowned MSS., a id thus, if antiquity be the sole 
 
 c 
 
34 
 
 j^round of authority, these must yield the palm. Then 
 again, in the Commentaries of the early Fathers there are to 
 be found lengthy citations from versions earlier in date 
 than either the Sinaitic or theVatican MSS. But as a matter 
 of fact, since the original MSS. of the New Testament are 
 lost to us, and the earlier copies have shared the same fate, 
 antiquity is not by any means the only criterion. More- 
 over, although the Textus Receptus may be based on 
 manuscripts of later date than the tenth century, yet, as 
 Tischendorf admits, a text almost identical had been in use 
 in the Byzantine Church at a much earlier period. Also, 
 since the original MSS. of the Holy Grospels are lost to us, 
 and the very early copies have perished, we must believe, 
 with Bentley, that the real text does not lie in any MSS. 
 or edition, but is dispersed in them all. Hence the full 
 work of collation is as yet incomplete. The Authorized 
 Version was itself a revision of former versions, and its 
 very existence concedes the principle. Its long hold on 
 the hearts of men is ' ae ' o its almost incomparable beauty, 
 while every generation tiiat passes away has, by the power 
 of association, strengthei ed its influence. The practical 
 religious life of English speaking Christians all over the 
 world is mainly due to the Authorized Version. To a 
 great mass of people it is itself the inspired "Word of God. 
 And, in so far as it is an adequate and faithful rendering 
 of the original, this idea is correct, since inspiration 
 lingers in the case of any language in that translation, 
 which is a true representation of God's original message. 
 While therefore this knowledge should teach the utmost 
 caution to any and all revisers, it should fill our hearts 
 with a longing desire to possess as nearly as possible the 
 exact original, and should dispose us to accept cheerfully 
 any changes in phraseology, however dear and familiar, 
 which more truthfully represent the words of in- 
 spiration. St. Augustine lays down as a rule that 
 the versions preserved in the most careful churches 
 should possess the greatest authority, and it is an 
 
35 
 
 admitted canon of criticism that no reading is to be 
 accepted which violates the context and the sense. 
 This canon would dispose of the passage (Matt. 19 c, 7 v.) 
 as altered by the Revisers, ( in accordance with Codex 
 Aleph. and B.) "Why askestthou me concerning that which 
 is good?" This is not only uncouth, but places the Evan- 
 gelist in direct opposition with Mark (10 c, 18 v.) where we 
 have " why callest thou me good ?" This very divergence 
 is strongly condemnatory of the reading. 
 
 It is possible that material enough exists for the com- 
 pilation of as perfect a G-reek text as can ever be attained. 
 But the task will be a lengthy one. It will require the 
 most delicate care, the most judicial caution, the most 
 indomitable industry, the greatest skill in balancing 
 evidence, the most entire freedom of bias, combined with 
 the most accurate scholarship. I might mention still 
 higher and more spiritual qualities which should find their 
 place in those who apply themselves to the high and holy 
 task of deciding, as far as human intelligence can ascertain, 
 what was the original of God's revealed Word.=i^ Com- 
 mittees are very useful institutions, but given the one man 
 possessing the qualifications I have alluded to, and I 
 should in preference give my adhesion to the result of his 
 labours rather than to those of a Committee. As at present 
 advised, I am not inclined to receive the readings of the 
 Revisers, as necessarily all that can be desired in every 
 particular, where they are at variance with the Textus 
 Receptus. If therefore a perfect version of the original 
 has yet to be prepared, perfect, that is as far as human toil, 
 skill and patience can accomplish, it is obvious that at 
 present Revision must be regarded if not as tentative, 
 certainly as provisional The preparation of such a text 
 cannot be a -npfpy),-, a work carried on at intervals amid 
 engrossing pastoral. Diocesan or professional labours. It 
 
 * See J3p. EUicott's preface to his Commentary on the Ep. to the Oalations 
 p. 16, "what the world calls Theological Sense, hut which devout thinkers 
 recognize as the assisting grace of God." 
 
36 
 
 must be the sacred work of a life, an offering of love and 
 devotion to the Holy Spirit, who spake by the Prophets, a 
 sacrifice of every faculty, spiritual, mental, physical, to the 
 examination of the Sacred text. Any one who undertakes 
 it must labour as the Scribes of old, thankful to consecrate 
 his whole life and energy to such a task, and to carry it on 
 till it be accomplished, or till he be called hence. Till 
 such a man, or men, are raised up, or at all events till the 
 great work is consummated, let us accept with gratitude 
 the Revised Version as a most valuable contribution to 
 our knowledge of Scripture, and pray that G-od's blessing 
 may rest on those who, in the midst of arduous duties, have 
 found time to aid others to arrive at the whole truth, and 
 the words of eternal life. 
 
31 
 
 APPENDIX A. 
 
 SAMPLES OP IMPORTANT CHANGES OR OMISSIONS IN REVISERS' 
 
 TEXT. 
 
 Matt. 1 c. 25 V. " a son," instead of " first-born son." 
 
 Omission of Doxology in Matt. 6 c. 13 v. 
 
 Matt. 11 c. 19 V. '• her works," instead of « her children." 
 
 " boisterous," omitted. 
 
 " little faith," instead of " unbelief." 
 
 Omitted entirely. 
 
 " why askest thou me concerning that which is good ?" for 
 " why callest thou me good ?' 
 
 " tables," omitted. 
 
 '' this he said making all meats clean," for " purging all 
 meats." 
 
 "believe," omitted. 
 
 " fasting," omitted. 
 
 '' blessed art thou among women," omitted. 
 
 " a Sabbath," instead of " second-first." 
 
 " into a desert place belonging to," omitted. 
 
 "my chosen," for "my beloved." 
 
 " even as 'ias did," omitted. 
 
 " ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of," omitted. 
 
 " when it shall fail," for " when ye fail." 
 
 " nor let me go," omitted. 
 
 " he sent him back unto us," for '• I sent you to him." 
 
 " they stood still, looking sad," for " as ye walk and ar« 
 sad." 
 John 5 c. 3 and 4 vv. Mention of the angel and moving of the water, omitted. 
 
 «• 9 c. 4 v. " we," for " I must work," etc. 
 Acts 18 c. 21 V. "I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jeru- 
 salem," omitted. 
 1 Cor. 6 c. 20 v. " and in your spirit, which are God's," omitted. 
 Gal. 3 c. 1 v. " that ye should not obey the truth," omitted. 
 
 1 Tim. 6 c. 5 V. " from such withhold thyself," omitted. 
 Rev. 22 c. 14 v. " wash their robes," for "do his commandments." 
 Wordsworth prefers the latter, which is the reading of most MSS. 
 
 (1 
 
 14 c. 30 V. 
 
 (( 
 
 17 c. 20 V. 
 
 (I 
 
 17 c. 21 V. 
 
 i( 
 
 19 c. 17 V. 
 
 Mark 7 c. 4 v. 
 
 <i 
 
 7 c. 19 V. 
 
 u 
 
 9 c. 23 V. 
 
 l« 
 
 9 c. 29 V. 
 
 Luke 1 c. 28 v. 
 
 K 
 
 6 c. 1 V. 
 
 l( 
 
 9 c. 10 V. 
 
 (1 
 
 9 c. 35 V. 
 
 l( 
 
 9 c. 54 V. 
 
 (1 
 
 9 c. 55 V. 
 
 «{ 
 
 16 c. 9 V. 
 
 « 
 
 22 c. 68 V, 
 
 (( 
 
 23 c. 15 V. 
 
 U 
 
 24 c. 17 V. 
 
^%^ 
 
 38 
 
 APPENDIX B. 
 
 SELECTIONS FROM THE REVISED EDITION OF THE NEW TESTA- 
 MENT, WHICH ARE SAMPLES OF IMPROVEMENT IN THE 
 WAY OF INCREASED ACCURACY. 
 
 
 
 R. V. 
 
 A. r. 
 
 Matt 
 
 . 2 c. 16 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Borders. 
 
 Coasts. 
 
 u 
 
 3 c. 7 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Offspring. 
 
 Generation. 
 
 « 
 
 5 c. 21 V. 
 
 To them ot old time. 
 
 By them, etc. 
 
 <1 
 
 5 c. 29 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 To stumble. 
 
 (a) Offend. 
 
 (( 
 
 6 c. 19 V. 
 
 Consume. 
 
 Corrupt. 
 
 (( 
 
 6 c. 25 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Be not anxious. 
 
 (6) Take no thought. 
 
 « 
 
 9 c. 9 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Place of toll. 
 
 Receipt of custom. 
 
 <( 
 
 12 c. 23 V. 
 
 Is this the son. 
 
 Is not this. 
 
 « 
 
 12 c. 29 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 The strong man. 
 
 A strong man. 
 
 C( 
 
 13 c. 3 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 The sower. 
 
 A sower. 
 
 (( 
 
 14 c. 26 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Apparition. 
 
 Spirit. 
 
 u 
 
 17 c. 25 V. 
 
 Spake first. 
 
 Prevented. 
 
 (( 
 
 21 c. 13 V. and elsewhere, 
 notably 26 c. 53 v. and 
 
 
 
 
 27 c. 38 V. 
 
 Robbers. 
 
 Thieves. 
 
 II 
 
 21 c. 19 V. 
 
 Immediately. 
 
 (c) Presently. 
 
 l< 
 
 21 c. 41 V. 
 
 Miserable. 
 
 Wicked. 
 
 (1 
 
 22 c. 2 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Marriage feast. 
 
 Marriage. 
 
 11 
 
 23 c. 24 T. 
 
 Strain out. 
 
 Strain at. 
 
 II 
 
 26 o. 50 V. 
 
 (d) Friend, do that 
 
 Wherefore art thou 
 
 
 
 for which thou art 
 
 come. 
 
 
 
 come. 
 
 
 (1 
 
 28 c. 4 V. 
 
 Watchers. 
 
 Keepers. 
 
 Marl 
 
 L 1 c. 4 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Unto remission of 
 
 For the remission, 
 
 
 
 sins. 
 
 etc. 
 
 II 
 
 1 c. 10 V. 
 
 Rent asunder. 
 
 Opened. 
 
 II 
 
 1 c. 1 1 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Out of the heavens. 
 
 From heaven. 
 
 (a) It should be observed that the word " offend" in the A. V. is used as 
 the translation for three distinct Greek words, viz., to sin, to stumble, and to 
 cause to stumble, as in Acts 25 c. 8 v., James 2 c. 10 v. and above. 
 
 (6) " Thought " in the same Version is employed for eight different Greek 
 words, too numerous to quote. 
 
 (c) " Presently " does duty for two different ideas, viz., P) J c. 23 v. and 
 above. 
 
 ((f) The word translated " friend" is companion. The same word is used 
 in Matt. 20 c. 13 v., and Matt. 22 c. 12 v. Of Julius Caesar, Act 4, sc. 3. It 
 has not of necessity a good meaning. 
 
39 
 
 
 
 R. V. 
 
 A. r. 
 
 Mark 
 
 : 1 c. 22 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Teaching. 
 
 Doctrine. 
 
 (1 
 
 2 c. 18 V. 
 
 Were fasting. 
 
 Used to fast. 
 
 11 
 
 2 c. 21 V. 
 
 Undressed. 
 
 New. 
 
 K 
 
 2 c. 22 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Wine skins. 
 
 Bottles. 
 
 (1 
 
 3 c. 18 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Canaan. 
 
 Canaanite. 
 
 « 
 
 4 c. 1 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Boat (a) 
 
 Ship. 
 
 (1 
 
 4 c. 21 V, and elsewhere. 
 
 Lamp (6) 
 
 Candle. 
 
 (( 
 
 6 c. 20 V. 
 
 Kept him safe. 
 
 Observed him. 
 
 (1 
 
 8 c. 33 V. 
 
 Mindest not. 
 
 Savourest. 
 
 (1 
 
 12 c. 26 V. 
 
 In the place. 
 
 In the bush. 
 
 (( 
 
 14 c. 12 V. 
 
 Sacrificed the Pass- 
 over. 
 
 Killed. 
 
 « 
 
 14 c. 54 V. 
 
 OflScers. 
 
 Servants. 
 
 (1 
 
 14 c. 65 V. 
 
 (c) Received bim. 
 
 Did strike him. 
 
 l( 
 
 16 c. 2 V. 
 
 Sun was risen. 
 
 The rising of the 
 sun. 
 
 (1 
 
 16 c. 14 V. 
 
 16 c. 16 V. and in some 
 
 Was manifested. 
 
 Appeared. 
 
 
 other places. 
 
 Condemned. 
 
 Damned. 
 
 Luk( 
 
 ; 1 c. 1 V. 
 
 Draw up a narrative. 
 
 Set forth in order a 
 declaration. 
 
 (1 
 
 1 C. 1 V. 
 
 Fulfilled. 
 
 Surely believed. 
 
 11 
 
 1 c. 19 V. 
 
 Was sent. 
 
 Am sent. 
 
 (i 
 
 1 c. 22 V. 
 
 Making signs. 
 
 Beckoned. 
 
 <( 
 
 1 c. 59 V. 
 
 Were calling. 
 
 Called. 
 
 (( 
 
 1 c. 63 V. 
 
 Tablet. 
 
 Table. 
 
 « 
 
 2 c. 3 V. 
 
 Enrolment. 
 
 Taxing. 
 
 (f 
 
 4 c. 20 V. 
 
 Attendant. 
 
 Minister. 
 
 (t 
 
 5 c. 18 V. 
 
 On a bed. 
 
 In a bed. 
 
 <( 
 
 5 c. 27 V. ' 
 
 Forsook. 
 
 Left. 
 
 u 
 
 13 c. 2 V. 
 
 They suffered. 
 
 Suffered. 
 
 l< 
 
 16 c. 23 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Hades. 
 
 Hell. 
 
 <( 
 
 17 c. 17 V. 
 
 Were not the ten 
 
 Were there not ten 
 
 
 
 cleansed ? 
 
 cleansed ? 
 
 II 
 
 18 c. 7 V. 
 
 Long suffering over 
 them. 
 
 Bear long with them. 
 
 .■ " 
 
 19 c. 13 V. 
 
 Trade. 
 
 Occupy. 
 
 11 
 
 19 c. 14 V. 
 
 Ambassage. 
 
 Message. 
 
 11 
 
 20 c. 18 V. 
 
 Scatter him as dust. 
 
 Grind him to powder. 
 
 II 
 
 1 c. 9 c. 
 
 Immediately. 
 
 By and by. 
 
 11 
 
 22 c. 37 V. 
 
 Hath fulfilment. 
 
 Have an end. 
 
 11 
 
 23 c. 42 V. 
 
 In thy kingdom. 
 
 Into thy kingdom. 
 
 (a) Often the boat, implyii^ one in general use. 
 
 (6) ?.vxv6g in Greek. 
 
 (c) A forcible expression, indicating striking from side to side 
 
40 
 
 
 
 
 
 R. V. 
 
 A. V. 
 
 Luke 24 c. 12 v. 
 
 
 
 Cloths. 
 
 Clothes. 
 
 11 
 
 24 0. 25 V. 
 
 
 
 Believe in all. 
 
 Believe all. 
 
 (( 
 
 22 c. 20 V. 
 
 
 
 The new covenant in 
 my blood, even 
 that which is 
 poured out. 
 
 The New Testamant, 
 etc., which is shed. 
 
 John 
 
 1 0. 5 V. 
 
 
 
 Apprehended. 
 
 Comprehended. 
 
 (( 
 
 1 c. 14 V. 
 
 
 
 Became flesh. 
 
 Was made flesh. 
 
 « 
 
 1 c. 42 V. 
 
 
 
 Looked upon. 
 
 Beheld. 
 
 (1 
 
 2 0. 8 V. 
 
 
 
 Ruler of the feast. 
 
 Governor, etc. 
 
 11 
 
 3 0. 10 V. 
 
 
 
 The teacher. 
 
 A master. 
 
 u 
 
 3 c. 19 V. 
 
 
 
 The darkness — the 
 light. 
 
 Darkness — light. 
 
 u 
 
 3 c. 36 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Obeyeth not. 
 
 Believeth not. 
 
 « 
 
 4 c. 6 V. 
 
 
 
 By the well. 
 
 On the well. 
 
 it 
 
 4 c. 29 V. 
 
 
 
 Can this be. 
 
 Is not this. 
 
 (1 
 
 5 c. 35 V. 
 
 
 
 Lamp. 
 
 Light. 
 
 « 
 
 6 c. 10 V. 
 
 
 
 People (a). 
 
 Men. 
 
 <i 
 
 7 c. 20 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Seek. 
 
 Go about. 
 
 i( 
 
 7 c. 35 V. and e 
 
 ilsewhere. 
 
 Dispersion (i). 
 
 Dispersed. 
 
 (1 
 
 10 c. 17 V. 
 
 
 
 One flock (c). 
 
 One fold. 
 
 « 
 
 11 C. 11 V. 
 
 
 
 Is fallen asleep. 
 
 Sleepeth. 
 
 (I 
 
 12 c. 6 V. 
 
 
 X ^^ 
 
 Took away. 
 
 Bare. 
 
 « 
 
 12 c. 13 V. 
 
 
 
 The branches of the 
 palm trees. 
 
 Branches of palm 
 trees. 
 
 u 
 
 13 c. 10 V. 
 
 
 
 Is bathed (rf). 
 
 Is washed. 
 
 u 
 
 21 c. 16 V. 
 
 and 
 
 at 1 Peter 
 
 
 
 
 5 c. 2 V. 
 
 (e). 
 
 
 Tend. 
 
 Feed. 
 
 u 
 
 21 c. 20 V. 
 
 
 
 At the supper. 
 
 At supper. 
 
 Acts 
 
 1 c. 13 V. 
 
 
 
 The upper chamber. 
 
 An upper chamber. 
 
 i< 
 
 1 0. 23 V. 
 
 
 
 Put forward. 
 
 Appoint. 
 
 u 
 
 2 c. 6 V. 
 
 
 
 This sound was 
 heard. 
 
 This was noised 
 abroad. 
 
 u 
 
 2 c. 42 V. 
 
 
 
 The breaking of 
 
 Breaking of bread 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 b r e ad and the 
 prayer. 
 
 and in prayer. 
 
 •1 
 
 2 c. 46 V. 
 
 
 
 At home. 
 
 From house to house. 
 
 (a) The Greek word is ai>Hpu-nvr i.e.. human beings, including men, women 
 and children. There were probably 20,000 people present. 
 
 (6) A technical word. 
 
 (c) The word " fold" in the A. V. stands for two distinct Greek words. 
 
 (i) The tense is the perfect. The Greek word for " wash" denotes a partial 
 operation. 
 
 (e) A beautiful instance of the apostle's living memory. 
 
41 
 
 
 
 R. V. 
 
 A. V. 
 
 Acts 
 
 2 c. 47 V. 
 
 (a) Those that were 
 
 Such as should be 
 
 
 
 being saved.* 
 
 saved. 
 
 « 
 
 3 C. 1 V. 
 
 Were going up. 
 
 Went up. 
 
 « 
 
 3 c. 8 V. 
 
 (6) Bvjgan to walk. 
 
 Walked. 
 
 (i 
 
 5 c. 17 V. 
 
 Jealousy (c). 
 
 Indignation. 
 
 (( 
 
 5 c. 42 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Jesus as the Christ. 
 
 Jesus Christ. 
 
 (1 
 
 7 c. 16 V. 
 
 Hamor in Shechem. 
 
 Emmor, the father of 
 Sychem. 
 
 (( 
 
 7 c, 29 V. and elsewbeie. 
 
 Sojourner. ^ 
 
 Stranger. 
 
 u 
 
 7 c. 38 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Living. 
 
 Lively. 
 
 (( 
 
 7 c. 44 V. 
 
 (d) Testimony. 
 
 Witness. 
 
 « 
 
 7 c. 53 V. 
 
 As it was ordained by 
 
 Ry the disposition ot 
 
 
 
 angels. 
 
 angels. 
 
 (1 
 
 12 c. 4 V. 
 
 Passover. 
 
 Easter. 
 
 t; 
 
 12 c. 6 V. 
 
 Was about to bring. 
 
 Would have brought. 
 
 i; 
 
 12 c. 6 V. 
 
 Guards. 
 
 Keepers. 
 
 11 
 
 13 c. 5 V. 
 
 Attendant. 
 
 Minister. 
 
 H 
 
 13 c. 7 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Proconsul. 
 
 Deputy. 
 
 « 
 
 13 c. 7 V. 
 
 Man of understand- 
 ing. 
 
 Prudent. 
 
 (1 
 
 16 c. 23 V. 
 
 Beat them with rods. 
 
 Beat them. 
 
 U 
 
 16 c. 25 V. 
 
 Were listening. 
 
 Heard. 
 
 u 
 
 17 c. 23 V. 
 
 An unknown god. 
 
 The unknown god. 
 
 u 
 
 17 c. 30 V. 
 
 Overlooked. 
 
 Winked at. 
 
 (1 
 
 19 c. 31 V. 
 
 Chief officers. 
 
 Chief. 
 
 (C 
 
 19 c. 35 V. 
 
 Temple-keeper. 
 
 Worshipper. 
 
 It 
 
 19 c. 37 V. 
 
 Bobbers of temples. 
 
 Robbers of churches. 
 
 (t 
 
 19 c. 38 V. 
 
 The courts are open. 
 
 The law is open. 
 
 u 
 
 19 c. 39 V. 
 
 The regular assem- 
 bly. 
 
 A lawful assembly. 
 
 (( 
 
 20 c. 9 V. 
 
 Third story. 
 
 Third loft. 
 
 tl 
 
 21 c. 3 V. 
 
 Come in sight of. 
 
 Discovered. 
 
 u 
 
 21 c. 13 V. 
 
 What do ye, weep- 
 
 What mean ye to 
 
 
 
 ing, etc. 
 
 weep. 
 
 u 
 
 21 c. 15 V. 
 
 Baggage. 
 
 (e) Carriages. 
 
 u 
 
 21 c. 16 V. 
 
 Early disciple. 
 
 Old disciple. 
 
 (a) i.e., Those in the way of salvation. 'The tense in the original is the 
 only one which could not possibly mean " Such as should be saved.' It is 
 the present participle, and no idea of impeccability is implied. 
 
 (i) A common use of the imperfect tense. 
 
 (c) The same word is rendered " envy" in Rom. 13 c. 13 v. 
 
 (d) "Testimony'' is better, as recalling Old Test phraseology. 
 
 (e) This word, in common with "occupy," "coasts," and some others, has 
 drifted from its former meaning. It is found in 1 Sam. 17 c. 20 v., and in 
 other places of the Old Text with the signification of « baggage." 
 
42 
 
 Acts 21 c. 25 V. 
 
 " 22 c. 25 V. 
 
 " 22 c. 28 V. 
 
 " 22 c. 28 V. 
 
 " 23 c. 15 V. 
 
 " 23 c. 35 V. 
 
 « 23 c. 35 V. 
 
 " 24 c. 6 V. 
 
 " 24 c. 19 V. 
 
 " 24 c. 27 V. 
 
 « 25 c. 24 V. 
 
 •' 26 c. 10 V. 
 
 «' 26 c. 11 V. 
 
 « 26 c. 14 V. 
 
 « 26 c. 28 V. 
 
 " 27 c. 3 V. 
 
 « 27 c. 7 V. 
 
 (( 
 
 27 c. 16 V. 
 
 " 27 c. 17 V. 
 
 « 27 c. 21 V. 
 
 " 27 c. 33 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 " 27 c. 40 V. 
 
 " 28 c. 2 V. 
 
 " 28 c. 10 V. 
 
 Rotn. 1 c. 28 V. And elsewhere. 
 
 « 1 c. 32 V. 
 
 R. V. 
 
 What is strangled. 
 Tied him up with. 
 Citizenship. 
 Roman -born. 
 Judge of his case 
 more exactly. 
 
 Hear thy cause. 
 
 Palace. 
 
 Assayed. 
 
 Hake accusation. 
 
 Was succeeded by 
 Ppstus. 
 
 Made suit to. 
 
 Vote. 
 
 Strove to make them 
 blaspheme (a). 
 
 The goad. 
 
 With but little per- 
 suasion (b). 
 
 Treated (c). 
 
 We e come with dif- 
 ficulty. 
 
 Were able with diffi- 
 culty to secure the 
 boat. 
 
 Lowered the gear. 
 
 Gotten this injury. 
 
 Take food. 
 
 Casting ofiF the anch- 
 ors, they left them 
 in the sea, * • 
 hoisting up the 
 foresail. 
 
 Barbarians. 
 Put on board. 
 Not fitting. 
 Consent with them. 
 
 " 2 c. 26 /. and elsewhere. Gloriest in. 
 
 A. V. 
 
 Strangled. 
 
 Bound him with. 
 
 Freedom. 
 
 Free-born. 
 
 Inquire more per- 
 fectly concerning 
 him. 
 
 Hear thee. 
 
 Judgment hall. 
 
 Hath gone about. 
 
 Object. 
 
 Festus came into 
 Felix's room. 
 
 Dealt with. 
 
 Voice. 
 
 Compelled them to 
 etc. 
 
 The pricks. 
 
 Almost thou persuad- 
 est me. 
 
 Entreated. 
 
 Scarce were come. 
 
 Had much work to 
 come by the boat. 
 
 Strake sail. 
 
 Gained this harm. 
 
 Take meat. 
 
 When they had taken 
 up the anchors 
 they committed 
 themselves unto 
 the sea, and hoist- 
 ed up the mainsail. 
 
 Barbarous people. 
 
 Laded us, etc. 
 
 Not convenient. 
 
 Have pleasure i n 
 them. 
 
 Makest thy boast of. 
 
 (a) The iraperlect impl)dng a continuous effort. 
 
 (6) This might be rendered " in a short time." 
 
 (c) Why was this emendation not generally introduced? The Greek word 
 is rendered " entreat" in 1 Thess. 2 c. 2 y. and elsewhere. 
 
43 
 
 
 
 
 R. V. 
 
 A. V. 
 
 Rom. 
 
 3 c. 25 V. 
 
 
 Passing over. 
 
 Remission. 
 
 (I 
 
 4 c. 6 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Reckoneth. 
 
 Imputeth. 
 
 II 
 
 5 c. 15 V. 
 
 
 The many (a). 
 
 Many. 
 
 (1 
 
 5 c. 20 V. 
 
 
 Came in beside (6). 
 
 Entered. 
 
 u 
 
 6 c. 23 V. 
 
 
 In Jesus Christ. 
 
 Through Jesus Christ 
 
 u 
 
 8 c. 19, 20, 21 vs. and 
 elsewhere except Gal. 6 
 
 Liberty ol the glory. 
 
 Glorious liberty. 
 
 
 c. 15 V. 
 
 
 Creation. 
 
 Creature. 
 
 II 
 
 12 c. 8 V. 
 
 
 Liberality. 
 
 Simplicity. 
 
 II 
 
 12 c. 12 V. 
 
 
 Stedfastly. 
 
 Instant. 
 
 II 
 
 12 c. 17 V. 
 
 
 Honourable. 
 
 Honest. 
 
 ll 
 
 13 c. 13 V. 
 
 
 Jealousy. 
 
 Envying. 
 
 11 
 
 14 c. 22 V. 
 
 
 Approveth. 
 
 AUoweth. 
 
 II 
 
 16 c. 9 V. 
 
 
 Urban us. 
 
 Urbane. 
 
 11 
 
 16 c. 18 V. 
 
 
 Innocent (c). 
 
 Simple. 
 
 11 
 
 16 c. 23 V. 
 
 
 Treasurer. 
 
 Chamberlain. 
 
 1 Cor. 3 c. 16 V. 
 
 
 A temple. 
 
 The temple. 
 
 ,1 
 
 3 c. 16 V. 
 
 
 Destroyeth (i). 
 
 Defileth. 
 
 K 
 
 4 c. 4 V. 
 
 - 
 
 Against myself. 
 
 By myself. 
 
 11 
 
 5 c. 1 V. 
 
 
 Actually. 
 
 Commonly. 
 
 II 
 
 7 c. 26 V. 
 
 
 As he is. 
 
 So to be. 
 
 11 
 
 9 c. 5 V. 
 
 
 A wife that is a be- 
 liever (e). 
 
 A sister, a wife. 
 
 11 
 
 9 c. 25 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 8triveth in the 
 
 Striveth for the mas- 
 
 
 
 
 games. 
 
 tery. 
 
 11 
 
 10 c. 13 V. 
 
 
 The way to escape. 
 
 A way. 
 
 11 
 
 11 c. 2 V. 
 
 
 Hold fast the tradi- 
 tions. 
 
 Keep the ordinances. 
 
 (1 
 
 11 c. 10 V. 
 
 and elsewhere. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 Power. 
 
 II 
 
 1 1 c. 20 V. 
 
 
 It is not possible. 
 
 This is not to, etc. 
 
 II 
 
 11 c. 25 V. 
 
 and elsewhere. 
 
 New covenant. 
 
 New Testament. 
 
 II 
 
 11 c. 29 V. 
 
 and in 34 v. 
 
 Judgment. 
 
 Damnation. 
 
 %i 
 
 13 c. 1 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Love. 
 
 Charity. 
 
 11 
 
 13 c. 1 V. 
 
 
 Clanging. 
 
 Tinkling. 
 
 II 
 
 13 c. 12 V. 
 
 
 In a mirror. 
 
 Through a glass. 
 
 11 
 
 14 c. 27 V. 
 
 
 In turn. 
 
 By course. 
 
 U 
 
 16 c. 31 T. 
 
 
 Glorying in you. 
 
 Your rejoicing. 
 
 (d) The Greek is practically equivalent to " all." The A. V. probably 
 borrowed its faulty translation from the edition of Beza. I need not enlarge 
 upon the importance of the change. 
 
 (6) As it were by a side door. 
 
 (c) Translated harmless in Matt. 10 c. 16 v. 
 
 (d) The verbs are the same, and the revision is an improvement, as 
 exhibiting the principle of divine retaliation. 
 
 (e) The words may mean a sister-woman, a believer, that is, who would 
 minister to the apostle's wants. 
 
44 
 
 2 Cor. 1 c. 17 V. 
 
 " 1 c. 23 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 " 2 c. 1 V. 
 
 " 2 c. 14 V. 
 
 " 3 c. 7 V. and e!:;ewhere. 
 
 " 3 c. 18 V. 
 
 " 7 c. 10 V. 
 
 " 8 c. 3 V. 
 
 " 8 c. 8 V. 
 
 " 11 c. 14 V. 
 
 " 12 c. 18 V. 
 
 '• 13 c. 10 V. 
 
 Gal. 1 c 6 V. 
 
 " 2 c. 11 V. 
 
 " 4 c. 2 V. 
 
 " 4 c. 9 V. 
 
 " 5 c. 24 V. 
 Ephes. 2 c. 21 v. 
 
 3 c. 6 V. 
 
 " 3 c. 9 V. 
 
 " 4 c. 3 V. 
 
 " 4 c. 12 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 « 4 c. 24 V. 
 
 " 5 c. 13 V. 
 
 «« 6 c. 12 V. 
 
 R. V. 
 
 Fickleness. 
 
 Witness. 
 
 Sorrow. 
 
 Leadeth us in tri- 
 umph. 
 
 Passing away. 
 
 heflecting as a mir- 
 ror. 
 
 Which bringetb no 
 regret. 
 
 Of their own accord. 
 
 Through the earnests 
 ness of others. 
 
 Fashioneth himself. 
 
 Exhorted. 
 
 Not for casting 
 down. 
 
 Different (6). 
 
 Stood condemned. 
 
 Guardians and stew- 
 ards. 
 
 Rudiments. 
 
 Passions. 
 
 E^h several build- 
 ing. 
 
 Fellow-members of 
 the body. 
 
 Dispensation, (c) 
 
 Giving diligence. 
 
 Building up. 
 
 Holiness of truth. 
 
 Everything that is 
 made manifest is 
 light. 
 
 Heavenly places. 
 
 A. V. 
 
 Lightness. 
 
 Record. 
 
 Heaviness. 
 
 Causeth us to tri- 
 umph. 
 
 Was to be done away. 
 
 (a) Beholding as in 
 a glass. 
 
 Not to be repented of- 
 
 Of themselves. 
 
 By occasion of the 
 
 forwardness of 
 
 others. 
 Is transformed. 
 Desired. 
 To destruction. 
 
 Another. 
 
 Was to be blamed. 
 Tutors and gover- 
 nors. 
 Elements. 
 Affections. 
 All the building. 
 
 01 the same body. 
 
 Fellowship. 
 Endeavoring. 
 Edifying. 
 True holiness. 
 Doth make manifest, 
 etc. 
 
 High places. 
 
 There are very many changes in the Revised Version of this epistle. Some 
 of them appear hardly necessary. (a) The translation in the A. V. is 
 admissible. 
 
 (6) trc/jov is strictly here a second, and ua/m different. St. Paul expresses 
 his surprise at his converts transferring their allegiance to a second gospel, 
 perhaps that teught by the 12, which was not in essence different from his 
 own. The translation in the A. Y. of the epistle to the Ephesians is admira- 
 ble, and that of the Revised edition no very marked improvement. 
 
 (c) Evidently a different reading, mivuvia in one case, oiKovofiia in the other. 
 
46 
 
 
 R. V. 
 
 A. V. 
 
 Phil. 1 c. 8 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Tender mercies. 
 
 Bowels. 
 
 " I c. 12 V. 
 
 Progress. 
 
 Furtherance. 
 
 " 1 c. 1 3 V. 
 
 Praetorian guard. 
 
 Palace. 
 
 " 2 c. 7 V. 
 
 Emptied himself. 
 
 Made himself of no 
 reputation. 
 
 " 2 f. 9 V. 
 
 The name above 
 every name. 
 
 A name, etc. 
 
 " 3 c. 11 V. 
 
 Resurrection from 
 the dead. 
 
 Of the dead. 
 
 « 3 c. 12 V. 
 
 Press on. 
 
 Follow after. 
 
 " 3 c. 14 V. 
 
 The goal. 
 
 The mark. 
 
 " 3 c. 20 V. 
 
 OJzenship. 
 
 Conversation. 
 
 '• 3 c. 2 1 V. 
 
 Body of our humilia- 
 tion. 
 
 (a) Vile body. 
 
 " 4 c. 5 V. 
 
 Forbearance. 
 
 Moderation. 
 
 Col. Ic. IIV. 
 
 Might of his glory. 
 
 Glorious power. 
 
 " 2 c. 21 V. 
 
 Handle not, nor 
 
 Touch not, taste not 
 
 
 taste, nor touch. 
 
 handle not. 
 
 " 2 c. 23 V. 
 
 Not of any value 
 
 Not in any honour 
 
 
 against the indul- 
 
 to the satisfying 
 
 
 gence of the flesh. 
 
 of the flesh. 
 
 " 4 c. 10 V. 
 
 Cousin. 
 
 Sister's son. 
 
 1 Thess. 4 c. 2 v. and elsewhere. 
 
 Charge. 
 
 Commandments. 
 
 " 4 c. 13 V. 
 
 That are fallen 
 asleep. 
 
 Which sleep. 
 
 " 4 c. 15 V. 
 
 Precede. 
 
 Prevent. 
 
 •' 5 c. 14 V. 
 
 Faint-hearted. 
 
 Feeble-minded. 
 
 « 5 c. 22 V. 
 
 Every form of evil. 
 
 All appearance, etc. 
 
 2 Thess 2 c. 3 V. 
 
 The falling away. 
 
 A falling away. 
 
 " 2 c. 4 V. 
 
 Against all. 
 
 Above all. 
 
 " 2 c. 4 V. 
 
 Wetting himself forth 
 
 Shewing himself that 
 
 
 as God. 
 
 he is God. 
 
 " 2 c. 7 V. 
 
 Mystery of lawless- 
 ness. 
 
 Mystery of iniquity. 
 
 " 2 c. 7 V. 
 
 One that restraineth. 
 
 Letteth. 
 
 " 3 c. 10 V. 
 
 Them that are per- 
 
 Perish. 
 
 
 ishing. 
 
 - 
 
 " 3 0. 5 V. 
 
 Patience of Christ. 
 
 Patient waiting for 
 
 
 
 Christ. 
 
 The Revised Version of the epistle to the Philippians is most excellent and 
 instructive, (a) The present lorce of the word " vile" is stronger than it 
 was some time back. 
 
 In the Revised Version the difificult 2nd chapter of 2nd Thessalonianc 
 becomes less obscure to the English reader. 
 
46 
 
 iTim. 1 c. 12 V, 
 
 '< 1 c. 19 V. 
 
 " 2 c. 9 V. - - 
 
 " 2 c. 14 V. and eiRewhere. 
 " 2 c. 1 V. 
 
 « 
 
 3 c. 11 V. 
 
 
 (( 
 
 3 c. 13 V. 
 
 
 « 
 
 4 c. 15 V. -. 
 4 c. 15 V. 
 
 
 « 
 
 5 c. 1 V. 
 
 
 (1 
 
 5 c. 4 V. 
 
 
 « 
 
 6 c. 5 V. 
 
 
 (f 
 
 6 c. 12 V. 
 
 
 it 
 
 6 c. 19 V. 
 
 
 2 Tim. 2 c. 4 V. 
 
 ■ 
 
 u 
 
 2 c. 15 V. 
 
 
 11 
 
 3 c. 1 V. 
 
 » 
 
 
 4 c. 14 V. 
 4 c. 15 V. 
 
 
 (1 
 
 4 c. 16 V. 
 
 
 Titus 
 
 1 c. 5 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 II 
 
 1 c. 12 V. 
 
 
 (1 
 
 2 c. 13 V. 
 
 
 " 2 c. 14 v., and at Peter 1 
 
 ep. 2 c. 9 V. 
 " 3 c. 6 V. 
 
 R. V. 
 Appointing me to 
 
 his service. 
 
 Having thrust from 
 them, 
 
 Shamefastness. 
 
 Beguiled (a). 
 
 Through the child- 
 bearing. 
 
 Women (/>). . 
 
 Standing. 
 
 Be diligent. 
 
 Progress. 
 
 Exhort. 
 
 Grandchildren. 
 
 Godliness is a way 
 of gain. 
 
 The good confession. 
 
 Which is life in- 
 deed. 
 
 Soldier on service. 
 
 Handling aright, (c) 
 
 Grievous. 
 
 Will render to him. 
 
 Withstood. 
 
 At my first defence 
 
 no one took my 
 
 part. 
 Appoint. 
 Idle gluttons. 
 Appearing of the 
 
 glory. 
 People of his own 
 
 possession. 
 Poured out upon 
 
 us. 
 
 A. V. 
 
 Putting me into the 
 
 ministry. 
 Having put away. 
 
 Sbamufacedncss. 
 
 Deceived. 
 
 In child-bearing. 
 
 Wives. 
 
 Degree. 
 
 Meditate. 
 
 Profiting. 
 
 Entreat. 
 
 Nephews. 
 
 Gain is godliness. 
 
 A good profession. 
 Eternal life. 
 
 No man that war- 
 
 reth. 
 Rightly dividing. 
 Perilous. 
 
 The Lord reward, etc 
 Hath withstood. 
 First answer no one 
 
 stood with me. 
 
 Ordain. 
 Slow bellies. 
 Glorious appearing. 
 
 (d) Peculiar people. 
 
 Shed on us. 
 
 The word ' creature'' in 4 c. 4 v. is n-iafia, not Kriat^, as in Rom. 8 c, pamim. 
 
 (a) The use of this word connects the passage with the history of the Fall. 
 
 (b) Some have supposed that these were deaconesses, and there is authority 
 for the idea. The word applies either to such, or to women in general. It is 
 very improbable that deacons' wives are alluded to. The omission of any 
 precepts for the guidance of the wives of presbyters or bishops would be 
 incomprehensible in that case. 
 
 (c) The original means literally cutting in a straight line. 
 
 ((i) The word " peculiar" has lost, except in legal phraseology, this particular 
 signification. 
 
4t 
 
 
 
 R. V. 
 
 A. V. 
 
 Titus 
 
 1 3 c. 11 V. 
 
 Perverted. 
 
 Subverted. 
 
 Philemon 7 v., and elsewhere in 
 
 Hearts. 
 
 Bowels. 
 
 
 this epistle. 
 
 
 
 II 
 
 9 V. 
 
 Befitting. 
 
 (a) Convenient. 
 
 Heb. 
 
 2 c. 1 V. 
 
 Haply drift away 
 
 At any time let them 
 
 
 
 from them. 
 
 slip. 
 
 ti 
 
 2 c. 10 V. 
 
 Author. 
 
 Captain. 
 
 ti 
 
 4 c. 6 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Disobedience. 
 
 Unbelief. 
 
 ti 
 
 4 c. 8 V. 
 
 Joshua (6). 
 
 Jesus. 
 
 It 
 
 4 c. 9 V. 
 
 Sabbath rest (c). 
 
 Rest. 
 
 u 
 
 5 c. 11 V, 
 
 Hard of interpreta- 
 tion. 
 
 Hard to be uttered. 
 
 u 
 
 5 c. 12 V. 
 
 Solid food. 
 
 Strong meat. 
 
 u 
 
 7 c. 3 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Geneaology. 
 
 Descent. 
 
 n 
 
 9 c. 1 V. 
 
 Of this world. 
 
 Worldly. 
 
 tl 
 
 9 c. 2 V. 
 
 Holy place (d). 
 
 Sanctuary. 
 
 II 
 
 9 c. 3 V. 
 
 Holy of holies (e). 
 
 Holiest of all. 
 
 l( 
 
 9 c. 6 V. 
 
 Continually. 
 
 Always. 
 
 II 
 
 9 c. 11 V. 
 
 Creation. 
 
 Building. 
 
 it 
 
 9 0. 22 V. and elsewhero. 
 
 Apart from. 
 
 Without. 
 
 II 
 
 10 c. 38 V. 
 
 He (/). 
 
 Any man. 
 
 II 
 
 9 c. 25 V. 
 
 With blood not his 
 own. 
 
 Blood of others. 
 
 II 
 
 11 c. 10 V. 
 
 The city which hath 
 the foundations. 
 
 A city — foundations. 
 
 l( 
 
 1 1 c. 19 T . and elsewhere. 
 
 Parable. 
 
 Figure. 
 
 II 
 
 1 1 c. 23 V. 
 
 Goodly, (y) 
 
 Proper. 
 
 II 
 
 12 c. 14 V. 
 
 Sanctification. 
 
 Holiness. 
 
 a 
 
 12 c. 23 V. 
 
 Enrolled. 
 
 Written. 
 
 II 
 
 13 c. 4 V. 
 
 Let marriage be had 
 
 Marriage is honor- 
 
 
 
 in honour. 
 
 able. 
 
 (1 
 
 13C.7V. 
 
 Issue of their life. 
 
 End of their conver- 
 sation. 
 
 <; 
 
 13 c. 17 V. 
 
 In behalf of. 
 
 For. 
 
 James 1 c. 11 v. 
 
 The scorching wind. 
 
 A burning heat. 
 
 (o) The word " convenient" in modern English no longer means fitting or 
 seemly, cf. the exhortation in the Confirmation service. 
 
 (b) An important correction. 
 
 (c) ArarruiCT^f is the ordinary Greek for rest. Here the word is aaj3jiaTiafioi, 
 which links together the two covenants. 
 
 (d) and (c) are particularly instructive In this book, which throws such 
 light on the Mosaic ritual. 
 
 (J) A very important correction. 
 
 (g) Compare Acts 7 c. where the same word aartior is used of Moses, and is 
 rendered in both Versions « exceeding fair." Compare also Exod. 2 c. 2 v. in 
 the Septuagint. 
 
48 
 
 
 
 
 R. V. 
 
 A. r. 
 
 James 1 ^. 1 2 v. 
 
 
 Hath been approved. 
 
 Is tried. 
 
 (1 
 
 1 c. 15 V. 
 
 
 When it is full-grown. 
 
 When it is finished. 
 
 u 
 
 1 c. 17 V. 
 
 
 Perfect boon (n). 
 
 Perfect gift. 
 
 (1 
 
 1 c. 17 V. 
 
 
 Shadow that is cast 
 l>y turning. 
 
 Shadow of turning. 
 
 a 
 
 1 c. 18 V. 
 
 
 Brought us forth. (A) 
 
 Begat he us. 
 
 .< 
 
 1 c. 21 V. 
 
 
 Overflowing of wick- 
 edness. 
 
 Supeifluity of 
 naughtiness. 
 
 u 
 
 1 c. 21 V. 
 
 
 Implanted word. 
 
 Engrafted word. 
 
 u 
 
 2 c. 10 V. 
 
 
 Is become guilty. 
 
 Is guilty. 
 
 i. 
 
 2 c. 17 V. 
 
 ; 
 
 Dead in itself. 
 
 Dead being alone. 
 
 It 
 
 2 c. 19 V. 
 
 
 God is one. 
 
 There is ore God. 
 
 (1 
 
 2 c. 26 V. 
 
 and elsewhere. 
 
 Apart from works. 
 
 Without works. 
 
 u 
 
 3 c. 4 V. 
 
 
 Steersman. 
 
 Governor. 
 
 u 
 
 3 c. 5 V. 
 
 
 How much wood. 
 
 How great a matter, 
 
 u 
 
 3 c. 17 V. 
 
 
 Variance. 
 
 Partiality. 
 
 II 
 
 5 r. 3 V. 
 
 
 Rusted. 
 
 Cankered. 
 
 ii 
 
 5 c. 9 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Murmur. 
 
 Grudge. 
 
 1 Peter 1 c. 7 v. 
 
 and elsewhere. 
 
 Proof. 
 
 Trial. 
 
 a 
 
 1 c. 15 V. 
 
 and elsewhere. 
 
 Living. 
 
 Conversation. 
 
 « 
 
 2 c. 1 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Wickedness. 
 
 Malice (c). 
 
 11 
 
 2 c. 2 V. 
 
 
 Spiritual milk with- 
 out guile. 
 
 Sincere milk, etc. 
 
 « 
 
 2 c. 12 V. 
 
 
 Seemly. 
 
 Honest. 
 
 (1 
 
 2 c. 16 V. 
 
 
 Cloke of wickedness. 
 
 Cloke of Malicious- 
 ness. 
 
 « 
 
 2 c. 16 V. 
 
 
 Bondservants. 
 
 Servants. 
 
 « 
 
 2 c. 19 V. 
 
 
 Acceptable. 
 
 Thankworthy. 
 
 11 
 
 3 c. 1 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Behaviour. 
 
 Conversation. 
 
 11 
 
 3 c. 6 V. 
 
 
 Put in fear by any 
 terror. 
 
 Afraid with any 
 amazement. 
 
 (. 
 
 3 c. 21 V. 
 
 
 Interrogation. 
 
 Answer. 
 
 11 
 
 4 c- 14 V. 
 
 
 Blessed. 
 
 Happy, 
 
 (1 
 
 5 c. 3 V. 
 
 
 Lording it over the 
 charge. 
 
 Lords over God's 
 heritage. 
 
 2 Pet«r 2 c. 1 V. 
 
 and elsewhere. 
 
 Destructive. 
 
 Damnable. 
 
 II 
 
 2 c. 2 V. 
 
 
 Lascivious. 
 
 Pernicious. 
 
 (a) The words in Greek are different, viz., (i6air and 6uprjfia. The A. V. 
 translates both by " gift." 
 
 (6) A perfectly different word from the Greek for " begat.'" 
 
 There are many changes in the Revised text of the epistle ol St. Jame«, 
 and for the most part they are improvements, (c) Atalitia, malice, originally 
 meant what we broadly call evil or wickedness. Hence the legal maxim, 
 " Malitia tupplet setatem." 
 
49 
 
 2 Peter 2 c. 12 v. and elsewhere. 
 
 " 2 c. 15 V. 
 1 John 3 c. 9 V. 
 
 « 5 c. 16 V. 
 
 2 John 9 V. 
 
 " 10 V. 
 
 3 John 8 V. 
 Jude 3 V. 
 
 " 3 V. 
 
 " 6 V. 
 
 " 12 V. 
 
 " 12 V. 
 
 " 12 v.. 
 
 " 15 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Rev. 1 c. 18 V. 
 
 " 2 c. 3 V. 
 
 " 2 c. 4 V. 
 
 " 2 c. 13 V. 
 
 " 2 c. 13 V. 
 
 " 3 c. 4 V. 
 
 « 3 c. I7v. 
 
 " 4 c. 6 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 " 5 c. 8 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 « 5 c. 10 V. 
 
 " 7 c. 15 V. 
 
 " 8 c. 10 V. 
 
 " 8 c. 13 V. 
 
 " 9 c. 1 T. and elsewhere. 
 
 R. r. 
 
 Creatures without 
 reason, born mere 
 animals. 
 
 Children of cursing. 
 
 His seed abideth in 
 him. 
 
 Not concerning this 
 do I say that he 
 sliould make re- 
 quest (a). 
 
 Goeth onward. 
 
 Greeting. 
 
 Welcome. 
 
 I was constrained. 
 
 Once for all. 
 
 Principality. 
 
 Hidden rocks. 
 
 Love-feasts. 
 
 Autumn trees with- 
 out fruit. 
 
 Convict. 
 
 The keys of death 
 and Hades. 
 
 Grown weary. 
 
 Didst leave. 
 
 Satan's throne. 
 
 Didst not deny. 
 
 Did not defile. 
 
 The wretched one. 
 
 Living creatures (6). 
 
 Bowls (c). 
 
 Kingdom. 
 
 Spread his tabernacle 
 over them. 
 
 Torch. 
 
 An eagle. 
 
 The pit of the abys8.(d) 
 
 A. V. 
 Natural brute beasts. 
 
 Cursed children. 
 Remaineth. 
 
 I do not iay that he 
 shall pray for it. 
 
 Transgresseth. 
 
 God speed. 
 
 Receive. 
 
 It was needful. 
 
 Once. 
 
 First estate. 
 
 Spots. 
 
 Feasts of charity. 
 
 Trees whose fruit 
 
 withereth. 
 Convince. 
 The keys of Hell and 
 
 of death. 
 Fainted. 
 Hast left. 
 Satan's seat. 
 Hast not denied. 
 Have not defiled. 
 Wretched. 
 Beasts. 
 Vials. 
 
 Kings. ' 
 
 Dwell among them. 
 
 Lamp. 
 An angel. 
 Bottomless pit. 
 
 There are less important alterations in the case of the epistles of St. John 
 than in the rest of the Catholic epistles. In the two epistles of St. Peter they 
 are numerous, (a) It is doubtful whether the word should not be " make 
 enquiry." The word may signify <' request." 
 
 (6) One of the most valuable of alterations. It prevents any possible con- 
 fusion between these lua and the dripiov, the mystical beast later on. 
 
 (e) An important correction, and a connecting link between the ritual of 
 the Old Covenant and the imagery of the Apocalypse. 
 
 (d) Compare St. Luke 8 c. 31 v. 
 
 D 
 
50 
 
 
 
 R. V. 
 
 
 A. V. 
 
 Rev. 
 
 11 C. 9 V. 
 
 Peoples. 
 
 
 People. 
 
 4( 
 
 11 C. 11 V. 
 
 Breath. 
 
 
 Spirit. 
 
 l< 
 
 12 c. 1 V. 
 
 Sign 
 
 
 Wonder. 
 
 « 
 
 12 c. 3 V. 
 
 Diadems. 
 
 
 Crowns. 
 
 (( 
 
 12 c. 9 V. 
 
 Cast down. 
 
 
 Cast out. 
 
 (( 
 
 12 c. 11 V. 
 
 Because of. 
 
 
 By. 
 
 (( 
 
 16 c. 12 V. 
 
 From the sun rising. 
 
 Of the east. 
 
 u 
 
 17 c. 8 V. 
 
 Is about to come 
 
 up. 
 
 Shall ascend. 
 
 (I 
 
 18 c. 1 V. and elsewhere in 
 
 
 
 
 
 the N. T. 
 
 Authority. 
 
 
 Power. 
 
 (1 
 
 18 c. 2 V. 
 
 Hold. 
 
 
 Cage. 
 
 (( 
 
 18 c. 17 V. 
 
 Made desolate. 
 
 
 Come to nought. 
 
 u 
 
 18 c. 23 V. and elsewhere. 
 
 Lamp. 
 
 
 Candle. 
 
 (1 
 
 19 c. 13 V. 
 
 Sprinkled with. 
 
 
 Dipped in. 
 
 u 
 
 21 c. 14 V. 
 
 On them. 
 
 
 In them. 
 
51 
 
 APPENDIX C. 
 
 SOME DEFECTS IN AUTHORIZED VERSION WHICH ABE NOT 
 PREVIOUSLY ALLUDED TO. 
 
 « 
 
 Matt. 9 c, 36 v. <' fainted," for " were distressed," 
 
 " 10 c, 10 V. 
 and elsewhere. " scrip," for " wallet," 
 
 " 11 c. 23 V. "which art exalted," for « shalt thou be exalted nnto 
 
 Heaven." 
 Mark 4 o. 40 v. " how is it that ye have no faith," for " have ye not yet 
 
 faith." 
 John 7 c. 8 V. "I go not up yet unto this feast," for " I go not up." 
 1 John 5 0. 7 V. The insertion of the three heavenly witnesses. 
 
 INACCURACY. 
 
 Mercurius for Hermes, Jupiter for Zeus, Acts, 14 c, 12 v; in money, as 
 penny, farthing ; in measure, as firkin, etc. 
 
 LOSS OF FORCE BY ERRONEOUS ORDER. 
 
 Matt. 14 c, 8 V. "give me here John Baptist's head in a charger," for " give 
 
 me here in a dish the head of John the Baptist." 
 Mark 4 c. 38 v. " he was in the hinder part of the ship asleep on a pillow," 
 
 for « he himself was at the stern on the cushion 
 
 asleep." 
 John 14 c. 11 V. <' believe me for the very works sake," instead of "for the 
 
 very works sake believe me." 
 
62 
 
 APPENDIX B. 
 
 TRANSLATIONS IN THE REVISED EDITION THAT APPEAR OPEN 
 
 TO CRITICISM. 
 
 The chapters and verses simply are cited in the case of those passages that 
 have been previously noticed, and those that have an alternate reading in the 
 margin are not as a rule alluded to. 
 
 In Mark 2 c. 26 v. the Authorized Version reads, " In the days of Abiathar 
 the high priest." The revisers have changed this to, " When Abiathar was 
 high priest." Much obscurity and uncertainty surrounds the passage, but 
 with all respect to the committee I must beg leave to maintain that their 
 translation is critically inferior to that of the older version. The Greek is 
 'Et? AjiidHap apxiepfi'K, i. e., " In the time of Abiathar who was (afterwards) 
 high priest." The revisers' rendering, as all scholars would agree, 
 would require strictly 'Err'i npx'^pf'^C Al^inHnf>. The word SiKotog is for the 
 most part correctly translated " righteous," except in Titus 1 c. 8 v. and Heb. 
 12 c. 23 v., where the old word "just," is adhered to. It should, however, be 
 remembered that fi'iKaior in Hellenistic Greek means " one whom the judge 
 pronounces innocent," one, in fact, whom he pardons. An important truth 
 is thus suggested. In classical Greek fitKaio^ signifies " one who is just by 
 his avm. merits." 
 
 Node in Matt. 27 c. 5 v, is translated, and correctly, " sanctuary," but this 
 word, carefully distinguished from kpov in the New Testament, is in Rev. 3 c. 
 12 v., translated " temple." The former is the sacred portion of the 
 building, the latter the fabric and enclosure. The mof in Matt. 27 c. 5 v. wag 
 probably the court of the priests." 
 
 Luke 4 c. 13 v. " For a season." This should be " until " or " as far as " a 
 time or season when the temptation was renewed. 
 
 Luke 9 c, 17 V. The rhythm of this passage is rather rough. 
 
 Luke 12 c. 58 v. "Hale." This word is practically obsolete. A better 
 substitute would have been " drag," or " drag away," here and in Acts 8 c. 3 v. 
 (See corrections of American committee). 
 
 Luke 13 c. 1 to 16 vv. 'ilaavrcoq is rather stronger than o/wk)^; yet the 
 revisers have rendered it by what is now the weaker adverb, viz., "likewise."' 
 
 Luke 22 c. 68 v. '' Question " would be better than " ask," as the sense 
 would be plainer. 
 
 John 2 c. 4 V. " What have I," etc., conveys stronger reproof than the 
 words warrant. "What is therein common betwixt me and thee," should 
 have appeared in the margin, 13c., 2.5 v. 
 
 John 3 c. 27 v., 5 c. 10 v., 7 c. 39 v., 9 c. 14 v. Not very good English. 
 
 John 16 c. 26 v. The alternate reading in the margin is considerably 
 better than the text. The verb does not mean to " pray," but to " request," 
 as one eqoal of another. 
 
53 
 
 John 18 c. 36 V. " Not of this world." The preposition ek is in the origi- 
 nal. " Out of," or " from," is more correct. The Lord's Kingdom did not 
 originate from this world. A marginal note is needed. 
 
 John 19 c. 28 v. The Authorized Version is here superior, in my opinion, 
 to the Revised, for " Finished " is a very imperfect rendering for Teri^arcu. 
 The same may be said in a greater degree for " It is finished," as in v. 30, as I 
 have observed previously. In this defect the two versions agree, and to the 
 reader's losg. 
 
 John 20 c. 25 V. '< Put" is too weak a word for (idlu. True it is that the 
 same verb is used to describe the action of the finger and the hand, but unless 
 "thrust" is used for both, the translation in the authorized version is to be 
 preferred. 
 
 Acts 1 c. 11 V. " Looking" is inferior to "gazing up into," though more 
 rigidly correct. 
 
 Acts 2 c. 1 V. " In one place " is incorrect. It should be " the same place," 
 i. e., the upper room. 
 
 Acts 2 c. 3 V. " Parting asunder " is only one degree better than "cloven." 
 Why not " distributed among them" ? 
 
 Acts 5 c. 1 V. " Kept back." The verb is " middle," and the words « for 
 himself " are rather needed. 
 
 Acts 7 c. 6 v., 8 c. 13 and 27 vv., 9 c. 7 and 29 vv., 12 c. 17 -<• . 13 c. 48 v., 
 14 c. 5 and 23 vv., 15 c. 5 v., 1 7 c. 22 v., 19 c. 2, 24 and 35 w., d 21 c, 40 ▼. 
 "Artemis ' ought to be in the text, as " Diana " is incorrect, 15 c, 13 v. 
 
 Acts 21 c. 40 v. The word "language" means strictly "dialect," i. e., 
 Aramaic. 
 
 Acts 22 c. 5 v., 28 c. 10 v., Rom. 11 c. 11 v., 13 c. 7 v., 16 c. 1 v. "Servant" 
 should be " Deaconess," Ephes. 3 c. 30 v. ; 
 
 Gal. 6 c. 16 v., 4 c. 15 v., Eph. 6 c. 27 v., Phil. 2 c. 6 v. " Prize " is less 
 accurate and intelligible than " robbery," the reading of the A. V. 
 
 1 Thess. 2 c. 2 v., 1 Tim. 5 c. 3 v., Heb. 12 c. 23 v., James 1 c.6 v. "Wave" 
 is preferable to " surge," 2 Tim. 3 c. 16. 
 
 1 John 4 c. 7 v., 5 c. 1 v., Rev. 1 c. 12 v. " Lampstands," as in margin, is 
 more correct than "candlesticks." 
 
 Rev. 4 c. 5 v. For " lamps " read "torches," as in Matt. 25 c. 1 v. 
 
 Rev. 14 c. 15 and 18 vv. " Send forth " is inferior to " throw," or " thrust." 
 
 Rev. 15 c. 1 v. '-Finished" is very unsatisfiictory. The Authorized Ver- 
 sion " filled up " is better. 
 
54 
 
 APPENDIX E. 
 
 SPECIMENS OF READINGS IN THE REVISED EDITION DIFFER. 
 ING FROM THE TEXTUS RECEPTDS TO WHICH NO ALLU- 
 SION IS MADE BY WAY OF MARGINAL REFERENCE. 
 
 Mark 7 c. 19 v., 9 c. 23 v., Luke I c. 37 v., John 2 c. 17 v., 3 c. 25 v., Acts 
 18 c. 5 v., Rom. 7 c. 18 v., 9 c. 28 v., 1 Cor. 12 c. 15 v., 15 c. 29 and 47 vv., 
 GaL 3 c. 1 v., Ephes. 3 c. 9 v., 5 c. 9 v., 6 c. 19 v., Heb. 9. c. 17 v., 12 c. 7 v., 
 James 3 c. 12 v., 1 Peter 4 c. 7 v., 5 c. 12 v., Rev. 2 c. 17 v., 5 c. 10 v., 5 c. 
 14 v., 14 c. 1 V. 
 
 Many of these are approved by Bishop Wordsworth. 
 
 It would be wearisome to all parties for me to enter minutely into the 
 question of punctuation. I therefore will content myself with drawing 
 attention to a few instances in which the text is affected by a change in this 
 respect, sanctioned by the revisers: 1 Cor. 15 c. 22 v., 2 Cor. 12 c. 15 v., 
 Titus 3 c. 8-9 vv., Heb 12 c. 4-5 vv., Rev. 9 c. 10 v., 12 c. last verse, and 13 
 c, 1 V. 
 
55 
 
 APPENDIX F. 
 
 The readings preferred by the American committee are to be found at ttie 
 end of the volume, and deserve attentive perusal. Some also have a place in 
 the body of the book, as marginal notes, but the latter can never to an ordi- 
 nary reader rank with the text, and most readers would pass by such notes 
 without heed. Some few of the readings preferred by the American com- 
 mittee would seem to be improvements, but as a whole the revisers appear to 
 have done right in rejecting them. The Americans are inclined needlessly to 
 modernize the language of Scripture and of the Liturgy. Nevertheless, I more 
 than agree with them that the text and margin should have changed places in 
 Acts 17 c. 22 V. For St. Paul to have begun his oration at the Areopagns by 
 telling his cultivated auditory that they were " somewhat superstitious," would 
 have been a very unlikely way to obtain a hearing. Moreover such a mode of 
 address would have been totally unlike his ordinary procedure, which was, if 
 possible, to find some common ground of agreement, or at all events, to 
 adopt a conciliatory tone. He most likely told his hearers that they were 
 " very religious," and in my opinion '« too superstitious," or " very super- 
 stitious," should be erased altogether. » » 
 
 The following renderings by the American committee appear changes for 
 the better : 
 John 8 c. 58 v. " Abraham was bom," for "Abraham was." 
 Rom. 6 c. 7 v. " Released," or "set free," for "justified." 
 1 Cor. 11 c. 19 V. " Factions " in margin for " heresies." 
 1 Cor. 14 c. 3 V. " Exhortation " is better than " comfort." 
 1 Cor. 15 c. 33 v. In the quotation from Menander, " morals" is preferable 
 to " manners," as the latter word has lost its nobler meaning since the days 
 when it could truly be said that " Manners makyth man." 
 1 Thess. 4 c. 12 V. " Becomingly " is better than " honestly." 
 Heb. 11 c. 1 V. " Conviction" is preferable to "proving." 
 In these and other alterations preferred by the American committee, the 
 reader will of course judge for himself.