THE REVISED VERSION by Editor

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Aug 18, 1881

THE REVISED VERSION.

By Editor

Two particulars we have already noticed in which the revisers erred: 1. In placing the reading to be preferred in the margin, as demons for devils. The former should be in the text; the latter should not appear at all in such cases. 2. In the improper retention or use of words in italics. Many of these are calculated only to mislead the reader. They professedly adopted another course, but did not act consistently with it.

Two religious papers in the East have been contending over 2 Tim. 3:16. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable." The Revision has it: "Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable." The latter has, no doubt been adopted to avoid the cavil that every writing, not the Hebrew scriptures alone, is equally inspired. We say, no doubt, because we have heard speakers who thought it necessary to guard this text in this manner. But we think it is no improvement. The apostle himself guarded it by expressly stating the subject of his discourse, namely, the holy Scriptures, with which Timothy was acquainted even from his childhood. There may be such an effort to be literal as to bear the appearance of affectation; in this case we do not think the text gains anything either in literalness of translation or clearness of statement.

Acts 26:28. "Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian." This is changed to the following: "With but little persuasion thou wouldest fain make me a Christian." Says Dr. Roberts, the author of the "Companion," "It is with some reluctance that we here abandon the rendering of the 'Authorized Version.'" And we say, It is with some regret that we find that they have abandoned it. The only reason offered for the change is in these words: "Quite a different expression must have been used for almost." Granted that "almost" would be better expressed by a different word, we think it is not violating the rules of language so much to render en oligo, almost, as it is to render peitheis, persuasion. The Diaglott, in its interlinear rendering, has it, "Within a little thou persuadest me." But the version very consistently treats it as idiomatic and renders it, "Thou almost persuadest me."

The words of a certain eastern paper, in defense of the Revision, are quite out of place. It argues that Agrippa, being an ignorant heathen, would hardly avow himself almost persuaded on so little persuasion. But its reason is positively denied by Paul himself who declared that Agrippa was "expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews." It was for this reason that Paul was happy to defend himself before Agrippa. On this ground alone could Paul appeal to Agrippa on his belief of the prophets, saying, "I know that thou believest." Paul could not have said this of an "ignorant heathen." We have no doubt that Agrippa believed the prophets as Paul said, and that he was "almost persuaded" by Paul's argument on the fulfillment of the prophecies in the death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.

There is much better reason for the change in 1 Cor. 15:34, which we yet think unfortunate. A correspondent of the Examiner and Chronicle says of this text:- "What madness changed 1 Cor. 15:34 to this, 'Awake up righteously.' What does that mean? unless as paraphrased by a ten-year old girl, 'Don't get out of bed crosswise.'"

The change has considerable claim to being strictly literal, but very little claim to being a good English rendering. The Diaglott has a much better: "Awake to sobriety, as it is fit, and sin not." This has equal claims to a literal rendering. But we doubt whether the idea of the original is given in either better than in the Authorised Version.

Rev. 22:11, 14. On these verses the revisers have not wrought a good work. Taken abstractly we cannot think it improves the text to give permission to "do unrighteousness still." Taken according to the chronology given by the context and it is an evident truth that, in close relation to the coming of Christ, probation will close,-there will be no further opportunity to come to the Father through the Son, as he who has been the Mediator takes vengeance into his hands. Compare 2 Thess. 1:7-10; Rev. 6:16, 17. At that time it will be impossible that the unjust or filthy can have their characters changed. And this is stated in the text, and well expressed in the Authorized Version. Although the unjust cannot be justified then, there being no one to act as their intercessor, we see no reason why obligation to do right does not rest upon them still. The duty to do right did not originate with the gospel; nor will the obligation to do right cease, in any case, with a withdrawal of the privileges of the gospel.

If it be objected that this trenches on the duties of the expositor, rather than of the translator, we reply that the revisors, have not, to our mind, improved the translation of verse 11. And they have given a purely expository reason for their change of verse 14.

We grant that there is some evidence in favor of the reading given in the revision, but not sufficient to justify the change. Griesbach did not consider the evidence of versions sufficient to warrant the rejection of the rendering in the Authorized Version. The "Companion" says the revised rendering-"Blessed are they that wash their robes"-is "far more in accordance with the analogy of Scripture." We consider ourselves warranted in denying this. Analogy is as strongly in favor of the common reading as it is of this. We do not deny that they who enter the gates of the city will have their robes washed in the blood of the Lamb. Will the revisers, or any others, deny that they will likewise "do his commandments?"

See Matt. 7:21. "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in Heaven." These are the words of Jesus himself, who makes doing the will, equivalent to keeping the commandments of his Father, the condition of entering into the city, or the kingdom. No higher authority than this can be found, and no better ground for analogical reasoning. And in the book of Revelation keeping "the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus," is the peculiar characteristic of those who are accepted of the Lord Jesus at his coming. So far as analogy is concerned we have sufficient warrant to retain the common rendering.

Such are some of the faults we find in the Revision. Yet as a whole we think highly of it, and recommend all to study it.