T is a pity that our common version of 1611 has been called the King James Version,— sometimes even in pulpit and press it has been designated as the “Saint James Version,”— or the “Authorized Version.” James VI of Scotland, known also as James I of England, was far from a saint. He reigned, or was titular monarch, in Scotland and England from 1567 to 1625. In his earlier years there was a regent, and in later years his flattering favorites controlled him. He was noted for witty and pert sayings, and for some faculties of worth, bound together by no bond of consistency, “a medley of isolated capacities.” His “overweening self-conceit” and “strutting pomposity,” “often rash and reckless in regard to matters seemingly small, and always shifting and irresolute in regard to affairs of the highest moment,” and his disgusting favoritism, gave him the name of “the wisest fool in Christendom,” and needless to say, no English historian places him on a pedestal.
The Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster Abbey, London, where met the English Revisers, holding 800 sittings in this room, completing the New Testament in 1881, the Old Testament in 1884
He was ambitious to be literary, and essayed theology, poetry, and miscellany. These productions, “but for the fact that their author was a monarch,” says the Britannica, “would scarcely deserve a reference.” He hated Dissenters—Presbyterians and Puritans—and held to the Episcopacy. One of his sententious sayings was, “No bishop, no king.” His lack of Christianity and attitude toward religious liberty are indicated by the following from him in 1604: “I will have none of that liberty as to ceremonies, I will have one doctrine, one discipline, one religion in substance and in ceremony.” Of the Presbyterians he declared, “I will make them conform, or I will harry them out of the land.” Out of this attitude came his consent to a translation of the Bible. The Scotch had authorized the Geneva Bible—the only one ever authorized by law or decree or order of king or parliament or convocation or privy council, so far as history informs us. The Bishops’ and Great Bible were not in universal liking. The King therefore gave his consent, and as a self-appointed theologian took doubtless some interest in it.
But God overruled despite all the inconsistencies, weaknesses, and unworthiness of men, and a company of learned men were appointed. But these were placed under restrictions; among others the following: (1) The Bishops’ Bible should “be followed, and as little altered as the truth of the original will permit;” (2) The old ecclesiastical terms should be retained; (3) There should be only such marginal notes as were necessary to explain Hebrew or Greek words. There were thirteen other specifications.
The result was, despite the hand of human, a noble work, the beauty, strength, and dignity of which are universally recognized by all who know it. It was not a new translation; it was a growth out of all that went before it; a revision, not a translation.
Further Revision
It was quite generally received, tho it met with decided opposition and incisive criticism from such scholars as Hugh Broughton, and a new revision was forced in 1629, and the so-called final revision of the King James Version was issued from the press in 1638.
A further revision was called for, which went as far as the passage of a resolution and the appointment of a committee by parliament, but the demand gradually died out. Changes of a minor or technical character continued to be made down to the middle of the eighteenth century by both the Oxford and Cambridge publishing houses. In 1701 Usher’s Chronology was introduced; 383 changes were made in the Cambridge Bible in 1762, and 76 were made by Blayney in the Oxford Bible. In 1873 the Cambridge Paragraph Bible gave a list covering 16 closely printed pages of variations from the text of the King James Version as it appeared in 1611.
Since the seventeenth century there has been great accumulation of such knowledge and material as to demand a new revision. In fact the same reasons exist for a new revision now, under a consensus of ripe, devout scholarship, that existed in 1611. There have been during the last century ancient manuscripts found, and very ancient ones have been made accessible to Biblical students. Among these are Codex Sinaiticus of the fourth century, found by Tischendorf in 1844; Codex Alexandrinus of the fourth or fifth century, known as “A;” Vatican, known as “B,” of the fourth century; Ephrem’s, known as “C,” of century five, a palimpsest. None of these were accessible to the revisers of 1611. Of manuscripts ancient and more modern, containing a part or the whole of the New Testament, we have more than 100 uncials (written in large letters on vellum) and 3,500 cursives (written in running hand) accessible to scholars. Sometimes a modern cursive is important, as it is a copy of some very ancient copy. No work of classical authorship can present any such number of valuable ancient manuscripts to establish its authority as can the New Testament. All these ancient manuscripts are accessible to the scholars of this age.
Then, too, words and terms in current use in the time of the making of the King James Version have become either obsolete or are changed in meaning. “Prevent,” as used in 1 Thess. 4:15, formerly meant “precede,” or “go before,” now means to “hinder.” A change is demanded. By the term “meat” Americans usually understand flesh food; but in 1611 it stood for food of any kind, and in the “meat-offering” all flesh was excluded. Americans, too, by the term “corn” generally understand maize, but it is used in the King James Version for wheat and other cereals, never for maize, or Indian corn. How many there are who do not know that “seethe,” “sod,” “sodden,” mean boil and boiled! See Ex. 16:23; Gen. 25:29; Ex. 12:9; Lam. 4:10. How many know that when it says “the flax was bolled,” it means “the flax was in bloom”? Ex. 9:31. There are many such instances in the King James Version which need correction.6
Later Revisions and Versions
(Continued from page 5)
The 1611 version, beautiful, choice, strong, clear, happy as it generally is in its English, is sometimes obscure and frequently not uniform. For instance, we come to the term “hell” thirty-one times in the Old Testament and twenty-two times in the New. Usually the word is associated with punishment, but in every instance in the Old Testament it comes from the Hebrew word sheol, a word in its ordinary use meaning the place of the dead, the grave, to which both righteous and wicked go. The word “hell” in the New Testament occurs twenty-two times, and comes from three Greek words: hades, the grave, corresponding to sheol in the Old Testament, ten times; Gehenna, the place of future punishment, eleven times; Tartarus, where the devil and his angels are cast, once. Ordinary students of the King James Version are bound to be misled.
The verse division of the text is very unsatisfactory, oftentimes breaking sentences and chapters and so obscuring the meaning to the general reader.
“Holy Spirit” and “Holy Ghost” come from the same Greek terms. Why not “Holy Spirit” all the time? It would sound strange to our ears to use the word “Ghost” without modification as applying to the Spirit of God. There are many other instances of this lack of uniformity.
From the Sinaiticus Manuscript discovered by Tischendorf 1844,
Eminent scholars alone or in small groups have given us excellent translations and revisions of the Bible in whole or in part since the version of 1611. These are helpful and suggestive to the Bible student, but they have lacked the authority and confidence which a large body of men of different schools of religious thought inspire. Among these we may mention Harwood’s translation in modern English in 1768; Blayney’s revision of the Bible in 1769; Wakefield’s New Testament in 1791; Newcome’s New Testament on Griesbach’s Text, 1800; Thomson’s translation of the Septuagint, 1808; Bellamy’s translation of the Bible, 1821; Campbell’s New Testament, 1826; Boothroyd’s Bible, 1824; Noah Webster’s Version in 1833; Alford’s New Testament; Spurrell’s Old Testament, 1885; Leeser’s Old Testament (a Jewish translation), 1888; the Twentieth Century New Testament; Rotherham’s Emphatic Translation; Murdock’s Syriac New Testament translation; besides the translation of books of the Bible by eminent men like Bishop Lowth, Good, Wintle, and many others.
The Latest General Revision
But there is one version which more fully meets this need than any other; namely, the Anglo-American Revision begun in 1870, and pre-eminently the American Standard Revised Version.
The men appointed upon the Revised Version in England numbered fifty-four; in America, thirty,—eighty-four in all, present and devout scholars from various religious denominations, who set themselves to give us a correct rendering of the original tongues in which God has spoken to the world. They also adopted general principles and rules to guide them in their work, better, it seems to us, to secure correct results than were adopted by the 1611 revisers, without the restrictions. All the findings of the various divisions were twice revised. Experts were consulted outside the number appointed. Where the American Committee differed after final revision, their opinions were to be embodied in an appendix at the close of each Testament.
Assyrian account of the Deluge, confirming the Bible story, a clay tablet from the library of Assur-bani-pal, King of Assyria, in British Museum
Work was begun in the renowned Jerusalem Chamber in Westminster Abbey, June 22, 1870, where not less than 800 sittings were held. In America the first meeting was held in the Bible House, New York, October 4, 1874. The first editions were to be printed by the University Presses of Oxford and Cambridge, the Americans agreeing not to print another version for fourteen years. In ten long years the New Testament was finished and given to the world, May 17, 1881, under the greatest enthusiasm. It is estimated that 3,000,000 copies of different editions were sold in England and America in less than a year. Three years later the Old Testament was completed. Nearly fourteen years of scholarship was placed upon the English Revised Version as against about one half of that time in the revision of the 1611 version.
The American Revision Committee still continued their labors during the fourteen years following, and thus secured the benefit of the criticisms of the scholars of Christendom during that period. At the end of that time they prepared the American Standard Revised Version, embodying the result of the ripest and most devout scholarship of the world. This edition was published by Thomas Nelson & Sons in 1901.
Some Differences between the English and American Revisions
Little or no change was made in the superior paragraph division of the text. There is greater7uniformity of rendering and more smoothness and beauty in the places where it differs from the English. In many places it has come nearer to the King James Version. One of the chief differences is the use of the term “Jehovah,” the covenant, memorial name of God, instead of the indeterminate “Lord” or “God,” printed tho they are in capitals. When God specially reveals Himself by that name, why should Jewish superstition be permitted to shut it, with all the fulness of its meaning, from the child of God? See Ex. 34:6, 7. How some passages glow and shine when read with “Jehovah” instead of “Lord”! “Jehovah” (it may be pronounced “Yaveh,” or “Yaweh,” or “Jahweh;” that matters little) and its wonderful meaning is God’s note in blank to the believer, which he may fill out with any of God’s promises according to his need. Pharaoh did not ask, “Who is the Lord, that I should obey His voice?” nor did he say, “I know not the Lord.” Ex. 5:2. But he did ask: “Who is Jehovah, that I should harken unto His voice? . . . I know not Jehovah.” But he knew lords many. The American Standard Revised Version substitutes “who” and “that” for “which” when relating to persons. Our God is a personal God. It is not “Our Father which art in heaven,” but “Our Father who art in heaven.” “Foreign” and “foreigner” are substituted for “strange” and “stranger,” in harmony with common usage. “Its” is substituted for “his” and “her” when referring to impersonal objects. As in the English Revision, the Psalms are given in poetical form, and quotations from the Old Testament in the New set in narrower measure, with reference in the margin. The Old Testament names used in the New Testament retain the Old Testament form. “Elijah” in the Old Testament is not “Elias” in the New, but “Elijah;” “Elisha” is not “Eliseus,” nor is “Hosea” “Osee,” nor “Joshua” “Jesus,” as in the King James Version. This change is helpful to many readers. There are many other changes equally happy and helpful, and the American Standard Revised Version retains the simple, sweet, dignified, strong Anglo-Saxon of the King James Version. It is the 1611 version reborn, the best translation of the Bible we have.
Belshazzar's existence was once disputed and the book of Daniel discredited; research found the above baked clay cylinder on which is inscribed a prayer of Nabonidus King of Babylon on behalf of his son Belshazzar. (From British Museum.)
