Page images
[ocr errors]

cative, which a cloud of witnesses might shew was transferred
into the coinmon Greek. That, in the psalm cited, one is
the vocative, and not either the subject or the predicate of a
proposition, is manifest from the Chaldee Targum; and is fully
admitted even by the younger Rosenmuller.

Matt. xiv. 33. "Truly thou art a son of God." Very im-
proper. We should translate, with the common version, "the
Son:" since the article is superseded by it.
In ch. iv. 3. we

find the just rendering.

1 John iii. 16. "Hereby we know love, because Christ laid down his life for us." Strictly just: but, for "because” we should have preferred "in that." The supplement in the common version is quite unwarrantable, and, considering its probable motive, really censurable.

Rom. i. 25. "Who changed the true into a false God." The proper rendering of the

mate freedom had been used raism. We wish this legiti


2. Lord, Kupios.I Cor. x. 9. "Nor let us try the Lord." The authority of MSS. preponderates in favour of xúpov; but Xporo, Christ, is supported by the most ancient Versions and Fathers, and is retained by Griesbach.

It is obvious that where this word is used only as a compel lation of respect, it should be translated by Sir, or Master; and that the solemn title Lord should be employed only when the reference is to the Deity, or to cases where there is at least some recognition of the person and office of the Messiah. This rule is greatly violated in the Common Version: but in the I. V. we have noticed very few instances in which it is trangressed: viz. John vi. 68. xi. 27. xiv. 5, 8, 22. In these, we conceive Lord would be more suitable than Master.

3. Holy Ghost. The I. V. always reads "holy spirit." The change in the second word is required by the improvements in our language and national taste: but we wish the initial capitals had been retained. This, however, turns on our difference of religious sentiments.

4. Godhead. Col. ii. 9. tóns "the deity." Rom. i. 20. BELTS" providence." An unnecessary deviation, nor does it give the true meaning. Acts xvii. 29. To so, the Godhead." We should have greatly preferred Deity in these two instances.

5. Creation and Creature, xrios. Translated in the usual way, except in Rom. viii. 19-22, "world." We do not perceive the reason of this alteration: creation would be, at least, as suitable. V. 39. " matter;" a needless and insipid alteration,

6. Flesh, and Spirit. The numerous and important Hebraisms, connected with the N., T. use of these two words, are, with very few exceptions, given literally, in the I. V. 7. Tu xixés. I Cor. ii. 14. "sensual." Ch. xv. 44, 66, and Ψυχικός.

[ocr errors]

James iii. 15," animal." In each instance very properly.

8. "Ayythos. Where this word occurs in the sense of a superior order of beings, it is translated "angel" but when it is ap-. plied to apostles, ministers, &c. the editors have very properly employed the correspondent term, "messenger." The determination of this question, however, is not in all cases easy. In the apocalyptic epistles, and we believe throughout the whole of that book, "angel" is constantly used. We see no good reason for this inconsistency.

6. Zaravas. This word, which occurs 34 times in the N. T. is every where rendered "Satan," except in Matt. xvi. 23. and 2 Cor. ii. 11. where it is translated" adversary." This change would have been proper in some other places; but to have neglected to make it in Mark viii. 33, is inexcusable.

10. Aιáßoλos. In 1 Tim. iii. 6, 7. 2 Tim. ii 26. and Rev. ii. 20. "Accuser." In John vi. 70. 2 Tim. iii. 3. Tit. ii. 3. and I Pet. v. 8. "False accuser." In Eph. iv. 27. and 1 Tim. iii. 11. "Slanderer." In all other places, "Devil." These distinctions are very commendable.

11. Δαίμων and δαιμόνιον are justly rendered " demon” in the numerous places where they occur: and Sapoviloμas correspon dently.

12. Araban is, in every instance, properly translated "covenant."

13. Nóuos. The editors have endeavoured, by the use of the English definite and indefinite articles, to discriminate the application of this important word; whether to the Mosaic law, including both the moral and ceremonial, or to the general idea of a promulgated rule of conduct. But in this attempt they have materially failed, from an evident ignorance of the laws of the Greek language with respect to the article. This ignorance has obscured several passages: e. g. Rom. iii. 19, 20. iv. 13, 14. vi. 14, 15.

[ocr errors]

14. xaps. This term is uniformly expressed by χάρις. Favour;" a word certainly about as comprehensive in our language as xápis is in Greek; but we doubt whether, in its highest acceptation according to common use, it conveys a sufficient idea of generosity and affectionate tenderness. The usual word Grace, is so thoroughly established in speech, so generally understood in its proper meaning, and yet so appropriated in sacred use, that we perceive many advantages in retaining and inconveniences in exploding it. In some of the various senses of the term, "favour" reads awkwardly, and suggests a very imperfect notion of the true meaning: e. g. Acts vi. 8. xi. 23. Eph. iv, 7. However, in some instances, the expres sion is judiciously varied as Luke iv. 22. " graceful words." Col. iii. 16. "with thankfulness." iv. 6. "well-pleasing." Eph. iv. 29. "benefit."

15. 'Evayyor is translated "gospel" in every place but in five instances, where it is rendered "glad tidings." This has not proceeded on a careful discrimination: for, though in most passages of the Epistles the term, having grown into technical use, be best expressed by "gospel," the other translation would be more suitable in Matthew, Mark, and the Acts.

[ocr errors]

16. Aixam, when used to denote a moral quality, is translated as in the Common V. "righteousness," and, in Acts xxiv. 25. very properly, "justice. But when the word is used nar' ioxy to denote the grand blessing of the Christian Covenaut (pardon of sin and acceptance to the divine favour,) or the means of attaining that blessing,it is translated either "justification," or "method of justification." Though this acceptation of the word had been long understood and applied in exegetical theology, we owe to Abp. Newcome the introduction of this signal improvement into the translated scriptures. It is a rendering which, we are persuaded, will be more established by the most rigorous test of critical examination. The passages in which the term is translated "Justification," are these: Rom. v. 17, 21. vi. 16. (improperly; for V. 18-20 shew that moral righteousness is here intended :) ix. 30, 31. x. 3–6, 10. 1 Cor. i. 30. 2 Cor. iii. 9. Gal. ii. 21. iii. 21. v. 5. Phil.iii. 6, 9. Tit. iii. 5. Heb. 5. 13. (where we conceive that λóyos dixaioσuns denotes the general system of Christianity, and that consequently the Common V. is preferable to "doctrine of Justification" in I. V.) xi. 7. 2 Pet. i. 1.-In the following, the word is translated by " Method of justification :" Rom. i. 17. iii. 21, 22, 25, 26. As a specimen, we shall transcribe the last passage: and we intreat the candid consideration of our readers, whether the great Christian doctrine of Salvation by free grace through the infinite merit of the Blessed Redeemer (a doctrine to which we fear the editors of this book are real enemies) does not shine with a more unclouded lustre in this, than in the Common Version?

But now, without a law, God's method of justification is manifested, being attested by the law and the prophets; even God's method of justification by faith in Jesus Christ, unto all, [and upon all,] who believe: for there is no difference; for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God; being justified of free bounty, even by his favour, through the redemption which is by Christ Jesus; whom God hath set forth as a mercy-seat, in his own blood; to shew his method of justification concerning the remission of past sins, through the forbearance of God, to shew, I say, his method of justification at this present time: that he might be just and the justifier of him who hath faith in Jesus."

In 2 Cor. v. 21. where dixatorum is put by a metonymy for the persons endowed with this blessing, it is thus properly varied: "that we may be justified before God through him."

[ocr errors]

17. Dapos occurs only 1 John ii. 2. and iv. 10. and in both is rendered "propitiation."Ipo occurs only Rom. iii. 25. and ix. 5. in both "mercy-seat;" undoubtedly correct. 'Amourpuss is always rendered "redemption," except Heb. xi. 35." deliverance." Auto and antiurpov, uniformly

66 ransom."

18. Cynthius aurem vellit, and the patience of our readers joins in his hint. We must, therefore, cancel some of our notes; and only subjoin farther three or four miscellaneous instances. — Έντυγχάνω and ὑπερεντυγχάνω, "intercede," every where, except Heb. vii. 25. "interpose," and Acts xxv. 24. "apply to "O yo," saints," except in three or four places where it is rendered" the holy:" which would have been equally proper in many other places.-Ayán (improperly rendered charity in the Common Version of 1 Cor. xiii. and elsewhere) "love."-Exupia, (usually lusts in C. V.) "desires."

2 Cor. viii. 9. Túxuσ: “ he lived in poverty." In the note we are told that "the word properly signifies an actual state, not a change of state." This observation is not correct. Irwxía and its cognates certainly denote an actual state, and assert nothing necessarily on the cause or occasion of that state. But, from a curious passage in Aristophanes (Plutus 546-553), and the remarks of the Scholiast, it appears almost certain that these words were, very often at least, understood by the Attics as implying a fall from better circumstances; for x is applied to Dionysius the exiled tyrant of Syracuse. Plutarch (Wyttenb. t. i. 939.) has pakkov TTXEUTES," You will become more sordidly poor." Suidas says, Пrwxós, - iXTETTWXW'S TOû {'X than which nothing could be more express. The Attic, next to the common Greek, furnishes our best guide for the rayoμera of the N. T. when the LXX are silent; but, in this case, their testimony is abundant. Пrwxew occurs six times in the O. T. and Apocr; and always in the sense of transition from comfort or opulence to poverty.

[ocr errors]

We find another striking instance of Socinian prejudice in the rendering of rixatiopa, when Christ is, without possibility of evasion, the object of invocation. In Acts ix. 14. 21. xx. 16. and 1 Cor. i. 2. the editors have translated it passively, contrary to the constant use of the same phrase by the LXX and by Greek authors in general, and even to their own rendering of the N. T. in other passages.

Eph. iii. 19. "with all the fulness of God." That the editors should have retained this palpable deviation from us a Tò λ. in their text, putting the just translation ("into all" &c.) only in the margin, would appear incredible. But so is the fact: and we fear that it was a downright artifice to neutralize Col. ii. 9. by inducing the plain reader to infer that the

inhabitation of" all the fulness of the Deity" in Christ, means nothing essentially superior to what is there said of Christians in general. This suspicion is too plainly authorized by the Note on that text.-1 Tim. iv. 10. " a preserver," justly; but, from the law of the article after the verb substantive, it would have been better, the preserver.-1. Cor. xi. 10. " the woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the messengers.' Entirely just. v. 9." I write unto you, in this epistle ;" | Tim. v. 11. when they grow weary of the restraints of Christ;"both these rest on very good grounds.Moyoyevs," only," passim; Teya, Heb. i. 5. adopted." These have too much of exegetical liberty, for a literal version; though we have no objection to the interpretation. But in Acts xiii. 34. they have inconsistently used "begotten."

[ocr errors]


IV. On the Style. This is so much a matter of taste, and it is so difficult to ascertain any standard for the guidance of opinion, that we shall offer only one or two remarks. Judgement and fidelity are the first requisites of a translator, and these involve some attention to his vernacular style: he satisfies, however, every reasonable expectation, if he preserves purity in the selection of his words, perspicuity in the structure of his sentences, and that auroquis or Native Character, which, like the complexion and features of the countenance, distinguishes every original writer. With regard to the second of these requirements, we have no dissatisfaction with Abp, Newcome or his revisers: but, in the other respects, we cannot express full contentment. We have found a few words and phrases which have not the stamp of the best use: e. g. "becomingness,affectioned,-forthwith, we went to prayer, I did away." The delicate tints and touches which mark the peculiar marks of mind, genius, and habits in authors, are of all things the most difficult to be expressed by translators. We cannot, therefore, indulge the severity of censure, because we perceive a degree of tameness and uniformity in the different parts of the N. T.; or because we look in vain for the colouring, too nice perhaps for art to imitate, which would sufficiently discriminate the ardour and labouring fulness of Paul, the cool tranquillity of Matthew, the flowing tenderness of John, and the solicitous circumstantiality of Luke. "Difficile est enim," says Jerome, "alienas lineas insequentem non alicubi excedere; arduum, ut, quæ in aliena lingua bene dicta sunt, eundem decorem in translatione conservent."

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

V. On the general. Faithfulness and Impartiality of the I. V. We have pointed out some important instances in which the spirit of party has perverted the judgement of the Primate and his Improvers, so as to have turned them from that right

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »