It is surely significant that God should be calling, in these last days, such public attention to His own word. Never, perhaps, has there been such eager and widespread interest in the appearance of any volume as in the Revised Version of the New Testament Scriptures; and never certainly has any book obtained such a rapid sale. Its first delivery in London was counted by hundreds of thousands, and this huge supply, it is credibly stated, entirely disappeared in a few days. It has therefore acquired an unprecedented circulation, a circulation which by this time will have embraced every quarter of the globe. Whatever the causes of this, there are few spiritual minds who will not discern in the fact a distinct action of the Spirit of God; for whether men will hear, or whether they will forbear, God has spoken, and so loudly, that His testimony has gone “out through all the earth, and His words to the end of the world.” The Lord is at hand, and it may be that this testimony is the immediate harbinger of His coming.
It will not be without interest to our readers to inquire, what is the result of this revision of the English Testament? The result on the whole, it may be safely affirmed, is to the advantage of the truth of God. There are blemishes—errors indeed—arising from the want of spiritual understanding—that understanding which no scholarship can supply, because it is the fruit of the indwelling and teaching, the anointing, of the Holy Spirit; but while making allowance for these, many mistakes have been rectified, and many doubtful translations have been made more intelligible. Our readers will discover most of these improvements for themselves, and hence we shall simply call their attention to some passages that have been omitted, and to some of the mistranslations that affect the truth.
Several verses or parts of verses have been entirely rejected. The first of these is what is commonly termed the doxology of the “Lord’s prayer:” “For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen.” This has created much feeling in certain ecclesiastical quarters—as was to be expected; but there need to be no hesitation in accepting the exclusion on the ground of entirely insufficient evidence of its inspiration. No Christian would dispute the truth of the language; but the only question to be decided was, is it a part of the inspired word of God?
The next passage omitted of any importance is Acts 8:3737And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. (Acts 8:37): “And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” The context shows that this verse is by no means necessary to the narrative, and for many years past it has been admitted on all hands to be an unwarranted addition. To believe with the heart is a divine condition (Romans 10:9,109That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. (Romans 10:9‑10)), but let us thank God—for who could stand the test? —that we are not required to ascertain if we believe with the whole heart.
Passing onward to the first epistle of John, a part of the much-contested passage in chapter v. 7, 8 is also omitted, and it now reads, “For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, the water, and the blood: and the three agree in one”—a change already anticipated in what is known to many as “The New Translation,” and one which clears away a great difficulty in the apprehension of the teaching of the Spirit of God.
So far we can thank God for the alterations made; but in two passages, while not omitted, so much doubt, and very unnecessarily in our judgment, is thrown upon them, that it will lead in many minds to their positive rejection. The first of these is the narrative of the woman taken in adultery.
(John 7:53;853And every man went unto his own house. (John 7:53)
53Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? (John 8:53). 1-11) It is freely conceded that this passage is not found in some very important manuscripts. It should be borne in mind, however, that the most ancient manuscripts do not reach back further than the time of Constantine; and Augustine expressly says that it was left out “for fear of allowing immorality.” One can readily perceive, how that those who failed to understand the significance of this striking scripture, and the characteristic position of the Lord in it, should thus miss the mind of God, and be animated by such motives of prudence; but the spiritual mind, not governed by human feelings, but by the Spirit of God, will have no difficulty in rejecting their action, and in regarding the scripture as a precious unfolding of divine truth, of the Person, indeed, of our blessed Lord. The other passage alluded to is the close of Mark’s gospel (16: 9-20), which, as the revisers inform us, is omitted “by the two oldest Greek manuscripts,” &c. Even the casual reader will perceive that this passage does not follow on with the narrative, but forms a kind of appendix to the gospel itself, as it gives a general account of the special manifestations of the Lord to His own after His resurrection. This, no doubt, occasioned the difficulty; it would be sure to perplex human wisdom, and hence the attempt to obviate it. The source of much controversy of this kind has been the confusion of the question of authenticity with that of inspiration; that is, if the authorship of a part of any of the books of Scripture has been thought doubtful, the temptation has arisen to reject it. So here, instead of asking whether this close of the gospel were inspired, they discussed whether Mark penned it. Now it is quite clear, from many books of Scripture, that inspired additions may be made by those who were not their authors.
(See Deuteronomy 34, &c) Remarks of this kind need not therefore trouble simple souls.
In the translation many passages, as already remarked, have gained in clearness and accuracy, while others have lost both in respect of point and truth through the want of spiritual intelligence. A few examples of the latter class may be given. In Acts 2:4747Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. (Acts 2:47) the Revised Version reads, “And the Lord added to them day by day those that were being saved.” So in 2 Corinthians 2:1515For we are unto God a sweet savor of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: (2 Corinthians 2:15), and 4:3 we find, “them that are being saved,” and “them that are perishing.” There is no doubt whatever as to the tense of the verb, or that a hard literality, apart from the knowledge of divine truth, might so translate. But it is not difficult to conjecture that the origin of the translation in these cases is unbelief in the fact that man can either be saved or lost before death. Even evangelical Protestantism very unwillingly admits that the sinner is already lost, or that he may know he is saved during his life. It will press very earnestly that he will be lost if he does not believe in Christ. But this is another thing, and ignores the teaching of the word of God as to the truth of the cross—that the cross, indeed, was the demonstration of the fact that man was both guilty and lost, and thus the termination of his history as man in the flesh, and as such responsible to produce fruit for God. It is this which displays the magnificence of God’s grace. At the very moment when all that man is, in all the depths of his corrupt and totally depraved heart, was revealed, God revealed Himself as the God of grace through the death of Christ. But even if the revisers were ignorant of this, a little more knowledge of the Scriptures would have saved them from their mistake. To show this, we transcribe part of a note to Acts 2:4747Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. (Acts 2:47), in the version known as “The New Translation”— “As to the form of the word, σωξόμενοι “(the word in Acts 2:4747Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. (Acts 2:47)),” &c., are all found in the LXX. The difference of σωξόμενος is that it gives the character instead of the fact; as I might say, the spared ones,’ or those to be spared,’ or the fact, those who have been spared.’ It is not this last here. It is the class of persons then God was saving. It is not a doubt as to their being saved, nor a state, but a class. Compare Luke 13:2323Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them, (Luke 13:23), ‘Are the σωξόενοι, that class, few?’ So the English means there, that be saved.’ The Jews discussed this point much as may be seen in Lightfoot and Schoetgen.”
The translation of Ephesians 2:66And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: (Ephesians 2:6) is still more unhappy. It is as follows: “And raised us up with Him, and made us sit with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus.” This contains a double error. Although not put in italics, there is nothing in the Greek text to answer to the first “Him.” In fact, the “Authorized Version” is correct, and the revision erroneous; for it is really “raised us up together” not with Christ, albeit that is true, but believing Jews and Gentiles together all distinction now having been abolished, as will be immediately seen if the apostle’s use of the pronouns “you” and “we” is apprehended. The last clause of the verse is nothing but confusion, as we are said to be made to sit with Christ in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus. No; we are not with Him yet. We shall be when He has come to receive us unto Himself, not before; but we are in Him, as the Scripture states. The truth is, it should be, as in the first clause, “made to sit together” i.e. Jew and Gentile— “in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus.” This is a striking example of the necessity of understanding the truth of God in the power of the Holy Ghost as a qualification for the translation of the Scriptures.
We had marked other passages for comment, but we must content ourselves, for the present, with reminding our readers of the need of care in accepting the alterations made by the revisers. At the same time we unfeignedly rejoice at the many improvements effected, and to some of these, if the Lord will, we hope to call attention at another time.
E. D.