In presenting to the reader this new translation of the second part of the holy scriptures, it is well to give him some information as to the plan which we have followed, and the principles which have guided us in our undertaking. With regard to the details of this work, we will only mention those which have appeared to us as needing some explanation.
Thoroughly convinced of the divine inspiration of the scriptures, we have endeavored in translating them to reproduce as exactly as possible in French, that which God has given us in another language, unknown to the greater part of those who read the Bible. We have rendered the Greek as literally as was consistent with the perspicuity needed for the understanding of what is said. The depth of the word of God is infinite, and the connection that exists between all the parts of the divine mystery is not less admirable; although this mystery is not revealed to us as a whole, for " we know in part and we prophesy in part.,é Therefore it is that we often meet in the word with expressions that, flowing from the depth of the mystery in the mind of the inspired writers, make us perceive (under divine teaching) the connection of the different parts with each other, and that of each of these parts with the whole. To retain these Greek expressions is sometimes disadvantageous to the style of the version; but, when the clearness of the sentence was not injured by it, we have allowed some to stand which might help the reader to apprehend all the meaning and bearing of what is written in the Greek. In other cases, when the French language would not admit of a literal translation, and where the form of the Greek phrase appeared to contain thoughts that might be more or less lost or modified in the French expression, we have given the literal translation in a note.
( Note: The parts which refer only to the French language are printed thus, in brackets [*] with a star inside them.-Ed. P. T.J)
There is another point which relates to the Greek text itself, and which it is needful to mention. Until the end of the fifteenth century, at which period printing was invented, the holy scriptures-as well as all other books-existed only in the form of manuscripts. The first impression of the Bible was due to Cardinal Ximenes, but the sources from which he drew are still very little known to us. Two years previous to its publication, Erasmus had already given an editio princeps of the Greek text, but he had been able to consult only a very few manuscripts, and indeed for the Apocalypse he possessed but one, and this very incorrect and incomplete. About the middle of the sixteenth century, R. Stephens (Stephanus) published in Paris an edition of the Greek text, founded upon the comparison which he had made of thirteen manuscripts that he had found in the royal library, and of a fourteenth which his son Henry had examined, and which afterward, from the hands of Theodore Beza, found its way into the Cambridge library. Theodore Beza himself published, at about the same time, an edition of the New Testament with a fresh translation in Latin. Also in 1633 a new edition of the Greek text was published in Holland, differing little from that of Stephens, to which they were bold enough to give the title of " Textus ab omnibus Receptus," the text received by all. If, at the present day, we put aside the translations from the Vulgate or ancient Latin version, we may say that in so far at least as we know, all modern translators of the New Testament have hitherto taken as the basis of their labors, either the text which is called " Text received by all/' or another which is even less correct. Now this " Received Text" is founded on a very limited number of MSS. At the time of its publication criticism had made but little progress. The anxiety also of some who feared that the common faith might thereby be shaken prevented the raising of the question as to the accuracy of the existing text thus presented. But since that period many hundred MSS, some of which are of great antiquity, have been carefully examined and compared. Those faults could thus be corrected which copyists had introduced into the thirteen MSS to which Stephens had access, or which, by any other means, had crept into the " Received Text." The learned men who have thus employed their time and their sagacity in purging the text from those errors, which had found their way into it through the carelessness or presumption of men, have formed a corrected text; classifying, according to different systems, and judging, each according to his own point of view, the numerous MSS known at present.
We will name here the most distinguished among these learned men. The first, perhaps, whom we should point out, is Mills, who accumulated an immense number of different readings, by examining the MSS that he found in divers European libraries. Next came Bengel, who suggested the principle, turned afterward to good account, of classifying the MSS in different families. After him Wetstein added many more readings, and published an edition of great critical value. Then Griesbach, Scholz, Tischendorf, Lachmann, availed themselves of the resources furnished by their predecessors in this field of labor, making also fresh researches themselves. We may add to the preceding names those of Birch, Matthaei, Alter, who have also contributed their share to the reconstruction of the text. Other men, no doubt, have labored in the same way; but it suffices to have pointed out the principal ones among the number.
We have then thought it good to profit by all the means which learned and hard-working men have put within our reach. Some among them have preferred to form their text entirely on the most ancient MSS. It is true that every copy tends to multiply mistakes; but a MS which is more modern than some other one may happen to be an exact copy of a MS much more ancient than the latter. The MSS from which a copy was made at a comparatively modern period, may also have been less corrupted by deliberate alterations, so that the true way of having a text as pure as possible is to make use of all the resources that are at one's disposal. There are versions more ancient than the most ancient of the known MSS. Those versions control the text of the MSS. A work has been recently published by Mons. Rilliet, on perhaps the most ancient of all MSS, called the Vatican. His work appears to us very well done, and in many respects interesting; but no one MS can, by itself, furnish a satisfactory text of the New Testament.
We will very briefly point out the character of those editions which, when they agree together, have formed the basis of our text.
Griesbach rests principally on the ancient MSS in uncial letters; but he has weighed the other authorities. His edition, published after the labors of Mill, Bengel, and Wetstein, has certainly laid the foundations of modern criticism. He sees it right to distinguish from each other three families or classes of readings or of MSS, the Alexandrian, the Constantinopolitan, and the Western. The greater number of the ancient MSS, that is, those in uncial letters, are of the Alexandrian family; and it is on this family that Griesbach has founded his text; but the learned critic did not confine himself to this source.
Scholz professes to follow the readings of the Constantinopolitan MSS, which are followed by the mass of modern or western MSS, which, far more than the Alexandrian, countenance the " Received Text." Nevertheless, in reality he often diverges from that family, so that his text differs little from that of Griesbach: his edition is disfigured by many faults of type.
Tischendorf, like Griesbach, follows principally the MSS in uncial letters. In his first edition he is a little rash, but he becomes much more sober in the subsequent editions, in which he has re-established many readings that he had previously rejected.
Lachmann has pursued a line of his own, laying it down at first as a principle, that the autographic text is not to be found; he has endeavored not precisely to come as near to it as possible; but, holding it for certain that the MSS of the first four centuries must be the most correct, he would not examine any that did not belong to those four centuries. This system is too absolute to be safe.
Matthaei has founded his edition on the MSS that are in the possession of the Russian synod, and that belong to the Constantinopolitan family. He also has followed an absolute system, and has even combated strenuously against those who attached themselves in preference to the Alexandrian text. Nevertheless, the successors of Griesbach have availed themselves of the labors of these two last-named men, who have furnished criticism with fresh resources. In result, all these learned men have helped to improve the text of the New Testament, so that we now possess the precious word of our God, purged from many of the faults which the carelessness of copyists had introduced into it.
The MS of the Vatican, which Professor Rilliet has recently translated, is of the Alexandrian family. The MS which bears the special name of Alexandrian is on the contrary not so throughout; the Gospels belong to one family, the Acts to another, and the Epistles to a third. We have merely given general ideas on these points, referring those who wish to study the subject to those books and prolegomena from which, trusting to our memory, we have drawn the substance of these brief remarks.
The result of all the labors of which we have been speaking has been most happy for all those who rightly value the integrity of the word of God. No doubt human weakness has left its traces here also, as is the case wherever anything has been entrusted to man; but the providence of God has watched over His word, so that, in spite of the great differences between the systems which learned men have followed for the revision of the text, they have nevertheless arrived at almost identical results. Apart from one or two passages, the various editions of the Greek text are almost everywhere in accordance with each other as regards the different readings which have any importance. The variations we meet with are few in number, of a secondary order, and, in a translation, would often be almost imperceptible; and the labors of the learned men who have compared the numerous MSS known at present have had the happy effect of removing the mistakes with which the first editions of the Greek text were disfigured.
These few remarks will make the reader understand our reasons for abandoning a text which was known to be inexact in more than one place. It was fit, however, not to give way to an uncertain or venturesome criticism; whenever therefore the principal editions, such as those of Griesbach, Scholz, Tischendorf, Lachmann, and often some others less known, are agreed, we have followed the text exactly as they have given it, as we have no motive that attached us to a less pure text. On the other hand, as criticism was not our object, we have simply and entirely retained the received text wherever these principal editors were not agreed. Moreover, we have always been careful to point out in a note the passages in which we have departed from the received text, giving the translation of the latter at the same time.
It remains for us to explain to the reader why, in the Apocalypse, we have no longer given at the bottom of the page the readings of the received text. As we have already stated, that of the Apocalypse was printed by Erasmus, from one very incorrect MS that did not even contain all the last chapter, which this learned man translated from the Latin. At present, on the contrary, ninety-three MSS have been collated with more or less care, three of which are in the uncial letters. We have not, therefore, thought it well to reproduce all the faults of one imperfect MS. Erasmus did his best, but there was no need to re-produce errors which he had no means of avoiding.
We have now to furnish some explanations on points of detail. And, first, it may appear singular that, excepting as it depends on the punctuation, we have excluded the capital letter from the beginning of every word which is not a proper name, as such. Thus we have written our god, our father, the son, the word, the spirit.
We desire that our readers should fully understand the motive that induced us to print these words in a manner which is not agreeable to ourselves, and which will perhaps be a matter of surprise to them. We have adopted this plan in order to avoid what appears to us a still greater impropriety. In speaking of the spirit, we find more than one passage in which the state of the soul and the Spirit of God are so united and mingled together, that it would have been rash or even impossible to decide between a small s or a capital S. Now if we had put a small s to the word spirit, and a capital G to the word God, the result would have been most grievous, and, in appearance at least, a denial of the divinity of the Holy Ghost. We had no other resource than to follow the example of the Greek, and to use capitals only for proper names: thus, when the word " God " is a proper name, it has a capital; when it is appellative, it has a small g. We have followed the same rule with respect to the word " Christ," which may be a proper name, or may have the sense of " anointed." This plan is, we repeat, disagreeable to ourselves, but it maintains the ground of truth, which would have been impossible on any other plan. Those who are in the habit of reading the Greek Testament will not be stumbled at it. The passages, Rom. 8:15 and John 4:24 (and there are many others), will suffice to mark the difficulty; in these two passages, in fact, to make the difference between Spirit with a capital S and spirit with a small s, and then to put the one or the other would in either case falsify the meaning.
It is with design that we have sometimes written " Christ," and sometimes " the Christ," that is, the Anointed One, the Messiah. An attentive study of the word will show that, in the Gospels, the word Christ is almost always preceded by the article, and generally expresses that which a Jew would have called " the Messiah." In the Epistles, on the contrary, the use of the article is rare, and in most instances may simply depend on the grammatical exigencies of the Greek language, without taking away from the word " Christ " the character of a proper name. In the latter case French rejects the article, and the translator has therefore to form a judgment as to the intention of the sacred writer. We cannot affirm that we have always succeeded in discerning it; but in the greater number of the passages the reader will easily distinguish between the office and the name of the person.
The Septuagint has used the word κύριος for " Jehovah," translated usually " the LORD " in the Old Testament. It is rendered also by " the Lord " in the New Testament, and is confounded with the same name applied to Jesus, viewed as a man. " God has made him," it is said," both Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:36). Not doubting but that this word is often the proper name " Jehovah," we think that it will be a service to the reader if we furnish him with a list of the passages in which κύριος presents this meaning: those among them which, in this respect, appear more or less doubtful, are followed by a note of interrogation.
Matt. 1:20, 22, 24; 2:13, 15, 19; 3:3; 4:7, 10; 5:33; 21:3 (?), 9, 42; 22:37, 44; 23:39; 27:10; 28:2.
Mark 1:3; 11:3 (?), 9, 10; 12:11, 29, 30, 36; 13:20; 16:20 (?).
Luke 1:6, 9, 11, 15, 16, 17, 25, 28, 32, 38, 45, 46, 58, 66, 68, 76; 2:9, 15, 22, 23, 24, 26, 38, 39; 3:4; 4:8, 12, 18, 19; 5:17; 10:27; 13:35; 19:38; 20:37, 42.
John 1:23; 12:13.
Acts 1:24 (?); 2:20, 21, 25, 39, 47 (?); 3:19, 22; 4:26, 29 (?); 5:9, 19; 7:30, 31, 33, 37, 49; 8:25 (?), 26; 9:31 (?), 10:4 (?), 14 (?); 12:7, 17 (?), 23; 15:17; 17:27
Rom. 4:8; 9:28, 29; 10:9, 12, 13, 16; 11:3, 34; 12:19; 14:11; 15:11.
1 Cor. 1:31; 2:16; 3:20; 14:21; 15:47 (?).
2 Cor. 3:17, 18 (peculiar character); 6:17, 18; 10:17.
Heb. 1:10; 7:21; 8:2, 8, 9, 10, 11; 10:16, 30; 12:5, 6
James 5:4, 11.
1 Peter 1:25; 3:12, 15.
2 Peter 2:9 (?), 11; 3:8.
Jude 5, 9.
Rev. 1:8; 4:8, 11; 11:15(?), 17; 15:3, 4; 16:5 (?), 7; 18:8; 19:6; 21:22; 22:5, 6.
In the Acts the word is used in an absolute and general way, and applied to Christ. It is usually the same in the Epistles, see 1 Cor. 8:5, 6.
[*We have hesitated whether to translate the word " λόγος " by " verbe " or by " parole," the use of a feminine noun being undesirable in speaking of God, of the incarnation, of creation, etc. On the other hand, the connection which exists between the word of revelation and the Word as a person, such as is seen in Heb. 4:12, 13, is likely to be lost by the use of the word " verbe." This last consideration has induced us to employ the word " parole " in spite of its feminine form: custom has, besides, in a great measure removed the unsuitableness of the expression.
After some hesitation we have retained the word " έvangile," instead of using such terms as " bonne nouvelle," or " heureux message" which, though they would have given more exactly the Greek sense, seemed to us, at the same time, both too harsh and too familiar.*]
The use we have made of the word " gospel " (εὐαγγέλιον) is not without its danger, and requires that the attention of the reader should be called to the proper meaning of the word, as well as to some facts connected with it. We commonly say, " to preach the gospel "-" this or that is not the gospel "; and by " gospel" is understood a certain system of doctrine. The word, however, means simply " glad tidings," " good news " brought by some one. Thus when Timothy brought to Paul good news of the faith and love of the Thessalonians (1 Thess. 3:6), it is said that he εὐηγγελίσατο (evangelized) Paul as to the faith and love of the Thessalonians.
On the other hand, in the same way that the word " Christ," used at first as a title in the sense of the Anointed One, became afterward a proper name; so the pre-eminently good news, the good news of the love of God and of His intervention in the person of Christ to save men, is called " the good news," " the gospel." It is important that the reader, when he meets with this expression, should bear in mind the idea of a communication of good and glad tidings, as a message from God; and that he should also remember that the word εύαγγέλιον, translated " gospel," is used to designate various glad tidings or good news. When, for instance, we read of " the gospel of the kingdom " (that is to say, of the good news that God was going to establish His kingdom on earth), this is quite a different good news from that of the intervention of God in grace for salvation. It must also be observed that when we find the expression " the gospel of God," the word speaks to us of God as the source of the good news; whilst when the expression is " the gospel of Christ," it is Christ who is presented as being the subject of this good news. Some other analogous modes of expression will not be passed unnoticed by the attentive reader.
We should add that this word εὐαγγέλιον (gospel) is not common to all the sacred writers, and that we do not find it in the Greek text of Luke, John, James, or Jude. Peter only makes use of it once; in Paul, on the contrary, that great herald of the glad tidings, we meet with it very frequently, but in different acceptations. Matthew uses it four times, always adding the words " of the kingdom." Of all the evangelists, Mark is the only one who employs this word several times in the sense which we now usually give it; and this is readily accounted for by the fact that Mark is particularly occupied with Christ as proclaiming the word, and that he makes no mention of the circumstances which accompanied the birth of our Lord, but begins with the glad tidings at once, and ends his narrative with the commission entrusted by the Lord to His disciples, without giving-as the other evangelists have done-an especial character to that mission. He says merely, " Go ye into all the world, and preach the glad tidings to every creature." The reader will however observe that even in Mark the word is not used independently of the idea of the coming of the kingdom, for it is there written " The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has drawn nigh; repent ye, and believe in the glad tidings." This coming of the kingdom is a very different thing from the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, although these events took place before the setting up of the kingdom, and were in fact necessary to it. It is evident that, before the accomplishment of the fact, the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus could not be preached as glad tidings, men being then called on to believe in a living Christ.
Finally and in a general way it may be said that the word " gospel," having by itself the meaning of good news declared, serves to express the preaching of the truth, as well as the truth preached; and that the word is used sometimes in the one, and sometimes in the other, of these two senses. Thus the study of the text will show that there are, both in Mark and in the Epistles of Paul, some passages in which the word " gospel " is used to point out a system of doctrine, the purport of the message of glad tidings, and not the act of proclaiming it. Elsewhere, when Paul says (1 Cor. 9:14) that " the Lord has ordained that they who preach the gospel should live of the gospel," these men preach a doctrine, but they do not live of a doctrine; it is of their service that they live, while preaching the doctrine. In verse 18 of the same chapter Paul speaks of " his right in the gospel," that is, in his service as a preacher; and again, in Phil. 4:15, he points out by the expression " the beginning of the gospel " the beginning of the preaching of these glad tidings.
It was important to preserve the distinction which the word makes between the expression (an extremely vague one however) of ἅδης, the invisible place, where the souls of men go after death, and that of γέεννα, the place of torment. We have therefore retained the Greek word ἅδης, hades.
Neither ought we to lose sight of the important difference that exists between the expressions, δοῦλος, διάκονος, and ὑπηρέτης. We have retained for the first, the term (of evil sound in the present day) of slave; the διάκονος was a man who served at table or elsewhere, without being, on that account, a slave; the ὑπηρέτης, originally a rower in a galley, was an official servant, such for instance as an " apparitor." When the text does not allow us to render these differences into French, we have given the Greek word in a note.
The reader will find the somewhat singular expression " the way " in Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23. We have translated it literally from the Greek, not doubting but that it was a nickname given to Christianity, as at all times the world has invented one for true piety.
We have rendered the Greek word προσκυνέω, by "do homage "; this expression applying in Greek to every kind of reverential action, from the simple act of bowing to a superior up to the adoration of God Himself. The reader will easily decide on the character of the homage, by considering who the person is to whom it is rendered, and who it is that renders it.
We frequently find in the Acts the participle of the verb σέβεσθαι with the sense of " who serves God." We call attention to this expression because it indicates a class of persons who, although they were not Jews, shunned the vanity and the defilements of Paganism, and took part in the Jewish worship. See Acts 13:43, 50; 16:14; 17:4, 17; 18:7, 13. We also find the same expression in Matt. 15:5; Mark 7:7; and Acts 19:27; used in the ordinary sense of worshipping, whether it be a Jew worshipping Jehovah, or a heathen his false gods.
The equivocal meaning of the word " call," which signifies alike " to give a name," or " to invite a person to come to us, or into some position," makes the use of this word difficult when it is attached to the term " saint " or " apostle." In the absence of a better expression we have nevertheless retained it. Rom. 1:6, 7; 8:28 Cor. 1:1, 2, 24; Jude 1; Rev. 17:14. To translate it, as has been done, by " called [to be] saints," is to pervert the sense; " who are called saints " is still worse. To give the exact meaning, it should be said " saints by call," the persons in question having become saints by the call of God; and the reader will do well to remember this in the passages we have named.
The meaning of the adjective ψυχικός, animal, which the reader will find in 1 Cor. 2:14; 15:44, 46; and James 3:15; may present some difficulty when thus applied, whether to the moral condition, or to the body, of a man. We think it well, therefore, to remark that, in these passages, the word indicates that which, like the first Adam, lives by virtue of the possession of a soul, and not by the mighty energy of the Holy Ghost. The same Greek word ψυχικός is found also in Jude 19, where we could hardly employ the term " animal," and have therefore replaced it by " natural."
The Greek word ὅσιος demands also a little explanation, as in Acts 13:34, 35. There is no question but that the word is used in the New Testament, as also in the Septuagint, in the sense of " holy," (see 1 Tim. 2:8; Titus 1:8; Heb. 7:26; Rev. 15:4), although the word usually translated " holy " is ἅγιος. The proper sense of ὅσιος is pious, compassionate, that which is not profane, and it is applied to Christ, in whom is summed up all the benevolence and the goodness of God towards men, as well as perfect piety. This application of the word comes out in a very remarkable way in Psa. 89, where the expression is used by the sacred writer to designate the loving-kindnesses of God towards Israel, which are centered in David, and the promises made to David and his seed, that is to say, to Christ (verses 1-4). The same expression is applied in verse 19 to the person in whom all these mercies are centered, in contrast with the other word that is usually rendered by " holy," and which is employed in verse 18 with respect of Jehovah.
The word in Acts 13:34 that is translated " the sure mercies of David " is the same as that which is translated " thine Holy one " in verse 35 of the same chapter, as well as in Acts 2:27; and these holinesses or mercies, which are made sure by the resurrection of Jesus, the Holy One who was not to see corruption, are the same mercies which are set forth in Psa. 89; see verses 29-39.
The reader will remember that the words enclosed in brackets [ ] are added to the text. They are not found in the Greek. The genius of the French language requires the addition. But we desire to call the reader's attention more particularly to a few cases of this, especially in Paul's Epistles, and chiefly in those to the Romans and Galatians, in which the introduction of the article might possibly alter the meaning. Thus, for instance, before the word " law," the article tends to make the reader think that it is the law of Moses which is spoken of. In these cases, and in others of the same nature, the reader must not fail to notice the brackets, which indicate that the article is not found in the original. This is particularly to be attended to when he meets with such expressions as " under [the] law," or " under [a] law," " by [the] law," etc.
The expression " under sin " (Rom. 3:9) is peculiar, but we have retained it in order not to weaken the moral force of the term, which, in the text, points out the sinful condition (as God views it) which presses upon us, a weight, a power, and on every side; the meaning would be lost if it were translated " in sin," or " subjected to sin."
[*In Rom. 6 and elsewhere, we have translated " si nous somrnes marts avec Christ" and not " si nous mourumes avec Christ" being convinced that we render thus more accurately the mind of the apostle, though the true form of the verb is altogether lacking in French. " Nous mourumes," as an historical tense, presents to the mind only an act which was accomplished at a given moment.*]
Acts 20:28 has been a great perplexity both to critics and translators. It seems to us that this has arisen from not paying sufficient attention to one of the ordinary senses of τοῦ ἰδίου. We read with all the modern editors διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου, not taking this last word as an adjective agreeing with αἵματος, but as a genitive after αἵματος. Ἰδιος is that which belongs to any one, and, consequently, his family, the people of his house: τὸ αἵμα τοῦ ἰδίου is the blood of some one who belongs to a person,' as a son to a father. The French language requires the addition of a name to the words " his own." We have therefore said " his own [son]," because we know that He who belonged to God, and whom God gave, was His Son.
By comparing the expressions ἐπί Άβιάθαρ (Mark 2:26), ἐπί τοῦ βάτου (Mark 12:26), and the analogous form ἐν Ἠλίᾳ (Rom. 11:2), we have arrived at the conclusion (evident to ourselves at least) that the first should not be rendered " in the days of Abiathar," but that all three designate a section or heading of a book-a section or heading in which is found the recital of the fact in question. We have therefore departed from the ordinary translation, and have said " in [the section, or heading, of] Abiathar " " in [the section of] the bush."
The translation of Luke 16:9, " that ye may be received," requires justification. The reader can easily convince himself that Luke, in his Gospel, frequently employs the active verb, with the third person of the plural, to express the simple fact which is usually rendered by the passive form, " that they may receive you," for " that ye may be received." Compare chapter 6: 38, 44 (twice); 12: 20; 14: 34, etc.
The expression, " the ends of the ages," which will be found in 1 Cor. 10:11, is rather strange; but to preserve the sense of the Greek, we could not say, " the last times," any more than " the end of the ages," still less " the end of the world." The end of the ages was not yet come; but all the different dispensations by which God had put Himself in relation with man, so far as they were connected with man's responsibility, had come to one point, and were brought to an end in the death of the Lord Jesus. After that-great as had been His long-suffering-God established a new creation. We have therefore used the literal translation, " the ends of the ages."
In the same epistle to the Corinthians we have used the expression, " speaking with tongues," and our excuse is that the thing designated by this term is as unusual as the term itself. To speak languages, or in different languages, is not at all the apostle's meaning. The divine gift, by which they spoke divers languages without having learned them, required a name of its own.
We have not known how to avoid the use of the words " offense," " offend," in an acceptation which is not properly French. The Greek word σκάνδαλον means literally a trap, a pitfall, into which animals are drawn by means of a bait; but there are many passages in which this word is used, which could not be rendered by employing the word " snare." In these we have therefore retained (in the absence of a better expression) the usual translation " offend," taking the word σκάνδαλον in its moral sense, as presenting an occasion of falling; or, passively, of finding something to be an occasion of falling.
[*The reader who compares our translation with the Greek, will observe, especially in John 6, that we have often omitted the ἐγώ. The Greek language generally admits of the omission of personal pronouns, unless the person designated is to be made prominent; but John often uses this pronoun without the least intention of giving the emphasis which the use of it would give in French. We fear we have even used the word " moi " too frequently after all; but, as its use is a peculiarity of John's style, we were anxious to leave it in wherever this was possible.
There are other expressions in the Gospel of John to which it may be well to draw the reader's attention, because it is difficult to give the force of the Greek in French. Thus the word " venu " in the sentence " venu de Dieu " (John 16:30) is the same as " sorti" of verses 27 and 28 of the same chapter, where we read "je suis sorti d'aupres de Dieu," the only difference being that of the accompanying preposition. Verses 27 and 28 express the consciousness that the Savior had of His position with the Father before coming down here; verse 30 the knowledge which the disciples had that He had come from God. Without pretending to have succeeded, we have at least sought to express this difference, which is one of real importance.*]
In the latter chapters of John's Gospel it will be found that in order to maintain the distinction, frequently important, between ἐρωτάω and αἰτέω, we have translated the first by " demand," the second by " ask." There are cases in which either the one or the other word may be used indiscriminately, at other times each is used in a sense peculiar to itself: ἐρωτάω expressing a familiar request where intimacy exists; αἰτέω, the request rather of an inferior with regard to his superior. The disciples employ both of these words in their relations with Jesus; but, in His relations with His Father, Jesus demands, ἐρωτάω, whilst He never employs the word αίτέω with regard to His Father. For the difference between the two, compare John 16:23.
The words πλεονεκτέω, πλεονέκτης, πλεονεξία, have sometimes a peculiar sense, which it is well to notice. The general idea expressed by the verb πλεονεκτέω, is that of making a gain at the cost of another, appropriating to oneself the goods of another; it is the desire of possessing oneself of something, and often with the accessory idea that crooked means are used for the purpose; and this desire may apply to the wife as well as to the goods (property so called) of another. We have ourselves the conviction that this is the meaning of Eph. 4:19, 1 Thess. 4:6, and perhaps of yet other passages, such as Eph. 5:3. Nevertheless, as we cannot rest this interpretation on any acknowledged authority, we have not ventured on introducing it into the text. We confine ourselves to the expression of our convictions on this point, adding that the thing in question is at any rate an unlawful desire to possess oneself of something in opposition to good morals; and that, in 1 Thess. 4:6, the word " matter " refers to relations with women.
The translation of 1 Cor. 16:15 does not satisfy us. The word ἔταξαν, which we have rendered by " have devoted," signifies to appoint an officer to a regiment, or, in general, a man to any post; but here it concerns a service of love. The family of Stephanas-the first converts in Achaia-moved by their desire to serve the Lord, and by their love for the saints, had placed themselves in that which related to service at the head of the saints. They had taken this place with regard to the saints in order to serve them with all their heart. They were thus established over the saints for the purpose of serving them, but they had appointed themselves to it; and Paul beseeches the saints to obey them.
" Many waters " in Rev. 17:1, is feeble; but we have been unable to do better. The Greek says," the many waters," that is to say, the great extent, with all its windings and various seas.
In 1 Tim. 5:17, we have found no better word for προίστημι than " preside," although this expression but poorly gives the sense of the Greek, which does not imply any relation with an assembly as does the French word " preside." The word is used to point out the direction or guidance which a father gives to his family, and is applied in general to all those who undertake to direct others in any way whatever. See Rom. 12:8 Thess. 5:12 Tim. 3:4, 5, 12; and, in a different sense, Titus 3:8, 14.
[*A difficulty is presented by the Greek preposition following the word βαπτίζω, which cannot possibly be satisfactorily expressed either in French or German. A person is baptized εἰς -becomes attached to something-adjoins himself to something, rallies to it. One adheres to a person by baptism. Thus one is baptized εἰς to the death of Christ, εἰς to Christ Himself, and again εἰς to Moses, εἰς to the remission of sins. The εἰς expressing the object proposed in the baptism, it has been said, " baptizer dans sa mort," but one could not say baptized in Christ, or in Moses; and, moreover, in His death is not the meaning. We have used the word " pour" " for," but it is not quite satisfactory in some cases; for example, " baptisis pour Moise" though it may be everywhere in such a way so as to give the nearest used approach to the idea of the word εἰς.
There is another Greek form of expression which demands a few words, the meaning being difficult to render into French. I refer to the use of the article before the words πλοῖον, ὄρος, οἶκος, literally in English " boat, mountain, house." The expression " a la maison," and that used in Switzerland, " d la montagne" are analogous idioms: "a la maison" does not mean any particular house, but " at home," " not abroad." In the same way " the mountain " means, in Switzerland, " in the mountains " in general, in contrast with the plains. We are convinced that this is usually the force of the article in the cases we are speaking of (the house, the boat, the mountain). He was on the mountain, not in the plain; on a boat, not on terra firma; in the house, not out of doors. We fear we have now and then been inconsistent with this view. However, " on a mountain " does not quite answer to the force of the Greek, nor does " on a boat." But " the boat," " the mountain," supposes a particular boat and a particular mountain, which supposition is unfounded in the cases we refer to. See Matt. 5:1; 8:23; 9:1; 14:22, 32, where one might have said, " en nacelle "; 4: 21, and 13: 2, where one must say " une nacelle "; Mark 1:19; 4:1; 5:18; 6:32; 8:10, 13; Luke 8:22, 37; John 6:17, 22, 24; 21:3.
It may be well to add a few words on the Lord's prayer in Luke. We accept, with the majority of the critical authorities, the alterations made in the text by Griesbach, Tischendorf, and others; but, faithful to our principle of altering nothing as to which the chief editors are not agreed, we have retained the
received version. We give here what we believe to be the true reading:-
" Pὲre, que ton nom soit sanctifiέ; que ton rὲgne vienne; donne-nous chaque jor le pain qu'il nous faut; et pardonne-nous nos pέchέs, car nous-mεmes aussi nous remettons a quiconque nous doit; et ne nous induis pas en tentation." " Father, hallowed he thy name; thy kingdom come; give us day by day our necessary bread; and forgive us our sins, for we ourselves forgive every one that is in debt to us; and bring us not into temptation."*]
These few observations made, we place our translation, beloved reader, in your hands. If it contribute to a more exact understanding of the word, it will be owing to the blessing of God having been with us in our undertaking; and it is to God that we also commend the result, in order that He may bestow on it His blessing. We earnestly entreat Him that, by the grace of His Spirit, He will help you to profit by His good and holy word. We trust that we have felt the greatness of our responsibility in venturing to translate the word of God, although we took the work in hand with the desire of reproducing it more faithfully than has yet been done in the French language; but the confidence we felt in the grace of God emboldened us to undertake that which might be useful to souls and tend to glorify Him who alone can bless. May He deign to bestow His blessing on His own word and on yourself in the use of that word!