Not a word have the Americans to say of ch. 8:3, though they might have seen the technical force of δ. admitted in the Authorized Version of ch. 11:3, which the Revisers have now blotted out everywhere in the book—i.e. give power, or render effectual. All the previous versions differ, and all are as wrong, it appears to me.
In 10:6 they rightly prefer the marg. alternative “delay” to the textual “time,” as in the Authorized and Revised Versions. “Time” in fact only misleads; as, according to the book itself, more than a thousand years elapse from the seventh angel's beginning to sound, before eternity is come; whereas every one would infer from these versions that eternity must at once follow the sounding of that trumpet. But χρόνος in the Apocalypse as elsewhere is regularly used for “a while or space,” a “lapse of time that intervenes” i.e. a delay: see Rev. 2:21; 6:11; 20:321And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. (Revelation 2:21)
11And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled. (Revelation 6:11)
3And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. (Revelation 20:3). So it is for example in Acts 14:3, 28; 15:23; 18:20, 23; 19:223Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands. (Acts 14:3)
28And there they abode long time with the disciples. (Acts 14:28)
23And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: (Acts 15:23)
20When they desired him to tarry longer time with them, he consented not; (Acts 18:20)
23And after he had spent some time there, he departed, and went over all the country of Galatia and Phrygia in order, strengthening all the disciples. (Acts 18:23)
22So he sent into Macedonia two of them that ministered unto him, Timotheus and Erastus; but he himself stayed in Asia for a season. (Acts 19:22), &c. There is really no excuse for the mistake of the Revisers. It is a mere perpetuation of traditional ignorance. Indeed it would be hard for any one to produce a single instance in the New Testament of the abstract force of “time,” in contrast with “eternity,” which is so arbitrarily conceived to occur here. Mr. E. B. Elliott's addition of “prolonged” or “extended” is quite uncalled for.
In 12:4 there is no doubt that the Americans are justified in giving a present force to the principal verb ("standeth"), and hence to the correction that follows. The truth is that here as in the Old Testament prophecy the Seer was expressly inspired to intermingle the past with the present and future. All was thus felt the more vividly to be before God who made His word known. This has led to a little swerving from a literal rendering.
In 13:1 (or end of ch. 12) the Americans rightly contend for at least a marg. addition to “he stood” thus— “Some ancient authorities read I stood etc., connecting the clause with what follows.” Why, it is the reading of B P, all the known cursives save two, more than one ancient version and the Greek commentators Andreas and Arethas. Tischendorf retains it, à notwithstanding, in his eighth or last edition. Was this beneath a marginal notice? In my opinion they are no less right in suggesting that marg. and the text, ver. 8 should exchange places. (Comp. 17:8)
In 14:6 they would for “an eternal gospel” read “eternal good tidings.” Would not “everlasting” be more correct? There is a shade of difference in our tongue. I do not find that the Americans contend for “good” or “glad tidings” elsewhere: why here only? But ἐξηράνθη in 15 does not mean “ripe” but perhaps “over-ripe” or simply and literally “dried up.” Why should this be departed from?
15:2 seems to be in the Revised Version as strongly rendered as the Greek can fairly bear.
16:9 does not stand happily in the Revised Version though expressing the Greek article in English—at least so it seems to the Americans and to me. It is another case with 11, as all agree. The margin might have been added in 16.
In 19:15 there is no good reason why those who said “God, the Almighty” (or some equivalent) in 1:8, 4:8, 11:17, 15:3, 16:7, 14, 19:6, should say, “Almighty God” without the English def. article in this verse.
In 22:3 is a needless departure from the almost invariable rendering of the Revised Version no less than of the Authorized Version in “do service” for the simpler “serve.” The only approach to it elsewhere is in their version of Heb. 12:2828Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: (Hebrews 12:28) where they have “offer service “; but they might plead εὐαρέστως as modifying the sentence and inducing them to prefer “offer service well-pleasing to God,” instead of the dignified simplicity of our old “serve God acceptably.” However this be, in the Apocalypse it is hard to imagine why they should depart from their own well-nigh uniform practice, to give us a more cumbrous form in accordance with none of their predecessors.