Untitled

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XVI, Issue 169, 18 July 1881, Page 3

{Continued ficm Second Page.) Sir, I cannot help adding, by the way, on *ny own psjtf, that I regret even this last remark on ihe oart of the Guardian; if the evidence is sufficiently strong for the removal cf the doxolojjy and the alteration of the clause " deliver cs from evil " to " deliver us from the evil one"— then to my mind ali regret at a change gives place at once to thankfulness for having an alteration made which ought to have been made. A person in Neisos said recently to me, "I should like to see the book, so as to judge whether I like it or not." I cannot sympathise with such a feeling. If the alterations ara right in themselves their reception should not, I think, b : permitted to be matters of feeling at all; my only anxiety is. I? it a trae rendering? and while tbe antecedent fret of the position and literary charter of the Revisers make me think" i»; probably is the true rendering-, I wait for further public criicism b; fore ventorirg any remarks, V/hnher of pr,*>i=?e or blame. There are, however, very many passages in the New Testament known to all examiners in the Greek Testament, for the last forty y^ars, as requiring nltoratioi:, about wSich there will be no donbt whatever, and I rejoice tn bave at last a Revision in which, a. ill events, these corrections are mr.de. The disrussion will r.ot be over the?e passages. Now for tbe limes: what if siys in praise I mention first, what it says by way of cautfto i aftfrwards It s«vs: — " Revision has been carried out to a fair and reasonable extent, but not as it would appear in any degree beyond it. * * * " The existence of this comparatively stable element (in the attendance of the Revisers) has tended to preserve harmony and consistency, and will be found to havo been an important element in tbe success, which, we believe, has been achieved by this work. _ " It is to be hoped, in justice to the revision, tbat no formal criticisms will be passed on 'he labors of the company until this careful and explicit document (the preface) has been thoroughly mastered. If it teaches* anything, it wil! teach this, first, that the revision of a translation such as the Authorised Vcsion. is a work of almost insuperable difficulty : secondly, that criticism to be just must not content itself with merely sporadic approval or disapproval of the renderings adopted, but must first intelligently master all the circumstances, conditions, and modifying details of the highly complicated undertaking. * * * '•' From the single example adduced, it may be inferred what strong reasons there may be in the back-ground for changes, which a mere off-hand critic might condemn with some passing show of plausibility. A work executed with the obvious care and devotion to the snbject, which ever y paragraph of therevision abundantly displays, may, with equal justice, deprecate a criticism that has not taken equal pains to arrive at the true aspects of the passage or the circumstances under consideration. That there will be especially at first much criticism of a very precipitate nature is a matter of the most perfect certainty, but it is equally certain that criticism of this nature will not affect in the slightest degree the ultimate and probably slowly formed estimate of this present revision. "What that estimate will finally be; it would be now utterly premature to forecast. Our belief is that in the main it will be favorable. (Then follow the reasons). It is quite probable that here and there throughout the volume particular.renderings will be objected to on grounds which will be ultimately considered valid, and it is hoped that where such should be the case nothing will prevent the Revisers from reconsidering their former decisions. "We pass to corrections of the translation and we will notice in the first place the unquestionable advantages presented by the ■revision. Some errors were indisputable blunders, and of these the correction will be universally welcomed. Others were errors of judgment, on which there will always be room for difference of opinion, and on the treatment-of which public opinion can alone decide. * * * ?}.-. " On the whole, however, there can be little doubt that the ordinary reader will be placed by the use of this version is a far better position than before for .following closely the argument of the more difficult parts of the New Testament, and in the argumentative passages, alterations of rhythm are of secondary consideration. " But with till these advantages there remains the question whether the revisers have been sufficiently conservative in details to avoid giving unnecessary offence to ears familiar with the Old Version, and this is a point which can only be decided by the popular verdict." With regard to the alterations in the Lord's Prayer, it concludes, after criticising, thus :— "There is no chance that this new rendering of the universal prayer of Christian nations will supersede the old one (?) " The reviser objects to the substitution of ' : Love " for " Charity " in 1 Cor. xiii., and adduces several of which he regards as unneeded alterations. We must own, he says, that the revisers seem to us to have introduced a good many rather gratuitous alterations. "A number of little changes of this kind, while bringing no appreciable benefit in point of accuracy, arouse a general sense of nnfamiliarness. and may give an uncomfortable feeling, if not something more, to the ordinary reader, and particularly to the ordinary hearer. They are pedantic particularities of scholarship, which, will not promote the prospects of the Version. " We will quote, however, in conclusion, Acts 2fi, 24 — 29, in which it has been necessary to abolish an English Text, which has inspired many excellent sermons, (" Almost thou persuadest me " nowrendered, "With but little persuasion"), and which exhibits the skill of the revisers to advantage." I Sir. neither of the above criticisms can be eaid to be unfavorable, and. considering the character of the papers. I hope you will lay them before your readers after such communications as have appeared. Some lamentable instances of ignorance as to the necessity of revision, have already come to my knowledge, and I am happy to have succeeded in dissipating some of the doubts and hesitation, and showing that if. as^ a whole, the Version has any authority! arising out of the position of the' revisers, it is a great improvement on the Authorised Version of 1(511, and. although I hope + j see it once more revised, yet that I trust the time will soon come when it will be brought in virtue of its own merits and accuracy into general use. I deprecate haste in judgment as much as any. but still more re-echoing some of the assertions of those " off-hand critics " to whom the Times refer. I am, &c. Jnly 15, 1881 . A. B. Nelsok.