H /v xClTv f.f .p,’; ! MO\f' 7 1923 *2 V* ,f? V / /? 0 / n j i { C ;• •. \> 0 1 S, a t a t -V '• -iN, % >• v V Division 35 4-4-5 Section * ■ ! * : / Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/birthofbibleOOheys THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE HEYSHAMS BIBLE CHART CANON CLOSED A.D. TALMUDISTS 300 MASSORETES XPT\'y • : 1000 1500 EZRA THE BIBLE MBje|4448-C.ga THEODORE HEYSHAM COPYRIGHT 1923 1*> BKS+APOC. LXX 277-132 B.C. ORDER BKS. ORIGEN HEXAPLA 1800 1900 USHER 1701 *2-13 CENTURY OT. — N.T. 320 A.D. QUOTED N.T. ORAL TRADITION GRKS. IT A I A WRITTEN RECORDS _ 2 i kit niiDKicn ana-aia E NO APOC. MSS. DEST. OLDEST MS.916 PRINTED 1488 B LUTHER JEWS REJECT I VULGATE LI NX BURNED 303-312 405 A D | JEROME 14Yrs.0.T. CANON CLOSED 397 AJX NO APOC. CAEDMON 700 fAPOCRYPHA APOCRYPHA TEXT VARIES ORK.CHURCH X1MENES POWGUJT . fTURKS 1453 . TYNDALE 1525—1536 A ff— 11 1 y V DOUAV 1609 JESUS CHRIST POLYCARP 69-156 PAPIAS 0b.-163 0LDE$TMS.4thCENT. TRADITIONALISTS VATICAN 4-1475 AWYCLIF1382 y |nO HEB.-GRK - mlERASMUSlSB I BKS. BURNED MARTYRS ien 3000 MSS. AMERICAN M T0THC6Y C€B6IAC My C T H piO NOCe 1 TIM. III. 16 ENGLISH * REVISED 1881-1885 - iSdzn BEZAE 2-6-1546 MT.LK.JN.MK. EPHRAEM 5-16-1841 TEXTUAL1STS SINA1TIC4-1859 STANDARD REVISED ~ 1901 PI USX 1907 1 K i 5 BIBLES i HI B I oocAercuyTAicMH T£..e<|>OBoyN 6K0AMB£IC06INZHTel TOT A fV MKXVI.&8 . . THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE A NEW PATHWAY TO THE BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLE Ul y ; V I Rev. THEODORE HEYSHAM, PH. D. PHILADELPHIA THE JUDSON PRESS BOSTON KANSAS CITY CHICAGO SEATTLE LOS ANGELES TORONTO Copyright, 19*3, by THEODORE HEYSHAM Published April, 1933 Printed in U. S. A, TO THAT GREAT BODY OF LAY PEOPLE WHO WOULD KNOW THE TRUTH ABOUT GOD AND THE FACTS ABOUT THE BIBLE TO THAT GENEROUS-HEARTED GROUP WHO IN DOING HONOR TO ME, HAVE DONE SERVICE TO TRUTH IN THE PUBLICATION OF THIS VOLUME TESTIMONIAL We, the friends of Rev . Theodore Heysham, Ph. D., irrespective of denomination, as a testimonial to the twenty-five years of min¬ istry in the town in which he was raised, unite in the publication of his new book “ The Birth of the Bible " TESTIMONIAL jrfaleuCjf » Oo^jO. yriM&LiA,#'' INTRODUCTION Wide-spread darkness overshadows the Church in relation to the Book. The great mass of the people are in almost total ignorance as to the facts about the Bible. No seminary, college, or univer¬ sity as yet has equipped men to bridge the gulf between the people and the facts about the Book. The result of this failure is seen in the chaos and confusion and conflict among the churches and within the churches. Men who do not under¬ stand the nature of the Bible can never under¬ stand one another. The deep need of the hour is a right understanding of the Book. We must understand the facts about the Bible if we are ever to come to unity in spirit and in service. When my eyes were opened to this sad condi¬ tion in the churches, I was much disturbed. I had taken it for granted that as I had a general knowledge of some of the facts about the Bible the people had the same. How they attained to INTRODUCTION this knowledge I never thought to inquire. Re¬ flection led me to realize that in all the years of my ministry, I had never succeeded in put¬ ting these facts across to the people, nor had I heard or known of any one else being able to do so. A tour of the religious book stores of a great city revealed the fact that not one of them either possessed or knew of any method to bridge the chasm. Impelled by a sense of the deep need, I set about to discover a solution. The Bible Chart described in this book is the result. The Chart was designed to be to the under¬ standing of the Bible what the skeleton or bony framework of a man is to the understanding of the human body. It coordinated all the parts of the Bible’s historic development into one har¬ monious and vital whole. The eye could see what it was very difficult to explain and next to impos¬ sible to piece together by purely intellectual proc¬ esses. Only a specialist could make such coor¬ dinations without the aid of a diagram. With the Chart enlarged first to seven feet and then to thirteen feet square, and painted in colors INTRODUCTION on canvas, I set out to make the effort to give the people the facts about the Book. The reception accorded was most gratifying. With the Chart before them the people listened eagerly to the story of “ The Birth of the Bible.” Children in the Bible schools from twelve years of age and upward were deeply interested. The initial ex¬ periment was a success. A further venture was made. Summer Assemblies, Sunday School Con¬ ventions, and Ministerial Conferences were given the opportunity to consider the Chart and its mes¬ sage. All bore testimony to its worth. I now present the Chart and its description as a con¬ tribution in the field of religious pedagogy. It has proved itself to be one method of getting the facts about the Bible across to the people, the first successful method. Many surprises have come to me as the result of this effort to master a difficulty. First, Among Christian leaders I found an almost universal conviction that the task of get¬ ting the facts about the Bible to the people was an impractical one. When I mentioned to the president of one theological seminary my purpose INTRODUCTION to make the effort, he said: “You can’t do it. The subject is too heavy.” The president of another theological seminary confessed that no adequate instruction along this line was given to the students in the institution he represented. Many ministers declared that they had made efforts to get the facts about the Bible to the people but had failed in every attempt; not a single minister would venture to assert that he had succeeded. Secondly, The people were amazed and full of wonderment at the revelation of the facts. An illustration will best explain. It is of a man who for thirty years had been superintendent of a large Bible school and an active Christian worker for more than a half century. This man, on hearing the Chart explained, asked in wonder¬ ment, “ Are these things all true? ” When it is remembered that this man was a college graduate, a graduate of a scientific school, a leading man in his profession, trustee of a university, one of the most intelligent and representative laymen of his denomination, it is not much wonder that sur¬ prise came to me. I had actually been the first INTRODUCTION to tell this man the facts about the Bible, I was to him the first missionary of a New Evangelism. This is simply a sample of experiences which I had in presenting the facts to the churches. The story was new to them all. Thirdly, The deep interest manifest in the Chart and the intense desire on the part of the people to know the facts about the Bible were truly a revelation. By question and by appeal, the people revealed their interest and their needs. At first, they requested that I have the Chart put in a form suitable for their use. This was done. The Chart was printed on a leaflet and given to the people. The possession of the Chart, how¬ ever, did not meet the need. With the Chart before them, the people were little better off than before. They requested, therefore, that they be given a description of the Chart to go with it. In a moment of enthusiasm this second request on the part of the people was granted. A descrip¬ tion was promised. Had I realized at the time the difficulties to be encountered and the sacri¬ fices to be made in assuming this responsibility, I INTRODUCTION fear I should have hesitated. Now that the task is completed, I am grateful for the privilege of having been permitted to open a new pathway of illumination for the better understanding of that great Book of books, the Bible. Two more requests were to follow. Dr. J. Milnor Wilbur, President of The Baptist In¬ stitute for Christian Workers, Philadelphia, de¬ sired that the Chart be put in the form of a lan¬ tern-slide. Effort to fulfil this request led to a realization of the necessity of revising and sim¬ plifying the Chart. This has been accomplished. The Revised Chart appears in this book and may be obtained as a lantern-slide. To secure simplicity and make the Chart more easily understood, Prof. Milton G. Evans, D. D., LL. D., President of Crozer Theological Semi¬ nary, suggested that parts of the Chart be printed separately. This suggestion has been carried out so far as practicable in the sectional charts printed herein. Doctor Evans also kindly read my manuscript and offered many valuable correc¬ tions and criticisms. In sending forth a description of the Chart in INTRODUCTION book form, I can only trust that it may in some measure answer the prayer of those for whom it has been prepared. Nothing, I know, can take the place of the living voice. In “ The Birth of the Bible,” I have done my best to provide a substitute. The Chart is designed to keep before the mind a picture of the way in which the Bible grew through the centuries. The narration of the facts will clothe the pictured form with life. In reading, keep the Chart before the eye. Both God and the Book will grow more wonderful as the character of the Book is revealed. Thanks are due to many for suggestions, kindly assistance, and encouragement in the de¬ velopment of this purpose to make the Bible a new Book for the people, a Book of inspiration and of the revelation of life. A peculiar sense of appreciation and gratitude is felt toward those friends who, as a testimony to my ministry in the community in which I was raised, have generously opened the way for the publication of this volume. In performing this gracious service they in no wise assume any re¬ sponsibility for its content. INTRODUCTION The responsibility for that which is written is mine. I have sought diligently to be true to fact and to remember at all times that in being true to fact I should be true to myself, my brother, the Book we all revere, and the Father we all love. CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. What Is the Bible? . i ♦ II. How Do We Know the Bible Is the Word of God? . 6 III. Historic Succession of Facts . 8 IV. Where, When, and How Was the Bible Born? . 13 V. How Came the Greek Civilization to Split the Old Testament Into Two Streams? . 23 VI. Dominance of the Latin Civiliza¬ tion Over the Streams of Divine Experience . 36 VII. How the English Civilization Turned All Streams of Divine Experience Into a New Chan¬ nel . 51 VIII. The English Triumvirate Broken 77 IX. Necessity of Modern Revisions. . . 82 B CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE X. Romance and Reality in Manu¬ scripts . 89 XI. The Pathway of Progress . 102 XII. The Test of Fire . 108 XIII. The Salvation of the Scriptures. 114 XIV. The Perssstent Problem of the Bible . 130 XV. The Spiritual Fact . 150 Index . 165 CHARTS PAGE Full Bible Chart, in colors . Frontispiece Sectional Chart, Showing the Development of the Old Testament . 25 Sectional Chart, Showing the Union of the Old Testament and the New Testament in the Latin Vulgate . 37 Full Bible Chart, in colors, opposite . 76 Sectional Chart, Showing the Development of the New Testament . 95 I WHAT IS THE BIBLE? The Bible is the Book of books. Like all things associated with life the Bible had a begin¬ ning. Wherein does the birth of the Bible differ from the birth of a babe? Was not the Bible born, born on earth just as a child is born ? Time, place, circumstance, do these not enter into the birth of all things, yea, and mystery too? Mys¬ tery and reality, do they not meet and mingle in all things associated with the human order ? But is there any more mystery in the birth of the Bible than there is in the birth of a babe? The mystery associated with the birth of the Bible as well as with the birth of a babe is the mystery of life itself. Life in its origin is sur¬ rounded with mystery. Science still stands in silence at life’s portal. No biologist has pene¬ trated the mystery of the origin of life, nor has any theologian resolved the mystery of the origin of the Bible. Both science and religion emerge from the same gateway of mystery. Beyond that gateway the human has no experience. Neither pride of pretense nor presumption at knowledge [i] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE can avail. There is a place where man must con¬ fess with Paul, “ His ways are past finding out.” On this side of the gateway of mystery are the scriptured experiences of the race, the glorious history of human civilization, achievement, and discovery. On this side is the record of facts, facts which are sacred because scriptured in ex¬ perience and shrouded in mystery. The history of the Bible is a part of this great record of facts. To be true to the facts about the Bible is to be true to the Bible and to God. Scrip¬ tured facts are rocks that cannot be shaken. A house of faith built on these rocks stands. A house of faith on which these rocks of fact fall is ground to powder. On the rock of fact paganism was shattered. Paganism pretended to possess the secret of life’s origin. It presumed to have penetrated into the realm of mystery in religion. The problem for the pagan priest centered in an idol, not in a book. To him the idol was sacred. In his zeal to ac¬ count for its origin, he disregarded facts. The worshipers of Diana were taught that the little wooden image of the goddess in the temple at Ephesus had fallen bodily from heaven and in perfected form. In like manner, the devotees of Minerva were led to believe that the little ivory image of the goddess in the temple at Athens [2] WHAT IS THE BIBLE? had been formed in heaven and passed down to earth. Faith was built upon falsehood. Idolatry thus preceded bibliolatry in pretense at knowledge and presumption in explanation. Pagan ideals had a new birth in bibliolatry; the explanation of the origin of an idol was used to account for the origin of sacred books. Moham¬ medanism and Mormonism are classic illustra¬ tions. This new paganism proclaims not a per¬ fect idol but a perfect book fallen bodily from heaven and in perfected form. Between these theories of sacred origins, between a perfect idol fallen bodily from heaven and in perfected form and a perfect book so fallen, there is no choice. The one is a perversion of the religious ideal in the realm of art; the other is a perversion of that ideal in the domain of literature. Both are con¬ tradicted by facts. The Bible warns against any kind of idolatry whether of form or of letter. He who would venture to trespass into the mystery of the origin of the Bible should take counsel from the priests of paganism and avoid their errors. No sadder accusation could be brought against those who love the Bible than to charge them with being pedlers of paganism. For the Bible did not come to earth as the idols of paganism were said to have come, nor did the Bible originate as the [3] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE books of this new-born paganism were declared to have originated. The Bible was not written in heaven and carried to earth by angels. No, the Bible was born on earth through the experiences of men. All efforts to express the sense of mystery asso¬ ciated with the birth of the Bible are attended with difficulty. In the past the words used in explanation have been so cumbrous, the language so unfamiliar, that the great multitude fled away or were bewildered. Truth must ever be adapted to the needs of the living. Difficult as is the effort to put the truth about the Bible into simple lan¬ guage, it is nevertheless imperative. What is the Bible? As a physical fact, the Bible is a Book of books. As a spiritual fact, the Bible is a record of Divine Experience. It bears witness to a vital relationship between God and man. The word “ Divine ” is used because it is the most beautiful and tender word in our lan¬ guage descriptive of God. To what heights are we lifted when we sing, Love divine, all love excelling, Joy of heaven, to earth come down. The word “ Experience ” is used because all that is in the Bible has come through the human order. There is not a word or a thought in the Book WHAT IS THE BIBLE? that has not been born in the soul of a man. Whatever of Divinity there is in the Bible is a Divinity that has been expressed through hu¬ manity. The Bible is the wrought-out experiences of human souls in contact with the Divine. It is a record of Divine Experience. The Bible is of value to the human just in the proportion and only in the proportion that the human can repro¬ duce the recorded experiences in terms of life. Hence this quality of life is eternal and, therefore, authoritative. Jesus “ spake with authority and not as the scribes.” In the synagogue of Naza¬ reth he could say with truth, “ This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears.” To Jesus, there¬ fore, the Bible was a Book of Life. It should be no less to us. II HOW DO WE KNOW THE BIBLE IS THE WORD OF GOD? To the question, “ How do we know the Bible is the word of God?” there is a confusion of answers. Ask a Roman Catholic, and he has an answer at hand. Ask a Protestant, and he has no answer or an uncertain answer. The Roman Catholic says, “ I know the Bible is the Word of God because the Church says so.” Ask him how he knows the Church knows, and he says the Pope says so. Ask him how he knows the Pope knows, and he says the Bible says so. This is what is known as reasoning in a circle. You start out to prove a thing and circle round by making the thing prove itself. How fares the Protestant? The average Prot¬ estant has no answer. If an answer is supplied him, it may be either the church, or the reason, or the Holy Spirit, or all three combined. Either form of the answer leaves the soul far from being satisfied. Can we not find some simpler way of arriving at assurance? Duty demands the adventure. How do we [6] HOW KNOW THE WORD OF GOD? know the sun shines or the wind blows ? Do we need to have some one tap us on the shoulder and say, “ The sun is shining,” “ The wind is blowing ” ? Can we be assured of these things only on the authority of some one else? Assur¬ edly not ! We know the sun shines and the wind blows because God made us to respond to the light of the sun and the touch of the wind. We know the Bible is the word of God because God made us to respond to truth. When the Bible says, “ God is our refuge and strength,” we need no external authority to assure us of its truth. Only that which proves itself to be true in human ex¬ perience, or which may be so proved, can claim any real authority over man. The only authority that can be permanently binding, is the authority of a fact. “ The Birth of the Bible ” deals with facts, not with theories. Theories are trouble-breeders. The world is already overburdened with theories about the Bible. The deep need of the present is a knowledge of the facts in relation to the Book. Only as we know the facts accurately can we build our faith confidently. A faith built upon the rock of Bible fact is as secure as the house of which Jesus said, “ It fell not.” That such a faith in the Bible may be realized is the purpose of this book. [?] Ill HISTORIC SUCCESSION OF FACTS The first fact about the Bible to be recognized is that the term “ The Bible ” is not the original “ trade-mark ” of the Book. The term “ The Bible ” is of comparatively recent origin. This may cause surprise. The facts, however, are at hand. Neither Jesus nor his apostles used the term. Some time in the second century after Christ, certain writers began to use the word “ Biblia ” to describe the Sacred Books. The use grew in favor. By the thirteenth century, some men forgot that Biblia was a neuter plural, meaning “ The Books,” and treated it as a feminine singu¬ lar, “ The Book.” What, therefore, had been “ The Books ” became “ The Book ” or “ The Bible.” John Wyclif’s translation of the Scriptures bore the title “ The Holy Bible.” Later the word “ Holy ” yielded its descriptive supremacy to the definite article “ The,” and “ The Holy Bible ” became simply “ The Bible.” Thus custom com¬ pressed a collection of books into a single book. [8] HISTORIC SUCCESSION OF FACTS The modern world has so approved of this mod¬ ern title “ The Bible ” that the term is clothed with a halo of antiquity. By the magic power of universal use this modern title “ The Bible ” has been made to appear ancient. In like manner the terms Old Testament and New Testament were not used by Jesus and the apostles. The apostles probably never thought of a new body of sacred writings set over against the old. Not until about A. D. 170 do we find some of the Gospels and letters gathered together into a unit and recognized as of equal sacredness with the sacred writings of the past. The list was not definitely fixed. There was much difference of opinion over the Canon of the New Testament until the end of the fourth century. From that time a certain list of books was generally accepted. Nor was the term which was to designate the two collections of sacred writings, agreed upon at once. The struggle centered finally between “ Covenant ” and “ Testament.” From the Coun¬ cil of Laodicea, A. D. 320, to the present, the general verdict has been in favor of “ Testa¬ ment.” The one collection of sacred writings was called the Old Testament ; the other, the New Testament. Tertullian is held responsible for starting the movement that led to this end. This lawyer-theologian spoke of the “ Gospel ” as the [9] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE instrument, i. e., document. In translating the Greek word dtadrjxrj, “ covenant/’ by the Latin word testamentum, “ testament,” he gave a wrong meaning to the old Hebrew idea which expressed the relation between God and his people. A term of jurisprudence took the place of an ideal of fellowship. In course of time the word Testa¬ ment was substituted for the word instrument, and the original idea was lost. Other events marking changes in the Bible’s history are as follows : Hebrew vowel-points first introduced, sixth to tenth cen¬ tury A. D. Chapters first introduced in Vulgate, 1228, Stephen Lang- ton. Verses first introduced in Hebrew, 1240, Hugh De St. Cher. Verses first introduced in Greek New Testament, 1551, Robert Stephen. Vulgate first printed, 1455, “ Mazarin Bible.” Hebrew Old Testament first printed, 1488. Greek New Testament first printed, 1516, Erasmus. Luther’s New Testament first printed, September, 1522. English New Testament first printed, 1525, Tyndale. Luther’s Bible first printed, 1534. English Bible complete first printed, 1535, Coverdale. Licensed by king. Chapter headings introduced. Apocrypha first printed in English. Placed between Old Testament and New Testament. Prayer of Manasseh omitted. Called “Treacle Bible” from Jeremiah 8 : 22, “treacle” for “balm.” [IO] HISTORIC SUCCESSION OF FACTS Matthew’s Bible (authorized), 1537. Prayer of Manasseh included. Great Bible (authorized), 1539. Pages 13*4 in. by 7j£ in. Edition, 1539, called Cromwell’s Bible. Edition, 1540, called Cranmer’s Bible. Title “ Hagio- grapha ” substituted for “ Apocrypha.” Geneva Bible, 1560. Verses first introduced into English. Roman type first used. Words not in original put in italics. Apocrypha printed separately. Prayer of Manasseh put between 2 Chronicles and Ezra. Called “ Breeches Bible ” from Genesis 3 : 9, “ breeches ” for “ aprons.” Bishop’s Bible, 1568. Map of Palestine first introduced. Also called “Treacle Bible.” Roman Catholics closed Canon, 1545, Trent. Greek Catholics closed Canon, 1672, Jerusalem. First Roman Catholic Bible in English, 1582 to 1609, Rheims-Douay. Bishop Lloyd’s Bible, 1701. First use of Archbishop Usher’s chronological dates. King James Bible, 1611. “Great He Bible,” “Great She Bible,” 1611: One translated Ruth 3:15“ He,” the other “ She.” Editions from 1611-1629 contained the Apocrypha. Editions, 1631, 1716. Two mistakes: (1631) Omitted “not” from the Seventh Command¬ ment. King’s printers fined £300. (1716) Translated “vineyard” “vinegar,” Matthew 21 : 28, and so called the “ Vinegar Bible.” English Revised Version, 1881-1885. American Standard Revised Version, 1901. Westminster Version of Sacred Scriptures, 1913 (Roman Catholic). (Not completed.) [n] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE A review of these facts will show how much of that which we find associated with the Bible is really modern. Time and change of ideas bring changes in the Book. Some of these things mentioned are passing away before our eyes. The chronological dates are disappearing from the Bibles of our day. Paragraphs are receiving an emphasis. Multiplied helps are being added in the way of references, concordances, maps, out¬ lines, and various other illuminating matter. IV WHEN, WHERE, AND HOW WAS THE BIBLE BORN? The Bible may be pictured in two ways. With the Chart before us. we may conceive of the Bible as two great arms of love reaching out to gather the human family into the fellowship of the love of God. The two arms would be the two arms of the Old Testament and the New Testa¬ ment stretching out from Ezra and Jesus Christ. Then again, the Bible may be conceived as a great river channel into which the two streams of Divine experience converged as they flowed through the centuries carrying the inspiration of the love of God to a world in need. We shall use the idea of a river channel in our descriptions and picture the two streams in the Chart coming from Ezra and Tesus Christ until they meet in the English and American Revisions. Turning now to the Chart ( black).1 the name of Ezra. 444 B. C.. appears. This date. 444 B. C., is an important one in Bible history. Then it was 1 The colors — black, yellow, purple, blue, red — refer to portions of the Chart. Note these carefully. [13] c THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE that Ezra, the scribe, gathered together the sacred writings of the Hebrews. All those separate streams of Divine experience which had been forming during two thousand years of history and over a thousand square miles of territory, Ezra united into a single stream. For the first time in Hebrew history, so far as we know, the sacred books of Israel then in existence began to be collected in the form in which they have come to us. These comprised what is known as the Books of the Law. At a later date the Prophets were added and at a still later date the Hagio- grapha, or Holy Writings. Thus some time between Ezra, 444 B. C., and the coming of Christ the books of the Old Testa¬ ment were fixed, the Canon closed, and the He¬ brew Bible completed. That is, it was practically closed. As a matter of fact, it was not officially closed until the Council of Jamnia, A. D. 90. And even after that to the Second Century after Christ some books were questioned. The term canon originally meant a reed or measuring-rod, hence a standard. Amphilochius (A. D. 330) was the first to apply the term to the Scriptures. Jerome followed. Books found worthy to be honored as Scripture were called canonical and the collection of such books, the Canon. Thus we have the Canon of the Old Tes- HOW WAS THE BIBLE BORN? tament, the Canon of the New Testament, and the Canon of the Bible. Opposite to the name of Ezra on the Chart stands the name of Jesus Christ. From him arose the other stream of Divine experience (red). It gathered in a few years of history and, with the exception of Paul, over a few square miles of territory. So far as we know, Jesus never wrote any¬ thing except on one occasion ; then he wrote upon the sand, and the writing was soon obliterated. Nor did Jesus’ disciples make record of what he said or did as a modern reporter or historian would do. When Jesus died, there had been no provision made for the preservation of his teach¬ ings and works in book form. For a period of from twelve to twenty years after the crucifixion, what Jesus had said and what he had done were passed down by word of mouth. All that future generations were to know of the life of Jesus, they were to receive through oral tradition. For many years the fate of Jesus rested upon the accuracy of human memory and the integrity of human reports. Oral tradition for from twelve to twenty years was to bridge the gulf between Jesus’ life and the zvritten records of his life. As the years passed, and the disciples began to [IS] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE grow older, fragments of the life of Jesus were jotted down. Papias speaks of the “ Logia of Matthew.” This was not the Gospel of Matthew as we have it today, but a much briefer work. Next in order came the written records, the Gos¬ pels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. At the beginning of his Gospel, Luke gives a good idea of the situation : Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning those matters which have been ful¬ filled among us, even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all things accurately from the first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty concerning the things wherein thou wast instructed (Luke 1 : 1-4). Prior to the writing of the Gospels came some of the letters of Paul and others. Thus after oral tradition came the letters, as Paul shows in 2 Thessalonians 2 : 15: “So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.” The order, therefore, would seem to be: Oral Tradition, Letters, Memoirs, Gospels. When men began to commit the traditions of the life of Jesus to writing, many took up the work. Harnack has a list of twenty such writings of which we have some information. A great [16] HOW WAS THE BIBLE BORN? body of literature came into existence. Out of these writings, some time between the death of Christ and A. D. 397, the books we now know as the New Testament were agreed upon, the Canon was closed, and the New Testament was com¬ pleted. That is, the Canon was practically closed. Strictly speaking, the New Testament Canon was never closed by a council representing the whole Church. The Third Council of Carthage, A. D. 397, was only a synod. Many books were dis¬ puted after that date, and some are in question to this day. The Council of Trent, A. D. 1545, closed the Canon for Roman Catholics, and the Council of Jerusalem, A. D. 1672, for Greek Catholics. For the Protestants, there is no officially closed Canon. How was this work accomplished? Who de¬ termined what books should go to form the Bible? By what method was the Bible completed? Speaking generally, the books of the Bible secured recognition by commending themselves, by prov¬ ing their worth in the experiences of the churches. Out of a diversity of views there merged a unity or general consensus among the churches. The books approved by use in the churches were then approved by the judgment of the scholars. [17] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE Taking the Old Testament first, these are the facts. Ezra and those who followed him, took that great mass of literature which presented itself as sacred and submitted it to critical inves¬ tigation and judgment. Of that literature we now know : 1. That some books were rejected as unworthy, e. g., Fourth (Second) Esdras, which never ap¬ peared in any list of the Septuagint. 2. That some books had been lost, e. g., The Book of the Law of God (Josh. 24 : 26), The Book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21 : 14), The Books of Nathan the Prophet and Gad the Seer (1 Chron. 29 : 29), The Prophecy of Ahi- jah, The Visions of Iddo (2 Chron. 9 : 29), The Book of Jehu (2 Chron. 20 : 34). 3. That some books were controverted, ac¬ cepted by one party and rejected by another, e. g., the Apocryphal Books — Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, First and Second Macca¬ bees. 4. That some books were accepted by all par¬ ties, namely, the books of the present Hebrew Bible (black). By a similar process, the books of the New Testament were formed into a unity. Existing separately or in groups, the books were finally brought together by the test of use in the churches HOW WAS THE BIBLE BORN? and by the judgment of Christian scholars. As with the literature of the Hebrew Church so with that of the Christian Church. 1. Some books were rejected, e. g., all of the Apocryphal books. 2. Some books were lost, e. g., Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, (i Cor. 5:9.) 3. Some books were accepted after much hesi¬ tation, e. g., Hebrews, Second Peter, Second and Third John, Jude, Revelation. 4. Some books were accepted by all. These, with those questioned for a time, were ultimately formed into the New Testament (red). To recapitulate, taking the birth of Christ as a view-point and looking back four hundred years, we see the birth of the Old Testament; looking forward four hundred years, we witness the birth of the New Testament. With these facts about the Canon before us, a question of importance arises? Supposing that we should find one of the lost books of the Bible, what would we do with it? Would we put it in the Bible if it proved of worth? This is impor¬ tant to consider, for it is not improbable, with the opening up of the great Eastern world as a result of the Great World War, that we may find many manuscripts of great value. The Sinaitic Manu¬ script, one of the two oldest Greek manuscripts of [19] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE the New Testament in the world, was not found until 1859. And the Nile Valley yielded up in 1896-97 and 1904 “ The Sayings of Jesus.” Again, the books of Daniel and Revelation are being accorded a position of preeminent honor and authority by many today. This must appear strange in the light of the facts. The book of Revelation was one of the last to be received into the Canon of the New Testament. For long years it failed to win the favor of large sections of the Church. Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen, Amphilochius of Iconium, and the Council of Laodicea in 363 all rejected the book. Eusebius wavered. That branch of the Syrian Church which holds to the Peshito rejects the book of Revelation to this day. Among the Reformers, Luther and Zwingli regarded the book as of little worth. Calvin did not comment upon it. In like manner, the book of Daniel was one of the last books added to the Canon of the Old Tes¬ tament. It was not written until about the middle of the second century B. C. The Hebrew did not place the book of Daniel among the prophets in his canon of Scripture, but among the Writings or Hagiographa. That the books of Daniel and Revelation should now be exalted to pinnacles of honor and made to appear as the keys by which the doors of [20] HOW WAS THE BIBLE BORN? Divine Revelation are permitted to swing open, is, to say the least, an ignoring of the facts of history. In addition to this false position assigned to the book of Revelation as a whole, there is to be noted a false use of some of its parts. The anathema in Revelation 22 : 18, 19, about “ add¬ ing to ” or “ taking away from the words of the book ” and “ God adding plagues ” or “ taking away participation in the Book of Life and the Holy City,” is often used as though it had refer¬ ence to the Bible as a whole. In view of the facts as to the book of Revela¬ tion, that it was a late addition to the Bible and is even now not regarded as a part of the Bible by that branch of the Syrian Church which uses the Peshito, the falsity of this use of that anathema is apparent. The curse pronounced on those who “ add to or take away ” has no reference to the Bible as a whole, but only to that particular book to which the curse is attached, i. e., the book of Revelation. Any other application of the anath¬ ema can only be a perversion of the purpose of the author as well as of the Scripture. The placing of an anathema at the end of a work was a common custom in those days. A proper regard for the facts of the Bible will save us from many a pitfall in the use of THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE the Bible. Take Paul’s counsel to Timothy: “ All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine,” etc. (2 Tim. 3 : 16, 1 7). To what Scripture was Paul re¬ ferring? To the only Scriptures that were recognized in his day, to the Scriptures contained in the Old Testament. The present books of the New Testament did not begin to be set up along¬ side those of the Old Testament for one hundred years after Paul’s day, nor was the New Testa¬ ment Canon completed until more than three hun¬ dred years after Paul wrote these words to Tim¬ othy. And yet how many quote these words as though they referred to the Bible as a whole? Only as we know the facts about the Bible can we deal fairly with the Bible. We honor the Book when we honor the facts about the Book. [22] V HOW CAME THE GREEK CIVILIZATION TO SPLIT THE OLD TESTAMENT INTO TWO STREAMS? Go back to Ezra. Picture those streams of Divine experience coming down through two thousand years and being gathered into a single stream. As this stream moves onward, it splits into two streams. One shoots to the left and goes down through history as the pure Hebrew stream (black). The other stream shoots off to the right and moves through the centuries as the Greek-Hebrew stream (yellow).1 This is known as the Septuagint or LXX. How did this happen? Very naturally. The conquering armies of Alexander the Great stamped the Greek civilization upon the world and with it the Greek language. Persecutions and necessities drove some Jews into Alexandria in Egypt. Speaking the Greek language, they very naturally desired their Scriptures in the lan¬ guage with which they were familiar. Accord¬ ingly, some time between 277 and 132 B. C., this 1 See Chart on p. 25, and compare it with the large Chart in colors. r 23] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE great work of translation was accomplished. The Septuagint has been a very influential stream. The story runs thus : Ptolemy Philadelphus, King of Egypt, gathered for the work seventy- two scribes, six out of each of the twelve tribes of Israel. They met, labored separately for sev¬ enty-two days, and submitted their translations, when lo! the translations were discovered to be all alike. This story is fanciful, similar to one about Ezra. Of Ezra, it was related that when he collected the Scriptures, some were found to be missing, and he, from memory or by inspiration, reproduced them all. This Greek translation of the Hebrew Scrip¬ tures gave great offense to the strict Jews of Palestine. They regarded it as a sacrilege equal to the worship of the golden calf. A day of fasting and humiliation was held annually to atone for the profanation. The strict Jews of Palestine never acknowledged the authority of this Greek-Hebrew Version, the Septuagint. But the great mass of the Greek-speaking Jews in Palestine and elsewhere did. It was the Bible of Stephen and of Paul. (Acts 6 : 9; 2 Tim. 3 : 15.) Thirty-three out of thirty-seven quotations from the Old Testament in the New Testament accred¬ ited to Jesus, and three hundred out of the entire three hundred and fifty quotations from the Old [24] CANON CLOSED! A.D. TALMUDISTS 300 MASSORETES tryjV 1000 1500 24BkS. EZRA 444RC.I 1800 1900 39 8KS+AP0C. ^^^WO<277-132 B.C. H I ORDER BKS. I IqUOTED N.T. ORIOEN IO GRKS. HEXAPLA JEWS REJECT NO APOC. g-g APOCRYPHA MSS. DEST. I nlTEXT VARIES! OLDEST MS.916| 1 GRK. CHURCH D| PRINTED 1488 1 gXlMENES PI LUTHER U POLYGLOT Iwr — iKf— i Chart showing the development of the Old Testament in its two forms, Hebrew and Greek. See full Chart in colors. THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE Testament in the New Testament are from this Greek-Hebrew Bible (yellow). Jesus may have used these Greek Scriptures. Of this we are not informed. If so, it would have been outside of the opposing synagogues. The Hebrew Bible (black) would have been im¬ perative there. Aramaic was the common lan¬ guage of the Jews in Palestine. Jesus spake this tongue. Remnants of it are found in the New Testament, as for example, “ Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani ? ” A portion of Daniel is also in Aramaic. In the Second Century the Christians made such free use of the Septuagint as an authority that the Jews abandoned it for the Hebrew. From the Second Century A. D., the Hebrew stream (black) has been the source of authority for all the Jews. The Septuagint or LXX is the official text of the Greek Catholic Church, and the ancient Latin versions used in the Western Church were made from it. The earliest trans¬ lation adopted in the Latin Church, the Vetus I tala, was directly from the Septuagint. 2 When those streams of Divine experience, which had been gathered up by Ezra and others into one great stream, split into two streams, the split was sharp and destined to leave its impress 2 New Roman Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XVII, p. 722. [26] INFLUENCE OF GREEK CIVILIZATION upon the future movement of all streams. The separation between the Hebrew (black) and the Greek-Hebrew (yellow) streams is so marked and so apparently irreconcilable that no one in two thousand years has been able to bring them into harmony. First and most important of all, the source of the Hebrew text differs from the source of the Septuagint. The transcribers of the Hebrew (black) must have used a different original copy from the translators of the LXX (yellow). The chapters in Jeremiah have not the same order in Hebrew as in Greek. Origen, A. D. 185-254, the greatest scholar of his day, worked for twenty-eight years in the effort to resolve the differences. When we re¬ member that the work of copying the Scriptures had to be done by hand, what Origen did seems remarkable even in this remarkable age. His Hexapla was a reproduction of six translations of the Hebrew Bible in six parallel columns on parchment. First, he set down the Hebrew. Then he turned that Hebrew into Greek. Next he copied the Septuagint or LXX, and then set over against these three columns three other columns, each containing a translation of the Hebrew into Greek by Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion respectively. Only a few fragments [2 7] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE of this monumental work have been preserved, but its influence and example abide. Secondly, the texts of the Hebrew (black) and Greek-Hebrew (yellow) are not only different; the number and order of their books differ also. 1. The Hebrew has twenty-four books; the LXX has thirty-nine books plus the Apocrypha. In the Hebrew, Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles each represent one book. In the Septuagint, they are divided into two books each. In the Hebrew, Ezra and Nehemiah form one book as do also the Twelve Minor Prophets. In the Septuagint they are classified separately. Thus the Hebrew numbers twenty-four books; the Septuagint, thir¬ ty-nine books. Our Bibles follow the Septuagint, numbering thirty-nine books in the Old Testa¬ ment, omitting, however, the Apocrypha. 2. The order of arrangement of the books. in the Hebrew follows the steps of the growth of the Canon. The order is as follows : (1) Books of the Law — Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. (2) Prophetical Books a. Former Prophet s — Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings. b. Later Prophet s — Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel. The Twelve Minor Prophets. [28] INFLUENCE OF GREEK CIVILIZATION (3) The Writings or Hagiograph a — Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Song of Songs, Daniel, Ezra and Nehemiah, Chronicles. The Septuagint departed from the order of the Hebrew. Our Bibles follow in part the order of arrangement of the books in the Hebrew and in the Septuagint, and in part an independent order. Hebrew Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Samuel Kings Isaiah Jeremiah Ezekiel Twelve Minor Prophets Psalms Proverbs Job Song of Songs Ruth Lamentations Ecclesiastes Esther Daniel Ezra - Nehe¬ miah Chronicles Septuagint Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth I Kings II Kings III Kings IV Kings I Chronicles II Chronicles I Ezra II Ezra Psalms Proverbs Ecclesiastes Song of Songs Job Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus Esther Judith Tobit Hosea Amos Rheims-Douay Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth I Kings II Kings III Kings IV Kings I Paralipome- non II Paralipom- enon I Esdras II Esdras, alias Nehimias Tobias Judith Esther with additions ch. 10 : 4- 16 : 24 Job Psalms Proverbs Ecclesiastes Canticle of Canticles Wisdom Ecclesiasticus Isias Jeremias Revised Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth I Samuel II Samuel I Kings II Kings I Chronicles II Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther Job Psalms Proverbs Ecclesiastes Song of Solo¬ mon Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Ezekiel Daniel [29] D THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE Hebrew Septuagint Rheims-Douay Revised Micah Lamentations Joel Baruch Obadiah Ezechiel Jonah Daniel (Song of Three Holy Children, His tory of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon), ch. 3 : 24-40; 13 ; 1 to 14: Nahum 40 Osee Hosea Habukkuk Joel Joel Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Amos Amos Malachi Obadias Obadiah Isaiah Jonas Jonah Jeremiah Micheas Micah Baruch Nahum Nahum Lamentations Epistle of Habacuc Habakkuk Jeremiah Sophronias Zephaniah Ezekiel Aggeus Haggai Daniel Zacharias Zechariah Susanna Bel and the Malachias Malachi Dragon I Maccabees I Maccabees II Maccabees III Maccabees IV Maccabees Psalm of Solomon II Maccabees The Hebrew and the LXX differ also with reference to the value of the Apocrypha. The Hebrew rejected, the Septuagint accepted these books. By a strange fate this division of opinion concerning the Apocrypha has come down through the centuries dividing the Christians as it divided the Jews at the beginning. This differ¬ ence of view originated two centuries before Jesus Christ was born between the Jews of Palestine and the Jews of Alexandria in Egypt. [30] INFLUENCE OF GREEK CIVILIZATION The Apocrypha were a constituent part of the Septuagint or LXX. This Greek-Hebrew Bible was undoubtedly the Bible of Stephen and of Paul, perhaps also of Jesus. The writers of the New Testament quoted from it almost exclu¬ sively, but only one or two refer to Apocryphal books. Jude quotes from the Book of Enoch and Paul from Aratus or Epimenides in Acts 1 7 : 28; Titus 1 : 12. The oldest manuscripts, such as the Sinaitic, Vatican, Alexandrian, and Bezas, are of the Septuagint and contain the Apocrypha. The Old Syriac manuscript, Peshito, omitted the Apocry¬ pha but a later revision included them. They are also found in the Ethiopic together with books found in few other manuscripts, i. e., Enoch, Jubilees, Ascension of Isaiah. The Armenian makes no distinction between Canonical and Apocryphal books. Honor was also conferred upon the Apocrypha by eminent Church Fathers. Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria used them as well as the Book of Enoch. Clement also quoted from the Assumption of Moses, Fourth Ezra, and many other Apocryphal books unknown to us. Origen declared that some of the Apocrypha “ pertain to the demonstration of our Scriptures.” Conflicting views of inspiration separated the [31] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE Jews. Those of the stricter sort in Palestine held that inspiration ended with the Prophets. The more liberal Jews of Alexandria in Egypt re¬ garded it as continuing. Christians of the East and of the West likewise assumed varying atti¬ tudes upon the subject. The East accepted the Apocrypha but scarcely knew how to value or classify them. Finally in 1672 the Council of Jerusalem declared their full canonicity. The official Bible of the Greek Church has the Prayer of Manasseh after Chron¬ icles. Nehemiah is followed by First Esdras, Tobias, and Judith; Wisdom, and Sirach come after Canticles. Lamentations is followed by the Epistle of Jeremiah and Baruch. After Malachi come First, Second, and Third Maccabees and Fourth Ezra. But Philaret’s Longer Catechism of the Orthodox Catholic Eastern Church (1839) pronounces the Apocrypha of value only for edification. In the West two standards of judgment have prevailed, the Roman Catholic and the Protestant. The Roman Catholic adopted the Apocrypha by way of the Itala through the Vulgate. The Old Latin or Itala which Jerome revised came from the Septuagint. It omitted, however, Third and Fourth Maccabees and added Second Esdras. Jerome felt that the Apocrypha should occupy a [32] INFLUENCE OF GREEK CIVILIZATION subordinate place but included them in his re¬ vision. Notable men through the centuries fol¬ lowing held this view, as Hugo St. Victor (d. 1140) and Nicolaus of Tyra (d. 1340). Car¬ dinal Ximenes ( 1437-1517) would have kept them outside the Canon. The Council of Trent (1545) pronounced in favor of the Apocrypha and set up the Vulgate as one standard of au¬ thority. Modern Catholics accuse the Jews of shortening the Septuagint in the Hebrew to an¬ tagonize Christianity. The Canon of the LXX is held by them to be the original one. Sixtus Senensis in his Bibliotheca Sancta clas¬ sifies the following books as being of value only for edification: Esther, Tobias, Judith, Baruch, Epistle of Jeremiah, Wisdom, Sirach, additions to Daniel, First and Second Maccabees in the Old Testament, and Mark 16 : 9-20, Luke 22 : 43, 44, John 7 : 53 to 8 : 11, Hebrews, James, Sec¬ ond Peter, Second and Third John, Jude, and Revelation. These books he declares to be late in their origin, to have been regarded by the Fathers Athanasius and Rufinus as Apoc¬ ryphal and not Canonical, then at last exalted as Scripture of irrefragable authority. Protestant opinion was incarnated by Luther. He subordinated the Apocrypha to a standard below Scripture and placed them between the Old [33] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE Testament and New Testament. The French Bible of Calvin followed the same course but added First and Second Esdras. Coverdale (1536) and Matthew’s Bible (1537) held to Luther’s ideal. Cranmer’s Bible (1540) termed the Apocrypha the Hagiographa, but in the edi¬ tion of 1541 the Apocrypha were classified as the fourth part of the Bible. The Authorized Ver¬ sion ( 161 1-1629) retained Luther’s order, but the edition of 1629 omitted the Apocrypha. In 1648 the Westminster Confession of Faith pronounced the Apocrypha to be no part of Scripture. The British and Foreign Bible Society (1827) for¬ bade the publication of the Apocrypha in any of their Bibles. The Lutheran, Anglican, and Prot¬ estant Episcopal churches have uniformly used these books in their services for edification. The Protestant Episcopal Church has recently per¬ mitted their use in services on the Lord’s Day. Empires as well as churches have been affected by this dispute over the Apocrypha. In 1902, Edward VII was crowned King of England. The British and Foreign Bible Society planned to publish a special copy of the Bible for the King on taking his coronation oath. Investigation re¬ vealed the fact that the Apocrypha made the plan impossible. The laws of England demanded that the King take his oath upon a complete Bible, [34] INFLUENCE OF GREEK CIVILIZATION i. e., a Bible containing the Apocrypha. The con¬ stitution of the British and Foreign Bible Society forbade the publication of a Bible with the Apoc¬ rypha. The Society, therefore, presented the King a copy of the Scriptures while the King took his oath upon a Bible which included the Apocrypha. In all this we see the survival in the present of laws enacted when England was Catholic. How few people know what the Apocrypha are. Many of the leading people in our Protestant churches have never heard of them. The great masses go on unconscious of their existence. Should the name be mentioned, they ask in won¬ derment, what are the Apocrypha? They are surprised to learn that the Apocrypha are in part the series of books printed and bound between the Old Testament and the New Testament in many of the large Bibles found on our pulpits. These books are sometimes called non-canonical or deu- tero-canonical. They are not printed in the smaller Protestant Bibles or in any of the Cal- vinistic. All Roman Catholic and Greek Catholic Bibles contain them. [35] VI DOMINANCE OF THE LATIN CIVILIZA- TION OVER THE STREAMS OF DIVINE EXPERIENCE Two great streams of Divine experience came from Ezra and Jesus Christ. How were they united? After Ezra, the Hebrew stream split into two streams, the Hebrew (black) and the Greek- Hebrew (yellow). For a time these two streams flowed parallel to one another and to that one (red) coming from Jesus Christ. In the second century after Christ these three streams had met in the Peshito (Syriac), Old Latin, and Egyptian versions. Their influence, however, was not destined to be far-reaching. Quite different was the union effected in A. D. 4°5 by Jerome. He produced one mighty stream out of the three streams (black, yellow, red).1 Jerome’s Vulgate affected the whole of Western civilization. So dominant was this Latin stream that it held apart the two original streams for a thousand years. Not in a thousand years, from the days of Jerome to the days of William Tyn- 1 See Chart on p. 3 7, and compare with Chart in colors. [36] (Peshito) and Egyptian languages. Compare with full Chart in colors. w n rt> 3* M-, aj O >1 M- ct 3* s: § y 5 h-*« so a cr orq 2 ^ 3 3* M- ^ £ 3 O 3 > § rr C+ 3* 3 CD o> O H p O • H p M 3 g O. CL H 3 p H Cl ’ t— » • O* 3 <5 M- 3 n § ET M . f+ M # rt> a < »-» • —T1 3 H* rt p r-t* CD CD 2S Cl cr. P 3 • Si* p* in *< *i p’ o THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE dale, did the Hebrew and Greek of the Old Tes¬ tament and the Greek of the New Testament meet and mingle in a vital way. The Latin Vulgate (purple) grew out of the Itala or Old Latin. The texts of these Latin Bibles1 of the second century had become corrupt, full of errors. The need of a new, a corrected Bible was keenly felt. The one man qualified for such a work seemed to be Jerome, but Jerome hesitated to assume the responsibility. He knew the prejudices of humanity and felt that he would be cursed for his pains by those who, he said, “ thought ignorance, was holiness.” Urged by Pope Damasus, however, Jerome undertook the task. He began his work in Rome and completed it in the cell of a monastery at Bethlehem. Jerome’s first thought was simply to revise the Itala, the popular Latin Bible. He soon discov¬ ered the necessity of going back to the original sources. With the aid of Greek versions, collec¬ tions from Origen and the original text, Jerome brought out his revised New Testament. For the Old Testament he first turned to the Sep- tuagint (yellow). The difficulties encountered caused him to abandon this source for the He¬ brew (black). In his labors, Jerome had the assistance of Origen’s Hexapla. Origen had toiled for twenty-eight years, and now Jerome [38] DOMINANCE OF THE LATIN CIVILIZATION was to work for fourteen years in the effort to arrive at the true text of the Old Testament. The Vulgate was completed in 405. It met with bitter opposition from conservative Chris¬ tians as did the Septuagint previously from con¬ servative Jews. Jerome had made a radical break with the past. The Itala, the popular Bible of the day, had been translated from the Septuagint. Jerome had forsaken this for the Hebrew. In translating, he had dared to change familiar pas¬ sages. This angered the people. They accused him “ of tampering with our Lord’s own words and of denying the inspiration of the Scriptures.” Churches rebelled. When a bishop in North Africa read from the Vulgate the story of Jonah and used the word hedera instead of cucurbita to translate “ gourd,” nearly all the people left the church. Right or wrong, conservatism in¬ sisted on hearing the old word cucurbita. Jerome was equally determined. He would make no concessions to those whom he called “ two-legged asses.” He died without seeing the triumph of his work. For one hundred and fifty years the Vulgate struggled against opposition. Finally, in the sixth century, it won the favor of Pope Gregory the Great and scholars generally. Then for one thousand years, it was lifted into the position of honor. The Council [39] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE of Trent (1546) declared the Latin Vulgate to be “ authentic,” one standard of authority for the Roman Catholic Church, and pronounced an anathema on all who did not accept the “ canon ” together with the additions to Esther and Daniel. In the struggle between the Itala and the Vul¬ gate, the texts were often interchanged by those copying. This, together with other corruptions, made a revision of the Vulgate necessary. Scholars took up the work through the centuries, Alcuin in the eighth, Cardinal Hugo in the thir¬ teenth, and Cardinal Ximenes in the sixteenth century. Cardinal Hugo was not content simply to restore the text of Jerome. He went back to the Greek and Hebrew originals. This was be¬ fore the Council of Trent had made the text of Jerome authoritative. Cardinal Ximenes in the Complutensian Polyglot (1522) laid the founda¬ tion for all scholarly efforts in the future. Like Origen previously, he placed the various texts in parallel columns — Hebrew, Chaldee Paraphrase, Greek or Septuagint, Latin Vulgate, and Greek New Testament. The Council of Trent (1546) made a definite effort to limit the texts in circulation to one. The Latin Vulgate was declared to be the “ authentic ” text for all “ public lectures, disputations, ser- [40] DOMINANCE OF THE LATIN CIVILIZATION mons, and homilies ” in the Roman Catholic Church. “No verbal inspiration or infallible accuracy was claimed for it.” The Council also ordered that the text of the Vulgate be freed from errors. Dr. Hugh Pope, a Roman Cath¬ olic, says, “ They seem to have thought that it could be done during the Session of the Council ! ” Within a year, John Hentenius, a Dominican of Louvain, produced what is known as the Lou¬ vain Bible, 1547. After that the work dragged on for forty years. Then Pope Sixtus V, 1586, brought the issue to a climax by appointing a commission and seeing that it produced results. When the Commission had completed its work, Sixtus revised their findings by the aid of the original Greek and Hebrew and in 1590 issued the revised Vulgate. He declared in an encyclical that the Sixtine edition of the Vulgate was to be regarded as “ true, lawful, authentic, and authori¬ tative in all public and private disputations, read¬ ing, preaching, and explanation.” He also for¬ bade any one to change the text under penalty of anathema. Unfortunately for the Pope, the edition con¬ tained many errors. Before the errors could be corrected, Sixtus V died, as did also his successor, Urban VII. A new commission was appointed by Gregory XIV in 1591. Bellarmine proposed to [41] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE the Pope that the new edition be gotten out “ as soon as possible,” “ reprinted under Sixtus’s name,” and that the errors of the previous edition be blamed on “ the printers or others.” The work was completed in nineteen days. Before the new edition could be issued, Gregory XIV died. His successor, Innocent IX, followed in death the same year. Then came Clement VIII, and within seven months the Clementine Vulgate was issued (1592) under the name of Sixtus V. This edition of Clement was not more for¬ tunate than that of Sixtus in the matter of escap¬ ing errors.2 Some of these were corrected in the editions of 1593 and 1598. “ No official Roman edition of the Vulgate has been published since 1598.” For nearly one hundred years the name of Sixtus V was printed on the title-page of the Clementine Vulgate. Not until 1675 was the name of Clement substituted. The Bull of Sixtus V was suppressed in 1593, but the Bull of Clem¬ ent VIII, anathematizing any who should change the text of the Clementine Vulgate in the least particle, is still in force. Non-Catholics are apt to misunderstand these anathemas of Sixtus V and Clement VIII. To 2 One of the many misprints of the original Clementine Vulgate and which failed to be corrected in the two subsequent editions was that of Genesis 35 : 8. By a substitution of the word super for subter Rebecca’s nurse was said to have been buried “ on top of ” an oak instead of “ under ” it. [42] DOMINANCE OF THE LATIN CIVILIZATION Non-Catholics the language seems to be binding, inflexible, permanently restrictive. The Romanist eludes the dilemma. He says : It is often remarked that Clement VIII, who published his revised edition in 1592, disregarded this Encyclical (Aiternus Ille). Yet to every Catholic it should be perfectly plain that Sixtus prohibited only unauthorized persons from making changes in the edition he was publishing; he could never have meant that no successor of his in the See of Peter was to make changes in the text. 3 In view of the fact that Sixtus V was a man of high intelligence, “ a great and most learned Pontiff ” as this Catholic confesses, Non-Catho¬ lics will be disposed to give Sixtus V the credit of being able to say what he meant to say in the anathema even though the Catholic should assume that Sixtus “ could never have meant to say ” what he did say. That Sixtus V said what he meant to say is evidenced further in that he went beyond the Council of Trent and ordained that the Sixtine Vulgate be authentic and authoritative not only in “ all public ” but also in “ all public and private disputation, reading, preaching, explanation.” Then too, as the text of the edition of Clement differs from that of Sixtus in “ no less than 2,134 places,” the Non-Catholic will wonder why the 3 Rev. Hugh Pope, O. P., " Eccl. Review,” October, 1911, p. 440. [43] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE name of Sixtus was placed on the Clementine Vulgate for more than fourscore years. Not until 1675 did the name of Clement alone get on the title-page of the Vulgate issued by him in 1592. The Non-Catholic also will wonder why Vallarsi in 1734, nearly one hundred and fifty years after the Clementine edition was issued, and nearly sixty years after Clement’s name was put on the Vulgate, should feel compelled to bring out a corrected edition of the Vulgate, not as the Bible but as one of the works of Jerome. Was he deterred by the “ anathema ” or by the taboo “ unauthorized ”? The regular form of title on a modern Vulgate Bible reads, Biblia Sacra Vul¬ gates Editionis Sixti V. Pont. max. jussu recog - nita et Clementis VIII auctoritate edita. Again, to the Non-Catholic, it must seem pass¬ ing strange that for more than three centuries and a half the Catholic should have been held under the domination of a Bible that was “ hastily ” in¬ troduced, and known to be marred by many errors. Nor does there seem to be a movement in the Roman Church to secure a perfect Bible by resort to the original manuscripts. The sole effort for centuries has been and is now to attain the ideal of the Council of Trent (1546), “ which aimed not at a correction of St. Jerome’s work but at a restoration of the current Bibles to the state in [44] DOMINANCE OF THE LATIN CIVILIZATION which they left St. Jerome’s hands.” When Val- verde presented to Pope Clement VIII a list of at least two hundred places in which the proposed Vulgate differed from the Hebrew or Greek originals, Clement, after taking advice on the matter, imposed per¬ petual silence on him. 4 Pope Pius X, in May, 1907, committed to the Benedictine Order “the restoration of the primi¬ tive text of St. Jerome’s own version, which in the course of centuries has become considerably corrupted.” The head of this Commission, the Abbot Gasquet, writing of the great work sub¬ mitted to Catholic scholarship, said : 6 Its end is not to produce a Latin Bible to be pro¬ posed as an official text for the approbation of the Church, but to take merely a preliminary step towards that official version. Supposing it were possible to “ achieve the end ” sought, a text of the Vulgate as it left the hands of Jerome, what would be the situation? Fortunately a Catholic answer is at hand. The Catholic Encyclopedia says : [Jerome] is open to reproach for not having sufficiently appreciated the Septuagint. This latter version was made from a much older and at times much purer Hebrew text than the one in use at the end of the fourth century. Hence * Rev. Hugh Pope, O. P., Eccl. Review, October, 1911, p. 446. 6 Catholic Encyclopedia, Art. Vulgate. THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE the necessity of taking the Septuagint into consideration in any attempt to restore the text of the Old Testament. The situation seems to be this. The text of the present Latin Vulgate is corrupt. Jerome’s text is sought. If Jerome’s text were found, it would be “ open to reproach,” imperfect so far as the Old Testament is concerned. And since Jerome worked for fourteen years and Origen for twenty-eight years in the effort to discover the true text of the Old Testament, the solution of the difficulty is so far removed that the Roman Church probably thinks it best to cut the Gordian knot, accept the Vulgate, and ordain that it be “ authoritative ” for the present even though it be not “ authoritative.” And the situation is further complicated in that Jerome is not always in agreement with his Vul¬ gate. The Rev. Walter S. Drum, S. J., says, “ We admit . . . that St. Jerome in his New Testa¬ ment Commentaries does not always follow and at times rejects our present Vulgate readings.” 6 The Catholic claim that “ God guarantees against any substantial error in transmission ” requires proof. The Biblical Commission 7 appointed by Pope Leo XIII has a wider scope, viz. : a Eccl. Rev., October, 1918, p. 431. 7 Cath. Encycl., p. 557, John Corbett, S. J. [46] DOMINANCE OF THE LATIN CIVILIZATION 1. To protect and defend the integrity of the Catholic faith in Biblical matters. 2. To further the progress of exposition of the Sacred Books, taking account of all recent discoveries. 3. To decide controversies on grave questions which may arise among Catholic scholars. 4. To give answers to Catholics throughout the world who may consult the commission. 5. To see that the Vatican Library is properly furnished with codices and necessary books. 6. To publish studies on Scriptures as occasion may de¬ mand. Thus far the Commission has pronounced on five points. These decisions are “ not infallible though approved by the pope.” They are “ to be obeyed and not to be questioned in public.” The five decisions are : 1. Quotations of uninspired writers in Scripture are not necessarily Scripture. 2. Historical character of Books not to be questioned where formerly held to be historical “ unless in a case where the sense of the Church is not opposed, and where, subject to her judgment, it is proved by solid arguments that the sacred writer did not intend to write history.” 3. Moses, the author of the Pentateuch. 4. The Fourth Gospel, John the author and historian. 5. Mark 16 : 9-20. It is not proved that Mark did not write these verses. The Roman Church claims to be the “ sole guardian” of the deposit of divine revelation in [47] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE its twofold aspect, oral tradition and written word. In the light of facts, the question arises in the mind of a Non-Catholic, What virtue is there in the claim? With the Bible in her hands, the Roman Church was not able to guard it against errors and corruptions. Origen made corrections and supplied omissions in the text of Scripture, indicating such changes by means of signs. Later copyists copied without the signs. Pope Damasus appealed to Jerome to save the situation. The Latin Vulgate was Jerome’s re¬ sponse. The Church failed to recognize its worth. For one hundred and fifty years manu¬ scripts were made by combining parts of the Itala and Vulgate. “ Textual corruptions, additions, and omissions crept into the primitive text.” Jerome was accused of “ tampering with our Lord’s own words and of denying the inspiration of the Scriptures.” Even in this age, he is de¬ clared to be “ open to reproach for not having sufficiently appreciated the Septuagint.” From the days of Jerome to that of Sixtus V, the Roman Church was unable to guard one single manuscript, the Vulgate, against errors and corruptions. Over the question of the cor¬ rect text, Sixtus V was at odds with the Caraffa Commission and Clement VIII took exceptions to the findings of the Toletus Commission. At [48] DOMINANCE OF THE LATIN CIVILIZATION present the Roman Church has neither the orig¬ inal text nor can she tell the true text. Val verde showed that the present Vulgate text differs from the Hebrew and Greek originals “ in at least two hundred places.” Catholics declare the Clementine Vulgate- “ inferior to the Sixtine Ver¬ sion of 1590 which it hastily superseded.” Of Sixtus V, they confess “ no doubt too he acted hastily in adopting certain changes.” If, therefore, the Roman Church as “ sole guardian ” has been unable to guard one special “ written revelation,” i. e., the. Latin Vulgate, against errors and corruptions, what evidence is there that she has been able to guard “ written revelation ” in general? And if she has failed to guard in that which is least difficult, namely the written word, how much more must she have failed in that which is most difficult, namely, the spoken word? The plain facts of the errors and corruptions; omissions and interpolations in the written tradition are strong evidence that the oral tradition has suffered distortion likewise. Truly the Non-Catholic cannot be accused of skepticism in failing to accept the Roman claim of “ sole guardian.” And her claim to be the “ sole guardian ” of the “ substance ” of rev¬ elation is a claim to conjure with, when it is re¬ membered what stupendous claims are built for [49] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE the Church on single texts of Scripture. Fur¬ thermore, not one of these texts is admitted by scholars to be the words of Jesus, and all of them are open to grave doubt. Nor can the apostle of literalism find fault, if literalism appears to be a “ house built upon the sand.” The “ sole guar¬ dian ” has fallen asleep so often at the post of duty that he has actually lost the “ password.” He cannot tell even what Jerome wrote down for him to pass on. And the literalist is so confused in his speech that confusion is made to appear the chief characteristic of the Book of Truth. Never can humanity be persuaded to believe that the God of order is the author of confusion. By this token literalism is doomed to failure. [50] YII HOW THE ENGLISH CIVILIZATION TURNED ALL STREAMS OF DIVINE EXPERIENCE INTO A NEW CHANNEL i The overshowing influence of the Latin civili¬ zation stamped itself upon the combined Hebrew (black-yellow) and Christian (red) streams of Divine experience in the Latin Vulgate (purple). The Greek civilization had stamped itself pre¬ viously upon the Hebrew stream in the Septua- gint or LXX. For a thousand years the Latin stream dominated Western Europe, holding the two great original streams apart. Not until the days of William Tyndale did the original streams meet and mingle in a vital way as in the days of Jerome. During this time another great civiliza¬ tion arose which was destined to color the streams of Divine experience as the Latin and Greek civ¬ ilizations had done. That civilization was the English (blue). 1 As early as A. D. 700, Caedmon, an unedu- 1 See full Chart (blue) and Chart on p. 95. [51] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE cated cowherd, turned into poetic form the Scrip¬ tures which were read to him. A part of the Bible was given to the people in their own tongue by the venerable Bede (800) and King Alfred the Great (900). Not until the time of John Wyclif (1382) was the Bible put into English in a way to affect the life of the nation. Wyclif turned the Latin Vulgate into plain, vigorous, homely English for the plain people. Many of the best-known phrases in our present Bible orig¬ inated with him, e. g., “ the beame and the mote/’ “ strait is the gate and narewe is the waye.” Although Wyclif was a recognized scholar of his day, Master of Baliol College, Oxford, he could read neither Hebrew nor Greek. He trans¬ lated the Bible from the Latin. The original sources, Greek and Hebrew, were not consulted. All the errors and corruptions in the Vulgate were necessarily passed over into the English. Much of the ecclesiastical language was retained, as “ penance ” for “repentance,” and “ priest ” for “ elder.” In spite of these defects, his work was creative. He gave the English people the Bible for the first time in their tongue and with Chaucer helped to mold the English language. Wyclif was sixty years of age when he com¬ pleted his work. For over a quarter of a century he had labored. Social and religious conditions [52] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION inspired him to the task. The country was de¬ pressed by reason of famine and plague. War had left its trail of sorrow. Ignorance and super¬ stition were rife. The rise of the new learning made the picture darker. The clergy, for the most part, were poorly educated. The higher prelates, rich and ambitious politically, held aloof from the “ poor parson.” Bitter hatred sepa¬ rated the secular from the regular clergy. Rival papal courts were set up at Avignon and Rome. Rival popes were hurling anathemas at one an¬ other. To the Kings of France, during the Babylonian Captivity (1309-1377), the popes were subservient. To the peoples looking up to them, they were recreant. To keep up their luxu¬ rious and shameful courts, the popes gave way to a spirit of greed and extortion. Foreign priests were thrust into English livings to secure the revenues. Taxes were levied. Pardons, dispen¬ sations, and indulgences were put up for sale. From his seat at Oxford, Wyclif sent forth his protest against the worldly priests and extortion¬ ate friars. The University was stirred. Efforts were made to suppress his work by ecclesiastical trials and papal bulls, but in vain. King Edward III protected him in his cause against papal ag¬ gression. Wyclif became the “ morning star of the Reformation,” “ the Reformer before the THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE Reformation.” By sermon and pamphlet, he spread the demand for a pure religion. By heroic zeal, he organized a company of “ poor priests ” and sent them over the country preaching the gospel. Necessity produces coalitions. Priests and friars were driven together. Prelate and king came to an understanding over the spoils of eccle¬ siastical patronage. King Henry V “knew not Joseph ” as did King Edward III. With king, primate, priest, and friar against him, Wyclif and his Lollards were driven from Oxford. With the death of religious freedom, all trace of intel¬ lectual life suddenly disappears. The century which fol¬ lowed the triumph of Courtney is the most barren in its annals. Nor was the sleep of the University broken till the advent of the New Learning restored it to some of the life and liberty which the Primate had so roughly trodden out. 2 The primary cause of the opposition to Wyclif was his rejection of the doctrine of transubstan- tiation and his denunciation of money-gathering monks and the presumptuous claims of popes. “If there were one hundred popes, and all the friars were turned into Cardinals,” said he, “ their opinion ought not to be acceded to in matters of faith except in so far as they base themselves on Scripture.” 3 2 Green, “Hist, of Eng. People,” p. 241. 3 Newman, “ Ch. Hist.,” Vol. I, p. 607. [54] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION Brought to trial time and again, he was finally condemned at Oxford in 1381. A year later twenty-four propositions of Wyclif were declared heretical. Undaunted by circumstances, the brave soul toiled on in the work of giving the Bible to the people. Nicholas Herford and John Purvey as¬ sisted him in the Old Testament. Not even the Pope could stay the work. Summoned to Rome, Wyclif replied by counseling “ that the Pope should surrender all temporal authority to the civil power and advise his clergy to do the same.” On December 30, 1384, while hearing mass in the parish church at Lutterworth, he was stricken with paralysis. The following day, the last in the old year, Wyclif “ rested from his labors.” Great souls are unconquerable. Wyclif was a great soul. Like Jerome he had been denounced for his Bible translation. Knighton wrote in melancholy wail, “ Thus the pearl of the Church is turned into the common sport of the people.” Jerome had been accused of “ tampering with our Lord’s own words and denying the inspiration of the Scriptures.” Archbishop Arundel savagely complained to the pope of that pestilent wretch, John Wyclif, the son of the old ser¬ pent, the forerunner of Antichrist, who had completed his iniquity by inventing a new translation of the Scriptures. [55] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE The desperation of ecclesiasticism is revealed in the action of the Convocation at Oxford, 1408 : We decree and ordain that no man hereafter by his own authority translate any text of Scripture into English, or any other tongue, by way of a book, pamphlet, or treatise now lately composed in the time of John Wyclif — until the said translation be approved by the ordinary of the place. The bitterness of the friars against Wyclif could not be restrained even after his death. It shocks us now to read the record of such actions. An appeal was carried to the Pope to have the body of Wyclif removed from consecrated ground and buried in a dung-hill. To the honor of the Pope the appeal was refused. But thirty years later, the Council of Constance, that Coun¬ cil which murdered John Huss, “ ordered his re¬ mains to be taken up and cast out.” Accordingly, in 1428, the shameful deed was done. Wyclif’s body was dug up and burned. The ashes were scattered on the river near the little church he served at Lutterworth. No harm was done to Wyclif or to his memory by this in¬ human act. Nor did any honor accrue to the in¬ stigators of the shame. But the scattered ashes were carried to the sea and symbolized the scat¬ tering throughout the world of those ideals for which Wyclif lived and died. John Huss of Bo¬ hemia caught up the spirit of Wyclif and bore [56] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION witness : “ I am content that my soul should be where his soul is.” The “ morning star of the Reformation ” had not shined in vain. Manuscripts of his Bible were eagerly sought by the people. A few years after his death copies of the Scriptures brought $150 to $200, and a load of hay was given for a “ few chapters of St. James or St. Paul.” Later on readers of Wyclif’s Bible were burned at the stake with copies of the Bible round their necks and his followers were “ hunted like partridges over the mountains.” Truly the ideal of Wyclif set forth as a prayer in the preface of his Bible found fulfilment : God grant us to ken and to kepe well holie writ, and to suffer joiefulli some paine for it at the laste. The next step in Bible history is preceded by influences that were destined to change human ideals. Between the day that John Wyclif turned the Bible stream from the Latin (purple) into the English (blue) and the day that William Tyn- dale opened a channel for the flow of the original streams of Divine experience (black, yellow, red) into the English, great events were to take place. Between Wyclif’s English Bible (1382) and Tyndale’s Bible (1535), the world witnessed the [57] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE birth of a new order. Old things passed away. Columbus (1492) made the world new. Coper¬ nicus (1530) conceived a new universe. Guten¬ berg (1452) opened the way to popular educa¬ tion by means of the printing-press. And the Seljukian Turks (1453), by the capture of Con¬ stantinople, drove the Greek scholars all over Europe. The effect of this last was electric. It was like the conversion of Constantine which opened .the way for Christianity to rise into power. It resembled the influence of the Greek language following in the wake of the conquering armies of Alexander the Great. The Greek scholars from the East brought with them the Greek language and the Greek literature. Men began to restudy the classics. Hebrew and Greek awoke as from a sleep. Universities were affected. Grocyn and Linacre were at Oxford. Erasmus brought the inspiration to Cambridge. Out of the rebirth of the classics came the Renais¬ sance. And out of that great intellectual awaken¬ ing arose the Protestant Reformation. Then came the birth of the Bible from the Hebrew and Greek originals. Luther and Tyndale and a suc¬ cession of noble scholars consecrated themselves to this task. For this awakened scholarship, this revival of interest in the Hebrew and the Greek, the print- [58] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION ing-press proved a splendid ally. As the presses multiplied, their products scattered. The Bible shared in the blessing. Three years after the first presses were set up (1452), the Latin Vulgate appeared for the first time in printed form (1455). Thirty-three years later (1488), the Hebrew Old Testament was issued. Luther availed him¬ self of this blessing. The Greek New Testament of Erasmus followed in 1516 and 1521. Then in 1522, there came from the press that great work of Cardinal Ximenes, the Complutensian Poly¬ glot, giving the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Chal¬ dee paraphrase in parallel columns as Origen had done previously. The Textus Receptus, the most influential Greek text of the New Testament of that day, appeared in 1624 and 1633. The times were alive, but religion was “ almost extinct.” Cardinal Bellarmine confessed that some years before the rise of the Lutheran heresy, there was almost an entire abandonment of equity in ecclesias¬ tical judgments; in morals, no discipline; in sacred litera¬ ture, no erudition ; in divine things, no reverence ; religion was almost extinct. Erasmus exclaimed, “ What man of real piety does not perceive with sighs that this is far the most corrupt of all ages? ” The times were ripe for the appearance of prophets of a new day. Their advent was at hand. [59] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE ii One hundred years after the death of Wyclif, eight years before the discovery of America, the same year that Martin Luther was born in Eisle- ben, Germany, William Tyndale was born in Glostershire, England. About the time (1516) Luther was nailing his theses to the church door at Wittenberg and burning the papal bull, Tyn¬ dale was being prepared for his mission and stirred into protest against religious evils at Ox¬ ford and Cambridge. While Luther (1522) was giving the German people the New Testament in their own tongue, Tyndale was telling the priests of England, If God spares my life, ere many years, I will cause the boy who driveth the plough to know more of the Scriptures than you do. Fired with zeal, Tyndale journeyed to London and besought Bishop Tunstal to permit him to translate the New Testament into English. The need of such a work was great. Many priests were unable to recite the Ten Commandments or to repeat the Lord’s Prayer. Tyndale felt shamed and humiliated by such a situation and wrote in appeal, If you will not let the layman have the Word of God in his mother tongue, yet let the priests have it, which for the [60] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION great part of them do understand no Latin at all, but sing and patter all day with the lips only that which the heart understandeth not. The Bishop, however, was blind to the deep need of the hour. Tyndale soon perceived not only that there was no rowme in my lorde of londons palace to translate the new testament but also that there was no place to do it in all englonde. That the Bible might be born in English, Tyn¬ dale went into exile. He accomplished his pur¬ pose. The Bible was born, but it cost Tyndale his life. *From London, he went to Hamburg in 1524 and from thence to Cologne in 1525. While here Cochleus, deacon of the Church of the Blessed Virgin at Frankfort, discovered the secret by making the printers drunk. Cochleus exposed the enterprise and roused the authorities to opposition. He also wrote letters of warning to the King of England, Cardinal Wolsey, and Bishop Fisher urging them to “ prevent the im¬ portation of the pernicious merchandise.” Discovered, Tyndale fled in haste with his printed sheets of the New Testament to Worms. Four years before (1521) in this very city, Mar¬ tin Luther had defied the Council appointed to try him. Now Tyndale, in defiance of English ecclesiasticism and inquisition, entered into the same city to complete the printing of the first F [6l ] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE New Testament in English. To escape detection, the new translation of the New Testament was sent to England concealed in cases, barrels, bales of cloth, and sacks of flour. Lee, afterward Archbishop of York, learned of the fact while traveling on the Continent and wrote to Henry VIII : I need not to advise your grace what infection may ensue hereby if it be not withstanded. All our forefathers, gover¬ nors of the Church of England, have with all diligence for¬ bid and eschewed publication of English Bibles. Ports were guarded. Hundreds of copies were seized and burned at the old Cross of St. Paul’s, as a “ burnt offering most pleasing to Almighty God.” A happy idea occurred to Tunstal, Bishop of London. He would buy up the whole edition of Tyndale and burn it. Accordingly through a merchant trading at Antwerp, he arranged the deal. The books were secured. A public burning was held at St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, En¬ gland. Cardinal Wolsey, clad in purple, was sur¬ rounded by abbots, friars and bishops. Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, preached, denouncing Luther and his heresy. Then was kindled a great fire with the books of the New Testament which Tyndale had translated into English. This was in 1526. With the money thus se- [62] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION cured Tyndale brought out corrected editions. In spite of burnings and warnings copies of the New Testament were multiplied and eagerly sought by the people. Bishop Nikke wrote de¬ spairingly to the Primate, “ It passeth my power or that of any spiritual man to hinder it now.” In 1528 Tyndale turned his attention to the Old Testament. First in Marburg, then at Ant¬ werp, he labored. In 1534-35 revised editions of the New Testament and the Old Testament as far as Jonah appeared. Chapter-headings and marginal notes were added. For the first time in Christian history, the orig¬ inal streams of Divine experience were brought together and turned into the English. In 1534 Luther had translated the entire Bible from the Greek and Hebrew into German. By so doing, he made the German language. What Luther did by means of the Bible for the German language that Tyndale did for the English. He “ fixed our standard English once for all and brought it finally into every home.” It was surely a most lucky accident for the young re¬ ligion [said Cardinal Newman] that while the English language was coming to the birth with its special attributes of nerve, sympathy, and vigor at its very first breathings, Protestantism was at hand to form it upon its own theo¬ logical Patois, and to educate it as the mouthpiece of its tradition. . . The new religion employed the new language [63] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE for its purposes, in a great undertaking, the translation of its own Bible; a work which by the purity of its diction and the strength and harmony of its style, has deservedly be¬ come the very model of good English, and the standard of the language to all future time. And Froude has said: The peculiar genius which breathes through it, the min¬ gled tenderness and majesty, the Saxon simplicity, the pre¬ ternatural grandeur, unequalled, unapproached, in the at¬ tempted improvements of modern scholars, all are here and bear the impress of the mind of one man — William Tyndale. The reward of such an achievement should have been the highest honor to the man and the encouragement of the enterprise by the most gen¬ erous assistance. Instead, we find enemies in high places plotting against him. Vaughan, the royal envoy, was instructed to persuade Tyndale to re¬ turn to England. Remembering the blush of Sigismund in the presence of John Huss, William Tyndale refused, saying, Whatever promises of safety may be made, the King would never be able to protect me from the Bishops, who believe that no faith should be kept with heretics. A clergyman by the name of Phillips finally accomplished the downfall of Tyndale. Ferret¬ ing his way into the confidence of Tyndale, he be¬ trayed him into the hands of the authorities of [64] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION Antwerp. Before doing so, the traitor borrowed forty shillings from his intended victim. Once in the clutches of the Inquisitors, Tyndale was thrust into the cold, damp dungeon of the Castle of Vilvorden. After thirteen years of faithful toil for humanity, this noble soul was kept in misery for sixteen months. His appeal to the governor for humane treatment is so pitiful as to cause wonder that any man could have turned a deaf ear. Only one whose humanity had been deadened by inhuman religious ideals could have refused. I beg your lordship and that by the Lord Jesus [wrote Tyndale], if I am to remain here during the winter, you will request the procurer to be kind enough to send me from my goods which he has in his possession a warmer cap, for I suffer extremely from a perpetual catarrh, which is much increased by this cell. A warmer coat also, for that which I have is very thin; also a piece of cloth to patch my leggins — my shirts too are worn out — also that he would suffer me to have my Hebrew Bible and Grammar and Dictionary. In that same country, Belgium, and not far from the same spot where Edith Cavell, an En¬ glish nurse, October 12, 1915, appealed in vain to a heartless Hun for mercy, William Tyndale, three hundred and seventy-nine years before, ap¬ pealed in vain to the heartless inquisitors of a heartless religion. [65! THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE On Friday, October 6, 1536, Tyndale was brought forth from his dungeon, tied to a stake, strangled to death, and his body was burned to ashes. It is recorded of the first Christian martyr, Stephen, that as the stones beat upon him, “ he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, ‘ Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.’ ” When this first martyr for an open Bible in the English tongue was being strangled to death in exile, this prayer burst from his lips, “ Lord, open the King of England’s eyes.” hi God answered that prayer of Tyndale in a larger way than Tyndale dreamed. European Christianity was now fully engaged in that great war over God and the Book. The tyranny of religious absolutism became unendurable. En¬ gland drove the hireling foreign priests from her borders and declared her independence of Rome. The torch lighted by the body of Tyndale illu¬ minated the night of ignorance and bigotry and enabled the people to read the truth of liberty in the heavens. Persecutions on the part of Papists and Protestants were in vain. Tyndale’s prophecy that the day would come when the plowboy should know more of the Scriptures than the ignorant priests was fulfilled. The protest of [66] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION Erasmus had become the protest of the common people : I utterly dissent from those who are unwilling that the Sacred Scriptures should be read by the unlearned, trans¬ lated into their vulgar tongue, as though Christ had taught such subtleties that they can scarcely be understood even by a few theologians, or as though the strength of the Christian religion consisted in men’s ignorance of it. As a result, England was literally filled with Bibles. This wide-spread enthusiasm for the translation of the Bible indicated that the interpretation of the Scriptures was to be no longer a monopoly of the priesthood. 4 One year before they strangled Tyndale and burned his body at the stake, Miles Coverdale, October 4, 1535, issued the first complete English Bible. It was taken from the Latin and German with the aid of “ five sundry interpreters.” There were no notes, chapter-headings, or division into verses, but it contained the Apocrypha as found in the Vulgate. The New Testament showed the influence of Tyndale. Within three years following the martyrdom of Tyndale, three separate versions of the Bible were issued in English. The first was Matthew’s Bible, which appeared in 1537. It was a com- 4 Nash, “ Hist, of Higher Criticism,” p. 66. [67] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE bination of the New Testament and Pentateuch by Tyndale with the remaining part of the Old Testament and Apocrypha by Coverdale. Mar¬ ginal notes were included. At the request of Archbishop Cranmer and under Crom well’s in¬ fluence, Henry VIII, granted permission for its publication and sale. Cranmer liked it “ better than any other translation heretofore made.” Thus one year after Tyndale’s execution, Mat¬ thew’s Bible was recognized by the King and be¬ came the first authorized English Bible. Within two years more, 1539, Taverner’s Bible and the Great Bible appeared. Taverner’s Bible was the work of a layman. It was little more than a re¬ vision of Matthew’s Bible, which was a combina¬ tion of Tyndale and Coverdale. The Great Bible was born at the instance of King and Bishops. Seven editions were issued without notes. It had been designed to issue it from the press in Paris. Coverdale was entrusted with the mission. Munster’s Hebrew-Latin Old Testament, the Complutensian Polyglot, and Erasmus’ Latin New Testament were at his com¬ mand. He had almost completed the task when the Inquisitor-General of France interposed. Coverdale escaped the fate of Tyndale by fleeing with his printers and equipment to England where the work was completed, April, 1539. [68] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION Thus the Great Bible, in large part a reproduc¬ tion of Tyndale’s through Matthew’s, became the second authorized English version. A copy was ordered set up in every parish church. Chained to the pulpits, the martyr’s work bore the name and commanded the reverence of that same Bishop, Tunstal, who had turned Tyndale from his door, bought up his books, and burned them before St. Paul’s. The Great Bible has left its impress upon the prayer-book. The Psalms con¬ tained therein are taken largely from it. In the first edition the Apocrypha are called Hagio- grapha. Later editions classified them as “ The fourth part of the Bible.” Troublous times were immediately ahead. King and Bishops had a change of heart. Tun¬ stal and Heath disavowed their part in the work of revision of the Great Bible. Parliament proscribed the Bibles of Tyndale and Coverdale. The notes in Matthew’s Bible and Taverner’s Bible were erased. It was enacted that no women, except those of noble birth, and no men below the upper middle classes were to read the Bible publicly or privately to others or by themselves. This was in harmony with the decree of the Council of Trent (1546), which crystallized the Catholic opinion of the centuries : [69] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE If anyone shall have the temerity to read or possess [the Bible] without . . . written permission, he shall not receive absolution until he have first delivered up such Bible to the ordinary. 5 Tyndale’s and Coverdale’s Bibles were burned (1546). Men fled to the Continent for safety. The death of Henry VIII brought a reaction. Under Edward VI, 1547-1553, nearly sixty edi¬ tions of the Scriptures were issued. Then came Queen Mary. (1553-1558.) Archbishop Cran- mer, who had been largely responsible for the Great Bible, and John Rogers, the author of Matthew’s Bible, were burned at the stake. The bones of Fagius and Bucer were dug up and burned. Coverdale escaped through the interven¬ tion of the King of Denmark. The Geneva Bible was born out of this agony. The exiles from England gathered at Geneva and worked “ for ten years by day and by night ” on this translation. Among them were Coverdale and William Wittingham. In 1557 the New Tes¬ tament appeared with an introduction by John Calvin. In 1560 the Geneva Bible complete with copious notes, was published at Geneva and dedi¬ cated “ to the most virtuous and noble Queen Elizabeth, whom God hath made our Zerubbabel for the erecting of this most noble temple.” It 6 Fisher, “ Hist, of Reformation,” p. 530. [70] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION was a careful revision of the Great Bible in the Old Testament and of Tyndale’s latest New Tes¬ tament. The Geneva Bible was the first English Bible to be printed in Roman type, the first to be divided into verses, the first to be made handy in size and popular in price. Nothing like it appeared until the Authorized Bible of 1611. Words not in the original were printed in italics. Following Luther’s, Coverdale’s, and the French Bible of Calvin (1535), the Apocrypha were placed be¬ tween the Old and New Testaments. For sixty years the Geneva Bible held the field, only slowly yielding to the King James version. The name of St. Paul was omitted from the letter to the Hebrews. “ Love ” was used in¬ stead of “ charity ” ; “ congregation ” instead of “ church.” In Genesis 3 : 7 the word “ breeches ” was used for “ aprons,” hence this Bible is often referred to as the “ Breeches Bible ” just as the Great Bible was known as the “ Treacle Bible ” from the use of the word “ treacle ” for “ balm ” in Jeremiah 8 : 22. The Prayer of Manasseh, which had been excluded from Coverdale’s Bible and inserted in Matthew’s, was now placed be¬ tween Second Chronicles and Ezra and not in the Apocrypha. The Bishops’ Bible grew out of the demand on [71] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE the part of the churchmen for a Bible that would be at once authoritative and popular. The Great Bible failed in this respect. The Geneva Bible offended the churchmen by its notes. A bill was passed “ for reducing of diversities of Bibles now extant in the English tongue to one settled vulgar translated from the original.” Archbishop Parker and a company of “ qualified divines ” labored for four years upon the task. They were instructed to “ make no bitter notes upon any text nor yet to set down any determination in places of controversy.” It was called the “ Bishops’ Bible ” because of the number of bishops engaged in the revision. When it was completed Convocation ordered that copies be placed in halls or dining-rooms of arch¬ bishops and bishops for the use of their servants ; also that cathedrals and, as far as possible, churches be supplied. No amount of patronage, however, could exalt the Bishops’ Bible. It met the ideals neither of High-churchman nor of Puritan, and so failed of its purpose. A special feature of the Bishops’ Bible was in a separate title-page which read, “ The volume of bookes called Apocrypha.” The order of the books followed the Vulgate except that First and Second Maccabees were placed after Job and Third and Fourth Esdras were added. These [72] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION last were not regarded as among those “ called Apocrypha ” but were declared to be Apocrypha. In 1572 a map of Palestine was inserted. For two hundred years Bibles had been pro¬ duced in the vulgar tongue in opposition to the wishes of the Roman Church. To prove to the world that this Church was not opposed to such a procedure, if properly done, and that it had scholars competent for such a task, the Rhemish New Testament was produced in 1582, and the Douay Old Testament in 1609. These efforts were based on the Clementine Vulgate of 1592, the “authentic text” according to Trent, “dili¬ gently conferred with the Greeke and other edi¬ tions in diverse languages.” The purpose was to make a better Bible than had been made and not to supply one for “ ale- benches, boats, and barges.” In the preface, Protestants were accused of “ casting the holy to dogs and pearls to pigs.” The notes were mark¬ edly controversial ; the language ecclesiastical. “ Charity ” was used for “ love ” ; “ church,” for “ congregation ” ; “ penance,” for “ repentance ” ; “ chalice,” for “ cup.” In spite of its exclusive purpose and origin, the influence of William Tyn- dale was apparent. No marginal readings were inserted, for the translation was to be as undi¬ vided in authority as the Vulgate itself. [73] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE What now passes as the Rheims-Douay Bible is in reality not so but a practically new transla¬ tion by Dr. Richard Challoner, Coadjutor to the Vicar Apostolic of London between 1749 and 1752. A Roman Catholic authority says the Douay Bible “ never had any episcopal imprima¬ tur, much less any papal approbation.” Cardinal Gibbons’ name appeared in an American edition as follows: We hereby approve of this new edition of the Catholic Bible which is an accurate reprint of the Rheims and Douai edition with Doctor Challoner’s notes and accordingly commend it to the faithful. The Apochryphal books, Tobit, Judith, Wis¬ dom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, First and Second Maccabees together with additions to Esther and Daniel are found in the Douay because found in the Vulgate. The Prayer of Manasseh and First and Second Esdras are omitted. The Rheims-Douay Bible was a translation on the basis of the Clementine Vulgate. The first attempt at translating the Bible into English direct from the original languages was made in 1836 by Dr. John Lingard, the historian. In 1898 another venture was made. This time it was by an American Dominican, the Rev. Francis A. Spencer. [74] SUPREMACY OF ENGLISH CIVILIZATION A new English translation from the originals was begun in 1913 under the title “ The West¬ minster Version of the Sacred Scriptures,” by two Jesuits acting as general editors, the Rev. Cuthbert Lattey and the Rev. Joseph Keating. These editors declared their purpose to be the production of a readable Bible . . . one which not only is couched in digni¬ fied and accurate English, but which also supplies in print¬ ing and arrangement and notes such aids to the eye and mind as will render the intelligent perusal of the sacred text as easy and pleasant as possible. The text of Westcott and Hort was made the basis of this translation instead of the Vulgate. By way of justification, the following apologetic appears in the preface : Such a proceeding is in no way contrary to any law or custom of the Church, which of course, while decreeing that the Latin Vulgate is to be treated as “authentic” in public lectures, disputations, sermons, and homilies, en¬ courages rather than hinders the study of the original texts. This readable “ Westminster Bible ” is being issued in separate book form. Several books of the New Testament have appeared. The editors forecasted the future in the following words: The present publication is in fact an experiment, and how far the scheme is proceeded with must depend to a large extent upon its reception. [75] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE It would be a grand thing if Catholic scholar¬ ship should bring forth a New Revision in En¬ glish. Cardinal Newman’s criticism of the present Rheims-Douay Bible is still a challenge to the scholars of Rome. Challoner’s revision of the Old Testament “ issues in little short of a new translation.” “ His version is even nearer to the Protestant than it is to the Douay.” 8 Protestant and Catholic alike are poorer in that the “ great Cardinal ” was compelled to give up his attempt at a new revision because of the oppo¬ sition within the Roman Church. The author of “ Lead, Kindly Light,” master in the domain of religion and of literature, would have made us all his debtors. But not only in English have new translations been made. Several new translations from the original texts have appeared in France and Ger¬ many. The Crampton Version is regarded as the best Catholic translation from the originals in French. Since 1911, in Germany, five separate translations of the New Testament have been made from the originals. Only two of these, however, cover the entire New Testament. a Tracts Theological and Ecclesiastical, p. 4x6. [76] HEYSHAMS BIBLE CHART EZRA THE BIBLE THEODORE HEYSHAM COPYRIGHT 1923 |A14J2 |TT*iD, CANON CLOSEDl A.D. | TALMUDISTS 300 MASSORETES • s 1000 1500 24BkS.| '™-|3g BKS + APOC. L.XX 277-132 RC. 1800 1900 ORDER BKs. ORICEN HEXAPLA NO APOC. MSS. OEST. OLDEST MS.9I6 PRINTED 1488 LUTHER TRENT 1 546 USHER 1701 . AMERICAN MTk •2-13 CENTURY OT. — N.T. 320 A.D. ORAL TRADITION QUOTED N.T. ORKS. ITflLA LK. WRITTEN RECORDS JEWS REJECT S I NX BURNED 303-312 JESUS CHRIST 1 6 VULCATEAOEAjO^^ LfjEROMEWKax" CANON APOCRYPHA TEXT VARIES ORK. CHURCH XIMENES POLYGLOT CAEDMON 700 jAPOCRYPHAl AWYCLIF1382 „| BTURKS1453 I**' TYNDALE 1525— 1536 Cf Clement vii! 1592. K i inT o JRSLM 1672 ENGLISH DOUAY 1609 . c=l CLOSED 392 AJX I NO APOC. NOHEBrORK. [RASMUS 1516 I BKS. BURNED ^lAgTYRS (ieii_ 13000 MSS. REVI SED 1881 - 1885 * — IS l — * STANDARD .REVISED PIUSX&07IN1 5 BIBLES 1HI 1901 POLYCARP 69-156 PAPIAS Ob-163 0LDESTHS4lhCENT. TRADITIONALISTS VATICAN 4-1475 BEZAE 2-6-1546 MT. LK. JN. MK. EPHRAEM 5161841 TEXTUAL1STS SINAITIC4-18S9 TOTH C 6Y C € BCI^C OACACTClAyTAICM H T6..,£(|»OBOyN MycT h pioNoce itim.iii.i6 fcKeAMBeiceeiilxHTer totapi-mkxvi&s t . VIII THE ENGLISH TRIUMVIRATE BROKEN, 1611, A. D. Three Protestant Bibles and one Roman Cath¬ olic Bible now held the field and bade for the affections of the people. The Great Bible was still chained in many churches. The Geneva Bible had won the mass of the people and the Bishops’ Bible appealed to most of the Church¬ men. The Catholics held to the Douay Version. No one was quite satisfied. The Churchmen ob¬ jected to the partisan notes in the Geneva Bible and were disappointed in that the two efforts on the part of the Church to produce a Bible had failed to win the favor of the masses. The Puri¬ tans were in protest against the Bibles authorized by King and Convocation, i. e., the Great Bible and the Bishops’ Bible. On January 18, 1604, James I met the repre¬ sentatives of both sides at Hampton Court. He was on his way from Scotland to be crowned King. They intercepted him with their troubles. Their troubles were not lightened, but a blessing came out of the conference. He gave the Puri- G [77] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE tans to understand that he would “ make them conform or harry them out of the land.” When they complained about the mistranslations of Scripture in the Prayer-book and suggested the need of a new translation of the Bible, James surprised the High-churchmen by favoring such a project. Doctor Reynolds, President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, and leader of the Puritans, urged a revision because “ those which were al¬ lowed in the reigns of Kings Henry VIII and Edward VI were not answerable to the truth.” Bancroft, Bishop of London and leader of the High Church party, replied, “ If every man’s humor is to be followed, there will be no end of translations.” At this the King interposed, say¬ ing, “ I have never yet seen a Bible well trans¬ lated into English and the worst of all transla¬ tions I have seen is the Geneva.” James hated the Geneva Bible because it opposed the divine right of kings in its notes. A new translation was ordered and the church¬ men were made responsible for its initiative. There was but one restriction : “ Let there be no marginal notes.” When the churchmen failed to act promptly, the King took up the goad. Fifty- four scholars were appointed for the work. The names of only forty-eight are recorded. They [78] THE ENGLISH TRIUMVIRATE BROKEN were divided into six groups, and the work was apportioned. Assistance was to be sought from all competent and available sources, men, manu¬ scripts, versions. The Bishops’ Bible was to be the standard. Old ecclesiastical terms were to be kept such as “ church ” for “ congregation.” Chapters and verses were to be introduced. For six years they toiled examining the He¬ brew, Erasmus’ Greek Testament, and the Com- plutensian Polyglot together with translations in various languages, Spanish, French, German, Italian. The Latin Vulgate had its influence as did the Rheims-Douay Version. And the spirit of William Tyndale hovered over all. It is said that eighty per cent, of the Old Testament and ninety per cent, of the New Testament are from Tyndale’s translation. Three years were spent in the new translation ; then three years in its revision and marginal ref¬ erences ; then a committee reviewed the whole in six months and put it through the press in 1611. For this consecrated labor they received no com¬ pensation above their expenses. The King James Bible was the product of no school or sect or party but the combined effort of the best in all. It went forth with the patronage of King, bishops, and scholars. On the title-page appeared the inscription, “ Appointed to be read THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE in the churches.” There is no record, however, that it was ever 4 4 publicly sanctioned by convo¬ cation, or by Parliament, or by the Privy Coun¬ cil, or by the King.” Bishop Lloyd in 1701 placed the chronology of Archbishop Usher in the margin of the Author¬ ized Version. Like all preceding efforts, the Authorized Ver¬ sion of 1611 ran the gauntlet of condemnation and criticism. It had to win its way on merit. The Geneva Bible yielded to its rival only slowly through a period of about fifty years. Now for over three hundred years the Authorized Version has commanded the increasing regard and affec¬ tion of the English-speaking people. It is still supreme in the affection of the masses. The tribute of the Roman Catholic, Faber, is worthy of remembrance : It lives on the ear like music that can never be forgot¬ ten; like the sound of church-bells. Its felicities often seem to be things rather than words. It is part of the national mind, and the anchor of national seriousness. Controversies were eliminated by translitera¬ tion as in the case of the word 44 baptize ” and 44 Jehovah ” or 44 Lord.” The disputes of the present over the Hebrew 44 Sheol ” and Greek 44 Hades ” for the English 44 hell ” had not arisen. Words not in the Hebrew were italicized. Doubt- [80] THE ENGLISH TRIUMVIRATE BROKEN ful readings were put in the margin, thus elim¬ inating any claim to infallibility of the text. Throughout the whole work, the common people are held in mind and their language is employed. The translators set forth their purpose in the Preface : Truly, good Christian reader, we never thought from the beginning that we should need to make a new transla¬ tion, nor yet to make a bad one a good one, but to make a good one better. Judged by their resources they have merited high praise. Few manuscripts of the New Testa¬ ment were available and these of late date. With the exception of the Psalms and a part of Job, the section of the Old Testament, i Chronicles to Ecclesiastes, has not the merit of the rest. Two notable additions of 1611 are known as the “ Great He Bible ” and the “ Great She Bible.” One translates Ruth 3 : 15, “ he went ” and the other, “she went.” The printer of the edition of 1631 was fined £3 00 for omitting “ not ” from the Seventh Commandment. In 1716 an edition appeared known as the “ Vinegar Bible.” “ Vineyard ” was translated “ vinegar ” in the headline of Luke, chapter twenty. Many changes crept in through the centuries. In 1851, the American Bible Society found 24,000 varia¬ tions in six different editions. [81] IX NECESSITY OF MODERN REVISIONS The question is often asked, If the King James Bible possesses such merits, why was it necessary to have an English Revised and an American Standard Revised Version? It is hard for the great body of the laity as well as a large company of the clergy to understand the reason for what they deem an unsettlement of their faith as well as an affront to the Scriptures. “ The King James Bible has stood the test for three hundred years. We are satisfied to have it continue the center of our affections and hopes,” is their as¬ sumed attitude. Not infrequently they manifest an air of impatience and say, “ Let us alone in our faith, and let the Old Book alone ! ” Now it is helpful to know that the reasons which led to the present Revised Versions, were the same in part as those which led to the King James Version itself. New translations had been made. Many Bibles were seeking for the favor of the people. The need of one standard of authority freed from the misunderstandings and inaccuracies of the Authorized Version was [82] NECESSITY OF MODERN REVISIONS keenly felt. Then too a large number of typo¬ graphical errors had been corrected and changes deliberately made in the text of the King James Bible. And as Doctor Scrivener has said, these had been “ introduced silently and without au¬ thority by men whose very names are often un¬ known.” The causes leading to this result were normal and natural. There was nothing forced. In the first place, language is a growing thing. Words change their meanings. Scripture that was per¬ fectly clear to a past age became either obscure or totally misunderstood in the present. Who but an expert in language could under¬ stand the meaning of that familiar text in the King James Bible, “ Take no thought for the morrow” (Matt. 6 : 31)? How many knew that the word “ thought ” formerly meant “ anx¬ iety”? Now the Revisers have made this text plain in the translation, “ Be not anxious for the morrow.” In like manner the word “ damned ” formerly meant “ condemned ” and is so trans¬ lated. The English word “ hell ” was made to do service for four different words in the orig¬ inal, one Hebrew, “ Sheol ” and three Greek, “ Hades,” “ Gehenna ” and “ Tartarus.” The Revisers have done a good service to truth here by bringing out the ideas in the original. Then [83] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE too “ meat-offering ” gave a false impression. By “ meat ” we understand “ flesh.” Not so the Hebrew. As there was no flesh used in the “ meat-offering ” it made for clearness to use the term “ meal-offering.” “ To ear ” means “ to plow ” and is so translated. As the chapter-headings tended to lead astray, they were removed in the Revision. Chapters and verses were retained but made subordinate to the paragraphs. The dominating purpose was to emphasize the thought of the Scriptures. Then too the Psalms are shown to be not a single book but a collection of five books and the Proverbs a collection of seven books. The composite 1 char¬ acter of the Bible is thus revealed. Poetical gems long obscured in prose translations are repro¬ duced in the Revision in poetical forms. The chief reason for revision, however, was in the manuscripts. Hundreds of manuscripts unknown to the translators of 161 1 were at hand. For three hundred years these newly discovered manuscripts had been accumulating. When Erasmus brought out his Greek New Testament in 1516, he had only eight manuscripts at his command and the chief of these were cursives dating from the thirteenth to the sixteenth cen¬ turies. The scholar now has over three thousand 1 See F. G. Lewis, “ How the Bible Grew.” [84] NECESSITY OF MODERN REVISIONS manuscripts, some of which are one thousand years older than those available to the scholars appointed by King James. A facsimile representation of two of these documents may be seen at the bottom of the Chart. They are the two oldest and best pre¬ served manuscripts of the New Testament known at the present time. Neither of these was accessi¬ ble to the translators in 1611. The one to the right under “ B ” is the Vatican Manuscript of the Vatican Library in Rome. It was in the pos¬ session of the Roman Catholics, but they would not permit the Protestants at that time to see it. The bitterness of the Reformation struggle was still at its height. At the left of the Chart under ft is a reproduction of the Sinaitic Manuscript now in the Imperial Library of Petrograd. It was not found until 1859, within the memory of many living today; hence was not at the com¬ mand of the translators of the King James Bible over three hundred years ago. The Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts were written in the fourth century and are copies of a manuscript of the second century. Both are now open to the scholars of the world. With such manuscripts in their possession, it was inevitable that Protestant scholars would give recognition to their testimony. [85] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE An illustration of their influence may be seen by referring to the Sinaitic lines on the Chart. They are taken from i Timothy 3 : 16 which reads in the King James Version: “And with¬ out controversy great is the mystery of godliness ; God was manifest in the flesh.” Why the change in the Revised versions to “ He who was manifest in the flesh ” ? Look at the last line in the Chart. Note the letters OC, Hos. This is the relative pronoun, “ who.” If the word were “ God ” in the Greek , it would be OC, Theos, but it is not. Hence the Revisers translated “ He who ” and not “ God.” Dr. Alfred Plummer says : 2 It is certain that St. Paul did not write, “ God was mani¬ fest in the flesh,” but “ Who was manifest in the flesh.” The reading “ God was manifested in the flesh ” appears in no Christian writer until late in the fourth century, and in no translation of the Scriptures earlier than the seventh or eighth century. And it is not found in any of the five great primary MSS, except as a correction made by a later scribe, who knew of the reading “ God was manifested,” and either wished to preserve it as an alternative reading, or as an interpolation. The Revisers, therefore, did not arbitrarily change the Scriptures. No, they were simply in¬ tellectually and morally honest. They gave us the testimony of two of the oldest and best pre- 2 Expositor’s Bible, “Timothy,” p. 133, 134. [86] NECESSITY OF MODERN REVISIONS served manuscripts of the New Testament in the possession of the Church. The Sinaitic and the Vatican manuscripts are alike here. Had the scholars of King James’ day possessed such manuscripts they would have rejoiced in the priv¬ ilege and used them. It may be of interest to know that the Rheims-Douay Bible translates this text as in the Revised Versions, “ He who was- manifest in the flesh.” The text of 1611 differs from that of 1881 in 5,788 readings. When the reader of the Revised Versions comes upon changes and omissions of readings found in the King James Version, he will now understand. The Revisers have given what in their judgment is the best testimony of the best manuscripts available. It may be helpful to call attention to a few of the more striking differences in the Re¬ visions growing out of a study of the original texts. Compare the readings of the King James and the Revised versions in the following : 1. The Doxology of the Lord’s Prayer, Mat¬ thew 6 : 13. (Omitted.) 2. The baptismal confession of the eunuch, Acts 8 : 37. (Omitted.) 3. The three heavenly witnesses, 1 John 5 : 7, 8. (Omitted.) 4. The ending of Mark’s Gospel, Mark 16 : 9-20. (Spaced.) [87] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE This last is a very important difference and should be carefully studied and considered. The Revisers retained verses 9-20 but separated them from verse 8 by an intervening space. Why the space? To call attention to the fact that the two oldest manuscripts of the New Testament we pos¬ sess omit them. At the bottom of the Chart to the right is indicated the Vatican manuscript end¬ ing the Gospel of Mark with verse 8. Verses 9-20 are omitted. The same omission is found in the Sinaitic manuscript in the Gospel of Mark. To note the omission of the verses 9-20 at the end of Mark’s Gospel in these two oldest Gospel manuscripts is simply a matter of moral honesty. To have withheld the facts from the people would have been discreditable to scholarship. The obli¬ gation of truth is to come to the light. [88] X ROMANCE AND REALITY IN MANUSCRIPTS The Sinaitic Manuscript indicated in two places on the Chart, is the most complete manu¬ script of the Bible in existence. It ranks equal in age with the Vatican which is thought by some to be the oldest. The symbol by which it is des¬ ignated is the first letter of the Hebrew alpha¬ bet, ft. The story of the discovery of the Sinaitic Manuscript is as interesting as a novel. In 1844, that great German scholar, Tischendorf, went on a pilgrimage through the East, seeking for old manuscripts. While visiting the monastery of St. Catherine at the foot of Mt. Sinai, he chanced to see in the hall a basket containing old parch¬ ments set apart for the fire. Plucking a leaf out of the basket, what was his surprise to discover that he had a part of a most ancient manuscript. Eagerly he rescued the precious leaves from dan¬ ger. They proved to be a copy of the Septua- gint (yellow). The zeal of Tischendorf over his find was his [89] THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE misfortune. The monks became cautious. They permitted him to take away the forty-three leaves he rescued from the basket, but would not reveal to him the existence of the remainder of the docu¬ ment. Tischendorf returned to Europe with his precious sheets and started to work for the recov¬ ery of the rest. For fifteen years he toiled, using every avenue of influence. Finally, after three trips to the monastery, with the aid of Czar Alex¬ ander II of Russia, he succeeded. In 1859, Tischendorf made his third trip to the Monastery of St. Catherine seeking for the great treasure. The effort seemed hopeless. The last evening of his stay had come. He was in the steward’s cell enjoying that official’s hospitality. After the refreshment, the steward showed him a manuscript of the Septuagint. It was the very document Tischendorf had seen in part fifteen years before. Concealing his emotions, he re¬ quested permission to examine the manuscript in his cell that evening. The request was granted. And there by myself [said Tischendorf] I gave way to my transports of joy. I knew that I held in my hand one of the most precious Biblical treasures in existence, a docu¬ ment whose age and importance exceeded that of any I had ever seen after 20 years of study of the subject. The Sinaitic Manuscript contains large por¬ tions of the Old Testament in the Septuagint [90] ROMANCE AND REALITY IN MANUSCRIPTS (199 leaves), and the entire New Testament to¬ gether with the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. There are 346E2 leaves, 13J4 inches wide by 14% inches long, with four columns of 48 lines each to a page. The manu¬ script is an uncial , written in capital letters with¬ out any division of words or sentences. It is a product of the fourth century and a copy of a manuscript of the second century after Christ. With this old document in his cell, Tischendorf gave himself to that great joy of a scholar, copy¬ ing and making notes of its contents long into the night. In the morning a greater joy came. He was permitted to take the manuscript to Cairo. There, in two months, he copied the text entire. The greatest joy came when, in 1862, this great Scripture record was published at the expense of Czar Alexander II in commemoration of the first millennium of the Russian Empire. Tischendorf, with the aid of the Czar, had secured posses¬ sion of the manuscript and placed it in the Im¬ perial Library of Petrograd. After one thousand five hundred years of oblivion it was brought forth to the light. We can only speculate as to its origin. Con¬ stantine the Great, in A. D. 331, ordered fifty copies of the Scriptures to be specially prepared for the Church of Constantinople. Tischendorf THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE thought the Emperor Justinian (527-565) may have secured one of these copies and placed it in the monastery of Mt. Sinai which he founded. On the presentation of a new silver shrine for the coffin of St. Catharine to the Convent by the Emperor of Russia, the manuscript was presented to the Czar in 1869 in the name of the new prior, Archbishop Kallistratos, and the monks of the Convents of St. Catharine and Cairo. Of about equal age, more accurate in work¬ manship but less complete in content is the Vati¬ can Manuscript of the Vatican Library of Rome. This uncial is supposed to have been copied in Egypt by a skilful and critical scholar. It may have been brought to Rome shortly after the founding of the Vatican Library by Pope Nicho¬ las V in 1448. Scrivener traced it to Cardinal Bessarion, who labored ineffectually for the re¬ union of the Greek and Latin Churches. The earliest catalogue of the Library, 1475, notes its presence. It is the glory of the Vatican Library. The Vatican Manuscript contains the whole Bible to Hebrews 9 : 14 with the exception of Genesis 1 to 46 and Psalms 105 to 137. It is made up of 759 leaves, 10 by ioj4 inches, with three columns of 42 lines to each leaf, and is the chief manuscript authority for Westcott and Hort’s text. [92] ROMANCE AND REALITY IN MANUSCRIPTS By a strange fate the Vatican Manuscript was not given to the world until 1 868-81. Then a complete and critical edition was issued using type cast from the same molds employed for Tischendorf’s edition of the Sinaitic Manuscript. This is one of the ironies of history. For long years the Roman Catholics locked it away from Protestant scholars. That it should appear for the first time in public in a Protestant dress is indeed remarkable. Yet such is the fact. So late as 1845, Doctor Tregelles was searched before being permitted to open the volume and all pens, ink, and paper were taken from him. Two priests watched him continually. If he be¬ came too intent in the study of the manuscript, they sought to distract his attention ; if too long, they would snatch the manuscript away. By craft, he managed to secure a few notes on his cuffs and finger-nails. Two years earlier, Tischendorf could get only six hours for a hasty examination of the manu¬ script and the copying of a few lines. When he had discovered the Sinaitic Manuscript and possessed an authority equal to the Vatican Manuscript, the doors of the Vatican Library swung open wider. He was given forty-two hours and special privi¬ leges. Now scholarship has risen above such actions, and the Vatican Manuscript is accessible [93] H THE BIRTH OF THE BIBLE to all in photographic reproductions. A beautiful edition was presented to the Columbian Exposi¬ tion (Chicago, 1892) by Pope Leo XIII. The Codex Alexandrinus comes after the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts in point of age and value. It is treasured in the British Museum, London, and is noted as being the first uncial to be used by textual critics. There are 773 leaves, each 12^4 inches long by IO/4 inches wide, with two columns to a leaf. The Old Testament is from the Septuagint. The New Testament omits Matthew 1 : 1 to 25 : 6; John 6 : 50 to 8 : 52; 2 Corinthians 4 : 13 to 12 : 6, but contains “ the Epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians ” and a fragment of a second. Uncial manuscripts or those written in capital letters date from the fourth to the tenth century. Over one hundred of these are in existence, in¬ cluding fragments. They are symbolized by let¬ ters and are divided into two classes. Uncials of the first class are four in number; the Sinaitic ( ft), the Alexandrian (A), the Vati¬ can (B), and Ephraem (C). The Alexandrian is symbolized by (A) because so designated in Bishop Walton’s Polyglot. It should follow ft and B, but custom prevails over fact of time and value. [94] JESUS CHRIST ORAL TRADITION 1 ITAI A LK.WR.TTEN RECORDS I ■ M| Nx BURNED 303-312 J VULGA7 'E 405 A.D. | L J JEROME CANON I CAEDMON 700„ 39TAJX I 1 “IE IXIMENES J 1 POLYGLOT f [WYCLIF1382 NO HEB.-GRK. |TURKS1453 1* ERASMUS 1516 TYNDALE 1525 — 1536 I Clement via g i | 1592. | 1 DOUAY 1609 . g BKS. BURNED g ! ! martyrs KING JAMES 1611 n^nOBOBM n | JRSLM 1672 1 1 j | J | 3000 MSS. gF ENGLISH ' REVISED 1881 - 1885 i . 1 * ISI 1 STANDARD REVISED 1901 I - INI - IHI S IK POLYCARP 69-156 PAP1AS Ob-163 0LDE5TMSl4thCENT. TRADITIONALISTS VATICAN 4-1475 BEZAE -2-6-1546 MT.LK.JN.MK. EPHRAEM 5-164841 TEXTUAL1STS S1NAITIC4-1859 OA€A€r€lAyTAlCMH T£,.E: