BV 2370 
 .085 E3 
 Copy 1 
 
BV 2370 
 .P85 E3 
 Copy 1 
 
Sr Library op Congress.*! 
 
 8 c "* p 8 
 
 :^ k 
 
 SS Shelf gg 
 
 3j p. 
 
 Ir^UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.^1 
 
 gF$g 9-167 gi;<g>; 
 

 
 
 y. 
 
 
 <^t^j 
 
 
 ■- 
 
 /o 1-o 
 

E" A 
 
 DISCUSSION 
 
 ON 
 
 EEVISION OF THE HOLY OBACLES, 
 
 AND UPON THE OBJECTS, AIMS, MOTIVES, THE CONSTITUTION, 
 OKGANIZATION, FACILITIES, AND CAPACITIES OF THE 
 
 AMERICAN BIBLE UNION, FOR REVISION, 
 
 By TWO " LAYMEN*' OF THE REVISION ASSOCIATION 
 AND FIVE CLERGYMEN; 
 
 THE LATTER SPECIALLY APPOINTED BY A CONGRESS OF 
 MINISTERS OF THE CITY OF LOUISVILLE. 
 
 LOUISVILLE, KY. 
 
 MORTON & GRISWOLD. ^PRINTERS. 
 
 1856. 
 
51277 
 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The Bible Revision Association appointed the undersigned to prepare and 
 publish in the Louisville Journal and the Morning Courier a series of articles on 
 the necessity of a Revision of the Holy Oracles, and on the means and facilities 
 of the American Bible Union for accomplishing this needed Revision. Upon the 
 announcement that an arrangement of this kind had been effected with the papers 
 we have named, and before we had made any publication, the drummers of that 
 sectarianism, which is at once the bane and disgrace of Christendom, took imme- 
 diate steps for a contention. Five clergymen were found ready to form a temporary 
 union for the purpose of doing all in their power to shut out from King James's 
 version, every ray of light that biblical science has shed upon the text of inspira- 
 tion, and to hunt down with worldly means all who are engaged in a pious, holy, 
 righteous desire to give the English reader as exact a transfer of the ideas of the 
 Holy Spirit as human labor, genius, learning, and skill can make from the Original 
 texts. A," religious " paper, devoted to party purposes, issues, and aims, thus 
 trumpeted, on the 17th of April, 1856, the official birth of the champions of this 
 contention : 
 
 " The five clergymen referred to were no mere volunteers, but at one of the 
 largest meetings of MINISTERS of various denominations ever held in the city 
 of Louisville, they were appointed expressly to assure their brethren that this 
 Revision movement was a sectarian immersionist interest, and that it had no claim 
 to the sympathies of any others." 
 
 The capitals are our own. The reader will perceive that this historic record of 
 the entree of the five clergymen upon their hunt after the Bible Union, announces 
 that the Convention that appointed them was the Kingdom of the Clergy, not 
 representatives of the people. Jesus Christ never appointed a clerical hierarchy 
 for the management of his affairs — he announced that the members of his Body 
 are brethren , they stand upon common ground, and are to call no man on earth 
 their leader. The commission, as recorded by Matthew, was given to five hundred 
 brethren on a mountain in Galilee, thus ordaining that all things pertaining to the 
 conversion of the world, belongs to the individual members ot the body, and not 
 to privileged orders. It is sectarianism that maintains the Kingdom of the Clergy, 
 not the Kingdom of Christ; and that same sectarianism, by its clerical orders, 
 sent these five clergymen into the newspapers to deride and revile the righteous 
 efforts of the American Bible Union to ascertain what God has said to mankind, 
 and after ascertaining it, to say it in intelligible English. The very terms of the 
 record we have quoted: — " ministers of various denominations," show that it was 
 not Christianity that was convened to oppose the Revision of the Holy Oracles, 
 for Christianity knows nothing of " various denominations ;" it is a unit , it was 
 so constituted divinely, and Heaven has never acknowledged any other charac- 
 teristic of it. It is sectarianism that is made up of "various denominations," not 
 Christianity. 
 
 On the 10th of April, the same partisan paper, in answer to a proposition of the 
 Western Recorder, that both sides of the' Revision Discussion should appear in 
 both papers, said: " toe will not publish both sides of the Revision question." "Be- 
 cause it would be unreasonable and unfair to our readers to do so." 
 
 And on the same day, the same paper saluted the assembling of the Revision 
 Association in Louisville in the following courteous and gentlemanly terms : 
 "A Query for the Journal and Courier. 
 
 " Mr. Editor : — Now that the five clergymen have clearly shown the intensely 
 sectarian character of the Revision movement, will the conductors of the Journal 
 and Courier permit Dr. Bell, in their name, to puff the doings of the Convention 
 which meets this week in the city, to promote that object 1 I, as a subscriber to 
 both their papers, protest in advance against any such prostitution of the secular 
 press, to the fostering of the most intensely sectarian movement of the age. 
 
 Fair Play." 
 
 To this admirable specimen of bigoted sectarianism, the editor of the Journal 
 thus) responded, on the 11th of April • 
 
 "Insolence. — We have been under the necessity several times of rebuking 
 the Rev. Mr. Hill, of the Presbyterian Herald, for his ill-mannered references to 
 the management of the Louisville Journal. He seems to have learned something 
 from those lessons and now undertakes this interference through the medium of 
 anonymous correspondents. As we never meddle with the Presbyterian Herald, 
 we can sec no reason why the editor of that paper should undertake to instruct us 
 in what is' clearly our own business In the present instance, the Herald's corn's- 
 
4 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 pondent begs permission to muzzle the Louisville Journal in reference to the 
 Bible Revision Association, now in session in this city. The course of the Jour- 
 nal has always been to give every great public enterprise, conducted properly 
 and under the management of good and true men, courteous and respectful treat- 
 ment ; and we know of nothing in the character of the Revision Association, or 
 in the character of the great number of learned, reputable, and pious men engaged 
 in furthering its objects, that should exclude it from the respect and courtesy of 
 this paper. The correspondent of the Herald may rest assured, that we shall 
 manifest that respect and courtesy in any way we may think proper,' 1 
 
 And the editor of the Courier expressed the most thorough contempt for this 
 impudent interference with his business. 
 
 The individual thus named in Fair Play's modest and decent dictation, felt 
 himself called upon to return his thanks for the honor conferred upon him, in the 
 following card, published in the Journal : 
 
 " I think that as a matter of simple justice, I owe the expression of my thanks 
 to the Rev, Mr. Hill and his correspondent " Pair Play for their modest request, 
 that I alone should not be permitted to notice the proceedings of the Revision 
 Association. They flatter me exceedingly in conveying the idea that no one but 
 myself would be likely to give any efficient aid to the cause, as efficient help 
 would be the only kind to which they would be likely to object. ' While I disclaim 
 all right to the honor, I may thank Ihe two gentlemen for even the unintentional 
 compliment they have thrust upon me. T. S. Bell;' ' 
 
 We have recorded the facts of the treatment received by the friends of Revision, 
 as specimens of a most unholy condition of things still in existence, amidst the 
 blaze of the light of nearly nineteen centuries of Christianity These specimens 
 of clerical interference with the desire of holy and true men, to give the masses of 
 the people the pure Word of God, in the clearest and most accurate translations, 
 are precisely such as have attended every effort of holy and true men of all ages, 
 to make the inspired text clear and intelligible to the people, as may be seen iu 
 our XL letter, 
 
 In this volume we present the entire Discussion of the Revision cause between 
 two "laymen," as sectarianism denominates members of the body of Jesus Christ, 
 on behalf of the Revision Association, and five clergymen selected and specially 
 appointed as champions, by a convocation of Ministers, represented as the lar- 
 gest assemblage of that kind ever convened iu Louisville. We cheerfully com- 
 mit the discussion to the judgment of the people. " In their opinions they are 
 seldom wrong, in their sentiments they are never mistaken. ' The Saviour ap- 
 pealed from the judgment of the doctors of divinity, the scribes and other mem- 
 bers of the hierarchy, to the people and we have followed his example. 
 
 Reader, we pray you diligently to consider these questions : Is King James's 
 version the Word of God in all its fullness ? Every scholar on earth, who has 
 paid any attention to the subject, says No. 
 
 And since all scholarship, all biblical science says the English language has no 
 version that is faithful, in all respects to the inspired text, are you not imperatively 
 bound, as one who is to give an account of all your acts and words, to look into 
 this matter, and determine for yourself, that let others do as they may, you will 
 do all in your power to secure for earth's teeming millions as faithful translations 
 of God's Word, as can be made ? The peace of your soul, reader, rests upon 
 your response to these questions — rests upon your fidelity to God's own Word. 
 For he that quietly permits false versions of the text of inspiration to pass into the 
 unlearned mind of the masses of the people, as true representatives of God's words, 
 or aids and encourages such perversions, apocryphal statements, interpolations 
 into or omissions from the true text, as are universally acknowledged to disfigure 
 the Common Version, will not be held guiltless. The path of investigation is 
 palpable, the way is clear, and neither negligence nor misdirected action can be 
 acceptable to God. The voice of inspiration rings in the ears of every redeemed 
 soul, it lingers amidst even the echoes of every awakened conscience, and will 
 sound as the trumpet of an archangel at the bar of final judgment: " to him that 
 knoweth how to do right, and who doeth it not, it is sin." Even in the utmost 
 degeneracy of the Jews into the very depths of sectarianism, no Jew ever insulted 
 Jehovah by saying, as an excuse for bad conduct, that he did not understand what 
 Jehovah wished him to to do. Christian reader, take care how you try such an 
 experiment upon your Maker and Redeemer. James Edmunds* 
 
 T. S.Beli... 
 
DISCUSSION. 
 
 N U M B E R I . ■ 
 
 THE REVISION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 The Bible Kevision Association have appointed the under- 
 signed to prepare and submit to the public such information, 
 as to the objects, efforts, plans, and facilities for success in the 
 purposes of the Bible Union in making a revision of the Holy 
 Scriptures, as shall conduce to a proper understanding of that 
 important enterprise. We enter upon the performance of the 
 duty with a full recognition of the responsibility entrusted to 
 our care. The enterprise is one of the noblest elements in the 
 progress of the age, and is commanding attention and approba- 
 tion wherever the English language is spoken. And of the 
 multitudes of great and good minds engaged in hearty co-ope- 
 ration in the work of a thorough revision of the Bible, we do 
 not know of one that does not recognize this cause as a leading 
 vitality in Christianity. How, indeed, can it be otherwise? 
 The two most momentous questions that can engage the human 
 mind are, first, has God spoken to mankind ? If he has, what 
 has he said ? No one will controvert the fact that the second 
 question is quite as momentous as the first. Even the mere 
 temporal blessings of the Jews were so entirely dependent upon 
 obedience, not to inferences, whims, fancies, or feeling, but to 
 words of the law, that Moses commanded an extensive publica- 
 tion of them upon great stones covered with plaster, and he 
 expressly enjoined: "You shall write upon the stones all the 
 words of this law very plainly." If that was essential under 
 the Mosaic institution, can it be less sounder the Christian dis- 
 
6 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 pensation ? Can any Christian mind utter a negative to this 
 question ? 
 
 It is not a matter of any controversy that what is called the 
 authorized version of the Scriptures fails to answer the condi- 
 tions we have named. There is not one sect in Christendom 
 that even pretends to think it in all respects a fair exposition 
 of the mind of the Holy Spirit, as that mind was expressed in 
 the original language. There is not a classical scholar any- 
 where, there has not been one in any age since King James 
 prescribed orders, not only for a translation, but as to how it 
 should be made, who has not discovered manifold faults in 
 the version thus made to royal order. A vast multitude of 
 translations have been made by scholars, eminent alike for 
 learning and piety, of almost every sect recognized as orthodox. 
 These have been great helps in the hands of biblical readers 
 toward retaining the authorized version, for the same reason 
 that the mass of persons - who are able to read Greek do not 
 feel the necessity for a better version, as much as those, who, 
 without the ability to read Greek, know that the authorized 
 version is not a faithful translation in all respects of the ideas 
 which the Holy {Spirit expressed in Greek. The more thor- 
 oughly the investigation is made, the more thorough will be 
 the conviction that in these matters the Bible Union has means 
 for success, which were utterly inaccessible to the men em- 
 ployed by King James. Not to enter into details, at this time, 
 it-may be sufficient to say that, when King James's translation 
 was made, not one of the Greek manuscripts, now received as 
 authorities for the purity of the text, was known to be in exist- 
 ence. The first discovered one of these four manuscripts did 
 not come to light until seventeen years after the publication of 
 King James's version, and that version, with all its acknowl- 
 edged imperfections, has been jealously locked up against any 
 ray of light from the floods thus cast upon the voice of inspira- 
 tion. There can be no good reason why such a state of things 
 shall any longer be tolerated. There is not an apology of any 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 7 
 
 kind for the refusal of any Christian to aid in removing the 
 acknowledged rubbish that has grown over the revealed will of 
 Heaven to man. 
 
 In the year 1850, in the month of June, a number of pious, 
 devout, and God-fearing scholars determined that, while others 
 might do as they desired in view of this state of things, as for 
 themselves, they would no longer aid in perpetuating the exist- 
 ence of errors against which their learning and consciences alike 
 rebelled. They felt that it was absolutely necessary that a 
 vigorous effort should be made for a correct version of the Holy 
 Scriptures, and they resolved upon starting the work. To this 
 resolve the American Bible Union owes its origin. The times 
 seemed eminently propitious for success. At no period since 
 the Apostolic age has there been a finer scholarship in the Greek 
 and Hebrew languages than at this time. And for many cen- 
 turies there has not been such a pure original text as the present 
 age possesses. These two truths constituted an excellent basis 
 for the superstructure undertaken by the Bible Union — an Eng- 
 lish text which should . be a faithful reflection of the original 
 text. That such an object may be attained few persons will 
 deny ; that it is desirable all will admit. Timid persons were 
 frightened with the idea that the result might be a sectarian 
 Bible, and many such characters rushed into opposition without 
 pausing to inquire whether an evil of that character could not 
 be successfully guarded. They readily admitted that there are 
 errors of a grievous nature in the authorized version, which pro- 
 mote and feed divisions among Christians, but they seemed to 
 think the evil irremediable. 
 
 The Bible Union has successfully grappled with this evil. 
 There is not one element of sectarianism in its constitution, its 
 aims, its efforts, or its work. It has called to the work of re- 
 vising the Holy Scriptures forty of the best Hebrew and Greek 
 scholars that could be found in Europe and America. If there 
 are any better scholars than those employed by the Bible Union, 
 no amount of honest and assiduous effort on the part of that 
 
8 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 association lias enabled it to hear of them. Ten different sects 
 have contributed the forty scholars to the great work of revis- 
 ing the Holy Scriptures. Not one of these forty was engaged 
 on account of his special sectarianism, but solely on account of 
 his well-ascertained position in acquirement and ability, and 
 for fidelity to the Holy Spirit, in faithfully transferring the ideas 
 uttered by inspiration in Hebrew and Greek, from those lan- 
 guages into the English tongue. No sect has any, the least con- 
 trol over the work, nor can any sect, in any manner, direct its 
 course. The broad principles laid down for the guidance of 
 the translators, and for as perfect security against error in the 
 work as human powers can devise, utterly destroy all scope for 
 sectarianism or partyism in the labors of the Bible Union. 
 For nearly six years that association has been publicly engaged 
 in its objects, in Europe and America, and no one has yet 
 charged that that broad principle has ever been departed from. 
 We ask attention to it, we challenge for it all that scrutiny, 
 time, and talents can do toward detecting a flaw in its charac- 
 ter. Whenever an improvement is suggested in any quarter, 
 the Bible Union will cheerfully adopt it. That principle is 
 contained in the following resolution : 
 
 "That appropriations made by the Union, shall in no case 
 be employed for the circulation of a version which is not made 
 on the following principles, viz: The exact meaning of the 
 inspired text, as that text expressed it to those who under- 
 stood the original Scriptures at the time they were first writ- 
 ten, must be translated by corresponding words and phrases, 
 so far as they can be found, in the vernacular tongue of those 
 for whom the version is designed, with the least possible ob- 
 scurity or indefiniteness." 
 
 A very large portion of the Bible is completed, so far as the 
 first translations are concerned, and we do not know of a senti- 
 ment nor a phrase that has been translated in violation of the 
 fundamental law of the Bible Union. The friends of the work 
 have not only made that law for revision, but they have taken 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 9 
 
 all conceivable pains to secure its observance. In addition to 
 the high scholarship we have named as engaged in promoting 
 the objects of the Bible Union, there are over three hundred 
 critics, in England and America, engaged by the Union for the 
 purpose of guaranteeing the fidelity of the translators to the 
 principles we have quoted. These critics belong to a large 
 variety of sects, but not one of them was selected because of 
 Iris position in sectarianism, but entirely on account of his rep- 
 utation for ability in critical labors. Each book revised has 
 not only to pass the inspection of all the scholars engaged on 
 the other books, but has to be examined by each of the critics, 
 before it goes to press. And, in addition to these ample safe- 
 guards, before the work is finally adopted by the Bible Union, 
 copies of it are distributed to eminent scholars, not in the em- 
 ployment of the Union, and suggestions are solicited from 
 them. This, therefore, is an enterprise which rejoices in the 
 fact that no sect has created it, no sect can guide or control it, 
 no sectarianism enters into any part of its life or movements. 
 The Bible Union is a voluntary association of persons, who, 
 without the slightest idea of sectarianism, believe that the Word 
 of God, cleansed from all the impurities which sectarianism 
 and other sources of error have thrown around it in King 
 James's version, can be presented to English readers so as to 
 express the identical thoughts to them, which were expressed 
 originally in Hebrew and Greek. The ultimate object of the 
 Bible Union is announced in the following terms : 
 
 "In accordance with the object set forth in the Constitution, 
 the Bible Union seeks to procure a faithfully revised version of 
 the English Scriptures and similar versions in other European 
 and heathen languages. The design is to have the Bible speak 
 /with one voice throughout the world.*' 
 
 Can any honest heart withhold a hearty amen to that an- 
 nouncement? And the Bible Union, strong in the recognition 
 of the sacred and momentous duty it has undertaken, and fear- 
 
10 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 less of any opposition that may array itself against its truths, 
 thus expresses its sentiments : 
 
 "No compromise of truth in its simplicity, its purity, and 
 its clearness will be made, to gain the co-operation and sanc- 
 tion of any man, or any body of men. But while the principle 
 of the most scrupulous fidelity to God is inflexibly adhered 
 to, no suitable means will be neglected to bring forth the Book 
 with the greatest weight of human authority, which, consist- 
 ently with that principle, can be secured." 
 
 The cause has been in progress nearly six years, and we 
 know much now for which we once could only hope. The 
 success of the Bible Union has been, in every particular, far 
 beyond the sanguine hopes of its early friends. Its means 
 have far outrun expectation, and it is winning confidence and 
 aid from the numerous sects in America and England. One 
 of the most pleasing testimonials to the success of all those 
 portions of the revised Bible that have been printed, is found 
 in the cordial commendation they have received from the most 
 authoritative periodicals devoted to sectarian interests, in Eng- 
 land and America. The secular press in both countries is con- 
 tributing some of its noblest powers to the furtherance of this 
 cause. And the Edinburgh Review, which for half a century 
 has occupied the highest rank in periodical literature, in a 
 recent number, not only pleads powerfully for the revision of 
 the Bible, but announces that it must be made. We shall 
 re-publish portions of this article in the next Weekly Journal. 
 England is largely contributing to the American enterprise, 
 and the subject was presented to the English Parliament lately 
 for its action. 
 
 To all who may read these sentiments, we submit the fol- 
 lowing queries, asked by the Bible Union: 
 
 "Is it right to continue the publication of known acknowl- 
 edged errors as a part of God's Word, when you have the 
 power to corect them and to publish the truth ? 
 
 " Can you, consistently witli your obligations to Christ, 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 11 
 
 refuse to aid, to the extent of your ability, in removing from 
 His precious Word the unauthorized additions of men, which 
 pervert the meaning or obscure the sense? 
 
 "You acknowledge that the work ought to be done. If the 
 Bible Union does not accomplish it, who will? Shall we be 
 left to work without your assistance? Would you have us do 
 the whole first and then come to you for aid ? No, my brother, 
 if the enterprise is worthy, it is your duty to help it now. 
 The Lord grant you grace to meet the duty in the spirit of 
 cheerful obedience, and to His name be the glory." 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 NUMBER II. 
 
 THE REVISION OF THE BIBLE. 
 
 In our first publication we referred to an article of great 
 clearness and force in the Edinburgh Review, for October, 
 1855, on the evils that have accompanied the revelations of 
 the Holy Spirit, in their English dress, and the absolute neces- 
 sity there is for a change from these evils. As we press for- 
 ward in our expositions, we shall endeavor to give the public 
 mind full and explicit facts upon these matters. In the present 
 publication, we shall mainly confine ourselves to a re-publica- 
 tion of such portions of the Edinburgh Review as may serve 
 to show, what one of the highest literary authorities in the 
 world has to say upon the past and present evils of the Bible 
 as it is now distributed to those* who speak the English lan- 
 guage. 
 
 The foundation of Protestantism, nay, of practical Chris- 
 tianity, is thus announced by the Review: 
 
 "But whatever influences may interfere to warp its opera- 
 lion, all Protestants, whether Churchmen or dissenters, are 
 
12 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 agreed in the principle that our only authoritative religious 
 teacher is the Bible ; and that ' as there is no truth nor doc- 
 trine necessary to our justification and everlasting salvation, 
 but which is, or may be, drawn out of that fountain and well 
 of truth; therefore, as many as be desirous to enter into the 
 right and perfect way unto God, must apply their minds to 
 know Holy Scripture, without the which they can neither suffi- 
 ciently know God and his will, neither their office and duty. 5 
 " Since the Bible, then, is of such inestimable value — the 
 depository of all religious and moral truth — the sacred ark in 
 which the history and the subject matter of the Creator's 
 communications to his creatures are preserved, we might very 
 reasonably have presumed that it would be regarded with a 
 reverence correspondent to its importance, and that, in the 
 copies of it disseminated among the people, every care would 
 be taken not only to render the translation an exact reflection 
 of the sense of the original, but to place the work before them 
 in such a convenient form as might induce them to read it, and 
 accompanied by such useful typographical aids as might facili- 
 tate their understanding what they read. It might have been 
 fairly expected that, in publishing a work which is of such 
 momentous consequence to us all, both here and hereafter, the 
 text would have been carefully divided into paragraphs accord- 
 ing to the sense; that what was spoken would have been placed 
 between inverted commas ; and that all passages taken by one 
 sacred writer from another would either have been printed in 
 italics, or,' in some easily intelligible manner distinguished as a 
 quotation. It would have been no more than reasonable to 
 assume that, among a Protestant people — setting the high 
 value upon them which we do — esteeming them as our sole 
 authority in religion — the Sacred Scriptures would have been 
 published, with at least as much consideration for the reader's 
 convenience as the writings of our popular poets and novelists ; 
 and that there would be editions, not only of every variety of 
 size and type, which might prove attractive to the taste of the 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 13 
 
 wealthy, or be adapted to the limited means of the poor, but 
 which might be demanded by the infirmities of our aged and 
 suffering brother Christians. But the very reverse of this is 
 the case. There is no other class of works, whether we regard 
 the size, the type, or the distribution of the letter-press, in which 
 we find that so little has been done to assist the reader, and so 
 much to perplex hini, as in the Sacred Scriptures. If it had 
 been the object to multiply then- difficulties, to prejudice their 
 meaning, and to deter men from the perusal of them, we doubt 
 whether the most accomplished Jesuit could have devised any 
 more effectual mode of publication than that which has been 
 generally adopted, and almost universally prevails. No works 
 of inferior value could have maintained their ground against 
 the treatment they have encountered. We are not ignorant of 
 the several editions of the Bible which exist ; and we fearlessly 
 declare that we have never yet met with any copy of the Bible 
 which we could take up and read with typographical satisfac- 
 tion." 
 
 On the manufacture of the Bible into scraps the Beview 
 says . 
 
 " This is a slight evil in comparison with the mischief which 
 has been inflicted on the sense of the inspired writings by the 
 mode of breaking them up into chapter and verse which has 
 been uniformly adopted. These divisions, which have no 
 existence in the original, have been made without any authority 
 whatever. About the middle of the thirteenth century, Cardi- 
 nal Hugo de Santo Caro projected a Concordance to the Latin 
 Vulgate, and divided the Old and the New Testament into 
 chapters. Kabbi Nathan, in the fifteenth century, in prepar- 
 ing a Concordance of the Hebrew Scriptures, subdivided the 
 chapters into verses. Robert Stephens, in tlio sixteentli cen- 
 tury, passed simultaneously through the press a New Testa- 
 ment and a Concordance ; and, so at least his son Henry tells 
 us, while traveling on horseback between Lvohs and Paris, he 
 cut the New Testament into verses for the sake of adapting it 
 
14 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 to liis Concordance. This, we believe, is, in brief, the most 
 approved account of the origin of those divisions and sub-divi- 
 sions by which our editions of the Bible are disfigured. No 
 other book ever suffered such irreverent treatment. In all 
 other compositions the paragraph ends where the sense pauses , 
 in the Sacred Scriptures, whatever the sense may be, every 
 third or fourth line brings the reader to the end of the para- 
 graph. They are the only works we happen to be acquainted 
 with in which the correct arrangement of the author's text has 
 been rendered subordinate to the facility of reference. And 
 we are quite sure that they alone are endowed with a sufficient 
 force of vitality to outlive so cruel a process of mutilation."' 
 
 The grievous character of this evil upon historic narrative, 
 epistolary style and meaning, and Hebrew poetry is fully 
 shown by the Reviewer. The Review adds : 
 
 "A very intelligent friend of ours declares that he never 
 could comprehend the drift of the Epistle to the Eomans till 
 he read it without the interruption of chapter and verse, m 
 Shuttleworth's translation. And we entirely sympathize with 
 him in his embarrassment. We repeat that no other work 
 whatever would have possessed internal life enough to bear up 
 against and maintain its place hi public estimation under the 
 usage to which the Bible has been subjected by its editors. 
 We had, at one time, intended to evince the deteriorating 
 and enfeebling effect of such an injurious process of division, 
 by printing two or three of the finest passages -from our own 
 authors, snipt into pieces and severed, without any sense of 
 compunction, from their context, as the Sacred Scriptures are 
 printed, but we have refrained in tenderness for the feelings of 
 our readers. 
 
 "But is not the condition of our common English Bibles 
 obnoxious to charges of a far more grave description than 
 those which we have already noticed, and which merely relate 
 to the size of the volume and the distribution of the letter- 
 press? Does the translation itself present that full, correct 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 15 
 
 and distinct expression of the sense of the original, which all 
 Christian people, who look to the sacred volume as their para- 
 mount religious authority, would be desirous of possessing, and 
 which all who entertain a pious reverence for its contents would 
 he anxious to afford them ? We do not ask this question un- 
 advisedly, or from a desire of putting forward any peculiar 
 theory or favorite devices of our own. We make the inquiry 
 simply as Christian laymen, who most sincerely wish to learn 
 what the Sacred Scripture were designed to teach us , whose 
 only means of acquiring a saving knowledge of the truth is an 
 accurate translation, and who look to our ecclesiastical supe- 
 riors for the grant of so reasonable a demand on their learning 
 and their zeal. We studiously place ourselves hi the position 
 of persons who are utterly ignorant of the original languages, 
 and whose only information respecting the state of our national 
 version is derived from the most patent and familiar sources, 
 the notes of Scott, of Adam Clarke, of D'Oyiey, and Mant, and 
 of the Paragraph Bible ; and we ask whether any man, with the 
 continual emendations which are suggested in these comment- 
 aries before him, can entertain the persuasion that our common 
 English Bible really does afford an adequate representation of 
 the sense of the inspired writings, or that it should be allowed 
 any longer to remain in its present unimproved condition ? 
 
 " What was the opinion of Selden, a high authority on such 
 a subject, at the time of its last revision? ' There is no book,' 
 says that learned man, ' so translated as the Bible for the pur- 
 pose. If I translate a French book into English, I turn it 
 into English phrase, and not into French-English. '77 fait 
 froidf I say, "'It is cold,' not 'It makes cold;' but the Bible 
 is rather translated into English words than into English 
 phrase. The Hebraisms are kept, and the phrase of that lan- 
 guage is kept, which is well enough so long as scholars have 
 to do with it ; but when it comes among the common people, 
 Lord, what gear do they make of it ! ' Most extraordinary, 
 indeed, is the gear they make of it • " 
 
16 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 The Reviewer thus alludes to those critical labors of the 
 Kev. Arthur Stanley, which are commanding the attention of 
 the learned world. The Eeviewer asks : 
 
 "Is the translation of the Holy Book such as it ought to 
 be?" 
 
 And answers : 
 
 " The Rev. Arthur Stanley, in his recent and very learned 
 edition of i St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians,' mentions 
 five kinds of error which exist in our received version of them, 
 and which he has rectified in his own. His emendations are: 
 '1st. Such as are produced by a restoration of the ancient 
 MSS. 2d. Such as are produced by a better system of punc- 
 tuation. 3d. Such as are produced by transposing the words 
 into a nearer conformity with the original order. 4th. Such as 
 are produced by bringing out the emphasis of words, apparent 
 in the original text, either from the use of the pronoun, or 
 from the place of the words in the sentence. 5th. Such as are 
 produced by inaccuracy of translation.'" 
 
 We do not see how any one can call those truths in question. 
 On the subject of the original text of the Bible, the Review 
 says : 
 
 "It would carry us far beyond our intention, to enter upon 
 the vexed questions of Biblical criticism in this place, but we 
 shall confine ourselves to an illustration of our meaning, bor- 
 rowed from the ingenious commentary on some of St, Paul's 
 -Epistles, lately published by Mr. Jewett, of Baliol College. 
 
 "No one who is acquainted with Sophocles or Thucydides 
 in the volumes of Dindorf or Bekker, would be willing to 
 reprint the text of those authors as it is to be found in edi- 
 tions of two centuries ago. No apology is therefore needed for 
 laying aside the ' textus receptus ' of the New Testament. 
 The text of Lachmann has many claims to be considered as 
 the most perfect which has hitherto appeared. It is the first, 
 most consistent, and, with one exception, the only recension 
 of the New Testament drawn entirely from the earliest manu- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 17 
 
 scripts and authorities. It is the work of a scholar of the 
 highest genius, and of the greatest knowledge and experience 
 as an editor. Lachmann is the first who based the text on the 
 most ancient authorities, solely on the grounds of evidence, 
 without regard to doctrinal considerations or claims of author- 
 ity, and irrespective even of the meaning of words. The result 
 has shown that the most ancient text is also in every sense the 
 best." — Jetvetfs Preface. 
 
 "It is obvious that the highest purity of the text to which 
 modem scholarship can attain, is the first condition of a correct 
 version." 
 
 But there are other imperative reasons for a revision : 
 
 " Scriptural phrases which were sufficiently clear to our great 
 grandfathers have gradually but imperceptibly changed their 
 meaning, and become altogether unintelligible to their descend- 
 ants. For instance, carriage, in the Bible, signifies the things 
 carried, such as baggage ; with us it means the vehicle. Pre- 
 vent, in the Bible, signifies to help by anticipation ; with us 
 it means to hinder. To let, in the Bible, often signifies to 
 abstract ; with us it means to permit. Pitiful, in the Bible, 
 signifies full of pity ; with us it means contemptible. The 
 preposition of, to the confusion of many a passage, and the 
 bewilderment of many a reader, is continually used as synony- 
 mous with by; a sense which it has now so entirely lost, that 
 Gifford, in his edition of ' Massinger,' has thought it necessary « 
 to make a note upon it." 
 
 And again: 
 
 "But there is another, a more general and plausible objec- 
 tion to the alteration of our common version ; it ought not to 
 be touched, because it has, for centuries, been held in reverence 
 by the people. We admit the fact. It has obtained, and most 
 deservedly so, the deep and affectionate reverence of our Pro- 
 testant population; but how is that any reason against its 
 being rendered more worthy of the deep and affectionate rever- 
 ence with which they regard it? If their reverence extend be- 
 
 2 
 
IS FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 yond the respect that is due to the most accurate and complete 
 translation of the inspired writings which, on the whole, has 
 ever been submitted to the contemplation of the unlearned dis- 
 ciples of the Gospel ; if their reverence attaches to its admitted 
 errors and deficiencies — such a feeling is not pious but super- 
 stitious ; and it ought not for a moment to be deferred to as an 
 impediment in the way of so great a blessing as an improved 
 edition of the sacred volume. It classes, as an instance of 
 ignorance and folly, with the Popish priest's obstinate adher- 
 ence to his old mumpsimus, which has been a jest among Pro- 
 testants ever since the first dawn of the Eeformation. They 
 who would resist the elimination of the palpable mistakes and 
 the acknowledged imperfections of our English Bible, from an 
 apprehension of offending the religious prejudices of the people, 
 are guilty of a pious fraud, which, though of a lighter shade of 
 guilt, ranks in the same vicious category with the practice of 
 the Romanist, who lends his support to the perpetuation of a 
 belief in fictitious relics, or endeavors to sustain the faith of 
 his flock by the contrivance of a fraudulent miracle. 
 
 "In dealing with a book, of which divine truth is the argu- 
 ment, nothing ought to be regarded but the means of rendering 
 it the most distinct and perfect reflection of that truth ; and if 
 our present translation do not afford such a distinct and perfect 
 reflection, it ought to be subjected to a course of continuous 
 ^md careful revision, till it shall. But even suppose that this 
 confidence of the people in the immaculate excellence of the 
 English Bible were as deeply impressed and generally diffused 
 as some of us imagine, and that hitherto we have evinced a 
 salutary caution in respecting it, the time for such forbearance 
 has now ceased." 
 
 And the reviewer, from all the premises before him, says : 
 
 " No overweening confidence in the English Bible, even if it 
 
 now existed, could be long preserved in face of the exhibition 
 
 which the Annotated Paragraph Bible sets in a popular form 
 
 before us, of the wrong version in the text and the rig] it ver- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 19 
 
 sion in the note. But whatever course our ecclesiastical author- 
 ities may pursue, they may depend upon it, that the Bible will 
 not long be allowed to remain in its present mutilated and 
 unsatisfactory condition." 
 
 With these extracts from the Edinburgh Be view, we must 
 close this communication. In our next we shall continue to 
 call the attention of our readers to such facts and truths as the 
 momentous interests confided to our care may demand. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 FIRST LETTER OF THE FIVE CLERGYMEN. 
 
 THE REVISION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 The undersigned have been requested by a number of their 
 brethren — ministers and members of several Christian bodies, 
 to make such reply as they might deem needful to certain 
 statements and reasonings lately advanced in some of the 
 newspapers of this city in behalf of the " Bible Revision Asso- 
 ciation." The request was prompted, no doubt, by the opinion 
 that this revision movement — sectarian in its spirit and aims, 
 and not called for by the church at large, or required by the 
 actual necessities of the subject — is not entitled to the public 
 confidence and support. Heartily concurring in this opinion, 
 universal as far as we know in the churches of which we are 
 ministers, we proceed to sustain it in terms as brief as may 
 consist with clearness, and intended to be entirely respectful 
 toward those from whom we differ so widely on the subject. 
 
 It would be as unnecessary for us to notice this attempt to 
 publish another version of the Scriptures as any other of the 
 many translations which have been made, were it not that this 
 is avowedly designed to supercede that to which we are accus- 
 tomed, and with which we believe the great body of Christian 
 
20 FIDELITY TO GOD IX THE 
 
 people are justly satisfied, and that those who are engaged in 
 urging its claims on the public, deceived themselves, may mis- 
 lead others by representing their enterprise as eminently Cath- 
 olic, to be approved and promoted, on that account, by all 
 denominations of Christians, while in truth its origin, progress, 
 and whole character prove it essentially and intensely secta- 
 rian. A simple statement of its history will make this plain 
 to all unprejudiced and candid persons. 
 
 The American Bible Society, formed in 1816, and supported 
 by nearly all the denominations of Christians in the country, 
 went on for about twenty years, in great peace, and with great 
 success, to do its work at home and abroad. At length a seri- 
 ous difficulty arose in consequence of some members of the 
 society desiring that its sanction should be given to the render- 
 ing of the Greek word baptizo by a term clearly meaning to 
 immerse, in certain translations then in progress, instead of by 
 a word formed from the Greek into the language in question, 
 to wit : the Burmese, as has been done in the English version. 
 This desire of the Baptist brethren was, of course, resisted by 
 others, and it was refused by the society, as must have been 
 foreseen from the beginning of the matter. The Baptists gen- 
 erally withdrew, and formed a society, which should cause the 
 word in dispute and its cognates to be rendered by words 
 meaning immerse, <&c, in all translations in foreign tongues 
 for missionary use. 
 
 : This association was called the "American and Foreign Bible 
 Society." After their separation on this point from the great 
 body of Protestantism, some of their number demanded that 
 the same rule should govern their future publications of Eng- 
 lish Bibles, which they had now applied to foreign. A schism 
 among themselves was the result ; and Dr. Cone, with a major- 
 ity of the members, withdrew from the majority, who adhered 
 to the received English version, and formed themselves into 
 the "American Bible Union," which, with the co-operation of 
 Alexander Campbell, his friends and adherents, has commenced 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 21 
 
 the very important work of a re-translation of the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, and of which, as we understand, the "Bible Revision 
 Association " in this city is a branch — at least an ally. 
 
 Some scholars of different denominations — paid of course for 
 their services — are in the employment of this body, and it is 
 said that here and there a minister or layman, not an immer- 
 sionist, and not in the employment of the society, sympathises 
 with the movement. We may add that a few literary and 
 scientific men also have been found to approve the scheme, 
 from a desire to adapt the Word of God to modern notions of 
 science and fashions of literature. 
 
 This brief recital is quite sufficient to show that the " Revi- 
 sion " is mainly supported by a forgone conclusion, which must 
 forbid an impartial and scholarlike translation of the Word of 
 God. 
 
 We intend no disrespect, although it clearly suggests a dis- 
 trust and suspicion of this enterprise, that it is so nearly con- 
 fined to persons, who, differing irreconcilably among themselves 
 on vital doctrines of the Gospel, agree only as to baptism, and 
 insist that, as the sacrament can be rightly administered only 
 by immersion, the English version of the Scriptures must con- 
 form to that view. The Bible Revision Association is repre- 
 sented, as composed with very few if any exceptions, of Bap- 
 tists and Reformers — or, as sometimes called, for distinction, 
 Campbellites — merging their differences of decided and con- 
 scientious convictions as to what they deem fundamental princi- 
 ples of the Christian religion, in agreement about baptism, and 
 uniting to re- translate the Word of God, irrespective of vital 
 doctrines, so as to make it call that immersion ! We under- 
 stand that the Reformers, as a body, support the scheme with 
 unanimity and great cordiality, while only a part, and, if we 
 mistake not, much the smaller part, of all the Baptists in the 
 country sustain it at all. However tiiis may be, it is well 
 known that many of the most eminent ministers and other lead- 
 ing men of the Baptist denomination, including many of their 
 
22 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 most distinguished scholars, do not only refuse to promote it, 
 but do earnestly and constantly oppose it. The Bev. Drs, 
 Wayland, Fuller, Welch, Williams, Dowling, Riley, Pattison, 
 Malcom, Magoon, Ide, and others not a few, very eminent among 
 them for their learning, wisdom, usefulness, and varied abilities, 
 have taken the strongest of ground against the whole scheme, 
 as needless, unwise, and fraught with mishief. 
 
 The support of it by Baptists is the more remarkable, as 
 they have heretofore insisted that the word baptism meant 
 nothing but immersion — and their present purpose to change 
 the word in this revision gives up the point, which has been, 
 in their view the strength of then' argument and the glory of 
 then- name. They have boldly contended that baptize is a 
 true and faithful word in English, as that from which it comes 
 was in Greek, to express the idea of immerse — and that no 
 other sense can be fairly gotten from it and its kindred terms. 
 And now to abandon all these terms, and substitute them with 
 others which more clearly express what they desire the Word 
 of God to say, is to acknowledge that they can no longer main- 
 tain their ground with the English Bible. No wonder, the 
 people say, that such inimersionists need a new Bible. 
 
 It is another just ground of suspicion and distrust of this 
 movement, that many of its leading friends are so ready, nay, 
 so desirous to bring discredit on the old English Bible. It has 
 been the accepted Word of God for nearly two hundred and 
 fifty years, with the great body of the people who have used 
 the English speech. Baptists, no less than others, have found 
 in it " the holy scriptures, which are able to make them wise 
 unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus." We 
 are very sure that when they make their new version it will be 
 no more to them than this has been, "the word of His grace 
 which is able to build them up, and to give them an inheritance 
 among all them which are sanctified." The Bible, as we have 
 it in our mother tongue ; has been the light and strength and 
 joy and hope of our fathers for these long centuries, and is still 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 2<> 
 
 deemed sufficient for all the purposes which God intended it to 
 fulfil by such a vast majority of their descendants, that those 
 who make light of it are as a drop in the bucket. We think 
 it not uncivil or unkind to ask, who are these that now deride 
 THIS Book ? The wisdom of ages and the wisdom of God 
 unite to say, " By their fruits ye shall know them." The fruits 
 of this old English Bible as it is — enlightening the people — 
 elevating them for this world, and preparing many of them for 
 the next — rebuke as pretenders the men who say they can 
 make it better — the more as the grand improvement which they 
 propose is to change baptism to immersion ! They seem not to 
 consider that other people will inquire whether, even if they 
 could amend the present version in some parts of it, they would 
 not be exceedingly apt to injure it materially in others — and 
 in such as are far more important than those in which they 
 might improve it. They do not claim to be infallible, or 
 divinely inspired as scholars to translate, any more than as 
 interpreters to explain. And they ought not to think it strange 
 that those who love the Bible as it is in our own language are 
 jealous of such as begin their work of changing it by scoffing. 
 Every one feels that derision of an object, which is loved or 
 revered by him, excites his suspicion of the good taste and 
 wisdom at least of the derider. 
 
 The friends of revision have made a bad appeal herein, 
 except to partizans — the more especially as the specimens of 
 their own work already put forth do not seem to have won for 
 it any great respect. The following criticism by the editor of 
 the London Record may fairly express the general feeling with 
 which their translations, as far as they have been made public, 
 are received: "Certainly the emendations already started, and 
 the disputes which have arisen upon almost all of them, give 
 us no very comfortable assurance of the possibility of the cor- 
 rections proposed, or the probability of any very general accepta- 
 tion of them. For instance, we have examined the specimens 
 of a revised version of the Second Epistle of Peter, the Epis- 
 
24 
 
 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 ties of John and Jude, and the Book of Bevelation, issued by 
 the American Union, with a feeling, we must confess, of great 
 disappointment." If this writer had seen the revised Job, his 
 disappointment would have been no less, we dare say. There 
 is an old adage, that people who live in glass houses should be 
 very careful how they throw stones — and still better, as our old 
 English Bible has it, "let not him that girdeth on his harness 
 boast himself as he that putteth it off." 
 
 It is pretended, in behalf of this revision, that our translators 
 were neither free to use their knowledge, nor competent to do 
 their work aright, if they had been free — not equal, as scholars, 
 to the men whom the American Bible Union employs, and 
 bound by authority to produce a "version made to royal order." 
 It were much more to the purpose to prove these charges. It 
 cannot be done. That was an era extraordinarily rich in true 
 scholars. The fifty odd men who did this work were among 
 the most eminent of their day for knowledge and learning — of 
 the sort they needed — and for their acknowledged piety, hon- 
 esty, and love of truth. Neither can it be shown — and there- 
 fore it ought not to be said — that they were restrained or 
 coerced by royal authority. "If it has been imagined by any, 
 or by many, that the present version of our Bible was either 
 suggested by the monarch, or that he was at any personal ex- 
 pense in the undertaking, or that he ever issued a single line of 
 authority by way of proclamation with respect to it, it is more 
 than time that the delusion should come to an end. The origi- 
 nal and authentic documents of the time are so far explicit, that 
 just in proportion as they are sifted, and the actual circum- 
 stances placed in view, precisely the same independence of per- 
 sonal royal bounty, and on the part of the people at large, the 
 superiority to all royal dictation, which we have beheld all 
 along, will become apparent." This statement, which the 
 writer proceeds to sustain by ample historical testimony, we 
 take from a work of great learning and research, which is 
 thus charactered by some of the most eminent Baptists of 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 25 
 
 this country: " 'The Annals of the English Bible,' by Chris- 
 topher Anderson, of Edinburgh, a Baptist minister of the high- 
 est character, whose work is of unquestionable authority on the 
 subject to which it relates." 
 
 We quote further from " The Translators Reviewed," a work 
 of equal research, by the Rev. Dr. McClure, of New York. 
 He says of his labors — and the book will be found to sustain 
 it all ; "As the result of his researches, which he has carried, 
 he believes, to the utmost extent to which it can be done with 
 the means accessible on this side of the Atlantic, he offers to 
 all who are interested to know in regard to the general suffi- 
 ciency and reliableness of the common version, these biographi- 
 cal sketches of its authors. He feels assured that they will 
 afford historical demonstration of the fact which much aston- 
 ished him, when it began to dawn upon his convictions that the 
 first half of the seventeenth century, when the translation was 
 completed, was the Golden Age of Biblical and Oriental learn- 
 ing in England. Never before, nor since, have these studies 
 been pursued by scholars whose vernacular tongue is the Eng, 
 lish with such zeal and industry and success. This remark- 
 able fact is such a token of God's providential care over his 
 Word as deserves most devout acknowledgment. * * * * 
 The general result is the ample proof afforded of the surpass- 
 ing qualifications of those venerable translators, taken as a 
 body, for their high and holy work." 
 
 Such were the men to whom was given, in the providence of 
 God, this great trust. The rule by which they were governed 
 in its execution was this: " That a translation be made of the 
 whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew 
 and Greek, and this to be set out, and printed, without any 
 marginal notes." That is, the Word of God plainly rendered 
 into the common language of the people, without note or com- 
 ment ! No wonder that their work soon won the public confi- 
 dence, and has held it, with comparatively few exceptions, to 
 the present time. It has never been pretended by its in tell i- 
 
26 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 gent friends, that it is free from imperfections. One of the 
 most difficult things in the world is to render one language into 
 another with absolute accuracy, and it is not reasonable to 
 expect that so large a book could be so rendered out of lan- 
 guages no longer spoken — unless it would please God to. inspire 
 men, and make them infallible for that work. 
 
 It has done more than all other books to fix our noble speech, 
 and is this day carrying it, in its strength and beauty, around 
 the earth,- Even its enemies cannot withhold their praise. 
 Take these beautiful and philosophic words of Newman, whose 
 dislike of the Protestant religion cannot blind him to the beauty 
 and power of the "Word of God in its old English dress : "Who 
 shall say that the uncommon beauty and marvelous English of 
 the Protestant Bible is not one of the strongholds of heresy in 
 this country? It lives in the ear like a music that can never 
 be forgotten — like the sound of church bells which the convert 
 hardly knows how he can forego. Its felicities often seem to 
 be almost things rather than words, It is part of the national 
 mind, and the anchor of the national seriousness. The mem- 
 ory of the dead passes into it. The potent traditions of child- 
 hood are stereotyped in its verses. The power of all the griefs 
 and trials of man is hidden beneath its words. It is the repre- 
 sentative of his best moments', and all that there has been 
 about him of soft and gentle, of pure and penitent and good, 
 speaks to him forever out of the English Bible. It is his 
 sacred thing, which doubt has never dimmed and controversy 
 never soiled. In the length and breadth of the land, there is 
 not a Protestant, with one spark of religiousness about him, 
 whose spiritual biography is not in his Saxon Bible." 
 
 We have been favored with copious extracts from the Edin- 
 burgh Review, intended to depreciate the English Bible. To 
 exhibit the just force of this testimony, it would be well to 
 show us how far that work is really friendly to our holy reli- 
 gion, as understood and embraced by evangelical Christians. 
 Can the Bible Revision Association assure us that the Gospel 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 27 
 
 of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, with its blessed insti- 
 tutions, as pious Baptists and other Christian people in Europe 
 and America hold and love it, is any more an object of respect 
 with these reviewers than the old English Bible ? It will be a 
 sad day for the Church of Christ when it comes to look to 
 such sources for light upon religion, or the way it should treat 
 the Word of God. Are such as these, or any other men of the 
 world — not lovers of the truth as it is in Jesus — to settle by 
 their authority great practical questions for the people of God ? 
 "Literary authority" is the word, the Edinburgh Beview the 
 fountain of it! Be it so. At this high suggestion,^ the Word 
 of God must be revised, and the old English' Bible, one of the 
 noblest monuments of English literature, as true scholars have 
 held, be thrown away! Be it so. Will the Edinburgh Be- 
 view, or anybody else but themselves, be willing to commit 
 that great work to the American Bible Union or the Bible 
 Bevision Association of Louisville, Ky. Who but themselves 
 will trust them either as scholars or expositors ? It will still 
 remain to be shown that these bodies are competent to such a 
 work, either for the learning which they can command or the 
 impartial and just fidelity with which it will be used or the 
 wisdom of their measures. Said the Bev. Dr. Welch, on 
 taking the chair at a great meeting of Baptists opposed to this 
 movement: "We may also ask without impertinence, are the 
 men who have undertaken this delicate and most responsible 
 task, in all respects qualified for its adequate performance? 
 It is no easy work which they attempted. A different pro- 
 cedure, it is certain, would have been better adapted to insure 
 success. It would have been necessary to call a convention of 
 the ablest and most learned men in the denomination. They 
 should give the subject their profound and earnest attention, 
 seek the aid of all the lights which they could command, com- 
 municate with their brethren in Europe, especially with those 
 who speak the Anglo-Saxon tongue, appeal to every university 
 in the United States for its counsel and assistance, and thus 
 
28 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 procure a version which should be worthy of universal confi- 
 dence." 
 
 But other counsels prevailed. Instead of this 'wise and cau- 
 tious moderation, a few men determined to carry this measure 
 over the heads of their brethren, resolved to have a Bible which 
 would support their preconceived sectarian views, as the old 
 one, they admit, does not. In the face of history, in derision 
 of its faithful testimony, they charge that our venerable trans- 
 lators set out to make a Bible, which should support man's 
 views, not God's. And now, forgetful of the Saviour's words 
 concerning the mote in another's eye and the beam in their 
 own, they are seeking to do the very thing which they bit- 
 terly condemn, as they unjustly ascribe it to these old servants 
 of God, whom He honored to do so great a work. Unques- 
 tionably, if they succeed in carrying out their purpose, their's 
 will be "a version made to order." 
 
 W. L. Breckinridge, 
 
 Of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 H. M. Denison, 
 
 Of the Protestant Episcopal Church. 
 
 Samuel Lowry Adams, 
 
 Of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South 
 
 E. C. Trimble, 
 
 Of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church. 
 
 G. GORDEN, 
 
 Of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church. 
 
 NUMBER III. 
 
 THE BIBLE UNION. REVISION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 We think that we have already given sufficient proof to 
 convince all honest-hearted persons, that the efforts of the Bible 
 Union to secure a faithful and perfect translation of the Holy 
 Scriptures into the English language are as free from, and inde- 
 pendent of all partyisin or sectarianism as human powers can 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 29 
 
 command. The Bible Union has grown to be a large and 
 numerous body of God-fearing men, and throughout its ranks 
 everywhere, in all its individual members, one spirit and one 
 desire prevail. And that spirit and desire are that all possible 
 measures shall be taken to procure an honest, faithful version 
 of the Scriptures, faithful to God and useful to man. It is 
 utterly impossible that any man or party of men can prescribe 
 to the revisers or critics that anything shall be translated to 
 suit the partyism or sectarianism of any body. We have 
 already shown how carefully, how securely that point is 
 guarded. The very corner-stone on which the Bible Union is 
 founded is, that each word and phrase of the original utter- 
 ances of the Holy Spirit shall be translated into the vernacular 
 of all people, by words or phrases in each vernacular that shall 
 most perfectly present to those who use it the divine ideas 
 originally presented in Hebrew or Greek. Can any reasonable 
 objection be made to that ? Can any one suggest any improve- 
 ment in its character? And this fundamental law can be 
 modified or repealed only by a unanimous vote. Let that be 
 remembered. And in order to show how consistent the action 
 of the Bible Union is, we shall now merely remark that the 
 board of revisers is made up of persons who are among the most 
 eminent scholars of the following denominations : Church of 
 England, Old School Presbyterian, Methodist Episcopal 
 Church, Associate Reformed Presbyterian, American Protest- 
 ant Episcopalian, Disciples of Christ, Seventh Day Baptist, 
 Baptist, German Reformed Church, and Lutheran. This 
 board of revisers is the body that finally settles the transla- 
 tion as it is to go to press, and a majority of it are Pedobap- 
 tists. Another principle that lies at the very basis of the ope- 
 rations of the Bible Union is, that the revision of the Bible 
 shall be made to conform to the version now in use, in all 
 places where it can be done consistently with the first law. 
 We appeal to men of integrity, of fair dealing, of honest pur- 
 poses whether human means could devise more honest mcas- 
 
30 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 iires than these, measures faithful alike to God and man? 
 
 But these are not all the safeguards that stand in perpetual 
 vigilance over this holy work, Each scholar engaged for the 
 work of revision knows beforehand that all his work must con- 
 form to the conservative laws we have named, and he signs a 
 contract with the managers of the Bible Union, which provides 
 for a rigid adherence to these laws. This contract we shall 
 publish in due time. If the measures thus taken and thus 
 secured will not produce a faithful version of the Bible for all 
 who speak the English tongue, can any human means be 
 devised by which that desideratum can be accomplished ?• The 
 timid, the unbelieving fear that something will be unsettled by 
 these measures, but, if the past experience of mankind is of 
 any value, all that can be unsettled by knowledge and truth 
 are ignorance and error, and the Bible Union was not estab- 
 lished to sustain or cherish them. 
 
 There have been for centuries two widely variant Bibles in 
 use — one for the learned, and the other for the unlearned. 
 This violation of the very element of the revelation of God to 
 man must come to an end some time, and it is time now that 
 the ax were laid to the root of the tree. There is not one rea- 
 son under the heavens why each English reader of the Bible 
 should not as perfectly understand the ways of God to man as 
 the brightest scholar of the land. The enjoyments of the 
 learned in biblical attainments are deeply interesting, vast in 
 their magnitude, vitalising, strengthening, and purifying in their 
 character. And shall the masses of the people be cut off from 
 the attainment of these blessings, when they can be brought 
 within their reach ? The Bible Union says no, and myriads of 
 the people in every State of the Confederacy, in Great Britain? 
 and in her colonies have responded to that resolve, in a lan- 
 guage neither to be misunderstood nor mistaken. Each indi- 
 vidual on this earth has to be judged by the words of Jesus 
 Christ, uttered either by himself in person, or through the 
 Holy Spirit, and if these words are not made clear, pro- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 31 
 
 cise, unmistakable in their character, it shall not be for the 
 want of a well-directed effort on the part of the Bible Union 
 to command all the resources which time, labor, learning, and 
 wealth have prepared for this noble work. 
 
 Within six months after the publication of King James's 
 version, biblical learning commenced its attacks upon that 
 work ; the ancestors of those very dissenters who are now en- 
 deavoring to consecrate and maintain its errors, its glaring defi- 
 ciencies, and inconsistencies, then denounced the wrongs that it 
 had done to them. Every age since that translation was made 
 has teemed with the strong and irresistible objections of emi- 
 nent scholars among all the Protestant sects against that ver- 
 sion. Immense labors and learning, and the expenditure of 
 untold treasures have built up for scholars and for men of 
 leisure and wealth, a plain, emphatic Bible speech, that should 
 have been placed in the text of inspiration, palpable and acces- 
 sible alike to the peasant and the prince. For, let it be re- 
 membered, that such men as Walch, Masch, Marsh, Townley, 
 Pettigrew, Lowtli, George Campbell, and Macknight, by their 
 biblical powers ; Buxtorf, Jablonski, Van Der Hooght, Michae- 
 lis, Kennicott, Rossi, Boothroyd, by their remarkable powers 
 upon the Hebrew text ; John Mills, Dr. Wells, Wetstein, Mat- 
 thei, Griesbach, Lachman, to say nothing of hosts of others, 
 by their efforts upon the Greek text, have thrown floods of light 
 upon the Bible, which are almost utterly shut out from the 
 masses of the people From 1624, when the Elzevir editions 
 commenced, the scholarship of every age has industriously ran- 
 sacked the earth for means to purify and correct the original 
 texts of the Holy Scriptures. In a single case, Dr. Kennicott 
 was engaged from 1760 to 1769 in collecting Hebrew manu- 
 scripts. A voluntary subscription of fifty thousand dollars was 
 placed at his disposal to aid him in his work. He employed 
 scholars all over Europe to assist his search and labors, and he- 
 obtained six hundred Hebrew manuscripts and sixteen manu- 
 scripts of the Samaritan Pentateuch, scarcely one of which was 
 
32 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 known to King James's translators. A vast library has been 
 created, made up exclusively of biblical criticism, sacred phil- 
 ology, invaluable translations of various parts of the Bible, 
 commentaries, and of other aids to a clear and precise under- 
 standing of all that Almighty God has spoken to man, but for 
 any utility that any of these labors of the pious and the learned 
 have been to King James's translation or to the masses of the 
 people, this vast and invaluable material might as well have 
 been buried in the depths of the sea. The learned can pursue 
 these labors upon the original text, immense libraries may be 
 built up by critical skill and industry, and no hue and cry is 
 raised against scholars. Their work is considered laudable 
 and meritorious ; but the moment that scholarship attempts to 
 correct the errors of King James's version, to amend its numer- 
 ous defects, to clear up its obscurities, and to bring it up to all 
 that learning has discovered and settled as essential to bring it 
 near to the revelation of the Holy Spirit, so that the masses 
 of the people shall be put in possession of all that God has 
 said to man, superstition takes alarm ; bigotry is aroused ; 
 prejudice, misrepresentation, and zeal without knowledge or 
 truth, call all their forces to battle. Demetrius summons the 
 Ephesian artisans to guard the shrine from his notions of 
 destruction. Scholars and privileged orders may be entrusted 
 with all facilities for increase of Christian knowledge*, it is 
 only the masses of the people that must be shut out from all 
 such enjoyment. But the enemies of revision may as well 
 forbid the mists of the meadow to disperse before the rising 
 sun, or attempt to shroud the beams of the morning in their 
 own darkness, as to undertake to stay the progress of this 
 cause, The work will go on despite of all that a blind opposi- 
 tion can do to hinder its course. All that the biblical scholar- 
 ship of the past two hundred years has done for punfying and 
 elucidating the Word of Life, and which is now locked up from 
 all intercourse with King James's version, shall now have 
 an opportunity of lighting up that version with all the holy 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 33 
 
 beams of heavenly radiance that learning and labor have sent 
 forth. There is not one of the leading sects of Christendom 
 whose most eminent scholars have not pleaded for just such a 
 work as the Bible Union are now carrying forward successfully. 
 The masses of the people must and shall have the laws of 
 God written and printed very plainly. No scholar who has 
 any respect for his reputation for scholarship, can be induced 
 to say that such is now the case with Kins; James's version; 
 no earthly mortal has any reason or privilege for saving that ' 
 it shall not be made so. Take an example of the tampering 
 with the Divine Word that disfigures the authorized version. 
 In the twelfth chapter of Acts, fourth verse, we are told that 
 Hero* intended to bring Peter out of prison after "Easter.*' 
 Neitfier Herod nor Peter nor any other man in Judea could 
 have told when that would be. Ask a learned Presbyterian 
 or Methodist to take the Greek text and say whether there is 
 the least shade of an excuse for that "translation," and he 
 will unhesitatingly say no; that To Pasha always means 
 Passover, and never, under any circumstances, can mean 
 Easter, Ask an Episcopalian scholar, and he will say the 
 same : but the excuse is, that by this utter disregard of what 
 the Holy Spirit really said, the solemn feasts of the Church 
 are sustained ! Is the Word of God to be confided to such 
 conservatism as this ? If those who know these wrongs will 
 not amend them, must those who both know and feel them 
 stand dumb hi the presence of such abuses ? Is it likely that 
 either the heavens or the earth will weep over the unsettling 
 of such tampering with the Word of God as this ? And let 
 it be remembered that this is but a small specimen of a 
 numerous class. "When John Wesley revised the Xew Testa- 
 ment, he corrected the abuse of which we speak, and restored 
 Passover to the text, instead of Easter. We hope that the 
 "representatives of the clergy" who have promised to meet 
 the Bible Union in its efforts to provide a pure Bible for the 
 people, will panoply themselves well, for they may rest assured 
 
34 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 that they will need all the defensive armor they may be able 
 to find in any quarter. 
 
 It is strange that the movements of the Bible Union should 
 already have produced the mutilation of biblical literature. 
 Kitto has published ten editions of his immortal " Cyclopedia 
 of Biblical Literature." In the large and expensive work, too 
 expensive for common use, he pleads powerfully for a revision 
 of the Bible, on the very plan which was afterwards adopted 
 hy the Bible Union. Samuel Davidson, one of the ablest 
 biblical scholars of the age, wrote the article for Kitto's work, 
 and thus speaks: "It is needless to pronounce a formal enco- 
 mium on our authorized version. The time, learning, and 
 labor bestowed upon it were well bestowed. It far surpasses 
 any English version of the entire Bible in the characteristic 
 qualities of simplicity, energy, and purity of style, as also in 
 uniform fidelity to the original. 
 
 "A revision of it, however, is now wanted, or rather a new 
 translation from the Hebrew and Greek, based upon it. Since 
 it was made, criticism has brought to light a great mass of 
 materials, and elevated itself in the esteem of the fundamental 
 theologian as an important science. Hermeneutics, too, have 
 been cultivated, so as to assume a systematic, scientific form. 
 We require, in consequence, a new English version, suited to 
 the present state of sacred literature." 
 
 Will the reader believe the fact, that since the Bible Union 
 "commenced its labors, a cheap edition of Kitto's Cyclopedia 
 has been published for distribution among the people, in which 
 it has been found convenient to omit all this article of Dr. 
 Davidson's on revision ? 
 
 In our next publication we shall attend to the remarkable 
 logic, and the still more remarkable historical statements, con- 
 tained in the publication of the "representatives of the clergy," 
 which appeared in the papers of last Saturday. If those gen- 
 tlemen feel no sorrow for the position they occupy, they may 
 rest assured that we do. In addition to these matters, we shall 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 35 
 
 show that the learned of every leading sect called evangel- 
 ical, have uttered their censures of King James's version, 
 and have pleaded for amendments. We hope that those who 
 love that version merely because of its age, will seal their lips 
 on the Koman Catholic religion, for that is at least eight hun- 
 dred years older ; and if age sanctifies error, why shall it be 
 partial in its charities and operations ? 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 NUMBER IV. 
 
 THE REVISION OF THE BIBLE FOR THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE 
 AN IMPERATIVE DUTY. 
 
 The Bible Union is engaged in one of the noblest works 
 that ever occupied the attention of human beings. There is 
 not a more momentous enterprise, to each individual, in the 
 whole range of human affairs, than that which seeks to know 
 what God has said to man, and endeavors carefully to deter- 
 mine that knowledge upon foundations which shall command 
 the most perfect confidence. There was a Supreme Providence 
 in making the original utterances of the heavenly revelation in 
 the Hebrew tongue, for it was the best on earth for the purpose ; 
 there was an equal providence in the ordering of the New In- 
 stitution hi the Greek language, on account of its perfections 
 and universality. These utterances were inspiration over 
 which no mortal power has control-, which no man may alter 
 but at his peril ; with which no one must tamper. All who 
 approach the inspired text must feel that they are on hallowed 
 ground, and that no upright or holy mind can do otherwise, 
 in translating that text into another language, than make it 
 express as precisely what the inspired text expresses as is pos- 
 sible. There is a Providence now in ordering this essential 
 
36 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 work for the English language. Nothing of the kind has ever 
 yet been done. There is not one version in that language that 
 is in all respects a faithful expression of the ideas of the Holy 
 Spirit, and there never has been one. The want of such a 
 version is an evil which grows daily. The English language 
 is becoming the predominant language of the globe ; the Eng- 
 lish race is the supreme power of the earth. It has done what 
 no other race has done ; it has made the circuit of the globe 
 as a race. Starting from Asia, it has traversed the earth, and 
 now, from the plains of Hindostan, from the slopes of the Pa- 
 cific, it looks over upon the cradle of its progenitors It is 
 daily adding to its power ; its speech is daily assuming new 
 importance in all that concerns civilization and the momentous 
 affairs of humanity. Eichardson says * " Not one hour of the 
 twenty-four, not one round of the minute-hand of the dial, is 
 allowed to pass, in which, on some portion of the globe, the 
 air is not filled with accents that are ours. They are heard 
 in the ordinary transactions of life, or in the administration of 
 law ; in the deliberations of the senate house or council cham- 
 ber ; in the offices of private devotion, or in the public observ- 
 ance of the rights and duties of a common faith." And in 
 view of these vast and momentous affairs, which are daily and 
 hourly growing in vastness and importance, is it not humilia- 
 ting — nay, is it not iniquitous — that there is not upon the earth 
 a transcript of God's word in that language — a transcript that 
 is faithful in all things to the inspired text? We speak to 
 intelligent minds ; to thoughtful, reflecting persons ; to men 
 and women who are to account to God for all they think, say, 
 and do ; who weigh facts and evidence, and who love truth ; 
 and we ask, is not this a grievous and intolerable wrong? The 
 predominant race upon the earth, the world's master-speech, is 
 locked, bolted, and barred out from the fullness of the inspired 
 text. Every sea, every estuary, every gulf, every mighty 
 river that drains continents, all climates and territories, feel 
 the advancing march of Anglo-Saxon civilization, and in its 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES, 37 
 
 van should stream the light of God's truth in the full mid-day 
 effulgence of heaven's own inspiration ; not in the fitful, dark, 
 obscure, unsteady lights of human contrivance. A plain, 
 simple, perfectly decisive method has been furnished by 
 Heaven, by which each individual can ascertain for himself 
 whether the English language possesses the revelation of 
 God's will as he uttered it to the earth. The means for set- 
 tling this question are not in the heavens, so that we need to 
 say, who shall ascend and bring them to us, so that we may 
 hear them, and perform our duty ; nor are they beyond the 
 sea, so that we need to ask, who shall go for them and bring 
 them to us ; but they are nigh us, in our mouth and in our 
 heart, so that we may use them. And He that sitteth in the 
 heavens will demand of all who speak the English language a 
 full fidelity to this responsible trust. Through His servant 
 Moses ; through the Anointed One whose blood has redeemed 
 us ; through his commissioned Apostle, God has given every 
 intelligent being the most perfect means to settle this impor- 
 tant question: Has the English language a Bible that is 
 faithful in all respects to the voice of inspiration? Moses, 
 Jesus Christ, and Paul have fixed the law, that in the mouth 
 of two or three witnesses every thing shall be established. The 
 important word in this law is witness ; but there is no kind of 
 difficulty in determining what is the meaning of that. Wit- 
 ness is derived from the Saxon word gewitta, one who knows. 
 A witness, then, is one who possesses positive knowledge ; not 
 one who retails what he hears, but who knows that which he 
 affirms. It is palpable that a blind man can not be a witness 
 in any matter requiring sight, nor can a deaf man be a 
 witness in any thing relating to hearing. In the important 
 question before us now, in order to constitute a man a witness, 
 he should be a master of three languages ; he must be of two. 
 He should be a master of Hebrew, Greek, and English ; he 
 must be of Hebrew and English, or of Greek and English. 
 The most perfect mastership of the Hebrew, Greek, and Ger- 
 
38 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 man languages merely would as entirely cut him off from 
 being a witness in the case before us as though he were not a 
 master of any language. 
 
 Now we ask all honest men and women,. who expect to give 
 an account of their stewardship to God regarding their treasu- 
 rership of his Sacred Word, to look at this important point. 
 Can there be found in the whole English race two or three 
 witnesses who have said or will say that we possess one version 
 of the Bible that is faithful in all respects to the inspired text? 
 Can one such witness be found? If there are not two or three 
 witnesses, or even one, that will thus testify, then the question 
 is virtually settled. 
 
 "When we were informed that several gentlemen, representing 
 the clergy, had determined to come before the people in oppo- 
 sition to the Bible Union, we had hoped to hear something- 
 edifying on the subject. It is scarcely necessary for us to say 
 how much we have been disappointed. In the entire publica- 
 tion made by those gentlemen on the 16th inst., there is not 
 one word on the issues before the public. The vital proposi- 
 tion which those gentlemen were bound to announce and sus- 
 tain is, that King James's version is, in all respects, a faith- 
 ful translation from the inspired text. Those gentlemen 
 nowhere utter such a declaration ; but it must be palpable to 
 themselves, as it is to others, that until they announce and 
 prove that pointy all argumentation on their part is utterly futile 
 and vain. If they can not thus speak, their case is closed, 
 and they may as well retire from the field of investigation. 
 
 Of the medley of matters which the gentlemen alluded to 
 have thrust into their publication, we shall say but little. 
 Among logicians it would not be necessary for us to say a 
 word ; for no logician can discover any relevancy, in any part 
 of the publication under consideration, to the issue involved. 
 Yet we shall bestow a few passing words upon the document. 
 
 The "representatives of the clergy" have undertaken to 
 paint a portrait of the Bible Union. Will they bear with us 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 39 
 
 when we say that no acquaintance of that body can recognize 
 a single feature of the organization in that painting? Let us 
 retouch their work with the pencil of facts, and make the por- 
 trait truthful. Our clerical friends announce that the Bible 
 Union originated in an attempt, by the Baptists, to "foist" 
 an improper version upon the American and Foreign Bible 
 Society for circulation among the heathen. Dates and facts 
 will settle the character of this statement. The British and 
 Foreign Bible Society patronized the Calcutta version for thirty 
 years, in which bajptizo was translated by a word correspond- 
 ing to immersion. The American and Foreign Bible Society, 
 with an organic law setting forth that they would patronize 
 any faithful version of the Bible for the term of fifteen years, 
 circulated Judson's Bible in the Burmese language, in which 
 bajptizo was made to express immersion. After patronizing 
 this kind of "foisting" for fifteen years, the American and 
 Foreign Bible Society changed their law and made a new one, 
 requiring all versions to be faithful, not to God's inspiration, 
 but to King James's version. The disruption, therefore, was 
 not because the Baptists wished to foist any novelty upon the 
 Society, but because the Bible Society deserted its law that 
 was faithful to God, and made one that was faithful to King 
 James's version. That is the reason why the Baptists deserted 
 the American and Foreign Bible Society. 
 
 And now, as to the character of the persons engaged in the 
 cause of the Bible Union. It has over five hundred thousand 
 persons engaged in its support. The great mass of these per- 
 sons are among the most pious, the most holy and righteous 
 people on earth, if obedience to Jesus Christ in every thing is 
 a criterion of holiness and righteousness. There is not one in 
 the whole body who would respect a translator for tampering 
 with or wresting one word of the inspired text. Each one 
 feels that he must give an account of his stewardship to God, 
 and he recognizes the necessity of perfect fidelity to God and 
 man in these matters. There is not one in the whole bodv 
 
40 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 that would "buy a false translation of a word if it were as 
 cheap as a penny ; there is not one who does not regard each 
 word of the inspired text as a priceless gem, with which no 
 man can trifle. Is it likely that the naked assertion even of 
 five clergymen can make any body believe that such a body of 
 people, for any purpose whatever, could be induced to tamper 
 with the Word of God? 
 
 When the Bible Union commenced its operations, there was 
 not one religious paper in this country that would publish a 
 line in its favor ; but such has been the progress of the cause 
 among the people, that forty-four papers, devoted to a pure 
 speech for the Bible, now come to the Kevision Booms of 
 Louisville alone. The immense expenditures required for the 
 work of revision are borne by the people, and their contribu- 
 tions grow liberally every year. But, above all, the Bible 
 Union has become the possessor of the largest, amount of rare, 
 valuable, and essential material for a faithful version of the 
 Word of God that is owned by any organization in America. 
 It thus possesses advantages for its sacred and heavenly mis- 
 sion that no other body enjoys. No injunction or restriction 
 is laid on any one employed in revision, except that every 
 idea, originally uttered by the Holy Spirit, shall be expressed 
 as perfectly in English as the capacity of the language will 
 permit. Nobody asks or requires any specific translation of a 
 word or phrase for any party purpose. And each reviser en- 
 ters into a solemn written compact of the following character : 
 
 "The exact meaning of the inspired text, as that text ex- 
 pressed it to those who understood the original Scriptures at the 
 time they were first written, shall be translated by correspond- 
 ing words and phrases, so far as they can be found in vernacu- 
 lar English, with the least possible obscurity or indeflniteness.' v 
 
 And the contract further provides that it shall be done i ' in 
 the phraseology of the common English version, so far as is 
 consistent with fidelity to the original, and a proper regard to 
 the present state of the English language." 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 41 
 
 Now we ask the intelligent and honest-minded everywhere, 
 how could fidelity to God and duty to man be more faithful than 
 the Bible Union has been in each and every particular in this 
 matter ? Yet five clergymen of the city of Louisville announce 
 that these honest, faithful measures will produce a Bible made 
 to order. We admit the fact, gentlemen, but not in your in- 
 vidious sense. It will be the first Bible in the English lan- 
 guage that ever was ordered to be made in exact conformity, in 
 every particular, to the inspired text. The Bible Union has 
 given no other order but that, and on it that body is willing to 
 stand at the judgment-bar of God. We grieve to say that 
 the clergymen to whom we allude insinuate that the revisers 
 are actuated by mercenary motives. Do they mean to say 
 that an agreement to do a useful, sacred duty, in an honest, 
 faithful manner, is mercenary? Well, gentlemen, we went 
 among your scholars, guided by the assistance of the best 
 lights in your denominations; we employed men who adorn 
 your pulpits and your halls of learning ; men whom you set 
 forth to the world and endorse, in the responsible duties you 
 pay them for performing, as worthy of all acceptance ; and if 
 you now charge that such men, who are still your preachers 
 and professors in your colleges and theological seminaries, are 
 mercenary, may you not injure the standing of your own de- 
 nominations while you are trying to injure the Bible Union ? 
 We submit the question to your patient consideration. 
 
 But again . These five clergymen profess to be familiar with 
 the history of the translators of the English Bible: but in 
 order to show the value of their historic sketch of the Bible 
 Union, for which they used no authentic material, we cite 
 a single instance of their accuracy in matters with which 
 they profess to be very familiar. They announce that the 
 English Bible was translated by '* fifty odd" persons Ander- 
 son's Annals of the Bible, from which these clergymen quote 
 in their document against the Revision Association, would 
 have shown them that there were but forty translators, instead 
 
42 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 of "fifty odd." Their names and the portions assigned each 
 division of names are all given in Anderson's work. We shall 
 give these forty translators a thorough investigation in a future 
 article. When we do that the people of Kentucky will not 
 be likely to hear much more about "sectarian," "mercenary" 
 revisers, or about "Bibles made to order." But we now ask 
 attention to this fact: each of the learned gentlemen among 
 these five remonstrants uses two Bibles, the Greek and the 
 authorized version ; and each one freely revises the authorized 
 version in his pulpit, and we hope and doubt not that he often 
 improves it, for it has a large capacity for improvement. One 
 of these ministers uses three Scriptures in his public ministra- 
 tions: — he reads the inspired text in Greek, uses the version 
 of the Psalms in King James's Bible, and uses a different 
 version of the Psalms in the Book of Common Prayer. And 
 yet these gentlemen, who luxuriate in the work of individual 
 revision, denounce the honest, faithful, and holy efforts of five 
 hundred thousand Christians who are determined to procure 
 for the English language what it does not now possess and 
 never has possessed — an English Bible faithful in all 
 things to the text of inspiration. Verily, gentlemen, you 
 kick against the goads. 
 
 Of the judgment which these gentlemen pass upon that 
 portion of the work already partially revised, we shall have 
 something to say in a future number. Reverting to the Divine 
 law already mentioned, we shall easily and perfectly establish 
 the superior excellence of the revision by witnesses whose words 
 our clerical friends will not gainsay. 
 
 On one more point made by our clerical friends and co-la- 
 borers in the work of revision, we must say a few words. We 
 hope they will not be offended at being called co-laborers, when 
 we assure them that the friends of revision sincerely regard 
 their first document as quite an aid to the cause. It is a 
 curious fact that they use against revision the identical rule of 
 evidence upon which the Jews rejected the Saviour of the 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 43 
 
 world. The Messiah said, "Search the Scriptures; they tes- 
 tify of me." But the Jews cut the knot in another way. 
 They asked, "Have any of the rulers or Pharisees believed 
 on him ? " And these gentlemen, instead of giving the laud- 
 able, the sacred cause of the Bible Union a patient, full inves- 
 tigation, on facts and testimony, ask, "Are Dr. Wayland and 
 Dr. Malcolm in favor of the movement ? " Upon such logic 
 we would not waste an argument ; but we hope our friends will 
 bear with us while we correct their random assertions. They 
 name ten distinguished Baptists as using their influence, abili- 
 ties, learning, and zeal against the cause of revision. Among 
 these names is that of the Rev. Richard Fuller. If our cler- 
 ical friends had read the papers, they would have found Mr. 
 Fuller's position denned in a letter which he has published. 
 He is one of the ablest, firmest, most liberal, and one of the 
 most zealous friends of the cause of revision that it has in its 
 ranks. He not only liberally contributes his talents and 
 means to the cause, but is president of a society in Maryland 
 whose object is to aid the Bible Union. Of the other Baptists 
 named by our 'clerical friends as active in opposition, we assure 
 them that they misstate their position. We are safe in saying 
 that about one half of them have never uttered a sentence 
 against the Bible Union, nor is it probable that one of the ten 
 Baptists named would consent to occupy the place given them 
 by our clerical friends. 
 
 We now proceed to establish the fact that King James's 
 version is not, in all particulars, a faithful revision of the 
 Word of God. Moses, Jesus Christ, and Paul made and 
 sustained the rule by which we try that version — in the mouth 
 of two or three witnesses every thing shall be established. 
 There is but .one escape for anti-revisionists, and that is the 
 rejection of the authority of Moses and Christ. If their law 
 for the establishment of a truth is a valid one, we can easily 
 and satisfactorily arrive at truth. 
 
 Let the reader now bear in mind what constitutes a witness, 
 
44 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 and that Moses and Jesus Christ say, that in the mouth of 
 .two or three witnesses every thing shall be established. We 
 proceed to summon men who are witnesses. 
 
 Episcopal Church Witnesses. 
 
 Eobert Lowth, whose "Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of 
 the Hebrews " placed him on the highest eminence as a critic, 
 and whose works are a monument to his learning and skill as 
 a biblical scholar of the first rank, thus speaks of King 
 James's version: 
 
 "In respect of the sense and accuracy of the interpretation 
 [translation], the improvements of which it is capable are 
 great and numberless.'''' And nearly one hundred years ago, 
 Bishop Lowth said: " W T henever it shall be thought proper to 
 set forth the Holy Scriptures, for the use of our Church, to 
 better advantage than as they appear in the present English 
 translation, the expediency of which grows every day more 
 and more evident" &c. That is the testimony of a witness 
 whose qualifications were never surpassed, and whose position 
 as a testifier no one will challenge. 
 
 Benjamin Kennicott, D. D-, Canon of Christ Church, 
 Oxford, of whom, with unchallenged accuracy, it has been 
 said, "Hebrew literature and sacred criticism are indebted 
 more to him than to any other scholar of his age," says of 
 King James's version: "Great improvements might now be 
 ^nade, because the Hebrew and Greek languages have been 
 much cultivated, and are far better understood since the year 
 1600." 
 
 Anthony Blackwell, A. M., author of a celebrated work 
 called "The Sacred Classics Defended and Illustrated,'' the 
 second volume of which is a monument of learning and bib- 
 lical skill, says of King James's version* "Innumerable 
 instances might be given of faulty translations of the Divine 
 original." 
 
 We might go on and fill this entire paper with similar tes- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 45 
 
 timony ; but, so far as the Episcopal Church is concerned, we 
 have fulfilled the Divine law. By these witnesses we have 
 established the character of King James's version. There is 
 not one witness of equal qualifications with these who contra- 
 dicts their testimony. 
 
 Presbyterian Witnesses. 
 
 Geo. Campbell, Professor of Marischal College, Aberdeen, 
 whose "Ecclesiastical Lectures," and answer to Hume's 
 "Essay on Miracles," will live while the English language 
 exists, was one of the most masterly biblical critics that ever 
 lived. His preliminary dissertation* to his translation of the 
 four Gospels display far more learning than is to be found in the 
 entire works of the forty translators of King James's version. 
 He was a scholar over whom the Presbyterian Church has 
 good reason to rejoice. Both Catholic and Protestant biblical 
 critics recognize his remarkable merits. The Catholic Bishop 
 Kenrick, in the preface to his translation of the four Gospels, 
 speaks in warm terms of George Campbell's abilities as a 
 scholar and critic. 
 
 The tenth and eleventh preliminary dissertations of George 
 Campbell are crowded with abundant evidence that King 
 James's version is not a faithful translation of the ideas of 
 the Holy Spirit. Of the evil influence of the Genevese trans- 
 lators, of Junius, Tremellius, and of the unscrupulous Beza, 
 over the forty translators of King James's work, George 
 Campbell gives ample testimony. He bears witness to the 
 fact that he found four hundred errors in their version of 
 Matthew alone. 
 
 James Macknight, universally recognized by both Catholics 
 and Protestants as one of the ablest biblical critics that ever 
 lived, was for thirty years the foremost man of the Presbyte- 
 rian Church of Scotland. In his translation of the Epistles 
 of the New Testament, he corrects fifteen out of every sixteen 
 verses of King James's version. He thus witnesses: •'Even 
 
46 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 that which is called the King's translation, though in general 
 much better than the rest, is not a little faulty. It is by no 
 means such a just representation of the inspired originals, as 
 merits to be implicitly relied on, for determining the contro- 
 verted articles of the Christian faith, and for quieting the 
 
 DISSENSIONS WHICH HAVE RENT THE CHURCH." It is thus the 
 
 nursing mother of sectarianism. No witness comparable to 
 George Campbell or James Macknight can be produced to 
 refute their testimony. 
 
 Methodist Witnesses. 
 
 John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, without the aids 
 possessed at present, and without asking the assistance of 
 other scholars, made a revision of the New Testament on his 
 own account. He says: "I have never, knowingly, so much 
 as in one place, altered for altering sake, but there, and there 
 only, where, first, the sense was made better, clearer, 
 stronger, or more consistent with the context; secondly, 
 where the sense being equally good, the phrase ivas better or 
 nearer the original" He made seventy-two changes in one 
 chapter of Acts. 
 
 Adam Clarke, D. D., one of the profoundest scholars that 
 has adorned Methodism, on 2d Samuel, 12th chapter, says: 
 ft Though I believe our translation to be by far the best in 
 any language, ancient or modern, yet I am satisfied it stands 
 much in need of revision," 
 
 So far as Presbyterians and Methodists are concerned, until 
 they can bring forward equal or superior witnesses to George 
 Campbell, Jas. Macknight, John Wesley, and Adam Clarke, 
 to contradict them — and none such can be found — we have, 
 under the Divine law, perfectly established the fact that King 
 James's version is not, in all things, faithful to the inspired 
 text. And our clerical friends will not themselves assert to 
 the contrary. But they may say that the Bible Union is not 
 the body to revise the Scriptures. May we inquire whether 
 
 v 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 47 
 
 our clerical friends are exactly the men to say so? In all 
 fairness, in all holiness, in all the truth and love of the gospel, 
 are not those who know and feel an evil, and who take legit- 
 imate measures to remove or remedy it, superior, in every 
 point of view, to those who know and feel an evil, and do 
 nothing to remove it ? That is precisely the relative position 
 of the Bible Union and of our five clerical friends. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 SECOND LETTER OF THE FIVE CLERGYMEN. 
 
 THE REVISION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 It has not been the purpose of the undersigned to expose 
 every objectionable feature of the Revision scheme, nor to 
 engage in any personal controversy with the gentlemen who 
 are advocating it in the newspapers of this city. We have 
 deemed it enough for us to show the reasonableness of the 
 general satisfaction with the old English Bible, and of the 
 distrust towards those who Avish to change it for sectarian 
 ends. Even though they were the best scholars and the most 
 honest-hearted men in the world, they would be unworthy to 
 be trusted with the translation of the Word of God, if they 
 were determined beforehand to make it speak in a particular 
 way to suit a party. The best scholars are liable to mistake, 
 as the most sincere and intelligent Christians are capable of 
 error as well in faith as in practice. It matters little whether 
 such determination arise from their mistake as scholars, or 
 their error as believers, or their prejudice as partizans and sec- 
 tarians. In any case, it unfits them for such a work as this ; 
 and the more resolutely they pursue it in defiance of the opin- 
 ions of the Church at large, the less do they deserve the 
 public confidence and support. 
 
48 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 The whole question of baptism has been much disputed in 
 the Church. Like every other question concerning religion, 
 it ought to be discussed freely, in the spirit of charity and 
 mutual forbearance, with all the light that can be shed upon 
 it, the ultimate and only authoritative arbiter being the Word 
 of God in its plain and simple meaning. But this does not 
 imply that it is proper for any body of men to reconstruct the 
 Bible to uphold their own views. We have heretofore shown, 
 in the history of this Eevision movement, from the beginning, 
 and through the progress of the circumstances which have 
 resulted in its operations, that such was its main design. 
 
 It will not be denied that the American and Foreign Bible 
 Society was formed by a secession of Baptists from the Amer- 
 ican Bible Society because that truly catholic association 
 refused to sanction certain translations in foreign languages 
 which made the Word of God call baptism immersion. Nor 
 will it be denied that the American Bible Union, out of which 
 has grown the Bible Eevision Association of Louisville, was 
 formed by a secession from the American and Foreign Bible 
 Society because that society refused to apply to the old Eng- 
 lish Bible the principle which it had adopted in its foreign 
 translations. Doubtless these last seceders were consistent; 
 but that is only another way of saying that they separated 
 from their brethren because they were determined, no matter 
 who opposed them, to make the Word of God, in all their 
 translations of it, declare that baptism means nothing but im- 
 mersion, and thus do what they could to settle that question, 
 by forcing the Bible, as we believe, to say what it does not 
 mean. 
 
 We are not ignorant that such a purpose is disclaimed by 
 the revisionists, and that strenuous and earnest efforts are made 
 by them to persuade the Christian world that their ends are 
 not sectarian. It is not for us to reconcile this representation 
 of their design with the history of the enterprise. Neither is 
 it for us to reconcile the several representations of this design 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 49 
 
 with each other, as they have been made at different times by 
 its intelligent friends and most influential promoters. 
 
 We proceed to show how such friends and promoters of it 
 have declared its object and disclosed its spirit. 
 
 It is no disparagement of other men to say that the Rev. 
 Dr. Cone was, in his day, the head and heart of this move- 
 ment. He guided its counsels, he infused into it his own 
 spirit. Can any one suppose that this eminent man did not 
 know what he was about, or that he did not consider the force 
 of the words he uttered on great public occasions, when u Re- 
 vision " was the subject of his discourse? Long the president 
 of the first Baptist Bible Society, formed by the secession 
 from the American Bible Society, and then president of the 
 second Baptist Bible Society, formed by the secession from 
 the first, from its organization to the day of his death, and 
 honored and trusted by his brethren above any other, he may 
 be held, in some sort, to speak by authority. On one occasion 
 he is reported as saying, " There can not be a moment's hesi- 
 tation as to the best English word among Baptists. Having 
 directed their missionaries among the heathen to translate bap- 
 tizo and its cognates by words signifying immerse, immersion, 
 dbc, they can not long continue to be so inconsistent as to 
 despise or reject immersion in their own vernacular tongue." 
 
 On a former occasion, addressing the Bible Union as its 
 president, in words of encouragement to his brethren to proceed 
 in their work of revision, he said of himself: " He has dared 
 to say from this pulpit, again and again, that Christian bap- 
 tism is immersion only ; that, if right to preach it, it is right 
 to print it — to print it in the Bible; for if it is not in 
 the Bible, we have no right to preach or print it as a part of 
 God's revealed will to man." * * * " Since the English 
 word baptize, according to our standard lexicographers, means 
 to sprinkle, pour, asperse, christen, <&c, the American Bible 
 Union must come up to the help of the Lord against the 
 
 mightv, take off the Popish cover from His pure Word, dis- 
 
 4 
 
50 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 abuse the public mind led astray by doctors and dictionaries, 
 and, among other revealed truths, show to all who understand 
 our language, that baptism is immersion only." 
 
 That is in the "vernacular," because scholars and common 
 usage say that baptize, the original Greek word as used by 
 our Lord and his Apostles, simply turned into English, means 
 something else, and not immerse ; therefore, we will make 
 the Word of God, in our version, say that it means immerse 
 only, and moreover, we will so print it in the Bible. 
 
 It will be observed that Dr. Cone boldly rejects a distinction 
 which is not only clear, but of the utmost importance, the 
 denial of which by a well-informed, reflecting, and truly Chris- 
 tian man, can be explained, as far as we can see, only by a 
 spirit of intense sectarianism ; that is, the distinction between 
 preaching a doctrine and printing it in the Bible. Clearly, 
 the one is to state and enforce our sense of what God has 
 taught in his Word , the other is to mold the Word of God 
 to our notions. One is to expound religion ; the other is to 
 make it. In the one, good men may err unquestionably 
 through the infirmities that are common to all, the other is 
 exceedingly like that presumption "which sitteth in the temple 
 of God, showing itself that it is God " 
 
 On a still earlier occasion, the first anniversary of this Bible 
 Union, in 1850, President Cone is reported as having said in 
 a public address, "Brethren and friends ot faithful immersion- 
 ist versions of the Scriptures in all languages, the English not 
 excepted ! •* * * The American and Foreign Bible Society 
 was organized to vindicate A principle — that the Word of God 
 should be translated in all lands ; that, in accordance with 
 this principle, baptizo and its cognates should be rendered by 
 words signifying immerse, immersion, d?c. And here we 
 fought the battle with the Pedobaptists, and here we have to 
 fight the battle over again with the Baptists who will not allow 
 immerse, immersion, ddc, to have a place in the New Testa- 
 ment." Nor does it appear that Dr. Cone became warmer, 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 51 
 
 and expressed himself more strongly as the discussion of the 
 question advanced ; for it seems that years before this, as long 
 ago as 1842, at the anniversary meeting of the American and 
 Foreign Bible Society, of which he was the President, he ex- 
 pressed his views in these terms : "In prosecuting our work, 
 our hands have been strengthened by the formation of the 
 Bible Translation Society of England ; and Brother Edward 
 Steane, its accomplished Secretary, in a letter published in the 
 London Baptist Magazine of the present month, urges the 
 importance of adhering to our fundamental principle, the Bible 
 translated, in the following terms ' Our wisdom consists, as 
 I conceive, and certainly not less our strength, in standing 
 firmly on our own ground. Our only business is to uphold 
 immersionist versions, and to give them as large a circulation 
 as we can, and this becomes our business because all the rest 
 of the Christian world have thrown them away. This single 
 object is our rallying point. Let the Society steadily preserve 
 its course as it has begun, and it will, under God's blessing, 
 unite Baptists heart and hand as one man, and grow every day 
 into a more formidable antagonist to error and a more exten- 
 sive propagator of truth.' In these sentiments we cordially 
 unite." 
 
 " In these sentiments," says Dr. Cone, "WE CORDIALLY 
 unite ' " The gist of these sentiments is, that immersion is 
 the rallying point. The circulation of immersionist ver- 
 sions the one business and single object of the brethren ! 
 We submit to all candid men whether, if Dr. Cone may be 
 taken for a fair exponent of the revision movement, it is not 
 proved that the aim and spirit of that movement have been from 
 the beginning essentially and intensely sectarian — the super 
 extract of the spirit of a party, and therefore unworthy of the 
 confidence, support, and sympathy of the Church at large. 
 
 We intend no disrespect to any when we say that Alexander 
 Campbell is by far the most eminent person for his abilities, 
 position, and influence among all the promoters of this scheme. 
 
52 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 in the west and south-west at least. He may well be referred 
 to, then,, next after Dr. Cone. The undisputed head of a 
 large and powerful sect, he has stamped his opinions upon his 
 followers as few men have ever been able to do. His opinion 
 on so much of the question of baptism as the revisionists are 
 concerned about, is well known. He has long held it. He 
 has fearlessly declared it. He has made it very plain. He 
 has long ago translated the New Testament to support it. 
 That opinion, as announced by himself, is, "that immersion in 
 water, into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of 
 the Holy Spirit, is the only Christian Baptism." 
 
 Accordingly, in his version of the New Testament, he dis- 
 carded the English words baptize, baptism, &c, and boldly 
 supplanted them with immerse, immersion, &c. In like man- 
 ner, and with entire consistency, he has not called himself a 
 Baptist ; nor do his adherents use that name. In short, his 
 example, his influence, his learning, have all been strongly 
 committed to the purpose of making the Word of God teach 
 that immersion, and nothing else, is baptism. Such a man 
 would naturally take his place at the head of a movement like 
 this, among his own people, with whom his name is a tower 
 of strength ; and Baptists who have differed from him so widely 
 on vital questions in religion, and whose churches his influence 
 has rent asunder, drawing many of their people to his stan- 
 dard, would naturally join heart and hand with him in this 
 "work, just in the degree of their excessive attachment to im- 
 mersion; just as they exalted this outward ordinance above 
 the fundamental doctrines of the Gospel , just as they made 
 up their minds to do what he was bold enough to do before 
 them — compel the Word of God to read immersion! We 
 are not surprised, therefore, to hear that Baptists of this class, 
 that is, the Bible Revision Association, merging all other dif- 
 ferences in agreement on this "rallying point," should desire 
 Mr. Campbell for one of their translators. They steadily 
 refuse, we are informed, to make the names of the translators 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 53 
 
 public, preferring to do this thing in a corner ; but now and 
 then a name "leaks out,"' and the rumor is, that to Mr. Camp- 
 bell has been entrusted the "revision" of the Acts of the 
 Apostles. If this be so, we commend the wisdom of this step ; 
 for on the principles of the Association, and for the main object 
 it has in view, no selection could be made more to the purpose. 
 But what becomes of the catholic spirit of the enterprise, its 
 freedom from all sectarian bias, its fair deserving of the Chris- 
 tian confidence and liberal support of all denominations ? 
 With Mr. Campbell's translation of the New Testament long 
 before the world, with his settled opinions as an immersionist, 
 to say nothing of the vital doctrines of the gospel on which he 
 has been held these many years by all the Churches commonly 
 called evangelical and orthodox to have departed from the 
 truth as it is in Jesus, and therefore to differ irreconcileably 
 from themselves, how can it be expected that any but immer- 
 sionists will accept his work? It may be very learned, it 
 may be very fair in the purpose of his own mind ; but it will 
 certainly bear the image and superscription of his cherished 
 opinions. And how can the Church at large encourage it now, 
 or receive it when it is done ? This is said to be his own view 
 of the subject freely expressed. He is candid enough to take 
 it, and manly enough to say so. We honor such a man while 
 we differ from him widely on some great questions of Christian 
 doctrine. We have seen, in several different quarters, a para- 
 graph ascribed to him ; and in the True Baptist, a paper of 
 great ability, research, and fairness, as we believe, referred to 
 Mr. Campbell's Millennial Harbinger of January, 1852. Wc 
 are not able, at the moment, to lay our hands on the Harbin- 
 ger, and can not, therefore, verify the quotation for ourselves 
 as we would desire to do. But we have no reason to question 
 its accuracy. There is no doubt, we believe, that the same 
 sentiments were uttered in this city by the Rev. Dr. Maelay, 
 a leading man, as a traveling agent and lecturer and otherwise, 
 in the Baptist Bible Societies from the beginning, and, sincf 
 
54 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 the death of Dr. Cone, chosen President of the Bible Union, 
 The paragraph is in these terms : 
 
 "I am folly of the opinion that those practicing the immer- 
 sion of believers are the only people that can make a really 
 valuable and faithful translation of the New ^Testament. They 
 have in Protestant Christendom the only commanding and 
 favorable stand point for such a work. Their eyes are couched. 
 They can see what no man, looking through the leather spec- 
 tacles of pedobaptism or pedorantism, can see in the Christian 
 institution. I speak experimentally as well as theoretically, 
 having been on the top of Mount Sinai before I stood upon the 
 top of Mount Zion. I know the horizon of both these time- 
 honored summits. I therefore emphatically silence all cavil as 
 to their incompetency, and strongly declare the conviction that 
 they, and they only, can furnish a version worthy of the age. 
 * * Pedobaptists and Baptists will never agree to make a 
 new version. Not one Pedobaptist will touch the ark of our 
 sanctuary, fearing he might be stricken dead. * * While it 
 is a show of generosity or catholicity on our part to invite him, 
 he will with all complaisance say, with one of olden time, * I 
 pray you, sir, have me excused.' None but immersionists can 
 unite in this work, and none but they can do justice to the 
 subject." 
 
 In the "Proceedings of the Bible Kevision Convention, held 
 at Memphis, Tenn., April 2, 1852, together with" Addresses 
 showing the necessity of a Revision of the English Scriptures > 
 Louisville, Hull&Bro,, 1852/' we find an elaborate and well- 
 considered discourse by Mr. Campbell, in which he says : 
 " But again, none but Baptists can do this great work * * 
 Still, none but immersionists do discern the spirituality of the 
 kingdom of Christ." 
 
 We submit to all candid men whether, taking Mr. Campbell 
 for a fair exponent of the revision movement, it is not proved 
 to be an immersionist movement, a sectarian movement, ani- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 55 
 
 mated by a spirit which will be extremely likely, speaking in 
 the gentlest and most moderate terms, to sacrifice the Word 
 of God to a party? 
 
 There are many men of less note and influence engaged in 
 this enterprise, who have expressed themselves to the same 
 effect with these more eminent persons, only more incautiously. 
 We might quote their sayings at great length. We deem it 
 needless, having done our work sufficiently without them. We 
 will only add the testimony of a few leading Baptist ministers 
 opposed to the revision, who, looking at the subject from a dif- 
 ferent point of observation, have taken the same view of it 
 with ourselves. Thus says the Rev. Dr. Fuller: "The 
 moment we resort to a new translation, we sacrifice the whole 
 argument, and virtually say, i as the book now is, we can not 
 make out our case ; we must therefore follow the Campbellites 
 and the Socinians and others, and make a Bible to suit our- 
 selves!'" Says the Rev. Prof. Ripley: "It is impossible to 
 put aside or bring into comparative disuse the English version, 
 and therefore to alter the established name of the ordinance ; 
 so that the substitution of immerse would only be regarded as 
 a party measure or a Baptist interpretation, of value only 
 within the precincts of a certain denomination." Says the 
 Rev. Dr. Brently: "The Baptist will have gained not a par- 
 ticle of advantage by the change, while he will have increased 
 at least the suspicion, in the mind of his Pedobaptist neighbor, 
 of tampering with the Word of God, and of making a version 
 expressly to suit his own particular views." Says the Rev. 
 Dr. Dowling. "Let us alter the word baptize into immerse, 
 and that moment we render ourselves liable to the charge of 
 making a Bible to suit our own purposes, because we could 
 not maintain our cause with the common version. " 
 
 We think we have vindicated the opinion which we expressed 
 at the beginning, that "this revision movement, sectarian in 
 its spirit and aims, and not called for by the Church at large. 
 
5Q 
 
 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 nor required by the actual necessities of the subject, is not 
 entitled to the public confidence and support." 
 W. L. Beeckineidge, 
 
 Of the Presbyterian Chureh. 
 
 H. M. Denison, 
 
 Of the Protestant Episcopal Church. 
 
 Samuel Lowey Adams, 
 
 Of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. 
 
 E. C. Teimble, 
 
 Of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church. 
 
 G. GOEDEN, 
 
 Of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church. 
 
 NUMBER V 
 
 THE REVISION OF THE TEXT OF INSPIRATION FOR THE 
 ENGLISH LANGUAGE. 
 
 It is a curious and impressive fact, that almost every at- 
 tempt that has ever been made for securing a faithful utterance 
 of the Divine oracles, for the use of the masses of the people, 
 has been received with denunciation on the part of those in 
 the house of God, who forgot Paul's injunction: "Be ambi- 
 tious to be unambitious." One would suppose, a priori, that 
 all such efforts would be hailed with delight ; but those who 
 may thus judge show that they know but little of the sectarian 
 department of human nature. History is full of examples of 
 these irrational, unscriptural, heaven-defying attempts to man- 
 acle the progress of the pure truths of heavenly revelation ; 
 but we have not space now to sketch more than one instance. 
 That occurred in the fourth century. Even at that early 
 period, that illustrious scholar, Jerome, incurred the most vio- 
 lent opposition in his efforts to produce what is now known as 
 the Vulgate Bible. But few of the people could read the 
 Greek Bible; but says Dr. Davidson, "An excessive and su- 
 perstitious veneration for the Septuagint, and the Veins made 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 57 
 
 from it, prevailed at that time, so that any one who departed 
 from them could not hope to escape animadversion. Calum- 
 nies were freely uttered against the laborious translator. He 
 was pronounced a heretic. Detraction and opposition befell 
 him. Even Augustine joined partially with his accusers, not 
 daring to go against the stream of popular opinion. * * Its 
 departures from the current Greek version, and from the old 
 Latin version taken from the Greek, were seized as proofs of 
 the' danger accruing from the new work. Accordingly, it was 
 reserved for the more correct judgment of posterity to appre- 
 ciate the merits of Jerome as a translator. His contempora- 
 ries condemned what they ought to have approved and ap- 
 plauded." Tyndale deserves to be held in grateful memory by 
 all who speak the English language for his noble efforts to 
 supply the people of England with an intelligible translation 
 of God's Holy Truth, which he made the object of his life. 
 He was persecuted unto death for those efforts, but he accom- 
 plished his purpose with a remarkable success, considering the 
 hindrances thrown in his way. Nineteen-twentieths of the 
 purities and beauties of the common version, which are ascribed 
 to the forty translators of King James's version, are due to the 
 learning and skill of Tyndale. And Jerome is entitled to no 
 ordinary praise for his beneficent labors in producing the 
 Vulgate. 
 
 These lessons of the past should not be forgotten. The 
 labors of those who are endeavoring to procure a faithful ver- 
 sion of the Word of God for the present English race should 
 be assisted and promoted by all who love the truth of God 
 more than all other things. Those timid souls, those time- 
 serving trimmers, whose apprehensions are awakened with the 
 fable that evil will come if men lose their confidence in King 
 James's version, should keep their clamor for some useful pur- 
 pose, if any can be found for it. One of the most distinguished 
 doctors of divinity of the Methodist Church in this country : 
 one of the most learned and able biblical critics in that dcnom- 
 
58 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 ination, in speaking of such characters as we have named, 
 says: "It is painful to the liberal and candid mind to revert 
 to the prejudices and opposition which such inquiries" [what 
 says the inspired text?] u have met with in former times, 
 within the bosom of the Church itself, and it is mortifying to 
 catch, now and then, from modern Christians, an echo of the 
 same narrow sentiments. Even ministers, authors, and editors 
 are occasionally found who openly decry or privately discour- 
 age such pursuits, from the mistaken notion that they weaken 
 the popular reverence for the Word of God. Revelation needs 
 no such defenders , it seeks no lurking-place ; it fears no in- 
 vestigation. Error alone can suffer by an examination of evi- 
 dence. It is the hight of fanatical folly to cling to any system 
 of belief which we are not willing to submit to the most 
 searching test of facts. If the Bible will not bear the closest 
 scrutiny that a fair criticism can apply, then we are free to 
 confess it unworthy of our confidence. On the contrary, it 
 has always triumphed after such an ordeal; and it is these 
 very labors of biblical critics that have established the sub- 
 stantial and wonderful accuracy of the text of Scripture on a 
 basis of certainty which the cavils of infidels can never here- 
 after shake." 
 
 Now we ask why all these treasures of biblical knowledge, 
 of truth, of all the landmarks of God's highway among men, 
 are gathered for scholars exclusively? Why is it laudable, 
 why is it worthy of all praise to undertake and pursue these 
 labors for the benefit of the learned; and why are the mi. 
 dertaking and pursuit of these labors for the benefit of the 
 masses of the people considered worthy only of detraction, 
 misrepresentation, evil judgment, and evil doing? Is the 
 homage of the heart, is the praise of the lips, is the obedi- 
 ence to the revealed will of God on the part of a doctor 
 of divinity more grateful to Jehovah, more acceptable to Him, 
 than on the part of the humblest soul on God's foot-stool? 
 The "common" people of Berea were nobler than others, 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 59 
 
 because they searched the Word of God. Apollos was 
 mighty in the revealed will of God. The Colossians were 
 directed to " let the Word of God dwell in them richly." 
 The leaves of the Word of God are the leaves of those 
 trees of life which John saw in his visions. "Man shall 
 not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth 
 out of the mouth of God." These are the utterances of inspi- 
 ration ; these were the intentions of the Holy Spirit, at a time 
 when no one in the body of Christ attempted to hinder the 
 career of the Word of God. We are standing in the midst 
 of different times. Men can now be found who know that 
 the people of this country have not the fullness, the purity of 
 the Word of God, and can lift their arm of threatening toward 
 those who are determined to secure that boon for the English 
 race, if human agencies can accomplish it. It is almost im- 
 possible to open any work written by a biblical scholar that is 
 not full of evidences that, instead of the pure truth of God for 
 the people, we have a very faulty translation of it, by transla- 
 tors who had not a perfect text from which a pure version 
 could be made ; who often utterly misconceived what the Holy 
 Spirit said ; who made corrupt uses of their opportunities, and 
 utter sentiments, as of divine origin, which God never counte- 
 nanced ; who often supplied words that nothing can justify, as 
 was proved in a sermon at the Second Presbyterian Church, 
 on Lord's Day, the 24th of February; and who mark, as prob- 
 ably spurious, passages which recent labors have found to be 
 among the purest and best established utterances of the Holy 
 Spirit. The highest authorities in biblical learning among 
 Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and Methodists, unite in bearing 
 witness to these facts, and no witness disputes their truth. Let 
 us summon a few witnesses to these truths, and hear what 
 they have to say. Bishop Lowth, of the Church of England, 
 in his notes to Isaiah, page 132, London edition, in recording 
 the recovery of a Hebrew word that was not in the text from 
 winch King James's translators revised, says. "I have en- 
 
60 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 deayored to set this matter in a clear light, as it is the first 
 example (in Isaiah's prophecy) of a whole word lost out of the 
 text, of which the reader loill find many other plain exam- 
 ple,' in the course of these notes.''' 
 
 Dr. Adam Clarke, of the Methodist Church, says — and his 
 words should burn themselves into the very heart of hearts of 
 all who wish to be faithful to God and man, for God will hold 
 all to strict accountability : u Most of the advantages which our 
 %mbelievers have appeared to have over certain passages of 
 Scripture, have arisen from an inaccurate or false translation 
 of the terms of the original, and an appeal to this has gene- 
 rally silenced these gainsay ers.^ But we have five clergymen 
 pleading for a continuance of all these evils, which biblical 
 criticism proclaims, instead of pleading, as faithful devotees of 
 God's truth, for an extension of those means which enable 
 scholars to "silence gainsayers." Why should not the masses 
 of the people be so armed with "the sword of the Spirit, which 
 is the Word of God," that they may "silence gainsayers?" 
 Will our five clergymen answer that plain question ? He who 
 teaches a pious mind one new truth of Jehovah's revelation, 
 imbues that mind with additional power and grace ; lie who 
 undertakes to veil or obscure one passage of the inspired word 
 from the understanding of men, is a friend neither to God or 
 man. But if one new truth of the inspired text, or one truth 
 once obscure, but now clear and tangible, is thus important, 
 -what must be the importance of thousands, given as God gave 
 them, and disrobed of the rubbish with which man's devices 
 have covered them i And the united voice of all biblical crit- 
 icism bears testimony to the existence of the evils we have 
 named in King James's version, and is equally unanimous in 
 the declaration that all these evils can be remedied. Let us 
 look at two authorities on this subject. 
 
 Conybeare and Howson, two distinguished ministers of the 
 Church of England, have recently published a work entitled 
 "The Life and Epistles of St. Paul." It has been hailed with 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES, 61 
 
 acclamation everywhere, by the learned, as one of the noblest 
 monuments of biblical criticism ever erected by learning. The 
 highest authorities in periodical criticism among Presbyterians 
 and Episcopalians have bestowed upon the work the warmest 
 approbation, and the authors deserve the lasting gratitude of 
 all scholars for the floods of light they have thrown upon the 
 New Testament. In a vast number of instances, they conclu- 
 sively establish the existence of the very faulty condition of 
 the text used by King James's translators, and in many other 
 instances show the bad use made of the text that was in the 
 hands of those translators. Thus, for an example, in 2d Co- 
 rinthians xi. 25, Conybeare and Howson say; "The true 
 meaning is lost in the authorized version, and is similarly lost 
 in the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew vii. 25, 27." In 
 Paul's discourse at Antioch, in Pisidia, a metaphor more beau- 
 tiful than any thing in Demosthenes or Cicero, is entirely lost 
 in the authorized version. Again, these authors, on Romans, 
 iii. 25, after giving the Greek text, say: " The mistransla- 
 tion, which is in the authorized version entirely alters the 
 meaning.'''' These are but specimens of many hundreds of 
 such instances given by these renowned biblical scholars. 
 
 Again, the Religious Tract Society of England, composed 
 of what are called evangelical sects, established 1799, have 
 recently produced an "Annotated Paragraph Bible," which 
 should command the favor of the English world. It is not 
 saying too much to say, that if such a Bible had been in the 
 hands of the English race one hundred years ago, Christianity 
 would have been immensely advanced over the world, and in 
 the hearts and practices of myriads, beyond what it is, The 
 increasing knowledge of the English people in Bible matters 
 demanded a Bible worthy of the text of inspiration , and the 
 "Religious Tract Society" have furnished one, for which they 
 deserve the highest honor. That society makes a multitude 
 of improved versions in lieu of the faulty ones of King James's 
 work. A great number of those improved revisions arc inval- 
 
G2 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 liable, and will prove a precious "boon to all who love the pure 
 light of the Bible. The revisions are numerous throughout 
 the work. For example, the new translations in the five books 
 of Moses alone amount to three hundred and fifty-seven. In 
 Isaiah, they amount to two hundred and sixty-five- And this 
 invaluable service has been rendered to the English people by 
 the brethren of the five clergymen, who, if they were able to 
 prevent it, would permit no such service to be rendered to the 
 American people. And the Church of England, recently at a 
 meeting of both Houses of Convocation of Canterbury, at 
 Westminster, has given notice of a motion for all the objects 
 announced by the Bible Union for a revision of the Holy 
 Scriptures. And while surrounded by such a host of over- 
 whelming testimonies and facts, five clergymen of Louisville 
 have deliberately set themselves to the work of perpetuating 
 the existence of a faulty version of God's Word. But the 
 vast treasures of biblical knowledge, accumulated by the 
 labors of the learned, must and will stand m the text of 
 God ? s inspiration, and all the opposition that clerical zeal can 
 command will not only not prevent it, but will not even 
 obstruct the work. The enterprise is safely beyond the reach 
 of its caviling opponents. From the days of the Apostles to 
 the present moment, there has not been a Bible Society of 
 holier, purer, and nobler purposes ; there have been none more 
 perfectly of one mind and heart, than the Bible Union , and 
 -its members will carry the work forward, no matter what may 
 be the sacrifice demanded. Amidst the immense array of 
 witnesses among all the sects, who point out clearly the line 
 of duty in this holy, this sacred enterprise of the Bible Union, 
 the voice of inspiration speaks in terms that can not be mis- 
 understood. Moses teaches, that if we know a matter upon 
 which we should testify, and the time comes for us to bear 
 testimony, and we do it not, we shall be guilty. If we warn 
 not men of the pure counsel of God, and they die in their 
 wrong doing, their blood, Jehovah says, will be reqmred at 
 
TRANSLATION OF TtfE SCRIPTURES. 63 
 
 our hands. But if we warn the wicked, and they turn not, 
 and die in their wrong doing, we have delivered our souls. 
 The King of Heaven is not among the enemies of Bible revi- 
 sion. Do our clerical friends imagine that they can crush the 
 life out of an enterprise vitalized by such principles as we 
 have named? Archbishop Newcome, one of the most learned 
 and devoted lovers of the Bible that has lived since the Apos- 
 tles, in his "Historical View of Translations," says "Were 
 a version of the Bible executed in a manner suitable to the 
 magnitude of the undertaking, such a measure would have a 
 direct tendency to establish the faith of thousands, to open 
 their understandings, to warm their hearts, to enliven their 
 devotions, and to delight their imaginations." And to the 
 accomplishment of these results, the Bible Union will devote 
 all their earthly powers that may be necessary, All the cler- 
 gymen that can be induced to oppose it can not make the cause 
 even pause in its progress. 
 
 There are a few unsettled items between the Bible Revision 
 Association and our clerical friends, to which we shall now 
 address ourselves. They seem to think that a sneer from 
 them is quite sufficient to snuff out the Edinburgh Review. 
 The article on Revision, in that Review, was written by a 
 biblical scholar thoroughly acquainted with the whole subject. 
 Every paragraph of the writer shows the hand of a master, 
 and the article exhibits an intimate acquaintance with the 
 masters of ancient and modern theology. This writer appeals 
 to witnesses who adorn the Church of England universities 
 and pulpits, and to Selden, the most learned man in the 
 Westminster Assembly, which made the Presbyterian Confes- 
 sion of Faith. And how do our five clerical friends meet the 
 overwhelming facts witnessed by these witnesses ? They say : 
 " To exhibit the just force of this testimony, it would be well 
 to show us how far that work is really friendly to our holy re- 
 ligion, as understood and embraced by evangelical Christians." 
 Arc not Jowett, of Baliol College, Selden, "the glory of Eng' 
 
G4 . FIDELITVTO GOD IN THE 
 
 land," the author of the " Homily on Reading of the Scrip- 
 tures," Hartwell Home, the present Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 the Rev. Arthur Stanley, Professor Scholefield, Bishop Hors- 
 ley, and " The Religious Tract Society," " really friendly to 
 our holy religion, as understood and embraced by evangelical 
 Christians ? " If they are not, our clerical friends should let 
 the world know who are. The authorities we have named are 
 appealed to in the Edinburgh Review, and sustain all it says. 
 But our clerical friends have no confidence in their own ideas 
 of "the just force of this testimony." In their distress, they 
 summon Mr. Newman as an authority ; yet neither of the five 
 clergymen considers him "really friendly to our holy religion, 
 as understood and embraced by evangelical Christians." But 
 the legs of the lame are not equal. Our clerical friends ap- 
 peal to Mr. Newman to prove a point that is not in the contro- 
 versy — the excellence of the English of the common version. 
 But certainly they are aware that that English has been 
 greatly altered since King James's day ; and excellent as they 
 may say it is, neither of the five clergymen would use all the 
 speech of that version, either in the pulpit nor in society. 
 Why did they not appeal to their friend in need, Mr. Newman, 
 on the character of the translation ? He is quite as good an 
 authority in the one case as in the other ; and the law says, 
 if they reject their witness in one thing, they must in all. 
 
 , Again the clergymen say : " Can the Bible Revision Asso- 
 ciation assure us that the Gospel of our Lord and Saviour 
 Jesus Christ, with its blessed institutions, as pious Baptists 
 and other Christian people in Europe and America hold and 
 love it, is any more an object of respect with these reviewers 
 than the old English Bible?" Now, if these clergymen 
 wished to make an evil charge, why did they cloak the desire 
 under the form of such a query ? They well knew that they 
 had not one fact on which to base the charge thus insinuated. 
 The Edinburgh Review is in the fiftieth year of its existence, 
 and these clergymen can not place their fingers on one article 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 65 
 
 in its pages that is opposed to Christianity. A multitude of 
 articles in favor of the Bible have appeared in its pages. We 
 challenge contradiction to these statements. And we add, 
 that many of the bright lights of Episcopalianism and Pres- 
 byterianism have sought the services of that renowned head 
 of literature as a means of advocating Christianity. One of 
 the celebrities of Scotch Presbyterianism is the principal con- 
 tributor to the Eeview. We allude to Henry Rogers, the 
 author of a work of great renown, called " Reason and Faith," 
 which first appeared in the Edinburgh Review. He is also the 
 author of the "Eclipse of Faith." Verily our clerical friends 
 must have been in sore distress when they resorted to such an 
 attack upon that Review, in order to shrink the crushing force 
 of its authorities, facts, and reasonings, upon revision. They 
 should remember that they are now before the intelligent 
 people of Kentucky, who are not very likely to be deceived 
 by such snares as these. One who knew the people well, 
 said *. " They are seldom wrong in their opinions ; in their 
 sentiments, they are never mistaken." We should be pleased 
 to see these five gentlemen agree upon a common definition of 
 what they mean by "the Gospel of our Lord and Saviour 
 Jesus Christ, with its blessed institutions." What is the 
 gospel with one, is not with another of these five clergymen ; 
 and what are "its blessed institutions" with one, are not with 
 the others. They are in a delightful state of harmony to sit 
 in judgment upon the piety of the Edinburgh Review ! 
 
 These five harmonious clergymen are shocked at the idea 
 that Baptists, and those Christians whom they politely, cour- 
 teously, and piously insult with the epithet of Campbellites, 
 should be united in the cause of revision. It is marvelous in 
 their eyes that the two should have waived their differences ! 
 Could they not have found a greater wonder to marvel over 
 by looking in upon themselves ? Three varying phases of one 
 human creed — the Westminster Confession, with scarcely any 
 common bond, one representative of the Thirty-nine Articles, 
 
C6 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 who would admit neither of his co-workers into his pulpit, and 
 a representative of the Discipline of the Methodist Church 
 South — are banded together in opposition to the Bible Union's 
 efforts to procure a faithful translation in English of the in- 
 spired text for the enlightenment of the people — a blessing 
 they have never enjoyed ; and these five harmonies shake their 
 heads in melancholy grandeur over the fact that two denomina- 
 tions have waived their differences! Consistency, thou art a 
 jewel ! This coolness is too unseasonable to be interesting or 
 refreshing. Our clerical friends admonish us that no one in 
 putting on his armor should boast like him that taketh it off 
 Our admonitors should bear in mind that some persons may 
 have no great reason for boasting even when they take off their 
 armor. 
 
 Our clerical friends roundly assert that the object of the 
 Bible Union is to get some change made in the rendering of 
 the Greek word bajptizo, and, without the semblance of proof, 
 they declare that a foregone conclusion. We have already 
 dissipated the statement to the winds, in showing that a ma- 
 jority of the Board who are to make the final decision of the 
 text as it is to go to press are Pedobaptists. Our clerical 
 friends are in a very awkward dilemma. We have shown by 
 ample testimony, complete indeed, that the Bible Union has 
 made no contract whatever for the translation of any specified 
 word ; and here is the dilemma of our clerical debaters they 
 must either prove their unqualified assertion by some testimony 
 that is not known to any body connected with the Bible Union, 
 or they must rest their assertion upon the fact that a contract 
 to faithfully transfer every word of the inspired text, by honest 
 English words, must necessarily result in some change of the 
 present word baptize. On one of these horns of the dilemma 
 they have hung themselves, and we commend the case to their 
 consciences. • 
 
 The Bible Union is cheered in its progress by thousands of 
 pious hearts and holy hands. It has gathered strength from 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 67 
 
 this clerical war, and it will be happy if the war continues. 
 We shall give the people the enjoyment in the Bible which the 
 author of Polymetis found in studying the classics through 
 the remains of ancient architecture and paintings. He says .* 
 "The chief use I have found in this sort of study has not 
 been so much in discovering what was wholly unknown as in 
 strengthening and beautifying what was known before. When 
 the day was so much overcast just now, you saw all the same 
 objects you do at present — these trees, that river, the forest on 
 the left hand, and those spreading vales to the right , but now 
 the sun is broke out, you see all of them more clearly and 
 with more pleasure. It shows scarce any thing that you did 
 not see before § but it gives a new life and lustre to every 
 thing that you did see." King James's version is under a 
 clouded sky, in a drizzling atmosphere ; the revised Bible will 
 show the sloping vales, the rolling rivers, the lofty forests, and 
 the majestic mountain heights of God's inspiration in the full 
 blaze of the meridian sun. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 P. S. — Since the foregoing was in type, we have seen the 
 publication of the 1st of March, made by the five clergymen 
 appointed to oppose a revision of the Holy Scriptures. In our 
 article of next Tuesday, we shall examine that remarkable 
 document, and we are sure that we can satisfy every dispas- 
 sionate mind that even if all its statements were correct, which 
 we regret to say they are not, there is not one sentence in the 
 entire publication that has the least bearing on the Revision 
 question. We pledge ourselves to make these declarations 
 good next Tuesday. May we suggest to our clerical friends 
 a revision of at least one of their statements before we do it 
 for them ? They will gain nothing by waiting for us to do it. 
 
68 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 NUMBER VI. 
 
 A BIBLE FAITHFUL TO THE INSPIRED TEXT. — ITS ENEMIES, 
 WHO ARE THEY? 
 
 Aechbishop Whately, iii illustrating the various forms of 
 ignoratio elenchi in logic, speaks of one kind "in which the 
 respondent finds it more serviceable to disprove some part 
 of that which is required, and dwell on that, suppressing all 
 the rest. Thus, if a university is charged with cultivating 
 only the mere elements of mathematics, and in reply a list of 
 books studied there is produced, should even any one of those 
 books be not elementary, the charge is in fairness refuted ; but 
 the sophist may then earnestly contend that some of those 
 books are elementary, and thus keep out of sight the real 
 question, viz., whether they are all so." Our five clerical 
 friends, who are attempting to arrest the revision of the Bible, 
 have given the readers of their publication of March 1st an 
 extended display of that method of disputation, as we shall 
 now proceed to show. The means by which the objects and 
 designs of any organization are to be discovered and settled 
 are through its constitution and laws. The constitution and 
 laws of the Bible Union, in all their completeness, have been 
 before the public for the past five years. No attempt has 
 "been made to conceal any of those fundamental features ; but, 
 on the contrary, all possible publicity has been given to them. 
 Truth has been piled upon truth, fact has been heaped upon 
 fact, in such a manner as to make the platform of the Bible 
 Union perfectly familiar to the public mind. We hold that 
 this platform is invulnerable to attack from any quarter. The 
 five Louisville clergymen have not even attempted to assail 
 any one principle proclaimed by the Bible Union; yet every 
 one who has read the two decretals they have issued knows 
 that they would be intensely gratified if they could find one 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 09 
 
 salient point in the constitution, organization, or platform of 
 the Bible Union, against which they could direct an assault. 
 The enmity is willing, but the power is weak. And we feel 
 amply assured that the Bible revision movement can not be 
 assailed by any one truth or fact in the possession of these 
 clergymen. Let us test this declaration by notorious facts. 
 The Bible Union says : There is not, and there never has 
 been, an English version of the Holy /Scriptures faithful, in 
 all respects, to the inspired original. Now, if these gentle- 
 men know of one such version, they can produce it, and we 
 are silenced ; the revision movement is at an end. If these 
 clerical gentlemen can find any such version, their appointed 
 task of annihilating the revision cause becomes one of the easi- 
 est and cheapest of labors. Again the Bible Union says, thai 
 King James's version is condemned, in very many places, by 
 the highest authorities m all the leading sects. The five cler- 
 gymen do not and can not deny that truth. The Bible Union 
 says, that the masses of the people who speak English are 
 fully entitled to have the utterances of the inspired text in 
 as clear, full, definite, and intelligible terms as the masses 
 had them in the original languages. The five clergymen do 
 not, can not controvert that truth. The Bible Union says, 
 that scholarship or the means of sacred philology are able to 
 make as perfect a representative in English of the inspired 
 text as any translation can be a representative of the ideas 
 of an original. Our clerical friends do not dispute that truth, 
 because, if they were to do so, they would virtually destroy 
 all usefulness of the entire text of inspiration, so far as the 
 English race is concerned, Now, in order to give the people 
 of the English race the benefit of these principles in a practi- 
 cal way, the Bible Union made a constitution, founded upon 
 this living truth: "The Word of God shall be translated 
 into all languages, so as most clearly to express to the people 
 the exact sense of the original or inspired text, without refer- 
 ence to the tenets or practices of any seel . r party m Chris- 
 
i 
 
 70 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 tendom." That truth is broad enough to hold every Christian 
 on this earth who loves his Maker and Eedeemer more than 
 he does his party. These five clergymen can easily step upon 
 that platform, if they desire to take a hand in securing a ver- 
 sion of the Bible faithful in all respects to the original. In 
 the most intimate acquaintance they may form with the Bible 
 Union, in its most secret archives, they will not find one prin- 
 ciple or practice that is in the least degree inconsistent with 
 the broad truth announced above. Come in, gentlemen ; you 
 will create more joy in heaven and on earth by manfully 
 struggling for a faithful version of the Word of God, than by 
 clerically fighting for a faulty one. Inasmuch as you do not 
 even call in question one principle or truth announced by the 
 Bible Union, what have you to fight about ? Do you really 
 know ? ' Surely you do not suppose that you are fighting the 
 Bible Union in assailing some of its members ; for you know 
 that there is not one organization of men under the heavens 
 that can truly and honestly be measured by any thing but its 
 constitution and laws. You may try individuals by the con- 
 stitution or laws, but you cannot try the constitution and laws 
 by individuals. Thus, when infidelity undertakes to measure 
 Christianity by some of its professors, our five clergymen can 
 easily detect the fallacy. They appeal to the institution as 
 founded by Jesus Christ, and the laws ordained by the Apos- 
 tles. Take another example: Suppose a Judaising teacher 
 had gone to Antioch immediately after the difficulty between 
 Paul and Peter, and announced that the Gentiles must submit 
 to Moses: the "pure Bible speech" brethren at Antioch would 
 meet the doctrine by an appeal to the constitution — the decree 
 of the apostles, elders, and congregation at Jerusalem, on the 
 Mosaic point. But the Judaiser, in the very ignoratio elenchi 
 of our five clergymen, would ignore even the existence of such 
 a document, and insist that Peter was the head and heart of 
 Christianity, the foremost man in the cause, and that he had 
 l)con recently at Antioch refusing to acknowledge the baptisecf 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES- 71 
 
 but uncircumcised gentiles as Christians. Thus, though 
 crushed down by the mountain-load of testimony, our Ju- 
 daiser managed still to carry on a verbal campaign. 
 
 But let us pursue our clerical friends through all the sinuos- 
 ities of their logic. We have shown all the principles of the 
 Bible Union, against no one of which do our clerical dispu- 
 tants utter one dissenting word. Now what is the Bible 
 Union ? It is a regularly organized body of Christian people, 
 who stand perfectly fair in society as honest, upright people 
 before God and man. There is not a Bible Society in the 
 world that has stronger claims upon the confidence of every 
 pious man and woman on earth. But this society is not able, 
 of itself, to make a pure version of the Word of God, and 
 has not attempted it. Where is the capacity for this essential 
 work to be found ? The unanimous voice of the world says it 
 exists exclusively in men of learning. The Bible Union, 
 therefore, constituted a Board of Revisers, consisting generally 
 of the most learned biblical scholars that could be found in 
 Europe or America , and many of the highest dignitaries in 
 the various denominations assisted the Bible Union in finding 
 the best scholars in their ranks. We are debtors to Episco- 
 palians, Church of England men, Presbyterians of diverse 
 names, and Methodists, for the assistance given us in finding 
 their scholars. To this Board of Revisers the entire subject of 
 translation is committed, and it has full and independent con- 
 trol of that whole department. It decides upon the text that 
 is to be printed as the version secured by the Bible Union, 
 and is in no way hampered by the Union, except in the re- 
 quirement of fidelity to God and man. The Board consists 
 of upwards of forty men of unsullied character as men, and 
 they are recognized as among the most learned men of tins or 
 of any other age. And so little idea did the managers of the 
 Bible Union have that their object was to procure, as the five 
 clergymen assert, a translation merely of the word baptiso, 
 that this Board of Revisers, this jury of faithful versions, to 
 
72 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 whom the whole responsibility is given, is so constituted that 
 it has a large majority of Pedobaptists in it. If the assertion 
 of these clergymen as to the objects of the Bible Union had 
 even a shadow of. evidence to rest upon, would not this fact 
 be conclusive against their assertion ? 
 
 No one has any control over this Board, either in its delib- 
 erations or acts. The Bible Union has confidence in the men 
 who compose it, and has submitted to it the entire question of 
 translation, without attempting to hamper any man in the 
 Board with a single sectarian or party thread. Our five cleri- 
 cal friends do not deny any of these truths , they can not con- 
 trovert one of them. Those who may not have read their 
 production of March 1st, may feel curious to know, under 
 these circumstances, how these gentlemen manage to argue. 
 They can not assail the Bible Union with one truth or fact, 
 and how can they make a show even of controversy ? Why, 
 with the most imperturbable gravity, they undertake to batter 
 down the impregnable bulwarks of the Bible Union by pub- 
 lishing the opinion of Dr. Spencer Cone on the proper render- 
 ing of the Greek word hctfttizo, and by asserting that Alexan- 
 der Campbell made a translation of the New Testament. Let 
 no one suppose that we are losing sight of the dignity of the 
 revision cause, and imagine that we are jesting. We are 
 uttering the words of soberness and truth. "Why," says 
 some straightforward man, not expert in the ways of dodging, 
 " what have those two things to do with the question of revi- 
 sion? The five clergymen might as well have quoted Gen. 
 Jackson's proclamation on the South Carolina difficulty, and 
 have said that Napoleon died at St. Helena." Certainly they 
 might have done quite as well with these two items of the 
 past , they have quite as much bearing on the question before 
 the public. Yet those gentlemen could not have inflicted a 
 greater shower of words than they did on this little piece of 
 false logic if they had been recording the discovery of a new 
 continent. Dr. Cone had and Alexander Campbell has strong 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 73 
 
 and well settled convictions as to the meaning of the word 
 baptizo ; but when a tribunal of learned men of integrity was 
 established to decide all questions of translation, Dr. Cone and 
 Alexander Campbell at once went into the Bible Union, and 
 showed that they were willing, in a meek and quiet spirit, to 
 submit baptizo, with all the other words of the Bible, to the 
 tribunal of revision. Would it be discreditable to these five 
 Pedobaptist clergymen to imitate the example ? If they are 
 as well convinced of the strength of their view of the meaning 
 of the word baptizo, upon which they harp so much, as they 
 say Dr. Cone and Alexander Campbell were, why not submit 
 their case to the adjudication of this learned tribunal ? Their 
 Pedobaptist brethren largely predominate in this board of ad- 
 judication. Are they afraid of their own brethren and of their 
 own scholars? All questions of life, liberty, and property, 
 are amenable, in this countiy, to tribunals erected by the 
 people, and the award of justice depends upon the purity of 
 constitutions, laws, and courts, and not upon the wishes or 
 hopes of litigants. If a litigant begins to abuse a respectable 
 jury before it utters a sign of its award, common sense would 
 say that such a litigant felt that his cause was desperate. 
 
 The Bible Union is in the exact condition of the tribunals 
 of the American people in its leading points. It has a con- 
 stitution, laws, and a competent tribunal for revision ; and the 
 purity of these fundamental provisions of the Bible Union is 
 not challenged or controverted by the five clergymen. Why, 
 then, are they not willing to seek justice as other men do? 
 Granted that the opinions of Dr. Cone and of Alexander Camp- 
 bell on immersion are strong, can they not make their opin- 
 ions equally as strong on sprinkling ? If they can, they will 
 be equally potential with Dr. Cone and Alexander Campbell 
 in guiding or biasing the learned jury who have charge of the ■ 
 whole case ? If they can not, the deficiency is not chargeable 
 to the Bible Union. The revision jury will not settle the 
 character of a word or phrase by the wishes of any pavtizan 
 
74 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 or sectarian, or of any number of such persons. Unless our 
 plans and rules are false and unconstitutional, or our transla- 
 tors are incompetent or bribed, eacli word and phrase of the 
 inspired text will be faithfully dealt with. If baptizo should 
 be translated by the word immerse, it will be, under the gen- 
 eral law requiring fidelity to God and man, a law which no 
 man impeaches ; and it will be done by a board that has a 
 large majority of Pedobaptists in it. It would not require one 
 half the courage on the part of» these clergymen to do as Dr. 
 Cone and Alexander Campbell have done — to lay down #11 
 their preconceived notions at the feet of this tribunal and await 
 its award, as it does to be stemming the torrent of truth and 
 fact that is roaring in their ears in this discussion. If they 
 refuse this honest proposition, may not public opinion turn 
 upon themselves the weapon they have been prodigally using 
 upon the Bible Union, and settle down upon the conviction 
 that the opposition of the five clergymen to the Bible Union 
 enterprise has not arisen from a study of the movement in its 
 aims, principles, and measures, but from a sectarian jealousy 
 on their part in regard to the rendering of a single word ? 
 
 To that point, gentlemen, you have brought yourselves, and 
 there you must hang. The revision enterprise is a general 
 work, extending from Genesis to the close of the Kevelations, 
 and it is carried on by general principles. It knows nothing 
 of single words, as such. May not a shrewd public detect 
 the fact that the opposers of this work are consciously or un- 
 consciously acting the part of sectarians in directing all their 
 opposition to a single point of translation which may possibly 
 affect their sectarian positions and standards? While offi- 
 ciously attempting to pull the mote of partyism out of the 
 eyes of their brethren, may not their own vision be obscured 
 by a beam of sectarianism ? Look at these things, gentlemen. 
 You charge that the rendering of the word baptizo is a fore- 
 gone conclusion. How can you assert any thing of that kind? 
 The tribunal that is to decide it for the Bible Union has not 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 75 
 
 given the least hint as to what is to he its decision, and how 
 can you announce its foregone conclusion ? Should you not, 
 as clergymen, pay some little attention to the proprieties of 
 fact, and assert nothing that you can not prove? The opin- 
 ions of Dr. Cone and of Alexander Campbell upon bajptizo or 
 any other words of the Bible, can not sway, bias, or coerce 
 the revision tribunal — which has all this matter in its hands — 
 any further than those opinions may be based on clearly estab- 
 lished truth and philological authorities. As clergymen, you 
 certainly do not object to this. Even if the board of revisers 
 should see the opinions of Dr. Cone and of Alexander Camp- 
 bell on the word baptize, may it not also see your fresh, ori- 
 ginal, conclusive, and overwhelming arguments and statements 
 on baptism, with which you have embellished your two articles 
 against revision, and be converted? May you not, gentlemen, 
 have overwhelmed the board of revisers by your cogent rea- 
 soning upon baptism? It is not the Baptists nor the Chris- 
 tians that are trying to create an outside pressure upon the 
 jury to wring the verdict from that body. It is a portion of 
 the Pedobaptist clergy that are exercising their timidity and 
 fears in this way. But if our clerical friends have fully 
 swept the revisionai tribunal into their logical vortex, what 
 becomes of their gaudy rhetoric about Spencer Cone as "the 
 head and heart" of this work, when he was not even a mem- 
 ber of the board of revisers? xlnd what becomes of their 
 assertions respecting Alexander Campbell's position? lie is 
 but one man in the tribunal, where their brethren are largely 
 in the majority! But they assert that he made a translation 
 of the New Testament to suit himself. Suppose he did : what 
 has that to do with the revision question ? Hundreds of the 
 brethren of these clergymen have translated the New Testa- 
 ment, and certainly our clerical friends will not claim that they 
 hold a patent for the business. John Wesley revised the Xew 
 Testament to suit himself; but that did not seal his lips upon 
 the Bible, nor paralyze his actions. The Methodist book con- 
 
76 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 cerns throughout the country print, sell, and circulate this 
 revised New Testament, revised by one man, who had not 
 such advantages of biblical scholarship as the humblest scholar 
 on the revision jury of the Bible Union possesses. And here 
 is a stationed Methodist preacher denouncing in the papers 
 some of the best scholarship in the word for doing what the 
 founder of his Church did, without a murmur from his lips. 
 Every blow that he aims at Alexander Campbell's head on the 
 subject of translating the New Testament, falls heavily on the 
 head of John Wesley. All the denunciation he lavishes on 
 the Bible Union falls furiously on the Methodist book concerns 
 of this country. If, as this preacher tries to teach in the 
 newspapers, the Bible Union has no right to revise the Holy 
 Scriptures, John Wesley had no right to do it ; but if the 
 Methodist book concerns have a right to print and circulate a 
 revised New Testament, the Bible Union has an equal right 
 to do a better thing. Alexander Campbell has as much right 
 to translate the New Testament as the Episcopal Church has 
 to use two varying versions of the Psalms ; and he had quite 
 as much right to do this as any one of these five clergymen 
 has to stand up in the pulpit and translate portions of the Bible 
 to suit himself — a luxury these gentlemen use whenever they 
 please. If, because Alexander Campbell made a translation 
 of the New Testament, his lips are to be sealed on revision, 
 then, by parity of reasoning, the lips of at least four of these 
 clergymen should be sealed on the subject, for they make 
 translations of the Scriptures whenever the humor seizes them. 
 It is a bad rule that will not run parallel lines. These five 
 clergymen seem to teach that if a man has ever been engaged 
 in the business of translation, he is disqualified from translat- 
 ing. Thus they reproduce an equivalent of the maternal idea 
 expressed in the prohibition to the son against going into the 
 water until he had learned to swim ! 
 
 The public may not be aware of the truth that the asser- 
 tion of these five clergymen, that Alexander Campbell trans- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 77 
 
 lated the New Testament, has no foundation in fact. As 
 small as the matter may appear to reasoning and intelligent 
 minds, we must say that Alexander Campbell never translated 
 the New Testament, as these five clergymen assert he did. 
 He published a New Testament translated by two Presbyte- 
 rian divines, who are among the brightest biblical intellects 
 the Church of Scotland ever possessed, and by a doctor of 
 divinity of the Congregational Church, a species of Presbyte- 
 rian Church. George Campbell, the pioneer mind in biblical 
 science, and one of the most remarkable intellects that has 
 been devoted to the Bible, translated the four Gospels of 
 Alexander Campbell's publication. Jas. McKnight, prolocu- 
 tor of the Presbyterian General Assembly of Scotland for 
 nearly thirty years, and one of the best biblical scholars known 
 to history, translated the epistles of Alexander Campbell's 
 publication. Philip Doddridge translated the Acts of the 
 Apostles of that publication. The work of these three trans- 
 lators constituted the book which these pains-taking and accu- 
 rate clergymen call Alexander Campbell's translation. 
 
 We suggested to our clerical friends, last Tuesday, the pro- 
 priety of revising some of their statements, rather than to 
 leave for us that work. We have just revised the statement 
 of these five clergymen made about Alexander Campbell's 
 translation, That one now to be revised is of a graver cast. 
 In the anxiety of these gentlemen to press Dr. Cone into their 
 service, they have ascribed to him. in quotation marks, senti- 
 ments which he never uttered by mouth or pen, and which no 
 body but these clergymen ever reported on him. We know 
 what we are saying. Now let these gentlemen produce evi- 
 dence to sustain them, or make public reparation for the wrong 
 done to Dr. Cone. It is bad enough to thus attempt to wrong 
 the living ; it is worse to invade the sanctity of the tomb. 
 
 These clergymen, in the face of the Rev. Richard Fuller's 
 own recent publications, and of the notorious fact that he is 
 President of the Maryland Revision Association, to both of 
 
78 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 which facts we referred these gentlemen, have the hardihood, 
 in their article of March 1st, to again claim him as an enemy 
 to revision. Such conduct needs no comment. The first an- 
 nouncement might set up the weak plea that it was a sin of 
 ignorance. The second can seek no cloak of that kind. As 
 a specimen of clerical courtesy, it is duly appreciated. 
 
 Our clerical friends spend a great deal of time in dwelling 
 upon the general excellence of the authorized version. They 
 owe the public some explanation for slumbering at the post of 
 duty. These clergymen know that the Bible Society has been 
 for years circulating Bibles which that Society, in 1852, ac- 
 knowledged had nearly twenty-four thousand errors in them. 
 A learned committee of that Society reported this fact in 1852, 
 and we have the report now before us. Now it betrays great 
 indifference on the part of these clergymen as to what kind of 
 Bibles the people get, when they permit editions of that book 
 to be in the market with nearly twenty-four thousand errors 
 in them, and with no word of warning to the people. And the 
 very men, the very sects, the very Bible Societies, which are 
 now up in arms against the Bible Union, circulated these Bibles 
 with nearly twenty-four thousand errors in them up to 1852* 
 And more than that, at the very meeting of the Bible Society 
 to which the report of this committee was made, Dr. Edward 
 Itobinson, the distinguished Presbyterian scholar, urged the 
 Society to expunge Easter from the Bible as an utterly false 
 jrenclering, which no man could justify. The Bible Society 
 refused to do it as a matter of time-serving policy. But that 
 Society, in its marginal Bibles, prints the ivords used by the 
 Holy Spirit in the margin, and permits the Saxon idol, Eostre 
 or Easter, to occupy the text of the Word of God ! In the 
 Bibles printed for the masses of the people this falsehood glares 
 from the text without any marginal correction ' And those who 
 sanction, encourage, and sustain such tampering with the text 
 of inspiration dare to insult the public intelligence by talking 
 in advance about a sectarian Bible from the Bible Union. 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 79 
 
 This is a specimen of the kind of fidelity which some anti- 
 revisionists exercise toward the Word of God. When the 
 Bible Union thus tampers with the text of inspiration then, 
 and not till then, let it be denounced. But let it be remem- 
 bered, than when the Bible Society corrected, through a jury 
 of experts in the special art needed, nearly twenty-four thousand 
 errors in the Bible in common use, these clergymen said not a 
 word ; but when the Bible Union undertakes, with the aid of 
 the best scholars that can be found, to correct the numerous er- 
 rors in King James's version, which all Biblical science says 
 should be corrected, these gentlemen make a declaration of war 
 upon the Bible Union. Ha#not the Bible Union every light 
 to make a faithful version of the Bible that the Bible Society 
 had to correct nearly twenty-four thousand errors in the 
 authorized version? Will our clerical friends answer that 
 question ? 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 THIRD LETTER OF THE FIVE CLERGYMEN. 
 
 THE KEVISION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 The undersigned have heretofore expressed their purpose to 
 decline all personal controversy in this discussion. We will 
 not now depart from it. Uncivil words and discourteous allu- 
 sions we resign to the other side, assured that truth and reason 
 need no such helps. This, however, does not forbid the ex- 
 posure of errors into which these gentlemen have run in their 
 hasty zeal to discredit their neighbors. We suppose we ought 
 not to complain, as this is only the way they treat the old 
 English Bible, Take an example. It will be sufficient to put 
 the candid reader on his guard, and suggest the grains of al- 
 lowance with which their statements ought to be received. The}- 
 
80 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 have not thought it unworthy of themselves or their cause to 
 charge us with an ignorance which is their own, forgetting the 
 Divine caution, which they love to quote when it suits them, 
 concerning the mote and the beam. 
 
 It respects the number of the persons engaged in the trans- 
 lation of the Bible as we now have it. We had said — per- 
 haps incautiously, for we did not at the moment think of an 
 exact precision — "fifty odd." These gentlemen insist with 
 great confidence, and with seeming derision, which we trust 
 was in the appearance only, that there were but "forty " We 
 invite their attention to a work already cited by us, "The 
 TPvANSLATOES Eevived." Perhaps it has escaped their notice, 
 having been only a few years before the world. Neither its 
 research nor its fairness will be called in question by such as 
 are competent to judge of either, Its author, having given 
 long time and great labor to his inquiries concerning the 
 translators, to ascertain everything that could be learned about 
 them, and enjoying the benefit of the researches of all who 
 had gone before him, may be safely relied on for the informa- 
 tion which he has gathered. He says, page 66: "The King 
 was for appointing fifty-four learned men to this great and 
 good work, but the number actually employed upon it, in the 
 first instance, was forty-seven" On page 77: "Of the forty - 
 seven who acted under King James's commission, some are al- 
 most unknown at this day, though of high repute in their own 
 time.' 4 He proceeds to record the names of these forty-seven, 
 with a biographical sketch of each, and then he says, page 
 208 : "It remains for us to add a brief account of some, who 
 are known to have assisted in different stages of the work. It 
 has been shown that two or three of those who were named in 
 the King's commission, died soon after their appointment. At 
 least two others appear to have taken their places, and there- 
 fore require our notice." Concerning one of these two, he 
 quotes from Anthony Wood in his Athange . 
 
 "What he hath published I find not — however, the reason 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 81 
 
 why I set him down here is, that he had a most considerable 
 hand in the translation of the New Testament, appointed by 
 King James L in 1604." Concerning the other, also, he says 
 it is expressly stated by Wood, that "he had a hand in the 
 translation of the Bible." And then he adds (p. 212) . • " Sev- 
 eral other persons were employed in various stages of the 
 work." In a letter from the King to the Bishop of London, 
 dated July 22, 1604, the monarch says " We have appointed 
 certain learned men, to the number of four and fifty, for the 
 translation of the Bible.'''' As the authentic lists contain but 
 forty-seven names, it is presumed the others were certain 
 4 'divines" referred to in the fifteenth article of the royal 
 instructions as to the mode of prosecuting the work. In tins 
 fifteenth article it is provided, that besides the several direc- 
 tors or presidents of the different companies, "three or four of 
 the most ancient and grave divines in either of the universi- 
 sities,' not employed in translating, be assigned by the Vice 
 Chancellor, upon conference with the rest of the heads, to be 
 overseers of the translation, as well Hebrew as Greek, for the 
 better observance of the fourth rule." That rule required, 
 that among the different meanings of any word, that one should 
 be adopted which is most sanctioned by the Fathers, and is 
 most "agreeable to the propriety of the place and the analogy 
 of faith." It is not known who those supervisors were ; but 
 if one of the universities designated three of them, and the 
 other four, it would make out the requisite number. 
 
 We have given far more attention to this question of "fifty 
 odd" or "forty" than it deserves on its own account. But 
 we have thought it proper to vindicate our statement, and not 
 unbecoming to show, as Ave have now done, that the gentlemen 
 who have so confidently impugned our accuracy are very far 
 from being well read in the history of the good old translation. 
 
 Had we any desire to retort on them, we might indicate 
 their ignorance on a point which every well-informed gentle- 
 man ought to understand, especially such as desire to enlighten 
 
 6 
 
82 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 the world on theological and ecclesiastical subjects. We con- 
 fess, that notwithstanding all that we had observed of the 
 inaccuracy of their knowledge and the want of precision in 
 their statements, we were surprised to read from them, March 
 4: "And the Church of England, recently, at a meeting of 
 both Houses of Convocation of Canterbury, at Westminster, 
 has given notice of a motion for all the objects announced by 
 the Bible Union for a revision of the Holy Scriptures." The 
 " Convocation" has near about as much life in it, and as much 
 influence in affairs, either civil or religious, as the Order of 
 the Cincinnati. If these gentlemen, as it would seem, sup- 
 pose it to be the real and efficient embodiment of the Church 
 of England, we have no more to say ! " Where ignorance is 
 bliss, 'tis folly to be wise." But if the Convocation were, to 
 all intents and purposes, the Church of England, the balance 
 of the statement would be very far from the truth of the case 
 which is, that one member of one House gave notice of his 
 own intention to propose that the other House be requested to 
 take into consideration the propriety of calling the attention 
 of the Queen to the subject! We do not remember that we 
 ever heard of a story that swelled in the rolling more than 
 this. We take the following representations of it from the 
 Episcopal Recorder, whose fairness, intelligence, and interest 
 in looking into the matter, will hardly be questioned by any : 
 
 "And the following reference was made to the Bible: Canon 
 Selwyn gave notice of his intention to propose a petition to 
 the Upper House, requesting his grace and their lordships to 
 take into consideration the subject of an address to the Crown, 
 praying that Her Majesty might be pleased to appoint a body 
 of learned men, well skilled in the original languages of the 
 Holy Scriptures, to consider of such amendments to the au- 
 thorized version as have been already proposed, and to receive 
 suggestions from all persons who may be willing to offer them , 
 to communicate with foreign scholars on difficult passages when 
 it may be deemed advisable , to examine the marginal readings 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 83 
 
 which appear to have been introduced into some editions since 
 the year 1601 , to point out such words and phrases as have 
 either changed their meaning or become obsolete in the lapse 
 of time $ and to report from time to time the progress of their 
 work and the amendments which they may be prepared to 
 recommend." 
 
 These instances will sufficiently expose, the inaccuracy which 
 pervades the argument for "Revision" with which we are 
 favored. The candid reader must distrust the whole. We 
 pass without other remark the incivility which charges us with 
 " insinuating that the revisers are actuated by mercenary mo- 
 tives," and with "insulting" the Reformers by saying that 
 they are sometimes, for distinction, called Campbellites. Con- 
 scious of no unkindness or want of respect towards any, and 
 willing to be distinguished ourselves as Calvinists or Armin- 
 ians, we cheerfully allow such shifts to those who need them, 
 while we argue out the case. 
 
 It has been asserted with great confidence that we seriously 
 mistake the position of the eminent Baptist ministers to whom 
 we have referred as being opposed to the revision scheme ; and 
 particularly, that the Rev. Dr. Fuller is a firm and active 
 friend of it. In addition to all else that we find in various 
 quarters explaining the opinions of these distinguished persons 
 as we have stated them, and of Dr. Fuller in particular, we 
 have before us a publication for which many of the leading 
 Baptists of New York, ministers and others, are responsible, 
 setting forth the measures in opposition to the "Revision" 
 which were adopted by these brethren at the beginning of the 
 movement, in which measures such men as Dr. Magoon, Dr. 
 Dowling, Dr. Welch, Dr. Williams, and others took part. In 
 this publication we find the following paragraph, headed 
 
 "View of Dr. Fuller. — We can not doubt that the pro- 
 ject for the publication of an altered version of the English 
 Scriptures, by the American and Foreign Bible Society, will 
 strike the minds of the great body of its adherents and sup- 
 
84 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 porters in the same light in which it is viewed by Dr. Fuller, 
 of Baltimore. In a communication just received, he presses 
 'the question,' 'whether a society, which has secured the con- 
 fidence of a denomination on the implied pledge that there 
 would be no new version, ought to depart from that pledge.' 
 Again he says, 'This project I deplore.' 'The Society will 
 inflict upon itself a deep and lasting if not fatal injury.' " 
 
 We know not whether Dr* Fuller has changed his " view." 
 But we think there can be no question that he was utterly 
 opposed to the whole scheme at the beginning. We are no 
 further concerned about the matter than to establish the accu- 
 racy of our statement, the substance of which simply was, that 
 he and many other of the wisest and best men in the Baptist 
 churches had condemned, as uncalled for and mischievous, this 
 attempt at an "altered version of the English Scriptures." 
 
 It has been urged, apparently with great satisfaction and 
 self-complacency — we suppose to swell the dignity of "Ee vi- 
 sion" — that there are five hundred thousand of the best Chris- 
 tians in the world now supporting it. We do not pretend to 
 know the number of them, and we are very far from disputing 
 their goodness. But we would like to be informed whether 
 they are not nearly all immersionisU? Not that all Baptists, 
 by any means, sustain this scheme. We are not much mis- 
 taken, however, if almost all persons who do are not immersion- 
 ists, and such as attach to the whole question of water baptism 
 an importance which sound orthodox evangelical Christians all 
 over the world, Baptists among them, have ever agreed in 
 condemning, because, as they believe, it far exceeds all that is 
 due to an ordinance or a sacrament in its mere form, and thus 
 involves the great danger of putting the outward sign in the 
 place of the inward grace, which is signified thereby. 
 
 For ourselves, we believe that this is a dangerous error, and 
 we are sure that the great body of the Church of Christ, hold- 
 ing the truth as it is in Jesus, is now and always has been of 
 the same opinion. And if nearly all these half million of 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. So 
 
 people are desiring a new Bible under the influence of that 
 error, and because the old one does not sufficiently sustain 
 them in it, what would it amount to, as an argument, in the 
 eyes of dispassionate and reflecting Christian people, to say 
 that there are many whole millions intent upon mutilating the 
 Word of God in such a spirit and for such an end? The 
 greater the number of persons so misled, and the better their 
 character as citizens and Christians in all other respects, the 
 more is their error here to be deplored, and the more steadily 
 ought all other men to frown upon this design. 
 
 There is one feature of the management of this enterprise 
 which we are not able to reconcile with candor, fair-dealing, 
 and that confidence in the friends of the Bible, whether pro- 
 fessing Christians or not, which we think due to the Church 
 of Christ, and to all who value the Word of God ; we may 
 add, which is due to scholars as such. We allude to the sed- 
 ulous concealment of the names of the translators. We per- 
 ceive no worthy and honorable reason for this secrecy. We 
 think it lays the ground for a just suspicion that there is some- 
 thing in the matter of which those who manage it are conscious 
 that it can not bear the public scrutiny We think that 
 people are not in the habit of doing things secretly, except 
 such as they are ashamed to be seen doing. 
 
 Here is a work of the utmost importance, one of the least im- 
 portant parts of which is, that it requires vast sums of money ; 
 and for this money, and for general confidence and support, 
 earnest and persistent appeals are made to the Christian world 
 and to "a generous and enlightened public.'' Now it seems 
 to us that all who are thus appealed to have a right to know 
 who are the persons engaged to conduct the most important 
 part of this great enterprise, that is, the translation of the 
 Bible. If we were not asking too much, we would be glad to 
 be favored with their names, or at least an explanation of that 
 secrecy which seems to us unsuitable to an honest and fair 
 design in a matter of this kind. We can image nothing 
 
86 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 which more clearly demands that all be done openly, and in 
 the face of the sun, than a scholar-like and faithful rendering 
 of the Word of God, intended to take the place of the accepted 
 English Bible ; and when the chiefest part of the work is done 
 in a corner, away from the light of day, it is very natural to 
 think of the Word which tells us why men love darkness 
 rather than light. 
 
 There is another point on which we crave information. It 
 is constantly insisted that the received version is not only im- 
 perfect, but wholly inadequate, and, as we have heretofore 
 shown, one of the steady aims and constant efforts of revision- 
 ists is to descredit it. Now we would like to know whether it 
 is really held that any of the doctrines of the Gospel are not 
 capable of easy and exact discovery out of the common Eng- 
 lish Bible. Is it held that plain common sense people, not 
 scholars — understanding no tongue but our own — can not 
 get out of this old English Bible a just and clear sense of the 
 Gospel in every doctrine, in every promise, in every precept 
 of it? If such people can easily, and upon the face of it, 
 find in this old Bible a plain and fair statement of the Gospel 
 of Christ, by which they can be truly religious, truly happy 
 in religion, and truly acceptable to God while they live and 
 when they die, then, where the need of this ado about revision? 
 If they can not, then we desire to know what are the religious 
 character and condition of all the plain people, not scholars, 
 now speaking and reading only the English language in any 
 part of the earth, who suppose themselves, by the grace of 
 God, to know and to enjoy the true religion? And we desire 
 to know what has become of all such people, of whom we have 
 rejoiced to believe that they adorned the doctrine of God our 
 Saviour in their respective generations, and now, having gone 
 the way of all the earth, we had hoped are in glory ? But if 
 these questions be too hard to answer, and yet it is still in- 
 sisted that the English Bible does not fairly and fully give the 
 mind of the Holy Spirit, then we crave to know, in a clear 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 87 
 
 statement, what are the truths that are concealed in 
 this version ? If the Bible, as the common people read it, 
 does not make them all plain, which of them are covered 
 UP OR CORRUPTED by it ? 
 
 We say respectfully, but we say distinctly, that it seems to 
 us unworthy of the people who are engaged in this movement 
 to clamor against the old Bible, and yet not show that one 
 principle of the Gospel, on which hangs the experience of 
 heart religion, or the hope of the recompense of the reward, or 
 the daily practice of a Christian life, through the merits and 
 grace of our Divine Redeemer, is either perverted or obscured 
 in this translation. 
 
 We find a great deal of this clamor in the writings and the 
 published speeches of revisionists, but when it is analyzed it 
 sinks to the insignificance of a complaint about baptism. To 
 the water it comes at last, forgetful, it would seem, of Paul's 
 sense of his high calling, in which he said, " Christ sent 
 
 ME NOT TO BAPTIZE, BUT TO PREACH THE GOSPEL." A single 
 
 example will illustrate a class. We have before us the 
 4 - Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of the Bible Re- 
 vision Association, held at St. Louis, April, 1855. Second 
 Part. James Edmunds, Corresponding Secretary," &c. At 
 page 20, we find an "Address by Elder J. Creath," a Yice 
 President of the Society, and for many past a leading man 
 among the Reformers; that is, with all respect, the friends 
 and adherents of Alexander Campbell. 
 
 Mr. Creath offered the following resolution: " Resolved ', 
 That the American Bible Union deem it wise, important, and 
 imperative to have a revised version of the Scriptures in all 
 languages, for the use of the common people. 1 '' In its sup- 
 port, he said: "The first argument in favor of a revision of 
 the English Scriptures is the imperfection of the common ver- 
 sion. No person pretends to deny that there are numerous 
 mistranslations in the present received version ; many errors, 
 some great, some small, some materially affecting the faith 
 
88 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 and practice of Christians. * * No tongue of man or of 
 angel can tell the injury which the souls of men have received 
 from the present Episcopal, sectarian, and Pedobaptist ver- 
 sion. * * If we should succeed in establishing the charge 
 of our enemies in making a Baptist Bible, we shall do no 
 more than was done by the revisers of the present version. 
 They did, to all intents and purposes, make a Pedobaptist 
 Pible, as far as they dared to do it, &e. * * Now, if we 
 should give the people of the earth a Baptist or immersionist 
 Bible for two hundred and forty years^to come, we shall do 
 no more than they did." 
 
 The reader will perceive that Mr, Creath fairly surrenders 
 the argument concerning baptism, if the appeal must be to the 
 present version. He gives it up that he can not maintain Ms 
 views by the old Bible, and so he must get a new one. But 
 what is more to our present purpose, it will be seen that Mr. 
 Creath's complaints against the present version and its mis- 
 translations as materially affecting the faith and practice of 
 Christians, and causing such vast injury to the souls of men, 
 dwindle down to questions about baptism' And so it ever 
 is, as far as we have seen, when you get at the real sense of 
 what is urged by this party against the present version. 
 4 'The head and front of its offending hath this extent, no 
 more." It does not teach, and it can not fairly be made to 
 teach, what they choose to hold concerning baptism ! 
 
 It is proper to say that this subject has been pursued already 
 quite as far as was expected at the beginning. We entered 
 upon it with no intention of following these gentlemen whither*- 
 soever they might lead. We did not undertake to show that 
 the received version of the Word of God is free from imperfec- 
 tion, nor to dispute the right of any to make a new translation. 
 We rejoice in every contribution that true scholars make to the 
 elucidation of the sacred writings, prompted by the love of 
 truth, or even by the love of letters; nor are we unwilling 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 89 
 
 that errorists and pretenders should give then* opinions to the 
 world. We believe, however, that the old English Bible is 
 about as good a translation, take it altogether, as is likely to 
 be made. We see no reason to expect that a new version, by 
 whomsoever produced, would be better than this. We believe 
 that this is so far correct, that every principal doctrine which 
 God intended to reveal to men, and every command which Ke 
 intended to impose, are fairly exhibited to the common reader. 
 Persuaded, then, that this translation clearly "teaches what 
 we are to believe concerning God, and what duties He requires 
 of man," we think that the Church at large is justly satisfied 
 with it as a fair rendering of the Word of God for common 
 use. Nor should we, nor those who requested this service 
 of us, interfere with any others who chose to offer a new 
 translation, if they would fairly represent a just design, to be 
 pursued in a right spirit, searching after truth as becomes 
 Christian men, to be executed by scholars of acknowledged 
 learning and abilities for the work. 
 
 Instead of this, it is intended, as we believe, to make a 
 version for a party — that party wrong on the questions on 
 which it is determined to force the Word of God. Let men 
 do even this, if they please, but let them not attempt to 
 beguile others into a confidence which they will abuse — by- 
 representing that as catholic which is intensely sectarian. 
 Such is the spirit of this enterprise, and as such we expose it. 
 We undertook to show that this " revision movement, sectarian 
 in its spirit and aims, and not called for by the Church at 
 large, or required by the actual necessities of the subject, is 
 not entitled to the public confidence and support" which it is 
 soliciting on the plea of an unprejudiced and catholic design. 
 The reader must judge how far we have succeeded. 
 
 And now, in conclusion, we invite the public attention # to a 
 new and significant feature in this subject. It has been proved 
 beyond all fair denial that the rallying point of the revision 
 
90 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 enterprise has been immeesion, substituted for baptism. Now, 
 as we understand, the principal organ of the revisionists is the 
 New York Chronicle, a leading religious paper in the interest 
 of the Baptist churches of this country. We have not the 
 pleasure of receiving that paper, but we find it quoted in vari- 
 ous quarters by the religious press, within the last few days, 
 as follows; 
 
 "We doubt whether, as a sect, we should not lose more 
 
 than we gained, by translating the word baptizo. 
 
 * *■ * * * * * 
 
 u We deprecate the idea of any organization getting out a 
 version, with its own imprint, and then instituting a system 
 of out-door agencies, through the press or otherwise, to give it 
 currency, By the same rule that one society may do it, any 
 other society may repeat the experiment in reference to a ver- 
 sion of its own, and thus the people will become divided up 
 between belligerent Bible organizations, each contending with 
 stentorian lungs, and a vigorous system of agencies, to draw 
 the public within the whirlpool of its own influence. A battle 
 of Bibles would ensue more terrific than that of sect, and feud 
 and faction would be eternal. '* 
 
 It is impossible, we think, to mistake the sense of all this. 
 The first dissatisfaction of the public mind with the scheme, 
 the stern condemnation by the Church at large, by reflecting 
 men of the world, and by true scholars, of this sectarian tam- 
 pering with the Word of God, can not but be felt, and the 
 impression is beginning to show itself in this change of posi- 
 tion, But observe how this frank statement is the means of 
 nailing the colors of sectarianism to the mast of this Revision 
 Association: the American Bible Union, through its Secre- 
 tary, has publicly stated that the Chronicle is not the organ, 
 and must not be held to speak the sentiments of that Society ; 
 the plain meaning of which seems to be, that the Union ad- 
 heres to the purpose of making the new Bible call baptism 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 91 
 
 immersion, notwithstanding all misgivings of its friends and 
 defections from its party. 
 
 W. L. Breckinridge, 
 
 Of the Presbyterian Church. 
 
 H. M. Denison, 
 
 Of the Protestant Episcopal Church. 
 
 Samuel Lowry Adams, 
 
 Of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. 
 
 E. C. Trimble, 
 
 Of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church. 
 
 G. GORDEN, 
 
 Of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church. 
 
 P. S. — Since the above was written, we have seen the last 
 discourse with which the public has been favored by the gen- 
 tlemen who are writing against us and for "revision." We 
 perceive nothing in it that meets the argument we have urged, 
 or the testimony we have offered against their designs as purely 
 sectarian, while the bitterness of its spirit and the rudeness of 
 its terms show that its authors are writing for a party. And 
 thus we excuse that contempt of truth and fairness, and that 
 ignorance of good manners, which charge us with forgery in 
 ascribing to Dr. Cone "sentiments which he never uttered by 
 mouth or pen, and which nobody but these clergymen ever 
 reported on them." 
 
 The gist of their labored reasoning seems to be that their 
 association ought to be judged only by its written constitution 
 and laws. To all which we deem it sufficient to reply, that 
 men's true spirit and their own sense of their constitution and 
 laws are to be learned from their practice under them. The 
 way to know a tree, as the old Bible tells us, (perhaps the new 
 one will give a better,) is by its fruit. The people who arc 
 acting under this constitution, fair as it may be, make it per- 
 fectly plain what they are doing. "Our ONLY business is to 
 uphold immersionist versions, and to give them as largo a 
 circulation as we can ; and this is our business because all the 
 
92 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 rest of the Christian world have thrown them away. This 
 single object is OUR eallying point." So writes .the "ac- 
 complished secretary" of the Bible Translation Society of 
 England. "In these sentiments we coedially unite," 
 says Dr. Cone. This is the spirit which has betrayed itself 
 in every step of this movement, and which shows the true 
 nature and design thereof. How far the counter influence, 
 which has begun to show itself, as appears by our quotation 
 from the New York Chronicle, may change the whole subject, 
 it not for us to say. We shall see in the future who will do 
 justice in the matter of Dr. Cones statements. We aee 
 eight, they weong, and they aee now aw aee of it. 
 
 NUMBER VII. 
 
 THE FIVE CLERGYMEN ABOUT REVISION. 
 
 We are exceedingly sorry that our clerical friends have per- 
 mitted their angry passions to get the mastery of their reason, 
 and cause them to make such a display as they did in the 
 Journal of last week. The public have a summary way of 
 deciding questions between disputants, on just such displays 
 of temper as those in which they indulge themselves. It is 
 considered quite a fair rule that the disputant who gets angry 
 in conducting a logical discussion, and who resorts to abuse 
 and invective, is on the losing side. It was no fault of ours 
 that these clerical gentlemen undertook to meddle with matters 
 that did not concern them, and that they entered upon the 
 work thoroughly unprepared. It is rather their misfortune 
 than our fault that they have gone continuously through a 
 series of blunders, marking each stage of their progress with 
 wild assertions, false logic, blundering statements, and sophis- 
 tical argumentation. Why, then, display an evil temper 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES, 93 
 
 toward us? We know that these gentlemen have some 
 excuse for being angry. When men are bruised from head 
 to foot, when pains rack them in every joint, it is scarcely to 
 be expected that they can always exhibit, in its most exem- 
 plary light, the virtue of Christian patience; but then they 
 need not be unjust in their irritability, and ascribe their suffer- 
 ings to innocent parties. Nor need our clerical friends feel 
 any extraordinary surprise that their lectures upon courtesy 
 and good taste, uttered in the midst of illustrative querulous- 
 ness, wrath, and invective, fall still-bom from their pens. 
 Will they pardon us for saying that not only we, but the 
 public, would greatly prefer examples of courtesy, good taste, 
 and pleasant manners from them, than didactics on those sub- 
 jects without examples ? Their course is not very impressive, 
 but we wish them more success as teachers of manners and 
 the general proprieties of life than they have been able to com- 
 mand in their efforts to put down a revision of the Bible. 
 
 "We confess that our clerical friends have great reason to be 
 sick of their attempts upon the revision cause. It has been a 
 losing business to them from the moment they appeared in the 
 arena of public debate until the present time* It is not a 
 matter of marvel, therefore, that they are now anxious to quit. 
 But they are the John Gilpins of debate, and ride they must 
 when there is no opportunity for dismounting. These gentle- 
 men determined, as John Gilpin did, to -take a merry little 
 jaunt ; and since their Rosinante has become as restive and 
 unmanageable as that renowned horseman's did, they must 
 follow his example and hang on to their steed as best they 
 can. All England is engaged in a laugh at this time at the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, who is called the Episcopal John 
 Gilpin, because in an ill-advised moment he was indiscreet 
 enough to order an investigation of the sermons of an arch- 
 deacon, in order to see whether there was any heresy in them. 
 The committee reported that it was a case for further proceed- 
 ings. But just at that point the zeal of the Archbishop cooled 
 
94 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 off. Thus far the process was a cheap one ; but further steps 
 were to be attended with a horrid bill of costs without any 
 increase of happiness or reputation to the Archbishop. The 
 Primate did not feel that he was called upon to nurse ortho- 
 doxy by the expenditure of his Episcopal revenues, and he 
 therefore resolved to permit the archdeacon and his heresies to 
 remain in the Church. But alas for his wishes ! he was in for 
 it ! The inexorable Mr. Ditcher, who had drawn him into the 
 difficulty, who had, in the language of the London press, 
 "placed him on the inclined plane of a parliamentary act," 
 resolved to keep him moving. Mr. Ditcher appealed to the 
 Queen's Bench for a mandamus requiring the Archbishop to 
 prosecute the archdeacon. The Archbishop resisted the court, 
 he wrung his hands in anguish, and asked lugubriously, what 
 it was to him if the archdeacon had ten thousand heretical 
 crotchets ? Why was he to expend fifty thousand dollars to 
 ascertain their existence? But the Queen's Bench made their 
 rule absolute against his grace of Canterbury, and despite of 
 himself he must go on with the case and foot the bill of costs. 
 None of the London papers estimate the law expenses at less 
 than fifty thousand dollars ; and this sum the Archbishop will 
 have to pay merely because he started on the hunt of heresy 
 in his archdeacon, and could not stop when he wished to do 
 so. Like our five clerical friends, "when he had his discre- 
 tion, he would not be discreet, and when he was anxious to be 
 discreet, he had no discretion." For our clerical friends are in 
 quite as disagreeable a predicament as the Archbishop. They 
 were willing to take a little journey into the revision question, 
 provided they could have everything their own way ; but they 
 are sickened and disgusted in finding that they have reached a 
 place where blows can be given as well as received. They 
 seemed to adopt the idea that they could stigmatize what and 
 whom they pleased, lampoon all who stood in their way, and 
 no one was to say a word in answer to them. The moment 
 they are routed and driven from every point they assumed, 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 05 
 
 they commence delivering homilies upon good taste, courtesy, 
 pleasant manners, and such matters. When we need any 
 instructions in such things, we shall claim the privilege of 
 choosing our instructors. If, like His Grace of Canterbury, 
 our clerical friends have found heresy-hunting neither a profit- 
 able nor a pleasant pastime, they may profit by the lesson, 
 and be careful how they begin the hunt next time Forty 
 millions of Bibles have not been wasted upon the people. 
 Men and women are learning everywhere that Christianity is 
 an individual matter, demanding the exercise of personal judg- 
 ment and the personal action of each individual. They are 
 cutting themselves loose from the dicta of those who usurp the 
 right to think for them and to lord it over their consciences. 
 
 The time has come now for us to turn upon these five cleri- 
 cal gentlemen and demand of them why, without reason, right, 
 authority, or provocation, they undertake to meddle with the 
 inalienable lights of others ; why they undertake, without a 
 shadow even of right or privilege, to dictate to free people 
 who are at least their equals ; why they presumptuously attempt 
 to manacle and bind those over whom they have not even a 
 fancied overseership ? Neither the minds nor souls of an intel- 
 ligent free people are in their keeping or under their control. 
 Not have they any the least right to interfere with the acts 
 of any body engaged in a revision of the Bible. Each mem- 
 ber of the body of Jesus Christ is clothed with every Christian 
 authority on earth that belongs to either of these five gentle- 
 men. Yet they have undertaken, by a most extravagant 
 assumption of authority, to meddle with a great public enter- 
 prise, over which they have no special stewardship, These 
 five clergymen would think it extremely presumptuous in the 
 Bible Union to declare that neither themselves nor their people 
 should read any tiling, as the Holy Scriptures, but the revised 
 Bible: is it less presumptuous on their part to attempt to bind 
 the free and enlightened mind of the American people to King 
 James's version? "What earthly authority is possessed by 
 
96 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 these gentlemen, in these matters, that is not in full possession 
 of the humblest soul on God's foot-stool that has been re- 
 deemed by the blood of Jesus Christ? The time has passed 
 for clerical dictation to paralyze the faculties of the soul ; they 
 belong alone to Jesus Christ. Yet these five clergymen tails 
 as though they had the custody of the Hebrew and Greek 
 Scriptures, and seem to claim that they can shut and no man 
 shall open, and opon and no man shall shut. If these five 
 clergymen imagine that King James's version, which they 
 revise and alter at pleasure, is good enough f#r such people as 
 give them the keeping of their consciences and faculties, the 
 Bible Union does not arrogate to itself the authority to disturh 
 that enjoyment. Surely these gentlemen can retain King 
 James's version without meddling with the rights of other 
 people. The question of translation of the Scriptures is 
 solely between the translators and the Author of the inspired 
 text; and in no possible way can these five clergymen show 
 that they have any right to make themselves third parties to 
 the question. Three of these clergymen have solemnly sub- 
 scribed to a Confession of Faith, which, in the eighth division 
 of the first chapter of the copy from which we quote, says, 
 that "the inspired text is authentical, and may be appealed to 
 in all controversies of religion." This proclaims in unmistak- 
 able language that King James's version is not a reliable stan- 
 dard, since an appeal may ignore its very existence in the 
 Churches that adopt that standard of faith. If it is a fair and 
 faithful version of the inspired text, by which all the nations 
 of the earth are to be molded, why not use it for "appeals in 
 all controversies of religion " ? If it is not a fair and faithful 
 version of the Word of God, if it is not a proper standard for 
 appeal, what do the three clergymen who subscribed that Con- 
 fession of Faith mean by trying to force the people of this free 
 country to hold to it alone ? Do they mean to say, that though 
 unauthentical, it is good enough for the masses of the people ? 
 If they mean that, why not say so and not dodge the question ? 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 97 
 
 But admitting that these gentlemen had some right to med- 
 dle with the established and indefeasible rights of others, was 
 it not due to themselves, to the community, to the eternal 
 principles of justice and truth, to that golden rule — "do unto 
 others as you would have them to do unto you" — that a sense 
 of decorum, of clerical dignity, of common civility should have 
 restrained these clergymen from unprovoked and inexcusable 
 insults ? Was there any propriety m the exhibition by these 
 clergymen toward the Bible Union of those ideas of Christian 
 ethics in which they have indulged themselves ? With an utter 
 perverseness and gross inconsistency., for which these gentlemen 
 can plead no other excuse than that of the man who swore a 
 certain horse was seventeen feet high, they persevere in the 
 parrot-like notes that the object of the BiOle Union is to make 
 a sectarian Bible. We have nailed that base coin to the coun- 
 ter too firmly to be removed by these gentlemen All their 
 iterations and reiterations can do nothing toward strengthening 
 their original statement — that was a wild and gratuitous asser- 
 tion, and all its repetitions are of the same character. But 
 these are full-blown teachers of good manners, ethics, courtesy, 
 and decorum! Stripped of its verbiage, this charge means 
 that the Bible Union's constitution, laws, and organization, its 
 requirements of its translators, its contracts for fidelity in trans- 
 lation are a mass of falsehood, and that all the aiders and 
 abettors of the work are liars, knaves, and villains! The 
 language of these clerical worthies admits of no other interpre- 
 tation. And this is the language which these clergymen dare 
 to use about thousands of people at least their equals in repu- 
 tation for truthfulness, fidelity, righteousness, and holiness 
 before God and man ! This is a specimen of clerical politeness, 
 gentility, and decorum with a vengeance! And when these 
 clergymen have heretofore been brought to the bar of public 
 opinion to answer for this foul wrong, this deep offence against 
 good morals, the people will bear witness with us how com- 
 pletely they broke down in all their attempts at proof. Invec- 
 
98 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 live against Spencer Cone, and Alexander Campbell, seem to 
 constitute the sum total of their ideas of testimony. Such 
 conduct can do these gentlemen no good ; it can do the cause 
 of revision no harm. But when did these five clergymen get 
 sick of sectarianism ? If it is lawful to be a sectarian, it is 
 lawful to have a sectarian Bible ; if it is wrong to have a sec- 
 tarian Bible, it is just exactly as wrong to be a sectarian ; for 
 an apostle has declared that whatsoever is not of faith is sinful, 
 and if a man has a Bible that is not sectarian and is a sectarian 
 himself he is living in open and confessed sin. Yet these 
 five gentlemen, who are so shocked at the idea of getting a 
 sectarian Bible from the Bible Union, are recognized in this 
 community as intensely sectarian. Their daily labors and 
 nightly thoughts are devoted to sectarian pursuits. Their 
 avocation is to build up five varying sects, which differ from 
 each other so widely that some of them would consider their 
 pulpits degraded by the presence of their anti-revision coadju- 
 tors in them. But they are awfully shocked at the idea of a 
 sectarian Bible! Now they themselves know that they are 
 intensely sectarian ; this whole community knows it as posi- 
 tively as it knows that the sun gives light and heat to the earth. 
 And, since they are steeped in sectarianism, the natural inquiry 
 is, where did they get it ? If not from King James's version, 
 from whence did they obtain it ? If from that, then these five 
 clergymen • have the very thing that they are lustily crying 
 against in the papers, and which they are trying to saddle upon 
 the community ! Verily, gentlemen, you have brought your- 
 selves to a pretty pass before the intelligent people of Kentucky. 
 Do you flatter yourselves that the honest common sense of the 
 people cannot see through such transparent cobwebs as you 
 spin? No wonder these clergymen seek to dismount from the 
 animal on which they dashed into this arena. They must have 
 well-founded fears that their necks may be broken in any 
 plunge that he may make. 
 
 Let us try these gentlemen on some other points of their 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 99 
 
 attitude before the sovereign people* They seemed some time 
 ago to consider in then first ramble before the public, that it 
 was a matter for their investigation and invective, that two 
 denominations differing, as they said, on " fundamental " points 
 had united for a revision of the Scriptures. Now, it should 
 have touched the reason of these clergymen that these two 
 denominations in being willing to submit whatever differences 
 existed between them to the college of revisers, expected then 
 and expect now to give up any practice, doctrine, or tenet that 
 is not clearly taught in the revised Bible. To people even of 
 ordinary understanding this looks like good and commendable 
 conduct. It precisely resembles that conduct of the Bereans, 
 which won from the pen of inspiration the praise that they were 
 more noble than those of Thessalonica, in that they searched 
 the inspired oracles in order to ascertain truth. We doubt 
 whether the Bereans would have ceased then laudable labors 
 on account of the taunts of exasperated leaders, nor shall we, 
 while we are in the line of their example. 
 
 But since our clerical friends thought proper to awaken 
 public attention to this combination, they will pardon us for 
 looking into their extraordinary coalition. The sound public 
 sentiment of the English race has always looked with strong 
 jealousy upon all coalitions of exceedingly discordant materi- 
 als. And when five clergymen, whose lives are devoted to 
 hostility to each others' denominations, who, though enjoined 
 by the Saviour of the world to maintain the unity of his body 
 inviolate, as an essential element in the conversion of the na- 
 tions, scorn and reject the Divine injunction which cries from 
 the garden of Gethsemane in stronger terms than the blood of 
 Abel did from the ground, but who zealously seek and readily 
 find a temporary bond of a quasi union in a common animosity 
 against a work, which the pure-minded, the holy, the righteous, 
 the pious, and the learned of every Protestant denomination 
 for the past two hundred years have declared is a heavenly, 
 holy, and needed work, the people have a full right to know 
 
100 FIDELITY TO GOD IK THE 
 
 the animus that brought them together into such a remarkable 
 coalition. It is made up of very much such material as the in- 
 dignant eloquence of Edmund Burke immortalized, immortalized 
 because the eloquence was the echo of the popular sentiment. 
 Burke described that coalition as "an administration so check- 
 ered and speckled ; it was a piece of joinery so crossly in- 
 dented and whimsically dove-tailed; a cabinet so variously 
 inlaid , such a diversified Mosaic ; such a tessalated pavement 
 without cement, here a bit of black stone and there a bit of 
 white ; of patriots and courtiers ; king's friends and republicans ; 
 whigs and tories? * * • * * * * * 
 that it was indeed a curious show, but utterly unsafe to touch 
 and unsure to stand upon. The colleagues who were thus as- 
 sorted at the same boards stared at each other and were obliged 
 to ask — ' Sir, your name? ' ' Sir, you have the advantage of 
 me.' 'Mr. such-a-one, I beg a thousand pardons.' I venture 
 to say it did so happen that persons had a single office divided 
 between them who had never spoke to each other in their lives 
 until they found themselves, they knew not how, pigging to- 
 gether, heads and points, in the same truckle bed." But 
 Burke's cabinet coalition was not more of a surprise-party than 
 our five clergymen were when they first found themselves com- 
 bined in a common object, the hunting down of Spencer Cone 
 and Alexander Campbell in the columns of a newspaper. They 
 probably felt that it was a piece of good fortune that they had 
 found one thing on which they could unite and form a brother- 
 hood. How much of a reward they will get for springing such 
 unions, while they utterly neglect the Divine one enjoined upon 
 them, is a matter for future adjudication. That special union 
 was the choice of these clergymen, and they must abide the 
 award of an intelligent public who are abundantly able to make 
 a discriminating judgment in all such matters. 
 
 Having thus disposed of this cabinet picture, we turn to 
 some other features which these clergymen present for exhibi- 
 tion. They must themselves see the adroit dodge by which 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 101 
 
 they attempt to relieve themselves of the truth we have pinned 
 upon them in relation to their ostentatious display of knowl- 
 edge respecting King James's revisers. We showed that they 
 did not even know how many men were employed on the work. 
 In a loose and rambling way they said there were fifty odd. 
 We produced conclusive authority to show that there were 
 only forty. After weeks of labor these gentlemen have at last 
 made a faint effort to sustain themselves. They uttered a 
 loud hosanna over Anderson's Annals of the Bible when they 
 wished to use that work against us; but when we turn its 
 truths against them, and shiver their statements into shreds, 
 they find it very convenient to disclaim all further acquaintance 
 with Anderson's great work. In order to try and find a prop 
 for their fatal blunder about the "fifty odd translators," our 
 clerical friends hunt up a poor miserable work called M'Clure's 
 " Translators Revived," and attempt to pass that off as an 
 authority against the highest authorities in this matter. But 
 even M'Clure does not sustain them beyond the number forty- 
 seven, and our clergymen ingeniously pieced out the forty- 
 seven into fifty-four by a little imagination of their own ! And 
 they endeavor to palm off this guess-work as history ! Now 
 we shall make the matter very plain. Anderson's " Annals of 
 the English Bible" is a standard authority, endorsed by these 
 five clergymen in their first article. Anderson thus distributes 
 King James's workmen : 
 
 He gives the names of the ten at Westminster, engaged on 
 Genesis to 2d Kings, inclusive ; at Cambridge, the eight en- 
 gaged on 1st Chronicles to Ecclesiastes, inclusive ; at Oxford, 
 the seven employed on Isaiah to Malachi, inclusive ; at the 
 same place, the eight employed on Matthew to the Acts, in- 
 clusive, and the Revelations , at Westminster again, the 
 seven employed on Romans to Jude. Anderson gives the 
 names and position of each one of these revisers. If the 
 reader will add together the figures we have placed in small 
 capitals, he will see that they make forty instead of the fifty 
 
102 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 odd which these clergymen have been looking for so anxiously 
 and fruitlessly. And Thomas Hartwell Home, in his great 
 work, gives precisely the same distribution that Anderson 
 does, and makes the number just forty, as we stated it. Our 
 clericals might as well submit ; they can not get out of that 
 blunder. 
 
 Again, these gentlemen undertake to make capital out of 
 what they call our mistake about the motion of Canon Selwyn 
 for a revision of the Scriptures. The highest dignitary in the 
 Episcopal Church of Kentucky communicated to one of the 
 undersigned, last week, the information that Canon SelwyrCs 
 motion embodied the sentiment of his Church. The Church 
 of England thus intimated its sentiment through one of its 
 own members. 
 
 These gentlemen feel that they are so lame that they can 
 not get along without Dr. Fuller. They once more claim him 
 on the ground that he once spoke of the impropriety of another 
 organization engaging in the work of revision. He was not 
 speaking of the Bible Union, for v that body was not then in 
 existence. He is novj actively engaged in assisting the Bible 
 Union. These clergymen should try their hands at proving 
 that Paul never was a Christian because he held the clothes of 
 those who stoned Stephen to death. 
 
 Our clerical friends seem to be fairly frantic on the immer- 
 sion question. They appear to think that there is no other 
 question under the sun. We have never said a word about it 
 except in answer to them, and with rare coolness they talk of 
 our clamor about immersion ! Anti-revisionists have written 
 ten lines about immersion where the friends of revision have 
 Written one, as may easily be verified, in our case, by compar- 
 ing our articles with those of the clergymen. Our Bible 
 Union treats baptism as it does all other words — by requiring 
 all to be translated so as most clearly to express the sense of 
 the original. And these five clergymen seem horror-stricken 
 at the operation of such a law in the hands of the learned, but 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 103 
 
 the horror is only about one word in the text of inspiration. 
 Verily, gentlemen, you are in a trouble that will command but 
 little sympathy. 
 
 Again, as if determined to vindicate their title to be con- 
 sidered the most consistent mortals in all inconsistencies, these 
 five clergymen talk grandly about "attaching too much impor- 
 tance to an ordinance or sacrament in its mere form." And 
 yet each of these gentlemen has solemnly subscribed to a 
 Confession of Faith that boldly and plainly teaches baptismal 
 regeneration even for unbelieving infants. 
 
 These gentlemen merely pass from one slough to get into 
 another. Until we observed their work we had supposed that 
 human nature might be fatigued even in blundering , but the 
 endurance of these gentlemen is almost beyond the powers of 
 faith. They now raise a clamor because the work of revision 
 is, as they say, in the hands of immersionists. It is a sound 
 maxim in law, as in all sound morals, that no man can justify 
 himself by a plea founded on his own wrong-doing. If this 
 cause is in the hands oi the immersionists, it is the fault of 
 such gentlemen as these five clergymen. The Bible Union 
 opened its doors wide enough to admit every honest-minded 
 man or woman on earth. Its platform demands no more than 
 that God's Word shall be translated faithfully into all lan- 
 guages. These clergymen were not excluded, unless they are 
 opposed to the faithful translation of that Word. And why 
 not come in now ? The doors are still open. The gentlemen 
 widely mistake the truth. There are great numbers of persons 
 in the Bible Union who are not immersionists. But what if 
 all are immersionists? Arc the constitution and laws good 
 and suitable for carrying on the revision enterprise? Is the 
 work needed? God has ordained that "all the words of 
 His law shall be written very plainly." Do the five 
 clergymen feel disposed to give a counter ordinance to that ? 
 We have shown so clearly that even the five clergymen 
 do not dispute the fact, that many things in King James's 
 
104 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 version are obscure, many others are very erroneous, some are 
 palpable and universally acknowledged perversions, and some 
 are contradictory. But the five clergymen choose to defy 
 God's ordinance requiring plain speech for his laws ! 
 
 Our clerical friends utterly refuse to meet any question at 
 issue with any sign of fairness. On a certain occasion some 
 Jews undertook to entrap the Saviour. He told them that he 
 would tell them what they desired to know, provided they 
 would answer one question — was John's baptism from heaven 
 or from men? They reasoned among themselves, that if they 
 said from heaven, He would corner them by asking, why then 
 did you not receive it? And they were afraid to say from 
 men, because of the danger of being stoned. They concluded 
 not to answer. The five clergymen closely imitate these 
 Jews. We have put the question to them repeatedly, Is King 
 James's version faithful in all respects to the inspired original ? 
 They are afraid to say it is not, because then the public demand 
 would be, why not revise it ? They dare not say it is, because 
 then we could overwhelm them with all their scholars and 
 with one another of the coalition. Instead of answering that 
 honest, fair, and vital question, they cry out, at the top of 
 their lungs, immersionists, Spencer Cone, Alexander Camp- 
 bell, and sectarianism, and complacently think that they are 
 logicians ! They work in sectarian harness day and night, and 
 occasionally seek each other's company, not for the promotion 
 of the Gospel of Christ, not for the conversion of the world, 
 not for the union of Christians, but to abuse Spencer Cone, 
 Alexander Campbell, and the Bible Union. Are they afraid 
 that, if the Scriptures are made intelligible to the masses of 
 the people, they will find it difficult to maintain the attenuated 
 threads of their sectarian distinctions ? 
 
 The gentlemen are greatly troubled about some of Elder 
 Creath's opinions, uttered in St. Louis. Have they not yet 
 learned that the Bible Union fetters no man's opinions? 
 Whatever is founded in reason, and is consistent with truth, 
 
I 
 
 TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 105 
 
 is respected. Is not that the way that these clergymen get 
 along in their coalition ? Are all the members of this famous 
 coalition to be judged by the opinions of any one member of 
 that immortal quintuple alliance ? ISTow, in order to show these 
 clergymen how free the Bible revision cause is, we hereby 
 tender a public invitation to any one of the alliance, to attend 
 the Annual Revision Association, which assembles in this city 
 on the 10th of April, and make a speech. It shall be pub- 
 lished in our proceedings, and scattered among the friends of 
 revision. The speaker may take his text on any one of the 
 favorite topics of the coalition — immersion, Spencer Cone, 
 Alexander Campbell, or sectarianism. If they have not ex- 
 hausted themselves on these entertaining themes, we hope that 
 some one of the body will avail himself of this opportunity for 
 distinguishing himself. 
 
 The coalition seems steadily bent on finding out the names 
 of the college of revisers. They speak of the "sedulous con- 
 cealment." Gentlemen, do be patient. Some of your friends 
 have declared, that if any names in their denominations can 
 be discovered, they shall be expelled. But the names of 
 numbers of them are widely known. They have been given 
 to thousands in public addresses, and to several of the five 
 clergymen, by one of the undersigned. When you cool down 
 and get through with your decorum letters, you shall have more 
 names. After all, may we not enquire whether these five 
 clergymen are not more worried about the names they already 
 know than concerned about the remainder? The friends of 
 revision have all the information on this subject that they 
 desire at present. 
 
 Our clerical friends are much more devoted to asking ques- 
 tions than to answering them. They ask us solemnly, "Is it 
 held that plain, common sense people, not scholars, can not 
 get out of the old English Bible a just and clear sense or* 
 the Gospel in every doctrine, promise, and precept ? " And wc 
 ask, does not each one of you teacli that these can be found 
 
106 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 either in the Thirty-nine Articles, the Westminster Confession 
 of Faith, or in the Methodist Discipline ? If there is any 
 sense or logic in your question, why print Bibles at all, or 
 why preach from them? Why not print and circulate the 
 little formularies , why not preach from them , why not teach 
 in the Sunday-schools from them? Will not your question 
 apply to the Douay version? Why does each one of you 
 denounce that ? Will not your inquiry apply to the Swedish 
 and Portuguese versions, not one fourth of which is correct or 
 intelligible to the common people ? God declares, that "all 
 Scripture given by Divine inspiration is pkofitable." Do 
 you call that in question ? God denounces those who shall 
 add to the words of His Book, and those who shall diminish 
 from His words. Many letters, words, and sentences, that do 
 not belong to the Word of God, are added in King James's 
 version : many that belong to the inspired text are not to be 
 found in the authorized version, and many expressions are un- 
 intelligible that should be plain. How many of the ablest 
 and best of scholars have we already quoted upon these cler- 
 gymen on these points ? But, in good season, we shall give 
 more. 
 
 As specimens of what these gentlemen understand by cour- 
 tesy, good manners, decorum, &c , we beg leave to call atten- 
 tion to the following We are charged with "acting under 
 false pretenses , " with ' attempting to force the Word of 
 God;" "to beguile others into a confidence that will be 
 abused." These beautiful gems of politeness, we suppose, 
 are the choice morceaux of clerical courtesy to which we poor 
 laymen must submit in humble gratitude to these dispensers 
 of blessed words! Although the reader may search all the 
 articles of the undersigned without finding the least semblance 
 of such language, yet these gentlemen not only indulge in the 
 most insulting inuendoes and criminations, but with the coolest 
 complacency lecture us upon good manners, civility, and cour- 
 tesy! But they say that they "would not interfere with us 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 107 
 
 i 
 
 if we would represent a just design." We shall feel obliged 
 to the clergy jif they will translate that into intelligible Eng- 
 lish. But this much we can say: we challenge these gentle- 
 men to place their finger upon a single instance in which we 
 have failed to fully express our true designs and objects. An 
 injustice by inuendo is rather worse than an open wrong. 
 
 Our clerical friends are exceeding fretted on account of our 
 allusion to the wrong they perpetrated on Spencer Cone. The 
 charge is true, just in the terms in which we expressed it. We 
 answered them from their publication in the Courier ; and in 
 their article in that paper the grievous wrong was done to 
 Spencer Cone of which we complained. And the wrong has 
 never yet been amended. The Rev. Mr. Adams has pointed 
 out the fact that the publication in the Journal was correctly 
 printed. But why did not these gentlemen see that their 
 publication was correct in both papers? They are responsible 
 for both. We charged that the wrong was perpetrated by 
 quotation marks ; and so far as the article of the clergymen 
 in the Courier is concerned, the wrong is still unredressed. 
 These clergymen owe it to themselves, and to a sense of 
 justice to the memory of Dr. Cone, to correct their error for 
 the readers of the Courier. When they do that, they may 
 consider themselves relieved of our charge, but not until 
 then. When a man discovers that he has committed a wrong, 
 even by a typographical error, he is in common honesty bound 
 to correct it. 
 
 Our clergy talk about judging a tree by its fruit. They 
 should be careful about awaking too much public attention to 
 that rule just now; we question whether it will benefit them 
 a great deal. But we are willing to be tried by that rule. 
 What better first-fruits of an organized body do they want 
 than its constitution and settled rules of procedure? And we 
 call upon the gentlemen now, as we have often done unsuccess- 
 fully, to point out the least flaw in them, or the first instance 
 in which we have deviated from them. 
 
108 
 
 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 We beg leave to say to our clerical friends that these arti- 
 cles are extensively republished; and the friends of revision, 
 in all cases, publish the articles of the five clergymen. Prep- 
 arations are in progress for the republication of the whole cor- 
 respondence in pamphlet form for distribution in Europe and 
 America. We shall be happy if our clerical friends will try 
 their hands once more, and produce something that will do 
 them credit. We pray them, before they abandon this field 
 of fame, to try and state ONE fact on revision that will bear 
 scrutiny; to make at least ONE argument that will pass cur- 
 rent in the realms of logic. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 NUMBER VIII 
 
 THE AUTHORS AND FINISHERS OF THE COMMON VERSION. — ITS 
 REVISERS AND THEIR OPPONENTS. 
 
 We have heard and read a great deal in relation to the 
 remarkable merits of the forty gentlemen, who, by a stretch 
 of courtesy, are called the translators of King James's version. 
 The period in which they flourished is called, very curiously, 
 "the golden age of learning," a phrase which can have no 
 force of truth to those acquainted with the History of that 
 epoch. What are the golden fruits of that period? What 
 are the products of the learning of that age ? In what quar- 
 ter of the earth may any man seek for any evidence of the 
 truth of the statement that the learning of King James's times 
 was either comprehensive, accurate, vital, or able ? It is easy 
 enough to manufacture fine phrases — quite easy, in the loom 
 of an active imagination, to weave tissues at once gaudy and 
 glaring and attenuated. But in matters that concern the 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 109 
 
 welfare of human beings, that are connected with their highest 
 interests and their eternal rights, that bind them to the throne 
 of Omnipotence and to an inheritance that is undefilecl and 
 that fadeth not away, fine phrasing and a tesselated mosaic of 
 pompous words, that speak more of sound than of sense, are 
 not the proper food for the immortal mind. At the judgment- 
 bar of God each individual must answer for himself ; neither 
 priest nor clergy of any kind, nor church institutions made by 
 men, nor human formularies, can be of any avail. Each 
 mortal must answer for himself, upon the Word of God , and 
 by that alone will, each one be measured. Hence the value of 
 the labors of the Bible Union towards that glorious consum- 
 mation which the English language so much needs — a transla- 
 tion of the Word of the Eternal, faithful in all respects to the 
 inspired original. Battle after battle has been fought upon 
 the principle involved in this work. In all ages, privileged 
 orders have felt that among their dearest privileges was that 
 which protected the masses of the people from too clear a 
 comprehension of the Word of God. Thus, when Cranmer 
 attempted to revise Tyndale's translation of the New Testa- 
 ment, and divided the work out among the most learned men 
 of Iris time, the answer of Stokesly, bishop of London, is not 
 a bad type of myriads of established crrorists of that age and 
 of all succeeding ages. This clergyman, to whom Cranmer 
 had sent the Acts of the Apostles for revision, said : "I mar- 
 vel what my lord of Canterbury meaneth, that he thus abuseth 
 the people in giving them liberty to read the Scriptures, which 
 cloth nothing else but infect them with heresy. I have be- 
 stowed never an hour upon my portion, nor ever will. And 
 therefore my lord shall have his book again, for I will never 
 be guilty of bringing the simple people into error." In plain 
 terms my lord bishop of London could see nothing but evil in 
 an attempt to make the Scriptures of Divine Truth intelligi- 
 ble to the masses of the people. When the early reformers 
 endeavored to translate language of this kind into such as 
 

 110 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 expressed good honest thoughts, they successfully spake, ac- 
 cording to Hume, in these terms: "Nothing can he more 
 absurd than to conceal, in an unknown tongue, the Word of 
 God itself, and thus counteract the will of Heaven, which, for 
 the purpose of universal salvation, had published that salutary 
 doctrine to all nations, that if this practice were not very 
 absurd, the artifice at least was very gross, and proved a con- 
 sciousness that the glosses and traditions of the clergy stood 
 in direct opposition to the original text, dictated by Supreme 
 intelligence ; that it was now necessary for the people, so long 
 abused by interested pretensions, to see with their own eyes, 
 and to examine whether the claims of the ecclesiastics were 
 founded on that charter which was on all hands acknowledged 
 to be derived from heaven , and that, as a spirit of research 
 and curiosity was happily revived, and men were now obliged 
 to make a choice among the contending doctrines of different 
 sects, the proper materials for decision, and, above all, the 
 Holy Scriptures, should be set before them ; and the revealed 
 will of God, which the change of language had somewhat 
 obscured, be again, by their means, revealed to mankind.*' 
 The Bible Union of the present time occupies the very ground 
 occupied by the reformers of the troublous times of Henry 
 VIII. , Edward, Elizabeth, and James I. ; the opposition to 
 the Bible Union stands precisely where all opposition to giving 
 the fullness and purity of the Word of God to the people has 
 ever stood. And this opposition now is doomed to meet even 
 -a more disastrous fate than its kindred types have ever expe- 
 rienced , for the Bible Union occupies a territory of truth, of 
 fidelity to God and man, and of capacity for its noble objects, 
 never before occupied in any attempt to make a perfectly faith- 
 ful version of the entire Word of God. Burnet's " History 
 of his own Times" and JSTeal's "History of the Puritans," 
 amply confirm the truth of Hume's picture of the opposition 
 to a faithful translation of the truth of God ; and a modern 
 artist might draw a similar picture from living models. Even 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. Ill 
 
 those forty gentlemen who revised the Bible in King James's 
 time, and who are now canonized and sainted among Protest- 
 ants to such an extent that a Presbyterian clergyman, hi the 
 Independent, recently said that some Protestants bestowed 
 upon their work an " idolatrous reverence," felt a great load 
 of the evils which their reverers attempt to heap now on others. 
 We have now before us the preface of these forty mirrors of 
 " the golden age of learning of King James's times " to the 
 first edition of the Bible revised by them. In that they thus 
 speak: "Whosoever attempteth anything for the public (espe- 
 cially if it pertain to religion and to the opening and clearing of 
 the Word of God) the same setteth himself upon a stage to 
 be glouted upon by every evil eye , yea, he casteth himself 
 headlong upon pikes to be gored by every sharp tongue . for 
 he that meddleth with men's f eligion, in any part, meddleth 
 with their costume, nay, their freehold , and though they find 
 no content in that which they have, yet they can not abide to 
 hear of altering " The italicized portion of this word-picture 
 has all the fidelity of a perfect daguerreotype. We have 
 among us those who are not content with what they have, but 
 can not abide to hear of altering. Take, for example, the 
 practices and connections of "the five clergymen" who have 
 recently immortalized themselves before the people of Ken- 
 tucky in their attempt to crush out life from the revision cause. 
 All that portion of the five clergymen who know any thing 
 of the Greek language industriously revise the Scriptures in 
 their pulpits and in their theological polemics ; and three of 
 the rive utterly condemn King James's version in what are 
 held to be important and essential parts. King James's ver- 
 sion sets up an establishment called Bishops, which three of 
 these clergymen, with all their brethren, utterly repudiate. 
 With two of these "harmonious clergymen" bishops arc a 
 divine order, set forth in the Holy Scriptures ; but the other 
 three harmonies reject the divinity of bishops, refuse to ac- 
 knowledge their existence in their church government, and 
 
112 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 declare, that although such an order is taught in King James's 
 New Testament, the Holy Oracles in the inspired text teach 
 nothing of the kind! Verily, these are guides for the people 
 to the pure light of God's truth! 
 
 But we turn to a consideration of King James's packed jury 
 of revision. It is a great stretch of the truth to call them 
 substantially by the name of translators. The real translator 
 of a large portion of the English Bible was William Tyndale, 
 who gave ample evidence of the possession of more learning 
 than we have any evidence was m possession of the entire 
 forty gentlemen called King James's translators. Tyndale 
 really translated the Old Testament from the Hebrew, for he 
 no had English translation from those tongues to guide him. 
 That noble martyr to truth determined, even at the risk of his 
 life, which he lost in the cause, to furnish the people with as 
 faithful a version of God's word as he could make ; and his 
 truthful mind foresaw the results. In a conversation with a 
 reputed learned divine, he uttered the remarkable words: "If 
 God spare my life, ere many years, I will cause a boy that 
 driveth the plow to know more of the Scriptures than you 
 do" The light of that truth shines now upon the labors of 
 the Bible Union. 
 
 To return • King James's revisers had before them the labors 
 of Tyndale, Coverdale's translation, John Bogers's compila- 
 tion of Tyndale and Coverdale, with improvements of his own; 
 Cranmer's Great Bible ; the Geneva Bible ; the Bishop's Bible ; 
 -and the Latin Vulgate, All testimony of any weight con- 
 curs in supporting these facts. A great deal of labor is spent 
 by persons, who scarcely know what they are talking about, in 
 glorifying the learning of King James's "translators." If 
 these parties were called upon for proof of their statements, 
 they would necessarily be dumb, for the record is vacant in all 
 the matter of proof. Those "translators" have not left a single 
 monument of their learning by which its character can be ascer- 
 tained. Men of science, of learning, of arts, and of philoso- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 113 
 
 phy are known by the works they produce, and can be known 
 in no other way. Where is the lexicon, the grammar, any 
 editions of the classics, any treatise in any one department of 
 learning, prepared by any one of King James's board of forty 
 revisers, to which men may look in order to learn something of 
 their acquisitions ? All history stands dumb to these questions. 
 There is not a particle of reliable evidence that any one of the 
 forty could read and translate with skill either Hebrew or 
 Greek. It requires no great amount of scholarship to detect 
 their frequent visits to the Latin Yulgate for such improve- 
 ments as they made upon previous versions ; but their improve- 
 ments were more than counterbalanced by their numerous 
 blunders and palpable corruptions of the Word of God. The 
 preface, to their first edition of the Bible was full of the lowest, 
 vilest, almost profane adulation of one of the most wicked, 
 profane, and outrageous beings that ever wore a crown ; one 
 who spent his time in burning Presbyterians and Baptists, and, 
 in the language of Neal, in " wounding the Protestant religion 
 and the liberties of England." And they carried this adula- 
 tion where it became profanity, into the text of God's word. 
 In order to assist the tyrant James in riveting a yoke upon 
 the necks of the people, these corrupt revisers, holding appoint- 
 ments under James and seeking church benefices at his hands, 
 did not hesitate to make holy writ utter repeatedly, God save 
 the King — a phrase not only never written by the Holy Spirit, 
 but at war with all of God's revelation on kingly governments. 
 In former articles we have shown the enormity committed by 
 these men in placing in the word of inspiration a Saxon feia^e 
 idol Eostre or Easter, in lieu of the Divine institution ordtmd 
 by Jehovah. And we might go on and fill column after 
 column with specimens of such work, which not one scholar 
 on this earth would attempt to defend. King James's servitors 
 warped the Word of God to suit their employer or to suit their 
 own theological notions. Their business was with philology 
 not theology. Take a single case of their unscrupulousness in 
 
 8 
 
114 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 their department of theology. The word Klinee means a bed 
 or a couch. From that word the English language has ob- 
 tained all such words as decline, recline, incline, and clinical. 
 Throughout the entire Bible, indeed throughout all English 
 literature, wherever the word occurs, it is always translated a 
 bed or a couch, except in a single place. It has no other mean- 
 ing than that which we have mentioned. But in Mark vii, 4, 
 King James's "translators" had the hardihood to translate it 
 tables. They might as well have translated it horse, cow, or 
 sheep, for it means either of them quite as much as it does 
 table. The word Klinee or its derivatives occur ten times in 
 the New Testament, a^d nine times King James's revisers 
 translate it bed. Why then did they forge a meaning for 
 Klinon in Mark vii. ' 4. ? Simply because in that place the 
 Saviour used the word bajptismous and a forged meaning was 
 given to Klinon in order to obscure the common meaning at- 
 tached to baptismous, The common meaning of that word 
 perfectly applies to the immersing of beds; the intention was 
 to make it difficult to apply such washing to tables ! Is there 
 a pious or an honest man any where who would hold a tenet 
 erected on such tampering with the inspired text as that ? 
 
 Let us return to a consideration of the character of King 
 James's "translators." We learn from Dr. S. E. Shepard 
 that a Mr. M'Clure has published a work called "The Trans- 
 lators Revived." He felt anxious to do honor to these men, 
 but he says, that where he expected to satisfy himself without 
 "difficulty, he found himself sorely disappointed. He searched 
 piifce libraries and found some little about all the forty save 
 two — Fairclough and Sanderson. They are in hopeless ob- 
 livion. We know more of Tyndale and Eogers, who preceded 
 them, than we do of all the forty. Mr. M'Clure, although 
 earnestly bent on doing them honor, acknowledges that their 
 labor was but a revision of the translations of Tyndale and 
 Rogers. As the end of Mr. M'Clure's twenty years' labor to 
 do them honor, that is the result. Upon Clark, the author 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 115 
 
 devotes twelve lines of biography , upon Peryn and Brainth- 
 waite each eleven lines , RadclifFe, Laifield, and King each nine 
 lines , R. Andrews and Ward each eight lines , upon Bavens 
 seven lines , Hutchison and M. Sanderson five lines , upon 
 Burleigh four lines ; Spalding three and a half, upon Babbet 
 two and a half lines. And to such celebrities as these the 
 English mind is called upon to bow in humble servitude for all 
 time to come. There is not the least evidence that any one of 
 the body was a good scholar and a pious man. They praised 
 the King's remarkable piety, and he swore like a trooper in 
 their presence, and was guilty of the most awful abominations 
 before God and man. Bancroft, in attempts to drive the Puri- 
 tans, Baptists, and others into conformity to King James's 
 notions of a church, drew up three hundred ministers, and 
 suspended, or deprived, or excommunicated, imprisoned, or 
 exiled the whole number. He was King James's chosen church- 
 man, his agent in religious matters. He chose the "transla- 
 tors,*' and it requires no very great conjectural power to under- 
 stand what kind of tools Bancroft chose for the work in hand 
 — a Bible shaped for a despotic King who avowed that his 
 throne rested not upon Christianity nor upon freedom, but 
 upon a despotic church establishment, And the Puritan de- 
 scendants of Baynolds, of Sparks, Chadderton, and Knew- 
 stubbs, of the Hampton Conference, are now standing before 
 the people of Kentucky, glorifying King James, Bishop Ban- 
 croft, and their allies, and spitting upon the graves and the 
 memories of their martyred Puritan progenitors ! Verily, the 
 world moves after a fashion of its own. 
 
 . But the five clergymen attempted, some time since, to show 
 the remarkable glories of King James's times in biblical learning 
 for a "translation" of the Bible that must never be disturbed. 
 Yet that "translation" has never commanded the confidence 
 or approbation, in all respects, of the learned. In the seven 
 years that succeeded its publication, ten editions of the Geneva 
 Bible, and four editions of the Geneva Now Testament, were 
 
116 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 printed in England. And for twenty-one years the Geneva 
 Bible was the popular one in England ; and that bitter hater 
 of dissenters, Bishop Land, made it a high commission crime 
 to import, print, or sell the Geneva or the Presbyterian trans- 
 lation. We can now place our hand on more than one hun- 
 dred learned works upon the Bible, extending from 1632 down 
 to our day, each of which condemns King James s version, and 
 proposes amendments in it. And in relation to the relative 
 capacities of the biblical science of King James's age of bitter 
 theological controversy and fiery persecutions, and of our 
 peaceful age of freedom and popular sovereignty, we quote the 
 authority of the ablest Presbyterian scholar in this country. 
 
 Edward Robinson, in his "Greek Harmony of the Gospels,' 7 
 says "In the lapse of centuries, and even of years, there is 
 a constant progress in the observation and discovery of new 
 facts and circumstances, bearing upon the social and also the 
 physical history of the Hebrews and other ancient nations. 
 They all serve to enlarge the circle of biblical knowledge ; 
 they add to the apparatus and means of the interpreter and 
 biblical harmonist, and often shed new light upon topics which 
 before were dark or doubtful. It may also be truly said, 
 that in no former period, perhaps, has there been accumulated 
 a greater amount of such facts and such progress than during 
 the half century which has closed. 1 '' That is the testimony 
 of a biblical scholar whose pre-eminence is universally ac- 
 knowledged. It utterly refutes the gratuitous statements, 
 which, in the absence of any thing that can be called proof, 
 assert the superiority of King James's age, opportunities, or 
 desires, for a faithful version of the Word of God. At least 
 nineteen-twentieths of the merits of the common version are 
 due to Tyndale, Coverdale, and Rogers ; a large mass of the 
 blunders, corruptions, and perversions of that version are due 
 to the jury of revisers packed by the relentless persecutor of 
 dissenters, Bishop Bancroft, under the orders of the blasphe- 
 mous and wicked head of the Stuart race of English kings, 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 117 
 
 Tlie Bible Union has scholars in its board of revisers who 
 have built up monuments of learning that will be honored 
 among men while biblical science has a friend upon the earth ; 
 and there is not a man in it whose personal character has a 
 stain upon it. The principles of the Society we have amply 
 and clearly developed, and they commend themselves to all 
 men. Presbyterians, Methodists, and Episcopalians have, in 
 this city, since the five clergymen commenced their opposition, 
 rallied under the banner of the revision cause, and they cheer 
 us forward in that glorious work which animated the noble 
 heart of Tyndale — to make the Word of God, in English, so 
 clear, so intelligible, and so palpable to the understanding, 
 that an enterprising plowman may in three weeks know more 
 of it than a lazy clergyman. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 NUMBER IX. 
 
 testimonies of scholars on revision. 
 
 When the Bible Revision Association appointed us to per- 
 form the duty of explaining before the public the principles 
 upon which the revision of the Bible has been undertaken by 
 the Bible Union, we had no reason to suppose that any one 
 would undertake to get up a controversy with us on the subject. 
 And we could not have conceived, that under any circum- 
 stances, any one would deliberately undertake the wholesale 
 aspersion of the moral characters of the hosts of pious men 
 and women engaged in this cause, whose characters are not 
 called in question in any other matter. All the parties engaged 
 m the enterprise of the Bible Union are recognized as persons 
 of unblemished integrity, of pure morals, of thorough truthful- 
 
118 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 ness in matters of veracity. All these parties are endeavoring 
 to procure what no man of learning any where will say the 
 English language now possesses — a Bible faithful in all respects 
 to the inspired texts. They have secured fidelity in this work 
 by all the guarantees known to them, and they have pleaded 
 with their opponents to suggest a better plan or an improvement 
 upon this. JVb man has challenged a single principle of the 
 Bible Union. Wo one has said that there is a single defect 
 in the constitution, the organization, or the contracts of the 
 Bible Union. There is not one Christian man or woman on 
 the earth who can give one good reason why he or she may 
 not stand on the platform of the Bible Union. That platform 
 is, that all the inspired text shall be faithfully translated. 
 Yet notwithstanding these substantial and incontrovertible 
 truths, we have been assailed. We have been virtually told 
 by those who adduce no proof of their statement, that the 
 constitution, the organization, and the contracts of the Bible 
 Union are false in every respect, and that people whose integ- 
 rity is commended in all communities wherever they are known, 
 are persons who are so steeped in falsehood that they are not 
 to be believed in any thing they say. Can any person, in any 
 state of case, be justified in making such wholesale denuncia- 
 tion of honest, virtuous people? Is there any Christianity, 
 any ray of a holy spirit, in such work as this ? Yet every 
 person who says that the revised Bible is to be a sectarian 
 work, is guilty of this remarkable deed of wrong. And there 
 is not a person any where, who is guilty of this deep offence, 
 who is not himself steeped in sectarianism. There is not a 
 more perfect criterion by which any person's intense sectarian- 
 ism may be known than by his resort to this sweeping denun- 
 ciation. We exceedingly regret that Christianity has not yet 
 been received enough by men to purify the moral atmosphere 
 from such poisonous influences. We regret that instead of 
 those pure, gentle, holy, truthful, loveable traits of character, 
 which Christianity intended to introduce- even men who 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 119 
 
 profess to be under its influence display the same sectarian 
 bigotry, deep-seated prejudices, and reckless tongues, that 
 hunted the Saviour to the cross, and tracked the fooi^teps of 
 the apostles with unvarying misrepresentation and unrelenting- 
 persecution. When the Saviour was among men, he asked, 
 "When the Son of Man cometh, shall he find faith on the 
 earth?" The condition of things we have described does not 
 look much like it. The souls of believers desire the pure oil 
 which Zachariah saw emptied from the two olive branches, 
 through two golden pipes — those two olive trees and two can- 
 dlesticks which John, in the Apocalypse, saw "standing before 
 the God of the earth;" but the intense sectarianism which has 
 usurped the province of Jehovah, declares that we shall not 
 have it. It dares to declare to men and women, that though 
 its oil is impure, they shall have no other. This intense sec- 
 tarianism, while admitting that there is not one English version 
 of the Word of God, faithful in all respects, dares to assume 
 that a defective representation of God's revelation is quite as 
 useful as a faithful one. The common version has crowded 
 English Christendom with sects that are almost as innumerable 
 as the sands upon the sea-shore. These sects are the legiti- 
 mate fruits of that sectarian version from which they all pre- 
 tend to draw their sustenance ; they could not have been pro- 
 duced by the inspired oracles. All the promises of God are 
 based upon His Word, not upon unfaithful versions of it. 
 
 But we turn from these contemplations of the subject to 
 legitimate sources of evidence. There are scholars in the sec- 
 tarian establishments of the day, who can afford to be truthful 
 and honest, and who remember that gentleness and truth are 
 among the graces of Christianity. The cause for which we 
 plead is sustained by the testimony of the entire Word of 
 God, and by the criticises of every biblical scholar living, 
 and by every one that has lived. And even those influences 
 which occupy positions antagonistic to the cause of revision 
 are now beginning to bear witness to its excellence. We 
 
120 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 begin with the Western Christian Advocate, a Methodist 
 paper published at Cincinnati. In answer to a correspondent 
 as to jjie fact that a prominent Methodist doctor of divinity 
 was engaged by the Bible Union, the editor says : 
 
 "After all, no one may be disconcerted about this matter. 
 The new translators must be very incompetent and unfair men 
 if they do not furnish a better translation of the Scriptures 
 than our present English version, which, though the best that 
 could be made at the time — and it may be better than the 
 new one — may be greatly improved for the better, in accord- 
 ance with the original Scriptures. Wesley gave a better 
 translation of the New Testament. Campbell and Doddridge 
 also improved. No one need be frightened on this subject, as 
 the Bible is quite safe in almost any of the English versions — 
 the Douay not excepted — if you reject the gross sectarian 
 notes." 
 
 The New York Independent, a leading Presbyterian paper 
 of the city of New York, thus speaks of one of the revisers : 
 
 "The Bev John Lillie, D.D., is a clergyman of the Scotch 
 Presbyterian Church in this city, eminent alike for his learning 
 and Christian integrity. Dr. L. is at present engaged profes- 
 sionally upon the new version of the Bible, a service for which 
 his sound scholarship and his critical accuracy admirably fit 
 him." A number of other revisers are known, and no one has 
 questioned either the scholarship, piety, or integrity of any 
 one of them. Does not this fact speak trumpet-tongued in 
 behalf of the excellence of the Bible Union's efforts to employ 
 none but faithful, competent men ? May not something be 
 conjectured as to the character of the unknown revisers from 
 those who are known? Does any one imagine that such men 
 as Buttiger, Forsyth, Boys, Lillie, Conant, and Morton would 
 be associated with incompetent, unfaithful men, engaged in 
 perverting the Word of God? Shame upon the heart that 
 can be guilty of such evil imagining! Shame upon the pei\ 
 that can utter such injurious statements ! 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 121 
 
 Archdeacon Hare, of the English Church, a man of profound 
 learning and evangelical piety, says : 
 
 " This notion that slight errors and defects and faults are 
 immaterial, and that we need not go to the trouble of correct- 
 ing them, is one main cause why there are so many huge 
 errors and defects and faults in every region of human life, 
 practical and speculative, moral and political. Nor should any 
 error be deemed slight which affects the meaning of a single 
 word in the Bible, where so much weight is attached to every 
 single word, and where so many inferences and conclusions are 
 drawn from the slightest ground, not merely those which find 
 utterance in books, but a far greater number springing up in 
 the minds of the millions to whom our English Bible is the 
 code and canon of all truth. For this reason, errors, even the 
 least, in a version of the Bible, are of far greater moment 
 than in any other book, as well because the contents of the 
 Bible are of far greater importance, and have a far wider influ- 
 ence, as also because the readers of the Bible are not only the 
 educated and the learned, who can exercise some sort of judg- 
 ment on what they read, but vast multitudes who understand 
 Avhat they read according to the letter. Hence, it is a main 
 duty of a Church to take care that the version of the Scrip- 
 tures which it puts into the hands of the members shall be as 
 faultless as possible." 
 
 The Rev. John Stock, of Patmos College, Longwood, Hud- 
 dersfield, in reference to the American Bible Union, says : 
 
 "I look on the work in which you are engaged as the noblest 
 of modern days, and trust that your Union may be enabled, 
 eventually, to supply every tribe of men with a faithful and 
 complete translation of the whole Word of God in their own 
 tongue. Remember me kindly to that man of God, Dr. 
 Maclay. Our people collected for him nearly £40." 
 
 Of that portion revised by a Presbyterian clergyman of the 
 city of New York, the Church of England Quarterly Maga- 
 zine says : 
 
122 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 "If this be the conclusion [i. e., of the revision of the New 
 Testament], then we must congratulate our American brethren 
 both on their translation and on their notes. We certainly 
 want a work of the kind here, and if this be not a conclusion, 
 we hope there will be sufficient encouragement to go on with 
 so good a work." 
 
 The Nonconformist, published in London, is the chief organ 
 of the dissenters in England, and is edited with great learning 
 and ability. It says . 
 
 "The work before us is an installment of what we hope 
 may prove speedily a complete revision of our common Eng- 
 lish version. The American Bible Union is unknown to us , 
 but we, on the evidence of this thin quarto, must regard it as 
 a most valuable association for the promotion of the best of 
 purposes ; and we trust its labors may be adequately sustained, 
 and accomplish the great ends proposed. The special instruc- 
 tions given to the revisers of the English New Testament, and 
 observed by the author of the portion now before us, are, to 
 retain the present version as the basis of their revision, and to 
 make that version from the received Greek text, critically ed- 
 ited, with the known errors corrected, to cite all authorities 
 for alterations made, and to give the views of the reviser as to 
 the translation of the same word or phrase of the original, not 
 only in the place before him, but in every other place in which 
 it occurs. Should this plan be carried out, provision is more 
 effectually made for gaining the concurrent authority of the 
 biblical scholars for the revised version than existed among 
 the fifty -four translators of King James ; and the result could 
 scarcely fail to be successful and to secure public confidence. '' 
 
 Eev. Samuel H. Turner, D. D., of the Episcopal Theolog- 
 ical Seminary, New York : 
 
 " It is only necessary to examine your work in part to be 
 satisfied that you have devoted much care and labor to it, and 
 that the result is, in very many places, a decided improvement 
 on the authorized version," 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 123 
 
 Samuel Davidson, LL.D., Professor in Lancashire Indepen- 
 dent College, Manchester, England, author of u An Introduc- 
 tion to the New Testament," &c, a biblical scholar of the 
 highest reputation both in Europe and America, says : 
 
 "There is no doubt that the revision is very well done, 
 Whoever the unknown writer be, he has done his work ex- 
 tremely well. His scholarship is varied and sound." 
 
 The Clerical Journal and Church and University Chronicle, 
 published at Oxford, England, thus speaks of the last revision : 
 
 " The American Bible Union has the merit of putting forth, 
 in a book now before us, the first attempt at such a revision of 
 the text as is required. 
 
 " The conscientious minuteness with which every slight de- 
 parture from the authorized text is noted, and every authority 
 of value collated, is highly creditable to the editor or editors. 
 The style in which the book is printed, and the price at 
 which it is offered to the public, are highly creditable to the 
 publishers." 
 
 From American Periodicals. 
 
 The Biblical Repository and Princeton Beview says : 
 
 "This volume is understood to be the work of a Presbyte- 
 rian minister, in full communion with our own Church. As 
 we have not his permission to destroy the incognito maintained 
 throughout the publication, we content ourselves with saying 
 that he has no reason for concealment, if the most extensive 
 and exact acquaintance with the text, theology, and exegesis 
 of the New Testament, as well as with the niceties of English 
 diction, and the utmost tenderness in dealing with the venera- 
 ble English Bible, even while correcting it, can give a man a 
 place among the biblical critics of the age and country." 
 
 From Waymarks in the Wilderness, we extract the intro- 
 ductory sentences of different paragraphs : 
 
 "This is one of the most important works that has ever 
 issued from the American press." 
 
124 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 " The chief value and primary design of this work is its 
 excellence as a translation." 
 
 "One of the great excellences of this version is its faithful 
 adherence to the original." 
 
 "This new translation also throws great light on many doc- 
 trines of Scripture." 
 
 "Another excellence of this revised version is the rectifica- 
 tion of the Greek text of Revelation." 
 
 The Home and Foreign Journal says : 
 
 " We are prepared to give it a thorough examination, &c 
 Here is the book itself, avowedly given to the public to be 
 criticised. Let it be subjected to the severed philological 
 tests, and if shown to be imperfect, the Bible Union will make 
 changes accordingly. What could be fairer than this ?" 
 
 All these witnesses as to the practices of the Bible Union 
 are Pedobaptist authorities of eminence. We have heretofore 
 published in full the principles of the Bible Union as devel- 
 oped in its constitution, organization, contracts with the 
 revisers, and professions of its friends. No man has felt 
 himself strong enough to question any one of the principles 
 of the revision organization. Those principles have recently 
 run the gantlet of five clergymen, who were aboundantly able, 
 willing, and zealous to attack them, had there been one vul- 
 nerable point in them j but those gentlemen did not challenge 
 a single principle of the Bible Union. A more just, fair, and 
 truthful organization for carrying forward a holy work never 
 was made upon this earth. And as there is but one other 
 method beside the principles of an organized body, of judging 
 the motives of men, and that is in seeking to find how far 
 their practices conform to their principles, we have to-day 
 shown the testimony of independent scholars and authorities 
 to the fact that the practices of the Bible Union are in strict 
 conformity to its principled. Indeed, such has been the wel- 
 come given by scholars and high authorities among the various 
 sects, to the specimens of revision abeady made, that the 
 
V 
 
 TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 125 
 
 friends of the cause have ample reason to anticipate a much 
 more general and cordial welcome from them than was origi- 
 nally hoped for. If the revision movement be of God, mortal 
 power can not arrest it , if it be of men, it will come to naught 
 of itself. 
 
 We close with these testimonies for the present. We shall 
 continue to show the voice of the learned upon the absolute 
 necessity of a revision of the Holy Oracles, and upon the suc- 
 cess in faithfulness thus far achieved by the Bible Union in 
 revising the Holy Oracles. There is not a more momentous 
 question to mortals than is contained in that which asks, What 
 has God said to man? There is not one version of the' Bible 
 in the English language that gives a complete answer to this 
 all-important, all-pervading question. But the Bible Union 
 intends, that so far as human powers can accomplish a great 
 and an essential result, this crying sin shall no longer mar the 
 progress of the masses of the people in the attainment of bib- 
 lical truth. We shall therefore devote our labors, hereafter, 
 to an exposition of the resources of the Bible Union for secur- 
 ing the great objects contemplated. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 T S. Bell. 
 
 N UMBER X. 
 
 KING JAMES S VERSION COMPARED WITH THE WORK OF 
 THE HOLY SPIRIT. 
 
 When the Arch-enemy of mankind undertook to prove Him 
 to whom the Holy Spirit and the voice from Heaven had just 
 borne testimony at the Jordan, one of the answers given by 
 the Founder of Christianity was, " It is written, man shall 
 not live by bread alone, but by every word that proccedeth 
 
126 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 out of the mouth of God." And this is the answer now of 
 every faithful, truthful heart ; it is the answer, too, not only 
 in words, but in every action of life. In the ear of every 
 true and faithful follower of Jesus Christ rings the Eternal 
 voice, uttering, " Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my 
 words shall not pass away." " The word that I have spoken 
 the same shall judge him in the last day." "If you continue 
 in my word, then are you my disciples indeed." These are 
 the declarations of the Holy Spirit, and the testimony of every 
 biblical scholar who has ever spoken on the subject is, that 
 there is not one version of the Word of God in the English 
 language that, in all respects, represents faithfully " the 
 words " that are to survive the destruction of the heavens and 
 the earth — the word that is to judge each one of us at the last 
 day — the word, by our continuance in which our discipleship 
 is to be ascertained. If we have not the fullness of these 
 words, how are we to prepare for the judgment? If we have 
 not the word to begin with, how are we to continue in it? No 
 scholar any where pretends to say that we have all the words 
 of God in King James's version. Such a man can not be 
 produced in all the records of biblical literature. Yet even 
 for the temporal blessings promised the Jews, the utmost pains 
 were taken to make known, in a plain and intelligible manner, 
 every word that God had uttered through Moses. In Deuter- 
 onomy the mandate is given more than once : "You shall not 
 add unto the word which I command you, neither shall you 
 "dimmish aught from it." And when Joshua, after the destruc- 
 tion of Ai, stood with Mount Ebal on one side and Mount 
 Gerizim on the other, he read the words that had been uttered 
 by Moses, and we are told that "there was not a word of all 
 that Moses commanded which Joshua read not before all the 
 congregation of Israel, with the women and the little ones and 
 the strangers that were conversant among them." Now, if all 
 this was necessary to the Jews, how mucli more necessary to 
 us are all the words of the Holy Spirit in the new dispensa- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 127 
 
 tion, in their proper places, and faithfully rendered into intelli- 
 ble English ? Inspiration asks a question on this subject that 
 should sink deep into the mind of every human being, a ques- 
 tion intimately connected with the whole principle of revision : 
 "For if they escaped not who refused Him who spake on 
 earth, much more we who turn away from Him who speaketh 
 to us from Heaven." Each individual has to settle this matter 
 for himself or herself; and if they do not do it satisfactorily in 
 this world, they will be likely to do it unsatisfactorily in the 
 world to come. 
 
 In view of the fact that all men who are capable of reading 
 Hebrew or Greek concur in the declaration that the English 
 language has not one version of Holy Writ in it faithful in all 
 respects to the inspired originals, we should have supposed, 
 that upon the first attempt to procure such a desirable, such 
 an essential work, all lovers of Divine truth would have has- 
 tened to the effort, and assisted in the great undertaking. No 
 one, a prio?% would have supposed that clergymen would 
 have announced from their pulpits that they know that King 
 James's version is defective as a translation, but that it is 
 good enough! It would have been difficult to imagine that 
 the most intense sectarianism could have thus insulted the 
 majesty of Heaven; yet we see and hear such things as ordi- 
 nary occurrences. We see the intense sectarianism of this 
 age raising its puny arm to assail an effort to secure a faithful 
 transfer into English of the ideas expressed by the Holy Spirit 
 in Hebrew and Greek. If the learning, the piety, the fidelity, 
 and the holiness, that stand pledged before God and man to 
 spare no effort within human means to procure a faitlrful trans- 
 lation of the revelation of God, had undertaken acts of impi- 
 ety, of dishonesty, of falsehood, of treason against the King 
 of Heaven, they could scarcely have been assailed with mis- 
 representations more groundless, calumnies more unfounded, 
 abuse and virulence more unstinted. These things arc a sad 
 commentary upon the awful sectarianism of the age. Jesus 
 
128 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 Christ said : " He is free indeed, whom the truth makes free." 
 And no one of that character ever lifted his finger against a 
 well-devised organization for a full and faithful translation of 
 the inspired text. Not one of all the hosts whose freedom 
 rests or rested upon truth, ever uttered an objection to the cor- 
 rection of a contradictory, incomplete version of the Word of 
 God. There is not a Hebrew or Greek scholar in the world, 
 who can read any one chapter of King James's version without 
 seeing the absolute necessity of corrections. And in order to 
 show that the appeal that the Bible Union has made to the 
 world is recognized by Catholic scholarship, as we have 
 shown it is by ALL the Protestant scholarship that has ever 
 spoken, we quote the following clear, divinely truthful, and 
 righteous sentiments of Bishop Kenrick, of Maryland. In 
 Bishop Kenrick's preface to his new translation of the Acts, 
 Epistles, and Apocalypse, he says: "If there be a single pas- 
 sage in which the meaning of the sacred text is wilfully per- 
 verted, it is enough to involve the whole work in condemnation. 
 A jot or a letter must not be taken from the law. The Word 
 of God must be preserved in its integrity. It is treason against 
 the Supreme Majesty to change a word in a charter under the 
 seal of the Great King. Not without a special design of 
 Providence, the closing book of the Sacred Volume denounces 
 woes to the man who shall take away from or add to the words 
 of that prophecy — a threat which extends to all who adulterate 
 the Word of God, changing that which should remain invio- 
 late though heaven and earth pass away." There is not a 
 free Protestant on this earth who will call in question these 
 sterling truths uttered by Bishop Kenrick. To their excel- 
 lence all the prophets of Israel, all the Divine agencies of the 
 new dispensation, bear testimony. How tar King James's 
 version can stand a measurement by those truths, we shall 
 presently see. We pause in that trial only to bear witness to 
 the fact, that although Catholics are derided for their attach- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 129 
 
 merit to the Vulgate text, and to the Ehemish version of the 
 New Testament, Bishop Kenrick has made "a new version 
 of the New Testament from the Vulgate, and diligently com- 
 pared it with the Greek text, being a revision of the Rhemish 
 translation." This excellent and commendable work is open 
 to the purchase of Catholics and Protestants ; and although 
 Bishop Kenrick and his clergy are accused of a desire to hide 
 the Word of God from the laity, there is nothing in all this 
 version that breathes any other thought than a solicitation to 
 make the Word of God as clear, full, and intelligible as pos- 
 sible to every human bemg. The notes, critical and explana- 
 tory, are in the main instructive and valuable, and they do his 
 learning, his piety, and his love of truth, a great deal of credit. 
 And the world has seen neither Pope nor council nor conclave 
 of clergymen hurling anathemas upon the head of Bishop 
 Kenrick for thus endeavoring faithfully to make the Word of 
 God plain and complete to the most ordinary reader. Bishop 
 Kenrick did not hesitate to enrich the Vulgate version with the 
 copious treasures of the Greek text ; but Protestant sectarian- 
 ism rouses its forces against the enriching of King James's 
 version from the ample resources of the inspired text, as 
 though it feared that what was the Word of God in the hands 
 of the apostles and the early saints in Christ Jesus, and what 
 is now the Word of God in the hands of scholars,' might 
 poison the common version in the hands of the masses of the 
 people^ who have been imperfectly taught hi the ways of God 
 by the sectarian teaching of the age. Nothing, indeed, can 
 show more perfectly the innate sense of weakness on the part 
 of sectarianism than its dread of a faithful rendering of the 
 Word of God. Whoever expresses a fear of a faithful trans- 
 lation of the Words of eternal life, whoever manifests a dread 
 of a revision of King James's defective version, shows that he 
 needs some Aquila and Priscilla to teach him the way of the 
 Lord more perfectly. How badly have the people been taught, 
 
 9 
 
130 
 
 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 when, in the nineteenth century of Christianity, there can be 
 found such weak religionists in the world. Let them hope 
 that they are not infallible. 
 
 We now ask the reader to look at King James's text, which 
 some Protestants are accused of worshiping idolatrously, and 
 compare it with the Divine original as we call up a few speci- 
 mens in appropriate classes. The reader will please under- 
 stand that those we publish are not all the specimens of their 
 kind in King James's version. What we give are mere evi- 
 dences of an ample quantity of their kinds. 
 
 In the nature of things it is impossible that the Holy Spirit 
 can ever contradict Himself, and in the inspired text nothing 
 of the kind is ever seen. Let us compare the Divine Word 
 with King James's version : 
 
 CONTRADICTIONS. 
 
 Exodus xx, makes it sinful to covet. 
 See also Romans vii. 7 ; xiii. 9. 1st Cor- 
 inthians v. 11 places covetous persons in 
 the same category with idolators, drunk- 
 ards, railers, with whom Christians are 
 not to eat. 
 
 1st Cor. vi. 10 declares that covetous 
 persons shall not inherit the kingdom of 
 God. Ephesians v. 3 — "but covetous- 
 ness, let it not be once named among 
 you. ): 
 
 Genesis xxii. 1— "God did tempt Abra- 
 ham." " You shall not tempt the Lord 
 your God." Deut. vi. 16. This language 
 is repeated in many of the Prophets and 
 in the New Testament. 
 
 Exodus xxiv. 10— "Then went up Moses 
 and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and 
 seventy of the elders of Israel; and 
 they saw the God of Israel," &c. 
 
 1st Corinthians xii. 31 orders Chris- 
 tians to " covet earnestly the best gifts." 
 In 1st Cor. xiv. 39 the Christians are 
 again ordered to covet. " Delight in the 
 best gifts,'' in the first instance, and " de- 
 light to prophecy," in the second, would 
 be accurate, and removes all appearance 
 of contradiction. Is there no revision 
 needed of these palpable contradictions, 
 purporting to come from the pen of in- 
 spiration ? The inspired oracles are cor- 
 rect and true in all these places. 
 
 James i. 13 — " Let no man say when 
 he is tempted, I am tempted of God, for 
 God cannot be tempted with evil, nei- 
 ther tempteth he any man. " God did try, 
 or prove, Abraham. God does not tempt 
 any man, would be accurate, and remove 
 the contradiction. 
 
 John i. 18 — "No man hath seen God." 
 1st John iv. 12 — "No man hath seen God 
 at any time." 
 
 Thompson translates Exodus xxiv. 10 
 — " They saw the appearance of the God 
 of Israel," which is in accordance with 
 the Septuagint and the Chaldee versions. 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 
 
 131 
 
 Proverbs v. 15-18. 15. < ' Drink waters 
 out of thine own cistern, and running 
 waters out of thine own well 16- Let 
 thy fountains be dispersed abroad and 
 rivers of waters in the streets. 17- Let 
 them be only thine own, and not the 
 strangers* with thee* 18 Let thy foun- 
 tain be blessed — and rejoice with the 
 wife of thy youth." 
 
 Correction. — The mistranslation of the 
 ] 6th verse makes a contradiction of the 
 17th and makes nonsense of the whole 
 passage. The 16th verse should be trans- 
 lated as an interrogatory : — ''Shall thy 
 fountains spread abroad, channels of 
 water in the streets?" This removes 
 the contradiction and makes sense, viz., 
 Shall thy fountains (when thou seekest 
 pleasure) be public fountains to which ail 
 have access ? The 17th verse answers : 
 "let them be only thine own and not 
 strangers' with thee." 
 
 MISTRANSLATIONS. 
 
 Genesis ii. 5 — "In the day that the 
 Lord God made the earth and the hea- 
 vens, and every plant of the field before 
 it was in the earth, and every herb of 
 the field before it grew, for the Lord 
 God had not caused it to rain upon the 
 earth," &c. 
 
 Genesis xxxvi. 24 — " Anah that found 
 the mules in the wilderness." 
 
 Genesis xxxi. 35 — "And Jacob swareby 
 the fear of his father Isaac." 
 
 2d Samuel i. 17 , xviii. 19— In the ac- 
 count of David's elegy, we have this in 
 parenthesis: "(Also he bade them teach 
 the children of Israel the use of the 
 bow.)" 
 
 This is absurd, for it represents that 
 plants of the field and herbs before they 
 grew were made because there had been 
 no rain. The true rendering is : " In the 
 day that the Lord God made the earth 
 and the heavens and before any plant of 
 the field was in the earth and before any 
 herb of the field grew ; for the Lord God 
 had not caused it to rain." This is cor- 
 rect, and has a meaning, 
 
 Correction, — "Anah that found the 
 warm or medical springs in the wilder- 
 ness " — a discovery of some note. 
 
 Tyndale's version had this correctly 
 rendered : " And Jacob sware by Him 
 whom his father Isaac feared." 
 
 Correction. — il Use of" in this place is 
 an interpolation, and conveys a false idea. 
 Its insertion is unaccountable. David 
 bade them teach the children of Israel 
 the Boiv, that being the name of the song 
 or elegy which was to be sung as a tri- 
 bute to the memory of Saul and Jona- 
 than. The parenthesis is an interpola- 
 tion. Coverdale had long before trans- 
 lated it correctly : " And David mourned 
 with this lamentation over Saul and 
 Jonathan, his son, and commanded to 
 teach the children of larael the Bow. 
 Behold it (the Bow) is written," &e. 
 Rogers, the proto-martyr, also, long be- 
 foro the time of King James, gave the 
 same correctly, but not so literally as 
 Coverdale 
 
132 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 2d Samuel xii. 31 — " And he brought Correction — Dr Adam Clarke saysr 
 forth the people and put them under " It is surprising, and a thing to be de- 
 saws, and under harrows of iron, and plored, that, in this and similar cases, 
 under axes of iron, and made them pass our translators have not been careful to 
 through the brick-kiln." sift the sense of the original records, by 
 
 which they would have avoided a pi ofu- 
 sxon of exceptionable meanings with which 
 they have clothed many passages of the 
 sacred writings." The errors in the' 
 passage before us have made many infi- 
 dels. David put his prisoners to saws, 
 to harrows of iron, to axes of iron, to 
 brick - kilns. He made them work. 
 Charles Thompson, the American trans- 
 lator, was the first to correct this blunder, 
 and he has received much credit from 
 European critics for this correction. 
 
 In our former articles we referred to the defective original 
 text in the times of King James ; and we stated that some of 
 the passages marked as doubtful or spurious texts by King 
 James's revisers are now known to be among the best sustained 
 genuine readings that we possess. Yet, under the authority of 
 King James's version, these genuine texts of inspiration have 
 been under a cloud of doubt for more than two hundred years, 
 in the English version of the Bible. And after the illustrious 
 labors of Mills had established these facts in but little over 
 fifty years after King James's version was made, no effort was 
 attempted by Bible societies, nor by the sects by whose hands 
 those societies are wielded, to purify the common version from 
 these uneasy doubts, until since the Bible Union commenced 
 its labors. Take an example of this criminal and inexcusable 
 neglect: In 1st John ii. 23 we have, " whosoever denieth the 
 Son, the same hath not the Father ; [but he that acknowl- 
 edgeth the Son hath the Father also.]" The passage in italics 
 and brackets was not in the received Greek text at the date of 
 the common version, though it was found in some manuscripts 
 aiid ancient versions. It is now in the Greek text on the 
 authority of the most ancient manuscripts, after having been 
 marked as doubtful for more than two hundred years. In 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 133 
 
 1 853, the American Bible Society, which, through its commit- 
 tee, revised the printed editions of King James's version for 
 the purpose of restoring the integrity of that text, removed 
 the brackets from the above passage, and. printed the words in 
 Iloman letters, as a genuine portion of the inspired text. Now 
 we ask, and we call public attention to the question, if it was 
 right in this instance to correct a time-honored blunder of 
 King James's revisers, which had grown quite as venerable 
 by age as numerous other errors in that version, why is it not 
 right in a great many other cases of the same kind, when the 
 original texts have been corrected on the authority of ancient 
 and authoritative manuscripts, and when the common version 
 requires a corresponding correction? If it takes the Bible 
 Society upwards of a century to correct one error in the com- 
 mon version by a purified Greek text, how long would it take 
 to correct the multitudes of others that require the correction 
 quite as much and in the same way ? And if such societies 
 prove themselves unequal to their duties, are parties who 
 know their duty and privileges to shrink away from their 
 responsibilities ? The American Bible Society was com- 
 mended for doing in one instance what the Bible Union is 
 abused for trying to do in all similar cases. All scholars 
 know that there are a great many spurious readings in the 
 Book of Eevelations . why are they not corrected by the 
 Bible Societies ? For instance, in Eevelations v. 14, " Him 
 that liveth forever and ever," is condemned by the critical edi- 
 tions ; it has no ancient manuscript authority, and is not in 
 the Syriac, Arabic, Coptic, or Ethiopian versions. But we 
 shall recur to this department of our subject in another article. 
 We close with a few more palpable examples of the errors 
 of King James's version. In Acts v. 3, Peter is made to say : 
 4 'Whom ye slew and hanged on a tree," meaning that the Jews 
 first killed the Saviour, and then hung Him on a tree ! And 
 those venerable revisers, who flourished in that golden age of 
 biblical learning adorned by the presence of King James, not 
 
134 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 content with making Peter talk thus absurdly before the 
 Jewish council, made him repeat the absurdity at the house 
 of Cornelius, as the reader may see by turning to Acts x. 39. 
 Yet the original says: "Whom you did kill, hanging Him on 
 a tree," as Wickliffe rendered it in 1380, and as the Rhemish 
 version made it in 1582. 
 
 In Ephesians, hi. 14, we have : " For this cause I bend 
 my knees before the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" The 
 italicized words are in our version, but are not in the Greek. 
 
 Romans viii. 1. "There is, therefore, no condemnation to 
 those who are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh 
 but after the Spirit." The italicized words are in our common 
 version, but are not in the inspired text at that place. 
 
 We think that we have said enough to-day to show that 
 there is not one duty on this earth, not an obligation, due alike 
 to God and man, that is more imperative than a revision of the 
 Bible. God will not hold him guiltless who shrinks from the 
 work, and the platform of the Bible Union is broad enough 
 to hold every honest Christian on earth. If our anti-revi- 
 sion friends think that we are incompetent for the work or that 
 there is danger that we may fail in our fidelity, why not come 
 in and take the work out of our hands and manage it themselves ? 
 The door of the Bible Union is standing open for all who wish 
 to enter, and we invite them to come in. If they can outwork 
 us, and outvote us, they may guide this revision enterprise. 
 They have only made it grow apace by opposition; now let 
 them try friendship for the cause, and see what they can do 
 with that. By the time the revision is ready to go to press, 
 the Bible Union and the Revision Association will not only be 
 a revision organization, but is bound to be one of the largest 
 and most efficient Bible Societies that the world has ever seen. 
 They have all the elements of that great position now, and 
 will inevitably reach it. One of the very least of their diffi- 
 culties will be the introduction and circulation of their faithful 
 version of the Word of God. They can not now begin to 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 135 
 
 supply the demand for their publications, and the demand is 
 increasing at a rate far beyond all our anticipations. The 
 faithful will find themselves harnessed in Bible Union and 
 Revision Association duties for the remainder of their lives ; 
 and each one who performs his duty will find that he is aiding 
 in the destruction of the "Man of Sin" by ushering in "the 
 bright appearing of the Lord, w through his faithful Word, and 
 the consuming of the Apostacy by "the Word of his mouth.'' 
 That is the Divine appointment, and will as certainly be ful- 
 filled in that way as the promise to Abraham, and that respect- 
 ing the coming of "the Word in the flesh," were in the literal 
 words of their promise. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 NUMBER XI. 
 
 EARLY TRANSLATORS OF THE BIBLE INTO ENGLISH AND THEIR 
 
 ENEMIES COMPARED WITH THE PRESENT REVISION 
 
 MOVEMENT AND ITS ENEMIES. 
 
 Merle D'Aubigne draws a very truthful picture of the 
 condition of Christendom, in comparing it with two strange and 
 curious camps, one consisting of priests in all the high places, 
 the other of timid, submissive flocks, each of the latter heark- 
 ening to the voice of its own shepherd, and too many of them 
 deaf to the voice of the Great Shepherd. A single mandate 
 of that Great Shepherd makes a frightful commentary on the 
 present condition of Christendom. He said. "Call no man 
 on earth your master, for One is your master, and all ye arc 
 brethren." The great commission recorded in the 2Sth chap- 
 ter of Matthew — "Go ye, therefore, and teacli all nations, 
 baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 
136 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whai- 
 soever I have commanded you" — was not given merely to the 
 eleven apostles, but to upwards of five hundred disciples, on a 
 mountain of Galilee. But both its letter and spirit have been 
 wrested for the purpose of keeping up the two camps which 
 apostate Christendom presents to the world. Clergy and laity 
 are household words in these camps, but they were utterly 
 unknown to the Apostolic Church. In that there was one 
 body and one Head , now there is every diversity of body and 
 every variety of head. The office of the Holy Spirit as an 
 instructor has been usurped by the clergy, and we are taught, 
 that we are to feed on such pasture as they may select for us. 
 They measure out the Word of God by measures of their own 
 manufacture, and tell us that, even if we have not the full 
 measure of God's truth, unto them is given the power to say 
 how much is necessary to our salvation, what is essential and 
 what of the Word of God is nonessential to the people. And 
 thus it has been ever since the "Man of Sin" — the great Apos- 
 tacy — commenced his career, and thus it is now. The self- 
 constituted guardians of the Y/ord of God have ever been the 
 enemies of faithful translations of the inspired text, and are so 
 now. Let us glance at the character of the men to whom the 
 whole English race is indebted for the Bible, and at the con- 
 duct and principles of those who waged a fierce warfare against 
 the labors of those who have endeavored to make the Word of 
 God plain and clear to the masses of the people. When 
 Wickliffe undertook the great enterprise of enlightening the 
 minds of the people with the riches of the Holy Oracles, he 
 saw his path of duty, and he clearly perceived the danger of 
 the way. He said m words that should never be forgotten; 
 "All Christians should be the soldiers of Christ. But it is 
 plain that many are chargeable with great neglect of this duty ; 
 being prevented by fear of the loss of temporal goods and 
 worldly friendship, and apprehensive about life and fortune, 
 from faithfully setting forth the cause of God, from standing 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 137 
 
 manfully in its defence, and, if need be, from suffering death 
 in its behalf." And after showing that fidelity to God's truth 
 was a certain means of bringing down the wrath of a "perverted 
 clergy," WicklifFe says: "Hence we Christians need not visit 
 pagans, to convert them by enduring martyrdom in their 
 behalf; we have only to declare with constancy the Word of 
 God before Caesarean prelates, and straightway the flower of 
 martyrdom will he ready to our hands." A contemporary 
 writer of Wickliffe's times, a distinguished clergyman too, used 
 this language respecting Wickliffe's effort to give the people 
 the Word of God in their vernacular: "The gospel which 
 Christ committed to the clergy and doctors of the. Church, that 
 they might sweetly dispense it to the laity, according to the 
 exigency of the times and the wants of men, this Master John 
 WicklifFe has translated into the Anglic (not Angelic) tongue ; 
 thereby making it more open and common to the laity, and to 
 women who can read, than formerly it was to the best instructed 
 of the clergy. And thus the gospel pearl is cast forth and is 
 trodden under foot of swine ; and what was one time revered 
 by clergy and laity is become, as it were, the common jest of 
 both; and the jewel of the clergy, their peculiar treasure, is 
 made forever common to the laity." 
 
 Thus error constantly reproduces itself; its substance is 
 ever the same. What difference is there between this con- 
 temptuous language about Wickliffe's faithful labors and that 
 which the present generation hears from a religious partizan 
 press and from sectarian pulpits? Portions of the clergy still 
 arrogate to themselves the exclusive control of God's Word ; 
 they denounce now such faithful efforts for clearing the English 
 Bible of obscurities and errors as their antecedents denounced 
 in the days of WicklifFe, of Tyndale, and of Coverclalc. Such 
 of the modern clergy as possess learning for the work of revi- 
 sing the Scriptures, regularly revise them from the pulpit ; but 
 they denounce all attempts to do this for the masses of the 
 people. There is not a Hebrew or Greek scholar on earth 
 
138 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 who will say that the English Bible does not need revision ; 
 hundreds of the most learned men that have adorned the his- 
 tory of English learning have shown their faith by then- 
 works ; they have revised various portions of the Word of 
 God, and have thus borne their testimony in favor of the 
 work in which the Bible Union is now engaged. It was not 
 among clergymen, nor doctors of divinity, nor in the priestly 
 camp, that the Word of God first came to light in the Eng- 
 lish language. It was among the humble, despised, con- 
 temned, but faithful disciples of Christ, called Lollards, that 
 the English Bible found its only friends ; it was among the 
 people, not the clergy, that that goodly tree was planted which 
 has done so much for the start, progress, advancement, and 
 prosperity of the English race. And the masses of the people 
 have ever been the friends and the supporters of the efforts to 
 speak the words of Jehovah faithfully, clearly, plainly, and 
 fully to the human race. Even Sir Thomas More, who used 
 all the power that he possessed against the faithful labors of 
 Tyndale, made this acknowledgment : "I would not, for my 
 mind, withhold the profit that any one good, devout, unlearned 
 layman might take by the reading [of a vernacular Bible], 
 not for the harm that an hundred heretics would fall in by 
 their own wilful abusion." May not the enemies and revilers 
 of Bible revision learn a useful lesson from this principle ? 
 Again, in the early efforts of the faithful to translate the Holy 
 . Oracles into English, the royal proclamation, procured by the 
 clergy, set forth, " That having the whole Scripture is not 
 necessary to Christian men, and that the divulging of the 
 Scripture at that time, in the English tongue, to be committed 
 to the people, should rather be to their further confusion and 
 destruction than to the edification of their souls." And have 
 we not heard language akin to this quite recently ? Have we 
 not heard clergymen admit that King James's version is not 
 faithful in all respects to the Word of God, and then declare, 
 that though thus defective, there is enough in it for the use of 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 139 
 
 the people ? But again : The royal decree, brought about by 
 clerical devices in the time of Henry VIII. , declared, that 
 "the Scriptures in English are books of heresy, and shall be 
 clearly exterminated and exiled out of this realm of England 
 forever." And does not this principle live now in the efforts 
 to prevent a faithful translation of the Word of God, and in 
 the proud and confident vaunting that this faithful translation, 
 guaranteed in its fidelity by the learning of the world without 
 respect to party, shall not be circulated ? Vain and impotent 
 boast. All the military, legal, and ecclesiastical powers of 
 England were unable to prevent the circulation of the English 
 Scriptures among the people ; and there is not enough ecclesi- 
 astical power and influence in free America to curb the circu- 
 lation of the revised Scriptures among the people now. The 
 poor old Bishop of Norwich, in the days of Henry VIII. , in a 
 weeping appeal to the Archbishop, said: "I am accumbered 
 by such as keepeth and readeth these erroneous books in Eng- 
 lish [the English Bible], and who believe and give credence to 
 the same, and teach others that they should do so. My lord, I 
 have done that lyeth in me for the suppression of such persons * 
 but it passeth my power or of any spiritual man to do it;" 
 and he feelingly adds, "if they are not speedily checked they 
 will undo us all." And may not our clergy claim that they 
 have warred upon the Bible revision cause in all conceivable 
 ways'? Have they not warned the dear people that their souls 
 were about to be lost by a faithful rendering of the Word of 
 God? And have not the people turned a deaf ear to all their 
 labors? That the revision cause has been strengthened by 
 ill-judged opposition, we have abundant and most substantial 
 reasons for knowing. The Revision Association now contrib- 
 utes one thousand dollars a-month to the Bible Union more 
 easily than it did one hundred two years ago. Large masses 
 of people in the West and South have recently come up to the 
 help of the cause, to which, a few weeks since, they were in- 
 different And thus it was when fire and fa-sot awaited alike 
 
140 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 those who translated the Scriptures and those who read them : 
 the people sustained the Bible cause in opposition to the "per- 
 verted clergy," as Wickliffe called his clerical opponents. 
 
 But let us catch another glimpse of ancient teaching, and 
 compare it with our times. Sir Thomas More, Chancellor to 
 Henry VIII. , was sorely distressed, that "all through these 
 two hundred years, during which the Holy Catholic Church 
 has possessed so many learned and virtuous doctors, not one 
 of them has been moved by the Holy Spirit to undertake this 
 work ; " he begins to be in doubt whether the wishes he has 
 indulged are in harmony with the will of God. Heretics alone 
 seemed to have their minds inclined to Bible translation. A 
 New Testament translated out of the original Greek into clear 
 and vigorous English had already appeared, and had com- 
 mended itself widely to the popular mind. It was the first 
 effort of the kind by any English scholar, and, as a literary 
 work, might well have been an object of pride to English 
 scholars. But, as the work of a heretic, it must be prohib- 
 ited, and wherever found, burned to ashes by the faithful guar- 
 dians of the flock. Better far that the people should never 
 have a Bible than receive it from this poisoned source. 
 
 But unfortunately the notion had gone abroad among the 
 people that these measures were attributable rather to personal 
 and selfish considerations than to any concern for their welfare. 
 
 The visible contrariety between that book and the doctrines 
 of those who handled it, was the popular solution of their zeal 
 for its suppression , an opinion which did not tend to lessen 
 their eagerness to read it or their prejudices against the clergy. 
 To counteract this impression and to persuade the people to 
 wait patiently till Providence should send them a Bible, pre- 
 pared by the right men on the right principles, More put forth 
 all the power of his pen. 
 
 And thus it is at present. All the learned are dissatisfied 
 with King James's version; all the sects are dissatisfied with 
 it, but century after century rolls away, year rushes after year, 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 141 
 
 and. the evil grows. The sects will not attempt to amend the 
 wrongs of ages; a body of people at length determine that 
 they will do all that faithful, righteous, holy men and women 
 can do to secure a faithful version of the Holy Oracles ; they 
 employ the highest philological authorities in the world, without 
 respect to sect or partyism, and bind them to translate the 
 word of God faithfully; they commit the whole business to 
 that learned tribunal, belonging to twelve sects, a majority 
 of whom are Pedobaptists, and for these efforts they have been 
 abused, reviled, and calumniated, and traduced in every evil 
 way. The entire sectarianism of this age, like that of Henry 
 VIII... says: "Better far that the people should never have a 
 Bible than receive it from this poisoned source." And this in- 
 tense sectarianism, after folding its hands for centuries over the 
 wants of the people, still cries: "Wait till Providence moves 
 all my jarring, discordant materials into a homogeneous mass, 
 and then you shall have a bible prepared by the right men on 
 the right principles." The ancient cry against Tyndale was, 
 that he had translated ecclesiastical terms, and thus disrobed 
 them of those mystical garments which the clergy had woven 
 around them. And Tyndale nobly replied : "In which all he 
 [Sir Thomas More] can not prove that I give not the right Eng- 
 lish unto the Greek word. But it is a far other thing that 
 paineth them and biteth them by the breasts. There be secret 
 pangs that pinch the very hearts of them, whereof they dare 
 not complain. The sickness that maketh them so impatient is, 
 that they have lost their juggling terms." It is to Tyndale 
 mainly that the English race is indebted for all the good it has 
 derived from a Bible m English. The praise lavished upon 
 King James's revisers belongs to him. 
 
 There was among the clergy of the days of WicklifTe and 
 Tyndale, an idea that they had exclusive control over the 
 oracles of God, and that the people must submit to Such dis- 
 pensations of those oracles as the clergy pleased to bestow 
 upon them. And there was, among the whole body of the 
 
142 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 clergy of that period, the utmost horror at the idea of a Bible 
 in the English language. A bench of bishops declared that 
 the translations of the Evangelists contained "divers erroneous 
 and damnable opinions and conclusions of heresy" C. Shoo- 
 maker was burned at Newbury for reading to John Say, "The 
 words which Christ spake to his disciples." Seven persons 
 were burned at Coventry, in 1519, for having taught their 
 children and servants the Lord's Prayer and the Ten Com- 
 mandments in English. John Thatcher was tried for teaching 
 Alice Brown, this saying of Jesus — "Blessed are they that 
 hear the Word of God and keep it." 
 
 When the Greek Testament of Erasmus made its appear- 
 ance a terrible hue and cry arose among the clergy. Priests 
 used their influence at the confessional to warn young students 
 against it, and a college at Cambridge forbade its introduction 
 within its walls. Standish, afterwards Bishop of St. Asaph, 
 kneeled to the King and prayed him to put down Erasmus. 
 The monks made themselves especially conspicuous by the zeal 
 of their opposition, declaring from the pulpit that "there was 
 now a new language invented called Greek, of which the 
 people should beware as the source of all heresies : that in this 
 language had come forth a book called the New Testament, 
 which was now in everybody's hands, and was full of thorns 
 and briars : that there was also another language started up 
 which they called Hebrew, and that they who learned it were 
 turned Jews." 
 
 These portentous signs in the clerical atmosphere were cer- 
 tainly ominous affairs, but not more so than the Revision 
 movement of our day is to the perturbed imaginations of some 
 of our clergy. They seem to feel sufficient horror at the 
 thought of permitting the Hebrew and Greek texts of the 
 Holy Oracles to shed a ray of light upon King James's ver- 
 sion, for the use of the people. At the first effort of the Revi- 
 sion Association to frankly explain itself before the public in 
 the daily papers, sectarianism took the alarm and aroused itself 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 143 
 
 for a contention against as clear and as palpable a Christian 
 right as the sun ever shone upon. A historiographer of that 
 eventful scene informed his waiting readers, that "the five 
 clergymen" were sent into the newspapers in pursuit of the 
 "two laymen" of the Revision Association by one of the 
 largest assemblages of the kind ever gathered in this city. Of 
 the place where this immense assemblage was convened, and 
 of the persons composing it, and whether it still holds its con- 
 servative meetings, both the public and ourselves are profoundly 
 ignorant. It is strange that so large an assemblage, animated 
 with so much religious zeal, could have been held in this city 
 with such profound secrecy. The historian of that mysterious 
 convention, who gave out the swelling hints we have quoted, 
 lias never informed the public of the finale of the meeting, of 
 its course toward the five champions who issued forth to battle 
 under the behests of that immense assemblage, nor whether 
 they were crowned with chaplets of willow or laurel. We 
 know not whether they have been placed upon furlough, or 
 honorably discharged from further service. In either view it 
 looks strange to see so much apathy, while the heresy which 
 was to be crushed by the chosen champions of that large 
 assemblage, yet runs at large, rejoicing in youth and vigor., 
 and growing in power, in public confidence, and in influence. 
 So large an assemblage, swelled with such intense zeal, should 
 not have cooled off so suddenly. 
 
 We turn from this comparison of ancient sectarianism with 
 its modern types to present further examples of the mistakes of 
 the common version when measured by the inspired original. 
 
 In Exodus xxxiv. 6, 7, in the common version, is 
 sublime declaration of Jehovah : " The Lord God is merciful 
 and gracious, long suffering, and abundant in goodness and 
 truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and 
 transgression and sin, and that roill by no means clear the 
 guUty" The italicized part contradicts the rest of the pas- 
 sage, which the inspired text does not contradict: the He! 
 
1 U FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 original says, "and acquitting him who is not innocent" the 
 very reverse of the translation in our common version. Is 
 there no need of revision of that perversion of the original ? 
 
 A distinguished Methodist scholar has pointed out the fol- 
 lowing mistakes : 
 
 In Matthew xx. 23, we have: "But to sit at my right hand 
 and on my left is not mine to give, but it shall be given to 
 them for whom it is prepared of my Father." The italic 
 words are not in the Greek, and contradict all the claims of 
 Jesus Christ, for they virtually say that the distribution of 
 rewards in the last day shall be given to some other person 
 besides our Lord. • » '' 
 
 1st John hi. 6 : "Hereby perceive we the love of God, be- 
 cause he laid down his life for us." " Of God" is not in the 
 original, and the addition destroys the emphatic expression of 
 the inspired text. 
 
 Hebrew xii. 2 says: "Looking unto Jesus, the author and 
 finisher of our faith." "Our" is not in the Greek, and it 
 destroys the sense of the original, which here presents the 
 Saviour not as the perfecter of our faith, but as the first and 
 last example of faith in God, the most perfect model that we 
 can have before us. 
 
 In Exodus xxxiv. 33, we have : "And till Moses had done 
 speaking with them, he put a veil on his face." " Till" is not 
 in the Hebrew, and its introduction conveys a false statement, 
 for Moses took the veil off while speaking, and put in on when 
 he was done. 
 
 2d Kings xi. 2 reads; "Took Joash, the son of Ahaziah, 
 and stole him from among the king's sons, which were slam, 
 and they hid him ; even him and his nurse, in the bed-chamber, 
 from Athaliah, so that he was not slain." The words "which 
 ■were slain," supplied by the translators, convey a false idea, 
 such as the original could never have done. The king's sons 
 were not slain when Jehosheba, the sister of Ahaziah, stole 
 Joash from among them, because the purpose of Athaliah to 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 145 
 
 destroy all the royal seed was not yet accomplished. The 
 translators would have us believe that Joash was picked up 
 among the slain, which is plainly contradicted by the whole 
 history of the case. 
 
 2d Samuel xvi. 15: " Hushai said unto Absalom, God save 
 the king." The original reads simply, u save the king" The 
 translators affixed to the exclamation the term " God" for the 
 purpose, doubtless, of making it more emphatic, and to convey 
 the idea of the special protection of the Almighty as extended 
 over kings, that inasmuch as they ruled by Divine right, so 
 were they the special objects of Divine protection. This addi- 
 tion may be pardoned, as done by king's translators; but it 
 will hardly be adopted as the Word of God by those who 
 believe in a church without a bishop, and a state without a 
 king. The same addition is made in 2d Chronicles and 2d 
 Kings. Various other changes have been made, particularly 
 in the New Testament, favoring the idea of a monarchy, which 
 are without any authority. 
 
 In Luke xx. 16, we have this translation : "And when they 
 heard it, they said, God forbid." The word "God" is not found 
 in the original. Dr. Clarke says, "Let it not be answers 
 pretty well to the meaning of the Greek, but it is no transla- 
 tion." How a reading can be no translation, and yet answer 
 well to the original, is something we confess that we do not 
 exactly comprehend. But the translators " seized the very 
 soul and spirit of die original," and we presume this was suffi- 
 cient to answer for any mere literal defects. The same trans- 
 lation of the above Greek expression is given in Romans iii. 4, 
 6,31, vi. 2, 15, ix. 14, xi. 1, 11, 1st Cor. vi. 15, Gal. ii. 17, 
 iii. 21. 
 
 John x. 24, the common ' version, reads* "How long dost 
 thou make us to doubt?" The Greek reads: "How long wilt 
 thou keep our souls in suspense?" Here the word " souls" is 
 omitted. Though the omission does not destroy the sense of 
 the passage, it evidently weakens its force, as the original docs 
 
 10 
 
146 FIDELITY TO GOD IJS THE 
 
 not leave the Jews in doubt only, but intensely excited, as 
 though, in the language of Dr. Clarke on this passage, "their 
 very life was taken away," in the extreme anxiety they had to 
 know whether Jesus was the Christ. 
 
 Similar to the above is the translation of the passage in 2d 
 Corinthians xii. 16: "And I will very gladly spend and be 
 spent for you." The Greek reads: "And I will very gladly 
 spend and be spent for your souls." This omission takes 
 away the entire force of the Apostle's meaning. The Greek 
 shows us the object for which he was willing to spend his 
 strength and life, namely, their souls. It was for the salva- 
 tion of their souls that, following in the footsteps of his 
 Master, he lived, labored, and died. As the English reads, 
 one might infer that his labors were for their temporal good — 
 for their bodies, and not for their souls ; and a very learned 
 commentator seems to have so understood it, when he says, 
 in his exposition of the passage: " I will continue to act as a 
 loving father, who expends all he has upon his children, and 
 expends his strength and life in providing for them the things 
 necessary for their preservation and comfort." He even goes 
 further, and founds it on the observation that Christian parents 
 are under obligation to lay up in store for their children at least 
 as much as is necessary, and makes them sin against God and 
 nature if they neglect it. He who would take the same lib- 
 erty with the Confession of Faith, or the Thirty-nine Articles, 
 or the Doctrines and Discipline, as the translators have taken 
 with the Word of God, would be held guilty of a species of 
 sacrilege for which excommunication would be a small punish- 
 ment. And yet if any thing is said about correcting the work 
 of these translators, a holy horror fills the minds of some, and 
 they are ready to exclaim, "Touch not the Lord's anointed, 
 and do the translators no harm." It seems that they make 
 ever so sad work with the prophets, apostles, and evangelists ; 
 but wrapped up in the vestments of regal and ecclesiastical 
 sanctity, their performances must not even be called in question. 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 147 
 
 In Acts xxiv. 25, the translation reads: "And as he rea- 
 soned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come." 
 Properly translated, it would read: "And as he reasoned of 
 righteousness, temperance, and the judgment to come." This 
 rendering would make the judgment definite, and shows that 
 it was not the decision of a Roman tribunal, which may as 
 readily be inferred as any thing else from the reading, which 
 caused Felix to tremble, but the decision of the last day. 
 Where a reference is made to the judgment in Matthew xii. 41, 
 which reads, "shall rise up in judgment," the definite article 
 should be inserted. 
 
 Acts vii. 20, the English version reads: "Moses was born, 
 and was exceeding fair." The Greek reads: "Moses was 
 born, and was unblemished unto God,''' or was fair unto God 
 — fan in the estimation of God. A man may be exceedingly 
 handsome in the estimation of his fellow men, and yet not be 
 so in the estimation of God. The translators make the opin- 
 ions identical. 
 
 Obscure Readings. 
 
 1st Cor. xii. 7: "The manifestations of the Spirit are given 
 to every man to profit withal." Can any one make sense of 
 this? The original says : "The gifts whereby the Spirit of 
 God becomes manifest are given to each for the profit of all." 
 
 Job iv. 19; " Which are crushed before the moth." Like 
 the moth, makes the meaning clear. 
 
 James ii. 4; "And have become judges of evil thought.' 1 
 The true rendering is, "and have judged after evil thoughts."' 
 
 Matt. vi. 34: "Take no thought for the morrow.'' This 
 would be sinful improvidence. "Be not anxious for the mor- 
 row," is a correct rendering. 
 
 Heb. xi. 1 : "Faith is the substance of things hoped for. 11 
 This is sheer pedantry of "the golden age" — "Faith is confi- 
 dence in things hoped for," is correct. 
 
 Wc bad marked many other passages, but our allotted space 
 
148 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 is waning. We call attention to a small list of the obsolete 
 words which abound in the common version, and no honest 
 man can give one reason why a single word, unmeaning to 
 each intelligent reader, shall remain in a Bible for the people. 
 We have almug, algum, chode, as the preterite for chide, cha- 
 rashim, chapt, earing for plowing, gat, habergeon, hosen, kab, 
 knob, ligure, leasing, maranatha, nard, neesed, pate, scarcely 
 a sacred word for head, pilled for peeled, rabboni, raca, ring- 
 straked, stacte, strake, sycamyne, thyme wood, trocle, wimples, 
 ouches, tatches, brigandine, ambassage, occurrent, purtenance, 
 bruit, fray, cracknels, nusings, mufflers, anathema, corban, tabi- 
 tha cumi, ephrata, aceldama, centurion, quaternion, delectable, 
 sanctum sanctorum, carriage for baggage, let for obstruct, when 
 it now means to permit, pitiful for full of pity, when it now 
 means contemptible, prevent for anticipate, when it now means 
 to obstruct, wot once meant know, trow to think, sod was 
 once the preterite of seethe or boil, but these words in their 
 ancient meanings are dead in the English language. Why 
 should such words encumber, mar, and obscure the Word of 
 God, in which, of all other books, every word should be clear, 
 direct, and as a palpable in its meaning as possible ? Can those 
 who oppose a revision of the Scriptures be fully aware of what 
 they are about ? If they cannot stand before the judgment of 
 intelligent people, how will they stand before their Maker in 
 their warfare against these palpable paths of duty. 
 
 _ We close this article with the following seasonable and 
 rational remarks from an able English paper, the Freeman, of 
 March 12. After a glowing eulogy upon King James's revi- 
 sion, for many excellences, the Freeman says : — 
 
 44 As children we lisped its words of grace and truth stand- 
 ing at our mother's knees — as wanderers from the ways of 
 pleasantness and peace we were reclaimed by its words, tremu- 
 lous with tenderness, or awful as the thunders of Sinai — as 
 penitents our bursting hearts found utterance in its confessions 
 
TRANSLATION OK THE SCRIPTURES 141) 
 
 and prayers — its promises restored our pcaee by their assurance 
 of pardon — it has been our guide in perplexity, our joy in 
 grief, our hope in despondency, our strength in weakness. Its 
 very words have thus acquired %, sanctity and preciousness 
 apart from the meaning they enshrine, just as a casket gains 
 and retains a fragrance from the perfume it has held. Dear, 
 therefore, to every English heart is our venerable version, 
 which has guided our fathers to heaven, and has led us thus 
 far on the read thither. 
 
 "On these grounds we should strenuously resist any attempt 
 to supplant our ancient translation , but it does not therefore 
 follow that revision may not be desirable or even necessary. 
 It is the dotage of antiquarianism to prize the rust more than 
 the coin. It is not true conservatism which refuses to admit 
 the changes needful to bring our ancestral institutions into 
 harmony With modern times, for, in the pregnant words of 
 Burke, ' reform delayed is revolution begun.' There is a wise 
 love of antiquity which seeks to retain what is really good by 
 consenting to the requisite modifications, and there is an insane 
 dread of innovation which resists all the changes till the good 
 has become evil or worthless. "' 
 
 The revision cause is now progressing in a ratio beyond all 
 its former success. From all parts of the country we are 
 receiving abundant evidence that now, as in all former times, 
 the people have taken the translation of the Scriptures into their 
 keeping, and their devotion to the cause can not be checked. 
 
 For the historic sketches of early Bible translators and their 
 enemies, used in this paper, we are indebted to a now History 
 of English Bible Translation, by Mrs. Conant, of Kochester, 
 New York. It is by far the ablest work that has appeared 
 on the subject, and we commend it to all who feel any interest 
 in that exceedingly important portion of English history em- 
 braced in this work. 
 
 We shall continue our custom of calling the attention of 
 
150 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 the public to the progress of revision, to the means of the 
 Bible Union for a faithful version of the Word of God, and to 
 the uses made of those means. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 NUMBER XII 
 
 THE BIBLE UNION'S MEANS FOR REVISION. THE FIVE CLERGY- 
 MEN. STATE OF THE GREEK TEXT. THE IMPERATIVE 
 
 DEMANDS OF TRUTH AND RIGHTEOUSNESS. 
 
 In the course of that discussion of the claims of the Bible 
 Union which the contentious spirit of intensified sectarianism 
 thrust upon the Bible Revision Association, we promised to say 
 something respecting the means of the Bible Union for making 
 a Revision of the English Bible. The fulfillment of that 
 promise has been delayed by the absence of one of the under- 
 signed from the State, and the unwillingness of the other to 
 commit him to anything that had not received his sanction, and 
 by the delay in getting out the book containing the articles- pre- 
 pared by ourselves for the Revision Association and those 
 published by the five clergymen. Circumstances over which 
 neither the publishers of the book nor ourselves had any control 
 have deferred the publication far beyond the time at which we 
 had hoped to have it before the public. While this hinderance 
 remained, we did not deem it necessary to hasten the present 
 article, which we design to make the closing one of the book, 
 but as that work is now nearly ready for the binder, we turn 
 our attention to the redemption of the promise to which 
 we have referred. We feel that it is very important that 
 the subjects of the present paper shall appear, as all the 
 others have done, in the Journal and Courier, because as the 
 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 151 
 
 champions of King James's Bible made to order will appear 
 in all the fullness of their labors in the book published under 
 the auspices of the Eevision Association, it is proper that they 
 should have an opportunity of replying to the statements which 
 we now make about King James's Bible. Those sturdy cham- 
 pions of what they call the settled convictions of all the 
 churches, those hardy defenders of King James's Bible with all 
 its errors, its spurious readings, its Apocryphal forgeries foisted 
 into the text of the Holy Spirit, will surely not permit our pres- 
 ent statements to pass unchallenged, and suffer us, in their own 
 civil and courteous phraseology, to " beguile others into a confi- 
 dence that will be abused," and let us act, as they charge, 
 " under false pretenses." If the statements we are about to 
 make are true, all the enemies of the revision enterprise must 
 stand covered with confusion. The man who is in possession 
 of the facts we are about to state, who shall undertake to say 
 that there is not an imperative call for a revision of that Bible, 
 must do so under a full knowledge that he is committing trea- 
 son against the King of Heaven, and doing grievous wrong 
 and crying injustice against his fellow men. If what we say 
 is vulnerable anywhere, it is the bounden duty of the five 
 clergymen to find the vulnerable points, for if they do not, their 
 cause is hopelessly wrecked. Stand to your posts, gentlemen, 
 and defend your banner — your own chosen banner. If these 
 champions were acquainted with the state of the text from 
 which King James's version was made; if they knew the 
 multitudinous sources of error that prohibited accuracy in the 
 attempt of King James's men to give the English race a fair 
 and honest version of the Word of God , if they knew that a 
 defective, erroneous, and, in many particulars, a false text was 
 the sole guide of those revisers in their effort to utter the voice 
 of inspiration, these five clergymen have not one excuse under 
 the heavens for daring to attempt to perpetuate the work of 
 King James's revisers upon the unfettered minds of the Amer- 
 ican people. If they did not know the facts connected with 
 
152 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 the apparatus "by which those revisers undertook the solemn 
 and vital responsibility of giving the Word of Inspiration to 
 the English race, these clergymen must then admit that they 
 embarked in a business of which they knew scarcely the ele- 
 ments, and on which it would have been prudent for them to 
 be silent. 
 
 Every Christian who has been cast in the Apostolic mold of 
 doctrine, holds that it is of the utmost importance that the 
 world shall have the written revelation of God as nearly like it 
 was when originally uttered by the Holy Spirit as possible. 
 and that the attainment of this object is worth all it will cost, 
 no matter what that may be. The accomplished La Croze 
 said: " I firmly adhere, indeed, to the Nicene Creed and ortho- 
 dox faith ; but God forbid that I should ever employ fraud in 
 its defense " What can be a more heinous, a more flagrant 
 and unpardonable fraud than to palm off on men as the Word 
 of God, that which the Holy Spirit never uttered, and trans- 
 lations even of what the Comforter did utter, that are univer- 
 sally admitted to be perversions? All the forgeries of earth 
 are' venial in comparison with these deeds. And yet the five 
 clergymen of Louisville, in the face of multitudes of such 
 examples in King James's version, had the temerity to stand 
 in the presence of the people of Kentucky and publish such 
 sentiments as the following : 
 
 "If such people can easily, and upon the face of it, find in 
 this old Bible a plain and fair statement of the gospel of Christ, 
 by which they can be truly religious, truly happy in religion, 
 and truly acceptable to God while they live and when they die, 
 then, where the need of this ado about revision ? If they can 
 not, then we desire to know what are the religious character 
 and condition of all the plain people, not scholars, now speak- 
 ing and reading only the English language, in any part of the 
 earth, who suppose themselves, by the grace of God, to know 
 and to enjoy the true religion? And we desire to know what 
 has become of all such people, of whom we have rejoiced to 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 153 
 
 believe that they adorned the doctrine of God our Saviour in 
 their respective generations, and now, having gone the way of 
 all the earth, we had hoped are in glory? But if these ques- 
 tions he too hard to answer, and yet it is still insisted that the 
 English Bible does not fairly and fully give the mind of the 
 Holy Spirit, then we crave to know, in a clear statement, what 
 are the truths that are concealed in this version? If the 
 Bible, as the common people read it, does not make them all 
 plain, which of them are covered up or corrupted by it ? 
 
 "We say respectfully, but we say distinctly, that it seems 
 to us unworthy of the people who are engaged in this move- 
 ment to clamor against the old Bible, and yet not show that 
 ONE principle of the gospel, on which hangs the experience 
 of heart religion, or the hope of the recompense of the reward, 
 or the daily practice of a Christian life, through the merits and 
 grace of our Divine Redeemer, is either perverted or obscured 
 in this translation." 
 
 Thus these clerical gentlemen plainly declare, that if a por- 
 tion of the Word of God that suits them is correctly given, 
 the rest may be looked upon as rubbish or trash ! And these 
 are teachers in religion ; these are champions, par excellence, 
 of the Bible. May not that Book ask to be saved from its 
 friends? Bloomfield, whose critical labors on the Bible, in 
 the main, can scarcely be too highly appreciated, says; 
 " Surely, nothing dubious ought to be admitted into ' the 
 sure word' of 'the Book of Life.' " That is a truth by which 
 every Christian mind on this earth will stand. But if it is 
 true about matters merely dubious, what should it be in things 
 that are undoubtedly spurious ? 
 
 In answer to the grave questions we have just quoted from 
 our five clergymen, we present the deliberate convictions oi 
 the British and Foreign Bible Society. That society is made 
 up of Presbyterians, Church of England men, and Methodists. 
 It must be, in the estimation of the five clergymen, exceed- 
 ingly evangelical and orthodox, for it refused to circulate 
 
164: FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 Carey's translation in India, because it expressed baptizo by 
 a term corresponding to immerse. In the annual report for 
 1839, of this society, thus composed of Presbyterians, Church 
 of England men, and Methodists, the following judgment on 
 King James's version was rendered : 
 
 " No version is perfect ; no version is to be found but what 
 contains acknowledged error, and in a great many instances, 
 error that might be corrected. Your committee are persuaded, 
 that if even the English authorized version were dealt with 
 in the same manner as the Portuguese, an amount of indi- 
 vidual mistranslations might be presented which would, with 
 equal justice, give rise to the question, Can such a version be 
 called the Word of God?" 
 
 That is the language of " evangelical orthodoxy" assembled 
 from all parts of the British Empire. 
 
 In the nature of things it was impossible that our English 
 Bible could be any thing else than exceedingly defective. It 
 is a revision of WicklifFe's translation, and there is no proba- 
 bility that Wickliffe ever saw a Greek text of the New Tes- 
 tament. He translated from the Latin, and of course fell into 
 all the errors of that text. The Latin has no articles, and can 
 not, of course, be as definite as the Greek or English, both of 
 which possess articles. So far as Wickliffe was concerned, 
 the Scriptures might as well not have been written in Greek, 
 for the Latin could not definitely express all Greek ideas, and 
 they were lost to the English reader. The occurrence of the 
 word testament in Matt. xxvi. 28, Mark xiv. 24, Luke xxii. 
 20, 1st Cor. xi. 25, 2d Cor. iii. 6, 14, Heb. vii. 22, ix, 15, 
 16, 17, 20, Hev xi. 19, is conclusive as to the Latin origin of 
 the English Bible. In no one of those places does the word 
 testament even approach the Greek idea. And the revisers of 
 the English Bible under King James do not seem to have 
 corrected by any Greek text, for we can trace them by Wick- 
 1 iffe's version, the Vulgate, and by Erasmus, but rarely by 
 any Greek text. Innumerable instances of these facts might 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES, 15.> 
 
 be given, for the merest tyro in Greek could never have made 
 the blunders that disfigure the authorized version. Take a 
 single example: xAJmost invariably scandalizo is translated 
 by the word offend; and George Campbell truly says, a worse 
 word to convey the meaning could scarcely have been found. 
 Erasmus had so translated that word into the Latin, where the 
 translation is passable. Our English revisers borrowed the 
 word very improperly from him, and failed to convey the mean- 
 ing of the Holy Spirit. Cause to stumble is the correct one 
 for almost every place where the word offend occurs in what 
 is called the New Testament. Cardinal Ximenes, Erasmus, 
 Stephens, and Beza had each published a Greek edition, but 
 the best of them were very defective. The first edition, by 
 Erasmus, did not enjoy one Greek manuscript older than the 
 tenth century. The first Elziver edition of the Greek text 
 was not published until eight years after the authorized ver- 
 sion was issued. And the testimonies are strong, that the 
 English Bible has never yet felt much benefit from even the 
 meanest edition of the text in the language used by the Holy 
 Spirit. This is a most humiliating statement, but it is a truth- 
 ful one. But since the Elziver edition was printed, between 
 six and seven hundred Greek manuscripts of either the whole 
 Bible, or portions of it, have been discovered, not one of which 
 was known in the age of King James. And the received 
 Greek text is not supported, in all its utterances, by one man- 
 uscript, ancient or modern. Erasmus, Canter, Stephens, Beza, 
 Montfaucon, Sabatier, Semlcr, Griesbach, Woide, Holmes, 
 Birch, Matthie, Marsh, Walton, Mill, Wade, Bengel, Bentley, 
 Wetstein, Blanchini, Scholz, Schulz, and others, by their 
 labors upon the Greek text, have rendered inestimable service 
 to Bible truth. Under these labors, biblical science has con- 
 tinually advanced ; and as errors in the received Greek text 
 are thus pruned off by ancient manuscripts, the Word of God 
 stands purer, firmer, and more invulnerable. Granville Penn, 
 to whose invaluable investigations we are indebted largely, 
 
156 FIDELITY TO GOD IN TUB 
 
 says of the times of the latter names : u From this last period 
 a compound mass of new light is become diffused over the 
 sacred volume, imparting a spirit of exact and punctilious 
 criticism to direct and apply it ; and these new and powerful 
 succors have been destined, in the order of Divine Providence, 
 to be the portion of this late age of the Church, by a wise and 
 wonderful economy, administering light in a ratio increasing 
 with the distance of time from the first effulgence of the gospel, 
 as the remoter planets are provided with multiplied means of 
 collecting and reflecting light in proportion as their distances 
 remove them further from the solar fountain. Now, as the 
 whole of that light could not have been drawn and concentered 
 into one focus until the present age, so no reasonable objection 
 can be raised against it from the lateness of its occurrence ; and 
 it is only by obtaining a knowledge of the true state of the 
 scriptural text that we can be able to apply and derive the full 
 benefit of that light." But there is one spotted, obscured, 
 erratic planet upon which the five clergymen are determined 
 no ray of this light shall shine, except that which scintillates 
 from the starry orbs of their own pulpit revisions. That planet 
 is King James's version. 
 
 The learned men whose names we have given spent a large 
 portion of their lives in collating the most ancient Greek man- 
 uscripts — in weighing, exploring, comparing, and scrutinizing 
 every word and point of these transcripts. Great alarm was 
 felt when those labors commenced, lest the faith of men should 
 be unsettled; but Bentley disregarded the clamor, and pre- 
 dicted that faith would grow and fatten upon these efforts. 
 The various manuscripts not only show the sources of error, 
 but enable us now to purify the text. Some of the sources of 
 error may be classed under the following heads : tampering, 
 with the text in transcribing copies ; errors of negligence, of 
 design; omitting pronouns and writing proper names; addi- 
 tions, omissions, and borrowing from one New Covenant writer 
 to fill up the text of another. Origen, in the third century. 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 157 
 
 and Jerome, in the fourth, loudly complained of the manner 
 in which Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were mixed up. 
 Another source of error is found in the influence of party ism in 
 making omissions of the sacred text. Take an example — 
 Matthew xxvii. 50 r Origen had a crotchet that it was a dero- 
 gation from the character of the Saviour to suppose that he 
 died at the hands of men. Matthew's plain statement in the 
 chapter and verse we have named, refuted that crotchet. The 
 inspired text, as written by Matthew, said: "But another 
 taking a spear, pierced his side, and there came forth water 
 and blood ; and Jesus crying out again with a loud voice, 
 expired." It stands thus in " the Vatican and Ephrem 
 manuscripts, the two oldest in the world -, also in the copies 
 of Diodorus, Tatian, and various holy fathers ; in Chrysos- 
 tom's copy; in the ancient Jerusalem - Syriac and Ethiopic 
 versions; in some of the most ancient Latin versions; in one 
 Uncial and five other Greek manuscripts," according to Gran- 
 ville Penn. In the fourteenth century, this passage was ex- 
 cluded from the inspired text by Pope Clement and by his 
 successor, John XXL, on the pretense that it contradicted 
 John xix. 34. If the reader will look at the 50th verse of 
 the 27th chapter of Matthew in the common version, and 
 compare it with our quotations above, he will see how men 
 have tampered with the Word of God. The Saviour died 
 from the wound in his side, as Matthew records, according to 
 the only authorities in the world that can settle such a ques- 
 tion. Our version, which in that verse is Origen's, Pope 
 Clement's, and Pope John's text, not Matthews, teaches that 
 the spear was used after the death. The Pope thought it 
 contradicted John xix. 34, which is not true. "For a soldier 
 ■pierced" is a correct translation of the 34th verse, for Park- 
 hurst and Macknight conclusively establish the fact that the 
 Greek word alia, used causally, has the meaning of for ; thus 
 John corroborates the genuine verse of Matthew, which has been 
 omitted from our version. No manuscript of the tenth century 
 
158 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 can call in question a manuscript of the fourth century $ and 
 J. L. Hug has demonstrated that the Vatican manuscript was 
 written before the middle of the fourth century. The Codex 
 Ephrem was written in the fifth century. They establish most 
 of the facts we are stating and those we are about to state. 
 And we may as well now state that all we shall say on the 
 subject is based upon the highest standard authorities. 
 
 Our subject is much greater than our space, and we can refer 
 only to a few of the many spurious matters in our version. 
 For instance, the entire nine verses at the close of the 16th 
 chapter of Mark; the Gethsemane scene in Luke xxii. 43, 
 44 , John v. 4, the disturbance of the pool by an angel from 
 53d verse of the 7th chapter of John to the 11th verse of the 
 8th chapter, the scene of the woman taken in adultery . Luke 
 ix. 54, 55, 56 ; Luke xxiii. 24, are pronounced spurious pas- 
 sages that have not the least authority in the world to stand 
 upon. As proof of the spuriousness of the adultery scene, 
 for example, we have only to examine it. The law required 
 that both the parties should be accused; but, though, as her 
 accusers said, "taken in the act," the woman only is accused. 
 Again, the statement is, that Moses said she should be stoned 
 to death ; but Moses says no such thing, as may be seen in 
 the 20th chapter of Leviticus. 
 
 In Matthew v. 22, we have, "Whosoever is angry with his 
 brother without a cause" <&c. "Without a cause" is spuri- 
 ous, having been added by some one who wished to give men 
 an opportunity of being angry with their brethren without 
 "danger of the judgment." The Saviour makes no such 
 qualifying declaration as "without a cause." The 4th verse 
 of the same chapter has a large amount of matter in it that is 
 spurious, being unsustained by any authority. In Matthew 
 vi. 13, the doxology is spurious, making a disagreeable break 
 in the instruction. If the reader will read the 12th and 14th 
 verses continuously, he will discover that the 13th is an 
 interpolation 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 159 
 
 Matthew xvi. 2, 3, xvii. 21, xviii. 11, are all spurious, 
 resting on no sufficient authority. The clauses about being 
 " baptized with the baptism," &c, in Matthew xviii. 22, 23, 
 are spurious ; they are genuine in Mark. The 14th verse, 
 23d chapter of Matthew, is not in any ancient manuscript ; it 
 is in Mark xii. 40, and in Luke xx. 47. 
 
 In Matthew xxiii. 35, a probable false text and a false ren- 
 dering make us lose a beautiful prediction and an important 
 historic fact. We ascertain the fulfillment of many of the 
 Saviour's prophesies through Josephus, and in this way we feel 
 the influence of the correction we now suggest. The declara- 
 tion that all the righteous blood from that of Abel to that of 
 Zechariah, son of Barachia, who should be slain between the 
 altar and the sanctuary, was a prediction ; and the Saviour's 
 statement respecting Zechariah was, "whom you will slay in 
 the midst of the temple." This prediction was fulfilled during 
 the siege of Jerusalem, when Zechariah, son of Baruchias, a 
 man of great purity of character, was slain in the midst of 
 the temple, when Titus and Vespasian were demanding of that 
 generation all the innocent blood that had been shed between 
 that of Abel and Zechariah. All trace of this important 
 prediction is lost in our common version. 
 
 In Matthew xxi. 40, the disciples are made to reply to 
 the Saviour, in Luke xx. 15, 17, the Saviour himself is 
 made to reply to his own question; thus making a palpable 
 contradiction. 
 
 In 2d Corinthians iii. 6, Paul is converted into an eo*oti?t 
 by being made to say, "Who also hath made us able mins- 
 ters" dec. This is one of the results of the Latin text. The 
 Greek says . "Who also hath qualified us to be ministers." 
 1 iinother specimen of the beauties of the text of our common 
 version is found in the first General Epistle of Peter. 
 chapter, 3d verse, which converts Peter into an idolater. l! -' 
 is made to say: "For the time past of our life may sn5i 
 to have wrought out the will of the gentiles, when ire walked 
 
160 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 in Iasciviousness,, lusts, excess of wine, rcvellings, banquetings, 
 and abominable idolatries" There is no excuse for this render- 
 ing. The Latin text was correct, and Wickliffe had it accurate 
 in his version. But King James's men, in their remarkable 
 proclivity to errors and blunders, were led by rash alterations 
 made in the Vulgate by Erasmus ; and as King James's revi- 
 sers apparently had no Greek text, they blindly followed the 
 unauthorized alteration of Erasmus. In the genuine text there 
 is no " our? "us? nor "we," to make Peter an idolater, 
 which he never was. The language of Peter is this: "For 
 the time past of your life sufficeth to have wrought the will of 
 the gentiles, walking in Iasciviousness, lusts, &c, and abomi- 
 nable idolatries." Can not our five clergymen take these facts, 
 and show, that as this statement is in "the good old Bible," 
 it makes no difference whether Peter is presented to his Eng- 
 lish readers m the truth which he wrote, or steeped in the 
 falsehood which King James's revisers immersed him in by 
 altering his language? May- we not hear from the five cler- 
 gymen on the important subject of the "ado about revision?" 
 
 We might thus go on and write a good sized volume on 
 these blunders, contradictions, and apocryphal statements, 
 spurious readings, and interpolations which so much disfigure 
 and mutilate the Word of God in King James's version, all of 
 which scholarship is now about to correct. One more speci- 
 men must suffice, and it is difficult to imagine how it has 
 maintained its place, except on the principle of the five cler- 
 gymen, that the work of King James's revisers is not to be 
 corrected, especially by Christians who have obeyed Jesus 
 Christ in immersion. 
 
 Moses was divinely directed to make " the tabernacle after 
 the pattern shown him in the mount." According to our cler- 
 gymen this is not important, provided the Jews held "a plain 
 and fair statement of the law uttered by Moses, by which they 
 could be truly religious, truly happy in religion, and truly 
 acceptable to God while they lived and when they died," even 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 161 
 
 if the tabernacle should deviate from the pattern. Our clerical 
 friends seem to think that the Bible Union and its friends are 
 too particular and exacting, in requiring that the Bible shall be 
 an exact copy of what the Holy Spirit said, when there have 
 been so many good people under the defective, perverted, and 
 corrupted version of King James. But neither Moses nor 
 any other servant of God ever admitted such reasonings into 
 his mind. Exactness in learning what God said, and exact- 
 ness of obedience, were the vitalities of their holiness ; and a 
 holiness, to be of any account, must partake of those charac- 
 ters. Moses made the tabernacle after the pattern God gave 
 him, and did not vary it in a" ring, a curtain, nor the color of 
 any thing, That tabernacle was a pictorial illustration of the 
 heavenly places and of the Christian kingdom ; and the 8th 
 and 9th "chapters of Hebrews contain some of the sublimest 
 thoughts ever uttered by inspiration on this very subject. Now 
 if Moses did not dare to deviate from his pattern in any, the 
 least particular, if he did not dare to change the position of a 
 single piece of furniture, who may have the temerity to do it 
 in its application to Christianity ? Yet King James's version 
 is guilty, in Hebrews, of this very "treason against the Su- 
 preme Majesty," as the Catholic Bishop Kenrick nobly and 
 beautifully expresses the idea. In the 9th chapter, 3d and 
 4th verses, we find this specimen. We give the received 
 Greek text, as it is called, and King James's version • 
 
 RECEIVED GREEK TEXT. COMMON VERSION. 
 
 3. psta 8s to Sfvtfspov xafartc- and after the second veil (common 
 tafyia, dxrivf\ 7] wyofxtvr] ayio, version), the tabernacle which is 
 ayiuv, called the Holy of Holies, 
 
 4. 2pi>oW f^ovfla 0iytJa**7piw, which had the golden altar of in- 
 &c. cense, §c. 
 
 Now this statement is a positive contradiction of Moses and 
 of the 9th verse of the 1st chapter of Luke. The altar of 
 incense was not in the Holy of Holies, but outside the veil of 
 
 11 
 
162 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 that apartment. Hence Zechariah is described by Luke as 
 officiating at it, which no one but the high priest could have 
 done, had it been behind the veil, and he could have done it 
 only once a-year. Nor did the Holy Spirit write the state- 
 ment as it is in the received Greek text and in our common 
 version. The Vatican manuscript, among the innumerable 
 blessings it has given in purifying the Greek text, adds this 
 purification to its long list. We give the Vatican text, as 
 written before the middle of the fourth century, and Penn's 
 version of it : 
 
 VATICAN MS. • G. PENS' 8 VERSION. 
 
 2. Sxn]vi] yap xati<fKsvaG6-i h For first the tabernacle was 
 ztpatq, ev y\ rtfs %vzvia xcu fy tfpa- formed, in which were the can- 
 7te£a, x a « v) apodqo'cs tuv aptfcw, *at dlestick and the table and the 
 to xpvtfow dvfitatyptov, 'qtisteynat, shewbread, and tlie golden altar 
 ctyta' for incense, which is called the 
 
 Holy : 
 
 3. fitta 5e to Bsvtspov, &c. and secondly, after the veil, &c. 
 
 The Vatican is one of the highest authorities known in these 
 matters. It is the Greek text that stands nearest the day of 
 the Apostles, and a million of manuscripts of the tenth century 
 could not shake any one of its foundations. It makes Hebrews 
 ix. 3, 4 synchronize with Moses and Luke. 
 
 Now let our clerical friends try their hands at defending the 
 -grievous wrongs done to the inspiration of God hy the com- 
 mon version, even in the matters we have shown on this occa- 
 sion. We can pile hundreds of similar expositions upon the 
 specimens we have given. We have gone through the New 
 Covenant from the first verse of Matthew to the last verse of 
 Revelations, and with the aid of Granville Penn's work, have 
 compared each challenged verse with the text of the ancient 
 Greek manuscripts, the Vatican, the codex Ephrem, and codex 
 Bcza. Jerome's vulgate is not an unimportant assistant in 
 these labors for ascertaining the pure text of inspiration. And 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 1C3 
 
 we rejoice in being able to say, that the pure text passes through 
 this ordeal, cleansed from all that had marred its beauty and 
 weakened its powers. On that pure expression of Jehovah's 
 revelation, mankind can stand as upon an impregnable acropolis, 
 stable and immovable. Those who rely alone on King James's 
 version, are afloat upon uncertain s^as, in darkness and doubt, 
 in fear and in trembling That version has never felt the offices, 
 even of the received Greek text, to say nothing of the lofty, 
 ennobling, exalting, and enlightening ministrations of those 
 higher sources of purity and light which Christendom now 
 possesses in the Vatican and Ephrem manuscripts and the 
 ancient versions. The sole object of the Bible Union, of the 
 Bible -Revision iissociation, and of the friends of revision 
 every where, is to bring the English Bible up to all the perfec- 
 tions that are possible, which shine with purity from the ancient 
 texts, And to the five clergymen, to that "immense assem- 
 blage" which sent them into newspapers in the futile hope of 
 crushing the cause of revision, and to all who fight against the 
 purification of a defective and corrupted version, we answer as 
 Erasmus answered in his day those who undertook to hinder 
 his efforts at finding the true text of inspiration: — 
 
 "I heartily assent to those who maintain that the authority 
 of the Holy Scriptures is inviolate. Whoever knowingly de- 
 praves them, outrages the Holy Spirit, this I acknowledge. 
 But that majesty resides only in the fountain-head. Isaiah 
 lias not erred, nor does any one attempt to alter what he wrote. 
 Matthew has committed no error: no one corrects what he 
 transmitted. Our business lies with his interpreters, his copy- 
 ists, and his corrupters. If all the authority of the sacred 
 Scriptures was to be shaken by some corrupt readings, the 
 Holy Spirit must needs attend the copyists, no less than the 
 prophets and evangelists. The Spirit is nowhere absent from 
 them ; but He so discovers himself as to leave for its a portion 
 of labor. The inviolability of their authority resided in the 
 prophets, apostles, or evangelists. The highest praise of Scrip- 
 
3G4 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 ture is this: that, though so often transfused into other 
 languages, so often mutilated or depraved by heretics, so often 
 corrupted by transcribers, yet they retain the vigor of eternal 
 truth. Thus the Church stands firm, though assailed by all 
 the storms of evil. But he acts in the service of the Holy 
 Spirit, who endeavors, with all his powers, to restore to its 
 primitive integrity whatever has been deteriorated by men. 
 As there will never be wanting those who deteriorate, so we 
 ought never to cease from the task of correcting. The Scriptures 
 themselves, therefore, are one thing ; what interpreters have 
 ill-rendered, or transcribers have corrupted, are another. 
 Every knave can corrupt the copies of the Gospel ; and shall 
 it be forbidden to restore what has been so corrupted ? " 
 
 Whenever the five clergymen can refute or shake these state- 
 ments and sentiments of Erasmus, the revisionists will abandon 
 their cause and leave the field to those who glory in the blun- 
 ders, errors, corruptions, and apocryphal statements of an 
 English Bible translated from a Latin text, and which has 
 scarcely felt the influence of a Greek manuscript. 
 
 We have now shown enough to exhibit something of the 
 condition of the English text of the Bible, and the imperative 
 duty of every one who loves Christianity is to aid by all his 
 means in securing an English Bible, that speaks from the lan- 
 guage in which the Holy Spirit wrote the text of inspiration. 
 The Bible Union is the only body of people that has ever 
 undertaken this holy, righteous, heavenly work. It asks all 
 the world to join it, and it demands no other principle of action 
 than fidelity to God and man. The Bible Union has armed 
 i tself with the finest apparatus for biblical criticism and revision 
 of the text of inspiration that has ever been gathered in this 
 country. Neither time, nor labor, nor wealth, nor talent has 
 been stinted in the effort to obtain every thing known to be in 
 existence, that can do the cause of revision any service. We 
 designed to give some details of the treasures thus gathered, 
 but as that has been done by a Methodist gentleman of high 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES, 165 
 
 reputation for varied acquirements, especially in biblical litera- 
 ture, we prefer to use his remarks upon the acquisitions of the 
 Bible Union. Of the Library of the American Bible (7?iio?i, 
 he thus speaks • — 
 
 "The work of translation or revision of the Holy Scriptures 
 is connected with whatever pertains to biblical criticism : and 
 the American Bible Union, duly impressed with this fact, has 
 availed itself of the labors of biblical scholars, not only in this, 
 but in every department connected with biblical literature. In 
 the library of the Union may be found the results of the labors 
 of biblical critics, from the time of Origen down to the present 
 day ; and we doubt if the world can furnish, apart from the 
 manuscripts themselves (all the various readings of which, 
 however, have been collated and published, and are in possession 
 of the Union), a more complete apparatus. In connection with 
 Origen's Hexapla and Walton's Polyglott, are to be found the 
 most celebrated editions of the Hebrew and Greek text of the 
 Scriptures, with the various critica sacras, thesauruses, synop- 
 ses, digests, lexicons, grammars, and works on criticism, her- 
 meneutics, archaeology, history, and in fact the leading works 
 on all that pertains to the vast field of biblical literature, 
 embracing the most ancient and modern authors, with the 
 translations from the Septuagint and Vetus Itala, Vulgate, to 
 the English versions, from Wickliffe to the present time ; and 
 also the principal versions that have been made in the various 
 modern languages and dialects. The library contains the 
 commentaries ot greatest value, ancient and modern, that have 
 been written in the various languages, from the Targums of 
 the Jews and ancient Fathers, down to the present day ; and 
 also copies of the Grecian, Roman, and English classics, toge- 
 ther with the most valuable books of reference in the various 
 departments of literature, science, and art. 
 
 "The special object had in view by the Bible Union has led 
 it to procure without regard to expense, all those works that 
 have any bearing whatever upon the history, philologv, chion- 
 
166 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 plogy, archaeology, criticism, or exegesis of the Bible, that y 
 thus thoroughly furnished, its scholars may have every facility 
 afforded them for making such a revision of ,the English Bible 
 as the present age demands." 
 
 In addition to this, it may be well to say that the Bible 
 Union also, has the free use of rare and valuable works on 
 biblical science in various private libraries, and we know of 
 nothing in this country that has any bearing on the subject 
 that is not at the service of the revisers ol the Bible Union. 
 And thus having this extensive apparatus for a thorough Re- 
 vision of the Bible, an ardent, holy, and honest desire for a 
 faithful one, scholars of the highest ability to do the work, and 
 the liberal support of the people in carrying it forward, the 
 Bible Union is secure in the possession of every thing that can 
 guarantee a faithful exposition of the pure text of the holy 
 writings. 
 
 It is often said and has been much harped upon in this dis- 
 cussion tnat the great body of the churches are content with 
 the present version and wish no change made in it. If such 
 were the case, though we know it is not, for there is no one 
 church in Christendom that has ever been content with it, it 
 would betray in the presence of the truths we have now pre- 
 sented, the fact that the sectarian churches in Christendom arc 
 in as unsound a condition as the ancient Jewish Church of 
 God, which Jesus Christ and his Apostles undertook to en- 
 lighten and reform. The great body of that church was con- 
 tent, and desired no change. Its sectarian members put the 
 Saviour to death and martyred his apostles, but the change was 
 made despite of the opposition. And sueh success will be the 
 result of the efforts of the Bible Union and of the friends of 
 revision. The Bible revised under the auspices of the Bible 
 Union, faithful to God and man in all its details, will as 
 certainly command the approbation, confidence, and zealous 
 co-operation of the American people as the truths of the gos- 
 pel commanded those qualities in the Roman world* The Bible 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 167 
 
 Union has flourished amidst all the floodgates of calumny, 
 detraction, cruel injustice and wrong that sectarian Christen- 
 dom has let loose upon it, and it has survived that which the 
 Apostles encountered — the malice of false friends. There is no 
 power on this earth that can stay the progress of Bible revision. 
 Jehovah has declared that his word shall accomplish all where- 
 unto he has appointed it ; and if he has not appointed it to 
 purity and to the exercise of its own inherent powers, freed from 
 the glosses and corruptions of men, neither his character nor 
 purpose have been revealed. The cause is beyond the reach 
 of the malice of its enemies. 
 
 We have spoken of King James's version as compared with 
 the ancient texts. But let us not be misunderstood. We 
 readily admit that WicklifTe, in giving the English people a 
 Bible adapted to the common apprehension, performed a remark- 
 able work for his time ; a work that first lighted the English 
 race toward civilization. King James's revisers, with quite as 
 defective an apparatus, improved that version in some respects 
 and injured it in others. Even in that form it has done great 
 good, for as Erasmus says: "The authority of the Scriptures 
 is not to be shaken by some corrupted readings." But their 
 acknowledged presence in King James's version, now in the 
 hands of such a race as the English, constitutes an excellent 
 reason why the wheat shall be winnowed from the charT, and 
 that version be made fully worthy of all the admiration that has 
 been bestowed upon it. And to that holy labor the Bible 
 Union are directing their purest and most righteous energies, 
 and, when their work is completed they will be acknowledged 
 as the true friends of " the good old family Bible." 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 P. S. — The foreman of Morton & Griswold informs us that 
 the work of composition for the book form of this discussion 
 
168 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 will be completed earlj next weekj but we shall keep it open 
 until July 26 for any response the five clergymen may choose 
 to make to this article. 
 
 NUMBER XIII. 
 
 BIBLE UNION FATHER MACLAY's PAMPHLET. 
 
 The New York Times has recently published a notice of a 
 pamphlet purporting to be written by Dr. Maclay, late Presi- 
 dent of the Bible Union. The Times announces that the 
 Bible Union is in an uncomfortable position before the public 
 at this time, but we beg leave to assure all who think thus, 
 that the discomfort arises entirely from the fact that Dr. Ma- 
 clay has been put to services, in his present condition of mind, 
 that are at war with all the services of the days of his intel- 
 lectual vigor. The old gentleman has been induced lately to 
 lend himself to purposes at direct variance with his labors and 
 proclamations of the past few years, and he has been carried 
 so far into the regions of wrong doing that his managers have 
 required that the pamphlet against the Bible Union, of which he 
 is the putative author, shall be sedulously kept from the friends 
 of that body, and placed in the hands only of the most violent 
 and virulent enemies of the cause, with injunctions not to per- 
 mit any friend of revision to see it. Does truth or honesty or 
 honor ever require such services as these ? The most earnest 
 efforts have been made by the friends of the Bible Union, for 
 two weeks, in the city of New York, to obtain a copy of this 
 pamphlet — this secret emissary, but even those who admitted 
 that they had a copy of the work, declared they were enjoined 
 not to show it. But an enemy of revision, the Philadelphia 
 •Chronicle, has published the precious document in that paper. 
 
 We have been well acquainted, for weeks, with the matters 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 160 
 
 of which Dr. Maclay complains. We shall not burthen this 
 communication with their enumeration, but content ourselves 
 with saying, that all of these complaints that have any truth 
 in them, were as palpable to him, as open to view, as common 
 to all the members of the Bible Union, when Dr. Maclay was 
 an agent of the society, boldly proclaiming the superlative 
 claims of the Bible Union to the confidence and support of all 
 true men, as they are now to the defected ex-President. He 
 is made ridiculously to assert that he has just discovered these 
 wondrous secrets, and while every employee of the Bible 
 Union was perfectly posted in them, he claims that he was a 
 dupe for years ! And if he was thus duped for years, may 
 not some such work still be in progress ? 
 
 At the instance of Father Maclay, a committee was organ- 
 ized by the Bible Union to investigate every complaint made 
 by him. That committee labored long and sedulously and 
 patiently. It gave the matter so much time that some com- 
 plaint was made about the delay of the report. The pamphlet 
 nays that the committee has not reported, but we have the re- 
 port before us and we quote enough of it to refute all the 
 criminations of Father Maclay. It is as follows : 
 
 " Your committee appointed to enquire into the present con- 
 dition and practical working of the enterprise, respectfully 
 report, that, after a careful examination into its affairs they 
 are satisfied that its executive officers have laboriously and 
 honestly discharged their duty to the Union, and they sec no 
 reason to recommend any change in the practical working of 
 the enterprise. 
 
 W. Colgate, 
 Ezra Smith, 
 W. II. Wyckoff, 
 Sam'l Baker, 
 S. E. Siiepard, 
 T. B. Stillman, 
 J. W. Sarles." 
 
170 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 In addition to this, the Bible Revision Association, after a 
 thorough inquiry, unanimously resolved that the Bible Union 
 is acting in strict accordance with fidelity, and is abundantly 
 worthy the esteem and confidence of every honest and truthful 
 mind. The attempt by a few ambitious spirits to make the 
 Bible Union subservient to their uses has been promptly met 
 and put down, and the Bible Union is honestly, faithfully, and 
 nobly performing all its duties to God and man, which it 
 assumed in undertaking a faithful revision of the Holy Oracles. 
 There is not even the shadow of a foundation, in the manage- 
 ment of the Bible Union, for the charges, the conduct, or the 
 dereliction of Father Maclay, the infirmities of age are rapidly 
 pressing him down, and while we grieve over the fact that such 
 a man has become a castaway from the noblest cause of the 
 age, we rejoice to know that neither his example nor his crimi- 
 nations have in the slightest degree affected the Bible Union, 
 or checked its onward progress. The great scholars of the 
 Bible Union, Conant, Lillie, Schaff, and numbers who approach 
 them in scholarly attainments, know the revisers of the Union. 
 It is' absurd to suppose that the Baptist and Presbyterian 
 scholars we have named would be associated as co-laborers with 
 such scholars as Father Maclay is made to say some of the 
 revisers are. 
 
 These facts will explain what is called the "uncomfortable 
 condition" of the Bible Union, and will answer in advance, 
 whatever may be said by a partizan religious anti-revision press, 
 which unblushingly announces that it Will publish only one side 
 of these matters, "because a different course (that of letting 
 both sides be heard) would not be just or fair to its readers." 
 If any words of admonition on our part would be of any use 
 to the enemies of revision, we would caution them to handle 
 these affairs carefully, for we assure them that we have fullness 
 enough of information in all the premises, to enable us to say 
 that the Bible Union is anxious to court l the largest inquiry 
 into its conduct, and that it will triumphantly come through 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 171 
 
 the ordeal, to the joy of its friends and the discomfiture of its 
 enemies. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 Bible Revision Ivooms, July 22, 1856. 
 
 P. S. — May we not ask such of the secular press as may 
 publish an account of Dr. Maclay's pamphlet, to republish this 
 response to it ? 
 
 FOURTH LETTER OF THE FIYE CLERGYMEN. 
 
 THE BIBLE REVISION MOVEMENT. — FINALLY. 
 
 Some months ago, the undersigned were requested by a 
 number of their brethren to make a suitable answer to certain 
 publications, at that time appearing in the newspapers of this 
 city, in behalf of the Bible Revision Association. It was our 
 intention, from the beginning, to do no more than to show 
 that "this revision movement, sectarian in its spirit arid aims, 
 and not called for by the Church at large, or required by the 
 actual necessities of t lie subject, is not entitled to the public 
 confidence and support. 
 
 Having done that, as we supposed, we declined all personal 
 controversy and all further argument on the subject, deeming 
 any thing else superfluous. 
 
 The gentlemen who still conduct the discussion on the other 
 side have repeatedly invited us back to the field, which we 
 thought proper to leave when our work was done, declaring 
 their intention to lay before the public, for wide circulation and 
 in permanent form, this whole discussion bound up together. 
 And now, again, what seems intended for their final commu- 
 nication to the public, after many allusions to ourselves, closes 
 with these last words to us: 
 
172 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 "P. S. — The foreman of Morton & Griswold informs us that 
 the work of composition for the book form of this discussion 
 will be completed early next week ; but we will keep it open 
 until July 26, for any response the five clergymen may choose 
 to make to this article." 
 
 Our thanks are due to these gentlemen for so great liberal- 
 ity; and, that we may not be wanting in courtesy, or any 
 other duty in the premises, we depart from the purpose which 
 we had formed of declining further discussion, and offer this 
 response. We trust they will receive it as final, if they will 
 not accept it as sufficient. We desire not to abuse the wide 
 liberty they give us, and will compress, as far as we can, what 
 we have to present. 
 
 They will bear in mind, as the public also will, that our 
 single aim has been to answer their plea for the public confi- 
 dence and support, by proving that their movement deserves 
 neither. In every "response" we have made to any "article" 
 of theirs, we have kept our aim in view. In this, which they 
 have succeeded in drawing from us, we do so still. 
 
 In all that we have read of the writings of revisionists, or 
 heard of their talk, few persons have been so highly com- 
 mended by them as the Bev. Dr. Maclay. None, we believe, 
 have been more trusted ; none have really done more to pro- 
 mote their object. Long their principal agent to recommend 
 it and to collect funds for it in this country and in Europe, 
 and a few months ago, after so many years of patient and 
 effective service in the field, called to the Presidency of the 
 Society upon the death of Dr. Cone, as the fit successor of 
 that eminent man, he has linked his name to this work as few 
 have done. Indeed, he may be called one of the fathers of 
 the enterprise to which he has devoted the best years of his 
 life with the deepest interest in its success. We may add, 
 that he has certainly enjoyed very fair opportunities of inform- 
 ation as to the real character of it, the spirit and manner in 
 which its affairs are conducted, and its claims upon good men. 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 173 
 
 Now, with every thing to attach him to it if it were worthy 
 of his regard, he has turned his back upon it with disgust. 
 Dr. Maclay has made public the considerations which influ- 
 enced him herein. They are stated with simplicity and great 
 clearness, apparently without anger or malevolence, under 
 convictions of duty which compelled him to speak out, and 
 with the confidence of a man who knows that what he says is 
 true. These representations are made at great length, else we 
 would insert them here entire. That, we suppose, would be 
 drawing too largely on the kindness of the gentlemen who are 
 waiting for this " response," to put it in their book. 
 
 They will indulge us, however, in culling out a few para- 
 graphs of this extraordinary testimony. One shall be that in 
 which the witness sums up his evidence, to-wit : 
 
 " Being fully satisfied, from personal examination, that the 
 funds which I have done so much to collect, and which I 
 know have been most sacredly devoted, by the rich and the 
 poor, to one of the holiest purposes of Christian charity, are 
 being squandered ; that a vast amount is expended for opera- 
 tions remote from the one great object of the institution , that 
 men are employed to translate the Word of God who are not 
 qualified for the work ; that unwarrantable translations have 
 been made, which, if published, must bring into discredit the 
 most precious doctrines of my faith, sap the fundamental 
 truths of Christianity as indubitably revealed in the Holy 
 Scriptures, and shake the confidence of the people in the canon 
 of the sacred writings ; that such revisions are likely to be 
 published for indiscriminate circulation, without the previous 
 precautionary examination provided for, and required, by the 
 plan and rules of revision, as originally adopted by the Board ; 
 that the controlling power of the institution has become com- 
 pletely centralized in one man, and that the exercise of that 
 power is not only such as to forbid the hope of reform, but 
 also to blast the name and influence of every one who ad- 
 vocates reform. Feeling perfectly assured of all tins, I am 
 
374 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 compelled, by a stern sense of duty, to abandon the enter- 
 prise, and to free myself, as far as possible, from all further 
 responsibility in its operations. And I can not doubt that my 
 friends, when rightly informed, will justify me in so doing." 
 
 Another extract will tell us something about the "revisers:" 
 
 "During the last six years, from the origin of the Bible 
 Union till a few months ago, I labored as its agent, most of 
 the time at a distance from the seat of its operations, so that 
 I had but very little opportunity to examine minutely the in- 
 ternal management of the institution. I relied mainly on the 
 published documents of the Union, to which the official corres- 
 pondence of the Secretary seldom added any thing of impor- 
 tance. I did not so much as know the names of the revisers, 
 with a few exceptions. Hence the statements which I made, 
 publicly and privately, during my agency, rested for the most 
 part on the assurances of those for whom I acted. 
 
 " But on being elected President of the Union, in October, 
 in 1855, I found myself in a position of more direct and un- 
 qualified responsibility ; and under these circumstances, I felt 
 the importance of becoming more particularly acquainted with 
 the operations of the body. I then, for the first time, ascer- 
 tained who the revisers were, and found, to my astonishment, 
 that instead of there having been about forty individuals actu- 
 ally engaged in translating the New Testament, as I had 
 understood from the Secretary, and often stated, there had not 
 been more than twenty-three or twenty-four. Instead of all 
 these being competent scholars, as I had supposed, and as the 
 plan of the Union required, and as is often reiterated in the 
 official documents of the Union, some of them unquestionably 
 lacked the essential qualifications of a translator." 
 
 The following extracts will exhibit the marvelous beauty 
 and exact faithfulness of some instances of revision : 
 
 " On resuming my examination in the revisers' department, 
 I found that numerous translations had been made, which, 
 though not in all cases inconsistent with good scholarship, 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. I/O 
 
 were nevertheless calculated, on other grounds, to compromise 
 the character of the Union, and to shake the confidence of 
 men in the truth of God's Word. Of these the following may 
 serve as specimens ^ 
 
 "John i. 1 : 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word 
 was with God, and God was the Word.' 
 
 "John i. 33: ' He it is that immerses in a Holy Spirit.' 
 
 " John iii. 5 : 'If any one be not born of water and Spirit/ 
 
 "John v. 19: 'The Son can do nothing of himself, if he 
 see not the Father doing any thing.' 
 
 "John vii. 39. 'But this is said of the Spirit which those 
 believing on Him were about to receive ; for there was not yet 
 a Holy Spirit.' 
 
 "John x. 28: 'And I give to them eternal life, and they 
 shall not perish forever.' 
 
 " John xi. 33 : ' Jesus, therefore, when he saw her weeping, 
 and the Jews, who came with her, weeping, groaned in the 
 spirit and troubled himself.' 
 
 "John i. 13, 14: "Who were begotten, not of blood, nor 
 of a will of flesh, nor of a will of man, but of God. And the 
 Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we saw his glory, 
 a glory as of one only begotten of a Father), full of grace and 
 truth.' 
 
 "These are by no means the most objectionable renderings. 
 In this and other books are some which I would not disclose 
 to the public eye. And on a closer examination in the depart- 
 ment of revision, I found, that in addition to the shocking 
 translations already referred to, the misguided hand of the 
 reviser had been rashly laid upon the original text, as it seemed 
 to me, without any authority of the Board." 
 
 The following will show what Dr. Maclay found to bo thfc 
 honesty of the policy which guides the executive departn* 
 
 " The Secretary urged me again to leave New York and travel 
 abroad as an agent. I informed hint that, with the views v 
 i then entertained. I could not conscientiously act in the ci 
 
176 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 city of an agent ; that, among other things, I had assured the 
 people that we have competent scholars to translate the Scrip- 
 tures, and that the funds of the Union were judiciously and 
 economically expended, but I could do so no longer ; that I 
 had aimed to live an honest man, and I meant to die an honest 
 man ; and that if I were to go and publish my honest impres- 
 sions regarding the operations of the Bible Union, I should 
 only damage its reputation, which, under existing circumstances, 
 I was not prepared to do. One would have supposed that 
 such a statement would have precluded any further request 
 from the Secretary for me to go abroad as an agent of the 
 Union. His subsequent repeated reiteration of this request, 
 besides the imputation of a disbelief in my own statement 
 which it conveyed, exhibited such a solicitude for the services, 
 and such an indifference for the conscientious views of an agent, 
 as equally surprised and pained me." 
 
 And finally, this will show at once how they use the money, 
 and how they treat this old servant of God for daring to object- 
 to such expenditures. 
 
 "I know that Brother Conant, in that extraordinary letter 
 of April 23, 1856, which the Secretary got up and sent out 
 as a circular of the Bible Union, pronounces my dissatisfac- 
 tion 'groundless,' attributing it to mental imbecility, and this 
 judgment, though contrary to my own consciousness, would 
 have great weight on my mind, if he were not himself an inter- 
 ested party. But a man who has already received nearly six 
 thousand dollars before finishing the translation of Job, on a 
 contract which secures to him, in addition to a salary of $1,200 
 from the Theological Seminary at Eochester, $2,000 a-year 
 for the portion of time not required in his professional duties, 
 till he shall have completed the Old Testament, with a copy- 
 right interest, and a per-centage on the future sales of his 
 translation, when published with notes ; a man for whose pupils 
 the Hebrew school-book, with grammatical notes, was specially 
 designed, and the stereotyping of whose translation, in six 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES, 177 
 
 different forms, without any examination by other scholars, 
 according to the contract, and without any authorization of the 
 Board, was one occasion of my dissatisfaction, occupies a posi- 
 tion in relation to the affairs under consideration which greatly 
 depreciates, if it does not entirely destroy, the admissibility 
 of his testimony. And I think that all well-informed, impartial 
 men will agree that he, who has such grounds for his own 
 satisfaction, is not sufficiently disinterested to sit in judgment 
 upon my dissatisfaction.'''' 
 
 This is the way, it seems, they intend to put down Dr. Ma- 
 clay. A few months ago he was worthy of all they could give 
 him in place and honors. Then he was using his influence to 
 promote their ends. Now he is in his dotage, for now he is 
 exposing to the light of day that which cannot bear the light. 
 We think the public will say that such a taunt is equally false, 
 absurd, and cruel. We think the same public will say, as 
 they come to understand it all, that such a scheme of tampering 
 with the Word of God, and abusing the credulity of his people, 
 richly entitles itself to derision and contempt. 
 
 W. L. Breckinridge, 
 Sam'l Lowry ADAM3, 
 Henry M. Denison, 
 G. Gorden. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Trimble is at present absent from the city, 
 which accounts for the absence of his name from this response. 
 Louisville, July 22, 1856. 
 
 12 
 
378 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 NUMBER XIV. 
 
 THE FIVE CLERGYMEN. — DR. MACLAY AND THE DISMISSED 
 REVISER. 
 
 We published an article last week, on the state of the Greek 
 text of the New Testament, on the apocryphal statements in 
 the English version in common use, on various omissions from 
 and interpolations in that version, all going to show the imper- 
 ative demands for revision. And in order to test the character 
 of the startling facts we then presented, we called upon the 
 five clergymen who had taken up King James's Bible as a 
 banner, to refute our statements if in their power to do so. 
 Our object is to know truth, to advocate nothing else, and to 
 yield allegiance to its supreme dictates. In making the call 
 upon the five clergymen thus to meet the stubborn facts which 
 we presented as the result of a careful inquiry into the state of 
 the Greek textus receptus, the overwhelming proofs which we 
 adduced, and which may be multiplied, that the version in 
 common use is a translation from a Latin text, and not from 
 the text of inspiration, we had a hope that those gentlemen 
 would attempt some defence of the authorized version. If the 
 facts we presented are verities, no Christian acquainted with 
 them can hesitate as to the imperative necessity of a speedy 
 revision of the Bible. No man who owes allegiance to Jesus 
 Christ can feel that he is justified in palming off on the com- 
 munity, as the words of inspiration, statements which no 
 inspired pen ever touched. 
 
 The five clergymen have run their allotted time for an 
 answer to the grave and startling facts to which we allude, and 
 they have not attempted a rejoinder, for, of course, they do 
 not consider the string of trashy quotations from a mendacious 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 179 
 
 pamphlet, written by a dismissed reviser from the service of 
 the Bible Union, which they published yesterday, as in any 
 degree an acceptance of our request. We therefore have a 
 right to consider that our article on the state of the Greek text 
 and the condition of the authorized version is unassailable. 
 Nothing can be clearer to the public mind than the fact that 
 these five clergymen can not defend King James's Bible. They 
 are ready enough to fight away upon all other matters, but 
 they have to admit that the deplorable condition of King 
 James's version is utterly indefensible. What a position for 
 clergymen! They cannot defend the text of King James's 
 work ; they will not attempt themselves to procure a pure ver- 
 sion of the Word of God, and they seem to feel that their 
 mission is to abuse, defame, and insult all who honestly under- 
 take this essential work for the people. Clergymen who occupy 
 this exceedingly awkward position before an intelligent peo- 
 ple are not in the best possible condition to investigate the 
 moral atmosphere of the Bible Union. 
 
 In not denying before the public, with statement of proof 
 and illustrations, the necessity and importance of the revision 
 of the Scriptures while attempting to discredit and asperse those 
 engaged in it, the five clergymen may be compared to those in 
 Christ's time who, not denying the necessity of his reform, yvt 
 objected to his measures, and stood aloof from his cause and 
 Church; or those, acknowledging the corruption of Christianity 
 and the importance of its restoration, yet refused to co-operate 
 with Luther on account of some alleged incompetency or faults 
 of temper , or like the Tories of the Revolution, acknowledg- 
 ing the wrongs of the colonies and the justice of their claims, 
 yet abandoning their cause and betraying them to their oppress- 
 ors Fault-finding with measures of progress is always an 
 easy as it is an ignoble task. Men have found it easy to point 
 out faults in the methods of originating and carrying out all 
 good causes. The reforming prophets were too rash and rad- 
 ical ; Christ was too regardless of the established order of 
 
180 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 religion; Lutlier impaired the public confidence in the consti- 
 tuted ecclesiastical authorities ; the founders of missions were 
 enthusiasts ; the apostles of temperance were fanatics. Is it 
 strange, then, that the advocates of revision are charged with 
 a grievous hallucination ? We hope our five clergymen may 
 yet see that they have stooped to a low calling, in devoting 
 themselves to the mere depreciation of needed reform and 
 blocking the wheels of progress. 
 
 In reference to the pamphlet called the Maclay document, 
 we present the following notice by the officers of the Bible 
 Union; and we make this additional remark, that as long as 
 the real author of that pamplet, the dismissed reviser, was 
 able to draw his salary from the Bible Union, he was silent 
 upon all the matters on which he is now expending, under the 
 name of A. Maclay, his vengeful malice. He never awakened 
 to "duty" until he was cut off from the treasury of the Bible 
 Union. His pen is traceable, in what is called Dr. Maclay's 
 pamphlet, from the beginning to the end of the work. There 
 is not a man anv where, who has known the condition of Dr. 
 Maclay's mind for the past three years, who does not know 
 his incapacity to write. 
 
 We present the appeal of the officers of the Bible Union, 
 and ask for it an honest reading. 
 
 american bible union concerning dr. maclay's pamphlet 
 
 American Bible Union Rooms, } 
 No. 350 Broome st., New York, July 18, 1856. \ 
 
 To the Editor of the JYew York Daily Times : 
 
 SiR: We perceive by your issue of the 18th inst., that you 
 quote statements from a production purporting to be written 
 by Rev. A, Maclay, D.D., giving his reasons for resigning the 
 Presidency of the American Bible Union. We have been 
 informed from other sources that such a document was in ex- 
 istence, and have seen what professes to be a copy in a news- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 181 
 
 paper; and we have addressed the most respectful letters to 
 Dr. Maclay and other persons, soliciting a copy for the use of 
 the Union. As yet, however, we have been unsuccessful, and 
 can but conclude that there are good reasons why it should be 
 circulated so secretly, and withheld so carefully from the 
 Board of the Society, whose principles, plans, and officers it 
 attacks. 
 
 When Dr. Maclay sent in his resignation, it was unaccom- 
 panied by any reason whatever. Nor has he, at any time 
 since he became President, uttered a word before the Board 
 expressive of his dissatisfaction with it. He has never sub- 
 mitted a suggestion to the Board, personally or in writing, for 
 any change m its operations, as he was in duty bound to do 
 if he thought a change necessary, although he was importuned 
 privately to do so. In a committee appointed by the Board in 
 January last, at Dr. Maclay's suggestion, "to inquire into the 
 present condition and practical workings of our enterprise," of 
 which committee Dr. Maclay was a member, he stated some of 
 his grievances. But because the committee did not adopt 
 his suggestions, he threatened to resign as President, and to 
 publish his reasons to the world, which, he said, "would ruin 
 the Union" and actually refused to attend any more meetings 
 of the committee or the Board, and did so resign long before 
 the committee reported. 
 
 We have good reason to believe that Dr. Maclay is not the 
 real author of this pamphlet, but that it was written by a 
 gentleman who has recently been dismissed from the service 
 of the Bible Union for the very best of reasons, and who, we 
 understand, has another publication against the Union in the 
 press. We owe it to the public, in this connection, to say, 
 that we have abundant evidence for disproving every material 
 allegation which the published document contains, in the form 
 it has reached us. In due time the Board and officers of the 
 Union will ask a hearing. They have nothing to suppress ; 
 they have no information to withhold from the public eye : 
 
182 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 and, above all, they feel conscious they have nothing to fear 
 from a thorough investigation of their doings. Measures have 
 already been taken not only to invite, but to demand, such an 
 investigation. 
 
 The document signed by Dr.'Maclay attacks all the proce- 
 dure of the Bible Union under the administration of his im- 
 mortal predecessor, Dr. Cone, as well as under his own. And 
 as the Board has in no case deviated from the policy estab- 
 lished by Dr. Cone — a policy which the Union itself has unan- 
 imously approved from year to year — we shall await the final 
 decision of the same body with the utmost confidence. 
 
 At the same time, we now invoke the scrutiny of all who 
 are interested in the cause of truth and the welfare of the 
 Bible Union. We therefore invite all such persons to call at 
 the rooms of the Society, No. ,350 Broome street, and examine 
 our affairs personally, and we promise them every facility we 
 possess for such an examination. Especially do we request the 
 representatives of the secular press to take advantage of this 
 invitation. You, gentlemen, have always acted most honor- 
 ably toward the Bible Union, and we believe that you still 
 desire to treat it in the same manner. For this reason, we 
 solicit you personally to make yourselves acquainted with our 
 plans and modes of procedure at your leisure, with the liberty 
 of stating frankly your findings to the public. 
 Respectfully yours, 
 
 Thomas Armitage, President 
 
 Wm. H. Wyckoff, Cor. Sec. 
 
 E. S. Whitney, Bee. Sec. 
 
 E. Parmly, Treasurer. 
 
 C. A. Buckbee, Asst. Treasurer, 
 
 Sylvester Pier, Auditor, 
 
 We regret that we have to close our book without such a 
 rejoinder as we hoped to obtain from the five clergymen. But 
 as we shall continue to call the attention of the public to the 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 183 
 
 subject of Bible revision, may we not indulge the hope that 
 our clerical friends will hereafter undertake that rejoinder? 
 They may rest assured, however, that whatever may be their 
 course, we shall hereafter honor them with an abundance of 
 just such biblical matters as we gave them in the Courier of 
 the 19th inst., and in the Journal of the 21st inst. ; and if 
 they can stand such expositions, we can patiently make them. 
 . They timorously plead for a finale ; but let them remember 
 that they came into this matter of their own accord ; that they 
 undertook to meddle with what does not concern them, and 
 they must meet the consequences. And now that they are 
 standing before the community as the peddlers of the paltry 
 slanders of a dismissed reviser of the Bible Union, it is too 
 late for them to cry " enough." They will regret the hour 
 they made use of the miserable calumnies which Dr. Maclay 
 has been made to father. We shall soon be at liberty to ex- 
 pose this whole business. 
 
 In the meantime we pray the public to bear in mind, that 
 up to the 22d inst., the date of our last advices from the city 
 of New York, not one friend of the Bible Union had been able 
 to obtain even a sight of the Maclay pamphlet, and up to the 
 present date no friend of the Revision Association has seen 
 one. It is scattered freely among the enemies of those two 
 bodies ; but the most perfect safeguards are thrown around it 
 to prevent it from reaching the friends of revision. 
 
 Such conduct betrays unmistakably the animus of the par- 
 ties engaged in this work. It is conclusive that Dr. Maclay 
 is not under his own management, for even in his weakness he 
 is incapable of such unfair, unjust, and unprovoked conduct. 
 For our knowledge of the contents of the pamphlet, we are 
 indebted to what purports to be a copy of it, published in a 
 violent anti-revision paper in Philadelphia. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 T. S. Belt. 
 
184 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 NUMBER XV. 
 
 THE BIBLE UNION. — THE FOUR CLERGYMEN. — THE MACLAY 
 PAMPHLET. 
 
 No real friend of Bible Revision or of the Bible Union 
 can do otherwise than rejoice that, if any thing of the kind 
 had to be done, Dr. Maclay has been placed before the public 
 as an accuser of his brethren. The Bible Union courts now a 
 full exposition of all that Dr. Maclay and Dr. Judd can say 
 to its prejudice. They have occupied positions that should 
 have opened all the affairs of the Bible Union to their inspec- 
 tion, and we know that even their profoundest malice can utter 
 no truth that will in any degree implicate the Bible Union in 
 wrong, except in one case, which implicates Dr. Judd very 
 deeply, to which we shall attend in due time. The Bible 
 Union is in the hands of men who fear no scrutiny that may 
 be exercised upon their acts. We do not rejoice in iniquity ; 
 but since it has come, we rejoice that it assumed the shape 
 over which a bigoted sectarianism is now rejoicing. That sec- 
 tarianism is more delighted when righteousness, purity, and 
 truth are kicked about through the public press, than when 
 sinners turn from the errors of their way. The Bible Union 
 is made up of men of unblemished character, men who fulfill 
 all Christian duties in every department of public and private 
 life, who live as ever in the Great Taskmaster's eye, against 
 whom no sentiment of any kind, except that of sectarianism, 
 ever breathed a word of scandal. We express but the voice 
 of all who know them, when we say that this continent holds 
 no men of purer, holier, or of more upright characters, than 
 the officers of the American Bible Union. Yet upon the mere 
 accusation of such men, purporting to be made by old Father 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 185 
 
 A. Maclay, now eighty years of age, sectarianism is prepared, 
 not only to stop the greatest enterprise of the age, but to blast 
 the characters of numbers of men, each one of whom has as 
 much reputation for piety or goodness as Dr. Maclay, no mat- 
 ter how great his may be. Surely lives of piety, of recognized 
 public virtue, of untarnished integrity, should always, among 
 people taught of God's Holy Spirit, be a shield against the 
 barbs of unproven charges. But the religion of men who claim 
 to be teachers of Christianity did not restrain them from the 
 inexcusable conduct of seizing upon mere accusations, unsus- 
 tained as they were by a particle of testimony, any more than 
 a politician might have been restrained from seizing and using 
 any thing that he thought would injure an opponent. It is a 
 frightful commentary on the sectarianism of this age, that in 
 the nineteenth century of Christianity, four of its professed 
 teachers made such a display as the four clergymen did in the 
 newspapers of this city last week. Among the mere moralists 
 of the world it is considered exceedingly unjust and unfair to 
 use unsupported charges against any one, until the person 
 criminated lias an opportunity of answering; but to use 
 charges of this character in the presence of a full denial, 
 made by a committee of as upright, holy, and pious men 
 as can be found in this or any other country, and by the 
 Board of the Revision Association in this city, without mak- 
 ing the least allusion to the fact that the charges were de- 
 nied, is pronounced by all moralists — Christians and infidels, 
 a species of conduct for which neither Christianity nor morals 
 furnishes support or excuse. Yet this conduct was exhibited 
 by the four clergymen. On Wednesday, the 22d inst., the 
 undersigned published an extract from the report of the com- 
 mittee of the Bible Union (each one of whom is at least the 
 equal of either of the four clergymen), appointed at Dr. Maclay's 
 instance, to examine the very charges afterwards uttered to the 
 world under the cloak of Dr. Maclay's name. This report was 
 signed by seven as respectable gentlemen as can be found 
 
iSG FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 any where, and that report utterly contradicted the statements 
 purporting to be made by Dr. Maclay. In addition to this, 
 we announced that the Board of the Bible Revision Association 
 had also investigated this whole subject, and were unanimous 
 in the conclusion that there was no foundation for the charges 
 nor any apology for an attack upon the Bible Union. But in 
 this state of things, in which every man's conscience, if not 
 asleep, would say, proof of the charges was imperatively de- 
 manded, the four clergymen, on the Friday succeeding our denial 
 on Wednesday, used the accusations as though they were es- 
 tablished facts, and uttered no hint that the criminated party 
 denied the charges. There was as much fairness and justice 
 at the tribunal of Pontius Pilate. Is this a clerical specimen 
 of "that love which thinketh no evil," which Christianity was 
 designed to impart. Is this the "love which rejoiceth not in 
 iniquity," without which, an Apostle affirms, he became as 
 sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal? The royal Psalmist of 
 Israel asks. "Lord who shall abide in thy tabernacle, who 
 shall dwell in thy holy hill?" Among the characters who 
 are thus to abide and dwell, are those "who backbiteth not 
 with their tongues, nor doeth evil to their neighbors, nor tak- 
 eth vp a reproach against their neighbors." We know not 
 what the casuistry of others may teach them, but with the 
 reflected light of the New Covenant before our minds, we 
 know that we would not have been guilty of such conduct as 
 that of which we speak, for the wealth of the universe. 
 
 We do not hold Father Maclay in any way responsible for 
 the pamphlet issued in his name, for in his unfortunate weak- 
 ness he is not accountable for any thing he does. We all felt 
 how weak he was when he was made president of the Bible 
 Union , he felt it, and so expressed himself. But we knew his 
 goodness of heart, and never dreamed that any sinister influ- 
 ence would attempt to turn him aside from the few paths of 
 duty in which he seemed to be able still to walk. We do not 
 -call in question the goodness of Father Maclay, but we more 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. J 87 
 
 than question the goodness of his statements. 'And we feel 
 confident that it is to the influence of Dr. Orrin B. Judd, a 
 dismissed reviser from the Bible Union rooms, Ave are mainly, 
 if not wholly, indebted for the mendacious pamphlet issued 
 under the name of Dr. Maclay. There is in the pamphlet 
 itself a deep undercurrent of malignity that surpasses all the 
 ordinary forms of human malice, to say nothing of the nefa- 
 rious management of the pamphlet. That Dr. Judd, after 
 being dismissed from the confidence, the service, and treasury '; 
 of the Bible Union, should have attempted to use this infirm 
 old man, borne down with the weight of nearly eighty years, 
 could have excited no great degree of surprise: but that he I 
 should have degraded him, through a weakened memory that 
 was scarcely conscious of what it was doing, into a derogatory/ 
 and most insulting attack upon his own son, and thus, in ad-/ 
 dition to Dr. Judd's other mischief, carry distress and affliction | 
 into the old man's domestic circles, was a stretch of malice I 
 that is scarcely human. /^And as a fitting prelude to our por* 1 
 rait of Dr. Judd ami of the Maclay pamphlet, we begin 
 with this very case. Among the pamphlet charges which Dr. 
 Maclay was made to father, is the following string of inven- 
 tions 
 
 "A portion of the New York Chronicle, secured by an 
 annual appropriation of one thousand dollars, for the publica- 
 tion of revision matter, was found to be practically under the 
 absolute control of the Secretary, and to be used according to 
 his pleasure. I do not object to the appropriation made by 
 the Board ; but I think the object of the appropriation has 
 been perverted, to invest the Secretary with power which no 
 such officer should possess." 
 
 Dr. Maclay's son is the editor of the Bible Union depart- 
 ment of the New York Chronicle, and these derogatory charges, 
 levelled no matter at whom, fell on his head. Dr. Church, the 
 editor and proprietor of the New York Chronicle, thus disposes 
 of the string of unprovoked slanders wc have quoted : 
 
188 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 "Now the truth is — 
 
 "1. The Board never engaged to give us a thousand dollars 
 a-year. 
 
 " 2. Of the amount which it did agree to pay us, for every 
 four dollars which come to us, five go to Dr. Maclay's son in 
 payment of services for the Bible Union. 
 
 "3. The space in our paper occupied by the Bible Union 
 matter, and the copies which we furnish weekly to that organ- 
 ization, bring us about one-half the amount which we obtain 
 fo<* the same amount of space and of papers from other sources. 
 We work for the Bible Union at half the rate of our ordinary 
 prices, and are quite sure that if all its concerns are managed 
 as cheaply, it is one of the most economical organizations in 
 the world. 
 
 " 4. The right to exclude whatever we please from the Bible 
 Union department of our paper, has been from the first conce- 
 ded to us by contract, and if it has been "under the absolute 
 control of the Secretary," it has been so by no fault of ours, 
 and by no defect in the terms of the agreement. We have not 
 gone behind the curtain to pry into the manner in which the 
 Bible Union editor does his duty, but have left him at liberty 
 to pursue his own course, the same as we do those who adver- 
 tise with us in getting up the form of their advertisements, 
 reserving to ourselves the right to exclude whatever we consi- 
 der not in keeping with the design of our paper. 
 
 "We Avere the more surprised at this part of Dr. Maclay's 
 document, inasmuch as it relates to his own son, who had every 
 means of correcting its mistakes. If his son has been "under 
 the absolute control of the Secretary," it belonged to him and 
 not to us to throw off that control, and to act independently. 
 If he has not done so, why should the New York Chronicle be 
 charged with a subserviency inconsistent with its identity and 
 its dignity?*' 
 
 Here then we find there is not the shadow of truth in the 
 statements put forth in this pamphlet for Dr. Maclay in tins 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 189 
 
 matter, and he is made to state these inventions as seriously 
 as any of the others, and without any provocation he is made to 
 assail a son for whom he feels an honest pride. He was not 
 only made thus to assail his own son, but to withhold even 
 from him a copy of the pamphlet containing the assault. On 
 the 26th of July, after that publication had been in the hands 
 of the enemies of the Bible Union for three weeks, there was, 
 under the editorial head of that portion of the Chronicle con- 
 fided to the •are of Maclay's son, an advertisement for a copy 
 of the pamphlet. The wickedness that has, thus far, withheld 
 this document from every friend of Revision, while scattering 
 it freely, with specific injunctions, among the enemies of the 
 cause, is palpable to every honest heart. No Christian mind 
 can approve or sustain such conduct. Are not the four clergy- 
 men beginning to feel proud of their new compeer in the war 
 against a pure version of the Word of God ? Is not this com- 
 peer a beautiful specimen for their endorsement ? Do they not 
 feel exalted in the honor they enjoyed last week, and shall enjoy 
 in our book, in leading forth such a character and in introducing 
 such a being to the people of Kentucky, as worthy of the clergy's 
 praise and of the people's love ? We congratulate the im- 
 mortal four on their discriminating moralities and proprieties. 
 What vast and unnumbered crimes lie at the door of sectari- 
 anism the enemy alike of God and man ! 
 
 We have said that the Revision Association investigated 
 the case of Drs. Maclay and Judd. It is due to truth to add 
 that the investigation was commenced with decided leanings 
 toward Drs. Maclay and Judd, arising from an imperfect ac- 
 quaintance with their case. The Revision Association, early 
 in June, not only took decided grounds against the Bible 
 Union, but suspended all appropriations to it, until the Board 
 of the Association should be convinced of the propriety of the 
 Bible Union in these matters. Dr. Judd was informed of these 
 things at the same time that the Bible Union were advised of 
 them. The Bible Union promptly met the requirements of the 
 
190 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 Revision Association, and by an array of conclusive testimony 
 established the fact that Dr. Judd was unworthy to be contin- 
 ued as a reviser. Upon a full hearing of the case, the Board 
 of the Revision Association, numbering among its members 
 names that stand as fair as any in this community, unanimously 
 sustained the Bible Union in its whole course, and not only 
 made the usual monthly appropriation, but will largely increase 
 it. And so triumphant have the clergy been in their victorious 
 support of what their friends requested them to advocate in the 
 newspapers, that we have paid for this discussion in the secular 
 press, and shall probably double our usual appropriation to 
 the Bible Union for August and September and undoubtedly 
 through the fall, appropriating one thousand dollars a-month, 
 instead of five hundred, the usual sum. Cannot the five 
 clergymen be induced to carry on another series of their vic- 
 tories ? 
 
 And now for the pamphleteer — the new compeer of the four 
 clergymen. We have already shown the utter falsity of his 
 statements respecting the New York Chronicle. We ask at- 
 tention to a few other matters. Dr. Judd is now the fidus 
 achates of Dr. Maclay, but he was the reviser whose work first 
 aroused the old man's dread of heresy. It was his revision of 
 the 11th verse of the 3d chapter of Matthew that stirred up 
 the childish apprehensions of Dr. Maclay. The old gentleman 
 received it just as he was starting for Baltimore on a collect- 
 ing tour, and the supposed heresy so haunted him with spectral 
 "visions that he was unfitted for work. Dr. Judd's revision is 
 precisely of the same character as some of the specimens from 
 another reviser for whom Dr. Judd has a great dislike, which 
 specimens the old gentleman is made to put forward for con- 
 demnation in the pamphlet. On these essential facts the Ma- 
 clay pamphlet is silent, thus marking distinctly, it seems to 
 us, the complicity of Dr. Judd with the pamphlet. We have 
 the revision of John and Dr. Judd's revision of Matthew be- 
 fore us while we write. 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 191 
 
 And here let us pause to ask the reader to look at the 
 pamphleteer's attack upon the revisers, with the clergy's endorse- 
 ment, and see how conspicuously the attack proves the fidelity 
 and integrity of the Bible Union. The old gentleman is made 
 to appear as busying himself about the work of the revisers, 
 and about "his faith." The Bible Union was not established 
 to revise the Word of God, in accordance with Dr. Maclay's 
 faith, but by the laws of philology. No one has any control 
 over the revisers, and Dr. Maclay is the first officer of the 
 Bible Union who has ever attempted to usurp any control over 
 that body. It is a glorious fact for the Bible Union that the 
 first attempt to exercise such usurped power, though made by 
 the President, was promptly spurned. Neither the President of 
 the Bible Union nor any other functionary can interfere with 
 that tribunal of scholars, which the Bible Union, from the first, 
 made independent of any dictation. If Dr. Maclay or any 
 other man loves his prejudices and opinions better than the 
 laws of philology and the demands of truth, the Bible Union 
 is no place for him, for it is founded on truth and is governed 
 in revision by the laws of philology. It was a curious crot- 
 chet of the old gentleman, that while he regarded one of the 
 best scholars in the Bible Union as incompetent because he did 
 not revise to suit him, he thought Dr. Judd altogether com- 
 petent to revise the entire New "Testament," although Dr. 
 Judd had made the same heretical revision as that made by 
 the condemned reviser. Alas for human infirmity ! Let it not 
 be forgotten that Dr. Maclay is made to admit that he could 
 not influence the scholars of the Bible Union to revise accord- 
 ing to his wishes. And the poor old gentleman is presented 
 in the pitiable plight of prying into the papers of the revisers, 
 seizing their immature thoughts, and emblazoning them to the 
 world as the work of the Bible Union, when they were not the 
 finished work even of the reviser. There is not one person on 
 earth, entitled to the name of gentleman, who could be induced 
 to father such a deed as this ; but the managers of Dr. Maclay 
 
192 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 do not hesitate to present him in this degraded position. It is 
 most shameful. In the presence of such admissions from an 
 enemy of the Bible Union as we have quoted, what becomes 
 of the charge that that bodj is making a sectarian Bible? 
 Even the mouths of its enemies are made to speak its praise 
 and bear testimony to its integrity and faithfulness. 
 
 The entire work of revision is entrusted to scholars, and not 
 to the officers of the society. As soon as Dr. Maclay was 
 elected president he betrayed his utter unfitness for the station 
 by undertaking to disturb this vital element of the Bible Union. 
 Sectarianism is greatly elated just now because l)r. Maclay is 
 antagonistic to the Bible Union, although his antagonism re- 
 sults mainly from the fact that he could not influence or coerce 
 the revisers. But how would the four clergymen rejoice if 
 they had been told that the revision tribunal was not an inde- 
 pendent body, but was under the influence and control of the 
 president of the Bible Union! We rejoice that Dr. Maclay 
 is made to admit that he could not have his own way in this 
 matter, and on that ground we regard his present enmity as a 
 boon. He strengthens the reputation of the Bible Union. 
 But not content with direct interference with the revisers, he 
 called upon a gentleman in Baltimore, of whose scholarship he 
 has a most fantastic idea, and requested him to draw up his 
 views upon the Greek article for the guidance of the revisers ! 
 Let the reader imagine, if he can, a greater insult to such 
 scholars as Dr. John Lillie, to whose pre-eminent scholarship 
 the highest authorities among the Pedobaptists bear willing 
 testimony, Dr. Philip SchafT, Dr. Conant, and such men, each 
 one of whom could teach the supernumerary instructor more 
 than he ever knew of Greek. But the old gentleman obtained 
 this wonderful disquisition upon the Greek article, and gravely 
 placed it before the revisers. Upon this point we may here- 
 after be compelled to expose Dr. Judd, over his own hand, but 
 we leave it now as a specimen of the readinesss of Dr. Maclay 
 to violate and outrage the fundamental principles of the Bible 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 193 
 
 Union, and because he could not thus sectarianise the revision 
 tribunal, he quit his attendance upon the meetings of the Board. 
 When he discovered that his pet reviser was in trouble on 
 account of unfaitlrfulness to his contract, Dr. Maclay resigned 
 his presidency, and, with the assistance of that dismissed 
 reviser, proceeded to put his threat in execution, by making a 
 publication which he hoped would ruin the Bible Union. There 
 never was a time when he could draw the bow of Ulysses, and 
 his infirmities of mind, body, and temper now place it beyond 
 his reach. The Bible Union has enough holiness, integrity, 
 and fidelity in every duty to God and man, to stand without 
 injury a great many such blasts as Dr. Judd blows upon Dr. 
 Maday's slogan. _ w g^C*^ 
 
 That Dr. Judd is the chief machinator of all this war upon 
 the Bible Union is abundantly evident to any one acquainted 
 with him, and in him the whole animus is for revengeful pur- 
 poses. The peculiarities of the style of the Maclay document 
 are Dr. Judd's, and belong to no one else known to us ; the 
 reckless statement of assumed facts, the insinuation of a false 
 statement that cannot be safely stated openly, and the identity 
 ot mistakes in the Maclay document and in Dr. Judd's speeches 
 before the Bible Union, point to him indubitably as the 
 author. 
 
 We had written thus far when we received the response of 
 the officers of the Bible Union to the Maclay document. We 
 shall partially avail ourselves of its developments, in addition 
 to our own matter. 
 
 In October, 1855, Dr. Judd was removed from the Com- 
 mittee on Versions, that committee on which is expended so 
 much venom in the Maclay pamphlet. He was appointed be- 
 fore he became a reviser, and he never felt delicacy enough to 
 resign after he was appointed upon that tribunal. The other 
 members of the committee felt themselves hampered by the 
 presence of a reviser, and complained of it. There was no 
 reason why, of all other revisers, he alone should be on the 
 
 13 
 
194 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 Committee on Versions. From the moment of that removal. 
 Dr. Judd became incensed against all who were engaged in 
 his dismission from that committee and against all who ap- 
 proved it, declaring that he would not be put on a level with 
 the other revisers. He suddenly seemed to be converted to 
 Dr. Maclay's notions on the 11th verse of the 3d chapter of 
 Matthew, and thus pleased the old gentleman's vanity. Deacon 
 Colgate was induced to present a resolution of inquiry as to 
 the economical working of the Union and on this committee 
 were placed Dr. Maclay, Dr. Judd, Dr. Judd's brother-in-law, 
 and seven other members of the Bible Union, representatives 
 of all the denominations in the Board. From January down 
 to June Dr. Judd kept this committee examining into every 
 conceivable charge he could invent. His target for perpetual 
 crimination was the secretary, just as that functionary is the 
 target of the pamphlet, and, according to the testimony of all 
 other men who know him, no purer man lives upon the earth. 
 Even in the midst of his schemes to ruin the Kev. W. H. Wyckoff, 
 Dr. Judd felt himself compelled in one of his speeches before 
 the committee, to bear testimony to the object of his bitter 
 persecution, in the following terms : 
 
 "I do not wish to speak disrespectfully of the secretary. I 
 regard brother Wyckoff with feelings of great personal kind- 
 ness. He is in my view the very best secretary in this coun- 
 try. I know of no one who is better qualified for the position 
 -which he holds. This is more than I am accustomed to speak 
 in commendation of others ; and I only do so now, to meet the 
 suggestions that have gone abroad, that I am personally hostile 
 to the secretary. My estimate of his personal worth, talentf, 
 and ability is equal to that of any of the brethren here pres- 
 ent." 
 
 Old Father Maclay is made to say that the venerable Deacon 
 Colgate sympathised in his views of the condition of the Bible 
 Union, when he offered the resolution for the creation of thr 
 committee of inquiry. But mark the difference between the 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 195 
 
 two men ; the inquiry satisfied LeacOn Colgate of the folly of 
 the whole business, and his name appears to the report of the 
 committee, which pronounced judgment against each and every 
 charge made by Drs. Judd and Maclay. 
 
 Almost the entire mass of the stuff concocted into a pamphlet 
 for Dr. Maclay's signature was delivered in speeches made by 
 Dr. Judd before the committee of inquiry. His speeches oc- 
 cupied twenty-seven hours of the time of the committee, and 
 no public body hi this country ever had a more respectable or- 
 ganization for inquiry. Those who love honesty better than 
 groundless denunciations, may feel gratified in seeing the 
 truths which defeated Dr. Judd before this respectable com- 
 mittee. We present a few specimens of the charges which 
 Dr. Judd made before the committee, and with which Dr. Ma- 
 clay's pamphlet is embellished. We present them with their 
 refutation : 
 
 ALLEGATIONS AGAINST OFFICERS OF THE UNION. 
 
 " 1. That the secretary published the Monthly Reporter 
 without authority. 
 
 The authority of the Board and the special authority of the 
 Union in the case were proved from the documents. 
 
 2. That the secretaiy and assistant treasurer published the 
 Quarterly without authority. 
 
 The authority both of the Board and Union was proved from 
 the documents. 
 
 3. That the Monthly was a heavy pecuniary loss to the 
 Union, amounting to hundreds of dollars every month. 
 
 It was proved by the written testimony of the printers, the 
 binder, the purchaser of paper, the mailer, the assistant treas- 
 urer who keeps the accounts, and the statements of the accounts 
 drawn from the books, that, aside from the stereotype plates 
 of revision which had to be made for other purposes, the pub- 
 lication after deducting all expenses yields us a monthly profit 
 while it is doing immense good. 
 
196 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 4. That 1500 copies of the Monthly were sent each month 
 to the Bible Revision Association, and no compensation was 
 received for them. 
 
 It was proved that they were uniformly paid for in cash. 
 
 5. That certificates were given to the Bible Revision Asso- 
 ciation for life membership without payment or money. 
 
 It was proved that in each case the money for this purpose 
 was first received by our treasurer. 
 
 6. That the officers freely advertised the Monthly Reporter 
 in the New York Tribune, the Times, and other papers with- 
 out authority. 
 
 The economy of such advertising was clearly shown, and the 
 authority for it proved from resolutions of the Board. 
 
 7. That the Secretary had in December, 1854, interfered to 
 prevent the payment of certain moneys to Dr. Judd. 
 
 It was admitted that Dr. Cone, and the Secretary, advised 
 that no money be paid to Dr. Judd without the presentation 
 of his bills for the services rendered. 
 
 8. That the plates of Job, besides those used in the Month- 
 ly, cost the Union "thousands upon thousands of dollars." 
 
 Their whole cost when completed was proved from the bills 
 to be $294 12. 
 
 9. That these had been made without authority. 
 
 It was proved to have been the joint act of the officers during 
 Dr. Cone's life (the President, Secretary, and Assistant Treas- 
 urer), and to have been in full accordance with the contract 
 made by the Board, and a great saving of expense to the Union. 
 
 10. That it was wrong to send the Quarterly to so many 
 persons. 
 
 It was proved that they were entitled to it as life members 
 or subscribers for life membership, and that its circulation 
 among them did great good. 
 
 11. That the Secretaiy had changed the policy of the Union 
 by not allowing every revision to be printed and circulated 
 unions: scholars. 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES, 107 
 
 It was proved that the Secretary had no power or authority 
 in the matter. That the Board had established the rule gov- 
 erning the case, and the Union had approved it unanimously, 
 and that the Secretary had only carried out instructions as in 
 duty bound." 
 
 It can scarcely be necessary for us to go into a minute 
 examination of all the criminations made by the pamphlet 
 against the Bible Union, A general review of them will be 
 sufficient, for upon all legal principles, inasmuch as we have 
 positively proved the most scandalous fabrications upon the 
 author of the pamphlet in relation to the New York Chronicle 
 and Dr. Maclay's son, and in the specimens above, all the rest 
 of this testifier's statement may be safely set down as worth- 
 less. From that principle there is no chance of retreat. 
 
 The four clergymen loomed out upon the honesty of Wm. 
 II. WyckofT in urging Father Maclay to go out upon a collect- 
 ing tour. They fully endorsed the mendacious pamphlet in 
 that particular, but knew very little of what they were saying. 
 The Secretary urged the old gentleman to go, simply because 
 he had claimed the privilege of doing so in the event of being 
 elected President, and when the Secretary was urging him to 
 go out upon a collecting tour, Dr. Maclay was drawing his 
 salary as a collecting agent of the Bible Union. And for this 
 discharge of a simple duty, the Secretary is abused by the 
 pamphlet, and the abuse is endorsed by the four clergymen, as 
 though he were one of the worst of human beings. Sectarian 
 members of a church of God said of Jesus, the Christ, that " lie 
 was a Samaritan and had a devil," and their brother sectarians 
 in Christendom are not behind them in then' love of traducing 
 virtue and merit. What reason had these four clergymen for 
 calling in question the purity of Wm. H. WyckofFs character ? 
 They must answer, none. 
 ff Upon the conduct of the pampleteer in his infamous re- 
 ference to the work of the reviser of John's testimony, it is 
 scarcely possible to be too severe. Dr. Maclay's learning lias 
 
198 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 long been in ruins, and his critical powers are very feeble, but !\ 
 Dr. Judd had been a reviser and a member Of the Committee i 
 on Versions, and well knew the baseness of this conduct in \) 
 publishing as Bible Union revisions, specimens which never M 
 had been received by the Bible Uniomjwhich had none of the 
 notes of the reviser required by the i3ible Union, upon which 
 it had not acted in any way, and which had not been publish- 
 ed by it. But in order to place the four clergymen and the 
 pamphleteer in a proper position before the public, we entreat 
 the reader to compare the specimens of revision, republished 
 derisively by the four clergymen, with the authorized version 
 and he will be able to see that in nearly all the specimens the 
 ideas conveyed are identical. The four clergymen could not 
 tell what there is objectionable in them if they were to try. 
 If they are " shocking" in the revised text, are they not so in 
 the authorized version ? In some of the passages the grossest 
 fraud is practiced upon the Reviser of John, for we have his 
 revision before us, printed long before the pamphlet, and he 
 has made no such revision of them as Dr. Maclay is made to 
 allege. Upon this great outrage, the Bible Union thus 
 speaks : 
 
 " The quotations which are professedly made from the work 
 of a reviser, are sufficiently answered by the fact stated by Dr. 
 Maclay, that the work has not been published, and, therefore, 
 the Bible Union is in no way responsible for them. It may 
 be added that they do great injustice to the reviser, having 
 been taken from a copy which was subsequently revised and 
 materially altered. 
 
 "But the propriety, the magnanimity, the justice of taking 
 extracts from the work of a reviser without his permission and 
 publishing them to the w T orld to condemn him before he has 
 been heard, no man of principle will attempt to sustain. 
 
 4 'To go behind the Bible Union and select obnoxious pas- 
 sages from its unpublished revisions, and to make these public 
 tor the purpose of injuring its reputation — to go between the 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 190 
 
 reviser and his work, and before it has received his corrections 
 so as to be ready for the public eye, to rudely separate his in- 
 cipient and undecided changes from the reasons by which, 
 according to the rules of the Union, he would accompany 
 them, and thus to endeavor to prejudice the public mind, in 
 advance, against all the publications of the Union, is a course 
 of proceeding that can not be justified on any pretense. No one 
 has ever before attempted such liberties with a reviser of the 
 Bible Union, and, for the sake of Christian propriety and 
 gentlemanly courtesy, we hope and pray that it may never be 
 repeated. 
 
 "The ungenerous imputation — 'these are by no means the 
 most objectionable renderings,' might readily be disposed of 
 by arguments. But we think it proper to say, in addition, 
 that the whole spirit of the pamphlet is so obviously hostile to 
 the Bible Union, that if any thing worse could have been dis- 
 covered, it no doubt would have been published." 
 
 The old gentleman is made to say, also: "In this and other 
 books are some ['objectionable renderings'] which I would 
 not disclose to the public eye." That looks like Dr. Judd all 
 over. The pamphleteer knows that there is not a shade even 
 of truth in this insinuated falsehood, but he desires the public 
 to see what he cannot shoio. Dr. Judd himself could see noth- 
 ing of the kind himself until he was degraded from a position 
 he was unworthy to hold among the revisers of the Bible Union. 
 Neither Dr. Judd nor any one else can show one rendering 
 accepted by the Bible Union that is unfit for the public eye. 
 
 The four clergymen endorse the following : "I found that, in 
 addition to the shocking translations already referred to, the 
 misguided hand of the reviser had been rashly laid upon the 
 original text.'''' Now what is the original text? Where is it? 
 Who has seen it? We proved in the presence of the four clergy- 
 men the grossest corruption in the Greek textus reeqrfus, and 
 the four clergymen did not dare to call in question anv one 
 statement that we made. They were utterly unable to moot 
 
200 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 any one point. And we now say, fearless of confutation, that 
 the condition of the Greek textus receptus is as disgraceful to 
 the scholarship of this age, as the state of the English version 
 is to the biblical science of the times ; and in the vast number 
 of "shocking translations " we have summoned from that, in its 
 gross absurdities and glaring contradictions, the four clergymen 
 have not been able to find a single place on which to make a de- 
 fense. If they will now undertake to defend either the received 
 Greek text or the authorized version against the palpable proofs 
 we have brought against both, we will keep our book open 
 one week longer for them. This might enable them to enlighten 
 the public mind and improve the public heart, much more than 
 their scandalous attacks upon the characters of the officers of 
 the Bible Union, who possess as good a reputation as they do, 
 as good as we admit that is. We can produce more than five 
 hundred passages from the authorized version, not one of which 
 can be defended in any way by the four clergymen. When 
 they can meet this charge they may then begin to talk about 
 "the shocking translations" of the Bible Union, which they 
 do not even pretend they have seen ! Now, gentlemen, if you 
 desire space in our book, that you can fill with honor to your- 
 selves and profit to your readers, take up this proposition. 
 But look at these facts : the pamphleteer makes Dr. Maclay 
 say that the revisers are incompetent. When Protestants 
 fight Roman Catholics they call this Jesuitism, and it certainly 
 contains all the elements of that species of wickedness. The 
 old man is made to say, that he could no longer assure the 
 people that the Bible Union had competent scholars in its 
 employment. Now, if this is true, the old man and his friend 
 Dr. Judd have been bearing false testimony for years. Only 
 two years since, Dr. Judd assured the meeting of the Revision 
 Association at Nashville, of the fullness and competency of the 
 tribunal of revision, as may be seen in a subsequent part of 
 this article. The incompetency never was discovered until 
 Dr. Judd was dismissed. Since Dr. Judd made that Report 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 201 
 
 to the Nashville meeting in 1854 there has been but little 
 change made in the Board of revisers, save the addition of a 
 few names, the competency of which even Dr. Judd would not 
 have the face to challenge. If the Bible Union has not com- 
 petent scholars, it is because the highest authorities among the 
 Presbyterians and Episcopalians deceived us in the testimony 
 which they gave us in behalf of those scholars we employed 
 in their ranks. The Bible Union has published a number of 
 important specimens of revisions, such as the minor Epistles, 
 the Book of Revelations, the two Letters to the Thessalonians, 
 and the Book of Job. Upon these the best scholars in Europe 
 and America have spoken in terms of the highest admiration. 
 Presbyterians, Methodists, and Episcopalians have alike borne 
 testimony to the excellence of every revision published by the 
 Bible Union. Where is the justice or decency in assailing 
 what the Bible Union has not yet accepted or published ? And 
 what fairness is there in insinuating incompetency, when Dr. 
 Judd could refer to no reviser by name, in the employment of 
 the Bible Union, that could not stand every test of scholarship 
 that he can, and the pamphlet makes Dr. Maclay raise him to 
 the highest pinnacle? It is disgraceful that men can descend 
 to such depths of wrong as these. If the Bible Union's 
 Board of Revisers are incompetent, it is because neither Europe 
 nor America can furnish competent men. The world ascribes 
 to some of the men in that tribunal the first rank in scholarship, 
 and no man can successfully challenge that fact. As the four 
 clergymen endorsed Dr. Judd, they are of course now prepared 
 to settle. Their bill has gone to protest and they must now 
 settle their draft or lose credit. 
 
 The four clergymen quoted the paltry remarks of the pam- 
 phlet about the salary of Dr. Conant. We rejoice that wc 
 belong to a society that honors scholarship with liberal remu- 
 neration ; and if Dr. Conant were receiving five times the 
 amount he receives from the Bible Union, it would be no more 
 than he deserves. Dr. Maclay thought thus of Dr. Conant 
 
202 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 until he was hounded on after that great luminary of learning. 
 On the 7th of March, 1856, Dr. Maclay, while President of 
 the Bible Union, wrote to Dr. Conant that his desire was "to 
 increase his salary to $3000 per annum, and to pay any as- 
 sistant he might choose, provided Dr. Maclay's plan of revi- 
 sion could be carried out." And, reader, what do you think 
 that plan was? — To dismiss all the scholars employed by the 
 Bible Union, and employ Dr. Judd and an assistant to revise 
 the New Testament ! When the reader comes to learn that 
 Dr. Judd's revision of three chapters of Matthew's Gospel 
 has cost him nearly three years' labor, and that he is the only 
 one upon whom any one can say the money of the Bible Union 
 has been wasted, the richness of Dr. Maclay's ideas of revision 
 will be palpable. 
 
 But the averment which the pamphlet makes for Dr. Maclay 
 about Dr. Conant's salary, is falsely stated. His salary is 
 $1500, and $500 additional are allowed him for an amanuen- 
 sis. Dr. Conant employs his wife in that capacity. She is 
 the author of the finest history of early translations of the 
 English Bible that has ever been written. She is also the 
 translator of several of Neander's works, and reads and writes 
 eight or ten languages, including the oriental biblical tongues. 
 Under what other circumstances could the Bible Union enjoy 
 the use of such learning and ability for the paltry sum of 
 82000? The cheeks of the pamphleteer and of the four cler- 
 . gymen should tingle whenever they think of their complicity 
 in the wrong; done to Dr. Conant. 
 
 We shall not dwell on Dr. Maclay's course in failing to ex- 
 ercise his influence in correcting the evils which he imagined 
 in the Bible Union, nor upon the demonstrative proofs of Dr. 
 Judd's authorship of his pamphlet, further than to say, that 
 although Dr. Maclay has been made to say that whatever his 
 name is signed to is his own, yet, as we know that Dr. Judd 
 lias often written articles which appeared before the public as 
 Dr. Maclay's, and also know that the late John L. Waller 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 203 
 
 wrote articles which appeared in publication with A. Maclay's 
 name appended to them, we understand the full merit of the 
 claim that what he signs his name to is his own. Among the 
 reasons for Dr. Maclay's resignation, the pamphlet makes 
 him give Dr. Judd's dismission from the Board of revisers, 
 The resignation was written on the 13th of May, and Dr. 
 Judd's dismission took place on the 1st of June. 
 
 On the subject of the forty revisers, Dr. Maclay is made to 
 say that he found there were only twenty-three or four. Yet 
 he published in Great Britain the following: "Distinguished 
 scholars are employed by the American Bible Union in the 
 revision of the common version. Written contracts have been 
 made with more than twenty scholars ; and many of these, in 
 compliance with the stipulations, have made engagements with 
 others to work with them ; so that the number of scholars ac- 
 tually engaged in the service of the Union does not vary far 
 from forty." Alas for the old man's memory! And Dr. 
 Judd, the author of this attack upon the Bible Union, as 
 chairman hi a committee in a Kevision Association meeting at 
 Nashville, April 7th, 1854, reported: " Some forty or fifty 
 scholars, connected with several evangelical denominations, 
 have been employed in this country and in Europe, either 
 wholly or in part." Dr Judd was a member of the Commit- 
 tee on Versions when he made this report ; and he must have 
 then borne false testimony, or he is doing it now, if, as we 
 have abundant reason for thinking, he prepared this charge for 
 Dr. Maclay, and he can take his choice of the two horns ot 
 the dilemma. / Out of his own mouth we convict him of at- 
 tempting to destroy the Bible Union by the most flagitious 
 conduct ; and the four clergymen endorse the work ! 
 
 The pamphlet makes Dr. Maclay mourn over the change in 
 the Committee on Versions; and yet the only mournful change 
 was the removal of Dr. Judd from it — one of the most right • 
 eous of the acts of the Bible Union. 
 
 The general plan of the Bible Union has commanded the con- 
 
204 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 fidence of the myriads of friends of revision. It was projected 
 by Dr. Cone, and deserves the admiration of every honest 
 mind. Soon after Dr. Maclay's electidh, it was discovered 
 that he had an intense dislike for the memory of Dr. Cone ; 
 and his friend Dr. Judd advised that the name should not be 
 mentioned in his presence. This envious dislike of Dr. Cone 
 is the reason for the old gentleman's desire to revolutionize the 
 Bible Union, which he hoped to accomplish when he stepped 
 into Dr. Cone's place ; and when he found that he could not 
 do that, he hoped to blow it into ruins. 
 
 The attacks made by the pamphlet on the Committee on 
 Versions have already been accounted for. That committee 
 has no such powers, claims no such privileges, and can exercise 
 no such authority, as the pamphlet falsely alleges it claims. 
 One answer to all the allegations about the committee is suf- 
 ficient : While Dr. Judd was permitted to he on it, he never 
 uttered a complaint against it ; its horrible character revealed 
 itself only after Dr. Judd's removal from it. It deserves and 
 should command the confidence of all friends of a pure version 
 of the Holy Oracles. The one-man power ascribed to W. H. 
 WyckofT is a fabrication arising from Dr. Judd's intense 
 dislike for that honest, faithful, and meritorious officer. l 
 
 On the financial matters of the Bible Union, the following 
 facts are a sufficient answer to the Maclay pamphlet. 
 
 " In respect to the financial department of the Union, the 
 following facts will entirely remove the injurious impression 
 sought to be made by the pamphlet : 
 
 a 1. The Corresponding Secretary has no control over the 
 treasury. 
 
 " 2. He seldom receives any money, except what comes in 
 letters addressed to him ; and all such money, with the letters, 
 he immediately passes to the Assistant Treasurer. 
 
 " 3. Money can not be taken from the treasury except by 
 the Treasurer's check; and this is never given except upon 
 the written warrant of the Assistant Treasurer. 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES. 205 
 
 u 4. The warrants are made out in accordance with the acts 
 of the Board, which are certified to the Treasurer by the 
 minutes of the Board. 
 
 "5. In no instance has the Corresponding Secretary been 
 known to interfere with the treasury department, or to claim 
 or to exercise control over it." 
 
 On account of the length of this communication, we are 
 compelled to omit a notice of some matters connected with the 
 pamphlet, especially upon the causes of Dr. Judd's dismission 
 from the service of the Bible Union ; but we shall supply the 
 omissions in the book edition of this article.* The four cler- 
 gymen have also endorsed the statements of the Maclay pam- 
 phlet which falsely allege that the Bible Union has squandered 
 the funds entrusted to it. In return for this courtesy, we may, 
 in the book edition, look into a little piece of machinery in 
 which some of these clergymen officiate as leading spirits ; and 
 if they can show as satisfactory documents as the Bible Union, 
 they will deserve praise. 
 
 But we turn to the four clergymen for a different item now in 
 the account between us. You, gentlemen, have attempted to 
 arrest an enterprise which enjoys the approbation of Heaven, it' 
 any thing on earth does. You have never established one fact 
 against the Bible Union, nor have you found it possible, as 
 scholars, to defend King James's version, nor can any man do 
 it. We have shown that it was made from an imperfect and 
 corrupted Latin text; that it has many omissions from it of 
 the things of the Holy Spirit, and many interpolations of 
 matter that the Holy Spirit never dictated. It has numerous 
 contradictions which the genuine text does not countenance. 
 And you, gentlemen, are engaged in an effort to palm these 
 off upon the community as the Word of God. Your own 
 brethren of the British and Foreign Bible Society denounce 
 those numberless errors ; and you can not, in the presence of 
 
 ' See page 4 ,»09. 
 
206 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 scholars, nor before an intelligent people, make any defense of 
 that version. Instead of such a defense as would command 
 the approbation of scholars, win the love of the people, and be 
 in unison with the spirit of Christ, you devote your time, 
 learning, and talents to the abuse, villification, and misrepre- 
 sentation of all who are honestly engaged in an effort to 
 amend the great sin, the crying evil of the times — the want of 
 a pure version of the Word of God. This may do for those 
 most miserable paltry things, the partizan religious presses ; it 
 is their vocation ; and nothing good, noble, or magnanimous, 
 need be looked for from them. And now, gentlemen of the 
 clergy, look your language full in the face, ponder upon it in 
 your hours of repose, think of it in your pulpits, meditate 
 upon it in auditing your accounts as stewards, for you have to 
 undergo that auditing. Because Drs. Maclay and Judd have 
 accused the Bible Union of mismanagement and the employ- 
 ment of incompetent revisers, you say: 
 
 "We think the same public will say, as they come to un- 
 derstand it all, that such a scheme of tampering with the Word 
 of God, and abusing the credulity of His people, richly enti- 
 tles itself to derision and contempt." 
 
 Look at your words calmly and soberly. They are the very 
 impertinence and insolence of sectarianism directed against the 
 aims, purposes, motives, and acts of thousands of people at 
 least equal to you in learning, in piety, in holiness, in all good 
 deeds, in all that ennobles humanity and gives dignity to man, 
 and in the estimation of the communities in which they dwell. 
 And about such people, in the presence of an intelligent, sound, 
 inquiring public sentiment, you dared, in clerical arrogance, to 
 utter such language. 
 
 But if, as you say, mismanagement by the overseers of 
 revision and incompetency of some of its revisers mark "such 
 a scheme of tampering with the Word of God, and abusing 
 the credulity of His (?) people, which richly entitles itself to 
 derision and contempt," does not your logic show you that you 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 207 
 
 and your cause are down beyond redemption ? It is notorious 
 to you, gentlemen, that the revisers of King James's version 
 were exceedingly incompetent , they made versions of multi- 
 tudes of passages of the Holy Oracles which no scholarship can 
 tolerate or excuse. You, have repeatedly admitted the incom- 
 petency of King James's revisers by acknowledging the defects 
 of the version. Some of them were preachers of what you 
 denounce as the leading doctrines of Rome. So much for the 
 revisers. 
 
 Bancroft, that abandoned wretch, and King James, were 
 the overseers and managers of the revisers, and King Jame? 
 was the final reviser of the authorized version. He is well 
 known as one of the most profane wretches of his age, "the 
 most greedy, blood-thirsty, and contemptible of all recorded 
 kings." He was a combination of the tiger, the leech, and 
 the monkey — at once monster and mountebank. But all ideas 
 formed of him by those who have never read Mr. Pitcainrs 
 researches among the law records of Scotland, are milk and 
 water compared with those developments. We present a few 
 examples of the pastimes of this h.olyfi?ial reviser of the book 
 which the four clergymen call the word of God. A Mr. 
 Tennant dropped two "pasquils" or notes on a church floor. 
 which reflected on his gracious majesty. The sentence cf 
 this "reviser" was, that Francis Tennant should have his 
 tongue cut out by the root, and then taken to the gallows and 
 hanged "till he be dead," and all his goods were escheated to 
 the Crown. 
 
 A constable, in distraining some poor man for debt, seized a 
 miserable daub of a painting, purporting to be a " portraiture " 
 of his gracious majesty. On the day of sale, wishing to 
 the "portraiture" where it could be seen by the bidder-. I 
 was about to drive a nail in a beam to hang the portrait on, 
 but a friend warned him, and he did not do it. But the matt<. c 
 came to the "reviser's" ears — the intention was enough. He 
 was tried and found guilty of the intention, and the I" 
 
208 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 sentence was, that he should be hanged till he was dead, on 
 the beam where he intended to hang the "portraiture," and all 
 his goods were escheated to the Crown. 
 
 A Polish gentleman visited Scotland, and was much derided 
 and abused by the people. When he got back home he wrote 
 a book, which was not very complimentary to the Scotch. 
 James read it, sent an embassador to Poland, demanded the 
 author, obtained him, and hung him. 
 
 A poor half-witted clergyman from Scotland went to Lon- 
 don, affixed a "thesis" to St. Mary's door, setting forth that 
 all Scotchmen, except his gracious majesty and his son, should 
 be driven from England. It was carried to James, and he 
 ordered that the writer's right hand should be struck off, and 
 then his head, and his goods were escheated to the Crown. 
 
 Such is a part of the character of the manager, overseer, and 
 final reviser of that immaculate version, over which the five 
 clergymen have wasted so much ink. That cold, narrow, fero- 
 cious, tyrannical, and depraved mind, filled to overflowing 
 with the idea that James was King by right divine, presided 
 over the- authorized version from its inception until its publica- 
 tion by royal authority ; and those royal hands, dripping with 
 the blood of hundreds of innocent human beings, gave the final 
 touches to this immaculate version, as the four clergymen con- 
 sider it. And now, gentlemen, take your own pill — the re- 
 visers of your version were so incompetent that you cannot 
 defend them, and you acknowledge their incompetency; the 
 overseer and manager of the work, and its final reviser, was a 
 meaner tyrant than Caligula or Nero ; he was one of the most 
 ferocious and selfish wretches that ever disgraced the human 
 race $ he was steeped in all conceivable wickedness ; and, ac- 
 cording to the logic you impertinently framed for the work of 
 the Bible Union, the authorized version, made by such charac- 
 ters as we have drawn from the records of history, betrays the 
 existence of " such a scheme of tampering with the Word of 
 God, and abusing the credulity of his people, as richly en- 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 209 
 
 titles itself to derision and contempt." Gentlemen of the clergy, 
 shall a waiting public have the honor and pleasure of hear- 
 ing from you again — on the machinery of making versions ? 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 T. S. Bell. 
 Bible Revision Rooms, July 29, 1856. 
 
 NOTE REFERRED TO ON PAGE 205. 
 
 Father Maclay is made to say : that Dr. Judd was induced by Dr. 
 Cone, Dr Armitage, and Rev. Mr. Wyckoff to relinquish his post as an 
 editor, and become a reviser. It would be difficult to prove that there is 
 any accuracy in this statement. And the old gentleman is made to as- 
 sume, that the contract for revising Matthew's gospel was for any length, 
 of time that Dr. Judd might choose to loiter over it. 
 
 But this statement is far from being accurate, as the following official 
 history of these special matters will show : 
 
 At a meeting of the Board, held May 3d, 1854, the Committee reported, and 
 upon their recommendation it was 
 
 Resolved, That we authorize the Committee on Versions to make an arrangement 
 with Rev. O B. Judd, LL. D., to devote his time and attention exclusively to the 
 business of revision, and the passing of parts through the press as they shall 
 severally be prepared, at a salary not to exceed $15'.)U per annum. 
 
 In accordance with the authority given in the above resolution by the Board, 
 the Committee on Versions, on the 24th of May, 1854, made an arrangement with 
 him, by the adoption of the following: 
 
 Resolved, That we hereby agree with Bro. Judd (wlw is pi cseni, and unites in 
 the agreement J that he be, and he is hereby, engaged in the service of the Biblo 
 Union, for one year, from and after the first of June next, in accordance with the 
 resolution upon the subject, adopted by the Board at its last meeting. 
 
 The following report made by the Committee on Versions to tho Board, June, 
 1856, presents the facts of the case. 
 
 We deeply regret that we arc compelled, by the statements of this pamphlet, to 
 publish such facts in vindication of the Bible Union ; but Drs. Maclay and Judd 
 force upon us this painful necessity by their defective and erroneous representation 
 of the case : 
 
 REPORT ON THE DISMISSAL OF DR. JUDD AS A REVISER. 
 
 The Sub-Committee that was introduced to prepare a history of the connection 
 of Brother Judd with the Bible Union, as one of its Revisers, and to givo the 
 
 14 
 
210 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 reasons which influenced the Committee to notify him that their contract with him 
 was no longer in force, present the following as their report: 
 
 Your Committee feel that a clear view of all the facts that have a bearing on 
 the relation Dr. Judd sustains to the Bible Union, as one of their revisers, is ne- 
 cessary to prepare us to act in the case before us. They, therefore, submit the 
 following statement : 
 
 On the 29th of October, 1852, Eev. O. B. Judd expressed his willingness, in 
 writing, to revise the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, in connection with Eev. Dr. 
 
 , for the sum of one thousand dollars for each Gospel, for the services of 
 
 both revisers. 
 
 On the 19th of November, 1852, he specified in writing, one thousand dollars a* 
 compensation for the revision of the Gospel of Matthew, the work to be dnne by 
 himself. 
 
 On the 1st day of December, 1852, the Gospel of Matthew was assigned to him 
 by the Board to " revise at a compensation of one thousand dollars." 
 
 Under the above contract, he was paid : 
 
 February 10, 1853 $100 
 
 April 5 150 
 
 August 1 100 
 
 Total ......$350 
 
 On the 3d of May, 1854, the Board authorized the Committee on Versions " to make 
 arrangements with Eev. O. B. Judd to devote his time and attention exclusively 
 to the business of revision and the passing of the parts through the press, as they 
 shall severally be prepared, at a salary not to exceed $1500 per annum." 
 
 On the 24th of May, 1854, the Committee on Versions availed themselves of the 
 discretion given to them, and Dr. Judd being present, they engaged him " in the 
 service of the Bible Union, for one year from and after the 1st of June next (June 
 1, 1854), in accordance with the resolution upon the subject adopted by the Board 
 at its last meeting." 
 
 On the 3d of June, 1854, he drew $125 in advance on this salary, and has regu- 
 larly drawn his salary since ; making, in all, the sum of three thousand dollars 
 drawn on this salary. 
 
 At Dr. Judd*s request, Mr. was employed to aid him in the revision of 
 
 Matthew; and from January 1st, 1854 till August 1st, 1854, seven months, Mr. 
 labored upon that Gospel, at the cost of the Bible Union of $583 33. 
 
 The aggregate of moneys thus paid to Dr. Judd, and for his aid in the revision 
 of Matthew, is $3983 33. 
 
 The reader will observe that this sum has been drawn from the Treas- 
 ury of the Bible Union for three chapters of Matthew, by a gentleman 
 who originally contracted to revise the entire twenty-eight chapters for 
 one thousand dollars. And in one breath Father Maclay is made to com- 
 plain of the Bible Union for squandering the money entrusted to it, and 
 in another breath he is made to mourn lugubriously because the Bible 
 Union would not squander its funds on Dr. Judd ! Assuredly the legs of 
 the lame are never equal. Dr. Maclay is made to forget the laws of 
 Christianity, so far as to intimate a suit-at-law on the bond. But the 
 lime lias past for forcing money again from the pockets of friends of the 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES 21.1 
 
 Bible Union by threats of this kind. If Dr. Judd feels like appealing to 
 Caesar, he will be met at Caesar's tribunal in this second effort. But again, 
 respecting this $3983 33, the official report says : 
 
 For this sum the Board has received from Brother Judd the first three chapters 
 of Matthew revised, and nothing more These were printed in September, 1855. 
 
 On the 5th of February. 1856, the Committee on Versions appointed Brethren 
 1 aker and Sarles o sub -committee, to ascertain the condition of the work of each 
 Reviser laboring in the rooms of the Bible Union, and the prospect of the com- 
 pletion of each of their revisions. The committee addressed a copy of the same to 
 each of the revisers, requesting information upon these points. The others an- 
 swered promptly and satisfactorily, but Brother Judd made no reply. 
 
 After waiting several weeks, the sub-committee addressed a second note to him, 
 repeating the request. 
 
 To this note the sub-committee received replies, dated March 29th, 1856. In 
 these replies to Brethren Baker and Sarles, he communicated no information (ex- 
 cept what was already in the possession of the Committee) in regard to the condi- 
 tion of his work and the prospect of its completion, but he very unnecessarily 
 occupied his own time, and the attention of the Committee, with uncalled for com - 
 parisons and calculations about the work of other revisers. In these comparisons 
 and calculations, Dr. Judd seemed to take it for granted, that he would be justified 
 m spending as much time on a narrative as upon an epistle of the same length ; 
 „ as much time on one book as upon several books of the same number of pages, 
 and as much time upon one author as upon six, provided the number of pages is 
 the same. The fallacy of those comparisons was so evident that the Committee 
 considered that it would be a waste of time to attempt a formal refutation; but 
 they could not fail to be struck with the inference that Dr. Judd seemed to wish 
 us tc draw from his calculations., viz., that if he spend some years longer upon the 
 revisions of Matthew, the Board will have no reason to complain. 
 
 The Committee on Versions instructed the sub-committee, on the 28th of April, 
 1856, to inform Brother Judd that his reply was not satisfactory, and to request 
 distinct information upon the condition of his revision and the prospect as to its 
 completion. His second letter was as unsatisfactory as the first. 
 
 From these letters received from Brother Judd, it is evident that he does not 
 design to give the committee any information about the probable time which he 
 yet expects to occupy, before handing in his revision of Matthew. 
 
 On the 8th of May, J 856, the Chairman of the Committee on Versions received 
 the following note from the Assistant Treasurer : 
 
 American Bible Union Rooms, ? 
 No 350 Broome street, New York, May 18, 1856. S 
 Rev. Samuel Baker, D,D., 
 
 Chairman of the Committee on Versions — American Bible Union. 
 Dear Brother: — Our Treasurer is now absent from the city, and will not 
 probably return before the close of the ensuing month. 
 
 I notice at the last Board meeting, that the Committee of which you are Chair- 
 man expressed dissatisfaction with the progress, etc , of the reviser of Matthew. 
 As compensation in this case, under the authority given by the Board, requires the 
 approval of the Version Committee, will you have the goodness to communicate 
 io mo my proper course of action in the matter. 
 
 Very truly yours, C. A. BUCKBEE, Assistant Treasurer. 
 
212 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 Under these circumstances the Committco are compelled to investigate the sub- 
 ject, and to express their views to the Board. 
 
 As Brother Judd refuses to give any information about the probable time of 
 completing the work assigned him, the Committee are obliged to deduce that in- 
 formation, to the best of their ability, from the circumstances that have character- 
 ized his proceedings in revision, from the commencement of his work under a 
 salary up to the present date. On this subject, wo call attention to the following 
 facts : 
 
 1. Notwithstanding the express stipulation of the Board, that he should " devote 
 his time and attention exclusively to the work of revision and the passing of the 
 parts through the press, as (hey shall severally be prepared,"' he did from the 1st 
 of June, 1854 to the 1st of January, 1855, — seven months of the time in which 
 he drew his full salary as a reviser — edit and publish the New York Chronicle, 
 and keep its pecuniary accounts. 
 
 2. During the last six months, Brother Judd is known to have occupied a 
 largo portion of his time and attention in other investigations than those con- 
 nected with the revision of Matthew, and to have had his mind deeply absorbed 
 and excited on other subjects, as has been clearly manifested at the meetings of 
 the Committee of Inquiry, and at the meetings of our Board. Your Committco 
 consider it absolutely impossible for a man Avho suffers so much of his time to be 
 thus employed, and his mind to be so much excited and absorbed in other matters, 
 to " devote his time and attention exclusively to the work of revision." 
 
 3. Your Committee are painfully impressed with the conviction that Dr. Judd, 
 by Buffering his mind to be so much excited and absorbed in other matters, in a 
 great, measure unfits himself for his work as a reviser. The circular which he 
 saw fit to publish, calling in question the acts of the Board and of the Com- 
 mittee on Versions, and which he has circulated among friends and foes, and the 
 spirit exhibited in his correspondence, as in the letters before us, evince his con- 
 dition of mind, and show the want of that calm composure which characterizes 
 a mind all of whose powers are acting in sweet harmony under the influence of 
 the Divine Spirit. We remind our revisers, in the action of our Board, of their 
 need of "the sanctifying presence and power of the Holy Spirit," and of their 
 duty to pray for the "promised indwelling and guidance of the Holy Spirit;" but 
 that heavenly guest will not take up its abode in a mind disturbed in its depth by 
 its indignant feelings, or thrown out of its composure by the tumult of inward 
 agitation. The business of revision requires entire abstraction from other pursuits, 
 
 -and the quiet and calm devotion of the mind to study ; while a mind constantly 
 excited and absorbed in other matters is unfitted for this work, and indisposed for 
 prayer and the enjoyment of that aid of the Spirit which is necessary in revising 
 the Scriptures. 
 
 4. While Dr. Judd refuses to give the committee any information in regard to 
 what are the prospects as to the time of the completion of his work, and pleads 
 his inability to do so, it should be borne in mind, that as long ago as the 1st of 
 August, 1853, he seems honestly to have believed that one third of his whole work 
 was done ; for he then drew from the treasury a little more than a third of the sum 
 for which he had contracted to do the whole work. If he did not believe then that 
 one third of his whole work was done, he had no right to draw $350 (more than 
 one third of what was to be paid for the whole work) from the treasury. If he did 
 believe it, is it not strange that at this period, when so much time has elapsed 
 Bince, and when for two years he has been employed under a stipulation that ho 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 213 
 
 should devote his time and attention exclusively to this work, and has been draw- 
 ing a salary of $1590 a-year, the completion of the other two thirds of the work is 
 still so far in the distance that its length can not he measured, or even the proba- 
 ble time of the completion of the work ascertained ? The one third of the work 
 cost the Bible Union $350 ; the other two thirds have already cost the Bible Union 
 
 $3633 33, and the end of it can not be seen yet. The aid of Mr for seven 
 
 months, in addition to the two years' labor, has failed to secure this end. 
 
 Such is the history of the connection of Bro. Judd with the Bible Union as one 
 of its revisers : and influenced by the considerations presented in this report, as 
 the Board left it to the discretion of the Committee on Versions to contract for the 
 services of Dr. Judd ; and as the committee, acting under the instructions of the 
 Board contracted for his services " for one year " only, and as a second year has 
 just expired, the committee felt it to be their duty to notify Dr. Judd that their 
 contract with him is no longer in force, and instructed their chairman to give him 
 notice to that effect. 
 
 Samuel Baker, 
 J. W. Sarles, 
 
 Svb-Committee. 
 
 In one of his letters to the sub-committee, Dr. Judd makes free to enter into a 
 lengthened discussion of the comparative remuneration received by himself and 
 the reviser of the last six books of the New Testament, which so preverts true 
 history, and reasons so sophistically, that it is necessary to say a word or two 
 in passing For instance, he assumes that the work he has done on Matthew's 
 Gospel was fully equal in labor to all that this reviser had accomplished in the 
 service of the Bible Union, and consequently, that he was entitled to equal remu- 
 neration. It is but necessary to say, that the reviser of the last six books of the 
 New Testament had completed his work, up to this time, in the following order : 
 First, he had given in the first Jive books of the six, and had edited them while 
 passing through the press Then he proceeded to complete the Book of Revelation, 
 and went over the five published books the second time, with the aid of criticisms 
 from many living scholars, and amnch larger apparatus of critical works, and saw 
 the five books through the press in a second edition, twice the size of the first in 
 point of philological notes and authorities, in connection with the publication of this 
 revision of the Revelation. Besides this, the same reviser had finished his revision 
 of the first and second Epistles to the Thessalonians, and put them through the press, 
 and had nearly finished his revision of the first Epistle of Peter, which he has since 
 completed. Now, the absurdity of Dr Judd's claim, in this respect will appear 
 at once, when we state that all that the Union has ever received from him, as a 
 reviser is the first three chapters of the Gospel according to Matthew, and his 
 labor in superintending their printing. But add to this the consideration that the 
 difficulties of translating a Scripture narrative are not comparable to those to be 
 measured in translating an epistle , that the labor of mastering the style of Matthew 
 is small compared with that of mastering the several styles of Peter and Paul and 
 Jude and John and the very peculiar style of John in the Book of Revelation ; and 
 that the present condition of the original text of the Book of Revelation presents 
 innumerable more difficulties than that of Matthew. He was equally wrong, in 
 point of labor, in comparing his translation of the three chapters of Matthew with 
 that of other revisers who had gone through whole epistles. In Bay comparison, 
 therefore, justly made, with all the facts before the mind, it will be seen that he 
 has received fur moro for his labors than any other reviser. 
 
2H FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 This history is closed by the following resolutions, adopted July 2, 1856. It is 
 sufficient to add, that Dr. Judd intimated to the Board, in person, his purpose not 
 to deliver the manuscripts described in the resolutions , and it was upon this inti- 
 mation that the resolutions were passed. They were forthwith communicated to 
 him in writing, and an official written application made for the manuscripts, but 
 he persists in retaining them. 
 
 Whereas, We are informed by Mr that the manuscript revision of the 
 
 first fourteen chapters of Matthew, made by him for the Board of the American 
 Bible Union, while in its employ, is now in the hands of Rev. 0. B. Judd, and 
 
 we are informed that Mr has applied for it to Bro. Judd, and been unable 
 
 to obtain it , and whereas, this manuscript having been made solely at the. expense 
 of the Union, by the aid of its library, at its rooms, and with materials furnished 
 by it, belongs, of right, exclusively to the Board of the American Bible Union, and 
 is needed in the prosecution of its work ; — therefore, 
 
 Resolved, That the Corresponding Secretary be instructed to make written ap- 
 plication to Bro. Judd for the manuscript revision, now in his possession, of the 
 
 first fourteen chapters of Matthew, made by Mr. for the Board of the 
 
 American Bible Union, and for which he has received from the Board the sum of 
 $583 33. 
 
 And whereas, Bro. Judd retains the manuscript revision of the Gospel of Mat- 
 thew, made by himself for the Board of the American Bible Union while in its 
 employ ; and whereas, this manuscript having been made solely at the expense of 
 the Board, and in its rooms, and with materials furnished by it, and with the aid 
 of its library, belongs of right and exclusively to the Board of the American Bible 
 Union, and is needed in the prosecution of the work ; — therefore, 
 
 Resolved, That the Corresponding Secretary be instructed to make written ap- 
 plication to Brother Judd for the manuscript revision of Matthew, made by him 
 for the Board of the American Bible Union, and for which he received from this 
 Board the sum of $3350. 
 
 After this clear and satisfactory history of Dr. Judd's contracts, and 
 his extraordinary course in relation to them, the reader can be at no loss 
 to ascertain from whence came the idea that Dr. Judd could devote any 
 number of years he might choose to Matthew's narrative, and draw $125 
 per month, for an indefinite period of time, from the treasury of the 
 Bible Union. And it is from such accusers, that the charge of squander- 
 ing is made against the Bible Union ! If all the employees of the Bible 
 Union had acted in this way, the Treasury of the United States could not 
 have met the demands ; and the age of Methuselah would not have been 
 sufficient for the completion of the work of revision. Drs. Maclay and 
 Judd are admirable lecturers upon the economies of the Bible Union. 
 Father Maclay has taken a heavy load on his shoulders in undertaking, 
 at his age, to carry Dr. Judd through his own unprovoked warfare upon 
 the cause of Revision. 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 215 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 BIBLE REVISION. 
 
 The following article was, as the reader may perceive, 
 written for the Nashville Christian Advocate, the editor of 
 which declined publishing it. It was sent to the Bible Eevi- 
 sion Association, and placed at our disposal, and we cheerfully 
 place it before the readers of this Discussion. 
 
 James Edmunds. 
 
 T. S. Bell. 
 
 To the Nashville Christian Advocate. 
 
 " Audi alteram partem." 
 
 Mr. Editor : — As you have published so much in opposi- 
 tion to the "Revision" of the Scriptures by the "American 
 Bible Union," I feel sure from the knowledge I have of your 
 candor and courtesy, that you will also admit into your paper 
 something in its favor, and that, too, by one who claims to be 
 a ''Methodist minister," but by no means a "distinguished" 
 one. If you send forth into the world the criticisms of those 
 who judge of that performance from what has been "told" 
 them, you certainly will not refuse a place to a few remarks 
 from one who has read with the utmost care nearly every verse 
 issued by that society hitherto, comparing it with King James's 
 translation and the original, and weighing well every reason 
 assigned in the notes for the alterations that have been made." 
 
 You arc aware that, besides nearly all the book of Job, six 
 looks of the New Testament were published some time ago, 
 
216 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 with this notice prefixed ; " This revision is not final. It is 
 circulated in the expectation that it will be subjected to a 
 thorough criticism, in order that its imperfections, whatever 
 they are, may be disclosed and corrected." I have been in the 
 habit for more that twenty years of using different versions 
 both of the Old and New Testament, collating them with the 
 originals and King James's translation, with a sincere desire 
 to ascertain the exact sense of the Spirit of God in every pas- 
 sage, divesting myself as much as possible of all prepossessions 
 and prejudice, and I am constrained to declare that the version 
 hitherto issued by the "Bible Union," so far as it goes, is most 
 decidedly and conspicuously superior to them all. This my 
 judgment and conscience would compel me to acknowledge, 
 even if it had proceeded from the Shakers or Mormons. 
 
 The "Bible Union" may have set out with a wrong motive 
 and an unjustifiable intention. The desire to make it appear 
 that " immersion " is the only legitimate mode of introducing 
 persons into Christ's Church may have given rise to it ; but 
 whatever may have been its design in the beginning, I am well 
 convinced that if it publish the remainder of the Sacred Books 
 with the same fidelity and scrupulous adherence to the original 
 observed hitherto, it will confer an incalculable benefit on the 
 many millions who use the English language throughout the 
 world. I speak not of the other versions published by this 
 society in French, Italian, &c, for the simple reason that I 
 have not examined them; having read somewhere that "He 
 who answereth a matter before- he heareth it, it is folly and 
 shame unto him." Persons who have not read a single chap- 
 ter of the "revision," nay, some who have not seen it, have 
 raised and are daily raising, a senseless hue and cry against it 
 This is unwise, unjust, and, moreover, uncharitable and un- 
 christian. They are impeaching the motives of those engaged 
 in the work, taxing them with ignorance, bigotry, malice, &c.. 
 without any knowledge whatever of the individuals. Surely 
 it is "folly and shame" unto those who do so. Now, after 
 
TRANSLATION OP THE SCRIPTURES 217 
 
 having, as already stated, perused most scrutinizingly all that 
 has yet been printed, nearly seven books, I am utterly unable 
 to determine to what denomination of Christians the translators 
 belong. One writer stigmatises them as " New Version Tink- 
 ers." Tinkers, indeed! I think I can judge by a man's 
 writings whether he is a scholar or not ; and if the gentlemen 
 who have given us these seven books in English dress are not 
 scholars, and accurate, thorough, profound scholars, I know not 
 in what country we are to find such. " The works that they 
 do bear witness for them ; " and, according to the highest au- 
 thority, this testimony ought to satisfy all. But ignorance 
 and bigotry are both very unreasonable things, and it is use- 
 less for any m*n or society of men to aim at quieting their 
 clamor. 
 
 These translators, too, have evidently availed themselves 
 of every aid, consulting not only all the English versions from 
 Tyndal's down to the present day, but those made in many 
 other languages also, as Syriac, Ethiopic, Slavonic, Dutch, 
 German, Spanish, Italian, French, &c, besides all the lexico- 
 graphers and grammarians of any note. They frequently re- 
 fer to Clarke and Wesley as authorities for some of the changes 
 made. Who that reads the Bible in the original language 
 does not know that a revision is imperatively, absolutely de- 
 manded? I venture the assertion that there is hardly a para- 
 graph in our common English Bible, from the first chapter of 
 Genesis to the last of Revelation, that is not capable of amend- 
 ment. The version was good for the age in which it was exe- 
 cuted, but it is very far from being so now. Who can for a 
 moment believe that no progress has been made in biblical 
 criticism, in the space of nearly two hundred and fifty years ? 
 Dr. Adam Clarke tells us that this science was, in King James's 
 time, "in its infancy, if indeed it had begun to exist." Who- 
 ever has read his commentary with care has found thousands 
 of corrections of the common version, and no very civil epithets 
 applied to many of the passages so corrected; such as "noii- 
 
•513 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 aensical," "absurd," "no translation at all." And instead of 
 King James's version of Isaiah — one of the most sublime and 
 evangelical, but, unfortunately, one of the worst translated 
 books in the Bible — he informs us he came very near insert- 
 ing Bishop Lowth's admirable version. It would be very easy 
 to show, from a multitude of theologians and commentators, 
 that King James's version abounds in errors — some of them, 
 too, of a very grave character. If permitted, I shall advert 
 to a few of these hereafter. I have read in the Advocate from 
 time to time some most ridiculous strictures on the "Revision." 
 One gives us a long diatribe on the use of the perfect tense 
 in Greek, referring very learnedly to Winer, Butman, and other 
 masterly grammarians. He thinks too he has discovered "a 
 stroke at Armenianism " in one passage, wherein the perfect is 
 very rightly employed in the new rendering. For myself, I 
 must confess I am rather dull of vision, but I believe I would 
 rather labor under this disadvantage than possess the over- 
 excited optics of this vigilant brother. Another thinks it 
 -'furnishes infidels with the most deadly weapon they have 
 ever used against the Christianity of the Bible." Should any 
 persons be so extremely weak as to discredit Christianity, 
 because of a new translation of the Bible, let them run their 
 own course. They certainly have not common sense enough to 
 be Christians. They must be the very quintessence of ninnyism. 
 Have we not had hundreds upon hundreds of translations of 
 the Bible ; and who has ever known of one infidel being made 
 or confirmed thereby ? On the contrary, I am fully persuaded 
 that this translation, truly faithful and beautiful as it is, will 
 induce many to read the sacred Scriptures who hitherto have 
 neglected to do so, and thousands to peruse them with more care 
 and diligence than ever before. What can be more fair than 
 the manner of publishing this "Revision"? You have pre- 
 sented to your view on each page the common version, the 
 original, and the revision, and underneath you have authorities 
 tor all the amendments made. Every man who is capable, can 
 
TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 219 
 
 form for himself an instant judgment as to the merits of the 
 performance. It is forced upon no one. No one need substi- 
 tute it for the old, defective translation, if he is so wedded to 
 error. But for my part, if the rest at all equals what has been 
 already accomplished, I will, if spared to see it completed, 
 most assuredly adopt it, at least in my own family and for 
 private use. I value it above gold , yes, much fine gold. And 
 I will confess" that my design in writing the present article is 
 mainly to call the attention of my brethren in the ministry to 
 this work. With the utmost deference I would advise every 
 minister of the Gospel to subscribe for the " Bible Union Re- 
 porter," and to study it, laying aside all prejudice and passion; 
 and I am satisfied, if he do, he will thank me heartily for the 
 counsel. What an opportunity is hereby offered to all young 
 ministers of acquiring an accurate knowledge of the sacred 
 languages! The notes subjoined afford considerable help to 
 the attainment of this end. They are, I venture to say, the 
 soundest and most reliable critical and philological notes ever 
 published. They are indeed the very cream of all that has 
 preceded them in that kind. The Greek text is magnificent. 
 Methinks it should tempt every preacher of the Gospel who 
 sees it, and who has neglected the study of that language, to 
 commence it forthwith. The whole is beautifully got up, and, 
 besides, it is remarkably cheap — 12 numbers, postage paid, 
 for one dollar. If we ministers of the Gospel had but the 
 industry and love of learning that characterized the great Adam 
 Clarke, theological institutions would hardly be needed among 
 us. He could preach daily and yet find time to study the 
 Scriptures in the languages of the inspired writers. 
 
 What if the authors of this revision do translate the word 
 "baptizo" immerse, will that destroy the value of the whole 
 work or make immersionists ot all who may prize and use it ? 
 By no means. I doubt whether it will make a single proselyte 
 to immersionism. People will continue to think for themselves 
 on that subject, as hitherto. Thousands who practice sprink- 
 
223 FIDELITY TO GOD IN THE 
 
 ling or pouring believe that immersion was the primitive and 
 Apostolic mode of administering that sacrament, but not at- 
 taching any importance to the mere mode, they still employ the 
 more convenient and feasible methods. For instance, the late 
 Bp. Capers believed that "baptizo" meant to "immerse," and 
 that anciently that was the custom. I heard him say so my- 
 self at Ash- Spring Camp Ground, Logan county, Ky., only a 
 few years before his death. Yet, I believe, the good bishop 
 died as he lived, in the bosom of Methodism. So did Dr. A. 
 Clarke, who had the same persuasion. So have thousands of 
 others. I wish there were less controversy among us, espe- 
 cially in matters of little importance, and more of that heaven- 
 ly temper of mind described and recommended in the 13th 
 chapter of 1st Corinthians. We would then no longer "bite 
 and devour one another," as is too much the case at present 
 But. this article being already sufficiently long, I shall close it 
 with stating that I have marked more than fifty passages in 
 the six books of the New Testament already published by the 
 "Bible Union," wherein the translation is altered greatly for 
 the better, and it would not be difficult to add fifty more to 
 the number. The portion of Job issued is a perfect gem — 
 more intelligible without any commentary at all than the Old 
 Version, with twenty of the best commentaries that have been 
 written, casting their light upon it. Come brethren, "in under- 
 standing be ye men," and do not suffer yourselves to be carried 
 away by the popular current, but stand, consider, review, and 
 judge for yourselves. Despise popularity, and be well assured 
 that so far from the "vox populi" being always "Vox Dei," 
 it is much oftener vox DiabolL But more anon. 
 
 W. McCallen. 
 
 Washington county \ Miss* 
 
• 
 
" 
 
i 
 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGF 
 
 021 220 002 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 021 220 002 5