Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: June 1, 2025
A very slight inspection however of these difficult prophecies will certainly show two things first, that the Revisers of 1611 did their work in this portion of Holy Scripture less successfully than elsewhere; secondly, that the English and American Revisers between whom the differences are here noticeably very few laboured unitedly and successfully in keeping their revision of the preceding version of these prophecies fully up to the high level of the rest of their work.
In the Litany the words "rebellion" and "schism" were introduced into one of the suffrages, becoming tide-marks of the havoc wrought in Church and State by what the revisers, doubtless, looked back upon as "the flood of the ungodly." The words "Bishops, Priests, and Deacons" were substituted for "Bishops, Pastors, and Ministers of the Church."
These thoughts might be carried much further, but enough has been said to justify the minute care that has been taken in the renderings of the written word of the New Testament by the Revisers, and further, the validity of the deductions that may be drawn from their use of one word rather than another, especially in the case of words that might seem to be practically synonymous.
It was already mentioned that about the beginning of this century the Latin epic poets found their -diaskeuastae- and revisers of their text; it was also noticed, that not only did the Scipionic circle generally insist on correctness above everything else, but several also of the most noted poets, such as Accius and Lucilius, busied themselves with the regulation of orthography and of grammar.
The remaining two years were spent in the consideration of various details and reserved questions, and especially the consideration of the suggestions, on our second revision, of the American Revisers, of whose work and connexion with the English Revisers it will now be convenient to speak.
But little, I believe, of a systematic character has, as yet, been accomplished. The Revisers mention that they have been obliged, in some few cases of extreme difficulty, to depart from the Massoretic text and adopt a reading from the Ancient Versions.
The prevailing purpose seems to have been to expunge all obsolete words and phrases while dealing tenderly with obsolescent ones. In this course, however, the revisers were by no means always and everywhere consistent. "Prevent," in the sense of "anticipate," is altered in some places but left unchanged in others.
A responsible and deeply respected writer, the late Bishop of Wakefield, only a few years ago plainly stated in a well-known periodical that the revisers "largely exceeded their instructions, and did not adhere to the principles they were commissioned to follow." This is a very grave charge, but can it be substantiated?
They have taken away our orthodox hell, that has stood by us since we first went to Sunday school, and given us a hades. Half of us wouldn't know a hades if we should see it dead in the road, but they couldn't fool us any on hell. No, these revisers have done more harm to religion than they could have done by preaching all their lives.
In the Old Testament, adherence to the Massorite Text has left only a very limited number of passages in which consideration of the ancient Version was deemed to be necessary; but, in the New Testament, as we well know, questions of textual criticism occupied a large portion of the time and attention of the Revisers, both here and in America.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking