tested. Moreover, the peculiarity of St. John's Greek would perhaps more readily induce erroneous translation; while his peculiar record of doctrinal and spiritual truth would so greatly enhance the vital consequence of any such error.

II. The very names of the five translators carry with them their own credentials. They are all of them, so to speak, masters in Israel. They are specially fitted by learning, and by previous experience in critical theology, for the execution of so grave a work. They are well known as men of deep and earnest religious principles; they are altogether unknown as partizans on either side of the conflicting opinions into which the religious world is now divided.

It

III. The principle on which the translation has been accomplished commends itself at once to every man's judgment. gives us the result of individual and yet united effort; a separate and also a combined investigation; a quintuple guarantee for the same common labour. The correctness and fidelity of the Authorized Version is thus fully and strictly put to the proof; and we may congratulate ourselves that the issue has been joined. The alterations which have been proposed are, as we might expect, many and various. The majority of them arise from a closer attention to the force of particles, or tenses, and the more exact rendering of certain words; some of them exhibit statements of truth in a clearer and more intelligible form: not one of them, it may be confidently affirmed, throws doubt or question upon any essential truth, as already stated.

To suppose that the Authorized Version is incapable of any alteration for the better, would be to presuppose the gift of actual inspiration for the original translators. To find that it admits of scarcely more improvement than consists in greater amount of secular scholarship, and greater nicety of expression, springing out of the natural change and progress of language itself, this bespeaks for the original translators much soundness of knowledge, patient painstaking, sagacious faithfulness. To find that no vital truth of Scripture has been ignored, or overlaid, or erroneously set forth, this will confirm us in the sure conviction, how clearly the grace and providence of God guided the pen of those ready writers, went along with and watched over their labours, and guarded the Divine Word from all risk of marring by human adulteration.

The revisers have put forth their work as an experiment; not to provoke unkindly criticism, but purposely to invite fair and honest examination. With this view, and in this spirit, the revision is examined in the following pages; it has been followed out verse by verse, its variations noted down, and divided into

three several classes. One comprehends those passages which, either by greater accuracy, or clearer expression, or from any other cause, are manifestly improved. Another, those which vary in terms, but are not different in sense from the Authorized Version. A third, those which admit of debate and question, and therefore perhaps had better not have been suggested. For convenience sake, these have been marked respectively with the symbols +, =, ; and thus at a glance the exact amount of needful change may be reckoned up in each chapter, and, from the aggregate of chapters, the whole gain upon this one gospel may be estimated clearly. To save space, and avoid repetition, it seemed sufficient that different alterations of the same kind should be noticed only once. In the end it will be found, that the great majority of desirable alterations consists in structure rather than in statement; in phrase, but not in fact; often in the clearness with which truth may be set forth, never in the reality of the truth itself. We shall perhaps be disposed to conclude that every needful requirement would be fully satisfied by a somewhat considerable addition to our present marginal readings. These, of course, should not be admitted merely at the suggestion of individual clergymen, however talented and trustworthy; they must be adopted with the formal sanction of adequate ecclesiastical authority. The one great advantage of such a course would be, that it is no innovation. It is simply carrying out, to its requisite extent, the principle already acknowledged and acted upon in the Authorized Version. That Version will then remain intact and unmutilated; no violence will be done to the natural and religious feelings of Christian men; no excuse or opportunity will be afforded for tampering with, or throwing the doubts of scorn upon that translation, which has been the rule of faith, the trusted guide to truth, the ground of heavenward hope for generations. This will still remain, and be accounted our all but perfect translation of the Word of God.

If the revisers of the gospel by St. John shall set forward a movement towards such a desirable end, they will have done no little service. Of old, as we read in Roman history, "Quinqueviri muris turribusque reficiendis creati sunt." Their modern namesakes have entered upon the same office in a holier sense. They have been marking well that tower and bulwark of our Christian Zion, the pure and unveiled knowledge of the Word of Life. They have gone round about this tower with wary carefulness; they have found it, not only beautiful and the joy of the whole earth, but needing nothing to give it soundness or stability or strength; needing, it may be, somewhat of surface

cementing and outward adornment, here a little and there a little; but firm in its rock foundation, indestructible in its fabric, and reaching up to heaven in its height.

Having so laboured, but not in vain, they will tell those who may come after them in any kindred labour, that it will not be wise or safe to lay hands suddenly upon this hallowed building. As with God's altar in the early day, they must beware of lifting up their tool upon it, lest they pollute it; lest they break down its walls, desiring to build them up; lest they undermine instead of strengthening its foundations; lest they daub with untempered mortar the structure that has been raised with judgment laid to the line and righteousness to the plummet. Undoubtedly, if any one shall so attempt to fasten crude and fancied emendations upon our English Bible, he will reverse against himself the imperial boast; and reasonable, thinking men will say of him, "Marmoream invenit, lateritiam reliquit."

In the following examination of the revision of St. John, the writer can at least lay claim to the credit of having carefully considered the proposed amendments, and he lays them before the public in the hope that the cause of scriptural truth may be promoted. The Authorized Version is first given, and the alterations follow with an R prefixed to them. The Greek text used is Bloomfield's.

CHAPTER I.

Ver. 3. Πάντα δι' αὐτῷ ἐγένετο. καὶ χωρὶς αὐτῇ ἐδὲ ἓν ἐγέVETо à Yéyovεv.-ò yéyovev. That was made. R. That hath been made. This change is doubtless proposed to mark the difference of tenseἐγένετο and γέγονεν. But is it quite safe to make yéyover such a decided perfect? This would hardly be borne out by the two exceptional instances from Plat. Alcib., i., adduced by Buttman (Irreg. Verbs). The ordinary sense of yéyova is all but a present. Here yéyovev might almost be rendered, that hath existence. So Heb. xi. 3, yeyovéval would be more strongly expressed are, than were made, though the perfect κατηρτίσθαι goes before. "By faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that the things seen are not formed, that is, do not exist, from the things which appear." St. John affirms the doctrine which St. Paul, with his better knowledge of purer Greek, sets forth to the Colossians (i. 16, 17): ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα... καὶ τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῷ συνέστη κε; where συνέστηκε, like γέγονεν, is a past present, and so is rightly rendered consist. Again, if any

alteration were to be made in the translation of this verse, it would have been better to have marked the force of ¿dè èv—not even one thing.

Ver. 5. év Tŷ σKOτią.—In darkness. R. In the darkness, as it certainly should be.

+

Ver. 8. Was sent. R. Came, borrowing ev from ver. 7 more naturally, than åπeσтаλμévos from ver. 6. +

Ver. 8. To pos.-That light. R. The light, as before. + Ver. 9. d write.-Which lighteth. R. Which lighteneth, scarcely needed.

=

Ver. 9. épxóμevov.—That cometh. R. Coming. This version is adopted as a sort of compromise, and is therefore vague and unsatisfactory. From the preface (p. xiii) it would seem that preference is rather given to epyóuevov as masculine. But surely Scholefield (Hints, p. 40) is right in saying that this would require Tòv épxóμevov. If altered, it should rather stand, Which at its coming into the world enlighteneth every man.

Ver. 11. εἰς τὰ ἴδια ἦλθε, καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι αὐτὸν ἐ παρέλαβον. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. R. He came unto his own, and his own people received him not. The adjectives standing alone in the original, the translators have consistently omitted the substantives in each case. The revision omits one, and introduces the other, with an apologetic misgiving (pref., p. xiii), that " they would fain have expressed the neuter τὰ ἴδια.” But why one without the other? If any change were desired, by supplying ovn to the former, as λaoì in the latter, it might have been rendered, He came to his own country, and his own countrymen received him not. But how much simpler and more forcible it stands unaltered.

Ver. 14. δόξαν ὡς μονογενῆς παρὰ πατρὸς.—The glory as of the only-begotten of the Father. R. Glory as of the only-begotten from the Father. If altered at all, should it not be, “A glory as of an only-begotten of a father?" That is, an indefinite sentence with a definite application.

Ver. 15. ὁ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν· ὅτι πρŵτós μον v.—He that cometh after me is preferred before me ; for he was before me. R. He that cometh after me is advanced before me; because he was before me. To render yeyovev is advanced seems very violent; for it also somewhat of an apology is given in the preface (p. xiv): it is adopted to avoid a misunderstanding of preferred, into which it is clear Johnson has fallen. The parallel passage from Milton given by Johnson explains his view :

"O Spirit, that dost prefer

Before all temples th' upright heart."

Cf. Plat. Phedr., 245, ὡς πρὸ τῶ κεκινημένε τὸν σώφρονα δεῖ πроaιрeîolai piλov. At any rate, if Johnson be in error, we may go to Bishop Pearson, who says (p. 110, fol.) with reference to St. John in this verse, "First, he taketh to himself a priority of time, speaking of Christ, He that cometh after me; secondly, he attributeth unto Christ a priority of dignity, saying, He is preferred before me." But, after all, the question is not, whether advanced is an improvement upon preferred, but whether either of them really expresses the original Greek. Clearly orlow μs and ἔμπροσθέν με are antithetical, as are ἐρχόμενος and γέγονεν. If ὀπίσω is a temporal adverb, so is ἔμπροσθεν ; one can scarcely be of time and the other of place. There must also be a strict analogy between ἐρχόμενος and γέγονεν ; namely, that of the Saviour's existence, and his coming into the world: while the same fact, to give it greater significance, is repeated by oτ πρŵτós μ v. The testimony of the Baptist is simply this, that the Saviour must have priority, because he had pre-existence: He that cometh after me, hath existence before me; inasmuch as he was before me. Even as to pŵтоs, it may be said, not merely that it is for πρóτeρos, but that it carries with it latently its superlative sense ; it involves the truth αὐτός ἐστι πρὸ πάντων (Col. i. 17).

Ver. 16. K T Tλпpóμaтos avт.—Of his fulness. R. Out of his fulness, gives the proper force of ex, implying that we not only partake in the fulness of Christ, but derive ours from him. +

Ver. 17. Sià M... Sià Xp.-By. R. Through. See pref., p. xiii. Is anything gained by the change?

Ver. 18. enyno aтo.-Hath declared. R. Declared, as marking the aor. from the perfect, but the sense is nowise altered. + Ver. 19. μарrupía.-The record. R. The testimony. + Ver. 32. papтúpnoev.—Bare record. R. Bare witness. + Ver. 38. μéveis.-Dwellest. R. Abidest, which is the marginal reading.

=

Ver. 39. εἶδον πᾶ μένει καὶ παρ ̓ αὐτῷ ἔμειναν.—Saw where he dwelt, and abode with him. R. Saw where he abode, and remained with him. Nothing is gained by this change; it would have been better to give the same meaning, abide, to μévew, in the three places.

Ver. 42. ἐμβλέψας δέ αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησᾶς εἶπε.—When Jesus beheld him, he said. R. Jesus looked on him, and said. If altered at all, surely it should be, Jesus, after looking upon him, said.

Ver. 42. à épunveveтaι IIéтpos.—Which is by interpretation, a stone. R. Which is by interpretation, Peter. This is the marginal reading. In Matt. xvi. 18, the Authorized Version gives, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church. But