CHAPTER V. INACCURACIES IN GRAMMAR IN OUR PRESENT VERSION. It It is no disparagement to the merits of those learned men who gave us our excellent authorized version to point out false grammar in their translation, and to seek to correct these errors. was not the fault of the translators, but of the age in which they lived. The two hundred and sixty years which have elapsed since our version was made are marked by an intellectual action and progress in scientific and exegetical knowledge surpassing any like period in the world's history. Manuscripts have been discovered, collated and published, so as to give every scholar an opportunity of comparing them as witnesses for or against a disputed word or passage. Researches have been made in geography and topography which throw light on the names of countries and cities mentioned in the Bible unknown to the translators of our present version. It would be a shame to our age if no progress had been made in this branch of study, when the broad and splendid realms of discovery have been explored by other sciences. In fact, however, Biblical learning has kept pace with or outstripped other learned pursuits; and it is but just that the results of all this study and discovery, and advance in real knowledge, should be given to the world in a corrected version of God's word. Dr. Kendrick, Professor of Greek in Rochester University, and one of the American Revisers, in a well-matured paper on the "Inaccuracies of the Authorized Version in Respect of Grammar and Exegesis," writes: "The Greek definite article, in many respects (not in all), squares precisely with the English. It cannot always be rendered, but it is no more used without a reason 6 6 6 than is the English article. Yet, of its special use and importance the English translators seem to have had but the faintest notion, and they rendered it or omitted it in the most capricious manner. Into a mountain,' into a ship,' appear almost constantly for 'into the mountain' and 'into the ship.' The [one] pinnacle of the temple becomes a pinnacle (as if there were many). 'A synagogue' stands for the synagogue,' which implies the only or chief one in the place. Thus Luke vii, 5, He hath built us a synagogue,' for 'He himself built us our synagogue.' The English version here contains three errors: 'he, for himself, hath built for built,' and 'a' for the,' which, by a convenient idiom, we replace by our. So Nicodemus (John iii, 10) is lowered from the teacher of Israel,' to which rank the Savior exalts him, to a teacher.' In 2 Tim. iv, 7, the good fight (more exactly, the noble contest,' in contrast with the secular games of Greece) becomes a good fight,' and 'the crown of righteousness,' which follows it, becomes a crown of righteousness.' In Heb. xi, 10, we have a city that hath foundations,' for 'the city that hath the foundations,' apparently of Rev. xxi. 19. On the other hand, the unwarranted insertion of the article in John iv, 27, 'wondered that he was talking with the woman,' instead of ‘a woman,' quite changes the ground of the disciples' wonder. They knew nothing of the woman's history. Their surprise was that he talked thus at length and familiarly with a woman. So in 1 Tim. vi, 5, 'their wives' should be simply 'women.' The apostle is speaking of deaconnesses, not of the wives of deacons. In 1 Tim. vi, 2, the force of the article with the participle is not recognized, and we have 'because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit,' for the apostle's appropriate and beautiful declaration, because they that partake of their benefaction are faithful and beloved." In 1 Tim. vi, 5, by confusion of the subject and predicate, we have 'supposing that gain is godliness ;' the original represents them as 'supposing that godliness is [a source of] gain.' In Rom. i, 17, and iii, 21, the definite article is unhappily introduced for a righteousness of God;' seriously darkening the argument by the changed meaning thus forced upon the word 'righteousness.' But it is unfortunately omitted again in the striking description of John the Baptist, at John v, 35, 'he was the lamp that was burning and shining.' The English version here doubly errs both in the way of disparagement and of exaltation. Of exaltation, because it elevates to an original light him whom the Saviour designates as only a lamp, shining with borrowed brightness. "The prepositions, in their variety and delicacy, are a most important element of the Greek language. In the rendering of these, the authorized version is not unfrequently at fault. On behalf of' (Cor. v, 20) is turned into 'instead of,' and in 2 Thess. ii, 1, it becomes by.' The preposition en becomes, needlessly, sometimes by' and sometimes with.' On the clouds (Math. xxiv, 30) becomes in the clouds;' on their hands' 'in their hands,' in both cases to the injury of the figure. 6 เ Dr. Kendrick produces various illustrations of the incorrect rendering of particles such as then, now, nevertheless, moreover, and notwithstanding; and he then proceeds to point out errors in verbs. "Thus in Matt. viii, 24, the ship was not covered,' but 'being' or 'becoming covered,' by (not with) the waves. In Mark iv, 37, the ship was not filled,' but filling.' "The Greek perfect tense is very uniform in its use, but is dealt with upon no fixed principle by our translators. They often confound it with the present, as Gal. ii, 20, am crucified,' for have been crucified.' Rom. v, 5, 'is shed abroad,' for 'hath been shed abroad' (where the distinction is important). Rom. iii, 21, 'is manifested,' for 'hath been manifested.' It is quite as frequently, and more disadvantageously, confounded with the imperfect or aorist, as John i, 3, 'was not anything made that was made,' for 'that hath been made.' Matt. xix, 8, 'from the beginning it was not so for it hath not been so.' Matt. xxiv, 21. such as was not since the beginning of the world,' for 'such as hath not been from the beginning,' etc. John iv, 38, 'I sent you to reap,' for 'I have sent you to reap;' others labored,' for 'others have labored.' Heb. iv, 2, unto us was the gospel preached,' for 'hath the glad message been proclaimed' (i. e., the promise of a rest); v, 3, as he said,' for as he hath said;' v, 4, for he spake,' for 'he hath spoken.' Heb. ii, 3, 'for this man was counted worthy,' for 6 6 ' hath been counted worthy '(referring to his recent glorification). 1 Cor. xv, 12, be preached that he rose,' for hath arisen,' or ' hath been raised;' v, 21, the first-fruits of them that slept,' for have fallen asleep,' and hence, are sleeping.' 6 "I shall now," continues Dr. Kendrick, "select a few farther examples of unfortunate renderings, without attempt at classification. The distinction between the indicative and subjunctive moods in conditional sentences (if it is,' and 'if it be ') is habitually neglected. Oida, I know, (2 Cor. xii, 2) is rendered I knew. Luke xxi, 19, in your patience possess your souls,' should be in your endurance gain (i. e., preserve) your souls.' The verb to become (gignomai) is habitually confounded with the verb to be, and sometimes improperly made passive. Thus, John i, 14,the word was made flesh,' for the word became flesh.' Heb. i, 4, being made so much better,' for 'becoming so much better,' or 'superior.' Gal. iv, 5, 'made of a woman, made under law,' for 'born from a woman, coming under law.' 2 Cor. iii, 7, was glorious,' should became in glory.' In Matt. xvii, 24, seq., is an interesting account of an application to Peter to know whether his Master paid the 'tribute money,' and our Lord's explanation to Peter why he should be exempted from paying it. The word in the Greek is entirely different from the ordinary word for the tribute or custom paid to the Roman government, and clearly designates the Jewish half-shekel paid to support the temple service. Yet, this distinction is lost in the translation. The reader has no clue to the special character of the tribute required, and the Saviour's beautiful plea for exemption, based on the fact that he was the Son of the Lord of the temple, becomes utterly unintelligible. Tribute money' should be the half-shekel' (see Ex. xxx, 13).” To these examples others might be added. Only one more will be noticed. In Romans vi, 3, we read, correctly, "know ye not, that as many of us as were baptised into Jesus' Church were baptised into his death." A past action is referred to. This same past action is again introduced in the fourth verse, with the same mood and tense. But here it is translated, "Therefore we are blessed," as a present continuous thing, not only violating the |