of our first copy of King James's Version, is London, 1620, which reads in Matt. iv. 1," spirit," in Mark i. 12, "Spirit," and in Luke iv. 1, "spirit." Another copy of a later edition, 1639, has in Matt. "Spirit," but "spirit" in the parallel passages. In one Cambridge edition, 1805, we have "Spirit," in all the three places; and so reads the edition of 1819; but that of 1831 has in Matt. and Mark, "spirit," while in Luke the reading is "Spirit." In most of the Oxford editions which we have collated, the reading in Matt. and Mark is "spirit," but in Luke Spirit." In the same manner the term appears in the recent London editions. In the Oxford Bible of 1765, we have "spirit" in all the three passages. Rom. i. 4, is in this same manner varied in sense in different copies of the Common Version, some reading "Spirit of holiness," and others "spirit of holiness.”

Vs. 23. Here the Common Version reads:- -"all manner of sickness and all manner of disease." In Chap. ix. 35, the same words are rendered, "every sickness and every disease." A uniform rendering is desirable:-" every kind of sickness, and every kind of disease."

Vs. 24. "Possessed with devils," and so throughout:-"vexed with a devil," an unclean devil,"-" casting out a devil. Passages of this kind are passed by without notice in the Hints." We find, however, in the Author's remarks on 1 Tim. iv. 1, 2, "Doctrines of dæmons," substituted for "Doctrines of devils;" from which we should infer his readiness to correct the Common Version in the other instances in which they use the discarded expression. The distinction of the original should be preserved in the Version: dáßoxos and daμoviov are never confounded.

66

66

Ch. v. 17. "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." There is a considerable number of passages in the Common Version, in which the transposition of the negative adverb would be an improvement of the English text. "I am come, not to destroy, but to fulfil." I am come to call, not the righteous, but sinners to repentance. ix. 13. "I am come to send, not peace, but a sword.” x. 34. “The Son of man is come, not to destroy men's lives, but to save them." Luke ix. 36. The reading in this verse, in some editions of the Common Version, is, "the Law or the Prophets;" in others," the law or the prophets."

Ch. vi. 13. The doxology is not found in the parallel passage of Luke's Gospel, and is rejected by Biblical critics, who regard it as an interpolation introduced from the liturgies of the Greek Church. We take this notice of it for the purpose of remarking on the entire absence, in these "Hints," of all reference to the subject of the various readings of the New Testament. This seems to us an omission of some consequence in the work of a Regius Professor of Greek in an English University, written for the purpose of suggesting improvements in the translation of the

most important portion of the sacred Scriptures. No opinion is anywhere in these pages delivered by the Author on the claims of words and sentences to a place in the sacred text. Even 1 John v. 7. is passed by without a single observation. A translation of the New Testament could not be satisfactorily undertaken or offered to the public, but by competent persons who must necessarily conduct their work with a constant reference to the original text; and the received Greek text, adopted from the Elzevir impression of 1624, would not be allowed as the standard to which the New Version should be made conformable. Since that date, more than two centuries have elapsed, in the course of which an immense expenditure of everything most valuable to men of learning has been devoted to the criticism of the Bible. Those labours would not, indeed, be altogether lost, if the results of them should never be seen in a Common Version: they are available to the Christian scholar, who, however, is not entitled to a monopoly of the advantages to be derived from them. Until, therefore, they shall be rendered generally serviceable, in furnishing a corrected vernacular text, there will be wanting the grateful and proper return which is answerable to such labours and such sacrifices. From a Greek Professor in an English university, we might surely expect to receive, in such a work as the present, the means of assisting us to appreciate the value of the most important various readings in Wetstein and Griesbach. Hints for an Improved Translation of the New Testament, should not be limited to the manner of rendering the Textus Receptus. Matt. xiv. 20. "fragments;" but, in Chap. xv. 37, "broken meat." This is the reading in Mark viii. 8: but in Luke ix. 17, we again have "fragments." "Fragments" should be the ren

dering in every place.

66

Ch. xix. 28. The editions of the Common Version exhibit a variety in the construction and sense of this verse. In some copies we find: "That ye who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory." In others "that ye who have followed me in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory." And in a third class: "that ye who have followed me, in the neration, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory."

rege

'Ch. xx. 11. The good man of the house, to oixadeσTórov. "The householder." So translated v. 1. in the introduction of the parable; and the variation is not only needless, but has a quaintness in it not calculated to recommend it.'

This is the only place in the gospels where this correction is required; but there are some passages in which the rendering, "master of the house ", should be inserted, instead of the quaint

expression employed by the translators. Chap. xxiv. 43. Mark xiv. 14. Luke xii. 39. xxii. 11. Campbell has, landlord,' Matt. xxi. 33. Wakefield, occasionally, master of the family."

Ex

Ib. 23. But it shall be given to them for whom—àxx' ï . cept to those for whom'-By foisting in the supernumerary words, we make the passage contain a doctrine directly contrary to other places of Scripture: ex. gr. John xvii. 2. Revelation iii. 21.'

Both Campbell and Wakefield, as well as some other modern translators, read, unless to them for whom.' This is the reading of the authors of the first English New Testament. Is not myne to give, but to them for whom it is prepared of my father." Tyndal. 'Is not myne to gyve to you but to which it is maad redy of my father.' Wicklif.

‹ Mark x. 14 (= Matt. xix. 14.) For of such is the Kingdom of God. τῶν γὰρ τοιούτῶν ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. ‘For to such belongeth the kingdom of God.' The common translation is at best ambiguous; but probably no one, who should first become acquainted with the sentiment from the Greek, would hesitate to affix to the words the sense expressed by the proposed rendering."'

In both passages, the reading of the Bishop's Bible is, 'For to 'such belongeth the kingdome of God.'

XIII. 9. For they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten. παραδώσουσι γὰρ ὑμᾶς εἰς συνέδρια καὶ εἰς συναγωγὰς δαρήσεσθε. For they shall deliver you up to councils and to synagogues; and ye shall be beaten.' It is most unlikely that is ouvideg and is σuvayaras should be thus connected together both by juxtaposition and the use of the same preposition, only to be disjoined and brought into different forms of expression as in our translation. The parallel place in Luke xxi. 12. is παραδιδόντες εἰς συναγωγὰς καὶ φυλακάς. Dr. Doddridge's paraphrase of is ouraywyas is, "the inferior courts in the synagogues.' The want of the copula before daghoobs seems to have misled our translators as well as many editors, and Griesbach among them: but though I have inserted it in the proposed version, any one, upon consulting the original, will perhaps consider the omission of it there not only allowable but emphatic.'

The grounds of this correction, and the propriety of the remark on the absence of the copula, are very clear. The Bishop's Bible reads: "For they shall deliver you up to councils, and to synagogues, and ye shall be whipped."

Luke i. 48. Shall call me blessed. μακαριοῦσί με. 'Shall call me happy.' Let us hear the unseasonable vaunt of the Roman Catholic Church upon this pious declaration of the Virgin. "These words are a prediction of that honour which the church in all ages should pay to the blessed Virgin. Let Protestants examine whether they are in any way concerned in this prophecy." Note in the Douay Bible.-Now,

will it be believed, that this simple word upon which these learned annotators ground the claim of the Virgin to divine honours, occurs in James v. 11. in a sense too plain to be mistaken? Behold, we count them happy (or, call them blessed) which endure. In both places, it predicates not honour, but happiness.-There is not a shadow of objection to the received translation in the passage of Luke, but that which arises from its awful abuse by the Papists.'

6

The Rhemish Translators are less courteous than their Douay brethren:- Shall call me blessed. This prophesie is fulfilled, when the Church keepeth her Festival daies, and when the faithful in al generations say the AVE MARIE, and other holy antems of our Lady. And therefore the Calvinistes are not among those generations which call our Lady blessed.' There can be no doubt about the meaning of the word. The adoration of the Jews would be quite as proper as the adoration of the Virgin: μακαριοῦσιν ὑμᾶς παντα τὰ ἔθνη. “ All the nations shall call you blessed." Malachi iii. 12. field's rendering, Luke i. 48. ' me happy.'

'Will call me happy,' is WakeCampbell reads, will pronounce

ii. 38. Coming in!' imorava. Standing near.' The common translation, besides being incorrect, apparently contradicts the statement of the preceding verse, that she departed not from the temple.'

The proposed alteration is questionable. In Chap. x. 40, ETIOτara seems to denote coming to, rather than standing near, and there can be no doubt of the verb being used of motion towards. There is no contradiction between the sense of the passage in the common version, and the statement in vs. 37th. Anna might not depart from the temple, and yet might go from one division or apartment of it to another. The disciples after Christ's ascension, chap. xxiv. 53, were "continually in the temple"; which, however, is not to be so construed or explained as if they never at any time left it. In both cases, the expression is probably used to signify regular attendance on the temple worship.

6

iv. 26, 27. Save, saving. pin. "But." The mistake in the authorized translation is not an unnatural one, but the effect of it is most unfortunate. It introduces a direct blunder, by making the passage state, that Elias was sent to none of the Israelitish widows, except to a Sidonian widow. And so of the lepers.--But the fact is, that though the natural and common sense of i, is except, it is also not uncommonly used, as here proposed, in a sense not of limitation, but exclusion. So, Gal. ii. 16.* A man is not justified by the works of the law, but (iàv pin) by the faith of Jesus Christ; where the learned Bishop of Salisbury has mistaken the sense of the particles *. So in Aristophanes, Equit. 185, 6.

鑒

VOL. IX.-N.S.

Primary Charge, 1828. p. 79.

RR

μῶν ἐκκαλῶν εἶ κἀγαθῶν ; μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς,
εἰ μὴ κ πονηρῶν γ

As the reading is admirably restored by Professor Bekker.-I will not enter further into this criticism here, having more fully investigated it in my remarks on Bishop Burgess's translation of the passage in Galatians; but will only stop to remark, that this use of appears to be elliptical. Are you born of good parents?—No, (I am not born of any) except base ones."

xxii. 31. "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not." The emphatic repetition of the Apostle's name in this monitory address, and the modern usage in respect to the pronoun, by which the singular and the plural are confounded, may here mislead readers, as we have known some to be misled. You,' tuas, refers to the whole of the disciples, and both Campbell and Wakefield convey the sense by the supplementary addition, to sift you all as wheat." xxiii. 32. This verse appears in different forms in the Common Version, some editions presenting a punctuation which others do not exhibit. We have, We have," And there were also two other malefactors led with him to be put to death,"—and,-' two others, malefactors, led.'

50. A good man, and a just. åvǹg άyalòs nai dínaios. A good and just man.

54. The preparation. maçaonen. paration;-vs. 42. preparation day.

In John xix. 31, the Pre

Acts i. 20. Bishoprick. Tǹv éπionoπýv.

In Chap. xii. 4., Professor Scholefield very properly expunges 'after Easter,' and adopts the correct reading, after the Pass' over." We rather wonder that he has passed by the present passage, the error of which is so obvious and strange. A reader would weary himself in his perusal of the Book of Psalms', without finding Bishoprick' in any part of it. The authority of King James prevailed here above the judgement of the Translators; else, in so very plain a case, the reading which they have thrown into the margin had been the only one sanctioned by them. One of his Majesty's rules directs, that the old ecclesiastical words shall be kept, and so antiquity and prejudice were honoured more than truth.

On the Epistle to the Romans, the Hints are very few. Many passages in this epistle are so intricate, and so difficult of explication, that every intelligent reader who seeks to understand them

* Preface to Two Sermons on Justification by Faith. 35-7.

pp. 30,