Remarks, pp. 37-43
Having
often heard of a New Version coming out, I was anxious to see it, expecting to
see something in good form, nicely improved in versification; strictly
grammatical, and worthy the notice and reading of all classes who read and
speak the English language. But, to my astonishment, I found it to be miserably
poor in form, ingrammatical, and in some cases amounting to almost nonsense—i.
e., in the new construction of texts.
Now,
as I have been an extensive reader in the theological works of all churches,
have thoroughly studied the Christian Bible, and have read several versions of
the New Testament, the Mormon Bible, the Spiritual Bible, the Mohammedan
Bible,—Alcoran, with extracts from the Hindoo Bible,—Shaster, all commentaries
on the Scriptures, all theological writers, the Age of Reason and near all
other infidel works, the Grecian philosophy, and all the parts of science,
together with the widespread book of Physiological Nature, I think I am able to
compare the New Version with King James’ translation; to give credit where
credit is due, and to detect mistranslations and interpolations, especially
when not in accordance with Divine Writ—Holy Bible, from whatsoever source they
may come.
I
have carefully compared the two versions, given the manner of phraseology,
changes of words to make the same meaning, words, phrases and verses left out,
etc., in a plain and fair way, so that every reader may understand to what
extent one version is inferior or superior to the other.
In
the New Version there are words amounting to the same meaning, but in some
cases a very inferior class to those of the Old Version; therefore, nothing
better, no improvement—and, with former versions, gotten up with the same
intent, it falls beneath the notice of enlightened Christians, and of those
wishing to be. In its form it is not well adapted to be used in the pulpit, the
family circle, nor the Sunday-school.
It
corrects very few ingrammatical expressions of the Old Version; indeed, it is
much more ingrammatical than the Old. And instead of being a help to the other
and to the world, it acts as a club in the hands of the infidels to destroy, if
possible, the influence of the Holy Scriptures.
The
Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and the New Testament was written in
Greek. The Vulgate is a translation into Latin directly from the Apostles’
manuscripts and from the Hebrew manuscripts as compiled by Ezra, and from the Septuagint,
and held most sacred by the Catholics, and always will be; so the English
Version will be to them as King James’ was and yet is.
King
James’ translation is the Protestant Bible, and always will be, being the best
adapted to all evangelical purposes, agreeing perfectly with the Divine
revealment, whether in the Bible or in nature; and as a matter well understood
by enlightened ministers and people, to have come out with the Divine sanction
in the days of peril when the glory of God was the consideration, not money.
The
New Version in meaning as to its theology differs but little from the Old one,
except in the doctrine of tri-unity—trinity—which doctrine by the general
church has always been considered the leading doctrine in Divine theology, and
held most sacred; and which considers Jesus in his pre-existence co-equal and
co-eternal with the Eternal Deity—whom Jesus called the Father. And as
Arianisin has made much trouble in the church, it should not be cherished now
by those who believe Jesus to be equal in the God-head.
True,
the Old Version is ingrammatical in much of its reading, but in no case does it
clash with theological science, nor with physiological metaphysics. No
contradiction in the theological department. True, in the historical department
of the Old Testament there are some discrepancies, but it amounts to no
difficulty.
Considering
the New Version, and knowing the condition of the world and the falling state
of the general church in her three grand divisions—as to their outer circles,
it is easy to determine as to the chaotic style in which it is gotten up. The
OLD VERSION
has
for its source Jesus of Nazareth, the Apostles and the Holy Ghost. The
NEW VERSION
has
for its source Arius, Socinus, Dr. Priestley and the spirit of the age. The
OLD VERSION
is
a Trinitarian Testament, and held most sacred by the true church of Christ. The
NEW VERSION
with
its sister—the American Bible Union
Version, are Unitarian Testaments, because they, both, have expunged the seventh verse of the fifth chapter of I.
John. The
OLD VERSION
teaches
that “there are Three that bear record in heaven—the Father, the Word and the
Holy Ghost, and these three are one.” The
NEW VERSION
throws
that verse away; therefore, teaches
an inferiority of Christ to the Father, and which is noticeable in certain
other parts of the work.
KING JAMES’ TRANSLATION
harmonizes
the fifth chapter of I. John with the twentieth chapter, twenty-eighth verse of
Acts; and in fact harmonizes the entire Bible with universal nature in all its
departments, which also consists of a tri-unity—three in one—co-equal in their
created—infinite existence.
God’s
ministers and their people should be careful how they swallow Tom, Dick and
Harry’s notions without comparing them with the Bible and with nature. The
Bible and the visible creation, and their theological and metaphysical trend is the standard by which all
doctrines and all translations are to be measured.
It
is right to translate the Holy Scriptures into the different languages and
tongues; but it is wrong for any man or set of men to be bringing out different
versions in the English, (after the translation of the entire Bible into it,
and after it has been carried to all nations, tongues and people)—only to make
a jargon, and to bring the whole Bible into disrepute; to cause bitter envy,
strife and divisions, and to drive millions into skepticism, because of the
purported discrepancy.
I
unhesitatingly say, that the same Holy Ghost who gave inspiration to the
Apostles to write out the New Testament, presided over and inspired those men
in the translation and bringing out of the entire Bible in the English
language. And I also say, that no version
since, brought out in the English language, has the Divine sanction.
King
James’ translation came out when the English language was becoming the
vernacular of the world— all countries—and was adapted to the high-toned
English, and the varied dialects of it, in all parts of the world. Now, why
would God cause at this age and in these trying times, versions in the same
language to be brought out, to conflict and to batter down the influence of
that of his instigating? He would not.
I
furthermore say, that King James’ Translation of the
Bible is the only Divinely Inspired translation directly, since the
compilation of the ancient manuscripts by Ezra, and the giving of the New
Testament by the Apostles; and this fact is sustained by the fact of the
several Theological Historic Periods of Divine
Revealment, which are,
1.
The giving of laws and rules to Adam, directly by the Deity.
2.
The giving of the law by Moses.
3.
The Inspired New Testament by Jesus and the Apostles; and
4.
The confirmation of the Gospel at the revealment of the Shiloah, second coming
of Christ, and ushering in of the Millennium.
Now,
the intermediates are,
1.
The Abrahamic covenant, between the Theocratical reveal ment and the law by
Moses.
2.
The compilation of the manuscripts by Ezra, between the Mosaic Law and its
ratification by Jesus of Nazareth; and
3.
The translation of the Old and New Testaments into
the English language, by King James, between the giving of the Gospel and its
ratification by its Chief Good—the Shiloah—the fullness of the
Gentiles; and these are the only dispensations, and the only intermediates in
the run of time, and which will close up all active scenes from not only the
days of Adam, but also that of all materiality as materiality, since the beginning,
in the completement of the New Creation, when all action will be immortal
action.
These
facts are backed up by the inscriptions in the great pyramid of Egypt, written
there by order of Shem, the son of Noah—the Melchisedec—the Job of the land of
Uz, in the reign of Cheops, king of Egypt; wherein are the regular
dispensations, with their intermediates, together with the theological metaphysics
of Divine revealment; the twelve signs of the zodiac and other astronomical
revealments, which are to be in the last days “as a witness unto the Lord in the
land of Egypt.”
No comments:
Post a Comment