NEW TESTAMENT, REVISION OF THE. 



641 



versions. 3. Each company to go twice over 

 the portion to be revised, once provisionally, 

 the second time finally, and on principles of 

 voting as hereinafter provided. 4. That the 

 text to be adopted be that for which the evi- 

 dence is decidedly preponderating, and that, 

 when the text so adopted differs from that 

 from which the authorized version was made, 

 the alteration be indicated in the margin. 5. 

 To make or retain no change in the text on the 

 second final revision by each company, except 

 two thirds of those present approve of the 

 same, but on the first revision to decide by 

 simple majorities. 6. la every case of pro- 

 posed alteration that may have given rise to 

 discussion, to defer the voting thereupon till 

 the next meeting, whensoever the same shall 

 be required by one third of those present at the 

 meeting, such intended vote to be announced 

 in the notice for the next meeting. 7. To re- 

 vise the headings of chapters, pages, paragraphs, 

 italics, and punctuation. 8. To refer, on the 

 part of each company, when considered de- 

 sirable, to divines, scholars, and literary men, 

 whether at home or abroad, for their opin- 

 ion. 



Six years were spent in making the first re- 

 vision. The work was transmitted as it was 

 done, part by part, to the American Committee, 

 who returned it with their criticisms and sug- 

 gestions, and these were considered by the 

 English Committee on a second revision. The 

 second English revision was then transmitted 

 to the American Committee and considered by 

 them. The work was again examined for the 

 removal of harshness of diction and the reme- 

 dying of rhythmical defects, and, again, for the 

 purpose of bringing all the renderings of 

 words into harmony. Bishop EUicott, in com- 

 municating the report of the committee to 

 Convocation, attested the thoroughness with 

 which the work had been done, with the re- 

 mark that "there is not a hastily-arrived-at 

 judgment to be found in any page of the re- 

 vised version." He also stated that the vol- 

 ume was in every part the result of united and 

 corporate discussion ; that he did not believe 

 there would be found in the whole volume " the 

 faintest trace of a rendering which would ad- 

 just itself to one or other" of two competing 

 views of the original Greek ; and the rule had 

 invariably been observed to put the judgment 

 of the majority in the text, and that of the 

 minority in the margin. 



The committee also gave much attention to 

 the consideration of the Greek text as the 

 original from which the revision should be 

 made. It did not confine itself to any particu- 

 lar manuscript or text, but used all, subjecting 

 them to a critical examination for each passage, 

 and selecting for each the form which, after 

 such examination, appeared to be correct. 



The first meeting of the English Committee 



was held on the 22d of June, 1870, and the 



last one on the 1 1th of November, 1880. Four 



hundred and seven meetings were held in the 



VOL. xxi. 41 A 



interval, at three fourths of which one third of 

 the company were in attendance. 



The departures which the revisers have made 

 from the authorized version are of two classes : 

 those which have been made in consequence 

 of the adoption of an amended text, and those 

 which are due to an amended rendering of the 

 already received text. Changes, owing to the 

 former cause, may be found in every chapter, 

 but most of them are regarded as of very little 

 importance. It is only on rare occasions that 

 differences of reading have been found to in- 

 volve questions of doctrine, or to be otherwise 

 entitled to be regarded as of very great conse- 

 quence. Among the more conspicuous changes 

 of this character are the omission of the dox- 

 ology (Matt, vi, 13) to the Lord's prayer, and 

 of three clauses from the Lord's prayer, as 

 given in Luke xi, the fact of which is indicated 

 by marginal notes ; the indication, by a note in 

 the margin, that the closing passage of the 

 Gospel of Mark, xvi, 9-20, is of doubtful au- 

 thenticity ; the marking, by putting it in brack- 

 ets, of the fact that the passage concerning the 

 woman taken in adultery (John vii, 53 ; viii, 11) 

 is probably, while many believe it may be quite 

 historical, no part of the original gospel ; and 

 the omission, as without warrant of authority, 

 of the passage, 1 John v, 7, 8, relating to the 

 three heavenly witnesses. The verses mention- 

 ing the descent of the angel into the pool (John 

 v, 3, 4) ; the prophecy of the parting of the 

 garments of the Saviour at the time of the 

 crucifixion (Matt, xxvii, 35) ; the notification by 

 St. Mark (Mark xv, 28) of the fulfillment of 

 prophecy ; the rebuke to the disciples in Luke 

 ix, 55 ; the statement to the Ethiopian eunuch 

 of he necessity of faith before baptism (Acts 

 viii, 37) ; and the liberty of Christians (Rom. 

 xiv, 6) not to observe certain days, have been 

 removed from the text. Ten entire verses 

 have been excluded from the gospels, of which 

 three (xvii, 21 ; xviii, 11 ; and xxiii, 14) are from 

 Matthew ; four (vii, 16 ; ix, 44 ; xi, 26 ; and xv, 

 28) from Mark; two (xvii, 36; xxiii, 17) from 

 Luke ; and one (v, 4) from John. The number 

 of words and phrases omitted is considerably 

 greater. The Rev. B. Pick, Ph. D., while re- 

 garding none of them as of doctrinal impor- 

 tance, has recorded among the more noticeable 

 omissions of this class, thirty-seven in Matthew, 

 forty-five in Mark, and nine in John, and adds 

 that " the list can be largely increased with 

 some yet smaller items." 



The emendations in the rendering of the ac- 

 cepted text comprise the correction of positive 

 mistakes in the translations of the Greek ; the 

 rectification of mistakes relative to the gram- 

 mar of the original, umK-r v liich head are in- 

 cluded more particular attention to the signifi- 

 cance of the articles, attempts to represent the 

 tenses of the Greek (particularly the aorists and 

 the other past tenses) more accurately, and 

 pains to give more exact definitions of the prep- 

 ositions ; the removal of archaisms by which 

 the sense in the authorized version is made un- 



