B I B 



regained, neither tlie reformation, nortlic revolution, could 

 Inve taken place ; and wc ilioulJ liavo been itill fubjca to 

 Romilli fiiperllition, and to dcfpotic power. It is certainly 



B I B 



comparative imperfeftions ; and yet thefe {liould be promot- 

 ed by the nafiral p:itrons of facred learning, and parts of the 

 Scriptures (lioiild be afiigntd to fuch as are belt quahfied for 



not'icfs t"hrpart'of'wlfdo.n andma-nanimity to -ive up what the honourable taH. of tranflati^ng and explaining thena ; be- 

 is wrong, than rcfolutely to maintain what is right. caufe thefe pr.vate verfions and expohnons wdl lorm a mod 



It has been further argued, that the prtfcnt tranflation 

 derives an advantage from its antiquity, greatly fuperior to 

 any which could arife fiom a correftion of its inaccuracies. 

 Hence it would follow, that the verfions of Tindal, Wick- 

 clifTe, and Jerom, rife in excellence. But no age or preferlp- 

 tion can authorife error ; and it is obdinacy to defend iu any 

 verfion, however ancient or venerable, what cannot be ration 



ufeful ground-work for a revifed verlion of the whole Bible by 

 public authority. 



After all, it will be faid by feme, who are convinced that 

 our prefent Bible fliould be revifed, that tins is not a propei" 

 time for the undertaking ; and th-,* we (hould wait till, by 

 the further increafe of light and ', rogrefs of improvement, 

 we fliall be able to carry the work to a greater degree of 



ally defend-d. Although it be defirable that the grave an- perfeftion, and, if pofTible, make future rev-ifals unneceffary. 

 cientcilllliould prevail in an Enghditrandation of the Bible, This argument may be always urged; becauie religious 

 a tranHation may ncverthelefs become too antiquated ; and knowledge will encreafe, in propo. tion as human lenrnmg 

 in faft our own Bible retains words and forms of fuch re- improves, and as rew light is obtained from vcrlions ai:d 



MSS. that are already known, and that may yet be dil- 

 covered, duly examined and compared. " But fhall we, in 

 the mean time, prolong the difficulties of the Chriftian, and 

 the fancied triumph of the Infidel >. The miftakes already 

 difcovered are well worthy of correftioii. Should others of 

 importance be brought to light iu the next, or fubfequenc 



mote ufe, that fome of them are not underftood, even by in 

 telligent readers, and many of them are rather har(h and 

 uncouth, than venerable and majellic. 



But it has been faid, that the prefent tranflation ought to 

 he retained in our churches, on account of its intriufic beauty 

 and excellence. The language, though fimple and natural, 



is rich and expreffive. Even in the literal tranflation of the generation, let them alfo be correded. The ti-ue rule lu 

 Flalms, there are palTagcs exquifitely beautiful andirrefilUbly this cafe is, to revife as often as revifion is neceflary. To 

 tranfporting ; and where the fenfe is not clear nor the con- defer this longer, is an injury to religion ; to^put it off till 



lofophy, has acquired fufficient ilrength to triumph over 

 their oppofers." 



In favour of an improved verfion of the Bible, for national 

 ufe, it has been argued, that fuch a tranflation becomes ne- 

 ceffary by the unavoidable fluftuation of living languages. 

 The ftyle of WickclifFe's verfion, and of Tindal's, veiy widely 

 differs in the courfc of 14S years , and the Euglilh language 

 v.nqueflionably be retained by all future tranflators; but underwent alfo a great change between the publication of 

 " ' • ■ ■ ■ ■ -^ r Tin(j;,i'g ;B;blt and that of king James's, in an interval of 81 



years. Since the year 1611, when the prefent verfion firlt 



__ appeared, our language has acquired a great degree of copi- 



The correfting tranflators, it will be again urged, differ oufnefs, of elegance, of accuracy, and perhaps of ftability. 

 amon-T themfelves. Differences mud neccffarily arife among Many words and phrafes which occur in the revifed verfion 

 interpreters of the Scriptures. King James's tranflators are become unintelligible to the generality of readers ; and 



are found, m an equal, or partly in a fuperior degree, in our 

 iirfl verfion ; and mail be more or lefs found in every verfion 

 of the Hebrew Scriptures, that is not a mere paraphrafe. 

 King James's tranflators found it in their prototype ; the 

 d'.ftion and phrafeology they borrowed from their predecef- 

 fors in tranflation. What is beautiful, what is excellent, 

 what i^ melodious and ravifliing in the prefent verfion, fliould 



is there any reafon for retaining its corruptions, its miftranf- 

 lations, its obfcurities, and its other acknowledged imper- 

 ftcHon> ' 



often difagreed as individuals ; and adopted in a body what 

 feemed to be mod agreeable to the found rules of interpreta- 

 tion. Let a like number of able judges decide, on the fame 

 principles, between biblical critics of the prefent age. But 

 the new tranflators recede too far from the common verfion. 

 This, however, in a new verfion, is not neceffary, nor would 

 it be proper ; whilft they recede from its errors and iinper- 



many, v.-hlch are intelligible, are fo antiquated and debafed, as 

 to excite difguft among the ferious, and contempt and dcrilion 

 among libertines. Pilkington (Remarks on ftveral paffagcs 

 of Scripture, Camb. Svo. 1759); Purver (Tranflation of the 

 Bible); Dr. Symonds (Obfervations on the expediency of 

 revifiiig the prefent Englilh verfi(}n, &c. Camb. .).to. 17S9) ; 

 Dr. Wells (Pref. to Comment on the O. T.) ; Dr. Camp. 



feftions ; they fliould retain its general dlAion and manner, bell (Four Gofpels tranflated from the Greek, 4to. Lond 



nor ever allow themfelves to deviate from it without a fatif- 

 faftory reafon. 



It has been further intimated, by thofe who are averfe from 

 a new verfion, that fuch as wilh for additional information 

 may have rccoutfe to thofe authors, who have explained ob- 

 fcure and erroneous paffagcs. But have all Chiiftiaus, who 

 meet with difficulties, time and ability to confult thefe 



1789); and Di'. Geddes (Profpttlus) ; have feleftcd many 

 words and phrafes that require correction, and that admit of 

 obvious improvement. The ftyle of a biblical verfion is a 

 matter of importance; both as it invites the perufal of a 

 book which the Spirit of God infpired, and as it infl'.iences 

 the national language and tafte. Whatever merit be allow- 

 ed to the verfion now in ufe, with regard both to its inter- 



writers ? Or if they had, is it in any refpecl decent or fit pretations as well as its ftyle, it mult be allowed that, fince 



that the public Scriptures, confeffed to want affiltance, 

 fliould be fuffered to depend for fupport on thefe extraneous 

 props ? The national Bible is the great record of our reli- 

 gion ; it is this v.-hich the Dcill attacks, and this mull fup- 

 ply us with our defence. 



The objectors proceed with obferving, that no tranflation, 

 fven of a fingle book, has yet appeared, preferable on the 

 whole, to the received one. Let it be confidered, however, 



that the attempts of individuals neccfl'arily labour under great of the Hebrew Scriptures, have been collated by Kennicott 



and 



the period in which it was executed, the biblical apparatus 

 has been much enriched by the publications of polyglotts ; 

 of the Samaritan pentateuch ; of ancient and modern ver- 

 fions ; of lexicons, concordances, critical differtatlons, and 

 fermons ; books of eaftern travels ; difquifitions on the geo- 

 graphy, cultoms, and natural hiltory of the Eaft ; accurate 

 tables of chronology, coins, weights, and meafures. Many 

 Hebrew and Samaritan MSS. ; many early printed editions 



