第8章

TheBibleconstantlyimpressesmenthatthisrelationtoGodistheessentialone。Everythingelseisincidental。Grantednowapeoplefreshlyundertheinfluenceofthatteaching，youhavealargeexplanationofthemovementwhichfollowedtheissuanceofthisversion。 [1]ShortHistoryoftheEnglishPeople，chap。vii，sec。vii。 Jamesopenedhisfirstparliament(1604)withaspeechclaimingdivineright，adoctrinewhichhadreallybeenraisedtomeettheclaimoftherightofthepopetodeposekings。Jamesarguedthatthestateofmonarchyisthesupremestthingonearth，forkingsarenotonlyGod\'slieutenantsonearthandsetuponGod\'sthrone，butevenbyGodHimselfarecalledgods。(HeneverfoundthatintheGenevanversionoritsnotes!)AstodisputewhatGodmaydoisblasphemy，soitisseditioninsubjectstodisputewhatthekingmaydointheheightofhispower。\"Iwillnotbecontentthatmypowerbedisputedon。\"TheHouseofCommonssatbyhisgraceandnotofanyright。 SetthatideaofJamesoveragainsttheideawhichtheBiblewasconstantlydevelopinginthemindofthepeople，andyouseewhyTrevelyansaysthattheBiblebroughtindemocracy，andwhyhethinks，aswehavealreadyseen，thatthegreatestcontributionEnglandhasmadetogovernmentisitstreatmentoftheStuarts，whenittransferredsovereigntyfromthekingtoParliament。AmongthemenwholistenedtothatkindofteachingwereEliot，Hampden，Pym，allPuritansunderthespelloftheBible。 ButthestrifegrewlargerthanamerelyPuritanone。Thepeoplethemselveswerestronglyfeelingtheirrights。\"TothedevoutEnglishman，muchashemightlovehisprayer-bookandhatethedissenters，thecoreofreligionwasthelifeoffamilyprayerandBiblestudy，whichthePuritanshadforahundredyearsstrugglednotinvaintomakethecustomoftheland。\"ItwasthisspiritwhichJamesmet。 Wehavealreadythoughtsufficientlyoftheeventswhichactuallyfollowed。ThefinalruptureofCharlesI。withparliamentaryinstitutionswasduetothereligioussituation。ThereweremanyBible-readingfamilies，learningtheirownrights，whilekingsandfavoriteswereplottingwar。Laudandthebishopsforbadenon-conforminggatherings，buttheycouldnotpreventaman\'sgatheringhishouseholdabouthimwhilehereadthegreatstoriesoftheBible，inwhichnokingruledwhenhehadceasedtoadvancehiskingdom，inwhicheachmanwasshutuptoGodinthemostvitalthingsofhislife。Thediscussionofthetimegrewkeenaboutpredestinationandfree-will。OnemeantthatonlyGodhadpower；theothermeantthatmen，andifmen，thenspeciallykings，mightcontrolothermenifonlytheycould。Notfully，butvaguely，thecrowdunderstood。Veryfully，andnotvaguely，theleadersunderstood。PredestinationandParliamentbecameacry。Thatis，controlliftedoutofthehandsofthefree-willofsomemonarchintothehandsofasovereignGodtowhomeverymanhadthesameaccessthatanyothermanhad。Lauddecreedthatallsuchdiscussionshouldcease。HerevivedanolddecreethatnobookcouldbeprintedwithoutconsentofanarchbishoportheBishopofLondon。Sothebooksbecamesecretandmorevirulenteachyear。Thecivilwar(1642-46) betweenCharlesandParliamentwasawarofideas。Itissometimescalledawarofreligion，notquitefairly。Itwasduetothereligioussituation，butactuallyitwasforthelibertiesofthepeopleagainstthepoweroftheking。Andthatquestionrootedfardowninanotherregardingtherightsofmentobefreeintheirreligiouslife。CharlesstruckhiscoinatOxfordwiththeLatininscription:\"TheProtestantreligion； thelawsofEngland；thelibertiesofParliament。\"Buthestruckittoolate。Hehadbeentriflingwiththefreedomofthepeople，andtheyhadlearnedfromtheirfiresideBiblesandfromtheirpulpitsthatnomanmaycommandanotherinhisrelationtoGod。ItwaslongafterthatBurnsdescribed\"TheCottar\'sSaturdayNight\"；buthewasonlydescribingaconditionwhichwasalreadyinvogue，andwhichwashavingtremendousinfluenceinEnglandaswellasinScotland: \"Thecheerfu\'supperdone，wi\'seriousface，They，roundtheingle，formacirclewide； Thesireturnso\'er，wi\'patriarchalgrace，Thebigha\'Bible，ancehisfather\'spride: Hisbonnetrev\'rentlyislaidaside，Hislyarthaffetswearingthinan\'bare； ThosestrainsthatoncedidsweetinZionglide，Hewalesaportionwithjudiciouscare，And\'LetusworshipGod!\'hesays，withsolemnair。\" UndersuchguidanceasthisthepeopleofEngland，Puritansandothers，relaxedthepoweroftheStuartsandbecameademocracy。Fordemocracyisnotaformofgovernment。Itcanexistundermonarchy，providedthemonarchyisaconvenienceofthewillofthepeople，asitisinEngland。Itcanexistunderinstitutionslikeourown，providedtheyalsoareheldasaconvenienceofthepeople。Thiswasnorebellionagainstsomeformofmonarchy。ItwassimplyaclaimofeverymantohavehisrightsbeforeGod。UndertheParliamentofeighteenyearsduration，theIndependensts，Presbyterians，andallothernon-conformingbodiessufferedasheavilyasunderJamesandCharles，yettheydidnotfleetheland。Theirbattlewasreallywon。 Theybelievedthetimewouldcomewhentheyaspartof\"thepeople\"whonowgovernedshouldassertthemselves。Iftheywerepersecuted，itwasunderagovernmentwhereyettheymighthopefortheirrights。FleeingfromEnglandin1620washeroism；fleeingin1640 wouldhavebeencowardly。ItisimpossibletocalculatewhatwastherevelationtothereadersoftheEnglishBibleoftheirrights。 LetTrevelyantellthestory:\"Whileotherliterarymovements，howevernobleinquality，affectonlyafew，thestudyoftheBiblewasbecomingthenationaleducation。Recommendedbytheking，translatedbytheBishops，yetinchiefrequestwiththePuritans，withouttherivalryofbooksandnewspapers，theBibletoldtotheunscholarlythestoryofanotherageandrace，notinbaldgeneralizationanddoctrinalharangue，butwithsuchwealthofsimplenarrativeandlyricalforcethateachmanrecognizedhisowndimstrivingsafteranewspirit，writtenclearinwordstwothousandyearsold。AdeepandsplendideffectwaswroughtbythemonopolyofthisBookasthesolereadingofcommonhouseholds，inanagewhenmen\'smindswereinstinctwithnaturalpoetryandopentoreceivethelightofimagination。Anewreligionarose，ofwhichthemythuswastheBiblestoriesandthepervadingspiritthedirectrelationsofmanwithGod，exemplifiedinthehumanlife。Andwhileimaginationwaskindled，theintellectwasfreedbythisprivatestudyoftheBible。Foritsprivatestudyinvolveditsprivateinterpretation。 Eachreader，evenifaChurchman，becameinsomesortachurchtohimself。HencethehundredsectsandthousanddoctrinesthatastonishedforeignersandopenedEngland\'sstrangepathtointellectualliberty。TheBiblecultivatedhere，morethaninanyotherland，thegrowthofintellectualthoughtandpractice。\"[1] [1]EnglandundertheStuarts。 AllthathasseemedtoreferonlytoEngland，butthesameessentialdemocracyoftheBiblecametoAmericaandfoundedthenewnation。 ItwasahandfulofPuritansturnedPilgrimswhosetoutintheMayflowertogivetheirBibleideasfreefield。Inadozenyears(1628-40)，underLaud\'spersecution，twentythousandEnglishmenfledtojointhosePilgrims。Andhowmuchturnedonthat!Supposeithadnothappened。 ThentheFrenchoftheNorthandthecavaliersofVirginia，withtheSpanishoftheSouth，wouldhavehadonlytheDutchbetweenthem。Andofthefour，onlytheDutchhadfreeaccesstotheBible。ThenewlandwouldnothavebeenEnglish。ItisanEnglishwriterwhosaysthatNorthAmericaisnowpreparingthefutureoftheworld，andEnglishspeechisthemoldinwhichthefolkofalltheworldarebeingpouredfortheirfinalshaping。[1]ItisthedemocracyoftheBiblewhichisthefundamentaldemocracyofAmerica，inwhicheverymanhasitaccentedtohimthatheissomuchachildofGodthathisrightsareinalienable。Theycoverlifeandlibertyandthepursuitofhappiness。 Andthoughwehaveheldthatprincipleofdemocracyinconsistentlyattimes，andhavepaidaterriblepriceforourinconsistencyinthepast，andmaypayitinthefutureagain，itisstilltruethatthefundamentaldemocracyofourAmericanlifeisonlythatessentialdemocracyoftheBible，whereeverymanismadetheequalofhisfellowbybeingliftedintothesamerelationwithAlmightyGod。 [1]Trevelyan，EnglandundertheStuarts，p。174。 TheBiblemakesitsmoralappealonthesamebasis。IfamanisachildofGod，thenheisshutuptodutieswhichcannotbeavoided。 Someoneelsemaytellamanhisdutyinatruemonarchy。Inademocracyeachmanstandsaloneatthemostsolemnpointofhisduty。 Thereisnosafedemocracrywheremenrefusetostandalonethere。InJefferson\'sgreatspeech，replyingtotheforebodingsofPatrickHenry，heinsistedthatifmenwerenotcompetenttogovernthemselvestheywerenotcompetenttogovernotherpeople。ThefirstdutyofanymanistotakehisindependentplacebeforeGod。 Democracyisthesocialprivilegethatgrowsoutofthemeetingofthesepersonalobligations。 Severalfactsstrengthenthispersistentmoralappeal。Foronething，theBookisabsolutelyfairtohumanity。Itleavesoutnolineorwrinkle；butitaddsnone。Themenwithwhomitdealsaretypicalmen。Thefactsitpresentsaretypicalfacts。Therearebookswhichflattermen，makethemoutallgood，prattleonabouttheessentialgoodnessofhumanity，whilemenwhoknowthemselves(andthesearetheonlyoneswhodothings)knowthatthestoryisnottrue。Ontheotherhand，therearebookswhicharedepressing。Theirpigmentsareallblack。 TheymovefromthedignityofSchopenhauer\'spessimismtothebedlamofNietzsche\'scontemptforlifeandgoodness。Buthere，also，thesanecommonsenseofhumanitycomestotherescue。 Thepictureisnottrueifitisallwhiteorallblack。TheBibleisabsolutelyfairtohumanity。 Itmoveswithinthecircleofman\'sexperience； and，whileitdealswithmen，itresultsinatreatmentofman。 ThatishowitcomesaboutthattheBibleinspiresmen，andputsthemattheirbest。Nomoralappealcanbesuccessfulifitfailstoreachthebetterpartofaman，andlaysholdonhimthere。JustthatitdidfortheEnglishpeople。 \"NogreatermoralchangeeverpassedoveranationthanpassedoverEnglandduringtheyearsthatpartedthemiddleofthereignofElizabethfromthemeetingoftheLongParliament。 EnglandbecamethepeopleofaBook，andthatBookwastheBible。\"[1] [1]Green，ShortHistoryoftheEnglishPeople。 AddtothatpersonalappealandthatabsolutefairnesstohumanitytheconstantchallengeoftheBibletothenoblerelementsofhumanity。 Itnevertrifles。Itisindeadlyearnest。Anditmakesearnestmen。ProbablywecannotillustratethatearnestnessmoreclearlythanbyastudyofoneelementinPuritanhistory，whichisconfusedinmanyminds。ItisthematterofthethreegreatantagonismsofPuritanisminEnglandandAmerica。Theycanneverbeunderstoodbymoraltriflers。Theymaynotbeapprovedbyallthemorallyserious，buttheywillbeunderstoodbythem。Whatarethosethreemarkedantagonisms?Theantagonismtothestage，topopularfrivolity，andtothepleasureSabbath。 1。TheearlyEnglishstagehadtheapprovalofvirtuallyallthepeople。TherewerefewvoicesraisedagainstthedramasofShakespeare。 ButthecleavagebetweenthePuritansandthestagegrewgreaterastheyearswenton。Therewereriotousexcesses。ThelatercomedyafterShakespearewasincrediblygross。Thetragedieswereshallow，theyturnednotongravescenesofconscience，butoncommonandcheapintriguesofincestandmurder。Inthemeantime，\"thehatredofthePuritansforthestagewasonlythehonesthatredofGod-fearingmenagainstthefoulestdepravitypresentedinpoeticanddramaticforms。\"TheBiblewaslayingholdontheimaginationofthepeople，makingthemserious，thoughtful，preparingthemforthestruggleforlibertywhichwassoontocome。 Theplaysofthetimeseemedtootriflingorelsetoofoul。ThePuritansandtheEnglishpeopleofthedaywerewillingtobeamused，ifthestagewouldamusethem。Theywerewillingtobetaught，ifthestagewouldteachthem。Buttheywerenotwillingtobeamusedbyviceandfoulness，andtheywerenotwillingtobetaughtbylecherousactorswhoparrotedbeautifulsentimentsofvirtueonthestageandlivedfilthylivesofincestandshameoffthestage。LifehadtobewholetothePuritan，asindeedithastobetootherthoughtfulmen。AndtheBibletaughthimthat。Hisconcernwasforthehigherelementsoflife；hisappealwastotheworthiervaluesinmen。Theconcernofthestageofhisdaywasforthemorevolatileelementsinmen。 Thetestofasuccessfulplaywaswhetherthecrowds，anycrowds，cametoit。Andasalwayshappenswhenamanwantstocatchtheinterestofacrowd，thestagecateredtoitslowestinterests。 YoucanhardlyreadthestoryofthetimeswithoutfeelingthatthePuritanmadenomistakeinhisday。Hecouldnothavebeenthethoughtfulmanwhowouldstandstronginthestruggleforlibertyonthatsideoftheseaandthestruggleforlifeonthissideoftheseawithoutopposingtriflingandvice。 2。TheantagonismoftheearlyPuritantopopularfrivolityneedstohavethetimesaroundittobeunderstood。Nogreatmovementcarrieseverybodywithit，andwhileitisstillstrugglingthemajoritywillbeontheopposingside。WhiletherealleadershipofEnglandwaspassingintothestrongerandmoreserioushandstheartificialexcessesoflifegrewstrongonthepeople。 \"Fortuneswerebeingsunkandestatesmortgagedinorderthatmenshouldwearjewelsanddressincoloredsilks。\"[1]Inthepressureofgravenationalneedsmenpersistedinfrivolity。 Thetworeigningvicesweredrunkennessandswearing。Intheircupsmenwereguiltyofthegrossestindecencies。Eventheirotherwiseharmlesssportswereendangered。ThepopularnotionoftheMay-poledancesmissestherealpointofthePuritanoppositiontoitinOldandNewEngland。Itwasnotaninnocent，jovialout-doorevent。Onceitmayhavebeenthat。 Veryoftenitwasonlypartofadaywhichbroughtimmoralityandviceinitstrain。Itwaspartofaruralpaganism。Someofthecustomsinvolvedsuchgraveperils，withtheirseclusionofyoungpeoplefromearlydawnintheforests，astomakeitimpossibletoapproveit。OveragainstallthesethingsthePuritanssetthemselves。 Sometimestheycarriedthissolemnitytoanabsurdlength，justifyingitbyScriptureversesmisapplied。Againsttheaffectedeleganciesofspeechtheysettheplainyea，yeaandnay，nayofScripture。Intheirclothing，theirhomes，theirchurches，they，andinevenmoremarkeddegree，theQuakers，registeredtheirsolemnprotestagainstthefrivolityofthetimes。Iftheywenttoofar，itiscertaintheirprotestwasneeded。Macaulay\'sepigramisfamiliar，thatthePuritan\"hatedbear-baiting，notbecauseitgavepaintothebear，butbecauseitgavepleasuretothespectators。\"Insofarasthatistrue，itistothecreditofthePuritan； forthebearcanstandthepainofbeingbaitedfarbetterthanhumannaturecanstandthecoarseningeffectsofbaitinghim，anditisnoblertoopposesuchsportonhumangroundsthanonanimalgrounds。But，ofcourse，theepigramisMacaulay\'s，andmustbereadwithqualification。 Thefactis，andhesaysitoftenenoughwithoutepigrams，thatthetimeshadbecometriflingexceptasthisgrave，thoughtfulgroupinfluencedthem。 [1]Trevelyan，EnglandundertheStuarts，p。66。 3。TheattitudeofthePuritanstowardtheSabbathcamefromtheirseriousthoughtoftheBible。PuritanismgaveEnglandtheSabbathagainandplanteditinAmericaasaninstitution。 Ofcourse，thesemenlearnedallthattheyknewofitfromtheBible。Fromthatday，inspiteofmuchchangeinthoughtofit，English- speakingpeoplehaveneverbeenwilfulabusersoftheSabbath。Buttheconditioninthatdaywasverydifferent。MostofthegameswereonthedaysetapartastheSabbath。Therewerebull-baiting，bear-baiting，andfootballonSunday。 Calvinhimself，thoughnotinEngland，bowledonSunday，andpoorKnoxattendedfestivitiesthen，sayinggrimlythatwhatlittleisrightonweek-daysisnotwrongonSundays。 AftertheserviceonSundaymorningthepeoplethrongedtothevillagegreen，wherealeflowedfreelyandgameswereplayeduntiltheeveningdancewascalled。Itwasawork-day。ElizabethissuedaspecialinjunctionthatpeopleworkafterserviceonSundaysandholidaysiftheywishedtodoso。EmployersweresustainedintheirdemandforSundaywork。 TherearealwayspeopleineverytimewhocountthattheidealSabbath。ThePuritansfounditwhentheyappeared。TheEnglishReformationfounditwhenitcame。AndtheBiblefounditwhenatlastitcameoutofobscurityandlaidholdonnationalconditions。 Whateveristobesaidofotherraces，everyperiodofEnglish-speakinghistoryassuresusthatourmoralpowerincreasesorweakenswiththeriseorfallofSabbathreverence。ThePuritanssawthat。Theysaw，asmanyotherthoughtfulpeoplesaw，thatthesteady，repeatedobservanceoftheSabbathgavecertainnationalinfluencesachancetowork；remindedthenationofcertaingreatunderlyingandundyingprinciples；inshort，broughtGodintohumanthought。TheSundayofpleasureorworkcouldneveraccomplishthat。Bothasreligionistsandaspatriots，asloversofGodandloversofmen，theyopposedthepleasure-SundayandheldfortheSabbath。 ButthatcomesaroundagaintothesayingthatthepersistentmoralappealoftheBiblegivesitinevitableinfluenceonhistory。Itcentersthoughtonmoralissues。Itchallengesmentomoralcombats。 Suchaforcepersistentlyworkinginmen\'smindsisirresistible。Itcannotbeopposed；itcanonlyfailbybeingneglected。AndthisistheforcewhichhasbeensteadilyatworkeverywhereinEnglish-speakinghistorysincetheKingJamesversioncametobe。 LECTUREVI THEBIBLEINTHELIFEOFTO-DAY THISlecturemustdifferattwopointsfromthosewhichhaveprecededit。Inthefirstplace，theotherlectureshavedealtentirelywithfacts。Thismustdealalsowithjudgments。Intheearlierlectureswehaveavoidedanyconsiderationofwhatoughttohavebeenandhavecenteredourinterestonwhatactuallydidoccur。 WeespeciallyavoidedanyargumentbasedonatheoryoftheliterarycharacteristicsorliteraryinfluenceoftheBible，butsoughtfirsttofindthefactsandthentodiscoverwhatexplainedthem。ItmightbeverydifficulttodeterminewhatistheactualplaceoftheBibleinthelifeofto-day。Perhapsitwouldbeimpossibletogiveabroad，fairjudgment。ItisquitecertainthatthepeopleofJames\'sdaydidnotrealizetheplaceitwastaking。Itisequallycertainthatmanyofthosewhomitmostinfluencedwereentirelyunconsciousofthefact。 Itisonlywhenwelookbackuponthescenethatwediscovertheinfluencethatwasmovingthem。 But，whileitisdifficulttosaywhattheplaceoftheBibleactuallyisinourowntimes，theplaceitoughttohaveiseasiertopointout。Thatwillinvolveastudyoftheconditionsofourtimes，whichsuggesttheneedforitsinfluence。Whilewemustconsiderthefacts，therefore，wewillbecompelledtopasssomejudgmentsalso，andthereinthislecturemustdifferfromtheothers。 ThesecondfactofdifferenceisthatwhiletheearlierlectureshavedealtwiththeKingJamesversion，thismustdealratherwiththeBible。 FortheKingJamesversionisnottheBible。 Therearemanyversions；thereisbutoneBible。Whateverthetranslatorsputintothevarioustongues，theBibleitselfremainsthesame。Therearevaluesinthenewversions； buttheyaresimplytheoldvalueoftheBibleitself。ItisafamiliarmaximthatthenewestversionistheoldestBible。WearenotmakingtheBibleuptodatewhenwemakeanewversion； weareonlygettingbacktoitsdate。A revisioninourdayistheefforttotakeoutoftheoriginalwritingswhatmenofKingJames\'sdaymayhaveputin，andgivethemsomuchthebetterchance。ThereisnorevisedBible；thereisonlyarevisedversion。ReaderssometimesfeeldisturbedatwhattheyconsiderthechangesmadeintheBible。Thefactis，therevisionwhichdeservesthenameislesseningthechangesintheBible；itisgivingustheBibleasitactuallywasandtakingfromuselementswhichwerenotpartofit。OnecansympathizewiththeeloquentDr。Storrs，whodeclared，inanaddressin1879，thathewasagainstanynewversionbecauseofthehistoryoftheKingJamesversion，describingitasagreatoakwithrootsrunningdeepandbranchesspreadingwide。Hedeclaredwewerenotreadytogiveitupforanymoderntulip-tree。Thereissomethinginthat，thoughsuchfiguresarenotalwaysgoodargument。 Yetthevaluetoanybookofaworthytranslationisbeyondcalculation。Theoutstandingliteraryillustrationofthatfactisfamiliar。TheRubaiyatofOmarKhayyamlayinPersianliteratureandindifferentEnglishtranslationslongbeforeFitzgeraldmadeitahouseholdclassicforliterarypeople。Thetranslatormadethebookforusinmoremarkedwaythantheoriginalwriterdid。InsomewhatthesamewaytheKingJamesversiongavetotheEnglish-speakingpeopletheBible；andnootherversionhastakenitsplace。 Yetthatwasnotamistakenmovenearlyfortyyearsago，whentherevisionoftheKingJamesversionwasproposedandundertaken。 Thirtyyearsago(1881)itwascompletedinwhatweordinarilycalltheRevisedVersion，andtenyearsago(1901)theAmericanformofthatRevisedVersionappeared。FewthingscouldmoredefinitelyprovetheacceptedplaceoftheKingJamesversionthanthefactthatweseemtohearlessto-dayoftheRevisedVersionthanweusedtohear，andthat，whiletheAmericanRevisedVersionisincomparablythebestinexistenceinitsreproductionoftheoriginal，evenitmakeswayslowly。InlessthanfortyyearstheKingJamesversioncrowdedallitscompetitorsoffthefield。ThepresenceoftheRevisedVersionof1881hasnotappreciablyaffectedthesalesorthedemandfortheKingJamesversion。 InthemindsofmostpeopletheEnglishandtheAmericanrevisionsstandasadmirablecommentariesontheKingJamesversion。IfonewishestoknowwhereintheKingJamesversionfailedofrepresentingtheoriginal，hewilllearnitbetterfromthoseversionsthanfromanynumberofcommentaries；butthenumberofthosetowhomoneorotheroftheversionshassupplantedtheKingJamesversionisnotsolargeasmighthavebeenexpected。 TherewereseveralreasonsforanewEnglishversionoftheBible。Itwas，ofcourse，noindignitytotheKingJamesversion。ThosetranslatorsfranklysaidthattheyhadnohopetomakeafinalversionoftheScriptures。Itwouldbeverystrangeifinthreehundredyearslanguageshouldnothavegrownbyreasonofthenecessitiesoftheracethatusedit，sothatatsomepointsabookmightbeoutgrown。InanotherlectureithasbeenintimatedthattheEnglishBible，byreasonofitsconstantuse，hastendedtofixandconfirmtheEnglishlanguage。 Butnoonebook，noranysetofbooks，couldconfinealivingtongue。Someofthereasonsforanewversionwhichgivevaluetothesetworevisionsmaybementioned。 1。ThoughtheKingJamesversionwasmadejustaftertheliteraryrenaissance，theclassicallearningofto-dayisfarinadvanceofthatday。 TheKingJamesversionisoccasionallydefectiveinitsuseoftensesandverbsintheGreekandalsointheHebrew。WehaveGreekandHebrewscholarswhoareablemoreexactlytoreproduceinEnglishthemeaningoftheoriginal。 Itwouldbestrangeifthatwerenotso。 2。ThentherehavebeennewandimportantdiscoveriesofBiblicalliteraturewhichdateearlierinChristianhistorythananyourfathersknewthreehundredyearsago。Insomeinstancesthoseearlierdiscoverieshaveshownthataphrasehereortherehasbeenwronglyintroducedintothetext。Therehasbeennomarkedinstancewhereaphrasewasaddedbytherevisers； thatis，aphrasedroppedoutoftheoriginalandnowreplaced。Oneillustrationoftheomissionofaphrasewillbeenough。InthefifthchapterofIJohntheseventhversereads:\"Fortherearethreethatbearrecordinheaven，theFather，theWord，andtheHolyGhost，andthesethreeareone。\"Intherevisedversionsitisomitted，becauseitseemsquitecertainthatitwasnotintheoriginalwriting。ItdoesnotatallalterthemeaningofScripture。WhileitappearsinmostofthebestmanuscriptswhichwereavailablefortheKingJamestranslators，earliermanuscriptsfoundsincethattimehaveshownthatitwasformerlywrittenatthesideasagloss，andwasbysometranscribersetoverinthetextitself。 Theprocessofmakingtheearlymanuscriptsshowshoweasilythatcouldhaveoccurred。 Letussupposethattwoorthreemanuscriptswerebeingmadeatoncebydifferentcopyists。 Onewassettoreadtheoriginal；asheread，theotherswrote。Itwouldbeeasytosupposethathemightreadthismarginalreferenceasasuitablecommentaryonthetext，andthatoneormoreofthewriterscouldhavewrittenitinthetext。Itcouldeasilyhappenalsothatacopyist，evenseeingwhereitstood，mightsupposeithadbeenomittedbytheearliercopyist，andthathehadcompletedhisworkbyputtingitonthemargin。Sothenextcopyistwouldputitintohisowntext。Onceinamanuscript，itwouldreadilybecomepartoftheacceptedform。DiscoveriesthatbringthatsortofthingtolightareofvalueingivingusanaccurateversionoftheoriginalBible。 3。ThenthereareinourKingJamesversionafewarchaicandobsoletephrases。Wehavealreadyspokenofthem。Mostofthemhavebeenavoidedintherevisedversions。Theneuterpossessivepronoun，forexample，hasbeenputin。Animalnameshavebeenclarified，obsoleteexpressionshavebeenreplacedbymorefamiliarones，andsoon。 4。ThentherewerecertaininaccuraciesintheKingJamesversion。Thefactisfamiliarthattheytransliteratedcertainwordswhichtheycouldnotwelltranslate。Intherevisedversionsthathasbeencarriedfartherstill。Thewordswhichtheytranslated\"hell\"havebeenputbackintotheirHebrewandGreekequivalents，andappearasSheolandHades。AnotherinstanceisthatofanOldTestamentword，Asherah，whichwastranslatedalways\"grove，\" andwasusedtodescribetheobjectofworshipoftheearlyenemiesofIsrael。Thetranslationdoesnotquiterepresentthefact，andtherevisershavethereforereplacedtheoldHebrewwordAsherah。ThetransliterationsoftheKingJamesversionhavenotbeenchangedintotranslations。 Instead，thenumberoftransliterationshasbeenincreasedintheinterestofaccuracy。 AtonepointonemightinclinetobeadverselycriticaloftheAmericanrevisers。TheyhavetransliteratedtheHebrewwordJehovah；sotheyhavetakensidesinacontroversywherescholarshaveroomtodiffer。Theversionwouldhavegainedinstrengthifithadretainedthedignifiedandnobleword\"Lord，\"whichcomesasnearrepresentingtheideaoftheHebrewwordforGodasanywordwecouldfind。ItmustbeaddedthattheEnglishofneitherofournewversionshastherhythmandmovementoftheoldversion。Thatispartlybecausewearesoaccustomedtotheoldexpressionsandnewonesstriketheearunpleasantly。Inanycase，theversionsdifferplainlyintheirEnglish。ItseemsmostunlikelythateitheroftheseversionsshalleverhavetheliteraryinfluenceoftheKingJames，thoughanymanwhowillprophesyabout，thataffectsawisdomwhichhehasnot。 These，then，arethetwodifferencesbetweenthislectureandtheprecedingones，thatinthislectureweshalldealwithjudgmentsaswellasfacts，andthatweshalldealwiththeBibleofto-dayratherthantheKingJamesversion。 Passingtotheheartofthesubject，thequestionappearsatoncewhethertheBiblehasorcanhaveto-daytheinfluenceortheplacewhichitseemstohavehadinthepast。Twothings，forcethatquestion:HasnotthecriticalstudyoftheBibleitselfrobbeditofitsplaceofauthority，andhavenotthechangesofourtimesdestroyeditspossibilitiesofinfluence?Thatis，ontheonehand，hasnottheBiblebeenchanged? Ontheotherhand，hasitnotcomeintosuchnewconditionsthatitcannotdoitsoldwork? ItisanaturalbutamostmistakenideathatthecriticalstudyoftheBibleisanewthing。 FromlongbeforethechildhoodofanyofustherehasbeensharpcontroversyabouttheBible。Itisacontroversy-provokingBook。Itcannotacceptblindfaith。Italwayshasmadementhink，anditmakesthemthinkinthelineoftheirowntimes。ThedayswhennoquestionswereraisedabouttheBiblewerethedayswhenmenhadnoaccesstoit。 TherearesomewhotakealltheBibleforgranted。Theyknowthatthereisindifferencetoitamongfriendsandintheirsocialcircle； buthowrealthedisputeabouttheBibleisnoonerealizesuntilhecomeswherenewideas，sayideasofsocialism，areintheair。There，withthebreakingofotherchains，isamightyefforttobreakthisbondalso。InsuchcirclestheBibleislittleread。Itisdiscussed，andtime- wornobjectionsarebandiedabout，alwaysgrowingastheypass。Inthesecirclesalsoeverysupposedlyadverseresultofcriticalstudyiswelcomedandremembered。IfitissaidthatthereareunexplainedcontradictionsintheBible，thatfactisremembered。Butifitissaidfurtherthatthosecontradictionsbidfairtoyieldtofurthercriticalstudy，ortoawiserunderstandingofthesituationsinwhichtheyareinvolved，thatfactisoverlooked。Thetendencyinthesecirclesistokeepaliverathertheadversephasesofcriticalstudythanitsfavorablephases。SomeofthosewhospeakmostfiercelyaboutthestudyoftheBible，bywhatisknownashighercriticism，areleastintelligentastowhathighercriticismactuallymeans。Believersregretit，andunbelieversrejoiceinit。Asamatteroffact，indevelopinganystrongfeelingabouthighercriticismoneonlyfallsapreytowords；hemistakesthemeaningofboththewordsinvolved。 CriticismdoesnotmeanfindingfaultwiththeBible。[1]Itisalmostanargumentfortotaldepravitythatwehavemadethewordgainanadversemeaning，sothatiftheaveragemanweretoldthathehadbeen\"criticized\"byanotherbewouldsupposethatsomethinghadbeensaidagainsthim。Ofcourse，intelligentpeopleknowthatthatisnotnecessarilyinvolved。 WhenKantwroteTheCritiqueofPureReasonhewasnotfindingfaultwithpurereason。Hewasonlymakingcarefulanalyticalstudyofit。 Now，criticalstudyoftheBibleisonlycarefulstudyofit。Itfindsvastlymorenewbeautiesthanunseendefects。Inthesamewaytheadjective\"higher\"comesinformisunderstanding。Itdoesnotmeansuperior；itmeansmoredifficult。 Lowercriticismisthestudyofthetextitself。 Whatwordoughttobehere，andexactlywhatdoesthatwordmean?Whatisthecomparativevalueofthismanuscriptoveragainstthatone?Ifthismanuscripthasacertainwordandthatotherhasaslightlydifferentone，whichwordoughttobeused? [1]Jefferson，ThingsFundamental，p。90。 TakeoneillustrationfromtheOldTestamentandonefromtheNewtoshowwhatlowerortextualcriticismdoes。IntheninthchapterofIsaiahthethirdversereads:\"Thouhastmultipliedthenationandnotincreasedthejoy。\" Thatword\"not\"istroublesome。Itdisagreeswiththerestofthepassage。NowithappensthattherearetwoHebrewwordspronounced\"lo，\"justalikeinsound，butspelleddifferently。 Onemeans\"not，\"theothermeans\"tohim\" or\"his。\"Putthesecondwordin，andthesentencereads:\"Thouhastmultipliedthenationandincreaseditsjoy。\"Thatfitsthecontextexactly。Lowercriticismdeclaresthatitisthereforetheprobablereading，andcorrectsthetextinthatway。 TheotherillustrationisfromtheEpistleofJames，whereinthefourthchapterthesecondversereads:\"Yelust，andhavenot；yekill，anddesiretohave，andcannotobtain；yefightandwar，yetyehavenot，becauseyeasknot。\" Nowthereisnocommentatornorthoughtfulreaderwhoisnotarrestedbythatword\"kill。\" Itdoesnotseemtobelongthere。Itisfarmoreviolentthananythingelseinthewholetext，anditisdifficulttounderstandinwhatsensethepersonstowhomJameswaswritingcouldbesaidtokill。YetthereisnoGreekmanuscriptwhichdoesnothavethatword。Well，itisinthefieldoflowercriticismtoobservethatthereisaGreekwordwhichsoundsverymuchlikethisword\"kill，\"whichmeanstoenvy； thatwouldfitexactlyintothewholetexthere。 Allthatlowercriticismcandoistopointoutsuchaprobability。 Whenthisformofcriticismhasdoneitspart，andcarefulstudyhasyieldedatextwhichholdstogetherandwhichrepresentstheverybestwhichscholarshipcanfindfortheoriginal，thereisstillafieldmoredifficultthanthat，higherinthesensethatitdemandsalargerandbroaderviewofthewholesubject。Hereonestudiesthemeaningofthewhole，theideasinit，seekstofindhowtherevelationofGodhasprogressedaccordingtothecapacitiesofmentoreceiveit。 HighercriticismisthecarefulstudyofthehistoricalandoriginalmeaningsofScripture，theefforttodeterminedatesandtimesand，sofarasmaybe，theauthorofeachwriting，analyzingitsideas，thegeneralGreekorHebrewstyle，therelationofparttopart。Thatisnotathingtobeafraidof。Itisamethodofstudyusedineveryrealm。Itistruethatsomeofthemenwhohavefollowedthatmethodhavemadeothersafraidofit，becausetheywereafraidofthesementhemselves。Itispossibletoclaimfartoomuchforsuchstudy。ButiftheresultofhighercriticismshouldbetoshowthatthelatterhalfoftheprophecyofIsaiahismuchlaterthantheearlierhalf，thatisnotadestructionoftheWordofGod。Itisnotanirreverentresultofstudy。Iftheresultofhighercriticismistoshowthatbyreasonofitscontent，andthelessonswhichitespeciallyurges，theEpistletotheHebrewswasnotwrittenbytheApostlePaul，asitdoesnotatanypointclaimtohavebeen，why，thatisnotirreverent，thatisnotdestructive。 Thereisadestructiveformofhighercriticism； againstthatthereisreasontosetupbulwarks。 Butthereisaconstructiveformofitalso。 ScholarlyopinionwilltellanyonewhoasksthatcriticismhasnotaffectedthefundamentalvaluesoftheBible。InthestudieswhichhavejustnowbeenmadewehavenotinstancedanythingintheBiblethatissubjecttochange。 Nomatterwhattheresultofcriticalstudymaybe，thefundamentaldemocracyoftheScriptureremains。Itcontinuestomakeitspersistentmoralappealonanyterms。Boththosegreatfactscontinue。Othergreatfactsabidewiththem。Andontheiraccountitistoourinteresttoknowasmuchaswecanlearnaboutit。TheBiblehasnotbeenlessenedinitsvalue，hasnotbeenweakenedinitself，byanythingthathastakenplaceincriticalstudy。Ontheotherhand，thenetresultofsuchstudiesasarchaeologyhasbeentheconfirmationofmuchthatwasoncedisputed。SirWilliamRamsayisauthorityforsayingthatthespadeoftheexcavatoristo-daydiggingthegraveofmanyenemiesoftheBible。 Takethesecondquestion，whetherthesetimeshavenotinthemelementsthatweakentheholdoftheBible。Thereagainwemustdistinguishbetweenfactsandjudgments。Therearecertainthingsinthesetimeswhichrelaxtheholdofanyauthoritativebook。Thereisageneralrelaxingofthesenseofauthority。Itdoesnotcomealonefromtheintellectualawakening，becausesofarasthatawakeningisconcerned，ithasaffectedquiteasmuchmenwhocontinueloyaltotheauthorityoftheBibleasothers。 No，thisrelaxingofthesenseofauthorityistheresultofthefirstfeelingofdemocracywhichdoesnotknowlaw。DemocracyoughttomeanthatmenareleftindependentofthecontrolofotherindividualsbecausetheyrealizeandwishtoobeythecontrolofGodorofthewholeequallywiththeirfellows。When，instead，onefeelsindependentofothers，andaddstothatnosenseofahighercontrolwhichhemustbefreetoobey，theresultisnotdemocracy，butindividualism。 Democracyinvolvescontrol；individualismdoesnot。AvastnumberofpeopleinpassingfromanysenseoftherightofanotherindividualtocontrolthemhavealsopassedoutofthesenseoftherightofGodorofthewholetocontrolthem。Sothatfromagoodmanyallsenseofauthorityhaspassed。Itischaracteristicofourage。Anditisastageinourprogresstowardrealdemocracy，towardtruehumanliberty。 Observethatrelaxedsenseofauthorityinthecommonattitudetowardlaw。Mostmenfeelitrighttodisregardalawofthecommunitywhichtheydonotlike。Itappearsintrivialthings。Ifthecommunityrequiresthatashesbekeptinametalreceptacle，citizensapproveitingeneral，butreservetothemselvestherighttoconsideritafoolishlawandtodosomethingelseifthatisnotentirelyconvenient。Ifthelawsaysthatpapermustnotbethrownonthesidewalk，itmeanslittlethatitisthelaw。Thosewhoareinclinedtobecleanandneatanddonotliketoseepaperlyingaroundwillkeepthelaw；thosewhoareotherwisewillbeindifferenttoit。Thatisattherootofthematter-of- coursesayingthatalawcannotbeenforcedunlesspublicopinionsustainsit。Underanydemocraticsystemlawsvirtuallyalwayshavethemajorityopinionbackofthem；buttheminorityreservetherighttodisregardthemiftheychoose，andtheminoritywillbemoreaggressive。 Risingfromthoserelaxationsoflawintofarmoreimportantones，itappearsthatmeninbusinesslife，feelingthemselveshamperedbylegislation，setthemselvestofindawaytoevadeit，justifyingthemselvesindoingso。Themerefactthatitisthelawdoesnotweighheavily。 Thisis，however，onlyaninevitablestageinprogressfromtheearliestperiodsofdemocracytolaterandmoresubstantialperiods。Itisastagewhichwillpass。Therewillcomeademocracywheretheruleofthewholeisfranklyrecognized，andwhereeachmanholdshimselfindependentofhisfellowsonlyinthesensethathewillclaimtherighttoholdsuchrelationtoGodandhisdutyashehimselfmayapprehend。 Inthesetimes，also，thedevelopmentoftemporalandmaterialprosperitywiththeintellectualmoodwhichisinvolvedinthataffectstheattitudeoftheagetowardtheBible。Sometimesitisspokenofasascientificageoveragainsttheearlierphilosophicalages。Perhapsthatwilldoforaroughstatementofthefacts。 Itistheageofexperiment，oftryingthingsout，andtherenaturallyworksintomenafeelingthatthethingsthatwillyieldtothemostmaterialscientificexperimentationarethethingsaboutwhichtheycanbecertainandwhichareofrealvalue。Thatnaturallyinvolvesagooddealofappreciationofthepresent，andcallsfortheimprovementoftheconditionsofpresentlifefirstofall。Itlooksmoreimportanttoseethatamaniswellfed，wellhoused，wellclothed，andwelleducatedthanthatheshouldhavetheinterestsofeternitypressedonhisattention。