a study of bible-第11部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


ut　they　did　their　part　with　finest　skill。　The　fourth　company；　sitting　at　Cambridge；　had　the　Apocrypha；　the　books　which　lie　between　the　Old　and　the　New　Testaments　for　the　most　part；　or　else　are　supplemental　to　certain　Old　Testament　books。　Their　work　was　rather　hastily　and　certainly　poorly　done；　and　has　been　dropped　out　of　most　editions。　The　fifth　company；　sitting　at　Oxford；　with　great　Greek　scholars　on　it；　took　the　Gospels；　the　Acts；　and　the　Revelation。　This　company　had　in　it　the　one　layman；　Sir　Henry　Savile；　then　the　greatest　Greek　scholar　in　England。　It　is　the　same　Sir　Henry　Savile　who　heard；　on　his　death…bed　in　1621；　that　James　had　with　his　own　hands　torn　from　the　Journal　of　Parliament　the　pages　which　bore　the　protest　in　favor　of　free　speech　in　Parliament。　Hearing　it；　the　faithful　scholar　prayed　to　die；　saying：　〃I　am　ready　to　depart；　the　rather　that　having　lived　in　good　times　I　foresee　worse。〃　The　sixth　company　met　at　Westminster　and　translated　the　New　Testament　epistles。

It　was　the　original　plan　that　when　one　company　had　finished　its　part；　the　result　should　go　to　each　of　the　other　companies；　coming　back　with　their　suggestions　to　the　original　workers　to　be　recast　by　them。　The　whole　was　then　to　be　reviewed　by　a　smaller　committee　of　scholars　to　give　it　uniformity　and　to　see　it　through　the　press。　The　records　are　not　extant　that　tell　whether　this　was　done　in　full　detail；　though　we　may　presume　that　each　section　of　the　Scripture　had　the　benefit　of　the　scholarship　of　the　entire　company。

We　know　a　good　deal　of　the　method　of　their　work。　We　shall　understand　it　better　by　recalling　what　material　they　had　at　hand。　They　were　enabled　to　use　the　result　of　all　the　work　that　had　been　done　before　them。　They　were　instructed　to　follow　the　Bishops'　Bible　wherever　they　could　do　so　fairly；　but　they　were　given　power　to　use　the　versions　already　named　from　Wiclif　down；　as　well　as　those　fragmentary　versions　which　were　numerous；　and　of　which　no　mention　has　been　made。　They　ransacked　all　English　forms　for　felicitous　words　and　happy　phrases。　It　is　one　of　the　interesting　incidents　that　this　same　Hugh　Broughton；　who　was　left　off　the　committee　and　took　it　so　hard；　yet　without　his　will　contributed　some　important　matter　to　the　translation；　because　he　had　on　his　own　authority　made　translations　of　certain　parts　of　the　Scripture。　Several　of　our　capital　phrases　in　the　King　James　version　are　from　him。　There　was　no　effort　to　break　out　new　paths。　Preference　was　always　given　to　a　familiar　phrase　rather　than　to　a　new　one；　unless　accuracy　required　it。　First；　then；　they　had　the　benefit　of　all　the　work　that　had　been　done　before　in　the　same　line；　and　gladly　used　it。

In　addition；　they　had　all　other　versions　made　in　the　tongues　of　the　time。　Chiefly　there　was　Luther's　German　Bible；　already　become　for　the　German　tongue　what　their　version　was　destined　to　be　for　the　English　tongue。　There　were　parts　of　the　Bible　available　in　Spanish；　French；　and　Dutch。　They　were　kept　at　hand　constantly　for　any　light　they　might　cast　on　difficult　passages。

For　the　Old　Testament　there　were　very　few　Hebrew　texts。　There　had　been　little　critical　work　yet　done　on　them；　and　for　the　most　part　there　were　only　different　editions　running　back　over　the　centuries。　We　have　little　more　than　that　now；　and　there　is　almost　no　new　material　on　the　Old　Testament　since　the　days　of　the　King　James　translators。　There　was；　of　course；　the　Septuagint；　the　Greek　translation　from　the　Hebrew　made　before　Christ；　with　the　guidance　it　could　give　in　doubtful　places　on　the　probable　original。　And　finally　there　was　the　Vulgate；　made　into　Latin　out　of　the　Greek　and　Hebrew。　This　was　all　the　Old　Testament　material　they　had；　or　that　any　one　could　have　in　view　of　the　antiquated　original　sources。

The　New　Testament　material　was　more　abundant；　though　not　nearly　so　abundant　as　to…day。　There　were　few　manuscripts　of　the　early　days　to　which　they　could　refer；　but　there　were　the　two　great　critical　versions　of　the　New　Testament　in　Greek；　that　by　Erasmus　and　the　Complutensian；　which　had　made　use　of　the　best　manuscripts　known。　Then；　finally　again；　there　was　the　Vulgate。

We　must　stop　a　moment　to　see　what　was　the　value　of　the　Vulgate　in　this　work。　It　is　impossible　to　reckon　the　number　of　the　early　New　Testament　manuscripts　that　have　been　lost。　In　the　earlier　day　the　Scriptures　were　transmitted　from　church　to　church；　and　from　age　to　age；　by　manuscripts。　Many　of　them　were　made　as　direct　copies　of　other　manuscripts；　but　many　were　made　by　scribes　to　whom　the　manuscripts　were　read　as　they　wrote；　so　that　there　are　many；　though　ordinarily　comparatively　slight；　variations　among　the　manuscripts　which　we　now　know。　More　manuscripts　are　coming　to　light　constantly；　manuscripts　once　well　known　and　then　lost。　Many　of　them；　perhaps　many　earlier　than　we　now　have；　must　have　been　familiar　to　Jerome　four　hundred　years　after　Christ。　When；　therefore；　there　is　a　plain　difference　between　the　Vulgate　and　our　early　Greek　manuscripts；　the　Vulgate　may　be　wrong　because　it　is　only　a　translation；　but　it　may　be　right　because　it　is　a　translation　of　earlier　manuscripts　than　some　of　ours。　It　is　steadily　losing　its　value　at　that　point；　for　Greek　manuscripts　are　all　the　time　coming　to　light　which　run　farther　back。　But　we　must　not　minimize　the　value　of　the　Vulgate　for　our　King　James　translation。

With　all　this　material　the　scholars　of　the　early　seventeenth　century　set　to　work。　Each　man　in　the　group　made　the　translation　that　seemed　best　to　him；　and　together　they　analyzed　the　results　and　finally　agreed　on　the　best。　They　hunted　the　other　versions　to　see　if　it　had　been　better　done　elsewhere。　The　shade　of　Tindale　was　over　it　all。　The　Genevan　version　was　most　influential。　The　Douai　had　its　share；　and　the　Bishops'　was　the　general　standard；　altered　only　when　accuracy　required　it。　On　all　hard　passages　they　called　to　their　aid　the　appropriate　departments　of　both　universities。　All　scholars　everywhere　were　asked　to　send　in　any　contributions；　to　correct　or　criticize　as　they　would。　Public　announcement　of　the　work　was　made；　and　all　possible　help　was　besought　and　gladly　accepted。

Very　faithfully　these　greatest　scholars　of　their　time　wrought。　No　one　worked　for　money；　and　no　one　worked　for　pay；　but　each　for　the　joy　of　the　working。　Three　years　they　spent　on　the　original　work；　three　years　on　careful　revision　and　on　the　marginal　references　by　which　Scripture　was　made　to　throw　light　on　Scripture。　Then　in　six　months　a　committee　reviewed　it　all；　put　it　through　the　press；　and　at　last；　in　1611；　with　the　imprint　of　Robert　Barker；　Printer　to　the　King's　Most　Excellent　Majesty；　the　King　James　version　appeared。　The　name　Authorized　Version　is　not　a　happy　one；　for　so　far　as　the　records　go　it　was　never　authorized　either　by　the　King　or　the　bishop；　and；　even　if　it　were；　the　authority　does　not　extend　beyond　the　English　Church；　which　is　a　very　small　fraction　of　those　who　use　it。　On　the　title…page　of　the　original　version；　as　on　so　many　since；　is　the　familiar　line；　〃Appointed　to　be　Read　in　Churches；〃　but　who　made　the　appointment　history　does　not　say。

The　version　did　not　at　once　supersede　the　Genevan　and　the　Bishops'；　but　it　was　so　incomparably　better　than　either　that　gradually　they　disappeared；　and　by　sheer　e