Spain, which has every natural advantage, and which once proudly led the van among the nations of Europe, but is now the "basest of kingdoms?" and why are the United States far in advance of the states of South America? Why have India and China, with their hoary civilizations, been for centuries without movement or progress? The fact is patent on the world's history, that the gospel of Christ is "the resurrection and the life" to nations. It has made England nearly all that in point of greatness and prosperity England is. No advantage or prosperity are likely to be permanent to a people that are not the slow and sure growth of character. To the formative energy of a comparatively pure faith upon the national mind and heart we owe, chiefly, our intelligence, -our love and enjoyment of freedom, -our noble literature,- our philanthropic institutions, our just laws, our thriving commerce, and our vast wealth. the means which it asks to be used in the furtherance of its own designs. It makes the wealth, a portion of which it demands. And in this way, for one, it counteracts what might otherwise be alleged as a danger, that it should become weakened and corrupted by the very prosperity which it produces. The danger, if it be one, brings with it its antidote. Freely ye have received, freely give," is the law of Christ. Neither the Christian nor the community can be corrupted by wealth, unless they are first recreant to their calling and faithless to the trusts of their stewardship. 66 Passing by, then, many considerations on which, but for time's sake, we might appropriately dwell, we avow that while our faith in the triumphant future of Christ's kingdom upon earth rests upon the simple "yea and amen" of divine promise, that faith meets with much to confirm and support it in other quarters, and from various sources. If there be any truth in Christianity, all Now the bearing of the fact asserted that this psalm foretells of its future is upon the destiny of Christianity in the true. If it has ever truly changed and world is most important. The prose-the same thing for all men; and must, saved one human spirit, it is able to do cution of its great work of evangelization requires not only a spirit of enterprize, but means; a supply of means and appliances such as can be furnished effectively only by a prosperous people. That work cannot be made, we imagine, light in its labor and inexpensive in its cost. It involves every resource which civilization can furnish, or art supply. The vigorous use of the printing-press, and of the school-room, with all its educational apparatus, is needful, in order to do the work effectively. And this involves cost, an affluence of resources, and a liberality of outlay which only a prosperous people can meet. But Christianity largely creates eventually do it, from its own inherent nature, and from the purpose and character of its Author. And there is nothing in its past history, or present position and prospects, to justify the presumption of its failure as a worldremedy and power. Alike to the unbeliever who looks upon the troubled tells a cloudy and disastrous day, and sky of the present, in hope that it foreto the timid Christian who gazes with a morbid apprehension, our Lord's voice of dignified rebuke is addressed, 66 Can ye not discern the signs of the times?" (To be concluded in our next.) DR. SHEPARD ON JOHN III. 8. THE great importance I attach to the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus, as recorded in the third of John, is my excuse for troubling you with a few remarks on Dr. Shepard's criticism on that passage. While highly appreciating the knowledge displayed in his criticisms, I am constrained to differ materially from him on this passage. Neither with his translation nor his interpretation can I agree. This passage has been made the battle-ground of many a contest between truth and error, and well worthy it is to be so, for in no other portion do we find so much truth in so few words. Dr. Shepard's translation is, "The Spirit breathes as it wills, and thou hearest its voice, but canst not tell whence it comes, or whither it goes." His interpretation seems to be the Spirit The mental man - of man speaks when, where, and how it pleases; and Nicodemus-the individual-was so ignorant, that he could not understand the phenomena." Upon his translation I would observe, 1. There is no absolute necessity for translating pneuma by "wind." Although it is nowhere else in the New Testament so translated, according to Parkhurst, it is frequently so used by the Seventy and profane writers. This fact is sufficient to reduce the impropriety in no little degree. 2. The verb commonly used to signify the blowing of the wind is the verb pneoo, from which pneuma is taken. The Doctor's remark upon breathing is, therefore, beside the question, as the supplying of anemos for pneuma would not alter the verb. So, also, with the word translated "sound." It depends entirely on the translation of pneuma; therefore, whether it should be "blow" or" breathe," sound" or voice." 99.66 66 3. In maintaining wind" as the proper translation, I would observe that Jesus used these words as an illustration. It is impossible to illustrate a thing by itself; there must be a difference between the pneuma in the beginning of the verse, and that at the end. Were they identical, Jesus would hardly have used the noun a second time, but would have used the pronoun instead. rence to it that Jesus asked, "Art thou a teacher in Israel, and knowest not these things?" The doctrine which Jesus taught evidently was, that a man reasoning as Nicodemus did, with so little true knowledge; would find these matters, and the individuals under their influence, as obscure and mysterious as the wind. The reproach contained in the question of Jesus, was one which bore a deep meaning. Israel was the chosen of God. The children of Israel were heirs of spiritual promise, to be fulfilled to them through a divine Saviour. From the fleshly relation in which the nation stood, it was to be translated into a spiritual one, and similar language might be used in regard to this translation, that is used in regard to the fleshly relationship. Every one, therefore, who professed to teach Israel, ought to be a teacher in Israel—ought to apprehend the meaning of such language as Jesus used. The lack of knowledge on the part of Nicodemus, makes the words of Jesus a mournful apostrophe on the ignorance and degeneracy of the Jewish nation. It is not a personal charge against Nicodemus so much, as a declaration, that neither he nor the people understood their position, and the purpose of God concerning them. There is a spirituality in the very word Israel, as Jesus used it, which it is very questionable if Nicodemus understood the ceremonial like the unknown yet palpably existent wind, coming and going by a power of which he knew nothing. 4. The translation "wind" would answer all the purpose Jesus had in view at the time, if it was, as I think, merely an illustration, as the freedom of the wind, its invisibility, its coming and going, are all wonderful and mys- Further, Dr. Shepard makes Nicodeterious. mus turn away with the question, As far as critical correctness is con-"How can these things be?" This is cerned, then, I do think the common translation will stand as close an examination as Dr. Shepard's. indeed what many do in the present day, and they are the more induced to do so by the teaching so prevalent in our day, of regarding this passage as complete and conclusive. But it was not so with Jesus, nor did Nicodemus go without a full answer to his question, the subsequent words of Jesus containing the celebrated allusion to Moses and the serpent, and the glorious statement of Jesus concerning the love of God for a perishing world, stand a complete answer to the question of Nicodemus, and a thorough condemnation of those who delight in mystery. But the gist of the matter lies in his interpretation. The power of spirit to speak cannot be denied, as speech without spirit would be unnatural. But is this a subject upon which Jesus could accuse Nicodemus of ignorance? He knew that there is a spirit in man, and the breath of the Almighty giveth him inspiration; and that the body returns to dust, and the spirit to God who gave it. What more do we know now? Can we tell whence it comes, and whither it goes? Can we, any more than Nico- To my mind, no passage in the word demus, see the Spirit come and go? I is so full of matter for study by the think not. It could not then be in refe-Christian student-so confirmatory of с the high standing he occupies so convincing of the deep searching power of the Law. The traditions of the elders had cast a thick veil over his eyes, and although the things of which Jesus had been speaking can be answered in the Jewish Scriptures, yet they can never be thoroughly understood, save through Christ crucified. So that Jesus could hardly reproach Nicodemus with being ignorant of ordinary truth, but with attempting to be a teacher in Israel, instead of guiding the mind of the Israelite by the flesh, to dwell on the promises of God concerning him, and become prepared by faith and hope for that Christ which God would send, and so rise into some knowledge of that spi REVISION OF THE ENGLISH SCRIPTURES.-No. II. BY A METHODIST. BUT lest it should be objected that the testimony which we have presented is not sufficient to produce conviction of the necessity which is claimed for revision, growing out of the defectiveness of the present translation, we shall now proceed to a specific enumeration of the defects and errors with which the present translation abounds. To some of these errors we have already called the reader's attention. We shall begin with what may, for the sake of division, be denominated defects arising from the present state of the English language, by which, words which at the time of the translation were in common use, have since become obsolete, while others have obtained a meaning entirely different, and in some instances directly opposite to that which then prevailed. We shall first notice some of those belonging to the former class. For example: Exodus xxxii. 1, "We wot not what has become of him." The words wot and wotteth occur frequently in both the Old and New Testaments, and it is claimed by revisionists that the words know and knoweth should take their place. The word wist (knew) also occurs frequently, and there can be no reason, human or divine, why it should not have the word now in use, which signifies the meaning, placed in its stead In Genesis xxv. 29, and 2nd Chronicles xxxv. 13, the word sod which signifies boil, or the ebullition of liquids pro duced by heat, together with the word sodden, and seethe derived therefrom, which often occur, should be changed to the appropriate words. In Genesis xli. 2, the word kine (cows) occurs, as well as in several other parts of this chapter and elsewhere, and no reason can be offered for its being retained. Exodus xii. 9, we find the word purtenance, signifying the internal part belonging to an animal, which according to the divine command, was to be roasted. Coming, as it does, from the Latin pertinens, shows that it was taken by the translators, not from “the original tongue," or even the Seventy, but from a translation-the Vulgate. In Genesis xlv. 6, and Exodus xxxiv. 21, the word earing occurs, which to a reader of the present day would hardly signify ploughing. Exodus xxvi. 6. and xi. 33, we find the word taches (hooks,) which is found nowhere else than in King James' translation; the same may be said of tale (number) and chode (contend.) In Ezekiel xxx. 2, we read Woe worth the day." The word worth (betide) destroys the significance of the whole expression. How much more intelligible and forcible would the passage be made by the substitution of the word betide, we need not inquire. 1 Chronicles xxii. 5, we read the following, "The house (that is) to be builded for the Lord must be exceeding magnifical of fame," &c. The word magni fical (grand, magnificent) may be found in Miiton, who probably took it from the King's Bible, but it would hardly be used by a scholar or poet even, of the present day. The same may be said of the word wench, (servant-maid) found in 2nd Samuel xvii. 17. Of like character are the words albeit, (nevertheless) in Eze. xiii. 7, bestead (distressed); Isa. viii. 21, beuray (betray); Isa. xvi. 3, and Prov. xxvii. 16, et. al. also eschew, (avoid, shun); Job i. 1-8, ii. 3, leasing (falsehood) in Ps. iv. 2-6, and holpen (helped); Ps. lxxxiii. 8, et. al. In Matt. xvii. 12, and Mark ix. 3, the word listed (to choose or desire) is found, and in John iii. 8, we find the word listeth (pleaseth.) How much more significant would these words be made by the substitution of the appropriate ones. The same may be said of the word dureth, (endureth) in Matt. xiii. 21; trow, (think) in Luke; in Judges iii. 7, we find the word forgat, (forgot); in Prov. xxiii. 20, the word bibbers, (drinkers); and Matt. xi. 19, bibber, (drinker) ; in Prov. xxii. 22, bray (pound); in Isa. lii. 12. rere ward, (near guard); in 1 Cor. x. 11, ensamples, (patterns); and the word husbandman, (farmer or cultivator of the soil,) which is of very frequent occurrence. tuate it in its purity, to the end of time. We shall next call the attention to those words which have changed their meaning since the translation was made. Of these, we notice the following, viz. : In 1 Sam. iv. 9, and 1 Cor. xvi. 13, we find the word quit, which, at the time of translation, was made to signify -to act courageously, but now it means to leave, depart from, abandon. The passage, therefore, "quit yourselves like men," &c. would, according to the present meaning of that word, be an exhortation to them to flee from the scene of conflict, instead of manfully standing their ground and fighting. In 2 Thess. ii. 7, we find this language, "He who now letteth will let," &c. The words letteth and let once signified to hinder, oppose, but now they have a directly opposite meaning, and signify to permit, to allow. Webster says, the word let, in the sense of hindrance, "is entirely obsolete unless in some technical phrases." The Apostle says, in Romans i. 13, "Oftentimes I proposed to come unto you, but was let hitherto." The Greek plainly shows that he was hampered, prevented from visiting his brethren; but King James' version, instead of showing, according to the present state of the English language, that there was any obstacle to thwart his purpose, shows the contrary. What grave and weighty considerations those are which hinder the Bible Societies of the present day from substituting the proper word? If the American Bible Society can insert a word in the present version because it is required by the Greek," surely they may change a word for the same reason. 66 But we need not furnish any more examples of obsolete words, as the above will serve to show that a revision is necessary, so far as this division of the subject is concerned. We hesitate not to affirm that not one in ten of those who are constant readers of the Bible, understand the meaning of one-half of the words we have enumerated, and were they to look into the lexicons of the day, they would scarcely be able to find them. That they should be retained, when it not only answers no In Psalms cxix. cxlvii. and cxlviii. good purpose whatever, but greatly the following language occurs: "I premars the beauty and force of the lan- vented the dawning of the morningguage of inspiration, will remain a won- mine eyes prevent the night watches." der until the important and truly com- Also in Psalm lxxxviii. 13, "Unto thee mendable work of revision is accom- have I cried, O Lord, and in the mornplished. That they are defects, none ing shall my prayer prevent thee." And will deny; but that they should be re- in 1 Thess. iv. 15, we read, "We which tained, when they can be so readily re- are alive and remain unto the coming moved, because they are not fatal, is an of the Lord, shall not prevent them argument which would not be resorted which are asleep." The word prevent, to in regard to any other book. The which occurs in these passages, taken Word of God, like the church of God, from the Latin, pro before, and venio to should be "without spot or wrinkle, or come, signified, in the days of King any such thing, without fault before the James, what its origin imports, to go throne," and it becomes those who are before or anticipate, but its use has enits custodians, to preserve and perpe-tirely changed since those days, and it 66 66 now means to hinder, stop the approach, the Bible perfectly intelligible to the access, or performance of a thing; hence English reader of the present day, and for one to speak of "preventing the to remove from it any obscurities in dawning of the morning," is the same which its language may be involved. as to say they hinder the approach of They ask that the Hebrew and Greek morning. To say my prayer shall thoughts of the Holy Spirit may be prevent thee," would be the same as clothed in such becoming drapery as is to say my prayer shall hinder thee, the in accordance with the purity and digvery opposite of what the Psalmist in-nity of the Author. They ask nothing tended. To say we shall not prevent more, they can be satisfied, they ought those who are asleep," would convey not to be satisfied with anything less. the idea that the living shall not hinder We have heard it said that it is strange the dead, whereas, it means they shall that two hundred years have elapsed not go before them in the resurrection. since King James' translation was The term conversation, which is fre- made, and that no dissatisfaction has quently used in the New Testament, been heard in the entire Protestant has also changed its meaning, and needs church until within a few years past, a word expressive of the original, and and that from only a small portion of corresponding to the present verna- the Christian world; that during all cular. This word in 1 Peter ii. 12, this time this version has been the shows what meaning was attached to standard authority in all the Protestant it. The passage reads, "Having your churches, and Christian scholars of all conversation honest among the Gen- names and parties have united in laudtiles, that whereas they speak against ing it for its perfection and purity. It you as evil doers, they may, by your is evident, however, that such are either good works," &c. It is seen that an not aware of the fact, or if so, are anhonest conversation is put in opposi- xious to ignore it, that the leaves of tion to evil action, and as a synonyme of King James' Bible, as we have shown, good works. The wor! then meant de- had scarcely become dry on the shelf of portment, conduct, but it now means the King's bookseller, when murmurs oral communication, familiar discourse. were heard from eminent biblical schoThere is a peculiar force and meaning lars, both within and without the pale in the term as it was used, and if it had of the establishment, and that these not become obsolete we would not urge murmurs have been increasing in numthe slightest objection to its being re- ber and volume from time to time, until tained, and the same may be said of now they come upon the attentive ear several other words of the like charac- like the gathering of the waves in a ter; but as a conversation now means storm from the shores of a distant sea. discourse, and words, however good, The friends of the "old family Bible" are not indicative of character, judging, need not be alarmed, however, at the as we must, men by their actions, it is sound. It is the cry of the mu titude not only proper, but necessary, that it for the pure bread and water of life, and be changed. we need no miracle-working Moses to stretch his rod towards heaven, or to smite the rock, for God is furnishing, through ordinary channels, means for this supply. If we understand the rules governing the revisionists, we are assured they ask for no changes in the present version that are not strictly required to make PERSONALITY AND OFFICE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. WAKEFIELD translates a Holy Spi-, xxvii. 50; John iii. 8; Rev. xiii. 15.) rit, probably from the omission of the article; but after prepositions, anomalous cases of this kind frequently occur. There are six meanings of the word Pneuma, clearly distinguishable in the New Testament. 1, Breath or wind; in which sense it rarely occurs (Matt. 2, The intellectual or spiritual part of man, as distinguished from sarx, his carnal part. 3, Spirit, as abstracted from body or matter; whence is deduced the idea of immaterial agents. Compare Luke xxiv. 39; John iv. 24; Acts xxiii. 8. The pneumata of the de |