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。