Charles Spurgeon's heartily commended English Bible

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Logos1560, Nov 2, 2013.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Charles Spurgeon wrote the following in his review concerning a 1877 edition of the English Bible: "Here is our own English Bible with its mistranslations amended, and its obsolete words and coarse phrases removed" (Sword and the Trowel, Sept., 1877, p. 438). Spurgeon asserted: “Mr. Gurney has done great service to the church by employing learned men to make the needful corrections. Not one word is altered more than is needed to be, nor are the thoughts re-cast, it is our grandmother’s Bible, with many a blunder of the translator’s set to rights” (Ibid.). Spurgeon added: "We commend the work heartily" (Ibid.).

    This 1877 edition of the English Bible commended by Charles Spurgeon in his review quoted above is one that was edited by Joseph Gurney, F. W. Gotch, Benjamin Davies, G. A. Jacob, and Samuel G. Green and published by Eyre and Spottiswoode. Gotch and Green were Baptists.

    This edition was entitled: The Holy Bible according to the Authorised Version, Compared with the Hebrew and Greek texts, and carefully revised" (Darlow, Historical Catalogue, p. 381). The heading “Revised English Bible” was above that title at the top of the page. Concerning this edition, William Chamberlin noted: “The design ‘is to correct what may be considered indisputable errors and inadequate renderings in our present English Bible’” (Catalogue, p. 29). That design is stated on the first page of its preface.
     
  2. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,407
    Likes Received:
    328
    Do you have a physical copy of that? Even if you do not --it look quite interesting. Many KJVO-types don't want to believe that Spurgeon used and valued other translations like the one you referenced as well as the ERV.
     
  3. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    I do not have a printed copy of it. I have seen its text that was scanned from a printed copy online, and have examined some places in it.

    One web site that had a good number of translations did have it available, but that site seems to be no longer available.

    Another place where I have found a copy [evidently scanned from a copy with some missing pages] is at archive.org

    What needed alterations, revisions, or corrections could be found in this 1877 edition of our English Bible? This 1877 edition has “almond” for “hazel” (Gen. 30:37), “hot springs” for “mules” (Gen. 36:24), “hamstrung an ox” for “digged down a wall” (Gen. 49:6), “ask“ for “borrow“ (Exod. 3:22), “ostrich“ for “owl“ (Lev. 11:16), “crying lizard“ for “ferret“ (Lev. 11:30), “Far be it“ for “God forbid“ (1 Sam. 14:45), “javelin“ for “target“ (1 Sam. 17:6), “baggage“ for “carriage“ (1 Sam. 17:22), “bow of brass“ for “bow of steel“ (Job 20:24), “precious ores“ for “defence“ (Job 22:25), “ostriches“ for “owls” (Job 30:29), “pipe“ for “organ“ (Job 30:31), “falsehood“ for “leasing“ (Ps. 5:6), “salvation“ for “saving health“ (Ps. 67:2), “turtle-dove“ for “turtle“ (Song of Solomon 2:12), “terebinth“ for “teil tree“ (Isa. 6:13), “All workers for hire shall be sad of soul“ for “all that make sluices and ponds for fish“ (Isa. 19:10), “vats“ for “fats“ (Joel 2:24), “wormwood“ for “hemlock“ (Amos 6:12), “lay bare“ for “discover“ (Micah 1:6), and “pelican“ for “cormorant“ (Zeph. 2:14). In its New Testament, some examples of revisions in this 1877 edition are the following: “strain out“ for “strain at“ (Matt. 23:24), “lampstand“ for “candlestick“ (Mark 4:21), “honour“ for “worship“ (Luke 14:10, “tithes of all my increase“ for “tithes of all that I possess“ (Luke 18:12), “one flock“ for “one fold“ (John 10:16), “office“ for “bishoprick“ (Acts 1:20), “Joshua“ for “Jesus“ (Acts 7:45), “Passover“ for “Easter“ (Acts 12:4), “temples” for “churches” (Acts 19:37), “bishops” for “overseers” (Acts 20:28), “Joshua” for “Jesus” (Heb. 4:8), “hope“ for “faith” (Heb. 10:23), “lead you astray“ for “seduce you“ (1 John 2:26), “bodies“ for “slaves“ (Rev. 18:13), and “tree of life“ for “book of life“ (Rev. 22:19).
     
  4. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,407
    Likes Received:
    328
    Was the 1877 edition of the English Bible used by the ERV translators?
     
  5. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    I am not completely certain Spurgeon continued to endorse the version after about 1885 or so.

    I don't have time, but I recall that at about that time, he referred to that translation as blundering.

    Then I may be wrong and someone else may correct my blunder. :)
     
  6. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,407
    Likes Received:
    328
    He always qualified his support for the Revised Version. But he did use it till he died in 1992. In his Final Manifesto before his Pastor college students he employed it.

    I think his most most famous quote about it was that it was "strong in Greek,but weak in English."
     
  7. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,097
    Likes Received:
    49
    Would he be then like dean Burgeon, not a KJVO. but rather one who see that the Kjv should be 'corrected?"
     
  8. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,407
    Likes Received:
    328
    Mr. Gurney,from the information that was supplied, can in no way be compared with Dean Burgon.
     
  9. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,097
    Likes Received:
    49
    Not comparing their qualifications, but how they viewed the Kjv itself, neither saw it as being the "perfect" edition!
     
  10. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Charles Spurgeon was clearly not a KJV-only advocate although some KJV-only advocates try to misrepresent him as being one.

    In his preface to the 1859 book The English Bible: History of the Translation of the Holy Scriptures into the English Tongue by Mrs. H. C. Conant, Charles Spurgeon noted: "And it is because I love the most Holy Word of God that I plead for faithful translation; and from my very love to the English version, because in the main it is so, I desire for it that its blemishes should be removed, and its faults corrected" (p. xi). Spurgeon continued: “It is of course an arduous labour to persuade men of this, although in the light of common sense the matter is plain enough. But there is a kind of Popery in our midst which makes us cling fast to our errors, and hinders the growth of thorough reformation; otherwise, the Church would just ask the question, ‘Is this King James’ Bible the nearest approach to the original?‘ The answer would be, ‘No; it is exceedingly good, but it has many glaring faults’” (p. xi). In his same preface, Spurgeon wrote: "I ask, from very love of this best of translations, that its obsolete words, its manifest mistranslations, and glaring indecencies should be removed" (p. xii). Again in this preface, Spurgeon asserted: “It was a holy thing to translate the Scriptures into the mother tongue; he that shall effect a thorough revision of the present translation will deserve as high a meed of honour as the first translators. Despite the outcry of reverend doctors against any attempt at revision, it ought to be done, and must be done. The present version is not to be despised, but no candid person can be blind to its faults“ (pp. vii-viii). Spurgeon maintained: “Multitudes of eminent divines and critics have borne their testimony to the faulty character of King Jame’s version: there must therefore be some need for a little correction” (pp. viii-ix).

    Spurgeon then gave several example quotations from several authors as evidence that supported his statement. In one example, Spurgeon favorably quoted Anthony Blackwall as saying concerning King James’s version: “Innumerable instances might be given of faulty translation of the divine original” (p. ix). Spurgeon also favorably quoted Richard Fuller as writing in 1850: “That our present English version has some defects is admitted on all hands, and by every denomination. That the Word of God ought to be purged of all defects in the translation which the people read,--this is also admitted” (p. x).
     
  11. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,097
    Likes Received:
    49
    And the :"purged" version was the RV/Asv version, correct?

    How do you regard those 2 versions?
     

Share This Page

Loading...