The language of Psalm xxxvi, 9, conveys no distinct idea to my mind: "In thy light we shall see light." If understood without a figure, it is a mere truism. If understood metaphorically, do the terms in English express properly the metaphor, or convey the sense? I am satisfied no person of judgement or candor will maintain either position. If we understand by light, the word of God, we must desert the idiom in the latter clause: "By thy light (or word) we shall be enlightened." Or if we understand light to mean God's favour, and by light in the close, joy, prosperity; this is the version: "Through thy light (or favour) we shall enjoy prosperity." There is evidently a play on the word light, and the term is used in different senses. I conceive the text will admit either rendering, and I hesitate which to prefer.' The translators of the Common Version having either not understood or not attended to the peculiar manner' in which the tenses and conjugations of the Hebrew verbs are used, have rendered many passages in an ambiguous and obscure manner, which affords Mr. Boothroyd another reason for attempting improvements in the English Bible. How excellent soever the Common Version may be, it is unquestionable that it did not proceed from men eminently skilled in Hebrew. The influence of the Greek and Latin versions is to be traced throughout the whole of it. Nor can this appear at all surprising, if we reflect that King James's translators were only the revisers of a version which, in the first instance, had been made by Tyndal, who, it is highly probable, principally used the Vulgate. Many improvements in the English Bible may doubtless be made by accomplished Hebrew scholars. In many instances the English preterite is used when the context and design of the author clearly prove that the present is the proper tense. Our translators in many places have so rendered, and with the strictest propriety. The learned reader need only compare the version of the first Psalm with the Hebrew for a proof of this. Misled by prior translators, they have in many places, improperly rendered it otherwise. Gen. iv, 14, " Behold thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth, &c." We have not many instances of so many inaccuracies contained in one single commentary. The words seem put together without any regard to sense or propriety. The verb should be in the present tense; "Behold thou drivest me out this day, &c." If driven from the face of the earth, in what other world was he to reside? The original properly signifies, from the face of this ground: i. e. the place where Cain had hitherto dwelt. "And it shall (will) come to pass that every one that findeth me shall slay me." Strange indeed! If every one, who might meet with him, was to slay him, how many lives had he, and how often might he be slain? In the next commentary our translators have properly rendered () whosoever; and propriety demanded the same rendering here. "And it will come to pass that whosoever findeth me will slay me." The impropriety of shall in this last clause is obvious, as it implies that the person who found him, was under some kind of necessity to slay him. In short the expression of his fear is converted into a prediction.' In the Common Version, 2 Kings v, 18, Elisha, a true prophet of Jehovah, is represented as conniving at the idolatry of the Syrian General Naaman. By translating the passage in the preterite, according to the original, this inconsistency is removed: "In this "thing the Lord pardon thy servant, that when my Lord went "into the house of Rimmon to bow down himself (or worship) "there, and leaned on my hand, I bowed down myself there; "that I bowed down myself-the Lord pardon thy servant in this "thing." This text has lately been the subject of debate between the Bishop of St. David's, and Mr. Bellamy, whose version of the passage is substantially the same as that which we have inserted, and which is transcribed by us from Whitby's Commentary, Vol. 1 p. 380. Ed. 1709, on Luke xii, 8. A good version of the Scriptures ought to convey as much as possible the spirit and manner of the original. In the Common Version these have been frequently sacrificed by the diversity of renderings which the translators have employed in translating the same Hebrew or Greek words and phrases-as pn, which they rendered by law, statute, decree, ordinance. Many passages of Scripture, says Mr. B. would be placed in a striking light by uniformity of rendering. Isaiah xxxvii, 3, 4, should be thus rendered: "This day is a day of trouble and of "reproof, and of blasphemy.-It may be that the Lord thy "God-will reprove the words, &c." "Rabshakeh has ut"tered words of reproof against Judah: it may be that God "will reprove the words of the Assyrian." Rom i, 19. "Be"cause that which is known of God is manifest (Cavegov) among "them for God hath mamfested it (pavegos, not shewed it) "unto them." The manner and spirit of the originals cannot be exhibited in a version, unless the poetical parts of Scripture be divided into lines corresponding with the metre. For the same reason, quotations from the Old Testament, and parallel passages, should be uniformly rendered. Matt. xxvi, 41, and Mark xiv, 38, exactly correspond in the original, but differ in our translation: "Watch and pray, that ye enter not into "temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is "weak." "Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation: "the spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak." Instances of this kind are very frequent. In Matt. xvi. 26, we have— "What is a man profited;" in Luke ix, 25, "What is a man "advantaged:"-the words of the original being the same in both places. O ȧgxitpíxλwos, John ii, 8, 9, is, in the former verse, "Governor of the feast;" in the latter," Ruler of the feast." VOL. VI. N.S. 3 B The common reader of the Public Version never can suppose that Areopagus" and "Mars'-Hill," Acts xvii, 19, 22, are the same place. Izpos is rendered in some places by wedding, and in others, by marriage, neither of which terms conveys the proper meaning of the word in almost every passage in which it occurs in the New Testament: convivium nuptiale, marriage feast,' is clearly the proper rendering. The concluding section is on the regard due to the Common Version, in which Mr. Boothroyd records his approbation of the rules which Archbishop Newcome has proposed, and his intention of governing himself by them. The language, sense, and punctuation of our present version,' he remarks, 'should be retained; unless when a "sufficient" reason can be assigned for departing from them.' Uniformity in the orthography of proper names, is included in the improvements which the Author contemplates in his projected Version. In the New Testament, King James's translators have followed the Greek, and instead of Elijah, have written Elias; Eliseus for Elisha; Esaias for Isaiah; Charran for Haran; Osee for Hosea, &c. The public have a right to know what are the Theological opinions of the author of this attempt. He feels no hesitation in avowing them. Though he has learnt to call no man master, but freely to follow that sense of the Sacred Scriptures which he conceives the original most naturally suggests, yet he owns, that in his general views he most entirely agrees in the Theological sentiments of that great and good man Philip Doddridge.' The corrected text for the Old Testament which the author intends to adopt, will be that stated in his edition of the Hebrew Scriptures; and for the New he will generally follow the most accurate edition of Griesbach,' These reflections, though but a small part of what might be written on the subject, are sufficient to prove the object for which they were written. That an improved version of the Scriptures is desirable, and would be highly advantageous, is an opinion in which many illustrious scholars of the present and of past times have cordially united. Into whose hands shall such a work be.committed? Into the hands, certainly, of any competent person who may be able and willing to prosecute it. Fidelity and ability are the only requisites. Mr. Boothroyd offers himself for this important enterprise; and as specimens of his qualifications and of the manner in which he proposes to conduct the undertaking, he has accompanied the Reflec'tions' with a translation of nearly the first two chapters of the book of Genesis, and of part of the third chapter of the book of Job, with notes. From these specimens we give the following extracts. 13 And the evening had been, and the morning had been, a third day; 14 And God said, Let there be luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth, and to distinguish the day from the night: † and let them be for signs of stated times, and of weeks, and of years; and so it was. 16 For God made the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for the regulation of the day, and the less for the regulation of the night; he made also the stars. 17 And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth, 18 And to regulate the night, and to distinguish the light from the darkness; and God saw that this also was good. 14 I adopt the reading of the Samaritan, Sept. and 1 ms. on this comment, and omit the next, as I am satisfied that it has originated from the words omitted being afterwards inserted, and the beginning of this verse again repeated. That office which the light created on the first day had hitherto discharged, is henceforward to be discharged by the sun, moon, and stars. These are to be signs of stated times. So J. T. render, and so the word is most usually rendered. I render, weeks, a sense which it has chap. xxiv. 55. See Note. On the first day God created light, ; but on this he, created luminaries, ; which implies, a luminous body, a body to which light is attached, as Mercer has justly observed.' JOB, Chapter III. 1 After this, Job opened his mouth, and execrated his own BIRTH-DAY; 2 And Job spake, and said: 3 Perish the day on which I was born, the night it was said, Lo! a man child! let God from above never regard it; let it not be joined with the days of the year; 7 Lo! let that night be solitary; let no joyful sound ever come thereon. 9 Obscure be the stars of its twilight; let it expect light, and may there be none; 10 Because it shut not the doors of the womb to me, * Sam. Sept. 1 ms. † And let them be for luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth. These are highly respectable specimens, which cannot fail of procuring for Mr. Boothroyd the good opinion of the public. Should the proposed Version be executed throughout with equal care, its claims to general patronage will not be inconsiderable, as it will possess no common excellence. To the English reader, it will exhibit the variations of the ancient versions, and will include every material correction and improvement of the public version which have been suggested by the most eminent Biblical critics, and which are required that the English Bible may correspond with the present advanced state of Biblical learning. The undertaking on which Mr. Boothroyd has adventured, is one of high importance and of great labour, requiring not only the attainments of learning, but the higher endowments of a mind unprejudiced and impartial. Of Mr. Boothroyd's qualifications for the office in which he is engaged, we entertain a very favourable opinion. Of his acquaintance with Hebrew literature, he has already furnished proof in his Edition of the Hebrew Bible. He is not deficient in critical acumen, and his judgement is generally exact. We are pleased with the modesty which invariably distinguishes him, and which forms a striking contrast with the offensive intrusions and dogmatic assertions of some other authors. His diligence and perseverance are unquestionable. We must, however, be permitted to caution him against haste in dismissing the sheets of his, work from the press, and to submit them to a more rigorous examination than the Prospectus has received. There are several errors in these pages, one of which, in the specimen,' we must not omit to notice. Gen. i, 18, And to regulate the night,' should be, 'And to regulate the day and the night;' the three words, the 6 day and'-are left out, either by accident or mistake, as they are indisputably a part of the text. Some persons may probably be of opinion, that the work on which Mr. B. is employed, is much too arduous to be successfully accomplished by an individual. They will probably advert to the number of translators who were appointed by King James to revise the Bible, and ask whether one man be competent to execute a work which was assigned to fifty-four persons in à former reign. For our own part we confess that we see nothing very weighty in this objection. We should on several accounts prefer a version of the Scriptures by a single translator, principally for the sake of uniformity; and though the work is laborious it is not impracticable. The present is not the only instance of the Bible's being translated by an individual. Luther translated the Scriptures in circumstances far less propitious than Mr. B.'s. Michaelis, whose literary avocations were so numerous, and whose writings |