The King James Version had to compete with the Geneva Bible in popular use; but in the end it prevailed, and for more than two and a half centuries no other authorized translation of the Bible into English was made. We owe to it an incalculable debt. Yet the King James Version has grave defects. By the middle of the nine- teenth century, the development of Biblical studies and the discovery of many manuscripts more ancient than those upon which the King James Version was based, made it manifest that these defects are so many and so serious as to call for revision of the English translation.
The task was undertaken, by authority of the Church of England, in The English Revised Version of the Bible was published in ; and the American Standard Version, its variant embodying the preferences of the American scholars associated in the work, was published in In this copyright was acquired by the International Council of Religious Education, and thus passed into the ownership of the churches of the United States and Canada which were associated in this Council through their boards of education and publication.
The Council appointed a committee of scholars to have charge of the text of the American Standard Version and to undertake inquiry as to whether further revision was necessary. For more than two years the Committee worked upon the problem of whether or not revision should be undertaken; and if so, what should be its nature and extent.
In the end the decision was reached that there is need for a thorough revision of the version of , which will stay as close to the Tyndale-King James tradition as it can in the light of our present knowl- edge of the Hebrew and Greek texts and their meaning on the one hand, and our present understanding of English on the other.
The Commit- tee has worked in two sections, one dealing with the Old Testament and one with the New Testament. Each section has submitted its work to the scrutiny of the members of the other section; and the charter of the Committee requires that all changes be agreed upon by a two-thirds vote of the total membership of the Committee.
The problem of establishing the correct Hebrew and Aramaic text of the Old Testament is very different from the corresponding problem in the New Testament. For the New Testament we have a large number of Greek manu- scripts, preserving many variant forms of the text. Some of them were made only two or three centuries later than the original composition of the books. For the Old Testament only late manuscripts survive, all with the exception of the Dead Sea texts of Isaiah and Habakkuk and some fragments of other books based on a standardized form of the text established many centuries after the books were written.
The vowel signs, which were added by the Masoretes, are accepted also in the main, but where a more probable and con- vincing reading can be obtained by assuming different vowels, this has been done. No notes are given in such cases, because the vowel points are less ancient and reliable than the consonants.
Departures from the consonantal text of the best manuscripts have been made only where it seems clear that errors in copying had been made before the text was standardized. Most of the corrections adopted are based on the ancient versions translations into Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, and Latin , which were made before the time of the Masoretic revision and therefore reflect earlier forms of the text.
In every such instance a footnote specifies the version or versions from which the correction has been derived, and also gives a translation of the Maso- retic Text. Sometimes it is evident that the text has suffered in transmission, but none of the versions provides a satisfactory restoration. Here we can only follow the best judgment of competent scholars as to the most probable reconstruction of the original text. Such corrections are indicated in the footnotes by the abbreviation Cn, and a translation of the Masoretic Text is added.
The discovery of the meaning of the text, once the best readings have been established, 1s aided by many new resources for understanding the original languages. Much progress has been made in the historical and comparative study of these languages. A vast quantity of writings in related Semitic lan- guages, some of them only recently discovered, has greatly enlarged our knowl- edge of the vocabulary and grammar of Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic.
Some- times the present translation will be found to render a Hebrew word in a sense quite different from that of the traditional interpretation. It has not been felt necessary in such cases to attach a footnote, because no change in the text is involved and it may be assumed that the new rendering was not adopted without convincing evidence. The analysis of religious texts from the ancient Near East has made clearer the significance of ideas and practices recorded in the Old Testament.
Many difficulties and obscurities, of course, remain. Where the choice between two meanings 1s particularly difficult or doubtful, we have given an alternative rendering in a footnote. If in the judgment of the Committee the meaning of a passage is quite uncertain or obscure, either because of corruption in the text or because of the inadequacy of our present knowledge of the lan- guage, that fact is indicated by a note.
It should not be assumed, however, that the Committee was entirely sure or unanimous concerning every rendering not so indicated. To record all minority views was obviously out of the question. The present revision returns to the pro- cedure of the King James Version, which follows the precedent of the ancient Greek and Latin translators and the long established practice in the reading of the Hebrew scriptures in the synagogue.
The ancient Greek translators substituted the word Kyrios Lord for the Name. The Vulgate likewise used the Latin word Dominus. The King James Version of the New Testament was based upon a Greek text that was marred by mistakes, containing the accumulated errors of fourteen centuries of manuscript copying. It was essentially the Greek text of the New Testament as edited by Beza, , who closely followed that published by Erasmus, , which was based upon a few medieval manuscripts.
The earliest and best of the eight manuscripts which Erasmus consulted was from the tenth century, and he made the least use of it because it differed most from the commonly received text; Beza had access to two manuscripts of great value, dating from the fifth and sixth centuries, but he made very little use of them because they differed from the text published by Erasmus.
The evidence for the text of the books of the New Testament is better than for any other ancient book, both in the number of extant manuscripts and in the nearness of the date of some of these manuscripts to the date when the book was originally written.
But they lacked the resources which discoveries within the past eighty years have afforded for understanding the vocabulary, grammar and idioms of the Greek New Testament. A major reason for revision of the King James Version, which is valid for both the Old Testament and the New Testament, is the change since in English usage.
Many forms of expression have become archaic, while still generally intelligible—the use of thou, thee, thy, thine and the verb endings -est and -edst, the verb endings -eth and -th, it came to pass that, whosoever, what- soever, insomuch that, because that, for that, unto, howbeit, peradventure, holden, aforetime, must needs, would fain, behooved, to you-ward, etc. Other words are obsolete and no longer understood by the common reader.
The greatest problem, however, is presented by the English words which are still in constant use but now convey a different meaning from that which they had in and in the King James Version. These words were once accurate transla- tions of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures; but now, having changed in meaning, they have become misleading. They no longer say what the King James trans- lators meant them to say.
It not only does the King James translators no honor, but it is quite unfair to them and to the truth which they understood and expressed, to retain these words which now convey meanings they did not intend.
The Revised Standard Version of the Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments, was published on September 30, , and has met with wide acceptance. That is done in pamphlets entitled An Introduc- tion to the Revised Standard Version of the Old Testament and An Introduction to the Revised Standard Version of the New Testament, written by members of the Committee and designed to help the general public to understand the main principles which have guided this comprehensive revision of the King James and American Standard versions.
These principles were reaffirmed by the Committee in , in connection with a study of criticisms and suggestions from various readers. As a result, a few changes have been authorized for the present and subsequent editions. Most of these are corrections of punctuation, capitalization, or footnotes. Some changes of words or phrases are made in the interest of consistency, clarity or accuracy of translation.
All the reasons which led to the demand for revision of the King James Ver- sion in the nineteenth century are still valid, and are even more cogent now than then. But we hope that we have not taken undue advantage of that freedom. The Revised Standard Version is not a new translation in the language of today. It is not a paraphrase which aims at striking idioms.
It is a revision which seeks to preserve all that is best in the English Bible as it has been known and used through the years. It is intended for use in public and private worship, not merely for reading and instruction. We have resisted the temptation to use phrases that are merely current usage, and have sought to put the message of the Bible in simple, enduring words that are worthy to stand in the great Tyndale-King James tradition. And it is more than a classic of English literature to be cherished and admired.
It records the life and work of Him in whom the Word of God became fiesh and dwelt among men. That Word must not be disguised in phrases that are no longer clear, or hidden under words that have changed or lost their meaning.
It must stand forth in language that is direct and plain and meaningful to people today. It is our hope and our earnest prayer that this Revised Standard Version of the Bible may be used by God to speak to men in these momentous times, and to help them to understand and believe and obey His Word. Amos 1Kg. Lamentations Col. Colossians Lev. Leviticus 1Cor. Luke 2Cor.
Malachi Dan. Daniel Mic. Micah Dt. Deuteronomy Mk. Mark Ec. Ecclesiastes Mt. Matthew Eph. Esther Neh. Nehemiah Ex. Exodus 67 Num. Numbers Ezek. Obadiah Ezra Ezra 1 Pet. Galatians 2Pet. Genesis 1 Phil. Philippians Hab. Habakkuk Philem. Philemon Hag. Haggai Pr. Hebrews Ps. Psalms Hos. Hosea Rev. Revelation Is.
Tsaiah Rom. Romans Jas. James Ru. Ruth Jer. Jeremiah 1Sam. Judges 2Sam. Joel S. Song of Solomon Jn. John 1 Th.
Titus Jon. Jonah Zech. Zechariah Jos. Joshua Zeph. Chapter, chapters Cn Correction; made where the text has suffered in transmission and the versions provide no satisfactory restoration but where the Standard Bible Committee agrees with the judgment of competent scholars as to the most probable reconstruction of the original text. The reader is referred to pp. Iterally Mace. In the annotations italics are used to designate the words which are quoted verbatim from the Scripture text.
In the notes belonging to the Revised Standard Version designated by italic letters and standing at the foot of the second column of the Scrip- ture text alternative renderings or readings are printed in italics. In the annotations on the Synoptic Gospels Matthew, Mark, and Luke the cross references to parallel passages stand in parentheses immediately after the boldface heading of a new paragraph.
A careful comparison of such parallel passages will often reveal the special emphases in each Synoptic account. Acts 8. See Heb. Both the Scripture passage and the annotation should be consulted.
Tb means the first part of verse 4; the second part of verse 7. The best commentary on the Bible is often some other text in the Bible: therefore it cannot be too strongly urged that, for the fullest comprehension of any one passage, all of the cross references should be looked up. More than a thousand years of time separate the earliest and the latest compositions in the Old Testament.
It reflects a varied social, economic, political, religious, and geographical background; slave and free, the nomad and farmer, the oppressed poor and privileged landowners and rulers, proud empires and vassal states, the desert and the sown, rain-watered highlands and the great flood plains of the Nile and Tigris-Euphrates—these are among the settings of the drama of divine revelation. The Old Testament reflects the many facets of the life of Israel, and its literature takes many forms; in it are prose and poetry, myth and legend, folk tale and history, sacred hymns and a superb love song, religious and secular laws, proverbs of the wise and oracles of the prophets, epic poems, laments, parables, and allegories.
Despite the variety in content as well as in viewpoint, there is a significant unity, centered in belief in the God of judgment and redemption, of justice and mercy, and spring- ing out of the continuity and corporate nature of that people chosen by God to play the main role in the drama of revelation and from whom was to come Jesus of Nazareth.
The Israelites were more history-conscious than any other people in the ancient world. Probably as early as the time of David and Solo- mon, out of a matrix of myth, legend, and history, there had appeared the earliest written form of the story of the saving acts of God from Creation to the con- quest of the Promised Land, an account which later in modified form became a part of Scripture. But it was to be a long time before the idea of Scripture arose and the Old Testament took its present form.
The Law is the Pentateuch, the first five books, i. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The remaining books belong to the Writings. In the Hebrew Bible, Ruth, Lamentations, and Daniel are placed among the Writings, a section which begins with the Psalms and ends with 1 and 2 Chronicles; this is in contrast with the English Bible, where the order is influenced by the Greek and Latin versions.
What we use is the translated Bible see pp. The translation of Hebrew and Aramaic presents distinctive and often difficult problems; they belong to the Semitic family of languages, to which Arabic, Assyrian and Babylonian, and Canaanite also belong, in contrast to Greek and English, which are Indo-European.
The text of the Old Testament, like that of the New Testament see p. The translator must also decide among variant readings in the Hebrew manuscripts themselves, a task complicated by the recent discovery of much earlier manuscripts of the Hebrew Old Testament than had previously been known. Before the time of the council of Jamnia, about A. It is true that there was already in existence a form of that Hebrew text which was to be edited later by the Jewish scholars known as Masoretes from about A.
In contrast with this Qumran evidence of variant textual recensions, the Biblical manuscripts found further south in the Wilder- ness of Judea at Wadi Murabbaat and belonging to the early part of the second century A. Although there are variants in the preserved manuscripts of the Masoretic Text, due largely to simple scribal errors, the Masoretic Text has been transmitted with incredible accuracy.
If by canonical one means that a book must be regarded as having a special authority, that it is holy and inspired, that it is one of a strictly limited number of books, and that there is a single, standard text with its verbal form inviolable, then one cannot speak of a canon of Old Testament Scripture before about A. Long before this, however, the Jews had their Scriptures.
It is generally agreed that it is now incorporated within the present book of Deuter- onomy chs. Ezra 7. The date of the final compilation of the Pentateuch or Law, which was the first corpus or larger body of literature that came to be regarded by the Jews as authoritative Scripture, is uncertain, although some have con- servatively dated it at the time of the Exile in the sixth century.
Since the P Source is found in Genesis through Joshua, those responsible for the final form of the Pentateuch must have looked upon Joshua as a continuation of it, but because the career of Moses did not extend beyond Deuteronomy, only Genesis to Deuteronomy came to be regarded as Mosaic in origin, and so the Law was limited to the Pentateuch.
Certainly before the middle of the third century B. It was to retain this primary position even after the body of Scripture had been enlarged to include the Prophets and the Writings. When in the second century B. This may have occurred in two stages, i. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the book of the Twelve were edited and compiled during the post-exilic period. The process of compiling and editing the Latter Prophets is illustrated by the addition of chs.
The editing was both an adaptation of the books of the prophets to the needs of the post-exilic period and a recognition of the relevance of the prophetic messages for contemporary as well as historic Israel.
Just when the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets came to be regarded as a definitely limited body of Scripture is not clear. Ben Sirach, the author of the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, writing around B. The grandson of Ben Sirach in his Preface to Ecclesi- asticus refers to the three-fold division of Scripture as the Law, the Prophets, and the other or rest of the books, although he does not necessarily imply a closed canon.
The Former Prophets perhaps came to be associated with the Latter Prophets because of allusions in the Former Prophets to prophetic figures and because of a tradition that they were composed largely by prophets.
Such a tradition is suggested in 1 Chr. In contrast with the Pentateuch, the Former Prophets, and the Latter Prophets, the books of the Writings contain less homogeneous materials. It was not until about a.
Among many writings not included in the canon were the books of the Apoc- rypha, which are found in the Septuagint see p. They could not be accepted, in part because of the current conviction that the Old Testament canon was closed at the time of Ezra when prophetic revelation was supposed to have ceased, or because, in the case of some, they had been written in Greek or else had ceased to be copied in Hebrew and Aramaic after their translation into Greek.
There was also probably no widespread demand for their canonization. These books elab- orate basic themes of Israel's tradition: the revelation to the patriarchs against the background of primeval history Genesis , the exodus from Egypt Exodus chs.
The Pentateuch embraces a great diversity of material which reflects Israel's pilgrimage from the time of Abraham to the Exile. The whole tradition, how- ever, has been shaped by basic themes found essentially in the confession of faith preserved in Dt. The Pentateuch may be regarded as an elaboration of this creedal statement, according to the interests and insights of various circles of tradition.
In the early monarchy perhaps about B. Sometime later between about to B. In the seventh century B. Deuteronomy D was published 2 Kg. And finally, about the time of the Exile, priestly writers P rounded out the expanded tradition with materials preserved by the Jerusalem priesthood.
Thus the Pentateuch took shape over a long period of time. It preserves not only the tones which reverberated in the Mosaic period, but the overtones of meaning perceived by subsequent generations. In tribute to the creative influence of Moses, the whole tradition in its manifold richness was ascribed to the leader to whom, Israel believed, God had spoken as to no other man.
The book falls naturally into two main sections: chs, deal with primeval history; chs. The latter section tells the stories of Abraham chs. Unlike the stories of primeval history, those of the patriarchs can be read against the background of the history of the Near East in the early part of the second millennium B.
Thus the call of Abraham Out of this fallible human material, however, God gradually separated one family line and eventually chose one man, Abraham, promising that he and his people would have a great historical destiny and would be instrumental in bringing divine blessing upon all the dispersed families of mankind.
The book is composed of three main literary traditions Judean, Ephraimite, and Priestly; see Introduction to Pentateuch and these, in turn, often preserve ancient oral tradition. Thus the voices of many generations unite in the affirmation that the only true God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, whose redemptive purpose, like the rainbow of his Promise, spans the course of human history from its remote beginning to its unrealized future.
And there was evening and there was morning, ment and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firma- ment.
And it was so. And there was evening and there was morning, a sec- ond day. Out of primordial chaos God created an orderly world and assigned a pre-eminent place to man among his creatures. Light was created first compare 2 Cor. Night, a remnant of un- created darkness v. Since the Jewish day began with sundown, the order is evening and morning. See 7. And God saw that it was good. And God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also.
Implicitly worship of the heavenly host is forbidden Dt Zeph. Sea monsters, see Ps. The Hebrew word for man Adam is collective, referring not to an individual but men as a whole. And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day.
Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done. This is a different tradition from that in 1. Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat? The prohibition against cating the forbidden fruit 3. A helper fit for him means a partner who is suitable for him, who completes his being. And again, she bore his brother Abel.
Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a tiller of the ground. And the Lorp had regard for Abel and his offering, F The name in Hebrew resembles the word for living 'z Heb ganah, get old explanation of why the serpent crawls rather than walks and why men are instinctively hostile to st. Work is not essentially evil 2. Note that the curse is upon the ground, not man.
The tree of life 2. A flaming sword compare Jer. So Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. And if you do not do well, sin is couching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it. When you till the ground, it shall no longer yield to you its strength; you shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth.
If any one slays Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. Zillah bore Tubal-cain; he was the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron. At that time men began to call upon the name of the Lorp. Sin is pictured as a predatory animal, crouching at the door.
When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. This priestly tradition bridges the times from the creation to the flood. Ik See 1. Priestly tradition makes no Teference to the account of the fall of man. In Hebrew tradition the ages decrease from Adam to Noah , to Noah to Abraham , to the patriarchs , to the normal three-score years and ten Ps.
This list is somehow related to the genealogy of Cain 4. Thus all the days of Lamech were seven hun- dred and seventy-seven years; and he 32 After Noah was five hun- dred years old, Noah became the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth. When men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daugh- ters were born to them,?
These were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown. Noah is instructed to make an ark 9 These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation; Noah walked with God. It 1s generally recognized that an earlier and a later priestly tradition have been combined. The priestly version mentions two animals of every sort [v.
Thus the earth was threatened with a return to pre-creation chaos 1. Archaeological evidence indicates that traditions of a prehistoric flood covering the whole earth are heightened versions of local inundations, e.
Only Noah was left, and those that were with him in the ark. However, F. Bruce dismissed it as a publicity stunt and wrote [ citation needed ] that it had the opposite effect of causing nearly every family in that congregation to acquire a copy. He was accused of willfully perverting the meaning of the Scriptures, and his New Testaments were ordered to be burned as 'untrue translations.
To make the RSV acceptable to individuals and parishes within the Orthodox Church, an expanded edition of the deuterocanonical texts containing 3 and 4 Maccabees and Psalm was released in ; in these additions, as in the New Revised Standard Version, archaic pronouns such as 'thou' and 'thee' and verb forms such as 'hast' and 'didst' are no longer used for God.
Most editions of the RSV that contain the Apocrypha place those books after the New Testament, arranged in the order of the King James Version the Eastern Orthodox deuterocanon in post editions is added at the end. The exceptions are the First and Second Catholic Editions and the Common Bible in which the Apocryphal books were placed in the order of the Roman Catholic Biblical canon and between the Testaments and rearranged in an order pleasing to Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants alike, respectively see below for more information about the Catholic Editions and the Common Bible.
Approximately 85 alterations to the RSV text were authorized in and introduced into the printings. Some of the changes included but were not limited to reverting to the Greek phrase 'the husband of one wife' in 1 Timothy 3. The RSV Catholic Edition included revisions up through , a small number of new revisions to the New Testament, mostly to return to familiar phrases, and changes to a few footnotes. It contains the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament placed in the traditional order of the Vulgate.
Whereas in the translation panel had merely authorized a handful of changes, in they gave the New Testament text a thorough editing. This Second Edition incorporated Greek manuscripts not previously available to the RSV translation panel, namely, the Bodmer Papyri, published in The most obvious changes were the restoration of Mark Also restored was Luke In the text, this had been cut off at the phrase, 'This is my body', and the rest had only been footnoted, since this verse did not appear in the original Codex Bezae manuscript used by the translation committee.
The description of Christ's ascension in Luke had the footnote ' Luke Many other verses were rephrased or rewritten for greater clarity and accuracy. Moreover, the footnotes concerning monetary values were no longer expressed in terms of dollars and cents but in terms of how long it took to earn each coin e. The Standard Bible Committee intended to prepare a second edition of the Old Testament, [10] but those plans were scrapped in , when the National Council of Churches voted to authorize a full revision of the RSV.
The Common Bible of ordered the books in a way that pleased both Catholics and Protestants. It was divided into four sections:. The non-deuterocanonicals gave the Common Bible a total of 81 books: it included 1 Esdras also known as 3 Ezra , 2 Esdras 4 Ezra , and the Prayer of Manasseh, books that have appeared in the Vulgate's appendix since Jerome's time 'lest they perish entirely', but are not considered canonical by Catholics and are thus not included in most modern Catholic Bibles.
In , the RSV Apocrypha was expanded to include 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, and Psalm , three additional sections accepted in the Eastern Orthodox canon 4 Maccabees again forming an appendix in that tradition , although it still does not include additional books in the Syriac and Ethiopian canons.
This action increased the Common Bible to 84 Books, making it the most comprehensive English Bible translation to date with its inclusion of books not accepted by all denominations. The goal of the Common Bible was to help ecumenical relations among the churches. In , Reader's Digest published a special edition of the RSV that was billed as a condensed edition of the text. A team of seven editors led by John Evangelist Walsh produced the manuscript. The Reader's Digest edition was intended for those who did not read the Bible or who read it infrequently; it was not intended as a replacement of the full RSV text.
This second edition removed archaic pronouns thee , thou , and accompanying verb forms didst , speaketh , revised passages used in the lectionary according to the Vatican document Liturgiam authenticam , and elevated some passages out of the RSV footnotes when they favored Catholic renderings, such as replacing 'young woman' with 'virgin' in Isaiah It was the first major version to use gender-neutral language and thus drew more criticism and ire from conservative Christians than did its predecessor.
This criticism largely stemmed from concerns that the modified language obscured phrases in the Old Testament that could be read as messianic prophecies. This version was commissioned for the purpose of modifying RSV passages that conservatives had long disputed: e. Unlike its counterpart, it used only a small amount of gender-neutral language. It was the first truly ecumenical Bible and brought together the two traditions — the Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible and the Protestant Authorised Version.
The year marked the 50th anniversary of the RSV Bible's first publication. Oxford University Press commemorated it by releasing two different Anniversary editions: one with the Old and New Testaments only with the NT text from , and another including the Apocryphal books as seen in the Expanded Edition.
0コメント