The Scripture Guide, a Familiar Introduction to the Study of the Bible [pp. 201-221]

1839.] Critical Study of the English Bible.
sion even among clergymen, as to endanger the unfortunate
discovery that dvotiAc means something more than actual transgression? It is true that the deception has been fully detected and exposed in controversy; but the original suggestio falsi, or at least suppressio veri, argues either profound ignorance in those who made it, or a supposition
of profounder ignorance in those to whom it was addressed.
Another effect, common to both cases, is the tendency to
distort and falsify the context by false emphasis, by making
that predominant which ought to be subordinate, and vice
versa. Of this there are perpetual illustrations in the sermons of some admirable preachers, and even in their manner
of reading the scriptures, a manner often of itself demonstrative, that the English Bible, and the English Bible only, is
to them the word of God.
To convey a more definite idea of this error, we will give an
illustration. Matthew Henry, in remarking on the 21st verse
of the 24th chapter of Proverbs, says "He does not say, with
themn that change, for there may be cause to change for the
better; but that are given to change, that affect it for change
sake." Now it unfortunately happens that this pregnant and
emphatic given belongs entirely to the English version;
the original word is a participial form, and means changers
or those changing. Particular illustrations might be multiplied; but we rather choose to point out a whole class
of passages, in which the exclusive student of the English version is apt to betray his want of acquaintance with
the original. We refer to those parts of Isaiah where the
church is personified as the object of address. In exposition
or quotation it is not uncommon to apply these passages to
God himself, there being nothing in the form of the translation to prohibit such an application, though in Hebrew it is
rendered impossible by the gender of the pronoun. We have
known, for instance, these words-" the nation and kingdom, that will not serve thee, shall perish"-to lIe cited and
explained as if the pronoun "thee" referred to God himself,
whereas in Hebrew it is feminine, and determines the object
of address to be the church. Another text which we have
known to be thuls misconceived, is Isaiah 41: 15-" Behold
I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having
teeth"-where a slight inspection of the Hebrew text will
show, that the pronoun "thee" is not masculine but feminine; so that the whole verse is addressed, not to the prophet, as the mere English reader might imagine, but to the
209