TheBibleconstantlyimpressesmenthatthisrelationtoGodistheessentialone。Everythingelseisincidental。Grantednowapeoplefreshlyundertheinfluenceofthatteaching，youhavealargeexplanationofthemovementwhichfollowedtheissuanceofthisversion。
[1]ShortHistoryoftheEnglishPeople，chap。vii，sec。vii。
Jamesopenedhisfirstparliament1604withaspeechclaimingdivineright，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。Thecivilwar1642-46
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。Inadozenyears1628-40，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，whilemenwhoknowthemselvesandthesearetheonlyoneswhodothingsknowthatthestoryisnottrue。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。
Thirtyyearsago1881itwascompletedinwhatweordinarilycalltheRevisedVersion，andtenyearsago1901theAmericanformofthatRevisedVersionappeared。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。