This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1898 Excerpt: ...is of real importance, because the common habit in the churches of curtseying and bowing when the second sentence in the Creed is read, is supposed to be warranted by Philippians 2. 10. But as a matter of fact the Revisers brought the notion of bowing "at" the name of Jesus to this passage; they did not and could not ...
Read More
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1898 Excerpt: ...is of real importance, because the common habit in the churches of curtseying and bowing when the second sentence in the Creed is read, is supposed to be warranted by Philippians 2. 10. But as a matter of fact the Revisers brought the notion of bowing "at" the name of Jesus to this passage; they did not and could not get it out of the Preposition. And in that misrepresentation double harm was wrought. Not only was a tendency to superstitious and profitless habit encouraged, in which, alas! human nature needs no stimulus, but the definite Apostolic echo to the Master's words was entirely lost. In John 16. 24 we read: "If ye shall ask anything of the Father, he will give it you in my name. Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name; ask, and ye shall receive." Who that reads Paul's words can doubt that this, not any kind of bodily posture, was what he meant? This is therefore another of the myriad gains of the Revised Version. IV. Finally, as to the Articles. The differences between English, Hebrew and Latin are especially manifest here, in that whilst we have two articles, the "Definite" and "Indefinite," Greek and Hebrew have but one, the "Definite Article," whilst Latin has neither. It is of most moment here to refer to the Greek. In their treatment of its Article CONFUSION OF THE ARTICLES 101 the Revisers of 1611 appear to have been generally in sweet confusion lost. Sometimes they put "a" for "the," sometimes "the" for "a "; sometimes "the" is just left out altogether; sometimes "that" is put for "the "; in all cases without authority, without necessity, without advantage. How mischievous and regrettable is the resulting distortion of th...
Read Less
