promise." If the reader can compare these solemn asseverations with the passages above quoted and not be shocked by the insincerity which they exhibit, he has more charity than I can pretend to possess. Yet this is scarcely the beginning of what we find to disapprove in regard to this translation.

The following are additional professions of Mr. Campbell in regard to the faithfulness of his labors. "It may so happen that, now and then, once or twice in a hundred years, an individual or two may arise, whose literary acquirements, whose genius, independence of mind, honesty, and candor, may fit them to be faithful and competent translators." See Preface, p. 8. Now as Mr. Campbell is the translator of this book, and as, on his own showing, these must be the qualifications of translators, he must of course possess them all, and cannot plead exemption from censure as to the merits of his performance, on the score of ignorance.

The reader will bear in mind. while he reads the following, that the preface still claims the three doctors as authors of the translation. We quote from the stereotype edition. "The present edition-shows that in the judgment of some at least, the style of the whole volume, even of the historical books, was susceptible of some improvement."-" Macknight presented more work for the pen of a reviser than Campbell; and Doddridge, more than either." Preface, p. 70.

After professions like the following, what should we not be led to look for on the score of correctness? "Few readers," says he, "can appreciate the labor and care necessary to the perfecting of an impression of the New Testament.-Aware of all the difficulties in our way, and most solicitous to have the stereotype pocket edition [the one from which we now quote, and to which we shall confine our attention through the remainder of this investigation] of this work as perfect, in its typography, as any in existence, we have been at the labor and expense of preparing two editions at one and the same time; so that any errata discovered after the sheets of the third edition were worked off, might be corrected in the standing form of the pocket edition. Few, very few errors have been discovered in the third edition; these are corrected in its errata ; and, of course, do not appear in this." "The sheets of the third edition, after having been repeatedly read by myself and others, were submitted to the examination of Thomas Campbell, sen., and of Francis W. Emmons.-Their classical and

biblical attainments have been of much service to us, and to the public, in the completion of this work," pp. 74, 75.

Once more: "This edition being the ultimatum of our critical labors, in comparing, reviewing, and reconsidering our own disquisitions, as well as those of many others, living and dead; after a full review of the third edition, or Family Testament, while the whole subject was fresh in our recollection, with all the analogies, parallelisms, and peculiarities of the eight authors of the New Testament in full view, exhibits, as we humbly conceive, a correct, and perspicuous translation of the sacred writings of the New Institution, in a style so modernized, and yet so simple, exact, and faithful to the original, as to render it more intelligible than any version in our language." Mr. Campbell is determined not to submit to the inconvenience of waiting, as other authors are compelled to, till the tardy public utter forth their praises of his productions. He has acquired the art of self-praise, and extols himself, and his works still more. He acknowledges obligations to no one in this respect. The following is the conclusion of the paragraph, from which the last quotation is made: "To vindicate and sustain the fidelity of this version to the original now in its most improved form, and its superior accuracy, we feel ourselves fully competent; and therefore do not hesitate in placing it in the stereotype form."

A full year after uttering this language, we find this passage, from under his hand, in the Millenial Harbinger, Vol. V. p. 154: "I am glad to perceive the attention which the New Version is receiving from all denominations; and if the Lord preserve my life, I hope to be able to defend it in all capital matters, against each, and every assault, from any pen or tongue on this continent." And, p. 174: "Who will undertake to show that the New Version is not to be depended on?" we must stop.

But

We had thought of dwelling upon the translation of particular words, as e. g. ixxinoia, which he makes the "three doctors" uniformly render congregation, and the word ßantico, which he makes them always render immerse, even in passages where they are known to. regard such renderings absurd, as in 1 Cor. 10: 1. But there are so many things in this translation that require notice, that we are under the necessity of omitting any further remarks on these. For bad as they are, they are nothing in comparison with what is yet to be exhibited.

Incredible as it may appear, Mr. Campbell even while so

lemnly pronouncing this work to be the translation of Drs. Macknight, Doddridge and Campbell, was mutilating the text, and even leaving out hundreds of passages which they regarded as inspired. The following are a few specimens, in which he has omitted words, phrases, and sometimes whole verses. He omits the following: Matt. 6: 13, "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever, amen." In 9: 13, he omits the words "to repentance." In 12: 35, the words "of the heart." In 14: 22, "Jesus," and also in v. 25. In 18:29," at his feet, and," and in v. 35, " their trespasses." In 20: 6, "idle." 20: 22, "And to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with." 26: 9, "ointment." In 27: 35, he omits the following entire passage: "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet; They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots." In 28: 19, "therefore."

In Mark's Gospel, among other passages he omits the following:-2: 17, "to repentance." 3: 5, "whole as the other." 4: 24," Unto you that hear, shall more be given." In 6: 11, he leaves out the following: "Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than for that city." 7: 2, "they found fault." In 11: 14, 15, "Jesus" is twice omitted. 12: 27, "God." 13: 14, "spoken of by Daniel the prophet." 14: 22, “eat."

"He

In Luke's Gospel, the following are omitted: 4: 18, hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted." v. 41, "Christ." 9: 56,"For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save." 11:2, 4, the following words and phrases: "Our -who art in heaven-thy will be done as in heaven so in earth -but deliver us from evil." v. 29, "the prophet." v. 44, "Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites." 24: 49, "Jerusalem."

In John's Gospel, the following: 1: 43, "Jesus." 5:30, "the Father." 6: 58," the manna. 8:20,"Jesus." 8: 59, "going through the midst of them, and so passed by." In Acts 2: 30, he omits, "according to the flesh he would raise up Christ." 8: 37, " And Philip said, If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest; and he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." 10: 6, " He shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do." 10: 21, "which were sent to him from Corneljus." 19: 10, "Jesus." 23: 9, "Let us not fight against God."

In Romans 1: 16," of Christ." 11: 6, "But if it be of works, SECOND SERIES, VOL. I. NO. II.

41

it is no more of grace; otherwise work is no more work." 13: 9, "Thou shalt not bear false witness." 1 Cor. 6: 20, " and in your spirits which are God's." 7: 39, "by the law." 11: 24, "Take, eat." Galatians 3: 1, "That ye should not obey the truth." Philippians 3: 21, "That it may be fashioned." Colossians 1: 14," through his blood." 1: 28, "Jesus." 1 Tim. 2: 7, "in Christ." 3:3,"not greedy of filthy lucre." 4: 12, "in spirit." Hebrews 10: 9, "O God." 11: 13, " And were persuaded of them." 1 Peter 1: 23, "forever." 1 John 4: 3, "Christ came in the flesh." Rev. 1: 8, "the beginning and the ending." 5: 14, " Him that liveth forever and ever."

In the foregoing omissions, I find that Mr. Campbell has strictly followed in the steps of the Unitarian editors of the "Improved Version." He has even been bolder than they; for in a number of instances, the clauses which they inclosed in brackets, (thereby intimating that there was not sufficient proof of their spuriousness,) he has had the hardihood to omit altogether. We cannot trust ourselves to speak the sentiments we entertain of such atrocious treatment of the word of God. No one can be at a loss how to estimate such conduct.

Out of all the foregoing passages, Drs. Campbell, Macknight, and Doddridge have not ommitted a single word or phrase in their version of the New Testament, and yet Mr. Campbell omits them all, and not less than five or six hundreds of others, and pledges himself that the version which he offers to the public is made by "Drs. Campbell, Macknight, and Doddridge!"

But this is not the worst of it. He has even left out of their version, as he calls it, passages, for the genuineness of which, they strenuonsly contend. Take a single specimen. In Rev. 1: 11, (and it will be recollected that Dr. Doddridge was the only one of the three doctors who translated the Revelation,) Mr. Campbell omits "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last." It is on this clause that Dr. Doddridge has the following note: "I cannot forbear recording it, that this text has done more than any other in the Bible toward preventing me from giving up to that scheme, which would make our Lord Jesus Christ no more than a deified creature." Yet does Mr. Campbell make the reader believe that this very text is omitted by Doddridge. The same thing is true in relation to passages contended for by the other translators; by Macknight, for example, in 1 Cor. 10: 28, etc.

I have myself examined and compared with Griesbach, up

wards of three hundred passages from which Mr. Campbell has omitted words, phrases, and texts, nor have I examined by many hundreds, all the passages. The reader will be satisfied of this when I inform him, that Mr. Campbell in the controversy with a" Friend of Truth," was compelled to admit that he has altered the language of Drs. Campbell, Macknight, and Doddridge, in the translation about three thousand times. And the Rev. Mr. Jamieson, before spoken of, states that, upon comparing together the first and second edition of this pretended translation, as far only as Matthew's and Mark's Gospels, he found in this short compass upwards of six hundred alterations in phraseology, and upwards of one hundred in doctrine.

Now what is the conclusion to which an unsuspecting reader must be led, who confides in the declarations of Mr. Campbell ? One would imagine that no book was ever issued with more scrupulous care bestowed upon it in order to have it correct. And yet I venture to affirm that there has never been a work stereotyped with half the glaring evidences of carelessness, that are to be found in this. I will specify a few instances. In his appendix, Mr. Campbell after Griesbach, pronounces the phrase "And he followeth not with us" in. Mark 9: 38, to be spurious; and tells us that it is "rejected from this improved version ;" and yet by turning to his text we find it still there! So little has been the care with which he has prepared this work, that he has not even compared his list of "spurious readings" with the text. He also professes to omit the words "And turning to his disciples he said," from Luke 10: 23, pronouncing them, in like manner, to be spurious; and telling us in the appendix that he has rejected them from the text: but, upon turning to the text we find them still there! The word "you," in Colos. 1: 10, he after Griesbach pronounces to be spurious, and says that he has rejected it from his version; but on turning back, we find it still there! So shameful has been his negligence while professing to correct the words of eternal life, that he has not only not troubled himself to compare his spurious readings with the text itself; but has made up his appendix by just running over the margin of Greisbach's text and collecting the readings which he denominates spurious. In this way he has pronounced many readings spurious which are still in his text. He has followed Griesbach so implicitly in this respect, as even to copy his false references; e. g. in his appendix he tells us, after Griesbach, that the word "Jesus" is left out of John 1: 44, when that