Twentieth Century New Testament

The Twentieth Century New Testament. A Translation into Modern English. Made from the Original Greek. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1902. First published in three parts: 1898, 1900, 1901. A revised edition was issued in 1904.

The production of this version of the New Testament was set in motion by William T. Stead (1849-1912), the eccentric and visionary editor of The Review of Reviews. In this journal Stead had been promoting various endeavors for the betterment of society, and had begun to build a network of volunteers which he called the Review's "Association of Helpers." One of the members of the Association, Mr. Ernest Malan of Hull, wrote to Stead and suggested that a translation of the New Testament in the idiom of common speech would benefit uneducated people. Stead introduced him to another person who had written to him expressing the same desire, a Mrs. Mary Higgs of Oldham (near Manchester). These two began to work on a new translation of the Gospel according to Mark, and Stead printed the following call for volunteers in the September 1891 issue of The Review of Reviews:

Wanted: a new Translation of the Gospel.—I have received from two correspondents, who have been simultaneously engaged in the task of translating the Gospel narrative from the original into nineteenth-century English, an appeal for help from those who are in sympathy with their object. What they urge is, that the English even of the Revised Version is somewhat archaic, and gives a sense of unreality to the narrative in the Bible, which stands in the way of its realisation by the ordinary reader. Those who are interested in the subject, and are willing to help in the translation, are asked to send their names and addresses to me, which I will communicate to the translators in question. ¹

The next issue of The Review of Reviews contained the following notice:

A New Translation of the Bible.—I am glad to be able to report that the appeal which I inserted last month from a lady and gentleman who wished for help in the work of making a translation of the New Testament into the vernacular English of to-day, has had a very widespread response. This shows that our correspondents are in sympathy, and now, I hope, in touch with a considerable number of educated men and women throughout the country who are ready to essay one of the most difficult and delicate of tasks, but one which, if well performed, would confer a real benefit upon the English-speaking world. ²

The December number contained the following short article:

A VERNACULAR TRANSLATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Another manifestation of the activity stimulated by the Review is the undertaking by a company of translators of the work of rendering the New Testament into the language of the ordinary man and woman of our own time. This suggestion, originally thrown out by one of our Helpers in Yorkshire and a lady correspondent in Lancashire, has taken practical shape. It has been decided to confine the attempt at present to the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. The work has elicited widespread sympathy, and is now being carried out by eighteen workers, each book being allotted to a group of three or four. The whole will be submitted to a revising committee, and it is hoped that by the end of 1892 a cheap modern version of the " Old, old story " will be within reach of the poorest.

The translation, while aiming at the simplest language, will still remain as faithful as possible to the Greek text. It is expected that it will meet a general want, as, besides the workers, many others have expressed a desire for such a translation in simple idiomatic English of to-day. It is hoped that this will be so well received as to render it desirable to translate the remaining books of the New Testament. Tho list of workers is now closed. ³

The publication of the first part (containing the Gospels and Acts) was announced by Stead in 1898:

THE TWENTIETH CENTURY NEW TESTAMENT.

Publication of Part I.

There is being published this month from the office of this Review a volume which, whatever the final verdict pronounced upon it by public opinion, will, as competent judges believe, at least mark the commencement of a new stage in the history of the English Bible.

Readers of this Review will remember to have seen, at long intervals, notices of the progress of a translation of the New Testament, to be phrased in really modern English, and to appeal more especially to that generation which is rapidly forgetting those antique idioms that are to be found, of course, everywhere in our Authorised Version. The first part of this new venture, to which has been given the somewhat daring title of "The Twentieth Century New Testament,"' is now offered to the public.

The work of translation, whatever its merits, has not, at least, been hastily done. The translators (who, wishing their work to stand or fall on its own merits, are remaining anonymous) have been engaged upon the production of this, the historical, portion of the New Testament since 1891. The most diverse forms of English Christianity are represented in their number; and the very variety of the points of view from which they have approached so-called "controversial passages" has probably made the appearance of biassed or prejudiced renderings less likely in this translation than might have been expected. This was greatly to be desired in the present divided state of Christian opinion.

It is evident from their preface that the translators have been by no means blind to the strong opposition which this version is certain to encounter from the allied forces of orthodox prejudice and affectionate conservatism which rally round the standard of the Authorised Version. They have realised how easy a thing it is to provoke ridicule by any modernisation of passages which have long commanded admiration and reverence on account of their antique charms. Yet, believing that a modern translation ought to be made, they have braved criticism. For the modernisation of the language of our English version of the Bible is "in the air," so to say. This translation, for instance, is the result of the co-operation of a number of individuals, each of whom had been separately impressed with the need for a modern Bible by actual experience, and several of whom were, in ignorance of each other's attempts in the same direction, endeavouring to satisfy single-handed what they believed to be a real need—a need, too, that it ought not to be impossible to satisfy. Through this Review these isolated workers were brought into touch with one another and led to combine their efforts.

It is professedly a tentative edition, issued in the hope of evoking many friendly criticisms and suggestions which may materially aid in bringing later editions nearer to the ideal which has been aimed at. But, so far as it now goes, it represents the painstaking and sincere efforts of a body of workers, of some experience and capabilities, to faithfully present in modern English the historians of the New Testament.

Part II., now in preparation, will contain the Epistles and the Book of Revelation, and will be issued at an interval which will enable those who are engaged upon it to reap the full benefit of the criticisms and suggestions which this Part I. may call forth. The present edition is issued in limp cloth covers at the price of Is. 6d. Any profits that may result from its sale, or from that of later editions, will, after the payment of the ordinary expenses of publication, be devoted to the cheapening and improving of the work. ⁴

The Preface of 1898 and the Preface of the Revised edition of 1904 are both reproduced in full below.

The translators remained anonymous until 1935, when the Bulletin of the John Rylands Library announced that the Library had acquired a box of documents related to the version, including the “Secretary’s notebook and various official papers relating to the preparation of the work,” and biographical sketches of several participants: “Henry Bazett, T. Sibley Boulton, W. Tucker Broad, John A. Barrow Clough, W. Copland, E. Bruce Cornford, William M. Crook, Peter William Darnford, George G. Findlay, Edward Deacon Girdlestone, Mary Higgs, J.K. Homer, A. Ingram, Ernest de Merindol Malan, Sarah Elizabeth Mee, and R.O.P. Taylor.” ⁵ These records were donated to the library by Mary Higgs in 1933. In 1955 they were examined by the biblical scholar Kenneth W. Clark, who then wrote a long article on the history of the version for the Bulletin. Clark states that Ernest Malan, who served as Secretary, was chiefly responsible for the production of the version. Malan’s interest in Bible translation began when he noticed what problems his children had in understanding the King James version, and how much easier it was for them to understand a modern French paraphrase: “The family was bi-lingual and Malan observed that the modern French version by Lasserre was better understood than was the traditional English Bible.” ⁶ “Malan became the driving force in the project and served as its secretary. He was but 33 at the start, but he carried the heaviest burden in the problems of translating, revising, financing and publishing.” ⁷

Clark also gives much interesting information about the organization of the work and the people involved.

Altogether, thirty-five persons were associated with the translation, including as advisers three prominent scholars: G.G. Findlay of Headingley College, J.R. Harris of Cambridge, and R.F. Weymouth, retired Headmaster of Mill Hill School.

Certainly this company of translators is no ordinary assemblage, and it is difficult to imagine a more disparate group. The members range in age between 19 and 63. In education they vary widely. They represent all parts of the British Isles. About half of them are clergymen, of which probably none is a typical representative. Others are schoolmasters, business men, and housewives. They belong to the Church of England, Wesleyans, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, and Baptists, and one speaks of himself as a Huguenot. Among them, there are many whose records show a procession through successive religious affiliations. Several of the clergymen have experienced repeated doubts as to their calling, and some have forsaken their orders altogether.

It is a company of liberal and independent thinkers, strong-minded, and even opinionated. Their struggle with life--social, political, and intellectual--is reflected in the tensions and ill-health which they report, for hardly a single biography lacks this element. It was a grim realism, in the Articles of Association drafted in 1898, that included a provision: “If any partner shall die, retire, or become lunatic ...” As a group, their children are numerous, and domestic problems have created a heavy and constant strain. Among them are many Socialists, sone self-styled Radicals, and almost all have engaged in numerous social services toward reform and uplift. They hold in common a sympathy for the mass of workers. A number of them have written articles on social and religious reforms, and some have previously engaged in translating, or at least re-phrasing, the English New Testament.

Compare such a group with the scholarly and academic group which had produced the English Revised Version only a decade before. It is a non-professional group, whose translating was motivated by social causes and by the desire to mediate the Word of God in a plainer English idiom. A more fasciating company of workers can hardly be imagined, and fascination becomes greater when we see them against the background of their time. They worked during the last decade of the Victorian era which was ablaze with political and social revolution. The Home Rule controversy was at its height, and one member who had been reared in an Irish Wesleyan family openly declared his advocacy of Home Rule. The Socialist movement was everywhere astir, and many of the translators affirmed their sympathy with it. Free education for the poor had but recently been granted, the electorate had been enlarged, and new land regulations were being pressed into law. ⁸

The papers were also examined by the historian Herman Ausubel, who writes:

The participants consisted of laymen, clergymen, and former clergymen, all of whom felt that, although the Revised Version was a great advance over the Authorized Version, it retained, nonetheless, far too much archaic language; and this, they insisted, was unfortunate, for the working classes could not understand what they read. “I am inclined to think,” one of the participants, a Congregational minister, wrote in 1893, “that few things have repelled the multitudes of artisans and manual labourers from the Churches more than the artificial aspect given to Christianity by the old-world language, the antique clothing given to the truth.” Christianity, he added, was undergoing a severe trial, and unless it penetrated all phases of the nation's life, it would die. If it was to live and rule, it could not remain a curiosity. The new translation, in a word, was not for the educated but for the masses—artisans, laborers, and young people leaving school. …

Several of the contributors were outspoken Christian Socialists. E.D. Girdlestone, an ex-curate, helped to found the Clifton and Bristol Christian Socialist Society and the Birmingham Fabian Society, and he wrote and lectured constantly on socialist topics. Henry Bazett, another former clergyman, was a socialist who engaged actively in the organization of trade unions among women. Ernest Malan, on the other hand, was suspicious of socialism and convinced that its adherents were often hostile to religion and lacking in morality. “As long as human selfishness continues in both master and man,” he told one of his clergymen-translators in 1893, “so long will it be impossible to much ameliorate the lot of the community; the oppressed will merely become the oppressors and so on ad infinitum. No, we want the power of the Good News to help the 'kosmos' and may our present labors tend towards that happy end!” ⁹

Bruce Metzger describes them:

... Malan, as secretary of the project, requested each to provide an autobiographical sketch that would serve as an introduction to all the others. Fifteen of these sketches are preserved among the papers, and from them one can appreciate the diversity of backgrounds of the translators. The Reverend Henry Bazett described himself as a Huguenot ex-curate, though he had been ordained in the Church of England. Thomas Sibley Boulton, who was only twenty years old, had embraced socialism and wrote of his desire for "a reunion of Christianity." W. M. Copeland, who was a headmaster educated in Aberdeen, called himself "a Radical in Politics andReligion." W. M. Crook, the eldest son of an Irish Wesleyan minister, was a master in classics at Trinity College, Dublin. At twenty-one, ill health caused his temporary withdrawal. He later became a lecturer for the National Liberal Club. The Reverend E. D. Girdlestone, at sixty-three, was possibly the oldest member and a stalwart associate who published a number of articles, mostly socialistic. A. Ingram was a Presbyterian, born in Aberdeen; he listed successive occupations as cowboy, grocer, draper, lawyer's and accountant's clerk, and journalist since 1880. He was a widower with three children. The Reverend E. Hampden-Cook, a Congregationalist and "broad Evangelical," had received his degree from Cambridge. In 1903 he prepared the posthumous Weymouth translation for publication. Besides Mrs. Higgs, the only other woman among the partners was Mrs. Sarah Elizabeth Butterworth Mee, who was related to Sir Joseph Butterworth, an emancipationist. She had married the Wesleyan minister Josiah Mee and taught a Sunday school class for twenty years. Mrs. Mee, and at least one other of the partners, knew no Greek, but they served on the English committee to review the translation for its proper idiom. ¹⁰

_____________________________________________

1. The Review of Reviews vol. iv, no. 21 (September 1891) p. 288.

2. The Review of Reviews vol. iv, no. 22 (October 1891) p. 391.

3. The Review of Reviews vol. iv, no. 24 (December 1891) p. 554.

4. The Review of Reviews vol. xviii (November 1898) p. 500.

5. Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, 19/2 (July 1935), p. 471.

6. Kenneth W. Clark, “The Making of the Twentieth Century New Testament,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, 38 (1955), p. 60.

7. Ibid., p. 61. This contradicts P. Marion Simms, The Bible in America (New York, 1936), p. 278, in which Simms states “More credit is due Mrs. Mary Higgs, now of Oldham, England, for this version, than any other one person.” But I have several times found that Simms is unreliable.

8. Ibid., pp. 65-6.

9. Herman Ausubel, In Hard Times: Reformers among the Late Victorians (Columbia University Press, 1960), p. 122.

10. Bruce Metzger, The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions (Baker Academic, 2001), p. 107.

Preface to Part I, 1898

A Translation into Modern English

Few English-speaking people of to-day have the opportunity of reading the Bible in the English of their own time. In the course of the last hundred years the Bible has been translated into the every-day language of the natives of most countries, but the language of our Bible is still the English of three hundred years ago.

The translation now offered to the public had its origin in the discovery that the English of the Authorized Version (closely followed in that of the Revised Version), though valued by the more educated reader for its antique charm, is in many passages difficult for those who are less educated, or is even unintelligible to them. The retention, too, of a form of English no longer in common use not only gives the impression that the contents of the Bible have little to do with the life of our own day, but also requires the expenditure of much time and labour on the part of those who wish to understand or explain it. The Greek used by the New Testament writers was not the Classical Greek of some centuries before, but the form of the language then spoken. Moreover, the writers represent those whose utterances they record as using the words and phrases of ordinary conversation.

We believe that the New Testament will be better understood by modern readers if presented in a modern form. In this respect the present translation differs altogether in its plan from that of the Revised Version of 1881. No attempt is made in that Version to translate into the language of our own time. Its authors say :

"We have faithfully adhered to the rule that the alterations to be introduced should be expressed, as far as possible, in the language of the Authorized Version, or of the Versions that preceded it. We have habitually consulted the earlier Versions; and in our sparing introduction of words not found in them, or in the Authorized Version, we have usually satisfied ourselves that such words were employed by standard writers of nearly the same date."

Our constant effort, on the contrary, has been to exclude all words and phrases not used in current English. We have, however, followed the modern practice of using an older phraseology in the rendering of poetical passages and quotations from the Old Testament, and in the language of prayer.

Preface of the Revised Edition, 1904

A Translation into Moden English.

English-speaking people of to-day have not, until quite recently, had the opportunity of reading the Bible in the Modem English of their own time. Though in the course of the last hundred years the Bible has been translated into the vernacular of most countries, the language of our Bible remains the English of three hundred years ago.

This translation of the New Testament is an endeavour to do for the English nation what has been done already for the people of almost all other countries—to enable Englishmen to read the most important part of their Bible in that form of their own language which they themselves use. It had its origin in the recognition of the fact that the English of the Authorized Version (closely followed in that of the Revised Version), though widely valued for its antique charm, is in many passages difficult, or even quite unintelligible to the modern reader. The retention, too, of a form of English no longer in common use is liable to give the impression that the contents of the Bible have little to do with the life of to-day. The Greek used by the New Testament writers was not the Classical Greek of some centuries earlier, but the form of the language spoken in their own day. Moreover the writers represent those whose utterances they record as using the words and phrases of every-day life.

We believe that the New Testament will be better understood by modern readers if presented in a modern form; and that a translation of it, which presents the original in an exalted literary and antiquated dress, cannot, despite its "aroma" and the tender memories that have gathered around it, really make the New Testament for the reader of to-day the living reality that it was to its first readers. In this respect the present translation differs altogether in its aim from that of the Revised Version of 1881. No attempt is made in that Version to translate the original into the language of our own time. Its authors state in their preface:

"We have faithfully adhered to the rule that the alterations to be introduced should be expressed, as far as possible, in the language of the Authorized Version, or of the Versions that preceded it."

Our constant effort, on the contrary, has been to exclude all words and phrases not used in current English. We have, however, followed the modern practice of using an older phraseology in the rendering of poetical passages, and of quotations from the Old Testament, and in the language of prayer.

Neither a Revision nor a Paraphrase.

The translation of 1611, known as the "Authorized Version," was the outcome of many successive revisions of the translation completed by Tyndale in 1534, which was, at least to some extent, founded on that completed by Wycliffe about 1380. Further, the last named translation was not made from the original Greek, but from a Latin Version. The present translation is not a revision of any previous one, but is made directly from the Greek. Nor is it a paraphrase. A paraphrase might be useful as a help to the interpretation of the New Testament, but it would not be the New Testament itself. Yet, on the other hand, our work is more than a literal translation. No purely literal rendering can ever adequately represent the thoughts conveyed in the idioms of another language. In this translation not only every word, but also the emphasis placed upon every word, has been carefully weighed, and an effort made to give the exact force and meaning in idiomatic modern English.

Neither a Revision nor a Paraphrase.

The translation of 1611, known as the "Authorized Version," was the outcome of many successive revisions of the translation completed by Tyndale in 1534, which was, at least to some extent, founded on that completed by Wycliffe about 1380. Further, the last named translation was not made from the original Greek, but from the Latin Version, known as the Vulgate. The present translation is not a revision of any previous one, but is made directly from the Greek. Nor is it a paraphrase. A paraphrase might be useful as a help to the interpretation of the New Testament, but it would not be the New Testament itself. Yet, on the other hand, our work is more than a verbal translation. No purely verbal rendering can ever adequately represent the thoughts conveyed in the idioms of another language. In this translation, not only has every word been carefully weighed, but also the emphasis placed upon every word, and the effort has been made to give the exact force and meaning in idiomatic modern English.

The Greek Text.

Since the publication of the Authorized Version of 1611, more than 1,500 manuscripts of the New Testament have been discovered or become accessible, and among them are the three oldest and most important. The Greek text here translated, that of Bishop Westcott and the late Dr. Hort, is mainly founded on these oldest manuscripts, and is widely acknowledged to be, as Dr. Philip Schaff called it, "the purest Greek text," and "the last and best edition of the Greek Testament."

The Greek Text.

Since the publication of the Authorized Version of 1611, more than 1,500 manuscripts of the whole or of parts of the New Testament have been discovered or have become accessible, and among them are the three oldest and most important. The Greek text here translated, that of Westcott and Hort, is mainly founded on the oldest manuscripts, and may be said to represent that form of the text of the New Testament which was generally in use in the Church at the end of the Third Century.

Parallel Passages.

A large amount of time and care has been expended upon those passages of the gospels which record the same or similar events or discourses, in order to show where the same or different words have been used. Such passages abound in the first three gospels, while in the fourth they are more numerous than is commonly supposed. Dr. Westcott writes:

"The English reader has a right to expect that he will find in the Revision which is placed in his hands a faithful indication of the verbal agreement or difference between the several narratives. These afford the clue, often slender and subtle, to the particular meaning of a passage."

In addition to such help as that here referred to, the English reader will be able to study more easily the composition of the gospels, and to discern their relation to a common source. This important matter was neglected by King James's translators. To the Revisers of 1881 the public are indebted for very careful work in this direction, in which we have gladly followed and endeavoured to surpass them. There are, however, many minute points where such an indication as that alluded to by Dr. Westcott seems impossible.

Parallel Passages.

A large amount of time and care has been expended upon those passages of the gospels which record the same, or similar, events or discourses, in order to show the remarkable similarities, and the no less remarkable divergences, which abound in them. Such passages are common in the first three gospels, while in the fourth they are more numerous than is generally supposed. Dr. Westcott writes:

"The English reader has a right to expect that he will find in the Revision which is placed in his hands a faithful indication of the verbal agreement or difference between the several narratives."

In addition to such help as that referred to by Dr. Westcott, the English reader should now be able, to some extent, to study the origins of the gospels, and to discern their relation to a common source. Great advances have been made in the study of this subject since the issue of the Authorized and even of the Revised Version. There are still, however, minute points where such an indication as that required by Dr. Westcott seems impossible.

Quotations and "Borrowed Phrases."

The numerous and important quotations from the Old Testament are in this translation placed in special type. In addition to these, a large number of " borrowed Old Testament phrases," as Westcott and Hort call them, are indicated in the same way. These have been carefully compared with the Septuagint, and, where necessary, with the original Hebrew, and, in some cases, with the Aramaic versions. Passages quoted from the Apocrypha (references to which were formerly given in the Authorized Version, but have been long omitted by the printers) are here also indicated. It is believed that the use of a different type for all such passages, which show how the writers of the New Testament often borrowed the language of the Old, will be of considerable advantage to the careful student, without embarrassing the ordinary reader. Other quotations are in ordinary type.

Quotations and "Borrowed Phrases."

The numerous and important quotations from the Old Testament are in this translation set out in modern form; but minor quotations (i. e., those not specially introduced as quotations) from the Old Testament, the Apocrypha, the Book of Enoch, and other sources, are placed between single inverted commas; while, at the foot of the pages, references are given to some of the vast number of places, in which the writers consciously or unconsciously borrow the phraseology of the Old Testament. This will enable the reader to see how familiar the writers were with the very words and phrases of the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament, and how insensibly it influenced them in describing the events of their own day.

Proper Names.

The names of persons and places we have, as a rule, left in the forms with which English readers have been made familiar by the Authorized and Revised Versions. But in the case of names which occur in the Old Testament as well as in the New, we have reverted, with some exceptions, to the more correct Hebrew forms. This principle was partly adopted by the Revisers of 1881.

Proper Names.

The names of persons and places we have, as a rule, left in the forms with which English readers have been made familiar by the Authorized and Revised Versions, except where a change in the spelling seemed likely to show the correct pronunciation.

Measures and Coins.

We have given measures of space and time, and also the values of coins, in their nearest English equivalents. In estimating the latter, the insufficient amounts usually given in the margins of our Bibles, and in popular commentaries, have been abandoned. Larger values, which more correctly represent the purchasing power of the precious metals in New Testament times, have been substituted.

Measures, Coins, and Titles.

We have attempted to give measures of space and time, the values of coins, and also official titles in their nearest English equivalents.

Bracketed Passages.

A few passages, numbering fourteen in all, will be found placed between square brackets. These are judged by Westcott and Hort "not to have originally formed part of the work in which they occur," but to be "stray relics from the Apostolic or sub-Apostolic age." The three most important of these will be found at pages 35 [end of Mark] and 197 [Pericope Adulterae].

Bracketed Passages.

Order of the Books

In early times very great variety prevailed in the arrangement of the books of the New Testament. The order depended partly on their length, partly on the relative importance of the cities to which they were addressed, still more on the different degrees of authority attributed to the writers. The "Gospels" were always placed first, and of these the two attributed to Apostles usually had the precedence. The position of the "Acts" varied somewhat. The "Revelation," though far from being the latest book, was on account of its prophetical character almost always placed last. In the middle position came the two groups of Letters, one comprising those written to Jewish Christians by the Apostle Peter and by the Master's brothers, James and Jude, together with the Letters attributed to John, two of these last being private letters. The other group of Letters comprises nine from the Apostle Paul, addressed to seven churches in Italy, Greece, and Asia Minor, and four private Letters. The anonymous Letter " to the Hebrews " (otherwise entitled "to the Alexandrians") was added to this group, usually at the end of the thirteen. Of these two groups of Letters the former had the precedence in Eastern, the latter in Western Christendom. Westcott and Hort have followed the order of two out of the three oldest Manuscripts.

It might, at first sight, appear best, in a translation intended principally for general readers, to keep to the common order, but this would help to perpetuate an arrangement which greatly hinders the comprehension of the Pauline Letters, placing, as it does, the earlier ones after those written in later years. On the other hand, to put the whole of the books in the order of their composition (in which the "Epistle of James" would probably stand at the beginning and the "Gospel according to John" at the end, and in which Historical Books and Letters would be curiously mixed) would be an arrangement, not very difficult in the present state of chronological learning, but more puzzling than helpful.

It has been thought best, therefore, to retain the usual grouping, but to arrange the books contained in each group in chronological order, according to the judgement of the best experts. By the adoption of this method the reader begins with the "Gospel according to Mark," the earliest, shortest, and simplest of the gospels, and is enabled to trace the new matter introduced by each successive Evangelist. When he comes to the Letters, he is enabled to read them with reference to the corresponding position of the Christian Church, the development of doctrine, and the varying personal history of the writers.

Order of the Books.

The order, in which the Books and Letters of the New Testament appear in this translation, is due to the desire not to inconvenience a reader, familiar with the old order, more than is necessary, but, at the same time, to make an advance in the direction of such a chronological arrangement, as modern research has rendered possible. Three main divisions have been adopted, suggested by the character of the books—Historical Books, Letters, and an Apocalypse; and, in the sub-divisions, the Letters have been grouped under the names of those writers to whom they have been traditionally attributed. Within these sub-divisions the Books and Letters stand in a probable chronological arrangement.

It is probable that our translation will meet with a cold reception from many. This was the case with the Authorized Version itself, when it first made its appearance. Long after that date, many preferred to use the plain and vigorous "Geneva Version," which, like the present translation, was without authority from Church or State. Each successive translation, indeed, has been received with some amount of distrust by those who have preferred the retention of the familiar form of words to an accurate presentation of the meaning in more modern language. But, as Bacon asks, "since things alter for the worse spontaneously, if they be never altered for the better designedly, how is the evil to stop?"

It is certain that our translation will not be acceptable to those who regard any attempt to re-translate the New Testament as undesirable, if not dangerous. It is, nevertheless, hoped that, by this modern translation, the New Testament may become a living reality to many by whom the Authorized Version, with all its acknowledged beauties, is but imperfectly understood or nerer read.

Our work has extended over many years, in the course of which death has deprived us of the help of one of our first, and most valued, workers. Undertaken, as a labour of love, by a company of about twenty persons, members of various sections of the Christian Church, we now commend this translation to the good-will of all English-speaking people, and to the blessing of Almighty God.

The Translators.
November, 1898.

In this hope, we now commend this translation, which has been undertaken as a labour of love, to the good-will of all English-speaking people, and to the blessing of Almighty God.

The Translators.
September, 1904.

Note :—The present volume contains about three-fifths of the New Testament. The remainder is in preparation.

When the Revised Version of 1881 was in progress, it was proposed by the present Bishop of Worcester that it should first appear in a Tentative Edition, as had been the case with the German Revised Bible, so that it might "circulate experimentally for two or three years." The difficulties of the plan thus proposed appeared to the English Revisers to be insurmountable. We, however, have adopted it, and issue this Edition as a Tentative Edition only.

Proof sheets, printed for private circulation in the progress of our work, have been already submitted to a large number of critics, and their suggestions have been carefully considered. The co-operation of a wider circle of readers is now cordially invited. All criticisms and suggestions will be welcomed. They should be addressed:—

The Treasurer of the T.C.N.T
10 Gordon Road, Clifton, Bristol

NOTE.

The "Tentative Edition" of this Translation was issued in three parts between 1898 and 1901. In that Edition we endeavoured to discover what was practicable in a modern translation of the New Testament, before issuing a permanent edition. This Revision of our Translation, rendered necessary by the large demand for our "Tentative Edition" in every part of the English-speaking world, amounts practically to a careful re-translation made in the light of experience derived from our previous attempts, and of the many valuable criticisms that have been received.