ana translation

xxxvi
INTRODUCTION
first three and last two) of the eight from Jude, of those above given.
It is hardly possible to question that in these instances the later
Version borrowed from the earlier, especially as the periphrases are
neither easy nor obvious, but formed with skill and study. Moreover
(it may be fairly added), they are in the freer manner of our
Version, not in that of the Harkleiisian with its word-for-word
laboriousness ;
and the latter, therefore, may be presumed to be the
borrower.
6. Coincidences- in erroneous or imperfect Renderings.
Further, the Versions concide, not only in renderings, but now and
then in mis-renderings. The reviser has in some places followed his
predecessor, not in well-chosen equivalents or happy periphrases, but
in his (by no means frequent) errors or failures. Thus, both treat
(2 Pet. i. 9) as signifying merely ofy 6po>i/,
both misconstrue
(ib. 20) as a nominative,* both force on Trvpovfitvoi (iii. 12) the
sense of irvpl SoKi/x,ao//,ei>oi,
both render BLK-^V vrr^ova-ai (Jud. 7) as if
it were is Btictjv /cara/c^ivo/Aci/cu,
both pervert StaK/atvo/xeVovs (ib. 23) to
mean ^cTa/xcXo/xeVovs.
But under this head the leading example
is in
Jud. 6, where both are misled by a false etymology into translating
di'Stois as if equivalent to This error dyi/too-rots. appears, it is true,
to have had some currency,^ and is not, therefore, peculiar to these
Versions. But inasmuch as the Harklensian translator renders d'/'Sios
correctly where it occurs in the Epistle which follows next in order
(Rom. i. it
20),
is fair to infer that his mistranslation of it here in
Jude is due to his too faithful adherence to his Philoxenian precursor.
c. Simultaneous variation in Renderings.
Another class of coincidences carries the evidence farther, and
convincingly. They are found to agree not only in single renderings,
but in simultaneous variation of renderings where a word recurs.
Such instances appear where 2 Peter and Jude run parallel. Thus in
the case of [crwjevco^ov/xevot.
In 2 Pet. ii. 13 both render it
by the
verb (a rare one) ^iQI^ALD ; in Jud. 12 by
the still rarer
* Possibly both followed a Greek reading (unattested), eV/Auo-ts (see Greek Text,
p. 61 infr.). If so, this is an instance of textual coincidence, to be added to those
given in the following Section (xi, see p. xl).
t See Note, p. 130, infr.