Basic HTML Version
the margin, [Sixtus 5. praef. Bibliae.] (which though it be not altogether the same thing to that we
have in hand, yet it looketh that way) but we think he hath not all of his own side his favorers, for
this conceit. They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings,
than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other. If they were sure that their high Priest had
all laws shut up in his breast, as Paul the Second bragged, [Plat. in Paulo secundo.] and that he were
as free from error by special privilege, as the Dictators of Rome were made by law inviolable, it
were another matter; then his word were an Oracle, his opinion a decision. But the eyes of the world
are now open, God be thanked, and have been a great while, they find that he is subject to the same
affections and infirmities that others be, that his skin is penetrable, and therefore so much as he
proveth, not as much as he claimeth, they grant and embrace.
REASONS INDUCING US NOT TO STAND CURIOUSLY UPON AN IDENTITY OF
PHRASING
Another things we think good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that we have not tied ourselves
to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we
had done, because they observe, that some learned men somewhere, have been as exact as they
could that way. Truly, that we might not vary from the sense of that which we had translated before,
if the word signified that same in both places (for there be some words that be not the same sense
everywhere) we were especially careful, and made a conscience, according to our duty. But, that
we should express the same notion in the same particular word; as for example, if we translate the
Hebrew or Greek word once by PURPOSE, never to call it INTENT; if one where JOURNEYING,
never TRAVELING; if one where THINK, never SUPPOSE; if one where PAIN, never ACHE; if
one where JOY, never GLADNESS, etc. Thus to mince the matter, we thought to savour more of
curiosity than wisdom, and that rather it would breed scorn in the Atheist, than bring profit to the
godly Reader. For is the kingdom of God to become words or syllables? why should we be in
bondage to them if we may be free, use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as
commodiously? A godly Father in the Primitive time showed himself greatly moved, that one of
newfangledness called [NOTE: Greek omitted but was a dispute over the word for “a bed”] [Niceph.
Calist. lib.8. cap.42.] though the difference be little or none; and another reporteth that he was much
abused for turning “Cucurbita” (to which reading the people had been used) into “Hedera”. [S.
Jerome in 4. Ionae. See S. Aug: epist. 10.] Now if this happens in better times, and upon so small
occasions, we might justly fear hard censure, if generally we should make verbal and unnecessary
changings. We might also be charged (by scoffers) with some unequal dealing towards a great
number of good English words. For as it is written of a certain great Philosopher, that he should
say , that those logs were happy that were made images to be worshipped; for their fellows, as good
as they, lay for blocks behind the fire: so if we should say, as it were, unto certain words, Stand up
higher, have a place in the Bible always, and to others of like quality, Get ye hence, be banished
forever, we might be taxed peradventure with S. James his words, namely, “To be partial in ourselves
and judges of evil thoughts.” Add hereunto, that niceness in words was always counted the next
step to trifling, and so was to be curious about names too: also that we cannot follow a better pattern
20
KJV Bible