The Latin Versions.--The necessity for a Latin version of the Scriptures did not arise

in Rome, but in the Roman province of Africa. There were a number of copies in use,

and these exhibited considerable differences. In order to correct the provincialisms and

other defects of the African translation, an edition was published in Rome, to which

Augustine refers as the Itala, which can be traced back as far as the second century.

To eliminate the differences and imperfections of the Latin copies, Jerome

commenced a revision of the text, as Origen had previously done for the Greek.

Realizing, however, the need for some more drastic change, he prepared a translation of

the O.T. in Latin direct from the original Hebrew, a work which occupied nearly twenty

years. This version of Jerome's became known afterwards as the Vulgate (or current

version), and was the Bible of Europe until the Reformation.

What light do these versions throw upon the text of the O.T Scriptures?

We observe that the Coptic, Ethiopic and Old Latin versions were made from the

LXX, and while helping us to ascertain the true text of that version do not throw any light

upon the Hebrew original. The Syriac and the Vulgate, though translated from the

Hebrew, can only give us the Massoretic text, a text which we already possess.

The Septuagint is much the most important of all the versions. Together with the

existing Massoretic text it provides us with sufficient material for arriving at a fairly clear

understanding of the true meaning of the original Scriptures. The believer may take

comfort in the fact that with all the mass of textual material available the divergences are

so slight, and their effect upon doctrine so negligible, that for all practical purposes we

may say that we posses to-day the Scriptures as originally given by inspiration of God.

We should be thankful for the great crowd of witnesses that gather around the sacred text

and testify that we still have in our hands "God's Word written".

In this, the last paper of the series, we present in as concise a form as possible the

story of the manuscripts of the N.T., together with a survey of some of the most

important versions.  Into the question of textual criticism we do not enter.  The

conflicting theories and methods espoused by such critics as Scrivener, Greisbach,

Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tragelles, Westcott and Hort, will not submit to a condensed

presentation; the whole subject lies outside our scope. The interested reader who is

already sufficiently advanced to profit by any remarks that we could make here, is

already adequately equipped to go on alone. Textual criticism calls for the highest

scholarship, acumen and spiritual insight, and we should be sad indeed if what we have

written should cause any to lay unprepared hands upon so sacred a subject, with issues so