Should The Revised New Testament Be Authorised

In this thought-provoking work, Baron Edmund Beckett Grimthorpe offers a compelling argument against the authorization of the Revised New Testament. Drawing on his extensive knowledge of theology and history, Grimthorpe makes a compelling case for maintaining the traditional text of the New Testament. With its rigorous scholarship and insightful analysis, this book is a must-read for anyone interested in the history of the Bible and its impact on Western culture. This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the "public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

Alan Cadwallader explores the intricate tensions and conflicts that infused the work of revision of the Authorised Version of the Bible between 1870 and 1885. The Promethean aspirations of the venture actually generated one of the most bitter instances of the political manoeuvres involved in the translation of a sacred book. Cadwallader reveals how the public avowal of unity and fraternal harmony that accompanied the public release and marketing of the New Testament revision in 1881 and the Old Testament revision in 1885, masks fraught historical realities that threatened the realization of the project from the beginning. Through a thorough examination of private correspondence, notebooks kept by various members of the New Testament Revision Companies in England and the United States, and other previously unstudied primary sources, Cadwallader examines and presents the complexities of the political situation surrounding the translation. He exposes the competing interests of an imperial, sovereign nation and a seriously divided Established Church floundering over its continued relevance; the ambitions and significance of Nonconformity in a nation's highly contested religious environment; the agonistic conflicts that erupted from assertions of national and international prestige and responsibilities; and the ultimate control exercised by publishing houses that fundamentally flawed the process of revision and the public acceptance of the final product.