Show HELL OR DEVIL = The W y r aha Revised Bible Deals J With Them A writer 1 the New York Times evidently a theological scholar reviewing the changes made by the translators of the new version of the New Testament says There is one word which is not to be found anywhere any-where in the old version which has been transferred bodily from the Greek to the revised edition This is the word Hades which was used in Greek mythology to denote the world of departed spirits This word in the authorized version was translated hell and the fact the scholars having this revision in charge have refused to sanction this translation has given rise to the report that the hell of the Bible was to be abolished The report has no foundation in fact Wherever the word Gehenna appears ap-pears in the original it has been properly translated hell The Hades of the original has a quite different signification and by trans lating it hell the proper meaning of the word was obscured An instance in-stance of the use of Hades in the new version is to be found in Acts ii 27 where these words are quoted from Psalms xvi in reference refer-ence to Christ Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades neither wilt thou give thy holy one to see corruption corrup-tion The common rendering hell is evidently here wholly unsuitable suitable The text simply predicts the resurrection of Jesus after his death affirming that he will not be allowed to remain Hades the region re-gion of departed spirits In the 1st verse of the same chapter chap-ter of Acts His soul was not left in hell is changed to His soul was not left in Hades and wherever the word Hades occurs in the original it is retained in the version The hell of the gospel the place of eternal punishment is retained but the word used to describe scribe it in the Greek is Gehenna and not Hades The word deYilr which appears in the authorized version very frequently fre-quently is eliminated in the revised in many places Two very different Greek words were each translated devil by the men who made the King James version One of these clearly meant the prince of darkness This was the word used in Matthews iv 1 Then was Jesus led up of the spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil Then there is the other word the liberal trans lation of which is demon which is so often used in connection with those miserable persons who are scribed liberally as demonized or in the free translation of the authorized version as possessed of the devils The rendering of the two distinct words by the same term obliterates to the English reader a very clear distinction which is made in the original The men possessed of devils or demonized were not regarded even by the Jews of the days of Jesus as influ enced by the Prince of Darkness They were the victims of a disease some of them being epileptic others insane and others still deaf and dumb The revisers have not deemed it advisable to substitute the word demon for devil when the latter occurs in this connection i old transla I but while retaining the tion they have indicated on the margin every instance in which the word for demon has been translated trans-lated devil The devil therefore has not been abolished in the revision revi-sion of the New Testament He occupies oc-cupies a position with the hell of the old version He has simply been confined to his proper sphere f |