Next to Purity of Text is a CORRECT VERSION. That the present version does not satisfy this condition in the just sense of the word, or to the extent we have a right to require in such a matter, is now almost universally conceded. The plea of “good enough” is given up, and the wishes of the religious public for a translation more true to the original, are “condescendingly” admitted to be just and reasonable; and if this admission expressed the voice of authority, as well as the general sense of the learned world, our wishes would speedily be in a condition to be fulfilled. Meantime it is for us to agitate the question till the boon be accorded, agreeably to the good old English rule, when the stronghold of authority is to be stormed. It has appeared to us, in the prosecution of our task, that we could put this question before the ordinary English reader in a form to enable him to determine for himself with tolerable correctness the Validity of our plea for a more correct version of Holy Writ. _On such a point it is important he should be able to judge for himself_: accordingly, we shall exhibit sundry amended passages, by way of specimen, in _juxtaposition_ with the corresponding passages of the present version. It may be premised, that it is not necessary that the amended translation should be in all respects immaculate and unassailable; it suffices for the present purpose if we establish the fact, that the authorized version _is_ capable of amendment. The field before us is almost illimitable, so numerous are the corrections that require to be supplied. Of course, we must pick our path here and there. We begin with the Old Testament; and here two passages recommend themselves for selection, as well for their own intrinsic interest as for the materials they afford for elucidating the principles that underlie the transfusion of Hebrew into English. The reader is invited to ponder the two versions in the points in which they differ, however minute the difference at first sight may appear, as the change in these cases has proceeded upon a strictly literal translation of the original Hebrew; and the variation, on a further view, may not appear so unimportant as at first. Our first passage consists of extracts from the Song of Deborah, Judges v., and the amended version is due, substantially, to the able pen of Dr. Edward Robinson, Translator of Gesenius, &c. See “Biblical Repository.” Two other versions of the same Song are given by Dr. Adam Clarke in his Commentary, from Dr. Hales and Dr. Kennicott respectively; but, with all their merit, they are less literally true to the original, and therefore less eligible for selection, than the one we have adopted:— JUDGES V. _Old Version_. _New Version_.