Philip Mauro

I have always loved and sought the writings of Philip Mauro. My pastor of 45 yrs. ago , the Rev. Lawrence L. Foster, originally of Manassas, VA., told me of his meeting with Mauro near the end of his life. He told me there were few who could pray and teach like Bro. Mauro. I continue to collect and read his writings to this day. Thank you for speaking so well of him.

Thanks for this collection. The very last one you list is a truly amazing compilation and a rather full visual into a topic obfuscated by bickering and large scale publishing royalties nowadays: few have any idea of the academic resistance in the 19th century and early 20th century to the NT texts underlying the 1881 Revised Version Bible. I mean it’s mentioned at a cursory level but that is like a ladies tea discussion versus a Mauro parking a battleship sitting offshore of the squalid RV academic borough and pounding the shab buildings with salvo after salvo…. 120 pages of densely packed quotations, rebuttal and intense discussion of the machinations and issues with Westcott & Hort’s Frankenstein … as well as the pseudo-methodology they instituted. Modern scholarship has perpetuated and resurrected this beast like some sort of Alexandrian mummy.

Illustrious words, but spot on. Sadly Mauro’s prediction: “It is now more than forty years—the Scriptural period of full probation—since the R.V. appeared; and as we contemplate the existing situation (in the year 1924) the most conspicuous fact that presents itself to our view is that the New Version (in either or both of its forms) has not superseded the A.V., and that there is not the faintest indication that it will ever do so,” would sadly not pass the test.

Apart from JN Darby’s “textually critical” version (it reaches into the critical texts), which came out soon after the RV, it was soon after Mauro’s death that the NASB appeared, then the NIV, and so forth. The W&H text has spawned every modern version today. We thank the Lord for men like Scrivener, Dean Burgon and others who most ably exposed the “fraudulent handling” of W&H during the revision, but modern scholars scoff at this.

W. Hoste wrote a good paper on the RV debacle; not on this site under his name, but here it is - https://www.thegloriousgospel.ca/why-i-abide-by-the-authorized-version-kjv-william-hoste/