As to the "unintelligible authorised version," I must premise that no version has yet had so large an amount of learning bestowed on it as the English one; indeed it has fairly beaten out of the field all the versions of all other sections of Christians. The difficulty of the English version arises from its close adherence to the oriental letter; but if we put the scope of this Psalm into the vernacular, such difficulty is eliminated.
Solomon says, in this Psalm: "Without Jehovah's support, my house will fall: if He keep this city, the watch, with its early-risings, late-resting, and ill-feeding, is useless: _thus He_ (by so keeping or watching the city himself) _gives sleep to him whom He loves_." The remainder of the Psalm refers to the increase of population as Jehovah's gift, wherein Solomon considers the strength of the city to consist. The words in Italics correspond precisely in sense with those of the authorised version--"_For_ so He giveth His beloved sleep;" and the latter is supported fully by all the ancient versions, and, as far as I can at present ascertain, by all the best modern ones.
What is there _unintelligible_ in the authorised translation of Psalm cxxvii. 2., "He giveth His beloved sleep?" It is a literal translation of three very plain words, of the simplest grammatical construction, made in accordance with all the ancient versions. A difficulty there does indeed exist in the passage, viz. in the commencing word [Hebrew: KN]; but this word, though capable of many _intelligible_ meanings, does not enter into the present question. Since the great majority of critics have been contented to see no objection to the received translations, it is perfectly allowable to maintain that the proposed rendering makes, instead of removing, a difficulty, and obscures a passage which, as generally understood, is sufficiently lucid. Hengstenberg's difficulty is, that the subject is not about the _sleep_, but the _gain_. But is not sleep a gain? Can we forget the [Greek: hupnou dôron] of Homer? that is, sufficient, undisturbed sleep, rest. Hengstenberg's remark, that all, even the beloved, must labour, is a mere truism. The Psalmist evidently opposes excessive and over-anxious labours, interfering with natural rest, to ordinary labour accompanied with refreshing sleep. The object of his censure is precisely the [Greek: merimna] which forms the subject of our Lord's warning; who censures not due care and providence, but over-anxiety. Burkius rightly remarks, that [Hebrew: SHN'] is antithetical to _surgere, sedere, dolorum_. Hammond observes, with far more clearness and good sense than Hengstenberg,