CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH AND REGIUS PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY. IN TWO VOLUMES. VOL. I. OXFORD, PRINTED BY S. COLLINGWOOD, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY, FOR J. PARKER, OXFORD: WHITTAKER, TREACHER, AND ARNOTT; J. G. AND MDCCCXXXI. 625. PREFACE. IT is perhaps hardly possible to produce a commentary upon the scriptures, which shall be suited to readers of every description. If it is intelligible to the poor, and to people of little education, it will not satisfy the curiosity of the learned: or if it enters into doctrinal and critical difficulties, there must be much which is unprofitable to the unlearned reader. The very nature of the case seems to make the union of these two objects impossible: and lest I should be thought to have attempted in the present publication, what I have already pronounced to be hopeless, I am anxious to state explicitly what is the class of readers for which this edition is intended. The notes are calculated for those persons who are not reading the Greek Testament for the first time, but who as yet have little acquaintance with the labours of critical commentators. If they should be found useful in the upper classes of schools, to the younger members of our universities, and to the candidates for holy orders, the anxious wishes of the editor will be amply gratified. It is not merely the fashion of the day which has induced me to compose the notes in English rather than in Latin. This custom seems indeed to be gaining ground in editions of profane authors, as well as of the Greek Testament: and unless the work is intended for circulation on the continent, or unless Latin notes are supposed to improve the reader's proficiency in that language, there seems no reason why the difficulties of one dead language should be explained by a commentary written in another. In compiling notes from writers of different countries, and particularly from English commentators, it is obviously much more easy to convey their sentiments in our own language: and if such a system should be found more useful and agreeable to the majority of my readers, I shall consider it a recommendation rather than an objection, that the commentary has no pretensions to be considered learned. I have studied conciseness of expression to a degree which many persons will perhaps consider faulty: but it was not my intention to write dissertations, or to balance one elaborate argument against another. I have been satisfied with giving the result of opinions, and sometimes with adding two or more different interpretations, without deciding in favour of any. In almost every instance I have given the names of the commentators and the reader who wishes for more information will thus be able to know where it is to be found. In order to render the present work more useful in this respect, and to make up in some measure for its own deficiencies, I have added a list of all the writers whose names are mentioned in the notes, together with the titles of their works. This list will be found at the end of the second volume. The text of the present edition is taken from that of Mill, which was printed at Oxford in 1707. Though the received text, as it is called, of the Greek Testament is generally considered to have been settled by the Elzevirs, yet the editions, which appeared in the last century, have differed from one another to a greater degree than is supposed by persons who have not examined this subject for themselves. The text adopted by Mill, though in some instances undoubtedly faulty, has perhaps had the greatest number of followers : and since this text has been adopted in the small and popular editions printed at Oxford in 1828 and 1830, I have thought it better to do the same. The reader will however find frequent mention of various readings in the notes. I have examined with no small labour and attention the copious materials which have been collected by Griesbach; and after weighing the evidence which he has adduced in favour of any particular reading, I noted down all those variations from the received text which seem to have a majority of documents in their favour. This abstract of Griesbach's critical apparatus may be seen in White's Criseos Griesbachiane in N. T. Synopsis: and Vater, in his edition of the Greek Testament, published in 1824, has not only mentioned the reasons for preferring certain variations, but has admitted them into the text. Though the accuracy of these two persons might spare us the necessity of consulting Griesbach's notes, I preferred going through the same analysis myself; and it has been satisfactory to me to find, that my own conclusions were generally supported by these two independent authorities. Whoever may be induced to pursue a similar plan, will find that the |