is spoken of persons: 1 Tim. 4: 6. 2 Tim. 3: 10. That L. was not, as Whitby supposes, an attendant on our Lord's ministry, the contrast, in the preceding verse, of avτóлrai xaì vnŋoétai, ‘eyewitnesses and ministers, to what he calls in this verse παρηκολου κήκως πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς, clearly shows. Can we imagine that, by this less explicit phrase, he would have described the source of his own intelligence, had he been himself of the αυτόπται καὶ ὑπη péial? There is, besides, in the preceding words, another contrast of the autóлta who gave the first testimony concerning Jesus, to those who received their testimony, in which latter class he includes himself, παρέδοσαν ̔ΗΜΙΝ οἱ ἀπ' ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται. Now, if it had not been his express purpose to rank himself among these ; if he had meant to oppose the autónia to those only who, from their information, had formerly undertaken narratives, the proper and obvious expression would have been, καθώς παρέδοσαν ΑΥΤΟΙΣ οἱ ἀπ' ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται.

2 "To write a particular account to thee,” xavε§ns ooi roάvai, E. T. "To write unto thee in order." From the word xavens we cannot conclude, as some hastily have done, that the order of time is observed better by this than by any other evangelist. The word navεns does not necessarily relate to time. See Acts 18: 23. The proper import of it is distinctly, particularly, as opposed to confusedly, generally.

3 "Theophilus," ógile. It has been questioned whether this word is to be understood here as a proper name or as an appellative. In the latter case, it ought to be rendered 'lover of God.' But I prefer the former, which is the more usual way of understanding it. For, 1st, If the evangelist meant to address his discourse to all pious Christians, and had no one individual in view, I think he would have put his intention beyond all doubt, by using the plural number, and saying, xoάrioroi deópiloi. 2dly, This enigmatical manner of addressing all true Christians, under the appearance of bespeaking the attention of an individual, does not seem agreeable to the simplicity of style used in the Gospel, and must have appeared to the writer himself as what could not fail to be misunderstood by most readers, proper names of such a form as Theophilus, and even this very name, being common in Gr. and La. authors. 3dly, In the Scriptures, when gilos, that is, lover, or friend, makes part of a compound epithet, it is always, if I mistake not, placed in the beginning, not the end, of the compound. The apostle Paul, to express lover of God, says pulóvros, 2 Tim. 3: 4. There occur, also, in holy writ, several other compositions after the same manner, of which this noun makes a part; as pikáɣados, pik, άδελφος, φίλανδρος, φιλανθρώπος, φιλάργυρος, φίλαυτος, φιλήδονος, φιλόνεικος, φιλόξενος, φιλόσοφος, φιλόστοργος, φιλότεκνος. The other manner, wherein gilos is placed in the end, though not un

exampled in classical writers, is much more uncommon. Lastly, What is said in the fourth verse evidently shows, that the author addressed himself to a person with whose manner of being instructed in the Christian doctrine he was particularly acquainted.

4 "Most excellent," zodzioze. Some consider this as an epithet, denoting the character of the person named; others, as an honorary title, expressing respect to office or rank. I prefer the latter opinion. The word occurs only in three other places of the N. T., all in the Acts of the Apostles, another work of the same hand. In these places, the title is manifestly given as a mark of respect to eminence of station. Accordingly it is only on Felix and Festus, when they were governors of the province, that we find it conferred. It is therefore not improbable that Theophilus has been the chief magistrate of some city of note in Greece or Asia Minor, and consquently entitled to be addressed in this respectful manner. For though Paul observes, (1 Cor. 1: 26), that there were not many wise men after the flesh, not many rich, not many noble, in the Christian community, his expression plainly suggests that there were some. And, at the same time that we find the inspired penmen ready to show all due respect to magistracy, and to give honor, as well as tribute, to whom it is due, no writers are less chargeable with giving flattering titles to men. Such compellations, therefore, as αγαθέ, βελτιστε, κράτιστε, when they may be considered as adulatory or complimental, however usual among the Greeks, do not suit the manner of the sacred writers. When Paul gave this title to Festus, it appears it was customary so to address the Roman presidents or procurators. In this manner we find Felix, who preceded Festus, was addressed, both by the military tribune Lysias, and by the orator Tertullus. Such titles are a mere piece of deference to the civil establishment, and imply dignity of function or rank, but no personal quality in the man to whom they are given. The same distinction, between official respect and personal, obtains amongst ourselves. Among so many reverends, it is, no doubt, possible to find some whose private character would entitle them to no reverence. And it will not, perhaps, be thought miraculous to meet with an honorable, on whom the principles of honor and honesty have little influence. The order of civil society requires a certain deference to office and rank, independently of the merit of the occupant; and a proper attention, in paying this deference, shows regard to the constitution of the country, and is of public utility in more respects than one. But of those commendatory epithets which are merely personal, these writers, alike untainted with fanaticism and flattery, are very sparing. They well knew, that where they are most merited, they are least coveted, or even needed. But in a few ages afterwards, the face of things, in this respect, changed greatly. In proportion as men became more de

ficient in valuable qualities, they became more fond, and more lavish of fine words.

5. "Of the course of Abijah,” ¿§ ¿qnuepias Aßia. This was one of the twenty-four sacerdotal families into which the whole order was divided by David, (1 Chron. 24: 3, etc.), and which served in the temple by turns.

9. "The sanctuary," rov vaov. E. T. "The temple." Had the word been to pov, it could not have been rendered otherwise than the temple;' but o vaós, though commonly translated the same way, is not synonymous. The former comprehended the whole edifice, with all its enclosures, piazzas, and other buildings; the latter included only what was termed, by way of eminence, the house, consisting of the vestibule, the holy place or sanctuary, and the most holy. The altar of incense, on which the perfumes were burnt, was in the sanctuary; the people who were praying without, were in the temple, v to too, in the court of Israel, though not in what was strictly called the house of God, that is, iv z váy. In order to render the version as explicit as the original, it behoves us to avoid confounding things in the one, which are not confounded in the other.

15. "Any fermented liquor," oixepa. E. T. "Strong drink." Some think that by this name was meant a liquor made of dates, the fruit of the palm tree, a drink much used in the East. But I see no reason for confining the term to this signification. The word is Heb. shecher, and has been retained by the Seventy interpreters in those passages where the law of the Nazarites is laid down, and in the rules to be observed by the priests when it should be their turn to officiate in the temple. The Heb. root signifies to inebriate,' or 'make drunk.' All fermented liquors, therefore, as being capable of producing this effect, were understood as implied in the term. Strong drink is not the meaning. It might be impossible by words to define intelligibly, the precise degree of strength forbidden, or for judges to ascertain the transgression. For this reason, the proper subject of positive law is kinds, not degrees in quality, whereof no standard can be assigned. For this reason, all liquors, however weak, which had undergone fermentation, were understood to be prohibited, both to the Nazarites, and to the priests during the week wherein they officiated in the temple.

17. And, by the wisdom of the righteous, to render the disobedient a people well-disposed for the Lord," xai aneideîs, ¿v 900νήσει δικαίων, ἑτοιμάσαι Κυρίῳ λαὸν κατεσκευασμένον. E. T. "And the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord." The construction, in this way of rendering the words must be καὶ ἐπιστρέψαι ἀπειθεῖς ἐν φρονήσει δικαίων, ἑτοιμάσαι λαὸν κατεσκευασμένον Κυρίῳ. I readily admit

that in the N. T. is sometimes used according to the Heb. idiom, for sis or iní, and sometimes for our or for dia; but this concession is not to be understood as implying, that such a use may happen equally in whatever way the words be connected. I question whether the verb into givα will ever be found joined with the preposition iv, for expressing to turn to, or to convert to. It renders it the more improbable that this should be the case here, as in the preceding clause we find the verb noroiya followed by the preposition ini, for expressing this very idea, turning to, or converting to. That in two parallel and similar clauses, depending on the same verb, such an alteration should be made in the construction, is very improbable, being repugnant at once to simplicity, perspicuity, and propriety. It has some weight also, that as in that explanation the sentence has three clauses, though the first and the second are coupled by the conjunction zai, there is no copulative prefixed to the third. This, at least, is unusual, and suits neither the Heb. idiom nor the Gr. In the way I understand the sentence, it has but two clauses. Απειθεῖς is not governed by ἐπιστρέψαι, but by the following verb &10udoa. The placing of a comma after anvis, is all the change necessary in the pointing. This makes ev qoovnoɛi dizaior fall between two commas, and express the manner in which the Baptist was to effect those changes, namely, by inculcating that disposition of mind which, with righteous men, is the only genuine wisdom or prudence. Bishop Pearce has given the same turn to the sentence; only he seems to think that the word dixalov peculiarly relates to John himself. This supposition is quite unnecessary, and, as the word is in the plural number, embarrasses the construction. The wisdom of the righteous may well be understood as opposed to the wisdom of the ungodly, in like manner as the wisdom which is from above (another phrase for the same thing) is opposed to the wisdom which is from beneath. 23. His days of officiating;" that is, his week (for it lasted no longer at one turn), during which time he was not permitted to leave the precincts of the temple, or to have any intercourse with his wife.

66

28. "Favorite of Heaven," zɛyaqırmùévɛ. Vul. "Gratia plena." There is no doubt that, in the sense wherein this last expression was used by Jeroin, it was of the same import with that given here after Dod. and with that used in the E. T. “ thou that art highly favored." But at present, the phrase full of grace would not convey the same meaning. Be. "Gratis dilecta." This, though in strictness (if we consider only the import of the words taken severally) it may be defended, conveys an insinuation exceedingly improper and unjust. Gratis dilecta is precisely such a compellation as we should reckon suitable, had it been given to the woman whom our Lord permitted to anoint his feet in the house VOL. II.

40

of Simon, to the great scandal of that Pharisee, who knew her former life. What might even but obliquely suggest a conception so remote from the scope of the evangelist, ought carefully to be avoided.

2 "The Lord be with thee," Kvotos perà σov. E. T. "The Lord is with thee." Vul. Er. and Zu. "Dominus tecum." Be. "Dominus tecum est." As the substantive verb is not expressed in the original, it may be interpreted either in the indicative or in the optative. When rendered as an affirmation, we cannot question its truth. But it seems more suitable to the form of salutation, which is always expressive of good wishes, to understand it in the latter of these ways. The word zało, which immediately precedes, suits this interpretation, and so did all the forms of saluting customary among the Hebrews, such as "Peace be to this house;" "the Lord be with you ;" and, "the Lord bless you." See chap. 10: 5. Ruth 2: 4.

T.

3 Thou happiest of women," tuloynμévn où ¿v yvvaiživ. E. "Blessed art thou among women." I conceive this expression here as more properly a compellation than either an affirmation or a salutation; and I understand the pronoun as emphatical, and in the vocative. Such a phrase as εὐλογημένη ἐν γυναιξίν is, in the Heb. idiom, an expression of the superlative. It is accordingly so rendered by Cas. in this place, " mulierum fortunatissima." The same idiom is sometimes similary used in the E. T. Thus, ἡ κάλη ἐν γυναιξίν in the Sep. which is literally from the Heb. is, with us," thou fairest among women," Cant. 1:8; and i

laish gibbor babbehemah, "a lion, which is strongest among beasts," Prov. 30: 30. The expression used here by the evangelist we find repeated ver. 42; but as it is coupled with another clause, καὶ εὐλογημένος ὁ καρπὸς τῆς κολίας σου, it must be understood as an affirmation.

29. "At his appearance and words she was perplexed," de ἰδοῦσα, διεταράχθη ἐπὶ τῷ λόγῳ αὐτοῦ. Vul. “ Quæ cum audisset, turbata est in sermone ejus." This version would appear to have sprung from a different reading; yet there is no known reading that is entirely conformable to it. The Cam. and two other MSS. omit idovou. Si. thinks that the Vul. fully expresses the meaning of the original, and that the evangelist, in saying idovou, has, by a trope not usual with the sacred authors, expressed the operation of one of our senses by a term which, in strictness, belongs to another. I admit that there are examples of this kind, but I see no occasion for recurring to them here. It cannot be questioned that such an extraordinary appearance, as well as the words spoken, would contribute to affect the mind of the Virgin with apprehension and fear.

35. “ The holy progeny,”τὸ γεννώμενον ἅγιον. ”τὸ γεννώμενον ἅγιον. Ε. Τ. “ That holy thing which shall be born of thee." Vul. "Quod nascetur