Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

15. Hypocrites. E. T. Thou hypocrite. In the common Gr. we read itongira, in the singular number; but in many MSS. some of principal note, in the Com. and other early editions, in the Vul. Cop. Arm. Eth. Sax. and Ara. versions we find the word in the plural. The very next words, ixas iμav, show that our Lord's answer was not addressed solely to the director, but was intended for all those present who espoused his side of the question. Mill, and several other critics, have preferréd this reading.

25. If once the master of the house shall have arisen, aø' ¿ αν εγερθη ο οικοδεσποτης. Vul. Cum autem intraverit pa'erfamilias. In one or two copies we find 20 instead of sygen. But this reading of the Vul. though favoured by Cas. and the Sax. translation, has no support of either MSS. or versions to entitle it to regard.

31. Herod intendeth to kill thee, 'Hewdrs Jedes de añonttivai. E. T. Herod will kill thee. But if this last declaration in Eng, were to be turned into Gr. the proper version would be, not what is said by L. but Ηρωδης σε αποκτενει. The term will in Eng. so situated, is a mere sign of the future, and declares no more than that the event will take place. This is not what is declared by the Evangelist. His expression denotes that, at that very time, it was Herod's purpose to kill him; for the λ here is the principal verb; the will in the translation is no more than an auxiliary. Nay, the two propositions (though, to a superficial view, they appear coincident) are in reality so different, that the one may be true and the other false. Suppose that, instead of Herod, Pilate had been the person spoken of. In that case, to have said in Gr. Пlidar Dedes σe añonteval, would have been tell. ing a falsehood; for the history shows how much his inclination drew the contrary way: whereas, to have said Пar de añoXTE= ves would have been affirming no more than the event verified, and might, therefore, have been accounted prophetical. Mt. xvi. 24. N. J. vii. 17. N.

CHAPTER XIV.

1. Of one of the rulers who was a Pharisee, Tw✪ TWY afkorter swy Dagicalwy. E. T. Of one of the chief Pharisees. I agree with

Gro. Ham. Wh. Pearce, and others, that agxor properly denotes persons in authority, rulers, magistrates; and that any other kind of eminence or superiority would have been distinguished by the term gero, as in ch, xix. 47. Mr. vi. 21. Acts xiii. 50. xvii. 4. xxv. 2. xxviii. 17.

5. If his ass or his ox, on Bus. Both the Sy. interpreters have read here i, son, instead of „, ass, and so have some of the Fathers. The number and value of the MSS. which preserve this reading, are very considerable; and though it is not found in any ancient version except the Sy. yet, if we were to be determined solely by the external evidence, I should not hesitate to declare that the balance is in its favour. There is, however, an internal improbability in some things, which very strong outward evidence cannot surmount. The present case is an example; and therefore, though this reading has been admitted by Wet. and some other critics, I cannot help rejecting it, as, upon the whole, exceedingly improbable. My reasons are these: First, Nothing is more common in Scripture style, wherever propriety admits it, than joining in this manner the ox and the ass, which were in Judea almost the only beasts in common use for work. In the O. T. it occurs very frequently. We find it in the tenth commandment, as recorded in Exod. xx. and both in the fourth and in the tenth, as repeated in Deut. v. When a case like the present is supposed, of falling into a pit, Exod. xxi. 33. both are, as usual, specified. If a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein. That this was also conformable to our Lord's manner, we may see from the preceding chapter, v. 15. Who is there amongst you that doth not, on the Sabbath, loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him away to watering? Secondly, Such a combination, as that of the ass and the ox, is not more familiar and more natural, than the other, of a man's son and his ox, is unnatural and unprecedented. Things thus familiarly coupled in discourse, are commonly things homogeneal, or of natures, at least, not very dissimilar. Such are, the son and the daughter, the manservant and the maid-servant, the ox and the ass. Thirdly, In those specimens which our Lord has given of confuting the Pharisees, by retorting on them their own practice, the argument is always of that kind which logicians call à fortiori. This cir.

cumstance is sometimes taken notice of in the application of the argument, and even when it is not expressly pointed out, it is plain enough from the sense. See ch. xiii. 15, 16. xv. 2, 3, 4. 8, 9. Mt. xii. 11, 12. But if the word here be son, this method is reversed, and the argument loses all its energy. A man, possessed of even the Pharisaical notions concerning the Sabbath, might think it, in the case supposed, excusable from natural affection, or even justifiable from paternal duty, to give the necessary aid to a child in danger of perishing, and, at the same time, think it inexcusable to transgress the commandment for one to whom he is under no such obligations. Fourthly, When the nature of the thing, and the scope of the place, render it credible that a particular reading is erroneous, the facility of falling into such an error adds greatly to the credibility. Now and o, in writing, have so much resemblance, that we cannot wonder that a hasty transcriber should have mistaken one for the other. If the mistake has been very early, the number of copies now affected by it would be the greater. It is too mechanical a mode of criticizing, to be determined by outward circumstances alone, and to pay no regard to those internal probabilities, of which every one who reflects must feel the importance.

15. Who shall feast, is QaysTUI ALTOV. E. T. Who shall eat bread. To eat bread is a well-known Heb. idiom for to share in a repast, whether it be at a common meal, or at a sumptuous feast. The word bread is not understood as suggesting either the scantiness or the meanness of the fare.

2 In the reign, ev on Bætiλesa. E. T. In the kingdom. The E. T. makes, to appearance, the word Bares here, refer solely to the future state of the saints in heaven. This version makes it relate to those who should be upon the earth in the reign of the Messiah. My reasons for preferring the latter are these: 1st, This way of speaking of the happiness of the Messiah's adminis tration, suits entirely the hopes and wishes which seem to have been long entertained by the nation concerning it. (See ch. x. -23, 24. Mt. xiii. 10, 11.) 2dly, The parable which, in answer to the remark, was spoken by our Lord, is, on all hands, under. stood to represent the Christian dispensation. Sdly, The ob vious intention of that parable is to insinuate that, in consequence of the prejudices which, from notions of secular felicity

and grandeur, the nation, in general, entertained, on that subject; what, in prospect, they fancied so blessed a period, would, when present, be exceedingly neglected and despised; and, in this view, nothing could be more apposite; whereas, there appears no appositeness in the parable on the other interpretation.

23. Compel people to come, avayxatov «5eddav. Ch. xxiv.

29. N.

26. Hate not his father, & moes tov Tarega izvry. It is very plain, that hating, used in this manner, was, among the Hebrews, an idiomatic expression for loving less. It is the same sentiment, which, in Mt.'s Gospel, x. 37. is conveyed in these words, He who loveth father or mother more than me—. In the strict acceptation of the term, the doctrine of Christ does not permit us to hate any one, not even an enemy, much less a parent, to whom it exacts a more substantial honour than the traditional system of the scribes represented as necessary. The things here enumerated, particularly what finishes the list, of which I am to speak immediately, show evidently that the language is figurative.

2 Nay, and himself too, er det iauts Juxm. E. T. Yea, and his own life also. Vul. Adhuc etiam et animam suam. Cas. Atque adeo suam ipsius animam, which he explains on the mar gin, semetipsum. Dio. renders it anzi anchora se stesso. The reasons for which I have preferred this last manner are the fol lowing: First, ʊx is generally used in the Hellenistic idiom as corresponding to the Heb. s nephesh, soul or life. Now it is well known, that this word, with the affix, is frequently used in Heb. for the reciprocal pronoun. Thus w naphshi, com. monly rendered in the Sep. xa ux, is myself, TDI naphskecha, un ou, thyself, and so of the rest. See Lev. xi. 43. i Esth. iv. 13. Ps. cxxxi. 2. Now as there runs through the whole of this verse in L. an implicit comparison; to preserve an uni. formity in the manner of naming the particulars, shews better the preference which our Lord claims in our hearts, not only to our nearest relatives, but also to ourselves. Secondly, I have avoided the phrase hating his life, as ambiguous, and often used, not improperly, of those who destroy themselves. Now the disposition which our Lord here requires of his disciples, is exceedingly different from that of those persons. For the like reason I have not said hate his own soul, though what many

would account the most literal version of them all. For this expression is also used sometimes (see Prov. xxix. 24.) in a sense quite different from the present. Thirdly, I prefer here this strong manner of exhibiting the sentiment, as, in such cases, whatever shows most clearly that the words cannot be literally understood, serves most effectually to suggest the figurative and true interpretation. Now as, in the common acceptation, to hate one's parents would be impious, the Apostle Paul tells us, Eph. v. 29. that to hate one's self is impossible. It is not in this acceptation then that we can look for the meaning.

CHAPTER XV.

1. The Vul. the Sy. and the Sax. have no word answering to all in this sentence.

16. He was fain, ExebμLE. Ch. xvi. 21. N.

2 With the husks, απο των κερατίων. Vul. De siliquis. That MegaTION answers to siliqua, and signifies a husk, or pod, wherein the seeds of some plants, especially those of the leguminous tribe, are contained, is evident. But both the Gr. xepatio and the La. siliqua signify also the fruit of the carob-tree, a tree very common in the Levant, and in the southern parts of Europe, as Spain and Italy. The Sy. and Ara. words are of the same import. This fruit still continues to be used for the same purpose, the feeding of swine. It is also called 'St. John's bread, from the opinion that the Baptist used it in the wilderness. It is the pod only that is eaten, which shows the propriety of the names xigaTov and siliqua, and of rendering it into Eng. husk. Miller says, it is mealy, and has a sweetish taste, and that it is eaten by the poorer sort, for it grows in the common hedges, and is of little

account.

18. Against heaven, that is, against God. Diss. V. P. I. § 4.

22. Bring hither the principal robe, eževeynaTE THY SOÀNI TEY πρώτην. Vul. Cito proferte stolam primam. Taxes is found in the Cam. and one other MS. of small note. The second Sy. Cop. Sax. and Arm. versions have also read so.

30. Thy living, σx Toy Blov. Vul. Substantiam suam. The reading of the Vul. has no support from ancient versions or Gr.

« ПредишнаНапред »