XX. The HOLY BIBLE, containing the Old and New Testaments, with original notes, practical observations, and copious references. By THOMAS SCOTT, Rector of Aston Sandford, &c.

BEFORE we proceed to investigate the claims of this popular work to the patronage of a religious public, we shall invite the attention of our readers, to a few preliminary observations. An objection of some plausibility lies at the very entrance of the sacred region, which Dr. Scott and other commentators have ventured to explore. It has been said, that the Scriptures are so plain, and so admirably adapted by their Divine author to every capacity, that labored general expositions are wholly unnecessary; and that they tend rather to perplex and mislead, than to enlighten, common readers.

We greatly admire the unrivalled simplicity and plainness of the sacred volume; and we bless God, that he has been pleased to give a revelation to mankind, which, without note or comment, is able to make them wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus. We moreover admit, that an expositor may, of design, or through ignorance and prejudice, write in such a manner, as to darken counsel by words without knowledge. But then we must be permitted to ask, whether even the plainest truths in the Bible, are not capable of many striking and useful illustrations, which plain unlettered Christians would Vol. IV. New Series.

not be very likely to think of? Is not a truly pious man, who has devoted himself for years to the study of the Scriptures, likely to understand even common truths better, than one equally pious, who has but just entered the school of Christ? May not commentators be men of sound sense, close application, and ardent piety; and if by making these sacred studies the main business of their lives, they acquire more knowledge than common Christians, may they not communicate it to the public, and ought it not to be gratefully received? We think an affirmative answer must be given to these questions.

It is, moreover, obvious to remark, that the objector against such publications as that of Dr. Scott now before us, must, to be consistent, maintain, that all religious instruction, which rests on any portion of Scripture as its basis, is, at best, quite unnecessary. He must even say, that all the public teachers of religion, might spare themselves the la bor of explaining and enforcing the truths of revelation, without any loss to the world. For if the sacred text be so plain and impressive, that it cannot be rendered plainer or more impressive by the explanatory notes and practical remarks of commentators, neither can it be, by the weekly labors of Christ's ministers. The real question in this case, is, "Can any thing profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, be said upon the inspired volume?" If there

21

can, (and who will deny it) then a pious and judicious expositor may be even more extensively useful, through the medium of the press, than any preacher, however faithful and pious, whose instructions cease with his life.

There is another view of this subject, which we deem perfectly conclusive. It will not, we are confident, because it cannot, be denied, that the Bible abounds with allusions to manners, customs and facts, which it no where fully explains; and of course, that some knowledge, drawn from other sources, of the general history of the ages and countries in which the Scriptures were written, is, to say the least, very desirable. How, we would ask, are the common people to obtain this knowledge? Not one in a thousand of them, can have access to the various and expensive books of history, travels, and antiquities, where it is to be found; or if they could, would have time to glean it, from hun dreds of large quartos and octavos. Now it is the business of a commentator to collect from all authors, ancient and modern, and to direct to one point of vision, those scattered rays of light, which, without such direction, would reach the eyes of but very few. To have an author always at hand, who has executed this arduous task faithfully and judiciously, is an invaluable blessing. It is like living in the same house with a learned and pious friend, who has, for our sakes, spent the best part of his life in treasuring up knowledge, and permits us to draw upon him whenever we please. For a practical illustration of the correctness of these

remarks, we would refer our readers to Dr. Scott's notes upon the parable of the marriage feast, in the twenty second chapter of Matthew; to the parable of the ten virgins in the twenty-fifth chapter; and to the letting down of the man sick of a palsy, through the roof of a house, where Christ was preaching, as stated in the second chapter of Mark. Other passages equally pertinent to the case in hand, or perhaps more so, will readily occur to the diligent reader of this exposition of the Sacred Oracles.

The observations which we have just made, might, with little variation, be applied to the types, symbols, and prophecies of the Scriptures. It is idle, or something worse, to say, that these can be as well understood without the explanations of learned men, as with them. Our readers will agree with us, that none but Goths and Vandals, could, without the deepest regret, witness the destruction of such authors, as Mede, Lightfoot, Stillingfleet, Newton, Lardner, Owen, Jones, Faber, and a long list of others, who have labored in the same field, and thrown much light upon those parts of revealed truth, to which they have respectively directed their attention. But if these are worth being preserved and read, for the same reason ought the works of such commentators as Calvin and Poole, and Henry, and Patrick, and Doddridge, and Scott, to be snatched from the hand, which would sacrilegiously commit them to the flames, or assign them a place among the lumber of bookseller's shops. We doubt not, that thousands of happy souls are now praising God on

Mount Zion above, for the instructions and comfort which they received during their earthly pilgrimage, from these and similar publications.

But while we express ourselves thus decidedly in favor of general expositions of Scripture, we are anxious to guard against those abuses, to which they are liable. If they are made to serve as pillows for the slothful; if they are used as convenient machines to save the labor of investigation and reflection; if they are put on a level with the Divine Oracles; or if, in short, they are viewed in any other light than as the works of fallible men, they will indeed prove injurious to their posses

sors.

The proper use of a commentary is not to encourage idleness, but to assist industry; not to supersede the study of the sacred pages, but to facilitate it. Such a work, however ably and judiciously executed, is mere human authority after all. Let it never be forgotten, that the Scriptures are the standard, and the only standard, of truth. Let them be kept forever in view, as the pole star, to guide the soul into the haven of eternal rest. Let them be searched daily, with all that diligence which their supreme importance demands; and in these balances of the sanctuary let every human opinion be weighed. Let this course be pursued, and we are sure, that Commentaries may be studied with great advantage, especially by those, who have scanty means and little leisure for more extensive reading.

We have not room at present to discuss the question, how far, or in what stage of their pro

gress, students in divinity, may profitably turn their attention to formal expositions of Scripture. We fully agree with Dr. Campbell, that such works should not be studied first, and that biblical criticism and sacred history, deserve a far greater share of time and attention, throughout the whole course. But we are by no means certain, that the Dr. has not assigned too low a place, even in the library of the theolo gical student, to our learned and pious commentators.

When we began this article, it was our intention to hazard some remarks upon what we conceive to be the leading features of a good commentary; nor can we persuade ourselves to do less, than throw out a few brief hints, though we are fearful of trespassing too far upon the pa tience of our readers. If such a work is intended principally for the learned, it ought crit ically to investigate the conflic ing claims of various readings; to settle, as far as possible, the true meaning of difficult texts, by a fair and careful examination of the original; and to contain some of the discordant glosses and constructions, which men of different sentiments have put upon the sacred text, together with the arguments, by which they have severally labored to maintain their opinions. It should, in fine, be a work, from which the public teachers of religion, may draw much useful instruction, for their own benefit and the benefit of their people.

Very different, however, are the characteristics, which we *See his Lectures on Systematic Theology:

should wish to find in a commentary designed for the use of families. In such a book, deep and intricate criticism, would be worse than useless. The perpetual recurrence of unknown characters and hard names, would exceedingly embarrass the reader; and we should fear, would upon the whole, do much more harm than good. Men are not fond of reading a book, which they cannot understand. A family expositor, therefore, should be written in a plain and simple style; should contain the most natural and approved explanation of difficult passages; should state doctrines clearly and forcibly; should abound with practical observations, as well as close appeals to the heart and conscience, and should furnish the reader with copious and correct marginal references. It should, besides, be comprised within such moderate limits, that the middling and lower classes of people may be able to pur

chase it.

Very few men, we believe, possess all the qualifications which are requisite, to the writing of a good exposition, especially for common use. We say especially for common use, beIcause we think it on some accounts a more difficult task, to adapt such a work to the capacities and circumstances of the people at large, than to write for the learned. In stating what qualifications we should wish to see united in the man who undertakes the office of a commentator, we shall have opportunity to introduce Dr. Scott, in this capacity, to the acquaintance of such of our readers, as have not

perused his invaluable publications.

1. A commentator should be a man of genuine and ardent piety. That one destitute of vital religion may be an able biblical critic, and that he may communicate much useful instruction, we readily admit. But, then, there are things, which he cannot know, because they are spiritually discerned. And how can he teach them in the best manner to others? We hold it to be in the nature of things impossible, for a stranger to experimental religion to enter into the spirit of it, as if he had felt its power in his own soul. Now Dr. Scott appears to be a man of unfeigned and ardent piety. If we are not greatly deceived, this is plainly discernible in all his writings. As we accompany him through the Scriptures, especially, we seem to be conversing with a man, who has tasted of the hidden manna, and speaks of spiritual comforts, from his own experience of their sweetness.

2. A commentator should be deeply sensible of his own insufficiency, and habitually look to God for the teachings of his Spirit. Nothing is more dangerous, than an implicit confidence in the boasted sufficiency of human reason. This unscriptural confidence, is the parent of a thousand errors. It inevitably leads men away from the truth as it is in Jesus. God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble. When a man is jealous over himself with a godly jealousy; when he distrusts his own powers and fervently prays, What I know not, that