(12.) T. Scott ("Holy Bible with Notee,** itc Lond. 1692, and often since; Lond. 1841, 6 vols, 4te; Bost. 1827, 6 vols. 8vo).— The prevailing chazactoBtie of Scott's commentary is judicioosnesa in the opiai(» advanced. The greater portion of it, however, is crt proper exposition. The pvous antiior preaches aboct and paraphrases the originaL His aimplici^ of psr- pose generally preserved him from miatakee ; hot t» a commentator he was neither acute nor learned, flc wanted a competent acquaintance with the originsL power of analysis, a mind unprepoeseaaed bj a <k>e> trinal system, and penetration of sinrit.
(13.) A. Clarke (" Holy Bible, with Commmtaryr etc. 8 vols. 4to, Lond. 1810-28, and often since ; bert ed. Lond. 1844, 6 vols. 8vo, N. Y. 1843).~In many rf the higher qualities by which an interpreter should be distinguished, this man of much reading was wanting His commentary, however, which was the chief liteniy labor of his life, is replete with profound and varied, though not always aceurate, and often inappoaite, learn- ing. He is always thoroughly earnest and practieillT spiritual. Some of his notions are indeed extravagant but they are never the errors of the heart. Many ef the dissertations scattered through the work possesi t permanent value for their diligent research. Its his- torical notes are the best. Its quotations from andat and Oriental authors are abundant and nsually apt Its remarks in vindication of the truth and oonsisteii^ of Scripture are also often worthy of consultation.
(14.) E. F.C. RosenmfiUer.— The "Sdiiilia'*«f this laborious writer extend over the greater part of the Old Testament (11 pts. in 28 vols. 8vo, Lpx. 17» sq. ; " in Compendium redacta," by Lechner, 5 vok. 8vo). — The last editions especially are nnqueetioDiMT of high value. They bring together a mass of aniM»> tation such as is sufficient to satisfy the desires of most Biblical students. Yet the learned antiior nndertook too much to perform it in a masterly style. Heace his materials are not properly sifted, the chaff from tbe wheat. He has not drunk deeply into the spirit of tie inspired authors. He seems, indeed, not to have had a soul attuned to the spirituality of their uttenmoes, er impregnated with the celestial fire that touched tbdr hallowed lips. His father, J. G. RosenmCkller, the as- thor of the ** Scholia" on the New Testament (5 vok. 8vo, Numbg. 1785, and since), is a good toord-ea^ioiMr for students beginning to read the original. He bai not produced a masterly specimen of commentaiy «n any one book or epistie.
(15.) H. Olshausen Q'Biblisches Oomsmentai^ oc the N. T. continued by Ebrard and others, 7 vols. 8tq, Kdnigsb. 1837-56; tr. in Ckrke's Library, EOiab. 1847 sq. ; ed. by Kendrick, N. Y. 1866 sq., 6 vols. 8to, have hitherto appeared).---One of the best examples of comiAentary on the New Testament with which we are acquainted has been given by tiiia writer. Tbe arrangement, however, being semi-histoiical, has eome inconveniences, especiiedly as the text is not girea. The exposition is almost wholly free from the infls- ence of German neology. Verbal criticbm u but sparingly introduced, although even here the hand of a master is apparent. He is intent, however, on higher things. He investigates the thought, traces the con- nection, puts himself in the same posHion as tiie writ- ers, and views with philosophic ability the holy reve- lations of Christ in their comprehensive tendencies. The qitical and the popular are admirably mingled. The continuation of the work by other hands is scarce- ly equal in value.
(16.) A. T h 0 1 u c k.^The commentaries of this emi- nent writer on various books of the New Testamest, especially those on the Episties to tiie Romans and
COMMENTARY
491
COMMENTARY
Bebnws, exhibit the highest exegetical excellences. Wliile he critically investigates phrases and idioms, he iscends into the pure region of the ideas, unfolding the sense with mach skill and discernment. His com- mentaiy on John is of a more popular cast. His in- terpretation of the Bergprtdigt^ or Sermon on the Mount, is very valuable. That on the Psalms is less thorough. (For the editions, see each of these books in their place.)
(17.) E. W. Hengstcnberg.— This irriter is too fiuclAil in his exegesis, too, arbitrary in his philology, and too extreme in his theology to be fully trustwor- thy as a commentator; yet hb expositions of the Psdms, Ecdeeiastes, Revelation, etc., may be consult- ed with advantage, if used with comparison of other authors.
(18.) £. H e n d e rson. — ^This commentator^s transla- tion and notes on the Minor Prophets, as well as Isai- ah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, are admirable specimens of sound learning, good judgment, and evangelical piety. Their only fault in the exposition is an excess- ive leaning to literalism.
(19.) A. Barnes. — ^This series citNotet on the New Test. (N. Y. 12 vols. 12mo; Lond. 1860-62), and por- tions of the Old (Job, Isaiah, Daniel), have had a pop- ularity which shows their adaptation to an extensive want They are simple, ludd, and practical, and writ- ten with the author's happy flow of style, and are mariced by genuine spirituality ; but they are not char- acterized by critical or extensive learning.
(20.) J. A. Alexander.^The notes of this emi nent scholar on Isaiah are a thorough and well-digest- ed production. His commentaries on the Psalms and historical books of the N. T., however, are too popular to add anything to his reputation.