The Expositor's Greek Testament. Edited by the Rev. W. Robert-
Ben Nicoll. Vol. II. (Hodder and Stoughton. 28e.)—This volume contains the Gospels, — the Synoptic Gospels having been treated by Professor A. B. Bruce, the Gospel of St. John by Professor Marcus Dods. The editor hopes that the whole edition will be completed in five years. He adds that the "com- mentators have been selected from various churches, and that they have in every case been left full liberty to express their own views." The form of the edition is that of the well-known work of Dean Alford, a book which, as a whole, has held its place, though in respect of most of the particular books the Biblical student supplements it from other sources. The dimensions of the new editions are to be substantially the same, four—i.e., practically five—volumes, Alford's fourth being divided into two parts. But the pages of The Expositor's Greek Testament are slightly more capacious than those of its predecessor ; while a considerable amount of space has been gained by a great reduction in respect of the critical matter. In Alford this exceeds the text in bulk, much of it being of little import- ance. The text in the Expositor's is that known as the Receptus—our editors do not recognise the term " traditional"— and only important variations are given. In Matt. xii. 6, for instance, " I say to you that a greater than the Temple is here," Alford reads AsiCow for the ge:Ccou of the T.R. In the critical annotation he tells us that Codex Bezae reads loip for the 84 of the T.R., which is supported by Vaticanns and R. Parisiensis, and sundry Latin versions. Two variations in Latin versions on TO; lEpoi; are next mentioned. These might as well have been spared, as far as ninety-nine students out of a hundred are concerned. On the aelCov nearly thirty authorities are given, all but R. Parisiensis being for the neuter. In the Expositor's, on the other hand, we have AtiCtou in the text, while the annotation gives af;Cor as supported by Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Bezae, and others, and adds 14e(Catu as a misjudged attempt at correction. The space thus saved is given, with much profit, to a more copious annota- tion. Of this it is quite impossible to speak in detail ; but we may say that wherever we have tested it we have found it to be all that could be wished. Professor Bruce. to take as an example Matt. xiv. 16-21 (Feeding the Five Thousand), while not accepting the explanation of the concealed stores being brought out, does not repudiate it with scorn. "Even if, as some think, what happened was under the moral influence of Jesus, the people present gene- rously made the provisions they bad brought with them available for the company at large, the character of Jesus appears here in a. commanding light." He holds that the Gospel of Mark had its origin in the recollections of St. Peter, that the Gospel of Matthew was probably founded on the Logia of that Apostle, and that " it paints the life image of Jesus in prophetic colours," that St. Luke's characteristic is idealisation, and that the commonly accepted view of its authorship is probably correct. Professor Marcus Dods has an admirable summary of the arguments in favour of the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel. Chap. 5 gives an easily intelligible conspectus of the question of the text. We hope to be able to return to a consideration of the edition when it has made further progress. Meanwhile, we heartily recommend it to the consideration of Biblical students.
Previous page
