Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: Luke, Vol. 1 (Luke I–X)

The Tolume now in the reader’s hands is a continuation of the ‘Expository Thoughts on the Gospels,” of which two volumes have been already published.

The general design of the work has been so fully explained in the preface ‘to the volume on St Matthew, that it seems needless to say anything further on the subject. I will only remark that I have steadily adhered to the three-fold object, which I proposed to myself, when I first began. I have endeavoured to produce something which may meet the wants of heads of &.milies in conducting &,mily prayers, — of district visitors in reading to the sick and unlearned, — and of private students of the Bible who have neither large libraries nor much leisure. These three classes I have constantly kept in view. Their wants have been continually before my eyes. Whatever would be unsuitable to them I have diligently tried to avoid.

In one important respect the present volume will be found to differ from the two which have preceded it. I allude to the explanatory notes which I have appended to each portion of Scripture expounded. These notes are so numerous that some may think they occupy a disproportionate place in the volume. I trust however that the majority of readers will think that they are worth the space which they fill.

▼L PKEFACE.

A few words on the nature of these notes may not be out of place. I am desiions to explain the object I hare had in view in the preparation of them.

1. My first object has been to throw light on difficulties. I can say with a good conscience that I have endeavonred to examine every hard passage, and haye never turned aside from any perplexing expression or text. I have striven to gather together all the information I could obtain on each difficulty, and to present it to the reader in a compact and lucid form. I do not for a moment pretend to say that I have explained everything. I am deeply conscious that I have left many a hard thing in St. Luke where I found it But I can honestly say, that I have never shrunk from the discussion of difficulties. I have resolved that it should never be said, {hat I commented upon easy things, and left hard things untouched.

2. My second object has been to aid those readers who do not understand the Greek languaga I have tried to point out the literal meaning of words in the original Greek, which, from various causes, our English transLators have rendered less literally than they might have done. I have also noticed the varying tranalations» which in many cases our translators have made of the same Greek word. In doing this, I would state distinctly that I wish to bring no accusation against our authorized version of the Bible, and that I have no sympathy with the movement for a revised version. I do not forget that any translation of the Bible, to be useful, must be written in a popular style, and that an excessively literal reading of many Greek expressions would sound very harsh to English ears. That the authorized English version has fiiults, weak points, and defects,

I^EFAOE. Vll.

I folly allow. Bat after reading the exiflting attempts at revifflon, I confess that I feel very strong doubts whether we are likely to alter our version for the better. It appears to me the wiser course to ‘’ let well alone.’*

3. My third object has been to quote passages from approved writers, which throw light on subjects under discussion, and to name writers who may be referred to on special points, by those who have libraries and leisure. This is a department of the notes, I need hardly say, which might easily have been greatly enlarged, and I would have gladly enlarged it. Nothing, in fact, but the fear of making my work extend to an unreadable size, has made me refrain from giving many more quotations than I have already given. But I remember that we live in a hurrying age, and that it never was so true as it is now, that ‘’a great book is a great evil.”

4. My last object in these notes, has been to combat existing fiJse doctrines and heresies, on every occasion; and to point out the answers to them which the texi of Scripture supplies. I have never shrunk from exposing the utter contrariety to Scripture of the peculiar doctrines of Socinians, Neologians, Romanists, and Semi-Romanists. I have not been deterred from speaking out plainly by the dread of being thought ^’ controversial.” I have made no secret of my opinions. I have unhesitatingly avowed that I hold the plenary inspiration of every word of Holy Scripture, and that I thoroughly adhere to those views which are commonly called Protestant and Evangelical. I cannotp of course, expect that notes on Scripture, written on such principles will satisfy all readers; — but that they are so written, T would not for a moment conceal

On one point only I have carefully abstained from offering

Till. PBEFACE.

any opinion. I refer to the vexed questions of the comparatiye claims of various readings, of ther authority of manuscripts, and of the best Greek text of the New Testament. This is a field into which I decline to enter. Materials do not appear to me to exist at present for forming a decided opinion on the subject. The time may come when all existing manuscripts shall have been carefully collated, the Vatican text not excepted. The time may come, when a competent jury of reverent-minded Biblical scholars, shall weigh the merits of conflicting readings, and finally bring forth an indisputably true and correct text of the Greek Testament. The time has certainly not come yet, and I doubt much whether it ever will.* In the mean time, I frankly avow, that I am content to use Scholefield’s version of the weU-known edition of Stephens, a. d. 1550. I am not ignorant of its blemishes; but I am unable to see that any other text has thoroughly made out a claim to be regarded as the “textus receptus” in its place.f

It only remains for me to say, that in the preparation of these notes, as well as of the Expository Thoughts, I have made a diligent use of all the commentators within my reach, both ancient and modern. I add a list of them, which may prove interesting to some readers, and useful to those who want to know the names of writers who have commented on St. Luke.

* I look forward with much interest to Dr. Tregelles’ promifled edition of the Greek Testament, and expect much £rom it.

t It is due to readers who are not familiar with the snhjeot on which I am here speaking, to remind them, that the” Tarious readings,’* of which they sometimes hear so much, are after all of infinitesimallyfftnall importance. They often consist of omissions or additions of littb words and particles, wmch in no case affect the sense of a pass a It is not too much to say, that the whole of the various readings in existence, do not affect a single doctrine or precept in the whole New Testament.

Keep reading