αριστε

2 King xxv. 18., and in other places. See Mark xii. 29. 31., where Tgwrn and devrega [first and second] mean not first and second numerically, but in point of importance. And the derivative of gwros-gwreuw-has no reference to time, but to rank or dignity: Colos. i. 18. "That in all things he might have the preeminence : [πρωτεύων.] In the same secondary sense the word πρώτος is used in the classical Greek writers. See Oedip. Tyr. 33. Avdgwv de πgwrwv first of men ; and this is equivalent to a subsequent expression in the same piece—ßgwrwv agiore-best of mortals. v. 46. And it may be farther observed that deuregos, second, is sometimes used according to the same analogy—to signify not numerical order, but gradation of rank. See Gen. xli. 43. Esth. viii. 13, in the Septuagint translation. The expression gros, first, in the last clause, is expressive of the same notion as goods, before, in the foregoing clause-namely, precedence; and it is added as a kind of reason, or a mode of accounting, for the superiority of Christ; the scope of the writer being plainly this" He has become before me in rank as a divine messenger, because he was always before me, in his original destination." With this compare Acts xiii. 24. 25., where the same meaning is expressed in words which convey no intimation of the assumed pre-existence.

Dr. Campbell maintains, in his notes on this passage, that priority of time is the intended import of the language; for the proof of which he adduces John xv. 18. "It hated me before it hated you." Dr. Lardner, however, maintains (Credibil. bk. ii. ch. 1.) that the Greek words ought to be translated-" It hated me your chief.

[Tgwгov μw]." The connection of the words, he says, may satisfy us, that this was our Saviour's meaning. His argument is, that men had hated him, who was superior to them; nay, they had hated even his Father: the disciples, therefore, ought not to be surprised, if they hate them also: v. 20. "Remember the word which I said unto you- the servant is not greater than his lord; if they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you."" v. 24. "But now they have both seen and hated me and my Father." The force of the argument is not, that the world had hated him BEFORE it hated them; but he bids them consider, that it had hated him who was their master, and whom they allowed to be so. This is the argument made use of in other places with the same view. Matt. x. 24. 25. "The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household ?" To say that when used in the sense of chief, TeWTOS ought to have the article, is to exceed the knowledge of the moderns about the use of the article, and even to place greater reliance on the integrity of the text and the skill of the writers in the use of the Greek language, than in regard to such minute particulars we are warranted. It is to be observed, too, that we have no other example of the form of expression in question than those which have been above considered.

It may be remarked, also, in answer to Dr. C.'s observations, that if priority of existence is meant by— πρωτος μου ην, "he was before me"-it is no confirmation, as the writer intended, of the former clause: "He is

preferred before me; for he was before me." Is priority of existence, then, a necessary proof of preference? And in the sense contended for, it stands in direct opposition to the last clause but one: "He that cometh after me.........for he was before me." "*

VERSE THE SIXTEENTH.

And of his fulnesss have all we received, and grace for grace."

s Fulness of grace and truth. t All believers, according to their respective measure, participate.

u Even favour as favour, and not as a recompence or reward.

COMMENTARY.

"For of his fulness we have all received."-This is to be read in connection with v. 14, the intermediate verse being a parenthesis; and the reading adopted into the text by Griesbach-ir for, instead of xa and— is more agreeable to the sense: "He was full of grace and truth. For of his fulness, &c." The fulness here meant, is the full portion of grace and truth, as already explained, from which Christian believers have received their respective portions. Although, the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit-the power of working miracles, which ceased with the apostolic age-were received through Christ as the medium of communication, yet as there is no reference to any special privileges in this place, it is probable that "grace and truth" here mean the essential privileges and blessings of the gospel, of which, all believers universally participate. Yet, as in

. Appendix, Note IX.

natural endowments, all Christians do not partake to the same degree of the ordinary Christian gifts; for they are both of various kinds and of different degrees. It was even so with the extraordinary gifts to which we have alluded. See Rom. xii. 6. 66 "Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy, &c." See also 1 Cor. xii. 8-11. In the following passage, both the extraordinary and common grace or gifts appear to be comprehended: Ephes. iv. 7-12.

Some are misled as to the import of the word receive, as if spiritual blessings were imparted in all instances by direct communication from above. This can only be true in regard to those, who are charged with a specific revelation, or an immediate divine commission to men in which sense Paul said, "I have received of the Lord." 1 Cor. xi. 23. In ordinary cases, those who receive, or to whom is "delivered," such communication, whether by word of mouth or writing, avail themselves of the favour or grace it conveys, by the various provisions of our rational nature. On this supposition alone, can we admit the propriety of numerous exhortations like the following: 2 Cor. vi. 1, "We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also, that ye receive not the grace of God in vain."

"Even* favour for favour:-or, favour as mere gift." I confess that I am not satisfied with any interpretation of this clause, which has been offered. That which I think most probable, suggested by Grotius, I

* "Even." It is observed by most expositors that xa here is explicative.

K

have given. Of the phraseology here used, we have not only no similar example in the New Testament, or the Septuagint, but we can attach to it no satisfactory meaning "Grace for [avri, instead of] grace." What does that mean? Wetstein thinks that the context leads us to infer, that grace for grace, means the gospel instead of the law-a greater instead of a less favour. But xagis, favour or grace, no where else means the law. Schleusner, with others, interpret it thus: "the greatest and most signal benefits;" or grace in addition to grace: which however is supported by no example. It will answer no good purpose to adduce a great number of other interpretations equally unsatisfactory. They are to be found in Poole's Synopsis Critic.

If any weight will be allowed to conjecture when other resources fail, it may be imagined that the original reading was xαgiv avri voμou-grace for the law. This appears to be the scope of the context. Or we may suppose the reading at first to have been χαριν επι χαριτι -favour in addition to favour, or abundant favouras some have interpreted the words as they now stand. And for this the Seventy afford the following example. Job xvi. 14. πτωμα επι πτώματι, ruin upon ruin.* Though it is highly probable that the true reading has been lost irrecoverably, and consequently the exact meaning of the clause cannot be ascertained; yet the scope of the passage is clear; namely, we have received through Christ the pre-eminent blessings of the gospel.

* We have also, (Isa. lvii. 19.) eignen e signon, and, (Ezek. vii. 26.) ουαι επι ουαι εσται, και αγγελια επι αγγελιαν εσται.