ANNOTATIONIS SACRÆ;

BEING A

CRITICAL DIGEST

AND

SYNOPTICAL ARRANGEMENT

OF THE MOST IMPORTANT

ANNOTATIONS ON THE NEW TESTAMENT,
EXEGETICAL, PHILOLOGICAL, AND DOCTRINAL:

CAREFULLY COLLECTED AND CONDENSED, FROM THE BEST COMMENTATORS,
BOTH ANCIENT AND MODERN,

AND SO DIGESTED AS TO FORM ONE CONSISTENT BODY OF ANNOTATION,

In which

Each Portion is systematically attributed to its respective Author,

AND THE FOREIGN MATTER TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH;

The whole accompanied with

A COPIOUS BODY OF ORIGINAL ANNOTATIONS.

BY THE REV. S. T. BLOOMFIELD, M. A.

OF SIDNEY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, VICAR OF BISBROOKE IN RUTLAND, AND RESIDENT
CURATE OF TUGBY, LEICESTERSHIRE.

Οὐ σοφισταὶ ἥκομεν, οὐδὲ ἀπιστεῖν ἕτοιμοι, θεαταὶ δε μόνον τῶν
γεγραμμένων, ἐξετάζομεν τὴν Γραφήν.

Philostr. Jun. Icon. 1. 24.

Ὅπου οὐκ ἔστι πίστις, ἅπαντα νοσεῖ, καὶ οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ μάχαι τίκτονται
λόγων, τοῦ πιθανοτέρου τὸν ἕτερον ἀνατρέπειν δοκοῦντος
ὀφθαλμός ἐστιν· ὁ μὴ ἔχων ὀφθαλμοὺς οὐδὲν εὑρίσκει, ἀλλὰ μόνον
Ζητεῖ.
Theophylact, from Chrysostom.

VOL. IV.

LONDON:

C. AND J. RIVINGTON,

62, ST PAUL'S CHURCH-YARD; AND 3, WATERLOO-PLACE, PALL-MALL.

MDCCCXXVIII.

13907.

ADVERTISEMENT.

In thus, at length, ushering into the world the Second Part of the arduous Work which he has been enabled to accomplish, the Author feels it is due to the Public to preface it with a brief statement of the causes which occasioned so long a delay in publication, and especially the reasons which induced him to adopt some alterations (and, as he trusts, improvements,) in his plan. These had partly occurred to him from experience and mature reflection, and partly had been suggested by some distinguished personages, who kindly took an interest in the Work, and to whose opinions much deference was, on various accounts, justly due. Both combined to point out that, in consequence of the immense mass of annotatory matter to be digested and reviewed in this second Part (comprehending nearly three-fourths of the difficulties of the New Testament), and of the marvellous diversities, nay, contrarieties, of interpretation perpetually to be encountered, it would be impossible to make the Work answer the chief purpose in view, or, indeed, to do any tolerable justice to the subject, within the prescribed limits; which, indeed, the Author had rather hoped than expected would suffice. That, moreover, in this portion of Scripture the nature of the subjects treated of rendered it necessary to in