Charles GORE
( 1853 - 1932 )

This Commentary is written by Anglican scholars who, while holding their faith, are determined in approaching the books to give their critical faculty, instructed by all the means within their power, its full and rightful freedom. It is hardly necessary to say that they have not found the results of legitimate criticism to conflict with the Catholic faith, though, believing, as they do, that criticism is a progressive science, and in the main a new science, their conclusions do very often differ widely from those which have been traditional. It will perhaps hardly be doubted that a Commentary on the whole Bible, written from this particular point of view, has been for many years both wanted and lacking; so that we need not apologize for endeavouring to supply the need. But it should be added that on no portion of the books was a new Commentary more obviously required than on the Apocrypha. It is not easy to exaggerate the importance of the books comprised under this ambiguous title in supplying the mental background necessary for understanding the New Testament.
Two further general explanations seem to be necessary, i. The Bible should be read from the point of view from which it was written; and there can be no doubt that from end to end the original writers wrote, and later editors, where such there were, edited and adapted the original documents for the purpose of edification, not of pure science. Thus, though, the historical and archaeological importance of the books is immense, it is the spiritual use of them which is their proper use, and it is principally to this spiritual use of the Bible that we intend our Commentary to minister. We shall have fallen quite short of our aim if it does not lead all those who study it onwards from ' reading, marking, and learning ' to ' inwardly digesting' the Holy Scriptures; and in particular if it is not of service to the ministers of religion in that ' daily reading and weighing of the Scriptures ' to which they are pledged, and by which alone they can hope to wax riper and stronger in their ministry. But it must be confessed that, especially in parts of the Old Testament, it will be found that the critical and archaeological aspects of the books are the most prominent in this Commentary. In the present condition of biblical criticism this is inevitable. A commentator on any book must explain his view of the book, his reasons for so regarding it, and his relation to current criticism. His readers would demand this of him. Hence the large place inevitably held by critical discussions.
It must be remembered, however, that sound criticism involves appreciation. There is a great deal of modern biblical criticism which is inspired by a spirit so obviously hostile to the Christian faith as to leave no room for real appreciation of the books. But it is not this sort of criticism which readers will find in this Commentary.
2. The contributors to this volume are almost all united in their general point of view, but this is not held to preclude considerable differences of opinion on particular points. Each contributor is alone responsible for the opinions which he expresses; but where considerable differences appear, attention is directed by cross references from one opinion to another. Where, however, as in the case of Kings and Chronicles, or of the Synoptic Gospels, we have two or more parallel accounts of the same events, it has not been thought necessary constantly to insert cross references. It is assumed that the student will read the different accounts side by side. Sometimes also the editors have added a footnote, either supplying a judgement different from that expressed in the text, for comparison with it, or supplementing the information there supplied. No attempt, however, has been made to provide a full compendium of theology; we have only sought to give what is needed for the understanding of the books.
It should be observed that all the footnotes throughout the Commentary are by the editors. Where the Old Testament or New Testament editor and the final editor have both had a hand in the footnote, or it expresses the judgement of both, it is signed ' ED.' Where only one has been concerned in it, it is signed by initials. Some further details should be noted.
(1) The name ' Jehovah ' has been retained throughout, and not altered into ' Jahveh ' or ' Yahweh,' first because the old word has been hallowed by centuries of use in English, and secondly because the new forms are only hypothetical constructions which many scholars (including the Old Testament editor of this Commentary) believe to be artificial and not the name by which the God of the Hebrews was actually invoked.
(2) As we have written with the ordinary reader or elementary student always in view, we have not assumed that he will have access to complete libraries. But we have assumed that he will possess the Revised Version, with full references and some maps. We recommend the S.P.C.K. Bible Atlas (price is.). Like all English Bible Atlases, it contains some site identifications which are inaccurate or doubtful; but the Commentary will generally correct errors of this kind. Those who desire more exact information should consult the Encyclopedia Biblica, and especially Driver's Samuel and Burney's Judges, to which frequent reference is made in the commentaries.
(3) As knowledge of the original language of the Bible is not taken for granted in those who use this Commentary, where Hebrew or Greek words must be cited, they are transliterated.
(4) To save space, certain well-known works of reference are referred to by initials. A list of such abbreviations follows this Preface.
(5) The paging of the book is in three parts—Old Testament—Apocrypha— New Testament. This is to make it easier at some future date to publish the parts separately, but there is no present intention of doing so. The references therefore are given thus: OT, 533a, Apoc., ijb, NT, 2ja—the a and b indicating the left-hand and right-hand columns of each page.
The order of books in this Commentary follows that of the English Bible, with two exceptions: St. Mark's Gospel is given precedence over the others, and the Epistle to Philemon is attached to Colossians. The reasons for these two exceptions will be sufficiently obvious.
Probably none of the editors, when they embarked on this work, had any idea how much labour and difficulty it would involve, and now that they are sending the Commentary out on its career, they can only do so with the modest hope that it will be found—not perfect, but useful.
They are bound to express their gratitude to all their contributors, especially to those who sent in their contributions speedily and have had to wait a long time before seeing them published, and to those who cut down their contributions, or submitted to such cutting down, to the required limit—a matter in which we must confess that strict impartiality has not been observed. With so large a team of contributors, absolute uniformity in technical details of scholarly method is neither possible nor, in view of the variety of subject-matter, always desirable; but the editors have done as much as was feasible in this respect. We also owe a great debt to the Rev. Dr. C. Harris, to whose vision and initiative the inception of the Commentary, and the overcoming of various difficulties that arose during its preparation, were largely due; and to the Rev. Dr. W. K. Lowther Clarke, the secretary of the S.P.C.K., for the labour he has bestowed upon the book, and to the printers for the skill with which they have dealt with the material submitted to them. Not least do they desire to express their gratitude for the work of Arthur James Mason and Andrew Ewbank Burn, who passed away while the volume was still in preparation.
May the good Lord prosper our undertaking!