211 



was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three 

 days?" Origen enquires into the evidence for this assertion, 

 and the manner by which it can be reconciled to the account 

 in the book of Kings, that the temple was " completed in seven 

 years ;" he conseo'^ently quotes some verses from the original 

 authority to which he had referred. Would it not have been 

 importunate, redundant, and inapplicable, to produce in the 

 discussion of the question, " what period was consumed in 

 the^erection of the temple ;" an account of the particular 

 epoch and interval elapsed since the commencement of the 

 Jewish commonwealth ? Origen was not so puerile and un- 

 selecting a writer, although by no means a sound or judicious 

 critic, as to be guilty of the unmeaning verbiage, which the 

 learned author would desire from him ; he quotes the verse 

 as his authority, but he quotes it without any extraneous, 

 unnecessary, and redundant particulars : he produces from 

 the record, just so much as will bear upon his subject — ^^vhat 

 will illustrate and not burthen, — what will establish and not 

 overload it. The various adjuncts, Avhich transcription only: 

 might accumulate and comprle, are not, even by the volumi- 

 nous Origen, always brought together, and the learned gramma- 

 rian, while he may not be displeased at an opportunity of dis- 

 covering the variety and compass of his reading, is sensible 

 that the quotation of that part of an original authority, which, 

 serves to explain or enlighten the subject of his enquiry, would 



