Graviora. 5^9 this sense, and the authorized version is, as usual, un¬ objectionable. N.B.—I know no better proof of shallow scholarship, than the habitual eagerness to amend it with which some seem to be, as it were, possessed. ROMANS, iii. 25.—I understand Trpoekrjkvdora (past, or bygone) as distinctly marking sins committed under the previous dispensation. Hebrews, viii. 5, and ix. 23 and 24. "Did Moses see the real heavenly things in the mount and make after that pattern ? or, did he only see the mere pattern of the Tabernacle &c. ?" From viii. 5, I should think he only saw a pattern, in the mount, of the realities in heaven. But the words are strictly capable of either meaning, since the realities might serve as a pattern ; as when one " draws from Nature." HEBREWS, ix. 12.—"Should the words in italics, 'for us,' be retained ?" They are not necessary ; but at least harmless, and perhaps help the meaning. N.B.—The subject of italics is a very important and interesting one. They very inadequately, and often inconsistently, represent one form of difference between the original and the transla¬ tion ; but are, of course, apt to be mistaken for emphatic words. As they are often important to the sense, and the accurate adjustment of them would be extremely difficult, it is to be hoped they will not be rashly interfered with. 1 TIMOTHY, vi. 5.—Should most decidedly be "that godliness is gain ;" i.e., that the profession of godliness is a way of making money. The article settles this question : it must be with the subject, not the predicate. " ivKoyea and eu^aptcrTetu—are these two words ever used in the same sense, i.e., merely for giving of thanks ? Matthew, xiv. 19, xv. 36, xxvi. 26, 27 ; Mark, vi. 41, xiv.