ページの画像
PDF
ePub

I cannot but feel, in view of all this, that the confirmation of the reading cos in 1 Tim. 3: 16, is a very strong one, from the great similarity of the two passages. It would seem as if there were some significant design, on the part of the apostle, in omitting the article here. If I may venture to express it, he seems to say that eos, divinity, a divine nature, was in Christ, or manifested in the flesh; while ó cós, the Godhead, i. e. the proper and entire Godhead, is not affirmed to be united to the person of Christ; or, in other words, the Father and Spirit are not asserted to have become incarnate. Do I merely imagine a distinction here? Or does the omission of the article, in these two peculiar cases, actually indicate something of this nature?

Whoever compares John 1: 1 with John 1: 14; and these with Rom. 9: 5; and both these with the texts cited under no. 1 on p. 77, and with other texts of a similar tenor; will find reason sufficient, (at least so it appears to me), to acquiesce in the possibility and probability of the reading os; especially since, as we have seen, the Pauline usus loquendi favours this anarthrous reading.

But if we should read ös, still the sentiment of the text would seem to be strongly at variance with the idea, that Christ was merely and simply human. For what can be the meaning of ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί? It is applied to no other being; and if applied to Christ, would it not necessarily imply that he lived, or at least could make his appearance, in some other state than that of human flesh and blood? Granting this, it follows of course that he could not have been a mere man. He must, at least, have been a being altogether sui generis.

Again; when we consider this in connexion with the " great mystery" that is asserted of it, I confess myself altogether unable to believe that the apostle would have thus spoken of an ivavdoάлwσis, such as every human being undergoes. For then how would Christ have been distinguished from all the rest of the human race, and what was there particularly "wonderful" in his case? These considerations serve to shew, that the theory of an origin merely and entirely human, without any reference to a pre-existent state, must have been foreign to the views of the apostle, even on the ground that the reading ös should be adopted.

I cannot however adopt it, in the present state of evidence. Indeed, I consider it, on the whole, as a case made out, so far as evidence is as yet accessible, that eos is the genuine reading.

But then, I must add here also, that while I admit this, I cannot feel that the contest on the subject of the reading, can profit one side so much, or harm the other so much, as disputants respecting the doctrine of the Trinity have supposed. Whoever attentively studies John 17: 20-26. 1 John 1: 3. 2: 5. 4: 15, 16, and other passages of the like tenor, will see that "God might be manifest" in the person of Christ, without the necessary implication of the proper divinity of the Saviour; at least, that the phraseology of Scripture does admit of other constructions besides this; and other ones, moreover, which are not forced. And conceding this fact, less is determined by the contest about ös and sós, in 1 Tim. 3: 16, than might seem to be at first view.

My own belief of the meaning of the text is, that the apostle designs to say, (just as John does in 1: 1, 14,) that God, or the divine nature, dwelt in, or was disclosed in, Christ, while in his incarnate state. But he who differs from me in sentiment, may have so many things to say, which are founded in analogical expressions elsewhere applied to believers, that I cannot advance the text in question with much confidence that an opponent will feel the force of any argument from it for the proper divinity of Christ. Of course, while I sincerely believe that the sentiment of the apostle is such as is stated above, I cannot persuade myself that it is best to place dependence on this text, in the great controversy respecting the Godhead of the Saviour. It helps to confirm my faith in this doctrine, with the view which I have of it; but I deem it inexpedient to use it in combating an opponent to the doctrine in question.

If an apology be necessary for the length of the above remarks, I can say, that when I entered upon them, I had no expectation of occupying more than three or four pages. Investigation raised difficulties; and these I was as it were obliged to investigate, until I found satisfaction. If I have been fortunate enough to satisfy the reader, as well as myself, it will afford me pleasure. He will, at least, not accuse me of having trodden a beaten path, or of merely repeating what has been said, scores of times, as well as I could say it, or perhaps much better.

To Dr Henderson, whom I have the pleasure to reckon as my friend and correspondent, no apology, I trust, is needed, for the remarks which I have made. I hope he will find in them a desire manifested ἀληθεύειν ἐν ἀγάπῃ. It would be cherishing entirely different views of him from those which I now enter

tain, if I should for a moment suppose, that he would not sincerely rejoice in any candid discussion of what he has advanced in any part of his truly valuable Essay, whether the result should accord with his past views or not. He will see that my general results differ not at all from his, although I have come to them, in some respects, by means somewhat different from his own. If I am correct, no one will more candidly allow it than he; if I am not, few are more able to detect my errors. I take it for granted that he will do this, if he finds me in error; and he may be assured that I shall receive the correction with double thanks, as coming from the hand of so highly valued a friend.

ART. III. THE NATURE AND MORAL INFLUENCE OF HEATHENISM, ESPECIALLY AMONG THE GREEKS AND ROMANS, VIEWed in the light of ChrisTIANITY.

By Augustus Tholuck, Professor of Theology in the University of Halle. Translated from the German by R. Emerson, D. D. Professor of Ecclesiastical History in the Theological Seminary, Andover.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS.

If some

For a notice of the author of the following treatise, the reader is referred to the first volume of the Biblical Repository, p. 29. As to the merits of the piece, it may not be improper to remark, that it ranks high in Germany. Gesenius, one of the most competent judges on such a subject, though differing widely from its author in religious views, pronounced it, in the hearing of the Editor of this work, to be the best performance that has appeared on the subject. It certainly exhibits great research, and is written in a style at once lively and candid. marks of youth are perceptible, they may well be pardoned, as the essay was first published in 1822, when Prof. Tholuck was about twenty three years of age. The strain of pious feeling which often appears in it, without producing any digression from the main subject, is truly delightful; especially when we consider the prevalence of the opposite feeling in the land from which it comes. While the treatise will afford many facts and general views which cannot fail to be useful to the Christian and to the preacher, it will be an additional advantage of no small importance, should it serve to excite in this country the needful inter

est in historical research as connected with religion and with the christian church. Perhaps in this branch only of professional education, are the clergy of New England inferior to those of our mother country. And in this, as well as in some other branches of clerical education, we are confessedly and greatly inferior to the Germans. It would be as easy to account for this evil, as for our superior attainments in some other branches to which special attention has been paid. It would also be easy to point out unhappy consequences of a practical nature, resulting from this comparative neglect; but this is not the place.

That the first sentence may be intelligible, it is necessary to observe, that this was the first essay in a periodical work designed for the illustration of memorable facts and principles in the history and biography of the christian church, printed at Berlin and edited by the excellent Neander: Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums und des christlichen Lebens.

It may be proper to remark, that this essay consists of five parts; of which only the two first are given in the present number, viz. on the origin of the heathen religion, and on the estimation in which it was held by the heathen themselves. The remaining three parts, on the character of polytheism, on the influence of heathenism upon life, and on the study of classical literature, will be given in the succeeding numbers of the present volume. TRANSLATOR.

THE NATURE AND MORAL INFLUENCE OF HEATHENISM.

Introduction.

The following treatise is designed to shew, that heathenism was by no means capable of renovating man, but that rather, during its continuance, the faults and sufferings of the human race, were continually increasing. It precedes a course of essays, the object of which is to evince, that the invisible community of the Lord must be denominated the heart of the human race; and that even under the coldest temperature, that heart has ever been capable of some pulsations, whose fresh vital power was widely felt. Whoever stands on a lofty mountain, should look not merely at the gold which the morning sun pours on the grass and flowers at his feet; but he should sometimes also look behind him into the deep valley where the shadows still rest, that he VOL. II. No. 5.

11

may more sensibly feel that that sun is indeed a sun! Thus is it also salutary for the disciples of Christ, at times, from the kingdom of light to cast forth a glance over the dark stage where men play their part in lonely gloom, without a Saviour, without a God! Hence, a treatise like the following stands here directly in its proper place.

This treatise, therefore, does not come to bless; that is, its object cannot be to praise. It lies moreover not within its object-which is likewise reasonable-to show where God is manifested even in the midst of heathenism. Its object is to demonstrate, that heathenism, as such, did not restore, but profaned the image of God in man. No one will therefore accuse the author of injustice, if he does not place before the eyes of the reader every particle of divine seed, of which so many have occurred to his notice in heathenism. Yet, where the mention of good in heathenism is intimately connected with that of the bad, he will not suppress it; for the mirror of Christianity has no occasion first to breathe on other mirrors with the poisoned breath of calumny, in order that itself may be esteemed clear.

One further preliminary objection, which may be raised against such a view as the one before us, demands attention here at the commencement, viz. that even a hasty glance into the history of Christendom,-to pass over in silence what would be known, could the walls of christian palaces and cloisters speak, -reveals no less of corruption than what is here depicted of heathenism. It may perhaps be asserted, that if one were to gather the booty from the Byzantine Historians and the French Moniteur of the close of the 18th century, or from the Chronique Scandaleuse of the Lewises and the Annales Ecclesiastici of Alexander VI. and Caesar Borgia, a still more glaring picture of human profligacy might be shown. And this, indeed, we do not deny. As the Lord hath said, that it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon than for Chorazin and Bethsaida,' so say we.

But here, it is not the question, in what the Christian who is merely baptized with water, is better than the heathen, but the one who is baptized with the spirit and with fire. Nay, the question is not even, in what this or that Christian baptized with the spirit and with fire, is superior to this or that heathen; but what the fire and the spirit which baptize them through Christ, and which are to be given them without measure, can effect, and from their own nature do effect; and, on the other hand, what the spirit of heathenism from its own nature is calculated to produce, and does produce.

« 前へ次へ »