Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

A. Egyptian Symbols.

Appendix. alluded to. (See Plutarch de Iside et Osir. referred to by Bishop Cumberland in his Sanchoniatho, p. 13.) Cudworth, in his Intellectual System, has made a similar application of the passage. (See Mosheim's edition, vol. i. p. 527, and p. 730.) His learned editor has indeed raised an objection, on the ground that the Egyptians understood by the term Cneph, and by the symbol to which it was applied, The Creative Power, and that this was no characteristic with them of the Supreme Being. But this fact rather supports Cudworth's view. For, does it not seem unaccountable, that the one part of the Egyptian nation should have excluded from their religion all the gods of the other, because their God was the Creative Power? Does it not indicate that the Egyptians of Thebais had not yet, like the rest of their countrymen, and like all the heathen, distinguished the Creator from the Supreme Being, and classed him among deified men, and the symbols of idolatry?

B.

Allegorizing

of Pagan

NOTE [B.] PAGE 14.

Vide Eusebii Præparat. Evangel. Lib. II. C. 2, and again, C. 6, Mythology. where he alludes to this method of defence being set up by the philosophical champions of orthodoxy. Τοιαύτα ἦν τὰ τῆς παλαίας, θεολογίας, ἦν μεταβάλοντες νεοῖ τίνες, χθὲς καὶ πρώην ἐπιφύεντες, λογι κώτερον τε φιλοσοφεῖν αὐχοῦντες, τὴν δὴ φυσικώτεραν τῆς περὶ Θεὸν ἱστορίας δόξαν ἀρνήσαντο, σεμνότερας εὐρεσιολογίας τοῖς μυθοῖς προσεπινοήσαντες. Tertullian makes a similar allusion in his tract against Marcion, (Lib. I. C. 13.) "Ipsa quoque vulgaris superstitio communis Idololatriæ, cum in simulacris de nominibus et fabulis veterum mortuorum pudet, ad interpretationem naturalem refugit, et dedecus suum ingenio obumbrat, figurans Jovem in substantiam fervidam, et Junonem in aerem," &c. The subject is discussed at large by Warburton in the Divine Legation, Book III. § 6.

C.

Twofold

object of the Jewish

What was thus done with some reason by the heathen, was afterwards perversely imitated by the Christian Fathers, who applied to the defence of the Bible the principles of criticism on which the Pagan mythology had been upheld. These were again imitated by the mystics of the twelfth century, who even proceeded to found their system of interpretation on Scripture itself, and quoted for this end, "litera occidit, spiritus vivificat;" as if the literal and primary sense of Scripture was pronounced worse than useless. See Marsh's Divinity Lectures, Lect. XVII.

NOTE [C.] PAGE 23.

In contemplating the Jewish dispensation, it is very important to distinguish between those parts which seem to have been designed Scriptures. for immediate revelation, or other immediate purposes, and those which could only have served indirectly to qualify the Jews for a

C.

Jewish

future revelation, and a finished dispensation. The principle may Appendix. be extended even to their canon of Scripture. For, not to mention such obscure prophecies, as could only be understood by a know- Twofold ledge of the event after it had taken place, there is a great portion object of the of the Old Testament Scriptures which seem to have had no further Scriptures. use and design, than to educate the people at large for Gospel instruction. The Jews had no literature but Scripture; and God was not only their Supreme Governor, but their national Preceptor. By means of those parts of the Proverbs, the Psalms, and Prophets, which, conveying no revelation, often no religious truth, are merely valuable for the acute judgment, or the poetic imagination displayed, -by means of these, the national taste and mode of thinking received such a moulding as was best suited for the teaching of the Messiah when he came. From these, accordingly, he borrows his images and illustrations, and to these perpetually alludes in order to make himself understood.

Of all the Jewish Scriptures so circumstanced, no one portion is so remarkable as the Song of Solomon. It appears to contain no revelation, -no religious instruction. It suggests to us no character but that of a royal epithalamium. But if we wish to discover

a reason why the Spirit of God should have sanctioned the work, let us refer to the narrative of Christ's discourses and parables; and we shall find them abounding with the images which it furnishesthe bride-the bridegroom-the wedding feast-the wedding garment-the fidelity of the mysterious spouse, and the like. Evidently he had found in this work a train of images which had taken possession of the popular fancy from their beauty, and had also become sanctified by their place in the Scriptures. This and the like portions of Holy Writ had given just such a degree of cultivation to the meanest class, as enabled them to comprehend readily his instructions, on topics which require the learner to have some such previous cultivation of mind. The fishermen of Galilee, who might have been too dull and unimaginative to enter into his various lively forms of instruction, and needful illustrations of the peculiar truths of Christianity, had they been accustomed to no Scripture but such as drily detailed God's laws and judgments, found his teaching, in consequence of this preparation, intelligible and agreeable. Of all the popular Scriptures, none probably were more so than the Psalms of David; and we may observe, accordingly, that out of these come a considerable part of the quotations which he made to them.

[blocks in formation]

Canon of

Lightfoot (see Hora Hebraicæ in Joann. IV. 25,) supposes the Samaritan Samaritans to have made use of the prophetical books of the Jews, Scripture. only so far as they confirmed the predictions of the Pentateuch; and in this way accounts for the woman of Samaria's adoption of

D. Samaritan Canon of Scripture.

Appendix. the Jewish phrase, in calling the Redeemer "the Messiah." This view derives support from a passage in Justin Martyr, quoted by Beausobre. Remarques, T. I. p. 152.) 'Ιουδαιοῖ τε καὶ Σαμαρεῖς, ἔχοντες τὸν παρὰ Θεοῦ λόγον, διὰ τῶν προφήτων παραδόθεντα αὐτοῖς, X. T. λ. And as Justin was himself of Sychem, his authority on this point is so much the greater. (See Bishop Blomfield's note on his "Dissertation upon the Traditional Knowledge of a Promised Redeemer," p. 172, where the views of Lightfoot, Beausobre, Basnage, and others, are noticed.) But after all, why should not the Samaritan woman have accommodated her language to the stranger whom she was addressing, and have called him, whom she expected, by the name which that stranger was known to use? As to Justin's words, διὰ τῶν προφητῶν, they might have been intended to apply to Moses, only as one of the prophets, the class being put for the individual belonging to it. Thus we should still speak of a quotation from the prophets, although it were only from one prophet's writings. And, besides, the term prophet, it is well known, is applicable to all those to whom "God at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past;" and might, without any forced interpretation, be here understood to mean those who received, and passed on, the several intimations of a Saviour from Adam unto Moses.

The account of theological tenets of the Samaritans must be received with considerable caution, since they are known to us almost entirely through their adversaries the Jews. Attempts have indeed been made to procure a fairer and more unexceptionable statement from an examination of some of the scanty specimens of their literature which are still extant. Professor Gesenius, with this view, published at Leipsic, in 1824, three Samaritan poems from MSS. in the British Museum and the public library of SaxeGotha. The sketch of Samaritan doctrine elicited from these, I shall give in his own words.

66

Primum Deum unicum esse docent sine socio et consorte-ab humana imbecillitate, humanique corporis similitudine, immunempartim ratione et ex operibus suis, partim e libro divinitus patefacto cognoscendum-qui totum mundum impleat-cætcrum, naturæ a mortalibus non indagandæ cujus virtutes ante mundum conditum in eo quasi delituerunt, in mundo condendo demum se exseruerunt -Mundum, cujus duas partes esse ponunt, alteram sensibus patentem, alteram spiritualem, angelorumque sedem-Hominem, e pulvere montis Safræ ad imaginem angelorum, non Dei, creatum esse volunt-semel microcosmum nuncupant-Angeli qui creaturis opponuntur, potestates mundi occultæ et copiæ divinæ appellantur, quæ semel duntaxat in legislatione in hunc mundum prodierunt-Prorsus repudiatis prophetis sequioribus, qui mendacii disertis verbis insimulantur-Moses omnium temporum propheta, decus prophetiæ, revelationis terminus, Dei amicus et servus familiaris, mundi vortex,

3

Samaritan

sol, corona, salutatur, post ascensum in cœlum in splendore Dei Appendix. habitaturus-cui prophetia jam in ipsa creatione destinata sit- D. Legem vero in ipso Hexaëmen creatam, omnium creaturarum principem, vestis divinæ scintillam, mundi cœlestis micam esse volunt Canon of ejusque late historiam biblicam mythis imaginibusque poeticis Scripture. exornant assidua ejus lectione et accurata observatione homines vitæ æternæ participes fieri statuunt. Ut Sabbathi festum pie celebrent, pios Dei cultores etiam atque etiam admonent, idque religiose colentibus eximia quæque præmia spondent—In fine rerum instare volunt magnum Judicii diem, remissionem peccatorum, et piorum resurrectionem; pios resurrecturos esse, falsos autem prophetas cum cultoribus a resurrectione exclusum iri et igne combustum-De Messia in uno loco eoque dubio agitur.'

Respecting the argument founded on these poems, if, as Gesenius supposes, they were written at so late a period as the age of Justinian, or (as is more likely) of the Arabian conquerors, they are scarcely a less doubtful guide to the tenets of the Samaritans in our Saviour's day, than the accounts of the Jews, however prejudiced. They bear evident marks of Gnosticism, which probably continued more and more to corrupt the Samaritan faith from the time of Simon Magus. Thus, in the above abstract, we find the Deity described as a subtle nature, filling or pervading all the world; and to the creatures of God are opposed certain beings who are called the powers of God. In their view of a day of judgment-remission of sins-and resurrection unto life, we may, perhaps, recognise the adoption of the Christian doctrines, which, doubtless, influenced the theological views of many who were not converts to Christianity.

[blocks in formation]

These two uses of prophecy-information and evidence-should Use of be carefully distinguished, because a very different character Prophecy. attaches to a prophecy, as it is applied to the one or the other. When the use of a prophecy is to convey anticipated views, which are requisite for those who cannot naturally foresee them, then the prediction requires to be miraculously supported; that is, it requires that its particular application should be pointed out by a messenger divinely and miraculously accredited. Thus, the previous knowledge of a famine which was to take place in Judæa, was needful for the early Christian churches there, and accordingly formed the subject of a prophecy, whose proper use was information; and had this prophecy not been made by regularly accredited prophets, such as

3 These images are probably an allusion to "the glory of the Lord," or the symbol of holy light, which denoted his presence.

4 Avvaμs, or ons, such as Simon Magus (who probably first taught this

66

vain philosophy to his countrymen) pretended to be," " giving out that himself was some great one: to whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God."-Acts viii. 9, 10.

E.

Appendix. Agabus and his company, no one could have been expected to act on its authority. The event, when it came to pass, would have proved, then, indeed, that he who foretold it was inspired; but before the event, no assurance of this sort belonged to the prophecy itself; it required to be authorized by an accredited servant of God.

Use of
Prophecy.

On the other hand, when the use and intent of a prophecy is evidence, then its use begins only with its fulfilment; and that fulfilment is its credential. For instance, the fulfilment of our Lord's prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, became a miraculous evidence of the truth of his pretensions, as strong as any miracle could be, which he wrought during his abode on earth; but its use in this respect did not at all depend on its being recorded, preached, and applied, by persons divinely accredited. All that was requisite was, that it should be known certainly to have been delivered by Jesus. A fulfilled prophecy carries with it its own credentials. Nay more; considered as evidence, it would have its character destroyed, by supposing it to be otherwise circumstanced. This will be very clear if we consider the question, “In what way is a prophecy miraculous evidence? In what respect does it correspond to a testimonial miracle?" Is it not that prophecy is an appeal to the senses in proof of miraculous knowledge in the author, just as a sensible miracle is an appeal to the senses in proof of an exercise of miraculous power in the agent? Knowing that no human being can raise the dead to life, he who should witness a dead man so raised, would have the evidence of his senses, that miraculous power must have done it. So, too, one who has witnessed the destruction of the Jewish polity and the dispersion of the Jews, being quite sure that there were no human means of foreseeing these events, sees in that destruction and dispersion, a sensible evidence of the miraculous knowledge of him who foretold the events. But if he cannot of himself recognise the fulfilment of the words of Jesus in those events, the events are no more evidence to him, than the raising of the dead man would have been, if he had not seen that he was raised. He might indeed, in the case of the raising of the dead, have been assured by another who did see it; but the evidence would be no longer the original evidence of a sensible miracle. And so, too, he might give credence to one deserving of it, who should inform him that the destruction of Jerusalem was the fulfilment of certain words of our Lord; but if he could not recognise the fulfilment, the event would not be itself miraculous evidence. Whatever purpose therefore the information might serve, it could not make the prophecy evidence. Its whole character as such-its whole correspondence to a sensible miracle-depends on the clear recognition by the ordinary human faculties of the complete connexion between the prophecy and the event.

It is generally acknowledged, that the main purpose of the Old Testament prophecies concerning Christ was that of evidence.

If

« VorigeDoorgaan »