Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

REMEMBERING THE POOR.

mark or emblem. The priests were known by their vestments of linen-the Pharisees by the breadth of their phylacteries; but hereby all men were to know that they were Christ's disciples, by the love they bore to their brethren. It was his design to link his people together again in a bond of holy brotherhood, as children of immortality, capable of emerging from obscurity, and shining as the brightness of the firmament, and as the stars for ever and ever. And he declared, that so soon as any one became a disciple of his indeed, he laid aside for ever his proud and fierce disposition, and put on bowels of mercies; became gentle to all men; meek and lowly as the master he served; overflowing with benevolence like him who sits aloft and scatters his goodness freely and without restraint through all the earththrough all the universe. Nor was this to be merely a transitory feeling, but one permanent and lasting-the result of a new heart; nay, one that should increase throughout the ages of a ceaseless eternity. When their souls parted from their bodies, and crossed the gulf, and arrived in heaven, a deep interest in all the members of the glorious society there assembled was still to characterize them; though sympathy is there uncalled-for, as care and sorrow and weeping are unknown. All ordinances are to vanish, but love is to endure. Faith and hope are to be swallowed up, but love is never to fail. It is to be the fair garment which clothes all the redeemed-part of the very essence and perfection of redeemed humanity; and they who walk not in love to men-blessing all, forgiving all, and doing good to all as they have opportunity, especially to such as are of the household of faith-give plain evidence that as yet they are involved in all the degradation of the fall-that they are none of the disciples of Jesus, nor members of the royal household of God.

Hence, in all the summaries of practical Christianity found in Scripture, this occupies a prominent place as being an essential fruit of the operation of the Spirit of God: "A good man showeth favour and lendeth. He hath dispersed abroad, he hath given to the poor; his righteousness endureth for ever"-"What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God?"-"Is not this the fast which I have chosen, that ye deal out your bread to the hungry?"—"Pure religion, and undefiled before God and the Father, is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and

543

to live unspotted from the world"—" But he that hath this world's goods, and seeing his brother have need, shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?"

All the prominent examples of Scripture tend to enforce the same duty. See the striking example of Abraham in Gen. xviii. 1-8, concerning which the apostle says, "Be not forgetful to entertain strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares." See the example of Job (xxix. 11-17): “I was eyes to the blind, and feet was I to the lame; I was a father to the poor, and the cause that I knew not I searched out." The converted Zaccheus said, " Half of my goods I give to the poor." The prayers and alms of Cornelius came up for a memorial before God; and so universal is this, that on the day of judgment Christ is to say to all his people, "I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat; thirsty, and ye gave me drink; naked, and ye clothed me; sick and in prison, and ye visited me. Inasmuch as ye did it to these my brethren, ye did it to me."

Indeed, when a Christian thinks what is meant by professing to be a child of Him who maketh his sun to rise and his rain to fall even on the evil and unthankful; when he thinks that he is only a steward of all he possesses, and not a lord, and that he must soon part from all his goods and give an account of his stewardship; when he thinks of Him who was rich, and yet for our sakes became poor, and who on earth went about continually doing good; when he thinks that amidst all their poverty the poor are equally possessed with himself of immortal souls, that some of them are heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, and that by cherishing a kind and loving spirit he is promoting his own happiness and the great end of his being; whereas, by hardening his heart he is hateful to God and abhorred of men, he sees a multitude of arguments all urgently enforcing the duty of giving to the poor.

Such is the doctrine of Scripture respecting the duty of self-sacrificing benevolence. Giving to the poor is not a duty which we may neglect with safety; it is not peculiar to any dispensation, but is enforced by the clearest precepts of both Testaments. Neglect of it is a sin, and stamps us as hypocritical and insincere in our profession of Christianity. He that professes Christianity, and is open-hearted and generous, is so far to be believed. But he that is under the power of covetousness, and grasps eagerly after gain, and adds house to house, and heaps up

riches as if he were to live for ever, and suffers the poor to cry in vain, and wretchedness in a thousand forms to remain unrelieved around him-be his outward profession of religion ever so great; let him perform the heartless representations of holiness ever so devoutly; let him glory in being able to solve every question in theology, and in astonishing others by the extent of his knowledge; let him pray with the fervour of one upon whose eyes have burst the glories of the world of spirits, and exhort with the eloquence of an angel, and read the Word of God as if he esteemed it more precious than gold, yea, than fine gold; and rebuke the sins of others with all the sternness of an Elijah; and welcome the return of every sacrament as the Jews welcomed the return of the year of jubilee: but still it is all in vain; he wants the grand mark of Christian discipleship-the grand requisite for promoting the blessedness of the redeemed in heaven. He is but a hypocrite and a dissembler; he loves his riches more than God, more than his brethren, more than the glorious rewards of heaven. And, alas! when the veil shall at last be withdrawn from every heart, and the secret histories of all shall be revealed on the day of judgment, how many such will have their wickedness exposed! But we must leave the subject to be prosecuted in another paper.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY.

degree the distinction reaches, is it not also too much for them to decide upon the precise kind and degree of union which is necessary to denominate the great Creator of the world-the ONE GOD?

The doctrine of a trinity in unity is evidently a doctrine of pure revelation, and could never have been discovered by the mere light of nature. But, by comparing Scripture with itself, we may plainly perceive that the divine unity is not a unity of persons. Though there the same incommunicable titles of Jehovah, God, are three in the Godhead who are dignified with and Lord-possessing the same attributes and perfections, and entitled to the same worship and adoration-yet the Scriptures do not exhibit a plurality of Deities, but teach us that Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. The obvious conclusion is, that these three are one God, and that the Scripture doctrine of unity is of more persons than one in the Godhead. The following passages, among many others, are very full to this purpose :

66

Go, teach all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.-There are three that bear record in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit ;

and these three are one.-I am one that bear wit-
ness of myself. The Father that sent me beareth
witness of me.-It is the Spirit that beareth
witness.-And the Holy Spirit descended in a
bodily shape upon him; and a voice came from
heaven which said, Thou art my beloved Son, in
whom I am well pleased.--When the Comforter
is come, whom I will send unto you from the
Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth
from the Father, he shall testify of me.-Now
I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus
Christ's sake, and for the love of the Spirit, that
you strive together with me in your prayers to
God for me.-
-Through him (that is, Christ) we
both have access by one Spirit to the Father.-
Praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in
the love of God, looking for the mercy of our
Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.-The Lord
direct your hearts into the love of God, and the
patient waiting for Christ.-The grace of our
Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the
communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you
all."

No sober Trinitarian would take upon him to say precisely to what degree the distinctions in the Godhead extend. It is generally supposed, however, that the term person approaches the nearest to the scriptural idea of any term that could be applied to this subject; yet those who use and contend for this term, in opposition to that of three names or three properties, do not mean to suggest that the distinctions in the Deity are in all respects the same as between three persons among men. The latter have no necessary connection between each other, so as to denominate them one. It is highly probable On reading these and similar passages, tothat there is nothing in creation perfectly ana-gether with a great number of others which logous to the mode of the divine subsistence; teach the proper Deity of Christ, we conclude and therefore nothing by which it can be fully that in a mysterious way, far above our comconceived. And what if this should be the prehension, there are in the divine unity three case? Where is the wonder that there should subsistences; and as the New Testament conbe something in God peculiar to himself, in the stantly represents each of these three as bearing mode of his existence, which we cannot compre- personal names, sustaining personal offices, and hend? If Socinians would but modestly consider performing personal acts, we think ourselves the weakness of the human understanding, they warranted in accounting them three divine would not decide so peremptorily, on the other persons. hand, concerning the unity of God, as that it must needs be personal, or not at all. If it be too much for us to say with exactness to what

Socinians, however, object to the doctrine of the Trinity on account of its being incomprehensible; and Dr. Priestley denies that the first

PARENTAL PITY-FILIAL FAITHFULNESS.

teachers of Christianity taught any "mysterious doctrines, or doctrines in their own nature incomprehensible;" and insists upon the necessity of "considering in what manner three persons are one God, upon the general principle that every proposition, before it can be believed, must be understood in some sense or other." The first preachers of Christianity taught the self-existence of God: "Grace be unto you, and peace, from him who is, and who was, and who is to come." (Rev. i. 4.) But the self-existence of God is allowed by Dr. Priestley himself to be so much of a mystery that "he does not understand the manner of it. He can here distinguish between things which are above reason, and things contrary to it." "Though it be above our reason," he says, " to comprehend how this original Being, and the cause of all other beings, should be himself uncaused, it is a conclusion by no means properly contrary to reason." Now, why might not an Atheist demand of Dr. Priestley an account of the mode or manner how God himself can exist, upon the general principle, "that every proposition, before it can be believed, must be understood in some sense or other?" Why should not this general principle apply to the manner in which God always existed, as an uncaused Being, as well as to the manner in which three persons are one God and if it be proper to distinguish between things above reason and contrary to it, in the one case, why not in the other?

The truth is, it is not necessary that everything contained in a proposition should be clearly understood, in order to our being rationally convinced that such a proposition is true. We ought not to deny everything we cannot comprehend; otherwise a man born blind would reason right when he forms this syllogism: We can only know the shape of different substances by feeling them; but it is impossible to handle them at a distance: therefore it is impossible to know the shape of different bodies beyond our reach! A blind man, by the concurring testimony of all about him, may be convinced that the figure of different bodies may be clearly ascertained by sight, though we cannot handle them. But when convinced of this on the ground of testimony, he never can be made to conceive how this is true. It is therefore a fundamental maxim, in all true philosophy, that many things may be incomprehensible and yet demonstrable, that though seeing clearly be a sufficient reason for affirming, yet not seeing at all can never be a reason for denying.

When it is affirmed that in the Godhead there are three, and that these three are one God, it has been objected, not only that the doctrine is incomprehensible, but that the terms themselves involve a contradiction; to this it might be replied, that if the Divine Being were affirmed to be three in the same sense in which he is said to be one, the objection would be valid; but the contradiction here is only a

545

seeming one, and is no other than what appears in other propositions concerning the Divine Being, which are also true. Suppose it were affirmed that it is possible for God to do evil, and yet that it is impossible he should do evil, this would involve an apparent contradiction; and if the two branches of the proposition were to be understood in the same sense of possible and impossible, the contradiction would be real. But to say that it is not naturally impossible for God to do evil, were he so inclined, is only affirming what is necessary to his being a free agent, and so of being virtuous or holy; and to say that it is morally impossible for God to do evil, is only ascribing to him that perfection of holiness which constitutes the true glory of his character. So, to affirm that the centre and surface of the globe are exceedingly remote, and yet so exceedingly near as to be equally the central point of infinite space, is an apparent contradiction, and yet demonstrably true. That the remotest periods of time are alike the centre of infinite duration is also a most evident truth, and yet a caviller might object that the terms of these propositions involve a contradiction; it is like saying that two points may be one, and that one may be two. Yet, opposite as the terms may appear, the truth of the proposition is not at all affected by them, but rests on the strongest demonstration.-Fuller.

PARENTAL PITY-FILIAL FAITHFULNESS.

YE sanctified parents, have ye no pity for your ungodly children? nor sanctified children for ungodly parents? "O, my father, my father, by whom I had my being, is going to eternal darkness! Alas, for my mother, my dear mother! that carried me in her womb, that dandled me upon her knees, that suckled me at her breasts; that did delight to break her sleep to quiet me when I was froward, to look to me when I was sick; that bound my head when it was pained; that wiped mine eyes when I did weep, and my face when I did sweat, because of my disease; this my mother is forgetful of her own immortal soul-was more troubled for me when she thought I was near my grave, than for herself, though near to hell. When I was young, she took care for me for things temporal; but for herself, neither young nor old, for things eternal. Ere long, she will be dead, and, I am afraid, damned too: ere long, she must go out of time; and, for anything I can perceive, being ignorant and fearless of God and unmindful of eternity, her soul will go into an eternity of torments. O how loath am I to have such thoughts of one so near, so dear unto me! O, it is the cutting of my heart, it is bitterness to my soul! I had rather die, than that she should be damned; and yet it is my fear, she is hasting to an eternity of woe; for, to my observing eye, she is taken wholly up with the cares, and pride, and vanity of this life, and apparently regardless of that eternal world."

Why do not also ye that are parents, that have a belief of an everlasting state, take on, and bewail the doleful state of your ungodly children, that in their

sinful courses are posting to eternal pains? "What, my son, the son of my loins, the son of my womb, did I bear him with so much sorrow, and shall he be a castaway? Did I travail with him with so much pain, and brought and nursed him up with so much labour; and must he be for ever fuel for the flames of hell? Have I brought forth a child to be a prey to devils, and a companion with them to all eternity? O, my son, my son! what shall I do for thee, my son, my son?" Thus, whatever relation, neighbour, friend, or acquaintance you have, or others, that you see go on in sin, let it be your grief, trouble, lamentation; when there is an eternity of joys, and they will lose it; an eternity of torments, and they be cast into it.-Doolittle.

in 1 Cor. iv. 6, irìg ö yiygazta gov. Neither | the words themselves, nor the connection in which they stand, will admit of such a translation. The expression is generally employed to condemn or rather to deride the folly of those who speculate on subjects which God has not revealed, and which can be known by revelation alone. Scripture itself has sufficiently reproved this presumptuous spirit, when it denounces the man who is guilty of "intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind;" and when it teaches that "secret things belong unto the Lord our God, but those which are revealed belong to us and to our children." +

Some supposed quotations seem to be formed from a confused construction of different texts. Thus the familiar form of words, "Greater is POPULAR MISQUOTATIONS OF SCRIPTURE. he that is for us than all they that are against THOSE who have been accustomed to peruse us," appears to be composed of the two Scripwith care and attention the language of Scripture statements, "Greater is he that is in you ture must often have observed, both in the than he that is in the world;" and, " If God pulpit and in conversation, references to it be for us, who can be against us?'s We have which were far from accurate. Some of these, met the expression somewhere in the works of by frequent repetition, are familiar to the ear, Jeremy Taylor with a marginal reference to. and yet, we believe that it will be found that 2 Kings vi. 16, and probably this is the place in no case where the language of Scripture has where a general recollection of Scripture would been altered, has the alteration been an im- lead one to look for it; but neither there nor in provement in regard to the meaning. Indeed, any other part of the Sacred Volume will the we have sometimes thought that an argument, precise words be found. or at least a strong presumption, in favour of the verbal inspiration of Scripture, might be derived from the injury done to the sense by what were imagined to be an improvement on the phraseology of Holy Writ.

It is rarely that a professed quotation from the Bible is without some foundation there. We have, indeed, heard the expression of Sterne, that "God tempers the wind to the shorn lamb," adduced as Scripture proof of the compassion of our Creator. But whether Sterne made or borrowed the phrase, he did not find

it in the Bible. There are, however, truths
and representations there, which may have re-
commended the expression to acceptance. It
is written, that Christ, as a compassionate shep-
herd, "gathers the lambs with his arm, and
carries them in his bosom,"
"*that the Lord

"stayeth his rough wind in the day of the
east wind," +-that in his faithfulness he will
not suffer his people "to be tempted above
what they are able" to bear. Whatever
truth is contained in the imaginary quotation
is expressed in these passages, and conveyed
with that divine authority which alone can
afford rational support to an afflicted mind.

There is another expression in common use as a scriptural one, though it is not to be found in the Sacred Volume. We mean the phrase "To be wise abore what is written." There can be little doubt that this was derived from the New Testament,and that it is the version given by some half-learned interpreterof the apostle's words

[blocks in formation]

The alterations made on passages actually existing in Scripture, seem to have been originally suggested by various considerations. It would seem to be a taste for the parallelisms of Hebrew poetry that has suggested the construing and supplementing the passages found in Ps. cxxx. 4, 7, "There is forgiveand plenteous redemption, that thou mayest be ness with thee, that thou mayest be feared; sought after," or "sought unto," as others more clumsily term it. There is perhaps nothing wrong in the idea suggested by the addition; and yet it may be questioned whether it is the idea of the Psalmist. When the soul is plunged ¦ in the "depths" of grief and conscious guilt, its distress tends to despair-and despair to reckless disobedience. But when faith discerns the "mercy" of God, and the "plenteous redemption" he has provided, hope comes to relieve its sorrow: "Let Israel hope in the Lord, for with the Lord there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption:" and when this mercy is exercised in acts of forgiveness, the heart is enlarged to run in the way of the | divine commandments: "There is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.”

A similar feeling has probably led to the is written (Deut. xxxiii. 25), “As thy days, so common change in the blessing of Asher. It shall thy strength be." By the slightest alteration this is generally extended into, as thy day is," &c. The passage, in its application to

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

POPULAR MISQUOTATONS OF SCRIPTURE.

Christians, is commonly understood to contain the promise of grace adapted to the varied circumstances of their lot of strength in trials, direction in perplexity, comfort in affliction. The more obvious meaning seems to be similar to that in Isaiah: "They that wait on the Lord shall renew their strength." "They go from strength to strength." Weak though the believer is in himself, the Lord is his strength, and to those who have no might, he not only giveth, but "increaseth strength." In the ordinary course of nature," Days should speak, and the multitude of years should teach wisdom;" and in what may be called the ordinary course of grace, days should have their effect and their privilege in mature experience, vigorous principle, strong faith and hope. Or as Dr. Watts has taught children to say or sing of the Christian:

When he comes nearer to finish his race, Like a fine setting sun, he looks richer in grace, And gives a sure hope at the end of his days

Of rising in brighter array.

Another form of quotation, apparently suggested by the same principle of balance and antithesis, is found in reference to Heb. iv. 16: "Let us come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy to pardon, and find grace to help in time of need." Very good, so far as it goes, but the apostle goes farther in fewer words. It is very true that the believer needs daily pardoning mercy; but the mercy of God is not confined to pardoning. "All his paths are mercy and truth to such as keep his covenant and his testimonies." In bearing with their ignorance and impurity, in soothing their distresses, in moderating their chastisements, in preserving or removing them from the evils that come upon the world, the Lord shows his mercy. "Like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him." They shall be mine, saith the Lord of hosts, in the day when I make up my jewels, and I will spare them as a man spareth his own son that

serveth him."

547

sight, he cannot look upon it: the other continues to gaze, though with a painful feeling of shuddering-that is, of abhorrence. It is the former who may be considered as showing the stronger aversion, and therefore the simple Scripture expression states more strongly than the altered one, the eternal repugnance of God to all iniquity.

Very similar to this is a common way of quoting the 130th Psalm, verse 3: "If thou, Lord, shouldest be strict to mark iniquities," as if God were sometimes strict and at other times lax or indulgent in marking iniquities. Perhaps the notion is countenanced, if not originated, by the old translation preserved in the English Prayer-Book, "If thou wilt be extreme to mark what is done amiss." So also Watts:

If thou severely mark our faults

No flesh can stand before thine eyes.

All suggesting, however unintentionally, the no-
tion, that if some indulgence might be shown,
some abatement made in the demands of the law,
there might be a prospect of our standing after
all. It must be remembered, however, that if
God marks iniquities at all, his all-seeing eye
must mark them strictly. Hence the appro-
priateness of the prayer: "Enter not into judg-
ment with thy servant, for in thy sight shall no
man living be justified." When sin is forgiven,
and the sinner reconciled, iniquity ceases to be
marked at all. God hath not beheld iniquity
in Jacob, neither hath he seen perverseness in
Israel. The sinner whose days are passed in
the wrath of God may well say,
set our iniquities before thee, our secret sins in
the light of thy countenance." But as for those
who are pardoned, God "hides his face from
their sins." He "casts them into the depths of
the sea." Blessed is the man to whom the
Lord imputeth not iniquity.

66 Thou hast

We shall, at present, only refer to another of these imaginary emendations, and it is one of those modest improvements which appear in the guise of a monosyllable. The passage Some alterations seem to have been made (Heb. x. 22) is quoted thus: "Let us draw with the foolish view of correcting or improv-near with a true heart, in full assurance of ing the simple language of Scripture. The Prophet Habakkuk says: "Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity." To this some add, "without abhorrence," feeling, probably, that He who sees all things, must look on iniquity. No doubt, in one sense, the Lord looks on iniquity and requires it. "All things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him with whom we have to do." But if there be any difficulty in conceiving how God cannot look upon iniquity, it will hardly be removed by the additional idea of abhorrence. Either way, there is something figurative in the language. When some scene of abominable atrocity ocurs in the presence of two different persons, one turns away from the

* 2 Chron, xxiv, 22.

faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed as with pure water." The interpolated particle implies that the "pure water" is figurative: and what, it may be asked, is the reality with which our bodies are washed? If the body is washed at all, pure water would seem to be the most natural means. If the expression be figurative it should be said, Having our bodies, as it were, washed with pure water. But any interpolation is unnecessary; it is very common to connect visible holiness with internal purity in this way, without an explicit simile: "Cleanse your hands ye sinners, and purify your hearts ye double-minded "Who shall ascend into the hill of God? He that hath clean hands and a pure heart." There may be, however, in the

[ocr errors]
« VorigeDoorgaan »