Page images
PDF
EPUB

6

adjective consisting of the same elements, and yet such that the proper sense of the preposition out of composition is departed from. In other words, granting that ova is understood, the phrase must still mean who was on earth, and not who was of earth. Secondly, where Christ's heavenly origin is spoken of, he is said to come, not an', but ovpavor. This I believe is altogether true, though the argument itself is rather calculated to throw suspicion on an explanation otherwise doubtful, than to produce any independent conviction. Thirdly, the participle with zov in such a case as this, can be used substantively with the exclusion of the idea of time, so that the sense here is, the maker of divine communications.' I believe Winer, in his grammar, explains it thus. But the whole context seems necessarily to require us to regard it as expressing time, i. e. as not laying aside its participial power. Or the participle may have an imperfect force, and denote a person not speaking' historically considered, but engaged in a series of acts of this kind. And there was this additional reason for using it, that the present participle being understood after ovoavov, must have been in the writer's mind. It is perhaps separated from its company by an intervening word, in order to throw emphasis upon ni yns ἐπὶ γης. But, fourthly, the preceding context requires us to think of Christ as addressing his communications from heaven. And this leads to the consideration of the manner in which this context is related to the verse before us.

In the former parts of the epistle, the writer recurs more frequently perhaps to the ascension of Christ to heaven, than to anything else. (See 1: 3. 7: 26. 8: 1. 10: 12.) But especially does he speak of Christ in heaven, when he compares him with the Jewish high priest. "If he were on earth, he could not be a high priest" (8: 4); but he has "passed through the heavens" (4: 14), which are the more noble tabernacle (9: 11), not made by hands but fashioned by God himself, and bearing his offering of blood with him, (dia rov idiov aïμaros), has entered the most holy place above the heavens (7: 26), now to appear in the presence of God for us. And in the present chapter, he is thought of as in heaven. In v. 18-24 we have the earthly dispensation of terror compared in a sublime strain with the spiritual one of hope and joy. Ye have come, says the writer, not to earthly scenes, but to amazing heavenly realities; and among the rest, to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood sprinkled in heaven that higher most holy place, which

blood by opening the way there to believers (10: 19), speaks better things than were spoken by Abel, that is, by Abel's blood. The scene here is wholly laid in heaven, and the writer now makes use of these sublime strains to inculcate the danger of rejecting Christ. It is not a Saviour ascended to heaven only that the Hebrews were liable to turn away from, but one, whose blood spoke to them; one who by his blood made divine communications to them, as being by it the founder of Christianity. Nor is there any thing frigid, as Kuinoel thinks, in the contrast of earth and heaven here as the places whence the words of Moses and Christ came. For with the idea of speaking on earth, is connected, in the writer's mind, that of an earthly system and its earthly founder; and with that of speaking from heaven, the idea of Christ's exalted dignity at the right hand of God. Thus it seems to be shown that the interpretation advocated in these remarks arises most happily out of the context.

A word ought to be added in regard to the ensuing context. If Christ is clearly meant at the close of the 25th verse, he must unquestionably be the subject of the next verse also. Now here in Tote we have an obvious reference to v. 19. Hence this verse contains one of the most illustrious testimonies in the New Testament in favor of the exalted nature of Christ; for both the transactions on Mt. Sinai and those prophesied of by Haggai are ascribed to him. And hence it appears to be taught by the author of this epistle, not only that God "made the worlds" by his Son, but also that all divine inanifestations under the Jewish system were made by him.

A remark or two upon particular words and phrases shall close what we have to say concerning this verse.

Οὐκ ἔφυγον. Here we have οὐ and not μή after the conditional, a usage which is so common in the New Testament that some one has remarked that i un is seldom found except in the sense of nisi. Winer lays it down (§ 59. 5.) that εi ov are used where the emphasis is on the negative. A special reason here perhaps is, that the condition is only a rhetorical one; a matter of fact being put into that form. They did not escape; much less then shall we escape.

"Eqvyov, come off unpunished. Some commentators, as Prof. Stuart, supply dizny after this word. It is obviously more true to say, that nothing is understood. The context limits the

meaning, and the verb is used without an object.

'Eni yns. This is the best reading. Respecting the use and

omission of the article with this word in the sense of the earth, and with ovgavós, where the insertion of the article is not necessary to avoid ambiguity, no general rules can be laid down. On the whole, I suspect that the Nominative, and Accusative, as the object, incline to take the article in prose, and that the cases, at least of yn after a preposition incline to omit it. Thus we have φαέθων τὰ ἐπὶ γῆς ξυνέκαυσε, (Plat. Timaeus, 22. c.) and a little below, τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς φθορά. And yet on the next page we have τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν. With us the article is never needed when heaven in its monadic sense is spoken of, but is freely added or left out in prose with earth: yet in such expressions as who on earth, no one on earth,' it is perhaps better suppressed. And yet we must always say the world, the sun, when those words are used in their monadic sense, except in exclamations. There are, perhaps, reasons for all this that may be ascertained; but such instances show the necessity of considering each of such words by itself, and the folly of reasoning from one language respecting the article to another.

[ocr errors]

Χρηματίζοντα. Perhaps the translation of this word in our version is unfortunate, as it is far from meaning speaking in general, and as that is remote from its original sense. It denotes more exactly making communications. In the Septuagint it occurs several times almost solely in Jeremiah, and answers to in every instance, I believe, except one. It is used of God both in the Septuagint and New Testament, except in one passage of Jeremiah, which I cannot at this moment find. Its common meaning in profane Greek, to do business (especially of a public nature, as an ambassador, president of an assembly, etc.), may be illustrated by the word negotior, which, in Latin, is limited, I believe to the act of trading, but the derivative of which, negotiate, is almost technically applied to certain actions of ambassadors.

ARTICLE VII.

CAMPBELLISM.

By Rev. R. W. Landis, Jeffersonville, Pa.

"Our country is full of pretended reformers, who never read the Bible, and who, animated by a blind impulse, vainly imagine they are turning the world upside down; while in fact, they are only turning upside down in the world."-CLOUGH'S DISCOURSES.

By Campbellism I mean the system of theology promulgated by Mr. Alexander Campbell, of Bethany, Brooke County, Virginia. But inasmuch as the followers of this gentleman reject this designation as offensive, we disclaim all intention of employing it as a term of reproach. It is used simply to avoid circumlocution, in discriminating this sect of religionists from other professors of Christianity. It is as foreign from our wishes to offend the Campbellites by this appellation, as it is from theirs to offend others by using the terms Lutheran, Calvinist, Arminian, and Papist, for a similar purpose.

Mr. Campbell was born, and educated with a view to the Presbyterian ministry, in Ireland. He subsequently, with his father, (who was a preacher in the same denomination) being in straitened circumstances, emigrated to America; and arriving in the western part of Pennsylvania, it was found necessary to attempt something for their relief. Contributions were made by a number of Presbyterian churches for this purpose. We mean this as no reflection upon Mr. Campbell, but we desire to obviate the influence of some of his statements upon the minds of his followers. He has often asserted that in emigrating to America, he voluntarily relinquished many advantages not to be here enjoyed, and turned his back upon brighter and more attracting prospects than this country afforded. The proof of disinterested benevolence in this case is by no means so clear as to be satisfactory.

Soon after arriving in this country, Mr. Campbell forsook the communion of the Presbyterian church, and united himself with that of the anti-paedo-Baptists. He still professes to be a Baptist, but (as will appear hereafter) it would be doing the greatest injustice to that intelligent and evangelical community to identify

it with Mr. Campbell and his followers. They have long ago, in the general, repudiated both him and his system.*

The leaders of this sect boast that it is very numerous. Mr. Campbell himself, in 1830, affirmed that he had 150,000 followers; another of their popular writers, in 1833, estimates the number at 200,000. Their number cannot now be ascertained with precision, but they are numerous in the Southern and Western States.

The questions are not unfrequently asked, What are the distinguishing doctrines of this sect?-and, On what do they rely in support of their views? It is the intention of the present article to give a distinct answer to these questions; and to examine, with some thoroughness, the system itself; together with their adopted translation of the New Testament.

It is a trite remark, that there is no new error in theology; and that what in the present day is regarded as such, is nothing more than the resuscitation of error which existed, and was exploded, in a former age. Were we disposed to illustrate the truth of this remark, we should look in vain for a better or a more confirmatory instance than the one now under consideration. Though it may be true that the whole system was never before advocated by any single errorist, it is still a fact that there is scarcely a weatherboard or a tile which Mr. Campbell has fastened on his singularly heterogeneous structure, that cannot be shown to belong, appropriately, to the demolished fabric of some other opposer of the gospel in former days. We had, at the first, some thoughts of making this apparent; but have abandoned the design, believing that such is not the kind of investigation demanded by the present age. Nor could it accomplish any good end, that may not be better answered by conducting the investigation in the method which we have resolved upon.

By the Appomattox (Va.) Association, in 1831, then comprising 24 churches, 14 ministers, 4 licentiates, and 4000 communicants, of whom 962 had been added by baptism during the preceding year, the following resolution was adopted.

"Resolved, that in view of the distracting ravages of Campbellism in the bounds of the Meherrin Association, this Association will cease to correspond with that Association, until the old leaven be purged out; and that this Association will not knowingly correspond with any other, holding in fellowship Campbellite churches, or Campbellite preachers." Ab uno disce omnes.

« PreviousContinue »