Page images
PDF
EPUB

grounds, "during the currency of the four famous justifies the projects of Rome on precisely similar kingdoms;" (for the last only is supposed to be sub-principles, with equal claim, as far as expounding the sisting imperially ;) but in the days of the ten kings prophecy goes, and with greater ability. And such are just intimated by the toes of the great image; pre- the inevitable consequences, be it observed, of the cisely as in Dan. vii, we have the closing history of the attempt to apply the ordinary notion of Christ's fourth empire followed by a solemn session of judgment, kingdom to the exposition of Dan. ii. and the investiture of one like the Son of man in presence of the Ancient of days. Both manifestly exclude the ascension, which is entirely passed over here, as is the Lord's stay and work on earth; both show the time in question to be during, and in reference to, the last form of the anti-christian Roman empire before its destruction. With this, all coheres. For the first action of the stone is judgment. There is no mere spiritual or moral influence which acts on the heart set forth here, but a direct and judicial demolition of the last human empire which is seen on earth. It is not the slow and chequered sowing of the gospel seed, often caught away, dying off, or choked up; neither is it some grand development ever and anon absorbing its enemies into its own substance or body; it is a grand display of divine force, which suddenly and utterly destroys the existing imperial power, with all that remained of its predecessors, before it becomes a mountain and fills the whole earth. No such idea appears in the passage as "the now existing church," (Brown, p. 322,)"fighting and winning its way to the throne of the world," (id., p. 321;) which is indeed a dream worthy of Papists or Mormons, not the truth as it is in Jesus. Dr. B's view (and it is the common one) subverts the entire teaching of the New Testament as to our right relations to the kingdoms of this world, and therefore must be rejected, not merely as erroneous interpretation of a prophecy, but as unsound and mischievous doctrine. It denies the essentially subject and suffering place of the Christian on earth; and, if practically carried out, would degrade the Church into an organized system of rebellion against the powers that be, at least in their anti-christian principles and character, a conspiracy consecrated under the plea that the kingdoms of this world are themselves conspirators against the interests and the people of God here below.*

While it is true, then, that the kingdom of heaven is going on now, it must be carefully remembered that its present form is mysterious and special, because of Israel's unbelief and rejection of the Lord. This is what we find fully brought out in the Gospel of Matthew. In consequence of the people's refusing the King, He goes on high, and the anomaly appears of the kingdom entrusted to the responsibility of man, proceeding in patience, and not enforced by power; so that if tares are sown by the enemy and seen growing in the wheat-field, there is to be no gathering of them until the harvest, when angels do that work. Such is the form and character of the kingdom presented in the New Testament-long-suffering grace on the part of Christ's servants towards evil doers, falsely professing His name. It is not a question of church discipline, to which it has been often and monstrously perverted, but of conduct towards the evil in the field, ("the world,") where they are on principle to be let alone, mingling with the children of the kingdom till the end of this age, (not of the next or millennial age, where a totally different state of things is found, and a different principle governs.) In the end of THIS age the Son of man shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity. That is to say, the form and character of the kingdom will change, judgment shall be executed on the wicked then alive, (instead of grace bearing with them as now,) and the righteous shall shine forth then, instead of groaning within themselves, as now. Judgment shall return unto righteousness in that day, and this publicly, manifestly, under the Son of man. Hence in Daniel, where we have the normal aspect of the kingdom, there is the execution of judgment as its introductory act here below: as indeed it is the chief, though not exclusive, feature of the millennial reign, and everywhere so presented in the Word of God.

No! the more we reflect, the more are we satisfied that no Jesuit, no Hildebrand even, would ask more The reader may now judge how far scripture is the sanction for their ambitious schemes than Dr. B. con- source or sanction of Dr. B's fifth propositioncedes in the following words: "Christ's presently" Christ's proper kingdom is already in being; comexisting kingdom has within itself the whole resources mencing formally on His ascension to the right hand by which it is destined to crush the anti-christianism of God, and continuing unchanged, both in character that obstructs its universal triumph, and to win its way to the throne of the world." (p. 319.) He may guard his thought as much as he will; he may tell us that, as a mere succession of civil monarchies, the vision has nothing to do with them; he may say that the fall of those anti-christian kingdoms can only be considered their fall in the character of hostility to the Church of the living God. But Cardinal Wiseman

We do not charge Dr. B., as some appear to have done, with making the fall of the stone to be a judgment upon a mere abstraction. On the contrary, it seems to us to be a thoroughly practical evil. Again, he has no right to

limit the sphere of judgment to the Papacy. All the kingdoms of the Roman empire are judged with the little horn.

and form, till the final judgment." (p. 124.) Satan may still reign the prince of this world; creation may still groan, subject to vanity; all that live godly in Christ Jesus may still suffer persecution; the Jews may still cry, "Not this man but Barabbas;" the Gentiles may never so much boast, and never so little stand in God's goodness: yet is it, according to Dr. B., Christ's proper kingdom! Satan may be bound, and creation delivered into the liberty of glory; the saints that suffered first may reign with Christ; the Jews may say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord, and the Gentiles may rejoice with them: never

theless, according to Dr. B., the kingdom continues administration of Christ in the church," we can only "unchanged both in character and form." Now there say that, as interpretation, whether one looks at the is tribulation, then there will be none; now there are text or its context, it is a sense which is destitute, to wars, then it will be learnt no more; now the gospel our mind, of the smallest probability. The passage is being preached to all as a testimony, to the Jew supposes unprecedented vengeance executed, and the first, and also to the Gentile, then (at least in Israel) government carried out on principles of righteousness. "they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, (2) "Prince of life" we deny in toto to be the and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord; same as sitting on the throne of David. It seems to for they shall all know me." No matter, according to us a singular instance of a pre-occupied mind that Dr. B., "the extent is nothing. The principle is the such a title should be cited in proof of a force so only thing of consequence, and who does not see that distant from its own proper meaning. Again, Dr. B. that is the same in both cases?" (p. 368.) It is is quite wrong in asserting that "pre-millennialists "Christ's proper kingdom," and it continues un- tell us that Christ's second coming must precede the changed, both in character and form, till the final conversion of the Jews." Some, no doubt, have so judgment!! Such is Dr. B.'s principle, and these are thought, but by no means all. We ourselves agree some of its consequences. with Dr. B. that the reverse appears here, as, indeed, we may add, from our Lord's own words, "Ye shall not see me henceforth till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh," etc. Their heart must be touched so to say, and so they shall say before they see the Lord. But Dr. B. has no warrant for adding, that on their conversion, "and events then hastening on apace," He would send again to the earth your predicted Messiah. This interpretation is, we presume, to gain more time, and so far postpone the coming of Christ. Further, Dr. B. says, in reference to "till the times of restitution," ""the sense plainly is, that whatever the things predicted be, they are to be accomplished ere Christ comes; and that certainly will not be before the millennium." But this is to miss the point. If the grand theme of all the prophets had been the great white throne (Rev. xx) and the subsequent eternal state, there might be force in what he says; for in that case Christ's coming would be connected with the end of the millennium. But since all the prophets dwell, not on the final scene, but on the millennial times of blessing and righteousness, it follows that Christ's coming is bound up with those times, not with their end or what follows; that is, the passage tells decisively for pre-millenarianism and against Dr. B., notwithstanding good Joseph Perry's conviction.

But we must glance at the evidence:—(1) Acts ii, 29-36, compared with Zech. vi, 12, 13; Rev. v, 6; iii, 7, 8-12; and Isaiah ix, 7. (2) Acts iii, 13-15; 19 -21. (3) Acts iv, 26-28. (4) Acts v, 29-31. (5) Ps. cx, 1, compared with Heb. x, 12, 13; and 1 Cor. xv, 24-26. These passages are employed by Dr. B. to show that the apostles take up precisely his "position against the pre-millennialists regarding the kingdom of Christ," (p. 128.) These are bold words. How are they made good? (1) Peter's arguments prove that Christ was the risen Messiah; that His death, and resurrection, and session at the right hand of God, were predicted, as well as His right to the throne of David. This we accept as cordially as Dr. B.-not a particle of this was believed by the incredulous Jews, with whom he associates his premillennialist brethren. But he further maintains that the Pentecostal mission of the Spirit was Christ's first exercise of royal authority from the throne of Israel. "That CHRIST IS NOW ON DAVID'S THRONE, is as clearly affirmed by Peter in this sermon as words could do it." (p. 130.) We, on the other hand, maintain not only that there is not one word to this effect, but that Christ's ascension is expressly distinguished from his Davidical title. Three separate psalms are cited or referred to in proof of three distinct glories of Christ: Ps. xvi, as indicating Christ's resurrection; Ps. cxxxii, God's oath touching David's throne; and Ps. cx, His session on Jehovah's throne in heaven, which, as the apostle argues, was no more true of David than the resurrection of Ps. xvi. This, then, affords not proof, but disproof: the Father's throne above is not the throne of David or of Israel, as men most singularly make out of Peter's words. So, as to Zech. vi, 12, 13, (though it is quite lawful for us to appropriate very much that is blessed in it,) it supposes a time yet future, when "he shall be a priest upon his throne" the regular and formal fulfilment of the prophecy, and indeed of the kingdom; not the mystery of His present place on the Father's throne, Rev. iii, 20. The possession of David's key applied figuratively in Rev. iii, 7, is an extraordinary witness to call, seeing that it pertained not to the king, but to his subject and servant. David's throne is quite another thought. As to understanding Isa. ix, 7, of "the

(3) The apostolic use of Ps. ii, in Acts iv, is the next argument. "They apply the psalm, beyond all contradiction, to the present sovereignty and rule of Jesus in the heavens." (p. 140.) But it is clearly used, not to prove or illustrate the nature of Christ's kingdom, but solely as predictive of the world's opposition to God and His anointed servant. Unquestionably much of the psalm was not accomplished: it cannot thence be assumed that Christ was actually reigning in Zion; and other scriptures show that He is not yet.

Dr. B. urges, as to this, the discrepancies of premillennialists; but, after all, what do they amount to? A mere difference in the application of a particular verse or clause in 1 Cor. xv. Some hold that the kingdom delivered up means the kingdom as now going on in mystery; others, and we believe more correctly, the proper and future kingdom of Christ. On this Dr. B. triumphs without reason. ceives that you have only to combine the separate statements (that "the kingdom" is in being with the

He con

Original Contributions.

NOTES ON SCRIPTURE.
No. I.

THE COMMUNION OF ABRAHAM WITH GOD IN GEN. XV, XVII.

one, and that it is the full Davidical reign of Christ with the other,) to overthrow both classes of antagonists, and establish his own system. But it is plain, as Mr. Birks well observes, (" Outlines," p. 203,) that the same mode of argument may be used with equal success to establish any one of the conflicting theories by premises derived from the others. If we assume, Ir is lovely enough to see God's ways of grace and with Dr. B., that the Davidical reign is clearly in-condescension. He could come down to talk with tended, and with Dr. McNeile, that that reign is Abraham,—to eat with him. But for us it is another future, the result is premillennialism as commonly thing we are called upon to feed on Christ Himself, held. Again, if we agree with Dr. B. that the reign" the bread of God that came down from heaven." here mentioned is begun, and with Dr. McN. that the Davidical reign is future, premillennialism follows equally: "Nothing, then, can be more illusive than this ad captandum style of reasoning, which would extract, from the admissions of two different sets of opponents, their common refutation."

:

Promises end in myself; they minister to my need, "As thy day, so shall thy strength be." This is most sweet and precious, and we feel the need of such a promise; but when we look at all these promises, we think of what we get for ourselves, and then our horizon is limited by what we need. In Gen. xv, God (4) Still less plausible is the use made of Acts v, says to Abraham, "I am thy shield and thy exceeding 29-31. What the Jews did not believe was that great reward." The word "thy" would bring in the Jesus of Nazareth was the predicted Saviour-Prince, thought of self and of his need; it was what God was and that salvation could only be through His cross. for Abraham, as One who could meet all his need: but The word here translated "Prince" does not express in chap. xvii, it is what He is Himself. The effect of regal dignity, but a "leader or "captain," as in God's revealing Himself to Abraham as his shield and Heb. ii, and xii. Further, it is His title in relation | his exceeding great reward was, that Abraham at once here to Israel, (presented to their responsibility then, and by and by to be accepted through the grace of God;) not a word is hinted about Christ's actual relation to the Church, which is our author's thesis.

(5) Neither does Ps. cxi, 1, help Dr. B., nor the comments on it in Acts ii; Heb. x; and 1 Cor. xv. Sitting at Jehovah's right hand is rather in contrast with the exercise of His Davidical throne, as we have seen in Acts. ii. Heb. x uses the fact of His seat there to show the work perfect and finished, instead of being always a-doing, as with the Jewish priest. It would rather prove that Christ was not ruling in the midst of His enemies. He is expecting till His enemies be made His footstool. When He reigns in the sense of Ps. xc, the enemy will have been made His footstool. In Heb. x He has completed His offering for His friends: henceforth He waits for another thing, viz., vengeance upon His enemies; and this "the kingdom," in the full and literal sense of the term, is to witness. "Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father. . . . ... For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet."

turns to the thought of his own need, and says, "Lord God, what wilt thou give me ?" But directly God reveals Himself, (Gen. xvii,) Abraham falls on his face, and God talks with him. It produces a closer, holier character of communion. And then, too, Abraham is not asking, "what wilt thou give me?" but he is able to intercede for others--he is taken out of himself. It is sweet to get back to what it was at first, and to see God able, as it were, to come down to the tent door in the heat of the day. God came in the cool of the day to Paradise, (Gen. iii,) but it was in vain, as far as communion was concernedAdam hid himself away. There should be a going of the soul to God, in a far more intimate way than to any one else. Communion with saints is precious; but I must have intimacy of communion with God above all; and communion of saints will flow from communion with God. Then the soul getting into this wonderful place of communion with God, takes His likeness. "We all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory." While there is dependence upon God learnt by need, still there is a deeper thing, a forming into the image of God by the soul's getting near to Him, and finding its delight The definition of a Christian is-We have known and bein Him. lieved the love which God has to us. His history is simply this: This was, in a sense, true of Christ Himhe was once in death; judgment hanging over him, but not yet self. The ways of the Father were reproduced in His executed; but he has heard Christ's voice; has owned the Fa-ways down here, through the communion which He ther as sending Him, and is passed from death unto life. Then had with Him. begin all holy affections-for a child does not love its parent before it is born; but it does love long before it can express the The resurrection of life is the filling up the quickening power of Christ, as to the body, mortality being swallowed up of life. The resurrection of judgment (not exactly of "damnation," though in effect that is true) is for the wicked only, for none can stand there. (Compare Ps. exliii, and John v.) The Son who has been outraged must be honoured by all-every knee shall bow. But believers do not need judgment to honour Him,

love.

revealed Himself in chap. xvii. First, there is the There were two things in the way in which God outspreading of grace to the Gentiles: "thou shalt be a father of many nations;" because if He is the Almighty God He could not be cooped up, if we may so say, in Israel. The second thing is, I will be a God "unto thee, and unto thy seed after thee;"—that is, more intimacy of communion, immediate relation

ship with God Himself. The nearer we get to Christ, the more shall we enter into this.

is communion. What a different idea we are apt to have of God! Communion with God is the retiring place of the heart. It is essential for a soul to be brought into perfect confidence in God Himself, in order to a walk with God.

Wherever the heart was cast upon what GOD was in Himself, He must go beyond Israel: this title over-reached all the barriers. It is not the law, but in contrast with it; circumcision and promise without Promise always comes before law, and raises no condition; though along with it, Abraham has prin- question of righteousness at all. There was no quesciples made obligatory on him and his seed, which ex-tion raised here as to the fitness of Abraham. Law press the character of such as enjoy God's promises. does raise the question of righteousness, and God (Compare John vii, 22, and Rom. iv, 10-13.) Cir- therein assumes the character of a judge. But now, cumcision set forth the mortification of the flesh; but under grace, it is even more than promise. "We are this, not as a legal binding, though peremptorily en- made the righteousness of God in Christ." Here, joined as a confession of what man is, whatever may be then, is an object worthy of God to delight in, and the grace of God. In fact, nothing so condemns the I bask in the sunshine. God looks at me just as He flesh as that grace. As a matter of daily life, I am looks at Jesus. brought to trust in God Himself as the sole spring Paul had seen Christ in glory-the pattern-man in and source of all my blessing and strength. God re-heaven; and therefore he, as it were, says, "I cannot vealed Himself to Abraham, and then said, "walk rest till I am that." "The power of his resurrection" before me, and be thou perfect." Here is what I am: (Phil. iii) means, that no difficulties can stand in the now that is what you are to be in answer to me.' We way, because Christ has been raised from the dead. see what a blessed thing it is to be loved of God. We Everywhere and in all things the power of God to have got God Himself in Christ, and that is our eternal meet all need abounded. But afterwards (Phil. iv) we life. When we see Christ walking through this world, come to "his riches in glory by Christ Jesus." (Just our souls are attracted by the loveliness of all His as in Gen. xvii.) ways; they delight in and admire all that we see, and get their life and happiness there. "Be ye imitators of God, as dear children." As a child of God, I have got God's family likeness.

We do want promises; they are most precious, as meeting our need. But God's revelation of Himself is a creative power, which renews me into His own image. "I am thy shield;"-then Abraham's heart turns upon himself, and therefore he says, "Lord, God, what wilt thou give me ?" God puts Himself forward as able to answer Abraham's wants, and then Abraham comes out with his wants. That is most beautiful and precious. It is what we have in 1 Chron. xvii, 24. David wished that the God of Israel should be all that God could be to Israel. In 2 Cor. vi, 18, we get the two names by which God had made Himself known, Shaddai and Jehovah: but now that the Son has come, He takes the place of Father. He who was "the Almighty" to the patriarchs, and "the Eternal" to Moses and the people, will now be a Father to them.

If I am risen with Christ, and am walking in the power of His resurrection, what is all the world to me? Paul would not merely not have his sins, but he would not have his own righteousness: he was raised clean out of everything that he had valued as a man and as a Jew. This we have to learn often in the midst of failure, and in the details of every day life. In principle the Christian is dead to all here, and has got a new life altogether. Christ never had a motive that this earth suggested; He walked through this world with divine motives. The thing in which the disciples were following Christ so tremblingly is what the apostle says he wants to have; viz., "to know the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death." He does not count himself to have apprehended, nor to have attained, till he gets to resurrection. He goes on getting more and more; but he has not got it in full till the resurrection. Just as we may imagine a lamp before us at the end of a straight path; we get more and more of the light as we go along the road, but not the lamp itself till we get to it. But the Christ that we get then is the Christ that we have got already.

Gen. xv accordingly ends with the earth. (See verses 13-21.) It is the promise to Israel, in connexion with the land, hence speaks of their suffering It is well that there is a nature given to us indein Egypt, and of their deliverance by the divine judg-pendent of its development; there is such a poor ment of their oppressors. display of it in our ways before men; there is not the "bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus."

It is an astonishing favour that God should thus come down and put Himself at our disposal. He binds Himself to Abraham by covenant, by death. We get How wonderful for a man in prison like Paul to the same principle in Phil. iv, " My God shall supply say, "he can do everything!" Many have triumphed all your need:" that is most sweet. Then Paul can say, in prison through God's grace, but still had a feeling "I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth as if they were shut out from service, and chastening But still the thought here is of need, and was come upon them. Paul's being in prison may of the power of God to supply it all. Joy in God have been in some sense a chastening; but in his case is communion, and a deeper thing. Presenting a the chastening came, to use a homely phrase, upon want to God (as in Gen. xv,) is not communion. good stuff-upon a man with a single eye; and so it "God talked with Abraham," "his friend," that only purged away dross, and made him see clearer.

me."

THE VULGATE.

FOR Some period after the first profession of Christianity in the West of Europe, all christian writers seemed to have used the Greek as the ecclesiastical language, and not the Latin-no doubt for two reasons, mainly. In the first place, the apostles and early emissaries from the East, spoke Greek, and, in many cases, no other tongue. Respect for these teachers, and imitation of them, naturally produced a continuation of their speech. In the second place, there existed a strong and a reasonable wish to preserve the unity of the Church, and to keep it from separating into fragments.

however, found in various authors, have been collected and published by Flaminius Nobilius at Rome, in 1588, and again by Sabatier, at Rheims, in 1743.

After Origen's great revision of the Septuagint, in the middle of the third century, the world began to feel the inconvenience of having a disagreement between the Greek and the Latin scriptures; for while Origen's amended Greek text became the Textus Receptus, the Versio Itala agreed with the unamended Greek; and it occurred to Jerome, towards the close of the fourth century, to introduce the same changes into the Italic, that Origen had introduced into the Septuagint. This Jerome, one of the four great Latin fathers, and the patron, if not the inventor, of monastic institutions, is said to have performed the work hastily, and even carelessly, and yet this workthe corrected Italic-remains substantially in the Vulgate of the New Testament to this day, and in the Psalters of the Roman and the Gallican Missals.

This wish, however, was in vain. In the third century, there were many influences at work, which were fast tending to divide the huge Roman empire, and the Church along with it, into two parts. In the West, the people of Italy, Spain, Gaul, and that portion of the other continent then known emphatically as Africa, of which Carthage was the principal city, Jerome himself, even while the work of correction spoke Latin, and owed their civilization and their was proceeding, became aware of its imperfection; he Christianity also, almost entirely to Rome. They stood resolved, therefore, to apply not merely to the Septuaapart, therefore, from the people of the East, who gint, but to the Hebrew itself, for more thoroughly spoke Greek, whose civilization and Christianity both amending the Italic version. He laboured diligently, were of older date than those of Rome; and who, in with the assistance of learned Jews, to acquire a knowsome respects, considered the Italians as still bar-ledge of the Hebrew tongue, and then he recombarous. In consequence of this constitutional va- menced his revision of the Italic. That part of this riance between the East and the West, the Greek version, containing the Old Testament, was completely language obtained no permanent footing in the latter, revised and re-edited; and yet we should be in error but was gradually driven back to its original seats; if we supposed that Jerome executed a new translaand Latin Christians began to discard the Greek, and tion. He only did what our English translators did, to revert to Latin as their common tongue. he took the old translation for a basis, and amended those parts where he thought the Hebrew ought to be followed; but in substance the new edition resembled the old, and retained, in consequence, many of those peculiarities which the Vetus Itala had inherited from the Septuagint, such as the presence of the apocryphal books, the way of spelling the proper names, the titles of the books, the order in which the books stand, and especially that unnecessary retention of the word Dominus instead of Jehovah.

And as gradually, and almost imperceptibly, a Latin version of the scriptures came into notice, which soon displaced the Septuagint. It was a literal translation from that venerable document, as far as the Old Testament was concerned, and from the original Greek of the New Testament. The exact time and place when this version was made are quite uncertain; but from being called the Old Italic (Vetus Itala) in the 4th century, it must have been effected soon after the completion of the New Testament. It could not have been effected before that completion, because it contained the whole of the Canon; at the same time it must have come into being before the year 200, A.D., for it is referred to by the renowned Tertullian, an advocate of Carthage, who lived about that time. The age of the Old Italic may safely be placed in the first half of the second century; and its birth-place was very probably the neighbourhood of Carthage. It was here that Tertullian flourished, who was the first known christian writer who used Latin, and to the influence of whose name in the West the gradual adoption of Latin by other Christians has been traced.

For 200 years this Old Italic was the only authorized Bible in western Christendom. It was always quoted, and it obtained that veneration which once was paid to the Septuagint. Indeed by many Latin fathers it was considered faultless. As afterwards it was entirely superseded by the Vulgate, this Old Italic version, as a whole, perished. Fragments of it,

The New Testament, of course, he did not retouch, except to bring it up to the corrected Greek of Origen, and, for the same reason, viz., because there was no Hebrew to go to; he might have been satisfied with the Septuagint version of the apocryphal books, in which version, indeed, they had originally appeared. But Jerome seems to have been so much under the influence of his learned Jewish friends, that he used certain Chaldee translations for correcting some of the books in the Apocrypha.

The improved edition of the entire scriptures, thus edited by Jerome, has been constantly styled the Vulgate; that is, the Versio Vulgata, or the version in common use; for during many centuries the western church knew of no other version. There can be no doubt of the importance of Jerome's labours; and yet we are told that it met, for some time, with the most decided opposition. In spite of the support given to it by Jerome's friend, Pope Damasus, people thought it was a needless innovation to alter that

« PreviousContinue »