Chap. XVII. 22, 24.-Ver. 22. "While they abode [in Galilee] (ἀναστρεφομένων δὲ αὐτῶν) Jesus said unto them.” Ver. 24. "When they were come to Capernaum (λóvтv δὲ αὐτῶν εἰς Καπερναούμ) they that received tribute money came to Peter and said."

The participles of epxoμai and its compounds are of frequent use in the Case Absolute; e. g., Matt. xvii. 14; xxi. 10; XXV. 10; xxvi. 60; Mark vi. 22, 54; xi. 12; Luke vii. 24; ix. 37, 42; xi. 14; xii. 36; xvii. 12; xxi. 10; 3 John 3. Paul uses these participles often, and sometimes with other ideas included with that of time; e. g., Acts i. 8: "When the Holy Ghost is come upon you (ÊTEλóvтos τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφ' ὑμᾶς) ye shall receive power”; also xxv. 23 (1 Cor. iv. 18 with 2 Cor. v. 20); Gal. iii. 25; I Thess. iii. 6. On the other hand, we often meet with the simple temporal usage of Paul; e. g., Acts vii. 31: "While he [Moses] drew near to behold it (роσEρxoμÉvοv dè avтоû κатavoñoai) the voice of the Lord came unto him"; so, also, xxv. 17; xxviii. 17; 1 Cor. xi. 18, 20; 2 Cor. vii. 5.

As to Rom. vii. 9: ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς ἐντολῆς (“when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died"); it would certainly seem poor theology to treat the "coming of the commandment" as the cause of sin's revivification; or to suppose that sin had no place among men before the Decalogue on Sinai. It seems best, therefore, to consider this Genitive Absolute as a simple time marker, i. e., as used in its usual temporal signification.

The same observation seems applicable to the Genitive in Gal. iii. 25: "But after that faith is come (èx@ovons dè THIS TίOTEWS), we are no longer under a schoolmaster," etc. Is justification by faith either the effect (or result) of the schoolmaster Law, or is it the cause of the Law? Paul most emphatically repudiates such a conclusion-apparently before it was urged. The pedagogue Law leads us to the Door (Christ); but cannot enter within the portal. At the

very Door we may turn back, refusing to enter, and consequently fail of the justification by faith. But, having entered, the justification is made through Christ, and the ascending ladder of Law may be cast from under us, so far as relates to its obligations and sacrifices. The relation is one of sequence (not of consequence) in time. It is when the law has performed its office of guide, that we may stand at the Door (Christ), ready to receive faith's justification.

Again in 1 Thess. iii. 6: "When Timotheus came from you unto us έλθόντος Τιμοθέου πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀφ ̓ ὑμῶν), and brought us good tidings (καὶ εὐαγγελισαμένον ἡμῖν) of your faith and love, . . . we were comforted by your faith," not by Timothy's coming. The temporal is here the predominant idea.

The same observations apply also to 3 John 3.

But to continue our review in order :

Chap. XVIII. 24, 25.-Ver. 24. "When he had begun to reckon (ἀρξαμένου δὲ αὐτοῦ συναίρειν), one was brought which owed him," etc. Ver. 25. "When he did not have wherewith to pay (μὴ ἔχοντος δὲ αὐτοῦ ἀποδοῦναι), his lord commanded him to be sold," etc. See the similar thought and construction in Luke vii. 42.

Chap. XXII. 42.-"While the Pharisees were gathered together (ovvnyμévwv dè tôv Papioaíwv), Jesus asked them"; so, also, xxvii. 17; Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. v. 4. In the first three of these passages, the perfect passive participle is used, and the "gathered together" is assumed as a state, or condition, rather of the adjective or descriptive kind; while in the example from Corinthians, the "coming together" in the Aorist (ovvax@évτwv) claims specific attention as a preliminary act to the "committing of such an one to Satan" for the destruction of the flesh.

Chap. XXIV. 3.-The same state, or condition, may be thought of in connection with the Perfect Present (кaðŋμévov): "As he sat upon the Mount of Olives, the disciples

came," so of Pilate "sitting" upon the judgment seat (xxvii. 19); see also Mark xiii. 3. In all these instances, however, the simple relation of present or contemporaneous time for the action of the leading verb would be sufficient to account for the use of the Absolute.

Chap. XXV. 5, 6.—Ver. 5. “While the bridegroom tarried (χρονίζοντος δὲ τοῦ νυμφίου), they all slumbered and slept.” Ver. 6. "When it was midnight (μéons dè vUKTÒS [OvσNS]), a cry was made," etc. Under this head may be classed similar genitives of time: e.g., σKOTÍAS ÉTI OVONS (John xx. i), "While it was yet dark"; #pwias de yevoμévns ("when the morning was come"); and the incomplete expression πρw” of Mark xvi. 2; and the full form in John xxi. 4: "When the morning was now come, Jesus stood on the shore." So of ὀψίας δὲ γενομένης (or οὔσης), “when it was late,” or “when it was even," which gives the time to the main action; as in Matt. xxvii. 57: "When it was evening, a rich man named Joseph, from Arimathea, came," etc.; so Mark i. 32; iv. 35; vi. 47; xi. 11; xiv. 17; xv. 42; John xx. 19.

Analogous is the construction γενομένης δὲ ἡμέρας (“when it was [become] day"). Luke iv. 42: "At dawn he went forth into the desert." So also Acts xii. 18; xvi. 35; xxiii. 12. See, also, Acts xxv. 13: "When some days had passed" (μepv dè diayevoμévwv Tivov); also Mark xv. 33: “When it was the sixth hour (γενομένης δὲ ὥρας ἕκτης), there was [became] darkness over the whole earth."

Chap. XXVI. 21.-"And as they did eat (éotóvтæv avт@v), he said.” See likewise the same form in verse 26: "And as they did eat Jesus took bread and blessed it"; also Mark xiv. 18, 22.

Chap. XXVIII. 13.-"They stole him away while we slept (ἡμῶν κοιμωμένων, κ. τ. λ.).

[TO BE CONTINUED.]

ARTICLE VI.

WHAT IS THE TRINITY?

BY THE REVEREND JUSTUS NEWTON BROWN.

I.

INTRODUCTORY.

PROFESSOR WILLIAM NEWTON CLARKE showed himself a discerning teacher of theology when he said: "The Spirit of truth is still guiding the church into the truth, and genuine progress in apprehension of truth respecting Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is to be expected yet." I am not setting myself up as a prophet of a new teaching. Such a prophet there has been, and I am merely one of those who heard him. I refer to Professor John Morgan of Oberlin, a profound thinker and an eminent scholar, the lifelong associate and intimate friend of President Charles G. Finney.

It seemed to Professor Morgan that he had received some light from the Bible upon the Trinity which had not come into the possession of the church; and the years that have passed since he was my teacher have confirmed me in the opinion which I formed then, that he was right. It is a pity that he did not put his views into writing. I wrote them out from hearing them in his classes. After several years, I rewrote them more at length and then went over them with Professor Morgan himself, that he might assure me, as he did, that I had not misunderstood him. These views were original with him; though, after formulating them, he found them in the writings of Twesten, whom Dr. Schaff characterized as "perhaps the clearest thinker and writer among all the systematic divines of Germany." But,

so far as I am aware, they have not been set forth by any American writer.

Of course Professor Morgan is not responsible for anything in the presentation which follows, except its underlying principles. These I state in my own way, and I fully believe them. I think that they will remove speculative difficulties which, to some minds, have reduced what has been supposed to be the doctrine of the Trinity to a metaphysical puzzle; and that they will throw fresh light upon many passages of Scripture, and particularly upon the relations of Christ and the Holy Spirit to our experience.

II.

MODERN STATEMENTS OF THE DOCTRINE.

Among the attempts made in our own time to summarize the Scripture teaching in regard to the Trinity, or Triunity, of God, I will mention three. The first was made more than a score of years ago, by Joseph Cook.

I. THE STANDARD DEFINITION.

Said Mr. Cook:

"What is the definition of the Trinity?

"One. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one and only one God.

"Two. Each has a peculiarity incommunicable to the others.

"Three. "Four.

Neither is God without the others.
Each, with the others, is God.

"That I suppose to be the standard definition."

If we accept this as the standard definition, let us add the word "metaphysical." Perhaps it is the standard metaphysical definition. It represents the Father by himself as not being God, but merely one of the constituents of the Godhead.