Page images

and hoped not that he might return from the bottom of the sea ; as he sings in honor of his deliverance : "I said, the earth with her bars is closed about me forever.To the same effect are the mountains named everlasting or perpetual. Cf. Eccl. 12: 5; Jon. 2: 4-6; Hab. 3: 6 and al.

4. When taken to denote the duration of principles and the Divine nature, the universal time of all things, duration without beginning or end. Thus the elements of geometry are eternal truths; as they depend not upon time or space, and can never change. So the obligation to love truth, holiness and righteousness, and to love God as the personification, and we may say, embodiment, of all true excellence, is eternal; since they depend not upon time, place, or circumstances, and are attributes of Him who is unchangeably what he should be.

Of the just it is said they shall go into everlasting life, and of the wicked they shall go away into everlasting punishment. As this is uttered in the same sentence (Matt. 25: 46), so both states must be deemed of equal duration. Both must exist during the life of those who are subjects of them ; if they be awarded in the future world, (as all, except a few presumers lately sprung up, have ever held), they must exist while that world endures. Since in that world the kingdom of Christ shall become merged in that of God, as all in all, (1 Cor. 15: 24), so those states must endure with the duration of that kingdom.

There can therefore be no ground whatever for a religious life, unless there be an immortal state, and the retributions of that life must be final and eternal. As to all surmise of another probationary period beyond the grave to any portion of the race, if such scholars as Tholuck, while wishing to find it so, acknowledge they cannot find it in the Scriptures, we may well be excused if we can find no evidence of a satisfactory kind in the Divine Word to establish aught that looks like affirming that the dead have any more “a portion among the things that are done under the sun;" of which the most important to us all is, to “seek the Lord while he may be found,” that we may find pardon and life. Paul evi. dently knew nothing of all this, though he had been caught up into Paradise, and there heard "unspeakable words;" for he affirms that “the things that are seen are temporal, but the things that are not seen are (alória) eternal.II Cor. 4: 18. Neither have we a single uninspired voice of the ancient and true church, nor of any claiming apostolic authority in early times, to hold forth any other view. For as to Origen and a few others in times long after the apostles, there is no clear evidence that they doubted the eternity of God's retributions; and it is not claimed by any that they taught openly such doctrines as men of inferior scholarship infer from hearsay that they held in secret, and drew from the dreams

of Plato concerning the metempsychosis; by which they would have bad men subjected to alternations of good and ill forever.

But do we affirm that the souls and bodies of the resurrection world shall exist, and be pained or comforted so long as God exists? To this we would reply, (as Watts has done before), We know not that creatures shall exist so long. Eternity is an abyss too awful to be comprehended, or steadily contemplated by finite minds. God has not declared it in so many words; though the Church has always so received what he has taught concerning the immortality of soul and body beyond the grave. In no known religion is the soul held as perishable, or the beatific vision less than eternal to the just. Far be froin us then the presumption to set limits to that of which we know so little; or for any regard to such as wilfully destroy themselves, to call in question the immortality of man, or for any cause deny that the belief of men in an immortal state of rewards and punishments is fundamental to all religion, and old as the world.

A certain class of writers indeed have imagined that they find more certainty of eternal duration in words of another class than in those we have considered. Thus they will have in to denote absolute eternity to God; while in reality it is (according to the best authorities) originally 777 he is, or he shall be ; and when he speaks of himself to Moses, he uses only the first person of a kindred verb, (777) I am, or I will be. So that this word derives its sense of eternal existence only from conventional usage ; and because it is taken for his name who is, i. e., he who exists in himself and not in another.

Again they conclude that such words as incorruptible, unfading, immovable, indissoluble, unchangeable, (aqdagros, auagavios, auapáv. τινος, ασαλευτος, ακαταλυτος, απαράβατος,)and the like, may be more certainly taken to signify what is eternal than 33's, ael, and their correlates. In this, however, they are not sustained by any usage; neither have they much confidence in their own affirmations. For Luke describes the prow of a ship as becoming immoveable (uoádutos) when it grounded upon the Maltese reefs. Acts 27:41. And Paul speaks of endless genealogies, (yevealoyia. andpavtoi) i. e. useless, or worthless, things that are to no end. I Tim. 1: 4. So Dionysius of Halicarnassus speaks of the indissoluble power of a proconsulship, (ακατάλυτον κράτος της επαρχίας). Ant. 10: 31. Paul also uses & q@apola for sincerity, or purity. Eph. 6: 24. Its cognate &qdoula or &štaqbogia is used for integrity. Tit. 2: 7. In early editions we have apoapoia. 'Audgavios is also the name of a plant; (as the houseleek is called deitwov ;) and from the custom among a pastoral people of crowning with evergreens such as distinguished themselves for anything excellent in connection with their calling, we hear an apostle affirm that ,from age to age ,מִן־הָעוֹלָם וְעַד־הָעוֹלָם then it was ordered to be said


"when the chief shepherd shall appear,” they that have used well the office of a pastor shall be rewarded with an amaranthine crown of glory, (umagártivov ins Sófns orégavov,) i. e. the honor of an evergreen crown. As to anapapatos we find it applied to laws, oracles, etc., in the sense of inviolable, i. e. not transgressed, observed. See Epict. Enchir. 50, 2.

Plut de Fato 1, and Def. of Orac. 3. Joseph. Ant. 18: 8, 2. In the New Testament it is taken for what is not transient; or, (as Theophylact renders it), åsiúdoxos, untransferable.

But if these words must be taken by Scripture usage for what is eternal, (which we do not admit without qualification) then also must hell be eternal, for it is represented under the figure of an unquenchable fire, (1) abg to dosegrov) and worms that never end life, (é oxdans avrūv tedevtậ) Mark 9 : 44 et al.

Still that there are some set terms taken by all usage as denoting what is everlasting and final there can be no doubt. Of this class are the reduplicated and intensive forms, met in the New Testament. These seem borrowed from the temple service, and are said to have been introduced into that service for this end, not far from the coming of Christ. For at the close of all prayers in the temple, it was customary to say opis 75, forever. But when the Sadducees arose, and said there was but one siz, or world,

, , or forever and ever. i. q. 797 03 Ex. 15: 18; and al. 75i9-79 Isa. 45: 17. See also i Chron. 16 : 36 ; 29: 10; Dan. 2: 20; Neh. 9: 5; Ps. 111:8; and 148: 6; Isa. 30: 8; Dan. 7: 18; Jer. 7:7; and 25: 5; Ps. 90: 2; and al. For as in the New Testament we have aidv ó mellor for the life to come, as well as for the times of Christ; (Cf. Matt. 12: 32 ; Mark. 10: 30; Luke 17: 30; 1 Cor. 10: 11; Eph. 1: 21; Heb. 2:5; and 6:4; a usage well known to the ancient Hebrews, and to this day common through all the Christian world. We have also o alvv toð alāvos the age of ages; or of alūves tūv aluvav the age of ages, i. e. a period containing all worlds and all ages, even the eternal time of all things; and this, according to New Testament usage, can signify nothing less that what is eternal in duration. Thus: Heb. 1: 8; Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, els tòx åtūvu tov alòvos, in Heb. 797 378, Ps. 45: 7; To whom be glory forever and ever, is tous aiôvus tūv aiórov. Galatians 1: 5; see also Phil. 4: 20; 1 Tim. 1: 17; 2 Tim. 4:18; Heb. 13: 21; Rev. 4:9, 10; 10: 6; 15:7; 5: 13; 7: 12; 11: 15 ; 22 : 5; 14: 11; 19:3; 20: 10. These three last express the duration of hell in the punishment of Satan, the beast, and the false prophet, the great fornicatrix Babylon, and such as wore their livery. Hence that punishment is declared to be as eternal as heaven is to the saints. In Eph. 3 : 21, we have the singular expression, "until all periods of the אֹרֶךְ

age of ages,” εις πάσας τας γενεάς του αιώνος των αιώνων, a phrase, however, of similar import with the others; as it represents eternal futurity by the figure of successive generations, ages, or periods of time, and that, as already observed, constitutes the only method we have or can invent by which we can represent to ourselves infinite duration.

There are other words occasionally used to denote eternal or unchangeable duration. Thus it is said that Christ hath perfected forever, (eis dinvenis) the saints;" Heb. 10: 14; and that “he is able to save (eis navtedès) to completeness, or to the uttermost all that come to God through him. since he ever (navtors) liveth to make intercession for them.” Heb. 7: 25. So in the Hebrew we are told that eternal life is "length of days evermore.”

797 ding by, Ps. 21: 4 (5). But these are less adapted to denote eternity than bis, 79, hxg, alwr, and their correlates, and hence are used but seldom in the Scriptures, while the latter are found in common use throughout the sacred text.

Thus much for a brief view of Scripture imagery concerning immortality and a life to come. That the doctrine of eternal punishment, and the soul's immortality that involves it, should both be questioned, we need not wonder; since “the natural man receiveth not the things of God's Spirit.” What is sin in his eyes, that it should deserve eternal pains ? What to him are the laws of God that only work wrath to him, while they lay the curb to his lusts? What to him is the beauty of holiness, or the glory of truth, that he should care for either, so long as he prefers what delights he can wring out from the dullest clods and grossest impurities of the world, before the fruition of God and the never-ending joys of the beatific vision? In such a world as ours, and among a race so depraved, the miracle is not that an eternal state of being, involving as it does sin and pain, should find questioners to rail at, or pervert the Scriptures because they repeat to us the voice of the ancient church, and the Angel of the Covenant that warns to flee from the wrath to come, and lay hold of eternal life, as a divine and gracious gift from the Father of our spirits ; but rather that it should be received at all, and be found of least efficacy in ministering to personal sanctity by alarming us from the dreams of sin to find true rest for our spirits in the peace of God that passeth understanding; and that we should be drawn thence to take up and repeat the warnings, no less than the invitations, of God's Word, saying to the penitent, “it shall be well with him, for they shall eat the fruit of their doings;" and to the impenitent, “it shall be ill with him, for the reward of his hands shall be given him.




Translated from the German of Baur, by Alfred H. GUERNSEY, New York.

[FERDINAND Christian Baur, born in 1792, and since 1826, Professor-Ordinary of Theology in the University of Türbingen, deservedly occupies a high place among the latest German theologians. His labors bave iaken å historical or bistorico-critical direction; and in them he has manifested an extraordinary power of analysis and combination exerted upon a full survey of all the materials belonging to his subject. Among his numerous productions may be specified an essay on the “ Christ-Party in the Church of Corinth," published in the “ Tübinger Quartalschrift, für Theologie." which he demonstrates that the apostle Peter never was at Rome, and, consequently, that the pope can in no sense be the successor of Peter. Other important questions bearing upon Catholicism he satisfactorily disposes of in his “ Apollonius of Tyana and Christ, or, the Relations of Pythagoreanism and Christianity.” On the other hand, he is no less opposed to the school of Hengstenberg than to Catholicism. In several works, among which are "Symbolism and Mythology, or, the Natural Religion of Antiquity;" “ The Manichæan System;" “The Christian Gnosis, or, the Christian Philosophy of Religion in its Historical Development;" " The Christianity of Platonism, or, Socrates and Christ,” he endeavors to develop and support the doctrine, that the history of religions is, throughout, but the history of God in the finite, and that all forms of belief are but phases in the development of the original idea of religion. Baur originally took his stand on the philosophy of Schleiermacher, and his work on the Natural Religion of Antiquity, may be considered as but an amplification of some hints thrown out in Schleiermacher’s “ Einleitung zur Glaubenslehre.” In this work Baur displays so much eloquence and vigor of thought, that he may be regarded as the successor to his master's genius. The critical labors of Baur extend over the whole New Testament canon. The extract herewith given is from his latest work, entitled, “Critical Researches concerning the Canonical Gospels, their Relation to each other, their Character and Origin." All commentators have remarked the striking affinity, which, notwithstanding many diversities, exists between the first three Gospels; and the no less striking diversity between them and the Gospel of John. This diversity, as far as the exterior of the Gospels is concerned, relates to the quesiions of time and place, and is so great as to make it evident that in one, at least, the order of time has not been followed. Most commentators have followed the chronology of John, in their attempts at harmonizing the gospel narratives. Baur adopts the contrary view. He groups together the three Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, under the name of the Synoptical Gospels, and supposes them to be composed with a prevailing historical aim; while the Gospel of John he supposes to be composed with a metaphysical and dogmatical view; with the design not so much to relate actual events, as to set forth the nature of Christianity in its highest stage of development. It is an ideal rather than an actual narrative. He furthermore holds that it is not the composition of the apostle to whom it is attributed, but is in all respects an anonymous work, and he further considers the last chapter of it to be spurious. This, in brief, is the standpoint from which he surveys the Gospels. Affirming to the irreconcilable contradictions between these Gospels, and denying the authenticity of the last, which yet is the exponent of Christianity in its highest form-higher even than that set forth by the

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »