« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
our Correspondent Abdiel. We shall notice his difficulties seriatim,— not altogether as a solution of them; which it cannot be expected we should be always prepared to offer;but by way of communicating such information as we possess.
1. For a reply to No. I, we refer him to page 34 of our second Number.
2. His second difficulty he will find ably noticed by our Correspondent E. at page 53 of our last Number. And we also beg to state, that our Correspondent Amicus is not correct, when he calls the phrase quoted under his second difficulty
exactly parallel” with that under the first. There cannot be a reasonable doubt, that when our Lord said, "There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till &c." he limited the accomplishment of that, concerning which he spake, to the term of life of the by-standers. But not so when he says, "this generation shall not pass :" for here a very important question arises, as to the meaning of the word generation.
3. In regard to the third difficulty, concerning the coming of Elias or Elijah, we have first of all to say, that if Amicus would limit the prophecy concerning him in Malachi to its fulfilment in John the Baptist, he will find, that he only exchanges one difficulty for another. For Malachi says, Behold I send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." How can Amicus call that day of our Lord, which John announced, "the great and dreadful one?" He is doubtless acquainted with that well known quotation from Isaiah in Luke iv, 18, 19, in which Jesus evidently makes the period of his sojourn at the first Advent the acceptable year of the Lord;" and omits the very next words of Isaiah (lxi, 2)—as not applicable to that
period" the day of vengeance of our God."
We conceive, that the ministry of John the Baptist was undoubtedly an incipient fulfilment; and that the circumstance, that one has come in the spirit and power of Elias,” is a pledge, that the real forerunner promised in Malachi will precede the Lord's second Advent. Our reasons for this conclusion are first, that when John had the direct question put to him, Art thou Elias?" his answer is plain and absolute,-"I am not." This, notwithstanding the usual explanation given of the passage by commentators, is quite decisive in our mind against the complete fulfilment of Malachi. Our second reason is, that in the account given of the Transfiguration in Matthew xvii, our Lord first says, in answer to the question from his disciples-" Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things," and then follows his reference to John. Now did John restore all things' when he came ? are not the words truly shall' plainly and distinctly prospective, notwithstanding that partial fulfilment ? We expect therefore another messenger before the restitution of all things. We only add that all the Fathers of antiquity expected a second coming of Elias, not excepting even Jerome.
4. For a solution of his fourth difficulty we refer Amicus to the letter of our Correspondent E, which follows this Article to which we here add an extract from a useful little Tract, called THE FUTURE DESTINY Of Israel." "As to the argu'ment which is sometimes raised upon our Lord's declaration, that his kingdom was not of, in the
sense of from, or (as it literally stands) out of this world-ɛK TOV к00μ8 7878—that is, (as is shewn by the context, as well as by the words,) it was not of human ori
ON LUKE XVII, 20, 21; AND JOHN XVIII, 36.
To the Editor &c.
Allow me to offer to your Correspondent Abdiel a few observations on two important texts, to which he has referred in his last Paper. The first he declares himself to regard as obscure and difficult; the second he has, I think, miscontrued.
I.—LUKE XVii, 20, 21.
Being demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, He answered them and said; The kingdom of God " cometh not with observation. "Neither shall they say, Lo here! or Lo there! for behold the king"dom of God is within you.'
Ουκ ερχεται ἡ βασιλεια τε Θεσ μετα παρατηρήσεως. Ovde εpuσiv, Ουδε ερυσιν, Ιδε ὧδε· η, Ιδε εκει· ιδε γαρ ἡ βασιλεια τε θες εντος ὑμων εςιν.
1. According to the usual interpretation of this passage, it was our Lord's meaning that the kingdom of God was, simply, a spiritual king
at the first resurrection there will be
6. For a reply to this difficulty we may again refer to our Correspondent Abdiel in page 34 of No, II, and to E's notice of it following this.
dom,-its seat the heart,-its rise and progress therein indiscernible.
To this there is the decisive objection, that the observation was addressed, not to his disciples, but to the Phariseesi. e. to his enemies.
Moreover, it is obvious, from our Lord's connecting the subject in the verses following with his own second advent, that He was answering the Pharisees according to the intent of their question; and speaking not of his preparatory spiritual reign over men's hearts, but of its glorious establishment on earth, such as will be seen at his appearing and kingdom.
2. Sensible of the force of the first objection noted, Beza, Grotius, Doddridge, Whitby, Macknight, and others have adopted the marginal reading. Instead of within you, they translate the evтos vμwv among you; and explain the passage of the Messiah's kingdom already beginning to be preached among the Jews.
To this the objection remains in full force, that the subject matter of discourse was the kingdom as it is to be manifested at Christ's second advent. Besides which, it has been reasonably objected" that the EVTOS never has the meaning they give it in Scripture, and scarce ever in the Greek writers." (Scott.)
Nor, again, can we well say of our Lord's ministry, by which He was then laying the foundations of his kingdom, that it " came not with observation." Was it not by observation, and very careful observation, too, of the evidences which Jesus offered, that men were then to be convinced that he was the Christ? Were they not to search the old prophecies with this view, and compare them with his life, character, doctrine, miracles? Were they not to look into, and so discern, the signs of the times?—It was unquestionably with observation that its foundations were then laid.
3. My persuasion is that the clause we speak of has been hitherto totally misapprehended. It has been taken and commented on as a part of Christ's address to the bystanders. I doubt not that it should be connected with the Lo here! or, Lo there!" as a part of the exclamation of those men whom Christ speaks of, as thus reporting to one another respecting the Messiah's conjectured advent.
Thus the sense will be; "Neither shall there be any thing so partially revealed or secret in the ultimate establishment and revelation of God's kingdom, as that there shall be occasion for any doubtful rumours on the subject; as, "Look here! for the king is to be found within our city! or, Look there! for the king is within your city!"—" For as the lightning that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven shineth even
unto the other, so shall also the Son of Man be in his day!"
It must be remembered that the Jews had their minds full of prophecies that spoke of the Messiah fixing his kingdom within their borders; though in what part of Judea He might first manifest Himself, whether in Bethlehem, Jerusalem, or Galilee, they might doubt; each of those districts being mentioned in that connexion in prophecy.-Hence the current but mistaken notion, that when He came to take the kingdom, He might possibly be concealed for a while, and have to be inquired after and sought out.
What can be more simple than this interpretation? What more agreeable to the general tenor of prophecy? What more in accordance with Christ's subsequent remarks on this occasion ? or the cometh not with observation," of the verse preceding?
I cannot think with Abdiel, that Christ's glorious advent and kingdom may be said to come with observation, because signs of its being near will be observable. The signs of proximity are one thing; the coming or manifestation quite another. Observation is that fixed and attentive regard which we can direct to those objects and events. only, that remain a certain length of time before the eyes and to such objects and events it is then most specially directed, when they have enough of obscurity about them to leave us in a degree of doubt respecting their true character, and enough of interest to excite an anxious. eagerness for the development. But so it will not be with the Coming and Manifestation of the King and kingdom. It will not come with observation. It will be instantaneous, it will be irresistible in its light of evidence, as the flash of lightning,
The rendering of Evтos iμwv, it will be observed, is within you, in the sense of within your city, or country. This is in strict conformity with its frequent use by the Greek writers, as designating a position within some local division or boundary. -Now as it is common in topois common in topographical descriptions to put the occupiers of a locality for the locality itself after certain prepositions, such as εv, ɛk, dia, &c.* so are there inεκ, stances of the same figure of speech after adverbs such as εντος.
11. Ω. 199. Κεις ιεναι επι νηας εσω τρατον ευρυν Αχαιων· of the locality of their encampment.
Xen. Anab. vI. 5. Exaμßavov ta επιτηδεια εντος της φαλαγγος. Citra aciem." Zeun-behind it. Cyrop. vi. 1. Έντος των σκοπων. of one advancing from the enemies' side within the piquets.
Anab. 1. 10. Ων εντος εδενι εςιν εισιέναι των μη τετιμημένων: within guards who lined both sides of the road.
Anab. 1. 10.† Παντα όσα εντος αυτων, και χρηματα και ανθρωπες, εσωσay' said of Greeks in the camp preserving from the invaders all that was locally within their station.
To which I will only add a similar phrase from the Latin: Ea intra se consumunt Arabes." Plin. 11. 21, within their own borders.
Thus to designate a locality it is perfectly legitimate to use Evros with the genitive of the inhabitants; e. g. εντος των Γαλιλαιων, for εντος της Γαλιλαιας ; εντος ύμων, for εντος της χώρας ὑμων.
To the whole of the passage, thus interpreted, the 24th of St. Matthew (vv. 26, 27) offers so exact a parallel, both as regards the lightning-like coming of Christ, and the incongruity with such a manifestation of
surmisings and doubtful rumours on the subject, as both to illustrate and confirm what has been advanced. If they say to you, 'Behold He is in the desert!' Go not forth! Be'hold He is in the secret chambers !' 'Believe not!" Why? Not because his kingdom was spiritual, within their hearts, and so not to come with observation; but because,
the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be in his day. II. JOHN XVIII. 36.
"My kingdom is not of this world: 8K ESIV EK 78 KOOμ8 T8T8. The ɛk, like the old English of used by our translators, may designate in the genitive following either the constituents and nature of the thing in question, or the source whence it is derived, and the efficient cause by which effected. We find it in the latter sense in Matt. xxi, 25. The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven? or of men?” TOĐEV ην ; εξ ερανε ; η εξ ανθρωπων. Also in Matt. i, 18. εύρεθη εν γατρι έχεσα εκ Πνευματος ἁγιε: and Rom. xi. 33, εξ αυτε τα παντα, &c.
Interpreters have usually taken ɛ in the former sense and construing коσμ8 7878 of this earth, as opposed to what is heavenly and spiritual, urge the passage very frequently as an argument against Abdiel's view of Christ's kingdom being an earthly kingdom. There is no doubt that
their construction is one that the Greek admits of; and my only objection to it is, that, as they apply it, it seems to me scarcely consistent with the general tenor of Scripture on the subject of the kingdom.
Abdiel takes εk in the same sense : but, construing kooμe 7878 of the
* Ek Mavτin vwv pɛɛɩ (Herod.) of a river flowing from Mantiene, &c. &c. This is quoted in Elsley from Macknight: incorrectly, however, as from the Cyropædia.-Nor is Macknight's translation exactly correct. Evтos avτwv is not "things with them in the camp," but things within them; i.e. within their position.
(kooμs) are become the kingdoms "of our Lord and of his Christ." The supremacy of Satan therefore among the inhabitants of this world applies only to the present dispensation :—in which sense I should conceive that awr would be a word more suitable than κοσμος.
There remains the other sense of εk, from or by ;-indicating the source whence a thing is derived, or whence established. This I conceive to be the true meaning in the passage under discussion. It will then be as if our Lord had said, My kingdom is not derived from this
world, nor is it from this world "that it is to have that which shall establish it.". This meaning agrees best, I think: 1st, with the adverb EVTεVɛv, used in the same verse as the parallel and explanation of εκ το κοσμο τότε, "but now my kingdom is not from thence." 2dly, with the statements about his ser
vants not fighting.—The connexion of this with the sentence under discussion seems, on Abdiel's construction of the latter, difficult to comprehend. Would Pilate have had a correct idea of the nature of Christ's kingdom had he understood Him to say, say, "My kingdom numbers at present but very few of the inhabitants of this world. If it numbered the great majority then would my servants fight that I should 'not be delivered to the Jews." On the usual and Anti-millennarian sense of Christ's kingdom not being of this world, the connexion of the two clauses is obvious. My kingdom is a spiritual one; therefore my servants fight not for it." At the same time let it be remembered, that it is no unknown thing in the world for spiritual kingdoms (kingdoms of opinion, or in other words, religions) to be propagated, as Mahomet's was, by the sword of their advoc: tes. The inference therefore though obvious, on this construction, is not necessary.—On the sense that I propose of the ε 78 коσμ8 7878 the inference is not only It is not obvious, but necessary. from this world, its soldiers or its weapons, that my kingdom is to Were it derive its establishment.
so my servants would fight, that I 'should not be delivered into the
hands of the Jews. But it is from above that the power is to proceed, that will establish it: and there'fore to fight for my deliverance is altogether out of their province." E.
To the Editor, &c.
I have ventured to address you, on what appears to me to be an error in the letter No. II. of Abdiel. I do not pretend to criticise: I want
THE GROANING OF THE CREATURE.
truth and conviction, and will therefore proceed at once to the point at issue.
In the letter alluded to there is this expression :-" In Romans the