I may here take notice, however, of the argument founded by Trinitarians upon the conceptions of the Apostles respecting the judgment of mankind by Christ. It has been contended by them, that what the Apostles expected is still future; that Christ is hereafter to judge all men in person; that, in order to this, he must be acquainted with every thought and action of every individual; that such knowledge supposes omniscience; that omniscience is the attribute of God alone; and that Christ, therefore, is God. Without examining any of the other steps in this argument, one need only remark upon the very limited notion which it implies of omniscience on the one hand, and of the power of God on the other. The knowledge of all thoughts and deeds which have taken place in this world from its creation would be, compared with OMNISCIENCE, less than the acquaintance that a child may have with its nursery, compared with the apprehensions of an archangel. Would it, then, be an act transcending the power of God to communicate that knowledge? Could he not give to one man a perfect acquaintance with one other? And if this be possible, is his power still so bounded, that he could not give to one who had been a man, a perfect knowledge of the thoughts and deeds of all other men who have lived? In urging such obvious arguments as these, there is a humiliating consciousness of the weakness of the cause we are opposing. One may feel as if he were wasting reasoning upon a subject unworthy of it; as if his remarks implied a want of common intelligence in his readers; as if he were exposed to the same ridicule, as he who should gravely and earnestly labor the proof of an undeniable proposition. But the same is the case with all direct reasoning against the doctrine of the Trinity; and one can reconcile himself to the discussion of it only by considering, not what that doctrine is in itself, but how widely and how long it has prevailed, how obstinately it is still professed, and the manifold mischiefs which have flowed and are still flowing from it. CLASS VI. Passages misinterpreted through inattention to the peculiar characteristics of the modes of expression in the New Tes tament. Corresponding to what has been already said, the modes of expression in the books of the New Testament are often different from those, which we should use at the present day to express the same essential meaning. All our habits of life, all the habits of our minds, our conceptions, our modes of apprehension, our associations of thought, are more or less unlike those of their writers, or of the individuals for whom the books were primarily intended. Our imaginations are familiar with different objects; our feelings are excited by other causes; our minds are occupied by other subjects. While the essential truths of religion, as taught by Christ and his Apostles, have remained unchanged and unchangeable, the sphere of human knowledge has widened, and philosophy has made great advances. A gradual change has been taking place in the character of men's ideas; they are combined in different aggregates, they are embodied in other forms of language, they are better defined, they stand in different relations to each other. Let any one recollect and bring together what he may know of the half-civilized inhabitants of Galilee, of the bigoted Jews of Jerusalem, or of the Christian converts from heathenism at Corinth or Ephesus; and he will perceive that they were men, who, in their ways of thinking and feeling, in their opinions and prejudices, in their degree of information, in their power of comprehending truth, in the influences to which they had been subject, and in the circumstances in which they were placed, were very unlike an intelligent reader at the present day. The writers of the New Testament partook of the character of their age and nation. Their circumstances, likewise, were in the highest degree peculiar, and produced corresponding feelings, which we cannot fully apprehend without an effort of thought and imagination. They were Jews, accustomed to strong Oriental modes of speech, and to figurative language of a kind not familiar to us, and the force of which, therefore, we are liable to misapprehend. All these circumstances contributed to produce a style of expression in the New Testament, which is not to be judged of by the standard of our own. We may satisfy ourselves that we have ascertained the true meaning of a writer, even when his language varies much from that, which the habits of our time might lead us to adopt in conveying the same ideas. Of passages that bear the stamp of what, in a wide sense of the term, one may call the Oriental style of the New Testament, we have already had many examples under the preceding heads, particularly under the last. I now propose to explain a few passages in the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians; two epistles written probably at the same time, having a striking likeness, and serving to illustrate each other. That which goes under the name of the Epistle to the Ephesians was probably a circular epistle sent to different churches in Asia Minor. They were written from Rome late in the life of the Apostle, just about the termination of his first imprisonment in that city. They were addressed to Christians, who were principally converts from heathenism. One main object of the Apostle was to impress them with a deep sense of the blessings they had received solely through the favor of God, of the value of their religion, and of the relations in which its teacher stood to God and to his followers: and thus to prevent them from confounding it with any human doctrine, and modifying it, or adding to it, from heathen philosophy or the superstitions of the Jews. He was earnest to make them feel how intimately they were connected with Christ, and to direct their thoughts to him as, under God, the only source of their knowledge, blessings, and hopes. There was danger that after the first excitement produced by the promulgation of Christianity had passed away, it would be regarded by many Gentile converts only as a new speculation upon topics which had long engaged the attention of their philosophers, a system of opinions, having its origin in a nation whom they regarded as barbarous (in the ancient sense of the word), which they might adopt in part only, reject, or modify, like other speculations, in their view similar. It was with a feeling of this danger, that St. Paul told the Corinthians that he was sent to preach, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should become of no I account;'* and that he was determined to know nothing among them, but Jesus Christ, and him crucified.' In the two Epistles we are considering, he teaches those addressed, that it was through Christ alone, that they who were formerly Gentiles had attained to a knowledge of God, and of the truths and hopes of religion. To raise and strengthen their sense of the value of Christianity, he describes its blessings, especially in reference to themselves who had been Gentiles, in the strongest terms; and, to fix their attention on Christ as their great and sole master, he uses language equally strong in speaking of his relation to God, of the importance and dignity of his office, and of the dependence of all his followers upon him. To the Colossians, he says (i. 9-20.); 'So then, we also, since we first heard of your faith, cease not to pray for you and to ask, that ye may be made perfect in the knowledge of God's will, having all spiritual wisdom and understanding; that ye may walk worthily of the Lord to all acceptance, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God; being endued with all strength through his glorious power, so as to bear all things patiently and joyfully; giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified us to share the lot of the holy who are in the light, rescuing us from the empire of darkness, and transferring us into the kingdom of his beloved Son; by whom we are delivered, our sins being remitted; who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of the whole creation; for by him all has been created, the heavenly and the earthly, the seen and the unseen, whether thrones, or principalities, or governments, or powers, all has been created through him and for him, and he is over all, and all exists by him. And he is the head of the body, the community of the holy, he being the beginning, the first-born from the dead, that he might have pre-eminence in all things. For with him it pleased God that whatever is perfect should be united, and through him to reconcile all to himself,-making peace through the blood of his cross,-all whether in heaven or on earth through him.' In this passage there are some expressions that require ex+1 Cor. ii. 2. * 1 Cor. i. 17. Or the church': I use the term given aboye as more comprehensive and expressive. planation. God,' says St. Paul, has transferred us from the empire of darkness into the kingdom of his beloved Son.' To this metaphor much of the following language corresponds. It was this kingdom which had been newly created, that is, had been newly formed; for it is thus that the word rendered created is to be understood. We find it, and its correlatives, repeatedly used in a similar sense by St. Paul, namely, to denote the moral renovation of men by Christianity. Thus he says: If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature. The old things have passed away, behold all things have become new.' 2 Cor. v. 17. For in Christ Jesus neither is circumcision any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.' Gal. vi. 15. 'For we are God's workmanship, created through Christ Jesus for good works.' Ephes. ii. 10. 'Put on the new man, who is created in the likeness of God with the righteousness and holiness of the true faith.' Ephes. iv. 24. The language from the Epistle to the Colossians in which Christ is said to have created all things, is to be explained in a corresponding manner. He created all things in the new dispensation, in the kingdom of heaven. It has been understood as declaring, that the natural creation was the work of Christ. But it is obvious at first sight, that the words used are not such as properly designate the objects of the natural world; and not such, therefore, às we should expect to be employed, if these were intended. In speaking of the natural creation, the same Apostle refers it to God in different terms, to the living God who made heaven and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them.'* : But what is meant by the Apostle when he speaks of Christ as creating things heavenly, and unseen, thrones, principalities, governments, and powers? I answer, that Christ is here spoken of by him as the founder and monarch of the kingdom of Heaven; and that this kingdom is conceived of, not as confined to earth, but as extending to the blessed in heaven, to those who have entered, or may enter on their reward. Christ being represented under the figure of a king, and his followers being] those who constituted the * Acts xiv, 15. |