Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

than a modification of the Jewish faith, the phrases which had been employed in the one would not have been changed, or extended their signification in the other.

5. The corruption of human nature, and the necessity of regeneration, as it was the professed cause of his appearance in the world, so it forms a prominent part of the teaching of Jesus and his Apostles. This leads to the usage of the word flesh and its derivatives, for corrupt nature, in a sense altogether original". "That which is born of the flesh, is flesh." "The natural (or fleshly) man cannot receive the things of God 3." What a volume of doctrine is concentrated in these short sentences! To "live in the flesh," to "walk after the flesh," are phrases familiarly used in Scripture for a life led after the natural desires and propensities of the heart. But what meaning have they, till the difference between the spiritual

2 The existence of the term in the Septuagint, Gen. vi. 3, will hardly be thought to invalidate this assertion.

and carnal life is first established? till it is understood to be the object of a religion divinely instituted, to take men out of a state of nature, in which they are enemies of God through the corruption that is in them, and to renew their hearts after the divine image, which bears the stamp of "righteousness and true holiness 4?" These do not sound like the inventions of human teachers. I cannot think that it was a selfinstructed or unauthorized reformer who first laid down the distinction, "That which is born of the flesh, is flesh; and that which is born of the spirit, is spirit 5."

6. The word faith affords a similar instance. For by the terms faith, or believing, in the New Testament, that is not generally meant which is required, as of course, in the case of any divine revelation, a belief of its truth, and a patient expectation of its promises. The sense which the word often bears in the apostle's language is as peculiar, as the doctrine on which its mean

4 See Col. iii. 10. Eph. iv. 24.

5 John, iii, 6.

ing depends, is original. Faith is represented as the channel through which the benefits of the death of Jesus are conveyed to the believer. For as the doctrine of Christianity is, that he has undertaken to deliver from divine wrath all who trust in him, and to bestow on them eternal happiness; the characteristic of the religion is faith; and those who are invited to receive the religion, are invited to rely upon Jesus; to put their confidence in him; to depend upon him.

To see the force of this argument, consider the phrases: "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved."

66

Being justified by

faith, we have peace with God."

"Do we then.

make void the law through faith?”.

"The

Gentiles have attained the righteousness which is of faith." All this, written within twenty

years of the death of Jesus, shows the substantial and solid form which the religion early attained, and the deep roots which its leading doctrine had struck. The words, trust in Christ;

by trust we are saved;-what idea would they convey, when heard for the first time? How much must be explained, to render them intelligible? Yet all this had been so explained as to become familiar, and to enable the apostles to write, without circumlocution, of salvation through faith in him, who, but a few years before, had been despised, rejected, and condemned.

Even to this day the phrases here discussed would appear too singular, too technical for general conversation, or writings of a general nature. How can this be accounted for, if there was nothing extraordinary in their origin, nothing beyond the thoughts naturally occurring to men, and very ordinary men?

Here, again, I cannot fail to observe, that this is exactly what we should expect if the religion were divine. It was an original revelation of the purpose of God. Therefore it required fresh phrases to convey it. For words follow ideas. If the ideas were new, they could not be

expressed without some innovation in language. But can we be contented with believing, that such an innovation was attempted and effected by such persons as the first Christian teachers were, if they were not what they professed to be; i. e. if they had no authority to warrant them, and procure them attention? Did such men give a new turn to language, and strike out notions which they could not even express in terms hitherto employed?

« AnteriorContinuar »