Imágenes de páginas

disciples (John xvi. 33) to be of good cheer, because he has overcome the world, (¿yo vevívyxa zòv zooμóv.) So he is represented in this book of Revelation to be the only final conqueror or overcomer; and, consequently, he must be the only heir of all things in his own right. As the Lion of the tribe of Judah, he overcame (víznoer) to open the book; as the Rider of the white horse, he went forth overcoming and to overcome, vizor, zai îva rizon; and as the Lamb, he overcame the ten horns or ten kings. On the other hand, the beast is said to have overcome the two witnesses (Rev. xi. 7) and the saints, (Rev. xiii. 7 ;) but the beast himself is finally overcome by the Word of God; and the dragon, from whom the beast derived his power, was overcome in heaven, through the instrumentality of the brethren, by the blood of the Lamb.

There is but one exception to this general observation, and that is the case of those seen on the sea of glass, who had overcome (rovs vizõvras)* the beast, and his image, and his mark, and the number of his name; (Rev. xv. 2.) It is not said how these overcame, but the inference seems to be unavoidable, that they obtained their victory in a way similar to that by which the brethren overcame the accuser; that is, by the blood of the Lamb, or, by the exhibition of that blood, as the Word overcame the beast by virtue of the vesture dipped in blood. They sang the song of Moses and of the Lamb-indicating a victory obtained through the law and the gospel. The contest with the beast being a contest of manifestation, the victory of these elements is apparently the same as that obtained by the armies of heaven under conduct of the Word of God. These elements, however, overcame only the beast and his forces; the blood of the Lamb overcame the dragon, and fire from heaven the nations of the earth, under conduct of Satan.

§ 475. And I will be his God, and he shall be my son.'-At the close of the introductory addresses to the churches, (Rev. iii. 21,) it is said, Christ himself being the speaker, "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne." This is a promise of identity by substitution; a throne being a seat, (§ 118.) To sit in one's seat, is to sit in one's place; and to sit in the place of another, is to be substituted for that other.

The whole tenor of the Apocalypse has shown us in what manner Christ by overcoming has obtained the inheritance of all things; and we might confine the declaration before us to Him alone. He has overcome. He is consequently heir of all things, as just noticed; and by the clause of

* The Greek verb, it will be perceived, is the same in all these instances.

The Tyndale and Cranmer versions employ the word seat here, instead of


the verse now under consideration, he is "declared to be the Son of God with power," (Rom. i. 4.) He has thus revealed to us in what manner, and by virtue of what victory, he is set down with his Father on his throne. He has unveiled himself as the Lamb, as the Word, and as the Son of God on the right hand of the Father.

We now go back to the promise of Jesus, "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my seat," that is, to occupy my place as the Son of God, and to be substituted for me-to be manifested as identic with me. Corresponding with what we have before said of the application of the promises to the overcoming to a principle, we make the same application here. The principle of righteousness imputed by sovereign grace to the sinner, overcomes all principles opposed to that sinner's salvation; all the power of the accuser, with every element of the legal dispensation, being in subjection to it. So, when fully manifested, the same principle overcomes all the pretensions of self-righteousness, as well as every element of man's dependence upon his own works. This principle of a righteousness imputed by sovereign grace is personified in Jesus Christ, is identic with him, and when its manifestation is complete, will appear as occupying his seat, ruling on the throne of divine sovereignty. Christ, in the first instance, is manifested to be the Son of God with power; next, this principle of grace is manifest to be identic with Christ, and is thus figuratively spoken of in the text as receiving from God the appellation of "my Son;" for which reason we may presume both God the Father and God the Son are denominated Jehovah our righteousness.

If the term man (roomлos) were absolutely expressed in this passage, we should still suppose a personification to be intended; but it is not, and the Greek expression ó vizor, signifying the overcoming, may be applied even without a figure to a principle as well as to a human being. The article is mas culine, but a masculine article in the Greek, may be employed with a noun or name which in English would be termed neuter. The masculine article ó and the pronoun avròs agree with the term 2óyos, (speech or word,) as well as with rowлos, man. In the present sentence we might suppose λόγος to be understood for what we express by principle—ὁ λόγος νικῶν, the word overcoming, or which overcomes, "shall inherit all things, and I will be to it God, and it shall be my son." Adopting this term, allusion would appear to be made to the word of God, (ó λó70s,) which, as a warrior, had overcome the beast, and as a judge, had condemned all not written in the book of life to perdition. This rendering would be strictly conformable to the grammatical construction of the sentence, while it appears to be in keeping with the whole representation. The Lamb has been manifested as a conqueror, and the Word has been manifested as a conqueror. We have taken these two to be identic, influenced, no doubt, by views drawn from other

portions of the sacred writings; but perhaps, apocalyptically, this identity is to be more fully developed. We may perceive the importance of this development at the close of the book. Meantime, if the views already stated be correct, it must appear evident that, to say that God saves us by his imputed righteousness, and that Christ saves us by his merits, are synonymous declarations,—the language of the prophets and the language of the apostles thus coinciding in their representation of the way of salvation.


$476. But the fearful and unbelieving,' &c. &c. shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.'-This lake must be the same as that into which Death and Hell are said to have been cast. We have already formed our views of the nature of this lake by the subjects exposed to its action, (§§ 440, 460) We suppose it to be a figure corresponding with the fire which is to try every man's work. We do not suppose it to be intended to represent the state of future punishment, for the reasons already given, (§ 461;) consequently, we now judge of the things represented as having a part in this lake, by what has been before revealed respecting it.

The characters here described we take to be personifications of doctrinal principles opposed to the truth, and operating against its manifestation; all of them opposites of the overcoming principle, or logos.

'The fearful,' or timid, (dɛλós,) are those who cannot trust Christ for salvation; as personifications, we may suppose them to represent elements of doctrine, opposites of such as inculcate a perfect trust in the imputed righteousness of Christ. The Greek term is that applied by Jesus to his own disciples, Matt. viii. 26, and Mark iv. 40, "Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith?" the timidity of the disciples affording an illustration of that want of confidence in Christ, as a refuge from the peril of vindictive justice, with which those must be chargeable who do not discern in him a sufficient provision for their justification. The same term is applied in the Septuagint (Judges vii. 3) to the fearful multitude turned back by Gideon. So, also, Deut. xx. 8, to the faint-hearted.

'The unbelieving,' ȧníotos, must represent something nearly of the same character. This term is applied by Jesus to the incredulous Thomas, (John xxi. 27,) "Be not faithless, but believing"-be not without faith, but believe. We commonly use the term faithless, as significant of something treacherous or false; but this could not have been the sense in which it was used by Jesus, and does not appear to be the meaning we should attach to it here, although others have so understood it; (Rob. Lex. 58.) Viewing the Apocalypse in the light of a treatise on faith, we suppose the unbelieving to correspond very nearly with the definition we have given of the fearful; alike in kind, but differing in degree.


The abominable,' or rather the abominated; the word ßdeλvyuévos

being the past participle of 88ɛ2úcooμai. The appellation, according to the Septuagint, is given to Lucifer, Is. xiv. 19, as an abominated branch cast out; and to man in general, Job xv. 16, "How much more abominated and filthy is man, who drinketh in iniquity like water." So, Hosea ix. 10, οἱ ἐβδελυγμένοι ὡς οἱ ἀγαπημένοι, things abominated, as things beloved. The term is met with under different forms in a number of places of the Old Testament, although it occurs but twice as a participle, once as an adjective, and six times as a noun in the New Testament. According to Titus i. 16, the character of abominable is to be found even amongst those that profess to know God: it is not a quality confined to the ignorant or openly immoral. The primitive sense in the original is that of something extremely disgusting, from its rank impurity. In a spiritual sense, this offensive quality is to be understood of the pretensions to self-justification, with which the Pharisees were particularly charged, (Luke xvi. 15.) Abominated principles we suppose to constitute the ingredients of the harlot's cup, ($ 385.) The remarks made on those abominations will equally apply here. The elements of self-righteousness, generating a Lao dicean lukewarmness, we presume to be peculiarly hateful and abominable in the sight of God.


§ 477. Murderers,' (góreus,)—the whole multitude of persecuting Jews are called murderers, (Acts vii. 53 ;) and Heb. vi. 6, those falling away from the faith are said to crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and must be therefore murderers, in a sense analogous to that applied to the Jews. There is a crime of murder in a spiritual sense, of which they are guilty who reject Christ. Something of this kind seems to be contemplated in the following and other similar passages: "Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing [falsehood] in matters of doctrine." "The Lord will abhor [abominate] the bloody and deceitful man.” "Gather not my soul with sinners, nor my life with bloody men." "Yea, for thy sake are we killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter," (Ps. v. 6, xxvi. 9, xliv. 22.) "How is the faithful city become an harlot! It was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it, but now murderers. Thy silver is become dross; thy wine mixed with water,” (Is. i. 21, 22.) Here the prophet contrasts a faithful exhibition of the scheme of salvation with a perverted view of it. The true ransom is represented by something worthless; the true element of joy and rejoicing, (the propitiation of Christ,) so adulterated and diluted in the exhibition made of them, as to lose its power; and the true principles of justification so misrepresented, as to be the opposite of those tending to eternal life; corresponding with this we consider the blood-guiltiness of the murderers, alluded to by the prophet, and in this passage of the Apocalypse, to be such as that with which we have supposed Babylon to be chargeable, (§ 420.)

The term whoremongers' is to be understood, we apprehend, in a corresponding spiritual sense; as, in the quotation just made from the prophet, the faithful city is said to have become a harlot. The true exhibition of the economy of redemption, symbolized by the lawful wife, is perverted to a false view, such as we suppose to be represented by Babylon, the mother of harlots; so we suppose the principles now alluded to in this apocalyptic enumeration, to be doctrinal elements of the harlot character; such as cannot be admitted into a correct view of the divine plan of redemptioncannot dwell in it, as we find further declared, Rev. xxi. 27, and xxii. 15.

The same Greek term novos, appears to be used, Heb. xii. 16, as an equivalent for a profane person; that is, profane (33λos) as an opposite of holy ;—Levitically, profane, common, or unclean, from not having been sanctified or set apart as a profanation of the Sabbath (Matt. xii. 5) consisted in making it common, as other days of the week. Parties married are set apart or sanctified; cohabitation without marriage, or illicit intercourse, on the contrary, is the state of something profane, common, or unclean. Thus, a fornicator and profane person, in the scriptural sense, are nearly synonymous or interchangeable terms.

The apostle cautions the Hebrews against losing sight of the doctrine of salvation by grace, by giving countenance to any doctrinal element militating with it; denominating such an erronous principle a root of bitterness, capable of defiling (as by spots or stains) the disciple's views of faith; and illustrating his meaning by an allusion to the conduct of Esau in parting with the promised blessing for a mess of pottage. Except in this passage, the Scriptures do not represent this elder son of the patriarch as a man of immoral life, in our ordinary sense of the term; and we have to look for an explanation of the fornication ascribed to him, in some occurrence warranting the charge in a spiritual sense.

The promised blessing was an offspring which should bruise the serpent's head-a seed in which all the nations of the earth should be blessed. Such a seed was to the patriarchs of old, as the merits of Christ are to the Christian. On the other hand, the mess of pottage was a production of the earth, it was red pottage too, distinguished especially by its colour, (Gen. xxvi. 30 ;) as such, it represented the pretensions of human merit in furnishing a propitiation for sin. Esau, as the eldest son, would have been warranted in appropriating to himself the promise made to his progenitors; and if he had believed this promise, his argument, when suffering with hunger, would have been this, If I am to be the father of many nations, there is no danger of my perishing now: God will provide.' But he had no faith in the divine assurance, and therefore relinquished his title to it for a single meal. Like Esau, the deluded disciple, from want of faith in the promise of salvation by grace, relinquishes all his hopes of justifica

« AnteriorContinuar »