Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

seriousness and solemnity of your manner in prayer, and your impressiveness in preaching! How do I wish that endowments of such value were consecrated to those views which I have received!—But I feel myself getting on tender ground; it is difficult to word such a wish without appearing arrogant or impertinent, or presumptuous, and yet nothing is farther from my heart than either of these feelings: believe me to be with sincere regard Yours, my dear Sir, J. R. STOCK.

P.S. I know not whether it may be deemed unnecessarily minute to add

that, during the inquiry, I have looked into Doddridge's “Rise and Progress," and read through "Scott's Force of Truth," and the Letter connected with it in Newton's "Cardiphonia," and Newton's "Narrative of his own Life," but it is my wish to omit nothing. I ought also to state that once, and but once, I have entered another place of worship (Castle Green), when Mr. Thorpe repeated a Thursday evening Lecture on the Trinity, but this produced no conviction at that time, although the recollection of it has perhaps been useful to me since.

BIBLICAL CRITICISM.

Observations intended to illustrate the court of the women, because they

Do

Discourse of Christ,

JOHN XII. 23—32. May 10th, 1817. ODDRIDGE and other commentators suppose, that the discourse of Christ, contained in this passage of Scripture, was spoken in the presence of the Greeks, whose application to Philip, to be admitted to an interview with Christ, is mentioned just before. That it arose out of that application is evident; but it does not appear from the narrative, either that the applicants accompanied Philip and Andrew, when they brought the message to Jesus; or, that he, immediately upon receiving it, went to present himself to them. It is natural, therefore, to conclude that the discourse was not spoken in the hearing of these persons: indeed, it has much more the air of a meditation of Christ on the admission of the Gentiles to his kingdom, than of a discourse devised for the instruction of the individuals here mentioned.

It will serve to illustrate this passage, if we suppose that Jesus (who was certainly in the temple during the greater part of the day when the application appears to have been made, see Matth. xxi. 12-17), was at the time in one of the inner courts of the temple, into which no Gentiles were allowed to enter. Of these there were several, to which all Jews, and, we suppose, all Proselytes from the Gentiles, who conformed in all respects to Jewish observances, had access. The first court was usually called, the

might go no further, except when they came with sacrifices; within this was the court of the children of Israel, where the sacrifices were of fered, and the ordinary services of the temple performed; the upper part of this was the holy place, where none but priests might come; and beyond, was the holy of holies, which only the high priest might enter once a year.

All these courts were enclosed by a wall, or (as Lightfoot thinks), by an open space between two walls, called the Chel; and on the outside of the whole, principally on the south and east sides, was the court of the Gentiles, occupying all the rest of the mount or platform, on which the temple was built. Into this court, it is to be understood, all Gentiles might enter, whether they were Proselytes, or devout meu, or Idolaters.

But Josephus, in his Jewish War, Book v. chap. v. relates, that "as you went through this (namely the court of the Gentiles) into the second temple, there was a stone wall that encompassed it, of three cubits high, of very curious work; in which stood columns (or tablets) at an even distance, some in Greek and some in Latin letters, giving notice of the holiness of the place; that no stranger must enter within the holy place un. der pain of death." See Antiq. Book. xv. chap. x.

Now as there seems no good reason for doubting that the Greeks spoken of in this passage, were (agreeably to

the usual sense of that word in Scripture), Gentiles who had not conformed to Jewish ordinances, and who, therefore, could not enter into the part of the temple where Jesus was, an attention to these circumstances will explain the formalities observed in delivering their message.

We may well suppose them to have been amongst the number of those who had witnessed the triumphant entry of Jesus into Jerusalem the same morning; from which their curiosity would be much excited to learn something further of so extraordinary a person; and if (as some think) his driving the money-changers out of the temple, was meant in vindication of the right of the Gentiles to worship in their court, free from such interruptions, this circumstance, which had just occurred, (see Matth. xxi. 12,) might farther interest them in the inquiry, and make them still more desirous to see Jesus.

Lightfoot supposes them to have been Syro-Grecians, of Decapolis, or some of the places bordering upon Galilee; both because they appear to have had some acquaintance with Philip, of Bethsaida, and "because those Greeks that bordered upon Galilee, and the places where Christ wrought his miracles, might seem more prone, both to embrace the Jewish religion, and also to see Jesus, than those that lived farther off."

These persons, then, meeting with Philip, either in the city or as he passed through the court of the Gentiles, respectfully apply to him, saying, "Sir, we desire to see Jesus;" Philip, not knowing what to make of this application, or considering it, perhaps, as no less than an overture made to his master in the name of the Gentile world, upon entering the temple where Jesus and the other disciples were, consults with Andrew his brother, and they conjointly mention it to Jesus.

That he would be forcibly impressed by receiving such an application, we can easily conceive, especially when we consider that it was only a few days previous to his being crucified; and that the time was therefore rapidly approaching when he should have all things given unto him by his Father, and should send his apostles with power to make disciples of all nations. The message of these Gentiles, re

ceived at such a time and in such a place, naturally led him to reflect how large a portion of his church would consist of this despised class of men, whom the Jews, by the heaviest penalties, forbade to step beyond the threshold of their worship. He began to contemplate the glory of that new and better dispensation of the Divine will, by which the middle wall of partition would be thrown down, and the Gentiles admitted to the covenant of promise, and made citizens in the commonwealth of Israel; being fellow-citizens with the saints and of the household of God. And in anticipation of this event, of which he had received so lively an impression from the application above-mentioned, he exclaimed, (see 23d ver.) "The hour is come that the Son of Man should be glorified." That is, let this incident be acknowledged to be a manifest token of the approach of that hour, when the Son of Man, though rejected by his own, shall be glorified in the faith of the Gentiles, and when those impediments shall be removed, which have hitherto prevented the distinct avowal of his character and the dif fusion of his doctrines.

Then, calling to mind what death he must die, according to the will of God, as the only means by which these glorious results can be obtained, he proceeds to declare his submission to the will of God in this instance, and his persuasion of the glorious ends which would thereby be accomplished. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone, but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. He that loveth his life shall lose it, but he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.” “If any man serve me, let him follow me, and where I am, there shall also my servant be; if any man serve me him will my Father honour." We may evidently perceive in these sentiments of our Lord, a reference to his own case and duty: and the passage becomes much more interesting when we regard it as expressing the principles from which he himself derived fortitude to carry him through his extraordinary sufferings, than if we considered it only as intended for the admonition of his disciples. And it is in such instances as this, that the Uni

tarian appears to have a great practical advantage over others, in the study of the Christian Scriptures: for although all Christians ought with the same readiness to admit this view of Christ's holy character, as formed to its beauty and perfection by the discipline of religion, and the operation of truth upon the human mind, since they all profess that Christ was perfectly man, and had a complete and distinct human nature—yet the Unitarian, who from the better opinion he has of human nature and the ends for which it was formed, is disposed to think, that both the perfections and the offices of Christ might belong to the man Christ Jesus, without the union of any other nature, is more likely to view the life of Christ in this interesting and useful light. In the following words of Lightfoot, the sense and connexion of this passage are well given: "Is it so indeed? Do the Gentiles desire to see me? The time draws on wherein I must be glorified in the conversion of the Gentiles; but as a corn of wheat doth not bring forth fruit, except it be first thrown into the ground, and there die, but if it die it will bring forth much fruit, so must I die first, and be thrown into the earth, and then a mighty harvest of the Gentile world will grow up, and be the product of that death of mine." St. Paul, in 1 Cor. chap. xv. makes use of the same beautiful and very significant emblem of the resurrection from the dead.

As our Lord proceeds in this discourse, the thought of his approaching death so forcibly impressed upon his mind, becomes the occasion of much disturbance to him; as he himself acknowledges, ver. 27, "Now is my soul troubled, and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour? But for this cause came I to this hour. Father, glorify thy name." That is, In the anticipation of my sufferings, my soul is now troubled, and what desire shall I express in prayer to my Father? Shall I say, Father, save me from this hour? But for this cause, namely, to suffer these things, I came to this hour; it was the object of my undertaking, and the end of my being sent with this Divine mission to the world. I will, therefore, only say, Father, glorify thy name. Accomplish

the great purposes which thou hast in view, and carry into effect beyond all reach of opposition, thy glorious designs for the reconciliation and salvation of the whole world, by whatsoever means may, to thine unsearchable wisdom, seem best; I yield myself to thy whole will.' "Then came there a voice from Heaven, saying, ‘I have both glorified it and will glorify it again.' The multitude, therefore, who stood by, and heard it, said, that it thundered: others said, an angel spake to him. Jesus answered and said, 'This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes."" This corresponds to what he says in the 11th chapter in this Gospel, ver. 42, and the import probably is, this voice came not so much for my sake as for your sakes; agreeably to a common figure of speech, see Proverbs viii. 10, for we cannot suppose that Jesus could be insensible to the encouragement yielded by so remarkable a sign of the favour of Heaven. Indeed, if we recount the transactions of the day, and especially if we consider that it was in the very temple itself that this Divine voice was uttered, it will appear to have been the most glorious and triumphant day during the whole of our Lord's earthly ministry.

Ver. 31, "Now is the judgment of this world, now the prince of this world will be cast out." As if he bad said, 'Now is at hand a great and awful crisis of things, in which the corrupt and wicked powers that sway this world, and are opposed to all that tends to the happiness and salvation of mankind, will be overthrown: for the prevailing influence of spiritual wickedness in high places, which resists the glorious Gospel, and is contrary to all men, shall be cast out. It will prevail so far, as to lift me up upon the cross; it will deliver me over to death; but in so doing it will seal its own destruction; and I shall, thereby, be set up as a standard, which will draw all men unto it.' “ And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me."

The Improved Version gives a different translation of this passage, "And although I shall be lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men after me." But the sense does not appear to require that we should depart from the usual meaning of the

preposition here used. From the connexion, we should be led to suppose that the death of Christ upon the cross was rather represented as the condition and means of the conversion of all men, than merely pronounced to be not inconsistent with it: and the following words might perhaps express the sense of the passage more correctly; "And I, if once I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men after me."

It will now appear that this discourse is closely connected with the application of the Greeks to be admitted to see Jesus, and we are naturally led to make the following remarks upon it. Our Lord does not receive their application, as at an earlier period of his ministry he had done that of the Syrophenician woman, by saying, "I am not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." He plainly intimates that the time is come, or is fast approaching, when Gentiles will be received into the number of his followers. It had been the object of his personal ministry, not to admit the Gentiles, but to set open the door for their admission; not to form a church of the believers in his name, but only to prepare teachers by whom the members of his church might be collected his was a life of labour and grief and rejection; he was to end it in ignominy and pain; and he was to leave it to others to labour with success, and to raise the glorious temple of which he was the foundation and chief corner-stone. This is in agreement with those words of Christ to his disciples: John iv. 37, "Herein is that saying true, one soweth and another reapeth. I sent you to reap that whereon ye bestowed no labour; other men laboured, and ye are entered into their labours." To this we may likewise refer the words, John xiv. 12, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on me, the works that I do, he shall do also, and greater works than these shall he do, because I go unto my Father."

But though he was subject to these restrictions during his life on earth, he anticipated with joy, a time quickly approaching, when he should be freed from them; when the Gospel of the forgiveness of sins should be published with power to the whole world, in his name and by his apostles. "I am

the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so know 1 the Father, and I lay down my life for the sheep. And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also must I bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd."

Thus, Mr. Editor, I have concluded the observations which I proposed to make on this interesting passage: if you think them worthy of insertion in the pages of the Repository, I would beg for farther information from any of your correspondents, on the following points.

1st. Schleusner in his Lexicon, &c. under the word "Eλ, cites this passage (i. e. John xii. 20), as an instance in which the word is intended to describe "a Jew living out of Pa lestine amongst Gentiles, and using the Greek language in reading holy Scripture." He considers this as the only instance of the kind, and acknowledges that the passage is very doubtful and ambiguous. Ön what grounds is this unusual sense of the word supported? And what arguments does Croius, quoted by Schleusner, bring forward to prove that the persons here mentioned were Greek Proselytes?

2dly. I am in want of more distinct information than I have hitherto met with, on the subject of Proselytes to Judaism. Were there different classes of them? Or were not all required to conform to all Jewish rites; and particularly to the initiatory rites of baptism and circumcision? ~ Lardner and Doddridge maintain this: and the pertinacity with which the Jewish Christians insisted upon the circumcision of Gentile converts to Christianity, seems to prove that they had known of no other terms of admission to the privileges of true religion. Then, did the Jews admit their proselytes, who observed all Jewish ordinances, to the same privileges as a native Jew; or did they require even proselytes to stay behind in the court of the Gentiles? This last can hardly be supposed, though possibly there might be some restrictions imposed upon them. Lightfoot produces some passages from the Talmudists, from which it appears that the Rabbins held Prosclytes in great scorn, though they might

[blocks in formation]

P.S. I find it difficult to reconcile the opinion given by your learned Correspondent Solomon Bennett, in p. 222 of the present vol. that "during the whole great period of the second temple, the numerous synagogues and colleges of Hebrews of the great dispersion, had nothing to do with the sacrifices of the temple at Jerusalem," with the testimony of several ancient and approved authorities on Jewish affairs. A variety of proofs might be collected of the veneration which the whole Hebrew nation had for the temple at Jerusalem. Philo, (who was of Alexandria) in his book against Flaccus, prefect of Egypt, in the beginning of Caligula's reign, says, " One country does not contain the Jewish people, they being extremely numerous, for which reason there are of them in all the best and most flourishing countries of Europe and Asia, all esteeming for their metropolis the holy city, in which is the sacred temple of the Most High God." And in a letter of Agrippa the Elder, to Caligula, he says, interceding for Jerusalem, "If you grant my request in favour of my native place, you will be a benefactor not to one city only, but to thousands of cities in every part of the world; for scarcely any country of note can be mentioned, in which there are not Jewish inhabitants." In another place Philo says, "One thing we desire instead of all others, that no novelty be introduced into the temple, but that

it be preserved such as we received it from our forefathers. If we cannot obtain this, we yield ourselves to be destroyed, that we may not live to see a greater evil than death." This great zeal expressed by foreign Jews towards the temple of Jerusalem, is not consistent with the independence and freedom from the sacrificial law, attributed to them by your Correspondent. Indeed, from all that can be collected from the ancient history of Judaism, it should appear, that the Jews of the dispersion were never excused from any part of the ceremonial law whilst the temple remained, except so far as distance of place made the fulfilment of it impossible. Thus, although it was certainly impossible for Jews from Rome, &c. to appear before the Lord three times a year; and the young and the indigent were likewise necessarily prevented from taking such a journey; yet from all that appears, and especially from the great concourse of Jews from foreign parts at the great festivals, I am led to think, that it was accounted disgraceful if not a mark of impiety, for any adult Jew, of sufficient substance, not to go up to Jerusalem at certain intervals to attend upon the temple worship. And, although it was impossible to bring from a distance their sheep and cattle, to sacrifice them at the altar of the temple, there can, I think, be little doubt that on their arrival they purchased such animals, and such meat-offerings, as the law enjoined them to present in sacrifice. Philo relates, that the Jews of Rome sent money, instead of firstfruits, by their own officers, to Jerusalem. And the first-fruits must certainly be included in every definition of sacrifices. Many other facts might be brought forward both from Josephus and from the Acts of the Apostles, a book which, as an historical record of Jewish affairs, may probably be deemed by your learned Correspondent worthy of some attention, independently of its merits as a relation of the planting of the Christian religion. But what has been said seems sufficient.

H. T.

« AnteriorContinuar »