oe CEE GLEE CED EEA PETER OEE LV EBE EER OO DEA LOR A LEEALEEE LECT 
 
 DEO LEIS TOUS 
 
 Y Z, 
 > A DB 
 o 4 | | 
 © 2 io = 
 ep. iad n | 
 OO nw oe! Q | 
 a 0 (x) yy) 
 - = - 
 Be 8 A 
 
of the Gheologicns Soup 
 | any 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 BT 157 .M54 1883 
 
 Milne, David, 
 
 The philosophy of the 
 _ Shelf. dispensations and 
 
 38 4 — r S 
 ——_— a ae 
 
Al 
 fy 
 
 ! ee 
 %, 
 
THE 
 
 tee LOS OR ay 
 
 OF 
 % 
 
 Lie a DUSPE NSA TIO NS 
 
 TRADITIONAL ‘THEOLOGY OF THE 
 
 FIRST TWO CENTURIES 
 
 BY 
 
 DAVID “MILN PAG 
 
 Punted by 
 SPOTTISWOODE & CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE, LONDON 
 1883 
 
 (Zo be had of them and of all Booksellers, price '7s. 6d.) 
 
Tveotce adnOic, rev amocrod\wy oidaynhn* Kal TO apyaio 
 
 HNC, x" | 
 Tic exkAnotac obornpa KaTa TAVTOC TOU KOOMOV, K.T.A, 
 
 TREN. 1V.033, O00) 
 
 \ j aN AM a \ ! ae 3 oe \| 
 
 Tnv YVMOTtKHY OLKOCOLYY (I Coral 10 13) KAY TH Oy 
 
 ‘Pwpaiove éxrotodj aivicoouevog gnaw (Rom. i. 113 Xv. 29) 
 
 » oe 5 TO TVEUPLATIKOV Xaptopa Kal mY yrworu)y TApPdoog, UE 
 
 wer xcovvat airotc mapwy mapovot Tobe. 
 
 CLEMENT'S Strom. v. 4 and Io. 
 
 *x” A Synopsis of Contents will be found at page cCxxxvii. 
 
AN ARABS oc 
 
 — Ot 
 
 Iv has been observed that instruction systematically im- 
 parted is more permanent than that which is merely 
 desultory. Thus a correct and comprehensive under- 
 standing of a subject as a system fits not only to 
 expound the system but also to direct those preliminary 
 studies which lead to this comprehensive survey and to 
 ground disciples. Perhaps, when that which is full- 
 grown is come, such a comprehensive system may 
 commend itself to the general consciousness of mankind 
 (1 Cor. xiv. 24, 25) as the true exposition of Christianity ; 
 if this truth were placed alongside of the rival theories 
 which at present leaven the teaching of different de- 
 nominations of Christians and prevent the subject from 
 being properly taught in schools, perhaps a basis of Chris- 
 tian union might be found. But we must take heed how 
 we build or teach a system (1 Cor. iii, 10); all experience 
 shows how difficult it is to dislodge a system of error 
 which has fully established itself in a mind, a Church, 
 or acountry. The vials of God’s judgment seem to be 
 poured out in the atmosphere of religious thought. There 
 is'a general aversion to clear up the sources from which 
 
 the system has sprung, or to examine more carefully the 
 A. 2 te 
 
iV PREFACE. 
 
 roots of thought so as to distinguish what are sober- 
 minded first principles from transcendental fancies. 
 Ordinary men, as in Isaiah’s time, excuse themselves 
 because they are not learned; and learned men say that 
 the book is sealed, that is, that it is a hopeless waste of 
 time to try to understand its mysteries although they | 
 are vevealed. Reactions ensue; and men, trained to 
 prove the old but ill-prepared for its passing away, 
 have a tendency to range themselves, as in Plutarch’s 
 time, into the two extremes of an irrational bigotry and 
 a hopeless infidelity. 
 
 Christians might find a basis of union in the teaching 
 of the Primitive Fathers while yet the Church was un- 
 divided. No sect is surely so blindly opposed to all 
 tradition as not to acknowledge that all Christian teach- 
 ing was first a tradition, or so ignorant of Church History 
 as not to know that a general consent as to the most 
 important principles bound the Early Church together. 
 This treatise professes to reconstruct, from the records 
 of the first two centuries, the primitive system or wisdom 
 which was discoursed among the full-grown before the 
 circulation of the Scriptures. The subjects have occupied 
 the Author’s mind since he was a student of Theology 
 nearly thirty years ago. For nearly seven years his 
 leisure time has been devoted to the study of these 
 subjects and the writing of his book on the ‘ Philosophy 
 of the Dispensations and the Theology of the First Two 
 Centuries,” The long Introductory Outline of the book 
 has been expanded into a Compendium of Theology, and 
 
PREFACE, Vv 
 
 may now be had as a separate treatise under the 
 title of ‘The Early Doctrinal System of the Church, or 
 Philosophical Tradition of the First Two Centuries.” He 
 has had many assurances from eminent patristic scholars, 
 and leading clergymen (e.g. Canon Farrar), as to the 
 great importance of showing what the Primitive Fathers 
 ‘really meant and really said, and as to the good which 
 such ‘studies, if conducted in a truth-loving spirit, are 
 calculated to do. He was recommended to publish his 
 researches by Professor Robert Flint of Edinburgh, who 
 very naturally reserved his judgment as to the positions 
 maintained, and by one of our most eminent professors 
 of philosophy, who considered ‘ the mode in which the 
 philosophical questions at issue are discussed to be just 
 and pertinent.’ The aged and learned Bishop of Win- 
 chester (Dr. Harold Browne) expresses his sympathy 
 with the purpose of the book, namely, to ‘bring out 
 clearly and simply the belief of the primitive ages on 
 these great questions,’ and although he could not ‘ endorse 
 opinions without thoroughly going over the ground,’ yet 
 he thinks that the author has ‘fairly stated the views of 
 these Fathers on the questions of free will, predestina- 
 tion, &c., and that other matters have been ‘all gone into 
 carefully and honestly. To another dignitary of the 
 Church of England the outline ‘appears carefully, faith- 
 fully, and impartia!ly done’ According to the Early 
 Fathers, the Biblical records are ‘the Lord's Scripture 
 and Voice’ (Clement); and the reader will be able to 
 compare the accuracy of these records with the accuracy 
 
vi , PREFACE. 
 
 of some modern crities of the Old Testament. ‘I think 
 what you have said of Professor Robertson Smith very 
 good,’ writes Professor Stanley Leathes ; ‘I have been 
 lately reading his book, and am astonished at the un- 
 warrantable conclusions he draws from the most slender 
 premises.’ ‘The Philosophy’ has been characterised by 
 ‘The Academy’ as a well-planned and well-intended 
 book, and recommended by ‘The Scotsman’ to clergy- 
 men and others interested in the subjects treated of. 
 The Author desires to have his work criticised and its 
 imperfections pointed out; he would willingly co-operate 
 with others who think that some of our modern tra- 
 ditional theories need improvement ; and he trusts that 
 he will receive the support as well as the sympathy 
 of those who desire that the doctrinal system of the 
 Primitive Church should be clearly and simply brought 
 out, and who approve of the circulation of this Com- 
 pendium. He cherishes the hope that other students 
 may find in what he has done some assistance to bring 
 out these early beliefs more clearly and simply, and thus 
 assist ordinary Christians to obtain a fuller grasp of the 
 faith they profess. 
 
ie / ‘i 
 ‘7 i. WAY, OYE XT, 2 
 THE HANS AAU A UU AX 4 Paes 
 ed 
 
 “*< 
 . Cae 
 - 
 
 EARLY DOCTRINRE SYSTEM 
 OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 Wile SOME ACCOUNT OF THE CRITICAL. PHEORV: 
 
 THE common basis of Christianity is the teaching of its 
 founders; and if it could be demonstratively shown 
 what was the meaning which the apostles themselves 
 put upon their own writings, we should have in this the 
 true exposition of the Christian faith. When the 
 Gnostics imagined that they had advanced to a more 
 perfect ‘knowledge’ than that of the apostles, on 
 whom the Church was founded, the early fathers re- 
 pudiated this as a foolish conceit. ‘Could it be, said 
 Irenzus, ‘that Peter (and the rest of the apostles) had 
 not yet the perfect knowledge, but that it was afterwards 
 discovered by these men? Then the apostles had need 
 to live again and go to school to these people, that they 
 too may be made perfect. But this is surely ridiculous’ 
 (fen. “iit, 12,°7); “it can never be tight to say that 
 they preached before they had the perfect knowledge’ 
 (iii. 1,1). Ifthey withheld from the untrained a wisdom 
 which these might readily mistake (1 Cor. iii. 2), they 
 were neither ignorant of the higher branches of a 
 precise theology nor jealously guarding an esoteric 
 doctrine; and if they spoke among the perfect an 
 explanatory wisdom which they did not write, they would 
 unfold it to the presidents of the churches even more 
 
Vlil RECORDS OF TRADITIONAL EXPLANATIONS. 
 
 than to the others, and the agreement of the tradition in 
 different churches would be a convincing proof of its 
 genuineness and authenticity (Iren. iii. 3, 1; 4, 1). 
 
 I. We do not find in the early Christian fathers a 
 fully developed system of theology, but the elements of 
 a system scattered (1) through epistles written to the 
 brethren, (2) in exhortations or apologies addressed to 
 the heathen, (3) in books explaining the Old Testament 
 and connected with the Jewish controversy, and (4) in 
 their refutations of the Gnostic perversions. Barnabas, 
 an early writer, expounds the Old Testament in the 
 style of the Epistle to the Hebrews ; and by initiating 
 his readers into the meaning of the law as well as of ‘ the 
 parable of the Lord,’ he endeavours to guard them 
 against all iniquity, against a new Judaism and the 
 final stumbling-block (c. 1, 3, 6). Justin, martyr and 
 philosopher, born about A.D. 100, gives us, in his two 
 apologies and in his dialogue with the Jew Trypho, 
 much important information. Being well acquainted 
 with the different schools of philosophy and spend- 
 ing his life as an itinerant teacher, he had the best 
 means of knowing what was the faith and practice of 
 Christians both in his own and preceding times, His 
 honesty, fairness, love of truth and care to avoid rash 
 statements, are conspicuous in his works. 
 
 Hegesippus, whose Notes were known to Eusebius, 
 and who flourished during the reigns of Hadrian and the 
 two Antonines (A.D. 117-180), relates that the Church 
 continued pure till the apostles and those privileged 
 to hear them had passed away; that afterwards false 
 teachers were no longer obliged to skulk in dark retreats, 
 but thenceforth attempted, without shame, to pervert 
 the sound teaching of the saving gospel (Eus. iii. 32), 
 
GNOSTIC PERVERSIONS OF THE GNOSIS. ix 
 
 The early fathers repeatedly tell us that these per- 
 versions bore a plausible resemblance to the truth ; 
 that they were a seeming knowledge; that St. Paul 
 (1 Cor. viii.) guarded his converts against this sem- 
 blance of knowledge, but not against a real, well-founded, 
 sober-minded knowledge, which has power ora tendency 
 to edify and promote love ; that the Gnostics were losing 
 the food by grasping at the shadow of it (Iren. it. II, I ; 
 fihtseeClem.Seintt jeviisid5)a o Webare ‘astonished, 
 on the one hand, at the strange enigmas which they 
 brought in, at their heathen or magical rites, and their 
 wonderful angelology ; and, on the other hand, at their 
 strange perversions of the doctrines of grace. Even in 
 St. John’s time there were many Antichrists (2 John 
 7); and Irenzeus saw in the Gnostics precursors of the 
 great Antichristian apostasy (Iren. iii. 15; ii. 31, 3). They 
 misunderstood or perverted the Scriptures or the teach- 
 ing of the Church. Thus, under the pretext of a know- 
 ledge too deep to be divulged, they brought in an 
 infinite God, who causes all, and to whom all actions are, 
 therefore, indifferent. Again, because our Lord ‘acted 
 the saving drama of humanity, because He exhibited to 
 us by parabolic actions the way of life, it does not follow 
 that He was not a real but a phantom man. Again, 
 because He pleased God by doing good to men, because, 
 in ritual language, He propitiated God in our behalf, this 
 is a sign or symbol that we too must please God by 
 crucifying the flesh and doing good to others; that in 
 this way the blots left by past sins on the soul will be 
 undone when the Holy Spirit is communicated per- 
 manently, or when the Divine Nature comes to be 
 formed in us so as to cover the soul (Iren. iv. 12, 5; 36, 
 6) ; but not, as the Marcosians supposed, that, our case 
 
x RECORDS OF TRADITIONAL EXPLANATIONS, 
 
 being one with the Ransom, we are free to do as we 
 like, being out of the power of the Judge and screened 
 from His sight in the judgment (Iren. i. 13, 6). Weare 
 saved by faith, when we look into the meaning of the 
 law and ‘the Lord’s parable, and practise this meaning ; 
 but we are not, as Basilides and Marcion supposed, saved 
 by faith apart from conduct (i. 24, 5 ; 27, 3). God does 
 not need our works, but men need them, and we ourselves 
 need them for the formation of the new nature, which is 
 not given apart from conduct or voluntary choice, as 
 Valentinus supposed ; for then there would be nothing 
 to distinguish it from physical nature or mere instinct 
 (Clem. S. ii. 3). Again, because a certain knowledge of 
 good and evil belongs to the idea of man, because some 
 experience of evil serves to generate ideas of right and 
 wrong, as sweet is known by sour or ‘light by darkness, 
 and to develop stable character (Iren. iv. 39), the followers 
 of Carpocrates seem to have concluded that it was 
 incumbent on them to experience or practise all evil as 
 well as all good; and, though Irenzus could not believe 
 that they went to this extreme of impiety, yet he found 
 in their books a tradition to this effect, which they 
 professed to have derived from Jesus and His apostles 
 (Iren. i. 25). Again, the Holy Spirit is given to men as 
 a new inspiration; but we must not think of this as 
 ‘a part of God,’ or suppose, as the Montanists did, that 
 the gift is an irrational possession of the soul (Slane i 3: 
 Again, because salvation is all of grace, inasmuch as 
 God does not need our works, but gives the means as 
 well as the result, it does not follow that man’s freedom 
 of choice is superseded, or that God’s light and operation 
 are forced upon men. 
 
 It was to disprove these perversions by placing along- 
 
THE WORKS. OF IRENAZUS AND CLEMENT. cal 
 
 side of them the truth (apposita veritata, Iren. iii, 2) that 
 many eminent Christian teachers, ‘whose orthodoxy 
 of sound faith had descended in writing’ to Eusebius, 
 took pains to collect the early Christian tradition and to 
 expound it in a more scientific manner (NoyLKwTEpOLV). 
 Hegesippus, Irenzeus, and Clement of Alexandria found 
 the same tradition among the overseers of the churches, 
 wherever they travelled; and although the Notes of 
 Hegesippus and many other treatises are lost, yet in the 
 ereat work of Irenzeus against Heresies,! and in the works 
 of Clement,? we appear to have the substance of them 
 all. Irenzeus had, in his early youth, listened to elders 
 who had not only seen the aged John but others of the 
 apostles, and to the disciples of those who had seen 
 them (Iren. ii. 22, 5 &c.). He had treasured up the sayings 
 of Polycarp, who had been appointed by the apostles to 
 be bishop for (eés) Asia, and who was martyred A.D. 168 
 in extreme old age. The work of Irenzus was written, 
 as Harvey shows, between A.D. 182 and 188. Thus 
 early have we ‘a clear-headed, considerate, and philoso- 
 phical theologian’ (Hase, Guerike), who took the greatest 
 pains to investigate not only the tradition of the Church, 
 but also the Gnostic semblances of knowledge. Clement 
 of Alexandria, also, originally a heathen philosopher 
 and a man of immense learning, travelled extensively in 
 Greece, Southern Italy, Egypt, and the East, to collect 
 the traditional ‘knowledge’ from eminent teachers, who 
 
 1 Besides the translation of Irenzeus in Clark’s Series, there is an ex- 
 cellent translation by the poet Keble in the Oxford library of the Fathers. 
 
 2 The two volumes of Wilson’s translation of Clement in Clark’s Series 
 are here denoted C! and C?, the Stromata or Miscellanies by S. The 
 treatise of Clement, entitled: What Rich Man is Saved? js translated 
 in Clark’s Ante-Nicene Library at the end of the Second Volume of 
 Lactantius. 
 
Xli EARLY RULE OF FAITH AND TRUE KNOWLEDGE, 
 
 professed to deliver it to him as they had received it by 
 transmission from the apostles. His researches in these 
 countries were made before he succeeded his master 
 Pantzenus in the Catechetical school of Alexandria, that 
 is, before about A.D. 189; and his Stromata or Mis- 
 cellanies are supposed to have been published about 
 A.D. 194. 
 
 Il. Lhe Early Church Tradition was proved to be well- 
 founded by its oneness and its harmony with Scripture. 
 Ireneus and Clement lived in a transitional age, and 
 were profoundly acquainted both with the more learned 
 Christian tradition, which was fading away, and with the 
 New Instrument, as Tertullian calls the writings of the 
 New Testament. Irenzus tells us of the wisdom which 
 St. Paul spake among the full-grown, i.e. ‘those having 
 received the Spirit of God, and speaking in all languages 
 (comp. Just. Ap. ii.6; Dial. 35), as he (Paul) himself also 
 used to speak ; as we also hear (Lat. have heard) many 
 brethren in the Church, who have prophetic gifts and 
 speak by the Spirit in all kinds of tongues, and _ bring 
 into clearness the hidden things of men as expediency 
 requires, and expound the mysteries of God’ (v. 6, I). 
 Long before the apostolic Scriptures were circulated, 
 the faith was traditionally handed down all over the 
 civilised world; ‘wisdom’ did not surely cease to be 
 spoken among the full-grown after St. Paul’s death ; 
 charity was to be an unfailing gift; but St. Paul’s pre- 
 diction that extraordinarily communicated and one- 
 sided prophesyings and knowledge would be done away, 
 and that ‘tongues’ would cease (1: Cot.pigtiing iiwas 
 beginning to be fulfilled. Jrenzeus protested against the 
 attempts to monopolise the Spirit of prophecy (iii. 11, 9), 
 and asserts that he who reads the Scriptures intently, 
 
PRIMITIVE SYSTEM OF IRENAZUS AND CLEMENT. Xili 
 
 using what helps the presbyters of the Church could give, | 
 will learn how far the man loving God will improve, 
 and will be a perfect or full-grown disciple (iv. 26). 
 Such a spiritual man does not change the primary 
 teaching (iv. 9, 2), but by pointing out to what character 
 (aspect) of the Lord’s arrangement each prophetic utter- 
 ance belongs, and by exhibiting the extzre body of the 
 work of the Son of God, he will harmonise and expound 
 the Scriptures (iv. 33, 15). The following passage from 
 Irenzus exhibits both the traditional and the Scriptural 
 sources of ‘knowledge.’ ‘True knowledge (gzoszs) is (1) 
 the teaching of the apostles, and (2) the primitive system 
 (70 apxyatov cvotnua) of the Church in the whole world, 
 and (3) the character of Christ’s Body according to 
 the successions of bishops to whom they everywhere 
 committed the Church; and it (gue, true knowledge) 
 has come down even to us, guarded without any fabrica- 
 tion (fictzone) of writings by a very full handling (tracta- 
 tione), and admitting (recipiens) neither of addition nor 
 diminution; and (it is) a (1) reading without falsifica- 
 tion; and (2) an exposition according to the Scriptures, 
 ruled by laws, painstaking, without peril and without 
 blasphemy ; and (3) the most eminent gift of love, which 
 is more precious than knowledge, more glorious than 
 prophecy, and more exalted than all other gifts’ (iv. 
 33, 8). The very full handling may either refer to the 
 very comprehensive treatment of the subjcct or to the 
 laying on of hands, which the apostles practised when 
 they imparted ‘The Perfect Bread of the Father,’ or the 
 strong meat (iv. 38, 2), or to their putting the deposit 
 or the Episcopate into the hands (éveyeipicav) of suc- 
 cessors (iii. 3, 3), who, however, had no authority to utter 
 anything different or abate aught of the tradition (i. 10 
 
 , 
 
X1v EARLY RULE OF FAITH. AND TRUE KNOWLEDGE. 
 
 2). Clement of Alexandria repeatedly asserts that in 
 his time the Church possessed a ‘philosophical tradition’ 
 (7) yvoorikn tapddoots), that is, a tradition of the wis- 
 dom which the apostles had spoken among the fuil- 
 grown ; that it is not essentially (esoterically) different 
 from the common faith which the apostle calls the 
 Joundation and milk ; that it is this milk solidified (co- 
 agulated) and compacted into a system (S. v. 43; 10; 
 vi. 7; Peed. 1.6); that Christ is both the foundation and 
 the superstructure (S. vii. 10); that ‘as the teaching of 
 all (wdvtwv) the apostles was one, so also the tradition’ 
 (S. vii. 17). Clement found few who had received this 
 theoretical tradition ; and deeming these ‘ancestral and 
 apostolic seeds to be in danger of escaping,’ incorporated 
 his Notes of them in his Miscellanies(S.1,1). It remains 
 that (évreddev) we should exercise our minds in know- 
 ledge or wisdom so as to acquire a habit of reflective 
 survey (&w Oewpias, S. vi. 7). The toiler for truth, he 
 says, will not desist from the search till he gets the de- 
 monstration from the Scriptures themselves. Certainly 
 we use ‘the Lord’s Scripture and Voice’ as a criterion 
 or test; it is the surest or rather only demonstration. 
 Those, therefore, who have merely tasted of the Scrip- 
 tures are believers; and those who have advanced 
 further to an accurate and skilled acquaintance with 
 them have knowledge (S. vii. 16) and become identified 
 With it. (C 7.157). | 
 
 Two eminent men, Tertullian and Origen, whose 
 writings belong to the first part of the third century 
 rather than to the second century, mark, each in his own 
 way, the commencement of a new epoch in theology. 
 Tertullian ‘followed Ireneus and sometimes translated 
 from him’ (Bp. Wordsworth). ‘His writings,’ says Dr. 
 
MONTANUS, TERTULLIAN AND ORIGEN. XV 
 
 Holmes in his preface to the treatise against Marcion, 
 
 ‘show that he flourished at the time specified by Jerome, 
 that is, during the reigns of Severus and Antoninus 
 Caracalla, or between the years A.D. 193 and 216.’ 
 Some conjecture that he died A.D. 220, and others 
 A.D. 245. He was a man of great learning but of fervid 
 and impatient temperament ; and, owing either to what 
 Neander calls ‘the internal congeniality of his mind, 
 or to his impetuous reaction against Gnostic errors and 
 loose discipline, he looked for ‘the coming of that which 
 is full-grown,’ not in a more truly philosophical under- 
 standing, not in the leavening of man’s entire life through 
 the Spirit, but in ‘bare faith,’ in the inspiration, celibacy 
 and fasting of the Montanists. An unknown Early Father 
 (Eus. v. 16, 17) describes these prophets as beginning in 
 voluntary ignorance, as quite disregarding the Lord’s dis- 
 tinction (unlike Irenzus), as courting and giving full sway 
 to a possession and ecstasy beside themselves (év xatoy7 
 TWh Kal TapexoTdce.), as carried away into frenzied, un- 
 seasonable, unbefitting, and illegitimate utterances. ‘In 
 ecstasy, a prophet should not speak’ (Miltiades). Origen, 
 again, was a man eminent for his self-denying virtues 
 and for his encyclopedic learning. Following his own 
 peculiar genius for speculation or allegorising, and ‘ des- 
 pising,’ says Vincentius Lirinensis, ‘the traditions of the 
 Church and the guidance of the ancients,’ he was carried, 
 in some of his fancies, ‘far beyond the limits prescribed by 
 Clement’ (Bp. Wordsworth). In his book on First Prin- 
 ciples, written in his immature youth, he presumes that 
 created beings are limited in number and magnitude ; 
 that as the Creator cannot consistently create an infinite, 
 His power must thus be finite. He speaks of the Word 
 as ‘generated in a timeless present, an eternal now sae 
 
Xvi EARLY RULE OF FAITH AND TRUE KNOWLEDGE. 
 
 throws out ideas about the consignment of fallen spirits 
 to certain bodies as penitentiaries, about the possibly 
 remedial nature of future punishments ; and goes so far 
 as to suggest that those oppressive powers, which the 
 apostles call the devil and his angels, may come to have 
 free will and be saved. The gradual introduction into 
 the theology of the Church, on the one hand, of a narrow 
 dogmatism limiting the gift of prophecy to certain 
 prophets or priests, setting aside Christian freedom or 
 misrepresenting the nature of the Spirit’s work ; and, on 
 the other hand, of a speculative metaphysic, soaring 
 beyond what God has made subject to human know- 
 ledge, may perhaps be dated from these two great men. 
 
 The early fathers clearly taught that ‘the Scriptures are 
 the true utterances of the Holy Spirit’? (Clem. Rom. i. 45) ; 
 that ‘the Scriptures are indeed perfect as being uttered by 
 God’s Word and His Spirit ;’ but we, in such measure as we 
 are less than, and (novitiates) far behind God’s Word and 
 Spirit, are in so far wanting also in the knowledge of His 
 mysteries (Iren. i. 28, 2) ‘Matthew might have said, she 
 birth of Fesus was on this wise; but the Holy Spirit foreseeing 
 corrupters. . . . saith by Matthew, the birth of Christ was on 
 this wise (iil. 16, 2). It was the same men who once preached 
 the Gospel and afterwards by the will of God handed down to 
 us the Scriptures to be the ground and pillar of our faith’ (iii. 
 1, 1). ‘Jeremiah, or rather,’ says Clement, ‘the Holy Spirit in 
 Jeremiah (xxiii. 24), exhibits God’ (Exh. 8). ‘Icould adduce 
 ten thousand scriptures, of which not one tittle shall pass 
 away without being fulfilled ; for the mouth of the Lord, the 
 Holy Spirit, hath spoken these things’ (Exh. 9). ‘The prophets 
 alone knew and taught the truth. . . . declaring those things 
 alone which they saw and heard when filled with the Houy 
 Ghost’ (Just. Dial. 7) ; if any Scripture appears contradictory 
 to another, it is because we do not understand its meaning 
 (D. 65). But what was supernaturally revealed is to unfold 
 itself to the rational consciousness through reflection and study; 
 
THE SPHERE OF CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. xvii 
 
 Christianity is not perfected by the perpetuated visions and 
 frenzied utterances of Montanists (Neander). 
 
 The early fathers indicate THREE sraGrs or CHRISTIAN 
 KNOWLEDGE, in the fullest sense of the word. ‘The first is the 
 assent of faith ; the second is the fuller understanding or en- 
 lightened exposition of divine things, knowledge properly so 
 called ; and the third, the training of a man’s whole turn of 
 mind, life, and speech—the character which is in harmony with 
 his knowledge and confesses it in the life. The first stage of 
 knowledge is the reception of those ‘facts, dogmatic germs and 
 hints, which constituted the first deposit of the Christian faith.’ 
 The second is the accurate exposition of the Scriptures or of 
 the first deposit, an exposition to be carried on cautiously and 
 legitimately so as not to overthrow the basis of all belief. 
 Thirdly, as falsehood is not dissipated by the bare presentation 
 of the truth, but by the practical improvement (ypncer) of it, 
 our Lord requires self-discipline (cuvdsxnotc), as well as under- 
 standing, when He returns to reckon with His servants con- 
 cerning the deposit ; and He is ready to increase out of His 
 abundance the good things which He has distributed, working 
 in them new habits of body and mind, and that philanthropy 
 and love of excellence for its own sake, which is the consum- 
 mation of knowledge. Clement elsewhere speaks of the recep- 
 tion of the deposit as the first taste of the Scriptures ; secondly, 
 of an accurate exposition or fuller understanding of the Scrip- 
 tures, which was to be attained by careful research, but which 
 he believed had also been by the apostles imparted unwritten 
 to a few, who were capable of profiting by it, and transmitted 
 till it had reached him ; and thirdly, he connects this full know- 
 ledge with godliness (Se004Be), for God only can teach men 
 so as to make them hke Himself, or write this knowledge on 
 their hearts as on a new book. The only royal road to know- 
 ledge is: Seek and ye shall find. When, therefore, Clement 
 was induced by his friends to write, for the benefit of posterity, 
 this Gnostic tradition, that it might not be lost, he wrote ‘ Mis- 
 cellanies,’ the scattered elements of a system, and ina style by 
 
 B 
 
XViil EARLY RULE OF FAITH AND TRUE KNOWLEDGE. 
 
 no means plain, that those who were worthy seekers might be 
 exercised by the pursuit of it, and that those might not handle 
 it who, through their want of intelligence, their perversity, or 
 their contentiousness, were likely to get injury and not good.! 
 
 According to the early fathers, THE SPHERE OF CHRISTIAN 
 KNOWLEDGE, properly so called, is to explain and harmonise 
 the Scriptures, and, in so doing, to build on what is plain and 
 open to the understanding. The healthy, cautious, and truth- 
 loving mind will exercise itself in the things which God has 
 put within the power of man’s knowledge and make progress 
 in them. It will not go beyond the limits of human thought 
 into transcendental questionings ? about God’s physical infinity, 
 or about the cause of that choice, through which some acquire 
 an evil or demoniac nature ; it will leave such subjects to God, 
 since no Scripture declares them. In this way, we shall build 
 on what ze at least ought to recognise as the first principles of 
 existing things and not on mere words or mere fancies about 
 things beyond our comprehension and not revealed. Well- 
 founded knowledge and sound speech serve to edify and to 
 minister grace; but a knowledge founded on fancies or mere 
 words, not on the first principles of what man can know, is the 
 semblance, not the reality, of knowledge. Secondly, when that 
 which is perfect is come, we shall not have another foundation, 
 but a fuller understanding of the mystery. Accordingly, we 
 must not explain difficult passages so as to subvert the basis of 
 all belief in God or the theistic position of Christianity. God 
 made man like Himself, rational and in his own power, having 
 free choice (Iren. iv. 4, 3; 38, 4), and, on the other hand, 
 God is like man in these respects (S, vi. 9). We must also 
 consider ‘ what is the perfectly befitting character of Him who 
 is the Lord God’ (C? 478). If God created men, intending 
 to torment or deceive His workmanship, how could we believe » 
 in what He reveals? Miracles might then be wrought for the 
 purpose of deceiving. Thirdly, we must distinguish things 
 
 MS Tren. itv... 26313, 5.3. 33;/8, ) Clem S. is (1,082 3 avii2 Five ep Ugeee 
 240,°3715 377, Boh3 Vil: 104°xh.15,59:C! 46> 82, 
 
 2 Suprasentiunt quam est mensura sensationis. Iren. v. 20, 2; Rom. xii, 3. 
 
THE PREDESTINATION OF THE PREPARED. xix 
 
 that differ, so as not to take in a literal sense what is meta- 
 phorical, or conversely. Ambiguities may arise from God’s 
 different modes of teaching men; but we must not expound 
 such difficult passages by blaspheming the Creator or by making 
 a still greater difficulty. It is one God who made temporal 
 things (the things of sense) for man’s sake, that man might 
 grow to maturity, and who also brings in eternal things, that 
 He may show the riches of His grace. Fourthly, it belongs to 
 Christian knowledge to explain the dispensations, their connec- 
 tion (dxoAovOia), their differences and their unity or agreement— 
 how both the law of Moses and the grace of the New Testa- 
 ment were suited to the times and for the good of men—to 
 work out (zpooepyafeobac) the things spoken in parables, and 
 fit them to the foundation ; to explain why God made some 
 things earthly and temporal, and others heavenly and eternal ; 
 why, though invisible, He manifested Himself to different pro- 
 phets in different ways; why the Son of God took flesh and 
 suffered ; why He did so in the last times ; what is said about 
 the end and about things to come ; and what is meant by such 
 passages as Rom.*ix. 25, xi. 32°; Eph. 11.6; 1 Cor. xv. 54.! 
 Ws THE CONNECTION OF THE DISPENSATIONS, 
 their orderly succession (axoXov@ia) and harmony formed 
 an early church canon or rule for reconciling dogmas and 
 opening up the Scriptures (C? 377, 379, 481, 483). The 
 first elders taught that the spiritual man judges error by 
 its inconsistency, that God is constant, and His greater 
 gifts consistent with His past dealings (Iren. iv.). Thus 
 (1) THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION 
 
 does not set aside probation. That dispensation which 
 precedes is fitted to prepare men for some advanced stage 
 or rank, which is to follow, and which those who have 
 been taught of God and have learned (John vi. 45) attain. 
 Clement (S. i. 5, 19; vi. 8) asserted that the philosophical 
 
 ye drenpetsy a. 10, 33 lieIO, 25:27, 2S x.liie 129 52 veg, 24 Clem: 
 
 Strom, i, 115 il, 11; vii. 16 C%, 478, 481. 
 B 2 
 
xXx). THE, CONNECTIONUOF |. THEY DISPENSATIONS. 
 
 elements of the heathen world did not arise from mere 
 chance or from demoniac operation, but that both these 
 and the Jewish elements, the Mosaic Law, were intended 
 to train men beforehand for Christ. There were, he 
 says, not only among the Jews but among the Gentiles 
 those who were fitted (ésrut7dev0r) for conversion ; and to 
 such, even in Hades, the gospel was preached (S. vi. 6). 
 ‘God came to call men, not according to respect of 
 persons, but according as the Spirit had prepared 
 them’ (Bar. c. 19). These writers taught that men were 
 first placed undera preparatory discipline, and that those 
 on whom this discipline produced the intended result 
 were predestined to be conformed to the image of God’s 
 Son; that they were the elect, known or recognised by 
 God before Christ appeared ; that such as feared God 
 and were anxious about His law ran to Christ ‘and 
 were all saved’ (Iren. iv. 2, 7); and that those who did 
 not learn came to serve a baser purpose. 
 
 God's purpose according to election appears from the follow- 
 ing passages. When our Lord said : ‘ All that the Father giveth 
 Me shall come unto Me. No man can come unto Me except 
 the Father draw him.’ He added, according to the Revised 
 Version, ‘It is written in your law, “And they shall all be 
 taught of God.” Everyone that hath heard of the Father and 
 hath learned cometh unto Me’ (John vi. 37, 44, 45). It is 
 not said that everyone that hears learns, or that the taught of 
 God have been forced to consent to learn, or that the drawn 
 may not pluck themselves out of God’s hands. ‘Our Lord, 
 the Word of God,’ said Irenzeus (iv. 13, 4), ‘first drew men as 
 slaves to God, and afterwards set free those who are subject to 
 Him? (John xv. 15). The Revised Version explains other 
 passages. ‘Thus, ‘the Lord added to them (or together) day 
 by day those that were being saved’ (Acts ii. 47) ; or, ‘suchas 
 were in the way of salvation’ (Dean Alford). ‘God chose you 
 from the beginning,’ or, as in the margin of Revised Version, 
 
THE PREDESTINATION OF THE PREPARED. XXi 
 
 ‘as a first-fruits unto salvation’ (2 Thess. ii. 13); and who 
 those chosen were appears from Eph. i. 3-13, if we omit the 
 long parenthesis, verses 7, 8, 9, 10, and connect the words that 
 precede it, ‘in the Beloved,’ with those that follow it, ‘in Him’ 
 (I say) ‘in whom.’ St. Paul repeats what he said before the 
 parenthesis, and tells us that those predestined to be to the 
 praise of God’s glory are ‘we who before hoped in Christ’ 
 (v. 12, Rev. Ver.). The law of Moses and the elements of the 
 world were schooling men to ‘hope before in Christ,’ the Hope 
 of Israel and the Desire of all nations. But if the vessels 
 which were being prepared for this became through human 
 freedom marred, they might be employed for another purpose 
 for which they had become fitted (Rom. ix. 22). ‘As many 
 as were ordained (reraypévor) unto eternal life believed’ 
 (Acts xiii, 48). But it is not said how these men came to be 
 SO disposed ; and the word might equally well be translated 
 trained up in order for, equipped or prepared Jor. The Scrip- 
 tures never say that before each man is born or has made his 
 (self-determining) choice, God foreknows what he will do. 
 God foreknew ‘men of well-pleasing’ (Rom. viii. 28, 29, 20% 
 PePCiei 192); Lukestimr4! Rev. Ver.), that is, according to 
 Calvin, Alford, Fausset, &c., He Sore-owned, fore-acknowledged, 
 Sore-recognised-as-His, fore-cared for such men ; as He never 
 knew workers of iniquity (Matt. vii. 23). The ninth and 
 eleventh chapters of Romans (with Gale i5y ive 21eai 
 I Pet. i. 895 :Is: xlv. 7 ; xlvii 10; Jer. 1. 5; xviii. 1-10) are more 
 fully explained in the ‘Philosophy of the Dispensations’ 
 (pp. 71-86, and pp. 247-253); but some idea of the Early 
 Patristic explanations of such difficulties may be here given. 
 By not recognising that the Scripture doctrine of ELECTION 
 AND PREDESTINATION presuppose not only a fall but also 
 different results under the preparatory discipline, Marcion, 
 Augustine, Calvin, and others have explained it in such a way 
 as to bring in a character of God which the early fathers con- 
 sidered blasphemous ; especially, when their explanation is 
 combined with the idea that those passed over are wakened up 
 
xxii THE CONNECTION OF THE DISPENSATIONS. 
 
 after death to an eternity of endless, hopeless, and conscious 
 misery. In reading the ninth chapter of Romans, we * ought to 
 understand what is meant by Esau and Jacob and the subjec- 
 tion of the elder to the younger,’ determined before their birth 
 (Bar. c. 13). ‘The history,’ says Irenzeus (iv. 21, 2), ‘is not 
 without meaning, being a prophecy of two peoples, one under 
 servitude and the other free.’ Adam and Edom both mean 
 red flesh, and both are typical of a first state or a first worship. 
 As flesh and blood do not inherit the kingdom of God, but are 
 inherited ; as life is not inherent in our first Adam, in mere flesh 
 and blood (Iren. v. 9), but is of God’s giving ; so the type of 
 Esau and Jacob shows that God’s blessing is of God’s good- 
 ness, not of the flesh, nor of its will, nor of (€6) works, as if 
 God needed them to make Him good, or as if they had a 
 magical efficacy to give life without His power, or as if by an 
 exact literal performance of every detail of the Mosaic law, the 
 Jew could lay God under an obligation to give him the reward 
 of life. God’s teaching is not brought down to men by their 
 works done in ignorance, but He is teaching men of His good- 
 ness, drawing men by sensuous and other means to look into 
 the meaning of the things of sense, to understand the old ritual 
 and ‘the parable of the Lord, so that by this faith or insight 
 into the meaning of the law and by practising it, they may at- 
 tain the gift, not as a reward due to their merit, but by God's 
 blessing the means, by God’s ‘calling’ or ‘comforting’ those 
 who truly repent (C? 156), that is, those who no longer do the 
 things of which they repent (C? 35). For, though God does not 
 need our works, yet we need them, that the Divine Spirit may rest 
 upon us. In this matter, ‘he who does good, gets good ; and 
 he who gives, receives ; like the pilot of a ship, who, in saving 
 others, saves himself’ (Clem. S. ii, 19). The blessing is not 
 of good works, whether ritual or rational, as if they could of 
 themselves produce a new nature, apart from God’s personal 
 operation ; but God uses them as a means of disciplining, 
 He blesses them. The means of salvation are given, so 
 that we have it in our power to attain life; and there are 
 
THE PREDESTINATION OF ESAU AND JACOB. xxiii 
 
 degrees of excellence in men’s choice, what is essential being 
 made comparatively easy (S. iv. 23). 
 
 There are transpositions (Ayferbaza) and other difficulties in 
 St. Paul’s writings, which, as Irenzus says, arise ‘from the 
 rapidity of his discourses, and the vehemence of the spirit in 
 him’ (ili. 7, 2); and in quoting the oracle about Esau and 
 Jacob and the saying of Malachi, ‘ Jacob I loved, but Esau I 
 hated,’ he does not explain who were signified, or how the 
 elder was in bondage or hated. The first manner of man is 
 not the stage of enlightenment, but that of Edom ‘in whom 
 there is no understanding’ (Obad. 7). It was a childish idea 
 to suppose that God could be pleased with the cruel rite of 
 circumcision performed on a child or with the smell of burnt 
 sacrifices and incense. And though the typical observances of 
 the law were appointed for men in a childish state, and were 
 hallowed by the conscience (cvveéénovc) of the offerer, yet, as 
 Irenzeus says, many of the Jews became careless about true 
 righteousness and the love of God, thinking that God was pro- 
 pitiated by the Mosaic sacrifices. Accordingly, God is repre- 
 sented (Ps. xl. 6; 1.; Is. 1.) as rejecting those things whereby 
 they thought to appease God while sinning, ot through any emo- 
 tion of anger, as many dare to say, but, in pity to their blindness, 
 giving them an intimation of the true sacrifice (Is. 1. 11, 16, 
 18 ; Jer. vil. 3-7), they who offer which shall propitiate God to 
 the receiving of life from Him, and mercifully recommending to 
 them the means whereby they might be saved, the things which 
 send* to salvation: (iren. 1v.°17°;"15 2). “Phe ’sort “of ‘works, 
 which a carnally-minded Jew, an Esau without understanding, 
 or a hater like Cain, offered, did not make him pleasing to God. 
 The second manner of man, the penetrating Jacob of prophecy, 
 who, by the insight of faith looked through the symbolic veil 
 and practised the weightier matters and meaning of the law, 
 was destined, before the birth of the brothers or before the 
 giving of the law, to ‘supplant’ the elder brother and obtain 
 both the birthright and the blessing. ‘Do you not perceive,’ 
 said Justin to the Jew, ‘that God willeth not that circumcision 
 
XXIV THE CONNECTION OF THE DISPENSATIONS. 
 
 which is given as a sign (type or symbol)? But if anyone has 
 the knowledge of God and of His Christ, and observes the 
 things eternally righteous, he is circumcised with the good and 
 profitable circumcision, and is pleasing to God, who takes de- 
 light in his offerings and sacrifices’ (Dial. 28). 
 
 When the Scriptures speak of God as hating Esau, harden- 
 ing Pharaoh’s heart, or blinding part of the Jews, we must 
 understand what is meant so as not to bring in another 
 character of God. Fury or hatred is not in God but in the 
 furious people who oppose Him (Is. xxvii. 4) ; and when the 
 word of God is represented as trampling down Edom in His 
 fury (Is. Ixili. 1-6), Justin quotes the passage as applicable to 
 those Jews whose fury or religious zeal in persecuting the 
 church was an evident token of their perdition (Dial. 26 ; Phil. 
 1, 28). It was when the nations were angered, that God’s anger 
 came (Rev. xi. 18); men, by giving vent to their angry pas- 
 sions, become possessed by a spirit of hatred, and are thus said 
 to be hated of God. So when men shut their eyes against the 
 truth or against conscience and reason, they may become blind 
 to infatuation ; or when they steel their hearts against good, 
 they may become hardened. But God can only be said to 
 blind or harden such in so far as He has appointed that law 
 of our nature by which these results follow certain actions. 
 Further, what Clement says of false teachers or prophets ap- 
 plies also to persecutors, who are likened to wild beasts. ‘The 
 counsels and activities of those who have rebelled are guided 
 by universal Providence to a salutary issue, even though the 
 cause be productive of disease. It is, accordingly, the greatest 
 achievement of Providence not to allow the evils which have 
 sprung from voluntary apostasy to be useless or in all respects 
 injurious, but to accomplish some good and profitable end 
 through these evils as also through the testimony that comes 
 from temptation’ (C! 4o9). ‘God does not actively produce 
 these tribulations ; but we must believe that He does not pre- 
 vent those that cause them, while He overrules their crimes for 
 good’ (C* 178). Evil men are ‘so far useful and serviceable to 
 
GOD PRESERVES MAN’S FREEDOM OF CHOICE. xxv 
 
 the righteous as stubble serves towards the growth of wheat and 
 its straw for burning for the working of gold’ (Iren. v. 29, i.). 
 God put Abel in Cain’s power, showing that the fault was not 
 in God nor the evil wrought by Him(Iren. iv. 18, 3). Why then 
 does God find fault, if His will is still accomplished ? is the 
 question asked in Rom. ix. St. Paul answers that God is not 
 unrighteous in inflicting wrath, that He is a better judge than 
 man. Not only so, but ‘He goes the round of all curative 
 modes of treatment to call men to salvation’ (Clem. Peed. i. 
 10); when men had become almost like wild beasts, rulers 
 were appointed to check and correct them (Iren. v. 24, aie 
 and so Irenzeus speaks of the New Testament or Dispensation 
 as reconciling men to peace (iv. 34, 4), as granting precepts, ex- 
 pedient for the weak, but as ‘always preserving that element in 
 man which is free and self-determining and His mode of suasion’ 
 (iv. 15, 2; 37). God seals on men a nature in accordance 
 with what they choose (S. iv. 23); so that men, fleeing from 
 light and God’s life-giving operation, and having what they 
 choose, cannot complain of this judgment (Iren. iv. 20, 5, 6; 
 30a -27)- 
 
 The early fathers believed that men have a real FREEDOM OF 
 CHOICE, that they are born subject to passions which tempt 
 them, but not with a fixed moral character either divine or 
 demon-like ; that God does not leave us without rational teach- 
 ing, correction, and moving influences, drawing us to Himself 
 and to virtue (S. vi. 12) ; and that, according as we follow the 
 higher or lower influences, we become sealed with the character 
 of God or of demons, being the cause to ourselves of the result, 
 especially when the result is evil (S. iv. 23, C? 209). Men are 
 worsted through not employing sufficient athletic energy in the 
 contest, and are deceived or seduced by not distinguishing be- 
 tween the true and the false pleasure or beauty ; and each 
 deceit, by constantly pressing on the soul, stamps on it the 
 image of the passion, ¢he cause arising Jrom the batt-and cur 
 consent (S. i. 20 C? 64). But how God created material things 
 and why, though He has supreme power, some of His crea- 
 
XXV1 THE CONNECTION OF THE DISPENSATIONS, 
 
 tures rebelled, are questions which must be left to God. ‘The 
 Scriptures declare that God has prepared eternal fe for trans- 
 gressors ; yet the cause itself of the ature of transgressors 
 neither hath any Scripture declared nor apostle said nor hath 
 our Lord taught. We must, therefore, leave this knowledge to 
 God, as our Lord Himself doth that of the Hour and the Day, 
 . .. lest we form an impious (or antitheistic) foundation’ 
 (Iren. i. 28, 7). So Aristotle does not attempt to explain the 
 nature of such misleading powers. ‘There appears in men,’ 
 he says, ‘something not only different from reason, but fight- 
 ing with and contrary to reason... but in what way it is 
 such we need not determine.’! It is this contest, however, 
 which gives to virtue its value ; and Aristotle defines virtues to 
 be praiseworthy habits, states of moderation, which, though not 
 voluntary in the same sense as the actions which form them, 
 are yet really in our power, because the separate actions, which 
 are the beginnings of them, are in our power from beginning to 
 end (Ethics, iil. 5, 22). So Irenzeus contended that our good, 
 our virtue, were it by a nature, not the result of trial, struggling 
 and self-discipline (zmexercitatum), would be irrational (zzsen- 
 satum), and not such as we esteem (iv. 37 ; 6,7). ‘While God 
 is good,’ he says, ‘ Heis yet a Trier of those on whom He sends 
 His goodness. He saves those whom He ought to save, and 
 judges those whom He ought to judge. He shows Himself 
 mercifully just’ (i. 25; 2, 3). And in regard to the question 
 asked by Edwards in his Freedom of the Will: What cause 
 determines a man’s choice to yield to one set of influences and 
 not to another? or, Why does temptation produce evil action 
 in one man and not in another? the early fathers replied 
 that the man himself, the sou!, personality, or Ego, is the cause 
 of this, and not the inborn nature (Just. Ap. i. 43 ; Clem. S. 
 il. 35 Iren. iv. 4, 3 ; 39, 3). ‘How could man, who is destined to 
 rule over the whole creation, be a slave in respect to himself, 
 
 , a 
  balverat d ev avrois cal &Ado Ti Tapa Tov Adyov mepunds d wdxeral TE 
 > e ~ “~ o a ~ ¥f 
 kal ayTireive: TE Adyw.. . THs Erepov ovdiy Siadéper. . . THY Ekewy BE 
 \ > 4 J \ / “~ . 
 TAS EmavEeTas apeTas A€youcy,—Leth, i, 13. 
 
PHYSICAL INFINITY AND FOREKNOWLEDGE. xxvil 
 
 without the faculty of reigning over himself?’ (Tert. Adv. 
 Marc. u. 8, 6, 9). Ad’ the early fathers agreed that men have 
 such a power of self-determination or freedom of choice, 
 otherwise men would not be amenable to praise or blame ; 
 and they did not, like some Gnostics, ‘ despise the consistency 
 of their opinions’ (S. vii., 16) so as to hold contradictory beliefs. 
 How could they a misunderstand the apostolic teaching, or, 
 without tradition, err into one and the same belief ? (Hagenbach, 
 i. 1507.; Tert. de P. H. 28). Ifit be objected that, in this case, 
 we might have a result without a sufficient cause, or a cause 
 without a result, the answer is that our idea of efficient cause 
 is derived from the operation of our wills ; that we cannot 
 explain as an effect that which gzves us the idea of a cause; 
 that the subject is beyond the sphere of our knowledge. 
 Prof. Huxley (Hume, p. 194) considers that the philosophy of 
 Edwards virtually teaches that God is the author of sin. It 
 was to prove that God is not the author of evil that Irencus 
 wrote his epistle to Florinus concerning sovereignty. 
 
 The whole subject of God’s physical essence (substantia) 
 and immensity (maguztudo) must, according to Ireneus, be 
 left to God. God is comprehensible in regard to His ethical 
 attributes of love, kindness, &c., and His power to do all; but 
 what He is physically and how eet (gualts et guantus) saint 
 be known or described by His creatures (Iren. iii., 24, 2 ; iv. 
 20, 1-6). He is revealed by His Word or Son; bat how eae 
 Word or Son is generated must also be left to God (ii. 28, 7). 
 Now as the subject of God’s INFINITE FOREKNOWLEDGE of 
 whatever comes to pass belongs to these physical categories of 
 essential nature and greatness, we must understand Irenzeus to 
 mean that we, ‘in so far as we are in the fashion of this world, 
 must leave such a question to God, lest, when we seek to in- 
 vestigate the height and depth (a/ttudo) of the Father, we fall 
 into so great a danger as to enquire whether there be another 
 God (Infinity) above God’ (Iren. ii. 28, 8). When God pre- 
 dicts that some will be unchangeably wicked, the reason is not 
 that He made them such or fated them to be such, but because 
 
XXVlil THE OLD TESTAMENT AND ITS TYPES. 
 
 He knew them beforehand (iv. 29, 2; Herm. Sim. viii. 6; 
 Just. D. 141), having tried Pharaoh before He raised him up to 
 be king. In speaking of God’s Addden arrangements, James 
 (Acts xv. 17, 18, emended text) and Irenzeus (A1Le1 6,075 Auman: 
 32, 2) say that all ¢Zese things were foreknown to God from the 
 beginning. The Scriptural and the early Patristic doctrine of 
 foreknowledge is that what God purposes that He foretells as 
 certain to come to pass; but that, as God purposed with 
 Himself that every man should be recompensed according to 
 his worth, He foretells this also (Just. Ap. i. 44); and that 
 predictions about such moral agents either express or suppose 
 a condition (1 Sam. ii. 30 ; Jonah iii, ro ; Just. Dial. 141). 
 
 (2) THE TYPOLOGY OF THE PENTATEUCH and of 
 ISRAEL’S HISTORY connects the testaments and shows all 
 to be right (C? 377). The early fathers looked for types 
 in questionable histories ‘set down without definite cen- 
 sure’ (Iren, iv. 31, 1). The first Adam is the type of the 
 second ; and these fathers found many typical analogies 
 in the histories of Genesis. The Mosaic Law of ‘works’ 
 was a type of that exhibition of truth and of that disci- 
 pline which men have in the kingdom of God’s Son. The 
 principle of seeking for types in the histories of Ishmael 
 and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, Israel in the wilderness, &c., 
 appears in different parts of the New Testament, 
 especially in the Epistle to the Hebrews ; it runs through 
 the whole theology of the early fathers, and must have 
 been of apostolical origin. If the Gnostics abused it, or 
 if some of the early fathers were fanciful in their applica- 
 tion of it, as when Barnabas finds a type of Christ in the 
 number 318 circumcised in Abraham’s household, or as 
 when Theophilus of Antioch sees in the coagulation of 
 (Abel’s) blood a sign of nature’s horror of murder, this 
 does not prove the method to be incorrect. Though Bacon 
 himself made mistakes in applying his method of inter- 
 
WISDOM HID IN PARABOLIC MYSTERIES. XXIX 
 
 preting nature, it does not follow that his method is 
 wrong. Was it by error or tradition that a// the early 
 fathers thus interpreted such things as the oracle about 
 Esau and Jacob? (Rom. ix. 11-13, Harvey’s Ir. ii. 226 7. 2). 
 ‘Now these things Lappened to them as types") (1- Gor 
 x. I1), they were historical occurrences, written for our 
 admonition ; they have a spiritual meaning, but are not 
 mere parables. ‘The whole of the Scriptures are 
 spiritual . . . that God may be always teaching and 
 man throughout learning of God’ (Iren. ii. 28, a) 
 
 THE PARABOLIC STYLE JIS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE 
 PROPHETIC SCRIPTURES. Justin finds fault with the 
 Jews for taking everything in a carnal sense (Dial. 14). 
 “The style (character) of the Scriptures,’ said Clement, 
 ‘is parabolic. Our Lord, who was not of this world, 
 came to men as one who was of the world. . . . Where- 
 fore, also, He used metaphorical description, for such is 
 the parable . . . and this parabolic style abounds most, 
 as was to be expected, in the prophets’ (S. vi. 1 By 773 78). 
 Not only did our Lord teach men by the parables of the 
 gospels, but His actions and sacraments are parabolical 
 exhibitions and injunctions of the way of life. Those 
 who learn the meaning of these things are enlightened by 
 Christ in their minds; and this is the true washing in 
 the laver of the forgiveness of sins (the truth), that men 
 should sin no more (Ap. I. 44, 61). The question why 
 truths are taught in parables is answered by Clement. 
 Such sensuous instruction is attractive and stimulates 
 men to think; passive indolence must not be encouraged, 
 and pearls are not to be too readily cast before men who 
 are too devoid of sense or too perverse and contentious 
 to profit by the explanation of mysteries (S.ct62'5 v.09). 
 “Those who know plainly that the Saviour teaches His 
 
xX THE OLD "TESTAMENT AND ‘ITS GREPICS, 
 
 disciples nothing with man’s, but all things with divine 
 and mystic wisdom, ought not to take (hear) His sayings 
 carnally, but to investigate and thoroughly study the 
 meaning hidden in them. For even our Lord’s seeming 
 explanations to the disciples of things enigmatically 
 said, are found to require not less but more intelligent 
 study on account of the surpassing depth of meaning 
 in them’ (De Div. Ser. 5). The supernatural inherits the 
 natural. Samuel heard a voice unheard by Eli. The true 
 prophet had some vision or other objective manifesta- 
 tion presented to his mind; he was elevated, not out of 
 the sphere of the rational and moral, but in it. 
 
 (3) EXCURSUS ON RECENT CRITICAL THEORIES OF THE OLD 
 TESTAMENT.— The Scriptures, as expounded by Barnabas (c. 14), 
 Justin (Dial. 19, 22), and Irenzeus (iv. 15, 1; 17, 3), teach that 
 the natural precepts of the moral law were first given as the 
 main thing ( Paean erie) when Israel came out of Egypt 
 (Deut. v. 22; Jer. vil. 22); but that, after the people had 
 shown fremselves unfit for liberty, prone to idolatry and in 
 need of a sensuous discipline, they got the sacrifices and 
 burdensome ritual as the consequence of their conduct (secun- 
 dum consequentiam), and that they might not fall into idolatry. 
 In this ritual imagery, the people bore at once the correction 
 and the memorial of their iniquity, till our Lord took this im- 
 agery on Himself and bore it. The book of Deuteronomy 
 seems to foreshadow the recapitulation of all things, when the 
 old ritual was superseded and the plainer precepts of the primi- 
 tive patriarchal faith were re-enacted and amplified. Some 
 modern critics, however, neglecting these early Christian ex- 
 planations, and deeming it inconsistent that three different 
 bodies of law should be given at one epoch and by one person, 
 have started other theories of the origin of the Pentateuch. 
 The chief of these is ‘the thesis, which, propounded by Vatke 
 as early as 1835, was, after twenty years of total neglect, taken 
 up by Graf, and has since been elaborated by Kuenen (in Hol- 
 
THE -DIVISIONS OF ‘THE=PENTATEUCHAL LAW. XXXi 
 
 land) and Wellhausen (in Germany). For some years it has 
 been before English readers in a somewhat confused and cum- 
 brous form in the not very popular writings of Kalisch and 
 Colenso. In Professor Robertson Smith’s Lectures on the Old 
 Testament it is treated for the first time in this country with 
 full mastery of detail and-with adequate literary power’ 
 (Scotsman). Other lectures on the Prophets of [srae are just 
 published by A. and C. Black. The lectures are a sequel to a 
 pamphlet on the Pentateuch which Prof. R. Smith published pre- 
 viously (D. Douglas, Edinburgh), and which we may first examine. 
 
 THE PENTATEUCHAL Law is divisible into three different 
 books : the Sinaitic Covenant (S), the Levitical ritual or middle 
 part of the Pentateuch (Q), and the book of Deuteronomy (D). 
 The Sinaitic Covenant is called the book of the Covenant, and 
 is said to contain ‘all the words of Jehovah’ (Ex. xxiv.). By 
 this we may understand either the Ten Commandments, on 
 hearing which the people asked for a mediator, or the system 
 of laws in Ex. xx. to xxiil., which appears as a connected scheme. 
 It is based on patriarchal customs, declaring God’s right to 
 locate altars (Ex. xx. 24), and speaking of the mohar (téva) 
 or patriarchal dowry paid by the husband to the father. As 
 it was set aside by the making of the golden calf, there 
 would be no inconsistency even if it could be shown that the 
 ' lawgiver modified it. (1) The first difficulty refers to the local 
 altars which Exodus seems to recognise and Deuteronomy to 
 abolish (Deut. xii.). The historical cases, to which Prof. Smith 
 refers, were either justified by preceding theophanies at Bochim 
 (Jud. i. 5), to Gideon (vi. 24), and to Manoah (xiii. 19); or 
 they occurred during the period of irregularity, after the ark of 
 God was taken by the Philistines and when there was really no 
 central temple; or they were connected with the high places 
 which certain kings are said not to have removed, although zz 
 other respects they did right (1 Kings xv. 14; xxii 43; 
 2 Kings xii. 3; xiv. 4; xv. 4, 35). In regard to the case men- 
 tioned in Judges xx. 26, 27, if we must read Bethel for the 
 English version ‘house of God,’ we might question whether 
 
XxXxXil. THE: OLD TESTAMENT AND ITS CRITICS, 
 
 the presence of the ark did not imply the presence of the 
 central sanctuary. It might be thus maintained that the Old 
 Testament did not authorise sacrifice at these high places, 
 except where God ‘recorded His name’ by a theophany (Ex. 
 Xx. 24), or in the period between Samuel and Solomon, when 
 ‘there was no house built unto the name of the Lord’ (1 Kings 
 ill. 2). But according to the Jewish Rabbis, ‘it was not ab- 
 solutely forbidden to sacrifice on high places until the Temple 
 was established in Jerusalem ; and, further, that on a Bamah 
 erected for the use of an individual only, even non-priests were 
 permitted to sacrifice’ (Rabbi). There is no contradiction 
 (2) in the substitution of a definite fine of 50 shekels (Deut. 
 XxiL 29) for the indefinite patriarchal dowry of virgins paid 
 for a wife (Ex. xxi. 16, 17). Moses probably saw the practice 
 decaying or foresaw that it would cease. (3) In Ex. xiii. 13, 
 and xxxiv. 20, the Israelites were directed to redeem the first- 
 born of an ass with a lamb, or, if not, to break its neck. In 
 Ley. xxvil., Moses is speaking of animals &c. vowed or de- 
 voted to the Lord. Verse 26 is parenthetical, explaining that 
 the firstlings ofclean animals could not be so sanctified because 
 they were already the Lord’s. Verse 27 is taken by Prof. Smith 
 to be a continuation of the parenthesis, in which case it would 
 seem contradictory to the two passages in Exodus. But why 
 not understand Moses to be returning in y. 27 to the subject of 
 vows as he does inv. 28, and to mean that if azy unclean 
 animal were vozed, it was to be redeemed or sold but not 
 sacrificed? There is, therefore, no contradiction ; nor is there 
 any (4) between the law of the release of Hebrew maidservants 
 in Ex, xxl. 7-11, and in Deut. xv. :2. If we read the whole 
 passage in Exodus, it appears that Moses enacts that the 
 Hebrew woman, who was a slave, was not to go out (exactly) as 
 the slaves, that is, either as the men-slaves or as the Canaanitish 
 slaves. Moses is evidently adapting his legislation to the 
 existing customs of concubinage, for he speaks of the owner as 
 having betrothed her to himself. But if she did not please 
 him, he was either to find another Hebrew who would redeem 
 
DEUTERONOMY AND THE PREVIOUS BOOKS. xxxiij 
 
 her, so as to provide her with a new home ; or he might give 
 her as a wife to his son; if he or his son had another wife, her 
 rights as such were not to be interfered with. But if the owner 
 did not one of these three things, she was to go out free with- 
 out money. Deuteronomy does not speak of the case where 
 she had been betrothed or a concubine. 
 
 The middle part of the Pentateuch (Q) gives details of the 
 Jewish ritual specially suited for the priests ; whereas Deutero- 
 nomy is addressed to the whole of Israel and appointed to be 
 read in their hearing every seventh year, the year of release nat 
 the feast of tabernacles. (5) It is to be expected that, being a 
 popular and hortatory book, it will differ in style and structure 
 from a book written more especially for those who had to per- 
 form the ritual. We do not surely need to suppose that Deute- 
 ronomy was written in a different age from Q, when we can 
 explain its difference of style on a ground so familiar to us : 
 because Deuteronomy is a popular book, giving all about the 
 plain duties of the Israelite’s life and omitting the complicated 
 details of the ritual. Thus when it has occasion to speak of 
 the law of leprosy—that significant disease of the skin, that 
 spotted covering of the flesh which Jeremiah (xiii. 23) com- 
 pares to habits—it refers the people to the priests (Deut. xxiv. 8). 
 Similarly (6), it omits the details of the different functions of 
 the priests and Levites, speaking of them as one body, the 
 priests, the Levites, just as we speak of the Levitical priesthood, 
 or of the clergy, or of the ministers of religion, &c., without 
 distinguishing the different orders of bishops, priests, &c, 
 Deuteronomy omits the name of Korah, the Levite, who aspired 
 to the priesthood, perhaps because he was not a warning to the 
 people so generally as Dathan and Abiram. (7) To the priests, 
 however, and not to all the Levites, was assigned a certain due 
 of the animals slaughtered for food in Palestine, namely, the 
 two cheeks (the mouth-piece), the right leg (the organ of action 
 or progress), and the stomach (Deut. xviii. 3). Our translation 
 says that this was due to the priest ‘from them who offer (sac- 
 rifice) a sacrifice ;’ and, as the priest’s share of the sacrifices 
 
 ao 
 
XXXIV THE OLD TESTAMENT AND ITS CRITICS. 
 
 was different, Prof. Smith makes a great difficulty of this. But 
 the word zebach here used, although it ustially means a sacréfice, 
 has also the meaning of slaughtering or. ktdling an animal for 
 food ; it is used in this sense in Deut. xu. 15, 21, as an eminent 
 Jewish Rabbi points out, and in the sense of feast (Lectures, 
 pp. 235-237) in 1 Sam. ix. 12 xx. 29, besides the poetical 
 passages mentioned by Prof. Smith. 
 
 Not only is the Levitical priesthood spoken of as one in 
 Deuteronomy, but all Israel is addressed as one holy people, 
 doing the holy -things. To use Prof. Smith’s own words 
 (Lectures, p. 346), ‘the religious subject, the worshipping 
 individual, Jehovah’s son, was not the individual Israelite, but 
 the nation gva nation. In the old law, the worship of feasts 
 and sacrifices is the natural consecration, in act, of a simple 
 happy society,’ &c. It is to this worshipping subject that 
 Moses says: ‘Thou mayst not eat within thy gates the tithe of 
 thy corn, . . or the firstlings, . . or thy freewill offerings; but thou 
 must eat them before the Lord thy God, in the place which 
 the Lord thy God shall choose, . . and thou shalt offer thy burnt- 
 offerings, the flesh and the blood, upon the altar of the Lord 
 thy God’ (Deut. xi. 17, 27; xv. 19). Now (8), as Prof. Smith 
 would surely not infer from this that the private Israelites 
 were authorised to offer up the public burnt offerings, he need 
 not conclude that the firstlings were to be eaten by them. 
 These passages, says the Rabbi, were not addressed to the 
 people only. The firstlings are said to be given or sanctified 
 to the Lord; and although Deuteronomy does not zive these 
 details, we know, from Num. xvii. 18 and Neh. x. 37, that 
 they belonged to the priests. There is, no doubt, a meaning 
 in Israel’s eating the flesh of the first-born in the central 
 sanctuary. It is with the heart that men believe unto righteous- 
 ness, inwardly digesting the history of the First-born. 
 
 The Gér was a person who was sojourning out of his own 
 country,astranger. Moses gave permission to any Levite, who 
 was sojourning as a gér in any of the townships of Israel, to 
 come to reside at the central sanctuary, and ordained that he 
 
DEUTERONOMY AND THE PREVIOUS BOOKS. xxxv 
 
 should share with his brethren, besides having what came of 
 the sale of his patrimony—for the Levites had certain cities 
 with a right of pasturage in the neighbourhood (Num. xxxv. 2 ; 
 Josh. xxi.), Now (9), it seems unnecessary to discuss whether 
 this law applies only to homeless Levites or to them all ; fora 
 Levite, if he intended to remove, would naturally sell his patri- 
 mony, and thus first become homeless. In Jeroboam’s time, 
 many of them did so. (10) In Lev. xvii. 12, 15, the Israelite 
 is interdicted from eating the carcase of any animal which had 
 died of itself ; and so also is ‘the stranger who sojourned in 
 their midst,’ by which expression Prof. Smith himself would 
 understand a proselyte; so that there is really no contradiction 
 when Exodus (xxii. 31) bids the Israelites throw to the dogs 
 those animals which had been torn of wild beasts, or when 
 Deuteronomy (xiv. 21) authorises them to dispose of that 
 which had died of itself to the stranger or the foreigner, to 
 heathens who were not proselytes (for without are dogs, Rev, 
 Xxll. 15). The connection of the word gér shows the two 
 kinds of strangers ; we need not suppose that the word has 
 changed its sense. (11) Deuteronomy (xii, xiv.) speaks of a 
 tithe which the poor Levite was to share with the stranger, the 
 fatherless, and the widow. According to the later practice of 
 the Jewish people, this was a second tithe, besides the tithe 
 appointed for the support of the Levitical priesthood. Field 
 produce only was to be tithed for festival purposes and stored 
 up every three years (Deut. xiv. 22, 28). Israel was to tithe 
 truly all the increase of his seed (Deut. xiv. 22); and, having 
 computed the tenth, was (according to Keil, Lange, &c., and 
 the Jewish authorities) to devote ove tenth to the support of 
 the Levites, and a second tenth to festival and charitable pur- 
 poses (Deut. xii. xiv.). Ewald, Davidson, Colenso and others, 
 however, insist that one and the same tithe is meant. If this 
 were admitted, the statement in Num. xvii. 31, that the Levites 
 were to eat the tithe in every place, is not contradictory to 
 Deuteronomy, which requires that its tithes should be eaten 
 every third year in the different townships (Deut. xiv. 28 29). 
 
 @.2 
 
XXXVI THE OLD TESTAMENT AND ITS CRITICS. 
 
 Besides, Deuteronomy seems to speak only of the tithe of the 
 vegetable produce (the corn, wine, and oil); there were also 
 tithes of the herd and the flock (Lev. xxvii. 32); and Moses 
 may have made a distinction—just as in the Jewish practice 
 the Biccurim (or first-fruits of wheat, barley, figs, grapes, pome- 
 granates, olives, and dates) were only presented in the temple, 
 while the Zerumoth (or first-fruits of prepared produce—flour, 
 wine, oil—and of garden produce) might be given to the priest 
 in every place (Edersheim’s. ‘Temple,’ p. 332). If God spake 
 to Moses plainly and directly, and not in enigmas or parabolic 
 riddles (Num. xii. 8), we infer that he knew the significance of 
 this sacred feasting, and that thus he speaks in Deuteronomy 
 of all Israel’s feasting together on the tithes and other sacred 
 things, without specifying what belonged to the priests, to the 
 Levites, and to the laymen respectively. In certain sacrifices, 
 at least, the flesh was to be eaten before the third day (Lev. 
 vil. 16, 17); and, surely, if the sacrifices were numerous, 
 the clergy would share the flesh with the needy rather than 
 burn it. (12) In Num. iv. the Levites were mustered for the 
 special task of bearing the tabernacle from the age of thirty to 
 fifty ; in Num. vill. they were mustered for the lighter work 
 of doing duty in the tabernacle from the age of twenty-five to 
 fifty. Numerous attendants must have been required in a 
 large temple capable, at the time of Christ, of containing 
 210,000 persons ; and because of their numerous services and 
 their freedom from the necessity of carrying the tabernacle any 
 more, David still further reduced che minimum age to twenty 
 (1 Chron. xxii. 25-32 ; Edersheim’s ‘Temple,’ pp. 45, 70,-T11). 
 
 The first three verses of Deuteronomy mean that what pre- 
 cedes is a record of the legislation at the Jordan, in the desert, 
 in the arabah, over against Suph and in other places of the 
 wandering ; that it was now the eleventh month of the fortieth 
 year of it, though the direct route was only eleven days’ march. 
 The expression at the side or crossing of Jordan (0 eber hay-yarden) 
 came to be the conventional term for Persea. It often means 
 beyond or a-cross Jorcan, but (13) the writer was not necessarily 
 
FICTITIOUS SPEECHES IN-ANCIENT HISTORY. xxxvii 
 
 over on the West side. In one chapter (Deut. iii, 8, 20, 25) it 
 means both ov ches sede and beyond Jordan. In Num. xxxii. 19, 
 32, the Reubenites, &c., mean by it the side they were on, from 
 the passage of Jordan, eastward, and contrast it with me’ eber lay 
 yarden, from the passage to Jordan and forward. Who wrote 
 the last eight verses of Deuteronomy no man can teil. 
 
 These difficulties do not warrant Prof. Smith in supposing that 
 either the middle part of the Pentateuch or the Deuteronomic 
 law was written much later than Moses, or that the clear asser- 
 tion (Deut. xxxi. 9, 10) that Moses spake all the words of the 
 Deuteronomic law and wrote them in a book, which he 
 delivered to the priests, is not historically but parabolically 
 true (First Answer, p. 55). Prof. Smith compares the practice 
 of some classical historians in putting speeches into the mouths 
 of historical characters ; but when Thucydides tells us expressly 
 about these speeches in his history, he does not conceal tha 
 he made up the speeches himself according to what he thought 
 ought to have been said, while he adhered as closely as possible 
 to what he had ascertained to be the general sense of the actual 
 speeches (Thuc: 1:22). 
 
 In his recent lectures on the Old Testament, Prof. Smith 
 accounts in a different way for the statement that ‘Moses 
 wrote the words of this law in a book,’ by supposing that the 
 law or Torah here meant is some summary such as the Ten 
 Commandments (p. 332) ; he quotes Calvin’s opinion that when 
 the lawgiver directed ‘all the words of this law’ to be inscribed 
 on the plastered stones of Ebal (Deut. xxvii. 8), he could only 
 mean such a summary. But Moses must have known of won- 
 derfully long histories written in this way in Egypt ; and, though 
 an injunction might be indefinite, did not the person who made 
 the historical statement mean to convey the impression that 
 the Deuteronomic code was the actual writing of Moses ? 
 
 Having decided that the different parts of the Penta- 
 teuchal law were not written at one time and by one person, 
 Prof. Smith has to decide in what order he supposes them to 
 have been developed and to have come into operation. He 
 
XXXViii THE OLD TESTAMENT AND ITS CRITICS. 
 
 thinks it probable that the Sinaitic Covenant was mainly in 
 vogue till Josiah ; that Josiah, who abolished the high places, 
 introduced for the first time the Deuteronomic code; and that 
 this having proved an insufficient barrier against what was 
 heathen and unholy, the prophet Ezekiel addressed himself to 
 the task of drawing up a more stringent ritual, which was 
 eveloped till the time of Ezra, and became the Levitical 
 code (Q). This Levitical scheme, however, was not entirely 
 new ; it was the working up of many older Torahs or law 
 books (p. 384), just as the English Prayer Book comes from 
 many sources, the distinction being that the older ‘Torahs 
 were not written but traditional. His assumption is, as has 
 been said, that, as ordinary legislation, three codes could not 
 have been given in one lifetime ; he does not recognise the 
 extraordinary and typical character of the legislation of Moses, 
 or presume that God, who declares the end of these things 
 from the beginning (Is. xlvi. ro; Acts xv. 18, emended text), 
 would no doubt foreshadow the future ; he seems to overlook 
 the teaching of the prophets and of the early fathers, that the 
 main thing, the natural precepts of the law, was first given, 
 and that the burdensome Levitical ritual was superadded to 
 correct and discipline Israel after they had shown, by their 
 actions, their proneness to idolatry and their unfitness for 
 freedom. Deuteronomy, again, being an independent repro- 
 duction of the substance of the Sinaitic Covenant, extending 
 and modifying its details (except those relative to compensa- 
 tions to be paid for various injuries, Ex. xxi. 18-xxii. 15, and 
 also the law of treason, Ex. xxii. 28, pp. 317, 431), is, no doubt, 
 a prophetic indication that God was to ‘return to the many 
 thousands of Israel’ (Num. x. 36); that there should be 
 a coming restoration of the natural precepts of simple faith 
 through that Angel or Prophet whose coming is predicted 
 both in the Sinaitic Covenant and in Deuteronomy. In 
 Deut. xxx. 11-14, Moses describes the righteousness of faith ; 
 in Ley. xviii. 3, he describes the righteousness of the law (Rom. 
 X. 5, 10). Moses executed the offices of prophet, priest, and 
 
SECOND LAW FORESHADOWED, CRITICISMS. xxXxXix 
 
 king, as our Lord does ; his meekness foreshadowed our Lord’s, 
 and his Ethiopian bride the Gentile Church (Iren. iv. 20 ; 10, 
 12); (14) why then (p. 321), in asserting his intimacy with 
 Jehovah, should he not speak of his meekness (Num. xii.), as 
 our Lord also spoke of His moral fitness for His office? The 
 natural meaning of Deut. xxx: 5, and that assigned by Eben 
 Ezra, Luther, &c., is that Moses was ‘king in Jeshurun’’; and 
 thus ‘before the reigning of a king to the sons of Israel’ (Gen. 
 XXXVl. 31) may mean that there were so many kings in Edom 
 before Moses delivered Israel from their bondage in Egypt 
 and reigned, or, whilst as yet the sons of Israel Aave no king. 
 The passage may be thus explained without supposing (15) with 
 Prof. Smith (p. 322), that the chapter was not written till the time 
 of Saul or David. (16) On whatever substance and with what- 
 ever ink the very ancient Hebrew MSS. were written, the 
 benevolent wish of Moses to be blotted out of God’s book 
 (Ex. xxxil. 32), and the figurative act of blotting out the words 
 of acurse with bitter waters (Num. v. 23), do not prove, as 
 Prof. Smith supposes (pp. 82, 330, 400), that the old Hebrew 
 writing was easily obliterated. (17) Prof. Smith thinks that 
 the Levitical law was written later than Moses, because in 
 Hebrew sea-ward means westward, and because Negeb, one of 
 the words for sow¢h, is the name of the dry steppe district in the 
 south of Judah. In Palestine sea-ward means westward, but 
 in Egypt northward. ‘The Israelites, however, were in the 
 peninsula of Sinai, where Prof. Smith admits that sea-ward 
 means towards the Red Sea, that is, westward. If, then, the 
 Israelites did not take their Hebrew expression from Palestine 
 to Egypt, why should they take the Egyptian idea of sea-ward 
 to the wilderness? The word Negeb is connected with a root 
 meaning dry or parched, just as south is connected with seethe ; 
 but in all probability the Negeb or South of Palestine derived 
 its name from its lying to the south, and was not the orzg7 of 
 the word for south or southward, as Prof. Smith supposes (p. 
 223). From Num. x. 11-28 we might infer that the zabernacle 
 was in the midst of the Israelites on their march from Sinai, 
 
x] THE OLD TESTAMENT AND ITS’ GERITICS. 
 
 but not, (18) as Prof. Smith supposes, that the av% was in their 
 midst. On the contrary, it was three days’ march in front (vv. 
 33-36). We need not suppose that the same person did not 
 write the whole chapter (p. 319)! ‘It has often been affirmed,’ 
 says Prof. Smith (p. 441), ‘that Joshua xxii. proves that the 
 Deuteronomic law was known to Joshua. But if the narrative 
 assumed this law, this would only prove that the chapter, or part 
 of it, is an interpolation !’ Again (19), Prof. Smith (p. 258) 
 concludes that the service of the great day of atonement could 
 not be performed in the tabernacle at Shiloh, because he thinks 
 that it had no secluded place or inaccessible Holy of Holies, 
 and his reason for thinking so is because Samuel ‘lay down to 
 sleep in the temple where the ark of God was’ (1 Sam iii. 3). 
 But surely this does not mean that he slept in the Most 
 Holy Place, but that he slept in the temple, and that the ark 
 was there. Samuel, David, and Zadok were the first of their 
 lines in an epoch, and indicated a higher priesthood. 
 
 Prof. Smith (pp. 218, 266) holds that the books of Samuel 
 and Kings were vastly older than the Chronicles ; that the 
 Chronicler is giving expression to the ideas of his own, not of 
 David’s time, when he speaks as if the great high place at 
 Gibeon had been the only legitimate sanctuary in David’s 
 time (1 Chron. xvi. 39, xxi. 29 ; 2 Chron. i. 3); and that the 
 worship at the high places recorded in the previous books, has 
 ‘a provisional legitimacy of its own from the point of view of 
 the author of the Kings.’ As the Chronicler (p. 420) refers to 
 a midrash (2 Chron. xxiv. 27), that is, according to Gesenius, a 
 commentary on or supplement of the books of Kings, Prof. Smith 
 thinks that the Chronicler was a sermonising commentator on 
 these books. (20) In 2 Sam. viii. 18, we read that David’s 
 sons were priests (cohenim, p. 264), which the Chronicler 
 replaces by ‘chief by the hand of the king’ (1 Chron. xviii. 17); 
 they were the king’s familiars who executed /Jzs will. But, 
 according to Prof. Smith, it was a later idea that the functions 
 of the priests belonged exclusively to the Levites. He believes 
 that the Carim and Rashim (2 Kings xi. 4), who assisted 
 
THE BOOKS OF KINGS AND THE CHRONICLES. xli 
 
 Jehoiada against Athaliah, were Carians and footguards (a 
 strange conjunction), and not, as Gesenius and Young translate 
 the words, ‘ executioners and runners.’ As in 2 Chron. XX11L., 
 these are replaced by Levites, he finds in this another proof 
 of the later origin of Chronicles (p. 421). Again, he finds in 
 the words of Abijah, on the field of battle (2 Chron. xiii,’ 4), 
 not what Abijah did say, but words put freely into his mouth 
 by some one writing under a later ritual. (21) Abijah is de- 
 scribing the service of the second temple, he says, when he 
 speaks of the golden candlestick as one element, for in 
 Solomon’s temple there were ten. But surely the essential 
 element was ¢Ae candlestick: and how would Prof. Smith 
 explain the fact that in 2 Chron. iv. 7, these ten are mentioned ? 
 Again, Abijah speaks of the evening burnt-offering, whereas 
 Prof. Smith thinks that in the first temple the evening offering 
 was purely cereal, in proof of which he quotes 1 Kings xviii. 
 36 “Heb. ; 2 Kings xvi. 15; and Ezra ix. 4 ffeb. The word 
 applied in these passages to the evening sacrifice is mznchah, 
 St or offering, a general word, applied to the meal offerings 
 (Lev. 11. 1, 4, 5, 6), coupled with zedack in the well-known 
 passage ‘sacrifice and offering’ (Ps. xl. 6), but applied to 
 animal offerings, as Abel’s, as well as to Cain’s (Genviwizrquny: 
 Besides, the expression ‘At the going up of the offering, 
 Elijah came nigh, &c.,’ includes Abijah’s word (o/ah) for 
 burnt-offering, which is this ‘going up.’ Again (22), the 
 Chronicler (2 Chron. xiv. 5, xvii. 6) says that both Asa and 
 Jehoshaphat ¢urned aside the local high places or caused them to 
 depart (as when Saul turned aside the wizards, without, how- 
 ever, wholly succeeding). This, however, says Prof. Smith, 
 does not prevent the Chronicler from copying (in 2 Chron. xv. 
 17, Xx. 33) the opposite statements of 1 Kings xv. 14, xxii, 43, 
 in connection with some other particulars which he has occasion 
 to transfer from that book. But the two statements are not 
 expressed in the same voice. What the history does say is, 
 that these kings’ hearts were right in that they turned aside the 
 high places or caused them to depart ; but, asthe people had not 
 
xiii THE OLD TESTAMENT AND ITS CRITICS. 
 
 yet prepared their hearts for the God of their fathers, these high 
 places did not depart or turn aside. A man may spend a life- 
 time in displacing certain strange traditional misconceptions 
 about God and His worship, and yet, because the people are 
 not ripe, these misconceptions may not give place to a better 
 order of things in his time. (23) Weread in Neh. viii. 14-17, 
 that the people, finding it ordained in the law of Moses that 
 the feast of tabernacles should be duly kept, ‘made booths 
 and dwelt in the booths, decause from the days of Joshua the 
 children of Israel had not done so till that day.’ Prof. Smith 
 thinks that this means that they had never before kept the 
 feast of booths, but does it not mean that they dwelt or sat in 
 booths, decause in the days of Joshua they had ceased to dwell 
 in booths, decause they were to commemorate the wilderness life 
 in booths from which they had been delivered? (L. xxiii. 43). 
 While Prof. Smith finds in the Sacred History speeches 
 freely reported or put by later historians into the mouths of 
 historical personages, and plain statements about matters of fact 
 which seem to him only parabolically true, he makes use of the 
 parabolical language of the prophets to establish a new set of 
 historical facts. (24) To show that the Mosaic Torah was not 
 written till long after Moses, that it was an affair of practice 
 and tradition, he quotes Hosea iv. 6. (pp. 297, 330): ‘My 
 people are cut off for lack of knowledge; because thou hast 
 rejected knowledge, I also will reject thee from being my 
 priest ; because ¢hou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will 
 forget thy children, even I.’ But the passage is differently 
 explained at pp. 300, 344. ‘The standard of the prophets is 
 the moral law ; and because the priests had forgotten this, they 
 declare them to have forgotten the law, however copious their 
 Torah and however great their interest in the details of ritual.’ 
 ‘The moral conditions of acceptance with the king of Zion 
 were forgotten’ (p. 370). Israel is spoken of as a priestly 
 nation gua nation (p. 346), before God’s Face ; but their zeal 
 for their ritual pleased themselves, not God (p. 434, Amos iv.5). 
 Yet no one might reprove them (v. 4). Their prophets perverted 
 
EZEKIEL’S VISION OF LEVITICAL IDOLATRY. xliii 
 
 God’s words into false durdens; as such, God would cast 
 them and their city out from before His Face (Jer. xxiii. 39). 
 Jeremiah (vii. 22) says that the law of Levitical sacrifices was 
 not the first covenant given to Israel, when they came out of 
 Egypt. God spake the Ten Commandments and added no 
 more (Deut. v. 22, p. 310). But Prof. Smith (25) understands 
 the passage in Jeremiah to be a flat contradiction of the theory 
 that the Levitical law of stated sacrifice was given in the wil- 
 deress (pp. 263, 288). Again (pp. 249, 425), Prof. Smith (26) 
 makes much of the vision of Ezekiel (xl.—xlviii.), especially 
 c. xliv., for historical purposes. Ezekiel’s véséonary temple was 
 to be as large as Jerusalem and the city as large as Palestine 
 west of Jordan ; with half of the tribes located south of the 
 city (c. xlviil.). The glory of the God of Israel is seen coming 
 from the way of the east to occupy it, causing the earth or the 
 land to shine. The front of the house is eastward ; and from 
 under its threshold a marvellous stream flows eastward. Into 
 this sanctuary no stranger, uncircumcised in heart (a figurative 
 characteristic) and uncircumcised in flesh, is to enter (xliv. 7) ; 
 or, as St. John expresses it, nothing common or defiling shall 
 euter (Rev. xxi. 27). The people made idols of their altars, 
 almost after the manner of the heathen, supposing that by 
 zealously observing the ritual they might secure God’s favour, 
 while they were unjust, unmerciful, orlicentious (pp. 288, 302, 344, 
 Hos. vii. Bar. c. 16). The ordinary Levites, who ministered to 
 this idolatry, were to dear their iniquity (Ez. xliv. 6-16), they 
 were to bear, in their personsand actions, a burdensome imagery, 
 which our Lord took upon Himself, bearing the curse of the 
 law. The true priests—those of the seed of Zadok, the righteous 
 ——Were to come near to God and minister to Him—presenting 
 their bodies as living sacrifices. ‘They were,’ says Fairbairn, 
 ‘a race of faithful and devoted servants, a priesthood serving 
 God in the newness of the spirit and not in the bondage of the 
 letter. The other prophets also (as Jer. xxxi. 38-40) repre- 
 sent the future with reference to symbolic places and names of 
 the past, adjusting and modifying them to suit their immediate 
 
xliv EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 design’ (see Fausset’s, Lange’s, and Cook’sComm.). Prof. Smith 
 (Prophets of Israel, p. 341) says that such ‘concrete pictures of 
 the future are not literal forecasts of history, but poetic and ideal 
 constructions ;’ yet he takes Ez. xliv. 6-16 to mean that Carians 
 and other uncircumcised Gentiles had previously done Levitical 
 work in the temple ; that these men should officiate no more, but 
 that in their room should come the Levites ; that those Levites, 
 again, who were not of the house of Zadok, were to be degraded 
 from the priesthood, because they officiated in all Israel before 
 the idolatrous shrines (pp. 249, 374, 436). But does not the 
 language of Ezekiel, in contrasting the Levites with ‘the priests 
 the Levites, the sons of Zadok,’ show that Prof. Smith is mis- 
 taken in supposing that no distinction is made in Deuteronomy 
 (xvill. 1-4, xxvi. 4) between the clergy and the priests proper ? 
 
 Prof. Smith usually sides with the Septuagint Version when 
 the text varies from the Hebrew; but when it translates 
 Is. vil. 10-15: ‘Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a 
 son,’ he sides with the early Hebrew antagonists of Christianity 
 and translates ‘a young woman.’ But if ‘the Lord Himself 
 gave this sign,’ we may well ask, with Ireneeus, what great 
 thing or sign an ordinary birth would be. According to 
 Irenzeus, the Babe’s eating is expressive of His humanity, and 
 His refusing the evil that He may choose the good is signifi- 
 cant of Emmanuel’s Godhead (iii. 21; 5, 6). The Babe 
 Christ was worshipped by the Magi, whose gifts were spoils 
 taken from the powers of evil in the sight of the King of Assyria 
 (Is. vill. 4), as the Scripture, for his ungodly and lawless dis- 
 position, terms Herod. It was ‘through the voice (of the 
 Magi) heard from Ramah, 7e., from Arabia (Genie?) that 
 weeping was to fill the place where Rachel was buried 
 (Jer. xxxl. 15), the women weeping inconsolably for their slain 
 children’ (Just. Dial. 68, 71, 77, 78). 
 
 IV. THE EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE 
 CHURCH may be treated of under the following head- 
 ings :— 
 
BRANCHES OF THEOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE. xlv 
 
 . Lheology proper : primary beliefs about God. 
 
 . Christology: the Mediator and His reconciliation. 
 . Soteriology : grace and the laws of salvation. 
 
 . Lneumatology : the Holy Spirit and the evil one. 
 . Anthropology : man, his nature, fall, &c. 
 
 . Ihe Church : its organisation, sacraments, &c. 
 
 . Lschatology : the doctrine of the last things. 
 
 TIAN BW DNDN 
 
 THEOLOGY PROPER. THE ABSOLUTELY FIRST CAUSE, 
 who is Himself uncaused, transcends our ordinary modes 
 of thought and description (Clem. S. v. 12); but the early 
 fathers reasoned from man’s rational nature, personality, 
 and power of self-determination, that the Source from 
 which man sprang could not be inferior to himself, but 
 must also be rational, personal, and powerful to cause ; 
 in regard to God’s moral character, they thought it im- 
 pious to attribute man’s worst moods to the Divine Being. 
 
 THE Trinity. The invisible Father is over all, bearing 
 (Zortans) the universe and the Word, who ministers to the Father 
 and manifests Him ¢irough all (Iren. iv. 6; vy. 18, 2), but whose 
 generation none can tell (ii. 28, 6). _God’s Word and Spirit (or 
 Wisdom) are His two hands (iv. 20, 1, &c. ; Gen. i. 26). . The 
 Spirit is the working (operante) exhibiterof God’s dispensations 
 zm men (iv. 20, 6; 33, 7; v. 18, 2), who, vivified by this blessed 
 Seal or Figure of Christ, receive continuance fer ever (iv. 28, 3), 
 and are, with the Father and the Son, called Gods (ive75 4.0Rs, 
 Ixxxil. 1). ‘ No other is set forth by the Spirit as (called by the 
 Apostles) God and Lord, but He who rules over all as God with 
 His Word, and they who receive the anointing of the Spirit’ (iv. r, 
 1). Our Saviour (God’s own kindred Son) and those anointed to 
 prophecy (proclaimed His Sons) are the true witnesses (Clem. S. 
 Vv. 133 u. 3). The Father is the Head of Christ, and Christ 
 of the Church, having the leavening Spirit (Iren. v. Bea); 
 
 Gop’s CHARACTER AND IMAGE IN Man.—The only true 
 God is He who exists in the invariableness of righteous. good- 
 ness, and that which most‘resembles Him is the soul of an 
 
xlvi EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 enlightened, righteous and good man (C? 416, 417). He gives 
 as a Sovereign to whom He wills, being possessed of freedom 
 and independence in His decisions; but He is a wise as well 
 as a good Sovereign, and therefore a discriminator of men, 
 saving whom He ought to save and judging those worthy of 
 judgment (Iren. 111. 25 ; v. 4; v. 27). He formed man in the 
 beginning that He might have some one on whom to bestow 
 His favours; He is never slack in benefiting and enriching 
 men, guiding even those ancient Gentiles who minded His 
 providence and their own conduct, desiring that men should 
 follow the light and thus have it reflected upon them, that they 
 should persevere in His service, which is man’s glory and the 
 preservative of man’s life, and that thus becoming His disciples 
 men should partake of that glory for which they were made 
 and prepared and elected or chosen (John xy. 14), for God chose 
 to beautify all things (111. 25, 3 iv. 2,2; 14,13 20,1,5). But 
 although God, in His benignity, is thus manifesting His light 
 to men and working savingly on them, adapting His teaching 
 and discipline to every sort of men without grudging, yet He 
 does not force His saving light and operation on any. He 
 always respects man’s self-determining (atrefovowec) freedom, 
 whereby there is room for human virtue and praise, but from 
 which it may also result that men may be to themselves the 
 cause of the eternal loss of good things (iv. 37, 39). While He 
 that maketh is absolutely perfect and always the same, it 
 belongs to man who is made to be ever receiving improvement 
 and growth, and, not overstepping the conditions of each stage 
 or time of his growth, to pass through such an experience as 
 shall teach him moral knowledge and his own dependence on 
 God for life and all good things ; to be disciplined in a state of 
 childishness by a suitable law; to advance to bountiful service 
 and so be justified (iv. 30, 3), ‘receiving precepts fit for those 
 who are free and justified by faith ;’ to be exercised in appro- 
 priating (applicarz) that glory which is to be revealed in the 
 sons of God ; and thus, abiding in His love and in submission 
 to Him and in thanksgiving, to be continually receiving in- 
 
CHARACTER OR NAME OF THE TRUE GOD. xlvii 
 
 crease or making progress ‘ from faith to faith,’ till he becomes 
 like unto Him who died for men ; for the steps which lead to 
 God are not a few (ili. 20, 2 ; iv.9, 27, 28; C! 465; C? 221, 456). 
 But in a state of liberty man is more thoroughly tried (iv. 16, 5) ; 
 to whom much is given of him much is required (iv. 28) ; and, 
 therefore, those who are eminent for their spiritual gifts and 
 official position ought not to be elated as if they had already 
 attained the goal or were secure against falling away. The 
 Christian idea of perfection is to be constantly striving after 
 higher perfection and ever making progress (Phil. iii. 13, ra, 
 Ct 148). A man does not cease to be virtuous because he 
 sees and confesses his deficiencies. The Pharisee of the 
 parable boasted as if he were already perfect in a very nega- 
 tive and shadowy righteousness ; he thanked God that he was 
 not an unjust plunderer or adulterer, or even as the tax- 
 gatherer for the hated Roman government, whom he saw 
 worshipping: he fasted twice a week and paid all his tithes 
 (Luke xviii. 9-14). He did not, however, claim the merit of 
 this perfection ; he thanked God for it. But such a state of 
 mind, much more than that of the publican or tax-gatherer, 
 would bar his progress to that more enlightened excellence 
 which is the end of justification (Iren. iv. 13, 1; 17, is 
 30, 3 3 C* 471), which comes when men gaze steadily on the 
 Light supplied by Christ’s coming and which shines more 
 and more unto the perfect day of glorification (Iren. iv. 27, 2 ; 
 Rom. viii. 30). It was ‘the boast of life’ when our first 
 parents acted on the conceit that they were zherent/y immortal 
 and not dependent for life on the gift of God as He wills 
 (il. 34, 33 Vv. 2, 3, &c.); and those are to be reckoned proud 
 boasters and despisers, who presume they are heaven’s favourites 
 and at liberty to do things inconsistent with the divine laws of 
 health and growth, who give themselves airs as if they were 
 gifted with a nature coming physically, ie. apart from men’s 
 choice, and despise others who do not receive their conceits 
 as natural or psychical men (iil. 15,.2 ; v. 9-12 ; C? 7, AYO) Tt 
 belongs to human nature to be made, but not so as to supersede 
 
xlviil EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 man’s will ; he, therefore, who keeps in the way of and gets 
 (conseguor) God’s skill, he who abides in God’s service, is 
 receiving glory from God (iv. 14, I; 39, 2, 3). God manifests 
 Himself in all His works, and especially in the living man, who 
 is the sum or head of them ; but if men, who are appointed to 
 be the imitators of God, to bear His Name or His image, to be 
 His living epistles, are, in spite of God’s light and operation, 
 found dishonouring God’s Name and defiling His Temple, shall 
 they be held guiltless? ‘To such as render to God what it 
 belongs to man to render, to such as do not flee from the light 
 but abide in it and reflect it, to such as do not withdraw from 
 God’s operation but bear fruit, He multiplies grace, having 
 ever a larger measure for those of His own household, but not 
 things contrary to those previously given or mutually dis- 
 cordant. On the other hand, He judges those who, having 
 received their share of His kindness, have not behaved suitably 
 to the gifts bestowed by Him, but have lived iuxuriously, 
 ‘opposing His gracious Will, yea, and blaspheming Him who 
 hath wrought so great benefits for them’ (iil. 25, 1-4; iv. 9, 2). 
 His judgment, however, is the natural consequence of their 
 own great carelessness and choice of darkness, which occasion 
 their want of mindfulness and of sound judgment ; and, when 
 they flee into darkness, they as is fitting partake of the evil that 
 is in the darkness (iv. 37, 2; v. 27, 2). Thus the receptacle of 
 God’s goodness, and of all His wisdom and power, and the 
 instrument of His bright manifestation (orxganum clarificationis 
 ejus) is man grateful to his Maker; and, again, the receptacle 
 of God’s just judgment is man unthankful and scorning 
 his Maker and not submitting to His Word, who hath 
 promised to give most abundantly to those that bear fruit, 
 who first calls together (to the marriage) the unworthy because 
 of His abundant goodness, but afterwards, coming to inspect 
 all, is represented as not well-pleased with many ; who gives 
 liberally to whom it is meet and worthily rewards the un- 
 thankful (iv. 36; 4, 6). And not in works only but also 
 in faith hath the Lord kept man’s choice free and inde- 
 
CHARACTER OR NAME OF THE TRUE GOD. xlix 
 
 pendent (iv. 37, 5); to those who please Him He grants a 
 fuller knowledge of the plan of salvation (iv. 14, 2), not, how- 
 ever, altering the primary conception of God as a good 
 Creator and discriminating Rewarder of men, nor making the 
 instruction of a contrary nature, for the Word has always been 
 the same (iv, 11, 3; 36,4). Although they admitted that 
 there would be a fuller understanding of the mystery, a consis- 
 tent science and systematic exposition of the faith, when that 
 which is full-grown is come, yet the early fathers were totally 
 opposed to conceits which were subversive of the faith, and 
 maintained that to bring in a new idea of God, or radically 
 to change the first instruction, is not really to make pro- 
 gress, but to float about perpetualiy in the abyss of mysterious- 
 ness (iv. 9, 3). By abandoning thus the fundamental position 
 of ChristianjTheism, that the Creator has ever been good to all 
 His creatures, and is still a trier of those on whom He sends 
 His goodness, theologians would, as the primitive elders fore- 
 saw, fall into much absurdity and many contradictions ; and 
 the natural consequence would be that they would seek to hide 
 their opinions, to wrap them up in mystery, lest they should be 
 proved to be unsound and futile (iv. 32, 1; C? 479). Thus, when 
 some Gnostics fancied themselves full-grown or spiritual, in that 
 they had reached the idea that God is a mere distributor of dif- 
 ferent natures to men, apart from voluntary choice (C? 7); or, 
 as in the case of Marcion, in that they regarded the Deity as only 
 good to some and only just to others, the early fathers saw no 
 progress or full-growth in such conceits, but only perversions 
 of the first principles of theistic belief in God ; systems making 
 the Word of God of none effect and misrepresenting the Creator 
 (v. 26,2; 27,1). Why, if His goodness is not joined with 
 judgment, does He not save all? (ill. 25, 2). So, at the present 
 day there are men who think themselves far advanced beyond 
 the early fathers andjcall them childish ; theologians who have 
 reached the idea that the state of men is not now probationary, 
 that men inherit a nature so evil that they cannot help resisting 
 all God’s operations on them, unless He virtually supersedes 
 
 ‘D 
 
] EARLY DOCTRINAL ‘SYSTEM’ OF) THE “CHURCH. 
 
 all probationary choice by the physical gift of another nature. 
 Beasts of prey, which as a matter of course yield to the impulse 
 to seize it, are yet not compelled against their will to do so ; 
 and so, while this theology admits that violence is not done to 
 men’s wills, in that ‘the creature is not compelled to do the 
 things which it would not ;’ that is, that men are free agents, 
 or free to act; and again, while it is admitted that the motives 
 or second causes, from which actions take their rise, are con- 
 tingent, that is, not the necessary evolution of physical operations, 
 not necessarily caused as Hume, Huxley, Tyndall, or Edwards 
 might say: yet this theology teaches that God so varies these 
 second causes or motives, as to determine men’s choice in 
 every instance, and somehow to get everything that comes to 
 pass accomplished just as He fore-ordained ; that men are no 
 longer in.a probationary state; that, since ‘to a// those, for whom 
 Christ hath purchased redemption, He doth certainly and effect- 
 ually apply and communicate the same,’ ‘ their state is not now 
 probationary but confirmed’ (Macpherson on the Confession 
 of Faith for Bible Classes; pp. 47, 76, 80, 81. Clark). There are 
 others, however, who consider this representation as one-sided, 
 and who, at the same time, represent the teaching of the early 
 fathers as also one-sided. Such teachers represent God as 
 predestining all’ that comes to pass, and also as giving man a 
 true probationary choice; at one time they speak of man’s 
 state as now probationary, and at another as not now proba- 
 tionary. On the other hand, the early fathers described the 
 spiritual man as ‘ consistent in his whole speech,’ and as there- 
 fore not judged or refuted by any one; while they regarded 
 inconsistency as a proof of error. They tell us of some Gnostics 
 who ‘either despised the consistency of their dogmas’ or 
 were prepared to go so far as to reject the Scriptures, rather 
 than admit a sensible exposition of the things signified (Iren. 
 iv. 32, 13 33, '; C? 478, 479); but the early fathers would 
 have been surprised to find theologians who regard hopeless 
 irreconcilablenéss as an aid to faith, who would doubt a 
 system of theology if they could reconcile its parts. 
 
THE MEDIATOR AND HIS ATONEMENT, li 
 
 MEDIATORIAL AND ACCEPTABLE PRESENTATION OF 
 MAN TO GOD AND GOD TO MAN. 
 
 Under this heading are included such subjects as THE 
 ATONEMENT or RECONCILIATION and REDEMPTION. It 
 has just been said that it belongs to man as the head or 
 sum of God’s work, (1) to please God, and (2) to ex- 
 hibit God. Now the first man (1) offended God by 
 sinning or transgressing His commandment, and (2) 
 lost the divine image, a certain tyranny of death passing 
 over him that he might know the nature of good and 
 evil (v. 22, 23). When men had thus been overcome, 
 and in various ways shattered (e/zsz), they could not now 
 win the palm of victory against death or remould them- 
 selves in the divine image (v. 12, 6; 18, 2); but the 
 Word of God did both, becoming that very thing which 
 the other was, namely man, subjecting Himself to all 
 the laws established by the Father, fulfilling the times 
 of man’s condemnation because of disobedience (iii. 23, 
 I), coming as Man even to death and rising again, that, 
 through the Visible Word, men might be partakers of 
 this complete likeness to the Invisible Father and receive 
 a second formation from death (v. 16, 2; 23, 2). This 
 saving of man consistently with law is pleasing to God, 
 first, because it is pleasing to Him who is the Artificer 
 and Creator of man, that His workmanship should not 
 be lost ; our Lord, therefore, pleased God when He pre- 
 sented (offerentem) and commended to God that Man 
 whom He had found. Secondly, as God is the Law- 
 giver, it is pleasing to Him that, in saving His work- 
 manship, that which is just or according to law should 
 not be broken through (iv. 9, 3; v. 1, 1). Now as they 
 
 who see the light, are in the light, and partake of light, 
 D2 
 
lii EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 so the beholding (vszo) of God gives both light and 
 life ; and as man of himself does not behold or see God 
 (iv, 20, 5, 6, 7), therefore it belongs to the Divine Word 
 to reveal God, that men, gazing steadfastly on His light, 
 may be justified (iv. 27, 2), But unless the Divine 
 Word become man, how could man, according to the 
 law of the race, see or hear or hold intercourse with 
 Him, so as to be influenced by Him ? (v. 1, 1). ‘ How else 
 would men have been saved by beholding Him, when they 
 cannot gaze at the (unveiled) sun?’ (Bar. 5). Before ‘the 
 faith’ came, the weak elements of the law fore-shadowed 
 it; but now His Church or His people must continue 
 this work of His on earth; and, surely, it is only as 
 holy, blameless and irreproachable, that men are either 
 presented to God as perfect or are the word of wisdom to 
 others, shining as lights prepared through Christ (Gola, 
 223 Phil. ii) i5,-165—1) Thessi-v..234 Tren. iv, Tatas 
 6,1; C! 341). ‘It behoved the Mediator of God and 
 man, says Irenzeus, ‘through His relationship with either 
 side to bring into friendship and concord (6ydvorav) 
 both, to present man to God and make known God to 
 men’ (kal O&@ pév mapacticas tov dvOpwroy, avOpwrots 
 62 yvwpicat Tov Medv, Iren. iii. 18, 7; iv. Longe) Hawmey, 
 ii, 101,218 n. 10). The Latin of this passage, except in 
 one instance (in the Ar. MS.), differs from the Greek 
 preserved by Theodoret, and indicates that the Word 
 was to assume human nature (1), that God might be 
 revealed to man, and (2) that man might devote himself 
 (se dederet) to God. The Greek is probably the correct 
 reading ; but the connection shows that the rest of the 
 body, the Church, was to follow the type of its Head, 
 and be presented to God, not full of spots and blemishes, 
 but holy and blameless (Eph. v. 27). By due admonition 
 
THE MEDIATOR AND HIS ATONEMENT. litt 
 
 and instruction in all wisdom, St. Paul sought to present 
 every man perfect or full-grown in Christ (Col i. 28). 
 It was not according to men’s merits that the saving 
 manifestation of the Son of God was given, but of 
 God’s fatherly goodness ; nor is it to a bondage of rites 
 and ceremonies, according to the works of the first 
 man’s choice, that we are now called ; but we are called 
 to be imitators of that kindness and philanthropy and 
 perfect well-doing, which God fore-determined to mani- 
 fest in His Son (2 Tim. i. 8-12; Tit. 111. 1-8). In giving 
 us in His Son the means of being washed or cleansed, 
 and in working in us renewingly, our Heavenly Father 
 is passing by previous sins; but in the last judgment 
 our Lord will not know as His friends, or acknowledge 
 as His, or confess before His Father those who have not 
 given effect to His light and operation, ‘who by their 
 works dishonour Him who made them, and by their 
 views blaspheme Him who nourishes them’ (Iren. iv. 
 33, 15). Clement also speaks of this acceptable present- 
 ation: ‘ Knowledge is fit for the acceptable transformation 
 for the better, and terminating in love thereafter presents 
 (rapiotnow) friend to friend, the knowing to the known’ 
 (Sorvhiy 1O)¢ 
 
 JHE vlONEMENT. THOSE, IN. CHRIST..—— [he 
 English word atone had once the meaning of the Greek 
 word so translated in our version of A.D. 1611. We 
 find it used by Shakespeare! about A.D..1600, in the 
 sense of to set at one, to reconcile. ‘The Greek word (katan- 
 
 1 Since we cannot atone you, we shall see 
 Justice design the victor’s chivalry. Ach. ZZ. 1., i. 202. 
 I was glad I did atone my countrymen and you. Cymd. I. 4, 42. 
 When earthly things made even atone together.—As You Like St, 
 Marg) E16; 
 
liv EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 Adoow) and that translated propitiate (irdoxec Oar) 
 are versions of the Hebrew caphar or kipper, which 
 means properly to cover, to change the face of, or reface 
 (Gen. xxxii. 20) ; to wzpe over an old writing with some- 
 thing so as to make the document or groundwork below 
 appear (as was done in the case of the Codex Ephraemi) ; 
 to efface, obliterate, or supersede an old bond so as to do 
 away with it (Is. xxviii. 18). The lid of the ark, under- 
 neath which were the Ten Commandments, derives its 
 name capporeth from the same root; and, according to 
 Clement, this lid represents a certain veil by which the 
 things of thought are covered and which it belongs to 
 the teacher judiciously to open (C? 242, 259). Now 
 such a veil, such a significant mystery or enigma, was 
 ‘the saving drama of humanity’ which our Lord acted 
 (C * 98)—the ‘compendium’ of ‘His Presence as Man,’ 
 in which, according to Irenzeus, He ‘summed up’ His 
 previous manifestations. That which the Word of God 
 had been-addressing to mankind in the significant dis- 
 plays and utterances of nature (Ps. xix. 1-6), that which 
 was indicated by Moses and the prophets in many 
 shadowy types and divers ways, has been presented to 
 men with a new face, ina more compendious and perfect 
 form, in the Life or History of the Word made flesh. 
 The veil that was spread over all nations has been done 
 away in Christ—the ‘Enigma’ in whom we still see as 
 through a mirror (1 Cor. xiii. 12; 2 Cor. iii.), the Pro- 
 pitiatory Covering (or Hilastery, Rom. iii. 25), whose 
 glory, once hidden beneath the old veil or covering, now 
 shines forth in an open Temple. The handwriting of 
 the Old Covenant of Judaism has been effaced and 
 superseded by a new and better Covenant in the face 
 of Jesus Christ. This illumination of the Gospel of 
 
2 
 
 THE MEDIATOR AND HIS ATONEMENT. lv 
 
 Christ, who is the Image of God—this shining forth of 
 God’s glory in the face of Jesus Christ—is, no doubt, 
 ‘the Reconciliation we have now received’ (2 Cor. iv. 
 4-6; Rom. v. £1). In this sense we may perhaps under- 
 stand Art. 3 of the Church of England, as asserting 
 that Christ the Son ‘has reconciled the Father to us,’ 
 that is, has presented God to us suitably or in sucha 
 way as to attract, accustom, and train men to the know- 
 ledge and service of God, and, so to speak, to conczlzate 
 as well as correct men. For the object of the gift is 
 that we men might be reconciled to God, that is, pre- 
 sented to God with our stains and blemishes reformed, 
 with a new aspect or face as being transformed and re- 
 newed in the whole man, and thus made good and 
 acceptable or well-pleasing to God (Rom. xii. 1-2). ‘If 
 any man, therefore, be in Christ, he is a new creature : 
 the old things are passed away; behold, all things are 
 become new’ (2 Cor. v.17). To be zz Christ, therefore, 
 is to have this covering of light spread over us, to put 
 on this changed aspect of the whole man (xatad\aynre, 
 2 Cor. v. 20), to have this face of Christ reflected on us 
 (2 Cor. iii, 18. Rev. Trans.), to be partaking in ‘that 
 transformation for the better,’ which is acceptable to 
 God (C? 447). Clement quotes a passage from the 
 ‘Valentinian Heracleon, in which the expression Zo con- 
 fess in Christ (Luke xii. 8) is explained as referring to 
 men’s whole conduct, including speech. Clement agrees 
 with this explanation of the expression 2% Chrtst, but 
 considers that Heracleon undervalued the confession 
 which a man might make by martyrdom, for this might 
 show his heart to be in the right place, though his con- 
 duct or life had previously been inconsistent (S. iv. 9). 
 By our Lord’s passing through the various stages of 
 
te 
 
 Ivi EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 human life, and presenting them in a new or consecrated 
 aspect, by His fulfilling the Mosaic ritual, by His 
 laborious life of ministry, by His crucified flesh, and by 
 His resurrection, He sets before men, in a parabolic or 
 dramatic manner suited to men’s sensuous nature, the 
 way of life. In thus saving men in accordance with law, 
 He pleased God, or, in ritual language, He propitiated 
 God in our behalf (Iren. vi. 17, 2), but His inaugurating 
 work is a szez that the way of life is by pleasing God ; 
 they who offer the true sacrifice of a broken spirit or 
 heart turned from evil will propitiate God to the receiv- 
 ing of life from Him; and He accepts as done to Him- 
 self what we do to redeem our fellow creatures, i.e. to 
 benefit them in their troubles and set them right (Iren. 
 iv. 17,2; 18,6; C?420).. As sinners or transgressors 
 we are in the old Adam, in the way of death, covered 
 with works of darkness displeasing to God ; as volun- 
 tarily taught of God, as choosing well-doing, we are in 
 the Second Adam, and in the Way of Life, of which 
 He became the sensuous Image ; we are in the Light 
 which is reflected upon us. If then our Lord suffered in 
 the flesh, it is a sign that we too must crucify the lusts 
 of the flesh, arming ourselves with a like mind (1 Pet. 
 iv. 1). As we have borne the image of the earthly, let 
 us bear (as Irenzeus reads 1 Cor. xv. 40) the image of 
 the heavenly. To mortify the members which are upon 
 earth, to put off the old man with his deeds, is to put 
 away evil desires, words, and actions (Col. iii. ; Eph. iv.). 
 To put on the new man is to follow after what is good, 
 to acquire the quickening Spirit, to walk according to 
 the Word, that, as by sinning or falling away to the 
 _bad, men became depraved in those habits and disposi- 
 ‘tions which constitute a second nature, so by returning 
 
THE MEDIATOR AND HIS ATONEMENT. lvii 
 
 to the better part, by following after good works, the 
 blots left by previous sins may be effaced, or the former 
 covetousness destroyed through the formation of new 
 habits and dispositions.' | 
 The early fathers taught in no uncertain way that 
 the Saviour Christ is the Saviour of all men, and cares 
 for all men, being their Creator and Lord, exhibited 
 dispensationally (tjv ayiav otxovopiav avadsdevypeve) 
 to teach holiness, and compelling by various corrections 
 even egregious sinners to repent. He trains the en- 
 lightened by mysteries, the faithful (believer) by good 
 hopes, the hard-hearted by the corrective discipline, 
 which is through sensible operation (60 aic@ntixhs évep- 
 yelas, S vii. 2; C? 409). The sameness of this varied 
 economy consists in God’s addressing men according 
 to their nature, using sensuous means to correct sen- 
 suous men. Thus Hespeaks to men in sensuous or para- 
 bolic language, exhibits Himself to their senses as the 
 Way of Life, corrects them by sensuous discipline, and 
 elevates them by the trials and difficulties to be overcome. 
 Irenzeus (v. 12, 6; 13, 1; 15, 2) considered it very signi- 
 ficant that our Lord’s miraculous power was displayed so 
 much in healing men, and that He used sensuous means 
 for this purpose. Thus he formed eyes and sight to the 
 blind man bysmearing his eyes with clay (from which man 
 was made) and sending him to wash in Siloam (John ix.). 
 The supernatural is founded on the natural; and thus 
 the early fathers reasoned that a new sight is formed 
 for those morally blind—not by depositing in them some 
 germ of a higher physical nature apart from voluntary 
 choice, as the Gnostics supposed—but by leading men to 
 the truth, as the good teacher ought to do, by means of 
 
 1 Tren. iv. 125 53 36,93 39, 1, 23 Vv. 9, 33 12, 3,5; C? 230, 416. 
 
lvili EARLY DOCTRINAL. SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 what they have (dca ray idtwv, C ? 232). Irenaeus insists 
 much on the Word’s becoming visible and audible ; and 
 thus by the very (sensuous) things wherein man formerly 
 disobeyed and disbelieved God, by these He brought in 
 obedience and assent to His Word (Iren. v. 15, 3 ; 16, 2). 
 Man is the workmanship of the Lord ; naturally, there- 
 fore, says Clement (Pd. i. 3), He does all things bene- 
 ficially for man ; ‘as God, He forgives sins, and as man 
 He trains us (as children) so that we should not sin,’ 
 Children need a course of milk nourishment ; and this 
 sort of thing is His bodily presence (Iren. iv. 38, 1), per- 
 
 petuated in His Church, His sacraments, &c. His flesh ~ 
 
 was the propitiatory covering, underneath which lay the 
 perfect law of God, the beautiful curtain, behind which 
 was veiled the rational service of the initiated priesthood. 
 Now we see in this bright mirror enigmatically the glory 
 of God; this glass or screen lends its colours to that 
 which shines through it ; but it was an idea of the Mar- 
 cosians, repudiated by Irenzeus, that a man’s case is so 
 identified with that of the Ransom, that he is out of the 
 power of the Judge, who caznot, it is still said, punish 
 both him and the Surety; or that, in the judgment, a 
 man will be screened from the sight of the Judge, so as 
 to be unseen (Iren. i. 13, 6).! 
 
 * The Marcosians ‘ do all things freely, having no fear in anything ; for 
 they affirm that because of the Ransom (Redemption) they come to be 
 beyond the power and out of the sight of the Judge. But, if He did lay 
 hold on them, they might stand before Him with the Ransom and speak 
 as follows: O (Wisdom) Assessor of God . . . do thou, as knowing the 
 case of us both (me and the Ransom), present the case of (plea in behalf of 
 Adbyov éxép) both of us to the Judge as being one case.’ On this they are 
 screened from the Judge’s sight and enter heaven. The followers of Simon 
 Magus, not having investigated the cause of the difference of the two testa- 
 ments, their adaptation, imagine that the laws enacted by Moses were unlike 
 and contrary to the doctrine of the gospel (Iren. iii. 12, 12), disregard the 
 
THE REDEEMER AND HIS RANSOM. lix 
 
 THE RANSOM PAID BY THE) REDEEMER. | THE 
 SIN-BEARER.—I. The Divine Lawgiver respects His 
 own laws, and is pleased when they are respected. 
 When, therefore, our Lord became man, He became, as 
 one of us, a Victim to the evils which sin had brought 
 upon the race, that, in saving man, God's laws might 
 not be broken through (Iren. v. 1, r). It is appointed 
 unto all men once to die; our Lord, therefore, having 
 become man, did not set aside the law appointed to our 
 race; He passed through childhood, boyhood, man- 
 hood, and eventually pazd the penalty of death, that is, 
 died, that men might follow His steps, and, like Him, 
 be raised from the dead (Iren. ii. 22, 4; Heb. 1x. 27, 28). 
 Again, when our Lord became a member of the Jewish 
 community, and when, as the blameless and just Light, 
 He reproved the prevailing covetousness, hypocrisy and 
 blind guidance (Just. Dial. 17), then the curse of a malig- 
 nant, wrathful, and infatuated spirit, which was itself the 
 judgment of God or the consequence of a persistent 
 choice of evil and darkness (Rom. iii. 5-8), broke out 
 against Him. Thus our Lord pard the penalty of men’s 
 sins, in that He bore their consequences or suffered from 
 the working of evil among men, which also has its laws. 
 Again, it is the law of our race that men are perfected 
 
 old prophetic utterances, and ‘do whatever they wish under the idea that 
 they are free, that they will obtain salvation not by good works, but by. 
 grace, that they are not chargeable (atriov Sins) for what they do badly, 
 for this is not to be bad by nature but by enactment (@éce:) established 
 (& @evro) by the angels. . . who brought in such prescriptive rules to 
 enslave men. . . Accordingly they are not laid hold of as culprits upon 
 the ground of anything reckoned (by law or custom) to be evil, for they 
 have been redeemed’ (ov yap wh kparetoOat avtovs em Tivt vomiCouevm Kak, 
 AcAUTpwrTa ydp. Hip. Phzl. vi. 19; Harvey’s Zen. i, 123, n. 23 1243 
 193; Nn. 2, 3 > 194). f : 
 
Ix EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 by patiently enduring temptation and doing well, though 
 they suffer for it ; ‘the disciplinary art of providence is 
 the same in such things, and, therefore, our Lord was 
 not hindered from suffering (waeiv, omitted in Clark) 
 this sanctification of ours’ (C?178). As ‘tribulation is 
 necessary for such as are saved’ (Iren. v. 28, 4), it 
 behoved the Leader and Forerunner of man’s salvation 
 to be made perfect through sufferings (Heb. ii. 10). 
 Both Irenzus and Clement believed that, though God 
 does not cause the voluntary apostasy of rebels, yet it is 
 the greatest achievement of His Providence to overrule 
 their persecutions, false prophesyings, or other causes of 
 stumbling (scandals), so as to make them serve some 
 good purpose in perfecting those who endure the test 
 and are approved (C! 408, 409), as ‘the stubble is of 
 use for the growth of wheat and the chaff thereof for 
 burning, for the working of gold’ (Iren. v. 29). The 
 incarnation was thus the beginning of our Lord’s 
 redeeming’ work; having become man, He was only 
 consistent in not setting aside the established laws 
 which God has assigned to the race ; but in honouring 
 these laws He presented Man well: pleasing to the 
 Father. 
 
 II. Man also must be conciliated or attracted by the 
 Presentation according to the laws of his nature. The 
 Creator respects these, if, as we presume, He does not 
 work magically. It was to win and, so to speak, to 
 purchase man’s well-pleased service or hearty co-opera- 
 tion, that our Lord became a Brother-Man. He stooped 
 to conquer. Christians are not their own; a ransom 
 has been paid to them for (av7i) themselves; and for 
 man’s sake a return is sought for. This is no ordinary 
 agreement, for God alone has arranged it for our good, 
 
THE REDEEMER AND HIS RANSOM. lxi 
 
 and God alone is Judge whether a man is to be accounted 
 grateful or ungrateful, approved or worthless. In the 
 following passage, Clement is speaking of our Lord as 
 the expression of the Father’s unspeakable love, as the 
 Great Sign of the Father, and as having, as a Fellow- 
 Sufferer, caught at us with a mother’s love. ‘It was 
 for this,’ he goes on, ‘that He Himself descended and 
 put on humanity, for this that He willingly suffered the 
 things of men, that by bringing Himself to the measure 
 of the weakness of us whom He loved He might cor- 
 respondingly bring us to the measure of His strength; 
 and both when about to pour out a ratification (amévSeoOau) 
 and when giving Himself a Ransom Hé bequeaths to us 
 a New Covenant: “ My love I give to you.” What is 
 this and how much? In behalf of each one of us, He 
 put down (as a payment, xaréOnxe) His life worth the 
 whole (77v uyny tiv avraklay tov oXwv) ; in return 
 He demands of us this (life) in behalf of each other. 
 But if we owe our lives to the brethren and have thank- 
 fully owned (av@wporoyjoapefa) such an agreement 
 (cvvOn«nv) with the Saviour, should we live avaricious, 
 unloving, and worthless lives, the end of which is the 
 fire ? (De Div. Ser. 37) . Instead of mere fleshly pleasures 
 our Lord gives us His (manifestation in the) flesh, which 
 is bread indeed, and for what intoxicates He gives His 
 Spirit ; to console us for the sacrifice of this life, He 
 gives eternal life; for transcendental conceits (the wis- 
 dom of this world) He gives us a knowledge fitted to 
 our capacity, and instead of that old covenant between 
 men which exacted eye for eye and tooth for tooth, which 
 taught or allowed men to avenge themselves, we have 
 received a new covenant of love to bind ‘men of well- 
 pleasing’ in one brotherhood. Thus our Lord presents 
 
Ixii EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 God and life eternal to man to win him from his evil plea- 
 sures ; but man must still choose, and is to himself the 
 cause why in one case he becomes wheat for God’s 
 garner, and in another chaff to be left and burned up 
 (Iren. iv. 4, 3). 
 
 It appears also from their interpretations of the 
 Scriptures that the early fathers gave this two-fold 
 explanation of our Lord’s sufferings. When Isaiah 
 says (lili. 5, 8) that He was wounded and stricken from 
 (Heb. mn, Sept. 6a and dd) men’s transgressions and 
 bruised from (min) our iniquities, Barnabas (c. 5, 6, 14) 
 and Justin understood, first, that He suffered /rom the 
 consummated sins of the people, from the accumula- 
 tion of evil which had grown up in human society. 
 When Trypho the Jew quoted Deut. xxi. 23, to show 
 that because Christ was crucified, therefore He was 
 cursed of God, Justin (Dial. 89) replied that there would 
 be room for ae if Isaiah and the prophets had 
 not predicted that He would suffer dishonourably from 
 the sins of the people ; he then showed that all men are 
 under a curse, since every Jew would admit that he had 
 more or less broken the law, and since the Gentiles were 
 still more guilty of idolatrous- wickedness; that our 
 Lord took upon Himself the curses of all (oan. sub- 
 ject to ill-treatment, death, &c.), that He might heal 
 men from these bites of the serpent, the curses resulting 
 from sin; that the Jews, who would not be healed can 
 cursed fe as they cursed those who believed in Him 
 (thrice a day, as Epiphanius and Jerome tell us), should 
 rather mourn for themselves (Just. Dial. 16 note, Oxf. Tr. 
 94-96). The second reason for our Lord's sufferings, 
 assigned by Barnabas (5, 6, 14), was to redeem our nature, 
 as here conditioned, from the dominion of sin and death, to 
 
THE REDEEMER AND HIS RANSOM. Ixiil 
 
 exhibit, in our suffering humanity an Image of God, which 
 we could behold and reflect. Made in the likeness of the 
 flesh (holden) of sin, He combated the tempter as Man, 
 and ‘acted the saving drama of humanity’ (C' 98). ‘He 
 is introduced in the Gospels as wearied, because toiling 
 for us, and promising to give His life a ransom for many, 
 fer him alone who does so He owns to be a good shep- 
 herd; and as man He wished to be a Brother when He 
 might have been Lord’ (Matt. xx. 28; John x. 11). It 
 was to break the power of fleshly lusts and heal the 
 wounds of the serpent, to draw men to be imitators of 
 God, and provoke thein to (put on) His own likeness, 
 that our Lord, bearing patiently the desertion of His 
 friends, and praying for His murderers, was in the like- 
 ness of sinful flesh and of the brazen Serpent, lifted up 
 from the earth on the wood of martyrdom (Iren. iii. 18, 
 53 20, 2; iv. 2,7). We were the strong man’s goods, 
 and his house as long as we were in apostasy ; but now 
 he is bound with the same chains wherewith he bound 
 man! (iii 18, 1/25°V-°21, 3)3-Matt.)/xX11.,!26).; .Sinl entered 
 through enticement to pamper the flesh, through self- 
 seeking or self-exaltation, through the conceit of a trans- 
 cendental wisdom leading to a disregard of God’s known 
 laws. As, therefore, the flesh and God’s other creatures 
 had been made to minister to evil, it was reasonable 
 that God should assume what belongs to Himself, that 
 in what is corporeal and visible the Word of God should 
 have the pre-eminence, that, being made flesh and the 
 First-Born from the dead, Hle might attract all in con- 
 venient season (iii. 16). To expel the vainglorious boast- 
 ing, or the selfish love of life in this world, our Lord 
 appears divesting Himself of His transcendent glory, 
 not grasping at equality with God, but giving us an 
 
Ixiv EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 actual proof of a life incorruptible to be attained by 
 self-sacrifice (John xii. 25). Again, sin had made use of 
 the commandment to prompt men to what is forbidden 
 (Rom. vii. 8); but our Lord showed that the divine com- 
 mandments are not grievous or jealous restrictions, but 
 laws of health and life; He undid ‘diabolic ignorance,’ 
 by means of discourses and_precepts, which He Himself 
 practised. The adversary concealed his falsehoods by 
 a false appearance of knowledge, and by perverting 
 Scripture or God’s words, as the heretics still do; our 
 Lord offers us sober-minded knowledge adapted to our 
 capacity instead of transcendental conceits; and He re- 
 futed perversions of Scripture by means of Scripture 
 (ili. 18, 5,6; v. 21-24). He teaches us to give heed how 
 we hear, and not to disregard God’s known laws. To 
 those who follow Him, He promises that good habits 
 and the divine life shall expel the power of sin and 
 death. 
 
 The Hebrew words (gadl and padhah), meaning to 
 redeem, have the double sense of the English word: we 
 vedeem when we recover, rescue or deliver, either by 
 literally paying money or by giving the necessary fazns. 
 Job’s Redeemer (God) was He who was to deliver him 
 from his troubles, and from death (Job xix. 25). The 
 Goél or Avenger of Blood was the near kinsman, whose 
 duty it was to pursue the manslayer to slay him in turn. 
 Now sin is a manslayer; and Ireneus speaks of men 
 who were such as banished to a city of refuge till the 
 death of the Great High Priest (iv. 8, 2). The Lord 
 jaid upon Him (Sef¢. delivered Him to) our iniquities 
 (Is. lui. 6), plainly, says Clement, as ‘Corrector and: 
 Reformer of sins’ (C! 158). The task laid upon Him 
 was to redeem us from all lawlessness (Tit. ii. 4) ; 
 
) 
 
 THE SIN-BEARER AND HIS OFFERING. Ixv 
 
 Clement represents the Saviour as pleading His claims 
 to a man’s allegiance on the ground that He has acted 
 as his Champion against Death, giving freedom and 
 healing. ‘I, a teacher of heavenly lessons, contended 
 with (zpos) death for thy sake, and discharged (paid off 
 or rather chastised away, é&érvca) thy death, which thou ° 
 owedest for thy former sins, and thy unfaithfulness 
 towards God’ (De Div. Ser. 23). This task of chasing 
 away sin and death, of ‘reforming and correcting sins,’ 
 belonged to Him as the Avenger of our blood. ‘The 
 chastisement of our peace was upon Him’ Cis? lii-5 is 
 and here the word mosar (Sept. madsa) translated 
 chastisement means instruction and disciplinary correc- 
 _ tion—the two tasks which, according to Clement, were 
 assigned to Him (Ped. i. 7). The Word of the Cross 
 reconciles men to peace (Iren. iv. 34, 4); and the burden 
 of government was upon his shoulders (issixc6) Sav But 
 in whatever sense He bore our burdens, He did not 
 thereby free us from His /aw of bearing one another’s 
 burdens (Gal. vi. 2). 
 
 The objects of men’s idolatrous worship are some- 
 times called in Scripture their sins (Deut. ix. 21; 
 Amos viii. 14). Men may make idols of the flesh, 
 of their own selves, or of that beautiful imagery of 
 earthly things, through which God manifests Himself 
 (I fohn ii. 15, 16; v. 21). When St. Paul says that our 
 Lord ‘ was made sin for us’ (2 Cor. v. 21), he may mean 
 that He took upon Himself what we had idolised, or 
 that He came in the likeness of the flesh (holden) of sin, 
 with a human soul, recapitulating the old (perverted) 
 elements. Thus He may be said to have borne, ice. lifted 
 or taken wp (aipeiw = Heb. nasa), the sin of the world 
 (John i. 29), for He gave us by means of the old ele- 
 
 Ve 
 
Ixvi EARLY’ DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 ments a new manifestation of God, a true Image to set 
 aside forbidden images; He came into this sin-pos- 
 sessed world to take away (aipew) its sins (1 John iii. 5), 
 to reconcile it to God (2 Cor. v. 17-21), by making it a 
 true image of God. The same word (avadépw) is em- 
 ' ployed when our Lord is said to have borne (offered up) 
 sins (Heb. ix. 28), to have offered up Himself (Heb. vii. 27), 
 and to have carried 2 our sins in His body to the cross 
 (duveyxev ert To EbAov, I Pet. ii. 24). St. Paul speaks of 
 the cross as the rival of the world (Gal. vi. 14), and also 
 of the old shadowy ‘deeds’ of the Mosaic law (Rom. vii. 6 ; 
 Gal. v. 14). Our Lord is the Sun of Righteousness 
 (Mal. iv. 2), superseding the Gentile elements of worship 
 (Deut. iv. 19), and an enigma (1 Cor. xiii, 12), super- 
 seding the darker Mosaic ordinances (2 Cor. iii.), ‘a law 
 put down upon a law (véuos kata rouou TeOels, i.e. covering 
 it) and abrogating it’ (Justin, Dial. :1). Israel’s blessings 
 had been turned into curses (Ez. xx. 25 ; Mal. 1i. 2) when 
 Israel made idols of God’s altars (Hos. viii. I1), wor- 
 shipping God in the temple almost after the manner of 
 the heathen (Bar. c. 16), and putting their Pharisaic 
 zeal in the place of divine philanthropy or love 
 (Iren. iv. 11, 4; 12). From the curse of such a zeal of 
 fire, as well as from the curse of being holden by death, 
 our Lord delivers His followers, having become a curse 
 for them, first, in that He came under the burdensome 
 rites of the law in order to supersede them, and secondly, 
 in that He suffered death from the working of wrath in 
 the minds of men; both death and this evil spirit having 
 come upon men through voluntary disobedience and 
 indulging the passions. Inasmuch then as He bore our 
 nature and the consequences entailed upon it by sin, He 
 bore our burdens and set before us, in a saving drama, 
 
CHRIST A COMPENDIOUS RECAPITULATION. Ixvii 
 
 His law (Gal. vi. 2); and in so doing He both pleased 
 God, whose laws He honoured, and presented God and 
 God’s law of well-doing to men in such a way as to 
 conciliate men and induce them to follow the pattern 
 Cre Claes 
 
 AppiTionaL Notes oN THE ATONEMENT.—The artistic 
 skill of the Creator displays itself in the adaptation of means 
 to ends, and also in symmetrical arrangements and_har- 
 monious evolution. Accordingly, Irenzus reasons that, ‘as 
 God made all things in due proportion and well adjusted, the 
 outward aspect (species) of the Gospel must needs be also well 
 ordered and compacted ;’ he explains, on this principle, why 
 there are four gospels and no more, twelve apostles and no 
 fewer (ill. II, 9 ; 12, 1) ; and goes on to show that as there is 
 with God nothing inelegant (czcomptum), nothing incongruous, 
 nothing following unseasonably, as it was one and the same 
 God who pre-arranged the various dispensations from beginning 
 to end, and one Christ Jesus who was with God in the beginning, 
 by whom all things were made and who came by means of all 
 the dispensational arrangements, so in the end He reca- 
 pitulated (avaceparawoacbat, Eph. i. to) in or reconciled 
 (aroxaradAdéa, Col. 1. 20, 21) into Himself all things, whether 
 things upon the earth or things in the heavens (ili. 16, 6-7; 
 iv. 5, 1). He summed up those natural manifestations of God 
 and His ways, which were previously given through the host 
 (Saba)! of heaven and earth, as well as those preparatory 
 elements of the Jewish law and the Gentile philosophy (C! 366, 
 367, 415 ; C? 340, 341), by which the way was prepared for 
 Christ. ‘Thus, as the Word of God is chief in things super- 
 celestial, spiritual, and invisible, so also He ‘acted the saving 
 
 1 Saba, host, is translated in the Septuagint kécuos, world (Gen. ii. 1; 
 Deut. iv. 19; xvil. 3; Is. xxiv. 21-23), or d¥vauis, power or powers 
 (Ps. xxxiii. 6; Dan. iv. 32; viii. 10; Is. xxxiv. 4, &c.). It is well-known 
 that the heathen religions began with the worship of the heavenly bodies 
 and the powers of nature, which is a manifestation of God. The Lord or 
 Hosts (Sabaoth) is ravroxpdrwp, the Almighty (Sept.). 
 
 E 2 
 
; 
 
 Ixviii EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 drama of humanity’ (C! 98), and fulfilled God’s dispensational 
 manifestations (omnem secundum hominem dispensationem tm- 
 lente, Iren. iil. 17, 4), that also in things visible and corporeal 
 He might have the pre-eminence (Col. i. 18). Now among 
 these ‘all things,’ which the Divine Word recapitulated, is man 
 himself (ili. 16, 6); and as man is made perfect through 
 endurance and victory over temptation, so also was the Arche- 
 type of man’s salvation exhibited (Heb. ii. 10). The living 
 man is the glory of God, and the life of man is the seeing (v7sz0) 
 of God (iv. 20, 7); accordingly, for us men and for our salva- 
 tion the Divine Word became visible, palpable,! and capable 
 of suffering, and ‘summed up in Himself the long exposition? 
 of men, presenting salvation to us (ed¢sés) in a compendium.’ 
 Thus Irenzus sees many parallels between the temptation in 
 Eden and that in the wilderness, between the disobedience of 
 Eve and the obedience of the Virgin Mary, between Adam’s 
 disobedience, his grasping at forbidden pleasure and at trans- 
 cendental knowledge, his elated self-conceit, and his seeking 
 to save the life in this world, and the obedience, the patient 
 waiting for food given by God, the humble dependence on the 
 Father’s laws, and the unworldly disinterestedness of our Lord 
 (v. 213; 22). ‘And not only by the aforesaid things, but by 
 His very passion did the Lord manifest both Himself and His 
 Father,’ recapitulating, rectifying, effacing, and compensating 
 (sanans, consolatus, dtssolvens, exsolvens) the disobedience 
 wrought at a tree by the obedience at a tree (éz /igno), and 
 
 * Tren. ili. 16, 6. Harvey (ii. 88) quotes an exactly parallel passage 
 of Ign. ad Polyc. c. 3, where zxcomprehensibilis is replaced by apnadpnros. 
 
 * Tren. iii. 18, 1. The word exfositio comes from exponere, which 
 replaces oxnvoBareiv, to bring on the stage (Harvey, ii. 262), or, as it is 
 translated (Clark, iv. 33, 7), set forth, or by Keble, aisf/ay. Thus our Lord 
 acted the saving drama of humanity (C! 98), recapitulating (avaxepa- 
 Aaiduevos) by His crown of thorns on the head (caput, kepadh) His first 
 appearing to Moses in a (thorny) bush, and, because of His suffering, 
 exalted above every name (Phil. iii. 9 11), above every manifestation to 
 sense and thought, like the name on the crown or plate of the High 
 Priest’s mitre (Paed. ii. 8, S. v. 6). 
 
CHRIST A COMPENDIOUS RECAPITULATION. Ixix 
 
 bringing in obedience and assent unto God’s word by the very 
 same things wherein we refused to obey God and to believe 
 ‘His word’ (v. 16, 3 ; 19, 1) 3 recapitulating man’s death on the 
 sixth day, and by means of His own passion conferring on 
 (donans) man a second formation (plasmationem), that which is 
 out of (2) death (v. 23, 2), that death might not hold man, 
 but become the gate of a new life. So, likewise, He anointed 
 over and superseded (éaXetPac) the bond written in ordinances, 
 and nailed it (in His body) to the Cross, thus remitting men’s 
 debt or sins (comp. Iren. v. 17, 3, with Frag. 36 or 37), trium- 
 phantly stripping the principalities and powers (Sadaoth) and 
 making an exhibition in ofenmess (éderypcricev Ev Tappyoia), 
 that 1s, as appears from John xvi. 29, in frank plainness, as 
 compared to the mystery of the old religions, the middle wall of 
 shadows, which parted men from God and one another (Eph. 
 ll, 14, 15 3 Col. il. 14, 15). For ‘since the law began with 
 Moses, it ended in due course with John, Christ having come 
 to fulfil it. . .. Jerusalem also, beginning with David and 
 completing her proper times, was to have an end of legislation 
 in the revelation of the New Testament. . . . But why speak 
 we of Jerusalem, since the fashion of the whole world must 
 pass away’ (Iren. iv. 4, 2). 
 
 Our Lord died for (urép, i.e. 22 behalf of) us, being de- 
 livered up for (ccd, 1.e. because of) our sinful errors ; but in one 
 and only one case avri, 2x the place of, is used. He gave His 
 life or soul a ransom for (avri) many (Matt. xx. 28 ; Mark x. 45). 
 Clement of Rome (i. 49) and Irenzeus (v. 1, 1) speak of Him as 
 giving His soul for (érép) our souls and His flesh for (avri zz 
 fren.) our flesh (capxév). Here (i) we may understand that there 
 is a representative parallelism, that, as on the Day of Atonement, 
 the blood was love given upon the altar of His soul, the mind of 
 self-sacrifice was set forth on the Propitiatory, that it might be 
 on our souls (Lev. xvul. 11, Rom. i. 25). ‘ Let us give earnest 
 heed,’ says this Clement, ‘to the blood of Christ, which having 
 been shed for our salvation, has set the grace of a changed mind 
 (repentance) before (irhyeyce) the whole world’ (i.7). Adam 
 
Ixx EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 exhibited a different mind, when tempted to disobey God 
 through the attractions of this world, the flesh, and the soul 
 (self). To match (ari) these, new attractions were presented 
 in the life, flesh, and soul of our Lord which He gave in self- 
 sacrifice for us, leaving us a pattern, binding upon us as a debt, 
 that we should follow His steps. The gift of the Son of God, 
 manifested in this way, was the passing by of sins that are past. 
 The reason why God thus passed these sins by was His love 
 or kindness to man. (ii) He gave this Zo man for himself, 
 Cremer, in his Lexicon, says that. we never read in the 
 Bible ihaoxecOae rov Oeor, to propttiate God,! as if anything 
 happened to God; that something rather happens to man; 
 that the syntactical peculiarity of the expression ¢o propitiate 
 sins (dat. or acc., Dan. 1x. 24, &c. ; Heb. 11. 17) is due to the 
 fact that the profane notion in tAdcxeoOar differs from the 
 Biblical notion in caphar to cover,? wrap up so as to withdraw 
 from sight (7e-face, Gen. xxxil. 20 ; efface or do over, Is, xxviii. 18). 
 The same explanation may be given of the peculiar construc- 
 tion with wepi, about, translated propitiation for (1 John ii. 2 ; 
 iv. 10), but derived from the Septuagint, where it replaces the 
 Hebrew ad, uwpfon. Thus Christ is a covering upon sins or upon 
 the world. Another equivalent of cafhar is xaradhéooeyr, 
 
 * Irenzeus speaks of our Lord as propitiating the Father, and recon- 
 ciling us to God after this model (vy. 16; 17). He may have used the word 
 popularly in the sense of please ; in fact, Cremer says that dpéonew, please, 
 is synonymous, meaning primarily zo give satisfaction, content, appease. 
 Ireneeus speaks of heretics appeasing (placantes) God by renouncing their 
 blasphemies (ii. 11, 2). He says that our Lord fulfilled the Sabbath by 
 doing good on it; that He performed the works (ofera) of the High 
 Priest, propitiating God for (70) men, cleansing the lepers, &c. (iv. 8, 2). 
 But those who offer to Him the true sacrifice of a proper mind and right 
 ways will propitiate God, for such sacrifices are the means of salvation 
 (iv.<173 2). 
 
 * The English language admits of a similar use of the word cover. 
 Thus the Z%mes of April 21, 1882, speaks of ‘some greater law which 
 will cover Darwinism and take a wider sweep.’ ‘A law laid down upon a 
 law (kara vduov reOels) makes that before it to cease, and so a covenant 
 subsequently made terminates a previous one’ (Just. Dial. c. 11). 
 
CHRIST ‘A. COMPENDIOUS. RECAPITULATION. [xx] 
 
 reconcile or eachange, for our Lord’s flesh became a new veil in 
 exchange for the old (Heb. x. 20), and thus He became the 
 Mediator of intercourse between the invisible God and sensuous 
 man, superseding the old weak and unprofitable elements by 
 bringing in thereupon (new trans.) a better hope, through which 
 we draw nigh to God (Heb. vil. 18, 19). But God so loved 
 the world that He gave His Son. His sentiment did not need 
 to be changed ; but for righteousness’ sake, because of man’s 
 sense-bound condition, the law of man’s second life through 
 crucifying the flesh and sacrificing one’s self for the general 
 good, was set forth as a suitable drama, in an enigma (éy 
 aiviypare, t Cor /xilt: 12). 
 
 Our Lord was not only a merciful and faithful High Priest 
 to propitiate the sins of the people (Heb. 1. 17), uit He was 
 also the Lamb of God that taketh up and beareth, or taketh 
 away (aipev, Heb. zasa) the sin of the world (John i. 29), that 
 bore our sins in His body to the tree (é7} 70 EvAoy, 1 Peter ii. 
 24). Though He knew no sin, He was made sin for us 
 (2 Cor. v. 21). The serpent, which first tempted man, is 
 usually represented as hanging from the tree; and yet by 
 beholding the image of the serpent on a pole, the Israelites 
 were cured of the serpents’ bites. In Lev. xvi. directions are 
 given that, on the Great Day of Atonement, a goat should be 
 sacrificed for the sins of the people; and yet, immediately after- 
 wards, the idolatrous objects of the people’s worship are called 
 goats, translated devils (Lev. xvu. 7). In Deut. ix. 21, Moses 
 says: ‘And I took. your sin, the calf which ye had made.’ Men 
 swore by the guz/¢ (Sept. propitiation) of Samaria: ‘As thy god 
 (calf),O Dan, or thy way, O Beersheba, liveth’ (Amos vill. 14). 
 Hosea declares that, ‘because Israel hath multiplied altars for 
 (7) sin, altars shall be to him for sin’ (vii. 11). When they 
 made the ceremonial of their law (dora) a substitute for judg- 
 ment, mercy and intelligent faith, Isaiah (i. 13, 14) speaks of it 
 asan abomination, a burden (dorach) to ’God; statutes originally 
 good were turned into idols or scourges (Ez. xx. 25), and their 
 blessings cursed (Mal. i. 2) Thus our Lord, in taking the 
 
Ixxii EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 place of the law, recapitulated it, as, in the providence of God, 
 it was then binding on the Jews ; as Justin (Dial. 9g 5) expresses 
 it, He took upon Himself the curses of all; but the Jews, who 
 rejected Him, should think themselves (not Him) to be accursed 
 (for they were still under the idolised law). The law of Moses, 
 the dark veil or covering, had become a curse, and our Lord 
 took its place, unless men adhered to it. Much more are 
 heathen idolatries to be reckoned curses ; and as all sins are 
 idolatrous symbolisms, perversions of what is intended to 
 manifest God truly, our Lord may be said to have re-formed 
 these perverted symbolisms, supplanting the idol or curse or 
 sin. Such actions, also, as eating and drinking are an imagery 
 of truth, although they may be perverted into sins and curses. 
 Our Lord became the bread of life; we drink of the water 
 which He gives and of a new wine. We may idolise dress ; 
 His garment showed wisdom and true comeliness (Cha54, 262). 
 ‘Thus our Lord supersedes what men pervert into idols. He 
 became /lesh, and, therefore, may be said to have been made 
 sim for us ; for the flesh is the god which men still worship, 
 and may, therefore, be called their sé (Deut. ix. 21). 
 
 THE LAWS OF SALVATION. 
 
 THE SAVIOUR AND HIs DISCRIMINATING Ways. 
 
 Irenzeus speaks of our Lord’s economy assigned to 
 Him, according to which He fulfilled in suitable order and 
 time and hour what His Father had foreknown and ap- 
 pointed (iii. 16, 7). According to Clement, there was an 
 indefinite and timeless production (¢xgopav) in the be- 
 ginning ; but the day in and through which God made 
 the heaven and the earth refers to the activity which is 
 by the Son (S. vi.16; C?390). Irenzeus finds fault with 
 the gnostic description of the generation of the Son as 
 an emanation of thought from the First Father, of rind 
 from thought, and of word from mind, as if in this way 
 we could understand the mystery of God's Being. God 
 
THE SAVIOUR AND HIS RIGHTEOUS WORK.  Ixxili 
 
 is all Mind and all Reason; and who shall declare the 
 Son’s generation? No man knoweth this production or 
 generation or utterance or manifestation, or can describe 
 it. Also whence and how He produced matter is a 
 knowledge which must be left to God. By indulging 
 in such infinite conjectures about God and in such vain 
 talk we run the risk of losing what we do know (ii. 28). 
 But the early fathers certainly considered that our Lord 
 Jesus Christ is God and Man ([Iren. iv. 33, 4); and 
 Irenzeus saw nothing irrational in the Word’s becoming 
 man, likening Himself to man and man to God; for 
 He truly revealed the Image, Himself having become 
 that very Thing which the Image of Him was (v. 16, 2). 
 Man’s rational and moral nature is the reflection or 
 manifestation of God’s nature; therefore, God may 
 manifest Himself through the Perfect Man. In all 
 God’s doings law reigns (Clem. S. i. 29). The Son of 
 God did not become man to set aside or stultify His 
 Father’s laws; but that we through these laws might 
 attain anew formation from death. The laws which 
 He follows in saving men, and which men must follow in 
 order to be saved, are sometimes treated under the 
 heading of Soteriology. 
 
 i. God’s righteousness has been manifested to men that 
 ‘God inight be just and the justifier of him that is of the faith 
 of Jesus.” In Rom. iil. 5, 21, 26, ‘mention is made,’ says 
 Cremer, ‘ of the righteousness of God, so far as God is regarded 
 as one who acts as He is bound (sé venda verbo) by Himself to 
 act, so that He does not contradict Himself.’ ‘Used of God 
 Himself, the word just (Cixatoc) refers mainly to His relation to 
 man, but also to all His doings as answering to the rule which 
 He has established for Himself, so that no default, no defect 
 can be charged against Him. It signifies the perfect coinci- 
 dence between His nature, which is the standard for all, and 
 
Ixxiv EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 Mis acts.’ God’s dealings are thus consistent with one another ; 
 and, as our Lord did not set aside in His own case His own 
 law of the human race (Iren. ii. 22, 4), and as He was set 
 forth as the fulfilment of past dispensations, He manifested the 
 Divine righteousness or self-consistency. ‘God did not fail in 
 Flis own justice (regard for law), but acted justly (according to 
 law) in turning Himself (becoming man) to match (adversus) 
 that apostasy, ransoming from it the things which were His 
 own not by compulsion (cum vz), but in accordance with reason 
 and persuasion, so that neither that which is just (according to 
 law) might be broken through nor God’s old workmanship 
 utterly perish’ (Iren. v. 1, 1). Our Lord’s sacrifice thus fulfilled 
 God’s past dealings and satisfied the divine laws: or ways of 
 working ; He may thus be said to be a ransom paid that they 
 might not be broken. But the language of Irenseus indicates 
 that this divine justice or seif-consistency respects the power of 
 self-determining choice, which the Creator has given to man, 
 and without which man would not be made in God’s image, 
 Our Lord’s pleasing the Father does not free us from the obli- 
 gation of pleasing Him, but is a s¢ga that we must do so ; that 
 we, too, must become part of this reconciled world and exhibit 
 God. We must, as Clement says (on 1 John ii. 1-6), seek to 
 ‘complete the fair face of the church’—an expression which 
 shows that he appreciated the Hebrew equivalent of ‘the 
 propitiation about the whole world.’ For, he adds, ‘the blame- 
 less, pure, and faultless sons of God are to be the word of 
 wisdom, to shine as lights in the world’ (C! 340, 4am ¢ thal 
 ll. 15). ‘They are those who are set forth as righteous, for this 
 is ‘everywhere (in the Bible) the root-meaning of dcavody,’ 
 justify (Cremer). ‘This setting forth is no forensic fiction, as if 
 evil men, while they remain evil, were exhibitions of God’s 
 righteousness. ‘They must arise and be light (Is. Ix. 1), and 
 walk as Christ walked, that they may lay hold of and put on 
 His righteousness (1 John ii. 6, 29 ; iii. 7, 16). 
 
 i. This New Covenant, binding man as a debtor to 
 love and do good, is not an ordinary agreement. It is God 
 
THE SAVIOUR AND HIS RIGHTEOUS WORK. Ixxv 
 
 who forms it ; man’s part is to.accept it (Cremer), not to arrange 
 its terms as an independent party. The Author of man’s life, He 
 who gives His bounties to man, determines the Jaws of His 
 operation, the ways of His blessing (Clem. Rom. i. 21, 31), the 
 means whereby the promised inheritance is secured. If we 
 speak of these laws, ways, or means as conditions, we do not 
 mean that they are a ground whereby a man entztles himself to 
 salvation, as if he had made an independent agreement with 
 God, or as if God needed anything ; we mean that in this, as 
 in all His works, God follows laws, still searching the hearts of 
 men, trying those on whom He sends His goodness, not setting 
 aside the praiseworthy element in virtue, but rejecting those 
 who continue to disregard or transgress these laws. When, 
 therefore, men deny that godliness is a ground of salvation, 
 they should explain what they mean. None could have more 
 distinctly repudiated the idea of man’s endéztling himself to 
 salvation, or of God’s needing anything, than the early fathers ; 
 and none could have more distinctly asserted that there is a 
 sphere wherein man’s will is left free play, so that he may 
 submit to or reject the divine workmanship, instruction, or 
 correction, and thus ‘be to himself a cause why in the one 
 case he becomes wheat and in the other chaff’ (Iren. iv. 4, 3 ; 
 39, 3). Bearing these things in mind, we can understand 
 St. Paul’s argument (Rom. vi.—vili.) that Baptism is a sort of 
 symbolical engagement (sacrament) to be, like Christ, dead to 
 sin and living to God, and that it is most unreasonable to 
 contradict this by the life; that as men had presented them- 
 selves and their members as slaves to sin—in other words, as 
 they had sold themselves to sin for that pleasure and that gain 
 of this world’s life, which it had promised—so. now they are 
 ‘debtors’ to present themselves as s/aves to Christ and His 
 righteousness, because of the new pleasures, the new life, the 
 higher attractions and influences presented in Him. So 
 Clement represents our Lord as calling upon a man to confess 
 by deeds what He has done for him, and decide between His 
 service and those attractions which would seduce him from it 
 
Ixxvi EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 (‘ De Div. Ser.’ 23-25; see note, p. xliii.). Our Lord, he goes on 
 to say, bequeaths to us a covenant, giving to us His love, 
 putting down (as a payment to us, caréOyxe) His life, worth as 
 much as the whole of us, and demanding in return (avramare7) 
 this (life) from us in behalf of each other. Jf, then, we have in 
 our turn owned this agreement (cvr6jxnv) with the Saviour, 
 how can we be unfruitful, selfish, wn/oving worldlings? Such 
 men have not the hope of better things, but await the fire 
 (c. 37). For the Beneficent One first begins to benefit, and 
 one requital of His benefits is the doing of what is well-pleasing 
 to God, who esteems things done to assist and improve His 
 creature man as a personal favour and honour. But we cannot 
 make an adequate return (apou3y, S. vii. 3). 
 
 Treneeus records what he had ‘heard from a certain Elder, 
 ~ one who had heard from those who had seen and learned from 
 the Apostles, that David, Solomon, &c., sinned and were 
 rebuked, that no flesh might glory before God ; that all men 
 need the glory of God, and those are justified not of themselves 
 but by the coming of the Lord who give earnest heed to His 
 light ; but that it was a senseless thing to suppose that God is 
 not now searching out those that now are, as He was in previous 
 times. If men fall away again, Christ shall no more die for 
 such, for death shall no more have dominion over Him (Rom. 
 vi. 9); but the Son shall come in the glory of the Father, 
 exacting from His agents and stewards the money which He 
 lent them with usury ; and to whom He gave most, of him He 
 will require most. We ought, therefore, said the Elder, to fear 
 lest haply after the knowledge of Christ, if we do something 
 displeasing to God, we no longer have remission of our sins, 
 but find ourselves shut out of His kingdom. And to this he 
 (the Elder) referred Paul’s saying, “ For if He (God) spared not 
 the natural branches, neither will He spare thee” (Rom. xi. 2). 
 And, again, he (the Elder) said, the Apostle points out this 
 most clearly in 1 Cor. x. 1-12, and 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10; and in 
 proof that he said these things, not to those who are without, 
 but to ws, lest we be cast out of the kingdom of God for doing 
 
IN BENEFITING, GOD SEARCHES OR TRIES US. Ixxvii 
 
 some such thing, he (Paul) hath subjoined, “ And such were 
 some of you, but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified ” (v. 11). 
 And again the Apostle saith, ‘ Let no man deceive you with 
 vain words : for because of these things cometh the wrath of 
 God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye, therefore, 
 partakers with them”’ (Eph. v. 6, 7; sum. of Iren. iv. 27). 
 Our Lord is traditionally reported to have said, ‘ Become 
 approved bankers,’ and ‘the deposit rendered to the Lord is 
 the understanding and practice of the godly tradition, according 
 to the teaching of the Lord by His Apostles’ (C! 467, C? 377). 
 Heresies and vices grow like tares or weeds when men sleep 
 or leave the result to come as it may (C? 419, 474). Barnabas 
 (c. 4) bids Christians not neglect the common inquiry into 
 saving truth, as ¢f justified, and take heed not to rest at their 
 ease, as the called, and fall asleep in their sins. This warning 
 seems needed at present. If men believe that all good things 
 flow to them as a matter of course out of the work of Christ 
 and the divine call, they may leave everything to be done by 
 grace, and not give effect to grace. We must lay hold on what 
 we hope for. The fatéence (vropovh) of the saints, which is 
 the Septuagint word for the distinctive Old Testament hope 
 (Cremer), does not mean idle waiting ; the comfort, exhortation 
 or prophetic instruction (rapakAnatc) by which we are streng- 
 thened or established, is not given without study or the pains- 
 taking use of means; and the crown of victory is not won 
 without struggling. 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OF GRACE, which is received by faith, and 
 THE LAW Of THE NEW NATURE, given to man, were misunder- 
 stood and misrepresented by the Gnostics in a way that ought 
 to be a warning to subsequent ages. Some of them represented 
 the new nature as something permanently conferred apart from 
 voluntary choice, so that there would be nothing in it to dis- 
 tinguish it from a higher physical nature, and men would not 
 be amenabie to praise or blame (Clem. S. 11. 3). Others repre- 
 sented this grace as the gift of life apart from conduct, by some 
 
Ixxviii EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 faith or running to Christ (Iren. i. 23, 3; 27, 3). In opposi- 
 tion to these Gnostics, the early fathers maintained that the 
 natural precepts of the law, the things eternally righteous and 
 virtuous, are still binding on Christians ; that they were obli- 
 gatory in the patriarchal dispensation, on which the Sinaitic 
 Covenant seems founded ; and that our Lord, in His recapitu- 
 lation of all things (to which Deuteronomy, the second law, 
 seems significantly to point), has increased not only the ove of 
 sons but also the feay ; for in a state of freedom men have a 
 wider sphere of action, but are more severely tested. We have 
 liberty, not that we may abuse it, but for the trial (ad proba- 
 tzonem) and manifestation of faith (Iren. iv. 16,5). Those 
 who Aope to acquire the divine nature are required to act 
 consistently, abstaining from every form of evil (Iren. iv. 
 16,5). ‘This hope to acquire the divine nature permanently 
 can only be secured by following after what tends to this per- 
 fection of character. Men falsify their sacraments when they 
 indulge in thoughts, words, or deeds which war against the soul. 
 We should discern ourselves in the bread (1 Cor. x. 17; xi. 31). 
 
 The dispensation of the Spirit is free in comparison with 
 the ordinances of the Old Testament. But even in the New 
 Testament our Lord appointed certain superintendents, 
 teachers, and helpers for the sake of the weak and childish, #7 
 all should grow to the full stature of manhood (Eph. iv. 11-14). 
 St. Paul also recommended his converts to make a prudent use 
 of their liberty, restricting it when their own or other men’s 
 interests required (e.g. 1 Cor. vi. viii.). We must not, therefore, 
 says Irenzeus (iv. 15, 2), wonder at this sort of thing in the Old 
 Testament. ‘When the children of Israel came out of Egypt, 
 God did indeed admonish them by means of natural precepts, 
 when He spake the Ten Commandments from Mount Sinai 
 and added no more (Deut. y. 22); but when they made a calf 
 and turned back in their hearts to Egypt, desiring to,be slaves 
 instead of free, they were ruled with a yoke of slavery, not cut- 
 ting them off from God, but as a discipline and a prophecy of 
 good things to come’ (Iren. iv. 15 ; 1, 3). It was because of 
 
THE LAW OF WELL-DOING NOT ABOLISHED. Ixxix 
 
 _Israel’s sins and proneness to idolatry that the Mosaic ordi- 
 nances were superadded for their good, not because God had 
 need of them (Bar. c. 14; Just. Dial. 18-22 ; Amos v. 21~27). 
 ‘Those things, then, which were given unto them unto bondage 
 and for asign, our Lord hath cut off by His coming in the flesh, 
 calling men to liberty, but hath not abolished those precepts 
 which are natural, savouring of liberty (¢zdera/ia) and common 
 toall’ (Iren. iv.15; 4, 5). Onthe contrary, our Lord extended 
 and perfected these precepts, requiring men to abstain from evil 
 words and thoughts as well as evil actions (iv. 13,1; 17, 1 ; 28 
 2), to follow after those things which conduce to the growth of 
 the new nature hoped for. We read in Jeremiah: ‘ Thus saith 
 the Lord God of Hosts, the God of Israel. . . I commanded 
 not your fathers in the day that I brought them up out of the 
 land of Egypt concerning matters of burnt-offering and sacri- 
 fice. . . But this thing I commanded them, saying : Hearken 
 unto My voice, and I will become your God and ye shall be- 
 come My people; and walk in all the way that I have com- 
 manded you, that it may be well with you. But they hearkened 
 not, but went backward and not forward’ (Jer. vil. 22, 24). ‘They 
 made void My covenant and I rwled over them (éaaltz, ruled 
 as a lord or owner of slaves). But this shall be the covenant 
 that I will make with the house of Israel. I will put My law 
 in their inward parts and write it in their hearts, and I will 
 pardon their iniquity, and their sin I will bring no more to mind’ 
 (Jer. xxxl. 32-34). But it ought to be known, as Clement 
 says, that men’s sins done in times of ignorance are remitted 
 when they first receive the enlightenment or washing of the 
 Word ; but that sins done afterwards are purged or corrected 
 (Ped. i. 7; S. iv. 24), and that ‘pardon zs established not 
 according to remuisston but according to cure’ (kara iaowy, Clem. ii. 
 15). ‘Our Lord, the Word of God, first drew men as slaves 
 to God, and afterwards set free those who were subject to Him’ 
 (Iren. iv. 13, 4). 
 
 Our Lord took the place of the typical ‘ works’ and discipli- 
 nary rules of the Law, and became Himself, in His words, His 
 
Ixxx EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 actions, and His Church, the PERFECT Law, ‘exhibited to all 
 men, disciplining us’ (Tit. ii. 11) ina way suitable to our nature. 
 We must grow from childhood to perfect manhood. ‘For 
 which cause, also, our Lord, having summed up all things in 
 Himself, came to us not as He could but as we were able to 
 receive Him ; and He, who was the perfect Bread of the Father, 
 presents Himself as milk to us, who are infants—for that kind 
 of thing was His bodily presence—that we, being accustomed 
 by this milk diet to eat and drink the Word of God, might re- 
 tain in ourselves the Bread of immortality, which is the Spirit 
 of the Father’ (Iren. iv. 18, 1). Our Lord took the place of 
 the Law of Moses both as a Teacher and as a Corrector ; but, 
 as has been said, the early fathers protested against the Gnostic 
 notion that we are thus freed from the law of Christ, or not 
 under an obligation to keep ‘the natural precepts of the law, by 
 which man is justified, which even before the giving of the 
 law were kept by such as were justified by faith and pleased 
 God’ (Iren. iv. 13, 1; 17, 13; 28, 2). Our Lord sacrificed 
 Himself in our behalf, and we glorify Him by sacrificing 
 (‘epevorrec) Our own selves, imitating the divine plan (xpoaipeacy) 
 by doing good to others, or, if in authority, by ruling for the 
 salvation of the governed (Clem. S. vii. 3). God does not need 
 our works, but ze need them, that the praiseworthy habits and 
 dispositions of the new nature may he formedinus. The blood 
 was exhibited on the altar that it might also cover men’s souls, 
 as when, by intelligent contemplation and well-doing, the glory 
 of God was reflected on the face of Moses (Lev. xvii. ii. C 2 364). 
 ‘In addition to our calling, we must be adorned with works of 
 righteousness, that the Holy Spirit may rest on us, for this is 
 the wedding garment’ (Iren. iv. 36, 6). 
 
 PNECMATOLOGY: OR THE HOLY, SPIRIT 
 AND THis VIL, ONE 
 
 How THE DISPENSATION OF THE HOoLy SpIrRit 
 
 takes place and what this Spirit is, Clement professes to 
 
 show in works on the soul and on prophecy (S. ». 13); 
 
THE SPIRIT AND THE NATURE SEALED. Ixxxi 
 
 but these books are now lost. He speaks of the Blessed 
 Seal and the Son and the Father (S. ii. 3). Of those 
 who do not preserve the Seal, says Clement of Rome, 
 their worm dieth not and their fire is not quenched (ii. 7). 
 A nature is sealed on men in accordance with the things 
 which they choose. Justin speaks in a remarkable way 
 of three Persons as speaking in the prophets : the Person 
 of the Father, the Person of the Son, and the Person of 
 the peoples or of the apostles, considered as united in 
 one Person and as answering the Lord and His Father 
 (Ap. i. 36, 47; Dial. 42). ‘Where the Church is, there 
 is also the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God 
 is, there is the Church and all grace; but the Spirit is 
 truth’ (Iren. iii. 24, 1). This ‘Hand of God’ abides in men, 
 who become‘ partakers of the divine nature’ (2 Pet. i. 4), 
 Clement of Alexandria, in various passages, Irenzus 
 (iv. 75; v. 2), and Hippolytus speak of men becoming 
 gods. ‘The Word was made flesh,’ said Athanasius, ‘ that 
 we might be deified’ (AzorounOadpsv) (see Wordsworth’s 
 Church History, p. 268). The early fathers saw a certain 
 tmage of God in man’s first state ; but men are perfected 
 in the /zkeness of God, when, by following God, they 
 acquire the Blessed Seal or Divine Nature with immor- 
 tality. But what this communicated power of the un- 
 created is, ‘what the nature is of those who transgressed, 
 and again of those who persevere, we must leave to God 
 and His Word’ (Iren. ii. 28, 7). We know not whence 
 this Breath or Spirit of a new life cometh, nor what the 
 divine nature essentially or physically is, nor what those 
 who inherit God become. 
 
 The supernatural ts founded on the natural. As our Lord’s 
 manifestation in the flesh was the fulfilment or completion of 
 (covering upon) the past manifestations of God, which men 
 
 F 
 
Ixxxil EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 had perverted, so the gift of the Holy Spirit within us is not 
 something ecstatic or abnormal or discordant with reason and 
 conscience, but, on the contrary, this gift is the perfection of 
 man’s rational and morai nature, the purification and elevation 
 of that conscious, judging, conscientious nature (cuveidnoce, 
 Heb. ix. 14; x. 22) to which St. Paul appealed (2 Cor. iv. 2). 
 Our Lord reveals Himself inwardly to this rational and moral 
 nature, as He did outwardly to man’s sensuous nature. If, 
 then, we are called upon to receive as the teaching of the 
 Scriptures any doctrine, or system of doctrines, which is at 
 variance with the plain principles of common sense and under- 
 standing, or with those elementary convictions of God’s 
 righteous goodness and truth, without which there could be no 
 belief in God, or with the theistic basis of human responsibility 
 and divine judgment, which characterises Christianity, we may 
 reasonably presume that there 1s some mistake in such a system. 
 ‘Those phenomena which are clear to the perception and 
 understanding—that which is self-evidenced without any 
 demonstration—must be made the starting point in our investi- 
 gations and the criterion of what seems to be made out’ 
 (evpicbae) ; ‘special attention must be paid to the first principles 
 reasoned from’ (S. vill. 3). ‘The sound, safe, cautious, and 
 truth-loving mind will be diligent (écuederhoec) in those things, 
 which God has put within man’s reach and has made subject 
 to our knowledge and will make learning easy to itself by 
 daily., practice? (Uren, 412229, 0.0.1, hina, s1Vp5 4.50) 3 lbs will 
 not go into transcendental speculations about God’s physical 
 infinity or fatalistic foreknowledge, or about a cause determin- 
 ing the choice for which.a man is judged, &c.; it will 
 remember St. Paul’s maxim ‘not to think transcendentally 
 
 beyond what a man ought to think’ (jy) vrepdpovety wap’ 0 et 
 
 ppoveitv, Rom. xi. 3, as interpreted in Iren. v. 20, 2). Again, 
 as God is self-consistent in His dealings with man, we may 
 
 presume that He will reserve to Himself, or not reveal, what is 
 beyond man’s sphere of knowledge, and that His various | 
 revelations will.not be self-contradictory. It was the Gnostics | 
 
THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH: SPIRITUAL MEN. Ixxxiii 
 
 who ‘despised the consistency of their opinions’ (C? 479). 
 Ireneeus and a disciple of the Apostles, whom he quotes, 
 pronounce (iv. 32, I ; 33, 7) inconsistency to bea mark whereby 
 the spiritual man will judge and refute various heresies, the 
 natural consequence being that these heretics, finding their 
 systems to be self-contradictory, and, therefore, unsound and 
 futile, will seek concealment lest they should be saved (!), 
 while the spiritual man is judged of no one, because he is 
 consistent in his whole speech (omnds sermo et constabit), 
 leaving to God what is not revealed and not within the limits 
 of man’s knowledge, not explaining what is mysterious by bring- 
 ing in another God, but setting forth the many-sided aspects 
 and various operations of the Divine Word, so that through the 
 many-toned utterances, one harmonious strain may be sung in 
 honour of God, the Creator of all things (int Oye (528.00); 
 Clement—after reminding Christians that they must take more, 
 not less, pains in investigating truth, because heresies exist ; 
 that men do not cease to travel because some roads lead to 
 precipices, nor abandon gardening because weeds are growing ; 
 that nature has given us abundant starts (a@oppic) on the way 
 to truth, and tests for examining statements—adds : ‘There- 
 fore we are rightly condemned if we do not assent to what we 
 ought to believe or obey (mei#eo0ac), and do not discriminate 
 what is inconsistent (rd payduevor), unbefitting, against nature, 
 and false from what is true, consistent (d«odobov), befitting, 
 and natural’ (C? 474). Some modern theologians, however, 
 reasoning at one time from transcendental fancies or language 
 borrowed from types, and at another time from plain theistic 
 principles, naturally arrive at statements which seem to them 
 contradictories, but are ‘content to sit down under the utter 
 impossibility of reconciling them.’ Some even profess to 
 ‘distrust a theology which does not transcend their powers to 
 reconcile its parts, seeing it deals with the relations between 
 the Infinite and the finite.’ But, according to the early fathers, 
 we must harmonise the Scriptures by means of what is plain 
 
 and uncontrovertible, and not make its mysteries more mys- 
 Buz, 
 
Ixxxiv EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 terious by bringing in transcendental fancies. Those perfect 
 or spiritual men, among whom Paul spoke wisdom, were, 
 according to Irenzeus, men who had received the Spirit, and 
 through the Spirit linguistic gifts such as Paul possessed, and 
 of whom Irenzus professed to have heard (audtvimus) not a 
 few, ‘men who possess prophetic gifts, and bring to plain light 
 (cic pavepor), as is expedient, the hidden things of men, and 
 unfold (éxdunyouueévwy) the mysteries of God’ (vy. 6, 1). 
 
 ANTHROPOLOGY. 
 
 This branch of the subject treats of human nature, 
 its individuality, and original state, of the consequences 
 of the fall and man’s state of probation. Much of what 
 was already said concerning the connection of the Dis- 
 pensations belongs to ANTHROPOLOGY. 
 
 The early fathers believed that Adam by THE FALL 
 lost the divine image or likeness, until one greater Man 
 came to restore it, manifesting God and His ways, that 
 we may with knowledge choose to be subject to Him, 
 but they believed that the knowledge of good and evil 
 is obtained in this two-fold way, as we know sweet by its 
 contrast with sour and light by its contrast with dark- 
 ness (Iren. iv. 37, 38). Adam had not learned to control 
 his passions ; he knew not of the lurking foe; but when 
 the commandment came, sin manifested its living 
 activity (avéGnoev, Rom. vii. 9). If, then, God made use 
 of this experience to lead men to a more perfect stage 
 of being, how can we suppose that merely because of 
 Adams sin, multitudes of his offspring are left in hopeless 
 slavery to an evil nature, which, like a Manichean prin- 
 ciple, must needs resist all God’s influences, till it is put 
 out of its power to resist; and that, for this resistance, 
 they are then wakened up after death to an eternity 
 of endless, hopeless, and conscious misery ? 
 
THE EARTHLY COPY OF THE HEAVENLY. Ixxxv 
 
 told is Cl UnGd, AND Lil PS ACh AV Lod IS. 
 
 The institutions which were handed down in the 
 Early Church by means of successions of overseers, bore 
 the figure (cyja) or character of Christ’s Body.’ Now 
 our Lord’s humanity or presence as man is the ex- 
 planatory comment on all that relates thereto in the law 
 of Moses and the prophets; and at the same time it 
 is ‘an enigma in which we see through a mirror’ 
 (1 Cor. xiii. 12) heavenly truths without figure (acynua- 
 tiotos) but ‘nigh’ us (Rom. x. 8), because we are made 
 like Christ, if we give diligence to amend our lives and 
 follow Him as a Man and as a Teacher (Iren. iv. 9, 2; 
 Bowie 25, 2°) Krags 35)... Thus the religious services’of. 
 the Christians—their liturgies, the sacraments and other 
 services connected with the presentation of the Word of 
 God—are intermediate ‘antitypes’ (Frag. 36) between 
 the typical worship in the outer court of Judaism and 
 ‘that which is perfect’ in the Secret Place of the Most 
 High, or Holy of Holies. From such principles Irenzeus 
 drew the conclusion that we should not, as the Gnostics, 
 despise that which is intermediate and which leads to 
 the more perfect, but diligently avail ourselves of all 
 these helps. The way to become ‘perfect disciples’ is 
 to ‘read the Scriptures intently,’ with the help which 
 the presbyters of the Church could give; by these means 
 ‘the lover of God might make such progress as to see 
 God and hear His speech, and from this hearing to be 
 highly glorified’ (iv. 26, 1), to de, rather than to have, 
 science and knowledge (C? 157); for the full knowledge 
 
 1 Character corporis Christi secundum successiones (S:ad0xas) episco- 
 
 porum (Iren. iv. 33, 8). Eandem figuram (= ox7jMa) ejus quee est erga eccle- 
 siam ordinationis (= tdfis administration) custodientibus (v. 20, 1). 
 
Ixxxvi EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 is what is digested into a body (cwpatorrovovyevy) in the 
 soul itself (C' 140); and that image which is likest to 
 God is reflected in the good man’s own soul. All true 
 Christian worship is that incense and pure offering pre- 
 dicted by Malachi (i. 11), whereby the Name of God was 
 everywhere to be glorified (Dial. 41, 117 ; Iren. iv. 17, 5-6). 
 We may then compare the services of the Christian 
 Church to those in the Holy Place or Sanctuary of God’s 
 true priests. When divested of sins and fired by His 
 word, we are His true high-priestly race (Just. Dial. 116) ; 
 into the Holy of Holies the High Priest entered after 
 washing himself from the things here below and putting 
 on a Holy-of-Holies tunic instead of the consecrated 
 stole—a type, according to Clement, of the Christian 
 who is thoroughly purified or regulated in his entire life, 
 and exercised so as to distinguish intellectual from 
 sensuous things (S. v. 6). In the intermediate or Holy 
 Place were, on the North, the Table of Shewbread ; on 
 the South, the Golden Candlestick ; and, between these, 
 the Altar of Incense. 
 
 THE ORGANISATION OF THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCHES. 
 A Body is an organisation for specific purposes. Those who 
 wished to emancipate the world from evil and falsehood could 
 not make common cause with evil-doers or with those who 
 denied the fundamental beliefs which it was proposed to 
 establish. The second thing necessary was that there should 
 be harmonious and mutual co-operation on the part of the 
 different members of the body, so that they should receive 
 mutual profit and edification, and thus their object of bringing in 
 a better condition of things in the world might be attained. 
 The members would present not the character of Christ’s Body 
 but of the wild beast, if they appeared tearing, devouring, and 
 deceiving one another or others. According to Irenzus, in 
 rending the Church of God for the sake of things external 
 
CHURCH: ORGANISATION : ITS TYPE. IxxxXvili 
 
 (ru ékrdc) as feasts and fasts, we cast away things that are 
 better, namely, the faith and love (Frag. 37); and no reforma- 
 tion effected by rending the great and glorious Body of Christ 
 for trifling or ordinary (chance) causes, or private interests, can 
 be so great as the mischief of the schism (iv. 33, 7). 
 
 Tue Type.—Every Fatherhood in Heaven and on earth is 
 named from one God and Father, who 1s over all, through or by 
 means of al, and zz all (Eph. ili. 15 ; iv. 6), who is thus chief 
 Bishop, chief Deacon, and chief Councillor. The Father cares 
 for His offspring; and St. Paul regarded the distribution of 
 various powers, gifts, and ministries in the Church as intended 
 for benefit (zpd¢ 70 cupdépor), for the good of those within and 
 those without the Church (Rom. xii ; 1 Cor. xi). In his time, 
 at least, God had set in the Church, first, @pos/les—men whose 
 special duty it was to lay the foundation of the faith, and to 
 take a general oversight of the Churches. It is also clear that 
 they left men like Timothy and Titus to act in their place as 
 organising overseers of provinces and of congregational bishops. 
 We know also that after the last of the apostles was removed 
 by death, the extraordinary development and spread of the 
 Gnostic heresies made the need of such general overseers very 
 great, and that Irenzeus speaks of Polycarp as constituted by 
 the apostles bishop or a bishop for (eic) Asia in the Church of 
 Smyrna (iii. 3, 4). Such men as Timothy were Evangelists 
 having a ministry to fulfil (2 Tim. iv. 5). In the planting of 
 the Church there were also extraordinary gifts of prophecy 
 (Iren. v. 6, 1), spirits which were to be tried (1 John iv. 1). 
 Apostolic fathers, prophetic spirits, evangelistic ministers, may 
 be a gradation (Eph. iv. 11), analogous to the president, elders, 
 and deacons who followed. We know from Justin that in every 
 individual assembly, as in ordinary assemblies, some one pre- 
 sided (Ap. 1. 65, 67). The New Testament tells us of a class 
 of men called ¢eders, or bishops, whose duty it was to act-as 
 the president’s council in matters respecting the exposition of 
 the Word, and to superintend the morals. ‘There were at first 
 teachers or expounders besides these, according as men were 
 
 fh 
 
Ixxxviii EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 qualified. Thirdly, the deacons were ministers or agents of the 
 president in the pastorate ; they watched over cases of distress 
 or cases needing spiritual oversight, and distributed the church 
 funds. 
 
 In other departments of God’s works we find the prevalence 
 of types, and we may expect to find such analogies in God’s 
 special arrangements for the manifestation of Himself and the 
 good of His creatures. ‘The earthly Church,’ says Clement, ‘is 
 the image of the heavenly, as also we pray that the will of God 
 may be done upon earth as in heaven’ (S. iv. 8). Clement sees 
 in the gradation of the three orders—bishops, presbyters, and 
 deacons—imitations (uihpara) of that angelic glory and that 
 economy which await the enlightened followers of the apostles 
 in the future, and upon which, although they be not ordained, 
 they are even now entering. These three chosen abodes were, 
 he thinks, indicated by the numbers 30, 60, and 100 in Matt, 
 xi. 8. Such elevated operations and ministrations were also, 
 according to Clement, indicated by the wings of the Cherubim 
 in the Most Holy Place ; their name indicates ‘much full 
 knowledge’ (ériyyworc), their face the rational soul, and 
 their voicé a constant doxology while they contemplated 
 (S. v. 6; vi. 13, 14). The Ark towards which their faces were 
 turned was overlaid with pure gold within and without, indicat- 
 ing, according to Ireneus (Frag. 8), the Body of Christ 
 adorned within by the Word, and guarded without by the Spirit, 
 or, as Clement suggests, a region or world of thought, where 
 God is contemplated (S. v. 6). 
 
 The Supreme Orderer, President or Bishop is God over all, 
 the Father (Ign. ad. Mag. 3) ; the Word is said by Irenzeus to 
 minister (asa deacon) to His Father’s will (sinistrans Patris 
 sui voluntatt), being the Dispenser (Dispensator) of the Paternal 
 grace for the good of men (iv. 20; 6, 7). As the Word mani- 
 fests God ¢hrough or by means of all things, so the Holy Spirit 
 is the Divine Wisdom, dwelling zz angels and zz men in fellow- 
 ship with God (v. 18, 2). The Spirit of prophecy sometimes 
 speaks as from the person of the people or of the apostles 
 
CHURCH ORGANISATION: ITS TYPE. Ixxxix 
 
 (Just. Ap. i. 47; Dial. 42). The Word and Spirit are thus the 
 two Hands of God, to which Hands He was speaking when He 
 said, ‘Let us make man after our own Image and Likeness’ 
 (Iren. v. 1, 1, &c.). Now, in the president’s council the elders sat 
 and the deacons stood ; so in the Marcosian description of the 
 Court of Heaven, probably borrowed from the true Church, the 
 Judge has as His Assessor Wisdom, to whom the Gnostic evil- 
 doer, standing together with the Ransom, appeals that his case 
 (Adyoc treo) may be presented as one with that of the Ransom. 
 Wisdom then covers or screens him from the Judge’s sight and 
 ushers him into heaven (Iren. i. 13, 6). In the description 
 given of God’s Court by Hermas, God the Father appears as 
 the Owner or Judge, the Son or Word as the Heir, and the 
 holy first-created angels as God’s friends and fellow-councillors 
 (Sim. y. 5). The same type appears in Ignatius, if we remember 
 that it is zz angels or zz men that the Holy Spirit abides and 
 unites them in one. According to the Ignatian teaching, the 
 bishop and his agents, the deacons, represent God the Father 
 and His Son Jesus Christ ; while the presbyters are the sanhe- 
 drim of God and the assembly of the apostles ; apart from these 
 No. church. is called (Mag. 6.; Trall 253). ,.As our: Lord. of 
 His own Self did nothing, so men should act in harmony with 
 their bishop (the pastor) and the presbyters (Mag. 7 ; Eph. 3). 
 As in the Temple arrangements, Christian ministers were not 
 to go beyond their offices so as to set aside the functions of 
 others (Clem. Rom. i. 41). 
 
 In the Mosaic grades of High Priest, Priests and Levites, 
 Clement of Rome saw types of Christian offices (c. 40). 
 Irenzeus shows how all the disciples of the Lord are Priests 
 and Levites (iv. 8, 3; v. 34, 3). According to Origen, ‘those 
 who sit down to the Divine Word and are in God’s service 
 alone are not improperly called Priests and Levites’ (see 
 Hatch’s Bampton Lectures, p. 138; Clem. S. v.. 6). The 
 (direct) service of God is, according to Clement of Alexandria, 
 ‘the enlightened man’s continual supervision (émipéAeca) of 
 the soul and occupation in what is divine;’ the service 
 
XC EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 (directly) rendered to man is of two kinds: one is scientific 
 improvement (i pév Bedrwwruh) and the other subordinate 
 ministry (i) oe trnpereckh). Thus medical science has for its 
 object the improvement of the body, and philosophy the im- 
 provement of the soul; ministerial service is rendered by 
 children to parents, by subjects to rulers. Similarly, in the 
 Church, the elders preserve the likeness of the skill which im- 
 proves, the deacons that of subordinate ministry. But the pious 
 and enlightened man, who through knowledge and skill sets 
 before men the scheme (@ewpia) of improvement and _ gives. 
 them the fruits of his rectifying skill, secures the best harvest’ 
 (S. vil. 1), ‘There is a saving word as well as a saving work, 
 and happy is he who has the use of both hands’ (Sis 10}. 
 
 MInIstRy.—The members of the Body owe one another a 
 ministry of mutual benefit. In Palestine, the most nourishing 
 winds are those of the North ; in this way Clement explains 
 why the Exhibition of Loaves was placed on the North side 
 in the Holy Place; and, ‘these would represent certain abidings 
 (novai, comp. John xiv.) of Churches blowing together to form 
 one Body and one Association’ (sivodor, C? 242). Our Lord 
 departed to prepare a place or make room for this other Body. 
 
 Licut.—Irenzeus and Clement enjoined men to study the 
 Scriptures with great care and attention, because this is the 
 way to become perfect disciples (iv. 26, 1; S. vii. 15). They 
 dissuaded the Gnostics from thinking that they would attain 
 to this perfect discipleship by following dreamy and imagin- 
 ative conceits about God and germs of a new nature, &c.; but 
 they appealed to men’s sober-minded judgment as well as to 
 the Scriptures. They also recommended men, in studying the 
 Scriptures, to avail themselves of what aid could be obtained 
 from those ordained teachers by whom the apostolic teaching 
 had as yet been handed down as a legacy... * Thet;Churchy 
 says Irenaeus, ‘ everywhere preaches the truth ; and this is the 
 Candlestick with the seven wicks (or branches) bearing the» 
 light of Christ’ (v. 20,1). So long as it does so, it remains. 
 
CHURCH ORGANISATION: ITS TYPE. xci 
 
 the Church. ‘For where the Church is, there is the Spirit of 
 God ; and where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church and 
 every grace ; but the Spirit is truth’ (iii. 24, 1). The Lamp was 
 placed on the S. side of the Tabernacle, because the planetary 
 lights shone on the world from the south ; there were three 
 branches on either side of the central sun; and, by the ministry 
 of the first-born, men believe, hope, and see (S. v. 6). Itisa 
 foolish thing to imagine that God dispenses with the use of 
 means and the established laws of learning ; thus the way into 
 the Most Holy Place is through the Holy Place. On the same 
 principle it is foolish to overlook the assistance to be derived 
 from the study of the early fathers and other studies. Irenzeus 
 regards the falling away of ordained men as a possible ca- 
 lamity (ili. 3, 1; iv. 27, 2). He exhorts his readers to study 
 the Scriptures intently, availing themselves of the exposi- 
 tions of those presbyters of the Church who, in addition to 
 the succession (as legatees of this doctrine), exhibited sound 
 speech and irreproachable lives, but to withdraw themselves 
 from those who, because of the original grant or chief seat 
 (principalis concessio), abused their position, misrepresenting 
 the truth, seeking their own selfish interests, or arrogantly 
 driving men (iv. 26). Irenzeus goes on to quote the solemn 
 warning of a primitive elder, that those who were once really 
 in God’s Kingdom might apostatise after the example of the 
 Jewish nation (iv. 27, 2; Rom. xi. 21). Suppose that, unlike 
 Moses, the Church officials should become ‘envious’ of the 
 spread of prophetic light among the people ; then again, ‘that 
 which is preparatory becomes an opponent of that higher eee 
 for which it was the very purpose of its institution to prepare’ 
 
 (Neander’s ‘ Hist.’ 1. 50; Bohn). 
 
 Not the mere light of truth, but the entire life of Christian 
 freemen, so far as whatever they do is done to God’s glory, is 
 represented by the light of this Golden Candlestick on the 
 south side of this Altar of Incense. Men may eat and drink 
 to God’s glory (1 Cor. x. 31) 3 every creature may be so sanc- 
 tified (1 Tim. iv. 5) ; the married man may be a miniature. 
 
XCli EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH! 
 
 ' of God’s providence (C? 457). Christians were to. reprove 
 the unfruitful works of darkness by an enlightened course of 
 life, for that which is made to shine is light (Eph. v. 11-13). 
 The Church oblations were the firstfruits of God’s creation ‘ 
 but the whole creation will be made to shine in the divine 
 light, and glorified when the whole framework (economy) of 
 business and social life is emancipated from darkness and 
 deformity, and made to exhibit truly the glory of God. The 
 character of Christ’s Body will be again wrought out in the 
 citizenship of the Sons of God, when the fair face of arenewed 
 world is an embodiment of God’s Word, an Image of God, 
 pleasing to God, and beneficial to man. Thus Christians are 
 to give thanks to God, not only in the Eucharistic oblation of 
 the firstfruits of God’s creatures, but in all things (Iren. iv. 18, 4). 
 The peace offerings corresponded to this Golden Lamp, being 
 eaten on the south side in the outer court. To them the 
 needy were invited. So, in addition to the study of the Scrip- 
 tures, prayers, &c., the Christian knows of that other sacrifice, » 
 the giving of doctrines and money, of worldly wealth and 
 divine wisdom, to those in need (CY gr26-C4--442).-Such 
 good deeds the Lord esteems as done to Himself, and are 
 doubly blest (Iren. iv. 18, 6; S. ii. 19). 
 
 IncensE.—In the Centre of the Holy Place was the Altar 
 of Incense. With us, says Clement, the terrestrial altar is the 
 praying congregation ; but the truly sacred altar is the righteous 
 soul, and the incense rising from it is holy prayer (C? 428, 429), 
 or holy thoughts (C? 442). The Sacrifice on the Brazen Altar 
 was broken ; and those who offer unto God the sacrifice of a 
 broken and humbled spirit (Ps. li. 17) will propitiate God to 
 the receiving of life from Him ; an odour of sweetness to God 
 is a heart glorifying Him who made it (Iren. iv. 17, 2). There 
 is, therefore, an altar in the heavens, for thither our prayers 
 and oblations are directed, and a Temple (iv. 18, 6). When 
 the Temple of God that is in heaven was opened, there was 
 seen in His Temple the Ark of His Covenant (Rev. xi. 19), 
 that which is nearest and likest to God was clearly disclosed, 
 
CHURCH ORGANISATION: LORD’S DAY. XCilk 
 
 Clement also speaks of this middle altar of incense ‘as a 
 symbol of the earth which is situated in the middle of the 
 universe (xkéopm) and from which are the sweet odours ot 
 incense’ (S. v. 6), good deeds ‘ going up before God’ (Acts 
 x. 4). We may reconcile these explanations of Clement if we 
 remember that there is a world within us as well as a worid 
 without us. In the inner world the soul is the altar, in the 
 outer world this earth is the altar ; and God will have us to be 
 unceasingly presenting, on the one, the offering of right-minded 
 thoughts and aspirations, and, on the other, our gifts of good 
 deeds (Iren. iv. 17, 2; 18, 6). And as, in the outer world, 
 God has set His bow of hope in the clouds, so in the inner 
 world will this hope appear amidst cloudy troubles through 
 which men’s characters are perfected, if they endure or are 
 exercised thereby. In the Church we may connect this altar 
 of incense with the office of the president, ,who ‘sent up’ 
 (Justin) prayers with all his might, conducted the Eucharistic 
 service, received the people’s offerings and solemnly presented 
 them (Clem. Rom. 1. 44). 
 
 THE Lorp’s Day is the day of holy convocation in the 
 Christian Church as the Sabbaths were formerly (Lev. XX1il. ). 
 It has the appearance of being intermediate between these 
 Jewish Sabbaths, which Justin classes among the abrogated 
 rites and ceremonies of the Jewish law (Dial. tg-27), and that 
 perpetual Sabbath which the New Law commands (Dial. 12). 
 The early fathers speak of it as the eighth day (Dial. 24). So 
 Barnabas, after explaining the seven days of Genesis as ages, 
 speaks of the eighth day, which Christians keep with joyfulness 
 as the beginning of another world (c. 15). Ignatius contrasts 
 its joyful life with the sabbatising idleness of the Jews (Mag. 9). 
 According to Irenzeus, the (Mosaic) law enjoined men to 
 abstain from all servile work, from all those worldly dealings 
 which foster avarice, and to be occupied with works which 
 benefit the soul and men’s neighbours, with matters of judgment 
 and good discourses (Iren. iv. 8, 2). The symbolic meaning 
 of the Sabbath is that we should minister to God the whole 
 
XCiv EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 time after our belief, abstaining from all covetousness, not 
 laying up our treasures on earth (iv. 16, 1). . 
 
 LAE HISTORY OF CHURCH ORGANISATION. 
 
 The Bampton Lecturer for 1880 (the Rev. Edward Hatch) 
 treats very ably and impartially of the Early Church organisa- 
 tion and its developments. He contends that there was an 
 original type ; that its modifications in after ages were necessi- 
 tated by altered circumstances; and that possibly, in the future, 
 new modifications of the original type may arise, showing that 
 Christianity has a divine vitality capable of adapting itself to 
 men’s needs. According to Mr. Hatch, the assembly of the 
 faithful, as constituted by the apostles, was like the various 
 colonies of Jewish settlers in the Roman world, a parwhia 
 (parish) or settlement in a strange world (p. 60, comp. Jren. 
 Frag. 3). Its officers were at first freely chosen by the several 
 communities from their adult: members (p. 202); there was a - 
 senate (from sewex, old) or council of e/ders (the presbytery), 
 who sat for judicial purposes, reconciling quarrels &c., for 
 deliberation and superintendence (pp. 38, 66). Like other 
 such councils or colleges, this session of presbyters or bishops 
 had a president or ruling elder, who ‘became a single perma- 
 nent officer’ (pp. 41, 66, 89). This officer also presided in the 
 assemblies of the faithful; into his hands their offerings were 
 committed ; and he was primarily responsible as ‘ steward’ for 
 their distribution (p. 41). These offerings were of two kinds : 
 (1) the Eucharistic offerings consumed at the time, afterwards 
 restricted to the elements of bread and wine; and (2) free-will 
 offerings for the clergy and the poor (pp. 39, 40). In both 
 these functions he received assistance from men acting as 
 deacons (pp. 49, 50, 78). It was from his superintending the 
 distribution of these offerings that he received the title of the 
 bishop (p. 41). But the members of his council were associated 
 with him in this superintendence; and, as is now practically 
 admitted, were at first.called bishops as well as elders or pres- 
 byters (p. 66, 129; see Lightfoot on Phil.). They might or 
 
CHURCH ORGANISATION: ITS GROWTH. XCV 
 
 might not assist him in teaching or preaching; for any 
 
 Christian, if he were skilled in the word and reverent in habit, 
 
 was to be allowed to teach (p. 115; Ap. Const. vill. 31); the 
 spirit of prophecy was poured out on all (Iren. iii. 11, 9); but 
 
 it very soon became a matter of Church order to obtain a pre- 
 
 sident’s warrant to teach or preach if he were present (pp. 114, 
 
 124). It was considered a breach of Church order when 
 
 Origen, a layman, preached in presence of bishops (Eus. vi. 19). 
 
 The office of the deacons was originally twofold : first, they 
 
 assisted the president in watching over cases of distress, in dis- 
 
 tributing the Church offerings, whether as his assistants in the 
 
 Eucharistic service or as outdoor relieving officers ; secondly, 
 
 they assisted him in his pastoral duties of guarding the strong 
 
 or sound, of healing the weak or wavering, of restoring the 
 
 wounded or erring, when they became penitent (p. 124). They 
 
 were to be the presiding bishop’s eyes and heart, reporting to 
 
 him about the souls as well as the bodies of the flock (p. 51; 
 
 Clem. Hom. ii. 67; Ap. Const. 111. 19). In subsequent times, 
 
 the sick, orphans, infants, aged, poor and strangers were taken 
 
 care of in institutions, called in Italy deaconships (daconi@) 
 
 and presided over by appropriate officers (p. 52); thus the 
 
 ordinary deacons came to be merely subordinate officers of 
 public worship. ‘The type of the president’s original court has 
 
 been preserved in the college of cardinals or parish clergy of 
 Rome. The president’s seat (bishop’s throne) was slightly raised 
 
 above that of the elders, who sa¢ round him in a semicircle at 
 
 the end of the holy table; while the deacons s/ood below (pp. 
 
 109, 200). 
 
 The earliest records of Christian antiquity, as well as 
 general considerations of probability, show that in each full- 
 grown community there was 2 president,-who at first did not 
 hold supremacy as a monarch, but primacy or priority of rank 
 as the centre round which the Christian system revolved, as 
 chairman of the committee of elders and conductor-of the 
 conference or meeting of the assembly (pp. 41, 89, 90). His 
 promotion to this office was at first determined by his fitness 
 
xcvi EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 for it according to the judgment of the people and their repre- 
 sentatives. In the case of the republican magistrates at 
 Rome there was, first, a nomination; then, the people 
 ‘ordered’ the appointment of one of the nominated candi- 
 dates ; there was then an investigation into his fitness for the 
 office ; and, lastly, the action of the presiding magistrate, who 
 was said to ‘create’ the official (p. 127). Mr. Hatch refers 
 to his article on ordination, in the ‘Dictionary of Christian 
 Antiquities,’ for the evidence that the same order was observed 
 in the appointment of all but the lowest grades of ecclesiastical 
 officers (p. 128). Also the mode of election in the Church 
 varied afterwards, as the mode of election in the state. In 
 both it came to pass that the senate or officers nominated, and 
 the people approved or vetoed ; and, lastly, by steps that can 
 be traced, the Christian people’s right came to be to object to 
 unsuitable candidates (p. 128). Justin calls this chief super- 
 intendent ¢he president (0 mpoeorac, Ap. i. 65,67). Similarly, 
 in a formal letter to Victor, the head of the Roman Church, 
 Treneus speaks of ‘the elders who before Soter presided 
 (tpoorarrec) over the Church, which you now lead’ (Frag. 3). 
 Tertullian tells us that ‘the most approved elders preside’ 
 (Ap. 39). The Greek word translated preside has etymolo- 
 gically the sense of standing before in active ministry rather 
 than of sztézmg in council. St. Paul uses the word when he 
 exhorts ‘him who presides’ (rev. vers. vu/es) to do so with 
 zeal or diligence (Rom. xu. 8), enjoins the brethren to esteem 
 those (presiding) over them (1 Thess. v. 12, 13), and lays 
 down the principle that ‘the elders who rule (or preside) well’ 
 are to be considered worthy of remuneration as well as honour, 
 especially if they be laborious students and teachers (1 Tim. 
 v. 17.) Who, then, were these ruling or presiding elders, 
 spoken of by St. Paul? Were they the regular presidents? 
 Mr. Hatch thinks that St. Paul is distinguishing between 
 ‘those elders who formed part of the governing (ruling, pre- 
 siding) body and those younger who did not’ (p. 63, n. 3); 
 he believes that Hermas is thus distinguishing ‘the elders who 
 
CHURCH ORGANISATION : ITS GROWTH. XCVil 
 
 preside over the Church’ (Vis. il. 4). He says: ‘When the 
 president became a single permanent officer, he was, as before, 
 the person into whose hands the offerings were committed ’ 
 (p. 41). Heseems to hint that the presiding elder varied 
 before. Several presbyters or elders might have the gift or 
 talent of ruling or presiding; and, in fact, if a presbyter was 
 detached to take charge of a parish, he was sent to rule (ad 
 regendum), an expression still preserved in the modern title 
 ‘Rector’ (pp. 75, 76). St. Paul specifies ability to rule as one 
 of the chief qualifications of the bishop and the deacons ; they 
 were to be men who ruled well, or presided well over their 
 own houses (1 Tim, ill. 4, 12). But good rule in a community 
 must depend upon the state of it. Possibly some minds 
 require restraint ; but it is not a necessary element of good 
 rule to discourage the active search for truth and the exercise 
 of talents for exposition, as though it were the greatest merit 
 to be an unthinking and passive recipient. Barnabas enjoins 
 Christians to meet together to make common inqulry (c. iv). 
 The active search for truth is a most important element of 
 mental culture, as Clement of Alexandria repeatedly asserts ; 
 although we need not, with Lessing, think it of more conse- 
 quence than the knowledge of the truth itself. 
 
 ‘If the prayer of one or two,’ says Ignatius (Ad. Eph. 6), 
 ‘possesses such power, how much more that of the bishop 
 and the whole Church. He, therefore, that does not assemble 
 with the Church has even by this manifested his pride and 
 condemned himself.’ Ignatius thus regards the bishop as the 
 expression of the Church’s Oneness, and his official prayer as 
 that of his congregation. As there were numerous assemblies, 
 we should expect to find numerous bishops. Accordingly, 
 from the proconsular Asia of post-Diocletian times (a small 
 province about the size of Lincolnshire) 42 bishops were pre- 
 sent at an early council ; and, in North Africa, 470 episcopal 
 towns are known by name (p. 78). This original complete- 
 ness or independent government was modified by various 
 circumstances. In the first place, the monstrous miscon- 
 
 G 
 
xXCVill EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 ceptions of the Gnostics and their perversions of Christian 
 liberty threatened to wreck the Church ; tests would not pre- 
 vent the evil, for they were liable to be perverted as well as 
 the Scriptures (p. 94); and like the widow, who, forgetful of 
 God, called in ‘the judge of unrighteousness’ to avenge her 
 of her enemies (Iren. v. 25, 4), so the Church more and 
 more gave up her original privileges to her officials, and next 
 called in the secular authority to repress heresy. Clement 
 of Alexandria had exposed the unreasonableness of ceasing 
 to explore because some roads lead to precipices, or to cul- 
 tivate gardens because weeds grow (S. vil. 15); but, in point 
 of fact, men did more and more fall back on ‘bare faith.’ 
 At first, the whole of Christians possessed gifts or talents 
 for the common good; and the gifts which fitted a man 
 to rule were merely a special manifestation of the Spint 
 that wrought in all (p. 119). Clement of Rome (c. 44) 
 insists that those who have blamelessly and holily ‘pre- 
 sented the offerings,’ or honourably discharged their church 
 offices, were not to be removed; but neither he nor Polycarp 
 questions the right of the community to sit in judgment on 
 these officials, and to remove them if they did not worthily 
 discharge their offices (p. 117). In the third century, how- 
 ever, and subsequently, the bishops are found claiming excep- 
 tional powers ; and what had been their primacy or first rank 
 was becoming more and more a supremacy (p. 90). This was 
 the result of the struggle with Gnosticism (p. 215). 
 
 But the need for maintaining a uniform system of doctrine 
 and discipline led to the supremacy of the bishop in his town 
 and diocese (p. 104). Evangelistic overseers had been appointed 
 by the apostles. Thus Polycarp ‘was appointed by the 
 apostles bishop (or a bishop) for (ei¢) Asia in the church of 
 Smyrna’ (Iren. iii. 3, 4). There is in this passage no article 
 before Jzshop to show he was constituted sole president ; but 
 his commission in the neighbourhood may have been similar to 
 that of Titus, whom St. Paul left in Crete to organise churches, 
 orto that of Timothy, whom he exhorted to tarry at Ephesus 
 
CHURCH ORGANISATION : ITS GROWTH. XCIX 
 
 to charge certain men not to teach a different doctrine, and 
 not to occupy themselves with interminable questionings about 
 what transcends the faith. Other circumstances came to modify 
 the original self-government of each ‘parish.’ In the first 
 place, one building soon came to be insufficient to hold all the 
 members of the Christian Church in a large town, and the 
 sentiment of one brotherhood survived the separation of the 
 places of meeting. At Rome, this feeling was so strong that 
 the bread and wine were consecrated by the bishop and his 
 clergy only in one building and sent round ; each district of 
 the city was put in charge of a deacon, who reported to the 
 bishop (p. 191). In the dispute between Cyprian and 
 Novatian, in the third century, it became an established prin- 
 ciple that in a city like Rome, which had already an organisa- 
 tion, a new Christian organisation should not be established 
 side by side with it (pp. 103, 104). At Rome and Alexandria, 
 again, the suburban churches, that is, those of the outlying 
 hamlets, were presided over by a presbyter detached (ad 
 regendum) from the bishop’s church. The presbyter’s district: 
 was originally called his diocese, and the bishop’s district his. 
 parish (rapouéa); but far down in the middle ages the 
 bishop’s district was called his diocese, and the presbyter’s. 
 his parish. In Syria and parts of Asia Minor, the detached 
 presbyter received for a time the name of chorepiscopus, or: 
 bishop suffragan (p. 192). Thirdly, in the scattered villages of 
 the East, several of the communities of Christians had a bishop 
 who was itinerant (repwoevrhc) from one to another, while two: 
 elders and two deacons seem to have resided in each (p. 194). 
 When the diocesan system came to prevail, the itinerant 
 bishop preserved his designation but lost his functions, which. 
 Mr. Hatch identifies with those of a western rural dean: 
 (p. 194). When, however, the bishop and the clergy of a 
 city and of the surrounding district had formed themselves into 
 an association for organised work, the bishop and his council 
 were at first regarded so far as a unity, that ‘the judgment of 
 
 the bishop was invalid unless confirmed by the prestnce of his 
 G2 
 
EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 clergy’ (p. 109). But we soon find the high dignity of the 
 bishop of Alexandria enforcing a subordination like that of 
 the city prefect, so that his district was the earliest example 
 of the modern diocese (p. 194). 
 
 Councils or conferences of neighbouring bishoprics began 
 as early as the second century ; they were held in order to 
 adopt a common action in regard to the time of keeping 
 Easter, the re-admission of those who had lapsed under pres- 
 sure of persecution, and the treatment of the Montanist 
 prophets (p. 166). Cyprian, although a vigorous preacher of 
 Catholic unity, claims, in the most emphatic terms, the abso- 
 jute independence of each bishop, who, he contends, is not 
 bound to follow the practice of other bishops or the decision 
 of their conference against his will (p. 167; Ep. 55, 59). As 
 the mass of Roman citizens and still more as the barbarians of 
 the North became nominally Christian, there seemed again to 
 be need for a discipline of tutors and governors; no doubt 
 there was under such circumstances much to be commended 
 in orderly obedience to the direction of superiors, or in waiving 
 one’s right of judgment in favour of those better qualified to 
 judge, or in seeking to have the greatest amount of order that 
 is compatible with freedom rather than, as now, the greatest 
 amount of freedom that is compatible with order; and thus 
 the ecclesiastical dignitary came to stand upon a platform in- 
 accessible to ordinary men as if he were ‘a God upon earth’ 
 (p. 137). But were councils to tolerate ecclesiastical abuses 
 in these circumstances? The church assemblies followed the 
 jines of the civil assemblies and appropriated their designations ; 
 and as the bishop of the metropolis was the ordinary president 
 of the assembly held in it, he came to have pre-eminence over 
 the bishops of that province. As the vote and sanction of a 
 provincial bishop had become necessary to the validity of the 
 election of a presbyter, so the vote and sanction of the metro- 
 politan bishop were necessary to constitute an ordinary bishop. 
 So closely did the ecclesiastical organisation follow the civil, 
 and so firm was its hold upon society, that in the France of the 
 
CHURCH ORGANISATION: ITS GROWTH. ci 
 
 present day, with hardly an exception, there is a bishop, wher- 
 ever there was a Roman municipality, and an archbishop 
 wherever there was a provincial metropolis. When the native 
 Celts or the newly settled Germans became converted in large 
 numbers, their district or head-quarters did not receive a new 
 organisation ; but officers of the bishop’s church were tempo- 
 rarily dispatched to superintend them. The endowment of 
 such church officers rendered them tenants for life (pp. 197, 
 198). In time, the archbishops or metropolitan bishops began 
 to be grouped under patriarchs or exarchs (p. 170). The 
 Roman Empire, acting in union with the Church, gave to the 
 decisions of these councils and authorised bishops the sanctions 
 of law ; and thus by means of councils, authority delegated to 
 bishops and state legislation, the Christian churches were 
 consolidated into a great confederation, with formidable powers 
 of excommunication and coercion (p. 177). When the Roman 
 empire of the West was overthrown, a new central direction 
 seemed needful, and the Church organisation became central- 
 ised (p. 215). ‘The patriarchs of Constantinople or New 
 Rome,’ says Mr. Freeman, ‘were the chief Bishops in the 
 East ; but, as the Emperors were always at hand, they never 
 won anything like the same power which the Bishops of old 
 Rome won in the West.’ 
 
 There is nothing in the early fathers to support the claim 
 of the Bishop of Rome to an authority over all other Bishops. 
 The passage of Irenzeus cited to prove this has another bear- 
 ing. In refuting the Gnostic pretensions to a different apostolic 
 tradition, he appeals to the tradition in the various Churches 
 founded by these very apostles; for one might reasonably 
 expect, he says, to find the truth correctly handed down by 
 those to whom the apostles committed the care of these 
 Churches ; their ‘correctness would be a great advantage, and 
 their failure an extreme calamity.’ Irenzus proceeds to esti- 
 mate the value of the evidence thus supplied. He finds the 
 whole of this Church tradition opposed to the Gnostic conceits. 
 The evidence of a Church, however, would be more or less 
 
Cii EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 ‘valuable’ or ‘sufficient,’ according as it had received its 
 doctrines directly from the apostles or from another parent 
 Church. Now, the Church of Rome was probably the 
 only church in the West which was founded by Apostles 
 themselves ; its primitiveness (p7¢zcipalitas) was therefore 
 ‘superior’ to that of all those who were offshoots of itself, 
 whose doctrines must (zecesse est), therefore, have at first agreed 
 with those of the Roman Church on account of its superior 
 antiquity (potentiorem principalitatem). A comparison of other 
 passages shows that the Latin translator of Irenzeus uses £777- 
 cipalitas as the equivalent of a Greek word meaning primztive 
 antiquity (apxh i. 31, 1, OY apxacdrne, see notes in Keble, p. 206, 
 and Harvey, ii. p.9). Tertullian (De Pres. Her. 31) makes this 
 principalitas a test of truth, as opposed to fosteritas, or later 
 origin. The Greek text of Irenzeus immediately following has 
 been preserved, and gives txavwraroc, most sufficient, as the 
 equivalent of the Latin Aotentissimus, the epithet applied to 
 the tradition at Rome being now applied to Clement’s Epistle 
 to the Corinthians. The same Greek word is also applied to 
 Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians, and variously translated 
 (pervalida, perfectissima) ; but the sense evidently is that the 
 epistles are most satisfactory, the strongest evidence (ill. 3 ; 
 3) 4). 
 
 As the Church now included the ordinary masses of men, 
 the old contrast between it and the world took a new aspect. 
 An unenlightened spirit of self-sacrifice began to aspire to the 
 perfection of an ascetic life, beyond the virtues of ordinary 
 life ; the persecution of monks by the Arians increased the 
 tendency to rnonasticism; and all this acting on Church organi- 
 sation practically compelled the clergy to live this higher, that 
 is, this more ascetic life (p. 158). Legislation now gave the 
 clergy a civil status with their own laws (ie. the laws of the old 
 Roman empire), emoluments apart from ordinary pursuits, 
 from which it excluded them, and a separate garb. The 
 shepherd bishop, the merchant bishop, and the physician 
 presbyter were now vanished types. It became customary for 
 
CHURCH ORGANISATION : ITS GROWTH. Cili 
 
 the clergy to live together ; this served to provide for the edu- 
 cation of the younger clergy (p. 202); the bishop’s council (or 
 chapter of presbyters) became the canons of the cathedral 
 church, called canonice because they received an allowance 
 (canon) of church funds. If they lived together under a rude, 
 they were regulars ; if they lived apart, managing their own 
 revenues, they were called secuwlars (pp. 204, 205). Chorde- 
 gang, the pious bishop of Metz, a.p. 760, drew up a strict rule 
 for his canons (p. 204) ; but before two centuries had elapsed, 
 the name was all that was retained of the ancient ‘common 
 life.’ ‘The canons of the middle ages living in separate houses, 
 discharging their duties by means of vicars, that is, substitutes, 
 and no longer giving their superfluity,to the poor, became legi- 
 timate objects of satire and lament’ (p. 205.) The clergy of 
 the country parishes and dependent towns were still in theory 
 members of the bishop’s council, which met every year (p. 205) ; 
 but the canons of the cathedral or bishop’s church came to ad- 
 minister the affairs of the diocese during a vacancy and elected 
 a new bishop (p. 206). When the parochial clergy came to be 
 grouped into districts, each of which had its own organisation, 
 the difference between them and the cathedral clergy was 
 widened. As the cathedral had its arch-presbyter and its arch- 
 deacon, so had each rural district. The rural arch-deacon was 
 in a special sense the bishop’s deputy, and had a jurisdiction 
 over a district in which several arch-presbyteries or ‘rural 
 deaneries ’ were comprised (p. 207). 
 
 Mr. Hatch believes that the Church will continue to adapt 
 herself to human needs. But what are the needs of the peo- 
 ple at the present time ? Among the Anglo-Saxon communities 
 people have grown habituated to meet together, discuss without 
 violence, organise themselves and submit to rules of action 
 agreed upon by the majority, knowing that the forms of the 
 constitution are sacred in the eyes of their opponents as well 
 as their own. What hinders such a free organisation of the 
 Church? Perhaps the great obstacle is that ‘ignorant and un- 
 stable’ men hastily explain what are mysteries and call their 
 
civ EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 strange explanations mysteries ; because ordinary men have 
 scarcely the time or means to investigate these subjects 
 thoroughly, and must take a great deal at second hand. It is 
 to be hoped that, as in science, the leading principles of theo- 
 logy will soon be firmly established. In the mean time, the 
 spirit of determined inquiry is abroad. The people who ask 
 for bread will not be satisfied with husks. They seem ready 
 to lapse largely into secular antagonism to the faith, because 
 they cannot receive the gross expositions which perhaps 
 satisfied their forefathers. A better knowledge is needful ; 
 the discipline of mind in the search for it is needful ; and the 
 encouragement to be obtained by common inquiry is needful. 
 
 LIT L, SAG al fe IV 1S 
 
 BaprisM.—The punishment of men’s follies and sins is 
 mental and moral, as well as physical, death, Men become 
 stamped with the image of that which they worship. Ignorance 
 and foolish conceits lead to evil customs (C! g1 ); and again, 
 evil customs foster ignorance and mistakes. That which 
 characterises the rational soul, however, is knowledge; this, 
 therefore, must play a great part in man’s redemption, for all 
 rational action proceeds from impulses derived from knowledge 
 of some kind. Accordingly, Clement calls upon those who 
 were polluted by evil customs transmitted from their fathers to 
 put away childish grossness, to take or receive the rational} 
 Word and wash, to purify themselves from such evil ‘use and 
 wont, by the drops of truth- (Ch:o1, C* 343).° Before the 
 heathen convert was baptised, he had to come under the 
 catechumenical discipline of the Church, so as to learn the 
 elements of its saving truths, and be put in the way of cor- 
 recting his bad habits. But, if darkness and the enslavement 
 of bad habits be the punishment of sins, we need not wonder 
 if the baptismal completion of a training, which removed the 
 darkness by light, and puts men in the way of good habits, was 
 almost a synonym for the remission of sins ; for it did away 
 
THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. . CV 
 
 with that darkness and paralysis which were the results of sins 
 (v. 17, 3), and surely that which is the beginning of a new life 
 is properly called regeneration or the new birth. 
 
 Justin tells us that those who (1) received as true what was 
 taught in the Church, who (2) undertook (promised to be 
 able) to live accordingly, were taught (3) to pray that God 
 would grant them forgiveness of their past sins, and (4) were 
 baptised. At his baptism there was ‘ called over’ him who 
 chooses the New Birth and repents of his sins, the name of 
 God the Father (Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit)... his 
 conductor saying over him (émAéyovroc, comp. émdoy?, Tren. 
 Frag. 35 or 36) this and nothing more (Ap. i. 61). As Naaman 
 the leper was baptised and cleansed, as a man must be born of 
 water and the Spirit, so says Irenzeus, ‘we being lepers in our 
 sins are by the Holy Water and the cad/ing over (émuchijaewc) of 
 the Lord cleansed from our old transgressions, as new born 
 children spiritually regenerated’ (Frag. 33). It was a very 
 early and probably a primitive practice of the Church to require 
 at baptism, that the person baptised should express his belief 
 in the leading articles of the Christian Faith, in some Rule of 
 Faith similar to that of the Apostles’ Creed (Iren. i. 9, 4), to 
 say ‘Jesus is Lord’ (1 Cor. xil. 3), or to answer as the Ethio- 
 pian Eunuch, ‘I believe that Jesus is the Son of God ’ (Iren. 
 iii, 12, 8). Cornelius and the Gentiles, who were with him, 
 already knew the true God, but were baptised into ‘Jesus 
 Christ, the Son of God, Judge of the living and the dead, 
 unto or into (civ) remission of sins’ (iil. 12, 7 ; comp. Acts iL. 
 38). In the burial of the baptised person in the water, and in 
 his rising again, St. Paul evidently saw a bodily or symbolic 
 reception of the New Birth (Rom. vi.). In early times, the 
 newly baptised person received the anointing with oil, the 
 laying on of hands, the sign of the cross and a benediction. 
 The early fathers were well aware of man’s instability and 
 the strength of temptation, by which lapses are occasioned. 
 Clement looked upon the frequent recurrence of such. lapses 
 as little better than wilful choice of evil (S. ii. 13). The power . 
 
Cvi EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 of the keys was exercised by the Church, both in admitting 
 men by baptism to its membership, and also in expelling 
 unworthy members. Before loosing the penalties of Church 
 censure and interdict, after these had been bound, a peniten- 
 tial confession called exhomologesis was required (Harvey, Iren. 
 i. 122,n. 8). Clement makes a distinction between first forgive- 
 ness (cépeorc) and the condonation (cvyyvwpn) of subsequent 
 lapses. ‘The loving Word no longer passes over infidelities in 
 silence (C! 152). He condones, but condonation is not 
 established according to forgiveness, but according to remedial 
 healing (S. 11. 7).° Thus the very enlightenment or knowledge 
 of what is meant in the baptismal service, &c., (Just. Ap. i. 61) 
 is the taking effect of the forgiveness of sins (C! 134), the 
 beginning of a new life or the new birth (C! 104); and the 
 remedial healing of lapses arising from the re-appearance of 
 sinful habits and dispositions is the condonation or pardon of 
 them. Accordingly ‘there are two ways of rectification (rpdmoe 
 éravop0woewc), One the teaching method and the other the 
 corrective (or punitive), which we also call the disciplinary. It 
 ought then to be known that those who lapse into sins after the 
 Laver (or washing, ro Nourpor), are the disciplined, for those sins 
 which were wrought before were remitted (agei0n), and those 
 which are done afterwards are purged (éxccaOatperac, comp. 
 John xiv. 2), but of unbelievers (rejecters or practical deniers 
 of the faith) it is said, they are reckoned as the chaff’ (S. iv. 
 24). ‘Wherefore prophecy invests our Lord with a rod, that 
 whom the persuasive Word heals not, the threatening may heal, 
 and whom the threatening heals not the rod may heal, and 
 whom the rod heals not the fire may devour, (Peed. i. 7.) 
 Our Lord’s Body was. the manifestation of the truth ; it 
 bore the character or presented the earthly figure and expres- 
 sion of the Divine Word. Now, baptismal washing is also an 
 outward expression of the Christian faith and life ; and, in the 
 ‘baptismal service the Name of God is ‘called over’ the 
 baptised. In respect both of this significant washing and this 
 no less significant ‘calling over’ them of God’s Name, our 
 
THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. CVib 
 
 bodies receive at baptism the mark or character of God’s 
 purity ; they have put upon them, or are made to bear the Name 
 or Word of God, and are thus one with the Body of Christ. 
 This washing and ‘calling over’ are ‘antitypes’ of a true 
 washing from all pollution of sins and a true writing of God’s 
 Name on Christians ; but in Baptism there is a certain wmzty 
 received bodily (Iren. iii. 17, 2). In speaking of this ‘manner’ 
 of regeneration and its ‘meaning,’ Justin says that Isaiah 
 declares in what way repentant sinners shall escape from their 
 sins : ‘Wash ye, make ye clean, put away the evil of your 
 doings from your souls, cease to do evil, learn to do well’ (Is. 1. 
 16-20). But the very outward sign is the grace of God, 
 because by outward signs God teaches us heavenly and saving 
 truths. Christians, therefore, brought their converts to the 
 laver, that ‘they might receive remission of sins in the water .. . 
 Now, this washing (laver) is called illumination (gwriopcc), 
 because they who learn the meaning of these things are 
 enlightened in their minds’ (Ap. i. 61). Justin tells the Jew 
 Trypho that it was ‘ the baptism of repentance (change of mind) 
 and the knowledge of God which was instituted for the sins of 
 the people,’ that ‘the same baptism which Isaiah preached, 
 _ and which is alone able to cleanse those who repent, is the 
 water of life. For what profit is there in that baptism which 
 cleanses the flesh and the body only? Let your souls be 
 washed from anger and from covetousness, from envy and 
 hatred, and the whole body will be clean’ (Dial. 14). There is 
 no other obtaining of the forgiveness of sins or hope of the 
 future inheritance than that ‘becoming acquainted with this 
 Christ of ours, and being washed in that laver of the forgiveness 
 of sins of which Isaiah speaks, men should henceforth live 
 without sin’ (Dial. 44). Isaiah speaks of ‘the mystery of the 
 regeneration both of us and, in fact, of all those who look for 
 the appearance of Christ in Jerusalem, and endeavour by their 
 works to please Him’ (Dial. 85). 
 
 It must be remembered that, in much that they said about 
 Baptism, the early fathers were dealing with those who, mis- 
 
CVili EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF FHE CHURCH. 
 
 taking the deep things of Christianity, conceived that an 
 unspeakable enlightenment came upon them in some magico- 
 miraculous manner ; that the divine nature was deposited in 
 them as a seed or germ determining their choice, as men inherit 
 a physical nature apart from choice or conduct; that they were 
 thus free from all law and saved in virtue of their nature apart 
 from conduct ; that free choice and good works and the belief 
 that these were indispensable to salvation belonged to 
 natural or psychical men, not having the Spirit. These per- 
 verters of Christian truths forgot that the same God who works 
 in us by His Spirit gave us also reason and a bodily constitu- 
 tion, and that He works according to good laws of orderly 
 development. Thus, as Clement tells us, they despised also 
 catechetical training and baptism as belonging to natural or 
 psychical men (Pzed. 1. 6). Clement shows that the elementary 
 teaching of the Church, the milk of catechetical instruction, 
 was no longer to be displaced or superseded, as the old 
 elements of Judaism or of heathen philosophy had been (C! 
 135); that itis the one only foundation on which Christian 
 knowledge is built; that catechetical instruction conducts to 
 faith which is the completion of this discipleship! ; that 
 where the faith is there is the promise (for our Lord promised 
 that the divine working would accompany its teaching, Matt. 
 XXVill. 20) ; that the consummation of the promise is rest (rest 
 from evil passions, peace with one’s self, oneness of mind with 
 God) and the final resurrection. It is by rational baptism 
 (Aoyeno Parricpar:), by instruction in the Word and by 
 washing, that is, amending the life (C! 91), that the bonds of 
 ignorance and the entanglements of vice are unloosed (C! 134). 
 The catechumen’s training included such rules of life as those 
 contained in the second and third books of Clement’s 
 Peedagogus ; and both the instruction imparted catechetically 
 and the rules, which served to bar up the way to evil, would 
 
 1 rloris yap wabhoews TeAELdTHS, words omitted in Clark’s Clement, 
 
 Peed. i. 6, top of p. 134. From this chapter most of this summary is 
 taken. 
 
THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. cix 
 
 aid the formation of better habits, tend to remove or wipe away 
 the film of those sins which obscured the vision and found the 
 faith, Thus, the moment (ev@éwc) the man gave ear, he 
 became a disciple ; after the rational washing or baptism of the 
 Word, he acquired a new state of mind (rpé7oc). But the 
 question might be asked : Did not this altered state of mind or 
 improvement of character take place sometime on the arrival 
 of the instruction? To this Clement answers: ‘You could not 
 tell the time, for catechetical instruction brings round (meprayec) 
 to faith, and faith along with (éua) baptism is instructed (or 
 trained, wacdeverar) by the Holy Spirit’ (C! 134). Evidently, 
 therefore, Clement connects no magico-miraculous result with 
 the mere act of baptismal washing. The young Christian 
 certainly received and confessed at baptism the form of teach- 
 ing (Rom. vi. 17) or of sound words (2 Tim. i. 13), which is 
 called ‘the faith’; even this was a great step out of heathen 
 darkness. He was also baptised into union and communion 
 with the one visible Body of Christ, the Church, and received 
 the fellowship of excellent Christian men ; this was, in some 
 sense, a separation from the evil fellowships of the world. He 
 also received the promise that, if he continued in the good 
 course he had begun, his soul would be washed from all 
 pollution, and new habits formed. But this washing of the 
 soul could not be assigned merely to the time of baptism ; 
 according to Clement, it might have begun before baptism, and 
 might go on after it. All, however, who turned back from the 
 downward course, who renounced evils, were already entering 
 upon salvation, which is to follow Christ (C! 132). The very 
 reception of elementary Christian instruction is the rising of 
 the sun-light of knowledge on the mind; those who are out of 
 the darkness are already entering into light (C! 133). There 
 are only two ways, the way that leads into darkness, and the 
 Opposite way that leads into light (comp. Bar. c. 18); and all 
 who. have abandoned the darkness of idolatry and the lusts of 
 the flesh are equal and spiritual before the Lord (C! 135). The 
 perfection of Christianity consists in forgetting these idolatries 
 
¢x EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE’ CHURCH. 
 
 as childish things behind and in stretching forward to the 
 things which are before (Phil. iii. 13); it is to be perfect as 
 aspiring after fuller knowledge (not as unsettling the basis of 
 the faith), and as striving after perfection in the better life 
 (C! 148). It is very unphilosophical to despise outward things 
 as the Gnostics despised the Church training and baptism. 
 Our Lord, whom Clement calls God and the Word, who was 
 in no need of instruction, because he was superior to all 
 teachers, fulfilled by baptism the profession (or announce- 
 ment) which man makes (70 érayyedpa 7O avOpmmvor). It 
 seemed good to say to Him at His baptism ‘Thou art My 
 Beloved Son, to-day have I begotten Thee.’ The perfect 
 Word of the perfect Father was surely free, and yet He was 
 according to economic fore-typing (mpod:arirwowy) ‘to-day 
 born again’ (avayevynOeic), ‘perfectly regenerated.’ ‘He was 
 perfected by the laver (washing) alone, and sanctified by the 
 descent of the Spirit. And this same thing also takes place in 
 the case of us, whose pattern (troypag?) the Lord became’ 
 (C! 131, 132). Clement is contending against any magical 
 distribution of natures, especially such as would make freedom 
 of choice a mere redundancy. The outward training and the 
 open reception of the faith are the necessary means whereby 
 the Divine Nature is made to grow in us inwardly. The 
 Blessed Seal is rationally, not magically, wrought in us 
 (S213): 
 
 According to Irenzeus the Gnostic doctrines of regeneration 
 and of redemption were ‘a denial of baptism (as) regeneration. 
 into God, and a rejection of the whole faith’ (1. 21, 1). The 
 purport of his answer is similar to that of Clement ; we gather 
 from both these fathers that there is, first, an outward mani- 
 festation of the truth corresponding to faith and baptism, and 
 that the Spirit follows upon and works by means of this 
 apostolic foundation ; that as the Holy Spirit ‘speaketh not of 
 Himself, but makes clear to us the things of Christ,’ namely, 
 the faith and its outward manifestations (John xvi. 13, 14), 
 therefore the faith is the basis of the whole teaching, and 
 
THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. cxi 
 
 those men who with baptism receive the faith may properly be 
 said to have entered upon a new way of thinking, and to be 
 ‘regenerated into the faith of the only Perfect One’ (C! 148). 
 The teaching of these Gnostics, and the answer of the 
 early fathers, deserve the most careful study, because of the 
 analogy of many notions current at the present time. It is 
 common to hear the new birth represented as the physical 
 gift of a new nature or disposition, which must precede all 
 our efforts to amend our lives—as the deposition of a germ 
 which ‘must and will grow after its kind or type.’ But, ac- 
 cording to the early fathers, the same man, who has sunk 
 towards the worse and become earthly, becomes, on yield- 
 ing to divine impulses and returning to the better, renewed 
 after the divine type (Iren. v. 12). The Gnostics taught 
 that baptised Christians were merely natural or psychical men, 
 and promised those who followed them another baptism, 
 which they called redemption and regeneration, namely, the 
 deposition of some divine seed (in some mystico-physical 
 way) in them, or the descent of some divine nature (in some 
 magico-miraculous way) into them. Thus they held out hopes 
 of another forgiveness of sins, that is, of an internal manifesta- 
 tion of the truth, coming upon or into men apart from the faith 
 or their conduct, and so pulling the strings of their wills that 
 their actions are no longer worthy of praise or blame; and 
 they represented their followers, who adopted their conceits or 
 their phrases, as having received this extraordinary gift, as so 
 redeemed as no longer to be amenable to judgment, and so 
 one with the Ransom that, in the Judgment, they would be 
 screened from the Judge, even if He did lay hold of them, 
 justified and ushered into heaven, whatever lives they may 
 have led (Iren. i. 13,6; i. 21,1, 2; note in Harvey; Hip. 
 vi. 41). Thus they subverted the Christian Faith, and did 
 what they could to blind men to the rebukes and judgments of 
 God, coming on those who lapse. Irenzus speaks of men 
 having their sins forgiven in the Coming or Presence of the 
 Lord ; of that remission of sins and justification, which are by 
 
cxii EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 His Coming or Presence, when men give heed to it and turn 
 their earthly property to His service ; he speaks of our Lord’s 
 death as being to the Patriarchs (in Hades) healing and re- 
 mission of sins (iv. 5, 53 27,23 39 35 31; 1), and of our 
 Lord’s addressing the Pharisees (Matt. ix. 6) ‘as not receiving 
 the Advent of God’s Son and, therefore, not believing the 
 remission which was being made by Him’ in the undoing of the 
 paralysis which was the result of Sitis (ved 73102, 93 owe Dhose, 
 therefore, who by the faith and baptism, or by the manifesta- 
 tion of God’s Word, had that heathen darkness in a measure 
 dispelled, received in the same measure the forgiveness of past 
 sins; for heathen darkness was the result of sins. But all 
 through his writings Irenzeus 1s solemnly warning those who 
 have thus received God’s Word to give diligent heed to its 
 warnings, not to pervert its meaning, or continue in sin ; for 
 the judgments inflicted of old on those who did evil in God’s 
 sight are but types of more serious, lasting, and real calamities 
 coming upon those who now displease God (iv. 28, 1). 
 Therefore, in addition to that which is earthly and outward, we 
 need also the Aeavenly water or dew of the Spirit, and should 
 cultivate such gifts lest a non-literal fire from heaven scorch us 
 up (iii. 17 5 Iv. 36, 37): 
 
 In accordance with their theory the Gnostics represented 
 Jesus as, at first, a natural man, and his baptism by John also 
 as natural or psychical; but after his baptism the Saviour-Spirit 
 or the Christ, they said, descended into Him. After relating 
 what did occur at our Lord’s baptism, and how our Lord gave 
 to His disciples ‘the power of regeneration into God,’ when He 
 bade them go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them, 
 &c., and how after our Lord’s ascension the Spirit came down 
 on the disciples at Pentecost, Irenzeus goes on: ‘ Wherefore 
 also the Lord promised to send us the Paraclete to unite us to 
 God. For we being many, could not be made one in Christ 
 Jesus without the water which is from heaven. For by the 
 washing (baptism into one Name of God, one Faith and one 
 Body) our bodies received that unity that leads to incorrup- 
 
THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. CXili 
 
 tion, but our souls (receive it) by the Spirit. And so both (the 
 outward manifestation and Spirit within men) are necessary, 
 since both are profitable unto the life of God; even as the 
 Lord had pity on that sinful woman of Samaria, both showing 
 to her (e¢ ostendente ez), and promising Living Water’ (iii. 17, 3). 
 It is clear that the Lord’s visible presence was the Living 
 Water which He showed to the Samaritan Woman; and we 
 should have ove form of sound words, ove watery element of 
 life-giving truth (C! 206), oxe body of Christians, if the Church 
 were not so sadly rent for want of the Heavenly Water. Irenzeus 
 means that men’s souls can only be brought into oneness of mind 
 with God and with one another, when they cultivate the seven- 
 _ fold gifts of the Spirit (Is. xi. 2) which are for mutual benefit 
 (Just. Dial. 39). Irenzeus goes on to say that Gideon prophesied 
 of the drought which was to fall on the fleece, a type of the Jewish 
 people, while the heavenly Moisture (needed to mould us into 
 one Bread), the Dew of heaven, that is, the Spirit of sevenfold 
 gifts, both descended on the Lord and is sent upon the whole 
 Earth by the Church. But on this (Earth) also the Devil was 
 like lightning projected, as the Lord saith (Luke x. 18). 
 Wherefore the Dew of God is needed .by us that we be not 
 scorched up nor become unfruitful ; and that where we have 
 an accuser (one who pleads our offences), there we may have 
 also an Advocate (the Paraclete), that we, receiving by the 
 Spirit the image and inscription of the Father and the Son, 
 may cause the coin (penny) entrusted to us to bear fruit, 
 rendering it to the Lord (Matt. xxii. 21) with manifold increase 
 (ili. 17, 3). Upon the baptised person the worthy Name of 
 Jesus Christ has been called (James ii. 7; Acts xv. 17), 
 Christians must therefore be careful not to misrepresent God in 
 word or deed, lest they lose the very traces of God’s name on 
 them. Shakespeare expressed a great truth when he makes 
 Richard II. (iv. 1, 274) speak of himself as the book in which 
 all his sins are writ. In the course of this life each man is 
 stamped or sealed or characterised (yapaxrnpiZerac) accord- 
 ing to the impress on his soul of the things he has chosen 
 H 
 
cxiv EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 (S. iv. 23). Men who worship the wild-beast receive his mark 
 or character or name; they become licentious as the ass, 
 covetous as the wolf, deceitful as the serpent (C? 144); but all 
 the servants of God receive the seal of the Living God; the 
 Name of God shall be written permanently upon them, the 
 Name of the City of God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and our 
 Lord’s new Name (Rev. iii. 12) ; God Himself shall tabernacle 
 upon them (Rev. vil. 15). 
 
 Our Lord passed through the different stages of human life 
 and thus sanctified them all (Iren. ii. 22, 4). The children of 
 Christians are called holy (1 Cor. vil. 14). The light of reason 
 and conscience dawns very early on their minds ; and if this be 
 also the true light; if such children are from the very first 
 taught by their Christian parents and severed from evil fellow- 
 ship by their connection with them; if they might be con- 
 sidered as parts of their parents’ bodies (1 Cor. vil. 14) ; if the 
 kingdom of heaven be of such ; and if even adults after their 
 baptism may need correction like children: why should not the 
 Name of God be called over such children in baptism? And 
 if, after being trained by Christian parents, they fall away into 
 evil courses, is not this apostasy? Origen calls infant-baptism 
 a vite derived from the apostles (Hagenbach). 
 
 Tue Eucuarist.—There can be no doubt that the early 
 fathers, as well as the Scriptures, call the consecrated bread 
 and wine of the Sacrament the Body and Blood of Christ; but 
 as our Lord is the Word of God, the question might properly 
 be asked what is meant by saying that the consecrated Bread is 
 the Body of the Word of God. There can be no question that 
 our Lord did habitually, and to a very great extent, veil His 
 teaching in parables ; and assuredly the early fathers diligently 
 sought for mystic meaning in much of His recorded discourses. 
 It would have been very inconsistent in Justin to find so much 
 fault with the gross interpretations of the Jews (Dial. 112), if he 
 had seen no mystic meaning in what Jesus Christ, the prophet 
 like Moses, also said. Thus Justin explains the sprinkling of 
 the blood of the Paschal Lamb on the houses of the Israelites, 
 
SACRAMENT OF CHRIST'S BODY AND BLOOD. cxv 
 
 when leaving Egypt, as a type of Christ, with whose blood men 
 according to the measure of their faith anoint their houses, i.e. 
 themselves ; and Justin goes on to speak of the Eucharist as 
 being ‘ done’ in remembrance of the passion which our Lord 
 underwent for those who purify their souls from all sin (Dial. 
 40, 41). Surely Justin understood this ‘purification unto 
 brotherly love unfeigned’ (1 Pet. 1. 22) as being the meaning of 
 having the blood of Christ sprinkled on the soul. Should we, 
 as some religious teachers, put a more literal sense also on this 
 washing in Jesus’ blood? The exact words of our Lord in 
 instituting the Sacrament are, we may presume, given by St. 
 Paul (1 Cor. xi. 24) and St. Luke (xxii. 19, 20); and it is to be 
 observed, first, that our Lord said: ‘This Cup is the New 
 ‘Testament (or Covenant) in My blood.’ Clement speaks of 
 this New Testament or Covenant being the food and drink of 
 the Christian athlete (De Div. Ser. 3). Now we can under- 
 stand how our Lord left us a Testament of Enlightenment and 
 a Covenant or Bond of Love,—but not how this Bond is drunk 
 literally. Again, if our Lord added the words, ‘which is poured 
 out for you,’ He was undoubtedly speaking of the cup then 
 ‘being poured out rather than of His Blood which was to be 
 poured out, for the word poured out agrees with the Cup and 
 not with the Blood (ro worfjpwy ... év ro aivari pov. . 
 
 TO tmep tyev éxxuvouevov, Luke xxii. 20). Similarly, when 
 our Lord said, ‘This is My body,’ if He did add ‘which is 
 broken for you’ (not in the Rev. Text) or ‘which is given for 
 you’ (Luke xxi. 30), the reference would be to the Bread, for 
 in the New Testament the Eucharist is called the Breaking of 
 Bread. Thus, if we are to interpret literally, we should con- 
 clude that the Bread which He broke was the Body of the 
 Word of Ged and that the Blood of the grape which He poured 
 out was the Blood of this Word ; in other words, that the Bread 
 and Wine are an embodiment of God’s Word. We need not 
 by a hasty generalisation suppose that this embodiment of 
 God’s Word is or contains the identical particles ‘of matter of 
 the Body which broke it. The Church is also Christ’s Body 
 
 H2 
 
CXvi EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 (Col. i. 24) ; Christians are His members, the robe which He 
 will wash in the Blood of the grape (Gen. xlix. 11); and, there- 
 fore, their consecrated food is affirmed to be the Body and 
 Blood of Christ (Iren. v. 2, 2) We should not, therefore, 
 suppose that Christians and their consecrated food are literally 
 the identical portions of God’s created matter, the same 
 particles of it which hung on the cross. The Word of God 
 may surely clothe Himself with other material forms than that 
 of a Man; and the particles of matter in the several formations 
 need not be always the same. 
 
 In interpreting the early fathers and especially Irenzeus, it 
 is important to observe that they saw in this ordinance, /st, 
 the presentation unto God of His creatures and especially of 
 these first fruits of them—a thankful acknowledgment of 
 God’s goodness in providing men with bodily and mental food 
 and the means of health ; and, secondly, as God does not fail 
 to make a return when we worthily thank Him, they saw, after 
 the completion of the offering (Iren. Frag. 36), the exhibition to 
 man of the Divine Word who manifests Himself in all creation, 
 but more especially in that Bread and Wine which have been set 
 apart or ‘called out’ to bear His Name, as the eccles¢a (Church) 
 means ‘called out’ from God’s creatures. ‘Thus there is, 
 first, a Eucharist or thanksgiving to God for all our means of 
 subsistence and health (Just. Ap. i. 13), especially for the 
 Word which is presented unto God (guod or per guod offertur 
 Deo).! This Eucharistic Thanksgiving or Presentation the 
 Jews could not make, for they have not received the Word ; 
 nor could those heretics who regarded God’s creation as the 
 result of ignorance or as opposed to God, present the first 
 fruits of it as a thanksgiving (iv. 18, 4). Secondly, the 
 Eucharistic offering was, as it were, received back as a mani- 
 festation or embodiment of God’s Word. ‘There is reason to 
 believe that this was what Ireneeus meant when he said that 
 
 1 One MS. has ger guod, ‘through whom the oblation was made’ 
 (Harvey ii. 203). So, ‘the Church makes her offering in God Almighty 
 through Jesus Christ’ (iv. 17, 6). 
 
SACRAMENT OF CHRIST’S BODY AND BLOOD. cxvii 
 
 “the Eucharist (i.e. the Thanksgiving of Bread and Wine) 
 ‘becomes the Body of Christ,’ (i.e.) an embodiment of God’s 
 ‘Word to those who have senses to perceive it (v. 2, 3). We 
 should infer that this is his meaning from his ideas respecting 
 the Mediatorial presentation of man to God and of God to 
 man, and also from a fragment of his lost works found by 
 Pfaff in the Royal Library of Turin. Irenzeus is showing that 
 both that rational service of our bodies, of which St. Paul 
 ‘speaks (Rom. xii. 1), and also the sacramental offering are a 
 worship in spirit and truth (John iv. 25), a worship according 
 to knowledge. ‘For we offer (or present, rpoopépouev) unto 
 ‘God the Bread and the Cup of blessing, giving thanks unto 
 Him that He bade the earth send forth those fruits for our 
 nourishment, and afterwards, having completed the oblation 
 (nv mpochopav 7edoavrec),—we Call out or invoke (éccadodper) 
 the Holy Spirit that He would exhibit (arogjvn) this sacrifice, 
 the Bread (as) the Body of Christ and the Cup (as) the Blood of 
 ‘Christ, that they who partake (or have partaken, perada/3dyrec) 
 of these antitypes (copies or exact counterparts [Harvey], true 
 likenesses, 1 Pet. iii. 21, Rev. Ver.) may obtain forgiveness of 
 sins and eternal life. Those therefore who bring these offerings 
 in remembrance of the Lord do not approach to Jewish ordi- 
 nances ; but, performing (liturgical) services spiritually, shall be 
 called sons of Wisdom’ (Frag. 36, Harvey,n. 8). Such men 
 Teceive remission of their sins in the very enlightenment. ‘As 
 those who see the light are in the light and partake of its 
 ‘splendour ; so those who see God are in God, partaking of His 
 splendour. And the splendour quickens them. Those there- 
 fore who see God will partake of life’ (iv. 20, 5). 
 
 Our Lord appeared bodily to Abraham ; the Israelites in the 
 wilderness did all eat the same spiritual meat: and drink the 
 ‘same spiritual drink ; our Lord’s historical coming or presence 
 as man («a7’ dvOpwrov) summed up the long dramatic exhibition 
 (exposttionem, Iren. iil. 18, 1) of men or made to men in the 
 past ; so the Holy Spirit in every age gives such an exhibition 
 {oxnvoBaroty=exposuit, iv. 33, 7); and such is ‘the com- 
 
CXVili EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 pendium of the cup’ which Mary wished to bring in pre- 
 maturely at Cana (ill. 16, 7). Again, by enlightenment and 
 consecration, every creature of God may be made to show 
 forth God’s glory (1 Cor. x. 30, 31). Irenzeus speaks of the 
 Creation as being borne (ortatum) by the invisible Father and 
 as bearing (ortans), so far as it is visible (secundum visibile),, 
 the Word ; asa sort of outward expression (body) of God’s 
 power, wisdom and skill (v. 3; v.18). Now though the wine 
 of God’s creation was good, yet that which was furnished 
 ‘compendiously and simply’ at the marriage was better (iii. 
 11, 3). Thus we may understand the Eucharist as also a 
 compendium of the Word embodied in God’s visible creation. 
 But although the Eucharist would not be to us the Body of the 
 Divine Word unless this Body were seen, yet all the flesh of 
 our Lord is not the same flesh, for, if His Body was like ours, 
 probably not one particle of His Body on the Cross was the 
 same as those which formed His Body as a boy or as a child. 
 The very fact that our bodies are nourished shows that there is 
 a change of particles. And again, though our bodies shall rise 
 again after death, it is as the plant from the seed. The risen 
 body need not contain one single particle of matter which was 
 in the seed. Again, we can readily understand that our 
 sensuous minds are influenced by sensuous exhibitions ; but 
 there is no need to suppose that God sets aside His established 
 laws and brings about results by physical agencies which have 
 no connection with these results. The magician astonishes 
 people by the incongruity of the means he uses to accomplish 
 seeming results ; but all we know of the serene and self-con- 
 sistent God proves that He does not thus disregard the laws 
 which He Himself established. 
 
 In most of his references to the Eucharist, Irenzus is dis- 
 proving the Gnostic conceit that the material creation is 
 essentially the kingdom of darkness and evil, and showing that 
 it was created with a view to become the organ or vehicle of 
 God’s manifestations of Himself, that it is not inconsistent with 
 or opposed to these manifestations. The notions of the 
 
 | 
 
SACRAMENT OF CHRIST'S BODY AND BLOOD. cxix 
 
 Gnostics led them to the mischievous conclusion that our 
 material bodies are to be neglected as incapable of showing 
 forth God’s glory, or abused as evil things, fit for destruction, 
 having no share in the future resurrection. Irenzeus reasons 
 that it was in our Lord’s power to dispense with the agency. of 
 the present creation ; but the very fact that He did not shows 
 that He was carrying on and. completing the Creator’s work 
 (iii. 11,5). If the present creation had been a worthless 
 obstacle or the evil work of another, God would not have made 
 use of it to bear (fortaret) or be the vehicle of His Word, nor 
 would His Word have really assumed flesh and blood to 
 redeem man; and the Gnostic idea that the word of truth 
 would assume the appearance of a suffering man, not having 
 really become such, is monstrous (ill. 18, 6; v. I, 2; v. 18). 
 In regard to the resurrection, Irenzeus taught that our Lord 
 formed (facéens) in Himself the first fruits of man’s resurrection, 
 that as the Head rose from the dead, so the rest of the body of 
 the whole man, such as He is found in life, may rise again 
 (iii. 19, 3) ; that those who know Christ are those who are 
 made like Him in a resurrection life here (Frag. 35) ; but that 
 then ‘the end cometh,’ when their bodies shall after death be 
 transformed (Phil. iii. 21), that is, shall put on immortality and 
 incorruption ; for ‘then shall death be truly overcome (1 Cor. 
 XV. 33-35), when the flesh which is holden of it shall have gone 
 from under its sway ;’ that the new bodies of the redeemed 
 shall be substantial and capable of inheriting the earth (v. 13, 
 33, 36). Irenzeus endeavours to prove this, among other 
 arguments, from the fact that the Word of God stamps the 
 Bread and Wine of the Sacrament with the character of His 
 Body and Blood, and reasons that there would be no sense in 
 feeding Christians with such food, if the material world were 
 incapable of incorruption. Thus in the Eucharist ‘we present 
 unto God the things which are His own, showing forth suitably 
 (éupeNGe) communion and union (and confessing a resurrec- 
 tion) of flesh and spirit : namely, that as bread from the earth, 
 
CXX EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 receiving the calling out (é«cAyow)! of God, is no longer 
 common bread but an Eucharist constituted or consisting of 
 two things (é« dvo zpaypdrwy suveornxvia), an earthly and a 
 heavenly, so also our bodies partaking of the Eucharist (or 
 thanksgiving) are no longer corruptible, having the hope of 
 eternal resurrection’ (Iren. iv. 18, 5). We say that acoin ora 
 banknote is not an ordinary piece of metal or paper, that it 
 consists of two things, the metal or paper and the stamp or 
 mark impressed upon it, and yet the stamp on the metal is 
 merely the form. The anointed, crowned and enthroned 
 deputy-elect King was the figure of God’s majesty, but became 
 unkinged Richard when he gave away what constituted him 
 more than a common man (Richard II. Act iv. 1). But it 
 was not a physical substance, but a character, which Richard 
 gave away. So Irenzus speaks of Christians as receiving the 
 image and inscription of the Father and the Son, or the 
 anointing of the Spirit (iil. 9, 3; 17, 3). Those receive the 
 image of the heavenly who put off the former lusts, are restored 
 to the original type of man, and moulded by the form-giving 
 Spirit in God’s image and likeness (v. 19). What our Lord 
 reconciled or brought into friendship and harmony with God 
 is the same humanity which formerly lost the divine image ; 
 it is no new substance that is saved, but the old (v. 14). 
 Hence we are not ‘to devise a new substance of our Lord’s 
 flesh,’ or humanity, as if a Saviour-Spirit called the Christ was 
 deposited in a mere man Jesus after His baptism. The Word 
 Himself became flesh, and bore God’s image and likeness. 
 Similarly, it is not by the deposition of a physical nature or 
 substance in us as a germ, but by making our earthly members 
 instruments of well-doing, by having our whole nature cleansed 
 from the filth of sin and adorned with divine beauty, that we 
 receive the Spirit or put on the new man. Our flesh is thus 
 possessed by God’s Spirit, the very vessel being vivified when 
 it assumes the quality of the Spirit, being made comformable 
 
 1 St. Basil speaks of the words as ‘called over,’ T& Tis emikAhoews 
 piwata, See Harvey’s Iren. II. 205, n. 4. 
 
SACRAMENT OF CHRIST’S BODY AND BLOOD. cxxi 
 
 or becoming conformed to the Word of God (v. 9-14). If 
 Irenzeus had meant to say that another spiritual body or sub- 
 stance is deposited in the Bread after consecration, the 
 Gnostics could not have desired any better analogy to support 
 their perverted conceits that another spiritual substance was 
 deposited in the mere man Jesus after His baptism, and that 
 the New Birth or Regeneration of the enlightened is the depo- 
 sition of a higher physical nature or germ disposing them. 
 There is a heavenly element in the Church which Irenzeus 
 calls the character of Christ’s Body (iv. 33, 8), and Clement 
 calls the Blessed Seal (S. ii. 3), and it is the character of the 
 life-giving Word and Spirit of God, which the consecrated Bread 
 and Wine bear, stamped like a name on a coin, and which we 
 may reasonably judge to be the heavenly thing they possess. 
 Again, the very fact that the bodies of Christians are 
 nourished by the Bread and Wine, which are of this creation 
 (v. 2, 2), disproves the ideas of these Gnostics ; for what would 
 be the sense of nourishing zz this way a body which does not 
 admit of being saved or of putting on incorruption? Irenzus 
 means that all God’s creatures are good, because He puts 
 His Name upon certain of them. It is not his object to show 
 that the Bread of the Sacrament and the Body on the Cross 
 are, or contain, the same identical portions of created matter. 
 On the contrary (in Frag. 13), he tells us of the mistake of 
 some slaves of Christian catechumens, who, ‘ hearing from their 
 masters that the participation in God (rv Oeiay perddndw) was 
 Christ’s Body and Blood, and supposing that it was in reality 
 (rp dvr) flesh and blood, told this to those who were examining 
 them’ by torture. Should we then conclude from Irenzus 
 that the Bread, which is the Body of the Word of God on 
 which we feed, and the Wine, which is His Blood which we 
 drink, are the same human flesh and blood which hung on the 
 Cross? The argument of Irenzeus is as follows : ‘And because 
 we are members of Him and are nourished by the creation— 
 which creation is His gift unto us, in that He causeth His sun 
 to rise and raineth. according to His will—He confessed the 
 
CXXll1 EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 Cup which is of the creation to be His own Blood, wherewith 
 He supplieth (or bedeweth, dever) our Blood, and the Bread 
 which is of the creation He affirmed to be His own Body from 
 which He nourisheth our bodies. Since (émdre) therefore it— 
 the mingled Cup and the produced Bread—receiveth (or taketh 
 upon it, éridéyerar) the Word of God, and the Eucharist 
 becometh the Body of Christ (i.e. what we present unto God 
 becomes in turn a manifestation to us of God’s Word), and of 
 these things the substance of our flesh groweth and is com- 
 posed (cvvicrara), how say they that the flesh is not capable 
 of the gift of God ?—that flesh which is nourished by the Body 
 and Blood of the Lord and is a member of Him, as Paul 
 saith, ‘We are members of His Body, of His flesh, and ot 
 His bones’ (Eph. v. 30). He saith not this of some spiritual 
 and invisible man—for a spirit hath neither bones nor flesh— 
 but of the frame accorded to the true man (zepl rijg xara rov 
 a&AnOivdv avOpwrov oixovopiac, comp. Vv. 3, 2), Consisting as it 
 does of flesh and nerves and bones, which (frame) is nourished 
 from His Cup which is the blood, and groweth from the Bread 
 which is His body. ‘And even as the corn of wheat falling 
 into the ground and being dissolved is raised up manifold by 
 the Spirit of God, who keepeth all things together (cvvéyovroc) 
 so our bodies nourished thereby (by the Eucharistic 
 
 ‘Grea and Wine) and put into the ground and dissolved 
 therein, shall rise again in their own time, the Word of God 
 giving them resurrection to the glory of God and His Father 
 . . . that having learned by experience that not of our own nature 
 but of God’s excellency (by the working of the Lord, not of the 
 body’s own substance, v. 13, 3), we have continuance for ever ! 
 . we might see what God can do and what benefits man 
 receives’ (v. 2, 3). From the fact that God hath been both able 
 and willing to call us into conscious existence, and clothe us 
 already with so wonderful a body, Irenzeus goes on to reason 
 
 1 rhy els del mapauovhy =in eternum perseverantiam. This passage gives 
 the Greek equivalent for that continuance for ever, which the lost do not 
 have (i1. 34, 3). 
 
SACRAMENT OF CHRIST’S BODY AND BLOOD. cxxiii 
 
 that God would not be unable to restore the body again after 
 it had been dissolved in the earth into its primary constituents 
 (cic éxetva O0ev Thy apxnyv éyeyove 6 avOpwroc); that He 
 would be much more willing to restore again to life those who. 
 had already been brought into existence ; and that the flesh 
 would anew be found receptive of, or impressible by (xwpnre), 
 or capable of participating in the Power, Wisdom and Artistic 
 Skill of Him who already has moulded our bodies—an eye 
 capable of seeing, an ear capable of hearing, &c. (v. 3). On 
 those who follow Him the power of God is exerted to heal 
 their bodies here, and to reconstitute them after death. It is 
 not, as Irenzus reasons, the subsistence or essence of the 
 creation, but the fashion of it, that passeth away (v. 36, 1) ; 
 there will be a new Cup to drink in the Father’s kingdom 
 (Matt. xxvi. 29), when the inheritance of the earth is renewed 
 and the mystery of the glory of the sons is perfected afresh ; 
 and, though we cannot understand our Lord’s meaning to be 
 that He would then drink of the fruit of the vine ; yet, what- 
 ever the new Cup is, those who drink it are not without flesh ; 
 such drinking belongeth not to the spirit, but to the new flesh. 
 which ariseth (v. 33, 13 36, 3). 
 
 According to Irenzeus, it is not the principle of making 
 gifts, sacrifices and oblations that is changed, but the special 
 sort of them. He from whom the Jews received their ritual 
 by way of types, as was shown to Moses in the Mount, is the 
 same God whose Name is now glorified in the Church in all 
 nations. It accords (congruzt) with this, that the earthly things. 
 _ which are ordered with a view to us (erga nos disposita) should. 
 be types ‘of the things which are heavenly, made however by 
 the same God. For in no other way could He represent 
 (assimilare) the image of things spiritual. The peculiar mark 
 (tndictum) or characteristic (character), which distinguishes. 
 Christian from Jewish oblations, is the mark of freedom, the 
 Church offering to God (things) of His own Creation, and! 
 not merely the lesser portions, but cheerfully and freely assign- 
 ing all that themselves have, as men having the hope of greater 
 
CXXiv EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 things. Now those who give to the poor lend to the Lord ; 
 and, though God does not need our offerings, He esteems 
 what is done to the needy as done to Himself, and gives us a 
 return of His own good things (Iren. iv. 18., 4-6 ; 19, 1 ; Matt. 
 xxv. 34-36). As Clement expresses it (C! 136), Christians 
 are saved by willing choice, being rationally afraid of God, not 
 irrationally terrified as children are by bugbears (sroppodukeiorc) 
 and, as Justin says, we have been instructed that the only sac- 
 rifice worthy of God is not to consume by fire what He has 
 given us for our sustenance ; but to apply it to our benefit, and 
 to that of those in need (Just. Ap. 1. 13). The Jewish burnt- 
 offerings were thus those of bondmen ; but Christian freemen, 
 who know what their Lord is doing (John xv. 15), offer rational 
 sacrifices (Rom. xi. 1). 
 
 But men are not full-grown all at once. They must still 
 grow from childhood to maturity ; and, therefore, according to 
 Irenzus, ‘our Lord came to us in the last times, not in His 
 incorruptible glory, for as yet we had not the power to endure 
 the greatness of His glory. And, therefore, tous, as to babes, 
 the perfect Bread of the Father communicates Himself as 
 milk ; for that kind of thing was His presence as man (ka7’ 
 dvOpwrov) : in order that we, as (it were) nourished by the 
 breast of His Flesh, and accustomed by this sort of milk diet 
 to eat and drink the Word of God, might be able to retain in 
 ourselves the Bread of Immortality, zwhzch ts the Spirit of the 
 Father. And therefore Paul saith to the Corinthians : I have 
 fed you with milk, &c. (1 Cor. iii, 2): Le. Ye have indeed 
 been taught the presence of the Lord as Man ; but not yet 
 doth the Spirit of the Father ves¢ upon you, because of the 
 weakness and incongruous state of your conversation. There 
 was no inability on the part of the Apostle to give them the 
 meat ; for they on whom they laid hands, received the Holy 
 Ghost, which is the meat of life; but they for their part were 
 incapable of receiving it, because they had their souls’ organs 
 of discernment as yet weak and unpractised in the Divine (or 
 perfect) training’ (iv. 38 ; 1, 2). To be fed with milk is, there- 
 
SACRAMENT OF CHRIST’S BODY AND BLOOD. CXXV 
 
 fore, to learn the (historical) presence of our Lord as Man, 
 that is, to be instructed in the Gospel history, and in such 
 elementary lessons as are easily received and not easily per- 
 verted. But the strong meat belongs to the full-grown or 
 spiritual man, whose well-balanced mind harmonises the 
 various utterances of the prophetic Word into one consistent 
 system, based on the Apostolic Faith, as dry wheat is made 
 into one loaf by means of the water of heaven, or as different 
 notes are combined into one harmonious strain (ii. 28, 3). 
 The truth is spiritual ; we express it by verbal or external 
 symbols: but it is discerned in the mind itself; our true 
 thoughts are truths perceived. 
 
 According to CLEMENT oF ALEXANDRIA, the wine and the 
 bread, the consecrated food, given by Melchizedek, priest of 
 the Most High God, is a type of Eucharistic thanksgiving 
 (rumor evyapiatiac, S. Iv. 25)s ‘ Further,’ he says (Peed. i 6), 
 ‘the Word declares Himself to be the Bread of heaven, 
 saying : Moses gave you not that Bread from heaven, and the 
 Bread which I will give is my Flesh, &c. Here is to be noted 
 the mystic meaning (7rd pvorecor) of bread, that He calls it 
 flesh (John vi. 32, 51) ; and the blood is allegorically termed 
 (a\Anyopetrar, figuratively described as) wine (for the Scrip- 
 ture has named wine the symbol of the Sacred Blood, Peed. 
 ii. 2). Thus in many ways the Word is allegorically termed 
 meat and flesh, and bread and blood and milk. Let no one 
 then think it strange, when we say that the Lord’s blood is 
 figuratively termed milk. For is it not figuratively termed 
 wine: ‘‘Who washes,” it is said, “His garment in wine, His 
 robe in the blood of the grape” (Gen. xlix. 11). In His own 
 Spirit, He means, He will deck the body of the Word, as 
 certainly by His own Spirit He will nourish those who hunger 
 for the Word’ (C? 206). According to Justin, this passage in 
 Genesis shows that our Lord’s blood is dy a figure of speech 
 called the blood of the grape, and is thus proved to be not of 
 human generation, but from divine power, while ‘the ‘Holy 
 Ghost calls those who receive remission of sins through Him 
 
CXXVi EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 His robe, in whom He shall be manifestly present in His Second 
 Appearing’ (Dial. 54, 63). Man is transformed by the Word ; 
 and the faultless sons of God shall be the word of wisdom 
 (C! 341). In showing that pains and skilful husbandry are 
 necessary in order to gather fruit from the Vine of Truth, in 
 other words, that we must make a careful use of all the proper 
 means in order to expound the revelations of God, Clement 
 shows that what the Divine Word or Reason (Adyoc) does is 
 done rationally, and must be interpreted consistently with 
 reason. ‘Wherefore the Saviour, taking the bread, first spake 
 and blessed; then, breaking the bread, He presented (po- 
 éOnxe) it, that we might eat it rationally (AoyrKc), and that 
 knowing the Scriptures we might walk obediently ° (S:z-29,-20). 
 Clement, at least, gives no sanction to an irrational interpreta- 
 tion of this mystery. 
 
 Clement discusses at large what we are to understand by 
 the solid bread or meat, the milk, and the wine or blood which 
 is the strength of the meat (Ped. i. 6). The solid food is not 
 essentially different from the milk; it is milk solidified (yada 
 mernyoc), just as cheese is the solidification (wife) of milk ; it 
 is the faith compacted out of catechetical instruction into a 
 foundation, solider than the hearing, and made into a body in 
 the soul itself (C! 139, 140). In other words, it is the body of 
 the Faith, fitly framed or compacted into a scientific system 
 in the mind, such a knowledge or true gnosis as that which 
 Clement repeatedly asserts was handed down among the 
 learned Christians of his time, and the actual existence of 
 which is also proved by the strange counterfeit perversions or 
 mistakes of the Gnostics falsely so called. Clement goes on 
 to tell us that the blood is the hope, the promise hoped for, 
 that which, like the soul in the body, binds the faith together 
 and gives vitality to it (C! 140). This must be the Divine 
 character in men. ‘ Eat ye my flesh and drink my blood! O 
 paradoxical mystery! He enjoins us to cast off the old and 
 carnal corruption, as being also the old food, and participating 
 in Christ’s other new kind of living (Scaérng), taking Him up if 
 
SACRAMENT OF CHRIST’S BODY AND BLOOD. CXXVIi 
 
 possible and laying Him up in ourselves, to enshrine Him in 
 our breasts, that we may correct the affections of our flesh’ 
 (C' 142). Clement goes on to notice another interpretation of 
 this mystery. We might understand the Blood of Christ either 
 as something external presented to us, or as something of 
 which we are made partakers. If both the Flesh and the 
 Blood of Christ be viewed as external objects for our regard, 
 he understands by the Flesh the Holy Spirit made flesh, the 
 Life (of Jesus Christ), into which the Word of God has been 
 richly poured as blood, flowing forth as milk to us (C! 143). 
 Thus Irenzus represents the Ark overlaid within and without 
 with pure gold as a type of the Body of Christ adorned within 
 by the Word and guarded without by the Spirit (Frag. 8). 
 ‘Thus the sanctified Flesh is the Life (which men contemplate), 
 the Blood is that which is thereby spoken. But ‘the blood of 
 Christ is twofold. For there is the fleshly Blood, by which 
 we have been redeemed from corruption ; and the spiritual, 
 that by which we are anointed. And to drink the Blood of 
 Jesus is to participate in the Lord’s immortality, the Spirit 
 being the strength (icyic) of the Word as the blood is of 
 flesh’ (Peed. ii. 2). Clement therefore considers that, when 
 taken into the mind, the Bread represents the well-compacted 
 and solidly digested Faith, and the Blood, the participation in 
 what is Divine—in God’s loving nature and immortal life. His 
 object is mainly to prove (against the Gnostics) that the 
 fuller knowledge is in harmony with the catechetical in- 
 struction, and to show where it comes in the natural order of 
 growth. ‘Believing,’ he says elsewhere (S. vil. 10), ‘is the 
 foundation of knowledge, and Christ is both the foundation 
 and the superstructure.’ He maintained, as St. Paul did, that 
 there is a progress from light to light or from glory to glory, 
 even as from the Lord the Spirit ; that faith leads to know- 
 ledge ; and that knowledge is quick in purifying, and fit for 
 the acceptable transformation for the better, or that it leads to 
 love, which has the promise of the inheritance (S. vil. 10). He 
 also asserts that ‘when our Lord said, “ Eat ye My Flesh and 
 
CXXVili EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 drink My Blood,” He was distinctly speaking allegorically of 
 the drinkable properties (ro méripov addAnyopv) of the faith 
 and the promise’ (C! 140). ‘The Sacrament,’ said Augustine 
 in a later age, ‘is the visible Word, because the rite is, as it 
 were, the picture of the Word, because the effect of both is the 
 same.’ 
 
 ESGHATOLOGYV2O0R: THE DOCTRINE OF 
 TFHENLAST ITAINGS. 
 
 The minds of the early Christians were much occupied 
 with ‘The things which must shortly come to pass ’— 
 the Second Coming or Presence of the Lord, the resur- 
 rection and the judgment to come. 
 
 Ture COMING OF THE FULL-GROWN AND OF LATTER-Day 
 OrpEALS. As the Old Testament prophets blended together 
 in their visions the nearer and more distant future, so our Lord 
 in His last great prophecy concerning the destruction of the 
 Temple, warns His disciples by this type that they must act so 
 as to be counted worthy to stand before Him as His Temple in 
 that day and that hour when He came again for judgment, and 
 to escape all these things (Luke xxi. 36), namely, a similar 
 destruction (Rom. xi. 21 ; 1 Cor. il. 16, 17; 1 Pet. iv. 17). 
 Hengstenberg, in a chapter on the Nature of Prophecy, main- 
 tains that we ought not to ignore the light thrown upon 
 prophecies by their partial fulfilment. He quotes two passages. 
 from St. Peter (1 Pet. i. 10-12 and 2 Pet. i. 19-21), showing 
 that the chief import of the O. T. prophecies did not relate to 
 the prophets themselves and their contemporaries, and was not 
 of their own interpretation (idéac émiAicewc) ; that they were 
 not the originators, but spake, being moved or borne along 
 by the Holy Spirit, and testified of the sufferings of Christ 
 and the glories hat should follow ; that now, after Christ has 
 suffered, we have a surer exposition (word) of prophecy, and 
 ought to give diligent heed to this lamp ; for false prophets 
 would arise, and ignorant or unstable men would pervert St. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF THE LAST THINGSS< Gxxix 
 
 Paul’s meaning ; the very rudimentary elements would be on 
 fire in the day of the Lord (2 Pet. ii., iii.). 
 
 In the same way, Irenzeus maintains that ‘every prophecy 
 before its fulfilment is to men enigmatical and of double sense 
 or analogous reference (ambiguitates, avriNoyia) ; but when the 
 time has arrived and the thing foretold has come to pass, then 
 the prophecy has got the most exact (clear and certain) exposi- 
 tion.’ ‘Thus he shows how, in the days of the dispersion (Dan. 
 Xi. 4,7), or in the last days (Jer. xxiii. 20), men would know 
 the meaning of the prophecies referring to the coming of our 
 Lord as man ; that an attentive reader of the Scriptures would 
 find in them not only such prophecies, but also a prefiguring of 
 the new vocation, for they announce that man loving God shall 
 improve so far as even to see God, to hear His voice, and from 
 the hearing of what He saith to become highly glorified (like 
 Moses). Such a careful reader of the Scriptures will be a 
 perfect or full-grown disciple (Iren. iv. 26, 1). He says that 
 when that which is perfect or full-grown cometh, there will be 
 no new foundation of the faith, no other Father, Son, and Holy 
 Spirit ; but that in these, the very same, we shall have our 
 growth and increase, so as to enjoy the gifts of God now no 
 more through a mirror and in an enigma (év aivéypart, t Cor. 
 xill. 12), but face to face (iv. 9, 2). This is what J. Smith, 
 in discoursing ‘of Prophesie’ (Ed. 1673, p. 172), calls the 
 Mosaic grade, when the things are expressed not in dark 
 riddles but nakedly to the understanding (Num. xii. 8). 
 “Respecting all Scripture after our manner (rie xa’ puac),’ 
 says Clement of Alexandria, ‘it is expre-sly written in the 
 Psalms (ixxvill. 1, 2) : “ Efear, O my people, my law: incline 
 your ears to the sayings of my mouth. I will open my mouth 
 in parables : I will utter enigmas from the beginning.” Similarly, 
 the noble apostle says : “ Howbeit, we speak wisdom among the 
 full-grown ... the wisdom of God in a mystery, wisdom 
 having been hidden, which God appointed before the ages to 
 be for our glory” (1 Cor. ii. 6, 7). Now the apostle in contra- 
 distinction to the enlightened full-growth speaks of the 
 
 I 
 
CXxx EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 common faith sometimes as the foundation and sometimes as 
 milk . . . these (were) superstructures of knowledge built on the 
 groundwork of faith in Jesus Christ (1 Cor. iii 1-12). In 
 reference to the systematic knowledge he says in his Epistle to 
 the Romans: “ For I long to see you, that I may impart unto 
 you some spiritual gift, that ye may be established,” for it was not 
 possible to send by letter in an unveiled way gifts of this descrip- 
 tion.. . . It was for the teacher to open up the covering of the 
 ark. “I know,” says the apostle, ‘“ that if I come, I will come in 
 the fulness of the blessing of Christ,” calling this fulness... . 
 the showing (ro defkvvvac?) what the things are (mean), which 
 are ina mystery. [t will then be understood that the milk is 
 catechetical instruction, and that the meat is the initiated 
 science’ (1 érorrixy Oewpia, S. v. 4 and to). Barnabas, he says, 
 was already depositing a trace of this knowledge, writing in a 
 plainer way (“Aovcrepov) that they might understand (cc. 1, 6). 
 The grace of God has now been manifested for all men’s 
 salvation (Tit. 1. 11) ; ‘the faith’ has come (Gal. ili. 23) ; ‘the 
 atonement’ has been received (Rom. v. 11). We do not hofe 
 for a manifestation already given (Rom. vill. 24), but that we 
 may know and understand and fulfil the mystery of God, and 
 thus grow up, individually and collectively, to the full stature 
 of Christ’s body (Col. ii..2; Eph. iv. 13, 14). (First, the 
 creature, man, is emancipated from the bondage of corruption 
 into the glorious liberty of the children (récvwv) of God ; but 
 even those children, who have ¢asted the good word of God, or 
 have received the jirst-fructs of the Spirit, earnestly wait 
 for the adoption or sonship (viofeciar), something beyond the 
 state of children, when God’s will is done more perfectly on 
 earth (C? 168), and the body-or outward manifestation is re 
 deemed (Rom. viii. 21-23). ‘Vow we are the children of 
 God,’ said St. John, ‘and it is not yet manifested what we shall 
 be. We know that when or if (é&v) it is manifested, we shall be 
 like Him (God), for we shall see Him as He is. And every one 
 that hath this hope wpon him (ér avrg) purifieth himself even 
 as He (éxeivoc) is pure’ (1 John iii. 2, 3). His faithful people 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF THE LAST THINGS. cxXxxi 
 
 are ‘the robe (Gen. xlix. rr), in whom He shall be manifestly 
 (évapyec) present in His Second Coming’ (Just. Dial. 54). God 
 “shall tabernacle upon them’ (axnvwase éx’ abrovc, Rev. vii. 15). 
 
 So long as their Lord did not depart, that which is spiritual 
 or full-grown did not come to the disciples (John xvi. 7). So 
 Joshua exhorted the children of Joseph to learn self-help 
 (xvil. 15) ; so heresies were to come that they who are approved 
 may be manifested (x Cor. xi. 19) ; and so he who prevented 
 the growth of the great apostasy was to be taken away, before 
 the bright day of the Lord’s Second Coming shone forth in 
 His Temple. The early fathers saw what facilities the Scrip- 
 tures presented for counterfeiting the truth (Zert. de Pres. 
 ffer. 39). But, on this account, to interdict investigation and 
 to limit the communications of the Holy Spirit to would-be 
 prophets is to make void the gift of the prophetic spirit poured 
 out in the last times on mankind, men and women (Iren. iii. 
 11,9; 1 Cor. xi. 4,5). It behoved Christians, as long as they 
 had the sound, safe, and legitimate exposition of apostolic 
 men, to follow it; but the time was certainly to come when 
 such extraordinary helps would be found wanting. Christians 
 would have to judge their angels (presidents) and test the coin, 
 hike approved bankers (C?474). Irenzeus exhorts them to 
 learn the truth from those presbyters, who, along with the 
 original succession or concession or deposit of faith committed 
 to them, exhibited sound speech and blameless conduct, but 
 to withdraw themselves from those who, puffed up with the 
 conceit of what had been granted to them, and, regardless 
 of God, lawlessly drove others and did evil in secret or 
 hidden things (¢ adsconsis), among which Irenzus has just 
 reckoned types and parables. Of them our Lord spoke, 
 Luke xii. 45, 46 (Iren. iv. 26, 2-5). According to Ireneeus, it 
 was in the Temple of the ¢7we God that Antichrist was to exalt 
 himself above every idol. This is the unjust judge, to whom the 
 widow in her forgetfulness of God has recourse for redress upon 
 her enemy ; tyranny, divisions, the burning of Babylon, and 
 the driving out of the church or the exiling of the saints, were 
 
 12 
 
CXXXii EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 to follow; but, in the end, God was to raise up a kingdom 
 which would suffer no decay for ever (Iren. v. 25, 26). 
 
 THE FUTURE JUDGMENT AND THE FUTURE LIFE. 
 This subject is connected with that of the two natures 
 acquired by or sealed upon men, the nature of God and 
 the mark or character of the wild beast. By persever- 
 ing in well-doing, men attain ‘glory, honour and immor- 
 tality ;’ by indulging earthly desires, the soul of man 
 comes to share in the designation of earthly ; by giving 
 vent to tempting passions, by worshipping the wild 
 beast, men become demon-like. But. although the 
 Scriptures declare that God has prepared eternal fire for 
 transgressors, they do not tell us what their nature is 
 essentially (Iren. ii. 28, 7) ; and though we infer from the 
 early fathers that their punishment is never-ending, yet 
 we should also infer that, some time or other, when God 
 wills it, the soul or consciousness would cease to continue, 
 that loss of life is part of the eternal punishment. 
 
 Ture GEHENNA OF FIRE is a metaphor taken from the 
 burning of carcases outside Jerusalem in the valley of Hinnom. 
 The spirit of reprobate men is spoken of as a spirit of burning, 
 an abyss of wrath, an outer darkness bringing calamities, an 
 unrest which torments day and night. Our Lord cautioned His 
 disciples against giving vent to bitter anger, as when Moses 
 inadvertently called the people Moreh, against contending who 
 should be greatest, or jealously forbidding one who did not 
 follow with them to cast out devils—lest they should fall into 
 this Gehenna (Matt. v. 22 ; Mark ix. 33-50).!_ Bodies of men 
 
 1 In searching out the deep meaning of prophetic language respecting 
 the judgment to come, we need the cautious vigilance and the careful 
 research, which Clement recommends (De Div. Ser. 5). Our Lord warns 
 us in the above passages that it is hetter to have only one eye than to lose 
 the sight of both or to turn the elementary principles into dark perversions ; 
 it is better not to know much that may be known than, by plunging into 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF THE LAST JUDGMENT. cxxxiil' 
 
 as well as individual men may fall into it. When Moses bids 
 the Gentiles rejoice with God’s people (Deut. xxxii. 43), Justin 
 says that all the people of Israel are not meant, but only those 
 well-pleasing to God ; for we know from Isaiah that the car- 
 cases (Heb. ill. 17) of transgressors are devoured by the worm 
 and unquenchable fire, remaining immortal, for a spectacle of all 
 flesht (Dial. 130). The connection and Iren. iv. 4 show that 
 _ Justin is speaking of the exhausted shell of the Jewish national 
 party, the burning carcase,? the dry tree, when all true life and 
 sap had been driven out, and not of the immortality of any 
 
 transcendental questionings and things too high for us, to pervert what is 
 the basis of true belief into falsehood. Men may cover God’s altars with 
 weeping (Mal, ii. 13) or gnash their teeth in religious fury ; but how shall 
 they escape the fire of strange doctrines when bound upon them by tra- 
 ditional standards? Again, it is better to have only one hand, better not 
 to use one’s full liberty, than to become more and more the slave of the 
 carnal things we are using (1 Cor. vi. 12; x. 23), and thus to give 
 occasion to the flesh or carnal doings which deprive of life (Iren. v. 14, 4). 
 Trenzeus says that life and death, corruption and incorruption, expel one 
 another ; that by the presence of the one the other is made away with or 
 perishes (&voupévrou = interit, v. 12, 1). Thus, when prophecy speaks of a 
 death or worm of corruption that does not die, this does not mean that the 
 man lives for ever. Again, when we say that the passions of some men 
 are insatiable, and their zeal fiery and unquenchable, we do not mean’ that 
 these men live for ever. 
 
 1 Justin says eis dpaciw maons capkds for a vision of or untoall flesh. Two 
 other passages (Dza/. 44, 140), where Justin quotes the exact words of the 
 Septuagint (don capxi, Is, Ixvi. 24), show his meaning. The Jews, he there 
 says, deceive themselves in supposing that, because they are the children 
 of Abraham according to the /lesh, therefore the promised gifts of God’s 
 eternal kingdom will assuredly be given to them. The destiny of a// flesh 
 (which is grass), of mere flesh, not having the Spirit, is shown by this 
 vision for all flesh ; and, therefore, they should not think that mere flesh 
 and blood can inherit the kingdom of God (comp. Iren. vy. 9). The Spectacle 
 of mere flesh, earth without the fruits of the Spirit (Heb. vi. 8; Iren. iii. 
 17, 3), burning with fiery passions and becoming the prey of an irremedi- 
 able corruption, will remain while human flesh or nature remains what it 
 is ; such vultures will be gathered together, wheresoever the carcase is. 
 
 2 Ta KwAG, members = corpse, OY, aS We Say, bones (see Robinson’s Lexicon). 
 
 % 
 
 ‘ 
 
CXXXiV EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 individual’s body living in pain. Such effete bodies or perverted 
 organisations are wonderfully tenacious of life ; as soon as any 
 member makes an effort to correct them, he is expelled from 
 the society ; and thus we may expect that some remains of 
 Judaism will survive, being thus immortal, even when the ful- 
 ness of the Jewish people are enlightened. In regard to the 
 individuals, it is better to put restrictions upon one’s liberty 
 than to become the slave of the things one uses or the prey of 
 malicious passions. An untamed tongue is set on fire by the 
 Gehenna (James iii. 6). The fire is eternal, first, in the primary 
 sense of the Hebrew word o/am, something /Azdden, something 
 beyond mere physical sense and connected with the unseen 
 world of mind, conscience and conscious existence (2 Cor. 
 iv. 18). Secondly, the fire is said to be wnguenchable ; and the 
 passions, when indulged, become insatiable or unquenchable. 
 Also, when we read that the wild beast and the false prophet 
 shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever (Rev. xx. 
 ro), the meaning surely is that evil men and seducers have no 
 peace day or night; that unrest and trouble are the appointed 
 reward of such evil doers, as long as the world lasts and men 
 are what they are ; that an age will never come when men who 
 worship their evil passions have peace. ‘There is even in this 
 life a repentance which is of no avail, but drives men to worse 
 excesses ; and Justin speaks of a late unavailing repentance as 
 eternal sensation and torment (Ap. i. 52); it is one of those 
 punishments which are #zdden and unseen. ‘Thirdly, Irenzeus 
 and other early fathers believed in the endlessness of eternal 
 punishments, in this way that dissolution (the opposite of that 
 union, which Irenzeus associates with the living principle) 
 would some time, when God pleases, be the endless consumma- 
 tion of these punishments. A man so engrossed with the pur- 
 suit of earthly riches and pleasures as to have, as it were, a 
 heart of metal or earth ‘is earth and shall return to earth’ 
 (Clem. de Div. Ser. 17). The sinful soul is in partnership with 
 the dying body (S. iv. 3). Our Lord wrote such mere flesh 
 into the ground (John viii. 6, 8). The good things from God 
 
THES DOCTRINE JOF! THEILAST?JUDGMENT; icxxxXv 
 
 are eternal and endless ; and, on this account, the privation or 
 loss (srépnocc) of them is also eternal and endless (dreAeirnroc, 
 Iren. v. 27). And one good thing, of which ‘the unthankful 
 man, who is not subject to God but throws life away, deprives 
 himself, is continuance (ferseverantia)' for ever . . . length of 
 days for ever and ever... given to those who preserve the gift 
 of life and are thankful to the Giver. For life is not of ourselves, 
 nor of our own nature, but is given according to the grace of 
 God’ (Iren. 11. 34). Irenzeus here refers what is said of Lazarus 
 and Dives to their state defore the judgment. This subject was 
 that on which Justin conversed with his aged instructor, the 
 conclusion being that souls are neither necessarily mortal nor 
 inherently immortal ; that those whom God finds worthy die 
 no more, because He wills it; that the others undergo punish- 
 ment as long as God wills them to exist and be punished ; but 
 that, when the soul is to die, it returns again to that from 
 whence it was taken (Dial. 5, 6). It is singular with what con- 
 fidence Dr. Pusey, in his recent book on Eternal Punishments, 
 speaks of this old man as affirming that sow/s never die ; whereas 
 other eminent scholars (e.g. an authority at Oxford, Dr. 
 Clyde of Edinburgh, &c.) translate the passage differently ; and 
 the whole context before and after unmistakably shows the 
 
 1 The connection leaves not the slightest doubt that physical continuance 
 is meant ; and a comparison of other passages (e.g. iii. 3, 43; iv. 38, 
 3,5 V. 2, 33 v. 12, 2, or in Harvey’s Irenzeus, vol. ii. 12, 295, 323, 351) 
 shows that the original Greek word was mapauovf, and that undoubtedly 
 it means literal continuance in life, as when Polycarp continued (mapéwewve = 
 perseveravit) very long, or as the bodies of the antediluvian patriarchs 
 lasted (Jerseverabant) much time (Harvey ii. 330). St. John remained 
 (wapepelve = permansit) till Trajan’s time (i. 331; ii. 15); and Valentinus 
 continued (mapeueivey = prorogavit tempus) till the time of Anicetus 
 (Harvey ii. 17). Thus the reckless, ungrateful man ‘ deprives himself of 
 continuance for ever and ever,’ and ‘shall not receive from God length of 
 days for ever and ever’ (ii, 34, 3). What would Irenzus and Justin’s 
 Instructor have said of the article in the ‘Westminster Confession of 
 Faith,’ asserting that ‘men’s souls neither die nor sleep, having an 
 immortal subsistence’? (chap. 32). The work of Arnobius in the third 
 century shows the change of ideas on this subject. 
 
CXXXvi EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 meaning to be that souls do not necessarily die, that it would 
 be a godsend to the wicked if the death of the soul depended 
 on some necessity and not on the will of the Creator, Sup- 
 porter, and Judge of men ;! that, as the death of the soul is not 
 a matter of necessity, so neither is its continuance in life. That 
 phenomenal consciousness, which had a beginning, may surely 
 have anend. ‘What is your life? For ye are a vapour that 
 appeareth (parvopnevn) for a little time and then vanisheth away’ 
 (James iv. 14). An eternal fire, a fire from heaven, burns up or 
 scorches up corrupters of God’s word, who, ‘like Nadab and 
 Abihu, offer strange fire at God’s altar, that is, strange doc- 
 trines,’ and those who listen to them ; but these men are not 
 therefore immortal. ‘Those who rise up against the truth and 
 stir up others against God’s Church, shall remain in the lower 
 regions (apud inferos), swallowed up by the earth’s chasm as 
 those around Korah, Dathan and Abiram (Iren iv. 26, 2 ; Ign. 
 Eph. 16). But the approved shall rise to inherit the material 
 creation (p. cxix. &c.), with a purified vision and unsatiating 
 joys’ (S. vii. 3). 
 
 ' Canon Farrar is clearly of opinion that the passage should be trans- 
 lated: ‘ Nay-but neither do / affirm that all souls die.’ He believes that 
 if the doctrine, that the lost will finally cease to exist consciously, had not 
 come subsequently to be regarded as a heresy, there would have been no 
 question as to this being the belief of Irenzeus. The same belief, he thinks, 
 underlies the teaching of Justin on this subject (Mercy and Fudgment, pp. 
 242, 243). What else did Clement indicate when he spoke of the incor- 
 rigible as the chaff or small dust so easily scattered, as the drop spilt from 
 the bucket (C'176 ; C*41, 211, 368, 489), as superfluities with regard to 
 (wepiocot eis) salvation, cast away from the body (C? 368), as good for 
 nothing but fuel (C'257)? He taught that painful inflictions of punish- 
 ment are corrective, not retaliative, that ‘God does not hate anything and 
 yet wish what He hates to exist. . . nor does He wish anything not to 
 exist and yet this exists. . . that that of which He supplies the cause of 
 existence is loved by Him’ (Ped. i. 8). If, then, Clement believed that 
 God sentences men to endless, hopeless, and conscious misery, he must 
 have supposed that God loves them throughout all this eternity of hopeless 
 torment! But how could Clement have reconciled his statement with 
 the doctrine that they are sentenced to this before they are born? 
 
SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS 
 
 (OF ‘THE EARLY DOCTRINAL SYSTEM OF THE CHURCH’). 
 
 T. 
 
 iI. 
 
 III. 
 
 RECORDS OF PRIMITIVE EXPLANATIONS 
 
 Barnabas professes to ‘ write more clearly,’ and then proceeds, says 
 Clement, to ‘ deposit already a trace of philosophical (gnostic) tradition.’ 
 The Gnostic perversions of the Christian Gnosis or full knowledge 
 caused eminent Christians to collect ‘the scattered seeds.’ Works of 
 Justin Martyr, Irenzeus, and Clement of Alexandria. Eusebius gives 
 extracts from others. 
 
 THE EARLY CHURCH RULE OF THE FAITH; THE IN- 
 SPIRED WORD AND TRUE KNOWLEDGE 
 
 The Early Church Rule of the Faith and of Christian knowledge was 
 the teaching of the apostles. The tradition, carefully preserved in all 
 churches founded by them, was in this period one and in harmony with 
 the Apostolic Scriptures, and thus proved to be primitive and well- 
 founded. ‘The inspired prophesyings, heard by Irenzeus, were explana- 
 tions spoken in season and for profit, not frenzied utterances like those 
 of the Montanists. By the Spirit some might still ‘speak in all sorts of 
 languages, as Paul himself spoke.’ But swchk inspirations and the orad 
 traditions of the ‘wisdom spoken among the full-grown’ (the Primitive 
 System) were passing away; consequently, sound knowledge, which 
 conduces to ‘the acceptable transformation for the better,’ must be 
 sought for through careful cultivation. Tertullian and Origen belong 
 to the next age. 
 
 THE CONNECTION AND HARMONY OF THE DISPENSA- 
 TIONS. ‘ : F F - c : 
 
 As the Lord’s Coming was the fulfilment of the law and the prophets, 
 ‘the Testament according to His Coming’ and the Old Testament were 
 “the things new and old,’ to be expounded harmoniously together, so as 
 not to ‘judge’ unfairly of typical histories or of God’s ways, for such 
 was said to be the meaning of Matt. vii. x (Iren. iv. 16-32). This early 
 * Ecclesiastical Canon’ or ‘ Church Rule,’ as Clement calls it, 
 
 (1) Along with other Rules, explains Predestination 
 (2) Throws Light on the Difficulties, Style, and 
 Teaching of both Testaments. : 
 
 (3) Is ignored in some recent Critical Theories. 
 LEixcursus on the Old Testament and its Critics 
 
 PAGE 
 
 vill 
 
 xil 
 
 XIX 
 
 X1x 
 
 XXVili 
 
 XXX 
 
CXXXVIII SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS. 
 
 TV. BRANCHES OF THEOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE 
 
 (1) Theology proper : 
 Primary Beliefs about God 
 
 (2) Christology : 
 The Mediator and His Atonement A 
 
 (3) Sotertology : 
 Grace and the Laws of Salvation 
 
 (4) Preumatology : 
 The Holy Spirit and the Evil One 
 
 (5) Anthropology : 
 Man, his Nature, Fall, &c. 
 
 (6) Zhe Church and the Sacraments 
 Types in the Church Organisation 
 The Lord’s Day . : 
 Growth of the Church Oheatenttons 
 The Sacrament of Baptism . : : 
 - The Eucharist 
 
 (7) Eschatology: the Doctrine of the Last Things 
 The Coming of that which is Full-grown . 
 . The Future Judgment and the Future Life 
 
 PAGE 
 
 xlv 
 
 xlv 
 
 Ixxii 
 
 Ixxx 
 
 Ixxxiv 
 
 Ixxxv 
 Ixxxvli 
 XClii 
 XC1V 
 Civ 
 CXIV 
 CXXVlil 
 CXX1X 
 
 CXXXli 
 
CON LEN. US 
 
 (OF “THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE DISPENSATIONS’}. 
 
 : PAGE 
 PREFACE AND OUTLINE . ° : ‘ ‘ : : 1li-CXxXXv1 
 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ON THE BACONIAN METHOD or In- 
 VESTIGATING TRUTH , ‘ ‘ . ; : : oo SE 
 “PART, I. 
 THE CONNECTION OF THE DISPENSATIONS. 
 CHAPTER 
 I. THE PREPARATORY DISPENSATION . : ‘ ; Me 
 Different Elements of Preparation . : F out 332 
 Laws of Growth or Divine Working . ‘ ‘ . 56 
 Il.. THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION SEP) 
 Analysis of Scripture Passages. ‘ . : . 68 
 III. PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS AT ISSUE: 
 The Doctrine of the Infinite . ‘ : : + 6089 
 The Cause of the Will’s Choice . , : : > 95 
 PAR Dah. 
 LHE TYPOLOGY OF “THE, PENTATR UGH. 
 I. THE DISCERNMENT OF TYPES AND ANTITYPES viwgep LOR 
 II. THE WorpD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. SuLt4 
 The Six Days of Creation : ; 4 ‘ Ag rhe 8G 
 
 The Sabbath . . . . . : . 118 
 
cxl CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER PAGE 
 Seducing Doctrines of Subtle Spirits . ; : . Fat 
 The Eternal Laws of Life and Death Sek ween i LAS 
 The Soul and the Breath of Natural Life. } «543 
 The abiding Spirit or Breath of a New Life . + « 349 
 The Powers of Evil . : ; ‘ ‘ : Be Se 
 The Deluge, Babel, and Sodom. ; : cP OO 
 Abraham ; or Righteousness by Faith . ‘ ; . 164 
 
 III. THE Law oF Moses AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE . . 170 
 Two Inaugural Rites ; the First Passover. : Pen Oy 
 and the Sacrifice of the’'Covenant . : oe ae 
 The Tabernacle, the Priesthood, and the Altar . . 180 
 The Holy Places and the Services in them . ee LON 
 Levitical Purifications . : ; : : : » 197 
 Vows and Tonsures : : , : : S/BaOe 
 Clean and Unclean Meats . : i ? : » 205 
 THE DAILY ROUTINE OF THE TEMPLE SERVICE Se NOD, 
 The Week and the Month . ‘ , ; : Y2E2 
 THE YEAR, ITS FESTIVALS, &C. 
 The Passover. : ; : ; : ; pear pr 
 Pentecost. Firstfruits ; ; ; - Jhetee ho 
 The Day of Atonement . é : ; F ~ abereee 
 The Feast of Tabernacles ‘ i , : 22e 
 evel os ihe 6 a 
 
 THe SLNLL NAND: SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 I. WISDOM HID IN PARABOLIC MYSTERIES ., : meee 250) 
 IJ. THE Way or EGYPT AND OF THE NATIONS . ; . 243 
 III. THE CURSE OF THE Law. EDOM AND ISRAEL ~~» 247 
 
 IV. THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE 
 The Jordan and the Canaanites . ‘ , ; | 254 | 
 The Servitudes and the Judges Ln eee : .. 257 
 Subsequent Epochs , ; : : : ; - 260 — 
 
CONTENTS. cxli 
 
 CHAPTER PAGE 
 THE INHERITANCE OF THE EARTH . : ; a. 201 
 The Use and Abuse of Natural Things : , . 262 
 The Knowledge of God and Reason : ‘ aia Om 
 Neander’s Account of Early Mistakes . ‘ : . 268 
 The New Heavens and the New Earth . , Whiley a Begs 
 V. ZION AND BABYLON ; THE THINGS OF SENSE. ; «294 
 VI. THE NEw TEMPLE; THE BODY AND THE CHURCH . . 285 
 The Three Orders of the Christian Ministry . 5 . 286 
 The Three Regions of the Body. : + seen 
 Right and Left Hand Worshippers fyvithescest : 4, 206 
 
 BARA RY: 
 
 CHE TRADITIONAL THEOLOGY OF THE FIRST 
 TWO CENTURIES. 
 
 I. CLEMENT’S INSTRUCTOR AND ORAL TRADITION a) 5200 
 
 IJ. Firsr PRINCIPLES AND METHODS OF STUDY. : a 300 
 
 III. Gop: His IMAGE AND PREPARATORY WORK . PAA AIO 
 
 IV. CuRIst’s ATONEMENT AND RIGHTEOUSNESS . : + 329 
 
 V. THE HOLy SPIRIT AND THE EviIt ONE . d is gia, 
 
 PRAYER NOT SUPERFLUOUS . F é : ‘ $2355 
 
 Viv > DLAN’S: FALE, ULIBERTY,. AND ETERNAL Lire, 9 YES IRS 
 NOTES. 
 
 A, THE GNOosTIC HERESIES . é ; F : : Kw 378 
 
 B. ACCOUNT OF POLYCARP BY IRENAUS : ; + ; » 304 
 
 PRLOFAS OF Hermas on THE, Son |.) (su 2h OLR i 385 
 
 D. THE AUGUSTINIAN DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION . . 386 
 
 E. RECENT SERMONS ON REDEMPTION BY PRICE, SUDDEN 
 CONVERSIONS, SALVATION WITHOUT WoRKs, &C. . . 388 
 
ee ti, + 
 oat se 
 
 a L 
 ‘ 
 © s \ 
 i as 
 ee 
 
 oars = dein it heal bens E oA ar So 
 pau Laer Go SORA hie Sho.rrantt tha: ‘eas ee td : 
 © : Pere er ‘oat 
 
 Se ios mr ‘ na aa ie Wien Yaak git 7 a pele Sing aT. oer 
 
 rare ea, : ay terre ae erat, 4 4 
 os: ae Bieta $5 BAAN SAE AER) Ley ates 
 WER rs. Aes | able te ieee ae 
 sie (fatty CNY, a Peet Ra Praetcs gE 
 + a ie ag ‘ on L } | ie; ps : z se t ; 
 BIS [yar ae 
 hice Be Py t Hack \ = Te s iu ‘‘ os Sah \y. 
 af i i as ‘in AGU SSNS “fs [38 4 
 
 pe iret 
 
 yf 
 * oa 
 
 ies S.. #20 ) ae 
 
 a pani: vintet ark. 
 
 Hana i soni me % aos 
 
 ra be 
 
 mk ae ‘Papi ef a 
 7 ghey Pata tei at A (eeqed 
 
 ee ik i anette dane Iv 
 
 Rs gee rine, 
 
 63 ; y 
 F ee th ay: uf e 
 ara} a fe, 7 4 
 ate: sis | 
 ay a ay ri ae age ay me! 5 Toe 
 ai ss i the ja 
 ‘ 4 en A fy mi 
 rar eae ~ ae 
 Nee os RP 
 
PHILOSOPHY 
 
 OF ‘THE 
 
 DISPENSATIONS: 
 
 Nos autem et causam differentiss testamentorum et rursum 
 unitatem et consonantiam ipsorum, in his que deinceps futura 
 sunt, referemus.—/rez, III. 12, 12. 
 
 r Dos oo ~ Q ~ , 
 Pv adpOecav dea rig axoAovOiag rev CraOnkar augnvicovrec. 
 
 Clem. Alex. Strom. VII. 16. 
 
MH ie bate 
 
 ‘| sie o 
 
 8% ese wok. ree 
 
 chat A 
 
 rt. v 
 
 at sil 3 secon li, 
 
 5, gn eat aire ui 4 hate ane 
 
DE CREATOR 
 HIS DISPENSATIONS AND HIS PURPOSES. 
 
 INTRODUCTION, 
 
 METHOD IN THEOLOGY, 
 
 _ IN the study of the laws of nature and in the applications — 
 of our knowledge of them, the inductive method is ac- 
 knowledged to be that which is likely to lead to any 
 correct or valuable result. Man can only rule nature by 
 being obedient to nature’s laws ; and in order to obey 
 them, he must first ascertain what they are by honestly 
 | and diligently seeking for the truth. The first principle 
 of the inductive method is that man is the minister and 
 interpreter of nature ; he is not to idolise his traditional 
 or hastily formed notions, shutting his eyes to well- 
 established facts when these facts are inconsistent with 
 his preconceptions ; he is bound to alter his first hasty 
 explanations to suit the facts, and not to ignore, mystify, 
 or to explain away the facts to suit prejudices. A sup- 
 position or hypothesis may be useful to guide him in his 
 investigation of the facts of the case ; but, if he clings to 
 it in spite of the facts, seeking merely to prove it as a 
 special pleader, then his principle or supposition becomes 
 B 
 
2 METHOD IN THEOLOGY. 
 
 an evil,and an impediment in the way of truth. Itis not | 
 
 enough that a man’s mind should be thoughtful till he 
 has reached a principle ; he must not be satisfied till he 
 has tested this principle; and if the subject does not, in 
 its present state, allow him to form a sure conclusion, he 
 must be in readiness to modify his first explanations or 
 principles, so as to bring them into real harmony with 
 any possible discoveries. To seek desperately for proofs 
 to establish some traditional or hastily formed notion is 
 to idolise the notion. The spirit which sacrifices truth to 
 easy-going routine, to party maxims, or to personal 
 interest, the spirit which tampers with truth to make it 
 more comfortable, the conceit or pride in theories with 
 which we have identified ourselves, the domineering in- 
 fluence of great names, the misuse of language—these 
 and similar tendencies were called zdols by Bacon, 
 because they seduce men’s minds from the worship of 
 the truth. 
 
 There is no want of instances illustrating the blind, 
 fanatical,. persecuting spirit of men, when they have 
 made up their minds to abide by an old system which is 
 in danger of falling. Not to speak of personal interests 
 connected with such a system, there is a natural unwil- 
 lingness to unsettle one’s mind as to what has been most 
 surely believed, and to return to first principles. A 
 system would require to be very clearly disproved in 
 order that men, who yield to such temptations, should not 
 be able to bring forward some arguments in favour of it. 
 In such matters people will often willingly deceive them- 
 selves, or maintain an endless war of words, by bringing 
 forward vague, indefinite, transcendent fancies about the 
 divine Being and the nature of things, instead of looking 
 fairly at the facts; or they insist on interpreting, in its most 
 
SYSTEMS OF ERROR. 3 
 
 literal sense, the figurative language in which the Scrip= 
 tures speak of God and His attributes and works. For 
 instance, in those controversies which took place in 
 Galileo’s time, many theologians were committed to the 
 belief that the earth stands still, while the sun and stars 
 move round it. Some psalms speak of the earth as being 
 established, or made to stand, and abiding, how then could 
 it move round the sun? The church system and the 
 traditional belief in Aristotle were both against the 
 theory of Copernicus, that the earth is a planet and that 
 all the planets move round the sun. Galileo’s discovery 
 of Jupiter’s moons, however, showed to the world a simi- 
 lar system of bodies moving round Jupiter. While most 
 
 men capable of forming an opinion on the subject 
 
 watched these bodies and their eclipses with the greatest 
 interest, others whose minds were moulded in the old 
 pre-inductive habits of thought, would not believe in the 
 existence of them, because they imagined that there 
 could only be seven planets, or that these new planets 
 could be of no use to us, and are therefore superfluous. 
 Horky wrote a book to answer the enquiries, What they 
 -are? What they are like? and Why they are? The 
 answer to the last question he considered conclusive, 
 because astrologers had done very well without them 
 hitherto, there was, therefore, no reason for their thus 
 starting into existence. Wedderburn, a Scotchman, 
 then studying at Padua, humorously suggested that 
 their evident use was to torment and put to confu- 
 sion Horky and all superstitious astrologers. After- 
 wards, when Horky visited Kepler, the latter would only 
 pardon him for his conduct to Galileo upon condition 
 that he should look at these satellites of Jupiter through 
 
 Kepler's telescope, and ‘own that they were there.’ 
 B 2 
 
4 METHOD IN THEOLOGY. 
 
 ‘Here at Padua,’ wrote Galileo to Kepler, ‘is the prin- 
 cipal professor of philosophy, whom I have repeatedly 
 and urgently requested to look at the moon and these 
 planets through my glass, which he pertinaciously re- 
 fuses to do, . . . and to hear the professor of philosophy 
 at Pisa labouring before the grand duke with logical 
 arguments, as if with magical incantations, to charm the 
 new planets out of the sky.’ ‘You almost make me 
 laugh, he wrote to his pupil Castelli, ‘by saying that 
 these clear observations are sufficient to convince the 
 most obstinate. To convince the obstinate and those 
 who care for stupid applause, not even the testimony of 
 the stars would suffice, if they were to descend on earth 
 to speak for themselves.’ (L.U.K.). 
 
 ~The lessons of history may, however, become lost to 
 us. It requires some self-denial to investigate a sub- 
 ject with the simple view to find out the truth, when we 
 are interested in advocating a system already formed. 
 Men may call what they are teaching the gospel, and 
 neglect to enquire fairly whether it bethe truth. ‘ Pres- 
 byterians, it has been said, ‘are wont to come to the 
 Scriptures full of the Confession of Faith and the Larger 
 and Shorter Catechisms. It is generally the first glory o 
 their system that they are religiously brought up and 
 carefully instructed in doctrine. But there is this danger 
 accompanying this valuable care, that they bring a com- 
 plete system, already formed in the mind, to the study 
 of the Word of God.’ A principle, held in the mind pro- 
 visionally, may, like a hypothesis or guess at truth in 
 physical science, assist the student by connecting his 
 knowledge, so far as it extends, and even guide him in 
 his subsequent investigations ; but if the old position is 
 not recognised as merely serving to still greater ad- 
 
GUESSES: AT”, TRUTH, 5 
 
 vances, if a man persists in defending his first theory or 
 principle against facts and suggestions which ought to 
 make him seek for a better or a higher principle, if he 
 refuses to correct his first ideas, generalisations, or. 
 systems, or to look fairly at evidence, he deserves to be 
 called bigoted and prejudiced. This is for men to cease 
 to seek for truth inductively, to sink into mere deductive 
 reasoners and narrow-minded provers of a system. Men 
 who grasp about in all directions for arguments to defend 
 their principles ! are likely to find them ; but such men 
 are not likely to come in first in the pursuit of truth, but 
 last. ‘He reads well, says Hilary, speaking of Scripture, 
 ‘who does not bring the sense with him, but takes it 
 back with him.’? It is not enough to read and think, till 
 one’s mind gets hold of a principle. The experience of 
 mankind has shown that we must expect to have to cor- 
 rect our first principles. Our Lord did not encourage 
 the Pharisees in their blind attachment to their first 
 ideas, for in this way they became ‘blind guides of the 
 blind.’ On the other hand, the Bereans are commended for 
 their noble candour, because they searched the Scriptures 
 daily to see ‘ whether these things were so. There is a 
 great family likeness between the true spirit of inductive 
 science and the humble, teachable, and childlike spirit of 
 Christian research. Neither of these spirits will wil- 
 lingly shut its eyes to evidence for fear of compromising 
 favourite theories, much less blindly oppose the thorough 
 investigation of what appears unsatisfactory and im- 
 perfect. cae’ 
 
 1 Tn this way the Gnostics in the early ages of Christianity sought out 
 dark passages of Scripture to prove their ideas of the Infinite (remus, bk. 
 >TO, 1). 
 
 2 Tlle bene legit qui non affert sed refert sensum. 
 
6 METHOD IN THEOLOGY. 
 
 DIFFICULTIES IN APPLYING THE INDUCTIVE 
 METHOD TO MORAL SUBJECTS.—I. In comparing the 
 study of religious truth with the study of science, we 
 must bear in mind that subjects connected with the 
 development of the human mind are by no means so 
 easily traced; that the ultimate causes of our moral 
 actions are probably hidden in the depths of the human 
 soul; and that a perfect knowledge, even of moral 
 results, must be, in a great measure, based upon our ex- 
 perience of them. Our first natural tendency isto judge 
 of the results of actions by what we see; it is an after- 
 thought to judge of them by their moral consequences. 
 Character is the result of thousands of actions and voli- 
 tions, repeated from day to day; and it would be too 
 late to decide after the evil has been done, the character 
 formed, and the life finished. In this respect, men must 
 receive the kingdom of heaven like children, they must 
 act upon the testimony of those who are older and more 
 experienced, and upon the testimony of God Himself. 
 The psalmist’s faith in God was nearly gone when he 
 saw how the wicked prospered (Ps. lxxiii.) ; it was only 
 when he entered into the sanctuary of God that he 
 understood their end. ‘ How are they brought into deso- 
 lation as ina moment: they are utterly consumed with 
 terrors.’ When we also look attentively into the inner 
 sanctuary of our own souls, we too can understand the 
 desolating end of wicked men ; but the subject does not 
 admit of the same defined and measured calculation 
 which we can apply to physical science. The principles 
 on which we decide to frame our lives will, if we be wise, 
 depend to a great extent on the testimony of others, 
 and more especially on the testimony of God Himself, 
 and on the promptings of a higher nature working 
 
SENSUOUS IDEAS OF MORAL TRUTHS. yi 
 
 within us. Perhaps our heavenly Father means by par- 
 tially hiding the full consequences of our actions, or even 
 allowing faise prophets to misrepresent them, to leave 
 scope for the development of disinterested goodness, of 
 manly scorn for evil irrespective of its consequences, as 
 if He wished sur characters to be above the insinuation, 
 ‘Does Job fear God for nought ?’ 
 
 Il. THE INADEQUACY OF MECHANICAL OR 
 MATERIALISTIC IDEAS TO REPRESENT MORAL OR 
 MENTAL FACTS is another source of difficulty, and often 
 of mistakes. There are branches of natural science it- 
 self, as, for instance, those which treat of electricity and 
 life, in which our mechanical ideas of the connection of 
 events are at fault. When we speak of moral choice as if 
 it were a mechanical result, we run the risk of coming to 
 the conclusion that men are merely conscious, irrespon- 
 sible, automata. When we speak of God as the Being 
 from whom everything is evolved by a rigorous law of 
 causation, or from whom everything good and bad ema- 
 nates according to fixed laws and unalterable decrees, 
 then we are apt to overlook the facts that we have no 
 mental data whereby to determine the mechanical cause 
 of moral choice, that our consciousness pronounces in the 
 clearest way that we are in some mysterious way re- 
 sponsible for our lives, that our wills in moral choice 
 appear to us as causes not as puppets, while the Scrip- 
 tures no less clearly assert that God willeth not the death 
 of the sinner, and caution us against a philosophy sprung 
 from the mind of the flesh, from those first rudimentary 
 conceptions of things through the effects which we see 
 and experience bodily, and from the analogy of our own 
 natural thoughts and ways. The sensuous principle is 
 the first beginning of childish thought. By such wisdom, 
 
8 METHOD IN THEOLOGY. 
 
 however, the world knew not God ; and still this mind 
 of the flesh, this natural man, cannot know God. It is 
 not by God’s physical attributes, but by the revelation of 
 His paternal and moral character, that God is to us 
 truly God. What God had borne testimony to, at 
 sundry times and in divers manners, speaking to the 
 fathers by the prophets, has also been confirmed to us, 
 God giving us such a revelation of Himself by His Son, 
 who is an embodiment of His testimony. But in the 
 very first ages of Christianity, a most dangerous sort of 
 heretics arose, who threatened to set aside this testimony 
 by vain speculations about God’s infinity ‘and by repre- 
 sentations of evil as if it were an essential characteristic 
 of material and finite natures. In short, they attempted 
 to found Christian truth on some physically conceived 
 theory of God’s infinity and of the essentially evil bias of 
 our material nature. The very wildness of their theories 
 about emanations is now-a-days sufficient to refute them ; 
 but there can be no doubt that their method of en- 
 deavouring to conceive of spiritual things physically lies 
 at the bottom of most other heresies past and present. 
 Spirituality, according to them, was a thing of physical 
 essence, a spark of the divine falling somehow into 
 matter ; they denied that mere natural (psychical) men, 
 who wanted this spark, were capable of salvation ; and 
 thus they maintained a certain predestination of natures, 
 inconsistent with man’s indestructible moral freedom. 
 Their highest God was the Great Infinite Unknown—the 
 Bythos or Abyss where thought loses itself ; evil, they 
 thought, arises through remoteness from this Infinite, or 
 is something in the nature of matter, which makes it ob- 
 structive to the divine ideas or working. 
 
 In modern times, the same tendencies of philoso- 
 
PHYSICAL THEORIES OF MORAL CHOICE. 9 
 
 phical thought appear in a more scientific form. By 
 reflecting on the activity of our minds or wills, we ob- 
 tain an idea of physical causation. Weare conscious of 
 ourselves as efficient causes, and we justly infer from 
 the analogy of our own volitions and operations, that 
 every material change, especially if associated with de- 
 sign, is caused in some way similar to that in which we 
 feel ourselves capable of bringing about physical effects. 
 Our consciousness of ourselves as rational and moral 
 agents reveals to us our wills or minds as causing ma- 
 terial phenomena ; but it tells us nothing as to the source 
 of moral choice. We are conscious of physical effects 
 coming about by the agency of will, and as long as we 
 apply our ideas of physical causation to the physical 
 world, we are free from danger ; but not when we carry 
 this idea of causation into a higher sphere and conclude 
 that, as the will causes material changes, so the will it- 
 self is in the same way caused. Our consciousness pro- 
 tests against this conclusion, for it reveals cause and will 
 together ; but, if we pay no heed to its protest, we 
 may fancy we are irresponsibly moved, like ‘conscious 
 automata.’' But are philosophers justified in transfer- 
 ring ideas derived from the consciousness we have of our 
 power over matter into a sphere where they have no 
 proper data to go upon, and where the instincts of our 
 nature would lead us to a totally different conclusion ? 
 The influence of truth, moral suasion, rational motives, 
 are spiritual and moral, not physical forces; and the 
 
 1 Modern physical science has brought into prominence the question of 
 the human will in its connection with the theory of evolution ; but it has 
 added no new element of any importance to the discussion. With due change 
 of old theological into modern scientific terminology, the famous work of 
 
 Jonathan Edwards on the will very nearly expresses the opinion of Profes- 
 sor Huxley on the subject, according to his own account. 
 
IO METHOD IN THEOLOGY. 
 
 power of the Holy Spirit ought always to be associated 
 with such influences, and to be thought of as proceeding 
 to us in the way of the full completion of our nature. 
 In such a sphere, we run the greatest possible risk of 
 error, if we introduce our ideas of physical causation or 
 speak of these spiritual influences as if they acted on us as 
 we act on matter. The work of the Holy Spirit may 
 thus come to be thought of as some ecstatic transforma- 
 tion or mystico-physical emanation from God, some im- 
 pulse assuming the garb of argument or moral influence, 
 but really as acting on man in some more physical way, 
 so as to change his absolute, essential nature. There is 
 supposed to be some essential capacity wanting in our 
 nature since the Fall, from which want we necessarily 
 resist to the very uttermost all moral influence, till it is 
 put beyond moral choice to resist by our receiving, in 
 some self-manifesting, physically conceived way, this 
 essential change. God’s work of grace is looked upon 
 as on a par with His miracles of healing, as a putting 
 forth of something like physical omnipotence, or as a 
 work of sovereignty, irrespective of all previous pre- 
 paration, and all the laws of human development and 
 growth. And just as the highest God of the Gnostics 
 was the Infinite Unknown, the Abyss where the thought 
 of man loses itself, so the highest God of their modern 
 successors is that Being in whose mind everything past, 
 present, and future is written. It is no matter how 
 plainly the God of the Bible, the living God, assures us 
 that He wills not the death of the sinner ; these men tell 
 us that He does not really mean this unless it is written 
 in His mind, for it seemsan axiom with them that every 
 event has been from all eternity written in His mind and 
 fixed. 
 
DARK THINGS EXPLAINED BY CLEAR. II 
 
 Sensuous ideas of our mental and moral constitution, 
 as if it were made up of physical parts, have also given 
 rise to aberrations of thought respecting the Person 
 of our Lord, who, it has been supposed, brought some 
 infinite elements, incongruous with our nature, and 
 amalgamated them with others more human, so that 
 He became a man only in appearance. 
 
 CANONS OF IREN&US.—The ancient Gnostics en- 
 deavoured to establish their ideas of the Great Infinite 
 Unknown, and ofa predestination of natures, by bringing 
 forward a few dark and difficult passages of Scripture. 
 Irenzus, in answering them, says that these passages 
 are ‘dark and difficult, not as referring to another God 
 (this Unknown Infinite, above God), but as regards the 
 dispensations of God.’ It is from these passages, says 
 Neander,' that the doctrine of absolute predestination 
 was in after ages derived; but Christians of this early 
 period ‘were far from framing to themselves out of these 
 passages a doctrinal system to which they sacrificed all 
 other religious interests and the whole analogy of Bible 
 faith.’ Irenzeus and others showed that these passages 
 (as for instance, the hiding of the truth from the Jewish 
 people, the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart) ‘contain a 
 meaning capable of being reconciled with God’s love 
 and justice and man’s indestructible freedom.’ In op- 
 position to these Gnostics, Irenzeus? laid down some 
 important rules to guide his readers. ‘ Things in the Scrip- 
 tures, he says, ‘which are dark, difficult, and enigmati- 
 _ cal, cannot be explained by means of another greater 
 enigma; but things of such a character receive their 
 solution from those that are manifest, consistent, and 
 
 * Neander’s Church Hist, Bohn’s edition, vol. ii. p. 343. 
 ?' lreneus, bk. ii. ch. x. s. 13 bk. ii, ch. xxviii. s, eA of eat ears 
 ex aS. 2, 
 
12 METHOD IN THEOLOGY. 
 
 clear. Secondly, he says that there are many questions 
 which we cannot solve; that we must leave these in the 
 hands of God and not aim at bringing forward (in 
 reply to them) foolish, rash, and blasphemous supposi- 
 tions. Thirdly, he says that we ought not to reason as 
 if we were making God, but to think of Him as fashion- 
 ing us and show ourselves plastic in His hands. 
 
 THE SPHERE OF CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE.—It 
 ought always to be borne in mind that the object of our 
 studies of religious truth is not so much the acquisition 
 of knowledge for its own sake, as our own mental and 
 moral growth and the wise direction of our lives. The 
 Apostle Paul exhorted the Roman Christians not to 
 speculate in matters of thought beyond what they ought 
 to occupy their minds with, but to ‘be minded so as to be 
 sober-minded,’ to be practically wise (Rom. xii. 3) ; he 
 prayed that the Ephesians ‘ might, in the full knowledge 
 of the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, have the spirit of 
 wisdom and of a sound mind’ (Eph. i. 17); and he re- 
 commended the Corinthians to cultivate that best of all 
 gifts, the spirit of love, which is ‘the super-eminently 
 excellent way’ to Christian perfection (1 Cor. xil. 31 ; 
 xiii). The sort of speculative knowledge about God's 
 physical greatness, about the way in which He created 
 the world, about what He was doing in the beginning, 
 about the origin of evil and its relation to the First Cause, 
 about the generation of the Son of God, by whatever 
 name it is called—the knowledge of such things ought 
 to be left to God and not made a boast of by men 
 (Irenzus, bk, ii. 28, 7-9). Such speculations serve to 
 ‘puff up,’ not to edify or to stimulate men to love and 
 good works. They have their source in man’s vain 
 ‘mind of the flesh, seeking to build up a vain 
 
FULL-GROWN CHRISTIAN MANHOOD. 13 
 
 tower of conceit on some dark passages of the Bible ; 
 and they serve as a refuge of vain hopes to men of 
 corrupt minds. The subject of God’s physical essence 
 and unmeasurable greatness is beyond our comprehen- 
 ‘sion: hence controversies carried on with a view to 
 solve such questions end in mere disputes about words ; 
 and the man of God is directed not to strive about words, 
 a thing tending to no profit but to the subversion of the 
 hearers, to shun vain babblings, to decline foolish and 
 irregular questions, not to strive with men who oppose 
 the truth with such vain reasonings, but to ‘correct them 
 in meekness,’ ‘that they may return to soberness out of 
 the snare of the devil.’ (2 Tim. ii. 14, 16, 23,1 25y (20 
 Though the apostles and their immediate successors 
 discouraged those fruitless speculations about subjects 
 which transcend our comprehension and which serve no 
 practical good, they certainly did not discourage men 
 from studying religious truths as revealed to us in our 
 conscience or in the Scriptures, and seeking a ‘ thorough 
 knowledge of the mystery of God.’ Though the culti- 
 vation of our moral nature be of more consequence 
 than the cultivation of our intelligence, yet still we 
 must remember that it is as rational beings that we were 
 in the first place created in the image of God ; and that 
 it is through our understandings that our moral natures, 
 our affections, and our wills are reached. It would be 
 an insult alike to God and to man to suppose that God 
 influences us, through our mere sensibilities, in some 
 spasmodic or hysterical way, rather than through our 
 rational nature. It is of the greatest consequence that 
 we should understand the truth, because the more we 
 understand of God in all that can be revealed of Him, 
 the more we are influenced towards well-doing, the more 
 
ka METHOD IN THEOLOGY. 
 
 we see that He is doing us good and thus come to sym- 
 pathise with him as our Friend. The ‘enthusiasm of 
 humanity,’ in its best sense, results not from mere instinc- 
 tive impulse but from an intelligent acquaintance with 
 that for which we become enthusiastic. Again, in the 
 direction of our lives, we must be intelligent and de- 
 liberate. A heedless, fitful, impulsive, uncertain, direction 
 of life is likely to lead to moral shipwreck or to very un- 
 satisfactory results. A wise man will decide deliberately 
 whom he will serve and how he will order his life, so as 
 to make the best of it. By reducing our knowledge into 
 practice, we acquire some experimental data on which 
 religious truth is founded; but if we neglect the direct 
 study of Christian truth, we run the risk of being misled 
 by prevailing misrepresentations of God’s dealings or 
 cheated out of those liberties which we do not know how 
 to use. Our Lord and his apostles predicted a great de- 
 velopmentof lying doctrines and delusive impostures, such 
 as, if it were possible, might deceive the very elect. Paul 
 foresaw that even among the first presbyters ordained by 
 him, men would arise speaking perverse things to draw 
 disciples after them (Acts xx. 30). The apostles, there- 
 fore, exhorted their converts to go on to perfection, so that 
 they might be firmly established in the faith. Paul valued 
 all the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, but more under- 
 standing, the prophetic gift, as means of edifying the 
 entire body of the Christians, that a//should attain to the 
 perfect knowledge of the Son of God, that men should 
 become full-grown according to the measure of the 
 stature of the fulness of Christ ; that they should be no 
 longer children, tossed as waves and carried about by 
 every wind of teaching, in the sleight of man, in crafti- 
 ness that leadeth to the system of error, but being fol- 
 
MEN NOT PERFECTED IN IGNORANCE. 15 
 
 lowers of the truth in love, may grow up into him (Eph. 
 iv. 13, 14, 15), rooted and built up in Him and stab- 
 lished in the faith, even as they were taught .. . lest 
 some one by a show of voluntary worship or abetciniaas 
 self-mortification, by a pretence of wisdom or philosophy 
 falsely so-called, taking his stand on some sensuous 
 view of spiritual things, and vainly puffed up in his 
 mind of the flesh, should defraud them of their prize ; 
 for in Jesus Christ dwelt, as in a temple, all the commu- 
 nicable attributes of God, with which also they might 
 be filled full (Col. ii. 7-10, 18).1 ‘Be babes in malice, 
 wrote Paul to the pss ‘but in understanding be 
 full-grown men’ (1 Cor. xiv. 20). Formerly, when 
 they were Gentiles, they had followed d/ndly the wor- 
 ship of some dumb idol ; but now, in all the manifesta- 
 tions of the spirit of truth, Paul would not have them 
 agnorant (1 Cor. xii. 1, 2). The seed of Christianity is 
 sown in the heart, but if men do not understand what 
 they hear, if they do not give diligence to add to their 
 faith virtue and knowledge, then the wicked one cometh 
 and catcheth away that which is sown in their hearts. 
 This is sown by the wayside (Matt. xiii. 19). 
 
 OuR LORD’S MISSION WAS TO FULFIL, NOT TO 
 DESTROY ; SIGNS AND WONDERS WERE HIS LESSER, 
 NOT HIS GREATER WORKS.—Man’s legitimate method 
 of ruling over nature is by studying its established laws 
 and directing its powers. Our Lord claims to be the 
 interpreter of His Fathers work; He bases His own 
 _ power on the adaptation of what He did to the Father’s 
 work —to the laws of our constitution and to the previous 
 training of men under the law of Moses, the teaching of 
 the prophets, and the teachings of conscience and pro- 
 
 1 See Fausset’s Commentary on v. 18. 
 
Ls METHOD IN THEOLOGY. 
 
 vidence. Our Lord did not come to destroy or set aside 
 His Father's work, but to fulfil it. The Jewish rulers, 
 indeed, imagined that he was breaking the Father’s law 
 given to Moses when he healed men on the sabbath day. 
 ‘Therefore, said some of the Pharisees, ‘ this man is not 
 of God because he keepeth not the sabbath day’ (John 
 ix. 16). ‘Therefore the Jews persecuted Jesus because 
 he did these cures on the sabbath day’ (John v. 16). 
 Our Lord’s answer, in substance, was that they misun- 
 derstood the meaning of the Sabbath rest; that he had 
 not come to undo the work of His Father, but to interpret 
 it, to build upon it, and to fulfil it. ‘The Son,’ he says, 
 ‘can do nothing of Himself, except what He seeth the 
 Father doing: for whatsoever things He doeth, these also 
 doeth the Son in like manner. For the Father loveth the 
 Son, and sheweth Him all things that Himself doeth, 
 and greater works than these will He shew Him, that ye 
 may marvel.’ 
 Our Lord’s miraculous interruptions of physical laws 
 only showed that there is a higher principle to which 
 physical. law gave way, that is, the higher law of God’s 
 moral dealings with men. Our Lord’s miracles were 
 typical of those merciful cures which the revelation of 
 Himself would effect in those who received the truth in 
 the love of it. A new law of life was about to be intro- 
 duced which would bring to nought the old law of death ; 
 and these miracles served to arrest men’s attention and 
 bring them within the temple of truth. Our Lord 
 speaks of His miracles as His lesser works; when men 
 come under the influence of the truth, they see and ex- 
 perience His greater works. What our Lord meant by 
 His greater and His lesser works may be made out from 
 John i. 50, 51. .Nathanael was induced, by our Lord’s 
 
OUR LORD’S GREATER WORKS. IZ 
 
 miraculous knowledge of what He was doing, to confess 
 his belief that our Lord was the Son of God and the 
 King of Israel. Our Lord then told him that he would 
 see greater works than such miracles, that he would see. 
 ‘heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and 
 descending on the Son of man. The reference is: to 
 Jacob’s ladder ; and the meaning is that our Lord Him- 
 self, in His human nature, was the means of communi- 
 cation with heaven; that He Himself was an embodiment 
 of the truth ; that this truth is the power of God brought 
 down to men, and thus the means of raising men to God. 
 His greater works are the revelation of God and the 
 transformation of men through this revelation into the 
 same image. 
 
 Our Lord represents Himself (John v. 19) as doing 
 all His works, not as of Himself, but by following the 
 working of the Father. Even the miraculous proofs of 
 His mission were necessary to satisfy men’s legitimate 
 demand for some guarantee of its reality. Much more 
 are the exhibitions of God’s character and moral deal- 
 ings with men adapted to their moral wants and higher 
 aspirations, which spring from the teaching of the Father. 
 It was necessary to have ears to hear and receive our 
 Lord’s words, and this groundwork is laid in the Father's 
 Previous preparation. St. Paul commended himself to 
 every man’s conscience in the sight of God; he had no 
 power against the truth but for it. He speaks of men 
 who heard this truth as falling down on their face, wor- 
 shipping God, when they were convinced by what they 
 felt or understood, when they found the secrets of their 
 heart made manifest (1 Cor. xiv. 243: 2» COLES IVa, Qa 
 8). This echo or testimony to the truth within the 
 breast of Peter was the revelation of the Father and the 
 
 $) C 
 
18 METHOD IN THEOLOGY. 
 
 rock upon which our Lord built His church, though the 
 testimony of Peter and the other apostles was also an 
 essential part of the foundation (Matt. xvi. 18). To 
 claim supernatural power apart from the teaching of 
 truth is a heathenish, not a Christian idea; to represent 
 even the teaching of Christianity as operating apart from 
 the established laws of our constitution, indicates a 
 system more or less founded on delusion. 
 
10 
 
 liga ed eeedlZ 
 
 LHE LAW OF MAN’S NATURE AND THE 
 CONNECTION OF THE DISPENSATIONS. 
 
 (i "9 eo A Ae 9 
 
 THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK AND ELEMENTS 
 OF THE WORLD. 
 
 OUR LORD based His work on that of the Father. In 
 order, therefore, to understand the meaning of our 
 Lord’s work, we must be acquainted, first, with man’s 
 natural constitution ; and, secondly, with that prelimi- 
 nary training called, in the New Testament, the rudi- 
 ments of the world, through which men were schooled 
 for better things. With the stern discipline of these 
 rudiments was joined a witness to God’s goodness ; the 
 sabbath was, in this way, ordained to be kept in the 
 spirit of mercy. It was the Father’s purpose to trans- 
 late into the kingdom of the Son of His love, those who 
 had been, in His own school, made meet for this inherit- 
 ance of the saints in light (Col. i. 12, 13), who had been 
 prepared beforehand unto glory (Rom. ix. 23). These 
 were, therefore, predestinated to be conformed to the 
 image of His Son. God creates all things in due season 
 and in accordance with reason. The first or natural man 
 
 has capacities; but he must learn to discern good and 
 C 2 
 
20 THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK. 
 
 evil. Men must have animal desires, before they learn 
 to govern them ; and ignorant men are first taught as 
 slaves (Deut. i. 29; John xv. 15.) ‘The Lord God formed 
 man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his 
 nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living 
 soul.’! ‘The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second 
 man (not the first) is from heaven.’ Adam was, there- 
 fore, perfect only as an earthy image of God ; it remained 
 that he should afterwards put on or bear the image of 
 the heavenly man. The child is not less perfect as a 
 child, though it is not yet man, and can only become man 
 ‘by having his organs of sense exercised with a view to 
 discernment between good and evil.’* So Adam was 
 made capable of receiving a higher nature after the 
 image of the Son of God ; but that is not first which is 
 spiritual, but that which is natural or animal. 
 
 Our knowledge is all communicated to us in some 
 way through experience; knowledge of right and wrong 
 is no exception to this rule, for it is not developed in a 
 young person’s mind without a certain experience. Now, 
 although Adam had knowledge derived from the senses, 
 he had not as yet had that experience necessary to give 
 him certain elementary ideas of the nature of right and 
 wrong. Moral character does not exhibit itself in in- 
 stinctive preference but in deliberate choice between 
 two things of which we have a proper idea. Man’s 
 nature is not perfected unless there be developed in him 
 certain abiding principles of self-control and moral good- 
 
 1 Gen. ii. 7. 
 
 2 1 Cor. xv. 47. The oldest MSS. omit the Lord. 
 
 * Heb. .v.14. 
 
 4 1 Cor. xv, 46. The word is derived from the Greek word psyche ; 
 
 it expresses man’s first state which is explained by Jude (19) as sensual, 
 not having the Spirit. 
 
FIRST -CONCEPRTIONS: 21 
 
 ness, founded on higher notions of God and higher 
 motives than could yet move Adam in his state of inno- 
 cence and inexperience. 
 
 1. Man’s first thoughts were those derived from the 
 apparent consequences of actions, or what his first intui- 
 tions would suggest. Eve judged by the appearance of 
 the apple to the senses; and she judged of God from 
 herself. There was, she no doubt thought, some know- 
 ledge which God wished to reserve for Himself. The 
 tree was not only good for food and pleasant to the 
 eyes ; but it was a tree to be desired to make one wise, 
 tc make them as gods, knowing good and evil. Man 
 had yet to learn the plague of a guilty conscience. He 
 seemed to think himself safe because God had not seen 
 him eating it, he did not anticipate that God would sur- 
 prise him in this wxseen way, in his own conscience. 
 ‘And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in 
 the garden in the midst of the day; and Adam and his 
 wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God 
 amongst the trees of the garden. And the Lord God 
 called unto Adam and said unto him, Where art thou? 
 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was 
 afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself’! We 
 must remember that, in this history, we are reading an 
 account of the first sin; and that, though the Second Man 
 from heaven may have had His knowledge of good and 
 evil in a heavenly way, yet we, who are of the earth, ac- 
 quire it in a double form from experience, as we acquire 
 _ the knowledge of sweet and sour, hot and cold. It may 
 be considered as a settled point in mental science that 
 we do not come into this world with ready-made ideas. 
 We bring faculties with us ; but these faculties do not 
 
 ! Gepanil...9, 10: 
 
22 THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK. 
 
 develop the ideas without the appropriate experience. 
 Our ideas are, as Dr. Thomas Brown expressed it, ‘ sug- 
 gested’ to us by our experience. Thus we bring a moral 
 faculty with us; but, in order that we may acquire the 
 ideas of right and wrong, certain conditions must be ful- 
 filled—we must have a certain experience of actions and 
 their consequences. Our minds, for instance, form the 
 idea of distance when we compare what we see with 
 what we learn by touch and locomotion. So our ideas 
 of right and wrong may result in a similar way by 
 combining together our different experiences, private 
 and social,! which not only become generalised and from 
 their frequent repetition appear underived, but, like the 
 idea of distance, are really different in character from 
 those primary experiences, which were necessary to sug- 
 gest or occasion them. The want of this necessary ex- 
 perience is indicated in Genesis, for the suggestion of the 
 tempter must have been founded on some fact. ‘God 
 doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes 
 shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods knowing good 
 and evil’? This implied that they had not as yet the 
 idea of good and evil, of right and wrong. They no 
 doubt thought as little about the matter, and knew as 
 little about it, as a man blind from his infancy thinks 
 and knows about colour. They must, however, have 
 known something about God, otherwise their conscience 
 would not have reproached them for disobedience ; but 
 we may best compare their case with that of the child, 
 who knows something of its parents, yet disobeys them 
 in its first wilfulness, and grows up through its little ex- 
 
 1 See Sir James Mackintosh, Dés. on Ethica Science. Lncyc. Brit, 
 
 PP. 424, 425. 
 4 Geén, Hb 2 
 
THE: GROWTH OF PRINCIPLE: 23 
 
 perience, we can scarcely imagine, much less remember, 
 how, to know good from evil. God teaches men by the 
 consequences of sin. Man must learn that he lives ‘ not 
 by bread alone,’! not by what he sees to be ‘good for 
 food and pleasant to the eyes,’ ? but by every word of 
 God, by every law of moral retribution. Israel in the 
 wilderness was humbled and taught this lesson, which he 
 did not zaturally know ; so, by the coming of the com- 
 mandment, which became the occasion of sin, Adam’s 
 conscience manifested itself in a sense of guilt and shame; 
 his experiences became the first step to a higher life, the 
 first lesson that ‘it is an eviland a bitter thing to forsake 
 God,’ * the first perception that there is a law of moral 
 retribution, and a moral death more to be feared than 
 the loss of physical enjoyment. 
 
 II. It is not enough that man should obey aac 
 or constrainedly. Man comes, in his perfect state, to 
 appreciate, to some extent, the wisdom and goodness 
 of his divine Maker and of His commandments, so as to 
 love that which is good and hate evil. But how can he 
 appreciate what his Maker is doing until he have some 
 experience of the consequences of things? The com- 
 mandment given to Adam was merely external; he 
 could not enter into the intention of God, so as to co- 
 operate intelligently with Him; for he did not under- 
 stand, with his natural mind of the flesh, why so good 
 and pleasant a fruit was forbidden, but seems to have 
 thought that God was jealously guarding some mystery. 
 The motive to obedience was not, therefore, at first any 
 enthusiastic intelligent motive, but fear of the conse- 
 quences ; though as yet Adam scarcely knew enough of 
 God to imagine how evil consequences might follow 
 
 ? Deut. viii. 3. 4 ren. as iO; ®: Jered, 09, 
 
24. THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK. 
 
 transgression. The commandment must have appeared 
 to his first ideas either as a meaningless or as a jealous 
 restriction ; and, if he had obeyed, his obedience would 
 have been a blind obedience proceeding from fear, like 
 that of a slave. Now we know that God did not an- 
 ticipate that men would be moved to obedience by 
 a merely external commandment; it was predestinated, 
 before the foundation of the world, that men in this re- 
 spect should be conformed to the image of the Son of 
 God, the second head of our race.! It was certainly 
 God’s intention that men should serve Him as sons, 
 intelligently, and from choice, not blindly from instinct, 
 or from fear like slaves. It was the second head of our | 
 race who, from the beginning, was destined to bring 
 among men the life-giving Spirit, which the natural man 
 did not as yet have (1 Cor. xv. 45, Jude 19), the Spirit 
 which is always connected in the Bible with a knowledge 
 of God and a belief in His word or His testimony as to 
 the moral consequences of actions, the Spirit which leads 
 men to co-operate intelligently with God, like friends or 
 sons, and to be subject to Him reverently, knowing that 
 all things—even the losses they sustain in serving Him— 
 become in His hand the means of ‘working out for His 
 people a far more exceeding, even an eternal weight 
 of glory. Adam, as a natural man, was naked, he had 
 to be clothed upon with a new nature; and the coming 
 of the commandment made him know that he was naked, 
 and that he needed so to be clothed upon. ‘We also 
 ought, says Irenzeus, ‘after our calling to be adorned 
 with works of righteousness, that the Holy Spirit may 
 rest upon us, for this is the wedding garment.’ 
 
 1 Rom. viii. 29; Eph. i. 3-13. The expression in Eph. i. 10, ‘to sum 
 up,’ ‘to head all things over again in Christ,’ is very much used by Irenzus. 
 
MORAL CHOICE NOT INSTINCTIVE. 245 
 
 I. The law of the human race is to be first subject 
 to passions, and to make progress rationally towards the 
 perfect. This account of the natural condition of man 
 is that given by Irenzus, (iv. 38: 3, 4), whose testimony 
 must be allowed considerable weight, as he was so ee 
 connected with the apostles! ‘If says Irenzus, ‘men 
 had been originally possessors of good, not by choice but 
 by having it implanted in them and flowing forth of its 
 own accord without their concern, then they would not 
 understand that good is a comely thing, nor take plea- 
 sure in it. What credit or what crown is it to those who 
 have not ‘followed in pursuit of it, like those victorious 
 ina contest? If good were not the result of striving 
 and care, that is, if Adam had been prompted to it by 
 natural instinct, good would not have been esteemed and 
 it would have been irrational. Moreover, seeing appears 
 desirable when we know what it is to be devoid of sight, 
 and health is rendered all the more estimable by an ac- 
 quaintance with disease. The Lord tolerated (sustinutt) 
 these things on our behalf, that we, being taught ration- 
 ally to love God, may continue in His perfect love’; “for 
 God has displayed longsuffering in the case of man’s apos- 
 tacy, while man has been instructed by means of it, as 
 also the prophet says, “ Thine own apostacy shall heal 
 thee,” ? God thus determining all things beforehand for 
 _ the bringing of man to perfection, for his edification, and 
 for the revelation of His dispensations, that goodness 
 may both be made apparent and righteousness perfected, 
 and that the church may be fashioned after the image 
 of His Son, and that men may finally be brought to ma- 
 
 1 Irenzeus was the disciple of Polycarp, and Polycarp was the disciple 
 of St. John. Clark’s Iren. ii, 158, 159. 
 peero a, 19: 
 
26 THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK. 
 
 turity in the course of time, becoming ripe, through such 
 privileges, to see and comprehend God. If, however, 
 anyone should say, What then? Could not God have 
 exhibited man as perfect from the beginning? let him 
 know that inasmuch as created things are not uncreated, 
 for this very reason do they come short of the perfect ; 
 and just as it is in the power of the mother to give strong 
 meat to her infant, but she does not do so, as the child is 
 not yet able to receive it, so God had power to grant, at 
 the beginning, perfection to man, but man, being as yet 
 an infant, could not have received it or retained it. Man 
 makes progress day by day, ascending towards the per- 
 fect, that is, approximating to the Uncreated One, who 
 in all things has the pre-eminence. Men, therefore, are 
 irrational who do not await the time of increase, but 
 ascribe to God (blame God for) the infirmity of their 
 nature. The dumb animals bring no charge against 
 God for not having made them men; but men cast 
 blame upon God because they have not been made gods 
 from the beginning, but at first merely men like to God, 
 that is, possessed of power over ourselves. By His pre- 
 science, He knew the consequences that would flow from 
 the infirmity of human beings ; but through His love and 
 power He would overcome what belonged to created 
 nature, making man after the image and likeness of God, 
 after he had received the knowledge of good and evil. 
 ‘Man has this twofold experience of good and evil, 
 that he may with judgment make choice of the better 
 things. And how, if he had no knowledge of the con- 
 trary, could he have had instruction in that which is 
 good? For just as the tongue receives experience of 
 sweet and bitter by means of tasting, and the eye dis- 
 criminates between black and white by means of vision, 
 
EXPERIENCE NECESSARY. 27 
 
 and the ear recognises the distinction of sounds by hear- 
 ing, so does the mind receive, through the experience of 
 both (good and evil), the knowledge of that which is 
 good, that coming to understand what disobedience to 
 God really is, that it deprives him of life and is contrary 
 to goodness and sweetness, man may cast it away as 
 something nauseous, and, in the time to come, be diligent 
 in his obedience and in all respects circumspect.’! Thus, 
 according to Irenzus, a man must taste what evil is 
 that he may know what good is, that with discipline 
 he may make choice of better things, and that he may 
 be tenacious of them. Without this double knowledge, 
 Irenzeus considers that we should not be human beings. 
 ‘If anyone,’ he says, ‘do shun the knowledge of these 
 things, and the twofold perception of knowledge, he us- 
 awares divests himself of the character of a human being. 
 How, then, shall he bea god who has not yet been made 
 aman? It must needs be that thou at the outset hold 
 the rank of man, and then afterwards, having recovered 
 (from the disease of sin), partake of the glory of God. 
 Iv. ‘Because man is possessed of free will from the 
 beginning, as God is possessed of free will in whose like- 
 ness man was made, advice is always given to him to 
 hold fast that which is good, which thing is done by 
 means of obedience to God. For this reason, our Lord 
 has said, “ Let your light so shine before men, that they 
 may see your good deeds and glorify your Father which 
 is in heaven.” And, “Take heed to yourselves lest at 
 any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting and 
 drunkenness and worldly cares.” And Paul says, “ Let 
 no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, 
 
 ' Trenzeus trans, in Clark’s Ante-Nicene Library, vol. ii. 34-47 (bk. iv, 
 36-39). What precedes and follows is a summary of these chapters. ~ 
 
28 THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK. 
 
 neither filthiness nor foolish talking, which are not ex- 
 pedient.” And, “For ye were sometime darkness, but 
 now are ye light in the Lord: walk honestly as the 
 children of the light, not in rioting and drunkenness, 
 not in anger and jealousy. And such were some of 
 you; but ye have been washed, but ye are sanctified in 
 the name of the Lord.” “ Blessed is that servant whom 
 His Lord when He cometh shall find so doing. But if 
 that servant say in his heart, My Lord delayeth his 
 coming, and shall begin to beat his fellow-servants, to 
 eat and drink and to be drunken, the Lord will come in 
 a day when he does not expect him, and will cut him in 
 sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the hypo- 
 crites.” All these passages, says Irenzeus, ‘demonstrate 
 the independent will of man and the counsel which God 
 conveys to him, it being in his power to forfeit what is 
 good and to bring no small amount of injury and mis- 
 chief. Jf zt were not in our power to do or not to do 
 these things, what reason had the apostle, and much more 
 the Lord Himself, to give us counsel to do some things and 
 abstain from others? Because it is in our power to do 
 good, to act justly, and to work righteousness, and be- 
 cause by excessive negligence we mignt become forgetful, 
 we stand in need of the good counsel which the good God 
 has given us by means of the prophets. very man, 
 inasmuch as heis a man, zs God’s workmanship, though he 
 know not his God. “He makes His sun to shine upon 
 the evil and the good, and sends rain upon the just and 
 the unjust.” He had good will and draws men to good ; 
 but moral good would lose its preciousness, if necessitated. 
 It is His attribute to create, man’s to be created. If, then, 
 thou art God’s workmanship, await the hand of thy 
 Maker which creates everything in due time, so far as 
 
GOD’S SKILL NOT AT FAULT. 29 
 
 thou art concerned. Offer to Him thy heart in a soft and 
 tractable state, and preserve the form in which the Creator 
 has fashioned thee, lest, by becoming hardened, thou lose 
 the impression of His fingers. By faith towards Him 
 and subjection, thou shalt receive His handiwork and 
 shalt be a perfect work of God. If, however, thou being 
 obstinately hardened dost reject the operation of His 
 skill and show thyself ungrateful to Him because thou 
 wert created a man, thou hast at once lost both His 
 workmanship and thy life; but the cause of the imperfec- 
 tion shall be in thee who didst not obey, not in Him 
 who called. The light does not fail because of those 
 who blind themselves, nor does God exercise compulsion 
 upon anyone unwilling to accept the exercise of His 
 _ skill. Those persons who have apostatised from the light 
 
 given by the Father have done so through their own 
 fault, since they have been created free agents and pos- 
 sessed of power over themselves.’ 
 
 ‘It is, therefore,’ says Irenzeus, ‘one and the same 
 God the Father, who kindly confers the light on those 
 who resort to it, but for the despisers and mockers who 
 turn themselves away from the light, has prepared dark- 
 ness suitable to persons who oppose the light. Submis- 
 sion to God is eternal rest ; those, therefore, who remain 
 in apostacy flee from eternal rest and have a habitation 
 in accordance with their fleeing, being sons and angels 
 of the devil, because they do his works. There is one 
 Judge sending both into a fit place, as He says: “Iama 
 jealous God, making peace and also creating evil things” 
 (Isaiah xlv. 7); thus making peace and friendship with 
 those. who repent and turn to Him, but preparing for the 
 impenitent eternal fire, and for those who shun the light 
 outer darkness—which things are indeed evils to those 
 
30 THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK. 
 
 who fall into them (ii. 48, 49). The advent of the Son 
 was for the purpose of judging and separating the 
 believing from the unbelieving ; but on as many as de- 
 part from Him he inflicts that separation from Himself 
 which they have chosen of their own accord, with the loss 
 of those benefits which He has in store. God, however, 
 does not punish them immediately as of Himself, but 
 that punishment falls upon them because they are desti- 
 tute of all that is good. “He that believeth not is con- 
 demned already,” in that he hath separated himself from 
 God (the source of good) of his own accord’ (ii. 129). 
 
 v. According to Irenzeus, God’s first judgments are 
 typical, temporary and more moderate (iv. 28, 1) ; men 
 are not condemned hopelessly on account of Adam’s sin, 
 for without this twofold knowledge of good and evil man 
 would not be man. According to him, that which makes 
 a man’s sins binding and the punishment more enduring 
 is the fact that he apostatises from the light and delibe- 
 rately chooses to follow the evil, after knowing both.! In 
 speaking of the sins of such men as David and Solomon, 
 he says that they were done before our Lord suffered, and 
 that the death of our Lord became the means of healing 
 and remission of sins to such men, but that Christ shall 
 not come again in behalf of those who now commit sin, 
 for death shall no more have dominion over Him; but 
 the Son of man shall come in the glory of the Father, 
 requiring from His stewards and dispensers the money, 
 which He has entrusted to them, with usury, and from 
 those to whom He has given most shall He demand most. 
 
 ‘ The apostles were commissioned to teach men the truth. In this way 
 they had a power of binding and loosing ; for when men rejected the truth 
 and did not obey it, their sins were bound ; but if they obeyed it, their sins 
 were loosed. 
 
 " F st 
 A eS a Peart a WA Meee ON es Ri 
 
SINS OF MEN IN OLD TIME. 31 
 
 Concerning the sins of men committed in old time, 
 Irenzeus has left this remarkable record: of the elders’ 
 teaching: ‘ As I have heard from a certain presbyter who 
 had heard it from those who had seen the apostles and 
 from those who had been their disciples, the punishment 
 declared in Scripture was sufficient for the ancients in 
 regard to what they did without the Spirit’s guidance. 
 For if these men of old time, who preceded us in gifts 
 and for whom the Son of God had not yet suffered, were 
 rendered objects of such disgrace, what shall the men of 
 the present day suffer, who have despised the Lord’s 
 coming and become slaves of their own lusts? And 
 truly the death of our Lord became the means of healing 
 and remission of sins to the former, and we ought not, 
 as this presbyter remarked, to be puffed up or to be too 
 severe upon those of the old time, but ought ourselves 
 to fear, lest perchance after we have come to the know- 
 ledge of Christ, if we do things displeasing to God, we 
 obtain no further forgiveness of sins, but be shut out 
 from His kingdom,’ ! 
 
 ‘The presbyter before mentioned,’ Irenzeus says again, 
 ‘was in the habit of instructing us and saying, With 
 respect to those misdeeds for which the Scriptures them- 
 selves blame the patriarchs and prophets, we ought not 
 to inveigh against them, nor become like Ham, who 
 ridiculed the shame of his father, and so fell under a 
 curse: but with respect to those actions, again, on which 
 the Scriptures pass no censure, but which are simply set 
 down as having occurred . . . we should seek for a type 
 in them,? for not one of these things, which have been 
 
 1 Jyeneus, book iv. ch. xxvii. 1-3. Clark’s edition, i. 466-468. 
 
 2 In reading the Old Testament with boys, it is quite possible for a 
 prudent teacher to suggest to them the secondary meaning of these histories ; 
 
32 THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK. 
 
 set down in Scripture without being condemned, is with- 
 out significance’ (Bk. iv. ch. xxxi. s. 1). He instances 
 the history of Lot and his daughters, who typified one 
 God and Father, and the two churches of the Old and 
 New Testaments. ‘After this fashion also did a (another) 
 presbyter, a disciple of the apostles, reason with respect 
 to the two testaments. For all the apostles taught that 
 there were indeed two testaments among the two 
 peoples, but that the first testament was not given with- 
 out reason, or to no purpose, or in an accidental sort of 
 manner, but that it subdued those to whom it was given 
 to the service of God for their benefit ; and that it exhi- 
 bited a type of heavenly things, inasmuch as man was 
 not yet able to see the things of God through means of 
 immediate vision, . . . and that owr faith might be firmly 
 established.’ 
 
 ‘Inasmuch, then,’ says Irenzus,! ‘as in both testa- 
 ments there is the same righteousness of God displayed 
 when God takes vengeance, in the one case, indeed, typi- 
 cally, temporarily, and even moderately, but in the 
 other, really, enduringly, and more rigidly: for the fire 
 is eternal, and the wrath of God which shall be revealed 
 from heaven from the face of our Lord entails a heavier 
 punishment-on those who incur it: THE ELDERS 
 pointed out that those men are devoid of sense who, 
 arguing from what had happened to those who formerly 
 did not obey God, do endeavour to bring in another 
 Father (one mercilessly just), setting over against (those 
 punishments) what great things the Lord had done at 
 His coming to save those who receive Him, taking com- 
 
 and he will find that any tendency to levity is checked when a boy comes 
 to see they are not common stories. 
 * Book iv. ch. xxviii. s. I, i. 471. 
 
THE BLINDED AND HARDENED. 33 
 
 passion upon them, while they kept silence with regard 
 to His (our Lord’s) judgments, and all those things which 
 shall come upon such as have heard His words and done 
 them not, that it were better for them if they had not been 
 born, and more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah than 
 that city which did not receive the word of His disciples. 
 As our faith has been increased (by revelation) we must 
 
 e€ more circumspect in words and thoughts as well as in 
 actions ; thus the punishment of those who despise His 
 advent, who forget God and are turned backwards, is in- 
 creased and becomes not merely temporal (like that of 
 the Egyptians &c.) but eternal.’ 
 
 ‘But,’ say they, ‘God hardened the heart of Pharaoh 
 and his servants. ‘In the same way, says Irenzus,! 
 ‘the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them 
 that believe not; and inasmuch as men did not think 
 fit to have God in their knowledge, God gave them over 
 to a reprobate mind; for this cause, God sent the work- 
 ‘ing of error to those . . . who believed not the truth 
 but consented to iniquity. ‘If therefore,’ he says, ‘in the 
 present day, God has turned away His face from men of 
 this stamp, what is wonderful if he did give over to their 
 unbelief Pharaoh, who never would have believed, along 
 with those who were with him; and, for the same 
 _ reason, that the Lord spake in parables and brought 
 blindness upon Israel, that, seeing, they might not 
 see, since he knew the (spirit of) unbelief in them?’ 
 _ Irenzeus labours to show that God was in the previous 
 dispensation working on men for their benefit; that all 
 men are His workmanship, for He has made them and 
 sends His rain on all; that men are all of the same 
 
 Me BK TVs Glia Xe Exe 
 4-2 Cor-avi 4} Rom.-1.' 23.7 -2 Thessvily-11; 
 
 D 
 
34. THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK. 
 
 nature, that the cause of some men’s condemnation, 
 while others receive testimony of ‘their choice of good 
 in general and of persevering therein,’ is their being 
 created with independent wills having power to hold 
 fast that which is excellent and good, and power also to 
 cast it from them and not to do it (Bk. iv. 37, 2). He 
 labours to prove that the God of the Old Testament was 
 not mercilessly just; on the contrary, that the vengeance 
 inflicted before Christ was more of a typical, temporal, 
 and even moderate character; and that the revelation of 
 God in Jesus Christ is not mere goodness irrespective of 
 men’s conduct (to those whom He was represented as 
 calling out of the kingdom of this exclusively just God), 
 for then ‘His goodness is defective inasmuch as He 
 does not save all’ (Bk. iv. chap. 32, s. 2). 
 
 vi. Real, enduring, and more rigid judgments follow 
 chastisements. In the parallel between His own work and 
 the work of the Father (John v. 17-31), our Lord speaks of 
 Himself as giving lifein a way analogous to that in which 
 the Father bestows it, while final judgment is committed 
 to the Son. God the Father is the author of our natural 
 lives, and in Him we live, move, and have our being. His 
 first dispensation promised, in an outward and typical 
 way, a long and prosperous life to those who kept His 
 commandments. But in the kingdom of God’s Son, 
 though godliness has still the promise of the life that now 
 is, still the peculiar rewards which it promises to obe- 
 
 dience and subjection to God are spiritual; increased | 
 
 knowledge of God, peace of mind, and that joy of inward 
 satisfaction which nothing can take away. The first 
 dispensation punished transgressors in a way terrible to 
 the eye of sense ; but this is but a small matter in com- 
 parison with those spiritual evils which befall men who 
 
TYPICAL AND TEMPORAL. 35 
 
 have tasted of the good word and the powers of the world 
 to come, and yet apostatise from the faith by living an 
 ungodly life. The punishments which fall upon men 
 in times of ignorance are more of the nature of the 
 chastisements of a father; they serve to teach men the 
 consequences of evil, and so eventually to bless men in 
 turning them away from their iniquities. The Father’s 
 judgments were thus more of a temporal and typical 
 character; but the things which affect a man’s eternal peace 
 and rest are those which are habitually practised, or not 
 practised, in the presence of the truth, and they are moreof 
 a lasting character. By habitually disobeying the truth, 
 a man may become so habituated to evil that he thinks 
 little about it; he forgets our Lord’s warning to walk while 
 _ he has the light, and darkness overtakes him (John xii. 53): 
 When the end comes like a flash of lightning, thought 
 can no longer be shut out. When they say peace and 
 safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them . . 
 
 and they shall in no wise escape. The judgment of the 
 last day is indissolubly bound up with the verdict of 
 conscience. If our hearts condemn us not, then have we 
 confidence towards God ; but if our hearts condemn us 
 of having habitually misused God’s gifts instead of ren- 
 dering Him a rational service, if all our treasure be still 
 in this life, who shall comfort us in those dark days 
 which precede our Lord’s second coming? Will not the 
 knowledge of the truth, which we have had, rise up to 
 torment us? In those days, men shall seek death and 
 shall not find it, and shall desire to die, and death shall 
 flee from them. It is our Lord who comes down from 
 heaven like a mighty angel, crying with a loud voice, as 
 when a lion roareth, and swearing by Him that liveth 
 
 for ever and ever that there shall be an end to delay, 
 D2 
 
36 THE PREPARATORY GROUNDWORK. 
 
 a conclusion. It was reserved for the Son of man to 
 bring in that burning light of truth which should finish 
 the mystery, as God spake to His servants the prophets 
 (Rev. x. 1-6). In this way ‘the Father doth not judge 
 any one, but hath committed judgment altogether to the 
 Son’ (John v. 22). 
 
 Are we then to presume that this eternal destiny is 
 determined through our own wilful disregard of the truth, 
 or on account of Adam’s first sin? Israel was enjoined 
 by Moses to look upon God’s chastisements as those of 
 a father ; he was not to harbour such unkind thoughts 
 of God as to imagine that God had brought him out into 
 the wilderness to do him evil. On the contrary, God 
 had humbled him and caused him to suffer hunger that 
 he and we might know God’s way of life (Deut. viii. 
 1-7). And shall we imagine that, because of Adam’s 
 sin, God means to bring nothing but evil on many of us 
 by the painful experiences we still have in this wilder- 
 ness life? Shall we harbour the suspicion that perhaps 
 God hated us before we were born; that perhaps the 
 troubles of this life are meant not to lead us to repentance, 
 but to punish us for Adam’s sin in this life as well as in 
 that which is to come? In this case, final judgment 
 would have been settled irrespective of any revelation 
 of truth subsequent to Adam, irrespective of any lessons 
 which might be derived from the first experience of 
 actions ; our trials in the wilderness of this life would 
 not be the chastisements of a father, but the judgments of 
 a God who has forgotten to be gracious tous ; we should 
 have been subjected to the bondage and corruption of 
 this mortal life, without our own consent and without 
 any hope. Shall we not rather judge that God in His 
 goodness and longsuffering was and is correcting men by 
 
 A 
 
MAGISTRATES.: ao 
 
 the first consequences of sin, that they may learn the 
 nature of good and evil? Thus to Israel it was said : 
 ‘Thine own wickedness shall correct thee and thine own 
 backsliding shall reprove thee ; know therefore and see. 
 that it is an evil and a bitter thing that thou hast for- 
 saken the Lord thy God and that my fear is not in thee, 
 saith the Lord of Hosts’ (Jer. ii. 19). And so in all 
 men’s experience, more or less, sin manifests its evil 
 nature by creating misery of mind, pain and disease of 
 body; if persevered in, it enslaves men by evil habits, 
 debases their inclinations and stupifies their under- 
 standings; it stirs up strifes and wars, which create 
 other terrible evils; and it corrupts society, so that it 
 becomes unfit for liberty and intolerant of what is good. 
 From the very beginning, evil manifested its evil nature, 
 by hating those whose lives and conversation were a 
 reproach to it. Cain slew his brother Abel, because his 
 own works were evil and his brother’s righteous. There 
 was a law of the working out of evil in society ; and our 
 Lord voluntarily became subject to this law. 
 
 DIFFERENT ELEMENTS OF PREPARATION. 
 
 I, EVERY FATHERHOOD is named of God (Eph. iii. 15). 
 In the family, the first beginnings of virtue have their 
 rise; on this foundation, said Dr. Vaughan, the Church is 
 built. Magistrates were appointed to check the excess of 
 wickedness among the nations. The civil powers, which 
 governed the world, were said by Paul to be ordained 
 by God (Rom. xiii. 1). Society, if very corrupt, may be 
 punished through its rulers ; though even bad rule may 
 be better than no rule, and tyranny may serve to school 
 lawless men, who would trample upon or abuse milder 
 
38 THE PREPARATORY ELEMENTS. 
 
 forms of government. Freedom can only be beneficial, 
 or even possible, where there is a leaven of mutual good 
 feeling among the different classes of society—where 
 there is a certain amount of goodness and forbearance. 
 The cities of Greece and Rome herself had fought man- 
 fully for freedom; the period when those cities were free 
 was marked by deeds of genius and heroism; but it was 
 also marked by incessant strife. Freedom could not last 
 long, for the lawless forces in society were too strong. 
 Nothing short of despotism could keep the fabric of that 
 ancient society together. Now the loss of political or 
 social liberty must have been a bitter draught to many 
 noble spirits; and many such found consolation. in 
 Christianity, which made them citizens of a heavenly 
 country (Phil. iii. 20), and which turned slaves into free- 
 men of the Lord, who would Himself reward them fer all 
 their labours done in His service. As some compensa- 
 tion for her oppressions, Rome gave the nations a regu- 
 larly developed law, and prevented those petty wars 
 between cities which form the darkest page in the his- 
 tory of Greece. It is easy to see in the political state of 
 the Roman world a preparation for Christianity. 
 
 IJ. Gop’s WITNESS AND ITS RECORD IN LITERA- 
 TURE.— Great plagues fall on those nations which forsake 
 God ; but God has never left Himself without a witness 
 that He has no pleasure in men’s misery, and that He is not 
 indifferent to the wrongs of the oppressed. Men receive 
 good at the hand of God as well as chastisement, which 
 ‘seems for the present to be no matter of joy but of grief ;’ 
 for God gives men fruitful seasons, filling their hearts with 
 food and gladness. God has also written His law on their 
 hearts and on their consciences; and the forebodings of 
 a judgment to come could make even an unrighteous 
 
GOD’S WITNESS. 39 
 
 ruler like Felix tremble. The tyranny of evil powers, 
 no doubt, shook rudely the faith of those who, in the 
 midst of the darkness, clung to this witness of God’s 
 goodness and just dealing; but still the literature of 
 Greece and Rome shows this light dimly burning even 
 in the darkest periods. We may instance the Axtigone 
 of Sophocles, founded on a legendary story. The tyrant 
 Kreon had promulgated a decree that no one should 
 bury Antigone’s brother on pain of being buried alive. 
 According to the belief of the Greeks, this would have 
 occasioned a long period of trouble and disquiet to the 
 departed spirit; and Antigone, accordingly, performed 
 the rites of burial to her brother, for which transgression 
 she was buried alive. When Kreon asks how she could 
 
 _ dare to disobey his decrees, Antigone replies : 
 
 It was not Zeus that heralded these laws, 
 
 Nor justice, helpmate of the gods below ; 
 
 Nor did I deem a mortal’s law enough 
 
 To set aside the unwritten law divine, 
 
 Which binds us always and which none can change ; 
 Nor first appeared to-day nor yesterday, 
 
 But no one knows its date of origin. 
 
 Shall men persuade me then to violate 
 
 Heaven’s great commands and make the gods my foes? 
 Without thy mandate, death had one day come, 
 
 For who shall ’scape it ? and if now I fall 
 
 A little sooner, ’tis the thing I wish. 
 
 To those who live in misery like me, 
 
 Believe me, king, ’tis happiness to die. 
 
 But to my brother, had I left the rites 
 
 Of sepulture unpaid, I then indeed 
 
 Had been most wretched. 
 
 The evils which befell Antigone were, according to the 
 legend, the working out of a curse which lay on the 
 house of Labdacus; but Sophocles derives even from 
 
40 THE PREPARATORY ELEMENTS. 
 
 such a story the moral that men are thereby ‘ warned to 
 learn justice and not to despise the gods.’ ! We find 
 this moral in the concluding lines of the Antigone :— 
 
 Wisdom alone is man’s true happiness ; 
 We are not to dispute the will of heaven ; 
 For ever are the boastings of the proud 
 By the just gods repaid, and man at last 
 Is taught to fear their anger and be wise. 
 
 The Jupiter of A®schylus, however, is a much more 
 jealous and revengeful being than that of Sophocles. 
 The Greeks thought that their gods were jealous of 
 human aggrandisement and of its haughty spirit. 
 
 Juvenal, in his thirteenth satire, gives a powerful 
 picture of the moral consequences of evil. The following 
 lines are a summary of the sense. They cannot fail to 
 show that, even amidst heathen darkness, some men 
 could discern the hand of a moral Governor. 
 
 The pleasure men expect their crimes will bring 
 Is poisoned by the insulted conscience’ sting. 
 The traitorous wretch who robs the entrusted chest, 
 Cares not for frauds which none but gods attest ; 
 Dares all the punishment the gods prepare, 
 Drags you before their shrine to hear him swear. 
 There are who think that all is ruled by chance, 
 Who see no power divine but nature’s dance ; 
 These boldly in the temple’s precincts stand, 
 And touch all altars with intrepid hand. 
 Some deem that gods exist who punish lies, 
 Yet day by day new perjuries devise. 
 ‘The gods,’ they think, ‘may pardon or forget, 
 We'll take our chance, and we are safe as yet. 
 Some villains writhe on cross, some wear a crown, 
 Fate’s beam decides it, moving up or down. 
 But should the gods deal out their stripes to all, 
 Their wrath is slow, perhaps long hence shall fall.’ 
 
 1 Discite justitiam moniti et non spernere divos,—VI1RGIL. 
 
HEATHEN RELIGIONS. 41 
 
 ‘Your goods,’ they swear, ‘ were ne’er to us consigned, 
 Or else let Jove or Isis strike us blind !’ 
 
 Wilt thou not, long-enduring Jove, reply, 
 
 Move those brass lips of thine, confute their lie ? 
 If not, why offer incense at thy shrine, 
 
 The pluck of oxen or the cawl of swine? 
 
 But think! the anguished spirit mars all joys ; 
 
 In sleep, the consciousness of guilt annoys 
 
 The wretch who bears that witness in his breast, 
 Which haunts by day and nightly breaks his rest. 
 Thus guilty men shall not escape the curse ; 
 
 Not Rhadamanthus could devise a worse. 
 
 These, these be they whom secret terrors scare, 
 When muttered thunder shakes the lurid air ; 
 Where’er the lightning strikes, the flash is thought 
 Judicial fire, with Heaven’s high vengeance fraught. 
 If pain or fever should their sleep prevent, 
 
 They think some god incensed his bow has bent. 
 They offer victims ! but farewell to peace ; 
 
 Ne’er on this earth their souls’ alarms shall cease. 
 And who can fix the barrier to his sins, 
 
 Or knows their last extreme when he begins? 
 Thus, by sure steps, the traitor shall pursue 
 
 His desperate course, until he finds his due 
 
 In dungeon or in exile ; thus you’ll find 
 
 That the just gods be neither deaf nor blind. 
 
 III. THE EARLY WORLD-RELIGIONS.—The early 
 religions of Greece and Rome showed a belief in God’s 
 goodness and retributive justice. The gods, it was be- 
 lieved, had given men corn and wine, and had taught 
 them the arts. The furies tormented those who were 
 very guilty, even in this life; and after death they 
 imagined that men were judged in the infernal regions, 
 and rewarded according to their deeds. The wrath 
 of the gods, however, might in some way be appeased 
 by sacrifices. The priests were supposed to be ac- 
 quainted with the mysteries of worship, but their 
 
42 THE -PREPARATORY -ELEMENTS. 
 
 power was, in most instances at least, founded to some 
 extent on falsehood and imposture. Are we then to 
 suppose that even these powers were ordained by God? 
 Or are we to believe, like the ancient Persians, that 
 there is a rival and independent power of evil? The 
 word of the Lord to Cyrus king of the Persians declared 
 to him that there was one God. ‘I am the Lord, and 
 there is none else ; I form the light and create darkness ; 
 I make peace and create evil. I the Lord do all these 
 things’ (Is. xlv. 5, 7). When the centurion spoke of 
 diseases as being subject to our Lord, and as doing his 
 commands like soldiers, our Lord spoke of his faith in 
 terms of the highest commendation. Not only diseases, 
 but even the demon powers bring about His will, if 
 they do so unwittingly. The heathen priests, no doubt, 
 maintained their power over men by means of mystery, 
 deception, and superstitious awe; but among lawless 
 men and in times of ignorance, any rule may be better 
 than lawless anarchy and confusion. Even a supersti- 
 tious faith. might be better than no faith. The gods 
 also were not all equally bad. Jeroboam’s idolatry, for 
 instance, was not so bad as that of Ahab; and we know 
 that some of these terrible forms of heathenism were 
 sent upon the Jews as a sore chastisement. Thus the 
 word of the Lord spoke to them by Ezekiel the prophet : 
 ‘Because they had not executed my judgments, but had 
 despised my statutes, and had polluted my sabbaths 
 (the object of which was mercy), and their eyes were 
 after their fathers’ idols; wherefore I gave them also sta- 
 tutes which were not good, and judgments whereby they 
 should not live ; and I polluted them in their own gifts, 
 in that they caused to pass through the fire all their 
 firstborn, that I might make them desolate, to the end 
 
 ——* ws ia_s er > 
 I a | ee 2 te Se ES Fe thee 
 
 oa 
 
THE EARLY WORLD-RELIGIONS. 43 
 
 that they might know that I am the Lord.’ Accord- 
 ingly, we learn from the testimony of the town clerk of 
 Ephesus that Paul and his companion did not blaspheme 
 these heathen dignities (Acts xix. 37). Even Michael 
 the archangel durst not bring a railing accusation 
 against the prince of the demons, but said ‘The Lord 
 rebuke thee.’ Our Lord would in due time rebuke these 
 powers ruling in the-darkness, and His truth would take 
 the place of their ‘malice and hypocrisy. But though 
 He warns His disciples against the leaven of evil, yet, 
 before the coming of the truth, if men had been left 
 without anything to excite fear of the divine anger, and 
 without any palpable exhibition of the presence of 
 supernatural powers, they would have sunk into grosser 
 evils and deeper degradation. Thus God winked at or 
 overlooked many abuses done in times of ignorance 
 (Acts xvii. 30). For instance, when Naaman told 
 Elisha that he was under the necessity of worshipping 
 on state occasions, with his master, in the house of 
 RKimmon, and begged that he might be pardoned for 
 this thing, Elisha the prophet bade him go in peace. 
 St. Paul represents men’s subjection to this vain worship 
 of gods which do not exist as part of an elementary 
 discipline, which he calls ¢he elements or rudiments of this 
 world ;* and not only so, but he classifies this bondage 
 with the subjection of the Jewish nation to a law which 
 was to pass away—to tutors and governors, till the time 
 appointed by the Father. When the Galatians, con- 
 verted by St. Paul’s preaching from heathenism, began 
 immediately to abandon the freedom of Christian ser- 
 vice, and were falling back again on the ceremonial 
 service of the law of Moses, Paul wrote to them: ‘ How- 
 
 The expression occurs—Gal. iv. 3, 9; Col. ii. 8, 20. 
 
44 THE PREPARATORY ELEMENTS. 
 
 beit, at that time, knowing not God, ye served gods 
 which by nature exist not. But now that ye know God, 
 or rather are known of Him, how is it that ye turn back 
 to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire 
 Jrom the beginning again to be in bondage. Ye are 
 observing days and months and times and years’—al- 
 luding to the ordinances of the Jewish law by which 
 
 they imagined to make themselves perfect (Gal. iv. 
 
 8-10). ‘Are ye so foolish ?’ he asks, ‘having begun in 
 the Spirit, are ye now made perfect in the flesh ?’ 
 
 IV. PHILOSOPHY.—Paul in his speech on Mars’ Hill 
 represents God as having settled the nations in their dif- 
 ferent countries that they might feel after God, if haply 
 they might find Him; though He is not far from any one 
 of us, for in Him we live and move and have our being.! 
 Philosophical studies must have served to discipline the 
 human mind and so prepare it to receive intelligently the 
 revelation of the Son of God. As the old traditional 
 legends of the gods lost their hold on the more en- 
 lightened of the heathen, philosophy came to take their 
 place. Men attempted to explain the mysteries of 
 existence and the problems of good and evil by physical 
 speculations about the absolute nature of matter and 
 spirit, or about the disconnection of the finite from the in- 
 finite—speculations which are classed by St. Paul among 
 the rudiments of the world (Col. ii. 8). One cannot 
 wonder that such attempts to comprehend God were 
 very conflicting. But amidst the discords of philoso- 
 phical systems and the variety of religious beliefs which 
 came to meet in the Roman world, many were ready to 
 abandon as hopeless the question, What is truth ? 
 
 1 Compare Seneca’s well-known passage : God is near thee, with thee, 
 within thee, Zp. ad Lucil. 41. 
 
THE MISSION: OF SOCRATES. 45 
 
 SOCRATES.—At Athens, the necessity of public 
 speaking and argumentation had called into existence a 
 class of teachers called Sophists, who trained their pupils 
 to reason as if there were no fixed principles of morality 
 and truth, but merely expediency, opinion, and the law 
 of the strongest. Reason, in its first reaction against old 
 creeds, became worldly and heartless; the sophists trained 
 men for public life by teaching them how to prove the 
 worse to be the better reason, and how to delude their 
 hearers by a show of knowledge without the reality. 
 Gorgias called in question the reality of all existence; 
 and Protagoras taught that there is no real truth beyond 
 the man’s own ideas.! It was the high vocation of 
 Socrates to oppose, as it first appeared, this worldly and 
 heartless tendency of thought, and to awaken in men 
 higher aspirations, which, in the dissolution of the old, 
 might prepare the way for a more glorious future. Ac- 
 cording to Neander,? it is pre-eminently true that so far 
 as the manifestation of Christ to the old world is con- 
 cerned, the Platonic Socrates, like John, was a forerunner 
 of Christ. Plato, his great disciple, employs, in his dia- 
 logues, the name of Socrates as spokesman, putting into 
 his mouth opinions which, in some of these treatises 
 (the Apology, the Kriton, and the Phzdon), appear to 
 have been those of Socrates himself; while the political 
 and social views, the theories of creation and of ideas, 
 seem to have been those of Plato. Socrates,says Grote, 
 during the middle and latter parts of his life, devoted 
 himself exclusively to the self-imposed task of a public 
 mentor and censor of morals. He frequented the public 
 
 1 The maxim of Protagoras was : Man is the measure of all things. 
 
 2 In this account of the ancient Philosophies, as well as the early 
 speculations of the Gnostics, the first volumes of Neander’s Church History 
 have furnished many ideas, 
 
46 THE PREPARATORY ELEMENTS. 
 
 places and talked with everyone, rich or poor, who sought 
 to address him, cross-questioning them on subjects they 
 pretended to know. He looked at all knowledge from 
 the point of human practice: the gods, he believed, had 
 assigned this to man as his proper sphere, managing all 
 upon intelligible principles (except in the most critical 
 junctures), so that everyone, who chose to learn, might 
 learn, while those who took no pains to learn suffered. 
 He was incessantly occupied in discussing the questions 
 ‘What is piety? What is temperance?! What things 
 are just, honourable, and courageous, and what things are 
 their opposites? What are the duties of a citizen, of a 
 magistrate?’ and such practical questions. His mode 
 of showing people their ignorance, and his fidelity in 
 exposing abuses, made him many enemies. He was 
 accused of corrupting the youth and of introducing new 
 gods—for Socrates believed himself to have received a 
 mission from the gods to spend his days in this way ; 
 and he said that he had been accustomed to hear a 
 divine voice within him acting in the way of restraint, 
 but never in the way of instigation. Having answered 
 these accusations, Socrates went on in his defence to say: 
 ‘No man knows what death is, yet men fear it as if it 
 were the worst of evils; and this is just a case of that 
 worst of evils—a conceit of knowing what you do not 
 really know. I know nothing about Hades, but I know 
 
 well that disobedience to a person better than myself | 
 
 (namely to the divine monitor) is both an evil and a 
 shame; nor will I embrace certain evil, to escape evil 
 
 which, for aught I know, may be a good. Perhaps you — 
 
 may have expected that I should do as others in less 
 
 | Swppoodtyn, sober-mindedness (wise prudence and control of the pas- 
 sions) was, according to Socrates, necessary to happiness. 
 
 ray 4} 
 
SOCRATES AND PLATO. 47 
 
 4 
 
 dangerous trials have done—that I should weep and beg 
 and entreat for my life, that I should bring forward my 
 children and relatives to do the same. Itisa disgrace 
 to Athens that her distinguished men lower themselves 
 by such mean and cowardly supplications. You have 
 sworn to follow your convictions in judging according 
 to the laws, and it is your duty to do so,and not to make 
 the laws bend to your partiality.. Do not therefore 
 require in me proceedings dishonourable to me and 
 criminal and impious in regard to you. I leave to you and 
 the god to decide as may turn out best for you and me.’ 
 
 Sentence of death was unjustly pronounced against 
 him, but Socrates had to remain in prison thirty days, 
 till the return of the sacred ship from Delos. His friends 
 and companions had free access to him ; and Krito even 
 arranged a plan for his escape, which was only prevented 
 by the refusal of Socrates to become partner in any 
 breach of the law. His days in prison were spent in 
 discourses respecting ethical and human subjects, show- 
 ing his unabated interest in the improvement of men and 
 society, and his belief in the immortality of the soul. 
 His serene and even playful equanimity, amidst the un- 
 controllable emotions of his friends, proved his genuine 
 persuasion that the sentence of death was no calamity 
 to him. The hemlock produced its effects by steps far 
 more exempt from suffering than natural death would 
 probably have caused. And so far was he from bringing 
 a railing accusation against the gods of his country that 
 just before he lapsed into a state of insensibility, he 
 remembered a religious debt: ‘ Krito,’ he said, ‘we owe 
 a cock to A®sculapius; discharge the debt and by no 
 means omit it.’ 
 
 PLATONISM. 
 
 Plato was much more of a speculative 
 
48 THE PREPARATORY ELEMENTS. 
 
 theorist and model reformer than his more practical 
 predecessor. His philosophy, however, must have had a 
 material influence in preparing the way fora new deve- 
 lopment by suggesting ideas which Christianity perfected 
 in a higher sense. According to the Platonic philosophy, 
 God was the Creator and Father of the Universe, whom 
 it is difficult to find ; and, when found, it is impossible to 
 make known to all—the only true Being, transcending, by 
 His unchangeableness, that which is produced and ever 
 changing. From him proceed the spirits who animate 
 the worlds, the gods who are born. In this way Plato 
 endeavoured to reduce Polytheism to a higher unity. 
 The material world is the source of imperfection, our 
 sensations are not real knowledge but delusion ; only 
 ideas are the shadows and patterns of something real and 
 perfect. The soul is the animating principle by which 
 the Deity, when He had brought the world out of the dis- 
 order and confusion of unreason, communicated intelli- 
 gence to it, fashioning it after the pattern of eternal 
 ideas. The ideas are of the nature of recollections, being 
 eternal; but the multitude can never rise beyond the 
 stage of opinion where the true is necessarily mixed with 
 the false. Corruption is rather a physical than a moral 
 debasement ; for no one willingly chooses evil for its own 
 sake. The humours and distempers of the body pro- 
 duce discomposure in the soul, destroying its internal 
 harmony, unduly magnifying pleasures and pains; the 
 mind becomes diseased analogously to the body ; hence 
 arise folly, madness, ignorance. This world is in a 
 constant state of flux ; it is not, therefore, perfect accord- 
 ing to the idea, but it is doing its best by its constant 
 flux to seek after perfection. So the human mind with 
 its constant flux of passions, perpetually craving after 
 
PLATONISM AND STOICISM, 49 
 
 something and not satisfied, is showing its own divinity 
 by its sense of want. As corruption is the result of a 
 process, so restoration is also to be effected by restrain- 
 ing and mortifying the passions. One lifetime, how- 
 _ ever, is not enough. We pre-existed, and after death 
 our souls continue to exist. The guarantee of our 
 immortality is the eternity of ideas; while, according to 
 Christianity, this pledge is the formation of a moral cha- 
 racter which loves and serves that which is good: the 
 gift of the Holy Spirit is the earnest of our inheritance. 
 _ Even if we attain a life wholly above sense and divine, 
 still after a certain time, according to Plato, this life 
 must yield to the force of destiny and plunge once more 
 into the cycle of earthly existence. Such an immortality, 
 however, could not satisfy the desires of mankind. ‘It 
 is, therefore, easily conceivable,’ says Neander, ‘what 
 power the proclamation of the eternal life, in the 
 Christian sense, must have had over a want thus excited 
 _and left unsatisfied. Platonism also awakened many 
 other ideas closely allied to Christianity, as, for example, 
 the idea of a redemption from the unreason or blind 
 _ power of nature, and of a divine life beyond the reach of 
 the natural powers. But even that which is best fitted 
 to form a preparatory position may be converted into 
 one of fierce hostility, when it attempts to maintain the 
 old (philosophical, aristocratical principle) against the 
 higher principle which has revealed itself.’ 
 STOICISM.—The Jupiter of Stoicism was the being 
 who devours his own offspring, the Universal Spirit from 
 whom all individual existence has flowed, and into whom 
 after certain periods it returns. Platonism represented 
 man and his thoughts as rays of light which existed only in 
 connection with the great Source, and which showed their 
 E | | 
 
50 THE PREPARATORY ELEMENTS. 
 
 divine origin by asense of want of God or by the 
 ceaseless effort made to reach something to satisfy them. 
 But Stoicism represented man as an independent spark 
 of the divine, and claimed for him, as long as he pos- 
 sessed his separate existence,an entire equality with 
 Jupiter himself. He was master of his own life, and 
 might take it when he liked. Virtue was the only real 
 good ; but as it was impossible for them to deny that 
 the objects of the desires and affections are preferable, 
 the Stoics were led to teach a double morality, one 
 from inferior and mixed motives, and another which 
 consisted in acts done from mere reverence for morality, 
 unaided by feelings, all which they classed among the 
 enemies of reason and the disturbers of the human soul. 
 The wise man showed his independence and his self- 
 sufficiency by his indifference to all feelings. In this 
 way, it might prepare the soil for the more rational self- 
 devotion of Christianity ; for men who had no depth 
 of soil might embrace Christianity, but soon became 
 offended because of temptation or persecution. Again, 
 according te the Stoics, the word of Jupiter signified 
 
 foresight, fate, the unchangeable law of the ‘universe, @ 
 which all must obey. Evil itself, according to this law, 
 
 is necessary for the good of the whole, for without it 
 there could be no virtue, no patience, no triumph over 
 evil. The wise man calmly contemplates the game, 
 cheerfully surrenders his individual existence to the good 
 of the whole, and submits to that iron necessity which 
 decrees his annihilation. To know that a thing is, ought 
 to satisfy us that it ought tobe so. This idea, however, 
 of attaining perfection by repressing all human feelings 
 
 and aspirations in this unnatural way, could not satisfy — 
 
 human wants; the void it necessarily left might prepare 
 
 4 
 
EPICUREANISM AND SCEPTICISM. 51 
 
 men to believe in the God who transfigures and glorifies 
 but leaves inviolate every human feeling, who gives 
 every individual a distinct duty and a distinct end to 
 fulfil, who governs all with paternal love, reconciling the 
 good of the whole with the good of the individual. It 
 also prepared the way for Christianity by the idea, how- 
 ever pantheistically conceived, of one God, | 
 EPICUREANISM AND SCEPTICISM.—With the pro; 
 gress of luxury in the Roman world, the decline of the 
 old civic virtues, and the portentous growth of moral 
 depravity and abject servitude, were connected two de- 
 velopments of thought corresponding to such a distem- 
 pered state of morality. One of these was Epicureanism, 
 which makes pleasure the highest end of life ; and the 
 other was scepticism, like that of Lucretius or Lucian, 
 which denies all objective truth or ridicules al] human 
 belief in God. Epicurus taught that we are placed in 
 this world to seek our own happiness or good. Being 
 himself a man of an amiable and excellent character, 
 he taught that our happiness or good is to be found in 
 a calm and tranquil life undisturbed by passion, and 
 that it is bound up with the happiness of the society 
 in which we live. But what philosophers may teach with 
 zmpunity to themselves, often becomes, in the minds of the 
 uneducated or half-educated, JSraught with pernicious con- 
 sequences ; thus his followers too often judged that their 
 happiness lay in practising a profligate and dissolute life. 
 Epicurus also taught that the gods were perfectly happy, 
 impassible beings, incapable of being affected by the 
 good or evil of this world and taking no active interest 
 in human affairs. This was just the sort of God which 
 the debased tone of the Roman world,' at the time 
 
 * See Neander's account in his Church fTistory, vol. i. 
 2 
 
52 THE PREPARATORY ELEMENTS. 
 
 we speak of, required, if they did not prefer to ignore 
 his existence altogether. But when this infidelity was 
 widely diffused, the Roman world was also groaning 
 under the loss of liberty and the merciless despotism of 
 tyrants. Men compared these times of public misfor- 
 tune with the good old days, when men believed in the 
 old gods without any doubt. The decline of this old 
 faith seemed the cause of the evil, and, besides, the mind 
 of man is pained when left in the uncertainty of doubt. 
 Hence arose a reaction. After the natural conviction 
 was gone, a sort of artificial faith was revived, and in 
 this state of mind there was a tendency to fanaticism. 
 The more mysterious and enigmatical the practice was, 
 the more readily it found admittance. Unbelief and 
 superstition are two distempered developments of the 
 same worldly spirit which either suppresses all religious 
 feeling, or, blending itself with it, gives it a meaning 
 of its own. Plutarch, a wise and devout heathen of the 
 Neo-platonist School, wrote a treatise concerning these 
 two tendencies, atheism and superstition, treating them 
 both as mistakes of the understanding, not as the ex- 
 pression of a moral state. On the one hand, the infidel 
 “leaves himself neither joy nor hope, neither courageous 
 cheerfulness in prosperity, nor in adversity access to the 
 Divine Being’ On the other hand, to the superstitious 
 man every little evilis magnified by the scaring spectres 
 of his anxiety. He looks upon himself as a man whom — 
 the gods hate and pursue with their anger. He employs 
 no remedial means lest he should seem to fight against 
 them. The physician, the consoling friend, are driven 
 
 away. He rolls himself naked in the dirt, confessing _ 
 
 this and that sin: that he has eaten or drunk something 
 wrong, that he has gone some way oF other which the © 
 
PLUTARCH ON SUPERSTITION, 53 
 
 Divine Being does not approve of. The superstitious 
 men are most wretched when they approach the gods 
 in worship ; they fear them and yet they fly to them for 
 succour. ‘They pray to them and yet complain of them. 
 . They would willingly disbelieve and rid themselves. of 
 this fear, which is no trifling burden to them, but they 
 are too weak to believe of the gods as they desire to 
 do.! In like manner, Plutarch says that bolder and 
 acuter minds were hurried by the prevailing false notions 
 of the gods into unbelief. He thinks that an intellec- 
 tual process was all that was necessary to recover both 
 these classes. He did not seem to have perceived, says 
 Neander, that both these disorders of the spiritual life 
 have their proper seat in the direction of the moral 
 affections, in the disposition ; that the intellectual error 
 might be merely a symptom or a reflection of the super- 
 stitious man’s own moral state. The deeply felt need 
 implied in these states of mind might, however, lead 
 men to embrace Christianity, if the satisfaction, uncon- 
 sciously sought for, were presented to them. To coun- 
 teract infidelity, Plutarch philosophised on the old 
 superstitions, employing the doctrine of demons, as in- 
 termediate beings between gods and men, to defend the 
 popular traditions and, at the same time, to vindicate 
 the dignity of the gods. These demons, he taught, were 
 of different grades, according as the divine element or 
 the impure, sensuous element, derived from matter, 
 predominated. In the latter case, these demons were 
 malignant beings with violent passions and desires, de- 
 lighting in bloody sacrifices, and endeavouring to lead 
 men away from the worship of the Supreme God and 
 the purer subordinate gods, by unworthy stories propa- 
 1 See Neander’s Ch. Hist. i, 18, 19. 
 
54 THE PREPARATORY ELEMENTS. 
 
 gated among the multitude. But we are told by Dio- 
 nysius of Halicarnassus that ‘only a few shared this 
 philosophical view of religion ; that the many understood 
 those mythical stories in the worst possible way, either 
 despising the gods for taking an interest in such pitiable 
 affairs, or abandoning themselves to the worst abuses 
 
 because they found the same practised among their gods.’ 
 
 It is easy to trace the roots of many heresies in the 
 Church to these early speculations, and to understand the 
 warning of Paul: ‘Beware lest any man lead you cap- 
 tive through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the 
 tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and 
 not after Christ. Our Lord is the only mediator, who 
 as man reveals to us the nature of God; and in Him 
 evil had no place. Thus, it is easy to see how even 
 such explanations as those of Plutarch might assist the 
 Christians in their attacks on the popular religion. ‘But 
 if that which is preparatory fails to understand its true 
 relation to the higher stage which follows, it invariably 
 becomes an opponent.’ (Neander i. 50.) 
 
 V. JUDAISM.—It was especially the object of the law 
 of Moses and the Old Testament dispensation to prepare 
 men for the coming of Christ. The old religious ser- 
 vice and even the history of God’s chosen people sym- 
 bolised the advent of the Messiah and the glorified state 
 of the world which was to follow; and to their ancient 
 prophets, the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, testi- 
 fied of ‘the sufferings of Christ and of the glory that 
 should follow.’ It was, however, revealed to them that 
 not unto themselves but unto those that followed they 
 did minister the things revealed by Christianity (1 Peter 
 1, 11, 12). The very darkness and mystery of the sym- 
 
 bolic worship must have suggested to many of the wor- 
 
 t 
 = i f 
 A a eee Sia ee ~~ s 
 
JUDAISM. 55 
 
 shippers that this was not the perfect thing, not the rest 
 which remains for the people of God. The deeds of the 
 law were certain sacrifices, washings and offerings, sym- 
 bolical of the perfect obedience of the Second Man from 
 heaven. Men were not justified so as to be absolutely 
 meritorious by the symbolic deeds of the law. On the 
 contrary, the imperfection of their obedience was destined 
 to bring prominently into view that inward conscious- 
 ness of schism and disorder, which formed so prominent 
 a phase in the later development of the heathen world, 
 and to create a longing in the minds of the faithful for 
 the deliverance which was symbolised. Men were com- 
 manded to worship God with their whole heart and soul, ~ 
 to love their neighbours as themselves, and not to covet 
 or desire what was forbidden. But the manifestation of 
 God was then anticipatory, dark and feeble, and could, 
 at the utmost, develop but very imperfectly those affec- 
 tions towards Him, which would expel the lust or desire 
 after what is forbidden and awaken in men a spirit like 
 that of God Himself. They could but very imperfectly 
 enter into the meaning of their ordinances ; and how 
 could they love an ordinance so long as they did not 
 understand its meaning, so long as it was a dead letter ? 
 The living God did not directly manifest Himself, but 27- 
 directly through Moses and symbol ; the commandment 
 was written on tables of stone, that is, it was outside of 
 man’s nature. But man is only moved or influenced 
 when he appreciates the truth intelligently; he is 
 warmed into affection by intimacy with a friend or a 
 living person ; he does not fall in love with command- 
 ments written merely on stone. Peter speaks of some of 
 the ordinances of the law as ‘a yoke which neither our 
 fathers nor we were able to bear’ (Acts xv. 10). It was 
 
56 THE PREPARATORY MODE OF WORKING. 
 
 thus intended to lead the faithful to Him whose com- 
 mandments are not grievous. ‘By the law,’ says Paul, 
 ‘is the knowledge of sin,’ not because the law is evil, but 
 because it becomes an occasion of stirring up the hos- 
 tility of man in his first unenlightened state, and thus 
 shows him that he wants a new nature. It thus worked, 
 in connection with the witness which God has given to 
 all men and with His special promises to the Jewish 
 people, to lead them to ‘hope beforehand in Christ’ 
 (Eph.-1. 12; Gal. iii, 24)::, Even when:they fell, under 
 the yoke of oppressors, these very oppressions served to 
 confirm their faith, but, in many cases also, to give a 
 worldly turn to their hopes. They longed for deliverance, 
 but thought of it as a deliverance from temporal not 
 spiritual evils. Their religion taught them to believe in 
 the living God ‘ who worketh hitherto ;’ but many looked 
 for His interference in some fantastical exhibition of 
 signs and wonders. Not feeling the bondage of sin, 
 they could not understand how ‘the truth would make 
 them free.’ ‘In Jesus, they could not discern the Son 
 of God, says Neander, ‘because they had no ear for the 
 voice of the Father witnessing of Him in the wants of 
 the human heart, and under the influence of the same 
 temper they became a prey to the artful designs of every 
 false prophet, who knew how to flatter their wishes’ (vol. 
 i. 52, 53). Still the faithful Jews had much advantage 
 every way in their previous training (Rom. iil. 1). 
 
 LAWS OF GROWTH.—Men like Cornelius and Zac- 
 chzeus were already accepted of God. The disciples were 
 told to enquire, on entering a city or village, who in it was 
 worthy. A sudden change of character might, if we knew 
 the man’s history fully, be found to have been preceded 
 by some discipline which has served to form a character, or 
 
FORMATION OF CHARACTER. a7 
 
 by some mental preparation. Those who have to do with 
 young persons, whose characters are not yet formed, can- 
 not be too much impressed with the importance of little 
 things. ‘No one,’ says the Latin proverb, ‘becomes very 
 base all at once.’ A man begins to tamper with his sense 
 of duty; he yields in small matters to sin ; becomes 
 accustomed to the idea of committing it, and is thus 
 rendered gradually callous to it; by-and-by, habits be- 
 gin to tyrannise over him ; if he has, occasionally, some 
 rebellions of conscience, he encourages himself in some 
 refuge of lies. The character gets formed; and if, in — 
 some providential way, a man’s attention is then called 
 to the consideration of the truth, men might, in some 
 cases, guess the result. ‘There is such a thing,’ says 
 Dr. Vaughan,! ‘as aptitude or inaptitude for receiving 
 the gospel. See that man wholly set upon his gains, 
 scheming and bargaining and investing, counting and 
 gloating over his money from morning till evening : is 
 there anything there for the gospel to fasten upon? It 
 may bid him give to the needy or refuse some unlawful 
 gain, but it will not teach him a short road to riches. 
 Or see that vain, frivolous woman, living only for plea- 
 sure, measuring and weighing life by its ornaments and 
 amusements, seeing no beauty or fulness in a Saviour 
 (from sin and such frivolities). Can such people receive 
 or be approached by the gospel?’ Wisdom is needed 
 to make known the truth as it ought. (Col. iv. 4, 5.) 
 
 It is a bad sign of a man when he dislikes to hear 
 or to think about the truth. Ifa man has wholly made 
 up his mind to enjoy the baser pleasures of life, to con- 
 tinue to follow after some unrighteous means of making 
 gain, to spend his days in vanity, then the idea of a 
 
 Characteristics of Christ's Teaching, pp. 237, 238, 239. 
 
58 THE PREPARATORY MODE OF WORKING. 
 
 coming judgment and the call to a higher and better 
 life will be very unwelcome. Such men will get rid of 
 all thoughts of this kind as soon as possible ; or they 
 will delude their minds by practising some formalities, 
 so that they may continue in their sins unmolested by 
 any sense of neglected duty. ‘If any man, said our 
 Lord, ‘will do the will of my Father, he shall know of 
 the doctrine, whether it be of God or whether I speak 
 of myself’ But the Pharisees, dezug covetous, derided 
 Him, when they heard His unworldly teaching about the 
 impossibility of serving God and mammon (Luke xvi. 
 14). Many of the rulers believed in Him, yet would not 
 confess Him, lest they should be put out of the syna- 
 cogue, for they loved the glory that is of men more than 
 the glory that is of God (John xii. 43). The Bible re- 
 presents that faith, through which we are saved, as hav- 
 ing its seat or source in the heart, that is, in the man’s 
 character and disposition. ‘With the heart,’ says St. 
 Paul, ‘man believeth unto righteousness’ (Rom. x. 10). 
 ‘The seed is sown in the heart,’ though some degree of 
 understanding be necessary to guard it against the Evil 
 one (Matt. xiii. 19). ‘Those who reject the truth and 
 choose the darkness rather than the light do so because 
 their deeds are evil’ (John iii. 19); ‘and they manifest 
 an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living 
 God’ (Heb. iii. 12). 
 
 As soon as the truth begins to make man uncom- 
 fortable, there will be a tendency greater or less either 
 to banish the subject, as Felix did, or to delude one’s ~ 
 self by a pretence of godliness, or to take refuge in 
 some perversions of the truth founded on hard passages 
 of Scripture or on philosophical speculations. Before 
 Christ, no less than at the present time, men have been 
 
COUNTERFEITS OF RELIGION. 59 
 
 prone to substitute an excessive zeal for the formalities 
 of God’s worship, or an excessive regard to the verbal 
 expression of a creed, in the place of that worship and 
 that faith to which God the Father, according to the 
 apostle James, has regard. The prophets, from Isaiah 
 to Malachi, denounce this pretence of godliness as a re- 
 fuge of lies, as untempered mortar, as spiritual unfaith- 
 fulness. To keep the Sabbath sanctimoniously and 
 long for its departure that men might cheat the poor 
 in daily life, was to take God's name to an evil thing, 
 to change His character while retaining His name, to 
 honour Him with the lips but to dishonour Him by the 
 life. Thus the Jews were ready to kill our Lord, be- 
 cause He cured men’s diseases on the Sabbath. They 
 ought to have known what Hosea meant when he said, 
 ‘I desired mercy and not sacrifice.’ It was to no pur- 
 pose that the man, whose eyes had been opened on the 
 Sabbath, suggested to them that, if this man were not 
 of God, he could do no miracle. In spite of all His 
 miracles, they did not believe in Him; and the reason 
 was because they did not believe in God. They had 
 come to confound the Spirit of God with the spirit of 
 the Evil one; and attributed our Lord’s miracles of 
 mercy to the agency of Beelzebub, the prince of the 
 devils. They hoped in a Messiah who would make 
 their nation a great kingdom of the earth ; and, ‘ accord- 
 ing to the legends of their nation, would enrich and 
 crown them and banquet them on pomegranates from 
 Eden and on the flesh of Behemoth and Leviathan ;’ 
 but these materialistic hopes were not those hopes in 
 God’s coming salvation which gladdened the heart of 
 Abraham, David, and the faithful ‘who hoped eel 
 hand in Christ.’ 
 
60 THE PREPARATORY MODE OF WORKING. 
 
 At the present day, we must remember the same — 
 truth, that saving faith in God and in His Son Jesus © 
 Christ depends more upon a moral state than upon in- 
 tellectual evidence. No doubt the evidences of Chris- 
 tianity are strong, but historical evidence does not and 
 cannot amount to ocular or mathematical demonstration ; 
 and, in the reception of it, much will depend upon the 
 man himself. There are two classes of sceptics, those 
 who do not wish to believe and those who do. There 
 are some men of nervous temperament, whom, as Dr. 
 Chalmers remarked, their very anxiety to believe makes 
 sceptical—men who, like the apostle Thomas, are con- 
 stitutionally doubters. _Nowsuch men should remember 
 what saving faith is, that it is swch a belief in the truth 
 as will influence a man to be a follower of that which is 
 good. If, therefore, through such a man’s mere hope in 
 God, if through his cherishing the thought of God and 
 studying the character and words of His Son, his life is 
 so influenced, then the end of faith has been accom- 
 plished. The realities of the unseen and future world 
 will soon’make themselves felt, and thus more perfectly © 
 known; the character and work of the man will remain 
 to bless the man, whether faith or hope has been the — 
 means of generating them. It is a vain thing for a man 
 to profess an orthodox faith in God the Father Al- 
 mighty, and in Jesus Christ, who will come to judge the © 
 world, while yet a man lives every day as if he did not 
 believe it. It is very evident that he scarcely means 
 what he says; for it must be difficult to keep steadily 
 in mind true thoughts about God, His righteous dealings 
 with men, His fatherly goodness, and the fast approach- 
 ing conclusion of this life, without being powerfully in- — 
 fluenced so to consider our ways and our end as to apply © 
 
TO DRAW IS NOT TO DRAG. 6! 
 
 our hearts to wisdom. The truth thus makes men free 
 from the bondage of worldly lusts ; but the test of the 
 sincerity of a man’s hope or faith in the truth is that he 
 is led by it to live soberly, righteously, and godly. That 
 is saving faith which saves a man from his sins; 
 and this sort of faith or hope is what it is the object of 
 the Father’s dispensations to.work in us. 
 
 THE MODE OF THE FATHER’S WORKING on the 
 mind and will of man is not a physical superseding of 
 man’s individual personality, as some men represent it, 
 when they wish to exalt God’s grace at the expense of 
 His first creation. Sufficient distinction has not been 
 made in some systems between the first motions of the 
 natural man’s heart in opposition to an external com- 
 mandment, the purpose of which he does not understand, 
 which is given by a Being whose motives and character 
 are as yet but little or not at all appreciated, and, on 
 the other hand, the motions of a man’s heart when he is 
 being influenced more directly, when he hears the voice 
 of the Father witnessing to him in his heart, when he is 
 taught by the lessons of experience. It is one thing not 
 to be subject to commandments, written merely on stone 
 and addressed merely to one’s fears, and another thing 
 to resist the leadings of the Holy Spirit within us, to 
 turn a deaf ear to the whisperings of the truth and to 
 appeals calculated to touch the heart, to ignore the 
 lessons of Divine providence. That we are not in our first 
 natural state subject to a law like that given to Adam, 
 or like that given by Moses, does not prove that we 
 cannot be disciplined by the lessons of experience or 
 influenced by the voice of a Father and of His truth 
 within us. It is a law of human life that we should 
 learn by our early mistakes and even by our first errors. 
 
62 THE PREPARATORY MODE OF WORKING. 
 
 Adam’s sin, as we have seen, taught him much that he 
 did not before know. God works upon men that they 
 may be no longer natural men, but may become spiritual 
 men. But if man resist the Spirit always, if he banish or 
 corrupt the truth, or live as if he did not believe it, then 
 he will remain a natural man (not having the Spirit, 
 Jude 19), only a worse thing will be happening to him. 
 By nature, man is blind and does not see; he needs to 
 be taught, disciplined, and led unto all truth by God; 
 but if he persistently disobeys the truth and opposes or 
 corrupts it, then he may come to lose the power of 
 seeing, to lose, as it were, the very organs of sight. He 
 is, in his first natural state, naked ; he requires a higher 
 character—a goodness founded on knowledge and prin- 
 ciple ; he requires, as Irenzus says, that ‘the spirit of 
 God may rest upon him, for this is the wedding garment’ 
 (iv. 36, 6); but, by persistent opposition to the motions 
 of this Holy Spirit, a worse thing may come upon him 
 than the original ‘ infirmity of his nature’ (Iren. iv. 38, 4; 
 John v. 14): he may become possessed of a reprobate 
 character ; he may become lost to all proper feeling, or, 
 as Jude says, twice dead, plucked up by theroots, and there- 
 fore incapable of growing. But this reprobate state is 
 acquired, and acquired by the coming of those very in- 
 fluences which are calculated to loosen man from his 
 original disabilities, and to clothe him with his higher 
 nature—with the fine linen, pure and white, which is the 
 righteousness of the saints (Rev. xix. 8). If all the in- 
 fluences of discipline and truth have been brought to 
 bear upon a man, without turning him eventually from 
 his sins, we know of no other means of salvation (Heb. 
 vi. 1-6, x. 26, 27). ‘All unrighteousness is sin, says 
 St. John, ‘and there is a sin unto death; I do not say 
 
GRACE RECEIVED IN VAIN. 63 
 
 ye shall pray for it.’ But men sin on, in spite of their 
 misgivings, waiting till some angel trouble the waters, 
 till they be converted, forgetting that their turning, or 
 being turned from sin, zs their conversion ; or possibly 
 imagining that the more they sin, the more they will be 
 sensible of it ; whereas, on the contrary, they become 
 habituated and callous to it, till, as an eminent preacher! 
 said, ‘the dream and the intoxication are over,’ when 
 their misspent life is closing and death is staring them 
 in the face, when perhaps there remain but a week or 
 two of illness, during which they can serve God in this 
 world. 
 
 Again, sufficient distinction has not been made 
 between works which were prescribed by the Jewish law 
 as a symbol of Christ’s obedience, which are thus sym- 
 bolically works of merit, the deeds of the law ; and, on 
 the other hand, works of instrumentality, works which 
 are the only way in which the Divine grace can be 
 received, as the growth of vegetation is the only way in 
 which the earth can appropriate the rain. We cannot 
 be too sensible of our dependence on God’s grace ; it is 
 a.much safer state to believe that we are weak than to. 
 believe that we are strong. We are as dependent on 
 God's grace and God’s teaching for our growth in right- 
 eousness and goodness, as the earth is upon the rain; 
 but it is a denial of God’s witness to say that God has 
 not given His Son as a light to lighten the Gentiles, or 
 that He is working on men, not as a Father to do them 
 good, but to torment them here and hereafter. It is 
 an exceedingly dangerous thing to presume that God 
 works in a physical or physico-mystical way on us, doing 
 for us what cannot be done for us without robbing us of 
 
 ! Canon Farrar, 
 
64 THE PREPARATORY MODE OF WORKING. 
 
 our separate personalities as men, without making the 
 good irrational and destroying all honour or preciousness . 
 in the heavenly prize (Iren. iv. 37, 6,7). There is also 
 a law in the bestowal of God’s gifts: to him that hath, 
 shall be given; if we be faithful in the least, we shall 
 receive more. But it is a strange and perverse mistake 
 to confound this with merit. If we make the very best 
 possible use of that which we first receive, still we are 
 unprofitable servants; we have done no more than it 
 was our duty to do. Ifa man géves me a sum of money 
 and I make, we shall suppose, the best possible use of 
 it, he is not thereby dound to give me more. So, at the 
 end of our lives, if we have been led by the Spirit, if we 
 have received the influences of the truth by giving effect 
 to it in our lives, we must still hope that God will, as a 
 matter of grace, not of merit, complete His work in our 
 resurrection from the dead. The difference between the 
 man who has so used God’s gifts in this world and the 
 man who has not is, that the former has an earnest of 
 his final redemption, so that his mind, asa matter of fact, 
 will rest on God’s gracious promises ; whereas the other 
 man, in all human probability, will be unable to forgive 
 himself, and, his treasure being all in this world, he will 
 be desolate. Good works or well-doing may not merit 
 God’s favours, but they may be the only means by which, 
 in the nature of things, heavenly peace and happiness 
 can be attained. So the cause of my natural life and 
 health is not food or exercise ; but food and exercise 
 are necessary as means to preserve them. We may not 
 be able exactly to distinguish what is the divine working 
 and what submission can only, if we continue to be men, 
 be yielded by us; but, undoubtedly, Christianity teaches 
 that, in this matter, we must be fellow-workers with God. 
 
WE MAY MAR GOD’S WORK. 65 
 
 In the natural processes of growth, the Father’s work 
 may be modified by men. Thus the farmer may allow 
 weeds to choke the growth of a plant or to kill it; 
 he may put it away from light and rain, or in other 
 ways retard its growth. He may also foster its growth 
 by judicious rearing. Yet how ridiculous it would be in 
 the farmer to boast that the growth of the plant was “is 
 doing ; that 4e had given it life or made it grow! The 
 farmer does nothing except what he sees God doing, 
 that is, he merely ministers to the laws and powers 
 which make the plant grow. Now, moral results, in the 
 nature of things, do not come to pass mechanically. We 
 must be God’s intelligent instruments, even in our own 
 salvation; and here there comes into play our own sepa- 
 rate individualities, and the mysterious and inexplicable 
 persistence of some in evil opposition, so that the growth 
 of the divine seed may be marred or destroyed. We 
 may, like St. Paul, be not disobedient to the heavenly 
 vision, but we also may. Food may be digesting in my 
 stomach, but I may swallow some deleterious drug and 
 stop the process. I may hear a sound in the next room. 
 I do not require to do anything to make me hear it. 
 The construction of my ears, the air, my life, are not 
 my own doing or making ; but I may become active and 
 shut the sound out, or I may be a listless hearer and so 
 let the things I hear slip my attention. But how very 
 absurd it would be, if I do hear the sound, to say that I 
 have brought about the result myself! In this case, I 
 have literally nothing to do in order to hear it; not to 
 shut my ears, not to go to sleep, is not active doing ; but 
 by doing something, as, for instance, by shutting my ears, 
 I may prevent my hearing it. It is of no use to say 
 that man is asleep naturally; we only reply that God’s 
 
 F 
 
66 THE PREPARATORY MODE OF WORKING. 
 
 voice is loud enough to waken him, but it may not be 
 loud enough to pass all the obstacles which he may put 
 in the way of the sound when he wakens. Salvation is 
 all of grace, because we are saved when we cease to 
 desire to have our natural wills, but seek those things 
 which are well-pleasing to God. Salvation is all of 
 grace, because we do not merit God's manifestations of 
 Himself and His truth by works done in ignorance ; 
 because we do what we see Him doing on us, as the 
 farmer follows nature and ministers to her laws and 
 powers in rearing his crops; and because by fulfilling 
 the elementary law which man had broken, our Lord 
 exhibited God’s character and dealings in such a way as 
 to save men from a bondage of corruption. According 
 to Irenzeus, all God’s dispensations are of grace, because 
 ‘ He does not need our service when He orders us to follow 
 Him; but He thus bestows salvation upon ourselves’ 
 (iv. 14). We know that, if we break the laws of nature, 
 we suffer the consequences ; and the precepts which 
 God gives are also intended to put us into unison with 
 the ordained course of things. To know God’s way of 
 life or to be admitted into His service is itself a grace, a 
 favour, a privilege ; we do not confer a benefit on Him by 
 our service, but in this way only we obtain our highest 
 good. According to Clement of Rome, ‘the Lord 
 stands in need of nothing’ (c. 52); but ‘we must con- 
 sider what are the ways of His blessing’ (c. 31); and 
 ‘follow the way of truth,’ casting away all evil and being 
 ‘prompt in the practice of well-doing’ (c. 34, 35). Our 
 knowledge increases our danger (c. 41). According to 
 Hermas (Vision ii. 2), the repentance of the‘ elect’ OF 
 
 ‘righteous’ has its day or its limits. | 
 
67 
 
 GLA Knee. 
 
 GOD'S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED, 
 
 Gop the Father was, in the first ages, ‘preparing men 
 beforehand unto glory’ (Rom. ix. 23), ‘making them 
 meet’ (Col. i. 12) for a more perfect revelation of God. 
 He purposed that the prepared should be glorified by the 
 final redemption of their nature from the power of evil. 
 If the heathen were suffered to grope darkly after God, 
 walking in their own ways ; if the law of evil, working 
 in society, produced the saddest consequences, it was 
 that men might know that sin is ‘an evil and a bitter 
 thing,’ and so be prepared for the coming redemption. 
 The law of Moses, like the law given to Adam, did, in 
 effect, two things—first, it condemned men on their own 
 merits; and secondly, it showed them their need. It 
 thus prepared men for the better things which were to 
 come. Now, if in fore-ordaining men, some to be saved, 
 and some to be lost, God foresees them all ‘in a corrupt 
 mass,’ because the condemning effect of the law on them 
 has been accomplished, then it is reasonable to suppose 
 that God’s eternal purpose also presumes that the other 
 effect for which God’s law was given has also been ac- 
 complished ; namely, that in some it has worked, as it 
 was intended to work, a certain preparation of the soil 
 of the mind (Matt. xiii. 18-23), a certain hope in God’s 
 
 promises (Eph. i. 12) ; while in other men, who, we know 
 ) F2 
 
68 GOD’S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 not why, rejected God’s teaching and working, their 
 hearts became hardened and their minds blinded, ac- 
 cording to some law of our moral nature when we 
 persistently shut our minds to the leadings of the truth, 
 The passages of Scripture, which speak of predestination 
 and election, distinctly indicate or expressly declare 
 that those were the predestined or elected who had been 
 previously prepared or had not against themselves re- 
 jected the counsel of God ; and Barnabas says expressly 
 that God ‘did not come to call men with respect to 
 persons but even as the Spirit had prepared them * (§ 10). 
 In what follows, these passages of Scripture are treated 
 of in the same order as they occur in the books. 
 PASSAGES RELATING TO PREDESTINATION AND 
 ELECTION. JOHN VI. 37, 44, 45.—When our Lord told 
 the Jews that no man could come unto Him, ‘ unless it 
 were given to him of the Father, or unless the Father 
 draw him, and I (will) raise him up in the last day,’ He 
 adds immediately after: ‘It is written in your laa ‘Sand 
 they shall be all taught of God.” Every one, therefore, 
 that heareth of the Father and learneth, cometh unto 
 me.” The clauses which Dean Alford here translates 
 heareth of the Father and learneth are separate in the 
 original, as if to hear and to learn were not the same 
 thing ; whereas our translators alter the order and say: 
 hath heard and hath learned of the Father. ‘The light, 
 says Irenzus, ‘does not enslave any one by necessity ; 
 it does not fail because of those who blind themselves.’ 
 ‘Those persons, therefore, who have afostatised from the 
 light given by the Father, have done so through their 
 own fault’ (Bk. iv. 39, 3). The Father teaches all men 
 by the conscience, His vicegerent, by the discipline of — 
 life, and by His word, which has gone out into all the | 
 earth. But all men do not learn; there is a mystery in 
 
THE TAUGHT OF GOD. SO) 
 
 the human will ; God only knows how ‘we have power 
 over ourselves.’ But all that this passage asserts is, that 
 those who have learned of the Father come to His Son; 
 that the work of the Son follows and is based upon the 
 work of the Father. It presupposes a previous learn- 
 ing, that is, a previous preparation of those who are 
 ‘predestined to be conformed to the image of God’s 
 Son.’ It is as if some were advanced from a lower pre- 
 paratory school to one where they are perfected. ‘Our 
 Lord, the Word of God, first drew slaves to God, but 
 afterwards set free those who were subject to Him’ 
 lren: iv.eT3."4). 
 
 ACTS Il. 47.—There is a well-known mistranslation 
 of this passage in our English Bible. It is rendered, 
 ‘The Lord added daily to the Church such as should be 
 saved, according to the Calvinistic ideas prevalent among 
 the translators. Its real, literal, meaning is, ‘The Lord 
 added daily to the church such as were being saved, or, 
 as Dean Alford translates it, ‘such as were in the way of 
 salvation. The process of their salvation had been be- 
 gun before; and the Lord added them to the Church, 
 where the work would be carried on to a higher stage, 
 where they would be conformed to the image of the 
 Son of God. This passage, therefore, implies that the 
 work of the Son followed that of the Father. 
 
 AcTS xiii. 48.—This passage is translated in our Eng- 
 lish Bible, ‘As many believed as were ordained unto 
 eternal life ;’ but the word which the translators were led 
 by their Calvinistic notions to translate ordained, means 
 properly set zx order, equipped for, or, as Dean Alford 
 translates it, dzsposed (in a military way) to eternal life. 
 We might very properly translate it, ‘As many believed 
 as were made ready or prepared or were prepared and 
 appointed unto (or for) eternal life,’ 
 
y£e) GOD’S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 ROMANS VIII. 28, 120;'305' 40 PETER 1.0, 2nnORES 
 KNOWLEDGE.—In this passage Paul is speaking of the 
 gift of God’s Son and the shedding abroad in men’s 
 hearts of the Holy Spirit as an assurance of our hopes. 
 ‘We know,’ he says, ‘that all things work together for 
 good to them that love God, to them who are the called 
 according to. His purpose. For whom He did foreknow, 
 them He also foreordained to bear the likeness of the 
 image of His Son, that He might be the first-born 
 among many brethren; moreover, whom He fore- 
 ordained, them Healso called, and whom He called, them 
 He also justified, and whom He justified, them He also 
 glorified.’ He not only sent His Son to die in behalf of 
 men, but He also sent His servants to make known this 
 salvation, and gave those whom He called the earnest 
 of the Spirit. These facts, according to Paul, proved that 
 God was for them ; and, if He were for them, who could 
 be against them? But what are we to understand by 
 God’s foreknowledge of His people? The best commen- 
 tators, including Calvin, understand not the mere being 
 aware of beforehand, but His peculiar, gracious, compla- 
 cency in them (see Brown and Fausset’s ‘Commentary ’) 
 just as the angels heralded the advent of our Lord, say- 
 ing, ‘Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace 
 to men of well-pleasing,’ to men in whom God is well- 
 pleased (compare Luke ii. 14 with Matt. iii. 17). Our 
 Lord represents Himself as not knowing workers of 
 iniquity in the last judgment, where the meaning must 
 be that He does not owz or acknowledge them or recog- 
 nise them as His, according to a sense which the Greek 
 word derived from the Hebrew equivalent, in the lan- 
 guage of the Apostles. St. Paul, in speaking of some 
 who destroyed men’s faith in the resurrection, says: 
 
THE FORE-ACKNOWLEDGED. | yi 
 
 ‘Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, 
 having this seal: the Lord kxoweth them that are His’ 
 (2 Tim. ii. 19). ‘Though God be high,’ we read in Ps. 
 Cxxxvill. 6, ‘yet He hath respect unto the lowly; but 
 the proud He £noweth afar off” The proud are not His 
 people, they do not receive His grace, and are thus not 
 cared for—another sense of the word in Hebrew. The 
 passage in the eighth of Romans then means that God 
 had predetermined to show the riches of His grace to 
 those whom He fore-acknowledged, fore-recognised as 
 His, to those whom He owned and cared for (see Al- 
 ford’s ‘Commentary’). This foreknowledge, therefore, 
 according to the sense of the word kvow in the other 
 passages, presupposes a state of preparation, and indi- 
 cates the same truth as is taught in the other passages, 
 _ namely, that in predestinating some men only to be con- 
 formed to the image or pattern of His Son, the Father 
 had regard to a previous work of His, which He never 
 purposed to disown or zgnore; that these men were 
 being called in the preaching of Christianity ; that they 
 received the first-fruits of the Spirit, to the end that 
 _ their entire nature might be emancipated from the power 
 ~ of evil and glorified. 
 
 These, remarks about the meaning of the word ‘ fore- 
 knowledge’ are applicable to the address of Peter’s first 
 epistle. ‘Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the 
 strangers of the dispersion, elect according to the fore- 
 knowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the 
 Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of 
 Jesus Christ. Grace unto you and peace be multiplied.’ 
 
 ROM. IX. 10-33 (compare Gal. i. 15, iv. 21-31 ; 1 Peter 
 ii. 8 ; Isaiah xlv. 7, 8,93 Jer. i. 5, xviii. 1-10)——The ninth 
 chapter of the Romans is one of the most difficult and 
 
72 GOD’S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 perverted passages in Scripture. When Peter warned 
 the Church that there are in St. Paul’s epistles ‘some 
 things hard to be understood, which they that are un- 
 learned and unstable wrest, as they do the other 
 Scriptures, unto their own destruction,’ his reference, in 
 the connection, to God’s longsuffering seems an allusion 
 to this chapter (compare 2 Peter ili. 15,16 with Rom. 
 ix. 22); and in fact we know from early Christian 
 writers, as Irenzeus, Clement, Origen, &c., that the 
 gnostics did pervert such passages and especially this 
 chapter. Paul is certainly speaking in it as unto wise 
 men. His countrymen built their hopes, first, on their 
 being descended from Abraham ; and to show that God 
 did not purpose to deal with the race in this undis- 
 tinguishing manner, Paul instances the history of Ishmael 
 and Isaac. This proved that all the children of Abra- 
 ham, according to the flesh, were not thereby the 
 children of the promise. There was to be an election, 
 ‘for in Isaac shall thy seed be called. All the natural 
 descendants of Abraham were not chosen. But, 
 secondly, the Jews might fancy, and did fancy, that the 
 elect were those who observed all the commandments of 
 the law of Moses and abode by it. Paul disproves this 
 by citing the history of Jacob and Esau. ‘And not 
 only so, he goes on to say, ‘but when Rebecca also had 
 conceived by one, even by our father Isaac (for the 
 children not being yet born, neither having done any 
 good or evil, that the purpose of God according to 
 election might stand, not of works but of him that 
 calleth), it was said unto her, “The elder shall serve 
 the younger,” as it is written, “Jacob have I loved and 
 Esau have I hated.”’ The commandments given ‘to 
 Moses, left men to themselves, and pronounced those 
 
HISTORIES HAVING ANOTHER MEANING. 73 
 
 who kept them fully to be extétled to the reward ; but 
 the truth, which is of grace, influencesmen. Paul means 
 that the blessing was not to be of works, that is, it was 
 not to be a matter of debt, due to the natural man’s 
 unaided merits in keeping perfectly the law of Moses, 
 as if God needed them. ‘To him that worketh,’ he says 
 in Rom. iv. 4, ‘his reward is reckoned not in the way of 
 erace but of debt.’ It does not, however, follow on this 
 account, that in His working on men not left to them- 
 selves, God disregards. all differences of human conduct, 
 as, for instance, of human opposition on the part of those 
 on whom He works. Paul expressly tells us (Gal. iv. 24) 
 
 ‘that all this class of histories about Hagar and Sarah, 
 Ishmael and Isaac, Jacob and Esau, &c., have a typical or 
 allegorical meaning. In his epistle to the Galatians he 
 reasons, ina similar way as in that to the Romans, against 
 Judaising teachers, who were leading his Galatian con- 
 verts to trust to the law of Moses and a strict, literal, 
 observance of all its ordinances. ‘Tell me,’ he says to 
 them, ‘ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear 
 the law (i.e. Moses)? For it is written that Abraham 
 had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by 
 a free woman; but he that was of the bondmaid 
 was born after the flesh, but he of the free woman 
 was by promise; which things (or rather, which class 
 of things, all which things)! are an allegory (or have 
 another meaning: Alford), for these women are two 
 covenants, one from Mount Sinai, bearing children unto 
 bondage, which is Hagar. For this Hagar is Mount 
 Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now 
 is, for she is in bondage with her children. But Jeru- 
 salem which is above is- free, which is our mother,’ 
 
 1 See Bishop Ellicott’s Commentary on the Galatians. 
 
74 GOD’S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 St. Paul distinctly tells us in this passage that this class 
 of histories have another, allegorical, meaning ; and there 
 can be no reasonable doubt that he included the history 
 of Esau and Jacob in this class. The very answer given 
 to Rebecca proves that Esau and Jacob were typical 
 personages. ‘They are spoken of as ‘two nations, ‘two 
 manner of people;’ and, undoubtedly, Paul meant by 
 quoting this history to prove that the Jew could not 
 obtain the blessing in his position of elder brother, as 
 constituted under the law of Moses; that the blessing 
 did not come to men of works, as the payment of a 
 debt, but that it had been a settled purpose in the mind 
 of God before the brothers were born, to give it to those 
 ‘whom He had prepared beforehand unto glory,’ not as 
 the reward of deeds done in ignorance, but as the fulfil- 
 ment of what the deeds meant. If this passage means 
 that of any two ordinary men living now-a-days, one may 
 be destined to be saved and another to be lost, before they 
 are born and without reference to their actual conduct, 
 then the circumstance would not be material that the 
 younger, and not the elder, was elected. But this pass- 
 ing by of the elder, to make room for the younger, runs 
 through all or nearly all the early types, as in the case 
 of Adam and Noah, Cain and Abel or Shem, Ishmael 
 and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, Leah and Rachel, Pharez 
 and Zarah, Manasseh and Ephraim. Understood of the 
 two dispensations, the oracle that the elder should serve 
 the younger is full of meaning. It was predetermined 
 that the first ‘manner of man, the Esau of prophecy, 
 should be placed under a provisional law of external, 
 typical, and burdensome ordinances; that he should thus 
 be in bondage, or minister to the ‘second manner of 
 men, those who bear the image of the Second Man from 
 
THE: DESTINY: OF / ESAU ANDaJACOB. 75 
 
 heaven. Not only was it predetermined that the first 
 manner of man should be in bondage under the law ; 
 but, as man in his first state, by himself, is not subject 
 to the law, ‘neither indeed can be,’ its first direct result 
 was also to minister death as if those under it were 
 ‘hated.’ It is called the ministration of death and con- 
 demnation (2 Cor. ili. 7, 9); and much more would it 
 _ serve to condemn the Jew, if he persisted in remaining 
 under its bondage, trusting to works which were merely 
 symbolic of our Lord’s work of obedience. ‘The law,’ 
 _ said St. Paul, ‘works wrath.’ ‘For as many as are of 
 the works of the law are under a curse, for it is written, 
 “Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all the things 
 that are written in the book of the law to do them”’ 
 (Gal. ili. 10). It was probably in reference to this curse 
 
 _ that Paul quotes the words of the prophet Malachi: 
 
 ‘Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated, and made 
 his mountains and his inheritance desolate, indicating 
 the. destiny of those who remain natural men, ‘ the people 
 against whom the Lord hath indignation forever.’ This 
 is proved by comparing the words of Malachi with our 
 Lord’s lamentation over Jerusalem, when He visited the 
 temple for the last time. ‘Behold, your house is left 
 unto you desolate (or deserted), for I say unto you, Ye 
 shall not see me henceforth, till ye say, Blessed is he 
 that cometh in the name of the Lord. And he went 
 out and departed from the temple’ (Matt. xxiii. 38, 39; 
 xxiv.1). The Lord, the glory of that latter house (Haggai 
 ii. 9), never more entered its precincts, and Israel’s 
 house or inheritance was made desolate or deserted by 
 the departure of the Messiah. 
 
 Another expression, when taken in connection with 
 the tendencies of thought in the first ages of Christianity, 
 
76 GOD'S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 to which St. Paul could not have been a stranger, makes 
 it certain that he is speaking of the two dispensations. 
 It is specially noted by the apostle that the two children 
 had one father, Isaac.. There is no necessity to prove, in 
 the present day, that the God of Christ and the gospel 
 is the same as the God of nature and the preceding dis- 
 pensation ; but this truth was called in question by the 
 Gnostics, both Jewish and Gentile,! who were perhaps 
 the most dangerous heretics that have ever threatened 
 the existence of the Christian Church. The apostles 
 allude in their epistles to some of their ideas ; and, in 
 refutation of them, Irenzus, the disciple of Polycarp 
 (who again was the disciple of St. John), wrote his book. 
 Irenzus shows, in various ways, their mistake in sup- 
 posing that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ was not 
 also the author of the earlier Mosaic dispensation ; and 
 for this purpose he quotes this very passage (Rom. ix. 
 10, Ir), interpreting it to mean, typically, that as Jacob 
 and Esau were sprung from the same father, so Judaism 
 and Christianity came from the same heavenly Father. 
 The passage is as follows: ‘The history of Isaac, too, is 
 not without a symbolical character. For, in the epistle 
 to the Romans, the apostle declares, Moreover, when 
 Rebecca had conceived by one, even by our father 
 Isaac, she received answer from the word’ (then follows 
 the prophecy about Esau and Jacob). ‘From which,’ says 
 Irenzus, ‘it is evident that not only were there pro- 
 phecies of the patriarchs, but also that the two children 
 brought forth by Rebecca were a prediction of two 
 nations; that the one indeed should be the greater, but 
 the other the less; that the one should be also under 
 bondage, but the other free ; but that both should be of | 
 one and the same father. One God, one and the same, 
 
 1 See the account given of the Gnostics at the end of this treatise. 
 
THE DESTINY OF ESAU AND JACOB, Ve 
 
 is also the God of them (under two dispensations), who 
 knows hidden things, who knows all things before they 
 can come to pass, and for this reason has He said, 
 “Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated.” If any 
 one again will look into Jacob’s actions, he shall find 
 them not destitute of meaning, but full of import with 
 regard to the dispensations.’! Irenzeus then speaks of 
 the name Jacob, which means supplanter, of his grasping 
 his brother's heel, which implies victory, of his receiving 
 the rights of the firstborn as ‘the younger nation re- 
 ceived Him, Christ, the firstborn, when the elder nation 
 rejected him saying, “We have no king but Cesar.” 
 But in Christ every blessing is summed up, and therefore 
 the latter people has snatched away the blessings of the 
 former from the Father, as Jacob took away the blessing 
 of this Esau. Then the Church suffers the persecutions 
 of the Jews, as Jacob did those of Esau. The twelve 
 tribes of Israel represent the twelve-pillared foundation 
 of the Church. The two wives of Jacob also represent 
 sister churches, the elder being blear-eyed. For with 
 God,’ he concludes, ‘there is nothing without purpose 
 and due signification.’ But, if Paul speaks not typically 
 of two dispensations, but merely of ordinary individuals, 
 then what can we understand by his so distinctly saying 
 that the children were born of ove father? We must 
 understand him to be telling every Christian parent that, 
 of two of his children, one may be destined to be saved 
 and the other to be lost, irrespective of all actual conduct 
 of theirs, whether good or bad. 
 St. Paul goes on, in the ninth chapter of Romans, to 
 
 answer an objection. The law had promised life to 
 those who kept it perfectly : ‘The man that doeth these 
 
 1 Clark’s Trans. i. 452, bk. iv. ch. xxi. 2, 3. Barnabas (c. 13) says the same, 
 and bids us understand who Isaac was, who Rebecca, and who the peoples. 
 
78 GOD’S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 things shall live by them.’ If, therefore, those who con- 
 tinued to hope to live by the deeds of the law were set 
 aside, ‘is there not unrighteousness with God?’ ‘By 
 no means,’ says St. Paul. Almost as soon as this cove- 
 nant was given at Horeb, the Israelites had broken it by 
 worshipping the golden calf. It was never anticipated 
 that a perfect obedience would or could be rendered to 
 such ordinances by the natural man; the promised 
 blessing was not to come as a matter of debt to any 
 man, but as a matter of grace and mercy to those who 
 were men ‘of well-pleasing. The ‘wondrous things’ of 
 the law were revealed in its sense. God said to Moses at 
 the very time the law was given, ‘I will have mercy on 
 whomsoever I have mercy, and I will have compassion 
 on whomsoever I have compassion.’ In man’s first state, 
 in so far as he was constituted under a law like that of 
 Moses and left to his own natural power without God’s 
 teaching or working on him, he would certainly not 
 obtain the end or reward of the law. Grace and truth 
 came by Jesus Christ; and, as was remarked by Dean 
 Stanley, the grace was the truth revealed. It was not 
 man’s merit which brought the revelation of God to any, 
 it was the gift of God ; but, without this revelation of the 
 truth, man wanted what could give him the heart to 
 obey. In this respect, it was not of him that willeth nor 
 yet of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. 
 The law was given to prepare men, making sin to abound 
 and foreshadowing something better. The divine purpose 
 of mercy existed before the law, and could not therefore 
 be merited by it. But it does not follow that the divine 
 working excludes human instrumentality as a necessary 
 means of giving effect to this working, or that the gift 
 of truth may not become the means of working out a 
 
THE DESTINY OF PHARAOH. 79 
 
 worse death than before, if men harden their hearts in 
 spite of it. The sun may shine and the rain fall on the 
 earth, but some earth on which it falls may not bring 
 forth the appropriate herbage (Heb. vi. 7, 8). Whenthe 
 soil is not left to itself but dressed and watered, if it still 
 bear thorns and thistles, it is rejected ; but it is not re- 
 jected because this dressing and watering are wanting. 
 ~ God, in saving us, may require our instrumentality as an 
 essential means. It is one thing to say that, because of 
 our own doing, He gave us that revelation of Himself 
 -and those impulses to good without which we cannot be 
 saved, and another thing to say that we are held to be 
 ‘debtors, though not compelled, to become the instru- 
 ments of this grace and truth (Rom. viii. 12, 13). A man’s 
 efforts are good for nothing in order to merz¢ thisgrace and 
 truth ; but they are absolutely zxzazspensable as a means 
 to carry it into effect in our lives, when it comes; while 
 those who persistently oppose themselves to the divine 
 leadings may justly be made vessels unto dishonour. 
 Those, therefore, who are not men of well-pleasing are 
 hardened; but the fault, as Irenzus said, is in them- 
 selves. ‘ The light does not fail because men blind them- 
 _ selves.” Here Paul quotes the history of Pharaoh, whom 
 God raised up to a high station that He might show His 
 power in him, and that God’s name might be published 
 abroad in all the earth; and he quotes this history as an 
 illustration how God was to deal with those Israelites 
 who determined to reject the light which God was giving, 
 and to abide by their merits or symbolic deeds of the 
 law. It was God’s purpose to ‘gather’ His people out 
 from these proud boasters of their nationality and privi- 
 leges, and to allow the natural results—blindness and 
 the other curses of God’s law—to follow. But we must 
 
80 GOD'S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 bear in mind what Irenzus says: that ‘the Lord spake 
 in parables and brought blindness upon Israel, sence He 
 knew the (spirit of ) unbelief in them, in the same way as 
 He gave over to their unbelief Pharaoh, who never would 
 have believed, and those who were with him.’ ! 
 
 The verses (Rom. ix. 19, 20, 21), which follow prove 
 that St. Paul regarded men as being God’s workman- 
 ship, that they were being fashioned by God’s long- 
 suffering mercy and goodness into an image of Himself 
 for honour; but that those who resisted His working 
 always were made, like the clay that is marred in the 
 hands of the potter, into another vessel unto dishonour, as 
 it seemed gvod to the potter (Jer. xvili. 1-10). The pro- 
 phetic utterances of the Scriptures indicate a double 
 purpose: to them who patiently continue in well-doing, 
 yielding their members as God’s instruments, is pro- 
 mised eternal life; but to them who are contentious, 
 who contend with God and do not obey His truth, is 
 denounced indignation and wrath, tribulation and an- 
 guish (Rom. ii. 7, 8, 9). The primary result of God’s 
 working is represented to be righteousness, peace, and 
 salvation ; but if man obstinately refuses to give effect 
 to God’s working, the other purpose is fulfilled in his 
 dishonour and destruction (Is. xlv. 8,¢). God, therefore, 
 is not defeated or foiled in His purposes; in either case, 
 His word accomplishes a purpose and does not return 
 to Him void. But the Jew objects to Paul’s reasoning : 
 ‘Why does God yet find fault, for who hath resisted His 
 will?’ Paul replies, ‘Nay but, O man, who art thou 
 that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say 
 to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus? 
 or hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same 
 
 1 Trenzus, bk. iv. 29, I, 2 (Clark i. 475). 
 
MARRED VESSELS. SI 
 
 lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto 
 dishonour?’ To reply against God, no doubt, means 
 to charge God with unjust or unreasonable dealing. 
 But does man, a creature of yesterday, presume to think 
 that God has not good reason to reject such men, that 
 He may make use of reprobates and yet destroy them? 
 God has made us men with knowledge and independent 
 wills, our position being one of high honour, if we do not 
 mar God’s workmanship on us ; but it is possible that our 
 own obstinacy or negligence may turn what should have 
 been a source of honour into one of dishonour. This 
 alternative seems to belong to the very nature of free- 
 dom and manhood. If, therefore, some men, to use the 
 words of Irenzus,! ‘reject the operation of God’s skill and 
 show themselves ungrateful to Him because they have 
 been made men,’ if a strive with their Maker bese 
 ‘He made them so,’ then woe to them! 
 
 St. Paul alludes in this passage to the 45th chapter 
 of Isaiah, where this double purpose is clearly explained. 
 God says to Cyrus in v. 7: ‘I form the light and create 
 darkness, I make peace and create evil ; I the Lord do all 
 these things.’ The next verse represents God as pouring 
 out righteousness and salvation, but woe to the man that 
 ' striveth with his Maker; Let the potsherds strive with 
 potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that 
 fashioned it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath 
 no hands?’ It is surely a wise thing ina man to accept 
 the position in which he is placed as a man, and seek 
 to give effect to God’s grace so as to make the most of 
 his position: and it is an equally foolish thing to quarrel 
 
 1 Bk. iv. 39, 2 (Clark, ii. 47). Irenzeus here takes a similar view of the 
 
 divine workmanship on the clay, and the fault it sometimes finds with the 
 Worker, 
 
 G 
 
82 GOD’S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 with God for having made him a man, with an indepen- 
 dent will, perhaps for having given him a nature capable 
 of being tempted, and placed him in a world full of 
 temptation, where he must fight his way to glory, honour, 
 and incorruption ; and, while he thus ‘ascribes the in- 
 firmity of his nature to God,’ to yield himself up as the 
 slave of those lusts which tempt him. This quarrelling 
 with God’s arrangements is a common case. 
 
 There is also a passage in Jeremiah which Paul may 
 have had in his mind when he spoke of the potter and 
 
 the clay ; and, as this passage brings out, in the clearest | 
 possible way, the eternal principles of God’s dealings — 
 
 with moral agents, it is worth our while to quote it here 
 in full. In Jeremiah xvili. I-10 we read, ‘The word 
 which came to Jeremiah from the Lord saying, Arise 
 and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause 
 thee to hear my words. Then I went down to the 
 potter's house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the 
 wheels. And the vessel that he made of clay was 
 marred in the hands of the potter, so he made it again 
 into another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to 
 make it. Then the word of the Lord came to me say- 
 ing, O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this 
 
 potter, saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the _~ 
 
 hand of the potter, so are ye in mine hand, O house of 
 Israel. At what instant, I shall speak concerning a 
 nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up and to 
 pull down and to destroy it; if that nation against 
 whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will 
 repent of the evil that I thought todo unto them. And 
 at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation and 
 concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it do 
 evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice (become 
 
 a ™ : 
 
 ais 
 tage 
 
CASES OF PAUL, JEREMIAH, ELI, 83 
 
 ‘marred in the potter’s hand), then I will repent of the 
 good, wherewith I said that I would benefit them.’ The 
 passage, therefore, is a vindication of God’s eternal 
 principles of right dealing with men. What is said here 
 of nations might also be applied to individuals. Jere- 
 miah represents himself (i. 5) as ordained before his 
 birth to be a prophet unto the nations; and Paul says 
 that he was separated from his very birth for the same 
 purpose (Gal. i. 15, 16). But according to the principle 
 which Jeremiah in this prophecy lays down, he himself, as 
 a vessel of clay, might become marred in the hands of 
 the Potter, and be made into another vessel. Paul also 
 represents himself as ‘not disobedient to the heavenly 
 vision, implying that he might have been so. He also 
 represents himself as keeping his body in subjection, 
 lest by any means, when he has preached the gospel to 
 others, he himself should be a castaway ’ (li; Cote, a7)) 
 There are undoubtedly absolute purposes which God 
 means to bring about ; and, therefore, there may per- 
 haps be some room for hesitation in speaking of such 
 exceptional cases as Jeremiah and Paul ; but, so far as 
 we can gather from the principles of the Word of God, 
 it would appear that God, ‘who could from the very 
 stones raise up children unto Abraham,’ might have 
 chosen other means for the conversion of the Gentiles, 
 if Paul had been disobedient. ‘Woe is me,’ he says, 
 ‘if I preach not the gospel,’ implying surely that he con- 
 sidered such a result might have been possible. We 
 have at least one instance of such a rejection in the 
 history of Eli and his family. The message of the Lord 
 »to him is, ‘I said, indeed, that thy house and the house 
 of thy father should walk before me for ever;’ but now 
 
 the Lord saith, ‘Be it far from me, for them that honour 
 - GrZ 
 
Ul 
 
 84 GOD’S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED, 
 
 me I will honour; and they that despise me shall be 
 lightly esteemed’ (1 Sam. ii. 30). ‘My just man shall 
 live by faith, but if he draw back my soul hath no plea- 
 sure in him,’ he is not a man of well-pleasing (Heb. x. 
 38). ‘Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown,’ 
 cried Jonah; but Nineveh was not overthrown, for it 
 repented. 
 
 But although prophecy represents God’s dealings 
 with rational or moral agents as thus depending on the 
 way they receive His benevolent operations on them, yet 
 
 God had absolute intentions in regard to the old forms — 
 
 of worship. There was nothing inconsistent with God’s 
 justice in His first ‘ gathering’ His people out of Judaism 
 ‘under his wings’ (Matt. xxiii. 37), and then bringing 
 judgment on the nation of unbelievers who remained 
 behind—‘ whereunto,’ to stumble and be broken, ‘ they 
 were appointed, being disobedient (1 Peter ii. 8). But 
 Paul goes on to tell us (v. 22) that though it suited 
 God’s purpose to show forth His wrath and to make His 
 power known in the destruction of these men who, by 
 their disobedience, had become ‘vessels of wrath fitted to 
 destruction,’ He yet led them to repentance with much 
 long-suffering, delaying the day of vengeance! till some 
 men began to think Him slack concerning His promises, 
 not willing that any should perish unprepared, but pur- 
 posing to make known the riches of His glory on the 
 vessels of mercy whom He Jefore prepared (prepared 
 beforehand) unto glory, whom He called, not from 
 among the Jews only, but also from among the Gentiles. 
 Clearly, in that case, there was no room for charging God 
 
 with cruelty or arbitrariness ; but, on the contrary, He: 
 
 was long-suffering and no respecter of persons, for though 
 the Jewish nation did not obtain that which they were 
 
 1 Compare 2 Peter iii, 9 16 with Rom. ix. 22, 23. 
 
GOD’S PEOPLE, S5 
 
 seeking after, in a wrong way, as a nation, yet all those 
 obtained this gift of God, who had been ‘prepared before- 
 hand unto glory, whether they were Fews or Gentiles. 
 ‘This election obtained it and the rest were blinded’ 
 (Rom, xi. 7). Here again the separation of those who, 
 according to the purpose of God, were to be conformed 
 to the image of His Son, is represented distinctly as 
 based on a previous preparation; and, from what has 
 been said before of the nature of men and of God’s work- 
 ing on them, we may presume that, in preparing rational 
 free agents, without destroying or tampering with their 
 original constitution as men, there would or might be 
 differences in the results, not to be ignored. 
 
 ROM. XI. 2-5.—‘Has God then cast away His. 
 people?’ ‘No, says St. Paul, ‘by no means; for I am 
 an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Ben- 
 jamin, God has not cast away His people (those) whom 
 He foreknew.’ In the first place, God had not cast all 
 the Israelites away, He had left Himself a remnant; se- 
 condly, although all were guilty of breaking the law, 
 yet all were not alike in His eyes; there was a people whom 
 fle foreknew, men of well-pleasing, whom He had not cast 
 away. When Elijah pleaded against Israel, the answer 
 of God to him was, ‘I have reserved to myself seven 
 thousand men such as! have not bowed the knee to 
 Baal.’ Though God never intended that the law should 
 make men perfect, or that the blessings to be destowed 
 in His Son should become due as a debt to them, this 
 does not say that, in electing the seven thousand, God 
 had no regard to the motions of their hearts and to their 
 conduct, when under His divine teaching. These seven 
 
 ‘ The word ofrives, translated ‘who,’ means rather ‘all those who,’ 
 “such as ;” see the passage in Galatians (iv. 24) already referred to, and 
 Dr, Ellicott’s remarks. on it. ‘All the knees which,’ 1 Kings xix. 18, 
 
86 GOD’S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 thousand were, no doubt, sinners, but they were sincere 
 worshippers; they had not bowed the knee to Baal. 
 They had not turned altogether a deaf ear to the voice 
 of the God of Israel. They were being prepared for 
 better things, and God had reserved them for Himself, 
 and had not cast away this people whom He foreknew, 
 that is, fore-recognised as His, fore-owned, fore-acknow- 
 ledged. ‘Even so at this present time,’ says Paul, 
 ‘there is a remnant, according to the election of grace,’ 
 (v. 5), that is, not according to debt but the teaching of 
 God. These found that which Israel was seeking after, 
 and, as a nation, did not find. The rest of the nation 
 were hardened. There are, therefore, in this chapter two 
 distinct intimations that the remnant, who was not cast 
 away, were not reserved in any arbitrary manner. In 
 the first place, they were people whom God foreknew, 
 that is, as we have seen before, whom He fore-recog- 
 nised as His, fore-owned and cared for, implying that 
 they had in some way profited already by His teaching, 
 
 and that they were thus the objects of God’s gracious ° 
 
 complacency. In the second place, whatever imperfec- 
 tions they had, they were at least such sincere worship- 
 pers as had not bowed the knee to Baal. Elijah was 
 mistaken in supposing that he was left alone in this re- 
 spect. Seven thousand is a typical number. 
 
 EPH. I. 3-13.—Paul’s epistle to the Ephesians com- 
 mences with a sort of doxology. ‘Blessed be the God and 
 Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us in 
 all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places in Christ : 
 even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the 
 world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him 
 in love, having fore-ordained us unto adoption,’ &c. The 
 key of the passage is in v.13, where it is distinctly stated 
 
THOSE WHO FOREHOPED IN CHRIST. 87 
 
 that the ‘ws’ to whom this mystery of His will was made 
 known, and ‘who were fore-ordained that wwe should be 
 to the praise of His glory, were those ‘who had before 
 hoped in Christ,’ those faithful Jews who had looked 
 forward to the coming of Christ in hope. This fore- 
 hoping in Christ was, as we have seen before, the object 
 which God, by the law and the promises, was seeking to 
 produce in the Israelites. In reading the passage, verses 
 7, 8, 9, 10 seem to be parenthetical ; verse 10 ends with 
 the words even zx him, which seem to be a repetition 
 of the words zz the beloved, which terminate verse 6. 
 At all events, it is certain that Paul repeats after these 
 verses exactly the same statements about predestination 
 which he has made before them, and adds that those 
 were the predestined who forehoped or hoped beforehand 
 in Christ ; that they are now heirs as well as sons ; that, 
 in bringing this about, God makes everything which 
 comes to pass contribute to the fulfilment of His purpose; 
 that He worketh all things after the counsel of His will, 
 and, therefore, that nothing can defeat His purpose.! We 
 shall put the clauses before and after these verses to- 
 gether. ; 
 
 Lepore ae, |7, 8; 94103 
 1. Having fore-ordained us unto 
 adoption, through Jesus Christ unto 
 Him, 
 2. According to the good plea- 
 sure of His will, 
 
 3. To the praise of the glory of 
 His grace (which He has freely be- 
 stowed upon us in the Beloved). 
 
 After vv. 7, 8, 9, 10. 
 
 1. In whom also we have in- 
 heritance, being predestined (unto 
 sonship, as in Romans viii. 17), 
 
 2. According to the purpose of 
 Him who worketh all things after 
 the counsel of His will, 
 
 3. That we should be to the 
 praise of His glory, who hoped before 
 in Christ. 
 
 1 This passage (v. II) is the basis of the statement in the Westminster 
 Shorter Catechism, that God’s decrees are His eternal purpose, according to 
 the counsel of His will, whereby for His own glory He fore-ordains whatso- 
 
 €ver comes to pass. 
 
 But the two statements are very different. 
 
88 GOD’S PURPOSE TOWARDS THE PREPARED. 
 
 This passage, therefore, merely asserts that God chose 
 those Jews who forehoped in Christ to make known 
 through them the riches of grace. We have already seen 
 how the burdensome nature of the Jewish law, its veiled 
 symbolical and provisional character, its indirect com- 
 munications and commandments written on stone, could 
 not renew the human heart or purify satisfactorily the con- 
 science of the worshipper ; but that, on this very account, 
 when taken in connection with the promises of a deliverer 
 and of a prophet like to Moses, it was calculated to make 
 men hope beforehand in the coming Messiah. The law 
 was the child’s guide which was leading the Israelite to 
 Christ (Gal. iv. 24). To them, who did thus receive 
 Him, it was revealed in the Spirit that the Gentiles 
 should be joint heirs with the Jews, that they should 
 be joint partakers of the promise, the earnest of which, 
 namely, the Holy Spirit, they received when they 
 believed (Eph. i. 13, 14). The hidden meaning of the 
 temple service was ‘now, according to God's good plea- 
 sure which He purposed in Himself, revealed to us’ (v. 9), 
 that is, to holy apostles and prophets of the stock of Israel, 
 including himself, that, through theit ministrations, the 
 Gentiles might sit with them in heavenly places. Our 
 Lord speaks of such Israelites as His sheep, who followed 
 Him because they knew His voice. But He added that 
 He had other sheep also who were not of this fold, that 
 is, who were Gentiles, not Jews; and that they also 
 
 would hear His voice (John x. 4, 16). Thus, both among 4 
 
 the Jews and Gentiles there was a people who had been 
 prepared to hear His voice, and to whom He was to 
 give eternal life. 
 
89 
 
 CHAPTER, Id. 
 
 THE FATHER’S REVEALED NAME, AND THE PHILO- 
 SOPHY OF THE INFINITE. 
 
 THE attention of the fathers of the Christian Church was 
 specially directed, in the first ages of Christianity, to such 
 dark and difficult passages of Scripture as those we have 
 been investigating ; and the reason of this was that these 
 passages were quoted by the Gnostics! of their time to prove 
 their theories of the Infinite; to show that there is another 
 Infinite and Unknowable supreme God beyond and above 
 the Father who reveals Himself. ‘These passages,’ says 
 Irenzeus (ii. 10, 1), ‘are doubtful in meaning, not as if 
 referring to another God, but as regards the dispensations.’ 
 The Gnostics ‘conjured a God into existence, above the 
 Father to whom all the prophets bore testimony, a God 
 who really has no existence and has never been pro- 
 claimed by any one (ii, 9, 2), and transferred to him 
 those dark and difficult passages (ii. 10, 1). Now, what 
 these Gnostics were doing is still being done. Men 
 interpret these passages as if they expressed the doings 
 of an Infinite, Absolute, and Unknowable God, who 
 brings about everything, whose ‘will of the decree’ is 
 absolute, determining man’s entire conduct, and above 
 
 * See the account of the Gnostic systems at the end of this treatise. 
 
go THE FATHER’S REVEALED NAME. 
 
 His representation of Himself that He willeth not the 
 death of the sinner. In the mind of this Infinite (the 
 Gnostic Bythos, the abyss where the spirit loses itself), 
 everything, past, present, and future, is at once present, 
 and, therefore, in a manner written, and therefore fixed. 
 By such vague fancies about the Infinite who, men 
 
 imagine, reveals himself as the Unknowadle (!), they set | 
 
 aside God’s expressions of good-will to sinful men as 
 being human representations, and thereby they virtually 
 ‘conjure into existence’ another Being, above the Father 
 who has revealed Himself. Other theologians, instead 
 of setting aside the one representation, as not being so 
 absolute as the other, maintain a sort of double represen- 
 tation of God, one which they get by viewing the subject 
 from the side of man’s freedom and responsibility, while 
 _ the other is deduced from philosophical speculations 
 about the infinite and ‘sought after,’ as Ireneus says, 
 (ii. 10, 1) in the difficult passages referred to. Sober 
 philosophy, however, cannot transcend the basis which 
 it finds in men’s own minds; it is not wise to reason 
 into depths of being, as it were, behind the scenes of our 
 
 consciousness ; to stultify moral truths by soaring into — 
 
 an Unknown Infinite comprehending all things in him- 
 self, past, present, and future, and evolving them in 
 time. It is surely wiser to follow the advice of Irenzus, 
 to leave such questions in the hand of God, and to con- 
 clude with him that these passages of Scripture refer to 
 
 the dispensations and not to a Bythos, an abyss of é 
 thought where the spirit of man is lost, or toan unknow- — 
 
 able, unnameable, and unrevealed Infinite above God. 
 Gopb’s MORAL ATTRIBUTES THE SUBJECT OF REVE- 
 
 LATION, NOT PHYSICAL INFINITY.—The following ex- 
 tract from Dr. Dorner’s ‘ Person of Christ’ (div. i. vol. i. — 
 
THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE INFINITE. OI 
 
 p. 304, Clark’s For. Theol. Lib.) contains a principle of 
 the greatest importance in the study of Theology. 
 ‘Irenzus,’ says Dr. Dorner, ‘ views justly as the funda- 
 mental error of Gnosticism the doctrine of the Bythos, or 
 the concept of God which abides by mere quantitative 
 _infinitude, by physical categories. God, it is true, is 
 here the obscure basis, the unknowable sebuty dns dthe 
 esteem of Irenzus, that is so little the innermost of God, 
 that he objects to the Gnostics, who are always restlessly 
 steering towards this, that they seek to float into the in- 
 finite above God; but, since they lift their thoughts 
 above God, they find no resting place for thought. 
 God’s quantitative greatness is unmeasurable ; but we 
 are referred to His love; it has been manifested and it 
 is the highest, the innermost, in the knowledge of God. 
 \In the Word, we have God (revealed).! The Son is 
 God’s love and power. Whilst, then, the Gnostics call 
 the Bythos incognisable, Irenzeus says that God is know- 
 able. There is work and reward enough for knowledge 
 (the Gnosis), though the question be not asked, Whence 
 God? That is, we must not attempt to deduce the 
 higher categories through which God is to us truly God 
 —wisdom and love—from the Bythos as the last and 
 highest. There is lacking to them, otherwise, true abso- 
 luteness, &c. In a similar way, when we reason from 
 God’s infinite power, or foreknowledge, or absolute su- 
 premacy, that He disposes of each of His rational crea- 
 tures, made in His own image, without any reference to 
 * “The Word reveals the Creator by means of the creation, by the law 
 
 and the prophets, and by His manifestation in the flesh. All men were ad- 
 dressed in the same manner; all men heard, but all did not believe. It was 
 fitting that the truth should become judgment for the salvation of those 
 
 who believe and the condemnation of those who believe not? (Iren. iv. 
 O7)=6;°7). 
 
92 - THE FATHER’S REVEALED NAME. ° 
 
 his actual. conduct, good or bad, we, like the Gnostics, 
 soar into the infinite above God; we endanger (in 
 another sense) the absoluteness of God’s moral attributes, 
 or make it very uncertain whether God does or does not 
 will the death of the sinner. Besides, when we suppose 
 that God is infinite in power, wisdom, goodness, &c., we 
 can only mean so far as these infinite attributes do not 
 limit each other. No one, for instance, would deny that 
 God could make a human being in His own image, so 
 free and independent of Himself, that He might, by so 
 doing, hide from Himself the way in which such a crea- 
 ture would, in certain cases, use this freedom or inde- 
 pendence. To deny that God can do so is to deny His 
 omnipotence ; and how can we affirm that He has not 
 done so? Has He told us that He has not made us 
 such, or called upon us to reconcile God’s physical attri- 
 butes of power and knowledge with one another? It is — 
 surely wiser to conclude with Irenzeus that it is not we — 
 who make God, but that God is making us, and leave 
 such transcendent questions in His hands instead of — 
 bringing. forward rash, foolish, and blasphemous supposi- 
 tions in reply to them. ‘% 
 
 THE DIVINE FOREKNOWLEDGE.—Should any one — 
 take the trouble to go over the above passagesof Scripture 
 with a prejudiced Calvinist and prove to him that they | 
 are ‘dark and difficult as referring to the dispensations,’ — 
 that the electing fore-ordination, taught in the Scriptures, — 
 presupposes a state of preparation of some under the — 
 Father's teaching, he will find that his friend will take 
 refuge in the doctrine of God’s foreknowledge. ‘Did 
 not God,’ he will ask, ‘foreknow everything? did He not 
 foresee a// the movements of our hearts before we are 
 born? and, if He knew them, are they not written in His 
 
THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE INFINITE, 93 
 
 mind and fixed?’ He begins, as the Gnostics did, to 
 soar into the infinite above God. What, then, does the. 
 Bible say on this subject ? 
 
 The doctrine that God has from all eternity fore- 
 known His purposes, is Biblical; but the idea that He ~ 
 has, from all eternity, foreknown absolutely everything, 
 is not to be found in the Bible. We have already seen 
 that the word foreknow in Romans viii. 29, xi. 2, and 
 I Peter i. 2, denotes a fore-recognising, a Sore-owning, 
 a fore-acknowledging, a fore-caring for those who are of 
 a certain description. The other two passages which 
 speak of foreknowledge are Acts xv. 18 and Isaiah 
 xlvi. 9, 10, 11. In the passage in Acts, James speaks of 
 the call of the Gentiles as known to God. The reading 
 of this passage, as determined by the ancient manuscripts, 
 is in great confusion. There are two other readings 
 more probable than the one in our translation. The one 
 contained in the three oldest MSS. would make the 
 passage read as follows: ‘That the residue of men 
 might seek after the Lord and all the Gentiles, upon 
 whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who maketh 
 _ these things known from the beginning, or who doeth 
 these things known from the beginning’ Another 
 version which some adopt (as, for instance, Stier and 
 Theile in their Tetraglott) is, ‘Known unto God is 
 His work from the beginning ;’ namely, the call of the 
 Gentiles. According to both these readings, and also 
 according to the connection, it is evident that James 
 means merely to say that the call of the Gentiles was 
 God’s work, which He knew of beforehand and spake 
 of by the mouth of His prophets; that He had de- 
 termined to ‘take out from them also a people for His 
 name, and that therefore it was not a thing unknown 
 
94 THE FATHER’S REVEALED NAME, 
 
 or uncertain. What the prophetic spirit teaches is, not 
 that God has fixed beforehand everything which comes 
 to pass, but that He has certain determined purposes 
 which He will certainly carry out.! So far is it from 
 * teaching that God has absolutely fixed everything, that, 
 in the passage, already referred to, about the clay and the 
 potter, the prophet Jeremiah plainly tells us that, when 
 God speaks to rational agents, threatening evil and pro- 
 mising good, there is a condition expressed or understood, 
 namely, that the moral agent should go on in the same 
 course. ‘Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be over- 
 thrown,’ was the message of Jonah. But Nineveh was 
 not overthrown, for the Ninevites repented. The second 
 passage (Isaiah xlvi. 9, 10, 11), which speaks of God’s fore- 
 knowledge, bases it upon His purpose to bring about the 
 end which He foretells, for He says: ‘Iam God and there 
 
 is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning, and - 
 
 from ancient times the things that are not done, saying, 
 My counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure ; 
 calling a ravenous bird from the east,a man that exe- 
 cuteth my counsel froma far country; yea, I have spoken 
 it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will 
 also do it’ This passage evidently means that what 
 God declares is what He purposes; and that what He 
 purposes, He will bring to pass. Man’s best laid schemes 
 are liable to be defeated and fail, therefore he cannot 
 declare the end from the beginning; but God’s purposes 
 do not fail and cannot fail, therefore it is His prerogative 
 
 to declare the end from the beginning. Whenever, there- — 
 
 fore, He declares from the beginning an end which He 
 has purposed to bring about, that end will certainly come 
 
 to pass. But to say that whatever He absolutely declares 
 
 1 See Principal Fairbairn’s work on Prophecy. 
 
THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE WILL. 95 
 
 will come to pass, does not mean that He declares every 
 future event absolutely; to say that what He has deter- 
 mined will come to pass, does not mean that He has 
 predetermined everything that comes to pass ; to say 
 that He makes everything that happens contribute to the 
 fulfilment of His purposes according to the counsel of 
 His will (Eph. i. 11), does not mean that He has, for 
 His own glory, foreordained whatsoever comes to pass’ 
 (Shorter Catechism). 
 
 THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE WILL.—Edwards, in his 
 work on the ‘ Freedom of the Will, maintained that the 
 will is in every case determined efficiently, in accordance 
 with the same law of cause and effect which rules in the 
 physical world. His theory has been advocated, with 
 modernised terminology, by Tyndall and Huxley. What, 
 then, is the cause of a man’s decision, when there is a deli- 
 _berative choice between his sense of duty and some other: 
 motive? Ifa person answers that the cause is because he 
 chooses, then Edwards asks, Why do you choose? If the 
 person answers, ‘ Because I choose to choose,’ Edwards 
 asks, ‘Why do you choose to choose to choose?’ And 
 so back to the first choice. Here Edwards takes it for 
 granted that the will is efficiently caused, as it causes 
 other things efficiently ; he forgets that he has cot his 
 idea of a cause and of himself from the originating 
 activity of his will. He is justified in inferring that all 
 physical effects, like what he produces, have an efficient 
 cause like his will; but he is not justified in extending 
 this generalisation beyond the sphere of physical effects, 
 into a region behind his own consciousness and ex- 
 perience. We shall first suppose that his opponent 
 admits that the will has an efficient cause which deter- 
 mines it, that there is some unseen power beyond the 
 
ele THE FATHER’S REVEALED NAME. 
 
 scene of consciousness, which, so to speak, pulls the 
 strings and sets the will in motion. Then this efficient 
 cause must come directly or indirectly from that Power 
 in nature in whom we live, and move, and have our 
 being ; or we must suppose some independent power 
 or powers—a god of evil, according to the dualistic 
 systems of the East. Edwards would have taken the 
 first alternative, tracing this determination to the Decrees 
 of God, which the Divine Being executes according to 
 the counsel of His will; but his opponent might now 
 ask, ‘What was the efficient cause which moved the 
 Creator’s will?’ It would not do for Edwards to object 
 that, in regard to the Creator, we are beyond our depth ; 
 for we are equally beyond our depth when we speak 
 about the efficient cause of our own wills in such a 
 choice. My consciousness tells me that my own will 
 causes physical changes: I think of mind or will as 
 having power over matter; but I do not think or feel 
 conscious that my will is caused, as I move other things. 
 Edwards has at least applied the principle, that every 
 effect has a cause, beyond that sphere of things to which 
 his consciousness is limited. He would, therefore, be 
 forced to admit that there is some power which moves the 
 Creator’s will efficiently—a creator of the creator. This 
 would: bring him to the doctrine of evolution : that, 
 though we fancy we are causes but not caused efficiently, 
 yet this is a mistake ; that all this world is merely an evo- 
 lution; that everything comes necessarily out of every- 
 thing which preceded it, by established laws ; that 
 whatever that Power be, in whom we live, and move, and 
 have our being, the motions of His will are caused in the 
 same efficient way, so that His very thoughts and works 
 are also an evolution. 
 
THE PHILOSOPHY OF THOUGHT. 97 
 
 The same mistake has arisen in the application of 
 Paley’s famous maxim,:that everything which exhibits 
 marks of design must have an intelligent maker. This 
 maxim applies to physical productions and mechanisms, 
 for they ‘exhibit’ to the senses marks of adaptation. 
 We find a watch ; we observe its adaptations ; it belongs 
 to that sort of material effects which we ourselves could 
 produce ; hence we conclude that there was a mind like 
 our own which schemed it. But here we ought to stop. 
 If we begin to inquire who schemed the mind that 
 schemed the watch, we are beyond our depth. We 
 have no notion of minds scheming and fabricating other 
 minds. Our generalisations are applicable to the human 
 body ; we are justified in inferring that it had an intelli- 
 gent Maker; for although it is a structure far more 
 _ wonderful than we can fabricate, still it is material. But 
 our generalisations do not apply to minds, which we 
 think of as scheming and constructing material mechan- 
 isms, but not as being themselves constructed in any 
 such physical or mechanical way. Our idea of mind as 
 distinct from matter is founded on this difference, as all 
 our ideas come in a double form; but if we confound 
 the fundamental distinction on which our primary no- 
 tion is founded, we destroy the basis of our knowledge. 
 We do not know how our minds come to us from Ged, 
 the Father of our spirits ; but, as we did not always pos- 
 sess this conscious existence, we judge that the Source 
 of it is not mindless or purposeless, not inferior, but 
 superior to ourselves. 
 
 Not only was Edwards beyond the depth of inental 
 data in applying the maxim, that every effect has a 
 cause, to the human will in a deliberative moral choice ; 
 in considering this choice as if it were a physical effect, 
 he confounded that elementary distinction in our primary 
 
 “ 
 
ors) THE FATHER’S REVEALED NAME. 
 
 and intuitive consciousness of ourselves which gives us 
 the idea of a cause. My consciousness of myself asa 
 separate personality comes to me in a double form I 
 feel myself to be distinct fromthe material world arounc 
 me, inasmuch as it seems inert, merely transmitting 
 forces, while I can do more than transmit motion—I car 
 originate it. Not only have I no consciousness of any 
 power behind my being, which is, as it were, pulling the 
 strings of my will and causing it efficiently ; but this 
 idea of my will as being caused is contrary to the pri- 
 mary intuitive thoughts which first revealed to me my 
 own separate personality. My will appeared to me as 
 a power which could originate or stop motion, while 
 material bodies seemed to have no such power to origi- 
 nate, though they could transmit motion. But if, when 
 I seem to myself to be originating motion, I am in 
 reality only transmitting a force which is applied to 
 myself in an unseen way, is there any reality in my im- 
 pression that I am a separate personality? If I con- 
 found this elementary distinction between mind as an 
 active spring, originating motion, and the material world 
 as something inert, which only transmits motion, then 
 what real -basis is there for my notion of a cause? Iset 
 aside the first primary facts of my consciousness of my- 
 self, my first primary notion of a cause, as a hallucina- 
 tion. But unless we accept these elementary ideas as 
 we find them, no knowledge is possible. 
 Our sense of responsibility, also, comes to us as the 
 authors of actions. A man feels remorse for an evil deed 
 in spite of his being taught, philosophically, that he has 
 been caused efficiently to do it, in the same way as he 
 causes other things to move. He /ee/s convinced that 
 the temptation to do evil did not efficiently set his will 
 in motion, as he sets other things in motion; and he 
 cannot shake himself rid of this idea. He doubts his 
 
THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE WILL. 99 
 
 responsibility, who can think of his moral decisions as all 
 caused by God, as he thinks of physical phenomena as 
 effects. God knows how we have power over ourselves, 
 for He made our bodies and He is the Father of our 
 spirits; we must accept the fact, though we cannot ex- 
 plain it, that we are efficient causes of evil, without being 
 efficiently caused to do it, at least after we come to our 
 full-grown state. The question what cause vitiates natures 
 is one of those which, as Irenzeus said (ii. 28, 7-33), we 
 must leave in the hands of God, and notaim at bringing 
 forward ‘foolish, rash, and blasphemous suppositions in 
 reply to it.’ ‘We must accept the fact of the existence 
 of evil,’ says Neander, ‘and leave it unexplained, except 
 by the creature’s leaving its natural dependence upon 
 God. And more especially must we hold ¢hat sin to be 
 a man’s owz doing, not caused in any other efficient way, 
 which a man commits in resisting always the Spirit of 
 truth and in continuing to sin in spite of light. We are 
 not warranted by our own consciousness, or by any 
 just philosophy based upon it, or by the word of God, in 
 tracing the evil which a man commits in spite of his 
 knowledge of the truth and after the lessons of expe- 
 rience he has received from God, to any effictent cause 
 beyond himself. Evil works are, emphatically and in 
 the language of Scripture, the wicked man’s own works, 
 for he, in some mysterious way, originates them. 
 
 1 <The cause,’ he says, ‘of the nature of those, for whom God has 
 prepared eternal punishments, neither has any Scripture informed us, nor 
 has an apostle told us, nor has the Lord taught us. It becomes us, there- 
 fore, to leave the knowledge of this matter to God, lest by attributing 
 apostacy and ignorance to the Creator, we frame an impious hypothesis in 
 opposition to God.’ He says that the man who refuses the operation of 
 God’s hands and blinds himself, is the cause to himself of his imperfection ; 
 that this cause is not any deficiency in God’s goodness or skill or in the 
 light, but is connected with that liberty of choice which He has given to 
 man as the law of human nature. ‘The light, he says, never enslaves any 
 
 12 
 
100 THE FATHER’S REVEALED NAME. 
 
 one by necessity ; nor, again, does God exercise compulsion upon any one 
 unwilling to accept the exercise of his skill (Iren. iv. 39, 2, 3). 
 
 - Justin Martyr did not enter into the philosophical question of the cause 
 of apostacy; but he asserted again and again, in opposition to the Stoical 
 philosophy, that each man has moral freedom of choice within the time 
 appointed. It is, he says, those who cannot be raised above the earth, 
 that the demons rivet to earthly things; and it is for want of soberminded- 
 ness, purity, and control of the passions that students of divine things 
 are baffled in their pursuit. The Christian doctrine of fate is that each 
 man has an appropriate reward according to his choice ; and, if a man were 
 not able to be anything else than he was made, he would neither be worthy 
 of reward nor punishment (Apol. i. 43, 58). According to Clement of 
 Alexandria, if men were pulled by their desires as with strings, they would 
 be no better than inanimate machines, there would be no room for refusing 
 (axovo.or), or for the precepts of Scripture, or for the advent of our Lord, 
 or for praise or blame (Strom. ii. 3; v. i). 
 
 These fathers distinguish between the man, the soul or personality, he 
 who is the cause of the actions for which he is judged, and his xature 
 (likings, &c.), which by some mysterious working is fixed as the result of 
 choice (Clem. S. ii. 20; vi. 12). In regard to foreknowledge, ‘ the things 
 absolutely (wdvrws) foreknown are predicted as already come to pass.’ ‘God 
 foreknew the things (¢hizgs, not al/, as in Clark’s translation) about to be 
 done by all (collectively) ; and, it being a decree (or purpose, dé-yua) with 
 Him to award to each of men appropriately to his actions, He foretells also 
 that He will do this’ (Ap. i. 42, 44). ‘ If the Word of God predicts abso- 
 lutely the doom of some, it was because He knew them before, that they 
 would be (yeynrouevovs) unchangeably wicked, not because He made them 
 so? (D. c. Tryp. c. 141). So Irenzeus says that ‘all the things which the 
 Father foreknew were carried out by the Son,’ and speaks of God’s fore- 
 knowing ‘all these things’ (iii. 16, 17) ; and Clement (S. iv. 4) says that 
 the martyr ‘ was by his love shown to the Lord, who also knew (had regard 
 to) the free choice of the martyr before the genesis.’ 
 
 According to Prof. Huxley (Hume, p. 194), Edwards must admit that 
 God is the author of sin, but modern science or philosophy has added very 
 little (except a new terminology) to the argument of Edwards. If our 
 actions are morally caused ‘as certainly and invariably as physical effects 
 follow their physical causes’ (J. S. Mill), then, in this case, says Mansell, 
 our consciousness of freedom, of sin, and of personality is delusive. How 
 long will it be, he asks, till God’s personality disappear also? (Gnostic 
 Heresies, p. 15). ‘The cause,’ says Reid, ‘ must either be the person him- 
 self whose will it is, or some other being. Zhe first is as easily concetved 
 as the second. If the person was the cause of that Cetermination of his own 
 will, he was free in that action,’ 
 
PA Reta le 
 
 THE GENESIS AND THE MOSAIC DISPENSA- 
 TION: THE TYPES, ANTITYPES, AND SIMPLE 
 TRUTHS. . 
 
 CTA ar Raa, 
 THE DISCERNMENT OF TYPES AND ANTITYPES. 
 
 THE revelation, which God gave in many detached 
 portions and in divers manners by the prophets to the 
 fathers, and which, at the end of these days, He com- 
 pleted by the mission of His Son, was a gradual unfold- 
 ing to men, as they were able to receive it, of His 
 righteous, consistent, and fatherly dealings, for the good 
 of those who lived at the time as well as of those who 
 followed. The perfect exhibition of the truth did not 
 come till the world was prepared for it ; the shadowy 
 types, which preceded this fulness of the times, speak a 
 language which can only be distinctly understood by 
 those who can read their meaning in the light of the 
 gospel history; nevertheless ‘as institutions in the 
 existing worship or events in the current providence of 
 God, they had a present purpose to accomplish apart 
 altogether from their prospective reference to future 
 times.’! ‘The first dispensation,’ said Irenzus (iv. 32, 
 1 Fairbairn’s Zypology of Scripture, vol. 1. p. 32. 
 
102 THE DISCERNMENT OF ‘TYPES AND ANTITYPES. 
 
 2) ‘served to bend those to whom it was given to the 
 service of God (as untamed animals are bent to the 
 yoke), not, however, as if God needed their service but 
 for their benefit ; it exhibited a type of heavenly things, 
 inasmuch as man was not yet able to see the things of 
 God as they are in themselves; it foreshadowed the 
 images of those things which exist in the Church, that 
 our faith might be firmly established ; and it contained 
 a prophecy of things to come, that man might know 
 God’s prescience of all” The two dispensations, he says, 
 are the things new and old; our Lord is the house- 
 holder, who first delivered a law suitable to slaves and 
 to those who were yet undisciplined, but afterwards set 
 free those who were subject to God, conferring greater 
 gifts upon them but not things of an opposite character 
 (iv. 9, I, 2; 13, 4). By unfolding the new and the old 
 together, the well instructed scribe seeks to explain their 
 enigmas. 
 
 In attempting to explain those truths or principles 
 of the divine operation which lie beneath the varying 
 forms of the different ages or dispensations and which 
 are as immutable as God Himself, our attention is neces- 
 sarily directed to that symbolism, which forms so im- 
 portant a place in the education of the world as well as 
 of each individual. We, who are accustomed from early 
 youth to oral and written discourse, may seldom think of 
 the symbolical origin of this discourse, or imagine the 
 extent to which symbolical representations were at one 
 time employed to convey proper views and impressions 
 of truth. In the youth of the world, the visible and the 
 dramatic formed an essential element of training ; and 
 still, in mature years, our minds are open to lively 
 impressions from these sources. If, therefore, we enquire 
 
WHAT ARE TYPES? 103 
 
 into the method of the divine government of the world, 
 and the eternal laws of God’s operation on men, it is 
 necessary to study His dispensations historically, to note 
 what is typical and significant in the early history, the 
 universally followed customs and the divinely established 
 worship of men; to compare this with the word of 
 prophecy as well as with the lessons of experience and 
 common sense. | 
 
 A type is a fitting and designed resemblance of some 
 more perfect exhibition of truth, which is destined to 
 appear in the future and which is called the antitype. 
 Types thus contain an element of prophecy. That 
 there were such types in the Hebrew history and reli- 
 gious services is clearly taught by the New Testament 
 writers, who expressly give their sanction to the typical 
 interpretation of the tabernacle and its services, and of 
 at least the following histories: Adam (Rom. v. 11-143 
 1 Cor. xv. 22); Noah (1 Pet. iii, 20); Melchizedek 
 (Heb. vii.); Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar (Rom. iv. 17 ; 
 Gal. iv. 22-35); Moses (Acts iii. 22-26); the passover, 
 the passage through the Red Sea, the sojourn and 
 provocation in the wilderness (Matt. 11.15; Luke xxii. 
 PH LObeohmiih wysuvng3 Got Corry 173 aR Rev ain 
 14); David (Luke i. 32, 33); Jonah (Matt. xii. 40). 
 These histories have every appearance of being selected 
 as examples for the occasion ; and the Hebrew Christians 
 were reproved for not being better acquainted with the 
 meaning of such histories as that of Melchizedek. ‘Can 
 it be seriously believed,’ says Fairbairn, ‘that Sarah and 
 Hagar stood in a typical relation to gospel times, while 
 no such place was occupied by Rebeccah, the spouse of 
 Isaac, and the mother of Esau and Jacob?’ Even De 
 Wette in his old age wrote as follows: ‘ Christianity 
 
104. THE ‘DISCERNMENT OF TYPES ‘AND ANTITYPES: 
 
 sprang out of Judaism. Long before Christ appeared, 
 the world was prepared for His appearance ; the entire 
 Old Testament is a great prophecy, a great type of Him 
 who was to come and who has come. Who can deny 
 that the holy seers of the Old Testament saw in spirit 
 the advent of Christ long before He came, and, in pro- 
 phetic anticipations sometimes more and sometimes less 
 clear, descried the new doctrine? The typological com- 
 parison, also, of the Old Testament with the New, was 
 by no means a mere play of fancy; nor can it be 
 regarded as altogether the result of accident that the 
 evangelical history, in the most important particulars, 
 runs parallel with the Mosaic. Christianity lay in 
 Judaism as leaves and fruit do in the seed; though 
 certainly it needed the divine sun to bring them out.’ ! 
 The writers of the New Testament were exceedingly 
 familiar with the Old Testament history and ritual ; and 
 they frequently clothe their doctrines and even their 
 exhortations in language borrowed from them. We 
 cannot, therefore, expect to understand fully what they 
 mean unless by comparing their words with the Old 
 Testament, and by guarding against the miscomprehen- 
 sion of ritual and symbolical language, transferred either 
 from the type to the antitype or from the symbol to the 
 sense. We may very soon fall into serious mistakes by 
 interpreting everything quite literally, in what Calvin 
 calls its natural and obvious meaning. On the other 
 hand, as Luther says, we cannot receive any certain 
 notion, if we interpret Scripture in a fanciful, super- 
 ficial and mystical manner. The true method is that 
 laid down by Irenzeus (ii. 10, 1), to explain those things 
 which are dark and enigmatical by those things which 
 ' See Fairbairn’s Zyfology, vol. i. pp. 42, 55. 
 
ENIGMAS EXPLAINED BY CLEAR THINGS. 105 
 
 are manifest, consistent and clear. The type and the 
 antitype are both embodiments of the same truth or 
 principle, the type being an earthly shadow analogous to 
 the antitype; but it is this embodied truth, moral, or prin- 
 ciple that serves as a key to the full understanding of 
 both of them. In order, says Fairbairn,! to determine 
 the connection between them, we must enquire what 
 are the elements of truth symbolised. 
 
 We may expect to find types in the peculiarities, or, 
 so to speak, the aberrations of the Old Testament 
 history and ritual, rather than in what is commouplace.? 
 For instance, a tent must have a covering; all the 
 coverings of the tabernacle may, therefore, not have 
 been significant, but the innermost one containing ‘the 
 work of the designer’ was exceedingly peculiar. So the 
 dress of the priests and many ceremonials might be 
 called eccentric, if they were not significant. 
 
 In regard to some histories of the Old Testament, 
 which seem to us no less extraordinary, Fairbairn * says 
 that ‘nothing is to be regarded as a type of the good 
 things of the gospel which is of itself of a forbidden or 
 sinful nature.’ He instances the deceitful garments 
 worn by Jacob to obtain his father’s blessing and his 
 having, in consequence, to leave his father’s house ; but 
 he explains the extirpation of the Canaanites by its 
 typical bearing. We have the high authority of the 
 first presbyters, as recorded by Irenzus, for a rule which 
 seems preferable. Irenzeus, in vindicating God’s first 
 dealings in the case of David, Solomon and the Israelites, 
 who spoiled the Egyptians, quotes from a presbyter, 
 
 1 Fairbairn’s 7yfology, vol. i. pp. 26, 68, 187; vol. ii. p. 256. 
 2 Cave’s Scripture Doctrine of Sacrifice, p. 114. 
 8 Fairbairn’s 7ypology, vol. i. 176. 
 
106 THE DISCERNMENT OF TYPES AND ANTITYPES. 
 
 who ‘had heard from those who had seen the apostles 
 or from thosé who had been their disciples,’ that the 
 punishment declared in Scripture had been sufficient for 
 them. But ‘with respect to those actions on which the 
 Scriptures pass no censure, but which are simply set down 
 (as having occurred), we ought not to become accusers, for 
 we are not more exact than God, nor can we be superior 
 to our Master; but we ought to search for a type (in 
 them). For not one of those things which have been 
 set down in the Scriptures without being condemned is 
 without significance,’ (iv. 27, 13; iv. 31, 1). A good 
 example occurs in the story of Jael, the wife of Heber, 
 who slew Sisera, the captain of the Canaanites, by 
 piercing his temples. A blessing is pronounced on her 
 by Deborah; but as her song of triumph ends: ‘So 
 ‘shall thine enemies perish, O Lord,’ we think of Satan, 
 the captain of these enemies, whose head was to be 
 bruised, and of Goliath who was pierced in the forehead. 
 So the Psalmist says: ‘Do thou to them as to Midian, 
 as to Sisera, as to Jabin at the brook Kishon’ (Ps. 
 Ixxxiil. 9). The Midianitish host destroyed themselves 
 (Judges vii. 22); and Kishon means the ‘tortuous’ 
 stream. ‘Those whom God wills to destroy, He first 
 dements.’ Or, as the head has the senses, hearing, seeing, 
 tasting, through which sin entered and ruled, so through it 
 and them, sin’s power is crushed and its hosts rooted out. 
 
 Both type and antitype are historical realities, whose 
 moral 1s discerned spiritually and rationally. 
 
 In all learning there are stages, the more elementary 
 serving as a preparation for the more advanced. Thus 
 the elementary types of Judaism were superseded by 
 Christian antitypes. But men, who are in the body, 
 must still be addressed through their organs of percep- 
 ‘tion. They must hear or see or feel in order to appre+ 
 
THE WORD AND WISDOM. 107 
 
 hend. There are thus in all learning outward signs, 
 addressed to the eye or the ear, and a certain mental 
 action, which apprehends more or less distinctly the 
 meaning of that which is presented. The external ex- 
 hibition of the truth, read, seen, or heard, is associated 
 in the Bible with the Word of God; the internal power 
 by which a man apprehends the truth, is associated in 
 the Bible with the Holy Spirit, which was also called 
 by the early Fathers the Wisdom of God. The process 
 by which a man comes to know about God is analogous 
 to that by which he comes to know other things ; there 
 is presented outwardly, an object read, seen, feltor 
 heard, which the mind is stimulated more or less to 
 discern but of which it may be a careless observer. In 
 this way, David prayed that his eyes might be opened 
 to see wondrous things out of the law (Ps. cxix. 18). 
 To the ancient prophets objects were presented ; and, 
 although, no doubt, they were specially fitted, both 
 morally and intellectually, to receive these revelations, 
 yet we know that they sometimes did not fully under- 
 stand the meaning of the objects although they described 
 them (Dan. xii. 9). Our Lord was present wth the 
 disciples, being manifested outwardly zo them, that the 
 spirit of truth might also be zz them, that they might know 
 the truth inwardly as a matter of understanding and 
 conviction (John xiv. 17). ‘They were,’ he said, ‘slow 
 of heart to understand ;’ and His exhortations to look 
 and hear are often remarkable (Luke xxiv. 25; Mark 
 xiii. 33). In the gospel history we have the divine 
 Ideal manifested to us; but we must not only read this 
 history, but mark, learn and inwardly digest its meaning, 
 that we may become more and more like this image. 
 Rationalism denies the facts, the wisdom of the world 
 ‘seeks transcendental fancies in them ; but to sober reason 
 
108 THE DISCERNMENT OF TYPES AND ANTITYPES. 
 
 and sound wisdom, the word is not hid in deep, infinite 
 abysses, but ‘nigh, that we may do it’ (Deut. xxx. 11-14). 
 
 There is this important difference between the Old 
 Testament Dispensation and the gospel that ‘the Jews 
 did not possess the explanation of those enigmatical parts 
 of the law which relate to our Lord’s incarnation and 
 history ; and, for this reason, when the law is read to 
 them at the present day, it appears to them as a fable’ 
 (Iren. iv. 26, 1). The least in the kingdom of heaven is 
 ina better position to understand the meaning hid under 
 the drapery of the Old Testament service than even John 
 the Baptist. Nevertheless, the same method of teaching 
 is followed ; an external history is placed before us, from 
 which we must draw lessons for life. Our Lord’s words 
 express the sense and spirit of His history ; He thus in 
 a manner dramatised His teaching, speaking to us by 
 His actions as well as by His voice. He calls Himself 
 the bread of life, for we must digest the meaning of 
 what He revealed and practise it in order to live. His 
 blood is His mind or spirit which we must imbibe. He 
 is the truth; we believe in Him, when we hear the 
 Word of God and do it, that is, when we act as if we 
 believed it, ‘If ye believe not that or what I am, He 
 said to the Jews, ‘ye shall die in your sins. Therefore 
 said they unto Him, Who art thou? And Jesus said 
 unto them, Originally and in very deed what I also 
 speak (talk) unto you (John viii. 24, 25).’1 He, whose 
 
 1 The expression thy dpxhv means either originally or in very deed. 
 The Greek word Aadéw means to speak or talk; a different word, Aéym. 
 means to say or ze/l. The word 7, translated ‘hat in wv. 24 and 28, 
 occurs as a relative in its divided form 8 7, in verse 25, but some MSS. 
 have here also S7t. The sense would be more intelligible if we were to 
 read in all three verses 8 71, what (the indefinite of 0, shat which), instead 
 of drt, that. 
 
MODERATION AND EXTRAVAGANCE OF THOUGHT. I09 
 
 bodily presence was with them, was, in the beginning, 
 the Word of God. 
 
 When our Lord spoke thus of the necessity of eating 
 His flesh and drinking His blood, the Jews disputed 
 how He could give them His flesh to eat. There has 
 been a tendency, ever afterwards, to understand such 
 sayings too literally. A material change is brought 
 about by material agency ; a moral and spiritual trans- 
 formation is not wrought by occult physica] agency, but 
 through the personal influence of a higher nature and 
 the knowledge of the truth. Even a dog’s nature is 
 elevated by intercourse with man. We must endeavour 
 to understand the objects presented to us so as to prac- 
 tise the truth or moral embodied in them. To look for 
 some occult power of transformation residing in the 
 object presented, to expect to receive the good by mere 
 eating and drinking, or by some mysterious application 
 of transcendental agencies or ideas, apart from the 
 established laws of human development, is to believe 
 in magic. If we could eat the body or the bones of 
 Shakespeare, it would not help us to understand his 
 meaning. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and 
 that which is born of the spirit is spirit. Self-denial 
 and sound judgment are not put into a man by any 
 occult transubstantiation, by what Sydney Smith jocu- 
 larly called a surgical operation. 
 
 According to Irenzeus,! the natural man does not 
 receive the things of God, because he leaves the study of 
 that which relates to a straightforward and self-denying 
 course of life, and proudly goes into matters of which he 
 has no perception, quibbling in a disputatious way. The 
 epilogue, import (sum and substance) of apostolic teach- 
 
 ' Clark’s Zren@zus, vol. ii. pp. 75, 1753; 1 Cor. il. 
 
IIO0 THE’ DISCERNMENT OF TYPES: AND ANTITYPES. 
 
 ing is truth without figure, easy of comprehension to the 
 obedient. But the natural man is too proud or too 
 animal to receive these things of God. The practical 
 meaning of Christianity isa key to the deep things of 
 God. ‘The first thing,’ says Ireneus, ‘ is surely to deny 
 one’s self and to follow Christ ; and those who do this 
 are borne onwards to perfection.’ ‘To those who be- 
 lieve in Him and follow Him, He grants a fuller and 
 greater illumination of mind’ (iv. 39, 1). The simple 
 precepts of Christ, or such plain truths as encourage a 
 man to follow His example in the hope of eternal life, 
 are the milk; the enigmatical representations do not 
 mean anything contrary to this. God ‘sketches out, like 
 an architect, the plan of salvation to those who please 
 Him’ (iv. 14, 2); but those who can explain best ‘ His 
 operation connected with human salvation, recognise 
 God’s work in ‘small things’ prescribed for the good of 
 the weak and the headstrong. 
 
 The Christian doctrine does not, therefore, consist of 
 mere milk or simple statements of truth. Its mysteries 
 are deep things hid in parables. Types have been super- 
 seded, but the antitypes must not be misunderstood. A 
 statue and its shadow may both represent the same 
 man; so baptism and the deluge, our Lord’s work and 
 the Jewish sacrifice, may both represent the same truths, 
 the antitype being, like the statue,a much more definite 
 representation than the weak, shadowy type. The word 
 type is not synonymous with symbol. A symbol, accord- 
 ing to Webster, is the sign or representation of something 
 moral or intellectual by means of images or properties 
 of natural things. A type contained a prophecy of 
 some future exhibition of truth, whose place it occupied 
 both as a symbol of truth and asa discipline. ‘When 
 
SOBER REASON AND RATIONALISM. Lid 
 
 the thing typified is exhibited, said South, ‘a type is 
 no longer a type.’ The typical washings, sacrifices, and 
 exercises of religious worship are no longer an unfulfilled 
 prophecy, but have been superseded by the gospel 
 history and sacraments, by the appearance of the grace 
 which bringeth salvation to all men and which disci- 
 plines us to exercise /ovzxg self-denial (Tit. ii. 11 ; 1 Cor. 
 ix.23; Heb. xii. 6, 7). But though the old shadows have 
 given place to the substance, still Christianity is not 
 without its symbolic parables and its deeptruths. Even 
 Christ Himself must be known after the spirit (2 Cor. v. 
 16). The first converts to Christianity saw the higher 
 truths in a mirror, in an enigma ; and, for the thorough 
 knowledge of the mystery, a matured ‘skill in the word’ 
 was necessary so that they should not misconstrue it 
 Ce Oeniilo=15 ForcitimD2 wbinCors iy r8oyr Colieysy 
 Medien 6. LHebaxiat 4): 
 
 The sort of rationalism which is subversive of the 
 Christian faith, is not the endeavour to understand the 
 spiritual meaning or sense of the Scripture history, but 
 the attempt to set aside the reality of the narrative, to 
 explain away the facts of which it is composed as mere 
 didactic fables or as parables or allegories which never 
 actually took place. Thus, in a recent book, the five 
 thousand are represented not as having been fed literally 
 with bread, in order to teach us a lesson, but as having 
 themselves got nothing except spiritual food ; while the 
 crumbs were merely the multiplication of God’s grace 
 and truth in the hands of the ministering apostles. The 
 gospel narrative tells us that the devils entered into the 
 swine and drove them to self-destruction; and this 
 history is an appropriate image of the way in which 
 swinish men are infatuated by their lusts and, as it were, 
 
IIlI2Z2 THE DISCERNMENT OF TYPES AND ANTITYPES. 
 
 driven to self-destruction ; but the writer of this book 
 thinks it more credible that devils should enter into men 
 in the shape of swine! So when it is said that the 
 disciples saw that the fig-tree was withered, the disciples, 
 according to this interpreter, merely understood what 
 our Lord meant. But St. Peter expressly contradicts 
 this sort of rationalism, declaring that it was not in 
 pursuance of cunningly devised fables that the apostles 
 made known the power and coming of the Lord Jesus, 
 but as eye-witnesses and ear-witnesses (1 Pet. i. 16-18). 
 Paul had given up high prospects among his country- 
 men; and what with want of food and clothing, what 
 with homelessness, buffetings and defamatory abuse, his 
 life was a daily death. What sense, he asked, would 
 there be in his submitting to this, if he thought that the 
 resurrection was past, a mere figure of speech? (1 Cor. 
 iv. II ; Xv. 15, 29-32). 
 
 The Gnostics, in the first ages of Christianity, made 
 similar attempts to unsettle the basis of Christian facts 
 or adapt them to transcendental theories. Irenzeus, in 
 answering them, recapitulates in a creed, like that of the 
 apostles, the substance of what was believed in all the 
 churches of Germany, Spain, Gaul, the East, Egypt, 
 Libya and Palestine, contrasting the unity of this faith 
 with the results of the Gnostic method. The testimony 
 of Irenzeus, who was well acquainted with the Eastern 
 as well as the Western churches, is confirmed by that of 
 a still earlier traveller called Hegesippus; and we may 
 fairly conclude that this tradition would not have been 
 the same everywhere, if the things reported had not been 
 actual facts but cunningly devised parables. According 
 to Irenzus, ‘the Gnostics abused the Scriptures by en.- 
 deavouring to support their wild systems out of them,’ 
 
ONE SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE FAITH. 113 
 
 ‘collecting expressions scattered here and there and 
 twisting them from a natural to a non-natural sense,’ and 
 in order to show that ‘the rule of the truth, received at 
 baptism and proclaimed by the Church, is immovable,’ 
 he compares its unity with the inconsistencies resulting 
 from their ‘method.’ And as to some ‘ knowing’ more 
 or less in the way of understanding, this consists not in 
 changing the subject-matter (t7d@zow, the faith) itself, 
 nor in conceiving another God beyond the Contriver, 
 Creator, and Nourisher of this Universe, as if this were 
 insufficient ; not in soaring transcendentally into a region 
 of spirit, which we can neither see nor describe ; not in 
 conjuring up an Infinite of whom the righteously good 
 God is but a dark image or defective type ; not in bring- 
 ing in another Father destitute of provident care or of 
 power, or one who even consents to or decrees (consen- 
 Zientem) all sins, to whom all men must be alike neither 
 praiseworthy nor blameworthy, instead of the God of 
 power, providence, and judgment, who leaves to His 
 created image, man, some real freedom of choice, and 
 who, in distributing His goodness, judges men (Bk. iv. 
 19, 1; v. 26, 2; 27): ‘but this knowledge consists in bring- 
 ing out the meaning of those things which have been 
 spoken in parables, and accommodating them to the 
 groundwork of the faith, and explaining the modes of 
 dealing and dispensation of God connected with hu- 
 manity. Then follow other interesting details of what 
 Irenzus considers the proper object for the exercise of 
 this superior skill (Irenzus, Bk. 1, chaps. ix. and x). 
 The uniformity as well as the steadfastness of belief 
 among the early Christians as to the historical facts is 
 one of the most convincing proofs that the subject-mat- 
 ter of Christianity was really witnessed and not invented, 
 I 
 
114 
 
 CHAPTER: IT, 
 
 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 THE -olx DAYS: OF (CREA EION: 
 
 WE have, as the very first chapter of revelation, an 
 account how God formed the heavens and the earth out 
 of chaos; and if He does not intend that we should 
 spiritualise away or doubt the reality of what He pre- 
 sents as objective truth, we may expect to find that 
 there is no material discrepancy between this account 
 and the well-established results of scientific investigation. 
 In examining the account, however, it is necessary to 
 bear in mind that our scientific terminology has been 
 elaborated by turning the names of natural things toa 
 more extended sense ; and that,in the time of Moses, 
 the Hebrew people had the primitive language but not 
 its scientific development. 
 
 According to the theory of Laplace, the matter of 
 which the sun and the planets are composed was at a 
 very remote period in a nebulous state, that is, dispersed 
 loosely or as fluids over the space now intervening 
 between these bodies. Nebulous appearances are still 
 visible in the heavens and may possibly be embryo sys- 
 tems, worlds in the course of formation. The interior of 
 the earth is proved in all probability to be intensely hot, 
 and the crystalline structure of such rocks as granite 
 
THE WATERS AND THE DAYS OF GENESIS. I15 
 
 shows that the particles of which they were composed 
 were at one time molten and free to move about readily 
 among one another. There is some ground, therefore, 
 for presuming that our solar system was at one time 
 similar to these nebule ; and that the matter of it, in the 
 course of time, gradually arranged itself round certain 
 centres of attraction which served as the nuclei of the 
 several bodies. By waters, in the first chapter of Genesis, 
 we may understand fluzds or fluid matters, for in Hebrew 
 the word wader contains the idea of flowing or being 
 molten, as the English word water is itself connected 
 with the Sanscrit roots uda, the sea, and znd, to flow. 
 
 In the epistle to the Hebrews, the six days of creation 
 are called ages.' The writer is reviewing the course of 
 
 ' The meaning of the Greek word aidy, age, and the derivative adjec- 
 tive, aimvios, translated eternal, has been much discussed. Aristotle, who 
 believed in the eternity of matter, defined the aidy, or age, of the visible 
 universe to be eternity and infinitude, that beyond which nothing exists, as 
 the aidy (the age or life-time) of anything else is what it is by itself 
 entirely. Material existence may vary in form; the phases are produced ; 
 but the sum of what exists by itself entirely is unchangeably the same. 
 According to Plato, the Father of the visible universe made it an image of 
 eternity (ai@vos), or of the intelligible living Being, as much as might be. 
 The pattern zs for all eternity (wavra ai@vd éorw dv); but the image has 
 been, and zs, and wll be produced perpetually (8: réAous) throughout all 
 time. Plato, however, had ideas of God’s retributive justice as well as 
 His goodness, | ‘ God,’ he says, ‘as He is the ancient Word, does every- 
 thing rightly, moving about existing things according to their nature; but 
 retributive justice always follows Him against those who depart from the 
 divine law.’ Philo says that in eternity (ev aidv) ‘nothing is past, nothing 
 is about to be, but only subsists.’ The idea that with God there is no past 
 or future, but only an eternal ow, is a philosophical fancy and not a part 
 of the Christian faith. Christianity teaches us that the Father has pur- 
 poses and works them out, but that these purposes concern a creature to 
 whom He gives a power of self-determination ; that He works out His 
 purposes in consistency with reason and with the indestructible freedom 
 essential to manhood; and that in doing so a ¢housand years are as one day. 
 
 I 2 
 
116 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 biblical history from the beginning, in order to show the 
 nature of faith. ‘By faith,’ he says, ‘we understand 
 that the ages (not worlds) were framed (orderly prepared) 
 by the word of God, so that that which is seen (visible) was 
 ‘not produced out of things which appear’ (Heb: xi.<3). 
 The writer goes on to speak of Abel and Cain, Enoch, 
 Noah, and others in succession. The analogy of an 
 evening and a morning in such ages appears in the word 
 Eocene applied to the first deposits of the Tertiary form- 
 ation, in which the life of our present era begins to 
 aawn. 
 
 Tue First DAy or AGE.—‘The spirit of God 
 moved cn the face of the waters, and God said, Let there 
 be light, and there was light.’ According to modern 
 science, motion forms an essential element in the genera- 
 tion of heat and light, both of which would by motion be 
 distributed over the entire nebula and not confined to the 
 sun. : 
 
 Tur SECOND Day.—The waters or fluids of our 
 earth were separated from the waters or fluids of other 
 centres by means of ‘an expanse’ or extent of space, 
 which God called Aeavex. The word means properly 
 something beaten out or spread out or extended, and 
 ought not to be translated firmament but expanse. 
 
 Ture Turrp Day.—When the surface of the earth 
 cooled, it would naturally bend into ridges and hollows, 
 as we see in the case of smaller bodies. Into these 
 hollows the waters would naturally retreat, so that the 
 dry land would appear. Heat and moisture are favour- 
 able to vegetation ; and as the Mosaic account describes a 
 vegetation at this epoch, so Geology discloses an exuber- 
 
 (Plato’s Zim. c. 10; De Leg. iv.; Aristotle, mep) odpavod, i. 9, 10; Philo 
 de Mundo, § 7; Iren. iii. 25, 5; Beble Treas. for June 1878.) 
 
THE SAME ORDER IN BOTH ACCOUNTS. Be 
 
 ant vegetation, from which beds of coal were formed, at 
 so early an epoch that sometimes half a mile of strata 
 has accumulated over them. 
 
 THE FourTH Day OR AGE.—When the planets 
 became cooled externally, they ceased to be luminous ; 
 but the sun, being a much larger body, has retained its 
 light and heat. It may even have increased them by 
 reason of loose bodies, which, after revolving round it 
 in ever narrowing circles, eventually fall into it with 
 prodigious velocity. When the earth came to depend 
 on the sun for its supply of light, the days and months 
 and seasons were defined. 
 
 THE FirtH Day.—God formed great monsters 
 and creeping creatures, with which the waters abound, 
 and winged fowl. Geology shows us monsters half-fish 
 half-lizard (the ichthyosaurus), and winged monsters (the 
 pterodactyl), coming after the coal formation. 
 
 THE SIXTH Day.—God prepared creeping things 
 of the ground and land quadrupeds, domestic and wild. 
 The Geological remains follow the same order as the 
 Mosaic account. At last man was formed bodily out of 
 the matter of the earth, with an animal nature. Every- 
 thing which God had previously made was very good, 
 but there was progress in His work. We must not 
 suppose that Adam had reached the final stage of this 
 progress all at once. He was perfect as a natural or 
 animal man, with capacities for future progress. Moses 
 says nothing as to the mode in which he was created, 
 or the connection between his life and that of other 
 animals. Even if it were proved that creatures very 
 like Adam in form pre-existed, it would still be open to 
 enquiry whether they had the mental conditions of men, 
 whether they had Adam’s power of naming or sufficient 
 
118 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 power of reflection to be capable of distinguishing good 
 from evil. 
 
 THE SEVENTH DAY OR SABBATH.—After man 
 had been created, God entered into His rest, as if He 
 would now be satisfied in a creature who could under- 
 stand and admire His works. Our Lord, in speaking 
 of the Sabbath, drew a parallel between His work and 
 that of the Father's (John v. 19). Previous to His being 
 made man, He had, as the Word of God, given several 
 dispensations, connected with the histories of Adam, 
 Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, the Temple, and the 
 Prophets ; and when, in ‘the end of the ages, the divine 
 Worker came as man, He called His followers no longer 
 slaves, who could not understand what their Lord was 
 doing, but friends (John xv. 15), in whom He would see 
 of the travail of His soul and be satisfied, as God was in 
 the first man, who could understand His works. When 
 men appreciate more or less intelligently what God is 
 doing, they, so to speak, sympathise with it; they enter 
 into God’s service with cheerfulness and thankfulness, 
 esteeming it not a bondage but a saving grace, a favour 
 or privilege of sons ; not grievous but light ; not labour 
 but rest (Matt. xi. 28-30; 1 John v. 3). Menno longer 
 serve God in the bondage of ignorance or in shadowy 
 ritualisms which they cannot understand, but rationally 
 (Rom. xii. 1); they understand that God does not 
 demand service because He needs it, or because they 
 merit it, but that He may do us good. Of this sabba- 
 tism or sabbath-keeping David spoke as the fulfilment 
 of the Sabbath day ; and it comes by faith, by listening 
 to the voice of that prophetic Spirit which God gives to 
 mankind. But those who harden their hearts against the 
 knowledge of His ways, shall not enter into His rest 
 le: aV% oP sxc ie 
 
THE REST REMAINING TO THE PEOPLE OF GOD. II9 
 
 As God rested from His final judgment, in mercy de- 
 laying toconsummate Hisstrange work (Is, xxviil. 21, 22), 
 so we are required to cease from our own peculiar works 
 (Heb. iv. 10). Now man’s own works, those which he 
 does by himself, when left to himself, those of which he is 
 the originator, those to which he is not prompted by the 
 teachings of God, are evil, selfish works, as deceits, 
 oppressions, hard exactions. God is enlightening the 
 earth with a great light; therefore His people are to 
 
 ‘cease from the works of darkness, and be kind and good 
 to all men, wisely considering their case. The meaning 
 of the Sabbath rest is that the wicked man should for- 
 sake Ais way and the unrighteous man /zs thoughts ; 
 that he should learn to do as God does and think as 
 He thinks; that he should delight himself in the Lord 
 and in His bountiful work—this is the day that is ac- 
 ceptable to the Lord. ‘Be ye therefore merciful, says 
 our Lord, ‘as your heavenly Father also is merciful. 
 Judge not and ye shall not be judged, condemn not and 
 ye shall not be condemned’ (Luke vi. 37, 38). As God 
 rests from speedily executing wrath, as He fills men’s 
 hearts with food and gladness, and seeks to bless them 
 in turning them away from their evil ways, so we also 
 are enjoined not to judge men, not to mete out to them 
 rigorously as they have done to us, not to treat them 
 according to their evil deeds or refuse to help them 
 when they turn from them; we are required to do good 
 to all men as we have opportunity, even to our enemies, 
 as God sends His rain even to the unthankful and to 
 the unholy. Our heavenly Father counts it His su- 
 preme pleasure to heal the misery of those who turn 
 from their wickedness; He sent His Son to minister to 
 our wants, and to save us when we were yet sinners ; 
 therefore we must not seek our own selfish aggrandise- 
 
120 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 ment, or /abour, like the heathen, for those pleasures 
 which come from sense and show; we must seek first 
 the kingdom of God and His Rigo gumtiess for: ince 
 life of patient continuance in well doing we shall find 
 heavenly rest, and participate in that satisfaction with 
 which God beheld all that He had made. 
 
 GOD's REST TURNED INTO A SNARE AND A BuR- 
 DEN.—The tendency of mankind to forget the spirit of 
 a religious ordinance, under cover of a most intolerant 
 zeal for a religious literal interpretation of its meaning, 
 is illustrated by the history of Sabbath observance. 
 From Isaiah downwards, the prophets protested against 
 men’s ‘counting the great things of God’s law asa strange 
 thing’ (Hosea viii. 12), while they soothed their con- 
 sciences by overdoing the formalities of religion. In 
 speaking of days observed as religious rites, Isaiah says: 
 ‘Behold in the day of your fast, ye find (your) pleasure, 
 and exact all your labours. Behold ye fast for strife and 
 debate and to smite with the fist of wickedness ; ye 
 shall not fast as for a day, to make your voice to be 
 heard on high. Is it such a fast as I have chosen? a 
 day fora man to afflict his soul? Is it to bow down 
 his head as a bulrush and to spread sackcloth and ashes 
 under him? Wilt thou call this a fast and an acceptable 
 day unto the Lord? Is not the fast that I have chosen 
 to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy 
 burdens and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye 
 break every yoke? Is it not that thou deal thy bread 
 to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast 
 out to thine house? when thou seest the naked that 
 thou cover him, and that thou hide not thy face from 
 thine own flesh? . . . If thou turn away thy foot from the 
 Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, .. . 
 not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own 
 
MERCY AND NOT SACRIFICE. I2I 
 
 pleasure, nor speaking (thine own) words, then shalt 
 thou delight thyself in the Lord’ (Isaiah lviii.).!. The 
 prophet Amos loudly protests against that pretence of 
 religion which consists in keeping days, and practising 
 solemn ceremonies with music, while all the time, under 
 cover of this, men were practising the grossest wrongs. 
 ‘When will the Sabbath be gone ?’ they said to them- 
 selves, ‘that we may sell corn, using false weights, . 
 that we may buy (or sell) the poor for silver and the 
 needy for a pair of shoes ?’ (Amos vili. 5, 6). 
 
 Many of our Lord’s miraculous works of healing 
 were done on the Sabbath. In answer to the Pharisees 
 who considered this a breach of it, He quoted the passage 
 in Hosea vi. 6: ‘I desired mercy and not sacrifice,’ show- 
 ing what was the proper spirit and what was the mistaken 
 spirit, in which the Sabbath might be observed. In 
 carrying out God’s merciful thoughts to men, in deliver- 
 ing them from sin and its morbid and deadly conse- 
 quences, our Lord was interpreting and fulfilling the 
 Sabbath. But the Jewish rulers concluded that He was 
 not of God because He did these works on the Sabbath. 
 They imagined that, by doing good on the Sabbath 
 day, He was setting aside the fourth commandment. 
 ‘The insensate and self-satisfied scrupulosities of the 
 Rabbis had turned a rich blessing into a burden anda 
 snare.’ 
 
 It is instructive to observe that modern mistakes are 
 often old foes with a new tace; and, inthis matter of the 
 Sabbath, it is the duty of parents and teachers to see 
 that, in the education of the young, what is intended as 
 a rich blessing should not even now be turned into a 
 
 1 This law forbade serzzle work and gain-getting on the Sabbath, but 
 exhorted men who were without understanding and hard-hearted, to ve- 
 
 fiection, to good words and good deeds towards their neighbours. This is 
 what Isaiah here inculcates (Iren. iv. 8, 2; Justin’s Dzal. c. 27). - 
 
I22 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 burden and a snare. The Westminster Confession of 
 Faith was written by men who imagined that the world 
 was brought into its present state in the space of six 
 natural days, and seem to have had no other idea of 
 entering into God’s rest than by ceasing from all ordi- 
 nary thoughts, words, and actions for twenty-four hours, 
 ‘The Sabbath,’ says the Shorter Catechism, ‘is to be 
 sanctified by a holy resting all that day even from such 
 worldly employments and recreations as are lawful on 
 other days, and in spending the wole time in the public 
 and private exercise of God’s worship, except so muchas 
 is to be taken up in the works of necessity and mercy.’ 
 ‘The Sabbath,’ says the Confession, ‘is then kept holy 
 unto the Lord, when men... do not only observe an 
 holy rest all the day from their own works, words, and. 
 thoughts about their worldly employments and recreations, 
 but are also taken up the whole time in the public and 
 private exercises of His worship and in the works of 
 necessity and mercy.’ The authors of the Confession of 
 Faith therefore understand by God’s worship not the 
 pure ‘religious worship’ which St. James speaks of (i. 27), 
 using a word which means worship and is translated so 
 in Col. ii. 18. They seem not to have understood that 
 God’s thoughts are not as our thoughts, nor His ways 
 our ways, inasmuch as ‘the imagination of the thoughts 
 of man’s heart is only evil continually’ in his selfish 
 or untaught state, while God sends His rain bountifully 
 on all, seeking to lead the unthankful and the unholy to 
 repentance by His goodness, giving to all, liberally, who 
 do not cast His gifts away, and upbraiding none who ask 
 wisdom. According to the two Catechisms, the works 
 of mercy are exceptional, like the works of necessity ; 
 they are counted as a strange thing (Hosea viii. 12), not 
 
TAMPERING WITH THE CONSCIENCE. 123 
 
 as an exercise of public and private worship, not as the 
 great thing. But do we not thus run a risk of falling 
 into the error which the prophets so loudly denounced, 
 of making a great deal of these exercises, and, under 
 cover of them, forgetting mercy, ‘ holding the balances of 
 deceit in the hand and loving to oppress?’ (Hosea xii. 7). 
 Another terrible evil must result from such teaching. If. 
 we can imagine a full-grown man, with deep insight 
 into heavenly things, keeping his mind fixed for an en- 
 tire day wholly on subjects apart altogether from ordi- 
 nary life, let anyone think of the consequences of binding 
 such a rule on the consciences of the young or of those 
 to whom indigestible doctrines are presented. If, for 
 instance, ina boarding school, boys are taught that it is 
 absolutely sinful to think or to speak of anything but 
 God or religious subjects, as usually presented, would 
 they not all of them habitually transgress such a com- 
 mandment, especially if the ‘seed’ of doctrine sown be 
 such as will not grow in the ‘garden’ of the human 
 mind? But to him that thinketh a thing to be evil and 
 does it, to him it is sin (Rom. xiv.) ; and it is just in 
 these repeated tamperings with man’s sense of duty, that 
 the foundation of a bad character is laid. We are not 
 under a grievous law, which cannot be borne, or which is 
 intended to multiply sin; we are under the dispensation 
 of reconciliation, and will be cast out of God’s kingdom 
 unless we give up what is offensive. It is one thing to 
 know what right and wrong are, and another thing to be 
 habitually, and as a matter of course, tampering with one’s 
 sense of duty. Ifamanor a boy habitually and even 
 deliberately violates what he believes to be his duty in 
 the matter of Sabbath-keeping, is he not likely to begin 
 very soon to take other liberties with his conscience—to 
 
124. THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 lie, to cheat ? And where will hestop? Some teachers 
 are fond of tracing a life of sin back to Sabbath-breaking, 
 showing that men’s downward career began with this 
 offence, but some of these are the very men who bind 
 the duty of Sabbath observance on the conscience in a 
 way which it is difficult, burdensome, if not impossible, 
 to be borne. And if they thus make the Sabbath a 
 ‘burden and a snare,’ are they quite guiltless of their 
 brother's blood? Let them imagine, for instance, the 
 effect produced on the unfortunate author of ‘Caleb 
 Williams, when his father, a dissenting minister, sternly 
 rebuked him for fondling a cat on Sunday! Surely 
 boys should be brought up with a more common-sense 
 notion of the Sunday—thatit is a day for rest from labour, 
 for receiving religious instruction, and for those friendly 
 and charitable offices which, from the necessities of busi- 
 ness, cannot be attended to during the week-days. A 
 boy is sent away from home to learn; but, if ne were 
 kept constantly at his books during the week days, 
 without intermission, the purpose for which he is sent 
 from home would be defeated. So he might be taught 
 that it is not binding on his conscience to keep his mind 
 fixed the whole day, without intermission, on religious 
 subjects, as in prayer, songs of praise, in religious read- 
 ing, meditation or conversation ; for then the very object 
 of the Sunday would be defeated, and instead of being 
 to him a ‘rich blessing,’ it would become a ‘burden and 
 a snare. The Sabbath was made for man, and not man 
 for the Sabbath.! 
 
 ' But Sabbatarians say that, as God judged it to be for man’s vood to 
 spend the whole day in religious observances, we must not presume to 
 judge otherwise. A recent report sets it down (1878) as a case of Sabbath- | 
 breaking that young ploughmen should visit their parents on that day, and 
 carry back their clean clothes. 
 
THES BROPITIATING: OBEDIENCE) OF “CHRISTE. 125 
 
 LHe TWO; ADAMS? 
 MAN’S SUBJECTION TO LAW. 
 Neque solvens suam legem in se generis humani.—/vem. il. 22, 4. 
 
 THE laws of nature are known to us by the regularity 
 of their action; and, if God’s moral laws were not 
 also uniformly carried out, we should have no sure 
 knowledge of them. The first or elementary law of 
 symbolical commandments was, no doubt, to be super- 
 seded ; but it must serve its purpose as a platform or 
 dramatic stage on which God’s eternal and law-keeping 
 character is exhibited ; it must be fulfilled before it is 
 takenaway. If good had come to men merely out of its 
 breach and not from its fulfilment, then any declaration 
 that God carries out His words and executes vengeance 
 would have been falsified by this fact, and the serpent’s 
 suggestion that God did not mean to fulfil His word 
 would have been verified. If it had appeared that by 
 the mere breaking of the first law, without its having 
 been fulfilled and honoured, we had come indeed to lose 
 natural life but to inherit a much better and enduring 
 life, then we might have been encouraged to think that 
 God’s words do pass away, and to hope to partake in 
 what is good and pleasant by falling. But this lesson 
 would, according to Irenzus, be contradictory to what 
 uc Lord.) came-to..teach + (v..22,..2)«. ‘Our Loerdiihe 
 also says, ‘did not set aside in His own case that law 
 which He had appointed for the human race’ (ii. 22, 4), 
 being subject to His parents, paying tribute, labouring 
 to do good, enduring temptation. His history was an 
 ‘actual proof’ of what He taught (v. 21, 3); or, to-use 
 the words of Clement of Alexandria, he ‘enacted the 
 drama of our salvation.’ 
 
126 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 In order to exhibit the effect of the righteous 
 sentence of the law, the Second Man must not be under 
 death, the condemning sentence of the law, by any 
 necessity of birth. Other men exhibited, as natural 
 men, the consequences of breaking the law, inasmuch as 
 they all came under the power of death ; and they were 
 thus precluded or disqualified from showing forth, on the 
 same platform, the consequences of obedience. Our Lord, 
 however, says Irenzus, ‘obtained the prize of victory, 
 descending from the Father, regarding and fulfilling all 
 the conditions of human nature; that, as in heavenly, 
 spiritual, and invisible things the Word of God _ is 
 supreme, so also, in things visible and corporeal, He 
 might take to Himself the pre-eminence, and draw all 
 things to Himself at the proper time’ (iii. 16, 6; iii. 17, 
 4; iii. 18, 2). His work was thus an embodiment 
 of the truth for the sake of our needs. As man, He 
 subjected Himself to all man’s limitations and debility ; 
 and, having become a member of Jewish society, He did 
 not suspend the laws of society in His own favour. 
 Evil men, in the natural course of things, hate the truth 
 and persecute those whose conduct or teaching re- 
 proves them; and our Lord, who came to be an em- 
 bodiment of God’s word to men, submitted to all the 
 laws of things; teaching us that God’s laws will be 
 consistently carried out, and that we must follow the 
 same rule of life as He did. He was in all points 
 tempted as we are; He magnified God’s law by 
 submitting to it as well as by keeping it ; and thus He 
 has been raised from the dead and made the centre of 
 light and life to men. 
 
 Our Lord’s regard to His Father’s laws and His 
 patient endurance as our Forerunner or Pattern are 
 shown in His /adourzng to heal the evils about Him. 
 
THE LAW KEEPER AND SICKNESS BEARER. 127 
 
 Thus we read, in Matt. vii. 16, 17, that they brought 
 unto Him many that were possessed with devils, and He 
 cast out the evil spirits with His word, and healed all 
 that were sick, that it might be fulfilled which was 
 spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying, ‘ Himself took our 
 infirmities and bare our sicknesses.’ The quotation is 
 from Isaiah liii. 4, the chapter which speaks most clearly . 
 of the nature of our Lord’s sufferings. Our Lord did 
 not will to annihilate those evil consequences which, in 
 the course of things established by God, flow from sin, 
 but He bare them as one of us, labouring to heal men, 
 and falling asleep, apparently from fatigue, in the storm 
 which followed. He became man and took upon Him- 
 self our infirmities that He might ‘serve asa law for 
 every age,’ and teach us that God’s laws will not be 
 broken, but that we live by following His example in sub- 
 mitting to them and in labouring patiently to do good. 
 The writings of the apostolic men are full of exhortations 
 to follow His example, not as if God needed our works, 
 but as if it were a grace or privilege or blessing to 
 ourselves to do good and even to suffer martyrdom! 
 ‘Stephen,’ says Irenzus, ‘fulfilled the perfect doctrine, 
 copying in every respect the Leader of Martyrdom, and 
 praying for those who were slaying him’ (ili. 12,13) A 
 new spring of action was brought in when men’s hopes 
 of immortal life were confirmed by the resurrection of 
 Christ. Labour, trouble, and even death may now 
 appear, as they did to Ignatius (Ep. ad Rom.), to be 
 opportunities for the attainment of perfection. This 
 revelation of God in Christ adapted to men, this changed 
 aspect of the Word, was the appointed means whereby 
 men should be conciliated and receive growth rationally 
 and without force, their enmity being turned away from 
 1 Hippolytus, i. 395; Justin Martyr, Deal. c. 7ryph. c. xi. 
 
128 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 God and His knowledge against the serpent ; for in no 
 other way could this be effected except our Master being 
 the Word had been made man, that we might see and 
 imitate our Teacher, “ear His voice, and be doers of His 
 words (iv. 40, 2; v. 1, 1). Secondly, this philanthropic 
 and law-honouring work of the Son was well-pleasing to 
 - the Father, and it makes men ‘ precious’ or well-pleasing 
 to Him by ‘ making them like the Son.’ It is thus said 
 to reconcile orpropitiates Him (wl 16 3293171) eas 
 also expressed by a Greek word (katallage) properly 
 meaning change, but translated atonement or reconciliation 
 (Rom. v. 11; 2 Cor. v. 18, 20). God’s purposes, however, 
 were not changed, but fulfilled. 
 
 THE THEORY OF THE ATONEMENT—that it is the 
 punishing of a substitute instead of the transgressor, or 
 the payment of the penalty due to a man’s sins, so that 
 he cannot justly have to suffer the punishment of azy of 
 his sins again, including sins of whatever kind, past, 
 present, and future—seems to have been first taught by 
 Anselm, and probably arose from pressing too closely 
 the ritual and figurative language of the Scriptures. 
 We must not forget that our Lord’s willing obedience 
 unto death was only jigured by the willingness of the 
 innocent lamb which was led to the slaughter; and that 
 the payment of a ransom is a money transaction, which 
 can only figure His work. In 1 Tim. ii. 6, our Lord is 
 called a ransom (antilutron) in behalf of all men ; and it © 
 is in the same passage declared that God wills all men to 
 be saved. If, therefore, this ransom were the literal price 
 or penalty due to all the sins of all men, and if He paid 
 it so that it could not be justly required again, then all 
 men must be saved; but is this consistent with other 
 plain biblical statements ? 
 
THE WORD MADE FLESH, I29 
 
 THE RECAPITULATION OF ALL THINGS. 
 
 The expression to ‘sum up,’ ‘ recapitulate,’ or ‘gather 
 into one head,’ is frequently used by Irenzeus, who thus 
 explains Paul’s use of the word (Iren. v. 20, 2 ; Eph. i. 
 10). ‘Into the paradise of life our Lord has introduced 
 those who obey His call, “ summing up ” all things which 
 are in heaven and earth. Now the things which are in 
 heaven are spiritual (unseen truths), while those things 
 which are on earth are arrangements or dispensations 
 connected with man’s first condition (secundum hominem 
 dispensatio, adaptations, e.g. visible exhibitions). Those 
 things, therefore, He recapitulated in Himself by uniting 
 man to the Spirit, and causing the Spirit to dwell in 
 man; He is thus made the head of the Spirit, and gives the 
 Spirit to be the head of man, for through Him (the Spirit) 
 we see and hear and speak.’ Adam was made in God’s 
 image, but it was not shown, ze. he neither knew it nor 
 reflected it, as light comes to us from the ruddy flesh of 
 the Second Man (iv. 20, 2). The Word was yet invi- 
 sible ; ence Adam easily cast off the likeness (v. 16, 2). 
 He was deceived and sinned ; death passed upon him ; 
 but the fear or prospect of death is itself a bondage. 
 Men require experience to know God and themselves 
 (iii. 20, 2), motives to encourage them to rise above ani- 
 _ mal enjoyments, to live as if they were not ‘to-morrow to 
 
 die” Our Lord brought life and immortality to light ; 
 He redeems man from darkness and the power of Satan 
 by revealing God in ways adapted to men’s state. In re- 
 capitulating past dispensations, He ‘became Himself 
 what was His image, and firmly re-established the like- 
 ness, bringing tn obedience and assent by the very things 
 (visible, &c.), wherein we did not hear or obey, solacing 
 (consolatus) both parties, that man through the visible 
 
 K 
 
130 THE WORD. OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 Word may acquire the quickening Spirit, and'through this 
 likeness to the Son may be dear to God’ (v. 12, 2, 3; 16, 2). 
 ‘The result of man’s disobedience proved that God was 
 true and that the serpent was false’ (v. 23,1); and our 
 Lord taught us ot to expect what ts good or pleasant 
 by falling (v. 21, 3; 22,2). As man had transgressed 
 God’s laws and become ‘death’s debtors,’ He also ‘ ob- 
 served the law of death,’ suffering in obedience to the 
 Father and rising again. He thus recapitulated the sen- 
 tence of the law in the case of disobedience as well as 
 obedience (v. 23, 2). Being a Teacher, coming to be 
 heard by all, and being what He seemed, He did not 
 reject or transcend the human, or set aside, in His own 
 case, that law which He had appointed for the human 
 race’ (ii.22,4). He conquered Satan fairly, using what he 
 abused, and being ¢vzly what He appeared. If He had 
 not been so truly, but had suffered only in appearance, 
 then He would have been misleading us when He ex- 
 horted us to follow His example. But though there be 
 one God and one salvation, yet the steps to salvation 
 are not a few. When men were ignorant they were 
 placed in a servile condition for their benefit. Our Lord 
 first drew slaves to God; and, when they were subject, 
 He set them free. He conferred greater benefits upon 
 us than the Temple, inasmuch as He conferred His own 
 presence and the resurrection from the dead. God the 
 Father has always more to measure out to those of His 
 household iv#G, 1, (2) 5 3p uve 13.54 3) Matte xiiiG)aaait 
 is the attribute of the Uncreated God to be perfect from 
 the beginning ; men must make progress. Paul, there- 
 fore, exhorts men to bear! the image of the heavenly, to 
 put on Christ, lest they lose incorruption, which is a bliss- 
 
 1 Cor. xv. 491 The MSS. vary between ze shad? bear and let us bear. 
 
- 
 
 OLD FOES WITH A NEW FACE. I31 
 
 ful and never-ending life with God. Our Lord showed by 
 ‘actual proof’ that immortality comes by the Spirit, and 
 is not inherent in our first nature, mere flesh and blood. 
 
 SEDUCING DOCTRINES OF SUBTILE SPIRITS. 
 
 ‘There is one God and one salvation,’ said Irenzus, 
 ‘but the steps to salvation are not a few. Man must 
 have animal desires before he can learn self-control or 
 virtue. The Gnostics, however, threw all the blame of 
 their own misconduct on their nature, ‘as if God had not 
 given us His Spirit and established a law adapted for the 
 good of all’ (v. 26, 2). They attributed this evil nature 
 to a fall of angels; and men still excuse themselves on 
 account of the fall of Adam, or they suppose that their 
 
 actions are caused by some natural power and come 
 
 about in the necessary course of evolution. But does it 
 materially alter the seductive doctrine to what cause men 
 assign their misconduct, if they imagine that they cannot 
 be held to be the responsible causes ; that ‘the Father 
 consents to all actions which take place and accounts all 
 men equal and in the same condition’? (v. 27, 1). Some 
 current opinions have a strong resemblance to those of 
 the Gnostics, who looked for salvation ‘ not by means of 
 conduct’ (Iren. i. 6, 2), not by being plastic in God’s 
 hands and bringing forth good fruit, not by being subject 
 to the Creator and His working, but by the deposition 
 of a spiritual seed in them. They said that ‘they were 
 saved by faith and love, and that they were free with 
 regard to all other things (i. 25, 5); that, by means of 
 some new birth or spiritual seed deposited in them, they 
 passed into an entirely new ‘sphere,’ where they were 
 above fear of the loss of salvation ; and ‘they despised 
 
 ordinary Christians, who, from the fear of God, guarded 
 K 2 
 
132 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 against sinning even in thought and word, as utterly 
 contemptible and ignorant persons. For they declare 
 that we receive grace for use (given conditionally, a talent 
 for use), wherefore it will again be taken from us; but 
 that they themselves have grace as their own special 
 possession ; and that, on this account, more will be 
 given them. Their salvation was secured by means of 
 the seed sent forth from the ‘sphere’ of God’s fulness in 
 a feeble and immature state and here brought to per- 
 fection (i. 6, 4, comp. Luke xix. 26). One of the 
 most conspicuous of these Gnostic teachers was Marcion, 
 a man against whose moral character none of his 
 opponents have spoken, but whose teaching was con- 
 demned with horror by Polycarp, Irenzeus, and the 
 early Church (Iren. iii. 3, 4; iv. 29-34). Carried away 
 with mistaken ideas about Paul’s doctrine of grace into 
 the notion that God is only good to some and only just 
 to others, he taught that there is a God of the law and 
 of nature who is only just; and that the God of grace, 
 who sent Jesus Christ to deliver men from this just God, 
 is only good. The God of love, according to Marcion, 
 requires no instrumental preparation of man’s nature, no 
 Old Testament prophecies preparatory to the mission of 
 Christ ; He is able to do all by His word and will alone. 
 He does not punish ; but those who refuse to accept the 
 proffered fellowship with Him fall under the power of 
 the just God of the law—the Demiurge, or Spirit of 
 nature. Whoever, on the other hand, enters into fellow- 
 ship with the Father, that is, the good God, through 
 faith in the Son of God, becomes partaker, even in this 
 world, of a divine life, superior to the power of the just 
 God and of the material world. For him there is no 
 longer any judgment ; he is delivered from the God of 
 
THE THEISTIC POSITION: OF: CHRISTIANITY...” 133 
 
 justice and is under the dominion of the God of love ; 
 all things shall work together for his good and conduct 
 him onward to eternal life ; the gospel by faith brings 
 him into such union with the fountain of divine life as 
 must manifest itself by a triumph over sin and by 
 holiness of living.! ‘But, says Irenzus, ‘if the judicial 
 God is not also good to bestow favours on the deserving. 
 and direct reproofs against those requiring them, He 
 will appear neither a wise nor a just judge. On the 
 other hand, the good God, if He is merely good and not 
 a God who tests those upon whom He sends His good- 
 ness, will be out of the range both of justice and good- 
 ness; and His goodness will seem imperfect as not 
 saving all, for it ought to do so, if it is not accompanied 
 with judgment. Marcion thus on both sides puts an 
 end to the Deity. God is good and merciful and patient, 
 and saves those whom He ought, nor does His goodness 
 desert Him in the exercise of justice, for His goodness 
 no doubt takes the precedency (iii. 25, 2,3). According 
 to the elders who followed the Apostles, the punishments 
 in the Old Testament were typical of much heavier and 
 more enduring punishments, which woulc be revealed 
 from the face of the Lord on those who rejected His 
 words and did not do them. Inrending Christianity from 
 its basis in the past and from all ideas of a just and righ- 
 teous retribution, Marcion, says Neander, lost sight of that 
 which characterises the theistic position of Christianity. 
 Adam’s first state is often- represented as if he had 
 been zaturally endowed with the ideas of right and wrong, 
 which children learn through experience, and even with 
 the Holy Spirit. But when he transgressed, the devil, 
 it is said, put suck an impress upon his nature, or, at all 
 1 Neander’s Church History, ii. 40, 147, 148, 
 
134 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 events, God removed His Holy Spirit in such a way, and 
 left man’s nature so beset with moral evil, that he has 
 lost all capacity for being taught or disciplined by God. 
 Those who get this capacity or ‘faculty’ are ‘born 
 again, and by virtue of this ‘seed’ become ‘spiritual ’ 
 men, who, as a matter of course, are influenced by God’s 
 teaching and discipline. Others may have some com- 
 mon influences of the Spirit, which cannot, however, 
 make them spiritually good and which will be removed. 
 It is not their nature to profit by God’s teaching. God 
 gives the capacity or faculty for being taught to some, 
 at the same time taking away their wish to resist God, 
 and making them to differ from others who do not get 
 this capacity or faculty. As all men are alike unteach- 
 able and opposed to God, it follows that no foreseen 
 conduct has anything to do with God’s determination to 
 make this distinction ; and, if Christ suffered the punish- 
 ment due to all the sins of some men, past, present, and 
 future, in their room and stead,’it would not be just to 
 allow them to suffer this punishment again. The robe 
 of Christ’s righteousness is thought of as put upon men 
 externally, not as woven into their natures, but as 
 “screening’ them and their characters, whatever they 
 are, from the eyes of the Judge both here and hereafter. 
 When such men are warned to abide in the truth and 
 not to be entangled again in the pollutions of the world, 
 the reason is represented to be, not that they may fall 
 away and become examples of God’s judgments, but 
 because men are not moved as machines, and, therefore, 
 God uses arguments, making them effectual in their 
 case. God’s warnings, therefore, are made to produce 
 the proper effect on them and to save them from the 
 danger of which they are warned ; while others, who do 
 
WISDOM AND LIBERTY. 135 
 
 not get the capacity for being moved by them or by 
 other offers and invitations, are merely condemned by 
 them. We might ask whether this representation is 
 likely to produce vigilant caution or diligent effort, or 
 whether it would not encourage a man to think that, 
 whether he shall or shall not surely die, he may as well 
 enjoy the pleasures of sin for a little while longer. | 
 Paul’s remarks about che wisdom of this world and the 
 deeds of the law have led some to confound folly with 
 spirituality, and to dream of being free to neglect God’s 
 laws of life. The Gnostics formed ‘opinions beyond the 
 limits of the human understanding’ so absurd and blas- 
 phemous that ‘all the hellebore upon earth would not 
 suffice to rid them of their intense folly’ (v. 30, 2 5 ii. 30, 
 1). Yet when any of their auditors asked explanations or 
 started objections, they affirmed that he had not received 
 seed from above, that he wasa natural man, and therefore 
 incapable of receiving the truth. But the real reason 
 why ‘the truth has been entrusted to children is because 
 it does not require any disguise’ (Iren. iii. 15,2). ‘A 
 sound mind,’ says Irenzus, ‘and one which does not 
 expose its possessor to danger, and is devoted to piety 
 and the love of truth, will eagerly meditate upon those 
 things which God has placed within the power of man- 
 kind and has subjected to our knowledge, and will make 
 advancement in (acquaintance with) them, rendering the 
 knowledge of them easy to him by means of daily study. 
 These things are such as fall plainly within our obser- 
 vation, and are clearly, unambiguously, and in express 
 terms, set forth in the Sacred Scriptures. . . . Therefore 
 we ought not to apply expressions which are not clear or 
 evident to the interpretation of parables according as 
 every one is inclined. For, in this way, no one would 
 
136 THE WORD OF GOD AND TIE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 possess the rule of truth..... man would always be 
 enquiring but never finding, because he has rejected the 
 very method of discovery’ (ii. 27, 1). 
 
 Some men speak of salvation as if it were ‘not a 
 matter of being better, ‘not a matter of stewardship or 
 conduct,’ but a matter of ‘believing,’ by which they 
 understand seeing themselves already safe through 
 Christ, that they may be good ‘from motives of pure 
 gratitude or disinterestedness,’ as if a prudent regard to 
 the unseen and lasting consequences of our actions wholly 
 vitiated their goodness, or were not a step to love of ex- 
 cellence for its own sake, or as if we ought to be above 
 receiving good to ourselves. But the very grace or 
 privilege or favour bestowed is to be admitted to the 
 enlightened service of God; it is not God who needs 
 our service, but we who are benefited by conforming to 
 His laws. We are never freed from the necessity of 
 acting conscientiously, kindly, honourably, and pru- 
 dently ; for, if we act otherwise, we quench or do not 
 receive the divine nature. ‘Our Lord,’ said Irenzus,! 
 ‘did not come to abrogate those laws or precepts which 
 are natural and noble and common to all (iv. 13, 43 iv. 
 15, 1; iv.16, 5). The Author of the law and the gospel 
 promulgated laws adapted for each (dispensation) ; but 
 the more prominent and the greatest laws, without which 
 there cannot be salvation, are the same and inculcated 
 in both (iv. 12, 3). Our Lord’s words are those of one 
 fulfilling, widening, and extending the law. Thus, instead 
 of the commandments not to kill or steal, He enjoined 
 His followers to love not their neighbours only, but also 
 their enemies; to be liberal givers, performing kind 
 offices even to those who defraud them. The natural 
 
 1 What follows is a summary of Bk. iv. chaps. 13, 14, 15, 16. 
 
MEN TESTED IN A STATE. OF LIBERTY. 137 
 
 precepts of the law had their beginning and origin in 
 Judaism, but their growth and completion in Christi- 
 anity. Our Lord, the Word of God, first drew slaves to 
 God, but afterwards He set free those who were subject 
 to Him; as He Himself declares to His disciples: “I 
 will not now call you servants (slaves), for the slave 
 knows not what his Lord doeth; but I have called you 
 friends, for all things which I have heard from my 
 Father I have made known” (John xv. 15). He thus » 
 indicates in the most marked manner that He appointed 
 the bondage and confers the freedom ; and also foznts 
 out the zgnorance of a people in a servile condition. The 
 Word of God accepted the friendship of Abraham, not 
 that He stood in need of it, but because the friendship 
 of God imparts immortality to those who embrace it. 
 Men receive the benefit of the light when they follow it; 
 and God demands service, that He may benefit those 
 who continue in His service. When He imposed the 
 Temple services on the Jewish people, it was for their 
 benefit, to teach the headstrong, and to instruct those 
 who were prone to idols by means of earthly types or 
 images of eternal, spiritual, and heavenly realities. Pro- 
 hibitory mandates were also enacted because of men’s 
 unwillingness to obey (Matt. xix. 7, 8); but the same 
 thing was done by the Apostles in consideration of human 
 infirmity (1 Cor. vii. 5, 25). The more complete men’s 
 subjection to and affection for God, the more extensive 
 is their field of operation (iv. 13, 3) ; but in a condition 
 of liberty men are more severely tested whether they 
 will reverence, fear, and love God’ (iv. 16, 5). 
 
 Nothing could be more opposed to the spirit of the 
 whole Bible than to disregard the counsels of heavenly 
 prudence, Our Lord emphatically told his followers to 
 
138 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 have a prudent regard to the eternal consequences. of 
 their actions, and, especially, in the employment of their 
 worldly means and talents. Our bodies also, as temples 
 of God, ought to be kept in sanctification and honour ; 
 it is infatuated folly to disregard the consequences of 
 self-indulgence, by which, says Clement, the body is 
 wasted and the soul buried in the mire of vice. ‘The 
 divine law, he says, ‘seems to me necessarily to menace 
 with fear, that by caution and attention the philosopher 
 may attain absence of anxiety, continuing without fall 
 or sin in all things. For peace and freedom are not 
 otherwise won than by ceaseless and unyielding struggles 
 with our lusts.’ According to him, it is the fear of sin 
 (and of its consequences) which takes away the dread ot 
 God. The fear of evil is not an irrational perturbation, 
 as the Gnostics said, but the beginning of wisdom which 
 departs from evil, a step to the love of well-doing.! 
 
 If, as St. Paul says, the types of the Old Testament 
 are types of us (1 Cor. x, 6), it is still possible for us to 
 be deceived as our first parents were (2 Cor. xi. 3), to 
 leave our first estate as the sons or angels of God did 
 (Jude 6); to fall into or after the same example of un- 
 belief as the Israelites did in the wilderness, though 
 Israel was called God’s son (Heb. iii. and iv.). But there 
 are clearer statements than types (Heb. vi. 4, 5 ; 1 Tim. 
 iv. 1; 1 Cor. x. 12, &c.). Men are not full grown all at 
 once ; it is possible to offend God’s ‘little ones,’ though 
 such aman as Paul had great assurance at the end of 
 his course. Men may pluck themselves out of God’s 
 hand, or go to sleep during the day, or become intoxi- 
 cated with the very words of truth. 
 
 ‘But can any sin,’ it is seriously asked, ‘alter the 
 
 1 Clement of Alexandria, i. 21, 67, 68 (Clark’s edition), - 
 
CAN SIN ALTER THE RELATION OF SONS? 139 
 
 relation of sons?’ This question was answered by 
 Irenzus, or rather by an earlier teacher whom he quotes. 
 ‘The Scripture,’ he says, ‘ always terms those who remazn 
 in a state of apostacy ‘‘sons of the devil” and “angels of 
 the wicked one” (malignz). For “son,” as one before me 
 has observed, has a twofold meaning ; one (is a son) in 
 the order of nature, because he was born a son; the 
 other, inasmuch as he was made so, is reputed a son, 
 although there be a difference between being born so 
 and being made so. For when any person has been 
 taught from the mouth of another, he is termed the son 3 
 of him who instructs, and the latter is termed his father. 
 According to nature then, that is, so to speak, according 
 to creation, we are all sons of God because we have been 
 all created by God; but, with respect to teaching and 
 obedience, we are not all the sons of God. Those only 
 are so who believe in Him and do His will; others are 
 sons and angels of the devil, because they do the works 
 of the devil. For as among men those sons who do not 
 obey their fathers, being disinherited, are still their sons 
 in the course of nature (but by law are not reputed as 
 their sons), so those who de not obey Him, being disin- 
 herited by Him, have ceased to be His sons. When 
 men are subject to God and keep His teaching, they are 
 sons of God ; but, when they have apostatised and fallen 
 into transgression, they are ascribed to their chief, the 
 devil’ * (ive 41,’ 2, 3): 
 
 1 The first Christians in their simple and artless language gave the 
 
 ~ name of papa, or father, to all their teachers ; at a later date, the name was 
 restricted to the Pope.—(Dean Stanley). _ 
 
I40 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 THE: SWORD AND ‘ITS,;FLAME; -THE: SECOND 
 DEATH. 
 
 On the way back to Paradise and the Tree of Life, 
 God placed the fire or flame of a sword and cherubim. 
 The flaming or two-edged sword of God is His Word or 
 His laws which shall not pass away but judge men in 
 the last day (Matt. xxiv. 35; John xii. 47, 48). The 
 wrath of God is revealed as fire from heaven, from the 
 Jace of the Lord, who comes again in flame of fire. The 
 nations are tormented by the truth and angered ; and iz 
 their anger God’s anger is revealed and the ‘dead’ are 
 judged. Lawless passions blaze up, unquenched by grati- 
 fication. God's word is as fire to those who pervert it ; men 
 may be scorched up by lying, evil influences ; Sinai, the 
 mount that might be touched, durned (Jer. xxiv. 29; Rom. 
 15 TCOr iit, 3/12) Pitess 1.52 ‘Pet digsiiiz; Revi xtiy &e.) 
 
 THE WORM THAT DIETH NOT.—A man cannot 
 obey sin and at the same time resist it; he cannot be 
 Jearning a virtue, while, at the same time, he is doing 
 those actions which, when often repeated, create the 
 opposite habit. Ifa man encourages infatuated ways of 
 thinking and avoids all influences which tend to elevate 
 him, he acquires habits of mind and body which are 
 second nature. A time may come when he who is thus 
 filthy or unrighteous may never be otherwise (Rev. xxii. 
 11); when the truth, instead of proving the salt which. 
 preserves a man from temptation, becomes corrupted 
 and perverted in a man’s own mind. Our Lord has the 
 keys of Hades and of natural death; its gates shall not 
 prevail against those whose lives are a confession of the 
 truth; but if the truth becomes itself perverted ; if men 
 go to sleep in the day; if they harden their hearts in 
 
GOD’S LAWS DO NOT PASS AWAY. 141 
 
 sin because God is good, how shall they be delivered 
 from this worm of moral corruption? To terrify a man 
 into obedience by some awful manifestation. is not to 
 improve him morally. 
 
 UNQUENCHABLE FIRE.—The valleys of Kedron and 
 Hinnom surrounded Jerusalem continuously on three 
 sides, meeting at the south-east corner of the city, where 
 the ground is 670 feet below the level of their com- 
 mencement. The Kedron, or black valley, is a dry 
 ravine except in winter, when there are rainy torrents. 
 From early times it has served as the common burying- 
 place of the people. To pollute the shrine of Baal, 
 Josiah caused it to be beaten to dust and cast this dust 
 over the graves in the Kedron. After the era of Christ, 
 the place was known as the Valley of Jehosaphat ; and 
 both Moslems and Jews believe that it will be the scene 
 of God’s last judgment, as prophesied by Joel. The 
 other part of the valley, called the Valley cf Hinnom, 
 or Gehenna, and especially a place called Tophet in the 
 south-east extremity of it, was the scene of the horrid 
 rites of the worship of Baal or Moloch, in which children 
 were burned. Josiah polluted the place by spreading 
 dead men’s bones upon it. It subsequently became the 
 cesspool of the city, its filth being carried away by the 
 wintry torrents of the Kedron into the Dead Sea, or else 
 consumed by fires kept burning for the purpose. 
 
 This valley of death and filth-consuming fire is 
 spoken of by the prophets as an emblem of God’s retri- 
 butive judgments. The doom of the Assyrian persecutor 
 is described in this way: ‘For Tophet is ordained of 
 old, for the king it is prepared (for the devil and his 
 angels) ; He (God) hath made it deep (as an abyss) and 
 wide (as a lake of fire) ; the pile thereof is fireand much 
 
142 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS, 
 
 wood, and the breath of the Lord as a stream of brim- 
 stone doth burn in it’ (Isaiah xxx. 27-33). 
 
 On one occasion the disciples had disputed about 
 pre-eminence, and also had rebuked one who cast out 
 devils in their Master’s name, though he followed not 
 them. In this attempt to turn religion into a means of 
 aggrandising themselves or their party, our Lord dis- 
 cerned the germs of a spirit which is in itself moral 
 death. It would be better for the body, He said, to lose 
 an offending hand, which hurts a brother, or an offending 
 eye, which misleads, rather than to be cast into the 
 Gehenna of fire, where their worm dieth not and the fire 
 is not quenched (Mark ix. 33-50; Isaiah Ixvi. 24). Like 
 the saplessness of a tree plucked up by the roots, or the 
 blindness of a man who puis his eyes out,.so the worm, the 
 corruption of those who corrupt the means of life or peace, 
 never ates ; there 1s no dew to quench the fire of passion or 
 temptation, or assuage regret when too late (Iren. iii. 73). 
 If a man opposes God's laws, if he puts his hand in the 
 fire or leaps from a precipice, the law is not altered to 
 favour him. This fire burns for evers; but we do not 
 read that the chaff or stubble, which is thrown into it, 
 continues for ever ; but, on the contrary, that it is burned 
 up, devoured or destroyed. When it is said that ‘the 
 wild beast and the false prophet shall be tormented day 
 and night for ever and ever’ (Rev. xx. 10), the meaning 
 is that those who oppose God’s most sacred laws, evil 
 men and impostors, shal] in every age be as the troubled 
 sea that cannot rest; that it will always be the case that 
 such transgressors are miserable; that the law abides 
 for ever and ever; but not that any one man’s conscious 
 misery will never cease. God’s judgments are appro- 
 priate; men reap what they sow and in the same pro- 
 
ARE SOULS INHERENTLY IMMORTAL ? 143 
 
 portion. The sentence of those who sow to the flesh 
 was written, Into the ground (John viii. 6); the worm 
 shall feed sweetly upon them (Job xxiv. 19, 20). Lying 
 deceivers and destroyers like Cain shall, like Cain, be 
 ‘hidden from God’s presence, and shall be ‘ trembling 
 ones, without rest day and night ; and, as it was in the 
 beginning, so it shall be for ever and ever. 
 
 Is IMMORTALITY INHERENT IN THE SOUL 2. aihe 
 leading teachers of the early Church, Justin Martyr, 
 Theophilus of Antioch, Irenzeus, Arnobius, and others, 
 taught that the human soul, as first created, is not 
 necessarily mortal or inherently immortal; that it is 
 capable of both mortality and immortality ; that it lives 
 as long as God wills, or returns, when He wills, to that 
 state in which it was before its birth ; that God alone 
 has immortality in Him. The belief that the soul is - 
 inherently immortal belongs to the old world philosophy, 
 and found its way, at a later period, into Christian 
 _ theology. We first give the opinions of Justin’ s venerable 
 instructor. 
 
 Justin Martyr, who lived from about 114 A.D. to 
 about 165 A.D., was accustomed, in his Platonic con- 
 templations, to go to a retired field near the sea. Here 
 he was one day accosted by an old man, of mild and 
 venerable manners, yet by no means contemptible in 
 appearance, who said that he had come there in search 
 of some straying members of his household. Justin, on 
 his part, said that he had come because the place was 
 fitted for philosophy or quiet reasoning. The old man 
 asked whether he did not aim at being a practical man 
 rather than a sophist. Justin replied that philosophy 
 and right reason are indispensable to prudence. ‘ Philo- 
 sophy,’ he said, ‘is the knowledge of that which really 
 
144 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 exists, a clear perception of the truth and virtue is its 
 reward. The conversation turned on the nature of the 
 soul and of future rewards. The old man and Justin 
 agreed that souls do not see God; that they do not 
 transmigrate into other bodies; that they may, indeed, 
 perceive that God exists and that righteousness and 
 piety are honourable, but that philosophers cannot tell 
 what a soul is and ought not to call it immortal (inca- 
 pable of death), for then it would also be unbegotten ; 
 that, if we suppose that souls were originated wholly 
 apart and not along with their respective bodies, then, 
 possibly, they did not exist before the men and the 
 creatures on whose account they were made. 
 
 ‘But again, no more do all souls as a race (wacas tas 
 wuyas) de; certainly not, say I) continued Justin’s in- 
 structor, ‘for that were truly a piece of good fortune for 
 the evil. What then? The souls of the pious re- 
 main in a better place, while those of the unjust and 
 the wicked are in a worse, waiting for the time of the | 
 judgment. Thus some which have appeared worthy of 
 God never die; but others are punished so long as God 
 wills them to exist and to be punished. The two sentences 
 italicised have probably the same meaning, The old 
 man does not say that ‘death issues in a state of insen- 
 sibility to all, for that would be a piece of unlooked-for 
 good fortune to all the wicked’ (Apol. i. 18) ; he does 
 not say that ‘each thing returns to that from which it 
 was produced’ (Apol. i. 19), for then there would be no 
 
 1 °AAAG phy ode arobvicKe pnul madcas Tas Yuxas (see Donaldson’s Gr, 
 Gram. p. 355) ya €puaoy yap jv, k. t. A. The meaning is : Souls are born 
 or produced ; as a race, they are not immortal ; but, although they are a 
 race, they do not all ‘return to that from which they sprung, as if even 
 God Himself were powerless to do anything beyond this’ (Ap. i. 19). 
 
fa 
 
 GOD'S POWER AND FAITHFULNESS. 145 
 
 consciousness of loss similar to that which tormented the 
 rich man, when he saw Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham. 
 Justin understands him to mean that ‘souls both die and 
 are punished,’ and tries to find the same thing in Plato, 
 But the old man does not mean that all souls assuredly 
 continue in existence for ever, for he goes on to explain 
 his meaning in this way. ‘A soul undoubtedly is or. 
 has life. If then it is life, it would cause something else 
 and not itself to live, even as motion would move some- 
 
 thing else than itself. . . . But if it lives (itself), it lives not 
 
 as being life but as partaker of life... . Now the soul 
 partakes of life because God wills it, and thus will not 
 partake of life, when God does not will it to live. For 
 to live is not its attribute as it is God’s ; but as a man 
 (as at present constituted) does not live always, and the 
 soul is not for ever conjoined with the body, since, when- 
 ever this harmony is broken up, the soul leaves the body 
 and the man no longer exists, even so, whenever the 
 soul must cease to exist, the life-maintaining spirit is taken 
 from it and it goes back to that (thither) from whence 
 
 _it was taken.’ The old man finally went away, recom- 
 
 mending Justin to study the ancient prophets, whose 
 miracles proved them worthy of credit, and above all 
 
 _ things to pray for light, for God and His Christ could 
 
 alone impart wisdom. Justinsaw him no more; but, in 
 pursuance of his advice, he found ‘in the words of the 
 Saviour a safe and profitable philosophy, for they have 
 in them a terrible power to awe men whoturn aside from 
 the path of rectitude ; while the sweetest rest is afforded 
 to those who make a diligent practice of them’ (Dial c. 
 Tryp. 'c-5,'6, 7). | 
 
 We may illustrate the old man’s meaning by the 
 example of a lamp in a room. Remove the lamp (the 
 
 L 
 
146 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 soul) from the room (the body) and the room is dark 
 (the body dies). But if the time comes that the lamp 
 itself should lose its light, it returns to the state it was 
 in before it was lit. 
 
 The opinions of Irenzeus on this subject are given in 
 connection with and in direct opposition to the Platonic 
 doctrine of the soul’s pre-existence and its subsequent 
 transmigrations from body to body. It is a funda- 
 mental principle with him, that God is a God of power, 
 who can create souls, re-integrate man or destroy him. 
 ‘God,’ he says, ‘is not so poor or destitute of resources, 
 that He cannot confer its own soul on each individual 
 body, even as He gives it also its own special character ; 
 and, therefore, when the number of mankind, which He 
 had pre-determined in His counsel, is completed, all those . 
 who have been put down for life shall rise again, having 
 their own bodies and also their own souls and their own 
 spirits, in which they pleased God. Those, on the other 
 hand, who are worthy of punishment shall go away into 
 it, they too having their own souls and their own bodies, 
 in which they fell away from the grace of God (ii. 33, 
 5); or, as he says in a fragment, they will receive bodies 
 ‘such as they (had when they) departed this life and be 
 judged faithfully.” But he immediately proceeds to give 
 us more of his ideas of this judgment. The narrative of 
 the rich man and Lazarus, he says, ‘plainly declared 
 that souls continue to exist, that they do not pass from 
 body to body, that they possess the form (or character) of 
 a man so that they may be recognised, and retain the 
 memory of things in this world; moreover... that 
 each class (of souls) receives a habitation such as it has 
 deserved, even before the judgment’ (II. 34.1.) ‘But, 
 if any one at this point maintain that-souls must be 
 
GOD. THE GIVER OF LIFE. 147 
 
 -either unborn, in order that they may be immortal; or 
 that, if they have had a beginning by way of generation, 
 they should die with the body itself, let him learn that, 
 God alone, who is Lord of all, is without beginning and 
 without end, being truly and for ever the same. . . un- 
 changeable Being. But as the heaven above us, the sun, 
 moon, and stars were called into being and continue 
 through a long course of time in accordance with the 
 will of God, so also any one who thinks thus respect- 
 ing souls and spirits and, in fact, respecting all created 
 things, will not by any means go far astray, inasmuch 
 as all things that have been made, had a beginning 
 when they were formed, but endure as long as God 
 wills that they should have existence and continuance. 
 The prophetic spirit bears testimony to these opinions, 
 when He thus speaks respecting the salvation of man: 
 “He asked life of Thee, and Thou gavest him length of 
 days for ever and ever’ (Ps. xxi. 4). For life does not 
 arise from us or from our nature, but it is bestowed 
 according to the grace of God. And, for this reason, he 
 who shall preserve the life bestowed upon him and give 
 _ thanks to Him who imparted, shall receive also length of 
 _ days for ever and ever. But he who shall reject it, and 
 : prove himself ungrateful to His Maker for his creation, 
 -and has not recognised Him who bestowed (life), deprives 
 himself of continuance for ever and ever. For this reason, 
 the Lord declared to those who showed themselves un- 
 _ grateful towards Him: ‘If ye have not been faithful in 
 that which is little, who shall give you that which is 
 great ?’ indicating that those who, in this brief temporal 
 life, have shown themselves ungrateful to Him who be- 
 _ stowed it, shall justly not receive from Him length of days 
 
 Jor ever and ever. But asthe animal body is certainly not 
 L2 
 
148 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 the soul, yet has fellowship (is connected) with the soul as 
 long as God pleases, so the soul is not itself life, but 
 partakes in that life bestowed upon her by God. The 
 soul and the life which it possesses must be understood 
 as separate’ (II. 34. 2, 3, 4). The argument is that life 
 is not necessarily inherent in the soul; that God, who 
 ‘willed that souls should exist, may also will that they 
 ‘should continue in existence ;’ but that He does not 
 will that the ungrateful should do so. He says that the 
 narrative of the Rich Man and Lazarus proves that dis- 
 embodied souls may remember what they have done 
 and be tormented ; but he distinctly refers this to their 
 state or habitation defore the judgment. He, elsewhere 
 (iv. 38. 3), says that it is through the gratuitous bestowal 
 of eternal existence by God, through His super-eminent 
 kindness, that those things, which continue in being 
 through a long course of ages, thus vecezve a faculty of the 
 - Uncreated. On the other hand, if men separate them- 
 selves from Him who is light and life, God inflicts upon 
 them that separation which they have chosen of them- 
 selves. They lose all the benefits derived by subjection 
 to Him; and, being in darkness, partake of its calamities. 
 God does not punish them dy direct infliction, as of 
 Himself; but that punishment comes upon them because 
 they are destitute of all that is good. Now good things 
 are eternal and never ending with God; and, therefore, 
 the loss of good things ts eternal and never-ending (v, 27. 
 I, 2). When men blind themselves or are blinded by 
 others, they are for ever deprived of light ; and, in the 
 same way, ‘ungrateful men, who do not wish to behold 
 the light of truth, are justly reckoned by the Word (Is. 
 xl. 15-17) as waste water from a sink, and as small dust 
 from the balances, in fact as nothing-—so far useful and 
 
LIFE AND DEATH. 149 
 
 serviceable as stubble conduces towards the growth of 
 wheat, and straw, by means of its combustion, serves for 
 the working of gold’ (v. 29. 1). 
 
 It was a first principle with Irenzeus that God isa 
 God of power, not inferior to any natural cause or 
 necessity (v. 4). Our own origin, our conscious life and 
 our wonderful organisation ought to teach us this. He 
 argues that it is surely a more difficult and incredible 
 thing that God should create us such as we are, than 
 that He should re-integrate again that which has been 
 created, or re-instate that which had a former existence 
 (v. 3, 2). But from this principle it would also follow 
 that the soul has not an inherent immortality, indepen- 
 dently of God’s will. 
 
 BODY, SOUL, AND SPIRIT. THE .TRINITY. 
 
 Irenzus speaks of life and death as antagonistic 
 principles, each of which drives the other out (v. 12, 1). 
 So heat and cold, light and darkness, virtue and vice, 
 are mutually inconsistent. ‘To die,’ he says, ‘is to lose 
 vital power, to become for the future breathless, soulless, 
 motionless, to be decomposed or melt away into those 
 things from which one derived the commencement of 
 one’s substance. Now this befalls neither the soul, for 
 it is the very inbreathing (flatus, afflatus, mvon) of life ; 
 nor the spirit, for it is not composite, but the very life of 
 them who take it in (percipiunt), that which saves, moulds, 
 and uwnztes. The inbreathing makes naturally alive, the 
 spirit perfects life. According to him, we do not say 
 that that which gives life dies, or that the life or the 
 breath of life or the spirit of life dies ; for that is not said 
 to die which is the negation of death. It is not the prin- 
 
150 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 ciple of heat that gets cold but the hot body (v. 7, 1; 
 6.0 3" 12)9;°2'* 1353) Arenas quotes “Isaiah vis; 
 where the Spirit is said to be from God, and God is 
 said to have created ‘the breathing’ (neshamoth). He in- 
 terprets the Spirit to be that which ‘God pours out 
 in the last times,’ and ‘the breath’ to be that ‘which 
 is common throughout creation, and infers that it is) 
 something made or created. ‘Now that which is made 
 is different from Him who makes it. Zhe breath, then, 
 as temporal, but the Spirit eternal. The breath, too, 
 increases for a short period and continues for a certain: 
 time ; after that, it takes its departure, leaving its former 
 abode destitute of breath; but the Spirit when it per- 
 vades a man within and without, inasmuch as it abides 
 continually, never leaves him’ (v. 12, 2). The Spirit is 
 the breath: of a never-ending. life (iii. 24, 1; v. 1,:.3 5 Hz. 
 XXviii.) ; and its mysterious origin and endless duration 
 seem to be typified by the mysterious obscurity, which 
 hangs over the beginning and end of our present life, or 
 by the mysterious source and destination of the wind. 
 (Heb. vii. 3, 16; John iii. 8). Our first condition of 
 flesh and blood does not possess life inherent in it ; it is 
 the Spirit which fashions and preserves or inherits what 
 
 is in itself a dead man’s property ; the body is fashioned, 
 preserved and inherited. But ¢at which is between the 
 
 two, which is a soul, sometimes sympathises with the 
 flesh and falls into carnal lusts, and sometimes follows. 
 the Spirit and is raised up by it. He, therefore, who, by 
 pampering the flesh, does not receive this Spirit, shall be 
 called mere flesh and blood which rots in the earth or is 
 like waste water; but he who changes the fruit of his 
 works receives another name, being a spiritual man and 
 called such (v. 9. 1,2; v..10, 2). Zat which is and 
 
ie THE SOUL AND THE SPIRIT. | I5I 
 
 chooses between these two, is the Unity (Ego), or per- 
 sonality, called a soul (Acts ii. 41; Ron. xiii. 1,se¢ 
 Cremer onuyxn). It is just in the union and commingling 
 of what is divine with God’s handiwork, that salvation 
 consists. Therefore, Paul exhorts Christians to make 
 progress towards or choose better things ; to bear in their 
 members or put on the image of the Heavenly, lest they 
 lose the kingdom of God by remaining animal men, 
 mere flesh and blood (1 Cor. xv. 49; Col. iii. 10). ‘God 
 shall be glorified,’ says Irenzeus, ‘in His handiwork,’ fit~ 
 ting it so as to be conformable to and modelled after His 
 own Son. For, by the hands of the Father, that is, by 
 the Sonand the Holy Spirit, man and not a part of man 
 was made in the likeness of God. Now the soul and the 
 spirit are certainly a part of a man but certainly not the 
 man, Ireneus is contending against those who thought 
 their salvation secured apart from the body and the right 
 discipline of it. ‘For the perfect man consists in the 
 commingling and uniting of the soul, receiving the Spirit 
 of the Father (typified by the breath of conscious life in 
 Adam) and the admixture of that fleshly nature (the 
 bodily handiwork), which was moulded after the image 
 of God.’ Without this Spirit, a man would possess the 
 image of God in his first formation (in plasmate), but 
 not receive the similitude through the Spirit, and this 
 being would be thus imperfect (v. 6, 1). Adam was 
 driven from God’s presence in paradise ; and as life con- 
 sists in beholding God and in intercourse with Him, he 
 lost what was to keep him alive. He, therefore, became 
 a dying image, so to speak, or an image of God without 
 the abiding spring of life. But ‘when the Word of God 
 become flesh, He became Himself what was His own 
 image, and re-established the similitude after a sure 
 
152 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 fashion, making man like to the invisible Father (who is 
 immortal) by means of the visible Word (v. 16, 2). But 
 it is just our fleshly nature that needs salvation and 
 life ; therefore, we must strive to bear in our members 
 or put on the likeness of Christ, we must study to be 
 like Him (v. 10, 1). The bodies of those who thus per- 
 severe shall be renewed so as to preclude the possibility 
 of their becoming old. It is right also that they should 
 receive their reward in the very creation in which they 
 suffer. It is not the world but the fashion of it that 
 passes away; but, in this present life, it does not appear 
 what the fashion of the next will be. 
 
 The first Adam was a type of Him who was to come 
 (Rom. v. 14) and of those perfect or spiritual men who 
 follow this Model (Iren. v. 1, 3; Eph. iv. 13). Adam as 
 first created was the son of God, having a body, an animal 
 soul and the breath of a conscious life. But the perfect 
 sonship is constituted when the eternal Spirit reunites the 
 man, re-inspiring the soul, transforming the bodily 
 nature of man, God’s handiwork. ‘For neither,’ says 
 Hippolytus, ‘was the Word, prior to incarnation and 
 when by Himself, yet perfect Son, although He was 
 perfect Word, only-begotten ; nor could the flesh (the 
 first nature of Adam) subsist by itself apart from the 
 Word, because it has its connective or conservative 
 principle (tv ciotacw) in the Word.’ Man lives by 
 the Word of God, by the knowledge of God and by 
 subjection to His laws; and as the Word was perfect 
 Son when He united the divine or heavenly with the 
 natural or fleshly nature, so it is by the same union that 
 man is perfected. ‘God the Word, says Hippolytus, 
 ‘took flesh from the Virgin and assumed also a human 
 soul, by which I mean a rational soul, becoming thus all 
 
4 
 
 THE PRIVILEGES OF PERFECTED MEN. 153 
 
 that man is with the exception of sin, that He might save 
 fallen man and confer immortality on men who believe 
 on His name. In that He had both what is the 
 heavenly and what is the earthly, He came forth into — 
 the world as God in a body and as perfect man,’ ! the 
 Model, by copying which men become baves in Christ, 
 heavenly and perfect men, who unite the two natures in 
 themselves and are therefore called souxs of God. ‘The 
 Word was addressed as Son because He was to become 
 such,’ 
 
 But men who are perfected are said to be ‘ built to- 
 gether for an habitation of God in the Spirit’ (Eph. ii. 
 21, 22), to be ‘partakers of the divine nature’ through 
 the knowledge of God (2 Pet. i. 4), to be ‘fellow-heirs 
 of God with Christ’ (Rom, viii. 16, 17), who is not 
 ashamed to call them ‘brethren’ inasmuch as He became 
 flesh and blood, while they have His Spirit (Heb. ii. 11). 
 Those to whom the word of God came are called gods 
 (Ps. Ixxxii.; John x. 35). ‘What gods?’ says Irenzus 
 (iii. 16, 1). ‘Those, no doubt, who have received the 
 grace of adoption, by which we cry, Abba Father.’ 
 Those who ‘pass into the glory of the Father, receiving 
 a faculty of the Uncreated,’ are said both by Irenzeus 
 and Hippolytus to become gods,’ to be deified. As the 
 man and the woman were to be one flesh, the woman’s 
 flesh being taken from the man’s, so he who is joined to 
 the Lord is one spirit. We cannot understand how, to 
 
 1 Clark’s Hippolytus, vol. ii. 66, 68; Eph. iv. 13! 
 
 ? Men cast blame upon God, because they are first merely men and 
 then at length gods (Iren, iv. 38. 4). It must be that thou shouldst at the 
 outset hold the rank of a man, and then, afterwards, partake of the glory 
 of God (iv, 39. 2). He who is desirous of becoming a god must obey his 
 
 Creator and not resist now, that He may have greater things entrusted to 
 him (Hip. i, 395). 
 
I54 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF ‘GENESIS. 
 
 win or draw sense-bound men, the Word became man 
 
 and how, as Hegrew, the Divine Spirit was communicated 
 
 to this Man. But His people also receive the divine 
 
 _nature; and thus both He and they unite, in their 
 persons, the divine nature and the human, and are sons 
 of one Father. 
 
 By becoming gods or being deified, we understand 
 these writers to mean that men come to have the same 
 divine nature, the same kind of life and in the same per- 
 manent way, as the Son of God, to be sons of God. To 
 have the Holy Spirit ruling and dwelling in them as in a 
 temple, to have Him as their own possession, and to be 
 possessed by Him as by the breath of a new life, is to be 
 one Spirit with the Lord. 
 
 The Word, who appeared in various aspects to the 
 prophets, and was partially announced by each, appeared 
 in the end of the ages as the Perfect Man, recapitulating 
 the past and exhibiting in a visible, palpable, and para- 
 bolical way that which may be known (10 yvwordv) of 
 God. The invisible things thus revealed by the Word 
 are not God's essential substance and greatness, which can- 
 not be seen, handled, or measured, but God's power (increat- 
 ing, &c.), His ratzonal Word, called also by the fathers 
 His Well, and His uutting Spirit or Wisdom. In mant- 
 Jesting FHlimself the Son manifested the Father. \t was 
 not inconsistent with His Godhead. to become what His 
 
 “image was, to become to man what man’s soul is to his 
 body (Ath. Creed): and there was nothing transcending 
 man’s capacity, in His uniting the divine Spirit to the 
 first nature of man, for man was made to be so perfected: 
 But we must distinguish between the Perfect Image and 
 the Original, When our Lord said: ‘ He who hath seen 
 me hath seen the Father, and ‘I and the Father are 
 
THE PERFECT’ MAN. 155 
 
 oné’ (thing), He spoke of Himself as the manifestation 
 of the Father, of His being one in power, willing and 
 working the same things in like manner as the Father, 
 and one in the disposition of same-mindedness, for so also 
 His followers were to be ove. Our Lord’s person, history, 
 and words, ‘signed’ forth enigmatically invisible and 
 divine truths, teaching us heavenly lessons in a mystery, 
 that we beholding this light in a typical mirror, may be 
 changed into the same image, that of death to sin and 
 meen chife (Iren. ii: 24, 2);,iv. 6; 3; Hippoe: Noet.'7,783 
 John xvii. 22). 
 
 The Word, in revealing the Unseen Father and pre- 
 senting to us a Divine model of subjection, became man, 
 1.¢. He emptied Himself and took upon Himself the form 
 of a Servant, the human side of the Sonship. As He grew 
 the Holy Spirit ‘communicated’ to Him that which is 
 the divine side of the Sonship (communicatio idiomatum). 
 The flesh (Word) and the Spirit of holiness constituted 
 the Perfect Man, declared to be the Son of God with 
 power by the resurrection from the dead (Rom. i. 4). 
 This seems to have been the idea which Hermas, the 
 author of ‘The Shepherd,’ had of Christ’s person ; 
 he calls the humanity body, flesh, the Son who is the 
 slave, and the spirit, the Son who ts the heir (see Note 
 at end). The flesh or human nature of Christ, the man 
 Jesus, was the Word of God who emptied Himself and 
 took upon Him the body of a servant; but He grew 
 with his years in the divine Spirit as the Model of 
 men, adapted to win all ages. 
 
 Now if the Word of God, Jesus Christ, be, as Justin 
 says, something different. from the Father, the Holy 
 Spirit who is the Father’s gift, entrusted to men or 
 communicated by the Father, is to us something different 
 
156 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 from the Father. But we must not, like the Gnostics, 
 suppose that God's attributes flow out of Him so that 
 He must either be emptied of them or they be endan- 
 gered in their reality. Nor must we substitute any 
 other gross physical conception of the work of God. 
 God gives Himself to men and the gift we call the Holy 
 Spirit ; but the subject transcends our notions and our 
 language ; we can see mental and moral effects, but how 
 shall we explain the connecting link of causation? The 
 flesh of Jesus Christ or His human nature was the Word of 
 God made man; and the Spirit of divine nature, which 
 grew in the Man and raised Him from the dead, is given 
 to other men, but ‘not as a part of God’ (Clem. S. v. 13). 
 
 Hippolytus,' in writing against Noetusand his doctrine 
 that the Father was born and suffered, shows that there 
 must be some difference between the Father and the Son 
 and the Holy Spirit. In executing what the Father 
 decreed, the Word of God, whom Hippolytus connects 
 with the ratiocination of the universe, became man and 
 ‘passed through every period of life that He might serve 
 as a law for every age and that He might exhibit His 
 own manhood as an aim for all men. But He would in 
 vain ordain that we should imitate Him asa teacher 
 unless He were truly of the same nature as we are. 
 For this reason, He did not refuse the conditions proper 
 to Him as man, since He hungered and toiled and was 
 in weariness and laid down His life and was raised by 
 the Father, that men, when in tribulation, may not be 
 disheartened but await what God has granted to human 
 nature. The Father is the source of all, and adove all 
 bearing creation ; the Word is ¢hrough all, borne by crea- 
 
 * Clark’s Hippolytus, i. 399, 400; ii. 65-69. Hippolytus, who pro- 
 fessed to follow Irenzeus, was martyred about a.D, 235-239 
 
THE CHERUBIM OF GLORY. 157 
 
 tion (Iren. v. 18, 1), manifesting the Unseen Father ; the 
 Holy Spirit is zz all, giving inner understanding or con- 
 viction of the truth revealed outwardly ; communicating | 
 the nature of God, inspiring the soul with the breath of © 
 a new life. If, therefore, the Holy Spirit be God com- 
 municating Himself or communicated, we cannot think 
 of this Spirit apart from those to whom He is communi- 
 cated ; and in this way Irenzeus speaks of Him. ‘The 
 Holy Spirit, he says, ‘has been entrusted to the church, 
 as breath was to the first created man, that all its 
 members might be vivified . . . For where the church 
 is, there is the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of 
 God is, there is the church, and every kind of grace ; but 
 the Spirit is truth’ (iii. 24, 1). ‘It is,’ he goes on to say, 
 ‘through the faith of the church and the Spirit that men 
 are convicted and instructed.’ 
 
 THE CHERUBIM OF GLORY IN THE WAY OF LIFE 
 indicate much knowledge (Clem. S. v. 6), the xearness (Ges.) 
 of ministering intelligences. They were woven in the inner 
 tapestry or curtains of the tabernacle as ‘the work of 
 the designer” (Ex. xxxvi. 8); and they were placed in 
 the zznermost sanctuary of the tabernacle, overlooking 
 the ark. Moses speaks of them as having faces and 
 wings ; Ezekiel and St. John describe them as having 
 four faces: the face of a man, the face of an eagle, the 
 face of an ox and the face of a lion. Ezekiel (chap. i.) 
 speaks of them as running and returning with lightning 
 speed, as moving on mystic wheels covered with eyes, 
 as having the appearance of burning coals, from which 
 flashes of fire issued. A man clothed in white linen gets 
 fire from the hand of one of them and scatters it over 
 Jerusalem, in token of coming judgment (Ez. x). They 
 were called by Isaiah Seraphim or burning ones (Is. vi). 
 
158 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 John speaks of them as wholly covered with eyes, and 
 as resting not day and night in their praise (Rev. iv.). 
 One of them gives to the seven angels seven vials con- 
 taining the /ast plagues, in which God’s wrath is filled 
 up (Rev. xv. 7). , 
 
 The four faces of the cherubim symbolise the rational 
 soul (Cl. S. v. 6) of man, combining the far-seeing and ele- 
 vating character of the eagle, the laborious and meat-sup- 
 plying character of the ox, and the kingly majesty of 
 the lion. Froma very early age of Christianity, these 
 four aspects have been associated with the four gospels ; 
 but, as in Ezekiel’s vision there were four living beings 
 each of which had four faces, interpreters have not 
 agreed which aspect each gospel mostly takes up. 
 According to Irenzeus, Matthew wrote the gospel of our 
 Lord’s humanity ; Mark’s gospel is cursory and compen- 
 dious, beginning with Esaias the prophet and pointing to 
 the winged aspect ; Luke takes up our Lord’s priesthood 
 for the finding again of the younger son (xv. 27), begin- 
 ning with Zacharias the priest ; John describes thekingly 
 boldness of the Word of God, by whom all things were 
 made. He connects with them the dispensations given 
 to Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses (iii. 11, 8). Our 
 Lord was the Son of man; He inherited the promises 
 symbolised to Noah by the rainbow and the abundance 
 of new wine ; as the Son of Abraham, He was sacrificed ; 
 and like Moses, the servant of God, He is our Lawgiver 
 and our Judge, and summed up the past history of God’s 
 dispensation. The twelve wings of the Cherubim are 
 ‘elevated ministrations and operations (1 Cor. xii. 5, 6) 
 of right as well as left hand powers, the voice is thankful 
 glory (glorification) in ceaseless contemplation’ (Cl. S. v.6). 
 
 That life in God’s creatures, which is nearest and 
 
LAW. IN THE WORKING OF EVIL. 159 
 
 likest to God, that second nature of ‘the soul assuming the 
 Spirit of the Father’ (Iren. v. 6, 1), that character or work 
 of the Designer, does not grasp at equality with God, as 
 if immortality were inherent in the creatures ; as if they 
 had a knowledge beyond the understanding which He 
 gives; as if He needed our services and we merited 
 His favour ; or as if we were privileged to neglect His 
 laws. It ceaselessly ascribes to God all glory and wis- 
 dom Oy reflecting them (Matt. v. 16), and thanks dy 
 grateful ministrations, and dominion by being subject to 
 flim. Its eyes are on all parts of itself to maintain a 
 conscientious and enlightened course. Woe to him who 
 quenches his convictions or opposes the truth. 
 
 THE DEVILS AND THEIR. POWER. 
 
 Irenzus speaks of man as having offended in the first 
 Adam and as owing a debt to the Father and to the Father 
 only ; he speaks of the Father as being propitiated and 
 of this debt as cancelled by the obedience of the second 
 Adam (v. 16. 3; 17. 1); of Satan as having enticed man 
 to transgress his Maker’s law and thereby got him into 
 his power; yet of his power as consisting in trans- 
 gression and apostacy, with which he bound man 
 - (v. 21. 3). “By wicked works,’ as Ireneus interprets 
 Col. i. 21, ‘men become enemies to God’s. know- 
 ledge’ (v. 14. 2), which knowledge, he says, is the same 
 as that fedowship with God in which is found the means 
 of life (iv. 20. 5). Whether Satan be a person or not, his 
 _ power lies in that law of things, by which men who 
 transgress become more and more bound (by habit) to 
 evil and averse to hear plain truth. To counteract this, our 
 Lord ‘ disciplined men beforehand, and when He came 
 as man, ‘ He conferred this knowledge or fellowship on 
 
160 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 men as they were able to bear it, accustoming them by a 
 course of milk nourishment to eat and drink the word 
 of God, reconciling the human race to an agreement 
 with salvation in various ways adjusted to them, and 
 sketching out, like an architect, the plan of salvation to 
 them who please Him’ (iv. 20.1; 14. 2,3). Even when 
 He suffered from the evil consequences of sin, He bore 
 witness to the truth ; and, in submitting to man’s debt 
 of death, He honoured God’s laws and exposed Satan’s 
 falsehoods (v. 23). The demons rivet to earthly things 
 those who cannot be lifted above earth, and baffle men in 
 the pursuit of divine truths, unless they study them 
 soberly, szzcerely and dispassionately (Justin, ap. i. c. 58). 
 Satan’s bites are evil deeds ; he rules by deception and 
 the fear of death; Christ is the mighty sword which 
 slays him (Dial. c. Try. 91, 94). 
 
 THE DELUGE, BABEL AND SODOM. 
 
 There are two prominent types which represent the 
 word of God ; the one is water and the other is fire ; the 
 one is the calm voice of truth and the other the discipline 
 or judgment of experience. Except a man be born of 
 water and of the Spirit, except he obeys the truths and 
 yields to the influences of God’s higher nature, he can- 
 not enter into the kingdom of God. The water sprinkled 
 over symbols indicated that the word of God was in 
 them ; from this word Judaism sprang and by this word 
 it was superseded (2 Pet. iii. 5, 6). ‘But, said John the 
 Baptist, ‘He that cometh after me is stronger than I. 
 He shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost and with 
 fire’ (Matt. iii. 11). There is in the dispensation of the 
 Spirit, a correction or discipline, to which we are to give 
 heed that it may not become a judgment. 
 
THE FIGURE OF BAPTISM. 161 
 
 According to St. Peter, baptism, the antitype of the 
 flood, saves us, because it indicates ‘the enquiry of a good 
 conscience after God’ and ‘the resurrection from the 
 dead.’ When the catechumen had _ professed his belief 
 in the Lord Jesus (Acts xvi. 31), who came from the 
 Father, died, rose again and gives His Spirit to men 
 (Matt. xxviii. 19), it was the custom of the early church 
 to dip him in water. Baptism thus figures the death, 
 burial and resurrection of Christ, which history is the 
 word of God. Baptism thus declares that we must 
 
 _ ‘enquire conscientiously’ or dip into the meaning of this 
 
 word or history, so as to practise what is indicated or 
 confess our hope in the resurrection by living as if we 
 looked forward to it. Whatever importance we attach 
 to the particular form of washing or dipping, it is essen- 
 tial that we should not forget the sense; and when 
 children are baptised, we are thereby taught not that any 
 
 _ occult transformation has been performed on the uncon- 
 
 scious natures, but that men enter the kingdom of 
 -heaven as children, that is, by practising simple and un- 
 sophisticated truths, by denying themselves and following 
 Christ, by striving to lead straightforward lives, and not 
 by going into matters beyond their powers of under- 
 standing or perception.! 
 
 To prevent themselves from being dispersed and to 
 make for themselves a name, the descendants of Noah 
 
 _ built a city and a tower and ‘its head in heaven.’ Men’s 
 
 _ principal object ought to be to know the truth and to 
 practise it ; but if, for fear that their party be broken up, 
 men pledge themselves to shun all divisive courses, and 
 darken sober counsel with words, they are building another 
 Babel. Probably the building of Babel had something 
 1 1 Peter iii. 21; Clark’s ven. vol. i. 322; vol. ii. 17. 
 M 
 
162 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 to do with the worship of the heavens, or of those ele- 
 ments whereby God reveals Himself. God now reveals 
 Himself by certain elementary forms of worship and 
 words; and people may become so accustomed to 
 them as to forget the sense and not put it into practicein 
 ordinary life. When people make use of transcendental 
 language without attaching a plain meaning, they are apt 
 not to understand one another’s speech. The late Bishop 
 Thirlwall considered that the cause of the Gorham 
 controversy was that the disputants put different senses 
 on the word regeneration. ‘Words are the counters 
 whereby wise men govern fools,’ says the proverb ; but 
 the wise men may suffer from their own misunderstand- 
 ing. The prophet Isaiah represents the priest and the 
 people as intoxicated with their dark words and notions. 
 ‘ For with babbling lips and another tongue will He speak 
 to this people .. . and they will not hear’ (Is. xxviii. 13). 
 
 This verse was quoted by St. Paul (1 Cor. xiv. 21) to 
 show the superiority of those gifts which were based on 
 the understanding: unknown speech is a sign of judgment 
 to them who believe not. The first half of this chapter 
 of Isaiah was quoted by the great republican general of 
 England, when the leaders of the Scotch Presbyterians 
 withheld from their people the papers he had sent them. 
 There might, he said, be a carnal confidence upon mis- 
 understood and misapplied precepts; and, therefore, he 
 besought them by the bowels of Christ to think it 
 possible that they might be wrong. 
 
 The misleading king of Assyria, speaking a strange 
 language, is a type of another ‘king, fierce of face, and 
 understanding hidden things’ (Dan. viii. 23), ‘sifting men 
 with a sieve of falsehood, leading men astray through 
 love of life or by the idolatry of werds and notions beyond 
 
THE LAW OF RETRIBUTION, 163 
 
 the limits of the human understanding. Paul quotes 
 Isaiah to show that this misleading principle would be 
 brought to nothing or made foolish. Where is the wise? 
 Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world ? 
 Thou Shalt see no more a fierce people ; a people of a deep 
 speech that thou canst not hear ; of an alien tongue that 
 canst not understand (Is. xxxiii. 18, 19; 1 Cor. i. 19-21). 
 Unprogressive childishness and schismatic discord are 
 partial evils but not ‘the last plagues.’ Nothing seems 
 to break through the uniform course of nature, for God 
 has given all things a law; but there is such a law of 
 retribution in His words (2 Pet. iii.). Men are allowed to 
 deceive themselves, if they are bent upon it. The 
 heavens which are intended to enlighten and the atmo- 
 sphere of thought, which men breathe, may become the 
 scene of God’s fiery judgments, as in the overthrow of 
 Sodom and Gomorrah. The rivers and fountains of 
 
 water, which issue from the Lord’s house to fertilise the 
 
 _ desert land and heal the waters of the dead sea, May 
 first become bitter and even turned into blood (Ez. xlvii. ; 
 Rev. viii. 11; xvi. 4). When men will not endure the 
 healing doctrine but turn aside to babbling, not under- 
 standing what they say, no wonder that they make 
 _ Shipwreck of the faith, no wonder that the creatures in 
 the sea die (Rev. xvi. 3; 1 Tim. i. 5,0, LO. 2 ii tae 
 _If they say in their hearts that they will have peace by 
 _ trusting to Christ, though they walk in the imagination 
 of their hearts, is not the swz scorching and hardening 
 their hearts, so that nothing is sown or grown in that 
 land, like the overthrow of Sodom (Deut xxix' 23) 0 fe 
 was not without reason that Paul cautioned men how 
 they du7/¢ on his foundation, and that St. Peter, in speak- 
 
 ing of this judgment in she heavens, warns men not to 
 : M2 : 
 
164 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TY PES: OF GENESIS. 
 
 wrest the meaning of difficult passages in Paul’s epistles 
 to their own destruction. ‘Because of anti-Christian 
 unrighteousness, false prophecy and deception, a deluge 
 of fire comes’ (Iren. v. 29, 2). 
 
 When Peter predicts that ‘the e/ements will be scorched 
 up and dissolved, he employs a word (ctovyeia), which 
 comes from a root (cre/yw) meaning to march orderly 
 ortoascend. This word expresses, first, the elementary 
 sounds and letters of a language ; and, secondly, the first 
 or rudimentary principles of a science. These adapta- 
 tions to men’s sense-bound or first childish state are, no 
 doubt, the mirror in which the first Christians saw the 
 truth enigmatically (1 Cor. xiii.) ; but there was a danger, 
 if men grew older without making rational progress, lest 
 their minds should become intoxicated with perverted 
 conceits or caricatures of the implied sense, and lest the 
 whole heavens of divine manifestation should thus ‘be 
 on fire.’ These perversions were to precede and, perhaps, 
 serve to educe the more perfect knowledge ; and hence 
 Peter speaks of God’s long suffering in delaying this day. 
 
 ABRAHAM: OR, RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH. 
 
 Paul cited the history of Abraham to show that salva- 
 tion is of grace and by faith. Man needs divine teaching ; 
 and he obtains the inheritance, which God purposes tc 
 give him, by following the light which God gives. One 
 mistake, which Paul was correcting, was the idea that 
 God gives us His blessings in reward for our service as 
 if He needed it ; God requires our service for ovr benefit. 
 It was by acting as if he believed, that Abraham was led 
 by progressive revelations to know more of the mind of 
 God and of the meaning of the ritual works, which he’ 
 performed. A readiness to be subject to God and a 
 
FAITH IN GOD’S SIGHT. 165 
 
 willingness to apprehend His meaning led Abraham to 
 know what God was doing and to be called His friend. 
 
 1. While Terah was yet an idolater (Josh. xxiv. 2), 
 God appeared to Abraham in Mesopotamia, bidding him 
 go to a land, which he was afterwards to receive as an 
 inheritance. But although Abraham received the pro- 
 mise of this unseen land and this future inheritance, he 
 could not, in the nature of things, enter upon the posses- 
 sion of them, if he stayed where he was; the land would 
 not come to him. The promised blessing could only be 
 counted or reckoned as his by faith, that is, by his 
 acting as if he believed God’s word and setting out to 
 the promised land. He did not get the land in reward 
 for setting out; but his setting out was the only means 
 of entering upon the gift. A man may inherit a business ; 
 but this business is nothing to him so long as it is not pro- 
 secuted. He may obtain by favour a lucrative situation in 
 a distant colony, but he must go to it, otherwise it cannot 
 be counted as his. In the same way, God has given us a 
 nature capable of a blissful and never-ending life with 
 Him, and has prepared all things needful for this result, 
 yet as the blessedness to be conferred is not merely 
 instinctive or physical good, but the satisfaction derived 
 from overcoming temptation and exercising a virtuous 
 control over ourselves, we can only, in the nature of 
 things, enter upon the inheritance thus given us, by 
 leaving off sin, which makes men miserable, and by 
 following after those things which, by the very nature of 
 things, give peace and enduring satisfaction. 
 
 = When Abraham did arrive in the promised land, 
 there seemed to be little ostensible probability that he 
 would possess it; for it was in the hands of the Amorites, 
 whose iniquity was not yet full, and Abraham was child- 
 
166 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 less. The Word of the Lord again appeared to him in 
 a vision, assuring him of the divine protection and pro- 
 mising that his children should be as numerous as the 
 stars of heaven. Abraham again acted as if he believed, 
 by ‘not returning to the country from whence he had 
 come out’ (Heb. xi. 15); and, on this occasion, we read 
 that his faith ‘was counted to him for righteousness’ 
 (Gen. xv. 6). It is only by patient continuance in well- 
 doing that the blessing, which God means us to have, 
 can be counted or reckoned as ours. If a man ceases to 
 live the life of faith or to continue in well-doing, the 
 blessing will not, in the very nature of things, continue 
 in his possession. We deceive ourselves with vain words, 
 if we imagine that there is peace to the wicked, and that 
 we remain the servants or sons or friends of God, if we 
 accustom ourselves to do evil. 
 
 3. When Abraham was ninety-nine years old, God 
 again appeared to him and told him that Ishmael was 
 not the heir of the promise ; but that Sarah, who was 
 ninety years old, should have ason. The sign of cir- 
 cumcision, which he received, was a seal of the righteous- 
 ness which he had while in his uncircumcision (Rom. iy. 
 11); it was in fact a gift of symbolic truth, a partial 
 fulfilment of the promise; for it intimated that 
 Abraham’s spzritual children, who cast away, in a sense, 
 the filth of the flesh, would inherit the promise. 
 Abraham fulfilled the cruel rite; and when next God 
 appeared to him, on his way to Sodom, He spoke to 
 Abraham as His friend whom He knew. But no sooner 
 was the lad grown up than Abraham was commanded 
 to offer him up as a burnt-offering. As formerly 
 Abraham had cherished his hope in God, not considering 
 the deadness of his own body, so now he acted as if he 
 
 A 
 
ISAAC A TYPE OF OUR LORD. 167 
 
 believed that God was able to raise Isaac from the dead ; 
 from whence also he received him in a figure (Heb. xi. 
 g). Inasmuch, therefore, as Abraham believed in God, 
 that He quickeneth the dead, and acted as if he believed, 
 his faith was faith in God’s sight (Rom. iv. 17; James ii, 
 gi'+ 1. Pet. i: 211). é 
 
 4. Abraham received his son back again in a figure 5 
 for Isaac was a type of our Lord, who was given up by 
 His heavenly Father unto death and afterwards received 
 by Him, when He was raised from the dead. The 
 Angel of Jehovah, also, spoke twice from heaven, first 
 bidding Abraham not sacrifice Isaac, a ram being pro- 
 vided in his stead, as in the Jewish sacrifices; and, 
 secondly, confirming the promise with an oath. The 
 first of these utterances served, we may reasonably 
 think, to prefigure to Abraham that there would be a 
 provisional dispensation, under which animal sacrifices 
 should be offered up typically in the room of the coming 
 Messiah; and the word of the oath was a type of that 
 strong assurance which God would give to the heirs of 
 salvation of the immutability of His counsel, when He 
 raised up Jesus from the dead (Heb. vi. 18-20). But, 
 according to the epistle to the Hebrews, not only has 
 God interposed, after the manner of men, with an oath, 
 that we may have strong encouragement, or, as St. 
 Peter calls it, a lively hope, but our Lord Himself was, 
 by an oath, constituted a priest, abiding for ever after the 
 order of Melchizedek, whose kingdom and priesthood 
 had no known beginning or end (Heb. vii.; Ps.cx.), The 
 _ manifestation of the Son of God has once for all taken 
 the place of those sabbaths, sacrifices and ritual deeds of 
 the law, which were ministered by priests of the order of 
 Aaron but are not now needed (Justin D, c. T. 23). It 
 
168 THE WORD OF GOD AND THE TYPES OF GENESIS. 
 
 remains that we should with reverence look into the 
 meaning of what our Lord exhibits and, by practising 
 it, obtain its benefit. 
 
 Faith is sometimes spoken of as believing God, 
 sometimes as trusting God or in God, and sometimes as 
 receiving God’s grace not in vain. But if we really 
 believe in the Father, who is able to raise the dead, and 
 in Jesus Christ, who is coming to judge men according 
 to their works, then we shall not live every day of our 
 lives as if we did not believe this. To profess to believe 
 something, and at the same time to act as if one doubted 
 or disbelieved it, is to be double-minded (James i. ; iv. 8). 
 Abraham hoped against hope; and a man may have 
 many intellectual misgivings, yet if he direct his life as 
 if even ¢he hope of another and incorruptible life were 
 preferable to the enjoyment of base pleasure or un- 
 righteous gain, he is following in the steps of Abraham. 
 God reckons with us by deeds, and His judgments are 
 not words but results. If, again, we ¢vwst in an unseen 
 Rewarder of men, then we shall not be led by the 
 apparent prosperity of evil-doers to choose their ways 
 (Ps. xxxvii.) ; we shall act as if we believed or trusted in 
 God. Again, ifa man recezves food and does not eat it, 
 or a doctor’s prescription and does not follow it, ora 
 treasure and keeps it buried, or accepts a lucrative 
 appointment and never enters upon it, is this really to 
 receive anything? If the earth drinks in the rain and is 
 not fertilised by it, does the earth profit by the rain? And 
 if it only brings forth thorns and thistles, is it not receiv- 
 ing acurse instead of a blessing? (Heb. vi. 7,8; xii. 15). 
 ‘Wilt thou know, O empty, fanciful, man,’ said St. James, 
 ‘that faith without works is idle? Was not Abraham 
 our father justified by works, when he offered up his son 
 
FAITH AND WORKS. 169 
 
 Isaac upon the altar? Thou seest that faith wrought 
 with his works, and by works was faith made perfect. 
 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith with- 
 out works is dead also’ (James ii. 20-26). We do not 
 sdy that the dead body of a man is the man;and so the 
 faith of a man who does not act as if he believed is not 
 faith in God’s sight.! ) 
 
 1 Aristotle says that the judgment which follows knowledge is faith, 
 Plato says that the unbeliever is one to whom yoluntary falsehood is agree- 
 able ; that the man to whom involuntary falsehood is agreeuble is senseless. 
 Faith, says Clement (Mis. ii. 4), manifests a willing spirit ; to believe is 
 to obey the Word, voluntarily to follow our light, our ‘preconception ’ 
 (zpo\nvVis) of whatis true and useful ; and this spirit leads to more knowledge. 
 
170 
 
 CHAPTER’ LH, 
 
 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 WHEN men are in an ignorant condition, they are disci- 
 plined, as slaves, for the enjoyment of enlightened free- 
 dom; but the high ones of the earth do not always 
 welcome this result. If they cannot read the signs of 
 the times but oppress and keep down the truth, like 
 Pharaoh and his magicians, they sooner or later lose 
 their people or are forced ‘to give place to honester 
 men.’ 
 
 The early Presbyters saw in the Exodus of the 
 Israelites from Egypt a type of the separation of the 
 Christian church from the heathen nations which, in the 
 Apocalypse, ‘receive the same plagues universally, as 
 Egypt did particularly’ (Iren. iv. 30). The gold and 
 silver and raiment, which the Israelites asked and 
 obtained from the Egyptians, served afterwards to con- 
 struct the tabernacle in the wilderness. In this, these 
 Presbyters saw a type of the consecrated use of worldly 
 means (Iren. iv. 30. I-4). 
 
 There were two inaugural rites which introduced the 
 Mosaic dispensation; namely, the Passover and the 
 sacrifice of the Covenant. 
 
TWO INAUGURAL RITES. 17k 
 
 THE FIRST INSTITUTION OF THE PASSOVER. 
 
 At the departure of the Israelites from Egypt, Moses 
 directed that a lamb should be slain in every household, 
 roasted whole and eaten hurriedly with unleavened 
 bread and bitter herbs ; that some of the blood should 
 be sprinkled upon the lintel and upon the two side- posts 
 of the door of the house, so that, when the angel, who 
 passed through to destroy the first-born of the Egyptians, 
 saw this blood, he might pass over the door and not 
 suffer the destroying angel to come in. In their haste 
 to depart, the people took the dough of the morrow’s 
 provisions, before it was leavened, and so left behind 
 them all the leaven of Egypt. In memory of this 
 deliverance, the Israelites were directed to consecrate to 
 God all the first-fruits of their increase, to sacrifice the 
 first-born of clean animals, to substitute a clean animal 
 for the first-born of an unclean, and to redeem the first- 
 born of their own children ; they were also to keep the 
 feast of the passover, and for seven days to eat only 
 unleavened bread. They were also to explain to their 
 children the reason of these ordinances; ‘and it shall be 
 for a sign unto thee upon thine hand and for a memorial 
 between thine eyes, that the Lord’s law may be in thy 
 mouth? (Ex. xiii.). 
 
 There is a reference to this passover in the prophecy 
 of Ezekiel, when a man clothed with linen is directed to 
 set a mark upon the forehead of men who sigh and 
 groan for the abominations done in the midst of the 
 city ; and six men, who had the charge of the city, are 
 directed to follow after him and slay, without mercy, all 
 
 _ who have not this mark (Ez. ix.). St. John also, in his 
 
 vision, heard the angel forbidden to hurt the earth, till 
 
172 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 the servants of God are sealed in their foreheads ; but 
 the judgments of God fall on those who have the mark 
 of the wild beast on their forehead and on their right 
 hand (Rev. vii. 3 ; xiv. 9). Israel was enjoined by Moses 
 to love God and serve Him only, to keep His command- 
 ments and ‘ bind His words as a sign upon his hand and 
 as frontlets between his eyes, to write them on the 
 door-posts of his house and on his gates’ (Deut. vi. 8 ; 
 xi. 18). The explanation of the figure is probably that 
 given by Justin Martyr (Dial. c. Tryph. c. 40). ‘The 
 mystery, then, of the lamb which God enjoined to be 
 sacrificed as the passover, was a type of Christ ; with 
 whose blood, in proportion to their faith in Him, they 
 anoint their houses, that is, themselves, who believe on 
 Him. For that the creation which God created— 
 namely, Adam—was a house for the spirit which pro- 
 ceeded from God, you can well understand.’ If the body 
 be the house, it is plain what*the lintel and side-posts 
 mean. If the family be the house, women are exhorted 
 to adorn themselves with a meek and quiet spirit, which 
 in the sight of God is of great price; children are to 
 obey their parents, for this is well-pleasing in the Lord ; 
 bondsmen were to obey their masters, not as men- 
 pleasers ; masters were to deal with their slaves, accord- 
 ing to the principles of justice and equity, for with God 
 there is no respect of persons. The unleavened bread 
 of sincerity and truth was to be in men’s mouths and in 
 their hearts. The word is not transcendental but nigh and 
 practical (Deut. xxx. 14), guileless milk entrusted to 
 children, because it is not sophisticated but easy of com- 
 prehension to those who are obedient and study a straight- 
 forward life (Iren. vol. i. 322; vol. ii. 175 ; Clark’s Ed.). 
 
 THE RANSOM OR PRICE OF DELIVERANCE was the 
 
RITUAL LANGUAGE. REDEMPTION. i73 
 
 sacrifice of an innocent lamb; what then are we to 
 understand by such statements as that Christ is a ransom 
 in behalf of all, and that He has redeemed us from the 
 curse of the law, being made a curse in our behalf? Are 
 we to imagine that God’s goodness was literally pur- 
 chased? On the contrary, God so loved the world 
 that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever 
 believeth in Him might not perish. But it would be 
 contradictory to declare. that God is a_ consistent 
 Governor and at the same time exhibit Him as neglect- 
 ing to carry out His words and as making the greatest 
 possible good to come to us out of the breaking of a law 
 ‘which had not been kept. The first elementary or 
 school-boy law had been broken ; and a new dispensa- 
 tion or revelation of the truth could only come as the 
 fulfilment of it; for, if it appeared that God sets aside 
 His words without fulfilling them, then we might still 
 delude ourselves with the hope that we shall not reap as 
 we sow, though God has said so. In order that God 
 might reveal the truth consistently and not encourage 
 us to hope for or expect what is good or pleasant by 
 falling (Iren. v. 22. 2), God sent His son to fulfil the old 
 law that we might obtain its reward. Until He came, 
 His work was foreshadowed by this lamb; but lan- 
 guage, borrowed from an animal’s willingness and death 
 or from the payment of a ransom, is also shadowy and 
 ritual. We are speaking figuratively, when we speak of 
 propitiating God’s anger by the payment of a debt or the 
 sacrifice of a victim. The meaning is that He came 
 voluntarily as man among us, submitting to all the laws of 
 society and to the labours and sufferings which the reign 
 of evil in it brings, in the course of things on those who 
 seek to bear others’ burdens or to let in the light upon 
 
174 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 old abuses. He did no sin Himself, He became thus 
 the wctim of God’s laws, teaching us, in the most 
 emphatic way, that God’s laws will not be broken ; that 
 the way to life is by submitting to them and by follow- 
 ing His example in labouring patiently to do good. 
 There are three Greek words translated redeem or 
 vansom in our English version of the New Testament. 
 The first class of words (/utron, lutroo, lutrosts) is mostly 
 used in the Septuagint for the Hebrew terms gaal and 
 padhah, signifying to buy back what was consecrated to 
 God, to deliver from danger or slavery, to release from 
 captivity. In one passage, our Lord is said to be a 
 ransom (antilutron) in behalf of all men; and this is 
 said to be a proof why God wishes all men to be saved 
 (1 Tim. ii. 4-6). If, therefore, we think of a literal 
 transaction of buying, it would follow that all men must 
 be saved, for the price of their ransom has thus been 
 paid and cannot justly be demanded again. The second 
 word (peripoteo) means properly to acquire or obtain as 
 a possession ; and God’s redeemed are those whom He 
 acknowledges as peculiarly His. We may compare the 
 sense of the Hebrew gaa/ in Job iii. 6: ‘Let darkness 
 and the shadow of death redeem it’ (the day of Job’s 
 birth), that is, let them retake it for themselves. The 
 word is used in the New Testament in different connec- 
 tions (Acts xx. 28; Eph. i. 14; 1 Thess. v. 9; 2 Thess. 
 i. 145 1 Tim. tit 135 Heb. -x.-39% © Pet: ii. 19). The 
 third word (eragorazo) ‘to buy up’ occurs in Gal. iii. 
 13; iv. 5; in the sense of redeeming men from the 
 curse of the law, and in Eph. v. 16; Col. iv. 5, in the 
 sense of ‘buying up opportunities’ for self-discipline, &c., 
 from the prevalence of evil. When it is said that ‘ Christ 
 has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having been - 
 
THE MEDIATING VICTIM. 175 
 
 made a curse on our behalf . . . that we might receive 
 the promise of the Spirit,’ we might, at first sight, suppose 
 that He was merely substituted instead of us, that we 
 might also obtain. His reward instead of Him. But in 
 this view of His suffering, He would not have been raised 
 in glory ; He would have suffered what we had to suffer 
 and we should have had its reward. When the Ten Com- 
 mandments were first given, the Lord added no more 
 (Deut. v. 22); but when the people idolatrously made a 
 calf, turning stubbornly back to the slavery of Egypt, they 
 recetued the Mosaic law as a disciplinary correction, fit for 
 the desire of stiff-necked slaves, a‘ burden’ of ceremonialism 
 which they could scarcely bear (Acts xv. 10), but a sign or 
 shadow, symbolical of better things to come. Our Lord 
 did away with what was ‘the burden’ or ‘the curse’ of 
 
 this law, becoming Himself ‘ the sign’ of spiritual circum- 
 
 ciston, of Sabbatic abstinence from evil and of rational 
 religious offerings; but He did not do away with men’s 
 natural duties or those services symbolised, which savour of 
 rational liberty, kindness, and moral excellence. Tren. v. 
 memo sewhere Ex; XXx1. 13); Hz. xx2224).25);. Actsi vin 
 42, are quoted. 
 
 DHE, SACRIFICE OF -THE, COVENANT: 
 
 I. THE BLOOD OF THE COVENANT. ‘Where a dis- 
 pensation is,’ says the writer to the Hebrews, ‘there must, 
 of necessity, be brought in the death of the mediating 
 victim’ (Heb. ix. 16), for whoever would exhibit God’s 
 dealings and man’s redeeming work must become a 
 member of human society and be subject to social laws 
 and suffer from the evils he cures, that God’s laws might 
 not be broken or appear to be so.. ‘Whence,’ adds 
 the writer, ‘neither hath the first dispensation been dedi- 
 
176 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 cated without blood.’ It was necessary that its figures 
 should be purified with animal sacrifices, but the heavenly 
 antitypes themselves with better sacrifices. This first 
 dedication took place on the first return of Moses from 
 Mount Sinai in the following manner. When Moses 
 had spoken to all the people the ten commandments and 
 other precepts contained in the twentieth and three fol- 
 lowing chapters of Exodus, an altar was erected and 
 surrounded by twelve pillars; burnt offerings and peace 
 offerings were offered and the blood was collected in 
 basins. One half of the blood was then sprinkled on the 
 altar; and the other half on the people, when they had 
 promised obedience. The blood of the animal is its life. 
 The burning body and the raised blood of the sacrifice 
 represent the patient obedience and risen life of our Lord; 
 and we shall find the same double emblem in other types. 
 ‘To drink the blood of Christ,’ said Clement of Alex- 
 andria, ‘is to become partaker of our Lord’s immortality ; 
 the Spirit being the energetic principle of the Word, as 
 blood is of flesh.’ He also speaks of this energetic principle 
 as ‘hope’ (i. 140, 200). Ignatius calls the blood of Christ 
 ‘incorruptible love and eternal life.’ The exhibition of 
 Christ’s death and resurrection serves to generate in 
 men that ‘incorruptible love, that mind or spirit of 
 Jesus, which is the earnest or first-fruits of eternal life. 
 That the communication of this Spirit is what is 
 meant by the sprinkling of the blood on the people, 
 appears also from 1 Pet. i. 2, where Christians are 
 spoken of as ‘elect through the sanctification of the 
 spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of 
 Jesus.’ ‘Here,’ says Dr. Fairbairn, ‘the sprinkling of 
 Christ’s blood is not only coupled with a personal obedi- 
 ence, as being somewhat of a similar nature, but the two 
 
THE COVERING UPON THE SOUL. 177 
 
 together are set forth as the result of the electing and 
 sanctifying grace of God upon the soul (the sprinkling of 
 the blood being put last). The good here intended 
 must be something inward and personal, not wrought 
 for us but upon us and in us. It is this personal puri- 
 fying from every lust which the apostle describes in 
 vitual language, and which is also described in the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews, with a similar reference to the 
 blood of Christ, as ‘having the heart sprinkled from an 
 evil conscience, and again as ‘having the conscience 
 purged from dead works to serve the living God. The 
 sprinkling or purging spoken of is manifestly the cleans- 
 ing of the soul from all internal defilement . . . through 
 the holy and divine life, represented by that blood be- 
 coming truly and personally theirs . . . whose hearts are 
 purified by faith’! A similar distribution of the blood 
 was made at the consecration of Aaron and his sons to 
 _ the priesthood when some of the blood was put upon 
 _ the right ear, the thumb of the right hand, and the 
 great toe of the right foot, implying still more distinctly 
 that they were to hear intelligently, and to obey. 
 
 There is a remarkable passage in Leviticus (xvii. 11) 
 where the children of Israel are forbidden to eat blood, 
 ‘for the life (or soul) of the flesh is in the blood, and I 
 
 “ (the Lord) have given it upon the altar to be a covering 
 
 _ upon or over (al) your souls; for it is the blood which 
 covers or atones by or in (b’) the soul. The Hebrew 
 
 word (£ipper) which is translated atone means properly 
 to cover ; but it is generally used as a sacrificial term in 
 connection with the forgiveness of sin, and, in this sense, is 
 also translated puree away, pacify, pardon, be merciful to, 
 _ make reconciliation, cleanse. In Prov. xvi. 14, and Gen. 
 .  Fairbairn’s 7ypology, vol. i. pp. 221-223. 
 
 N 
 
178 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 XXxii. 20, the word is used in the sense of averting the 
 consequences of a great man’s anger by wise manage- 
 ment or a gift. This covering of the soul was effected 
 not merely by the blood on the altar, but also by the 
 ransom of half a shekel which every Israelite paid (Ex. 
 xxx. 5), by the grateful offerings of warriors who had 
 risked their lives (Num. xxxi. 50), by the offering of 
 incense (Num: xvi. 46) and by the prayer of Moses (Ex. 
 xxxil. 30). The word is used in Isaiah (xxviii. 18) to 
 express the obliterating or blotting out of an ancient 
 writing: ‘Your covenant with death shall be annulled 
 (covered).’ In like manner, Paul speaks of our having 
 received the forgiveness of sins, in the blotting out of 
 the handwriting of ordinances which was against us 
 (Col. ii. 14), or in the abolishing of the law of the com- 
 mandment in ordinances (Eph. ii. 15). The self-sacrific- 
 ing mind of God’s Son and His subjection to God’s laws 
 were exhibited in accordance with the old law of ordi- 
 nances, so as to give us a more perfect exhibition of God, 
 a typical example and an actual proof of a resurrection. 
 And ‘blessed are we,’ said Clement of Rome, ‘if we keep 
 - the commandments of God in the harmony of love; that 
 so through love our sins may be forgiven us. For it is 
 written, Blessed are they whose transgressions are for- 
 given and whose sins are covered (Ps. xxxii. 1, 2; Clem. 
 i. 50). Men’s sins are in fact forgiven when, through the 
 manifestation of the Word, they are transformed into the 
 same image, as when the face of Moses shone by the 
 presence of Him who is the truth, or as when the moon’s © 
 dark surface is itself lit up by the light of the sun. The | 
 righteousness of God is unto and upon all that believe © 
 (Rom. iii. 22); it is exhibited zo them that it may be za — 
 them or oz their souls (John xiv. 17). In the remark- | 
 
THE BREAD AND WINE OF THE SACRAMENT. 179 
 
 able passage of Leviticus xvii. 11, just referred to, the 
 blood is said to atone dy or zz the soul (bannephesh) ; 
 and the Hebrew verb takes this particular proposition 
 (b’) to indicate that by which the atonement is made 
 or the sacrifice by which the expiation is made (2 Sam. 
 xxi. 3, Num. v. 8; xxxv. 33);! and that which is covered, 
 or zpon which the covering is to be, is marked by the pre- 
 position a/, ‘upon.’ - Thus the passage means that the 
 atonement is made by (means of) the blood of the sacrifice, 
 and that it is to be upon the souls of the worshippers so 
 as to cover them with or transform them into the same 
 image. 
 
 IJ. THE BODY OF THE SACRIFICE, from which the 
 blood or energetic principle was poured, represents, ac- 
 cording to Clement, the Word of which the Spirit is the 
 energetic principle ; or,as Dean Stanley expresses it, the 
 history of our Lord, of which love is the incorruptible 
 principle. 
 
 THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST, represented by 
 the bread and wine of the sacrament, are the historical 
 word and risen life of Christ. The exhibition of our Lord’s 
 obedience and death and the assurance of His actual 
 resurrection from the dead encourage men to make pro- 
 gress towards immortal life, after His example, and 
 
 4 generate in them His nature, mind or spirit, which is the 
 
 earnest or first beginning of risen life in men. We must 
 digest our Lord’s history and make it our own by 
 following His example. To eat ignorantly or supersti- 
 tiously is to be ignorant of this symbolical language or 
 to mistake it and possibly to delude ourselves (1 Cor. xi. 
 29, 30). The word of God is addressed to our senses, to 
 our hearing and seeing and even to our taste (Heb. vi. 5), 
 
 » Fairbairn’s Zyfology, ii. 3051. Gesenius on Caphar, 
 N 2 
 
180 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 that we may digest and practice it. Our Lord was 
 originally and in very deed that which He spoke to the 
 Jews (John viii. 25) ; the revealed Word is God's gift of 
 mercy (John iii. 16; 1 Cor. vii. 25). Thus even ‘the sub- 
 stance of the sacrament is the forgiveness of sins, because 
 this picture of God’s way of life is given in mercy. ‘The 
 sacrament,’ said Augustine, ‘is the visible word, because 
 the rite is, as it were, the picture of the word, signifying the 
 same as the word, because the effect of both is the same.’ 
 
 THE TABERNACLE OF WITNESS OR TENT OF 
 MEETING. 
 
 The sanctuary stood in a court, 100 cubits long and 
 50 broad, beyond which the common Israelite was not 
 permitted to enter. This court was enclosed with 
 curtains of white byssus or canvas and had an entrance 
 on the east. In it stood the Altar of Burnt Offering 
 and the Brazen Laver. The Tabernacle proper was 30 
 cubits long and 10 broad, surrounded on three sides by 
 planks of acacia (imperishable) wood, gilded or overlaid 
 with gold and rising perpendicularly from silver sockets. 
 The planks were furnished with golden rings, through 
 which transverse bars of gilded acacia or shittim wood 
 were passed, so that the whole was braced together but 
 might be easily taken down and removed. Over this 
 wooden frame were spread four coverings, the innermost 
 of which consisted of ten curtains of fine white linen, em- 
 broidered in blue, purple and scarlet, with figures of 
 cherubim, ‘the work of the designer’ (Ex. xxxvi. 8). 
 These curtains were hooked together with golden hooks 
 and blue eyes, the ends perhaps hanging down within 
 the planks so as to form a tapestry. The second 
 covering was of goats’ hair; the third of rams’ skins ; 
 
 j| 
 } 
 i 
 } 
 
THE SOCIAL BODY AND ITS MEMBERS. 181 
 
 and the fourth probably of seals’ skins. The Tabernacle 
 proper was divided into the Holy Place, 20 cubits long 
 and the Most Holy Place, which was 10 cubits every 
 way.! A veil, of the same material and workmanship 
 as the tapestry of the ceiling, separated them, being 
 suspended on four gilded pillars of acacia sunk in silver 
 sockets. The east or open end of the tabernacle was 
 closed by another veil or curtain of the same material 
 but without the cherubim, and suspended on five such 
 pillars. The covering of goats’ hair was arranged so as 
 to fall over this outer veil, when required. The shittim 
 or acacia wood, of which the articles in the Holy Places 
 were made, was of a very hard or, as Hippolytus calls it, 
 imperishable nature. | 
 
 The Tabernacle was the work of wise or wise- 
 
 hearted men, under two master-builders, Bezaliel of the 
 
 tribe of Judah and Aholiab of the tribe of Dan, whom 
 God filled with His spirit, in wisdom and understanding, 
 putting it into their hearts that they might teach (Ex. 
 XXXV. 30-35; xxxvi. 4, 8). So now our Lord assigns to 
 each of His servants his sphere, according to his ability 
 
 and vocation, that the entire body of Christians may be 
 
 built up into a spiritual house and that each may attain 
 his full-grown and enlightened manhood. There are, 
 Paul says, different ministrations, but the same Lord is 
 Head over the organised body. All are followers of the 
 truth and are knit together by love, the bond of perfect- 
 ness. In this ‘fitly framed and compacted’ structure, 
 ‘each joint ministers supply according to the working of 
 each several member in his own apportioned sphere,’ 
 In this building, Paul speaks of himself as a master- 
 
 1 In the Temple, the dimensions of the Holy Places were double those 
 of the Tabernacle ; its Most Holy Place was 20 cubits every way. 
 
182 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 builder and cautions others how they build upon the 
 foundation which is laid, lest their work should be burned 
 up. If, however, any man should defile or destroy this 
 temple, him would God destroy (1 Cor. iii. 9-17). Man’s 
 body is the temple of the Holy Ghost and the congre- 
 gation of such men is also God’s temple in which God 
 sits and judges (Ps. Ixxxii.; Eph. iv. 16; Col. ii. 19). 
 
 THE MEDIATION OF MOSES AND THE PRIESTS. 
 
 When Moses came down from Mount Sinai the 
 second time, his face shone so that the children of Israel 
 could not look steadfastly on its glory. When he had 
 finished speaking, he put a veil upon his face, so that the 
 children of Israel did not see the glory disappearing. 
 The glory of the Mosaic ritual cou!d not be understood 
 till that which related to our Lord’s humanity was con- 
 summated (Iren. iv. 26, 1); and even then the Jews did 
 not discover that it was done away in Christ. By means of 
 this key, however, Christians may look into the meaning 
 of the mystery and participate in the glory (2 Cor. iii.). 
 
 The Priests were also mediators, presenting the 
 people's offerings to God and representing God as His 
 messengers to the people whom they taught (Lev. x. I1 ; 
 2 Chron xv. 33. Mal. cil.:7)2°' All: the -Aaronites were 
 priests, if they were without physical blemish ; they were 
 to bear in their persons the external symbol of what is 
 morally without blemish (Eph. i. 3, 4). For this reason 
 they were not to shave their heads or disfigure their 
 persons, or marry a dissolute woman, or drink wine 
 during their ministrations, or defile themselves by con- 
 tact with dead bodies (unless those of their near rela- 
 tives), or eat that which had died naturally or had been 
 
THE DRESS OF THE PRIESTS. 183 
 
 torn by wild beasts. They were not to gird themselves 
 with anything causing sweat (Ez. xliv. 18) ; their under- 
 dress, their cassock or robe, and their cup-shaped or 
 
 conical mitre, were all of byssus, that is, the fine twined — 
 linen (rather than cotton-stuff) of Egypt, pure and white, 
 expressive of the righteousness of the saints ; and their 
 girdle, which was of the same material, but originally em- 
 broidered in blue, purple, and scarlet, was perhaps sig- 
 nificant of truth (Eph. vi. 14), which its colours of earth, 
 air, water, and fire revealed (Clem. S. v. 6). In addition 
 to these garments of holiness, the high priest was to wear 
 other distinctive articles of dress, called ‘golden gar- 
 ments. There was, first, a dark blue mantle or robe 
 (meil), wholly woven, and having attached to it blue, 
 purple, and scarlet pomegranates and golden bells alter- 
 nately. Upon this robe was the Ephod of white byssus, 
 embroidered with blue, purple, and scarlet and gold 
 threads interspersed. It consisted of two parts, one 
 hanging down in front and the other behind, clasped at 
 the shoulders with two onyx stones, each of which had 
 six of the names of the twelve tribes of Israel inscribed 
 on it. It was held to the body by a girdle of the same 
 sort, passing round the breast, and not, as in the case of 
 _ ordinary priests, round the loins. The Ephod was a 
 - - shoulder dress, and indicated that the government was 
 - to be upon the shoulders of the person represented 
 
 (1s. ix. 6). Jesus Christ appears also in John’s vision as 
 
 girt about the breasts with a golden girdle. Hewas the 
 Counseller, who knew the divine mind and will and came 
 to reveal it. This is indicated by the breastplate, a piece 
 _of cloth, a span square, set with twelve different precious 
 stones in four rows, and connected with the Urim and 
 -Thammim, literally ‘light and perfection. To Paul a 
 
184. THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 knowledge of this mystery of God had been abundantly 
 given, and he laboured to impart it to others ; in it are 
 all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col. ii. 2, 3). 
 The high priest’s mitre was a turban, of a different shape 
 from that of the ordinary priests. Fastened to it by 
 two ribbons of blue lace was a golden plate (Zzz or 
 Nezer), on which the words ‘ Holiness to the Lord’ were 
 inscribed. Aaron was to wear this ‘crown’ upon the 
 front of his mitre, ‘that he might bear the iniquity of 
 the holy things, which the children of Israel do hallow, 
 even all their gifts, that it might be on his forehead con- 
 tinually for a pleasing thing Jdefore the Lord’ (Ex. xxviii. 
 38). This Weger, like the Nezer or hair of the Nazarite, 
 veiled the head, the seat of reason, and formed a pleasing 
 figurative covering, shadowing truth and giving it power. 
 The Son of Godsuperseded the ritual symbols of Judaism ; 
 He took the place of its holy things or burdensome rites 
 and sacrifices, so as to bear this curse or become it; and 
 He removes men’s iniquities by transforming them after 
 God’s image. 
 
 At their first consecration, Aaron and his sons first 
 washed their entire bodies and put on their state dress. 
 The sacred oil, the symbol of the Holy Spirit (Ps. cx xxiii. ; 
 I John ii. 20), was then put upon the tabernacle and 
 sprinkled seven times upon the altar, after which it was 
 poured on the head of Aaron only. Afterwards, a triple 
 sacrifice was offered: a sin-offering, a burnt-offering, 
 and lastly ‘the ram of the consecration’ for a peace- 
 offering. Some of the blood of the ram was put on the 
 right ear, the right thumb, and the great toe of the 
 right foot of Aaron and his sons. To complete the 
 ceremony, Moses took of the anointing oil, and of 
 the blood that was upon the altar and sprinkled upon 
 
PRIVILEGES OF GOD’S PRIESTS. 185 
 
 Aaron and his sons, and upon their garments and 
 sanctified them (Ex. xxix.). In the first Temple, only 
 the high priest was anointed ; in the second Temple, both 
 the high priest and the ordinary priests were ordained 
 to their office by investiture without anointing, the 
 Rabbis holding that the anointing of Aaron applied 
 also to his descendants. The second nature, which -is 
 divine, covers the first as a garment ; it is purified by the 
 endurance of temptations (Rev. vii. 14), but stained or 
 destroyed by obeying sin habitually and presumptuously. 
 
 _ They who have endured temptation are those who have 
 
 ¢ 
 
 _ washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb ; they serve 
 
 God day and night in His temple; and God shall 
 (spread a) tabernacle over them. 
 
 When Korah and his company disputed the exclusive 
 wight of the Aaronites to the priesthood, Moses referred 
 the matter to the Lord. ‘Even to-morrow,’ he said, 
 
 : _ ‘the Lord will show who is His (1), and who is holy (2), 
 
 and will cause him to come near to Him (3), even him 
 whom He hath chosen’ (4). St. Peter describes all true 
 Christians by these four characteristics, reversing the 
 order. ‘But ye, he says, ‘are a chosen generation (4), 
 
 -a royal priesthood (3), an holy nation (2), a people pecu- 
 
 liarly His (1), that ye should show forth (as the Levites 
 in the Temple) the praises of Him who hath called you 
 out of darkness into His marvellous light (1 Pet. it. 9; 
 Num. xvi. 5). In following the Son of God, men partake of 
 His glory; they do not confer glory or benefit on Him, 
 but He on them; therefore He is said to choose them, 
 not they Him (Iren. iv. 14), 
 
186 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 THE ALTAR OF BURNT OFFERING. 
 DIFFERENT SACRIFICES. 
 
 The altar in the court of the tabernacles was made 
 of acacia or shittim wood, overlaid with brass and hollow. 
 It was five cubits square and three cubits high ; in 
 Solomon’s temple it was twenty cubits square and ten 
 high ; and, in Herod’s temple, Josephus says it was fifty 
 cubits square and fifteen high, made without’ any iron 
 tool. and approached by a gentle declivity on the south. 
 All round it ran a circuit or ledge for the ministering 
 priests. A perpetual fire was kept burning on the altar 
 (Lev. vi. 12, 13). According to Irenzus (iv. 26, 2), those 
 
 ‘who bring strange fire to God’s altar—namely, strange 
 doctrines-——-shall be burnt up by the fire from heaven, as 
 Nadab and Abihu.’ 
 
 The Sacrifices with Blood were of four kinds. I. The 
 Sin-offering. II. The Trespass-offering, which resembled 
 the sin-offering, but was always accompanied with pay- 
 ment for the amount of injury done, increased by one- 
 fifth. III. The Burnt-offering, of which the continual 
 morning and evening sacrifices were examples. IV. The 
 Peace-offering, of which there were three kinds: the 
 Thank-offering, the Votive-offering, and the Voluntary 
 or Freewill offering. The animal was to be without 
 blemish ; only in the case of the freewill offering it might 
 have something superfluous or defective. 
 
 The Bloodless Sacrifices were Meat-offerings consist- 
 ing of flour baked or unbaked, and Drink-offerings or 
 Libations of wine poured out at the base of the altar. 
 They included also the first sheaf of the Passover, the 
 two loaves at Pentecost, and the shew-bread, 
 
 The Sacrificial acts were partly performed by the 
 
DIVERSITIES OF OPERATION. 187 
 
 _ offerer and partly by the officiating priest. To the 
 
 offerer it belonged to lay, or rather, to rest his hand on 
 the victim’s ead, to slay, skin, cut in pieces, and wash the 
 inwards ; to the priest it belonged to catch up the blood, 
 sprinkle it, prepare the fire, lay wood upon it, and, 
 finally, to lay the pieces of the sacrifice upon it. The 
 offerer first brought his sacrifice to the door of the 
 Tabernacle, where the altar was, and leaned his hand or 
 both his hands on its head forcibly, as for suppart.! When 
 the sacrifice was for some public sin done in ignorance, 
 the elders of the people leaned their hands on the head 
 of the animal; and, in the case of the scapegoat, the 
 high priest did so. The sin and trespass offerings and 
 the public peace offerings at Pentecost were slaughtered 
 on the north side of the altar, the side on which the 
 table of shew-bread was, within the veil. All the sacri- 
  fices offered on the north side of the altar as well as the 
 - shew-bread eaten by the priests were most holy. The 
 lamb of the continual burnt-offering was fastened to the 
 north side of the altar, in the morning to the north-west 
 corner, and in the evening to the north-east corner, 
 always opposite the sun. We find the altar of burnt 
 offering connected with the altar of incense, which was 
 right in front of it (Deut. xxxili. 10; Ps. cxli. 2); and 
 _ the word, which expresses the burning of the sacrifice, is ° 
 not the ordinary word for burning, but means to cause 
 to give forth odours like incense.* Private peace-offer- 
 ings were only holy, not most holy, and were slaughtered 
 on the south side of the altar, the side on which the 
 golden candlestick stood within the veil. The priest 
 collected the blood in a silver vessel, and, in most cases, 
 
 1 The word is Samach. See Edersheim’s Temple and its Services, p. 8% 
 * The word is Aztfer. See Edersheim, p. 91, 
 
188 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 threw some of it against the sides of the altar below a 
 red line, but, in the case of the sin-offering, he sprinkled 
 some of it upon the four elevated corners or horns of 
 the altar.- This, no doubt, indicated a risen life, upon 
 which men enter by cultivating that mind or spirit 
 which is the earnest of eternal life. If, however, the 
 sin offering were for the priest or the whole people, some 
 of the blood was carried into the Holy Place, and 
 sprinkled by the priest seven times with his finger 
 towards the veil of the Most Holy Place and again upon 
 the horns of the altar of incense. In all these cases, the 
 rest of the blood was poured out at the base of the altar; 
 and, in the case of. firstlings, tithes of animals, and the 
 paschal lamb, all of the blood was so poured out.!. The 
 animal was then flayed, the skin of the most holy sacri- 
 fices (except those wholly burnt) belonging to the priests, 
 and those of the private peace offerings to the offerers. 
 After the intestines and lower parts had been cleansed, 
 it was cut in pieces according to certain rules, a sym- 
 bolism fulfilled in that rightly dividing the word of truth, 
 which Paul commends Timothy to study.2 Burnt offer- 
 ings were wholly burnt as incense; but, in other sacri- 
 fices, only certain fat parts. The flesh of the sin and 
 trespass offerings was most holy; and it was given to 
 Aaron and his sons to be eaten within the Holy Place, 
 that they might ‘bear the iniquity of the congregation 
 and make an atonement for them Jdefore the Lord’ 
 (Lev. vii. 7, 8; x.17). So our Lord bore our iniquities by 
 jabouring and suffering in order to remove our curses 
 (Matt. viii. 16, 17); and so men ought to fulfil the law 
 of Christ by bearing one another's loads, not withdrawing 
 
 * Edersheim’s Temple and its Services, p. 90. 3. p. 86, 
 22 Tim. il. 15. op0otopodvra Thy Adyoy Ths GAnbeias, 
 
SACRIFICES WELL-PLEASING TO GOD. 189 
 
 themselves (as Trench interprets the passage) from the 
 burdens which the inconsiderate faults of their brethren 
 may impose upon them, seeing that they themselves 
 also may be tempted (Gal. vi. 1, 2). When the sin 
 offering was for the high priest or the people, the fat 
 portions were withdrawn and burnt (for incense) upon 
 the altar, the rest of the carcase being carried outside 
 the camp and consumed whole on wood ina clean place, 
 which served as a Holy Place to the tabernacle itself. 
 Thus the law itself pointed to an altar outside the city, 
 ‘whereof they have no right to eat who serve the taber- 
 nacle, for the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is 
 brought into the sanctuary by the high priest are burned 
 outside the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that He might 
 sanctify the people through His blood, suffered outside 
 the gate. There was an exhibition of the Second Man, 
 dead, buried, and passed through the heavens, that men 
 might be encouraged to go forth from the camp of Jewish 
 ceremonialism ; and that, following the rule of His 
 example, they might not forget to do good, and to com- 
 municate, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased 
 (Heb. xiii. 13-16). In the case of the peace offering, 
 the fat parts only were burnt as incense on the altar; 
 symbolic services, like fat, the efflorescence of flesh, 
 beautify and enrich, but need mental purification. The 
 rest of the flesh was eaten by the offerer, his family, 
 and his servants, while the Levite, the stranger, the 
 fatherless, and the widow were also invited (Deut. xii. 
 12; xvi.11). The priest’s portion, the right shoulder, 
 was heaved, or moved upwards and downwards, perhaps. 
 to indicate that all power comes from God and must be 
 exercised for His glory. The owner’s portion was the 
 _ breast; it was waved or moved horizontally, either 
 
190 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 forwards and backwards or from side to side, perhaps to 
 indicate that God will in all things fulfil the just deszre 
 of them who serve Him; that wherever men sow with 
 blessings, they shall reap also with blessings (2 Cor. ix. 6). 
 Meat-offerings of flour and cakes accompanied the 
 burnt-offerings and peace-offerings. These were pre- 
 pared without leaven and honey. Good works are to be 
 offered without hypocrisy, the leaven of the Pharisees, 
 and without malice or party rancour or revenge, the 
 sweets of that which stings. These offerings were to be 
 prepared with salt, the salt of God’s covenant, and with 
 oil. Sothe speech and whole conversation of Christians 
 should be in grace, seasoned with salt, seasonably edify- 
 ing, not insipid, worthless, foolish talking (Eph. iv. 29 ; 
 v. 4; Col. iv. 6). Oil, when burnt, gives light; and, 
 when used as an unguent invigorates the body. ‘Christ- 
 ians, said John, ‘have an anointing from the Lord by 
 which they know all things (1 John ii. 20). Men, who 
 seek to practise what is pleasing to God find, in the 
 study of this, the key to the deep things of God and 
 strength to fulfil their duties (Phil. iv. 12, 13). The high 
 priest’s daily meat-offering and that of the priests at their 
 consecration were prepared also with frankincense. The 
 meat-offerings of priests and those which followed burnt- 
 offerings were wholly burnt (as incense) ; in case of those 
 which followed peace-offerings,a handful only was burnt 
 (as incense) and the rest belonged to the priests. Every 
 meat-offering was accompanied by a drink-offering of 
 libation of wine which was poured out at the base of 
 the altar. Our Lord’s spiritual meat was to fulfil His 
 work or mission (John iv. 34); and Paul, in discharging 
 his mission, was willing to be poured out as a libation 
 (Phil. ii. 17 ; 2 Tim. iv. 6), to spend and be spent. The 
 libation was followed by the Temple music. 
 
PRAYER AND INCENSE. Ig! 
 
 THE HOLY PLACE. THE HEART AND HANDS. 
 
 The Holy Place contained the altar of incense in the 
 centre ; on the north side of this, the table of shew- 
 bread ; and, on the south side, the golden candlestick. . 
 None but priests entered. 
 
 The Altar of Incense was a cubit (about 21 inches) 
 long, a cubit broad, and two inches high; it was made 
 of acacia or shittim wood plated over with gold ; and it 
 had an ornamental edge with jutting points at its corners 
 called horns. ‘The incense consisted of four sweet spices, 
 of which one is known to have been frankincense ; it is 
 described as ‘salted, pure and holy ;’ and it was kindled 
 at the time of the continual sacrifice, morning and even- © 
 ing, with live coals taken from the altar of burnt-offer- 
 ing. When the cloud of incense rose up before the 
 Lord, the whole multitude was praying without (Luke 
 ier tO). : 
 
 Prayer is associated with incense. In the book of 
 the Revelation, when the Lamb is about to open the 
 seals, the living beings and the elders worship having 
 each of them golden vials full of incense, which vials are 
 the prayers of the saints (Rev. v. 8). There is some- 
 thing more than the mere prayer which comes up as a 
 memorial before God, and is accepted. Again, just 
 before the angels sounded the trumpets, ‘ another angel, 
 having a golden censer, mingled much incense with the 
 prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar ;’ it was 
 thus a certain kind of prayer of a certain kind of men, 
 prayer with incense in it, which came up before God 
 (Rev. viii. 3, 4). ‘The supplication of a righteous man,’ 
 says St. James, ‘availeth much in its working. Fora 
 righteous and good man’s heart is the work of the Holy 
 Spirit ; his aspirations are for that which our Lord came 
 
192. THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 to fulfil, for those things which are good and well pleasing 
 to God. The vialof his prayer is, therefore, a form filled 
 with the intercessory spirit of Christ. Thus we read of 
 Cornelius that his prayers and his alms came up asa 
 memorial before God. If men pray for the grace of divine 
 wisdom, and for such excellent gifts as God means us to 
 have, they ought not to fancy that by merely asking for 
 them, without the earnest endeavour to attain them, 
 they will secure them. A man who merely asks for 
 them and is not sufficiently in earnest to strive to obtain 
 them, is a double-minded man in his prayer. His 
 prayer lacks the fire of eagerness or determination to 
 get. Let not that man think that he shall receive any- 
 thing from the Lord (James i. 7). 
 
 Prayer is not enjoined in the law of Moses, unless 
 perhaps in the entreaty made by the Israelite, who had 
 brought his first-fruits and paid all his tithes to the poor, 
 that God would bless Israel and the land which He had 
 given them (Deut. xxvi. 12-15). To this perhaps may 
 be added the three-fold blessing invoked by Aaron 
 (Num. vi. 24-27). On the return of the Jews from 
 Babylon, a special appointment was made to begin the 
 thanksgiving with prayer (Neh. xi. 17). Prayer was 
 wont to be made in the synagogues. Ostentatious and 
 hypocritical prayer was condemned by our Lord, as it 
 had been by Isaiah (i. 15): The prayers of the Rabbis 
 contained no counterpart to the petitions: ‘ Forgive us 
 our trespasses’ and ‘lead us not into temptation ;’ but 
 any prayer which did not make mention of the kingdom, 
 was, according to them, no prayer at all. In the Temple, 
 the people did not respond, ‘ Amen,’ but, ‘ Blessed be the 
 name of the Glory of His Kingdom for ever ;’ and as 
 the words: ‘For thine is the kingdom, the power and 
 
THE FRUIT. OF BIGHT: 193 
 
 the glory’ do not occur in the most ancient MSS. of 
 Matthew (vi. 13), they are no doubt borrowed from the 
 Temple service. Prayer, according to the Rabbis, com- 
 _ prehended the two elements of thanksgiving or eulogy 
 and petition; and these two elements are found com- 
 dined in the Epistles (Rom. xvi. 24-27; Eph. i. 3, 16; 
 feer4-21),, Phil. i. 3-11 ; iv. 6°; Colvi, 3,°12 ;-Hebaxttee 
 20, 21; 1 Pet. v.10, 11). According to the Rabbis, the 
 worshipper was, during prayer, to turn towards the Holy 
 Place ; compose his body and his clothes; cast his eyes 
 on the ground, at least at the beginning of his prayer ; 
 cross his hands over his breast ; and stand, as a servant 
 
 _ before his: master, with all reverence and fear.! 
 
 The Golden Candlestick was formed of a talent of 
 _ pure gold. Thecentral lamp inclined towards the Most 
 _ Holy Place, and the three lamps on each side of it 
 inclined to the central lamp. It was trimmed and lit at 
 the time of the morning and evening service. The oil 
 used was pure olive oil. The prophet Isaiah speaks of 
 seven spirits: wisdom, might, reverential fear, &c. (Is. 
 pared), the.seven eyes of, God (Rev. v.64 Clem. S:.viG6. 
 Zechariah speaks figuratively of two olive (oil-supplying) 
 trees on each side, and of two olive branches (/z¢. ears of 
 corn) pouring out the gold or oil, through two olive pipes. 
 _ Perhaps these ‘two witnesses’ are ministries of the Word 
 and Spirit, which men may tamper with or quench, but 
 quench to their own destruction (Rev. xi.; Zech. iv. 6). 
 ‘The fruit of the light, says St. Paul, ‘is in all goodness 
 and righteousness and truth’ (Eph. v.9). Good men 
 ‘shine as lights in the world’ (Phil. 11. 15); but to others 
 the lights of heaven may become ‘a great hail, as of a 
 talent in weight’ (Rev. xvi. 21). | 
 1 Edersheim’s 7emple, pp. 124-128; 139 note. 
 
 O 
 
194 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 The Table of Shew-Bread was similar to the Altar of 
 Incense but half a cubit higher. It had also a border 
 round it about the breadth of a man’s hand, as it is still 
 visibly sculptured in the Arch of Titus at Rome. Every 
 Sabbath, twelve new cakes or loaves were ranged in two 
 rows on this table and sprinkled with frankincense as a 
 memorial, a fire-offering unto the Lord. There were 
 vessels on the table, probably vessels for carrying the 
 bread, cups (or censers, according to the Septuagint) for 
 the incense, and vessels for wine to pour out ,withal 
 (Num. iv. 7). On the following Sabbath, this bread was 
 eaten by the priests, who replaced it by fresh bread. 
 Thus the table was never to be without this bread, which 
 was always to be before God, literally, bread of faces 
 through which God ts seen (Smith’s Dict.) It was to be 
 eaten only by the priests and in the Holy Place, for it is 
 most holy unto him (the priest) of the fire offerings of 
 the Lord, an eternal statute (Lev. xxiv. 9). 
 
 This table probably represents different ministrations 
 on account of the poverty, ignorance, errors and other 
 wants of God’s ‘little ones, good works for the necessary 
 wants (Tit. itt. 14). Only men without blemish were to 
 bring near this dread of exhibition or enter into.the (at- 
 tractive) veil before the Lord (Lev. xxi. 16-23), le. men 
 must be full-grown in knowledge to deliver suitably 
 things spread before truth as a veil (Cl. S. vii. 1). To 
 serve tables the Apostles ordained the first deacons, 
 while they gave themselves specially to prayer and to 
 the ministry of the word. If the altar of incense connects 
 itself with the Father’s love, and the Golden Candlestick 
 with the Holy Spirit, the table connects itself with our 
 Lord’s manifestation in the flesh, when He poured out 
 His life in ministering to our necessities, and with that 
 
SIGNIFICATION OF THE ARK. 195 
 
 of His followers, who now bear the burdens of others, 
 
 _ submitting to organised labour, restrictions, and loss for 
 
 the sake of their fellows. Such service is most holy. 
 
 7HE MOST HOLY PLACE AND ITS CONTENTS. 
 
 The Holy of Holies was in form a perfect cube; in it 
 was the Ark, an oblong chest of acacia wood (very hard 
 or imperishable), 23 cubits long, 14 cubits broad, and 14 
 cubits deep, overlaid within and without with pure gold. 
 The Ark, according to Irenzus (vol. ii. 163) and his fol- 
 lower Hippolytus (1.425, 4483 ii. 90), signified our Saviour’s 
 imperishable and incorruptible body, adorned within 
 and without by the purest gold of the Word and Spirit 
 of God. The Ark contained the Ten Commandments 
 and had a propitiatory covering (translated mercy-seat) 
 deriving its name from the Hebrew word caphar, meaning 
 to cover or atone for sins, and vez/éng an inner world of 
 _ thought or rest (Cl. S. v.6). On either side of the Cappor- 
 eth, and forming, as it were, part of it, stood two cherubim ~ 
 also of pure gold. When the Temple was built, two other 
 much larger cherubim were put into the Most Holy 
 » Place over the Ark and the smaller cherubim, so ‘that 
 there were altogether four cherubim. The Shechinah or 
 visible presence of God enveloped in a cloud, or as man 
 - glorified (Lev. xvi. 2; Ez. i. 26), appeared over the Cap- 
 . poreth and between the Cherubim. There was neither 
 Ark nor Shechinah in the Second Temple built by 
 Zerubbabel ; but, instead of it, there was a stone base- 
 ment, called the stone of foundation, three fingers high. 
 Aaron’s rod that budded, a pot of manna and the entire 
 book of the law were laid up by Moses either in the Ark 
 or beside it, as a memorial; but this took place at a 
 
 subsequent period of the wandering in the wilderness. 
 02 
 
196 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 THE TEN COMMANDMENTS in the Ark were covered 
 by. its top, the Capporeth, on and before which the 
 blood of the sacrifices of the Day of Atonement was 
 sprinkled by the priest’s finger. The Ten Command- 
 ments participated in the imperfection of the rest of the 
 Mosaic Dispensation and were superseded by the Word 
 of God made flesh, who, as Hippolytus says, serves as a 
 law for every age. Israel was forbidden to worship 
 other gods; but the worship was conceived of as an 
 external service. We are required to resist diabolic 
 passions, and not to give heed to seducing spirits and 
 doctrines of devils. Israel was forbidden to worship those 
 elements whereby God reveals Himself; but we must 
 beware of covetousness, which is idolatry, of trusting in a 
 mere religion of forms or words, so as to neglect that 
 which is pure and undefiled religious worship before 
 God the Father. Israel was not to profane God’s name ; 
 and the Jews to this day will not utter in common con- 
 versation or read the name Jehovah ; but the followers 
 of Christ must not conduct themselves so that the way 
 of truth should be evil spoken of or the name of God 
 blasphemed. Israel was not to labour at his own work on 
 the Sabbath Day ; but we must be subject to God in all 
 that we do, for this subjection to God is man’s glory, as 
 it is the glory of children to obey their parents. Israel 
 was not to injure his neighbour ; we must do good to all 
 men, not hating even those who injure us. Israel was 
 not to covet what was his neighbour's; we are to 
 love our neighbour as ourselves. The law, written on 
 stone, was a symbol of divine love written on the heart. 
 The old law was made for a people in ignorance (Iren. 
 iv. 13, 4); but, though Christians are enlightened so as 
 to know what their master is doing, they are never set 
 
DELUSIONS OF THE GNOSTICS. 197 
 
 free from the obligation to act conscientiously, kindly 
 and prudently. Although this may become a pleasure, 
 - it does not thereby cease to be our duty. 
 
 LEVITICAL PURIFICATIONS. 
 
 Certain physical conditions debarred the Israelite 
 from sharing in the worship of the sanctuary and were. 
 to be reinoved by the fulfilment of ceremonial purifica- 
 tions. Some of these were by water and some by blood. 
 Ceremonial uncleannesses arose (1) from all that accom- 
 panied natural birth, (2) from contact with the dead or 
 with certain symbols in the Jewish worship, (3) from the 
 disease of leprosy. With these are to be classed the 3 
 daily washings of the priests, the purifications of a city 
 from an uncertain murder and of a woman who was the © 
 object of her husband’s jealousy. 
 
 I. THE WATER OF PURIFICATION.—The enone ? 
 taught and taught rightly that there is a veiled symbolism 
 in nature ; but they made the most serious mistakes in the 
 practical conclusions they drew from this principle (Iren. 
 i. 6, 4), as if men should intoxicate themselves with wine, 
 because wine is a symbol of the Spirit or Comforter. 
 Others of them supposed that they were accomplishing 
 _ the will of the Creator or His angels when they gave 
 _ vent to their natural propensities, just as the heathens 
 __ worshipped their gods impurely. We are created first 
 * 35 natural men, with natural desires; but it is that we 
 may control them. If there were no temptation, there 
 would be no virtue ; ifthere were no combat, there would 
 _ be no victory. Circumcision symbolised the necessity of 
 
 resisting temptations, of enduring fidelity after first faith 
 (Iren. iv. 25); so also the water of baptism indicates 
 that we must maintain a good conscience and deny our- 
 
198 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 selves. Our first birth is a symbol of the new birth ; 
 but, as all that relazed to natural birth needed Mosaic 
 purification, and as children are stil] baptised with water, 
 we are to understand by this water that there is another 
 sort of birth, veiled in symbolism. We must not supersti- 
 tiously mistake the water itself for the meaning, for then 
 the water would become to us a mistake (hatiath, sin) or 
 the water of mistake, from which it is intended to Separate 
 us (Num. viii. 7; xix. 9). A man is born again of water 
 and of the Spirit, when he is taught by the word of God 
 and yields to the personal influences of a higher nature. 
 
 II. CONTACT WITH A DEAD Bopy and even the very 
 proximity to it defiled the persons and even the tent and 
 the utensils in it (Num. xix). To purify these, a spotless 
 red heifer without blemish, upon which never yoke came, 
 was slaughtered outside the camp. No part of it came 
 upon the altar; but some of the blood of it was sprinkled 
 with the finger seven times towards the sanctuary by the » 
 son and presumptive successor of the high priest. The 
 whole carcase—skin, blood and entrails—was then con- 
 sumed by fire, not burnt as incense like the offerings on 
 the altar. Into the burning the priest threw cedar- 
 wood, scarlet and hyssop ; and the ashes, being gathered 
 by a clean person, were preserved for use in a clean 
 place ; but the person, who killed the heifer, and the 
 priest had to wash their clothes ; he, also, who gathered 
 the ashes, washed his clothes; and all three were to be 
 unclean till the evening. : 
 
 When a person came for purification from the defile- 
 ment of contact with the dead, some of the ashes of the 
 
 heifer were mingled with living water, that is, spring or @ 
 
 running water. Into this water (called the water of se- 
 paration, avoidance or uncleannéss) a legally clean person 
 
THE ASHES OF THE RED HEIFER. 199 
 
 dipped a bunch of hyssop and with it sprinkled the 
 persons, the tent and the vessels on the third day, and, 
 ‘again, on the seventh day after defilement. Every one 
 who touched the water had to wash his clothes ; and 
 he who sprinkled it was unclean till the evening. 
 
 THE RED HEIFER! was to be without blemish, 
 one upon which never yoke had come. _ Red is the 
 colour of flesh and to be in the flesh means, in St. Paul’s 
 language, to worship God in an unenlightened, judaizing 
 way. Paul’s own righteousness or deeds of the law, that 
 is, his observance of the outward ordinances and forms 
 of worship, had been without blemish (Phil. iii. 6). The 
 law was given because of transgressions, to check men’s 
 unruly lusts and affections ; because the mind of the flesh 
 was not subject to the perfect law of God. The old ritual- 
 istic works of the law had, like the spotless red heifer, an 
 external blamelessness of their own; but this was not to 
 be under yoke in heart and soul. The outward cere- 
 monial of Judaism was, therefore, to be dissolved in the 
 fire of the latter day, leaving only its ashes, that essence 
 which could not be burned. An unyoked heifer was slain 
 in a barren valley for the purification of a city from an 
 uncertain murder (Deut. xxi. 1-9). So the men of that 
 city, in which our Lord was slain, were to wash their hands 
 over the dead body of that old elemental worship (the 
 heifer), which He came to dissolve, in order to clear 
 themselves of the guilt of His murder. The living water 
 with the ashes of the heifer in it would thus represent 
 
 the truth with the essential, incombustible, sense of the 
 
 old ritual in it, the fleshly body or ritual form having 
 perished as by fire. . Speaking of the effect of mere slavish 
 
 1 A Jewish tradition says that King Solomon knew the meaning of all 
 God’s ordinances except that of the Red Heifer. 
 
200, THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 or ritual commandments, Paul asks who shall deliver 
 him from this dead body, and thanks God through Christ 
 (Rom. vii. 24). | 
 
 III. THE PURIFICATION OF THE LEPER.—On the 
 appearance of the symptoms of the Mosaic leprosy, that 
 is, of a swelling or a scab or a bright white spot in the 
 
 flesh, the man might be shut up seven days, till the - 
 
 disease pronounced itself. If, in the swelling, the raw 
 flesh appeared ; or the scab spread and seemed to go 
 deeper than the skin; or the colour of the hair became 
 white or yellow: then the priest pronounced the man to 
 be leprous. He was then to go with his clothes rent, 
 his head bare, his lip or chin covered, and to warn others 
 who approached him by crying: ‘Unclean, unclean.’ 
 But if the whole skin was white, the leper was clean. 
 What is now known as leprosy is not infectious; and, as 
 the Mosaic leprosy attached to houses and garments as 
 well as to persons, it has been conjectured by some that 
 it was causcd by the fret of some acarus (mite or tick) or 
 by some fungus. The Egyptian bondage,! as well as the 
 exposure to the sun when at work or in their subsequent 
 wanderings, must have had a tendency to generate skin 
 disorders.. But to whatever cause the disease itself owed 
 its origin, it tells, according to Fairbairn, of the insidious 
 nature of sin, spreading from small beginnings, and, if 
 indulged in, bringing inevitable exclusion from the 
 fellowship of God and the society of the blessed. 
 According to Hengstenberg,? it occurred, as a theocratic 
 punishment, especially in those who had sinned secretly 
 
 ' Manetho, the Egyptian priest and historian, asserts that the Egyptians 
 drove out the Israelites as infected with leprosy. See Smith’s Dictionary. 
 
 * Hengstenberg’s Christology, on Jer. xxxi. 38-40, where Gareb the 
 Hill of the Leprous, and Goah (= Gol Goathath ?) are spoken of. 
 
SECRET’ SINS, 201 
 
 or cloaked their sin with a good appearance, so as to hide 
 it from the eyes of men, as in the case of Miriam, Uzziah 
 and Gehazi. God compelled them to bear outwardly 
 the image of their real character. The Israelites were 
 exhorted by Moses to remember what the Lord their 
 God did to Miriam, when she spoke against his 
 marriage with an Ethiopian woman, by which bride, 
 _ says Irenzus, the Gentile church was indicated. ‘Those,’ 
 he says, ‘who detract from, accuse and deride it (the 
 prophetic word) shall not be pure; they shall be full of 
 leprosy and expelled from the camp of the righteous’ 
 (Iren. iv. 20,12; Deut. xxiv. 9). Uzziah cloaked his 
 disobedience and Gehazi his covetousness under the 
 - pretence of religion; and God made them to appear 
 what they were. In all cases, secret sins generate habits 
 which, according to Jeremiah (xiii. 22-26), stick to a 
 man like the Ethiopian’s skin or the leopard’s spots, and 
 put him to shame. . Evil habits and unclean spirits creep 
 ~ ever men insidiously, like Egyptian vermin (Rev. xvi. 13). 
 If the leper recovered, he went and showed himself 
 
 to the priest ; who, having assured himself of the fact, 
 went through an elaborate ceremonial of purification, 
 consisting of three parts. ~First, the priest took two 
 birds, one of which he killed, letting its blood fall into a 
 vessel of living or running water. He was then to dipa 
 stick of cedar, with scarlet and hyssop attached to it, 
 into the water and blood, and sprinkle the leper seven 
 times. The living bird was also dipped and then let 
 loose upon the face of the field, for the ceremony was 
 performed outside the camp. Justin Martyr thus ex- 
 plains the figure. ‘By the two birds, Christ is denoted 
 both dead as man and living (risen) as God. He is 
 likened to a bird, because He is understood and declared 
 
202 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 to be from above and from heaven ... By that which 
 took place in the running water, in which the wood and 
 the hyssop and the scarlet were dipped, is set forth the 
 bloody passion of Christ on the cross for the salvation of 
 those who are sprinkled with the Spirit and the water 
 and the blood’ (p. 357). The cedar, as its Hebrew name 
 erez implies, is ‘a firmly rooted and strong tree,’ and 
 may thus represent the cross and its history. The 
 hyssop has detergent or cleansing properties ; and it is 
 according to God’s word that the young man cleanses 
 his path (Ps. cxix. 9). Scarlet is the colour of blood or 
 of flesh, and is perhaps a type of our Lord’s humanity. 
 It is by this instrumentality, by the doctrine or teaching 
 of the cross, that men are sprinkled with the water and 
 the blocd in which the live bird had been dipped ; that is, 
 influenced by the truth, the love and the life of Christ. 
 Seven days after this ceremony, the leper was to 
 shave off all his hair and then to wash his clothes and 
 his flesh. On the eighth day, the priest took the leper 
 to the door of the tabernacle and offered for him a lamb 
 as a trespass-offering, waving it whole with a log of oil 
 before the Lord. Some of the blood and oil was applied | 
 to his right ear, his right thumb and the great toe of his 
 right foot; and the rest of the oil was poured on his 
 head. Lastly, the priest offered a sin-offering, a burnt- 
 offering and a meat (or meal) offering for him, and he was 
 clean. His old garments had to be purified or destroyed. 
 
 THE. ORDEAL-OF: JEALOUSY. 
 
 God is a jealous God, and the way in which He tests 
 His people may be symbolised by the remarkable 
 ordinance by which a jealous husband was allowed to 
 test his wife’s fidelity. When the priest had explained 
 
THREE KINDS OF VOWS. 203 
 
 to her the terrible consequences of making a false pro- 
 fession before the Lord, he washed out the words of this 
 curse into ‘holy water’ containing also the dust of the 
 tabernacle ; and the woman holding in her hands her 
 meat-offering, made without oil or frankincense, was 
 obliged to drink this water. If she were innocent, it was 
 to become a blessing to her, but, if she were guilty, a curse 
 of shame. This dust, like the ashes of the heifer, was 
 _ imperishable; when the structure was shaken and re- 
 _ moved, its dust or essential truth remained (Heb. xii. 27) 
 The drinking or knowledge of the truth sets men free to 
 use God’s creatures prudently, whereas ‘ prohibitory man- 
 dates ° are given because of man’s infirmity or childish- 
 ness ; but, ‘in this condition of liberty, a man is more 
 severely tested whether he will reverence, fear and love 
 God . . . it is the means of testing and evidencing faith’ 
 (Iren. iv. 16, 5; Num. xxx. 2-15). But this dust might 
 rather signify the earthly or parabolic element in God’s 
 dispensations which men so seriously misconstrue. 
 
 VOWS AND TONSURES. 
 
 A vow (nxeder) might be of three kinds. A man 
 might consecrate to the service of the Temple or religious 
 _ Purposes what was fairly his own, by pronouncing it 
 _ corban or a gift. A vow might also be a pledge of 
 abstinence, a bond (zssar, Num. xxx. 2-15) to renounce 
 the use of certain things, as the Rechabites, for instance, 
 renounced wine. He might also devote something to 
 God as irredeemable, as something to be destroyed, 
 which thus became a cherem or anathema. Our Lord 
 condemned the tradition which allowed a man to conse- 
 _ crate to the Temple what was, by a higher obligation, 
 due to his father or his mother. Ifa man made a legi- 
 
204 THE‘LAW. OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 timate vow he was to pay it; or, in certain cases, he 
 might redeem it. Nazarites were persons who had a 
 vow of self-consecration or separation unto God for a 
 certain number of days. Samson, Samuel and John 
 the Baptist were Nazarites for life. The Nazarite was 
 to let his locks grow; for his hair was the crown of his 
 God upon his head, like the weger or crown of the High 
 Priest. The ‘hair of his head of separation’ was the wvez/ 
 of truth, the power of separated azgels. He was to abstain 
 from wine, as the priests did during their ministrations. 
 The old sense was to give place to the new wine sym- 
 bolised, the Spirit. Like the High Priest, he was to 
 avoid all defilement by contact with the dead, even in 
 the case of his father and mother; but, if he did acci- 
 dentally happen to come in contact with the dead, he 
 was to shave his head and recommence the days of his 
 consecration. When these were ended, he shaved his 
 head as. Paul did-at,.Cenchrez ; and, after cértain sacri- 
 fices, he was to burn the hair under the pot in which the 
 flesh of his peace-offerings was boiled (Num. vi. I-21). 
 There was a Nazarites’ chamber for this purpose in the 
 Temple, in the Court of Women. It was considered 
 meritorious to bear the charges of poor Nazarites, that 
 is, the expenses of their sacrifices (Acts xxi. 24). 
 
 ‘In Jesus of Nazareth,’ says Fairbairn, ‘the idea of 
 the Nazarite was consummated, though the outward 
 symbol was dropped’ (Typ. 1. 427). It behoves men, 
 who make vows or professions, not to be double-minded 
 like Lot's wife, lest their judgment become a sign to all 
 succeeding generations (Clem. ii. 23), to act consistently 
 with them, that the name of God may not be blasphemed. 
 
 There were three ¢ovsures in the law of Moses; that 
 of the recovered leper, that of the Nazarite who came in 
 
HAIR A SYMBOL OF POWER. 205 
 
 contact with the dead or who had finished the days of 
 his consecration, and that of the Levites at their first 
 consecration (Num. viii. 7). The hair is that which 
 veils the head, the organ of reason ; it is mentioned as 
 an element of beauty in Absalom; and it is an indication 
 of strength and abundant vitality. Man is the glory of 
 God ; and under man all things are put or will be put in 
 subjection. We are God’s ‘helpers meet for Him’ to 
 carry out His purposes ; and, without our agency, we 
 have no right to expect Him to bless ourselves or others. 
 Now woman is symbolically to man, what humanity is to 
 God; the man, therefore, ought not to wear long hair, 
 because he is the visible representative of God; but the 
 woman ought not to be shaved or shorn, because she 
 represents humanity, veiled truth, and delegated power. 
 ene was created for man as man was. for God,as a 
 ministering angel, ‘an helper as his counterpart’ (Gen. 
 i. 18). She has therefore ‘ power on her head by way of 
 the angels, that is, her hair is a symbol of deautiful 
 entgmas (1 Cor. ii. 7) of truth vezled to the perishing (2 
 Cor. iv. 3), a savour of death or of life, a symbol of power 
 attached to messengers or human angels whom He sends 
 tie xxvii. 16-21 ; 2 Cor. ii. 15, 160°; Revi ioe 
 Heb. ii. 5-9). Humanity is also the image of God,a 
 manifestation of God ; but it is a manifestation veiled in 
 symbolism; and, for this reason, the woman prays with 
 her head covered and wears a veil. 
 
 CLEAN AND UNCLEAN MEATS. 
 
 According to the law of Moses, beasts which both 
 divide the hoof and ruminate, as the ox, the sheep, the 
 - goat and the deer, also fishes, which have both fins and 
 scales, were clean and might be eaten. Other beasts 
 
206 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 and fishes, birds of prey, insects which had not the 
 two: hind legs for leaping, things strangled or dead 
 of themselves, things offered in sacrifice to idols, wére 
 unclean and forbidden to the Israelites. The Jewish 
 doctors understood by unclean animals idolatrous people, 
 with whom they were to have no fellowship. In refer- 
 ence to unclean animals, the voice from heaven admon- 
 ished Peter not to call that common which God had 
 cleansed ; and Peter said that God had thereby showed 
 him that he should not call any az common or unclean 
 (Acts x. 15, 28). When our Lord said; ‘He who eateth 
 me, the same shall live by reason of me, He no. doubt 
 referred to that fellowship with Him, which elevates men’s 
 characters. On the contrary, evil fellowships corrupt good 
 manners. ‘Those,’ according to Clement (S. vii. 18) and 
 Irenzeus, ‘who make their way steadily by faith towards 
 the Father and the Son are the clean animals. This is 
 denoted by the steadiness of those which divide the hoof, 
 for they are more sure-footed, their cleft hoofs succeed- 
 ing each other as they advance, and the one hoof 
 supporting the other. Those animals, again, which have 
 their hoof all in one piece, easily slip, and represent those 
 e.g. Jews, who, though they have God’s words in their 
 mouth, yet do not fix their root (fouting) steadfastly in 
 the Father and the Son. The ruminants, again, are those 
 who meditate day and night upon the words of God, 
 that they may be adorned with good works. Non- 
 ruminants are heretics and others who profess to go on 
 this two-fold basis of faith in God, yet do not thus medi- 
 tate, as they should, upon: the things of God, but walk 
 stupidly or recklessly after their lusts.- Neither to have 
 faith in God or to muse on His words is the abomination 
 of the heathen. Through their unbelief and luxury, 
 
THE TEMPLE SERVICES. 207 
 
 men fail to attain the Divine Spirit, and in their various 
 phases (as swine, dogs, beasts of burden, wild beasts) 
 cast out from themselves the life-giving Word. Justly, 
 therefore, does the apostle call all such irrational men 
 carnal and animal or natural (Iren, v. 8, 3; 1 Cor. ii. - 
 14; iti, 1, &c.). In this way, Irenzeus explains how 
 ‘the natural man receiveth not the things of God,’ 
 
 According to the so-called Epistle of Barnabas (c. 
 x.), the unclean animals signify men with whom we are 
 not to consort ; the ruminant animals are those who 
 meditate on God’s word and keep it; the cloven-footed 
 are those ‘righteous men who walk in this world but 
 look for the holy age.’ 
 
 THE DAILY AND YEARLY ROUTINE OF THE 
 TEMPLE SERVICES. 
 
 The arrangement of the priesthood into twenty-four 
 courses dates from the time of David ; and, though only 
 four of these courses returned from Babylon, the original 
 number was completed by lot. The Levites, as well as 
 the priests, were arranged by David in twenty-four 
 courses ; their duties were to act as priests’ assistants, 
 singers and musicians, gate-keepers and guards, officers 
 and judges. In the time of Herod, however, the judi- 
 cial functions were in the hands of the Sanhedrim or 
 Council and its subordinate authorities. Each course of 
 priests and Levites shared the duty for a week, from 
 Sabbath to Sabbath, the whole course being on duty on 
 Sabbath. At the feast of tabernacles, all the twenty- 
 four courses were bound to be present.! 
 
 1 A more detailed account of this subject will be found in Edersheim’s 
 Temple and its Services, as they were in the Time of Fesus Christ. 
 
208 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 There was a night as well as a day service in the 
 Temple. No less than 240 Levites and priests were 
 stationed in it during the night to guard it from unclean- 
 ness. During the night the Captain of the Temple made 
 iis rounds ; and, if he found any one asleep, the punish- 
 ment was to set fire to his clothes. At the cock-crowing, 
 perhaps a little earlier or a little later, the superintending 
 priest might knock ; and, when they had opened to him, 
 he said, ‘All ye who have washed come and cast lots,’ 
 that is, to determine who should officiate in the morning 
 service ; for none might do so unless he had washed his 
 body in bath-rooms appointed forthe purpose. ‘ Watch 
 ye therefore, said our Lord, ‘for ye know not when the 
 Lord of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at 
 the cock-crowing, or in the morning, lest coming 
 suddenly He find you sleeping’ (Mark xiii. 35, 30): 
 
 The Morning Sacrifice was slain after the Morning 
 dawn had ‘lit up the sky as far as Hebron,’ and before 
 the sun had risen above the horizon. The first lot was 
 to designate the various priests who were to cleanse the 
 altar and prepare it. No sacred vessel, however, was to 
 be touched by a priest, till his hands and his feet had 
 been washed. These preliminary duties being fulfilled, 
 a second lot determined those who were to offer the 
 sacrifice and to cleanse the Golden Candlestick and the 
 Altar of Incense. Immediately after casting this lot, the 
 president appointed one to ascend a pinnacle and observe 
 the break of day. When he reported that the sky was 
 lit up as far as Hebron, the lamb of the sacrifice was 
 brought from a chamber, where it had been kept four 
 days, and tied to the altar. The Temple gates were now 
 thrown open; and, as the last swung round, the priests 
 blew three blasts on their silver trumpets. After this, the 
 
THE MORNING SACRIFICE. 209 
 
 gates of the Holy Place were opened; this was the 
 signal for the priest to kill the lamb, while, as nearly as 
 possible at the same time, another priest removed the 
 burnt coal and ashes from the Altar of Incense. <A third 
 priest caught the blood of the sacrifice in a golden bowl 
 and threw part of it against the north-east corner of the 
 altar, below a red line, and then against the south-west 
 corner, SO as in each case to cover two sides of the altar 
 ‘with blood. The rest of the blood was poured out at 
 the base of the altar. When this was going on, the 
 Golden Candlestick was trimmed and (at least in the 
 corresponding part of the evening service) re-lit. The 
 most solemn part of the service now began with prayer ; 
 the third lot was drawn to determine who was to burn 
 _incense, and the fourth lot to determine who was to lay 
 the sacrifice and the meat-offering upon the altar and to 
 _ pour out the drink-offering. The incensing priest first 
 filled with incense a golden censer held ina silver vessel ; 
 and another priest placed in a golden bowl coals taken 
 from the altar. A large instrument called the Magre- 
 phah was now sounded to summon the priests and 
 _Levites to take their proper places for worship. Then 
 the coals were spread upon the Altar of Incense and the 
 officiating priest was left alone in the Holy Place to 
 await the signal of the president to burnincense. It was 
 here and probably at this time that the angel Gabriel 
 appeared to Zachariah (Luke i. 11). When the incense 
 was burning and the cloud of odours rose up before the 
 Lord, the whole multitude had withdrawn from the 
 inner court and fallen down before the Lord, spreading 
 out their hands in silent prayer. Meanwhile the priest, 
 on whom the fourth lot had fallen, had ascended the 
 altar of burnt-offering, and thrown the pieces of the 
 
210 THE LAW-.OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 sacrifice confusedly on the fire, afterwards arranging 
 them. 
 
 To understand what followed, it is necessary to know 
 the arrangement of the different courts of the Temple. 
 Around and east of the two Holy Places, were three inner 
 courts of the Temple and the outer court of the Gentiles. 
 The most easternly of the three inner courts was called 
 the Court of Women, because they were not allowed to 
 proceed farther. Around the Court of Women ran a. 
 simple colonnade, within which, in all probability, was the 
 space called the Treasury (John viii. 20), containing 
 thirteen chests shaped like trumpets for the contributions 
 of worshippers. Proceeding westward, the worshipper 
 next entered the Court of Israel, by a flight of fifteen 
 steps, giving name, as some suppose, to the Psalms of 
 Degrees; but, as this Court of Israel was only a narrow 
 strip of 1635 feet, separated by a low balustrade, 14 feet 
 high, from the third court called the Court of Priests, it 
 may be considered as forming part of this latter, which, 
 with the Holy Places, thus measured 2804 feet by 2024 
 feet. From the Court of Israel, three low semi-circular 
 steps led toa platform in front of the immense altar of un- 
 hewn stones in the Court of the Priests. On this platform, 
 as well as on the fifteen steps behind, the Levites had 
 arranged themselves to sing. In the West part of the 
 Court of Priests a flight of twelve steps led to the porch of 
 the Holy Place; and, on these steps, the ministering 
 priests had now ranged themselves facing eastwards, 
 while the Levites with their sons faced westwards. 
 
 One of the ministering priests standing on the steps 
 which led to the Holy Place now repeated the three-fold 
 blessing on Israel in Num. vi. 24-26: ‘Jehovah bless 
 thee and keep thee; Jehovah make His face to shine 
 
THE SERVICE OF PRAISE, PAN Be 
 
 upon thee and be gracious unto thee; Jehovah lift up 
 _ His countenance upon thee and give thee peace.’ To 
 this the people responded: ‘Blessed be the Lord God, 
 the God of Israel, from everlasting to everlasting. After 
 the priestly blessing, the meat-offering was brought ; and 
 when oil and salt had been added to it, it was laid on 
 the fire. Next the high priest’s daily meat-offering (of — 
 twelve half-cakes in the morning and twelve half-cakes 
 in the evening service) was brought ; finally, the drink- 
 offering was poured out at the base of the altar. 
 
 The joyous music of the Temple commenced when the 
 drink-offering or libation of wine was poured out. ‘If,’ 
 _ said Paul to the Philippians (ii. 17), ‘I am poured out as 
 _a libation following upon the sacrifice and service of your 
 faith, I joy and rejoice with youall.” ‘Iam already being 
 poured out as a libation,’ he wrote to Timothy (2 Tim. iv. 
 7), ‘and the time of my departure is at hand.’ He had 
 been willing to spend and be spent in the service; and 
 now he was about to obtain the martyr’s crown of life. 
 St. Peter exhorts his readers to rejoice in so far as they were 
 partakers of Christ’s sufferings, that is, in so far as they 
 did well and suffered for it (1 Pet. ii, 19-25 ; iv. 12-19). 
 
 The service of praise! assumed great importance in 
 the Temple after the time of David, who was both a 
 poet, a composer of music and an inventor of instru- 
 -ments. The Levites and their sons, standing on the 
 platform and the steps between the Court of the Priests 
 and the Court of Women and facing westwards, sung 
 the proper psalm for the day of the week, each com- 
 memorative of that day’s work of creation and the 
 millennial kingdom symbolised by the seventh day, when 
 ‘God's glory and service would fill the earth with thanks- 
 
 1 Edersheim’s Zenzple and tts Services, pp. 51-55. 
 P +2 
 
212 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 giving.” These psalms in order were Ps. xxiv., xlviii., 
 Ixxxii. xciv., lxxxi., xciii., xcii. The so-called Gregorian 
 tones are believed to be approximately what the ancient 
 melodies were. The psalm was sung in three sections 
 with instrumental accompaniments, chiefly of the harp 
 and the lute, in which common Israelites might take part 
 with the Levites. Paul speaks of mere accompaniments 
 of Christian life as sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal 
 (1 Cor. xiii. 1). At the close of each section, the priests 
 who stood on the right and on the left of the table 
 where the fat of sacrifices was laid, blew three blasts with 
 their trumpets. Thus concluded the morning service. 
 
 The morning service was followed by private sacri- 
 fices, sin-offerings, trespass-offerings, peace-offerings, 
 offerings brought by Hebrew mothers, consecrations to 
 the priesthood, vows and offerings of first-fruits, which 
 must have often continued without interruption till the 
 time of the evening sacrifice. According to the law of 
 Moses, the lamb of the evening sacrifice was to be offered 
 between the evenings, that is, between the light of day 
 and the darkness of night; but, at the time of our Lord, 
 the sacrifice certainly degax earlier. Josephus (Antiq. 
 xiv. 4, 3): puts it down at the ninth hour ; according to 
 the Rabbis, it was about 2.30 P.M. When Peter went up 
 to the Temple at the ninth hour to pray (Acts iii. 1), it 
 must have been at the time of the evening sacrifice. It. 
 is unnecessary to describe this evening service, as it was 
 similar to but somewhat shorter than the morning 
 service, lasting about an hour and a half or longer, so as 
 to be over about the time between the evenings (Num. 
 xxviii. 4). No other service followed except on the eve 
 of the passover. 
 
 SABBATH IN THE TEMPLE—Friday is called by the 
 
 ‘ 
 
SABBATH IN THE TEMPLE. 213 
 
 Rabbis ‘the Eve of the Sabbath.” At the ninth hour 
 (3 P.M.) on Friday, three blasts of the priests’ trumpets at 
 the evening sacrifice were the signal for stopping all work ; 
 and Josephus tells us that the Emperor Augustus set 
 the Jews free from attendance at the law courts at that 
 hour (Antiq. xvi. 6, 2). A second three-fold blast at 
 sunset announced that the Sabbath had begun. The 
 day was observed as a day of holy convocation ; and all 
 work was strictly prohibited. On this day, the shew- 
 bread in the Holy Place was eaten and renewed by the 
 priests. Besides the continual burnt-offering, two 
 lambs were offered with the appropriate meat-offerings 
 and libations (Num. xxviii. 9, 10); and, besides the 
 proper psalm for the day (Ps. xcii.), the song of Moses 
 in Deut. xxxii. was sung in the morning service, and, in 
 the evening service, that in Ex. xxv. 
 
 On the day of the New Moon, the eouneil sat to 
 determine its appearance, which they announced by the 
 formula: ‘It is sanctified. Immediately afterwards, 
 the priests blew the silver trumpets to announce the fact. 
 The sacrifices on this day consisted of two young 
 bullocks, one ram, and seven lambs of the first year for 
 a burnt-offering, with the appropriate meat and drink- 
 offerings. Besides these, one kid of the goats was offered 
 as a sin-offering unto Jehovah (Num. xxviii. 11-15). 
 
 The two silver trumpets which Moses was directed to 
 make in the wilderness were used to summon assemblies, 
 to direct a march, to sound the alarm of war, to blow 
 over their burnt-offerings, at the first appearance of the 
 heavenly luminaries and on festivals. “The sound or cry 
 of the trumpet symbolises the voice of God, the call to 
 -awake and put on the armour of light. ‘He that hath 
 ears to hear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the 
 
214. THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE, 
 
 churches. The voice of God invites men to come and 
 drink of the water of truth, that they may have eternal 
 life. At the sound of the last trumpet, the dead shall 
 be raised incorruptible ; for it is the beholding of God, 
 according to Irenaeus, which gives immortality, and this 
 last trumpet will be at the dawn of another sun. 
 
 THE HEBREW YEAR AND THE GREAT FESTIVALS. 
 
 The Hebrew year commenced about the time of the 
 vernal equinox or the beginning of April. Its months, 
 reckoned from new moon to new moon, had an average 
 of about 294 days; and hence it was necessary to add a 
 thirteenth month commonly every third year, to bring 
 the months into harmony with the seasons. 
 
 The word Moéd, pl. Moadim, was applied to all festive 
 seasons, including the Sabbaths and New Moons ; the 
 term Chag, from a root signifying to dance or exult, 
 was restricted to the three great festivals of the year, the 
 
 Passover or Easter, Pentecost or Whitsunday and the 
 
 Feast of Tabernacles. These three feasts of the Jews 
 referred, first, to their history ; secondly, to the fruits of 
 the holy land ; and, thirdly, they have a typical meaning. 
 Besides these, we have the Presentation of the First Fruits 
 of the land, other solemnities of the Seventh Month and 
 two anniversaries of important events in later Jewish 
 history. 
 
 THE PASSOVER AND THE PASCHAL OFFERINGS. 
 
 On the roth day of the first month, Abib or Nisan, 
 the Israelites were to select the lamb for the passover. 
 This was fulfilled in our Lord’s public entrance into 
 Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, when the multitude shouted 
 Hosannah. The preparation for the passover began on 
 
THE CELEBRATION OF THE PASSOVER. 215 
 
 the evening of the 13th; all leaven was then, or on the 
 forenoon of the 14th, carefully and silently sought out 
 with a lighted candle and destroyed. The lamb of the 
 passover was slain between the evenings, that is, at the 
 sunset which closed the 14th day and commenced the 
 i5th day of Nisan. One lamb served for a company of 
 Israelites; and the representatives of these different 
 companies led the lambs to the Temple. The first of the 
 three divisions, into which they were arranged, being 
 admitted into the Court of Priests, three blasts of the 
 silver trumpets were biown, when each Israelite slew his 
 lamb. The blood of the victim was caught in a bowl 
 by a priest, passed from hand to hand through a row of 
 priests and thrown out at the base of the altar. While 
 ¢his was going on, the Levites sang the Hallel or hymn 
 of praise (Ps, cxiii. to cxviii.). When the Levites sang 
 the first verse, the people repeated it; but to the other 
 verses of each psalm they merely responded ‘ Hallelu- 
 jah’ (Praise the Lord). Thus in singing Ps. cxiv., the 
 Levites began: ‘When Israel came out of Egypt,’ and 
 the people repeated: ‘When Israel came out of Egypt.’ 
 The Levites continued: ‘The house of Jacob from a 
 strange people,’ and the people responded : ‘ Hallelujah,’ 
 
 _ At evening, when the hour was come, our Lord sat 
 down (leaning) to eat the passover and the twelve apos- 
 tles with Him. The passover was not now eaten with 
 the loins girt and the staff in the hand, but in a sitting 
 posture, each guest leaning his left-arm on a cushion 
 and, as it were, overlapping his neighbour (John xiii. 23 ; 
 xxi. 20). Our Lord had desired to eat this passover 
 with His disciples (Luke xxii. 15, 16), for it was His last 
 and also theirs. The Paschal service commenced by the 
 -head of each company taking the first cup of wine in his 
 
216 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 hand and giving thanks or blessing God for His goodness. 
 This cup our Lord took and gave thanks and said, 
 ‘Take this and divide it among yourselves,” He was 
 no more to drink of it, till He drank of the new 
 wine of the Spirit in the resurrection. After this cup 
 was drunk, each washed his hands. The bitter herbs 
 were now dipped in salt and tasted; after which, the 
 ordinance was explained. Our Lord also gave meaning 
 to it by His example when He rose from the table and 
 washed His disciples’ feet. After the explanation, the 
 first part of the Hallel (Ps. cxiii. and cxiv.) was sung. 
 The second cup was then drunk, and, hands being again 
 washed, two unleavened cakes were broken ; then thanks 
 were given and pieces of this broken cake with bitter 
 herbs between them were dipped in the Charoseth (a 
 compound of dates, raisins, &c., and vinegar) and handed 
 to each in the company. This was, in all probability, 
 the sop which our Lord gave to Judas, on receiving which 
 Satan entered into him. If there were an additional 
 festive offering (or Chagigah) that night, it was now eaten, 
 and, lastly, the Paschal lamb itself. At the very time 
 when our Lord was eating it, Judas, who had been 
 desired to do his work quickly, may have been making 
 arrangements with the chief priests and captains of the 
 Temple for betraying his Master. After the lamb was 
 eaten, the Lord’s supper was instituted. When our 
 Lord had first given thanks, He brake bread, in memory 
 of His broken body, and gave it to His disciples. After 
 this, He took the third cup, called the cup of blessing, 
 and passed it round as the memorial of His blood, The 
 Jewish service concluded with the fourth cup, over which 
 the second portion of the Hallel was sung (Ps. cxv., cxvi., 
 CXvii., cxviii.) ; and, when this hymn was sung, our Lord 
 and His disciples went to the Mount of Olives. 
 
THE CHAGIGAH. 207, 
 
 The mysterious temptation and agony in Gethsemane 
 followed ; then our Lord’s arrest, His examination 
 before the high priest and His condemnation by the 
 Jewish council or Sanhedrim. Early in the morning of 
 the 15th, He was led away into the Roman pretorium or 
 hall of judgment, into which His Jewish accusers did 
 not enter, ‘lest they should be defiled, but that they 
 might eat the passover’ (John xviii. 28). They had 
 already eaten the Paschal lamb, but not all the passover. 
 On each of the seven days of the feast, the continual 
 sacrifice of the morning was followed by the sacrifice of 
 two young bullocks, one ram and seven lambs of the 
 first year, with the appropriate meat-offerings, and a kid 
 of the goats as a sin-offering ; but, on the 15th of the 
 month, each worshipper was, after this, to bring a peace- 
 offering or offering of festivity (Chagigah), in addition to 
 which he might present a voluntary peace-offering of 
 ‘joyousness’ (Simchah). The term Passover, according 
 to the Jewish authorities,! means the whole feast and all 
 its festive meals, especially the peace-offerings ; and the 
 plural of the word Passover is applied, even in the Bible, 
 toraliepassovervofferinys (2‘ Chron: xx xv-22°j2 kx 7; 
 8,9). The defilement spoken of would not have ex- 
 tended beyond evening or prevented the Jews from eat- 
 ing the Paschal lamb at night, but it would have pre- 
 vented them from eating the Chagigah on the same day ; 
 for the Jewish law very explicitly forbade any one to 
 offer the Chagigah who had contracted Levitical defile- 
 ment. The trial before Pilate and the preparations for 
 crucifixion lasted till the third hour (9 A.M.), when our 
 Lord was crucified. From noon till the ninth hour 
 (3 P.M.), darkness was over the land; and at the ninth 
 hour, about the time when the lamb of the evening 
 
 1 See Edersheim’s Zempile, p. 218, and Appendix, p. 347. | 
 
218 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 sacrifice was slain, our Lord died. It is supposed that 
 36 hours must usually have elapsed till gradual benumb- 
 ing ended in death; and, accordingly, when Joseph of 
 Arimathea came to Pilate to beg the body of Jesus, 
 Pilate wondered that He was so soon dead. Although 
 the 15th day was observed asa day of holy convocation, 
 a sort of sabbath on which no servile work was done, 
 yet it was not kept with such rigour as the weekly 
 sabbath ; and even on the weekly sabbath and feast days, 
 the Talmud allows men to attend to the offices of the 
 dead. Joseph bought a linen cloth, wrapped the body 
 of Jesus in it, and laid it in his own tomb with the spices 
 needful to embalm it, when the Sabbath had passed. It 
 must have been close on sunset when He was buried. 
 
 The Sabbath which followed was a high or great day, 
 because on this day, after the sun of the previous day 
 had just set, the first-fruits of the barley harvest were 
 cut down in a field across Kedron amidst loud demon- 
 strations. As much was cut down as would give one 
 ephah or ten omers of barley (nearly a bushel) ; this was 
 carefully thrashed out, parched, winnowed and ground in 
 the Court of the Temple. One omer (translated sheaf) of 
 the fine flour was mixed with a log of oil (about three- 
 fourths of a pint); a handful of frankincense was put 
 upon it and it was waved before the Lord, ‘ on the day 
 after the Sabbath.’ A handful was then burned and the 
 rest belonged to the priests, As this presentation took 
 place exactly seven weeks before the presentation of the 
 two baked loaves at Pentecost, it must have coincided 
 very nearly with the time when He, who was ‘the first- 
 fruits of them that sleep,’ rose from the dead.! | 
 
 1 1 Cor. xv. 20, 23,,. Edersheim’s Zemple, 223, 340, 
 
THE’ FEAST OF. FIRST-FRUITS. 219 
 
 THE FEAST OF PENTECOST. FIRST-FRUITS. 
 
 The Feast of First-fruits took place, as the name 
 Pentecost implies, on the fiftieth day after the presenta- 
 tion of the first sheaf or rather omer. Jewish tradition 
 is unanimous that it was on this day that the Ten 
 Commandments were given; and it was on this day that 
 the sound of a rushing mighty wind and the appearance 
 of cloven tongues of fire announced the commencement 
 of the dispensation and discipline of the Holy Spirit. 
 The day was kept as a day of holy convocation; no 
 servile work was done on it, but all males were to 
 - appear in the sanctuary. Most of the harvest had been 
 already reaped ; and the season of the year with its star- 
 lit and delicious nights afforded facilities for travelling, 
 so that the concourse at Jerusalem from all parts of the 
 civilised world was great (Acts ii.). Thesacrifices of the 
 day were two young bullocks, one ram and seven lambs 
 of the first year for a burnt-offering, with the appropriate 
 meat and drink-offerings and a kid of the goats for a 
 sin-offering ; but the most peculiar part of the service 
 was the presentation of two loaves ‘baked with leaven, 
 the first-fruits to the Lord’ (Lev. xxiii, 17) and two 
 lambs which were public peace or thank-offerings and 
 considered most holy. The leaven, as well as the bread, 
 was the new year’s produce and was significant of the 
 new leaven of sincerity and truth. The lambs while yet 
 alive were waved before the Lord ; and after they had 
 been sacrificed, the breast and shoulder were laid beside 
 the loaves and again waved. These public peace-offerings 
 were eaten by the officiating priesthood within the 
 
220 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 Temple ; the people brought their own free-will offerings 
 and feasted on them, inviting the poor, the Levite, and 
 the stranger to share with them. After the presentation 
 of these loaves, new flour might be used for meat-offer- 
 ings in the sanctuary. , 
 
 THE FIRST-FRUITS OF THE LAND were to be pre- 
 sented, as they gradually ripened, the latest time for 
 presentation being the anniversary of the Dedication 
 of the Second Temple, the 25th day of Kislev, our 
 Christmas. Wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, 
 olives and dates were the first-fruits of the land 
 (biccurim) and were to be presented in the Temple ; 
 wine, oil, flour and other produce in a prepared state 
 were offerings (terumoth), which, like the tithes, were 
 obligatory on the Jews everywhere and might be given 
 to the priests. There was a tithe for the Levites and 
 another tithe for festivals and the poor. These, with the 
 first of the fleece and the dough, the first-born of all 
 animals, the corners of the fields for the poor and the 
 half-shekel of Temple tribute must have amounted to 
 more than a fourth of the lay Israelite’s income, not to 
 speak of his voluntary contributions. The land was 
 divided into 24 circuits corresponding to the 24 courses 
 of priests and Levites ; and, by their means, the people 
 were assisted in bringing up their offerings to Jerusalem. 
 Some writers think that the psalms of degrees were 
 ‘psalms of ascent’ sung in the joyous processions to 
 Jerusalem of pilgrims carrying the first-fruits. On 
 reaching the Temple Mount, the pilgrims sung Ps. cl. ; 
 and, as they entered the Temple, the Levites intoned 
 Ps. xxx. In presenting his basket at the altar, each 
 was to confess solemnly that his father was a Syrian 
 ready to perish, who went down to Egypt and became a 
 
BELIEVERS AS FIRST-FRUITS, 221 
 
 great people ; that God delivered them, when they cried 
 unto Him, and brought them into the good land, which 
 He sware to give their fathers ; that he himself had not 
 forgotten God’s Commandment, but had brought the 
 hallowed things and given them to the Levite, the 
 stranger, the fatherless and the widow ; and, having 
 made this declaration, he prayed that God would look 
 down from heaven and bless Israel and the good land of 
 his inheritance (Deut. xxvi.). In this way he might be 
 taught that God blesses the meek and the merciful as 
 well as the spiritually poor and hungry. 
 
 _First-fruits are a partial fulfilment of what will be 
 perfected afterwards. Thus Paul speaks of the gift of 
 the Holy Spirit as an earnest of the redemption of the 
 entire man (Eph. i. 13, 14 3 iv. 30; 2-Cor.i. 22)> In refer- 
 ence to the world, Paul speaks of those who believed as 
 being the first-fruits of Asia or Achaia (Rom. xvi. 5; I 
 Cor. xvi. 15) ; and James calls such men a kind of first- 
 fruits of God’s creatures (i. 18). They had been chosen 
 as first-fruits unto salvation, through sanctification and 
 belief of the truth (2 Thess. ii.13).! Paul reasons that, if 
 the first-fruits of Jews and Gentiles be holy, so is the 
 lump (Rom. xi. 16, 25, 26). The earth shall be filled 
 with the knowledge of the Lord. 
 
 THE SEVENTH MONTH AND ITS. FESTIVALS. 
 
 The Seventh Month, Tishri, was to the year what the 
 Sabbath was to the week; the harvest of the land had 
 now been gathered in, and men were to enter upon the 
 fruits of their labour. 
 
 1 The MSS. vary between am’ apxijs, from the beginning, and amapxny, 
 Sirstfruits. 
 
222 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 Tue First DAY OF THE SEVENTH MONTH, about 
 the autumnal equinox or the beginning of October, was to 
 be observed as a day of holy convocation on which no 
 servile work was done, ‘a memorial of blowing of 
 trumpets,’ ‘a day of blowing the trumpets’ (Lev. xxiil. 
 24; Num. xxix. 1). On it special sacrifices were offered 
 and appropriate psalms (Ixxxi. and xxix.) were sung in 
 the morning and evening services. 
 
 THE Day OF ATONEMENT, on the Ioth day of 
 the seventh month, followed. On this day, once a year, 
 the high priest entered the Most Holy Place (Lev. xvi.). 
 The day was to be observed as a ‘sabbath of sabbatism ’ 
 (v. 31); on it the people were to afflict theirsouls. The 
 high priest, having washed his flesh and put on the pure 
 white garments of holiness, not his usual state dress, 
 offered a bullock as a sin-offering to make an atonement 
 for himself and his house. Then, taking a censer full of 
 burning coals from off the altar and having his hands 
 full of incense, he entered within the veil and cast the 
 incense upon the fire so that the cloud of incense 
 covered the Capporeth or mercy-seat. He then took 
 some of the blood of the bullock and sprinkled it with 
 his finger on the face of the Capporeth and, again, in 
 front of it eastward, seven times. Two goats had pre- 
 viously been placed at the door of the tabernacle, one 
 selected by lot for Jehovah, with a piece of scarlet cloth, 
 shaped like a tongue, round its throat; the other for 
 Azazel, the goat of ‘complete removal,’ with a similar 
 scarlet cloth on its horn. The goat for Jehovah was 
 now killed by the high priest and its blood sprinkled in 
 the same manner as that of the bullock. Then going 
 
 1 Gesenius has no doubt that the word Azazel comes from aza/, to re- 
 move or separate. See Edersheim’s Zemfuz, p. 283. 
 
THE GOAT OF ‘ COMPLETE SEPARATION,’ 223 
 
 out into the Holy Place, the high priest purified it also, 
 sprinkling the Altar of Incense on its horns, and seven 
 times on the top, with the blood both of the bullock and 
 the goat. The rest of the blood was poured out at the 
 base of the altar of burnt-offerings on the west side. 
 Thus the high priest made an atonement for the Holy 
 Places, the altar and the tabernacle, because of the un- 
 cleanness of the children of Israel and because of their 
 transgressions in all their sins. When the high priest 
 was in the sanctuary, making this atonement, no one was 
 to enter into the tabernacle. After this, he brought the 
 live goat, the goat of ‘complete separation,’ laid or 
 leaned his hand upon its head, confessing the iniquities, 
 transgressions and sins of the children of Israel, putting 
 or giving them on the head of the goat. After this, the 
 goat was sent by the hand of a fit person into ‘the 
 wilderness,’ the goat thus ‘bearing upon him all their 
 iniquities into a land of separation.’ The high priest 
 _ was then to wash himself, again put on his official or 
 golden garments and offer two rams for a burnt-offering, 
 one for himself and one for the people. The person 
 who conducted the live goat into the wilderness was 
 also to wash his clothes and his flesh before coming into 
 the camp (Lev. xvi.). 
 
 _ The whole service needed purification by water ; that 
 is, the Word of God was darkly hid in it ; men needed 
 the key to the meaning of the symbols. Our Lord as the 
 true priest, ‘consecrated to minister instead of His Father ’ 
 (Lev. xvi. 32), obeyed the law, submitting to all its 
 requirements and thus, as a fulfilment of its sentence, 
 giving us a better manifestation of truth, which will last 
 _ for ever, so that these rites are not now needed (Justin D. 
 
 ¢, 23; Heb. ix. 13, 14; x. 1-4). According to Justin (p. 
 
224 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 358) the two goats, like the two birds in the purification 
 of the leper, represent one economy of God incarnate, 
 Christ dead as man but living as God. Inthat He died 
 and rose again, ascending into heaven, we receive a reve- 
 lation of the Word, clearing the way to eternal life. But 
 this gift of truth and hope, consistently revealed, is the 
 passing by of sins that are past ; it is a new drama, super- 
 seding and explaining burdensome, corrective types; 
 encouraging us to fulfil the sense, to endure temptation, 
 crucify lusts, and rise to an endless life of well-doing. 
 THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES, on the 15th day 
 of the seventh month, was commemorative of God’s 
 goodness in leading the Israelites through the wilderness 
 into that good land whose fruits they now enjoyed. It 
 was also the anniversary of the Dedication of Solomon’s 
 Temple, of the descent of the Shechinah, and, if we may | 
 believe Jewish tradition, of the first appearance of the 
 pillar of cloud by day and fire by night. During seven 
 days, the Israelites were enjoined to make great 
 rejoicing, to eat the fat and drink the sweet and send 
 portions to them who had none ; and, as God had made 
 them to dwell in booths when they came out of Egypt, 
 they were-now to dwell in booths made with the leaves 
 of the olive, the oil tree, the myrtle tree, the palm tree, 
 and thick or bushy trees (Neh. viil. 9-18). In the time 
 of Christ, the direction given in Lev. xxili. 40 to ‘take 
 the fruit of goodly trees, the branches of palms and boughs 
 of thick or bushy trees and willows of the brook’ was 
 universally applied to what the worshippers were to 
 carry in their hands. According to the Rabbis, the 
 citron was the goodly tree and the myrtle was the thick 
 or bushy tree. | 
 At early morn, each Israelite in his holiday attire, 
 
THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES. 225 
 
 repaired to the Temple with his Z/av (or palm branch 
 
 bound together with a willow branch and a myrtle) in 
 his right hand, and his citron (zthrog), or the fruit of 
 the goodly tree, in his left hand. While the morning 
 sacrifice was being prepared, a joyful company proceeded 
 
 with music to the pool of Siloam, from which a priest 
 
 drew three logs of water in a golden pitcher. As the. 
 procession re-entered the Temple through the water 
 gate, the priests sounded their trumpets. Another 
 
 company had by this time brought willow branches 
 
 from the Kedron valley; and, amidst the blasts of 
 priests’ trumpets, stuck them round the altar so as to | 
 form a leafy canopy. When the pieces of the sacrifice 
 
 were arranged on the fire, the water from the pool of 
 Siloam was poured through a silver basin (at the head of 
 the slope of the altar), with a small hole in it, which led 
 to the base of the altar and thence, by a pipe, into the 
 Kedron valley ; while at the same time the wine of the 
 drink-offering was poured into another such basin. As 
 the wine and the water were being poured out, the 
 Hallel was sung. In singing the 118th Psalm the 
 worshippers waved their palms towards the altar at the 
 words: ‘Give thanks to God’ (v. I and 29), and again 
 at v. 25, shouting: ‘Hosannah, or, Save now (I beseech 
 Thee), O Lord.’ On every day, the priests made the 
 circuit of the altar singing this 25th verse; and, 
 on the seventh day, they compassed it seven times, as 
 the Israelites had compassed the walls of Jericho. 
 
 The springs of the pool of Siloam are in the Temple 
 Mount, and its waters were ‘sent’ out to the king’s 
 gardens. Joel (iii. 18), Ezekiel (xlvii.) and Zechariah 
 (xiv. 8) describe, under the figure of these living waters, 
 the spread of the truth in the latter days. The stream 
 
 @ 
 
226 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 which issued from God’s house was, according to 
 Ezekiel, to become a mighty river; and, where its 
 waters came, every creature was to live. ‘And by the 
 river upon its bank, on this side and on that side, there 
 shall grow every fruit-tree, whose leaf fadeth not and 
 whose fruit is not consumed; it shall yield seasonable 
 fruit, according to its months, for its waters come out of 
 the sanctuary and its fruit shall be for food and its leaf 
 for medicine.” ‘Its fruit was imperishable food and its. 
 leaf, the leaf of oil-bearing trees, was, as John says,. 
 for the healing of the nations (Rev. xxii. 1, 2). Its 
 miry and marshy places, however, were not healed ; for 
 the truth may be muddled or corrupted, not practised. 
 
 The morning sacrifice at the Feast of Tabernacles. 
 was followed by festive offerings described in Num. 
 xxix. 12-38.. These were a kid of the goats for a sin- 
 offering, twice as many lambs and rams as at Easter for 
 a burnt-offering, the number of bullocks being so 
 arranged that on the first day 13 were offered; on the 
 second 12; and so on till the seventh day, when 7 were 
 offered. Altogether, there were 70 bullocks offered. 
 The burnt-offerings were accompanied by appropriate 
 meat and. drink-offerings and followed by votive and 
 free-will offerings. Then came the festive meal, the 
 reading of the law in public every Sabbatical year, and 
 then the evening service. At the close of the first even- 
 ing of the feast, men and women assembled in the 
 Temple to hold a rejoicing, with music and dancing, 
 over the drawing of water at Siloam. The Temple was 
 illuminated by four golden candelabras, and ‘the light of 
 the house of water-pouring’ lit up the dark courts of 
 Jerusalem every evening. | 
 
 The eighth day was kept as a day of holy convo- 
 
THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES, 227 
 
 cation on which no servile work was done. Special 
 sacrifices were offered,:but all the peculiar expressions 
 of exultation ceased. This or the preceding day was 
 that on which our Lord revealed Himself as the fulfl- 
 ment of the type of the water from the pool of Siloam. 
 The pouring out of this water had some reference to the 
 autumn and spring rains ; but it was also understood to 
 refer to the pouring out of the Holy Spirit. When, 
 therefore, our Lord cried in the midst of the assembled 
 multitude: ‘If any man thirst, let him come tome and 
 drink,’ some said, Of a truth, this is the Prophet ; others 
 said, This is the Christ ; but others said, Doth Christ 
 then come out of Galilee? Officers, sent by the chief 
 priests and Pharisees to take him, excused natalia 
 for not doing so, because ‘never man spake like this man.’ 
 
 But the Pharisees decided that no prophet ariseth out of 
 Galilee, and that the multitude who did not know the 
 Scriptures were cursed. Passing over the passage about 
 the woman, which figured ¢hezy sin or may have found its 
 way into the wrong place, we read that Jesus therefore 
 said unto them, ‘I am the light of the world,’ possibly 
 with some reference to the prophecy of Isaiah (ix. 1), 
 where itis foretold that the appearance of the great 
 light of the latter days would be in Galilee. In the con- 
 versation that followed, He told them that the great 
 deliverance (indicated by the word Hosannah) would be 
 ‘fulfilled if they continued in His word, for the truth 
 would free them (John viii. 31, 32); and, if they kept 
 His word, they would never die. When, in answer to 
 their objections, He declared that He was before 
 Abraham, using the expression ‘I AM,’ the name by 
 which God revealed Himself to Moses, they took up 
 stones to cast at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and left the 
 
 Q2 
 
228 THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE TEMPLE SERVICE. 
 
 Temple. Passing by, He saw a man blind from his 
 birth and sent him to wash in the pool of Siloam, which 
 is interpreted sezt (John ix. 7). As the blind man came 
 to see, so might the blind multitude whom the Pharisees 
 considered cursed ; while the Pharisees, who perverted 
 the truth, became blind. After this practical lesson, our 
 Lord went on to speak of His other sheep, the Gentiles, 
 who were to be gathered in, when the typical feast of 
 tabernacles was fulfilled (John x.). 
 
 The righteousness typified in the Mosaic Law is fud- 
 filled and exhibited in those who, walking after the Spirit, 
 and offering rational services, are freed from ordinances 
 fit for slaves or children. The Feast of Tabernacles 
 signifies this emancipation of the creature, through the 
 divine Spirit, from the bondage of corruption. The re- 
 moval of sins or ignorances on the day of atonement is 
 followed by the pure, benevolent, rational services of 
 freemen. ‘In this mountain,’ said Isaiah (xxv. 6, 8), 
 ‘shall the Lord of Hosts make unto all people a feast of 
 fat things. . . He will destroy in this mountain the face 
 of the covering or veil spread over all nations. . . He 
 will swallow up death in victory, and the Lord will wipe 
 away tears from off all faces.’ Men, who have been 
 perfected through suffering, will remember, with thankful 
 hearts, the wilderness life by which they were fitted for 
 their inheritance. In John’s vision, God’s sealed people, 
 who had overcome in the first drama of the Church's 
 history, appear triumphantly in God’s presence with 
 white robes and palms in their hands (Rev. vii). 
 Again, when the harvest of the world comes and the 
 wine-press of God’s anger is trodden without the city, in 
 the darkness of infatuation, the redeemed appear in 
 Mount Zion. John hears the voice of many people 
 
THE DEDICATION AND PURIM. 229 
 
 singing, amidst the music of harpers, the Song of Moses 
 and of the Lamb, and discerns the laver of truth and the 
 fire of the altar, in which they have been purified (Rev. 
 xiv., xv.). Again, at the close of John’s apocalyptic 
 vision, the Holy City is lighted up and shines with 
 preternatural splendour, illuminating the nations who 
 walk in the light of it. A pure river of the water of life. 
 is shown to him, issuing from the throne of God, in 
 and beside which grows the tree of life, with its 
 imperishable fruit for food and its oil-producing leaves 
 for the healing of the nations (Rev. xxi., xxii.). 
 
 The Dedication of the Second Temple in the time of 
 Judas Maccabzus was commemorated by the Jews on the 
 2sth of Kislev, our Christmas; and the preservation of 
 the Jewish people in the time of Esther was commemo- 
 - rated about the beginning of March by a feast of private 
 merry-making, called the feast of Purim or Lots. St. 
 John groups his narrative round the Jewish festivals, 
 which he mentions as follows: (1) the Passover of the 
 Jews (ii. 13) ; (2) a feast or the feast of the Jews (vind) 
 which was formerly thought to be a Passover, but now 
 supposed by many! to be the feast of Purim ; (3) the 
 Passover, the feast of the Jews (vi. 4) ; (4) the feast of 
 the Jews, the Tabernacles (vii. 2) ; (5) the Dedication (x. 
 22); (6) the Passover of the Jews (xi. Boe 
 
 1 Farrar’s Life of Christ, vol. ii. p. 468. 
 
RA eal. 
 
 LHE STYLE. AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 es 
 
 GH ARR hs 
 
 WISDOM HID IN PARABOLIC MYSTERIES. 
 
 THE parabolic style is a prominent feature of the lan- 
 guage and actions of the prophets. ‘I have spoken by 
 the prophets and multiplied visions, and by the hand of 
 the prophets I have used parables,’ said the Word of the 
 Lord (Hosea xii. 10). ‘By a prophet the Lord brought 
 Israel out of Egypt and by a prophet was he kept,’ that 
 is, as a flock. ‘What the prophets said and did,’ says 
 Justin, ‘they veiled in types and parables, so that it is 
 not easy for. all to understand the most of them, since 
 they hid the truth in them, that those who seek to 
 discover and learn it might require to labour in finding 
 zt’ (Dial. c. 90). The Jews, however, expounded these 
 types and signs in a shallow and unworthy way, not in- 
 vestigating what was said and done by the blessed pro- 
 phet (Moses) with much meaning and mystery ; and, 
 instead of seeking the knowledge of those dispensational 
 mysteries, which were accomplished by the marriages 
 and other actions of the patriarchs and prophets, they 
 excused themselves in a wretched and senseless way for 
 
WISDOM HID IN PARABOLIC MYSTERIES. 231 
 
 doing the same things (c. 112, 134, 141). Not only did 
 Justin find types of the cross and of the name of Christ 
 in the histories and ritual of the Old Testament, but he 
 _ .speaks of the cross and the name as themselves myste- 
 ties (Dial. c. 111). The Gentiles proclaimed the mad- 
 ness of the Christians ‘in giving to a crucified man the 
 -second place after the immutable and eternal God and 
 Father of all things, being ignorant of the mystery that 
 is herein’ (év rovr@, Ap. i. 13); for, through the mystery of 
 Him who was crucified, the whole race of believers are 
 ‘turned from their vain idols and worship of demons. 
 To those who become like to’ Abraham in faith and in 
 ‘knowledge (éréyvwous) of these mysteries, who are 
 
 washed in the laver of which Isaiah (i. 16) speaks and 
 — live new lives, this gospel is the power of God for salva- 
 tion; but to those who do not obey the truth, the same 
 _sign is revealed for their destruction and condemnation 
 (c. 44, 54, 91, 106). To Justin’s mind Christian baptism 
 was evidently a sigz of the baptism or ‘washing of the 
 soul from anger, covetousness, and every kind of evil ;’ 
 it also signified that those are enlightened in their under- 
 standing who learn (the meaning of) these things, the 
 baptiser calling over (évAéyortos) the baptised the name 
 -of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit of prophecy 
 (Ap. i. 61). Justin also speaks of the Eucharist not only 
 as commemorative of our Lord’s passion but also as an 
 injunction of ‘all those sacrifices which Jesus Christ 
 -delivered to be performed (rapédoxe yiveo@au), that is, in 
 the Eucharist of the bread and the cup.’ ‘Do not sup- 
 pose,’ he continues, ‘that Isaiah or the other prophets 
 speak of blood or libations being presented at the altar 
 -on His second advent, but of true and spiritual praises 
 _and giving of thanks,’ as anticipated by Malachi (Justin, 
 
232 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 Dial. 117,118; Mal. i. 10, 11). The same passage is: 
 quoted by Irenzus, who says that in this ordinance 
 our Lord was giving counsel to His disciples to offer to 
 God the first fruits of His creation (iv. 17, 5), the sort of 
 offerings and sacrifices being now changed, as being now 
 offered not by slaves (who know not what their Lord 
 doeth) but by freemen, by those who, having received. 
 their freedom, assign all that themselves have to the 
 uses of the Lord, cheerfully and freely giving them.. 
 The altar, at which such oblations (eg. those mentioned 
 in Phil. iv. 18, Matt. xxv. 34-36) are offered, is in heaven 
 (iv.18; 2-6). Thus Christians, partaking (wetadaBortes): 
 in those antitypes, who, bringing these offerings in 
 memorial of the Lord, do not approximate (1pocépyovtat): 
 to Jewish ordinances, shall be called the sons of wisdom 
 (Iren. Frag. 36 or 37). It seems plain that Ireneus saw 
 in the Eucharist a symbol of the dedication of created 
 things to God’s rational service. 
 
 THE NAME OF GOD—the Father, the Son, and the: 
 Holy Ghost—called over the baptised was no doubt what: 
 Irenzus meant by the epz/ogé sum and substance of apos- 
 tolic teaching, which, he says, the unlearned or private 
 persons (ids@Tas) receive, who give diligence to the 
 amendment of their lives (Frag. 35 or 36). ‘When that 
 which is perfect is come,’ he says (alluding to I Cor.. 
 xiii. 10-12), ‘we shall not see another Father, or look for 
 another Christ and Son of God, or receive another Holy 
 Ghost, there will be no other name, no other foundation. 
 (i7rd0eous), ‘but we shall have our growth (or increase) 
 and make progress in the very same things (as now), so: 
 as to enjoy the gifts of God, now no more through a 
 glass and by means of enigmas, but face to face’ (iv. 9,. 
 2). Hence Irenzeus insists on interpreting what is doubt-. 
 
WISDOM HID IN PARABOLIC MYSTERIES. 233 
 
 ful or enigmatical according to what is unmistakable 
 and plain. ‘When the Bridegroom comes, he who has 
 his lamp untrimmed and not shining with any brightness 
 of openly shown (manzfestc) light, turns back to those 
 who in the darkness distort the interpretation of parables, 
 forsaking Him who by plain statements ( pr@dicationem) 
 grants to grateful persons (grads) admission to Him, 
 and so is excluded from His marriage-chamber’ (ii. 27, 2). 
 It is to be observed that Justin connects the utterances 
 of the prophets with a threefold personality. ‘When 
 you hear the utterances of the prophets spoken of as from 
 a person, said he to the Emperor Aurelius, ‘you must 
 not think of the utterances as proceeding from the in- 
 spired themselves but from the Divine Word who moved 
 them. For sometimes he declares what will come to 
 pass, in the way of fore-announcement ; sometimes he 
 speaks as from the person of God, the Lord and Father 
 of all (eg. Is. i. 2-4; lviii. 6; Ixvi. 1); at another, as 
 memeothe person of ‘Christ (eg: Is. 1.) 65 Ixvor)2';) Ps. 
 Xxii. 16); and at another as from the person of the 
 peoples (@s amo tpoceTrov Aawv), answering the Lord or 
 His Father’ (eg. Is. Ixiv. 10, 12), or ‘as from the person 
 of the apostles’ (Is. liii. 1, 2). For as in the case of the 
 body, which consists of many members and yet is called 
 and is one body, so the Church and people being many 
 in number, yet, as forming but one thing, are called and 
 described by one appellation’ (Ap. i. 36; Dial. 42). 
 
 In the interpretation of the prophetic ‘ word of hear- 
 _ ing,’ two opposite extremes soon manifested themselves 
 in the Christian Church. One was to look upon the 
 surface of the ‘elements’ of the faith, to refuse to put 
 any higher meaning or allow any higher meaning to be 
 put on enigmatical statements or symbols of the faith ; 
 
234 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 the other was to put meanings rashly on what is dark or 
 enigmatical, to subvert the most essential truths of re- 
 ligion by hasty conceits (e,¢. about St. Paul’s meaning), to 
 turn Christianity into a speculative metaphysic, to think, 
 but not to think soberly. In regard to the former, those 
 who ‘demanded mere faith,’ we find an early writer 
 called Barnabas earnestly exhorting Christians to in- 
 quire diligently into the ordinances of the Lord, not to 
 be without understanding as to those things which are 
 able to save us, not to fall back into a religion of man- 
 made or, as Clement of Rome calls them, useless works, 
 as if they were proselytes to the law. The final stum- 
 bling block was fast approaching ; therefore Christians 
 ought to understand (c. 2, 3, 4). On the other hand, 
 Irenzeus had to do with those who, under pretence of 
 knowledge, were setting aside the whole groundwork of 
 Christian facts and sober-minded religion ; he accord- 
 ingly insisted that the foundation (b7d@ecvs) should not 
 be changed, and that what is already enigmatical and 
 mysterious should not be rendered more enigmatical and 
 more mysterious by foolish, rash, and blasphemous ex- 
 planations, brought in under the guise of spirituality. 
 The one tendency was to fall back into a sensuous 
 ceremonialism, to hear the words of our Lord ina carnal 
 way, to Judaise Christianity ; the other was to rush for- 
 ward into foolish conceits about’ God and the words of 
 Scripture, to misrepresent God’s character and dealings, 
 to subvert by a so-called knowledge the first principles 
 of morality. The same two extremes seem to have been 
 prefigured in the nations which surrounded Israel, and to 
 have been described in the enigmatical utterances of the 
 Hebrew prophets. To go the way of Egypt was to 
 symbolise natural symbols, to flee into darkness. Edom 
 
WISDOM HID IN PARABOLIC MYSTERIES. 235 
 
 also on the south was a wild beast, without understand- 
 ing, a persecutor. The idolaters of the north and the 
 nations generally had ferverted those natural elements 
 or created things, in which God is revealed ; they had 
 fallen into fadse beliefs and foul worship. Tyre, for 
 _ instance, is spoken of as having too much of its own 
 wisdom, as if nothing were hid from it. 
 
 Between these two extremes of an unenlightened 
 faith and an extravagant interpretation, contrary to the 
 essential principles of sober religion, was Clement of 
 Alexandria,| a man of sound judgment and immense 
 learning, who, in the latter part of the second century, 
 went to different countries to collect what both he and 
 ‘the most eminent Christian teachers of the time believed 
 to be apostolical explanations, orally handed down in 
 the Christian Church, the gwostic tradition truly so 
 called. According to Clement, the style or character of 
 _ the Scriptures is parabolic ; the dispensational arrange- 
 ments of our Lord were adapted to men’s sense-bound 
 nature. As was to be expected, this parabolic style, 
 being of the highest antiquity, abounded mostly in the 
 _ prophets, who, when they spoke beforehand of our 
 Lord’s coming and of the mysteries connected with it, 
 ‘used expressions capable of leading to other conceptions, 
 lest, while speaking what was beyond the ideas of the 
 multitude, they might seem to blaspheme. The Word 
 of God Himself, though not of the world, yet came as 
 one of the world, clothing Himself with all virtue, lead- 
 ing men, who had been reared in the material ideas of a 
 natural world, to a higher world of intelligible and lordly 
 truth, addressing Himself to what senses they had, using 
 
 1 Wilson’s two volumes in Clark’s series are here referred to as C! and 
 *C*, while S. means the Stromata or Miscellanies. 
 
236 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 metaphorical representations such as the parable, and 
 suiting His actions to His words by acting the saving 
 drama of human life (Exh. 10 C! 98 ; S. vi. 15, C? 378, 
 379). ‘Those,’ said Clement, ‘who know plainly that 
 the Saviour teaches His own people nothing as a mere 
 man, but all things with divine and mystic wisdom, 
 ought not to hear in a fleshly way the things spoken, but 
 to search down into the meaning hidden in them with 
 becoming industry and intelligence and learn them 
 thoroughly.” ! Those also who were separated to be His 
 apostles to some extent used the same methods. St. 
 Paul desired to see the Romans that he might impart a 
 spiritual gift, that they might be established, for, adds 
 Clement (S. v. 4), ‘it was impossible that gifts of this. 
 description should be communicated in an unveiled way’ 
 (dmroxexaduppévos) by Jetter.” Orally, he had expounded 
 to the Ephesian elders the whole counsel of God; and 
 possibly this may have been the reason why many of the 
 Corinthians despised his bodily presence and speech,. 
 whilst they so much respected his letters. To use the 
 expression of Tacitus, some men consider that to be mag- 
 nificent which they do not understand. ‘Let such an 
 one,’ says St. Paul, ‘consider this, that such as we are 
 in word by letter, such we are also in very deed when 
 present.’ He himself put the highest value on what was. 
 said and done with understanding, and taught that un- 
 known speech was a sign to them who believe not. 
 
 The object of the early Christian teachers was to’ 
 teach the truth, and to teach it in the way most suitable 
 to men, so as to gain all. ‘To those,’ says Clement, 
 
 1 Ae? de capas elddras ds ovdty dyOpwmlvws 6 TwThp GAAG mayTA bela copia. 
 Kal pvotikh diddoKer Tovs EavTov, My capklyws aKpodicba Tay AcyouEevar, 
 
 BAAG Tov ey abrois KeKpuupéevoy vody meTa TIS atlas (nthoews Kal cuvérews- 
 épevvay kal karopovOdve (De Div. Serv. 5). 
 
WISDOM HID IN PARABOLIC MYSTERIES. 237 
 
 ‘who ask the wisdom which is with us, we are to hold 
 out things suitable, that, with the greatest possible ease, 
 they may through what they have (da tav idiwv) be 
 likely to arrive at faith in the truth (S. v. 3). The great 
 crowd tests a thing’s intelligibility or justice not by its 
 truth but by its pleasingness. Those, therefore, who 
 address them must handle truth as they are capable of 
 hearing it. All, therefore, who have spoken of divine 
 things, both Hebrews and Greeks, have veiled the first 
 principles of things (tas dpyas Teav tpayuatov) and 
 delivered the truth in enigmas and symbols, and alle- 
 gories and metaphors, and such like tropes (S. v. 4), 
 because such a style is attractive and elevating. All 
 things that shine through a veil appear grander and 
 more imposing, as fruits shining in the water, or figures 
 appearing through veils, which add to them striking 
 appearances (cvveuddoes). Another reason why God 
 gives treasures hidden and dark (Is. xlv. 3), why the 
 wisdom taught in theology by the prophets is hard to 
 hunt (C? 234), is that men may be trained to habits of 
 industrious research and reflection (@ewpia), that they 
 should be inquirers (fntnTtxol) ever wakeful and intent 
 to find out the meaning of the words of salvation, and 
 that knowledge itself should be the reward of those who 
 are most worthy. The method is also conducive to 
 memory and succinctness’ (S. v. 9). 
 
 It is one thing to use symbols and sensuous modes 
 of expression in order to introduce men to the under- 
 standing of enigmas and hasten their ascent to the dis- 
 covery of the truth (S. v. 4); but it is altogether wrong 
 (ov Oéguts) to use them so as to perpetuate a senseless 
 want of understanding. Clement speaks of some in the 
 exercise of a bare faith, which is of the law, casting 
 
238 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 others into a pit destitute of knowledge and selling them 
 (like Joseph) into Egypt, which is destitute of the word. 
 This was the one extreme; but Clement goes on imme- 
 diately to caution teachers against causing those to 
 stumble or apostatise who have a superficial (avto- 
 oxéd.os) faith, whom he describes as workers not thinkers 
 (C? 234, 253). Pearls must not be cast before men of 
 untrained and swinish minds, lest they should despise or 
 ridicule what to nobler-minded men is most inspiring 
 (S. i, 12). Besides there is in many mena rash haste 
 to form opinions (mpometis Sofocodia), a superficiality, 
 stupidity, or whatever else it might be called, which 
 makes some men very liable to fall into heresies (S. vii. 
 16, C2 476, 483). Hence the apostles were directed to 
 preach on the house-tops what they heard in the ear, 
 that is, says Clement, to proclaim the truth in a becoming 
 lofty way, or to those capable of being built up to a lofty 
 height (S.i,-125 view5, C? 377). The three results of 
 gnostic power (enlightened insight and ability) are first, 
 the knowledge of things; secondly, the performance of 
 what the truth suggests ; and thirdly, the capability of 
 delivering in a becoming and suitable manner those 
 things connected with the truth which are veiled over (Ta. 
 mapa Th adnOeia émcxexpuppera, S. vii. 1 ; C* 408). 
 
 One great object which Clement had in writing his 
 Stromata or Miscellanies was to show that there was a 
 hidden meaning, a fuller knowledge or guosts, tradition- 
 ally handed down among the most enlightened teachers 
 of Christianity, and to keep a record of it, that it might 
 not be lost. He lays claim to the words gmoszs and 
 gnostic, showing that the so-called gxoszs of the heretical 
 gnostics was a mere counterfeit. He finds the same 
 faults with their methods of treating prophetic language 
 
WISDOM HID IN PARABOLIC MYSTERIES. 239: 
 
 as Ireneus does. ‘They violently adapt, said Irenzus, 
 ‘the good words (of the Saviour and His apostles) to 
 their own devices or fanciful theories, abusing the terms 
 and parabolic sayings, collecting phrases here and there 
 and transferring them from the sense which they have 
 in their proper place to their own hypothesis or basis. 
 And not only from the Gospels and Apostolical writings. 
 do they endeavour to derive proofs by perverse inter- 
 pretations and false expositions, but also out of the law 
 and the prophets ; for taking occasion from the many 
 parables and allegories there uttered, things capable of 
 a double sense in the exposition (a literal and a mystical 
 sense, as the sayings about Egypt, Edom, Babylon, &c.),. 
 they with a terrible craft adapt them to the device or 
 theory they have formed’ (Iren. i. 3, 6, 9). ‘They 
 also venture,’ said Clement, ‘to make use of the pro- 
 phetic Scriptures, not quoting all of them or entire 
 passages, or as the body and context (dos) of the pro- 
 -phecy prescribe ; but, selecting ambiguous expressions, 
 _ they wrest them to their own opinions, gathering a few 
 expressions here and there, not looking to the meaning 
 (TO onuawvopuevov) of these expressions but to the mere 
 phraseology itself (adr7 Warn rH réEe, as is not un- 
 common in our day); and while they persist in or build 
 on (mpocavéxyouor) mere terms, they alter the thing 
 signified’ (S. vii. 16 ; C? 478). Clement, as we shall see, 
 insists that all our knowledge should be built upon and 
 checked by the first principles of ¢hz2gs, upon what is. 
 self-evident and essential ; but if men have made mis- 
 takes, he directs that a more thorough training in these 
 studies is necessary, and that the truth must ‘be ex- 
 plained according to what he and Ireneus call the 
 consistent sequence or adaptation of the dispensations. 
 
240 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. ; 
 
 (axorovbla tev SiabnKav ; C? 481 ; Iren, iv. 20,7): It is 
 a great matter to get persons to admit that the subject 
 requires labour, knowing that the entrance into eternal 
 rest is toilsome and strait (C? 476). ‘But there are 
 some who cannot bear at all to listen to those who 
 exhort them to turn to the truth ; who claim for them- 
 selves the knowledge of the greatest things in the uni- 
 verse, without having learned or inquired or laboured or 
 discovered this consistent sequence or adaptation (axo- 
 rovbla of God’s dispensations), whom one ought to pity 
 not to hate for such perversity’ (C? 483). This picking 
 out phrases from the prophetic Scriptures without 
 understanding the context is still a great evil. 
 
 The method of hiding knowledge, that men might 
 seek for it, was followed by the philosophers and poets 
 of antiquity. Thus Pythagoras counsels not to have a 
 swallow in the house, meaning a garrulous person ; not 
 to leave the mark of the pot on the ashes, when it is 
 lifted from the fire, but to scatter the ashes, meaning 
 that we should not give effect to impressions of anger, 
 but, on its ceasing to boil, that we are to efface all trace 
 of it. Epicurus and Zeno the Stoic had writings which 
 they would not allow their disciples to read till they had 
 given proof that they were genuine philosophers. Other 
 philosophers instituted mysteries and buried their doc- 
 trines in myths that ignorant persons might not handle 
 them. There are myths in Plato which must be taken 
 in another or allegorical sense, not in every expression, 
 but in those which are signs of the general meaning. 
 Some of Aristotle’s treatises are esoteric and some 
 exoteric; and the poet Sophocles speaks of God as a 
 teacher of enigmas to the wise (S. v. 4, 5). 
 
 According to Clement, the Hebrew enigmas were the 
 
 e 
 
WISDOM HID IN PARABOLIC MYSTERIES. 241 
 
 same as those of the Egyptians in respect of conceal- 
 ment. As among the Hebrews the most approved 
 (Soxtpwrator) were chosen from among the sacred tribes 
 to be high priests, and elect or select men were 
 anointed as priests and prophets, so the Egyptians did 
 not entrust the mysteries they possessed to all and 
 sundry, and did not divulge the knowledge of the divine 
 things to the profane, but only to those who were des- 
 tined to ascend the throne and to those of the priests 
 who were judged the most approved from their nurture, 
 training, and birth (S. v. 6,7; C2 245). However piaes 
 tically senseless the Egyptian symbolism may have been, 
 Clement and others consider that it was not perverted 
 like that of other heathen nations. ‘The Greeks,’ he says, 
 “laughed every day at the Egyptian worship of beasts ; 
 and yet they themselves not only worshipped beasts but 
 gods with the passions of men, who sought pleasure in 
 what is contrary to nature, gods who confessed their 
 ‘gluttony and were convicted of shamelessness, demons 
 hostile to the human race, and demi-gods who ought to 
 meocecalled demi-asses’ (Exh. 2, 3; C! 45, 47). . The 
 Egyptians made images of things (already symbolic) in 
 the heavens and in the earth for their worship, but they 
 do not seem to have perverted the symbols of nature 
 into excesses and abominations, as the other nations did, 
 taking God’s name to an evil thing. Clement gives 
 Specimens of their enigmas. The sun on a ship is the 
 symbol of the generation of time; a boy means birth, 
 an old man decay ; the crocodile means sometimes the 
 flow of time and sometimes impudence ; the lion sym- 
 bolises strength and prowess ; the ox, clearly, the earth 
 itself and husbandry and food; the horse, manly forti- 
 tude and confidence; the sphinx, strength combined 
 ; R 
 
242 THE: STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 with intelligence. In some processions they carried 
 about golden images of two dogs, one hawk, and one | 
 ibis, meaning the two hemispheres or the .two tropics. i 
 (which guard the sun’s passage), and the sun and moon. 
 or the equator and ecliptic (S. v. 7). 
 
243 
 
 CHAPTER IT. 
 
 patie “WAY (OF ‘EGYPT AND-OF. THE: NATIONS: 
 
 OuR first nature is sense-bound, and God in His mani- 
 festations adapts Himself to our needs, so as to raise us 
 to a higher order of intelligence by knowledge. Justin 
 (Dial. 121) and Clement (S. vi. 14) considered that in 
 Deut. iv. 19 Moses meant that God had given to the 
 nations the sun, moon, and stars for their worship, that. 
 they might not become altogether atheistical and perish, - 
 while philosophy was also given with a view to elevate 
 them, previous to the faith. ‘But these nations, having 
 ‘become senseless even in this commandment, and ad- 
 dicted themselves to graven images, stocks, and stones, 
 are judged, unless they repent, some for not being willing — 
 and others for not taking the necessary pains.’ There 
 are two courses which men may follow: they may either 
 make progress in what is rational, they may seek to dis- 
 cern the mind of God and rise from a sensuous toa 
 rational service ; or they may fall farther back from the 
 worship of Him who is a Spirit, symbolising the sym-. 
 bols, whether of nature or of grace, which He has given, 
 overlaying the plain precepts of well-doing by a symbol- 
 ism made darker and darker, till they end in perverting 
 these symbols into an immoral idolatry. Because they 
 - do not like to retain God in their thoughts, God gives 
 them over to a reprobate mind ; the darkness becomes. 
 
 R.2 
 
244 THE- STYLE: AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY, 
 
 the parent of evils to them. The just judgment of God 
 makes men ever more the subjects of what they choose ; 
 but if they turn to Him or from Him, He also turns. 
 ‘Woe to the departing children, saith Jehovah, that take 
 counsel, but not of me; and that weave a covering, but 
 not of my Spirit, that they may add sin to sin: that walk 
 to go down to Egypt, and have not asked at my mouth; 
 to strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, and 
 to trust in the shadow of Egypt. . .. Thisisa rebellious 
 people, children that will not hearken to the law of 
 Jehovah, which say to the seers, See not, and to the pro- 
 phets, Prophesy not to us right things, speak unto us 
 smooth things, prophesy deceits ... cause the Holy 
 One of Israel to cease from before us. Wherefore, thus 
 saith the Holy One of Israel, Because ye despise this 
 word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay 
 thereon: therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach 
 ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whose breaking 
 cometh suddenly in an instant . . . as when an earthen — 
 pitcher is broken, broken unsparingly, so that there shall 
 not be found in the bursting of it a sherd to take fire 
 from the hearth, or to take water out of the well’ (Is. xxx. 
 1-14). Israel had built up the wall between God and — 
 them ; and Ezekiel (xliii. 8-12) is charged to show them 
 the house and let them measure the pattern, that they 
 might keep God’s statutes, the holy law of His house. 
 On such a wall God’s wrath was to be consummated ; 
 the wall would perish, and they who daubed it (Ez. xiii. 
 15). The old typical ordinances of the flesh had be- | 
 come a wall of partition and an occasion of enmity ; } 
 and when our Lord took their place, nailing them to His 
 cross, He reconciled men to God and to one another by | 
 
 | 
 
 sensuous, rational, and proper means (Eph. ii, 14-17 )s i 
 
 } 
 
 | 
 
THE WAY OF EGYPT AND OF THE NATIONS. 245 
 
 By the way of the sea were a people who sat in darkness 
 and in the region and shadow of death. To them light 
 arose ; and as God’s Son was called out of Egypt, so 
 are His people called out of the city which is spiritually 
 called Sodom and Egypt or Babylon (Matt. ii. 15; iv. 
 BO; Kev, xi. 8.;, Rev, xvii. 4), AX 
 
 This fleeing from the plain precepts of righteous 
 living to symbolical services, this obscuring what is 
 already enigmatical by bringing in a still darker enigma, 
 is the way of Egypt. Prophetically Ezekiel laments 
 over the King of Egypt, the troubling and stagnation of 
 his waters, the darkening of his lights, the destruction of 
 his multitude and of the senseless beasts of burden beside 
 his waters (Ez. xxxii. 2-16). Egyptologists find no 
 monuments of the magicians of Egypt, spoken of by 
 Moses. Perhaps he is speaking of the Egyptian worship, 
 of its magical charms, incantations, mummifications, in- 
 scriptions of the ritual of the dead, to which the Egyp- 
 _tians attributed far too much importance in their, ideas 
 of the judgment (Mr. Poole in the ‘ Ency. Brit.’), When 
 Israel counted the weightier matters of the law as a 
 strange thing, forgetting God and idolising their forms 
 of worship, Hosea prophesied that their altars would be 
 to them for sin. ‘They shall return to Egypt (Deut. 
 xxvili. 68), for Israel hath forgotten his Maker and 
 builded temples; and Judah hath multiplied fenced — 
 cities; and I will send a fire upon his cities, and it shall 
 devour the palaces thereof’ (Hosea viii. 11-14). Their 
 senseless zeal, which they preferred to God Himself (Iren. 
 iv. II, 4), would, like a fire, desolate their service of its 
 glory, burn up their house (Ps. lxix. 9); 
 
 In a fragment of Justin Martyr (Clark’s Ed., p. 359) 
 a passage of Jeremiah (ii. 19) is quoted to show that the 
 
246 THE: STYLE ‘AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 ‘Gentiles, who are spoken of prophetically, are not the 
 nations of foreign lands, but those who agree with the 
 ‘Gentiles, who are becoming heathenish in their ways: 
 ‘€Ts Israel a servant, or is he ahome-born slave? Why is 
 he spoiled? Hast thou not procured this for thyself in 
 that thou hast forsaken the Lord thy God, when He led 
 thee by the way ? And now what hast thou to do in the 
 way of Egypt, to drink the waters of the (black) Sihor? 
 or what hast thou to do inthe way of Asshur, to drink the 
 waters of the river? Thine own wickedness shall cor- 
 rect thee, and thy backslidings shall chastise thee. Know, 
 therefore, and see, that it is an evil thing and a bitter, 
 that thou hast forsaken the Lord thy God, and that my 
 fear is not in thee, saith the Lord God of Hosts. For 
 of old thou hast broken thy yoke and torn asunder thy 
 - bands and said, I will not serve Thee, and thou bowest 
 down upon every high hill and under every green tree, 
 a harlot’ (Jer. ii. 14-20; Hab.i. 5). ‘The Scripture,’ says 
 Clement, ‘ sells those who have fallen away to strangers ; 
 and when it says, “Look not on a strange woman to 
 lust,” it calls sin entirely strange and contrary to the 
 temple of God. Now the temple is great as the Church, 
 - or small as the man who preserves the seed of Abraham. 
 Those things which belong to heathen life are not to be 
 adopted by apostatising from the Gospel. For he who 
 conducts himself heathenishly in the Church, whether in 
 _ deed or word, or even in spirit, commits fornication with 
 - reference to the Church and his own body. He who in 
 “this way is joined to the energy (évepyeda, the power of | 
 ‘ evil desires, &c.), contrary to the covenants, becomes not — 
 a holy body but another body, and one flesh (only flesh), 
 ,and has a heathenish life and another hope’ (S. vii. 13, | 
 
 ~14; C? 467, 471). 
 
247 
 
 CHAPTER SLE: 
 
 THE CURSE OF THE LAW: EDOM AND ISRAEL. 
 
 - SERIOUS mistakes have been made from the ambiguity 
 of the word daw by not distinguishing between what 
 Irenzeus calls the natural precepts and that which was 
 superadded because of transgressions. The natural pre- 
 cepts, he says, are common both to Judaism and Chris- 
 tianity ; ‘the meaning of the Decalogue’ amplified was 
 renewed by our Lord to His disciples when He bade 
 them not only to abstain from wrong towards their neigh- 
 bours but also from evil desires, and required them to do 
 good to all men, even to their enemies. The Sabbath 
 taught perseverance in serving God all the time since our 
 belief and abstinence from covetousness. The precepts 
 of a servile state, however, ¢g. temple ministrations, 
 sacrifices, oblations, and precautionary mandates, which 
 were given to the Jews only as a bondage suited to them 
 and for a sign, He hath cut off by a New Testament of 
 ‘liberty ; but those which are natural and savouring of 
 freedom and common to all, He hath amplified and 
 _ expanded, increasing not only men’s knowledge and love, 
 but their fear also (Iren. iv. 16). He speaks of men as 
 justified not by circumcision, Sabbaths, &c., but by those 
 natural precepts which were kept before Moses by those 
 who were justified by faith and pleased God; and in 
 opposition to ‘the cry of Marcion’s school,’ he maintained 
 
248 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 that ‘ our Lord’s discourses (e.g. Matt. v.) involve no con= 
 trariety with or abolition of things past, but the fulness. 
 and expansion of them’ (iv. 13,1). In fact these natural 
 precepts were never abolished. But Ireneus and Bar- 
 nabas explain wherefore the ritual or symbolical law of 
 Moses was superadded. The promised testament (that 
 
 according to knowledge) was first given to Moses; but 
 
 meanwhile the people had made molten images, showing 
 that they were unworthy to receive it; hence its tables 
 were broken (Bar.c. 14). ‘At first,’ says Irenzus, ‘God. 
 warned them by means of natural precepts, which He 
 had implanted in man from the beginning, that is, by 
 
 means of the Decalogue, as Moses said in Deuteronomy, 
 
 “These are all the words which the Lord spake to the 
 whole assembly of the sons of Jacob on the mount, and. 
 He added no more” (Deut. v. 22) ; but when they turned 
 to make a calf and had gone back in their minds to 
 Egypt, desiring to be slaves instead of freemen, they 
 were placed for the future in a state of servitude, suited. 
 to their wish, a slavery which did not cut them off from. 
 God, but which subjected them to the yoke of bondage’ 
 (Iren. iv. 15, 1). The law drew men as it were by servile 
 chains, that they might learn to serve God without them. 
 He goes on to say that certain other precepts, as the law 
 of divorce, were ordained because of the hardness of men’s 
 hearts, that they might be detained from returning to 
 idolatry ; but that these precepts were not so from the 
 beginning. In the same way Justin Martyr distinguishes 
 between those laws which ‘were given for holiness and 
 righteous living,’ and a superadded law which was typical 
 or ordained because of the hardness of men’s hearts. 
 ‘Many things,’ he says, ‘were enjoined to them that they 
 might have constantly God before their eyes in every 
 
 0 at 
 
THE CURSE OF THE LAW: EDOM AND ISRAEL. 249 
 
 act, that they might never forget God and begin to act 
 unjustly or impiously; but, at all times, they who do 
 those things which by nature are universally and eternally 
 good are well-pleasing to God (Dial. 44, 45,46). It was. 
 necessary that circumcision, the Sabbath, sacrifices, offer- 
 ings, and feasts, things commanded because of the hard- 
 ness of the people’s hearts, should cease in Jesus Christ,. 
 who was to come as the future everlasting Law and New 
 Covenant for the whole world (c. 43). According to 
 Justin, it was foreknown that this ritual law would 
 become a curse to the Jewish nation (Dial. 16, 92); as. 
 they did not perform all its commandments exactly, the — 
 law itself pronounced them under its curse. The Father 
 of all wished that His Christ should take upon Himself 
 (avadéEac Gar) the curses of all in behalf of the whole race 
 of men (c. 95). Our Lord’s first advent was, says Justin, 
 an ‘economy of suffering’ (Dial. 30, 3); He was ex- 
 hibited as the type of a race enduring temptation, as a 
 pattern, having power to succour the tempted. He 
 fulfilled the types of the law, so that it no longer hoids 
 men under its darkness and burdensome restrictions ; 
 and He suffered from human curses, although not from 
 personal sin. 
 
 But when Isaiah (lili. 5) predicted that our Lord 
 would suffer for (literally, from 7zzz) our iniquities, there 
 is another sense in which the early Christian teachers 
 interpreted the passage. According to Barnabas (c. 5, 
 14), this was written partly with reference to Israel and 
 partly with reference to us (Christians). He suffered on 
 account of (propter, uzép) those who, by His personal 
 manifestation, are redeemed from darkness and death ; 
 and,secondly, ‘ He suffered from (or at the hands of, ad 
 = Heb. mz) men in whom sins are consummated.’ So 
 
250 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 Justin explains that our Lord not only removed the 
 curses of the law, but that He and His followers suffered 
 from the curses of the Jews, who cursed them in their 
 synagogues, while the other nations carried out their 
 curses (Dial. 94,95). Men’s infatuations, their furious 
 zeal, their angry hatred and bitter jealousy, especially 
 when cloaked under the appearance of doing God service, 
 are, in the parabolic language of Scripture, said to be 
 curses, the wrath of God, an evil spirit from the Lord, 
 eternal fire, retributive destruction proceeding from the 
 face of the Lord (2 Thess. i.). ‘The nations were angered 
 and thine anger came ’ (Rev. xi. 18). ‘My zeal for thine 
 house hath eaten me up’ (Ps. lxix. 9; cxix. 139). ‘To 
 despisers,’ said Irenzeus, ‘and such as are not subject to 
 God, but follow external purifications to have glory of 
 men, 2.e. purifications of the law given as a shadowy type 
 of future and eternal things ; to those who pretend to 
 observe more than has been commanded, as if preferring 
 their own zeal to God Himself, but are within full of 
 hypocrisy, and covetousness, and all wickedness: to 
 such He brought eternal perdition, cutting them off from 
 life’ (iv. 11, 4). But they choose their own zeal or dark- 
 ness, and thus cut themselves off from life. ‘Gideon pro- 
 phesied of drought which should come upon the fleece 
 of wool, which was a type of the people; but that upon 
 all the earth there should be dew, that is, the Spirit, the 
 Spirit of wisdom and understanding, &c. (Is. xi. 2). 
 Wherefore the dew of God is needed by us, that we be 
 not scorched or rendered unfruitful, and that, where we 
 have an accuser, there we may have an advocate’ (Iren. 
 iii; '17,+3); 
 
 In studying the mystic meaning of the prophetic 
 utterances regarding Esau or Edom, we must keep in 
 
THE CURSE OF THE LAW: EDOM AND ISRAEL. 251 
 
 mind his entire history. His name Edom, ved, expresses 
 the colour of flesh, as Adam does. He wasa azry man, 
 with a natural vez/ over him and-his mind. His country, 
 called also Seir, that is, shaggy, had a reddish aspect, 
 
 from the colour of its rocks. Its cities were Bozrah,an 
 
 inaccessible #eep, and Sela, a vock (Petra). In the red 
 
 cliffs of these, as well as in caverns and grottoes, hewn 
 
 out of the soft sandstone, the natives appear to have 
 dwelt. Esau was the elder, unspiritual, brother of Jacob, 
 the man who despised his birthright and lost his father’s 
 blessing, being supplanted by Jacob. Edom appears at 
 critical periods of the history of Israel as a bitter and 
 ageressive enemy. Doeg and Herod, for instance, were 
 Edomites. Edom is spoken of by Jeremiah, c. xlix., 
 Ezekiel, c. xxxv., and Obadiah, as being bereft of under- 
 standing; his bread is to be a snare to him; he comes 
 up as a lion from the swelling of Jordan against the 
 habitation of the strong, but he is to be suddenly turned 
 away; he claims the mountains of Israel as his own 
 that he may desolate them, but his own habitation is to 
 be desolate as in the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah ; 
 
 his hidden things are to be sought out; from his lof 
 -eagle’s nest in the clefts of the rock he is to be 
 brought down; every passer-by is astonished at his 
 plagues. Esau is spoken of by St. Paul (Rom. ix. 13), 
 by Irenzeus (iv. 21, 2), and by Barnabas (c. 13) as a type 
 of that Israel of the flesh who abode unintelligently 
 under the dark feshly ordinances of the Jewish law, who 
 took away the key of knowledge, neither entering in 
 themselves nor suffering others to enter, who were con- 
 ‘trary to all men, forbidding the Gospel to be preached to 
 the Gentiles, that they might be saved. When Isaiah 
 -calls Edom the people of God’s curse, and Malachi 
 
 te 
 
252 . THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 speaks of Edom as the people against whom the Lord 
 hath e¢erna/ anger or indignation for ever, we can under- 
 stand that though ¢heir anger or bitter hostility to the: 
 progress of truth worked out God’s purposes, yet it was 
 to them an evident token of perdition. It was made to 
 serve God’s purposes, yet God was not unrighteous. ‘It 
 is,’ says Clement, ‘the greatest achievement of divine 
 providence not to allow the evil which has sprung from 
 voluntary apostasy, the counsels and activities of evil- 
 disposed rebels, to be in all respects useless and inju-- 
 rious, but to guide even these to a good and useful issue, 
 using to advantage those things which appear to be evils 
 and the testimony which is occasioned by temptation ” 
 (S.i. 17 ;,Ct 409). Jehovah hasa sword ; it is glutted in 
 the blood of lambs and goats (the sacrifices which were 
 a snare to Israel after the flesh), and it shall come down 
 upon Edom and upon the people of my curse (cherem) 
 for judgment. The streams thereof shall be turned to 
 pitch and the dust thereof to brimstone, the land thereof” 
 shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched 
 day nor night ; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever, 
 from generation to generation shall it lie waste (Is. 
 xxxiv.). All becomes wild and ferine in that land ; 
 * thorns, nettles, and brambles grow in its fortresses ; wild 
 dogs, greedy ostriches, jackals, wolves, satyrs, night. 
 spectres, owls, and vultures make it their abode from 
 generation to generation. But in the next chapter all 
 is changed: the desert blossoms, streams burst forth 
 from it ; the eyes of the blind are opened and the ears 
 of the deaf unstopped; men shall see the glory of 
 Jehovah and the excellency of our God. What wasa 
 curse to Edom, z.e. to Israel after the flesh, would become 
 a blessing to the chosen Israel. To show this election,. 
 
THE CURSE OF THE LAW: EDOM AND ISRAEL, 253 
 
 Paul quotes the words of Malachi: ‘Jacob I loved but 
 Esau I hated, and laid his mountains and his heritage 
 desolate for the dragons of the wilderness . . . and they 
 shall call them the border of wickedness, the people 
 against whom the Lord hath indignation (great anger) 
 for ever’ (Mal. i. 2-5 ; Rom. ix.13). But whocan doubt 
 that Paul meant by Edom an ideal people? : 
 In interpreting the ninth chapter of the Romans, we 
 ought to follow the counsel of Barnabas and ‘ understand 
 who was Isaac, who Rebekkah, and concerning what 
 persons He declared that this people should be greater 
 than that’ (c. 13). Before the brothers were born or had 
 done good or evil, it was ordained that the elder should 
 serve the younger, and foreseen that his table of works 
 would become a snare. The Jew vested in the law (Rom. 
 ii. 17), instead of hoping for better things ; he thought 
 of meriting favour by worshiping blindly instead of 
 looking for the grace which guides to more truth. The 
 birth of the two brothers represents the coming into 
 existence of two types of men with the two economies. 
 But we might say that God’s purposed goodness to His 
 creatures does not spring from (&&) any works of theirs. 
 God is good of Himself, Good works, however, are His 
 _ ways or means of blessing us. They bless the receivers 
 and also the doers, on whom, like a ball, they rebound 
 (Clem. Ped. i. 2). Though God makes the counsels and 
 wrath of wicked men to serve His purposes, these cannot 
 justly answer: ‘Why doth He yet find fault, if His pur- 
 pose is served ?’ (C? 408, 409). And men like Pharaoh, 
 raised up to be vessels of dishonour, ‘were known to 
 God beforehand’ (from previous conduct and acquired 
 character) ‘that they would be unchangeably wicked, - 
 not because God made them so’ (Justin, D. c. T, 141). 
 
254. THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 CHAPTER, Ly. 
 
 THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 
 
 THE JORDAN AND THE EUPHRATES.—The Jordan 
 bounded the land of Canaan on the East, as the Eu- 
 phrates was the eastern boundary of the kingdom of 
 David. At the season of barley harvest, or about the 
 time of the vernal equinox, the Jordan overflows all its 
 banks ; and it wasat this season that the Israelites, quit- 
 ting their wilderness life, approached it from the east. 
 To make way for them, the stream was arrested in its 
 course ; and to make way for the kings who come from 
 the rising of the sun, the Euphrates is dried up (Rev. 
 xvi. 12). The type may be interpreted by a comparison 
 with other passages of the prophets. Egypt was the 
 first great monarchy which oppressed Israel, and Asshur 
 the second. Isaiah (viii. 7, 8) speaks of the King of 
 Assyria as coming up against the land, like the waters 
 of the river, and ‘it hath gone up over all its streams, 
 and overflowed all its banks ;’ also ‘as an overflowing 
 stream to sift the nations with a sieve of vanity, and a 
 misleading bridle in the jaws of the people’ (Is. 
 xxx. 28). The Assyrians persecuted men for their re- 
 ligion ; they spoke a language ke the sacred tongue, 
 but a babbling language to the Jews because unintelli- 
 gible ; they led Israel captive to a land “ke their own, 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 255 
 
 but unknown to them (Is. xxxiii. 19, xxxvi. 17; Jer. 
 xxii. 28). The drying up of the Jordan is compared by 
 Joshua (iv. 23) to the drying up of the Red Sea. But 
 ‘God shall devote to destruction the tongue of the sea 
 of Egypt, and with His mighty wind smite the river 
 (Euphrates) into seven streams, and cause men to go 
 over it with shoes’ (xi. 15). Zechariah, in speaking of 
 such oppressors as Egypt and Asshur, shes that ‘all the 
 depths of the flood shall be dried up’ (x. 11), words 
 which, as Hengstenberg says, ‘contain a manifest allu- 
 sion to the passage of the Jordan.’ The meaning, there- 
 fore, is, that to diligent students and doers of the divine 
 word, an abundant entrance shall be ministered into the 
 eternal kingdom of our Lord (2 Pet. i. 11); that though 
 wild beasts (young lions, greedy wolves, deceitful ser- 
 pents) make their lairs along the banks of these waters 
 of separation, though, in anage of transition, a stream of 
 dark difficulties must be passed, enigmas solved, &c., 
 since in the continuity of God’s dealings the new comes 
 to us as the fulfilment of the old, though these things 
 are deep and it may be swollen beyond their proper 
 limits, yet God will either remove these difficulties or 
 make them the means of purifying those who abide the 
 test, who ‘pass through the rivers and are not overthrown, 
 and through the fire and are not burnt’ (Is. xliii. 2). 
 THE CANAANITES.—The promised land was for- 
 merly in possession of the Amorites, whose deeds were 
 so abominable that the land is described as vomiting 
 them forth (Lev. xviii.) ; and the Israelites were enjoined 
 to have no fellowship with them, but to extirpate them. 
 So, in the New Testament, creation is represented as 
 Sroaning under its old subjection to vanity and corrup- 
 tion; Christians are enjoined to have no fellowship 
 
256 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather to let 
 the light of a better example shine upon them, so as to 
 show the proper use. When persecution ceases, and bad 
 men are no longer privileged, the good, in the natural 
 course of things, supplant the bad ; and, however much 
 good men may seek to reclaim the bad, the laws of 
 things will not be altered; and, if men remain bad, 
 these laws are against them to extirpate them from off 
 the face of the earth. 
 
 But there is, no doubt, a deeper and more allegorical 
 meaning in this slaughter of the Canaanites. The ene- 
 mies which afflicted David’s soul and for whose destruc- 
 tion he prayed were, no doubt, the passions (Ps. cxliii. 
 3). Clement speaks of ‘men taking themselves prisoners 
 and slaying themselves, when they put to death the old 
 man, who is through lusts corrupt, and raising the new 
 man from death, that is, from the old conversation. It 
 was this, then, that the law intimated by ordering the 
 sinner to be cut off and transferred (as a captive) from 
 death to life, that is, to the passionlessness, which is the 
 result of faith ; which the teachers of the law not com- 
 prehending, inasmuch as they regarded the law as con- 
 tentious (piAovesxos), give a handle to those who attempt 
 without ground to calumniate the law’ (Strom. vii. 3 ; C? 
 A415). Those men only who will not put away what is 
 evil or abominable become themselves abominable, and 
 then are by Moses identified with the old inhabitants of 
 the land. ‘The graven images of their gods shall ye 
 burn with fire; thou shalt not covet the silver or gold 
 on them... neither shalt thou bring an abomination 
 into thine house, lest thou be a cursed thing (cherem) 
 like it ; but thou shalt utterly abhor it, for it is a cursed 
 thing’ (Deut. vii. 25, 26). 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 267. 
 
 THE SERVITUDES.—As the Israelites in the wilder- 
 ness were types of us, so we find allusions to the Servi- 
 tudes, showing that in the latter days perilous times 
 ‘would come and contests with evil. The final battle with 
 the Canaanites took place at Armageddon, the great 
 city or mountain fortress in the plain of Esdraelon or 
 Jezrael, near the waters of Megiddon, that is, the sources 
 and side streams of the tortuous Kishon. The place was 
 also remarkable for the victory of Gideon over the 
 Midianites, and for two great disasters, the death of Saul 
 and of Josiah. The name Barak, meaning lightning, 
 may prefigure the coming of the Son of man as lightning, 
 which lights up the earth but may also blind ; the mode 
 of Sisera’s death by a wound in the head seems to in- 
 _ dicate that the power of sin is wounded through those 
 very senses by which it entered and ruled ; or that those 
 ‘who choose it perish by their infatuation. 
 
 Woe to the land because of the plagues which follow. 
 _Multitudinous bands of Midianites—like those of Gog 
 and Magog, the description of which by Ezekiel! is 
 evidently ideal, or like the locusts which came out of the 
 Abyss, darkening the heavens—destroyed the increase 
 of the land, leaving no sustenance for Israel, and driving 
 _. them into dens of the mountains and caves and strong- 
 
 holds. So the locusts of the Apocalypse had power to 
 _ torment or chastise and prove (Gacavifew) men. Their 
 appearance was that of men with the hair of women, 
 hair which veils the head or organ of reason; they had 
 
 1 Gog and Magog were to come up from the ends of the earth, from 
 places far from God’s seat and from one another ; they were to perish on 
 the mountains of Israel, being overthrown, like Midian, by mutual 
 slaughter, or share the doom of Sodom and Egypt; their wood was to 
 Serve as fuel to Israel for seven years; and all Israel was to take seven 
 months in burying the dead. (Ez. xxxviii. xxxix.) 
 
 S 
 
258 THE STYLE. AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 iron breastplates, iron-bound desires of the soul and 
 intents of the heart ; and teeth of lions, which rend and 
 swallow but do not rightly divide their food. Of this 
 plague Joel says: ‘ Awake, ye drunkards, and weep ; and 
 howl, all ye drinkers of wine, because of the new wine 
 (the sense of the words and symbols, with which men 
 intoxicate themselves spiritually); for it is cut off from 
 your mouth. For a nation (the locusts) is come up upon 
 my land, strong, and without number, whose teeth are 
 the teeth of a lion.’ The deliverance from this plague is. 
 to be the pouring out of God’s spirit of prophecy upon 
 all flesh (Joel i., ii.). The picture seems to represent the 
 relapse of men into dark systems of symbolism, which 
 while they hide the plain meaning serve to correct or 
 discipline men. The fleece of Gideon represents Israel, 
 and the dew the Spirit (Iren. iii. 17, 3); the mode of the 
 people’s drinking water seems to show that the words of 
 Scripture must not be swallowed indiscriminately ; men 
 must break their earthen pitchers to find the light, and 
 by the sword of the Spirit the land is rid of these 
 enemies. 
 
 The next servitude of Israel was under the Ammon- 
 ites, who.were defeated by Jephthah, and the Philistines 
 of the plain, the old Canaanitish enemies of Israel, whose 
 chief arms of offence were their horses, their chariots, and 
 the -bow)\(1I-Sam. xilii5; xxxt./3.;02 Samii). ¢Zacha- 
 riah (c. ix) speaks prophetically of our Lord as coming 
 to cut off these weapons from Israel and Jerusalem. A 
 plague of horsemen is represented in the Apocalypse as. 
 following that of the locusts. The four winds bound up in 
 the river Euphrates—winds of doctrine or passion—are let 
 loose. The multitudinous horsemen who appear have red-, 
 blue-, and yellow-coloured breastplates, corresponding 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 259 
 
 Eto the fire, smoke, and brimstone which come out of their 
 
 - mouth. ‘For the power of the horses is in their mouth 
 
 and in their tails; for their tails are like unto serpents 
 (deceitful), and had heads, and with them they do hurt’ 
 (Rev. ix. 19). ‘The false prophet,’ says Fausset, ‘seems 
 to me to be intended, as Isaiah ix. 15 proves.’ His lying | 
 signs may be a perversion of the signs or symbols of 
 religion. ‘The Syrians before and the Philistines be- 
 hind,’ says this passage, ‘shall devour Israel with open 
 mouth. ... For the people turneth not unto Him that 
 _smiteth them, neither do they seek the Lord of Hosts. 
 Therefore the Lord will cut away from Israel head and 
 _ tail, palm tree and rush, in one day. The ancient and 
 honourable, he is the head, and the prophet of lies the tail,’ 
 The prophets see the land desolated by tempests of 
 passions, turned upside down by moral shakings, con-. 
 sumed by hidden fires ; fear, the pit and the snare are 
 upon its inhabitants, and its lights are confounded 
 » (1 Kings xix. 11 ; Is. xxiv.). The sword is followed by 
 the famine, and the famine by pestilence ; that is, a bitter, 
 party spirit is frequently followed by a persecuting 
 tyranny, either civil or ecclesiastical, through which arises 
 a famine of truth, men being afraid to investigate,. and 
 prevented from being taught the true meaning of their 
 religious ordinances. When this tyranny is removed, a 
 pestilence naturally ensues, a pestilence of extravagant, 
 wild, pernicious conceits arising from the grievous ignor- 
 _ ance and want of skill in interpreting what is difficult. 
 Another figure of Scripture’seems to indicate a similar 
 sequence, Three unclean spirits come out of the mouths 
 of the dragon, the wild beast, and the false prophet... The 
 dragon was either a shining scaly or a bright-coloured 
 
 animal with very large eyes, and no doubt represented 
 , Suz 
 
260 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 what Ezekiel calls the idolatry of Egypt, the abomina- 
 tion of the eyes, the worship of the created symbol 
 instead of seeking to fulfil its meaning. The wild beast 
 comes out of a sea of unruly passion to tempt men: the 
 expression is applied by Clement both to persecutors 
 and to the wild passions or fleshly temptations within 
 which seek to master us (Peed. iii. 2; C! 277; S. iv. 10; 
 vi. 18 5; C* 3715 De Divsper. 25). “The falee prophetus 
 evidently another name for perverted ideas of divine 
 truth, such as misled our first parents in paradise. Such 
 ideas may arise within us or proceed from misleading 
 teachers and systems. 
 
 THE TABERNACLE, THE FIRST TEMPLE, AND THE 
 SECOND TEMPLE, REPRESENT THREE AGES.—The 
 period of the judges was wound up by the misconduct 
 of Eli’s sons, their profanation of the tabernacle at Shiloh, 
 and the permanent removal of the Ark from it. God 
 forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh (Ps. lxxviii. 60); and, 
 when David brought back the Ark to Jerusalem, it was 
 placed within curtains, in a tabernacle, but not in the old 
 one. So when the people of Israel trusted in their 
 temple and perverted it from the purposes for which God 
 had given it to them, the word of God by Jeremiah 
 threatens to make it like Shiloh and to make their city 
 a curse to all the nations of the earth (Jer. vii. 12-14; 
 xxvi. 6). Samuel, emphatically called the prophet 
 (Acts xiii. 20), was the connecting link between the 
 period of the judges and that of the kings. With the 
 materials collected by David, ‘the beloved, Solomon, ‘the 
 peaceable,’ built a temple. So the Holy Spirit, taking 
 of the things of Jesus Christ, built up the Christian 
 Church. The mystic meaning of this history appears 
 in Ps. Ixxii. and John xvi. 13-15. But peace and an 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 261 
 
 established form of religious worship bring their usual 
 temptations. Even Solomon’s reign was not free from 
 idolatry. An angry schism followed; then the establish- 
 ment of Jeroboam’s idolatry ; and then the still more 
 abominable worship of Baal, introduced by Ahab and 
 Jezebel. The end of the age begins to appear once 
 more. Elijah was the first of a line of great prophets, 
 whose mission seems to have been to gather up the frag- 
 ments of good in the land, to call attention to the 
 weightier matters of the law, to encourage the faithful 
 amidst the calamities which befell the nation, and to pre- 
 side over the re-establishment of God’s worship in a new 
 temple and a new city. Greater than a prophet was 
 John the Baptist, who came at the close of another epoch 
 to prepare the way for a new dispensation. 
 
 THE INHERITANCE OF THE EARTH. 
 
 In the Epistle to the Hebrews it is shown that Joshua 
 did not lead Israel into the true rest of God’s people, 
 that Canaan was only a type of the inheritance or rest 
 which remains for the people of God. The whole of 
 created life, material and mental, is entered upon when 
 men use created things so as to make them exhibit truth 
 and glorify God, when they light up those things which 
 formerly were under bondage to evil. To enter Canaan 
 is to rule over the earth and its creatures properly and 
 intelligently (Bar. c. 6). The difficulties which the early 
 Christians had to encounter were analogous to those of 
 Israel, and just as the people of Israel rushed from the 
 extreme of turning back to Egypt to that of a reckless, 
 premature attempt to enter upon their inheritance, so 
 there was a tendency among early Christians, on the one 
 hand, to fall back into a magical, ascetic, or J udaistic faith, 
 
262 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 and, on the other, to make a senseless use of liberty and 
 pervert the faith. It may not be out of place to describe 
 here this task of early pe AE and the mistaken 
 tendencies it had to shun. 
 
 I. THE USE AND ABUSE OF NATURAL THINGS.— 
 In the discharge of their proper duties and calling, men’s 
 nature receives discipline and culture and development. 
 By this means, also, God’s creatures serve no longer to 
 curse, but to bless, being applied to their proper use. 
 According to Neander,! Christianity had a double task 
 to perform in this way. First, it had to pass sentence 
 upon all ungodliness and unrighteousness in the use 
 of natural things ; Christians were to have no fellowship 
 with the evil works of darkness, on account of which 
 the wrath of God comes upon the children of disobe- 
 dience, as it did upon the Canaanites ; but, by carefully 
 abstaining from them, they were to show to the dark 
 world what these things are and what is their end. 
 Secondly, Christians were not to go out of the world, 
 but to recognise whatever is pure and truly natural in 
 human life. Heathenism, however, had become so 
 closely mixed up with the civil and social life of the 
 ancient world, that, in practice, it was often a question 
 with the Christian whether he ought to withdraw him- 
 self entirely from it. Could he, for instance, undertake a 
 magisterial or a military office? Could he take part 
 in any of their public amusements? Could he possess 
 slaves? To us it is still not always clear what has 
 sprung from old corruptions or ignorance, what must be 
 avoided for the sake of others, and what is an essential 
 and proper element in human life. In the early ages of 
 Christianity, with the exception of a few, who united 
 
 } Neander’s Church History, vol. i. pp. 360-86 (Bohn). 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 263 
 
 _ deep Christian earnestness with the prudence and clear- 
 ness of knowledge, the sincerer Christians were gene- 
 rally more inclined to the extreme of stern reprobation 
 than that of a false accommodation. Rather than run the 
 risk of retaining the corruptions of heathenism, which 
 had attached to the use of natural things, they preferred 
 to cast aside much which the heathen had used in the 
 service of sin, even though it was capable of another use. 
 Christianity, as a wnole, passed through a stage of re- 
 action similar to what occurs in individuals (Neander, 
 vol. i..p. 362). In this way, many of the early converts 
 from heathenism gave up, after their baptism, great 
 part of their earthly possessions to the church fund or 
 the poor, in order to show their contempt for the earthly 
 things by which their hearts had hitherto been enslaved ; 
 they then led a quiet, retired life, supporting themselves 
 by the labour of their hands and remaining unmarried, 
 in order that, undisturbed by earthly cares, they might 
 devote themselves to prayer, study of the Scriptures, 
 holy meditations, and labouring for the Kingdom of God 
 (p. 380). It sometimes, also, happened that heathen 
 ascetics were led, in their earnest pursuit of a higher 
 life, to embrace Christianity, after which they still 
 adhered to their ascetic habits. The influence of such 
 men might easily combine with the negative, aggressive, 
 self-abnegation of the convert, so as to repress for a 
 while the positive element of appropriation, without 
 which the problem of purifying life could never attain 
 its solution. In this way Neander traces the rise of an 
 undue estimation of the value of an ascetical life of con- 
 templation and celibacy, which was carried to the ex- 
 
 treme of promising to such a life a more exalted stage 
 of future blessedness. 
 
264. THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 This false notion of opposition to the world soon 
 became a mask for an ungodly temper, which affected 
 an appearance of holiness or sought a life of ease at the 
 expense of the Church; and nature, indignant to be 
 despised, quickly exercised a fearful reaction. From the 
 praises given to the secluded life of ecclesiastics above 
 the ordinary life of Christians, another evil resulted. 
 Men were led to believe that perfection does not lie in 
 fulfilling their duties in their proper spheres and natural 
 vocations, but in the renunciation of all earthly good. 
 In this way, tradespeople and mechanics, occupied in 
 the common business of life, lost sight of the seriousness 
 and sacredness of their Christian calling; and, when 
 exhorted not to put themselves on a level with the 
 pagans in their rage for the public shows, would reply : 
 ‘We cannot all be philosophers and ascetics ; we are an 
 ignorant people ; we cannot read, we understand nothing 
 of the Scriptures; ought such rigorous demands to be 
 made from us?’ To this Clement of Alexandria replied 
 that, if they could not read, they had heard; that there 
 was one Scripture adapted to the capacity of the most 
 ignorant, and that was love ; and that even the business 
 of the world could be managed in an unworldly and 
 godly manner. Earthly property he considered as 
 materials and instruments to be used rightly and ration- 
 ally for good uses. ‘If none had the means to bestow, 
 there could be no charity. Our Saviour did not com- 
 mand us to throw away money but the love of it and 
 the cares which choke the word, To exercise self- 
 restraint is to control oneself in accordance with right 
 reason, not to indulge desires or yield to impulses which 
 are contrary to it. The man without a household 
 escapes many temptations ; but he is inferior to the man 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 265. 
 
 who, having more to disturb him, fulfils more duties and 
 truly exhibits in his family a miniature of God Himself.’ 
 
 When the Montanists attempted to impose new fasts. 
 and new laws of abstinence, the enlightened Christians. 
 of that age objected that this was to overlook the dis- 
 
 tinction between the economy of the Old Testament 
 and the New; to make laws, where, according to 
 Neander,! every one should be at liberty to act accord- 
 ing to his peculiar temperament and individual necessi- 
 
 ties. ‘How shall we conquer the enemy, asked 
 Chrysostom at a later age, ‘if those who are interested. 
 in virtue retreat to a distance from the order of battle?’ 
 
 But, on the other hand, ‘though you fast, though you sleep: 
 on the ground, though you eat ashes and mourn per-. 
 -petually, without benefiting others or giving yourselves 
 
 any concern that others are going to ruin, you cannot 
 maintain a good conscience in the sight of God. Nothing 
 
 can testify in our favour, if we have not the crowning 
 
 virtue of love.’ 
 
 II. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD AND OPPOSING 
 STRONGHOLDS.—The Canaanites of the plain had 
 chariots of iron; a race of giants also held strongholds. 
 in the land, described as being ‘in heaven’ (Deut. i. 
 28). These enemies were not subdued till the time of 
 David. When the shepherds of Israel fed themselves. 
 ~ and not the flock, when they themselves drank of ‘deep’ 
 _ waters and fouled the residue with their feet, Ezekiel 
 predicted a return of the person and times of David, who: 
 would feed the flock ; and God would cause evil beasts 
 
 __ to cease out of the land (Ez. xxxiv. 1-25). When the 
 
 Euphrates, the eastern boundary of David’s kingdom, 
 is dried up, the way of the Captain of the Lord’s host 
 
 1 Neander’s Church History, vol. i. pp. 386, 387 ; iii. 380 (abridged). 
 
266 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 is prepared. He appears in John’s vision as the Word 
 of God, the Faithful and the True, riding on a white 
 horse, while the armies of heaven follow Him riding on 
 white horses. The mighty mén or giants of the old 
 land are given as a prey to the birds that fly in mid 
 heaven ; and wild beasts and false prophets, who oppose 
 God’s laws or His truth, are ‘taken’ in their own error 
 and perish (Rev. xix.) The truth prevails against 
 strongholds of reasonings and high things which exalt 
 themselves against the knowledge of God, bringing all 
 thought (dv vonua) into captivity to the obedience of 
 Christ (2 Cor. x. 4, 5). According to Barnabas, it is by 
 knowledge that we enter into the good land of Canaan ; 
 and as man was originally earth, fashioned by a plastic 
 hand (yj mécyovaa), so the Lord makes those whom He 
 leads into this land, after a new pattern, feeding them 
 with His word and giving them power to rule by perfect- 
 ing them as heirs of the Lord’s covenant, as understand- 
 ing His parable (c. 6), 
 
 TYRE, THE MERCHANT CITY OF THE SEA, whose 
 princes were the great men of the earth (or the land), is 
 identified by Isaiah with that Canaan concerning whose 
 strongholds God had given commandment to destroy 
 them (Is. xxiii. 11). Jezebel, who introduced the cruel 
 and licentious worship of Baal in Israel, is represented 
 by St. John as a type of the Gnostics and their depths of 
 Satan (Rev. ii. 24). The cruel asceticism (1 Kings xviii. 
 28) and licentious worship of Tyre have their parallel in 
 the two extremes which characterised the early Gnostic 
 perversions. Ezekiel describes Tyre as lifted up with 
 the conceit that she was God and sat in God’s seat, as 
 fancying that she was wiser than Daniel and that no 
 secret was hid from her, and as defiling her sanctuaries 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 267 
 
 with the iniquity of her traffic. Therefore God would 
 bring a fire out of the midst of her to consume her, or 
 she would perish in those deep waters of which she 
 boasted (Ez. xxviii.). Ever since the first temptation, 
 men have emboldened themselves in their abuse of 
 ‘created things by a perverted transcendentalism. But 
 Isaiah (xxiii. 18) foresaw the time when the merchan- 
 dise and the gift of Tyre would be holy to the Lord, 
 when that which had been perverted, especially philo- 
 sophy or thought, would be for those who sit before the 
 Lord that they may eat to satiety and for a lasting 
 ‘covering, so that they shall no more be ignorant as 
 Slaves, but as friends of God, know what their Master is 
 doing (2 Cor. x. 4, 5). 
 
 In the sphere of thought as in the sphere of practical 
 life, Christianity had a double task to perform. It ad- 
 dresses itself to the understanding which God gives ; it 
 is intended to be digested by judicious reflection and 
 practised. But it would have nothing to do with the 
 transcendental fancies of a philosophy falsely so called. 
 It would not allow the claims of Montanist prophets to 
 be the medium of ecstatic revelations: but, on the other 
 hand, it rejected the philosophy of causation, which 
 traces to a difference in their natures or constitutions the 
 
 reason ‘why certain of God’s creatures sinned and 
 
 revolted from a state of submission ; and others, indeed 
 the great majority (?), persevered and still persevere in 
 subjection to Him’ (Iren. ii. 28, 7). Trains of thought 
 hhave a tendency to recur; and, although we need not 
 drink up the sea, as Irenzus said, to know that the 
 water is salt, the study of these early heresies is in- 
 -Structive. 
 
 Neander describes three tendencies which at an early 
 
268 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 age of the Christian Church’ began to leaven or adulterate- 
 the simplicity of Christianity. i. One was to turn the 
 outward elements of the faith, the symbols and offices of” 
 Christianity, into A NEW JUDAISTIC DISCIPLINE. This. 
 tendency went on increasing till it may be said to have 
 culminated in forbidding men to seek for a rational. 
 meaning of what was taught or exhibited to them. 
 
 ii. MONTANISM.—An exaggerated idea of the Chris-. 
 tian duty of resisting the world early showed itself in a 
 tendency to magnify God’s grace at the expense of 
 natural reason, or to consider human nature as so beset 
 by evil and so contrary to divine teaching that reason 
 and revelation must be in perpetual discord. This 
 heresy was named after Montanus, a native of Phrygia, 
 in which country a belief in magic was prevalent ; and 
 the Montanist prophets professed to be recipients of 
 extraordinary revelations, which they uttered in an 
 ecstatic manner. Even Tertullian adopted some of their: 
 ideas; but other leaders of Christian thought at the 
 time regarded this idea of ecstatic inspiration as. 
 borrowed from the old-world religions, contrasting the 
 frenzied ecstasies and spurious utterances of these pro- 
 phets with the spirit of soberness and clearness which is. 
 characteristic of the truth. Irenzeus (iii. 11, 9) speaks. 
 of others who admit not the gift of the Spirit, which, in 
 the latter days, has been, by the good pleasure of the: 
 Father, poured out on the human race, men and women. 
 ‘Wretched men, indeed,’ he exclaims, ‘who wish to be 
 pseudo-prophets, forsooth, but who set aside the gift of 
 prophecy from the Church.” According to Neander, 
 Montanist ideas afterwards obtained a footing within the 
 Church, when the regular organs or office bearers claimed 
 these special revelations as belonging to them. Private: 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 269 
 
 Christians ought not to look for communications of 
 knowledge apart from sober reflection and honest study ; 
 it is intended that what is revealed outwardly should be 
 ‘digested inwardly and practised. 
 
 iii, GNOSTICISM.—The Gnostics, again, claimed, by . 
 virtue of their divine nature, to possess a transcendental 
 knowledge of God; and in attempting to reconcile this 
 with Christianity, they mutilated and perverted its’ fun- 
 damental facts. According to Neander,! the Gnostics 
 agreed in holding that a world emanating out of the 
 vital development of God, a creation evolved or emitted 
 directly out of the divine essence (as spiritual seed), is 
 far exalted above any creation produced by God’s 
 plastic power and conditioned, as they supposed, by pre- 
 existent matter. They agreed in holding that the 
 immediate framer of this lower world is not the Father 
 but a Power (called the Demiurge) of a kindred nature 
 to the universe framed and governed by him ; in Judaism 
 they saw the special kingdom of this Demiurge and in 
 paganism the kingdom of his angels ; but they differed 
 in their conceptions of him. One class of them, follow- 
 ing ideas held by Philo and other philosophic Jews and 
 Neo-platonists of Alexandria, supposed that the supreme 
 God governs the world by means of angels or minister- 
 ing spirits, at the head of whom is the Demiurge 
 (Creator), whom they compared with Plato’s soul of the 
 world or mundane spirit which animates and forms the 
 world, the god who is born (yevvytés) and who represents 
 God on this lower stage of existence, not acting inde- 
 _ pendently but carrying out the supreme God’s ideas in 
 
 _ that which is beginning and temporal, creating all things 
 
 1 This account is abridged from Neander’s Church LTistory, vol, ii. pp. 
 20-33. 
 
270 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 after the pattern of ideas communicated to him by the 
 Supreme Reason. But these ideas, they imagined, 
 transcend his limited essence; he is merely their uncon- 
 scious organ, revealing higher truths than he can himself 
 understand. Thus Moses received the law from him 
 and his angels; the Old Testament, like the creation, 
 was the veiled symbol of a higher mundane system ; 
 but the Demiurge himself was unable to understand it. 
 Nor could the mass of the Israelites after the flesh rise 
 beyond the symbol to the idea symbolised. They 
 imagined the Demiurge to be the Supreme God Himself. 
 Their faith was grounded on mere authority ; and they 
 needed to be schooled and disciplined by the Demiurge 
 by means of threats, punishments, and rewards. On 
 the other hand, spiritual men rise by the lofty aspirations 
 of their own minds to a knowledge of the Supreme 
 God: they need no rewards and punishments, but love 
 Him for His own sake. The Divine Reason, the highest 
 emanation from God, appeared in the form of Christ to 
 manifest the scope and end of the whole creation and of 
 all human development. The Demiurge himself hence- 
 forth serves as a conscious organ. 
 
 The other class of the Gnostics consisted of those 
 who had formerly been opposed to Judaism as well as to 
 all popular religions. They regarded the Demiurge and 
 his angels as absolutely hostile to the Supreme God ; 
 notwithstanding their finite nature, these angels are 
 determined to establish their own independence, and 
 will tolerate no foreign rule within their realm. The 
 Demiurge is a limited and limiting being, proud, jealous, 
 revengeful ; and this character betrays itself in the Old 
 Testament, which came from him. In nature, which 
 they thought was governed by invariable and inexorable 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 27.3 
 
 laws, they believed that the God of love, revealed 
 through Christ, was not to be found ; but they saw in it 
 the plastic power of the Demiurge, endeavouring to 
 control the wild chaotic elements, which were continually 
 revolting against his control and destroying the work he 
 had begun. The Supreme God has revealed Himself in 
 this earthly creation only by certain divine seeds of. 
 spiritual life, which He has scattered among men, but 
 the germination of which the Demiurge strives to check 
 and suppress. Now this God has through His highest 
 emanation (zon) come down to this inferior world for 
 the purpose of drawing up to himself those spiritual 
 natures which are held in bondage. Thus Christianity 
 receives a welcome only from those spiritual men who 
 have known and worshipped the highest God in myste- 
 ries and secret doctrines handed down from age to age. 
 According to some modern ideas, many men are left 
 in a state of ‘blind nature,’ inasmuch as the Supreme 
 God, in His sovereignty, never purposed to open their 
 eyes or give them a capacity for being taught the truth ; 
 as the grace they receive caz only condemn not save them. 
 Others suppose that the devil ‘sets his impress’ on men 
 as first created, and speak of God’s implanting a new 
 nature in some unconscious children at their baptism, or 
 giving divine seed to some along with the word; while 
 
 _ others, who do not receive this seed, are incapable of 
 
 being taught by God’s word or elevated by His personal 
 influence. A blind unteachable nature takes the place of 
 the ‘blind Demiurge’; and the ‘hostile Demiurge’ or 
 Devil is supposed not to create men but to impress his 
 image upon them; while in some men there are seeds 
 . deposited which, being emitted from God, increase and 
 
 reach perfection in. the midst of what, by reason of this 
 
272 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 impress, is not God’s handiwork (Iren. ii. 19, 4). But in 
 Opposition to such crude theories, Irenzeus maintained 
 that ‘ men were at the outset created subject to passions ;’ 
 that this is ‘the law of the human race’ (iv. 38, 4) ; and 
 that men must overcome and ‘make progress rationally’ 
 toward the perfect or ‘with judgment make choice of 
 better things,’ since the Uncreated is alone perfect from 
 the beginning (iv. 36, 37, 38). 
 
 THE NEW HEAVENS AND THE NEW EARTH. 
 
 There is a symbolic reflection of God’s glory in our 
 present bodies and natural life which we do well to pre- 
 serve as pure and entire as possible; but if, through 
 inobservance or negligence, it has been already marred, 
 we may still gather up the fragments, so as to show 
 forth in this way the Creator’s glory. It will no doubt 
 be difficult work to resist evil habits; but man has 
 always a certain power over himself. There is a possi- 
 bility of making them occasions of self-discipline. The 
 reign of righteousness and truth upon earth is progressive. 
 There must in the very nature of things be temptations, 
 otherwise. man would have no virtue ; and these tempta- 
 tions serve to separate the worthless. But the tone and 
 manners of society may become more and more 
 improved. ‘There must also be heresies among you, 
 said Paul, ‘that they who are approved may be made 
 manifest among you’ (I Cor. xi. 19); but the truths of 
 religion, like the truths of science, may become better 
 and better understood ; and men may have less difficulty 
 in seeing what is ‘the end of the whole matter’: to 
 follow the light, to strive to copy the divine Ideal, to fear 
 God and keep His commandments. But what men 
 
THE ACQUISITION OF THE INHERITANCE. 273 
 
 receive in their present state is but the foretaste, the 
 first-fruits, the earnest, indicating what ¢hey shall have 
 who are thought worthy to attain to the resurrection from 
 the dead. It is not the world that passes away, said 
 Irenzeus, but the fashion or form of it; there shall be a 
 new heaven and a new earth. We know not in what 
 way man, in. his next state, is connected with material 
 existence, but Christianity declares the fact in its doctrine 
 of the resurrection of the body. ‘They who come to 
 these things shall see, said our Lord to the traitor Judas, 
 when he did not give credit to our Lord’s figurative de- 
 scription of them, and asked how they could be so abun 
 dantly wrought.! In their present state, men see a veiled 
 symbolism, an enigmatical reflection ; but in the next state 
 they shall know fully, even as also they were known (1 
 Cor. xiii. 12); they shall be like the Lord, as He put on 
 _ and knew humanity ; they shall make progress among 
 
 __ things which actually exist, the fashion of the body of 
 humiliation being changed. God the F ather, who made 
 
 the earth and promised its inheritance to the fathers, 
 manifests Himself in the sons of God and by all things. 
 For there is one Son, who accomplished the Father’s will ; 
 and one race of mankind, in which the mysteries of God 
 are accomplished ; so that the First-Born, the Word, may 
 _ descend upon His work ( jfactura) and be received 
 _ (capiatur) by it ; and that His work, again, may receive 
 _ (capiat) the Word and ascend unto Him, passing beyond 
 | (supergrediens) the angels, and be made after the image 
 -and likeness of God (Iren. v. 36). 
 
 * This account was given by Papias, ‘the hearer of John and the com- 
 panion of Polycarp.’ It has been preserved by Irenzeus (v. 33, 4); the 
 original work of Papias, compiled in five books, is lost. Eusebius thinks that 
 
 ~ he was a hearer, not of John the Apostle, but of John the Presbyter, another 
 disciple of the Lord. 
 
274 THE. STYLE, AND’ SPIRIT. OF) PROPHECY, 
 
 CHAPTERS; 
 
 THINGS OF SENSE ALIENATED FROM TRUTH: 
 
 Zion and Babylon. 
 
 ‘THE way of truth is one,’ said Clement of Alexandria, 
 ‘but into it, as into a never-failing river, streams flow in 
 all sides... fountains gush from the earth itself’ 
 (S. i. 5). The two veils of the temple were variegated 
 with blue, purple, scarlet, and white linen ; and this sug- 
 gests, he says, that the nature of the elements contained 
 the revelation of God; for the purple is from water (from 
 a shell-fish of the Mediterranean Sea), linen is from the 
 earth, and blue (hyacinth), being dusky, is like air, as 
 scarlet is like fire. The outer veil, the barrier of popular 
 want of faith or insight, was stretched in front of five 
 pillars. So, in. a mystical way, the five loaves were 
 broken by the Saviour and fill the crowd of listeners, for 
 great is the crowd of those who keep to the things of sense 
 (rots aicOnrois), as if they were the sole existing things. 
 Cast your eyes around, said Plato, and see that, none 
 of the uninitiated are present. Such are they that think 
 that nothing exists but what they can hold tight with 
 their hands, and do not admit that active powers and 
 productive causes (mpd&eus Kal yevéoers) and the invisible 
 are to be ranked as existing things (é ovolas pépet). 
 Such are they who keep by the five senses ; but the 
 knowledge of God is inaccessible to the ears and organs 
 of this kind of people. Hence the Son is said to be the 
 Revealer of the Father’s face, being the Revealer of the 
 
THINGS OF SENSE ALIENATED FROM TRUTH. 275 
 
 _ Father’s character to the five senses, by clothing Him- 
 _ self with flesh. But if we live by the spirit let us also 
 walk by the spirit (by the truth hidden in the outward 
 sign), not by sight. Within this curtain, then, is concealed 
 the sacerdotal service. The inner veil, again, is sus- 
 pended on four pillars, the sign of the four ancient 
 _ covenants. As the high-priest put off his ordinary — 
 ~ robe, which is the symbol of the world of sense, washed — 
 himself and put on a holy-of-holies tunic when about to 
 _ enter into the inner shrine, so the enlightened Christian, 
 distinguishing the objects of thought from the objects of 
 sense, cleansing himself from the things here below but 
 not in water, being quite purified in heart by the in- 
 _telligible Word and quite sanctified in speech and life, 
 having put on the bright array of glory and become a 
 son and friend, is replenished with insatiable contempla- 
 tion.’ <A still more intimate knowledge or repose of 
 " spirit is indicated by the interior of the ark, vedled by its 
 _ caporeth or mercy-seat ; and the inaccessible height of 
 the Ineffable is indicated by the mystic name of four 
 letters inscribed aloft on the high-priest’s mitre. The 
 _ Saviour ascended through sufferings above every name 
 (Phil. ii. 9), above every manifestation to sense or thought, 
 so that He, the Framer and Archetype of all, is above all 
 this world. He exhibits the man who, distinguishing 
 the things of intellect from those of sense, purified in 
 heart and really sanctified in word and life, enters the 
 _Holiest (S. v. 6). ‘Many are the stakes and ditches, 
 which impede us, and the pits of wrath and anger, which 
 _ must be overleaped, and a whole array of crafty machina- 
 tions, which we must escape if we would look deeply 
 into the knowledge of God no longer through a mirror’ 
 (0. iv. 3). 
 
 C2 
 
276 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 In the proper discharge of common things, whether 
 we eat or drink or whatsoever we do, we may exhibit 
 God’s glory and truth. But, on the other hand, we may 
 idolise the things of sense, whether the symbols of life © 
 or of religion, so as to render them senseless or pervert 
 them into an abomination. The fruits of the earth are 
 God’s creatures; men also are His workmanship, that — 
 the image of God might shine forth in them; but men — 
 cannot lawfully alienate what belongs to God’s house- 
 hold, by making it subject to another master, for that 
 which is alienated from its proper service or purpose is 
 deprived of the truth it had as a member of God’s house- 
 hold (Cl. Exh. 10; C! 94). The grass or flower of the 
 field is very beautiful so long as it is bedewed with God’s 
 grace and truth ; though cut down, we, if we are that 
 grass, will spring up again. ‘But the hay figuratively 
 designates the disorderly crowd (yvdatos dyNos), such as 
 the rich man of the parable, attached to ephemeral 
 pleasure, flourishing for a little, loving ornament, loving 
 praise, and being everything but truth-loving, good for 
 nothing but to be burned with fire”! And so Isaiah in 
 speaking of this flesh or grass pronounces the doom 
 of the nations who turn away to stocks and stones and _ 
 do not repent. ‘They are counted,’ he says, ‘as chaff-— 
 dust and as a drop from the bucket’ (xl. 15), ‘use-— 
 less superfluities,’ adds Clement, ‘cast away from the 
 body.’ ? 
 
 In the language of prophecy, all those natural or sen- ; 
 suous manifestations are said to become meretricious, 
 when they are turned away from their proper office, and, 
 instead of exhibiting God’s glory and truth, serve as an 
 occasion of stumbling by confounding right and wrong, 
 
 1 els oddéy GAA’H els bwéxkavua evOeTos mupds (Ped. ii. 11 ; C) 257). 
 
 2 Tlepiccol eis cwrnplay of amoppimrduevot TOD TwpaTos (S. Vi. 14). 
 
THINGS OF SENSE ALIENATED FROM TRUTH. 277 
 
 truth and falsehood. Thus the faithful city may become 
 an harlot ; the very affianced lady, once a Church, may 
 _ become a mother of abominations; the human body 
 may be joined to a different energy, the spirit which 
 works in the children of disobedience, and not to that 
 spirit or mind which was in Christ. Even now, said St. 
 John, there are many Antichrists ; wherever there is a. 
 man or a system, in which some spirit contrary to the 
 Lord’s has become the energy or ruling principle, there 
 we have a man of sin, a system of error, a temple of 
 Antichrist. There is much in St. John’s description of 
 the mystic Babylon (Rev. xviii.) which reminds us of the 
 preacher’s description of an effete old man, but more that 
 reminds us of the Temple worship, of its fat and splendid 
 things, the show of its peace-offerings, the harvest (of the 
 land) which its soul lusted after, its music, its lights, &c. 
 The glory had departed. But might not this occur again 
 in the history of the Church? It would be altogether 
 inconsistent with God’s former dealings if He did not 
 allow even this. But there are many Antichrists.! 
 
 1 ¢JTIn Antichrist, when he comes,’ said Irenzus, ‘a recapitulation is 
 made of all sorts of iniquity and every deceit, in order that all apostate 
 power flowing into and being shut up in him may be sent into the furnace 
 of fire. Fittingly, therefore, shall his name possess the number 666, since 
 he sums up in his own person all the commixture of wickedness which 
 took place previous to the Deluge ; for Noah was 600 years old when the 
 deluge came by reason of that infamous generation which lived in his 
 times. And Antichrist also sums up every error of devised idols since 
 the Flood, together with the slaying of the prophets and the burning of 
 the just. For that image which was set up by Nebuchadnezzar had 
 indeed a height of sixty cubits, while the breadth was six cubits, on ac- 
 count of which Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, when they did not worship 
 it, were cast into a furnace of fire, pointing out prophetically, by what 
 happened to them, the wrath against the righteous, which should arise 
 ~ towards the end. For that image, taken as a whole, was a prefiguring of 
 this man’s coming, decreeing that he should undoubtedly himself be 
 worshipped by all men. Thus then the six hundred years of Noah and 
 
278 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 The Earth and the Land (ze. of Israel) are in Hebrew 
 the same word. From both gush forth streams of truth ; 
 both are rich in parabolic beauties and good things 
 which may sustain and fortify life (Deut. viii. 7; S. i. 5). 
 But Israel was warned not to become intoxicated with 
 its richness, not to wax fat and kick. In different pas- 
 sages of -the prophets. (Is. i.:2; Jers*xxii. 29,30; Mic@ 
 i. 2) the earth or land is called upon to give ear, that is, 
 says Clement, to give understanding. The man who 
 contemplates divine things intelligently (gnostically), 
 being a true Israelite, is called ‘heaven, while he who 
 has made ignorance and hardness of heart his choice is 
 called earth; and fleshly things are the portion of those 
 who cling to the things of sense.! But enlightened men, 
 who imitate God as far as possible, are poetically called 
 godlike and gods, and are said to have counsels like the 
 gods. Euripides, for instance, speaks of going aloft to 
 hold converse with Jupiter; but I, says Clement, will 
 pray the spirit of Christ to wing me to the new Jeru- 
 salem (Strom. iv. 26). It is a leading principle with 
 Clement that men are sealed or stamped with a nature 
 in conformity with the objects of their choice, and the 
 Scripture, he says, calls those who are senseless and dis- 
 obedient ‘ earth,’ while those who seek out the truth and 
 
 the number of the cubits of the image do indicate the number of the 
 name of that man in whom is concentrated all the apostasy and un- 
 righteousness and false prophecy and deception of six thousand years; — 
 for which thing’s sake a deluge of fire shall also come’ (Iren. v. 29, 2). 
 The thrice-repeated six, he goes on to say, indicates the summing up of — 
 his whole apostasy, that it was the consummation of that which was 
 in the beginning, in the intermediate time, and in the end. The number 
 six is a mystic number. The Adam who is of the earth, earthy, was 
 formed on the sixth day. Daniel ‘points out the time when his tyranny 
 shall last . . half the (mystic) week, three years and a half’ (Iren. v. 25, 5). 
 1 Ta capkixd Tois mpocavexouat Tots aigOnTots amoveluas. 
 
THINGS OF SENSE ALIENATED FROM TRUTH. 279 
 
 obey it are called ‘heavenly’ or ‘spiritual.’ Sin, how- 
 ever, does not, he says, lie in any uncleanness of natural 
 - things, but in an inordinate desire of them, or in an ex- 
 cessive, or perverted, or inexpedient use of them. 
 In the second and third books of his Pedagogus, 
 
 Clement gives many wise and elevating precepts to guide 
 the convert from the heathenism of life as well as of 
 worship. It is not enough, he says, to have abandoned . 
 the external worship of heathen gods ; the Christian con- 
 vert must lay aside the vices of the heathen, which are 
 also idolatrous. There is a significance in human gar- 
 ments and ornaments ; but he calls the love of finery or 
 of mundane ornaments (:Aococpia), idolatry ; and he, 
 praises the practice of the ancient Lacedemonians, who 
 interdicted their women from this finery. Those, there- 
 fore, he says, who are devoted to the image of the beau- 
 tiful, that is, to the love of ornament, not to the love 
 of the beautiful itself, practise idolatry again under a 
 specious name, interpreting as ina dream the nature of 
 the beautiful, by appearance and not by knowledge 
 (Ped. ii. 10; C! 257). It was their women’s ornaments 
 and their gold that the ancient Hebrews cast into the 
 form of an- ox, paying it idolatrous worship. Putting 
 aside these baubles, then, let them (the converts) not take 
 part in this meretricious display of beauty, which is to 
 be classed with the sophistical tempter who deceived 
 Eve (C! 271). Our Lord exhibited not that beauty 
 which is visible to the eye (Is. liii. 2, 3), but, in regard to 
 the soul, the beauty of beneficence, and, in regard to the 
 body or the flesh, the beauty of incorruptibility or im- 
 mortality. This, then, is the true beauty in man. Those 
 women who beautify the outside, and are withered up in 
 the secret depths of the heart, are like the Egyptian 
 
280 THE’ STYLE AND .SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 temples, with their porticoes and vestibules carefully 
 constructed, and groves and sacred fields adjoining ; the 
 walls gleam with foreign stones and artistic paintings. 
 without a flaw ; the temples shine with gold, silver, amber,. 
 and parti-coloured pearls from India and Ethiopia ; and 
 the shrines are veiled with gold-embroidered hangings. 
 But if you enter the innermost place of the inclosure, 
 and any ministering priest, looking grave and singing a. 
 pean in the Egyptian tongue, remove a little of the veil 
 to show the god, he will give you a hearty laugh at the 
 object of worship. For the Deity you have earnestly 
 sought will not be found within, but a cat, a crocodile, or 
 a serpent of the country or some such beast, worthy of a 
 den, a hole, or the dirt, rolling on a purple couch. And 
 if one were to withdraw the veil of gaudy personal orna- 
 ments, one would be disgusted to find, not the image of 
 God in the soul, but the true wild beast (Ped. iii. 2).. 
 In this rage for finery and for gold Clement sees the 
 most insatiable of all vices. Clement also sees a sym- 
 bolism in eating and drinking; he requires men to be 
 moderate in this respect, not to be ruled by the belly- 
 demon (xovrtodaipwyv), the worst and most abandoned of | 
 demons. Indulgence in eating is not the regimen of a 
 Christian, for the table of truth is far from lascivious. 
 dainties. It is an admirable thing to raise our eyes aloft. 
 to what is true, to depend on that divine food above, to: 
 satiate ourselves with the exhaustless contemplation of 
 that which truly exists, and so ¢aste of the only sure 
 and pure delight. But it is totally irrational and not 
 human for those who are of the earth to feed themselves: 
 up for death, burying all the good of existence in a life 
 that will by-and-by come to an end, shaming themselves | 
 by excessive or indecorous eating. Men who bury their 
 
THINGS OF SENSE ALIENATED FROM TRUTH. 281 
 
 minds in their bellies are like that fish called ‘ass,’ which, 
 according to Aristotle, has its heart in its stomach. But 
 
 in the use of meats, moderation or the middle course is. 
 good ; extremes are dangerous. Herbs are not love; it 
 is not the sort of meat that entereth into a man that: 
 - defileth him, but the vain opinion of uncleanness does 
 (Ped. ii. 1). With reason, again, the apostle enjoins, 
 - Be not drunk with wine, wherein is dissolute excess (ac@-_ 
 ria), intimating that drunkenness tends to dzssolution, not 
 to salvation (dcworov). If He (our Lord) made water 
 into wine at the marriage, He did not thereby give per- 
 mission to get drunk, but He vivified the watery element 
 of thought (rd dSapéis Tod Ppovijaros), mixing the old 
 law with the new word, supplying to the son of Adam, 
 who is a worker or doer, and to piety everywhere the 
 drink of the vine of truth. The Scriptures, therefore, 
 have named wine the mystic symbol of the sacred blood 
 (Ped. ii. 2). Clement approves of what he calls sober 
 cups of friendship or feasting for rational enjoyment ; 
 but he is altogether opposed to that indecorous eagerness 
 to drink which tends to intoxication. ‘Do not haste to 
 mischief, my friend, your drink is not being taken from 
 you. Of other abominations of heathen worship and 
 
 life it is a shame, as St. Paul said, even tospeak. Such, 
 
 for instance, were the worship of Belus and Beltis at 
 
 Babylon (Her. 191, 199; Rawl. Anc. Mon. iil. 30, cap 
 of Baal-peor (Num. xxv.), of the Syrian goddess and of 
 some of the festivals of Bacchus and Aphrodite at Athens 
 and Corinth. Irenzus (i. 6) gives us an idea how in the 
 minds of the Gnostics the most wonderful of God’s works 
 of nature, which may well be significant of truth, might 
 be perverted into falsehoods or made the excuse of the 
 ~ most abominable practices. 
 
282 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 THE CITY AND ITS COMMERCE.—The busy city, 
 with its mutual interchange of industries and ideas, fur- 
 nished the prophets with other analogies. Such a com- 
 merce, if honestly conducted, is beneficial. ‘As iron 
 sharpeneth iron, so doth the countenance of a man his 
 friend. Buta spirit of commercial dishonesty, or what 
 Bacon calls the idolatry of the market-place, that is, 
 the worship of words, may turn this good into an evil. 
 In speaking of the New Jerusalem, Clement quotes the 
 opinion of the Stoics that ‘heaven is rightfully called a 
 city, and that cities upon earth fall short of this ideal. 
 For a city is a place of serious activity (covéaiov), 
 and its people form a certain decorous organised body 
 (aorelov TL ovoTnpa), a multitude of men regulated by 
 law, as the Church is, by the word, a city on earth, im- 
 pregnable, free from tyranny, the will of God on earth as 
 it isin heaven. Images of this city the poets construct 
 in their writings ; and Plato’s city was, we know, placed 
 asa pattern in heaven.’ (S. iv: 26; C? 219); 
 
 In speaking of the public amusements of cities, 
 Clement says that the cities which make a serious busi- 
 ness of pastimes are not wise, and that there is no real 
 diversion or relaxation of mind to be got by a senseless 
 expenditure of money or by frivolities. ‘But it is said, 
 “We do not all philosophise.” Do we then not all 
 follow after life? How, pray, dost thou love God and 
 thy neighbour, if thou dost not philosophise? It is said, 
 “T have not learned letters” ; but thou canst not excuse 
 thyself in regard to hearing, for it is taught. And faith 
 belongs to those who are wise according to God; its 
 handbook, at once fit for common men (éds@reKov) and 
 divine, is called love, a spiritual book. You are at 
 liberty to hear divine wisdom and also to practise it in 
 civil life (aodutevecOar); you are not hindered from 
 
THINGS OF SENSE ALIENATED FROM TRUTH, 283 
 
 taking part in the world’s business with becoming pro- 
 priety (kocpiws) according to God. Let not the buyer 
 or the seller name two prices, but naming a single price 
 and studying to speak the truth, if he gets not his price, 
 he gets the truth and is enriched in rectitude of disposi- 
 tion. In this way let market people and petty traders 
 (or tavern-keepers, xdmndov) philosophise. But those 
 who act contrary to these things—the avaricious, the 
 liars, the hypocrites, those who make merchandise of the 
 truth—the Lord cast out of His Father’s court, not 
 willing that the holy house of God should be the house 
 of unrighteous traffic either in words or in material 
 things’ (Ped. iii. 11 ; C! 328). 
 
 The prophets rebuked the perversions of God’s words, 
 and lamented the evils arising from ‘ misunderstood and 
 misapplied precepts.” The twenty-eighth and seven 
 following chapters of Isaiah, forming, as is agreed, a con- 
 tinuous prophecy, describe this meaningless use of lan- 
 guage as an intoxication, an unknown speech, a judgment 
 whereby men are snared, as the removing of men’s 
 teachers into a corner. The persecuting spirit of Ariel, 
 the lion-city where David dwelt, brings a tempest of 
 evils with earthquake and fire. There is a dream of 
 eating but no reality in it,a dream of drinking but the 
 ~ soul awakes faint and unsatisfied. ‘And the vision of 
 all is become unto you as the words of a book that is 
 _ .sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, 
 Read this I pray thee, and he saith, I cannot, for it is 
 sealed. And the book is delivered unto him that is not 
 learned, saying, Read this I pray thee, and he saith, I 
 am not learned’ (Is. xxix.). Jeremiah speaks of the 
 whole city, under such circumstances, fleeing for the 
 noise into thickets and into clefts. It was not the 
 
 ignorant multitude who were alone to blame ; the great 
 
284 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 men had also dealt treacherously against God, saying 
 that evil results would not come from evil doings. God 
 would, therefore, make His word in their mouth to be 
 fire and the people wood, so that the fire would devour 
 them (Jer. v.). The prophets had given forth. their false 
 visions as burdens of the Lord. Hence Jeremiah’s mes- 
 sage: ‘The burden of the Lord shall ye mention no: — 
 more, for every man’s word shall be his burden ; for ye 
 have perverted the words of the Lord of Hosts, our God.. 
 But because ye say, The burden of the Lord, and I have 
 sent unto you saying, Ye shall not say, The burden of | 
 the Lord, therefore behold I, even I, will utterly forget 
 (take up) you and will cast you and the city which I gave 
 you and your fathers forth from before my face. And I 
 will bring an eternal reproach upon you and an eternal 
 shame which shall not be forgotten’ (Jer. xxiii). The 
 daughter of Zion becomes thus repudiated from God.. 
 ‘How hath the Lord covered the daughter of Zion with 
 a cloud in His anger and cast down from heaven to earth 
 the beauty of Israel. Her king and her princes are: 
 among the heathen; there is no law; her prophets also. 
 find no vision from the Lord... . Thy breach is great 
 as a sea, who can heal thee? Thy prophets have seen 
 (vain) falsehoods and (perverse) deceits for thee ; and 
 they have not discovered thine iniquity, to turn away 
 thy captivity ; but have seen for thee false burdens and 
 causes of expulsion’ (Lam. ii. 1-14). The prophets,. 
 therefore, exhort God’s people to depart out of the midst 
 of such a Babylonish confusion of good and evil, such 
 blasphemous perversions of first principles, such iniquitous. 
 fellowships with the unfruitful works of darkness (Comp. 
 Num. xvi. 5, 26 with 2 Tim. ii. 19; 1 Cor. xv. 33 ; and. 
 Is. lii. 11; Jer. li. 6,9, 45 with 2 Cor. vi. 17, Rev. XViil. 4)... 
 
285 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE NEW TEMPLE: THE BODY AND THE CHURCH, 
 
 WHEN the proclamation of ‘Cyrus directed the Temple 
 to be rebuilt, many of the Jews under Zerubbabel 
 
 returned to their own country and began the work of 
 
 reconstruction. In the time of Smerdis the work was 
 stopped at the instance of the Samaritans; but sixteen 
 years after their return the prophets Haggai and 
 Zechariah encouraged the people to recommence the 
 work. When the old people compared its diminutive- 
 ness with the grandeur of the old Temple, the prophets 
 encouraged the people by this very circumstance. It is 
 not the visible show but the spirit of religious service 
 which constitutes its grandeur. ‘Yet once more, it is a 
 little while, and I will shake the heavens and the earth ° 
 and the sea,and the dry land; and I will shake all 
 nations and the desire of all nations shall come; and 
 I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord of Hosts’ 
 (Haggaiii. 6, 7). The Jewish temple was to be removed 
 to make way for the manifestation of the sons of God. 
 Jesus Christ was the first among many brethren. When 
 He was on earth He was the temple, but when the temple 
 of His body was destroyed, He was able to raise 
 up another temple, present wherever there are good 
 men, made in His image and likeness (John xi. 19-21). 
 
286 THE: STYLE *AND -SPIRITOF SPROPHCY. 
 
 A man who is a true Christian is a temple of the Holy 
 Ghost (1 Cor. iii, 16), and the organised society of 
 Christian men is alsothe temple. ‘The temple of God, 
 said Clement of Alexandria, ‘is that which is great as 
 the Church, or that which is small as the man who pre- 
 serves the seed of Abraham~,(S. vii..135,G?.467). «Ace 
 cording to Hengstenberg, the above passage of Haggai 
 is referred to not only in Heb. xii. 26-29, but also by 
 St. Peter (2 Pet. iii.), when he predicts the dissolution by 
 fire of the heavens and earth, which then were rudimen- 
 tary elements, under which Jews or Christianssaw through 
 a mirror enigmatically and were trained. It is easy to 
 understand how a man’s body, the small temple, is dis- 
 ~ solved, as it were, by the fire of death; but did St. Peter 
 mean that there might be a dissolution of those ecclesi- 
 astical elements under which in its infancy the Church 
 seems to have been at first placed ? 
 
 THE THREE ORDERS OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY 
 ‘are bound, said Ignatius, ‘to avoid all grounds of 
 accusation as they would fire’ (Tral. c. 2). ‘The 
 apostles, says Irenzeus (iii. 3, 1), ‘wished those to be 
 perfect and blameless in all things whom also they were 
 leaving as their successors, delivering over to them their 
 own place of government (magzsteriz) ; which men, if 
 they dealt (or acted) correctly (emendate), would be a 
 great advantage (w/zlétas), but if they fell away (/apszs) 
 the direst calamity.’ It appears from these two passages. 
 that both Ignatius and Irenzus, the two fathers sup- 
 posed to be most favourable to these orders, nevertheless 
 do testify that there might be such a falling away or 
 lapse, and that some fiery ordeal of the latter days 
 awaited them. ‘Know ye not,’ said St. Paul, ‘that ye 
 shall judge angels,’ meaning, as is supposed, the angels 
 
THE NEW TEMPLE: THE BODY AND THE CHURCH. 287 
 
 or presidents of the Churches, ‘how much more things 
 that pertain to this life, or secular affairs (1 Cor. vi. 3). 
 A: case occurred at Philippi of a lapsed presbyter called 
 Valens, and, in a letter which Polycarp wrote to the 
 Philippians, he reminded them that the saints would 
 judge the world, referring to this passage of St. Paul, 
 but he advised them to be moderate in this matter and 
 restore such men, because this would tend to edify them- 
 selves and save their whole body (c. 11). A very dif- 
 ferent case occurred about the close of the first century, 
 at Corinth, where the lay members were endeavouring 
 - to expel their presbyters apparently for doing their duty 
 - in maintaining discipline or sound teaching. Clement of 
 Rome wrote to remonstrate against this proceeding. 
 ‘The apostles,’ he says, ‘knowing that there would be a 
 strife about the oversight (the episcopate), appointed 
 their first converts, having first tested them in the spirit, 
 to be bishops and deacons of those who should after- 
 wards believe . . . and afterwards directed that when 
 these should fall asleep, other approved men should 
 succeed them in their ministry. We are of opinion, 
 - therefore, that those appointed by them or afterwards by 
 other eminent men, wz2zh the consent of the whole Church, 
 who have blamelessly served the flock of Christ in a 
 humble, peaceable, and disinterested spirit, and have for a 
 long time possessed the good opinion of all, cannot be 
 justly dismissed from their ministry. For our blame 
 ~ will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate (over- 
 sight) those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled 
 their duties. Blessed are those presbyters who, having 
 finished their course before (z.e. being now dead), have 
 obtained a fruitful and perfect dissolution, for they fear 
 not lest any one should remove them from the place 
 
288 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 appointed to them’ (c. 44, 45). Clement exhorts Chris- 
 tians to learn to be subject and submit to correction 
 (c. 57), and dwells upon the order in God’s works of 
 nature and in the Mosaic economy. His epistle thus 
 cautions Christian laymen not to rebel against their 
 teachers because they tell them unpalatable truths or 
 exercise a salutary discipline. But all this presupposes 
 that the teachers or rulers have not misunderstood or 
 neglected the duties of their offices. Clement, however, 
 exhorts all Christians to mutual love and forbearance. 
 Ignatius and Clement of Alexandria saw in these 
 grades of the Christian Ministry a veiled symbolism of 
 something unseen or future; but, if they are so, then, 
 like all other sensuous emblems of the truth, these 
 ministries must rightly exhibit the truth, otherwise they 
 ‘become a cherem or thing set apart for destruction, as 
 pérverting truth into falsehood. Ignatius exhorts the 
 Magnesians (c. 6) and the Trallians (c. 2, 3) to reverence 
 the deacons as (the appointment of) Jesus Christ, of 
 whose place they are the keepers (for He came to mini- 
 ster, and the word deacon means minister), even as the 
 bishop is the representative of the Father of all (comp. 
 Eph. iii. 15), and the presbyters are the sanhedrim of God 
 and the assembly of the apostles ; none was to look upon 
 his neighbour after a fleshly manner, but each was to love 
 his neighbour in Jesus Christ (looking upon him asa 
 member of Christ’s mystical body). They were to be 
 united with their bishop and those who ruled over them 
 as a type and manifestation of their immortality. Isg- 
 natius, however, claims no divine right for bishops to 
 govern wrong, nor any exclusive right in the presbyters 
 to teach. In his epistle to the Ephesians he bids them 
 act in concert and harmony with the will of the bishop, 
 
THE NEW TEMPLE: THE BODY AND THE CHURCH. 289 
 
 who rules over them according to God (rod cata Oeod 
 qrou“avovTos vas, c. 4, larger recension). He says that 
 they are initiated in the mystery of the Gospel with St. 
 Paul (c. 12), and that while Christians are known more 
 by their practice than by their profession, while it is 
 better to be silent and to be a Christian than to talk and 
 not be one, yet it is good to teach, if he who speaks also 
 acts. For he who shall both do and teach others shall - 
 be called great in the kingdom of heaven (c. 14, 15). 
 Silence is often a proof of wisdom (c. 6). The spirit of 
 deceit preaches his own things arrogantly. He is lying, 
 fraudulent, soothing, flattering, rhapsodical, trifling, dis- 
 _cordant, verbose, sordid, and timorous (c. 9). Every one 
 who has received from God'the power of distinguishing, 
 and yet follows an unskilful shepherd, and has received 
 _.afalse appearance of truth for the truth, shall be punished 
 (c. 16). The first thing, therefore, is to practise Chris- 
 tianity, which enjoins obedience to those who rule but 
 not blind obedience, and respect towards those who 
 _ teach, but not a senseless assent to everything that is said. 
 If a man has ability to teach, and uses his ability, he is 
 great in the kingdom of heaven, whether he be a clergy- 
 man or a layman. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, in describing the perfection 
 of the Christian who is enlightened, who not only ab- 
 stains from evil but excels in well-doing, who is good | 
 according to knowledge (as God, in whose image he is 
 made, knows all), refers to the glory manifested on the 
 face of Moses from his righteous conduct and his unin- 
 terrupted intercourse with God. ‘Soalsoadivine power 
 of goodness clings fo the righteous soul (characterising 
 or marking also the body, which Clement calls the face 
 of the soul), in the exercise of supervision, prophecy, and 
 U 
 
— 
 
 290 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 managing power’! ‘Those then who have exercised 
 
 themselves in the Lord’s commandments, and lived per- 
 
 fectly and intelligently (gnostically) according to the 
 
 Gospel, may be enrolled in the chosen body of the 
 
 apostles. Such a one is in reality a presbyter of the 
 Church and a true deacon of the will of God, if he do 
 and teach what is the Lord’s; not being ordained by 
 
 men nor regarded as righteous, because he is a presbyter, 
 but enrolled in the presbyterate because he is righteous. 
 And, although here upon earth he be not honoured with 
 
 the chief seat, he will sit down on the four-and-twenty 
 
 thrones judging the people, as John says in the Apoca- 
 
 lypse. . .. The chosen of the chosen are those who by 
 
 reason of perfect knowledge are the flower of the Church 
 
 itself, honoured with the most august glory... . Since, 
 according to my opinion, the grades (honoured positions) 
 
 here in the Church of bishops, presbyters or priests, and 
 
 deacons are imitations of angelic glory, and hold (repre- 
 
 sentatively) that economy or dispensation” which the 
 
 Scriptures say awaits those who, following the footsteps 
 
 of the apostles, have lived in perfection of righteousness, 
 according to the Gospel. For those taken up in the clouds, 
 
 the apostle writes (figuratively, no doubt), will first mini- 
 
 ster as deacons, then be classed in the presbyterate ac- 
 
 cording to the gradation of glory, for glory differs from 
 
 glory, until they come to the perfect man.’ 
 
 LIVING STONES.—The body or flesh is described as. 
 the pearly wall of the city. ‘Wretched creatures,’ said 
 Clement, ‘ bestow the greatest pains on pearls got from 
 
 1 Kard te emickoTyy Kard Te Thy mpopyteiay Kara TE THY SiorenTiKhy 
 evepyeiav.—S. vi. 12 ; C? 364. 
 
 2 ey éyradda Kata thy éexkAnolay mpoxoTal émikdTwy mpeaBuTépwr, 
 
 Siaxdvev piuhwara oluar dyyeAris Sdins KaKelvns THs oikovoplas TuyxXdvoucty, 
 hy dveuévely, K.T.A.—o. Vi. 13. 
 
THE NEW.TEMPLE: THE BODY AND THE CHURCH. 2QI 
 
 oysters, when they might adorn themselves with the tran- 
 sparent word of God, by which ¢he flesh, being regenerated 
 by water, becomes precious. We have heard that the Je- 
 tusalem above is walled with precious stones; and we 
 allow that the twelve gates of the celestial city, by being 
 - made like precious stones, indicate the transparent grace 
 of the apostolic voice. For the colours are laid on in 
 precious stones, and these colours are precious, while the 
 other parts remain of earthy material. With these, by 
 a meet symbolism, the city of the saints, which is spiritu- 
 ally built, is walled. By that brilliancy of stones, there- 
 fore, is meant that brilliancy of spirit, their inner being’s 
 (THs oveias) purity and sanctity (Ped. ii. 13; C! 267). 
 THE HOLY PLACES MEASURED.—Zechariah’s vision 
 of the man with the measuring line going to measure 
 Jerusalem is similar to, and perhaps borrowed from, 
 _ Ezekiel’s vision of a man with a line of flax in his hand 
 and a measuring reed, with which the Temple and city 
 
 t : of God are measured in detail. Ezekiel’s description 
 
 shows that we must interpret this measurement ideally. 
 The Temple as literally measured would be larger than 
 all the earthly Jerusalem ; and the city itself would be 
 nearly as large as the whole of Judea west of the Jordan, 
 half of the tribes being located south of the city. The 
 _ name of the city was to be Jehovah Shammah, the Lord 
 ts there. A stream of water was to issue from the temple 
 and flow eastward into the Dead Sea, increasing in a 
 most wonderful manner in depth and rapidity, healing 
 the waters of the sea and making all creatures live (Ez. 
 xl.—xlviii. ; Zech. ii.). 
 St. John, who may be said to have summed up in his 
 Apocalypse the visions of the ancient Hebrew prophets, 
 
 receives a reed like to a rod, and one says to him: ‘ Rise 
 U 2 
 
292 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 and measure the sanctuary (vads, the Holy Place) and 
 the altar of incense and them that worship therein.’ The 
 Word of God, the Model Man, is the straight reed or rod 
 of measurement ; and the measuring line was made out 
 of the materials of the priest’s dress. Both indicate that 
 uprightness and purity of character which are the law 
 of God’s house. The measurement is to distinguish 
 between them who receive God’s mark or character and 
 those who receive the mark or character of the wild 
 beast, as if there was to be a new separation in the Church 
 between those who follow the Spirit and those who follow 
 fleshly things, as there was between the two sections of 
 the Jewish nation at the first advent of Christ. At the 
 close of the Apocalypse the whole city, the heavenly 
 Jerusalem, is measured ; the measure of man is now the 
 same as that of an angel, man being now, in his en- 
 lightened ministry, equal to the angels, and all things, 
 being emancipated from the bondage of corruption and 
 from ordinances of the flesh fit for slaves or children, 
 imposed till the time of reformation (Heb, 1x. 10), are 
 made in the city to minister to God’s glory (Rev. xi. 
 Xo): 
 
 Tur Two WITNESSES.—Zechariah’s vision of the 
 measurement of the Temple, and St. John’s vision of the 
 measurement of the sanctuary, are each followed by a | 
 vision of a golden candlestick and two witnesses on: 
 each side. Zechariah sees a candlestick, all gold, with a 
 - bowl upon the top of it and its seven lamps thereon, and 
 twice seven (seven and seven) pipes to the seven lamps 
 which are upon the top of it, and two olive-trees by it, 
 one upon the right side of the bowl and the other upon 
 the left, also two olive branches, literally ears (of corn), 
 which through the two golden pipes empty the gold (oil) 
 
THE NEW TEMPLE: THE BODY AND THE CHURCH. 293 
 
 out of themselves. These are the two anointed or shin- 
 ing ones, that stand by, or, in the Apocalypse, before 
 the Lord of the whole earth. The olive gives oil which 
 serves for light and healing ; and the ears of corn are full 
 of nourishment. God manifests Himself, as in the temple 
 service, by right and left hand operations, two kinds of 
 witnesses, Zechariah seems to be also portraying the 
 body with its organs of secing, hearing, and ministering. 
 God is, as it were, all eye, all ear, all goodness ; and 
 man’s rational, percipient and moral nature is that 
 through which He siives. Man is the image of God; 
 and there is an analogy between his body and the 
 Temple of which Zechariah was prophesying. The 
 Temple had three compartments, an outer, a middle, and 
 an inner, with ministrations on the right and left, and 
 man’s body is made up of three regions, a lower, middle, 
 and upper, each with its ministering organs. 
 
 The two cherubim on the right and left of the central 
 ark had each three pairs of wings, under which there ap- 
 peared to Ezekiel the likeness of a man’s hand. ‘These 
 wings, says Clement, ‘are elevated ministrations and 
 operations of right and left hand powers, and the voice is 
 thankful glory in ceaseless contemplation.’* ‘ With twain 
 he covered his face and with twain he covered his feet 
 and with twain he did fly’ (Is. vi. 2). In other words, 
 there is a threefold gradation corresponding to the three 
 
 regions of the human body, the feet, the hands, and the 
 organs of the head. A similar gradation is that of body, 
 soul, and spirit (1 Thess. v. 23), corresponding to De: 
 Paul’s classification of Christians as earthly (yovxos) or 
 
 1 wrépuyes dé AerToupyla: Te Kal évépyetat af werdpoto Sebi@y Te Gua 
 nal Aadv duvduewy, f pwvh St SdEn edxdpioTos ev axaramavaTw Yewpla 
 
 (S. v. 6). 
 
294 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 fleshly (capxtxot), psychical (ruyetxot, an intermediate 
 class in whom knowledge is more superficial than real), 
 and, thirdly, spiritual (avevyarcxoi). There may be also 
 such a graduated progress in the historical development 
 of Church systems. When the Christian Church had 
 progressed beyond the lower elements of Judaism, there 
 remained a higher stage in prospect when that which is 
 in part (provisional) would be more and more set aside, 
 and many enigmas explained (1 Cor. Xili.), 
 
 THE HuMAN Bopy, as medical men tell us, is 
 divided into three regions, the spine and spinal marrow 
 connecting all three. 1. THE HEAD, or highest of these, 
 on the top of the spinal marrow, is like a golden bowl or 
 ball on the top of a golden candlestick ; it is the organ 
 of thought or of that reason of man which, according to 
 Bishop Butler, is the candle of the Lord, the part of the 
 human structure which is, so to speak, nearest to God, 
 a sort of Holy of Holies. The seven lamps on the top 
 of it are indicative of divine light or wisdom, the seven 
 spirits mentioned by Isaiah (xi. 1, 2), the seven eyes of 
 God (Zech. iv. 10). The eyes and the ears of the head 
 are the pipes or channels of communication with the 
 lights within men; there are, therefore, twice seven 
 pipes to the lamps or lights of divine reason, seven for 
 the eyes and seven for the ears. Men are called upon 
 to give earnest heed to what they see and hear. The 
 Laodiceans were counselled to buy eye-salve wherewith 
 to anoint their eyes ; the right eye might offend as well 
 as the right hand or the right foot ; the willing slave had 
 his ear bored ; and he who has ears is called upon to 
 hear. The seeing eye and the hearing ear indicate true 
 discernment and intelligent obedience. 
 
 THE THORAX OR BREAST is the second region of 
 
THE NEW TEMPLE: THE BODY AND THE CHURCH, "205 
 
 the body; its principal organ is the heart, and its ap- 
 pendages are the arms and hands. The prophets may 
 have seen some analogy between the knotted and enarled 
 branches of the frail olive and the knuckled and bent 
 limbs of man. The breast may have some analogy with 
 the intermediate place in the Temple and with the cor- 
 responding stage of Christian worship. ‘The breast,’ 
 says Clement, ‘is the seat of the heart and soul. The- 
 congregation devoted to prayers, having one voice and 
 one mind, is the terrestrial altar with Christians ; while 
 the righteous soul is the truly sacred altar, and that in- 
 cense arising from it is holy prayer.’ The ephod again 
 was the symbol of work, ‘the shoulder being the com- 
 mencement of the hand’ (S. v. 6; C? 243 ; vii. 6) Men 
 are said to take hold of God’s righteousness, and not to 
 handle the word of God deceitfully (2 Cor. iv. 2). 
 
 THE THIRD OR LOWER REGION OF THE Bopy is 
 
 the seat of the appetites. It has, like the thorax, two 
 
 jointed limbs for action, at the extremity of which are 
 
 the feet. Weare said to hunger and thirst after righteous- 
 ness, to eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His 
 blood, to divide rightly the Word of God. Man should 
 
 stand in the faith, not walk in the way of sinners but in 
 
 the eternal paths, run in the way of God’s command- 
 ments, having the feet shod with the preparation of the 
 ~ gospel of peace. ‘ Out of his belly shall (then) flow rivers 
 of living waters, said our Lord, speaking of the Spirit. 
 If the Israelite were unfaithful, he was to be smitten 
 with an evil ulcer, commencing in the knees and the 
 legs (Deut. xxviii. 3 5). The lower region of the body 
 would thus correspond with the outer court of the Temple, 
 which St. John was desired not to measure, as if the 
 Church had passed through that preliminary stage. The 
 
296 THE STYLE AND SPIRIT “OF. PROPHECY, 
 
 fire which consumed the flesh of the sacrifices is com- 
 pared by Clement to that mental fire (zip dpdvipov) which 
 pervades the soul; in other words, it is the fire of the — 
 mind which lays hold on the thing signified. In com- 
 menting on the passage: ‘Meats for the belly and the — 
 belly for meats, which God shall destroy’ (1 Cor. vi. 13), 
 
 Clement is of opinion that there is a latent meaning ; 
 that men who are called Christians but yet live as if 
 they were made to eat, who do not make knowledge and. 
 a life according to the Word their chief end, are perhaps. 
 those fleshly parts of the body or Church of the Lord 
 (S. vii. 14.3 slow bellies, Tit. i. 12). 
 
 RIGHT AND LEFT HAND WORSHIPPERS.—As the 
 Jew faced eastwards when he marked the cardinal points, 
 the right hand side was the south, on which side, within 
 the curtain of the Temple, were the golden candlestick, 
 and outside of it the peace-offerings. The left hand 
 side, again, was the north, on which side were the table 
 of shew-bread within and the sin and trespass offerings’ 
 outside the curtain. Clement considers that this ar- 
 rangement had something to do with the position of the 
 seven planets in the south and with the fostering winds, 
 which, in these regions, were those of the north (S. v. 6). 
 The exhibition of loaves, he says, signifies certain abiding 
 places (uovai, John xiv. 2) of churches breathing together 
 (a common life), so as to form one body and one common 
 way (cvvodov). Clement’s distinction between right 
 and left hand worshippers is very much the same 
 as the distinction between those who are strong and 
 those who are weak in the faith, still fettered by the 
 ritual bondage and scruples connected with such subjects 
 as meats and days. The enlightened Christians are. 
 bound to respect these conscientious difficulties of their 
 
THE NEW TEMPLE: THE BODY AND THE CHURCH. 297 
 
 weaker brethren (Rom. xiv. ; 1 Cor. viii.) ; but they them- 
 ' selves have come to know what their Lord is doing, that 
 “His yoke is excellent (ypnords, Matt. xi. 30), that His 
 
 service is another name for excellence, which they choose 
 for its own sake and not in the old spirit of labouring 
 ignorantly for fear or even for the mere prospect of 
 reward. When the apostles asked our Lord what they 
 
 _ would have who had left all and followed Him, our Lord. 
 
 answered that those who for His name’s sake and the 
 Gospel’s, that is, according to Clement, for the know- 
 ledge of His name and the understanding of the Gospel, 
 had forsaken father or mother, that is, the old paternal 
 _ (customs) or political laws (eg. of Judaism) and the old 
 ‘maternal country and sustenance, were blessed. These 
 things must be thankfully despised by the high-souled, 
 just man for the sake of becoming the friend of God and 
 obtaining the right hand place of the sanctuary, as the 
 apostles have done (S. iv. 4). ‘We must hasten, he 
 ~ goes on to say, ‘beyond mere abstinence frem evil (and 
 beyond that shadowy righteousness of which the rich 
 young man boasted), to that higher grade of the spirit 
 which expresses itself in lordly beneficence. We must, 
 according to my view, come (mpoceAndvOévar) to the 
 saving Word neither on account of. fear of punish- 
 ment nor any promise of gift, but on account of the 
 good (or excellence) itself. Such as these stand on the 
 tight hand side of the sanctuary, but those who think 
 ‘that by the gift of what is perishable they shall receive 
 in exchange what belongs to immortality, are in the 
 parable of the two brothers (the prodigal son) called 
 hired servants. The former live according to the like- 
 ness of Christ, while those who stand on the left hand 
 live according to their image. There is one root beneath 
 
298 THE STYLE AND: SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 both, but the choice is not equal. To choose by way of 
 imitation differs, as appears to me, from ‘the choice of © 
 him who chooses according to knowledge, as that which | 
 is set on fire differs from that which is illumined’ (S. iv. 
 63) C?.152): 
 
299 
 
 PAR Lely. 
 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSTIS. 
 
 CHAP TEARS. 
 
 CLEMENT’S INSTRUCTOR AND ORAL TRADITION. 
 
 “TITUS FLAVIUS CLEMENS, the illustrious head of the 
 _Catechetical School of Alexandria, at. the close of the 
 second century, was originally a pagan philosopher. 
 The date of his birth is unknown. It is also uncertain 
 whether Alexandria or Athens was his birthplace. On 
 embracing Christianity, he eagerly sought the instructions 
 of its most eminent teachers, for this purpose travelling 
 extensively over Greece, Italy, Egypt, Palestine, and 
 other regions of the East. Only one of these teachers 
 can be with certainty identified, namely, Pantanus, 
 whom he describes as the greatest of them all. He 
 succeeded his master Pantznus in the catechetical school 
 somewhere about A.D. 189. He was also made a 
 ‘presbyter of the Church, either then or somewhat later. 
 The persecution under Severus compelled him to retire 
 from Alexandria A.D. 202. We hear of him at Jerusalem 
 and at Antioch. The close of his career is covered with 
 
300 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 obscurity. He is supposed to have died about A.D. 220.’ ? 
 Clement’s account of the progress of the Christian 
 convert from heathenism to perfection is that he is intro-_ 
 duced by faith, disciplined by the precepts and thes 
 corrections of the Divine Instructor or Peedagogus ; and, 
 lastly, that he attains by sound teaching, by diligent. 
 study, and by practising (ypyoe, Exh. 8 ; C! 76) what he 7 
 learns, a full knowledge (ééyvwous) as an accurate in- 
 ‘terpreter (yvémov) of what formerly he had merely 
 tasted (S, vii. 16; C? 478). Clement’s three principal 
 treatises form a series corresponding to this progress. 
 The first treatise is an ‘Exhortation to the Heathen,” 
 rousing them to give heed to the saving word, for, he 
 says, the whole of piety is hortatory, engendering in the 
 kindred faculty of reason a yearning after the true life 
 now and to come (Peed. i. 1). When the convert had- 
 been introduced into Christianity, Clement next sup- 
 plies, in his ‘Paedagogus’ or ‘ Instructor, minute direc-_ 
 tions as to his every-day life. Christianity, however, 
 was intended to create new habits of mind as well as of 
 body, to free men from their old passions and to create a 
 love of excellence for its own sake. The readiest way 
 to accomplish this end is through knowledge, because 
 men love what they know to be good and friendly. 
 There is a saving word as well as a saving work; and 
 righteousness is not established without this saving 
 enlightenment: Men must be initiated into this higher 
 knowledge as they are able to bear it, and Clemen® 
 reserves it for the third treatise, the Stromata, or 
 Stromateis. 
 
 Clement’s Stromata or Miscellanies want some sen- 
 
 1 Introductory notice in Wilson’s translation of Clement, published by 
 Clark. The two vOlInes are here referred to as C! and C?.~ 
 
CLEMENT’S INSTRUCTOR AND ORAL ,TRADITION. 301 
 
 tences at the commencement. Clement is then found to 
 be discussing the question whether it be right for him 
 to commit the subject-matter of his miscellaneous notes 
 to writing. He argues that it is absurd to disapprove 
 of the writing of earnest men, and, at the same time, to 
 approve of the written compositions of others who are 
 not such. No doubt the higher knowledge of Christian 
 truth does not belong to all. We must not, as the pro- 
 _verb goes, ‘set an ass to the lyre. Nevertheless, 
 written compositions are for the many (they ought to be 
 open to all who wish to learn such subjects), /A man 
 
 must determine in his own conscience whether he is 
 _ qualified to teach and whether he does so from proper 
 - motives, but suitable instruction, coming from a man who 
 also leads a right life, confers the greatest advantages on 
 others, putting them in the way of a right mode of life 
 and giving impulses anda clue (?yvos) to knowledge ; in 
 a word, the means (ddoppat, é6d0va) of salvation. It is 
 right to supply want, but it is not well to support lazi- 
 ness. Clement, therefore, writes his notes miscella- 
 neously, leaving behind him a field in which those who 
 thirst may dig for water. 
 
 Clement assigns another reason for writing his mis- 
 cellaneous notes. ‘This work of mine is not constructed 
 artistically for show ; but I have stored up for old age, 
 as a remedy against oblivion (A7#@ns), memoranda or 
 notes (d7rouvi}para), giving in an artless way an image 
 and rough sketch (cxwoypadia) of clear and animated — 
 (évapydv Kat éurpiyov) discourses of blessed and truly 
 
 remarkable (d&oAdywv) men that I was privileged 
 to hear. Of these there was the one in Greece, the 
 Ionian, and others in Magna Grecia, that other of Ccele- 
 Syria, and he of Egypt, and others in the East, of whom 
 
302 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 one belonged to the land of the Assyrians and the other | 
 was in Palestine, originally a Hebrew; but having met — 
 with one last who was first in power, taeey hunting forll 
 him in his concealment in Egypt, I desisted (or found — 
 rest)! These men, preserving the blessed doctrine, 
 handed down directly from the holy apostles Peter, 
 James, John, and Paul, the son receiving it from the 
 father (few, however, being like the fathers), have come, 
 in God’s providence, to deposit with us also those ances- . 
 tral and apostolic seeds. And I well know that they | 
 will be well pleased, I do not mean with this description 
 (éx@paces), but solely with the preservation by means of — 
 notes (kata THv UToonpetwmaw), for such a sketch (vzro- — 
 TUTwots) as this will, I think, be agreeable to a soul 
 desirous of preserving the blessed tradition, so that it be 
 not dost (Sil 1'3°C4355).. Our “Lord certainly*did™ not 
 disclose divine mysteries to the many, but only to those 
 able to receive them ; so he who inwardly or secretly 
 digests what he reads will still understand them. I well 
 know, continues Clement, ‘that these written memor- 
 anda or notes of mine are weak when compared with 
 that spirit full of grace which I was privileged to hear. 
 And we do not profess (or promise) to interpret secret 
 things (adppnra) sufficiently, far from it, but only to 
 keep up the memory of them (U7ropuvicat) whether our — 
 recollection is in aught impaired or for the purpose of — 
 not forgetting. There are somethings of which we have 
 
 1 coitwy 6 piv em ris “EAAdSos, 6 “lwyikds, of Se eml ris meydAns 
 ‘EAAd DOs, THs KolAns Odrepos abTav Suplas hy, 6 dé am Airyimtov, &AdAor dE 
 ave Thy avaroAhy, Kat radtns 6 wey THs Tav’Acouplav, 6 dé ev Maraorivy 
 ‘EBpatos avéxadev, dotdrw 8& mepitruxdv, Suvduer 3€ obtos mpatos jy, 
 dveravodunv ev Aiyimr@ Onpacas AcAnOdra. 
 
CLEMENT'S INSTRUCTOR AND ORAL TRADITION. 303 
 
 no recollection, for the power which these blessed men 
 -had was great; other things which long remained un- 
 noted have escaped ; others which are faded in my mind 
 I revive in commenting on them; others I purposely 
 omit, afraid to write that which I was on my guard not 
 to say, not grudging (for that were wrong) but fearing 
 for my readers, lest they should stumble by taking them 
 in a wrong sense, and lest we should be found handing 
 -a sword to a child, as the proverb says’ (C! 357). 
 
 The Stromata or Miscellanies contain, he says, the 
 ‘truth mixed up with philosophical dogmas; in other 
 words, the book is a philosophical explanation of Chris- 
 tianity. It is written miscellaneously, and not intended 
 to supersede other labours and researches on the part of 
 the Christian student. It is sufficient to indicate toa 
 traveller the road ; he must find out the rest for himself.. 
 ~The truly royal road which men must hold on, not 
 deviating from it, is, Seek and ye shall find. This way 
 may be narrow, steep, and rough at first, but it becomes 
 easier (S. iv. 2). Some, indeed, who think themselves 
 gifted (evdvets) do not wish to touch either philosophy 
 or logic ; nay, more, they do not wish to learn natural 
 science. They demand bare faith alone, as if they 
 wished to gather clusters from the very first, without 
 bestowing any care on thevine. Our Lord is figuratively 
 called the vine ; and from Him fruit must be gathered 
 with painstaking, and according to the rules of good hus- 
 bandry. I call him truly learned who brings everything 
 to bear on the truth, and he who brings everything to 
 bear on a right life, procuring examples from the Greeks. 
 as well as the barbarians (as Clement often calls the 
 Hebrews), this man is an experienced searcher after 
 
304. THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 truth, and in reality a man of much counsel (S. i. 9). 
 Rational philosophy and the art of reasoning are most 
 useful as auxiliaries. It was not all philosophy which 
 Paul branded as ‘philosophy and vain deceit,’ but that 
 baseless or transcendental philosophy which sets aside 
 the Creator as a making Cause, a God of power and pro- 
 vidence, who superintends His works, or which explains 
 the whole economy of the Saviour as amyth: it was not 
 logic but the jugglery of it (S. i. 11). ‘It is not in sophis- 
 tical wrangling or in disputatious speeches that the violent 
 storm the kingdom of heaven ; the righteous seek for a 
 discovery which tends to love (eipecw ayamntixnv), and 
 by a continuance in a right life and unceasing prayers 
 are said to take it by force, wiping out the blots left by 
 past sins’ (S. v. 3). But, on the other hand, ‘the things 
 which co-operate in the study of truth are not themselves 
 of an evil or reprobate character.’ Clement has no sym- 
 pathy with those who are frightened at Hellenic philo- 
 sophy as children are at masks, being afraid lest it lead 
 them astray; he thinks that a faith which cannot with- 
 stand plausible reasoning, or which opposes itself to pro- 
 gress and knowledge, is scarcely worth having, if not 
 worse than useless: (S. viw10, 12; 15.3.C? 350), The 
 existence of heresies is a reason for undertaking the toil 
 of discovery, not at all forabandoning it. By intelligent 
 contemplation and the most masterly («upuwtat@) rea- 
 soning, we must distinguish the true from the seeming. 
 We must investigate (hunt out) the most accurate know- 
 ledge. concerning the truth. Do husbandmen desist 
 from careful gardening because weeds are growing up 
 along with their garden vegetables? We are rightly 
 condemned if we do not assent to what we ought to 
 believe or obey (aeé@ec@ar), not distinguishing what is 
 
CLEMENT’S INSTRUCTOR AND ORAL TRADITION. 305 
 
 inconsistent (waydpevov), unbecoming, and against nature 
 from what is consistent (axoNovOov), becoming, and ac- 
 cording to nature (S. vii. 15). 
 
 Another reason why Clement wrote his Stromata was 
 to check if possible the proneness of some to fall into here- 
 sies, subversive of the most essential things (kupi@tata), 
 whether this arose from conceited superficiality, stu-. 
 pidity, or bad disposition; and, if possible, to correct 
 those who had fallen into their rash conceit of wisdom 
 (mporetys d0€0copia), by setting truth alongside of it or 
 presenting the truth (comp. Iren. iii. 2, 3, apposita veri- 
 tate, and Justin, Ap. i. 12). This rash haste to grasp 
 ata knowledge above that of ordinary Christians was 
 another extreme of error, the reverse of ‘demanding 
 bare faith alone.” But it was still a great matter in 
 choosing between these conceits and accurate knowledge 
 to recognise the fact that the way to eternal rest (know- 
 ledge of the truth) is toilsome and strait, and that the 
 
 tradition which it devolves upon us to understand and 
 practise is a godly one (edceSys). The ecclesiastical 
 canon by which our Lord explained and by which we 
 must explain the Scripture is the concord and harmony 
 of the law and the prophets with the dispensation 
 delivered at the coming of the Lord (S. vi. 15 ; Case 
 Ignorance of the Scriptures and of the consistency » 
 (axonovOla) of the dispensations with one another and 
 with the wants of the people, to whom they were 
 adapted, had given rise to these mistakes, (C7) 4315 
 comp. Iren. iii. 12, 12; iv. 20, 7); and to correct this 
 ignorance a fuller research was necessary and the assist- 
 
 ance of competent instructors. 
 In this work of instruction the Christian teacher re- 
 He must consider the different 
 
 x 
 
 quires to use discretion. 
 
306 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE, OR EARLY GNOSIS.: 
 
 stages of progress and the characters of those whom he 
 instructs.. Clement asserts in the most positive terms 
 that the Saviour is the saviour of all men and cares for 
 all men, being their Creator and Lord, exhibited (avaéde- 
 Sevyuév@) dispensationally to teach holiness, and com- 
 pelling by various corrections even egregious sinners to 
 repent. He trains the enlightened Christian by mysteries, 
 the faithful man or believer (ziarov) by good hopes, and 
 the hard-hearted by the corrective discipline which is 
 through sensible operation (d0’ aio Ontuxhs évepyetas, S. vii. 
 2; C?409). The enlightened teacher must therefore ex- 
 hibit truth so that by means of what they have (d:a tov 
 id¢wv) men may be likely to arrive at it, and so that they 
 should not be caused to stumble or apostatise by having 
 things presented to them which are beyond their depth 
 or likely to lead them into mistakes (S. v. 3; 8, C? 253). 
 But this was not to change the truth to suit men, as the 
 Gnostics supposed. We find Irenzeus (ili. 2; 5; 13) re- 
 pudiating this idea; and Clement’s exhortation to the 
 heathen was a call to give up their old evil customs and 
 notions. If the apostles had accommodated the truth 
 to men’s errors, they would not have suffered. The 
 Christian, according to Clement, ought to be truthful in 
 his whole life (except perhaps when a physician speaks. 
 sophistically for the sake of the sick, S. v. 9); he ought 
 to maintain a life calculated to inspire confidence, so that 
 an oath may not even be asked. Knowing that God is. 
 everywhere and that it is unworthy of him to lie, he is. 
 afraid not to speak the truth or to act contrary to his 
 contracts ; nor will he deny the truth by speaking false- 
 hood, though he should die by tortures (S. vii. 8). ‘When 
 we are interrogated, said Justin, ‘we do not deny, but 
 account it wicked not to speak the truth in all things, 
 
CLEMENT’S INSTRUCTOR AND ORAL TRADITION. 307 
 
 and even now we desire to disabuse you (the Emperor) 
 of an unfair prejudice’ (Ap. ii. 4). 
 
 According to Clement, therefore, Paul and the apostles 
 did not wrzte this hidden wisdom fully, but’ spoke it 
 among those who were perfect ; he desired to be present 
 that he might impart this spiritual gift or gnostic com- 
 munication. He had fed the Corinthians with the milk 
 of catechetical instruction, but the strong meat was 
 ‘the mystic contemplation,’ the true philosophy. The 
 instruction which revealed hidden things has been called 
 illumination, the teacher only having uncovered the lid 
 of the ark. But only to a few of the nations is it shown 
 what these things are which are in mystery (S. v. Io). 
 Clement, as has been said, had, after a careful search, 
 received a tradition from many of the leading teachers 
 of churches wide apart, which tradition both he and they 
 believed to be the explanations orally given by the 
 apostles and handed down orally in the churches. Her- 
 mas, he says, spoke of the faith which occupies the 
 place of the rudiments as reading by (separate) letters, 
 whilethe enlightened unfolding of the Scriptures is likened 
 
 a by him to reading according to syllables. And as the 
 
 prophet was directed to take a new book, so the un- 
 written rendering of what is written has been handed 
 down also to us on new hearts. This initiation into the 
 meaning of those things wherein the truth is veiled is 
 for those only who seek the truth in love. But even 
 those whose reading is not casual and superficial, and to 
 whom the knowledge of the truth properly belongs, do 
 not have it given to them all at once (S. vi. 15 ; C? 380 
 ~382; Herm. Vis. ii.). Of this Gnostic tradition, as he 
 calls it, he says: ‘ The knowledge itself, which is by suc- 
 
 cessive traditions, has come down to few, having been 
 xX 2 
 
308 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. ° 
 
 transmitted without writing from the apostles: hence- 
 forth, therefore, it is necessary that knowledge or wisdom 
 should be cultivated as a discipline, so as to form an 
 eternal and unchangeable habit of contemplation.! Al- 
 though Clement disclaims the idea that his Stromata, 
 forming a book of varied erudition, seeks artfully to con- 
 ceal the seeds of knowledge, yet he admits that it is 
 written in a miscellaneous manner, ina somewhat hid- 
 den and veiled way, not to encourage laziness or divulge 
 the secret of the true philosophy to men who speak 
 against everything unjustly and deceive themselves and 
 orers'{ 5, 1.2): 
 
 Irenzeus, while setting his face against the violence 
 which Gnostics did to the Scriptures, and esteeming love 
 more perfect than knowledge and more glorious than 
 prophecy, yet asserts that there had been handed down 
 in the Church a very full mode or system of handling 
 (plenissima tractatio) the Scriptures, an exposition, legi- 
 timate, diligent, without peril and blasphemy (iv. 33, 8) ; 
 that the whole Scriptures must be explained and har- 
 monised by means of what is openly, unequivocally, and 
 incontrovertibly said in them; that the Scriptures are 
 Spiritual throughout ; that though we explain parts of 
 them, yet there are things which must be left in God’s 
 hands, even in the age about to come (ii. 27, 2; 28, 3); 
 but that when the Bridegroom comes, when that which 
 is perfect comes, then we shall have our growth and in- 
 crease, so as to enjoy the gifts of God, now no longer 
 through a mirror and enigmas, but face to face (iv. 9, 2). 
 
 1 f yv@ors Bt adth h kara diadoxas cis dAlyous ek TOY drocTéAwy aypapws 
 mapadobeica KaTreAnavbey, evTeddey 5& pa yvaow elte coplay ocvvacKy- 
 Oijvat xp eis Zé Oewplas aldioy kal avadrdrolwroy (S. vi. 7; C* 339). 
 
309 
 
 CHAPTER Il, 
 
 FIRST | PRINCIPLES AND° METHODS: OF ‘STUDY, 
 
 ‘PHILOSOPHY,’ says Clement, ‘is occupied with the inves- 
 tigation of truth and the nature of existing things (tov 
 -$ytwv). It was concerning this truth that our Lord said, 
 “T am the truth.” St. Paul exhorts to “ prove all things 
 and hold fast that which is good,” speaking to spiritual 
 men who judge according to truth what is said, whether 
 it truly holds by the truth or merely seems to do so’ 
 (SEs tl yy G'9300, 386)... Even St. Paal considered 
 himself perfect in that he had been emancipated from 
 his former life, not perfect in knowledge but as aspiring 
 after perfection (Ped. i.6; C! 148). Clement wonders 
 how men could dare to call themselves perfect and 
 gnostic, or entertain inflated and boastful ideas of them- 
 selves above the apostle. It is characteristic of counter- 
 feit wisdom (S0foc0dia) to make a great ado about the 
 mere words instead of seeking to ascertain their real 
 import, to strain every nerve to make the conclusion 
 come suitably to oneself, to seek to establish the truth 
 of hasty fancies, instead of seeking to ascertain the 
 actual facts, to quibble with those who are engaged in 
 the prosecution of the true philosophy (S. vii. 16 ; C* 479). 
 ‘In rebuke of those who are wise in appearance and who 
 think themselves wise but are not in reality wise, Paul 
 
310 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 writes: “And I will know not the speech of those who 
 are puffed up, but the power ; for the kingdom of heaven 
 is not in word,” not in that which though not true is yet 
 plausible and specious in the way of an assumption or 
 hastily formed notion, “ but in power,” for the truth alone 
 is powerful.’ The truth does not consist in base- 
 less fancies or in a phraseology to which no meaning is 
 attached. 
 
 TRUE PHILOSOPHY HAS ITS BASISIN FACTS WHICH 
 ARE SELF-EVIDENT TO THE SENSES OR TO THE UNDER- 
 STANDING.—AIl our knowledge of existing things is 
 traceable to what we believe intuitionally, or, as Clement 
 expresses it, to those things which are to be believed of 
 themselves (ra 2& adtov micra) without demonstration 
 and are thus self-evident. A certain element of faith is 
 involved even in the reception of these things. A man, 
 for instance, cannot prove what appears evident to his 
 senses or to his consciousness ; he cannot prove that that 
 exists which he sees or feels; but he believes in its ex- 
 istence. If we supposed that the Author of our being 
 was deceiving us by false appearances, we could believe 
 in nothing. So when the Jews attributed our Lord’s 
 miracles to the agency of an evil spirit, how could they 
 know at any time whether the Divine Being is revealing 
 truth or imposing upon them? Consequently, all de- 
 monstration (amddecEcs) is traced up to undemonstrable 
 faith (S. viii. 3; C? 494). Sensation (a¥cOnovs) is to that 
 which is felt by the senses (aic@nrov) as understanding 
 (vonots) is to the objects of thought. (vontov, S. vi. 16; 
 C? 385). Those things which appear clearly to the sen- 
 sation and to the understanding are the first principles 
 
 1 ov TE UNH GANOEL GAAA KAP Fardanwuy mibavG, ev Suvaper dé elrev (S. i, 
 ¢ we @; 
 F1% <1 Gor, iy. 0, 20). 
 
J FIRSE PRINCIPLES AND METHODS OF STUDY. 3I1I 
 
 of universal truths (af tov ddXov apyat). Our rational 
 faculty decides upon the truth of what is put before it 
 by its perception of congruity or incongruity (axodovdou 
 Kal paxomévov) ; not only do things appear self-evident 
 to our sensation and understanding, but those which are 
 demonstrated by compounding these appear no less clear 
 and reliable. If, then, a man begins with these primary 
 facts and draws the proper conclusions, he truly demon- 
 strates ; but if he begins with mere conceits (2& evooE@v 
 pdvov), not basing his reasonings on the first principles of 
 things or facts (dvayxaias apxas Tpayyaror, G?:479); 
 he will reason (syllogise) indeed, but not produce a scien- 
 tific demonstration.’ We demonstrate something by ~ 
 proving it from something previously demonstrated, and 
 this again by other things demonstrated before this, till 
 at last we get back to those things which are self-evident, 
 that is, evident to sense or understanding. Or we may 
 reverse the process, and, beginning with those self-evi- 
 dent truths, demonstrate the point in question. But the 
 great matter is to use every precaution that the premises, 
 assumptions, or axioms (no matter what name is given 
 them) are true, and that the conclusions are properly 
 drawn from the premises and relevant to the subjects 
 proposed, whatever be the form of reasoning employed ; 
 and, in all questions, that which is previously known and 
 self-evident must not only be the starting point in the 
 investigation but also the criterion of the apparent results 
 {S. viii. 3; C? 494, 495). 
 
 DEFINITION.—It is of the greatest importance that 
 ‘the terms we use in our inquiries should be clearly 
 explained, and that the definitions should not take for 
 granted statements which require proof (S. viii. 2). 
 For instance, in Clement’s time there had’ been serious 
 
312) THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 mistakes about the meaning of the new or spiritual 
 nature, and men had not been sufficiently careful to dis- 
 tinguish wherein the gift of the second nature must 
 essentially differ from the gift of our first animal or 
 physical nature. Clement taught that God stamps or 
 seals men according to the objects of their choice, ac- 
 cording as they follow or do not follow the light which 
 God gives and His correction. He considered that this 
 new and higher nature is something acquired, a passion- 
 less habit, an enlightened and loving disposition ; and 
 according to him, the true God is He who exists in the 
 invariableness of righteous goodness (S. vii. 3 ; C? 4, 16). 
 But the Gnostics virtually set aside the fundamental 
 element of voluntary choice or assent, or represented it 
 as a redundancy, so that their God turned out to be a 
 ‘mere distribution of natures to them (7 Ttav dicewr 
 avtots Stavoun, S. ii. 3). | 
 
 METHODS OF INVESTIGATING AND CRITERIA FOR 
 DISTINGUISHING TRUTH.—The sphere of science is to 
 apply itself (émrepeidecOar) to general and defined prin- 
 ciples or laws (@ewpjwata) ; for of particulars there is no 
 scientific knowledge, seeing they are infinite (S. viii. 8). 
 ‘The method of discovery’ (7) uéodos ths ebpyoews) 
 begins by a clear recognition of what the problem is. 
 For instance, if it be inquired whether certain embryo- 
 nic forms of life are to be classified as animals, we must 
 first understand what is meant by ‘an animal’ (S. viii. 
 4; C’ 496). Induction (éraywy7) starts from particulars 
 evident to the senses and to the intellect, and leads up 
 to its goal, the universal (76 xa@ Grou, S. viii. 6). There 
 is another method of study, ‘the method of exposition’ (o 
 kata dizEodov tpémos). A man may listen to the expo- 
 sition of an instructor, who goes over the subject ; and 
 
FIRST PRINCIPLES AND METHODS OF STUDY. 313 
 
 when he has heard the exposition, he may take up every 
 point in detail (S. viii. 4). When the general truths and 
 principles of a science are fully established, the whole 
 subject may be taught deductively according to this 
 
 “method of instruction, as modern logicians tell us:' but 
 
 in any case, great care must be taken not to build on 
 
 rash assumptions, on merely plausible fancies (Ta é- 
 
 d0&a). 
 
 According to Irenzus, there is a certain plausible 
 resemblance that error bears to truth, otherwise it would 
 be easily exposed. False teaching craftily puts on a 
 plausible dress, so as to make itself appear to the simpler 
 sort truer than the truth itself (i. 1, 2; iii. 15,2). There 
 
 is a wisdom of transcendental fancies about infinity, of 
 
 magical conceptions about God’s operation, of a phrase- 
 ology to which no meaning or no intelligible meaning is 
 attached, which looks like Christian teaching but is not 
 really so. This appearance of wisdom, which is not 
 founded on the first principles of actually existing things 
 but on hasty conceits, is characteristic, says Clement, 
 of heresy in contradistinction to heathenism, which is 
 
 ignorant, not having either the true or the seeming know- 
 
 ledge. Whether true knowledge be called a habit (&Eus) 
 or a disposition (SidOecus), it is characteristic of it to 
 watch and be sober-minded, to keep one’s eyes open, so 
 as not to fall into any waking dream (d7rap) or visionary 
 conceit, characterised by the boastful pretence of spiri- 
 tuality or perfection.2 No doubt, reasons St. Paul, we 
 are the children of the day; therefore, we ought not to 
 fall into some intoxicated sleep during the day (1 Thess. v.). 
 
 1 See Jevons, Elementary Lessons in Logic, pp. 200-210. 
 MeO, 11, iv. 22, vil. 163 C? 476-81; Padi. 65 C! TAS 2k Cor: 
 
 viii, 2. 
 
314 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 Clement regards the Scriptures as a criterion of truth 
 because they confirm those truths which arethe first 
 principles of things, and are in turn confirmed by them 
 (C? 478). They proclaim a personal God of providence 
 and power, whose offspring man is, and who exists in 
 the invariableness of righteous goodness; and they set 
 aside that philosophy which represents the Source of our 
 being as mindless, purposeless, and powerless matter. 
 But, according to Clement, the personality of God, His 
 freedom of choice, His superintending providence and 
 rational nature, are proved by the very fact that we, His 
 creatures, have these characteristics ; for how could that 
 which is provident and rational proceed from what is 
 mindless? The Saviour, he also says, is proved to be 
 the Son of God by the prophecies, by the testimonies 
 which accompanied His sensible generation, and by His 
 work on Christians, whose faith makes them superior to 
 their adversaries and to the assault of temptation coming 
 in every form from this world of shows (S. vi. 15; C’ 
 375, 376). 
 
 A man’s moral state influences his clearness and cor- 
 reciness of mental vision ; and, conversely, he is morally 
 influenced -by what he learns——The influence of men’s 
 conduct and inclinations on what they receive as truth 
 is especially discernible in the study of that which 
 relates to divine things and human responsibilities. St. 
 Paul valued the best gifts, especially the gift of prophecy, 
 but there was one way or method surpassingly excellent, 
 namely, to cherish and abide in that divine love which 
 is kind-hearted, seemly, inoffensive, longsuffering, and 
 full of good deeds. This was not only in itself the great 
 end to be attained, but it gives men a readiness to receive 
 and appreciate the higher knowledge of the truth. ‘It 
 stands to reason,’ said Clement, ‘that the ideas enter- 
 
FIRST PRINCIPLES AND METHODS OF STUDY. 315 
 
 tained by wicked men will be bad, and that those of good 
 men will be more excellent’ (S. vii. 4; C? 421). 
 
 The most enlightened students of the human mind, 
 however, teach that so far as man is above mere irrational 
 instinct, his active powers, his affections, and desires are 
 reached through the understanding ; that we must learn 
 before we are rationally impelled to action, and that our 
 wills give or withhold consent to the impulse. This is 
 also Clement’s teaching. In comparing the fragmentary 
 philosophy of the ancient Greeks with the more intel- 
 lectual objects unfolded by the truly perfect science and 
 teaching of our Lord, who unveils to men the Holy of 
 Holies, ascending ever into still holier things, Clement 
 says that prophecy is full of knowledge. ‘ Knowledge 
 and impulse are both powers of the soul ; but impulse is 
 found to be a movement after intellectual assent (vyxa- 
 -téOects). For he who has an impulse towards an action 
 first receives the knowledge of the action, and secondly, 
 the impulse. First, the man learns, and knowledge 
 -comes from learning, and impulse follows knowledge, 
 after which comes action. Thus knowledge turns out to 
 be the beginning and author of all rational action; and 
 it is by this alone that the peculiar nature of a rational 
 soul is characterised’ (S. vi. 8 ; C? 343). God's work is not 
 accomplished without the rational Word ; ahd he who 
 acts irrationally does not act according to this Word. It 
 is characteristic of the brutes to be driven by mere fear. 
 «Wherefore the Saviour taking the bread first spake and 
 ‘blessed ; then breaking the bread, He presented it that 
 we might eat it rationally (Noyexds), and that knowing 
 the Scriptures we might walk obediently. Those who 
 are given to good speech are near neighbours to those 
 who accomplish good deeds. Rational discourse, then, 
 “wins (avaxratas) the soul and entices to excellence in 
 
316 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 well-doing (él caroxayabiay mpotpéret); and happy is 
 he who has the use of both his hands (good deeds and 
 good speech). But let each do that for which he is. 
 naturally fitted; there is a saving word as well as a 
 saving work. Thus, then, we mutually benefit each. 
 other by words and deeds ; but we must entirely repu- 
 diate the art of wrangling and sophistry, since the sophis- 
 tical ways of speaking not only deceive (yonrevoucr) and 
 beguile the many but sometimes win a Cadmian victory,” 
 that is, a victory disastrous to the conquerors as well as. 
 to the conquered (S, i. 9, 10). Let not a man go back 
 to his former life which adheres (zpocavéyovta) to the 
 things of sense nor to heresies which in some way form 
 the character (20éfovce+), not knowing the God who exists 
 (z.é. Him who exists in the invariableness of righteous. 
 goodness), and who as the Father and Teacher of truth 
 regenerates, creates anew, and nourishes the elect soul 
 (S. vii. 16; C? 476). Faith is, so to speak, an abridged 
 knowledge of things that are urgently needful; know- 
 ledge is a sure demonstration, a scientific comprehension, 
 of these things. ‘The first saving change appears to me- 
 to be from heathenism to faith, the second from faith to 
 knowledge, which being fulfilled in love makes the friend 
 devoted to (zrapiornowy) his Friend, and that which knows. 
 devoted to that which is known, and perchance equal. 
 to the angels’ (S. vii. 10). Bishop Kaye compares this 
 with the following passage from John Wesley : ‘By sal- 
 vation I mean a present deliverance from sin, a recovery 
 of the divine nature ; the renewal of our souls after the 
 image of God in righteousness and true holiness, in 
 justice and mercy and truth. Now without faith we- 
 cannot be saved ; for we cannot rightly serve God unless. 
 we love Him; and we cannot love God unless we know 
 Him ; neither can we know God but by faith. There-- 
 
FIRST PRINCIPLES AND METHODS OF STUDY. 317 
 
 fore, salvation by faith is only, in other words, the love 
 of God by the knowledge of God, or the true recovery 
 of the image of God by a true spiritual acquaintance 
 with Him’ (Kaye’s Clement, p. 262). ‘Those who by 
 many fooleries (fAvapiars) have polluted the holy hear- 
 ing of faith, become deaf to the truth and unprofitable 
 and fall to the earth. . . . By hearing the feeling of lov 
 is generated’ (S. v.; 1 C? 228). a 
 THE IDOLS WHICH BACON DESCRIBED seduce men 
 from the worship of the truth. Different reasons are 
 given by Clement why men were not willing to believe 
 that ‘the only true God is He who exists in the invari- 
 ableness of righteous goodness.’’ Some were disgusted 
 with evils, which prevail by reason of the independence 
 or self-determination of the human soul; others were 
 soured by their misfortunes, so as to deny that there is a 
 God or to say that He does not superintend all things. 
 Others, again, reckon those to be gods who can be pre- 
 vailed upon by sacrifices and gifts to favour, so to speak, 
 their own profligacies. Clement also endeavours to ac- 
 count for the mistaken fancies of the gnostic heretics. 
 The very circumstance that real truth concerning the 
 God who exists is a subject which requires arduous and 
 careful investigation gives rise to many questions from 
 which spring the heresies, savouring of self-love and 
 vanity, of men, who, not having learned or received 
 (instruction) truly, are carried away by a mere conceit 
 of knowledge (S. vii. 15). Their method of rending 
 sentences or phrases from the context of the prophecy, 
 of making much about the mere phraseology (A¢é&s), 
 while they set aside the sense, of ‘fitting the mere ex- 
 pressions by themselves into a system (amraptlfovtes), 
 
 1 opde Grover morevew udvov Elva TY byTws BEdy, Toy Ev TAVTOTATE THS 
 Sixalas &yadwotyns bvra (S. vii, 3 3 C’ 416). 
 
318. THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 without having discerned the apostle’s meaning or criti- 
 cally examined the force of the terms’ (Iren. v. 13, 2), 
 cannot be too much remembered by us as a warning. 
 They read the Scriptures, continues Clement, superfi- 
 cially, being too indolent to go to the bottom of things, 
 despising the books and tradition of the Christians in 
 their haste to surpass common faith, incessantly wrang- 
 ling with those whose knowledge is better founded, 
 and straining every nerve to force the conclusion to come 
 suitably for themselves. When their opinions were clearly 
 disproved, they were prepared to do one of two things, 
 either to disbelieve the Scriptures or to despise the con- 
 sistency of their own opinions, boasting of that privately 
 which they would not own openly. They would go any 
 such length rather than lose the high positions which 
 they held in their churches and love-feasts. But truth 
 is not found by perverting meanings, but in considering 
 what perfectly belongs to and befits the Lord God (the 
 Sovereign and Creator of men), and in establishing each 
 one of the points demonstrated in Scripture by parallel 
 Scriptures. These heretics, however, had fallen into 
 some conceit about the new birth or higher nature, not 
 unlike that which some have fallen into at the present 
 time. ‘They disparage us,’ said Clement, ‘as of a differ- 
 ent nature and notable to understand the things peculiar 
 to them.’! They seem to have quoted St. Paul’s saying, 
 that the natural man receiveth not the things of God,—a 
 text stillabused. Certainly ‘all men do not receive their 
 portentous and deep mysteries,’ said Irenzus, ‘because 
 all have not yet spit out their brains’ (Iren. i. 1, 2). 
 
 1 fuas adrods &s BAAS yeyovdtas picews wh olovs Te elvat ovvetvat Te 
 oixeta éxelvors SiaBdAAovow (S. vil. 16; C? 479).. 
 
319 
 
 CHAPTER IIT. 
 
 GOD: HIS IMAGE AND PREPARATORY WORK. 
 
 -TuHE Divine Being, the First Cause, or Father of the 
 Universe, who did not make a. beginning of being Lord 
 and God but was always what He is, cannot, says Cle- 
 ment, be found or exhibited without the greatest diffi-_ 
 culty. How shall that be expressed (or described, pnrov) 
 which is absolutely the first and oldest principle, the 
 cause of all other things being or having been, and which 
 cannot by comparison be classified among the many 
 kinds of things or events about us, or defined by limita- 
 tion (amespov). For things that are descriptively named 
 (Td Neyomueva) are either expressed by what belongs es- 
 sentially to them (é tév tpocdvTwy avrtots) or from 
 mutual relativity (2 Ths mpos d\Anra cyécews). But 
 neither of these means holds good with reference to God. 
 If we are to demonstrate or explain God, it must be by 
 means of what He sprung from or by comparing Him to 
 things which we know better. But there is nothing which 
 preceded God, and we cannot classify Him among the 
 things which we do know. For want of one proper 
 name, we give Him good names (that is, names indica- 
 tive of His goodness) ; we call Him the One, the Good, 
 or Mind, or absolute Being, or Father, or God, or Crea- 
 tor, or Lord ; all of which together are indicative of the 
 
320° THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 power of the Omnipotent. The Unknown makes Him- 
 self known to us by His divine grace and by that rational _ 
 Word alone which is from Him (S. v. 12; C? 260, 270). 
 In other words, God has not left Himself without wit- 
 ness; He has manifested Himself to our rational nature 
 by His works which are rational (S. i. 9), to our moral 
 nature by His goodness, giving us rain from heaven and 
 fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness 
 (Acts xiv. 17), and, above all, in our own consciousness 
 of a rational and moral nature inspired within us. ‘This 
 is the Creator, who in love is our Father, in power our 
 Lord, in wisdom our Maker and Framer’ (Iren. v. 17, 1), 
 who in these respects comes within our knowledge but 
 not in respect of His magnitude or essential substance, 
 which no man has ever measured or handled or can 
 describe (iii. 24, 2). In respect of His greatness and 
 wonderful glory, the Father is incomprehensible, un- 
 known to all who have been made by Him, but in regard 
 +o His love and kindness and His power to do all things 
 He grants to those who obey or love Him to see God, 
 to know God and enjoy His goodness and ever be learn- 
 ing how great He is (Iren. iv. 20; 1, 4,5). We may 
 compare Justin’s ideas. ‘ But proper name for the Father 
 of all things there is none. For whoever is called by a 
 name has the person older than himself who gives him 
 the name. But the terms Father and God and Creator 
 and Lord and Master are not names, but terms of ad- 
 dress (rpoopyaess), derived from His benefits and from 
 His works. But His Son, who is properly called Son, 
 the Word, is called Christ, in reference to His having 
 been anointed, and God’s ordering all things through 
 Him—and this is itself a name having about it (zrepieyov) 
 an unknown significance, as the title God is not a name 
 
GOD: HIS IMAGE AND PREPARATORY WORK. 321 
 
 but a notion (or opinion, 8d£a) implanted in the nature 
 ‘of man, a thing which can hardly be explained. But 
 Jesus has the name and signification both of Man and of 
 Saviour’ (Ap. ii. 6). 
 
 The highest notions which man can form of the 
 Author of his being must be drawn from his own con- 
 ‘sciousness, from the analogy of our own nature in its 
 best state. We know what reason and free choice are 
 by our experience of them, and infer that God is 
 ‘tational and possessed of free choice. There are amia- 
 bilities of character even in the nature which God gave 
 to Adam, and, where this fails, we have exhibited to us 
 in Jesus Christ that higher moral excellence which 
 ‘perfectly belongs to and becomes the Lord God’ 
 (S. vii. 16). We may share in God’s moral excellence 
 and thus know His excellent name, but not His ineffable 
 name (Ap. i. 16.). 
 
 If we remove all our physically conceived ideas of 
 dimension, motion, position, bodies, and essences said to 
 be without a body, and throw our minds upon the great- 
 ness of Christ, and thence advance by holiness into 
 immensity (rd dyavés), we may reach some conception 
 of the Almighty ; as Plato said, we come to know God 
 not as in other studies but by great intimacy with Him, 
 _ by living in the light (S. v. 11). In other words, man is 
 initiated into the full knowledge of God by the perfec- 
 _ tion of his own nature. The righteous man, therefore, 
 seeks that discovery which tends to love and to wipe out 
 _ the blots of past sins (S. v. 3). This knowledge is such 
 as produces practice or self-training (cuvdexnow), and 
 practice produces habit or disposition (g£u, did eowv), 
 and such a state as this works freedom from passion 
 (ara@eav). The acquisition of knowledge, the study 
 
 ; Y 
 
322 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 itself, tends to this end, demanding application, training, 
 and progress, and passing from practice into a habit 
 which love makes infallible (5. vi.g). And to possess — 
 this nature is to know God ; for, as Clement of Rome 
 said, love conducts to the height which is inexpressible ;, 
 love ‘unites us to God (c. 49). The sure evidence 
 (rexprjpeov) that the truth is with us is that the Son of 
 God Himself has taught us; the Son of God is the 
 Person of the exhibited truth, and the power of Chris- 
 tian faith, exceeding that of every adversary and the 
 world, is the fact or result (paypa, C23 REM 
 
 Clement’s mode of treating the materialistic philo- 
 sophies of his time deserves our special attention. It is 
 absurd, according to him, to suppose that the Source 
 from which we sprung is senseless or mindless and thus 
 inferior to ourselves. If man has mind and self- 
 determining power and choice, then surely that Being 
 or Existing One whose offspring man is must also have 
 mind and efficient power and choice. It is folly, he says 
 to the heathen, to set up a lifeless image of God, and 
 impiety or godlessness to liken the Deity to the worst of 
 men. The image of God is His Word, the genuine Son 
 of mind, the archetypal Light of lights ; and the image 
 of the Word is the true man, the mind which is in man, 
 who is, therefore, said to have been made in the image 
 and likeness of God, made like to the Divine Word in 
 the understanding of the heart (77 Kata Kapdlay ppovn- 
 o«t), and therefore rational. Receive then the water of 
 the word. Wash, purify yourselves. The pure must 
 ascend to heaven.. Thou art a man, seek Him who 
 created thee ; thou art a son, acknowledge thy Father 
 (Hah. 2104) onyyotie exhorts them, when they re- 
 flect on the good, to be grateful and choose at once 
 what is best, instead of painfully inquiring whether 
 
* GOD: HIS IMAGE AND PREPARATORY WORK. 323 
 
 - the best ought to be followed ; not to be so insanely 
 taken up about dead matter, lest, like Niobe or Lot’s 
 _ wife, they be turned into stone. | 
 -. The economy of the Saviour, or the philosophy 
 which is in accordance with divine tradition, confirms us 
 _ in the belief that there is a Creator above the elements, 
 _a Making Cause (rrowtix) airia), an all-superintending 
 i (wqaverricxotros) Providence, a rational] God of power, of 
 ~ whom man’s nature is the image (S. i. 11, vii. 355 Ce: 
 _ Accordingly the divinely speaking apostle writes (1 Cor. 
 _ xiii. 12) respecting us, ‘For now we see as in a mirror,’ 
 _ recognising ourselves by reflection in it and contemplat- 
 ing the Creating Cause, as is possible for us, by com- 
 parison with what is divine in us (cvvOewpodvres). He 
 (Paul) means (dyot): ‘ For thou hast seen thy Brother, 
 thou hast seen thy God. 1 think that the Saviour God 
 _has been expressed to us as far as our present circum- 
 _ stances (admit),! but after the putting away (amddeow) 
 of the flesh, then face to face, distinctly and by intelligent 
 apprehension (opsotixds Kab kaTadkn7TiKoOs), when the 
 heart becomes pure’ (S, i. 19). Clement means that 
 men will know more of God when the image, which they 
 now see in a mirror, is reflected in themselves. ‘The 
 prophet,’ said Barnabas, ‘speaketh the parable of the 
 Lord ; who shall understand, except he who is wise and 
 prudent and who loves the Lord?’ (c.6). When that 
 which is perfect is come, we shall make progréss, no 
 longer understanding by enigmas but faceto face (Iren. 
 ‘iv. 9, 2). The exhibition of the Saviour was in order to 
 ‘Perfect God’s likeness in man; and His second advent 
 will be manifest and glorious (Justin’s Dial. I10). ‘The 
 image of God is the divine and royal Word, the dispas- 
 
 1 roy cwriipa olpat Oedy eipjabat hutv Te viv. 
 a2 
 
324. .°-THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 sionate Man; and the image of the image is the human — 
 
 mind, and, if you wish for another name for the likeness, 
 
 Moses calls it the following of God (Deut. xiii. 4). And } 
 I reckon all the virtuous to be servants and followers of — 
 God: (S.v. 145 C 277). The perfect man associates — 
 through love with the Beloved, 70 whom he is allied 
 by free choice, and to whom he approaches closer by the 
 habit which is by training. For the Word of God. is — 
 
 intellectual (voepos), according to the image of mind seen in ; 
 man. Thus also the good man is godlike in form and — 
 
 semblance as regards the soul. And,on the other hand, 
 God ts like man, for the distinctive form of each is the 
 mind by which we are characterised (Sei vi, Oo)! Tie 
 
 holiness of the enlightened man and the reciprocal f 
 
 benevolence of the friend of God are a sort of counter- 
 
 ee 
 
 part or echo (avremvatpopy) of Providence. For neither 
 
 is God involuntarily good as the fire is) Warming = 0% 
 
 and he who is being saved shall not be saved against his @ 
 will. Man received the commandments that he might — 
 
 be self-impelled in matters to be chosen and avoided. — 
 
 Wherefore God does not do good by necessity, but /rom ( 
 
 His own free choice benefits those who spontaneously ~ 
 
 turn (S. vii. 7; C? 439). 
 
 Man’s consciousness of intelligence and freedom of | 
 choice and his sense of righteousness and goodness give — 
 
 him the primary ideas of God's rational, moral, and 
 
 personal character. If we set aside our own conscious 
 ness as illusive, we unsettle the basis of our belief in | 
 God, ‘who made man like Himself, in His own power’ — 
 
 (sue potestatis, Iren. iv. 38, 4). ‘God has always pre- 
 
 served the liberty and freewill in man as well as His 
 
 own way of moral suasion ’ (swam exhortationem, iv. 15, 2). 
 ‘Man being rational and in this respect like to God 
 
 created in free-will and in his own power, is himself the 
 
GOD: HIS IMAGE AND PREPARATORY WORK. 325 
 
 - cause to himself that sometimes he becomes wheat and 
 sometimes chaff’ (iv. 4, 3). The moral likeness, whether 
 
 of God or of evil, becomes stamped on men in accordance 
 _ with the objects of their choice. 
 
 THE FATHER’S PREPARATORY TRAINING AND PRE- 
 DESTINATION.—‘ A natural manifestation of the one 
 Almighty God,’ says Clement, ‘existed in the previous 
 ages of the world among all right-thinking men; and 
 most men, those who did not act shamelessly towards 
 the truth, apprehended the eternal beneficence in divine 
 providence.’ Even if men have attained philosophy, he 
 says, they must still be saved by learning the truth 
 through Christ ; but, as we read in Genesis that man 
 partook of divine breath or inspiration, therefore man is 
 far from being destitute of divine thought. We must 
 not think of inspiration as if the Holy Spirit were in 
 each of us as a part of God (S. v.13). Paul did not 
 disparage (Ssa8dAXo) philosophy, although he described 
 it in a figurative way, as rudimentary (orovyevotexy) and 
 as a preparatory training (mpo7avdeia) for the truth, ex- 
 horting the Colossians not to be enticed to return again 
 to this elementary teaching. But if any one should say 
 that the faint light or dim teaching of Greek philosophy 
 was discovered through the human understanding, still 
 the Scriptures say that understanding is given by God 
 (Ps. cxix. 69, 125). David; indeed, confessed that the 
 covenants are the chief thing and given to the most ex- 
 cellent when he said that God hath not done ¢hus to any 
 nation ; but the word tus shows the pre-eminence of the 
 Israelites, not the exclusion of other nations, to whom God 
 hath also done but not ¢hkus (cxlvii. 20). When David 
 speaks of the nations who forget God (Ps. xxix. 3), he 
 implies that there was a certain dim (apavpa) knowledge 
 
326 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 of God even among the nations (S. vi. 8). To ascribe the : 
 true philosophy uttered by the Greeks to mere accident 
 or chance would be to deify chance; and, if we call it a 
 natural conception of the mind, we know that one God _ 
 is the Creator of nature and Father of the common mind 
 of man (S.i.19; C! 415). Clement considered the philo- 
 sophy of the Greeks, as well as the Hebrew law, to be a 
 schoolmaster or child’s guide, paving the way to Christ, © 
 preparing beforehand the man who is perfected by Christ, _ 
 What was bestowed at seasonable times on each genera-_ 
 tion for its advantage, trains men beforehand (1potras- 
 dever) for the word of the Lord. We must therefore use 
 this preparatory training of the world (79 coopuxh Tatogia), 
 but not continue permanently in it (S. i. 5; C! 307) tot 
 as Neander says, ‘when that which is but preparatory in 
 its design fails to understand its true relation to the whole 
 historical development and attempts to assert its own 
 independence, then it invariably becomes an opponent 
 of that higher stage which it was its very purpose to 
 prepare for’ (Hist. i. 50, Bohn). The Jews were thus 
 exhorted to come forth from the grievous burdens 
 which they had voluntarily bound on themselves ; and 
 the Gentiles, whose ears philosophy fitted for the Gospel 
 (20ifovea mpos TO kjpvypa), not only required this faith — 
 in the Lord but also the abandonment of idolatry. The — 
 Shepherd of Hermas recognises certain righteous persons 
 among Jews and Gentiles not only before the appearance | 
 of Christ but before the law, according as they were well- — 
 pleasing before God (kata thy pos rov Ody evapéoTnaw), 
 Such men, says Clement, were those who had lived in 9 
 
 1 émadaydéye: yap Kal ath to ‘EAAnvindy ds 6 vouos Tovs ‘EBpatous eis 
 Xpiotdv,  Tpomapacrevdcer Tolvuy 7} dirocodpia mpocdorowica tov Ged 
 Xpiorov Tererduevoy (S. i. 5 ; C! 366), 
 
GOD: HIS IMAGE AND PREPARATORY WORK. 327 
 
 righteousness according to the law and philosophy, 
 having passed through life not perfectly but prone to sin 
 (dpaprntixas). According to Clement, the perfection 
 arrived at by Christian teaching and discipline includes 
 exemption from passion and from this proneness to sin ; 
 but these men had an imperfect righteousness, which 
 God recognised whether they were Jews or Greeks. 
 God is no respecter of persons; and as the apostles 
 did in the one place (among the Jews), so in the other 
 they evangelised those among the heathen who were 
 ready or prepared for conversion. To.them also ot 
 former times, God’s well-pleasing servants, accepted of 
 God among every nation, the Gospel was preached in 
 Hades, that they might be translated to a higher order 
 (rdfw). God cares for all men; if He did not, the rea- 
 son would be either that He is unwilling or indifferent or 
 unable. But none of these suppositions befits Him who 
 isthe Lord of all, and who for man’s sake invested Him- 
 self with our nature and its susceptibility to suffering. 
 «According to the amount of fitness (émrurndecorns) pos- 
 sessed by each, the Saviour of all men has dispensed 
 His beneficence both to Greeks and barbarians (Jews), 
 even to those of them who were predestinated (set apart 
 beforehand) and in due time called—to faithful and elect 
 -(select) men. He is the Saviour of those who believe, 
 assigning special honours to those who believe in a spe- 
 cially excellent way ; and He is the Lord of those who 
 have been faithless, till being unable to confess Him 
 they obtain the peculiar and appropriate boon that is by 
 Him’ (S. vii. 2; C?410; comp. v.14; C?301). This is 
 Clement’s doctrine of ‘ predestination’ and ‘election’ ; it 
 
 1 robs e& eOvav emirndelous eis emiatpodyy ed’nyyeaAtoayto (S. vi. 63 
 
 457020) * Sil, 0.5104 28). 
 
328 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 coincides with that of Irenzus, who says that ‘ Our Lord,. 
 the Word of God, in the first instance drew slaves to 
 God, but afterwards set those free who were subject to 
 Him, as He Himself declares to His disciples’ (Iren. iv. 
 13,4; John xv. 15). It is also the doctrine of Barnabas,. 
 who said that God came to ‘call men not by respect of 
 persons, but according as the Spirit had prepared them’ 
 (c. 13, 19). The difficulties connected with the Scrip-- 
 tural doctrine of predestination belong to that class 
 which must, according to Clement, be explained by the 
 congtuity of the dispensations! with one another and 
 with the state of those to whom they were given. 
 
 The opinions of these Fathers in regard to Divine 
 foreknowledge has already been spoken of (Ds, 100}! 
 Irenzus speaks of God’s foreknowing all, but it is in con-. 
 nection with His dispensational pians, ‘all these things” 
 (iii. 16, 7, iv. 32, 2), and in connection with the passing. 
 away of the present fashion of things (v. 36,1). He 
 speaks of God’s knowing the number (character?) of those 
 who will not believe, as He takes cognisance beforehand 
 (preecognitor) of all (men), and as turning away His face 
 from men of this stamp, as in the case of Pharaoh (iv. 
 29,2). So Justin says that when God predicts about 
 men of this stamp, that they would certainly be pun- 
 ished, it is because God knew them beforehand (from - 
 their previous conduct and acquired character), that. 
 they would be unchangeably wicked, not because He 
 made them so (Dial. 141) ; and that if God has absolute 
 purposes or decrees, which He will certainly bring to. 
 pass, it is one of these that He will reward men according: 
 to the value of their actions, and He predicts also that — 
 He will do this (Ap. i. 44). 
 
 1 Thy GdAndeay did THs aKoAovdlas Tay diadjKwyv capynvigorvtes (S. viii. 
 
 16; C? 481). 
 
329 
 
 GEAR TER OE: 
 
 CHRIST'S ATONEMENT AND RIGHTEOUSNESS. 
 
 THEZexpressions, the righteousness of God, the glory of 
 God, the love of God, have a twofold reference in the 
 Scriptures. There is righteousness exhibited to men 
 with a view to be communicated as far as possible ; and 
 there is the righteousness of God in men, communicated 
 by means of the former. ‘The righteousness of God,’ 
 said St. Paul, ‘is in the Gospel manifested (1) unto all 
 men and (2) upon all who believe’ (Rom. iii. 21, 22). 
 The prophets also use the expression, the righteousness 
 of God, in this double sense, speaking of it as something 
 shown or brought near in order to be taken hold of or 
 
 _. practised, and identifying it with God’s salvation. ‘Thus 
 
 saith Jehovah, Keep ye justice and do righteousness ; 
 for My salvation is near to come and My righteousness 
 to be revealed ; blessed is the man that doeth this and 
 the son of man that layeth hold on it.’! Moses also, in 
 a passage quoted by St. Paul, exhorts the Israelites not 
 to think that they could bring this teaching down from 
 heaven by their own untaught works. ‘But the word 
 is very nigh thee, that thou mayest do it’ (Deut. xxx. 14). 
 
 There is the same double sense of the words denoting 
 justification in the New Testament, if we accept the 
 interpretation given by the early Fathers. God is 
 
 SUAS. lyi..1, 2 3:so ds. xly; Se xlvt 280g Ixiisoy, 2 <abss xevilin eas 
 
330 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 exhibited to men as the ‘God who exists in the invari- 
 ableness of righteous goodness’; He sends His light 
 and His rain even to the unthankful and to the unholy ; 
 He treats all men as if they deserved His teaching and 
 His fatherly correction, for He gives it to them, not 
 imputing the sins which they have done in ignorance 
 and mercifully correcting much that is done in spite of 
 knowledge. He thus justifies those whom He teaches ; 
 He treats them as if they deserved it. ‘As therefore 
 every fatherhood is referable (avatpéyet) to God the 
 Creator, so is the teaching of good things to the Lord, 
 both that which justifies (77 éscasotea) and that which 
 leads to and assists it’ (S. vi. 7). ‘Philosophy at one 
 time justified the Greeks, not to the extent of that perfect 
 righteousness (which those have who are taught of God, 
 by the Son of God), but philosophy is found helping 
 (cuvepyos) towards this, as the first and second flight of 
 steps help you in your ascent to the upper room, and 
 as the grammarian helps the philosopher’ (S. i. 20). But 
 Clement also uses the word ‘justify’ in the sense of 
 making gust or imparting personal righteousness, and 
 interprets I Cor. vi. 11 in this sense. St. Paul is speak- 
 ing of the duty of Christians not to retaliate, and 
 reasoning that at one time the Christian converts were 
 such men as those with whom they were now going to 
 law. ‘But ye have been washed, but ye have been 
 sanctified, but ye have been justified in the name of the 
 Lord Jesus and in the Spirit of our God,’ ye have been 
 made (explains Clement) so to speak to be righteous as 
 He Himselfis, and blended (avexpa@nre) as far as possible 
 with the Holy Spirit (S. vii. 14). ‘Falsehood is not 
 dissipated by the bare presentation of the truth, but by 
 the practice (ypyoes) of it’ (Exh. 8). Ina letter of the 
 
CHRIST'S ATONEMENT AND RIGHTEOUSNESS. 331° 
 
 Lyons martyrs of the second century, preserved by 
 Eusebius, they quote Rev. xxii. 11, reading: ‘He that 
 is just let him be still (more) justified.” The ancient 
 MSS. read ‘let him still do righteousness ;’ and the - 
 meaning is that God gives men more and more of what 
 they continue to choose, whether sin or holiness. The 
 same double sense of the word ‘justify’ is found in 
 Clement of Rome. ‘We are not justified by ourselves, 
 nor by our own wisdom or understanding or godliness, 
 or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart, 
 but through that faith through which from the beginning 
 God has justefied all men (c. 32). The Saviour is the 
 mirror in which we see the truth or saving way ; His 
 blood is the grace of a new mind (petavota) set before the 
 whole world (c. 7, 36); but the wise man displays his 
 wisdom not in words but in works, and shows himself 
 thankful (c. 38). Clement exhorts the Corinthians to 
 holiness, concord, humility, self-control, to avoid all 
 arrogance, audacity, or evil-speaking, ‘being justified by 
 our works and not by our words’ (c. 30). So Irenzeus 
 speaks of a justification of faith, which men had before 
 circumcision, that is, the justification of all who follow the 
 Word of God and endure to be strangers in the world. 
 The giving of circumcision was intermediate between faith 
 which preceded and faith which followed ; and the giving 
 of it to Abraham indicated that he would also be the 
 father of those who from among the circumcision were 
 faithful, both testaments and one faith being prefigured . 
 in him (iv. 25, 1). It was a mistake to suppose that 
 ritual sacrifices and observances propitiated God ; but. 
 “while rejecting these things, God makes matter of ex- 
 hortation and admonition those things whereby man is 
 justified and draws near to God, things which tend to 
 
332 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 salvation’ (¢g., the weightier matters of the law, Is. i. 
 16-18). ‘We who have believed turn to the Lord’s. 
 service those things which, when heathens, we acquired. 
 by our unrighteousness, and so are justified’ (iv. 17, I, 
 30, 3). 
 
 The same double sense is discernible in the words. 
 denoting forgiveness and grace ; the faith itself is some-- 
 times spoken of as the object presented (Gal. ili. 25) as. 
 well as man’s assent, insight, or obedience. Thus Clement 
 of Alexandria speaks of the illuminating word as for-. 
 giving sins; that is, God bestows His teaching gratui- 
 tously, not imputing sins done in ignorance, blotting 
 out sins ‘which are not established according to choice,’’ 
 but correcting others, who sin after enlightenment, ‘ not 
 passing over their transgressions in silence.’ You see 
 then the good God awarding (amovewntixov) and for- 
 giving as is fitting (xa7’ a&/av), and prescribing modes of | 
 cure, according to the maladies; but it is of the nature 
 of a change of mind (yerdvola) to generate pardon,. 
 pardon being established not according to forgiveness. 
 but according to cure.! The debtor was forgiven in the 
 first instance by his lord, but when he manifested an. 
 unforgiving spirit the first forgiveness was cancelled. 
 So men do not really obtain any blessing by God's. 
 teaching and guidance, gratuitouslybestowed upon them,,. 
 
 1 ovyyvoun 5& ob Kata &deow BAAG KaTa Taow ouviorara (S. li. 
 15; Ped. i. 7; C! 152). Clement takes occasion by the etymologicaf 
 meaning of the word merdvoia, translated repentance, to show that it is. 
 not sufficient to condemn ourselves for past transgressions, that we must 
 after this take heed (uer& tadra vohcaytes), so as to divest ourselves of 
 such sinful gratifications (S. iv. 22). This is what he calls a sure and 
 thorough repentance ; but to be continually sinning and continually repent- - 
 ing of the same sins is the semblance of repentance, not repentance- 
 itself (S. ii. 13). | 
 
CHRIST’S ATONEMENT AND RIGHTEOUSNESS. 333 
 
 unless they are made morally better or healed by it; on 
 the contrary, it would have been well for them if they 
 had not known the way of righteousness. In the same 
 way we read of the saving grace of God being manifested 
 to all men, teaching and disciplining us (Tit. ii. 11) ; and ; 
 
 of men falling short of, failing to attain or to profit by this 
 
 grace (Heb. xii. 15). ‘The law,’ says Clement, ‘was 
 ancient grace given by Moses, but grace and truth were 
 by Jesus Christ ; for truth being the grace of the Father 
 is the eternal work of the Word (who, becoming the 
 Gospel, broke the mystic silence of prophetic enigmas, 
 Exh, i.; C! 25). Moses threatens the man who will not 
 thear that Prophet. Wherefore prophecy invests Him 
 with a rod, that those whom the persuasive word heals 
 not, the threatening may heal; and whom the threaten- 
 ing heals not, the rod may heal; and whom the rod 
 heals not, the fire may devour’ (Peed. i. 7 ; C’ 153, 154). 
 So Clement of Rome says that God wishes His people 
 to share in that grace of repentance which in the blood 
 of Christ is set before the world (c. 7, 8). ‘Nearly 
 every passage,’ says Dr. Donaldson, ‘in which Justin 
 mentions the giving of God’s grace is in connection with 
 the understanding of the (Old Testament) Scriptures’ 
 (pp. 174, 328). So Irenzus speaks of God’s not cutting 
 the Jews off from good counsel, inasmuch as He is 
 merciful (iv. 17, 2) ; of God’s pouring out His compassion 
 upon us, in that the dayspring from on high hath 
 appeared to those who sat in darkness (iii. 10, 2); and 
 of investigating the Scriptures, which are spiritual 
 throughout, so as by the grace of God to explain some 
 parts of them (ii. 28, 3). : 
 
 Tue ATONEMENT OR EXHIBITED RIGHTEOUS- 
 NESS.—The dispensational manifestations of God were 
 
334 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 beneficially adapted tothe people to whom they were given. 
 We have received from God the atonement (catadArayijv) ; 
 Christ, given as a sign (L. ii. 34), manifested to win and 
 train weak. men (R. v. 6); bearing ritual burdens im- 
 posed on the people through their sins and ignorances 
 (Heb. ix. 7, 10) ; superseding self-imposed curses (G. iii. 
 13), to reconcile or conciliate men to Himself, to draw them 
 to perfection by what senses and means of knowing they 
 have (2 Cor. v. 19). The necessity of doing everything 
 in accordance with law and of respecting the nature and 
 freedom which God has given us is the key to the early 
 patristic doctrine of our Lord’s ‘economy of suffering’ 
 (dispositio passionis), as Irenzeus calls it (iii. 18, 5). It 
 became God to regain His own by suasion not compul- 
 sion, not else could we receive divine growth than by what 
 eyes, ears and reason we have. According to reason, 
 suasion and law (rationabzliter, secundum suadelam, juste), 
 He redeemed us with His blood, giving His soul in behalf 
 of (Zyper) our soul and His flesh for (andi, to match) our 
 flesh, when thus bringing God down to man by the Spirit 
 and again dedicating (avariOgvros) man to God by the 
 incarnation (z.¢. making man exhibit God as ina Temple), 
 He bestows upon us incorruption by communion with 
 God (v. 1; 1,2). He goes on to say that our Lord must 
 have been truly man, otherwise He would have been 
 acting untruly and not exhibiting truth; and that he 
 must unite God to man, otherwise there would be no 
 quickening spirit in the image presented, nothing to 
 behold but the old Adam, who was overcome. Our Lord 
 acted not only benignly but according to law (juste) in 
 redeeming us by His blood from apostasy. The use 
 of the bread and wine in the sacrament shows that in that 
 creation which apostatised the truth of God is manifested 
 
CHRIST'S ATONEMENT AND RIGHTEOUSNESS. 335 
 
 for our nourishment (v. 2, 2). Irenzeus is labouring to 
 show that salvation is not apart from the body, since our 
 bodies are to be temples of God as‘our Lord’s body was 
 ( v. 6, 2), and since it is through the flesh and blood of our 
 Lord that we are reconciled, redeemed, reclaimed, and 
 saved (v.14). Our Lord formed sight to the man born 
 blind (John ix.) by outward actions and by clay, by spit- 
 ting, making clay of the spittle, smearing it over his. 
 eyes, and sending him to wash in Siloam. Thus our 
 Lord in the last days, manifesting Himself unto men, 
 formed sight for him who was born blind from Adam, 
 seeking out and winning back His own lost sheep (v. 15 ; 
 2, 3). Thus by the very same things wherein we refused 
 to hear God and believe His word (namely, by sensuous 
 things), He brought in obedience and assent to His word 
 (v. 16, 3). He became the Mediator between God and 
 man, on the one hand, propitiating on our behalf 
 the Father against whom we had sinned, rectifying or 
 healing (consolatus) our disobedience by obedience to 
 His laws ; and, on the other hand, conferring upon us 
 intercourse with and subjection to (conversationem et sub- 
 jectionem) our Maker. Our Lord taught the bystanders 
 to give glory to God through the evidence of their senses, 
 through those signs’which He accomplished (v. 17 ; 1, 2). 
 He is both the Word of God and very man, communi- 
 cating with invisible beings after the manner of the in- 
 tellect, but appointing a law observable to the senses and 
 so reigning manifestly over things visible and pertain- 
 ing to men (v. 18, 3). The enemy would not have been 
 legitimately (jwste) vanquished unless it had been a man 
 born of woman who conquered him (v. 21, 1). For the 
 clory of God is the living man ; and the life of man is 
 the beholding of God (visio Det, iv. 20,7). 
 
3360 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 In the same way Clement of Alexandria says that 
 our Lord, who was not of the world, came as one who 
 was of the world, clothed with all virtue and leading 
 man, the foster child of the world, to higher worlds of 
 thought and understanding, using metaphorical descrip- 
 tion, while the very sufferings which His flesh endured 
 are, when the Scriptures are opened up, the power and 
 wisdom of God (S. vi. 15; C? 378, 379). He acted the 
 saving drama of humanity,! helping our weakness; and 
 by becoming the Gospel broke the mystic silence of pro- 
 phetic enigmas (Exh. 1; C! 25). When Isaiah said that 
 the Lord laid our iniquities upon Him, the meaning 
 plainly is that upon Him was laid the task of correcting 
 and ‘reforming ‘them (Paed.4.7'8’;, €!) 58) “Our\:Lord 
 re-formed the old world symbolisms, burdens or scourges 
 imposed by reason of sins, and uses various means to 
 correct. Why, it was asked, should Providence allow 
 good men to be persecuted? Asa training in endur- 
 ance, answered Clement (S. iv. 11). Why, in God’s pro- 
 vidence, did Christ sufferon account of men’s sins? It is 
 through endurance of temptation and through suffering in 
 order to benefit others that man’s nature is perfected, so 
 He who was exhibited as our Brother, the Pattern of this 
 perfection, the High Priest of our calling, was exhibited 
 as enduring temptation, as learning obedience by the 
 things which He suffered (Heb. v. 8). Providence is a 
 disciplinary art. Men suffer on account of their own sins ; 
 and our Lord and His apostles were disciplined on ac- 
 count of ours (dca Tas 7uodv). Whenmen do well and 
 suffer for it, it is the highest excellence if they take it 
 patiently. ‘Wherefore our Lord was not hindered from 
 
 1 1d cwrhpioy Spava t7s dvOpwrdtnTos Swexpivaro (Exh. ro; C} 98). 
 
CHRIST’S ATONEMENT AND RIGHTEOUSNESS. 337 
 
 suffering (va@eiv, omitted in Clark) this sanctification of 
 ‘ours ’(S. iv. 12). 
 
 Our Lord suffered both as a type of those sufferings 
 which a man must endure either by correcting himself or 
 by being corrected, if he is purified from sin: and He 
 suffered as the highest example of that law of our race 
 by which one man may take upon himself vicariously the 
 evil consequences of another’s sin or folly.! If, for instance, 
 a man squanders his property, his friend may relieve him 
 at the expense of his own convenience. Ifa man’s mis- 
 conduct threatens to break up his family, some other 
 member may prevent this result by long-suffering endur- 
 ance. If a soldier loses his life in warning his comrades 
 of the enemy’s approach, or a man perish in rescuing 
 others from a conflagration, such men may be said to 
 die vicariously for others ; but then no_one thinks that 
 the enemy or the fire will cease to destroy men if they 
 
 do not heed the warning. 
 It has been already mentioned that at the departure 
 
 of the Israelites from Egypt, burnt-offerings and sacrifices 
 were not required. The Ten Commandments were given, 
 but at first the Lord addedfno more (Deut. v. 22). 
 ‘When, however, the people made a golden calf, showing 
 that they were prone to idolatry, headstrong and unfit 
 for liberty, they were subjected to the burdensome ritual 
 ofthe old Mosaic law, for their good. So our Lord died 
 in behalf of men yet weak and in their idolatrous sins 
 (Rom. v. 6, 8, 10; 1 Cor. viii. 11). He pleased God in 
 that He conformed to the law of our race and of its 
 growth, conciliating and correcting childish men by sen- 
 suous means. The sensuous services of the priests are 
 said to be before the Lord as an atonement. The High 
 
 * See Sir Edward Strachey’s work on Isaiah, pp. 381-383. 
 Z 
 
338 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 Priest was to wear the crownin front of his mitre, inscribed 
 with the words, Holiness to the Lord, for a pleasing thing 
 before the Lord, that he might dear the iniquity of the 
 people’s holy things and gifts (Ex. xxviii. 38). The 
 lamp was to be ordered before the Lord (Ex. xxvii. 21). 
 The blood of the sacrifices was to be sprinkled before 
 the Lord (Lev. iv. 6; xiv. 16); the flesh of the sin-offer- 
 ings was to be eaten by the priests in the holy place to 
 bear the iniquity of the congregation before the Lord 
 (Lev. x. 17). But on the great day of atonement, the 
 whole ceremonialism of Judaism was atoned for. Sin 
 had caused men to flee from God’s presence, to cover 
 truth with dark imageries, to multiply God’s altars into. 
 sin or pervert His laws into scourges (Hos. viii. 11; Ez. 
 xx. ; Jer. ii. 19). Our Lord took such rites on Himself ;. 
 His blood abolishes the blood of circumcision (Just. D. 
 24); He was set forth as a propitiatory covering in His 
 blood (Rom. iii. 25) as doomed to death, a life-giving 
 spectacle, that after this Man’s type, we might die to the 
 flesh, to the old dead works of the law and heathenism, 
 and live rationally to God; and that, as in things invi- 
 sible so also in things visible, He might have the pre- 
 eminence. We still wait for the redemption of our 
 bodies ; but now we have the atonement, the Word made 
 flesh, conciliating those alienated in mind, leading cap- 
 tive their captivity to sense, making their death the 
 means of life, as Clement’s words, put into the mouth of 
 the Saviour, show.. ‘I, thy nourisher, gave Myselfas bread, 
 which, when one has tasted, he has no more experience . 
 of death ; and I daily afford the drink of immortality. I, 
 a teacher of heavenly lessons, contended earnestly in thy 
 behalf to death, and made good (érica) thy death, 
 which thou owedst for thy past sins and unfaithfulness. 
 
CHRIST'S ATONEMENT AND RIGHTEOUSNESS. 339 
 
 to God’ (De Div. Ser. 23). Our Lord became man 
 and ‘acted the saving drama of humanity,’ suffering 
 at the hands of those whom He came to enlighten, and 
 doing away with ‘the mystic silence’ or burdensome 
 curse of a blind worship. But He never removed the 
 eternal laws of well-doing or changed the eternal ways 
 of God’s blessing men. Onthe contrary, He re-enacted 
 these laws and manifested these ways of blessing, | 
 The passage in Isaiah (liii. 5) which says that He was 
 wounded from (zz) our transgressions and bruised from 
 our iniquities is explained by Barnabas as having a | 
 double sense, as referring both to those men in whom sins 
 were consummated by their crucifying Him, and to 
 Christians who benefit by His sufferings. In regard to 
 the former, the meaning is that the stroke of His flesh 
 was from (2&, Heb. mzz) them; that He suffered from 
 (ab=min) or at their hands. But in regard to Christians, 
 he says that the meaning is that our Lord suffered on 
 account of or in behalf of men (propter, irrép), that their 
 hearts might be redeemed from darkness, and that, being 
 ransomed from the iniquity and captivity of their error, 
 they might live ruling over the earth and its beasts and 
 be made men after a new pattern (c. 5, 6,14). So also 
 Justin speaks of our Lord taking upon Him the curses 
 of all men (ze. scourging imageries), and as suffering 
 from the curses of the Jewish people, who in their 
 synagogues cursed Him and His followers, while other 
 nations carried out these curses (Dial.95,96). So, while 
 Marcion inferred from Gal. iii. 13, that.Christ was cursed 
 by God as a substitutionary purchase-price, Tertullian 
 contended that Christ was not cursed by God but by the 
 Jews, that their crime, not the hanging on the tree, was 
 
 the curse. He applied the term satisfaction to men’s 
 Z2 : 
 
340 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 amendment by good works. In other respects he agrees 
 with Ireneeus (Hagenbach, I. 117 ; Dorner, I. i. 454). 
 
 Polycarp says that the testimony of the cross is the 
 confession which Christians must make ; that Paul and 
 other martyrs suffered with Him, not loving this world 
 but Him who died in our behalf (isép) and was raised 
 on our account (8v #pds, c. 9). So Ireneus says that He 
 was made flesh for (imép i. 9, 2) men ; that He died and 
 was buried for (pro) them, and rose on their account (iii. 
 19, 2; 16, 6). 
 
 Our Lord is generally said to have died in behalf of 
 (hyper) men, as in 2 Cor. v. 14,153 or on account of (8ca) 
 sins or in sin’s fleshly garb (Rom. viii. 3), about (zep¢) 
 sin, that is, with a view to eradicate it (Heb. x. 18, 26; 
 1 Pet. iii. 18). There is one saying of our Lord’s in 
 which He speaks of the Son of man giving His life a 
 ransom for many, the proposition azz being used (Matt. 
 xx, 28; Mark x. 45). When the two sons of Zebedee 
 came with their mother asking that they might sit on 
 His right and left hand, in His Kingdom, the other 
 apostles were indignant. But our Lord called them to- 
 gether and explained that in His kingdom the one who 
 is the servant of all is the greatest, for even the Son of 
 man came not to minister unto but to minister, and to 
 give His lifea ransom ‘for (anti) many. The preposition 
 anti means primarily over against, corresponding to, to 
 match. ‘Thus Peter was bidden pay the stater, found in 
 the fish’s mouth, ‘ for (azz) me and for thee.’ St. John (i. 
 16) speaks of grace for grace, corresponding to grace. 
 Thus antitype means the counterpart of a type ; and the 
 Greek word antitheos does not mean opposed to or instead 
 of the gods, but, a match for the gods, or, as it is trans- 
 lated in Clement (C? 219), egual to the gods. Now our 
 
CHRIST’S ATONEMENT AND RIGHTEOUSNESS. 341 
 
 Lord was the type unto whom the Hebrew Christians 
 were directed to look, ‘who for (azt/) the joy set before 
 Him endured the cross, despising the shame,’ who is 
 ‘represented in the Gospel as wearied because toiling 
 for us,’ as Clement says, when he quotes the passage in 
 question (Peed. i. 9 ; C! 70), and who wishes His followers 
 like Himself to give their lives for (Zyger) the brethren 
 (1 John iii. 16), that is, not to live to themselves (2 Cor. 
 v.15). Hegave away His life in doing good to men, and, 
 in this sense, may be said to have suffered vicariously, 
 that they might be released from their evils and blessed. 
 But it was also as a type of His followers that He suffered 
 in this vicarious way ; they are also to labour and endure 
 hardship, that their brethren may be relieved. He 
 suffered thus in behalf of (Zyper) men, and as a type (azzz) 
 of many. But if we suppose that the preposition (av/t) 
 has here its second meaning zzstead of, in the room of, we 
 ought to remember that a successor or predecessor may 
 be instead of another. Thus it is said that Archelaus 
 reigned zustead of his father Herod (Matt. ii. 22). Our 
 Lord took the place of old prophetic types, representing 
 many who crucify the flesh and rise to new life. The 
 sayings of our Lord are deep and full of hidden meaning ; 
 there is such a thing as a ‘ carnal confidence upon mis- 
 understood and misapplied precepts’ of Scripture. [sit 
 consistent with what we receive as the basis of our belief 
 in God or with other passages of Scripture to represent 
 salvation as not a matter of becoming better men or 
 better stewards, or of leading a good life, but of ceasing © 
 from one’s doing because all was done, of having God’s 
 eternal blessings made over all at once, as a made up 
 thing and irrevocably, to those who agree to this, of having 
 put over us an external screen, which even at the close 
 
342 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY-GNOSIS. 
 
 of the career covers the real character whatever it is, or, 
 perhaps, of having put zzfo us a new nature, in some 
 magical or mystico-physical way? The formation of 
 character, the blessed Seal, is the result of choice (Clem. 
 
 S. ii, 3). | 
 THE WEDDING GARMENT IN THE JUDGMENT. 
 
 Ireneeus found many theories of redemption among 
 the Gnostics, one of which was so similar to the one just 
 mentioned, that people at the present time have admitted 
 that they would express themselves in a similar way, that 
 they hope to be screened in the day of judgment ina 
 similar way from the eye of the Judge, and that, their 
 sins having been once punished in Christ, they are now 
 out of the power of the Judge, who will not, according to 
 justice, punish their offences twice. Of course no one 
 now would speak about Silence and Wisdom as the 
 Gnostics did. ‘Some of the disciples of Marcus,’ said 
 Irenzus, ‘maintain that they know more than all others, 
 and that they alone have imbibed the greatness of that 
 
 " It seems impossible to describe these ideas clearly without seeming to 
 use offensive language : and yet the above words have been used by men 
 who inculcate these doctrines. Even Fairbairn, in histypology, uses ‘screen ’ 
 in this way. ‘In note E, I have quoted from Mr. Spurgeon’s sermons of 
 August 22 and 29, 1880. Hekindly informs me that he would not hesitate 
 touse the language. Such ideas are by no means confined to Mr. Spurgeon’s 
 denomination. Sucha theory was that of Ralph Erskine, who, in his Gospel 
 Sonnets, says : 
 
 The greatest sims to mortal men that cleave 
 shan’t damn the souls in Jesus that believe ; . 
 
 because they on the very method fall 
 that well can make amends to God for all.—P. 71. 
 
 No process more the law (i.e. of well-doing) can tent, 
 Thou stand’st without its verge, 
 
 and may’st at pleasure now present 
 thy husband’s full discharge.—P. 76, 
 
CHRIST’S ATONEMENT AND RIGHTEOUSNESS. 343 
 
 power which is unspeakable. They also maintain that 
 they have attained to a height above all power, and that 
 on this account they do all things freely, having no fear 
 in anything. For by reason of this ransom (or redemp- 
 tion), they are, they.say, out of the power of and invisible 
 tothe Judge. But even if He should happen to lay hold 
 of them, then they might stand in His presence along with 
 the Ransom and say as follows: “O thou Assessor! of 
 God (or, Thou who sittest beside God) and of Silence, 
 mystic before ages began: behold the Judge is at hand 
 and the crier orders me to make my defence. But do 
 Thou, as knowing the things of both, present the cause 
 (case or account Adyor, rationem) of both of us to the 
 Judge, as being in reality one cause (or account).”? On 
 this the mother (Wisdom) puts the Homeric helmet of 
 Pluto upon them, so that they may invisibly escape the 
 
 The Judge will ne’er demand of thee 
 two payments for one debt ; 
 
 thee with one Victim wholly free 
 thy husband kindly set.—P. go. 
 
 The sentence heaven did full pronounce 
 has pardoned all my sins at once 
 
 and even from future crimes acquit | 
 before I could the facts commit. 
 
 I’m always in a pardoned state 
 
 before and after sin. —P. 163. 
 
 1 Wisdom or Sophia (i. 5, 6). In Clement’s exposition of the Fifth 
 Commandment, he says that wisdom is our mystic mother, as God is our 
 Father (S. vi. 16 ; C? 391). 
 
 2 elya te avtovs év tye: tmép macav Sbvayw: 51d Kal éeAevdepws 
 xdyra mpdocew, undéva ev undevt pdBov Exovras. Ad yap Thy amodvTpwoww 
 &kparhrovs Kal dopdrous ylveoOar TG Kpirh. Eide kal emtAdBorto aitay, 
 mapaornodyres ait@ peta THS Amorutpdcews Tade elmorev; & wdpedpe Geo 
 wal pvotichs mpd aidvos Xvyhs . .. od 5 Kpirhs eyyis wal 6 Khpvt me 
 KeAever dmodoyeicbar’ at 5& ws emiotanevn TA Gupotépwr juay roy imép 
 d&uporépwy hpav Adyov as eva bvta TE Kpith wapdoryooy (Tren. i, 13, 6 ; 
 Harvey’s /reneus, vol. i. pp. 123-125). : 
 
344 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 Judge, and conducts them to the bridal chamber.’ Mar- 
 cus and his followers were among the most disreputable 
 of all the Gnostics; and it is not at all to the credit of 
 a modern theory that such men held it. 
 
 Irenzeus and the other early fathers taught very 
 differently. After quoting the parable of the marriage 
 feast, where a man was found not having the wedding 
 garment, Ireneus says: ‘He (our Lord) showed that 
 along with our vocation we must be adorned with works 
 of righteousness, that the Spirit may rest upon us, for 
 this is the wedding garment. For He will not endure 
 in His bridal chamber anything evil, or unjust, or abomi- 
 nable . . . and metes out most deservedly, according to 
 their desert, to the unthankful and such as feel not His. 
 kindness’ (iv. 36, 6). The redeemed are robed in light, 
 as when Clement speaks of a divine power of goodness. 
 clinging to the righteous soul through a right life and 
 intelligent intercourse with God, as a kind of glorified 
 hue settled on the face of Moses. By means of a right 
 life and prayers, men find love; and thus the blots left 
 by their previous sins are wiped out (S. v. 3; vi. 12; C2 
 230, 364). Pardon is established not according to for- 
 giveness, but according to cure (S. ii. 15 ;. C2 42). 
 
 The imparted righteousness differs from the exhibited 
 righteousness in so far as the former can only be pro- 
 gressive, while the latter is perfect. God alone is 
 absolutely perfect, always possessing something towards 
 which man must advance, lest man should at any time 
 become a despiser of God, or, falling away from God, 
 should cease to be at all (Iren. iv. 20, 7). This was. 
 the pride of the natural man against which the early 
 teachers cautioned Christians. ‘The publican was justi-. 
 fied rather than the Pharisee, because he made confession 
 
MAN’S RIGHTEOUSNESS PROGRESSIVE. 345, 
 
 without self-exaltation and boasting’ (iv. 36, 8). ‘It. 
 belongs to man who is created to make progress.’ God 
 hasalways more to measure out to those of His household. 
 And Paul saith: ‘Not that I have already attained, or 
 that [ am justified, or already have been made perfect’ 
 (iv. 9, 2; 38). The passage quoted in this way by 
 Irenzus is explained by Clement. Paul considered him- 
 self to be perfect, because he had been turned away from 
 his former life and was striving after the better, not as. 
 perfect in knowledge, but as aspiring (2ugwevov) after 
 perfection (Ped. i.6; C! 148). Irenzeus, however, goes. 
 on to say that when that which is perfect is come, we 
 shall make progress in the same things (the doctrine 
 of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost) ; that He who was 
 announced by the prophets has been manifested to men, 
 as God pleased, that believing in Him they might make 
 continual progress ; and, by means of the covenants, gra- 
 dually attain the maturity of salvation. For there is one 
 God and one salvation ; but the precepts which form the 
 man are numerous, and the steps which lead to God not 
 a few (iv. 9, 3). There is a progress from ceasing to do 
 evil, which is characteristic of the law, to learning to do 
 good, and from this to doing good intelligently and dis- 
 criminately (C? 456). Inregard to motives, the first step 
 is fear; the second, hope; and the third, love of ex- 
 cellence for its own sake. ‘It is in your power,’ said 
 Clement, ‘not to be a son of disobedience, but to pass 
 from darkness to light ; first to be a legal slave, then a 
 faithful servant, then a son, and, when enriched in love, 
 to be received into the elect adoption’ (S. i. 27 ; C! 465). 
 But not even Abraham had ground for boasting before 
 God. Haughtiness is a vice of the soul, of which we 
 are commanded to repent as well as of other evils, 
 
346 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 bringing our lives into that harmony (with the divine) 
 which changes for the better in these three respects, 
 mouth, heart and hands (S. ii. 19). It is impious to say 
 that virtue in man and in God is the same ; it is sufficient 
 for the disciple to become as his Master, to become perfect 
 as the Father in heaven is perfect, so far as it is possible 
 to human nature (S. vi..12, 14; C? 364, 371). Each one 
 is partaker of the divine beneficence as far as he wills, 
 the difference being made by a choice worthy of (one’s) 
 election and by practice or self-discipline (cvvdoxnats, C? 
 
 301, 420). 
 
347 
 
 GAP LE Rev 
 
 THE HOLY SPIRIT; AND. THE EVIL -ONE, 
 
 WITHOUT voluntary choice, there would be no element 
 of virtue in the nature which God communicates; it 
 would be only a higher sort of physical nature or 
 psychical instinct. There is much in the misconceptions 
 of the Gnostics regarding the new nature that ought to 
 warn men at the present day. The Gnostics imagined 
 that they had received by divine favour a new or spiritual 
 nature higher than the psychical or old Adamic nature, 
 some seed deposited in them in a mysterious way and 
 matured in the midst of the old nature. They appear 
 to have founded their doctrine on misconceptions of the 
 higher doctrines of Christianity, quoting such passages 
 as 1 Cor. ii. 14, 15; but, according to Irenzus (i. 1, 2), 
 “all men did not receive their portentous and deep 
 mysteries, because all men have not yet spit out their 
 brains. They, however, gave themselves airs‘as if they 
 alone could know the truth by virtue of this nature ; and, 
 if other men questioned what they said, they did not 
 answer them, but concluded that their questioners had not 
 got this peculiar nature, and were, therefore, incapable of 
 ‘understanding their speech.! What is said in Genesis 
 
 SrAPeny thse 5, ls 9; 33 fie 1Qs- 25 Af ail dS pee (Clem. Se vil bi. -C? 
 479). 
 
348 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS, 
 
 about the first man showed, they said, that he was created 
 and destined by the Demiurge (Creator) to bear His 
 
 sensible (aic@nros) image, the soul being the image of 
 the Spirit (a blind nature /eft incapable, or the devil’s 
 
 image impressed on young children) ; but the likeness of 
 God they transfer to themselves, teaching that, unknown 
 
 to the Demiurge, the spirit, which makes them differ, 
 
 was added to them, being inspired into the soul, which 
 
 is the image of the spirit.!. Thus they conceived of this. 
 nature as an inspired emanation from God, a mystico- 
 
 physical change, an instinct put into or deposited in 
 
 some men higher than the old psychical nature but 
 
 operating in the same instinctive way, not having its 
 
 basis in that faith which voluntarily follows God’s teach- 
 
 ing or guidance and submits to His operation, in that 
 
 self-determining power which makes man liable to praise. 
 or blame. They called the new nature spiritual, but they 
 thought of it as a higher instinct ; they virtually ignored 
 
 the freedom of the human will by the way in which they 
 
 represented this nature; they imagined that God gave: 
 it to some in the common way of giving, as He puts 
 
 appetites and desires into us without our consent, or as. 
 the heathen imagined themselves or their diviners to be- 
 possessed. 
 
 ‘The followers of Basilides,’ says Clement, ‘ regard. 
 faith as physical, inasmuch as they assign it to the: 
 election,’ (and regard it as) discovering their doctrines 
 without proofor demonstration, by intellectual apprehen- 
 sion. The followers of Valentinus, again, assign (ascribe) 
 
 1 «al rovr’ Err: Td eupdanua Tod diapépovTos mveduaros kal Kad? BAov - 
 d eumvetra TH Wuxf TH eixdvi rod wveduaros (Clem. S. iy. 13). 
 
 > prvoikhy jyovvra: thy wlortw, nab’ d Kal emi rhs exAoyhs Tdrrovew - 
 auTyy . . edplokovoay K.T.A. 
 
THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE EVIL’ ONE. 349 
 
 faith to us, simple persons, but will have it that knowledge 
 springs up in themselves who are saved by nature, 
 through the advantage of a germ of superior excellence, 
 and they say that it (knowledge) is as far removed from 
 faith as is the spiritual from the psychical nature. The 
 followers of Basilides, however, maintain that faith as 
 well as election is appropriated to each person according 
 to his grade; and that, in consequence of the supra- 
 mundane election, the mundane faith of each is deter- 
 mined; and that the free gift of faith is correspondent to 
 the hope of each. Faith (adds Clement) is no longer the 
 direct result of free choice if it isa natural advantage. 
 Nor will he who has not believed be rightly punished 
 «meet with due recompense), for that he himself was not 
 the author (of his unbelief) ; and he who has believed, 
 is not the cause (aitsos). Nay, the whole peculiarity and 
 distinctive character of belief and unbelief will not fall 
 under (be amenable to) praise or blame, being determined 
 by a natural necessity proceeding from Almighty power ; 
 and in us, if we are pulled, like inanimate objects, by 
 the puppet strings of our natural powers, then that which 
 is without will (natural or supernatural instinct) pulls us 
 aside or along, and so does the impulse which takes 
 the lead among these forces.! If men’s appetencies are 
 necessarily moved by an external cause, what occasion 
 is there for the repentance of him, who was once an un- 
 believer, through which sins are remitted. Upon this 
 supposition neither is baptism reasonable, nor the 
 blessed Seal, nor the Son, nor the Father (the name 
 called over the baptised) ; but their God is found to be 
 the distribution of natures to them (7) Tav picewv avTots 
 
 1 yevpoomacrounévwy 5¢ iar, abixwy dikny, puvotkais evepyelats, 76 TE 
 &kovotov mapéarer Spuh Te) Tpoxabnyouuevn TOVTWY. 
 
350 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 Svavoun), not having voluntary faith as the basis of sal- 
 vation’ (S. ii. 3). 
 
 Clement is entirely opposed to any such represen- 
 tation of faith or of the new nature as would make 
 voluntary choice or assent a mere redundancy. ‘To 
 obey the Word, whom we call Teacher,’ said he, ‘is to 
 believe or trust in Him, going against (avtiBaivovra) 
 Him in nothing. Thus Aristotle calls the judgment, 
 which follows knowledge, faith ; and Plato says that the 
 unbeliever is a man to whom falsehood is agreeable. 
 The disposition to receive (mapadextvxy) the truth 
 spoken, that first reception (apoAmpus) of it which must 
 precede its more perfect investigation, is a thing which 
 depends upon human choice; and, when it exists, the 
 man is said to have ears to hear (S. ii. 4). 
 
 ‘Since some men are unbelieving or disobedient and 
 others are contentious or wranglers (perverters), all do 
 not attain to the perfection of goodness; for it is not 
 possible to do so without deliberate choice (avev mpoaupe- 
 cews). Nor yet indeed does the whole depend upon our 
 resolution (yvwpn) how it will issue; for by grace we are 
 saved, not, however, without good works, but being 
 naturally constituted for what is good we must acquire 
 an earnestness or inclination (o7ovédyy) for it; we must 
 possess ourselves of that wholesome mind or Page 
 which is not to be changed in the pursuit of what is ex- 
 cellent. To this end we have need of divine grace, 
 both right instruction and holy impressions (ev7ra0eias), 
 and the drawing of the Father unto Himself’ (S. v. 1; 
 C224). But Clement is careful to distinguish between 
 man’s fitst creation and that second creation after God’s 
 likeness (Eph. iv. 24; Col. iii. 10) which is the impart- 
 ing of new habits and dispositions, through divine teach- 
 
THE HOLM. SPIRIY AND) THE: EVIL; ONE. 351 
 
 ing and discipline and moral suasion, but which is not 
 without man’s voluntary choice to follow God’s guidance 
 or without good works. ‘The same Lord,’ says Clement, 
 ‘has supplied the means of that creation which is by 
 nature, and of that transformation by time and education 
 which is a new creation (avaxtvots) and renewal (avavé- 
 wots) through the covenant. In his first creation man 
 was not created formless and shapeless in the workshop. 
 of nature; but (in his second creation) each man is. 
 stamped according to the impression produced in his: 
 soul by the objects of his choice.! Thus we say that 
 Adam was Jorn perfect so far as regards his formation 
 (7raow), for none of the distinctive characteristics of the 
 idea and form of man were wanting; but, whoever in 
 growing or becoming (yiveoGat) has received perfection. 
 and has been justified by obedience has decome a perfect 
 man, as far as depended on him—being the cause (or a 
 cause) of his own choosing. Still more is God not the 
 cause of his choosing what is forbidden. For there are 
 two sorts of birth or creation, one of things which are 
 naturally produced, and the other of things which grow 
 or become. ?. Clement goes on to show that we are 
 equally masters of both alternatives *—either to philoso- 
 phise (think and act reasonably) or not, to believe or 
 to disbelieve (or be faithless). ‘The commandments are 
 
 16 8€ Tis &vOpwros Kata TimwoWw Thy eyywoueyny TH Wuxh av by 
 aipnonrat xapaxTnpicerat (S. lv. 23). 
 
 2 6 be éy TH yiveoOou Thy TeAclwow éAduBavey Kat 50 bmaKkojs édikaovTo, 
 TovTo Hy amavSpotmevoy Td en’ avTE Keluevoy, aitia Tov EAouevov’ Kal ere 
 MaAAov Td KwAvOEY EAomEvou 6 Beds avaltios: SitTh yap h yéveois, | Mev TOY 
 yevvwpéevwy, 7 5 Tov yiwouevwy (S. iv. 23 ; C? 209). 
 
 ’ According to Dr. Dorner (I. i, p. 321), it was the teaching of Irenzeus. 
 that human nature is capable of the divine and also of carnal things. 
 
 (Natura humana capax divine et capax carnalium), and that this is true 
 even after men have become brutish by sinking in the carnal. 
 
352 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 such as may or may not be done by us, who are thus 
 reasonably liable to praise or blame,’ being corrected if we 
 do not heed instruction, and destroyed if incorrigible. ‘It 
 ought to be known,’ says Clement, ‘that those who fall into 
 sin after the washing (of baptismal instruction) are those 
 subjected to discipline ; for the deeds done before (this en- 
 lightenment) were remitted (ae/@m), but those done after 
 it are purged or purified (¢«xa@aiperas). But concerning 
 the faithless it is said that they are reckoned as the chaff 
 driven from the face of the earth, or the drop which falls 
 from the vessel’ (S. iv. 24; Is. xl. 15). 
 
 The Powers of evil afford an opportunity for moral 
 excellence, but, if yielded to, make men demon-like. In 
 answer to the objection of the Gnostics, that if man was 
 not created perfect, then the work of a perfect God, es- 
 pecially that work being man, would be imperfect, Clement 
 says! that man was created with an aptitude (rrernSevdrns) 
 for virtue, but that it was intended that he should be saved 
 in conformity with the nature which God has given to the 
 soul, namely, to move of itself (2£ éavtHs opwav). Natural 
 adaptation is a certain impulse towards virtue, but it is 
 not virtue. Thus some men apply more to learning and 
 training; and others, who, in other respects, have had 
 good dispositions, have turned to the opposite through 
 negligence ; and that knowledge which excels all others 
 in greatness and truth is most difficult to acquire and is 
 attained with much toil. God knows all; and, as men 
 were made to be like God, it follows that they should be 
 intelligently (usta dpovycews) righteous and holy. On 
 the other hand, Clement denies that men were created in 
 the devil’s likeness, so as to be at first demoniac in their 
 nature. He holds that this demoniac nature is the result 
 
 1S. vi. 12; C? 359 is here abridged. 
 
THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE EVIL ONE. 353 
 
 of persistently choosing evil, not a tyranny of evil under 
 which God has from first to last left them bound. ‘Let 
 them not say, he goes on, ‘that he who does wrong and 
 sins, errs through the agency of demons, for he would be 
 then guiltless; but by choosing the same things as 
 demons, by being unstable and thoughtless («oddos), and 
 easily carried away by lusts (etuera Boros ev em Oujetass), 
 he becomes like a demon, a demoniac man. He who is 
 vil by nature is the man who has decome fitted to sin by 
 wickedness, who has come to be in an habitual state of 
 depravity, having that which he has chosen, and, being 
 fitted to sin, goes quite astray in his actions; but, on the 
 contrary, the earnest good man makes his way right.’! 
 Clement is aware that, as Aristotle expresses it, ‘there 
 appear manifestly in human beings strong natural ten- 
 dencies not only different from reason, but fighting with 
 and resisting reason.’ But Clement considers that every 
 such temptation gives men an opportunity of testifying 
 that they have crucified the flesh with its affections and 
 lusts, and that they are consistent in calling Jesus Lord 
 (S. iv. 7). ‘He that loseth his life shall save it,’ said our 
 Lord ; but, according to Clement (S. ii. 20), this cross 
 means ‘not only exposing one’s life to danger for the 
 Lord’s sake, but also loosing the soul from the old habi- 
 tual life—from the seeking for the delight and pleasure 
 of this life. In this sense it would be an exercise (weA- 
 érn) of death if we should be content with those desires 
 which are measured by nature alone, not going into ex- - 
 cess or going against nature, when (or where év@a) the 
 proneness to sin (70 dwaptntixov) arises. There is need 
 
 1 airika 6 pey Kakds pice, GuaptytiKds 31a Kaklay yevduevos, paddAos 
 xabéornkev, txwv hy éxdv cideTo, Guaprytixds d¢ dv Kal Kara ras mpdters 
 ‘Stamaprdver, fumadw Se 6 grovdatos katopOot (S, vi. 12; C? 361). 
 
 Ag ® 
 
354 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 of a man who will use in a praiseworthy and discrimi- 
 nating manner the things from which the passions take 
 their rise, as riches and poverty, honour and dishonour, 
 health and sickness, life and death, toil and pleasure ; 
 and to abide these different ordeals, there is need of great 
 difference in us, who have been previously enfeebled and 
 have indulged ourselves in the distortion of a bad train- 
 ing and an education in ignorance. The simple account 
 of our philosophy is that all the passions are impressions. 
 (avettepeicpata) on the soul, which is soft and yielding 
 (to them), and, as it were, the seals (¢vatrocgpayicpata) 
 of the spiritual powers with which we have to wrestle. 
 For it is the business of the maleficent powers, in my 
 opinion, to endeavour to produce something of their own 
 habit (ews) in every case, so as to overcome and make 
 their own those who have renounced them. And it fol- 
 lows, as might be expected, that some men are worsted ; 
 but, in the case of those who engage in the contest with 
 more athletic energy, the powers mentioned above after 
 carrying on the contest in every form till the crown (2 
 Tim. iv. 7, 8), at last give up the contest and admire the 
 victors. The rational faculty of man ought not to be 
 impelled similarly with the irrational animals, but 
 ought to discriminate appearances and not be carried 
 away by them. But as men drive cattle by holding 
 green shoots before them, these powers hold out beauti- 
 ful sights, and honours, and pleasures, and such like allur- 
 ing phantasies before souls that have a propensity for 
 them (evemiddpors) ; and having beguiled those who have 
 not succeeded in distinguishing true from false pleasure, 
 the fading and the meretricious from the holy beauty, 
 they lead them into captivity; and each deceit, by press- 
 ing constantly on the soul, stamps its appearance upon. 
 
THE’ ‘HOLY SPIRIT: AND* THEY EVIL’ ONE. 355 
 
 it ;' and the soul unwittingly carries about the image of 
 the passion, the cause arising from the bait and our con- 
 sent. On the other hand, ‘in him who by enlightened 
 (Gnostic) training has acquired virtue that cannot be lost, 
 habit is inspired as a nature.’ ” 
 
 PRAYER NOT SUPERFLUOUS.—Christians are directed 
 to pray in every place, liftingup holy hands, without wrath 
 and disputings (1 Tim. ii. 8). Asin the Temple service 
 a continual watch was kept night and day, so Christians 
 are directed to watch in the way of (eis) prayer, to be 
 always in this spirit and mindful of God (Eph. vi. 18; 
 1 Pet. iv. 7), lest they should be surprised by false 
 conceits and evil practices, and so miss_ salvation. 
 According to Clement, the terrestrial altar with us here 
 is the congregation of those who devote themselves to 
 prayers, having, as it were, one common voice and one 
 mind. The sacrifice of the Church is this common 
 breathing together (cvpmvola). But the truly sacred 
 altar is the righteous soul; and that incense, which rises 
 from it,is holy prayer. For the sacrifices of the law 
 figuratively express the piety which we practise, and the 
 fire represents an intellectual fire (7dp Ppovimov) per- 
 vading the soul (S. vii. 6; C? 428-431). The enlightened 
 Christian’s prayers are not confined to any specified 
 place or time; but, during his whole life and in every 
 place, he honours God, acknowledging his gratitude for 
 the knowledge of the way of life. ‘And if the presence 
 _ of a good man, through the respect and reverence which 
 he inspires, always improves him with whom he associ- 
 ates, does not he who always is present uninterruptedly 
 with God by knowledge, life, and thanksgiving, with 
 
 1 thy pavractay ev adti tumodrat (S. ii, 20; C* 63, 64). 
 
 2 puciodra 7 eéis (S. vii. 7; C? 440). 
 AA 2 
 
386 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 much more reason grow, at every step, superior to himself 
 in all respects—in conduct, in words and in disposition ? 
 Such an one is persuaded that God is ever beside him, 
 and does not suppose that He is confined in certain 
 limited places, so that under the idea that at times he is 
 without Him, he may indulge in excesses night and day ’ 
 (S.vite 7 3 5C? 432).0 1n Clement’s ideas prayer is almost 
 a synonym for serious thinking, or keeping God in the 
 thoughts, so that a man may be continually on his guard 
 to avoid sinning, and considering to prevent the loss of 
 virtue (C? 435, 440). The enlightened Christian prays 
 along with good men and those who have recently 
 believed for those things in respect to which it is their 
 duty to act together. Not only are his sacrifices prayers 
 and psalms and reading of the Scriptures at meal times 
 and before bed, and prayers during the night, but he also 
 knows of the other kind of sacrifice which consists in 
 giving instruction and money to those who need. God 
 has free will as we have, therefore we pray to Him ; but 
 the enlightened Christian contributes also his efforts to 
 attain the good things which he desires, so as no longer 
 to have these lessons in prospect, but to be good, to grasp 
 mentally what he formerly desired to possess. If he 
 prays that he may never fall from virtue, he gives his 
 strenuous efforts that he may become a man who will 
 not fall. He prays, first, for the forgiveness of sins, and 
 after this, that he may sin no more; in addition, that 
 he may be able to do well and understand as a whole 
 the Lord’s work and His dispensational arrangements, 
 that, becoming pure in heart, he may be initiated into 
 the blessed contemplation face to face. But God hears 
 continually all inward converse; He is, so to speak, all 
 ear and all eye. We ought to have works that cry aloud, 
 as becoming those who walk in the day. God gives to 
 
THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE EVIL ONE. 357. 
 
 each what is suitable; He ministers as a shepherd or a 
 king to those who conduct themselves obediently ; or, as 
 a physician ministers health to those who co-operate with 
 him, so also God ministers eternal salvation to those who 
 co-operate for the attainment of knowledge and good 
 conduct. Prayers in the east are made with the face 
 towards the east, where the sun rises, and away from the 
 idols which were in the west of the temples ; so now that 
 a day of knowledge of the truth has dawned on those 
 involved in darkness, we must apply ourselves, without 
 intermission, in the way of reflection and learning, so as 
 to obtain the stability of knowledge and the elevation of 
 perfection; in the way, also, of the training which 
 abstains from idolatrous pleasures and in the way of 
 well-doing and pleasing God. When the Giver of good 
 things perceives an inclination or susceptibility on our 
 part, all good things follow our taking hold of them ; 
 and prayer contributes in this taking hold. The en- 
 lightened Christian, however, is persuaded that the affairs 
 of the universe are managed in the best possible way. 
 As a matter of course, he is well pleased with what falls 
 to his lot (rots cupBaivovow). Reasonably, therefore, 
 he asks for none of those things in life required for 
 necessary use, being persuaded that God, who knows all 
 things, supplies the good with whatever is for their 
 benefit even though they de not ask.' 
 
 1S, iv. 26; C2 219; vi. 12 ; C? 363; vil. 7, are here summarised. 
 Our Lord taught us to pray to our Father in Heaven for supra-substantial 
 bread. Without His Spirit or Mind we are not His sons ; and we are 
 known to the Searcher of hearts (Rom. viii. 27). Clement says that Thales 
 was interpreting this expression when he asked how a man could elude the 
 knowledge of God while thinking (S. iv. 14). Clement forbids us to think | 
 of the Spirit as a part of God, but will enquire what the Spirit is in books: 
 on prophecy and on the sow (S. v. 13). The Spirit is the axozntimg (Iren. 
 
 iii. 18, 3), which completes men’s nature and unites them in one, so that’ 
 they appear in prophecy as one person (Justin Ap. i. 36, Dial. 42). 
 
358 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 CHAPTER SI. 
 
 MAN’S FALL, LIBERTY, AND ETERNAL HOPE. 
 
 THE early fathers were opposed to the idea that man is 
 left helplessly the slave of a nature which came upon him 
 without his will. Irenzeus found ideas among the Gnostics 
 which represented God, the Creator, as apparently free 
 and independent, yet really yielding to some greater or 
 more absolute necessity, or else approving what is evil. 
 He quotes the words which Homer puts into the mouth 
 of Jupiter: 
 
 For willing, when I gave, was I, 
 
 And yet I gave unwillingly (Il. iv. 43). 
 
 At the present day some men, in a somewhat similar 
 way, do not admit that the human will may be a self- 
 determining.cause, /ike the Great First Creating Cause, 
 or assume that God has two wills, the will of the decree 
 and the will of the good pleasure, or represent Him as 
 virtually the Author of evil. Men also are represented | 
 as appearing to will what they choose in matters 
 wherein they are to be judged, and yet as virtually 
 being, in every such case, the slaves of some necessity. 
 Those who entertain these ideas of man, have differed 
 in regard to Adam, whether de had a veal freedom or 
 not. Irenzeus, however, teaches that Adam’s infirmity 
 
MAN’S FALL, LIBERTY, AND ETERNAL HOPE. 359 
 
 was foreknown ; and not only so, but that it was intended 
 that he should receive the knowledge of good and evil; 
 that he should make trial both of obedience and dis- 
 obedience, and so with judgment make choice of the 
 better. ‘How could he be trained for good, knowing 
 not what is contrary thereto? When matters are 
 brought home to us (swdjacentium), they are more surely 
 and undoubtedly understood than by the guess that 
 arises from mere suspicion. For just as the tongue by 
 taste receives experience of sweet and bitter, and the 
 eye by sight discerns black from white, and the ear by 
 hearing knows the difference of sounds, so also the 
 mind receives by experience of both the knowledge of 
 what is good, and is made stronger to preserve the same 
 by obeying God, first, by repentance, rejecting dis- 
 obedience as a thing bitter and evil ; then learning, by 
 comprehending what sort of thing the contrary of good- 
 ness and sweetness is, that he should not even make any 
 attempt to taste of disobedience to God. But if anyone 
 were to shun the knowledge of both these things and the 
 twofold perception of knowledge, he in secret puts an 
 end to his being a man.’) It is needless to say that, 
 holding these ideas, Ireneeus could not consistently have 
 admitted the doctrine that merely on account of the first 
 sin of the one man Adam many of his unfortunate 
 descendants are left helplessly to be the victims of an 
 evil nature without God’s Spirit and doomed to endless, 
 hopeless and conscious misery. According to Irenzus 
 (iii. 23, 35 V- 15, 2), the sentence on Adam’s sin was 
 weariness (¢@dia, languores) and labour in the earth, to 
 eat bread in the sweat of his face, and to be turned into 
 
 1 Latenter semetipsum occidit hominem, divests himself in his unseen 
 nature of the character of a human being (Iren. iv. 39,‘1). 
 
360 THE: FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 the earth from whence he was taken; in addition, the 
 woman received the pains of childbirth and was put in 
 bondage to her husband, that they might neither perish. 
 utterly, accursed of God, nor without rebuke continue and 
 contemn God. A new birth was shown (ostendit), that 
 as in the animal we all died, so in the spiritual we all 
 may be made alive. For never at any time did Adam 
 escape the Hands of God, to which Hands the Father 
 was speaking when He said, Let us make man in our 
 own image and likeness. And, therefore, zz the end, it 
 was not of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but 
 according to the good pleasure of the Father, that His. 
 hands perfected this living man, that Adam should be 
 after God’s image and likeness (v. I. 1, 3). And again: 
 As in Adam we all die, as (6T) being animal (sensual or 
 psychical), so in Christ let us live ({jowpev), as being 
 spiritual, putting away, not the form in which God has. 
 moulded us, but the lusts of the flesh (the old man with 
 his deeds, Col. iii. 19). For they who do such things, as 
 being merely (Zaztum) flesh and blood, cannot, saith the 
 Apostle, inherit the kingdom of heaven. For their soul 
 declining towards the worse, and sinking down into 
 earthly lusts, hath participated in that same title 
 (‘earthly ’) which belongs to these things (v. 12, 3). 
 
 In regard to what is called Original Sin, or the trans- 
 mission of an evil nature, the best of the early fathers 
 held that Adam as first created was an animal man ; that,. 
 as Theophilus says (ad. Aut. ii. 24, 27), he was a mere 
 child (vyvos), and had to be treated as such, being 
 neither (necessarily) mortal nor (inherently) immortal, 
 but capable of both results ; that,as Clement of Alexandria 
 expresses it, man in his first state was created perfect 
 only in respect of his capacity for choosing virtue, that 
 
MAN’S FALL, LIBERTY, AND ETERNAL HOPE. 368 
 
 moral perfection or the real possession of virtue can only 
 come by the proper exercise of choice, and that every 
 temptation serves as an occasion for virtue (S. iv. 6; 
 Vinraee G2 58360). -erThis “first: animal or mere 
 childish state is that of subjection to passions, and 
 Adam as well as his descendants was born or created 
 subject to these passions, that there might be room for 
 self-discipline and virtue. Without temptation what 
 virtue would there be in man ? If Adam had been created 
 naturally inclined to all virtue and, to use Clement's 
 expression, passionless, where would have been the 
 opportunity for self-control, victory, and the praise that 
 is attached to overcoming? ‘To sin,’ he says, ‘belongs 
 to the race (2udutov) and is common to all; but to 
 amend (dvadpapetv) is the part only of a man of worth’ 
 CHaed ih 12 C9337); 
 
 The Gnostics of his time quoted passages of Scripture 
 to show the impurity of man’s first created nature ; 
 among others they quoted Job xiv. 4, 5, and Ps. li. 5, 
 passages which are still quoted for a somewhat similar 
 purpose. Clement quotes these passages from the 
 Septuagint :—‘Who from what is unclean shall be 
 clean? No one, though his life on earth were but one 
 day’ (Job xiv. 4,5). ‘Let them tell us, says Clement, 
 ‘where the child (just) born committed fornication, or 
 how he who has done nothing has fallen under the curse 
 of Adam; it remains for them, it seems, to say that birth 
 (born state, yéveouv) is evil, and not only that of the body 
 but that of the soul, for the sake of which is the body.’ 
 And when David says, ‘I was conceived (cvveAjpOny) in 
 sins, and in iniquities my mother desired (é«éoonce) me,’ 
 he speaks prophetically of mother Eve; but Eve was 
 ‘the mother of living men ;’ and if he was conceived in 
 
362 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 sin, it was not himself who was in sin, and surely he him- 
 self was not sin. But if everyone who turns from sin to 
 faith, turns as from his sinful mother to life (this view)... 
 does not slander Him who said, ‘ Increase and multiply,’ 
 but calls the first impulses consequent upon birth (é« 
 yevéoews), according to which we do not know God, 
 “impieties’ (aceBeias). But if on this account anyone 
 call birth (tiv yéveow) bad, let him also call it good on 
 account that in Him (born subject to temptation) we know 
 the truth : ‘awake and be sober righteously (or, as Cle- 
 ment has it, reading éxvipate for éxvnare in I Cor. xv. 
 34, Wash righteously) and sin not, for some are in igno- 
 rance of God,’ namely, those sinning. The world-rulers 
 of darkness have power to tempt us, on which account 
 are forgivenesses ; and, on this account, Paul says, ‘I 
 ‘chastise my body and bring it into subjection. Every one 
 that contendeth in the games is temperate in all things ; 
 now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown, but we 
 an incorruptible, conquering in the combat (add), and 
 crowned but not without struggling’ (axoveri, S. iii. 16). 
 The first impulses give scope for virtue (Ir. iv. 37, 7). 
 There is a general agreement or consensus on the part 
 of the early fathers that men have not inherited ademoniac 
 or unteachable nature, but that by their own perverse 
 choice they may acquire it. Even Tertullian, who ima- 
 gined that souls are propagated as well as_ bodies, 
 defends the idea of liberty against Marcion. ‘How, he 
 asks, ‘could he who is destined to rule over the whole 
 creation be a slave in respect to himself, not having 
 the power of ruling over himself?’ To account for this 
 agreement, the opponents of the doctrine of human 
 liberty or freedom of choice ‘have strangely enough 
 supposed a general misapprehension of the doctrine’ on: 
 the part of these fathers (See Hagenbach’s ‘ Hist. of 
 
MAN’S FALL, LIBERTY, AND ETERNAL HOPE. 363 
 
 Doctrines,’ i. p. 150). Others have supposed that the 
 
 early teachers of Christianity had not reached the proper 
 or fully developed doctrine. But as it appears that 
 
 Marcion denied free-will (and, like the Marciosians, held a 
 
 theory of redemption very similar to that of substitution), 
 
 it might thus follow that Marcionism and other views of 
 the Gnostics which these fathers condemned were never- 
 
 theless in advance of the reasonable doctrines of the: 
 early fathers and more worthy of our acceptation. 
 
 CHRISTIAN LIBERTY AND ABSTINENCE.—Clement 
 divided the Gnostic heretics into two classes : first, those 
 who taught that salvation is not a matter of conduct but 
 of believing, or of knowledge, or of having a new nature 
 put into them apart from conduct or, as some say, apart 
 from works ; secondly, those who inculcated an over- 
 strained mortification, through impiously quarrelling with 
 man’s created state ;! in other words, from a mistaken 
 notion of the impurity of material pleasures and of the 
 value of ascetic self-mortification. The same two ex- 
 tremes have manifested themselves in later times. 
 
 True liberty is the converse of licentiousness. When 
 men come under the power of the lower pleasures and 
 passions, so as to be morally certain to choose what they 
 disapprove of, and still more when they approve of what 
 is evil, they are slaves. Freedom is a state of self- 
 mastery, of moral ability to choose what man’s true 
 nature approves of, whereas adegraded bondage to lower 
 gratifications, such that one is virtually bound by them, is 
 slavery. The first class of Gnostics, however, considered 
 that they were under the sway of no law, that they were 
 lords of the Sabbath, and king’s sons by a nature (given 
 them), being born in a way which is above all ordinary 
 
 1 A ydp Tot adiaddpws Civ diSdoKovor 7) 7d bwéprovoy kyovta eyKpadreray 
 dia SvoceBelas Kal piramwexOnmoovrns (S. il. 43 C* 95). 
 
364. THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 birth or descent; that being thus kings or the king’s. 
 sons, they might do as they wished, because the law was. 
 not written for a king.! But how, asked Clement, can. 
 incontinence and base speech be freedom? And how 
 can he be a citizen of God’s kingdom when he does not: 
 obey the Lord’s precept: Do not covet or lust? If it. 
 be granted that they belong to another kingdom and 
 have come into a strange world, then they ought to be 
 faithful in that which is another’s, that they may have: 
 that which is true. Does a stranger insult and injure 
 the citizens among whom he sojourns? And how can 
 those, whom the Gentiles hate because of their dis-. 
 obedience to the laws and their iniquitous conduct, say 
 that zey only know God ? (S. iii. 4; C?.97, 98). Letthem 
 not call slavery under pleasure freedom, as those who- 
 call bitter bile sweet. For we have learned ¢hat to be 
 freedom with which our Lord frees us, by loosening us. 
 from pleasures and lusts and other passions ; and he who: 
 says that he knows God and does not keep His com- 
 mandments‘is-a:liar(Siati2g36C* ro4ser)ohniis ein 
 no other way can peace and freedom be won than by 
 ceaseless and unyielding struggles with our lusts (S. ii. 
 20; C? 68). In him, who by enlightened training has. 
 acquired virtue which cannot be lost, Labzt becomes nature.” 
 By endeavouring to imitate what is excellent, by true 
 instruction and much discipline, he acquires the perfection 
 of habit, and becomes the friend and lover of that God 
 whom he knows to be friendly and philanthropical.?’ 
 
 1 kal bimepdvw maytds yévous mepundres Batre: maides* Baciret dé: 
 pact vduos &ypados (S. ili. 4). 
 
 = T@ &pa. dvamdBANTOY Thy apETHY ATKNHTEL YYWOTIKT TETOLNUEVH PYTLOUTAE. 
 h ets (S. vii. 7; C? 440). 
 
 $2901 skOn 2.3) C* Aan Ase as 5. 
 
MAN’S FALL, LIBERTY,-AND ETERNAL HOPE. 365 
 
 This enlightened habit of doing good because it is right, 
 and choosing virtue because it is excellent, and that we 
 may pass life after the image and likeness of the 
 Lord, this deliverance from evil passions and desires is 
 our new nature, not literally deposited in men, not given 
 ‘to them in a common way, not born in them as natural 
 instincts without our consent, but resulting from the 
 divine teaching or guidance or correction, and from the 
 Divine Power, which stamps on each man an image 
 according to what he chooses to follow. 
 
 Christian abstinence is not mere self-mortification or 
 abuse of the body, practised for tts own sake, but self-mastery 
 and the declining to use one's liberty to the full from pru- 
 dential motives and philanthropical purposes. Thesecond 
 class of Gnostics, according to Clement’s division, consisted 
 of those who looked upon the enjoyment of natural things 
 as degrading, who practised abstinence from them, and, 
 especially, from marriage, on the ground that the Creator’s 
 work is not good, and that it is not right to substitute 
 other unfortunate beings in our room, supplying death 
 with the food it consumes. According to Clement, it is 
 a heathen idea, suitable to magism or idolatry, or the 
 worship of angels and demons, to abstain for such a 
 ‘reason from wine and animal flesh and marriage relations. 
 But as Christian self-humiliation is meekness (of spirit) 
 and not ill-treatment of the body, so Christian abstinence 
 (éyxpareva) is a virtue of the soul, a secret self-mastery, 
 not an open display of it (S. iii.6; C’ 106). The self- 
 mastery of the Greek philosophers professes to contend 
 with lusts and not to yield to them ; the self-mastery of 
 Christian philosophy signifies not merely the manful 
 struggling with lusts, but the preventing lusts themselves, 
 which can only be accomplished by the grace of God. 
 
366 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 This self-mastery or continence does not refer merely to 
 chastity, but to everything which the soul may lust after 
 or inordinately desire (o7ratad@oa), when it is not content 
 with necessary things but seeks for luxurious delights 
 (yrdjv). Self-mastery is to despise or think slightly of 
 money, to look down upon pleasure, possessions and 
 show, to control one’s speech, to be rationally superior to 
 what is evil (S. iii. 7; C? 111). The ‘cross’ signifies not 
 merely martyrdom, but the cessation of a man’s former 
 habits of living for mere pleasure, the being content with 
 what is measured by nature alone without the excessive 
 or perverted use of natural things (S:5 M205 CIO 3)- 
 Abstinence (doy) from evil is the way to the Gospel 
 and well-doing. The man who abstains from evil in 
 obedience to the law of Moses, is perfected when, in 
 obedience to this law, he receives the Gospel ; when he 
 not only uses the law as a step, but when also, compre- 
 hending it, as our Lord delivered the dispensations to 
 the apostles, he conducts himself rightly, practising every 
 virtue, bearing testimony to truth from love, and main- 
 taining it to the end of his life (Siavi21;' C199 What 
 commends us to God is not meats or marriage or absti- 
 nence from them, but enlightened, virtuous conduct, a 
 disposition. to do good and please God from love of 
 what is excellent, not merely from regard to the pro- 
 mised reward or apprehended danger (S. iv. 22; C® 203, 
 207). It depends entirely upon the peculiar circumstances 
 of each individual whether it be proper or in accordance 
 with God’s word to marry, and when and whom it is 
 suitable for him to marry. The unmarried has only 
 himself to care for; and though he may thus escape 
 some temptations, he is in some respects inferior to the 
 married man, who withstands these temptations, fulfils 
 
MAN'S FALL, LIBERTY, AND ETERNAL HOPE. 367 
 
 more of the duties of life, and is, in himself, a miniature 
 image ‘of the providence of God{S. ii: 233°C?'784" vii. 
 E25 ©7457). ©The venerable and holy ‘guidance’of: 
 Christian philanthropy,’ says Clement of Alexandria, 
 quoting Clement of Rome, ‘seeks the common good, 
 whether by suffering martyrdom or by teaching by 
 word or deed. This is love, the love of God and of 
 our neighbour. This conducts to the height which is 
 inexpressible. Love covereth a multitude of sins; love 
 beareth all things, suffereth all things; love joins us to 
 God, does all things in common; in love all the chosen 
 of God are perfected. Apart from love, nothing is well- 
 pleasing to God. He who acts from fear or expected 
 reward is nothing in comparison with him who is faith- 
 ful to the Lord from love, and testifies as an enlightened 
 Christian’ (S. iv. 18; 1 Cor. xiii.). How great, for in- 
 stance, was the perfection of Moses in wishing to die 
 with the people rather than to be saved alone (S. iv. 19 ; 
 Clem. Rom. 53). And when a life of unselfish well- 
 doing is consummated in martyrdom, the martyr not 
 detesting his persecutors but praying for them, then the 
 highest perfection is reached (C? 158, 199). The en- 
 lightened Christian, he says, gives thanks for the good 
 things of this life during his sojourning here ; but he does 
 not love this world or the things in it as if it were abid- 
 ing; he lives as if he were ‘a stranger and a pilgrim 
 here, and is prepared to leave this life without regret 
 when called upon, testifying in this way that he prefers 
 the things that are unseen (S. iv. 6; vii. 12,13). Itisa 
 false.Gnosticism to consider mere knowledge to be one’s 
 testimony ; the true Gnostic does well with a certain 
 purpose (pos Twa oxorrov) and acts according to reason 
 (S. vi. 14), but he ought, like the apostles, to be sinless, 
 
368 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 Confessing Christ by martyrdom is at least one good 
 work, serving to ‘cleanse away past sins with glory.’ 
 Though Christians ought not to be abettors (euvastiovs) 
 of their own death by presenting themselves before the 
 judgment seat and challenging, so to speak, the wild 
 beast, yet, when occasion calls, they ought to be prepared 
 to suffer afflictions and even death for the Church out of 
 love to the Lord and their brother (S. iv. 9, 10). 
 
 Clement sees no merit, but the contrary, in useless 
 self-mortifications. True abstinence, when it gives up the 
 full use of liberty or sacrifices its own things, does so with 
 a certain (benevolent) purpose and according to reason. 
 Wisdom, prudence, and discrimination ought to guide 
 the exercise both of Christian liberty and of Christian 
 liberality (C2 456). It is a good rule to be jealous of 
 what most easily besets one, or serves to make un- 
 necessary things necessary. ‘All things are lawful unto 
 me, but I will not be brought under the power of any,’ 
 said St. Paul (1 Cor. vi. 12). Besides, we must be care- 
 ful not to lead others to do what they consider to be 
 wrong. Paul gives his own example as an illustration. 
 To them who were Gentiles as well as to Jews he 
 adapted himself, that he might do them all good, and 
 laboured with his own hands that he might teach gra- 
 tuitously. ‘Am J not free? Am J not an apostle? 
 Have we not liberty to eat and drink? Have we not 
 liberty to take about with us a believing sister as a wife ? 
 But I have used none of these things. What, then, is 
 my reward? I do all things for the Gospel’s sake, that 
 I may become a partaker thereof with them ... and 
 I chastise my body (buffet it, fighting for mastery) and 
 bring it into subjection, lest by any means when I 
 have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway ’ 
 {1 -Cor, 1x;). 
 
MAN’S FALL, LIBERTY, AND ETERNAL HOPE. 369 
 
 ETERNAL HOPE: OR REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS. 
 
 The office of the instructor is twofold, to teach and 
 to correct. The first is the baptism of the word, that is, 
 instruction; and the second is disciplinary or punitive 
 (Peed. i. 6-12). ‘It ought to be known that those who 
 fall into sin after the washing (of baptismal instruction, 
 TO AovTpov) are those who are subjected to discipline ; 
 for the deeds done before are remitted (ade(@n) and those 
 done after are purged (2xxa0aiperay, S. iv. 24). In giving 
 place to this perfect Instructor, Moses predicted His 
 double office by threatening the man who would not 
 hear that Prophet. Wherefore prophecy invests Him 
 ‘with a rod of discipline, of rule, of authority ; that those 
 ‘whom the persuasive word heals not, the threatening 
 may heal; and whom the threatening heals not, the rod 
 may heal; and whom the rod heals not, the fire may 
 devour’ (Ped.i. 7; C1154). But if any one object that 
 the Lord is not good in that he threatens and punishes, 
 Clement goes on to remind such (C!155) of our Lord’s 
 personal experience of our suffering nature, and to show 
 that the object of this correction is analogous toa father’s 
 correction of his children or to a surgeon’s cutting off a 
 limb, namely, to prevent the ruin of the child’s character, 
 or the destruction of the entire body. He asserts, first, 
 that God does not hate anything and yet wish it to exist; 
 secondly, that He does not wish anything not to exist 
 and yet that thing exists.'! Clement says that the good 
 God. punishes for three reasons: first, that he who is 
 ‘corrected may become better than his former self ; 
 
 1 ode why od BotrAcTar wév tL eivat, Td de Zorw (Peed. i. 8; C! 155). 
 BAG 
 
370 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 secondly, that others may be admonished by the ex- 
 ample ; and thirdly, that those apt to receive an injury 
 may not readily be despised (S. iv. 24). God has ar- | 
 ranged everything, even minor matters, so that all shall 
 be subsidiary (cuvepya) towards virtue, but not so as to 
 hinder man’s willing choice. The virtuous soul changes. 
 for the better, being prompted by knowledge, which is 
 within the power of the soul. But other corrections 
 coming from the goodness of the all-seeing Judge, both. 
 by the attendant angels and by various antecedent judg- 
 ments, and by the consummate (avredjs) judgment, 
 constrain senseless (é«RsdCovtas amndynkoTas) sinners to: 
 repent. But other things I pass over in silence, glorifying 
 the Lord; except that I affirm that souls that know God,. 
 ascending to higher and ever higher grades, and enjoying 
 a feast of direct vision which never satiates, continue 
 in this all-excelling sameness through ages without end: 
 (S. vii. 2,3; C? 414, 415). When our Lord was asked 
 what His sentence was on such a one as was brought to: 
 Him, one who lived after the flesh, He stooped down and 
 without saying a single word wrote on the ground, or, as. 
 it might be translated, wrote ‘into the ground,’ that is, 
 wrote these words on the ground. Whatever he wrote,. 
 it is impossible to conceive of a more significant action ;, 
 and Clement here seems to imitate our Lord’s reticence 
 on the subject. In his tract concerning the Rich Man 
 Saved (c. 17), he says that the man whose heart is not 
 possessed by the Divine Spirit, but ever more and more 
 inclined to look downwards, and bound fast by the nets 
 and traps of the world, is earth, and shall depart or re- 
 turn to the earth (y} av Kal eis yqv amedevoopuevos). He 
 repeatedly compares the earthly seeker for pleasure, 
 whose choice is to be rich in this world’s goods, whose 
 God is his belly or the show of this world, to the small 
 
MAN’S FALL, LIBERTY, AND ETERNAL HOPE, . 391 
 
 dust or chaff which the wind easily disperses or the drop 
 spilt from the bucket (C! 170, (P40 Sr ras03 489); they 
 are good for nothing but fuel of fire ;' or, as far as salva- 
 tion is concerned, superfluities cast away from the body, ? 
 A difficulty sometimes arises from the circumstance — 
 that, in dealing with the heathen, the early teachers of 
 Christianity tried to make the most of what good they 
 found in the old philosophers. They agreed with these 
 philosophers in asserting that there would be rewards 
 and punishments after death, but they differed from 
 them in regard to their ideas of the inherent immor- 
 tality of the soul. Plato and other philosophers sup- 
 posed the soul to be inherently immortal, while the 
 great teachers of the early Church held that its con- 
 tinuance or extinction depended entirely upon the will 
 of God. When, therefore, the Christians endeavoured to 
 convince the heathen that there would be a judgment to 
 come, they quoted the ideas of the heathen philosophers 
 without always correcting the heathen idea of inherent 
 immortality, although we find Justin doing so (Dial. c. 5. 
 See above, pp. 143, 144). In like manner, Justin con-: 
 trasts the Christian doctrine of ‘the fire of judgement 
 which was to descend, that wicked angels, devils and men 
 may exist no longer,’ with that spoken of by the Stoics. 
 ‘For so we say that there will be a conflagration, but 
 not as the Stoics, according to the doctrine of the change 
 of all things into one another, which seems most degrad- 
 ing’ (Ap. ii. 7). One of Clement’s favourite ideas was 
 that the Greek philosophy had by some means been 
 derived from that of the Hebrews, or a barbarian philo- 
 sophy much older than itself; and he undertakes to show 
 1 els ovdev GAN 9) eis bmexkavua evOeTos tupds (Peed- ii. ux 3 Cen), 
 
 2 mepiogol eis owrnplay of dmroppimréuevor TOD odhuartos (S. vi. 14). 
 BB 4 
 
372 THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 this clearly. Solomon’s statement that ‘all is vanity’ 
 suggested to Epicurus the idea of ‘chance ;’ but he mis- 
 understood Solomon’s statement. ‘Punishment after 
 death and retribution by fire were pilfered from the Bar- 
 barian (Hebrew) philosophy. Plato accordingly, in the last 
 book of the “Republic,” says: “Then these men, fierce 
 and fiery to look on, seized and took some aside ; and 
 binding the rest, hand, foot and head, and throwing them 
 down and flaying them, dragged them along the way, 
 tearing their flesh with thorns.” For the-fiery men are 
 the angels who seize and punish the wicked.’ Clement 
 means that Plato may have borrowed this from Ps. xxxvi. 
 5, and continues: ‘It follows from these things that the 
 soul is immortal. For what is tortured or corrected 
 being in a state of sensation lives, though said to suffer. 
 What then? Did not Plato know of rivers of fire and 
 the depth of the earth (sheol), prophetically calling the 
 Gehenna of the (Hebrew) barbarians Tartarus, and bring- 
 ing in Cocytus and Acheron and Phlegethon, and such 
 like corrective (cwppovifovra) punishment for disciplinary 
 instruction (waSevow). But indicating the angels of the 
 little ones, and their tutelary guardianship of us, he writes 
 that when all the souls (in their pre-existing state) have 
 chosen, as their lot has assigned, their several lives, 
 Lachesis sénds along with each as his guide in life and 
 the fulfiller of the things chosen, the demon or spirit 
 which he chose’ (S. v. 14; C? 275). Bishop Kaye 
 (p. 159) remarks about the fiery men that perhaps Cle- 
 ment is merely giving Plato’s opinion. In another pas- 
 sage Clement says: ‘Witnessing to the Lord (martyrdom) 
 seems a most violent death to such miserable men as do 
 not know that such a gate of death is the beginning of 
 - true life nor the punishments of those who have lived 
 
 eis 
 
MAN’S FALL, LIBERTY, AND ETERNAL HOPE. 373 
 
 unrighteously and impurely. They will not even hear 
 their own discourses, for the Pythagorean Theano writes : 
 “ Were the soul not immortal, death would be a godsend 
 (Zppavov) to the wicked”’ (S.iv. 7; vii. 12; C* 159, 463). 
 But the same passage was quoted by Justin, or Justin’s 
 instructor, in order to show that there are future rewards 
 and punishments, although he distinctly declares that the 
 soul is not inherently immortal (D.c. T. 5). Clement 
 merely asserts that these people’s ideas are at variance 
 with those of their own philosophers. 
 
 Justin asserts that the wicked would undergo eternal 
 punishment, and not only as Plato said for a thousand 
 years (Ap.i. 8), that they would be sent in eternal sensa- 
 tion (alo@nous) into eternal fire with the wicked devils 
 (Ap. i. 52); but he immediately proceeds to explain 
 what sort of sensation and punishment this is. ‘Then 
 shall they repent,’ he says, ‘when it profits them not. 
 Then in Jerusalem there shall be great lamentation not 
 of mouths and lips but of the heart.” In other words, 
 this sensation is eternal according to primary sense of 
 the Hebrew word olam, namely, fidden. Dissolution 
 would be an eternal punishment, an endless consumma- 
 tion of wnseen fires as vain regrets, restless troubles, 
 delusions, &c. Such was the opinion of Irenzeus spoken 
 of pp. 145-150. ‘Toscoffers,’ he says, ‘ and to those who 
 are not subject to God, but who follow outward purifica- 
 tions beyond what is required, as if preferring their own 
 zeal (their own fire?) to God Himself, while within they 
 are full of hypocrisy and covetousness and all wickedness, 
 God has assigned (or brought) eternal perdition, cutting 
 them off from life, (sempiternam attulit perditionem ab- 
 scindens eos a vita. Iren. iv. 11, 4). To those who are 
 thought worthy to attain the resurrection from the dead 
 
374. THE FULL KNOWLEDGE OR EARLY GNOSIS. 
 
 ‘the fashion of this world has been formed temporary, 
 but the subsistence and essence of it is not annihilated ;’ 
 God shall change the body of their humiliation, but 
 ‘they shall not vanish among non-existent things ;’ on 
 the contrary, ‘they shall make progress among those 
 which have an actual existence’ (Iren. v. 36, 1). But in 
 regard to those who are not considered worthy of eternal 
 life, neither Justin nor Ireneus nor Clement ! gives us any 
 means of defining the duration of their punishment after 
 death, except that it will be as long as God wills, and 
 that He will deal faithfully with them. ‘Good things are 
 eternal and never-ending with God ; and on this account 
 also the loss (amzssizo) of these is eternal and never-end- 
 ing’ (v.27, 2). If to have a soul (conscious existence, 
 memory, &c.) be good, the loss of it is an eternal punish- 
 ment, and, as Irenzeus taught (see above, pp. 144-150), 
 the consummation of other evils of body and soul, which 
 befall evil doers and despisers of God’s counsels and re- 
 bukes. Clement concludes his treatise concerning the 
 “Rich Man Saved’ as follows: ‘If any chooses to abide 
 continually in sinful pleasures and prefers luxurious living 
 to eternal life, and, when the Saviour is bestowing forgive- 
 ness, turns away, let him blame neither God nor riches, 
 nor the previous fall (ro wpozrecetyv), but his own soul, 
 which willingly destroys itself. But to him who looks upon 
 salvation with greedy eyes, importunately and violently 
 seeking this, the good Father will supply the true purifi- 
 cation and the life which is not to be removed. To Him 
 by His Son Jesus Christ, the Lord of the living and the 
 dead, and by the Holy Spirit, be glory, honour, power, 
 and eternal majesty, both now and always, to genera- 
 tions of generations and ages of ages!’ 
 
 ' Clement’s ideas of ‘the restitution of all things’ will be found in the 
 note on Guostic Herestes (Valentinus) or Strom, ii. 22. 
 
 er * Soe 
 
 Fo 
 
 = ga a anal 
 
NOTES. 
 
 NOTE A. 
 
 THE’ GNOSTIC HERESIES, 
 
 ‘GNOSTIC sects which represent the Creator or Demiurge as an 
 imperfect or ignorant Being, dependent on the Supreme Unknown, 
 are pantheistic; those which represent the Creator and the 
 ‘creation as hostile to the Supreme God are dualistic. The peculiar 
 form of each sect depended, first, upon the source from which it 
 started, whether from heathen philosophy or from Jewish notions 
 or from perversions of Apostolic language. Secondly, it depended 
 upon the practical way in which the Gnostic sought to manifest 
 his opposition to, or contempt for, the material world, whether by 
 ascetical practices, forbidding to marry and enjoining abstinence 
 from animal meats (1 Tim. iv. 3; Iren. 1. 28), or, on the other 
 hand, by treating ordinary life as a matter of indifference, and by 
 looking upon salvation as a matter of so-called faith and emanci- 
 pation from law. Accordingly, while Mosheim and Neander make 
 only two classes of Gnostics, namely, the Dualists of Syria (the 
 Ophites, Carpocrates, Saturninus, and Marcion) and the Pan- 
 theists of Egypt (Basilides, Valentinus, Bardesanes, and the Jew 
 Cerinthus), Gieseler and Matter, the learned French historian of 
 Gnosticism, follow a similar mode of classification, but make a 
 third class, namely, the Gnostics of Asia Minor ; especially Mar- 
 cion, who was originally a Christian, and whose Gnosticism was 
 a perversion of the doctrines he had learned. 
 
 THE SOURCES OF GNOSTICISM are mainly to be found in 
 the Alexandrine philosophy of Philo, and in the Kabbala, or secret 
 
376 NOTE A. 
 
 doctrines of the Jews. The problem of the Great First Cause of 
 the world, and His relation to the evil in it, had been glanced at 
 by Plato, but ‘he was glad, says Mansel, ‘to keep it as far as. 
 possible in the back ground of his teaching, and had never at- 
 tempted a systematic solution’ (Gnostic Heresies, p. 22). Plato: 
 described the object of philosophy as being to ascend to this. 
 First Principle, this Ideal Good, of which the world was made an. 
 image ‘as far as possible, but which transcends all definite exist- 
 ence (p. 16). From this language, and a perverted interpretation: 
 of the Platonic cosmogony of the Timzeus, Philo elaborated a 
 theory according to which the personal Creator and Governor of 
 the world, who held intercourse with the chosen people of Israel,, 
 was distinguished from the absolute First Principle, who is beyond 
 personal relations and beyond definite existence, destitute of 
 qualities, and not to be expressed in speech. Philo attributed. 
 the personal qualities which characterise the God of the Hebrew 
 Scriptures to the divine Word, or Logos, a Being intermediate 
 between God and the world. The Jewish Kabbala, again, re- 
 presented all definite existence as sprung from En Soph, ‘that 
 which has no limits,’ through ten emanations, called Sephiroth, or 
 Numbers ;! and this Jewish metaphysic coincides with one form,, 
 at least, of Persian philosophy, in which both good and evil are: 
 said to have sprung from boundless time. ‘In the systems of the 
 Gnostic Ophites, says Mansel, ‘the Phrygian orgies of Cybele, 
 the Phenician and Assyrian mysteries of Adonis, the Egyptian mys- 
 teries of Isisand Osiris, the secret doctrines of Eleusis, the dualism: 
 of Persia, the fables of Greek mythology, the poetic cosmogony of 
 the Platonic Timeeus, all find a place’ (p. 304). But perhaps. 
 there are natural tendencies of thought, touches of nature, which, 
 even in mental aberrations, make human thinkers kin. We need 
 not, therefore, trace every Gnostic conceit to an older philosophy. 
 SIMON MAGUS is traditionally reported to have.been the first 
 of the Gnostics. He taught that there are two offshoots of. 
 ‘Eternal Silence,’ one from above, Intelligence, and the other 
 from beneath, called Thought or Conception. He gave himself 
 out to be the Intelligence (vous), ‘the power of God which is called 
 great’ (Acts viii. 10), the divine word ; and he carried about with: 
 
 1 Mansel, Gnostic Heresies, p. 34. Compare 1 Tim. i. 4; Tit. i. 14 5 
 li. 9. 
 
THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 37¥. 
 
 him a woman of Tyre, called Helena, saying that she was Con- 
 ception, and that the angels who made the world were sprung 
 from her. MENANDER, the disciple of Simon, represented himself 
 as sent down from the invisible powers to save the world. ‘From 
 Menander, the disciple of Simon,’ says Eusebius, ‘there went forth 
 a power, as it were, of a two-mouthed and two-headed serpent, 
 which established leaders of two different heresies, namely, Satur- 
 ninus, a native of Antioch, and Basilides, an Alexandrian.’ 
 Basilides veszded at Alexandria, though some think he was a native 
 of Syria. The two different heresies are spoken of as the Syrian 
 Gnosis and the Alexandrian Gnosis. 
 
 The system of SATURNINUS was dualistic. He maintained 
 that the unknown Father made both good and bad angels ; that. 
 the world was made by seven angels, one of whom was the God 
 of the Jews; that Jesus Christ was the divine Intelligence, or 
 Reason, who came to destroy the God of the Jews and to save 
 them who have faith; that matter is essentially evil and devil- 
 possessed ; and that, therefore, Christ assumed a phantom body. 
 His hostility to material existence led him to condemn marriage 3. 
 and many of his followers abstained from animal food (Iren. i. 24). 
 
 BASILIDES, who claimed to be the pupil of Glaucias, the in- 
 terpreter of Peter, and to have derived his teaching from a secret 
 tradition communicated by the Saviour to St. Matthias, lived 
 during the early part of the second century. According to Basilides,, 
 the First Principle is without thought, counsel, choice, passion, 
 ‘desire, or anything whereby we can conceive of it or name it. 
 When he says that this Principle w7//ed to make the world, he 
 means ‘ willed without will, that is, the will sprang into existence 
 as will. By the world, which this Principle willed to make, he 
 means ‘the universal seed of the world,’ ! that which comprehends 
 all things and out of which all things are evolved. The seed of 
 all things was produced, he says, from things which were not 
 (from non-existence) ; and this seed is the word which was spoken, 
 Let there be light; and this, he adds, was that which was spoken 
 in the Gospels, That zs the true light which lighteth every man 
 coming into the world. Waving thus, as Irenzeus says, conjured 
 
 1 thy Tov Kécmov mavorepulay. (Hipp. Adv. Her. vii. 22, Mansel’s. 
 Gnostic Heresies, p. 148.) The reference to St. John’s Gospel proves that. 
 it was known at the time of Basilides. t 
 
378 NOTE A, 
 
 into existence a God who has no existence, he proceeds to show 
 how the seed, or germ of all things, which thus sprang into exist- 
 ence, developed or evolved itself, and how evil arose. By some 
 disturbance of the spiritual and material principles, it came to 
 pass that passions, or spurious spirits of a different nature, were 
 *appended’ to the rational soul, or spiritual nature. The de- 
 liverance from these material hindrances is by faith, and by a 
 supra-mundane election growing up in the elect in an extraordi- 
 nary way, but natural inasmuch as it is in no way the result of 
 free choice. ‘The followers of Basilides,’ says Clement (Strom. 
 ii. 3), ‘reckon faith to be natural inasmuch as (xaO’ 6) they assign 
 it to the election, and represent it as finding the lessons of learning 
 (rad paOnwara) without proof or demonstration by intellectual ap- 
 prehension.’ Basilides, also, spake of the election as being strangers 
 to the world, being naturally above the world, and possessing, by 
 their divine ‘essence, or nature,’ ‘a knowledge of supra-mundane 
 things’ (7 Trav vrepkoopioy yvaows, Hip. vii. 27). There are three 
 classes of sons of God: first, the purely spiritual, who rise up 
 immediately to God; secondly, those who strive to ascend, but 
 being grosser only reach a place intermediate between the world 
 and the supra-mundane region, and, in order to do even this, re- 
 quire the assistance of the Holy Spirit ; thirdly, there are natures 
 which require rectification, or purification, or completion. To 
 operate on this third class by the Gnostic doctrine, certain spiritual 
 sons of God are left here. There are three progressive periods 
 in this work of enlightenment or purification : first, from Sabaism 
 to Judaism under Abraxas, the Sun God; and, secondly, from 
 Judaism to Christianity, under the Lord of the Hebdomad, or 
 God of the Jews. Thirdly, the intellects below are kindled by the 
 Gospel, and the sons of God are manifested. The supra-mundane 
 election determines those souls who are to be conformed to the 
 image of Jesus; and when these shall have ascended to their 
 proper place, those souls which are designed by nature for the 
 world shall be brought into great ignorance, so as to have no sense 
 of deficiency or desire of what is above them. 
 
 The system of VALENTINUS is a philosophical romance some- 
 what similar to the speculations of Basilides. Valentinus was 
 said by his followers to have heard Theudas, the disciple of St- 
 Paul (Clem. Strom. S. vii. 17). He commences with the notion 
 of the Infinite, the Great Abyss, where thought loses itself—the 
 
THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 379 
 
 Unspeakable. From this he represents the rational and moral 
 
 attributes of God as emanating in a physical way, and becoming 
 
 more and more limited by their mutual relations, as well as by 
 individualising self-consciousness. This process culminates in 
 the creation of matter, which, if Mansel has rightly guessed the 
 meaning, is a dark, cloudy, hindrance to knowledge, a dark shadow 
 coming to take the place of diminishing light. A separation be- 
 tween the upper world of Spirit (the Pleroma) and the lower sphere 
 
 of the natural is made by Horos, or the Boundary, which corre- 
 sponds to the intermediate firmament of Basilides. Horos re- 
 -stores Sophia, or Spiritual Wisdom, to her place within the 
 
 Pleroma, or spiritual region, but banishes Achamoth, or Earthly 
 Wisdom, to the region outside of it. ‘In the Horos, who guards 
 
 ‘the distinction between the finite and the infinite, the Valentinian 
 
 school retained a merely physical reflection of the idea of righ- 
 teousness.’ Dorner’s ‘ Person of Christ,’ vol. i. p. 450. 
 The development which succeeds is the material counterpart 
 
 -of the emanations in the celestial world. The last germ of 
 “Spiritualism left to earthly wisdom (Achamoth) was a longing to 
 
 return to the upper sphere. From this desire the mundane soul, 
 or intermediate nature of the Demiurge, proceeded. The Demiurge 
 is a being capable of form, the earthly image corresponding to 
 
 ‘the Nous, or Reason, of the upper sphere, the Father of psychical 
 
 men of an intermediate nature like himself, and the Creator of 
 
 -others who are purely material. The Saviour, however, infused a 
 
 spiritual principle (from the upper sphere) into a select few through 
 
 _Achamoth and the Demiurge, who was unconscious of it. Those 
 
 who possess this spiritual germ of a transcendental nature alone 
 
 -attain to perfection, being given as brides to the angels of the 
 
 Saviour. The psychical sons of the Demiurge have a certain 
 freedom of choice; and, if they make choice of the better part, they 
 find repose in the intermediate place ; but their very freedom of 
 
 -choice being connected with separate personality and finite multi- 
 plicity, makes them unfit for the highest redemption, the life of unity 
 
 with God, attained by the higher knowledge or faculty of immediate 
 
 ‘intuition, whose object is the Absolute and the Infinite. In this 
 so-called spiritual faculty of metaphysical contemplation, the 
 -memory, the self-consciousness, and all those other powers and 
 -modes of operation of which the fsyche, or soul, is the sum, have 
 no place. The soul is the vehicle in which the spiritual part is 
 
380 NOTE -A, 
 
 here developed to maturity, but is not itself destined for this life 
 of metaphysical intuition. Where this metaphysically spiritual 
 nature exists, that is, in ‘the most perfect,’ it matters little what 
 actions they commit. ‘Psychical (natural) men are indeed, they 
 say, established by works and by a mere faith, but they have not. 
 this knowledge. We of the Church, they say, are these (psychical) 
 persons. Wherefore, also, they maintain that good works are 
 necessary for us, for that otherwise it is impossible that we should 
 be saved. But as to themselves they hold that they shall be 
 entirely and undoubtedly saved, not by means of conduct, but be- 
 
 cause they are spiritual by nature . . whatever be the sort of actions. 
 
 in which they indulge’ (Iren. 1. 6, 2). The third class of men 
 are the material, who, being by nature eviland of the same essence 
 as the beasts, cannot be saved. The material man after the 
 image (6 xolxds, kat eixdva) was represented by Cain ; the psychical 
 man after the likeness (6 Wuyxixds, ka6’ dpoiwow) by Abel, and the 
 spiritual man after the ideal conception (6 mvevyarikds, kar’ ideav) 
 by Seth. The psychical manhood was breathed into the irrational 
 animal man and contained something like the essence of God, 
 constituting him an animal having a free will and capable of both 
 corruption and incorruption according to his choice. The spiritual 
 seed was some portion or germ of the divine nature or essence: 
 which was secretly deposited in the elect, and grew to maturity 
 without any possibility of falling away from this unspeakable grace. 
 
 In modern times we still hear of men receiving this seed, or’ 
 
 germ, wrapped up in the word of God, or of its being deposited in 
 
 the unconscious breasts of little children brought for baptism. We 
 
 hear still of three classes, somewhat analogous: first, of those 
 who, like the heathen, neither have the common nor the extraordi- 
 
 nary influences of the Spirit; secondly, of those who hear the 
 
 Gospel and who have certain common influences by which they 
 can go a certain length, a certain kind of inferior virtue, but who, 
 never receiving any of those special influences called effectual 
 calling, are destined to lose the common influences, or to be con- 
 demned by them. The third class are those whom God makes to 
 
 differ by giving them His own nature, so that they are capable of 
 
 truly spiritual good, that is, of real faith and love, and are thus 
 
 saved, not by choice or conduct, but by the gift of a divine nature: 
 
 apart from man’s will or works, except perhaps as making them. 
 
 We cannot fail to trace a strange parallelism between these- 
 
 ‘ 
 - 
 
 ities Ss 
 
THE GNOSTIC HERESIES. 381 
 
 conceits and what Irenzeus and Clement taught as the full know- 
 ledge. There were, according to this knowledge, three stages of 
 progress indicated in various ways ; as, for instance, by fear, hope 
 and love; by the first law, which teaches slaves to cease from 
 evil; by an intermediate stage of learning to do well and seeing 
 through a glass and enigmas ; and, thirdly, by that perfect stage 
 of full knowledge, face to face, and of intelligence in well-doing. 
 But the principle according to which Christianity represents God 
 as promoting men, is that he who is faithful in little is faithful 
 also in much, and will receive whatever is good for him ; and that 
 the second nature, which God communicates, is semnped or sealed 
 on men according to the objects of their choice. 
 
 The Valentinians, also, had their ideas of THE RESTITUTION OF 
 ALL THINGS. The spiritual natures shall then be divested of 
 their souls and mount up into the fulness of the Godhead; the 
 Demiurge and the better class of psychical or ‘ natural’ men and 
 the souls of the spiritual shall find repose in the intermediate ; 
 and when this shall have come to pass, ‘the fires hidden in the 
 world shall burst forth, and while destroying all matter shall also 
 be extinguished along with it and have no further existence’ (Iren. 
 i. 7,1, 5). In this general conflagration of all material things, the 
 third class of men, the earthy, are destined to perish. On the 
 other hand, according to Clement, Paul teaches that the aim of 
 faith is assimilation to God as far as possible in righteousness and 
 holiness with wisdom ; that the fulfilment of this aim is ‘the end,’ 
 or ‘hoped for restitution’ of God’s image and likeness, ‘the rest 
 laid up’ for Christians. This restitution, or restoration (dmoxatdora- 
 ats), called by some ‘ hope,’ that which is hoped for, is to be reached 
 by living according to God’s commands irreproachably and intelli- 
 gently, and for this end (says Clement) Paul exhorted the Corin- 
 thians to be imitators of him even as he was of Christ. ‘These 
 doctrines,’ adds Clement, ‘ have given rise to the streams of those 
 who have dogmatised (taught fanciful conceits) concerning ¢he end, 
 He quotes Rom. v. 4, 5; vi. 22; Gal. v.5, 6; Heb. iv. 8, 9; vi. 
 11-20; Prov. i. 33; Ez. xviii. 4-9; Plato and other philosophers, 
 to show that exdaimony or happiness means properly a right spirit, 
 daimon, a right habit (és) or disposition ruling (76 jyepovxov) the 
 soul; that only the virtuous attain this state (kardoracis), the 
 virtues being productive (amepyaotixal) of this happiness (S. ii. 22). 
 
 Nicolas, the presbyter of Antioch, who was one of the seven dea- 
 
382 NOTE A. 
 
 cons mentioned in Acts vi. 5, gave his name to another succession of 
 Gnostic heretics (Iren. i. 26; Rev. il. 26). Irenzeus speaks of the 
 NICOLAITANS as the followers of Nicolas ; but Clement endeavours 
 to show that the Nicolaitans misrepresented the words of Nicolas. 
 He said that the flesh must be abused, meaning, according to: 
 Clement, that it must be disciplined so as to waste away its sinful 
 impulses and propensities ; whereas the Nicolaitans abused it by 
 abandoning themselves to pleasure like goats, and leading a life 
 of self-indulgence as if insulting the body, not knowing that 
 thereby the body is wasted, being by nature subject to dissolution, 
 and buried in a mire of vice (S. ii. 20). Certainly the story which 
 Clement himself tells of the method Nicolas took to clear himself 
 of the charge of jealousy (S. iii. 4) is not creditable. 
 
 The errors of CERINTHUS had, as we are told by Irenzus 
 (iii. 11), been long before disseminated by those termed Nicolaitans. 
 His opinions resembled those of CARPOCRATES with this difference, 
 that Cerinthus, following the Alexandrian or pantheistic philosophy, 
 represented the maker of the world as a power subordinate to but 
 ignorant of God, while Carpocrates represents the power or powers. 
 by which the world was made as hostile to the Supreme God. Both 
 of them represented Jesus as a mere man into whom a power (the 
 Christ) descended from the Unknown Father, whom Jesus then 
 proclaimed. The OPHITES, so called from the great respect 
 which they paid to the serpent of Genesis, held notions very 
 similar to those of Carpocrates, teaching that the Christ was a 
 separate spiritual being from Jesus ; that this spirit descended into 
 Him at his baptism and left Him before his passion, the proof of 
 which, they said, was that no miracles were wrought before his 
 baptism or after his passion. If the Creator of the world be re- 
 garded as an evil power, hostile to the Supreme God, it follows 
 that it is no longer a sin to revolt against his authority, but an 
 emancipation from the law of a dark, jealous, or evil power. 
 Hence the Ophites looked upon the serpent as the symbol of 
 intelligence, as an instrument of higher wisdom and a benefactor. 
 Carpocrates and some of the Ophite sects carried out their defiance 
 of the Creator, or their ideas of emancipation, by striving to prac- 
 tise actions usually considered sinful, or by humouring their pro- 
 pensities or evil angels, that they might be released from them. 
 This was their idea of a higher life of freedom and enlightenment. 
 The Ophites made great use of St. Paul’s epistles. They first 
 
THE GNOSTIC HERESIES, 383 
 
 called themselves Gnostics, saying that they alone knew the depths 
 (Hip. Ref. Her. v. 6,7). This expression appears to have been used 
 in John’s time (Rev. ii. 24), for he commends those ‘ who have not 
 known the depths of Satan as they call them,’ and connects these 
 depths with the teaching of the Syrian Jezebel, ‘ who calleth herself 
 a prophetess.’ 
 
 The example of MARCION, who was preceded by Cerdo, and 
 was contemporary with Basilides (from the time of Hadrian to the 
 time of the Antonines), shows that out of the bosom of Christianity _ 
 there may arise systems of teaching similar to, and in some re- 
 spects coinciding with, Gnosticism. It warns Christians, as much 
 as any example could, of the danger of building worthless materials 
 on Paul’s foundation, or of wresting the language of the Scriptures: 
 in a foolish, rash, and presumptuous manner. He taught, as has 
 been already said (p. 132), that the God of Christianity is only 
 good to some, and that the God of the Old Testament, from whom 
 these are delivered, is only just to the rest. He represented salva- 
 tion as being attained by those who learned his doctrine of grace. 
 He supposed that such men as Cain and the Sodomites would 
 welcome Christ when He descended to Hades, and would be 
 saved on their rusning to Him; while Abel and Enoch, Noah 
 and Abraham, knowing that their God was constantly tempting 
 them, would suspect that He was still tempting them, and thus, not 
 running to Him or deleving His announcements, would be left in 
 Hades (Iren. i. 27, 3). When the men in our time speak of coming 
 to Christ, they ought not to use the expression in Marcion’s sense. 
 Men who come to Christ find His yoke easy, not because they are 
 exempted from the obligation to practise excellence, but because they 
 come to understand His law and choose it because it is excellent. 
 
 Marcion’s doctrines plainly blasphemed the Creator (Iren. v. 26, 
 2). According to them men are naturally the workmanship of the 
 god of this world, and being children of their father the Demiurge, 
 are slaves in respect of themselves. To purchase some from this 
 unlovingly just god, by whose law (the Mosaic) they were accursed, 
 Christ became a curse or substitutionary ransom (Dorner, I. i. 
 p- 454; Hagenbach I. p. 150). Marcion represented the atonement 
 as a price paid by the superior god of Love to the god of Nature and 
 of Law ; and even this notion has its modern counterpart in those 
 who represent God as having two wills, one decreeing or consent- 
 ing to (Iren. v. 27, 1) men’s evil choice, and another wishing all to 
 be saved. 
 
384 NOTE B. 
 
 NOTESB: 
 
 POLYCARP’S TRADITIONAL TEACHING AS PRESERVED 
 BY LSRENACS. 
 
 The following account given by Irenzeus of his knowledge of 
 Polycarp is preserved by Eusebius. _ It is contained in the address 
 to Florinus of his work on ‘ Monarchy,’ or ‘on God not being the 
 author of evil, for this opinion did he (Florinus) appear to advocate.’ 
 
 ‘These opinions (Sdypara), Florinus, to speak sparingly, are of 
 no sound mind, these opinions are dissonant to the Church, and 
 invest with the deepest impiety those who assent to them . 
 these opinions, the elders who were before us, who were pupils too 
 of the apostles, delivered not to thee. For when I was yet a boy, 
 I saw thee in Lower Asia with Polycarp ... For I have a more 
 vivid recollection of what happened then than of recent events .. . 
 -so that I can even describe the place where the blessed Polycarp 
 used to sit and converse, his goings out and his comings in, and 
 the manner of his life and personal appearance and discourses 
 -which he delivered to the people; also, how he would speak of 
 his familiar intercourse with John and with the rest of those who 
 had seen the Lord; and how he would recount their words ; and 
 concerning the Lord, what things they were which he had heard 
 from them both as to His mighty works and His teaching, as 
 Polycarp, having received them from the eye-witnesses of the Word 
 of life, used to recount them all consonantly with the Scriptures. 
 These things did I through the mercy which was upon me listen 
 to attentively, noting them not on paper but in mine own heart ; 
 and I am constantly by God’s grace revolving (ruminating) these 
 things accurately in my mind. And I can bear witness before 
 God that if the blessed and Apostolic Elder had heard any such 
 thing he would have stopped his ears and fled from the place,’ &c. 
 (Fragment 2). 
 
 ‘Polycarp had not only been instructed by the apostles and 
 had conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was aiso by 
 apostles appointed for (is) Asia bishop in the church in Smyrna, 
 whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried (on earth) a very 
 long time’ (Iren. ili. 3, 4). 
 
 Polycarp would then have protested against such a system as 
 
 —— ee 
 
IDEAS OF HERMAS ON THE SON. 385 
 
 that of Edwards, which represents all our actions as caused by 
 man’s created nature or other such impulses, so as virtually to 
 represent God as the author of evil (Huxley’s ‘Hume,’ p. 194). 
 Irenzeus relates how Polycarp fled from the bath where Cerinthus 
 was, and how when Marcion asked him, ‘ Knowest thou me?’ he re- 
 plied, ‘ { know the first born of Satan.’ ‘Such pious care had the 
 apostles and their disciples not to communicate so much as by 
 word with any of those who put a false stamp on the truth’ (Iren. 
 
 iii. 3, 4). 
 
 NOTE SC: 
 
 IDEAS OF HERMAS ON THE SON. 
 
 The Ideas of Hermas may be gathered from the following 
 similitude : A certain man planted a vineyard, and during his 
 absence in a foreign country, directed a valued slave to attach the 
 vines to the stakes. The slave did not only do this, but also rooted 
 out the weeds in the garden. The owner on his return was so 
 pleased, that he called together his son, who was his heir, and his 
 friends, who were his councillors, and proposed to make the slave 
 fellow-heir with his son. This counsel was approved of. Some 
 time after, the master made a feast and sent the slave many dishes, 
 which he divided among his fellow-slaves. This conduct confirmed 
 the master’s resolution. The explanation of the similitude is : the 
 master of the field is the Creator, the slave is the Son of God, the 
 stakes are the angels who keep the vines (the people) together, 
 the weeds are their iniquities ; the dishes are commandments, for 
 the slave or Son of God, having purged away their sins, showed 
 them the paths of life. God’s friends and councillors are the 
 angels. The Son of the parable is (in one manuscript) said to be 
 the Holy Spirit. The reason why God took this counsel with the 
 Son and the angels is further explained in this way. The flesh (the 
 humanity), in which the Holy Spirit dwelt, was always nobly subject 
 to the Spirit, in no way defiling the Spirit or yielding (to tempta- 
 tion), but labouring rightly and chastely with the Spirit. This 
 conduct of the flesh pleased God; and He, therefore, received it 
 
 CC 
 
386 NOTE D. 
 
 (as a partaker) along with the Spirit, that the wearied body, which 
 had passed its time as a slave, might have some place of habitation 
 and not lose its reward. The moral is that every body, in which 
 the Holy Spirit has dwelt without spot or defilement, shall live 
 unto God. God overlooks sins of ignorance,and heals them. But 
 if those who know the way of life defile the flesh, they will also 
 defile the Spirit ; and the repentance of God’s elect has its day 
 and its limits. Hermas, Vis. ii. 2; Sim.v;ix.1. (See Donaldson’s 
 < Apostolic Fathers’ and Dorner’s ‘ Person of Christ,’ on Hermas.) 
 
 N@ Dba: 
 THE AUGUSTINIAN DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION. 
 
 Augustine’s doctrine of predestination pre-supposed the fall, 
 and, in this respect alone, so far as we can see, differed from that 
 of Calvin. Augustine was what would have been afterwards called 
 a Sublapsarian, and taught an indirect Reprobation, or Preterition 
 (passing over) with respect to the lost. Adam had free choice 
 with the grace necessary for perseverance, but he fell. All men 
 have fallen in him, and therefore deserve eternal perdition. Those 
 who are given up to perdition because they have not been pre- 
 destined to life, have no right to complain (for they sinned in 
 Adam) ; while those who are saved owe their salvation to God’s 
 free mercy, they being effectually assisted by grace, while the 
 others are not so helped. The fall of man destroyed his free will 
 and disordered his whole nature. By an eternal decree God 
 separated from the mass of fallen humanity (massa corrupta) a 
 certain number whom He chose to salvation. Those are, indeed, 
 predestined conditionally upon their being qualified (by faith, 
 obedience, virtue, or holiness) for it; but then they are also abso- 
 lutely predestined to these qualifications. If eternal life is made 
 absolutely certain, then holiness must be predestined, and, as 
 holiness must be the work of the Holy Spirit, there must be ensured 
 to every elect soul such a divine influence, not depending on man’s 
 will, as shall ensure a sanctified heart and mind—in other words, 
 efficacious or irresistible grace. The grace which God gives to 
 
 ee 
 
AUGUSTINIAN DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION. 387 
 
 the elect does not merely assist the will but actually controls it. 
 To teach that without grace man has no power to do good does 
 not necessarily involve irresistible grace ; but the later writings 
 of Augustine plainly teach that the very power of willing to co- 
 operate with grace is in itself the gift of grace; that man’s will 
 is not merely influenced but made by grace; that those to whom 
 grace is given cannot practically resist. God saves only the right- 
 eous who persevere in their righteousness ; it must, therefore, be 
 provided that those persons who are elect shall exhibit as much 
 goodness of life as is necessary for the end to which they have 
 been ordained. Final perseverance is the great gift which puts in 
 execution God’s eternal decree with respect to the whole body of 
 the elect. Predestination, he says, is the preparation of grace ; 
 and grace is the actual gift. Both, however, are free gifts, and 
 the reason why God bestows kindness on some and heaps punish- 
 ments on others, by which punishments they are hardened and 
 destroyed, must be referred to the secret judgment of God, to His 
 unsearchable decree to give faith only to some. He evades the 
 natural force of the text, ‘God wills that all should be saved,’ by 
 supposing that ‘all’ means ‘some out of all classes,’ who are saved 
 by His wiil. 
 
 The above account is taken from the Rev. W. R. Clark’s 
 volume on St. Augustine in the ‘Fathers for English Readers.’ 
 ‘ Passages,’ he says, ‘in support of it are given in abundance by 
 Dr. Mozley, in his treatise on “ Augustinian Predestination,” and by 
 Bohringer in Die Alte Kirche, Bd. xi. It is obvious that Augustine 
 could not have held that which we now mean by the doctrine of 
 free will. But as ai the early fathers, Justin, Irenzeus, Clement, 
 &c., founded their theology on the assumption that man has this 
 self-determining power in choosing whether he will follow the 
 divine guidance or not, as they even reasoned from this charac- 
 teristic of man that God also has free will, there can be little 
 doubt that Augustine’s doctrine of predestination was not that 
 held by the great teachers of early Christianity. 
 
388 NUTE E., 
 
 ONOTE st: 
 
 RECENT SERMONS ON REDEMPTION BY PRICE, SUD- 
 DEN CONVERSIONS, SALVATION WITHOUT WORKS, 
 &c. 
 
 The Rev. C. H. Spurgeon has kindly revised the following ex- 
 tracts from his published sermons of August 22 and 29, 1880, and 
 has approved them. 
 
 ‘Attacks have often been made on the central doctrine of the 
 Gospel, namely, the doctrine of redemption or atonement, profess- 
 ing to be corrections of our phraseology, but being essentially 
 assaults upon the truth itself. Objections have been raised against 
 what is called “the mercantile theory of the atonement ;” but there 
 is really nothing horrible in this description, even if it were allowed 
 its full force. Within the idea of purchase lies hidden the essence 
 of the Saviour’s work. An equivalent was given, a possession was 
 secured. The fact is, the objection is not to the mercantile expres- 
 sion, but to the very idea of substitution and vicarious sacrifice—a 
 truth so eminently consolatory to souls burdened with sin. We 
 may now go free because our Redeemer has suffered in our stead 
 whatever was due from us to the law of God; He has endured in 
 our place the punishment to be exacted from us’ (pp. 469-471). 
 
 ‘ There is a theology which teaches that when a man believes in 
 Christ, he is pardoned up to that point; but that, in future, if he 
 does not see to it, he may be again accused and summoned before 
 the judgment. This is not our theology. If you come to Christ, 
 He will grant you such a pardon that God will have no calling you 
 to account at some future time. Why then should we (z.e. we who 
 have believed) go to church and say that we are mserable sin- 
 ners? You are to confess sin daily as you commit it, but not 
 under the garb of misery, as if you were an unpardoned criminal. 
 Are you not a beloved child ?’ (but see Jen. iv. 41.2, 3). ‘ Confess 
 sin with the certainty that you are forgiven, and that still the sen- 
 tence of forgiveness runs on and includes these present and future 
 sins as well as past sins. Do not pray to God as if you dreaded He 
 
RECENT SERMONS. 389 
 
 would smite you.’ (But, according to Clement, such sinners ought 
 to fear. Pardon is established, not according to forgiveness, but ac- 
 cording to cure. Whom the word heals not, the rod may heal; 
 and whom the rod heals not, the fire devours. True ‘confession in 
 repentance’ consists in not giving way to the same fault, as Dr. 
 Vaughan also said not long since. Ped. i. 7; C! 154; Strom. ii. 
 133; li. 15; C? 42.) ‘Hecannot smite you; Hehas smitten Christ 
 instead of you.’ (Compare the idea of the Marcosians, that they are 
 -out of the power of the Judge, Iren i. 13,6; and the words of the 
 primitive elders, that those are senseless who speak about the Lord’s 
 -compassion and keep silence about His judgments on those who 
 are not doers of what they hear, Iren. iv. 28.) ‘Eternal justice 
 cannot charge you with sins which were once for all charged on 
 the great Substitute, and borne by Him. God is not unrighteous 
 to punish Christ and then to punish those for whom Christ died ; 
 ‘to take payment from Christ and afterwards from you—from the 
 _ Surety and then from the debtor’ (pp. 489-492). 
 
 A London preacher of another denomination, in speaking very 
 recently of the history of THE PENITENT THIEF ON THE CROSS, 
 drew the conclusion that salvation has nothing to do with men’s 
 conduct previous to conversion ; and that, as the thief had no time 
 
 left for the acquirement of new habits or a new nature, therefore 
 salvation does not depend on men’s subsequent conduct in practis- 
 ing virtue, or in becoming ¢hus fitted for heaven. But who knows 
 the antecedents of this thief? He might have been rashly betrayed 
 ‘into a criminal action,as David was. Man judges the outward act, 
 but God is able to judge the heart. The early Christians could not 
 believe that the atrocious persecutor Saul had become a Christian ; 
 but Paul had always been a conscientious man (Acts xxiii. 1; 
 1 Tim. i. 13; 2 Tim. i. 3). Had not the previous conduct and ac- 
 quired character of David and of Paul something to do with their 
 _repentance, when rebuked, and with their subsequent conduct? 
 All persecutors, all murderers, all thieves are not equally depraved. 
 Mr. Peace, the confirmed thief and murderer, appeared to accept 
 the offers of grace made to him before his execution ; yet his ante- 
 cedents would surely justify a suspicion of the result, if his sentence 
 had been remitted. In the extension of our Lord’s hands on the 
 cross, one of the elders, quoted by Irenzeus, saw the gathering of 
 
390 NOTE E. 
 
 the two peoples to God (Iren. v. 17, 4) ; and the history of the two- 
 thieves may thus have a latent meaning. 
 
 A somewhat similar conclusion was recently drawn by a weil- 
 known professor in preaching about Zacchzeus (Luke xix.), and by 
 Dr. D. Brown in his commentary on St. Luke’s account of him. 
 According to both these professors, Zacchzeus was a cold, hard- - 
 hearted extortioner, a man who had nothing in common with 
 Jesus of Nazareth before he went up the tree ; but, wondering, per- 
 haps, at the accounts he had heard, he went to see a man so unac- 
 countably different from himself, and became suddenly revolutionised 
 in his character. ‘What encouragement,’ says Dr. Brown, ‘ to hope 
 Sor sudden conversions !’ But was not the publican’s office sufficient 
 to account for the language of the Jews, and their condemnation of 
 our Lord’s choice? It was to justify our Lord’s coming to his 
 house to eat with him that Zacchzeus protested : ‘ Behold, Lord, 
 the half of what is mine (nov rév trapydvrav) I give to feed the 
 poor ; and, if I have taken anything from anyone by false informa- - 
 ion (é€cvxopdvrnca), I restore fourfold” He says ‘if, either admit- 
 ting the possibility that in such a business he may have over- 
 estimated a man’s taxable property and overcharged him, or else 
 challenging the Jews to prove it. He does not say, ‘I will give’ and 
 ‘| will restore,’ but ‘I give’ and ‘I restore,’ as if he were declaring 
 the rules of his existing practice and not merely good resolutions 
 for the future. He was possibly a ‘liberal publican,’ as Dean 
 Stanley lately called him, one who was in the habit of giving half 
 his private income to feed the pocr,a man like Cornelius, whose 
 prayers and whose alms had come up as a memorial before God. 
 He seems to speak like Samuel: ‘Behold here I am; witness 
 against me before the Lord and before His Anointed, whom have 
 I defrauded? and I will restore it you (fourfold).’ Our Lord, in 
 this instance and in what precedes, is showing that He does not 
 value men’s worth by the same measure as the Pharisees, who 
 trusted that they were righteous and already perfect, because of © 
 their excessive zeal for their national law and prestige, and who 
 considered such Jews as gathered up the Roman taxes as ‘lost’ 
 men or pariahs. Our Lord called Zacchzus a son of (faithful). 
 
 Abraham ; but if, up to this time, he had been an unprincipled ex- 
 tortioner, and a cold hard-hearted scoundrel, how could the Jews.- 
 
RECENT SERMONS. 391 
 
 tell that his character had been suddenly revolutionised? Our 
 ‘Lord sent His apostles to heal sinful men, but directed them to en- 
 quire who in any town was worthy, and to abide there (Matt. x. 11). 
 Did He follow a different rule Himself? He did not pronounce a 
 ‘blessing on the spiritually poor, who have nothing good in them (as 
 -a young preacher lately explained the first beatitude), but on ‘the 
 beggars in spirit,’ on those who, like Zacchzeus, ‘ seek to see Jesus’ 
 -and learn ‘ who He is,’ on men who ever strive after the better life 
 “so as to make rational and spiritual progress in it, on Israelites in 
 whom there is no guile, and on men of childlike disposition, who 
 -are ready to learn more and more of Divine wisdom, not vesting in 
 the law like the proud Pharisee. Not to vaunt one’s self does not 
 -show the absence of Divine charity ; not to be satisfied with what 
 he had already attained, but to strive earnestly after what was before, 
 -did not prove that St. Paul was destitute of the Spirit (Phil. iii.). 
 A cleanly housekeeper finds more fault with her clean house than 
 -a dirty housekeeper does with her dirty house. Irenzeus cites the 
 words of Zacchzus (Luke xix. 8) as showing that a covetous dis- 
 positicn is corrected by acts of beneficence ; but it does not follow 
 ‘that he considered Zacchzus to have been an extortioner. ‘That 
 the law taught before,’ he says, ‘that mankind ought to follow 
 Christ, Himself makes evident, Matt. xix. 17-21. He was teaching 
 ‘men to do the things commanded from the beginning and to undo 
 (solvere) their old covetousness by good works and to follow Christ. 
 But that the distributing of men’s goods to the poor does do away 
 “with (solutionem faciunt) their past covetousness, (the words of) 
 Zacchzeus made evident’ (Iren. iv. 12, 5). 
 Not long ago, another preacher of some note, in expounding 
 Ps. cxvi. 16, endeavoured to show that believers are loosed from 
 ‘their bands, not merely from the bands of bad habits and burden- 
 some ritual services and restrictions fit for slaves or children, but 
 also from the bands of moral obligation. He asserted that getting 
 to heaven is zot a matter of stewardship, and that, in order that 
 they may be disinterested, believers must see themselves saved 
 apart from their conduct. He, however, maintained that, although 
 believers are saved whether they serve God by rational well-doing 
 or not, yet that their grade in heaven depends on their conduct. 
 From this, however, it would appear that after all it is their zwdterest 
 
3902 NOTE E. 
 
 to do well. But were not those ‘ works of the law,’ which St. Paul 
 depreciated, the ritual services of Judaism? Would.he not have 
 called the rational services of well-doing—kindness, uprightness,. 
 temperance, and such like— works of faith? > And if he denied that 
 we can offer any meritorious service, as if God Himself were in 
 need of anything, did he not maintain that our rational services are 
 not only a blessing to others, who see God’s beneficence mirrored 
 in the temple of our bodies, but also indispensable to the doers, 
 in order to generate a fitness for the life to come, that ‘holiness 
 without which no man shall see the Lord?’ ‘There are two ways,’ 
 says Clement of Alexandria, ‘of reaching the perfection of salvation— 
 works and knowledge’ (S. iv. 6; C?157). The practice of the virtues, 
 he maintains, generates right habits and dispositions ; and the 
 holy (dyvjv) hearing of faith generates love ; but in his days it was 
 considered heretical to expect that these states would be generated 
 without painstaking and self-denying efforts, &e. (Si vat; 1 C228; 
 vii. 16). ° 
 
 LONDON : PRINTED BY 
 SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE 
 AND PARLIAMENT STREET 
 
*,* The entire work (7s. 6¢.), entitled ‘The Philosophy of the 
 Dispensations, and Theology of the First Two Centuries,’ or, separately, 
 the Introductory Compendium of Theology (2s.), entitled ‘The Early 
 Doctrinal System of the Church, or Philosophical Tradition of the First 
 Two Centuries,’ will be sent, post free, by Messrs. Spottiswoode & Co. or 
 
 the Author, on receipt of the price. The usual discounts are allowed, 
 
BY THE SAME, AUTHOR. 
 
 Crown 8vo. pp, 270, price 3s. 6d. cloth. 
 
 A GERMAN GRAMMAR ON MNEMONIC 
 PRINCIPLES. 
 
 ‘German is a difficult language. There are two ways in which the 
 difficulties may be made less formidable. The first is to put them out of 
 sight ; the second is to tell the truth, and to tell it in a clear style. Mr. 
 Milne has fairly succeeded in doing this. His little book is not a deceitful 
 book. The greater part of all that is contained in pp. 185-215 may be 
 specially recommended. Students who can put into German the phrases 
 and clauses there given in English have made some progress. Others, 
 who cannot do this, will find aid in the laconic rules given by the Author,’ 
 
 ATHEN4UM, March 11, 1876. 
 
 ‘This Grammar is an elaborate attempt to make the learning of German 
 as easy as possible. Its prominent feature is the frequent use of rhyme. 
 . The Author endeavours to add to the facility of recollection by 
 grouping words together that are cognate in meaning. ... . In other 
 respects the book deserves great praise. It exhibits an accurate knowledge 
 of English and German. Method prevails throughout; the definitions 
 
 are good, and the language is always clear and perspicuous.’ 
 
 Dr. DONALDSON in the EDUCATIONAL NEws of Jan. 8, 1876. 
 
 ‘The Author has evidently spared no pains either in the compilation or 
 revision of his work.’ The NEWCASTLE DAILY CHRONICLE. 
 ‘A remarkable book . . . . and very complete.’ 
 ARBROATH GUIDE. 
 
 ‘ There is much merit in some of Mr. Milne’s generalisations.’ 
 SCOTSMAN. 
 
 ‘The merits of this Grammar recommend it to teachers, and especially 
 to adults who are engaged in the study of the German language.’ 
 WESTERN TIMES. 
 
 ‘Mr. Milne’s book is not one of those numerous manuals which, by 
 shirking all the difficulties, train young people’s minds to habits of idle- 
 ness and mental slovenliness. He states the principles clearly, and 
 illustrates them by well-chosen examples. The rules and exceptions are 
 first given in prose, and then, for the sake of those whose memory requires 
 artificial aid, in rhyme. His treatment of the syntax is especially clear and 
 precise.’ A. L. MEISSNER, Ph.D., Professor of Modern Languages, 
 
 Nov. 1876. Queen’s University, Ireland. 
 
 ‘ Decidedly an honest work, sound and reliable in scholarship, and very 
 convenient to the teacher of German.’ C. Jepp, Professor of German, 
 Sept. 18, 1879. Staff College, Sandhurst. 
 
 PELE EEL LLL 
 
 London: LONGMANS & CO. 
 
THE rules and lists given in this grammar have been arranged and rhymed with the 
 greatest care, so as to relieve as much as possible the labour and tedium of learning them. 
 As it frequently happens in German that a word is irregular in more respects than one, 
 an attempt is here made to meet the difficulties together. For instance, in the lists of 
 nouns, when the plural form is a sufficient index by which one may distinguish the 
 gender, the word is given in the plural; and, similarly, if the gender serves to indicate 
 the plural, the word is given in the singular with the definite article attached. The 
 meaning also of the word is commonly given along with its grammatical irregularities ; 
 for the student mzzst learn the word and its meaning sometime and somewhere, and if 
 he learns it in such a connexion as to learn by the same effort its grammatical forms, he 
 will thereby make his labour more effective. If the word be a noun, he will thus by one 
 effort learn its meaning, its gender, and its declension ; if it be a verb, he will learn its 
 meaning and its irregular parts. 
 
 Another peculiarity of these lists is that words having a similar meaning are grouped 
 together, with a view to render the lists less dull and difficult, and to adapt them for 
 reading as well as for committing to memory. By reading the lists several times atten- 
 tively (with the English), the student will acquire readiness in recognising and in using 
 the words. Committing to memory is, of course, a much more impressive mode of learning 
 than reading is: and one must not imagine that this impression is lost, though the exact 
 order of the words in the lists be afterwards forgotten. Great care has been taken with 
 the rhymes and metre, so as not to offend the ear in reading or repeating these lists. 
 
 As the variety of exceptional forms and the number of exceptional words are apt to 
 tire and bewilder the student, the subject is arranged in such a way as to give him clear 
 and complete ideas as he goes on, the most important lists coming usually first. In this 
 way, the weak declension is treated of before the strong, not only because it is simpler, 
 but also because one can readily learn all the weak monosyllables, and thus acquire at 
 once a distinct idea what monosyllables are weak and what are strong. For the 
 same reason, the strong neuters forming the plural in ey are given before the neuters 
 which form the plural ine. The list of masculine monosyllables which do not modify 
 the plural is shorter than that of those which do ; but it is important to accustom one’s 
 ear to the sound of the modified plural. The student may learn either list or both. 
 
 The classification of the irregular verbs is the same as that adopted in the best 
 grammars, such as those of Bekker and Hoffmann ; while advantage has been taken of 
 several remarkable sequences of the vowels of the roots, to construct a tabulated mzemoria 
 technica, by means of which one can easily attain a knowledge of the subject, and to 
 which one can readily refer in the intercourse of life. In addition to this table the 
 irregular verbs have been given in rhyming lists along with the English and the principal 
 parts, so as to accustom the student to use and recognise them. 
 
 In many Grammars, the lists of conjunctions is mixed up with that of connective 
 adverbs ; or if the two lists are given separately, no means are supplied whereby the 
 student can distinguish the one set of words from the other, unless he learns them by 
 heart. As the order of words in the sentence is differently affected by these two classes 
 of words, a simple way of distinguishing them has been introduced, founded on the fact 
 that the adverb is movable in the sentence, while the conjunction must commence it. 
 The student will thus be able without hesitation to determine whether the word be a 
 conjunction or a connective adverb, and what will consequently be the order of words in 
 the sentence. The construction of sentences in German is treated of so as to train the 
 learner in the logical analysis of sentences—an_ exercise which the Germans first intro- 
 duced, and for which their grammar has a special adaptation. The subject of particles 
 has been fully treated of, their senses being compared and discriminated. A chapter 
 on adverbs used as expletives may supply information on a neglected subject. : 
 
 Teachers often find it necessary to prescribe not merely a chapter to be read, or an 
 exercise to be written, but also short and concise portions to be learned by heart. 
 Accordingly, short metrical summaries have been given at the end of each chapter, 
 containing the substance of what is more fully explained in the prose, with short examples 
 to make the rule or summary more intelligible. Some supplementary chapters con- 
 cerning the use of the article, the government of verbs and adjectives, the use of 
 prepositions after verbs and in phrases, have been.given in rhyming rules. Perhaps the 
 most difficult task in German Grammar is to make one’s self familiar with the correct 
 use of prepositions ; and it is hoped that the treatment of this subject will be found to 
 be an efficient means of acquiring a thorough practical acquaintance with it. 
 
 Alphabetical lists of the nouns and verbs are given in the last part of the book. Two 
 supplementary lists contain the rest of the monosyllables and nouns ending in ed, en, and 
 er. Asubsequent appendix gives rhyming as well as alphabetical lists of all the foreign 
 words about whose gender and declension the student need have any hesitation. — ’ 
 
 The book has been revised by Professor MeIssNER, of the Queen’s University, 
 Belfast, by Herr C. Jerr, Professor of German, Staff College, Sandhurst, and by other 
 German scholars. 
 
t =e eg 
 
 ® ibe 
 , rate 
 
 vs te LS Sa 
 
 oth yy 5 i 
 r r cf Ae Pe 405 <, u 
 TEE 1G te Cee 
 
a 
 
 hg nS 
 
 ~ 
 
 W 
 
 Kai 
 \ en 
 
{ 
 h