The Gentiles, groaning under the universal sentence of sin,

were ignorant of the sure promise of a common salvation yet

to be brought. While the Jews indulged in glowing and exclusive

expectations of the Messiah who was gloriously to redeem them, the

Gentiles were "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, strangers

from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in

the world." Fourthly, in the fulness of time long after "the

Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen, had

preached the gospel beforehand unto Abraham, saying, In thy seed

shall all nations be blessed" "Christ redeemed us from the curse

of the law, being made a curse for us, that the blessing promised

to Abraham might come upon the Gentiles." It was the precise

mission of Christ to realize and exemplify and publish to the

whole world the fulfilment of that promise. The promise itself

was, that men should be released from the under world through the

imputation of righteousness by grace that is, through free

forgiveness and rise to heaven as accredited sons and heirs of

God. This aim and purpose of Christ's coming were effected in his

resurrection. But how did the Gentiles enter into belief and

participation of the glad tidings? Thus, according to Paul: The

death, descent, resurrection, and ascent of Jesus, and his

residence in heaven in a spiritual form, divested him of his

nationality.13 He was "then to be known no more after the flesh."

He was no longer an earthly Jew, addressing Jews, but a heavenly

spirit and son of God, a glorified likeness of the spirits of all

who were adopted as sons of God, appealing to them all as joint

heirs with himself of heaven. He has risen into universality, and

is accessible to the soul of every one that believeth. "In him

there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision,

barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free." The experience resulting in a

heart raised into fellowship with him in heaven is the inward seal

assuring us that our faith is not vain. "Ye Gentiles, who formerly

were afar off, are now made nigh by the blood of Christ; for he

hath broken down the middle wall of partition between Jews and

Gentiles, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, namely, the

law of commandments in ordinances, in order to make in himself of

twain one new man. For through him we both have access by one

spirit unto the Father. Now, therefore, ye are no more strangers

and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and of the

household of God." Circumcision was of the flesh; and the vain

hope of salvation by it was confined to the Jews. Grace was of the

spirit; and the revealed assurance of salvation by it was given to

the Gentiles too, when Christ died to the nationalizing flesh,

rose in the universalizing spirit, and from heaven impartially

exhibited himself, through the preaching of the gospel, to the

appropriating faith of all.

The foregoing positions might be further substantiated by applying

the general theory they contain to the explication of scores of

individual texts which it fits and unfolds, and which, we think,

cannot upon any other view be interpreted without forced

constructions unwarranted by a thorough acquaintance with the mind

of Paul and with the mind of his age. But we must be content with

one or two such applications as specimens. The word "mystery"

often occurs in the letters of Paul. Its current meaning in his

time was "something concealed," something into which one must be

initiated in order to understand it.

13 Martineau, Liverpool Controversy: Inconsistency of the Scheme

of Vicarious Redemption.

The Eleusinian Mysteries, for instance, were not necessarily any thing

intrinsically dark and hard to be comprehended, but things hidden

from public gaze and only to be known by initiation into them.

Paul uses the term in a similar way to denote the peculiar scheme

of grace, which "had been kept secret from the beginning of the

world," "hidden from ages and generations, but now made manifest."

No one denies that Paul means by "this mystery" the very heart and

essence of the gospel, precisely that which distinguishes it from

the law and makes it a universal method of salvation, a wondrous

system of grace. So much is irresistibly evident from the way and

the connection in which he uses the term. He writes thus in

explanation of the great mystery as it was dramatically revealed

through Christ: "Who was manifested in the flesh, [i. e. seen in

the body during his life on earth,] justified in the spirit,

[i. e. freed after death from the necessity of imprisonment in

Hades,] seen of angels, [i. e. in their fellowship after his

resurrection,] preached unto the Gentiles, [i. e. after the gift

of tongues on Pentecost day,] believed on in the world, [i. e. his

gospel widely accepted through the labors of his disciples,]

received up into glory, [i. e. taken into heaven to the presence

of God.]" "The revelation of the mystery" means, then, the visible

enactment and exhibition, through the resurrection of Christ, of

God's free forgiveness of men, redeeming them from the Hadean

gloom to the heavenly glory. The word "glory" in the New Testament

confessedly often signifies the illumination of heaven, the

defined abode of God and his angels. Robinson collects, in his

Lexicon, numerous examples wherein he says it means "that state

which is the portion of those who dwell with God in heaven." Now,

Paul repeatedly speaks of the calling of believers to glory as one

of the chief blessings and new prerogatives of the gospel. "Being

justified by faith, we rejoice in hope of the glory of God." "Walk

worthy of God, who hath called you unto his glory." "We speak

wisdom to the initiates, the hidden wisdom of God in a mystery,

which before the world [the Jewish dispensation] God ordained for

our glory." "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God:

behold, I show you a mystery: we shall all be changed in a moment,

and put on immortality." In the first chapter of the letter to the

Colossians, Paul speaks of "the hope which is laid up for you in

heaven, whereof ye have heard in the gospel;" also of "the

inheritance of the saints in light:" then he says, "God would now

make known among the Gentiles the mystery, which is, Christ among

you, the hope of glory." In the light of what has gone before, how

significant and how clear is this declaration! "All have sinned,

and failed to attain unto the glory of God; but now, through the

faith of Jesus Christ, [through the dispensation brought to light

by Christ,] the righteousness of God [God's method of salvation]

is unto all that believe." That is, by the law all were shut up in

Hades, but by grace they are now ransomed and to be received to

heaven. The same thought or scheme is contained in that remarkable

passage in the Epistle to the Galatians where Paul says the free

Isaac and the bond woman Hagar were an allegory, teaching that

there were two covenants, one by Abraham, the other by Moses. The

Mosaic covenant of the law "answers to the Jerusalem which is on

earth, and is in bondage with her children," and belongs only to

the Jews. The Abrahamic covenant of promise answers to "the

Jerusalem which is above, and is free, and is the mother of us

all." In the former, we were "begotten unto bondage." In the

latter, "Christ hath made us free."

We will notice but one more text in passing: it is, of all the

proof texts of the doctrine of a substitutional expiation, the one

which has ever been regarded as the very Achilles. And yet it can

be made to support that doctrine only by the aid of arbitrary

assumptions and mistranslations, while by its very terms it

perfectly coincides with nay, expressly declares the theory which

we have been advocating as the genuine interpretation of Paul. The

usual commentators, in their treatment of this passage, have

exhibited a long continued series of perversions and sophisms,

affording a strong example of unconscious prejudice. The correct

Greek reading of the text is justly rendered thus: "Whom God set

forth, a mercy seat through the faith in his blood, to exhibit his

righteousness through the remission of former sins by the

forbearance of God." For rendering [non-ASCII characters]

"mercy seat," the usus loquendi and the internal harmony of meaning

are in our favor, and also the weight of many orthodox authorities,

such as Theodoret, Origen, Theophylact, OEcumenius, Erasmus, Luther,

and from Pelagius to Bushnell. Still, we are willing to admit the

rendering of it by "sin offering." That makes no important

difference in the result. Christ was a sin offering, in the

conception of Paul, in this sense: that when he was not himself

subject to death, which was the penalty of sin, he yet died in

order to show God's purpose of removing that penalty of sin

through his resurrection. For rendering [non-ASCII characters]

"through," no defence is needed: the only wonder is, how it ever

could have been here translated "for." Now, let two or three facts

be noticed.

First, the New Testament phrase "the faith of Christ," "the faith of

Jesus," is very unfairly and unwarrantably made to mean an

internal affection towards Christ, a belief of men in him. Its

genuine meaning is the same as "the gospel of Christ," or the

religion of Christ, the system of grace which he brought.14 Who

can doubt that such is the meaning of the word in these instances?

"Contend for the faith once delivered to the saints;" "Greet them

that love us in the faith;" "Have not the faith of our Lord Jesus

Christ with respect of persons." So, in the text now under our

notice, "the faith which is in his blood" means the dispensation

of pardon and justification, the system of faith, which was

confirmed and exemplified to us in his death and resurrection.

Secondly, "the righteousness of God," which is here said to be

"pointed out" by Christ's death, denotes simply, in Professor

Stuart's words, "God's pardoning mercy," or "acquittal," or

"gratuitous justification," "in which sense," he says truly, "it

is almost always used in Paul's epistles."15 It signifies neither

more nor less than God's method of salvation by freely forgiving

sins and treating the sinner as if he were righteous, the method

of salvation now carried into effect and revealed in the gospel

brought by Christ, and dramatically enacted in his passion and

ascension. Furthermore, we ask attention to the fact that the

ordinary interpreter, hard pressed by his unscriptural creed,

interpolates a disjunctive conjunction in the opposing teeth of

Paul's plain statement. Paul says, as the common version has it,

God is "just, and [i. e. even] the justifier." The creed bound

commentators read it,

14 Robinson has gathered a great number of instances in his

Lexicon, under the word "Faith," wherein it can only mean, as he

says, "the system of Christian doctrines, the gospel."

15 Stuart's Romans i. 17, iii. 25, 26, &c.

"just and yet the justifier." We will now present the true meaning

of the whole passage, in our view of it, according to Paul's own

use of language. To establish a conviction of the correctness of

the exposition, we only ask the ingenuous reader carefully to

study the clauses of the Greek text and recollect the foregoing

data. "God has set Christ forth, to be to us a sure sign that we

have been forgiven and redeemed through the faith that was proved

by his triumphant return from death, the dispensation of grace

inaugurated by him. Herein God has exhibited his method of saving

sinners, which is by the free remission of their sins through his

kindness. Thus God is proved to be disposed to save, and to be

saving, by the system of grace shown through Jesus, him that

believeth." In consequence of sin, men were under sentence of

condemnation to the under world. In the fulness of time God

fulfilled his ancient promise to Abraham. He freely justified

men, that is, forgave them, redeemed them from their doom, and

would soon open the sky for their abode with him. This scheme of

redemption was carried out by Christ. That is to say, God

proclaimed it to men, and asked their belief in it, by "setting

forth Christ" to die, descend among the dead, rise thence, and

ascend into heaven, as an exemplifying certification of the truth

of the glad tidings.

Thirdly, Paul teaches that one aim of Christ's mission was to

purify, animate, and exalt the moral characters of men, and

rectify their conduct, to produce a subjective sanctification in

them, and so prepare them for judgment and fit them for heaven.

The establishment of this proposition will conclude the present

part of our subject. He writes, "Our Saviour, Jesus Christ, gave

himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity and

purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works." "Let

every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity." In

various ways he often represents the fact that believers have been

saved by grace through Christ as the very reason, the intensified

motive, why they should scrupulously keep every tittle of the

moral law and abstain even from the appearance of evil, walking

worthy of their high vocation. "The grace of God that bringeth

salvation to all men hath appeared, teaching us that, denying all

ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly,

righteously, and godly in this present world." Bad men, "that obey

not the gospel of Christ," such characters as "thieves,

extortioners, drunkards, adulterers, shall not inherit the kingdom

of God." He proclaims, in unmistakable terms, "God will render to

every man according to his deeds, wrath and tribulation to the

evil doer, honor and peace to the well doer, whether Jew or

Gentile." The conclusion to be drawn from these and other like

declarations is unavoidable. It is that "every one, Jew and

Gentile, shall stand before the judgment seat of Christ and

receive according to the deeds done in the body; for there is no

respect of persons." And one part of Christ's mission was to exert

a hallowing moral influence on men, to make them righteous, that

they might pass the bar with acquittal. But the reader who

recollects the class of texts adduced a little while since will

remember that an opposite conclusion was as unequivocally drawn

from them. Then Paul said, "By faith ye are justified, without the

deeds of the law." Now he says, "For not the hearers of the law

are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified

in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus

Christ." Is there a contradiction, then, in Paul? Only in

appearance. Let us distinguish and explain. In the two quotations

above, the apostle is referring to two different things.

First, he would say, By the faith of Christ, the free grace of God

declared in the gospel of Christ, ye are justified, gratuitously

delivered from that necessity of imprisonment in Hades which is

the penalty of sin doomed upon the whole race from Adam, and from

which no amount of personal virtue could avail to save men.

Secondly, when he exclaims, "Know ye not that the unrighteous

shall not inherit the kingdom of God?" his thought is of a

spiritual qualification of character, indispensable for positive

admission among the blest in heaven. That is to say, the impartial

penalty of primeval sin consigned all men to Hades. They could not

by their own efforts escape thence and win heaven. That fated

inability God has removed, and through Christ revealed its

removal; but, that one should actually obtain the offered and

possible prize of heaven, personal purity, faith, obedience,

holiness, are necessary. In Paul's conception of the scheme of

Christian salvation, then, there were two distinct parts: one,

what God had done for all; the other, what each man was to do for

himself. And the two great classes of seemingly hostile texts

filling his epistles, which have puzzled so many readers, become

clear and harmonious when we perceive and remember that by

"righteousness" and its kindred terms he sometimes means the

external and fulfilled method of redeeming men from the

transmitted necessity of bondage in the under world, and sometimes

means the internal and contingent qualifications for actually

realizing that redemption. In the former instance he refers to the

objective mode of salvation and the revelation of it in Christ. In

the latter, he refers to the subjective fitness for that salvation

and the certitude of it in the believer. So, too, the words

"death" and "life," in Paul's writings, are generally charged, by

a constructio proegnans, with a double sense, one spiritual,

individual, contingent, the other mechanical, common, absolute.

Death, in its full Pauline force, includes inward guilt,

condemnation, and misery, and outward descent into the under

world. Life, in its full Pauline force, includes inward rectitude,

peace, and joy, and outward ascent into the upper world. Holiness

is necessary, "for without it no one can see the Lord;" yet by

itself it can secure only inward life: it is ineffectual to win

heaven. Grace by itself merely exempts from the fatality of the

condemnation to Hades: it offers eternal life in heaven only upon

condition of "patient continuance in well doing" by "faith,

obedience to the truth, and sanctification of the spirit." But

God's free grace and man's diligent fidelity, combined, give the

full fruition of blessedness in the heart and of glory and

immortality in the sky.

Such, as we have set forth in the foregoing three divisions, was

Paul's view of the mission of Christ and of the method of

salvation. It has been for centuries perverted and mutilated. The

toil now is by unprejudiced inspection to bring it forward in its

genuine completeness, as it stood in Paul's own mind and in the

minds of his contemporaries. The essential view, epitomized in a

single sentence, is this. The independent grace of God has

interfered, first, to save man from Hades, and secondly, to enable

him, by the co operation of his own virtue, to get to heaven. Here

are two separate means conjoined to effect the end, salvation.

Now, compare, in the light of this statement, the three great

theological theories of Christendom. The UNITARIAN, overlooking

the objective justification, or offered redemption from the death

realm to the sky home, which whether it be a truth or an error is

surely in the epistles, makes the subjective sanctification all in

all. The CALVINIST, in his theory, comparatively scorns the

subjective sanctification, which Paul insists on as a necessity

for entering the kingdom of God, and, having perverted the

objective justification from its real historic meaning,

exaggerates it into the all in all. The ROMAN CATHOLIC holds that

Christ simply removed the load of original sin and its entailed

doom, and left each person to stand or fall by his own merits, in

the helping communion of the Church. He also maintains that a part

of Christ's office was to exert an influence for the moral

improvement and consecration of human character. His error, as an

interpreter of Paul's thought, is, that he, like the Calvinist,

attributes to Christ's death a vicarious efficacy by suffering the

pangs of mankind's guilt to buy their ransom from the inexorable

justice of God; whereas the apostle really represents Christ's

redeeming mission as consisting simply in a dramatic

exemplification of the Father's spontaneous love and purpose to

pardon past offences, unbolt the gates of Hades, and receive the

worthy to heaven. Moreover, while Paul describes the heavenly

salvation as an undeserved gift from the grace of God, the

Catholic often seems to make it a prize to be earned, under the

Christian dispensation, by good works which may fairly challenge

that reward. However, we have little doubt that this apparent

opposition is rather in the practical mode of exhortation than in

any interior difference of dogma; for Paul himself makes personal

salvation hinge on personal conditions, the province of grace

being seen in the new extension to man of the opportunity and

invitation to secure his own acceptance. And so the Roman Catholic

exposition of Paul's doctrine is much more nearly correct than any

other interpretation now prevalent. We should expect, a priori,

that it would be, since that Church, containing two thirds of

Christendom, is the most intimately connected, by its scholars,

members, and traditions, with the apostolic age.

A prominent feature in the belief of Paul, and one deserving

distinct notice as necessarily involving a considerable part of

the theory which we have attributed to him, is the supposition

that Christ was the first person, clothed with humanity and

experiencing death, admitted into heaven. Of all the hosts who had

lived and died, every soul had gone down into the dusky under

world. There they all were held in durance, waiting for the Great

Deliverer. In the splendors of the realm over the sky, God and his

angels dwelt alone. That we do not err in ascribing this belief to

Paul we might summon the whole body of the Fathers to testify in

almost unbroken phalanx, from Polycarp to St. Bernard. The Roman,

Greek, and English Churches still maintain the same dogma. But the

apostle's own plain words will be sufficient for our purpose.

"That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that

should rise from among the dead." "Now is Christ risen from among

the dead and become the first fruits of them that slept." "He is

the beginning, the first born from among the dead, that among all

he might have the pre eminence." "God raised Christ from among the

dead, and set him at his own right hand16 in the heavenly places,

far above every principality, and power, and might, and dominion."

The last words refer to different orders of spirits, supposed

16 Griesbach argues at length, and shows unanswerably, that this

passage cannot bear a moral interpretation, but necessarily has a

physical and local sense. Griesbachii Opuscula Academica, ed.

Gabler, vol. ii. pp. 145-149.

by the Jews to people the aerial region below the heaven of God.

"God hath" (already in our anticipating faith) "raised us up

together with Christ and made us sit in heavenly places with him."

These testimonies are enough to show that Paul believed Jesus to

have been raised up to the abode of God, the first man ever

exalted thither, and that this was done as a pledge and

illustration of the same exaltation awaiting those who believe.

"If we be dead with Christ, we believe we shall also live with

him." And the apostle teaches that we are not only connected with

Christ's resurrection by the outward order and sequence of events,

but also by an inward gift of the spirit. He says that to every

obedient believer is given an experimental "knowledge of the power

of the resurrection of Christ," which is the seal of God within

him, the pledge of his own celestial destination. "After that ye

believed, ye were sealed with that holy spirit of promise which is

the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the

purchased possession." The office of this gift of the spirit is to

awaken in the believing Christian a vivid realization of the

things in store for him, and a perfect conviction that he shall

yet possess them in the unclouded presence of God, beyond the

canopy of azure and the stars. "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,

nor the heart of man conceived, the things which God hath prepared

for them that love him. But he hath revealed them unto us; for we

have received his spirit, that we might know them." "The spirit

beareth witness with our spirit that we are children and heirs of

God, even joint heirs with Christ, that we may be glorified [i. e.

advanced into heaven] with him."

We will leave this topic with a brief paraphrase of the celebrated

passage in the eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans. "Not

only do the generality of mankind groan in pain in this decaying

state, under the bondage of perishable elements, travailing for

emancipation from the flesh into the liberty of the heavenly glory

appointed for the sons and heirs of God, but even we, who have the

first fruits of the spirit, [i. e. the assurance springing from

the resurrection of Christ,] we too wait, painfully longing for

the adoption, that is, our redemption from the body." By longing

for the adoption, or filiation, is meant impatient desire to be

received into heaven as children to the enjoyment of the

privileges of their Father's house. "God predetermined that those

called should be conformed to the image of his Son, [i. e. should

pass through the same course with Christ and reach the heavenly

goal,] that he might be the first born among many brethren." To

the securing of this end, "whom he called, them he also justified,

[i. e. ransomed from Hades;17] and whom he justified, them he also

glorified," (i. e. advanced to the glory of heaven.) It is evident

that Paul looked for the speedy second coming of the Lord in the

clouds of heaven, with angels and power and glory. He expected

that at that time all enemies would be overthrown and punished,

the dead would be raised, the living would be changed, and all

that were Christ's would be translated to heaven.18 "The Lord

Jesus shall be revealed from

17 That "justify" often means, in Paul's usage, to absolve from

Hades, we have concluded from a direct study of his doctrines and

language. We find that Bretschneider gives it the same definition

in his Lexicon of the New Testament. See [non ASCII characters]

18 "Every one shall rise in his own division" of the great army of

the dead, "Christ, the first fruits; afterwards, they that are

Christ's, at his coming."

heaven, with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance

on them that know not God and obey not the gospel of Christ." "We

shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, at

the last trump." "We who are alive and remain until the coming of

the Lord shall not anticipate those that are asleep. For the Lord

himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of

the archangel, and with the trump of God;19 and the dead in Christ

shall rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught

up with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and so we

shall always be with the Lord. Brethren, you need not that I

should specify the time to you; for yourselves are perfectly aware

that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night." "The

time is short." "I pray God your whole spirit, soul, and body be

preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." "At

his appearing he shall judge the living and the dead." "The Lord

is at hand." The author of these sentences undeniably looked for

the great advent soon. Than Paul, indeed, no one more earnestly

believed (or did more to strengthen in others that belief) in that

speedy return of Christ, the anticipation of which thrilled all

early Christendom with hope and dread, and kept the disciples day

and night on the stretch and start of expectation to hear the

awful blast of the judgment trump and to see the glorious vision

of the Son of God descending amidst a convoy of angels. What

sublime emotions must have rushed through the apostle's soul when

he thought that he, as a survivor of death's reign on earth, might

behold the resurrection without himself entering the grave! Upon a

time when he should be perchance at home, or at Damascus, or, it

might be, at Jerusalem, the sun would become as blood, the moon as

sackcloth of hair, the last trump would swell the sky, and,

"Lo! the nations of the dead, Which do outnumber all earth's

races, rise, And high in sumless myriads overhead Sweep past him

in a cloud, as 'twere the skirts Of the Eternal passing by."

The resurrection which Paul thought would attend the second coming

of Christ was the rising of the summoned spirits of the deceased

from their rest in the under world. Most certainly it was not the

restoration of their decomposed bodies from their graves, although

that incredible surmise has been generally entertained. He says,

while answering the question, How are the dead raised up, and with

what body do they come? "That which thou sowest, thou sowest not

that body which shall be, but naked grain: God giveth it a body as

it hath pleased him." The comparison is, that so the naked soul is

sown in the under world, and God, when he raiseth it, giveth it a

fitting body. He does not hesitate to call the man "a fool" who

expects the restoration of the same body that was buried. His

whole argument is explicitly against that idea. "There are bodies

celestial, as well as bodies terrestrial: the first man was

19 Rabbi Akiba says, in the Talmud, "God shall take and blow a

trumpet a thousand godlike yards in length, whose echo shall sound

from end to end of the world. At the first blast the earth shall

tremble. At the second, the dust shall part. At the third, the

bones shall come together. At the fourth, the members shall grow

warm. At the fifth, they shall be crowned with the head. At the

sixth, the soul shall re enter the body. And at the seventh, they

shall stand erect." Corrodi, Geschichte des Chiliasmus, band i. s.

355.

of the earth, earthy; the second man was the Lord from heaven; and

as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the

image of the heavenly; for flesh and blood cannot inherit the

kingdom of God." In view of these declarations, it is astonishing

that any one can suppose that Paul believed in the resurrection of

these present bodies and in their transference into heaven. "In

this tabernacle we groan, being burdened," and, "Who shall deliver

me from this body of death?" he cries. If ever there was a man

whose goading experience, keen intellectual energies, and moral

sensibilities, made him weary of this slow, gross body, and

passionately to long for a more corresponding, swift, and pure

investiture, it was Paul. And in his theory of "the glorious body

of Christ, according to which our vile body shall be changed," he

relieved his impatience and fed his desire. What his conception of

that body was, definitely, we cannot tell; but doubtless it was

the idea of a vehicle adapted to his mounting and ardent soul, and

in many particulars very unlike this present groaning load of

clay. The epistles of Paul contain no clear implication of the

notion of a millennium, a thousand years' reign of Christ with his

saints on the earth after his second advent. On the contrary, in

many places, particularly in the fourth chapter of the First

Epistle to the Thessalonians, (supposing that letter to be his,)

he says that the Lord and they that are his will directly pass

into heaven after the consummation of his descent from heaven and

their resurrection from the dead. But the declaration "He must

reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet," taken with its

context, is thought, by Bertholdt, Billroth, De Wette, and others,

to imply that Christ would establish a millennial kingdom on

earth, and reign in it engaged in vanquishing all hostile forces.

Against this exegesis we have to say, first, that, so far as that

goes, the vast preponderance of critical authorities is opposed to

it. Secondly, if this conquest were to be secured on earth, there

is nothing to show that it need occupy much time: one hour might

answer for it as well as a thousand years. There is nothing here

to show that Paul means just what the Rabbins taught. Thirdly,

even if Paul supposed a considerable period must elapse before

"all enemies" would be subdued, during which period Christ must

reign, it does not follow that he believed that reign would be on

earth: it might be in heaven. The "enemies" referred to are, in

part at least, the wicked spirits occupying the regions of the

upper air; for he specifies these "principalities, authorities,

and powers."20 And the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews

represents God as saying to Jesus, "Sit thou on my right hand,

until I make thine enemies thy footstool." Fourthly, it seems

certain that, if in the apostle's thought a thousand years were

interpolated between Christ's second coming and the delivering of

his mediatorial sceptre to God, he would have said so, at least

somewhere in his writings. He would naturally have dwelt upon it a

little, as the Chiliasts did so much. Instead of that, he

repeatedly contradicts it. Upon the whole, then, with Ruckert, we

cannot

20 The apocryphal "Ascension of Isaiah," already spoken of, gives

a detailed description of the upper air as occupied by Satan and

his angels, among whom fighting and evil deeds rage; but Christ in

his ascent conquers and spoils them all, and shows himself a

victor ever brightening as he rises successively through the whole

seven heavens to the feet of God. Ascensio Vatis Isaia, cap. vi x.

see any reason for not supposing that, according to Paul, "the

end" was immediately to succeed "the coming," as [non-ASCII

characters] would properly indicate.

The doctrine of a long earthly reign of Christ is not deduced

from this passage, by candid interpretation, because it must be

there, but foisted into it, by Rabbinical information, because

it may be there.

Paul distinctly teaches that the believers who died before the

second coming of the Savior would remain in the under world until

that event, when they and the transformed living should ascend

"together with the Lord." All the relevant expressions in his

epistles, save two, are obviously in harmony with this conception

of a temporary subterranean sojourn, waiting for the appearance of

Jesus from heaven to usher in the resurrection. But in the fifth

chapter of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians he writes,

"Abiding in the body we are absent from the Lord." It is usually

inferred, from these words and those which follow them, that the

apostle expected whenever he died to be instantly with Christ.

Certainly they do mean pretty nearly that; but they mean it in

connection with the second advent and the accompanying

circumstances and events; for Paul believed that many of the

disciples possibly himself would live until Christ's coming. All

through these two chapters (the fourth and fifth) it is obvious,

from the marked use of the terms "we" and "you," and from other

considerations, that "we" here refers solely to the writer, the

individual Paul. It is the plural of accommodation used by common

custom and consent. In the form of a slight paraphrase we may

unfold the genuine meaning of the passage in hand. "In this body I

am afflicted: not that I would merely be released from it, for

then I should be a naked spirit. But I earnestly desire,

unclothing myself of this earthly body, at the same time to clothe

myself with my heavenly body, that I may lose all my mortal part

and its woes in the full experience of heaven's eternal life. God

has determined that this result shall come to me sooner or later,

and has given me a pledge of it in the witnessing spirit. But it

cannot happen so long as I tarry in the flesh, the Lord delaying

his appearance. Having the infallible earnest of the spirit, I do

not dread the change, but desire to hasten it. Confident of

acceptance in that day at the judgment seat of Christ, before

which we must all then stand, I long for the crisis when, divested

of this body and invested with the immortal form wrought for me by

God, I shall be with the Lord. Still, knowing the terror which

shall environ the Lord at his coming to judgment, I plead with men

to be prepared." Whoever carefully examines the whole connected

passage, from iv. 6 to v. 16, will see, we think, that the above

paraphrase truly exposes its meaning.

The other text alluded to as an apparent exception to the doctrine

of a residence in the lower land of ghosts intervening between

death and the ascension, occurs in the Epistle to the

Philippians: "I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to

depart and to be with Christ, which is far better; but that I

should abide in the flesh is more needful for you." There are

three possible ways of regarding this passage. First, we may

suppose that Paul, seeing the advent of the Lord postponed longer

and longer, changed his idea of the intermediate state of deceased

Christians, and thought they would spend that period of waiting in

heaven, not in Hades. Neander advocates this view. But there is

little to sustain it, and it is loaded with fatal difficulties. A

change of faith so important and so bright in its view as this

must have seemed under the circumstances would have been clearly

and fully stated. Attention would have been earnestly invited to

so great a favor and comfort; exultation and gratitude would have

been expressed over so unheard of a boon. Moreover, what had

occurred to effect the alleged new belief? The unexpected delay of

Christ's coming might make the apostle wish that his departed

friends were tarrying above the sky instead of beneath the

sepulchre; but it could furnish no ground to warrant a sudden

faith in that wish as a fulfilled fact. Besides, the truth is that

Paul never ceased, even to the last, to expect the speedy arrival

of the Lord and to regard the interval as a comparative trifle. In

this very epistle he says, "The Lord is at hand: be careful for

nothing." Secondly, we may imagine that he expected himself, as a

divinely chosen and specially favored servant, to go to Christ in

heaven as soon as he died, if that should happen before the Lord's

appearance, while the great multitude of believers would abide in

the under world until the general resurrection. The death he was

in peril of and is referring to was that of martyrdom for the

gospel at the hands of Nero. And many of the Fathers maintained

that in the case of every worthy Christian martyr there was an

exception to the general doom, and that he was permitted to enter

heaven at once. Still, to argue such a thought in the text before

us requires an hypothesis far fetched and unsupported by a single

clear declaration of the apostle himself. Thirdly, we may assume

and it seems to us by far the least encumbered and the most

plausible theory that attempts to meet the case that Paul believed

there would be vouchsafed to the faithful Christian during his

transient abode in the under world a more intimate and blessed

spiritual fellowship with his Master than he could experience

while in the flesh. "For I am persuaded that neither death

[separation from the body] nor depth [the under world] shall be

able to separate us from God's love, which he has manifested

through Christ." He may refer, therefore, by his hopes of being

straightway with Christ on leaving the body, to a spiritual

communion with him in the disembodied state below, and not to his

physical presence in the supernal realm, the latter not being

attainable previous to the resurrection. Indeed, a little farther

on in this same epistle, he plainly shows that he did not

anticipate being received to heaven until after the second coming

of Christ. He says, "We look for the Savior from heaven, who shall

change our vile body and fashion it like unto his own glorious

body." This change is the preliminary preparation to ascent to

heaven, which change he repeatedly represents as indispensable.

What Paul believed would be the course and fate of things on earth

after the final consummation of Christ's mission is a matter of

inference from his brief and partial hints. The most probable and

consistent view which can be constructed from those hints is this.

He thought all mankind would become reconciled and obedient to

God, and that death, losing its punitive character, would become

what it was originally intended to be, the mere change of the

earthly for a heavenly body preparatory to a direct ascension.

"Then shall the Son himself be subject unto Him that put all

things under him, that God may be all in all." Then placid virtues

and innocent joys should fill the world, and human life be what it

was in Eden ere guilt forbade angelic visitants and converse with

heaven.21 "So when" without a

21 Neander thinks Paul's idea was that "the perfected kingdom of

God would then blend itself harmoniously throughout his unbounded

dominions." We believe his apprehension is correct. This globe

would become a part of the general paradise, an ante room or a l

ower story to the Temple of the Universe.

previous descent into Hades, as the context proves "this mortal

shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the

saying which is written, 'Death shall be swallowed up in victory.

O Death, thou last enemy, where is thy sting? O Hades, thou gloomy

prison, where is thy victory?'" The exposition just offered is

confirmed by its striking adaptedness to the whole Pauline scheme.

It is also the interpretation given by the earliest Fathers, and

by the Church in general until now. This idea of men being changed

and rising into heaven without at all entering the disembodied

state below was evidently in the mind of Milton when he wrote the

following lines:

"And from these corporeal nutriments, perhaps. Your bodies may at

last turn all to spirit, And, wing'd, ascend ethereal, may, at

choice, Here, or in heavenly paradise, dwell."

It now remains to see what Paul thought was to be the final

portion of the hardened and persevering sinner. One class of

passages in his writings, if taken by themselves, would lead us to

believe that on that point he had no fixed convictions in regard

to particulars, but, thinking these beyond the present reach of

reason, contented himself with the general assurance that all such

persons would meet their just deserts, and there left the subject

in obscurity. "God will render to every man to the Jew first, and

also to the Greek according to his deeds." "Whatsoever a man

soweth, that shall he also reap." "So then every one of us shall

give an account of himself to God." "At the judgment seat of

Christ every one shall receive the things done in his body,

according to that he hath done, whether it be good or whether it

be bad." From these and a few kindred texts we might infer that

the author, aware that he "knew but in part," simply held the

belief without attempting to pry into special methods, details,

and results that at the time of the judgment all should have exact

justice. He may, however, have unfolded in his preaching minutia

of faith not explained in his letters.

A second class of passages in the epistles of Paul would naturally

cause the common reader to conclude that he imagined that the

unregenerate those unfit for the presence of God were to be

annihilated when Christ, after his second coming, should return to

heaven with his saints. "Those who know not God and obey not the

gospel of Christ shall be punished with everlasting destruction

from the presence and glory of the Lord when he shall come." "The

end of the enemies of the cross of Christ is destruction." "The

vessels of wrath fitted for destruction." "As many as have sinned

without law shall perish without law." But it is to be observed

that the word here rendered "destruction" need not signify

annihilation. It often, even in Paul's epistles, plainly means

severe punishment, dreadful misery, moral ruin, and retribution.

For example, "foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in

destruction and perdition," "piercing them through with many

sorrows." It may or may not have that sense in the instances above

cited. Their meaning is intrinsically uncertain: we must bring

other passages and distinct considerations to aid our

interpretation.

From a third selection of texts in Paul's epistles it is not

strange that some persons have deduced the doctrine of

unconditional, universal salvation. "As in Adam all die, even so

in Christ shall all be made alive." But the genuine explanation of

this sentence, we are constrained to believe, is as follows: "As,

following after the example of Adam, all souls descend below, so,

following after Christ, all shall be raised up," that is, at the

judgment, after which event some may be taken to heaven, others

banished again into Hades. "We trust in the living God, who is the

Savior of all men, especially of them that believe." This means

that all men have been saved now from the unconditional sentence

to Hades brought on them by the first sin, but not all know the

glad tidings: those who receive them into believing hearts are

already exulting over their deliverance and their hopes of heaven.

All are objectively saved from the unavoidable and universal

necessity of Hadean imprisonment; the obedient believers are also

subjectively saved from the contingent and personal risk of

incurring that doom. "God hath shut them all up together in

unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all." "All" here means

both Jews and Gentiles; and the reference is to the universal

annulment of the universal fatality, and the impartial offer of

heaven to every one who sanctifies the truth in his heart. In some

cases the word "all" is used with rhetorical looseness, not with

logical rigidness, and denotes merely all Christians. Ruckert

shows this well in his commentary on the fifteenth chapter of

First Corinthians. In other instances the universality, which is

indeed plainly there, applies to the removal from the race of the

inherited doom; while a conditionality is unquestionably implied

as to the actual salvation of each person. We say Paul does

constantly represent personal salvation as depending on

conditions, as beset by perils and to be earnestly striven for.

"Lest that by any means I myself should be a castaway." "Deliver

such an one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the

spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." "Wherefore we

labor, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of the

lord." "To them that are saved we are a savor of life unto life;

to them that perish, a savor of death unto death." "Charge them

that are rich that they be humble and do good, laying up in store

a good foundation, that they may lay hold on eternal life." It is

clear, from these and many similar passages of Paul, that he did

not believe in the unconditional salvation, the positive

mechanical salvation, of all individuals, but held personal

salvation to be a contingent problem, to be worked out, through

the permitting grace of God, by Christian faith, works, and

character. How plainly this is contained, too, in his doctrine of

"a resurrection of the just and the unjust," and of a day of

judgment, from whose august tribunal Christ is to pronounce

sentence according to each man's deeds! At the same time, the

undeniable fact deserves particular remembrance that he says, and

apparently knows, nothing whatever of a hell, in the present

acceptation of that term, a prison house of fiery tortures. He

assigns the realm of Satan and the evil spirits to the air, the

vexed region between earth and heaven, according to the demonology

of his age and country. 22

Finally, there is a fourth class of passages, from which we might

infer that the apostle's faith merely excluded the reprobate from

participating in the ascent with Christ, just as some of the

Pharisees excluded the Gentiles from their resurrection, and there

left the subject in darkness.

22 A detailed and most curious account of this region, which he

calls Tartarus, is given by Angustine. De Gen. ad. lit. lib. iii.

cap. 14, 15, ed. Benedictina.

"They that are Christ's," "the dead in Christ, shall rise."

"No sensualist, extortioner, idolater, hath any inheritance

in the kingdom of Christ and of God." "There is laid up a crown of

righteousness, which the Lord shall give in that day to all them

that love his appearing." In all these, and in many other cases,

there is a marked omission of any reference to the ultimate

positive disposal of the wicked. Still, against the supposition of

his holding the doctrine that all except good Christians would be

left below eternally, we have his repeated explicit avowals. "I

have hope towards God that there shall be a resurrection both of

the just and the unjust." "We must all appear before the judgment

seat of Christ." These last statements, however, prove only that

Paul thought the bad as well as the good would be raised up and

judged: they are not inconsistent with the belief that the

condemned would afterwards either be annihilated, or remanded

everlastingly to the under world. This very belief, we think, is

contained in that remarkable passage where Paul writes to the

Philippians that he strives "if by any means he may attain unto

the resurrection." Now, the common resurrection of the dead for

judgment needed not to be striven for: it would occur to all

unconditionally. But there is another resurrection, or another

part remaining to complete the resurrection, namely, after the

judgment, a rising of the accepted to heaven. All shall rise from

Hades upon the earth to judgment. This Paul calls simply the

resurrection, [Non ASCII Characters] After the judgment, the

accepted shall rise to heaven. This Paul calls, with distinctive

emphasis, [Non ASCII Characters] the pre eminent or complete

resurrection, the prefix being used as an intensive. This is what

the apostle considers uncertain and labors to secure, "stretching

forward and pressing towards the goal for the prize of that call

upwards," [Non ASCII Characters] (that invitation to heaven,)

"which God has extended through Christ." Those who are condemned

at the judgment can have no part in this completion of the

resurrection, cannot enter the heavenly kingdom, but must be

"punished with everlasting destruction from the presence and glory

of the Lord," that is, as we suppose is signified, be thrust into

the under world for evermore. As unessential to our object, we

have omitted an exposition of the Pauline doctrine of the natural

rank and proper or delegated offices of Christ in the universe;

also an examination of the validity of the doubts and arguments

brought against the genuineness of the lesser epistles ascribed to

Paul. In close, we will sum up in brief array the leading

conceptions in his view of the last things. First, there is a

world of immortal light and bliss over the sky, the exclusive

abode of God and the angels from of old; and there is a dreary

world of darkness and repose under the earth, the abode of all

departed human spirits. Secondly, death was originally meant to

lead souls into heaven, clothed in new and divine bodies,

immediately on the fall of the present tabernacle; but sin broke

that plan and doomed souls to pass disembodied into Hades.

Thirdly, the Mosaic dispensation of law could not deliver men from

that sentence; but God had promised Abraham that through one of

his posterity they should be delivered. To fulfil that promise

Christ came. He illustrated God's unpurchased love and forgiveness

and determination to restore the original plan, as if men had

never sinned. Christ effected this aim, in conjunction with his

teachings, by dying, descending into Hades, as if the doom of a

sinful man were upon him also, subduing the powers of that prison

house, rising again, and ascending into heaven, the first one ever

admitted there from among the dead, thus exemplifying the

fulfilled "expectation of the creature that was groaning and

travailing in pain" to be born into the freedom of the heavenly

glory of the sons of God. Fourthly, "justification by faith,"

therefore, means the redemption from Hades by acceptance of the

dispensation of free grace which is proclaimed in the gospel.

Fifthly, every sanctified believer receives a pledge or earnest of

the spirit sealing him as God's and assuring him of acceptance

with Christ and of advance to heaven. Sixthly, Christ is speedily

to come a second time, come in glory and power irresistible, to

consummate his mission, raise the dead, judge the world, establish

a new order of things, and return into heaven with his chosen

ones. Seventhly, the stubbornly wicked portion of mankind will be

returned eternally into the under world. Eighthly, after the

judgment the subterranean realm of death will be shut up, no more

souls going into it, but all men at their dissolution being

instantly invested with spiritual bodies and ascending to the

glories of the Lord. Finally, Jesus having put down all enemies

and restored the primeval paradise will yield up his mediatorial

throne, and God the Father be all in all.

The preparatory rudiments of this system of the last things

existed in the belief of the age, and it was itself composed by

the union of a theoretic interpretation of the life of Christ and

of the connected phenomena succeeding his death, with the elements

of Pharasaic Judaism, all mingled in the crucible of the soul of

Paul and fused by the fires of his experience. It illustrates a

great number of puzzling passages in the New Testament, without

the necessity of recourse to the unnatural, incredible,

unwarranted dogmas associated with them by the unique, isolated

peculiarities of Calvinism. The interpretation given above, moreover,

has this strong confirmation of its accuracy, namely, that it is

arrived at from the stand point of the thought and life of the

Apostle Paul in the first century, not from the stand point of the

theology and experience of the educated Christian of the

nineteenth century.

CHAPTER V.

JOHN'S DOCTRINE OF A FUTURE LIFE.

WE are now to see if we can determine and explain what were the

views of the Apostle John upon the subject of death and life,

condemnation and salvation, the resurrection and immortality. To

understand his opinions on these points, it is obviously necessary

to examine his general system of theological thought. John is

regarded as the writer of the proem to the fourth Gospel, also of

three brief epistles. There are such widely spread doubts of his

being the author of the Apocalypse that it has seemed better to

examine that production separately, leaving each one free to

attribute its doctrine of the last things to whatever person known

or unknown he believes wrote the book. It is true that the

authorship of the fourth Gospel itself is powerfully disputed; but

an investigation of that question would lead us too far and detain

us too long from our real aim, which is not to discuss the

genuineness or the authority of the New Testament documents, but

to show their meaning in what they actually contain and imply

concerning a future life. It is necessary to premise that we think

it certain that John wrote with some reference to the sprouting

philosophy of his time, the Platonic and Oriental speculations so

early engrafted upon the stock of Christian doctrine. For the

peculiar theories which were matured and systematized in the

second and third centuries by the Gnostic sects were floating

about, in crude and fragmentary forms, at the close of the first

century, when the apostle wrote. They immediately awakened

dissension and alarm, cries of heresy and orthodoxy, in the

Church. Some modern writers deny the presence in the New Testament

of any allusion to such views; but the weight of evidence on the

other side internal, from similarity of phrase, and external, from

the testimony of early Fathers is, when accumulated and

appreciated, overwhelming. Among these Gnostic notions the most

distinctive and prominent was the belief that the world was

created and the Jewish dispensation given, not by the true and

infinite God, but by a subordinate and imperfect deity, the

absolute God remaining separate from all created things, unknown

and afar, in the sufficiency of his aboriginal pleroma or fulness.

The Gnostics also maintained that Creative Power, Reason, Life,

Truth, Love, and other kindred realities, were individual beings,

who had emanated from God, and who by their own efficiency

constructed, illuminated, and carried on the various provinces of

creation and races of existence. Many other opinions, fanciful,

absurd, or recondite, which they held, it is not necessary here to

state. The evangelist, without alluding perhaps to any particular

teachers or systems of these doctrines, but only to their general

scope, traverses by his declarations partially the same ground of

thought which they cover, stating dogmatically the positive facts

as he apprehended them. He agrees with some of the Gnostic

doctrines and differs from others, not setting himself to follow

or to oppose them indiscriminately, but to do either as the truth

seemed to him to require.

There are two methods of seeking the meaning of the introduction

to the fourth Gospel where the Johannean doctrine of the Logos is

condensed. We may study it grammatically, or historically;

morally, or metaphysically; from the point of view of experimental

religious faith, or from that of contemporary speculative

philosophy. He who omits either of these ways of regarding the

subject must arrive at an interpretation essentially defective.

Both modes of investigation are indispensable for acquiring a full

comprehension of the expressions employed and the thoughts

intended. But to be fitted to understand the theme in its

historical aspect which, in this case, for purposes of criticism,

is by far the more important one must be intelligently acquainted

with the Hebrew personification of the Wisdom, also of the Word,

of God; with the Platonic conception of archetypal ideas; with the

Alexandrian Jewish doctrine of the Divine Logos; and with the

relevant Gnostic and Christian speculation and phraseology of the

first two centuries. Especially must the student be familiar with

Philo, who was an eminent Platonic Jewish philosopher and a

celebrated writer, flourishing previous to the composition of the

fourth Gospel, in which, indeed, there is scarcely a single

superhuman predicate of Christ which may not be paralleled with

striking closeness from his extant works. In all these fields are

found, in imperfect proportions and fragments, the materials which

are developed in John's belief of the Logos become flesh. To

present all these materials here would be somewhat out of place

and would require too much room. We shall, therefore, simply

state, as briefly and clearly as possible, the final conclusions

to which a thorough study has led us, drawing such illustrations

as we do advance almost entirely from Philo.1

1 The reader who wishes to see in smallest compass and most lucid

order the facts requisite for the formation of a judgment is

referred to Lucke's "Dissertation on the Logos," to Norton's

"Statement of Reasons," and to Neander's exposition of the

Johannean theology in his "Planting and Training of the Church."

Nearly every thing important, both external and internal, is

collected in these three sources taken together, and set forth

with great candor, power, and skill. Differing in their conclusions,

they supply pretty adequate means for the independent student to

conclude for himself.

In the first place, what view of the Father himself, the absolute

Deity, do these writings present? John conceives of God no one can

well collate the relevant texts in his works without perceiving

this as the one perfect and eternal Spirit, in himself invisible

to mortal eyes, the Personal Love, Life, Truth, Light, "in whom is

no darkness at all." This corresponds entirely with the purest and

highest idea the human mind can form of the one untreated infinite

God. The apostle, then, going back to the period anterior to the

material creation, and soaring to the contemplation of the sole

God, does not conceive of him as being utterly alone, but as

having a Son with him, an "only begotten Son," a beloved companion

"before the foundation of the world." "In the beginning was the

Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. He was

in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and

without him was nothing made that was made." The true explanation

of these words, according to their undeniable historical and their

unforced grammatical. There is an English translation of it, by

Professor G. R. Noyes, in the numbers of the Christian Examiner

for March and May, 1849, meaning, is as follows. Before the

material creation, when God was yet the sole being, his first

production, the Logos, was a Son, at once the image of himself and

the idea of the yet uncreated world. By him this personal Idea,

Son, or Logos all things were afterward created; or, more exactly,

through him, by means of him, all things became, that is, were

brought, from their being in a state of conception in the mind of

God, into actual existence in space and time. Thus Philo says,

"God is the most generic; second is the Logos of God."2 "The Logos

is the first begotten Son."3 "The Logos of God is above the whole

world, and is the most ancient and generic of all that had a

beginning."4 "Nothing intervenes between the Logos and God on whom

he rests."5 "This sensible world is the junior son of God; the

Senior is the Idea,"6 or Logos. "The shadow and seeming portrait

of God is his Logos, by which, as by an assumed instrument, he

made the world. As God is the original of the image here called

shadow, so this image becomes the original of other things."7 "The

intelligible world, or world of archetypal ideas, is the Logos of

the world creating God; as an intelligible or ideal city is the

thought of the architect reflecting to build a sensible city."8

"Of the world, God is the cause by which, the four elements the

material from which, the Logos the instrument through which, the

goodness of the Creator the end for which, it was made."9 These

citations from Philo clearly show, in various stages of

development, that doctrine of the Logos which began first arguing

to the Divine Being from human analogies with separating the

conception of a plan in the mind of God from its execution in

fact; proceeded with personifying that plan, or sum of ideas, as a

mediating agent between motive and action, between impulse and

fulfilment; and ended with hypostatizing the arranging power of

the Divine thought as a separate being, his intellectual image or

Son, his first and perfect production. They unequivocally express

these thoughts: that God is the only being who was from eternity;

that the Logos was the first begotten, antemundane being, that he

was the likeness, image, immediate manifestation, of the Father;

that he was the medium of creation, the instrumental means in the

outward formation of the world. History shows us this doctrine

unfolded by minute steps, which it would be tedious to follow,

from the Book of Proverbs to Philo Judaus and John, from Plato to

Justin Martyr and Athanasius. But the rapid sketch just presented

may be sufficient now.

When it is written, "and the Logos was God," the meaning is not

strictly literal. To guard against its being so considered, the

author tautologically repeats what he had said immediately before,

"the same was in the beginning with God." Upon the supposition

that the Logos is strictly identical with God, the verses make

utter nonsense. "In the beginning was God, and God was with God,

and God was God. God was in the beginning with God." But suppose

the Logos to mean an ante mundane but subordinate being, who was a

perfect image or likeness of God, and the sense is both clear and

satisfactory, and no violence is done either to historical data or

to grammatical demands. "And the Logos was God," that is, was the

mirror or facsimile of God. So, employing the same idiom, we are

accustomed to say

2 Mangey's edition of Philo, vol. i. p. 82.

3 Ibid. p. 308.

4 Ibid. p. 121.

5 Ibid. p. 560.

6 Ibid. p. 277.

7 Ibid. p. 106.

8 Ibid. p. 5.

9 Ibid. p. 162.

of an accurate representation of a person, It is the very man

himself! Or, without the use of this idiom, we may explain the

expression "the Logos was God" thus: He stands in the place of God

to the lower creation: practically considered, he is as God to us.

As Philo writes, "To the wise and perfect the Most High is God;

but to us, imperfect beings, the Logos God's interpreter is

God."10

The inward significance of the Logos doctrine, in all its degrees

and phases, circumstantially and essentially, from first to last,

is the revelation of God. God himself, in himself, is conceived as

absolutely withdrawn beyond the apprehension of men, in boundless

immensity and inaccessible secrecy. His own nature is hidden, as a

thought is hidden in the mind; but he has the power of revealing

it, as a thought is revealed by speaking it in a word. That

uttered word is the Logos, and is afterwards conceived as a

person, and as creative, then as building and glorifying the

world. All of God that is sent forth from passive concealment into

active manifestation is the Logos. "The term Logos comprehends,"

Norton says, "all the attributes of God manifested in the creation

and government of the universe." The Logos is the hypostasis of

"the unfolded portion," "the revealing power," "the self showing

faculty," "the manifesting action," of God. The essential idea,

then, concerning the Logos is that he is the means through which

the hidden God comes to the cognizance of his creatures. In

harmony with this prevailing philosophy one who believed the Logos

to have been incarnated in Christ would suppose the purpose of his

incarnation to be the fuller revelation of God to men. And

Martineau says, "The view of revelation which is implicated in the

folds of the Logos doctrine that everywhere pervades the fourth

Gospel, is that it is the appearance to beings who have something

of a divine spirit within them, of a yet diviner without them,

leading them to the divinest of all, who embraces them both." This

is a fine statement of the practical religious aspect of John's

conception of the nature and office of the Savior.

Since he regarded God as personal love, life, truth, and light,

and Christ, the embodied Logos, as his only begotten Son, an exact

image of him in manifestation, it follows that John regarded

Christ, next in rank below God, as personal love, life, truth, and

light; and the belief that he was the necessary medium of

communicating these Divine blessings to men would naturally

result. Accordingly, we find that John repeats, as falling from

the lips of Christ, all the declarations required by and

supporting such an hypothesis. "I am the way, the truth, and the

life." "No man cometh unto the Father but by me." But Philo, too,

had written before in precisely the same strain. Witness the

correspondences between the following quotations respectively from

John and Philo. "I am the bread which came down from heaven to

give life to the world."11 Whoso eateth my body and drinketh my

blood hath eternal life."12 "Behold, I rain bread upon you from

heaven: the heavenly food of the soul is the word of God, and the

Divine Logos, from whom all eternal instructions and wisdoms

flow."13 "The bread the Lord gave us to eat was his word."14

"Except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood, ye have no life

10 Mangey's edition of Philo, vol. ii. p. 128.

11 John vi. 33. 41.

12 Ibid. 54.

13 Quoted by G. Scheffer in his Treatise "De Usu

Philonis in Interpretatione Novi Testamenti," p. 82.

14 lbid. p. 81.

in you."15 "He alone can become the heir of incorporeal and divine

things whose whole soul is filled with the salubrious Word."16

"Every one that seeth the Son and believeth on him shall have

everlasting life."17 "He strains every nerve towards the highest

Divine Logos, who is the fountain of wisdom, in order that,

drawing from that spring, he may escape death and win everlasting

life."18 "I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if

any man eat of this bread he shall live forever."19 "Lifting up

his eyes to the ether, man receives manna, the Divine Logos,

heavenly and immortal nourishment for the right desiring soul."20

"God is the perennial fountain of life; God is the fountain of the

most ancient Logos."21 "As the living Father hath sent me, and I

live by the Father, so he that eateth me, even he shall live by

me."22 Does it not seem perfectly plain that John's doctrine of

the Christ is at bottom identical with Philo's doctrine of the

Logos? The difference of development in the two doctrines, so far

as there is a difference, is that the latter view is

philosophical, abstract; the former, practical, historical. Philo

describes the Logos ideally, filling the supersensible sphere,

mediating between the world and God; John presents him really,

incarnated as a man, effecting the redemption of our race. The

same dignity, the same offices, are predicated of him by both.

John declares, "In him [the Divine Logos] was life, and the life

was the light of men."23 Philo asserts, "Nothing is more luminous

and irradiating than the Divine Logos, by the participation of

whom other things expel darkness and gloom, earnestly desiring to

partake of living light."24 John speaks of Christ as "the only

begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father."25 Philo says,

"The Logos is the first begotten Son of God," "between whom and

God nothing intervenes."26 John writes, "The Son of man will give

you the food of everlasting life; for him hath God the Father

sealed."27 Philo writes, "The stamp of the seal of God is the

immortal Logos."28 We have this from John: "He was manifested to

take away our sins; and in him is no sin."29 And this from Philo:

"The Divine Logos is free from all sins, voluntary and

involuntary."30

The Johannean Christ is the Philonean Logos born into the world as

a man. "And the Logos was made flesh, and dwelt among us, full of

grace and truth." The substance of what has thus far been

established may now be concisely stated. The essential thought,

whether the subject be metaphysically or practically considered,

is this. God is the eternal, infinite personality of love and

truth, life and light. The Logos is his first born Son, his exact

image, the reproduction of his being, the next lower personality

of love and truth, life and light, the instrument for creating and

ruling the world, the revelation of God, the medium of

communication between God and his works. Christ is that Logos come

upon the earth as a man to save the perishing, proving his pre

existence and superhuman nature by his miraculous knowledge and

works. That the belief expressed in the last sentence is correctly

attributed to John will

15 John vi. 53.

16 Philo, vol. i. p. 482.

17 John vi. 40.

18 Philo, vol. i. p. 560.

19 John vi. 51.

20 Philo, vol. i. p. 498.

21 Ibid. pp. 575, 207.

22 John vi. 57.

23 John i. 4.

24 Philo, vol. i. p. 121.

25 John i. 18.

26 Philo, vol. i. pp. 427, 560.

27 John vi. 27.

28 Philo, vol. ii. p. 606.

29 1 John iii. 5.

30 Philo, vol. i. p. 562.

be repeatedly substantiated before the close of this chapter: in

regard to the statements in the preceding sentences no further

proof is thought necessary.

With the aid of a little repetition, we will now attempt to make a

step of progress. The tokens of energy, order, splendor,

beneficence, in the universe, are not, according to John, as we

have seen, the effects of angelic personages, emanating gods,

Gnostic aons, but are the workings of the self revealing power of

the one true and eternal God, this power being conceived by John,

according to the philosophy of his age, as a proper person, God's

instrument in creation. Reason, life, light, love, grace,

righteousness, kindred terms so thickly scattered over his pages,

are not to him, as they were to the Gnostics, separate beings, but

are the very working of the Logos, consubstantial manifestations

of God's nature and attributes. But mankind, fallen into folly and

vice, perversity and sin, lying in darkness, were ignorant that

these Divine qualities were in reality mediate exhibitions of God,

immediate exhibitions of the Logos. "The light was shining in

darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not." Then, to reveal

to men the truth, to regenerate them and conjoin them through

himself with the Father in the experience of eternal life, the

hypostatized Logos left his transcendent glory in heaven and came

into the world in the person of Jesus. "No man hath seen God at

any time: the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father,

he hath revealed him." "I came down from heaven to do the will of

Him that sent me." This will is that all who see and believe on

the Son shall have everlasting life. "God so loved the world that

he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him

should not perish, but have everlasting life." "The bread of God

is He who cometh down from heaven and giveth life to the world."

The doctrine of the pre existence of souls, and of their being

born into the world in the flesh, was rife in Judea when this

Gospel was written, and is repeatedly alluded to in it.31 That

John applies this doctrine to Christ in the following and in other

instances is obvious. "Before Abraham was, I am." "I came forth

from the Father and am come into the world." "Father, glorify thou

me with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."

"What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was

before?" As for ourselves, we do not see how it is possible for

any unprejudiced person, after studying the fourth Gospel

faithfully with the requisite helps, to doubt that the writer of

it believed that Jesus pre existed as the Divine Logos, and that

he became incarnate to reveal the Father and to bring men into the

experience of true eternal life. John declares this, in his first

epistle, in so many words, saying, "The living Logos, the eternal

life which was with the Father from the beginning, was manifested

unto us;" and, "God sent his only begotten Son into the world that

we might live through him." Whether the doctrine thus set forth

was really entertained and taught by Jesus himself, or whether it

is the interpretation put on his language by one whose mind was

full of the notions of the age, are distinct questions. With the

settlement of these questions we are not now concerned: such a

discussion would be more appropriate when examining the genuine

meaning of the words of Christ. All that is necessary here is the

suggestion that when we show the theological system of John it

does not necessarily follow that that is the true

31 John i. 21; ix. 2.

teaching of Christ. Having adopted the Logos doctrine, it might

tinge and turn his thoughts and words when reporting from memory,

after the lapse of many years, the discourses of his Master. He

might unconsciously, under such an influence, represent literally

what was figuratively intended, and reflect from his own mind

lights and shades, associations and meanings, over all or much of

what he wrote. There are philosophical and literary peculiarities

which have forced many of the best critics to make this

distinction between the intended meaning of Christ's declarations

as he uttered them, and their received meaning as this evangelist

reported them. Norton says, "Whether St. John did or did not adopt

the Platonic conception of the Logos is a question not important

to be settled in order to determine our own judgment concerning

its truth."32 Lucke has written to the same effect, but more

fully: "We are allowed to distinguish the sense in which John

understood the words of Christ, from the original sense in which

Christ used them."33

It is to be observed that in all that has been brought forward,

thus far, there is not the faintest hint of the now current notion

of the Trinity. The idea put forth by John is not at all allied

with the idea that the infinite God himself assumed a human shape

to walk the earth and undergo mortal sufferings. It is simply said

that that manifested and revealing portion of the Divine

attributes which constituted the hypostatized Logos was incarnated

and displayed in a perfect, sinless sample of man, thus exhibiting

to the world a finite image of God. We will illustrate this

doctrine with reference to the inferences to be drawn from it in

regard to human nature. John repeatedly says, in effect, "God is

truth," "God is light," "God is love," "God is life." He likewise

says of the Savior, "In him was life, and the life was the light

of men," and reports him as saying of himself, "I am the truth,"

"I am the life," "I am the light of the world." The fundamental

meaning of these declarations so numerous, striking, and varied in

the writings of John is, that all those qualities which the

consciousness of humanity has recognised as Divine are

consubstantial with the being of God; that all the reflections of

them in nature and man belong to the Logos, the eldest Son, the

first production, of God; and that in Jesus their personality, the

very Logos himself, was consciously embodied, to be brought nearer

to men, to be exemplified and recommended to them. Reason, power,

truth, light, love, blessedness, are not individual aons, members

of a hierarchy of deities, but are the revealing elements of the

one true God. The personality of the abstract and absolute fulness

of all these substantial qualities is God. The personality of the

discerpted portion of them shown in the universe is the Logos.

Now, that latter personality Christ was. Consequently, while he

was a man, he was not merely a man, but was also a supernatural

messenger from heaven, sent into the world to impersonate the

image of God under the condition of humanity, free from every

sinful defect and spot. Thus, being the manifesting representative

of the Father, he could say, "He that hath seen me hath

[virtually] seen the Father." Not that they were identical in

person, but that they were similar in nature and character, spirit

and design: both were eternal holiness, love, truth, and life. "I

and my Father are one thing," (in essence, not in personality.)

Nothing can be more

32 Statement of Reasons, 1st ed. p. 239.

33 Christian Examiner, May, 1849, p. 431.

unequivocally pronounced than the subordination of the Son to the

Father that the Father sent him, that he could do nothing without

the Father, that his Father was greater than he, that his

testimony was confirmed by the Father's in a hundred places by

John, both as author writing his own words and as interpreter

reporting Christ's. There is not a text in the record that implies

Christ's identity with God, but only his identity with the Logos.

The identity of the Logos with God is elementary, not personal.

From this view it follows that every man who possesses, knows, and

exhibits the elements of the Divine life, the characteristics of

God, is in that degree a son of God, Christ being pre eminently

the Son on account of his pre eminent likeness, his supernatural

divinity, as the incarnate Logos.

That the apostle held and taught this conclusion appears, first,

from the fact, otherwise inexplicable, that he records the same

sublime statements concerning all good Christians, with no other

qualification than that of degree, that he does concerning Christ

himself. Was Jesus the Son of God? "To as many as received him he

gave power to become the sons of God." There is in Philo a passage

corresponding remarkably with this one from John: "Those who have

knowledge of the truth are properly called sons of God: he who is

still unfit to be named a son of God should endeavor to fashion

himself to the first born Logos of God."34 Was Jesus "from above,"

while wicked men were "from beneath"? "They are not of the world,

even as I am not of the world." Was Jesus sent among men with a

special commission? "As thou hast sent me into the world, even so

have I also sent them into the world." Was Jesus the subject of a

peculiar glory, bestowed upon him by the Father? "The glory which

thou gavest me I have given them, that they may be one, even as we

are one." Had Jesus an inspiration and a knowledge not vouchsafed

to the princes of this world? "Ye have an unction from the Holy

One, and ye know all things." Did Jesus perform miraculous works?

"He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also."

In the light of the general principle laid down, that God is the

actual fulness of truth and love and light and blessedness; that

Christ, the Logos, is the manifested impersonation of them; and

that all men who receive him partake of their Divine substance and

enjoy their prerogative, the texts just cited, and numerous other

similar ones, are transparent. It is difficult to see how on any

other hypothesis they can be made to express an intelligible and

consistent meaning.

Secondly, we are brought to the same conclusion by the synonymous

use and frequent interchange of different terms in the Johannean

writings. Not only it is said, "Whoever is born of God cannot

sin," but it is also written, "Every one that doeth righteousness

is born of God;" and again, "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the

Christ is born of God." In other words, having a good character

and leading a just life, heartily receiving and obeying the

revelation made by Christ, are identical phrases. "He that hath

the Son hath life." "Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in

the doctrine of Christ hath not God." "This is the victory that

overcometh the world, even our faith" in the doctrine of Christ.

"He that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God and God in him." "He

that keepeth the commandments dwelleth in God and God in him." "He

that confesseth that Jesus is the Son of God, God

34 Philo, vol. i. p. 427.

dwelleth in him and he in God." "He that doeth good is of God."

"God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son."

"The Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding that

we may know the true God and eternal life." From these citations,

and from other passages which will readily occur, we gather the

following pregnant results. To "do the truth," "walk in the

truth," "walk in the light," "keep the commandments," "do

righteousness," "abide in the doctrine of Christ," "do the will of

God," "do good," "dwell in love," "abide in Christ," "abide in

God," "abide in life," all are expressions meaning precisely the

same thing. They all signify essentially the conscious possession

of goodness; in other words, the practical adoption of the life

and teachings of Jesus; or, in still other terms, the personal

assimilation of the spiritual realities of the Logos, which are

love, life, truth, light. Jesus having been sent into the world to

exemplify the characteristics and claims of the Father, and to

regenerate men from unbelief and sin to faith and righteousness,

those who were walking in darkness, believers of lies and doers of

unrighteousness, those who were abiding in alienation and death,

might by receiving and following him be restored to the favor of

God and pass from darkness and death into life and light. "This is

eternal life, that they should know thee, the only true God, and

Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."

The next chief point in the doctrine of John is his belief in an

evil being, the personality of wickedness, and the relation

between him and bad men. There have been, from the early

centuries, keen disputes on the question whether this apostle uses

the terms devil and evil one with literal belief or with

figurative accommodation. We have not a doubt that the former is

the true view. The popular denial of the existence of evil

spirits, with an arch demon over them, is the birth of a

philosophy much later than the apostolic age. The use of the term

"devil" merely as the poetic or ethical personification of the

seductive influences of the world is the fruit of theological

speculation neither originated nor adopted by the Jewish prophets

or by the Christian apostles. Whoso will remember the prevailing

faith of the Jews at that time, and the general state of

speculative opinion, and will recollect the education of John, and

notice the particular manner in which he alludes to the subject

throughout his epistles and in his reports of the discourses of

Jesus, we think will be convinced that the Johannean system

includes a belief in the actual existence of Satan according to

the current Pharisaic dogma of that age. It is not to be

disguised, either, that the investigations of the ablest critics

have led an overwhelming majority of them to this interpretation.

"I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the evil

one." "He that is begotten of God guardeth himself, and the evil

one toucheth him not." "He that committeth sin is of the devil,

for the devil sinneth from the beginning." "Whosoever is born of

God cannot sin. In this the children of God are manifest, and the

children of the devil." "Ye are of your father the devil, and his

lusts ye will do." There can be no doubt that these, and other

passages of a kindred and complementary nature, yield the

following view. Good men are allied to God, because their

characteristics are the same as his, truth, light, love, life,

righteousness. "As he is, so are we in this world." Bad men are

allied to the devil, because their characteristics are the same as

his, falsehood, darkness, hatred, death, sin. "Cain, who slew his

brother, was of the evil one." The facts, then, of the great moral

problem of the world, according to John, were these. God is the

infinite Father, whose nature and attributes comprehend all holy,

beautiful, desirable realities, and who would draw mankind to his

blessed embrace forever. The goodness, illumination, and joy of

holy souls reflect his holiness and display his reign. The devil

is the great spirit of wickedness, whose attributes comprehend all

evil, dark, fearful realities, and who entices mankind to sin. The

wickedness, gloom, and misery of corrupt souls reveal his likeness

and his kingdom.

The former manifests himself in the glories of the world and in

the divine qualities of the soul. The latter manifests himself in

the whole history of temptation and sin and in the vicious

tendencies of the heart. Good men, those possessing pre eminently

the moral qualities of God, are his children, are born of him,

that is, are inspired and led by him. Bad men, those possessing in

a ruling degree the qualities of the devil, are his children, are

born of him, that is, are animated and governed by his spirit.

Whether the evangelist gave to his own mind any philosophical

account of the origin and destiny of the devil or not is a

question concerning which his writings are not explicit enough for

us to determine. In the beginning he represents God as making, by

means of the Logos, all things that were made, and his light as

shining in darkness that comprehended it not. Now, he may have

conceived of matter as uncreated, eternally existing in formless

night, the ground of the devil's being, and may have limited the

work of creation to breaking up the sightless chaos, defining it

into orderly shapes, filling it with light and motion, and

peopling it with children of heaven. Such was the Persian faith,

familiar at that time to the Jews. Neander, with others, objects

to this view that it would destroy John's monotheism and make him

a dualist, a believer in two self existents, aboriginal and

everlasting antagonists. It only needs to be observed, in reply,

that John was not a philosopher of such thorough dialectic

training as to render it impossible for inconsistencies to coexist

in his thoughts. In fact, any one who will examine the beliefs of

even such men as Origen and Augustine will perceive that such an

objection is not valid. Some writers of ability and eminence have

tried to maintain that the Johannean conception of Satan was of

some exalted archangel who apostatized from the law of God and

fell from heaven into the abyss of night, sin, and woe. They could

have been led to such an hypothesis only by preconceived notions

and prejudices, because there is not in John's writings even the

obscurest intimation of such a doctrine. On the contrary, it is

written that the devil is a liar and the father of lies from the

beginning, the same phrase used to denote the primitive

companionship of God and his Logos anterior to the creation. The

devil is spoken of by John, with prominent consistency, as bearing

the same relation to darkness, falsehood, sin, and death that God

bears to light, truth, righteousness, and life, that is, as being

their original personality and source. Whether the belief itself

be true or not, be reconcilable with pure Christianity or not, in

our opinion John undoubtedly held the belief of the personality of

the source of wickedness, and supposed that the great body of

mankind had been seduced by him from the free service of heaven,

and had become infatuated in his bondage.

Just here in the scheme of Christianity arises the necessity,

appears the profound significance in the apostolic belief, of that

disinterested interference of God through his revelation in Christ

which aimed to break the reigning power of sin and redeem lost

men from the tyranny of Satan. "For this purpose the Son of God

was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."

That is to say, the revelation of the nature and will of God in

the works of the creation and in the human soul was not enough,

even when aided by the law of Moses, to preserve men in the

truth and the life. They had been seduced by the evil one into

sin, alienated from the Divine favor, and plunged in darkness

and death. A fuller, more powerful manifestation of the

character, claims, attractions of the Father was necessary to

recall the benighted wanderers from their lost state and restore

them to those right relations and to that conscious communion with

God in which alone true life consists. Then, and for that purpose,

Jesus Christ was commissioned to appear, a pre existent being of

most exalted rank, migrating from the super stellar sphere into

this world, to embody and mirror forth through the flesh those

characteristics which are the natural attributes of God the Father

and the essential conditions of heaven the home. In him the

glorious features of the Divinity were miniatured on a finite

scale and perfectly exhibited, "thus revealing," (as Neander says,

in his exposition of John's doctrine,) "for the first time, in a

comprehensible manner, what a being that God is whose holy

personality man was created to represent." So Philo says, "The

Logos is the image of God, and man is the image of the Logos."35

Therefore, according to this view, man is the image of the image

of God. The dimmed, imperfect reflection of the Father, originally

shining in nature and the soul, would enable all who had not

suppressed it and lost the knowledge of it, to recognise at once

and adore the illuminated image of Him manifested and moving

before them in the person of the Son; the faint gleams of Divine

qualities yet left within their souls would spontaneously blend

with the full splendors irradiating the form of the inspired and

immaculate Christ. Thus they would enter into a new and

intensified communion with God, and experience an unparalleled

depth of peace and joy, an inspired assurance of eternal life. But

those who, by worldliness and wickedness, had obscured and

destroyed all their natural knowledge of God and their affinities

to him, being without the inward preparation and susceptibility

for the Divine which the Savior embodied and manifested, would not

be able to receive it, and thus would pass an infallible sentence

upon themselves. "When the Comforter is come, he will convict the

world of sin, because they believe not on me." "He that believeth

on the Son hath eternal life; but he that believeth not is

condemned already, in that he loveth darkness rather than light."

"Hereby know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error: he

that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not

us." "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?"

The idea is, that such a denial must be caused by inward

depravity, could only spring from an evil character.

In the ground thought just presented we may find the explanation

of the seemingly obscure and confused use of terms in the

following instances, and learn to understand more fully John's

idea of the effect of spiritual contact with Christ. "He that

doeth righteousness is born of God." "He that believeth Jesus to

be the Christ is born of God." "He that denieth the Son, the same

hath not the Father." "He that hath the Son hath life." These

passages all become perspicuous and concordant in view of John's

conception of the inward unity of

35 Philo, vol. i. p. 106.

truth, or the universal oneness of the Divine life, in God, in

Christ, in all souls that partake of it. A character in harmony

with the character of God will, by virtue of its inherent light

and affinity, recognise the kindred attributes or characteristics

of God, wherever manifested. He who perceives and embraces the

Divinity in the character of Christ proves thereby that he was

prepared to receive it by kindred qualities residing in himself,

proves that he was distinctively of God. He who fails to perceive

the peculiar glory of Christ proves thereby that he was alienated

and blinded by sin and darkness, distinctively of the evil one.

Varying the expression to illustrate the thought, if the light and

warmth of a living love of God were in a soul, it would

necessarily, when brought into contact with the concentrated

radiance of Divinity incarnated and beaming in Christ, effect a

more fervent, conscious, and abiding union with the Father than

could be known before he was thus revealed. But if iniquities,

sinful lusts, possessing the soul, had made it hard and cold, even

the blaze of spotless virtues and miraculous endowments in the

manifesting Messiah would be the radiation of light upon darkness

insensible to it. Therefore, the presentation of the Divine

contents of the soul or character of Jesus to different persons

was an unerring test of their previous moral state: the good would

apprehend him with a thrill of unison, the bad would not. To have

the Son, to have the Father, to have the truth, to have eternal

life, all are the same thing: hence, where one is predicated or

denied all are predicated or denied.

Continuing our investigation, we shall find the distinction drawn

of a sensual or perishing life and a spiritual or eternal life.

The term world (kosmos) is used by John apparently in two

different senses. First, it seems to signify all mankind, divided

sometimes into the unbelievers and the Christians. "Christ is the

propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the

sins of the whole world." "God sent not his Son to condemn the

world, but that the world through him might be saved." It is

undeniable that "world" here means not the earth, but the men on

the earth. Secondly, "world" in the dialect of John means all the

evil, all the vitiating power, of the material creation. "Now

shall the Prince of this world be cast out." It is not meant that

this is the devil's world, because John declares in the beginning

that God made it; but he means that all diabolic influence comes

from the darkness of matter fighting against the light of

Divinity, and by a figure he says "world," meaning the evils in

the world, meaning all the follies, vanities, sins, seductive

influences, of the dark and earthy, the temporal and sensual. In

this case the love of the world means almost precisely what is

expressed by the modern word worldliness. "Love not the world,

neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the

world, the love of the Father is not in him."

In a vein strikingly similar, Philo writes, "It is impossible for

the love of the world and the love of God to coexist, as it is

impossible for light and darkness to coexist."36 "For all that is

in the world," says John, "the lust of the flesh, and the greed of

the eyes, and the pomp of living, is not of the Father, but is of

the world. And the world passes away, with the lust thereof: but

he that does the will of God abides forever." He who is taken up

and absorbed in the gauds and pleasures of time and sense has no

deep spring of religious experience:

36 Philo, vol. ii. p. 649.

his enjoyments are of the decaying body; his heart and his thoughts

are set on things which soon fly away. But the earnest believer in

God pierces through all these superficial and transitory objects

and pursuits, and fastens his affections to imperishable verities:

he feels, far down in his soul, the living well of faith and

fruition, the cool fresh fountain of spiritual hope and joy, whose

stream of life flows unto eternity. The vain sensualist and hollow

worldling has no true life in him: his love reaches not beyond the

grave. The loyal servant of duty and devout worshipper of God has

a spirit of conscious superiority to death and oblivion: though

the sky fall, and the mountains melt, and the seas fade, he knows

he shall survive, because immaterial truth and love are deathless.

The whole thought contained in the texts we are considering is

embodied with singular force and beauty in the following passage

from one of the sacred books of the Hindus: "Who would have

immortal life must beware of outward things, and seek inward

truth, purity, and faith; for the treacherous and evanescent world

flies from its votaries, like the mirage, or devil car, which

moves so swiftly that one cannot ascend it." The mere negation of

real life or blessedness is predicated of the careless worldling;

positive death or miserable condemned unrest is predicated of the

bad hearted sinner. Both these classes of men, upon accepting

Christ, that is, upon owning the Divine characteristics incarnate

in him, enter upon a purified, exalted, and new experience. "He

that hates his brother is a murderer and abides in death." "We

know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the

brethren." This new experience is distinctively, emphatically,

life; it is spiritual peace, joy, trust, communion with God, and

therefore immortal. It brings with it its own sufficient evidence,

leaving its possessor free from misgiving doubts, conscious of his

eternity. "He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in

himself." "Hereby know we that we dwell in him and he in us,

because he hath given us of his spirit." "That ye may know that ye

have eternal life."

The objects of Christ's mission, so far as they refer to the

twofold purpose of revealing the Father by an impersonation of his

image, and giving new moral life to men by awakening within them a

conscious fellowship with Divine truth and goodness, have already

been unfolded. But this does not include the whole: all this might

have been accomplished by his appearance, authoritative teachings,

miracles, and return to heaven, without dying. Why, then, did he

die? What was the meaning or aim of his death and resurrection?

The apostle conceives that he came not only to reveal God and to

regenerate men, but also to be a "propitiation" for men's sins, to

redeem them from the penalty of their sins; and it was for this

end that he must suffer the doom of physical death. "Ye know that

he was manifested to take away our sins." It is the more difficult

to tell exactly what thoughts this language was intended by John

to convey, because his writings are so brief and miscellaneous, so

unsystematic and incomplete. He does not explain his own terms,

but writes as if addressing those who had previously received such

oral instruction as would make the obscurities clear, the hints

complete, and the fragments whole. We will first quote from John

all the important texts bearing on the point before us, and then

endeavor to discern and explain their sense. "If we walk in the

light as God is in the light, the blood of Jesus Christ, his Son,

cleanseth us from all sin." "He is the propitiation for our sins."

"Your sins are forgiven through his name."

"The whole world is subject to the evil one." These texts, few and

vague as they are, comprise every thing directly said by John upon

the atonement and redemption: other relevant passages merely

repeat the same substance. Certainly these statements do not of

themselves teach any thing like the Augustinian doctrine of

expiatory sufferings to placate the Father's indignation at sin

and sinners, or to remove, by paying the awful debt of justice,

the insuperable bars to forgiveness. Nothing of that sort is

anywhere intimated in the Johannean documents, even in the

faintest manner. So far from saying that there was unwillingness

or inability in the Father to take the initiative for our ransom

and pardon, he expressly avows, "Herein is love, not that we loved

God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation

for our sins." Instead of exclaiming, with the majority of modern

theologians, "Believe in the atoning death, the substitutional

sufferings, of Christ, and your sins shall then all be washed

away, and you shall be saved," he explicitly says, "If we confess

our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins." And

again: "Whosoever believeth in him" not in his death, but in him

"shall have eternal life." The allusions in John to the doctrine

of redemption and reconciliation do not mean, it is plain enough,

the buying off of the victims of eternal condemnation by the

vicarious pains of Jesus. What, then, do they mean? They are too

few, short, and obscure for us to decide this question

conclusively by their own light alone. We must get assistance from

abroad.

The reader will remember that it was the Jewish belief, and the

retained belief of the converts to Christianity, at that time,

that men's souls, in consequence of sin, were doomed upon leaving

the body to descend into the under world. This was the objective

penalty of sin, inherited from Adam. Now, Christ in his

superangelic state in heaven was not involved in sin or in its

doom of death and subterranean banishment. Yet at the will of the

Father he became a man, went through our earthly experiences, died

like a sinner, and after death descended into the prison of

disembodied souls below, then rose again and ascended into heaven

to the Father, to show men that their sins were forgiven, the

penalty taken away, and the path opened for them too to rise to

eternal life in the celestial mansions with Christ "and be with

him where he is." Christ's death, then, cleanses men from sin, he

is a propitiation for their sins, in two ways. First, by his

resurrection from the power of death and his ascent to heaven he

showed men that God had removed the great penalty of sin: by his

death and ascension he was the medium of giving them this

knowledge. Secondly, the joy, gratitude, love to God, awakened in

them by such glorious tidings, would purify their natures, exalt

their souls into spiritual freedom and virtue, into a blessed and

Divine life. According to this view, Christ was a vicarious

sacrifice, not in the sense that he suffered instead of the

guilty, to purchase their redemption from the iron justice of God,

but in the sense that, when he was personally free from any need

to suffer, he died for the sake of others, to reveal to them the

mighty boon of God's free grace, assuring them of the wondrous

gift of a heavenly immortality. This representation perfectly

fills and explains the language, without violence or arbitrary

suppositions, does it in harmony with all the exegetical

considerations, historical and grammatical; which no other view

that we know of can do.

There are several independent facts which lend strong confirmation

to the correctness of the exposition now given. We know that we

have not directly proved the justice of that exposition, only

constructively, inferentially, established it; not shown it to be

true, only made it appear plausible. But that plausibility becomes

an extreme probability nay, shall we not say certainty? when we

weigh the following testimonies for it. First, this precise

doctrine is unquestionably contained in other parts of the New

Testament. We have in preceding chapters demonstrated its

existence in Paul's epistles, in Peter's, in the Epistle to the

Hebrews, and in the Apocalypse. Therefore, since John's

phraseology is better explained by it than by any other

hypothesis, it is altogether likely that his real meaning was the

same.

Secondly, the terms "light" and "darkness," so frequent in this

evangelist, were not originated by him, but adopted. They were

regarded by the Persian theology, by Plato, by Philo, by the

Gnostics, as having a physical basis as well as a spiritual

significance. In their conceptions, physical light, as well as

spiritual holiness, was an efflux or manifestation from the

supernal God; physical darkness, as well as spiritual depravity,

was an emanation or effect from the infernal Satan, or principle

of evil. Is it not so in the usage of John? He uses the terms, it

is true, prevailingly in a moral sense: still, there is much in

his statements that looks as if he supposed they had a physical

ground. If so, then how natural is this connection of thought! All

good comes from the dazzling world of God beyond the sky; all evil

comes from the nether world of his adversary, the prince of

darkness. That John believed in a local heaven on high, the

residence of God, is made certain by scores of texts too plain to

be evaded. Would he not, then, in all probability, believe in a

local hell? Believing, as he certainly did, in a devil, the author

and lord of darkness, falsehood, and death, would he not conceive

a kingdom for him? In the development of ideas reached at that

time, it is evident that the conception of God implied an upper

world, his resplendent abode, and that the conception of Satan

equally implied an under world, his gloomy realm. To the latter

human souls were doomed by sin. From the former Christ came, and

returned to it again, to show that the Father would forgive our

sins and take us there.

Thirdly, John expected that Christ, after death, would return to

the Father in heaven. This appears from clear and reiterated

statements in his reports of the Savior's words. But after the

resurrection he tells us that Jesus had not yet ascended to the

Father, but was just on the point of going. "Touch me not, for I

am not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren, and say

unto them, I ascend unto my Father." Where, then, did he suppose

the soul of his crucified Master had been during the interval

between his death and his resurrection? Dormant in the body, dead

with the body, laid in the tomb? That is opposed to the doctrine

of uninterrupted life which pervades his writings. Besides, such a

belief was held only by the Sadducees, whom the New Testament

stigmatizes. To assume that such was John's conception of the fact

is an arbitrary supposition, without the least warrant from any

source whatever. If he imagined the soul of Jesus during that time

to have been neither in heaven nor in the sepulchre, is it not

pretty sure that he supposed it was in the under world, the common

receptacle of souls, where, according to the belief of that age,

every man went after death?

Fourthly, it is to be observed, in favor of this general

interpretation, that the doctrine it unfolds is in harmony with

the contemporary opinions, a natural development from them, a

development which would be forced upon the mind of a Jewish

Christian accepting the resurrection of Christ as a fact. It was

the Jewish opinion that God dwelt with his holy angels in a world

of everlasting light above the firmament. It was the Jewish

opinion that the departed souls of men, on account of sin, were

confined beneath the earth in Satan's and death's dark and

slumberous cavern of shadows. It was the Jewish opinion that the

Messiah would raise the righteous dead and reign with them on

earth. Now, the first Christians clung to the Jewish creed and

expectations, with such modifications merely as the variation of

the actual Jesus and his deeds from the theoretical Messiah and

his anticipated achievements compelled. Then, when Christ having

been received as the bringer of glad tidings from the Father died,

and after three days rose from the dead and ascended to God,

promising his brethren that where he was they should come, must

they not have regarded it all as a dramatic exemplification of the

fact that the region of death was no longer a hopeless dungeon,

since one mighty enough to solve its chains and burst its gates

had returned from it? must they not have considered him as a

pledge that their sins were forgiven, their doom reversed, and

heaven attainable?

John, in common with all the first Christians, evidently expected

that the second advent of the Lord would soon take place, to

consummate the objects he had left unfinished, to raise the dead

and judge them, justifying the worthy and condemning the unworthy.

There was a well known Jewish tradition that the appearance of

Antichrist would immediately precede the triumphant coming of the

Messiah. John says, "Even now are there many Antichrists: thereby

we know that it is the last hour."37 "Abide in him, that, when he

shall appear, we may not be ashamed before him at his coming."

"That we may have boldness in the day of judgment." The

evangelist's outlook for the return of the Savior is also shown at

the end of his Gospel. "Jesus said not unto him, 'He shall not

die;' but, 'If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to

thee?'" That the doctrine of a universal resurrection which the

Jews probably derived, through their communication with the

Persians, from the Zoroastrian system, and, with various

modifications, adopted is embodied in the following passage, who

can doubt? "The hour is coming when all that are in the graves

shall hear the voice of the Son of Man and shall come forth." That

a general resurrection would literally occur under the auspices of

Jesus was surely the meaning of the writer of those words. Whether

that thought was intended to be conveyed by Christ in the exact

terms he really used or not is a separate question, with which we

are not now concerned, our object being simply to set forth John's

views. Some commentators, seizing the letter and neglecting the

spirit, have inferred from various texts that John expected that

the resurrection would be limited to faithful Christians, just as

the more rigid of the Pharisees confined it to the righteous Jews.

"Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, ye

have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood

hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

37 See the able and impartial discussion of John's belief on this

subject contained in Lucke's Commentary on the First Epistle of

John, i. 18-28.

To force this figure into a literal meaning is a mistake; for in

the preceding chapter it is expressly said that "They that have

done good shall come forth unto the resurrection of life; they

that have done evil unto the resurrection of condemnation." Both

shall rise to be judged; but as we conceive the most probable

sense of the phrases the good shall be received to heaven, the bad

shall be remanded to the under world. "Has no life in him" of

course cannot mean is absolutely dead, annihilated, but means has

not faith and virtue, the elements of blessedness, the

qualifications for heaven. The particular figurative use of words

in these texts may be illustrated by parallel idioms from Philo,

who says, "Of the living some are dead; on the contrary, the dead

live. For those lost from the life of virtue are dead, though they

reach the extreme of old age; while the good, though they are

disjoined from the body, live immortally."38 Again he writes,

"Deathless life delivers the dying pious; but the dying impious

everlasting death seizes."39 And a great many passages plainly

show that one element of Philo's meaning, in such phrases as

these, is, that he believed that, upon their leaving the body, the

souls of the good would ascend to heaven, while the souls of the

bad would descend to Hades. These discriminated events he supposed

would follow death at once. His thorough Platonism had weaned him

from the Persian Pharisaic doctrine of a common intermediate state

detaining the dead below until the triumphant advent of a Redeemer

should usher in the great resurrection and final judgment.40

John declares salvation to be conditional. "The blood of Christ"

that is, his death and what followed "cleanses us from all sin, if

we walk in the light as he is in the light;" not otherwise. "He

that believeth not the Son shall not see eternal life, but the

wrath of God abideth on him." "If any man see his brother commit a

sin which is not unto death, he shall pray, and shall receive life

for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do

not say that he shall pray for it." "Beloved, now are we the sons

of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know

that when he [Christ] shall appear we shall be like him, for we

shall see him as he is. Every man that hath this hope in him

purifieth himself, even as he is pure." The heads of the doctrine

which seems to underlie these statements are as follow. Christ

shall come again. All the dead shall rise for judicial ordeal.

Those counted worthy shall be accepted, be transfigured into the

resemblance of the glorious Redeemer and enter into eternal

blessedness in heaven. The rest shall be doomed to the dark

kingdom of death in the under world, to remain there for aught

that is hinted to the contrary forever. From these premises two

practical inferences are drawn in exhortations. First, we should

earnestly strive to fit ourselves for acceptance by moral purity,

brotherly love, and pious faith. Secondly, we should seek pardon

for our sins by confession and prayer, and take heed lest by

aggravated sin we deprave our souls beyond recovery. There are

those who sin unto death, for whom it is hopeless to pray. Light,

truth, and the divine life of heaven can never receive them;

darkness, falsehood, and the deep realm of death irrevocably

swallow them.

And now we may sum up in a few words the essential results of this

whole inquiry into the principles of John's theology, especially

as composing and shown in his doctrine of a

38 Vol. i. p. 554.

39 Ibid. p. 233.

40 See vol. i. pp. 139, 416, 417, 555, 643, 648; vol. ii. pp. 178,

433.

future life. First, God is personal love, truth, light, holiness,

blessedness. These realities, as concentrated in their

incomprehensible absoluteness, are the elements of his infinite

being. Secondly, these spiritual substances, as diffused through

the worlds of the universe and experienced in the souls of moral

creatures, are the medium of God's revelation of himself, the

direct presence and working of his Logos. Thirdly, the persons who

prevailingly partake of these qualities are God's loyal subjects

and approved children, in peaceful communion with the Father,

through the Son, possessing eternal life. Fourthly, Satan is

personal hatred, falsehood, darkness, sin, misery. These

realities, in their abstract nature and source, are his being; in

their special manifestations they are his efflux and power.

Fifthly, the persons who partake rulingly of these qualities are

the devil's enslaved subjects and lineal children: in sinful

bondage to him, in depraved communion with him, they dwell in a

state of hostile banishment and unhappiness, which is moral death.

Sixthly, Christ was the Logos who, descending from his anterior

glory in heaven, and appearing in mortal flesh, embodied all the

Divine qualities in an unflawed model of humanity, gathered up and

exhibited all the spiritual characteristics of the Father in a

stainless and perfect soul supernaturally filled and illumined,

thus to bear into the world a more intelligible and effective

revelation of God the Father than nature or common humanity

yielded, to shine with regenerating radiance upon the deadly

darkness of those who were groping in lying sins, "that they might

have life and that they might have it more abundantly." Seventhly,

the fickle and perishing experience of unbelieving and wicked men,

the vagrant life of sensuality and worldliness, the shallow life

in vain and transitory things, gives place in the soul of a

Christian to a profoundly earnest, unchanging experience of truth

and love, a steady and everlasting life in Divine and everlasting

things. Eighthly, the experimental reception of the revealed grace

and verity by faith and discipleship in Jesus is accompanied by

internal convincing proofs and seals of their genuineness,

validity, and immortality. They awaken a new consciousness, a new

life, inherently Divine and self warranting. Ninthly, Christ, by

his incarnation, death, resurrection, and ascension, was a

propitiation for our sins, a mercy seat pledging forgiveness; that

is, he was the medium of showing us that mercy of God which

annulled the penalty of sin, the descent of souls to the gloomy

under world, and opened the celestial domains for the ransomed

children of earth to join the sinless angels of heaven. Tenthly,

Christ was speedily to make a second advent. In that last day the

dead should come forth for judgment, the good be exalted to

unfading glory with the Father and the Son, and the bad be left in

the lower region of noiseless shadows and dreams. These ten points

of view, we believe, command all the principal features of the

theological landscape which occupied the mental vision of the

writer of the Gospel and epistles bearing the superscription,

John.

CHAPTER VI.

CHRIST'S TEACHINGS CONCERNING THE FUTURE LIFE.

The Destiny of the Soul: A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life · 第 14 / 26 章