Hutchinson as designed emblems of Jehovah himself, or rather of the
Trinity of Persons in the Godhead, with man taken into the divine
essence. But that God, who is a pure Spirit, without parts or passions,
perfectly separate and remote from all matter, should command Moses to
make material and visible images or emblematical representations of
himself, is utterly improbable: especially, considering that he had
repeatedly, expressly, and solemnly forbidden every thing of this kind
in the second commandment of the moral law, delivered from Mount Sinai,
amidst thunder and lightning, “blackness, darkness, and tempest,”
pronouncing with an audible and awful voice, while “the whole mount
quaked greatly, and the sound of the trumpet waxed louder and louder,
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, nor the likeness of any
thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the water
under the earth.” Hence the solemn caution of Moses, Deut. iv, 15, &c:
“Take ye good heed unto yourselves, (for ye saw no manner of similitude
on the day the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the
fire,) lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the
similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, of any beast
that is on the earth, of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, of any
thing that creepeth on the ground, of any fish that is in the waters.”
Hence God’s demand by his prophet: “To what will ye liken me, or shall I
be equal, saith the Holy One?” And hence the censure of the inspired
penman, Psalm cvi, 20: “They changed their glory into the similitude of
an ox that eateth grass.” Add to this, that in most or all of the places
where the cherubim are mentioned in the Scriptures, God is expressly
distinguished from them. Thus, “He,” the Lord, “placed at the east of
the garden cherubim, and a flaming sword,” Gen. iii, 24. “He rode on a
cherub and did fly,” Psalm xviii, 10. “He sitteth between the cherubim,”
Psalm xcix, 1. “He dwelleth between the cherubim,” Psalm lxxx, 1. We
also read of “the glory of the God of Israel going up, from the cherub
whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house,” Ezek. ix, 3. And
again, “The glory of the Lord went up from the cherub, and the court was
full of the brightness of the Lord’s glory,” Ezek. x, 4. And again, “The
glory of the Lord departed from off the threshold, and stood over the
cherubim,” Ezek. x, 18. In all these passages the glory of the Lord,
that is, the Shekinah, the glorious symbol of his presence, is
distinguished from the cherubim; and not the least intimation is given
in these passages, or any others, of the Scripture, that the cherubim
were images or emblematical representations of him. Mr. Parkhurst’s
laborious effort to establish Mr. Hutchinson’s opinion on the subject of
the cherubim, in his Hebrew Lexicon, _sub voce_, is so obviously
fanciful and contradictory, that few will be converted to this strange
opinion. It seems much more probable that, as most eminent divines have
supposed, the cherubim represented the angels who surround the divine
presence in heaven. Accordingly, they had their faces turned toward the
mercy seat, where God was supposed to dwell, whose glory the angels in
heaven always behold, and upon which their eyes are continually fixed;
as they are also upon Christ, the true propitiatory, which mystery of
redemption they “desire,” St. Peter tells us, “to look into,” 1 Peter i,
12: a circumstance evidently signified by the faces of the cherubim
being turned inward, and their eyes fixed on the mercy seat. We may here
also observe that, allowing St. Peter in this passage to allude to the
cherubic figures, which, from his mode of expression, can scarcely be
doubted, this amounts to a strong presumption that the cherubim
represented, not so much one order, as “the angels” in general, all of
whom are said to “desire to look into” the subjects of human redemption,
and to all whose orders, “the principalities and powers in heavenly
places, the manifold wisdom of God is made known by the church.” In
Ezekiel, the cherubic figures are evidently connected with the
dispensations of providence; and they have therefore appropriate forms,
emblematical of the strength, wisdom, swiftness, and constancy, with
which the holy angels minister in carrying on God’s designs: but in the
sanctuary they are connected with the administration of grace; and they
are rather adoring beholders, than actors, and probably appeared under
forms more simple. As to the living creatures, improperly rendered
“beasts” in our translation, Rev. iv, 7, some think them a
hieroglyphical representation, not of the qualities of angels, but of
those of real Christians; especially of those in the suffering and
active periods of the church. The first a lion, signifying their
undaunted courage, manifested in meeting with confidence the greatest
sufferings; the second a calf or ox, emblematical of unwearied patience;
the third with the face of a man representing prudence and compassion;
the fourth a flying eagle, signifying activity and vigour. The four
qualities thus emblematically set forth in these four living creatures,
namely, undaunted courage, unwearied patience under sufferings, prudence
united with kindness, and vigorous activity, are found, more or less, in
the true members of Christ’s church in every age and nation. But others
have imagined that this representation might be intended to intimate
also that these qualities would especially prevail in succeeding ages of
the church, in the order in which they are here placed: that is, that in
the first age true Christians would be eminent for the courage,
fortitude, and success, wherewith they should spread the Gospel; that in
the next age they would manifest remarkable patience in bearing
persecution, when they should be “killed all the day,” like calves or
oxen appointed for the slaughter; that in the subsequent age or ages,
when the storms of persecution were blown over, and Christianity was
generally spread through the whole Roman empire, knowledge and wisdom,
piety and virtue, should increase, and the church should wear the face
of a man, and excel in prudence, humanity, love, and good works; and
that in ages still later, being reformed from various corruptions in
doctrine and practice, and full of vigour and activity, it should carry
the Gospel, as upon the wings of a flying eagle, to the remotest nations
under heaven, “to every kindred, and tongue, and people.” This is a
thought which deserves some consideration. The four great monarchies of
the earth had their prophetic emblems, taken both from metals and from
beasts and birds; and it is not unreasonable to look for prophetic
emblems of the one kingdom of Christ, in its varied and successive
states. Perhaps, however, the most reasonable conclusion is, that, like
the “living creatures” in the vision of Ezekiel, they are emblematical
of the ministrations of angels in what pertains to those providential
events which more particularly concern the church.
CHESNUT TREE, ערמון. This tree, which is mentioned only in Gen. xxx, 37,
and Ezek. xxxi, 8, is by the Septuagint and Jerom rendered _plane tree_;
and Drusius, Hiller, and most of the modern interpreters render it the
same. The name is derived from a root which signifies _nakedness_; and
it is often observed of the plane tree that the bark peels off from the
trunk, leaving it naked, which peculiarity may have been the occasion of
its Hebrew name. The son of Sirach says, “I grew up as a plane tree by
the water,” Ecclesiasticus xxiv, 14.
CHILD. Mothers, in the earliest times, suckled their offspring
themselves, and that from thirty to thirty-six months. The day when the
child was weaned was made a festival, Gen. xxi, 8; Exod. ii, 7, 9; 1
Sam. i, 22–24; 2 Chron. xxxi, 16; 2 Mac. vii, 27, 28; Matt, xxi, 16.
Nurses were employed, in case the mother died before the child was old
enough to be weaned, and when from any circumstances she was unable to
afford a sufficient supply of milk for its nourishment. In later ages,
when matrons had become more delicate, and thought themselves too infirm
to fulfil the duties which naturally devolved upon them, nurses were
employed to take their place, and were reckoned among the principal
members of the family. They are, accordingly, in consequence of the
respectable station which they sustained, frequently mentioned in sacred
history, Gen. xxxv, 8; 2 Kings xi, 2; 2 Chron. xxii, 11. The sons
remained till the fifth year in the care of the women; they then came
into the father’s hands, and were taught not only the arts and duties of
life, but were instructed in the Mosaic law, and in all parts of their
country’s religion, Deut, vi, 20–25; vii, 19; xi, 19. Those who wished
to have them farther instructed, provided they did not deem it
preferable to employ private teachers, sent them away to some priest or
Levite, who sometimes had a number of other children to instruct. It
appears from 1 Sam. i, 24–28, that there was a school near the holy
tabernacle, dedicated to the instruction of youth. There had been many
other schools of this kind, which had fallen into decay, but were
restored again by the Prophet Samuel; after whose time, the members of
the seminaries in question, who were denominated by way of distinction
“the sons of the prophets,” acquired no little notoriety. Daughters
rarely departed from the apartments appropriated to the females, except
when they went out with an urn to draw water. They spent their time in
learning those domestic and other arts, which are befitting a woman’s
situation and character, till they arrived at that period in life when
they were to be sold, or, by a better fortune, given away in marriage,
Prov. xxxi, 13; 2 Sam. xiii, 7.
2. In Scripture, disciples are often called children or sons, Solomon,
in his Proverbs, says,to his disciple, “Hear, my son.” The descendants
of a man, how remote soever, are denominated his sons or children; as
“the children of Edom,” “the children of Moab,” “the children of
Israel.” Such expressions as “the children of light,” “the children of
darkness,” “the children of the kingdom,” signify those who follow
truth, those who remain in error, and those who belong to the church.
Persons arrived at almost the age of maturity are sometimes called
“children.” Thus, Joseph is termed “the child,” though he was at least
sixteen years old, Gen. xxxvii, 30; and Benjamin, even when above
thirty, was so denominated, xliv, 20. By the Jewish law, children were
reckoned the property of their parents, who could sell them for seven
years to pay their debts. Their creditors had also the power of
compelling them to resort to this measure. The poor woman, whose oil
Elisha increased so much as enabled her to pay her husband’s debts,
complained to the prophet, that, her husband being dead, the creditor
was come to take away her two sons to be bondmen, 2 Kings iv, 1.
“Children, or sons of God,” is a name by which the angels are sometimes
described: “There was a day when the sons of God came to present
themselves before the Lord,” Job i, 6; ii, 1. Good men, in opposition to
the wicked, are also thus denominated; the children of Seth’s family, in
opposition to those of Cain: “The sons of God saw the daughters of men,”
Gen. vi, 2. Judges, magistrates, priests, are also termed children of
God: “I have said, Ye are gods, and all of you are the children of the
Most High,” Psa. lxxxii, 6. The Israelites are called “sons of God,” in
opposition to the Gentiles, Hosea i, 10; John xi, 52. In the New
Testament, believers are commonly called “children of God” by virtue of
their adoption. St. Paul, in several places, extols the advantages of
being adopted sons of God, Rom. viii, 14; Gal. iii, 26. “Children, or
sons of men,” is a name given to Cain’s family before the deluge, and,
in particular, to the giants who were violent men, and had corrupted
their ways. Afterward, the impious Israelites were thus called: “O ye
sons of men, how long will ye love vanity?” Psa. iv, 2. “The sons of
men, whose teeth are spears and arrows,” lvii, 4.
CHILD BIRTH. In oriental countries child birth is not an event of much
difficulty; and mothers at such a season were originally the only
assistants of their daughters, as any farther aid was deemed
unnecessary, Exod. i, 19. In cases of more than ordinary difficulty,
those matrons who had acquired some celebrity for skill and expertness
on occasions of this kind, were invited in; and in this way there
eventually rose into notice that class of women denominated midwives.
The child was no sooner born, than it was washed in a bath, rubbed with
salt, and wrapped in swaddling clothes, החתל, Ezek. xvi, 4. It was the
custom at a very ancient period, for the father, while music in the mean
while was heard to sound, to clasp the new born child to his bosom, and
by this ceremony was understood to declare it to be his own, Gen. l, 23;
Job iii, 12; Psa. xxii, 11. This practice was imitated by those wives
who adopted the children of their maids, Gen. xvi, 2; xxx, 3–5. The
birth day of a son, especially, was made a festival, and on each
successive year was celebrated with renewed demonstrations of festivity
and joy, Gen. xl, 20; Job i, 4; Matt. xiv, 6. The messenger, who brought
the news of the birth of a son, was received with joy, and rewarded with
presents, Job iii, 3; Jer. xx, 15. This is the case at the present day
in Persia.
CHISLEU, the third month of the Jewish civil year, and the ninth of
their sacred, answering to our November and December, Nehem. i, 1. It
contains thirty days.
CHITTIM, the country, or countries, implied by this name in Scripture,
are variously interpreted by historians and commentators. Chittim has
been taken, by Hales and Lowth, for all the coasts and islands of the
Mediterranean; which appears most consonant with the general use of the
word by the different inspired writers.
CHRIST, an appellation synonymous with Messiah. The word Χριϛὸς,
signifies _anointed_, from χρίω, _I anoint_. Sometimes the word Christ
is used singly, by way of _autonomasis_, to denote a person sent from
God, as an anointed prophet, king, or priest. “Christ,” says Lactantius,
“is no proper name, but one denoting power; for the Jews used to give
this appellation to their kings, calling them Christ, or anointed, by
reason of their sacred unction.” But he adds, “The Heathens, by mistake,
call Jesus Christ, Chrestus.” Accordingly, Suetonius, speaking of
Claudius, and of his expelling the Jews from Rome, says that “he
banished them because they were continually promoting tumults, under the
influence of one Chrestus:” “_Judæos, impulsore Chresto, assiduè
tumultuantes, Româ expulit_,” taking Christ to be a proper name. The
names of Messiah and Christ were originally derived from the ceremony of
anointing, by which the kings and the high priests of God’s people, and
sometimes the prophets, 1 Kings xix, 16, were consecrated and admitted
to the exercise of their functions; for all these functions were
accounted holy among the Israelites. But the most eminent application of
the word is to that illustrious personage, typified and predicted from
the beginning, who is described by the prophets, under the character of
God’s Anointed, the Messiah, or the Christ. As to the use of the term in
the New Testament, were we to judge by the common version, or even by
most versions into modern tongues, we should receive it rather as a
proper name, than an appellative, or name of office, and should think of
it only as our Lord’s surname. To this mistake our translators have
contributed, by too seldom prefixing the article before Christ. The word
Christ was at first as much an appellative as the word Baptist, and the
one was as regularly accompanied with the article as the other. Yet our
translators, who would always say “the Baptist,” have, it should seem,
studiously avoided saying “the Christ.” The article, in such expressions
as occur in Acts xvii, 3; xviii, 5, 28, adds considerable light to them,
and yet no more than what the words of the historian manifestly convey
to every reader who understands his language. It should therefore be,
“Paul testified to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ,” or the Messiah,
&c. Many other similar instances occur. Should it be asked, Is the word
Christ never to be understood in the New Testament as a proper name, but
always as having a direct reference to the office or dignity? it may be
replied, that this word came at length, from the frequency of
application to one individual, and only to one, to supply the place of a
proper name. It would also very much accelerate this effect, that the
name Jesus was common among the Jews at that time, and this rendered an
addition necessary for distinguishing the person. To this purpose,
Grotius remarks, that in process of time the name Jesus was very much
dropped, and Christ, which had never been used before as the proper name
of any person, and was, for that reason, a better distinction, was
substituted for it; insomuch that, among the Heathens, our Lord came to
be more known by the latter than by the former. This use seems to have
begun soon after his ascension. During his life, it does not appear that
the word was ever used in this manner; nay, the contrary is evident from
several passages of the Gospels. The evangelists wrote some years after
the period above mentioned; and therefore they adopted the practice
common among Christians at that time, which was to employ the word as a
surname for the sake of distinction. See Matt. i, 1, 18; Mark i, 1.
CHRISTIAN, a follower of the religion of Christ. It is probable that the
name Christian, like that of Nazarenes and Galileans, was given to the
disciples of our Lord in reproach or contempt. What confirms this
opinion is, that the people of Antioch in Syria, Acts xi, 26, where they
were first called Christians, are observed by Zosimus, Procopius, and
Zonaras, to have been remarkable for their scurrilous jesting. Some have
indeed thought that this name was given by the disciples to themselves;
others, that it was imposed on them by divine authority; in either of
which cases surely we should have met with it in the subsequent history
of the Acts, and in the Apostolic Epistles, all of which were written
some years after; whereas it is found but in two more places in the New
Testament, Acts xxvi, 28, where a Jew is the speaker, and in 1 Pet. iv,
16, where reference appears to be made to the name as imposed upon them
by their enemies. The word used, Acts xi, 26, signifies simply to be
called or named, and when Doddridge and a few others take it to _imply_
a divine appointment, they disregard the _usus loquendi_ [established
acceptation of the term] which gives no support to that opinion. The
words of Tacitus, when speaking of the Christians persecuted by Nero,
are remarkable, “_vulgus Christianos appellabat_,” “the vulgar called
them Christians.” Epiphanius says, that they were called Jesseans,
either from Jesse, the father of David, or, which is much more probable,
from the name of Jesus, whose disciples they were. They were denominated
Christians, A. D. 42 or 43; and though the name was first given
reproachfully, they gloried in it, as expressing their adherence to
Christ, and they soon generally assumed it.
CHRISTIANITY, the religion of Christians. By Christianity is here meant,
not that religious system as it may be understood and set forth in any
particular society calling itself Christian; but as it is contained in
the sacred books acknowledged by all these societies, or churches, and
which contained the only authorized rule of faith and practice.
2. The lofty profession which Christianity makes as a religion, and the
promises it holds forth to mankind, entitle it to the most serious
consideration of all. For it may in truth be said, that no other
religion presents itself under aspects so sublime, or such as are
calculated to awaken desires and hopes so enlarged and magnificent. It
not only professes to be from God, but to have been taught to men by the
Son of God incarnate in our nature, the Second Person in the adorable
trinity of divine Persons, “the same in substance, equal in power and
glory.” It declares that this divine personage is the appointed Redeemer
of mankind from sin, death, and misery; that he was announced as such to
our first parents upon their lapse from the innocence and blessedness of
their primeval state; that he was exhibited to the faith and hope of the
patriarchs in express promises; and, by the institution of sacrifices,
as a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, so that man
might be reconciled to God through Him, and restored to his forfeited
inheritance of eternal life. It represents all former dispensations of
true religion, all revelations of God’s will, and all promises of grace
from God to man, as emanating from the anticipated sacrifice and
sacerdotal intercession of its Author, and as all preparatory to the
introduction of his perfect religion; and that as to the great political
movements among the nations of antiquity, the rise and fall of empires
were all either remotely or proximately connected with the designs of
his advent among men. It professes to have completed the former
revelations of God’s will and purposes; to have accomplished ancient
prophecies; fulfilled ancient types; and taken up the glory of the
Mosaic religion into its own “glory that excelleth;” and to contain
within itself a perfect system of faith, morals, and acceptable worship.
It not only exhibits so effectual a sacrifice for sin, that remission of
all offences against God flows from its merits to all who heartily
confide in it; but it proclaims itself to be a remedy for all the moral
disorders of our fallen nature; it casts out every vice, implants every
virtue, and restores man to “the image of God in which he was created,”
even to “righteousness and true holiness.”
3. Its promises both to individuals and to society are of the largest
kind. It represents its Founder as now exercising the office of the High
Priest of the human race before God, and as having sat down at his right
hand, a mediatorial and reconciling government being committed to him,
until he shall come to judge all nations, and distribute the rewards of
eternity to his followers, and inflict its never-terminating punishments
upon those who reject him. By virtue of this constitution of things, it
promises pardon to the guilty, of every age and country, who seek it in
penitence and prayer, comfort to the afflicted and troubled, victory
over the fear of death, a happy intermediate state to the disembodied
spirit, and finally the resurrection of the body from the dead, and
honour and immortality to be conferred upon the whole man glorified in
the immediate presence of God. It holds out the loftiest hopes also as
to the world at large. It promises to introduce harmony among families
and nations, to terminate all wars and all oppressions, and ultimately
to fill the world with truth, order, and purity. It represents the
present and past state of society, as in contest with its own principles
of justice, mercy, and truth; but teaches the final triumph of the
latter over every thing contrary to itself. It exhibits the ambition,
the policy, and the restlessness of statesmen and warriors, as but the
overruled instruments by which it is working out its own purposes of
wisdom and benevolence; and it not only defies the proudest array of
human power, but professes to subordinate it by a secret and
irresistible working to its own designs. Finally, it exhibits itself as
enlarging its plans, and completing its designs, by moral suasion, the
evidence of its truth, and the secret divine influence which accompanies
it. Such are the professions and promises of Christianity, a religion
which enters into no compromise with other systems; which represents
itself as the only religion now in the world having God for its author;
and in his name; and by the hope of his mercy, and the terrors of his
frown, it commands the obedience of faith to all people to whom it is
published upon the solemn sanction, “He that believeth shall be saved,
and he that believeth not shall be damned.”
4. Corresponding with these professions, which throw every other
religion that pretends to offer hope to man into utter insignificance,
it is allowed that the evidences of its truth ought to be adequate to
sustain the weight of so vast a fabric, and that men have a right to
know that they are not deluded with a grand and impressive theory, but
are receiving from this professed system of truth and salvation “the
true sayings of God.” Such evidence it has afforded in its splendid
train of miracles; in its numerous appeals to the fulfilment of ancient
PROPHECIES; in its own powerful INTERNAL EVIDENCE; in the INFLUENCE
which it has always exercised, and continues to exert, upon the
happiness of mankind; and in various collateral circumstances. Under the
heads of _Miracles_ and _Prophecy_, those important branches of evidence
will be discussed, and to them the reader is referred. It is only
necessary here to say, that the miracles to which Christianity appeals
as proofs of its divine authority, are not only those which were wrought
by Christ and his Apostles, but also those which took place among the
patriarchs, under the law of Moses, and by the ministry of the Prophets;
for the religion of those ancient times was but Christianity in its
antecedent revelations. All these miracles, therefore, must be taken
collectively, and present attestations of the loftiest kind, as being
manifestly the work of the “finger of God,” wrought under circumstances
which precluded mistake, and exhibiting an immense variety, from the
staying of the very wheels of the planetary system,--as when the sun and
moon paused in their course, and the shadow on the dial of Ahaz went
backward,--to the supernatural changes wrought upon the elements of
matter, the healing of incurable diseases, the expulsion of tormenting
demons, and the raising of the dead. Magnificent as this array of
miracles is, it is equalled by the prophetic evidence, founded upon the
acknowledged principle, that future and distant contingencies can only
be known to that Being, one of whose attributes is an absolute
prescience. And here, too, the variety and the grandeur presented by the
prophetic scheme exhibit attestations to the truth of Christianity
suited to its great claims and its elevated character. Within the range
of prophetic vision all time is included, to the final consummation of
all things; and the greatest as well as the smallest events are seen
with equal distinctness, from the subversion of mighty empires and
gigantic cities, to the parting of the raiment of our Lord, and the
casting of the lot for his robe by the Roman guard stationed at his
cross.