« EdellinenJatka »
W**: dead, in favour of a meaning which, to the fastidren's minip of Liverpool theologians, is absolutely intolerable. lier course admits the general rule, respecting the omission of the 4711 with the predicative noun; but conceives (greatly to the i.or, no doubt, of those whose sor inci ''Y) that the good ud Apostle would even have come to the s t art of a Greek article, for the sake of clear... Bisni spin! !!. “ If there had been any intention tu .81, 's x te : *?"gentot of the Logos and God, we should have expeci' In · write d beds. On account of the equivocal meaning of Deús *** ut ille article, the article could not possibly have been absent.”* itasi to say that such corrupt Greek as this cannot be ascribed to the Apostles. Here are examples from John ; η αμαρτία εστίν η ανομία και Td Tveïná dotiy ij athbela and here are others from Paul; kúpios ad rveïna dorty: § Harrds årdpos ń kepadh ó Xprotós cotill Nay, we have an example in the following text, of a total inversion of the rule, the article being attached to the predicate, and not to the subject ; ci dot Kúpios (7177") Oeds. I
It will be perceived by the text of this Lecture that I do not adopt the rendering of the Alexandrine Fathers; but I am anxious, in re. jecting it, to pass no slight on the learning of those who maintain it and to show that, out of England, orthodoxy can afford to be wise and just.
think it right to add, that to the view which has been given of the Froem, an objection of some weight occurs in the twelfth verse. The clause" to them that believe on his name"presents the question, 'who is denoted by the pronoun his,—the Logos or Jesus Christ personally?' According to the interpretation which I have recommended, it should mean the former ; according to the analogy of Scriptural diction, certainly the latter. Feeling the force of the difficulty, I yet think it less serious than those which attend every other hypothesis : and incline to think, that the clause is an anticipation of the personal introduction of the Incarnate Logos which immediately follows; a point of transition from the personification to the history. In conclusion, may I take occasion to correct an erroneous state
zbir per liberta
herpes dels and
ment in Mr. Byrth's Lecture ;-that Samuel Crell was a convert to Trinitarianism before his death. “He died,” we are told, “a in the Supreme Divinity of Christ, and the efficacy of his ało sacrifice."* I have before me the most authentic collection of socie nian Memoirs which has been published, by Dr. F. S. Bock, Gree Professor, and Royal Librarian at Königsberg. The work is princi pally from original sources; and the testimony of the following passage will probably be received as unimpeachable. It appears that a vague statement in the Hamburgh Literary News gave rise to the report of Crell's conversion : “ Obiit Crellius Amstelodami, a. 1741. d. 12. Maii, anno æt. 87. In novis litterariis Hamburg. 1747, p. 703, narratur, quod circa vitæ finem errorum suorum ipsum pænituerit, hujusque pænitentiæ non simulatæ haud obscura dederit documenta, quod Paulo Burgero, Archidiacono Herspruccensi in iisdem novis publicis Hamb. 1748, p. 345. eam ob caussam veri haud absimile videtur, quia sibi Amstelodami degenti Crellius, a. 1731, oretenus testatus fuerit, in colloquiis cum Celeb. Schaffio Lugdunensi institutis, quædam placita, jam sibi dubia reddita esse, adeo ut jam anceps circa eadem bæreat. Sed in iisdem novis 1749, p. 92, et p. 480. certiores reddimur : Crellium ad ultimum vitæ suæ halitum perstitisse Unitarium, quod etiam frater ipsius, Paulus, mihi coram pluribus vicibus testatus est.”+
In the rendering which I have given to this passage the word åprayuds is considered as equivalent to &prayua. The interpretation, however, in no way requires this; and if it should be thought neces. sary to maintain the distinction between them, to which the analogy of Greek formation, in the case of verbal nouns, undoubtedly points, and to limit the former to the active sense of the “ operation of seizing,” the latter to the passive sense of “ the object seized;" the general meaning will remain wholy unaffected. The only difference will be this; that the whole of the sixth verse must, in that case, be considered as descriptive of the rightful glory of Christ; and the transition to his voluntary afflictions will not commence till the 7th. The signification of this doubtful word simply determines, whether
* P. 157.
| Historia Antitrinitariorum, maximè Socinianismi et Socinianorum; Fred. Sam. Bock, Tom. I. P. i. pp. 167, 168.
the clause in which it stands shall be the last in the account of our Lord's dignity, or the first in the notice of his humiliation. The rendering, however, which I have adopted, is confirmed by the use made of this passage in the most ancient citation from this epistle. In the letter of the churches of Vienne and Lyons, the 6th verse is quoted, without the sequel, and the fact that Christ thought it not åppayudy to be equal with God, is adduced as an example of humility; " who showed themselves so far emulators and imitators of Christ; who being in the form of God thought not his equality with God, a thing to be eagerly seized.”—Euseb. Eccl. Hist. Lib. V. § 2. Heinichen, vol. ij. p. 36.
With considerable variation of expression, the same idea occurs in the (1st) Epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians. “ Christ is theirs who are humble. Our Lord Jesus Christ, the sceptre of the majesty of God, came not in the show of pride and pre-eminence, though he could have done so; but in humility. Ye see, beloved, what is the model which has been given us." C. xvi. If the Trinitarian view of the mediatorial office of Christ be correct, it is not easy to perceive how he could have come in the show of pride and preeminence; had he not laid aside the glories of his Deity, and clothed himself with a suffering humanity, his mission, as commonly conceived, could have had no existence, nor any one purpose of it have been answered. But he might have been the great Hebrew Messiah,
d he not chosen rather, by a process of suffering and death, to put himself into universal and spiritual relations to all men.