« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
with his neighbour, for we are members one of another*.”
Colos. ch. iii. 9. “ Lie not one to another; seeing that ye have put off the old man, with his deeds: and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledget."
The vice of “ lying,” or a correction of that vice, does not seem to bear any nearer relation to the “ putting on the new man," than a reformation in any other article of morals. Yet these two ideas, we see, stand in both epistles in immediate connexion. .
Ephes.ch. v. 20, 21, 22. “ Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; submitting yourselves one to another, in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.”
* Ephes, ch. iv. 24, 25. Και ενδυσασθαι τον καινον ανθρωπον, τον κατα Θεον κτισθεντα εν δικαιοσυνη και οσιοτητα της αληθειας: διο αποθεμενοι το ψευδος, λαλειτε αληθειαν έκαςος μετα τα • πλησιον αυτα· ότι εσμεν αλληλων μελη.
+ Colos. ch. iii. 9. Μη ψευδεσθε εις αλληλες, απεκδυσαμενοι τον παλαιον ανθρωπον, συν ταις πραξεσιν αυτου, και ενδυσαμενοι τον νεον, τον ανακαινομενον εις επίγνωσιν.
Ephes. ch. v. 20, 21, 22. Ευχαριςεντος παντοτε υπερ παντων, εν ονόματι τε Κυριε ήμων Ιησε Χριςε, τω Θεω και πατρι, υποτασσομενοι αλληλοις εν φoζω Θεε. Αι γυναικες, τους ιδιους ανδρασιν υποτασσεσθε, ως τω Κυρια.
Colos, ch. iii. 17. “ Whatsoever ye do, in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord*."
In both these passages, submission follows giving of thanks, without any similitude in the ideas which should account for the transition.
It is not necessary to pursue the comparison between the two epistles farther. The argument which results from it stands thus : No two other epistles contain a circumstance which indicates that they were written at the same, or nearly at the same time. No two other epistles exhibit so many marks of correspondency and resemblance. If the original which we ascribe to these two epistles be the true one, that is, if they were both really written by St. Paul, and both sent to their respective destination by the same messenger, the similitude is, in all points, what should be expected to take place. If they were forgeries, then the mention of Tychicus in both epistles, and in a manner which shows that he either carried or accompanied both epistles, was inserted for the purpose of accounting for their similitude: or else the structure of the epistles was designedly adapted to the circumstance: or lastly, the conforniity between the contents of the forgeries, and what is thus directly intimated concerning their date, was only a happy accident. Not one of these three suppositions will gain credit with a reader who peruses the epistles with attention, and who reviews the several examples we have pointed out, and the observations with which they were accompanied
* Colos. ch. iii. 17. Kai nav og to an toirt€, ex doyw, Y EX • εργω, παντα εν ονόματι Κυριε Ιησε, ευχαρισουντες τω Θεω και
πατρι δι' αυτου. Αι γυναικες, υποτασσεσθε τους ιδιους ανδρασις ως ανηκεν εν Κυρια.
No. II. There is such a thing as a peculiar word or phrase cleaving, as it were, tò the memory of a writer or speaker, and presenting itself to his utterance at every turn. When we observe this, we call it a cant word, or a cant phrase. It is a natural effect of habit: and would appear more frequently than it does, had not the rules of good writing taught the ear to be offended with the iteration of the same sound, and oftentimes caused us to reject, on that account, the word which
offered itself first to our recollection. Withi a writer who, like St. Paul, either knew not these rules, or disregarded them, such words will not be avoided. The truth is, an example of this kind runs through several of his epistles, and in the epistle before us abounds ; and that is in the word riches (TROUTos), used metaphorically as an augmentative of the idea to which it happens to be subjoined. Thus, “ the riches of his glory," “ his riches in glory," “ riches of the glory of his inheritance," " riches of the glory of this mystery,” Rom. ch. ix. 23, Ephes. ch. iii. 16, Ephes ch. i. 18, Colos. ch. i. 27 : “ riches of his grace,” twice in the Ephesians, ch. i. 7, and ch. ii. 7 ; “ riches of the full assurance of understanding,” Colos. ch. ii. 2; s riches of his goodness," Rom. ch. ii. 4: “ riches of the wisdom of God,” Rom. ch. xi. 33 ; “ riches of Christ,” Ephes. ch. ii. 8. In a like sense the adjective, Rom. ch. x. 12, “rich unto all that call upon him;" Ephes. ch. ii. 4, “ rich in mercy;" 1 Tim. ch. vi. 18, “ rich in good works.” Also the adverb, Colos. ch. iii. 16, “ let the word of Christ dwell in you richly.” This figurative use of the word, though so familiar to St. Paul, does not occur in any part of the New Testament, except once in the Epistle of St. James, ch. ii. 5, “ Hath not God chosen the poor of this world, rich in faith?” where it is manifestly suggested by the antithesis. I propose the frequent, yet seemingly unaffected use of this phrase, in the epistle before us, as one internal mark of its genuineness.
No. III. There is another singularity in St. Paul's style, which, wherever it is found, may be deemed a badge of authenticity ; because, if it were noticed, it would not, I think, be imitated, inasmuch as it almost always produces embarrassment and interruption in the reasoning. This singularity is a species of digression which may probably, I think, be denominated going off at a word. It is turning aside from the subject upon the occurrence of some particular word, forsaking the train of thought then in hand, and entering upon a parenthetic sentence in which that word is the prevailing term. I shall lay before the reader some examples of this, collected from the other epistles, and then propose two examples of it which are found in the Epistle to the Ephesians. 2 Cor. ch. ii.