« AnteriorContinuar »
a type, "a figare for the time then present," a prophetic representation of a greater and more perfect tabernacle," which, in the fulness of time, the Messiah was to establish. And thus Abraham is said to have received Isaac from the dead in, or for, a parable, or figurative representation of Him “who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.” (Romans iv. 25.)
Again, our Saviour, in one of His addresses to the Jews His country. men, said, “Your father Abraham longed to see My day, and he saw it and rejoiced."* There is no part of Abraham's history to which these words can so properly apply as the figurative death and resurrection of Isaac. He might have said, as another father did, (Luke IV. 24,) in a sense equally figurative, “ This my son was dead, and is alive again." And if Abraham “saw the day” of Christ, it is, as observed by Warburton, utterly incredible that so important a fact should have been omitted by Moses in his history of that patriarch. It could not, indeed, for the reasons already stated, be so described in Genesis as to be clearly and fully understood by the Hebrew people, during the first periods of a preparatory dispensation. It was, there. fore, with the utmost propriety and the greatest wisdom, that when * the father of the faithful" was permitted to see the Messiah's day, a representation was employed which admitted of a strictly literal narration, without a too complete explanation of its figurative and spiritual meaning.
The types and figures of the Old Testament may not appear of the ame value to us, as they must have appeared to the faithful before the coming of the Messiah. This is owing to our abundant light, compared with theirs. When the sun is risen, the stars, which in his absence were so bright, are concealed from our view; the “ morning star” itself, which heralded the day, is then hardly discernible; † and the moon grows pale, and seems no more than a cloud. Thus the discoveries made to Abraham and to Moses wax pale in the surpassing light of the New Testament. The oracles of God, which were com. mitted to the Hebrew people, have been supplemented by clearer knowledge; and therefore " that which was made glorious hath no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth."
But, before the Sun of Righteousness arose, the glory of types and symbolieal representations was great. The day may utter speech, but the night, which preceded the dawn, showed knowledge; for it was Night with all her stars. Yet the faithful were not satisfied: they knew that their dispensation was but introductory. “Many prophets, and righteous men, and kings, have desired to see those things which ye
* This is Campbell's rendering. The Authorized Version reads, “ rejoiced to see My day." The words iva ron, immediately following hardchoato, show that the meaning is, "he desired earnestly that he might see,” &c. “Rejoiced to sec, and was glad," is a tautology which should be avoided. Doddridge says, “ The expression may with the strictest propriety siguify, leaping forward with joy to meet the object of our wishes."
† On several occasions we have seen the planet Venus by day, and for a considerable time. This was when that planet was a morning star.
sec, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.” (Matt. xii. 17; Luke x. 24.) There were those "who looked for redemption in Jerusalem.” Like benighted mariners on a perilous coast, they cast out the anchor of hope, and waited for the day.
But Abraham, whose piety was pre-eminent, whose faith was illustrious, and who is called “ the Friend of God," was peculiarly favoured. He exulted to anticipate the coming glory, the far-off advent and sacrifice of the world's Redeemer. He rose above the level of his con. temporaries and of his dispensation; like one who climbs the mountain, that he may catch the first sight of the sun, before his beams have reached the valleys, or lightened the plains below. The mountain which God told him of in the land of Moriah, was to him “i the Specular Mount," from whence he saw, not “ the kingdoms of the world” and" the glory of them,” but “the day of Christ.” There, in that typical sacrifice,-that death and resurrection of an only and beloved son, which the Great Inspirer taught him to interpret and apply,he saw that “ day, and was glad.”
But although this action of Abraham, and the other types of the Old Testament, are not now of the same importance that they were before their fulfilment, they are still of great use on more than one account.
1. They furnish clear evidence of the Divine Inspiration of the Bible, and the truth of the Christian religion. They constitute a series of predictions, by action and representation, commencing with the sacrifice offered by Abel, and ending only with Him who came“ to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.” “ The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” There is a real and strict relation between the Old and New Testaments, both proceeding from the same Divine Inspirer; but, so far as human authorship is concerned, the history of Christ, and that of the Old Testament types, are independent of each other. The custody of the Old Testament by the Jews, and their rejection of the New Testament, is decisive on this point, and places the agreement of the two above suspicion. Between the time of Abraham and the day of Christ, more than eighteen hundred years elapsed. The striking correspondence, therefore, which we have shown to have existed between the two transactions on Mount Moriah, with such an interval between the type and the antitype, demonstrates, to the confusion of infidelity, the unity and truth of Divine Revelation.
2. This action of Abraham, regarded in its typical character, proves its Antitype to have been a real Sacrifice for the redemption of man. kind. The schools of Arius and Socinus regard the death of Christ only as that of a Martyr, and not as a Sacrifice, except in a figurative sense, the figure being borrowed from the sacrifices under the Old Covenant. The New Testament, however, uniformly represents those ancient sacrifices as figurative, “a shadow of good things to come.” But if the sacrifice of Christ was figurative and not real, then the Old Testament sacrifices were figurative of nothing, the shadow of a shade; which is absurd. A shadow implies a substance as its cause : a figure or type supposes the existence of a real object corresponding with it. “ The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” And the typical character of Isaac's figurative death and resurrection implies the reality of that sacrifice which He made, who died upon the cross, and rose triumphant from the tomb.
3. Abraham is doubtless to be regarded as an example of faith in Gud, of submission to His will, and obedience to His commands. Although the one command by which Isaac was rendered a type of Him that was to come, and the trial to which Abraham was thereby subjected, were singular, special, and incapable of repetition, yet we are not without law to God, but under law to Christ. We have to deny ourselves, to take up our cross, and to follow the Saviour. Let us then, like faithful Abraham, be unwavering in our trust, unhesi. tating in our obedience, and ready to do whatever God commands us to do, and to surrender whatever He requires us to give up. Our privileges are in some respects much greater than those of “the father of the faithful :” the day of Christ which he saw afar off and in figure, we see clearly and in reality. For “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son." And our responsibility is great in proportion to our advantages; for *#bere much is given much shall be required.” Abraham's eager desire for a higher knowledge of Divine things is also worthy of our imitation. For still “ we know” but “in part;" and in the mystery of redemption there are heights unscaled and depths unfathomed of Divine love, surpassing our present knowledge; things which the angels desire to look into. “Therefore, leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection.” “For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance : but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath."
J. W. T.
THE TALMUD: CARISTIANITY AND THE “ QUARTERLY REVIEW." * THE “ Seattered Nation” † Magazine for January contains an article from the pen of Dr. Delitzsch, on the subject of the Talmud, in reference to the attack on the foundations of Christianity, under cover of
* No apology will be required for laying before the reader the two following brief papers, though they are both on the subject indicated by this title. It is already evi. dent that this latest assault upon the Christian faith will turn out, as so many others have čce, to be an occasion of its further confirmation. An eminent Rabbi is reported, uot many years ago, to have exclaimed, “ Christianity is become a necessity for the Jew." Strange that his patrimony should be accepted by the Jew only as forced on him by a * necesaity,”-by social pressure, political expediency, the penalty of isolation, to a Large etteat, from that civilization which Christianity ind
uch Christianity indeed sustains and develops, but which, for all the higher and nobler purposes of life, owes everything to the principles
by Judaism itself.—[Ed. Wes. Meth. Mag.] Schwartz, D.D. Elliot Stock, 62, Paternoster-row.
great literary power, sanctioned by the “ Quarterly Review” in its number for October last-a number which has reached a sixth edition, and is diffusing error among readers of all ranks and sects. It is desirable that the corrective should be widely distributed ; and as among the readers of the Wesleyan-Methodist Magazine there are probably many who have seen the article in the “Quarterly," but to whom the “Scattered Nation " is unknown, the following extracts from the pages of the latter may be of service to the cause of truth.
The editor of that Magazine very truly says, “ The writer of the article, The Talmud,' in the 'Quarterly Review,' misrepresents Christianity by identifying it with the Talmud. I have no hesitation in saying that the article is destructive to the claims of Christianity as a Divine revelation, and to those of Jesus as the Son of God. It ought, therefore, to be resisted, and its fallacies must be exposed. We doubt not that the production of Professor Delitzsch (“The Saviour and the Rabbi,') will do us this service, and therefore tend to the glory of God.”
The Jewish traditions which are embodied in the Talmud rest on the authority of the Rabbi Hillel and his successors in the Jewish San. hedrim. It is worthy of note that Hillel was the grandfather of Gamaliel, at whose feet sat the Apostle Paul, and that he was the progenitor of a family within which the presidentship of the Jewish Sanhedrim was for some centuries hereditary.
The following account of Rabbi Hillel, abridged from Dr. Delitzsch's article, is believed to be historically true.
About fifty years before the birth of Christ an incident occurred in Jerusalem, which is thus recorded. Two of the most celebrated teachers of that age, during the night preceding the Sabbath, were conducting the studies of a large circle of pupils. At the appearance of early dawn, the light being rinusually obscured, they discovered a human form covered with snow, for it was winter, darkening their window outside. It was Hillel, who had climbed up into the window, and had become insensible through the cold. They brought him down, bathed him, rubbed him with oil, and placed him near the stove, saying, “He is worthy that we should desecrate the Sabbath for his sake."
What had prompted him to climb into the window ? Hillel was a poor scholar who had wandered from Babylon, where his family, descended from David, was in exile, that he might satisfy his thirst for knowledge at Jerusalem, the chief scat of Jewish learning. To accomplish his earnestly desired object, be wrought as & daylabourer, making one half of his earnings suffice for the support of his family, and the other half he paid to the proprietor of the Beth ha-Midrasch, the school which he attended. It so happened that he had been refused admission that evening, because of his poverty. He had failed to obtain work during the day, and consequently could not pay the fee; but, favoured by the darkness of the night, he climbed up into the window, where he could both see and hear. Overcome by the cold, he fell into a state of insensibility, and was with difficulty restored to consciousness.
Thus did Hillel commend himself by his zeal and diligence to the attention of his contemporaries. He spared no pains to make himself the heir of the learning of the first Jewish teachers of the age, and he was successful, and came to be regarded as one of first authority in the knowledge of the so-called oral or traditional law. Rabbi Hillel, and those instructed by him, were the authors of the Talmud, which is now presented by the writer in the "Quarterly Review” as equal in authority with the New Testament.
The training, eminence, and doctrines of this great Rabbi and Saint of Judaism, the authority on which the Talmud rests, are contrasted by Dr. Delitzsch with the Divine origin and training of our blessed Saviour :
Jesus also belonged to a decayed branch of the family of David. He was born not at Babylon, as was Hillel, but at Bethlehem, and passed His youth at Nazareth. It was not on record that any great man had proceeded from Nazareth, the despised village of Galilee, where He was educated. Its want of reputation was implied in the question, “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth ?” Josephus enumerates to hundred and four towas and villages of Galilee, but Nazareth is not on his record. If the village had been mentioned in the Gospels only, and could now be nowhere found, enlightened and modern scriptural criticism would perhaps have asserted that it had Dever existed. But happily to this day Nazareth remains as it existed two thousand years ago, among the Galilean hills, built up the hill-slope, in a deep narrow valley, which on the south declines towards the plain of Jezreel, the field of battles ancient and modern. Here in quiet seclusion Jesus grew, and "increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man."
Hillel laboured by human means to perfect the Jewish traditional system; and the Talmud is his monument; while of Jesus it is said pro. pbetically, Isaiah 1. 4, “ The Lord God hath given Me the tongue of the learned, that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary: He wakeneth morning by morning, He wakeneth Mine ear to hear as the learned.” Under this Divine guidance, throughout child. hood and youth, we know by the Gospels what a Teacher Jesus became. When, in the synagogue of Nazareth, the Book of Isaiah was handed to Him, that He might read the Sabbath lesson, He began at the words, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me; because He hath anointed Me to preach the Gospel to the poor; He hath sent Me to heal the broken. hearted; to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind,......to preach the acceptable year of the Lord.” Full of the Divine assurance that He and no other was the Servant of Jehovah, who speaks in the prophet, (Isaiah lxi. 1, 2,) He opened His discourse, while the eyes of all present were fixed upon Him, with the confirmatory exclamation, " This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears.” (Luko iv. 21.) The effect of the first appearance of Jesus as a Teacher was that of amazement: “Whence hath this man these things ? and what wis. dom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands ? Is not this the carpenter ? ” &c. He lacked the credentials, such as Hillel's, of an authorized Jewish teacher. He came