« PreviousContinue »
it is from the production of the same pen, let him turn to the second and third chapters of the first Epistle of St. Peter. The duties of servants, of wives and of husbands, are enlarged upon in that epistle, as they are in the Epistle to the Ephesians; but the subjects both occur in a different order, and the train of sentiment subjoined to each is totally unlike.
3. In two letters issuing from the same person, nearly at the same time, and upon the same general occasion, we may expect to trace the influence of association in the order in which the topics follow one another. Certain ideas universally or usually suggest others. Here the order is what we call natural, and from such an order nothing can be concluded. But when the order is arbitrary, yet alike, the concurrence indicates the effect of that principle, by which ideas which have been once joined, commonly revisit the thoughts together. The epistle under consideration furnish the two following remarkable instances of this species of agreement :
Ephes. iv. 24 : “And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness; wherefore, putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour : for we are members one of another."*
Colos. 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 knowledge.”+
* Ephes. iv. 24, 25. Και ενδύσασθαι τον καινόν άνθρωπον, τον κατά Θεόν κτισθέντα εν δικαιοσύνη και οσιότητα της αληθειας· διό αποθέμενοι το ψεύδος, λαλείτε αλήθειαν έκαστος μετά του πλησίος αυτού ότι εσμεν αλλήλων μέλη.
† Colos. iii. 9. Μή ψεύδεσθε είς αλλήλους, απεκδύσαμενοι τον
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 connection.
Ephes. v. 20, 21 : “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.”*
Colos. 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
παλαιον άνθρωπον, συν ταϊς πράξεσιν αυτού, και ενδυσάμενοι τον νέον, τον ανακαινόυμενον εις επίγνωσιν.
* Ephes. v. 20-22. Ευχαριστούιτες πάντοτε υπέρ πάντων, εν ονόματι του Κυρίου ημών Ιησού Χριστού, τω Θεώ και πατρί, υποτασσόμενοι αλλήλοις εν φόβο Θεού. Αι γυναίκες, τοις ιδίοις ανδράσιν υποτάσσεσθε, ώς τώ Κυρίω.
+ Colos. iii. 17. Και πάν 8, τι αν ποιήτε, εν λόγω ή εν έργω, πάντα εν ονόματι Κυρίου Ιησού, ευχαριστούντες τω Θεώ και πατρί δι' αυτού. Αι γυναίκες, υποτάσσεσθε τοίς ιδιόις ανδράσιν, ώς ανήκεν εν Κυρίω,
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 that circumstance; or, lastly, the conformity between the contents of the forgeries, and what is thus indirectly 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.
No. II. There is such a thing as a peculiar word or phrase cleaving, as it were, to 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. With 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 (THOŪTOS), 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. ix. 23, Ephes. iii. 16, Ephes. i. 18, Colos. i. 27; “riches of his grace,” twice in the Ephesians, i. 7, and ï. 7; “ riches of the full assurance of understanding," Colos. ii. 2; "riches of his goodness,” Rom. ii. 4;
. "riches of the wisdom of God,” Rom. xi. 33;
« riches of Christ,” Ephes. iii. 8. In a like sense the adjective, Rom. x. 12, "rich unto all that call upon him ;' Ephes. ii. 4, "rich in mercy;" 1 Tim. vi. 18, "rich in good works.” Also the adverb, Coloss. ii. 16, “let the word of Christ dwell in you richly.” This figurative use of the word, although so familiar to St. Paul, does not occur in any part of the New Testament, except once in the epistle of St. James (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 properly, 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. i. 14, at the word savour : “Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place (for we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish; to the one we are the savour of death unto death, and to the other the savour of life unto life; and who is sufficient for these things ?) For we are not as many which corrupt the word of God, but as of sincerity, but as of God; in the sight of God speak we in Christ.” Again, 2 Cor. ii. 1, at the word epistle : “Need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or of commendation from you? (ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men; forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in the fleshly tables of the heart.” The position of the words in the original, shows more strongly than in the translation that it was the occurrence of the word ETLOTOAN which gave