Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

Dr. Campbell, of the Presbyterian Church, in his able Dissertation prefixed to his Translation of the Four Gospels; Dr. Macknight, of the same Church, in his new Translation of the Epistles; Dr. Doddridge, in his Commentary; Dr. Wilson, in his Notes on Ridgely's Body of Divinity; Dr. Adam Clarke, and the Rev. Mr. Wesley-all maintain this opinion; and proofs of the assertion are given by extracts from their works. A number of authorities are also adduced in favour of the same opinion from the writings of some of the most illustrious divines of our own Church.

The doctrine is then proved from the Scriptures themselves. "1st. These uniformly represent that there is but one judgment at the last day; that the souls of men are not allotted to heaven or hell until this final judgment; and that, previously to that event, the soul must be in some other place. 2d. The happiness of heaven and the misery of hell are represented in Scripture as complete, both of soul and body; but, until the resurrection, the body is subject to corruption. Previously to the resurrection, then, the righteous and the wicked can neither be in heaven nor hell. They must be in some other place. Their state of happiness must be different from its character in the final heaven

of happiness, and hell of torment. Sd. The apostle asserts, that the saints of the patriarchal and Jewish dispensations have not yet arrived to the full glory of which they, with the saints of the New Testament dispensation, will finally partake. These,' says he, (the saints of old,) all having obtained a good report by faith, received not the promise; God

[ocr errors]

having provided some better things for us, that they without us should not be made perfect." Several of the best commentators refer this to their "final glory in the heavenly state, to the full consummation of their hopes in Christ Jesus, at the time of his triumphant appearing."

"As therefore these saints of old who are departed all live to God-for God is their God,' and 'God is not the God of the dead, but of the living;' and as they do not live in that state of final glory in heaven, on which they will not enter until the saints under the Gospel are admitted to it, at the judgment of the great day; it follows, that all departed saints must live to God in some place separate from heaven, anticipating with joyful hope their final glorification." 4th. Another argument in favour of this opinion is drawn from that expression of our Lord, 'No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man, who is in heaven.' Though, therefore, it is said that Enoch was translated, and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven, yet this cannot signify that heaven which is the scene of the more particular display of the divine glory to which Christ hath ascended, and to which he will finally exalt his saints, but to some separate abode of blessedness and peace. Any other construction of the word would make the passage of the inspired historian directly contradict the assertion of our Lord.

"Thus also it is said- David is not yet ascended into the heavens.' His soul, therefore, must abide in some separate region of hope and enjoyment.

"All these considerations prove that there must

be an intermediate state between death and the resurrection, where the souls of the departed abide. 5th. The place of the departed is particularly designated in Scripture.

"The language of our Lord to the penitent thief -This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise,' determines the fact, that the soul of the blessed Jesus after death went to some place, to which, as the habitation of the departed spirits of the righteous, the soul of the penitent thief was also admitted; and this place is called Paradise.

"Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; nor suffer thy Holy One to see corruption.' This passage of the sixteenth Psalm is expressly applied by St. Peter to our Saviour. According to this prediction, the soul of Christ was to be in hell. But he was not in hell before his death, neither was he there after his resurrection. It follows, that in the interval between his death and his resurrection, his soul was in hell. There is no escaping from this conclusion but by maintaining, according to the opinion of some commentators, that the soul here meant is not his rational or spiritual soul, but merely his animal soul, or life." This word, both in the Hebrew and Greek, undoubtedly admits of this double signifi

cation.

But there are several reasons to justify the interpretation of it in this passage, according to the former sense.

"1. If the soul" here "does not mean the spiritual and immortal part of man, but is synonymous with animal life, or dead body, the obvious meaning of the passage, as referring to the two distinct parts

of the human nature of Christ, is lost. The last clause would only be a redundant repetition of the first. Whereas there is plainly such an opposition between them, as that they convey distinct meanings, and refer to different things. Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; nor suffer thy Holy One to see corruption.'

"2. According to the interpretation which is here opposed, there is no account given of the soul of Christ, in the interval between his death and his resurrection-the whole passage merely affirms the condition of his body. But if the former clause of the passage be interpreted of the soul or spiritual part of the human nature of Christ, as the latter undoubtedly is of his body, there is then a full account of the condition of both parts of his nature. His soul was in hell, but not left there-his body in the grave, but did not see corruption.

"3. It is evident that some part of the human nature of the blessed Jesus, called his soul, was to be left in some place called hell. But if soul means merely his animal life, this not being a distinct subsistence, there was no part of his nature in hell. The term soul, therefore, cannot mean his body, his animal life, but the spiritual and immortal part of his human nature. This, his soul, properly so called, was in hell, but was not left there.

"4. This passage was understood of the descent of the rational and intellectual soul of Christ into hell, by the primitive Church. Bishop Pearson, in his learned work on the Creed, asserts, that there is nothing in which the Fathers more agreed than this, a real descent of the soul of Christ unto the

habitation of the souls of the departed," though they differed as to the persons to whom, and the end for which they descended; and he quotes their opinions at length.

"5. By denying that the descent of Christ into hell, in this passage, is meant of the descent of his soul, properly so called, we give up the principal argument from Scripture, of the existence of the human soul of Christ. Apollinaris, an early heretic, denied to Christ an intellectual or rational soul, the place of which was supplied, he said, by the Word, or Divinity. Against this heresy, the orthodox urged the text relative to Christ, Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell.' Christ's descent into hell they considered as an undeniable proof that he had a reasonable soul: For it could not be his Deity that descended into hell; that being omnipresent, was incapable of any local transition. It could not be his body, for that was committed to the tomb. It must therefore have been his reason

able, human soul."

[ocr errors]

The same passage was also urged against the Eutychians, who altogether denied the human nature of Christ, asserting that there was in him but one nature, the divine.

"But it is of primary importance, in this discussion, to ascertain the correct meaning of the word which, in this passage, and many others, is translated hell. If this mean a place of departed spirits, then the descent of the spirit, or soul, of Christ into the same abode is established.

"The word hell, in our English translation of the Bible, answers in the original to two distinct

« ZurückWeiter »