being proved, that the everlasting ways or paths of God, denote those very goings forth by which he scattered the mountains, and caused the hills to bow; and that the term everlasting, in both instances, is expressive of merely limited duration. But adin tting that the everlasting hills are opposed to the everlasting ways of God, or that the one were only lasting, and the other properly everlasting; still the antithesis in this case naturally directs us so to expound them; whereas in Mat. xxv. 46. it directs to the contrary. If there be an opposition of meaning in the one case, it lies in the very term everlasting; or between the duration of the hills and that of the divine ways; but the opposition in the other is between life and punishment, and the adjective everlasting is applie in common to both; which, instead of requiring a different sense to be given to it, requires the contrary. The words recorded by Matthew are parallel to those in John, v. 19. Some shall come forth to the resurrection of life, and some to the resurrection of damnation; and we might as rationally contend for a different meaning to the terin "resurrection" in the one case, as to the term “ everlasting" in the other. But besides all this, by your manner of quoting the passage, you would induce one to suppose that you had taken it merely from the English translation, which, in a man of your pretensions, would be hardly excuseable; for though the same word be twice used in the passage, yet it is not in those places which you have marked as being so: the instances which you have pointed out as being the same word, are not the same, except in the English translation. It was asked, Whether stronger terms could have been used concerning the duration of future punishment than those which are used? You answer, "The question ought not to be what language God could have used, but what is the meaning of that which he has used?" I should have thought it had been one way of ascertaining the strength of the terms which are used, to enquire whether they be equally strong with any which the language affords? Should this be the case, it must follow, that if they do not convey the idea of endless duration, it is not in the power of language, or, at least, of that language, to convey it. You suggest a few examples, however, which in your apprehension would have been stronger, and which, if it had been the design of the Holy Spirit to teach the doctrine of endless punishment, might have been used for the purpose. "I refer you, say you, to Heb. vii. 16. anaraλur, endless, say our translators. The word, you add, is neve connected in Scripture with punishment, and but this once only with life; which however shews that the sacred witers speak of future life in a different way than they do of punishment." P. 334. It is true the term axaraλ, is here appplied to life, but not, as you insinuate, to that life of future happiness which is opposed to punishment. The life here spoken of is that which pertains to our Lord's priesthood, which is * P. 334. opp sed to that of Aaron, wherein men were not suffered to continue by reason of death. The word signifies indissoluble; and being applied to the nature of a priesthood which death could not dissolve, is very properly rendered endless. It possibly might be applied to the endless happiness of good men, as opposed to the dissoluble or transitory enjoyments of the present state; but as to the punishment of the wicked, supposing it to be endless, I question whether it be at all applicable to it. I can form no idea how the term indissoluble any more than incorruptible, can apply to punishment. The word naraduw, to unloose or dissolve, it is true, is said to refer to travellers loosing their own burdens, or those of their beasts, when they rested by the way: but there are no examples of its being used with reference to the termination of punishment; nor does it appear to be applicable to it. In its most common acceptation in the New Testament, it signifies to destroy or demolish; and you will scarcely suppose the sacred writers to suggest the idea of a destruction which cannot be destroyed! You offer a second example, referring me to Isai. xlv. 17. Israel shall not be confounded world without end: but this is farther off still. -In the first place, the phrase is merely English, and therfore affords no example of "Greek," for which it is professedly introduced. Secondly, It is not a translation from the Greek, but from the Hebrew. To have done any thing to purpose, you should have found a Greek word which might have been applied to punishment, stronger than as: or if you must needs go to another language, you should have proved that the Hebrew words in Isai xlv. 17. which are applied to future happiness, are stronger than the Greek word aan, which is applied to future punishment; but if you had attempted this, your erit cisms might not have perfectly accorded, as they are the same words which you elsewhere tell us, would, if " literaily rendered, be age, and ages, †;" and therefore are properly expressive of only a limited duration. And why did you refer us to the Old Testament? It could not be for the want of an example to be found in the New. You know, I dare say, that the English phrase, world without end occurs in Ephes. iii. 21. And are the Greek words there used stronger than aww, and its derivatives? On the contrary, they are the very words made use of, and in a plural form too; εις πάσας τας γενεας του αιώνα Twv alwvwv, throughout all ages, world without end. Had these very terms been applied to future punishment, you would have pleaded for a different translation, and denied that they were expressive of endless duration. αιων, Without pretending to any thing like a critical knowledge of either the Greek or Hebrew language, I can perceive, Sir, that all your arguments have hitherto been merely founded upon English phraseology and from your translating y and by age and ages ‡, as though one were the singular, and the other the plural, and savas day to the age of ages, as though one here also were the singular, and the other the plural, as well as from your reference to axaranuros, as a proper term to be applied to endless punishment. I am furnished with but little inducement to retract my opinion that you had better not have meddled with these subjects. 2 3 "How long thus wilt thou speak ? And let thy breath multip y the words of thy mouth? Hath the mighty God perverted the sentence of judgment? Or hath the Pourer Forth turned justice aside? 4 If thy children wandered from him, 1. Then answered Bildad.] Stung by Job's reproaches, but unmoved by his distress, and regardless of his protestations, this respondent calls the whole a storm of passion. With this spirit he enters upon his answer; wherein he supports the principle of Eliphaz, that all sufferings necessarily imply preceding guilt. He advances, in detence of that position, two arguments; the first, ver. 3, is taken from the justice of God; the other, 8-13, frm the sentiments of the ancient sages. These are the outlines of his short discourse, which he fills up with amplification. It is hard to say what distinguisheth this orator, and marks the habit of his mind. Had he spoken no more, I should have set him down as a blunt man, of a middle rate genius: but it must be owned his second speech is full of fire. However, we may venture to affirm, he has neither -the dignity of Eliphaz or the violence of Zophar. 2. Thy breath.] It is difficult at all times to fully understand a dead language; the word may convey the idea of the old English proverb -to shend the breath in vain, or it may signify the spirit or temper of mind in which he supposes Job to be. 3.] Mr. Scott has excellently given the idea of this verse. Can the Great Source of Justice and of pow 'r Who darts the lightning and bestows the show'r, And bless and punish by a rule awry? These men had no conception that, in the government of an infinitely wise Being, suffering might be made to answer many other valuable purposes besides those of justice: and therefore that God might, without repugnance even to his goodness, lay heavy afflictions on a man of undissembled piety: but they were to learn this truth from the issue of the present athair; and to teach us this lesson was, I apprehend, one Subordinate design of the history of Job. 4. If thy children.] He instances that tragical event as an example of divine justice. If there be any thing characteristical of the manners in the And he hath stretched them forth with their transgression in their hand, If thou wouldest rise early unto God, And unto the Pourer Forth wouldest make supplication, 6 If thou wert pure and upright, Surely at this time he would awake for thy help, And he would make whole the habitation of thy righteousness. 7. Then should thy beginnings be from a little, But thy future days he would luxuriate exceedingly. 8 Therefore now demand of the generation past, 9 And prepare thyself to inquire of their fathers. For we are of yesterday, a id without experience; II And their words shall go forth from their heart.—— Will the sedge luxuriate without waters ? 12 Even whilst it is green, it shall not be plucked up, present speech, it must be this passage: Eliphaz had but gently touched that tender point, in a covered hint, ch. v. 4. But this man, in violation of all civity and decorum, mentions it bluntly, in the most open terms. He has the grace, however, to qualify the cruel reflection, by putting it in the form of a supposition. If, &c. 5. If thou wouldst, &c.] He here thinks to soften the foregoing uncharitable insinuation, by giving the afflicted father hope of his own restoration: but on what condition? On the condition of his sincere repentance and humiliation. The very condition was an insult: for it supposeth him to have coninued hitherto a contumacious sinner. 6. The habitation of thy righteousness.] Thy righteous family; compare this with ch. xi. 14, 15. 10. They shall instruct thee.] The sayings of wise men are respectable: but their maxims have no authority beyond the arguments which support them in a matter of speculation; or beyond the facts on which they are grounded, in a matter of experience. 11. Can the papyrus.] The famous paper reed, which formerly was much cultivated in the meadows along the Nile, but is now, as we are informed by Dr. Shaw, very scarce, the inhabitants having coutinually rooted it up for fuel. This, with the sedge, like all other marsh vegetables, requires much water. When, therefore, the Nile rose not sufficiently high for its usual overflow, they perished sooner than any other plants. What a just image of transient prosperity! This puts us in mind of the parables of our Lord, and the weighty sentences of Solomon; t exhibits a specimen of the ancient manner of conveying moral instruction; short pithy sentences, wrapped in concise similitudes, were cast, for the fixing of them on the memory, into a metrical form. Bp. Lowth mentions the words of Lamech to his two wives as the oldest example of this kind on record. 13 Thus are the paths of all who forget the Almighty. 14 When he shall loath his confidence, For a spider's web was his trust. 15 He shall lean upon his house, but it shall not continue, Concerning it he shall make sure, but it shall not be established. 16 Before the solar rays he is moist, And his young twigs shall shoot over his garden. 17 His roots shall completely cover over the spring,' But he shall find a stony soil. 18 Verily from his place he shall be swallowed up; It shall be concerning him, I have not beheld thee. 13.] In the 11th and 12th verses was the comparison; this is the moral application of it. The saying is a truth in itself, but the application of it to Job was an abuse of it. The saying applies to open profanity and notorious vice; the character of Job was outwardly irreproachable, and he contended that his private life was as pure as his public life was virtuous. In the mouth of Bildad it was a jewel in a swine's snout. The polluted.] Mr. Heath renders it the profligate man. Mr. Scott observes that he cannot any where find that the Hebrew word signifies hypocrite, here it is coupled with forgetfulness of God, which is a Scripture phrase for impiety, Ps. x. 4. 1. 22. ch. xxxiv. 30. it means an opressive ruler. In Ps. xxxv. 16. a profane scoffer. And our translators render the abstract substantive in Jer. xxiii. 15. by profaneness. The general idea of the word, therefore, is not hypocrisy, or concealed wickedness, but pollution, defilement from open and avowed sin. 14. When he shall.] Here begins the comment upon the proverbial citation, which continueth to the end of the 19th verse. He enlarges, in this and the next verse, on the vain hopes of these wicked men to perpetuate their greatness by powerful alliances, or any other means. He is moist, or green in the intense heat of the day; the metaphors are taken from a garden- plant, perhaps the vine, and, contrasted with the marsh plants the better to represent the wicked man's fortunes and fatal catastrophe. 17. But he shall find.] Literally, he shall behold a house of stones. An animated phrase for a stony soil, as Buxtorf explains it. Thus the house of thorns in the Syriac Testament, Mat. xiii. 22. is thorny ground Verdant, and gay. before the beam, awhile 18. I have not beheld thee.] This is a strong manner of expressing utter abolition and abhorrence. The figure is a bold prosopopeia; but not more daring than that of Ovid, who puts a long speech into the mouth of the earth, when she was burnt up by the chariot of the sun. |