Page images

I bestow away all my goods, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not love, it profiteth me nothing.

X. Rom. 6: 12, Únaxovelv tn đuagrią to obey (the solicitations of) sin. Gen. 4: 7,“ Sin is lying in wait for you,

and desires that you should obey her will; but rule thou over her.”1 James 1: 15, η επιθυμια συλλαβουσα τικτει αμαρτιαν when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin.

XI. The desires or motions of sin [primi motus, as they were called by the scholastic divines) which proceed from an evil and defective source (Rom. 7: 18, 13), are themselves sinful--παθηματα των αμαρτιων. .

That tendency of our nature by which the performance of our duty is rendered so difficult, is defective or wrong, and must be regarded as such, although it is inherited by the descendants of Adam and is not the consequence of their own acts. For they were not thus created by the Author of our nature, but this depraved tendency is the consequence of the voluntary guilt of our first parents, in whom, previously to their fall, there was no such preponderant propensity for the objects and pleasures of sense.

XII. Sins in thought are criminal.--Although our sinful desires may remain enclosed in the breast, they are still charged to man's account and render him deserving of punishment (επιθυμια produces death θανατος Rom. 7: 7, 8, 10). There are also other passages of the sacred volume in which internal feelings are declared sinful and deserving of punishment. Rom. 1: 28–32. Col. 3: 5, 6. Gal. 5: 19–21. Matth. 5: 22.

XIII. Gal. 5: 17, 16, ποιειν-τελειν επιθυμιαν σαρκος to do-fulfil the lust of the flesh.

XIV. Rom. 6: 13, 19, do not yield your members to sin as instruments of unrighteousness-to uncleanness and to iniquity. Ephes. 2: 3. Taver (to do acts of sin, to sin) signify a disorderly habit of life. The latter passages probably refer to the Gnostic morality of the Cerinthians, who believed that the soul would not have to account for the acts of licentiousness and prostitution committed by the body.

1 Comm. on the Hebrews, p. 145.

2 Annot. ad Kantii philos. p. 10.

XV. Rom 7: 14, 23, εγω ειμι πεπραμενος υπο την αμαρτιανο νομος εν τοις μελεσι μου αιχμαλωτίζει με τη νομο της duaptias I am sold under sin—the law in my members brings me into captivity to the law of sin.

XVI. 1 Cor. 2: 14, ψυχικος ανθρωπος ου δεχεται τα του πνευματος του θεου « 66 man in his natural state does not believe in the gospel.” See the explanation of this passage in the Dissertation on the influences of grace, $ 3.

XVII. Rom. 7: 15, for I know not what I do--for that which I would, I do not, but that which I hate, I do.

XVIII. Rom 6: 14. 8: 2: Gal. 5: 16.
XIX. Gal. 5:17. Rom. 6:12, the flesh lusteth against


the spirit.

XX. Rom. 8: 13, mortify the deeds of the body, by the spirit, 6: 12 &c.

XXI. Phil. 3: 12, 13, ovx otu non TETENelWual I am not already perfect.

XXII. Gal. 6: 1-5, ει δοκει τις (των πνευματικων) ειναι τι, μηδεν ων, εαυτον φρεναπατα if any one (of the spiritual) thinketh he is something, and is nothing, he deceiveth himself. 1 John 1: 7&c. 2: 1, 12. See on these passages, the work on the Object of the Gospel and Epistles of John, where the passages 1 John 3: 6, 8 &c. 5: 18, which appear to contradict the others, are explained. Prov. 20: 9, who can say, I am clean from sin ? Eccles. 7: 20, thus is there not a just man on

earth that doeth (exclusively) good and sinneth not.

In 1 John 1:7 &c. 2: 1, the expressions duapravew and duaotia (to sin, and sin) refer to individual acts of transgression ; but in 1 John 3: 6, 9. 5: 18. 3: 8, αμαρτιαν ποιείν, αμαρ

[ocr errors]

Loeffler, in his Dissertations on the Doctrines of the church concerning the atonement, explains auaptavsiv in 1 John 2: 1, 2, as meaning a continuance in the unchristian state of sin ; and therefore assumes that this Epistle was addressed to Jews who had not yet embraced Christianity.In opposition to this explanation see the Götting. Bibliothek, &c;' the New Theol. Journal;4 and Flatt's Dissertations on the doctrine of the reconciliation of man to God.5 See also what is said in this last work on the explanation of Schmid, On the Christian religion as a science (p. 209), who makes auaptaveiv in 1 John 1: 1, 2, signify the sinful state of the Christians after they had embraced Christianity.

$ 57.

Effect of natural depravity on our state in the future world.

The fact that all mankind are indiscriminately subject to mortality as well as Adam was (8 54), proves, that though mankind are not themselves to be blamed for being born with a depraved nature, they are nevertheless regarded as creatures possessed of a sinful nature (and such in truth they are), and are subjected to a participation in the punishment which was inflicted on Adam (1). For, the reason why all men must die, is, because all are treated as sinful creatures (ruaprov Rom. 5: 12. $ 55. Ill. 6). Now it is evident, even from the diversity between the body and soul of man, that the death of the body does not necessarily involve the death of the soul (Matth. 10: 28). On the contrary, the constitution of our moral nature excites in us the expectation (Rom. 2: 15 &c. $ 17, 18, 24), that our soul will survive the dissolution of the body. Moreover it is inconsistent with the holiness and justice of God (2), to suppose that it should be impossible for those who had been labouring in this world to improve in moral excellence, and who had really made some small advances in holiness, to make still farther progress in the work of sanctification; that those who laboured daily to subdue their inclination to sin, should eventually be blotted out of existence; and that all human happiness should be confined within the limits of the present life, in which the prosperity of the virtuous is often surpassed by that of the wicked. But this necessary belief in the future existence of the human soul, gives rise to the apprehension, that just as the body is subjected to mortality on account of innate depravity (3), so also the soul, which survives the dissolution of the body, may also be treated as the soul of a sinful creature. Nay, it is undoubtedly true, that those who abuse the gracious influence of God, which was given to aid them in the pursuit of holiness, and perseveringly obey the unlawful propensities of their depraved nature, will, on account of their depravity (4), be exposed to the penalty of

[1 According to this view of the subject, which is ably supported in Storr's work, these disputed passages are divested of all difficulty, and may be translated thus : Whosoever abideth in him, liveth not in sin; whosoever liveth in sin, hath not seen him neither known him (1 John 3: 6). Whosoever is born of God doth not live in sin ; for his seed (see 1 Pet. 1:23) remaineth in him; and he cannot live in sin because he is born of God (1 John 3: 9). We know that whosoever is born of God, liveth not in sin &c. ch. 5: 18. S.]

2 Zillechan 1796. 3 Vol. 1, p. 852 &c. 4 Vol. 7, p. 67-73. 5 Part II. p. 215.


the divine law (5). But even those who have actually repented and reformed, and who may justly entertain pleasing anticipations of the salutary effects of their reformation, can still not expect a future happiness of their spirit, unmingled with pain, as well on account of their sinful conduct

previously to their change, as of the indolence in their conflict with the sinful propensities of their nature of which they have since then been guilty, unless a pardon of their sins is provided for them (6). And even the souls of those who, on account of their innate depravity (8 55), die in their infancy, although they are themselves innocent, still participate in some degree in the punishment inflicted on Adam, inasmuch as they are justly regarded unworthy to be fellow-members of the society of angels and the just made perfect in the kingdom of heaven, and partakers of the blessedness (7) which they enjoy.


I. Meaning of the word punishment as applied to this subject.—Rom. 5: 18, ELS KaTaxouua to condemnation. The meaning of the word punishment, when applied to the sin of Adam as imputed to his posterity, is thus defined in the work on the Object of the death of Christ (p. 585, 657) : “Punishment does not in this instance signify sufferings which we have ourselves deserved, but sufferings which are entailed upon us in consequence

of a judicial sentence on account of sin.” “It is the consequence of punishment, and it is also itself punishment in this respect, that the judge foresaw this consequence and nevertheless decreed the punishment.”l

II. Matth. 5:6, blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled. Rom. 2:6–10.

1 Reinhardt's Dogmatik, S. 653.

« PreviousContinue »