Page images

And then, he proceeds to show, from verse 19th to 25th, that he is not singular in this testimony, for that all the children of God all who expect the future glory, are sustained by that hope, under the present afflictions, typified by Habakkuk’s Chaldeans; and that indeed nothing else could so sustain them. In this view, the passage is in fact a summary of the reasoning and exhortation of the same Apostle, in Heb. x. 34, to the end, and through the whole of chap xi.

Ver. 19-25th. “For the earnest expectation of the creature, (or family of God,) waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. And indeed, the creature, (or family,) has submitted to affliction, not willingly or from choice, but from a hope founded on the knowledge of the purpose of Him who hath appointed it, namely, that the family is in this way to be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creature, or family, from the very beginning, has been groaning and travailing together in pain until this present time; and not only they, but we also, (for we are no exceptions,) even we, which have the first-fruits of the Spirit, (the revelation of the truth and Spirit

in Christ,) even we ourselves, groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. For we are saved or sustained by hope. But hope that is seen, (that relates to things visible, to things on this side of death,) is not hope, for what a man seeth, why doth be yet hope for it? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience, wait for it.”

It appears to me, that the coherence and scope of the argument before us, require this interpretation. I am sensible that xious, the creature, when it has the signification of κτισθεντες εν Χριστώ, the family of God, created in Christ Jesus, has in other places, xam, new, added to it; but it seems to me, that in this place, the constitution of the family has been so distinctly marked in verses 14–17th, that the usual explanatory addition would have been altogether superfluous. And I cannot also help thinking, that the way in which the word is here introduced, shows that it refers to persons, supposed to have been already mentioned and described ; as otherwise its introduction would appear rather abrupt.

If I had not assumed that trois in these verses, is equivalent to oι κτισθεντες εν Χριστώ, Ι

should have taken it to mean, the human race in general—and then I must have interpreted verse 19th thus-“ That unsatisfied seeking after happiness, which is to be found in all men, is an instinct implanted in them, to indicate to them, and to guide them to the revelation of a future glory.” And verse 20th thus-For man submits reluctantly to affliction, until he embraces the hope, which the knowledge of Him who appoints the afflictions would inspire, that man shall yet be delivered,” &c. But this interpretation did not appear to me to connect so well with the context, either going before or following, as the interpretation which I have given.

The passive of υποτασσω, is very generally through the New Testament, and by the LXX. used in the sense of the middle voice, and I have therefore taken the liberty of translating it so here ; that is, I have substituted “submit,” for “was made subject.” I have also translated the 2d Aorist, as if it were a perfect tense—as our common version does in verse 15th.

If inttuyn—was made subject, is taken in the passive sense, then naturally the following elause—“not willingly, but by reason of

Him who hath subjected it,” must be understood, as indicating the cause of this suffering condition of the family, instead of indicating the cause of their meek submission under the suffering, though in itself not joyous, but grievous, which I conceive to be its true sense ; but in that case, it is not easy to see the use of introducing the unwillingness of the creature ; and besides this, such a statement really does not appear to harmonize with the Apostle's present argument, which is evidently rather of an experimental or subjective character, tending to show with what feelings the spiritual children of God submit to affliction, and how the hope of an enduring future glory, animates them to support a passing present affliction. The continuity of the meaning is preserved by this interpretation, which certainly is not the case in the common version. And as the words agree with the one interpretation, as well as with the other, I feel perfectly justified in attributing to them that signification, which agrees best with the tenor of the argument, of which they form a part. The difficulty of accounting for the introduction of the unwillingness of the creature here, according to the common view of the passage, has in

duced those who have adhered to that view, generally to interpret óux ixovou, not by its own fault, which seems rather forced.

Matelotns, the vanity here meant, is evidently the unsatisfactoriness of the present life, through affliction. Annd, but, seems used in verse 20th for å pen, unless, except, indicating the only cause which could deliver them from their unwillingness,-as it is used in other places of the New Testament.—(See Schleusner in voce.)

Ver. 24th, 25th. A hope of any thing on this side of death, (and all visible things are on this side of death,) is not the hope which will suffice, for it cannot sustain us in going through death. I may refer to the corresponding part of the Epistle to the Hebrews, as illustrative of the whole passage.

“ Now faith is the substance or assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.Heb. xi. 1. A hope of glory on the other side of death, is the unseen hope which will encourage us to meet death, and to pass through it; and as this hope is in accordance with the purpose of God, so it is by it, that the Spirit sustains our weaknesses, and by it, the spiritual mind is enabled to welcome

« PreviousContinue »