Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

Twice, without the article, it is applied to Peter, as an adversary. But with the definite article, it is applied to the Adversary, called the Devil, or the false accuser.

To exhibit to our readers our whole premises, we shall state, that we have the term Beelzebub eight times, but not once translated. It is sometimes read Baalzebub, and though in the New Testament he is called the prince of the demons, was regarded as the chief object of Pagan worship. Baal, or the sun personified, was the supreme divinity of Phenician or Canaanite idolatry. Baal, or the sun, and Ashtaroth, or Astarte, the moon, were worshipped from time immemorial. This idolatry of the sun and moon, as the generative and conceptive powers of nature, was originally introduced to Northern Europe from India. Taken in malem partem, it was finally translated Satan, the rival of God and prince of the demons.

But these imaginary divinities being disposed of, we have yet remaining only the family of demons, on which a few remarks may suffice. Daimoon, which is the parent of this large and powerful family, is, with a single exception, in the Common Version always translated Devil. The other branches of the family are Daimonion, Daimonizomai, Daimonioodees, in all occurring seventy-nine times in the New Testament; and, with one exception, were always translated Devil, or Devils. That exception, found Acts xvii. 18, is "gods." Because, indeed, a majority of all the gods of Pagan superstition were the ghosts, real or imaginary, of departed heroes or great men.

As to these demons, they may, perhaps, accomplish missions, as well as those properly called angels, and may be a portion of those fallen spirits that are called "the angels of the Devil." But, with all the lights the Bible affords on this subject, we still must rather regard them as the spirits of deceased wicked men. An induction of all the places where this word occurs is not called for, as logically necessary to such a conclusion. If it is only once shown to represent such a personage, it will suffice, in the absence of any contradictory testimony.

Amongst the facts and documents from which we make up our opinion or judgment in this case, the following are chief:

1. DIABOLOS, translated Devil, and DAIMONION, properly translated Demon, are never confounded in the New Testament. The one is never, in any case, substituted for the other; though the former occurs thirty-four times and the latter sixty times, in the New Testament.

2. In the second place, Diabolos, or the Devil, is never, in Sacred Scripture, said to take possession of any one.

3. Daimonion is as constantly indefinite, as Diabolos is definite. Devil is always preceded by the; Daimoon never, except when some particular one is named in reference to a special case.

4. Demons are exhibited as malignant and unclean spirits; and to their influence "Dumbness, deafness, madness, palsy, epilepsy," &c., are ascribed.

5. Demons are not yet in misery, but living in the dread and anticipation of misery. In the days of the Messiah, they exclaimed, "We know thee, the Holy One of God; art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" This is never said of the Devil, nor of any of his angels, and seems to intimate a characteristic difference between evil augels and demons.

Again: Paul affirms that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God. We know that the Gentiles did not sacrifice to God, nor to the angels of God, but to hero gods--to the spirits of dead men.

At Athens, they supposed that Paul was a setter forth of "strange gods"—not of strange Devils, (as King James' translators ought, in their uniformity, to have rendered it,) because he preached to them Jesus and the anastasis, or the resurrection. They supposed that the anastasis was a goddess, and that Jesus was a new god, in the Gentile sense; reasoning, no doubt, from what Paul had said of his death and resurrection.

It is conceded, on all hands, "that a great portion of the Pagan worship was avowedly paid to the ghosts of departed heroes, of conquerors, and potentates, and even to the inventors of the useful arts." Jews and Gentiles, with one consent, agreed in calling these spirits of great men daimonia, or demons. The Gentiles regarded the demons which they worshipped as the ghosts of good men--as public benefactors.

The Papal church has long been devoted to demon worship. They pray to the Virgin Mary, and to the spirits of her registered saints; and therefore, when her downfall and total ruin are prefigured in the Visions of the Apocalypse, her city, her temple, are represented as converted into an habitation of demons; the prison of every foul spirit-the cage of unclean birds." But we shall reflect on these premises for another month. A. C..

A REVIEW EXTRAORDINARY.

[From the Presbyterian.]

For the last three quarters, the radical Westminster Review has been taking a decidedly anti-religious, certainly anti-evangelical, direction. It is even affirmed that a party has bought the right of publishing an article in each number assailing the faith of Christians. The course has been more and more undisguised in some of the last numbers; but in the October issue, the disguise becomes so thin that all concealment may be thrown aside at once, and the Review may avow itself as the champion of infidelity. The closing paper in this number is upon "Septenary Institutions," and the design is to show that a Sabbath for worship and observance of religious duties exclusively, is not a divine appointment; that the observance of such days was introduced from the practice of celebrating certain changes of the moon; and hence, four of them came in a month, with an interval of seven days; and that there is no authority whatever for regarding the first day of the week in any sense, as a day for religious worship. But not contented with thus making war upon the Sabbath, the writer denies the divine authority of the Old Testament; thinks the books of Moses are a collection of miscellaneous writings, put together by Ezra or somebody else; the story of Eve and the serpent is an allegory, and of Joshua and the sun a fable; that Christ commanded his disciples to search the Scriptures, that they might distinguish the part to be believed from the rest; and thus he expressly taught them that some things said by them of old time in the Bible were not of divine authority, and this writer thinks it is high time that the public should be taught to regard the books of the Old Testament in their true light.

This article has been called out by the recent agitation of the Sabbath postoffice question of Great Britain. It shows that there, as in this country, infidelity regards the Sabbath as the great obstacle in the way of its success. Once break down the distinction of days, and persuade the nation that it is folly to devote one day in the week to religious worship, and you have struck a blow at the nation's heart. There is no religion without a Sabbath.

We have been thus particular in defining the present position and character of this Review, that its mischief may be lessened by the foreknowledge of the public as to its aims. That it is now under the control of an infidel corps, there can be little doubt; and the publication of such an article as this on septenary institutions, is an open and malignant assault upon Christianity, that deserves the rebuke of every Christian in the old world and the new. It serves to show that the enemies of our holy religion are becoming more bold. The contest of the day is to be between Rationalists and Scripturalists; between those who claim to be guided by human reason, and those who submit to divine authority in Holy Scripture. To this, all logical controversy is now tending. The friends of God's truth have nothing to fear but their own indifference.

AN INQUIRY INTO THE NATURE, CAUSE, AND CURE, OF SPIRITUAL DYSPEPSY-No. II.

In the inquiry which we have instituted, we may be thought, by some, to be guilty of an error, not uncommon to writers, and from which, indeed, not even professed logicians are always clear, viz: That of begging the question, or taking for granted what needs to be proved. Such may gravely ask, How do you know that there is such a moral ailment as you have been pleased to style Spiritual Dyspepsy?

But stop, my friend, ere you proceed farther, till I shall have answered your question, by proposing another. Do you profess to be a spiritually-minded person? Or, in other words, Are you a Christian? You have never, then, felt your spiritual zeal to cool, or even to become lukewarm. You have always relished that spiritual aliment-the bread of life and the water of life. You have never

hungered or thirsted after the pleasures of sense, since you have eaten of the spiritual manna. Your affections have never since been set upon earthly things. Business has never so occupied your attention as to prevent you from retiring, for an hour, from the world, to read and meditate upon the things of eternity. You have never so relaxed your vigilance or circumspection, as to give the Adversary an advantage over you, in the temptation. If such has been your happy condition, you certainly have no experimental knowledge of the things after which we are inquiring. And we should be equally happy in finding that you are not included in our category. All, indeed, that we could regret in your case, is, that you are not in such circumstances as permit you to sympathize so well with the class for whom we write, as are those who are encompassed with like infirmities.

While, then, we admit the novelty of the name by which we have chosen to designate certain things as they occur in the development of character, we contend that the things themselves are positive entities. We are inquiring after no ignis fatuus, but after what has given more discomfort and pain to the possessor, than all the bodily ailments he has ever experienced. What are the diseases of our physical nature, compared with those of our moral nature? Who will presume so to heighten the anguish of the body, as to make it equal that of the mind? Vain attempt! How obtuse and transient the former, compared with the poignancy of the latter, which is

eternal! Why is it, then, that the diseases of our spiritual nature are so difficult of detection? How is it, that we can live full threescore years, and not perceive the disease which has all that time afflicted us—a disease, too, fraught with the materials of everlasting anguish? The object of our inquiry, then, is to ascertain the symptoms of that moral malady, which, like a wide-spreading epidemic, has infected the fairest portions of the great community of Christendom.

The term which we have chosen to designate this spiritual disease, suggested itself to us because of the points of resemblance which we had discovered between it and physical dyspepsy. These points of resemblance, as to its symptoms, we sketched, though imperfectly, in our first number.

In the present number, we propose to trace the resemblance, also, between their cause and cure. If asked for the reason of our delay in furnishing the present number, our apology may be found in the nature of our subject. We write upon spiritual ailments, than which no class of diseases are more difficult of detection by those who are the subjects of them; and it is for them we write. To delineate, or even fully describe, a spiritual malady, is no very difficult task. It is often done, and well done, within the limits of a short discourse. But how long is it, oftentimes, before the subject of the malady makes the application, or realizes himself to be serously and dangerously ill? To offer the remedy before he discovers his diseased condition, avails him nought; for it is an axiom in spiritual therapeutics, That until the patient realize his condition, and desire a remedy, his case is incurable.

We, therefore, conceived it due to the reader, that he should have time for a calm, deliberate, and serious examination of his own case, with reference to this spiritual epidemic. And if, upon examination, he shall have found himself the subject of this malady, we hope that we shall now be able to present him with an infallible remedy.

We are, first, then, to inquire briefly into the causes of this disorder. They may be regarded as either immediate or remote. Remote causes produce the changes; which changes, as the immediate causes, excite the symptoms. We cannot, however, understand the remote cause, without some knowledge of the digestive process; as we cannot tell that any series of events has been changed, unless we first know what that series is. The digestive process consists of a series of actions or events. There is, first, prehension of the food by the mouth, then mastication, next insaliva

SERIES IV.-VOL. 1.

« ZurückWeiter »