Of the form, and the power of godliness.
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.
The first fermon on this text.
HE Apoftle, in thefe words, diftinguishes two things in religion, which do not, but ought always to go together, viz. the fhew and pretence of religion, and the life and power of it. He condemns neither, but blames the feparating of them. The latter, indeed, cannot be without the first; for wherever religion really is, there will be fome appearance of it but the former may be, and often is, without the latter. Men may make a great fhew of religion, and yet be very deftitute of the power of it. And fuch were thofe perfons the Apoftle describes here in the text; they were guilty of the greateft faults and vices in their lives, but thought to cloke all thefe by an outward fhew and appearance of godlinefs: Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.
The word uogos, which is here tranflated form, fignifies the fhew or image of a thing, which is dead and ineffectual, in oppofition to the reality and life, which is quick and powerful. And, I think, this word is but once more used in the New Teftament, and much in the fame fenfe, viz. for an empty and ineffectual knowledge of religion, without the practice of it, Rom. ii. 17, 20, 21. The Apoftle there fpeaks of fome Pharifaical Jews, who gloried in their knowledge of the law, but violated it in their practice. Behold, thou art called a few, and refteft in the law, and haft the form of knowledge, and of the truth in the law. Thou therefore that teacheft another, teacheft thou not thyself? Thou that preacheft, a man should not fteal, dost thou steal? VOL. IX