Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

DISCOURSE VI.

2 TIMOTHY i. 10.

-And hath brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel.

THESE words being spoken of our bleffed Saviour, and affirming that he through the Gospel brought life and immortality to light, are thought by fome to be exclufive of all arguments for a fu ture immortality, drawn either from the light of reason and nature, or from the writings of Mofes : for, if the hopes of immortality were fo fupported before the coming of Chrift Jefus, it could not be truly afferted of him, that he brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel. And fo far at leaft they must be allowed to argue juftly, that, if the text is to be understood in this exclufive sense, it will affect the proofs and authorities of any former revelation equally with those of sense and reafon. But then, on the other fide, it is certain, that, if this argument does not impeach the authority of Mofes with regard to this fundamental article of faith, neither will it fhut out the proofs of natural religion; fince it must destroy the evidence of both, or of neither. Now, that it does not set afide the authority of Mofes, is evident from our Saviour's argument to the Sadducees: Now that the

dead are raised, even Mofes fhewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Ifaac, and the God of Jacob, Luke xx. 37. From whence it appears, that our Saviour thought the law of Mofes afforded good proof of a future life; which is inconfiftent with the fuppofition that there was no evidence for life and immortality till the publication of the Gospel.

[ocr errors]

But, fuppofing Mofes or the law of nature to afford evidence for a future life and immortality, it remains to be confidered, in what fenfe the words of the text are to be understood, which do affirm that life and immortality were brought to light through the Gospel. To bring any thing to light may fignify, according to the idiom of the English tongue, to discover or reveal a thing which was perfectly unknown before: but the word in the original is fo far from countenancing, that it will hardly admit of this fenfe. The Greek runs thus; pwriσavros de Sun'u καὶ ἀφθαρσίαν. Νow φωτίζειν fignifies (not to bring to light, but) to enlighten, illuftrate, or clear up any thing. You may judge by the use of the word in other places it is used in John i. 9. That was the true light, which lighteth (or enlighteneth) every man that cometh into the world, ὃ φωτίζει πάντα ἄνθρω Tov. Jefus Chrift did not by coming into the world bring men to light; but he did by the Gospel enlighten men, and make thofe, who were dark and ignorant before, wife even to falvation. In like manner our Lord did enlighten the doctrine of life and immortality, not by giving the firft or only notice of it, but by clearing up the doubts and difficulties under which it laboured, and giving a better

evidence for the truth and certainty of it, than nature or any revelation before had done. There is one place more, where our tranflators render the original word as they have done in the text: 1 Cor. iv. 5. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifeft the counfels of the hearts; and then shall every man have praise of God. But in this place it had been more properly rendered, who will caft light upon the hidden things of darkness; and, fo rendered, it better fuits what follows, and will make manifeft the counfels of the heart. The hidden things of darkness, which shall be brought to light at the coming of the Lord, are the actions and practices of wicked men ; which, though they are of a certain and determinate nature, are yet hard to judge of, because we cannot difcern the fprings and motives from whence they arise : perfectly unknown to us they are not; if they were, there was no occafion for the Apostle to forbid us judging of them; for men do not, cannot judge at all of things which do not at all fall under their notice but they are so dark and obscure, that it is hard to judge rightly of them; and therefore it is but prudent to fufpend our fentence till the day comes which will make all things clear, which will hold fuch a light to these hidden things of darkness, that we shall manifeftly difcern them, and be able to view them on every fide. So that, in this cafe, the hidden things of darkness are not fupposed to be perfectly unknown, but only to be fo dark and involved, that we cannot fafely pafs our judgment on them; and to bring them to light im

ports no more than to set them in a clear light, and to make them plain and manifeft to the eyes of all the world. According to the use then of the original word, to bring life and immortality to light fignifies to illuftrate and make plain this great doctrine of religion, to difpel the doubts and uncertainties in which it was involved, and to give evident proof and demonstration to the world of the certainty of a future life and immortality.

The text, thus explained, leaves us at liberty to make the best both of the evidence of nature and of Mofes for a future life and immortality, and afserts nothing to the Gospel but this prerogative, that it has given a furer and fuller proof of this fundamental article, than ever the world before was acquainted with. The true point then now before us, and which takes in the whole view of the text, is, to confider the evidence which mankind had for the doctrine of immortality before the coming of Chrift, and the evidence which the Gospel now affords; and to fhew where the former evidence failed, and how it is supplied by the latter.

It would take up too much time to examine minutely the feveral arguments for the immortality of the foul, which are to be found in the writings of heathen authors; nor would it perhaps answer the purpose of our present inquiry: for the natural evidence in this case is not so much to be estimated by the acuteness of this or that writer, as by the common sense and apprehenfion of mankind: and this, and all other opinions which have any pretenfion to derive themselves from nature, owe their authority, not to the abftracted reasonings of any school,

but to fome general fenfe and notion which is found in all men, or to fome common and uncontroverted maxim of reason. The unbelievers of this age have abused their time and pains in their endeavours to expose the natural evidence of immortality, by confronting the different fentiments of the ancient philofophers, and by fhewing their uncertainty and inconfiftency: for what if Plato, if Ariftotle, if Tully, are inconfiftent with one another, or with themfelves, in their abftracted arguings upon this point? What is this to the evidence of nature, which is not the fingle opinion of Plato, or any other philofopher, but the united voice of all mankind? This was the common belief of the world, derived from some common sense, or principle of reason, before any philofopher had fo much as thought of an abstracted reason for the proof of it: and, had not the common sense of nature dictated this truth to them, I am very confident the philofophical reasons had never been thought of. That the common belief and perfuafion was the foundation of the philofophical inquiry, is evident from hence, that all the ancient writers upon this fubject appeal to the common notion and consent of mankind, as one great argument for the truth of the doctrine: which certainly proves this at least, that the world was poffeffed of this belief long before they were writers, or ever the philofophical reasons were thought of. If the notion was common, that alone is a fufficient proof that it did not arife from abftracted reasoning; for no common opinion ever did, or ever can: and the reason is plain; for a common opinion is that which is received by the generality of men,

« ElőzőTovább »