|
Of all the sins which our
Saviour laid to the charge of the Pharisees, perhaps none was more
heinous, certainly none more mischievous than this, that they made the
Word of God of none effect through their traditions. It would not be
difficult to enumerate many of those traditions, and to point out their
evil effects; but our object on this occasion is rather to inquire whether
Christians have not, through very culpable carelessness, fallen into a
very similar error. Here a wide field of observation is opened to us in
the traditions of the Romish Church, and in the astoundingly impudent
misquotations and misapplications of Scripture by which it is attempted to
defend every error of the Romish system; but it seems more to the purpose
that we should ask to what extent have we Protestants been guilty in this
matter of making the Word of God void by our traditionary modes of
understanding and applying various passages of Scripture? There are many
passages which have received a sort of traditionary application, the
correctness of which appears to us most questionable. Some of these errors
are, perhaps, harmless; others, we fear, are fraught with no little
mischief; but, under any circumstances, let us see to it, that we
understand the Scripture as it ought to be understood, and apply it as it
ought to be applied.
As an instance of harmless
misapplication, we may mention the traditionary meaning which has been
imposed upon the well-known words, '' How art thou fallen from heaven, 0
Lucifer, son of the morning!" It has been very hastily taken for granted
that the prophet here speaks of the fall of Satan; and, accordingly, for
many centuries, he whose kingdom is darkness, whose works are darkness,
whose character is darkness, has been invested with this really noble and
magnificent name—-Lucifer, the bringer of light. Now, any one who is at
the trouble of consulting the context, sees that Lucifer, the
morning-star, is the representation of the king of Babylon, and that there
is not the slightest allusion to the prince of darkness. Our readers may
not all be aware that the very word Lucifer, in its Greek form, is applied
by the Apostle Peter in a very different manner (2 Pet. i. 19). Here,
whatever Peter may mean by the day-star, and on this point there is
considerable diversity of opinion, the day-star and Lucifer, the
light-bringer, are one and the same word. Thus Lucifer is, in one passage,
the emblem of the king of Babylon in all his power and grandeur; in
another, the type of some glorious light arising in the Christian's heart.
The application of the word to Satan is altogether a mistake.
Some of our traditions have
done injustice to characters mentioned in the Scriptures. We have dealt
rather too severely with Gallio, the deputy of Achaia, who, we are told,
''cared for none of these things," and who, therefore, has been held up to
reprobation as the representative of all careless and thoughtless sinners.
Now, when the conduct of Gallio is inquired into, he appears more
deserving of praise than of censure. He protected St Paul from the
malicious Jews; and when the Greeks, sympathising with the apostle, and
detecting the motives of his enemies, took their leader and beat him in
the court, Gallio thought that he deserved his beating, and would not
interfere. Gallio would not, as a civil magistrate, undertake to determine
a matter of religious belief; he would not sanction persecution. He "cared
for none of these things;" what things? the truths preached by Paul ? we
fear that he did not care much about them; but what he is said not to have
cared for was the trumpery accusations laid against the apostle by his
persecutors. We have not treated Gallio fairly; we have treated another
person much more unfairly. It has been assumed that Mary Magdalene was,
before her conversion, a woman of openly and notoriously wicked life; and
hence, institutions for the reception of such persons have been named
Magdalen Hospitals. Now, there really is not the slightest ground for the
infamy which has thus been attached to the name of Mary Magdalene. We read
that she had been demoniacally possessed; but demoniacal possession seems
to have manifested itself in madness, or something very like it, not in
gross licentiousness. Tradition has identified Mary Magdalene with the
sinner woman who anointed, the Saviour's feet, in the house of Simon the
Pharisee; but there is not a little of evidence in favour of such
identification. But we have taken for doctrine the traditions of men, and
hence a woman, of whose moral character the Scripture says not one
disapproving word, has been for ages the victim of a most abominable
slander.
The cases which we have
mentioned are not, however, of so serious a character as to produce any
injurious results; but our traditions are not always so harmless.
Sometimes they involve us in very needless difficulties. "All Scripture is
given by inspiration of God." This is a great and inestimable truth; but
the popular notion seems to be this, that, because all Scripture is given
by inspiration of God, every sentence in the Bible is the deliverance of a
divinely-inspired truth. It seems to be forgotten that one part of the
sacred writers' duty was to record with all fidelity, and, generally,
without note or comment, many foolish, false, and wicked speeches uttered
by ignorant, mistaken, sinful men. The book of Job abounds with such
speeches. Job and his three friends say many things which, if we forget
that they were uninspired, will sorely perplex us. Job protests that he is
an innocent man, comes out largely upon his good works, and declares that
God is dealing with him very harshly; his friends tell him that he is an
unparalleled hypocrite, and that his sufferings prove that such a monster
of wickedness never had been seen before. Now, if we remember that it is
distinctly stated that they all erred, we shall perceive that nothing said
by them necessarily carries with it Divine authority. So, let Job and his
three friends say what they will, let them utter all manner of heresies,
what of that? we are not concerned to harmonise their opinions and
assertions with wisdom and righteousness. The poor men walked in darkness.
They said much that is wise, true, good; but intermingled with it much
that is foolish, false, and bad. So when we read this book, and our
attention is arrested by some passage which seems heterodox, let us first
ask who utters it; and if it be either Job himself, or any of his three
miserable comforters, we should remember that God, so far from endorsing
all their remarks, says to Job, "Who is this that darken-eth counsel by
words without knowledge?" and commands him to offer a sacrifice, to make
atonement for the folly and sin uttered by Eliphaz, Zophar, and Bildad.
We find that one of the
most fruitful sources of error, in our common interpretations of
Scripture, is the studious care with which we seem to shun the context,
when quoting or applying passages of God's Word. We listen to the
Scripture for a moment, hear it make some statement, and then we say, It
is enough; we think we have the whole truth; whereas, if we listened a
little longer, it would teach us something very different from that which
we have so hastily inferred. For example, turn to that well-known verse, 1
Cor. ii. 9. We read thus far, and then shut the book and begin to speak of
the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him as altogether
mysterious; and the knowledge of them we pronounce impossible in our
present state of being. Now, open the book again, and what do we read, in
immediate sequence to that passage? "But God hath revealed them unto us by
his Spirit, for the Spirit searcheth all things, even the deep things of
God." Thus Paul declares that God has revealed to him, and to others
likewise, those very things the knowledge of which you have hastily
pronounced unattainable. The traditionary interpretation tells us that it
is one of the imperfections of this present state that we cannot know what
good things God hath prepared for them that love Him; the true
interpretation, gathered from the context, is exactly the reverse.
The traditionary
interpretation, restricting itself to one verse, tells us that inquiry
into a certain glorious region of truth is utterly useless; the very next
instance assures us that such inquiry may be prosecuted with great and
profitable success. We seem in this instance to have gone very far towards
making the Word of God of none effect by our tradition.
Christian people, when
encouraging themselves and one another to pray, frequently quote, as
applicable to the subject, these words, "Prove me now herewith, saith the
Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you
out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it." "Prove
me now herewith;" with what ? with prayer, says our traditional
interpretation ; pray, and then see whether God will not, in answer to
your prayer, bless you in this abundant manner. But let us, in common
honesty, look at the context. We find the passage in Mal. iii. 10; now,
see wherewith God is to be proved; not with prayer, but thus—"Bring ye all
the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and
prove me now herewith," &c. By what authority, then, have we interpreted
the words, "prove me now herewith" as having reference to prayer? If the
passage teaches us anything, it teaches us this, that we are to expect
God's blessing when we have rendered to Him and to His cause that service,
that substantial help which is His due, and which, in the Christian
dispensation, corresponds with the tithes and offerings of the law. But
the traditionary interpretation, sympathising with man's selfishness,
perhaps springing out of it, has shut out of view this important
principle—has had the audacity to substitute prayer for liberality, and
led men to expect the opening of the windows of heaven on a. condition
which God, in this passage, has not laid down. By all means, let us pray
for God's blessing; let not one word be uttered to the disparagement or
restraining of prayer; let us pray; but let us also open our hearts, open
our hands, render unto God thankfully and cheerfully His due, recognise
His bounty by being bountiful ourselves, and then we can honestly, fairly,
and rationally plead this promise.
Once more: as an instance
of mischief arising from traditional interpretation, we would refer to the
manner in which the parable of the wise and foolish builders has been
treated. Tradition says, to build upon the rock is to trust in Christ; to
build upon the sand is to trust in self. So far well; but is this the
whole truth? Whom does Christ describe as the wise builder? The man who "heareth
these sayings of mine and doeth them." "These sayings of mine" are all the
sayings in the sermon on the mount, sayings which, all must admit, set
forth the practical duties rather than the doctrinal beliefs of
Christianity. The man who heareth these sayings and doeth them is,
obviously, the man who not only believes in Christ, but to the uttermost
obeys Him, and so advances to the perfection of holiness. The traditional
interpretation, accepted by many, almost loses sight of this; it says,
trust in Christ, and then your house is built upon the rock. No, friend:
trusting in Christ you come to the rock, you confide in the rock, you lay
the foundation of your house upon the rock; but the building of that house
is to be the work of your whole life; it is the work of ever doing all
that Christ has commanded you, it is the work of obeying every precept in
that great discourse, of which the parable of the builders is the solemn
and beautiful conclusion.
From these examples, (and
they are but a few out of many that might be given,) it would seem that we
have not steered altogether clear of the error committed by the Pharisees.
We have our traditionary interpretations and applications of Scripture,
which have, in some instances, led us to form unjust estimates of
character; in some, obscured the meaning of God's Word; in some, deprived
us of Christian consolation; in some, concealed from us the path of duty.
Let us learn to be more careful in the handling of Divine truth. Happily,
tradition has not made of none effect the great leading truths of the
gospel; but there are, in Scripture, pearls of lesser price as well as the
pearl of great price; and the smallest and least-considered of these gems
is far too costly a gift to be left covered with the obscuring dust of
ignorant and mischievous traditions. If we are faithful to God's Word,
God's Word will be faithful to us ; but if we intend to be thus faithful,
we must not, under the treacherous guidance of popular and traditionary
interpretation, learn from the Bible what it does not teach, nor expect
from its Author what He does not promise. |
