Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

a few years ago. Some of his remarks on this topic I deem very instructive, although I am not convinced of the soundness of all his reasoning.

The language of the New Testament, as well as of the Old, like that of nearly all oriental writings, frequently needs some modification. Some accounts, which, upon a first reading, seem to have been intended as details of miraculous occurrences, are, upon a critical examination of them, rightfully shorn of much of their garb of ap parent supernaturalness. Attendant circumstances sometimes tinge an event with a miraculous hue. The incident which occurred on the island of Melita, where Paul and his fellow-voyagers were stranded, though at first thought a seeming story of a miracle, and perhaps generally so regarded, does not bear indubitable evidence of being designed as such. It is said that "when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand. And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm. Howbeit, they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god." Was this

* Jesus and his Biographers, or the Remarks on the Four Gospels revised, with copious additions. Philadelphia; Carey, Lee & Blanchard, 1838. † Acts, xxviii. 3—6,

unprecedented, or is it wholly unparalleled? I have read well-authenticated accounts of men who have been accustomed to handle venemous serpents without being harmed in the least. The incident recorded in Acts might have so happened merely. I see nothing in the account that necessarily implies a special, divine interposition. The "barbarians" who witnessed the occurrence might have verily thought there was something supernatural in the apostle's preservation from injury. Their wonder was evidently excited to a high degree, and superstitious conjecture was aroused; insomuch that they "said he was a god." This last-named fact, as a suggesting talisman, may aid us in endeavoring to account philosophically for the origin of many of the miraculous stories recorded in the Bible and elsewhere, in perfect consonance with the integrity of their original authors or subsequent transcribers.

In three or four instances,* Jesus is said to have "cast out devils" from human beings, whom they are represented as having possessed: and on one occasion, we are told, he sent the evil spirits thus exorcised into a herd of swine, who in consequence thereof ran violently down a steep place, into the sea, and were drowned. Respecting the nature of these "devils," different opinions are entertained among those who believe that in each case divine agency was employed in liberating the subject of them. I believe that the members generally of *Matt. viii. 28–32. Ib. xii. 22. Mark, i. 23-26.

the Unitarian and Universalist denominations, as well as some others, suppose these "evil spirits" to have been nothing more than the wild hallucinations and tormenting fancies of a disordered brain. In other words, they believe that those who cried out, saying they were possessed with demons, were insane, and merely imagine that they were beset and afflicted by invisible imps and fiends. This exposition I regard as embodying the most rational idea on the subject, and it is in fact the only one which brings the matter within the scope of my apprehension : for a devil,-such a being as is popularly understood by that term, is an identity of which I have no sort of knowledge. But that I may not be judged as presenting a one-sided statement of opinion and argument on this subject, I will introduce here a brief extract from the comments of a distinguished clergyman, who interprets the accounts literally, supposing them as designed to convey the idea that Jesus exercised power over real, invisible devils. "Much difficulty exists, and much has been written, respecting those in the New Testament. said to be possessed with the devil. It has been maintained by many that the sacred writers meant only by this expression to denote those who were melancholy, or epileptic, or afflicted with some other grievous disease. This opinion has been supported by arguments too long to be repeated here. On the other hand, it has been supposed that the persons so described were under the influence of evil spirits; that they had complete possession of the faculties; and that they produced many

symptoms of disease not unlike melancholy, and madness, and epilepsy. That such was the fact, will appear from the following considerations: 1st, That Christ and the apostles spoke to them, and of them, as such; that they addressed them, and managed them as if they were so possessed, leaving their hearers to infer beyond a doubt that such was their real opinion. 2d, They spake, conversed, asked questions, gave answers, and expressed their knowledge of Christ, and their fear of him; things that certainly could not be said of diseases. Matt. viii. 28. Luke, viii. 27. 3d, They are represented as going out of the persons possessed, and entering the bodies of others. Matt. viii. 32. 4th, Jesus spoke to them, and asked them their name, and they answered him. He threatened them, commanded them to be silent, to depart, and not to return. Mark, i. 25. v. 8. ix. 25. 5th, Christ says, he cast out devils by the Spirit of God. Matt. xii. 25-28. 6th, Those possessed are said to know Christ; to be acquainted with the Son of God. Luke, iv. 34. Mark, i. 24. This could not be said of diseases. 7th, The early fathers of the church interpreted these passages in the same way. They derived their opinions probably from the apostles themselves; and their opinions are a fair intepretation of the apostles' sentiments. 8th, If it may be denied that Christ believed in such possessions, it does not appear why any other clear sentiment of his, may not in the same way be disputed. There is, perhaps, no subject on which he expressed himself more clearly, or acted more uniformly,

or which he left more clearly impressed on the minds of his disciples."* In reply to what is here said concerning the fact that the evil spirits are alleged to have conversed, asked questions, given answers, &c., I would remark that the peculiar form of expression adopted by the evangelist may be nothing more than a metonymy of speech, in which one word, such as the distinguishing cognomen of one person or object, is figuratively put in the place of another. We have in daily use some similar modes of expression. We say, for instance, that "the kettle boils,' when we mean the water that is in the kettle. So, in like manner, the New Testament historian may have written metonymically, meaning simply that certain mentally deranged persons spoke while under the influence of strange fancies, which the people, in that age of the world, either superstitiously regarded, or figuratively spoke of, as being "devils." If people were, in Christ's time, actually tormented with invisible, infernal spirits, did not our ancestors, who lived in this village and in the immediate vicinity, have some rational foundation for their belief in witchcraft? Some have supposed that Jesus himself, in common with his Jewish countrymen, believed in demons, and in their power to enter into and bewilder the minds of men. For one, however, I do not feel satisfied that such is the case; but rather incline to the opinion, that his mind was perfectly clear on the subject, while he took no special pains to disturb those who were tenacious of the erroneous ideas in relation to the * Barnes' "Notes," comment on Matt. iv. 24.

« AnteriorContinuar »