Page images
PDF
EPUB

makes all duty to consist in love to God and man. Now "no man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment; for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse. Neither do men put new wine into old bottles; else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish; but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved." As though the Saviour had continued, you wish to unite the two dispensations, and compel my disciples to observe what you regard as the ceremonies of the Mosaic law. It never was designed that these two dispensations should be united. The gospel was not sent as a patch for the law, but to make an end of it, and remove it entirely. Neither can they be united; they are so contrary in their natures that the new would destroy the old. As a piece of new cloth sewed to an old garment makes the rent worse, and as new wine will cause old bottles to break and perish, so would your religion be destroyed if mine were incorporated with it. Adam Clarke takes the same view of the design of this parable. "The Institutes of Christ, and those of the Pharisees, could never be brought to accord: an attempt to combine the two systems, would be as absurd as it would be distructive. The old covenant made way for the new, which was its completion and its end; but with that old covenant the new cannot be incorporated."

The Scribes and Pharisees on a certain occasion found fault with Jesus, because his disciples transgressed the tradition of the elders, in neglecting to wash their hands when they eat bread. Matt. xv. 1, 2. And so strong was the disposition to mingle the institutes of Moses and the Pharisees with 1 Commentary on the passage.

those of Christ, that on one occasion, at Antioch, it excited"no small dissension and disputation." Certain men, who had come down from Judea, taught the Christians, that except they were circumcised after the manner of Moses, they could not be saved. It became necessary to send a deputation consisting of Paul, Barnabus and others up to Jerusalem, to settle the matter; and it was decided that circumcision was not binding upon the disciples of Christ. Acts xv.

The force of the parable is easily perceived. A piece of new cloth put into an old garment will surely make the rent worse. The bottles of which the Saviour speaks were not made of glass, as they now generally are, but of skins. Dr. Campbell translates the phrase, “old leathern bottles ;" and adds, in a note, "such vessels were commonly then, and in some countries are still of leather, which were not easily distended when old, and were consequently more ready to burst by the fermentation of the liquor." "The modern Arabs, as the Jewish people anciently did, keep their water, milk, wine and other liquors, in bottles made of skins. These bottles, when old, are frequently rent, but are capable of being repaired, by being bound up, or pieced in various ways. Of this description were the wine bottles of the Gibeonites, old and rent, and bound up. Josh. ix. 4. As new wine was liable to ferment, and consequently would burst the old skins, all prudent persons would put it into new skins. Bottles of skin, it is well known, are still in use in Spain, where they are called Bor rachas." The doctrine of Christ was very fitly represented by new wine,-the same figure which the prophet Isaiah uses, Iv. 1. The effect of min1 Four Gospels.

2 Horne's Intro. iii. 389.

gling the doctrine and precepts of Christ with the institutions of the Pharisees, would be to destroy those institutions, as the bottles were destroyed by being made the repositaries of new wine.

One of the traditions of the Pharisees was, that men should wash their hands, when they eat bread, (Matt. xv. 1, 2) and this, not for purposes of cleanliness, but as a religious duty, to render them acceptable to God. On the other hand, Christ laid no stress on mere ceremonies, but made human duty to consist only in works of piety and benevolence. Now these precepts could not be blended; and to allow authority to the precepts of Christ, was to render the others of none effect. "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth"-this was an ancient tradition, entirely incompatible with the precept of Christ, "resist not evil." Again, it was an ancient tradition, "thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy." The command of Christ was directly opposed thereto. "I say unto you love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you." Matt. v. 44. Such contradictory laws could not both have influence on the mind; and to set up one, was to overthrow the other. To use the words of the figure, the new wine of the gospel would burst the old bottles of Pharisaic tradition.

In the present age of the world, we frequently perceive an unwise mixing of truth and error, fact and falsehood; but this always takes place to the disadvantage of error, not of truth. Error, if it stand at all, must stand alone, it can receive no support from truth. Those who believe the doctrine of endless misery, do well to maintain also the doctrine of reprobation to eternal death, by the

absolute and original decree of God, and to say that God reprobated the non-elect because he hated them, and that he made them to hate them, and render them miserable, and for no other purpose. This system would indeed be awful, but it would have the merit of being consistent with itself. Its repugnance to the benevolence of the human heart, has led many to endeavor to incorporate with it the mild doctrine of Jesus. Hence it is declared, that although God will punish some men without mercy and without end, he loves them all, and wills the salvation of all, and sent his blessed Son to die for all. This is putting the new wine into the old bottle; and the result inevitably wili be, that the old bottle will perish; as Paul says of the doctrines of men, "which all are to perish with the using." Col. ii. 22. Every person in the exercise of common sense will unquestionably conclude, that if God loves all men, and desires their salvation, and sent his Son to die for all, there is no danger that he will punish any unmercifully and endlessly; and thus the very attempt to patch the old doctrine of endless misery, will bring it into disrepute, and at last cause it to be very generally rejected.

[ocr errors]

Parable of the Debtors.

LUKE VII. 41, 42.

"There was a certain creditor, which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both."

WE have, in this parable, an instance of the facility with which our Saviour would throw together, at the moment, a train of circumstances in the form of a fable, for the purpose of producing in his proud and watchful opponents the strongest feelings of self-condemnation. To understand the parable, and the object of Jesus in uttering it, we shall find it necessary to take into consideration the principal events that are narrated in the con

text.

In verse 36 it is said, 'And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat.' Here it should be remarked first, that the Pharisees were that class of people, who, above all others, most bitterly opposed the Son of God. This Pharisee does not seem to have had any good object in inviting Jesus to his house. He certainly neglected the usual offices of respect in receiving a stranger; and the probability is, that the invitation was given, in the hope that Jesus during the visit would say or do something, that the Pharisee might turn to his disadvantage.

[ocr errors]

Verses 37 and 38, And, behold, a woman in the city which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, and stood at his feet be

« PreviousContinue »