The passages which represent Jesus as the creator of the material world, also suppose the exercise of power previously to his incarnation. These passages are decisively favourable to the Unitarian doctrine, that, if Jesus was concerned in the formation of the heavens and the earth, he was only employed as an instrument in the hands of God his Father. They are the following: John i. 3. “All things were made by him.” Verse 10. “The world was made by him.” Col. i. 16. “By him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by him, and for him.” Heb. i. 2. “By him He (i.e. God) made the worlds.” [I omit producing Eph. iii. 9. as a proof of the Unitarian doctrine, because the words “DIA IHSOU KRISTOU” “through Jesus Christ,” are rejected by Griesbach.] These passages, as I have now quoted them from the common translation of the New Testament, leave it undecided, whether Christ created all things by his own underived and independent authority, or merely as an instrument directed by the Supreme Being. In the Greek original there is no such ambiguity. The preposition DIA, in these passages translated BY, does not signify by any one as an original cause, (for this sense is expressed by a different preposition, HYPO,) but it denotes THROUGH ANY THING AS AN INSTRUMENT. For the sake of illustration I shall take the first example of the occurrence of DIA in the New Testament: Mat. i. 22. “Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet;” or, more accurately, “which was spoken by the Lord through the Prophet.” In the first place, the preposition HYPO, BY, points out the Lord as the original author of the communication; and, in the second place, the preposition DIA, THROUGH, represents the Prophet as the medium, through whom this communication was conveyed to mankind. The same distinction is accurately observed in all cases, (and they are very numerous,) in which the New Testament writers produce quotations from the Prophets of the Old. They never introduce a prophecy by saying, that it was uttered THROUGH the Lord, (DIA TOU KURIOU) and they very seldom, if ever, say, that it was delivered BY the Prophet, (hUPO TOU PROFHTOU,) but through the Prophet, and by the Lord.
The preposition DIA, followed either by a Genitive or Accusative case, occurs in the New Testament about 630 times. It is used to denote the efficient cause of the production of an effect, (of course governing in these instances the Genitive,) about 290 times. I have examined all the passages, where it is found. I have observed, that its general application, when used to point out an efficient cause, is to represent not the primary, but the secondary, or instrumental, cause. [Against the universality of this rule only one passage presents much difficulty: I Cor. i. 9. 3. DI OU EKLHQHTE, “through whom ye were called.” But even here there is strong evidence for considering hUPO as the true reading. See Griesbach. Even allowing D1A to denote the original cause in two or three passages, still the probability that it denoted the instrumental would be in any doubtful case as 100 to 1.] This sense of the word seems indeed to arise naturally from its original acceptation. It properly signifies motion through a place. Hence it has been transferred by an obvious process to the way or method, by passing through which any object is attained, or the instrument, by means of which any end is accomplished.
From reflecting upon the primary application of DIA in reference to place, its common use in Greek authors, and the distinction observed in the New Testament between this preposition and HYPO, I had formed a judgment of the Scripture testimonies concerning the Creation through Christ, before I saw the above remarks in any other author. I was lately much gratified to find that Origen, who lived at the beginning of the third century, who wrote in Greek, and than whom none of the ancient Fathers was more learned, more honest, or more industrious, observed the same distinction, and reasoned from it in the same manner. In his Commentary on the beginning of John's Gospel, having noticed the difference between DIA and HYPO, and having observed that in Heb. i. 2. the expression (DI OU) Through whom, denotes that God made the worlds, or ages, through his Son, he adds, “Thus also here, if all things were made through the Word, they were not made by the Word, but by one more powerful and greater than the Word.” Likewise Eusebius, the learned, accurate, and laborious author, to whom among the ancients the Christian world is chiefly indebted for the testimonies to the genuineness of the New Testament writings, and who could not possibly be mistaken about the common meaning of two prepositions, which he used daily and hourly in conversation and in books, explaining the commencement of John's gospel uses these words, “And when he says, in one place, (ver. 10,) that the world, and in another, (ver. 3,) that all things, were made through him, he declares the ministration of the Word to God. For, when the evangelist might have said, “All things were made by him,” and again, “The world was made by him;” he has not said “By him,” but “Through him;” in order that he might raise our conceptions to the underived power of the Father as the original cause of all things.” Lastly, the same distinction is noticed by Philo, the Jew, who was contemporary with our Saviour, who wrote in Greek, and in several parts of his writings expresses the difference between a supreme and a subordinate creator by the opposed use of these two prepositions. See Wetstein's Note on John i. 3.
For these reasons I think myself authorised to assert, that when a New Testament writer employs the preposition DIA to point out the cause of any effect, he means the instrumental, and refers to some other being, either expressly mentioned or contemplated, who is considered as the first or original cause. What then is the real import of the passages before cited, on the supposition that they refer to the creation of the material universe? John i. 3. “All things were made through Christ as an instrument, but by God as their original contriver.” Ver. 10. “The world was made through Christ as a subordinate agent.” The passsage from Colossians has the same import; “All things were created through him;” (TA PANTA DI AUTOU KAI EIS AUTON EKTISTAI) and the passage from Hebrews, “By whom He made the worlds,” can only signify, if it relates to the creation of the material universe at all, that God made the stars and planets through the instrumentality of Jesus Christ. The Greek words, employed in these passages, cannot bear to be interpreted so as to ascribe to our Lord the creation of the material world by his own uncommunicated omnipotence. They directly contradict the notion, that Christ stretched out the heavens alone, and made the world by himself. They clearly imply, whether they be supposed to refer to the formation of the Earth out of chaos, or to the RE-formation of its inhabitants through the influence of the Gospel, that Jesus Christ was only an instrument in the work, and not a principal.
In the longest and, as it is commonly imagined, the clearest of these passages, (that from Colossians,) sufficient evidence is presented to enable the mere English reader to determine, whether in the creation of the material universe Christ displayed underived glory. After stating the fact, that all things were created through him, the Apostle assigns the cause of this fact in the following terms; “For it pleased the Father, that in him should all ..fulness dwell.” It appears, that the reason why Christ was employed in the work of creation was, that such was the pleasure of the Father, and that the Father bestowed upon him a full participation of his power and glory. Thus, when we direct our view to the first supposed period of our Lord's existence, that preceding his incarnation, we find that every passage of the New Testament, which ascribes to him power in that period, ascribes it to him as a being, inferior to, and dependent upon, the Father.
No comments:
Post a Comment