The doctrine of the Trinity is usually ascribed to Egyptian influence, chiefly because it seems to have been specially championed by the theologians of Alexandria. The parallels brought forward from Egyptian mythology, however, are extremely vague and unconvincing, and it is very doubtful if they have much bearing on the question. Within the past few years another large body of literature has become accessible to the learned world—namely, the Babylonian literature; and it will be interesting to consider whether the Babylonians can offer anything in elucidation of the problem.
First of all, however, we must consider the origin of the idea of the Trinity; or, rather, the association of the Three Persons of the Godhead. In the earliest Christian writings Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are cited with all the solemnity of a known religious formula, as in 2 Corinthians xiii. 14 and Matthew xxviii. 19. The Third Person of the Trinity is unknown to the Old Testament, but appears, fully developed, in the New. He is introduced as a known conception, and not a word of explanation is vouchsafed about him. In the Gospel of St. John this Person has a special name—the "Paraclete" (John xiv. 26) or "Advocate," which the Authorised Version curiously renders "Comforter," in imitation of Martin Luther; although, as the margin of the Revised Version indicates, that is not the meaning of the word; and if Parakletos is translated "Advocate" in i John ii. i, it should certainly have the same rendering in John xiv. 26. However, apart from all philological considerations, we have to bear in mind that the Holy Ghost is assumed, throughout the New Testament, to be familiar to the reader; so that we must take it that it was a known conception, and not an innovation of doctrine. In consequence of these facts it has often been argued that the doctrine of the Trinity must be pre-Christian, and have been taken over bodily by the New Testament writers. The problem is, therefore, Who was it taken from?—for it is difficult to conceive that the doctrine was the product of Jewish speculation.
Until comparatively recently we had no certain knowledge of the religious ideas of the Babylonians; but the discovery of thousands of Babylonian tablets within the last fifty years has enabled us to gain an insight into these ideas as welcome as it was unexpected. The Babylonians had the same crowd of gods in their Pantheon that we find in the theology of other ancient peoples. But the deity who most concerns us is Ea, the God of the Sea. In calling him the God of the Sea the reader must not run away with the idea that he was a mere Babylonian Neptune. For the "Sea" meant much more to his worshippers. In the Babylonian Cosmogony the world is conceived as a flat disk, floating upon the bosom of the primeval ocean, and separated by the firmament from the upper ocean which occasionally pours down its waters in rains and storms. Over all these waters Ea reigned supreme, and all wisdom was supposed to be derived from him. But Ea himself was far too august to be approached by mere mortals; hence his son Merodach was conceived as the mediator. Merodach was the patron god of the City of Babylon. It was Merodach that had overthrown chaos and created the world, and it was Merodach who watched over his creatures and preserved them from every ill. He was hailed as the benefactor and savior of mankind, and the lord of heaven and earth. So great was the enthusiasm for Merodach that some of his worshippers practically denied the existence of any other deity, and Mr. Theo. G. Pinches has described at the Victoria Institute a theological tablet now in the British Museum in which all the gods of the Babylonian Pantheon are asserted to be mere manifestations of Merodach.
Therefore, the two most prominent personages in the Babylonian Pantheon are Ea, the Father, and Merodach, the Son; and we find these two acting together in a most noteworthy fashion.
Merodach was mostly invoked for the cure of diseases. The doctrine of demoniac agency was fully developed among the Babylonians; all misfortunes, all accidents, all diseases, were ascribed to the direct action of evil spirits. All these ills were caused by the agency of a demon who had taken up his abode in the sufferer. In fact, the Babylonians held precisely the same idea upon the subject as the New Testament writers. Thus Matthew considers that dumbness is the work of a devil; and when the devil is cast out the dumb speaks. Casting out demons cures epileptic fits, insanity, fevers, and all the ills that flesh is heir to.
When, therefore, a Babylonian found himself under the influence of misfortune or disease he sought divine help. He repaired to the temple, and confided his troubles to a priest, who looked up the proper formula in the temple library, and proceeded to work a cure. Within the last few years these formulas of exorcism have received considerable attention from European savants. Professor Lenormant led the way, but his studies are now antiquated, being superseded by the work of younger scholars. In these tablets the course of events is usually as follows:—The possessed man and his priest present themselves before Merodach, and draw his attention to the case. Merodach then retires to his father Ea, describing the sufferings of the patient, the recital ending in this fashion:—
"I know not, O Father, how this man can be restored."
Then Ea answered to his son Merodach:
"My Son, what is it that them dost not know?
What can I tell thee more?
What I know, thou knowest also—
Get thee gone, my son Merodach [and thus and thus
shall thou do to enable this man to be restored].
Merodach then receives specific instructions from his father as to the healing of the sick man by casting out the particular evil spirit that possesses him. In tablet after tablet we find Merodach acting as intercessor in this manner, and appealing to the wisdom of his father Ea for the benefit of mankind. The worshipper invoked Merodach with the greater confidence because the Son was co-equal with the Father. The line just quoted, "What I know, thou knowest also," has quite a Johannine ring about it (compare John x. 15), for it is very remarkable how all religions move along parallel lines, and often reproduce one another's formulae.
But, in addition to this association of father and son, we frequently find a third deity—namely, Gibil, the Fire-God, whose co-operation is quite as important. Thus, in an incantation quoted by Dr. Zimmern for the relief of a person possessed by the "Seven Devils" (a community much feared in the Babylonian superstition), the conclusion is as follows:—
Get thee gone, my son Merodach;
Take thou the dish of Ea which drives away
the demons;
Beneath it kindle holy fire, ths sacred exorcism
of Eridu.
Put fire above and below, that the Seven may
not come nigh the patient.
Let it glow at his head by night and by day.
O Gibil, stand beside him at the midnight hour:
Scare away the Seven, and scatter them afar.
In this incantation it will be observed that the sacred fire is supposed to ensure the attendance of Gibil, the God of Fire, who stands beside the patient and scares away the devils. Gibil was especially invoked for protection against sorcery, witchcraft, and evil spells. K. Tallqvist's Maqlu series contains the following exorcisms against sorcerers:—
Your sorceries, with which ye have bewitched me,
May Ea, the exorcist, dissolve.
Your witchcrafts shall be torn asunder
By Merodach, the divine exorcist, son of Ea, the judge.
I bind ye, fetter ye, deliver ye over
To the Fire-God, the burner, the singer, the binder,
Who overthrows the sorcerers.
For the loosening of the witchcraft, and the spell which is upon
me, I fly to the hands of Ea, Merodach, and the Fire-God.
In the Babylonian religion, therefore, we have a triad of divinities, of whom the two first—Ea and Merodach —stand to one another in the relation of Father and Son; while the third, the Fire-God, carries out the commands of both, and acts as the intermediary between heaven and earth, and the purifier of mankind from devilry and witchcraft. In the New Testament, likewise, the Third Person of the Trinity stands in close relation to fire. "I, indeed, baptise you with water," says John the Baptist; "but he that cometh after me, he shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost and with fire" (Matthew iii. 2). "And there appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost" (Acts ii. 3, 4). Thus the parallel between the Babylonian triad and the Christian Trinity is close and startling. It is difficult to resist the conclusion that there must be some relation between them. The above extracts are derived from tablets of the Assyrian period, dating some six hundred years before the Christian era; but the Babylonian religion endured very much later, only dying out about the time of Constantine the Great. It is true that we know little or nothing of its later developments, as only a few scattered records have come down to us; so that its influence upon early Christian theology can only be surmised, and not categorically proved. Parseeism, Gnosticism, Judaism, Mendaism, and sundry other isms rose upon the ruins of the Babylonian faith; and it is only now that scholars are beginning to realise how much of these is to be traced back to the old theological speculations of Babylon and the curious superstitions of the Babylonians.
No comments:
Post a Comment