"

undiscernible to the human eye, until the time of the general zgios, "judgment," when all the secrets of men shall be revealed (Rom. ii. 16). Hence, hypocrisy here appears at the same time in the light of self-delusion, according to which man persuades himself he belongs to the Lord, until the unfolding of the depths of all hearts shall bring him to a knowledge, that his pretended holy actions were but a great ȧvouía, "transgressions," inasmuch as his sole object was his own honour, and not that of God. For the rest, that a bandying of words on the day of judgment is out of the question, must be understood as a matter of course. The situation depicted here in such lively colours, is the language of the internal being; the unbeliever will stand there claiming to be heard, but he shall find no ear, i.e. he shall be rejected. (The words ȧoxwgere x. T. X., "depart ye," &c., are quoted αποχωρεῖτε κ. from Ps. vi. 8). The solution of this psychological enigma, of the possibility of such self-delusion in divine matters, is contained in the words, oùdéπote kyvwv ùμãs, "I never knew ye," of ver. 23. The term yox, "to know," like y, "to know, to recognise,' is used throughout the Holy Scripture in a deep, spiritual sense, especially in such phrases as, Θεός, χριστός γινώσκει ἄνθρωπον, ψυχήν, God, Christ knoweth or approveth, the man, the soul (Deut. xxxiv. 10; 1 Cor. viii. 3; xiii. 12; Gal. iv. 9). Tivúoxeiv Tòv ©eóv, "to know God," forms the natural consequence of the yoxsa Tò To Oo, "the being known or approved by God;" no one can know God without being recognised by God. If we refer these expressions to their obvious connection with the Christian doctrine of regeneration, the result will be the full rich meaning of this contrast. The real knowledge of God (not one merely comprehending his existence, but an essential one, which is even the life eternal, John xvii. 3) is only possible in consequence of a revelation of the hidden, or invisible God, to the soul (see on Matth. xi. 27); this revelation of God is a yivwoxeiv sàv tuxňu, "recognising or approving of the soul." The figure of a bridal relation of the soul to God, which pervades the language used throughout the whole of the sacred writings, obtains, according to this view, its essential signification. This internal illumination resembles the visit of the heavenly bridegroom, the result of which is the knowledge or recognition of God by the soul, according to the decision of the Old Testament; in his light we see light (Ps. xxxvi. 10). Hence, the LordLord-sayers (i.c. those who merely say Lord, Lord) appear in

the light of unregenerate men, who carry themselves in a region of false freedom as the children of God, without having been generated of him. Very significantly, therefore, is given in Luke xiii. 25 the question v σré; "whence are ye?" It refers to their foreign origin; they have not originated above (avaev, "from above," John iii. 3), they are agix s oagnós, "flesh of the flesh" (John iii. 6.) (In St Luke xiii. 25, 27, moreover, even the elements of this passage stand in a different connection to one another; in which connection they will be examined hereafter.)

Ver. 24-27. The epilogue teaches the importance of the application of such a discourse under the simile of a man who builds his house upon a rock; the Word of everlasting truth, which, having become incarnate, taught in the person of Christ, is here intimated as the rock of salvation (Deut. xxxii. 15; Ps. xviii. 3; xlii. 10; Isa. xvii. 10). Here the wicked forms no contrast with the good, but the fool with the wise (as Matth. xxv. 1 sqq.,) for, all those who hear are conceived as well-wishers, but many are wanting in the spiritual wisdom so necessary in order to derive spiritual advantage. The figure of the building is carried out in 1 Cor. iii. 9 sqq., and it is there, v. 11, wherein Christ is called the foundation, on which must rest the building of the spiritual life. St Luke vi. 48 carries out further the figure of laying the foundation by digging and deepening. (Bgo signifies a mighty or heavy shower of rain St Luke has it πλημμυρα Theμuugis a..., signifying the tide, the flood-tide, which is the reverse of ἄμπωτις, or ανάξια, the ebb. In the more common sense than the one in which it is here used, it signifies every inundating, destructive overflowing of streams or brooks, as well as that caused by violent showers of rain.

=

Ver. 26. The contrast to this building on the foundation of the rock of the everlasting word of God, which defies every danger and temptation, is formed by the simile of a building void of foundation, and which is built on the sand, to signify, or denote that internal life which is founded on perishable, human resolutions, opinions, and ideas. This building upon sand has an evident reference to a spiritual activity, which is nearly related to the real labours of the spirit, such as are created by faith, but which is, nevertheless, void of the true character thereof.

Ver. 28, 29. The Evangelist, finally, concludes the whole with

a reference to v. 1. St Matthew, in conclusion, only adds the impression which the words of Jesus produced upon the mind of his hearers. The expression izα, "to be astonished, to be amazed," is stronger than auá, "to wonder;" it expresses the sense of being inwardly impressed (Das innere Erfasst, Ergriffenseyn). To this points the passage, ovcíav

, "having authority," which distinguished the discourses of Jesus from those of the Pharisees; these also frequently spoke truths, but they wanted thežovcía τvevμatinń, "spiritual authority;" their discourses were pictures painted on the air, without being possessed of any essential and life-bestowing power. These the words of Jesus breathed forth, and by means of them he laid hold upon the hearts of his hearers in their innermost depths; hence, wherever there was dormant in the interior of any person an echo for truth, there this echo was necessarily awakened.

§ 4. HEALING OF a leper.

(Matth. viii. 1-4; Mark i. 40-45; Luke v. 12-16.)

גְבוּרוֹת

After this manifestation of Jesus as an instructor, St Matthew now follows it up with his portraiture of the Saviour as a worker of miracles, inasmuch as both the chapters which follow only contain communications respecting the miracles of our Redeemer. In so far as actions such as these are viewed as being preeminently the revelations or manifestations of mighty powers, they are called in the Scriptures duvάuss, "powers," "mighty works." But when the same are to be regarded as connected with the Divine decrees in reference to the individual or to the whole, the Scriptures then call them onusia, ini, "signs." As events or occurrences creating astonishment, amazement, or terror, they are called rigara, "wonders," Savuácia, "miracles" (Matth. xxi. 15), is "miracles, wondrous works.” The most significant expression for them, made use of when speaking of the miracles of our Lord, is gya, "works" (Matth. xi. 2, also very frequently used in the Gospel of St John). By this expression the wonderful is described as the natural form of the ministry of our Redeemer, inasmuch as he, imbued with Divine powers, must of necessity therewith produce supernatural

phenomena. He was himself the régas, "wonder," and his wondrous deeds the natural gya, "works," of his essential being or existence (seines Wesens). From this it appears clearly that we cannot here adopt those notions or views of a miracle, according to which the same is regarded as a suspension of the laws of nature. If we proceed according to the view held by the Bible of the omnipresent diffusion (Immanenz) of God throughout the universe, the laws of nature, in that case, will not admit of being regarded as ruled by fixed mechanical laws, which might be arrested or disturbed by an extraneous application of power, but they appear in their collective totality as resting or reposing on the essential nature of God. All phenomena, therefore, that cannot be explained according to the known or unknown laws of terrestrial life-development, must not be regarded, on this account, as reversing or as suspending the laws of nature; on the contrary, they themselves are comprehended in the higher laws which regulate the whole, inasmuch as that which is Divine is that which itself controls the laws of nature. That which is in contradiction to nature is the ungodly; the true supernatural is but a higher order of the natural. Nevertheless, we must admit that the ground-work of miracles is not to be sought for in the cycle of created things; this must rather be sought for in the immediate act of God. To the creature every act of God is a miracle, although, when considered in relation to the Divine Being, it is pure law and order. Hence, with the believer everything apparently natural, as, for example, the preservation of the world, the growth of all its formations and productions, is miraculous, because he is accustomed to reduce all things to their first principle. No miracle, therefore, is performed without there being a real power. When, therefore, we see, especially in the New Testament, human persons performing miraculous actions, we are led to conclude that higher powers have been communicated to men, who, exercising a sway over those around them far and near, may produce certain effects. Without the assumption of the presence of such a real element of power (of the TVμa, "spirit," in his xagiouaos, "miraculous gifts," 1 Cor. xii. 10), there would be no medium between the miraculous deed and the worker of miracles, and the former hence would appear, as it were, a mere apparition. As analogous to the presence of such a higher element of power in a human individual, may always be regarded animal

magnetism; but we must be on our guard not to confound this mysterious, dangerous power of the sensual principle of life with the pure element of light, which dwelt, as is related in the Bible, in the holy men of God; the latter is God's nature that dwelt in them, whereas the former power is of the creature clouded by sin. But if the fulness of spiritual power in the great men of the church of a subsequent period was not combined with the gift of performing external miracles, the cause must be sought for in the process of the development of the human race, and in the peculiar requirements of the times, which only from time to time present moments when the church has appeared again to put forth blossoms which have called forth extraordinary phenomena of this kind, leaving an echo for a time that gradually again dies away.

It is a highly important fact that the sacred writings consider not only the Divine power as the cause of miracles, but that they represent also the evil power as such.1 There are two series of miracles to be found interspersed throughout the Biblical history. As the acts of the Egyptian magicians form the contrast to the miracles of Moses (Exod. vii. sqq.), so in like manner, in the New Testament, do the miracles of the anti-Christ appear in contrast with those of the Redeemer (Matth. xxiv. 24; 2 Thess. ii. 8, 9; Revel. xiii. 15). This distinction between Divine and devilish miracles leads us to the decision that the object of miracles cannot possibly be to confirm the truth of any affirmation. According to the sense of the Scriptures, this is, in truth, by no means the destination of miracles. It was only the people that regarded it as such, inasmuch as they were guided in their judgment and decision by the impression of power in its action on the outward senses; hence it happened that they were as much and even more attached to the false prophets than they were to the true ones, and our Redeemer, therefore, severely rebukes this sensual mania for wonders (John iv. 48). When, however, we see from other passages (as, for example, John x. 25; xiv. 10, 11) that our Lord requires a belief in his works, and when we behold him, moreover, connecting them with his dignity and his sacred calling, this does not take place in order that he may confirm through them the truth of his assertions;

1 In so far as evil in general is the result of created powers, we may say that the miracles of the devil are merely illusory miracles; real miracles can be performed by God's omnipotence only.