pronoun understood is employed loosely, for mankind in general. How much weight must we give to this argument? In the first place it is questionable whether the laws of classical Greek are always heeded by the sacred writers. There are clear instances where the pronoun is expressed in one verse, and omitted in the next, in which it would be extremely difficult to show that any emphasis is intended by its use. A regard to euphony or something of a like character may have caused it to be expressed, where, in slightly different circumstances, it had been implied. And there is still another consideration. In v. 15th, it is the participial form which is used. Now as it is only in the verbs themselves, that the several persons are marked by a difference in the termination, Paul could not employ the first person without expressing the pronoun. But why use the first person, rather than the third? Because, he seems to have regarded mankind as divided into two classes, the living and the dead. As he and those to whom he writes were then alive, they were representatives of the living; what is there unnatural then, in saying "We who are alive, (that is, such as live) and remain unto the coming of the Lord, shall not anticipate those who are asleep,"what is there unnatural in the use of this form, to set forth the fact that the living should have no precedence over the dead, at the period of the resurrection. We have said that the events described in the xv. chapter of 1 Corinthians are unlike those described in the xxiv. and xxv. of Matthew. This is manifest even to the most careless reader. Take the former passage, and how can any one so torture it, as to make it teach merely the figurative resurrection, or moral change, of those simply who lived in the first century of the Christian era? After the apostle has asserted the fact that, "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive"; after he has described the order of the resurrection,-Christ, the first-fruits, then those who are Christ's at his coming; he proceeds to consider the question, "How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?" "Thou fool!" he replies, "that which thou sowest is not quickened except it die; and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body which shall be, but simple grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: but God giveth it a body 1850.] of the Coming of Christ. LIBRARY 245 NEW YORK as it hath pleased him, and to every seed its own body." Now these words are to have their fulfilment at a time called Christ's coming. We aimed to show, by statements above, how broad is the signification of this term coming. One coming of the Saviour's took place at the destruction of the Jewish State. But with any coming which either Christ or the apostles speak of as to occur in their generation, they associate not the resurrection of the dead. When, 246 The Martyr-Spirit. [July, however, the resurrection takes place, when such a change of the living as is described in the passages just quoted occurs, will there not then be a striking manifestation of the Saviour's power? Will it not be as remarkable an exhibition of the divine energy, and as wonderful a fulfilment of prophecy, as was the destruction of the Jews? If so, why cannot the word parousia be appropriately employed to describe it. We confess that we see no difficulty in such a usage. The term parousia is therefore, as we conceive, applied to at least two different events in the New Testament. It designated an occurrence which happened nearly eighteen centuries ago; and it also describes a grander event to which humble faith may confidently look forward,-we mean the resurrection of the dead. M. G. ART. XVII. The Martyr-Spirit. WHEN Paul had determined, against the earnest and affectionate dissuasives of his friends at Cesarea, to go up to Jerusalem, he met their kind remonstrances with this solemn declaration, "I am ready, not to be bound only, but to die at Jerusalem, for the name of the Lord Jesus." This language expresses a sentiment worthy of the apostle's fidelity, constancy and decision. It evinces all the self-renunciation and devotedness, which mark, if they do not constitute, the martyr-spirit. It indicates the high resolve and inflexible determination, combined with a forgetfulness of personal claims, without which nothing great or good was ever achieved, or at least effected, in a way that conferred honor upon the agents employed in the work. The words we have just quoted denote the character of our subject. We are to describe the spirit, in which the first promulgators of Christianity engaged in their minis terial labors. It was the spirit which leads him, who possesses it, to consider himself and all that he calls his, as nothing in comparison with the cause he has espoused. This we call the martyr-spirit. It is this that enables a man to act with ability and success in any sphere of labor in which he may be called to move. We know it may be said that, this spirit of self-devotion is very rarely exhibited; and we regret to feel compelled to acknowledge the truth of the remark; but this admission does not disprove the fact we wish to establish. There are those, too, who treat the idea of self-sacrifice with contempt and ridicule, as a vagary of an enthusiastic brain. Entertaining a very low opinion of human nature, and attached to some selfish theory of moral virtue, they seem unable to appreciate, or even to understand, true excellence of character; and hence are inclined to measure all goodness by the standard of personal advantage. It is gratifying, however, to know, that the history of the human race contradicts these sophistical reasonings. It is pleasing to find all civilized nations, in all ages, recognizing a patriotism which merges all selfish considerations in the cause of light, liberty and mental progress. At every anniversary of our National Independence, we are accustomed to hear the names of men, who "pledged" not only "their fortunes and sacred honor," but their "lives" in defence of their country's rights; and then, when we enlist the powers of oratory, of beauty and of song, in praise of statesmen and heroes, are we to resolve all their toils, hardships and sufferings into a contemptible burlesque, and to adopt the conclusion, that the patriotism, that we laud so highly, was, in reality, nothing but a calculating, cold selfishness in disguise? It will be perceived, from the nature of our subject, that we have entered a wide field of thought, whose inspiration comes from various sources; a field, which we can at present explore only to a very limited extent. The great point that we wish to establish and defend, is, that the promulgation, the success, the general prevalence, and the ultimate triumph of the gospel, were made to depend on the free exercise of the spirit by which its first ministers were actuated,-the martyr-spirit. And here, we would advert to a fact which deserves particular notice, as it stands in close connection with our subject, viz., that all great changes in the state of society, all innovations upon established forms of belief, all improvements, have always been, and probably always will be, attended by correspondingly great, personal inconveniences, privations, and sometimes, positive sufferings. The introduction and progress of religious truth form no exception to the general course of events. The same passions and prejudices, though probably in greater force, will be seen in operation in a religious movement, as in other cases of inferior consequence. As the man, who undertakes to subdue a wilderness, and to make it "blossom as the rose," must encounter some briars and serpents, so he, who commences the work of moral culture, must lay his account with meeting the scorn and ridicule, the misrepresentation and abuse of those, who are unable to appreciate the importance of the cause in which he is engaged, and to feel a sympathy with his motives and purposes. If he thinks otherwise, or allows himself to make more favorable calculations, he will suffer disappointment. Now, the fact we have mentioned and briefly illustrated, was kept in full view before the mind of Christ, and made the basis of his primary instructions to those who might become his followers. To those who seemed willing to stand as candidates for the labor and rewards of his kingdom, the Master presented and explained the conditions on which they would be received as his disciples. He did what no impostor would have been likely to have done; he set before them all the difficulties, dangers, trials and sufferings with which they might expect to meet, and endeavored to forearm them against their disheartening influences. He labored to show, that his truth would prove, not indeed the direct cause, but the innocent occasion of much animosity, contention, division and persecution. "Think not," said he, "that I am come to send peace on earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword." He knew the strength of passion and the power of prejudice; he knew, that both would be arrayed against the doctrines he taught; he knew, that the united powers of church and state would act in opposition to him, and to his religion; he knew, that menace and allurement would be employed to deter men from engaging in his service, |