SIR ROBERT ANDERSON
Secret Service
Theologian
MISUNDERSTOOD
TEXTS OF THE BIBLE
Chapter Nine
"Anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord "-
(James V. 14). The following is the R.V. reading of the passage from which the
above words are taken: "Is any among you sick? let him call for the elders of
the church; and let them pray over him, anointing himwith oil in the name of
the Lord : and the prayer of faith shall save him that is sick, and the Lord
shall raise him up ; and if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him.
Confess therefore your sins one to another, and pray one for another, that ye
may be healed."
Save for one word that needs explanation for English
readers, the New Testament contains nothing simpler and plainer than this, and
yet nothing that is more misunderstood and perverted. Upon it is founded "the
sacrament of extreme unction and, mirabile dictu! certain
ultra-evangelicals use it as a Scriptural basis for a practice akin to that of
the Roman Catholic Church.
In our English Testament "anoint" stands for
two wholly different Greek words, the meaning of which is thus explained in
Archbishop Trenchs Synonyms: "Aleiphein is the common and mundane,
chricin the sacred and heavenly word. Aleiphein is used indiscriminately
of all actual anointings, whether with oil or ointment ; while chriein, no
doubt in its connection with Christos, is absolutely restricted to the
anointing of the Son, by the Father, with the Holy Ghost, for the
accomplishment of His great office, being wholly separated from all secular and
common uses. Thus, see Luke iv. 18; Acts iv. 27, x. 38 ; 2 Corinthians i. 21 ;
Hebrews i. 9 ; the only occasions on which chriein occurs."
Classical English has no special word for aleiphcin, but to massage with
oil expresses its meaning. And "it was as a salutary and approved medicament
that the patient was to be thus massaged prior to intercessory prayer on his
behalf (Kittos Cyclopadia). Most expositors, however, represent this
anointing as a sacramental rite to be performed by the elders in virtue of
their office. And the inaccurate reading anointing him with oil
(which mars both our versions) lends itself to this error. But as it is certain
that among Orientals the elders would not themselves massage a female invalid,
it must not he assumed that they did so in other cases. The RV. marginal
reading having anointed him "is grammatically correct; but perhaps "after he
has been anointed" would better snit our English idiom. The added words, in the
name of the Lord," are commonly taken as proof that the anointing was a
sacramental rite. But this betokens ignorance of the true character of the
Christian life ; for it is to common and mundane " acts that the exhortation
refers, " Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord
Jesus" (Cohossians iii. 17).
The passage, I repeat, is clear and
simple. And its teaching may be summed up in two words, namely, the use of
means, and believing prayer. Hezrkiahs case illustrates this in a
striking way. For though the prophet Isaiah was Divinely bidden to bring him a
definite promise of recovery, he enjoined the recognised remedy of the fig
poultice. "For it is usual in the East, even to the present day, to employ a
poultice of figs as a remedy for boils " (Speakers Commentary, 2 Kings
xx. 7). The precedent is singularly apt. For the King was evidently dying of a
malignant tumour ; and in such cases "a lump of figs "would no more avail to
work a cure, than would a basket of bread and fish suffice to feed thousands of
hungry men. But "the use of means" is a Divine principle thus inculcated for
our guidance.And if, in these days of ours, Providence has brought within our
reach better medicaments than oil or figs, it behoves us to use them "in the
name of the Lord," with trustful and thankful hearts. Do we ignore God if we
use our eyes when traversing a dangerous street crossing ? or if we don a
lifebelt when a ship is in peril ? " God has no pleasure in fools!"
There is "a gift of faith." And if any Christian can trust God to heal his
sickness, or to set his broken limb, without the use of means, we should thank
God not only for his cure hut for his faith. But faith is a personal gift
(Romans xiv. 22) ; and a Christian, who allows others dependent upon him to
suffer through his failure to provide them with remedies which the Providence
of God has brought within his reach, is guilty of conduct as utterly
un-Christian as one who in other respects fails to "providefor his own house"
(1 Timothy v. 8). As for those who seek to corrupt and coerce their
fellow-Christians by this false teaching, they merit stern reprobation on the
part of all who fear God and love the truth.They bring Scripture into contempt,
and often betray devout hut ignorant Christians into a course of conduct that
brings them within the meshes of the criminal law.
We have no definite
ground for assuming that the elders of James v. 14 possessed miraculous powers
of healing. Indeed, the words, "The prayer of faith shall save the sick," are
against such a supposition. But there is no doubt that the disciples of the
Ministry were thus endowed. and it claims emphatic notice that, in their
mission of healing, they habitually made use of the oil massage (Mark vi. 13).
These things are "written for our learning." And if those who were
supernaturally gifted to heal the sick were Divinely led to make use of
ordinary remedies, it is surely our part to follow their example, without
hesitation and in thefulness of faith. And we shall recognise that the
anointing enjoined by this Scripture - the use of a well-known and
well-accredited medicament - has nothing in common with the superstitious
practice of touching the body here and there with a finger dipped in oil,
whether by a Romish priest or an Evangelical Christian.
"I beseech
you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts " (2 Peter ii. i
2).
Words are like counters. They have no intrinsic value, but bear
whatever meaning people put upon them. According to the dictionary, for
example, a pilgrim is "one who slowly and heavily treads his way; a traveller;
(2) especially one who travels to a distance from his own country to visit a
holy place." And as "religion" enjoins upon people to become pilgrims, some
sensitively devout folk will set out for Jerusalem or Mecca or Rome, while
others will set themselves morbidly to practise asceticism.But the Bible
nowhere enjoins upon the Christian to become a pilgrim. For while the aim which
human religion sets before its votaries is always to become something that they
are not, the true effort of the Christian life is to realise and live up to
what Gods grace has made us.
But who and what is a pilgrim ? The
parepidêinos of the New Testament is one who is living away from
his own country or people. How aptly this describes those who are born from
above, and whose citizen-ship is in heaven! To take a sublunary example,our
relations and friends in India. are pilgrims. Even though they spend a lifetime
there, Britain is their home. This does not make them useless as residents of
India, or careless in the discharge of their public and private duties there.
And there may be nothing of the pilgrim about them in the dictionary sense.But
they are pilgrims all the same.
It was not in order to become a pilgrim
that Abraham left his palatial home and became a wanderer; but his faith vision
being set on the heaven-built city of the Divine promise, he confessed that he
was a stranger and a pilgrim upon earth (Hebrews xi. 10, 13). So here, the
First Epistle of Peter is addressed to " the elect who are pilgrims of the
dispersion " ; and it is to such that the appeal is addressed, "I beseech you
as sojourners and pilgrims to abstain from fleshly lusts."
And here we
have exhausted the passages in which the word occurs. For though it holds so
large a place in the religion of Christendom, it is used but three times in the
New Testament. Kindred teaching, however, abounds. That life on earth is but a
pilgrimage is, indeed, in the very warp and woof of Christianity. The fact,
moreover, that it is transient and brief is stamped indelibly upon the human
heart. This, indeed, is one element in "the weight of that awful sadness, of
which, to the mass of men, life is the synonym and the sum." But while for
those who have no hope beyond the grave,the fleeting character of life on earth
may well give cause for sadness and gloom, it ought only to deepen in the
Christians heart a sense of the true significance and value of our sojourn
here, and of the eternal gladness and glory of the life to come.
"His own self bare our sins in His own body on the tree" (i Peter ii.
24).
"Most modern scholars are agreed to reject on the tree' in
favour of the marginal to'; the proper meaning of the Greek preposition,
when connected (as here) with the accusative, being what is expressed in
colloquial English by on to the tree."
This sentence from
Bishop Ellicotts N.T. Commentary is followed by a reference to the gloss
that the Lord "offered up our sins in His own body on the altar of the cross."
That such a view should have the sanction of eminent names exemplifies the
dictum of one of the great German theologians, that "the elucidation of the
doctrine of the types is a problem for future theologians." In other words,
theologians have neglected the study of the language in which Christian truth
is revealed in the New Testament.The Hebrew Christians to whom the Epistle was
specially addressed would have stood aghast at such a pagan suggestion as that
Christ was offering up sins to God; and upon an altar! The words of chapteri.
18, 19, would turn their thoughts at once to the Passover in Egypt; and no less
instinctively would their minds revert to the scapegoat of the Day of Atonement
as they read the words of chapter ii. 24.
"Bearing sins" is a figurative
expression. But the figure is neither poetic nor forensic. It is explained by
the ritual of the sin-offering. In Leviticusxvi. 21, 22, we read, "Aaron shall
lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the
iniquities of the children of Israel,putting them upon the head of the goat . .
. and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities into a land not
inhabited "- the desert aptly symbolising death. The ritual thus typified the
amazing mystery of redemption - the imputation of our sins to Christ.The 22nd
Psalm reveals His anguish when He reached that dread crisis of His mission. To
read it as denoting His relations with His Father during all His earthly
ministry betokens that in the religious sphere nothing is too profane or too
foolish to be believed
It was as Gods representative that Aaron
laid the peoples sins upon the scapegoat. And God Himself it was who laid
our sins on Christ. And what the type foreshadowed, our passage tells us
plainly, that this was before the Cross. The crucifixion was mans work
altogether; witness the words this same Apostle addressed to the Jews at
Pentecost,"Him being delivered up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge
of God, ye have taken and by wicked hands have crucified and slain" (Acts ii.
23).During all His ministry, no hand was ever laid on Him, save in loving
service. But at times His immunity from threatened outrage was explained by the
words, "His hour was not yet come." Now, that hour had struck; and the warning
He had given the disciples was fulfilled "The Son of Man shall be delivered
into the hands of men" (Luke ix. 44).Hence His words when His enemies
approached Him in Gethsemane, "This is your hour and the power of darkness"
(Luke xxii. 23).
Judas delivered Him to the Jews, and the Jews
delivered Him to the Roman power. But the words "delivered into the hands of
men" can only mean that GOD delivered Him up in pursuance of His determinate
purpose. And to this extent Scripture lifts the veil which shrouds the
mysteries of Gethsemane, that then it was that the Lord Jesus passed under the
load of the sins which He bare "in His own body to the tree."
"He
went and preached unto the spirits in prison" (i Peter iii. i9).
"The
literature of this passage is almost a library in itself" (Alford). And even
the briefest review of that literature would exceed the limits of these notes.
During a study of the passage extending over half a century I have sought for
an exposition of it which would take account not only of theApostles
actual words and their context, but also of the scope and burden of the Epistle
in which it holds such a prominent place; and I know of at least one that
satisfies these requirements.
1 Peter was written to comfort and
"stablish" the saints during one of the terrible persecutions which devastated
the early Church. And the burden of it is that their sufferings were transient,
and their triumph assured, the sufferings and glories of Christ being appealed
to as the great exemplar. And here we may well ask, Even if the heresy of "a
Protestant purgatory," as it has been aptly termed, were Divine truth, could
anything more egregiously inappropriate be introduced to crown the
Apostles exhortationto steadfastness? For if even the heinous sinners of
the antediluvian age were so specially favoured,the Christians might surely
assume that, if they turned from the path under pressure of such terrible
persecution, they would certainly be granted mercy and "a second chance"; and
thus the faithful and the unfaithful would reach the same goal at
last.
Who then were they to whom the gospel was thus preached in the
under world? The answer is that there is nothing in our text about "preaching
the gospel" The word the Apostle uses means "to proclaim as a herald," or " as
a conqueror" (Grimms Lexicon) ; and the context must decide the nature of
the proclamation. When the word is used of preaching the gospel, this is always
plainly indicated.
But then who were these "spirits" ? Now, first, it is
noteworthy that in Scripture, although human beings are said to have spirits,
they are not usually called "spirits." "Souls" is the term used of them, even
when disembodied (Revelation vi. 9).But angels are generically designated
"spirits."See, cx. gr., Hebrews i. 7, 14. So again in Acts viii."an angel of
the Lord," in verse 26, is referred to in verse 29 as "the spirit." And,
secondly, we must not isolate 1 Peter iii. 19. It should be studied together
with 2 Peter ii. 4 and Jude 6, 7. And all must be read in connection with
Genesis vi. 17,to which these Scriptures so plainly refer.
Now
Genesis vi. may be taken in either of two ways. The sceptic reads it with
interest as a piece of ancient folklore, which was probably suggested by some
tradition that a race of giants had once appeared on the earth. The Christian
reads it with awe as explaining why a God of mercy and love "spared not the old
world." The awful judgmentof the Flood was not inflicted to punish the natural
human sins of one generation of the inhabitants of earth - that is not
Gods way - but to exterminate a race that had become "corrupt" in the
special sense here indicated ; a corruption which, if left to work unchecked,
might have tainted even the stock of which the promised "seed of the woman,"
the Redeemer of our race, was to be born.
Here then is the clew to the
meaning of these references to "the angels that sinned" in ante-diluvian times.
To suppose that human beings who gave themselves up to immoral practices would
be called "the sons of God" is an extraordinary freak of exegesis. But that
angels should be thus designated (as in Job ii. 1 and xxxviii. 7) will not seem
strange to any who have studied the Biblical use of the word "son." Moreover
the Lord Himself has decided this for us. In answer to the Sadducean quibble
that the ordinance of marriage vetoed the doctrine of the resurrection, the
Lord replied that the glorified of earth are "equal to the angels and are sons
of God, being sons of the resurrection" (Luke xx. 36,R.V.). Marriage pertains
to an economy of natural bodies - the flesh and blood bodies of this world,
whereas in that world we shall have spirit-bodies like the angels.
And
this throws light upon the statement of Jude that these angels of Genesis vi. "
kept not their first estate (that is, their primary condition ; dignity is
Affords word) but left their own habitation" (their proper habitation,
R.V.). This last word seems to denote a descent from heaven. But it is most
note-worthy that in the only other passage where oiketerion occurs, it
denotes the spirit-body of the glorified saints (2 Corinthians V. 2); and this
is the second meaning of the word in Grimms Lexicon. These renegade
angels left their spirit-bodies, to come down to the level of flesh and blood.
How this was possible is not revealed, but the fact is clearly
indicated.
It may be objected that if there had been such an angelic
revolt in heaven within Old Testament times, a more explicit mention of it
would be found in Scripture. But this admits of a ready answer. The absence of
any mention of the kind points to the conclusion that these angels of Genesis
vi. were a section of those who shared in Satans fall. If we are to yield
to the folly of reasoning and guessing in such a matter, we would regard it as
utterly improbable that holy angels of heaven could fall so low at a single
swoop; but not so, that angels who had already fallen should sink to a still
lower depth of evil. Their sin, moreover, may well have been instigated by
Satan in furtherance of his age-long plot and effort to defeat the promise of
"the womans seed."
Although these angels are said to be "kept in
chains under darkness," it is not said that the angels who fell with Satan were
thus imprisoned; and we know that a host of them will yet take part in the
mysterious war predicted in Revelation xii. 7.
And now we can read this
most difficult of all difficult texts in a new setting and with a new meaning.
Its aim and purport, I repeat, was to cheer and stablish the suffering saints
by unfolding the suffering and glory of Christ. And the "argument" of the
teaching is that the height of His triumph was proportionate to the depth of
His suffering. The prophecy of the 24th Psalm was fulfilled when, in open view
of all the angelic hosts, He passed through the heavens(Hebrews iv. 14, R.V.).
They had wondered at His sufferings, and now they were called to worship Him as
Conqueror (Hebrews i. 6).
But, more than this, the Apostle was inspired
to tell that the Lord had proclaimed His triumph even to the apostate angels
who had flouted His authority in antediluvian days. In translating the
kai of this sentence by "also" our versions render it superfluous and
unmeaning, whereas it is intensely emphatic. "So complete was Christs
triumph that He led captivity captive (Ephesians iv. 8); so complete that,
having spoiled principalities and powers, He made a show of them openly
(Colossians ii. 15). So completely were angels and authorities and powers made
subject unto Him, that His triumphal proclamation reached even to Tartarus -
even to these in-prison spirits."
"The like figure whereunto even
baptism doth also now save us" (i Peter lii. 21).
The meaning of this
text is made clear by a more literal rendering of the words. The following is
based on Dean Alfords Commentary: "Which (water, not baptism) the
antitype (of the water of the Flood) now saves you also (as it saved Noah) even
baptism."
The Apostles teaching is that, as the water which
engulfed the world bore up the Ark, Noah was saved from death by death, so also
is the sinner who believes in Christ. For when united to Christ he becomes one
with Him in death. It is the same truth as that of the sprinkled blood of the
Passover in Egypt. This verse, therefore, is not a veiled reference to the
pagan doctrine of baptism according to the Eleusinian mysteries, but plain
teaching, which every Hebrew Christian would understand, that Noahs Flood
typified the death penalty upon sin, and Christian baptism symbolises union
with Christ in His death on Calvary.
Chapter
Ten
Literature | Photos | Links | Home