CHRISTIANITY, when you affirm that "there is NO RESUR- The question is discussed on the supposition, that this new doctrine of theirs were true. St. Paul points out two things, which are necessarily implied in it. These we may term his postulates; and he reasons on these, to show, that consequences are deducible from each, which not only leave no inducement to profess the Christian religion, but render the profession of it absurd and impolitic. Of these two postulates; one is, CHRIST IS NOT RISEN. (ver. 13.) I The other is, "They also which have fallen asleep in Christ ARE PERISHED," (ver. 18.) that is, those who have died in, or for the profession of Christ's religion, have perished ALTOGETHER, and are incapable of receiving any reward or benefit for their perseverance and constancy. 2 Consequences deducible from the first postulate. CHRIST IS NOT RISEN. Ver. 14. The preaching of the apostles is probably a tissue of falsehood, and the faith of the Corinthians is a delusion, or at least on a doubtful foundation. Ver. 15. For if the testimony of the apostles be false in a point so essential, their credit must be shaken in other respects. Ver. 16, 17. The faith of the Corinthians is not only on a doubtful foundation, but unprofitable. Even the supposed re See Macknight's note upon this verse (v). 2 Macknight appears to have made two mistakes in his paraphrase of this verse. He says, "Certainly also, they who have suffered death for believing the resurrection of Christ are perished. They have lost their existence here for a known falsehood, and shall either have no existence, or a miserable existence hereafter." Now the apostle is arguing on the admission of their doctrine; that there is NO RESURRECTION. It would therefore be quite irrelevant to speak to them of believing Christ's resurrection, or of a miserable existence hereafter, because they deny both these. And his aim is to prove that, admitting their doctrine, it is the height of folly and absurdity to profess Christianity. With deference I offer the following paraphrase as more accurate : "Then they also, who, I should say, are fallen asleep to rise again to their reward, are, according to your position, cOMPLETELY ANNIHILATED.' The apostle appears to oppose κοιμηθέντες to ἀπώλοντο; which latter is synonymous with ὅλως οὐκ ἐγείρονται (ver. 29.). "Αρα καὶ refers not to the precelling verse, but to the doctrine (ver. 12.) There is no resurrection. (See note on 17th verse.) 3 The distinction between Kevòs, and μários, should be observed: 1 surrection from sin, which the false teachers maintained was the resurrection promised by Christ, and already past; even this was exploded by their assertion. For if the preaching of the resurrection of Christ were false, so the preaching of the atonement was false; because the proof of God's acceptance of that atonement was the resurrection. "Ye are yet in your sins ;" even your fanciful resurrection of the soul from sin, has not taken place. Consequences deducible from the second postulate, ver. 18. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are PERISHED. Ver. 19. But it is notoriously evident, that in this life the profession of Christianity almost invariably leads to labor, self-denial, insult, persecution, and suffering; and that if in this life only they have hope, they are "of all men most miserable." Therefore they can gain nothing, IN THIS LIFE, by the profession of Christianity. It must be in hopes of something after this life, that they profess this religion, or else they have no motive.' 3 Ver. 29. And what shall they gain, who have professed 3 Christ's religion for the sake of the dead, (i. e. for the sake of advantages to be received after death, or by the dead) if the dead rise not AT ALL?5 Why! what rational motive can they assign? Why are they then baptized for the sake of the mere dead bodies, the VERY dead? 6 KEYÒÇ, vain, groundless, referring to the foundation of their faith. As I have already hinted, "ye are yet in your sins," is not connected with the following verse; but refutes that doctrine respecting the resurrection of the soul from sin, which I before mentioned. 'The whole of the apostle's statements from ver. 19 to ver. 29. may be placed in a parenthesis. His mind revolts from the contemplation of the absurdities he is exposing, and he burts forth into the animated declaration; "but now is Christ risen," &c. In verse 29, he resumes his argument, marking the return from his digression by ind, else, if Christ were not risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them that slept, and if he had not insured the destruction of the last enemy, Death; then, to return to our argument, what advantage would result from the profession of his religion? 2 Tí πOIŃσOUGIV; vide Schleusner. 3 BARTICμ means taking on them the profession of Christ's religion; and the apostle is pursuing his argument in asking them what they can expect to gain after death, when they assert, that the dead rise not; for it is notorious, that they gain nothing by that religion in life. 4 'Taip, in gratiam. See Whitby, note on this verse. 5 Ολως οὐκ ἐγείρονται ; comp. v. 18. ἀπώλοντο; 6 VERY-τῶν αὐτῶν νεκρῶν. The word αὐτῶν is not in our version, I take Ver. 30. And why, (he continues, still pressing the absurdity of such conduct,) do we every hour of our lives expose ourselves to danger, if the dead rise not AT ALL? Ver. 31, 32, 33. Every day I am in danger of death. If at Ephesus I was exposed to wild beasts for the profession of Christ's religion, what can I expect to gain by all this danger and suffering, if the dead rise not, and " are perished?" In such a case common sense would direct me not to embrace, or, if I had embraced, to renounce such a religion of pain and persecution. Let us, if what you assert be true, let us act consistently; "let us eat, and drink, and enjoy ourselves, for tomorrow we die." Ver. 33, 34. Having thus shown the total absurdity of professing Christianity, or in other words, of being baptized, when they denied the resurrection, and destroyed the basis of all its hopes; the apostle concludes this part of his subject with an affectionate and serious admonition; cautions them not to be deceived, notices the danger of associating with these false teachers, and bids them "awake to righteousness, and sin not." J. E. N. M. Milbrook, Hants. it from Valpy's Greek Testament, and it appears to me to give force to the apostle's reasonings. Nexpès (masculine) is sometimes used, as well as the neuter, to signify cadaver. Vide Schleusner. This sense of the passage exhibits a coherent view of the argument, and the interpretation of the words is simple and natural. This argument is the absurdity of professing Christ's religion, of which the rewards are not received in this life, and cannot be enjoyed by a mere dead body, which rises not. And baptism being the initiatory sacrament, BATTI CÓμEVOI TÈg Tv vexpv may, without any violence, be translated, "professing Christianity for the sake of the dead." It would not be difficult to show strong objections to most of the solutions which have been offered. The best I have seen is that of Sir R. Ellis, adopted by Doddridge and Scott. But the notion of "filling up the ranks," is fanciful, and is by no means suggested by the apostle's words or argument. He has appealed (ver. 19.) to the experience of the Corinthians, that the profession of Christianity in this life brings neither pleasure, nor profit: he now asks them, what, according to their doctrine, they can expect to gain by it after death. A Narrative of a Journey into Persia, and residence at Teheran: from the French of M. TANCOIGNE, attached to the Embassy of GENERAL GARDANE. 8vo. London. 1820. I THIS volume partially supplies a desideratum in literature, namely, a History of Persia independent of other countries. An inelegant work, by Captain John Stevens, bears that title, but is rather a collection of wonders than of facts: some papers in the Asiatic Researches throw considerable light on its early annals, by exposing the errors of ancient European writers: but M. Tancoigue's narrative, although by no means copious, is sufficiently particular to be valuable, and copious to be interesting. In passing rapidly through the several epochas of the Persian monarchy (he says) I shall endeavor to raise the veil of fictions, and avoid, as much as possible, the fables of Oriental historians and from the plan I have adopted, I hope to succeed in discovering the truth. : The origin of the Peishdadian dynasty, called in Scripture the Elamite, is lost in its remoteness, but some authors assign to it the year 2400 before Christ: Hosting, the third king of this race, who for his virtues was surnamed Peishdad, or the just, is supposed to have left this appellation to his successors, upon some of whom it must have been a burlesque. If true, (observes our author) his history deserves to be better known: such a title is the most glorious a sovereign can aspire to; it never causes tears to flow: while that of great, generally granted to conquerors, has been almost invariably destructive to the human race. The kings, who have received it from the transient enthusiasm of nations, or rather from the flattery of their courtiers, have unfortunately thought themselves obliged to merit it by exploits little calculated to secure the happiness of nations. Such was Hosting, and such, perhaps, were the early Asiatic monarchs, after their respective empires had been founded by military power. Rustem, the Persian Hercules, is honored with exploits in almost every reign of the Kaianites; perhaps that name is an appellative, or a composition of many great The history of Cyrus is thus related: men. Author of the Supplement to Dugdale's Monasticon: his history was printed in 1715, 8vo. 2 Voltaire says in the Henriade-" Le première roi fut un soldat heureux." VOL. XXXII. CI. JI. NO. LXIII. F He was named Kai Khousrew, and eventually succeeded to his paternal grandfather; but he did not return to Persia until long after the death of his father: concealed in Turkestan by his mother, who endeavored to save him from the implacable hatred of Giarsevech, he was at length discovered by the address of a young Persian sent in search of him by Kaikous.... Kai Khousrew, though possessing the peculiar affection of Kaikous, found many enemies and envious persons in his grandfather's court... Following the example of his progenitors, Kai Khousrew also made war on the people of Turkestan, and defeated them on several occasions he is represented as just, and having merited the love of his subjects.... Khousrew nominated his nearest relative, Sohorasp, to succeed him, and finished his days in retirement and tranquillity. c. xv. Sir William Jones, in a discourse on the Persians, read before the Asiatic Society, February 19th, 1789,' says, "the Greeks had little regard for truth, which they sacrificed willingly to the graces of their language, and the nicety of their ears; and if they could render foreign words melodious, they were never solicitous to make them exact; hence they probably formed Cambyses from Cambaksh, or granting desires, a title rather than a name; and Xerxes from Shiruzi, a prince and warrior in the Shahnamah, or from Shirshah, which might also have been a title; for the Asiatic princes have constantly assumed new titles or epithets at different periods of their lives, or on different occasions; a custom which we have seen prevalent in our own times, both in Iran and Hindustan, and which has been a source of great confusion even in the scriptural accounts of Babylonian occurrences. Both Greeks and Jews have in fact accommodated Persian names to their own articulation; and both seem to have disregarded the native literature of Iran, without which they could at most attain but a general and imperfect knowledge of the country." European writers make a longer list of kings than the Persians themselves, which in some measure corroborates this hypothesis. To Kai Khousrew succeed Sohorasp, Gustap, Ardeschir and Khomani, who resigned the crown to her son Dara, or Darius, whose son, of the same name, is Darius Codomaunus whom Colonel Mitford describes different to our author: Historians accused him of having been addicted to every vice,-a singular circumstance, as you will have seen, amongst the princes I have mentioned. He dishonored the close of the Kaianite dynasty, and rendered it odious to the nation. Iskender, or Alexander, availed himself of the circumstance to carry war into Persia; and Dara perished by the hands of his own subjects, after having been defeated. It is related that, at the moment of his death, he induced Iskender to accept his daughter Rouscheng in marriage, and charged him to revenge his death. Ibid. 1 Asiatic Researches, vol. 2. |