no one could have pointed out the precise point of resemblance which he intended to convey. Likewise no one could have told positively in what respect the Spirit, which descended upon our Lord at the baptism, resembled a dove; unless Luke had said, "Descended upon him like a dove in bodily shape." In like manner, in the passage under consideration, had the writer only said the sweat was like blood, it would have been difficult to affirm positively in what point the resemblance consisted. But Luke added an explanatory clause to define his meaning. "His sweat was," he says, "as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground." The "Falling down to the ground" is not in the singular; it does not agree with "the sweat." It is a plural form and agrees with "Drops of blood." And one has no more right to take away its qualifying differentiating force in the comparison, than that of "Having no shepherd," or that of "In bodily shape," in the comparisons of which they form a part. Whether the sweat resembled blood in other particulars, we can not say, simply because we are not informed; but the plain idea which satisfies all the exegetical wants of the passage is this: that instead of exuding in moisture-on a night so cold that fire was needed in the high priest's house-the sweat came out in great drops and fell down, just as blood will trickle from a wound and fall upon the ground. So thick and heavy were the drops, that a comparison with the drops of some liquid thicker than perspiration was necessary to describe them clearly. And the reason why Luke chose drops of blood for his comparison, was because the subject was a man; had he been speaking of the exuding sap of a tree, he might have likened it to oil or resinous gum.

It is claimed, however, that in Luke's use of coɛi comparison merges into direct assertion. The word occurs five times in his writings, but only two of these furnish any ground for the objection. It will scarcely be contended that the Holy Ghost really became a dove at Christ's Baptism, or combustion on the Day of Pentecost; or that in the presence of the Council Stephen's face became an angel's face. Acts ix. 18, and Luke xxiv. 11, are the only instances which seem in point. These read as follows; (1) "There fell from his eyes as it had been scales." This is claimed to be equivalent to the statement, "There fell from his eyes scales." Suppose, however, it had been eyebrows or eyelashes which sloughed off at Paul's cure, would Luke have said "There

fell as it were eyebrows or eyelashes?" Can there be any doubt that, as a matter of fact, particles resembling what the world calls scales fell down? The writer's words surely imply that and nothing else. (2) "And their words seemed to them as idle tales." The whole difficulty here arises from the insertion of the words "seemed to them." Drop them and this will appear. "Their words were as idle tales" surely differs from "Their words were idle tales." The women's story was so incredible that it resembled an idle tale; and the Evangelist inserted the words "seemed to them," to show that this impression was produced upon the Disciples' minds. Certainly the women's words were not idle tales. Finally, to put the whole thing in a sentence; if Christ actually did sweat blood, with what propriety could Luke say, "His sweat was like blood;" and when Luke says that what Christ sweat was "Like blood falling to the ground," with what propriety can he be made to mean to say, "His sweat was blood"?

(3) The third fact which Stroud attempts to establish is that mental agony will rupture the walls of the heart.

Rupture of the heart from physical causes is not a very uncommon occurrence. We have ourselves had three cases reported to us by three accomplished physicians, each having had one in his own practice. Upon this point Stroud's facts are very conclusive. Sudden death from mental emotions, also, is not extremely rare. But cases of death resulting from mental emotion, in which post-mortem examination has proved a rupture of the heart to have been the immediate cause, are "few and far between." This is only as one might expect. Stroud, however, does produce some such instances; and since his book appeared, others have been reported in trustworthy pathological journals. His conclusion therefore upon this point, we think, must be accepted.

(4) The fourth fact which Stroud attempts to prove is that rupture of the heart, and that alone, will account for the phenomenon which John records.

Dr. Stroud assumes, and with good grounds we think, that the flow of blood and water must have been considerable, or John would not have mentioned it. It is true, the context shows that it was not the blood and water, but the startling fulfilment of

two prophecies, which drew from him such unmeasured surprise. By an act of violence done by a Ronian soldier, one prediction was fulfilled; which act of violence, by rendering another needless, brought about the accomplishment of a second prediction. "And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true; and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, a bone of him shall not be broken." And again another Scripture saith, "They shall look on him whom they pierced." But this only increases the likelihood that the flow of blood and water was considerable. For if the fulfilment of prophecy was the thing that called forth such a solemn asseveration from the Apostle to his readers, surely the flowing blood and water would not have been recorded in such a connection, unless it had been sufficient to make a deep impression upon the writer's mind.

Now that rupture of the heart will most satisfactorily account for such a phenomenon is plain enough. The extravasated blood filling the pericardial sac, by the force of gravity would follow the soldier's spear-thrust, flowing out in blood and water sufficient in amount to attract attention.

But will not the second theory, that of bodily exhaustion,account for the phenomenon? We do not think that it will upon any of the hypotheses thus far advanced by its advocates. Aside from the fact that blood can hardly be said to flow from an incision after the heart has ceased to beat, the water still remains to be accounted for. Two explanations, however, have been given. First, that of the Bartholines, viz., that the blood and water were mingled and came from one or both of the pleural sacs. But this view is refuted by the following facts. In healthy persons the pleural sacs are only bedewed with moisture enough for lubrication. The alleged collection of bloody serum in persons dying by execution is not sustained by proofs. Such an effusion as the narrative demands would have caused suffocation; and could not have been distinguished from ordinary blood except by close examination. The second explanation is that of the Grüners, viz., that the blood came from the heart and the water from the pericardium. This opinion is refuted by the fact, notwithstanding the statement passed from one commentator to another to the contrary, that the pericardium in healthy persons contains an amount of

water which would be absolutely imperceptible in such a case as the one under consideration; and never more than a few drachms.

We have thus examined all the theories advocated as to the Immediate Cause of the Death of Christ as carefully and as fairly as we are able. If an explanation is to be sought at all, in order to be satisfactory, it must consider all the facts accessible. With much that is prolix, much that is irrelevant and inconclusive in his book, we think that Stroud does this. His theory seems to us to account for all the facts recorded; while it is contradicted by none of them. And this is more than we can say of any of the others.

A certain class of writers, however, discard all explanations, on the ground that all the facts accessible are insufficient to establish any of the theories. Of course this is a matter of opinion; and those who, having examined all the data, have come to that conclusion, have a right to hold it; knowing whereof they affirm. But there is another numerous class who hold a similar opinion on this and all other questions which require patient investigation, simply because too indolent to search after the truth. And these two classes are widely different characters. That order of mind which refuses to accept an explanation as final, when the facts accessible are not enough to prove it; which will not confound the possible with the probable, or the probable with the demonstrable; belongs to one category; and we admire it. That other order of mind, which refuses to accept a fair conclusion, because too indolent to ponder the true force of facts, falls under a different category, and awakens a different feeling. One exhibits a disposition not to be" Wise beyond what is written;" the other manifests an indisposition to read and to weigh what has been written. It is one thing, standing in the presence of mystery, to veil the face in imitation of angelic humility; it is a very different thing to strengthen Indolence struggling against Conscience, by whispering in her ear, "Where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise."

1873.] OUTLINES OF DR. J. A. DORNER'S SYSTEM, ETC.

261

ART. IV.—OUTLINES OF DR. J. A. DORNER'S SYSTEM OF THEOLOGY.

Translated from the German, by Prof. G. S. HALL, Antioch College, Ohio.* SPECIAL DOGMATICS.--CONTINUED.

III. CHRIST'S EXALTATION.

Descent to Hades; Resurrection, Ascension to Heaven; Sitting at God's Right Hand.

§ 54. The descent to Hades belongs neither to Christ's humiliation, nor can it have been for mere display, but it designates a higher stage of life than the earthly, already pneumatic (spiritual), and free from space and time. Cf. König, Ackermann, Güder, 1853. 1 Peter iii. 18; Acts ii. 24-27, and perhaps Eph. iv. 9-10. Christ visited Hades neither as a place of torment nor of purification, but in order to fully experience the separation of soul and body, and to triumph over death. (Form. Conc. 613.) Christ's universality is also thus established.

$ 55. The Resurrection. The inner spiritual perfection which he had attained, especially by his sufferings, shielded him fully from the power of death. The resurrection of the body could not, therefore, subject him to death the second time, but secured his immortality. Christ's resurrection is important as a confirmation of the atonement which he wrought, as the corner-stone of the Church, as giving validity to our hopes; in a word, it is the key by which we may unlock the secret of our being.

$56. Ascension: Sitting at the right hand of God. Completion of his Kingdom.

I. The Ascension is the consummation of the resurrection. It presents the transfiguration of the earthly personality into the heavenly as perfected. The exalted God-man is raised beyond the boundaries of space and time. The man Jesus becomes the adequate organ of the Logos.

II. Sitting at the Right Hand of God denotes the divine tranquillity and blessedness of Christ's assured majesty—as Lord of Glory and King of Kings.

* Continued from page 93.