Page:Anonymous - Darbyism and its new Bible.djvu/13

 in the Bible; and so far from signifying worship in the “modern English sense,” it does not signify worship in that sense at all. Beyond all question, the force of the two words is this the word used by the apostles signifies what cannot be done vicariously, as the personal adoration of an object, its derivation (from kuon, a dog ) signifying prostration before that object; and this gave the term the highest characteristic of worship, as it must be done by people for themselves, and cannot be transferred to another. Whereas, the other word refers to what can be done vicariously—by the priests in the sanctuary on behalf of the people, and to religious services generally, as in the references given above. The word means properly, “to serve for hire” (latron hire—see Trench’s “Synonyms”). But it never means worship at all “in the modern English sense, except in the imagination of Mr. Darby, and his associates.

The true word for worship (proskuneo) is employed upwards of one hundred and twenty times for the very highest order of worship in the Old and New Testaments; whereas the other word is never employed once in the Greek Scriptures for that purpose.

However, to justify himself, Mr. Darby concludes that the apostles and writers of the New Testament have done exactly what he has done—never employing towards Christ Mr. Darby’s higher word, which means “worship in the modern English sense,” but invariably the word that only means “personal homage and reverence.” This is what the apostles have done—strange to say, they sytematicallysystematically [sic], and methodically excluded the worship of Christ from the New Testament, by always omitting the higher word, and by always employing one that, if used for worship, would be “falsified in a material point,” and Mr. Darby has thought proper to justify in this way these baseless assertions!

Such are the latest conclusions of Darbyism regarding the New Testament. This we are further warranted in saying, for Mr. Kelly also comes out to the same effect, and, in justification of his chief, says: “We are not aware of a single orthodox Christian of competent biblical knowledge, who would not, in the main, support the discriminating value given to proskuneo in J. N. Darby’s version, as against the authorised version,” etc. (“Bible Treasury,” Dec. 1868—June, 1869.) Thus it appears that the “discriminating value” which “competent biblical knowledge” arrives at, with respect to the word which the apostles always employ towards Christ, is, that it does not signify worship at all, and would be “falsified in a material point” to suppose it!! The meaning of