On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
thers , say , that in the number of the false gospels , to which the Evangelist alludes , was the famous Egyptian Gospel . It is reasonable , then , to
conclude , that Luke wrote in the very country where the Egyptian Gospel was known and propagated , and this was Egypt , the birth-place and abode of Philo . Whoever might be the person to whom Luke dedicated his
narrative , Theophilus was not his real name , but a name which he received in consequence of his conversion . The epithet hao ^ tX ^ q , indeed , was in use among the Greeks before the Christian sera ; but the appellation Theophilus owes its origin to Christianity . It
means 0 ee < pihoq , a friend of God , and points to cf ) tXcoy 9 or Philo , as the person to whom it first belonged . We recognize a similar change from Saul to Paul , which last ( Paulus ) l ) eing a Roman name , the Apostle adopted to hold forth that he was a Roman citizen .
Abraham himself , after he believed in God , was called SreofaKoq , or a friend of God ; see James ii . 23 : and all those who followed his example by their faith in Jesus might have had the same title : but the name and virtues of
Philo naturally gave him a sort of exclusive right to it . Farther , Philo was a civil magistrate , and at the head of the Jews in Alexandria ; and this circumstance accords with the epithet yt ^ rig-og , which Luke annexes to Theophilus , and which implies the highest degree of influence and power .
We may gather from the writings of Philo that he had been instructed in the Christian doctrine some few years before the publication of Luke ' s Gospel in Egypt : and it is observable , and most characteristic of the fact for
which I contend , that this Evangelist supposes this illustrious friend whom he addresses , to have been already acquainted with the transactions respecting * Jesus Christ , which he was
going to relate— " 1 hat thou unghtest know the certainty of the accounts in winch thou hast been instructed > " or , as the clause may be rendered , " of which thou hasl been a catechumen /'
11 ns last word is known to be derived from KctT' / ixtifAEvoq , the passive participle of vtaT ^ fw , to catechize , the verb here used by Luke . While I am on this subject I must notice a remark , made by the critic
Untitled Article
who reviewed my Greek and English . Lexicon in the Eclectic . The writer is an able scholar , and did my book , in some respects , justice ; and we are to ascribe the following judgment ta his jealousy and zeal for orthodox theology . " The quality , " says he , 6 (
of some of Dr . Jones ' s explanations of words occurring in the New Testament , will not , we apprehend , be very highly appreciated by intelligent and sober writers . Under < xvccTaG ,-o-& we have , I new model , forge , or falsify the gospel , Luke i . 1 / Such meaning ,
we are persuaded , does not belong to the word . There is evidently nothingin the expression used by the Evangelist Luke , which can fix the charge of dishonest intention upon the writers , whose productions preceded his own Gospel . "
Now , reader , judge between me and my Reviewer . Luke wrote his narrative that Theophilus might know the truth . It seems , then , that the many to whom he alludes as having already attempted to give a similar narrative * were little calculated to lead Theophilus and others to a knowledge of the truth . If the authors referred to were not :
calculated , or had no intention , to deceive their readers , then 'Luke had good reason for determining not to write , as many honest and competent men had already written on the subject . Farther , Luke sets forth his
own qualifications to write in opposition to the many who undertook to write on the same subject . He had himself , as his language implies , closely attended from beginning to end the transactions which he records ; that is ^ he had been an eye and ear witness of all that his Divine Master said and
did ; he , moreover , was in the number of those Jewish believers to whom the Apostles , who had with him witnessed the same events , delivered an account of them in their discourses ;
so that he claimed the double qualification of having himself witnessed the things which he relates , and afterward of having" heard an account of them from the mouth of those who had
heard and seen them like himself . Now , why this emphasis and precision in stating his own competence as an historian of Christ ? Clearly in reference to the " many , " who attempted to write without being so competent , who sought to lead Thco-
Untitled Article
206 Dr . J + Jones on Philo , Josephus , False Gospels , fy c *
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1825, page 206, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2535/page/14/
-