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
that Christ is flesh and blood , denied also that he derived his authority from the Creator of the universe * This sentiment , of which Lardner does not appear to have been aware , was , if adopted , completely
destructive of the gospel , and John briefly sets it aside by representing the power , wisdom and goodness which Jesus displayed to be no other than the Logos , the moral perfections displayed by God himself in the creation and
government of the world . In this proem tjie Logos , as expressive of reason in God , or , more generally , of all those natural and moral attributes implied in reason when infinite , is personified . The object of this personification was to render the sense of the term more
prominent and impressive , and at the same time more conformable to the glowing imagination of eastern writers : and it is to be observed , that a similar personification characterizes the writings and preaching of the
apostles . I will here content myself with t > wo instances . Thus in Acts x . 36 , "The Logos , whom God sent to the children of Israel , preaching peace through Jesus Christ : this Logos is Lord of all . " Again , in Heb . iv . 12 , € t The Logos of God is alive and
energetic , surpassing in keenness a two-edged sword , penetrating so far as to separate between life and breath , joints and marrow , and is a judge of the meditations and thoughts of the heart . " These are striking instances , and they demonstrate the
erroneousness of the notion adopted by Lardner , Priestley and others , namely , that the personification of the Logos and its application to Christ originated with the Platonic philosophers converted to Christianity in the seoond century , this having already been done by the apostles * themselves .
The next scheme for interpreting this much-disputed introduction is that of Socinus . This is adopted by the late N . Cappe , and , embellished by his eloquence , it found its way into the Improved Version . According to
this scheme , the Logos means Jesus . " In the beginning , " means " In the beginning of the gospel dispensation . " ** All things were made by him , " means " All things in the Christian dispensation were done by Christ . ' * As the Logos was Jesus , the clause
Untitled Article
" He became flesh , " is rendered " He was flesh . " On this interpretation I remark . and I make these remarks not without reverence and affection for the high character and talents of the Editor—that it is founded in the absence of the circumstances in which John
wrote his Gospel , and which give full force and propriety * to every word that he has penned . The irrelevance of this scheme to the momentous errors which pressed on the attention of the sacred writer , renders it at
once impertinent and nugatory , the construction withal being in some of the clauses forced , and at variance both with common sense and the genius of the Greek language . " The Word was in the beginning , or from the commencement of the
gospel dispensation . " Was it necessary to say that the Word was in the beginning of the gospel , more than in the middle or the end of the gospel ? Who ever doubted that Jesus was in the beginning of his ministry ?
Who could question that every thing made during his ministry was made by him ? But it is said that * ' yivopai occurs upwards of seven hundred times in the $ Jew Testament , but never in the sense of create . " This
may be true , for the obvious reason that the writers of the Christian Scriptures had in no other place occasion to speak of the creation , or to allude to Moses a § the historian of it . I am free to assert that the perfect
middle yayove , is * the most appropriate verb which the Evangelist could have used to express creation ; the Pagan philosophers before Christ , and the Christian fathers afterwards , having continually employed it in that sense .
John wrote his Gospel as well as his Epistle against certain impostors who maintained the divinity of Christ with no other view than as a specious pretext to overturn Christianity . Is it then probable that he should in the
commencement assert the very doctrine which it is the principal object of his writings to set aside as false and pernicious ? " The Word was a God , " and this God was Jesus . If
the Evangelist was capable of saying this , or even favouring this conclusion , instead of the profound wisdom , the correct judgment and dignified simplicity which he displays as the
Untitled Article
726 Dr . */ . Jones on the Proem of John ' fi Gospel .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Dec. 2, 1825, page 726, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2543/page/22/
-