On this page

• Text (2)

  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.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• 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

    written serpentibus cincti . I can account for this mistake only by supposing that Virgil ' s cinctam serpentibus Hydram was indistinctly present to my mind . Had I thought of the Greek at the time , or recollected that

    the Giants ( to speak with Apollodorus ) £ i % ov Taq toca-etq cfro \ i $ a <; tip&KOj / Tay , association would not have got the better of my eye sight . A curious instance of the power of association is produced by a late eminent critic in the Classical Journal , No . XVII . p .

    49 . * ' A letter , " says he , " is inserted in the Gentleman ' s Magazine for 1798 , ( p . 839 , ) with the following title : An Original Letter from Dr . Thomas Moore , of Norwich . This letter is signed Tho . Browne , and appears to have been written by the celebrated Sir Thomas Browne , There

    is no resemblance between Browne and Moore , but the transition from Sir Thomas Browne to Sir Thomas More is extremely easy . " On the Homeric yevro spoken of by Dr . Jones , p . 727 > see Heyne ' s Homer , Vol . V . p . 421 .. E . COGAlNL

    Untitled Article

    Sir , t I THE Three Letters addressed by _ JL me to the Editor of the Quarterly Review are noticed in the last Number . In this notice the Reviewer

    declines entering on the argument for the genuineness of the text . I regret this much , especially as no man living is better qualified to do justice to his side of the question or to refute my views , if not founded in truth . * ' The

    world /* he says , " will conclude that he ( Ben David ) has ventured far into the region of paradox . ' I observed that by proving the genuineness of the verse , " the orthodox faith will receive a shock which shall shatter

    its very foundations , and bring it at no distant period completely to the ground . " The Reviewer in reply to this writes , " The orthodox faith does not rest on a spurious or disputed verse : it is built , and well built , upon the genuine word of God , and thus secured , it will endure for ever . "

    The discussion of the controverted text being thus excluded from the Quarterly Review , a Journal the most ably conducted , the most widely circulated , and the most powerfully influential of any that has ever ap-

    Untitled Article

    Sen David on 1 John v . ?• 16

    Untitled Article

    peared in the republic of letters , I purpose communicating to the Month * ly Repository a brief statement of the arguments which shall put aix end for ever to ail doubts respecting the authenticity of 1 John v , 7- These arguments are comprehended in the following propositions :

    1 . The context supposes the genu ineness of the disputed verse , and is even a dead letter without it . 2 . The supposed spurious verse is a summary of the evidence of Christianity ; and though John wrote it , Jesus Christ is virtually its author .

    3 . It is written by the Apostle in direct opposition to men who asserted the divinity of Christ , and could not therefore be the forgery of those in after ages who perverted it in support of the Trinity . 4 . The circumstances under which

    John wrote his Epistle being known and retained in the memories of men during the first three centuries , the orthodox were unable to conceal the true meaning of the verse without concealing the verse itself . They therefore erased it from the

    manuscripts and copies in general use , omitted it in their versions , and carefully avoided to quote it in their writings . Their conduct in this- respect is the cause of its absence from the Greek manuscripts and versions which have descended to our days . 5 . As the controverted passage ,

    containing , as it does , the sum and substance of Christianity , presents a triangular figure corresponding in shape to the base of the orthodox faith , it was diverted from its original object and made the foundation of the Trinity . The Greek and Latin Fathers with this view mutilated the

    verse , mystified it , transposed it , and always accompanied it with their own interpretation , and thus left to future ages unequivocal proofs of its being in the manuscripts , which they possessed .

    6 . Though the verse is not found in the Greek manuscripts now known , there is evidence to conclude that it existed in all those which descended from the Apostolic age to the fifth

    century . 7 . In the fifth century Unitarianism was extinguished , and Orthodoxy triumphed over Arianism , and the supporters of the Trinity thought they

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1826, page 15, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2544/page/15/