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.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
writer came , not the constitution of bis nature : but tile phrase , the " word wes flesh , " describes the nature of the hoyo $ d However , after all that may be said on either side , there is a better jbdge , at least as far as regards every raanV own satisfaction , than all the and
cit ^ ttops reasons can possibly be ^^ jduced . After we have obtained ai ^^^^^ ainiiiaritjr with a language , w ^| li % e bf the meaning of its expressiotis « £ once by that sense of their itiaport which experience has given us . According to this criterion , I , for my
< ftfr || part , feel it impossible to think thai the words Xoyc <; &ocp % tysveto , can properly be rendered " the word t 0 # j $ § flesh , " nearly as impossible as I do think that a former passage Can properly be rendered " the word was a God . "—I conclude where I
began , that I am happy to see discussion of this subject excited , and solicit from Mr . Cogan ' s candour that fair appreciation of ray arguments which his critical acuteness is so able to bestow . T . F . B .
discussion on this subject , which has been so well begun iii "' yefctfc Reposi tory , is brought $ 0 a cpncTusioh . There is a remarkable event in our Saviour ' s life , " Which appears to me to deserve particular attention . John was one of the apostles present on the Mount when the three greatest eKaracters 7 that have ever met in this
world wete surrounded with the effulgence of the Divine glory—Moses , Elijah and our Saviour . A voice at the same time proclaimed , This is my beloved Son ; hear ye him . In these words the superiority of our Saviour to either of the other two great characters is evident . But in what does
this superiority consist ? To me it appears traceable in the beginning of John's Gospel , and in the ^ difference of the manifestation of the word , with respect to the head of the law , the head of the prophets , and the head of the gospel dispensation .
The difference in the style of John ' s Gospel , from that of the three other historians , cannot have escaped the notice of any attentive reader . The latter have given us a detail of events , written in a clear , plain and impartial manner . John was the
beloved disciple of Jesus , and the affection was , I doubt not , reciprocal . John had witnessed the glory of his beloved Master on the Mount ; he was present with him in public and in private ; he had treasured up in his mind , more than any other , the
discourses of his Lord . It was impossible , with such impressions on his mind , that John could write like the other Evangelists . They detail events ; be enters fully into the sentiments of his Master , introduces us to all the
excellencies of his character ; he felt more , and therefore he makes us feel the more . The beginning of his Gospel corresponds with the conceptions I have of his character , and be appears to me to have acted strictly under the Horatian precept ,
Servetur ad imum , Qualis ab incepto processerit , et sibi constet .
There are three epochs of time in the preface to John's Gospel . The first denoted by the words , ** In the beginning . ? The second , when it came to pass , that " there was a man sent fro ^| Ald > whose name was John . " The i ^ HSld . when f € the word became
25 Mr . Freti&titiHfre Pw&n -eftUtofofi * Gospel .
* MMHflfl ^^^^ kMBW Sir , f I ^ HE preface to John ' s Gospel JL ffjfcfesents difficulties to our Tri-Uiiit&rian and many of our Unitarian brethren . To the former , from their preconceived opinion , that Christ is one of the three persons of their Trinity ; to the latter , from the low and
inadequate ideas they entertain of our Saviour ' s character . I cannot agree with Dr . Jones , that we are to enter into the labyrinth of the Gnctetic controversy for the solution of these difficulties . A due attention to the language of Scripture , and some important facts related in it , will , I am convinced , b # sufficient to render the
whole satisfactory to the commonest reader , John , indeed , has given us a clue to the explanation ; for at the close of his memoir he explicitly informs us of his intention in writing it , namely , to convince us that Jesus is the Son of God ; and it would be very extraordinary that a writer , with such an end in view , should commence his
history with a preface declaratory , ttot of his being the Son of God , but of his being God himself . It must be shewn , that the beginning and the end are in . conformity with each ^| fc ^ r ; and this I think will appear , wttea the
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1826, page 22, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2544/page/22/