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
jrcrtfeft ^ qlnffiftotifld « ? uiid ^ maiidiiig ^ ^ f ^ 3 ft «^ 0 te ^ 9 & * wky ^ ^ ^ ¦* < Nua * y Tki » Abb 6 t Joacliira was a » Arian : andf he hfere * at ^ iiee putfe tii toftrfc ^ ln our hand to gaide us through the intricate windings of this subterraneous controversy . .- The verse pressed as
hard against the A nans , as against those who denied the pre-existence of Ohristi And how does this champion of Arianism repel its force I By denying its genuineness ? By pleading Its absence from MSS . and versions ? No ; he admits its authenticity , and
meets his antagonists by pointing out the true sense of the verse . And how did Thomas Aquinas answer ? In a way which fully accounts for the silence of the more early fathers , and for the erasure of the text from manuscripts and translations : They cut out the clause which led to the true
understanding of the verse . The venerable Bede flourished in the eighth century : this monk wrote a commentary on the canonical epistles : and we are given to understand , on iiigh authorities , that he was a total
stranger to the verse in question - — * 'tf , any person / ' says Professor Porson , " will read through Bede ' s commentary , on the fifth chapter , he must see , unless he be wilfully blind , that Bede was totally ignorant of the
seventh verse / ' After this the Quarterly Reviewer adds , No . LXV , p . 86 , 44 any- one fact may be assumed , as certainly established in this controversy , it is , that Bede was unacquainted with the seventh verse / ' Griesbach , in
his note on the place , asserts , without any qualification , that the verse did not -exist in Bede's copies - It is fortunate for the interest of truth , that men of high reputation , in the plenitude of their confidence or
self-importance , are apt in an unguarded hour to say something that necessarily exposes them to ridicule and contempt . By this means the spell that dazzles the generality of readers is broken , authority loses its undue influence , and error is forced to give way , when ,
through caprice , prejudice or interest , it is supported by great names . Bede had the verse before him , and in part comments u £ on it z 1 appeal for this to Bede himself , and his own commentary shall decide the question . Bede , it is true , docs not quote the
Untitled Article
^ erse al together , nor at all in its pro p *> r pia < te ; But it is a known fact , that the verse , for reasons which I shall explain , was often transposed and made to succeed what ought to
follow it . In the true place of the text , Bede has these memorable words : Taceant blasphetni , qui hunc phantasma esse dogmatizant . Pereat de terra memoria eorutn , qui eum rel deum vel bominem esse verum
denegant . u Let the blasphemers become dumb who dogmatize that he ( Jesus ) was a phantom : let the memory of those perish from the earth who deny either that he was a real God or a real man . "
Now , reader , look back to my former letter , and see what I have there established . It is this , that the Apostle wrote the disputed rerse against certain impostors who , to sink Christianity in' Heathenism , taught that the founder was a man only in appearance .
Bede , then , so far from not knowing the verse , knew that it was written for the purpose which I now state ; otherwise , how came he , in the very place of it , to use the words , Taceant biasphemi , qui hunc phantasma esse dogmatizant ? According to the
interpretation of the orthodox , and of Bede in the number , John , in the seventh vferse , teaches the divinity of Christ ; in the eighth , that of his real humanity . But , in my views , the seventh
verse is but a summary of the evidences of his divine mission , and of his simple humanity , against a set of artful deceivers who taught that he was a God , and thfcse were the views of all the Unitarians in ancient times ,
whom Bede here so heartily curses with the Gnostics— " Perish from the earth the memory of those who deny him to be either real God or real man /' The clause tv t 5 J yrj of the eighth verse , points to tv t $ 8 oav $ of the
seventh , and by consequence supposes the genuineness of the whole verse . Accordingly , the adversaries of the disputed text impugn the authenticity of cy ttj yrj , or in terra , and Griesbach
has not scrupled to put it out of his text . " The truth 5 s , " says the Quarterly Reviewer , " that not a single manuscript can be produced wanting the seventh verse , and also reading & t 5 j 7 ? of the eighth , " If this be true ,
Untitled Article
Bert Bv&id on VJvfth vs i * 9 $
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1826, page 93, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2545/page/29/
-