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
verse from the copies used by Cyprian , Eucherius , Augustine and others , referring their supposed citation of the seventh to a mystical gloss of the eighth .
This is the chief instrument by which the genuineness of the verse was annihilated in the judgment of the learned ; and its fallacy will appear from the three following remarks : First , the reference proceeds on the assumption that the seventh verse
proves the doctrine of the Trinity , while , if properly interpreted , it proves the simple humanity of Christ . Secondly , the allegory of the eighth verse is so unnatural , absurd , and even impious , ( for it makes water to mean God the Father , ) that it never would
have been thought of , if it had not been suggested by the presence of the seventh , and adopted by cunning interpreters as an expedient to give a wrong direction to their readers , and by that means prevent the true meaning of the seventh from being known . In order to secure this text from
danger , and to pervert it , in safety , to the support of the Trinity , it was necessary for these true sons of the Church to leave the plain and solid ground of common sense , and rise into the region of mysticism ; and they let off this allegory as a smaller balloon to
pilot their readers in their interpretation of the seventh verse . Thirdly , the allegory vvas suggested by a transposition of the two verses , and then , end not till then , adopted . Hear the Professor ' s own words : " Bengelius wishes to transpose the seventh and
eight verses . I believe that this was the position of the verses when the Heavenly Witnesses first obtained admittance . The allegorical interpretation will then so naturally follow the verse which it explains , particularly in the copies which announce the
Heavenly Witnesses with a sicuty that the manner in which the interpretation was made , will be obvious to any persou acquainted with the history of MSS . Twells saw something of this consequence ; for he reasons against
the idea of an allegory or marginal gloss upon this ground—that the oldest and best MSS . prefix the seventh verse ; but , says he , if thfe seventh v ^ e rse were a gloss engendered by the eighth , the seventh would follow the
Untitled Article
eighth- The plain answer to this reasoning" is , that such , indeed , was the arrangement of the two verses . " P
394 . Finally , the prologue intimates that even in the days of Jerome there were various reading's of the ver 3 e , which contradicted each other , and caused doubt and uncertainty to the readers . " If all these various readings , " says
Mr . Porson , «• were presented in one view to any person , endowed with common sense , moderately instructed in the principles of criticism , and uninfluenced in the present debate by interest or passion , he could not help concluding that the number and
importance of the various readings furnish reasonable ground for a suspicion of corruption . That a passage which so often adds , omits or alters particular words , which now precedes , now follows , the unsuspected part of the text : which is sometimes seen in the
body of the work , sometimes in the margin , sometimes by the same , sometimes by a different hand , sometimes after a rasure , which , in short , changes shapes faster than Proteus or Empusa ; that such a passage is exceedingly questionable , whatever shape it assumes , " &c . P . 142 .
How differently does the same thing strike different minds I I am not influenced by interest or passion in the present debate ; and am too , it is hoped , moderately instructed in the principles of criticism , yet to my mind various readings , the variety of forms and positions which the verse
assumed , its transposition with the eighth , open fresh evidence of its genuineness . Uniformity may often be the effect of art and systematic falsehood , while diversity changes with , a change of circumstances ; agreement in the main and variance in inferior parts , are characteristics of nature and of truth . I
should , therefore , thus reason on the present occasion . The verse is certainly authentic : the tattered form in which it appears , the patches put upon it , and the turning of it , as it were ,
inside out , prove only that it is old , and has long suffered violence and hard service , not that it never came from the hand of the Apostle . Its dismemberment and abuse must therefore be referred to some causes very different from interpolation . The pre-
Untitled Article
220 Ben David on 1 John v . 7 .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1826, page 220, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2547/page/32/
-