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
The notion of a double sense of the term logos—a philosophic , in which ksignrfies the Divine intellect , or what is conceived in the Divine mind , and a religious , in which it refers to a divine person , cannot be defended other-wise than by shewing either that there are inconsistencies in the use of the term which cannot be reconciled without such an assumption , or that there are titles and epithets given to the logos which , necessarily implying distinct personality , cannot belong to the same logos , which the author affirms to have
been no more than the conception or purpose of the Creator , Now the inconsistencies of Philo on this subject relate to no essential point , and are > really very trifling , considering his character as a writer ; and in the long train of titles ascribed to the logos in different parts of his work , we do not observe one which is really inconsistent with merely figurative personality . If the word is called God , so , more than once , is the creative power-: all
such expressions as the shadow , image , express image of the seal of God , are peculiarly appropriate to the view we have given of Philo ' s doctrine : the word angel is often used by this writer to signify only a manifestation or medium of action , and affords no proof whatever of real personal existence : other personal titles are merely figurative , illustrating the action or office of the personified Word in particular instances , and forming parts of particular allegories .
Upon the whole , the philosophy which appears in the writings of Philo may have been common among his more learned countrymen , especially afe Alexandria ; it may possibly have had some influence on the language of the New Testament , and we do not doubt its having been the original source of those corruptions of Christianity which now assume the name of orthodoxy ; but that in the hands of the Jewish philosopher , or even of the earlier Christian fathers , it meant any thing resembling the modern doctrine , we must altogether deny , and we think we have justified this denial by abundant evidence .
Dr . S . ' s remaining section is on the Rabbinical writings : € < That the Jews , " he says , " in the middle ages , and their successors of the present day , have looked for only a human Messiah , it would be superfluous to prove But it is not impossible that in the writings of this unhappy people , some remains may be discoverable of their better and earlier faith . " It may be readily granted , that if we are determined to believe that their
earlier faith was different from their present , and was more to our taste , we may in the examination of writings so mystical and obscure as theirs , find something like support for almost any doctrine which pleases us ; , but the consideration that the modern Jews , who respect these writings and have much better means for understanding them than we have , find nothing in them inconsistent with their own opinions , ought surel y to have some little weight with us . Dr . S . proceeds to give an account of the book Zohar or book of light , said to have been compiled from the sayings of Rabbi . Simeon *
the son of Jochai , a celebrated Jew , supposed to have been born before the destruction of Jerusalem . " Being unable , " he tells us , «• to read this book with sufficient intelligence , I have recourse to the more easy method of extracting passages from the ample collections of Schoettgenius . " Our own acquaintance with the Zohar being derived from the same source as Dr . S . ' s , we shall not say a word on the controversy respecting its real age , or the extent to which it has been interpolated , but we are prepared to maintain , on his own evidence , that Schoett genius was mistaken in attributing to the
Untitled Article
fJr . J . P . Smith's Scripture Testimony to the Messiah . 469 ¦
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), July 2, 1831, page 469, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2599/page/37/
-