Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

water was an emblem of the purifying influence of the Spirit, which is poured out on men, in consequence of his death on the cross. This contested passage, evidently holds a close connection with the last part of verse 6, and the whole of verse 8. In the first part of verse 6, the apostle says, "This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood." The close of the verse says, "and it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, the water, and the blood and these three agree in one.

The text in debate, stands connected with the preceding verse, by the word "for ;" and with the following verse, with the copulative conjunction, "and.” It falls into its present position, therefore, with peculiar facility.

It has been made to appear from the Scriptures in general, that there are three such witnesses in heaven, as are mentioned in verse 7; and, it certainly forms a strong and beautiful union in testimony, with the witnesses in earth, which are spoken of in verse 8.

That we may perceive the force of this reasoning more fully, let the words of verse 6 and verse 8 be stated, leaving out the supposed insertion:-"This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, the water, and the blood and these three agree in one."

In reading the apostle's statement in this manner, there evidently appears to be a great deficiency; but, in reading it with the pretended interpolation, there is neither falsehood nor redundency. Dr. Scott, in his note on the text,

says, "It may be doubtful, whether the passage connects with so much propriety, if the contested words be omitted, as it otherwise does: for if we read with the copies in which they are wanting," "The Spirit beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth: for there are three that bear record, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood," &c. "there seems to be a remarkable repetition, and a want of the apostle's usual energy in the passage."

I have seen this argument, set in a very powerful light by the pen of a learned Deist, in an address to Unitarians; but, I cannot, at present, quote his words.* I shall now submit the point, to the judgment of my hearers, without pursuing it any farther, at present.

[ocr errors]

2. It may be argued, that 1 John 5. 7, is a genuine text, from the similarity of the style and doctrine of St. John's other writings. In the very commencement of his gospel, he calls the Lord Jesus Christ the Word; and he gives him the same appellation, in the book of Revelation. The Son of God, is not called the Word by any other sacred writer.

It appears that this apostle, was very particular in all his writings in teaching the personality, divinity, and record, of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and, also, their Unity in one glorious essence. These facts, were

In connection with the above argument for the genuineness of this verse from the connection, another may be added which appears in the Greek, but is not seen in the English translation. In the last clause of the 8th verse, "and these three agree in one," the article is used before one. Middleton, in his essay on the Greek article, lays it down as a rule, that the article is used in such cases for one of two purposes, that of hypothesis or that of reference. It is plain that its use in this place cannot he hypothetic. It must therefore, be used by way of reference. But to what can it refer? There is nothing to which it can refer, if the 7th verse is left out. If that is inserted, the reference is plain. The testimony of the three that bear witness on earth agrees in the same one thing which is asserted in the 7th verse, namely, the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity. (See Panoplist for 1811, p. 541.

fully substantiated, under the second general head of this subject.

This apostle was also much in the habit of vindicating Christ's proper Deity, and equality with the Father. In 1 John 5. 20, he says of him, "This is the true God, and eternal life." This completely establishes all that is contained in the text in question.

But as the opposers of a Trinity in Unity, profess to esteem the talents and candor of Dr. Doddridge, I shall cite a note of his, on the words, "This is the true God, and eternal life." He says, "To paraphrase this of the true religion as a celebrated divine does, is quite enervating the force of Scripture, and taking a liberty with plain words, by no means to be allowed. It is an argument of the Deity of Christ, which almost all those who have wrote in its defence, have urged, and which, I think, none who have opposed it, have so much as appeared to answer." These remarks are very pointed, and made by him, whom the Unitarians acknowledge to be candid, pious and learned. But, if the Deity of Christ be a Scriptural doctrine, the statement in 1 John 5. 7, stands as fast as the pillars of heaven. The style and doctrine, of this disputed passage, exactly agree with the style, character, and sentiment of St. John. We have no right, therefore, to consider it as being an inser-. tion, unless the thing can be positively proved, which, no one pretends, has ever been done. It is on the ground of negative proof, that its enemies are striving to erase it from the Bible. A learned divine, observes, "Negative evidence has, in determining the judgment of a candid mind, but little weight. One positive fact, well supported, is of more importance than a thousand negations."

In defending the authenticity of the text in debate, I proceed to observe,

3. That there does not appear to have been any necessity, of committing such a forgery. If the text was inserted, it must have been done for the purpose of supporting the Trinity. No sufficient motive for this can be made to appear; for the Scriptures in general, contain plenary evidence of that doctrine. Every one, who is not biassed against that glorious truth, must be convinced of it, by reading the Bible, independent of this contested text; and those men who lean to their own understanding, and prefer what they call reason, to Revelation, would not acknowledge the doctrine, if a thousand such passages as 1 John 5. 7, were to be found in the Scriptures, and without any objection to their authenticity.

1

Mr. Robinson, who was converted to Anti-Trinitarianism by Dr. Priestley, observes, in his "History of Baptism," page 47, concerning Unitarians, "The sufficiency of reason is the soul of their system." See Fuller's Letters, page 298. On this ground divine Revelation is unnecessary; and, whenever it is consulted, it must bow to the dictates of reason. To forge a passage, for the conviction of gentlemen of this cast, would amount to very little, for every doctrine of Scripture, must be tried at the bar of their own reasoning. Humble inquirers, however, will easily be convinced, that the doctrine of a Trinity in Unity is, the Alpha and Omega of Revelation-the grand hinge, on which, every one of its doctrines turns.

4. It is a powerful argument in favor of the passage in debate, that to have forged it, would have been a heinous crime, and attended with great danger. If there were any piety among the orthodox, when such a sentence was inserted in the epistle of John; they would surely have detected and exposed the guilty. Such an addition to the Holy Scriptures, would have subjected the impious agent, or agents, to these solemn threatenings, in the book of

God; "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book." Rev. 22. 18. "Every word of God is pure."-" Add thou not unto his word, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." Prov. 30. 5, 6. Surely, no one would be willing to expose himself to divine anger, and to the detestation and reproofs of men, who had any fear of God before his eyes; and a man of different character, would have no motive to vindicate the doctrine of the Trinity. Such an interpolater, must have anticipated these painful events.

It is difficult to see, how it was any more possible to have inserted this passage in any past period of time, without being detected, than it would be at present. Friends and enemies, have always been eyeing the Holy Scriptures very closely. If any person, church, or, denomination, had in fact, made such an addition to the sacred canon, it must have been discovered, and he, or they, exposed to the merited contempt of the whole christian world. We ought not to think so meanly of the church of God, as that they would universally, and silently, have suffered such a criminal forgery, even, if all the enemies of truth had consented to shut their mouths, in respect to the crime.

It is said by respectable authority, that the Jews were so careful in preserving their Scriptures from being corrupted, "that, when copies of the Law or the Prophets were transcribed, they observed the most scrupulous exactness: they not only diligently compared the one with the other, but even counted the number of letters in each book, and compared and recorded the numbers." We need not doubt, but the christian church, has taken some care in this respect, as well as the Jewish church. The same Holy Providence has, no doubt, watched over the Scriptures in

« FöregåendeFortsätt »