i.

£4

LETTERS

THE LOGOS

BY CHARLES W. UPHAM,
ASSOCIATE MINISTER OF THE FIRST CHURCH IN SALEM.

BOSTON :
BOWLES AND DEARBORN, 72 WASHINGTON STREET.
1828.

DISTRICT' OP MASSACHUSETTS, TO WIT :
District Clerk's 0£icc.
Be it remembered, that on the twentythird day of May, A. D. 1898, in the fifty-
third year of the Independence of the United States of America, Bowles & Dear
born, of the said district, have deposited in this office the title of a book, the right
whereof they claim as proprietors, in the words following, to wit :
1 Letters on the Logos. . By Charles W. Upham, Associate Minister of the First
Church in Salem.'
In conformity to the act of the Congress of the United States, entitled e An act
for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and
books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein men
tioned j ' and also to an act, entitled ' An act supplementary to an act, entitled,
" An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts,
and books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein
mentioned ; " and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving,
and etching historical and other prints.' JNO. W. DAVIS,
Clerk 6f the District of Massachusetts.

EXAMINER PRESS.
Hiram Tupper, Printer — Bromfield Lane,

THE REVEREND

HENRY WARE, D. D.

HOLLIS PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY,

THESE LETTERS

ARE RESPECTFULLY AND GRATEFULLY

INSCRIBED.

PREFACE.

The following Letters were commenced without any
expectation that they would pass beyond the inspection
of private friendship. But in the course of the investi
gation of which they exhibit the results, the writer was
more and more impressed with a conviction of the truth
and importance of the theory contained in them. So
deep and strong did this conviction at last become, that
he was led to reflect seriously upon the expediency and
propriety of presenting his views to the religious public
in a more grave and systematical form, than is appro
priate to private epistolary communications.
Upon mature consideration, however, it appeared to
him that the novelty and peculiarity of the opinions to
which he had been brought, called for the most natural
and easy manner of presenting them. And as these Let
ters accurately exhibit the process by which they were
reached, and the mode in which they are held, their
original form has been preserved. They are now offered
to the public, as they were addressed to the learned
divine to whom they are inscribed.
1*

vi PREFACE.
It is surely unnecessary to say anything to awaken
attention to the dignity and magnitude of the subject
to which they relate. It is a matter of the highest
concernment to every Christian to secure to himself
an accurate conception of the office and character of
Jesus Christ.
It is well known to all who watch the progress of
theological controversy, and can discernlhe condition of
religious opinion, that the decision of the great question
between Unitarian and Trinitarian believers, is pro
tracted, more than by any other cause, by the obscurity
which has ever rested over ' The Word,' as it is used
in the Preface of John's Gospel, and in some other
places of scripture. The removal of this obscurity
would, it is probable, determine effectually and forever,
the opinions of all, who, in simplicity and sincerity of
spirit, seek only the truth, and love it supremely.
If it should be clearly made out that the evangelist,
in applying ' The Word ' to Jesus Christ, meant to
assert the absolute, underived, and independent divinity
of his nature, then the Trinitarian will have secured
one passage in scripture on which to stand, as upon a
foundation. If, on the contrary, it can be shown that
the use of this phrase, in application to our Saviour,
demonstrates his inferiority to the Father, and declares
the exaltation, not of his nature, but of his office only,
then the most important, or, as some apprehend,

PREFACE. vJi
the only important argument, drawn from scripture, in
support of the Trinitarian hypothesis, will be turned
against it.
It must appear to an observing mind, that for some
time past, the Trinitarian and Unitarian forces have
been gradually retiring from every other position, and
concentrating upon this very ground. The question
which at the present day engages attention, is this ;
What was the meaning of John, when he said, ' The
Word was in the beginning ;' ' Itioas with God,-' '.ft was
God ; ' 'It created all things ; ' and ' It became flesh 1 '
A satisfactory answer to this question would impart
relief and joy to innumerable minds. It is in waiting
for this answer, that christian truth delays her progress
of triumph, not only in this country and Great Britain,
but even in the remote vales, and mountainous glens
of the Vaudois ; in every region, indeed, in which
the privilege of freely, prosecuting religious knowledge
is enjoyed.
It is not because the writer of these Letters flatters
himself that in them he has given this answer, that he
presents them to the public ; but because he indulges a
strong persuasion, and an ardent hope, that the views
contained in them may start the minds of more learned
and experienced men, in a course of inquiry which will
lead to such results as will settle the question.

viii PREFACE.
It will be perceived that the nature of the subject
rendered it impossible to give to this investigation a
more popular form.
With such views, and under such circumstances, the
following papers are communicated to the public. They
are presented solely from a sense of duty, as an offering
to all who are willing to investigate, and anxious to
ascertain, the truth respecting the great objects of
religious feeling and faith.
Trusting that the literary execution, the style and
manner, of these Letters will be regarded as compara
tively too unimportant to attract the severe sclTitiny of
critics, the writer most earnestly invokes that scrutiny
to the arguments, the evidence, and the doctrine, which
they exhibit. So long as it aims to detect his errors,
or to guide him to the truth, no matter how stern and
severe it may be, he will not shrink before it. Such, a
scrutiny is all that he asks or desires. If his views are
founded in error, the developement of that error will be
regarded as a favor. For nothing is more certain, than
that he, who rescues a mind from a single opinion which
is false, is a benefactor, surpassed only by him, who
conducts it to the acquisition of a truth.
Salem, May 15, 1828.

CONTENTS.

LETTER I.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.
The tendency of party controversy in religion to check the general
progress of theological learning — Scriptural theory of the office and
character of Jesus Christ not yet fully expounded — The present
inquiry, in what manner suggested — Its general object — Is not
affected by the mode of our Saviour's birth — The text, 1 John v. 7. —
Proem of John's Gospel — In what manner it serves the purposes of
the Trinitarian — Its force lies in Logos, or Word — Particular point
of the inquiry  13
LETTER II.
ORIGIN OF LOGOS.
Proem of John's Gospel controversial — False meanings attached
to Logos — Sources of information — Fundamental principles of the
Jewish religion— The tendency of the Jews to idolatry accounted for —
Our idea of a spirit — Difficulty in preserving it clear and correct — The
Jews did not utter the name Jehovah — The considerations which
governed them in this observance — Words associated with images —
Exposure of the Jews to the danger of regarding God as a local
deity — Origin of Logos — Its use — Its antiquity  19
LETTER III.
THE PROGRESS OOF A PHILOSOPHIZING SPIRIT IN THE
DIFFERENT SCHOOLS OF ANTIQUITY.
The first promoters of the spirit of philosophizing — The probable
extent to which they carried their speculations — The effect of their
speculations upon Polytheism — How far towards the truth they could
have advanced — A particular description of the progress of this spirit
in the different schools — In the Oriental, the principles of Good and
Evil — In the Egyptian, the doctrine of Emanations — Hieroglyphic s-^r

x CONTENTS.
In the Greek schools, Emperor Julian's opinion — Fluctuations of
opinion among the heathen philosophers — Cudworth's account of
their principles — Obstacle to the discovery of the truth — Not to be
obtained from the Jews — Anaximander — Thales — Homer — Virgil —
Pherecydes — Pythagoras — Plato, his trinity — Its probable theory —
Became the prevailing theory of Western Philosophy — Discussions
concerning it — Phraseology growing out of these discussions — First
reflection, the Fathers of the church indefatigable and daring —
Tertullian's testimony — Second reflection, origin and establishment
' of the trinity not extraordinary — Origen's confessions  31
LETTER IV.
ECLECTIC SYSTEMS OF PHILOSOPHY, AND THE FALSE MEAN
INGS ATTACHED TO LOGOS WHEN ADOPTED INTO THEM.
Tolerant spirit of antiquity — Gibbon's testimony — Formation of
Eclectic systems — State of opinion's in the Apostolic age — Gnostics —
Meaning of Logos in the Hebrew church — Its adoption into the
Oriental Philosophy — Into the Egyptian — Into the Platonic — Con
nexion between Hebrew and heathen phraseology — Doctrines at
the time of the apostles — Demiurgus — Origin of evil — Opinion that
Christ did not possess a real body — Emanations — Some of their
titles — God of the Jews thought to be an evil being — Simon Magus —
Menander — The, Nicolaitans — Cerinthus, the inventor of the artifice
of the double nature — Philosophical opinions in the second century —
Scheme of Basilides — Texts illustrated by it — Scheme of Valen
tinus — Texts illustrated by it — Philo— His character — His view of
Logos — Tertullian's definition of it — The disciples of John the Bap
tist — Serpentists — The Jews led to adopt erroneous views concerning
Logos — General recapitulatory remarks — Reflections — 1. Necessity
of a revelation — 2, Argument in favor of our religion from its internal
character — Rousseau's declaration — 3. Great .caution required in
interpreting scripture — 4. Easy to account for the errors and corrup
tions with which our religion became connected — Anecdote respecting
Plato's birth — Tertullian's testimony to the tendency of the church
in his day to the errors of the Philosophers  ,...,, 52
LETTER V,
ORIGINAL AND TKUE MEANING OF LOGOS.
The common interpretation not satisfactory — Too much of a heathen
aspect — Unphilosophical, and contrary to fundamental principles in

CONTENTS. x;
religion — Uncertain — Inadequate — Sources of the true interpretation
of Logos — Divine manifestations — Two views of them — One, that God
acted in them — The other, that a representative being acted in them —
Statement of the question in regard to these two views — General
arguments against the latter view — 1. The titles applied — 2. No
Scripture evidence or intimation of this view — 3. All the Fathers
against it — Particular arguments in favor of it — 1. God not visible —
These manifestations were visible, and therefore were not. God —
Proper meaning of the expression, 'seeing God' — 2. They were
called the 'Angel of the Lord' — Original meaning of 'Angel' — Did
not imply personality — Maimonides — Samaritan school — Ambrose —
Scriptural evidence — Jewish maxim — 3. That they were called
'The Word' — This argument takes for granted the main point in
discussion — Arguments in favor of the former view of these mani
festations — 1. Held by all the old Jewish writers, Philo, Josephus,
Son of Sirach, Hebrew scriptures — 2. Character and ¦titles of the
Supreme God appropriated to them — 3. Whole worship of the church
directed to the being acting in them — 4. The Unity of God — Result
of this investigation — The being, concerned in these manifestations,
the Supreme Jehovah — Meaning of a Shekinah, according to this
result — Merely an instrument — The several appellations of a Sheki
nah — 'Angel of the Lord,' 'Presence,' ' Glory of God,' 'His name,'
' Mimra,' or ' Logos,' or ' Word ' — ' Word ' still thus used in the
East — Analysis of the meaning of Word — Application of the meaning
to a Shekinah — A natural application — Used in sacred poetry and
common speech — Word includes all the meanings of Shekinah — These
meanings enumerated — 1. The truths and precepts conveyed — 2. A
representation of God's attributes — 3. The vehicle or bearer of God's
will or truth — 4. An evidence of God's presence — 5. Either, or any,
or all these meanings — Jesus Christ is called in scripture a ' Word ' or
' Logos ' — Every other Word, or Logos, prospective of.him — In what
manner prospective — A general view of revealed religion — A general
view of the dispensations of religion — Gradual progress of revelation
towards its' completion by Jesus Christ, the last and perpetual
Shekinah, or Word, or Logos — Opinion of Servetus — The meaning of
fulness of times — The view of our Saviour which the application of
Logos, or Word, when thus understood, presents — Excludes the idea.
that he is God — Ward, or Logos, is applied to the religion which he
conveyed — to his character as an image of God's attributes — to him
personally as the medium which conveyed his religion — to him as
an evidence of the presence of God — and in any or all these-senSEs^"

xii CONTENTS.
Christ officially the Word of God — As such, had preexisted — As the
Logos, or Word, cannot be an object of worship — With what rever
ence Christ should be regarded — The Jews offered their worship
through the Shekinah or Logos — So Christians should offer their
worship through Christ — The Mediation of Jesus — His Intercession —
Recapitulation of the previous Letters  86
LETTER VI.
INTERPRETATION OF TEXTS.
Caution preparatory to the process of interpretation — John i. 1 —
18 — Interpreted and paraphrased — Divided according to the several
subjects of which it treats — Passages in which Logos is used in its
first meaning — In its second meaning — In its third meaning — Pas
sages and expressions illustrated by this view of Logos. 1. Texts in
which the expressions, ascending to, and descending from heaven
are used — 2. Texts which seem to speak of the preexistence of Jesus
Christ — 3. Texts which speak of an intimate union between Jesus
Christ and God — Upon Trinitarian principles, these texts prove not a
double but a triple nature in Christ — The omnipresence of God —
True signification of these texts — 4. Texts which ascribe the office
of Judge to Christ — 5. Texts which speak of Christ as the image of
God — In what sense he was the image of God — 6. Texts in which
the word ' Glory ' is applied to Christ — Description of his glory — Ex-.
planation and paraphrase of the celebrated passage, Philip, ii. 6,
11 — 7. Texts which speak of the ' kingdom' of Christ — Unsatisfac-
toriness of the common explanations of these texts — His kingdom ex
ists in every mind which perceives his true ' glory' — It com
menced as soon as his glory was understood — Not understood until
after his death — Meaning of Comforter — Reflection, the evidence
of our religion founded upon the ' glory ' of Christ when rightly un
derstood — General remarks upon the theory put forth in these
Letters — Conclusion  143

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.

LETTER I.

Rev. and dear Sir,
The attention of the religious public at the
present day, is perhaps too exclusively directed to the
progress of that unhappy party strife, which exists
between the advocates and the opposers of the scheme
of doctrines, called Calvinism, composed, as they are,
of the whole community arrayed in hostile masses.
'There is reason to fear, that a spirit of mere contro
versy has extended to the most retired studies and
contemplations of theologians. I say there is reason
to fear this, not because I think the questions at issue
among us, are unimportant. Far from it. I believe
that the further spread of the gospel depends, under
God, upon the prevalence of those views which we
entertain, and the reception of them by all who go
forth to convert the unbeliever and confound the gain-
sayer. But I fear it, because it has, in a great
measure, suspended all calm and amicable discussion
of questions of general interest in Theology.
2

14 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
The field of knowledge and inquiry is becoming
more and more narrowed down to subjects immediately
and obviously connected with the popular disputes
of the day. The object, at present, is not so much
to carry forward the general science of Divinity,
as it is to overthrow certain erroneous systems which
have heretofore obscured its truths, and obstructed
its progress. For instance, learned, industrious, and
able men have long been striving to expose and refute
that erroneous opinion, which ascribes to Jesus Christ
the attributes of independent, underived, and distinct
divinity, and represents him as equal with the Father,
as very and eternal God, to the neglect of an amicable
and unbiassed research, to ascertain the real character
he sustained, and the actual position he occupied.
It has been demonstrated that he is not what the
Trinitarian declares him to be ; but it is not yet clearly
discovered and settled, what he really is in the great
scheme of the dispensations of religion and of the
moral administration of the world. It may be, that the
only way, in which false doctrines can be effectually
overthrown, is by the application of patient research
to discover the truth, leaving it to the truth when
discovered and made known, to work out, by its own
force, conviction in the minds of men, and, of its own
inherent energy, to secure to itself a free course, in
which it can run and be glorified.
It has always appeared to me, that the true scrip
tural theory, with respect to the office and character
of Jesus Christ, has not yet been plainly expounded.
The doctrine of the independent divinity of his nature,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 15
besides the entire want of scriptural evidence in its
favor, is encumbered with so many radical difficulties
and unremovable objections, that we cannot for a
moment hesitate in rejecting it. Then, on the other
hand, there is a large portion of the language of
scripture, which appears difficult of interpretation
upon the supposition of his mere humanity, in the
sense in which that phrase is commonly received.
The only refuge from these two views of his character,
appears, at first sight, to be in the opinion, that his body
was the residence of a superangelic and preexistent
spirit. But the evidence against this supposition also,
drawn from the circumstances of his birth and infancy,
his recorded growth in wisdom,* the descent of the
Spirit upon him, and other considerations, accumulates
to an amount not to be removed, and presses with a
force not to be resisted. Difficulties like these, have
always been connected in my mind with these several
views of our Lord's character.
The accidental perusal of Moses Lowman's Three
Tracts upon the Shekinah and Logos, — very learned,
original, and judicious performances, but which have
never made so great an impression, as they would
have made, had the author stated more clearly the
results of his elaborate and profound inquiries, — first
led me into a train of reflection and research, which
has brought me to a view of the subject highly satis
factory to my own mind. The process, and the theory
in which it resulted, I now respectfully submit to your
consideration. If the views, which I have been led to
*Luke,ii. 52.

16 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
afiopt, shall meet with your approbation, my reliance
upon them, as approximating towards a true exhibition
of our Lord's character, will be much strengthened.
I hope, sir, that it will not be too great an intrusion
upon your very valuable time, and upon the laborious
duties of your important office, to request you to run
your eye over these pages, and give me your opinion
of their contents. ,
The point to which the present inquiry is directed,
is simply and solely this ; What was it, in our Lord's
character, which constituted his peculiar dignity, which
made ^him worthy of being called the ' Son of God,'
and of being ranked as such, by himself, in the scale
of being, above angels as well as men ? ' Of that day,
and that hour, knoweth no man, no, not the angels
which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.'
I shall endeavour to exclude from consideration every
irrelevant topic. The discussion, therefore, need not
be encumbered with the question respecting the mode
of our Saviour's birth into this world, since that cannot,
in any way, when rightly considered, affect the eleva
tion of his nature, for we are all equally the creation
of God, whether brought into being in the ordinary
and appointed, or in an extraordinary manner. Be
sides, whatever may be our opinions on this point, in
believing that, at the commencement of his ministry,
the Spirit of God descended upon him, we all consider
him, from that time until the conclusion of his natural
life, as invested with a dignity and glory, equal to
what any mode of generation could imply, or any
imagination can conceive. Let it he remembered,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 17
therefore, that the object of the present inquiry, is, to
ascertain in what consisted the dignity and exaltation of
our Lord's character. As has been before intimated,
there appears to be reason to believe, from much of
the language of scripture, such for instance, as this
phrase, John i. 18, 'the only begotten Son, which is
in the bosom of the Father,' that there was something,
either in the person or in the office of Jesus, which
made him before and above all other men. If we can
arrive at a clear and intelligible view of what that
precedency and superiority was, we shall be relieved.
from much perplexity, and be able to understand
many passages, which are now obscure, and, upon
either of the three hypotheses abovementioned, inca
pable of explanation.
Ever since it has been discovered that, in addition
to its being a fraudulent interpolation, the text 1 John
v. 7, proves, if anything, that the Father, the Word,
and the Holy Ghost are separate in every essential
respect, and one in no sense whatever, except in the
sameness of their testimony (for if there were any
other oneness than this existing between them, their
testimony, according to the Jewish,* and, in truth,
according to an universal principle of evidence, would
lose its value), ever since this discovery has been
made by the Trinitarian, it has been considered, I
believe, on all sides, that the first eighteen verses of
John's Gospel are the most important passage in the
Bible, in relation to the question of the Saviour's
character. Believers in the distinct and absolute
* Deut. xvii. 6 ; xix. 15.
2*

18 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
divinity of his nature, regard these verses as their
strong hold, invariably retreat to them when their
other positions are rendered untenable, and have
always found in them a safe refuge, not because they
declare their doctrine, but simply because it has not
been determined, with certainty, what they do declare.
Trinitarians are sheltered, by this portion of scripture,
precisely as a flying squadron is sheltered by a fog ;
it is useless to attempt to follow them any further,
for we see not where they are, and may ourselves be
lost in the pursuit. As long as there is any doubt con
cerning the meaning of these verses, the advocate of
the trinity will insist upon it that they prove his point,
and the Unitarian will never be able to drive him from
this, his last fortress, until he can show their significa
tion, and dispel the obscurity in which his adversary
finds shelter and safety.
If, by common consent, this passage is looked upon
as the most clear and convincing proof of the eminence
of our Lord's character, we shall be authorised thus
to consider it, and, by gathering together the testimony
which it contains, shall arrive at what all will allow to
be a correct estimate of his personal dignity and official
elevation. The whole force of the passage depends
upon the phrase, ' The Word.' My object, therefore,
will be accomplished, if I can detect and exhibit its
meaning. The Greek word, of which it is a transla
tion, is A«y«s. The question then comes to this;
What did St John mean by ' Logos,' as it is used in
the commencement of his Gospel ?

19

LETTER II.
It is obvious, upon a cursory perusal of the first
fourteen verses of John's Gospel, that they are con-
strupted, as Michaelis has observed,* in the form of
counterpositions to opinions then prevalent; that, in
commencing the narrative of our Saviour's life and
preaching, the Evangelist endeavours either to correct
the errors of misguided friends, or to refute the false
doctrines of open or secret enemies* The brief elemen
tary propositions which he puts forth, are evidently
intended for the prevention or the refutation of error.
The whole structure of the sentences and the tone of
the sentiments, prove this. The style throughout is
direct and dogmatical, corrective and controversial.
Now if this be correct, the most obvious principles of
interpretation call upon us to endeavour, in the first
place, to discover what those false opinions were,
against which the Evangelist, in these verses, wrote ;
or, in other words, it must be our first step in this
investigation, to inquire what were the prevalent errors
in religious philosophy and belief at that time.
Although in conducting this inquiry, we must depend
chiefly upon inferences, yet they will be of a very
satisfactory nature: From notices of the progress and
state of opinion, in the different schools and countries,
* Marsh's Michaelis, vol. iii. p. 279.

20 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
in the ages before, and from the careful descriptions,
which the early Christian Fathers have given us, of
the several systems of philosophy existing in the age
immediately after that of the apostles, we can, with a
great degree of certainty, infer the character of the
speculations fashionable in the apostolic times. In
pursuing this process of inquiry, we shall be led over a
wide surface, which, in its several partsv has probably
been surveyed before, but of which a full and con
nected view has not yet, perhaps, been obtained. In
entering upon it, the first point to which our attention
is directed, is the Jewish dispensation, considered as
a system of Theology.
The fundamental articles of the religion of the
Jews, were the unity and the spirituality of the Deity.
They asserted the unity of God, without any modifi
cations, in its plainest, most obvious sense. By the
spirituality of God, all that they meant, because it was
all that they could understand, was, that he was not
confined to any place, and did not exist in a material
form ; but that, although everywhere invisible, he was
everywhere present. To preserve these two great
truths in the world, appears to have been the leading
purpose of the Jewish dispensation. For this end,
the Deity seems to have taken that people into his
peculiar keeping, and to have separated them from
all the other nations of the earth. In his regulations
for their government, and in all the usages and insti
tutions, which they were required to adopt, we can
discern this motive. The Jews were constantly
exposed to the danger of obscuring, or losing these

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 21
truths, especially the latter. They were surrounded
by nations of polytheists ; and their history affords
frequent and melancholy proof of their aberrations and
declensions from the simple faith revealed to their
fathers, of their having imbibed idolatrous notions, and
adopted heathenish practices.
But the tendency of the Jews to idolatry, which so
strongly marked their history previous to the days of
their captivity, was not wholly caused by the influence
of the opinions or religious rites and ceremonies of
the pagan worshippers on their borders. Perhaps,
when we come to analyze the circumstances of their
condition, by the principles of human nature, our sur
prise at their frequent defection from the truth, will be
diminished, and we may even moderate the reproach,
which we have cast upon them, as a hardhearted,
stifihecked, perverse, and rebellious race.* In the
early ages, the minds of men were but little conversant
with purely intellectual abstractions. On this account
merely, we might suppose, that there would be a
greater difficulty than is commonly imagined, in fixing
in the minds of a people, a clear and distinct notion
of a spiritual Divinity. It will be worth our while to
reflect upon the nature of the conception we have of
a spirit, and, in this way, prepare ourselves to explain
the need there was of precaution, lest the Jews should
fall away from their faith.
It is probable that, when we think of spirituality,
all the ideas in our minds are merely negations,! sucn
* Fleury's Ancient Israelites, Part II. chap. 19.
t Stjllingfleef s Origines Sacrae, p. 234.

22 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
as the exclusion of color, weight, shape, and every
material attribute. We think of something without
limit or outlines, and all that we can conceive of that
something, is, that it is unlike everything of which our
senses have given us any information, every image,
which the mind can contemplate, as existing without
itself. It is true, we can ascribe to a spirit certain
attributes; but these do not constitute parts of the
original idea of that spirit, any more than the virtues
and wisdom of a man are necessarily connected with
the idea of that man as a being, or even with the
original and immediate emotions, arising from the
contemplation of his person, or his image, as it exists
in the marble or on the canvass. All the attributes,
which we ascribe to a man, are secondary and posterior
to the idea which we form of him, as a man, as an
intelligent being. So, whatever attributes we consider
as belonging to God, we can only think of them as
coming forth from, and connected with a certain being,
whom we call God ; and when we attempt to analyze
the idea of God, we are concerned only with this
being, as such, not "with his exercises, nor with the
character appropriate to his exercises ; just as it is with
our own minds, when thinking of them in the abstract,
we do not think of memory, nor of comparison, nor of
imagination, but of a certain something, we know not
what, we know not precisely where, to the particular
exercises of which we apply these words.*
* Edinburgh Review, No. lxxxiv. p. 318. . In the celebrated article
on Milton, here referred to, is presented a very striking view of the
principles now stated,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 33
If these remarks are just, we see what extreme
danger the Jews were in of losing the only correct
notion of their God ; for that notion consisted almost
entirely in the exclusion of positive ideas, and the
association with it of a single image drawn from mate
rial objects, would in a moment effectually destroy it.
It was absolutely necessary, in order to preserve it,
to check the indulgence of the fancy, to prevent the
thoughts from going out, as it were, to gather up and
put together images, in which to embody their con
ceptions, and upon which they could dwell in contem
plation. This was the obvious end of the second
commandment. When we call to mind the great care and attention
which are required to banish from our minds those
material images of the Deity, to which, in early
life, we all, more or less, become accustomed, and
to rise up to a conception of his pure and spiritual
nature ; when we consider how large a portion of the
inhabitants of Christendom, at this time, have God
represented to their minds in a bodily shape ; and
when we reflect that in the Catholic communion the
practice is countenanced of painting the Almighty
Father, in the form of a venerable man,* in order to
present a ^distinct image of him to such as will not
strive to keep their apprehensions of his nature clear,
and to worship him as a spirit, and who, if their minds
were not possessed of an idea of him in a material
form, would reject all thought, and lose all conception
of him whatever ; when we think of all this, we can
* See Bell's Observations on Italy, p. 123.

24 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
easily imagine how difficult it must have been, in
the earlier and ruder ages of the world, to preserve
an uncultivated people in the belief of a spiritual God,
who could only be contemplated by a strong and
steady effort of the , mind, in its most active and
elevated state.
Bearing these general reflections in our minds, let
us now return to the consideration of the Jewish
Theology. It is well known, that from a period as far
back at least as the captivity of Babylon, it has been
the practice of the followers of Moses, in reading their
sacred books, not to utter the name of Jehovah.*
No Jew, since that period, has dared to pronounce that
awful name. This is generally attributed to a feeling
of reverence. Such a feeling is, without question,
produc.ed by it. But it did not altogether originate,
I think, in such a feeling. There was deep wisdom, as
well as piety, in the institution of this practice. It owes
its existence to a policy on the part of those to whom
the Jewish Theology was intrusted, the examination of
which will be found important to the elucidation of the
general subject of our inquiry.
It is the common definition of words, that they are
' signs of thoughts.' This is not strictly true. They
are the signs of images, which are supposed to reflect
the thoughts of the mind. We cannot, strictly speaking,
communicate thoughts directly from one to another.f
* See Calmet's Dictionary, art. Jehovah.
t See, upon the subject of the connexion between language and
thought, Dugald Stewart's valuable Essays upon the Tendency of
some late Philological Speculations.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 25
The purest, most abstract intellectual ideas, however
the mind may in itself contemplate them, can only be
communicated by words, which are associated with
the images of external objects, or changes, or relations,
supposed to bear an analogy or resemblance to the
ideas intended to be communicated. So that it may be
said with truth, that words, so far as they answer their
purpose, convey images of external things from mind
to mind. The knowledge of this fact led Herder, in
his admirable work on the ' Philosophy of History,' in
speaking of language, to say, 'The breath of our mouths
is the picture of the universe, the type that exhibits our
thoughts and feelings to the mind of another.'
This immediate connexion between words and
images in the mind, led to that ingenious theory,
defended by Ellis in his ' Inquiry whence cometh
Wisdom,' and by Wollaston, in his great work, ' The
Religion of Nature Delineated,' which asserted, that
we cannot think but by the means of words. The
truth is, that we cannot communicate thoughts but by
words, which excite images with which they are asso
ciated. It does not appear, that we cannot think
without words. Although all thoughts, therefore, may
not be necessarily associated with words, words, to
answer their purpose, must be associated with certain
images, so related to particular thoughts, that instantly
and reciprocally they suggest each other. Ideas are
wafted or floated on, from one to another, by the in
strumentality of images, impressed, as it were, upon
particular words;' and, to whatever minds these images
are thus presented, they suggest the intended ideas,
3 •

26 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
either directly, or by the agency of some supposed
analogy. That words receive their value and power in
this manner, is rendered evident by the circumstance,
that they have always been preceded, and introduced
into use by hieroglyphic writing.
We now see upon what principles the utterance of
the word Jehovah was forbidden; for, if used in the
interchange of thought, like all other words, it would
necessarily become associated with certain images,
and these images would gradually assume the place
of that abstract and negative notion, which alone
is appropriate to the apprehension of an Omnipresent
Spirit, until, in the process of time, it would be entirely
obliterated in the minds of men. The only remedy
or preventive of this great evil, was, to abolish the
utterance of the word altogether, and, by a solemn and
striking avoidance of it, to impress the minds of the
worshippers continually with a sense of the impropriety
of allowing themselves to speculate, in imagination,
concerning the nature of that Being, whose very name
their lips could not, without sin and danger, pronounce.
The wise policy of the Jewish divines did not end
here. A spiritual being, equally present everywhere,
could only reveal himself to particular men or commu
nities, by some limited, local, and sensible manifestation.
And there was danger lest the place in which he re
vealed himself, might be looked upon as especially
his residence ; or the material signs, by which he
revealed himself, be confounded with his own spiritual
nature. Moses, for instance, was exposed to the error
of thinking that God was actually present upon Mount

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 27
Horeb, in the -burning bush, in such a manner as to
imply that he was absent from, or not equally present
in, all other places. The Israelites were liable to the
impression, that God could not have been as much
present elsewhere, at the time when the law was given
them from Mount Sinai, as he was there; and that the
voice of the thunder, and the smoke, and the clouds,
before which they then trembled, were the permanent
accompaniments, lineaments, and exhibitions of his
person. And the people, who worshipped towards
the temple, because the ' most excellent glory,' the
visible, symbol of their God, rested within it and be
tween the cherubim, were certainly in danger of
regarding him as a local deity, and of not making the
cautionary reflection, which Solomon introduced in his
sublime prayer invoking him to put his name there,*
' But will God in very deed dwell with men, on the
earth? Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens
cannot contain thee ; how much less this house, which
I have built ! ' These instances will sufficiently explain
what reason there was to apprehend, that the Jews
might be led to confine the Deity, in their conception
of him, to a circumscribed and local existence, to for
get his invisible omnipresence and spirituality, amidst
the glorious manifestations he had been pleased to
make to them and their fathers, through the instru
mentality of material objects.
We find, as if in anticipation of this error, the
occasional use, in the Jewish scriptures, of the phrase
'The Word of the Lord,' or ' The Logos of the Lord,'
" 2 Chron. vi. 18,

28 -LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
instead of 'The Lord,' or 'God,' or 'Jehovah*' as,
for instance, Psal.xxxiii. 6, 'By the Word of the Lord
were the heavens made;' and Psal. cv. 19, 'Until
the time that his Word came.'* In the -Targums, or
Chaldean paraphrases of the scriptures, which were
made for the use of the common people after the cap
tivity of Babylon, this circumlocution of the 'Logos of
the Lord,' for the simple name of Jehovah, is almost
universally adopted, j Thus, the Jerusalem Targum
translates Gen. i.27, ' God created man,' by this phrase,
' The Word, or Logos of the Lord created man.' In
Gen. xv. 6, 'And he,' Abraham, ' believed in the Lord,'
the version of the Pentateuch made by Onkelos, says,
' He believed in The Word of the Lord.'' Num. xiv. 9,
' Rebel not ye against the Lord; ' Onkelos, ' against
The Word of the Lord'X &sc. Now the object of this
circumlocution was plainly this ; that men might not
mistake the manifestation of God, for God himself, but
might regard it, as it always really was, as the point, the
spot, the channel, at and through which, The Word of
God, that is, the declaration of his will and purposes,
came forth to men.
In taking'a view of the Theology of the Jews, we
have seen with what caution they attempted to pre
serve the true idea of a spiritual, omnipresent God,
and that, with this view, and for this purpose, they
adopted the practice of avoiding the utterance of his
* In the Septuagint version, what, in these instances, is rendered
' The Lord,' is translated by Aoj/ot.
f Rosenmuller, John i. 1.
\. Ben Mordecai's Apology, Letter III.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 29
name, and. of attributing all revelations and communi
cations received at particular periods and places, not
to a special interview with him personally, but to the
instrumentality of striking material exhibitions,' to which
their attention was attracted, and through which he
conveyed his instructions. They spoke of such com
munications and revelations, as received, not from
God, but from his Logos or Word, then and there
uttered and brought forth to them. The result of our
inquiries thus far, is, that as early as the time of the
writings of the Chaldean paraphrases, which was cer
tainly previous to the birth of Christ, and, it is proba
ble, as far back as the Babylonish captivity, there
existed among the Jews a general use of the phrase,
' Logos of the Lord,' adopted, most evidently, for the
purpose of preserving the idea of the unity and spiritu
ality of the Supreme Being. I say, it is probable, as
far back as the Babylonish captivity ; for, although
the Chaldean paraphrases, of which we have any
knowledge, are thought by some to have no higher
antiquity than the time of Christ, or twenty or thirty
years before his time ; yet we must carry back to a
long period anterior to their production, the origin of
expressions frequently found in them all, such as the
' Mimra,' or 'Logos,' applied to the divine appear
ances. Indeed, there can be no doubt, that some
such circumlocution was adopted at the same time
that the name 'Jehovah' ceased to be spoken. But
Jehovah began to be regarded as an ineffable word at
least as early as the captivity. The ' Mimra d'Adonai,'
or ' Logos of the Lord,' is the phrase used in its place
3*

30 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
in the remaining ancient paraphrases. It seems to be
clear, from this view of the subject, that the above
expression, as applied to the Divine manifestations, was
in use among the Jews, at the shortest estimate, from
the time of the captivity of Babylon ; that is, for more
than five hundred years before Christ. We find it
also in the original Hebrew scriptures. It is unques
tionably used in the place of Jehovah.*
I shall attempt, in a future Letter, to explain the
precise meaning, of this phrase. The next step will
be to inquire into the nature of the ideas which became
attached to it, during the period intervening between
the captivity of Babylon and the commencement of
the christian era.
* Le Clerc's Hammond, Heb. iv. 12.

31

LETTER III.
In order to form a judgment respecting the meaning
attached to the word Logos, at the time of our Sa
viour, it will be necessary to take a brief view of the
various speculations which prevailed previous to his
time ; for many of them contributed to that meaning,
as will, I think, be 'made to appear. We leave the
Jews, therefore, at this point, and turn our attention to
the progress and principles of Gentile Philosophy and
Theology. It is well known that, beyond the limits
of Judea, the nations of the world were, from the ear
liest period of authentic history, and of fabulous tradi
tion, overshadowed with the darkest idolatry, and
given up to the most degrading superstition. With
the exception of that single, separate, small branch,
the whole family of man were profoundly ignorant
of the true God, and of the principles of the moral
administration of the universe. It is also well known
that, from time to time, in every nation which had
risen above the lowest level of ignorance and barba-
'rism, individuals successively appeared, who, dissat
isfied with the prevailing systems, cast doubting and
inquisitive glances around upon the creation, and were
anxious to learn, in the language of Ovid, —
 ' magni primordia mundi,

' Et rerum causas, et quid natura docebat ;
' Quid Deus ? unde nives ? qua; fulminis esset origo ? '

32 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS,
These curious and independent inquirers after truth,
gathered around them schools of disciples, by the
means of whom they preserved and propagated a
Spirit of reflection and research. It is impossible to
determine the precise degree of progress which they
made. They seem to have dimly conceived some
truths, concealed from their contemporaries, to have
discerned the absurdity, and to have rejected the belief
of the most palpably false and ridiculous articles of
the gross superstition of their times. But they never
ceased to give an outward adherence and support to
all existing ceremonies, rites, and customs. There is
some ground for suspicion, that these philosophers, es
pecially the later ones, rejected, in their private specu
lations and confidential intercourse, the whole system
of the heathen idolatry, and veiled their infidelity
from public view and detection, by continuing to use
the titles, and to observe the accustomed worship of
the gods, with a hidden and mysterious meaning at
tached to their names, while they regarded them as
nothing more than emblems or personifications of cer
tain conceptions of the mind, or principles of the uni
verse. The theory of the heathen gods, as expounded
by these schools of Philosophy, was, it is probable,
not that they were persons, but personifications, or al- ,
legorical representations. Philo Biblius,* as preserv
ed by Eusebius, testifies to the truth of this supposi
tion, by declaring 'that, with a great deal of force
and straining, they turned all the stories of the gods
into allegories and physical discourses.'
* Stillingfleet's Origines Sacrae. p. 20.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 33
In the progress of physical discovery, of a more
scientific classification of the objects of knowledge,
and of the advancement of general intelligence, by in
tercommunication between distant schools and differ
ent nations, a gradual approach was made towards
that simplicity which belongs to truth. The great
principles of the government of the natural and moral
world were found to be less and less numerous. These
principles, as they were adduced, were allegorized,
and, for the sake of avoiding a shock of the popular
prejudice, considered as personified in the leading dei
ties of the Pantheon. The inferior gods, to whom no
such "personifications were attached, began slowly to
sink from their former elevated position. A gradual
process was going on, imperceptibly undermining the
splendid polytheism of antiquity, and loosening its hold
upon individuals and communities. In the course of
this progress some glimpses, perhaps, were caught of
the grand truth of the unity of God ; but they were
transient glimpses ; and there are many considerations,
which induce me to think, that, had it not been for the
christian revelation, the advancement of theological
knowledge would have terminated either in something
like the Platonic trinity, or in the adoption of a four
fold deity in imitation of Pythagoras, or, as is most
probable, in the reception of the two principles of Ma-
nicheism ; or, if in neither of these systems, in a wide
spread and universal infidelity, in which the only vi
brations of opinion would be between Stoicism, on the
one hand, enjoining a perpetual conflict with our natu
ral feelings whether right or wrong, and Epicurism,

34 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
on the other, commanding us to obey and gratify those
feelings, at all times, and equally without discrimina
tion. In order to give an idea of the extent, to which the
philosophers had encroached upon, and modified, and
perhaps improved -the various systems of idolatrous
polytheism, some of their speculations, and the theo
ries in which they resulted, will now be presented to
your consideration.
The religion of the Oriental nations was idolatrous.
Their objects of worship were numerous. The pro
gress of reformation and of advancement towards the
simple truth of one God, was never carried further,
in this quarter of the world, by any philosopher, than
it was by Zoroaster, and by those of the ancient Magi,
who adopted his opinions. He is said by Plutarch to
have reduced all the principles of the Universe to
these two ; ' Good and Evil,' or ' Light and Darkness.'
By maintaining this opinion, Zoroaster has come to be
regarded as the founder of the Manichean system of
Philosophy.* Let it be remembered, that the belief
of these two principles prevailed in the East, and exist
ed as a part of Persian and Asiatic Philosophy, long
before the birth of our Saviour.
In passing from Asia, we come to the Egyptians.
Let us notice the indications that remain, of their lead
ing views of religion and philosophy in those early
ages. Egypt and Chaldea were the sources from
* See Cudworth's Intellectual System, p. 290; Stillingfleefs
Origines Sacra, pp. 309 — 311 ; Stanley's Lives of the Philosophers,
p. 793,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 35
which the Greeks and all the Europeans derived their
polytheism and idolatry,* and from these countries did
they also receive those speculations and that habitof phi
losophizing, which, as I have before remarked, gradual
ly overthrew polytheism and idolatry. There is no
doubt that the priests and learned men among the
Egyptians, did allow themselves great liberty in alle
gorizing, and speculating concerning their gods. They
had struck out, and were in possession of an arcane
and recondite theology, which they kept concealed
from the vulgar, by means of allegorical fables, and
symbolical writing. Of this we have proof resting
upon the authority of Origen, f Clemens of Alexan
dria,* and Plutarch. We should infer it, without any
direct evidence, from the well known fact that Py
thagoras and the chief Grecian philosophers seem to
have caught an allegorizing spirit, and to haye adopted
those of their opinions, in which they differed from the
popular superstition of their times, while travelling in
Egypt, and the adjacent countries.
Vitringa, in his learned and very valuable book,
entitled Observationes Sacrs, J quotes Jamblicus, a
contemporary of Eusebius, who made it his business to
inform himself thoroughly, concerning the Theology of
the Egyptians, as asserting, that they gave rise to the
notion of a regular order or succession of spiritual be
ings, called CEons or Emanations, deriving their ex-
* Cudworth's Intellectual System, p. 309 ; Stillingfleet's Origines
Sacra;, pp. 75, 76.
t Cudworth's Intell. System, pp. 314, 315.
| Vitringa's Observat. Sac. lib. v. p. 162.

36 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
istence from the Supreme Original Cause of all things,
and intrusted, according to their respective rank and
dignity, with the several departments of the adminis
tration of the world. The Egyptians are supposed to
have been led, by their free speculations, conducted,
as they were, in perfect concealment and security, be
neath and behind their hieroglyphics and their alle
gories, nearer to a just conception of the unity of God,
than any other heathen nation.*
Whether this opinion be correct, and, indeed, every
question concerning, this extraordinary people, who,
in the early ages, were teachers of the world f in both
truth and error, whose priests, at one and the same
time, countenanced and perpetuated the most "gross
and degrading superstition, and imparted instruction to
wandering philosophers, and sent them home to their
various countries, bearing with them a wisdom, which
enabled them to discern the folly of the systems of
idolatry established there, and to commence the work
of their overthrow, — will soon, we think, be settled by
the application of the recent wonderful discovery of
the principles of hieroglyphic writing, to the yet nu
merous remains of Egyptian letters ; a discovery which
hardly has its equal in importance and interest in the
history of literature or of man.
I now proceed to give a brief sketch of the influ
ence of a philosophizing spirit upon the religion of the
Greeks and the Europeans. There is much reason
to receive as correct the opinion which the emperor
* Cudworth's Intell. System, p. 334.
t Stillingfleet's Orig. Sac. p. 267.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 37
Julian entertained and endeavoured to establish.* It
was this ; that the heathen Greeks, although support
ers of the worship of many gods, believed in one Su
preme Deity, to whom all others were considered
subordinate. In his book against the Christians, as
quoted by Cyril in his reply to it, he represents this
Supreme Deity, as holding the same relation to the
other gods, that the sovereign of a large empire sus
tains towards the governors, whom he has appointed
to exercise dominion over particular provinces. The
same opinion was more fully expressed in the oration
of this emperor in praise of the sun, as quoted by the
same author, in -which he supposes one Supreme First
Cause, corresponding with the ' ro ayuSov' of Plato, and,
as derived from this First Cause, an eternal mind or
intelligence. A large amount of evidence to this point
is scattered throughout the classical writings. Homer,
in his Odyssey, twice speaks of God, in both cases
evidently meaning Jupiter, in one expressly designat
ing him as omnipotent ; — ImmM yap «jr«vr«. He also
says that he has control over the principles of good
and evil ; — mya^nire K«MtiTs hht.jf Both Virgil and
Ovid speak of Jupiter, as the Almighty Father, ' Pater
Omnipotens.' The Christian Fathers undoubtedly
pushed this mode of theorizing away the heathen
idolatry, to an unwarrantable extent, in their ruinous
zeal to make the difference between Paganism and
revealed religion, appear as little as possible. Still,
* Cudworth's Intell. Sys. p. 274.
t Ibid. p. 200.
4

38 x LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
however, the general proposition, that the Grecian
idolaters recognised one superior and .supreme God,
is undoubtedly correct.
In tracing the progress of Grecian Philosophy, we
discern frequent fluctuations of opinion, as might be
expected, where men had nothing fixed to guide them
in their speculations. Sometimes they appear to have
risen up towards a clear conception of the unity of the
Divine nature, and, while in this elevated flight, they
look down upon the whole army of the gods, if not
with contempt, certainly as nothing more than mere
emblems, or personifications of the principles of the
moral and material universe. At other times, they
seem to have descended again into the darkness and
superstition, which enveloped the great mass of their
idolatrous countrymen, and to conform precisely to
their usages, their modes of thinking, and their belief.
It may be, perhaps* that their apparent conformity, in
their practice and in several parts of their writings, to
the worship and to the acknowledgment of a multi
tude of gods, was not owing to any change in their
opinions, but to the influence of considerations, such
as the following, stated by Cudworth, in that vast store
house of ancient wisdom, his celebrated ' Intellectual
System of the Universe.' * ' The truth of the whole
business seems to be this, that the ancient Pagans did
physiologize in their theology, and whether looking
upon the whole world animated, as the Supreme God,
and consequently the several parts of it, as his livipg
members, or else apprehending it at least to be a mir-
* Cudworth's Intell. System, p. 228.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 39
ror, or visible image of the Invisible Deity, and con
sequently all its several parts, and things of nature,
but so many several manifestations of the Divine pow
er and providence, they pretended, that all their de
votion towards the Deity, ought not to be huddled up
in one general and confused acknowledgment of a
Supreme Invisible Being, the creator and governor
of all, but that all the several manifestations of the
Deity in the world, considered singly and apart by
themselves, should be made so many distinct objects
of their devout veneration ; and therefore in order
hereunto did they wetaamicotHi, speak of the things
in nature, and the parts of the world as persons, and
consequently as so many gods and goddesses.; yet so,
as that the intelligent might easily understand the
meaning that these were all really nothing else, but so
many several names and notions, of that one Numen,
Divine force and power, which runs through the whole
world, multiformly displaying itself therein.'
Knowing that the Greeks were in the habit of phi
losophizing, in this manner, concerning their religion,
and that they did not always regard their gods as actu
al beings, but simply, for the most part, as personifica
tions of the several departments, and principles of the
government of one or more superior Deities, we shall
be prepared to find, in their writings, a great variety
and freedom of speculation, concerning the nature and
operations of Divine power ; and ,this we do find.
From the time of the traditionary Orpheus, to that of
Plato, the sublime master of this dim, mystic, tran
scendental lore, we meet with almost infinitely various

40 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
theories and hypotheses respecting the powers that are
above. The mind appears to have struggled often, but
always in vain, towards the truth, as it has been reveal
ed to us, and as we now read it, by the light of this
revelation, everywhere in the volume of nature. The
great obstacle, in the way of reaching it, was an igno
rance of the possibility of the coexistence with material
objects, and of the diffusion throughout the universe, of
one Spirit, everywhere- intelligent, everywhere and si
multaneously active. In consequence of their ignorance
of this truth, they all bad recourse to the supposition
of derived dependent beings, among whom the gov
ernment of things was distributed ; and the highest
aim of the philosopher was to reduce these beings to
as small a number as was possible, consistently with
an entire and effectual administration of the universe.
If it be asked, why the knowledge of the existence
of this one all pervading Spirit was not obtained from
the Jews ? the answer is, that the reverential circum
spection, observed by that people, in avoiding the ut
terance of the name. of Jehovah, and their practice, of
speaking of all his operations and interpositions and
communications in the circumlocution before described,
* The Word, or Logos, of the Lord,' had a tendency to
mislead observers and travellers, rather than to inform
them rightly on this subject. There is good reason to
believe, that this custom among the Jews, of attribut
ing all revelations and manifestations from above, to the
instrumentality of ' The Word, or Logos, of the Lord,'
laid the foundations, not only for erroneous opinions,
among their own descendants, but also for much of

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 41
those mysterious systems of divine Philosophy, which
were brought to perfection in the school of Plato,* a
school that, for many weary ages, has prevailed against
and eclipsed the school of Jesus. Of this, however,
more will be said hereafter.
In tracing the principles of nature up to their ulti
mate sources, or, rather, in reducing the number of
original underived gods, the early Greeks came to
very different and strange conclusions. One philoso
pher, Anaximander, rested at last in 'infinity,' as his
first principle. f How he made air things concentre
in that, we are not informed. Thales considered
' water ' the origin and source of all things ; J which
also appears to have been Homer's opinion. In the
fourteenth book of the Iliad, two hundred and first
line, he has this expression ; ' Qx.eMtv re S-em ytwrn.'
In the two hundred and fortysixth line of the same
book of the Iliad, Homer again expresses the same
idea ; — " ilxeats, iavrse ytienf irmrirri TirvxTtti.'
Virgil, in the three hundred and eightysecond line
of the fourth Georgic, repeats the sentiment; ' Ocea-
numque patrem rerum.'
Pherecydes Syrus, a contemporary of Thales,
said that the original and only eternal beings were
Jupiter, and Time, and the Earth. || Pythagoras ap
pears to have been very capricious and variable. At
one time he regarded as the chief deities, the sun and
* StiUingfleet's Orig. Sac. p. 366.
t Stanley's Lives, p. 61. { Ibid. p. 5. 6,
|| Cudworth's Intel!. System, p, 370,
4*

42 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
moon and stars. At other times he seems to have en
tertained the Manichean notion, in an obscure manner,
Under the names of Monad and Dyad. And to him
also is attributed the doctrine of a Tetrad or Tetrac-
tys, a fourfold division of the Deity ; an idea, drawn
either by some Rabbinical fancy from the Tetragram-
piaton, or name of God among the Hebrews, consist
ing of four letters, or from some peculiar properties of
the number four.*
This will serve as a specimen of the speculations of
philosophers, previous to Plato. We have seen, that
at one time, the original principles were made, we
cannot conceive in what manner, to depend upon, and
concentre in one principle, such as water or infinity.
Then, again, we find them reduced no further than to
three, and then diminished to two, and then multiplied
to four ; the number continually changing, according to
the changing fancies of the philosophers.
It only remains for me, in this part of the discussion,
to speak of Plato, and his system of religious Philoso
phy. The mind of this philosopher, although, in ma
ny respects, one of the most exalted and refined ever
connected with a mortal frame,was very much addict
ed to mystic, airy, and, as they may well be called,
transcendental speculations and wanderings. And he
so often expatiates, in this cloudy upper region* that
it is difficult to ascertain precisely what his elementary
principles were. Of this, however, there is satisfactory
* Cudworth's Intell. System, pp. 371, 375 ; Stanley's Lives, pp. 433,
484, 493, 505, 512 ; " Enfield's History of Philosophy, Book ii.
Chap. xii. 1.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 43
evidence;* that he recognised some supreme, inde
pendent, underived power, to which he gave the name
of r<> «v, ' The One,' defining its number, and to «y*3-«»,
'The Good,' declaring its nature. The next in
order to this moral principle, but beneath it, and
proceeding from it, he placed the intellectual principle
of the universe, which he called N«s, or ' Mind,' ^
and which was also called Aoy«s, the word being used,
in his Philosophy, as equivalent with Nas, and, of
course, in that sense, in which it means ' Reason.' J
The next and' last of Plato's ultimate principles, was
called by him *vXn, or ' The Soul of the World.' |[ So
that the Theology of Plato, if all this be nothing more
than a hidden allegory, which perhaps it is, was simply
this, and it is worthy of all admiration, as coming from
one to whom the true God had not been revealed ;
that the first principle in the universe is Benevolence ;
the second, Intelligence ; the third, Life or Vitality,
or the Active Principle.
When Plato surveyed the world in which we
are placed, these three seemed to him to be the
leading and prevailing principles, by which it was
governed. And it is an ever enduring monument of
the purity, and a demonstration of the true refinement
and sublime elevation of his mind, that he gave the
preeminence to the moral, over the intellectual and
life giving principle. What a testimony it is also, to
* Cudworth's Intell. System, p. 406. f Ibid. p. 573.
X Stanley's Lives, p. 207; Vitringa's Obser. Sac. lib. v. p. 162,
|| Cudworth's Intell. System, p. 403; Le Clerc's Ars Critica. P. II.
S. I. c. xv. p. 10. /

44 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
the benevolence of Him, who framed and governs all
things, that so powerful and capacious an intellect as
that which was imparted to this illustrious philosopher,
when left entirely free to its own speculations, after
having traversed and explored all nature to discover
what principle in creation it might be, which per
vaded most extensively, controlled most powerfully,
and surpassed all others in the amount of its agency
and the range of its operations, should settle down in
the full belief, and most thorough conviction, that that
principle is Benevolence !
If these three principles were not considered in the
light of an allegory by Plato, the only other alterna^
tive is to suppose, that he regarded them, as the great
body of his followers unquestionably did, as an order
of deities, above all others, and standing, with respect
to each other, in the succession in which they have
been named. This theory was generally adopted by
the Western schools of Philosophy. Changes took
place frequently, not only in the names of these Divine
principles, but also in the meaning attached to those
names. They were sometimes used as synonymous
with the three Capitoline gods, as they were called,
Jupiter,* Minerva, f and Juno ; and these again, were
allegorized to mean, the Middle Ether, the Higher
Heaven, the Lower Air and Earth.
When this triad had become perfectly established
in the Pantheon, many speculations were started re
specting the meaning', and origin, and relative rank of
its several parts. Controversies arose, and were multi-
* Cudworth's Intell. Sys. p. 450. t Ibid. p. 309.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 45
plied, until the whole subject was covered up and con
founded by an infinite mass of superinduced mysticism
and theories, and fanciful interpretations and phrases.
In the course of this wild speculation, there sprung up
and came into fashion, a whole host of such expressions
as these ; ' Selfbegotten,' ' Eternal Generation,' ' The
Father of himself Sic* Writers and reasoners of
this school, being, like the leaders of all other sects,
desirous of bringing as much of the authority of an
tiquity, as was possible, to bear in favor of their tenets,
tasked their industry and ingenuity, it is probable, to
the utmost, to force the systems of Pythagoras, and of
every other old philosopher, to appear to give evidence
in support of their trinity. And it was by no means
a difficult matter, as Cudworth in his great work has
given a practical proof, to find, or to make such
evidence, as would suit their purpose, in every actual
or possible system of heathen idolatry. All that was
necessary, was, to ascertain which were considered
the three most important and powerful gods, in the
several systems, and to separate them from the rest,
and declare them to be a trinity. , The materials, col
lected, without doubt, long before, in this manner, and
for this purpose, were all ready at the hands of those
Platonizing Fathers, who went over to Christianity, in
order to bring Christianity back to Platonism. They,
and their followers, who have been disposed to prove
the truth of the trinity, by demonstrating, that it had
been the foundation and fountlmi of every form of
absurd, gross, and horrible superstition, that may be
* Cudworth's Intell. Sys. p. 574.

46 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
found to have existed, have had nothing to do, but to
repeat over, what had unquestionably been gathered
together, and written out by the pagan followers of
Plato, long before our Saviour appeared on the earth.*
I shall conclude this brief view of the philosophy of
Plato, by merely observing, that it is probable, that a
correct description of it, as framed and left by him,
is contained in a book called ' Platonisme Devoile,'
' Platonism Unveiled,' written by an anonymous au
thor, who, notwithstanding his Socinianism, is much
applauded by Vitringa for his learning. I have not
seen the book, and only know it, as quoted by Vitringa
and others. Its purpose is to prove that the trinity
which Plato adopted, was understood, by him, to mean
no more than the three principal properties which
appeared to him to be exhibited in the creation and
course of the world ; Goodness, Wisdom, and Energy ."(¦
I cannot avoid giving utterance to two reflections,
which have been continually breaking in upon the train
of my thoughts, in the course of this part of the inquiry.
The first is, that the early Fathers of the church were
an indefatigable and bold race of men; not so much
* Preface to Cudworth's Intellectual System, and «verywhere in
his fourth chapter.
t Vitringa's Obs. Sac. lib. v. p. 147. Since these Letters were writ
ten, I have been permitted, by the kindness of a friend, to look into the
work here referred to, 'Le Platonisme DevoileV It was written by
Souverain, and richly merits the good opinion of Vitringa, as well an
the general celebrity it has obtained. It gives an interesting" and
ingenious account of the ' Logos ' of Plato and of St John ; and,
although it does not present, still it contributes much to illustrate
and confirm, the view of the subject attempted to be set forth in
these Letters.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 47
in compelling the various heathen schools, of what
soever diversity in their doctrines, to give testimony in
favor of their trinity — this, as has been said before,
was already done at their hands ; but their labor con
sisted in the endeavour to force the christian scriptures
to testify to its truth ; and their boldness, in daring to
make the attempt, in direct opposition, as one of their
number confesses,* and as another implies,f to the
great body of believers in the church, and the uniform
letter of the scriptures.
There are no more striking specimens of special
pleading on record, than these laborious and perse
vering writers present, in their arguments to this point.
They attempt to marshal the whole host of Oriental
and Egyptian idolaters, and the Grecian polytheists,
from Orpheus, and Hesiod, and Homer, down to
Plato, in harmonious union with the sacred writers of
both covenants, into one solid column, in defence of
* Tertullian adversus Praxeam, c. iii. p. 635. This treatise against
Praxeas, who is known to have been a Unitarian, is invaluable, as
containing a most perfect attestation to the fact, that, in Tertullian's
day, the great body of Christians, the common, unlearned, unsophisti
cated Christians, who, according to his declaration, made up the larger
part, were unwilling to admit the ceconomy, as he calls it, of the
trinity, for fear that it was inconsistent with, and would undermine
the unity of God in the strictest sense, as they held it. ' Simplices
enim quique,' says he, 'ne dixerim imprudentes et idiota?, quee
major semper credentium pars est — expavescumt ad osconomiam.'
He gives the reason, too, why they thus dreaded the ' oeconomy ' of
the trinity ; * Quoniam et ipsa regula fidei, e pluribus Diis seculi,
ad unicum et verum Deum transfert; ' ' because the rule of their faith
enjoined the belief of the one true God' — a most wise and prophetical
objection !
t Origen, as quoted by Cudworth, Intell. Sys. pp. 314, 315.

48 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
what they were pleased to determine to be the true
theory of the revealed God, in acknowledged contra
diction to the current belief of the church to which
they had voluntarily joined themselves. It is plain to
every observer, that they were more solicitous to add
to the number of the converts, than to preserve, in their
simplicity and purity, the doctrines, of the gospel ; and
that, in order the more easily to win the favor of the
various philosophizing sects, to our religion, they did
not much scruple to bend and twist its records into an
apparent conformity with the obscure and mysterious
dogmas of their several schools. They endeavoured to
make a similarity appear to exist between them, in as
many points as possible, and to diminish, to the greatest
extent, the amount of change necessary in the opinions
of a person shifting his relations as a disciple, from
Zoroaster, or Pythagoras, or Plato, to Jesus. Stilling-
fleet, in that admirable compound of learning, sense,
and wit, his ' Origines Sacra,' says, that ' it is too
evident, from the writings of some, that they rather
seek to accommodate the scriptures to the sentiments
of the school of Plato, than to reform that by the
scriptures ; ' and he quotes TertuUian, as complaining
of those, who, in his day, corrupted the truth, by
mingling with it the notions of philosophers ; ' Veritatis
dogmata ad philosophicas sententias adulterare.'' *
My other reflection is this ; there is nothing sur
prising in the origin of the trinity, and in its adoption
into the christian church. The process, by which the
•Vitringa's Obser. Sac. lib, v. p. 145; Stillingfleet's Orig.Sac.
p. 317.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 49
mind of Plato was conducted, in the course of its
contemplations and investigations, to the belief of his
three archical principles, as they are called, was
extremely natural. The deification of these principles
took place, in conformity to the settled opinions and
established usages of the times; and the eloquence
and genius of the great philosopher, and of many
of his followers, rendered his system popular, and
extended it to distant schools ; and it happened from
these and other causes to be preserved in the world,
until it became embalmed, as it were, by being wrapped
up with the doctrines of the church of Christ. While it
was the purest and most rational scheme of Philosophy,
it offered to the priests and apologists of that simple
gospel, which was preached to the poor, exactly what
they wanted, to put them on a level, in the public
estimation, with the heathen schools; namely, a certain
amount of mystery and recondite learning. I referred,
a page or two before, to a quotation from Origen, as
found in Cudworth. I now present it to you entire.
Let it be remembered, that Origen is writing against
Celsus, who had said that he thoroughly understood
all that belonged t'o Christianity. ' Celsus,' says he,
' seemeth here to me, to do just as if a man travelling
into Egypt, where the wise men of the Egyptians,
according to their country learning, philosophize much
about those things that are accounted by them divine,
whilst the idiots,' that is, the common, unlearned
people, 'in the mean time, hearing only certain fables
which they know not the meaning of, are very much
pleased therewith ; Celsus, I say, in pretending to
5

50 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
know all about Christianity, doth as if such a sojourner
in Egypt, who had conversed only with those idiots,
and not been at all instructed by any of the priests, in
their arcane and recondite mysteries, should boast that
he knew all that belonged to the Egyptiau Theology.'
, Who, after reading this passage, can entertain a
doubt concerning the fact, that, at the time of Origen,
the common people in the church were ignorant of
the mysteries, as they are still called, of the faith;
that Celsus could not learn these mysteries from the
people, simply for the reason, that they were ignorant
of them ; and that they were confined to the priests?
This single passage explains the reason why the
mysterious doctrines, still attempted to be forced upon
our belief, were introduced into the church at all. It
was done in order to place the christian priesthood in
the same relation to the people, in which the Egyptian
priests stood towards the populace of their country ;
as the revered preservers of those mysteries, which it
would not be proper to reveal to the multitude. It
amounts to an admission, that those mysteries were not
contained in the scriptures, but were kept concealed
in the possession of the priests ; and it establishes for-.
ever, beyond all controversy, the all important truth,
that, at the time of Origen; the ' major pars credentium,'
the great body of believers, did not receive these mys
terious articles of faith, and that it was the settled
policy of the priests, at that period, to keep them from
their knowledge. If, however, any should doubt,
whether the inferences, here drawn from the passage
of Origen just quoted, are sufficiently supported by

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 51
the passage itself, that doubt can hardly continue,
when they read the following almost open confession,
made by the same learned and zealous Father, in the
same work against Celsus. It seems that Celsus had
reproached the Christians, or the christian priests, with
keeping their doctrines secret; In reply, Origen partly
denies the charge, and mentions several doctrines of
the gospel, such as a future punishment, and the resur
rection of the dead, which were everywhere published.
He concludes his defence in these words ; ' But if
there be some arcana imperii in the christian religion,
which are not fit to be communicated to the vulgar,
it cannot be denied, that there are the same in
Philosophy ! ' *
* In this instance, I quote from a translation of this work into
English, by James Bellamy, Esq,

52

LETTER IV.
That part of my design, which respects the several
speculations and theories prevalent in the different
nations and schools, as they existed separately, previ
ous to the formation of eclectic systems of Philosophy,
has been already accomplished. I now proceed to trace
the formation of these eclectic systems. From the
materials already collected, we shall he able to take a
wide survey of the elements of which they were com
pounded, of the sources from which they were drawn,
and of the whole ground which they occupied.
In the first place, I would remark, that the heathen
sects were actuated in their views of each other, by a
very different spirit from that, which, so unhappily,
governs the several christian denominations. Instead
of opposing, and rejecting each other's opinions with
the utmost virulence, they exhibited, on all occasions,
the greatest possible courtesy, and the most cheerful
and amiable compliance. Instead of regarding a new
religious opinion, as necessarily an enemy, they invari
ably looked upon it as a friend, and, not unfrequently,
adopted it into the family of their previous opinions.
The Greeks and Romans, treated the gods of the
Barbarians, as they politely termed the inhabitants
of all countries which they had brought into sub
jection to their empire, with precisely the same kind

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 53
attention, manifested by the late victorious armies of
France towards the pictures and statues, which they
met by the way. They brought them home with
them to their own temples, and ranged them by the
side of their national deities, and regarded them with
equal reverence and attachment.
' In the purest ages of the Commonwealth,' says
Gibbon, ' Cybele and iEsculapius had been invited by
solemn embassies ; and it was customary to tempt the
protectors of besieged cities, by the promise of more
distinguished honors, than they possessed in their na
tive country. Rome gradually became the common
temple of her subjects ; and the freedom of the city
was bestowed on all the gods of mankind.' * This
trait in the character of the ancients, is admirably de
scribed in the polished diction of this most ingenious,
learned, and eloquent of historians. ' The various
modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman
world, were all considered by the people as equally
true ; by the philosopher as equally false ; and by the
magistrate as equally useful. And thus toleration
produced not only mutual indulgence, but even relig-
ous concord. The superstition of the people was not
embittered by any mixture of theological rancor ;
nor was it confined by the chains of any speculative
system. The devout polytheist, although fondly at
tached to his national rites, admitted, with implicit
faith, the different religions of the earth.' Again ;
' Such was the mild spirit of antiquity, that the nations
* Decline and Fall, ch. ii.

54 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
•were less attentive to the difference, than to the resem
blance of their religious worship.' In another place,
he speaks of ' the facility with which the most differ
ent and even hostile nations embraced, or at least re
spected,, each other's superstitions.' He contrasts this
mutual toleration and respect among the heathen na
tions, with the exclusive bigotry of the Jews. ' The
polite Augustus condescended to give orders, that
sacrifices should he offered for his prosperity, in the
temple of Jerusalem ; while the meanest of the pos
terity of Abraham, who should have paid the same
homage to the Jupiter of the Capitol, would have been
an object of abhorrence to himself and his brethren.' *
Gibbon gives, it must be confessed, a most melancholy
reason for the existence of this tolerant spirit. ' In
their writings, and conversation, the philosophers of
antiquity asserted the independent dignity of reason ;•
but they resigned their actions to the commands of
law and of custom. Viewing with a smile of pity and
indulgence, the various errors of the vulgar, they dili
gently practised the ceremonies of their fathers, de
voutly frequented the temples of the gods, and some
times condescending to act a part on the theatre of
superstition, they concealed the sentiments of an
atheist under the sacerdotal robes. Reasoners of
such a temper were scarcely inclined to wrangle about
their respective modes of faith, or of worship'. It was
indifferent to them, what shape the folly of the multi
tude might choose to assume ; and they approached,
* Decline and Fall, ch, xv.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 55
with the same inward contempt, and the same external
reverence, the altars of the Lybian, the Olympian, or
the Capitoline Jupiter.' *
But, whatever were its causes, toleration did always
exist, to its greatest extent of compliance, in the hea
then world. Keeping this excessive charity of the
ancients in view, we shall be able to conceive, in some
measure, of the effect gradually produced upon The
ology and Philosophy, by growing habits of intercom
munication between different and distant nations,
whether for the acquisition of knowledge, the gratifi
cation of curiosity, or the purposes of commerce.
The various systems of belief, or of opinion, must
have been diffused and slowly mingled together.
This effect, too, would be much promoted by the pro
gress of conquest, and be finally brought to its con
summation, by the universal extension of the Grecian,
and then of the Roman dominion, throwing all the
sects and nations, the whole known world* into one
vast community, within the limits of one' comprehen
sive empire.
We accordingly find, everywhere, traces of the
mixed existence of all the various and discordant sys
tems, which had originally been confined to distinct
schools, and separate nations. The Oriental notion of
two distinct ruling principles in the government of the
world, the deep mysteries of Egyptian lore, and the
various speculations of the Grecian schools, were all
made to contribute to the studies and reasonings of
* Decline and Fall, ch. ii.

56 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
those addicted to the contemplation and discussion of
the subject of religion. And this was everywhere a
favorite subject. Schools of theological learning were
established in various parts of the Roman world, to
which all curious and reflecting persons were attracted,
where they were imbued with the spirit of philosophiz
ing, and from which they went forth to discuss deep
and doubtful questions with all who would listen to
them. Innumerable wild, fanciful, and incoherent
schemes of Divinity and Cosmogony were invented
and became prevalent.
The people of Judea did not escape the infection
of the times. They, too, had their Kabbala, or deep
schemes of doctrine and systems of science, gathered
both from the eastern and western schools of philoso
phy, in which the principles of the revelation by
Moses were made to combine with the heterogeneous
notions of the Chaldeans, Syrians, Egyptians and
Greeks. * Inquisitive Israelites, who resided in Gen
tile countries, frequently became converts to some of
the opinions of the philosophers, and in different modes
of combination, adopted them in connexion with the
articles of their own faith, whether derived from the
sacred books of their Prophets and their Law, or from
the traditions of their doctors, many of which were
extremely fanciful and ridiculous, constituting by far
the largest part of their religious faith, and held with as
much reverence as the precepts of Moses. In return,
there is no reason to doubt, they would endeavour to
* Mosheim, Cen. I, Part II. ch. i. Beausobre and L'Enfant, Preface
Generale, p. cci, note 2. ¦

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 57
enlighten their Gentile teachers respecting their ritual,
customs,, and traditions ; to expound to them the won
ders, which the hand of the Lord had wrought for
their fathers, and to describe the glorious manifesta
tions and revelations, which had been made to them,
by his Word or Logos, in the burning bush, in the
cloud by day, and the pillar of fire by night, on Mount
Sinai, and within the Holy of Holies, between the
Cherubim of the temple.
In this manner, mutually giving and receiving from
each other, select systems of Theology of various
kinds were formed, at different periods and places, and
propagated from school to school, and from country to
country ; Gentile borrowing of Jew, and Jew borrowing
of Gentile, until the spirit of inventive speculation,
upon deep and mysterious topics, possessed all minds,
and extended to all nations ; so that, in the days when
John wrote his Gospel, Judea, as well as the heathen
countries, was overrun by teachers and preachers of
every imaginable combination of doctrines, and the
truths' of Christianity were in danger of being all swak
lowed up, in the flood of conjectures, and hypotheses,
and schemes, which was sweeping into one common.
confusion every form of Philosophy or of faith. Many
rash and bold adventurers from the heathen schools,
seized upon some of the articles of the christian faith,
and mixed them up with errors and fancies of their
own,* in the hope, that, by starting and establishing a
new compound of notions, they might acquire to them-
* Witsius, Misc. Sac, as quoted by Vitringa, Obser. Sac. lib. v.
p. 148.

58 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
selves the credit of originality, and secure the glory of
being regarded as the founders of a system. Christian
converts, also, were captivated by the theories that
prevailed, and were fond of associating them with the
doctrines of the gospel.* The advocates of the errors
of those times were called Gnostics ; an appellation,
applied to them in consequence of their high" preten
sions to extraordinary science and knowledge. This
word is not intended to specify any one sect, but em
braces all of every description, as they then existed. f
A judicious person will be able, after having observed
the peculiarities of the different schools of Philosophy
which have been described, to imagine, with a great
degree of accuracy, the general character of the mixed
systems, which grew up from their various combina
tion, the errors of which the apostle John might think
it his duty to admonish his christian brethren to avoid.
Before I proceed to describe the erroneous systems,
which then prevailed, so far as we are enabled to
describe them, from the scattered and imperfect
notices that remain, I "will state what appears to be
the most rational and probable account of the progress
¦ of the meaning, attached to the phrase, ' The Word
or Logos of the Lord,' from the point of time at
which we left it, the Babylonish captivity, until the
period of the composition of the Gospel of St John.
In the second Letter, I have attempted to account
for the origin of the phrase, ' The Logos of the Lord,'
or rather of a phrase corresponding to it in the Hebrew
* Stillingfleet's Orig- Sac. p. 315; Eusebius, lib. vi. c. 19,
J Moslieim, Cen. I. Part II.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 59
church, and among the Jewish people. And we have
seen reason to believe, that, so far from being intended
originally to express the idea of a being distinct from
the Supreme Jehovah,* it was adopted for the very
purpose of preserving the belief of his unity, by divest
ing the manifestations, made by him. at particular times
and places, of the idea of any distinct personality
whatever. In order to prevent the error of supposing,
that the Divine essence, which is everywhere equally
present, and equally imperceptible, had ever made
a sensible appearance, under a limited and circum
scribed outline, or shape, or species, the administrators
of the church of Israel, most prudently and wisely
instructed its members, when speaking or writing
concerning the wonderful exhibitions of a miraculous
nature, which had been vouchsafed to them, or to their
fathers, never to say, that God immediately and really
appeared in a personal manner,, but that his Logos, or
Will, or Word, then and there, was made known, or
came forth to them. When the idea of a communi
cation or revelation, made to the minds of men, by any
outward signs or sensible symbols of the existence,
purposes, laws, or power of God, was to be expressed,
instead of saying, that God appeared in these signs or
symbols, they were taught to speak of them, as the
mere instruments or vehicles, by which the ideas of
his existence, purposes, laws, 'or power, were conveyed
to them. As we arrest the attention of each other's
minds, and interchange our ideas by the means of
* Michaelis, Vol. III. p. 280.

60 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
words, so it was a most natural use of language among
the Jews, to call all those appearances, by which God
had communicated with them, his ' Word.' We'have
then the existence of this phrase in the Hebrew nation,
certainly as far back as the captivity of Babylon. We
can 'discern the purposes for which it was invented.
We perceive its original, simple, and, as will hereafter,
I think, be shown, true meaning. Let me now offer
my conjectures respecting the causes, which attached
to it that false signification, which, in substance, has
so long adhered to it, and the process by which it
became connected with it.
We turn our attention, in the first place, to the
eastern nations. Their leading philosophical or theo
logical doctrine, as we have seen, was the belief of
the existence of two original ruling principles, one
the source of good, the other, of evil. These nations
were in constant contact and collision with the Jews,
who were finally brought into captivity among them.
They would, of course, become acquainted with the
customs of the Jews, with their worship, and with their
religious phraseology. They would hear them speak
of their God, under the name of ' The Word.' They
would find him thus denominated in their sacred
books. It would be natural for them to regard this
Deity, as identical with either one or the other of their
own gods, and it would depend wholly upon the
opinion, which might happen to prevail respecting the"
character of the God of the Jews, whether he should
be associated or identified with the good or the evil
spirit of their own Theology. Some vould regard him

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. Qi
as coincident with the former, while others would
consider him as only worthy of being ranked with the
latter. We shall find traces of the existence of both
of these opinions. There is some evidence, it seems,
that many, being unable to determine to which of these
two ruling principles, the God of the Jews, spoken of
by them under the name of ' The Logos of the Lord,'
was most nearly allied, avoided the difficulty at once,
By supposing that he was coincident with neither, but
the author and parent of them both.*
We come, in the next place, to the Egyptians.
From the little that is at present known of their
religious Philosophy, we cannot speculate, with much
security, concerning the mode in which they received
or interpreted the Jewish appellation, which is the
subject of our investigation. We can, however, conjec
ture, from the circumstance of their having originated3
the doctrine of divine Emanations or OEons, that they-
would regard it in the light of one of them, and assign
it a place somewhere in the order of succession, in'
which they supposed them to be produced and arranged."
This conjecture we shall find amply sustained.
Lastly, we proceed to the Greek Philosophy, and
especially to that form of it which finally prevailed,
the system of Plato* I have endeavoured to delineate
and dispose in their proper order the original principles
upon which it was constructed. These principles
were three in number. It is extremely easy to con
ceive in what manner a Grecian philosopher of the
school of Plato, would have regarded the Jewish
* Michaelis, Vol. Ill; p. 281.
6

62 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
Theology. He would find in the scriptures which
contained it, the name Jehovah, most evidently be
longing to the supreme object of worship, to a being*
whom the whole people regarded with such profound
reverence, as to think themselves unworthy to utter
his name. This highest and most revered being he
would consider as corresponding with his most elevated
deity, ra h or re ecyecOev.
He would be wholly unacquainted with the , con
siderations, which led to the use of the phrase, the
origin of which has been explained , before, ' Mimra.'
It would appear to him to be applied to some divine
being. Its literal meaning was Word, and when trans
lated into his own language, would be represented by
Aeyes. Now Aeyes, in one of its common acceptations,
signified reason, and, it is highly probable, had been
often used by him and his school, as a synonyme with
N«, in its application to his second principle or deity,
and in this sense he would receive it. Nothing,
indeed,' would have been more natural than for Plato,
or for one of his disciples, to have regarded the
' Mimra ' of the Chaldees, and . the Hebrew word
corresponding to it, as the titles of a being, identical
with their own second god, and to have been confirmed
in the practice of using Aeyet, in the place of Ns«, but
as synonymous with it, when speaking or writing of
him. He would either adopt it, or be confirmed in
its use as the title of his second deity ; but still he
would use it in his own previous sense, as equivalent
to reason.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 63
I do not entertain a doubt, that Aoy«;, which meant,
as will be shown in the proper place, entirely a different
thing in the Hebrew church, by some such process as
this, came into use, as the title of the Intellectual
Principle, or Mind, or Reason, as deified in the Greek
Philosophy, which originally, without question, was
called Ns?. I know, that in making this conjecture,
I am coming into collision with the prevailing opinion
of the learned, which, in opposition to the authority of
all Jewish and Christian antiquity, forbids us to attempt
to trace any article of belief or of practice among the
heathen, to Hebrew sources. It has always appeared
to me, that more dogmatism than discretion has been
employed in the controversy, which has led to the
establishment of this opinion. When we reflect upon
the state of knowledge, and upon the means of literary
intercourse in ancient times, we allow our opinions, per
haps, to beformed too much from considerations drawn
from our own present social condition. We are apt
to think, that before the art of printing, or the facilities
of written correspondence existed, society was in the
same state, in which it would now be, were that art
and 'those facilities to be suddenly lost. Whereas, in
those days, when every man's library was his memory,
and the preservation of knowledge, and of literary
productions of every kind, depended almost wholly
upon oral communications, the faculties of recollection,
of attention, and of observation, were cultivated, to a
degree of strength of which we can hardly conceive.
The necessary cultivation of these particular faculties,
caused every traveller to bring home as much informa-

64 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
tion as is now collected by the most careful journalist ;
arid, at the same .time, the comparative infrequency of
travelling awakened a much higher degree of curiosity,
and procured more kindness and hospitality to the
stranger. From what we know, and can reasonably
imagine, of the condition of society in antiquity, with
which, however, we have the prospect of a more
intimate acquaintance, by means of -the agitation, at
present attempted, of the Homeric controversy, I can
not believe that Plato, and other philosophers, could
have travelled so extensively, as they did, in the East,
without learning much concerning the renowned and
extraordinary nation of the Jews. And I am fully
convinced, that there can be no more curious and
instructive course of investigation, than lies open to
inquisitive and learned men, in the connexion between
heathen opinions and phraseology, and their sources in
the Hebrew scriptures, customs, and idioms.*
A very large part, indeed, of the Grecian Mythology,
as well as Philosophy, had its origin in an ignorance of
the idiom of the Oriental languages ; in taking it inva
riably in a proper and literal sense ; and in supposing
a similarity of meaning, where there was only a simi
larity of phraseology. It will be worth our while to
mention an instance of this kind of misinterpretation
of Eastern idioms. In Genesis ix. 20, the idea of
husbandman, is expressed in this manner; 'Noah
began to be a man of the earth,' i ccne rw ym. ^The
mythologists,' accordingly, make Saturn,- who corres-
* Brucker's Hist. Phil, Appendix, p. 535,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 65
ponds with Noah, to be the husband of Rhea, which
is the same with the earth.* In hke manner, it is
reasonable to suppose, that the Greeks, perceiving that
the Jews spoke of the Divine manifestations, which
had been made to them, under the name of The Logos,
(which meant reason as well as word,) of the Lord,
would, without inquiring into the meaning of the
phrase, be led by the correspondency between it and
that phrase, by which they designated the second per
son of their trinity, The Mind or Reason of the Divine
JVature, to believe, that it meant the same thing, and
to adopt it accordingly into use. This conjecture is
abundantly and lamentably verified by the circum
stances, as they actually occurred.
As the expression, ' The Logos of the Lord,'
gradually became adopted into the religions of all the
surrounding nations, and us, when thus adopted, it
invariably was used to signify a distinct b'eing, a strong
probability' arises, that the Jews themselves would
also be imperceptibly led to associate with it such an
idea, and to regard it as the title of a separate Divine
existence or person.
Having thrown out these severalconjectures, I will
now proceed to notice the actual evidence, which has
come down to us, respecting the various opinions and
speculations prevalent at the commencement of the
christian era. This evidence, although scattered, and
dislocated, when collected and put together, sheds a
good degree of light upon the condition of sects and
* Stillingfleet'a Orig. Sac. p. 366.
6*

66 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
doctrines at that time. * A. leading doctrine was,
that this world was not created by the supreme God ;
nor by the Logos of the Jews ; nor by the Intellectual
Principle of Plato ; but by angels, inferior in charac
ter and dignity, or, as some thought, by a single angel
of preeminent rank, whom they called Demiurgus.
The purpose, for which this scheme was invented,
was to relieve the Supreme Being and his Logos, or
the Intellectual Principle, from the imputation of being
the authors of evil. There was nothing that puzzled
the ancient philosophers so much, as the existence of
sin and suffering in the world. The great question,
which they anxiously revolved in their private medita
tions was this, ' Unde malum et quare ? ' \ Whence,
and wherefore the existence of evil ?.
It had long been the opinion of the philosophers,
that matter was the source and foundation of evil.
From this sprang the doctrine, that Christ, the Son of
God, had not an actual human body of flesh and
blood, but that his form was either made of some purer
and more ethereal substance, or else was a mere phan
tom or apparition. A similar notion had been enter
tained by Epicurus. J It was also asserted, that there
existed a large number of spiritual beings, called (Eons,
or Emanations, between the Supreme First Cause,
and this world ; one deduced from another, but all
originally derived from him. Concerning the number
* Vitringa's Obser. Sac. lib. v. c. x. xi. xii. xiii. ; Marsh's
Michaelis, Vol. IV. p. 287; Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History,
Cen, 1, p. ii. t. v.
t TertuUian, adver. Heres. ch. vii.
X J. Jones's Illustrations, Pref. p. xvi. note.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 67
and appropriate offices and titles of these beings, Ire
naeus says, they had different opinions.* There were
Thought, Foreknowledge, Incorruption, Life, Light,
and almost innumerable others. f Some believed in
two coeternal first causes which they called God and
Matter ; the one the origin of good, the other the
fountain of evil.
Besides all these, we have evidence of the existence
of another opinion at that time. It was this; that
the God of the Jews was either the angel, or one of
the body of angels to whom the creation of the world
was ascribed ; that, under the administration of this
angel, the God of the Jews, called by them ' The Lo
gos of the Lord,' men were detained in sin and dark
ness, and kept from the knowledge and service of the
Supreme and Benevolent First Cause ; that this Su
preme Being sent Jesus Christ, who was one of the
first and most exalted of creatures, derived from him,
and who was clothed with a body of a celestial substance,
to overthrow and supersede the government of the
God of the Jews, to whom men had before looked up,
as to their supreme ruler; to make known unto
them, for the first time, the existence of his Father,
the first cause of everything true and good, and to
prepare them, by a course of discipline, and by a
constant contemplation of him, for a translation to a
nearer communion with this all perfect Being, where,
liberated, from flesh and all evil, they would pass a
blessed immortality. * Vitringa, lib. v. p. 150.
t Lowman's. Three Tracts, p. 224.

68 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
The histories which remain, inform us of the ex
istence of certain distinct sects, under their several
leaders, who, during the lives of the apostles, went
astray from the truth, in the prevailing spirit of wild
speculation and fanciful invention. There were the
followers of Simon Magus,* and of Menander, f the Ni-
colaitans,f and the disciples of Cerinthus. || Accounts
of these sects have -been preserved to us, principally
by Irenaeus, TertuUian, and Epiphanius. Their opin
ions were severally compounded, for the most part, of
some of those already mentioned. The leading doc
trine of Cerinthus is deserving of notice. He believ
ed that Jesus had a common human nature, until the
time of his baptism, when the most exalted of O3ons,
the first begotten Nss of Plato, descended upon him
from the opening heavens, dwelt with him in union
with his mortal nature, and passed off from him, and
ascended to the Pleroma or upper heavens, previous
to his crucifixion. This opinion is justly thought to
have been the origin of the doctrine, or rather the ar
tifice of the two natures, which is still extensively
maintained, and which will continue to be maintained,
as long as men are disposed to contend for the doc
trine of the equality of Jesus with the Father, in op
position to his own clear, positive, and often repeated
declarations. Although it destroys the testimony and
credibility of our Saviour, by imputing to him the
* Mosheim, Cen. 1. p. ii. c. v. ; Vitringa, lib. v. p. 153 ; Acts viii.
9, 10 ; J. Jones, Illustrations, Pref.
t Mosheim, Cen. 1. p. ii. c. v. ; Vitringa, lib. v. p. 153.
t Ibid. Rev. ii. 6. 15.
|| Mosheim, Cen. 1. p. ii. c. v. ; Vitringa, lib. v. p. 156.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 69
habitual practice of speaking on the most important
subjects, and of answering the most earnest and anxious
inquiries, with a concealed and double meaning to his
words, which it is only given to the initiated faithful to
understand ; still, notwithstanding all this, we cannot
expect that this unscriptural principle of interpretation,
mere subterfuge and human contrivance as it is, will
be disused or rejected, while the followers of Christ,
in the madness of controversy, are found willing to
sacrifice the morality of his character, to save the
divinity of his nature.
In addition to this direct evidence, concerning the con
dition of the various sects, and schemes of doctrine, in the
apostolic age, there is another source of information,
more copious, perhaps, than any other. We possess
detailed accounts of systems of error, prevalent in the
early part of the second century. There were, among
others, the sects of Saturnilus, of Basilides, of Va
lentinus, of Ptolemaeus, of Heracleon, and of Mar
cion,* the elements of whose several tenets were un
questionably derived from the Gnostics of the first
century. f The most eminent of those sectaries were
Basilides-and Valentinus, who are said by Epiphanius J
to have boasted that they received their doctrines,
the one from Glaucia, a friend and disciple of Peter,
the other from Theodades, a follower of Paul. This
coincides with other evidence to this point, || and
demonstrates, that the opinions of these false teachers,
* Mosheim, Cen. 2, p. ii. c. v.
r Vitringa, lib. v. p. 164. t Ibid. p. 161.
1| TertuUian de Heret, c. 34, 35, p. 244.

70 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
fabricated by them into new combinations, or other
wise wrought into systems, had existed together, or in a
separate state, long before their day, and in the first age
of the christian church. We can therefore infer from
their system, with great certainty, what opinions were
prevalent and propagated at the time of the apostles,
against which John may be supposed to have written.
The following was a part of the scheme of Basilides,
according to the testimony of Irenaeus and Epiphanius.*
I.
TO ArENNHTON, 'O MONOS ESTI ITANTQN IIATHP.
THE UNBEGOTTEN, WHO ALONE IS FATHER OF ALL.
II.
NOTS.
PLATO'S SECOND PRINCIPLE.

III.

Aoros.

WORD OR REASON.
IV.
OPONHSIS.
UNDERSTANDING. V.
'
Atnamis.
SOOIA.
STRENGTH.
WISDOM.
VI.
APXAI. EHOTSIAI.
AITEAOI.
PR
INCIPALITIES. POWERS.
ANGELS.
h Vitringa, Ub. v. p. 165 ; Lardner's History of the Heretics, p. 74.
LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 7],
VII.
'O ANQTEPOS KAI nPHTOS OYPANOS-
THE UPPER AND FIRST HEAVEN.
' From these proceeded,' says Lardner, ' other
angels and other heavens, to the number 365, both
angels and heavens.'
This will serve as a specimen of the wildness and
absurdity which characterised the . speculations of
philosophers at that time. We see that one supreme
source of all things is recognised. But the ' Logos,'
or Word, whatever may have been meant by it, was
not the only begotten, neither was it the first begotten
of all creatures. It was not even considered as deriving
its being immediately from God, but from the second
principle of Plato. In the sixth link of the chain of
descent, we find an explanation of several passages in
scripture, the force of which we have not heretofore
been fully able to perceive, such as the following.
Rom. viii. 38, 39. ' For I am persuaded that neither
death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor
powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor
height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be
able to separate us from the love of God, which is in
Christ Jesus our Lord.'
Ephes. i. 20,21,22. 'And set him at his own
right hand in the heavenly places, far above all princi
pality, and power, and might, and dominion, and. every
name that is named, not only in this world, but also in
that which is to come ; and hath put all things under
his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things
to the church.'

72

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.

Coloss. i. 15, 16. ' Who is the image of the invisible
God, the firstborn of every creature; for by him
were all things created, that are in heaven, and that
are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be
thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers'
ii. 10. 'Which is the head of all principality and power.'
15. 'Having spoiled principalities and powers' &c.
The scheme of Valentinus is another illustration of
the kind of philosophy to which the world was then
given up.* It is even more complex than the one just
presented. It is described by Irenaeus and TertuUian.
It consists of thirty emanations or spiritual beings,
regularly descending from each other. The following
are the first eight.f I.

II.

BYQOS.
THE PROFOUND,
sometimes called
nPOAPXH, or
APXH. NOTS. MIND,
described as
MONOrENHS, or as
nFflTorENHS.

* TertuUian adver. Valen. c. viii. pp. 292, 293.
t Vitringa, lib. v. p. 166 ; Le Platonisme Devoile, Part I. ch.
viii. ; Brucker's Hist. Phil. Tom. III. p. 294.

SirH.
SILENCE,
sometimes called
ENNOIA,
sometimes also
XAPL5.
AAH0EIA. TRUTH.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. .

III.

Aoros.

.Z£2H.

REASON OR WORD.

LIFE.

IV.

AN©pnnos.

EKKAHSIA.

MAN.

CHURCH.

73

After having seen these two schemes of divine
genealogy, we can understand what Paul means,
1 Tim. i. 4. ' Neither give heed to fables, and endless
genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly
edifying which is in faith ; ' vi. 20. ' Avoiding profane
and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely
so called;' and also to what Peter alludes, 2d Epis.
i. 16. ' We have not followed cunningly devised fables; '
ii. 1. 'There shall be false teachers among you, who
shall privily bring in damnable heresies;' 3. 'And
through covetousness shall they, with feigned words,
make merchandise of you.' *
In this system also, the ' Logos ' is neither the only
nor the first begotten. It is worthy of remark, that,
in both these schemes, Aeyes and N«s, which are fre
quently found in connexions which determine that they
were applied to the same object, the second principle
of Plato, are separated from each other, and made to
" An examination of these systems of opinion will enable us to
explain, or at least to throw new Ught upon, much of the phraseology
of the New Testament, such as the use of the words ' truth' ' life,'
' light,' 'beginning,' &c, as they are found in the writings of John.
We may also conjecture with some satisfaction, the meaning of such
expressions as ' heavenly places,' in the Epistle to the Ephesians,
i. 3, 20, and iii. 10, by observing the seventh step in the series of
Basilides. 7

74 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
bear different significations. Whether this arose from
the tendency of the times to make the chain of descent
in these genealogies as x long as possible, or from a
knowledge of the truth, that they originally belonged
to different systems, the one to the Hebrew, and the
other to the Platonic, cannot, perhaps, be ascertained.
The origin and first cause of all things is a very
strange and fanciful conception. Infinite Space and
Silence ! The word Bafos probably meant, not merely
the depths of the ocean, but the abyss of space, the
unfathomable height, and breadth, and depth of the
surrounding heavens. The word ' profound ' is used
in this sense in a passage of Pope's admirable trans
lation of Homer, which passage, by the way, is one of
the finest instances in. our language, of the skilful
adaptation of the sound to the sense of the words ;
 « but Jove with awful sound,

Rolled the big thundei^'er the vast profound.'
Iliad, book viii. 161.
That this is the meaning of ' profound,' in this, place,
is confirmed by the following passage in Virgil, which
evidently conveys the . same idea intended to be ex
pressed by Pope.
' Hie pater omnipotens ter.ccelo clarus ab alto,
Intonuit.' MneiA, vii. 141.
Besides all these, there were the disciples of Philo
the Jew, an eloquent and famous man in the first age
of the church. Eusebius gives a catalogue of his
numerous works. He calls him ' deepe of under
standing, high and profound in the contemplation of

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 75
holy scriptures.' * In another place, he gives this
description of him ; ' About this'time Philo did flourish,
a man not onely excelling our owne men, but also such
as passed in prophane knowledge ; he was by lineall
descent an Ebrue borne, inferior to none of them,
which excelled at Alexandria. But what labour and
industrie he hath "employed in divine discipline, and
the profit of his native countrey, his workes now extant
plainely do declare, and how farre forth he prevayled
in philosophicall and liberall artes, of profane knowl
edge, I suppose- it not very needefull to repeate. But
imitating the trade of Plato and Pythagoras, he is Sayd-
to have excelled all the learned of his time.' Amidst
the variety of opinions respecting this remarkable man,
all agree in attributing to him the -praise of genius,
eloquence, and erudition. It is not exactly known to
what original school he most inclined, whether to the
Grecian, the Jewish, or the Oriental. He seems to
have been imbued with the wisdom and the lore of
them all. Some, indeed, especially a late most inge
nious and learned English.theologian,j have believed
that he was a Christian. His Theology seems to have
embraced the idea of one God. He makes frequent
use of the term Logos,J and from some specimens
which have been pointed out, of his mode of speaking
of it, he seems to have approached, if he did not reach
* I quote Eusebius, as he appears in an excellent old English
black-letter translation, of a succession of Ecclesiastical writers,
"beginning with him, by Meredith Hanmer, D. D., London. 1585.
pp. 21, 30.
¦f John Jones.
t Vitringa, p. 143 ; Brucker's Hist. Phil. Tom. II. p. 808.

76 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
a very rational, if not just conception of its meaning.
In cases, where it could only signify the Divine per
fections in the abstract, it is spoken of as an agent.
In one place, he declares it to be only the create
principle, lw*tus xeey.emitirix.ti. He also declares, that
it was seated in the Divine mind, and could not have a
separate existence ; that it was not a "distinct being from
Jehovah, but that he alone was the maker of all things,
and had no assistance in the execution of his designs;
fMiia Si eavru ftpqirafieves ®ee$*
* J. Jones's Illustrations, pp. 12, 13. The view of the Logos, here
attributed to Philo, is essentially the view which Unitarian writers
have in general received and advocated. The cause which led to
the Trinitarian hypothesis concerning it, is to be found in the pre
vailing tendency, already largely described, in the first age of the
church, and in the ages immediately preceding its foundation, to give
a personal existence to every physical and moral principle, and, in
fact, to every abstract conception of the mind. It is evident that a
reviewer, in a late Monthly Repository, (N. S. Vol. I. No. 7), is
correct in saying, that the only reason why TertuUian opposed the
doctrine of his Unitarian antagonist Praxeas, was, that, on account
of the influence of the delusion just referred to, upon his habits of
thinking, he could not bring his mind to conceive of an attribute of
God in any other light, than as a 'person or being distinct from God.
His account of the Logos is worthy of quotation. ' Ante omnia emim,'
says he, ' Deus erat solus. Ipse sibi et mundus et locus et omnia.
Solus autem ; quia nihil aliud extrinsecus praeter ilium. Caeterum,
ne tunc quidem solus ; habebat enim secum, quam habebat in semet-
ipso, rationem suam, scilicet. Rationalis enim Deus, et ratio in ipso
prius ; et ita, ab ipso omnia. Quae ratio, sensus ipsiuS est. Hanc
Grasci Aoyov dicunt, quo vocabulo etiam Sermonem appeUamus.
Ideoque jam in usu est nostrorum, per simplicitatem interpretationis,
Sermonem dicere in primordia apud Deum fuisse, cum magis ratio
nem competat antiquiorem haberi ; quia non sermonalis a principio, •
sed rationalis Deus etiam anteprincipium.' Adver. Prax. c. v. p. 637.
It is most clear, from this passage, that TertuUian meant, by Logos,
an essential attribute of God, the intellectual and rational principle of

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 77
There was a body of sectarians in the apostolic age,
calling themselves the followers of John the Baptist.
They were, strictly speaking, a heresy from Christianity,
and were made up of those who wished to undermine
it, by perverting its principles. Michaelis gives an inter
esting account of them under the name of Sabians.*
Finally, there were the Serpentists, mentioned by
TertuUian and Origen. f They held the belief of the
union of two natures in our Saviour. As Christ, they
affected to honor him as divine ; but, as Jesus, they
regarded him as a man. As a singular practical in
ference from this doctrine, they denounced, anathema
tized, and excommunicated him, as Jesus, in his human
capacity. Origen says, that ' they did not admit any
into their society, unless he would first deposit curses
against Jesus.' A knowledge of the existence of this
extraordinary doctrine and practice, throws light upon
the language of Paul, in these two instances at least ;
1 Corin. xii. 3. ' Wherefore I give you to understand,
that no man, speaking by the Spirit of God, calleth
Jesus accursed.' xvi. 22. 'If any man love not the
Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema.'
The conjecture was thrown out, page 56, that the
Jews were induced to personify their phrase, ' The
his own original nature. It is worthy our notice, too, that he con
sidered ' The Word,' an improper translation of Logos, and that it
should be rendered, as all Unitarian writers have maintained,
' Reason,' or ' Wisdom.'
* Michaelis, Intro. Vol. III. ch. vii. sec. 4.
t TertuUian adver. Heret. ch. xlvii. p. 250 ; J. Jones's Illus. Pref.
xiv. xviii. ; Mosheim, Cen. II. Part. II. ch. v. For an account of the
estimation in which the ancients held the serpent, see the Ophion,
a curious work, lately published (1811) by John Bellamy, London.
7*

78 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
Logos of the Lord,' through the influence of the
opinions and practices of the surrounding nations.
This conjecture was founded upon the considerations
there mentioned, and upon the knowledge of the
character of their Doctors or Rabbis, who do not
appear to have been indisposed to keep pace with the
rest of the world, in fanciful speculations and inventions.
Evidence is spread throughout >the New Testament,
that the people of Judea were given up to gross super
stition ; and it is well understood, that, in accordance
with the practice in every heathen system into which
it had gained admission, they had personified and
given a distinct, substantive, and personal existence to
the word ' Logos.' *
We have now completed our survey of the^condition
of the world, as it respects religious and philosophical
opinions, in the apostolic age, and of the causes which
led to that condition. f Any reader of judgment will
be able, from what has been spread before him in
these pages, to imagine what kind of notions were
most likely to be connected with the word Logos, as
it passed from the Jewish into the Heathen systems.
He will see, indeed, what were the meanings attached
* Rosenmuller, John ii. ; Le Clerc's Epistola Critica, ix. I shall
notice hereafter Lowman's argument to prove that the word ' Angel '
did not originally imply a personal existence or being, but that the
Jews personified it in the same" manner in which they personified
' Logos.' t A large amount of rich and instructive speculation, on almost all
the subjects touched upon in this, and the previous Letter, may be
found in the ' Memoires de l'Academie de Literature,' Tom. xlvi.
xlvii. 1. li. lvi. lvii.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 79
to it in some of the most fashionable theories, at the
time when the evangelist undertook to remove from
it all erroneous significations, and to explain, in brief
and concise language, the sense in which it ought to be
understood. I am led to believe that the foregoing
collection of opinions will afford essential assistance in
illustrating many other passages of scripture, besides
that, the interpretation of which is the principal object
of our present inquiry. In the remaining Letters, I
shall endeavour to point out the true meaning of the
word Logos, as used in the Proem of John's Gospel,
and to apply it to the interpretation of that difficult
and important passage, and to such other parts and
expressions of scripture, as it may most obviously
affect, either by explaining what is difficult, or eluci
dating what is dark. Before we enter upon this part
of our design, I must be allowed to give utterance to
a few reflections, which are called to my mind, by a
review of the ground over which we have passed.
1. In the first place, I am struck with an increased
conviction of the necessity of a revelation. There
certainly would have appeared to be some ground for
hope, at that period when the most intelligent mem
bers of society began to perceive the falsity and the
folly of idolatry and polytheism, when they began to
give countenance and currency to the practice of re
jecting the belief of the personal existence of their
gods, when they attempted to aspire to the contem
plation, and to rise up to the knowledge of the true
system of the universe, and, especially, when they
approached the discovery of the great truth, that the

80 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
principles and powers, whom they had regarded as
beings of a personal nature, were intellectual abstrac
tions only, — there was surely ground for the hope, at
that time, that mankind might be gradually persuaded,
and Jed on, from one degree of instruction to another,
to the final reception of those simple, but grand arti
cles of faith, the Unity, Supremacy, Spirituality,
Omnipresence, and moral perfections of the Deity,
which are now established by revelation. But we
see, in 'the miserable absurdities, which we have re
viewed, the actual melancholy result to which learn
ing and philosophy brought the world, when they had ,
overthrown the ancient superstitions. The experi
ment commenced under auspicious omens. The
most exalted minds were raised up, as it were, for the
very purpose of conducting it. Favorable circum
stances of all kinds seemed to conspire. Knowledge
and refinement were carried to a height, on all sub
jects of moral speculation, taste, and science, which
if reached, has not been passed by the moderns.
The foundations of error and idolatry, in every nation,
so far as they were laid in the public faith and confi
dence, were shaken. The progress of conquest had
thrown down all barriers, and, by gathering the whole
civilized world into one empire, had brought all the
intelligence and philosophy of the times, within the
reach of every inquiring individual, and caused the
concentrated lights of wisdom to shine with unob
structed radiance upon all within its wide boundaries.
It is impossible to conceive of a fairer, more promising
opportunity for the trial of the great question, whether

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. gi
man can, without a star on high, a light from above to
guide him, escape from the darkness and the snares
of error, and reach the firm ground, and the clear
sunshine of truth. The trial was made, and it failed.
The progress of opinion, instead of leading upwards
to the simplicity, towards which it had at first advanc
ed, was soon turned back, and before the gospel had
gained sufficient strength effectually to check its down
ward course, it had descended- to the ridiculous fan
cies and the wretched fables, specimens of which have
just been presented to our view.
2. My next reflection is upon the strength of the
argument in favor of the truth and divinity of our re
ligion, arising from its internal character. When we
have been contemplating the religious condition of the
world, at the time of our Saviour, and considering
the infinite number, and variety of those theories, to
which a spirit of wild, rash, and fanciful speculation
had given existence ; when we ponder upon the uni
versal diffusion of superstition and error among all
classes, especially the higher and more intellectual
classes, we must recognise, with new astonishment
and increased confidence, the argument in favor of
the divinity of the mission, and the truth of the relig
ion of Jesus of Nazareth, arising from the simplicity,
originality, and vast, immeasurable superiority of his
character, principles, and doctrines. Viewing this ar
gument in the -light in which it is now presented to us,
we- cannot but exclaim, in the iflvoluntary, instinctive
language of the admiring and subdued Rousseau,
' Yes ; if the life and death of Socrates are those of

82 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
a philosopher, the life and death of Jesus Christ are
those of a God. Shall we say, that the history of the
gospel is invented at pleasure ? My friend, it is not
thus that men invent. It would be more inconceiva
ble, that a number of men should forge this book in
concert, than that one should furnish the subject of it.
Jewish authors would never have devised such a man
ner, and such morality; and the gospel has charac
ters of truth so great, so striking, so perfectly inimita
ble, that its inventor would be still more astonishing
than its hero.' But even this testimony, strong and
earnest as it, is not adequate to the expression of the
force and depth of our conviction. We can only ut
ter it in the unrivalled language of scripture. ' Never
man spake like this man.' Never without illumina
tion from on high, unless the Father had been with
him, could man have thus spoken.
3. A review of the ground over which we have
passed,»impresses me, in the third place, with a sense
of the propriety and necessity of great caution in the
interpretation of doubtful words and passages in
scripture. We are admonished not to attempt to es
tablish important doctrines upon phrases or sentences,
the meaning of which is not clear and certain. There
was such a vast variety of errors floating about in the
community, when the scriptures of the New Testament
were written, and against which, it is reasonable to sup
pose, their authors were anxious to preserve the church,
of which we are, and*probably must always continue to
be ignorant, that we should be prepared to meet with'
much, in their language and arguments, which we

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. gg
cannot understand, and should be slow to arrogate to
ourselves the ability to interpret and explain.
4. Lastly, we are enabled by the inquiry, in which
we have been engaged, to account for (the errors and
corruptions, with which the truth so soon became
overshadowed. Instead of astonishment, that they
were so numerous, we are filled with wonder and
gratitude, that so few obtained admission to the doc
trines of the infant church. When we consider the
facilities which existed previous to the art of printing,
and the modes of preserving and multiplying accurate
copies of documents, afforded by that art, for inter
polating, and altering, and thus rendering doubtful the
true reading of written records, and the great liability
to errors of transcription ; and, in connexion with
this view of the subject, reflect upon the incalculable
number of theories and systems then advocated, with
a zeal which threw the whole mass of society into a
state of moral distraction, in which ardent partisans
would not hesitate to do anything to give additional
authority to their own tenets ;— we cannot but be sur
prised and thankful, that our scriptures have passed
down to us, through all. these dangers, so much more
pure from fraudulent admixtures, and free from acci
dental variations, than could have been expected.
And while we are clearly instructed in what manner
to account for many errors, which now prevail, by
observing the earnestness with which early converts
endeavoured to conciliate to the religion which they
had espoused, the favor of those schools of Philoso
phy, the external communion of which they had de-

84 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
serted, by using all their ingenuity and eloquence to
draw them closer together, to conceal as far as possi
ble the .points in which they differed, to exaggerate
those in which they agreed, and to sum up the whole,
to make Plato and Jesus mutually and reciprocally
expound, and reflect, and in every point resemble
each other * — while we are thus informed, with re-
* Whether in the rage, which prevailed in the primitive times, to
run a parallel between Jesus and Plato, the currency of a'story, re
specting the mode of birth of the latter, (Stanley's Lives, Pref. p.
161.) did not lead, not merely to the corruption of the doctrine of
the church, but to a bold and high handed interpolation of the text
of scripture, is a question to be decided by the laborious examina
tion, and the sound discretion of the biblical scholar. That such in
terpolations and corruptions of the text were perpetrated, before
the time of TertuUian, he most distinctly declares, (De Heret, ch.
38. p. 246.) ' Alius manu scripturas, alius sensus expositione interver-
tit.' This same instructive and valuable writer, after having, in an
other place, (De Heret. ch. 7, p. 233.) traced many of the false doc
trines of his time to their heathen sources, in the following animated
manner complains of, and reproves the disposition among Christians
to mix with their belief the doctrines of the philosophers; ' Quid
ergo Athenis et Hierosolymis ? Quid Academias et Ecclesire ? Quid
haereticis Christianis ? Viderent qui Stoicum, et Platonicum, et
Dialecficum Christianismum protulerunt nobis, curiositate opus non
est post Christum Jesum, nee inquisitione post Evangelium.' The
most striking testimony anywhere to be found, perhaps, in proof of
the tendency of the early Christians towards Gentile errors and usa
ges, is afforded by TertuUian in his work on Idolatry, (ch. 14. p. 113.)
in a passage, in which he contrasts, in a spirit of reproach and re
gret, this trait in their character, with the superior fidelity to their
religion, and selfrespect of the Heathen worshippers ; ' O melior
fides nationum in suam sectam, quas nullum solennitatem Chris-
tianorum sibi vindicat ! non Dominicum diem, non Pentecosten, etiam
si nossent, nobiscum communicassent ; timerent enim ne Christiani
viderentur. Nos, ne Ethnici pronuntiemur, non veremur.' For
further illustrations of the view here taken of the tendency of the
early Christians to adopt the opinions of the schools of Philosophy,
see Priestley's History of Early Opinions.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 85
spect to the copious sources of early errors, we can
not but wonder that the truth was not wholly over
whelmed and lost. Most surely, if it had been of man,
it would soon have perished. But it was of God,
and it survived. It still lives, and enlightens the
world, and we have the blessed assurance, that noth
ing shall prevail against it.

86

LETTER V.
In a previous passage, note to page 76, I have
spoken of the meaning attached, by many Unitarian,
and also by some Trinitarian writers, to the word
Logos ; and we have seen that they are supported by
the authority of TertuUian. It has been maintained
by them, that the true signification of Logos, is the
wisdom or the reason of God ; that it implies one or
more of 'his moral attributes. This interpretation,
although infinitely more satisfactory than that proposed
by Trinitarians, has never appeared to me altogether
sufficient or acceptable. The objections which pre
sent themselves are various.
1 . In the first place, the opinion that Logos or The
Word is a personification of one or of several of the
attributes of God, has by far too much of a philosophic
aspect, and amounts, in fact and precisely, either to
the second or to the first principle of Plato, according
to the attribute it is supposed to mean. This con
sideration assumes its proper force, when we reflect
how entirely averse from the genius of the old and the
new dispensations, the spirit of heathen speculation
ever was. Indeed, it is not reasonable to suppose,
that John would have fallen in with, or countenanced
in any way, the error which was at the very founda
tion of every prevailing system of Pagan Philosophy,
and which had led to the personification, and the deifi-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 87
cation, not only of every divine attribute, but of every
general and abstract idea.
2. In the second place, it is as unphilosophical, and
as contrary to the true idea of God, to suppose any of
his attributes personified in a particular object, or con
fined to a particular spot, as it is to suppose God him
self personified in any object or form, which is idolatry;
or confined within given limits, which is error equally
gross and absurd. For every essential attribute of
God must coexist with his nature, throughout its whole
extension ; that is, must be considered as necessarily
omnipresent. If the contrary opinion were admissible,
we might consider one attribute as residing, or as
comprehended in a particular person or thing, and
another attribute, in. another person or thing; and,
since the only apprehension we can have of God,
consists in a conception of his several attributes, we
should in this manner lose, at last, all idea of the
truth of his omnipresent being. This was unques
tionably the process by which men gradually departed
from the ' simple and original belief of the one true
God. They personified, first one attribute, and then
another; until they had given a distinct existence, in
their imaginations, to all the several aspects of his
character, when, of course, nothing remained of the
original conception they had formed of him. It had
been divided into different parts, and distributed in
various directions, until it had become entirely ex
hausted and used up.
3. In the third place, it is not settled which of
the attributes of God is personified by Logos. Some

88 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
suppose it to be his reason, some his wisdom, and his
mercy or goodness might be equally well supposed.
If more than one be meant, it is equally doubtful
which, and how many enter into the combination.
Different passages seem to require different interpre
tations. And the result has been a great inconsistency
and diversity of opinion, among the advocates of this
mode of viewing the Logos, or Word. This con
sideration certainly amounts to a strong objection to
its admission.
4. In the fourth place, there are passages in which
Logos is used, to the explanation of which this inter
pretation can in no manner be applied. The instances
of the use of the word in the sense which may be
called its technical sense, are quite numerous in the
New, and not unfrequent in the Old Testament, but
are noticed hardly at all, in consequence of the sim
plicity and naturalness of the technical meaning. The
mind so readily gathers, from the connexion, the proper
ideas attached to it, that it does not perceive that it is
used in any other than a popular sense. But, in the
Proem of John's Gospel, it is introduced in so abrupt
and peculiar a manner, that we are led to suspect,
"that it bears a deeper and weightier meaning than
elsewhere. There can be no doubt, however, that,
in such instances as the following, it is used in a sense
equally remote from its common or popular acceptation.
2 Thess. iii. 1. ' Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the
Word, or Logos, of the Lord may have free course and
be glorified.' 2 Tim. ii. 9. < But the Word, or Logos
of God, it not bound.' 1 John i. 1. ' That which was

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 89
from the beginning, which we have heard, which we
have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon,
and our hands have handled of the Word, or the Logos,
of life.' In such passages as these, it will be extremely
difficult, if not impossible, to apply the interpretation
we are now considering, to Logos, or the Word, with
out rendering the sentences wholly unintelligible;
But my last objection to this mode of interpretation,
and such should be the last objection in all cases of
this kind, is what I believe to be a more satisfactory
explanation and exposition of the meaning of the Logos,
as used by John and the other scripture writers. I pro
ceed, therefore, to attempt to delineate and develope
the view, in (which I think it should be regarded.
I begin by observing, that the meaning of any word
or phrase is always ta be sought, and can only be dis
covered, in the sources from which its use originated.
Logos is a Jewish expression. To the Jews must
we go to ascertain its import. Inquirers and writers
on this subject have, in general, failed- to establish the
true interpretation, by directing all their researches
to the heathen systems, in which the Logos is used,
instead of descending beyond them to the Hebrew
Theology, from which they borrowed it. It has been.
asserted, page 29, that, at a certain period, it was
the current practice among the Jews, to speak of all
manifestations, communications, and revelations from
God, as made, not by God, or the Lord, but by his
Logos, or Word. It has also been attempted to
be shown, in what manner the heathens, who became
acquainted with this expression, and, at last, many of
8*

90 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
the Jews themselves were gradually led to consider,
that another; and a different being from the supreme
original Jehovah, was understood by the phrase, ' The
Word of the Lord.'
A modern school of divines have adhered to this
opinion, and have maintained, that the divine nature
of our Saviour was this very Logos ; that he created
the world, and that it is this being who acted in all the
communications made to the Jews ; and who, besides
this, has the entire control, and conducts throughout
the administration of the -affairs of the world. In order
to determine the truth or the error of this opinion, we
must resort to the investigation of the system of Jewish
Theology, as preserved in their sacred records, and
from them must be gathered the true meaning of the
abovementioned phrase. As has been repeatedly ob*
served, it was applied to the Divine manifestations and
interpositions. Our first inquiry, then, is concerning
these Divine manifestations and interpositions.
There are two views in which they are capable of
being regarded. One is, that the spiritual being, who
acted, or was concerned in them, was the Supreme
God himself. The other is, that they were the
appearances of some inferior spirit, of an intelligent
agent, different from the Supreme God, but personating ,
him as his messenger or angel. On- the one side, it
is believed, that Jehovah himself, without the instru
mentality of any other spiritual being, did appear in the
visible symbols, and the audible voices of the several
divine manifestations, called, in general, Shekinah.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 91
'They,* who apprehend *these appearances to have
been the proper and real appearances of the true God,
do not mean, as if thereby God did or could become
visible in his own proper nature, which, as spiritual, is
for that reason absolutely invisible. Nor do they
suppose, that an infinite spirit could possibly move
from one place to another, or leave one place for
another where he was not before. They only mean,
that God did, on some particular occasions, manifest
himself to others, by some special and particular
actions, which he designed should be taken as the
marks and evidence of some special and particular
presence.' f On the other side, it is maintained, that
these Divine ' appearances were the proper appearances
of some inferior spirit ; ' that in them ' some angel or
the preexisting soul of the Messiah, being sent by
God, in his name on some message, speaks and acts
as in the person of God, using his name and authority.'
A noble and popular writer in defence of this latter
opinion, thus expresses himself; ' It was the Word,
who made all the great appearances and manifestations
of God's will to our first parents, to the patriarchs, and
* I here quote Lowman's first Tract. So much use will be made,
in this part of our investigation, of his language and arguments, that
no particular reference will, in general, be made to him ; in cases
of quotation without reference, the reader will understand that we
are indebted to him.
t Lowman quotes the following passage from Bishop BuU to the
same effect ; p. 2. ' Deus igitur, qui Mosen e rubo ardenti allocutus
est, non aliter apparuit, quam Deum decuit ; hoc est, non de loco in
locum transeundo, aut ita ut loci alicujus angustils clauderetur, sed
speciem visibilem, atque audlbilem vocem efformando, sese prophets
sancto manifestavit.' De. Fid. Nic. Sect. IV. c. iii. s. 5.

92 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
to the Israelitish people. But we must always carry
it along with us, that he, that is, the Word, never
acted or spoke in his own name, but in the name of
the Most High, whom he personated as his angel,
acting as his chief minister or messenger, and by his
authority, without any authority of his own.'*
The learned and judicious Lowman, whom we must
follow in the progress of our present inquiry, for he has
marked out the ground in such a skilful manner, that
it will be impossible to improve upon him, presents, in
the first place, and at the outset, three general con
siderations against the latter of these two opinions,
which will now be offered to the reader's examination.
1. In the first place, 'there are several characters
given to these appearances, that in strictness and full
propriety, do only belong to the true God.' Titles of
supremacy are ascribed to the person who appears in
them, such as the ' Lord of Hosts' the ' Almighty
God,' ' Jehovah,' ' lam that lam.' The whole church
are required to acknowledge him as their head, as the
Lord their God, and they are most solemnly forbid
den to recognise any other god. ' Thou slralt have
no other gods before me.' f The unity of the Divine
Being is the fundamental article of the Jewish religion ;
and it is certainly everywhere plain that the God who
appeared to the Jews was this one God. This is ex
pressly and most carefully declared in Solomon's
prayer at, the dedication of the temple. J 'And he
* Lord Barrington's Essay on the several Dispensations of God to
Mankind. Addend, p. 130. .
t Exodus, xx. 3. t 2 Chron. vi. 12, 14, 18, seqq.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 93
stood before the altar of Jehovah in the presence of
all the congregation of Israel, and spread forth his
hands, and said ; O Jehovah, God of Israel, there is
no God like thee, in the heaven, nor in the earth.'
' It is plain,' says Lowman, ' that Solomon meant this
his prayer, should be directed to the one true God, to
that infinite Being, whose presence is universal;
though yet, in a good sense, he was also peculiarly
present in his temple. To this presence it is that he
immediately directs his prayer.' ' But will God in
very deed dwell with men on the earth? Behold,
heaven, and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee.
How much less this house, which I have built. Have re
spect, therefore, to the prayer of thy servant, and to
his supplication, O Jehovah, my God, to hearken unto
the cry and the prayer which thy servant prayeth before
thee ; that thine eyes may be open upon this house day
and night, and upon the place whereof thou hast said,
that thou wouldest put thy name there ; to hearken
unto the prayer which thy servant prayeth toward this
place. Hearken therefore unto the supplications of
thy servant and of thy people Israel, which they shall
make toward this place. Hear thou from thy dwell
ing place, even from heaven, and when thou hearest,
forgive.' 2. In the second place, there is no room for the
1 supposition, that the spiritual being, who appeared in
the Shekinah, was the representative of Jehovah, and
^therefore used his name. The scriptures do not af
ford the least shadow of evidence in its support. And
\ is highly improbable that, if there had been such a

94 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
representation, no intimation would have been given of
it ; and that, in conveying and preserving a religion,
the leading purpose of which was to make God known
to men, a representative being should have been em
ployed, who would serve to prevent the fulfilment of
that purpose, by placing himself, as it were, between
God and men, so as to conceal him entirely from
their view.
3. In the third place, all the early Fathers are oppos
ed to this notion of the representative character of the
Shekinah. Lowman quotes TertuUian, and Irenaeus,
and Augustin, to this effect.
There are three arguments, on the other hand-,
which have been urged in defence of the opinion,
that the miraculous appearances, made to the Jews,
were appearances of some spirit inferior to Jehovah.
These arguments I will now consider.
1. The first is stated in the following, manner. The
scriptures declare, that ' no man hath seen God at
any time,' John i. 18. In Colossians i. 15, and in
1 Timothy, i. 17, he is called ' invisible,' and, in the
16th verse of the 6th chapter of the last mentioned
Epistle, he is spoken of as ' dwelling in the light,
which no man can approach unto, whom no man hath
seen or can see ; * whereas the being, acting in the
Shekinah, did become visible to the eyes, and audi
ble to the ears of men. The answer to this argument
is obvious. Whatever were the rank or character of
the being employed in these appearances, the being
itself did not appear. ' No spiritual being at all was
properly seen or heard.' All that was subjected t>

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 95
the observation of the senses, was the material sym
bols, which were the mere appendages and instru
ments of the Divine presence. ' It was only the voice
of the oracle, or an articulate sound, that was heard,
and only the cloud and the fire that were seen.'
Strictly speaking, no spiritual being ever was, or ever
can be' seen. We do not see each others' spirits. We
only see the outward material forms, which they actu
ate, and this was all that was seen in the Shekinah.
In order therefore to give the passages of scripture
just quoted, any actual and intelligible meaning, we
must resort to some other interpretation, than the sup-
positron of a reference to bodily sight. It has been
thought that inward, moral, or intellectual vision is
spoken of. This is undoubtedly the true meaning of
the above passages. John i. 18, 'No man hath seen
God at any time ; the only begotten Son, which is in
the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.' In
this verse, the declaration of the character of God by
his Son is spoken of by way of opposition, or contrast,
with the expression ' not seeing God.' The following
passage appears to convey the same meaning, and to
serve as an interpretation of the one just quoted.
Matt. xi. 27, ' No man knoweth the Son, but the
Father, neither knoweth any man the Father, save the
Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.'
This interpretation is entirely confirmed by 3 John, 1 1 .
' He that doeth evil hath not seen God,' and gives a
beautiful simplicity and clearness to one of the beati
tudes. Matt. v. 8. ' Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they shall see God.'

96 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
This was the sense in which the Jewish doctors
understood the expressions we are now considering.
Thus Maimonides dxplains the words of Jehovah to
Moses, Exodus xxxiii. 20. ' Thou canst not see my
'face, for there shall no man see ine and live*' He
'considers it to mean, that no one in this imperfect
state, while in the body, ' quamdiu corpore indutus,'
can arrive at a full understanding and apprehension of
the character of God. He says that God calls such
an apprehension of him ' his face,' — ' veram autem ap-
prehensionem, msionem faciei appellavit.' * We have
reason to conclude, that, when rightly understood,
the use of language in scripture, upon which the
argument just considered is built, affords it no solid
foundation. 2. Lowman presents the second argument in favor
of the supposition of the agency of an inferior spirit in
the manifestations of a Divine nature, made to the
Jews, in the following words ; — ' We must understand
the appearance in the Shekinah of some spiritual be
ing representing God, because it is ascribed to angels,
and the appearance itself is often called in scripture,
the Angel of Jehovah. This observation is by many
thought to be decisive, and to show evidently that the
person, who appeared, and used the style and title of
Jehovah, in the appearance, could not he the hue God
himself, but some other spiritual being, sent from the
true God, as his angel, or minister, to represent Him.
For no interpretation, it is presumed, will allow that
the true God and his angel should be the same.' This
* Maimon. Porta Mosis, p. .230. ,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 97
is the argument as it has been urged by its advo
cates. Its whole force, it will be perceived, is con
tained in the word Angel; and it entirely disappears
before the proper interpretation of that word.
Now the original and the proper signification of An
gel, does not embrace the idea of an intelligent spirit,
but of instrumentality or office only. Maimonides, the
great master of Jewish learning, expressly declares,
that whoever, or whatever bears a message, or per
forms an office, is an Angel. * ' Quivis, qui mandatum
aliquod expedit, est Angelus, ita ut de motu animalium
irratiohalium etiam dicatur.' Again, ' Virtutes et facul-
tates omnes sunt Angeli.' He also affirms that such has
been the interpretation of learned Jewish commentators.
1 Nostri sapientes autem omnibus prudentibus satis ex-
plicuerunt quamlibet facultatem corporalem esse An-
gelum.' The decision of the Hebrew doctors on this
point, is corroborated by the authority of the Samari
tan School. They believed that whatever God em
ployed, was called his Angel, in virtue of that employ
ment. Reland, in his Dissertation concerning them,
gives this important definition, as the one applied by
them to the word Angel. ' Porro, quum Deus suam
virtutem corpori cuidam, sive instrument*), ita conjun-
git, ut illud animet, et in, et cum eo operetur ; illud in-
strumentum Angelus iis appelletur.'
' It is the concurrent opinion then of the Hebrew
and Samaritan schools, that the word Angel does not
only mean a spirit, but sometimes also, all sorts of
powers, or instruments, which God shall be pleased to
* More Nevochim, P. II. c. vi.
9

98 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
use, and to act by. So that the elements of the world,
fire and air, winds and storms, in particular visions, in
the language of the scriptures are called, " Angels of
the Lord, which do his will." ' ' The scriptures call a
dream, a vision, a voice from Heaven, a plague, a
burning wind, Angels of the Lord. Whatsoever God
is pleased to do by them, is said to be done by an
Angel of the Lord, , Whatever declares God's will,
or performs his pleasure, is his Angel.'
The Shekinah, or sensible manifestation of God's
presence, and the oracle that proceeded from it, might
each, in this sense, be called the Angel of the Lord.
We may say, therefore, that the Angel of the Lord
approved, without supposing the agency of another
spiritual being, than Jehovah himself. The visible ap-.
pearance of the Shekinah, and the audible voice of
the oracle, coming forth from it, were as properly
Angels, in the language of scripture, as intelligent be
ings, or spirits would have been.
As we shall have further occasion to consider the
word Angel, it may be worth our while to settle its
meaning still more clearly. I think that its true defir
nition is very nearly approached in the following quo
tation, which I find in Lowman, originally coming from
Ambrose. ' Sciendum est quod Angelus est nomen
Officii, non Natures. Quaeris hujus Naturae nomen?
Spiritusest. Quasris Officii? Angelus. Ex eo quod est,
est Spiritus ; ex eo quod agit, Angelus.' In these words
it is declared, that whatever spiritual beings there may
be, who discharge offices in the administration of the
world, under God, and are called Angels, they, derive

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 99
their title altogether from the circumstance of their
office. They also declare, that that title has no refer
ence to the nature of the subject, to which it is ap
plied. In addition to the citations already made from Mai-
monides, who is certainly the best authority upon this
point, I might produce many more, in which he as
serts plainly and strongly the opinion, that the word in
question does not necessarily imply the existence of
separate spirits, but is equally applicable to the natural
or the animal powers. But I prefer to establish this
point upon the authority of the text of scripture itself.
The first passage to which I would turn, is Acts xii.
23. ' And immediately the Angel of the Lord smote
him, [Herod] because he gave not God the glory, and
he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.' The
reader will judge whether the last part of this passage
does not interpret the first, and whether there is rea
son to suppose, that Herod was smitten in any other
way, or by any other agent than the disease which is
specified. I proceed to still stronger instances of the
use of language now contended for.
1 Chron. xxi. 14. ' So the Lord sent a pestilence
upon Israel; and there fell of Israel seventy thousand
men.' This pestilence was sent as a teken of God's
displeasure to David on account of his numbering the
people. In the following verses the same event is
described in other words. ' And God sent an Angel
unto Jerusalem to destroy it.' ' During the process of
the destruction David utters this supplication ; — ' Is it
not I that commanded the people to be numbered ?

100 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
Even I it is that have sinned and done evil indeed ;
but as for these sheep, what have they done ? let thine
hand, I pray thee, O Lord my God, be on me and
my father's 'house ; but not on thy people, that they
should be plagued.'
2 Samuel, xxiv. 15, 16. The same event is here
described in a similar manner. The people are said
to be smitten, in one part of the narration, by a pesti
lence, and in another by an Angel. It will be difficult
to avoid the conclusion, that the ideas connected in
these passages with a pestilence, and with Angel, are
precisely the same.
Exodus, ix. 23, 24, 25. 'And Moses stretched
forth his rod toward heaven, and the Lord sent thun
der and hail, and the fire ran along the ground, and
the Lord rained hail upon the land of Egypt. So
there was hail, and fire mingled with the hail, very
grievous, such as there was none like it in all the land
of Egypt since it became a nation. And the hail
smote throughout all the land of Egypt all that was in
the field, both man and beast.' Psalm lxxviii. 43.
The signs and wonders, wrought fey God, in Egypt,
are here celebrated, and the following account is giv
en of the fearful circumstances, recorded in the above
quotation from Exodus. ' He destroyed their vines
with hail, and their sycamore trees with frost. He
gave up their cattle also to the hail> and their flocks to
hot thunderbolts. He cast upon them the fierceness
of his anger, wrath, and indignation and trouble, by
sending evil Angels among them.' There can be but
little doubt, what these evil Angels were. The He-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 101
brew interpreters agree in considering them as synony
mous with the rain, hail, thunder, and fire or lightning.
Psalm cxlviii. 8. 'Fire and hail; snow and vapors;
stormy wind fulfilling his word,' or acting as his
messengers or Angels. The fourth verse of the one
hundred and, fourth Psalm, when properly translated, is
in itself an express declaration of the meaning which
I insist upon ; ' Who maketh the winds, his Angels ;
and the lightnings his messengers.'
Upon the whole, then, I think it clear, that we are
sustained by the authority of scripture, in interpreting,
as I do, the word Angel. The judicious reader will
determine for himself, whether this interpretation does
not remove all difficulty from such passages as the
following ; Dan. vi. 22. ' My God hath sent his Angel,
and hath shut the . lions' mouths, that they have not
hurt me ; ' and John v. 4. ' For an Angel went down
at a certain season into the -pool, and troubled the
waters.' I conclude the discussion of this point, in the words
of Lowman ; — ' If it should still be said, that it is a
current opinion that God is not used to act immediately
himself, but by the immediate agency of Angels as his
ministers ; it must be owned the Jews have such a
maxim, " non enim invenies Deum ullum opus fecisse,
nisi per manus alicujus Angeli." Yet the true mean
ing of that maxim, as we have already seen from
Maimonides, is to establish that sense of the word
Angel, which I have been endeavouring to explain ;
that is, that it is meant of everything God appoints,
and uses to fulfil his will, of the powers and effects of
9*

102 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
things inanimate and irrational, as well as of other
beings; and to adhere in all cases to, the common
sense of the word Angel, for a separate spirit, and its
proper action, is to mistake the meaning of the Hebrew
masters, as well as the language of scripture ; for that
maxim is so far from establishing the sense intended
to be supported by it, that*it is founded upon an opinion
in direct contradiction to it.'
I conclude, as the result of this investigation, that
no strength is given to the opinion, that a separate
spirit from God was concerned in the appearances of
a miraculous nature,' made to the Jews, by the circum
stance of their being spoken of as the Angel of the
Lord. 3. The third and last argument of any Weight, in
favor of the opinion,. that the divine appearances, under
the ancient dispensation, were appearances of another
being than Jehovah, is, that they are spoken of as The
Word. And, it is said, The Word is surely a different
being from the Supreme God. As this argument takes
for granted the main question of our present discussion,
which is the true and proper , signification of Logos, or
The Word, we shall not notice it at this time, any fur
ther than to observe that it may be found, that the
Divine appearances may all be referred to the Logos,
without the supposition of the agency ' of any other
being than Jehovah in them.
Having considered the leading arguments which
have been advanced in support of one view of the
Divine appearances in the ancient church, I will now
briefly sketch the convincing and irresistible reasoning

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.

103

offered in favor of the other view, which regards them
as appearances of God himself.
1. This was the opinion of all the old Jewish writers.
In speaking of certain laws, Philo expressly declares,
that God gave them immediately, without "the interven
tion of any other being whatever. T«» Neftav, »s /»« ctvres
o ©cos, ev 7rpetrxpyrctp,ms aX^ui, Si' kavra fuein S-savi^en nfyatnv.
And he makes these laws to be above all others, be
cause they were thus given by God in his own proper
person. Tas fist «v avreirpeTomos S-itriri&evras pi' lavru ftstn
cvfiGiSwi y-xi Hefixs mat, xmi Ne/««v rm ev pupil KKpaXaia.*
This same opinion is clearly declared by Josephus.
In two places, he says, that God himself, ©ws avrcs,
spake to the Jews from Mount Sinai.f The Son of
Sirach, Ecclesiasticus, xxxvi. 1, 5, 13, commences a
prayer in these words ; ' Have mercy upon us, 0 Lord
God of ail, and behold us.' Soon after its commence
ment, he again de'clares the object of his worship ;
' There is no God, but only thou, O God;' and, in
the course of the. prayer, he distinctly affirms, that the
being whom he addresses, is the same who appears in
the Shekinah, ' O be merciful unto Jerusalem, thy
holy city, the place of thy. rest.' t
I turn to the canonical scriptures, for evidence upon
this point. Exodus xxxiii. 14, 15. 'And he [God]
said, my- presence shall , go with thee, and I will give
thee rest. And he [Moses] said unto him, if thy
presence go not with me, carry us not up hence.' In
this passage, the word translated presence, means face.
* Philo de Decalogo, pp. 576, 746.
t Josephus, Antiq. 1. 3. c. S, p. 4, 6.

104 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
The Chaldean paraphrasts render it Shekinah; and the
Septuagint translators render this same word, which,
in the Hebrew, is the face or presence of God, and, in
the Chaldean paraphrases, the Shekinah, God himself;
which is a demonstration, that those translators under
stood the Shekinah as the appearance of none other
than Jehovah. This is the express declaration, too, of
John, in his book of Revelation, xxi. 3. 'And I heard
a great voice out of heaven, saying, behold, the taber
nacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with
them, and they shall be his people, and God himself
shall be with them, and be their God.' In this passage,
the words translated ' tabernacle ' and ' will dwell,'
e-xmn and o-xysiani, have the same meaning as the
Shekinah. An attentive perusal of the whole chapter of Exodus
just referred to, will show, to the entire satisfaction of
every mind, that it was God himself, land not any infe
rior being, or other being, who acted in the Divine ap
pearances usually made to the Jews. In consequence
of the obstinate propensity of the people to idolatry,
God is represented to have threatened, through Moses*
that he would not go up in the midst of. them any
more, but would send an Angel or deputy to accom
pany them. Upon hearing this, the people were
grieved, and returned to the worship of the true God,
and Moses offered their supplications for pardon and
the return of God's presence among them. God heard
their prayers, and granted their petition, and restored
their confidence, by promising not to put into execu
tion his threat of sending a subordinate being before

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. jq§
them, but to continue to favor them with his own
presence. It is not perceived in what manner the
inferences from this narration can be avoided.
But one other instance will be cited. Genesis ix. 17.
' And God said unto Noah, this is the token of the
covenant which I have established between me and all
flesh that is upon the earth.' This sentence is thus
rendered in the version of Onkelos ; ' This is the sign
of the covenant, which I have established between my
Mimra [a word always applied to the Shekinah or
Divine appearances] and all flesh.' ' Upon the whole,
it should seem, that the ancient interpreters, who were
best acquainted with the Hebrew expression, and the
doctrines of the Jewish church, understood the Divine
appearances made to the Jews, to be appearances of
God himself, not of some other being in his name,
and as his representative. This interpretation is also
most agreeable to the passages of scripture themselves,
and to the explications which the sacred writers have
given of them.'
2. The character, and titles of the Supreme God
are appropriated to the person, who is concerned in
these appearances, in such a manner as no form of
speech, or principles of interpretation can allow to one
who merely represents, or personates him. For in»
stance, Moses, in speaking of this person, says, Exoh
dus viii. 10, 'There is none like unto the Lord our
God.' Isaiah says, vi. 5, ' Mine eyes have seen the
King, the Lord of Hosts ; ' and Nehemiah uses this
strong language, ix. 6, ' Thou, even thou art Lord
alone; the host of, heaven worshipped! thee,'

106 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
3. ' The whole worship of the church is uniformly,
throughout the Old Testament, properly, and immedi
ately directed to the person appearing, or acting in
these appearances, without any intimation of a repre
sentative. So that if the person appearing in the
Shekinah be £ representative only, he is not only a
representative speaking in the name of another, and
with his authority, but he must also be a representa
tive to receive all religious worship for him too ; for
to him was all the worship of the church to be direct
ed, as the immediate object of it. The whole form of
expression concerning the worship of the church, un
der the Mosaical institution, is founded on this as a
principle, that it is directed to Jehovahj who dwelt in
the most holy place of the temple between the cheru
bim. All prayer is offered to this being, and it can
not be supposed that in a true revelation any other
being than the only God could be proposed as the
object of. prayer.
4. Finally, ' it was the first and fundamental article
of the faith of the Jewish Church that there is only
one true God. And it was the first command that
they should have no other gods before him or beside
him. They were to worship him and him only. If
therefore we consider another spirit or an Angel to be
the only person appearing, the whole worship of the
church will then be given to that person or spirit
directly and immediately, and not to the one God of
Israel, flip Lord of Hosts, and the Most High. And in
this sense, as I apprehend, the whole religious service
of the churph must have been an express contradiction

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS, 107
to the chief and principal doctrine of the Jewish reli
gion, and indeed of all true religion, natural as well as
revealed.' ' The worshippers of God, under the Jewish dis
pensation, seem very sensible of this— truth, and often
express how highly they were concerned- never to de
part from it, or to worship any other than the one
true God, on any pretence whatever. And yet through
out the whole of this dispensation, all their prayers,
and their whole worship, were addressed to the Sheki
nah, or to the person who appeared in it, though they
never once give the least intimation, on any occasion,
that the person appearing was properly an Angel, and
not the Most High. So that if the person appearing
in the Shekinah was indeed only an Angel, or any other
being than the Supreme God himself; it would seem
that the whole worship of the church, for two thousand
years together, was offered -to an object, besides, and
against the intention of every worshipper, against the
chief fundamental doctrines and rule of worship in their
revelation, and against the chief principles of all reli
gion, and religious worship, according to the light of
nature.' We have thus followed, step by step, the sure and
irresistible reasoning of the, learned and judicious Low-
man, until we have arrived at his conclusion, that it
was the Great Jehovah, the one true God who appear
ed to the Jews in the Shekinah, or who was concern
ed in those miraculous communications, which were
made to them.

108 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
The process by which the investigation, which is
now closed, has been conducted, has been necessarily
dry, and tedious; but it was impossible, from its very
nature, to make it otherwise. And it could not, with
out injury to the general discussion, have been render
ed more brief. It is true, that the ground of argu
ment, in favor of the trinity, or rather of the supreme
deity of Jesus Christ, which I think, has now been re
moved, has not been much occupied of late years.
And it would not now have been traversed again, had
it not been of essential importance to the prosecution
of our present inquiry, to settle, in the first place, the
question, which has been so often, and with so much
learned toil, agitated within its borders.
Having determined the spiritual Being, who spoke
and acted in the Shekinah, to have been Jehovah
himself, or the one true God, let us now see in what
light the appearances, so called, present themselves
to us.
No one can suppose that Jehovah, in his actual per
son, ever appeared to the senses of men. He is a
spirit, and therefore must be imperceptible to our bodily
organs. He is everywhere present, and therefore
cannot be perceived in any particular place. Whatever,
therefore, might have been seen, or heard, at any one
time, or, on any circumscribed spot, was not God, in
any sense whatever. Indeed, when we come to re
flect closely upon the subject, we must instantly be
convinced, that God could not be, actually and in his
essence, present in one part of space, more than in all
other parts. *In no sense then whatever, can we con-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 109
sider God to have been in the Shekinah, more than
in every other point of the universe, which he fills.
All that was seen, was material objects. All that was
heard, addressed itself to the mind, like other sounds,
through the mediation of the air, and the auditory
nerve. The amount of the meaning expressed by Shekinah,
considered in the light, in which it is now presented
to us, is this ; — the omnipresent, invisible Jehovah,
called into existence a certain striking and extraor
dinary sensible appearance, for the purpose either of
arresting the attention of men, or of manifesting his
power, or of communicating his will. So far, there
fore, from being God himself, the Shekinah was
merely an instrument in his hand, a mean by which he
promoted certain ends, such as awakening attention,
producing impression, or conveying knowledge. It was
an Angel, in the sense which has been given to that
word, and was so called throughout, as we shall see,
in one version of the scriptures.
Whenever God caused any miraculous appearance,
so as to direct the attention of men towards him, or to
convey to them communications, then and there was a
Shekinah. When therefore we think of a Shekinah,
we are not to suppose that God is contained within it,
in any sense in which we do not, at the same time,
suppose him to be contained in every other object in
the universe, and in every other portion of space; but
we are to regard it only as the chosen point, towards
which we are to look, in order to recognise his being,
and contemplate with reverence his character ; as the
10

110 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
selected channel, through which, we are to direct to
him our worship, and receive from him instructions. .
This, I think, can be proved to have been the view
which the Jews entertained of those appearances called
Shekinah. Maimonides meant this, when he called
it ' Gloria creata.' Deut. iv. 36, seems to offer the
same explanation ; ' Out of Heaven he made thee to
hear his voice, that he might instruct thee ; and upon
earth he showed thee his great fire, and thou heardest
his words out of the midst of the fire.' The Sheki
nah is in this passage defined to be a material element,
conveying God's words to men. An examination of
all that was said at the dedication of the temple by
Solomon, will lead to a confirmation of this opinion of
the Shekinah.
But we shall be able to understand more fully the
nature of the Shekinah, or of the Divine appearances
in the Jewish church, by examining the several appel
lations given to them.
1. They were called, as we have before remarked,
' the Angel of the Lord.' Exodus iii. 2. ' And the
Angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire
out of the midst of a bush.' Verse 4, this same ap
pearance is called ' God' ; verse 6, the being appear
ing declares himself, ' the God of Abraham, the God
of Isaac, and the God of Jacob' ; and in verse 14, he
says, in answer to the inquiry of Moses, 'lam that I
am.' It is remarkable that Stephen, in his account
of this occurrence, uses similar language. Acts vii. 30,
' There appeared unto him in the wilderness an angel
of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush.' In the re-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. i ] i
ihainder of Stephen's narration he calls it the ' voice of
the Lord,' and speaks of it as an appearance of the
one true God.
In the Book of Judges vi., the application of the
word Angel to the appearances of God himself, is, clear
and obvious ; 22d verse, ' And when Gideon perceiv
ed that he, was an Angel of the Lord, Gideon said,
Alas, O Lord God, for because I have seen an Angel of
the Lord face to face. And the Lord said unto him,
Peace be unto thee, fear not, thou shalt not die.' In
this place the second part of the first clause interprets
the first part, and proves, that the ' Lord God ' and
the ' Angel of tthe Lord ' are applied to the same ap
pearances. But besides this, there is other evidence
in this passage, that ' the Angel of the Lord,' was con
sidered as the appearance of God himself. ' Gideon
was impressed with terror, lest he should die, because
he had seen an Angel of the Lord. Now it was the
seeing God, which was supposed to be. followed with
death. Judges xiii. 22. ' And Manoah said unto his
wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.'
Isaiah vi. 5, the prophet exclaims, ' Woe is me ! for I
am undone, for mine eyes have seen the King, the
Lord of Hosts.' Deut. v. 25. ' If we hear the voice
of the Lord our God any more, then we shall die. For
who is there of all flesh, that hath heard the voice of
the Living God speaking out of the midst of the fire,
as we have, and lived ? ' These instances prove that
it is seeing the appearances, or hearing the voice of
God himself, which was supposed, by the Jews, to
be accompanied, or followed, by death. Gideon there-

1 12 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
fore must have meant, by the 'Angel of the Lord,' an
appearance of Jehovah, a true and proper Shekinah.
Paul, says, Galatians iii. 19, that the law was or
dained or given from Mount Sinai by Angels. An
examination of the part" of scripture, describing the
giving of the law, will satisfy any one, that it was the
Supreme God, who acted on that sublime and awful
occasion. The passages, now quoted, contain within
themselves full evidence, that, although ' the Angel of
the Lord ' is spoken of, the Divine being referred to in
them, is God alone ; of course the phrase Angel must
be limited in its meaning to the sense which we have
before seen to have been its original and proper sense.
The ' Angel of the Lord ' must therefore, in these
instances, mean that which God makes his agent, or
instrument, in a peculiar and extraordinary sense, to
exhibit his character or convey his will. But this
expression is equivalent to the Shekinah, and in the
Arabic version, is used almost invariably instead of the
Shekinah. From this appellation given to it, then, we
learn that the Shekinah discharged, in a preeminent
degree, the office, as God's Angel, or agent, or instru
ment, of exhibiting his character, and conveying his
will to men.
2. Another name for the Shekinah was ' presence,'
or ' the Angel of the presence.' We have already
seen, Exodus xxxiii. 14, 15, an instance of the use
of this expression. The amount of its signification
probably is this. The Divine appearances, made to
the Jews, were a sensible demonstration, vouchsafed
to them, of the general truth of the presence of God.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. H3
These forms of expression seem to exclude the idea of
the intervention of any other being than God, in the
Shekinah, by declaring, that it was his presence, which
was indicated by it. The only addition, then, made
by this title to the interpretation, or definition of the
Divine appearances, the nature of which we are inves
tigating, is this ; it is God, who acts by, and through
them, and they are tokens of his presence with us, and
of his interest in our welfare and progress.
3. The ' glory of God ' is another appellation given
to the Shekinah. Exodus xxiv. 16, 17. 'And the
glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, and the
sight of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire,
on the top of the mount ; ' and, also, xl. 35. ' And the
glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.' The author of
the Epistle to the Hebrews uses the same expression,
in describing the temple ordinances ; ix. 5. 'And over
it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercy seat.'
And Peter, who was present at the transfiguration,
described Luke ix. 28, speaks, in his 2d Epistle i.
17, 18, of the appearance of God upon that occasion,
using the same phrase ; ' For he received from God
the Father, honor and glory, when there came such a
voice from the excellent glory, This is my beloved
Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice
which came from heaven we heard, when we were
with him in the holy mount.' The import of this
expressipn can be easily perceived. As applied to the
Shekinah, it signified the impressive and awe striking
circumstances which accompanied it, and caused men
to -be filled with admiration and reverence towards him
10*

114 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
who appeared in it. Maimonides thus interprets it ;
'Pergloriam Domini significatur nonnunquam splendor
aliquis creatus, quern Deus, quasi prodigii, vel miraculi
loco, ad magnificentiam suam ostendendam, alicubi
habitare fecit.' * This title evidently meets the inter
pretation which we have given, in general terms, of
the Shekinah, as a striking exhibition, suited to pro
duce reverence; and admiration, and faith*. It is
unfavorable to the opinion, that there is any distinct
personal character connected with it, and instructs us,
that, in addition to its being the instrument of God's
will, and the token of his presence, the Shekinah is
an image or representation, to some extent, of his
glory and majesty.
4. The next title given to the appearances of God,
in the ancient church, is ' his name.' It is more par
ticularly applied to the Shekinah, as it existed in the
temple. An instance of its use has been given in the
prayer of Solomon, already quoted, 2 Chron. vi. 20, 21.
It is also used in the prayer of Jehoshaphat, 2 Chron.
xx. 5. ' And Jehoshaphat stood in the congregation
of Judah and Jerusalem, in the house of the Lord,
before the new court, and said, O Lord God of our
fathers, art not thou God in heaven ? And rulest not
thou over all the kingdoms of the heathen ? Art not
thou our God, who didst drive out the inhabitants of
this land before thy people Israel ? And they dwelt
therein, and have built thee a sanctuary therein, for
thy name, saying, If when evil cometh upon us, as the
sword, judgment, or pestilence, or famine, we stand
.«?-
* More Nevochim, Part I. c. 64. p. 115.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. H5
before this house, and in thy presence (for thy name
is in this house), and cry unto thee in our affliction,
then thou wilt hear and help.' In this prayer, the
being addressed, and whose appearance, or Shekinah,
is supposed to dwell in the temple, is manifestly dis
tinguished from that appearance which is spoken of,
not as his representative nor as a distinct being at all,
but simply as ' his name.' This title also seems to
exclude the idea of a peculiar spiritual presence, and
to set forth, that, as the name of a man is inscribed
for the purpose of recalling to the recollection of those
who read it, the idea of that man, so, in the Shekinah,
God inscribed his name before the eyes of men, in
order to keep them attentive to his existence, his
communications, and his will. From this appellation,
then, we gather that the Shekinah was a remembrancer,
a token, and a signature of God to men.
5. The last title given to the appearances of a
Divine nature, in the Hebrew church, was the ' Mimra
de Adonai ' of the Chaldean paraphrases, which, as
the Greek language prevailed, and acquired a fixed
predominance, was translated ' The Logos, or Word
of the Lord.' As an extensive use of the Greek lan
guage continued up to, and beyond the time of our
Saviour, this phrase also, continued, and, as it expressed
the Shekinah with greater accuracy than any other,
so it was the last appellation which was given to it.
It was so long, and so generally used by the Hebrews,
that it was borrowed and transplanted into the vocabu
lary of other nations. We have already, in another
part of this discussion, traced its progress from the

116 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
Shekinah of the temple to a distinguished station in
the Philosophy of Plato) and in the Theology of the
East. As it was used in the ancient scriptures, and
in.their paraphrases, to express the source from which
the Jews had received their law and their religion,*
so we find, that a similar title of office is applied to
Eastern kings and rulers, viewed as the sources of
authority and law to their people. Emir or Imer or
Amer, and Muphti, seem to have originated from the
Jewish title which we are now considering. And so
does the Roman word of office Dictator. The coun
sellors of Nebuchadnezzar are called Words, in the
original Hebrew, Dan. iii. 2, 3, 24, 27. Those Doc
tors, who gave out expositions and instructions con
cerning the Mishna, were called 'Amoraim,' which is
very similar in its import to the Word, as a title of the
Shekinah, and is equivalent to the etymological mean
ing of DiCtator.f
The adoption of this expression into so many of the
languages and speculations of antiquity, and the wide
field which it has occupied in the controversies and
discussions of christian Theology, render it highly im
portant, that we should ascertain, if possible, its mean
ing. The process which I propose to pursue for this
purpose, is extremely simple and obvious. It is an
examination of .its common, popular meaning. The
Shekinah, as we have seen, can be defined, in general
* Lowman's Tracts, p. 228, seqq. The same on the Civil Govern
ment of the Hebrews, p. 195; and the same on Revelations, p. 234
note ; Rational of the Hebrew Ritual, Part II. ch. ii. pp. 67,255,372.
t Prideaux's Connexion, Book V, Year 446.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. H7
terms, to mean, the sensible circumstances which accom
panied the conveyance of God's will to men, or, in
other words, whenever and wherever God addressed his
creatures through the instrumentality of sensible objects,
then and there was a Shekinah. But the phrase,
' The Word of the Lord,' or, by way of eminence,
' The Word,' was applied to the' Shekinah. The
question is, what light is thrown upon it by the
application of that title ? or, what is the meaning of
that title ?
When we analyze the meaning of ' word,' as it is
now used in common speech, we shall find, that it suits
exactly to the nature of the Shekinah, as a means of
communication between God and the human race.
There are three different significations universally
known to be attached to word. 1. The first is the
meaning or sense conveyed, the idea expressed by it.
For instance, when a man says, ' I like your words,'
' Your words are agreeable or satisfactory to me,' or
' Your words are wise and convincing ;' it is meant,
that the thoughts, which the words convey, are agree
able, wise, or convincing. This signification is the
most common, and the highest signification of word.
It constitutes in fact its essence. 2. The second is
this ; the visible characters, or the audible sounds, which
serve as the vehicles of the sense, or ideas communi
cated. We say, for instance, ' a long word,' ' a short
word,' or ' an harmonious word,' meaning word, as a
sensible object only. 3. The third meaning of word,
is formed by a combination^ of the two others. We
should say for instance, that, in a certain line of poetry,

118 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
a particular word, is ' an excellent word,' when we
mean, that it conveys the right thought, and, at the same
time, is melodious, and well adapted to the metre, or
the rhyme. These three are certainly common and
popular significations of word, as we now use it, in wri
ting, or in speech.
Now let us apply these significations to ' The Word,'
as the title, or description of the Shekinah. If they
answer the purposes of interpretation, and explanation,
there will be no occasion to go any further, but we may
rest in the simple and natural view, which will thus be
presented to us. The first fully meets all those cases,
in which the instructions and communications, received
from God through the Shekinah, are spoken of as
' The Word,' or in which, his will, or attributes, a
knowledge of which has been thus conveyed, are called
' Tlae Word.* The second explains those instances,
in which the agent, or instrument used in the commu
nication of any truth or precept, is called ' The Word ; '
and the third answers the exigency of those passages,
in which both the means and the matter of the com
munication are comprehended in one view. The
amount of what I say, is, that the Jews, without going
beyond the obvious and simple meaning of the phrase,
might have said ' The Word of the Lord,' either when
referring to the will or law of God, or to the instru
ments and vehicles which conveyed and made them
known, or to that will and the bearers of it, united in
one compound idea.
Words, by addressing the eye as written, or the
ear as spoken, convey the thoughts and feelings of one

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. ng
human being to another. In the same manner, the
appearances of the Shekinah, by addressing the senses
communicated the designs and the will of God to
men. They answered the same purpose and dis
charged the same office. How natural, therefore, and
how proper was it, to call the Shekinah ' The Word
of the Lord ! '
There is, indeed, nothing more common than such a
use of language. We speakoftheinstructionsrespecting
the will and character of God, which we receive from
the ordinary appearances and operations of the ma
terial and outward universe, in a similar phrase, the
voice of Nature. To the faith of the saint, and the
fancy of the poet, the whole creation, with all its pro
cesses and relations, is ever represented in the same
view as The Logos or Word of the Lord. ' The Hea
vens,' says the Psalmist, ' declare the glory of God.
Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night '
showeth knowledge. There is no speech nor language,
where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out
through all the earth, and their words to the end of the
world.' Thunder was called the voice of God by the
ancient Hebrews, the original word, Exodus ix. 28.,
translated ' thunderings,' means, literally, ' voices of
God.' And to this day, in the language of devotional
poetry, the objects of the outward creation are always
spoken of, as audible in the praises and teachings of
God. Such they were to the ear of Milton through
out his unrivalled morning hymn, —
' yet these declare

Thy goodness beyond thought, and power divine.'

120 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
Before the mind of Thompson, the material universe
appeared in the same light, —
' These as they change, Almighty Father, these
Are but the varied God. The rolling year
Is full of thee. Forth in the pleasing Spring,
Thy beauty walks, thy tenderness and love.
The thunder rolls : be hushed the prostrate world :
While cloud to cloud returns the solemn hymn.
Bleat out afresh, ye hills ; ye mossy rocks,
Retain the sound: the broad responsive low,
Ye vallies, raise  '
The beautiful verses of Addison, in his translation, or
paraphrase of the words of the Psalmist, just referred
to, set forth the same idea, and are an instance of the
same use of language, —
' The spacious firmament on high,
With all the blue etherial sky,
And spangled heavens, a shining frame,
Their great original proclaim.
The unwearied sun, from day to day
Doth his Creator's power display ;
And publishes to every land,
The work of an almighty hand.
' Soon as the evening shades prevail,
The moon takes up the wondrous tale,
And nightly to the listening earth
Repeats the story of her birth ;
Whilst all the stars which round her burn,
And all the planets in their turn,
Confirm the tidings as they roll,
And spread the truth from pole to pole.
' What though, in solemn silence, all
Move round this dark terrestrial ball ;
What though no real voice nor sound
Amidst their radiant orbs be found ;

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 12]
In reason's ear they all rejoice,
And utter forth a glorious voice,
Forever singing, as they shine,
The hand, that made us, is divine.
There is no limit to quotations illustrative of this
use of language and form of thought. Now if the or
dinary manifestations of God in his works are thus
found naturally to suggest this kind of expression, we
can have no difficulty in explaining its application to
extraordinary manifestations, to the audible and visible
appearances of the Deity in the Shekinah. As it was
thus natural and proper, at the time, to adopt this
phrase, so it is at this time, and so will it ever be. It
is much to be regretted, that its simple and obvious
meaning should have been obscured, or its literal trans
lation neglected and avoided..
Although the expression, ' The Word of the Lord,'
strictly speaking, conveys only the three meanings just
mentioned, yet, as the highest, most common, and
most lasting title of the Shekinah, it is capable of em
bracing the whole, or any part, of the ideas associated
with the Shekinah. I have endeavoured to collect
those ideas from the various appellations, given to
these Divine appearances, and I will now repeat them,
in order that we may have before us, in one view, the
materials, which go to make up the import of ' The
Word,' or ' The Word of the Lord,' as we find it used
in the ancient scriptures, in writings of the apostolic
age, and in the Chaldean paraphrases.
1. The highest and most comprehensive import of
a Shekinah is that which it communicates — the will,
the purposes, the laws of God ; that is, religion as a
11

122 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
body of truths and precepts, of motives and obliga
tions. This meaning is.contained in the first significa
tion, which we have seen to be attached to ' Logos '
or ' Word.'
2. The second characteristic of the Shekinah is
that in which it presents itself as an image of God, as
a representation of his character. This appears to
have been the occasion of giving to it the appellation
of the ' Glory, of God.'
3. The third view, in which it was regarded was,
as the appointed medium or bearer of God's will, and
as the instrument, selected for his special and peculiar
use. This meaning is expressed by the second sig
nification of Logos or Word and by the title of ' Angel
of the Lord.'
4. The fourth aspect of a Shekinah was that in
which it is regarded as a standing and particular proof
of the existence and the presence of God, and of his
connexion with us, and interest in us. This was the
import of the appellation — ' presence,' ' Angel of the
presence,' ' name,' &c.
5. Lastly, the Shekinah might frequently.be con
templated and spoken of, in a general manner, as em
bracing any, or all these significations,, and there are,
without doubt, frequent instances in which it is used
in this broad and indeterminate sense.
We have already seen, that ' The Logos,' or 'Word,'
was the general, and final title, affixed to these Divine
appearances, or to the Shekinah. Of course it is ca
pable of receiving any or all these meanings, and must
be understood to include them, more or less, accord-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 123
ing to the circumstances of the cases respectively in
which it is used.
But Jesus Christ is called, by John, and other
scripture writers, ' Logos ' or ' Word.' So far as this
title is appropriated to him, we are now able to ex
plain it, without any difficulty, by referring to its seve
ral significations, as just stated. There is reason to
belieye, however, that he was ' The Word,' in a pe
culiar and preeminent serise. There seems to be evi
dence, that every former ' Word,' all previous Divine
communications and appearances, were prospective,
preparative, and subsidiary to him, as ' The Word.'
Paul says, 1 Cor. x. 4, ' For they drank of that spir
itual Rock which followed them, and that Rock was
Christ,' or, as Locke, happily expresses it, ' They, the
Israelites, drank all the same spiritual, typical drink,
which came out of the Rock, and followed them ;
which Rock signifieth Christ.' Col. ii. 17. Paul
uses these words ; — ' Which are a shadow of things
to come, but the body is of Christ,' And the writer
of the Epistle to the Hebrews, speaking of the Jewish
dispensation, says, x. 1 , ' That the Law was a
shadow of good things to come, and not the very
image of the things.'
In order to throw light on these texts, and to obtain
clear ideas, respecting the manner, in which every
previous Shekinah, or 'Word,' was prospective and
subsidiary to Jesus Christ, regarded as a Shekinah,
or as ' The Word,' it will be necessary for us to take
a comprehensive view of the whole subject of religion,

124 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
or of intercourse and connexion between God and his
human creatures.
God is a spirit, invisible and incomprehensible.
His presence is spread throughout the universe. All that
we can discern of him is his works, and they are equal
ly numerous, and ^equally impressive, on every side.
We are incapable, at least while our minds are shut up,
as it were, in these bodies, with no other avenues of
thought leading to them, than those which the senses
open, to receive any adequate idea of his nature. In
a previous Letter, I have considered the extent to
which we can go, in forming a conception of God,
and have shown, that we can hardly advance beyond
mere negations, the removal of those restrictions and
limitations, by which we are confined. •
But the foundation of religion can only be laid in a
knowledge of God. It was the divine purpose to es
tablish religion among men. Something, therefore,
was required to be done. Some expedient was to be
used, in conveying to men such a knowledge of God,
as would serve for a foundation of religion. It may
be said, perhaps, that the inward light of reason, or
the outward light of nature, would be sufficient to
guide men to this knowledge. But natural reason ex
ists with different clearness, and strength, in different
individuals, and it is, in every mind, liable to be ob
scured, bewildered, and led astray. It would not be
safe, therefore, to trust to that to enlighten men, and
to keep them enlightened, with regard to God and his
attributes. Neither would it answer the purpose to

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 125
leave the mind to depend for a knowledge of God,
upon the observance of his works, for many reasons.
The works of God surround us. We see them in
every direction. Now we cannot, in our present state,
keep our thoughts fixed steadily, or clearly, unless we
have before them a definite and distinct object, unless
some particular direction has been marked out, which
they prevailingly assume, and in which they can go
forth, with the facility and force, which habit alone can
give. Again, he who knows God only in his works,
sees him, at one time in one object, at another time
in another object, and he will contemplate his presence
and character, on each several occasion, under such
different circumstances, and in connexion with such
various associations, that his conceptions of him will
be liable to inconsistency and confusion.
If men had been left to learn the character of the
Creator from his works alone, they would have been
perplexed and confounded, as we have seen them to
have been, when without, and even when in possession
of revelation, by the existence of evil in the outward
world. They would have been exposed, too, to the
error of regarding God as peculiarly, and even exclu
sively present, in those external objects, changes,- and
•powers, which might make the deepest impressions
upon their feelings or imaginations. The whole sys
tem of ancient polytheism and idolatry probably grew
out of an error like this.
There are many other considerations, of a similar
kind, which will suggest themselves, to a reflecting
mind, in favor of the opinion, that however much the
11*

126 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
works of nature may do to illustrate, they would not
have been adequate to the office of acquainting men,
or of keeping them acquainted with the character and
attributes of God. We conclude, therefore, that the
powers of the mind within, and the appearances of
creation without, were not sufficient to establish and
confirm relations of religion between man and his
Maker. And it became necessary to convey to the
human race, by particular revelation, those truths
upon which religion might rest as a foundation.
There are two ways in which the Divine might
communicate with the human mind. The one is di
rect, the other indirect. It would have been possible
to impart those truths directly to our intellects. But
there are three strong and insurmountable objections
to this mode. 1. It might, perhaps, to a mind not given
to reflection, and inward examination, often be diffi
cult to distinguish such suggestions of the Divine spirit,
from its own fancies, dreams, and reveries. 2. It would
be impossible to propose to others, or to perpetuate
any satisfactory proof that what an individual profess
es, to communicate, as truth supernaturally revealed to
him, is really such, and not delusion produced, in his
mind by natural causes, or deception fabricated for
the purposes of imposture. 3. And this impracticability
of affording to each other the evidence of their several
inspirations of Divine knowledge, would render it ab
solutely necessary that a separate revelation should
be made to every individual, throughout all genera
tions, which would leave no room for the exercise of
the natural faculties, in the investigation of its evi-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 127
dence, and annihilate all social and common inter
est in religion whatever, it being, under these circum
stances, not only a personal, but a private concern,
with which we should be connected, not by one gene
ral bond of union, but severally by a distinct and sepa
rate tie.
It appears, therefore, that a revelation, the truth of
which can be ascertained and vindicated, must be
made indirectly, by the agency, the instrumentality,
the mediation of objects, separate both from the Divine
and human mind, addressing themselves to the senses,
capable of that kind of evidence, the force of which
all can comprehend, and which can easily be preserv
ed and perpetuated, the evidence of the senses, and
performing the office of bearing the will, purposes,
and knowledge of God from him to his human crea
tures. This is the theory of revealed religion.
In establishing religion, it must have been the inten
tion of the Deity to make known all those moral and
spiritual truths concerning him, his attributes, and his
will, which it would be well for man to know. But,
in the infancy of the human mind, it would not be
capable of understanding, appreciating, and transmit
ting a full revelation of these truths. It would be
jiecessary, therefore, to open and enlarge the revelation
of them, according as men should gradually become
able to bear them ; to apportion the quantity of truth
conveyed to the existing capacity to receive it, and to
present it entire before them when there should be
found to be intellectual cultivation enough in the
world to secure to it a firm footing and a full reception.

128 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
This is thenheory of the several dispensations of re
vealed religion. And, in this sense, were all the
previous communications, or words of God to men,
preparations, forerunners, and types' of that final and
complete revelation, conveyed, in the fulness of the
times, by Jesus Christ, considered as the originally
appointed and preeminent medium or bearer of the
word or revelation of God to man. This prospective
appointment of Jesus Christ, considered as existing
only in futurity, to be the final and perpetual Word of
God, is thus declared at the institution of the Mosaic
dispensation, Deut. xviii. 18. 'I will raise them up a .
prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee,
[that, is Moses] and will put my words in his mouth,
and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command
him.' In the early and ruder ages of the world, when the
chief development of the character of man had taken
place in his physical nature, by the exercise of the
faculties of sense, and the powers of > the intellect had
scarcely been awakened into action, the Word of God
to men, that is, the communications made by him to
them, was of a corresponding and appropriate character.
It was uttered or conveyed under circumstances, and
by the instrumentality of striking and impressive sensi-,
ble appearances, suited to awaken terror and admira
tion, and to impress upon the mind a perception of
those of the divine attributes, which it would be most
able to appreciate and comprehend, such as power,
majesty, and glory. It enjoined the establishment
and observance of outward ceremonial services. It

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 129
proposed, as motives to the practice of virtue, and the
avoidance of vice, temporal rewards and retributions.
And it did not disclose the truth of a future existence
with much distinctness, because, at that time, men
would have been unable to form accurate conceptions
of the condition of that existence, of the spiritual joys,
which await the pure in heart, or of the spiritual woes,
which result to the hardened and depraved.
As mankind, or rather, that portion of them embraced
by the Jewish nation, advanced in the development of
the mind, larger and more generous views were un
folded to them, of the character of God, and of the
principles of duty. I think that we can trace a
gradual improvement and approach towards the entire
truth, not so much, however, in the quantity of the
truth revealed, as in right views of that truth, as we
follow up the succession of the Hebrew scriptures,
from the earliest historical, to the latest prophetical
writings. Before the termination of the line of
prophets, we have evidence, that the mind had out
grown the sacrifices, and offerings, and ceremonies of
the Jewish ritual. Micah vi. 6. ' Wherewith shall I
come before the Lord, and bow myself before the
high God ? Shall I come before him with burnt offer
ings, with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be
pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands
of rivers of oil? Shall I give my first born for my
transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my
soul ? He hath showed thee, O man, what is good ;
and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do

130 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with
thy God?'
When the volume of prophecy was closed up, the
course of preparation for the great and final revelation
was finished. There ceased to be a Word of God to
men. No communications were received from him.
There was an interruption in the chain of dispensa
tions, a long and solemn pause, until all the circum
stances of the world conspired in proclaiming the
fulness of the times. And then the Word of God to
men was, -restored. Then did God speak to men.
His Word came forth to them with a full and final
revelation, that for 'which all the others had been sent
to prepare the way, of his character and attributes,
of his pleasure and purpose, and of the duty and des
tination of man. Jesus Christ was chosen to be that
' Word.' ' He who at sundry times and in divers
manners spake in times past unto the fathers by the
prophets, hath, in these last days, spoken unto us by
his Son.'* Jesus of Nazareth was raised up and
* It is worthy of remark, that the title, ' Word,' is thus explained,
in its application to our Saviour, by the celebrated Servetus, the
learned Unitarian, whom Calvin, in his envy and wrath, styled ' the
proudest knave whiche Spayne ever brought forth.' The following
are his words ; ' Ea omnia, qua? antea Deus verbo suo, seu propria
voce' operabatur, caro Christus nunc operator, cui traditum est reg-
num et omnis potestas: Responsa, quse ab oraculo illo accipiebat
Moses, nunc ab ore Christi sumuntur. Ponam verba mea in ore
ejus, et in nomine meo loquetur. Deut. xviii. " A me ipso," inquit,
" non loquor, sed sicut docuit me Pater, ita loquor." Sermo Patris
ipse dicitur, quia Patris mentem enwnciat, et ejus cognitionemfacit.'
Pe Trinitate, lib. ii. p. 49. This passage is extracted from the book
which procured Servetus the honors of martyrdom at the hands of

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 131
appointed to discharge between God and man, in a
preeminent manner, and perpetually, the same office,
which words discharge between man and man. He
was to be the bearer of his law ; a copy, likeness,
image of his attributes, and the revealer of his char
acter. By the fulness of the times, must be understood,
the accomplishment of the preparation of circumstances.
These circumstances have been pointed out, in a pre
vious part of the inquiry, in the natural overthrow of
every separate system of superstition, in the compre
hension of the whole known world within the limits of
one empire, in which the toleration of all amounted
to the rejection in effect of all,, by .opening the door
for doubt respecting each single "region, and in the
prevalence of abstract reasoning and moral speculation
throughout all classes in society.
In order to prevent misapprehension and obscurity,
I will, in a few words, explain what I mean, when I
say that Jesus was ' The Word of God,' using the
phrase in the same manner, in which we have found it
to have been applied to the Shekinah, for ages before
his coming, in the Jewish church and scriptures. At
the very outset I would remark, that the idea of God
himself being visibly, or personally, or peculiarly pre
sent, that is, present in such a manner, as to imply,
that he was not equally, at the time, present in every
the great Protestant Reformer of Geneva ! It is entitled Christianismi
Restitutio, and, besides being a most powerful defence of Unitarian-
ism, discloses the illustrious physician and divine to the world, as
trje discoverer or first assertor of the circulation of the blood ! See
Cambridge General Repository, Vol. IV. p. 50.

132 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
other object and every other place, is obviously ex
cluded, as we have seen, by the whole tenor of Jewish
phraseology, as applied to the Shekinah, and in a
formal, precise, and definite manner by Solomon, in
his prayer at the dedication of the Temple. The
Jews did not regard the Shekinah, as God, in any
proper sense. It was not God, in any proper sense.
The application of the title of the Shekinah, ' The
' Word of the Lord,' to Jesus Christ, so far, therefore,
from authorising an inference that he was God, abso
lutely excludes and prevents such an inference.
1. I go on to say, that the doctrines and precepts,
the Divine declarations and promises which Christ
conveyed, that is^hil gospel, considered as a system
of moral truth and duty, is called ' The Word of the
Lord,' precisely as the law of God is called his
' Word,' in the Old Testament, in the one hundred
and nineteenth psalm, for instance, and as we speak
of word when we mean the sense conveyed by it.
This is the first meaning of the Shekinah, as we have
seen, p. 121.
2. Jesus Christ is called ' The Word of the Lord,'
in as much as he exhibited, in his character, example,
and principles, a representation of God's moral attri
butes. Regarded in this view, he is more worthy of
being called, the ' brightness of his glory, and the ex
press image of his person,' and ' the image of the in
visible God,' than any previous ' Word ' or ' Logos '
of God, which had principally been confined to exhi
bitions of his natural attributes, as they are called,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 133
shadowed forth in appearances of material grandeur.
This is the second meaning of the Shekinah.
3. The person of Jesus, as an object of sight, and
his language, as an object of hearing, were ' Th e
Word of the Lord,' in the same manner in which the
pillar of fire, or the cloud, or the burning bush, was
' The Word of God,' and in. which the visible signs
or audible sounds of language, are words of men.
They were the constituted vehicles of the thoughts
and purposes of God to us. In this sense, John
speaks of ' The Word ' in the first verses of his first
Epistle. This I placed as the third meaning of the
Shekinah. 4. Jesus Christ might be spoken of as ' The Word
of the Lord,' according to the fourth meaning which
I considered to be attached to the Shekinah, and in
virtue of which it was denpminated the ' presence of
God,' or the ' Angel of his presence,' or ' his name ;'
that is, it may sometimes signify that in him, God
gives to us an assurance of his presence, his intimate
relation with us, and his interest in our condition, and
that Christ and his gospel are a perpetual manifesta
tion and pledge of his regard, and of his readiness to
hear and answer our petitions.
5. ' The Word of the Lord ' might be applied to
Christ, as it was to. the Shekinah, in any or all these
significations, including any definite, or indefinite com
bination of them. The intelligent and careful inter
preter will, in every instance of its use, be able to de
termine, with sufficient accuracy, the nature and the
extent of its signification. 12

134 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
It should be mentioned, in conclusion, that Christ
was officially ' The Word of God,' in whatever sense
the phrase may be applied to him. As ' The Word,'
he bore an office which had been in existence, and
almost in constant operation, ever since the world be
gan. The same function was discharged by him as
flesh, that is, as a man, which had been discharged by
the cloud and light, which rested over the mercy seat
of the Temple, and by every previous Shekinah.
This is well expressed by Augustin, as quoted by
Lowman. ' In ipso inhabitat plenitudo Divinitatis
corporaliter, quia in Templo habitaverat umbraliter.'
We must often explain our Lord's language, when
speaking of himself, and the language of jthe scripture
writers, when speaking of him, by considering it as
referring to this his official character. He had pre
existed in his office, not merely because that office
had existed, and been exercised, before he came into
the world, but he could be spoken of, as preexistent,
in view of his office, with peculiar fitness and proprie
ty ; for, in every exercise of that office, in former
times, he had been foreshown, typified, and included,
as it were. Every previous ' Word,' or communica
tion of God's will "to men, had looked towards, and
been preparative and subsidiary to the final and com
plete declaration, made by Christ, as preeminently
and permanently ' The Word,' or medium of inter
course between God and his human creatures. How
far the view here given of the office of Christ will go
towards explaining and illustrating those texts, which,
at first sight, seem to set forth the doctrine of the pre-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 135
existence of his soul, is left to the calm consideration,
and dispassionate judgment of all who may take an in
terest in this important subject.
When we interpret in this manner, the title of
'Word' as applied to our Lord, we can ascertain the
true glory and dignity of his character. There is no
difficulty whatever in doing this. Christians should
regard Jesus with sentiments, similar in kind,,although
higher in degree than those with which devout and
well instructed Jews regarded ' The Word of the
Lord ' when it came lo them.
The Jews did not worsjiip the ' cloud by day,' nor
the ' pillar of fire by night,' nor the awful and sub
lime appearances on Mount Sinai, nor the ever present
light and cloud in the holy of holies. These were
never the objects of their prayers or their ritual.
And whoever worships Jesus, because he is the
•Logos' or 'Word of the Lord,' is guilty of precisely
the same kind of idolatry, as the Jew would have been,
who should have directed his worship primarily and
ultimately to the sensible appearances which constitu
ted the Shekinah, and not onwards, through them, as
it were, to Him whom the heaven of heavens cannot
contain. The application, therefore, of the title of
',Word ' to Jesus Christ, proves, upon the authority of
the Old Testament, that, so far from being, as the
Trinitarians represent him, the Supreme God and an
object of worship, as such, he is merely an instrument
in the hands of God, and that it is idolatry to view
him as God, or to make him. an object of ultimate
worghip.

136 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
As the Jews regarded the thunders, and lightnings;
and smoke on Mount Sinai with reverence, hecause,
through them, God addressed their attention, and
' talked with them ; ' so we should regard Jesus Christ
with reverence, for he is the chosen, the beloved,
the perpetual, and preeminently exalted mediator, or
interpreter, through whom God has vouchsafed to
commune with men. When we look upon our Lord,
in this light, all those passages of scripture which
ascribe greatness and honor to him, so far from being
considered exaggerations, do not seem adequate to
the conceptions which we cannot but form of his
glory and dignity. From the whole human race, he
has been selected, to be the herald, the ambassador
of God to men, and the bearer to God of the worship
of men.
It is important to remark, that the Jews regarded
the Shekinah with reverence, not only because it was
the appointed centre of communication from God to
them, but, also, because through it were all communi
cations to ascend from them to God. When they
were about to address God, either in meditation or in
prayer, they were directed to turn towards his ' Word '
or Shekinah, and to fix their eyes upon it. For it
presented to them a lively exhibition of his majesty
and power, his glory and presence, and, while thus
worshipping, their thoughts would be drawn off from
every forbidden idol, and they would have correct con
ceptions of the true God, in those aspects of his char
acter, in which he was then and there revealed to
them. They were confident, that when they offered

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 137
their worship in this manner, they would be heard and
accepted, because it was their belief, that ' God's eye
would be open upon the place, day and night, where
of he had said that he would put his name there, to
hearken to the prayer which his servant prayed to
wards that place,' and that when prayers ascended,
through this appointed channel, ' God would hear from
his dwellingplace, even from heaven, and when he
heard, forgive.'
So will it forever be the duty of Christians, when
they pray to the Father, to offer their petitions through
Christ. For Christ, in his instructions, uttered the
will, and in his virtues, presents us with a pattern, an
image of the moral glory and sublime perfection of
the Father's character. By fixing- our eyes upon
Jesus, that is, upon his example and principles, when
we worship the Father, we shall have before us an
accurate representation of his character, and shall wor
ship him in truth; that is, with a correctperception of
his moral attributes. When the thoughts and feelings
have been regulated and adjusted by the contempla
tion of such a model of himself, the devout affections
will rise, an acceptable offering, to God.
As the Jews all turned, in prayer, towards their
Shekinah, which conveyed the knowledge, and showed
forth the attributes of God, so far as he was pleased
to reveal himself to them, so all Christians, when they
pray, should turn, in inward vision, towards their Mas
ter, and through him who was appointed to reveal by
his teaching, and to exhibit in his example and char-
10*

138 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
acter, the moral principles and purposes of God, with
respect to men, direct their thoughts, and offer their
worship to the Father. It is by contemplating the ex
ample of Christ, and obeying his precepts, and culti
vating his spirit, by erecting his religion within us,
and, in. this way only, that we can hold communion in
a spirit of truth with our Father. As we are enabled,
by looking through certain optical instruments, to ex
plore the depths of the upper heavens, crowded, as
they are, with shining worlds, invisible to the naked
eye, so by directing our spiritual vision, through the
christian revelation, towards Him whom the heaven
of heavens cannot contain, we can see clearly his glo
rious attributes, and sublime perfections. It is the
pure in heart only, who are blessed with the privilege
and power of seeing God. The principles of the
gospel. of Christ alone can render our hearts pure.
' Through him, therefore, must we have access unto the
Father.' From this view of the correspondency between the
office of Jesus Christ and of the Shekinah of the
Hebrew church, we receive light respecting the mean
ing of a large number of passages in the New Testa
ment, which speak of him as the medium through
which spiritual services are to be offered, and spiritual
benefits to descend from God. We are enabled by
it to comprehend the whole nature and extent of the
mediation of Jesus, and the difficult doctrine of the
intercession is entirely cleared up. Instead of the
irrational opinion, that Christ acts as a perpetual ad
vocate for us before the Father, which necessarily

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 139
implies that the former either knows more concerning
us, or takes a deeper interest in our welfare, than the
latter ; we are taught by the system of interpretation,
now offered, that Christ intercedes between God and
us, merely by being the appointed channel through
which we are to have intercourse with God. In other
words, worship offered through him, who. preached in
his doctrine the truths of God, and exhibited in his
example his will and pleasure, will be offered in truth,
with a correct apprehension of the will, purposes, and
character of God, and will of course rise acceptably
before him. Christ, by thus constantly holding out to
our view, in his gospel, declarations, and in his char
acter, illustrations of the will of God respecting us, is
ever moulding and fashioning, as it were, our prayers
to God, and our meditations concerning his attributes
and our duties, and, in this sense, ' continually maketh
intercession for us.'
There are many other points, in which, I think, the
view now presented of Jesus Christ, as ' The Word of
God,' sheds light upon the doctrines of our religion.
But this investigation has already spread itself over too
large a surface. If the principle of interpretation here
advocated, should meet with the favorable considera
tion of those to whom it is to be submitted, it will be
easy to carry it on through all those points of opinion,
and all those parts of scripture unnoticed in these Let
ters, to which it may be found to apply. It only re
mains for me, after recapitulating the heads of the
present inquiry, to occupy the concluding Letter, with
an interpretation of some of those texts, upon which

140 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
light, "I think, has been thrown by the previous specu
lations. I first endeavoured to ascertain, and to explain,
upon principles of language, and of the Jewish dispen
sation, the adoption and the use of the phrase, ' The
Logos,' or ' Word of the Lord.' I next attempted to
trace, by the aid of the faint glimmerings of scattered
light, which are shed, at the present day, upon the
remains of the early ages of the world, the condition
of the several distinct systems of polytheism, the pro
gress of a philosophizing spirit with respect to them,
and the character of those eclectic systems, which
were formed by the admixture of their several parts
in various combinations. We noticed the adoption of
the Jewish phrase abovementioned, into those sepa
rate and mixed schemes of Philosophy, and followed
it up to the time of the apostles, and glanced at the
strange errors which had become associated with it,
and at some of the innumerable false projects and sys
tems of religion, which the madness and folly of unli
censed speculation had engendered. The survey of
the ground thus far traversed, procured but a part of
the materials to be used in interpreting ' The Logos,'
or ' Word.' We acquired a knowledge of the false
notions attached to it, which the apostolic writers
would be desirous of refuting, and against which they
may be supposed to have spoken and written. And
at the same time we met incidentally with illustrations
and explanations of several dark and difficult passages
in the New Testament, and discovered, as I think, the
seeds of many of those errors, which afterwards sprung

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 141
up with a vigorous growth in the church, and which
even yet overshadow the truth, and deprive it of its
own proper nourishment and support.
My next object was to ascertain the true meaning
of ' Word ' or ' Logos,' as used by the scriptural
writers. Instead of searching for it where it has so
often been searched for in vain, in the Greek or other
Heathen schools of Philosophy, we returned to the
Jewish nation and church, whence,. I think, there, can
be no doubt it derived its origin. We examined their
use of a similar and exactly corresponding phrase,
and endeavoured to establish its meaning. That
meaning I consider John and the early Christians to
have applied to Jesus Christ, and to his gospel. We
found it to be, in almost all its important aspects, in
cluded in the common, popular, and obvious senses of
word as we use it at this present time. Christ I think
to have been ' The Word of God,' because he was the
instrument or agent, which conveyed the will and pur
poses of God to man. He was ' The Word of God,'
in as much as he was the image of the moral attributes
and principles of God.* And his gospel was ' The
Word of God,' in the same manner in which we speak •
of words, understanding, thereby, the meaning and
sense which they convey. These were the principal,
although not the only meanings, which we found it
capable of bearing. I exhibited the harmony and
unity of the Jewish and Christian dispensations upon
* This was a literal and obvious sense of word, in those ages,
when hieroglyphic writing was in vogue, and continued to be an
obvious meaning, of course, long after it was disused.

142 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
this scheme, Christ bearing the same office which the
Shekinah formerly bore ; and, finally, in a few words,
I pointed out the glorious dignity and exaltation which
it ascribes to Jesus Christ, as the chosen organ of
communication between the Creator and the creature,
as the mediator, through whom all the truths, and
precepts, and promises of religion have come down to
us, and as the continual intercessor, through whom
all prayer and spiritual service, if it would be accepta
ble, must go up to the Father.

143

LETTER VI.

Before I enter upon an examination of the Proem
of John's Gospel, and of such other passages of scrip
ture as are illustrated by the views which have been
presented in the previous Letters, I will admonish my
self, and all who may follow me in the interpretation's
now to be attempted, to bear in mind the third reflec
tion at the conclusion of the fourth Letter. There
was so great a variety of opinions, and of shades of
opinion, upon religious and philosophical subjects then
in the world, which may have entered into the views,
and influenced the reasonings of the sacred writers,
and of many of which we are, and must ever be igno
rant, that we cannot hope to develope the entire force
and sense of their language, and must expect, after all
thought which we can collect is thrown upon it, to
find some obscurity still remaining.
With expectations and requisitions thus moderated,
let us now proceed to the accomplishment of the design
of this inquiry, the interpretation of those passages of
scripture, in which the Logos, or Word, is contained,
and of such other passages explained or illustrated by
the view now taken of its import, as may happen to be
suggested. I begin with the first eighteen verses of the
Gospel of John, and, in order to present them as clearly
and as fully as possible to examination, I will extract
them, in the first place, as they stand in the original
Greek, and also in the commonly received version.

144 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
1. Ev <*?X*i «» • Aoyos, xsti e Aoyo? )>v irpes ret Sset, xctl &ief
<jv o Aoyo;.
2. Outs? ijv ev os/>;g»l wpdj tov S-eov.
3. n«»r« eV avrov eyevero- xecf %apn ecvrev lysvere evSi iv,
0 ytyevcv. 4. Ev eevroi £«jj ijv, x«i i £«)) uv to <p«s ray avipomm'
5- K«i to <p»; ev t« o-xerut Qctivei, xiti i) e-xirix avre ev
xotTeAct€cv. 6. Eyevero mipairec. asOTerrctA/ueMf ss-apa. S-eev, eveput aevrco
\amtm' 7. Outo; sjAflev e/; ftceprvpittv, ita fixprvptjo-il irtpi tov (puros,
het ircttTif TtitTTivToxri Si' ecvrev.
8. Ovx fit ixilveg re (pas, c.XX' ha ficcprvpytrri irept rev &are$.
9. Hy re <pw$ re aAij0<vov, 0 (purist Travra, enipairet epfctfievev
tl( rev xee-fuev.
10. Ev TO) KOCTftiP JJV, Ult KOrpwf Si' earrev cyitcre, xxi 'e
xevfus ctvrev ovx tyva.
11. E15 roe i^ioe jjA^e, x«; 0; iJ'io; oevrov ev vrctpe>ice£ev.
12. *Oo-o< Ss lActSot itvrev, eoaxsv ctvreis e^evTictv rexvcc B-sev
ytvia-Soil, reii me-rtvevriv Hi re eveput ctvrev'
13. OJ evx e| eufuirav, evSs ex S-iJwputres o-ctpxos, ev$t ex
S-eAijftoiTo; mopes, «AA' ex £eot/ eyevvjjoV|T«v.
14. Keel 0 Aoyo; o"«f| eyevero* xmi eo-xijv«o-ev ev iftlv, (xou
t6i»e-ctptii» tdv soggy uvtov, ee\av ae puveyivevi True* irarpof),
TMpiS %eipiros x-cci *fa)6iias.
15. lactvvrfi puiprvpei irtpi ctvrev, xcil xixpayi, Xsyuv' OiItos
yv, ev eiweV 'O omru ftev ip%ept,ivec, tpurrperitv puv yeyovev"
in irpetres ftev »v.
16. On ex to« KhypufAMTos ctvrev i)puis irctvrsc, iXetSeptev, xat
%»ptt ctvn %ae ires.
17. 'On 0 voftoj Sla M<siere«is tSebr? i, x,*P'S **' » osAijS-efa
Stct lyrev Xpiserev eyevero.
18. ©eov evSelc, eapaxe irairere' 0 puveyivyc, vies, i a>v sl( rev
xehwev rev irurpef, exeivoj tfyiytirare.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 145
1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with
God, and the Word was God.
2. The same was in the beginning with God.
3. All things were made by him ; and without him was not
anything made, that was made.
4. In him was life ; and the life was the light of men,
5. And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness
comprehended it not.
6. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John ;
7. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the
Light, that all men through him might believe.
8. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of
that Light.
9. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that
cometh into the world.
10. He was in the world, and the world was made by him,
and the world knew him not.
11. He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12. But as many as received him, to them gave he power
to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his
name; 13. Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the
flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,
(and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten
of the Father) full of grace and truth.
15. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying ; This was
he of whom I spake ; He that cometh after me, is preferred
before me ; for he was before me.
16. And of his fulness have all we received, and grace
for grace.
17. For the law was given by Moses ; but grace and truth
came by Jesus Christ.
18. No man hath seen God at any time ; the only begotten
Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared
him. 13

146 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
In attempting to disclose the meaning of this passage,
[ shall go through it step by step, gathering, as I advance,
the sense of the successive clauses, and endeavouring
not to anticipate, or take for granted, anything. And
I hope to show, that the view which has been presented
of the signification of Logos, and the materials which
have been collected in these Letters, when applied to
its interpretation, enable us to discern its import and
bearing, and to explain to a great extent, if not
entirely, the force and sense of each expression and
word of which it is made up.
V. 1 . The first verse contains three distinct propo
sitions, in each of which Logos, or the Word, is used.
I consider it as bearing, in this place, the third signifi
cation ascribed to a Shekinah, page 122 ; namely, ' an
appointed medium or bearer of God's will.'
The first proposition, then, amounts to this ; — 'In the
very beginning, at the creation, there was an appointed
medium of communication from God to men ; there
was some being, or some thing, whose office it was to
act as the bearer to the world of the Divine will.'
This is a natural, clear, and intelligible meaning of the
expression, Ev *px? w i Aoyo*. But we perceive more
fully its pertinency and its point, when we reflect that
it was a popular objection to Christianity in the first
ages, that it was promulgated at so late a period of
the world. It was alleged, that if the gospel were, as
its advocates maintained, a communication from God
to men, it was not reasonable to suppose that so many
generations would have been permitted to pass away,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 147
and so many hundreds, nay, even thousands of years
be allowed to elapse, previous to its being sent.
In proof of the existence of such an objection to our
religion, at that early period, John Jones gives the fol
lowing testimony. ' Nothing was more common and
general than this objection against the christian doc
trine ; and it was an objection, which applied with
greater force at the first promulgation of the gospel
than in subsequent times. Celsus urges that Jesus
lived but a very few years before, and that he was but
recently born. Eusebius, towards the beginning of his
Ecclesiastical History, has, in opposition to it, endea
voured to prove the antiquity of the christian faith.
Justin Martyr, in his greater Apology, ch. Ixi., glances
at the same argument, and in reference to it, delivers
this candid remark ; " All those who lived a rational
life, though deemed atheists, were Christians, such as
Socrates and Heraclitus, among the Greeks ; Abraham,
Elias, and others, among the Barbarians." But to
ascend to the times of the apostles, Paul seems to
have the same object in view, when he says, that
Christ came in the fulness of time, Gal. iv. 4., and
gave his testimony in his proper season, 1 Tim. ii. 6 ;
He manifested his Logos in the proper times, Titus i. 3.
This position, which is so emphatically and repeatedly
stated, must have been intended against some, who
alleged that the time of his appearance was not the
proper one.' * We may suppose that John, in answer
to this objection, asserts, in a few words, substantially
what follows ; — * J. Jones's Illus. p. 17, note.

148 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
' We do indeed believe that Jesus Christ was the
Word of God, that is, conveyed to us his will and his
truth, but it is not just to charge us with maintaining
that he was the first who ever discharged that office,
for we do not believe that God spake to the world for
the first time by and through him. From the begin
ning, on different occasions, and under various forms,
" at sundry times, and in divers manners, he has spoken
to our Fathers." Let it be understood, therefore,
that in saying that there has been a communication
made, a Word spoken from God to man through Jesus
Christ, we do not assert any new and unprecedented
fact. Throughout the duration of the church of
Israel there was such a communication. • Nay, more,
in the very beginning, in the earliest notices we pos
sess of the history of the world, in its creation, we
are informed that God spake to the world. It is not
true that the world has for so long a period been left
without a witness of God in it, or that we hold that
Christ our Master bore the first communication ever
made from God to man. We do indeed believe that
it was his glorious office to convey to us the will of
his Father, and in this sense to be his Word ; but at
the same time we believe" that Divine communications
have been made to mankind before his time ; that
under other forms there has been a Word from God
to man. There was indeed such a Word even in the
beginning, at the creation.'
The whole force of the second proposition, xeui
Aoyo« uv "Vs rov ©eoy, is contained in the preposition vpei.
Upon the supposition that it means ' immediate connex-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 149
ion,' a very clear and important signification is given
to the Words of the evangelist. Now this appears to
have been the sense which Schleusner attached to it,
in this connexion. He assigns his eighth definition to
it as used in the above proposition, and that definition
is contained in the following Latin prepositions, ' apud,
prope, ad,' ' with, near to, at,' evidently meaning local
contact. In order to put the propriety of attaching this mean
ing to *rees, beyond a doubt, I will extract the follow
ing from Cappe, whose authority as a verbal critic^is
certainly preeminent. ' It is well known, that with
the accusative, detect has the sense of sreoj. In their
natural signification the only difference is, that a-^o;
signifies at, and irae «, by the side of. Tiapet tss a-oiV,
Luke viii. 41, is the same with npe% namS*;, Mark v.
22 ; and so in other places. Kosfl^evov nctpct iroSm, Luke
viii. 35 ; x. 39. EfefosiTo sr/wj irvTwvct, Luke xvi. 20.
ilctpet, with the dative too, has the same sense as *pei,
with the accusative. Compare John xix. 25,
"EfS^xelirav a-osjoj ro> ?*vgij>, with John XX. 11, 'Eijij^ei trjos
re ftv-j/tMioV.' *
Guided and sustained by these authorities and
proofs, I interpret sreo? in this connexion, as signifying
that the Word came forth directly from God ; that there
was no intermediate agent employed in producing it;
that God as cause, and the Word as effect, were in
direct contact, and that in this sense the Word was
with, near to God. The amount of meaning, in the
* Critical Remarks, Vol. I, p. 24.
13*

150 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
mind of the evangelist, and intended by him to be
conveyed in these words, will, according to this inter
pretation, be as follows ; —
' It is not true, that the Divine communications and
interpositions which have formerly taken place in the
world, have proceeded from inferior beings, or other
beings than the Supreme Jehovah. Those opinions
which now prevail, and which set forth that they have
proceeded from one or more Angels (p. 66), from
Demiurgus (p. 66), from (Eons or Emanations of
whatever rank or character, (p. 66), or from an evil
being, hostile to the one supreme and benevolent God
(p. 67), which some suppose to be the character of
the God of the Jews, the being who directed the
administration of the ancient church ; these opinions
are all entirely erroneous. So also, do those schemes
of divine genealogy which some have been wild enough
to fabricate (pp. 70, 72) violate the truth, in separa
ting Logos from the Supreme God, by inserting, as
they do, one or more beings between them. In op
position and contradiction to all these false opinions, I
.do now declare, that all revelations, messages, com
munications, or Words of whatever kind, which have
been made to men from above, have proceeded di
rectly and immediately from the Supreme God. There
has been no being or agent of any kind intervening to
separate them from God. They have emanated from
him alone. They have ever been with him in the
sense- in which I now have explained this expres-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 151
After having, in this way, removed a large amount
of error, and settled clearly the truth, the evangelist
goes on still further, and in the next proposition, x«i
©eos *v i Aoyoj, ' the Word was God,' or ' God was the
Word,' positively and precisely asserts the position for
which, following the footsteps of Lowman, I argued in
the former part of the Fifth Letter. As there is no
occasion to enter into a minute verbal criticism upon
the words of this proposition, I will proceed directly
to present, as I have done in the case of the two previ
ous propositions, in a free paraphrase, the ideas which,
it is probable, were associated in the mind of John
with this brief sentence, the errors which he intended
to refute, and the truth which it was his purpose to
establish by it ; —
' So far indeed from the truth are those opinions
to which I have already referred, which attribute all
the communications of a Divine nature, heretofore
made to the world, to other beings than Jehovah, that
on the contrary, it is true, that in making these com
munications, no other being, whether good or evil,
high or low, has ever been employed at all. God himself
and alone has acted and been concerned in them. And
I admonish the Jews, who, in the use of their religious
phraseology, have been accustomed to speak of Divine
communications made to their Fathers under the
name of ' Word,' not to be deceived by heathen phi
losophers, who have misapprehended the import of
that name, and have fallen into the error of supposing
that it is the title of a different being from the one
Jehovah, as too many already have been (p. 77), into

152 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
the belief that another being did act in those Divine
appearances and communications to which that title is
applied. I also admonish all Christians to avoid this
error. It was for a wise and good purpose that the
instruments and means of the Divine communications
were described by that title. But let it never be for
gotten that they were merely- the instruments, the
means of communication, the Word of God, and of
no other being. It was no CEon, nor Angel, nor
second divine person, that spoke to men in former
times. It was God himself who spoke to them. Those
appearances and objects which were called the Word,
were carefully defined to be, they were by the ancient
worshippers universally understood to be, the name,
the presence, the manifestation of the glory of the
only true God ; they were to them the sign of God's
being and presence, and in this sense were God to
them. In like manner, and upon the same grounds, I
say that the ' Word Was God,' for God alone acted or
was concerned in the Word, and it was the only dis
tinct signature of his existence and presence, and the
only source from which certain information' was de
rived concerning him.'
Interpreting the words of John in this manner, we
instantly perceive their pertinency and force. They
are clear, simple, and concise. The doctrine con
veyed by them is gradually unfolded, step by step,
until it amounts to this ; —
' There were, in the very beginning, Divine com
munications to men. They have not proceeded from
inferior or other beings, but directly and immediately

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 153
from the Supreme God. The Supreme God has him
self acted and been concerned in them.'
It refutes, in fact, many of the false doctrines ex
hibited in Letter IV., and wholly confirms the argu
ments and positions of Letter V.
Having explained in this manner the first verse,
which appears to be complete in itself, and distinct
from what follows, I now proceed to the two next
verses, which also seem to constitute an entire para
graph. V. 2 and 3. The second verse is merely a repetition
of the first and second proposition in the first verse.
The third verse is translated, 'All things were made
by him, and without him was not anything made that
was made.' In some translations 'it' has been used
instead of ' him,' and to us, who have no such idiom
in our religious phraseology, as the Logos or Word,
the true meaning is much more readily conveyed by
the former than by the latter. Still, however, we can
easily imagine how natural it would be to apply the
masculine pronoun to a word, which was used as a title
of office, as I have represented Logos or Word to have
been. The meaning of this verse I consider to be
something like this ; —
' It is not true that the creation is the work of Angels
or of inferior spirits, or that part of it is the produc
tion of a good, and part of it of an evil being. In all
its parts, and laws and relations, it was framed by the
interposition, the command, the Word of God himself.
The origin of all things is to be ascribed to him.'

154 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
This mode of attributing the creation of all things
to the Word of the Lord, was always familiar to the
Jews. Psal. xxxiii. 9. ' He spake, and it was done ;
he commanded, and it stood fast.' Peter has the same
use of language, 2 Epis. iii. 5. ' By the word of
God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing
out of the water, and in the water.' In speaking to
Gentiles, unacquainted with Hebrew phraseology, a ju
dicious Jewish convert to Christianity, would disuse
this idiomatic expression. We find that Paul, in his
noble speech at the Areopagus, expressed the same
idea, conveyed in the above quotation from Peter, in
a different manner. Acts, xvii. 24. ' God that made
the world and all things therein.'
V. 4. In attempting to interpret the fourth verse
we should bear in mind the reflection which was re
peated at the commencement of this Letter. It will
be impossible to develope its whole meaning without
understanding all the ideas associated in the mind of
the writer with Zay and *«;, which it would perhaps
be unreasonable for us to expect to be able to do.
All that we know, is, that both these words were hon
ored with high stations in the philosophical schemes of
that age. In the system of Valentinus (p. 72) z«fl
is considered as a spiritual being, distinct from, but
equal in rank to Logos. *«s was used as expressive
of that being from whom truth and moral light were
derived ; and Sxoroj, or Sxot/cs, was the name given to
the corresponding and opposite being, the source of
error and of moral darkness. In the Oriental Philoso
phy, as has been already mentioned, these two words

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.

155

were the titles of the good and evil spirit or deitv,
respectively. As we do not precisely understand the import of
these words in the philosophizing phraseology of that
age, it will be most safe and judicious not to attempt
to explain the evangelist's meaning, beyond what is
obvious and evident upon the plainest principles of in
terpretation. Governing ourselves by this restriction,
it seems clear that John, in this verse, overthrows
the opinions which ascribed a distinct existence to
Life and Light, and declares that the Word had dis
charged the same offices which they were erroneously
supposed to have exercised.
' In him was Life.' In these words John declares
that Life was not a separate being from the Word, but
that all the ideas, which had been associated with
that term, should be considered as included within
the meaning of Word.
In the remaining clause of the verse, Life is used
in the place of Word, and is said to be the same with
Light also. ' The Life was the Light of men ; ' and
the evangelist declares that those ideas, which had
been attached to Light, viewed as the source from
which men receive a knowledge of truth, should be
connected with Life, or, since Life was declared to be
comprehended in Word, should be connected with
Word, and considered as embraced within its mean
ing. If this view of the import of the above expressions
be correct, the substance of John's declarations con
tained in them, is this ; — 'All which is attributed to the

156 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
agency of Life and Light, has been produced by the
interposition, the command, the Word of God.' In
confirmation of this interpretation, we find that both
these words are applied, together with others employ
ed in the philosophical genealogies of, the day, such
as Truth, to Jesus Christ, who was preeminently ' The
Word.' John xi. 25. Our Lord says, ' I am the res
urrection and the Life,' and 'also xiv. 6. ' I am the
way, and the truth, and the Life.' John viii. 12. ' I am
the Light of the world,' and xii. 36. ' While ye have
Light, believe in the Light, that ye may be the chil
dren of Light.' Indeed it seems to me to be quite
evident that our Saviour himself, as well as this evan
gelist, was much addicted to the practice of adopting
phrases current in the speculations of his day, and of
applying to them a true christian meaning. That
John uses Life and Light, as synonymous with Logos,
and endeavours in this passage to refute the opinion
that they were the titles of distinct and separate be
ings, appears upon the whole, to be the most reason
able view which can be taken in interpreting it.
V. 5. In the fifth verse, the writer, having adopt
ed Light in the place of Word, and as synonymous
with it, is very naturally led into a figurative form of
expression, the general import of which is clearly in
telligible. There is some difficulty, however, in
determining its literal meaning. It is not settled to
the general satisfaction of the critics, what is the precise
sense of x*reA«£ev. Wakefield translates it ' hindered,'
Campbell, ' admitted,' Newcome, ' overspread,' and
the Common Version, ' comprehended.,' It appears to

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 157
me that Campbell approached nearer than the others
to the true signification. He is sustained by the au
thority of Schleusner. Whichever translation may he
adopted, the interpretation which I propose, will not,
in any essential respect, be affected.
In accordance with Campbell, therefore, I thus
translate this verse. ' And the Light shone in dark
ness, and the darkness admitted it not.' And regard
ing light as used in this, as it evidently is in the fol
lowing verse, as a synonyme with Word, the sense
intended to be expressed appears to be equivalent to
this; —
' There was a Word, or Divine communications were
made, in former times, to a part of the world, the de
scendants of Abraham ; to them, while darkness rest
ed upon mankind, did a light appear ; a knowledge
of God and of his truth was conveyed to them. But
those nations to whom no such Word came, and no
Divine communications were made, continued in error
and ignorance ; they did not receive the truths which
were revealed to the Hebrew church ; they would not
allow the darkness by which they were enveloped, to
be penetrated and dispelled by that light which beamed
upon the Jews.'
If this interpretation be correct, the fifth verse is to
be considered as containing a concise description of
the state of revealed religion during the existence of
the Mosaical dispensation.
V. 6, 7, and 8. The three next verses are easily un
derstood. The evangelist gradually approaches the
christian revelation, removing errors and establishing
14

158 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
truth as he advances. The precise relation which
John the Baptist sustained towards it is here clearly
and positively determined. The sixth verse needs no
explanation or comment. The occasion and perti
nency of the seventh and eighth would be obscure and
inexplicable to us, were we not made acquainted with
the fact of the existence .of the heresy already men
tioned, (p. 77,) of -the Sabians or advocates of the
claim of John the Baptist to a greater authority than
Jesus possessed. In the place referred to, I informed
the reader that there was an interesting account of this
sect to be found in the ' Introduction of Michaelis.'
He will there see that it was declared by them that
Jesus was not the true Light, but that John the Bap
tist was the only true Light. How fully does. the
knowledge of this fact admit us to the sense of the
words of the evangelist ; —
' This same John came merely as a witness. It was
his office to give testimony in favor of the Light, in
order to induce all men to receive that Light as true.
John was not, as some of a certain sect which adopts '
his name assert, in any respect that Light. The. ex
tent to which his official dignity and action reached,
was solely to perform the part of a witness, to pro
claim and verify that Light. John was not the true
Light.' y. 9. The evangelist, having thus determined the
character and office of John, returns to the main subject
in which he was engaged. ' But there was a true Light,'
says he, ' that lighteth every man that cometh into the
world.' As the use of the word Light, in the place

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 159
of Word, ceases at this point, I will, after having ex
pressed the general sense of the present verse, proceed
with greater facility in the interpretation of the re
maining verses, which are, comparatively, easy of ex
planation, there being no variation or mixture of the
titles Life, Light, and Word, in them. The substance
of the writer's meaning, when he used these words in
the ninth verse, I suppose to be this ; —
' John was not indeed the bearer of a Divine revela
tion ; but there has been such a revelation. The office
of bearing God's will, of acting as his Word to men,
has been discharged. And the instruction conveyed
by this Word will not be confined, as it formerly has
been, to a particular people or a circumscribed region,
but is intended to be diffused over the whole earth, to
be communicated to every individual inhabitant of the
world.' V. 10 and 11. Having thus arrived at the final reve
lation, John goes on in a narrative of beautiful sim-
" plicity, and unrivalled closeness and brevity of express
ion, to describe the prominent circumstances connect
ed with this last and universal revelation or Word.
Notwithstanding the ingenious reasoning of Cappe and
others, I cannot convince myself that xoc-ftos is confined
in its signification to the Jewish people or church.
Indeed, I think it will be apparent to any one that
such an interpretation very much reduces the force
and sense of this passage. I consider xoo-jkos as meaning
either the external creation, the outward world, or the
human inhabitants of the world. For this opinion I
have the authority of Gataker, and surely there is no

160 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
better authority. ' Quin et kosjkos pro tota mundifa-
brica Graecis est familiare, et peculiariter quandoque
pro ccelo. At sacris scriptoribus, prarter mentem
ipsam, varie admodumadhibetur; nunc pro hominibus
mundi ipsius incoUs generatim sumptis, sive pro gen-
ere humano.' * In this verse it appears to be used in
both the senses just mentioned, and the meaning of
the writer is this ; —
' A Word from God came to die world, and al
though at was by a Word or command from God that
the world was created, still the men of the world
would not receive this Word, would not admit the
idea of a Word being spoken or sent to them from
God.' *
The evangelist further says, ' Even the Jews, al
though they were accustomed to the reception <of such
heavenly communications, and had been distinguished
by the residence, during a long period of their history,
of the Word of God among them, even they would
not as a nation receive the Word which has, in these
latter times, been uttered to mankind.'
V. 12 and 13. In these verses the writer asserts the
character and dignity of this Word or revelation, and
draws a distinction between it and the Word as it
formerly came to the Jews. To be.' Sons of God'
means to be admitted to a knowledge, and service,
and worship of him in a spirit of truth. It was applied
to the Jews, as they were the only nation to whom
the true God had been revealed, and who had been
favored by communications from him, and admitted
* De Novj Instrument! Stylo, c. v. p, 36, E,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 161
to the honor of being called his people, his church,
his worshippers. 'Name,' we have seen (p. 114,)
was a title of the Shekinah. To ' believe on his name '
it is probable then, is another form of expressing the
belief, that a given person or object is a true Sheki
nah, or Word of God. We are now prepared to in
terpret the twelfth verse. Its meaning is this ; —
' Whoever receive this word and believe in it, as a
communication or manifestation from God, as a true
and proper Shekinah, they are instantly admitted to
all the privileges which the Jews have formerly enjoy
ed exclusively. They are forthwith received into the
church and worship of God, and, by knowing the will
and attributes of him, the Supreme Father, become
his children and sons.'
In interpreting the next verse I prefer to quote the
words of Cappe. ' One can hardly doubt that the evan
gelist meant to say, that no means whatever by which
the privileges of the Jewish dispensation were obtain
ed, were either sufficient or necessary to entitle to the
privileges of the Christian. Not only those whose
parents were both Hebrews, and those whose parents
were one a Hebrew and the other a proselyte, were
entitled to the privileges of the Jewish peculiarity;
proselytes also of Gentile parents were entitled to them
as soon as they were circumcised. The first were
born e| ct'iputrm, they were of Abraham's blood on both
sides ; the second, being the offspring of a passion,
which, to gratify itself, wandered beyond the limits of
Abraham's family, were ex SitoiptctTec. rctexoc, and prose
lytes, being in the language of the Jews the children
14*

162 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
of him by whom they were converted, were e» Setoputres
*»*V$.'* John therefore in this verse says ; —
' AH who became Sons of God by believing in, and
receiving the Word of God, then sent to the world,
were not admitted to this privilege upon any of the
conditions of admission to the privileges of the an
cient dispensation, but they were admitted solely be
cause it was the good pleasure of God that all should
be regarded as his people and children who should
receive the communication then made to all mankind.'
V. 14. This verse is the most important part of the
whole passage, and, when its phraseology is closely
examined, not only receives a complete explanation
from the views presented in the last Letter, but is in
itself a most powerful confirmation of those views. I
shall first consider the several clauses and expressions
of which it is made up, and then give its sense and
bearing taken as a whole. As Gataker has proved,
o-«f| means ' man,' ' human nature,' or ' human be
ing. f In such a sense I receive it in this place ; ' And
the Word became or was constituted a human being,'
Formerly inanimate objects, such as the burning bush,
the cloud, or the fire, discharged the office of convey
ing God's will to men, that is, were his Word ; but
the Divine communication, of which John is here
speaking, was borne by a man ; a man, in this in
stance, was the Word.
' And dwelt among us.' Emuvanv was evidently>sug-
gested to the evangelist by the view of the Word
* Critical Remarks, Vol. I. p. 82, 83.
t De Stylo, &c. c. v. p. 36. E.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 163
which I have supposed him to entertain. It was the
phrase applied to the Divine appearances or Shekinah,
and the proper sense which it conveys would be ex
pressed by such a translation as this ; — ' This man, the
Word, was, as a Shekinah, in the midst of us.' This
view of the meaning of the above word did not es
cape the observation of Cappe. He says, 'In the
term o-x*v««, tabernacled, there is a figurative allusion
to the tabernacle and the temple under the Jewish
dispensation.' *
To confirm this view of the Word as a Skekinah,
we have only to examine the following clauses. ' And
we beheld his glory.' By turning to page 113, we
shall see that ' glory ' was one of the titles applied, in
the ancient church, to the Divine appearances. And
in this place John applies it to the Word. < As of the
only begotten of the Father.' The meaning here is
probably this ; — ' Such a glory as that only can possess
which is derived immediately from God.' When
pitveyevvs or ireureyms are applied to the Word in the
writings of the New Testament, they probably derive
all their pertinency from the fact that systems of Phi
losophy and genealogy prevailed, (pp. 70, 72,) in
which Logos or Word was ' neither the only begotten
nor the first begotten.
In the next clause the nature of the glory possessed
by the Word of which John is here speaking, is defin
ed ' full of grace and truth.' Xcten means ' favor,'
' benevolence,' ' beneficence,' ' goodness.' And the
whole expression probably amounts to this ; — The
* Crit. Rem. Vol. I. p. 92.

164 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
Word which John was then describing differed from
all former Words in this respect. The ' glory ' which
had accompanied the Shekinah in the ancient church
was only a material glory, made up of awful and sub-
blime visible appearances or audible sounds, and suited
to produce admiration, wonder, and terror, in the
minds of all beholders. But the ' glory ' which ac
companied the last Word was of an entirely different
kind. It did not consist of circumstances of external
grandeur. It was not of a material, but of a moral
kind. It shadowed forth those Divine attributes of
mercy and goodness which are the true characteristics
of the Supreme Being. It represented God precisely
as he should be represented to us. It was in such a
sense as this that the Word, which became a man,
was said by John to be ' full of goodness and truth.'
Upon the whole then, it would seem that the mean
ing attached by its author to this very important verse
was something like this.
' Instead of being communicated, as in former times,
through inanimate objects, the will of God has now
been conveyed to us by the agency of a human being.
A man has, in this instance, acted as the Word of
God. Such a Word has been as a Shekinah, has
tabernacled among us. We have ourselves beheld it
surrounded by such a glory, as can belong only to
what proceeds directly from God. Its glory was not
in the least like that which accompanied former Divine
appearances. The Word or Shekinah, which we have
seen, was attended with a more sublime, even with a

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 165
moral glory. It was full of grace or goodness and
truth.' It seems to me that the phraseology and construc
tion of this single verse are enough to demonstrate
that John viewed the Logos or Word, precisely as I
have attempted to explain and interpret it in Letter
V., as equivalent to, and as corresponding with, a
Shekinah, such as had appeared in the Hebrew
church. At any rate, it is certain that the view which
I have there given, is adequate to the full explanation
of each clause, expression, and word, in this verse.
V. 15. As it is of no importance to the general
object of these Letters, to settle the question, with
respect to the proper relative position of this verse, I
shall not agitate it at this time, but shall proceed to
its interpretation, taking it up in the place in which it
stands in our Common Version. Let it be observed
that the evangelist has thus far discoursed concerning
the Word in its general, official character only. He
has, indeed, spoken of it, as it consisted of a human
being. But no particular person has yet been men
tioned as discharging this office, and possessing this
character. We must consider, therefore, that he is
regarding the Word in the light in which I explained
it in Letter V., as an office., which had existed before,
and in the very beginning, and which was capable of
being contemplated independently of the objects by
and through which it was exercised.
Bearing this consideration in our minds, the words
of this verse become plain and intelligible. We are
relieved from the necessity of resorting to nice phi-

166 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
lological speculations respecting the meaning of
epi7rpe<r3-iv and icparei. We can view them as possess
ing their natural and obvious significations. Indeed,
I do not perceive in what manner we can divest them,
or at least one of them, of reference to time, without
robbing emo-a of all force and pertinency whatever.
I consider the meaning of this verse to be in .substance
the following ; — *
' This Word, which I have described as a man, and
of which we have seen the glory, is the Word con
cerning which John gave his testimony, when he
uttered this declaration ;— " This is the Word of whom
I have spoken. And, although it is to come after me,
still it is not after me, for it has existed before me.
There is to follow me one whose office it will be to
make communications from God to men, an ofiice, in
truth, which at sundry times, and in divers manners,
has been exercised before my day." '
V. 16. This verse has immediate reference to the
fourteenth, and is a continuation of it. Before I
proceed to express its meaning, it will be proper to
notice the phrase at its conclusion, yppn »vn yppim. It
has, to a very great extent, exercised the ingenuity,
the industry, and the patience of the critics. Gataker *
collects an abundance of various interpretations which
have been invented. It seems to me thatCappef
offers the most probable conjecture respecting its
meaning. It is certainly the most agreeable to the
* De Stylo &c. c. xxvii. p. 719.
| Crit. Rem. Vol. I. p. IU.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. ' 157
connexion, of any which have been proposed. He
thus translates and explains it.
' Gift for gift. Avti signifies against, in proportion to,
according to. It is well known, that among other
relations, this preposition denotes that of corres
pondence, of similitude ; or equality, or proportion, in
point of excellence ; measure, value, frequency, di
versity, &ec, and this in a great variety of forms.' He
also says that it is used in the sense of secundum, ac
cording to, referring <to a rule of direction and of dis
tribution. : In like manner-,' says he, ' we use the
terms against, for, as man against man, man for man;
stroke againststroke, stroke for stroke ; of his fulness
have we all received, and grace for grace, or gift for
gift ; that is, from the fulness of Christ, in similitude,
in correspondence, in proportion, in equality to the
grace or gifts which he received for us, and with
which he was filled by God, we have received from
him and been filled by him. In him dwelt all the
fulness of the Godhead, and to like extent, and with
like variety, the church was filled by him. Coloss. ii.
9, 10.' Following this interpretation of Cappe, the
sense of the whole verse becomes something like this ; —
' The glory which filled and surrounded the former
Shekinah, or Word, could not be communicated or
imparted. It was confined to one separated and fix
ed object. This was intimated in the very name ap
plied to it. Shekinah literally means a particular
station, a fixed residence. But it was not so with the
glory of the Word which we have seen. That, was
capable of being imparted. It was a moral glory

168 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
which every man may receive in its fulnessj and ex
hibit to all around him. We, his followers, have
received of that glory which he was full of. As he
had received from his Father all moral beauty and
excellence, so, in Jike manner^ and to the same ex
tent, his followers can receive of him. His glory was
the image which he exhibited of the pure and holy
attributes of God. By exhibiting the same attributes
in our characters; we can form the image of God with
in us, and surround ourselves 'with the same glory
which our Master possessed. His glory did not con
sist of material grandeur, which no man can appropri
ate, but of that moral sublimity of character which
every man can learn of him to make his own.'
V. 17. In this verse the writer mentions Jesus
Christy personally, for the first Jime, and in a manner
so entirely artless and incidental, that it strengthens
my impression that in the preceding verses he was
speaking of his office, and not of his person. The
ideas expressed in this verse are clearly discernible.
' The former dispensations,' says the evangelist,
' that, for instance, in the establishment of which Mo
ses was concerned, were of a strict and severe charac
ter. They conveyed to us merely those positive laws
which it was the purpose of God that we should
obey. But the present communication'from Heaven,
that which Jesus Christ was appointed to make, is
of a different kind. .It is a full and true account
of the love which the Father exercises towards us,
of the benevolence, mercy, and unbounded goodness
of his character, of his ways, and of his designs. In

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 169
this sense was Jesus Christ the Word, by and through
which grace and truth have been communicated and
made known to us.'
V. 18. This verse has been explained in a pre
vious Letter, p. 95. The force of pMveytvm has been
pointed out, p. 163. The expression, ' which is in the
bosom of the Father,' means, ' who is beloved by the
Father, and admitted by him into his most secret
counsels.' And it is highly appropriate to our Lord,
when his office is viewed in the light, in which I have
sought to present it in these Letters. There is nothing
else in this verse which calls for remark or explana
tion. Here ends the Preface of John's Gospel.
I am fully aware that in the interpretation of these
verses I have not done justice to my view of the Word,
as I have attempted to explain it to you in these
Letters. If that view should meet with the favorable
consideration of the learned, and other minds be led
to apply themselves to an elucidation of this very im
portant passage, upon similar principles to those which
have guided me in its examination, I do not entertain
a doubt that much more light may be shed upon it.
Many deficiencies will be perceived, and whatever
errors there may be will be detected and removed.
There may, as was anticipated, be some difficulty and
obscurity in these verses still, when they shall have
received all the illustration which the view now taken
of the Word or Logos is capable of reflecting upon
them. If I am not much deceived, however, they
are now presented in a more intelligible and satisfac
tory light, than they have been upon any other theory
15

170 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
of interpretation. They are made to bear a more in
structive and important meaning. They constitute a
most appropriate introduction to the narrative of the
preaching and life of our Lord. Every sentence is
seen to contribute something to the general object.
Each phrase, and even word, appears to have some
point and pertinence. The Proem, taken as a whole,
is found, instead of being misplaced, obscure, or un
meaning, to be full of the most valuable information.
It is in itself a Body of Divinity. In its few brief senten
ces there is contained a clear and concise history of
the Divine revelations to men. It represents the chris
tian dispensation as a continuation and completion of
previous dispensations, and shows the connexion and
the prominent distinctions between it and all that had
been made before. It describes the office of Christ,
determines the character of his religion, and declares
the universality of its design.
An examination of its phraseology will, I think,
confirm the favorably disposed, if it may not convince
the doubting, in the reception of the theory put forth
in my last Letter, which supposes that the Logos or
Word, was used by John and the other scripture
writers, in a sense which had been derived from its
application to Divine appearances in the ancient
church, to the Shekinah.
Before I turn from this passage, in order to leave
a clear idea of the meaning, which I suppose it to
contain, upon your mind, I will repeat, in a very free
paraphrase, the ideas which are expressed in it. I
shall not vary, as is done in the original, the form of

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 171
expression by using different words where the same
idea is intended to be conveyed, but, in order to
prevent misunderstanding, shall preserve, as far
as possible, a unity of phraseology. As I consider
' Word,' when rightly understood, to be the proper
translation of Logos, it will be used throughout. Let
it be borne in mind that its meaning is, ' that which
conveys a Divine communication.'
I. THE TRUE THEORY OF DIVINE REVELATION.
V. I . 'In the very beginning there was a Word.
' That Word proceeded from no other being than
the Supreme God.
' The Supreme God himself spoke to men in this
Word.' II. A MORE PARTICULAR STATEMENT OF THE SAME.
V. 2, 3, and 4. ' The Word, as I have just said,
proceeded, in the beginning, from God himself.
' It was by the Word or command of God that all
things were created, and without it there was nothing
created. ' What in the Philosophy of these days is attributed
to Life, has been produced by the Word of God. So
also what is attributed to Light should be regarded as
produced by the Word. Life and Light should both
alike be considered as identical with, and as compre
hended in the Word. There are no such separate
beings. Instead of ascribing anything to their agency,
they should be spoken of, if at all, as synonymous with
the Word.'

172 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
III. THE REVELATIONS TO THE ANCIENT CHURCH.
V. 5. ' The Word, as it spake to men formerly,
came to a world lying in ignorance and error. And
men Would not resign their errors and receive from it
the truth.'
IV. THE CHARACTER AND OFFICE OF JOHN THE
BAPTIST.
V. 6,7 and .8. ' The new dispensation, that with
which we Christians are connected, was introduced in
the following manner. A man, named John, was sent
to the world, with a Divine commission.
' It was his business, to give such testimony con
cerning the Word, or bearer of a Divine communica
tion, then about to appear, as would induce men to
receive it in its true character and believe in it.
' This John was not, as some since his death, adopt
ing his name and assuming the use of his authority,
pretend, that Word. He did not sustain that office.
His office reached no further than to give testimony
of its approach and its advent.'
V. THE FINAL REVELATION AND1 ITS UNIVERSALITY.
V. 9. ' But, although John was not that Word, the
true Word did soon appear ; and, unlike all previous
Words, which conveyed instruction not intended to be
carried beyond; the limits of Judea, the instruction
conveyed by this Word was intended to be diffused
among all the races and generations of men.'
VI. THE RECEPTION OF THIS REVELATION.
V. 10 and 11. ' And, although the world itself was
created by such a Word or command of God, still the

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 173
men of the World would not receive it as a Word
from God.
' It came to the Jewish nation which had ever been
familiar with such Words, yet even the Jews did not
receive it.'
VII. THE PRINCIPLES OF ADMISSION TO THIS
DISPENSATION.
V. 12 and 13. ' None of the conditions upon which
admission could be obtained to the Jewish dispensa
tion, are imposed or required for admission to the
privileges and benefits of this religion. -
' Those who receive its bearer as a Word, or the
religion itself as a communication from God, and who
believe in it as such, are by the good pleasure of God,
without any other conditions, admitted to all its privi
leges.'VIII. THE MODE IN WHICH THIS REVELATION WAS
COMMUNICATED.
V. 14. ' In this instance a human being was the
bearer of the Divine will, and in this sense became
the Word of God to men.
' And this Word was, like every Word or Shekinah
in former times, accompanied by such a glory as
proved beyond dispute that it proceeded from God.
And we ourselves saw its glory.'
IX. THE CHARACTER OF THIS REVELATION.
V. 14. ' Instead of displaying, as every previous
Shekinah had done, merely the power and majesty of
God, this Word made known to us and represented
15*

174 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
to us his moral attributes, the sublime goodness and
mercy of his paternal character. It was in being the
image of these Divine attributes that its glory consisted.'
X. THE TESTIMONY WHICH THE BAPTIST GAVE TO THIS
WORD.
V. 15. 'John the Baptist declared that this was a
true Word, such as had often during the existence of
the ancient church appeared to men, and that it was
of this Word he had come tc testify.
XI. FURTHER PARTICULARS CONCERNING- THIS WORD.
V. 16 and 17. 'The Word which we have seen, and
which, in these latter days, has been sent to the world,
was unlike the former Shekinah in this respect also.
The glory which belonged to it was not confined to it,
but was capable of being communicated to others.
It was the glory of moral excellence, and all who
make advancement in moral excellence receive it and
become possessed of it. Just in proportion to its own
fulness, had it the power of imparting itself to others.
But the fulness of the perfection of God's moral at
tributes dwelt in it. By forming our characters, then,
in imitation of it, we shall be fashioning ourselves after
the image of God. And if we become possessed of
such an image of the moral character of God, we
shall be filled and surrounded by a more sublime glo
ry than any, composed of mere visible and material
splendors, which ever accompanied a Shekinah, wheth
er on the Mount or in the Temple.
' Moses acted a part in the dispensation of a system
of severe and positive law ; but Jesus Christ was the
Word in making known to us the goodness and truth,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 175
and in conferring upon os the the gracious benefits of
our Heavenly Father.'
XII. THE EXALTED OFFICE OF JESUS CHRIST.
V. 18. ' No man ever before was acquainted with
all the sublime and lovely attributes of the character of
God. It was reserved to be the- unspeakably glorious
privilege of Jesus Christ to discharge that office, which
admitted him to a knowledge of these attributes, and
required of him to make them known to the world.'
Besides the- celebrated passage, the interpretation
of which is now completed, there are others in the
New Testament, in which Logos is used, as was re
marked, page 88,, in a technical sense. It will be
worth our while to attend to> them.
In Letter V., page 121, I endeavoured to arrange
the several meanings capable of being attached to a
title of the Shekinah in the ancient church. As it is
supposed that Logos, or the Word, was one of its
titles, there is a probability that it will be found to have
been used to express all these meanings, or at least
the most prominent of them.- In looking through the
New Testament, we find this conjecture confirmed.
1. The first meaning of a Shekinah, or of the titles
applied to it, we have considered to be,, the Divine
truths and precepts conveyed by it. In the following
instances, it is probable that Aoyos, or Word, is intended
to bear this sense. The passages, Matt. xiii. 19, seqq.,
Mark iv. 14, seqq., and Luke viii. 11, seqq., contain
ing the parable of the sower, evidently describe the
doctrines and precepts of religion as they are received

176 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
into different minds, by this expression, ' The Word.'
In the following passages, we have other instances of
the same use of Logos. Luke v. 1.
Eymro ii ev t» rev o^xsv And it came to pass, that as
ta-Muo-SoM euira tov axivuv rev the people pressed upon him to
AOrON.<rou 3-eou. hear the Word of God.
John xvii. 17.
'O AOroS 5 e-ec «Mi6W te-n. Thy Word is truth.
Acts iv. 31.
K*» tKa,\evv rev AOrON rev And they spoke the Word of
B-iou fitra. vappne-ms. God with boldness.
xiii. 5, 7, 44.
Kamyyswov rev AOTON row They preached the Word of
•3-eou tv rats e-vvayayats rm God in the synagogues of the
lovi&MI. Jews.
JLfrefyrticev amova-ai rev A.OTON He desired to hear the Word
rev Jhou. of God.
n*o-a i ve\it e-uviixf)>> axova-ai The whole city came together
tov AOrON tow S-eou. to hear the Word of God.
Hebrews ii. 2, 3.
E/y«fotC('<iy5/6XavAAAH©EIS For if the Word spoken by
AOTOS iytnre fiiCttiet, xai nava. angels was steadfast, and every
•jra.pa.Ca.o-is icni 7ra.pa.xon ixaCzv transgression and disobedience
ivStxev /nie-Sn?reS'eo-ia.v. received a just recompense of
reward ;
Tiat i/teis exftv^e/teia. ruxixau- How shall we escape, if we
t»5 d/juMe-a-vris e-unrnpins ; iris neglect so great salvation, which
apxnv xa-Govira, AAAEI20AI ha. at first began to be spoken by
tou xvpiev ' the Lord ?
There are very, many other passages in the historical
books, and in the epistles of the New Testament, in
which we find a similar use of Logos.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 177
2. The second sense which I supposed Logos to
bear, or be capable of bearing, in consequence of its
application to the Divine manifestations in the Hebrew
church, was the ' image or representation of the char
acter and will of God.' We find that expressions
arising from this signification of the title of his office,
as I consider Logos to have been, are frequently
applied to Jesus Christ in the scriptures. Some of
them will, in the course of this Letter, receive attention.
In the mean time, I would suggest, that this view of
the meaning of Logos may enable us to give the right
interpretation to the following passages.
Philippians ii. 15, 16.
"Iv* yivne-Bi a./*iftmoi xai axe- That ye may be blameless and
f 3.101, rixva. S-eoB a/xa/xifr a. iv jue-ep harmless, the sons of God, without
ytvtas <rxo\t<ts xai hie-rpa/A/Aivijc, rebuke, in the midst of a crooked
fv oit taivivBt di leacmptt iv and perverse nation, among whom
xecr/Aet, ye shine as lights in the world,
AOrON #»« EnEXON TE2. Holding forth the Word of Life.
Titus i. 3.
E$ANEPJ12E ft xaipeit then But hath in due times mani-
TON AOTON avrov. fested his Word.
3. There are several instances of the use of Logos
in the third sense, which it derived from its application
to a Shekinah, besides that which has been already
minutely examined, the Proem of John's Gospel. It
will be proper to present a few of these instances.
Luke i. 2.
K*6a>c eraptterav iftiv el air' Even as they delivered them
apx,»s ATTOnTAI xai u7rnpsra.i unto us, which from the beginning
ytvof*ivoi TOT AOrOT. were eye-witnesses and ministers
of the Word,

178 .LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
Luke iv. 36.
K.a.1 rymre Su^Coj tvi itavras And they were all amazed, and
xa.1 ovioMkem ¦apes ah.M\evs, M- spake among themselves, saying,
yevrts' lis 'O AOroS "OTTOS, What a Word is this, for with
ert iv et-ovo-i*. »ai ivtapei mncu-o-a authority and power he command-
toip axaSapiots vvivpae-i, xat eth the unclean spirits, and they
t%ipxevta.t. come out.
Acts x. 36.
•TON AOTON ev airnrruxireis The Word which God sent unto
viett lo-panK, tva.yyt!Ki£optms eipnvnv the children of Israel, preaching
tia, I»o-ou X/mo-tou- "OTTOS ESTI peace by Jesus Christ: (he. is
nANTHN KTPIOS. Lord of all.)
I cannot but think, that upon any other view of the
meaning of Aoyos, than that now presented, this last
passage is incapable of a grammatical translation, or of
an intelligible interpretation. The application of the
last clause to God, would, in the first place, divest it
of any signification which could be considered as an
addition to the sense and force of the address of the
apostle ; for the meaning, which it would then receive,
is in substance embraced in the previous sentences ;
and it would also render it an unnecessary and weak
expression. There would be no pertinency nor use
in saying, in this connexion, that God is Lord of all. ,
Neither can it be applied, as it probably has been in
almost all cases, to Jesus Christ ; for the introduction
of his name into the preceding sentence, is merely
incidental to the leading subject, the principal thought
of that sentence, and cVos must refer to the main sub
ject, not to an inferior and accidental appendage of the
previous clause. Now there can be no doubt that
A«yov is the subject of the former part of this verse.
Aoyov, therefore, is the antecedent of ouros.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 179
I consider Aoyov as used in this place absolutely, or
rather elliptically, according to an idiom of speech
common, it is probable, in all languages, certainly so in
our own, by which we indicate the main subject of a
discourse about to be entered upon by merely naming
the word which expresses it. For instance, I suppose
that Peter, after having asserted that God is no re
specter of persons, but that, in every nation, he that
feareth him and worketh righteousness, is accepted
with him, proceeds to speak of the Word, by which
he means a bearer of a message from God, which had
in those latter days been sent to men, in the following
manner ; ' As for the Word, which God has now sent
in the person of Jesus Christ to the children of Israel,
with a message of peace, it is surely the most exalted
Word which has ever been sent, and is- intended to be
the source of authority, of instruction, and of precept
to all men, Gentiles as well as Jews.' He then goes
on to relate the particulars respecting the coming of
this Word. He evidently speaks of Jesus Christ in
such a manner as can only admit of interpretation
upon the supposition that he is called the Word in
virtue of the office which he discharged. The sending
of the Word, and the preaching peace by Jesus Christ,
are certainly equivalent expressions. The last clause
should therefore be translated in the following man
ner ;— ' This Word is the Lord of all.' *
Wakefield perceived the grammatical necessity of re
garding Aoyov as the antecedent of 'btos, and, not being
* J. Jones's Illustrations, p. 14. This appears to have been Cas-
talio's translation also.

180 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
aware of the meaning which, as I have endeavoured
to show, belongs to Aeyes, was only able to give the
following translation of this verse ; — ' That doctrine,
which God sent to the children of Israel, when he
delivered to them a gospel of peace by Jesus Christ,
belongeth equally to all.' But the framers of our
Common Version have made sad havoc indeed with
this whole passage. Having cut off all connexion be-
betwen Aoyov and the last clause of the verse, 'urec m
ircevrav Rvpies, they were extremely perplexed to know
what to do with it. They could not possibly dispose
of it in the sentence in which it stood. Finally they
fell upon a pretty bold expedient. It was this. They
were fortunate enough to find fV* in the next verse.
It seems that Aoyos sometimes, but not very frequently,
was used for p\um* Upon the strength of this use of
language, they formed their purpose. The following
is the thirtyseventh verse ; tiuis eiScvn re yiveptivev pyp*.*
xjhB-' e>w Tin luSctias, cep%apuvev ante rtn TciXiXacxs, y.tra re
fievrrrurput e txypv\ev laanm. They undertook to consider
pV,* as a mere repetition of Aoyov, although Aoyov, in the
sense in which it was a synonyme with p\pu», would be
wholly unintelligible in the thirtysixth verse, and they
accordingly thus render the thirtyseventh verse; — 'That
Word, I say, ye know, which was published through
out all Judea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism
which John preached.' In this manner, by dragging
Aoyov from the beginning of one verse, and repeating it
in the middle of the next, and by extinguishing faput
altogether, our translators surmounted what otherwise
* Gataker, De Novi Instrument! Stylo, p. 89.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 181
would have been an insuperable difficulty in their
version of this passage. But it seems to me that the
difficulty is wholly removed by supposing, as I have
done, and as the principles of construction require us
to suppose, that Aoyov is the antecedent of ivres, and
that it bears the meaning which I have attached to it.
I proceed to give one or two more instances of a
similar use of Logos. Acts xiii. 26.
Kvtpts ae*tMei,£teiyivi>vs ASpaapt, Men and brethren, children of
xa,i el ev v/iiv tbeGevpttvei rev Jhov, the stock of Abraham, and who-
Uj«iv "O AOrOS t»5 o-ampias soever among you feareth God,
ravrtis ame-ra\n. to you is the Word pf this salva
tion sent.
•
2 Peter iii. 5,
"Otj ovpavei »<r*v txTta.ha.1, xai That by the Word of God the
yH & ifares xu-i oV vtares o-ui/te- heavens were of old, and the
Tao-at, t» tou 3-801/ AOTOn. earth standing out of the water,
and in the water.
In this place the apostle evidently means by Logos
that which conveys and executes the will of God,
And he also establishes, it seems to me, beyond dispute,
that ' beginning ' in the first clause of the Proem of
John's Gospel, refers to the natural, material creation.
1 John i. 1.
"O xv ewr' n-p^iis, e axiixeaptev, e That which was from the be-
iupaxapitv reis efBahpteis nptm, o ginning, which we have heard,
- tQiat.crdLij.tBti, xai ai %eipes »«»v which we have seen with our
t^v^apue-av, irepi TOT AOTOT eyes, which we have looked upon,
T»t ferns' and our hands have handled of
the Word of Life.
16

182 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
How exactly this passage suits the view which I
have taken, page 133, of the Word as the title of
Christ, drawn from the third meaning of a Shekinah,
page 122, is obvious to the most superficial reader.
' His person as an object of sight, and his language as
an object of hearing,' are here almost defined to be
the Word. The next verse in this chapter affords
confirmation of the view given, in the interpretation,
John i. 4., of Life. And the introduction of this
epistle, throughout, sheds light upon the introduction
of the gospel written by the same apostle, and gives
much support to the interpretation, which has been
offered in this Letter, of that important passage. The
last instance I shall present of this use of Logos, is,
Revelation xix. 13.
Kai xaharai to evepta, avrev And his name is called The
'O AOroS TOT eEOT. Word of God.
There can be no doubt that this is meant to be a
declaration of the title of Jesus Christ. I cannot but
think that any one, who will examine the noble and
sublime passage of which this sentence is a part, will
discern beneath its magnificent phraseology, a descrip
tion of the office and agency of our Lord, confirmato
ry of that presented in Letter V.
The instances which I have now given, are suffi
cient to illustrate and exhibit the mode in which the
view that is taken of Logos, in these letters, can be
applied to the interpretation of those passages in scrip
ture, in which it may be found. There are many
other places in which it is used besides those here

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 183
quoted. And I do not entertain a doubt that its true
and full meaning, in every connexion, may be devel
oped by recurring to its sources, in its application to
the Divine appearances and communications in the an
cient church.
In order to complete my design, it will be necessa
ry to consider some other expressions and phrases
applied to Jesus Christ, in the New Testament, upon
which light appears to be thrown by the view of his
office, which has now been presented.
1 . The first passages to which I turn, are those in
which such expressions as these are found ; ' ascending to
heaven,' ' descending from heaven,' &;c. For instance,
John iii. 13. 'And no man hath ascended up to
heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the
Son of man which is in heaven.'
John vi. 38. ' For I came down from heaven, not to
do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.'
John vi. 62. ' What and if ye shall see the Son of
man ascend up where he was before ? '
The most judicious and learned interpreters, such,
for instance, as Beausobre and L'Enfant, have gener
ally explained this use of language in the following
manner. They consider the expression, ' to ascend
to heaven,' a figurative form of words, signifying to
penetrate and become acquainted with the secrets of
the Divine counsels, and the similar expression, ' to de
scend from heaven,' as meaning, to have a heavenly
nature and origin. To be in heaven, is regarded by
them as equivalent to being acquainted with the will
and counsels of the Divine mind. Although this inter-

184 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
pretation may express a part of the sense of the above
phrases, it does not express their whole sense. It
appears to me that the last quoted text proves this.
It can hardly be disputed that there were associated
in our Saviour's mind, with this language, ' What and if
ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was
before,' some allusion to a visible appearance.
When we consider that similar expressions were
applied to the Shekinah or Divine appearances in the
Old Testament, and that Jesus Christ discharged the
same office, and bore the same title with them, an
explanation immediately occurs to us. When a Word
of God appeared to men, it was said ' to descend from
heaven.' When it disappeared and was removed from
them, it was said ' to ascend into heaven.' And the Word
was always said ' to be in heaven,' because, as Solomon
expressed it, ' God's eye was open upon it,' and he
was with it, to hearken to the prayer which his servant
prayeth towards it.' As the Word, therefore, Jesus
Christ was in heaven. As a Word which had appear
ed, at a particular time, to men, he naturally spoke of
himself as having ' descended from heaven.' And as
he was shortly to disappear, to be removed up from
the sight of men, he spoke of himself as about ' to as
cend to heaven.' And as all this was said of himself
as the Word, which had from the beginning been as
cending and descending from heaven, it was proper
and natural to speak of himself as ' having been in
heaven before.'
The passages of scripture which I have thus ex
plained, are equally obscure and inexplicable, upon

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 1Q5
every other principle of interpretation, to the Unitari
an, the Arian, and the Trinitarian. As the view now
taken of the above use of language has been suggested
to me by Lowman, I will, in conclusion, present to
you the remarks which are the result of his inquiries.
'As the Shekinah, or visible Glory, was the seat of
the presence of Jehovah, whose dwelling place was in
heaven, at the same time that he dwelt between the
cherubim in the temple ; and therefore the local
presence could not confine Him to the temple, as a
local circumscriptive Deity, whom the heaven of
heavens could not contain ; so to ascend and descend,
to enter and go into the temple, to go out, and to de
part from the. temple, are understood, in the writings
of the Prophets, for the manifestation of the presence,
by the Glory, or the Shekinah. For they did not
mean, they could not mean, that Jehovah so came
down from heaven as to leave it, and be confined to
the temple. Now, as God manifest in the flesh, the
Word made flesh, dwelling, Shekinizing among us,
are manifestly taken from the Divine appearances in
the ancient church, are we not sufficiently directed to
use them in the same sense in which they are used in
the descriptions or explanations of those appear
ances? '
2. The second class of texts, to which I would ap
ply the foregoing view of the office of Christ, as ex
pressed by Logos, is composed of those which, by
appearing to ascribe to his soul preexistence, constitute
the foundation of the Arian, and are considered strong
supports of the Trinitarian hypotheses; such as; —
16*

186 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
John viii. 58. ' Verily, verily, I say unto you, be
fore Abraham was, I am.'
John xvii. 5. ' And now, O Father, glorify thou
me with thine own self, with the glory which I had
with thee before the world was.'
The application of such language to himself, by our
Lord, involves no contradiction or impropriety, even if
we reject the supposition of the preexistence of his
soul, provided that the view which I have given of
Logos is correct. As the Word of God to men, as
the bearer of an office, the functions of which had been
partially discharged before, even in the beginning, and
which were fully and finally discharged by him, he
may, in the view of that office, have spoken of himself
as having existed before Abraham, and before the
foundation of the world. I shall have further remarks
to offer upon this point, when we. come to an exami
nation of the use of the word Glory, in the New Tes
tament. It is proper, however, before we turn from these
passages, to observe that the explanation now offered,
is not needed to reduce and even destroy their force
as proofs of the doctrine- of the preexistence. The
following remarks, by an ingenious writer, point out
the considerations which entirely remove them, and
texts like them, as the foundation of this doctrine.
After having translated the first of them in the fol
lowing manner, ' Before Abraham was born, I have
been appointed to the office I am now filling,' he goes on
to say ; — ' The word to be supplied is Messiah, anoint
ed, which necessarily refers, not to existence, but to

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 197
designation to office, and this alone was necessary, that
Abraham might foresee his day. If any one, accus
tomed only to our modes of speech, should think it
strange that our Lord should thus assert his appoint
ment before the time of Abraham, let him consider
the following and similar expressions. Rev. xiii. 8.
" The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world,"
that is, appointed to be slain in the Divine counsels,
which rendered the violent death of the Saviour es
sential to the accomplishment of the great ends of his
mission. Rev. xvii. 8. " Whose names were not writ
ten in the book of life from the foundation of the world."
Ephes. i. 4. "As he [God] hath chosen us in him
[Christ] before the foundation of the world." We
may add, from the Targum of Jonathan, " Before
the world was created, the Lord Jehovah created the
law ; he prepared the garden of Eden for the just." '*
3. The next description of texts, to which I
would request your attention, are such as speak of an
intimate union and communion between Jesus Christ
and the Divine mind. I will repeat a few of them.
John viii. 19. ' Then said they unto him, where is
thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me nor
my Father. If ye had known me, ye should have
known my Father also.'
John xii. 44. ' He that believeth on me, believeth
not on me, but on him that sent me.' 50. ' Whatsoever

"This quotation is from an article in the Monthly Repository, N.
S. vol. i. p. 746, on Bloomfield's Recensio Synoptica Annotationis
Sacra?, in which there are some other excellent remarks upon the
text John viii. 68.

188 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
I speak, therefore, even as the Father said unto me,
so I speak.'
John xiii. 20. ' He that receiveth me, receiveth
him that sent me.'
John xiv. 6 — 11. 'No man cometh unto the Fa
ther, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have
known my Father also ; and from henceforth ye
know him,- and have seen him. Philip saith > un
to him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with
you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He
that hath seen me, hath seen the Father ; and how
say est thou then, Show us the Father? Believest thou
not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me ?
The words that I speak unto you, I spake not of my
self, but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the
works. Believe me that 1 am in the Father, and the
Father in me.'
Coloss. ii. 9. ' For in him dwelleth all the fulness
of the Godhead bodily.'
There is one view of these texts which has always
occurred to me when I have reflected upon the hy
pothesis of the trinity. It appears to be the opinion of
all those who maintain it, that there is some kind of
division in the Godhead. They differ as to the amount
and character of this division. But they agree in
considering the discriminative titles of the three per
sons, or distinctions, or somewhats, or whatever they
may be called, which constitute the whole Godhead,
to be ' the Father,' ' the Son,' and ' the Holy Spirit.'
And it is the second part or object in this Trinity, that

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. J89
is, God the Son, whom they consider as in mysteri
ous union with the man Christ Jesus. Now it seems
to me that in maintaining this opinion, they are in di
rect opposition to our Saviour, who never once says
that God the Son is in him, but who, on the contrary,
in all these texts, and there are others that I have not
quoted, expressly declares, that it is with ' the Father,'
and with no other Divine being or distinction that he
holds intercourse. It is with the Father that he main
tains a close and intimate union, whatever that union
may be. I cannot perceive in what manner those,
who, without any scripture warrant whatever, advocate
the doctrine of a double nature, by declaring that God
the Son was in mysterious union with the man Jesus,
can escape, upon their principles of interpretation, the
necessity arising from the language of these texts, of
going still further, and of supposing God the Father
also to enter into this mysterious union ; and thus, in
stead of a double, they would have a triple nature in
our Saviour, which might prove a very useful doctrine
to them, inasmuch as it would afford another analogy
in addition to those with which, they say, the world is
so full, in favor of their trinity !
I return from this digression to the consideration of
the true meaning of the last cited passages. It seems to
be plain that it cannot be meant by them, that, in his
essence, God, or the Father, was in Jesus Christ, in a
peculiar sense. If there is any fundamental doctrine
of reason, or of revelation, it is this, that the presence,
the nature, the essence of God are spread throughout
all space ; that he is omnipresent. It is perfect hea-

190. LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
thenism and idolatry, therefore, to consider him as ac
tually residing, as comprehended in one place more
than in another, in one person more than in another.
As long as the Ten Commandments continue to declare
sound divinity, so long must he be regarded as a trans
gressor of them who looks upon any particular per
son or upon any particular thing as, in an essential and
peculiar sense, God.
It is difficult to conceive in what manner those who
entertain the opinion that Jesus Christ was God in any
proper sense, who allow their imaginations to associ
ate with the conception of his visible person, of his lo
cal presence, or of his bodily outline, the idea of God,
of actual and personal divinity, can bring themselves
into a belief that they are not in direct opposition to
all philosophy and religion, both of which distinctly
and perpetually declare that God cannot be confined
within a visible form or any imaginable outlines. So
long as we believe that Solomon uttered the truth
when he said, ' But will God in very deed dwell with
men on the earth? Behold, heaven, and the heaven
of heavens, cannot contain thee,' so long as we receive
that most sublime, and awful doctrine of the bible, the
omnipresence of God, the diffusion through all hearts
and all creatures, and all space, of his being and of
every attribute belonging to him, just so long will it be
impossible for us to consider these, or any other pas
sages, as setting forth the idea that God was compre
hended or included in the person of Jesus Christ.
Neither can we suppose that it is the purpose of
these texts to teach merely that God was present with

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. jgj
Jesus Christ ; for they would, upon this supposition,
be deprived of all force and pertinency, since the same
can be said of each one of us, and, in truth, of every
object even in inanimate nature.
The true signification of such passages as these is
indicated in one of them ; ' Whatsoever I speak, there
fore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.'
In being the medium through which God's will comes
forth to men, in being the declarer of his attributes,
and the revealer of his designs, in being the proclaim-
er of his laws, and in conveying to men all, in fact
which they knew of the character and purposes of
God, Jesus Christ could well be said to contain the
fulness of the Godhead. This was the sense in which
the Father was in him, and he in the Father. He
was in a peculiar union, and enjoyed an intimate con
nexion, with God ; for, in consequence of his office as
the Word of God, all revelations were first communi
cated to him, and he alone was admitted to the se
cret counsels and determinations of the Divine mind.
A close examination of the office of Christ, as designat
ed by Logos, will immediately admit us to the full
meaning of all such passages of scripture as have now
been under our consideration.
4. I have already, Letter V. p. 138, alluded to the
effect produced upon the interpretation of those texts
which speak of the mediation and intercession of Je
sus Christ, by the view of his office presented in these
Letters as the Word, or perpetual Shekinah, of God.
It also explains those expressions which ascribe to
him the dignified and exalted character of the future

192 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
Judge of men. As the permanent medium or vehicle
of God's will to his creatures, it will of course be in
the usual exercise of his office for him to give forth
the decisions of God's judgment. This seems to be
declared in the following passage.
John xii. 47, 48, 49. ' And if any man hear my
words, and believe not, I judge him not ; for I came
not to judge the world, but to save the world. He
that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath
one that judgeth him ; the Word which I have spoken,
the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have
not spoken of myself ; but the Father which sent me,
he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and
what I should speak.'
I would suggest, for your consideration, whether
Logos or Word in the following place, is not used in this
sense, as the person or official character who will act
as the agent of God in the administration of his judg
ment. The verses which follow seem to confirm this
suggestion, and to represent Jesus Christ, ' our high
priest who can be touched with the feeling of our in
firmities,' as sustaining this office, as the Word which
is to judge us.
Heb. iv. 12. ' For the Word of God is quick and
powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, pierc
ing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and
of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the
thoughts and intents of the heart.'
When we consider the office of Jesus Christ in this
light, what a glorious exaltation and dignity it confers
upon him ! Through him do we have access to God,

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 193
not only in this life, but in the life that is to come ;
through all eternity he is to stand between us and God,
to exercise judgment and mercy in his stead, to be the
bearer of his will and purposes to us, and of our pray
ers and praises to him. He is to preside over the
happy and redeemed in heaven, convey to them the
blessings of his Father, conduct them in the holy ex
ercises of their worship, and be their leader and guide
in an eternal progress of felicity and improvement.
5. I come in the next place to those passages which
speak of Jesus Christ as the ' image of God.' This
was one of the aspects in which a Shekinah was view
ed, (p. 122) and as was intimated in a note to p. 141.
was perhaps one of the common meanings attached to
Word in the earliest period of" its use. There are
frequent instances of this form of language, applied
to Jesus Christ. For example,
2 Cor. iv. 4. ' Lest the light of the glorious -gospel
of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto
them.' <
Coloss. i. 15. ' Who is the image of the invisible
God.' 1 Tim. iii. 16. ' God was manifest in the flesh.'
Heb. i. 3. ' Who being the express image of his
person.' Such texts as the following are of a similar charac
ter, and come under the same interpretation. John
xii. 45. ' And he that seeth me, seeth him that sent me.'
John xiv. 7. ' If ye had known me, ye should have
known my Father also ; and from henceforth ye know
him, and have seen him.'
17

194 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
9. 'He that hath seen me hath seen the Father;
and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?'
It has been shown in the previous Letter that, in
in one point of view, a Shekinah, as the appearances
of a Divine nature made to the Jews, were called,
was considered as a representation, an image of God.
It exhibited those attributes which men were then ca
pable of apprehending, and which would make the
deepest impression upon them, such as power, and
majesty. Jesus Christ was the image of God's attri
butes, and, in one sense, of his will also. , He ex
hibited all those moral perfections which belong to the
Father, and constitute his highest glory. It was by
making the character of God thus known to men, by
illustrating its principles in his life, conversation, and
precepts, that he was God's image. It was in this
sense that those who knew him, that is, understood the
principles upon which he acted, saw in him the
Father. I have shewn, p. ,95, that in cases where words,
expressing ideas belonging to the perceptions of sight,
are applied to God, they were always considered as
signifying moral vision, the apprehension of the mind.
The application of this principle to the above passages
instantly developes their true meaning. As a Sheki
nah was a visible image of some of the attributes of
God, those for instance, of which a correct represen
tation could be given by visible objects, so Jesus
Christ was an image of the invisible God, inasmuch
as he exhibited in his character, and principles,, arid
manners, those moral attributes of God, which consti-

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 195
tute in a peculiar manner his perfections, and which
could only in this mode be exhibited. By impressing
upon a human character and a human life, a repre
sentation of the moral principles and attributes of God,
he' might well be said to have been ' God manifest in
the flesh.' He lived and thought, he spoke 'and felt;
under ' the guidance of those moral laws which are
drawn from the character of God, as from a fountain,
and to which he conforms all his designs, and all his
doings. Any one, therefore, by knowing Jesus Christ,
by comprehending the rule's and principles, the spirit
and character of his thoughts, and language, and con
duct, might with the most perfect propriety be said to
know the Father.
, I have said that in one sense Jesus Christ was an
image of God's will. There is no view in which he
can be regarded, which gives a more sublime dignity
to his character than this. In his example, made up,
as it is, of his life and language, of his conduct and
conversation, we have before us a perfect model of
that character, which it is the will of God we should
aspire to form. Jesus Christ, in all his physical,
moral, intellectual faculties, was a man ; he was made
like unto his brethren. In every respect he held, and
now holds, sympathy 'with our nature. He is touched
with the feeling of our infirmities. In no respect does
his natural character transcend the capabilities of our
natural powers. But in him the human nature, the
faculties and affections which belong to us all, are
carried up to a point, to which it is the will of God

196 ' LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
that we should aspire to carry them ; that is, to per
fection. In this sense he is the image of God's will.
As the Jews were directed to turn, during their re
ligious exercises, to their Shekinah, p. 136^ so in all
our devout contemplations, in our aspirations after ex
cellence, in our contemplations of God, of his will,
and of our duties, we should look in faith upon Jesus
Christ ; for, in his blameless and holy character, in his
pure and perfect example, we have presented to us
a bright image of what the Lord our God requireth of
us. During the whole course of our spiritual pro
gress, through whatever other scenes of moral ad
vancement we may pass, he will still be in front of us,
a glorious model and specimen of the highest possible
exaltation of our immortal natures, and when, if ever,
we overtake him, and render ourselves in every re
spect like him, then will every moral attribute be de
veloped and pourtrayed in our own characters, as it is
in the character of God. Then shall we ' be perfect,
even as our Father in heaven is perfect.'
6. The view of our Lord's office and character, as
described by a title which originally derived its im
port from an application to the Jewish Shekinah,
which I have ventured to suggest to your considera
tion, is in no respect, perhaps, more valuable, than in
the light which it sheds upon the use of the word
' glory,' in its various connexions, in the New Testa
ment. I will quote a few of them.
John xvii. 5. ' And now, O Father, glorify thou me
with thine own self, with the glory which I had with
thee before the world was..'

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 197
John xvii. 22. ' And the glory which thou gavest
me, I have given them ; that they may be one, even as
we are one.'
2. Cor. iii. 18. But we all, with open face behold
ing, as in a glass, the glory of the Lord, are changed
into the same image from glory to glory.'
The use of ' glory ' in the ancient church has alrea
dy been described. John has informed us of its im
port when applied to Jesus Christ. He says that it
was not, as before, an outward, material glory, but an
inward, moral glory. It was ' grace and truth.' It
was the moral sublimity of his character and princi
ples that constituted the glory which accompanied him
and belonged to him. There was nothing in the visi
ble appearance of his person which attracted the ad
miration, or compelled the reverence of men.
The glory which he had in the view of his disciples
was a false glory. They adhered to him, and gloried
in him, as a temporal deliverer,, as one who was to
fulfil the selfish and ambitious hopes, and to gratify
the violent and revengeful passions of their nation.
And they continued to accompany him through what
to them was the unaccountable course and manner of
his ministry and preaching, because they held fast to
the hope that he would soon assume a different cha
racter, and enter in earnest upon the work of 're
deeming Israel.' It was absolutely impossible while
he lived to remove this false view of his character
from their minds. And in this circumstance consisted
one important reason for the necessity of his death.
A violent and public dissolution, an extinction of life
17*

198 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
under such circumstances as to remove all doubt
concerning it, and this only, could overthrow or eradi
cate the false hopes and expectations of his disciples.
It was absolutely necessary, before men could be
brought to regard Christ in his true character, before he
' could enter into his glory,' that he ' should suffer.'
But when his crucifixion had removed the erroneous
expectations and false hopes of his followers, and his
resurrection and ascension had confirmed their faith,
then they began to perceive his true character, as a
Word, or bearer of God's moral law to men, as an
image of his moral attributes, and as a spiritual leader ;
and then did he begin to receive that glory for which
he prayed. This is a perpetual glory and it will
shine brighter and brighter forever. As the human
mind improves men will appreciate more and more
the dignity, the purity, the perfection of our Saviour's
moral character and precepts. With every advance
ment of the intellect, or of moral refinement, and of
sensibility to what is pure and benevolent, generous
and holy, heavenly and divine in the character and
conduct, in the thoughts and feelings of men, the
glory of Christ will be advanced.
This view of the subject explains, I think, all the
passages of the New Testament which contain the
word ' glory ' as applied to Jesus Christ. In the first
text cited above, John xvii. 5, 1 consider the phrase
¦* which I had with thee before the world was,' as re
quiring the same kind of interpretation which must be
given to the passage from Revelations xiii. 8, quoted
p. 187, ' The lamb slain from the foundation of the

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 199
world.' The similarity of the use of language in the
two instances, seems to determine that the meaning
conveyed is the same. The second text, v. 22,
appears to be a description of the same characteristic
of the Word made flesh ascribed' to it by John i. 16.
Jesus declares that he had imparted his glory to his
followers ; that is, he had endeavoured to impress upon
them the principles, and imbue them with the spirit of
that moral excellence which his character exhibited.
The last text quoted above, 2 Cor. iii. 18, is a more
particular expression of the same idea and of the
mode in which the glory of Christ is gradually im
parted to his disciples.
But the most striking passage in which this form of
thought is used, in connexion with Jesus Christ, re
mains to be considered. It is the following ; —
Philip, ii . 6 — 11. ' Who being in the form of God,
thought it not robbery to be equal to God ; but made
himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form
of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men ;
and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled him
self, and became obedient unto death, even the death
of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalt
ed him, and given him a name which is above every
name ; that at the name of Jesus every knee should
bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things un
der the earth; and that every tongue should confess that
Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.'
I do not propose to enter into a minute criticism of
these verses. But I request you to apply to them,'
the general theory of the office of Christ which I have

200 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
presented in this inquiry. It is no slight confirma
tion of its truth to my mind that it affords a clear ex
planation of this most important, and much contro
verted passage. The general meaning which I suppose
it to contain is something like this ; —
' He bore an office, which, in every previous dis
charge of it, had been invested with the most exalted
dignity, which had been surrounded with circum
stances of such external splendor and magnificence,
as to convey to every mind the ideas of the majesty
and glory of God, and which, for these reasons, was
called the image, the name, the presence, the glory,
the Angel, and the Word of God. He bore this
same office, and, as the history of his temptation
proves, he had it in his power to appropriate to him
self, if he had been disposed, the same appearances
of visible and external grandeur. God had invested
him with an office, and with it had conferred upon
him powers, which would have enabled him to appear
as God among men. But he did not eagerly desire
to secure to himself this outward personal glory. He
did not, and in this respect I urge his example upon
your imitation, he did not make a vainglorious show of
his great powers. He even stripped himself, while
discharging his sublime office, of those external signs
of distinction which had ever before accompanied it.
No fire, nor smoke, nor thunderings, accompanied
him. No cloud rested above, no li ght shone around
him. He did not strive to attract attention or create
admiration by any such means as these. He sought
no notoriety. He appeared and moved in the most

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 201
humble station. He lived among us in the form and
guise of a common man. And as he felt it his duty
thus to appear in the world, he never departed from
the course which he had marked out for himself;
but met without resistance and with the most perfect
humility every form of abuse and injury, and finally
submitted to a painful and ignominious death, even
the death of the cross. As a reward for this obedi
ence and humility God has now highly exalted him far
above every other agent employed by him in former
times to act as his Word. They hadi been surrounded
with a material glory only. But he is invested with a.
sublime moral glory. They had attracted the rever
ence and wonder of the Jews only, Or in some instances
of but a few individuals. He will be the object of
deep, heartfelt, rational admiration to a continually in
creasing number, until at last all intelligent creatures
will hail and bless him as the Word, the image of God.
The time will come when every voice, in every nation
and family of the earth, will acknowledge him to
be Lord, and to exhibit in his character and prin
ciples, the character and attributes of God the
Father.' Such, in a free and familiar paraphrase, is the
course of thought which, I am led, by the view of the
Logos now submitted to your consideration, to suppose,
the apostle meant to express, when he wrote this
celebrated passage. I have refrained from entering
into a critical interpretation of it, because there are
one or two questions of mere philology, wholly un
connected with the design of these Letters, which

202 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
arise in the course of its investigation, and because
you will be better able to determine how far my views
of the Logos or office of Christ go to explain it, by a
personal examination of the form and phraseology of
the passage, than by any particular and minute inter
pretation' which I might offer you.
7. The last class of texts which I shall now point
out, as receiving, illustration from the results of the
present inquiry, is made up of those which speak of
Christ's 'kingdom,' of the 'coining of his kingdom,'
he. The following will serve as instances :
Matt. xvi. 28. ' Verily I say unto you, there be
some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till
they see the Son_of man coming in his kingdom.'
Col. i. 13. ' Who hath delivered us from the power
of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom
of his dear Son.'
Perhaps there is no question cpnnected with the
phraseology of the New Testament, which has been
found more difficult of solution than this. When did
Christ come in his kingdom ? From what period or
event are we to date the commencement of that
kingdom ? There has been a singular want even of
plausibleness in the answers which have been given to
it. The most common opinion of the interpreters has
been that tho kingdom of Christ, or of Heaven, or of
God, for they all are used convertibly in the -New
Testament, commenced at the precise period of the
abolition of the Jewish peculiarity, by the destruction
of the city, and the dispersion of the nation, of the
Jews. It has, however, been proved by Cappe, in his

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 203
very ingenious discussion of the subject, that the king
dom of Christ began long before that period. Having
overthrown the common opinion abovementioned,
Cappe goes on to give his view of the period from
which to date its commencement, which is this ; — ' It is
the power from on high, the dispensation of the spirit,
the extraordinary gifts with which his doctrine, (the
gospel) was preached and patronized, which, in scrip
ture language, is called the kingdom of Christ.' *
But it seems to me that neither this nor any other hy
pothesis which dates the coming of his kingdom from
any outward, public, notorious act or event, can be
sustained for a moment, and for this reason ; they are
in direct opposition to the deliberate declaration of our
Saviour. He said that the coming of his kingdom
could not be discerned by any outward signs whatever.
Luke xvii. 20, 21. 'And when he was demanded of
the Pharisees, when the .kingdom of God should come,
he answered them and said, ' The kingdom of God
cometh not with observation. Neither shall they say,
Lo here ! or Lo there ! for behold, the kingdom of
God is within you.' It would hardly be possible to
declare in plainer or stronger terms, that the coming
of that kingdom could not be indicated by any exter
nal circumstances whatever ; but that it was entirely
an inward, moral effect; that the kingdom itself con
sisted in a state of the mind, and its coming, in the
formation of such a state of the mind.
I now proceed to point out the effect produced
upon the forms of expression, which we are now con-
* Crit. Rem. Vol. I. p. 131.

204 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
sidering, by the view which has in this discussion been
given of the Logos, as, expressive of the office of
Christ. The glory of a Shekinah has already been de
scribed to have consisted in those impressive circum
stances which accompanied its appearance, and awak
ened the admiration and reverence of men. The
power of a Shekinah, its influence, its dominion, con
sisted in the impression which was thus made, and was
measured by the depth and the extent of that impress
ion. The ' glory ' of Jesus Christ, that last and per
petual Shekinah, has also been described to consist in
those moral excellenc.es and perfections which prove
his truth as the Word of God, and attract the admira
tion and reverence of men towards him as towards the
image of God. His power and kingdom, consequent
ly, embrace all those who perceive this the true glory
of his character, and regard him as pourtraying in his
example and instructions the moral attributes and the
holy will of God. As his glory consists in his being
an image of the moral perfections of God, so his king
dom must be considered as extending to every mind
which recognises this his glory. ' He reigns,' to use
the language of a writer, whose rich and noble genius
seems to take peculiar delight in delineating the cha
racter of Jesus Christ and of his religion, ' he reigns
by the manifestation of celestial virtues.*
It is to be determined, in the next place, when the
kingdom, as it has now been described, commenced.
As has been already remarked, it is not to be dated
from any external events or changes of circumstances.
* Christian Examiner, Vol. V. p. 143.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 205
Consisting entirely in a state of the thoughts and feel
ings, it may be said to have commenced when the
thoughts and feelings began to pass into that state. In
the previous paragraph this state of mind was explain
ed to be a perception of the moral glory of Jesus
Christ, an acknowledgment and reception of him as
the constituted image of those of God's attributes,
which he would have us endeavour to imitate. This
was the only view of his character and office which
could represent to men his true glory. While other
views were taken of him, his true glory was obscured,
and could not possibly be discerned. Now if his
kingdom consisted in this perception of his glory, it
may be considered as beginning in every mind, at the
precise point of time at which it began to regard him
in this true light, and to invest him with this his real
and proper glory.
But it is probable that while he lived, he was view^
ed, even by those who had entered most deeply into
the spirit of his character, in a 'far different li°ht.
Until he had absolutely expired on the cross, and the
water mixed with blood had been seen to flow from'
his pierced side, there is reason to believe, that in the
minds all his disciples, bis name and person continued
to be associated with mistaken views and expectations
with those hopes and desires of temporal and earthly
deliverance and dominion, which every Jew had long
been taught to believe the Messiah would work out
for his nation. When, however, he had actually died,
and his lifeless and mangled body had been handled
by them, and the dark and silent tomb had closed
18

206 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
upon it, all these mistaken views, these false expecta
tions and hopes were entirely removed from the
minds of his disappointed and afflicted followers.
They no longer interposed to veil from their sight his
true glory, the moral perfection of his character and
of his doctrines. When their minds were thus pre
pared to receive him in his true character, his resur
rection, and ascension, and the descent of miraculous
powers upon them, restored and confirmed forever
their faith. When all this had taken place, and he
began to be thus regarded, he entered into his glory,
and all, who thus received him and viewed him in this
light, entered into the kingdom.
If 1 had not already wearied your patience, I should
delight to enter into a particular application of these
views of the ' glory ' and ' kingdom ' of Christ to the lan
guage of the New Testament, in such passages for in
stance as the following ; —
Luke xxiv. 26. ' Ought not Christ to have suffered
these things, and to enter into his glory ? '
John xvii. 1. ' These words spake Jesus, and lift
ed up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is
come. Glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify
thee.' John xvii. 5. 'And now, O Father, glorify thou me.'
Matt. xvi. 28. ' Verily I say unto you, there be
some standing here, which shall not taste of death,
till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.'
It seems probable that ' the Comforter ' means the
effect produced upon the followers of Christ by the
change of mind, of which I have spoken, as bringing

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 207
them 'into the kingdom.' While they entertained
false views of the character and office of their Master,
they were continually the victims of disappointment,
and, at the time of his death, were driven to despair.
But when they perceived his true glory, and discover
ed that the kingdom into which his followers were ad
mitted was a spiritual, a heavenly kingdom, they were
encouraged and confirmed. Their views were infi
nitely expanded. They were filled with a deep con
fidence, with an exalted hope, with a holy joy, which
could not be weakened or diminished by the world.
If this is the meaning of Comforter, we can fully un
derstand, in connexion with the views now presented
of the coming of the kingdom of Christ, such a pas
sage as the following ; —
John xvi. 7. 'It is- expedient for you that I go
away ; for if I go not away the Comforter will not come
unto you ; but if I depart I will send him unto you.'
, There is one reflection arising from the view now
taken of the kingdom of Christ, and of admission
into it, which I cannot refrain from expressing. We.
now perceive what is the great, the perpetual, the ever
strengthening evidence of the truth of our religion.
It is the moral perfection of the character and princi
ples of him who was commissioned and sent to be the
Word of God in establishing it. Jt is this, which has
given that impress of divinity to it, which will forever
sink deeper and shine brighter. The higher the mo
ral and intellectual attainments of any individual, or of
the race of men, the more clear and convincing -will
this evidence become. This glory of Christ, his moral

208 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
perfection, has secured the admiration and preserved
the faith of thousands, through periods when his reli
gion has been buried beneath a load of corruptions,
which of themselves would have repulsed every ration
al mind and every pure heart.
Fanaticism and folly have endeavoured, by associat
ing with his religion the most horrible doctrines, by
destroying the simplicity and beauty of his character,
and by attributing to him a mode of speaking which
would be considered deceptive among men, to ob
struct and extinguish the sublime moral light which
beamed around him, and thus destroy the great evi
dence of the divinity'of his mission. But they never
have succeeded. They never can succeed. It would
be easier to put out the light of the sun, or to prevent
its rays from reaching and warming the earth, than it
would be to shut the eyes and the hearts of reflecting,
intelligent, refined, or good men against the brighter,
warmer radiance shed forth from the character of him,
who, in the vision of the prophet, shone as the ' Sun of
Righteousness.' As the idolatrous Israelites came back trembling to
their God when he appeared before them in the ma
terial glory of a Shekinah, so every doubting, wavering,
disbelieving mind is compelled to return to faith and
reverence, whenever Jesus, the everlasting Shekinah,
appears before it in the sublime, the celestial glory of
his moral perfections. And here I would appeal to
the experience of every man, and there are many such
men, whom the corruptions of Christianity have almost
driven to infidelity, but who still adheres firmly to the

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 209
faith, and I doubt not this would be his testimony.
'I could not receive the religion as it had been pre
sented to me, crowded with doctrines as repulsive to
the sensibility of a good heart, as to the reason of an
intelligent mind, and I was about to reject it ; but I
read the words, and contemplated the character and
conduct of Jesus Christ, and his actions, his language,
his sentiments were so reasonable, so pure, so holy,
so heavenly, that I could doubt no longer ; all distrust
was driven away. Never can I reflect upon the moral
splendors of his character ; never can I look upon his
glory, without exclaiming, surely God was with him ? '
Even the most obstinate and stubborn, unbelievers nev
er have been able to resist the force of the evidence
of which I am speaking. They have all bowed down
before the glory of Christ. In one of my former
Letters it has been shown how it broke in upon the
infidelity of Rousseau. With an irresistible power it
compelled him to testify, as those possessed of an evil
spirit had been compelled to testify before, " Jesus,
thou Son. of God!"'
I have now completed the task, which I was led to
impose upon myself; in attempting to reduce to a regu
lar shape the view which has occurred to me as the
true one, of the interpretation of Logos, and of the
office of Christ, as it appears to have been regarded
by the scripture writers. The nature of the subject
has been such that it would not have been proper,
were it possible for me to have done it, to have dis
cussed it in a lighter and less tedious form. As this
theory of interpretation is, taken as a whole, as far as
18*

210 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
I am informed, quite new, I have great reason to fear
that there will be found some obscurity, and many
deficiences in the manner in which it is set forth in
these Letters. For all these things, I ask that
just and charitable consideration, which the novelty
and intrinsic difficulty of the subject seem to
suggest. As I promised at the outset, it has been my endea
vour to avoid entering into any unnecessary digres
sions. It appeared to me most proper to quote from
the Common Version of the scriptures, imperfect as
it is in some respects, in all cases where such quotation
became necessary. I have likewise abstained from
all questions of the criticism, and of the true reading
of the texts, and have even quoted, for the purpose of
illustration, passages or words the genuineness of which
is extremely doubtful, without any marks of discrimi
nation ; such as John v. 4, and 1 Tim. iii. 16. And
I have done so because, whether genuine or not, it is
well to ascertain their meaning. It is certainly some
thing gained, to remove the .false, and ascertain
the true signification, even of a spurious text.
It is proper perhaps for me to observe that, although,
as was mentioned in my First Letter, Lowman's Three
Tracts first suggested this view of the Logos to my
mind, I am indebted to him but for a part of the ma
terials which enter into this discussion.' He guided
me through the first part of the Fifth Letter, and pro
vided me with a few of the interpretations of particu
lar passages. He reflected no light upon that part of
the investigation contained in the Third and Fourth

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 211
Letters, the object of which was to ascertain the
false meanings attached to Logos. Indeed there is so
singular a want of clearness and method in his above-
mentioned work, that it is difficult to determine with
certainty what his views were. It should be remem
bered, however, in palliation of its faults and imperfec
tions, that it is merely a collection of posthumous and
unfinished tracts. So imperfect and obscure are the
views contained in them, that they do not appear to
have made any impression upon the minds, or even to
have arrested the attention of the three celebrated
divines, who collected and published them with a
preface to which their names are subscribed, Samuel
Chandler, Nathaniel Lardner, and Edward San-
dercock.* It is still perhaps a matter capable of
sustaining dispute, what were the precise views of
Lowman. From a repeated examination of this and
his other books, which, as a whole, are as good a guide
as can be followed, in the study of the Jewish ritual,
worship, government, and principles, and of the con
nexion between them and the phraseology of the
scriptures, I am convinced that he entertained a view
of the import of Logos, and of the office of Christ,
similar to that presented in this inquiry.
I think that John Jones f and Lant Carpenter, f
both of them men who have studied the scriptures
most thoroughly, seem to indicate in their writings
that they attached a meaning to the Logos some-
* See Mrs Cappe's Life of her husband. Crit. Rem. vol. I. p. 22.
t Illustrations of the Gospels, Sec. II. and Appendix II.
t View of Unitarianism, p. 61.

212 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
what similar to that exhibited in my Fifth Letter,
although they probably did not settle that meaning, by
tracing it to its origin. Dr Benjamin Dawson, in a
work on the Logos, endeavours with much ingenuity
to interpret the several texts upon a theory peculiar
to himself. He supposed it to mean, in all cases, what
I suppose it to mean in some, the gospel, the religion
which Jesus promulgated. It is unnecessary to re
mark that there .are some instances, in which Logos is
used, to which this meaning cannot be made to apply.
A passage has already been quoted from Servetus,
(p. 130,) which seems to show that he held an opinion,
something like that set forth in these Letters. Other
passages. in his writings, which have fallen under my
observation, seem to strengthen and confirm this im
pression. I believe, also, that the celebrated primitive
Unitarian Praxeas entertained the same opinion of
the office of Christ, and of Logos as the title of that
office. * These are the only theologians, in whose
opinions I have been able to find any considerable re
semblance to that hypothesis, which I have ventured
to offer to your consideration.
You will have remarked that the leading peculiarity
of my theory is, that Logos was originally derived from
the name applied by the Jews to the Divine appear
ances, and that its true meaning is to be found by
investigating the views which they entertained of these
Divine appearances. The correspondency between
'Logos' and ' Mimra,' the title of those appearances,
* TertuUian adversus Praxeam; Lardner's History of Heretics,
p. 412.

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 213
has frequently been observed, and it is to me a cause
of surprise that scholars have not thought it important
to detect the several meanings of ' Mimra, ' with the
view of discovering the source, and the original mean
ing of Logos. Wakefield appears to have been struck
with the circumstance of its use in the Targums. But
the most remarkable case of inattention to this simi
larity of language is that of Le Clerc. It was his
opinion, as you well know, that Logos was intended
by1 John to signify the same in his Proem, which it
does in the Platonic Philosophy, ' Reason.' By
turning to his note to Heb. iv. 12, in his translation of
Hammond, you will observe that he acknowledges the
inapplicability of his usual interpretation of Logos,
Reason, to the connexion in which it stands in that
verse. ' I am apt to think,' says he, ' this phrase is
taken from the custom of the Jews of that age, who
for God, and any of the divine attributes, used to say,
" the Word of God," of which custom there are still
frequent instances in the Chaldean Paraphrases of the
Old Testament, where in many places we, find the
" Word of God " set for " God." ' It is astonishing
to me that, when this great and most learned man
found himself compelled, in this instance, to resort to
Jewish sources, and to ' Mimra, ' for the proper inter
pretation of Logos, he was not led to suspect, that in
other places, and even in the Proem of John's Gospel,
it might be applied with success to the developement
of its true and original meaning.
Notwithstanding the inconsiderable number of those
who have preceded me in the view now taken of this

214 LETTERS ON THE LOGOS.
important subject, I cannot but cherish a strong as
surance that it is correct and can be sustained. It
appears to me to be natural and reasonable. The
phraseology of those passages in which Logos is used,
especially of the Preface of John's gospel, certainly
countenances, if it does not establish it. And although
the interpreters are almost all disposed to give a dif
ferent view, still there • is scarcely one, who has not
contributed something to confirm me in my. own.
You may, perhaps, smile at my confidence. It is
because I am aware that we are all liable to indulge
too sanguine an assurance of the correctness of any fa
vorite opinion, to overrate the strength of the arguments
in its support, and to be totally blind to all arguments
in opposition to it, that I have taken the liberty of
addressing to you these letters. Knowing the value
of your time, and the arduous nature of your duties,
I certainly should not have asked your attention to
them, if I had entertained the least expectation that
they would have reached to their present length. But
I did not see in what manner to prevent the extension
of the inquiry to the dimensions in which it now stands.
I am duly thankful, I trust, for the friendly interest
which you have manifested in the course of the in
vestigation. If I am wrong, the sources of my error
may be detected and pointed out by you, and others
to whom these views may be presented. And we
surely ought to be as anxious to discover our errors,
as to confirm the truths which we entertain. This is
too important a subject for us to be willing to acqui
esce in mistaken views of it, Whatever may be the

LETTERS ON THE LOGOS. 215
meaning of Logos, it is our duty to endeavour to as
certain it, for it is certainly applied to our religion, and
to its founder. An ignorance of its meaning may
keep us from apprehending truly these great objects
of thought and feeling. A knowledge of it may admit
us to more noble and exalted conceptions of them.
With such views of the high, I had almost said su
preme importance of this subject, I entered upon its
investigation. During its laborious progress I have
been cheered continually by an increasing satisfaction ;
and now, at its close, I feel a strong assurance that
the results to which I have arrived are sound and true.
I can hardly venture to presume that you will sympa
thize with me in this feeling. But of this I am sure,
that you will read these Letters with the single pur
pose of discovering the truth ; and this is all I ask,
or wish. It was the only purpose for which they were
written.

THE END.