of the man whose only child was possessed of an evil

spirit (Luke 9:38).  There is nothing unusual about the word

monogenes. If we remove the word for `only' we have genes, which is

intimately related to the words translated `begetting' (Matt. 1:2), `born'

(Matt. 1:16), and `generation' (Matt. 1:1). If the `generation', the

`birth', the `begetting' of Jesus Christ are thus attested by Scripture,

who are we to put our hands to save the Ark of His Deity, by robbing

Him of the glory of His perfect manhood and sonship?

We have said little about the virgin birth, for we are following the

line of teaching given by John, but, lest any should misconstrue our

silence, we affirm in passing our unwavering faith in the testimony of

those Scriptures that insist upon the supernatural conception of the Son

of God, His virgin birth and His untainted manhood.

A day is coming, when the Son shall be subject unto Him that

subjected all things under Him, `that God may be all in all'. We have

no right here to read `that the Father may be all in all' for we must

remember John's statement that `the Word was God'. The glorious

manhood of Him Who came to be the Mediator and the Sacrifice for

sin is vital to our hope and our peace. Let us beware lest, by using

unscriptural language when speaking of `the Son', we should be

denying that `Jesus Christ has come in the flesh'.

Once again the apostle reverts to the testimony of John the Baptist,

whose first witness, as recorded in this Gospel, is to Christ, `the true

Light', with the object that `all men through Him might believe'

John the apostle and John the Baptist have but one testimony, the

Baptist's witness becoming imperceptibly interwoven with the

testimony of the apostle, neither breaking its thread nor spoiling its

`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' (1:15).