New Page

lose their +learned", professional character. According to the Latin version, the Evangelist consciously
imitates Moses by using in principio, while in the Hungarian +just as Moses explains in order the beginning
of the Old Testament and of creation, so John does the beginning of the New
Testament..."155 According to the Latin, verbum can be considered a metaphor and a metonymy, while the
Hungarian merely circumscribes that the verb should be understood as Jesus Christ the man. The Latin
employs an erudite explication to show that erchomenon fits both the light and the man and that this is
why Jesus could claim that he was lux mundi. The Hungarian, on the other hand, only states that the Man
Christ is the light of the world and then, instead of expert explication, goes on to denounce the meanness
of the Antichrist.
At the same time, with some of the crucial details, the polyphony perceived in the earlier works of
Dávid does survive. Such, for instance, is the interpretation of the term filius unigenitus. As it is
commonly known, Fausto Sozzini uses a completely new solution in this case as well. Filius unigenitus
is, of course, not first born son for him either, nor does, however, the attribute unigenitus relate merely to
His miraculous birth or dignity, but is used rather with the meaning unice dilectus [especially beloved].
He thinks this is proved by a series of biblical examples: Ishmael was elder than Isaac among the sons of
Abraham, yet the latter is unigenitus; although Solomon was not the eldest among his siblings, he was
entitled to that epithet.
Albeit without an explanation supported by the Greek and Hebrew forms, and relying entirely on
the analogous biblical places, Ferenc Dávid's 30th sermon says that the expression means +particularly
beloved" son. Even when allowing that the phrase might also refer to the miraculous birth and dignity of
Christ, he is following the spirit of Fausto Sozzini, who left ample room for a number of various views.
Another sermon at the same time formulated the position containing Servetian reminiscences that we
have met in Rövid útmutatás:
+Primogenitus omnis creaturae, first born of all created beings, consider what the Scripture wants
to explain in it, I have said before thus it goes in Part 24 of Book Three of the Book of Solomon on
wisdom: Primogenita sum ante omnes Creaturas, Why speaks the Scripture thus? Because the uncreated
wisdom bears the secrets and the image of the future Christ, which for his majesty is called first born
among the created beings."156
Before drawing conclusions, a detail must be mentioned, where Dávid elaborates an idea in the
Latin text in an interesting way. Fausto Sozzini says that one reason why the clause et verbum caro
factum est cannot be interpreted as the incarnation of the Christ existing from eternity is that it does not fit
into the chronological order followed up to that point by the prologue: +For what could be more absurd
than to say that the Evangelist first said that the verb was in the world, had come to his own, and gave
such a power to those who believed in him that they could become the sons of god, and after all this to
say that the verb was made flesh? as if the verb had come to his own before his birth, and had been in the
world first and became flesh only after that."157 Dávid further enriches this argument in the introduction
and conclusion of the treatise disguised as objection. The essence of his reasoning is that the prologue of
John's Gospel gives the +sum" of the main text and follows a chronology closely sticking to that:
describing the task of the Man Jesus Christ (the verb teaching men), telling that it gave light and life,
made his own kingdom and, although many despised it, acquired followers. Then it relates how it was
made flesh, that is to say, humble, miserable, poor, and was cast to curse, i.e. died on the cross. Then its
glory could be seen, which, being full of grace and justice, can only be the glorification after the
resurrection.
This chain of thoughts is complemented with a denouncement of the method that +making the
head into foot" reverses the right relationship between the Synoptics and John's Gospel. He has no doubt
that among the Gospels John's was chronologically the last, and is regarded as first +according to
meaning" by his opponents only so that thereby they could prove that Christ has been born from eternity.
50