On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
bringback again to some former state " ( p . 128 ) . When the first change in the disposition of one person towards another has been manifested by the commission of some injurious or offensive act ; there-changing of disposition in the injurious or offending
party , or a return to a friendly temper and behaviour , is very properly expressed by being * ' reconciled to " the other . And it is the unvarying language of scripture , that the often ding person , not the offended one , is , or ought to be , the person reconciled :
see the above quotations . Now this " reconciliation ' of the injurious or offending party to that which hath been injured or offended , is precisely what was formerl y meant by the
English word * ' At-one-ment ; " and will appear to be so if the second syllable of that word is pronounced as the numeral " one . " For the proof of this assertion , we rnav refer to Acts vii .
26 , where we read that Moses , seeing two of the Israelites contending , ' * would have set them at one again , " would have at-one-d them , would have reconciled them ( literally " drove them together unto peace , " G i \ Test ) j an expression which may be illustrated
by a saying very common , in the southern parts of the kingdom , particularly in the mouth of parents to their children , " if you do so or so , you and 1 shall be two . '" And since it cannot be improper to appeal to any writer as to the sense in which
an English word was used in his time , I will beg leave to refer your readers to The Universal Theological Magazine , Vol . iv . p . 247 , where they will see a collection of passages from
Shakespeare ( who flourished about the time when our present translation of the Bible was made ); in which t he verb " atone" most evidently means —if an active verb , " to reconcile "—
igp neuter verb , " to be in a state of agreement , " and the substantive " atonement" as evidently means " reconciliation . " Supported by such authorities , will it be presumptuous to assert with confidence , that for the
word * ' atonement , " in the only passage of the New Testament in which it is to be found , we ought to substitute " reconciliation ? " Whether this is precisely the sense in which that word is used in the Old Testament , is si qucntion submitted to more compe-
Untitled Article
tent judges . " This , however , may be affirmed without hesitation , that in Heb- ii . lTt we read " make reconciliation for ± he sins of the people , " though , perhaps , in the Old Testament it would have been " make atonement" If these remarks should be thought worth inserting in some
early Number of the Repository , they may perhaps serve as introductory to a more particular examination of the subject by some abler hand . With hearty wishes for the increasing spread and success of a publication so eminently interesting to the friends of religious inquiry and scripture truth , I am , Sir , Yours very sincerely , X T . * H .
Untitled Article
86 •/ . T . H . and Philo-Biblicus on the Atonement .
Untitled Article
Sir , Feb . 6 , 1815 . IN page 32 , of your last Number , are some remarks bv Mr . Frend on the Atonement , in the course of which , he states that he has found in the writings of several Unitarians , and the conversations of others , that he differs very materially from them in his views of cur Saviour ' s character .
As a friend to free discussion , the writer of this would be glad to have these differences precisely and accurately defined . This , he conceives , Mr . F < has not done , in a manner that is likely to prove satisfactory to inquirers
after truth . He observes , " Whilst they ( Unitarians in general ) consider him merely a teacher sent from God , mighty in word and deed , I consider him as my Saviour ,- —as one through whom the Creator bestows the greatest of srifts to the human race . " And
do not Unitarians in general , regard Jesus , the Messenger of the Most High , as the instrument and medium of divine communications to mankind of the most inestimable value ? Thus far , then , the difference between Mr . F . and us appears to be very far from either essential or " material . " But
further , he views him also " as th £ indispensible medium by which we enter into eternity . " To this expression * understood in an unqualified sense , my views of the character of
God , connected with the future destiny of the heathen world , ( and all those , whose ignorance of that holy " name in which we bow" to God the Father , does not arise from wilful neglect of the mean * of knowledge , )
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1815, page 86, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1757/page/22/
-