On this page
-
Text (1)
-
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
filling their hearts with food ajid gladness * And in his epistle to the Romans he pronounces the Pagan guilty- a $ well as the Jew , because that when he knew God he did not
choose to retain him in his knowledge , glorified him not as God , neither was thankful ; and because he transgressed the natural law of morality which was written in his heart . These passages are sufficient to prove , that the
first teacliers of Christianity , who had received their commission immediately from Jesus Christ , did not regard their hearers , whether Jews or Gentiles , as men , who , being destitute of all moral aiid religious knowledge , had no test in themselves what doctrine was or
"Was not of divine origin . On the contrary , they referred the Jew to a prior revelation in the law and tlie prophets ^ an < j t $ ? Gentile to the evidence of the being , and goodness of GpcJ in the
natural world j and to his own moral faculties a § suggesting tp him a 113-tural law of mor ^ Jity , the authority of whicli ^ far froni being abrogated , <* vas sustained and exajted by the Christian revelation . We are then
jugtjfieq on the principles of Christianity it ^ ejf in dem aiiding a consonance between the undoubted dictates of reason and conscience , and whatever professes to be a doctrine of revejation : and if a system of opinions ,
said tp pe Christianity , 15 in direct opposition , to those principles of moralfty and religion to which the apostles confidently appealed , we have app ^ tplic authority for denying that those opinions are Chri s tianity . To tjie reasons which have been
given for rejecting the Calvinistic creed I $ ha ] J now add , 4 thly , If justice fneans any thing in theology , that preceding cannot be just , which mafces guilt to e ^ ist before the existence pf the accused , which affirms a partnership in critne including all of
hmn , a ^ kind when the first | nan arid woman only were in being , aiid which establishes this charge of confederacy 0 $ no better ground than tfye relation of consanguinity , iu ^ ifitajmng that when Adam SJnnecl all mankind
sinned in Jhw , or b ^ eainie guilty as well nah ^ ^ i ^ is tj ^ genuine doctrine of rife m&xl ? m $ ^ 99 r ^ g ! y the Ass « WbJj * 8 p ^ cfifem . iieclare $ that 4 H me $ a ^>^ rn unfjisr Q < & * % < $ i a « d ctp ^ e * J Kn ^ W ifla ^ ecj th ^ t mwny ^ e ivilling to have the credit of orthodox
Untitled Article
connexion and evangelical pJtocmfes . who would tremble to subscribe iS Calvinistic doctrine of imputed guilt . aad contract their faith withiti narrower limits , making hereditary de * pravity the cornet-stone of their b * lief . In flying from impiety they are however , entangled in inconsi stency !
If the guilt of Adam ' s sin cannot de ' volve qpon me , I cannot be blamed for its consequences . It is not my fault tjiat I inherit a depraved nature and it is not just that I be required * to > render such obedience to the divine
laiv as is possible only to a nature which is hot depraved * To condemn me for the want of conformity to a law which was framed for purer natures , is to charge on me the blame of not possessing such a nature , to make me responsible for the
consequences of Adam ' s offence , or , ( for it is in fact the same ) to impute to me the guilt of his offence . Since the advocates of the doctrine of hereditary depravity maintain also , that perfect obedience to the law under which
Adam was created is * notwithstanding , obligatory upon all men , and that whether the transgressions be few or inany , no man can escape the punishment of that law without expiation , they do by implication extend the guilt of Adam ' s offence to ail his
posterity . Thus a judicial pToaeediDg which is declared to be a glorious illustration both of the justice and mercy of G od implies , ajid even af * firms a community of guilt , where there was and could be no
participation of offepce , establishing the accusation on the sole ground of remote consanguinity and lineal descent . I » the cdurtg of Asiatic despots it has often been deemed politic to destro ) root and braqci ^ when onl y the head of the family has be ^ n foupd gu ilty ; but I shctald doubt tti at the people of Asia , subdued as they are to do hoiiiage | to tyranny , have ever regarded sucB $ w $ eping vengeance as an illustrious ^ Semonstration of justice---5 t % > Accprditig to the Calvinistic theo 76 ffy tjie evil tvhich Jiap resulted
from Adam ' s bfferlce far exceeds the good whi ^ h is the result of the obedieqe ^ and death of Christ . By me offence tjhe whple race of man were brwgftt into a state of guilt and misery ; ai > 4 their doom , eternal woe , unalterably flxed , unless the jW himself shdrll interpose to save , v *
Untitled Article
140 Reasons for rejecting the . Cmvintstic Theology . No . II
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), March 2, 1815, page 140, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1758/page/12/
-