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
But where does their history describe any such remarkable change ? See lC 0 r . viii . 65 rTiin . ii . 5 j Acts xvii . Si .
Now in the case under our present consideration , to . " grant the preacher all for which he has contended , the evidence for the sole religious worship of the Father , as the only true God , compared with that for the worship of Christ , may be fairly enough
represented by the fractional expression T ^ , in \\ h \ vA \ the denominator , at-a moderate calculation , will represent the evidence for the worship of the Father , and the numerator , the contrary evidence for the worship of Christ . The preacher , in- his defcuce ,
has referred to nothing more than the single case of Stephen , which he considers to be demonstrative of his position , and to contain a clear revelation of the mystic triad , to use his
own anti-scriptural expression . Now upon the first principles . of moral evidence , a proportionate degree of at teqtion should have been bestowed upon the hundred contrary arguments to which we allude . But such is not
the case ; not a word is bestowed upon any such arguments . The whole question seems to the preacher to turn upon the verses which conclude the seventh chapter of the Acts of the
Apostles ! And with a most unfortunate employment of Griesbach , precisely where he yields neither to the Uuitarian nor to the Trinitarian any assistance whatever , ( for the commonest Greek Testament will inform
us that the word God ought not to be in the text , ) he imagines that be has satisfied every scholar , and he certainly has succeeded in throwing dust in the eyes of the indiscriminate vulgar . He seems to think that he has placed the question of Christian worship for ever at rest : and with the full conviction
of the justness of his argument , he calls upon his brethren in the Scottish establishment to resume the employment of that " Directory for Worship / ' which , by his own confession , *« generally «« . allowed by them to remain unopened , amidst the dust and cobwebs of their shelves . ' While the of
^ st t he Christian world , forsooth , are emulating each other in their commendation an&circulation of the Bible , the displeasure of this divine is excited by the now prevalent and praisewortty ciutom . of the established « lergy
Untitled Article
in Scotland , ( in which they enjoy a privilege which those in the sister country know not , ) of confining their public devotions 1 o the Father only . He would have them retrace their
steps , and recur to what we should consider the darkness of ignorance , and the imperfection which naturally attached to the early Reformers who had but just emerged from the puerile absurdities of the Church of
Rome-May God be graciously pleased not tlius to retard , but to accelerate the work of Reformation ! May every addition in doctrine ; md in discipline which the Gospel has sustained , be soon swept away I And may the pure religion of Jesus issue from the ruins
of Calvinistic orthodoxy , with renovated and recruited power , to go forth among the nations conquering and to conquer !—The case of . Stephen has naturally come uuder the frequent review . of Unitarian writers ;* because ,
we hesitate not to acknowledge , itsupplies an apparent inconsistency with the doctrine and example of other parts of the New Testament * . Yet we are fully persuaded that it is appearance onlv .
From ver ? . 55 and 56 , we find that Stephen was favoured with a vision , illustrating the exalted state and extensive dominion of Christ . It is by far the most probable supposition , that this vision was continued while this
proto-martyr was enduring from hi * brutal enemies the agonies of a death by stoning . The-vision was evidently afforded him in order to confirm his faith , and to support his spirits . God he could not see : u No man hath
seen God at any time * " No representation of God could he see , for it is contrary to the second commandmept . Jesus he did see in vision ; and not to have addressed him , in such circumstances , would , we own , appear to us most unnatural and
unaccountable . All that he does say , is , " Lord Jesus , receive my spirit ; " or , accept of my life . I will lay down my life in thy service . Receive rne to thyself , as thou didst promise while on earth . But it is to be observed , that Stephen
* See Haynes on the Attributes , BelsbanrTs Calm Inquiry , Dr . Carpenter ' * ( Jnitariauisin , l * i-iestley * s Notes in ) oc , and Lindsay's Apology , notwithstanding the criticisms of Magee , which , on this head especially , are both flippant and contemptible .
Untitled Article
Review . — Hodgson on Stephen * * Prayer . 507
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1819, page 507, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1775/page/47/
-