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
* ' There is one point , " says he , pp . 76 , &c . u in which the -New Theology proposes nothing grateful except to tb £ wicked . 1 refer to the doctrine of an intermediate state between death and tire resurrection . This stale , according to the new opinions , is an unconscious one . . . . The Editors of
the New Version come forth to offer us tti £ grave instead of paradise : and the darkness of continued death for *) ie joys of light and life . Do you think we shall be disposed to listen to them and believe them ? . . . .
Trining , indeed , and worse than trifling , are the arguments adduced by the Authors of the New Version on this subject . Criticism must be all mouth and no argument , if their conduct hi this matter be deemed critical and weighty . "
Is it possible that this writer should never have heard of the controversy concerning an intermediate state , till he looked into the Improved Version ! and does he set himself up as a critic and a judge ? His arguments in defence of the popular doctrine are
trifling in the extreme , but with those we have / at present no concern . He takes upon himself , however , tq be very angry at the translation and interpretation of certain texts relating to this subject , particularly Heb . xii . 22 , where he accuses them , in his
usual polite style , of " playing their pranks again with angels . " He is also highly offended with Mr . Lindsey s interpretation of 1 Pet . iii . 18 , 19 , who explains the words " spirits in prison , " of idolatrous Gentiles , and not of human ghosts now in hell ^
whom Christ visited and instructed , as this gentleman would havd us believe : and in the plenitude of his critical , authority lie denounces Mr . Lindsey \ s interpretation , as adopted by the Editors of the Improved Version , to be * ' a most confused add
blundering method of setting aside the faith of Christ ' s p re-existence , and of the existence of spirits now in prison . " And if this gentleman says that it is blundering , who shall say
it is not ? It is true , that Mr . Lind-« ey was known and respected at Cambridge as an excellent scholar , as eminent for learning , sis for piety , for humility , and for charity . But Mr . Nekton says Mr . Lindsey was a
Untitled Article
gross Jblunderer in his interpretation of Scripture : and Mr . Newton " is an honourable , a very honourable man . * ' - .
8 . The next charge which is alleged against the Editors of the Improved Version is the old story , p . 85 , that " they have but little reverence for the writers or writings of the New Testament . " This learned critic is
one of that good sort of divines who receive every book as canonical , which they have been taught to call canonical ; and who believe that every canonical book is inspired . This easy and lumping faith is also a most convenient faith . It saves all the labour
of inquiry , all the trouble of discrimination , and obviates all difficulties at once : ' Alps are no Alps to that : difficulties are no difficulties to that- " If it cannot understand it can believe ; and if it cannot refnove mountains , it can at least swallow them . To such
a faith the Epistle of Jude is of equal authority with the Gospel of Luke : and it yields as ready an assent to the tatJe of a quarrel between Michael and the devil about the body of Moses , as to the momentous and strongly authenticated narrative of the
crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ . It is but too true that those graceless and " impudent witlings" the Editors of the Improved Version , were not gifted with this wholesome faith . In a far different way do these " ignorant and childish blunderers"
manifest their respect to the records of divine revelation . Being strongly impressed with the conviction that whatever bears the stamp of divine authority , is to be received with the most unreserved submission , they regard it as a sacred and imperative duty to make the most rigid inquiry into the character and evidence of
whatever lays claim to this high distinction ; that they may not , through indolence and negligence , admit erroneous traditions and human inventions as the word of God . And as the books of the New Testament , which contain the doctrine of Christ
and his apostks , were not « II written at the same time , are not all of equal authority , and were not collected and put together by any supernatural direction , their first concern was to inquire what books were really vyvit-
Untitled Article
i& 6 Oh th * Rev . Samuel Newton s Objections to the Improved Version *
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Oct. 2, 1819, page 626, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1777/page/38/
-