On this page

• Text (1)

  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.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• 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

    the cup and plate , and the small herbs , which probably made part of ths repast , ) than in Matthew , ( ch . xxiii . 25 , ) where these comparatively trifling accusations follow charges of a much graver kind ( ver . 14 and following } . In ] L . uke , Christ appears to have said nothing against the teachers of the law , £ ill one of them ( ch . xi . 45 ) put himself forward to identify himself with the Pharisees ; in Matthew they are included in those charges which , as addressed

    to them , who were in part Sadducees , and not particularly attentive to ceremonial trifles , are not well-founded . It might also have been observed , that the passage respecting the straining the gnat out of the liquor , which Matthew ( ch . xxiii . 24 ) has preserved , though Luke has dropped it , is derived from the meal , and makes part of the same train of allusion , as the cleansing the cup , and giving tithe of the esculent herbs . The discourse , ch . xii . 1 , issues ,

    as Dr . S . observes , entirely out of the circumstances narrated at the close of the preceding chapter , and Christ ' s exhortations to his disciples , not to fear the malice of their enemies , were designed to remove those fears which the machinations of the Pharisees ( ch . xi . 54 ) might have excited . From this connexion , too , is explained the passage respecting " blasphemy against the Holy Spirit . "

    " Even of the declaration at xii . 10 , certainly a very difficult one , I should be inclined to maintain that it belongs to this context much rather than to that in which Matthew has recorded it , at xii . 31 , 32 . For there the wyevfAcc & £ ov had been mentioned as the divine power by which Christ cast out the unclean spirits ; and I do not very well see how , in this precise sense , the blasphemy against the Son—which must there have been understood

    principally of the assertion that he himself had a devil—could be distinguished from the blasphemy against the Spirit , and both be in some degree contrasted with each other . Here , on the other hand , the irvevpa , dyiov is the Divine Power which was at a future time to animate and direct the disciples in the propaga , lion and defence of the Gospel ; and the contrast may fie conceived in this . way , If any man now resists the Son , the consequences of his sin may still be removed from him ; but whoever shall in future also blaspheme the power of

    the Spirit , whose operations will be more rapid and forcible , will have no means of salvation left . And in this sense this language was perfectly appro , priate to the occasion and calculated to encourage the disciples . Whereas in Matthew , chap , xii ., the 31 st verse , indeed , may belong to his context , but the 32 nd is quite foreign to it and seems to have been transferred to that passage from this in our Gospel . It remains to be observed , that this whole discourse can have been delivered only at a time when Jesus had already predicted his sufferings and when they were near at hand . "—Pp . 194 , 195 .

    The same course is pursued through the remainder of the chapter , and it is shewn how , after delivering the parable against confidence in riches , occasioned by the request that he would interfere in the division of an inheritance , our Lord , following the train of thought thus excited , and yet reverting to the peculiar situation of his own disciples , warns them ( ch . xii . 22 ) against undue anxiety about wealth , and exhorts them to watchfulness . But we think he has rather imagined than discovered a connexion between

    vers . 53 and 54 , when he supposes that an alleged ignorance of the signs of the times is the plea for the division of sentiment previously spoken of . Here the connexion of Matthew ( ch . xvi . 2 ) appears more natural . It is also only by a very forced interpretation , explaining b oIkos v ( jwv oL < pUtai , ( Luke xiii . 34 , ) of our Lord ' s intention to quit Galilee , ( p . 205 , ) that the insertion of these words where we find , tjhem is justified ; and even then another supposition is , necessary , that the exclamation , " O Jerusalem , Jerusalem I " is an interpolation from Matthew . The series of discourses and parables

    Untitled Article

    44 B $ view * ~ 8 chleiermacher > & Critical Essay on the Gospel of St . Luke ,

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1827, page 44, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1792/page/44/