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
fully have accepted the hand of persons of ' eminent orthodoxy J in preference to that of heterodox expounders , who would have disarmed him of his first prejudices , and half his subsequent arguments , against revelation P When , in his' Statement of the Question , above cited , he speaks of the facts which < at present peculiarly bear the name of the Christian religion , ' are we to infer his
acquaintance with the historical addition of the Trinitarian mystery to the simple truth ? As he cites ( p . xxxvi . ) Horsley ' s tracts against Priestley , in a passage expressly devoted to the controversy upon the acknowledgment of our Lord's divinity by the disciples , he must know that there are two views of the matter , and he might , and ought to have become acquainted with Priestley ' s writings as well as those of the * grave divine . * When quoting the character of Jesus , as given by Dr . Pye Smith , he observes that due allowance must of course be made for the exaggerated medium through
which a pious Trinitarian contemplates the object of his adoration' ( p . lxii . ) ; one might almost suppose his words to imply that the Unitarian medium is the correct one for a Christian to adopt . Yet he has in his definition , and throughout , taken the orthodox exposition as the naked Christian truth , without reserve , or accommodation of his argument to the very different view which he kilew to be held by many Christians . Is this candid ?—Is it just ? —Is it not more worthy of the man who covets victory , than of one whose single aim is truth ?
We must , however , proceed to a more particular exposition of the author's theory respecting the origin of Christianity , and point but such objections as seem to lie against it , without further reference to the above topics of complaint . His discussion of the historic question is easily separable from all those considerations ^ though they appear not to have been without their weight in deciding
his own estimate of evidence . Putting away the prejudice which involuntarily weighs against the Gospel , if considered as a system of mystery and contradiction , we may find the balance , perhaps , to be , in fact , on the opposite side . His hypothesis of the human origin of Christianity is , in his own words , as follows : —( see Introduction , p . xxi . )
* In estimating the character of the writers of the New Testament , there is one fallacy which runs through the whole argument of all divines ; with them the question consists but of the following alternative ;—either , say they , the Gospel writers were honest men , or they were impostors ; they either delivered the truth , the whole truth , and
nothing but the truth , or the tale they put forth to the world was an entire fabrication . They have been blind to the fact , that in human nature , especially when it is strongly influenced by religion , there may he a mixture of true belief and delusion , and of honesty and imposture in the same individuals . 4 their eagerness to make out a case , Christian advocates would not see that Jesus , in character , conduct , and doctrines , instead of
Untitled Article
778 : Orthodoxy and Unbelief .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Nov. 2, 1832, page 778, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1824/page/58/
-