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
His first argument stands thus ( 26 , 27 \; Y " I know / ' says he , e' that trie Bible was written by the prophets , apostles and evange - lists ; but I will add , that you do not know this : I mean , you
assume the fact , without having the necessary grounds for your opinion . Again , I know that these writers , who , however holy , were still men , and subject to human infirmities and passions , wrote their books under the immediate inspiration of-God ' s spirit ; but you have no sufficient reason for asserting this- Lastly ,
I know that the books themselves have not in the lapse of ages ^ suffered any material alteration ; but you cannot consistently assert this . Do you ask me my grounds for these positions ? I answer
you , I have the testimony of the universal church , who alone is competent to vouch for the facts in question , namely , for the authenticity , the inspiration and
the integrity of the several books of Scripture ; which testimony you reject as false and spurious . For observe , dear brethren , that the same uniform tradition of the great catholic church , which tells you that the four gospels were
written by the evangelists , whose name they bear , under the influence of inspiration , and that they have not been corrupted since they were written , tells you , with equal positiveness and unanimity , that there h a living , speaking tribunal in this church for interpreting them ; in other \*> rds , that she herself has authority to decide in all doubtful
* We almost doubt , whether Dr . M . has read the invaluable chapter on the authenticity q £ the . N . T , in the first volume ofMichaelis * Introduction . ( Marsh . )
Untitled Article
matters on the sense of the divine oracles /' Our answer to this reasoning is short and plain . We admit ttfese several points ^ not simply on the authority or testimony of any man
or body of men , ( though it is observable , that reputed heretics and even early enemies , as well as the mass of believers , ' have given their suffrages in favour of theauthenticity of the Scriptures , ) but , further , because in the books themselves we discern marks of
authenticity , inspiration and integrity . We know that certain writings , purporting to be Matthew ' s , Mark ' s , Luke ' s * John ' s ^
Paul ' s , &c . are their ' s , on the same principles that we receive the histories of \ Xenophon and Livy , as the productions of those authors . * Does thisV admission
imply , that the Romish communion is the universal churchy the great catholic church ? Or , even if it involved this concession ,
would it thence follow , that she has a sovereign and exclusive right to interpret the Scriptures ? Can Dr . M . imagine us to be ignorant of the distinction between
a man ' s testimony to a fact , and his assumption of a prerogative ? Do we judge on the same grounds of the validity of both ? What , although vie believe that the books which the catholic church
delivers to us are the genuine records of revelationj must we , of course , believe her when she tells us , that she has authority to explain them ? In each of these instances we are determined by evidence : in the former it is sal
Untitled Article
lleviezv . —Dr . Milncr ' s Consecration Sermon . 130
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), March 2, 1810, page 139, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2402/page/35/
-