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
mends ? . Dr . Laurence , writing ; t > e ~ r-Baps , from his own feelings , and from those of the ecclesiastical circle' in which he moves , too hastily charges en those from whom he differs in opinion the indulgence of a party-Spirit . It was an attachment to tne Scriptures , as the Scriptures , -which Obtained from the late Tespected Duke of Orafton the patronage of Griesbach ' s undertaking : this nobleman had no consciousness that the received text
would not * without a little straining ' satisfactorily entwine with his favourite tenets , and that relief must be sought from the unreserved use of the critical pruning knife . Dr . Laurence
substitutes poetical figures for simple expressions and accurate declarations . Qriesbach himself appreciated more honourably and justly the munificence of the Duke of Grafton *
But Dt . L . triumphs in his self-complacent persuasion tnat the purpose of V the Unitarians , " in patronising Griesbach , has , after all , been defeated . " What , " he asks , " has been Hie result ?" " " As far as relates to doctrinal points , tie great object of their contemplation , their hopes hare been completely
frustrated ; for nothing more was omitted in the second , than what had been exposed as illegitimate in the first edition . " In other words , Griesbach ' s persuasion that these passages formed no part of the Greek text was now stranger : tjie Trinitarian who should appeal to
them , after the accomplished editor bad produced this additional proof of flpeir spuriousness , would be adventurp iis in tbe extreme . Was it thus that tJbiJe hopes of " the Unitarians" were completely frustrate d ? vV ^ e beg our readers to compare together the two editions of Griesbach , in Acts xx . 28 , 1 Tim . iii . 16 , and
1 Jphp v . 7 ; and , leaving the proper conclusion to their judgment , we shall , without delay , p lace before them an important variation in . Matt , xix , 17-fjcre the received text is , fi jjue Xsyeig Qt , yaBoy ; ovSeif ayocQog , ei fjurj kigy o fysQ $ : this , too , is the reading in the former edition of Griesbach in the
second however they are omitted , and the following words taken into the text , - **** < fte £ p tora , $ its pi rou ocyocQov $ ki $
m "iNfcface . ' * Illustrissimus Dux— - ~ bonju-mn UtjerftTum patron us gregiu 3 » & « . "
Untitled Article
$$ * # ¦ I" fPya-Qo * . ' fthe XJnitarjans ^ in imitation of I ) r . Lawrence , dtd mq ? distinguish between ^ 30 > Bqal artel Scriptural criticism ; if they didTHi / cojifide in the impartiality as well a § > n ^ Uie knowledge ancl txpetience pf Qxiesbach , they might lament that their hopes ia respect of this passage have been frustrated : they might then , ^ susr
pect that the editor ' s avowed attachment to Trinitarian ism had updul y ^ prevailed on him to deprive them ^ of one of their favourite proofs of the Absolute unity of God . But they harbour no such suspicion : they feel no sueJ ^ concern . They honour Griesbaclfft memory for the care with which , a& an editor of the text of the New Testa *
ment , he divested himself of theological prejudices and prepossessions . Dr . Laurence has been silent concerning the verse which we have just quoted : this example of difference in the readings of the late Professor ' s two e 3 ition % might have convinced the rem arker that the regard exhibited by Unitarian Christians to Biblical criticism is en- *
lightened and sincere . He introduces Griesbach ( p . 3 ) ' pub ? licly and solemnly declaring his belief in the deity of Jesus Christ . The extract was perfectly needless . Griesbach , a member of the Lutheran
church , embraced ^ the doctrines of the religious community in which , he was educated : he embraced them , we doqbt not , with the full assent of his understanding and his heart . But this is not the point at issue between Dr . Laurence and ourselves . W ^ e are inquiring simply into Griesbach's merits as an editor of the text of the Christian
Scriptures . This is a distinct province from that of an interpreter of the Bible * It is not true that " the Unitarians" hold him in * contempt for his theological talents . " His wot % » on what the Germans style dogmatic and exegetic divinity , are little kiidwn by any of our cpuntrymen : to pronounce an opinion on them—to makQ them the subject of either our
censure or our praUe—wo , uld , assuredly , be premature . It is sufficient for u » to know that the high reputation of Griesbach rests on his service ^ as a Biblical critic , in the restricted aruf proper meaning of the term . Witinterpret $ criptufe fbr ourselves : | iut in previously asdetf 4 i | i 1 | ig what i $ correct al \ W what , * * p ttriO ^ W « thankfully employ the aid / and "bow
Untitled Article
tttl Revtew . — Laurence oif&AiWdWs &t ^ tTSri ^ ettf :
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), March 2, 1817, page 168, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2462/page/40/
-