On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
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
2 ?«?* Vw ? , ' — - ^ Laurence on Griesbachs Greek Testaments . ISQ ¦ ' ¦ . »
Untitled Article
with deference , though not implicitly , to the authority , oT a scholaf whose learning , time and faculties were principall y bestowed on this department of tfceoTbgy .
* It seerris , " says Dr . L . p . 5 , €% that no new weapon of Unitarian warfare has been obtained from the critical arrhoury of Griesbach , which once gtittered in tfte latitudmarian eye with so much promise , ; but that the integrity of the Trinitarian text , in
every undisputed passage of Scripture , remains precisely in it ' s former state uuattacked , and perhaps we must now presume unattackable /* On the degree of taste in which this period is composed , we are silent .
It is rather within our province to remark that Dr . L . misapprehends the nature and the state of the Unitarian controversy . In proof of there being only one God , even the Father , we
appeal to the whole tenor of the Jewish and the Christian Scriptures . Our evidence is direct and palpable , level to p lain understandings , and capable of being presented in the language of the Sacred volume . It is the Trinitarian doctrine which stands in need of * neW weapons of warfare ; " while ,
ifi the eye of it ' s advocates , the instruments of attack and defence furnished by ( he critical armoury of Burgess and iViiddleron and Granville Sharpe , ' * glitter" with a "promise" which has been completely disappointed . From Grjesbach ' s text of the New Testament " the Unitarians ** derive
no positive arguments for their characteristic tenet , in addition to those which they abundantly possessed befoTe : jrj one respect , however , and that very obvrious , it places them on much higher and , at the same time ,
in ore solid ground than their opponents ; inasmuch as Griesbach now removes from the text some important passages , which indeed he had already marked as exceedingly doubtful , yet which many Trinitarians have been in the habit of quoting with unqualified confidence . An edition of
the writings of the New Covenant , thus published by an orthodox believer and a most eminent critical scholar , which , nevertheless , renders if impossible for the advocates of the Trinity to cite without shame those verses as genuine which such a roan ljas demonstrated to be spurious is ,
Untitled Article
certainly , so far favourable to Unitarian ism . Dr . L . himself appears constrained to admit thus much ( ib . ) :
" The ancient weapons of the party have at least i * eceired a sharper edge t but those who may thus boast should recollect , that in defence of the same hostile ground , which was originally assumed by Clark \ Clarke * \ 9 Whiston , Wetstein , and others , they have merely acquired the additional support of another individual . "
It is true , the merely numerical addition < c of another individual * ' were nothing . When however we consider what are the religious sentiments of this individual , and what his critical qualifications , the acquisition is really important : and in his suffrage on such a topic it cannot be arrogant to triumph .
** All men , " observes the Hemarker , ' * are not critics ; but all men , who feel a real attachment to the religion which they profess , are alike interested in tb « result of critical investigation , when applied to an object so important as t ^ e adjustment of Scriptural readings . It is natural therefore to expect that every novel mode of ascertaining- the validity of a reading will be at first received with caution , and long watched with jealousy . ** —P . 6 .
We object not to it ' s being so received and so watched ; for Truth will be a gainer by this care and vigilance . Yet why insinuate that Griesbaclfs mode of ascertaining the validity of a reading is characterized by novelty f This , beyond doubt , is Dr . L / s mean- ' ing . But we shall soon perceive that * he contradicts himself , and with , wonderful inconsistency accuses the
learned editor of treading in the foptsteps of preceding critics . To Griesbach he even attributes other qualities which are mutually irreconcilable . On what he calls this scholar ' s " . particular hypothesis / ' we shall say little more till we p roceed to Dr . Laurence ' s second chapter . We are at a ios 9 however to imagine that it is more — _ —— .
. .- ^ ? Authors seldom misspell the name * of those of their predecessors with whose literary'productions they are familiar . WeT suspect thnt Dr . JL . is a comparative stranger to the works of the highly &a 4 jastly celebrated Rector of St . Jaipes ' s . —* tUv .
Untitled Article
VOL . Xll . 5 t
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), March 2, 1817, page 169, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2462/page/41/
-