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

    had no right to interfere with opinions in matters of religion ; that if Christianity had been assailed by foul arguments , they should have been repelled by fair ones , and not by the

    Attorney-General ; and , that the antidote might have been circulated b y the same means as the poison was administered ; for , if Christianity cannot be supported by fair and sound argument , it cannot be worth defending . —That Christianity gives no support to persecution for

    religious opinions , I should imagine no rational and enlightened Christian will deny ; but what may be clear in the abstract , is not always reducible to practice ; arid an important question presents itself in the present case—Was it practicable ? I firmly believe not ; and therefore think that Government has exercised a sound discretion

    in preventing the impending mischief , and thereby preserving the public tranquillity . But let me not be suspected of wishing to enter into any political discussion , or of defending the conduct of Government in all the measures they have adopted for the purpose . For , as far as I can judge , the same

    good ends might have been obtained without recurring to the severity of the late-enacted penal statutes , whereby the liberty of the unoffending part of the nation is so much abridged , and by which Government have drawn upon their own heads the severe

    condemnation of the more enlightened and judicious part of the nation . But my object is not political , but to shew the impracticability of convincing * the Unbeliever in the Christian religion by argument .

    In the first place , of what use could it be to discuss the subject in cheap publications with the labouring classes of the people ? They are neither from education nx > r inquiry capable of understanding the subject , o : c at all . fitted to unravel theperpiexities in which it is involved . Their belief in

    Christianity goes no further than a belief in some of the discordant doctrinea they have learned from their different teachers . It is only then to the wellinformed , and enlightened objector to th

    e Christian revelation that argument could jb § applied , and his rejection of Christianity does not arise from opposition to it in its native purity , , ( for in this state it has never been proposed to him , ) but ? to its corruptions and

    Untitled Article

    unintelligible doctrines , as they are professed under different shades of variety by all the churches in Chris * tendom ; which doctrines their different interpreters undertake to prove from the New Testament to be the word of God . Before I proceed to endeavour

    to convince the enlightened Theist of the truth of Christianity , instead of charging him with unreasonable prejudice , I will candidly confess to him that , if I did not believe it upon other and better evidence than that contended for by the orthodox church , I could not be a believer in the Christian

    revelation y but I hope , if he will have the candour and patience to attend to the arguments I shall offer for believing it , to produce in him the same firm conviction of its truth which I myself feel . In doing this I shall

    consider myself as reasoning with an enlightened and candid unbeliever , and shall examine his objections : for , as Paley justly observes , " the true Theist will be the first to listen to any creditable communications of divine

    knowledge . He wishes for light - his inward veneration for this great Being will incline him to attend to all that is taught by a revelation that gives reasonable proof of having proceeded from him . "

    The first objection of the Unbeliever is , that no revelation said to be from God , and received on historical testimony , can be worthy of credit , if , from its internal evidence , it contains doctrines contrary to , the Divine perfections and character as discovered by

    the light of nature ; such , he says , are the doctrines embraced and professed by all the churches in Christendom , and said by them to be contained in , and capable of proof from , the New Testament , the writers of which , they also affirm , were inspired . " Now , on such evidence , " says he , € t I cannot

    believe in Christianity . " The next objection , and a formidable one I confess it is , is , " How is it , if this revelation be from God , that , after having been promulgated almost 1800 years , there are scarcely any two interpreters or teachers of the different doctrinea which

    they embrace , that can agree upon what it does teach , though most of them contend that their own creed is necessary to . sal vat ion ? " He therefore says , that "A religion of so much contradiction , and uncertainty cannot

    Untitled Article

    Attempt to distinguish between Genuine and Spurious Christianity . 449

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1820, page 449, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2491/page/5/