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

    picion that Joseph was the natural father of Jestts . " The Briton acknow ledges the validity of this objection ; and proceeds to shew t&&t , if * ite genealogical tables exhibited iil tfite Gosof Matthew and Luke correct

    pels are , the account of the miraculous concejjtion must necessarily be a fabrication , but that if , on Hie other hand , Joseph was nothing more than the reputed father 4 > f Jesus , die Messiah eoufe not hare been a lineal descendant of David .

    The conclusion of the whole matter is , that , in the age in which Jesus lived , *• aa doubt was entertained 0 f Ms frying tlte legitimate son of Joseph , $ ft& that the evangelists and apostles held this opinion , and no other . * The next division of this curious

    pamphlet contains some < Further Observations on the Genealogy of Jesus Christ / ' The first ; remark of instportaeee here relates to the total dissimilarity of the names ifi the two genealogies , with the exception of -Salathiel , Zorobabel and Eliakim : and

    the consequent impossibility of reconciling them on any other supposition than that advanced in the course of the dialogue . The coincidence , as far as regards the above names , is accounted for by supposing that there might have been individuals of these

    names on both sides . To prove tka £ Luke ' s table does not refer t « the mother of Jesus , but to his father , the author ingeniously remarks that " the name of Joseph ( a favourite family appdHation ) is not le $ a than four times

    recorded / ' anti hence infers ' that the evaiigelist in assigning it to the father of Jes \ is , ( his more than p utative , his rea ^ father , ) lias placed it to the account of the , right owner / ' We are next referred to a curious inscription found by Mr . Wood at ^ Palmyra , of

    which the following I * atui version fe given from " Havfoefs Observations , " ^ Senatus pop ^ htsquc Alialamenetn , Pan ! filium , MOfcfttri nepotem , Mrmte pronepotem , ft | bft ^ fc fcJmepoTeln , et ^ raii ^ m tmtrei ^ ra ^ r ^ Wto fy * et patriae amicos /^ t oMni modo ttfacentea

    patn ^ patrHsque . att ^ te ^ ^ Oft . Annb , 450 MensfeAplH |^ ifete ^^ ife difficulty is that trailed i * ^ llfid the fatherw Alialamenes , vvho is hitoself called the son of Pa ^ us , jtt ^ at iii tlie sam ^ manner as St . Majttfa&iVy ytpM s us , ^ y ^^^ be&rt ^ ejpiks « ttid $ t . l *^ ke < j « Us Joaeph , iheaoncf&eiii V

    Untitled Article

    Tkis difficulty the atrtborCTorfcfere as fothf explained by suppmidg tbtt M&m& is the true feiher of Atiatamenes , atid Pinds ; hfe roatertial grandfather . The two geneulogical tables of Jesus , printed ^ at fuft length , hr ^ g th& part of the work to a close . « A treatise on f&Z F $ H of Adam ^ follows next in succe&sioiu ia whicJi

    the author boasts that he has elicited the prifimtive meaning of the ordinal Account . To this "Treatise ^ is subjoined ' a Prayer" * for the extension of more enlightened views on subjects connected with refigidn ^ atntf this prayer seems to have formed the

    original conclusion to the work . It is evidently the production of a pious but singularly constituted miad . The Treatise on Adam's Fall contains many curious and excellent observations ; but as our attention was attracted to

    the work by the theory advanced fesrpecrtng ^ the genealogy of Jesus , and as this , in , fact , codstitutes by far the most origiaal ai ^ d valuable part of tfee pamphlet , we must content ourselves wfth referring our Tenders ta the book itself for information an other

    subjeeta ^ to < l proceed to * an Address to tile Clergy of every Denomination relativne to ilia G ^ nealog-y of Jes ^ s , ^ which appears to have been » t $ tched tip only with the later editions . In this ** AddresB ^ the author endeavours

    to draw the attention of Ms readers once more to the importance of the subject which he has made it bis principal object to illustrate . ^ W $ sjball quote from it pne or twx > start passages for the satisfaction pf gar waders , and then close t ^ e ^ ha ^ ty ^ e ^ tcli which we have been inducedl tp jtake

    of this ingenious and sing-ular jH ^ bUcation . " * The introductory ver ^ e alone * to St . Matthew ' s genealogy of Jesus * tended hi a great measure to convince « ne that Joseph was the undoubted parent of J £ dus ; far I Wonld ^ sh to be informe d , be

    how the wowd * gehevh&otf c ^ blu tnter-^ reted ^ if he had been hid i Sutaure f « th ^ r only , a » id had u ^ act of getier&ictii tim& achieved on his part . Nor is thia all ; for had Joseph been a relatw ^>^ f such httle estmmtioti , would d ^ ; c ^ atngelist have thought { It worth ' ) iW || % taken ; su ^ 1 ^»^ "if ^ BO ^ I ^ -cli ^ r ~ i ^* * J k / d > i / . J ' . * -tt i . i -T V . J tm ' * ik » . f 1 * 7 ' % ' I tiiLLi ' i y 4 > iLi a , A * ijJ ^^ a ' A rwincnt 'WvTv 'tw < xii 6 fckmI xhicj tot me

    Untitled Article

    RemiM < .+ * Gi > t * 4 to < m 4 h * 0 emafc ^ § $ s

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Nov. 2, 1822, page 695, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2518/page/39/