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
himself * of further illustrating the Hebrew terms and idioms in question-One of the references of Archdeacon Wrangham , in this part of his Charge , ' * stands thus : Joseph , ap . JPkot ' . " He will be little obliged to his acute and learned opponent far not passing it in silence :
" Joseph , can of course be no other than Josephus , and Josephus ap . Phot , can be no other than the Jewish historian , from whose works Photius has made some extracts . The term Tpia $ , used by Josephas , struck me immediately as not a little extraordinary ; and though I knew
that some Christian Fathers had tampered with his works , I felt persuaded from my recollection of tlie passages cited by the author of the % fyrfabiblon r that the term had not been foisted into any of them . Not being wholly unacquainted with the learned patriarch ' s work , a little search
discovered to me the real author , —one Jobim , a monk of the sixth century , 'distinguished by his fanciful defence of the orthodox doctrine . I will allow what , I fear , you would not , in similar circumstances , grant to a Unitarian writer , that this wrong reference was the consequence , not of design , but of inadvertence ; but
there i& something so imposing and so misleading \ o an unwary reader , in the connexion of plural Hebrew terms , as names of Gfod , the Trinity and Josephus 9 a Jewish writer known tp be contemporary with the apostles , that I could not suffer the error , trifling as it may perhaps be thought by some , to pass unnoticed and uneorrecie& . ' ^ P . ' 114 .
We are much pleased with' the following reply to an ill-considered interrogation : 4 < You go on to inquire , Why are the names , and attributes , and works , and worship of the Divinity , ascribed to a certain character , appearing upon different occasions throughout the Old Testament ;
and more particularly appropriated by the prophets , in almost every variety of application , to the Messiah ? ' In answer to this inquiry , I must ' -be permitted to say , Produce the passages ; prove that such things as belong to the true God , are ascribed to any other than to Jehovah , the God and Father of our Lord . Jesus Christ , and the reason shall be given /'Pp . U 6 , 117 .
The Archdeacon of Cleveland appeal * to the Baptismal formula and to the apostolic benediction—nor to these alone , but to numberless pass ages In the New Testament , —as involving the irresistible conclusion
Untitled Article
of % h § doctrine of the Trinity ; upon which language p- numberless passages' ] his antagonist pertinently remarks , that it is " somewhat hyperbolical / ' and that the dignitary here displays more of the orator than of the divine . "—P . 118 .
As to the Baptismal formula , Mr . Wellbeloved ( fairly questions the propriety of Matt , xxviii . 19 , being s 6 denominated ; since there is not an instance on record of its having been ever used in the apostolic .-age . H&
explains the passage , as well as 2 Cof . xiii , 14 , [ an apostolic benediction ^ with sound judgment and learning , with perspicuity and success * —Pp . 119 —123 .
The Ven . Archdeacon inquires , c Why , with more especial reference to the second person of the Tfinitjg , do we read that the word , which was made flesh , and dwelt among us , was God , even God over all , blessed fojr ever V His question is answered by another :
Where , " the writer of the * Three Letters' also asks , " do we read , that € the word was God over all , blessed for ever * Paul , from whom this last phrase is cited , ( Rom . ix . 4 , ) fcever once speaks of Me
word ; and we Unitarians maintain , that it is not even of Jesus , the preacher of the word , that he here speaks ; but of that Great Being , whom he elsewhere calls the God and Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ , who is blessed for evermore , ( 2 Cor . xi . 31 , ) and to whom he ascYibes praise for the benefits conferred first in the Jewish , and * afterwards in the Christian , dispensation . " - —P p * 123 , 124 .
With reference to the Logos of the beloved disciple , * the Archdeacon of Cleveland speaks of the fntelligible commentary , and the brief and obvious interpretation , of the Chiirch of
England : and this -interpretutiOYi > whatever it be , for we can scarcely discern it , h 6 chooses to contrast with some varying paraphrases by Unitarian expositors . Here he lias to encounter another awkward question :
* ' Is this the interpretation of the Church of England ? for I d 6 not find that all her sons agree in . their coiriments . Are we to judge of her itfewV respecting this passage [ I John i . IQ as she declared them by the mouth of Dr . Daniel Waterland , in the year 171 ^ , . „ / ¦ » . i ' ** - i ii i » mm + John k 1 ; 1 John i . 1 .
Untitled Article
IlepUm ^ ffielltelovfd ' fi Letters to Arehdem&n Wmrtgham ^ 97
Untitled Article
vou xx . o
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1825, page 97, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2533/page/33/
-