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
Testament that represent Christ as a creatbr ; land we Vehtitre to say tliat ) Sc l ^ te Mr . TyrtvMtt ' s short paper ^ pdh ^ is subject ( € otttmentaries &hd 1 Essays ; It 9 , &e ) presents ** the true
key to these hyperbolical passages . if We are dissatisfied with Dr . Bruce ' s exposition and defence of his own system , we are altogether pleased with his confutation of the Trinitarian
doctrine , itf which he speaks out as plainly as the ( English ) Unitarians . In Sermon VII ., on the Pre-existence of Christ , we find the usual array of texts iii favour of the doctrine . Dr . Bruce has not examined them very critically , nor in most instances has he condescended to
notice the proper Unitarian exposition . Enjediims CExpllcationes loc . Vet . et Nov . Test exquibas Trinitatis dogma stabilin solet ) points out a more excelXent way of interpretation . We suspect Dr . Bruc $ has not very closely Studied the Unitarian controversy . He must have laboured , at least , uhde * Want bf memory , when
he wrote the following passage : * - *—€€ Those * who deny it" ( the pre-existence of Christ ) - € i are forced ^ tt the safcrie time to « expunge thfc commence' meat" ( we pass by this phrase ) * -bf * Matthew and Luke , find this without any warrant or authority from
manuscripts . " ( P . 132 . ) Is it possible that © rr'Bnice does "not < knoiv / thatP all Unitarians do not reject the introductions to these two Gospels , and that some that question the genuineness of Matthew ' s reoeive Luke ' s ! He
evidently confounds the roiracukms conception of Christ with his pre * existeiice , whereas they have no logical connexion . The earlier Unitarians made ? no scruple of admitting the former . 'Dr . Lardner has Four Discourses on Dr . Bruce ' s text , Philip . iL 5— 11 , which- our author would
have done well to consult . With these before him , he would , we think , have been less positive in some of his comments and assertions , and lie would have been spared these remarks upon
the singular passage just quoted ; for Dr . Lardner uses the language in which- the miraculous conception is stated as an argument for' the proper humanity of Christ . He says of those that hold " the Nazareaii doctrine /' that their sentiment concerning-our blessed Saviour is , " that foe is a man
Untitled Article
with a reasonable wv \ an < l " human btfdy , esj $£$% ^ rtftifed ^ Qdd , ^ Of wh 3 ch"IW 4 re ate t ^ e ; w 66 fe ^ He ivas born 6 t a wopatt . —^ A ¥ e liave an account of otir LotcPs nativity in two Evangelists , both agreeing that he was born of a virgin , and eohceithd by the
Holy Ghost , as it is expressed in the Apostles * Creed , Matt . i . 18—25 ; St . Luke i . 26—38 . Must not this be reckoned full proof , that Jesus was a man , and that it > v&s designed to reiic
present him to us ^ s sh ? fJot mad e as Adam , but borri of a woiiian , not ii \ the ordinary way 6 F generation , but af a virgfih , by the lih mediate operation and miraculotis poiyer of God . See Luke i . 35 . " * Four * Discourses .
Dis . HI . p . 4 £ , or Works , 8 yd . X . 623 . When Dir . Bruce accuses the Unitarians , of' Dr . Lardper ' s school , of ** perversion ^ arid ** distortion ^ of scripture , he uses the allowed language ( tfabi ^ h it is somewh at harsh ) of controversial theology ; but in the
folIdWrihg passage , there is a * sarcastic tone , scarcely beebming in one who courts the prai ^ df being a * moderate' * divine , atid ^ tinier the Doctor Know ihMlibly ttot ' h < B fs tight arid th 6 Umtarians vfiotigf ¦ reflecting' by possibility upoil the' Evangelists arid thfe whole scheme df diviae
revelit ^ n . " , | VYJiq jqan ^ Jiqy ^^ that the well-beloved and only Son of the Most High , the brightness of his glory , and the express image of his person , was the Son
of a Jewish Carpenter ; and ; that God manifested that tender love to the world , which is so much celebrated by the Sacred writers , by parting with this dearly beloved Sm of Joseph ; to be the propitiation for the sins of all mankind ? " —Pp . 134 , 135 .
* We are tempted to quote Dr . Lardner * s tiext paragraph : " Nor may it be amiss to observe here , that in the fore-^ ited evangelists are two pedigrees of Jesus ; one carrying his genealogy up to David and Abraham , the other as high as Adam : to satisfy tt ^ of his humanity \ and
to shew the fulfilment of the Divine promises concerning the great person who was to come , and that Jesus was the need of the woman who should bruise the . serpent ' s head : the seed of Abraham in whom all the families of the earth should be blessed , and the Son of David , in whom the everlasting kingdom promised to that patriarch should be established . "
Untitled Article
2 ^ 6 Review ^ Bru&js Sermons m Wtutfy vf Bible .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1825, page 226, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2535/page/34/
-