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

    of its kind , and it must be delightful to all your readers to see its veteran author again in the field , &p eminently displaying his £ re [ at powers 60 u (| gment and discrimination , witli his Wonted tactin thus

    , bringing Into oh £ < $ ? & &t \ d lucid focus the avbwed Senttinents of that great apostle of tJnitarianisni , Dr . Priestley , on a subject so highly interesting as is that of the resurrection unto life .

    At the same time , however , that the candour and perspicuity of Mr . Belsham ' s illustration of the principles of Dr . Priestley merit applause , it appears to m e , by the aid of that illustration , but too obviously apparent , that the learned Doctor's principles not only do not admit of a belter * in the resurrection of the

    body , but disown the doctrine that we shall exist In a future state ! Thus , ( in 10 , ) M r . Belshani tells us , that " upon Dr . Priestle ^* spii ^ ciple there can be no true reSiivfecJtiou but by a location of the original s ^ a > miiia in the original form . " Well , then , did the learned Doctor credit such a ic location" ? Assuredly not : for he thouglit ( 6 J , that " after death the

    Several particles are disposed of to make other bodies . * ' As , therefore , the same identical particles will , by the process of nature , form parts of many different Vodieain succession , it is most obvious that the same identical body cannot exist , in a future state . Those particles which made up the head of Solomon

    naaj have since formed part of every otfcei * member of the human body in the persons of other individuals . Inasmuch , therefore , as the same particles or stamina wjil have appertained in this life tp many different bodies , it is evident that there cannot be in another life , as to all of them , " a location of the same

    original stamina in the original form ;" and , consequently , upon Dr . Priestley ' s principles , there cannot be any ** true resurrection . " The same identical particles cannot , for example , at one and the same time , hereafter form part of the head of a Solomon , the tongue of a

    Xantippe , and the heart of a Penelope : aud , in truth , the particles which once formed parts of those members of the human bbdy , may now enter into the composition of a worm ^ or an ephemera , a mqnarcVs diadem * pr air old woman ' s 1

    pipkin ! Iteflecttorts such aja tfietee against tjie resurrection of oiir bodies ajfter detith are insurinoiintable ; by ttie' advocates for that floctrine >; Bttt witty respect to tW more Important , the mom ^ to ^ i 3 , the all-absorbing questloii—stiali we e £ isi Hi all after the death of our tiever-td - tie - reanimated

    Untitled Article

    bodies ?—shall we in our souls ? ee God ? it is a consolation to turn away from the principles of Dr . Priestley , and to believe with Dr . Price , that ( 5 ) " man lias a spirit or soul distinct from the body , " and ( 8 ) ttat the identity of the man consists wholly in identity of soul . "

    Upon the principles of Priestley , as illumined by Mr . Belsham , it seems to me utterly impossible for any rational being to believe in a future state of existence , for we are told ( 5 ) , that upon those principles " man might be wholly material : ** and , further , ( fi , ) that " the man , the conscious being , is anni < hilated by death , the several particles

    being disposed of to make other bodies , or , perhaps , parts of other souls . " Now , whoever thinks with Priestley , that man may be " wholly material , * ' and that the particles which constitute the man are disposed of to make other bodies , or parts of other souls , never can consistently feel any thing like a conviction tliai the same individual will or can exist in

    another life ; for the very same arguments which , upon Dr . Priestley ' s principles , repel a belief in the resurrection of the body , do , in precisely the same manner , disprove the doctrine of tnau ' s existence after death , or , in Mr . Belsham s Words , ( 6 , ) < c upon Dr . Priestley *^ £ riiici [ yies , the man , the conscious being , is tihtoihilatedby death" !

    Mi * . Belsham remarks ( 3 ) , tirat c < Dr . Priestley ' s matter was much the same as Dr . Price ' s spirit , i . e . extension without solidity or impenetrability '; " but , granting that Dr . Priestley did entertain such an opinion of " matter , " yet is there not any advance made bv it towards

    shewing that man may exist hereafter ,, supposing him to be *< wholly material , " as will be the case if , instead of being ^ o wholly material , he possesses , as Dr . Price thought , a spirit or soul distinct from the body . In that yvhich is' the only just point of comparison 'bh this subject , Dr . Priestley ' s matter" never can be assimilated to Dr . Price ' s "

    spirit : nor can tiie one ever approximate the other ; seeing that every thing " material" is perishable , whilst that which i 3 " spiritual" \ $ immortal , It is rather a contradiction in terms to characterize 0 r . Price's * ' spirit" as an " immaterial

    fabstatiee" ( 4 ) : and surely Dr . Priestley ^ s 4 t matter" cannot be aptly termed all " extended" substance , or be properly said tb resemble «« spirit , " if it consists of powers of attraction and renulsion , compactly surrounding each other > like the Coats of an onion ; " neither can it be u active , " for those opposing powers

    Untitled Article

    796 Miscellaneous Correspondence .

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Nov. 2, 1829, page 796, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2578/page/52/