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

    * . 1 * 1 t I qur , 4 Lor 4 ' s immediate attendants , J \| att . x . ^ 8 . The correct paraphrase therefore of trie words , t € thy sins are tojgiveii thee , " is , * Perceiving ttiat IHbtf art aualified for becoming a friember of my spiritual kingdom , I assure thee of the pardon of thy

    offences , on repentance : and , in testifeiony of my being authorized to grant it , 'I work a miracle of healing on thy body . ' Jesus , agreeabry to his character and practice , first asserts a claim , and then makes it good by an act which no man could have performed hud hot God been with him .

    It is remarkable that in Johri xt . 4 , we have a phrase which , it may fairly be conceived , the apostle would have used had he been speakitig here of a bodily disease : < r when Jesas heard { that Lazarus was sick ] , he said , This sickness is not unto death" The

    beloved disciple , we perceiye , employs Very different language , and treats ot a S 1 t * c not unto death . Am not I entitled to conclude that the difference t > f expression arises from a corresponding difference of subject ? II . Ottthese grounds i dissent from I > r . Benson ' s explanation , of the sin not Unto death , &c . From that which

    it proposed by the editors of the " Imp roved Version , &c . " I must likewise \ vithhold my humble suffrage . ** Sin and disea&e , * they observe in their hbrtd , " wefer considered as so inseparably connected , according to the -JeWteh philosophy , that ; perhaps , the

    ttpbstie might mean fiothiti g more by the advice which he here gives , than to recomifcend prayer for the sick wfoeti the disease was curable , and to dissuade from unbecoming importunity where the rhalady was evidently infetirdble , and fatal . See John ix . 2 .

    34 , Matt . ix . 1- —8 . See Dr . Priestley inlbc . " This interpretation is so far distinct from Dr » Benson ' s that it does not proceed * cm the hypothesis of a supcrrf&tifrcil infliction bt disease being the Case tre&tdd of by John : in other

    re-$ pwt * f the two expositions are nearly identical , and lie open to the same objections ; 'Justice indeed to the Editors , Osfty required me to observe that they ptbpode their explanation * as conjectural , and do little more than repeat the wntiment of Or . Priestley ; which he has not supported , however , by any reasoning or Q uotation .

    Untitled Article

    If the otyect of the apostle ws * s simply /~ to recommewt prayer for the siclf , Scc ^ it seems reason ^ g lj ^ t ^ believe that he woujd haye expressed himself in the phraseology of James on the same topi < v . ana ' on ^ ^ milfur occasion . V . 15 , &c . Concerning tne

    passages to which the Editors , & . refer their readers , it is obvious to remark that not one of them is pertinent to the end for which they are produced ^ at furthest , they evince no i cJentUjr of language on the subjects of disease , and

    sin , but merely indicate the existence of an erroneous opinion respecting them among the Jews ; art error which our Lord discountenaac ^ ed ,. instead of adopting . The irrelevancy ^ pi f Matt . ix . 1—8 to the hypothesis qja which we are arii mad verting , I fja ^ pointed out . Whether John ix . 3 % mean any thing more than that . J ^ e individual addressed was born of sinful parents , and in a degraded ra ^ kj | s at best doubtful : the just exnlanatian

    of it , appears to be afforded \ y J ? # . Ik 5 , compared with John vii . 4 g . Even as to the remaining text , Jofuji ix . 2 ; though the question of the ^ jpciples be framed on an erroneous tepet of " the Jewish philosophy , " it ra , || ifyr proves that they assumed a connection

    between sin and certain states of fop human body than that their cprre ^ ui phraseology was founded on an Ui ^ - gined inseparable relation between , fljr sease and sin : they speak of the ma ^ n before them as being destitute a ( * me of the senses , not as afflicted with

    sickness . 1 think , witri defer ' enjCC , that the Editors , &c . have laid down too general a proposition . That it ^ e Jews admitted an universally insepa rable connection between sin and 4 i-

    sease , and that their usual language ip denote the want of sight or of ' jieaftk was in conformity with this opinion ^ -j these points are not yet establisrieg . JBoth positions must be supported ' dV

    satisfactory evidence before the interpretation here offered by the EffithtS , © V . is acknowledged as correct . vnfil III . J . G . Rosenmuller would detach this passage from the rest of fhfe chapter : and Tie takes the sin iinlh death to be 4 € a capital offence agaifiifst

    the laws of society : " MM OcpoLpria ifpog Occvaroy videtur esse crimen capitale quodvis . Pro eo , qui tale crimen cornmiserit , non vuti apostolus interces * siones Jieri apud magistrates , auibus jus

    Untitled Article

    tX > 6 On ( He "Wn unto deaili * spoken qfly the Apostle John .

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1817, page 106, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2461/page/42/