On this page

• Text (3)

  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

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    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

    I confess , no particular force in this objection . Peter , it should be recollected , had made a boast on a former occasion , that , whatever others might do , nothing- should induce him to deny or betray his Master . " Although all

    should be offended / ' says he , ( Mark xiv . 29 , ) " yet will not / .- " thus placing his own attachment to Christ on higher grounds than that of his fcllowdisciples . In this view our Lord ' s question to Peter might have had some allusion to his former professions of attachment , and might thus have been intended to convey an indirect rebuke grounded on his late fickleness and miscarriage .

    Of the above interpretations , the first and third have been most generally adopted . The second appears to me to be the only one which suits both the context and the grammatical construction of the passage . Different minds , however , will of course be differently affected by them ; and it is possible that many arguments in favour of the first and third interpretations may have been overlooked by me in the course of the preceding remarks . If any of your learned readers ,

    Sir , are in possession of such arguments , by stating them in some future Number of the Monthly Repository they will oblige your occasional correspondent , O . P . Q .

    Untitled Article

    Sir , AT the conclusion of the Book of Psalms in the Septuagint is the following : " This Psalm was written by David , when he fought with Goliath , and is out of the number : ' I

    was the least among my brethren , the youngest in the house of my father . I fed my father ' s sheep . My hand made the pipe , and my fingers formed the viol . And who told it to my Lord ? He is the Lord , he heareth . He sent his messenger , and took me

    from my father ' s sheep , and anointed me with the oil of his anointing . My brethren were fair and great , yet the Lord did not take pleasure in them . 1 went out to meet the Philistine , and he cursed me by his idols . But I , having seized his sword from him , cut off . his head , and took away reproach from the sons of Israel . '" How is it

    that this has not been put in the Apocrypha ? Does the following account of the additions in the Apocrypha to

    Untitled Article

    the Books of Daniel and Esther seeifc probable ? In the Hebrew copies of those books we find , that under the Persian monarchy , the king could not revoke a decree which he had once signed . This seemed very strange to the inhabitants of Alexandria ,

    livingunder a very different government , and very ignorant of the ancient Persian customs . Some of them , there - fore , boldly wrote another account of the circumstances of DaniePs being thrown into the lion ' s den , in order to evade the difficulty . This appears to me to furnish a very strong internal

    proof , that the Books of Daniel and Esther were written during the continuance of the Persian monarchy , as otherwise this very remarkable custom would probably not have been mentioned in them . It strengthens this argument to observe , that Josephus in his history of Esther , and Racine in

    his play , have both committed the error of making the king revoke his decree , which shews the high probability that an historian who has given a correct history of these transactions , must have lived while the custom was

    still in existence , that is , before the destruction of the Persian empire . This is of importance , because , as the Book of Daniel certainly contains prophecies of events long after the destruction of the Persian empire ; if it were written before that time , the

    divine authority of its prophecies , from which the truth of the Jewish and Christian revelations may very easily be deduced , is an undeniable consequence in the opinion of T . C . II .

    Untitled Article

    81 it . January 12 , 1822 . A 8 you have inserted an account of a conference of the Emperor Alexander with three Quakers , Vol . XVI . p . 701 , I send you what I take to be an equally authentic narrative of a , less formal conference between Peter

    the Great , the founder of the Russian Empire , and two respectable members of that Society , in the words of one of them . If you think lit to * fcfcept it , your readers will see that this ancestor of Alexander was so far from

    affecting to adopt the peaceable principles of the Friends , that he inquired of what use they could be in any kingdom , seeing they would not bear arms aad fight ? Yet this conference se ^ as

    Untitled Article

    78 Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament .

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1822, page 78, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2509/page/14/