The Doubts of Infidels Or, Queries Relative to Scriptural Inconsistencies & Contradictions — Themes and Context

Ironic Dedication and Rhetorical Strategy

The epistle dedicatory frames the entire pamphlet as a mock-praise of ecclesiastical power. The author compares English methods—fines, imprisonment, pillory—to the 'ingenious machines' of the Inquisition, noting that 'mechanical and persuasive arguments are unknown in Britain.' This sarcastic contrast establishes the work's central rhetorical mode: feigned deference used to highlight absurdity. The dedication ends by thanking the bishops for their 'readiness to oppose error of every kind by argument and persuasion,' a phrase the author immediately undercuts by noting that when argument fails, 'the prison, fine, a' (the sentence breaks off, but the implication is clear).

Scriptural Contradictions as Logical Traps

The pamphlet's core consists of numbered queries that juxtapose passages from different books of the Bible. Query 29, for instance, examines the story of David numbering the people. In 2 Samuel, 'the Lord' instigates the census; in 1 Chronicles, 'Satan' does. The author asks: 'whether the Lord, and Satan, be one and the same person; and if not, which of the two was the instigator?' He also notes that the punishment shifts from seven years of famine in Samuel to three years in Chronicles. The query does not offer an answer but leaves the contradiction exposed, inviting the reader to see the impossibility of harmonizing the accounts.

Mock Theology and Ministerial Satire

Nicholson extends his critique to the logic used by divines to resolve such contradictions. He invents a parody of theological reasoning: 'if it were affirmed that Eldon is a Lord, Castlereagh is a Lord, and Sidmouth is a Lord, and yet they are not three Lords, but one Lord, this would be termed absolute and ridiculous nonsense.' The reference to contemporary politicians—Lord Eldon, Lord Castlereagh, and Lord Sidmouth—anchors the satire in the political context of 1819, suggesting that the same illogic that props up ministerial unity also props up scriptural inerrancy.

The Problem of Divine Instigation and Human Punishment

Query 29 also raises a moral problem: if God instigated David to sin, why punish him? The author's mock answer—'it is no uncommon thing for the Lord to be angry with his servants for obeying his commands'—parodies the doctrine of divine sovereignty. He extends this to the case of Balaam, arguing that 'in the commands of the Lord, there is always a clause implied or understood, which leaves it to the discretion of the faithful.' This leads, he notes, to 'the doctrines of the Jesuits,' a charge meant to embarrass the Anglican clergy by associating them with a universally abhorred casuistry.

Readers should approach this pamphlet as a specimen of early nineteenth-century freethinking satire, not a systematic theological treatise. Its power lies in the accumulation of specific textual discrepancies, each presented as a polite query that the bishops are invited to resolve. The work's brevity—around 12,000 words—makes it a concentrated dose of ironic argumentation, best read with a Bible at hand to verify the cited passages and appreciate the precision of Nicholson's traps.

I remember sitting in the university library, reading this 1819 pamphlet and feeling the strange weight of old certainty crumbling. It reminded me of evenings spent with The Grey Book A collection of protests against anti-semitism and the persecution of Jews issued by non-Roman Catholic churches and church leaders during Hitlers rule — Reading Notes, where faith itself becomes a quiet, aching question. Both books left me holding silence longer than I expected.