Richmond Indiana palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1837-1839, 1837-07-15

= .ssa.a DynoSp's EssASs % HesA'
Awsn. .vsr.I days sea ses'mpaaisd VII" com
Rxs~-er;s. hsvs psssssd v" % '"' "
ssn .~ssas; and an sn~s NJ >" We"
ase~-.~..a, sessinsnss, shas 1 Intend 70 give
1hs-..Afax Thsss ssnsssns arc NOS nv
IN 49, = -, ~ onsy By sssn 'n'nns'e
- ~~usa, ssd slsgancs Of d'e"oa - II
~ 49, = which sbsy are eonveyso ..,,.,
sAssss n RI. . e;ass, aware Of bis Strength o.s'
sOD - -s- .dd His il mt bs tread o. dooos;
sssAese - sAssiy sep Of eon6ds"e'- Inc a"-
0snS s-ssA-as. snd nember OF the 500 "
~ ~e .. -. ,spsbiishsd in 1894 in New hofA'
Fhss -. spd edited by clefgymas "a
- w....r,y a shs editor, as il il d'p'A''a ;"
aV' - .~sshs attached TO the boo1, -
He 10 frank and eamess >" ~"
~. ss;ecsicns u cersain opinions .. VIC -.
1900 hat ugly pass'on' 'se ~. ;,h
..-;.,... sbe pages of religious "nsnss' "''"
q ss''s .-. -. most ssssissnt Of these objections
avSs " - - article. Coincding as do,
-. esssssssd point, cannot but feel de- !
n: - sbouId prevail; for not only CONSIDER
-. I bsIie,e sbs difference between the author
- !, \, more important than the editor seems
wiu.s = slo~.
II an. readers of the Palladium ready TO
.:.. me- a little way into tho metaphysical sea,
,.d Of s,sir eompany for such are it, depths, that
- hing for oysters be mistaken for pearls, and
>Nd ~
~ unfortunate fancy see clearly, hope the
- .;.;.u of nv companions will set me right.
.eo. At issue very plainly stated by the editor:
-..cd will of God, make the distinction be-
go scd WRONG in regard to moral conduct, or docs IT
-, I.s,,e itrs I will proceed 70 quote his opinion,
~: ,,,,enss with as much brevy as justice TO ms
-, iii admit ave find it difhcu says ne, 10
$3.50 ish our author regarding The simple e1Pfess'on ~
~. gsuine vM a. the ultimate standard oil fsht ana
"For while agree with him. that the
neassd will of God, is the grand e1Po"fof OF human
.v Il ~sly does from it, supremacy IN this
.e, N saw tina. this will not in itself the eo"s"t"ts
es,se Of moral god and evil II right ana wrong are
a,or wha. actions ere themselves, then what
, they are they are such by decree, power but
by nature necessity. In tbs demonsasive Sciences
b.,sver triangle a circle that il IS unchanscaby
And essruay il depends upon will power, whe'ner
.s three angles triangle shall be equal to two right an
le, or WHISTLER diameter and circumference Of circle
,h.I be iucommenurablc. So Of moral good and evil
We zee not how will Of any being can render any thing
morally good aud obligatory which was not so anscceden',
and from eternity, any action morally right, which Il
absolutely in issc.'
lam aware question involves ncomprehensbili
Ges We that truth existed prior to tn
Author all things: conceive whom it did no
sxss Bu, this, think mus. BIS granted: God has mad
nalufc pure exactly what i, is and tina. which
s,m been from the beginning, according to his rit
This being admitted, appears the of the solg
sion easy. .4bsfrset truth is noneny: Before tn
triangle formed conceived, the arions arising out
could not have had existence; but cen conceived,
and s Attendant axiom be imagined have existt
from eternity. Moral good could have existed befo
soral beings. The law that thou shall, not murd
could rr'ro"ndof, anterior she s'""'o
oasliecut bsnss. Truth, far as can see, must
v.ys be attached something as said before, It cam
exist iependenAy; il is tefmo relaf'on not mn 9bsofo
ssn Thea course, all s,sbsfanccs having had bss'
sins truths arising modes of the substances 'hel
eivss, relations among these substances might ha
been could have been TO the sus'rase
and mus, have been according Divine ,r seeing
created tho arranged their relationship
truth, that God mercfil; there have been
time, when this truth for surely, anterior
creation Of objects Of mercy ordinary of Language
admit Of our saying He mercifu. The solar rays
lusinous, il another truth: but it had beginning
hAi them N origin, preecpfs cannot be eternal
fore the creation Adam, there could have been
cent: bsfrc tho crclioa Of Eve, there could have been
moral obligation Bu, if understand the tenor of the
,a,oc, have n,ads il IS tina. necessity Of the pres
stats Of things independent Of the tor, and that Ill
far subservicns be bound conform His
thereto ny declaring his what uncon tro
bile necessity requires: he is the "eTpoSfor' and not
Consolidating eans." For he says, actions are what
are nss by will dcrcs power, but by nature and
eessy.' Now have underworld 70 show, this very
the result of Divine uiH and porer Thusit vii
advocate the old fashioned doctrine that al
proceeds from this source and that is necessary chat M
ing but truth should flow from it, for the reTy reason
Gods wiH is such IL true, disc usng this doct
ofpocessity VIC may involve ourselves in iEexricahe
eues; but shall avoid cniaagns myself in this part
the question, by taking my stand upon the grouhd that
necesssty has its origin God.
The editor expresses wish that excellent auth
these Essays' had s.assucd that the preceps of Rev
ton obligatory, merely because they have eman-
from the highest authority i'll the Universe, but because
command that which in its intrinsic nature, eter
Iy and immu;ably birding.' Now Cannot compreh
how that which is cterriaiiy binrg have relation
any other than eternal being bu, being of
duration, all precep all moral obligation have
'ssefce- subsequent his creation. These preccpts
"s'gnasd, may be endless but canno, be eternal. I'm
d'aseiy after the above qIotao the editor makes the
lowing remarkable obsorvation sit is surely import,
says ne, ito establish far possible the identity of
"etascs AND promp:ings Of rational nature,
"meh understand him uncon.aminaseu
'feI with those nj the revealed will Maker, and
10 nSscFate the force of law, of the il
nal CONVICTIONS of our Breasts Now doubtless,
convictions are themselves, IN, law wri,,en in the hi