Richmond Indiana palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1837-1839, 1838-08-04
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES
Enr Nlc R.cLmand RnIta.i;;,Ir

tirely bafiled,' and Of IL determ,n1,on Ito go no
turiher,'' do no; know One thing is certain;
he has not as S. L. has done. concluded to .sdrop
the controversy ! have had no disposition to a.
bcndon the hc'd there Is nphing 10 j rS'iv such
an inclination on my pari. However, S. u. t!it.
..able' and bold ..deilndcr'' Of certain dorrintl
points. concludes he must 70. and he bids me
'.farewe:" but shall hoi hin by the hand Il few
minutes, while bring some things II his renein-
bsance; and then h. may depart IN peace and
be gathered 20 his fathers
1t will be rccollected by those who have fell an
int crest in these ESSAYS, that $. T. commenced an
attack upon me, by The charge Of infidc!ity the
rcader knows how he succeeded in sustaining this
accusation. Certain doctrinal points being nci
dcntaily brought before us, he stepped forward
with Il right worthy gtscpnade, that he was '.rea-
dy and able 10 defend them; but he must FIRST
have me to admit the Bale IS siccisiue evidence"
IN these matters; this admission was prom1uT
granted hun. And now, finding that the Bible is
likely to prove be .'dccisire evidence agains;
him. he concludes it was not Eat which he want,
ed; he cannot get along nor without .Sprevious
acquaintance with II. X. Perhaps it the
,cant Of this ..prcrious acquaintance with tho wr-
teri or his principles that led him to make The at
tack in the first place. But how this .prcv ious
acquaintance is To brighten his understanding,
or add force To his arguments, we are left CON
lecture ;. u. once said: '.wth RE, the Biblc IS
tho Judge that ends the strife. when mt aud req
son fa.n lie knows best whether his ,cit aud
reason faiicd before he res,rtcd 10 the Bible; but
wit, reason, AMI the Bible failing, he now needs Il
..previous aeguantancc.' This is necessary |
suppose, to enable HIM TO 'opcn the arguLlent'--
But must turn TO my subject.
And first, respects reason specializing ;ibo::t a
revolution, have no wish 10 add To what have
already said that subject; but as S. Z. has at
tempted in his last article, to preVaricatc, shalt
revive his original assertion, and the substance Of
my remarks upon IT, He stated certain "pin-
ion to be ga pnre rrrri1tion; and il this
squire rcreidtion,'' this thing which clearly
rereaied, that 5. u. said reason might speculate
about. II needs no ihscroscopc to sec this mon
strous absurliv. 70 modify Of s. L. SINH
lies this absurd sentiment disappears before the
truth like snow ball in a heated oven.
lam very fur f.om hl"ing ''abanloncd" the al
legation t,lt tho scriptures not the Sword OF
God;'' and that they do not pretend to be his
Word Letnot ;. L. suppose that because took
no notice Of hts last arguments on this topic that
they wero therefore unanswcrab!c; arguments
arc often unnotced, because of their tMi!Hy.
have exposed the profanity of prostituting the
term Sword of God,'' by applying it to any rri-
tings whatever: and not the profanity only, but
the righteousness of it also. have also shown
from the scriptures themselves, to whit they APP
apply the term Word of God. All $. US. biblical
quotations, have nothing to do with the title Word
of God although should believe all the ,cords in
can aver that this would make them the Word
which is God himself, is declared in scripture.
See the ninth paragraph of my fourth essay. In
reply TO 5. Us. italicized query, can say there
Is no .shigher authority he found for any COM
munication, that the inspiration o! God but this
does not affect the question under discussion
Had he not already exposed his ignorance OF
the spirituality OF the christian religion, should
be astonishcd at the contents of his second para
graph shoni like to know what difference he
establishes '.bctwcen Judging the evidence whl:',
proves the scriptures from God and sitting as
censor what tho. contain" II. r.a ..t-cc.! =
acknowledgement Reason may Judge of the evil
dcnces OF the scripturcs;' and what woul: he have
to sit ''censor on what they contain? Reason
surely; for he says he has no 81 ght" within him
nor the 'sspirit Of TRUTH And when treason
fails" the Bible is his 'Julge'' of the Bible; the
Bible sits as censor upon itself! And by the sim
ilitude OF Il letter from father TO his child, 5. u
plainly avows that to the Bible she IL perfectly
unable to kao,c the truth of It's contents although
j, is, as he says rereiatioa. He must first by
some other, he tells US not hor, 'know
the character of its author;'' he must have sor
Of "prerious acquaintance" with something else
before he '.know the truth OF its contents.
Ike is strangely cntangled here 1t is all rercal
ed, and yet do not .'anotr the truth of its con
tcntsr' We must look around for something TO re-
real the "tru,h of lis contents" which is '.rcrea
ed" Let us pursue S. U. through his dyoll route
he reads in his Bible, that it is given by inspira
ton; how shall we knor j, saysS L.? Why, h
answers, by interroga,ng the Bible, and know
ing the character of its author. He asks the Boo
whether it is the product of Inspiration. Oh. We:
says the Book Very well, says S. [. lie the
asks the Book again who is its author 5. Y. hear
the satisfactory reply and cNclaims Very concl,
sive! The Bible Is the only '.Judge." l col
ceive there is much more certain way of ties
ing the truth of scripture; even the 'maorc SUI
word Of prophecy" the fountain tselfof the Bib
In his next paragraph S. U. says few of II
"hirelng priests ever received 1000 acres OF laI
tor their great labors in the ministry Geo f,
did" Does S. u. think he en- impose upon h
reader, such malicious misrepresentation
this? He is grievously mistaken if he does
There is no better way OF exposing S. Us knav
nv than by a narration of the truth, rs it stan
recorded in Clarkson's Life OF Penn. vol l, y. y
Soon after VIM. Penn obtained title to the ari!
crncss Of Pennsylvania (or Observes it was n
just in the ricinityot' London that George Fox
ceived a gift ola 1000 acrcs) while he was e.
ployed in ''marlling on, townships and laying Q
lots, he did no, forget his venerable fric
and companion in the ministry. George Fox.