Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1841-05-08
RICHMOND PALLADIUM.
CON- UNIC Alto Ms.
For the Richmond Palladium.
THE uIRELINGS.

AS has told US, her chief object in making
''brief rejoinder,' to give the pubic, as tar
practicable, ian impartial view" OF The ma''er
under d scusston; and, as in her last commuhica-
ton, she informs US that she dismisses me SUD-
iect, il cannot be expected That she VIII take any
notice Of Q's subsequent remarks Although |
believe Il is capable Of routing whole battalion
Of priests, on "pay for preaching" yet as Qs
outrage against reason, and his daring perver-
sons Of scripture. will go unanswered, as far as
she is concerned, l ask the privilege Of exposing
them.
The reader will please 10 turn back TO Q's
charge against z for mu,a,ing tho scrip,ure;-
and then consider what it has resulted in. 1t APP
pears tina, acknowledged error of the press in
adding a letter to = word, by which rs argument
is rather weakened than strengthened, is the Of
fensive mutilation Ii is a bad cause that needs
such ehicancry as this. q further says, both he
and the printer charged with making the
blunder: this is false; and sther unbecomng one
who processes to be a minister Of the gospel
But says q, she '.substituted long word for u
short -: that is, she said better dispensaion,
instead Of better covenant For, counting
the letters in each word, q finds ,ha, dispensaion
his more letters in it than copenant; and there
fore concludes that has smuiilated" the scrip
:urs; that is, taken away some essential part
Every one should know that dispensaton and
covenant are used as convertible terms by the
writer's of the new testament. Thus ends Q's
charge Of mutilation.
/, is evident that q is "ignorant' of what con-
siitu,ss condensation, if he'does know tina, a
long word may be uscd for a short in :
Judgement, Or the subject of condensation, q
makes tho following newell enquiry: "Does there
not appear something ridiculous, no, to say i'm
pious, in talking about condenaing language which
tbs spri, Of wisdom has dicta,sd,r Paul shall
answer him: after having spoken largely 10 the
Hebrews, he says: snow Of ta5 things which we
hare spoken, this is the M" end then he pro-
seeds TO recapiua,e. Is Paul :nfamous"2 Is
he "rdiculous"7 Q's question leads me to ask
smother: if the language of tho Bible is sacred,
SO pure, SO perfect, why does q selec; part oft
and calling II his text, proceed to harangue the
people for whole hour on what it means? Did
tho spirit of wisdom not dictate enough, that
q should como to his aid TO help hin. ont' If
there is nothing ridiculous, not to cay impious''
in this, one would suppose, By Q's philosophy, it
approaches very to offciousness.
q asks: "Is the commandment, tho jewish
priesthood" Though 4 has not said tha,it was.
yet Paul shall again help O. infirmities by show
ing him how close a connexIon there was be-
tween the commandment and the priesthood
10 Heb ch. viii v. 5,he may read that the Levitical
priesthood, "had a commandment to take thhes of
the people according to the law; and afterward,
inv. l6: there arIseth another priest, "who is
made, not after the law OF carnal commandment
and then v. IS: "For there is verify Q disannul-
ling OF the commandment going before" Going
back to v. ii, we find Paul speaking directly to
tho point: "if therefore perfection were by the
LevHical PRIESTHOOD" plainly iE,pying that the
Levitical priesthood was imperfect. And if the
Law made nothing perfect; then the priesthood
psrt Of il, could not be perfect. But even Q
himself has al last acknowl lodged, that the whole
system, priesthood and all, "was so tceak not Of
itseft secure the salvation of the souls of ren."
'And." says Q, "migh, i, no. be asked, are the
pouple now admitted into the hottest Of all? Is
that sacred place on earth ard among men! This
has parallel bu, in MoFmonisrn" z did no,
say it was place, although Q is evidently so
ignorant Of its nature. to believe ii is an out
ward thing; and talks as if tho ''firs, tabernacle
were yet s,anding.'' Into this, switch was a fig
for the time then present" vent none but the
high-prest alone. But says Paul. addressing the
h9cre"s' 'd'iHS, thaFeioFe, ofe"HeH boioHeSS
to enter into the holiest," &c, 'let draw near
with pure heart" Sc. This has no parallel.
but in Mormon:sm." says Q.
@ again enquiries "Whera is th1t more excel
lent ministry 10 be founds" Ii is not to be found
among a hirelng priesthood, whether ethical or
s,pendiarv, who receive thur thousands OF dol
lars for pretending TO preach the gospel, who
not minister without money, who build magnifi-
cent houses and call them churches OF GOD, who
kueeI upon splendid cushions ssd say THY king
dom come who show By their sumptueu.ness of
living, and their pride, tina, ,ke "mammon of IN
righteousness" 10 more their ebIcct, than the sal
walton Of men
q does no, appear think there is any thing
"ridculous. no, TO say impious,' in adding to the
verse: "Freely ye have received Il savsO: that