New-York daily tribune., 1845-01-24

, That sio te1et which afiTIns the literal rsari-
NATION OF ihe identical and unchanged body OF onr
iCrd OF lac third Jay. utterly unenhhle fIoil ;He
ieci The, the texts which are usually relied on IL
proc! oil That position at variance with oihsf
texts equally iuF;ysd, which enforce upon Us the
contrary belief. The difficulty on the common view
IL that makes no authentic provision for the sUb
| seque?t change by which the terminated material
body OF Christ was changed 10 the glorious spiritual
h2dy which tbG Gass OF Christians suppose him nov
iDpossess IN hesTen. As TO his assuming such body
IN trcRSitu, IN tGc 7ery crisis OF his ascension, cca
only say OF il, present, that this is
OF inerence, snd not OF revelation. The Sacred Re-
cord contalna not syllable which atirms it. and no
ran has right 10 claim his inference be true, and
10 condemn mine as iase because il differs from his.
re real Point in question is the validity OF the
grounds on which our respective infcrences are
built
3. That the ususl sense put upon the phrase "end
OF the world, Gs implyiog the physical confi,sra-
ton or destruction IN any way OF the globe which
We inhabi is entirely contrary 10 the genuine i'm
pori Of the wordsghat i;uvolves The sacred writer's
in chaos OF contradictions, and that that doctrine
he .ue there is no possible alternative between il
and The the theory of MierisE, except perhaps in
regard to the precise day or year.
These positions, repeat, stand ready 10 defend
ct any time, before any audience, and il asy inEn.
ner that may be proposed. | cannot, of course, be
unconscious thar ,he stand which thus profess N.Y.
seit wiling 10 takeis that will expose TO hard
constructions the part OF many devout minds Ihat
have settled down in the firm persuasion that pre-
cisey the opposite doctrines, under each OF these
heads, are the true ones. Nevertheless, have
not spoken " "unadrisedly with my lips" | know
'what say, and ''isreot afim." And aver also
that the holding these positions is, in my own
case, connected with the profoundest reverence for
The word Of Coo. 10 the study and exposition OF
which my life Is devoted, and that nothing but
high regard for the nonoF of ;bat word could induce
Ere 20 thus peril N? own reputation in the advocacy
OF interpretations hch am well aware are 81 vs-
rance With the general pre- conceived notions oi the
Christian world. How far the public discussion Of
these topics, in the manner suggested, would sub
the best interests Of religion, is another ques
fion, on which ri ght myself share in the doubis o
discreet minds. But as my own sentiments are ar
ragnej under circumstances which sfford me no op-
poHunity Of reply, cs they are held up TO the odium
o large congregations, pandeTing 70 the interests
Of ipiieli,y, while the fundamental grounds on
which they rest arc almost entirely biinked, nc
other alternative seems left 10 me than that which
have row proposed. II is evident that the trne
Issue resolves itself iu,o question of the principles
on which the or0ci-s OF inspiration are 10 be inter
preied-whether tie meet reception of their doc
jTinas involves The surrender Of our reason in re-
gard 20 points which come legtimateiy within The
sphere Of scientific induction, or whether we may
sill be philosophers, while profess ourselves
believers. There uy5 certainly very few questions
more entitled 10 consideration than this.
Very respectfully, ycnts. &C., g;
2. S.-I would hy 70 means object TO making he
above lonics the lhere Of short series OF lectures
il any mode could lie devised by which could be
sacuIed Ceainst pscuniary sacrifice, which am an
able &c iEcar. &. Il.