Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1855-01-09

{ ...{ sSs i Sf.Ysssisg it, the sixth verse
9 to b sendersd mot pso<ver, but s0hot'oeusr
esddssh hanap bloc 4, as to include beasts as
6en a. mar" 4
!, But not only does our own version (made under
he authority a. King James, and by .forty-seuen
81 the most lsesned and accomplished orientalsts
in England) not allow according to the ordinary
rules of Interpretation, any other than that
which has been put upon this passage by the great
mass Of believers that have put upon ~; but
have yet to learn of single commentator who
gives a different Interpretation of it. Patrick
says &c Whose ateddeth mans blood, by man shall
his blood &c she'd; that is by the Magistrates or
Judges" Henry gathers from the passage, that
&C The magistrate must punish murderers." Scott
referring to it says, From this energetic decara-
ton, it certainly follows the wilfu murderer ought
invariably in all communities to be punished with
DEATH" Bush acknowledged to be one of the best
Hebrew scholars and commentators this country
has produced, speaking of it, remarks; ''The words
seem to carry with them the implication of the
existence of law and settled government, and that
their prominent drift is to invest the magistrate
with divine warrant for nAicting capital punish
ment upon the wilful murderer But as 1 have
remarked before, have yet to learn that one sin
gle commentator gives any different interpreta-,
ton from that given by these accomplished theo-
logians. If there be one, you MIR. Editor may
know the fact, and l therefore respectfully call
upon you to furnish yonr readers with his name.
There are two other points in your reply, but
as my object is not controversy, but to substanti
ate what believe to be the truth, trust you
anu your readers will pardon me if because of the
length of this article, defer what have to say
on these, for future article. .e.> ID. 7u37
la. tas..-. 81. oi,aesoe: .....'s CITIZEN. i
January 4, 1885,. f
The length of our correspondents communication
precludes us from answering him as fully as We
could wish, and we shall therefore be compelled
to be brief with what we have to say.
AS to our having thrown 'sthe weight of our in
tellect against the teachings of the Bible, he
states that this depends upon our being able sue
cessfully to prove that the teachings we deduce
from it, are the teachings of the Bible.'' Very
well. According to the Interpretation of our
correspondent, up to the present time, we have
not yet been able to prorc this fact; that is,
that the teachings we deduce, in favor of the
Death Penalty. emanate from the Bible, and
therefore we have not thus far sshrown the weight
of our intellect against the Word of God,'' and
our correspondent has been sshasty," in thus
accusing us. In all this he only corroborates
what we have previously said, and his admission
of our position is highly gratifying. But suppose
We do prove that our teachings come from the
| Bible, what then We have not thrown our in.
tellect against it, but the contrary have thrown
our influence in favor of it, and his remark would
be equally as unjust in this case as in the previ
Gus one.
Again he says that we s'aDirmed that men or
this subject had been led astray, by false edu
cation, &C., We beg to correct him we did no
affirm, but said we believed so and so, which al
tiers the matter materially. If we s'afirm," VI
should be called upon to prove our affirmation s.
if we merely expressed a belief, we might b.
called upon to give reasons for sur belief.
But again. He says we ssasscrt that the grea
mass of believers who are with him on this sub
ject, have been led astray by false education.''-
Our language certainly did not warrant him il
putting such construction upon it. We stated
that one denomination differed with another a
to the true meaning of certain passages in tn,
Bible (not on the Capital Punishment subject,
and ,re differed with our correspondent as to thu
meaning of this particular passage. Now il
these denominations, in expressing their differ
ence of opinion, ssthrow the weight Of their in
tellects against the Bible,'' then SO do we, ant
if they do not, then we do not, for it is
mere difference Of opinion and that is ALL
Our correspondent has the privilege to affirm jus
what he pleaecs, but he has no right to misrcpre
sent ", and believing that he has done so unin
tentionally, we leave this part of his article t.
consider
Secondly Citizen +" admits that there ar
many apparently strange things in the Bible,
but thinks that if there is sufficient evidence t,
cause it to be believed as revelation from God
or His Will, sUe are b0undt0 submit to its teach
ings, just as it unolds itself naturally and consis
tently." Let US inquire of our correspondent
that if there is not sufficient evidence to us tina
passages of the Bible are emanations of tn
Deity, whether zoe are bound to submit to the in
terpretations of others, who think there is suffi
cicnt evidence to that effect? Are we to hang on
faith on the garments of others? Suppose W
cannot reconcile our ideas of merciful and con
sistcnt God with certain passages in the Bibl
which make him inconsistent-what then? Sha
we gropc in darkness all our lives or begin to in
vcstgate for ourselves? The scriptures say, &c In
vestigate all things; hold fast that which j
good" ~....
But to illustrate his point our correspondent
remarks, -,hc Bible proclaims certain facts in tn
life of Cain and Lamech. These we are boun
to take just as they are" Very we'll then VIII
not take other passages as they are ? Admit tina
God said-ss Whose shcddeth mans blood b
man shall his blood be shed, - and that it is
command of God, why not make the sayings O
Christ equally as binding-"H He who takcth tn
sword shall perish by the sword.' In the bell G
of the Chuch was not Christ God? He it wa
then who gave utterance to both of these sayingl
What right has our correspondent or any one els
to say that the first is a command and the secon
is not? Is it not stated in both instances tha
certain results shall follow? .s.
In the twentieth chapter Of Exodus, we read
"And God spake all these words, saying.
2. am the Lord thy God which has brougt
thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the House 9