The Buchanan County guardian. (Independence, Buchanan County, Iowa) 1858-1864, 1859-03-17
INDEPENDENCE, MARCH 10, 1859. /

Mr. EDITOR:
Circumstances being unfavorable
for a hearing, in the usual way, (Which /
deeply regreD it seems to me that an ex
PLANTATION, or defence Of myself, or a
correction of some of the statements of
the Rev j. NJ. BoGGs, in his late lecture
would not be considered out of place in
a corner of your paper. | would not
ask this, but for the present circumstances,
and in strict justice TO myself. What /
wish to say of his statements will be in
no way considered as q reply. nor aryat-
'aentative, but explanatory of the position
l oceupy. ,r 81 agh.e y.3eEl
He said, speaking Of my second lee
ture, that the former part was occupied
with pretended history of Theological
opinions Now said nothing there, of
Theological opinions, historical or other
wise; the object of the introduction was
to +" show the philosophical growtA of the
solution OF The problem of EXISTENCE"
which was shown to have been accom-
plished by Anaxagoras, Grecian Phil
osopher, by placing an unmired lnlelli-
gence as the origin and first cause of all
things" s4a3s aaa IL,
In the second part of the lecture" =
he said, Z" the gentleman's object was 10
disprove the existence of a God" Mr..
BoGas certainly misstates me. The OBJ
jea Of the second part was to show the
character of the priori and posteriori
arguments-that they were unsound, and
had been given up by the best Theologi-
cal evidence writers of the present day.
How well succeeded, those who heard
the lecture are the best judges.
1t seemed to me to be unfair, ungen-
erous, and unmanly, to thus misrepre-
sent me, ard then ring the changes so
often or the word -AtheiSm, and accuse
me of openly advocating Atheism, when
he knew that did not advocate any doc
trine, or any idea, that / did not show
was advocated by the most eminent di-
vines of the present day. quoted Prof.
Hitchcock, Prof Chalmers, and Rev. r..
Pearson, and other Divines, as giving up
the 1oriori argument as fallacious and
assumptive. said no more myself
Does the Rev. Mr.. BoGes say that those
divines are open advocates of Atheism !?
| quoted DR.. Samuel Clark, Professor
Hitchcock, the, Rev. Thomas Pearson,
and others. as giving up the a posteriori
argument as incompetent and assumptive.
| said no more than they-I went not ont
of their own volumes. Iquoted Laurens
P. Hickok, a Doctor Of Divinity in Uni
on College, as saying that we were in
competent to know or conceive anything
of the supernatural in nature. l said no
more. also quoted him as saying that
tie Creator himself was not a subject OF
science" | said 10 more than that and
these are but two Of the many quotations
which / made. #Ht
Are, then, the best theologians and the
most eminent diyines Atheists and is
he who only, steps in their tracks to be
thus cried at from public high places. as
an Atheist, and an open advocate Of Athe-
ism
Mr.. Editor, whatever opinions may
hold. shall not shrink from the respon-
sibility of wearing right side ont but.
what opinions there advocated, were the
opinions Of those eminent diyines, who
grace The pages Of our present theologi-
cal literature. Docs not the Rev. Mr.
BooGs comprehend that in this fast age
OF scientific discovery, our notions and
our doctrines our beliefs and our con-
ceptions, are necessarily transitional and
fluctuating THAT what we believed bat
yesterday. we have to throw away as en-
roneous to-day ?-that the next scientific
issue from the press may make worthless
many Of the most valuable and most sub
lime conceptions We now so nobly cher
ish that what might be considered
Atheism nov, nay be scientific truth,
a theological doctrine, when another leaf
is turned over in The tone-book Of Ma
ture? Let US cease, then, all ungentle-
manly and ungenefous cries against each
other, and be manly.
Ever yours for free and friendly dis
cussion, J. c. DIMICK..
VINO KILLED THE PosT OFFICE APPRo-
PRIATIoN?-Some of the ultra Democrat
ic journals have sought TO throw the re-
en- IF E;lt.rer lo