Show IN our layt last weeks week I 1 a paper i editorial headed AM methodist eth odist odish preachers sophistry in the third paragraph aph of that article in reasoning upon the th marriages of abraham abraha tu and lac jac lacob jacob ob we are made to say and jacob obeyed him and still lived in polygamy poly gainy garny and afterwards had polygamous offspring what absurdity therefore to quote the angels calling israel the head as an evidence against polygamy 1 ac now we think our readers must have read this latter sentence and thon then read it again without having the least idea what we meant for it is entirely irrelevant to the subject under discussion gewere we were alluding to dr newman having used the augers angers words when speaking about maeland Ish ishmael and aud calling him the lad as an evidence ahat chat he was not recognized as the son of abraham and we wrote what what absurdity there thene therefore fore to quote tha the angers calling Is ishmael the lad aa as an at evidence against polygamy yip the printer substituted ed israel fo for r ishmael ana and an d the he headd adinor for fon the ad 0 O our reasoning as incomprehensible and ridiculous aa as that of dr newmans NeWman New mans mana li whose sermon we were to |