| Show conspicuous inexactitude A concise dictionary of religious knowledge is to be published by an eastern firm for the alleged purpose of diffusing correct information on religious auba acts it contains an article on mormonism whitted by professor whitsitt it is so erroneous that it has excited the animadversions of the Campbel lites or disciples and one of their papers the christian chrisman Boan evangelist geM published in st louis thus discourses upon it the editors doubtless expected prof whitsitt to write an historic sketch instead of this he has betrayed his trust and made a feeble effort to trace the origin of mormonism to the disciples and says further farther that the book of mormon is a book of disciple theology anin again and again hel heco comos mua to the C charge of f course sydney rigdon igdon is the disciple divine who says the philosophic whitsitt edited the book of Mr he was the redactor Ted actor do you want the proof here it is abundant clear and convincing I 1 prof W says that no one but a disciple dimne could coul dhave have edited the book I 1 1 1 1 now dare any one deny such overwhelming testimony 1 1 I 1 if bill nye had written the article for a comic pa paper r it would have provoked laughter 11 out ut one after all QUI hardly conceive that a theological theological could turn humorist 99 the next attack you make my friend dont hide yourself behind the breastworks of a respectable dictionary and vitiate what would otherwise be a respectable spec table book there are two things in this connection which seem strange to us and we believe they would appear in the same light to all candid persons who would take time to think on this subject one to is that editors and publishers of books and papers designed to convey correct information will continue to go to antl anti mormons Mor mons for explanations of mormonism and thus make sure of obtaining something at least colored with the antagonistic views of the writer if not dot a 8 totally incorrect exposition of the system treated of and the other is that these auti anti mormon writers persist in repeating the untruth completely exploded years ago that sidney bigdon wrote or edited the book of mormon it would be just as reasonable to apply to an anti evoret ret society fanatic for a dissertation on freemasonry free masonry as to engage a preacher of any orthodox sect to write up mormonism in the first place there is not one of them that understands the subject in the second place most of them are so charged with hostility to it that they are incapable of dealing with it fairly it has been established beyond reasonable doubt and successful dispute that sidney rigdon knew nothing about the book of mormon until many months after it was printed and published and no one who has carefully examined the book could rationally come to the conclusion that a preacher and writer with the scholarly attainments of mr bigdon had anything to do with its compilation it is certain too that even if the book is of human nit was not produced under the influence of any so called disciple or for the doctrines it contains are oppose opposed to notions entertained by that body and are am far in advance of its theology as well as that of every other religious sect in chri mendom if publishers of encyclopedias and dictionaries and works of religious reference desire to make their books reliable they will treat the mormon question in the same way they would treat other questions that is go to the recognized and authorized expositors expository exposi tors for explanations of mormon principles and a relation of Mort mormon now history and give both as thus obtained unless it cau can be proven that auy anything thing so stated is contradicted by known facts there has never been a book written or sermon or lecture delivered by a pronounced anti mormon but was a mis sf ament either of incidents or and was imbued with a spirit of conspicuous inexactitude |
