But suppose some one should take it into his fancy to say and believe that the Sabbath was not a Divine institution, or that “Thou shalt not kill,” “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” “Thou shalt not steal,” were mere human contrivances, and contrary to the will and laws of their God; now, if the God who has revealed these laws to us is the genuine God, would not the god who should teach these forbidden acts to be lawful be a different god? And although he would exist only in the imagination of those who believed in such a being, yet would it be any the less idolatry to worship him than it would be if a block were set up to represent him? Is it any sufficient excuse, because such worshipper acts from ignorance, or under the influence of a sincere _conscience_? Is it to be presumed that those who sacrificed their children, and even themselves, to a false god, were not sincere? Did not Paul act with a sincere _conscience_ when he persecuted the Christians? * * * * * But can we suppose that the real Jehovah would, in a revelation to man of his will, his law, recognise a thing as property among men, when, at the same time, it was contrary to his will and his law that such thing should be property among men? “Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour’s wife; neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour’s house, his field, or his _man-servant_ (וְעַבְ֑דּוֹ֜ _his male slave_), or his maid-servant (וֲאֲמָתוֹ֙ _his female slave_), his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour’s.” _Deut._ v. 21, the 18th of the Hebrew text. Would it not have been just as easy for God to have said, if such was his will, “_Thou shalt not have slaves_,” as to have said this, as follows? “And also of the heathen shall ye buy slaves, and your children shall inherit them after you, and they shall be your slaves for ever!” But Dr. Channing, speaking of the various exertions now making in behalf of the abolition of slavery, gives us to understand that the Christian philanthropy and the enlightened goodness, (and, he means, sympathy alone,) now pouring forth in prayers and persuasions from the press, the pulpit, from the lips and hearts of devoted men, cannot fail. “This,” he says, “must triumph.” “It is leagued with God’s omnipotence.” “It is God himself acting in the hearts of his children.” Vol. ii. p. 12. Does Dr. Channing mean the God who revealed the law to Moses? If so, has he changed his mind since that time?