{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_28066/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_28066","id":"gutenberg_28066","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/28066","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Journalism/Media/Writing","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Religion and science -- Periodicals","The Christian Foundation"],"text":"The Christian Foundation,\n\n                                   Or,\n\n                     Scientific and Religious Journal\n\n                              Vol. 1. No 2.\n\n                             February, 1880.\n\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nThe Influence Of The Bible Upon Civil And Religious Liberty.\nLiberty Of Conscience.\nThe Orthodoxy Of Atheism And Ingersolism, By Rev. S. L. Tyrrell.\nThe Shasters And Vedas, And The Chinese, Government, Religion, Etc.\nAncient Cosmogonies.\nSome Of The Beauties (?) Of Harmony Among Unbelievers.\nIs God The Author Of Deception And Falsehood?\nDarwinism Weighed In The Balances.\nWas It Possible?\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE UPON CIVIL AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.\n\n\nCivil government is a state of society in which men are reduced to order;\nit is a government in which every citizen has full power over his own\nrights, but is not at liberty to infringe upon the rights of others. The\ndeepest thought in the word _civil_ is the idea of being hedged around by\nrestraints, so as to be shut in from all privilege, or right, of meddling\nwith the rights of others. The Welsh use the word \u201ccau,\u201d to shut, inclose,\nfence, hedge.\n\nCivil liberty is liberty modified by the rights of others. No man has a\nright, by any Divine warrant, to infringe upon the rights of another; and\ncannot do it without forfeiting more or less of his own. This thought,\nthat a man may forfeit his rights, is as essential to proper conceptions\nof civil government, and civil liberty, as the thought that a man has\nrights; for if there be no forfeiture of rights through crime, then all\nlegal punishments are without foundation in justice; even the right of\nself-defense, individually and nationally, ceases to exist. And if this be\ntaken away, all support and strength in civil government is gone; anarchy\nand ruin only may remain. In all civilized nations a man is regarded as\nforfeiting his right, _even to life_, by trampling upon the _life-right_\nof another, and, while the danger lasts, the assailed may defend his life,\nin the absence of any other defense, even at the expense of the life of\nthe assailant. To deny this doctrine of the right of self-defense, it is\nonly necessary that we deny that a man can forfeit the right of life. To\ndo this is equal to the affirmation that God is the author of coexisting\nand conflicting rights. Such rights can exist only at the expense of the\ndestruction of all governments, both human and Divine, as well as all\nhealthy influences of social institutions. It is essential to civil\nliberty to restrain men from all interference with the rights of others.\nThe greatest degree of civil liberty is enjoyed where men are successfully\nrestrained from such officious interposition. A people may enjoy civil\nliberty without extending the right of suffrage to all ages and to both\nsexes; without making all eligible to office; without abolishing paternal\nauthority over minors; without abolishing the punishment of criminals, or\nthe right of the State to the service of its citizens when the public good\nrequires it.\n\nThe word _civil_ also signifies courteous, complaisant, gentle and\nobliging, well-bred, affable, kind. From this it will be seen that civil\ngovernment depends upon the intelligence and righteousness of the people.\nThe absence of all legal demands and all legal restraints would be the\nabsence of all government. It would be libertinism or lawlessness. The\ngreat majority of men, from the earliest ages of the world to the present\ntime, have been under the control of tyrants, and have known little\nexemption from despotic rule. There is not a single Pagan, Mahomedan, or\nanti-Christian country to-day in which the spirit of liberty has an\nabiding place. She may have brooded over them at intervals, but, like\nNoah\u2019s bird, found no resting place.\n\nThe influence of the Bible preventing the young, the mature, and the aged\nfrom crime, causing men and women to love and respect our humanity, is of\nnecessity _to the same extent_ the very life of civil government, and\nconsequently the life of civil liberty. It has been said the Bible is the\ngreat protector and guardian of the liberties of men. It was an axiom in\nan apostate church, that ignorance is the mother of devotion; but the true\norigin of this axiom is that ignorance which fastens the chains of civil\nand ecclesiastic despotism.\n\nIt is not possible for a people thoroughly under the influence of the\nteachings of the religion of Christ to be ignorant of their own rights and\nthe responsibility of their rulers. Where the teachings of Christ and the\nBible form public opinion the people must be free. No such tyrant as\nCaligula or Nero would be tolerated in Protestant Christendom. The\nnecessary effect of Christianity upon an abused people is to make them\nrestless under a tyrant\u2019s yoke. The author of Travels in England, France,\nSpain and the Barbary States, although an enemy to the Bible, said, after\nleaving the Barbary States and arriving in France, I could breathe more\nfreely. I no longer looked upon my fellow men with distrust, and I thanked\nGod that I was once more in a Christian land. When we survey the history\nof past events and kingdoms we, too, find good reasons to thank the Lord\nfor a Christian land. The only authoritative history of remote events and\nkingdoms is in the writings of Moses and the Prophets. In the times of\nMoses there were no historical records in Greece, Chaldea, Phoenicia,\nEgypt or Assyria. No other historian lived so remote as Moses. He was five\nhundred years before Sanconiathan, and more than a thousand years before\nManetho. He has been called the _father of history_. Men have claimed that\nastronomical calculations carry us farther back, but this claim has been\nsuccessfully refuted by the calculations of Bedford. There is a fact upon\nrecord in Gillie\u2019s history of Greece that confirms Bedford\u2019s calculations.\nThis man says: After Alexander conquered Babylon he eagerly demanded the\nastronomical calculations that had been preserved in that ancient capital\nabout nineteen centuries, and ordered them faithfully transcribed and\nhanded to Aristotle, who was the preceptor of this prince. They extended\nback twenty two hundred and thirty-four years behind the Christian era.\nThere is no reliable history so ancient as the writings of Moses. All the\nefforts between Moses and David are without regular form\u2014a mass of\nrearranged tradition, both fabulous and corrupt; long after the times of\nDavid the pages of writers regarded authentic, are loaded with absurd and\ndisgusting fictions.\n\nNimrod\u2019s kingdom was Babel, and he was a tyrant, instigating war and\nbloodshed everywhere, laying the nations under tribute and transmitting\nhis tyrannical spirit and powers from son to son, until the Egyptians\ndrove his descendants into Canaan and Joshua drove them into Greece. Ninus\ninherited the spirit of his father, and the history of his empire, until\nit was overthrown by the Babylonians and Medes, is a history of absolute\nAssyrian despotism.\n\nThe Babylonian Empire was no better from the revolt of Nebopolassar to its\ndestruction by Cyrus. Egypt and Persia were also equally deprived of the\nblessings of civil liberty. Greece and Rome were in no better condition\nwith the exceptions of a few restrictions consequent upon Greece being\ncontrolled by established customs and Rome by the Senate. These nations\nwere comparatively free, but their freedom did not grow out of a\ncomprehension of the rights of their citizens.\n\nThe Jewish Republic is the first ancient government where the people\nexerted any proper influence in state affairs. It is worthy of special\nconsideration that the Jewish laws were adapted to civil liberty in an age\nwhen human rights were so little understood. There is no one work so full\nof the great principles of civil wisdom as the Pentateuch and the history\nof Judah and Israel. They were free in choosing their form of government;\nfree in the establishment of their laws; free in the fact that their laws\ngoverned and not men. Their form of government was republican, with\nhealthy limitations. Twelve tribes were united in one great republic like\nso many confederated states bound together for purposes of defence. At\nfirst God was their king. After awhile they desired another king, and\ntheir form of government was changed to a limited monarchy upon their own\nrequest. Their kings did not enter upon their duties until they were\naccepted and crowned by the people, and then they were restricted in their\npower by sworn stipulations.\n\nBad men do not make good citizens. There never was a nation of infidels or\nidolaters, existing as such, in the enjoyment of freedom. Holland was free\nas long as she was virtuous. She flourished as a republic, produced great\nand learned statesmen; she became corrupt, and infidelity banished her\nglory.\n\nWhen Perrier, of France, the successor of Lafayette in the office of Prime\nMinister to Louis Phillipe, was on his death bed he exclaimed, with much\nemphasis and zeal, \u201cFrance must have religion\u201d\u2014man must be governed by\nmoral truth or by despotic power. Liberty does not flourish without\nmorality, nor morality without the religion of the Bible. The love of law,\nthe love of wisdom, the love of benevolent institutions, and the love of\nvirtue makes a people free. When these are absent tyrants are present.\nWhen a nation becomes corrupt, liberty degenerates into parties and\nfactions until the stubborn necessity of the strong arm of despotism makes\nits appearance to control the passions of men. If pride, selfishness, love\nof gold, thirst for power and licentiousness, are not controlled liberty\nwill die. It may be truthfully said that the high-toned principles of\nBible morality are necessary to the good of all classes. These, and only\nthese, will unite a people in one grand national brotherhood, wiping out\nits factions and hatred, extinguishing party spirit and bringing all the\nparts into one great whole. Many minds are so opposed to the Bible that\nthey _are_ inclined to oppose any government based upon its contents. This\nis a fearful current, and we should always watch against being carried\naway upon its turbid waters. Ours is a Christian land, and we shall be a\nfree people as long as we remain a Christian people. While the Bible is\nloved and honored our freedom will continue; beyond this there is nothing\nto hinder us from _degenerating into slavery_. All great struggles in\nChristian lands have been great _moral_ and political struggles.\n\n\n\n\n\nLIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE.\n\n\nThis phase of the question rises very high in our estimation; for we have\nbeen taught to regard the rights of conscience and to esteem them above\nall other rights in a free country. There can be no civil liberty where\nthe rights of conscience are ignored. The teachings of the Bible are\nopposed to all interference by law with man\u2019s religious faith and worship.\nReligious liberty asks for no laws meddling with the rights of conscience.\nSuch laws, whether of tolerance or of intolerance, are always in conflict\nwith the spirit of the religion of Christ; for it asks for the soul\u2019s\nfree, voluntary service. As American citizens we ask, at the hands of our\nGovernment, to be protected, in common with all other citizens, in the\nfree exercise of the rights of conscience. We ask no interference with\nreligion by law, and we apprehend none in our country. If our religion\ncannot take care of itself, by the force of its own merits, it must\nperish.\n\nRivers of blood have been offered upon the altar of a blind intolerance.\nLook at Antiochus sacking the city of Jerusalem and laying the country\nwaste. Look at the slaughter of the infants of Bethlehem under Herod\u2019s\njurisdiction. In many ages of the world religious intolerance has been the\nfruitful source of misery and bloodshed.\n\nThe religion of the Bible does not rest itself upon the authority of man;\nmuch less is it responsible for the cruel results of wicked efforts to\nestablish or overthrow it by law. Causes outside of Christianity in the\nhands of wicked men are responsible for every drop of blood that has been\nshed in the name of our holy religion. Christianity has nothing to fear in\nour country as long as our law-makers remember that their whole duty\nconsists, not in making or unmaking rights or religion, but in making laws\nprotecting all in the enjoyment of their rights. The principles of\nreligious liberty set forth in the Bible are the following: First, the\nword of God is the only source of authority in religious matters. Neither\ntradition, nor remote antiquity, nor ecclesiastical decisions, nor\nstatutes, but the Bible is supreme in our religion. Second, the Bible\nallows, and demands, the right of private judgment in all matters of faith\nand duty. This is based upon the well-defined principles of individual and\npersonal responsibility. \u201cLet every man prove his own work.\u201d\n\nThe true and intelligent Christian has always been opposed to\necclesiastical establishments by law, and the authority of the state to\nproduce unity of faith and worship. In all such matters we are responsible\nto God alone. His authority is all that is needed in order to the soul\u2019s\nown free service; and this is the only acceptable worship. The third great\nprinciple of religious liberty is this: the Bible contains the only\ninfallible standard of faith and worship, and its author is the only\ninfallible judge. The Bible gives to no man, or set of men, dominion over\nthe human conscience, but on the contrary lays the solemn injunction upon\neach individual: \u201cProve all things and hold fast that which is good.\u201d The\ndirection of Christ is in these living lines: \u201cCall no man master, for one\nis your master, even Christ.\u201d Every man\u2019s own works are the only true\nexpositor of his character, because they are the fruits of the affections\nwhich point him out as an enemy, or as a friend, of righteousness.\n\nThe man who abuses the right of private judgment has a fearful account to\nrender\u2014let him see to that. If he receives not the truth in the love of it\nthat he may be saved, it is at his own peril. The field of investigation\nis the place where Christianity has won her most splendid victories. She\nhas always lost when wicked men have called in the aid of the secular arm;\nfor it is a very great error to suppose that you can deal successfully\nwith a man\u2019s spiritual nature by such forces; it was not made for such\ngovernment. By the secular arm you may force a wicked man to be a\nhypocrite, but you cannot make him a Christian in that way; for you cannot\nreach his understanding, nor give life to his conscience by any such\nmeans.\n\nThere are two extremes, however, which we must carefully avoid: First,\nthat it is a matter of total indifference what religious principles a man\nadopts and what form of worship he prefers. The Bible contains essential\nprinciples\u2014principles which constitute the essence of the gospel of Christ\nwhich must be received, loved and obeyed, in order to the enjoyment of the\npromises of salvation. The sentiment that it matters not what a man\nbelieves, is no part of the religious liberty which the Bible inculcates.\nSuch a sentiment is everywhere discouraged and denounced. A forcible\nwriter said: Keep clear of uncommon pretensions to charity. Believe the\nlove of God, and be satisfied with his charity, and never dream of making\nan improvement upon his character.\n\nThe other extreme is to have no charity at all. There are many things\nabout which men may safely differ, but they are neither precepts to be\nobeyed, nor facts to be believed. Differences may exist in opinions, but\nnot in facts to be believed, nor in commands to be obeyed. Christians are\nsuch in virtue of faith in Christ and obedience to his commandments.\nWherever the minds of men have been brought under the power of the\nChristian religion, there they have been the devoted friends of such\nliberty. Such were the adherents of Luther in Germany, the Lollards in\nEngland, and the adherents of Knox in Scotland. Such was the case with\nHolland when her republican virtues, learning and piety, moral and\nliterary institutions made her famous throughout the earth. \u201cWhere the\nspirit of the Lord is there is liberty.\u201d One of the most erroneous\nobjections to Christianity is that it is calculated to subject the many to\nthe few, but its spirit and tendency is to bring all, both the rich and\npoor, on one common level. It pronounces temporal circumstances matters of\nno consequence, all men creatures of God, made of one blood, having a\ncommon nature, subject to common sufferings, common dependence and\nresponsibilities. It teaches us to \u201cdefraud no man,\u201d to \u201ccorrupt no man,\u201d\nto \u201clove our enemies,\u201d to \u201cpray for those who despitefully use us,\u201d to\n\u201cdisregard external distinctions.\u201d In Christ there is neither Jew nor\nGreek, bond nor free, male nor female, but all are one. The poor are\nexalted and the rich are humbled. Tholuck says: \u201cThe cultivated heathen\nwere offended at Christianity because the higher classes could no longer\nhave precedence of the common people.\u201d A religion which teaches that all\nare upon one grand level under its influences will certainly teach us that\nall are equal in the presence of the law. Christianity is not only a\nstranger to despotism, but denounces it in the plainest terms. Its great\nfounder said: \u201cWhosoever will be great among you let him be your servant,\nand whosoever will be chief let him be your minister.\u201d What greater\ncalamity could we experience than the loss of the last copy of the New\nTestament? Who would bring over the world once more the darkness of\nPaganism? Who would have our Government put on Roman character? Who would\nhave us foster the basest passions of men? Who would throw the human\nintellect back into a state of uncertainty respecting a future existence\nand the manner of securing its blessedness? Who would dry up the living\nfountains of joy which have been opened to us in the gospel? Who would\ndestroy the motive power of our religion and wither its fruits of\nrighteousness? Who would rob the bereaved heart of its consolations and\nprovoke anew the tears of the mourner which have been wiped away? Who\nwould go to the widow and say: Go and visit the grave of your loved one\nand weep without hope! Yes, weep with the terrible thought that this\nparting is to last forever! Weep with trembling, and at last step into the\ngrave with awful uncertainty, to learn all there, and never bring back the\nsecret. Who are they who would restore to death its sting and to the grave\nits victory? What victories have they ever achieved for our humanity? No\ncalculations could measure the sacrifice it would cost to part with the\nBible forever. Wicked men would toll its funeral, while the innocent ones\nof earth would bathe in tears and turn away in sorrow. Let us never\npersecute those unfortunate men who are opposing the truth of our religion\non account of the errors of the creeds of our fathers. Let us always avoid\na spirit of despotism and persecution, because it is dishonorable. If\nthere must be persecution, let truth be the victim. Error is not worthy of\nthe honor that martyrs bear.\n\nIt is better that we \u201csuffer for well-doing than for ill-doing,\u201d therefore\nlet us criticise ourselves severely, but deal with others in love. The\nBible is our authority in religion, and the civil arm is our protection in\nthe state. Religious freedom is ours\u2014may it long remain the glory of our\ncountry. In comparison with this freedom all else is mere illusion. You\nmay enjoy all the freedom that this world can give, and if you are slaves\nto sin you are miserable slaves to a cruel master. The intellectual and\nmoral condition of the soul, constituting its highest glory, is a liberty\nworthy of the name. Such an one, in a very important sense, is free\nindeed, free in solitude, free in poverty, free in abundance, free in\nlife, free in death, free everywhere, and forever free.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE ORTHODOXY OF ATHEISM AND INGERSOLISM, BY REV. S. L. TYRRELL.\n\n\n\u201cHail human liberty; there is no God!\u201d Such is the exulting song of many a\nhuman heart when bewildering metaphysics or superficial science has\ncrowded from its convictions faith in the Deity and his moral government.\nFew men have reached the pure, unclouded heights of religion and morality,\nwhere the unselfish love of the holy and the right, for their own inherent\nexcellence, forms the controlling motive of their conduct, regardless of\npenalty or reward. Humanity is yet on the low moral plane, where penal\nlaws, human or divine, are the most potent forces in regulating human\nlife. Hence the sad fact appears that when theism seems most successfully\nassailed we hear from many quarters ill-concealed rustlings of exultation\nat the welcome loosening of the bonds of morality and religion. It seems\nto be overlooked that a very stern theological system may be quite\nrationally evolved from atheistic premises; and there is now a new and\nvery tempting field inviting some bold Calvin or Luther in the ranks of\npositivism to write an immortal book, with the original and attractive\ntitle, Ethics of Atheism. The great offense of the scientific (sciolistic)\natheist is his lofty arrogance. He complacently assumes the name of\nInfallible Wisdom. He \u201cunderstands all mysteries;\u201d his mental telescope\nsweeps eternity \u201cfrom everlasting to everlasting;\u201d his microscopic vision\npierces the secrets of creation,\u2014sees the beauty and order of all\ncelestial worlds emerge from fiery chaotic dust,\u2014by the fortunate contact\nof cooling cinders of the right chemical properties and temperature, he\nsecretes and hatches into life an egg, or cell of throbbing protoplasm; to\nthis pulsating mass of jelly there comes from the unconscious abyss at\nlength a vague instinct, a drowsy awakening of desire; next a feeble gleam\nof definite thought; reason then faintly dawns, and lo! at last this fair\nuniverse burst into glorious light, clothed in surpassing loveliness,\nthrobbing with love, tender sympathy and sublime aspiration, and all\nthrough the magic potency of blind matter and unconscious force, without\nan architect or guide. O, wondrous matter, could a God do more?\n\nO, divine science (sciolist), we bless thy name; thou hast delivered us\nfrom the terrors of dogmatic fear! Man is but dust, and unto dust shall he\nreturn; \u201clet us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die.\u201d But ere we run riot\nin the intoxication of our new-born freedom from divine law, does not the\nskeptical, cautious, scientific spirit admonish us to pause a moment and\nlook logically at another class of possible achievements of this\nwonder-working, material power. In philosophical researches, analogy is a\nrecognized and legitimate guide to truth. Admitting, then, that pure\nmatter has done all that materialism claims it has done in the past, let\nus look by the light of analogy at other and graver possibilities it may\nhave wrought in its reckless, unrestrained creations. Time is a mighty\nattribute of evolutionary divinities; its power seems next to infinite. In\na few millions of years Alexanders, Bonapartes, Bismarks, Miltons, Edisons\nand Ingersols have been evolved from thoughtless chaos; now, if in limited\ntime (for what are millions of years to eternity) such majestic mental\nforces have been developed from the inexhaustible store-house of\n_intellectual nothingness_, why should bold mathematical science deem it a\n\u201cthing incredible\u201d that in an eternity of time, with an unlimited amount\nof matter for capital and infinite space for a theater of action, this\nmind-evolving force may not have generated beings of almost infinite\ncapacities\u2014even a monarch who sways a scepter over more worlds than\none\u2014EVEN A GOD. Why should material philosophy cavil at the creeds which\nteach a righteous judgment to come? Have not the judicial elements of\noxygen, carbon and hydrogen combined to organize on one planet at least\ncourts of equity and judgment seats, and crystalized into prison walls and\nhand-cuffs the gallows and the hangman? Upon the established scientific\nprinciple that nature\u2019s laws are uniform, undeviating and universal in\ntheir action, does not the analogy of earthly tribunals logically\nnecessitate the belief that our globe is but a province of the infinite\nempire governed by righteous laws, of which enlightened human laws are a\npartial revelation.\n\nModern science teaches the oneness of the universe and the identity and\nsameness of the matter composing it. What then can be more strictly\nscientific and demonstrable from materialistic premises than the vast\nconclusion that uniform passive matter, operated upon by the same\nundeviating laws, must in all worlds produce the same results and evolve,\nas it has on our planet, intelligence in which a sense of right and\njustice shall predominate, and everywhere and in all time, enact and\nexecute laws discriminating between right and wrong? What astronomical\nprediction, then, can be more certain of fulfillment than this moral\nprophecy of the final eclipse of evil and ultimate triumph of the right?\nWith no existing power to arrest or mitigate the sentence of this\nrelentless, carboniferous judge, how fearful may be the possible fate of\nthose who disregard the moral laws of protoplasm. Matter has evolved a\nFranklin and a Morse, who learned to wield the lightning\u2019s power. Why may\nthere not have been evolved in the infinite past a more profound\nelectrician, who, with his battery and etherial wires can shiver a planet\nwith his touch? A marvelous power\u2014the human spirit\u2014has gained a vast\ncontrol over the blind, stubborn substances and forces that created it,\nand by its immaterial, invisible will, can in a limited degree overrule\nthe most imperious law of nature by throwing a stone into the air. Is it\nunscientific, then, or derogatory to the vaunted potency of matter to\naffirm that the eternal ages may have developed an intelligent will that\ncan project a planet or sun, as the human will and muscle project the\npebble? Scoff not, exalted sages, at the weak terrors of those who tremble\nat the dogma of a malignant devil; consider that pity and compassion are\nnot the known chemical constituents of this soulless creator. Where, then,\ncan we fix the limit of that unconscious, fiendish force that evolved a\nNero, and incarnated in human bodies the myriads of demoniac spirits that\nwalk the earth to-day? Egotistical scientist (sciolist) calm the cyclone,\nquiet the engulphing earthquake, blot from human history the records of\nwar, pestilence, famine, the tales of St. Bartholomew and the Inquisition,\nand then deny by material philosophy the possibility of even a Calvinistic\nhell; deny the personality of man because your microscope and scalpel can\nnot find a soul by dissecting the brain of the mathematician, and then\ndeny a personal God because his spirit eludes the grasp of sealed\ncrucibles and can not be detected by digging in the earth with the spade.\nDeny the existence of conscious life, and then in the light of reason and\nscience deny that the forces that generate life must from necessary law\nwork for its continuance and immortality. Extreme materialism confidently\nteaches the birth, death and resurrection of planetary universes; why\nshould such grand faith stagger at the theory of the resurrection of a\nsoul? Where is the scientific absurdity of Renan\u2019s distant hope, that this\nmighty resurrection of dead worlds will embrace in its infinite scope the\nawakening to consciousness; the universal past consciousness of the\nuniverse. May not both theist and atheist find in this line of thought a\npartial answer to the oft recurring modern prayer, \u201cHelp thou mine\nunbelief.\u201d\u2014_From the Religio-Philosophic Journal._\n\n\n\n\n\nCan you believe that all things are the result of blind, unintelligent\nforces, operating under mechanical laws?\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE SHASTERS AND VEDAS, AND THE CHINESE, GOVERNMENT, RELIGION, ETC.\n\n\nMen who wish to be known as scientific skeptics and unbelievers often\nboast that the above-mentioned books are more worthy of respect than the\nbooks of the Bible. For the benefit of all who may not have access to\nthose books, the following, from Duff\u2019s India, credited to the Shasters,\nmay be of service in the search after truth:\n\n\u201cBrahm produced an egg. All the primary atoms, qualities, and principles,\nthe seeds of future worlds, that had been evolved from the substance of\nBrahm, were now collected together and deposited in the newly produced\negg. And into it, along with them, entered the self-existent himself,\nunder the assumed form of Brahma; and then he sat vivifying, expanding,\nand combining the elements, during four thousand three hundred millions of\nsolar years. During this amazing period the wondrous egg floated like a\nbubble on the water, increasing constantly in size. At length the supreme,\nwho dwelt therein, burst the shell of the stupendous egg and issued forth\nunder a new form with a thousand heads, a thousand eyes, and a thousand\narms. Along with him issued another form, huge and measureless, which\nspeedily matured into the present glorious universe.\u201d\u2014_Shasters._\n\nIn Hindostan we may see on one hand the trident of Neptune, the eagle of\nJupiter, the satyrs of Bacchus, the bow of Cupid and the chariot of the\nSun; on the other, we hear the cymbals of Rhea, the songs of the Muses,\nand the pastoral tales of Apollo Nomius. The Hindoos enumerate four grand\nperiods in the world\u2019s history called _yugs_. The first comprehends one\nmillion seven hundred and twenty-eight thousand years. The second, one\nmillion two hundred and ninety-six thousand; the third, eight hundred and\nsixty-four thousand years, and the fourth four hundred and twenty-three\nthousand years. Four thousand nine hundred and thirty-seven of the last\nyug expired in eighteen hundred and forty-three. The incredibility of\ntheir chronology will be seen at a glance, if you recollect that it is\nclaimed that one of their sovereigns lived through the whole of the first\nyug. Veda is a generic name for their four oldest and most sacred books,\ncontaining simply a revelation directly from Brahma.\n\nMany unbelievers in this, and the old world, who have set themselves\nagainst our Bible, have indorsed the Vedas as scientific, without so much\nas having read or known one line in them. These Vedas profess to go back\nthrough _maha yugs_ of 4,320,000 years of men. A thousand of these _maha_\nyugs, or 4,320,000,000 of years make a _kalpa_, or one day of the life of\nBrahma, and his night is of equal length; a hundred such days and nights\nmeasure the time of his life.\n\nThese books give, as facts, seven great continents, separated by that many\nrivers and seven mountain-chains four hundred thousand miles high. They\nrecord a hundred sons to one king, ten thousand to another, and sixty\nthousand to another. These kings were in no danger from violating the\ncommand to \u201cmultiply and replenish the earth;\u201d but there is one\ndifficulty, at least, about the records concerning the seventy thousand\nand one hundred sons born to these three kings, and that is this, the\nrecords say: They were all born in a pumpkin and nourished in pans of\nmilk, reduced to ashes by the curse of a sage, and restored to life by the\nwaters of the Ganges. Those same sacred books say: The moon is fifty\nthousand leagues higher than the sun, and that it shines by its own light\nand animates our body; they say, the sun goes behind the Someyra Mountains\nand this makes the night; they say, these mountains are many thousand\nmiles high, and are situated in the middle of our earth; they say, our\nearth is flat and triangular, having seven stories, each one of peculiar\nbeauty, having its own inhabitants, and each one having a sea. The first\nstory of earth, they say, is composed of _honey_, the second is composed\nof _sugar_, the third of _butter_, the fourth of _wine_; and the whole\nthing is carried upon the heads of elephants, and when these shake\nthemselves earthquakes are produced. Among the astronomical calculations\nwhich confirm all this there are accounts of floods of waters rising to\nthe Polar star. How is that for a flood?\n\nInfidel, if you read this, and remember that you have been guilty of\nfoisting the Vedas against the Hebrew Scriptures, hide your face and do it\nno more. The Hindoos worship cats and monkeys and holy bulls and sticks\nand stones. They are yet sacrificing their infants in that sacred river,\n_Ganges_. The car of Juggernaut, \u2019tis said, is yet rolling on its bloody\nwheels, and women are yet burned upon the dead bodies of their husbands.\nWhat is the trouble with those unfortunates? Well, they enjoy freedom from\nthe Bible, freedom from the Bible God, and freedom from the Protestant and\nCatholic clergy\u2014the freedom that the infidels of the United States concern\nthemselves so much about. Give them what they plead for and it will not be\nlong until they will have more hell than they will love or worship.\nInfidels boast of the worth of the writings of Confucius and the religion\nof the Chinese. Let us look after their condition. Here it is, as given in\nthe Universal Vocabulary. As they are esteemed by unbelievers so ancient\nas to put to shame all others pretending to antiquity, we must be allowed\nto make the test of their religious and scientific tree by its fruits.\nFirst. \u201cIf a person be suspected of treason he is put to death in a slow\nand painful manner, all his relations in the first degree are beheaded,\nhis female relations sold into slavery, and all his connections residing\nin his house are put to death. If a physician treat the case of a patient\nin any way different from established rules, and the patient dies, he is\ntreated as guilty of homicide, though, if on his trial it be shown that it\nwas a mere error, he is redeemed from death, but must quit his practice\nforever. When a debtor is unable to meet the demand of his creditor he\nreceives thirty blows, and the same number may be repeated from time to\ntime till the debt is paid. In case the creditor violently seize the\ndebtor\u2019s goods he is liable to eighty blows. In order to the collection of\ndebts, it is customary for creditors to enter the houses of their debtors\non the first day of the year and pronounce their claims with a loud voice,\nand continue there until they are reimbursed. It is said that this teazing\nproves a successful method of collecting debts; inasmuch as the debtor,\nfearing that something may befall the creditor while in his house, and,\ntherefore, suspicion fall on him, he is moved to use all possible\nendeavors to answer the demand. Women are sold in marriage and the highest\nbidder takes them. Their government is patriarchial and despotic. The\nemperor is styled Holy Son of Heaven, Sole Governor of the Earth. Their\nreligion is paganism.\u201d\n\nZell\u2019s Encyclopedia gives the following items as true to-day: \u201cTheir\nhusbandry is, to a great extent, nullified by the rude and ill-adapted\nimplements employed therefor, and also by the smallness of the farms.\nHence, agriculture, as scientifically considered, is but little advanced.\u201d\nThe form of government is strictly patriarchial. The emperor, who bears\nthe various euphuistic titles of the \u201cBrother of the Sun and Moon.\u201d\n_Teen-tsye_, or the \u201cSun of Heaven;\u201d _Ta-hwang-li_, or the \u201cGreat\nEmperor;\u201d and _Wansuy-yay_, or the \u201cLord of a Myriad Years,\u201d is regarded\nas the father of his people, and has unlimited power over all his\nsubjects. The emperor is spiritual as well as temporal sovereign, and as\nhigh priest of the empire, can alone, with his immediate representatives\nand ministers, perform the great religious ceremonies. The bamboo, as the\nchief instrument of government, is applied without distinction, to the\nhighest and lowest Chinese.\n\nThe imperial palaces are of great extent, consisting of a series of\ncourts, with galleries and halls of audience beautifully painted. The\ntemples differ greatly in form and size. The ordinary temples or\n_joss-houses_, consist each of one chamber _containing an idol_. This,\ngentle reader, is the store-house of pagan idolatry to which some\nunbelievers in Indiana and elsewhere resort for names or titles by which\nto designate the houses of Christian worship in our own country. How would\nthose men like to emigrate to China, where they could have a language that\nsuits their taste, and a literature and religion about which they have\nboasted so much? If Chinese government, religion, and literature and\nscience be so old as is claimed by Chinamen, and by infidels in our\ncountry, and its age be the cause of its great superiority in religion and\nscience, may we not thank the Lord that we are young?\n\n\n\n\n\nANCIENT COSMOGONIES.\n\n\nThe Mosaic method found in the first chapter of the book of Genesis is not\nthe method of physical science; this seeks, by induction, after laws,\nprinciples and causes, stepping backwards step by step, seeking, by the\nlight of physical science, the character of that unit which lies at the\nbase of the whole series of all created things. \u201cThe world by wisdom knew\nnot God.\u201d The truth of this statement is monumented by the literature of\nthe unbelievers of the nineteenth century. To-day, men who refuse Bible\ninstruction talk of the unknown and the unknowable, thus conceding that\ntheir efforts as naturalists, or \u201cnatural men,\u201d are not sufficient in\ntheir results to disclose the character of the great first cause. The same\ngreat failure has been, and ever will be, made by all mere naturalists. In\nview of this fact it is well that Moses gives us at once the great first\ncause in the phrase, \u201cIn the beginning God created the heavens and the\nearth.\u201d There is in this sentence no limitation of time, so there is room\nhere for astronomical ages, cycle upon cycle. There was time enough in\nthat beginning for the present system of planets to be arranged from a\nsingle nebulous mass. In it we have a picture of matter in a crude\ncondition, without fixedness of form, surrounded with darkness. Then comes\nthe commencement of the great work of preparing our planet for the home of\nman, by the spirit of God moving over the chaos. There is nothing in this\nstatement that should perplex any man, unless he is that fool who \u201csays in\nhis heart there is no God.\u201d If the chaos here described was matter in a\nrare, gaseous condition, floating in space, molecular motion produced by\nthe spirit of God brooding over it, and a chemical change producing\nelectricity may have given the light called the first day.\n\nHere is that troublesome word _day_. Why should it give trouble to any\nscientist? It is a part of his duty to know that neither this word nor the\ncontext in the first chapter of Genesis, nor biblical usage, requires us\nto limit the term to a period of twenty-four hours. But the context does\nlimit it, in its first occurrence, to an indefinite period of _light_.\n\u201cGOD CALLED THE LIGHT DAY!\u201d In the fourth verse of the second chapter the\nword is used to cover the whole period of time past, both the beginning\nand the subsequent six work-days of the Almighty, thus: \u201cThese are the\ngenerations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, IN THE\nDAY when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.\u201d This is no modern\ninvention, gotten up to serve a purpose; for Augustine so understood this\nmatter in the fourth century. He called them \u201cineffable days,\u201d describing\nthem as alternate pauses in the work of God. Such was the interpretation\ngiven by the first Christians. Why should we try to measure this term day,\nin its first occurrences, by a chronometer which did not come into use\nuntil the fourth day? The notion that these days were twenty-four hours,\nsprang up in the middle ages, and is the child of the literalism and\nrealism of those times. Moses gives seven great constructive periods of\nlight, which beautifully harmonize with the seven great geological ages\nlying this side of his beginning. How he came to do this has perplexed the\nincredulous scholar and historian beyond measure; it is, indeed, a\nremarkable fact in literature, but it gives strength to the faith of the\nintelligent Christian. God was with Moses; his cosmogony bears evidence of\ninspiration. Compare his narrative with the cosmogonies of the ancient\nnations. There is but little similitude; if there was much it would not\nprove identity. It would be strange if the ancient nations should have no\ntruth in their cosmogonies. And if they had, would it not be more strange\nfor Moses to leave it out on that account? It would be well to remind you\njust here that the Almighty, and doubtless his man Moses also, knew that\nmen possessed at least _common sense_. In the New Testament we have the\nword tartarus in its verb form. Where did it come from? The Apostle Peter,\nguided by the divine spirit, found it in Grecian mythology. Is it to be\nthrown out on that account? Nay, verily. A man of God, that is, a prophet,\nin any of the ancient ages as far back as Moses, is not to be regarded as\nunder obligations to shun a truth because it was already in use among men.\nThe man who would claim such a silly thing ought to be discarded from\nscientific and literary circles as a blockhead. The cosmogony of the\nBabylonians represents the beginning of things in darkness and water; in\nwhich great non-descript animals, hideous monsters, half-beasts and\nhalf-men, made their appearance; then a woman, who personates the creative\nspirit or principle, was split into two parts, and the heaven and the\nearth produced by the division. Next Belus, the supreme divinity, cut off\nhis own head, and his blood, trickling down and mingling with the dust of\nthe earth, produced human creatures having intelligence and spiritual\nlife. The Ph\u0153nician cosmogony presents, first, an ether or a mist diffused\nin space. Next, a wind arose, and from this motion proceeded a Spiritual\nGod, from whom proceeded an egg, which, being divided, produced the\nheavens and the earth. Next, the noise of thunder awakened beings into\nspiritual life. The Egyptian cosmogony presents a principal divinity,\nwhose name was Ptah, the world-creating power, who shaped the cosmic egg,\nwhich again appears here, as in the Ph\u0153nician. Next, there followed from\nPtah a long succession of gods, with many offices and powers\u2014solar,\ntelluric and spiritual\u2014from whom, after a time, proceeded _demigods_, and\nthen from these proceeded heroes, until the link of our humanity was\nreached. According to Grote, Grecian mythology opens with the gods prior,\nas well as superior, to man; it then descends gradually to heroes and then\nto the human race. Along with their gods are presented many monsters,\nultra-human and extra-human, who can\u2019t consistently be styled gods, but\nwho partake with gods and man in the attributes of free-will, conscious\nagency and susceptibility of pleasure and pain\u2014such as the Harpies, the\nGorgons, the Sirens, the Sphinx, the Cyclops, the Centaurs, etc. After a\ngreat struggle, or contest, among these wonderful creatures, there arises\na stable government of Zeus, the chief among the gods. Then appears chaos,\nthen the broad, firm, flat earth, with deep and dark tartarus below, and\nfrom these proceed different divinities and creatures, some grand and\nterrible, some simply monsters; their relations to each other violate all\nnotions of decency and morality; their wars and slaughters, their gross\nand abominable crimes issue in successive creative products upon earth,\nwhich terminate at last in the appearance of man.\n\nNext we will give you the cosmogony of the Vedas, as it is presented in\nwhat is known as the mystic hymn of the Vedas. It is _Pantheistic to the\ncore_. \u201cIt is one of the earliest relics of Hindu thought and devotion:\u201d\n\n\n    \u201cNor Aught nor Naught existed; yon bright sky\n    Was not, nor heaven\u2019s broad woof outstretched above.\n    What covered all? What sheltered? What concealed?\n    Was it the water\u2019s fathomless abyss?\n    There was not death\u2014yet was there naught immortal;\n    There was no confine betwixt day and night;\n    The only One breathed breathless by itself;\n    OTHER than It NOTHING since has been.\n    Darkness there was, and all at first was veiled\n    In gloom profound\u2014an ocean without light.\n    The germ that still lay covered in the husk\n    Burst forth, one nature, from the fervent heat.\n    Then first came love upon it, the new spring\n    Of mind\u2014yea, poets in their hearts discerned,\n    Pondering, this bond between created things\n    And uncreated. Comes this spark from earth\n    Piercing and all-pervading, or from heaven?\n    Then seeds were sown, and mighty powers arose\u2014\n    Nature below, and power and will above.\n    Who knows the secret? Who proclaimed it here?\n    Whence, whence this manifold creation sprang?\n    The gods themselves came later into being?\n    Who knows from whence this great creation sprang?\n    He from whom all this creation came,\n    Whether his will created or was mute,\n    The Most High Seer that is in highest heaven,\n    He knows it\u2014or perchance even He knows it not.\u201d\n\n    \u2014The Rig-Veda, book 10, hymn 129. Translated from Max Mullers\u2019\n    \u201cChips from a German Workshop.\u201d\n\n\nThis is Pantheistic throughout, and although it presents no absurd\ncombinations of matter and spirit, yet it puts the material creation\nbefore the creation of the spiritual, and scarcely allows consciousness to\n\u201cthe One,\u201d \u201cthe It,\u201d from which, somehow, the creation proceeded. The Book\nof Menu, which is of equal value with the Veda among the Hindoos, gives\nthe following account of the creation:\n\n\u201cMenu sat reclined, with his attention fixed on one object, the supreme\nGod, when the divine sages approached him, and, after mutual salutations\nin due form, delivered the following address: Deign, sovereign ruler, to\napprise us of the sacred laws in their order, as they must be followed by\nall the four classes, and by each of them, in their several degrees,\ntogether with the duties of every mixed class; for thou, Lord, and thou\nonly among mortals, knowest the true sense, the first principle, and the\nprescribed ceremonies of this universal, supernatural Veda, unlimited in\nextent and unequalled in authority.\n\n\u201cHe whose powers were measureless, being thus requested by the great\nsages, whose thoughts were profound, saluted them all with reverence and\ngave them a comprehensive answer, saying: Be it heard! This universe\nexisted only in the first divine idea yet unexpanded, as if involved in\ndarkness, imperceptible, undefinable, undiscoverable by reason, and\nundiscovered by revelation, as if it were wholly immersed in sleep; then\nthe sole, self-existing power, himself undiscovered, but making this world\ndiscernible, with five elements and other principles of nature, appeared\nwith undiminished glory, expanding his idea or dispelling the gloom. He,\nwhom the mind alone can perceive, whose essence eludes the external\norgans, who has not visible parts, who exists from eternity, even he, the\nsoul of all beings, whom no being can comprehend, shone forth in person.\nHe, having willed to produce various beings from his own divine substance,\nfirst, with a thought, created the waters and placed in them a productive\nseed; that seed became an egg bright as gold, blazing like the luminary\nwith a thousand beams; AND IN THAT EGG HE WAS BORN HIMSELF IN THE FORM OF\nBRAHMA THE GREAT FOREFATHER OF ALL SPIRITS. The waters were called nara,\nbecause they were the production of Nara, or the spirit of God; and, since\nthey were his first ayana, or place of motion, he thence is named\nNayrayana, or moving on the waters. From that which is, the first cause,\nnot the object of sense, existing everywhere in substance, not existing to\nour perception, without beginning or end, was produced the divine male,\nfamed in all worlds under the appellation of Brahma. In that egg the great\npower sat inactive a whole year of the Creator, at the close of which, by\nhis thought alone, he caused the egg to divide itself; and from its two\ndivisions he framed the heaven above and the earth beneath; in the midst\nhe placed the subtile ether, the eight regions, and the permanent\nreceptacle of waters.\n\n\u201cFrom the supreme soul he drew forth mind, existing substantially, though\nunperceived by sense, immaterial; and before mind, or the reasoning power,\nhe produced consciousness, the internal monitor, the ruler; and before\nthem both he produced the great principle of the soul, or first expansion\nof the divine idea; and all vital forms endued with the three qualities of\ngoodness, passion and darkness; and the five perceptions of sense, and the\nfive organs of sensation. Thus, having at once pervaded, with emanations\nfrom the Supreme Spirit, the minutest portions of six principles immensely\noperative, consciousness and the five perceptions, he framed all\ncreatures; and since the minutest particles of visible nature have a\ndependence on those six emanations from God, the wise have accordingly\ngiven the name of S\u2019arira, or depending on six, that is, the ten organs on\nconsciousness, and the five elements on as many perceptions, to his image\nor appearance in visible nature; thence proceed the great elements, endued\nwith peculiar powers, the mind with operations infinitely subtile, the\nunperishable cause of all apparent forms.\n\n\u201cThis universe, therefore, is compacted from the minute portions of these\nseven divine and active principles, the great soul, or first emanation,\nconsciousness, and five perceptions; a mutable universe from immutable\nideas. Among them each succeeding element acquires the quality of the\npreceding; and in as many degrees as each of them is advanced, with so\nmany properties is it said to be endued. He, too, first assigned to all\ncreatures distinct names, distinct acts, and distinct occupations, as they\nhad been revealed in the pre-existing Veda. He, the supreme ruler, created\nan assemblage of inferior _Deities_, with divine attributes and pure\nsouls, and a number of Genii exquisitely delicate; and he prescribed the\nsacrifice from the beginning. From fire, from air, and from the sun he\nmilked out, as it were, three primordial Vedas, named Rich, Yajush and\nSaman, for the due performance of the sacrifice.\n\n\u201cHe gave being to time and the divisions of time, to the stars also, and\nto the planets, to rivers, oceans and mountains, to level plains and\nuneven valleys, to devotion, speech, complacency, desire and wrath, and to\nthe creation, which shall presently be mentioned; for he willed the\nexistence of all those created things. For the sake of distinguishing\nactions, he made a total difference between right and wrong, and enured\nthese sentient creatures to pleasure and pain, cold and heat, and other\nopposite pairs. With very minute transformable portions called matras, of\nthe five elements, all this perceptible world was composed in fit order;\nand in whatever occupation the Supreme Lord first employed any vital soul,\nto that occupation the same soul attaches itself spontaneously when it\nreceives a new body again and again. Whatever quality, noxious or\ninnocent, harsh or mild, unjust or just, false or true, he conferred on\nany being at its creation, the same quality enters it, of course, on its\nfuture births; as the six seasons of the year attain respectively their\npeculiar marks in due time and of their own accord, even so the several\nacts of each embodied spirit attend it naturally.\n\n\u201cThat the human race might be multiplied, he caused the Brahmen, the\nCshatriya, the Vaisya and the Sudra to proceed from his mouth, his arm,\nhis thigh and his foot.\n\n\u201cHaving divided his own substance, the mighty power became half male, half\nfemale, or nature active and passive, and from that female he produced\nViraz. Know me, O most excellent of Brahmens, to be that person whom the\nmale power, Viraz, having performed austere devotion, produced by myself;\nme, the secondary framer of all this visible world. It was I who, desirous\nof giving birth to a race of men, performed very difficult religious\nduties, and first produced ten Lords of created beings, animated in\nholiness, Marichi, Atri, Angiras, Pulastya, Pulaha, Cratu, Prachetas, or\nDacsha, Vasishtha, Bhrigu and Narada; they, abundant in glory, produced\nseven other Menu, together with deities and the mansions of deities, and\nMaharshis, or great sages, unlimited in power; benevolent genii, and\nfierce giants, blood-thirsty savages, heavenly quiristers, nymphs and\ndemons, huge serpents and snakes of smaller size, birds of mighty wing,\nand separate companies of Pitirs, or progenitors of mankind; lightnings\nand thunder-bolts, clouds and colored bows of Indra, falling meteors,\nearth-rending vapors, comets and luminaries of various degrees;\nhorse-faced sylvans, apes, fish, and a variety of birds, tame cattle,\ndeer, men, and ravenous beasts with two rows of teeth; small and large\nreptiles, moths, lice, fleas, and common flies, with every biting knat and\nimmovable substances of distinct sorts.\u201d\n\nReader, I have given you this chapter of ancient cosmogonies under the\nconviction that a bare statement of them must convince any one of either\nthe ignorance or dishonesty of infidels who claim that Moses learned all\nthat he gave in his cosmogony from the ancient cosmogonies. How was it\nthat Moses avoided all their errors and extravagance? How was it that he\ngave such a severely simple description of creation, which no rhetoric can\nimprove, and no scientist _successfully_ refute?\n\n\n\n\n\nCan you believe that energy, or force, lies behind all things, operating\nthem, without believing there is something lying behind it, to which it\nbelongs?\n\nCan you believe that a concourse of dead atoms held a solemn convention,\nwent into harmonious action and produced life?\n\n\n\n\n\nSOME OF THE BEAUTIES (?) OF HARMONY AMONG UNBELIEVERS.\n\n\nThe author of \u201cThe System of Nature\u201d says of the English Jesuit\u2019s creation\nof eels by spontaneous generation from rye meal: \u201cAfter moistening meal\nwith water, and shutting up the mixture, it is found after a little time,\nwith the aid of the microscope, that it has produced organized beings, of\nwhose production the water and meal were believed to be incapable. Thus\ninanimate nature can pass into life, which is itself but an assemblage of\nmotions.\u201d\u2014_Part 1, p. 23. For Needham\u2019s Eels, see the Volume of Physics_.\n\nVoltaire says: \u201cWere this unparalleled blunder true, yet, in rigorous\nreasoning I do not see how it would prove there is no God.\u201d\n\nHe says, it is really strange that men, while denying a creator should\nhave attributed to themselves the power of creating eels. But it is yet\nmore deplorable that natural philosophers, of better information, adopted\nthe Jesuit Needham\u2019s ridiculous system, and joined it to that of Maillet,\nwho asserted that the ocean had formed the Alps and the Pyrenees, and that\nmen were originally porpoises, whose forked tails changed in the course of\ntime into thighs and legs. Such fancies are worthy to be placed with the\neels formed by meal.\n\nVoltaire says the ridiculous story of the spontaneous production of eels\nby rye meal is the foundation of D\u2019Holbach\u2019s \u201cSystem of Nature.\u201d He says:\n\u201cWe were assured, not long ago, that at Brussels a hen had brought forth\nhalf a dozen rabbits.\u201d He then adds, \u201cNeedham\u2019s eels soon followed the\nBrussels hen.\u201d D\u2019Holbach says: \u201cExperience proves to us that the matter\nwhich we regard as inert and dead, assumes action, intelligence, and life,\nwhen it is combined in a certain way.\u201d Voltaire responds: \u201cThis is\nprecisely the difficulty. How does a germ come to life?\u201d\n\nThe author of the \u201cSystem of Nature\u201d says: \u201cMatter is eternal and\nnecessary; but its forms and its combinations are transitory and\ncontingent.\u201d Upon the supposition that _all is __ matter_, Voltaire\nanswers, it is hard to comprehend, matter being, according to our author,\n_necessary_, and without freedom, how there can be anything contingent.\n\nAgain, the atheistic author of the \u201cSystem of Nature\u201d asserts that order\nand disorder do not exist. This is strongly refuted by Voltaire, who says\nthe author is to be distrusted very often, both in physics and in morals.\n\nSpinosa was a pantheist. He, like many modern sciolists, repudiated design\nin nature. Voltaire, treating upon Spinosism, says: \u201cI am aware that\nvarious philosophers, and especially Lucretius, have denied final causes.\nI am also aware that Lucretius, though not very chaste, is a very great\npoet in his descriptions and in his morals; but in philosophy I own he\nappears to me to be very far behind a college porter or a parish beadle.\nTo affirm that the eye is not made to see, nor the ear to hear, nor the\nstomach to digest, is not this the most revolting folly that ever entered\nthe human mind? Doubter as I am, this _insanity_ seems to me _evident_,\nand _I say so_. For my part, I see in nature, as in the arts, only final\ncauses; and I believe that an apple tree is made to bear apples, as I\nbelieve that a watch is made to tell the hour.\u201d Voltaire charges Warburton\nwith calumniating Cicero, by saying that Cicero said, \u201cIt is unworthy of\nthe majesty of the empire to adore one only God.\u201d Voltaire\u2019s words are\nthese: \u201cWarburton, like his contemporaries, has calumniated Cicero and\nancient Rome.\u201d He then gives the above quotation, along with a short\ncomment in Cicero\u2019s defense, and closes with the following words: \u201cIt is\nthen quite false that Cicero, or any other Roman, ever said that it did\nnot become the majesty of the empire to acknowledge a Supreme God. Their\nJupiter, the Zeus of the Greeks, the Jehovah of the Ph\u0153nicians, was always\nconsidered as the master of the secondary gods. This great truth can not\nbe too forcibly inculcated.\u201d Voltaire was a Deist.\n\nLucretius, according to Voltaire, denied design in nature. Voltaire said,\nin philosophy, he was very far behind a college porter or a parish beadle.\n\nSpinosa was a Pantheist. Voltaire says, \u201cHe frequently contradicted\nhimself; that he had not always clear ideas; that he sometimes clung to\none plank, sometimes to another.\u201d\n\nVoltaire says: \u201cA natural philosopher of some reputation had no doubt that\nthis \u2018Needham,\u2019 who made the eels, \u2018was a profound Atheist,\u2019 who concluded\nthat since eels could be made of rye meal, men might be made of wheat\nflour; that nature and chemistry produce all; and that it was demonstrated\nwe may very well dispense with an all forming God.\u201d Voltaire calls this\n_an unparalleled blunder_. D\u2019Holbach, the author of the \u201cSystem de la\nNature,\u201d was an Atheist, so were his assistants in the production of that\nwork.\n\nVoltaire addresses the author of that work in the following words: \u201cIn the\nstate of doubt in which we both are, I do not say to you, with Pascal,\n\u2018choose the safest.\u2019 There is no safety in uncertainty. We are here not to\ntalk, but to examine; we must judge, and our judgment is not determined by\nour will. I do not propose to you to believe extravagant things in order\nto escape embarassment. I do not say to you, \u2018Go to Mecca, and instruct\nyourself by kissing the black stone, take hold of a cow\u2019s tail, muffle\nyourself in a scapulary, or be imbecile and fanatical to acquire the favor\nof the Being of beings.\u2019 I say to you, \u2018Continue to cultivate virtue, to\nbe beneficent, to regard all superstition with horror, or with pity; but\nadore, with me, the design which is manifested in all nature, and\nconsequently the author of that design\u2014the primordial and final cause of\nall; hope with me that our monade, which reasons on the great eternal\nBeing, may be happy through that same great Being. There is no\ncontradiction in this. You can no more demonstrate its impossibility than\nI can demonstrate mathematically that it is so. In metaphysics we scarcely\nreason on anything but probabilities. We are all swimming in a sea of\nwhich we have never seen the shore. Woe be to those who fight while they\nswim! Land who can; but he that cries out to me, \u201cYou swim in vain, there\nis no land,\u201d disheartens me, and deprives me of all my strength. What is\nthe object of our dispute? To console our unhappy existence. Who consoles\nit\u2014you or I? You yourself own, in some passages of your work, that the\nbelief in a God has withheld some men on the brink of crime; for me this\nacknowledgment is enough. If this opinion had prevented but ten\nassassinations, but ten calumnies, but ten iniquitous judgments on the\nearth, I hold that the whole earth ought to embrace it.\u2019 \u201d\u2014_Voltaire\u2019s\nPhilosophical Dictionary._\n\nThis Voltaire says: \u201cThe laws punished public crimes; it was necessary to\nestablish a check upon secret crimes; this check was to be found only in\nreligion.\u201d In the same article we find the following: \u201cWe are obliged to\nhold intercourse and transact business and mix up in life with knaves\npossessing little or no reflection; with vast numbers of persons addicted\nto brutality, intoxication and rapine. You may, if you please, preach to\nthem that there is no hell, and that the soul of man is mortal. As for\nmyself, I will be sure to thunder in their ears that if they rob me they\nwill inevitably be damned.\u201d His true position upon the hell question is,\nthat it is necessary to preach hell to the blind and brutal populace, that\nthere is a real necessity for such teaching, whether it be true or false.\nHe seems to regard it untrue, but necessary. What an idea! The harmony and\nconsistency of unbelievers is (?) grand. It is no wonder that Voltaire\u2019s\nname should stand, along with the names of Atheists and Pantheists and\nDeists, above the head line upon the first page of the _Boston\nInvestigator_.\n\n\n\n\n\nIS GOD THE AUTHOR OF DECEPTION AND FALSEHOOD?\n\n\nThere is a want of fair dealing with Bible language manifested by all the\nenemies of our religion. The unbelievers of our time will find it very\ndifficult for them to sustain the reputation of moral honesty and, at the\nsame time, retain many of the old, worn out objections which they have\nurged against the Bible. They should remember that while the light of\nscientific investigation is exposing the old, unscientific and\nunscriptural tenets of the creeds of our forefathers, and making it hard\nfor candid, sensible men to defend them, it is also shedding light upon\nBible truth to such an extent that unbelievers are finding it equally\ndifficult to retain their silly objections to the Bible. They have\nasserted from 1st Kings 32, that God kept false as well as true prophets.\nThis charge is not only without foundation in fact, but also false and\ncontemptible. The four hundred prophets mentioned in the sixth verse of\nthat chapter are emphatically denominated \u201cAhab\u2019s prophets,\u201d\nnotwithstanding they professed to be the Lord\u2019s prophets. This wicked King\nof Israel had those wicked, false prophets in his service. The address of\nMicaiah to the two kings in verses 19-23 is a mere parable showing what,\nin the providence of God, would shortly take place, and the divine\npermission for the agents, spoken of, to act. Micaiah did not tell the mad\nand impious Ahab that his prophets were all liars; but he represents the\nwhole by a parable, and, in language equally strong and inoffensive, he\nsays that which amounts to the same thing. Unbelievers of the schools of\nmodern spiritualism and Bostonian infidelity, both say that God inspired\nprophets with false messages, and violated his own word.\n\nThe charge of inspiring prophets with false messages is founded,\npretendingly, upon 1st Kings 22: 22, 23, Jeremiah 4: 10, and Ezekiel 14:\n9. To answer this, it is only necessary to know that it is an idiom of the\noriginal languages to express, in the imperative active, that which is\nsimply permitted. Thus, when the devils begged permission to enter into\nthe herd of swine, Jesus said, \u201c_Go_\u201d\u2014Mat. 8: 31.\n\nAnd so we are to understand, John 13: 27, where Jesus says to Judas\nIscariot, \u201cWhat thou dost, _do quickly_.\u201d No man is thoroughly posted as a\nBible scholar who is honest in making the above charge. It is either\nignorance or dishonesty that causes men to thus oppose the record. As we\nare not justifiable in saying that Jesus commanded his own betrayal, so we\nare not justifiable in saying God commanded lying. Correct principles of\ninterpretation do not justify the unbeliever in any such blasphemy. When\nan evil spirit offered himself to be a lying spirit in the mouth of a\nwicked prophet\u2014false prophet\u2014God said, \u201cGo forth and do so,\u201d which only\nsignifies permission, not command. In Jeremiah 4: 10, where the prophet\ncomplains that God had deceived them, saying, \u201cThey should have peace,\nwhen the sword reached to the soul,\u201d we are to understand that God\npermitted the false prophets to deceive him, prophesying peace to the\npeople, as appears from the history (Ezekiel 14: 9). _I_, the _Lord_, have\ndeceived that prophet, that is, permitted him to be deceived, and\npermitted him to deceive the people, as the legitimate result of their own\nwickedness, and a just judgment upon them for their rejection of the\ntestimony of his true prophets. There is nothing strange about all this;\nfor as sure as there is a God, so sure it is that he permits wicked lying\nmen to be deceived in our own day. He has done this in all ages of the\nworld. In fact, it belongs to his ordained plan to permit, or suffer, men,\nindividually or collectively, to fall in their own deceptions and\nwickedness. This he threatened in the above case, as you may see in the\nfifth verse of Ezekiel 14, in these words, \u201cI will take the house of\nIsrael in their own heart, because they are all estranged from me through\ntheir idols; because they have chosen to themselves false Gods, I will\n_suffer them to be deceived_ with _false prophets_; and I will stretch out\nmy hand _upon him_, and I will _destroy him_ from the midst of my people.\u201d\n_Destroy whom?_ Ans.\u2014_The false prophet._\n\nWhen the prophet of God mistook the promise of God, who told him, when he\ncommissioned him, that he would be with him, by which he understood that\nhe would be saved from all evils, he said, \u201cThou hast deceived me, and I\nwas deceived.\u201d This prophet was now a derision, the people mocking him,\nand in his passion and weakness he breaks forth in the above language. It\nwas simply his own mistake, or misunderstanding of God\u2019s promise. God had\nnot promised him that he should not meet with scorn and opposition and\npersecution, but simply that they should not prevail against him, as we\nmay learn from the latter part of the first chapter. The second objection,\nthat the Lord violated his promise, is also founded in ignorance or\ndishonesty; it is based upon the statements found in Joshua 13: 1, and\nJudges 2: 20, 21, compared with Genesis 15: 18 and 18: 19, 20. In Joshua\n13, it is said that there remained very much land yet unconquered, which\nthey had not taken possession of, notwithstanding the Lord had promised to\nbe with them, and to give them all the land remaining yet in the\npossession of their enemies.\n\nIn Judges 2: 20, it is said that the people did not perform their part of\nthe covenant, and this is given as the reason why the Lord had not driven\nout any more of the nations before them.\n\nThe covenant with Abraham was in consideration of his past faith and\nobedience; yet it was suspended upon the future obedience of his\nposterity. See Deut. 7: 12, 13 and 11: 22 to 24; and Judges 2 to 20. The\nLord gives the following as the reason why he had not given them a\ncomplete fulfillment of the covenant upon his part, \u201cBecause that this\npeople hath transgressed my covenant which I commanded their fathers, and\nhave not harkened to my voice, I also will not henceforth drive out any of\nthe nations which Joshua left when he died.\u201d There are none so blind as\nthose who will not see. When we find a promise from the Lord, and it is in\nthe positive form, that is, when its terms are not rested upon an\nexpressed condition, we are authorized to supply the condition which\ninvolves the moral element in the divine government, viz: obedience upon\nthe part of man, or men, as the case may be. See Ezekiel 33: 13.\n\n\n\n\n\nDARWINISM WEIGHED IN THE BALANCES.\n\n\nScientists who claim to be followers of Darwin in scientific investigation\nare known as evolutionists. The majority of them seem to enjoy themselves\nvery much in opposing the statements of Moses respecting the creation. It\nmight be well for them to remember that Darwin himself was compelled by\nhis better sense to declare that science demands a miracle in order to the\nexistence of the living unit lying at the base of the series of evolution.\nSo after all it remains a fact that Darwinism is chained to miracle. If\nStrauss had remembered this he need not have said, Darwin deserves to be\npraised as one of the benefactors of the race because of having learned us\nhow to get rid of miracles. If there is any value in evolution against the\nBible it lies in the use that men make of it to destroy the idea that God\ncreated man out of the dust of the earth and breathed into his nostrils\nthe breath of life. Where does Darwinism take you to to study the origin\nof man? To the dust of the earth? _Not exactly!_ It takes you to the\n_slime_ of the sea, or the _mud_ of the Nile, just one step behind the\npulpy mass of protoplasm, or the moneron. God is there working a miracle;\nsuch is Darwinism. According to Moses, He was doing just as well yonder in\nEden working a miracle with the dust of the earth. Now, in all candor,\ntell us which statement is most worthy of God, the one that finds the\norigin of man in the Eden earth with a miracle wrought upon the _dust_ of\nthe ground, or the one that finds his origin in a miracle wrought upon the\n_mud of the Nile or the slime of the sea_? The one that stands him up\nerect, a man, with Godlike attributes, or the one that lays him down in\nthe slimy mass to pass through ages upon ages in order to get out of his\nlow, slimy paternity and beastly traits of mere instinct, with groveling\nhabits of life? Darwin, conscious of the axiomatic truth that no more can\nbe evolved than there is involved, teaches the doctrine that variation or\nchange of species is brought about by causes which already existed in the\ncommon progenitor. Such being true, we ask: In what link below man, in the\ngreat evolutionary chain, is intellect and moral nature to be found?\nSensible men are turning, however, away from the old, threadbare, worn-out\nguess-work. The time is not far distant when it will retire once more from\nscientific thought. It is very old. Pliny, eighteen centuries ago, said:\n\u201cThe various kinds of apes offer an almost perfect resemblance to man in\ntheir physical nature.\u201d This is just equal to Huxley\u2019s statement made in\nour own nineteenth century, that, \u201cSo far as structure is concerned, man\ndiffers to no greater extent from the animals which are immediately below\nhim, than these do from other members of the same order.\u201d Hence his\nconclusion: \u201cMan has proceeded from a modification or an improvement of\nsome lower animal, some simpler stock.\u201d This idea was fully expressed in\nthe early Pagan mythologies. Their satyrs or forest divinities were\ncreatures blending the animal with the human. So Anaximander, although an\nadvocate of the old hypothesis of evolution, was not the originator of the\nthought. The old _guess-up_ had its origin in Pagan mythology. The Fauns\nof the Roman legend were supposed to be the transition species, or bridge\nacross the chasm between the brute creation and man\u2014a notion found in\nHawthorne\u2019s \u201cMarble Faun.\u201d So it is plain that evolution, in Darwin\u2019s\nsense of the term, does not lie between new discoveries in science and old\ndogmas in religion, but it does lie between speculation in science and old\ndogmas in paganism\u2014poor science, she carries much that does not belong to\nher! Evolution of species from other species is an idea found in heathen\nmythology; it is also found in the ancient heathen cosmogonies. The God of\nflocks and shepherds among the Greeks was a compound creature having the\nhorns and feet of a goat and the face of a man. He was, doubtless, as near\nan approach to man as Darwin\u2019s imaginary link at some imaginary point in\nhis imaginary evolution.\n\nThis question is not one of progressive order in the same species, but a\nquestion relative to one species rising out of another of lower grade, and\nespecially the development of man from the lower animals. Agassiz says,\n\u201cSome have mistaken the action and reaction which exists everywhere in one\nand the same species for a _causal_ connection,\u201d that is to say, these\ninfluences produced the species, whereas the species must exist before any\nsuch action and reaction can take place. The action of physical\ninfluences, or external surrounding, _or environments_ upon species could\nnot take place unless the species _first existed_. Action and reaction in\none and the same species already existing, furnishes no evidence upon the\nmanner in which the species was first brought into existence. Darwin says:\n\u201cThe creation of organic matter having already taken place, my object is\nto show in consequence of what laws, or what demonstrable properties of\norganic matter, and of its environments, such states of organic nature as\nthose with which we are acquainted must have come about.\u201d Well, Mr. Darwin\nwill never get nearer the truth upon this great question than he was when\nhe marched boldly up to miraculous intervention in order to get his first\nunit, or living organism to place at the beginning of his evolutionary\nseries, unless he comes back to Moses and takes Christian ground. Geology\ndoes not teach that species have been evolved from lower species. Geology\ndeclares that new forms are new expressions of creative power. All the\nphysical forces that were operating upon our earth in the inorganic\nperiod, are in operation now. Why, O why, has it been that the experience\nand observation of the ages, as well as the record in the rocks, have\nfailed to give, in all the earth, one sensible demonstration in support of\nthe proposition that man, or any other species, was evolved from an\ninferior species? The answer is easy\u2014blind physical forces were, and are,\ninsufficient to bring into existence living being. Throughout every\ndepartment of creation there are evidences of invisible or spiritual\npowers that lie behind the events that come under observation in science.\nChemical affinity lies behind, and produces important changes that take\nplace in organic matter. But chemical affinities do not explain living,\norganic, being; for we have our existence at the expense of chemical\naffinities. The living force, whatever it may be, lies behind chemical\naffinities, and controls them. Instinct influences many of the\nmanifestations in animal life, and intelligence controls the sober conduct\nof men. Yet above all these there is that wonderful builder and overseer\nof the organism called life. As nature was perfect in all her elementary\nprinciples during the inorganic period, and as inertia was, and is, a\nproperty of matter, it follows, necessarily, that life was a new\nprinciple, from an immaterial source, otherwise inertia is not a property\nof matter; for a thing can not be\u2014exist and not be at the same time.\n\nVogt reasons in favor of evolution of species from a few abnormal\u2014that is\ndeteriorated\u2014human beings, which is the mistake spoken of by Agassiz, that\naction and reaction in one and the same species produce species. Action\nand reaction does not produce the species, nor yet _another species_. Men\nand apes have lived side by side for thousands of years. Why is it that\napes have made no advance towards the human form? Poor fellows! An ape is\nalways an ape, and a man is always a man. The geological record upon the\nrocks is in favor of man\u2019s existence as man by creative interposition. The\nevolution hypothesis rests its conclusions upon effects that well-known\ncauses have never been known to produce, for the evolution of species from\nlower species was never known anywhere in history or fact. In reference to\nDarwin\u2019s ideas upon the origin of species, Mr. Huxley said: \u201cThat,\nnotwithstanding the clearness of the style, those who attempt fairly to\ndigest the book find much of it a sort of intellectual pemmican\u2014a mass of\nfacts crushed and pounded into shape, rather than held together by the\nordinary medium of a logical bond.\u201d The impossibility of a scientific test\nis admitted, for vast periods of time in the infinite past are claimed for\nthe work of natural selection. Countless ages form the basis of the\nsystem, without which it could not have brought about the present order of\nthings. But an infinite series of life forms upon our earth could not be\npossible, for it has been shown, allowing that the heat has passed out of\nour earth uniformly, as it does at present, that inside of a comparatively\nlimited period in the past, it must have been so intensely hot as to have\nbeen capable of melting a mass of rock equal to the bulk of the whole\nearth. Yet Darwin has his half developed\u2014imaginary animals strewn along\nthere in the infinite ages of the past. Men may get around this difficulty\nby disregarding the facts of science and of common sense, or by doing as\nTyndall did; that is, by taking up the mechanism of the human body, the\nmind itself, emotion, intellect, will and all their phenomena, and\n_latentizing_ them in a fire cloud. Tyndall says: \u201cThey were once _latent_\nin a fiery cloud.\u201d Farewell to common sense or Darwinism\u2014which shall it\nbe? Darwin\u2019s idea that all the causes of evolution were placed in a common\nprogenitor, by a miraculous creation of that common progenitor is in very\npoor harmony with his denial of design in nature, and also in poor harmony\nwith the idea of environments contributing so extensively to the change of\nspecies; for if all the causes were placed in a common progenitor, of\ncourse, they are not to be found in the least degree in environment. If\nall was placed in a common progenitor, brought into existence by a\nmiracle, as Darwin teaches, how is design to be excluded from nature?\nImperfections in nature are urged against design in nature by all the\nschool of evolutionists. But what kind of imperfection is that which is\ninvolved in the idea of God creating a common progenitor, lying at the\nbase of Darwin\u2019s series of evolution, possessing all the causes of all\neffects in nature, without designing those effects? What wonderful\nundesigned results!\n\nThere are those, among unbelievers, who profess to see no evidences of a\ndesigning intelligence in all the harmonies of nature, and yet profess to\nsee the far off man behind the old stone ax. What wonderful intelligence\nthey have! There is no want of intelligence; it is want of something else,\nwhich Christianity requires. I think so much of your common sense that I\nwill leave you to say what that is. Socrates said: \u201cWhen I was young it\nwas surprising how earnestly I desired that species of science which they\ncall physical, for it appeared to me pre-eminently excellent in bringing\nus to know the causes of each, through what each is produced and\ndestroyed. But happening to hear some one read in a book, that it is\nintelligence which is the parent of order and cause of all things, I\nconsidered that, if it were so, the ordering intelligence placed each\nthing where it was best.\u201d\n\nIs mind a development upward from the instinct of the brute creation, or\nis it an offspring from God? Man\u2019s reasoning intelligence separates him\nfrom the brute by a chasm that no man can carry the reasoning powers of\nmind across. _All on that side is brutish._ The science of the Bible,\ndealing with intelligence as its subject, is the highest order of science\nknown to man. To limit the term science to physical phenomena is\nunjustifiable, unless matter is the only substance in the universe, and\nunless it be true, also, that some things resulting from matter lie\noutside of science; for if matter is the one, and only, substance, and if\nscience deals with all there is, or may be, connected with that substance,\nthen, according to materialists themselves, its province is to deal with\nlife, mind and religion. But matter is not the only substance, unless a\nthing can be, exist, and not be at the same time; for if life is a\nproperty of matter inertia is not, and if mind is a property of matter it\nmust be with all matter everywhere, or the thing is and is not at one and\nthe same time.\n\nThe mind, in all its faculties, lies outside of the domain of the physical\nsciences. Each man gets his knowledge of his own mental and moral\nself-hood, not through the senses, but by his consciousness. So there is a\nmental science that looks inward, and a physical science that looks\noutward. Break down consciousness and philosophy is ruined. But some\nignoramus is ready to say: What care I for philosophy? Poor fellow! He\ndoes not know what philosophy is; his ignorance is his trouble. Philosophy\nsimply tells us _how things are_; it answers the question, _how is it_?\nThere is nothing in which we are more interested than we are in the _how\nis it_? Let us not ruin philosophy; consciousness is her foundation with\nus; for in order to knowledge there must be primary and intuitive beliefs;\nthe man who has no faith in his own ability to see truth, when it is\npresented through the medium of the senses, will never come to any\ndefinite conclusions about any thing. So mind is innate, and lies in\nconsciousness, or self-hood, and is at the bottom of all our knowledge;\notherwise we would not, and could not, be men.\n\nMind is above matter, and virtue and morals are above both in their\nresults. The certainties are not all confined to physical nature, and\nhence science should not be. Personality and the freedom of the will,\npossessed in consciousness, are as certain as any facts in the physical\nworld. Truth, justice, right and wrong are equally certain.\n\n\n\n\n\nWAS IT POSSIBLE?\n\n\nThe miracle of the sun and the moon standing still in the days of Joshua\nis urged as contrary to the philosophy of nature, and therefore untrue.\nThat which is simply above the ordinary is not necessarily contrary to the\nordinary. The objection is without value until it be proven that there is\nno God; for it is in his power to control the planets. Otherwise he is not\nomnipotent. On this very account, it is true, that there is no consistent\nground between Christianity and atheism; for the moment we admit the\nexistence of God, that moment we concede the existence of the power\nadequate to the accomplishment of all the miracles of the Bible. Joshua\nwent to the aid of the Gibeonites against the confederate kings; went up\nto Gilgal _all night_, and came instantaneously upon the enemy; having\nthrown them into confusion with great slaughter, and chased them from\nGibeon to Beth-horon, in a westerly direction, the Lord co-operating in\ntheir destruction by a great hail-storm, which slew more than the swords\nof the Israelites, but touched not the Israelites. In this situation of\nthings the sun appears over Gibeon eastward and the moon over Ajalon\nwestward. When Joshua saw it, moved by a grand impulse, he said: \u201c_Sun_,\nstand thou still over Gibeon; and thou, moon, over the valley of Ajalon.\u201d\nSee Joshua 10: 1 to 28.\n\nThe entire machinery of nature is no more in the hands of an Omnipotent\nGod than a clock or watch in the hands of a man. How absurd it is for a\nman, who believes in God\u2019s existence, to be emptying out his wicked\nridicule, the result of his ignorance or otherwise, of his dishonesty,\nupon this miracle? Is not God above his laws? Can not he manipulate, take\nhold of and handle the laws of nature?\n\nIt is claimed that the miracle was contrary to the philosophy of nature.\n_God out_, it would be true, but _God in_, it is not. It is conceded by\nthe best of minds that the Bible is in perfect accord with the Newtonian\nsystem; that the sun is the center of the solar system; and the earth, and\nall other planets, move round the sun in certain periodical times; that\nthe sun revolves around his own axis, and round the common center of\ngravity included in his own surface; that the solar influence is the\n_cause_ of the annual and diurnal motions of the earth, and that the\nmotions of the earth must continue while the solar influence continues to\nact upon it; that no power but that of Jehovah can change this solar\ninfluence; that he can suspend the operation of this influence; that he\ncan and does manipulate\u2014handle the laws which he has established\u2014whenever\nhis wisdom sees proper. It would be degrading to allow that the Almighty\nOne threw this universe of his under laws over which he has no controlling\npower.\n\nThe miracle wrought upon this occasion was altogether worthy of God.\nJoshua spoke as if he knew all about the effect of the solar influence\nupon our planet; it is this influence that gives to our earth its diurnal\nmotion, and the arresting of this influence would arrest the motion of the\nearth and the day would be lengthened out.\n\nIt is objected that if the sun should stand still one moment everything\nupon the earth would be swept from existence. It is the objection that is\nat fault, for there is no evidence that it was an instantaneous miracle. A\nfew seconds is all that is necessary when a carriage is in rapid motion to\nenable its occupants to light out with perfect safety when an\ninstantaneous pause would hurl them over the dash. At the equator the\nrotation of the earth is at the rate of fourteen hundred and twenty-six\nfeet per second; twelve hundred and twelve feet at Jerusalem. It is the\nspeed of a ball at the moment of leaving a cannon\u2019s mouth, discharged by\none-fifth of its own weight of powder. This power is allowed to be\nsufficient to elevate its ball to the height of twenty-four thousand feet,\ndeducting the effect of atmospheric resistance. Yet a child of six summers\ncould destroy all this force by the elastic and continued action of its\nfingers inside of two-thirds of a minute. This last objection is entirely\nworthless until it be shown that the miracle under consideration was\ninstantaneous, for eighteen minutes is time enough to stop, gradually, our\nplanet in its motion, so effectually that you would not feel that anything\nhad happened. \u201cThe fool hath said in his heart there is no God.\u201d","title":"The Christian Foundation, Or, Scientific and Religious Journal, February, 1880","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":14668}