{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_28075/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_28075","id":"gutenberg_28075","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/28075","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","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 3.\n\n                               March, 1880.\n\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nThe Influence Of The Bible Upon Moral And Social Institutions.\nThe Influence Of The Bible Upon Social Life And Social Institutions.\nLaw, Cause, And Agent.\nThe Inconsistency Of Modern Unbelievers Or Materialists.\nMaterialism In Its Bearings Upon Person And Personality.\nWas It Right?\nIt Only Needs To Be Seen, And Its Ugliness At Once Appears.\nDid The Race Ascend From A Low State Of Barbarism?\nThe Flood Viewed From A Scientific And Biblical Standpoint.\nThe Mosaic Law In Greece, In Rome, And In The Common Law Of England.\nDid Adam Fall Or Rise?\nDid They Dream It, Or Was It So?\nMiscellaneous.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE UPON MORAL AND SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS.\n\n\nIt is profitable for us to occasionally survey the dark arena where men\nhave played their part, in lonely gloom, without a Savior and without a\nGod. Pagan morality, being without the motives and restraints of revealed\nreligion, and guided wholly by the passions and the lights of reason and\nnature, is grossly defective. It has no settled standard of right and\nwrong. It is vain to look, in all heathen philosophy for any settled\nprinciples of duty or motives that commend themselves to enlightened\nminds.\n\nWhat is the basis and character of virtue? What is the law of moral\nconduct? What is the object which governs it? In what does human happiness\nconsist? These are questions which have never been satisfactorily answered\nby the unaided powers of the human mind. The annals of Pagan history show\nthe real results of all their speculations upon these questions. They are\ncomprehensively presented in the following: \u201cThey became vain in their\nimaginations and their foolish hearts were darkened. They were filled with\nall unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness,\nenvy, murder, deceit, malignity. They were backbiters, haters of God,\ndespiteful, proud, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,\nwithout natural affection, implacable and unmerciful.\u201d Their manners and\nhabits were the results of mere whim and caprice when they were not the\nresults of simple love of wickedness. The vice of one community was the\nvirtue of another; and refinement in one was unpardonable rudeness in\nanother. The public festivals celebrated in Egypt are disgraceful upon the\npages of history, being accompanied with shameful practices. Egypt was\nnoted for corrupt morals as far back as the times of Abraham. Asia Minor\nwas no better; unrighteousness, sensuality and luxury prevailed. In Greece\nthere was brutal savageness in its most hideous forms; in the age of its\ngreatest refinement sin was dressed up in the finest style. The Olympic,\nPythian and Isthmian games, which were kept up to give strength to the\nbody and courage in the battle, were debasing and corrupting to the lowest\ndegree of wretchedness. The ages of ancient heroism were filled up with\ncrime and debauchery. They were fruitful in incest and parricide, and all\nthe dark and gloomy events which were necessary to make up the most\nfearful picture of immorality. The monarchs of Assyria spent their time\nmainly in debasing crime and voluptuousness. The brightest and best days\nof Babylon were notorious for lewdness and accomplishment in crime and\niniquity; loaded with riches, they spared no pains and withheld no means\nin the production of all that gratified their lusts and fed their\npassions. In Babylon there was a certain well known temple in which\nadultery was legalized by _compulsory law_ for the purpose of increasing\nthe public revenue. The ancient Pagan religions sanctioned and practiced\nthe most detestible licentiousness. Cato commended young men for visiting\nhouses of ill-fame. Such was the very best phase of morals and public\nmanners in the purest state of Roman society. What must have been the\nworst? The worst! Well, I will give you an idea of it. The Emperor Nero\ndrove through the streets of the capital with his mistress in a state of\nnudity; and the Emperor Commodus first seduced and then murdered his own\nsister. Here reason, blinded by lust, was their guide. These people were\nnot troubled with that terrible book called the Bible. Happy (?) state.\nHow would we like to have our homes in the midst of such fellows? Their\nconscience had no fastenings, how could their doctrines excite to moral\nvirtue?\n\nHow much better are the principles of modern infidels? Bolingbroke\u2019s\nmorality is all embraced in self-love. Hobbes claims that the only basis\nof right and wrong is the civil law. Rousseau says all the morality of\nactions is in the judgement we ourselves form of them. Shaftsbury says,\nall the obligations to be virtuous arise from the advantages of virtue,\nand the disadvantages of vice. Have such moral principles ever reformed\nthe world? Do they reform their advocates? Did you ever know a man to\nreform after he became an advocate of such principles? Did you ever know a\nman to reform after understanding and abandoning the Christian religion?\nIf any such ever reformed their lives after setting themselves on Pagan\nground, by opposing Christianity, I have yet to learn the fact. It is the\nmorality of a wicked world that simply asks for the profitable, and not\nthe right; which inquires not for duty, but for self-interest\u2014for the\nopinions of men; it is a body without a spirit\u2014a whitewashed\nsepulchre\u2014splendid only in sepulchral greatness.\n\nMorality rests not upon principles that clothe themselves in various garbs\nto please the different fancies of the different ages, consulting simply\nthe spirit of the times. Such morality is one thing to-day and quite\nanother to-morrow\u2014it is variable as the seasons. It adapts itself to the\noccasion\u2014to the hour. It is very pliant\u2014it has no conscience, but is\nalways popularity-seeking. The morality of the Christian religion is very\ndifferent. In the New Testament we find a morality as pure, lofty and\nunchanging as its divine author; it purifies and regulates the inner\nman\u2014\u201cmake the tree good and the fruit _will be good_.\u201d The Bible settles\nthe great question of duty. It teaches us that to do right is to do that\nwhich is right in itself, from _pure_ motives and with a _right spirit_.\nThese two things God hath joined together, viz: the right deed from right\nmotives, and the right spirit. A man\u2019s conscience may be satisfied without\nthe right motives and without the right spirit, but that is not enough.\n\nIt is not enough for a man to have the right spirit and the right motives,\nunless he does that which is right in itself. Conscience may be warped by\nmalevolence, selfishness, prejudice, or education, until the man is led to\ndo that which is detestable in the sight of God. The time may come when\nthis man will regret his foolishness, and see that he was wrong, like Saul\nof old.\n\nRight things may be done from a wrong spirit, and wrong things may be done\nfrom a right spirit, but the morality of the Christian religion consists\nin doing right things from right motives and in a right spirit.\n\nThe great motive that governs us as Christian moralists is the fact made\nknown in these words, _God requires it_. You may talk of the dignity of\ncorrect morals, of their beauty and virtue, and of the terrible nature of\nvice, and of the demands of a well-governed selfishness, but all these are\nweak compared with the authority of the Supreme Being whom Christians love\nand adore.\n\nIf we would reform men successfully we must bring the conscience under the\nstrong bonds of obligation; we must extend the authority of the great\nLawgiver over the understanding, over the conscience, over the memory,\nover the imagination, over the entire inner man. This alone will stop the\ngerminations of sin, and check wickedness in its conception. This is the\ntap-root of the tree of virtue\u2014the source of virtuous principles,\ndemonstrating the truthfulness of the axiom, \u201cMake the tree good and the\nfruit will be good.\u201d Simple advantage is not the foundation of virtue; it\nhas a nature aside from its tendencies to worldly profit. Otherwise virtue\nwould often cease to be virtue, and vice would often cease to be vice.\nAnciently there were moral philosophers who plead that utility was the\nonly foundation of virtue. Paul speaks of some who supposed \u201cGodliness was\ngain.\u201d Such a morality would be the most uncertain thing in the world;\ngive it what name you choose, it is mere selfishness.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE UPON SOCIAL LIFE AND SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS.\n\n\nMan\u2019s entire nature forces him directly into a social state. He is\ndestitute of the strength possessed by many of the lower animals, and\nnaturally unable for want of speed to escape their attacks, so care for\nlife leads him into the closest alliances with his fellows. Childhood and\nold age necessitate dependence, and his wants, during those periods, bring\nhim under obligations to others during his strength and manhood. The\nsocial state is also necessary to the development of his intellectual\nnature, and some of his natural affections can be exercised only in such a\nstate. Benevolence, gratitude, complacency and heroism are not exercised\nin an insolated condition\u2014they are called out only in mutual associations\nwith our fellow-men.\n\nThe noblest efforts of intellectual strength and of human ingenuity are\nmade under the most powerful influence of society. Thus encouraged, men\nhave collected armies, founded kingdoms and governed them. In such\nkingdoms the arts and sciences have flourished in a greater or less\ndegree, and imperfect morals have crowned their labors and lifted their\nminds as high as their unaided powers have permitted. Such has been the\nbest condition in which the Scriptures ever found the social state. The\nstructure has been incomplete, resting upon no solid basis, and only\nimperfectly cemented together. Such a state of society has always been a\nproper object for the modifying and controlling influences of a purer\nsystem of morality, founded upon a pure religion.\n\nWhat has been the state of society in times past without the light of\nrevealed religion? There are evils in the social state where the Christian\nreligion exists, but they were there before the Gospel of Christ visited\nthose places. It is very common for unbelievers to charge the calamities\nof the social state to the Christian religion, but it is a dishonorable\nmode of argumentation. The proper question is this: Has humanity ever been\nwell organized in the social state without the presence and influence of\nthe Bible? Has it ever been well governed under such circumstances? Have\nmen respected the social rights and obligations or properly understood\nthem in the absence of revealed religion? Has the religion of Christ been\na disturber of the social organization where social rights were properly\nunderstood and regarded? or has it set aside the rights and obligations of\nmen in social life where men were enjoying peaceable, happy relations?\nDoes its legitimate influence make men more wicked and miserable? An\nhonest answer to these questions will commend the religion of Jesus\nChrist, and do honor to him as our Lord and Master. The Scriptures have\nbeen the means of establishing institutions which have stood for\ncenturies. Where society has been disjointed and out of order, without\nbonds or adhesiveness, the Scriptures have been introduced, banishing\ndisorder and bringing peace and good will to man. They have silently\noperated in the social surroundings and gradually elevated Pagan lands out\nof Paganism. They refine and cleanse the cruel, giving them habits which\nmake them at once superior to all Pagans.\n\nLook at Rome and Persia in comparison with England and America. The\nPersian\u2019s religion was the best of all the uninspired religions. They\nworshiped their unknown god in the sun, moon and stars. In two reigning\nprinciples they sought for an explanation of the present state of good and\nevil mixed, which is the perplexing problem that has always confounded\nunenlightened reason. The Persian\u2019s creed only exercised his intellect and\ngratified his curiosity. It brought no power to bear upon his social\nrelations. Persian history is a mass of crimes, suffering and intolerance.\nThe government was a despotism, and polygamy gave laws to the domestic and\nprivate relations of the citizens.\n\nAncient Rome stands foremost in all that moral culture and philosophy\nalone can do for social institutions. Its religion was gross in the\nextreme, exerting an unhappy influence upon the masses, while it was\ndisregarded by the priests who taught it, their sole object being to\nterrify the multitude and keep them in subjection to the authorities of\nthe state. It was said by a Roman, \u201cOur nation exists more by religion\nthan by the sword.\u201d But upon an examination of Roman history you will find\nservitude, despotism, tumult, revolt, revolution and slaughter, peace and\nwar. The ambitions of rivals to the throne, and new schemes of rulers,\noften deluged the country with blood and carried the sword to remote and\npeaceable nations, till the horrors of civil war were realized in almost\nevery part of the world. Every now and then the powers of some great mind,\nirritated by his calamities, having all the vices and none of the virtues\nof his species, would rise up and wreak vengeance in deeds which can not\nbe thought of without sadness of heart.\n\nHow much better was ancient Greece? How much better are modern Pagan\nnations? These evils have been extinguished in the ratio of the\ncirculation and influence of the Bible. The relation between the state and\nits citizens the Bible recognizes as of divine appointment; the foundation\nof civil government is the will of God. Government is an ordinance of God.\n\u201cThe powers that be are ordained of God.\u201d The great author of our rights,\nlife, liberty, peace, order, public morals and religion, has not left\nthese interests to chance, anarchy or the social compact. Rulers were\nordained of God, and are rulers, not for their own exaltation, but for the\ntranquility, virtue and peace of the governed. Where are the Pagan rulers\nwho were taught this great lesson so as to feel its importance? When have\nthey respected the rights of the people? Where have anti-Christian or\nPagan nations, in a single instance, been actuated by any motive save the\nrestless, factious determination to sink one tyrant for the sake of\nelevating another? In Christian lands a free and virtuous people limit the\nauthority of rulers and assert the rights of citizens. In our country a\nmass of public virtue and a weight of moral influence, that restrains the\nwrath of man, keeps us from being involved in an ocean of blood at every\npopular election. We are not repeating the history of Rome in this\nrespect. We have been taught to \u201cRender unto C\u00e6sar the things which belong\nto C\u00e6sar.\u201d The apostles of Christ have enjoined upon us the duty of being\nsubject to the rulers of our land, to submit ourselves to every ordinance\nof man for the Lord\u2019s sake. We have been taught to pray for our rulers.\nWhile we do this we can not be rebellious. Who is so blind as to not see\nthat the Scriptures will control our citizens with more benevolence than\nany other book or any other maxims or set of opinions. When the Christian\nScriptures are duly regarded and their divine authenticity respected\ndesigning, ambitious, corrupting and aspiring politicians will have but\nlittle power to plunge us into crimes and sufferings.\n\nThe most important of all our social institutions is the marriage. It is\nthe paternal source of all other relations. There is no exhibition of the\ndivine goodness in conditioning our race that is more significant and\nlovely. By it our world is a collection of families in which the tenderest\naffections are cherished and the worst generally subdued. Here there is a\ncommunity of interests. Here we experience the highest motives to a\nvirtuous influence, especially in forming the character of the youth of\nour country. The race is continually multiplying and enlarging. What\nwonderful wisdom was it that consulted its honor, its virtue and eternal\ndestiny by the appointment of the marriage relation? It was the best\nmethod upon which human society could be organized. There are\nnarrow-hearted, lustful bigots who would do away the social family\ncompact. They talk about \u201cfree thought,\u201d \u201cfree love,\u201d no restraints of\nlaw, no protection of the mother save the voluntary. Such has been the\ncustom in a few heathen lands; such is the doctrine of a few modern\ninfidels; such are the habits of a few gregarious communities in Christian\ncountries. In these communities the sexes are taught from the cradle to\nhate the marriage bond. Such a state of society is poisoned and polluted;\nis a fearful mass of corruption and rottenness. All moral safeguards are\nremoved. The offspring are thrown out upon the world with no restraints of\npaternal love and wisdom; no obligations of filial love and reverence;\nmonsters in iniquity, and in a short time equal in crime to those who were\nswept from the earth by the waters of the deluge or the flames of Sodom.\nLook then for one moment after the evil of polygamy. It existed for awhile\namong the ancient Hebrews. Moses suffered it for the hardness of their\nhearts. From the beginning it was not so. It was a perversion of the\nancient institution of matrimony. All the evils of that idolatrous age\ncould not be remedied in a moment; nothing was made perfect until the\nappearance of that wonderful counselor\u2014_Christ_. He restored the primitive\nintegrity of the marriage institution by revoking polygamy and divorce.\nPolygamy was never friendly to the physical and mental character of its\npopulation. It is demonstrated beyond the possibility of a doubt that it\nis debasing and brutalizing. The Turks and Asiatics are polygamists, but\nthey are much inferior to the old Greeks and Romans; yet ancient Rome was\na long ways from Heaven\u2019s will in respect of marriage ties.\n\nThe matrimonial institution of Rome was a compromise between the right and\nthe wrong. The institution was considered in the light of a civil\ncontract, entered into for expediency, and protected by the magistrates\nbecause it was deemed a blessing to society; by the law of the twelve\ntables it continued during the pleasure of the husband. The result was\nthat frequent, and often, rapid succession of divorces and marriages took\nthe place of polygamy, and introduced many of its evils.\n\nThe private history of Roman ladies of first rank is a succession of\nmarriages and divorces, each new marriage giving way to one more recent.\nOctavia, the daughter of the Emperor Claudus, married Nero, was repudiated\nby him for the sake of Popp\u00e6a; this woman was first married to Rufus\nCrispinus; then to Otho; and at length to Nero, by whom she was killed.\n\nNero murdered Thessalina\u2019s husband, and married her for his third wife.\nJulia, the daughter of Augustus, was first the wife of Marcellus, then the\nwife of Agrippa, and then the wife of Tiberius. Such examples are found\nalmost without number in the annals of Tacitus. The extent to which this\nevil was carried may be learned from the poet Martial, who informs us,\nthat, when the Julian law against adultery was revived as a prevention of\nthe corruption of the times, Thessalina married her tenth husband within\nthirty days, thus evading all the restraints which the law imposed against\nher licentiousness. What is the marriage bond worth in such a state of\nsociety?\n\nWhere is the state of society essentially better in the absence of the\nChristian religion?\n\nThe Bible teaches us that the institution is of Divine origin, established\nby the Lord himself. It inscribes upon every marriage altar, \u201cWhat God\nhath joined together let no man put asunder.\u201d It definitely defines\nmarriage to be the act of uniting two persons in wedlock, and only two.\nAccording to the Scriptures, this union can only be dissolved by crime or\ndeath. With great tenderness the Bible prescribes the duties of this\nrelation. \u201cHusbands love your wives as Christ loved the church.\u201d This love\nis not the cold hearted affection that is after the fashion of free-love\nphilosophy, but it is after a model that has touched heavenly hearts, and\ncaused more admiration than all other things combined.\n\nIn the ancient dispensation adultery was punished with death. In the\nChristian dispensation, it is said with _great emphasis_, \u201cWhoremongers\nand adulterers God will judge.\u201d There is a place of which it is said,\n\u201cWhoso is simple let him turn in hither, but he knoweth not that the dead\nare there, and that her guests are in the depths of hell.\u201d There is a sin\nof which the Bible often speaks, pointing the guilty perpetrators to the\nfact that they have none inheritance in the kingdom of God and of Christ.\n\nThe history of Pagan nations is little else than a record of crime. By\nstudying it we may learn something of our obligations to the Christian\nreligion, and our indebtedness to its pure spirit, which has brooded over\nthe darkness of the nations, and brought order out of confusion. It will,\nalso, learn us to value the names father, mother, husband, wife, children\nand parents; these names were of little value among Romans. In the annals\nof the Roman empire may be found a record of all that is shocking; a\nrecord of all that man can be guilty of; a record of all that an enemy\ncould be guilty of; suspicion, licentiousness, murder, conspiracy of wives\nagainst their husbands, and husbands against their wives; children\nsacrificed by the doings of a mother; families whose peace is ruined by\nintrigue and violence; men everywhere falling upon their own swords; the\nwife murdering her own husband for the sake of marrying another; woman\npracticed, skilled, in the art of poisoning\u2014such is the picture of Pagan\nlife in the most enlightened age of Rome.\n\nLet any man compare society in our country, or in any protestant country,\nwith the state of society under the reign of the C\u00e6sars, and he will see\nwhat the Christ has done for our race. The spirit that sustains our social\ninstitutions does not grow cold even at the grave, but is felt beyond\ndeath. How is it in heathen lands? The sweetest loves of life give way to\nsuspicion and envy; the jealousy of love, the thirst for power and\nambition, drives them away, often as soon as the flowers and beauty of\nyouth are gone. Where Christ reigns it is not so. Yet there are those who\nwould have us believe that the religion of Christ is an unsocial, selfish\nreligion. If it is unsocial and selfish to have no sympathy with\nwickedness, to promote all that is virtuous and kind, pure and true, to\ntake pleasure in all that subdues the malignant and beastly, the ambitious\nand cruel, then it is an unsocial and selfish affair. If it is unsocial\nand selfish to take pleasure in that which elevates and moulds character\nin the image of God, and fits it for angelic society hereafter, then it is\ntruly unsocial and selfish.\n\n\n\n\n\nLAW, CAUSE, AND AGENT.\n\n\nThe word law denotes the unceasing, regular order in which an agent or\nforce operates. It should, consequently, be distinguished from cause or\nefficiency; it being only the manner, or mode, according to which an agent\nor cause manifests itself. Therefore law is neither cause or agent. Yet it\nimplies an agent, or an energy; for without these law is nothing\u2014does\nnothing. The laws of nature had no existence until nature existed. That is\nto say, the laws of water did not exist until water existed, etc. So it is\neasy to perceive the truth that the laws of nature created nothing. Nature\nis said to be the aggregate of everything; therefore nature created\nnothing. The laws of nature, being the rules according to which effects\nare produced, demonstrate the existence of a cause or agent which\noperates. As the rules of navigation never steered a ship, so the law of\ngravity never moved a planet. A bare order or law of nature was not the\ncause of nature. To confound order or law with cause is to speak\nunadvisedly\u2014unintelligently; it is perfectly irrational. Would you cut off\nexecutive authority in a government and continue its existence without a\nperson or society to exercise, judge and execute according to law?\n\nTo say the world is governed by the laws of nature, without rising up in\nour thoughts to the efficient cause and superior reason, or, that which is\nalways implied in the term law, viz., a legislator and executive putting\nin force, is to play the Atheist and take things by halves; is to suppose\nthe laws of nature are beings, and imagine fabulous divinities in ignoring\nor setting aside the Christian\u2019s God, who is the source of all the laws of\nnature, and who governs all things according to them. \u201cThe laws of nature\nare the art of God.\u201d Without the presence of such an agent\u2014one who is\nconscious of all upon which the laws of nature depend\u2014producing all that\nthe laws prescribe\u2014the laws themselves could have no existence. The\nintelligence, or, if you prefer it, cause, which gives the laws of nature\ntheir power, and by which they are kept in action, must be everywhere\npresent and always present; otherwise the whole machinery of nature would\nbe deranged\u2014inertia is a property of matter. The universal presence of God\nis the one great and overwhelming condition of the existence of life and\nmotion throughout the vast universe of nature. The laws of matter are the\nlaws which he has prescribed for his own action. His presence is the\nessential condition of any natural course of events in the history of\nmatter. His universal agency is the only organ of power adequate to the\naccomplishment of the wonders of nature\u2014the only solution of its great\nproblems which lies within the reach of human reason. Some fools still say\nin their hearts there is no God.\n\nOne of Newton\u2019s great laws of motion is, that a body must continue forever\nin a state of rest, inertia being a property of matter, or being put in\nmotion continues forever in a straight line, if it be not disturbed by the\naction of an _external_ cause.\n\nNow let us apply this law to our planet, as a body, and see the result.\nWhat is the first necessary conclusion to which we are driven? Ans. Some\nexternal agency or cause put our planet in motion. What is the second\nconclusion? Ans. Some agent or cause controls its motion causing it to\ndepart from a straight line. Do you say the cause is in the influence of\nother planets? Well, suppose, for the sake of the argument, we admit it,\nare we then through with the problem? No. We have only moved the\ndifficulty one step backward. We can see how one billiard ball may set\nanother in motion, but it is only thinkable upon the supposition that\nthere was an agent behind the ball which put the second ball in motion.\nWhat put the first ball in motion? Did it put itself in motion? No. The\nlaw is this: A body must remain forever at rest without some external\nagency to put it in motion. Now, you step out from our planet to its\nnearest neighbor, and from thence to the next, and so on till you get to\nthe furthest limits of matter\u2014carry along with you the idea that one\nplanet has put another in motion until you arrive at the last one\nthinkable, and then ask yourself this question: Is inertia a property of\nmatter here? Is the law of motion, already quoted, a law of motion here?\nIf it is, then, of necessity, science demands an agent outside of planets,\nor behind the whole of them, to put them in motion, and to control them\nwhile in motion in order to carry them forward in _circles_\u2014do you see?\n\u201cBut the fool says in his heart there is no God.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE INCONSISTENCY OF MODERN UNBELIEVERS OR MATERIALISTS.\n\n\nThe materialistic unbeliever is necessarily bound up in a contradiction\nfrom which there is no escape short of a denial of the eternity of matter,\nspace and duration, on the one hand, or a denial of the materialistic\nphilosophy, upon the other.\n\nHis reasoning is this: Space exists. I know it exists. I can\u2019t set bounds\nto space, therefore it is infinite.\n\nMatter exists. I know it exists. I can\u2019t annihilate matter, therefore\nmatter is eternal.\n\nDuration is. I know it is. I can\u2019t set limits to it; therefore duration is\ninfinite.\n\nNow, it is easy to discover that the conclusion in each case rests upon\ntwo thoughts. First, Conscious knowledge expressed in the phrase \u201cI know.\u201d\nSecondly, Want of power to set bounds to space, to limit duration and\nannihilate matter.\n\nThe other and contrary side is brought up in the following arrangement:\nMind exists. I know it exists. I can\u2019t set limits to mind; therefore mind\nis infinite, mind is eternal.\n\nLife exists. I can\u2019t comprehend or set limits to life; therefore life is\ninfinite, life is eternal.\n\nThe time was when there was no life or mind associated with or in matter,\nthe matter belonging to our planet. From whence came life? From whence\ncame mind? Do you say from the laws of nature? Well, laws are rules by\nwhich agents act. Laws are nothing unless there is an agent to act in\nharmony with them or by them. There is consequently something lying behind\nthe laws of nature, acting by them. What is that something? Do you say it\nis force? Force is the manifestation of energy\u2014a mere attribute. There is\nsomething behind energy, to which it belongs. Do you say it is matter?\nInertia is a property of matter? From whence came life and mind? The time\nwas when they were not here.\n\nYou unbelievers say it is scientific to reason from your own conscious\nknowledge upon the line of physical elements, as well as space and\nduration, to the ideas of infinite matter, space, and duration. Do you not\nknow that there is also a line of vital and mental forces? Why is it that\nyou do not consider men equally scientific who reason upon that line from\nconscious knowledge to the idea of an ever-living, all-powerful\nintelligence? Power is a matter of conscious knowledge. Can you set limits\nto it? No, never! Then power is infinite. Let us ever remember there is no\nlife without antecedent life; no mind without antecedent mind; and no\nmatter without antecedent substance. Where does power come from? Can you\ntell? If you are a Theist you can. If you are an Atheist you can\u2019t.\nUnbelievers say the Infinite One, if there be such, can not be revealed to\nman. This conclusion is rested upon the assumption that the finite can not\ncomprehend the infinite. This is regarded as a complete overthrow of\nrevealed religion. Can nothing be revealed to me unless I can comprehend\nit? Can I know nothing without comprehending it? I know load-stone, but do\nI comprehend it? I know electricity, but do I comprehend it? I am\nconscious of life and mind, but do I comprehend either? We know that\nmatter, of itself, is inert, dead, and yet it lives. But this is our\ndifficulty: How does it come to live? We know it lives, but do we\ncomprehend the fact? We know enough about a great many incomprehensible\nthings for all practical purposes. Do you unbelievers know the _unknown_?\nIf you don\u2019t, might it not be well to quit talking about it? Your language\nis at fault. You are no more competent to talk about the _unknown_ than we\nChristians. Turn that word _unknown_ out of doors and adopt the word\n_incomprehensible_, and then talk about it, for it is revealed to all who\ntalk about it. You and I apprehend the INFINITE ONE. You talk about\ninfinite space, infinite duration, infinite substance. Yes, and I talk\nabout infinite life, infinite power and infinite mind. We all know there\nare infinities in existence. We apprehend them, knowing enough about them\nfor all practical life purposes. You talk about the infinities known in\nscience, and I talk about the infinities known in religion. After all our\nreasoning may it not be true that mind is infinite in its capacities? May\nit not, in the future, comprehend many things which are now\nincomprehensible? My increase of knowledge, consequent upon the capacities\nof my mind, enables me to comprehend a great deal that I could not\ncomprehend a few years ago. If I could not have apprehended those things\nprior to comprehending them, I never would have learned enough about them\nto comprehend them. I always apprehend a thing, know it is, before I begin\nto investigate it. Now, I know God, but I do not comprehend him. He is too\ngreat in his majesty for my present knowledge. I may never comprehend him,\nstill I apprehend him and know enough for all practical life purposes. I\nbelieve that I shall know a great deal more about him in the future; yes,\nmore even in this life, if I am only faithful in \u201cgoing on to know the\nLord.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n\nMATERIALISM IN ITS BEARINGS UPON PERSON AND PERSONALITY.\n\n\nPersonality is individuality, existing in itself, but with a nature as its\nground.\u2014_Coleridge._\n\nPaley says: The seat of intellect is a person.\n\nLock says: Person stands for a thinking, intelligent being, that has\nreason and reflection, and can consider itself as itself, ... which it\ndoes only by that consciousness which is inseparable from thinking, and as\nit seems to me essential to it, it being impossible for any one to\nperceive without perceiving that he does perceive.\n\nHenry Taylor says: The quality of intelligence is essential in order to\nperson. That which is not intelligent we call a thing, and that which is\nintelligent we call a person. By the word person we therefore mean a thing\nor substance that is intelligent, or a conscious being; including in the\nword the idea both of the substance and its properties together.\n\nOldfield says: Person is a subsisting substance or \u201c_suppositum_,\u201d endued\nwith reason as a man is, that is capable of religion.\n\nThompson says: Person as, applied to Deity, expresses the definite and\ncertain truth that God is a living being and not a dead material energy.\n\nJouffroy says: Personality, in jurisprudence, denotes the capacity of\nrights and obligations which belong to an intelligent will.\n\nA person is a being who is intelligent and free. Every spiritual and moral\nagent, every cause which is in possession of responsibility and\nconsciousness, is a person.\n\nWebster says: Person is an individual human being consisting of body and\nsoul. We apply the word to living beings possessed of a rational nature;\nthe body when dead is not called a person.\n\nThe Biblical ground nature of the word person is in these words: \u201cWhat man\nknoweth the things of a man but the spirit of man which is in him.\u201d\n\nIntelligence is an essential attribute of person, but it is not a property\nof matter. If intelligence is a property of matter, then the distinction\nbetween person and thing is of a necessity a distinction without a\ndifference. But no greater absurdity could possess the human mind for one\nmoment than the thought that intelligence is a property or quality of\nmatter. Nothing short of the fact expressed in Bible language that the\nspirit of man is a gift from God, will account for the distinction between\nperson and thing. Man in his physical nature is enslaved to the laws of\nphysical nature in common with all organized things; is subject to the\nlaws that control matter. The law of organic existence is such that he can\nnot live without a continual supply of food, which the nutritive process\ncontinually provides in order to make up for the wastage consequent upon\ndisintegration of parts. But there are impassible limits fixed to the\nnutritive process by the most certain of all laws, viz: those of gravity\nand chemical action. To abolish these laws would insure the destruction of\nall organic existence, because it would be the abrogation of the essential\nconditions of organized being. Yet it is true that when a certain point is\nreached a change and dissolution of the molecules always takes place, and\nthis change is the sure introduction of death. Hence, nothing short of\nunion with God, through his own appointed means, by which he brings his\nown omnipotence to bear for the purpose of controlling the essential\ncondition of organic existence, could ever be an antidote of death. Man in\nhis original innocence enjoyed such means in the fruit of the tree of\nlife. Being removed from this he dies by the essential laws of his\nexistence. So man in his physical nature is enslaved in common with all\nthings that are under the reign of physical laws. Yet he is a free\nintelligence. He is conscious of his freedom. There is in his history an\nabundance of evidence to demonstrate his freedom. There is also a\nsufficient amount of evidence to demonstrate the slavery of his physical\nnature. But why refer to evidence here? These are facts of consciousness.\nMan\u2019s personality is, in view of all that has been said, grounded upon his\nmental or spiritual nature, which was always free, otherwise his identity\nis lost forever in the grave. I have said, if the attributes of person are\nproperties of matter, there is no distinction between persons and things;\nin such a case persons would be things and things would be persons. Here\nit is easy to see that the materialistic philosophy upon the subject of\nman\u2019s identity changes the ground nature of personality, and destroys all\ndistinction between persons and things.\n\n\n\n\n\nWAS IT RIGHT?\n\n\nScientists are the last men upon the earth that should deal unfairly with\nthe Bible. They profess to investigate, to analyze, to demonstrate. In one\nword, they profess to be in the lead of thought in a very progressive age;\ntherefore we expect just a little more from them than from the\nunscientific. But, alas! many of them are mere socialists, and many who\nare scientists have never investigated the Bible, do not understand its\nfacts, and are also averse to its claims.\n\n\u201cScience takes account of phenomenon, and seeks to understand its law.\u201d\nNow let us apply the test to some of the objectionable facts of the Bible,\nand note the result.\n\nMoses said to the children of Israel, Understand, therefore, this day,\nthat the Lord thy God is he who goeth over before thee. As a consuming\nfire he shall destroy them, and he shall bring them down before thy face;\nso shalt thou drive them out and destroy them quickly, as the Lord hath\nsaid unto thee. Deut. 9: 3. This language has reference to the inhabitants\nof the land of Canaan. Their wickedness appears in the following\nquotations. Deut. 12: 29, 31. When the Lord thy God shall cut off the\nnations from before thee, take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by\nfollowing them, and that thou inquire not after their gods, saying, How\ndid these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. Thou shalt\nnot do so unto the Lord thy God: for _every abomination_ to the Lord,\nwhich he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and\ntheir daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods. The destruction\nof these idolators, who were burning their own sons and daughters in the\nfire, furnishes unbelievers and skeptics with a great deal of capital,\nwhich can be used with ignorance, but not with intelligence.\n\nWhat was the law governing in the case? The answer is in these words: The\ncourse of conduct which is for the greatest good of the greatest number is\nright. This law is known in the science of civil government. It has its\nplace in the history of all civil governments. Without it we are unable to\naccount for the facts known in the history of our own government. It is a\nlaw that lies at the foundation of all moral and social institutions.\nThose wicked tribes in the land of Canaan, and upon its borders, were in\nthe way of the establishment of any civil institution. It is to be\nremembered, also, that the children of Israel did not forfeit their rights\nin the land by going down into Egypt in the time of a famine.\n\nThe land was theirs by right of preoccupancy and by gift. Upon their\nreturn from Egypt they found no civil institutions in the land, but, on\nthe contrary, the people were burning their own children in the fire. They\nwere also guilty of every abominable thing that was hateful in the sight\nof God. They were utterly unqualified for citizenship in any civil state,\nso they were cut off as cankers upon the body.\n\nTo the same end, the greatest good to the greatest number, our government\nhas cut off thousands of better men. When the children of Israel went into\nthe idolatrous worship of those wicked heathen and burned their sons and\ndaughters in the fire to Molech, the Lord gave them statutes and laws\nwhich were not good, and whereby they might not live. He served them\nright. How can civil government be perpetuated, or even exist, in the\nmidst of such heathenish idolatry? If infidel objections, based upon the\ndestruction of such wicked hordes as were put to death in Canaan, are\nworth anything they are worth enough to sanction, by the protection of\ncivil government, all manner of abominations that are known among\nbarbarous heathen.\n\nThese enemies of God and the Bible talk as though such an outrage as\nburning sons and daughters in the fire to idol gods should not be visited\nwith such punishment. Would they do any better? Could they manage such\nbarbarous murderers better for the general good? If it was possible for a\ncivil government to allow such characters the rights of citizenship it\nwould be at the expense of giving license to all other crimes, for there\nare no crimes greater in their heinousness than _murderous idolatry_. If\ninfidels ever get the power in this or any other civil government, and\ncarry out the spirit of their lectures against the God of the Bible, the\ngovernment will soon come to an end, and crime of every grade and\ncharacter will prevail. American citizens have seen many better men than\nold Amalek die. It is possible that a few unbelievers who were out in the\nlate civil war have seen better men die. It is possible that a few\nunbelieving colonels have killed better men upon Southern battle-fields,\nand it is possible that a few of them are traveling over the country\nabusing Moses and the God of the Bible for putting worse men to death.\n\nLet us ever remember that the eternal laws of right, sometimes,\nnecessitate the destruction of human life. The greatest good of the\ngreatest number is an object that should always govern the action of a\nnation. This law should never be disregarded. Murder, having no connection\nwith the general good, is a very different thing. When an individual is\nput to death by an individual to gratify malice its relations are not with\nthe general good.\n\nAll sensible men, who are acquainted with the Bible, know that the facts\nof the Bible, known in the ancient wars of the nation of Israel, like the\nfacts known in the wars of our own nation, would look terrible in the\nrelations of murder. Things out of their relations are always ugly. A man\nand a woman living together as husband and wife outside of the marriage\nrelation, would be in adultery, while others living in the same manner,\nbut inside of the matrimonial relation, would be in a grand and\npraiseworthy union. Why is it that sensible men will wrest the Scriptures,\ntaking things out of their proper relations, and do it to their own\ncondemnation? \u201cHappy is the man who condemneth not himself in that thing\nwhich he alloweth.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n\nIT ONLY NEEDS TO BE SEEN, AND ITS UGLINESS AT ONCE APPEARS.\n\n\n\u201cAre such shams of rights, as caucus-and-ballot-boxism can give us, worth\nspending any more time and money and agitation upon? I ask, and I appeal\nto what has been most lyingly named free government in Greece, Rome,\nEngland, Venice, France, the United States, and wherever else it has been\nattempted to _make permanent the crisis stage_ of progress which marks the\ndeparture from monarchy. No, my friends, art-liberty _alone_ can be of any\navail.... By art-liberty, my friends, I mean the _practical application_\nof _all_ science and art _systemized_ as fast as unfolded. The only law\nwhich can govern a free state must be _discovered_; it must be drawn from\nthe _whole of science and art_\u2014not \u2018enacted.\u2019 Human law can no more be\n\u2018enacted\u2019 than can physical law.\u201d ... \u201cMan\u2019s leaders must find out how to\nsatisfy man\u2019s highest aspirations, instead of catering for his prejudices;\ninstead of confirming him, by flattery and cajolery, in his false,\nsupernaturalistic notions; instead of studying the trickery of\nrepresenting and plundering him. And they will rapidly find this out, as\nsoon as a knowledge (already attained) of the _unity of science_ spreads\namong them, and along with it its correllate, that all mankind are one\norganism, no individual of which can be indifferent to _each_ and _all_ of\nthe others. Enlightened, far-seeing, _all-benefiting selfishness_ will\nthen take the place of short-sighted, suicidal, penny-wise pound-foolish\ncunning; and that barricade of hypocrisy, duty, that most fallible of all\nguides, conscience, and \u2018virtue\u2019 and \u2018vice,\u2019 those most unscientific and\nmischievous expressions that have ever crept into the vocabulary of human\nfolly, will be obsolete.\u201d\n\nHere is the outcome of the liberty that infidels talk so much about.\n\u201cArt-liberty\u201d is to ANNIHILATE CONSCIENCE and the distinction between\nvirtue and vice so completely that there will be no more use for the\nwords, \u201cthey will be obsolete.\u201d \u201cAll benefiting selfishness will then\ngovern humanity.\u201d Reader, are you prepared for such a state of society?\n\u201cIf all _contracts_ in accordance with present \u2018law\u2019 were fulfilled to the\nletter, and if all the \u2018_duties_\u2019 enjoined by present moralism were\nunflinchingly performed, and if all which \u2018virtue\u2019 styles \u2018vice\u2019 was\nentirely abstained from, and if what is now \u2018free trade\u2019 according to\n\u2018law,\u2019 had a \u2018fair field,\u2019 how long would it take a millionth of the\nearth\u2019s inhabitants to accumulate _all_ its wealth? In my opinion, it\nwould not take ten generations to produce that reign of \u2018law,\u2019\n\u2018principle,\u2019 \u2018morality,\u2019 \u2018virtue\u2019 and \u2018free trade,\u2019 or\nmind-your-own-business, and every-one-for-himself-ism, on the earth.\u201d Are\ninfidels down on law, down on virtue, down on principle, down on morality,\netc.? _It seems so._ \u201cBut there must be no stealing, swindling or robbery,\nas _legally defined, on any_ account; and there must be no sexual\nintercourse out of the bonds of monogamy, _even for bread_, and, above\nall, there must be no acts, or even words of _treason_. The laboring man\nand the laboring woman must patiently and slowly (nay, not very slowly,\nI\u2019m thinking,) die on such wages as they who, _in perfect security_, hold\nall the wealth, choose to give; and those out of work must brave martyrdom\nto \u2018principle,\u2019 by starving straightway, unless they can obtain a \u2018permit\u2019\nto drag out a few months, possibly years, in sack-cloth and on water-gruel\nin an almshouse.... Was Thomas Paine here to-day his old remedies,\nreligious and political _popular_ free discussion and reasoning, would be\nthrown aside or only used to assist science and art to displace them in\nreligious and state affairs.\u201d Truth will come to the surface! Here it is\nspeaking for itself. The office of \u201cart-liberty,\u201d the liberty for which\ninfidels plead, is to destroy _popular free discussion_ and _reasoning_,\nallowing them _only_ in order to destroy themselves, that is, allowing the\ninfidels to use them to displace them in RELIGIOUS and STATE _affairs_.\nThis is called \u201cart-liberty;\u201d liberty in art and science, and despotism in\nreligion and politics OR STATE. Such a society, plus the absence of\nconscience, virtue and vice, is the infidel\u2019s ideal of free government.\nAll this means is simply \u201cintolerance\u201d by law; intolerance in \u201creligious\nand state affairs.\u201d\n\nWhen such a state of society is brought about in this country the infidels\nwill have more _hell_ than they will relish. Listen once more, \u201cMan\u2019s\nright to be self-governed is, equally with his desire to be so,\n_self-evident_.\u201d How are these infidels going to have self-government and\nintolerance by law in matters of religion and state? This Godless infidel\nsays, \u201cBut what is most insultingly _termed_ \u2018elective franchise\u2019 is the\nfarthest thing possible from self-government.... The _popular_ free\ndiscussion of affairs of the last degree of complication, religious and\nstate affairs, except during the _crisis_ period of revolution, only\nrenders that worst of despotisms, anarchy, chronic; it seats in the social\norganism that political gangrene, demagogism, which has always hitherto\nsooner or later required the cauterization of military despotism in order\nto save even civilization. Despotism is the most inveterate of all the\ndiseases of the social organism which ignorance has inflicted; nay, it is\na complication of all its diseases. What, my fellow-man, would any of you\nthink of the physician who should consult with an individual organism with\na view to taking that organism\u2019s opinion as to what course he (the\nphysician) had best pursue in order to cure him (the organism) of\nscrofula, complicated with every other bodily disease to which flesh is\nheir?... Evidently, church and state management require art and skill\ninfinitely superior to what \u2018supernaturalism\u2019 and its legitimate child\nmonarchism, or its bastard issue, caucus-and-ballot-boxism, are capable\nof. From the dissecting-room, the chemical laboratory, the astronomical\nobservatory, the physician\u2019s and physiologist\u2019s study\u2014in fine, from all\nthe schools of science and arts should human law be _declared_, instead of\nbeing \u2018enacted\u2019 in legislative halls by those who in every respect besides\npolitical trickery, fraud and \u2018smartness,\u2019 are perfect ignoramuses.\u201d How\nis all this to be reconciled with the ideas of self-government set forth\nby this author and copied in this article? Who are to be the doctors, and\nwho are to be the patients? When _popular_ discussion is confined to art\nand science, only as it may be used in order to keep it out of religious\nand state affairs, who are to be the _popular_ free disputants? When\nlegislative halls are done away, along with their _progenitors_, elective\nfranchise and representation, and law emanates from all the schools of\nscience and art by \u201cdeclaration,\u201d will men be more ready to obey?\n\nGive the sore-headed, politically gangrened, conscienceless, virtueless,\nGodless applauders of Tom Paine what they ask, and it will simply amount\nto abandoning our posterity to the lowest, vilest sensualism known in\nPagan geography along the line or borderland of a foul lust-gratifying,\nbrutalizing _hell_. May all Christian people, and every lover of our\nhumanity, wake up to the importance of giving these wide-mouthed, blatant\ninfidels, who are traveling over our country howling about \u201cliberty of\nman, woman and child,\u201d a wide berth. They would like to be the \u201cdoctors,\u201d\nand treat the \u201corthodox\u201d people so as to purge \u201c_popular_ free discussion\u201d\nout of them, and at the same time have their own stomachs crammed full of\nthat grace, and so \u201csteal heaven\u2019s livery to serve the devil.\u201d The above\n_infidelism_ is copied _verbatim_ from the \u201cconcluding application\u201d of the\nlife of Thomas Paine by Calvin Blanchard, published in 1879, and being now\npeddled over our country. What do our infidel friends mean by so much ado\nabout liberty as opposed to the present state of society in our country?\nFree thought belongs to all. You can\u2019t chain the mind. What is it that\nthey want? Will they be so kind as to inform us? Is Calvin Blanchard a\nrepresentative of the liberty sought for? Then may we long live to keep\nour heels upon it.\n\n\n\n\n\nDID THE RACE ASCEND FROM A LOW STATE OF BARBARISM?\n\n\nThe fact that the human mind abhors a contradiction is an evidence of the\nGodlike nature of man, and an objection to the old tenet of total\ndepravity; it is also the secret of the effort, upon the part of\nerrorists, to systematize. One assumption creates a demand for another,\nand thus men who start wrong, in science or religion, labor under great\ndisadvantages. When an idea is once consecrated to science or religion in\nthe human heart it is hard to eradicate. When you find that you have made\na wrong start remember that it is the part of true manhood to make a frank\nsurrender, and start anew.\n\nThe assumption of the \u201cevolution of species\u201d lays all its advocates under\nthe necessity of assuming that a low state of barbarism lies behind the\ncivilization known in the history of the race as the primitive or first\ncondition of intellect. Now, as this is a question of fact, an examination\nof the evidence pertaining to this second assumption is a matter of\nprimary importance. What are the facts bearing upon the question? With\nDarwinians the \u201cprimeval savage\u201d is a stereotyped idea, finding expression\nin every-day language; and an idea that some scientists (rather sciolists)\nnever get tired of promulgating. With them primitive man was little\nremoved from the brute beasts, devoid of knowledge, art, and language\u2014a\ncreature in a small degree above; and in a great degree below, the\nanthropoid apes, from whom it is claimed he has descended by evolution. Is\nthere any proof of this primitive inferiority, or savagery, as opposed to\ncivilization? How does the voice of history speak? It doubtless shows many\ninstances of improvement, of an advance from a low condition to a higher\none; but what does the earliest history say as respects the _primitive\ncondition of mankind_? Waiving an examination of the Bible history, we\nwill at once proceed to other sources. In Egypt there are no indications\nof an early period of barbarism. All authorities agree that we find no\nrude or heathenish time in the far off history of Egypt out of which\ncivilization was evolved. The first king known in Egyptian history, Menes,\nchanges the channel of the river Nile, makes a great reservoir, and erects\nthe Temple of Phthah at Memphis. His son Athothis is known as the builder\nof the Memphite Palace, and as a physician, who wrote books on anatomy.\nThe pyramid times are early in Egyptian history; the portrayed scenes in\nthe tombs of this early period reveal the same habits which existed in\nafter times. That writing had been long in use is demonstrated by the\nhieroglyphics in the Great Pyramid. Go as far back as you may in Egyptian\nhistory, you will find no primitive barbarous mode of life. Sir Charles\nLyell admitted, in \u201cAntiquity of Man,\u201d p. 90, that \u201cwe have no distinct\n_geological evidence_ that the appearance of what are called the inferior\nraces of mankind has always preceded in chronological order that of the\nhigher races.\u201d\n\nGeorge Rawlinson says Mr. Pengelly made a similar confession at the\nmeeting of the British Association at Bristol, in August, 1875. So far as\nthis question of evolution is concerned, it is just as easy to establish\ninvolution of civilization into barbarism as evolution of civilization out\nof barbarism. Herodotus gives an account of the Geloni, a Greek people,\nwho were driven from the cities on the northern coast of the Euxine, and\nretiring into the interior, lived in wooden huts, and used a language half\nScythian and half Greek. We follow this people down to the times of Mala\nand find them fully barbarous, using the skins of those slain in battle as\ncoverings both for themselves and their horses. The Copts, of our times,\nare degraded descendants of the ancient Egyptians. In North and South\nAmerica the descendants of the Spanish conquerers are poor representatives\nof those Castilians who, under Pizarro and Cortez mastered the Peruvian\nand Mexican kingdoms, and planted the civilization of the old world in the\nnew. Civilization is liable to decay, to wane, to deteriorate, to sink so\nlow that it may be a question whether it is any longer civilization. In\nthe cases we have alluded to we have a low degradation retaining evidences\nof something higher. In comparative philology we have cases where it is\npresumed by the best of critics that a higher state of civilization sank\nto the lowest conceivable state of heathenism. The race existing in\nCeylon, known as the \u201cWeddas,\u201d is of this type. The language of the Weddas\nis regarded as a base descendant of the most complete and first known form\nof Aryan speech, the Sanskrit; and the Weddas are set down as descendants\nof the Sanskritic Aryans, who conquered India. There are no savages of a\nmore debased type. They do not count beyond two or three; they have no\nidea of letters; of all the animals the dog alone is domesticated; their\nart consists in making bows and arrows and constructing rude huts; they\nare dwindling and threaten to become extinct. See \u201cReport of the British\nAssociation for the advancement of science, for the Year 1875,\u201d part 3, p.\n175.\n\nCivilization and barbarism are states between which men oscillate, passing\nfrom one to the other with equal ease, according to the influences brought\nto bear upon them.\n\nThe mythical traditions of almost all peoples place at the beginning of\nthe history of the race, a \u201cgolden age,\u201d which is the opposite of savagery\nand barbarism. The Chinese speak of a \u201cfirst heaven,\u201d an age of innocence\nand a state of happiness, when \u201call was beautiful and good, and all beings\nwere perfect.\u201d Mexican tradition speaks of the golden age of Tezcuco; and\nPeruvian history commences with two \u201cChildren of the Sun,\u201d who established\ncivilization on the borders of Lake Titicaca. The Greeks described their\ngolden age as follows:\n\n\n    \u201cThe immortal gods, that tread the courts of heaven,\n    First made a golden race of mortal men.\n    Like gods they lived, with happy, careless souls,\n    From toil and pain exempt; nor on them crept\n    Wretched old age, but all their life was passed\n    In feasting, and their limbs no changes knew.\n    Nought evil came them nigh; and, when they died,\n    \u2019Twas but as if they were o\u2019ercome by sleep.\n    All good things were their portion; the fat soil\n    Bare them its fruit spontaneous, fruit ungrudged\n    And plentiful; they, at their own sweet will,\n    Pursued in peace the tasks that seemed them good,\n    Laden with blessings, rich in flocks, and dear\n    To the great gods.\u201d\u2014_Hesiod._\n\n\nSuch is the light that shines from the region where myth and history meet\nand wed. Can we go beyond this? There is no people, east or west,\ncharacterized by an uninterrupted _progress_ from barbarism to\ncivilization. So the theory of time based upon such an idea is altogether\nwithout foundation.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE FLOOD VIEWED FROM A SCIENTIFIC AND BIBLICAL STANDPOINT.\n\n\nUnbelievers usually pass over the events of the flood with mockery. There\nis something about them that is only reconcilable with the mental\ncondition of the man who says in his heart, \u201cThere is no God.\u201d The old\nmethods of their interpretation of the Scriptures have been abandoned in\nmany particulars. This is the result of two things: first, progression in\nscientific knowledge; and, second, the Bible was always ahead of science\nin its scientific allusions. Now, it is known to scientists that there is,\nat the lowest calculation, forty-eight times more water in our seas and\noceans than Keill was willing to allow when he made the objection that it\nwould require the waters of twenty-eight oceans to give us Noah\u2019s flood.\nThe objection was, \u201cthere is not water enough.\u201d Men seemed to think that\nthe earth contained the water; that the water was standing in the earth.\nThis was very natural, for people generally live upon the land. The Bible,\nhowever, presented a different idea, saying, the earth was \u201cstanding out\nof the water and in the water.\u201d\n\nWhen the Scriptures speak upon this subject they refer to the waters just\nas a man would who never had any misgivings upon the subject of their\nsufficiency. Their teachings are in harmony with recent scientific\ndiscovery, and against old-fashioned unbelief.\n\nBefore Galileo\u2019s time men would have been regarded insane if they had\nasserted the gravity of the air, but the Bible contained the fact. It was\nlaid away in Job 28: 25: \u201cFor he looketh to the ends of the earth and\nseeth under the whole heaven to make the weight for the winds; and he\nweigheth the waters by measure.\u201d\n\nThe force that is required annually in nature to give us the upper waters,\nto form the clouds, is estimated by Arago to be more than the labor of\nfour hundred million of able bodied men, continued two hundred thousand\nyears.\u2014_Aunuaire du bur. des. longit._, 1835, p. 196.\n\nThe Scriptures speak of floods and disorders that unbelievers of the\nbygone considered incredible, but in the present time geologists feel that\nthe half was not told, for they are unable to account for all the\ndestructions found in their investigations. The events known in the\ngeological history are only in harmony with the fact that our planet has\nbeen subjected to immense submersions. They are scientifically described\nthus: An internal fire which, raising the temperature of the seas and of\nthe deep waters, caused on the one side an enormous evaporation and\nimpetuous rains, as if the flood-gates of heaven were opened; and, on the\nother, an irresistible dilation, which not only raised the waters from\ntheir depths, broke up the fountains of the GREAT ABYSS, and raised its\npowerful waves to the level of the highest mountains, but which caused\nimmense stratifications of calcareous carbonate, under the double pressure\nof a great heat and a pressure equal to eight thousand\natmospheres.\u2014_Gansen_, p. 195.\n\nThe same author gives us the following, which will be beneficial to the\nscholar: \u201cWater is dilated 1-23 in passing from the temperature of ice\nmelting to that of water boiling. An elevation of from sixteen to\nseventeen degrees Reaumer will then increase its volume 1-111. Now, we\nfind by an easy calculation that the quantity of water necessary to\nsubmerge the earth to the height of 1-1000 of the radius of our globe is\nequal to 1-333 of its entire volume, or 1-111 of its third. If, then, we\nsuppose that the one third of the terrestrial globe is metallic (at the\nmean specific gravity of 12-1/2), that the second third is solid (at the\nweight of 21), and that the remaining third is water; then, first, the\nspecific gravity of the entire globe will be equal to 5-1/2 (according to\nthe conclusions of Maskeline and of Cavendish); and, secondly, it will\nhave been sufficient for the submersion of the earth to the height of\n6,368 metres, or 1,546 metres above Mount Blanc; that the temperature of\nthe mass of the water in the days of the deluge should have risen to\nsixteen degrees Reaumer is a reasonable conclusion.\u201d This calculation also\nhas reference to the unnecessary idea that the flood was universal. But\nwhy is it that a few men recognize the existence of a God omnipotent and\nridicule the flood?\n\nThe sufficiency of the ark is also called in question. Buffon says the\nvarious species of four-footed animals may be reduced to two hundred and\nfifty. And Dr. Hales shows conclusively that the ark had the capacity of\nbearing forty-two thousand four hundred and thirteen tons. He says: Can we\ndoubt of it being sufficient to contain eight persons and about two\nhundred and fifty pair of four-footed animals, together with all the\nsubsistence necessary for twelve months, with the fowls of the air and\nsuch reptiles and insects as can not live in water? Besides places for the\nbeasts and birds and their provisions, Noah might find room in the third\nstory for thirty-six cabins occupied by household utensils, instruments of\nhusbandry, books, grains and seeds, for a kitchen, a hall, and a space of\nabout forty-eight cubits in length to walk in. In addition to all this, it\nis conceded, by the very best minds conversant with ship building, that\nMoses\u2019 description of the dimensions of the ark are the descriptions of\none of the very best floating vessels that ever rested upon the waters.\nThis fact has puzzled the minds of many unbelievers who seem to think\nthere was but little scientific knowledge in that early period. They do\nnot believe that God was with Noah. HE WAS.\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE MOSAIC LAW IN GREECE, IN ROME, AND IN THE COMMON LAW OF ENGLAND.\n\n\nThere is no logical reason against the thought that God gave to man law in\nthe gift of speech or language. Speech is not natural to man. He does not\nexpress his feelings and passions with sighs and groans systematically and\ninvariably as do the lower animals. The speechless child has no order of\nthis kind; the lower kingdom differs widely from man in this respect; the\nsame animals have the same manner of expressing their feelings and\npassions throughout the world; but man has language to express _ideas_.\nInfants learn to speak by imitation; they do not speak naturally. Language\nis the result of education, of the imitative faculty of man. \u201cIt has been\nexperimentally demonstrated that a man who has never heard the\narticulations of the human voice can never speak.\u201d So deafness always\ncarries dumbness along with it when that deafness is from birth, or\ncontracted in early childhood. I have in my mind at the present moment two\nbright-eyed girls in their \u201cteens,\u201d who contracted deafness in infancy\nfrom the spotted fever; both are destitute of speech. If there ever was a\nlanguage of nature it was abandoned when artificial language was taught.\nThe greatest philosophers have failed to account for the origin of\nlanguage or speech. The Pagans have declared that it was a gift from the\ngods. If all the inhabitants of the world could be congregated, and all\nwould consent to the use of one and the same vocabulary, then we might,\nthrough universal training in that vocabulary, have an universal language.\nHow could such a convention be assembled? The truth is, the origin of\nlanguage or speech is neither natural or conventional, but imitative, and\nit is a fact, beyond the possibility of cavil, that the thing must have\nexisted before it could have been imitated. With whom did it exist? \u201cWe\nthink by words, and infants think by things.\u201d Words were from God.\n\nTwo lessons we must have as a capital to work with, and all else that we\nneed will grow legitimately out of exercise in those two. \u201cFirst, The\nelementary ideas. Second, The elementary words significant to them.\u201d Such\nwas doubtless given man, as the Bible teaches, as a capital stock, and all\nlanguages are, directly or indirectly, from this original stock, and its\nresults upon the human understanding; for who can set limits to\npossibilities of the human mind when once it is furnished with a capital\nstock and learned the art of its use? In Europe twenty-seven languages are\nknown, which are kindred branches from three roots, and these three roots\nare scions of one stock; all languages are traceable to one stock. The\nBible _alone_ accounts for the origin of speech, which was, doubtless, the\norigin of law. Chaldea, Media, Persia, Ph\u0153nicia and Egypt, under the\nsovereignty of Chedorlaomer, had everything in legislative knowledge to\nlearn from the Hebrews. This \u201cChedorlaomer was king of Elam, in Persia, in\nthe times of Abraham. He made the cities in the region of the Dead Sea his\ntributaries; and on their rebelling he came with four allied kings and\noverran the whole country south and east of the Jordan. Lot was among his\ncaptives, but was rescued by Abraham.\u201d _See Zell\u2019s Encyclopedia._\nLycurgus, a celebrated legislator of Sparta, who was born 926 years before\nChrist, gave an agrarian law that finds its prototype, without its\ndefects, in the agrarian law of the Hebrews. Solon, one of the seven wise\nmen of Greece, who died 558 years before Christ, transcribed, from the\nlaws of Moses, the laws prohibiting certain degrees in marriage. The laws\nof descent, among the Grecians, are almost identical with the laws of\ndescent among the Jews. The Grecians borrowed many laws from the Hebrews.\nThey had their harvest vintage festival; the presentation of the best of\ntheir flocks; the offering of their first fruits, and the portion\nprescribed to their priests; the law against garments of divers colors;\nprotection from violence to the man who fled to their altars; the law\nprohibiting all from the altar who had touched a dead body or any other\nimpurity; the law prohibiting from the priesthood all those having\nblemishes upon their persons. All these laws, found in the Athenian code,\nhad their origin with the laws of the Hebrews\u2014were taken from Moses.\n\nDuring the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus, who was the brother of Darius,\nand who ascended the throne of the kingdom of Persia in the year 465\nbefore Christ, the Jews were scattered all over the kingdom of Persia, and\ntheir laws were the subject of conversation and notoriety. Haman speaks of\nthem to the king as differing from the laws of all other people.\n\nThe oldest and most noted legislators and wise men took their laws from\nthe law of Moses. The Egyptians and the Ph\u0153nicians borrowed from the\nJewish laws. Ancient and modern writers affirm that the individuals\ncommissioned by the Senate and tribune under Justinian to form the \u201cTwelve\nTables\u201d were directed to examine the laws of Athens and the Grecian\ncities. This took them at once to the consideration of many of the laws of\nMoses. Zell, in his Encyclopedia, says: The glory of Justinian\u2019s reign is\nthe famous digest of the Roman law, known generally as the Justinian code,\nwhich was compiled out of the Gregorian, Theodorian and Hermogenian codes,\nby ten of the ablest lawyers of the empire, under the guiding genius of\nthe Jurisconsult Tribonian. Their labors consisted, first, of the \u201cStatute\nLaw.\u201d Second, The \u201cPandects,\u201d a digest of the decisions and opinions of\nformer magistrates and lawyers. These two compilations consisted of matter\nthat lay scattered through more than two thousand volumes, now reduced to\nfifty. Third, The \u201cInstitutes,\u201d an abridgement in four books, containing\nthe substance of all the laws in the elementary form. Fourth, The laws of\n_modern date_, including Justinian\u2019s own edicts, collected into one volume\nand called the \u201cNew Code.\u201d\n\nThe word \u201cPandects\u201d is a term of great importance in the investigation of\nthe origin of the Roman laws; it points directly and certainly to the fact\nthat the Roman laws, known as the _Pandects_, were gathered from all laws,\nfor such is the import of the term itself when it is associated with the\nterm _laws_. Moreover, it is a Greek term, showing at once that the\nGrecian laws contributed largely to the _Pandects_ of the Roman laws. The\nterm is defined by Liddel and Scott in the words, _all-receiving,\nall-containing_, so the _Pandects_ were gathered from _all laws_,\nconsequently from the laws of Moses as well as from the Grecian laws,\nwhich were largely from the laws of Moses. This relationship, existing in\nthe science of law, between the laws of the Bible and the Roman laws\ngotten up under Justinian, can be set aside by the infidels when stubborn\nfacts, as well as similitude, are set aside.\n\nSir Matthew Hale says: Among the many preferences which the laws of\nEngland have above others, the two principal ones are, the hereditary\ntransmission of property and the trial by jury, which originated with the\nJews, for, by the law of Moses, the succession in the descending line was\nto the sons, the oldest having a double portion. If the son died in his\nfather\u2019s lifetime, the grandson heired the portion of his father. Trial by\njury was first suggested in the administration of penal justice among the\nJews. Such trials came off publicly in the gates of the city, and their\njudges were elders and Levites, taken from the general mass of the\ncitizens. \u201cA part of the common law, as it now stands, was first collected\nby Alfred the Great, youngest son of Athelwolf, or Ethelwolf, King of the\nWest Saxons, who took the crown in 871. It is asserted by Sismondi, in his\nhistory of the fall of the Roman Empire, that when the above named prince\ncaused a republication of the Saxon laws he inserted several laws taken\nfrom the Judaical ritual into his statutes to give new strength and\ncogency to the principles of morality. So it is a common thing in the\nearly English reports to find frequent references to the Mosaic law.\nSismondi also states that one of the first acts of the clergy under Pepin\nand Charlemagne, of France, was to introduce into the legislation of the\nFranks several of the Mosaic laws found in the books of Deuteronomy and\nLeviticus. It is truthfully said that the entire code of civil and\njudicial statutes throughout New England, and throughout the States first\nsettled by the descendants of New England, were the judicial laws of God\nas they were delivered by Moses. From God himself one nation, and one\nonly, received their laws, and they are worthy of being regarded as models\nfor all succeeding ages. The learned Michaelis, who was professor of law\nin the University of Gottingen, says that a man who considers laws\nphilosophically, who would survey them with the eye of a Montesquieu,\nwould never overlook the laws of Moses.\u201d\n\nGoguet, in his learned treatise upon the origin of laws, says: The more we\nmeditate on the laws of Moses the more we shall perceive their wisdom and\ninspiration. They alone have undergone no changes, amendments or\nretrenchments for more than three thousand years, while all others have\nbeen receiving amendments and additions.\n\nMilman, in his history of the Jews, says: The Hebrew law-giver exercised a\nmore extensive and permanent influence over the destinies of mankind than\nany other individual in the annals of the world. The late Fisher Ames, a\ndistinguished statesman and jurist, said, \u201cNo man can be a sound lawyer\nwho is not well read in the laws of Moses.\u201d The seat of this law is the\nbosom of God, and her voice is the order, peace and happiness of the\nworld.\n\n\n\n\n\nDID ADAM FALL OR RISE?\n\n\nThe old scholastic ideas of \u201ctotal hereditary depravity, and miraculous\nconversion,\u201d with their correllates, have driven more minds into doubt and\nskepticism than most of men are apprised of. The reasons are evident.\nFirst. Common sense shrinks from them as ideas which are destructive of\nevery principle of human responsibility. Second. They are opposed to the\ntestimony of consciousness which asserts the soul\u2019s freedom. Third. They\nare opposed to correct ideas of justice as it is administered in all\ngovernments, both human and divine.\n\n\u201cAnd the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us to know\ngood and evil.\u201d Our fathers, of Calvinistic type of faith, used to tell us\nthat this language only asserted Adam\u2019s experience of conscious guilt;\nthat he knew good before he transgressed, and had experimental knowledge\nof evil after he transgressed. This was the best they could do and save\ntheir Calvinism, and even this would not have saved it in the days of\ninvestigation like ours. The Lord did not say, \u201cThe man is become as one\nof us knowing good and evil,\u201d but \u201cthe man is become as one of us _to\nknow_ good and evil.\u201d The old view of the subject virtually says, The Lord\nhad experimental knowledge of both good and evil, and that the way in\nwhich Adam became Godlike was the way of the transgressor. Then the\ngreatest Godlikeness is the result of the greatest sinning. _What\nnonsense!_ The Bible says: \u201cAnd the eyes of them both were opened, and\nthey knew they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made\nthemselves aprons.\u201d The account also asserts that the \u201ctree of knowledge\nof good and evil\u201d was \u201ca tree to be desired to make one wise.\u201d Total\ndepravity and its correllates could never have been found in this context.\nThis history is not responsible for it, nor for the mischiefs it has\nproduced.\n\nThe Heavenly Father knew, when he created man, that he would fail upon\ntrial. To have prevented this would have been nothing short of an\ninterference with man\u2019s freedom, and consequently his responsibility,\nwithout which he could not have been man. The Lord saw man in his alien\nstate and in his return to holiness. He \u201cmade of one blood all nations of\nmen to dwell upon all the face of the earth, and determined the times\nbefore appointed, and the bounds of their habitation, that they _should\nseek the Lord_.\u201d\u2014See Acts 17: 26. It was necessary that man should become\nas God _to know good and evil_ in order that he might be continued upon\ntrial in a world of good and evil. To this end the Divine Ruler placed in\nthe test fruit, the fruit of the tree that was forbidden, a mental lever\nto endow man with wisdom as God to know good and evil, without which the\nman\u2019s responsibility in relation to good and evil could never have been.\n\nThe fruit of the tree of life was for man\u2019s physical nature; was to\ncontrol the law of organic being, regulating waste and supply so as to\nprevent the present effects of old age, and keep man in perpetual\nconditions of youth. After man had sinned, with the knowledge of good and\nevil, he was master of his position, and now, lest he \u201cput forth his hand\nand take of the tree of life, and eat and live forever,\u201d subjected to\nshame, to torment, to anguish and tribulation, mental suffering, a lost\nbeing in the state of abandoned fallen angels, with a possibility of\ncorrupting his conscience until it should be past feeling, seared as with\na hot iron, and so glory in his shame; or, otherwise, be beyond the motive\npower of life and the restraining power of death, the Infinite One placed\nhim beyond the reach of the tree of life. All of these ways or doings of\nthe Heavenly Father were right, were merciful, were best for man. THE WAYS\nOF GOD ARE RIGHT. THE WAYS OF GOD ARE BEST. Farewell to \u201ctotal hereditary\ndepravity, and farewell to all its necessary correllations, such as\nmiraculous conversion,\u201d etc.\n\nMan is mentally endowed with wisdom by the tree of the knowledge of good\nand evil; is kept from ruining himself forever by being placed beyond the\nreach of the tree of life; is continued upon trial in a world of good and\nevil; is responsible through his knowledge of good and evil, and the\nmotive power of life, and the restraining power of death is preserved to\ncontrol him for his own eternal good; and, blessed be the name of our\nHeavenly Father, his eyes are open; so if man goes to perdition he must go\n_with his eyes open_. In all this we have perfect harmony with all Bible\nduty and truth, and also with science and universal consciousness of\nfreedom and ability to choose and act. Not by a hair\u2019s breadth has God\never infringed upon the freedom of the soul to shape and mould its own\nmoral character, and shape its own moral destiny; but he has done many\nwonderful things to better the condition of the free soul\u2014not forsaking it\nin the hour of greatest need.\n\nThe soul\u2019s free, voluntary service is that which constitutes the\nrequirement of religion in all the ages.\n\n\n\n\n\nDID THEY DREAM IT, OR WAS IT SO?\n\n\nThat there was such a person as Jesus Christ living in the land of Judea\nat the time allowed by all Christians is no longer disputed by\nunbelievers. That he lived a life far superior to the lives of all other\nmen is also conceded. If the powers of life and death were under his\ncontrol he was more than human. If he rose from the dead he was the Son of\nGod. Did he rise? This is a question upon which the whole Christian scheme\nhinges. What was the nature of the fact? Was it one about which men could\nbe mistaken? Was it a fact which, occurring, addressed itself to the\nsenses? If it was the witnesses could not be mistaken. There is not a\ncourt in the universe that would allow it.\n\nThere are things about which wise men may be mistaken, but they are not\nthings which address themselves to the senses. Those are things in which\nfools may not, can not, be mistaken. It is impossible for my wife to be\nmistaken about my presence at this moment, but it is just as possible as\nit was for any of the first witnesses of Christ\u2019s resurrection to be\nmistaken. They were not, they could not be mistaken. Then what becomes of\nStrauss\u2019s mythical idea. What folly it is to allow that those witnesses\nwere perfectly honest, enthusiastically and proverbially honest in all\nthey said, and yet mistaken.\n\nThis moral honesty and enthusiasm which Strauss and others allow to the\ncredit of the witnesses is undoubtedly designed as a feeler\u2014a mere\ncatering to the views of Christians upon the character of the first\nChristians. Very good fellows (?) after all. How is that? If one of my\nneighbors would go into a court room to-morrow and testify under oath that\nhe was with me yesterday, and the court was in possession of the fact that\nI was not with him, or near him at all, would it allow honesty to the\nwitness? Would not every sensible man say, in his heart, he is a perjured\nwitness? If he was with Walker he knew it; and if he was not with him he\nknew it.\n\nGentlemen, exercise all your shrewdness, adopt Strauss\u2019s idea of a\nmythical origin of the gospel of Christ, both as respects his miracles,\nwhich were either seen or not seen, and as respects his resurrection, then\nspread the blanket of honesty and warm-hearted enthusiasm over those men\nwho sacrificed everything, life not excepted, for the testimony which they\nbore, and the next day any well-instructed judge of our courts would say,\nit is nonsense; they could not be mistaken about any fact which addressed\nitself to their eyes and ears. Christ rose from the dead if the witnesses\ntold the truth; and the witnesses told the truth if they were honest men;\nand if they were not honest, labor, toil, suffering and martyrdom are no\nevidences of sincerity.\n\n\n\n\n\n                  -------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n\nCan you believe in harmony without believing in a harmonist?\n\nCan you believe that all things in nature adjusted themselves to each\nother?\n\nCan you believe that life, and mind, and moral nature, each and all came\nfrom where neither existed?\n\n\n\n\n\nMISCELLANEOUS.\n\n\nVoltaire built a church to God at Ferney.\n\nCan you believe that your great ancestors were apes?\n\nDo you oppose the Bible and prefer its legitimate effects?\n\nHuxley wants the Bible introduced into boarding schools.\n\nCan you believe in design without believing in a designer?\n\nTyndal says the theory of evolution of species is utterly uncredited.\n\nCan you believe that the type which made these letters set themselves up?\n\nThe _Saturday Review_ says Hume used to go to church sometimes in\nScotland.\n\nCan you believe that mind is the result of blind, unintelligent,\nmechanical forces?\n\nTyndal says spontaneous generation is the one essential pillar of\nevolution of species.\n\nTyndal says the failures to produce spontaneous life by experimenting are\nlamentable.\n\nCollins insisted on his servants going to church \u201cthat they might not rob\nor murder him.\u201d\n\nCan you believe that worlds hung themselves together and move themselves,\nas one grand whole, through space?\n\nCan you believe that the correllation of things in nature was without\ndesign? that such adaptations as light to the eye was unintended?\n\nCan you be honest in exerting your influence against the religion of Jesus\nChrist while it is your candid conviction that a country is better off\nwith it than without it?\n\nDo you sometimes say you prefer to live where there are churches and\nSunday-schools, and all their appliances for the bettering of the\ncondition of humanity, and at the same time constantly find fault with the\nBible and religion which creates such things? If such is your course, are\nyou strictly honest?","title":"The Christian Foundation, Or, Scientific and Religious Journal, March, 1880","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":14248}