{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_36800/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_36800","id":"gutenberg_36800","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/36800","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Free thought","Philosophy and religion"],"text":"</pre>\n\n\n\nProduced by David Widger\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLUDICROUS ASPECTS OF CHRISTIANITY:\n\nA Response To The Challenge Of The Bishop Of Manchester.\n\nBy Austin Holyoak\n\n\nThe Bishop of Manchester, in a speech delivered by him in Oldham in\nAugust, 1870, is reported to have said that \"he could defy anyone to try\nto caricature the work, the character, or the person of the Lord Jesus\nChrist.\" He no doubt felt confident in throwing out such a challenge,\nas the attempt would be considered so atrociously impious that few men\ncould be found with courage enough to incur the odium of such an act. We\nconfess that we have not the temerity to wound the sensitiveness of the\ndevoutly religious. What may be deemed of the nature of caricature in\nthe following remarks the reader is requested to regard as merely the\nspontaneous utterance of one who is keenly alive to the ludicrous, and\nwho is not awed by the belief that the Bible is an infallible volume.\nWe find the New Testament, when read without the deceptive spectacles of\n_faith_ as amusing, as extravagant, and as contradictory in many places\nas most books.\n\nA system of religion, to be a moral guide to men, should be perfect in\nall its parts. It should not consist of a few precepts which might\nbe followed under certain circumstances, the rest being made up of\nimpossibilities and contradictions; but should be so comprehensive as to\nembrace all orders of men under all circumstances. And a divine exemplar\nto mankind, if such a being can be imagined, should possess every human\nvirtue in perfection, and be absolutely without fault. We are told daily\nand hourly that Jesus Christ possesses these transcendent qualities, and\nis worthy of the homage and admiration of the world. We ask where this\ndivine image is to be found, and are referred to the four Gospels in the\nNew Testament. All that is there written was written by inspiration of\nGod, and God therefore is the painter of the lineaments of his own Son.\nWe will take it as such, and see what aspect Jesus presents when viewed\nin the light we are able to bring to bear upon his portrait. We shall\nfollow a somewhat different plan to that adopted by M. Renan. That\ngreat French writer has evidently gone to his task with the intention or\nanticipation of finding an almost perfect man, and he ends by believing\nhe really sees one in Jesus. We have taken up the Gospels with the\ndesire of finding what is actually there; and as it appears to us, so we\nwill present it to the reader. We know that some will view the sayings\nand actions in a different light; but that is inevitable. No two persons\never see in the painted portrait of a friend or relative, precisely\nthe same expression; yet they may be equally honest. Now we claim to be\nregarded as truthful in the following portraiture, though Jesus appears\nto us a very different man to what he appeared to M. Renan. Some may say\nwe are flippant, but that we cannot help, though we may regret it. We\nmust express ourselves in our own way, and we most be excused if we\nlaugh at what seems ludicrous or absurd.\n\nWe may be accused of a want of reverence, but we cannot feel reverence\nfor what does not excite that feeling in us.\n\nThese pages are not critical--they do not pretend to be learned--they\ndo not seek to explain away anything on the score of \"forgeries\" or\n\"interpolations.\" They are based upon the supposition that the _Four_\nGospels are each and collectively true, and without contradiction. No\nattempt is made to reconcile contradictions by rejecting all that does\nnot harmonise. The Churches do not do so--they cling to all within the\ntwo covers of the \"sacred book,\" and of course take the responsibility.\n\nNothing will be here set down that Jesus did not utter; no meaning will\nbe put upon his words that they will not legitimately bear; we have\njudged of him as we find him in the general actions of his life. A\ndevout believer will exclaim, with uplifted hands and eyes--\"Oh, this\nis blasphemy; it is revolting to the moral sense; Christ was the Son of\nGod, and therefore perfect. He could not be what you have represented\nhim to be, or people long ago would have ceased to worship him. He is\nthe one sublime character whose image fills the world, and before whom\nmillions bow the head in reverent humility.\" Just so; that is where the\ndelusion arises. Men have been taught that they must not think--that\nthey must not doubt--that they must not examine the grounds of their\nfaith--they must _believe_, and that the sin of unbelief is everlasting\nperdition. A halo of sanctity is thrown around this distorted\nimage--there is a sacred mystery, a \"holy of holies\" into which common\nsense must not enter; and so devotees fall down at the threshold and\nworship, where they should stand erect in reliance on their own reason\nand judgment, and examine fearlessly for themselves into those doctrines\non a belief in which their everlasting salvation is said to depend.\n\nJesus, the son of Mary, but not the son of Joseph, Mary's husband, was,\naccording to his biographers, an illegitimate child--at least, his\nbirth seems to have been brought about in a most illegitimate way. One\nMatthew, who pretends to know a great deal about this child, even before\nit was born, wishes his readers to infer that Jesus was descended in\na direct line from that worthy man and favourite of God, King David,\nthrough exactly twenty-eight generations; that is, down to Joseph, who\nwas not the father of Jesus at all. He was the son of the Holy Ghost,\nbut who or what that was no man knows, and no one has been able to\ncomprehend unto this day. Another biographer named Luke, more sensible\nthan Matthew, like a modern Welshman traces Jesus's descent direct from\nAdam, who, being the first man, _was_ probably a very distant relative\nof his.\n\nThis extraordinary child Jesus, who in his own language was simply\nJoshua, came into the world to fulfil no end of prophecies. He was to be\ncalled Jesus, that he might save his people from their sins. But he did\nnot do it, as the Jews have had amongst them since his time as great\ncriminals as ever existed before. He was also to be named Emmanuel,\n\"which, being interpreted, is God with us.\" But he never was called\nEmmanuel, so the second prophecy was fulfilled! He was born in a house\nin the first instance, and a star was seen to walk before certain wise\nmen and direct them where he was. In the second instance he was born in\na manger, in the stable of an inn where certain shepherds found Mary,\nand Joseph, and the babe lying. These were not wise men from the East,\nbut poor ignorant shepherds from the neighbouring fields, and they\nwere not led by a star, but had seen an angel of the Lord by night, who\nterrified them very much, and departed without telling them in which\nparticular manger the Saviour was to be found. The angel appeared amid\nloud sounds of \"Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, and\ngood-will towards men.\" If those glad tidings of great joy _were_ heard\nthen, they have never been heard since, for the advent of this child was\nthe signal for war, and strife, and bloodshed among mankind, which have\ndesolated every land where the Christian name has been spoken. After\ntheir fright was over, the shepherds consulted together, and resolved to\ngo into Bethlehem, to look for \"this thing which had come to pass.\" They\nalighted upon Joseph and his family all lying in a manger, much to the\nsurprise of Mary, who evidently did not comprehend what the excitement\nwas about, for we are told that \"Mary kept all these things, and\npondered them in her heart.\" So after all, who knows that they found the\nright babe at last? If such evidence as is here given were adduced in a\ncourt of law to prove the identity of a lost heir to an estate, it would\nnever be allowed to go even to trial, but the grand jury would ignore\nthe bill at once.\n\nHowever, as Jesus was declared the rightful heir, we must accept that\nfact, and proceed to examine how far he administered the great estate\nto which he was born. Joseph was a very drowsy man, who had to be\ncontinually warned and roused by angels as to what he should do and the\ndangers which threatened him. Being made wide awake to the fact that\nHerod sought to kill the child, he suddenly fled into Egypt with\nhis family, and there remained till the death of Herod, that another\nprophecy might be fulfilled, \"Out of Egypt have I called my son.\" But he\ndid not go into Egypt, but was taken back to Nazareth at eight days\nold, and there remained till he was a man. So the third prophecy was\nfulfilled!\n\nJesus is familiarly known by the name of the \"meek and lowly,\" but this\nis a title which scarcely seems warranted by the narratives. From\nhis youth upwards he gave signs of the possession of an imperious\ndisposition and a vituperative tongue, and he on several occasions\nmanifested a want of filial affection. His parents went to Jerusalem\nevery year to the feast of the Passover, and at the age of twelve Jesus\nwas taken. When the parents returned, the boy remained behind unknown\nto them, and they had got a day's journey on their way home before they\nmissed him. They retraced their steps to Jerusalem in much trouble, and\nat last, after three days' search, found the truant comfortably seated\nin the temple in the midst of the doctors, holding a learned argument\nwith them. When his mother saw him she asked him why he had caused them\nso much sorrow. Instead of showing any penitence, he pertly answered,\n\"How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my\nFather's business?\" And Mary, though she knew he was the son of the Holy\nGhost, had not the slightest idea what he meant.\n\nWhen he \"began to be about thirty years of age,\" he met with John\nBaptist, a strange sort of anchorite, who used to dress in camelshair\nand eat locusts and wild honey. From this cynic Jesus learnt much,\nespecially the habit of calling names. When people presented themselves\nto John to be baptised, he greeted them in this loving way--\"O\ngeneration of vipers, who hath warned _you_ to flee from the wrath to\ncome?\" Jesus was baptised, and afterwards retailed much that John had\nsaid, especially his abusive phrases. At this ceremony of immersion the\nheavens opened to Jesus, and the Spirit of God descended like a dove and\nalighted upon him. This Spirit assumes as many shapes as Satan himself,\nand altogether appears to be a very curious bird of passage. This\nbaptism was not a happy thing to Jesus, for immediately afterwards he\nwas led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the Devil,\nand he had to fast forty days and forty nights, and afterwards, we are\ngravely told, \"he was an hungered,\" which is not a remarkable fact,\nseeing that he was a young man of very good appetite. We shall see, as\nwe get farther on, that his love of eating and drinking was manifested\non many carious occasions. The Old and New Testaments teem with accounts\nof feasts and carouses by the chosen of the Lord, and the Lord himself,\nto such a degree, that Christianity has not inaptly been termed the\nreligion of gourmands. Jesus frequently manifests great readiness and\nsmartness in reply, which is either an answer to the question addressed\nto him, or a very clever evasion of it. When the Devil had got Jesus,\nhe said to him, \"If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be\nmade bread.\" The Devil evidently thought that to make something to eat\nwould be the greatest temptation he could offer him. But Jesus evaded\nthe task by saying, \"It is written that man shall not live by bread\nalone.\" The Devil tried again, and took him to the pinnacle of a temple,\nand asked him to cast himself down, saying--\"For it is written He shall\ngive his angels charge concerning thee.\" Jesus said unto him, \"It is\nwritten again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.\" The Devil tried a\nthird time, and took him up into an exceeding high mountain, and\nshowed him all the kingdoms of this world, and the _glory_ of them, and\npromised him all if he would fall down and worship him. How could Jesus\nsee from one spot all the kingdoms of the world? as no one looking\nstraight before him can see round a globe; but if it was done by\nsupernatural power, why take the trouble to go to the top of an\nexceeding high mountain? the _flat_ country would have been a more\nsuitable spot. He also saw the _glory_ of them, which must have puzzled\nhim greatly, for what is the glory of one place, is sometimes the shame\nof another, Jesus said, \"Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou\nshalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.\" The\nDevil deemed this conclusive, and thereupon took his departure.\n\nAfter John the Baptist was cast into prison, Jesus went to reside in\nCapernaum, and there commenced to preach from John's text--\"Repent, for\nthe kingdom of heaven is at hand.\" At the outset of his public career\nhe was a copyist, and he remained so to the end of his life. He\nsimply repeated other men's sayings, or elaborated the traditions and\nprophecies which were so prevalent among the Jews of his day. This\nkingdom of heaven did not mean something in another world somewhere\nin the clouds, but simply a new order of things here, and that more\nespecially among the Jews. At times, it must be confessed, it is\ndifficult to understand what it meant if not an improved mental state,\nand not a material kingdom at all. Jesus belonged to the working class,\nand his followers were of the lower orders, and he constantly preached\nagainst riches, which was very popular. His followers now appreciate\nhis sublime example so much, that they get rich as fast as they can,\nespecially the successors of the Apostles, who are content if they can\nonly get princely incomes, and a palace wherein to lay their heads!\n\nJesus wanted followers, so he walked out by the sea of Galilee, and saw\nPeter and Andrew casting their nets. If they had been only fishing for\nsmall fry, he could not have more contemptuously addressed them. \"And he\nsaid unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men. And they\nstraightway left their nets and followed him.\" A curious phenomenon\nstrikes one here. Peter and Andrew have never seen Jesus before; he does\nnot tell them who he is; he explains no principles to them by which to\nenlist their sympathies and awaken conviction--he merely says, \"follow\nme, and I will make you fishers of men,\" and in prospect of that\ndelightful occupation they abandon their home and calling to accompany a\nstranger on a doubtful mission, Whatever fish may have come to their net\nafterwards, they certainly could never have caught two greater flat-fish\nthan themselves. A more striking instance of blind following is not to\nbe found upon record. Peter afterwards became the greatest fanatic of\nall the Disciples, and caused his Master some trouble through his excess\nof zeal. And this is the man to whom are entrusted the keys of heaven.\nNo wonder the ignorant fanatics find a ready admission, whilst sensible\npeople are excluded. And he too is the great predecessor of the Pope\nof Rome, the head of a Church which preaches the efficacy of saints'\nrelics, the liquefaction of blood, and the truth of winking virgins.\nFanaticism was at the foundation, and delusion and ignorance very\nnaturally result. Others followed Jesus, forsaking their nets and their\nparents, and they went about all Galilee, Jesus preaching and curing\nall sorts of disease and sickness--and curious indeed were some of his\ncures, such as are not mentioned in any modern pharmacopoeia. Having\nvanquished great Satan himself on three occasions, the minor devils had\nno chance with him, and woe betide all who came before him inhabiting\nhuman beings. All these cures were performed that a prophecy might be\nfulfilled, \"which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying-, Himself\ntook our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.\" But then he did nothing\nof the kind. And so that prophecy was fulfilled! To cure a disease is\nnot to take it upon ourselves; if it were, the Royal College of Surgeons\nwould soon become an institution of the past. You might love your\nneighbour as yourself, but to be expected to have the measles tor him,\nwould cool the warmest friendship.\n\nOne style of cure Jesus had which may have been very efficacious, but\nit certainly was not delicate. Once a deaf man, who had an impediment in\nhis speech, was brought to him to be healed. Jesus took him aside from\nthe multitude, and put his fingers into his ears, and spat and touched\nhis tongue. And a blind man was brought to him, whom he took by the hand\nand led out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his\nhands on him, asked him if he saw aught And the man was restored to\nsight This kind of lubrication could scarcely be deemed pleasant.\n\nNeither do we find an incentive to cleanliness in this, for we are told,\n\"as he spake, a certain Pharisee besought him to dine with him; and\nhe went in, and sat down to meat And when the Pharisee saw it, he\nmar-yelled that he had not first washed before dinner. And the Lord said\nonto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the\nplatter; but your inward part is full of ravening wickedness. Ye\nfools, did not he that made that which is _without_, make that which it\n_within_ also?\" This may be very true, but it is also very dirty; and\nthough it may satisfy the Son of God, would not be an excuse for any man\nwho wished to be considered decent.\n\nThe fame of Jesus spread rapidly, and great multitudes flocked to hear\nhim. One day he went up into a mountain, and addressed the people, but\nhis discourse was of rather an extravagant description. As we understand\nmatters in these days, what is the amount of truth contained in the\nfollowing sentences?--\n\n\"Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.\n\n\"Blessed art they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.\n\n\"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.\n\n\"Blessed an the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.\n\n\"Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.\n\n\"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of\nGod.\n\n\"Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for\ntheirs is the kingdom of heaven.\n\n\"Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall\nsay all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.\"\n\nThis kingdom of heaven is past all comprehension. The poor in spirit\nhave it, and the persecuted for righteousness' sake have it; and if\nthese are the penalties to be paid for its possession, it is not worth\nthe winning. Then is it possible or proper for any one to act in this\nway:--\"If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out; if thy right hand\noffend thee, cut it off?\" Who in his senses would think of doing so?\nWho would stand by and allow others to do it? And who lives according\nto this Christian principle, and who follows this precept:--\"Resist not\nevil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the\nother also?\" In the first place, it is grossly immoral _not_ to resist\nevil; and in the second, all the world repudiates the doctrine of\nnon-resistance under such circumstances. If any one smites us on the\nright cheek, do we not quickly turn and hit him on the left? It is a\nnatural instinct, and to act otherwise is cowardice. Do the proceedings\nof our law courts furnish many instances of the adoption of this\nrecommendation:--\"And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away\nthy coat, let him have thy cloak also?\" One half humanity would very\nsoon be stripped by the other half. \"And whoever shall compel thee to\ngo a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him\nthat would borrow of thee turn not thou away.\" No one with any spirit\nor power of resistance would think of submitting to the _compulsion_ of\nwalking a mile with a person, much less of going two in the company of\none whose society might be a nuisance. And if we are to give to every\none that asketh, what are our vagrancy laws but a flagrant violation\nof Christianity? The injunction is here given without the slightest\nqualification, and is an encouragement to mendicancy the world over.\n\nThere are one or two precepts specially binding on Christians of the\npresent day! This, for instance, is very much obeyed:--\"And when thou\nprayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are; for they love to pray\nstanding in the synagogues, _and in the corners of the streets_, that\nthey may be seen of men.\" This, we know, is universally observed by\nthe followers of Jesus. It is obeyed by the ordained minister in his\ncanonicals; the Primitive in his whitewashed tabernacle; the Methodist\nin his tub; the Revivalists in their delirious and epileptic gatherings;\nthe Ranters in their camp meetings, and howling peregrinations through\nour country towns and villages; and above all, those highly gifted young\nmen belonging to the Town Mission, who render the night hideous by their\ninsane ravings at the corners of the streets and in the paths of public\nplaces. It is consoling to find the \"salt of the earth\" such consistent\nfollowers of their great Master. It is because _they_ are the salt of\nthe earth, that the world has got into such a precious pickle.\n\nBishops especially, and pluralists in particular, nurse in their hearts\nthis saying: \"Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth.\" No, poor\nmen, they think too much about their heavenly Father! A few thousand!\na year are quite sufficient for them. And Christian bankers and\nmillionaires equally regard the injunction.\n\nThis is a Christian country, and we are a Christian people, and our\nvarious provident and benefit societies and savings' banks tell how we\nesteem this command: \"Take no thought for the morrow, saying, What shall\nwe eat? or, what shall we drink? or, wherewithal shall we be clothed?\"\nWe don't think of the morrow merely, but of years to come, and he who is\nthe most careful in providing for the future, is most honoured amongst\nmen.\n\nNow all these impracticable and extravagant commands are taken from the\nmuch-vaunted Sermon on the Mount, and Jesus said, whosoever heard them,\nand obeyed them, he would liken unto a _wise_ man; but whosoever obeyed\nthem not, he would liken unto a foolish man. It may be an honour to be\ndeemed foolish in such a case; but what shall we say of the professing\nChristian, who considers himself so much superior to the Freethinker,\nand who boasts of his principles being the checks which keep him moral,\nand says that if it had not been for his blessed Saviour the world would\nhave been lost? Why, out of the mouth of Jesus himself he is proved to\nbe a hypocrite and foolish, for he does what is solemnly condemned,\nand leaves undone what is strictly enjoined. \"And it came to pass,\nwhen Jesus had ended these sayings, the people _were_ astonished at\nhis doctrine.\" And can any rational inquirer be astonished at that?\nOn reading over these Gospels calmly, and seeing what are attributed to\nJesus as his sayings and doings, one is amazed at the credulity of the\nworld in allowing such a stupendous delusion as the Christian religion\nto be palmed upon it as something divine derived direct from Deity.\n\nAfter this startling sermon, great multitudes followed Jesus, and\nwherever he went he healed the sick and performed miracles, but he\ngenerally enjoined the convalescents not to mention to any one what\nhe had done. The reason for this is not given, but if one may make a\nconjecture, it was either because he had really worked no cure at all,\nor else he was afraid of having too many demands made upon his time.\nWe are told that when \"Jesus saw great multitudes about him, he gave\ncommandment to depart unto the other side\" of the water, that he might\nget away from them. Before he departed, a disciple said unto him, \"Lord,\nsuffer me first to go and bury my father. But Jesus said unto him,\nFollow me, and let the dead bury their dead.\" Is this an instance of\nmeekness?\n\nWhen on board the ship, a great storm came on, and the sailors were\nafraid of being wrecked. So they awoke Jesus, telling him of their\ndanger. He first chided them, and then scolded the winds and the waves,\nwhich at once subsided. When he was come to the other side, into the\ncountry of the Gergesenes, he was met by two men possessed with devils,\nwho asked him if he had come to torment them before their time? And\nsingular to say, the devils also, from the _interior_, entered into\nconversation with Jesus, asking as a favour, that if they were cast out,\nthey might be allowed to go into a herd of swine which were feeding some\ndistance off. Why they should choose such an abode is not apparent; but\nhaving permission to go, they at once entered into possession, much to\nthe astonishment of the poor porkies, who took fright and ran violently\ndown a steep hill into the sea, and all, to the number of 2,000,\nperished in the waters. O unhappy pigs! O miserable devils! the Son of\nman, whom you had never injured, worked your speedy destruction. \"And,\nbehold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus; and when they saw him,\nthey besought him that he would depart out of _their_ coasts.\" They\nhad more desire to save their bacon than to see miracles worked at the\nexpense of their pigs. Jesus entered into a ship and came over to his\nown city, where a certain ruler came and worshipped him, saying that his\ndaughter was dead, but making the request that she should be raised to\nlife again. When Jesus entered the ruler's house, he said, \"Give place,\nfor the maid is not dead, but sleepeth.\" And they laughed him to scorn.\nBut when the house was cleared he took the girl by the hand, and the\nmaid arose. This was regarded as a miracle, but it could not be, because\nJesus said the girl only slept, and it is not possible that a perfect\nGod could tell an untruth.\n\nAfter this Jesus called together his twelve disciples, and gave them\ninstructions what to do. He said:--\"Provide neither gold, nor silver,\nnor brass in your purses, nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats,\nneither shoes, nor yet staves; for the workman is worthy of his meat.\nAnd into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, inquire who in it is\nworthy; and there abide till ye go hence. And when ye come into a house,\nsalute it. And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it; but\nif it be not worthy, let your peace return to you. And whosoever shall\nnot receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house\nor city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, It\nshall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of\njudgment than for that city.\" But it is doubtful if he meant the land of\nSodom and Gomorrha, or Tyre and Sidon. However, though we may overlook\nthis uncertainty, we cannot the fact, that a threat of destroying cities\nis held out if his disciples are not received and fed by people upon\nwhom they have not the slightest claim. This advice would justify the\norder of 'Mendicant Friars in their lazy habit of living upon all who\nare willing to support them. He also added--\"Behold, I send you forth\nas sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and\nharmless as doves.\" Have not the Jesuits carried out this advice? And\nthen he gave utterance to this painful truth to which the blood-stained\npages of history can testify:--\"Think not that I am come to send peace\non earth: I came _not_ to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to\nset a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her\nmother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a man's\nfoes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother\nmore than, me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter\nmore than me, is not worthy of me.\" There has been no peace, and there\ncan be none, in the world, so long as the contradictory and impossible\ndoctrines of Jesus of Nazareth are taught as infallible truth. House has\nbeen divided against house, the father's hand lifted against the child,\nand the mother's loving tenderness turned to bitterest hate, because of\ndifferences of opinion upon Christian dogmas.\n\nWhile Jesus was making one of his incoherent speeches, somebody told him\nthat his mother and brothers were without, desiring to speak with him.\n\"But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother?\nand who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his\ndisciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren.\" There is here\nmanifested a want of natural affection unbecoming any man, and which\njustifies M. Renan in saying, notwithstanding his great reverence for\nJesus, that he was more loved than loving. There is scarcely a trace of\naffection throughout his life, from his childhood to his death. He\nwas mystical and fanatical, like all who seek to set themselves up as\ninspired teachers.\n\nOne day Jesus sat by the sea-side and talked to the people in parables.\nHe is answerable for the following:--\"For whosoever hath to him shall be\ngiven, and he shall have more abundance; but whosoever hath _not_, from\nhim shall be taken away even that he hath.\" He says immediately after,\nas a sort of apology, \"Therefore speak I to then in parables, because\nthey seeing, see not; and hearing, they hear not, neither do they\nunderstand.\"\n\nIt would be a miracle greater than that worked among the pigs, if\nanyone did understand. This sort of talk must have been indulged in for\namusement--it could not have had any serious purport, or if it had, it\nis too profound to be understood.\n\nWhen Jesus learnt the execution of John the Baptist, he departed into\na desert place, but the multitude heard of him, and followed him out of\nthe cities. And when evening came, the disciples asked him to send the\nmultitude away, that they might go into the villages and buy themselves\nvictuals. We do not usually find villages in _desert_ places; but that\nwas quite as possible in this case as what followed. Jesus said they\nneed not go, and told the disciples to give to the people to eat. They\nsaid, We have here but five loaves and two fishes. He said, Bring them\nhither to me. And then looking up to heaven, he blessed and brake, and\ndistributed to the multitude. Now out of this very small commissariat,\nabout five thousand men, besides women and children, ate and were\nfilled, and left twelve baskets full of fragments at the end of the\nfeast. All we can deplore is, that the age of miracles is past. If\nanyone could do this now, what a number of attached followers be would\nhave, no matter what his speculative opinions might be. He might believe\nin the eternity of punishments; in three Gods in one, or one in three;\nin election, predestination, or transmigration of souls--in short, in\nanything or nothing; if he could only feed his flock by casting his eyes\nup to heaven, he would soon empty all the churches and chapels in the\nkingdom. As Renan very powerfully points out, no miracle ever yet took\nplace under scientific conditions; and till one of this description\nis wrought under such conditions, we must be allowed to suspend our\njudgment. We do not say it did not take place, but we don't believe it.\nIt is true it does not say what kind of fishes the two were which served\nto fill five thousand men, _besides_ women and children, who probably\nran the number up to eight thousand. Perhaps the fishes were whales, as\nthe whole story is so \"very like a whale\" that any suggested solution of\nthe astounding tale is legitimate. This miracle was once discussed by a\nsociety in Chicago, and the 'cute American intellect found a key to the\nmystery, for they _resolved_--\"That the multitude must certainly have\nmade their repast off _multiplication tables_!\"\n\nAfter this stupendous feat, Jesus constrained his disciples to get into\nthe ship and go across the water, whilst he remained behind to get rid\nof his well fed friends. And when night came, the ship was tossed by the\nstorm. And in the fourth watch Jesus went unto them walking on the sea.\nWhen his disciples saw him they said he was a spirit, and cried out for\nfear. But Jesus said, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid. Then the\nenthusiastic Peter said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on\nthe water. Jesus said, Come; to which Peter responded by stepping out of\nthe ship; but he could not float, and began to sink rapidly, and would\nhave perished if his master had not put out his hand and saved him.\nIf this system of aquatic locomotion could be instituted now, it would\nsupersede all lifeboats. But we have little _faith_ in these days of\nscientific facts, and it requires an immense amount of that commodity to\nbe able to attempt even what was said to have been accomplished by the\nfounders of our national religion.\n\nJesus did not confine his creative abilities to the solid comforts of\nlife, but exercised them upon the liquid luxuries of existence. Being\ninvited to a wedding, and there being no wine, his mother, with a\nwoman's natural solicitude on such an occasion, said to him, \"They have\nno wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine\nhour is not yet come.\" Now, what such a churlish answer had to do with\nthe simple remark made by his mother, we leave to gentle Christians\nto say. However, after a time he became more amiable; and, no doubt,\nreflecting upon the disappointment of those who had come to a marriage\nfeast, and found nothing but water to drink, he took compassion on\nthem, and turned the water into wine, to the extent of \"six water pots,\ncontaining two or three firkins apiece.\" \"This beginning of miracles\ndid Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his\ndisciples believed on him.\" Well they might; and we fear that any man\nin these days who should do such things, would have many followers, in\nspite of all the preaching of all the teetotallers, who, strange to say,\nfor the most part profess to be good Christians, notwithstanding that\nChrist, when he had the opportunity of rebuking wine bibbing, did not do\nso, but encouraged it by supplying the very beverage which teetotallers\nso vehemently condemn.\n\nWhen Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his\ndisciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am? He was\nanxious to know what people thought of him now that he was become so\nfamous. \"And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist; some,\nElias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them,\nBut whom say _ye_ that I am?\" Of course Peter was ready to crown all,\nand he said--\"Thou art the Christ, the son of the living God.\" For which\nJesus blessed Peter, and promised him the keys of the kingdom of heaven;\nbut they soon fell to quarrelling, when Jesus said that he must go unto\nJerusalem, and suffer many things, and be killed, and be raised again\nthe third day. Peter rebuked him, and said it should not be; but Jesus\nturned upon him, and said, \"Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an\noffence unto me.\" It was not very dignified or in good taste after\nPeter had imparted such an important fact to him, which was done by a\nrevelation of his Father which is in heaven.. But such was the manner of\nJesus.\n\nWhen he left Galilee, and came into Judaea, he resolved to go to\nJerusalem; and when he was come to the Mount of Olives, he sent two\nof his disciples to a village on a very questionable errand. It was to\nperform no less an act than the appropriation of a donkey and her colt.\nHe told them that, if any one said aught unto them, they were to say,\n\"The Lord hath need of them.\" That kind of answer would scarcely be\ndeemed satisfactory in these days, especially to a policeman. He would\nvery likely reply, If the Lord hath need of the ass, the magistrate\nhath need of thee; and if the instigator of the deed were not the actual\nthief, he would be charged as an accessory before the fact, and would\nbe provided with board and lodging at the expense of the county for\nat least twelve months. This was done that another prophecy might be\nfulfilled, which said, \"Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy king\ncometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of\nan ass.\" But this prophet must have been an ass, or he would have known\nthat even the Son of man would find it difficult to sit upon two asses\nof such unequal size at the same time. Apart from the absurdity of the\nstory, it is an example of very loose notions indeed of the rights of\nproperty, which, if stated of Mahomet, of Joseph Smith the Mormon, or\nany other founder of a religious sect, would be quoted as a proof of his\nobliquity of moral vision. After this successful exploit of taking unto\nhimself other people's goods, Jesus became quite daring; and when he got\nto Jerusalem he went into the temple of God, where he found a number of\npeople carrying on their usual business. He had no more right there than\nthey had--in fact, not so much, as he was a stranger to the city. But,\nnotwithstanding this, he got a rope, and thrashed every one out of\nthe place, upsetting the tables and chairs, and creating such a\nconsternation as only a Bedlamite broken loose would be likely to\nproduce. Though this was immediately after the appropriation of the two\ndonkeys, upon which he had actually ridden to the temple, he called all\nthe tradespeople dishonest, and accused them of having turned the place\ninto a den of thieves. Whatever it might have been before he came,\ncertainly one would think the designation not inappropriate after the\narrival of himself and his disciples. He was not arrested on the spot\nfor this act of assault and battery; but what should we think of the\nCity Police Commissioner if he neglected to order into custody any mad\nenthusiast who might so conduct himself on the Stock Exchange? But he\nwould not, and the enthusiast's vagaries and his visit to the police\ncell would be a very little time apart. It would be no use his alleging\nthat he was about his Father's business, and that he was fulfilling\nprophecy--that would only aggravate the offence. He would be told that\nif his father did not take better care of him, the county asylum would;\nand the prophet would very soon be \"wanted\" who had instigated such\nfolly.\n\nJesus did not remain in the city during the night--it was not prudent\nafter such an advent in the morning, but he went and lodged in Bethany,\na little way out of town. In returning next morning he was hungry, so,\nwhen he came to a fig-tree, he looked at it hoping to find some fruit\non it, but there was none, as it was not the right season. We should\nforgive an excited hungry man here if he, in a moment of forgetfulness,\nlooked for apples in winter; but if he began to curse the tree for not\nbearing fruit out of season, we should think he was mad past doubt. Yet\nthis is exactly what Jesus did; and not only so, but he withered the\ntree that it should not bear fruit thenceforward forever. His disciples\nmarvelled at what he had done, as well they might. \"Jesus answered and\nsaid unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not,\nye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye\nshall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into\nthe sea; it shall be done. And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in\nprayer, believing, ye shall receive.\" No persons have ever yet had the\nrequisite amount of faith to remove mountains; and the less they try\nsuch credulity on fruit trees, the better for our orchards. Nobody does\nor can believe such insane talk. Jesus went to the temple again, and\nwhilst he was preaching, the Chief Priests and elders came and asked him\nby what authority he did such things. In true Quaker style he answered\nthem by asking a question, which had the merit of being impossible of\nsolution. He said--\"The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or\nof men?\" They said: \"We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell\nI you by what authority I do these things.\" That seemed to silence his\ninterrogators, but it did not answer them. It was a favourite way with\nthis Messiah; and we remain as much in the dark to this hour as did the\nChief Priests and elders. This method of evasion is also exemplified\nin the case of the tribute money. When asked whether it was lawful to\nrender tribute unto Caesar, he said, looking at a coin, \"Whose is this\nimage and superscription?\" They said, Caesar's. \"Then saith he unto them,\nRender therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God\nthe things that are God's.\" Renan says on this point--\"To establish as\na principle that we must recognise the legitimacy of a power by the\ninscription on its coins, to proclaim that the perfect man pays tribute\nwith scorn, and without question, was to destroy Republicanism in the\nancient form, and to favour all tyranny. Christianity, in this sense,\nhas contributed much to weaken the sense of duty of the citizen, and to\ndeliver the world into the absolute power of existing circumstances.\"\nBut we are not surprised that he should so readily teach the payment of\ntribute, considering how easy he found it to pay tribute himself;\nfor the ludicrous account given in Matthew, in the same chapter which\ndescribes the transfiguration, shows Jesus discharging his own liability\nand that of Peter in the most original manner imaginable. Not wishing\nto offend the tax collectors, he said to Peter--\"Go thou to the sea, and\ncast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou\nhast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: take that, and\ngive unto them for me and thee.\" If fish of this description swam\nin rivers now, they would be preserved to the exclusion of the most\ndelicious members of the finny tribe. Every man would be an angler,\nand fishing-tackle making would be the most lucrative trade known.\nTake another instance of evasion. The Sadducees did not believe in\nthe resurrection, so they put a question to Jesus on that point. They\ninstanced a woman who had been married to seven brothers in succession,\nall of whom had died. Therefore, in the resurrection, they asked whose\nwife she would be out of the seven when they met again. This was quickly\ndisposed of, for \"Jesus answered and said onto them, Ye do err, not\nknowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God. For In the resurrection\nthey neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of\nGod in heaven.\" If this is so, what becomes of the hope which believers\nin immortality have that in heaven they will be joined again to those\nthey have lost on earth? This great consolation of the Christian is\nfounded on a delusion. Jesus also supplemented his statement with this\nremarkable declaration, \"But as touching the resurrection of the dead,\nhave ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the\nGod of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is _not_\nthe God of the _dead_, but of the _living_,\" What then is the use\nof Catholic prayers for the souls of those in Purgatory? What is the\nutility of our burial service, which goes upon the supposition that God\nwill attend to our requests as touching the dead we are about to consign\nto the grave? Freethinkers and rational thinkers discard the whole\nceremony as a mockery. When once dead, the particles which composed our\nbodies are dissolved, and pass into new combinations--_we_ never live\nagain.\n\nAfter he had done all his preaching, and had thoroughly aroused the ire\nof the authorities and most of the people of Jerusalem against him,\nhe began to fear that he would have to suffer for it, and he told his\ndisciples so. After they had supped together in the house of one of\nthe friends, they departed to the Mount of Olives outside the city, and\nJesus said they would all be offended with him because of that night.\nPeter the loquacious declared, that though all men might be offended\nbecause of him, he would never be. Jesus had no great opinion of Peter's\nsteadfastness, and told him, notwithstanding his protestations of\nattachment, that before the cock crew he would deny him thrice. Peter\nasseverated again: \"Though I should die with ye, yet will I not deny\nthee.\" Poor Peter's word, like his judgment, however, was not to be\nrelied upon, for the very next day he denied all knowledge of Jesus, and\nwhen pressed for an answer, he began to curse and to swear that he had\nnever seen him. Soon after this the Garden of Gethsemane, into which\nthey had entered; was surrounded by a multitude with staves and with\nswords, and Jesus was arrested, Peter the dauntless did make some\nresistance, and cut off the ear of Malchus, a servant of the High\nPriest; but the loss was only temporary, for we are told that Jesus\nimmediately \"touched his ear, and healed him,\" and if this does not\nmean that he stuck the ear on again, what does it mean? When Jesus\nwas arrested in the Garden, all the disciples, escaped as quickly as\npossible, but Peter followed at a distance; and when Jesus was taken to\nthe house of Caiaphas the High Priest, Peter entered and mixed with\nthe servants. He was soon recognised as a follower of Jesus; but when\naccused of the fact, he stoutly denied it three times, the last with\noaths, like the low-bred man he was; for though he had been consorting\nwith Jesus a long time, he had not learnt refinement of manners,\nwhich is not wonderful, as Jesus certainly did not set an example of\nchoiceness of language, his favourite mode of speech being to call\npeople fools, and to launch curses at them. But Peter had to fulfil a\nprophecy--namely, that he would deny his master _thrice_, before the\ncock crew _twice_, which he did before the cock crew _once_. And so that\nprophecy was fulfilled!\n\nWhen Jesus was first examined on the charge of blasphemy he remained\nsilent, and would not answer any questions put to him. Then Caiaphas\nsaid--\"I adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be\nChrist, the Son of God.\" Jesus at last replied--\"Thou hast said,\" which\nmay fairly be interpreted to mean, \"You say I am, not I.\" This is in\nkeeping with his usual evasive mode of answering, as before pointed out.\nEspecially as he continued--\"Nevertheless I say unto you, _Hereafter_\nshall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and\ncoming in the clouds of heaven.\" This was declared blasphemous, and we\nknow how excited bigoted people get when that word is pronounced. So\nthey struck the enthusiast, as he had struck others in the temple. In\nthe morning he was bound and led before Pilate the governor, who asked\nhim, \"Art thou the king of the Jews?\" He again answered, \"Thou sayest\"\nAnd when the Chief Priests and elders repeated their charges, he still\nrefused to answer them, which surprised Pilate. However, Pilate saw no\nharm in what he had done, and was anxious to set him at liberty; but the\npriests, as is usual with them, persisted in their demands of vengeance\nagainst one who had offended them. Then Jesus was delivered over to the\nsoldiers to be crucified, which was a very barbarous mode of execution.\nHe was cruelly treated by the soldiers, who were incited thereto by\nthe priests. He died the death of a malefactor, but his end was brought\nabout by his own wild and extravagant conduct. In these days he would\nhave been confined as a lunatic, but in that barbarous time, and\nunder the influence of priests, he was tortured to death. No one\ncan contemplate his fate, whatever his faults may have been, without\nfeelings of sorrow. But if his death was to fulfil prophecy, and to save\na lost and ruined world, we ought to regard it with exultation and great\njoy, and not only observe Good Friday as a national holiday, but every\nFriday as a public festival. But who, on calmly reading the narrative,\nand dismissing from his mind the fables taught him in his childhood, can\nsee anything supernatural in Jesus' life and death? He displayed through\nlife all the infirmities and littlenesses of a man, and he died like one\nwho had brought about his own death by his own acts. When on the cross,\nand no doubt in mortal agony, he exclaimed, in the utterness of despair,\nlike one who had long trusted to a delusion, and when too late had found\nout his mistake--\"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?\" The Chief\nPriests and elders, the people about, and even the two thieves who were\ndying with him, jeered him for his folly, saying, \"He trusted in God;\nlet him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son\nof God.\" But there was no deliverance from heaven for him more than for\nany other man.\n\nJesus had acted so extravagantly from the time he entered on public\nlife that it is not surprising that his followers were infected by his\nexample, and it is to them we are indebted for the re-appearance of\nJesus after he was dead and buried. He himself said that he was to\nfulfil the prophecy of Jonas, for, as he was three days and three nights\nin the belly of the whale, so should the Son of man be three days and\nthree nights in the heart of the earth. Yet he never went into the heart\nof the earth, but was laid in a tomb or cave with a door to it; and he\nwas not even there three days and three nights, but only two nights,\nand not two days altogether. And so that prophecy was fulfilled! Jesus\nprophesied his own resurrection only, but the earthquake which followed\nhis death was no respecter of persons, for when the veil of the temple\nwas rent in twain from the top to the bottom, and the earth did quake,\nand the rocks were rent, the graves were opened, and many bodies of\nthe saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his\nresurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. No\northodox, Christians doubt for a moment that Jesus rose again from the\ndead, because he was to do so, and he was the Son of God; but do they\nbelieve these unknown saints revisited the glimpses of the moon, and\nexperienced a resurrection equal to that of Jesus, for no purpose at\nall, and for no merit of their own? Yet we have no more authority for\nthe one than the other, and no reason to believe one more than the\nother. Toward the end of the Sabbath (that is, Saturday evening) came\nMary Magdalene, with the other Mary, to see the sepulchre where Jesus\nwas laid, and another earthquake took place, and the angel of the Lord\ndescended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door,\nand sat upon it. His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment\nlike snow. He told the women that Jesus had risen, and asked them to see\nthe place where the Lord lay. But whether they looked or not we are not\ntold, but they ran away with fear and great joy to tell the disciples.\nAnd as they went, whom should they meet but Jesus himself, who said\nto them, \"All hail.\" But then there is some little confusion in this\ninfallible narrative. It was not towards the end of Saturday, but very\nearly in the morning of Sunday, at the rising of the sun, that the women\ncame, and for the purpose of anointing the body. And the stone was still\nagainst the door, and they said, Who shall roll us away the stone? But\nwhen they looked again the stone was away, and on entering the sepulchre\nthey saw a young man dressed in white sitting _inside_, and no angel\nwith a lightning face sitting _outside_. The women fled with terror, but\ntold no man what they had seen; and it isa mystery to this day how that\nwhich was never told to any one is known to nearly all the world. Jesus\ndid not meet the two Marys, but appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of\nwhom he had cast seven devils. She went and told the disciples about the\nresurrection, but they believed her not. He appeared afterwards to two\nof his disciples, but they did not believe in his resurrection, neither\ndid the eleven disciples, to whom he appeared. If they who knew him\nintimately did not believe in it after only three days' absence from\nthem, shall we, after a lapse of eighteen hundred years, put faith in\nthis clumsy, impossible, and absurd fable? But perhaps the condition\nhe attached to the belief may have something to do with the faith of so\nmany people in these days. He said, after upbraiding his disciples for\ntheir unbelief and hardness of heart--\"He that believeth and is baptised\nshall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.\" That threat,\nfulminated from thousands of pulpits, has frightened timid and weak\npeople in nearly every age of the Christian era. But then again there\nwere not two women but many who went to the sepulchre, and they found\nthe stone away; and when they entered they saw two men in shining\ngarments, and the women did not conceal what they had seen, but went and\ntold all the disciples, but they were not believed. This time the lively\nPeter ran to the tomb to look for himself, and saw nothing but the linen\nclothes lying by themselves. After that two of the disciples went to\nEmmana, where Jesus himself joined them, but they knew him not, and did\nnot believe the story of his resurrection. He then rebuked them in\nhis usual sweet and placid style, by exclaiming, \"O fools, and slow of\nheart,\" and beginning at Moses and all the prophets, \"he expounded unto\nthem in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself,\" which must\nhave been a tolerably long discourse for one so recently out of the\ngrave. They asked him to stop with them and have something to eat,\nwhich, his appetite being as good as ever, he consented to do; and it\nwas his mode of breaking bread and blessing it that convinced them that\nhe was Jesus. And he then vanished out of their sight. They went to\nJerusalem and told the others what they had seen, and while they were\ntalking Jesus stood in the midst of them; but they did not know him\nagain, but took him to be a spirit. He said--\"Behold my hands and my\nfeet, that it is myself; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see\nme have.\" And while they yet believed not for joy and wondered, he said\nunto them, \"Have ye here any meat?\" He was again hungry, and they gave\nhim a piece of broiled fish and a honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat\nbefore them. That was enough to convince them a second time. \"And he led\nthem out as far as Bethany, and he lifted up his hands and blessed them.\nAnd it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and\ncarried up into heaven,\" with the broiled fish on his stomach, where he\nentered into joy everlasting.\n\nThe foregoing will certainly be declared \"blasphemous\" by all true\nbelievers, and will no doubt be pronounced a \"caricature\" of Jesus by\neven Unitarians. But the fault does not lie with us--it is in the text,\nwhich we did not make. We are not responsible for the representation,\nfor we have scrupulously followed the inspired delineations of the\nEvangelists. Let us briefly sum up this biography.\n\nJesus was the Son of God, and not the son of his mother's husband, and\nhis mother remained a virgin notwithstanding his conception and birth,\nalthough she strangely offered the usual sacrifice when the days of her\npurification were accomplished.\n\nHe was descended from the royal line of David, that is, Joseph the\nhusband of his mother was so descended; but then Joseph was not his\nfather at all.\n\nThe miraculous boy was to fulfil many prophecies; but although he often\npurposely acted in order to fulfil them, several given as illustrations\nare singularly wide of the mark.\n\nAt twelve years of age he was a match for learned doctors in\ndisputation, and could pertly rebuke his mother for inquiring where he\nhad been for three days and three nights.\n\nHe was baptised at thirty by John, who taught him rudeness of manners;\nand though a dove descended direct from heaven, and alighted on his\nhead, he was immediately taken by the spirit into very dangerous places,\nwas kept a remarkably long time without food, and was very strangely\ntempted by the Devil in person.\n\nHe became a great talker, dealt largely in mystical language, and\ngathered followers from the poorest, most ignorant, and most credulous\nof his countrymen.\n\nHe cured all sorts of diseases and afflictions, though there is no\nevidence that he ever underwent a medical training.\n\nHe worked miracles, as became an Eastern founder of a sect, but his\nachievements scarcely rank as high as the tricks of an Indian juggler.\n\nHe was uneducated, and never, so far as the record goes, wrote a line\nin his life; but as a preacher he was famous, and always succeeded\nin making his hearers marvel at his strange doctrines--doctrines so\ncontradictory that no sane man can follow them.\n\nHe was vituperative in his language, austere in his manners, undutiful\nand repelling to his mother.\n\nHe appropriated other persons' property, and immediately after violently\nassaulted a large number of men, whom he charged with being dishonest.\n\nWhen asked questions touching vital points of his own doctrines, he\nusually gave evasive answers.\n\nHe promised his disciples all sorts of wonderful powers if they would\nbelieve in him, and he promised also to come in a cloud with great glory\nbefore that generation passed away; but having risen from the grave, and\nascended into heaven, he has not returned in a cloud with glory up to\nthe time of our going to press.\n\nHe ultimately met the death of a malefactor, and in the last moments of\nagony his fanaticism was strong upon him, for he promised to the thief\nwho flattered him that he would meet him that day in paradise, though he\ndid not go there himself till about six weeks afterwards.\n\nAfter his death he was brought to life again, thus defying all the laws\nof physiology. When but just out of the grave, his powers of preaching\nwere as strong as ever, and his appetite as vigorous as though he had\nreturned from a long journey; and after partaking of a singular repast,\nand before he had had time to digest it, he ascended into the clouds\nwithout the aid of a balloon, and was seen no more.\n\nAll this, with much more of the same incredible nature, is taught as\ninfallible truth by some of the best educated men the Universities can\nproduce, and belief in the whole of it is necessary to \"respectability\"\nin this life, and to salvation in a life after death. How educated men\ncan believe it, is a mystery which we trust the School Boards of the\nfuture will be able to unravel; at present we find it as insoluble as\nall the other sublime mysteries of Christianity, for we cannot believe\nthat a University training necessarily makes men hypocrites, and we are\nloth to believe that on one most important subject it necessarily makes\nthem imbecile.\n\nThere would be fewer believers if there were more inquirers. The\nadvocates of Bible reading in Elementary Schools must feel that there\nis danger to the faith lurking in the future if that \"precious book\"\nis read and not \"expounded.\" Dogmatic teaching is the stronghold of\nthe religion of Christendom. The \"plain, unvarnished tale\" of the\nFour Gospels would carry with it its own condemnation, for the best\nrefutation of Christianity is a true knowledge of Christ.\n\n\n          Printed and Published by\n          C. Watts,  17, Johnson's Court, Fleet St, London, E.C.\n          PRICE TWOPENCE\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<pre id=\"pg-footer\">","title":"Ludicrous Aspects Of Christianity: A Response To The Challenge Of The Bishop Of Manchester","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":10708}