{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_38600/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_38600","id":"gutenberg_38600","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38600","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Religious","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Christianity -- Controversial literature","Dying and rising gods -- Comparative studies"],"text":"Produced by David Widger\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE WORLD'S SIXTEEN CRUCIFIED SAVIORS\n\nOR, CHRISTIANITY BEFORE CHRIST\n\nCONTAINING NEW, STARTLING, AND EXTRAORDINARY REVELATIONS IN RELIGIOUS\nHISTORY, WHICH DISCLOSE THE ORIENTAL ORIGIN OF ALL THE DOCTRINES,\nPRINCIPLES, PRECEPTS, AND MIRACLES OF THE CHRISTIAN NEW TESTAMENT, AND\nFURNISHING A KEY FOR UNLOCKING MANY OF ITS SACRED MYSTERIES, BESIDES\nCOMPRISING THE HISTORY OF 16 HEATHEN CRUCIFIED GODS.\n\nBy Kersey Graves\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\nINVERSELY to the remoteness of time has been man's ascent toward the\ntemple of knowledge. Truth has made its ingress into the human mind\nin the ratio by which man has attained the capacity to receive and\nappreciate it Hence, as we tread back the meandering pathway of human\nhistory, every step in the receding process brings us to a lower plane\nof intelligence and a state of mind more thoroughly encrusted with\nignorance and superstition. It is, therefore, no source of surprise to\nlearn, when we take a survey of the world two or three thousand years\nin the past, that every religious writer of that era committed errors on\nevery subject which employed his pen, involving a scientific principle.\nHence, the bible, or sacred book, to which he was a contributor, is\nnow found to bear the marks of human imperfection. For the temple of\nknowledge was but partially reared, and its chambers but dimly lighted\nup. The intellectual brain was in a dark, feeble and dormant condition.\nHence, the moral and religious feelings were drifted about without a\npilot on the turbulent waves of superstition, and finally stranded on\nthe shoals of bigotry. The Christian bible, like other bibles, having\nbeen written in an age when science was but budding into life, and\nphilosophy had attained but a feeble growth, should be expected to teach\nmany things incompatible with the principles of modern science.\nAnd accordingly it is found to contain, like other bibles, numerous\nstatements so obviously at war with present established scientific\ntruths that almost any school-boy, at the present day, can demonstrate\ntheir falsity. Let the unbiased reader examine and compare the oriental\nand Christian bibles together, and he will note the following facts,\nviz:--\n\n1. That the cardinal religious conceptions of all bibles are essentially\nthe same--all running in parable grooves.\n\n2. That every chapter of every bible is but a transcript of the mental\nchart of the writer.\n\n3. That no bible, pagan or Christian, contains anything surpassing the\nnatural, mental and moral capacity of the writer to originate. And hence\nno divine aid or inspiration was necessary for its production.\n\n4. That the moral and religious teachings of no bible reach a higher\naltitude than the intelligence and mental development of the age and\ncountry which produced it.\n\n5. That the Christian bible, in some respects, is superior to some of\nthe other bibles, but only to the extent to which the age in which it\nwas written was superior in intelligence and natural mental capacity to\nthe era in which the older bibles were penned; and that this superiority\nconsists not its more exalted religious conceptions, but only in the\nfact that, being of more modern origin, the progress of mind had worn\naway some of the legendary rubbish of the past. Being written in a later\nand more enlightened age, it is consequently a little less encrusted\nwith mythological tradition and oriental imagery. Though not free from\nthese elements, it possesses them in less degree. And by comparing\nChrist's history with those of the oriental Gods, it will be found:--\n\n1. That he taught no new doctrine or moral precept.\n\n2. That he inculcated the same religion and morality, which he\nelaborated, as other moral teachers, to great extremes.\n\n3. That Christ differs so little in his character, preaching, and\npractical life from some of the oriental Gods, that no person whose\nmind is not deplorably warped and biased by early training can call one\ndivine while he considers the other human.\n\n4. That if Christ was a God, then all were Gods.\n\nThe Author.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.\n\nThe author desires to say that this work has been carefully reviewed\nand corrected, and some additions made, embracing two chapters from \"the\nBible of Bibles,\" and some explanatory notes, and is now able to place\nbefore the reader a greatly improved edition.\n\nThe author also desires to say here, that the many flattering letters\nhe has received from various parts of the country, from those who have\nsupplied themselves with the work, excites in his mind the hope it will\nultimately effect something towards achieving the important end sought\nto be attained by its publication--the banishment of that wide-spread\ndelusion comprehended in the belief in an incarnate, virgin-born God,\ncalled Jesus Christ, and the infallibility of his teachings, with the\nnumerous evils growing legitimately out of this belief--among the\nmost important of which is, its cramping effect upon the mind of the\npossessor, which interdicts its growth, and thus constitutes a serious\nobstacle to the progress both of the individual and of society. And such\nhas been the blinding effect of this delusion upon all who have fallen\nvictims to its influence, that the numerous errors and evils of our\npopular system of religious faith, which constitutes its legitimate\nfruits, have passed from age to age, unnoticed by all except scientific\nand progressive minds, who are constantly bringing these errors and\nevils to light. This state of things has been a source of sorrow and\nregret to every philanthropist desiring the welfare of the race. And if\nthis work shall achieve anything towards arresting this great evil, the\nauthor will feel that he is amply compensated for the years of toil and\nmental labor spent in its preparation.\n\nNote.--As the different works consulted have assigned different dates\nfor the same event, the author has, in one or two cases, followed their\nexample, accepting them as authority; as in the date of the birth and\ndeath of the Gods of Mexico. The reader will also notice that the name\nof the same God is found in different countries. Example--Adonis and\nBacchus are found amongst the Gods of both Greece and Egypt.\n\n\n\n\nEXPLANATION\n\n\"The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors.\" What an imposing title for a\nbook! What startling developments of religious history it implies! Is\nit founded on fact or on fiction? If it has a basis of truth, where was\nsuch an extraordinary mine of sacred lore discovered? Where were such\nstartling facts obtained as the title of the work suggests. These\nqueries will doubtless arise as soliloquies in the minds of many readers\non glancing at the title-page. And the author is disposed to gratify\nthis natural and most probable, in some cases, excited curiosity by a\nbrief explanation. In doing this, he deems it only necessary, to state\nthat many of the most important facts collated in this work were derived\nfrom Sir Godfrey Higgins' Anacalypsis, a work as valuable as it is\nrare--a work comprising the result of twenty years' labor, devoted to\nthe investigation of religious history. And although embodying many\nimportant historical facts which should have commanded for it a\nword-wide circulation, but a few copies of this invaluable treasury of\nreligious knowledge have ever found their way into this country. One\nof these copies the author of this work obtained, at no inconsiderable\nexpense, long enough to glean from its pages such facts as he presumed\nwould be most interesting and instructive to the general reader, some\nof which will be found in nearly every chapter of this volume. With\nthe facts and materials derived from this source, and two hundred other\nunimpeachable historical records, the present work might have been\nswelled to fourfold its present size without exhausting the author's\nample store of materials and would have possessed such unwieldy\ndimensions but for a strict conformity to the most rigid rules of\neclecticism and condensation. Encouraged by the extensive demand for his\nformer work, \"The Biography of Satan,\" which has passed through seven\neditions, the author cherishes the hope that the present work will\nmeet with a circulation commensurate with the importance of the many\ninvaluable facts which it contains. For he possesses the sad conviction\nthat the many religious errors and evils which it is the object of\nthis work to expose, operate very seriously to retard the moral and\nintellectual growth and prosperity of all Christian countries. They have\nthe effect to injure mentally, morally and religiously the great body of\nChristian professors.\n\nDr. Prince, of Long Island (now deceased), wrote to the author,\nrespecting the thirty-fifth chapter of this work, entitled \"The Logical\nView of the Incarnation,\" after he had seen it in the columns of a\nnewspaper, \"It is a masterly piece of logic, and will startle, if it\ndoes not revolutionize, the orthodox world. And the chapters comprising\n'The Philosophical View,' and 'The Physiological View,' were afterward\npronounced specimens of profound and unanswerable logical reasoning.\" We\nthus call the reader's attention to these chapters in advance, in order\nto induce that thorough attention to their facts and arguments which\nwill result in banishing from his mind the last vestiges of a belief (if\nhe entertain any) in the doctrine of the divine incarnation.\n\n\nIMPORTANT FACTS CONSTITUTING THE BASIS OF THIS WORK.\n\nIGNORANCE of science and ignorance of history are the two great bulwarks\nof religious error. There is scarcely a tenet of religious faith now\npropagated to the world by the professed disciples of Christ but that,\nif subjected to a rigid test in the ordeal of modern science would be\nfound to contain more or less error. Vast acquisitions have been made\nin the fields of science and history within the last half century, the\nmoral lessons of which have done much to undermine and unsettle our\npopular system of religious faith, and to bring into disrepute or\neffectually change many of its long-cherished dogmas. The scientific and\nhistorical facts thus brought before the intelligent public, have served\nas keys for explaining many of the doctrines comprised in the popular\ncreed. They have poured a flood of light upon our whole system of\nreligion as now taught by its popular representatives, which have\nhad the effect to reveal many of its errors to those who have had the\ntemerity, or the curiosity, to investigate it upon these grounds. Many\nof the doctrines and miraculous events which have always been assigned a\ndivine emanation by the disciples of the Christian faith, are, by these\nscientific and historical disclosures, shown to be explainable upon\nnatural grounds, and to have exclusively a natural basis. Some of them\nare shown to be solvable by recently developed spiritual laws, while\nothers are proven to be founded wholly in error. The intelligent\ncommunity are now acquainted with many of these important facts, so that\nno man of science can be found in this enlightened age who can popularly\nbe termed a Christian. No man can be found in any Christian country who\nhas the established reputation of being a man of science, or who has\nmade any proficiency in the whole curriculum of the sciences, whose\ncreed, when examined by an orthodox committee, would not be pronounced\nunsound. It is true that many of the scientific class, not possessing\nthe conviction that duty imposes the moral necessity of making living\nmartyrs of themselves, have refrained from fully avowing or disclosing\nto the public their real convictions of the popular faith.\n\nThe changes and improvements in religious ideas now observant in the\nmost intelligent portion of the community, are due in part to the rapid\nprogress of scientific discovery and the dissemination of scientific\nknowledge in Christian countries. The explorer in the field of religious\nhistory, however, comes in here for his meed of praise. New stores of\nhistoric facts and data may be reckoned among the recent acquisitions\nof the laborious archeologist; new fountains of religious history have\nrecently been unsealed, which have had the effect to reveal many errors\nand false claims set up for the current religion of Christendom--a\nreligion long regarded as settled and stereotyped. For many centuries\nsubsequent to the establishment of the Christian religion, but little\nwas known by its disciples of the character, claims and doctrines of\nthe oriental systems of worship. These religions, in fact, were scarcely\nknown to exist, because they had long been veiled in secrecy. They were\nfound, in some cases, enshrined in religious books printed or written in\na language so very ancient and obscure, as to bid defiance for\ncenturies to the labors of the most indefatigable, profound and erudite\narcheological scholar to decipher it. That obstacle is now partially\nsurmounted.\n\nThe recent translation for the first time of the Hindoo Vedas into\nthe English language (the oldest bible now extant or ever written) has\nrevealed to the unwelcome gaze of the Christian reader the startling\nfact that \"the heathen\" had long been in possession of \"holy books,\"\npossessing essentially the same character, and teaching essentially the\nsame doctrines as the Christian bible--there being, as Horace Greeley\nexpressed it, \"No doctrine of Christianity but what has been anticipated\nby the Vedas.\" (See Vol. II., Chap. i, of this work.)\n\nIf, then, this heathen bible (compiled, according to the Christian\nmissionary, Rev. D. G Allen, 1400 B. C.), contains all the doctrines of\nChristianity, then away goes over the dam all claim for the Christian\nbible as an original bible as an original revelation, or a work of\ndivine inspiration.\n\nBibles are thus shown to be of heathen and human origin, instead of\nheavenly and divine authorship, as claimed for them by their respective\ndisciples--the Christian bible forming no exception to this statement.\nThe latter, being essentially like other bibles, it must, of course,\nhave had the same or a similar origin--a fact which, though it may be\nnew and startling to millions, will be universally accepted as truth\nbefore the lapse of many generations, and a fact which confronts with\nopen denial the claims of two hundred millions of Christian professors,\nwho assert with unscrupulous boldness that every doctrine, principle and\nprecept of their bible is of divine emanation.\n\nHow utterly groundless and untenable is such a claim when arranged by\nthe side of modern discoveries in religious history!\n\nEqually unsupportable is the declaration that \"there is no other name\ngiven under heaven whereby men can be saved, than that of Jesus Christ\nand him crucified,\" when viewed in the light of the modern explorations\nof Sir Godfrey Higgins, which have disclosed the history of nearly a\nscore of crucified Gods and sin-atoning Saviors, who, we have equal\nproof, died for the sins of mankind.\n\nThus, the two prime articles of the Christian faith--Revelation and\nCrucifixion--are forever established as human and heathen conceptions.\nAnd the hope might be reasonably entertained that the important\nhistorical facts disclosed in this work will have the effect to open the\neyes of the professors of the Christian religion to see their serious\nerror in putting forth such exalted claims for their bible and their\nreligion as that of being perfect products of infinite wisdom, did\nnot the past history of all religious countries furnish sad proof that\nreason and logic, and even the most cogent and convincing facts of\nscience and history often prove powerless when arrayed against a\nreligious conviction, enstamped upon the mind for thousands of years in\nthe past, and transmitted from parent to child until it has grown to a\ncolossal stature, and become a part of the living tissues of the soul.\n\nNo matter how glaringly absurd, how palpably erroneous, or how\ndemonstrably false an opinion or doctrine is shown to be, they\ncannot see it, but will still continue to hug it to their bosoms as a\ndivinely-revealed truth. No facts or evidence can prove an overmatch for\nthe inherited convictions of a thousand generations. In this respect the\nMahomedan, the Hindoo and the Christian all stand upon a level. It is\nabout as easy to convince one as the other of their easily demonstrated\nerrors.\n\n\nRELIGION OF NATURAL ORIGIN.\n\nAmong the numerous errors traceable in the history of every religious\nsect, commemorated in the annals of the world, none possesses a\nmore serious character, or has been attended with more deplorable\nconsequences, than that of assigning a wrong origin to religion. Every\nbible, every sect, every creed, every catechism, and every orthodox\nsermon teaches that \"religion is the gift of God,\" that \"it is infused\ninto the soul by the spirit and power of the Lord.\" Never was a greater\nmistake ever committed. Every student of anthropology, every person who\nhas read any of the numerous modern works on mental science, and tested\ntheir easily-demonstrated facts, knows that religion is of _natural_ and\nnot _supernatural_ origin; that it is a natural element of the\n_human mind_, and not a \"_direct gift from God_;\" that it grows as\nspontaneously out of the soul as flowers spring out of the ground. It is\nas natural as eating, sleeping or breathing. This conclusion is not the\noffspring of mere imagination. It is no hastily-concocted theory, but an\noft-demonstrated and scientifically-established fact, which any person\ncan test the truth of for himself.\n\nAnd this modern discovery will, at no distant day, revolutionize\nall systems of religious faith in existence, and either dissolve and\ndissipate them, or modify and establish them upon a more natural and\nenduring basis, expurgated of their dogmatic errors.\n\nLet us, then, labor to banish the wide-spread delusion believed and\ntaught by a thousand systems of worship--Jew, Pagan and Christian--that\n\"religion is of supernatural or divine origin,\" and the many ruinous\nerrors; senseless dogmas and deplorable soul-crushing superstitions\nso thoroughly inwrought into the Christian system will vanish like fog\nbefore the morning sun, and be replaced by a religion which sensible,\nintelligent and scientific men and women can accept, and will delight to\nhonor and practice.\n\n\n\n\nADDRESS TO THE CLERGY.\n\nFRIENDS and brethren--teachers of the Christian faith: Will you believe\nus when we tell you the divine claims of your religion are\ngone--all swept away by the \"logic of history,\" and nullified by the\ndemonstrations of science?\n\nThe recently opened fountains of historic law, many of whose potent\nfacts will be found interspersed through the pages of this work, sweep\naway the last inch of ground on which can be predicated the least show\nfor either the divine origin of the Christian religion, or the divinity\nof Jesus Christ.\n\nFor these facts demonstrate beyond all cavil and criticism, and with\na logical force which can leave not the vestige of a doubt upon any\nunbiased mind, that all its doctrines are an outgrowth from older\nheathen systems. Several systems of religion essentially the same in\ncharacter and spirit as that religion now known as Christianity, and\nsetting forth the same doctrines, principles and precepts, and several\npersonages filling a chapter in history almost identical with that of\nJesus Christ, it is now known to those who are up with the discoveries\nand intelligence of the age, were venerated in the East centuries before\na religion called Christian, or a personage called Jesus Christ were\nknown to history.\n\nWill you not, then, give it up that your religion is merely a human\nproduction, reconstructed from heathen materials--from oriental systems\nseveral thousand years older than yours--or will you continue, in spite\nof the unanimous and unalterable verdict of history, science, facts and\nlogic, to proclaim to the world the now historically demonstrated\nerror which you have so long preached, that God is the author of your\nreligion, and Jesus Christ a Deity-begotten Messiah? Though you may have\nheretofore honestly believed these doctrines to be true, you can now no\nlonger plead ignorance as an excuse for propagating such gigantic\nand serious errors, as they are now overwhelmingly demonstrated by a\nthousand facts of history to be untrue. You must abandon such exalted\nclaims for your religion, or posterity will mark you as being \"blind\nleaders of the blind.\" They will heap upon your honored names their\nunmitigated ridicule and condemnation. They will charge you as being\neither deplorably ignorant, or disloyal to the cause of truth. And shame\nand ignominy will be your portion.\n\nThe following propositions (fatal to your claims for Christianity) are\nestablished beyond confutation by the historical facts cited in this\nwork, viz:--\n\n1. There were many cases of the miraculous birth of Gods reported in\nhistory before the case of Jesus Christ.\n\n2 Also many other cases of Gods being born of virgin mothers.\n\n3. Many of these Gods, like Christ, were (reputedly) born on the 25th of\nDecember.\n\n4. Their advent into the world, like that of Jesus Christ, is in many\ncases claimed to have been foretold by \"inspired prophets.\"\n\n5. Stars figured at the birth of several of them, as in the case of\nChrist.\n\n6. Also angels, shepherds, and magi, or \"wise men.\"\n\n7. Many of them, like Christ, were claimed to be of royal or princely\ndescent.\n\n8. Their lives, like his, were also threatened in infancy by the ruler\nof the country.\n\n9. Several of them, like him, gave early proof of divinity.\n\n10. And, like him, retired from the world and fasted.\n\n11. Also, like him, declared, \"My kingdom is not of this world.\"\n\n12. Some of them preached a spiritual religion, too, like his.\n\n13. And were \"anointed with oil,\" like him.\n\n14. Many of them, like him, were \"crucified for the sins of the world.\"\n\n15. And after three days' interment \"rose from the dead.\"\n\n16. And, finally, like him, are reported as ascending back to heaven.\n\n17. The same violent convulsions of nature at the crucifixion of several\nare reported.\n\n18. They were nearly all called \"Saviors,\" \"Son of God,\" \"Messiah,\"\n\"Redeemer,\" \"Lord,\" &c.\n\n19. Each one was the second member of the trinity of \"Father, Son and\nHoly Ghost.\"\n\n20. The doctrines of \"Original Sin,\" \"Fall of Man,\" \"The Atonement,\"\n\"The Trinity,\" \"The Word,\" \"Forgiveness,\" \"An Angry God,\" \"Future\nEndless Punishment,\" etc., etc. (see the author's \"Biography of Satan,\")\nwere a part of the religion of each of these sin-atoning Gods, as\nfound set forth in several oriental bibles and \"holy books,\" similar in\ncharacter and spirit to the Christian's bible, and written, like it,\nby \"inspired and holy men\" before the time of either Christ or Moses\n(before Moses, in some cases, at least). All these doctrines and\ndeclarations, and many others not here enumerated, the historical\ncitations of this work abundantly prove, were taught in various\noriental heathen nations centuries before the birth of Christ, or before\nChristianity, as a religion, was known in the world.\n\nWill you, then, after learning these facts, longer dare assert that\nChristianity is of divine emanation, or claim a special divine paternity\nfor its author. Only the priest, who loves his _salary_ more than\nthe cause of _truth_ (and I fear this class are numerous,) or who is\ndeplorably ignorant of history, will have the effrontery or audacity to\ndo so. For the historical facts herein set forth as clearly prove such\nassumptions to be false, as figures can demonstrate the truth of any\nmathematical problem. And no logic can overthrow, and no sophistry can\nset aside these facts.\n\nThey will stand till the end of time in spite of your efforts either to\nevade, ignore, or invalidate them.\n\nWe will here briefly state:--\n\n\nWHY ALL THE ANCIENT RELIGIONS WERE ALIKE.\n\nTwo causes are obviously assignable for Christianity in all its\nessential features and phases, being so strikingly similar to the\nancient pagan systems which preceded it, as also the close analogies of\nall the principal systems, whose doctrines and practical teachings have\nfound a place on the pages of history.\n\n1. The primary and constituent elements and properties of human nature\nbeing essentially the same in all countries and all centuries, and the\nfeeling called Religion being a spontaneous outgrowth of the devotional\nelements of the human mind, the coincidence would naturally produce\nsimilar feelings, similar thoughts, similar views and similar doctrines\non the subject of religion in different countries, however widely\nseparated. This accounts in part for the analogous features observable\nin all the primary systems of religious faith, which have flourished in\nthe past ages.\n\n2. A more potent cause, however, for the proximate identity extending\nto such an elaborate detail, as is evinced by the foregoing schedule,\nis found in the historical incident which brought the disciples of the\nvarious systems of worship together, face to face, in the then grand\nreligious emporium of the world--the royal and renowned city of\nAlexandria, the capital of Egypt Here, drawn together by various motives\nand influences, the devotee of India (the devout disciple of\nBuddhism), the ever-prayerful worshipper of \"Mithra, the Mediator,\" the\nrepresentatives of the crucified Quexalcoate of Mexico, the self-denying\nEssene, the superstitious Egyptian, the godly Chaldean, the imitative\nJudean founders of Christianity, and the disciples of other sin-atoning\nGods, met and interchanged ideas, discussed their various dogmas,\nremolded their doctrines, and recast and rehabilitated their systems\nof religious faith by borrowing from each other, and from other systems\nthere represented. In this way all became remarkably similar and alike\nin all their doctrines and details. And thus the mystery is solved,\nand the singular resemblance of all the ancient systems of religion\nsatisfactorily accounted for. (For a fuller explanation of this matter,\nsee Chapters XXX. and XXXI. of this work.)\n\nIn conclusion, please note the following points:--\n\n1. The religious conceptions of the Old Testament are as easily traced\nto heathen sources as those of the New Testament. But we are compelled\nto exclude such an exposition from this work.\n\n2. The comparative exhibition of the doctrines and teachings of twenty\nbibles which proves them to be in their leading features essentially\nalike (originally designed for this volume), is found to be, when\ncompleted, of sufficient magnitude to constitute a volume of itself.\n\n3. Here I desire to impress upon the minds of my clerical brethren the\nimportant fact, that the gospel histories of Christ were written by men\nwho had formerly been Jews (see Acts xxi. 20), and probably possessing\nthe strong proclivity to imitate and borrow which their bible shows\nwas characteristic of that nation; and being written many years after\nChrist's death, according to that standard Christian author, Dr.\nLardner, it was impossible, under such circumstances, for them to\nseparate (if they had desired to) the real facts and events of his life\nfrom the innumerable fictions and fables then afloat everywhere relative\nto the heathen Gods who had pre-enacted a similar history. Two reasons\nare thus furnished for their constructing a history of Christ almost\nidentical with that of other Gods, as shown in chapters XXX., XXXI. and\nXXXII. of this work.\n\n4. The singular and senseless defense of your now tottering system\nwe have known to be attempted by members of your order, by the\nself-complacent soliloquy \"Christianity, whether divine or human, is\ngood enough for me.\" But such a subterfuge betrays both a weak mind\nand a weak cause. The disciples of all the oriental systems cherished\na similar feeling and a similar sentiment. And the deluded followers\nof Brigham Young exclaimed in like manner, \"I want nothing better than\nMormonism.\" \"Snakes, lizards and frogs are good enough for me,\" a South\nSea Islander once exclaimed to a missionary, when a reform diet was\nproposed. Such logic, if universally adopted, would keep the world\neternally in barbarism. No progress can be made where such sentiments\nprevail. The truth is, no system of religion, whatever its ostensible\nmarks of perfection, can long remain \"good enough\" for aspiring\nand progressive minds, unless occasionally improved, like other\ninstitutions. And then it should be borne in mind, that our controversy\ndoes not appertain so much to the character as to the origin of the\nChristian religion. Our many incontrovertible proofs, that it is\nof human and heathen origin, proves at the same time that it is an\nimperfect system, and as such, needing occasional improvement, like\nother institutions. And its assumed perfection and divine origin which\nhave always guarded it from improvement, amply accounts for its present\ncorrupt, immoral, declining and dying condition. And it will ere long\ndie with paralysis, unless its assumption of divine perfection is soon\nexchanged for the principles of improvement and reconstruction. This\npolicy alone can save it.\n\n5. We will here notice another feeble, futile and foolish expedient we\nhave known resorted to by persons of your order to save your sinking\ncause when the evidence is presented with such cogency as to admit of no\ndisproof, that all the important doctrines of Christianity were taught\nby older heathen systems before the era of Christ The plea is, that\nthose systems were mere types, or ante-types, of the Christian religion.\nBut this plea is of itself a borrowed subterfuge of heathenism, and is\nmoreover devoid of evidence. The ancient Egyptians, also the Greeks,\nclaimed that Brahminism was a type, or ante-type, of their religious\nsystems. And Mahomedans now claim that both Judaism and Christianity\nwere designed by God as foreshadowing types of religion of the Koran.\nAnd the disciples of more than a thousand systems of religion which have\nflourished in past ages, could have made such logic equally available in\nshowing, in each case, that every system preceding theirs was designed\nby Infinite Wisdom as simply a typical or ante-typical forerunner of\ntheirs. How ridiculous and senseless, therefore, is the argument thus\nshown to be when critically examined in the light of history! So much so\nas scarcely to merit a serious notice.\n\n6. Here permit us to say that we believe Christianity to be not only\nof human origin, but of natural origin also; I that is, a natural\noutgrowth, like other systems, of the religious elements of the human\nmind--a hypothesis which accounts most beautifully for the numerous\nhuman imperfections now visible in nearly every line of its teachings.\n\nThose imperfections correspond exactly to the imperfect minds which\nproduced it.\n\n7. And we believe that the principle teacher of Christianity, \"the man\nChrist Jesus,\" possessed a very exalted and superior mind for that age\nin the moral and religious departments, and in the intellectual to some\nextent also. But his superiority in these respects was not probably\ngreater than that of Zera Colburn or Henry Salford in the mathematical\ndepartment. And all probably derived their peculiar extraordinary traits\nof mind from the same causes--that of strong psychological influence\nimpressed upon the mind of the mothers prior to their births. Had these\nante-natal influences been as well understood then as now, we presume\nChrist would have escaped the fate of an exaltation to the Godhead.\n\n     [The author, stating the above, demonstrates that same\n     assumption of a _truth_ which he criticises in the\n     Christians, Mohamedens and other proponents of religions.\n     _Ed._]\n\n8. In conclusion, permit us to say that the numerous and overwhelming\nfacts of this work render it utterly impossible that the exalted claims\nyou put forth for your religion and its assumed author (that of a divine\ncharacter) can be true. And posterity will so decide, whether you do or\nnot.\n\nCherishing for you naught but feelings of kindness and brotherly love,\nand desiring to promote the truth, we will answer any question, or\ndiscuss any proposition embraced in this work you may desire.\n\nYour brother,\n\nKersey Graves.\n\n\n\n\nTHE WORLD'S SIXTEEN CRUCIFIED SAVIORS.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I. RIVAL CLAIMS OF THE SAVIORS\n\nIT is claimed by the disciples of Jesus Christ, that he was of\nsupernatural and divine origin; that he had a human being for a mother,\nand a God for his father; that, although he was woman-conceived, he\nwas Deity-begotten, and molded in the human form, but comprehending in\nessence a full measure of the infinite Godhead; thus making him half\nhuman and half divine in his sublunary origin. It is claimed that he was\nfull and perfect God, and perfect man; and while he was God, he was also\nthe son of God, and as such was sent down by his father to save a fallen\nand guilty world; and that thus his mission pertained to the whole human\nrace; and his inspired seers are made to declare that ultimately every\nnation, tongue, kindred, and people under heaven will acknowledge\nallegiance to his government, and concede his right to reign and rule\nthe world; that \"every knee must bow, and every tongue confess that\nJesus is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.\"\n\nBut we do not find that this prophecy has ever been or is likely to be\nfulfilled. We do not observe that this claim to the infinite deityship\nof Jesus Christ has been or is likely to be universally conceded. On\nthe contrary, it is found that by a portion, and a large portion of the\npeople of even those nations now called Christian, this claim has\nbeen steadily and unswervingly controverted, through the whole line of\nhistory, stretching through the nearly two thousand years which have\nelapsed since his advent to earth.\n\nEven some of those who are represented to have been personally\nacquainted with him--aye! some of his own brethren in the flesh,\nchildren in the same household, children of the same mother--had the\ntemerity to question the tenableness of his claim to a divine emanation.\nAnd when we extend our researches to other countries, we find this\nclaim, so far from being conceded, is denied and contested by whole\nnations upon other grounds. It is met and confronted by rival claims.\n\nUpon this ground hundreds of millions of the established believers\nin divine revelation--hundreds of millions of believers in the divine\ncharacter and origin of religion--eject the pretentions set up for Jesus\nChrist. They admit both a God and a Savior, but do not accept Jesus of\nNazareth as being either. They admit a Messiah, but not the Messiah;\nthese nations contend that the title is misplaced which makes \"the man\nChrist Jesus\" the Savior of the world. They claim to have been honored\nwith the birth of the true Savior among them, and defend this claim\nupon the ground of priority of date. They aver that the advent of their\nMessiahs were long prior to that of the Christians', and that this\ncircumstance adjudicates for them a superiority of claim as to having\nhad the true Messiah born upon their soil.\n\nIt is argued that, as the story of the incarnation of the Christians'\nSavior is of more recent date than that of these oriental and ancient\nreligions (as is conceded by Christians themselves), the origin of the\nformer is thus indicated and foreshadowed as being an outgrowth from,\nif not a plagiarism upon the latter--a borrowed copy, of which the pagan\nstories furnish the original. Here, then, we observe a rivalship of\nclaims, as to which of the remarkable personages who have figured in\nthe world as Saviors, Messiahs, and Sons of God, in different ages and\ndifferent countries, can be considered the true Savior and \"sent of God\"\nor whether all should be, or the claims of all rejected.\n\nFor researches into oriental history reveal the remarkable fact that\nstories of incarnate Gods answering to and resembling the miraculous\ncharacter of Jesus Christ have been prevalent in most if not all the\nprincipal religious heathen nations of antiquity; and the accounts and\nnarrations of some of these deific incarnations bear such a striking\nresemblance to that of the Christian Savior--not only in their general\nfeatures, but in some cases in the most minute details, from the legend\nof the immaculate conception to that of the crucifixion, and subsequent\nascension into heaven--that one might almost be mistaken for the other.\n\nMore than twenty claims of this kind--claims of beings invested with\ndivine honor (deified)--have come forward and presented themselves at\nthe bar of the world with their credentials, to contest the verdict of\nChristendom, in having proclaimed Jesus Christ, \"the only son, and sent\nof God:\" twenty Messiahs, Saviors, and Sons of God, according to history\nor tradition, have, in past times, descended from heaven, and taken upon\nthemselves the form of men, clothing themselves with human flesh,\nand furnishing incontestable evidence of a divine origin, by various\nmiracles, marvelous works, and superlative virtues; and finally these\ntwenty Jesus Christs (accepting their character for the name) laid the\nfoundation for the salvation of the world, and ascended back to heaven.\n\n1. Chrishna of Hindostan.\n\n2. Budha Sakia of India.\n\n3. Salivahana of Bermuda.\n\n4. Zulis, or Zhule, also Osiris and Orus, of Egypt.\n\n5. Odin of the Scandinavians.\n\n6. Crite of Chaldea.\n\n7. Zoroaster and Mithra of Persia.\n\n8. Baal and Taut, \"the only Begotten of God,\" of Phenicia.\n\n9. Indra of Thibet.\n\n10. Bali of Afghanistan.\n\n11. Jao of Nepaul.\n\n12. Wittoba of the Bilingonese.\n\n13. Thammuz of Syria.\n\n14. Atys of Phrygia.\n\n15. Xamolxis of Thrace.\n\n16. Zoar of the Bonzes.\n\n17. Adad of Assyria.\n\n18. Deva Tat, and Sammonocadam of Siam.\n\n19. Alcides of Thebes.\n\n20. Mikado of the Sintoos.\n\n21. Beddru of Japan.\n\n22 Hesus or Eros, and Bremrillah, of the Druids.\n\n23. Thor, son of Odin, of the Gauls.\n\n24. Cadmus of Greece.\n\n25. Hil and Feta of the Mandaites.\n\n26. Gentaut and Quexalcote of Mexico.\n\n27. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls.\n\n28. Ischy of the Island of Formosa.\n\n29. Divine Teacher of Plato.\n\n30. Holy One of Xaca.\n\n31. Fohi and Tien of China.\n\n32. Adonis, son of the virgin Io of Greece.\n\n33. Ixion and Quirinus of Rome.\n\n34. Prometheus of Caucasus.\n\n35. Mohamud, or Mahomet, of Arabia.\n\nThese have all received divine honors, have nearly all been worshiped\nas Gods, or sons of God; were mostly incarnated as Christs, Saviors,\nMessiahs, or Mediators; not a few of them were reputedly born of\nvirgins; some of them filling a character almost identical with that\nascribed by the Christian's bible to Jesus Christ; many of them,\nlike him, are reported to have been crucified; and all of them, taken\ntogether, furnish a prototype and parallel for nearly every important\nincident and wonder-inciting miracle, doctrine and precept recorded\nin the New Testament, of the Christian's Savior. Surely, with so many\nSaviors the world cannot, or should not, be lost.\n\nWe have now presented before us a two-fold ground for doubting and\ndisputing the claims put forth by the Christian world in behalf of \"Our\nLord and Savior Jesus Christ.\" In the first place, allowing the question\nto be answered in the affirmative as to whether he was really a Savior,\nor supernatural being, or more than a mere man, a negative answer to\nwhich seems to have been sprung (as previously intimated) at the very\nhour of his birth, and that by his kindred, his own nearest relatives;\nas it is declared, \"his own brethren did not believe on him\"--a\nskepticism which has been growing deeper and broader from that day to\nthis.\n\nAnd now, upon the heel of this question, we find another formidable\nquery to be met and answered, viz.: Was he (Christ) the only Savior,\nseeing that a multitude of similar claims are now upon our council-board\nto be disposed of?\n\nWe shall, however, leave the theologians of the various religious\nschools to adjust and settle this difficulty among themselves. We shall\nleave them to settle the question as best they can as to whether Jesus\nChrist was the only son and sent of God--\"the only begotten of the\nFather,\" as John declares him to be (John i. 14)--in view of the fact\nthat long prior to his time various personages, in different nations,\nwere invested with the title \"Son of God,\" and have left behind them\nsimilar proofs and credentials of the justness of their claims to such\na title, if being essentially alike--as we shall prove and demonstrate\nthem to be--can make their claims similar.\n\nWe shall present an array of facts and historical proofs, drawn from\nnumerous histories and the Holy Scriptures and bibles appertaining to\nthese various Saviors, and which include a history of their lives\nand doctrines, that will go to show that in nearly all their leading\nfeatures, and mostly even in their details, they are strikingly similar.\n\nA comparison, or parallel view, extended through their sacred histories,\nso as to include an exhibition presented in parallels of the teachings\nof their respective bibles, would make it clearly manifest that, with\nrespect to nearly every important thought, deed, word, action, doctrine,\nprinciple, precept, tenet, ritual, ordinance or ceremony, and even\nthe various important characters or personages, who figure in their\nreligious dramas as Saviors, prophets, apostles, angels, devils, demons,\nexalted or fallen genii--in a word, nearly every miraculous or marvelous\nstory, moral precept, or tenet of religious faith, noticed in either\nthe Old or New Testament Scriptures of Christendom--from the Jewish\ncosmogony, or story of creation in Genesis, to the last legendary tale\nin St. John's \"Arabian Nights\" (alias the Apocalypse)--there is to be\nfound an antitype for, or outline of, somewhere in the sacred records\nor bibles of the oriental heathen nations, making equal if not higher\npretention to a divine emanation and divine inspiration, and admitted by\nall historians, even the most orthodox, to be of much more ancient date;\nfor while Christians only claim, for the earthly advent of their Savior\nand the birth of their religion, a period less than nineteen hundred\nyears in the past, on the contrary, most of the deific or divine\nincarnations of the heathen and their respective religions are, by the\nconcurrent and united verdict of all history, assigned a date several\nhundred or several thousand years earlier, thus leaving the inference\npatent that so far as there has been any borrowing or transfer of\nmaterials from one system to another, Christianity has been the\nborrower.\n\nAnd as nearly the whole outline and constituent parts of the Christian\nsystem are found scattered through these older systems, the query is at\nonce sprung as to whether Christianity did not derive its materials\nfrom these sources--that is, from heathenism, instead of from high\nheaven--as it claims.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II. MESSIANIC PROPHECIES\n\nNEARLY all religious history is prophetic of the coming of Saviors,\nMessiahs, Redeemers, and virgin-born Gods. Most religious countries, and\nmore than a score of religious systems, had a standing prophecy that a\ndivine deliverer would descend from heaven and relieve them from their\ndepressed state, and ameliorate their condition. And in most cases that\nprophecy was believed to have been fulfilled by the birth of a being,\nwho, as he approached the goal of moral and intellectual manhood\nexhibited such remarkable proof of superiority of mind as to be readily\naccepted as the promised Messiah.\n\nWe can only find room for a few citations and illustrations in proof\nof this statement. Many texts have been hunted out and marked in the\nChristian bible, by interested priests, as prophetic of the coming and\nmission of Christ. But a thorough, candid, and impartial investigation\nwill convince any reader that _none of these texts_ have the remotest\nallusion to Christ, nor were they intended to have. On the contrary,\nmost of them refer to events already past. The others are the\nmere ebullitions of pent-up feelings hopefully prayerful in their\nanticipation of better times, but very indefinite as to the period and\nthe agencies or means in which, or by which, the desired reformation was\nto be brought about. A divine man was prayed for and hopefully expected.\nBut no such being as Jesus Christ is anticipated, or alluded to, or\ndreamed of, by the prophecies. And it requires the most unwarrantable\ndistortion to make one text refer to him.\n\nBut this perversion has been wrought on many texts. We will cite one\ncase in proof. In Isaiah's \"famous prophecy\" so-called, the phrase \"Unto\nus a child is born\" (Isa. ix. 6), the context clearly shows, refers to\nthe prophet's own child, and the past tense, \"is born,\" is an evidence\nthe child was then born. And the title \"Mighty God,\" found in the text,\nDr. Beard shows should have been translated \"the Mighty Hero,\" thus\nproving it has no reference to a God. And \"the Everlasting Father\"\nshould have been rendered, according to this Christian writer, \"the\nFather of the Everlasting Age.\" And other texts often quoted as\nprophecies by biased Christian writers, the doctor proves, are\nerroneously translated, and have no more reference to Christ than to\nMahomet.\n\nIt is true the Jews, in common with other nations, cherished strong\nanticipations of the arrival of a Mighty Deliverer amongst them; and\nthis august personage some of them supposed would be a God, or a God-man\n(a demi-God). Hence, such prophetic utterances as \"Behold, a king shall\nreign in righteousness\" (Isa. xxxii. i), \"And all nations shall flow\nunto Zion\" (Isa. ii. 2).\n\nThe Hindoo Budhists long previously indulged similar anticipations with\nrespect to the triumph of their religion. Hence, their seers prophesied\nthat at the end of the Cali Yug period, a divine child (Avatar, or\nSavior) would be born, who would understand the divine writings (the\nHoly Scriptures) and the sciences, without the labor of learning them.\n\"He will supremely understand all things.\" \"He will relieve the earth of\nsin, and cause justice and truth to reign everywhere. And will bring the\nwhole earth into the acceptance of the Hindoo religion.\" And the Hindoo\nprophet Bala also predicted that a divine Savior would \"become incarnate\nin the house of Yadu, and issue forth to mortal birth from the womb of\nDevaci (a Holy Virgin), and relieve the oppressed earth of its load of\nsin and sorrow.\" Much more similar language may be found in their holy\nbible, the Vedas. Colonel Wilford tells us the advent of their Savior\nChrishna occurred in exact fulfillment of prophecy found in their sacred\nbooks.\n\nAnd the Chinese bible also contains a number of Messianic prophecies.\nIn one of the five volumes a prophecy runs thus: \"The Holy one, when he\ncomes, will unite in himself all the virtues of heaven and earth. By his\njustice the world will be established in righteousness. He will labor\nand suffer much,.... and will finally offer up a sacrifice worthy of\nhimself,\" i. e., worthy of a God. And a singular animal, called the\nKilin (signifying the Lamb of God), was seen in the yard, with a stone\nin its mouth, on which was inscribed a prophecy of the event. And when\nthe young God (Chang-ti) was born, in fulfillment of this prophecy,\nheavenly music, and angels and shepherds attended the scene. (See\n\"History of China,\" by Martinus; also Halde's \"History of China.\")\n\nWe will also give place to a Messianic prophecy of Persia. Mr. Faber,\nan English writer, in his \"History of Idolatry,\" tells us that Zoroaster\nprophetically declared, that \"A virgin should conceive and bear a son,\nand a star would appear blazing at midday to signalize the occurrence.\"\n\"When you behold the star,\" said he to his followers, \"follow it\nwhithersoever it leads you. Adore the mysterious child, offering him\ngifts with profound humility. He is indeed the Almighty Word which\ncreated the heavens. He is indeed your Lord and everlasting Ring\"\n(Faber, vol. ii. p. 92). Abulfaragius, in his \"Historia Dynastarium,\"\nand Maurice, in his \"Indian Skeptics Refuted,\" both speak of this\nprophecy, fulfilled, according to Mr. Higgins, by the advent of the\nPersian and Chaldean God Josa. And Chalcidus (of the second century), in\nhis \"Comments on the Times of Plato,\" speaks of \"a star which presaged\nneither disease nor death, but the descent of a God amongst men, and\nwhich is attested by Chaldean astronomers, who immediately hastened to\nadore the newborn deity, and present him gifts.\"\n\nWe are compelled to omit, for the want of room, the notice of numerous\nMessianic prophecies found in the sacred writings of Egypt, Greece,\nRome, Mexico, Arabia, and other countries, all of which tend to show\nthat the same prophetic spirit pervaded all religious countries,\nreliable only to the extent it might have issued from an interior\nspiritual vision, or have been illuminated by departed spirits. And we\nfind as much evidence that these pagan prophecies were inspired, and\nalso fulfilled, as those found in Jew-Christian bible, thus reducing all\nto a common level. The possibility of the interior vision being expanded\nand illuminated by spiritual beings, so as to enable the possessor to\nforestall the occurrence of future events, we, however, by no means\ndeny, since we have abundant proof of it in connection with the\npractical history of modern spiritualism. (See Chapter XXXIV., section\n2).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III. PROPHECIES BY THE FIGURE OF A SERPENT\n\nThe Seed of the Woman Bruising the Serpent's Head.\n\n\"AND I will put emnity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed\nand her seed. It shall bruise thy head, and thou shall bruise his\nheel.\" (Gen. ill. 15.) This text is often cited by Christian writers and\ncontroversialists as prefiguring the mission of the Christian Savior,\nviz., the destruction of the serpent, alias the devil. St. John calls\n\"the grand adversary of souls which deceiveth the whole world,\" \"the\ndragon, the serpent, the devil, and Satan.\" (Rev. xii. 8.) The serpent,\nthen, is the devil; that is, the dragon, the serpent, the devil and\nSatan are all one. The object of this chapter is to show the origin of\nthe singular figure set forth in the first text quoted, and to prove\nthat those Christian writers who assume it to be a revelation from\nheaven were profoundly ignorant of oriental history, as the same figure\nis found in several heathen systems of older date, as we will now cite\nthe facts to prove.\n\nSome of the saviors or demigods of Egypt, India, Greece, Persia, Mexico\nand Etruria are represented as performing the same drama with the\nserpent or devil. \"Osiris of Egypt (says Mr. Bryant) bruised the head\nof the serpent after it had bitten his heel.\" Descending to Greece, Mr.\nFaber relates that, \"on the spheres Hercules is represented in the act\nof contending with the serpent, the head of which is placed under his\nfoot; and this serpent guarded the tree with golden fruit in the midst\nof the garden Hesperides\"--Eden. (Origin of Idolatry, vol. i. p. 443.)\n\"And we may observe,\" says this author, \"the same tradition in the\nPhoenician fable of Ophion or Ophiones.\" (Ibid.) In Genesis the serpent\nis the subject of two legends. But here it will be observed that they\nare both couched in one.\n\nAgain, it is related by more than one oriental writer that Chrishna of\nIndia is represented on some very ancient sculptures and stone monuments\nwith his heel on the head of a serpent. Mr. Maurice, in his Indian\nAntiquities, vol. ii., speaks of \"Chrishna crushing the head of a\nserpent with his foot,\" and pronounces the striking similarity of this\nstory with that found in the Christian bible as \"very mysterious.\"\nAnother author tells us \"The image of Chrishna is sculptured in the\nancient temples of India, sometimes wreathed in the folds of a serpent\nwhich is biting his foot, and sometimes treading victoriously on\nthe head of a serpent.\" (Prog. Rel. Ideas, vol. i.) In the Mexican\nAntiquities, vol. vi., we are told, \"A messenger from heaven announced\nto the first woman created (Suchiquecul), that she should bear a son who\nshould bruise the serpent's head, and then presented her with a rose.\"\nHere is the origin of the Genesis legend, the rose being the fruit of\nthe tree of \"the knowledge of good and evil.\" \"The ancient Persians,\"\nsays Volney, in his \"Ruin of Empires,\" p. 169, \"had the tradition of a\nvirgin, from whom they predicted would be born, or would spring up, a\nshoot (a son) that would crush the serpent's head, and thus deliver the\nworld from sin.\" And both the serpent and the virgin, he tells us,\nare represented imaginarily in the heavens, and pictured on their\nastronomical globes and spheres, as on those of the Romish Christian.\n(See Burritt's Geography of the Heavens.)\n\nIn the ancient Etrurian story, instead of \"the seed of the woman\" (the\nvirgin), it is the woman herself who is represented as standing with one\nfoot on the head of a serpent, which has the twig of an apple tree in\nits mouth to which an apple is suspended (the forbidden fruit), while\nits tail is twisted around a celestial globe, thus reminding us of St.\nJohn's dragon hauling down one-third of the stars with his tail. (See\nRev. xii. 4.) In the ancient celestial diagram of the Etrurian, the head\nof the virgin is surmounted with a crown of stars--doubtless the same\nlegend from which St. John borrowed his metaphor of a \"a woman with\na crown of twelve stars on her head.\" (Rev. xiii.) \"The _Regina\nStellarum_\" (Queen of the Stars), spoken of in some of the ancient\nsystems appertains to the same fable. Also the tradition of Achilles\nof Greece being invulnerable in the heel, as related by Homer. The last\nclause of the first text quoted reads \"_It_ shall bruise thy head\"--a\nvery curious prophetic reference to the savior of the world, if the text\nrefers to him, to represent him as being of the neuter gender, for the\nneuter pronoun _it_ always refers to a thing without sex.\n\nIn the further exposition of the serpent tradition, we are now brought\nto notice, and will trace to its origin, the story of the original\ntransgression and fall of man--two cardinal doctrines of the Christian\nreligion. Like every other tenet of the Christian faith, we find these\ndoctrines taught in heathen systems much older than Christianity, and\nwhose antiquity antedates even the birth of Moses. We will first notice\nthe Persian tradition. \"According to the doctrine of the Persians,\" says\nthe Rev. J. C. Pitrat, \"Meshia and Meshiane, the first man and first\nwoman, were pure, and submitted to Ormuzd, their maker. But Ahriman (the\nevil one) saw them, and envied them their happiness. He approached them\nunder the form of a serpent, presented fruits to them, and persuaded\nthem that he was the maker of man, of animals, of plants, and of the\nbeautiful universe in which they dwelt. They believed it. Since that\ntime Ahriman was their master. Their natures became corrupt, and this\ncorruption infested their whole posterity.\" This story is taken from the\nVandidatsade of the Persians, pp. 305 and 428.\n\nThe Indian or Hindoo story is furnished us by the Rev. Father Bouchat,\nin a letter to the bishops of Avranches, and runs thus: \"Our Hindoos say\nthe Gods tried by all means to obtain immortality. After many inquiries\nand trials, they conceived the idea that they would find it in the tree\nof life, which is the Chorcan (paradise). In fact they succeeded, and\nby eating once in a while of the fruits of that tree, they kept the\nprecious treasure they so much valued. A famous snake, named Cheiden,\nsaw that the tree of life had been found by the Gods of the second\norder. As probably he had been intrusted with guarding that tree,\nhe became so angry because his vigilance had been deceived, that he\nimmediately poured out an enormous quantity of poison, which spread over\nthe whole earth.\" How much like this story is the story of St. John,\n\"And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman\nthat he might cause her to be carried away of the flood!\" (Rev. xii.\n15.)\n\nThe idea of a snake or serpent inundating the earth from its mouth, as\ntaught in both stories is so novel, and so far removed from the sphere\nof natural causes and possible events, that we are compelled to the\nconclusion that one is borrowed from the other, or both from a common\noriginal.\n\nAnd as facts cited in other chapters prove beyond dispute that the\nHindoo system, containing this story, extends in antiquity far beyond\nthe time of Moses, the question is thus settled as to which system\nborrowed the story from the other.\n\nBefore closing the chapter, we wish to call the attention of the reader\nto the important fact that three out of four of the cardinal doctrines\nof the Christian faith are taught in the two heathen mythological\nstories of creation just presented, viz.:--\n\n1. Original sin.\n\n2. The fall of man caused by a serpent\n\n3. The consequent corruption and depravity of the human race.\n\nThese doctrines, then, it must be admitted, are of heathen origin, and\nnot, as Christians claim, \"important truths revealed from heaven.\" For\na historical exposition of the other cardinal doctrine of the Christian\nfaith, viz., man's restoration by the atonement achieved through the\ncrucifixion of a God, see Chapters xvi. and xxi.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV. MIRACULOUS AND IMMACULATE CONCEPTION OF THE GODS\n\nTHE ancients very naturally concluded that an offspring of God (a son\nof God) should have a purer, higher and holier maternal origin than is\nincident to the lot of mortals, and this was to constitute one of the\nevidences of his emanation from the Deity--that is, of his supernatural\nor divine origin. He, as a matter of course, must not only have\na different origin, but one in the highest degree superior and\nsupernatural. He must not only be able to claim the highest _paternal_\norigin, but the highest _maternal_ also. And on the part of the mother,\na sexual connection with the great Potentate of heaven would evince for\nher offspring the very acme of superiority with respect to his origin,\nmoral perfection and authority. That the Savior was born of a woman\ncould not possibly be made a matter of concealment. But his paternal\nparentage was not so obvious and apparent to general observation, being\ncognizant alone to the mother. This circumstance furnished the most\npropititious opportunity to concoct the story that \"The Most High\" had\ncondescended and descended to become both a father and a grandfather to\na human being, or a being apparently human at least.\n\nWe say grandfather, because, if God (as the Christian bible itself\nfrequently asserts, both directly and by implication) is father of the\nwhole human family, then he was father to the maternal parent; so that\nher son, though deriving existence from him, would be his grandson as\nwell as his son. Hence the corollary, _Jesus Christ was a grandson\nof God as well as a son of God_, and Jehovah both his father and\ngrandfather.\n\nAgain, to make the origin and character of the God and Savior stand\nhigher for purity, and partake in the highest degree of the miraculous,\nthe impression must go abroad that he was born of a woman _while she was\nyet a maiden_--i. e., before she was contaminated by illicit association\nwith the masculine sex. Hence, nearly all the saviors were reputedly\nborn of virgins. And the process of birth, too, was out of the line of\nnatural causes, in order to invest the character of the savior with the\n_ne plus ultra_ of the miraculous.\n\nAnd hence it is related of Jesus Christ (in an Apocryphal Gospel), of\nChrishna of India, and other saviors, that they were born through the\nmother's side.\n\nIt is true our present canonical gospels are silent as to the manner\nof Christ's birth; but one of the Apocryphal gospels, which gives the\nmatter in fuller detail, and whose authority in the earlier ages of the\nChristian church was not disputed, declares that the manner of his birth\nwas as related above. And, besides, some of the early Christian fathers\nfully indorsed the story. The same is related in the pagan bibles of\nheathen Gods. The motives which originated the reports of the immaculate\nconception of the Saviors, it may be further remarked, were of a\ntwo-fold character:--\n\n1. To establish their spotless origin (as the word immaculate means\nspotless.)\n\n2. To make it appear that there was a Deific power and agency concerned\nin their conception.\n\nAnd we may observe here that it is not the Saviors alone who are\nreported to have been ushered into tangible existence without a human\nfather, but it is declared of beings known and acknowledged to be men,\nas Plato, Pythagoras, Alexander, Augustus and a number of others. Of\nPlato an author remarks, \"He was born of Paretonia, and begotten of\nApollo, and not Ariston, his father.\" Both the manner, or process,\nand the source of the influence by which the Gods and Saviors were\ngenerated, seem to have been different in different countries, though\nthe idea of \"overshadowing with the Holy Ghost\" seems to have been most\ncurrent. Mr. Higgins says that \"the Supreme First Cause was generally\nbelieve to overshadow, or in some other mysterious manner to impregnate,\nthe mother of the God, or personage\" (vol. i. 378). We are told that\nPythais, the mother of Pythagoras, five hundred and fifty years B. C.,\nconceived by a spectre or ghost (of course the Holy Ghost) of the God\nApollo, or God Sol.\n\nIn Malcolm's \"History of Persia\" (vol. i. 494) the author tells us that\n\"Zoroaster was born of an immaculate conception by a ray from the Divine\nReason.\" The immaculate conception of Juno of Greece is thus described\nby the poet:--\n\n     \"Juno touched the flower;\n     Its wondrous virtues such,\n     She touched it, and grew pregnant at the touch;\n     Then entered Thrace--the Propontic shore;\n     When mistress of her touch,\n     God Mars she bore.\"\n\nThis case may certainly be set down as the _ne plus ultra_ of etiquette\nwith respect to sexual commerce or purity of conception. The sweet odor\nof an expanded flower, we are here taught, is adequate to the conception\nand production of a God. Here we have \"the immaculate conception\" in the\nsuperlative degree, and while much more beautiful and grand it cannot be\nmore senseless or unreasonable than the conception by a ghost. It proves\nat least that the doctrine of the immaculate conception is of very\nancient date. And this fastidious maiden lady and immaculate virgin,\nJuno, not only conceived the God Mars by the touch of a flower, but she\nalso (so the story reads) conceived Vulcan by being overshadowed by the\nwind--exactly a parallel case with that of the virgin Mary, as we find\nthat ghost, in the original, means wind. Thus we observe that Vulcan,\nlong before Jesus Christ, was \"born of the Holy Ghost,\" i. e., both were\nconceived by the \"Holy Wind.\" And the author of the \"Perennial Calendar\"\nspeaks of the miraculous conception of Juno Jugulis, \"the blessed virgin\nqueen of heaven,\" and describes it as falling on the second of February,\nthe very day which the early Christians celebrated with a festival, as\nbeing the date of the conception of the \"ever Blessed Virgin Mary.\"\n\nOf the ancient Mexicans, it is said \"they had the immaculate conception,\nthe crucifixion, and the resurrection after three days.\" (Mex. Antiq.,\nvol. i.) And in an ancient work called \"Codex Vaticanus,\" the immaculate\nconception is spoken of as a part of the history of Quexalcote, the\nMexican Savior. \"Suchiquecal,\" says the Mexican Antiquities, \"was called\nthe Queen of Heaven. She conceived a son without connection with a\nman\"--a very obvious case of immaculate conception.\n\nAlvarez Semedo, in his \"History of China,\" page 89, speaks of a sect in\nthat country who worshiped a Savior known as Xaca, who was reputedly\nconceived of his mother, Maia, by a white elephant, which she saw in her\nsleep, and \"for greater purity, she brought him forth from one of\nher sides.\" Colonel Tod, of England, tells us in his \"History of the\nRajahs,\" page 57, that Yu, the first Chinese monarch, was conceived by\nhis mother being struck with a star while traveling.\n\nIn the case of Christ, it will be recollected, the star did not appear\ntill after his birth. But here the star is the author and agent of the\nconception.\n\nAccording to Ranking's \"History of the Moguls,\" page 178, Tamerlane's\nmother (of Bermuda) professedly conceived by having had sexual\nintercourse with \"the God of Day.\" The mother of Ghengis Khan, of\nTartary, \"being too modest to claim that she was the mother of the son\nof God, said only that he was the _son of the sun_.\" (History of Mogul,\npage 65.)\n\nBoth Julis and Osiris of Egypt are spoken of by some authors as having\nbeen honored with a divine immaculate conception--the former being\nthe son of the beautiful virgin Cronis Celestine, and \"begotten by the\nFather of all Gods.\"\n\nBoth Budha and Chrishna, of India, are reported as having been\nimmaculately conceived. The mother of the latter (God) was (as the\nHindoo Holy Book declares) overshadowed by the Supreme God, Brahma,\nwhile the spirit-author of the conception (that is, the Holy Ghost) was\nNaraan. The mother of Apollonius of Cappadocia, who was cotemporary\nwith Jesus Christ (according to his history by Philostratus)--and his\n(Apollonius') disciple Damis testifies to the same effect gave birth\nto this God and rival Savior of Jesus Christ, by having been previously\n\"overshadowed\" by the supreme God Proteus. For the corporeal existence\nand earthly career of Augustus Caesar, the world has ostensibly to\nacknowledge itself indebted to the \"overshadowing\" influence and\ngenerating power of Jove, by whose divine influence he was immaculously\nconceived in the temple of Apollo, according to the statement of Nimrod,\nhis biographer. The virgin mother Shing-Mon of China furnishes another\ncase of immaculate conception. Possessing a sensibility too lofty and\ntoo refined to descend to the ordinary routine of the world, she gave\nbirth to the God Yu from previous conception by a water lily. This\ncase, with respect to the degree of procreative delicacy and refinement\nevinced, may be classed with that of Juno of Greece. Here it may be\nnoted as a curious circumstance, that several of the virgin mothers\nof Gods and great men are specifically represented as going ten months\nbetween conception and delivery. The mothers of Hercules, Sakia,\nGuatama, Scipio, Arion, Solomon and Jesus Christ may be mentioned as\nsamples of this character. This tradition probably grew out of the\nestablished belief in the ten sacred cycles which constitute the great\nprospective and portentous millennial epoch, as described in Chapter\nXXX. Arion, mentioned above, is represented as being both miraculously\nand immaculously conceived by the Gods in the citadel of Byrsa.\n\nIn view of the foregoing facts, drawn from accredited histories,\nthe reader will readily concede that the tradition of the miraculous\nconceptions of Gods (sons of God), Saviors and Messiahs was very\nprevalent in the world at a very ancient period of time, and long before\nthe mother of Jesus was \"overshadowed by the Most High.\" Indeed, says\nMr. Higgins, \"the belief in the immaculate conception extended to\nevery nation in the world.\" And Grote, referring to Greece, makes the\nremarkable declaration, that \"the furtive pregnancy of young women,\noften by a God, is one of the most frequently recurring incidents in\nthe legendary narratives of the country.\" And we find that both the\nprevalency and great antiquity of the doctrine of the immaculate\nconception among the heathen is conceded by Christian writers themselves\n(of former ages) in their attempts to find arguments and commendatory\nprecedents to justify their own belief in the doctrine. For proof of\nthis, we need only cite the Christian writer Mr. Bailey, who remarks,\n\"What I have said of St. Augustine is applicable also to Origen\nand Lactanius, who have endeavored to persuade us of the immaculate\nvirginity of the mother of Jesus Christ by the example of similar events\nstored by the heathen.\" Here we have several Christian authorities cited\nby another writer, also a Christian, for placing the doctrine of the\nimmaculate conception among the heathen legends in ages long anterior to\nChrist.\n\nWith respect to the degree of credence to be attached to the story\nof the immaculate conception of the mother of Jesus, it need only be\nobserved that there was no other person concerned in the transaction but\nherself who could possess positive, absolute knowledge of the parentage.\nAnd she, let it be noted, settles the matter forever, by virtually\naffirming that Joseph was his father in the declaration addressed to\nJesus when she found him in the temple, \"_I and thy father_ have sought\nthee sorrowing.\" (Luke ii. 48.) No one will dispute that the father here\nspoken of was Joseph, which amounts to a positive declaration by the\nmother, that Joseph was Jesus' father.\n\n\nIMMACULATE CONCEPTION AND MIRACULOUS BIRTH OF THE CHRISTIAN SAVIOR.\n\nThe following considerations exhibit some of the numerous absurdities\ninvolved in the story of the miraculous birth of Jesus Christ.\n\n1. The evangelical narratives show that Christ himself did not claim to\nhave a miraculous birth. He did not once allude to such an event; while\nif, as Christians claim, it is the principal evidence of his deityship,\nhe certainly would have done so.\n\n2. His paternal genealogy, as made out by Matthew and Luke, completely\ndisproves the story of his miraculous conception by a virgin. For they\nboth trace his lineage through Joseph, which they could not do only on\nthe assumption that Joseph was his father. This, of course, disproves\nhis sireship by the Holy Ghost, ergo, the miraculous conception. It\nis the lineage and parentage of Joseph, and not Mary, that is given\nin tracing back his ancestry to the royal household--a fact which\ncompletely overthrows the story of his miraculous birth.\n\n3. And the fact that his _own disciple_ (Philip) declared him to be the\n_son of Joseph_, and that several texts show that it was the current\nimpression, is still further confirmation of the conclusion.\n\n4. We find the story of the immaculate conception resting entirely upon\nthe slender foundation comprised in the legends of an angel and a dream.\nWe are told that Mary got it by an angel, and Joseph by a dream. And\nthrough these sources we have the whole groundwork and foundation of the\nstory of the divinity of Jesus Christ.\n\n5. It should be noticed that we have neither Joseph's nor Mary's report\nof these things, but only Matthew and Luke's version of the affair.\nAnd we are not informed that either of them ever saw or conversed with\nJoseph or Mary on the subject. It is probable they got it from Dame\nRumor, with her thousand tongues.\n\n6. If Christ were a miraculously born God, is it possible his mother\nwould have reproved him for misconduct when she found him in the temple,\nas she must have known his character?\n\n7. If Mary was miraculously conceived, why was the important secret kept\nso long from Joseph? Why did she keep the \"wool drawn over his eyes\"\ntill an angel had to be sent from heaven to let him into the secret?\n\n8. If she were a virtuously-minded woman, why did she thus attempt to\ndeceive him?\n\n9. Why did not God inform Joseph by \"inspiration\" instead of employing\nthe roundabout way of sending an angel to do it?\n\n10. We are told that \"Mary was found with child of the Holy Ghost.\" But\nas we are not informed who found it out, or who made the discovery, or\nhow it was made, is it not thus left in a very suspicious aspect?\n\n11. As the whole affair seems to have been based on dreams, and was\ncarried on through dreams, and has no better foundation than dreams, why\nshould we consider it entitled to any better credit than similar stories\nfound in works on heathen mythology?\n\n12. And would it not prove that Christianity is rather a dreamy\nreligion?\n\n13. Should not the astounding and incredible report of the birth of a\nGod be based on a better foundation than that of dreams and angels and\nthe legends of oriental mythology, to entitle it to the belief of an\nintelligent and scientific age?\n\n14. Or can any man of science entertain for a moment the superlative\nsolecism of an Infinite God by any special act \"overshadowing\" a finite\nhuman female, especially as modern science teaches us that God is both\nmale and female, and as much one as the other?\n\n15. As history teaches us the ancient orientalists believed that sexual\ncommerce is sinful and contaminating to the child thus begotten and\nborn, and hence had their incarnate Gods sent into the world through\nhuman virgins, can any unbiased mind resist the conviction that this is\nthe source of the origin of the story of Christ's immaculate conception?\n\n16. And finally, if it were necessary for Christ to come into the world\nin such a way as to avoid the impure channel of human conception and\nparturition, why did he not descend directly from heaven in person? Why\ncould he not \"descend on the clouds\" by his first advent, as the bible\nsays he will do when he makes his second advent?\n\n17. Would not this course have furnished a hundred fold more convincing\nproof and demonstration of his divine power and divine attributes than\nthe ridiculous story and inscrutable mystery of the divine conception,\nwhich is not susceptible of either investigation or proof?\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V. VIRGIN MOTHERS AND VIRGIN-BORN GODS\n\nTHE report in authentic history of a case of a virtuous woman giving\nbirth to a child with the usual form, and possessing the usual\ncharacteristics of a human being, and who should testify she had no male\npartner in the conception, might in an age of miracles and ignorance\nof natural law, be believed with implicit credulity. But in an age of\nintelligence, when the keys of science have unlocked the sacred shrines\nand hallowed vaults of sacerdotal mysteries, and modern researches of\nhistory have laid bare the fact that most ancient religious countries\nabound in reports of this character, a profound and general skepticism\nmust be the result, and a total rejection of their truth by all men of\nscience and historic intelligence.\n\nMany are the cases noted in history of young maidens claiming a\npaternity for their male offspring by a God.\n\nIn Greece it became so common that the reigning king issued an edict,\ndecreeing the death of all young women who should offer such an insult\nto deity as to lay to him the charge of begetting their children. The\nvirgin Alcmene furnishes a case of a young woman claiming God as the\nfather of her offspring, when she brought forth the divine Redeemer\nAlcides, 1280 years B. C. And Ceres, the virgin mother of Osiris,\nclaimed that he was begotten by the \"father of all Gods.\" Mr. Kenrick\ntells us the likeness of this virgin mother, with the divine child\nin her arms, may now be seen represented in sculpture on some of the\nancient, ruined temples of that ruined empire. And Mr. Higgins makes\nthe broad declaration that \"the worship of this virgin mother, with her\nGod-begotten child, prevailed everywhere.\" This author also quotes Mr.\nRiquord as saying, this son of God \"was exhibited in effigy, lying in\na manger, in the same manner the infant Jesus was afterward laid in the\ncave at Bethlehem.\" Mr. Higgins further testifies that the worship of\nthis virgin God-mother (that is, the God and the mother) is of very\nancient date and universal prevalence in all the eastern countries, as\nis proved by sculptured figures bearing the marks of great age.\n\nIn corroboration of this statement we might cite many cases, if our\nspace would permit, from the religious records of India, Egypt, Persia,\nGreece, Rome, Mexico, Thibet, etc. Maia, mother of Sakia and Yasoda of\nChrishna; Celestine, mother of the crucified Zulis; Chimalman, mother of\nQuex-alcote; Semele, mother of the Egyptian Bacchus, and Minerva, mother\nof the Grecian Bacchus; Prudence, mother of Hercules; Alcmene, mother of\nAlcides; Shing-Mon, mother-of Yu, and Mayence, mother of Hesus, were\nall as confidently believed to be pure, holy and chaste virgins,\nwhile giving birth to these Gods, sons of God, Saviors and sin-atoning\nMediators, as was Mary, mother of Jesus, and long before her time.\n\nMr. Higgins remarks that the mother was still held to be a virgin, even\nafter she had given birth to other children besides the deity-begotten\nbantling, which furnishes another striking parallel to the history of\nMary, as she was still called a virgin after she had given birth to\nJesus and his brothers James and John. And it is an incident worth\nnoticing here, that, in the case of Mayence, virgin-mother of the\nGod-sired Hesus of the Druids, the ancient traditions of the country,\nmore than two thousand years old, represent her body as being enveloped\nin light, and a crown of twelve stars upon her head, corresponding\nexactly to the apocalyptic figure described by the mystagogue, St. John,\nin the twelfth chapter of his Revelation. She is also represented with\nher foot on the head of a serpent, according to Davie's \"Universal\nEtymology.\" (Vide the case of the seed of the woman bruising the\nserpent's head, Gen. iii. 15.)\n\nAuguste Nichols tells us, in his \"Philosophical Essays on Christianity,\"\nthat Io is called, in Eschylus, \"the Chaste Virgin,\" and her son \"the\nSon of God.\" (For other similar cases, see Guigne's History of the\nHuns.) Gonzales informs us he found on an ancient temple in India the\nLatin inscription _Patiuro virginis_, \"the virgin about to bring forth.\"\nAnd similar inscriptions have been found on pagan temples in the country\nof the ancient Gauls. (For proof, see Riquord's Theology of the Ancient\nGauls, Chapter X.) \"He who hath ears to hear, let him hear,\" and\ntreasure up these facts. According to Chinese history there were two\nbeings--Tien and Chang-Ti--worshiped in that country as Gods more than\ntwenty-five hundred years ago, born of virgins \"who knew no man.\" The\nmother of the mighty and the almighty God Hercules, we are told, \"knew\nonly Jove.\"\n\nIf history and tradition, then, are to be credited, God had many \"well\nbeloved sons,\" born of pious and holy virgins, besides Jesus Christ. And\nsome of them are represented as being his \"only begotten,\" and others his\n\"first begotten,\" sons. And all these cases appear to be equally as well\nauthenticated as the story of Jesus Christ. All stand upon a level, the\nsame kind and the same amount of evidence being offered in each case.\n\nHere we will note it as a curious circumstance, that several of the\nabove-named Saviors are represented as being black, Jesus Christ\nincluded with this number.\n\nThere is as much evidence that the Christian Savior was a black man,\nor at least a dark man, as there is of his being the son of the Virgin\nMary, or that he once lived and moved upon the earth. And that evidence\nis the testimony of his disciples, who had nearly as good an opportunity\nof knowing what his complexion was as the evangelists, who omit to say\nanything about it. In the pictures and portraits of Christ by the early\nChristians, he is uniformly represented as being black. And to make this\nthe more certain, the red tinge is given to the lips; and the only text\nin the Christian bible quoted by orthodox Christians, as describing his\ncomplexion, represents it as being black. Solomon's declaration, \"I am\nblack, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem\" (Sol. i. 5), is often\ncited as referring to Christ. According to the bible itself, then, Jesus\nChrist was a black man.\n\nLet us suppose that, at some future time, he makes his second advent to\nthe earth, as some Christians anticipate he will do, and that he comes\nin the character of a sable Messiah, how would he be received by our\nnegro-hating Christians, of sensitive olfactory nerves? Would they\nworship a negro God? Let us imagine he enters one of our fashionable\nchurches, with his \"rough and ready\" linsey-woolsey, seamless\ngarment on, made of wild sea-grass, thus presenting a very forbidding\nappearance, and what would be the result? Would the sexton show him to\na seat? Would he not rather point to the door, and exclaim, \"Get out of\nhere; no place here for niggers?\" What a ludicrous series of ideas is\nthus suggested by the thought that Jesus Christ was a \"darkey.\"\n\nAnd the tradition of divine Saviors being born of undefiled and\nundeflowered virgins has an astronomical chapter we must not omit\nto notice. The virgin, with her God-begotten child, was pictured\nimaginarily in the heavens from time immemorial. They are represented on\nthe Hindoo zodiac, at least three thousand years old, and on the ancient\nEgyptian planispheres. And if you will examine \"Burritt's Geography of\nthe Heavens,\" you will find the infant God-son (the sun) is represented\nas being born into a new year on the 25th of December (the very date\nassigned for Christ's birth), and may be seen rising over the eastern\nhorizon, out of Mary, Maria, or Mare (the Latin for _sea_), with the\ninfant God in her arms, being heralded and preceded by a bright star,\nwhich rises immediately preceding the virgin and her child, thus\nsuggesting the text, \"We have seen his star in the east, and have come\nto worship him.\" (Matt. ii.8.) Such facts led the learned Alphonso to\nexclaim, \"The adventures of Jesus Christ are all depicted among the\nstars.\"\n\nAnd such facts fasten the conviction on our mind that the stories of\nGods cohabiting with young maids or virgins, and begetting other\nGods, is of astrological origin--the story of Jesus Christ included. A\ncritical research shows that astronomy and religion were interblended,\ninterwoven, and confounded together at a very early period of time, so\nindissolubly, that it now becomes impossible to separate them.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI. STARS POINT OUT THE TIME AND THE SAVIORS' BIRTH-PLACE\n\nPROFUSION of evidence is furnished at every step along the devious\npathway of sacred history, tending to show that all the systems of\nworship which have existed in the past have had a dip in \"the halo\nof the heavenly orbs,\" and hence shine with a light derived from that\nsource.\n\nWe find the stars acting directly a conspicuous part at the births\nof several of the Saviors, besides figuring in some cases by marking\nimportant events in their subsequent history.\n\nMr. Higgins remarks that \"Among the ancients there seems to have been a\nvery general idea that the arrival of Gods and great personages who\nwere expected to come, would be announced by a star.\" And the cases of\nAbraham, Caesar, Pythagoras, Yu, Chrishna, and Christ, may be cited in\nproof of this declaration. A star figured either before or at the birth\nof each, according to their respective histories.\n\nAnd it is a historical fact that should be noted here that the practice\nof calculating nativities by the stars was in vogue in the era and\ncountry of Christ's birth, and had been for a long period previously in\nvarious countries. \"We have seen his star in the east, and have come to\nworship him.\" (Matt. ii. i.) Now mark, here, it was not _the star_,\nnor _a star_, but \"_his star_;\" thus disclosing its unmistakable\nastrological features. Mr. Faber (in his \"Origin of Idolatry,\" vol. ii.\np. 77) reports Zoroaster (600 B. C.) as prophetically announcing to \"the\nwise men\" of that country that a Savior would be born, \"attended by a\nstar at noonday.\" For a fuller exposition of this case see Chapter II.\n\nIn the history of the Hindoo Savior Chrishna, we are told that \"as soon\nas Nared, who, having heard of his fame, had examined the stars, he\ndeclared him to be from God;\" i. e., the Son of God' The Roman Calcidius\nspeaks of \"a wonderful star, presaging the descent of a God amongst\nmen.\" (See Maurice's \"Indian Skeptics Refuted,\" p. 62.) Quite suggestive\nof the star \"apprising the wise men\" of Christ's descent from above. And\na star is said to have foretokened the birth of the Roman Julius C\u00e6sar.\nThe Chinese God Yu was not only heralded by a star, but conceived and\nbrought to mortal birth by a star.\n\nIn Numbers xxiv. 17, it is declared \"There shall come a star out of\nJacob,\" etc. This is a text often quoted by Christian writers as having\na prophetic reference to the Christian Messiah. But the same text\ndeclares further, \"It shall destroy the children of Seth,\" a prediction\nwhich no rational interpretation can make apply to Jesus Christ. And\nthen we find this star of Jacob or Judah (the same) represented on\nastronomical maps as a prominent star in the constellation Virgo (the\nVirgin), fancifully termed by the Hebrew Ephraim.\n\nIt was known in the Syrian, Arabian and Persian systems of astronomy as\nMessaeil (suggestive of Messiah), and was considered the ruling genius\nof the constellation.\n\nThe \"star of Jacob,\" then, was simply a figure borrowed from the ancient\npagan systems of astronomy, in which they fancifully represent a virgin\nrising with an infant Messiah (Messaeil) in her arms. Messaeil is, when\nanalyzed, Messaeh-el (Messiah-God), and is found in the constellation\nVirgo, which commences rising at midnight, on the 25th of December, with\nthis \"star in the east\" in her arms--the star which piloted \"the wise\nmen.\" The whole thing, then, is evidently an astronomical legend.\n\nAlbert the Great, in his \"Book on the Universe,\" tells us, \"The sign\nof the celestial virgin rises above the horizon, at the moment we find\nfixed for the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ.\" To which we will add the\ndeclaration of Sir William Drummond, who, in his \"Odipus Judaicus,\" p.\n27, most significantly remarks, \"The anointed of _El_ the male infant,\nwho rises in the arms of Virgo, was called Jesus by the Hebrews,... and\nwas hailed as the anointed king or Messiah\"--still further proof of the\nastrological origin of the story.\n\nDr. Hales, in his \"Chronology,\" calls Christ \"the star of our\nsalvation, the true Apollo, the sun of righteousness\"--all of which are\nastronomical terms.\n\nAnd here we may recur to the fact that some of the early inhabitants\nof the earth regarded a star as a thing of life, because it appeared\nto move, and acted as though controlled by a living spirit. And this\nfetchic idea we observe lurking amongst the borrowed orientalisms of the\nJewish Old Testament. The representation of the morning stars joining\nin a chorus and singing together (see Job xxxviii. 9), is an instance of\nthis kind of fetchic conception.\n\nAnd then we find a much stronger and more conclusive case in the New\nTestament, where Matthew represents a star as breaking loose from its\norbit, and traveling some millions of miles, in order to stand over the\nyoung child Jesus, as he lay amongst the oxen and asses in a stable.\n(See Matt. ii. 7.) Wonderfully accommodating star indeed! How did its\ninhabitants feel while thus traveling with the velocity of lightning?\nThis achievement would not only require life, but an active\nintelligence, on the part of the star, as it is represented as being an\nact of the planet itself.\n\n\"All nations,\" says Mr. Higgins, \"once believed that the planetary\nbodies or their inhabitants controlled the affairs of men, and even\ntheir births.\" Hence the cant phrases, \"My stars,\" \"He is ill-starred,\"\netc., in use then, and still in use at the present day. The good or ill\nluck of a person was attributed to the good or evil stars which it was\nbelieved ruled at the hour of his birth.\n\nWe find a counterpart to the story of Matthew's traveling star in\nVirgil's writings, who declares (60 B. C.) that a star guided \u00c6neas in\na journey westward from Troy. In the days of Pliny (see his \"Natural\nHistory,\" Book II.), the people of Rome fancied they saw a God in a star\nor comet in the form of a man. The Apocryphal book of Seth relates that\na star descended from heaven and lighted on a mountain, in the midst of\nwhich a divine child was seen bearing a cross. Christ betrays the same\nignorance of astronomy, when he speaks of \"the stars falling from heaven\nto the earth.\" (See Matt. xxiv. 29.) For if there could be any falling\nin the case, the falling would be in the other direction, and the earth\nwould fall to the stars, as larger bodies always attract smaller ones.\n\nAs shown above, the stupendous orbs of night were represented by Jew,\nPagan and Christian as breaking away from their orbits, and running\nhither and thither, like a fly on a ceiling, or a ball from a\nsky-rocket, being regarded as mere jack-a-lanterns, that could appear\nanywhere at any time creative fancy might dictate or require; while\nscience teaches that the stars are stupendous orbs, some of them a\nthousand times larger than the planet on which we live, and that they\ncould not depart one rod from their accustomed orbits without breaking\nup the whole planetary system, and destroying the universe.\n\nAnd then observe the absurdity in Matthew's story, which teaches that\nthe wise men followed the star in the east, when they, coming from the\neast, were, as a matter of course, traveling westward, which would place\nthe star to their backs. That must be a _sui generis_ pilot or guide\nwhich follows after, instead of going before. Omitting further citations\nfrom history, we will only observe further that the ancient Hindoos,\nEgyptians, Chaldeans, Syrians, Mexicans, etc., took great account of\nstars, and employed them on all important occasions, especially on long\njourneys and at the births of Gods and great personages--a circumstance\nwhich aids in explaining the star chapter in the gospel history of\nChrist.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII. ANGELS, SHEPHERDS AND MAGI VISIT THE INFANT SAVIORS\n\nIN an age when Gods and men were on the most familiar terms, and when\nthe character of one furnished a transcript for the other, and when\neach consented to act a reciprocal part towards elevating, honoring and\nglorifying the other, the birth of a God or Messiah was, as a matter\nof course, regarded as an event of sufficient importance to attract\nthe attention of the great ones of the earth, and even the denizens of\nheaven also.\n\nAnd hence we find it related in the history of several of the\nGod-begotten Saviors of antiquity, that as soon as they were born into\nthe world they were visited by \"wise men from a distance\" (or Magi, as\nthey were called by the Persians and Brahmins). And in some cases they\nwere likewise waited upon and adored by the neighboring shepherds; and\neven celestial spirits are reported in some instances as leaving their\nstar-gilt homes to wing their way to the humble mansion, the rude\ntenement, containing a new-born God, that they might honor and adore\n\"the Savior of men, the Savior of the world.\"\n\nThe sacred biographies of both Confucius and Christ furnish examples\nof the angel host forsaking their golden pavilions in the skies to pay\ntheir devoirs to a Deity-begotten bantling, sent down by the \"Father of\nMercies,\" to save a guilt-laden world. And in both cases the Magi are\nreported as assembling to present their offerings to the infant God.\n\nIn the case of Confucius (born 598 B. C.), it is declared, \"Five wise\nmen from a distance came to the house, celestial music was heard in the\nskies, and angels attended the scene.\" (See the Five Volumes.) Now let\nus observe how strikingly similar to this ancient legend, in each of the\nseveral characteristics, is the Christian story. Matthew (ii. 1) speaks\nof \"wise men from the east\" journeying to Jerusalem to visit the infant\nChrist, soon after his birth, amongst the mules and oxen in a stable,\nthough he omits to state the number of itinerant adorers who presented\nthemselves on the occasion.\n\nThe Persian story is more specific, as it gives the number of Magi who\nvisited the young Savior of that country as five.\n\nLuke (ii. 13) speaks of \"a multitude of the heavenly host praising God,\"\nin gratulation of the birth of the Judean Savior. Now, when we bear in\nmind that one method of praising God, with the orientals, was by\nmusic, as we will at once observe that this is only another mode of\nproclaiming, as in the case of Confucius, that \"celestial music was\nheard in the skies.\"\n\nAnd \"angels attended the scene\" of Confucius' birth. So, likewise, Luke\n(ii. 15) relates that the angels, after rejoicing with the shepherds on\nthe occasion of the birth of Christ, \"went away into heaven.\"\n\nHow complete the parallel! and, but for the digression, and monopoly of\nspace, we might trace it much further, and show that Confucius, like\nChrist, had twelve chosen disciples; that he was descended from a royal\nhouse of princes, as Christ from the royal house of David; that he,\nin like manner, retired for a long period from the noise and bustle of\nsociety into religious contemplative seclusion; that he inculcated the\nsame Golden Rule of doing to others as we desire them to act toward us,\nand other moral maxims equal in importance to anything that can be found\nin the Christian Scriptures, etc.\n\nBut to the line of history. Other Saviors at birth, we are told, were\nvisited by both angels and shepherds, also \"wise men,\" at least great\nmen. Chrishna, the eighth avatar of India (1200 B. C.) (so it is related\nby the \"inspired penman\" of their pagan theocracy) was visited by\nangels, shepherds and prophets (avatars). \"Immediately after his birth\nhe was visited by a chorus of devatas (angels), and surrounded by\nshepherds, all of whom were impressed with the conviction of his future\ngreatness.\" We are informed further that \"gold, frankincense and myrrh\"\nwere presented to him as offerings.\n\nThe well-known modern traveler, Mr. Ditson, who visited India but a\nfew years since, uses the emphatic declaration, \"In fact, as soon as\nChrishna was born he was saluted by a chorus of devatas, or angels.\" In\nthe evangelical narrative of the Christian Savior an angel is reported\nto have saluted his mother thus: \"Hail, thou that art highly favored;\nthe Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women.\" (Luke, i. 28.) And\nin the next chapter the angel is reported as joining with \"the heavenly\nhost\" in praising God. A similar report is found in the Hindoo bible\n(the Ramayana), appertaining to the mother of the eighth Savior, of whom\nit is declared \"Brahma and Siva, with a host of attending spirits, came\nto her and sang, 'In thy delivery, O favored among women, all nations\nshall have cause to exult.'\" And when the celestial infant (Chrishna)\nappeared (it is related in a subsequent chapter), \"a chorus of heavenly\nspirits saluted him with hymns; the whole room was illuminated by\nhis light, and the countenance of his father and mother shone with\nbrightness and glory (by reflection), their understandings were opened\nso that they knew him to be the Preserver of the world, and they began\nto worship him.\" The last text here quoted brings to mind Luke xxiv.\n45, which declares, \"Then he (Christ) opened their (his parents)\nunderstandings.\"\n\nThe ninth avatar of India (Sakia) furnishes to some extent a similar\nparallel. According to the account of an exploration made in India, and\npublished in the New York Correspondent of 1828, \"There is on a silver\nplate in a cave in India an inscription stating that about the time of\nthe advent of Budha Sakia (600 B. C.), a saint in the woods learned by\ninspiration that another avatar (Messiah or Savior) had appeared in the\nhouse of Rajah of Lailas. Learning which, he flew through the air to the\nplace, and when he beheld the new-born Savior he declared him to be the\ngreat avatar (Savior or prophet), and that he was destined to establish\na new religion\"--the New Covenant Religion.\n\nWe next draw on the history of Greece. It is authentically related\nof Pythagoras (600 B.), that his fame having reached Miletas and\nneighboring cities, men renowned for wisdom (wise men) came to visit\nhim. (Progress of Religious Ideas, vol. i.) In the Anacalypsis we are\ntold that \"Magi came from the East to offer gifts at Socrates' birth,\nbringing gold, frankincense and myrrh,\" the same kind of offering as\nthat presented to the two divine infants Chrishna and Christ, according\nto their respective \"inspired\" biographers. (See Matt. ii. 4, and the\nRamayana).\n\nAnd the legend of Mithra, of Persia, might also be included in our\ncategory of comparison, if we had space for it. All the four Saviors\nlast named (if Socrates may be called such) are reported as having been\nhonored and enriched with aromatic offerings at their respective births.\nAnd we have the statement from Mr. Higgins, that the same assortment of\nspices (with the gold) constituted the materials offered as gifts to\nthe sun, in Persia more than three thousand years ago; and likewise in\nArabia near the same era. And it may be stated here, that an ancient\nhistoric account of Zoroaster of Persia (6,000 B. C., according to\nPliny and Aristotle), speaks of his having also been visited by Magi, or\n\"Magia,\" at the period of his earthly advent.\n\nAnd it is, perhaps, well to note in this place, that \"Magi\" is the term\nused in the Apocryphal Gospels, to designate the \"wise men\" who visited\nChrist at birth; and that Magi, Magic and Magician are but variations of\nthe same word, at least derivations from the same root, all suggesting\na wisdom correlated to the Gods. Osiris, an incarnate deity of Egypt, we\nmay cite as another case of an infantile God receiving signal honors and\neclat at birth, as he was visited while yet in the cradle by a host of\nadmiring adorers. \"People flocked from all parts of the world to behold\nthe heaven-born infant.\" Such a world-wide fame must have had the effect\nto attract, with the numerous crowd who thronged to see and worship him,\nno small number of \"wise men.\"\n\nAt this stage of our historical exposition, we will suggest it as rather\na singular circumstance that the divine Father, in his infinite wisdom,\nshould have chosen to reveal the intelligence of the birth of his son\nJesus Christ to a set of nomadic heathen idolaters hundreds of miles\ndistant (though known as \"wise men\" because of their skill in astrology)\nbefore he made it known to his own \"chosen people\" (the Jews), who had\never regarded themselves as the recipients of his special favors. And\nperhaps it is still more singular that these pagan pedestrians should\nhave been denominated \"wise men,\" while men of God's own election,\naccording to the Christian bible, were often stigmatized and denounced\nas \"fools,\" a \".generation of vipers,\" etc. But it so happens that\n\"human reason\" finds many Incongruities in \"Divine Revelations.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII. THE TWENTY-FIFTH OF DECEMBER THE BIRTHDAY OF THE GODS.\n\nDIVESTED of all explanation, the announcement of the fact that the time\nof the birth of many of the incarnated Gods and Saviors of antiquity was\nfixed at the same period, and this period the twenty-fifth of December,\ncelebrated all over Christendom as the birthday of Jesus Christ, would\nsound marvelously strange, especially when it is noticed that this\nperiod formerly dated the birth of a new year--the birth of King\nSol. And when we find that the ancient pagans were in the habit of\ncelebrating this venerated twenty-fifth of December as the birthday\nof their Gods in the same manner Christians now celebrate it as the\nbirthday of Christ, we are driven to admit that something more than mere\nfortuitous accident must be adduced to account for the coincidence.\n\nAccording to Dr. Lightfoot, the temple of Jerusalem was employed in\ncelebrating the birthday of a pagan God (Adonis) on the very night\nChristians assign for the birth of Christ. And Robert Taylor informs us\nthat nearly all the nations of the East were once in the habit of rising\nat midnight to celebrate the birthday of their Gods, on the twenty-fifth\nof December. And to this statement Mr. Higgins adds that, \"At the first\nmoment after midnight of the twenty-fourth of December, the ancient\nnations celebrated the accouchement of the queen of heaven and celestial\nvirgin, and the birth of the God Sol, the Infant Savior, and the God of\nDay.\"\n\nBacchus of Egypt, Bacchus of Greece, Adonis of Greece, Chrishna of\nIndia, Chang-ti of China, Chris of Chaldea, Mithra of Persia, Sakia of\nIndia, Jao Wapaul (a crucified Savior of ancient Britain), were all\nborn on the twenty-fifth of December, according to their respective\nhistories. Chrishna is represented to have been born at midnight on the\ntwenty-fifth of the month Savarana, which answers to our December, and\nmillions of his disciples celebrated his birthday by decorating their\nhouses with garlands and gilt paper, and the bestowment of presents to\nfriends. The Rev. Mr. Barret tells us, \"It was once common for the women\nin Rome to perambulate the streets on the twenty-fifth of December,\nsinging in a loud voice, 'Unto us a child is born this day.'\"\n\nThe twenty-fifth of December, then, it will be observed, was marked as\nthe birthday of the incarnated Gods, Saviors, and Sons of God, of many\nof the religious systems of antiquity, long prior to the birth of Christ\nAnd why his birth was fixed at that date is not hard to account for.\nAccording to the celebrated Christian writer Mr. Goodrich, the Christian\nworld had no chronology and recorded no dates for several centuries\nafter the commencement of the Christian era. (See History of all\nNations, p. 23.) No event of their history was marked by dates for\nnearly four hundred years. Hence, the time of Christ's birth is\naltogether a matter of conjecture, as is also every other event noticed\nin the Christian bible. This is proved by the fact that the ablest\nChristian writers and chronologists differ to the extent of thirty-five\nhundred years in fixing the time of every event in the bible. A Mr.\nKennedy presents us with three hundred different chronological systems,\nby different Christian writers, all founded on the bible, and proving\nthat the date of its various events are inextricably involved in a\nlabyrinth of doubt, darkness and uncertainty.\n\nRelative to the time of Christ's birth, the \"Encyclopedia Britannica\"\nsays: \"Christians count one hundred and thirty-three contrary opinions\nof different authors concerning the year the Messiah appeared on\nearth--many of them celebrated writers.\" (Art. Chron.) Mark the\ndeclaration--one hundred and thirty-three different opinions as to the\nyear Christ was born in; one hundred and thirty-three different years\nfixed on by different Christian chronologists as the time of the birth\nof the most extraordinary and most noted being, as Christians would\nhave us believe, that ever appeared on earth. Think of an omnipotent God\ndescending from heaven, performing astounding miracles, and presenting\nother proofs of being a God, and yet not one of the three hundred\nwriters of that era take any notice of him, or make any note of\nhis birth or any event of his life. This circumstance is of itself\nsufficient to banish and dissipate all faith in his divinity.\n\nIt is evident, from the facts just presented, that all systems of\nChristian chronology are founded on mere conjecture, and hence should\nbe rejected as worthless. What event of Christ's life, then, can be\naccepted as certain, when no record was made of it till the time was\nforgotten, and none for at least half a century after the dawn of the\nChristian era, according to Dr. Lardner, when nearly all who witnessed\nit must have been dead?\n\nWe think the most reasonable conclusion in the case is, that Christ,\ninstead of performing those Munchausen prodigies attributed to him--such\nas casting out devils, raising the dead, controlling the elements of\nnature, etc.--led such an ordinary, obscure life--excelling only in\nhealing the sick and other noble deeds of charity and philanthropy--that\nhe attracted but little notice by the higher classes, or by anybody but\nthose of a similar turn of mind, till he was deified by Constantine, in\nthe year 325 A. D. Hence, the time of his birth was not recorded, and\nwas forgotten. Consequently, the twenty-fifth of December was selected\nas his birthday, because it was the birthday of other Gods, and because\nit was regarded by the heathen, from time immemorial, as the birthday\nof Sol, the glorious luminary of heaven, it being the period he is born\nagain into a new year, and \"commences again his journey and his life;\"\nand because, also, this epoch was, as Sharon Turner informs us, in his\n\"History of the Anglo-Saxons,\" the commencement of a new year up to the\ntenth century.\n\nThese events signalized the twenty-fifth of December, and made it a\nperiod of sufficient importance to lead the early Christians to suppose\nit must have been the birthday of their Messiah. Mosheim, however,\nconfesses that the day or the year in which it happened \"has not been\nfixed with certainty, notwithstanding the profound researches of the\nlearned.\" So that it is still an open question as to when Christ was\nborn. What day of the month, what year, or what century it took place\nin, is still unknown. This circumstance is, as before suggested,\nsufficient of itself to utterly prostrate all faith in the divine claims\nfor Jesus Christ. What would be thought of a witness who should testify\nin court to the truth of an occurrence of which he did not know the\nyear, or even the century, in which it took place, or who could come no\nnearer than one hundred and thirty-three years in fixing or guessing at\nthe time. Would the court accept such testimony?\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX. TITLES OF THE SAVIORS\n\nTHE various deific titles applied to Jesus Christ in the New Testament\nare regarded by some Christian writers as presumptive evidence of his\ndivinity. But the argument proves too much for the case; as we find the\nproof in history that many other beings, whom Christians regard as\nmen, were honored and addressed by the same titles, such as God, Lord,\nSavior, Redeemer, Mediator, Messiah, etc.\n\nThe Hindoo Chrishna, more than two thousand years ago, was prayerfully\nworshiped as \"God the Most High.\" His disciple Amarca once addressed\nhim thus: \"Thou art the Lord of all things, the God of the universe, the\nemblem of mercy, the bestower of salvation. Be propitious O most High\nGod,\" etc. Here he is addressed both as Lord and God. He is also styled\n\"God of Gods.\"\n\nAdonis of Greece was addressed as \"God Supreme,\" and Osiris of Egypt as\n\"the Lord of Life.\" In Phrygia, it was \"Lord Atys,\" as Christians say,\n\"Lord Jesus Christ\" Narayan of Bermuda was styled the \"Holy Living God.\"\nThe title \"Son of God\" was so common in nearly all religious countries\nas to excite but little awe or attention.\n\nSt. Basil says, \"Every uncommonly good man was called 'the Son of God.'\"\nThe \"Asiatic Researches\" says, \"the Tamulese adored a divine Son of\nGod,\" and Thor of the Scandinavians was denominated \"the first-born Son\nof God\" and so was Chrishna of India, and other demigods.\n\nIt requires, therefore, a wide stretch of faith to believe that\nJesus Christ was in any peculiar sense \"the Son of God,\" because so\ndenominated, or \"the only begotten Son of God,\" when so many others are\nreported in history bearing that title.\n\nThe title Savior is found in the legends of every religious country. So\nalso God, Redeemer, and Mediator. \"When a Mogul or Thibetan is asked\nwho is Chrishna,\" says the Christian missionary Hue, \"the reply is,\ninstantly, 'the Savior of men.'\" Budha was known as \"the Savior, Creator\nand Wisdom of God,\" and Mithra as both Mediator and Savior, also as \"the\nRedeemer,\" and Chrishna as \"the Divine Redeemer,\" also \"the Redeemer\nof the World.\" The terms Mediator and Intercessor were also frequently\napplied to him by his disciples. And both he and Quexalcote were hailed\nas \"the Messiah.\" In short, most ancient religious nations were honored\nwith or expected a Messiah.\n\nWas Jesus Christ the \"Lamb of God?\" (John i. 9.) So was Chrishna styled\n\"the Holy Lamb.\" The Mexicans, preferring a full-grown sheep, had their\n\"Ram of God.\" The Celts had their \"Heifer of God,\" and the Egyptians\ntheir \"Bull of God.\" All these terms are ludicrous emblems of Deity,\nrepresenting him as a quadruped, as the title \"Lamb of God\" does Jesus\nChrist, a term no less ludicrous than the titles of the pagan Gods as\ncited above.\n\nAnd was Christ \"the True Light?\" (John i. 9.) So was Chrishna likewise\ncalled \"the True Light,\" also \"the Giver of Light,\" \"the Inward Light,\"\netc. Osiris was \"the Redeemer of Light,\" and Pythagoras was both \"Light\nand Truth.\" Apollonius was styled the \"True Light of the World;\" while\nSimon Magus was called \"the Light of all Men.\"\n\nSeveral nations had also their Christs, though in many cases the word is\ndifferently spelled. Chrest, the Greek mode of spelling Christ, may\nbe found on several of the ancient tombstones of that country. The\nChristian writer Elsley, in his \"Annotations of the Gospels\" (vol. i. p.\n25), spells the word Christ in this manner, Chrest The people of\nLoretto had a black Savior, called Chrest, or Christ. Lucian, in his\n\"Philopatris,\" admits the ancient Gentiles had the name of Christ, which\nshows it was a heathen title. The Chaldeans had their Chris, the Hindoos\ntheir Chrishna, the Greeks their Chrest, and the Christians their\nChrist, all, doubtless, derived from the same original root.\n\nAs for Jesus, it was a common name among the Jews long before the advent\nof Christ. Josephus refers to seven or eight persons by that name, as\n\"Jesus, brother of Onias,\" \"Jesus, son of Phabet,\" etc. Joshua in the\nGreek form, Jesus, was in still more common use.\n\nAgain, was Jesus Christ \"the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the\nEnd?\" so, likewise, Chrishna proclaimed, \"I am the Beginning, the\nMiddle, and the End.\" Osiris and Chrishna were both proclaimed \"Judge of\nthe Dead,\" as Jesus was \"Judge of quick and dead.\" Isaiah represents the\nFather as proclaiming, \"I am Jehovah; besides me there is no Savior.\"\n(Isa. xliii. 11.) With what consistency, then, can Christ be called\n\"_the Savior_,\" if there is but _one Savior_, and that is the Father?\n\nAnd other divine titles besides those above named--in fact, all those\napplied to Christ--are found used also in reference to the older pagan\ngods, and hence prove nothing.\n\n\nORIGIN OF THE TERMS MEDIATOR, INTERCESSOR, ETC.\n\nSeveral causes contributed to originate a belief in the offices\nimaginarily assigned to divine God-descended Mediators, Redeemers, and\nIntercessors.\n\n1. In the first place, the Great Supreme God was believed to be too far\noff and too aristocratic to be on familiar terms with his subjects,\nor at all times accessible to their prayers. Hence, was gotten up a\n\"Mediator,\" or middle God, to stand midway between the Great Supreme and\nthe people, and transmit messages one from the other, and thus serve\nas agent for both parties. Confirmatory of this statement is the\ndeclaration of Mamoides, in his \"Guide to the Erring,\" that \"the ancient\nSabeans conceived the principal God, on account of his great distance,\nto be inaccessible; and hence, in imitation of the people in their\nconduct toward their king, who had to address him through a person\nappointed for the purpose, they imaginarily employed a middle divinity,\nwho was called a Mediator, to present their claims to the Supreme God.\"\nHere the whole secret is out, the whole thing is explained, and we now\nunderstand why Christ is called a Mediator, Intercessor, \"Advocate with\nthe Father,\" etc.\n\n2. Again, the Supreme God was supposed to be frequently angry with the\npeople, and threatening to punish if not to destroy them. \"I will punish\nthe multitude.\" (Jer. xlvi. 25.) \"I will destroy the people.\" (Ex.\nxxiii. 27). Hence, this middle divinity, this second person of the\ntrinity, stepped in to plead and intercede on their behalf, being, as we\nmust presume, a better-natured and more merciful being than the\nFather. And thus interceding, he received the titles of Intercessor and\n\"Advocate with the Father.\" (1 John, ii. 1.)\n\n3. The principal circumstance, however, which led to the conception of\na divine Savior was the desire to find some way to continue in sin and\nwrong-doing and escape its natural and legitimate consequences; in other\nwords, to evade the penalty. Hence, it came to be believed that people\nmight run riot in sin, and plunge into the indulgence of their passions\nand their lusts, till the hour of death approached, when they would have\nnothing to do but to ask forgiveness, and cast the burden of their sins\nand sufferings on the merits of \"a crucified Savior and Redeemer,\"\nwho \"suffered once for all, that we might escape,\" and thus dodge the\npenalty for sin. It was, as Mr. Fleurbach expresses it, \"A realized\nwish to be free from the laws of morality, and escape the natural\nconsequences of wrong doing.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X. THE SAVIORS OF ROYAL DESCENT, BUT HUMBLE BIRTH\n\nWE have the singular coincidence presented in the histories of several\nof the Saviors of their lineal descent through a line of kings or\nprinces, and yet commencing their probationary life under the most\nhumble and adverse circumstances--being born in stables, caves, and\nother inauspicious situations.\n\nThe story of their royal blood was calculated to add dignity to their\ncharacters, while their humble birth in the midst of poverty, and\nunmarked by ostentation, would evince their humility, meekness,\ncondescension, and absence of pride, and thus proclaim a lesson of\nhumility and resignation to their disciples and followers.\n\nHere, seems to be plainly indicated the motives for assigning them to\nsuch a birth, and such a character.\n\nChrist's lineal descent, it will be remembered, is professedly traced\n(though in a very zig-zag, disjointed manner) from the royal house of\nDavid. And yet his royal blood did not save him from the most ignoble\nand ignominious birth, and obscure exordium of his earth life.\n\nA singular story, and yet a similar story, is told of the Indian Savior\nChrishna, who was, according to the Rev. Mr. Allen (India, p. 379) of\nthe royal house of Kousa, traced back through many generations. Yet,\nin order to teach the world a lesson of true humility, and administer a\njust reprehension to pride, he submitted to be born in a cave, amid the\ndenizens of subterranean abodes. And here let it be noted, the best and\nmost orthodox writers concede that while Christ is said to have born\nin a manger, that manger was in a cave. Mr. Fleetwood (a very popular\nChristian writer) testifies in this matter that \"the Greek fathers\ngenerally agree that the place of Christ's birth was a cave.\" (Life of\nChrist, p. 568.) Then the coincidence in this respect between Christ and\nChrishna may be set down as complete.\n\nWe have no means of learning how many of the Saviors were of royal\nblood, as the genealogy of some of them is not given. But those whose\nlineal descent is furnished us are almost uniformly traced to or evinced\nas springing from royal parentage, and practical humility--so far as it\ncan be taught by an unostentatious birth--is a lesson taught by nearly\nall. Budha Sakia of Hindostan is directly traced through a royal\npedigree.\n\nSpeaking on this point, one writer remarks: \"Tradition affirms that his\nmother was betrothed to a rajah, and of course her son belonged to\nthe same royal caste that Chrishna did during his existence on earth.\"\n(Prog. Rel. Ideas, vol, i. 84.)\n\n\"The Great Prophet\" of Arabia (Mahomet) not only commenced his earthly\ncareer in a humble situation, but resembled Christ in having \"nowhere to\nlay his head.\" It is said of the Great Prophet, \"A cloak spread on the\nground served him for a bed, and a skin filled with date leaves was his\npillow.\" The genealogy of the God Yu (of China) is traced through a line\nof princes to a very remote origin, while his whole life was a lesson of\npractical humility, and proclaimed at every step, \"This is the way; walk\nye in it.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI. CHRIST'S GENEALOGY\n\nIN order to exalt the dignity and character of the Christian Messiah\nstill higher than a mere claim for a divine origin paternally would have\nthe effect to do, two of his assumed to be inspired biographers have set\nup for him a claim to a royal lineage through the maternal line.\n\nHence, they tell us that he descended from and through a line of kings\nembracing the house of David. But in presenting the names, and the\nnumber of generations, in their attempts to make out this royal\ndistinction, this kingly exaltation of birth, they exhibit a most\negregious bungle, and the most barefaced tissue of discrepancies. For\nthey not only differ widely with each other in this matter, but differ\nwith the Old Testament genealogy, and differ with those texts which give\nthe maternal ancestry of Jesus.\n\nIndeed, though varying as wide as the poles from each other, they both\nmiss Jesus and arrive at Joseph in tracing down the generations from\nAbraham (unless we assume they intended to represent Joseph as being his\nfather).\n\nLuke, in his gospel, names and counts off forty-one generations from\nDavid to Joseph, though he had previously represented it as being\nforty-two; but Matthew says that \"from Abraham to David are fourteen\ngenerations,\" but according to his own showing, and according to his own\nlist of names, there are but thirteen. And then he tells us there are\nbut fourteen generations from David to the carrying away into Babylon.\nBUt according to the Old Testament genealogy (see i Chron. iii.) there\nwere eighteen.\n\nAnd then the names comprised in the two genealogies of Matthew and Luke\nare so widely different from that found in Chronicles, as to set all\nanalogy and agreement at defiance.\n\nIn fact, in their whole list of names, from David down to Joseph, they\nonly come together twice. Their names are all different but two, that of\nSalathiel and Zorobabel, which names alone are found in both lists.\n\nMatthew tells us that the son of David, through whom Joseph descended,\nwas Solomon, but Luke says it was Nathan. The next name in Matthew's\nlist is that of Roboam, but the corresponding name in Luke's list is\nMattatha. Matthew's next name is Abia, which Luke gives as Menan, while\nChronicles differs from both, and gives it as Abijah. Matthew says Joram\nbegat Ozias, but Chronicles virtually declares Joram had no such son,\nalthough he had a great-great-grandson Uzziah. But Luke says, in effect,\nthere was no such person in the genealogical tree, or family line,\nas either Joram, Ozias or Uzziah. Matthew says again, \"Josias begat\nJechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to\nBabylon.\" (Matt. i. ii.)\n\nBut Chronicles declares that Jechonias was Jehoiakim's son, and not\nJosiah's, and that Josiah had no such son. And, besides, we learn, from\n2 Kings xiii., that Josiah was killed eleven years before the exile\nto Babylon, and could not well beget a son after he had been defunct a\ntenth of a century.\n\nMatthew, after naming twenty-four generations as filling out the line,\nand making it complete between David and Jacob, concludes by saying,\n\"and Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary.\"\n\nBut Luke, antecedent to spinning out his list to fourteen generations\nmore than Matthew, i. e., making it fourteen generations longer,\ndeclares that \"Joseph was the son of Heli.\" So that Joseph either had\ntwo fathers, Jacob and Heli; or Matthew or Luke, or both, were most\negregiously mistaken, with all their \"inspiration.\"\n\nAgain, Luke says that Salathiel was the son of Neri; but Chronicles\nsays he was the son of Jechonias. And after Chronicles had registered\nZorobabel as the son of Penniah, Matthew and Luke, assuming to become\n\"wise above what was written,\" both declare that he was the son of\nSalathiel. They agree here in contradicting Chronicles, which is\nthe only instance but one of their agreement in the whole list of\nprogenitors from David to Joseph.\n\nWith this exception they contradict each other all the way through, and\nin many instances that of Chronicles, too.\n\nThis is a strange way, indeed, of proving Jesus Christ to have had two\nfathers!--to be both the son of God and son of David! And it is still\nstranger that they should trace his genealogy to Joseph, if they did\nnot consider him Joseph's son. Otherwise, the genealogy of \"Sinbad the\nSailor,\" or \"Harry Haulaway,\" would have been as apropos.\n\nSuch are the beautiful harmony and agreement in the words of \"divine\ninspiration\" which Christians prate so much about.\n\nAnd all this appears to be the result of an attempt to elevate the man\nChrist Jesus to a level with the demigods of antiquity, nearly all\nof whom claimed to be of royal or princely descent. Such continual\nblundering, guessing, cross-firing, and clashing of names as is\nexhibited in the foregoing exposition, reminds us of the Hibernian's\nreply when asked for the number and names of his brothers:\n\n\"Well, sir, I have fourteen brothers, and they are all named Bill but\nBob--his name is Tom.\"\n\nMatthew and Luke's attempt to exalt and dignify the character of Christ\nby making out for him a pure, holy and royal lineage we find, upon a\ncritical examination not only proved a very signal but a very singular\nand ludicrous failure, for all his female anchors who are brought to\nnotice were persons of libidinous or licentious tendencies, according to\ntheir own biblical history.\n\n\"It is remarkable,\" says Dr. Alexander Walker, (a Christian writer, in\nhis work on Woman, p. 330), \"that in the genealogy of Christ only four\nwomen are named: Thamar, who seduced the father of her late husband, and\nRachel, a common prostitute, and Ruth, who, instead of marrying one\nof her cousins, went to bed with another of them, and Bathsheba, an\nadulteress, who espoused David, the murderer of her first husband.\"\n\nWhat a pedigree for an incarnate God--a being ostensibly of spotless\norigin! though his impure ancestral origin does not detract from the\nhigh moral character and distinguished moral life which marks the\nhistory of \"the man Christ Jesus,\" many incidents of whose life show him\nto have been what is now known as a spiritual medium.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII. THE WORLD'S SAVIORS SAVED FROM DESTRUCTION IN INFANCY\n\nOF course such an extraordinary circumstance as the birth of a God into\nthe world must be marked with unusual incidents and great eclat. This\nwas first exhibited by angels, shepherds, prophets, magi or \"wise men,\"\nflocking around their cradles. In the second place we observe an unusual\ndisplay of divine power and providential care on the part of the great\nFather God, who was still left in heaven to save the young saviors\nthrough their infancy.\n\nIt is certainly a remarkable circumstance that so many of the infant\nSaviors should have been threatened with the most imminent danger of\ndestruction, and yet in every case miraculously preserved, and thus were\nthe _Saviors saved_.\n\nA jealousy seems to have existed in several instances in the mind of\nthe tyrant king or ruler of the country that the young Saviors and\nprospective spiritual rulers (who were mostly of royal descent) would\nultimately acquire such favor with the people, by such a display of\nsuperior power and greatness of mind, as to endanger his retaining\npeaceable possession of the secular throne; to express it in brief, he\nfeared the young God would prove a rival king, and hence took measures\nto destroy him.\n\nIn the case of the Christian Savior we are told that an angel, or \"the\nangel,\" warned Joseph (the assumed father) to take the young Savior and\nGod and flee with him into Egypt, because \"Herod the king sought to\ndestroy the young child's life,\" and had, in order to effect this end,\ndecreed the destruction of all the children under two years old. And\nJoseph heeded the divine warning, and fled as directed. An angel and a\ndream, then, it will be observed, were the instrumentalities used to\nsave the young Judean Savior from massacre.\n\nAnd strange as it may seem, we find the same agencies had been\npreviously employed to effect the rescue of other Saviors likewise and\nsimilarly threatened.\n\nIn the case of Chrishna of India, in particular, the similitude is very\nstriking in nearly every feature of the whole story.\n\nIn the first place there is the angel warning. In the Christian story we\nare not specifically informed how the tyrant Herod first became apprised\nof the birth of the Judean Savior. The Hindoo story is fuller, and\nindicates that the angel was not only sufficiently thoughtful to warn\nthe parents to flee from a danger which threatened to dispossess them of\na divine child, and the world of a Savior, but was condescending enough\nto apprise the tyrant ruler (Cansa) of his danger likewise--as we are\ntold he heard an angel voice announcing that a rival ruler was born in\nhis kingdom.\n\nAnd hence, like Herod, he set about concocting measures to destroy him\nwithout a direct attack. Why either of them should have taken such a\ncircuitous or roundabout way of killing an infant, when the life of the\nstrongest man, and every man in their kingdoms, was at their instant\ndisposal, \"divine inspiration\" does not inform us.\n\nBut so it was. And we must not seek to \"become wise above what is\nwritten\" in their bibles. Herod's decree required the destruction of\nall infants under two years of age (see Matt. ii. 16)--first ordering,\nhowever, \"Go, and search diligently for the young child.\" (Matt. ii. 8.)\nCansa's decree ran thus: \"Let active search be made for whatever young\nchildren there may be upon earth, and let every boy in whom there may be\nfound signs of unusual greatness be slain without remorse.\"\n\nNow, let it be specially noticed that there is to this day in the\ncave temple at Elephanta, in India, the sculptured likeness of a\nking represented with a drawn sword, and surrounded with slaughtered\ninfants--admitted by all writers to be much older than Christianity. Mr\nForbes, in his \"Oriental Memories,\" vol. iii. p. 447, says, \"The figures\nof the slaughtered infants in the cave of Elephanta represent them as\nbeing all boys, who are surrounded by groups of figures of men and women\nin the act, apparently, of supplicating for those children.\" And Mr.\nHiggins testifies relative to the case, that Chrishna was carried away\nby night, and concealed in a region remote from his natal place, for\nfear of a tyrant whose destroyer it had been foretold he would become,\nwho, for that reason, had ordered all the male children born at that\ntime to be slain. Sculptures in Elephanta attest the story where the\ntyrant is represented as destroying the children. The date of this\nsculpture is of the most remote antiquity. \"He who hath ears to hear,\nlet him hear,\" and deduce the pregnant inference. Joseph and Mary fled\nwith the young Judean God into Egypt; Chrishna's parents likewise fled\nwith the young Hindoo Savior to Gokul.\n\nNow, let us observe for a moment the chain or category or resemblance.\n\n1. There was an angel warning in each case relative to the impending\ndanger.\n\n2. The governor or ruler was hostile in each case to the mission of the\nyoung Savior.\n\n3. A bloody decree was issued in both cases, having for its object the\ndestruction of these infant Messiahs.\n\n4. The hurried flight of the parents takes place in each case.\n\n5. And it may be remarked further, that the \"Gospel of the Infancy of\nJesus,\" once believed by the Christian world to be \"inspired,\" and which\nfor hundreds of years passed current as divine authority, relates that\nChrist and his parents sojourned for a time at a place called Matarea,\nor Mathura, as Sir William Jones spells it, who says it was the birth\nplace of Chrishna.\n\nIt is further related in the case of Chrishna, that as he and his\nparents approached the River Jumna in their flight, the waters \"parted\nhither and thither,\" so that they passed over \"dry shod,\" like Moses and\nthe Israelites in crossing the Red Sea. And here let it be noted that\nthe representation of this flight, which is said to have occurred at\nmidnight, is like that of the massacre perpetuated and attested by\nimperishable monuments of stone bearing evidence of being now several\nthousand years old.\n\nSir William Jones says:--\n\n\"The Indian incarnate God Chrishna, the Hindoos believe, had a virgin\nmother of the royal race, who was sought to be destroyed in his infancy\nabout nine hundred years before Christ. It appears that he passed his\nlife in working miracles, and preaching, and was so humble as to wash\nhis friends' feet; at length, dying, but rising from the dead, he\nascended into heaven in the presence of a multitude.\" The Cingalese\nrelate nearly the same things of their \"Budha.\" And several authors of\nEgyptian history refer to a story perpetuated in the Egyptian legends\nconcerning the God Osiris, who was threatened with destruction by the\ntyrant Amulius, to save whom his parents fled and concealed him in an\narm of the River Nile, as Christ was concealed in the same country, and,\nfor aught that appears to the contrary, in the same locality. The\nmother of another and older Savior of Egypt fled by a timely warning to\nEpidamis before the birth of the divine child, and was there delivered\nof \"our Lord and Savior,\" Horus. And the earthly or adopted father\nof the Grecian Savior, and God, Alcides, had to flee with him and his\nmother to Galem for protection from threatening danger.\n\nIn the ninth and tenth volumes of the \"Asiatic Researches,\" we find the\nstory of the \"only begotten\" or \"first begotten son of God,\" Salvahana,\nof Cape Comorin, son of a virgin mother (as were all the other Saviors\nreferred to), and a carpenter by the name of Taishnea. (It will be\nremembered that Joseph, \"foster-father of Jesus,\" was a carpenter.) The\nstory of this \"Son of God\" presents several features very similar to\nthat relating to Jesus. Sir William Jones, Colonel Wilford, and the Rev.\nMr. Maurice all confess to the antiquity of this story, as originating\nbefore the birth of Christ. Speaking of Zoroaster of Persia (another\ncase), 600 B. C., an author remarks, \"Tradition reports that his mother\nhad alarming dreams of evil spirits seeking to destroy the child to whom\nshe was about to give birth. But a good spirit came to rescue him, and\nconsoled her by saying, 'Fear not; God Ormuzd will protect the infant,\nwho has sent him as a prophet to the people and the world who are\nwaiting for him.\"\n\nChina, too, presents us with a case of the threatened destruction of\na Savior in infancy, evidently recorded more than two thousand five\nhundred years ago. It is the case of the God Yu, who was concealed in a\nmanner similar to that of Moses--a commemoration of the story of which\nis perpetuated by an image or picture of the virgin mother with a babe\nupon her knee--sometimes in her arms. Now, let it be noted that these\nvirgin-born Gods, who, we are told, came \"to save the world,\" could not\nsave themselves, but had to be protected and saved by other Gods.\n\nWithout pursuing the subject further in detail, we may mention by way\nof recapitulation, that Chrishna, Alcides, Zoraster, Salvahana, Yu, to\nwhich list we may add Bacchus, Romulus, Moses and Cyrus, according to\ntheir reputed history, were threatened with death and destruction, but\nwere providentially and miraculously preserved. The case of Augustus\nis related by Suetonius, that of Romulus by Livy, and that of Cyrus by\nHerodotus. It will be recollected that Pharaoh, like Herod, in order\nto reach the infant Moses, ordered the massacre of all the male infants\n(Herod making no distinction of sex), in order that he might, by this\nsingular and circuitous method, reach the object of his jealousy and\nmalignity without passing a direct sentence of death upon him.\n\nThe whole story of Herod's slaughter edict, with the familiar history\nof its execution, like nearly every other miraculous incident related\nin \"The Holy Scriptures,\" which detail their histories, are traceable in\nthe skies. Herod, we are told, literally means hero of the skin--a term\napplied also to Hercules, a personification of the sun--because the\nsun, on entering the constellation of the Zodiac in July, was supposed\nor assumed to invest himself with the skin of the lion, and this became\n\"the hero of the skin,\" or a hero with a new skin. Now this solar Herod,\npassing through the astronomical twins and young infants of May, was\nsaid to destroy them, though the word destroy is in the Greek anairean,\nwhich any person, on turning to the Greek lexicon, will observe means\nalso to take away, pass through, or withdraw from, so that Pharaoh more\nproperly passed through the infants than destroyed them.\n\nThe text, \"In Rama there was a voice heard,\" \"Rachel weeping for her\nchildren,\" etc., is quoted by a writer (Strauss) as referring to the\nchildren slaughtered by Pharaoh. Let two things be noticed here: 1. Rama\nis the Indian and Phoenician name for the zodiac. 2. Rachel had but two\nchildren to weep for--Joseph and Benjamin--just the number found in the\nfifth sign, or May sign, of the zodiac. And Venus, among the ancient\nAssyrians and Phoenicians, was in tears when the sun, in his annual cross\nthrough the heavens, passed through or over the astronomical Twins\n(Gemini), doubtless fearfully apprehending their destruction.\n\nThe case of the massacre is an illustration and example of the manner in\nwhich all the miraculous stories related in the Christian Scriptures,\nas having been practically exemplified in the life of Jesus Christ, are\ntraceable to older sources, frequently terminating among the stars.\n\n\nSECTION II.--INCREDIBILITY OF THE STORY OF THE MASSACRE OF THE HEBREW\nINFANTS.\n\n1. It is a cogent and potent fact, calculated to render the story of the\nmurder of the Hebrew children by Herod wholly incredible, that not\none writer of that age, or that nation, or any other nation, makes any\nmention of the circumstance.\n\n2. Even the Rabbinical writers who detail his wicked life so minutely,\nand who bring to his charge so many flagitious acts, fail to record\nany notice of this horrible and atrocious deed, which must have been\npublished far and wide, and known to all the writers of that age and\ncountry, had it occurred.\n\n3. And still more logically ruinous to the credit of the story is\nthe omission of Josephus to throw out one hint that such a wholesale\nslaughter ever took place in Judea. And yet he not only lived in that\ncountry, but was related to Herod's wife, and regarded him as his most\nimplacable enemy, and professes to write out the whole history of his\nwicked life in the most minute detail, devoting thirty-seven chapters of\nhis large work to this subject, and apparently enumerates every evil\nact of his life. And yet Josephus says not a word about his inhuman and\ninfamous butchery of the babes which Matthew charges him with (about\nfourteen thousand in number)--a bloody deed, unmatched in the annals of\ntyranny. Such facts prove the story not only incredible, but impossible.\nJosephus could not and would not have omitted to notice this the most\nnotorious and nefarious act of his life, had it occurred. It, therefore,\ncould not have occurred. And it is almost equally incredible that\nRoman historians, who furnish us with a particular account of Herod's\ncharacter, should pass over in silence such a villainous and bloody\ndeed.\n\n4. And then some of our ablest and most reliable chronologists have\nshown that Herod was not living at the time this bloody decree should\nhave been issued by him; that he died about three years prior to that\nperiod, and hence could have been guilty of no such villainy, and\nhighhanded murder, and cruel infanticide.\n\n5. And even if living, he would have been an old man (not less than\nsixty-eight according to Josephus). Hence, he could not have calculated\non surviving long enough for the son of a village carpenter, then a\nbabe, to oust him from his throne.\n\n6. It is wholly incredible, also, that Herod should have adopted such a\nroundabout method of destroying the object of his fear and envy when he\ncould have singled him out, and put him to death at once, and thus avoid\nthe felonious act of breaking the hearts of thousands of parents, and\nhis most loyal subjects, too.\n\n7. From the foregoing considerations, we endorse the sentiment of the\nRev. Edward Evanson, that it is \"an incredible, borrowed fiction.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII. THE SAVIORS EXHIBIT EARLY PROOFS OF DIVINITY.\n\nOF course, all Gods must be heroes--physically or intellectually, or\nboth. The more danger they encounter, and the earlier they manifest a\nprecocious or preternatural smartness, the more like Gods.\n\nAnd hence we find several of the Saviors in very early childhood\ndisplaying great physical prowess in meeting and conquering danger,\nwhile others exhibit their superiority mentally by vanquishing their\nopponents in argument. Christ first began to exhibit proof of his divine\ncharacter and greatness by meeting and silencing the doctors in the\ntemple when only about twelve years of age.\n\nAnd similar proofs of divinity at or near this age is found in the\nhistory of some of the pagan Saviors.\n\nOf Christ it is declared, \"There went out a fame of him through all the\nregion round about.\" (Luke iv. 14.) And of the Grecian Esculapius it\nis likewise declared, \"The voice of fame soon published the birth of a\nmiraculous child,\" and \"the people flocked from all quarters to behold\nhim.\" Of Confucius of China it is declared, \"His extensive knowledge\nand great wisdom soon made him known, and kings were governed by his\ncounsels, and the people adored him wherever he went.\" And it is further\ndeclared of this \"Divine Man,\" that he seemed to arrive at reason and\nthe perfect use of his faculties almost from infancy. It is reported of\nthe God Chang-ti, that when questioned on the subject of government and\nthe duties of princes and rulers while yet a child, his answers were\nsuch as to astonish the whole empire by his knowledge and wisdom.\n\nIt is related of a Grecian God that he demolished the serpents which\nattempted to bite or destroy him while in his cradle. \"The proof of\nOsiris's divinity was a blaze of light shining around his cradle soon\nafter he was born. Relative to Pythagoras of the same country, we have\nit upon the authority of a Christian writer, that he exhibited such a\nremarkable character, even in youth, as to attract the attention of all\nwho saw and heard him speak.\" And the author further testifies of\nhim that he \"never was at any time overcome with anger, laughter, or\nperturbation of mind or precipitation of conduct.\" \"His fame having\nreached Miletus and neighboring cities,\" it is said by another writer,\n\"the people flocked to see and hear him, and he was reverenced by\nmultitudes.\"\n\nLuke declares of Christ, that the people \"were astonished at his\nunderstanding and answers.\" (Luke ii. 47.) And the \"Gospel of the\nInfancy\" tells us that his tutor Zacheas was astonished at his learning,\nwhich reminds us of the statement found in \"The Divine Word\" of the\nHindoos (The Mahabarat), that the parents of the Savior Chrishna, in\nmaking arrangements to give him an education, sent him to a learned\nBrahmin as tutor, whom he instantly astonished with his vast learning,\nand under whose tuition he mastered the whole circle of sciences in a\nday and a night. \"Men, seeing the wonders performed by this child, told\nNanda (his adopted father) that this could not possibly be his son.\"\n\nIt is told of Budha Sakia of India that, \"as soon as he was born, a\nlight shone around his cradle, when he stood up and proclaimed his\nmission, and that the River Ganges daring this time rose in a miraculous\nmanner, which was stilled by his divine power, as Christ stilled the\ntempest on the sea.\" \"He was born,\" says the New American Cyclopedia\n(vol. iv. p. 61), \"amidst great miracles, and soon as born, most\nsolemnly proclaims his mission.\"\n\nOf Narayan, \"the Holy,\" it is declared that \"mysterious words dropped\nfrom his lips on various occasions, giving hints of his divine nature\nand the purposes for which he had come down to the earth.\" (Prog. Rel.\nIdeas, vol. i. p. 128.) The divine power and mission of Yu of China was\nvery early evinced by the display of great miracles.\n\nAnd here let us observe that some of the Old Testament or Jewish\nheroes--as Moses, Solomon and Samuel--are reported as exhibiting great\nsuperiority of mind in very early life; thus proving (it was thought)\nthat if they were not Gods, they were at least from God--that is,\nendowed by him with divine power while yet mere children. Thus the\nhistories of all Gods and divine personages run in parallel grooves.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV. THE SAVIORS; KINGDOMS NOT OF THIS WORLD\n\nRetirement and Forty Days' Fasting.\n\nCHRIST taught, \"My kingdom is not of this world.\"\n\nAnd we find that most of the other Saviors virtually and practically\ntaught the same doctrine.\n\nThe first practical evincement of it was exhibited by retiring from the\nworld; that is, they retired from the noise and commotion, from the\nbusy scenes of life, into some sequestered spot excluded from human\nobservation. Christ is reported to have withdrawn from society, and to\nhave spent some forty days in the wilderness fasting and being tempted\nby Satan--a man of straw conjured up in order to furnish the hero God\nsomething to combat with, that he might thereby exhibit practical proof\nof his divine power and prowess. It was simply the two kings or rulers\nof two hostile kingdoms (heaven and hell) contending for the mastery.\n\nLord Kingsborough tells us, \"The ancient Mexicans had a forty days' fast\nin honor and memory of one of their demigods or Saviors, who was\ntempted forty days on a mountain. He is called 'the Morning Star'.\" Mr.\nKingsborough (being a Christian) remarks, \"These things are very curious\nand mysterious.\"\n\nIt is said of \"the Son of God\" and Savior Chrishna that \"he imparted\nhis doctrines and precepts in the silent depths of the forest.\" Of the\nEgyptian God Osiris, we are informed in his sacred legends, that \"he\nobserved both fasting and penance,\" while Pythagoras of Greece spent\nseveral years in meditation and retirement in a cave, and was much given\nto fasting, and often inculcated the doctrine of \"forsaking the world\"\nand \"the things thereof.\" He taught these things both by precept and\nexample, even to \"the forsaking of relations.\" Both Confucius and the\nDivine Savior Chang-ti of China, \"in order to attain to a more perfect\nstate of holiness,\" spent several years in retirement and \"divine\nmeditation,\" the former in a wilderness, the latter on a mountain, and\nfasted, and their disciples after them often fasted in a very devout\nmanner. The Persian Zoroaster also spent several years in retirement and\n\"contemplation on true holiness\"--partly in a wilderness and partly on a\n\"holy mountain,\" \"holy mountains\" being the favorite places of resort of\nmost of the holy Saviors, holy Gods, and holy men of antiquity. One of\nthe most ancient Saviors, Thammuz, is reported to have spent \"twelve\nyears in devout and contemplative retirement from the busy world.\"\nAccording to the Christian bible, Moses, Elijah, and Christ, each fasted\nforty days, and a Mexican Savior, too (Quexalcote), spent forty days in\na similar manner, and other cases are so reported.\n\nWe may institute the inquiry here, \"How happens this coincidence?\"\n\nThe answer is indicated by \"the Hierophant,\" which says, \"Jesus in his\nbaptism and forty days' fast imitated the passage of the sun through the\nconstellation Aquarius, where John, Joannes, or Janus the baptizer had\nhis domicile, and baptized the earth with his yearly rains.\" Having been\nbaptized in Jordan, he fasted forty days in the wilderness, in imitation\nof the passage of the sun from the constellation Aquarius through the\nFishes to the Lamb or Ram of March. During the forty days when the sun\nis among the Fishes (in the sign of the Fish) the faithful Catholics,\nEpiscopalians and Mahommedans abstain from meat and live upon the fishes\nduring the season of Lent, as did the Jews and pagans, and did also\nJesus, \"to fulfill all righteousness.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV. THE SAVIORS WERE REAL PERSONAGES\n\nIT is unwarrantably assumed by Christian writers that the incarnated\nGods and crucified Saviors of the pagan religions were all either mere\nfabulous characters, or ordinary human beings invested with divine\ntitles, and divine attributes; while, on the other hand, the assumption\nis put forth with equal boldness that Jesus Christ was a real divine\npersonage, \"seen and believed on in the world, and finally crucified on\nMount Calvary.\"\n\nBut we do not find the facts in history to warrant any such assumptions\nor any such distinctions. They all stand in these respects upon the same\nground and on equal footing.\n\nAnd their respective disciples point to the same kind of evidence to\nprove their real existence and their divine character, and to prove\nthat they once walked and talked amongst men, as well as now sit on the\neternal throne in heaven \"at the right hand of the father.\" And we\nfind even Christian writers admitting the once _bona fide_ or personal\nexistence on earth of most of the pagan Saviors.\n\nAs to the two chief incarnated Gods of India--Chrishna and Sakia--there\nis scarcely \"a peg left to hang a doubt upon\" as to the fact of their\nhaving descended to the earth, taken upon themselves the form of men,\nand having been worshiped as veritable Gods.\n\nIndeed, we believe but few of the missionaries who have visited that\ncountry question the statement and general belief prevalent there of\ntheir once personal reality. Col. Todd, in his \"History of the Rajahs\"\n(p. 44), says: \"We must discard the idea that the Mahabaret, the\nhistory of Rama, of Chrishna, and the five Padua brothers are mere\nallegories; colossal figures, ancient temples, and caves inscribed\nwith characters yet unknown, confirm the reality, and their race, their\ncities, and their coins yet exist.\" To argue further the personal reality\nof this crucified God would be a waste of words, as it is generally\nadmitted, both by historical writers and missionaries.\n\nMr. Higgins declares, \"Chrishna lived at the conclusion of the brazen\nage, which is calculated to have been eleven hundred or twelve hundred\nyears before Christ.\" Here is a very positive and specific declaration\nas to his tangible actuality. Col. Dow, Mr. Robinson, and others use\nsimilar language.\n\nRelative to Bacchus, of whose history many writers have spoken as being\nwholly fabulous or fictitious, Diodorus Siculus says (lib. iii. p. 137),\n\"the Libyans claim Bacchus, and say that he was the son of Ammon, a\nking of Libya; that he built a temple to his father, Ammon.\" And that\nworld-wide famous historian (Mr. Goodrich) is still more explicit, if\npossible, as to his material entity. After giving it directly as his\nopinion that there was such a being, he says, \"He planted vine-yards and\nfig-trees, and erected many noble cities.\" He moreover tells us, \"His\nskill in legislation and agriculture is much praised\" (p. 499).\n\nWith respect to Osiris of Egypt, another God-Savior, Mr. Hittle declares\nunqualifiedly that \"Herodotus saw the tomb of Osiris, at Sais nearly\nfive centuries before Christ\" (vol. i. p. 246). Rather a strong evidence\nof his previous personality certainly, but not more so than that\nfurnished by the _New York Journal of Commerce_ a few years since,\nrelative to the Egyptian Apis or Thulis, whose theophany was annually\ncelebrated, at the rising of the Nile, with great festivities and\ndevotion, several thousand years ago. The Paris correspondent of\nthat journal, after speaking of Mr. Auguste Marietta's travels, \"a\ndistinguished scientific gentleman who for four years past had been\nemployed by the French Government in making Egyptian researches,\" having\nreturned home, says, \"The most important of Mr. Marietta's discoveries\nwas the tomb of Apis (Thulis), a monument excavated entirely in\nlime-rock.\" \"There are (he says in conclusion) epitaphs, forming a\nchronological record of each of the Apis buried in the common tomb. The\nsculpture is of the date of the Pyramids, and the statues are in\nthe best state of preservation; the colors are perfectly bright The\nexecution is admirable, and they convey an exact idea of the physical\ncharacter of the primitive population.\"\n\nThe New American Cyclopedia (art. Apis) in speaking of this Egyptian\nGod, tells us his lifetime was twenty-five years; in harmony with one of\nthe theologico-astronomical cycles of the Egyptians. The same work and\nvolume (p. 132), in speaking of the real existence of Adonis of Greece,\ntells us, upon the authority of the poet Panyasis, that he was a\nveritable son of Theias, king of Syria.\n\nBut of all the characters who figured in the mythological works or\nlawless rhapsodies of the ancients, and worshiped by them as crucified\nGods and sin-atoning Saviors, none has, perhaps, been so indubitably, so\npositively, and so universally set down as mythological or fabulous as\nthat of Prometheus of Caucasus.\n\nAnd yet Mr. Lempriere, D. D., tells us in his Classical Dictionary that\nhe was the son of Japetus. Sir Isaac Newton says he was a descendant of\nthe famous African Sesostris; while that erudite and masterly historian\n(Mr. Higgins) seems to have entertained no doubt of his personal esse;\nnor, indeed, of many, if any, of the pagan Saviors, as the following\ndeclaration will show. He says, \"Finding men in India and other\ncountries of the same name of the inferior Gods (as it is quite common\nto name men for them) has led some to conclude that those deified men\nnever existed, but are merely mythological names of the sun. True, the\nfirst supreme God of every nation (not excepting the Jews) was the sun.\nBut more modernly the names were transferred to men.\" Again, he says,\n\"Inasmuch as some of them are found to have been real bona fide human\nbeings, there is nothing unreasonable in concluding that all were\" And\nif we take into consideration the true and indisputable fact that the\npriests had everything at their disposal, and the strongest motives for\nconcealing and suppressing, not to say garbling and destroying evidence,\nit is not to be wondered at that the histories of some of these Gods\nshould be somewhat obscure and ambiguous. Further on he declares, \"In\nevery case the Savior was incarnate, and in nearly every case the place\nin which he was actually born was exhibited to the people.\" And upon the\nauthority of the Hierophant, we will add, the memories of many of them\nhave been consecrated and perpetuated by tombs placed beside their\ntemples, which is perhaps the most convincing species of evidence that\ncould be offered.\n\nThe evidence, then, is precisely of the same character as that offered\nin the case of Jesus Christ to prove that the pagan Saviors did really\npossess a substantial, earthly and bodily existence. Though it is true\nthat it never has been universally conceded or believed by Christian\nthemselves that Jesus Christ ever had a personal or corporeal existence\non earth.\n\nCotilenius, in a note on Ignatius, Epistle to the Trallians, written in\nthe third century of the Christian era, declares that \"it is as absurd\nto deny the doctrine which taught that Jesus Christ's body was a phantom\nas to deny that the sun shone at midday.\" His physical body of course\nwas meant, for it appears he believed in his eternal existence as a\nspirit in heaven.\n\nAnd we find whole sects advocating similar views in the early ages of\nthe Christian church. \"One of the most primitive and learned sects,\"\nsays a writer, \"were the Manicheans, who denied that Jesus Christ ever\nexisted in flesh and blood, but believed him to be a God in spirit only;\"\nothers denied him to be a God, but believed him to have been a prophet,\nor inspired character, like the Unitarians of the present day. Some\ndenied his crucifixion, others asserted it. It is more than probable\nthat this was the cause of dispute between Paul and Barnabas, mentioned\nin the Acts of the Apostles, seeing that Paul had laid such peculiar\nemphasis on \"Jesus Christ and him crucified.\"\n\nAnd this conclusion is corroborated by its being expressly stated in the\nGospel of Barnabas that \"Jesus Christ was not crucified, but was carried\nto heaven by four angels.\" \"There was a long list,\" says the same\nwriter, \"from the earliest times, of sincere Christians who denied that\nJesus Christ rose from the dead;\" while, as we may remark here, there\ncould not have been at that early date any grounds for denying these\nthings, had he really figured in the world in the miraculous and\nextraordinary and public manner as that related in the Gospels.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVI. SIXTEEN SAVIORS CRUCIFIED\n\n\"For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ\nand him crucified.\" (i Cor. ii. 2.) There must have existed a very\nconsiderable amount of skepticism in the community as to the truth of\nthe report of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ in the country and era of\nits occurrence to make it necessary thus to erect it into an important\ndogma, and make it imperative to believe it There must have been a large\nmargin for distrusting its truth.\n\nThe determination not to know anything but the crucifixion of Jesus\nChrist was narrowing down his knowledge to rather a small compass.\n\nAnd such a resolution would necessarily preclude him from acquainting\nhimself with the history of any other cases of crucifixion that might\nhave occurred before that of his own favorite Messiah. \"What! Was\nthere ever a case of crucifixion beside that of Jesus Christ?\" a good\nChristian brother or sister sometimes exclaims, when the world's sixteen\ncrucified Saviors are spoken of.\n\nWe meet the question with the reply, You seem to be a disciple of\nPaul, whose position would not allow him to know of any other cases of\ncrucifixion but that of Jesus Christ. Hence, he may have considered it\nmeritorious to perpetuate his ignorance on the subject And you, perhaps,\nare ignorant from the same cause.\n\nIt is the nature of all religions based on fear and unchangeable dogmas,\nto deter and thus exclude its disciples from all knowledge adverse\nto their own creeds. And sometimes their own religious systems are\nmagnified to such an exalted appreciation above all others as to lead\nthem to destroy the evidence of the existence of the latter for fear of\ntheir ultimate rivalry.\n\nMr. Taylor informs us that some of the early disciples of the Christian\nfaith demolished accessible monuments representing and memorializing the\ncrucifixion of the ancient oriental sin-atoning Gods, so that they are\nnow unknown in the annals of Christian history. Hence, the surprise\nexcited in the minds of Christian professors when other cases are\nmentioned.\n\nSuch influences as referred to above have shut out from the minds of the\ndisciples of several religious systems a knowledge of all crucified Gods\nbut their own. Hence, the Hindoo rejoices in knowing only \"Chrishna and\nhim crucified.\" The Persian entwines around his heart the remembrance\nonly of the atoning sufferings on the cross of Mithra the Mediator. The\nMexican daily sends up his earnest, soul-breathing prayer for the return\nof the spirit of his crucified Savior--Quexalcote. While the Caucasian,\nwith equal devotion, chants daily praises to his slain \"Divine\nIntercessor\" for voluntarily offering himself upon the cross for the\nsins of a fallen race. And the Christian disciple hugs to his bosom\nthe bloody cross of the murdered Jesus, unhaunted by the suspicion that\nother Gods died for the sins of man long anterior to the advent of the\nimmaculate Nazarene.\n\nWe will now lay before the reader a brief account of the crucifixion of\nmore than a dozen virgin-born Gods and sin-atoning Saviors, predicated\nupon facts which have escaped the hands of the Christian iconoclasts\ndetermined to know only Jesus Christ crucified. We will first notice the\ncase of the Indian God--Chrishna.\n\n\nI.--CRUCIFIXION OF CHRISHNA OF INDIA, 1200 B. C.\n\nAmong the sin-atoning Gods who condescended in ancient times to forsake\nthe throne of heaven, and descend upon the plains of India, through\nhuman birth, to suffer and die for the sins and transgressions of the\nhuman race, the eighth Avatar, or Savior, may be considered the most\nimportant and the most exalted character, as he led the most conspicuous\nlife, and commanded the most devout and the most universal homage. And\nwhile some of the other incarnate demigods were invested with only a\nlimited measure of the infinite deityship, Chrishna, according to the\nteachings of their New Testament (the Ramazand), comprehended in himself\n\"a full measure of the God-head bodily.\" The evidence of his having been\ncrucified is as conclusive as any other sacrificial or sin-atoning God,\nwhose name has been memorialized in history, or embalmed as a sacred\nidol in the memories of his devout worshipers.\n\nMr. Moore, an English traveler and writer, in a large collection of\ndrawings taken from Hindoo sculptures and monuments, which he has\narranged together in a work entitled \"The Hindoo Pantheon,\" has one\nrepresenting, suspended on the cross, the Hindoo crucified God and Son\nof God, \"our Lord and Savior\" Chrishna, with holes pierced in his\nfeet, evidently intended to represent the nail-holes made by the act of\ncrucifixion. Mr. Higgins, who examined this work, which he found in the\nBritish Museum, makes a report of a number of the transcript drawings\nintended to represent the crucifixion of this oriental and mediatorial\nGod, which we will here condense. In plate ninety-eight this Savior is\nrepresented with a hole in the top of one foot, just above the toes,\nwhere the nail was inserted in the act of crucifixion.\n\nIn another drawing he is represented exactly in the form of a Romish\nChristian crucifix, but not fixed or fastened to a tree, though the legs\nand feet are arranged in the usual way, with nail-holes in the latter.\nThere is a halo of glory over it, emanating from the heavens above,\njust as we have seen Jesus Christ represented in a work by a Christian\nwriter, entitled \"Quarles' Emblems,\" also in other Christian books. In\nseveral of the icons (drawings) there are marks of holes in both feet,\nand in others of holes in the hands only. In the first drawing which\nhe consulted the marks are very faint, so as to be scarcely visible.\nIn figures four and five of plate eleven the figures have nail-holes in\nboth feet, while the hands are not represented. Figure six has on it the\nrepresentation of a round hole in the side. To his collar or shirt hangs\nan emblem of a heart, represented in the same manner as those attached\nto the imaginary likenesses of Jesus Christ, which may now be found in\nsome Christian countries Figure ninety-one has a hole in one foot and a\nnail through the other, and a round nail or pin mark in one hand only,\nwhile the other is ornamented with a dove and a serpent (both emblems of\ndeity in the Christian's bible).\n\nNow, we raise the query here, and drive it into the innermost temple\nof the Christian's conscience, with the overwhelming force of the\nunconquerable logic of history--_What does all this mean?_\n\nAnd if they will only let conviction have its perfect work while\nanswering this question unhampered by the inherited prejudices of\na thousand years, they can henceforth rejoice in the discovery of a\nglorious historical truth, calculated to disenthrall their minds from\nthe soul-cramping superstitions of crosses, crucifixions and bloody\natonements on which they have been accustomed to hang the salvation of\nthe world.\n\nIf the credibility of the relation of these incidents going to prove\nan astonishing coincidence in the sacred histories of the Hindoo and\nChristian Saviors, and demonstrating the doctrine of the crucifixion\nas having been practically realized, and preached to the world long\nanterior to the offering of a God \"once for all\" on Mount Calvary;\nif its credibility rested on mere _ex parte_ testimony, mere pagan\ntradition, or even upon the best digested and most authentic annals of\nthe past that have escaped the ravages of time, there might still be a\nforlorn hope for the stickler for the Christian faith now struggling\nin the agonies of a credal skepticism, that the whole thing has been\nplagiarized from the Christian Gospels. For paper and parchment history\ncan be--and has been--mutilated. But the verity of this account rests\nupon no such a precarious basis. Its antiquity, reaching far beyond\nthe Christian era, is corroborated and demonstrated by imperishable\nmonuments, deep-chiseled indentures burrowed into the granite rock,\nwhich bid defiance to the fingers of time, and even the hands of the\nfrenzied iconoclast, to destroy or deface, though impelled and spurred\non to the effort by the long-cherished conviction burning in his soul,\nthat the salvation of the human race depends upon believing that \"there\nis no other name given under heaven whereby men can be saved\" than his\nown crucified God, and that all others are but thieves, robbers and\nantichrists. Some of the disciples of the oriental systems cherished\nthis conviction, and Christians and Mahommedans seem to have inherited\nit in magnified proportions.\n\nHence, we are credibly informed that some of the earlier Christian\nsaints, having determined, like Paul, \"to know only Jesus Christ and him\ncrucified,\" made repeated efforts to obliterate these sacred facts (so\nfatally damaging to their one-sided creeds) from the page of history.\nMr. Higgins suggests that if we could have persons less under the\ninfluence of sectarian prejudice to visit, examine, and report on\nthe sculptures and monuments of India, covered over as they are with\nantiquated and significant figures appertaining to and illustrating\ntheir religious history, we might accumulate still more light bearing\nupon the history of the crucifixion of the Savior and sin-atoning\nChrishna. \"Most of our reports,\" he declares, \"are fragmentary, if not\none-sided, having come through the hands of Christian missionaries,\nbishops and priests.\"\n\nHe informs us that a report on the Hindoo religion, made out by a\ndeputation from the British Parliament, sent to India for the purpose of\nexamining their sacred books and monuments, being left in the hands of\na Christian bishop at Calcutta, and with instructions to forward it\nto England, was found, on its arrival in London, to be so horribly\nmutilated and eviscerated as to be scarcely cognizable. The account of\nthe crucifixion was gone---cancelled out. The inference is patent.\n\nAnd we have it upon the authority of this same reliable and truthful\nwriter (Sir Godfrey Higgins) that the author of the Hindoo Pantheon (Mr.\nMoor), after having announced his intention to publish it to the world,\nwas visited and labored with by some of his devout Christian neighbors\nzealous \"for the faith once delivered to the saints,\" who endeavored to\ndissuade him from publishing such facts to the world as he represented\nhis book to contain, for fear it would have the effect to unsettle\nthe faith of some of the weak brethren (some of the weak-kneed church\nmembers) in the soul-saving religion of Jesus Christ, by raising\ndoubts in their minds as to the originality of the gospel story of the\ncrucifixion of Christ, or at least of his having been crucified as a God\nfor a sin-offering. His crucifixion is a possible event. It may be\nthus far a true narrative, but the adjunct of the atonement, with its\nefficacy to obliterate the effects of sin, connected with the idea that\nan infinite, omnipotent and self-existent God was put to death, when a\nhuman form was slain upon the cross--never, no, never. It is a thought\ntoo monstrous to find lodgment in an enlightened human mind.\n\nAnother case evincing the same spirit as that narrated above is found in\nthe circumstance of a Christian missionary (a Mr. Maurice) publishing\na historical account of this man-god or demigod of the Hindoos, and\nomitting any allusion to his crucifixion; this was entirely left out,\napparently from design. His death, resurrection and ascension were\nspoken of, but the crucifixion skipped over. He could not have been\nignorant of this chapter in his history as the writers preceding him,\nfrom whom he copied, had related it.\n\nAmong this number may be mentioned the learned French writer\nMonsieur Guigniant, who, in his \"Religion of the Ancients,\" speaks so\nspecifically of the crucifixion of this God, as to name the circumstance\nof his being nailed to a tree. He also states, that before his exit he\nmade some remarkable prophecies appertaining to the crimes and miseries\nof the world in the approaching future, reminding us of the wars and\nrumors of wars predicted by the Christian Messiah. Mr. Higgins names the\nsame circumstance.\n\nWe have it upon the authority of more than one writer on Hindoo or\nIndian antiquities that there is a rock temple at Mathura in the form\nof a cross, and facing the four cardinal points of the compass, which\nis admitted by all beholders as presenting the proof in bold relief of\nextreme age, and inside of this temple stands a statue of \"the Savior\nof men,\" Chrishna of India, presenting the proof of being coeval in\nconstruction with the temple itself by the circumstance of its being\ncut out of the same rock and constituting a part of the temple. (Further\ncitations of this character will be found under the head of Parallels,\nChapter XXXII.)\n\nThus we have the proof deeply and indelibly carved in the old,\ntime-chiseled rocks of India--that their \"Lord and Savior Chrishna\"\natoned for the sins of a grief-stricken world by \"pouring out his blood\nas a propitiatory offering\" while stretched upon the cross. No wonder,\nin view of such historic bulwarks, Col. Wiseman, for ten years a\nChristian missionary should have exclaimed, \"Can we be surprised that\nthe enemies of our holy religion should seize upon this legend (the\ncrucifixion of Chrishna) as containing the original of our gospel\nhistory?\"\n\nChristian reader, please ponder over the facts of this chapter, and let\nconviction have its perfect work.\n\n\nLIFE, CHARACTER, RELIGION, AND MIRACLES OF CHRISHNA.\n\nThe history of Chrishna Zeus (or Jeseus, as some writers spell it) is\ncontained principally in the Baghavat Gita, the episode portion of the\nMahabaret bible. The book is believed to be divinely inspired, like all\nother bibles; and the Hindoos claim for it an antiquity of six thousand\nyears. Like Christ, he was of humble origin, and like him had to\nencounter opposition and persecution.\n\nBut he seems to have been more successful in the propagation of his\ndoctrines; for it is declared, \"he soon became surrounded by many\nearnest followers, and the people in vast multitudes followed him,\ncrying aloud, 'This is indeed the Redeemer promised to our fathers.'\"\nHis pathway was thickly strewn with miracles, which consisted in healing\nthe sick, curing lepers, restoring the dumb, deaf and the blind, raising\nthe dead, aiding the weak, comforting the sorrow-stricken, relieving the\noppressed, casting out devils, etc. He come not ostensibly to destroy\nthe previous relgion, but to purify it of its impurities, and to preach\na better doctrine. He came, as he declared, \"to reject evil and restore\nthe reign of good, and redeem man from the consequences of the fall,\nand deliver the oppressed earth from its load of sin and suffering.\" His\ndisciples believed him to be God himself, and millions worshiped him as\nsuch in the time of Alexander the Great, 330 B. C.\n\nThe hundreds of counterparts to the history of Christ, proving their\nhistories to be almost identical, will be found enumerated in Chapter\nXXXII., such as--1. His miraculous birth by a virgin. 2. The mother and\nchild being visited by shepherds, wise men and the angelic host, who\njoyously sang, \"In thy delivery, O favored among women, all nations\nshall have cause to exult.\" 3. The edict of the tyrant ruler Cansa,\nordering all the first born to be put to death. 4. The miraculous escape\nof the mother and child from his bloody decree by the parting of the\nwaves of the River Jumna to permit them to pass through on dry ground.\n5. The early retirement of Chrishna to a desert. 6. His baptism or\nablution in the River Ganges, corresponding to Christ's baptism in\nJordan. 7. His transfiguration at Madura, where he assured his disciples\nthat \"present or absent, I will always be with you.\" 8. He had a\nfavorite disciple (Arjoon), who was his bosom friend, as John was\nChrist's. 9. He was anointed with oil by women, like Christ. 10. A\nsomewhat similar fish story is told of him--his disciples being enabled\nby him to catch large draughts of the finny prey in their nets. (For\nthree hundred other similar parallels, see Chapter XXXII.)\n\nLike Christ, he taught much by parables and precepts. A notable sermon\npreached by him is also reported, which we have not space for here.\n\nOn one occasion, having returned from a ministerial journey, as he\nentered Madura, the people came out in crowds to meet him, strewing the\nground with the branches of cocoa-nut trees, and desiring to hear him.\nHe addressed them in parables--the conclusion and moral of one of which,\ncalled the parable of the fishes, runs thus: \"And thus it is, O people\nof Madura, that you ought to protect the weak and each other, and not\nretaliate upon an enemy the wrongs he may have done you.\" Here we see\nthe peace doctrine preached in its purity. \"And thus it was,\" says a\nwriter, \"that Chrishna spread among the people the holy doctrines of\npurest morality, and initiated his hearers into the exalted principles\nof charity, of self-denial, and self-respect at a time when the desert\ncountries of the west were inhabited only by savage tribes;\" and we\nwill add, long before Christianity was thought of. Purity of life\nand spiritual insight, we are told, were distinguishing traits in the\ncharacter of this oriental sin-atoning Savior, and that \"he was often\nmoved with compassion for the downtrodden and the suffering.\"\n\nA Budhist in Ceylon, who sent his son to a Christian school, once\nremarked to a missionary, \"I respect Christianity as a help to Budhism.\"\nThus is disclosed the fact that the motives of some of \"the heathen\"\nin sending to Christian schools is the promotion of their own religion,\nwhich they consider superior, and in many respects most of them are.\n(For proof, see Chapter on Bibles.)\n\nWe have the remarkable admission of the _Christian Examiner_ that \"the\nbest precepts of the (Christian) bible are contained in the Hindoo\nBaghavat.\" Then it is not true that \"Christ spake as man never spake.\"\nAnd if his \"best precepts\" were previously recorded in an old heathen\nbible, then they afford no proof of his divinity. This suicidal\nconcession of the _Examiner_ pulls up the claims of orthodox\nChristianity by the roots.\n\nAnd many of the precepts uttered by Chrishna display a profound wisdom\nand depth of thought equal to any of those attributed to Jesus Christ.\nIn proof of the statement, we will cite a few examples out of the\nhundreds in our possession:--\n\n1. Those who do not control their passions cannot act properly toward\nothers.\n\n2. The evils we inflict upon others follow us as our shadows follow our\nbodies.\n\n3. Only the humble are beloved of God.\n\n4. Virtue sustains the soul as the muscles sustain the body.\n\n5. When the poor man knocks at your door, take him and administer to\nhis wants, for the poor are the chosen of God. (Christ said, \"God hath\nchosen the poor.\")\n\n6. Let your hand be always open to the unfortunate.\n\n7. Look not upon a woman with unchaste desires.\n\n8. Avoid envy, covetousness, falsehood, imposture and slander, and\nsexual desires.\n\n9. Above all things, cultivate love for your neighbor.\n\n10. When you die you leave your worldly wealth behind you, but your\nvirtues and vices follow you.\n\n11. Contemn riches and worldly honor.\n\n12. Seek the company of the wicked in order to reform them.\n\n13. Do good for its own sake, and expect not your reward for it on\nearth.\n\n14. The soul is immortal, but must be pure and free from all sin and\nstain before it can return to Him who gave it.\n\n15. The soul is inclined to good when it follows the inward light.\n\n16. The soul is responsible to God for its actions, who has established\nrewards and punishments.\n\n17. Cultivate that inward knowledge which teaches what is right and\nwrong.\n\n18. Never take delight in another's misfortunes.\n\n19. It is better to forgive an injury than to avenge it\n\n20. You can accomplish by kindness what you cannot by force.\n\n21. A noble spirit finds a cure for injustice by forgetting it.\n\n22. Pardon the offense of others, but not your own.\n\n23. What you blame in others do not practice yourself.\n\n24. By forgiving an enemy you make many friends.\n\n25. Do right from hatred of evil, and not from fear of punishment.\n\n26. A wise man corrects his own errors by observing those of others.\n\n27. He who rules his temper conquers his greatest enemy.\n\n28. The wise man governs his passions, but the fool obeys them.\n\n29. Be at war with men's vices, but at peace with their persons.\n\n30. There should be no disagreement between your lives and your\ndoctrine.\n\n31. Spend every day as though it were the last.\n\n32. Lead not one life in public and another in private.\n\n33. Anger in trying to torture others punishes itself.\n\n34. A disgraceful death is honorable when you die in a good cause.\n\n35. By growing familiar with vices, we learn to tolerate them easily.\n\n36. We must master our evil propensities, or they will master us.\n\n37. He who has conquered his propensities rules over a kingdom.\n\n38. Protect, love and assist others, if you would serve God.\n\n39. From thought springs the will, and from the will action, true or\nfalse, just or unjust.\n\n40. As the sandal tree perfumes the axe which fells it, so the good man\nsheds fragrance on his enemies.\n\n41. Spend a portion of each day in pious devotion.\n\n42. To love the virtues of others is to brighten your own.\n\n43. He who gives to the needy loses nothing himself.\n\n44. A good, wise and benevolent man cannot be rich.\n\n45. Much riches is a curse to the possessor.\n\n46. The wounds of the soul are more important than those of the body.\n\n47. The virtuous man is like the banyan tree, which shelters and\nprotects all around it.\n\n48. Money does not satisfy the love of gain, but only stimulates it.\n\n49. Your greatest enemy is in your own bosom.\n\n50. To flee when charged is to confess your guilt.\n\n51. The wounds of conscience leave a scar.\n\nCompare these fifty-one precepts of Chrishna with the forty-two precepts\nof Christ, and you must confess they suffer nothing by the comparison.\nIf we had space we would like to quote also from the Vedas. We will\nmerely cite a few examples relative to woman.\n\n1. He who is cursed by woman is cursed by God.\n\n2. God will punish him who laughs at woman's sufferings.\n\n3. When woman is honored, God is honored.\n\n4. The virtuous woman will have but one husband, and the right-minded\nman but one wife.\n\n5. It is the highest crime to take advantage of the weakness of woman.\n\n6. Woman should be loved, respected and protected by husbands, fathers\nand brothers, etc. (For more, see Chapter on Bibles.)\n\nBefore we close this chapter we must anticipate and answer an objection.\nIt will be said that the reported amours of Chrishna and his reencounter\nwith Cansa constitute a criticism on his character. If so, we will point\nto Christ's fight or angry combat with the money-changers in the temple\nas an offset to it And then it should be remembered that Chrishna's\ndisciples claim that these stories are mere fable, or allegorical, and\nare not found in the most approved or canonical writings.\n\n\nII.--CRUCIFIXION OF THE HINDOO SAKIA, 600 B. C.\n\nHow many Gods who figured in Hindoo history suffered death upon the\ncross as atoning offerings for the sins of mankind is a point not\nclearly established by their sacred books. But the death of the God\nabove named, known as Sakia, Budha Sakia, or Sakia Muni, is distinctly\nreferred to by several writers, both oriental and Christian, though\nthere appears to be in Budhist countries different accounts of the death\nof the famous and extensively worshiped sin-atoning Saviors.\n\nIn some countries, the story runs, a God was crucified by an arrow being\ndriven through his body, which fastened him to a tree; the tree,\nwith the arrow thus projecting at right angles, formed the cross,\nemblematical of the atoning sacrifice.\n\nSakia, an account states, was crucified by his enemies for the humble\nact of plucking a flower in a garden--doubtless seized on as a mere\npretext, rather than as being considered a crime.\n\nOne of the accusations brought against Christ, it will be remembered,\nwas that of plucking the ripened ears of corn on the Sabbath. And it is\na remarkable circumstance, that in the pictures of Christian countries\nrepresenting the virgin Mary with the infant Jesus in her arms, either\nthe child or the mother is frequently represented with a bunch of\nflowers in the hand.\n\nHere, let it be noted, the association of flowers with divinely born\nSaviors, in India, is indicated in the religious books of that country\nto have originated from the conception of the virgin parting with the\nflowers of her virginity by giving birth to a divine child, whereby she\nlost the immortality of her physical nature, it being transferred by\nthat act to her Deity-begotten son. And from this circumstance, Sakia\nis represented as having been crucified for abstracting a flower from a\ngarden. That his crucifixion was designed as a sin-atoning offering, is\nevident from the following declaration found in his sacred biography,\nviz.: \"He in mercy left Paradise, and came down to earth because he was\nfilled with compassion for the sins and miseries of mankind. He sought\nto lead them into better paths, and took their sufferings upon himself\nthat he might expiate their crimes and mitigate the punishment they must\notherwise inevitably undergo.\" (Prog. Rel. Ideas, vol. i. p. 86.)\n\nHe believed and taught his followers that all sin is inevitably\npunished, either in this or the future life; and so great were his\nsympathy and tenderness, that he condescended to suffer that punishment\nhimself, by an ignominious death upon the cross, after which he\ndescended into Hades (Hell), to suffer for a time (three days) for the\ninmates of that dreadful and horrible prison, that he might show he\nsympathized with them. After his resurrection, and before his ascension\nto heaven, as well as during his earthly sojourn, he imparted to the\nworld some beautiful, lofty, and soul-elevating precepts.\n\n\"The object of his mission,\" says a writer, \"was to instruct those who\nwere straying from the right path, and expiate the sins of mortals by\nhis own suffering, and procure for them a happy entrance into Paradise\nby obedience to his precepts and prayers to his name.\" (Ibid.) \"His\nfollowers always speak of him as one with God from all eternity.\"\n(Ibid.) His most common title was \"the Savior of the World.\" He was also\ncalled \"the Benevolent One,\" \"the Dispenser of Grace,\" \"the Source of\nLife,\" \"the Light of the World,\" \"the True Light,\" etc.\n\nHis mother was a very pure, refined, pious and devout woman; never\nindulged in any impure thoughts, words or actions. She was so much\nesteemed for her virtues and for being the mother of a God, that an\nescort of ladies attended her wherever she went. The trees bowed before\nher as she passed through the forest, and flowers sprang up wherever her\nfoot pressed the ground. She was saluted as \"the Holy Virgin, Queen of\nHeaven.\"\n\nIt is said that when her divine child was born, he stood upright and\nproclaimed, \"I will put an end to the sufferings and sorrows of the\nworld.\" And immediately a light shone around about the young Messiah. He\nspent much time in retirement, and like Christ in another respect, was\nonce tempted by a demon who offered him all the honors and wealth of the\nworld. But he rebuked the devil, saying, \"Be gone; hinder me not.\"\n\nHe began, like Christ, to preach his gospel and heal the sick when about\ntwenty-eight years of age. And it is declared, \"the blind saw, the deaf\nheard, the dumb spoke, the lame danced and the crooked became straight.\"\nHence, the people declared, \"He is no mortal child, but an incarnation\nof the Deity.\" His religion was of a very superior character. He\nproclaimed, \"My law is a law of grace for all.\" His religion knew no\nrace, no sex, no caste, and no aristocratic priesthood.\n\n\"It taught,\" says Max Muller, \"the equality of all men, and the\nbrotherhood of the human race.\" \"All men, without regard to rank, birth\nor nation,\" says Dunckar, \"form, according to Budha's view, one great\nsuffering association in this earthly vale of tears; therefore,\nthe commandments of love, forbearance, patience, compassion, pity,\nbrotherliness of all men.\" Klaproth (a German professor of oriental\nlanguages) says this religion is calculated to ennoble the human race.\n\"It is difficult to comprehend,\" says a French writer (M. Leboulay),\n\"how men, not assisted by revelation, could have soared so high, and\napproached so near the truth.\"\n\nDunckar says this oriental God \"taught self-denial, chastity,\ntemperance, the control of the passions, to bear injustice from others,\nto suffer death quietly, and without hate of your persecutor, to\ngrieve not for one's own misfortunes, but for those of others.\" An\ninvestigation of their history will show that that they lived up to\nthese moral injunctions. \"Besides the five great commandments,\" says a\nWesleyan missionary (Spense Hardy) in his Dahmma Padam, \"every shade\nof vice, hypocrisy, anger, pride, suspicion, greediness, gossiping, and\ncruelty to animals is guarded against by special precepts. Among the\nvirtues, recommended, we find not only reverence for parents, care for\nchildren, submission to authority, gratitude, moderation in all things,\nsubmission in time of trial, equanimity at all times, but virtues,\nunknown in some systems of morality, such as the duty of forgiving\ninjuries, and not rewarding evil for evil.\" And we will add, both\ncharity and love are specially recommended.\n\nWe have it also upon the authority of Dunckar that \"Budha proclaimed\nthat salvation and redemption have come for all, even the lowest\nand most abject classes.\" For he broke down the iron caste of the\nBrahminical code which had so long ruled India, and aimed to place all\nmankind upon a level. His followers have been stigmatize! by Christian\nprofessors as \"idolaters.\" But Sir John Bowling, in his \"Kingdom and\nPeople of Siam,\" denies that they are idolaters--\"because,\" says he, \"no\nBudhist believes his image to be God, or anything more than an outward\nrepresentation of Deity.\" Their deific images are looked upon with the\nsame views and feelings as a Christian venerates the photograph of his\ndeceased friend. Hence, if one is an idolater, the other is also. With\nrespect to the charge of polytheism, Missionary Hue says, \"that although\ntheir religion embraces many inferior deities, who fill the same\noffices that angels do under the Christian system, yet,\"--adds M.\nHue--\"monotheism is the real character of Buddhism;\" and confirms the\nstatement by the testimony of a Thibetan.\n\nIt should be noted here that although Budhism succeeded in converting\nabout three hundred millions, or one-third of the inhabitants of the\nglobe, it was never propagated by the sword, and never persecuted the\ndisciples of other religions. Its conquests were made by a rational\nappeal to the human mind. Mr. Hodgson says, \"It recognizes the infinite\ncapacity of the human intellect.\" And St. Hilaire declares, \"Love for\nall beings is its nucleus; and to love our enemies, and not prosecute,\nare the virtues of this people.\" Max Muller says, \"Its moral code, taken\nby itself, is one of the most perfect the world has ever known.\"\n\nIts five commandments are:--\n\n1. Thou shalt not kill.\n\n2. Thou shalt not steal.\n\n3. Thou shalt not commit adultery or any impurity.\n\n4. Thou shall not lie.\n\n5. Thou shalt not intoxicate thyself.\n\nTo establish the above cited doctrines and precepts, Budha sent forth\nhis disciples into the world to preach his gospel to every creature. And\nif any convert had committed a sin in word, thought or deed, he was to\nconfess and repent. One of the tracts which they distributed declares,\n\"There is undoubtedly a life after this, in which the virtuous may\nexpect the reward of their good deeds.... Judgment takes place\nimmediately after death.\"\n\nBudha and his followers set an example to the world of enduring\nopposition and persecution with great patience and non-resistance. And\nsome of them suffered martyrdom rather than abandon their principles,\nand gloried in thus sealing their doctrines with their lives.\n\nA story is told of a rich merchant by the name of Purna, forsaking all\nto follow his lord and master; and also of his encountering and talking\nwith a woman of low caste at a well, which reminds us of similar\nincidents in the history of Christ. But his enemies, becoming jealous\nand fearful of his growing power, finally crucified him near the foot\nof the Nepaul mountains, about 600 B. C. But after his death, burial and\nresurrection, we are told he ascended back to heaven, where millions of\nhis followers believed he had existed with Brahma from all eternity.\n\n[Note.--In the cases of crucifixion which follow, nothing like accuracy\ncan be expected with respect to the dates of their occurrence, as all\nhistory covering the period beyond the modern era, or prior to the\ntime of Alexander the Great (330 B. C.) is involved in a labyrinth of\nuncertainty with respect to dates. Hence, bible chronologists differ\nto the extent of three thousand years with respect to the time of every\nevent recorded in the Old Testament. Compare the Hebrew and Septuagint\nversions of the bible: The former makes the world three thousand nine\nhundred and forty four, and the latter five thousand two hundred and\nseventy years old at the birth of Christ--a difference of thirteen\nhundred and twenty-six years. And other translations differ still more\nwidely. All the cases of crucifixion which follow occurred before the\ntime of Christ, but the exact time of many of them cannot be fixed with\ncertainty. ]\n\n\nIII.--THAMMUZ OF SYRIA CRUCIFIED, 1160 B. C.\n\nThe history of this God is furnished us in fragments by several writers,\nportions of which will be found in other chapters of this work. The\nfullest history extant of this God-Savior is probably that of Ctesias\n(400 B. C.), author of \"Persika.\" The poet has perpetuated his memory in\nrhyme.\n\n     \"Trust, ye saints, your Lord restored,\n     Trust ye in your risen Lord;\n     For the pains which Thammuz endured\n     Our salvation have procured.\"\n\nMr. Higgins informs us (Anac. vol. i. p. 246) that this God was\ncrucified at the period above named, as a sin-atoning offering The\nstanza just quoted is predicated upon the following Greek text,\ntranslated by Godwin: \"Trust ye in God, for out of his loins salvation\nhas come unto us.\" Julius Firmicus speaks of this God \"rising from the\ndead for the salvation of the world.\" The Christian writer Parkhurst\nalludes to this Savior as preceding the advent of Christ, and as filling\nto some extent the same chapter in sacred history.\n\n\nIV.--CRUCIFIXION OF WITTOBA OF THE TELINGONESS, 552 B. C.\n\nWe have a very conclusive historical proof of the crucifixion of this\nheathen God. Mr. Higgins tells us, \"He is represented in his history\nwith nail-holes in his hands and the soles of his feet.\" Nails, hammers\nand pincers are constantly seen represented on his crucifixes, and are\nobjects of adoration among his followers. And the iron crown of Lombardy\nhas within it a nail of what is claimed as his true original cross,\nand is much admired and venerated on that account. The worship of\nthis crucified God, according to our author, prevails chiefly in the\nTravancore and other southern countries in the region of Madura.\n\n\nV.--IAO OF NEPAUL CRUCIFIED, 622 B. C.\n\nWith respect to the crucifixion of this ancient Savior, we have this\nvery definite and specific testimony that \"he was crucified on a tree\nin Nepaul.\" (See Georgius, p. 202.) The name of this incarnate God and\noriental Savior occurs frequently in the holy bibles and sacred books of\nother countries. Some suppose that lao (often spelt Jao) is the root of\nthe name of the Jewish God Jehovah.\n\n\nVI.--HESUS OF THE CELTIC DRUIDS CRUCIFIED, 834 B. C.\n\nMr. Higgins informs us that the Celtic Druids represent their God Hesus\nas having been crucified with a lamb on one side and an elephant on the\nother, and that this occurred long before the Christian era. Also that a\nrepresentation of it may now be seen upon \"the fire-tower of Brechin.\"\n\nIn this symbolical representation of the crucifixion, the elephant,\nbeing the largest animal known, was chosen to represent the magnitude\nof the sins of the world, while the lamb, from its proverbial innocent\nnature, was chosen to represent the innocency of the victim (the God\noffered as a propitiatory sacrifice). And thus we have \"the Lamb of\nGod taking away the sins of the world\"--symbolical language used with\nrespect to the offering of Jesus Christ. And here is indicated very\nclearly the origin of the figure. It is evidently borrowed from the\nDruids. We have the statement of the above writer that this legend was\nfound amongst the Canutes of Gaul long before Jesus Christ was known to\nhistory. (See Anac. vol. ii. p. 130.)\n\n\nVII.--QUEXALCOTE OF MEXICO CRUCIFIED, 587 B. C.\n\nHistorical authority, relative to the crucifixion of this Mexican God,\nand to his execution upon the cross as a propitiatory sacrifice for the\nsins of mankind, is explicit, unequivocal and ineffaceable. The evidence\nis tangible, and indelibly engraven upon steel and metal plates. One\nof these plates represents him as having been crucified on a mountain;\nanother represents him as having been crucified in the heavens, as St.\nJustin tells us Christ was. According to another writer, he is sometimes\nrepresented as having been nailed to a cross, and by other accounts as\nhanging with a cross in his hand. The \"Mexican Antiquities\" (vol. vi.\np. 166) says, \"Quexalcote is represented in the paintings of 'Codex\nBorgianus' as nailed to the cross.\" Sometimes two thieves are\nrepresented as having been crucified with him.\n\nThat the advent of this crucified Savior and Mexican God was long\nanterior to the era of Christ, is admitted by Christian writers, as we\nhave shown elsewhere. In the work above named \"Codex Borgianus,\" may\nbe found the account, not only of his crucifixion, but of his death,\nburial, descent into hell, and resurrection on the third day. And\nanother work, entitled \"Codex Vaticanus,\" contains the story of his\nimmaculate birth by a virgin mother by the name of Chimalman.\n\nMany other incidences are found related of him in his sacred biography,\nin which we find the most striking counterparts to the more modern\ngospel story of Jesus Christ, such as his forty days' temptation and\nfasting, his riding on an ass, his purification in the temple, his\nbaptism and regeneration by water, his forgiving of sins, being anointed\nwith oil, etc. \"All these things, and many more, found related of this\nMexican God in their sacred books,\" says Lord Kingsborough (a Christian\nwriter), \"are curious and mysterious.\" (See the books above cited.)\n\n\nVIII.--QUIRINUS OF ROME CRUCIFIED, 506 B. C.\n\nThe crucifixion of this Roman Savior is briefly noticed by Mr. Higgins,\nand is remarkable for presenting (like other crucified Gods) several\nparallel features to that of the Judean Savior, not only in the\ncircumstances related as attending his crucifixion, but also in a\nconsiderable portion of his antecedent life.\n\nHe is represented, like Christ:--\n\n1. As having been conceived and brought forth by a virgin.\n\n2. His life was sought by the reigning king (Amulius),\n\n3. He was of royal blood, his mother being of kingly descent.\n\n4. He was \"put to death by wicked hands\"--i. e., crucified.\n\n5. At his mortal exit the whole earth is said to have been enveloped in\ndarkness, as in the case of Christ, Chrishna, and Prometheus.\n\n6. And finally he is resurrected, and ascends back to heaven.\n\n\nIX.--(\u00c6SCHYLUS) PROMETHEUS CRUCIFIED, 547 B. C.\n\nIn the account of the crucifixion of Prometheus of Caucasus, as\nfurnished by Seneca, Hesiod, and other writers, it is stated that he was\nnailed to an upright beam of timber, to which were affixed extended arms\nof wood, and that this cross was situated near the Caspian Straits. The\nmodern story of this crucified God, which represents him as having been\nbound to a rock for thirty years, while vultures preyed upon his vitals,\nMr. Higgins pronounces an impious Christian fraud. \"For,\" says this\nlearned historical writer, \"I have seen the account which declares\nhe was nailed to a cross with hammer and nails.\" (Anac. vol. i. 327.)\nConfirmatory of this statement is the declaration of Mr. Southwell, that\n\"he exposed himself to the wrath of God in his zeal to save mankind.\"\n\nThe poet, in portraying his propitiatory offering, says\n\n     \"Lo! streaming from the fatal tree\n     His all atoning blood,\n     Is this the Infinite?--\n     Yes, 'tis he,\n     Prometheus, and a God!\n\n     \"Well might the sun in darkness hide,\n     And veil his glories in,\n     When God, the great Prometheus, died\n     For man the creature's sin.\"\n\nThe \"New American Cyclopedia\" (vol. i. p. 157) contains the following\nsignificant declaration relative to this sin-atoning oriental Savior:\n\"It is doubtful whether there is to be found in the whole range of Greek\nletters deeper pathos than that of the divine woe of the beneficent\ndemigod Prometheus, crucified on his Scythian crags for his love to\nmortals.\" Here we have first-class authority for the crucifixion of this\noriental God.\n\nIn Lempriere's \"Classical Dictionary,\" Higgins' \"Anacalypsis,\" and other\nworks, may be found the following particulars relative to the final exit\nof the God above named, viz.:--\n\n1. That the whole frame of nature became convulsed.\n\n2. The earth shook, the rocks were rent, the graves were opened, and in\na storm, which seemed to threaten the dissolution of the universe, the\nsolemn scene forever closed, and \"Our Lord and Savior\" Prometheus gave\nup the ghost.\n\n\"The cause for which he suffered,\" says Mr. Southwell, \"was his love for\nthe human race.\" Mr. Taylor makes the statement in his Syntagma (p. 95),\nthat the whole story of Prometheus' crucifixion, burial and resurrection\nwas acted in pantomime in Athens five hundred years before Christ, which\nproves its great antiquity. Minutius Felix, one of the most popular\nChristian writers of the second century (in his \"Octavius,\" sect. 29),\nthus addresses the people of Rome: \"Your victorious trophies not only\nrepresent a simple cross, but a cross with a man on it,\" and this man\nSt. Jerome calls a God.\n\nThese coincidences furnish still further proof that the tradition of the\ncrucifixion of Gods has been very long prevalent among the heathen.\n\n\nX.--CRUCIFIXION OF THULIS OF EGYPT, 1700 B. C.\n\nThulis of Egypt, whence comes \"Ultima Thule,\" died the death of the\ncross about thirty-five hundred years ago.\n\nUltima Thule was the island which marked the ultimate bounds of the\nextensive empire of this legitimate descendant of the Gods.\n\nThis Egyptian Savior appears also to have been known as Zulis, and with\nthis name--Mr. Wilkison tells us--\"his history is curiously illustrated\nin the sculptures, made seventeen hundred years B. C., of a small,\nretired chamber lying nearly over the western adytum of the temple-\" We\nare told twenty-eight lotus plants near his grave indicate the number\nof years he lived on the earth. After suffering a violent death, he\nwas buried, but rose again, ascended into heaven, and there became \"the\njudge of the dead,\" or of souls in a future state. Wilkison says he came\ndown from heaven to benefit mankind, and that he was said to be \"full of\ngrace and truth.\"\n\n\nXI.--CRUCIFIXION OF INDRA OF THIBET, 725 B. C.\n\nThe account of the crucifixion of the God and Savior Indra may be found\nin Georgius, Thibetinum Alphabetum, p. 230. A brief notice of the case\nis all we have space for here. In the work just referred to may be found\nplates representing this Thibetan Savior as having been nailed to\nthe cross. There are five wounds, representing the nailholes and the\npiercing of the side. The antiquity of the story is beyond dispute.\n\nMarvelous stories are told of the birth of the Divine Redeemer. His\nmother was a virgin of black complexion, and hence his complexion was\nof the ebony hue, as in the case of Christ and some other sin-atoning\nSaviors. He descended from heaven on a mission of benevolence, and\nascended back to the heavenly mansion after his crucifixion. He led\na life of strict celibacy, which, he taught, was essential to true\nholiness. He inculcated great tenderness toward all living beings. He\ncould walk upon the water or upon the air; he could foretell future\nevents with great accuracy. He practiced the most devout contemplation,\nsevere discipline of the body and mind, and acquired the most complete\nsubjection of his passions. He was worshiped as a God who had existed\nas a spirit from all eternity, and his followers were called \"Heavenly\nTeachers.\"\n\n\nXII.--ALCESTOS OF EURIPIDES CRUCIFIED, 600 B. C.\n\nThe \"English Classical Journal\" (vol. xxxvii.) furnishes us with the\nstory of another crucified God, known as Alcestos--a female God or\nGoddess; and in this respect, it is a novelty in sacred history, being\nthe first, if not the only example of a feminine God atoning for the\nsins of the world upon the cross. The doctrine of the trinity and\natoning offering for sin was inculcated as a part of her religion.\n\n\nXIII.--ATYS OF PHRYGIA CRUCIFIED, 1170 B. C.\n\nSpeaking of this crucified Messiah, the Anacalypsis informs us that\nseveral histories are given of him, but all concur in representing\nhim as having been an atoning offering for sin. And the Latin phrase\n\"suspensus lingo,\" found in his history, indicates the manner of his\ndeath. He was suspended on a tree, crucified, buried and rose again.\n\n\nXIV.--CRITE OF CHALDEA CRUCIFIED, 1200 B. C.\n\nThe Chaldeans, as Mr. Higgins informs us, have noted in their sacred\nbooks the account of the crucifixion of a God with the above name. He\nwas also known as \"the Redeemer,\" and was styled \"the Ever Blessed Son\nof God,\" \"the Savior of the Race,\" \"the Atoning Offering for an Angry\nGod.\" And when he was offered up, both heaven and earth were shaken to\ntheir foundations.\n\n\nXV.--BALI OF ORISSA CRUCIFIED, 725 B. C.\n\nWe learn by the oriental books, that in the district of country known\nas Orissa, in Asia, they have the story of a crucified God, known by\nseveral names, including the above, all of which, we are told, signify\n\"Lord Second,\" having reference to him as the second person or second\nmember of the trinity, as most of the crucified Gods occupied that\nposition in the trial of deities constituting the trinity, as indicated\nby the language \"Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,\" the Son, in all cases,\nbeing the atoning offering, \"the crucified Redeemer,\" and the second\nperson of the trinity. This God Bali was also called Baliu, and\nsometimes Bel. The Anacalypsis informs us (vol. i. 257) that monuments\nof this crucified God, bearing great age, may be found amid the ruins\nof the magnificent city of Mahabalipore, partially buried amongst the\nfigures of the temple.\n\n\nXVI.--MITHRA OF PERSIA CRUCIFIED, 600 B. C.\n\nThis Persian God, according to Mr. Higgins, was \"slain upon the cross to\nmake atonement for mankind, and to take away the sins of the world.\" He\nwas reputedly born on the twenty-fifth day of December, and crucified on\na tree. It is a remarkable circumstance that two Christian writers (Mr.\nFaber and Mr. Bryant) both speak of his \"being slain,\" and yet both omit\nto speak of the manner in which he was put to death. And the same policy\nhas been pursued with respect to other crucified Gods of the pagans, as\nwe have shown elsewhere.\n\nOur list is full, or we might note other cases of crucifixion. Devatat\nof Siam, Ixion of Rome, Apollonius of Tyana in Cappadocia, are all\nreported in history as having \"died the death of the cross.\"\n\nIxion, 400 B. C., according to Nimrod, was crucified on a wheel, the\nrim representing the world, and the spokes constituting the cross. It is\ndeclared, \"He bore the burden of the world\" (that is, \"the sins of\nthe world\") on his back while suspended on the cross. Hence, he was\nsometimes called \"the crucified spirit of the world.\"\n\nWith respect to Apollonius, it is a remarkable, if not a suspicious\ncircumstance that should not be passed unnoticed, that several Christian\nwriters, while they recount a long list of miracles and remarkable\nincidents in the life of this Cappadocian Savior, extending through his\nwhole life, and forming a parallel to similar incidents of the Christian\nSavior, not a word is said about his crucifixion.\n\nAnd a similar policy has been pursued with respect to Mithra and other\nsin-atoning Gods, including Chrishna and Prometheus, as before noticed.\n\nThis important chapter in their history has been omitted by Christian\nwriters for fear the relation of it would damage the credibility of the\ncrucifixion of Christ, or lessen its spiritual force. For, like\nPaul, they were \"determined to know nothing but Jesus Christ and\nhim crucified\" (i Cor. ii. 2) i. e., to _know_ no other God had been\ncrucified but _Jesus Christ_. They thus exalted the tradition of the\ncrucifixion into the most important dogma of the Christian faith. Hence,\ntheir efforts to conceal from the public a knowledge of the fact that it\nis of pagan origin.\n\nBy reference to Mackey's \"Lexicon of Freemasonry\" (p. 35) we learn that\nFreemasons secretly taught the doctrine of the crucifixion, atonement\nand resurrection long anterior to the Christian era, and that similar\ndoctrines were taught in \"all the ancient mysteries,\" thus proving that\nthe conception of these tenets of faith existed at a very early period\nof time.\n\nAnd it may be noted here, that the doctrine of salvation by crucifixion\nhad likewise, with most of the ancient forms of religious faith, an\nastronomical representation--i. e., a representation in astronomical\nsymbols. According to the emblematical figures comprised in their astral\nworship, people were saved by the sun's crucifixion or crossification,\nrealized by _crossing_ over the equinoctial line into the season of\nspring, and thereby gave out a saving heat and light to the world and\nstimulated the generative organs of animal and vegetable life. It was\nfrom this conception that the ancients were in the habit of carving or\npainting the organs of generation upon the walls of their holy temples.\nThe blood of the grape, which was ripened by the heat of the sun, as he\ncrossed over by resurrection into spring, (i. e., was crucified), was\nsymbolically \"the blood of the cross,\" or \"the blood of the Lamb.\"\n\nIf we should be met here with the statement, that the stories of the\nancient crucifixions of Gods were mere myths or fables, unwarrantably\nsaddled on to their histories as mere romance, and have no foundation in\nfact, we reply--there is as much ground for suspecting the same thing as\nbeing true of Jesus Christ.\n\nOne of the most celebrated and most frequently quoted Christian writers\nof the ancient bishops (Iren\u00e6us) declares upon the authority of the\nmartyr Polycarp, who claimed to have got it from St. John and all the\nelders of Asia, that Jesus Christ was not crucified, but lived to be\nabout fifty years old.\n\nWe find there has always been a margin for doubt amongst his own\nfollowers as to the fact of his crucifixion.\n\nMany of the early Christians and cotemporary Jews and Gentiles doubted\nit, and some openly disputed its ever having taken place. Others\nbestowed upon it a mere spiritual signification, and not a few\nconsidered it symbolical of a \"holy life.\" One circumstance, calculated\nto lead to the entire discredit of the story of the crucifixion of\nChrist, is the relation, in connection with it, of a violent convulsion\nof nature, and the resurrection of the long-buried saints--events not\nsupported by any authentic cotemporaneous history, sacred or profane.\n(See Chap. XVII., Aphanasia).\n\nAnd as these events must be set down as fabulous, they leave the mind\nin doubt with respect to the fact of the crucifixion itself, especially\nwhen the many absurdities involved in the doctrine of the crucifixion\nare brought to view, in connection with it, some of them so palpably\nerroneous that an unlettered savage could see and point them out.\n\nThe Indian chief Red Jacket is reported to have replied to the Christian\nmissionaries, when they urged upon his attention the benefits of\nChrist's death by crucifixion, \"Brethren, if you white men murdered the\nson of the Great Spirit, we Indians have nothing to do with it, and it\nis none of our affair. If he had come among us, we would not have killed\nhim. We would have treated him well. You must make amends for that crime\nyourselves.\"\n\nThis view of the crucifixion suggested to the mind of an illiterate\nheathen we deem more sensible and rational than that of the orthodox\nChristians, which makes it a meritorious act and a moral necessity. For\nthis would not only exonerate Judas from any criminality or guilt for\nthe part he took in the affair, but would entitle him as well as Christ\nto the honorable title of a \"Savior\" for performing an act without which\nthe crucifixion and consequent salvation of the world could not have\nbeen effected. If it was necessary for Christ to suffer death upon the\ncross as an atonement for sin, then the act of crucifixion was right,\nand a monument should be erected to the memory of Judas for bringing it\nabout. We challenge Christian logic to find a flaw in this argument.\n\nAnd another important consideration arises here. If the inhabitants of\nthis planet required the murderous death of a God as an atonement, we\nmust presume that the eighty-five millions of inhabited worlds recently\ndiscovered by astronomers are, or have been, in equal need of a divine\natonement. And this would require the crucifixion of eighty-five\nmillions of Gods. Assuming one of these Gods to be crucified every\nminute, the whole would occupy a period of nearly twenty years. This\nwould be killing off Gods at rather a rapid rate, and would make\nthe work of the atonement and salvation a very murderous and bloody\naffair--a conception which brings to the mind a series of very revolting\nreflections.\n\nThe conception of Gods coming down from heaven, and being born of\nvirgins, and dying a violent death for the moral blunders of the people,\noriginated in an age of the world when man was a savage, and dwelt\nexclusively upon the animal plane, and blood was the requisition for\nevery offense. And it was an age when no world was known to exist but\nthe one we inhabit. The stars were then supposed to be mere blazing\ntapers set in the azure vault to light this pygmy planet, or peep-holes\nfor Gods to look out of heaven, to see and learn what is going on below.\nSuch conceptions are in perfect keeping with the doctrine of the\natoning crucifixion of Gods, which could never have originated or been\nentertained for a moment by an astronomer, with a knowledge of the\nexistence of innumerable inhabited worlds. For as there is to the\nmonotheistic Christian but one God, or Son of God, to be offered, he\nmust be incarnated and crucified every day for a thousand years to make\na sin-offering for each of these worlds--a conception too monstrous and\npreposterous to find a lodgment in a rational mind.\n\n\nORIGIN OF THE BELIEF OF THE CRUCIFIXION OF GODS.\n\nIt has always been presumed that death, and especially death by\ncrucifixion, involved the highest state of suffering possible to be\nendured by mortals. Hence, the Gods must suffer in this way as an\nexample of courage and fortitude, and to show themselves willing\nto undergo all the affliction and misery incident to the lot, and\nunavoidable to the lives, of their devoted worshipers. They must not\nonly be equal, but superior to their subjects in this respect Hence,\nthey would not merely die, but choose, or at least uncomplainingly\nsubmit to the most ignoble and ignominious mode of suffering death\nthat could be devised, and that was crucifixion. This gave the highest\nfinishing touch to the drama.\n\nAnd thus the legend of the crucifixion became the crowning chapter, the\naggrandizing episode in the history of their lives. It was presumed that\nnothing less than a God could endure such excruciating tortures without\ncomplaining.\n\nHence, when the victim was reported to have submitted with such\nfortitude that no murmur was heard to issue from his lips, this\ncircumstance of itself was deemed sufficient evidence of his Godship.\nThe story of the crucifixion, therefore, whether true or false, deified\nor helped deify many great men and exalt them to the rank of Gods.\nThough some of the disciples of Budhism, and some of the primitive\nprofessors of Christianity also (including, according to Christian\nhistory, Peter and his brother Andrew), voluntarily chose this mode\nof dying in imitation of their crucified Lord, without experiencing,\nhowever, the desired promotion to divine honors. They failed of an\nexaltation to the deityship, and hence are not now worshiped as Gods.\n\nChristian reader, what can you now make of the story of the crucifixion\nof Jesus Christ but a borrowed legend--at least the story of his being\ncrucified _as a God!_\n\nNote.--The author desires it to be understood with respect to the cases\nof crucifixion here briefly narrated, that they are not vouched foras\nactual occurrences, of which there is much ground to doubt. It has\nneither been his aim or desire to prove them to be real historical\nevents, nor to establish any certain number of cases. Indeed, he deems\nit unimportant to know, if it could be determined, whether they are fact\nor fiction, or whether one God was crucified, or many. The moral lesson\ndesigned to be taught by this chapter is, simply, that the belief in\nthe crucifixion of Gods was prevalent in various oriental or heathen\ncountries long prior to the reported crucifixion of Christ. If\nthis point is established--which he feels certain no reader will\ndispute--then he is not concerned to know whether he has made out\nsixteen cases of crucifixion or not. Six will prove it as well as\nsixteen. In fact, one case is sufficient to establish the important\nproposition in view. The reader is, therefore, left to decide each case\nfor himself, according as he may value the evidence presented. More\nauthorities could have been adduced, and a more extended history\npresented of each God brought to notice. But this would have operated to\nexclude other matter, which the author considers of more importance.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVII. THE APHANASIA, OR DARKNESS AT THE CRUCIFIXION.\n\nMATTHEW tells us (xxvii. 31) that when Christ was crucified, there was\ndarkness all over the land for three hours, and \"the earth did quake,\nand the rocks were rent, and many of the saints came out of their\ngraves.\"\n\nHere we have a series of events spoken of so strange, so unusual and\nso extraordinary that, had they occurred, they must have attracted the\nattention of the whole world--especially the amazing scene of the sun's\nwithdrawing his light and ceasing to shine, and thereby causing an\nalmost total darkness near the middle of the day. And yet no writer\nof that age or country, or any other age or country, mentions the\ncircumstance but Matthew. A phenomenon so terrible and so serious in its\neffects as literally to unhinge the planets and partially disorganize\nthe universe must have excited the alarm and amazement of the whole\nworld, and caused a serious disturbance in the affairs of nations. And\nyet strange, superlatively strange, not one of the numerous historians\nof that age makes the slightest allusion to such an astounding event.\n\nEven Seneca and the elder Pliny, who so particularly and minutely\nchronicle the events of those times, are as silent as the grave relative\nto this greatest event in the history of the world. Nor do Mark, Luke\nor John, who all furnish us with a history of the crucifixion, make the\nslightest hint at any of these wonder-exciting events, except Mark's\nincidental allusion to the darkness.\n\nGibbon says, \"It happened during the life of Seneca and the elder\nPliny, who must have experienced its immediate effects, or received the\nearliest intelligence of the prodigy. Each of these philosophers, in a\nlabored work, has recorded all the phenomena of Nature's earthquakes,\nmeteors and eclipses, which his indefatigable curiosity could collect.\nBoth the one and the other have omitted to mention the greatest\nphenomenon, to which the mortal eye has been witness since the creation\nof the world.\" (Gibbon, p. 451.)\n\n2. With reference to the \"bodies\" of the dead saints coming out of their\ntombs (for it is declared their \"bodies arose,\" see Matt, xxvii. 52), many\nrather curious and puzzling questions might be started, which would at\nonce disclose its utter absurdity.\n\nWe might ask, for example\n\n1. Who were those \"many saints\" who came out of their graves, seeing\nthere were as yet but few Christians to occupy graves, if they had been\nall dead, as the enumeration at Antioch made out only one hundred and\ntwenty? (See Acts.) 2. How long had they lain in their graves?\n\n3. How long since their bodies had turned to dust, and been food for\nworms? 4. And would not those worms have to be hunted up and required to\ndisgorge the contents of their stomachs in order to furnish the saints\nwith the materials for their bodies again? 5. And were the shrouds or\ngrave clothes of those saints also resurrected? or did they travel about\nin a state of nudity? 6. For what purpose were they re-animated? 7. And\nshould not Matthew have furnished us, by way of proof, with the names\nof some of these ghostly visitors? 8. How long did they live the second\ntime? 9. Did they die again, or did they ascend to heaven with their\nnew-made bodies? 10. What business did they engage in? 11. Why have we\nnot some account of what they said and did? 12. And what finally became\nof them?\n\nUntil these questions are rationally answered, the story must be\nregarded as too incredible and too ludicrous to merit serious notice.\n\n3. Nearly all the phenomena represented as occurring at the crucifixion\nof Christ are reported to have been witnessed also at the final exit\nof Senerus, an ancient pagan demigod, who figured in history at a still\nmore remote period of time. And similar incidents are related likewise\nin the legendary histories of several other heathen demigods and great\nmen partially promoted to the honor of Gods. In the time-honored records\nof the oldest religion in the world, it is declared, \"A cloud surrounded\nthe moon; and the sun was darkened at noonday, and the sky rained fire\nand ashes during the crucifixion of the Indian God Chrishna.\" In the\ncase of Osiris of Egypt, Mr. Southwell says, \"As his birth had been\nattended by an eclipse of the sun, so his death was attended by a still\ngreater darkness of the solar orb.\" At the critical juncture of the\ncrucifixion of Prometheus, it is declared, \"The whole frame of nature\nbecame convulsed, the earth shook, the rocks were rent, the graves\nopened, and in a storm which threatened the dissolution of the universe,\nthe scene closed\" (Higgins). According to Livy, the last hours of the\nmortal demise of Romulus were marked by a storm and by a solar eclipse.\n\nAnd similar stories are furnished us by several writers of C\u00e6sar and\nAlexander the Great. With respect to the latter, Mr. Nimrod says, \"Six\nhours of darkness formed his aphanasia, and his soul, like Polycarp's,\nwas seen to fly away in the form of a dove.\" (Nimrod, vol. iii. p.\n458.) \"It is remarkable,\" says a writer, \"what a host of respectable\nauthorities vouch for an acknowledged fable--the preternatural darkness\nwhich followed C\u00e6sar's death.\" Gibbon alludes to this event when he\nspeaks of \"the singular defect of light which followed the murder of\nCaesar.\" He likewise says, \"This season of darkness had already been\ncelebrated by most of the poets and historians of that memorable age.\"\n(Gibbon, p. 452.) It is very remarkable that Pliny speaks of a darkness\nattending C\u00e6sar's death, but omits to mention such a scene as attending\nthe crucifixion of Christ. Virgil also seeks to exalt this royal\npersonage by relating this prodigy. (See his Georgius, p. 465.) Another\nwriter says, \"Similar prodigies were supposed or said to accompany the\ngreat men of former days.\"\n\nLet the reader make a note of this fact--that the same story was told\nof the graves opening, and the dead rising at the final mortal exit of\nseveral heathen Gods and several great men long before it was penned as\na chapter in the history of Christ.\n\nShakespeare, in his Hamlet says:--\n\n     \"In the most high and palmy days of Rome,\n     A little ere the mighty Julius fell--\n     The graves stood tenantless, and the sheeted dead\n     Did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets.\"\n\nThese historical citations strongly press the conclusion that this\nportion of the history of Christ was borrowed from old pagan legends.\n\n4. Many cases are recorded in history of the light of the sun being\nobscured at midday so as to result in almost total darkness, when it was\nknown not to be produced by an eclipse. And it is probable that these\nnatural events furnish the basis in part for those wild legends we have\nbrought to notice. Humboldt relates in his Cosmos, that, \"in the year\n358, before the earthquake of Numidia, the darkness was very dense for\ntwo or three hours.\" Another obscuration of the sun took place in the\nyear 360, which lasted five or six hours, and was so dense that the\nstars were visible at midday. Another circumstance of this kind was\nwitnessed on the nineteenth of May, 1730, which lasted eight hours. And\nso great was the darkness, that candles and lamps had to be lighted at\nmidday to dine by. Similar events are chronicled for the years 1094,\n1206, 1241, 1547, and 1730. And if any such solar obscurations occurred\nnear the mortal exit of any of the Gods above named, of course they\nwould be seized on as a part of their practical history wrought up into\nhyperbole, and interwoven in their narratives, to give eclat to the\npageantry of their biographies--a fact which helps to solve the mystery.\n\n\nORIGIN OF THE STORY OF THE APHANASIA AT THE CRUCIFIXION.\n\nThere is but little ground to doubt but that the various stories of a\nsimilar character then current in different countries, as shown above,\nfirst suggested the thought to Christ's biographers of investing\nhistory with the incredible events reported as being connected with the\ncrucifixion. The principal motive, however, seems to have grown out of a\ndesire to fulfill a prophecy of the Jewish prophet Joel, as we may find\nmany of the important miraculous events ingrafted into Christ's history\nwere recorded by way of fulfilling some prophecy. \"That the prophecy\nmight be fulfilled\" is the very language his evangelical biographers\nuse.\n\nJoel's prediction runs thus: \"And I will show wonders in the heavens,\nand in the earth, flood and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall\nbe turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great\nand terrible day of the Lord come.\" (Joel ii. 30.) A little impartial\ninvestigation will satisfy any unprejudiced mind that this poetic\nrhapsody has not the most remote allusion to the closing events in the\nlife of Christ, and was not intended to have.\n\nBut his biographers, writing a long time after his death, supposing and\nassuming that this and various other texts, which they quote from the\nprophets, had reference to him, and had been fulfilled, incorporated it\ninto his history as a part of his practical life. The conviction that\nthe prophecy _must have been fulfilled_, without knowing that it had,\nadded to similar stories of other Gods, with which Christ's history\nbecame confounded, misled them into the conclusion that they were\nwarranted in assuming that the incredible events they name were really\nwitnessed at the mortal termination of Christ's earthly career, when\nthey did not know it, and could not have known it.\n\nThis view of the case becomes very rational and very forcible when we\nobserve various texts quoted from the prophets by the gospel writers,\nor, rather, most butcheringly misquoted, tortured or distorted into\nMessianic prophecies, when the context shows they have no reference to\nChrist whatever.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVIII. DESCENT OF THE SAVIORS INTO HELL.\n\nTHE next most important event in the histories of the Saviors after\ntheir crucifixion, and the act of giving up the ghost, is that of their\ndescent into the infernal regions. That Jesus Christ descended into hell\nafter his crucifixion is not expressly taught in the Christian bible,\nbut it is a matter of such obvious inference from several passages of\nscripture, the early Christians taught it as a scriptural doctrine. Mr.\nSears, a Christian writer, tells us that \"on the doctrine of Christ's\nunderground mission the early Christians were united.... It was a point\ntoo well settled to admit of dispute.\" (See Foregleams of Immortality,\np. 262).\n\nAnd besides this testimony, the \"Apostles' Creed\" teaches the doctrine\nexplicitly, which was once as good authority throughout Christendom as\nthe bible itself; indeed, it may be considered as constituting a part\nof the bible prior to the council of Nice (A. D. 325), being supposed\nto have been written by the apostles themselves. It declares that \"Jesus\nChrist suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified (dead) and buried.\nHe descended into hell; the third day he rose again from the dead,\" etc.\nThis testimony is very explicit.\n\nAnd Peter is supposed to refer to the same event when he says, \"being\nput to death in the flesh, but quickened by the spirit, by which also\nhe went and preached unto the spirits in prison.\" (i Peter iii. 18.) The\nword prison, which occurs in this text, has undoubted reference to the\nChristian fabled hell. For no possible sense can be attached to the\nword prison in this connection without such a construction. Where have\nspirits ever been supposed to be imprisoned but in hell? And then we\nfind a text in the Acts of the Apostles, which seems to remove all\ndoubt in the case, and banishes at once all ground for dispute. It is\nexplicitly stated that \"his soul was not left in hell, neither did his\nflesh see corruption.\" (Adis ii. 31.) Why talk about his soul not\nbeing left in hell if it had never been there? Language could hardly be\nplainer. The most positive declaration that Christ did descend into hell\ncould not make it more certainly a scriptural Christian doctrine.\n\nWe, then, rest the case here, and proceed to enumerate other cases of\nGods and Saviors descending into Pandemonium (the realms of Pluto)\nlong before Jesus Christ walked on the water or on the earth. It is\nunquestionably stated in the Hindoo bible, written more than three\nthousand years ago, that the Savior Chrishna \"went down to hell to\npreach to the inmates of that dark and dreary prison, with the view of\nreforming them, and getting them back to heaven, and was willing himself\nto suffer to abridge the period of their torment.\" And certainly, in the\nmidst of the fire and smoke of brimstone, it could not have been hard\nto effect their conversion or repentance. One writer tells us that \"so\ngreat was his (Chrishna's) tenderness, that he even descended into\nhell to teach souls in bondage.\" Now observe how much \"teaching souls in\nbondage\" sounds like \"preaching to souls in prison,\" as Peter represents\nChrist as doing. And can any reader doubt that the meaning in the two\ncases is the same? And must we not confess that we are greatly indebted\nto the Hindoo bible for an explanation of the two occult and mysterious\ntexts which I have quoted from the Christian bible, and which have\npuzzled so many learned critics to explain, or find a meaning for?\n\nWe have another case of a God descending into hell in the person or\nspirit of the Savior Quexalcote of Mexico, (300 B. C.) The story will\nbe found in the Codex Borgianus, wherein is related the account of\nhis death, and burial after crucifixion, his descent into hell, and\nsubsequent resurrection. Of Adonis of Greece it is declared, that\n\"after his descent into hell, he rose again to life and immortality.\"\nPrometheus of Caucasus (600 B. C.) likewise is represented as \"suffering\nand descending into hell, rising again from the dead, and ascending\nto heaven.\" Horus of Greece is described as \"first reigning a thousand\nyears, then dying, and being buried for three days, at the end of which\ntime he triumphed over Typhon, the evil principle, and rose again to\nlife evermore.\" And Osiris of Egypt also is represented as making a\ndescent into hell, and after a period of three days rose again.\n\nHomer and Virgil speak of several cases of descent into Pluto's\ndominions. Hercules, Ulysses and \u00c6neas are represented as performing the\nhellward journey on, as we infer, benevolent missions. Higgins remarks,\n\"The Gods became incarnate, and descended into hell to teach humility\nand set an example of suffering.\"\n\nThe story of their descent into hell was doubtless invented to\nfind employment for them during their three days of hibernation or\nconservation in the tomb, that they might not appear to be really dead\nnor idle in the time, and as a still further proof of their matchless\nand unrivalled capacity and fortitude for suffering.\n\nAnd the story of the three days' entombment is likewise clearly\ntraceable in appearance to the astronomical incident of the sun's lying\napparently dead, and buried, and motionless for nearly three days at the\nperiod of the vernal epoch, from the twenty-first to the twenty-fifth\nof March. It was a matter of belief or fancy that the sun remained\nstationary for about three days, when he gradually rose again\n\"into newness of life.\" And hence, this period or era was chosen to\nfiguratively represent the three days' descent of the Gods into hell.\nWe are told that the Persians have an ancient astronomical figure\nrepresenting the descent of a God, divine, into hell, and returning at\nthe time that Orsus, the goddess of spring, had conquered the God or\ngenus of winter, after the manner St. John describes the Lamb of God\n(see Rev. xii) as conquering the dragon, which may be interpreted as\nthe Scorpion or Dragon of the first month of winter (October) being\nconquered by the Lamb of March or spring.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIX. RESURRECTION OF THE SAVIORS\n\nWE find presented in the canonized histories of several of the demigod\nSaviors the following remarkable coincidences appertaining to their\ndeath:--\n\n1. Their resurrection from the dead.\n\n2. Their lying in the tomb just three days.\n\n3. The resurrection of several of them about the time of the vernal\nequinox. The twenty-fifth of March is the period assigned by the\nChristian world generally for the resurrection of Christ, though some\nChristian writers have assigned other dates for this event. They all\nagree, however, that Christ rose from the dead, and that this occurred\nthree days after the entombment. Bishop Theophilus of Cesarea remarks,\nrelative to this event, \"Since the birth of Christ is celebrated on the\ntwenty-fifth of December,.... so also should the resurrection of Jesus\nbe celebrated on the twenty-fifth of March, on whatever day of the week\nit may fall, the Lord having risen again on that day.\" (Cent. ii. Call,\np. 118.) \"All the ancient Christians,\" says a writer, \"were persuaded\nthat Christ was crucified on the twenty-third of March, and rose\nfrom the dead on the twenty-fifth.\" And accordingly Constantine and\ncotemporary Christians celebrated the twenty-fifth of March with\ngreat eclat as the date of the resurrection. The twenty-third and\ntwenty-fifth, including the twenty-fourth, would comprise a period of\nthree days, the time of the entombment.\n\nNow mark, Quexalcote of Mexico, Chris of Chaldea, Quirinus of Rome,\nPrometheus of Caucasus, Osiris of Egypt, Atys of Phrygia, and \"Mithra\nthe Mediator\" of Persia did, according to their respective histories,\nrise from the dead after three days' burial, and the time of their\nresurrection is in several cases fixed for the twenty-fifth of March.\nAnd there is an account more than three thousand years old of the Hindoo\ncrucified Savior Chrishna, three days after his interment, forsaking\n\"the silent bourn, whence (as we are told) no traveler ever returns,\"\nand laying aside the moldy cerements of the dead, again walking forth\nto mortal life, to be again seen, recognized, admired, and adored by his\npious, devout and awe-stricken followers, and thus present to the gaze\nof a hoping yet doubting world \"the first fruits of the resurrection.\"\n\nAt the annual celebration of the resurrection of the Persian Savior\n\"Mithra the Mediator,\" more than three thousand years ago, the priests\nwere in the habit of exclaiming in a solemn and loud voice, \"Cheer up,\nholy mourners; your God has come again to life; his sorrows and his\nsufferings will save you.\" (See Pitrat, p. 105.) The twenty-fifth of\nMarch was with the ancient Persians the commencement of a new year,\nand on that day was celebrated \"the feast of the Neurone,\" and by the\nancient Romans \"the festival of the Hilaria.\" And we find the ancients\nhad both the crucifixion and resurrection of a God symbolically and\nastronomically represented among the plants. \"Their foundation,\" says\nClement of Alexandria, \"was the fictitious death and resurrection of\nthe sun, the soul of the world, the principle of life and motion.\"\nThe inauguration of spring (the twenty-fifth of March), and the summer\nsolstice (the twenty-fifth of June), were both important periods with\nthe ancients.\n\nHence, the latter period was fixed on as the birthday of John the\nBaptist (as marked in the almanacs), when the sun begins to decline\nsouthward--that is, decrease. How appropriately, therefore, John is made\nto say, \"I shall decrease, but he shall increase.\" And the consecrated\ntwenty-fifth of March is also the day marked in our calendars as the\ndate of the conception and annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary. And\nit was likewise the period of the conception of the ancient Roman Virgin\nAsteria, and of the ever-chaste and holy virgin Iris, as well as the\ntime of the conjugal embrace of the solar and lunar potentates of\nthe visible universe. May we not, then, very appropriately exclaim of\nreligion and astronomy, \"what God hath joined together, let no man put\nasunder.\"\n\nResurrection of Jesus Christ.\n\nWith respect to the physical resurrection of the Christian Savior, it\nmay be observed that, aside from the physical impossibility of such an\noccurrence, the account, as reported to us by his four \"inspired\" Gospel\nbiographers, are so palpably at variance with each other, so entirely\ncontradictory in their reports, as to render their testimony as\ninfallible writers utterly unworthy of credence, and impels us to\nthe conclusion that the event is both physically and historically\nincredible. There is scarcely one incident or particular in which they\nall agree. They are at loggerheads,--\n\n1. With respect to the time of its discovery.\n\n2. The persons who made the discovery (for no witness claims to have\nseen it).\n\n3. With respect to what took place at the sepulchre.\n\n4. What Peter saw and did there.\n\n5. And as to what occurred afterward, having a relation to that event.\n\n1. Relative to the time the witness or witnesses visited the sepulchre\nand learned of the resurrection, Matthew (chap. xxviii.) tells us, \"It\nwas at the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn;\" but according to\nMark (xvi.), the \"Sabbath was past, and the sun was rising;\" while\nJohn (chap. xx) declares \"it was yet dark.\" Now there is certainly some\ndifference between the three periods, \"the dawning of the day,\" \"the\nrising of the sun,\" and \"the darkness of night.\" If the writers were\n_divinely_ inspired, there would be a perfect agreement.\n\n2. With respect to the persons who first visited the sepulchre, Matthew\nstates that it was Mary Magdalene and another Mary; but Luke says it\nwas \"Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other\nwomen;\" while, according to John (and he virtually reiterates it),\nMary Magdalene went alone. It will be observed, then, that the first\n\"inspired\" and \"infallible\" witness testifies there were two women; the\nsecond that there were four; and the third witness declares there was\nbut one. What beautiful harmony! No court in the civilized world would\naccept such discordant testimony!\n\n3. And in relation to what took place at the tomb, Matthew testifies\nthat \"the angel of the Lord\" sat upon a stone at the door of the\nsepulchre, and told the women their Lord was risen. But Luke steps\nforward here, and avers that instead of an angel they found two men\nthere, not outside, but inside, and not sitting, but standing. But Mark\nsets the testimony of both these \"inspired\" witnesses aside by affirming\nthere was but one man there, and he was sitting. While Matthew says\n\"they,\" St. John says \"she\" (speaking of the person or persons who left\nthe sepulchre). According to Matthew the angel who rolled away the stone\nfrom the sepulchre sent a message to the disciples. But Mark affirms\nthat it was not an \"angel\" outside, but a \"young man\" inside, who did\nthis. And here the question naturally arises: Why was it necessary for\na being who could say, \"I have power to lay down my life and take it\nup again\" (John), to have an angel to roll away the stone from the\nsepulchre. Certainly, if he possessed such omnipotent power, he needed\nno aid from any being to perform such an act.\n\n4. And relative to Peter's visit to the tomb, there is a total disparity\nin the testimony of the witnesses. According to Luke, he did not go into\nthe sepulchre, but only stooped down and looked in. But Mark affirms he\ndid go in, and that it was the disciple who went with him who stooped\ndown.\n\n5. And with respect to the events which occurred immediately subsequent\nto the resurrection, there is no less discrepancy, no nearer agreement,\nin the testimony of the evangelical witnesses. Matthew says that when\nChrist's disciples first met him after the resurrection, they worshiped\nhim, and held him by the feet. (Matt, xxviii. 9) Strange, indeed, and\nwholly incredible, if John is a reliable witness, for he affirms he did\nnot allow even his best and dearest friend (Mary) to touch him. And then\nJohn combats this testimony of his by declaring he invited the skeptical\nThomas, not only to touch him, but to thrust his hand into his side for\ntangible proof of his identity.\n\n6. And why, let us ask here, was not the skeptical Thomas damned for\nhis doubting, when we, who live thousands of miles from the place,\nand nearly two thousand years from the time, are often told by the\npriesthood we must \"believe or be damned?\"\n\n7. And if Thomas was really convinced by this occurrence, or if it ever\ntook place, why have we no account of his subsequent life? What good was\neffected by his convincement if he never said or did anything afterward?\n\n8. John tells us Mary first saw Christ, after his resurrection, at the\ntomb, but Matthew says it was on her way home she first saw him.\n\n9. We are told by Luke (xxiv. 36) that when Christ appeared to his\ndisciples on a certain occasion, they were frightened, supposing it\nto be a spirit. But John (xx. 20) says they were glad. Which must we\nbelieve?\n\n10. According to Matthew, the disciples were all present on this\noccasion; but according to John, Thomas was not there.\n\n11. Here let it be noted that none of the narrators claim to have seen\nChrist rise from the tomb, nor to have got it from anybody who did see\nit The only proof in this case is their declaration, \"It came to pass.\"\n\n12. And we are prompted to ask here, how \"it came to pass\" that the\nchief priests and pharisees cherished sufficient faith in Christ's\nresurrection to set a watch for it, as Matthew reports, when his own\ndisciples were too faithless in such an event to be present, or to\nbelieve he had risen after the report reached their ears; for we are\ntold some doubted. (See Matt, xxiii.)\n\n13. And how came Matthew to know the soldiers were bribed to say\nChrist's body was stolen away by his disciples, when the disclosures of\nsuch a secret would have been death under the Roman government.\n\n14. And their confession of being asleep, as related by Matthew, would\nhave subjected them to the same fatal penalty by the civil rulers of\nRome.\n\n15. And if the soldiers were all asleep, can we not suggest several ways\nthe body may have disappeared without being restored to life?\n\n16. And here we would ask if Christ rose from the dead in order to\nconvince the world of his divine power, why did not the event take\nplace in public? Why was it seen only by a few credulous and interested\ndisciples?\n\n17. And if such an astonishing and miraculous event did occur, why does\nnot one of the numerous cotemporary writers of those times make any\nallusion to it? Neither Pliny, Tacitus, nor Josephus, who detail the\nevents very minutely, not only of those times, but of that very country,\nsays a word about such a wonder-exciting occurrence. This fact of itself\nentirely overthrows the credibility of the story.\n\n18. And the fact that several Christian sects, which flourished near\nthose times, as the Corinthians and Carpocratians, etc., rejected the\nstory in toto, furnishes another powerful argument for discrediting it.\n\n19. And then add to this fact that his own chosen followers were\nupbraided for their unbelief in the matter.\n\n20. And what was Christ doing during the forty days between his\nresurrection and ascension, that he should only be seen a few times,\nand but a few minutes at a time, and by but a few persons, and those\ninterested?\n\n21. And we would ask, likewise,--What more can be proved by Christ's\nphysical resurrection than that of the resurrection of Lazarus, the\nwidow's son, and several cases related in the Old Testament, or the\nnumerous cases reported in oriental history?\n\n22. And what analogy is there in the resurrection of the dead body of a\nperfect and self-existent God and that of vile man?\n\n23. And why should Christ be called \"the first fruits of the\nresurrection,\" when so many cases are reported as occurring before his?\n\n24. And why do Christians build their hopes of immortality almost\nentirely upon Christ's alleged resurrection, in view of the numerous\nfacts we have cited showing it to be a mere sandy foundation?\n\n25. Of course no person who believes in modern spiritualism will\ndiscredit the story of Christ being visually recognized after his death\n_as a spirit_--for they have ocular proof that many such cases have\noccurred within the last decade of years. But it is the story of his\nphysical resurrection we are combating--the reanimation of his flesh\nand bones after having been subjected three days to the laws of\ndecomposition. Neither science nor sense can indorse such a story.\n\n26. It was a very easy matter, and very natural to mistake Christ's\nspiritual body for his physical body; for such mistakes have been made a\nthousand times in the world's history.\n\n27. Is it not strange, in view of the countless defects in the story of\nChrist's physical resurrection as enumerated above, that the orthodox\nChristian world should rely upon it as the great sheet anchor of their\nfaith, and as their chief and almost their only hope of immortal life?\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XX. REAPPEARANCE AND ASCENSION OF THE SAVIORS.\n\nMANY cases are related by their respective sacred narratives of the\nancient Saviors, and other beings possessing the form of man, and\npreviously recognized as men, reappearing to their disciples and\nfriends, after having been consigned to the tomb for three days, or a\nlonger or shorter period of time, and of their final ascension to the\nhouse of many mansions.\n\nIt is related of the Indian or Hindoo Savior Chrishna, that after having\nrisen from the dead, he appeared again to his disciples. \"He ascended\nto Voiacantha (heaven), to Brahma,\" the first person of the trinity (he\nhimself being the second), and that as he ascended, \"all men saw him,\nand exclaimed, 'Lo! Chrishna's soul ascends to his native skies.'\"\nAnd it is further related that, \"attended by celestial spirits,.... he\npursued by his own light the journey between earth and heaven, to the\nbright paradise whence he had descended.\"\n\nOf the ninth incarnation of India, the Savior Sakia, it is declared,\nthat he \"ascended to the celestial regions\", and his pious and devout\ndisciples point the skeptic to indelible impressions and ineffaceable\nfootprints on the rocks of a high mountain as an imperishable proof of\nthe declaration that he took his last leave of earth and made his ascent\nfrom that point.\n\nIt is related of the crucified Prometheus, likewise, that after having\ngiven up the ghost on the cross, \"descended to hell\", Christ's soul was\n\"not left in hell,\" see Acts ii. 31), \"he rose again from the dead, and ascended into heaven.\"\n\nAnd then it is declared of the Egyptian Savior Alcides, that \"after\nhaving been seen a number of times, he ascended to a higher life,\" going\nup, like Elijah, in \"a chariot of fire.\"\n\nThe story of the crucifixion of Quexalcote of Mexico, followed by his\nburial, resurrection and ascension, is distinctly related in the \"holy\"\nand inspired \"gospels\" of that country, which Lord Kingsborough admitted\nto be more than two thousand years old.\n\nOf Laotsi of China, it is said that when \"he had completed his mission\nof benevolence, he ascended bodily alive into the paradise above.\"\n(Prog, of Rel. Ideas, vol. 214.) And it is related of Fo of the same\ncountry, that having completed his glorious mission on earth, he\n\"ascended back to paradise, where he had previously existed from all\neternity.\"\n\nIt is related also in the ancient legends, that the Savior or God\nXamalxis of Thrace, having died, and descended beneath the earth, and\nremained there three years, made his appearance again in the fourth year\nafter his death, as he had previously foretold, and eventually ascended\nto heaven about 600 B. C. Even some of the Hindoo saints are reported\nin their \"holy\" and time-honored books to have been seen ascending to\nheaven. \"And impressions on the rocks are shown,\" says an author, \"said\nto be of footprints they had left when they ascended.\"\n\nIt is related both by the Grecian biographer Plutarch, in his life\nof Romulus, and by a Roman historian, that the great founder of Rome\n(Romulus) suddenly ascended in a tempest during a solar eclipse, about\n713 B. C. And Julius Proculis, a Roman senator of great fame and high\nreputation, declared, under solemn oath, that he saw him, and talked\nwith him after his death.\n\n\nASTRONOMICAL VERSION OF THE STORY.\n\nBefore dismissing this chapter, we may state that, in common with most\nother religious conceptions, the doctrine of the ascension has in the\nancient legends an astronomical representation.\n\nHaving said that a planet was buried because it sunk below the horizon,\nwhen it returned to light and gained its state of eminence, they spoke\nof it as dead, risen again, and ascended into heaven. (Volney, p. 143.)\nWhat is the story of the ascension of Christ worth in view of these\nancient pagan traditions of earlier origin?\n\n\nASCENSION OF THE CHRISTIAN SAVIOR.\n\n1. The different scriptural accounts of the ascension of Christ are,\nlike the different stories of the resurrection, quite contradictory,\nand, hence, entitled to as little credit. In Luke (xxiv.), he is\nrepresented as ascending on the evening of the third day after the\ncrucifixion. But the writer of Acts (i. 3) says he did not ascend\ntill forty days after his resurrection; while, according to his own\ndeclaration to the thief on the cross, \"This day shalt thou be with me\nin paradise,\" he must have ascended on the same day of his crucifixion.\nWhich statement must we accept as inspired, or what is proved by such\ncontradictory testimony?\n\n2. Which must we believe, Paul's declaration that he was seen by above\n_five hundred of the brethren_ at once (1 Cor. xv. 6), or the statement\nof the author of the Acts (i. 15), that there were _but one hundred and\ntwenty brethren in all after that period?_\n\n3. How would his ascension do anything toward proving his divinity,\nunless it also proves the divinity of Enoch and Elijah, who are reported\nto have ascended long prior to that era?\n\n4. As these stories of the ascension of Christ, according to Lardner,\nwere written many years after his crucifixion. Is it not hence probable\nthey grew out of similar stories relative to the heathen Gods long\npreviously prevalent in oriental countries?\n\n5. As these gospel writers could not have been present to witness the\nascension, as it must have occurred before their time of active life,\ndoes not this fact of itself seriously damage the credibility of the\naccounts, and more especially as neither Mark nor Luke, who are the only\nreporters of the occurrence, were not disciples of Christ at the time,\nwhile Matthew and John, who were, say nothing about it?--another fact\nwhich casts a shade on the credibility of the story.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXI. THE ATONEMENT--ITS ORIENTAL OR HEATHEN ORIGIN.\n\nTHERE were various practices in vogue amongst the orientalists, which\noriginated with the design of appeasing the anger, and propitiating\nthe favor of a presumed to be irascible deity. Most of these practices\nconsisted in some kind of sacrifice or destructive offering called the\n\"atonement.\" But here let it be observed, that the doctrine of atonement\nfor sin, by sacrifice, was unfolded by degrees, and that the crucifixion\nof a God was not the first practical exhibition of it. On the contrary,\nit appears to have commenced with the most valueless or cheapest species\nof property then known. And from this starting-point ascended gradually,\nso as finally to embody the most costly commodities; and did not stop\nhere, but reached forward till it laid its murderous hands on human\nbeings, and immolated them upon its bloody altars. And finally, to cap\nthe climax, it assumed the effrontery to drag a God off the throne\nof heaven, to stanch its blood-thirsty spirit, as evinced by Paul's\ndeclaration, \"Without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of\nsin.\" Rather a bloody doctrine, and one which our humanity rejects with\ninstinctive horror.\n\nWe will trace the doctrine of the atonement briefly through its\nsuccessive stages of growth and development.\n\nThe idea seems to have started very early in the practical history of\nthe human race, that the sacrifice and consequent deprivation of earthly\ngoods, or some terrestial enjoyment, would have the effect to mitigate\nthe anger, propitiate the favor, and obtain the mercy of an imaginary\nand vengeful God. This idea obviously was suggested by observing that\ntheir earthly rulers always smiled, and became less rigorous in their\nlaws, and milder in their treatment of their subjects, when they made\nthem presents of some valuable or desirable commodity. They soon learned\nthat such offerings had the effect to check their cruel and bloody mode\nof governing the people; so that when their houses were shaken down,\nor swallowed up by earthquakes, the trees riven by lightning, and\nprostrated by storms, and their cattle swept away by floods, supposing\nit to be the work of an angry God, the thought arose in their minds at\nonce, that perhaps his wrath could be abated by the same expedient as\nthat which had served in the case of their mundane lords--that of making\npresents of property. But as this property could not be carried up to\nthe celestial throne, the expedient was adopted of burning it, so that\nthe substance or quintessence of it would be conveyed up to the heavenly\nPotentate in the shape of steam and smoke, which would make for him, as\nthe Jews express it, \"a sweet-smelling savor.\" Abundant and conspicuous\nis the evidence in history to show that the custom of burnt-offerings\nand atonements for sin originated in this way.\n\nThe first species of property made use of for burnt-offerings appears to\nhave been the fruits of the earth--vegetables, fruits, roots, etc.,--the\nlowest kind of property in point of value. But the thought soon\nnaturally sprang up in the mind of the devotee, that a more valuable\noffering would sooner and more effectually secure the divine favor.\nHence, levies were made on living herds of cattle, sheep, goats and\nother domestic animals. This was the second step in the ascending scale\ntoward Gods.\n\nAnd here we find the key to open and solve the mystery of Jehovah's\npreferring Abel's offering to Cain's. While the latter consisted in mere\ninanimate substances, the former embraced the firstlings of the flock--a\nhigher and more valuable species of property, and quite sufficient\nto induce the selfish Jehovah to prefer Abel's offering to Cain's, or\nrather for the selfish Jews to cherish this conception. In all nations\nwhere offerings were made, the conclusion became established in the\nminds of the people that the amount of God's favor procured in this way\nmust be proportionate to the value of the commodity or victim offered\nup--a conviction which ultimately led to the seizure of human beings for\nthe atoning offerings, which brings us to the third stage of growth in\nthe atonement doctrine. Children frequently constituted the victims in\nthis case. The sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter, as related in Judges\nxi. 30, and other cases cited by bible writers, (Isaiah xxxii. 25), and\nmodern Christian authors, prove that this practice was in vogue among\n\"God's holy people.\"\n\nOne step more (constituting the _fourth_ stage of development) brings us\nto the sacrifice of Gods. The climax is now reached; the conception can\ngo no higher. The ancient Birmese taught that while common property in\nburnt-offerings would procure the temporary favor of the ruling God, the\nsacrifice of human beings would secure his good pleasure for a thousand\nyears, and cancel out all the sins committed in that period. And when\none of the three Gods on the throne of heaven was dragged down, or\n_voluntarily came down_ (as some of the sects taught), and was put to\ndeath on the cross as an atonement for sin, such was the value of the\nvictim, such the magnitude of the offering, that it \"atoned for _all_\nsin, past, present and future, for all the human race.\"\n\nThe Hindoos, cherishing this conception, taught that the crucifixion of\ntheir sin-atoning Savior Chrishna (1200 B. C.) put an end to both animal\nand human sacrifices, and accordingly such offerings ceased in most\nHindoo countries centuries ago. Thus far back in the mire and midnight\nof human ignorance, and amid the clouds of mental darkness, while man\ndwelt upon the animal plane, and was governed by his brutal feelings,\nand \"blood for blood\" was the requisition for human offenses, originated\nthe bloody, savage and revolting doctrine of the atonement.\n\nAnother mode of adjudicating the sins of the people in vogue in some\ncountries anterior to the custom of shedding blood as an expiation, was\nthat of packing them on the back, head, or horns of some animal by\na formal hocus-pocus process, and then driving the animal into a\nwilderness, or some other place so remote that the brute could not find\nits way back amongst the people with its cargo of sins. The cloth or\nfabric used for inclosing the sins and iniquities of the people was\nusually of a red or scarlet color--of the semblance of blood. In fact,\nit was generally dipped in blood. This, being lashed to the animal,\nwould of course be exposed to the weather and the drenching rains, would\nconsequently, in the course of time, fade and become white. Hence, we\nhave the key to Isaiah's declaration, \"Though your sins be (red) as\nscarlet, they shall become (white) as wool.\" (See Isaiah, i. 18.) And\nthus the meaning of this obscure text is clearly explained by tracing\nits origin to its oriental source.\n\nAnd there are many other texts in the Christian bible which might be\nelucidated in a similar manner by using oriental tradition, or oriental\nsacred books, as a key to unlock and explain their meaning. We have\nstated above that some animal was made use of by different nations to\nconvey the imaginary load of the people's sins out of the country.\nFor this purpose the Jews had their \"scapegoat,\" the Egyptians their\n\"scape-ox,\" the Hindoos their \"scape-horse,\" the Chaldeans their\n\"scape-ram,\" the Britons their \"scape-bull,\" the Mexicans their\n\"scape-lamb\" and \"scape-mouse,\" the Tamalese their \"scape-hen,\" and\nthe Christians at a later period their _scape-God_. Jesus Christ may\nproperly be termed the scape-God of orthodox Christians, as he stands in\nthe same relation to his disciples, who believe in the atonement, as the\ngoat did to the Jews, and performs the same end and office. The goat and\nthe other sin-offering animals took away the sin of the nation in each\ncase respectively. In like manner Jesus Christ takes away the sin of\nthe world, being called \"the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the\nworld.\" (John i. 29.) And more than two thousand years ago the Mexicans\nsacrificed a lamb as an atonement, which they called \"the Lamb\nof God\"--the same title scripturally applied to Jesus Christ. The\nconception in each case is, then, the same--that of the atonement for\nsin by the sacrifice of an innocent victim.\n\nThe above citations show that the present custom of orthodox\nChristendom, in packing their sins upon the back of a God, is just\nthe same substantially as that of various heathen nations, who were\nanciently in the habit of packing them upon the backs of various dumb\nanimals. If some of our Christian brethren should protest against our\nspeaking of the church's idea of atonement as that of packing their sins\nupon the back of a God, we will here prove the appropriateness of the\nterm upon the authority of the bible. Peter expressly declares Christ\nbore our sins upon his own body on a tree (see 1 Peter ii. 24), just\nas the Jews declared the _goat bore their_ sins on his body, and the\nancient Brahmins taught that the bulls and the heifers bore theirs away,\netc., which shows that the whole conception is of purely heathen\norigin. And hereafter, when they laugh at the Jewish superstition of\na scape-goat, let them bear in mind that more sensible and intelligent\npeople may laugh in turn at their superstitious doctrine of a scape-God.\n\nThese superstitious customs were simply expedients of different nations\nto evade the punishment of their sins--an attempt to shift their\nretributive consequences on to other beings. The divine atonement more\nespecially possessed this character. This system teaches that the son\nof God and Savior of the world was sent down and incarnated, in order to\ndie for the people, and thus suffer by proxy the punishment meted out\nby divine wrath for the sins of the whole world. The blood of a God must\natone for the sins of the whole human family, as rams, goats, bullocks\nand other animals had atoned for the sins of families and nations under\nolder systems. Thus taught Brahminism, Budhism, Persianism, and other\nreligious systems, before the dawn of Christianity. The nucleus of the\natoning system is founded in the doctrine, \"Without the shedding of\nblood there is no remission for sin\" (Rom. v. 9)--a monstrous and\nmorally revolting doctrine--a doctrine which teaches us that _somebodys_\nblood must be shed, somebody's veins and arteries depleted, for every\ntrivial offense committed against the moral law. Somebody must pay the\npenalty in blood, somebody must be slaughtered for every little foible\nor peccadillo or moral blunder into which erring man may chance to\nstumble while upon the pilgrimage of life, while journeying through the\nwilderness of time, even if a God has to be dragged from his throne in\nheaven, and murdered to accomplish it. Nothing less will mitigate the\ndivine wrath.\n\nWhose soul--possessing the slightest moral sensibility--does not\ninwardly and instinctively revolt at such a doctrine? We would not teach\nit to the world, for it is founded in butchery and bloodshed, and is\nan old pagan superstition, which originated far back in the midnight of\nmental darkness and heathen ignorance, when the whole human race were\nunder the lawless sway of their brutal propensities, and when the\nennobling attributes of love, mercy and forgiveness had as yet found\nno place, no abiding home, in the human bosom. The bloody soul of the\nsavage first gave it birth. We hold the doctrine to be a a high-handed\ninsult to the All-loving Father, who, we are told, is \"long-suffering in\nmercy,\" and \"plentiful in forgiveness,\" to charge _Him_ with sanctioning\nsuch a doctrine, much less with originating it.\n\nThere is no \"mercy or forgiveness\" in putting an innocent being to death\nfor any pretext whatever. And for the Father to consent to the brutal\nassassination of His own innocent Son upon the cross to gratify an\nimplacable revenge toward his own children, the workmanship of his own\nhands, rather than forgive a moral weakness implanted in their natures\nby a voluntary act of his own, and for which consequently he alone ought\nto be responsible, would be nothing short of murder in the first degree.\n\nWe cherish no such conception. We cannot for a moment harbor a\nblasphemous doctrine, which represents the Universal Father as being a\nbloody-minded and murderous being, instead of a being of infinite love,\ninfinite wisdom, and infinite in all the moral virtues. Such a character\nwould be a deep-dyed stigma upon any human being. And no person actuated\nby a strict sense of justice would accept salvation upon any such terms\nas that prescribed by the Christian atonement.\n\nIt is manifestly too unjust, too devoid of moral principle, besides\nbeing a flagrant violation of the first principles of civil and criminal\njurisprudence. It is a double wrong to punish the innocent for the\nguilty. It is the infliction of injustice on the one hand, and the\nomission of justice on the other. It inflicts the highest penalty of\nthe law upon an innocent being, whom that law ought to shield from\npunishment, while it exculpates and liberates the guilty party, whose\npunishment the moral law demands. It robs society of a useful man on\nthe one hand, and turns a moral pest upon community on the other,\nthus committing a twofold wrong, or act of injustice. No court in any\ncivilized country would be allowed to act upon such a principle; and\nthe judge who should indorse it, or favor a law, or principle, which\npunishes the innocent for the guilty, would be ruled off the bench at\nonce.\n\nHere, however, we are sometimes met with the plea, that the offering\nof Jesus Christ was a voluntary act, that it was made with his own\nfree will. But the plea don't do away with either the injustice or\ncriminality of the act.\n\nNo innocent person has a right to suffer for the guilty, and the\ncourts have no right to accept the offer or admit the substitute. An\nillustration will show this. If Jefferson Davis had been convicted of\nthe crime of treason, and sentenced to be hung, and Abraham Lincoln had\ncome forward and offered to be stretched upon the gallows in his place,\nis there a court in the civilized world which would have accepted the\nsubstitute, and hung Lincoln, and liberated Davis? To ask the question\nis but to answer it. It is an insult to reason, law and justice to\nentertain the proposition.\n\nThe doctrine of the atonement also involves the infinite absurdity of\nGod punishing himself to appease his own wrath. For if \"the fullness of\nthe Godhead dwelt in Christ bodily\" (as taught in Col. ii. 9), then\nhis death was the death of God--that is, a divine suicide, prompted and\ncommitted by a feeling of anger and revenge, which terminated the life\nof the Infinite Ruler--a doctrine utterly devoid of reason, science\nor sense. We are sometimes told man owes a debt to his Maker, and the\natonement pays that debt. To be sure! And to whom is the debt owing, and\nwho pays it? Why, the debt is owing to God, and God (in the person of\nJesus Christ) pays it--pays it to himself. We will illustrate. A man\napproaches his neighbor, and says, \"Sir, I owe you a thousand dollars,\nbut can never pay it.\" \"Very well, it makes no difference,\" replies the\nclaimant, \"I will pay it myself;\" and forthwith thrusts his hand into\nhis right pocket and extracts the money, transfers it to the left pocket\nand exclaims--\"There, the debt is paid!\" A curious way of paying debts,\nand one utterly devoid of sense. And yet the orthodox world have adopted\nit for their God. We find, however, that they carefully avoid practicing\nthis principle themselves in their dealings with each other. When they\nhave a claim against a neighbor, we do not find them ever thrusting\ntheir hands into their own pockets to pay it off, but sue him, and\ncompel him to pay--if he refuses to do it without compulsion--thus\nproving they do not consider it a correct principle of trade.\n\nBut we find, upon further investigation, that the assumed debt is not\npaid--after all.\n\nWhen a debt is paid, it is canceled, and dismissed from memory, and\nnothing more said about it. But in this case the sinner is told he\nmust still suffer the penalty for every sin he commits, notwithstanding\nChrist died to atone for and cancel that sin.\n\nWhere, then, is the virtue of the atonement? Like other doctrines of\nthe orthodox creed, it is at war with reason and common sense, and every\nprinciple of sound morality, and will be marked by coming ages as a\nrelic of barbarism.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXII. THE HOLY GHOST OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN\n\nOF all the weird, fanciful, and fabulous stories appertaining to the\nGods and other spiritual entities of the olden times, whose capricious\nadventures we find so profusely narrated in oriental mythology--of\nall the strange, mythical and mystical feats, and ever-varying and\never-diverging changes in the shape, appearance, sex, and modes of\nmanifestation which characterize the hobgoblins or ghostly beings which\ncomprise the esoteric stock of the ancient mysteries, that appertaining\nto the third member of \"the hypostatic union,\" the Holy Ghost, seems to\nstand pre-eminent. And I propose here to submit the facts to show that\nthe Holy Ghost story of the Christian Gospels, like the more ancient\npagan versions of the same story, is marked by the same wild, discordant\nand legendary characteristics which abound in all the accounts of gods\nand ghosts found recorded in the religious books of various nations.\n\nThe following brief exposition of the history and exploits of this\nanomalous, nondescript, chameleon-like being will clearly evince that\nthe same fanciful, metaphorical and fabulous changes in the size, shape,\nsex and appearance of this third limb of the triune God are found in the\nChristian Scriptures which are disclosed in the more ancient oriental\ntraditions.\n\nWe will first exhibit a classification of the names and characteristics\nof this imaginary being drawn from the gospels and epistles of the\nChristian bible, by which it will be observed that scarcely any two\nreferences to it agree in assigning it the same character or attributes.\n\n1. In John xiv. 26, the Holy Ghost is spoken of as a person or personal\nGod.\n\n2. In Luke iii. 22, the Holy Ghost changes, and assumes the form of a\ndove.\n\n3. In Matt. xiii. 16, the Holy Ghost becomes a spirit\n\n4. In John i. 32, the Holy Ghost is presented as an inanimate, senseless\nobject.\n\n5. In John v. 7, the Holy Ghost becomes a God--the third member of the\nTrinity.'\n\n6. In Acts ii. 1, the Holy Ghost is averred to be \"a mighty, rushing\nwind.\"\n\n7. In Acts x. 38, the Holy Ghost, we infer, from its mode of\napplication, is an ointment.\n\n8. In John xx. 22, the Holy Ghost is the breath, as we legitimately\ninfer by its being breathed into the mouth of the recipient after the\nancient oriental custom.\n\n9. In Adis ii. 3, we learn the Holy Ghost \"sat upon each of them,\"\nprobably in the form of a bird, as at Jesus' baptism.\n\n10. In Adis ii. 1, the Holy Ghost appears as \"cloven tongues of fire.\"\n\n11. In Luke ii. 26, the Holy Ghost is the author of a revelation or\ninspiration.\n\n12. In Adis viii. 17, the Holy Ghost is a magnetic aura imparted by the\n\"laying on of hands.\"\n\n13. In Mark i. 8, the Holy Ghost is a medium or element for baptism.\n\n14. In Adis xxviii. 25, the Holy Ghost appears with vocal organs, and\nspeaks.\n\n15. In Heb. vi. 4, the Holy Ghost is dealt out or imparted by measure.\n\n16. In Luke iii. 22, the Holy Ghost appears with a tangible body.\n\n17. In Luke i. 5, and many other texts, we are taught people are filled\nwith the Holy Ghost.\n\n18. In Matt. xi. 15, the Holy Ghost falls upon the people as a\nponderable substance.\n\n19. In Luke iv. 1, the Holy Ghost is a God within a God--\"Jesus being\nfull of the Holy Ghost.\"\n\n20. In Acts xxi. 11, the Holy Ghost is a being of the masculine or\nfeminine gender--\"Thus saith the Holy Ghost,\" etc.\n\n21. In John i. 32, the Holy Ghost is of the neuter gender--\"It (the\nHoly Ghost) abode upon him.\"\n\n22. In Matt. i. 18, the Holy Ghost becomes a vicarious agent in the\nprocreation of another God; that is, this third member of the Trinity\naids the first member (the Father) in the creation or generation of the\nsecond member of the triad of bachelor Gods--the Word, or Savior, or Son\nof God.\n\nSuch are the ever-shifting scenes presented in the Scripture panorama\nof the Holy Ghost. Surpassing the fabulous changes of some of the more\nancient demigods, the Christian Holy Ghost undergoes (as is shown by\nthe above-quoted texts) a perpetual metathesis or metamorphosis--being\nvariously presented on different occasions as a personal and rational\nbeing, a dove, a spirit, an inanimate object, a God, the wind or a wind,\nan ointment, the breath or a breath, cloven tongue of fire, a bird, or\nsome other flying recumbent animal, a revelator or divine messenger,\na medium or element for baptism, an intelligent, speaking being, a\nlifeless, bodiless, sexless being, a measurable fluid substance, a being\npossessing a body, ponderable, unconscious substance, a God dwelling\nwithin a God, and, finally--though really first in order--the author\nor agent of the incarnation of the second God in the Trinity (Jesus\nChrist).\n\nThat many of these fabulous conceptions were drawn from mythological\nsources will be made manifest by the following facts of history:--\n\n1. _The Holy Ghost in the shape of a bird, a dove or a pigeon._ This is\nproven to be a very ancient pagan tradition, as it is found incorporated\nin several of the oriental religious systems. In ancient India, whose\nprolific spiritual fancies constitute the primary parentage of nearly\nall the doctrines, dogmas and superstitions found incorporated in\nthe Christian Scriptures, a dove was uniformly the emblem of the Holy\nSpirit, or Spirit of God. Confirmatory of this statement, we find the\ndeclaration in the Anacalypsis, that a \"dove stood for or represented\na third member of the Trinity, and was the regenerator or regeneratory\npower.\" This meets the Christian idea of \"regeneration and renewing\nof the Holy Ghost.\" (Titus iii. 5.) A person being baptized under the\nBrahminical theocracy was said to be \"regenerated and born again,\" or, as\nthe above-quoted writer expresses it, \"They were born into the spirit,\nor the spirit into them\"--that is, the \"dove into or upon them,\" (As vide\nthe case of the Christian's \"Holy Ghost descending in bodily shape like\na dove,\" and alighting on Christ's head at baptism, as related in Luke\niii. 22.) In ancient Rome a dove or pigeon was the emblem of the female\nprocreative energy, and frequently a legendary spirit, the accompaniment\nof Venus. And hence, as a writer remarks, \"It is very appropriately\nrepresented as descending at baptism in the character of the third\nmember of the Trinity.\" The same writer tells us, \"The dove fills the\nGrecian oracles with their spirit and power.\" We find the dove, also,\nin the romantic eclogues of ancient Syria. In the time-chiseled Syrian\ntemple of Hierapolis, Semiramis is represented with a dove on her head,\nthus constituting the prototype of the dove on the head of the Christian\nMessiah at baptism. And a dove was in more than one of the ancient\nreligious systems--\"The Spirit of God (Holy Ghost) moving on the face of\nthe waters\" at creation, as implied in Gen. i. 2, though a pigeon, was\noften indiscriminately substituted. In Howe's \"Ancient Mysteries\" it is\nrelated that \"in St. Paul's Cathedral, at the feast of Whitsuntide, the\ndescent of the Holy Ghost was performed by a white pigeon being let fly\nout of a hole in the midst of the roof of the great aisle.\" The dove\nand the pigeon, being but slight variations of the same species of the\nfeathered tribe, were used indiscriminately.\n\n2. As evinced above, the Holy Ghost was the third member of the Trinity\nin several of the oriental systems. Father, Son and Holy Ghost, or\nFather, Word and Holy Ghost (1 John v. 7), are familiar Christian\nterms to express the divine triad, which shows the Holy Ghost to be\nthe acknowledged third member of the Christian Trinity. And, as already\nsuggested, the same is true of the more ancient systems. \"The Holy\nSpirit and the Evil Spirit were, each in their turn (says Mr. Higgins),\nthird member of the Trinity.\" We might, if space would allow, draw\nlargely upon the ancient defunct systems in proof of this statement. \"In\nthese triads (says Mr. Hillell) the third member, as might be supposed,\nwas not of equal rank with the other two.\" And hence, in the Theban\nTrinity, Khonso was inferior to Arion and Mant. In the Hindoo triad,\nSiva was subordinate to Brahma and Vishnu. And a score of similar\nexamples might be adduced from the fancy-constructed trinities of other\nand older oriental religious systems (but for the inflexible rule of\nbrevity which forbids their presentation here), with all of which the\nmore modern Holy Ghost conception of the Christian world is an exact\ncorrespondence, as this imaginary, fabulous being is less conspicuous\nthan and has always stood third in rank with the Father and second\nto the Son, alias the Word, and is now seldom addressed in practical\nChristian devotion; and thus the analogy is complete. Mr. Maurice\nsays, \"This notion of a third person in the Deity (the Holy Ghost) was\ndiffused among all the nations of the earth.\" (See Ind. Antiq. vol. iv.\np. 75a) And Mr. Worseley, in his \"Voyage\" (vol. i. p. 259), avers this\ndoctrine to be \"of very great antiquity, and generally received by all\nthe Gothic and Celtic nations.\"\n\n3. The Holy Ghost was the Holy Breath which, in the Hindoo traditions,\nmoved on the face of the waters at creation, and imparted life and\nvitality into everything created. A similar conception is recognized in\nthe Christian Scriptures. In Psalms xxxiii. 6, we read, \"By the Word of\nthe Lord were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath\nof his mouth.\" Here is the Brahminical conception, square out, of the\nact of creation by the Divine Breath, which is the Holy Ghost, the same,\nalso, which was breathed into Adam, by which he became \"a living soul.\"\nM. Dubois observes, \"The Prana, or principle of life, of the Hindoos is\nthe breath of life by which the Creator (Brahma) animates the clay, and\nman became a living soul.\" (Page 293.)\n\n4. Holy Ghost, Holy Breath and Holy Wind appear to have been synonymous\nand convertible terms for the living vocal emanations from the mouth of\nthe Supreme God, as memorialized in several of the pagan traditions.\nThe last term (Holy Wind) is suggested by \"the mighty rushing wind from\nheaven\" which filled the house, or church, on the day of Pentecost. (See\nActs ii. 2.) Several of the old religious systems recognize \"the\nHoly Wind\" as a term for the Holy Ghost. The doxology (reported by a\nmissionary) in the religious service of the Syrian worship runs thus:--\n\n     \"Praise to the Holy Spiritual Wind, which is the Holy Ghost;\n     Praise to the three persons which are one true God.\"\n\nSome writers maintain that the Hebrew _Ruk Aliem._ translated \"Spirit of\nGod\" (Gen. i. 2) in our version, should read, \"Wind of the Gods.\" And\nwe find that the word _pneuma_ of our Greek New Testament, is sometimes\ntranslated \"Ghost\" and sometimes \"Wind,\" as best suited the fancy of the\ntranslators. In John iii. 5, we find the word Spirit, and in verse eight\nboth Wind and Spirit are found; and in Luke i. 35, we observe the term\nHoly Ghost--all translated from the same word. Let it be specially\nnoted that in the Greek Testament the word _pneuma_ is used in all these\ncases, thus proving that Spirit, Holy Ghost and Wind are used in the\nChristian Scriptures as synonymous terms; and proving, also, that an\nunwarranted license has been assumed by translators in rendering the\nsame word three different ways. M. Auvaroff, in his \"Essays on the\nEleusinian Mysteries,\" speaks of \"the torch being ignited at the command\nof Hermes of Egypt, the spiritual agent in the workshop of creation,\"\nrelative to which statement a writer remarks, \"Hermes appears in\nthis instance as a personification of Wind or Spirit, as in the\nbible (meaning the Christian bible), God, Wind and Spirit are often\ninterchangeable terms, and the Word appears to be from the same windy\nsource.\"\n\n5. _The Holy Ghost as \"a tongue of fire, which sat upon each of\nthem\" (the apostles)_. (See Acts. ii. 3.) Even this conception is an\norientalism. Mr. Higgins tells us that \"Budha, an incarnate God of the\nHindoos (three thousand years ago), is often seen with a glory or tongue\nof fire upon his head.\" And the tradition of the visible manifestation\nof the Holy Ghost by fire was prevalent among the ancient Budhists,\nCelts, Druids and Etrurians. In fact, as our author truly remarks, \"The\nHoly Ghost, or Holy Spirit, when visible, was always in the form of fire\n(or a bird), and was always accompanied with wisdom and power.\" Hence,\nis disclosed the origin of the ancient custom amongst the Hindoos,\nPersians and Chaldeans, of making offerings to the solar fire, emblem of\nthe Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit.\n\n6. _Inspiration by the Holy Ghost_ (Luke ii. 26.) \"Holy men of God,\"\nincluding some of the prophets, are claimed to have been inspired by the\nHoly Ghost (See 2 Peter i. 21; Acts xxviii. 25.) In like manner, as\nwe are informed by Mr. Cleland in his \"Specimens\" (see Appendix), the\nancient Celts were not only \"moved by the Holy Ghost\" in their divine\ndecrees and prophetic utterances, but they claimed that their Salic laws\n(seventy-two in number) were inspired by the \"Salo Ghost\" (Holy Ghost),\nknown also as \"the Wisdom of the Spirit, or the Voice of the Spirit.\"\nThis author several times alludes to the fact, and exhibits the proof,\nthat the doctrine of the Holy Ghost was known to this ancient people.\n\n7. _The Holy Ghost imparted by \"the laying on of hands_.\" This, too, is\nan ancient oriental custom. \"And by the imposition of hands on the head\nof the candidate,\" says Mr. Cleland, speaking of the Celts, \"the Holy\nGhost, or Holy Spirit, was conveyed.\" And thus was the Holy Spirit,\nGhost, Gas, Wind, Electrical Fire or Spirit of Authority imparted to the\nhierophant or gospel novitiate. \"And their public assemblies,\" continues\nour author, \"were always opened by an invocation to the Holy Ghost.\"\n\n8. _Baptism by or into the Holy Ghost accompanied with fire_. (Matt.\niii. 11.) This rite, too, is traceable to a very ancient period, and was\npracticed by several of the old symbolical and mythological systems.\nThe Tuscans, or Etrurians, baptized with fire, wind (ghost) and water.\nBaptism into the first member of the Trinity (the Father) was with fire;\nbaptism into the second member of the Trinity (the Word) was with water;\nwhile baptism into the third member of the Trinity (the Holy Ghost,\nor Holy Spirit) consisted of the initiatory spiritual or symbolical\napplication of gas, gust, ghost, wind, or spirit. It appears from\n\"Herbert's Travels,\" that, in \"ancient countries\", the child was taken to\nthe priest, who named him (christened him) before the sacred fire after\nwhich ceremony he was sprinkled with \"holy water\" from a vessel made of\nthe sacred tree known as \"The Holme.\"\n\n9. _The Holy Ghost imparted by breathing_. (See John xx. 22).\n\"Sometimes,\" says Mr. Higgins, relative to this custom among the ancient\nheathen, \"the priest blew his breath upon the child, which was then\nconsidered baptized by _air, spiritus sanctus,_ or ghost--i. e., baptism\nby the Holy Ghost.\" In case of baptism, a portion of the Holy Ghost\nwas supposed to be transferred from the priest to the candidate. \"The\npractice of breathing in or upon,\" says our author, \"was quite common\namong the ancient heathen.\"\n\n10. _The Holy Ghost as the agent in divine conception, or the\nprocreation of other Gods_. Jesus is said to have been conceived by\nthe Holy Ghost (see Matt. i. 18), and we find similar claims instituted\nstill more anciently for other incarnate demigods. In the Mexican\nTrinity, Y, Zona was the father, Bacal the Word, and Eckvah the Holy\nGhost, by the last of whom Chimalman conceived and brought forth the\nenfleshed God Quexalcote. (See Mex. Ant., vol. vi. p. 1650.) In the\nHindoo mythos, Sakia was conceived by the Holy Ghost Nara-an.\n\nOther cases might be cited, proving the same point.\n\nThus, we observe that the various heterogeneous conceptions, discordant\ntraditions, and contradictory superstitions appertaining to that\nanomalous nondescript being known as the Holy Ghost, are traceable to\nvarious oriental countries, and to a very remote antiquity.\n\nWe will only occupy space with one or two more historical citations of a\ngeneral nature, tending to prove the prevalence of this ghostly myth\nin other countries, not yet cited. \"Tell me, O thou strong in fire!\"\nejaculated Sesostris of Egypt, to the oracle, as reported by Manetho,\n\"who before me could subjugate all things, and who shall after me?\" But\nthe oracle rebuked him, saying, \"First God, then the Word, and with them\nthe Spirit.\" (See Nimrod, vol. i. p. 119.) \"And Plutarch, in his 'Life\nof Numa,'\" says our oft-quoted author, \"shows that the incarnation of\nthe Holy Spirit was known both to the ancient Romans and Egyptians.\"\n\nThe doctrine is thus shown to have been nearly universal.\n\n\nORIGIN OF THE HOLY GHOST SUPERSTITION.\n\nThe origin of the tradition respecting this fabulous and mythical being\nis easily traced to the ancient Brahminical trifold conception of the\nDeity, in which stands, in Trinity order, first, the God of power or\nmight--Brahma or Brahm (the Father); second, the God of creation--the\nWord--answering to John's creative Word (see John i. 3); and third, the\nGod of generation and regeneration--the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost. The\nlast member of the triune conception of the Deity was considered, under\nthe Brahminical theocracy, the _living, vital, active, life-imparting\nagent_ in both the first and second births of men and the gods.\n\nIt will be borne in mind by the reader that the Holy Ghost is\nrepresented in the Christian Scripture as being the active generating\nagent of Christ's conception, he being, as Matthew declares, \"conceived\nby the Holy Ghost.\" The Holy Ghost was also the regenerating agent at\nhis baptism. Although the specific object of the descent of the Holy\nGhost on that occasion is not stated by Luke, who relates it; although\nit is not stated for what purpose the Holy Spirit, after assuming the\nform of a bird, alighted and sat upon his head, yet the motive is fully\ndisclosed in the older mythical religions, where we find the matter in\nfuller detail.\n\nBaptism itself is claimed by all its Christian votaries as regenerating\nor imparting a new spiritual life; and this new spiritual life was\nbelieved by several nations, as before stated, to make its appearance in\nthe character and shape of a bird--sometimes a pigeon, sometimes a dove;\nand thus the origin of this tradition is most clearly and unmistakably\nexposed.\n\nAs the foregoing historical exposition exhibits the Holy Ghost as\nperforming several distinct and discordant offices, so we likewise find\nit possessing at least two distinct genders, the masculine and neuter,\ni. e., no gender--changing, ghost-like, from one to the other, as\noccasion seemed to require.\n\nFrom all these metamorphoses it is shown and demonstrated that the\nsexual and other changes of this \"mysterious\" being equal many of the\ndemigods of mythology. The primary windy conception of the Holy Ghost\nis traceable to that early period of society when the rude and untutored\ndenizens of the earth, in their profound ignorance of natural causes,\nwere very easily and naturally led into the belief that wherever there\nwas motion there was a God, or the active manifestation of a God,\nwhether it was in the wind, breath, water, fire, or the sun.\n\nHence, the Buddhists had their god _Vasus_ who manifested himself\nvariously in the shape or character of fire, wind, storms, gas,\nghosts, gusts, and the breath, thus constituting a very nearly-allied\ncounterpart to the Christian Holy Ghost, which Mr. Parkhurst tells us\noriginally meant \"air in motion.\" This god was believed to have sprung\nfrom the supreme, primordial God, which the ancient Brahmins and\nBuddhists generally believed was constituted of a fine, spiritual\nsubstance,--aura, anima, wind, ether, igneous fluid, or electrical fire,\ni. e., fire from the sun, giving rise to \"baptism by fire\" and hence, the\nthird God, or third member of the Trinity, subsequently arising out of\nthis compound being, was also necessarily composed of or consisted of\nthe same properties--all of which were believed to be correlated, if not\nidentical.\n\nSuch is a complete, though brief, historical elucidation of that\nmysterious, imaginary being so corporally intangible that Faustus, of\nthe third century, declared respecting it, \"The Holy Spirit, the third\nmajesty, has the air for his residence.\" And it is a fabulous God whose\nscriptural biography is invested with so many ludicrous and abstruse\nincidents as to incite several hundred Christian writers to labor\nhard with a \"godly zeal,\" by a reconstruction of \"God's Word\" and\na rehabiliment of the ghostly texts, to effect some kind of a\nreconciliation of the story with reason and common sense--with what\nsuccess the reader is left to judge.\n\n\nTHE UNPARDONABLE SIN AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST.\n\nBefore dismissing our ghostly narrative, it may effect something in the\nway of mitigating the anxious fears of some of our Christian brothers\nand sisters to explain the nature of \"the sin against the Holy Ghost,\"\nand assign the reason for its being unpardonable. The sin against the\nHoly Ghost consisted, according to the ancient Mexican traditions, in\nresisting its operations in the second birth--that is, the regeneration\nof the heart or soul by the Holy Ghost. And as the rectification of the\nheart or soul was a prominent idea with Christ, there is scarcely any\nground to doubt but that this was the notion he cherished of the nature\nof the sin against the Holy Ghost. And it was considered unpardonable,\nsimply because as the pardoning and cleansing process consisted in,\nor was at least always accompanied with baptism by water, in which\noperation the Holy Ghost was the agent in effecting a \"new birth,\"\ntherefore, when the ministrations or operations of this indispensable\nagent were resisted or rejected, there was no channel, no means, no\npossible mode left for the sinner to find a renewed acceptance with God.\nWhen a person sinned against the Father or the Word (the Son), he could\nfind a door of forgiveness through the baptizing processes spiritual\nor elementary, of the Holy Ghost. But an offense committed against this\nthird limb of the Godhead had the effect to close and bar the door so\nthat there could be \"no forgiveness, either in this life or that which\nis to come.\" To sin against the Holy Ghost was to tear down the scaffold\nby which the door of heaven was to be reached.\n\nAnd thus it is explained the great \"_mystery of godliness_,\" the\n\"unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost,\" which, on account of the\nfrightful penalty annexed to it, while it is impossible to learn what it\nconsists in--it being undefined and undefinable--has caused thousands,\nand probably millions, of the disciples of the Christian faith the most\nagonizing hours of alarm and despair.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXIII. THE DIVINE \"WORD\" OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN.\n\nThe Word as Creator, as Second Person of the Trinity, and its\nPre-Existence.\n\n\nTHE WORD OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN.\n\n\"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word\nwas God.\" (John i. i.) The doctrine of the divine creative word (from\nthe Greek Logos) appears to have been coeval in its origin with that of\nthe Trinity, if not inseparably connected with it, as it constitutes the\nsecond member of the Trinity of \"Father, Word, and Holy Ghost\" in most\nof the ancient systems of religion. Works on heathen mythology show that\nit was anciently a very prevalent custom to personify ideas, thoughts\nand words into angels and Gods. Words were first personated, and\ntransformed into men, then into angels, and finally into Gods.\n\nAnd here is foreshadowed the origin of John's personification of \"the\nWord made flesh.\" It was simply the word of the supreme God as it\nescaped from his mouth, assuming the form and characteristics of a\ndivine being like himself, and taking position as a secondary God and\nsecond member of the Trinity. This was the orient conception, and it\nappears to have been John's. He evidently had no thought of Christ\nexperiencing human birth, at first, or being born of a woman, but\nbelieved, like some of the orientalists, that he came out of the mouth\nof the Father, and was thus \"made flesh.\" (John i. 2.) Not a word of\nChrist being born is found in John's Gospel, till after his existence as\nthe Word is spoken of. (See first note in back of book.)\n\n\nTHE WORD AS CREATOR.\n\nJohn also represents the Word as having been the Creator. \"All things\nwere made by him.\" (John i. 3.) And Peter declares, \"By the word of God\nthe heavens were of old.\" (2 iii. 5.) Now, let it be observed here, as\na notable circumstance, that the Chinese bible, much older than the\nChristian's New Testament, likewise declares, \"God pronounced the\nprimeval Word, and his own eternal and glorious abode sprang into\nexistence.\" Mr. Guizot, in a note on Gibbon's work, says, \"According to\nthe Zend-Avesta (the Persian bible, more than three thousand years old),\nit is by the Word, more ancient than the world, that Ormuzd created the\nuniverse.\"\n\nIn like manner the sacred writings of the ancient Thibetans speak of\n\"the Word which produced the world\"--an exact counterpart to John's\ndeclaration, \"All things were made by him.\" And the ancient Greek writer\nAmelias, speaking of the God Mercury, says, \"And this plainly was\nthe Logos (the Word), by whom all things were made, he being himself\neternal,\" as Heraclitus would say,.... He assumed to be with God, and\nto be God, and in him everything that was made, has its life and being,\nwho, descending into body, and putting on flesh, took the appearance of\na man, though still retaining the majesty of his nature. Here is\n\"the Word made flesh\" set forth in most explicit terms. The Psalmist\nexclaims, \"By the Word of God were the heavens made, and all the host of\nthem by the Breath of his mouth.\" (Ps. xxxiii. 6.) Here is disclosed not\nonly the conception of the Word as Creator, but also the Word and the\nBreath as synonymous terms, both of which conceptions oriental history\namply proves to be of heathen derivation.\n\nIt was anciently believed that the Word and Breath of God were the same,\nand possessed a vitalizing power, which, as they issued from his mouth,\nmight be transformed into another being known as a secondary God. Both\nthe Jews and the Christians seem to have inherited this belief, as\nevinced by the foregoing quotations from their bible. The most ancient\ntradition taught that the Word emanated from the mouth of the principal\nGod, and \"became flesh,\" that is, took form, as the ancient Brahmins\nexpressed it, for the special purpose of serving as agent in the work of\ncreation, that is, to become the creator of the external universe. St.\nJohn evidently borrowed this idea. Read his first chapter.\n\n\nPRE-EXISTENCE OF THE WORD.\n\nThe pre-existence or previous existence of the Word, antecedent to the\ndate of its metamorphosis into the human form, we find taught in several\nof the ancient systems of religion, as well as the more modern Christian\nsystem. Several texts in the Christian New Testament set forth the\ndoctrine quite explicitly. Christ, as the Divine Word, declared, \"Before\nAbraham was I am,\" and that he had an existence with the Father before\nthe foundation of the world, etc., which is a distinct avowal of the\ndoctrine of pre-existence.\n\nBut oriental history proves the doctrine is much older than\nChristianity.\n\nThe Hindoo very anciently taught that \"the Word had existed with God\nfrom all eternity, and when spoken it became a glorious form, the\naggregate embodiment of all the divine ideas, and performed the work of\ncreation.\" And of Chrishna, it is affirmed that \"while upon the earth he\nexisted also in heaven.\" (See Baghavat Gita.)\n\nIn like manner it is declared of an Egyptian God, that \"though he was\nborn into the world, he existed with his father God before the world was\nmade.\" And parallel to this is the statement of the Chinese bible, that\n\"though the Holy Word (Chang-si) will be born upon the earth, yet he\nexisted before anything was made.\" Even for Pythagoras it was claimed\nhe existed in heaven before he was born upon the earth. Mr. Higgins,\nin summing up the matter, declares, \"All the old religions believed\nthe world was created by the Word, and that this Word existed before\ncreation\" (Ana., vol. ii. p. 77), which clearly indicates the source of\nSt John's creative Word.\n\n\nTHE DUAL OR TWO-FOLD NAME OF THE WORD.\n\nIn most cases the living Divine Word was known by different names and\ntitles, prior to the era of its assuming the mortal form, from that by\nwhich it was known after its fleshly investment.\n\nAmong the ancient Persians, the name for the divine spiritual Word was\nHonover. After its human birth, it was called \"Mithra the Mediator.\"\nThe Hindoo oriental term for the primeval Word was Om, or Aum. After\nassuming its most important incarnate form, it was known as Chrishna.\nThe Chinese Holy Interior Word was Om-i-to, and its principal\nincarnation was Chang-ti or Ti-en-ti. The Japanese also proclaimed\ntheir belief in a Divine Word before the Christian era, which, in their\nlanguage, was Amina. They taught, like John, that it came forth from the\nmouth of the Supreme God (Brahm) to perform the work of creation, after\nwhich, it was known as Sakia. And that popular Christian writer, Mr.\nMilman, informs us that the Jewish founders of Christianity believed in\nan original Divine Word, which they call Memra. When it descended to the\nearth, and \"became flesh, and dwelt amongst us\" (John i. 4.) according\nto the evangelist John, it was known as Jesus Christ. Mr. Milman states\nalso, that \"the appellation to the Word is found in the Indian (Hindoo),\nPersian, the Platonic, and the Alexandrian systems.\" (Hist, of Chr.,\nBook I., Chap. 2.)\n\nThus, the question is settled by Christian testimony--that the various\nconceptions of the Divine Word are of heathen origin.\n\n\nTHE WORD AS A SECOND MEMBER OF THE TRINITY.\n\n\"There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and\nthe Holy Ghost.\" (1 John v. 7.) Observe, the Word is the second person\nin the Trinity. And this was its post in the Brahman, Hindoo, Persian,\nand other systems. \"All religions,\" says a writer, \"which taught the\nexistence of the Word as a great primeval spirit, represent him as\nsecondary to the supreme.\" (P. R. 3, vol. ii. p. 336.) \"The Hindoos\nreverenced it next to Brahm.\" Mr. Higgins cuts the matter short by\ndeclaring \"The Logos, or Word, was the second person of the Trinity\nin all the ancient systems, as in the Christian system,\" which again\nindicates its heathen origin.\n\n\nTHE WORD AS A BIBLICAL TITLE.\n\n\"The Word,\" \"the Holy Word,\" \"the Divine Word,\" etc., are terms now\nfrequently applied to the Christian bible, without any suspicion of\ntheir heathen origin. The Zend-Avesta, the Persian bible, was always\ncalled \"The Living Word of God,\" for that is the meaning of the term\nZend-Avesta, and the oldest bible in the world is the Vedas, and\nit means both Word and Wisdom. Om, the Egyptian's Holy Word, they\nfrequently applied both to their incarnate Gods and to their sacred\nwritings.\n\nThe practice of calling bibles \"The Word of God\" originated from the\nbelief that, when the incarnate Word left the earth and returned to\nheaven, he infused a portion of his living spirits into the divine\nwritings which contained his history and his doctrines, and which he\nhimself had prompted his disciples to write as his \"Last Revelation to\nman.\" They then must contain a portion of him, i. e., a portion of the\nHoly Word--hence, both were called \"The Holy Word.\"\n\nAnd this heathen custom Christians borrowed.\n\n\nORIGIN OF THE WORD AS CREATOR.\n\nThe motive which prompted a belief in the creative Word may be styled a\ntheological necessity. It was believed that the principal God, like\nthe rulers of earth, was too aristocratic to labor with his own hands.\nHence, another God was originated to perform the work of creation, and\ncalled \"The Word.\"\n\nThe origin of the creative Word is still further indicated by\nBlackwood's Magazine.\n\nIt says:--\n\n\"Creation became impossible to a being already infinite, and was a\nderogation to a being already perfect. Some lower God, some Avatar, must\nbe interposed (as an emanation from the mouth of the God supreme) to\nperform the subordinate task of creation. Hence, originated and came\nforth the Word as Creator.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXIV. THE TRINITY VERY ANCIENTLY A CURRENT HEATHEN DOCTRINE\n\n\"THERE are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and\nthe Holy Ghost, and these three are one.\" (i John v. 7.) This text,\nwhich evidently discloses a belief in the existence of three separate\nand distinct beings in the Godhead, sets forth a doctrine which was\nanciently of almost universal prevalence. Nearly every nation, whether\noriental or occidental, whose religious faith has been commemorated\nin history, discloses in its creed a belief in the trifold nature and\ntriune division of the Deity. St. Jerome testifies unequivocally, \"All\nthe ancient nations believed in the Trinity.\"\n\nAnd a volume of facts and figures might be cited here, if we had space\nfor them, in proof of this statement A text from one of the Hindoo\nbibles, (the Puranas) will evince the antiquity and prevalence of this\nbelief in a nation of one hundred and fifty millions of people more than\ntwo thousand years ago. \"O you three Lords!\" ejaculated Attencion, \"know\nthat I recognize only one God. Inform me, therefore, which of you is the\ntrue divinity that I may address to him alone my vows and adorations.\"\nThe three Gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, becoming manifest to him,\nreplied, \"Learn, O devotee, that there is no real distinction between\nus. What to you appears such is only by semblance. The single being\nappears under three forms by the acts of creation, preservation and\ndestruction but he is one.\"\n\nNow, reader, note the remark here, that the ancient Christian fathers\nalmost universally and unanimously proclaimed the doctrine of the\nTrinity as one of the leading tenets of the Christian faith, and as a\ndoctrine derived directly by revelation from heaven. But here we find\nit most explicitly set forth by a disciple of a pagan religion more\nthan three thousand years ago, as the Christian missionary D. O. Allen\nstates, that the Hindoo bible, in which it was found was compiled\nfourteen hundred years before Christ, and written at a still earlier\nperiod. And we find the same doctrine very explicitly taught in the\nancient Brahmin, Persian, Chaldean, Chinese, Mexican and Grecian systems\n--all much older than Christianity.\n\nNo writer ever taught or avowed a belief in any tenet of religious faith\nmore fully or plainly than Plato sets forth, the doctrine of the Trinity\nin his Phaedon, written four hundred years B. C. And his terms are found\nto be in most striking conformity to the Christian doctrine on this\nsubject, as taught in the New Testament Plato's first term for the\nTrinity was in Greek--1. To Agathon, the supreme God or Father. 2. The\nLogos, which is the Greek term for the Word. And, 3. Psyche, which the\nGreek Lexicon defines to mean \"soul, spirit or ghost\"--of course, the\nHoly Ghost. Here we have the three terms of the Christian Trinity,\nFather, Word, and Holy Ghost, as plainly taught as language can express\nit, thus making Plato's exposition of the Trinity and definition of its\nterms, published four hundred years B. C., identical in meaning with\nthose of St. John's, as found in his Gospel, and contained in the above\nquoted text. Where, then, is the foundation for the dogmatic claim\non the part of the Christian professors for the divine origin of the\nTrinity doctrine?\n\nWe will here cite the testimony of some Christian writers to prove\nthat the Trinity is a pagan-derived doctrine. A _Christian bishop_,\nMr. Powell, declares, \"I not only confess but I _maintain_, such a\nsimilitude of Plato's and John's Trinity doctrines as bespeaks a common\norigin.\" (Thirteenth letter to Dr. Priestley.) What is that you say,\nbishop? \"A common origin.\" Then you concede both are heaven-derived, or\nboth heathen-derived. If the former, then revelation and heathenism are\nsynonymous terms. If the latter, then Christianity stands on a level\nwith heathen mythology. Which horn of the dilemma will you choose? St.\nAugustine confessed he found the beginning of John's Gospel in Plato's\nPh\u00e6don, which is a concession of the whole ground.\n\nAnother writer, Chataubron, speaks of an ancient Greek inscription\non the great obelisk at Rome, which reads--1. The Mighty God. 2. The\nBegotten of God as Christ is declared to be \"the only begotten of the\nFather\" (John i. 14). And, 3. \"Apollo the Spirit\"--the Holy Spirit or\nHoly Ghost--thus presenting in plain language the three terms of the\nTrinity. And Mr. Cudworth, in corroboration of this report, says, \"The\nGreeks had a first God, and second God, and third God, and the second\nwas begotten by the first. And yet for all that,\" continues Mr.\nCudworth, \"they considered all these one.\"\n\nIn the Platonic or Grecian Trinity, the first person was considered the\nplanner of the work of creation, the second person the creator, and\nthe third person the ghost or spirit which moved upon the face of the\nwaters, and infused life into the mighty deep at creation--the same\nHoly Ghost which descended from heaven to infuse life into the waters at\nChrist's baptism; thus, the resemblance is complete. Mr. Basnage quotes\na Christian writer of the fifth century as declaring, \"The Athenian sage\nPlato marvelously anticipated one of the most important and mysterious\ndoctrines of the Christian religion\"--meaning the Trinity--an important\nconcession truly.\n\nThe oldest and probably the original form of the Trinity is that found\nin the Brahmin and Hindoo systems--the terms of which are--i. Brahma,\nthe Father or supreme God. 2. Vishnu, the incarnate Word and Creator. 3.\nSiva, the Spirit of God, i. e., the Holy Spirit or Ghost--each answering\nto corresponding terms of the Christian Trinity, and yet two thousand\nyears older, according to Dr. Smith.\n\nWe have not allowable space for other facts and citations (as this work\nis designed as a mere epitome), although we have but entered upon the\nthreshold of the evidence tending to prove that the Christian Trinity\nwas born of heathen parents, that it is an offspring of heathen\nmythology, like other doctrines of the Christian faith, claimed by its\ndisciples as the gift of divine revelation.\n\nHere let it be noted as a curious chapter in sacred history that the\nnumerous divine Trinities which have constituted a part of nearly every\nreligious system ever propagated to the world were composed, in every\ncase, of male Gods. No female has ever yet been admitted into the triad\nof Gods composing the orthodox Trinity. Every member of the Trinity in\nevery case is a male, and an old bachelor--a doctrine most flagrantly at\nwar with the principles of modern philosophy.\n\nFor this science teaches us that the endowment of a being with either\nmale or female organs, presupposes the existence of the other sex; and\nthat either sex, without the other would be a ludicrous anomaly, and a\nludicrous distortion of nature unparalleled in the history of science.\nAs sexual organs create an imperious desire for the other sex, no male\nor female could long enjoy full happiness in the absence of the other\nparty. What an unhappy, lonesome place, therefore, the orthodox heaven\nmust have been, during the eternity of the past, with no society but old\nbachelors! The Trinity was constituted of males simply because woman has\nalways been considered a mere cipher in society--a mere tool for man's\nconvenience, an appendage to his wants. Hence, instead of having a place\namong the Gods she led the practical life of a servant and a menial,\nwhich accounts for her exclusion from the Trinity. But the time is\ncoming when she will rule both heaven and earth with the omnipotent\npower of her love nature. Then we shall have no \"war in heaven,\" and no\nfighting on earth.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXV. ABSOLUTION, AND THE CONFESSION OF SINS, OF HEATHEN ORIGIN\n\nSOME Christian writers have labored to make it appear that this is\nexclusively a Christian doctrine, while others have labored as hard to\nget it out of their bible, or make the people believe that it is not\ntherein taught.\n\nWe shall show, upon scriptural and historical authority, that both are\nwrong.\n\nThere can be no question as to this rite having existed outside of\nChristianity, or of its being much older than Christianity. History\nproves both. Nor can it be successfully denied that it is taught in the\nChristian Scriptures, both the confessing of sins and that of forgiving\nsins. The apostle James, with respect to the former, is quite explicit.\nHe enjoins, emphatically, \"Confess your faults one to another.\" (James\nv. 16.) The practice of forgiving sins is also enjoined. \"Forgiving one\nanother\" is recommended both in Ephesians (iv. 32) and Colossians. (iii.\n13). \"And whatsoever ye shall lose on earth shall be loosed in heaven\"\n(Matthew xviii 18), is interpreted as conferring the power to forgive\nsins.\n\nAnd then we remark that the practices both of confessing and forgiving\nsins are very ancient pagan rites and customs. Speaking of their\nprevalence in ancient India, the author of the Anacalypsis remarks, \"The\nperson offering sacrifices made a verbal confession of his sins, and\nreceived absolution.\" Auricular confession was also practiced among\nthe ancient Mithriacs, or Persians, and the Parsees proper of the\nsame country. Mr. Volney tells us, \"They observed all the Christian\nsacraments, even to the laying on of hands in the confirmation.\" (211.)\nAnd the Christian Tertullian also tells us that \"The priests of Mithra\npromised absolution from sin on confession and baptism,\" while another\nauthor adds, that \"on such occasions Mithra marked his followers (the\nservants of God) in their foreheads,\" and that \"he celebrated the\nsacrifice of bread, which is the resurrection.\"\n\nIn the collection of the Jewish laws called \"The Mishna,\" we are\ntold the Jews confessed their sins by placing their hands upon a calf\nbelonging to the priest, and that this was called \"the Confession of\nCalves.\" (See Mishna, tom. ii. p. 394.) Confessing sins was practiced in\nancient Mexico; also under Numa of Rome, whose priests, we are informed,\nhad to clear their consciences by confessing their sins before they\ncould offer sacrifices. The practice of confessing and forgiving sins\nas recommended in the Christian bible, and practiced by some of\nthe Christian sects, has been the source of much practical evil by\nfurnishing a pretext and license, to some extent, for the commission\nof crime and sin. While sins can be so easily obliterated they will\nbe committed--perpetrated without much remorse or restraint. \"In China\n(says the Rev. Mr. Pitrat, 232), the invocation of Omito is sufficient\nto remit the punishment of the greatest crimes.\" The same author tells\nus, \"The ancient initiation of the pagans had tribunals of penance,\nwhere the priests, under the name of _Roes_, heard from the mouth of the\nsinners themselves the avowal of their sins of which their souls were\nto be purified, and from the punishment of which they wished to be\nexempted.\" (Page 37.) The granting of absolution for sin or misconduct\namong the early primitive Christians was so common, St. Cyprian informs\nus, that \"thousands of reprieves were granted daily,\" which served as an\nindirect license to crime. And thus the doctrine of divine forgiveness,\nas taught by pagans and Christians, has proved to be demoralizing in its\neffects upon society.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXVI. ORIGIN OF BAPTISM BY WATER, FIRE, BLOOD AND THE HOLY GHOST\n\nBAPTISM, in some of its various forms, is a very ancient rite, and was\nextensively practiced in several oriental countries. It was administered\nin a great varieties of forms, and with the use of different elements.\nWater was the most common, but fire and air, wind, spirit ghost were\nalso used; and both the living and the dead were made the subjects of\nits solemn and imposing ceremonies.\n\nWe will notice each of these modes of baptism separate--appropriating a\nbrief space to each.\n\n1. Baptism by Water.\n\n\"Baptism by water,\" says Mr. Higgins, \"is a very old rite, being\npractised by the followers of Zoroaster, by the Romans, the Egyptians,\nand other nations.\" It was also vogue among the ancient Hindoos at\na still earlier day Their mode of administering it was to dip the\ncandidate for immersion three times in the watery element, in the same\nmanner as is now practiced by some of the Christian sects during the\nperformance of which the hierophant would ejaculate the following prayer\nand ceremony: \"O Lord this man is impure, like the mud of this stream!\nBut as thou cleanse and deliver his soul from sin as the water cleanses\nhis body.\" They believed that water possesses the virtue of purifying\nboth soul and body--the latter from filth and the former from sin. The\nancient Mexican, Persians, Hindoos and Jews were in the habit of\nbaptizing their infants soon after they were born. And the water used\nfor this purpose was called \"the water of regeneration.\" Paul speaks of\nbeing \"saved by the washing of regeneration.\" (See Titus iii. 5.) Those\nwho touched these infants before they were baptized were deemed impure.\nAnd as this was unavoidable on the part of the mothers, they were\nrequired, as in the cases of the mothers of Chrishna and Christ, to\npresent themselves on the eighth day after accouchement to the priest in\nthe temple to be purified. The Romans chose the eighth day for girls and\nthe ninth for boys. The child was usually named (christened) at the time\nit was baptized. And in India, the name, or God's name, or some other\nmark, was engraven or written on the forehead. This custom is several\ntimes recognized in the Christian bible, both in the old and in the New\nTestament. (See Ezek. ix 4; Rev. xiv. 9; xix. 20, etc.) John speaks of a\nmark being made on the forehead. (See Rev. xiii. 16.) Also of the name\nof God being written on the forehead. (Rev. iii. 12.)\n\n\nTHE DOVE DESCENDING AT BAPTISM.\n\nAt this stage of our inquiry it may be stated that several of the\nancient religious orders had the legend of a dove or pigeon descending at\nbaptism--a counterpart to the evangelical story of \"the Spirit of God\ndescending in bodily shape like a dove,\" and alighting on the head of\nJesus Christ while being baptized by John in Jordan. (See Luke iii. 22.)\nIt will be observed here that the spirit, or soul, of God descended not\nonly in the manner, but in \"bodily shape like a dove.\" This accords with\nthe tradition anciently prevalent among the Hindoos, Mexicans, Greeks,\nRomans and Persians, or Babylonians, that all souls, or spirits,\npossessed, or were capable of assuming, the form of a dove. Hence, it is\nreported of Polycarp, Semiramis, Caesar and others, that at death their\nsouls, or spirits, were seen to leave the body in \"bodily shape like\na dove\" and ascend to heaven. \"The Divine Love, or Eros,\" says Mr.\nHiggins, \"was supposed by the oriental heathen to descend often in the\nform of a dove to bless the candidate for baptism.\" These traditions,\ndoubtless, gave rise to the story of the dove descending at Christ's\nbaptism--that is God in the shape of a dove, for that is clearly the\nmeaning of the text. We are also informed by our author just quoted,\nthat a dove stood for and represented, among the orientalists, the third\nperson of the Trinity, as it does in the gospel story of Christ--he\nbeing the second member of the Christian Trinity of Father, Son and Holy\nGhost. It was considered \"the regenerator, or regenerating spirit,\" and\npersons being baptized were said to be \"born again\" into the spirit or\nthe spirit into them; that is, the dove into or upon them.\n\nWhat a master-key is furnished by these oriental religions for solving\nthe mysteries of the Christian bible! How much more lucid than Divine\nRevelation--so-called!\n\nWe will quote again from Higgins: \"Among all nations, from the\nvery earliest period, water has been used as a species of religious\nsacrament. Because, as it dripped from the clouds, it was observed\nto have the power of reviving drooping nature and creating anew, or\nregenerating the whole vegetable kingdom in spring, it was hence chosen\nas an emblem of spiritual regeneration and a medium of baptism. Water\nwas the element by means of which everything was born again through the\nagency of the Eros, Dove, or Divine Love.\" And, hence, the ceremony of\ndipping or plunging (or, as it is modernly termed, baptizing) came into\nvogue for the remission of sins and \"the regeneration into a new and\nmore holy life.\"\n\nSome streams were supposed to have more efficacy in these respects than\nothers. Hence, nearly all religious nations had their \"Holy Rivers,\"\n\"Holy Water,\" \"Sacred Pools,\" etc. The Hindoos resorted to the \"Holy\nGanges,\" the Egyptians to the \"Holy Nile,\" the Chaldeans and Persians\nto the \"Holy Euphrates,\" the Greeks to their \"Holy Lustral Water,\" the\nItalians to the river Po, and the Jews and Christians to their holy\nriver Jordan. If Jordan was not called \"holy,\" it was undoubtedly\nconsidered so, else why did Elisha order Naaman to wash seven times\nin that stream instead of Damascus, which was much nearer and more\naccessible? And why was Christ baptized in Jordan? \"And all the land of\nJudea, and they of Jerusalem, were baptized in Jordan, confessing their\nsins.\" (Matt iii. vi.) Why, as several streams were handier to a large\nportion of the candidates, simply because Jordan was considered to be\n\"more holy.\" And Christians had their sacred pool of Bethesda, as the\nHindoos had their Sahar.\n\nThe rite of baptism was at first generally practiced in caves--as were\nalso other religious rites; and as these caves were often difficult of\naccess, and their mouths, doors or gates narrow and difficult to enter,\nthey fully exemplify Christ's declaration, \"Straight is the gate and\nnarrow is the way that leadeth unto life.\" (Matt. vii. 14.) And when\nhe declared, \"Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot\nenter the kingdom of heaven\" (John iii. 5) he was only seconding the\nexhortation of the priests to enter these subterranean vaults and be\nbaptized after the oriental and Jewish custom. Thus originated baptism\nby water in the form of dipping, or immersion.\n\n\nBAPTISM BY SPRINKLING.\n\nOwing to the scarcity of water in some countries, and its entire absence\nin others, and the fatal effects sometimes resulting from the practice\nof baptizing infants and invalids by immersion, a new mode of baptism\neventually sprung up, now known as \"sprinkling,\" in which sometimes\nwater and sometimes blood was used. Virgil, Ovid and Cicero all speak\nof its prevalence amongst the ancient Romans or Latins. We are informed\nthat the ancient Jews practiced it upon their women while in a state of\nnudity, the ceremony being administered by three rabbis, or priests. But\nthe custom finally gave way to one more consonant with decorum. Blood,\nbeing considered \"the life thereof\" of man, was deemed more efficacious\nthan water, and hence was often used in lieu of that element. The Greeks\nkept a \"holy vessel\" for this purpose, known as the Facina. The Romans\nused a brush, which may now be seen engraven upon some of their ancient\ncoins and sculptured on their ancient temples. The Hindoos and Persians\nused a branch of laurel or some other shrub for sprinkling the repentant\ncandidate, whether water or blood was used.\n\nIn some countries the rite was practiced as a talisman against evil\nspirits. The Mexicans never approached their altars without sprinkling\nthem with blood drawn from their own bodies, as the Jews sprinkled the\nwalls and door-posts of their temples with blood under the requisition\nof the Levitical code. This mode of fancied purification by sprinkling\neither with water or blood we find recognized, and apparently\nsanctioned, in the Christian bible, both in the Old and New Testaments.\nEzekiel says, \"I will sprinkle clean water on you.\" (Ezek. xxxvi. 25.)\nPeter uses the phrase, \"The sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.\"\n(1 Peter i. 2.) And Paul makes use of the expression, \"The blood of\nsprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel\" (Heb. xii.\n24), which we regard as an indirect sanction of the senseless heathen\nidea of effecting spiritual purification by drops of blood. (See\nPotter's Antiquities and Herbert's Travels.)\n\n\nBAPTISM BY FIRE.\n\nBaptism by fire was a form or mode of application which seems to have\nbeen introduced from the belief that it was productive of a higher\ndegree of purification. There were several ways of using fire in the\nbaptismal rite. In some cases the candidate for immortality ran through\nblazing streams of fire--a custom which was called \"the baptism of\nfire.\" M. de Humboldt, in his \"Views of the Cordilleras and Monuments\nof America,\" informs us it prevailed in India, Chaldea and Syria,\nand throughout eastern Asia. It appears to have been gotten up as\na substitute for sun-worship, as this luminary was believed to be\nconstituted of fire, though in reality there never was any such thing as\nsun or solar worship. Christian writers represent the ancient Persians\nas has having been addicted to solar worship. But Firdausi, Cudworth\nand other authors declare that neither they nor any other nation ever\nworshiped the sun, but merely an imaginary Deity supposed to reside in\nthe sun. Heathen nations have been charged with many things of which\nthey were not guilty; though it is true that in the spirit of Christ's\nexhortation, \"Whosoever loseth his life for my sake shall find it,\"\nsome of the candidates for the fiery ordeal voluntarily sacrificed their\nlives in the operation, under the persuasion that it was necessary to\npurify the soul, and would enable them to ascend to higher posts or\nplanes of enjoyment in the celestial world. And some of them were taught\nthat sins not expurgated by fire, or some other efficaciously renovating\nprocess in this life, would be punished by fire in the life to come.\nHere we will mention that there is a seeming recognition of this ancient\nheathen rite in both departments of the Christian's bible. Isaiah says,\n\"When thou walkest through fire thou shalt not be burned.\" (lxiii.\n2.) And the Baptist John recognizes three modes of baptism: \"I indeed\nbaptize you with water, but he that cometh after me shall baptize you\nwith fire and the Holy Ghost.\" (Matt. iii. 11). And Paul teaches the\nnecessity of being purified by fire. (See i Cor. iii. 15.) So it is both\na heathen and a Christian idea.\n\n\nBAPTISM BY THE HOLY GHOST.\n\nThis fanciful ceremony is both a Christian and a heathen rite, and is\nundoubtedly of heathen origin. The mode of applying it was to breathe\ninto or upon the seeker for divine favors. This was done by the priest,\nwho, it was believed, imparted the Spirit of God by the process. The\ncustom, Mr. Herbert informs us, was anciently quite common in oriental\ncountries, and was at a later date borrowed by Christ and his apostles\nand incorporated into the Christian ceremonies. We find that Christ not\nonly sanctioned it but practised it, as it is declared when he met his\ndisciples after his resurrection \"he breathed on them, and saith unto\nthem, Receive ye the Holy Ghost.\" (John xx. 22.)\n\nAnd the following language of Ezekiel is evidently a sanction of the\nsame heathen custom: \"Thus saith the Lord God, Come from the four winds,\nO breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.\" (xxxvii.\n9.) Let it be borne in mind here that breath, air, wind, spirit and\nghost were used as synonymous terms, according to Mr. Parkhurst (see\nChap. XXII.), and this breathing was supposed to impart spiritual life,\nbeing nothing less than the Spirit of God, the same as that breathed\ninto Adam when \"he became a living soul.\" (See Gen. ii. 7.) For a fuller\nexposition see Chapter XXII.\n\n\nBAPTISM OF OR FOR THE DEAD.\n\nIt was customary among the Hindoos and other nations to postpone baptism\ntill near the supposed terminus of life, in order that the ablution\nmight extinguish all the sins and misdeeds of the subject's earthly\nprobation. But it sometimes happened that men and women were killed, or\ndied unexpectedly, before the rite was administered. And as it would\nnot do for these unfortunate souls to be deprived of the benefit of this\nsoul-saving ordinance, the custom was devised of baptizing the defunct\nbody, or more commonly some living person in its stead. The method of\nexecuting the latter expedient, according to St. Chrysostom, was to\nplace some living person under the bed or couch on which the corpse\nwas reclining, when the defunct was asked if he would be baptized. The\nliving man, responding for the dead, answered in the affirmative. The\ncorpse was then taken and dipped in a vessel prepared for the purpose.\nThis silly practice was in vogue among the early Christians, and Paul\nseems to regard it as an important custom. \"Else what shall they do\nwhich are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all.\" (i Cor.\nxv. 9.)\n\nThe inference derivable from this text is, that Paul held that the labor\nof baptizing the dead would be lost in the event of the falsification of\nthe doctrine of the resurrection, but otherwise it would be valid--which\nevinces his faith in the senseless and superstitious practice. It will\nbe observed from the historical exposition of this chapter that all the\nvarious ancient heathen modes and rites of baptism have been practiced\nby Christians, and are sanctioned by their bible.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXVII. THE SACRAMENT OR EUCHARIST OF HEATHEN ORIGIN\n\nAT the feast of the Passover, Christ is represented, while distributing\nbread to his disciples, to have said, \"Take, eat; this is my body\"\n(Matt. xxvi. 26); and while handing round the consecrated cup, he\nenjoined, \"Drink ye all of it, for this is my blood of the new covenant,\nwhich is shed for many for the remission of sins\" (xxvi. 27). Here is\na very clear and explicit indorsement of what is generally termed \"the\nEucharist or Sacrament.\" And nothing can be more susceptible of proof\nthan that this rite or ordinance is of pagan origin, and was practically\nrecognized many centuries prior to the dawn of the Christian era.\n\nSo we observe, by the text above quoted, the Christian Savior and\nLawgiver copied, or reproduced, an old pagan rite as a part of his\nprofessedly new and spiritual system, one of the most ancient and\nwidely-extended formulas of pagandom. And stranger still, the catechisms\nof the Christian church represent this ordinance as having originated in\nthe design and motive to keep the ancient Christian world in remembrance\nof the death and sufferings and sacrifice of Christ, while we find it\nexisting long prior to his time, both among Jews and pagans, this being\nvirtually admitted in the bible itself, so far as respects the pagans,\nthus proving that it did not originate with Christ, and therefore is\nnot of Christian origin. For in Gen. viv. 18, we read, \"And Melchisedek,\nking of Salem, brought forth bread and wine, and he was the priest\nof the Most High God.\" Because the Melchisedek here spoken of is\nrepresented as being \"a priest of the Most High God,\" and showed so much\nrespect to Abraham, it is presumed and assumed, by Christian writers,\nthat he was a Jewish priest and king; and Mr. Faber (vol. i. p. 72)\ncalls him \"an incarnation of the son of God.\" But there is no intimation\nthroughout the Jewish Scriptures of the Jews ever having had a king or\npriest by that name. And besides, Eupolemus (vol. i. p. 39), tells\nus that the temple of Melchisedek was the temple of Jupiter, in which\nPythagoras studied philosophy. Then, again, according to some writers,\nthe name is synonymous with Moloch, the God of war among the Greeks.\nStrange, then, that Melchisedek should be claimed as a priest and king\namong the Jews. Be this as it may, the case proves that the ceremony of\noffering bread and wine existed long before the era of Jesus Christ.\n\nAnd then we have much more and much stronger proof of this fact than\nis here furnished. The Christian Mr. Faber virtually admits it, when he\ntells us, \"The devil led the heathen to anticipate Christ with respect\nto several things, as the mysteries of the Eucharist, etc.\" \"And this\nvery solemnity (says St Justin) the evil spirit introduced into the\nmysteries of Mithra.\" (Reeves, Justin, p. 86.) Mr. Higgins observes, \"It\nwas instituted hundreds of years before the Lord's death took place.\"\nAmongst the ancient religious orders and nations who practiced this\nrite, we may name the Essenes, Persians, Pythagoreans, Gnostics,\nBrahmins and Mexicans. For proof of its existence and antiquity among\nthe last-named nation, we refer the reader to the \"Travels\" (chap. ii.)\nof that Christian writer, Father Acosta. Mr. Marolles, in his Memoirs\n(p. 215) quotes Tibullus as saying, \"The pagan appeased the divinity\nwith holy bread.\" And Tibullus, in a panegyric on Marcella, wrote, \"A\nlittle cake, a little morsel of bread, appeased the divinities.\"\n\nAnd here we discover the idea which originated the ceremony. It was\nstarted, like animal sacrifices, for the purpose of appeasing the wrath\nor propitiating the favor of the angry Gods. Tracing the conception\nstill further in the rear of its progress, and apparently to its primary\ninception, Mr. Higgins observes, \"The whole paschal supper (the Lord's\nsupper with the Christians) was in fact a festival of joy to celebrate\nthe passage of the sun across the equinox of spring.\"\n\nWe find one pagan writer who had intelligence enough to ridicule this\nsenseless ceremonial custom, called \"the sacrament.\" Cicero, some\nforty years before Christ, shows up the doctrine of the sacrament, or\nsubstantiation, in its true light. He asks, \"How can a man be so stupid\nas to imagine that which he eats to be a God?\" A writer quoted above\nsays, \"Mass, or the sacrifice of bread and wine, was common to many\nancient nations.\" (Anac. vol. ii. p. 62.) According to Alnetonae, the\nancient Brahmins had a kind of Eucharist called \"prajadam.\" And the same\nwriter informs us that the ancient Peruvians, \"after sacrificing a lamb,\nmingled his blood with flour, and distributed it among the people.\"\nWriters on Grecian mythology relate that Ceres, the goddess of corn,\ngave her flesh to eat, and that Bacchus, the God of wine, gave blood to\ndrink. Nor is there any evidence that Christ and his followers made a\nbetter use, or different use, or a more spiritual application of the\nsacrament, or ceremonial offering of bread and wine, than the pagans\ndid, though some have claimed this. It was a species of symbolism with\nboth, notwithstanding Mr. Glover, a Christian writer, declares, that\n\"in the sacrament of the altar are the natural body and blood of Christ,\nverily and indeed.\" (See Glover's Remarks on Bishop Marsh's Compendious\nReview.) It may be noted here that the Persians, Pythagoreans, Essenes\nand Gnostics used water instead of wine, and that this mode of practice\nwas less objectionable than that of the Christians, who (as sad\nexperience proves) have too often laid the foundation for the ruin of\nsome poor unsuspecting devotee, by luring him to the fatal fascination\nof the intoxicating bowl, by holding the sacred and ceremonial wine to\nhis lips, while administering the sacrament or the Lord's supper.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXVIII. ANOINTING WITH OIL OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN\n\nTHE custom and ceremony of anointing with oil by way of imparting some\nfancied spiritual power and religious qualification seems to have been\nextensively practiced by the Jews and primitive Christians, and still\nmore anciently by various oriental nations. Mark (xiv. 4), reports Jesus\nChrist as speaking commendingly of the practice, by which it was evident\nhe was in favor of the superstitious custom. The apostle James not only\nsanctions it, but recommends it in the most specific language. \"Is any\nsick among you, let him call for the elders of the church, and let them\npray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.\" (James\nv. 14.)\n\nThe practice of greasing or smearing with oil, it may be noted here, was\nin vogue from other motives besides the one here indicated. We find\nthe statement in the New American Cyclopedia (vol. i. p. 620), that\nanointing with perfumed oil was in common use among the Greeks and\nRomans as a mark of hospitality to guests. And modern travelers in\nthe East still find it a custom for visitors to be sprinkled with\nrose-water, or their head, face and beard \"anointed with olive oil.\"\n\"Anointing,\" we are also told, \"is an ancient and still prevalent custom\nthroughout the East, by pouring aromatic oils on persons as a token of\nhonor.... It was also employed in consecrating priests, prophets and\nkings, and the places and instruments appointed for worship.\" (Ibid.)\nJoshua anointed the ten stones he set up in Jordan, and Jacob the stone\non which he slept at the time of his great vision.\n\nThe early Christians were in the habit of anointing the altars, and even\nthe walls, of the churches, in the same manner as the images, obelisks,\nstatues, etc., had long been consecrated by the devotees of the oriental\nsystems. Aaron, Saul, David, Solomon, and even Jesus Christ were\nanointed with oil in the same way. David Malcom, in his \"Essay on the\nAntiquity of the Britons,\" p. 144, says, \"The Mexican king was anointed\nwith Holy Unction by the high priest while dancing before the Lord.\"\nVide the case of David \"dancing before the Lord with all his might.\" Dr.\nLightfoot, in his \"Harmony of the New Testament,\" speaks of the custom\namong the Jews of anointing the sick on the Sabbath day (see Works, vol.\ni, p. 333; also Toland, Sect. Naz. p. 54), as afterwards recommended by\nthe apostle James, as shown above. This accords exactly with the method\nof treating the sick in ancient India and other heathen countries\nseveral thousand years ago. For proof consult Hyde, Bryant, Tertullian\nand other writers. The custom of anointing the sick, accompanied with\nprayer and other ceremonies, was quite fashionable in the East long\nbefore the birth of either Jesus or James. One writer testifies that\n\"the practice of anointing with oil, so much in vogue among the Jews,\nand sanctioned by Christ and his followers, was held in high esteem in\nnearly all the Eastern religions.\"\n\nThe foregoing historical facts furnish still further proof that\nChristianity is the offspring of heathenism.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXIX. HOW MEN, INCLUDING JESUS CHRIST, CAME TO BE WORSHIPED AS\nGODS\n\n\nJESUS CHRIST A DEMIGOD, ACCORDING TO CHRISTIAN WRITERS.\n\nIT is truly surprising to observe the damaging concessions of some of\nthe early Christian writers, ruinous to the dogmas of their own faith\nwith respect to the divinity of Jesus Christ, placing him, as they do,\non an exact level with the heathen demigods, proving that the belief in\nhis divinity originated in the same manner the belief in theirs did,\nby which it is clearly shown to be a pagan derived doctrine. Several\nChristian writers admit the belief in earth-born Gods (called Sons of\nGods), and their coming into the world by human birth was prevalent\namong the heathen long prior to the time of Christ. Hear the proof.\n\nWe will first quote St. Justin relative to the prevalence of the belief\namong the ancient Greeks and Romans. Addressing them, he says, \"The\ntitle of Son of God (As applied to Jesus Christ) is very justifiable\nupon the account of his wisdom, considering you have your Mercury in\nyour worship, under the title of Word or Messenger of God.\" (Reeves\nApol. p. 76.) Here is the proof that the tradition of the Son of God\ncoming into the world, and \"the Word becoming flesh,\" was established\namongst the ancient Greeks and Romans long prior to the era of\nChristianity, or the birth of Christ.\n\nAnd yet more than a hundred millions of Christian professors can now be\nfound, who, in their historic ignorance, suppose St. John was the first\nwriter who taught the doctrine of \"the Word becoming flesh,\" and that\nJesus Christ was \"the first and only begotten Son of God\" who ever made\nhis appearance on earth. How true it is that \"ignorance is the mother of\ndevotion\" to creeds.\n\nHow \"the man Christ Jesus\" came to be worshiped as a God, is pretty\nclearly indicated by Bishop Horne, who shows that the doctrine of the\nincarnation was of universal prevalence long before Jesus Christ came\ninto the flesh. He says, \"That God should, in some extraordinary manner,\nvisit and dwell with man, is an idea, which, as we read the writings of\nthe ancient heathen, meets us in a thousand different forms.\" If,\nthen, the tradition of God being born into the world was so universally\nestablished in heathen countries before the Christian era, as here\nshown, why should not, and why will not, our good Christian brethren\ndismiss their prejudices, and tear the scales from their eyes, so as\nto see that this universal belief would as naturally lead to the\ndeification and worship of \"the man Christ Jesus\" as water flows down a\ndescending plane?\n\nAnd, certainly a thousand times more reasonable is the assumption\nthat his deification originated in this way, than that, with all his\nfrailties and foibles, he was entitled to the appellation of a God--a\nconclusion strongly corroborated by the testimony of that able Christian\nwriter, Mr. Norton, who tells us that \"many of the first Christians\nbeing converts from Gentileism, their imaginations were familiar with\nthe reputed incarnation of heathen deities.\" How natural it would be for\nsuch converts to worship \"the man Christ Jesus\" as a God on account of\nhis superior manhood!\n\nAgain, that ancient pillar of the Christian church, St. Justin, concedes\nthat the ancient oriental heathen held all the cardinal doctrines of\nthe Christian faith relating to the incarnation long prior to the\nintroduction and establishment of Christianity. Hear him: Addressing the\npagans, he says, \"For by declaring the Logos the first begotten Son of\nGod, our Master, Jesus Christ, to be born of a virgin without any human\nmixture, and to be crucified, and dead, and to have risen again into\nheaven, we say no more in this than what you say of those whom you style\nthe sons of Jove.\" (Reeves, Apol. vol. i. p. 69.) Now, Christian reader,\nmark the several important admissions which are made here:--\n\n1. Here is traced to ancient heathen tradition the belief in an\nincarnate Son of God.\n\n2. The doctrine of a \"first begotten Son of God.\"\n\n3. Of his being born of a virgin.\n\n4. Of his crucifixion.\n\n5. Of his resurrection.\n\n6. Of his final ascension into heaven.\n\nAll these cardinal doctrines of Christianity are here shown to have been\nin existence, and to have been preached by pagan priests long anterior\nto the Christian era, thus entirely oversetting the common belief of\nChristendom that these doctrines were never known or preached in the\nworld until heralded by the first disciples of the Christian religion.\nA fatal mistake, truly! This suicidal admission of St Justin (a standard\nChristian writer) thus entirely uptrips all pretensions to originality\nin the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith, and shows it to be\na mere travesty of the more ancient heathen systems.\n\nAnd we have still other testimony to corroborate this conclusion. The\nFrench writer Bazin says, \"The most ancient histories are those of Gods\nbecoming incarnate in order to govern mankind.\" Again he says, \"The\nidea sprang up everywhere from confused ideas of God, which prevailed\neverywhere among mankind that Gods formerly descended upon earth. The\nfertile imagination of the people of various nations converted men into\nGods.\"\n\nAnd to the same effect is the declaration of Mr. Higgins, that \"there\nwas incarnate Gods in all religions.\" Sadly beclouded and warped indeed\nmust be that mind which cannot see that here is set in as plain view as\nthe cloudless sun at noonday, the origin of the deification of \"the man\nChrist Jesus.\" No unbiased mind can possibly stave off the conclusion\nthat such a universal prevalence of the practice of God-making\nthroughout the religious world would cause such a man as Jesus Christ\nto be worshiped as a God--especially when we look at the various motives\nwhich promoted men to Gods, which we will now present.\n\n\nMOTIVES TO INCARNATION, OR THE CAUSE OF MEN BEING WORSHIPED AS GODS.\n\nThe causes which led to the conception of Gods and Sons of God becoming\nclothed in human flesh--the manner in which the absurd idea originated\nof an infinite being descending from heaven, assuming the form of a man,\nbeing born of a pure and spotless virgin, and finally being killed by\nhis own children, the subjects of his own government, are palpably plain\nand easily understood' in the light of oriental history.\n\nAnd at the same time it is so shockingly absurd, that the rapid march\nof science and civilization will soon inaugurate the era when the man\nor woman who shall still be found clinging to these childish and\nsuperstitious conceptions--the offspring of ignorance, and the relics\nof barbarism, and a certain proof of undeveloped or unenlightened\nminds--will be looked upon as deplorably ignorant and superstitious. We\nwill proceed to enumerate some of the causes which promoted men to the\ndignity of Gods.\n\n1. God must come down to suffer and sympathize with the people.\n\nThe people of all ancient religious countries were so externally-minded,\nthat they demanded a God whom they could know by virtue of his\ncorporeity, really sympathized with their sorrows, their sufferings,\ntheir wrongs, and their oppressions, and, like Jesus Christ, \"touched\nwith a feeling of our infirmities\" (Heb. iv. 15)--a God so far invested\nwith human attributes, human frailties, and human sympathies, that\nhe could shoulder their burdens and their infirmities, and take upon\nhimself a portion of their sufferings. Hence it is said of Christ,\n\"himself took our infirmities.\" (Matt. iii. 17.)\n\nThe same conception runs through the pagan systems. One writer sets\nforth the matter thus: \"The Creator occasionally assumed a mortal form\nto assist mankind in great emergencies\" (as Jesus Christ was afterward\nreported as being the Creator. See Col. i. 16.) \"And as repeated\nsojourners on earth in various capacities, they (the Saviors) became\npractically acquainted with all the sorrows and temptations of humanity,\nand could justly judge of its sins while they sympathized with its\nweaknesses and its sufferings. When they again returned to the higher\nregions (heaven), they remembered the lower forms they had dwelt\namongst, and felt a lively interest in the world they had once\ninhabited. They could penetrate even the secret thoughts of mortals.\"\n\nThe people then demanding a God of sympathy and suffering (as shown\nabove), their credulous imaginations would not be long in finding one.\nLet a man rise up in society endowed with an extraordinary degree of\nspirituality and sympathy for human suffering; let him, like Chrishna,\nPythagoras, Christ, and Mahomet, spend his time in visiting the hovels\nof the poor, or consoling their sorrows, laboring to mitigate their\ngriefs, and in performing acts of charity, disinterested alms and deeds\nof benevolence, kindness and love, and so certain would he sooner or\nlater command the homage of a God. For this was always the mode adopted,\nin an ignorant, undeveloped, and unenlightened age, for accounting\nnot merely for moral greatness, but for every species of mental and\nphysical superiority, as will be hereafter shown. We will proceed to\nnotice the second cause of men being invested with divine attributes.\n\n2. The people must and would have an external God they could see, hear,\nand talk to.\n\nAll the oriental nations, as well as Christian, taught that \"God was\na spirit,\" but no nation or class of people, not even the founders of\nChristianity, entertained a consistent view of the doctrine. Only a\nfew learned philosophers saw the scientific impossibility of an\ninfinite spirit being crowded into the human form. Hence they alone\nwere contented to \"worship God in spirit and in truth.\" Every religious\nnation went counter to the spirit of this injunction in worshiping for a\nGod a being in the human form. Even the founders of Christianity, though\nmaking high claims to spirituality, were too gross, too sensuous in\ntheir conceptions, too externally-minded, and too idolatrous in their\nfeelings and proclivities, to be content to \"worship God in spirit.\"\nHence their deification of the \"man Christ Jesus\" to answer the\nrequisition of an external worship, by which they violated the command\nto \"worship God as a spirit.\" That the practice of promoting men to the\nGodhead originated with minds on the external plane, and evinces a want\nof spiritual development, is clearly set forth by the author of \"The\nNineteenth Century\" (a Christian writer) who tells us, \"The idea of the\nprimitive ages were wholly sensuous, and the masses did not believe in\nanything except that which they could touch, see, hear and taste.\" A\ntrue description, no doubt, of the ancient pagan worshipers of demigods.\nBut we warn the Christian reader not to cast anchor here, for we have\nat our elbow abundance of Christian testimony from the pens of the very\noracles of the church to prove that the same state of things, the\nsame state of society, the same state of mind, the same proclivity for\nGod-making, existed with the people among whom Christ was born, and\nthat it was owing to this sensuous, idolatrous state of mind among his\ndisciples that he received the homage and title of a God.\n\nHence the famous Archbishop Tillotson says, \"Another very common notion,\nand rife in the heathen world, and a great source of their idolatry, was\ntheir deification of great men fit to be worshiped as Gods.\"... \"There\nwas a great inclination in mankind to the worship of a visible Deity.\nSo God was pleased to appear in our nature, that they who were fond of a\nvisible Deity might have one, even a true and natural incarnation of God\nthe Father, the express image of his person.\" Now, we enjoin the reader\nto mark this testimony well, and impress it indelibly upon his memory.\nAccording to this orthodox Christian bishop, Jesus Christ appeared on\nearth as a God in condescension to the wishes of a people too devoid of\nspirituality, and too strongly inclined to idolatry, to worship God as a\nspirit. For he admits the worship of a God-man or a man-God is a species\nof idolatry. This tells the whole story of the apotheosis of \"the man\nChrist Jesus.\" We have no doubt but that here is suggested one of the\ntrue causes of his elevation to the Deityship. Again he says, \"The world\nwas mightily bent on addressing their requests and supplications, not to\nthe Deity immediately, but by some Mediator between the Gods and men.\"\n(See Wadsworth's Eccles. Biog. p. 172.) Here, then, we have the most\nconclusive proof that the belief in mediators is of pagan origin. We\nwill now hear from another archbishop on this subject. In his \"Caution\nto the Times\" (p, 71 ), Archbishop Whately says, \"As the Infinite Being\nis an object too remote and incomprehensible for our minds to dwell\nupon, he has manifested himself in his Son, the man Jesus Christ\"\nPrecisely so 1 just the kind of reasoning employed to account for the\nworship of man-Gods among the heathen. This logic fits one case as well\nas the other.\n\nThe Christian writer F. D. Maurice declares in like manner, \"We accept\nthe fact of the incarnation (of Jesus Christ), because we feel that it\nis impossible to know the absolute invisible God without an incarnation,\nas man needs to know him, and craves to know him.\" (Logical Essay, p.\n79.) Here is more pagan logic--the same reasoning they employed to prove\nthe divinity of their Saviors and demigods. And the Rev. Dr. Thomas\nArnold declares, \"It (the incarnation of Christ) was very necessary,\nespecially at a time when men were so accustomed to worship their\nhighest Gods under the form of men\" (Sermon on Christian Life, p. 61.)\nLet the reader attentively observe the explicit avowal here made, and\nmark well its pregnant inferences. He makes Jesus Christ come into the\nworld in condescension to the idolatrous rivalry of the Jews to be up\nwith the heathen nations in worshiping God in the form of man; that\nis, the founders of Christianity, having been Jews, disclosed the true\nJewish character in running after and adopting the customs of heathen\ncountries then so rife--that of hunting up a great man, and making him\na God--which was only one case out of many of the Jews adopting some\nof the numerous forms of idolatry and other religious customs of their\nheathen neighbors. Their whole history, as set forth in the Bible,\nproves, as we have shown in another chapter, that they were strongly\nprone to such acts. It is not strange, therefore, that they should and\ndid convert \"the man Christ Jesus\" into a God. We will now listen to\nanother Christian writer, the notable and noteworthy Dr. T. Chambers.\n\"Whatever the falsely or superstitiously fearful imagination conjures up\nbecause of God being at a distance, can only be dispelled by God being\nbrought nigh to us.... The veil which hides the unseen God from the eyes\nof mortals must be somehow withdrawn.\" (Select Works, vol. iii. p. 161.)\nMost significant indeed is this species of reasoning. It is the same\nkind of logic which had led to the promotion of more than a score of\ngreat men to the Godhead among the ancient heathen. \"The veil which\nhides the unseen God must be removed'\" says Dr. Chambers; and so had\nreasoned in soliloquy a thousand pagans long before, when determined to\nworship men for Gods. It is simply saying, \"We are too carnally-minded\nto worship God in spirit; we must and will have a God of flesh and\nblood--a God who can be recognized by the external senses;\" he must\n\"become flesh, and dwell amongst us.\" (See John i. 14.) Our author\ncontinues: \"Now all this (removing the veil from the unseen God) has\nbeen done once, and done only once in the person of Jesus Christ.\"\n(Ibid.) Mistake, most fatal mistake, brother Chambers! It has been done\nmore than a score of times in various heathen countries--a fact which\nproves you ignorant of oriental history.\n\nNow let the reader mark the foregoing citations from standard Christian\nauthors, setting forth some of the reasons which led the founders of\nChristianity to adopt a visible man-God in their worship in the\nperson of Jesus Christ, Language could hardly be used to prove more\nconclusively that the whole thing grew out of an idolatrous proclivity\nto man-worship,--that is, the gross, sensuous, carnally-minded\npropensity to worship an extetnal, visible God,--proving, with the\ncorroborative evidence of many other facts, that they were not a whit\nabove the heathen in spiritual development. The reason employed by the\nThibetan for the worship of the Hindoo Chrishna as a God, tells the\nwhole story of the worship and the deification of Jesus Christ \"We could\nnot always have God behind the clouds; so we had him come down where we\ncould see him.\" This is the same kind of reasoning made use of by the\nChristian writer above quoted, all of which discloses a state of mind\namong both heathen and Christians that would not long rest satisfied\nwithout deifying somebody, in order to have a visible God to worship. And\nhence Christians deified \"the man Christ Jesus\" for this purpose.\n\n\"The more externally minded (says Fleurbach), the greater was the\ndetermination to worship a personal God\"--God in the form of man. And as\nthe Jewish founders of Christianity (as every chapter of their history\ndemonstrates) were dwelling on the external plane, it was not an act\nof direct innovation, therefore, for them to fall into the habit of\nworshiping the personal Jesus as a God. It involved no serious incursion\non previous thoughts or habits. And warped and blinded, indeed, must be\nthat mind which cannot here discover the true key to the apotheosis of\nJesus--one of the real causes of his being stripped of his manhood, and\nadvanced to the Godhead. It was as naturally to be expected from the\nthen state of the religious world, and the state of the Jewish mind\nconcerned in the founding of Christianity, as that an autumnal crop of\nfruit should succeed the bloom of spring.\n\nLet it be specially noted, that all the Christian writers above cited\ntell us, in effect, that God sent his Son Jesus Christ into the world\nto be worshiped as a God in condescension to the ignorance and\nsuperstitious tendencies, and we will add, idolatrous proclivities of\nthe people. From this stand-point we challenge the world to show why\nGod may not have sent the oriental Saviors into the world for the\nsame reason--that is, in condescension to the prejudices of the devout\nworshipers under the heathen systems. Why, then, is there not as\nmuch probability that he did do so? Why would he not be as likely to\naccommodate their ignorance and prejudices in this way as those of the\nfounders of the Christian system. This question we shall keep standing\nbefore the Christian world till it is answered, and we challenge them to\nmeet it, and overthrow it if they can.\n\n3. Men deified on account of mental and moral superiority.\n\nThe ancient nations, in their entire ignorance of the philosophy of the\nhuman mind, and the laws controlling its actions, always accounted for\nthe appearance of great men amongst them by supposing them to be Gods.\nEvery country occasionally produced a man, who, by virtue of natural\nsuperiority, rose so high in the scale of moral and intellectual\ngreatness as to fill the ideal of the people with respect to the\ncharacteristics of a God. So low, so limited, so narrow, so greatly\ncircumscribed were the conceptions of deity, of the undeveloped and\nintellectually dwarfed minds of all religious countries in that age,\nthat a man had to rise but a few degrees above the common level of the\npopulace to become a God. He could \"easily fill the bill,\" and exhibit\nall the qualities they assigned to the highest God in the heavens.\nAnd this is as true of the Jewish mind as that of any other nation, a\nportion of whom adored Jesus as a God. Or if they lacked anything in\nnatural inclination, they made it up by imitation, a propensity which\nthey possessed in no small degree, that is, a proneness to imitate the\ncustoms of other nations.\n\nMr. Higgins tells us that \"men of brilliant intellects and high moral\nattainments, and great healers (of which Christ was one), were almost\ncertain to be deified.\" In like manner Archbishop Tillotson says, \"they\ndeified famous and eminent persons by advancing them after their death\nto the dignity of an inferior kind of Gods fit to be worshiped by men\non earth.\" Mark the expression, \"after their death\" We have shown in\nanother chapter that Jesus Christ was not generally considered a God,\neven by his followers, till more than three hundred years after\nhis death, when Constantine declared him to be \"God of very God\"--a\ncircumstance of itself sufficient to establish the conclusion that\nhe did not possess this character. A God would be adored as such by\neverybody while living, but a man's worshipers rise up after his death,\nas in the case of \"the man Christ Jesus.\" Great mental endowments,\nor great moral attainments, would, in most countries, bring the most\nignorant down on their knees to worship such a man as a God. But it\nre-quired years, and sometimes centuries, to get him fully established\namong the Gods. This is as true of Jesus Christ as the other\nhuman-descended deities. Whatever amount of homage Jesus might have\nreceived while living, any person who will institute a thorough,\nunbiased scrutiny in the case will discover that it was his great\nhealing powers and superior mental qualities which finally deified him.\nHis ignorant admirers knew no way of accounting for such extraordinary\nqualities but to suppose him to be the embodiment of infinite wisdom.\nLike the Chinaman who exclaimed, \"See the God in that man,\" when an\nEnglishman cured a young woman of partial blindness by anointing her eyes\nwith kerosene. Such a deed would deify almost any man, in almost any\ncountry, before the dawn of letters and the recognition of the science\nof mind.\n\nThe missionary Rev. D. O. Allen's method of accounting for the\ndeification of the Hindoo God Chrishna is so suggestive, that we here\npresent it. He tells us that \"as the exploits ascribed to Chrishna\nexceed mere human power, the difficulty was removed by placing him among\nthe incarnations of Vishnu.\" (India, Ancient and Modern, p. 26.) Exactly\nso! We are glad of such historic information. We hope the Christian\nreader will note the lesson it suggests. For certainly, every reader,\nwho has not had his reason shipwrecked on the shoals of a blind and\ndogmatic theology, can see here a key to unlock the great mystery of\nthe Christian incarnation--the divinity of Jesus Christ As some of the\nexploits of Chrishna were supposed to \"exceed mere human power,\" we\nare told the difficulty was explained by imagining him to be a God. How\npowerful the suggestion! how conclusive the explanation, not only for\nthe Godhood of this sin-atoning Savior, but for that of \"our Lord and\nSavior Jesus Christ,\" and all the other Lords, and Gods, and Saviors of\nantiquity! A single hint will sometimes explain whole volumes of obscure\nhistory, as does this of the Rev. Christian Hindoo missionary D. O.\nAllen. And surely, most deplorably blinded by superstition must be the\ntwo hundred millions of Christ worshipers, the three hundred millions\nwho worship Chrishna, the one hundred and twenty million adorers of\nConfucius, the fifty millions of suppliants of Mithra the Mediator, and\nthe one hundred and fifty millions of followers of Mahomet, who cannot\nsee here a satisfactory solution of the deityship of all these Gods, and\nall the other man-Gods of antiquity.\n\nThe question is sometimes asked, How could two hundred millions of\npeople come to believe that Jesus was a God merely because of his\nsuperiority as a man? We will answer by pointing to the history of the\nHindoo Chrishna, and by asking the same question with respect to his\nGodhead. How could three hundred millions of people be brought to\nbelieve in his divinity, and worship him as a God, merely because he was\na superior human being? One question is as easily answered as the other,\nand posterity will answer both questions alike. When we observe it\ntaught as an important and easily learned lesson of history, and one\nbased on a thousand facts, that no man could rise to intellectual\ngreatness or moral distinction in the era in which Christ was born\nwithout being advanced to the dignity of a God, and worshiped as such,\nit is really a source of humility and sorrow to every unshackled lover\nof truth and humanity to reflect that there are so many millions of\npeople whose mental vision is so beclouded by a dogmatic and inexorable\ntheology that they cannot see the logical potency of these facts,--that\nthey cannot be even moved by this great and overwhelming amount of\nevidence against the divinity dogma, and observe that it explodes it\ninto a thousand fragments, but still cling to the delusion that \"the\nman Christ Jesus,\" with all the human qualities and human frailties\nwith which his own history (the Gospels) invest him, was nevertheless\na God,--ay, the monstrous delusion that any being possessing a _finite\nform_ could be an _infinite being_--a most self-evident and shocking\nabsurdity. And we challenge all Christendom to show, or approximate one\ninch toward showing, that there was sufficient difference between Christ\nand Chrishna to require us to accept one as a man and the other as a\nGod. It cannot be done.\n\nWe have shown, then, by the foregoing exposition, that one cause of the\ndeification of men was simply an attempt to solve the problem of\nhuman greatness,--an attempt to account for the moral and intellectual\nsuperiority of men which enabled them to perform deeds and otherwise\nexhibit a character far above the capacity of the multitude to\ncomprehend, and which they could find no other way to account for than\nto suppose them to be Gods, while the low and groveling conceptions\nwhich most religious nations, and especially the Jews, had formed of\nthe character and essential attributes of the Infinite Deity (often\ninvesting him with the most ignoble human attributes, human passions,\nand human imperfections), made it perfectly easy to convert their great\nmen by imagination into Gods. The Jews represented God not only as\na coming down from heaven in propria persona, and walking, talking,\nwrestling, &c., as a man (on one occasion we are told he and Jacob\nscuffled all night), but he is often represented as acting the part of\na wicked man, such as lying (see 2 Chron. v. 22), getting mad (see Deut.\ni. 37), swearing, sanctioning the highhanded and demoralizing crimes of\nstealing (see Ex. iii. 2), of robbery (see Ex. xii. 36), of murder (see\nDeut. xiii. 2) and even fornication (see Gen. xxxi. 1, and Num. xxxi)\nand thus they invested Diety with such mean, low, despicable attributes\nas to reduce his moral character to a level with the most immoral man in\nsociety. So that it was very easy, if not very natural, to elevate their\ngreat men (if it really required any elevation) to a level with their\nGod.\n\nMen and Gods were in character and conception so nearly alike, that it\nwas easy to bring them on a level, or to mistake one for the other. And\nhence it is we find an incarnated God, Savior, Son of God, Redeemer,\n&c., figuring in the early history of nearly every oriental religious\nnation whose name and history has descended to us. Indeed, the practice\nof deifying men, or mistaking men for Gods, was once so common, so\nnearly universal, that it must require a mind very ignorant of oriental\nhistory to adore Jesus Christ as having been the only character of this\nkind who figured in the religious world. It was, as before suggested,\ndeemed the most rational way of accounting for the marked superiority\namong men, to suppose that some men had a divine birth, and were\nbegotten by the great Infinite Deity himself, and descended to the earth\nthrough the purest human (virgin) channel.\n\nAs Mr. Higgins remarks, \"Every person who possessed a striking\nsuperiority of mind, either for talent or goodness, was supposed\nanciently to have a portion of the divine mind or essence incorporated\nor incarnated in him.\" The Jews had a number of men whose names imply a\nparticipation in the divine nature, among which we will cite Elijah and\nElisha (El-i-jah and El-i-sha), El being the Hebrew name or term for\nGod, while Jah is Jehovah (see Ps. lxviii. 4), and Sha means a Savior.\nElijah, then, is an approximation to God--Jehovah, and Elisha is\nGod--a Savior. The character of men and Gods were cast in molds so\napproximately similar, so nearly identical, as to make the transition,\nor change from one to the other, so slight and easy; either of men into\nGods or Gods into men, that several nations went so far as to teach\nthat a man might by his own natural exertions, his own voluntary powers,\nraise himself to a level with the Diety, and thereby become a God.\n\nMr. Ritter in his \"History of Ancient Philosophy\" (Chap. II.), tells\nus that some of the Budhist sect held that \"a man by freeing himself\nby holiness of conduct from the obstacles of nature, may deliver his\nfellows from the corruption of the times, and become a benefactor and\nredeemer of his race, and also even become a God\"--a \"Budha\"--i. e., a\nSavior and Son of God. Singular enough that the Christian should\nobject to this doctrine as being rather blasphemous, when his own bible\nabundantly and explicitly teaches the same doctrine in effect!\n\nWe find the same thing substantially taught over and over again in the\nChristian Scriptures. \"Be ye perfect even as your Father in heaven is\nperfect\" (Matt. v. 18), requires a man to become morally perfect as God,\nwhich is all that the Budhist precept requires or contemplates, and no\nman can become perfect as God without becoming a God. But we are not\nleft to mere inference in the matter, We have the doctrine several times\nexpressed and unquestionably taught in the Christian bible of man's\npower and prerogative to become either a God or Son of God. \"Said I not\nthat ye are Gods?\" (Ex. iv. 16). \"Behold now, we are the sons of God.\"\n(i John i. 2.)\n\nHere is the Budhist doctrine as explicitly stated as it can be taught.\nIt is, then, a Christian bible doctrine as well as a pagan doctrine,\nthat man can become a God, and that God can be born of woman, and\nthereby invested with all the frail and imperfect attributes of man. It\ncannot be considered a matter of marvel, therefore, that so many of the\ngood, the great, and the wise men of almost every country, including\n\"the man Christ Jesus,\" should be honored and adored with the titles\nof Deity, and worshiped as God absolute, \"Son of God,\" \"Savior,\"\n\"Redeemer,\" \"Intercessor\" \"Mediator,\" &c.\n\n4. God comes down and is incarnated to fight and conquer the devil. We\nwill proceed to enumerate other causes and motives which conspired in\nvarious cases to invest some one or more of the great men of a nation\nwith divine honors, and adore them as veritable Gods and Saviors \"come\ndown to us in the form of men.\" It was a tenant of faith with most of\nthe ancient religions, that almost at the dawn of human existence a\ndevil or evil principle found its way into the world, to the great\ndiscomfiture of man and the no small annoyance of the Supreme Creator\nhimself, and that hence there must needs be a Savior, a Redeemer, an\nIntercessor to combat and if possible \"destroy the devil and his works.\"\n\nFor this purpose appeared the Savior Chrishna, in India, the Savior\nOsiris, in Egypt, the God or Mediator Mithra, in Persia, the Redeemer\nQuexalcote, in Mexico, the Savior Jesus Christ, in Judea, &c. In the\ninitiatory chapter on the transgression and fall of man, some of the\noriental bibles graphically describe the scene of \"the war in heaven\"--a\ncounterpart to the story of St. John, as found in the twelfth chapter\nof Revelation, wherein Michael and the dragon are represented as the\ncaptains and commander-in-chief of their respective embattled hosts,\nand in which the former was crowned as victor in the contest, as he\nsucceeded in vanquishing and \"casting out the evil one.\" In the pagan\nmilitary drama the scene of the war in heaven is transferred to the\nearth. A God, a Savior (a Son of God), comes down to put a stop to the\nmachinations of the \"Evil One,\" i. e., to \"destroy the devil and his\nworks\" as we are told Christ came for that purpose. (1 John iii. 8 ) See\nthe Author's \"Biography of Satan.\"\n\nThe Egyptian story runs thus: \"Osiris appeared on earth to benefit\nmankind, and after he had performed the duties of his mission, and had\nfallen a sacrifice to Typhon (the devil, or evil principle), which,\nhowever, he eventually overcame ('overcame the wicked one,' 1 John ii.\n11), by rising from the dead, after being crucified, he became the\njudge of mankind in a future state.\" (See Kerrick's \"Ancient Egypt\",\nalso Wilkinson's \"Egypt.\")\n\nThe Budhist, or Hindoo, version of the story is on this wise: \"The\nprince (of darkness), or evil spirit, Ravana, or Mahesa, got into a\ncontest and a war with the divine hero Rama, in which the latter proved\nvictorious, and put to flight the army of 'the wicked one,' but not till\nafter considerable injury had been done to the human family, and the\nwhole order of the universe subverted; to rectify which, and to achieve\na final and complete triumph over Ravana (the devil) and his works,\nand thus save the human race from utter destruction, the gods besought\nVishnu (the second person of the Trinity) to descend to the earth and\ntake upon himself the form and flesh of man. And it was argued that as\nthe mission appertained to man, the God Vishnu, when he descended to the\nearth in the capacity of a Savior, should become half man and half God,\nand that the most feasible way to accomplish this end was for him to be\nborn of a woman.\"\n\nAnd that the glory and honor of his triumph over Ravana, the devil,\nwould be greater if achieved in this capacity than if he were to come\ndown from heaven and conquer Ravana wholly with his attributes as a God,\nor wholly in his divine character--i.e., as absolute God, uninvested\nwith human nature. The suggestion was approved by Vishnu, who descended\nand took upon himself \"the form of man\" (\"the form of a servant\"--Phil.\nii. 7). And that his metamorphosis or earth-born life might be\nthe purer, it was decided that he should be born of a woman wholly\nuncontaminated with man--that is, a virgin. And thus, far back in the\nmidnight of mythology and fable, originated the story of divine Saviors\nand Gods being born of virgins--a conception now found incorporated in\nthe religious histories of various ancient nations.\n\nAnd now let us observe how substantially the Christian story of a Savior\nconforms to the above. Jesus, like the Saviors of India and Egypt, was\nbelieved to be a man-God--half man and half God, and reputedly he came\ninto the world, like them, to \"destroy the devil and his works,\" or\nthe works of the devil--that is, to put an end to the evil or malignant\nprinciple introduced into the world by the serpent in the garden\nof Eden; as it is declared \"the seed of the woman shall bruise the\nserpent's head\" (Gen. iii. 15)--which is interpreted as referring to\nChrist. And like these and various other pagan Saviors Jesus is assigned\nthe highest and most ennobling human origin--a birth from a virgin. And,\nas in the instances above named, Jesus had also several encounters with\nthe devil; first in the wilderness, then on a mountain, and finally,\nlike them, falls a sacrifice to his insidious, malignant power acting\nthrough the agency and mediumship of Judas Iscariot; for his betrayal\nis ascribed wholly to Satan, whom John called the serpent, entering into\nJudas and prompting the act. (See Rev. xii. 3). And thus Christ, like\nthe other saviors, falls a victim to the serpentine or satanic power\nacting through the instrumentality of a Judas Iscariot; but finally,\ntriumphed, like the Savior of Egypt (Osiris), by rising from the\ndead--\"the first fruits of immortality.\" And thus the stories run\nparallel--the more modern Christian with the more ancient pagan.\n\n     (For a full exposition of the belief and traditions\n     respecting a devil and a hell in all ages and all countries,\n     see the Author's \"Biography of Satan.\")\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXX. SACRED CYCLES EXPLAINING THE ADVENT OF THE GODS\n\nThe Master-Key to the Divinity of Jesus Christ.\n\nExtraordinary Revelations in History and Science.\n\nRECENT explorations in the field of oriental sacred history have\nrevealed to the antiquarian some curious and deeply interesting facts\nappertaining to traditions founded on, and growing out of, astronomical\nphenomena and changes in the visible heavens, which throw much light on,\nand go far toward elucidating and furnishing a satisfactory explanation\nof many of the \"mysteries\" of the Christian bible. The works which we\nhave consulted, containing the reports and results of researches of this\ncharacter, tend to elucidate and establish the following conclusions:--\n\n1. That anciently, in religious countries, time was divided into Cycles,\nAetas, or Neros.\n\n2. That these measures of time grew out of, and represented periodical\nchanges, or periodically occurring phenomena in the astronomical\nheavens.\n\n3. That some religious nations had three Cycular periods of different\nlengths, representing three orders and degrees of miraculous births.\nIn India the length of the first or shorter Cycle was thirty days,\nthe length of one moon or month. Every change of the moon marked an\nimportant event in their religious history. Each change was supposed to\ndenote the birth of some angel or celestial being known as an Eon.\nThe second Cycular period was of six hundred years' duration, and\nwas founded on a text of the sacred book of India, known as the Surya\nSidhanta, which declares \"the equinoctial point moves eastward one\ndegree in thirty times twenty years\" (thirty times twenty being 600). At\nevery occurrence of this equinoctial change hightened by an eclipse of\nthe sun or moon, or some other wonder-exciting phenomenon, a God was\nsupposed to be born. Such a marvelous and terror-inspiring event, in\nthe apprehensions of the credulous and superstitious populace of an\nunscientific age, could not be designed for anything less than the birth\nof a God or Divine Savior. Their theology teaches that such was the\nwickedness of man, that a God had to descend from heaven, and suffer and\ndie for the people, in some way, every six hundred years.\n\nAnd this period was announced by the God's causing a collision of the\nsun and moon, or some other terror-exciting phenomena in the heavens\nabove or the earth beneath. When one of these six hundred Cycular\nperiods was about to expire, and another commence, every remarkable\nphenomenon in the heavens was watched and interpreted as being connected\nwith it. And some person born at that period, who exhibited any\nremarkable or extraordinary trait of character, was certain to be\npromoted to the Godhead, as being miraculously born and brought forth\nfor the special occasion. He was the Avatar Savior or Messiah for that\nCycle. There were two extraordinary events to be accounted for--one was\nthe display of unusual and terror-exciting phenomena in the heavens, and\nthe other the birth of extraordinary men on earth. And it was natural\nfor an ignorant age to associate them together, and make one aid in\naccounting for the other. And as these celestial phenomena were only\nwitnessed at intervals distant apart, the thought naturally arose, and\nthe conclusion was easily established, that they came periodically, and\nfor the special purpose of heralding the birth of a God.\n\nAnd as tradition reported that similar events were witnessed six hundred\nyears before the conviction was fixed in the popular mind, this was the\nestablished period intervening between these great epochs. And thus\nthe six hundred year Cycular tradition became established in India, and\nfinally spread through all the Eastern countries. We find traces of it\nin Egypt, Syria, Persia, Chaldea, China, Italy, and Judea. And the proof\nthat the deification of great men in some countries grew out of this\nCycular tradition is found in the fact that many of them were born at\nthe commencement of Cycles. The Hindoos are able to recount the names\nof ten sin-atoning Saviors who made their appearance on earth at these\nregular intervals of six hundred years. The name of the first Avatar\nMediator and Savior who forsook the throne of heaven to come down and\ndie for the people was Matsa. Tradition and the sacred books fix his\nbirth at about six thousand years B. C. The names and advent of the\nother sin-atoning Saviors occur in the following order: 2. Vurahay, 3.\nKurma, 4. Nursu, 5. Waman, 6. Pursuram, 7. Kama, 8. Chrishna, 9. Sakia,\n10. Salavahana. The last named Savior was cotemporary with Jesus Christ.\nThe God and Savior Sakia was born six hundred years B. C. \"Our Lord\nand Savior\" and \"Son of God,\" Chrisna, was immaculately conceived and\nmiraculously born, according to Higgins, 1200 B. C.\n\nA circumstance strongly confirming the conclusion that Cycular periods\nhad much to do with the promotion of men to the dignity of Gods is, that\nmost of the deified personages reported in history were, according to\nthe best authorities, born near the commencement of Cycles. Recurring\nback to the eighth Cycle, we observe the advent of that period of\nChrishna, Zoroaster 2d, Bali, Thammuz, Atys, Osiris, and several others.\nAt the commencement of the ninth Cycle appeared Sakia, Quexalcote,\nZoroaster 2d, Xion, Qairious, Prometheus, Mithra and many others.\n\nThe tenth Cycle brought in Jesus Christ, Salavhana, Apollonious, and\nothers that might be named. Mahomet succeeded Jesus Christ just six\nhundred years (he was born in the year 600 A. D.), which inaugurated\nanother Cycle. Many facts are recorded in history proving the prevalence\nand sacredness of the Cycle idea in different countries. The story\nin Egypt of the bird called the Phoenix, being hatched, according to\ntradition, just 600 years B. C., and living to be just six hundred years\nold, and having the power to renew itself every six hundred years, shows\nthe prevalence of the Cycular tradition in that country.\n\nWe have the statement upon the records of history that when the first\nsix hundred years after the foundation of Rome were about to expire,\nthe people became greatly excited with the apprehension that some\nextraordinary event, must attend the occasion. And but for the influence\nof the philosophers, some extraordinary man would have been hunted up\nand promoted to divine honor as being the God born for that Cycle. The\nwritings of Plato, Plutarch, Ovid, Cicero, Virgil, and Aristotle, all\nevince a belief in Cycles, and the belief that ten Cycles, or Aetas,\nwere the measure, for the duration of the world. According to M. Faber,\na new-born Savior was always expected to make his appearance at the\ncommencement of one of these Cycles. Hence the deification of those\npersonages above named, and many others that might be named. It is a\nremarkable circumstance that the Jewish bible should speak of Noah as\nbeing six hundred years old at the commencement of the flood, when it\nwas a tradition amongst the ancient Egyptians that the ushering in of\nthe six hundreth year Cycle was to be attended with a flood.\n\nAnd the time antecedent to Noah after creation, was the measure of three\nCycles, according to the chronology of the Samaritan bible, it being\n6004-600+600= 1800 years from Adam to Noah. It is an interesting fact\nthat those enigmatical figures made use of by Daniel, as also some of\nthose found in the Apocalypse, are susceptible of a Cycular explanation.\nThese occult prophecies, as they are supposed to be, which have puzzled\nand bewildered many thousands of Christian minds and bible expounders\nin their attempt to evolve their signification, are susceptible of a\nCycular explanation. They are of easy solution on a Cycular basis, or\nwith the Cycular key.\n\nTake, for example, Daniel's famous prophecy (so called) of the seventy\nweeks, as found in the ninth chapter, announcing the advent of a Messiah\nat the end of that period. We find by a calculation based on Tyson's\n\"Historical Atlas,\" and Haskell's \"Chronology and Universal History,\"\nthat Daniel lived in the hundred and tenth year of the ninth Cycle, at\nwhich time the prefigure seems to have been used. Assuming this as a\nbasis, and multiplying seventy weeks by seven, to convert it into years,\nas Christian essayists are accustomed to doing, and we have as the\nresult 70x7=490, which being added to one hundred and ten, the year that\ngave birth to the prophesy, makes six hundred, which exactly completes\nthe Cycle, and furnishes a simple and beautiful explanation of a\nmystical figure, on which many thousands of conjectures, speculations,\nand guesses have been founded, but on which they have failed to throw\nany light.\n\nThe 70x70=490 years, were wanting to complete the Cycle; and when this\nrolled away, it brought a new Cycle, and with it a new sin-atoning\nSavior was always expected in some countries (the country in which\nDaniel lived being one of this number); a new Messiah (or sin-atoning\nSavior), and some great man born at that time, was fixed upon and\ndeified as being that Messiah. Hence the Jews, in imitation of their\nneighbors, yielding to their strong proclivities to borrow from and copy\nafter heathen nations, selected \"the man Christ Jesus\" as their Messiah\nand Savior. The mystical era of Daniel, signified by \"a time, times, and\nthe dividing of time\" (Dan. vii. 25), or, as St. John has it, \"a time,\ntimes, and a half time\" (see Rev. xii. 14) is explainable by the same\nCycular key.\n\nSome writers have conjectured that Daniel was a Chaldean priest. If so,\nhe must have had a knowledge of their astronomical Cycle of two\nthousand one hundred and sixty years, which completed the period of the\nprecession of the equinoxes. Explained by this Cycle, his \"time, times,\nand dividing of time, or half time,\" or \"a time, another time, and\na half time,\" as some writers have rendered it, would be 2160 f\n2160-I-1080 5400; nine Cycles exactly, as 600X9= 5400. Add this to the\nCycle in which he lived, and we have 5400+600=6000, the great Millennial\nCycle, when not only a new Savior and Messiah was to be born, but a new\nworld also. Both the long and short Cycle (and one was a measure of the\nother) were expected to expire at that time, according to a Chaldean\ntradition. And thus is beautifully explained another \"deep, dark and\nunfathomable mystery,\" which thousands of devout minds have exhausted\ntheir ingenuity in trying to find a meaning for. Again, look at the\nfrightful nightmare visions of Daniel and the author of the Apocalypse,\nin which they saw a monstrous beast with seven heads and ten horns,\nthough Daniel mentions only the horns. The seven heads were, in all\nprobability, the seven auspicious months of the year in which some of\nthe nations revealed in the enjoyment of, and praised and celebrated\ntheir fruitful, bountiful blessings, the year being divided into two\nseasons, seven summer months and five winter months.\n\nNow, let it be noted, St. John lived near the tenth Cycle, which answers\nto the ten horns of the beast. Hence is most forcibly suggested that\ninterpretation of the figure. Daniel's ten horns should have been\ntranslated eleven horns, as he lived in the ninth Cycle, though so near\nthe tenth, that he probably constructed his figure on the tenth. And\nDaniel's prophetic declaration (so considered), found in the eighth\nchapter, that it would be two thousand three hundred days until the\nsanctuary should be closed, is explainable in the same manner. According\nto Mr. Irving, Mr. Frere, and other writers, there was a large fraction\nover the three hundred days, making it nearer four hundred, and hence\nmight have been so rendered, which would make 20004-400=2400; the exact\nlength of four Cycles, 600x4=2400. And their are other mystical\nfigures, frightful visions, and occult metaphors found in the Apocalypse\nsusceptible of a Cycular solution. The Cycle is the true key for\nunlocking many of the ancient mysteries of various religions. The\nChinese have always reckoned by Cycles of sixty years, instead of by\ncenturies. (See New Am. Encyclop. vol. v. p. 105.)\n\nWe will now bestow a brief notice on the Millennial Cycle: the\nsacred period of 6000 years, composed of ten of the smaller Cycles,\n600x10=6000. Dr. Hales says, \"A tradition of Millennial ages prevailed\nthroughout the east, and finally reached the west.\" (Chron. vol. i. p.\n44.) We are told by astronomers that if the angle which the plane of the\necliptic forms with the plane of the Equator had decreased gradually, as\nit was once supposed to do, the two planes would coincide in about six\nthousand years--a period which comprises ten of the smaller Cycles,\n600X10 =6000. And it was very easy and very natural for an ignorant and\nsuperstitious age to conclude that such a prodigious, astounding, and\nawful event as that of two stupendous orbits or planes coming in contact\nwith each other, should be attended with some direful and calamitous\nevent, and with a tremendous display of divine power. Nothing less than\nan entire revolution, if not the total destruction of the world, could\ncomport with the majesty and magnitude of such an event.\n\nAnd this great crisis was to bring down the Omnipotent Divine Judge from\nthe throne of heaven; that is, the Almighty being who caused it was to\ncome down, or send his Son to call the nations to judgment, and drown\nthe world, or set it on fire. The first destruction according to the\ntradition of the Chaldeans, Persians, Assyrians, Mexicans, and some\nother nations, was to be by water, and the next by fire, when the\noceans, seas, and lakes were to be converted into ashes. And Christ's\napostles seemed to have cherished this tradition. Peter says, \"whereby\nthe world that was then, being overflowed by water, perished. But the\nheavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store,\nreserved unto fire against the day of judgment,\" (2 Peter iii. 6.) This\nwas a pagan belief long prior to the era of Peter. Josephus says, \"Adam\npredicted that the world would be twice destroyed, once by water,\nnext by fire.\" A writer says, \"A glorious, blissful future attends the\ndestruction of the world by fire, and the reappearance of Vishnu (i. e.,\neleventh incarnation of Vishnu) has been for several thousand years the\nhopeful anticipation of India.\" \"The last coming of Vishnu in power and\nglory,\" says another writer, \"to consummate the final overthrow of evil,\nsin, and death, is so firmly fixed in the minds of the devotees,\nthat they have an annual festival in commemoration of their prophesy\nreferring to it, at which they exclaim, in a loud voice, 'When will the\nDivine Helper come? when will the Deliverer appear?'\"\n\nAt the consummation of this event, \"a comet will roll under the moon and\nset the world on fire;\" so affirms their bible. And the Persian bible,\nthe Zend-Avesta, in like manner predicts that \"a star, with a tail in\ncourse of its revolution, will strike the earth and set it on fire.\"\nSeneca predicts that \"the time will come when the world will be wrapped\nin flames, and the opposite powers in conflict will mutually destroy\neach other.\"\n\nOvid prophesies poetically,--\n\n     \"For thus the stern, unyielding Fates decree.\n     That earth, air, heaven, with the capacious sea,\n     All shall fall victims to devouring fire,\n     And in fierce flames the blazing orbs expire.\"\n     Lucian, in a like spirit, exclaims,--\n\n     \"One vast, appointed flame, by Fate's decree,\n     Shall waste yon azure heavens, the earth and sea.\"\n\nThe Egyptians marked their houses with red, to indicate that the world\nwould be destroyed by fire. Orpheus, 1200 B. C., at the inauguration\nof the eighth Cycle, entertained fearful forebodings of the speedy\ndestruction of the world by water or fire. Some nations held that\nthe alternate destruction of the world by water and fire had already\noccurred, and would occur again. Theopompus informs us that some of the\norientalists believed that \"the God of light and the God of darkness\nreigned by turn every six thousand years\" (commencing with an\nastronomical Cycle of course), and that during this period the other\nwas held in subjection, which finally resulted in \"a war in heaven;\" a\ncounterpart to St. John's story. (See Rev. chap. xii.)\n\nThis accords with Volney's statement, that \"it was recorded in the\nsacred books of the Persians and Chaldeans that the world, composed of\na total revolution of twelve thousand periods, was divided into two\npartial revolutions of six thousand years each--one being the reign of\ngood, and the other the reign of evil.\" (Ruins, p. 244.) This belief was\ndisseminated through most of the nations. One of these revolutions was\nproduced, some believed, by a concussion of worlds, which displaced the\nocean and seas, and thus produced a general flood, which drowned every\nliving thing on the earth. The next revolution will be caused by a\ncollision of worlds, which will produce fire, and burn the earth to\nashes.\n\nNow, let it be noted that all of these grand epochs were founded on\nCycles, and accompanied by the tradition of a God being born upon the\nearth (conceived by a virgin maid), or descending in person; that is,\nmen were promoted to the Godhead. And in this way Jesus Christ was\ndeified. Volney explains the matter thus: \"Now, according to the Jewish\ncomputation, six thousand years had nearly elapsed since the supposed\ncreation of the world (according to their chronology). This coincidence\nproduced considerable fermentation in the minds of the people. Nothing\nwas thought of but the approaching termination. The great Mediator and\nFinal Judge was expected, and his advent desired, that an end might be\nput to their calamities.\" (Ruins, p. 168).\n\nMr. Higgins corroborates this statement, when he tells us that \"about\nthe time of the C\u00e6sars, there seems to have been a general expectation\nthat some Great One was to appear. And finally, when the Cycle had\npassed, the people, the Jew-Christians, began to look about to see who\nthat Great One was. Some fixed on Herod, some on Julius C\u00e6sar, and some\non others. But finally public opinion settled on one Jesus of Nazareth,\non account of his superiority in morals and intellect, while the Hindoos\ndeified Salavahana, the Greeks Apollonious, &c.\" And thus science and\nhistory join hand in hand to explain most beautifully and conclusively\nthe greatest mystery that ever brought two hundred millions of people\ndaily upon their knees--the apotheosis, or deification of \"the man\nChrist Jesus.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXXI. CHRISTIANITY DERIVED FROM HEATHEN AND ORIENTAL SYSTEMS\n\nMORE than twenty thousand sermons are preached in the Christian pulpits,\non every recurring Sabbath, to convince the people that the religion and\nmorality taught and practiced by Jesus Christ was of divine emanation,\nand was never before taught in the world,--that his system of\nmorality was without a parallel, and his practical life without a\nprecedent,--that the doctrine of self-denial, humility, unselfishness,\nbenevolence, and charity,--also devout piety, kind treatment of enemies,\nand love for the human race, which he preached and practiced, had never\nbefore been exemplified in the life and teachings of any individual or\nnation. But a thorough acquaintance with the history and moral systems\nof some of the oriental nations, and the practical lives of piety and\nself-denial exemplified in their leading men long anterior to the birth\nof Christ, and long before the name of Christianity was anywhere\nknown, must convince any unprejudiced mind that such a claim is\nwithout foundation. And to prove it, we will here institute a critical\ncomparison between Christianity and some of the older systems with\nrespect to the essential spirit of their teachings, and observe how\nutterly untenable and groundless is the dogmatic assumption which claims\nfor the Christian religion either any originality or any superiority. Of\ncourse if their is nothing new or original, there is nothing superior.\n\nWe will first arrange Christianity side by side with the ancient system\nknown as Essenism--a religion whose origin has never been discovered,\nthough it is known that the Essenes existed in the days of Jonathan\nMaccabeus, B. C. 150, and that they were of Jewish origin, and\nconstituted one of the three Jewish sects (the other two being Pharisees\nand Sadducees). We have but fragments of their history as furnished by\nPhilo, Josephus, Pliny, and their copyists, Eusebius, Dr. Ginsburg, and\nothers, on whose authority we will proceed to show that Alexandrian and\nJudean Essenism was identically the same system in spirit and essence as\nits successor Judean Christianity; in other words, Judean Christianity\nteaches the same doctrines and moral precepts which had been previously\ninculcated by the disciples of the Essenian religion.\n\n\nA PARALLEL EXHIBITION OF THE PRECEPTS AND PRACTICAL LIVES OF CHRIST AND\nTHE ESSENES.\n\nWe will condense from Philo, Josephus, and other authors.\n\n1. Philo says, \"It is our first duty to seek the kingdom of God and his\nrighteousness so the Essenes believed and taught.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Seek first the kingdom of God, and his\nrighteousness, and all else shall be added.\" (Matt. vi. 33; Luke xii. 31.)\n\n2. Philo says, \"They abjured all amusements, all elegances, and all\npleasures of the senses.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Forsake the world and the things thereof.\"\n\n3. The Essenes say, \"Lay up nothing on earth, but fix your mind solely\non heaven.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Lay not up treasures on earth,\" &c.\n\n4. \"The Essenes, having laid aside all the anxieties of life,\" says\nPhilo, \"and leaving society, they make their residence in solitary wilds\nand in gardens.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"They wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and\nin dens, and in caves of the earth.\" (Heb. xi. 38.)\n\n5. Josephus says, \"They neither buy nor sell among themselves, but give\nof what they have to him that wanteth.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"And parted them (their goods) to all men as every\nman had need.\" (Acts ii. 45.)\n\n6. Eusebius says, \"Even as it is related in the Acts of the Apostles,\nall (the Esseues)... were wont to sell their possessions and their\nsubstance, and divide among all according as any one had need, so that\nthere was not one among them in want.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"Neither was their any among them that lacked, for\nas many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the\nprice of the things that were sold, &c.\" (Acts iv. 34.)\n\n7. Eusebius says, \"For whoever, of Christ's disciples, were owners of\nestates or houses, sold them, and brought the price thereof, and laid\nthem at the apostles' feet, and distribution was made as every one had\nneed. So Philo relates things exactly similar of the Essenes.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ (The text above quoted.)\n\n8. \"Philo tells us (says Eusebius) that the Essenes forsook father,\nmother, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, for their religion.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Whosoever forsaketh not father and mother, houses\nand lands, &c. cannot be my disciples.\"\n\n9. \"Their being sometimes called _monks_ was owing to their abstraction\nfrom the world,\" says Eusebius.\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"They are not of the world, even as I am not of\nthe world.\" (John xvii. 16.)\n\n10. \"And the name Ascetics was applied to them on account of their rigid\ndiscipline, their prayers, fasting, self-mortification, &c., as they\nmade themselves eunuchs.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"There be eunuchs which have made themselves\neunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake.\"\n\n11. \"They maintained a perfect community of goods, and an equality of\nexternal rank.\" (Mich. vol. iv. p. 83.)\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be\nyour servant.\" (Matt. xx. 27.)\n\n12. \"The Essenes had all things in common, and appointed one of their\nnumber to manage the common bag.\" (Dr. Ginsburg.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_ \"And had all things in common.\" (Acts ii. 44; see\nalso Acts iv. 32.)\n\n13. \"All ornamental dress they (Essenes) detested.\" (Mich. vol. iv. p.\n83.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"Whose adorning let it not be that outward\nadorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, and putting on of\napparel.\" (1 Peter iii. 3.)\n\n14. \"They would call no man master.\" (Mich.)\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Be not called Rabbi, for one is your Master.\"\n(Matt, xxiii. 8.)\n\n15. \"They said the Creator made all mankind equal.\" (Mich.)\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"God hath made of one blood all them that dwell\nupon the earth.\"\n\n16. \"They renounced oaths, saying, He who cannot be believed without\nswearing is condemned already.\" (Mich.)\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Swear not at all.\"\n\n17. \"They would not eat anything which had blood in it, or meat which\nhad been offered to idols. Their food was hyssop, and bread, and salt;\nand water their only drink.\" (Mich.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"That ye abstain from meat offered to idols, and\nfrom blood.\" (Acts xv. 29.)\n\n18. \"Take nothing with them, neither meat or drink, nor anything\nnecessary for the wants of the body.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Take nothing for your journey; neither staves nor\nscript; neither bread, neither money, neither have two coats apiece.\"\n\n19. \"They expounded the literal sense of the Holy Scriptures by\nallegory.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Which things are an allegory.\" (Gal. iv. 24.)\n\n20. \"They abjured the pleasures of the body, not desiring mortal\noffspring, and they renounced marriage, believing it to be detrimental\nto a holy life.\" (Mich.)\n\n_Scripture parallel._ It will be recollected that neither Jesus nor Paul\never married, and that they discouraged the marriage relation.\nChrist says, \"They that shall be counted worthy of that world and the\nresurrection neither marry nor are given in marriage.\" And Paul says,\n\"The unmarried careth for the things of the Lord.\" (i Cor. vii. 32.)\n\n21. \"They strove to disengage their minds entirely from the world.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"If any man love the world, the love of the Father\nis not in him.\"\n\n22. \"Devoting themselves to the Lord, they provide not for future\nsubsistence.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Take no thought for the morrow, what ye shall eat\nand drink,\" &c.\n\n23. \"Regarding the body as a prison, they were ashamed to give it\nsustenance.\" (c. ii. 71.)\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Who shall change our _vile_ bodies?\" (Phil. iii.\n21.)\n\n24. \"They spent nearly all their time in silent meditation and inward\nprayer.\" (c. ii. 71.)\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Men ought always to pray.\" (Luke xviii. 1.) \"Pray\nwithout ceasing.\" (1 Thess. v. 17.)\n\n25. \"Believing the poor were the Lord's favorites, they vowed perpetual\nchastity and poverty.\" (c. ii. 71.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"Blessed be ye poor.\" (Luke vi. 20.) \"Hath not God\nchosen the poor?\" (James ii. 5.)\n\n26. \"They devoted themselves entirely to contemplation in divine\nthings.\" (c. ii. 71.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"Mediate upon these (divine) things; give thyself\nwholly to them.\" (1 Tim. iv. 15.)\n\n27. \"They fasted often, sometimes tasting food but once in three or even\nsix days.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ Christ's disciples were \"in fastings often.\" (2\nCor. xi. 27; see also v. 34.)\n\n28. \"They offered no sacrifices, believing that a serious and devout\nsoul was most acceptable.\" (c. ii. 71.)\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"There is no more offering for sin.\" (Heb. x. 18.)\n\n29. \"They believed in and practiced baptizing the dead.\" (c. ii. 71.)\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Else what shall they do which are baptized for\nthe dead.\" (1 Cor. xv. 29.)\n\n30. \"They gave a mystical sense to the Scriptures, disregarding the\nletter.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"The letter killeth, but the spirit maketh alive.\"\n(1 Cor. iii. 6.)\n\n31. \"They taught by metaphors, symbols, and parables.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Without a parable spake he not unto them.\" (Matt.\nxiii. 34.)\n\n32. \"They had many mysteries in their religion which they were sworn to\nkeep secret.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"To you it is given to know the mysteries of\nthe kingdom; to them it is not given.\" (Matt xiii. 11.) \"Great is the\nmystery of godliness.\"\n\n33. \"They had in their churches, bishops, elders, deacons, and priests.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Ordained elders in every church.\" (Acts xiv. 23.)\nFor \"deacons,\" see 1 Tim. iii. 1.\n\n34. \"When assembled together they would often sing psalms.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel._ \"Teaching and admonishing one another in psalms.\"\n(Col. iii. 16.)\n\n35. \"They healed and cured the minds and bodies of those who joined\nthem.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_ \"Healing all manner of sickness,\" &c. (Matt iv.\n23.)\n\n36. \"They practiced certain ceremonial purifications by water.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"The accomplishment of the days of purification.\"\n(Acts xxi. 26.)\n\n37. \"They assembled at the Sabbath festivals clothed in white garments.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_ \"Shall be clothed in white garments.\" (Rev. iii.\n4.)\n\n38. \"They disbelieved in the resurrection of the external body.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_ \"It is sown a natural body, it is raised a\nspiritual body.\" (1 Cor. xv. 44.)\n\n39. Pliny says, \"They were the only sort of men who lived without money\nand without women.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_\\ \"The love of money is the root of all evil.\" (1\nTim. vi. 10.) Christ's disciples travelled without money and without\nscrip, and \"eschew the lusts of the flesh.\"\n\n40. \"They practiced the extremest charity to the poor.\" (c. ii. 71.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_ \"Bestow all thy goods to feed the poor.\" (1 Cor.\nxiii. 3.)\n\n41. \"They were skillful in interpreting dreams, and in foretelling\nfuture events.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_ \"Your sons and daughters shall prophesy, and your\nold men shall dream dreams.\" (Acts ii. 17.)\n\n42. \"They believed in a paradise,... and in a place of never-ending\nlamentations.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_ \"Life everlasting.\" (Gal. viii. 8.) \"Weeping,\nwailing, and gnashing of teeth.\" (Matt. xiii. 42.)\n\n43. \"They affirmed,\" says Josephus, \"that God foreordained all the\nevents of human life.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_' \"Foreordained before the foundation of the world.\"\n(1 Peter.)\n\n44. \"They believed in Mediators between God and the souls of men.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"One Mediator between God and men.\" (1 Tim. ii.\n5.)\n\n45. \"They practiced the pantomimic representation of the death, burial,\nand resurrection of God\"--Christ the Spirit.\n\n_Scripture parallel_. With respect to the death, burial, and\nresurrection of Christ, see 1 Cor. xv. 4.\n\n46. \"They inculcated the forgiveness of injuries.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.\" (Luke xxiii. 34.)\n\n47. \"They totally disapproved of all war.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_ \"If my kingdom were of this world, then would my\nservants fight.\" (John xviii. 36.)\n\n48. \"They inculcated obedience to magistrates, and to the civil\nauthorities.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"Obey them which have the rule over you.\" (Heb.\nxiii. 17; xxvi. 65.)\n\n49. \"They retired within themselves to receive interior revelations of\ndivine truth.\" (c. ii. 71.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"Every one of you hath a revelation.\" (1 Cor. xiv.\n26.)\n\n50. \"They were scrupulous in speaking the truth.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_ \"Speaking all things in truth.\" (2 Cor. vii. 14.)\n\n51. \"They perform many wonderful miracles.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_ Many texts teach us that Christ and his apostles\ndid the same.\n\n52. \"Essenism put all its members upon the same level, forbidding the\nexercise of authority of one over another.\" (Dr. Ginsburg.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. Christ did the same. For proof, see Matt. xx. 25;\nMark ix. 35.\n\n53. \"Essenism laid the greatest stress on being meek and lowly in\nspirit.\" (Dr. Ginsburg.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. See Matt. v. 5; ix. 28.\n\n54. \"The Essenes commended the poor in spirit, those who hunger and\nthirst after righteousness, and the merciful, and the pure in heart.\"\n(Dr Ginsburg.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. For proof that Christ did the same, see Matt.\n\n55. \"The Essenes commended the peacemakers.\" (Dr. Ginsburg.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"Blessed are the peacemakers.\"\n\n56. \"The Essenes declared their disciples must cast out evil spirits,\nand perform miraculous cures, as signs and proof of their faith.\" (Dr.\nGinsburg.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. Christ's disciples were to cast out devils, heal\nthe sick, and raise the dead, &c., as signs and proof of their faith.\n(Mark xvi. 17.)\n\n57. \"They sacrificed the lusts of the flesh to gain spiritual\nhappiness.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"You abstain from fleshly lusts.\" (1 Peter ii.\n11.)\n\n58. \"The breaking of bread was a veritable ordinance among the Essenes.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_. \"He (Jesus) took bread, and gave thanks, and brake\nit.\" (Luke xxii. 19.)\n\n59. \"The Essenes enjoined the loving of enemies.\" (Philo.)\n\n_Scripture parallel_. So did Christ say, \"Love your enemies,\" &c.\n\n60. The Essenes enjoined, \"Doing unto others as you would have them do\nunto you.\"\n\n_Scripture parallel_' The Confucian golden rule, as taught by Christ.\n\nThis parallel might be extended much further, but we will proceed to\npresent the reader with a general description of Essenism, as furnished\nus by Philo, Josephus, and some Christian writers. Philo, who was born\nin Alexandria 20 B. C., and lived to 60 A. D., and who was himself\nan Essenian Jew, in his account of them, says, \"They do not lay up\ntreasures of gold or silver,... but provide themselves only with the\nnecessities of life.\" Paul afterwards, having caught the same spirit,\nadvises the same course of life. \"Having food and raiment, therewith be\ncontent.\" Contentment of mind they regarded as the greatest of riches.\nThey make no instruments of war. They repudiate every inducement to\ncovetousness. None are held as slaves, but all are free, and serve\neach other. They are instructed in piety and holiness, righteousness,\neconomy, &c. They are guided by a threefold rule: love of God, love of\nvirtue, and love of mankind. Of their love of God they give innumerable\ndemonstrations, which is found in their constant and unalterable\nholiness throughout the whole of their lives, their avoidance of oaths\nand falsehoods, and their firm belief that God is the source of all\ngood, but of nothing evil. \"Of their love of virtue they give proof in\ntheir contempt for money, fame, and pleasures, their continence, easy\nsatisfying of their wants, their simplicity, modesty,\" &c. Their love\nof man is proved by their benevolence and equality, and their having all\nthings in common, which is beyond all deception. They reverence and take\ncare of the aged, as children do their parents. (Condensed from Philo's\ntreatise, \"Every Virtuous Man is Free.\")\n\nJosephus, 37 A. D., and who was also at one time a member of the\nEssenian Brotherhood, furnishes another fragmentary account of the\nEssenes in his \"Jewish Wars,\" of which the following is the substance:--\n\n\"They love each other more than others (that is, are \"partial to the\nhousehold of faith\"); they despise riches, and have all things in\ncommon, so that there is neither abjectness of poverty nor distinction\nof riches among them; they change neither garments nor shoes till they\nare worn out or become unfit for use; they neither buy nor sell among\nthemselves; their piety is extraordinary; they never speak about wordly\nmatters before sunrise; they are girt about with a linen apron, and have\na baptism of cold water; they eat but one kind of a food at a time, and\ncommence with a prayer, and the priest must say grace before any one\neats (that is, breaks and blesses as Christ did); they also return\nthanks after eating, and then put off their white garments; strangers\nwere made welcome at their tables without money and without price; they\ngive food to the hungry and the needy and show mercy to all; they curb\ntheir passions, restrain their anger, and claim to be ministers of\npeace; an oath they regard as worse than perjury; they excommunicate\noffenders ('Go tell it to the churches, says Christ); they condemn\nfinery in dress; though condemning in most solemn terms oaths, members\nwere admitted to the secret brotherhood by an oath ('See thou tell\nno man,' said Christ); they endured pain with heroic fortitude, and\nregarded an honorable death as better than long life; they read and\nstudy their Holy Scriptures from youth, often prophesy, and it was very\nseldom they failed in their predictions.\"\n\nDr. Ginburg's testimony, abridged, is as follows:--\n\n\"The Essenes had a high appreciations of the inspired law of God. The\nhighest aim of their lives was to become fit temples of the Holy\nGhost (see i Cor. vi. 19); also to perform miraculous cures, and to be\nspiritually qualified for forerunners of the Messiah. They taught the\nduty of mortifying the flesh and the lusts thereof, and to become\nmeek and lowly in spirit; they answered by yea, yea, and nay, nay (see\nMatt.), scrupulously avoiding oaths; they avoided impure contact with\nthe heathen and the world's people, and lived retired from the world,\nbeing in numbers about four thousand; they strove to be like the angels\nof heaven; there were no rich and poor, or masters and servants, amongst\nthem; they lived peaceably with all men; a mysterious silence was\nobserved while eating; a solemn oath was required on becoming a member\nof the secret order, which required three things:\n\n1. Love of God;\n\n2. Merciful justice to all men, and to avoid the wicked, and help the\nrighteous;\n\n3. Purity of character, which implied love of truth, hatred of\nfalsehood, and strict observance of 'the mysteries of godliness' to\noutsiders--that is, 'heathen and publicans;' they endured suffering for\nrighteousness' sake, with rejoicings, and even _sought_ it; regarding\nthe body as a prison for the soul, they desired the time to come to\nescape from it; they recognized eight different stages of spiritual\ngrowth and perfection: 1. Bodily purity; 2. Celibacy; 3. Spiritual\npurity; 4. The suppression of anger and malice, and the cultivation of a\nmeek, lowly spirit; 5. The attainment of true holiness; 6. Becoming fit\ntemples for the Holy Ghost; 7. The ability to perform miraculous cures,\nand raise the dead; 8. Becoming forerunners of the Messiah; and finally\nthey took a solemn vow to exercise, piety toward God and justice toward\nall men, to hate the wicked, assist the good to keep clear of theft and\nunrighteous gains, to conceal none of their 'mysteries of godliness'\nfrom each other, or disclose them to others. 'Great is the mystery of\ngodliness' ('See thou tell no man'); they were to walk humbly with God,\nshun bad society, forgive their enemies, sacrifice their passions, and\ncrucify the lusts of the flesh; they disregarded bodily suffering,\nand even gloried in martyrdom, preaching and singing to God amid their\nsufferings; but in their domestic habits they were extremely filthy;\nthey wore their clothes until they became ragged, filthy, and offensive,\nnever changing them till they were wore out; their food consisted\nof bread and water, and wild roots and fruits of the palm tree; they\nenjoined their duty, not only of forgiving their enemies, but of seeking\nto benefit them, and of even blessing the destroyer who took life and\nproperty. Such was the religion, such the moral system, such the devout\npiety, and such the practical lives of the Essenian Jews, a religious\nsect which flourished in Alexandria and Judea several hundred\nyears before the birth of Christ, and went out of history the hour\nChristianity came in.\n\nNow, as the foregoing exposition shows that Essenism and Christianity\nare most strikingly alike in all their essential features, that the\nformer system contains nearly every important doctrine and precept of\nthe Christian religion, the question occurs here as one of momentous\nimport, how is this striking resemblance, this identity of character\nof the two religions, to be accounted for? Does it not go far toward\nproving that Christianity is an outgrowth, a legitimate offspring,\nof Judean Essenism? Indeed, are we not absolutely driven to such a\nconclusion? Let us briefly recite some of the important facts brought\nto light by the investigation of the character and history of these two\nreligions, and see if those facts do not bring them together and weld\nthem as one system--as one and the same religion.\n\n1. Both are alike, and Essenism is much the older system.\n\n2. Both religions are an outgrowth of Judaism.\n\n3. Both were known and taught in Judea and in Alexandria.\n\n4. Josephus living in Judea, and Philo in Alexandria, neither of them\nspeaks of Christianity, or refers to any such religion by that name, and\nyet both describe a religion inculcating the same doctrines and moral\nprecepts, which they call Essenism.\n\nIs not this very nearly conclusive proof that Essenism was only\nanother name for Christianity--that it had not yet changed its name to\nChristianity? That famous standard author, Mr. Gibbon, was evidently of\nthis opinion when he said, \"Whether, indeed, the first of that sect (the\nEssenes) took the name of Christian when the appellation of Christian\nhad as yet been nowhere announced, it is by no means necessary to\ndiscuss.\" (Book II. chap. xvi.) Here is evidence that Gibbon believed\nthat the Essenes, after having borne that name for centuries, changed\nthe appellation to Christian. And we find still stronger language than\nthis in the writings of the same author expressive of this opinion. In\na note to chapter xv. he says, \"It is probable that the Therapeuts\n(Essenes) changed their name to Christians, as some writers affirm, and\nadopted some new articles of faith.\" Here the position is assumed that\nthe Christian religion is an outgrowth of Essenism, that is, merely\na continuation of that religion under a change of name, with a slight\nmodification of its creed.\n\n5. And then we have the declaration of Christian writers, expressed in\nthe most positive terms, that Essenism and Christianity were the\nsame religion, the former name being used at an earlier period. Hear\nEusebius, a standard ecclesiastical writer of the fourth century. He\nasserts positively, \"Those ancient Therapeuts (Essenes) were Christians,\nand their ancient writings were our gospels.\" (Eccl. Hist. p. 63.) Hark!\nHark! my good Christian reader, here is one of your own sworn witnessess\ntestifying that the Essenes originated and established the Christian\nreligion; i. e., the religion now known by that name. Will you then give\nit up? If not, we have other testimony of a similar character, rendering\nthe proposition still stronger. Robert Taylor declares, \"The learned\nBasnage has shown that the Essenes were really Christians centuries\nbefore Christ, and that they were actually in possession of those very\nwritings which are now our Gospels and Epistles.\" (p. 81.) And then we\nhave the declaration of the author of \"Christ the Spirit\" (p. no), that\n\"the Christians were the later Essenes--that is, the Essenes of the time\nof Eusebius under a changed name, that name having been made at Antioch,\nwhere the disciples were first called Christian.\" The same writer\nsuggests that \"their sacred books are our sacred books.\" We will now\nhear Eusebius again: \"It is highly probable that their (the Essenes')\nancient commentaries, which Philo says the Essenes have, are the very\nGospels and writings of the Apostles.\"\n\nBased upon this conclusion, he calls the Essenes \"the first heralds of\nthe gospel.\" \"I find it, therefore, most probable,\" says Mr. Weilting,\n\"that Jesus and John belonged literally to the society of the Essenes.\"\nAnd then the New American Encyclopedia furnishes us with the testimony\nof a very able English author of the last century (De Quincy), who\nconcurs with all the writers cited above. \"Mr. De Quincy (it says)\nidentified the Essenes as being the early Christians; i. e., the early\nChristians were known as Essenes. Such testimony, coming from such a\nsource, is entitled to much weight.\" (Vol. i. p. 157.) And to the same\neffect is the testimony of Bishop Marsh, who admits that our Gospels\nwere drawn from those of the Essenes. (See his edition of Michaelis'\ntranslation of the New Testament.)\n\nThus far historical _writers_. We will now lay before the reader some\nhistorical _facts_, fraught with unanswerable logical potency, and\npointing to the same conclusion. It is a fact, and one of deep logical\nimport, and tending to corroborate the conclusion of some of the writers\ncited above, who tell us the Christian Gospels were first composed by\nthe Essenes; that the language in which those Gospels were originally\nwritten was Greek, the language in which the Alexandrian Essenes always\nwrote, while the evangelical writers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John,\nbeing illiterate fishermen, could have had no knowledge of any but\nthe Jewish, their own mother-tongue,--at least it is susceptible of\nsatisfactory proof that they never wrote in any other language. Hence\nthe conclusion is irresistible that they were not the original authors\nof the Gospels.\n\nThe works of several authors are now lying at our elbow, who express\nthe conviction unequivocally that the Gospels were copied, if not\ntranslated, from older writings. Mr. Le Clerc, one of the ablest writers\nof his time, maintained this position, and did it ably. Another writer,\na Mr. Hatfield, was awarded a prize in 1793, by the theological faculty\nof Gottingen, for an essay, in which the position was ably argued that\nMatthew, Mark, Luke, and John were not the authors of the books which\nbear their names, but were mere copyists. Dr. Lessing and others concur\nwith him in this conclusion. A circumstance confirming this verdict is\nfound in the fact that the word _church_ occurs in our Gospels, which\nwere written before such an institution was established by those who\nwere then called Christians.\n\n\"Go tell it to the church\" (Matt, xviii. 17) was uttered before any\nsteps had been taken by the then representatives of the Christian faith\nto organize such a body--an evidence this, that he alluded to the church\nof the Essenes, as there were no other churches in existence at the\ntime; which leaves the inference patent and irresistible that he and\nhis disciples were Essenes, perhaps then under the changed name of\nChristians. Centuries prior to that era the Essenes had not only\nchurches, but their whole ecclesiastical nomenclature of bishops,\ndeacons, elders, priests, disciples, scriptures, gospels, epistles,\npsalms, hymns, mystery, allegory, &c. If Christianity was re-established\nin the days of Christ and his apostles, they had nothing to originate,\neither with respect to doctrines, precepts, church polity, or\necclesiastical terms--all being established for them centuries before\nthat era. With these facts in view, it seems impossible that the two\nreligious orders--Essenes and Christians--could have been in existence\nat the same time as separate institutions. The former must have ended\nwhen the latter commenced.\n\nJosephus says, \"the Essenes were scattered far and wide, and were in\nevery city,\" being quite numerous in Judea in his time. But he makes no\nreference to any sect or religious order by the title of Christian--a\nstrong inferential evidence, upon sound priori reasoning, that\nChristianity as yet was sailing under another name. Josephus must have\nknown and named the fact, had there been a Christian sect or disciple\nthere bearing that name. Impossible otherwise. We are then (upon the\nlogical force of these and many other facts) driven to the conclusion\nthat Christianity began when Essenism ended, and the change was only in\nname. I challenge the whole Christian world to find the historical proof\nthat Christianity commenced one hour before the termination of Essenism,\nor of Essenism overlapping the Christian religion so far as to survive\none day beyond or after its birth. I will confront them with the logic\nof dates, and defy them to find any proof except their own unauthorized,\nunauthenticated, and fictitious chronology, that a Christian was ever\nknown in any country by that name prior to the time of Tacitus, 104\nA.D., who is the first of the three hundred writers of that era that\nmakes any mention of Christianity, Christ, or a Christian. This was long\nafter Josephus' time, which accounts most satisfactory for his omitting\nany allusion to Christ or Christianity. That religion had not yet\ndropped the name of Essenism and adopted that of Christianity.\n\nNow, hard indeed must distorted reason fight the ramparts of logic and\nhistory to resist the conviction, in view of the foregoing facts, that\nChristianity is simply an outcropping of Essenism, either direct or\nthrough Budhism. And even if it were possible to prove that the two\nreligions never became welded together, yet it is not possible to\ndisprove the striking identity of their doctrines, and the spirit of\ntheir precepts, and the practical lives of their disciples. And this\nidentity, coupled with the fact that Essenism is the older system, is\nof itself most superlatively fatal to all pretension or claim to\noriginality for the doctrines of the Christian faith.\n\nIt is a matter of no importance whether Christianity was originally\nknown by another name, so long as it can be shown that its doctrines\nhad all been preached and proclaimed to the world centuries prior to\nthe date assigned for its origin. And this is proved by the long list of\nparalellisms presented in the incipient pages of this chapter. And this\nproof explodes the pretensions of Christianity to an \"original divine\nrevelation,\" and brings it down to a level with pagan orientalism. And\nthe fact that it sprang up in a country where its doctrine had long been\ntaught by pagans and orientalists, must produce the conviction, deep and\nindelible, in all unbiased minds, that orientalism was the mother and\nheathenism the father of the Christian religion, even in the absence of\nany other proof. In fact, no other proof can be needed.\n\nAnd what are the arguments, it may be well here to inquire, with\nwhich orthodox Christians attempt to meet, combat, and vanquish the\noverwhelming mass of historical facts and historical testimonies we\nhave presented in preceding pages, tending to prove and demonstrate the\noriental origin of their religion and its identity with Essenism? Their\nwhole argument is comprised in the naked postulate of the Rev. Mr.\nPaideaux, D. D., that \"the Essenes did not believe in the resurrection\nof the physical body (but believed in a spiritual resurrection),\nand omit from their creed the Trinity and Incarnation doctrine, and\ntherefore they could not have been the originators of the Christian\nreligion;\" but this argument is as easily demolished as a cobweb, as the\nfollowing facts will prove:--\n\n1. We have but a fragment of the Essenian religion,--but one end of\ntheir creed,--mere scraps furnished us by Philo, Josephus, and Pliny. We\nhave none of their sacred books apart from the Christian New Testament.\n\n2. They had secret books, as we have shown, in which doctrines were\ntaught which they regarded as _too sacred to be thrown before the\npublic_, as \"pearls before swine.\" And no doctrines were regarded as\nmore sacred or secret in that age than the doctrines of the Trinity and\nIncarnation. Christ's injunction, \"See thou tell no man,\" was probably\ntheir motto, which prevented the publicity of a portion of their\ndoctrines. And as their sacred books, containing their doctrines,\nperished with the extinction of the sect (except those now found in\nthe Christian New Testament), a full knowledge of their doctrines,\ntherefore, never reached the public mind. All religious sects had\nsecret doctrines, designated as \"Mysteries of Godliness,\" including\nthe principal Jewish sects and the earliest Christian churches. It is,\ntherefore, highly probable that if we were in possession of all their\nsacred books, we would be in possession of the proof that they believed\nand taught in their monasteries the doctrines above named. But we are\nnot left to mere inference that the Essenes' creed did include the\ndoctrines of the Trinity and the Divine Incarnation. We find skeletons\nof these doctrines scattered along the line of their history. Philo\nhimself, an Essene teacher, most distinctly teaches the doctrine of \"the\nIncarnation of the Divine Word or Logos.\" And \"Son of God,\" \"Mediator,\"\n\"Intercessor,\" and \"Messiah,\" were familiar words with him. The idea\noften reappears in his writings, that the \"Word could become flesh;\"\nthat the Son of God could appear as a personality, and return to the\nbosom of the Father. Moreover, one writer informs us that the Essenes\ncelebrated the birth and death of a Divine Savior as a \"Mystery of\nGodliness.\" And they claimed in their earlier history to be \"forerunners\nof the Messiah\"--a claim which would soon bring a Messiah before the\nworld, that is, lead them to deify and worship some great man as \"_The\nMessia_.\"\n\nAs for the doctrine of the Trinity, we have the authority of Eusebius\nthat they taught this doctrine too. So that it is not true that they\ndid not recognize these two prime articles of the Christian faith, the\nIncarnation and Trinity doctrines. Some modern Christians assert that\nthe Essenes not only omitted to teach these doctrines, but that, on the\nother hand, they taught other doctrines not taught in the Christian New\nTestament. This is not improbable. For the Christian religion has been\ncharacterized by frequent changes in its doctrines in every stage of its\npractical history, as was also the Jewish religion which preceded it,\nand from which it emanated. Judaism is a perpetual series of changes. It\nchanged even the name of its God from Elohim to Jehovah. Its leader and\nfounder Abram was changed to Abraham, and his grandson and successor\nfrom Jacob to Israel. And we have the works of many Christian writers\nin our possession who prove by their own bible that the Jews made many\nchanges in their religious polity and religious doctrines. This is more\nespecially observable when they came in contact with nations teaching\na different religion. Their whole history shows they were prone to\nimitate, and borrow, and always did borrow on such occasions, and\nengraft the new doctrines thus obtained into their own creed, and thus\neffected important changes in their religion. We have the authority of\nDr. Campbell for saying the Jews never believed and taught the doctrine\nof future punishment (and other doctrines that might be named) till\nafter they were brought in contact with Persians in Babylon who had long\ntaught these doctrines. (See Dissertation VI. ) And Dr. Enfield declares\ntheir theological opinions underwent thorough changes during this period\nof seventy years' captivity. Even their national title was changed at\none period from Israelites to Jews. With all these changes of names,\ntitles, and doctrines in view, it is not incredible that one of the\nJewish sects should change its name from Essenes to Christians, and with\nthis change modify some of the doctrines. And more especially as their\ntitle, according to Dr. Ginsburg, had been changed before from Chassidim\nto Essenes. And Philo at one period calls them Therapeuts, while\nEusebius says the Therapeuts were Christians. Put this and that\ntogether, and the question is forever settled.\n\nNow, with all this overwhelming mass of historical evidence before us,\n\"piled mountain high,\" tending to prove the truth of the proposition\nthat Christianity is the offspring and outgrowth of ancient Judean\nEssenism, we feel certain that no sophistry, from interested charlatans\nor stereotyped creed worshipers, can stave off or obliterate the\nconviction in unprejudiced minds, that the proposition is most amply\nproven.\n\nWe will now collate Christianity with another ancient religious system,\nwhich we are certain it will not be disputed, after the comparison\nis critically examined, contains the sum total of the doctrines and\nteachings of Christianity in all their details.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXXII. THREE HUNDRED AND FORTY-SIX STRIKING ANALOGIES BETWEEN\nCHRIST AND CHRISHNA\n\n\nI. THEIR MIRACULOUS HISTORY AND LEADING PRINCIPLES.\n\n1. The advent of each Savior was miraculously foretold by prophets.\n\n2. The fallen and degenerate condition of the human race is taught in\nthe religion of each.\n\n3. A plan of restoration or salvation is provided for in each case.\n\n4. A divine Savior is considered necessary in both cases.\n\n5. The necessity of atoning for sin is taught in the religion of each.\n\n6. A God, or Son of God, is selected as the victim for the atoning\nsacrifice in each case.\n\n7. This God is sent down from heaven in each case in the form of a man.\n\n8. The God or Savior in each case is the second person of the Trinity.\n\n9. Chrishna, as well as Christ, was held to be really God incarnate.\n\n10. The mission of each Savior is the same.\n\n11. There is a resemblance in name-Chrishna and Christ.\n\n12. Chrishna, as well as Christ, was incarnated and born of a woman.\n\n13. The mother in each case was a holy virgin.\n\n14. The same peculiarities of a miraculous conception and birth are\nrelated of each.\n\n15. Each had an adopted earthly father.\n\n16. The father of Chrishna, as well as that of Christ, was a carpenter.\n\n17. God is claimed as the real father in both cases.\n\n18. A Spirit or Ghost was the author of the conception of each.\n\n19. There was rejoicing on earth when each Savior was born.\n\n20. There was also joy in heaven at the birth and advent of each.\n\n21. Chrishna, as well as Christ, was of royal descent.\n\n22. Their mothers were both reputedly pious women.\n\n23. The names of two mothers are somewhat similar--Mary and Maia.\n\n24. Each had a special female friend--Elizabeth in the one case, and the\nwife of Nanda in the other.\n\n25. Neither Savior was born in a house, but both in obscure situations.\n\n26. Both were born on the 25th of December.\n\n27. Both, at birth, were visited by wise men and shepards.\n\n28. The visitors conducted by a star in each case.\n\n29. The rite of purification observed by the mothers of each.\n\n30. An angel warning of impending danger in each case.\n\n31. The incumbent ruler was hostile in each case.\n\n32. A bloody decree in each case for the destruction of the infant\nSavior.\n\n33. A flight of the parents takes place in both cases.\n\n34. The parents of one sojourned at Muturea, the other at Mathura.\n\n35. Each Savior had a forerunner--John the Baptist in one case, Bali\nRama in the other.\n\n36. Both were preternaturally smart in childhood.\n\n37. Each disputed with and vanquished learned opponents.\n\n38. Both became objects of search by their parents.\n\n39. And both occasioned anxiety, if not sorrow, to their parents.\n\n40. The mother of each had other children--that is children begotten by\nman as well as God.\n\n41. Both Saviors retired to, and spent considerable time in the\nwilderness.\n\n42. The religious rite of \"fasting\" was practiced by each Savior.\n\n43. Each delivered a noteworthy sermon, or series of moral lessons.\n\n44. Chrishna, as well as Christ, was called and considered God.\n\n45. Each was both God and the Son of God (so regarded).\n\n46. \"Savior\" was one of the divine titles of each.\n\n47. Each was designated \"the Savior of man,\" \"the Savior of the world,\"\n&c.\n\n48. Both expressed a desire to \"save all.\"\n\n49. Each sustained the character of a Messiah.\n\n50. Chrishna, as well as Christ, was a Redeemer.\n\n51. Each Savior was called \"Shepard.\"\n\n52. Both were believed to be the Creator of the world.\n\n53. Each is sometimes spoken of, also, as only an agent in the creation.\n\n54. Both were the \"Light and Life\" of men.\n\n55. Each \"brought life and immortality to light.\"\n\n56. Both are represented as \"the seed of the woman bruising the\nserpent's head.\"\n\n57. Was Christ a \"Dispenser of grace,\" so was the Hindoo Savior.\n\n58. One was \"the lion of the tribe of Judah,\" the other \"the lion of the\ntribe of Saki.\"\n\n59. Christ was \"the Beginning of the End,\" Chrishna \"the Beginning, the\nMiddle, and the End.\"\n\n60. Both proclaimed, \"I am the Resurrection.\"\n\n61. Each was \"the way to the Father.\"\n\n62. Both represented emblematically \"the Sun of Righteousness.\"\n\n63. Each is figuratively represented as being \"all in all.\"\n\n64. Both speak of having existed prior to human birth.\n\n65. A dual existence--an existence in both heaven and earth at once--is\nclaimed by or for both.\n\n66. Chrishna, as well as Christ, was \"without sin.\"\n\n67. Both assumed the divine prerogative of forgiving sins.\n\n68. The mission of each was to deliver from sin.\n\n69. Both came to destroy the devil and his works.\n\n70. The doctrine of the \"atonement\" is practically realized in each\ncase.\n\n71. Each made a voluntary offering for the sins of the world.\n\n72. Both were human as well as divine.\n\n73. Chrishna, as well as Christ, was worshiped as God absolute.\n\n74. Each was regarded as \"the Lord from Heaven.\"\n\n75. Chrishna, as well as Christ, had applied to him all the attributes\nof God.\n\n76. Was Christ omniscient, so was Chrishna.\n\n77. Was one omnipotent, so was the other (so believed).\n\n78. And both are represented as being omnipresent.\n\n79. Each was believed to be divinely perfect.\n\n80. Was one \"Lord of lords,\" so was the other.\n\n81. Each embodied the \"power and wisdom of God.\"\n\n82. All power was committed unto each (so claimed).\n\n83. Chrishna performed many miracles as well as Christ.\n\n84. One of the first miracles of each was the cure of a leper.\n\n85. Each healed \"all manner of diseases.\"\n\n86. The work of casting out devils constitutes a part of the mission of\neach.\n\n87. Each practically proved his power to raise the dead.\n\n88. A miracle appertaining to a tree is related of both.\n\n89. Both could read the thoughts of the people.\n\n90. The power to detect and eject evil spirits was claimed by both.\n\n91. Both had the keys or control of death.\n\n92. Each led an extraordinary life.\n\n93. Each had a character for supernatural greatness.\n\n94. Both possesed or claimed a oneness with the Father.\n\n95. A \"oneness with his Lord and Master\" is claimed, also, for the\ndisciples of each.\n\n96. A strong reciprocal affection between Master and disciple in each\ncase.\n\n97. Each offers to shoulder the burdens of his disciples.\n\n98. A portion of the life of each was spent in preaching.\n\n99. Both made converts by their miracles and preaching.\n\n100. A numerous retinue of believers springs up in each case.\n\n101. Both had commissioned apostles to proclaim their religion.\n\n102. Each was an innovator upon the antecedent religion.\n\n103. A beautiful reform in religion was inaugurated by each Savior.\n\n104. Each opposed the existing popular priesthood.\n\n105. Both abolished the law of lineal descent in the ancient priesthood.\n\n106. Each was an object of conspiracy by his enemies.\n\n107. Humility and external poverty distinguished the life of each.\n\n108. Each denounced riches and rich men, and loathed and detested\nwealth.\n\n109. Both had a character for meekness.\n\n110. Chastity or unmarried life was a distinguishing characteristic of\neach.\n\n111. Mercy was a noteworthy characteristic of each.\n\n112. Both were censured for associating with sinners.\n\n113. Each was a special friend to the poor.\n\n114. A poor widow woman receives marked attention by each.\n\n115. Each encounters a gentile woman at a well.\n\n116. Both submitted unresistingly to injuries and insults.\n\n117. General practical philanthropy and impartiality marks the life of\neach Savior.\n\n118. Each took more pleasure in repentant sinners than in virtuous\nsaints.\n\n119. Both practically disclosed God's attempt to reconcile the world to\nhimself.\n\n120. The closing incidents in the earth-life of each were strikingly\nsimilar.\n\n121. A memorable last supper marked the closing career of both.\n\n122. Both were put to death by \"wicked hands.\"\n\n123. Chrishna, as well as Christ, was crucified.\n\n124. Darkness attended the crucifixion of each.\n\n125. Both were crucified between two thieves.\n\n126. Each is reported to have forgiven his enemies.\n\n127. The age of each at death corresponds (being between thirty and\nthirty-six years).\n\n128. Each, after giving up the ghost, descends into hell.\n\n129. The resurrection from the dead is a marked period in the history of\neach.\n\n130. Each ascends to heaven after his resurrection.\n\n131. Many people are reported to have witnessed the ascension in each\ncase.\n\n132. Each is reported as having both descended and ascended.\n\n133. The head of each, while living on earth, was anointed with oil.\n\n\nII. DOCTRINES.\n\n134. There is a similarity in the doctrines of their respective\nreligions.\n\n135. The same doctrines are propagated by the disciples of each.\n\n136. The doctrine of future rewards and punishments is a part of each\nsystem.\n\n137. Analogous views of heaven are found in each system.\n\n138. A third heaven is spoken of in each system.\n\n139. All sin must be punished according to the bible teachings of each.\n\n140. Each has a hell provided for the wicked.\n\n141. Both teach a hell of darkness and a hell of light.\n\n142. An immortal worm finds employment in the hell of each system (\"the\nworm that dieth not.\")\n\n143. The arch-demon of the under world uses brimstone for fuel in one\ncase, and oil in the other.\n\n144. The motive for future punishment is in both cases the same.\n\n145. Each has a purgatory or sort of half-way house.\n\n146. Special divine judgments on nations are taught by each.\n\n147. A great and final day of judgment is taught by each.\n\n148. A general resurrection also is taught in each religion.\n\n149. That there is a \"Judge of the dead\" is a doctrine of each.\n\n150. Two witnesses are to report on human actions in the final assizes.\n\n151. We are furnished in each case with the dimension of heaven or \"the\nholy city.\"\n\n152. Man is enjoined to strive against temptation to sin by each.\n\n153. And repentance for sin is a doctrine taught by the bible of each.\n\n154. Each has a prepared city for a paradise.\n\n155. The bibles of both teach that we have no continuing city here.\n\n156. Souls are carried to heaven by angels, as in the instance of\nLazarus, in each case.\n\n157. A belief in angels or spirits is a tenant of each religion.\n\n158. The doctrine of fallen or evil angels is found in both system.\n\n159. Obsession by wicked or evil spirits is taught by each.\n\n160. Both teach that sickness or disease is caused by evil spirits.\n\n161. Each has a king-devil or arch-demon with a posse of subalterns or\nevil spirits.\n\n162. Both bibles record the story of a \"hellaballoo\" or war in heaven.\n\n163. Both teach that an evil man can neither do nor speak a good thing.\n\n164. Both teach that sin is a disadvantage in the present life as well\nas in the future.\n\n165. The doctrine of free will or free agency is taught by each.\n\n166. Predestination seems to be inferentially taught by each.\n\n167. In each case man is a prize in a lottery, with God and the devil\nfor ticket-holders.\n\n168. Both make the devil (or devils) a scape-goat for sin.\n\n169. Both teach the devil or evil spirits as the primary cause of all\nevil.\n\n170. The destiny of both body and soul is pointed out by each.\n\n171. The true believers are known as \"saints\" under both systems.\n\n172. Saints with \"white robes\" are spoken of by each.\n\n173. Both specify \"the Word of Logos\" as God.\n\n174. Wisdom, too, is personified as God by the holy Scriptures of each.\n\n175. Both teach that God may be known by his works.\n\n176. The doctrine of one supreme God is taught in each bible.\n\n177. Light and truth are important words in the religious nomenclature\nof each.\n\n178. Both profess a high veneration for truth.\n\n179. \"Where the treasure is, there is the heart also,\" is taught by\neach.\n\n180. \"Seek and ye shall find\" is a condition prescribed by each.\n\n181. Religious toleration is a virtue professed by both.\n\n182. All nations are professedly based on an equality by each.\n\n183. Both, however, enjoin partiality to \"the household of faith.\"\n\n184. The doors of salvation are thrown open to high and low, rich and\npoor, by each.\n\n185. Each professes to have \"the only true and saving faith.\"\n\n186. There is a mystery in the mission of each Savior.\n\n187. \"Rama\" is a well known word in the bible of each.\n\n188. \"The understanding of the wise\" is a phrase in each.\n\n189. Both speak figuratively of \"the blind leading the blind.\"\n\n190. \"A new heaven and a new earth\" is spoken of by each.\n\n191. The doctrine of a Trinity in the Godhead is taught by each.\n\n192. Baptism by water is a tenant and ordinance of each.\n\n193. \"Living water\" is a metaphor found in each.\n\n194. Baptism by fire seems also to be recognized by each.\n\n195. Fasting is emphatically enjoined by each.\n\n196. Sacrifices are of secondary importance in each system, and are\npartially or wholly abandoned by each.\n\n197. The higher law is paramount to ceremonies in each religion.\n\n198. The bible of each religion literally condemns idolatry.\n\n199. Both also make concessions to idolatry.\n\n200. Polygamy is not literally encouraged nor openly condemned by\neither.\n\n201. The power to forgive sins is conferred on the disciples of each.\n\n202. The doctrine of blasphemy is recognized by each.\n\n203. Pantheism, or the reciprocal in-being of God in nature and nature\nin God, is taught by both.\n\n\nIII. BIBLES AND HOLY SCRIPTURES.\n\n204. Each has a bible which is the idolized fountain of all religious\nteaching.\n\n205. Both have an Old Testament and a New Testament, virtually.\n\n206. The New Testament inaugurates a new and reform system of religion\nin each case.\n\n207. \"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God\" is the faith of the\ndisciples of each.\n\n208. Each system claimed to have its inspired men to write its\nscriptures.\n\n209. Both hold a spiritual qualification necessary to understand their\nbibles.\n\n210. It is a sin to become \"wise beyond what is written\" in their\nrespective bibles.\n\n211. Both recommend knowing the Scriptures in youth.\n\n212. Alteration of their respective bibles is divinely interdicted.\n\n213. The bible is an infallible rule of faith and practice in both\ncases.\n\n214. \"All scripture is profitable for doctrine\" is the faith of each.\n\n215. Both explain away the errors of their bibles.\n\n\nIV. SPIRITUALITY OF THE TWO RELIGIONS.\n\n216. The religion of Chrishna is pre-eminently spiritual no less than\nChrist's.\n\n217. Both teach that \"to be carnally minded is death.\"\n\n218. External rites are practically dispensed with in each religion.\n\n219. The spiritual law written on the heart is recognized by each.\n\n220. \"God is within you,\" Budhists teach as well as Christians.\n\n221. Both recognize an invisible spiritual Savior.\n\n222. \"God dwells in the heart,\" say Hindoo as well as Christians.\n\n223 An inward recognition of the divine law is amply seen in both.\n\n224. Both confess allegiance to an inward monitor.\n\n225. The doctrine of inspiration and internal illumination is found in\nboth.\n\n226. The indwelling Comforter is believed in by both.\n\n227. Both also teach that religion is an inward work.\n\n228. Both speak of being born again--i. e., the second birth.\n\n229. A spiritual body is also believed in by both.\n\n230. \"Spiritual things are incomprehensible to the natural man\" say\neach.\n\n231. God's spiritually sustaining power Budhists also acknowledge.\n\n232. Both give a spiritual interpretation to their bibles.\n\n233. Each has a new and more interior law superseding the old law.\n\n234. The spiritual cross--self-denial or asceticism--is a prominent\nfeature of each religion.\n\n235. The duty of renouncing and abandoning the external world is\nsolemnly enjoined by each.\n\n236. Budhists renounce the world more practically than Christians.\n\n237. Withdrawal or seclusion from society is recommended by each.\n\n238. Bodily suffering as a benefit to the soul is encouraged by each.\n\n239. Voluntary suffering for righteousness' sake is a virtue with each.\n\n240. The cross is a religious emblem in each system.\n\n241. Both glory in \"the religion of the cross\" as better than a religion\nwithout suffering.\n\n242. Hence both teach \"the greater the cross the greater the crown.\"\n\n243. Earthly pleasures are regarded as evil by both.\n\n244. Contempt for the body as an enemy to the soul is visible in both.\n\n245. Retirement for religious contemplation is a duty with each.\n\n246. The forsaking of relations is also enjoined by each.\n\n247. Spiritual relationship is superior to external relationship with\nboth.\n\n248. \"To die is great gain\" we are taught by each.\n\n249. A subjugation of the passions is a religious duty with each.\n\n250. The road to heaven is a narrow one with each.\n\n251. The same state of religious perfection is aspired to by the\ndisciples of each.\n\n\nV. THE DOCTRINE OF FAITH OR BELIEF.\n\n252. Faith is an all-important element and doctrine with each.\n\n253. Heresy, or want of faith, is a sin of great magnitude with both.\n\n254. Faith in the Savior is a condition to salvation by both.\n\n255. Confessing the Savior is also required in both cases.\n\n256. \"Believe or be damned\" is the condition or profess to believe the\nterrible sine qua non to salvation by each.\n\n257. Skeptics or unbelievers are with both the chief of sinners.\n\n258. \"Faith can remove mountains,\" either with a Bud-hist or a\nChristian.\n\n259. Both contrast faith with works.\n\n260. Faith without works is dead--so teach both Bud-hists and\nChristians.\n\n\nVI. THE DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE OF PRAYER.\n\n261. Prayer is an important rite in each religion.\n\n262. Private or secret prayer is recommended by both.\n\n263. Each has also a formula of prayer.\n\n264. \"Pray without ceasing\" is a Budhist as well as a Christian\ninjunction.\n\n265. Praying to their respective Saviors in sickness and in health is a\ncustom with both.\n\n266. The custom of praying for the dead is recognized in each system.\n\n\nVII. TREATMENT OF ENEMIES.\n\n267. It is a Hindoo as well as a Christian injunction to treat enemies\nkindly.\n\n268. Passive submission to injuries and abuse is enjoined by both.\n\n269. The holy Scriptures of both require us to pray for enemies, and\nfeed them.\n\n270. And even love to enemies is a part of the spirit of each religion.\n\n\nVIII. THE MILLENNIUM.\n\n271. Hindoos, like Christians, prophesy of a great millennial era.\n\n272. There is a remarkable similarity in their notions with respect to\nit.\n\n273. Both anticipate a second advent or new Savior on the occasion.\n\n274. The destruction of the world also is to take place in both cases.\n\n275. And an entire renovation and a new order of things are to be\nestablished in each case.\n\n\nIX. MIRACLES.\n\n276. There is almost a constant display of miraculous power in each\nsystem.\n\n277. The disciples of both are professedly endowed with this power.\n\n278. Miraculous cures of the lame, the blind, and the sick are reported\nin both cases.\n\n279. Miracles of handling poisonous reptiles with impunity are reported\nby both.\n\n280. Swallowing deadly poison is enjoined by Christians and practiced by\nHindoos.\n\n281. Many cases of the miraculous ejection of devils are reported by\nboth.\n\n282. The miracle of thought-reading is displayed by both.\n\n283. The saints in both cases are reported as raising the dead.\n\n\nX. PRECEPTS.\n\n284. \"The kingdom of heaven\" was to be sought first of all things in\neach case.\n\n285. Love to God is a paramount obligation under each system.\n\n286. And the worship of God is an essential requisition in each\nreligious polity.\n\n287. \"Cease to do evil and learn to do well\" is virtually enjoined by\neach.\n\n288. An inward knowledge of God is taught as essential by both systems.\n\n289. A reliance on works is discouraged by both.\n\n290. Purity of heart is inculcated by Hindoos as well as Christians.\n\n291. Speak and think evil of no man is a gospel injunction of each.\n\n292. A love of all beings is more prominently the spirit of Budhism than\nthat of Christianity.\n\n293. The practice of strict godly virtue is enjoined by both.\n\n294. Moderation and temperance are recommended by both.\n\n295. Patience is a virtue in each religion.\n\n296. The duty of controlling our thoughts is taught by each.\n\n297. Charity has a high appreciation by each.\n\n298. Both make the poor objects of attention.\n\n299. The practice of hospitality is recommended by each.\n\n300. Humility is a duty and a virtue under both systems.\n\n301. Mirthfulness or light conversation is forbidden by each.\n\n302. Purity of life is a duty with Hindoos as well as Christians.\n\n303. Chasteness in conversation is inculcated by both.\n\n304. \"Respect to persons\" is a sin in the moral polity of both.\n\n305. Alms-giving is religiously enjoined by the holy Scriptures of both.\n\n306. Both teach that \"it is better to give than to receive.\"\n\n307. Loyalty to rulers is a moral requisition of each system.\n\n308. Honor to father and mother is esteemed a great virtue by both.\n\n309. The correct training of children is with each a scriptural duty.\n\n310. \"Look not upon a woman\" is more than hinted by each.\n\n311. The reading of the holy Scriptures is enjoined by both.\n\n312. Lying or falsehood is with each a sin of great magnitude.\n\n313. Swearing is discountenanced by both religions.\n\n314. Theft or stealing is specially condemned by both.\n\n315. Both deprecate and condemn the practice of war.\n\n316. Both discountenance fighting.\n\n317. Neither of them professes to believe in slavery.\n\n318. Drunkenness and the use of wine are more specifically condemned by\nthe Hindoo religion.\n\n319. Adultery and fornication are heinous sins in the eyes of both.\n\n320. Both condemn covetousness as a great sin.\n\n321. Budhists more practically condemn anger than Christians do.\n\n\nXI. MISCELLANEOUS ANALOGIES.\n\n322. Both have their apocryphal as well as their canonical Scriptures.\n\n323. Stories are found in the bible of each which would be rejected if\nfound elsewhere.\n\n324. Both make their bible a finality in matters of faith.\n\n325. Both have had their councils and commentaries to reveal theis\nbibles over again.\n\n326. Numerous schisms, divisions, sects, and creeds have sprung up in\neach.\n\n327. Various religious reforms have sprung up under each.\n\n328. Conversion from one religious sect to another is common to both.\n\n329. Both religions have been troubled with numerous skeptics or\ninfidels.\n\n330. Both have often resorted to new interpretations for their bibles to\nsuit the times.\n\n331. The unconverted are stigmatized by each.\n\n332. \"Knock and it shall be opened\" is the invitation of each.\n\n333. Public confession of sins in class-meetings is known to each.\n\n334. Death-bed repentance often witnessed under both religious systems.\n\n335. A belief in haunted houses incident to the religious countries of\nboth.\n\n336. A superior respect for woman claimed by each.\n\n337. An idolatrous veneration for religious ancestors by each.\n\n338. Each sustain a numerous horde of expensive priests.\n\n339. A divine call or illumination to preach claimed by each.\n\n340. Religious martyrdom the glory of each.\n\n341. Both have encountered \"perils by sea and land\" for their religion.\n\n342. He who loseth his life (for his religion) shall find it, say both.\n\n343. Both in ancient times suffered much persecution.\n\n344. The disciples of both have suffered death without flinching from\nthe faith.\n\n345. Each sent numerous missionaries abroad to preach and convert.\n\n346. And, finally, each cherished the hope of converting the world to\ntheir religion.\n\n\nThe author has in his possession historical quotations to prove the\ntruth of each one of the above parallels. He has all the historical\nfacts on which they were constructed found in and drawn from the\nsacred books of the Hindoo religion and the works of Christian writers\ndescriptive of their religion. But they would swell the present volume\nto unwieldy dimensions, and far beyond its proper and prescribed limits,\nto present them here; they are therefore reserved for the second volume,\nand may be published in pamphlet form also.\n\nIn proof of the correctness of the foregoing comparative analogies,\nwe will now summon the testimony of various authors setting forth the\nhistorical character of the Hindoo God Chrishna, and the essential\nnature of his religion, so far as it approximates in its doctrines\nand moral teachings to the Christian religion. We will first hear from\nColonel Wiseman, for ten years a Christian missionary in India.\n\n\"There is one Indian (Hindoo) legend of considerable importance\" says\nthis writer... \"This is the story of Chrishna, the Indian Apollo. In\nnative legends he is represented as an Avatar, or incarnation of the\nDivinity. At his birth, choirs of Devitas (angels) sung hymns of praise,\nwhile shepherds surrounded his cradle. It was necessary to conceal his\nbirth from the tyrant ruler, Cansa, to whom it had been foretold that\nthe infant Savior should destroy him. The child escaped with his parents\nbeyond the coast of Lamouna. For a time he lived in obscurity, and then\ncommenced a public life distinguished for prowess and beneficence.\nHe washed the feet of the Brahmins, and preached the most excellent\ndoctrines; but at length the power of his enemies prevailed.... Before\ndying, he foretold the miseries which would take place in the Cali-yuga,\nor wicked age (Dark Age) of the world.\"\n\n\"Chrishna (says another writer) taught his followers that they alone\nwere the true believers of the saving faith; throwing down the barriers\nof caste, and elevating the dogmas of their faith above the sacerdotal\nclass, he admitted every one who felt an inward desire to the ministry\nto the preaching of their religion. A system thus associating itself\nwith the habits, feelings, and personal advantages of its disciples\ncould not fail to make rapid progress.\" (Upham's History. Doctrines of\nBudhism.)\n\n\"Budhism inculcates benevolence, tenderness, forgiveness of injuries,\nand love of enemies; and forbids sensuality, love of pleasure, and\nattachment to worldly objects.\" (Judson).\n\n\"At the moment of his (Chrishna's) conception a God left heaven to enter\nthe womb of his mother (a virgin). Immediately after his birth he was\nrecognized as a divine personage, and it was predicted that he would\nsurpass all previous divine incarnations in holiness. Every one adored\nhim, saluting him as 'the God of Gods.' When twenty years of age he went\ninto a desert, and lived there in the austerest retirement, poverty,\nsimplicity, and virtue, spending his whole time in religious\ncontemplation. He was tempted in various ways, but his self-denial\nresisted all the seductive approaches of sin. He declared, 'Religion\nis my essence.' He experienced a lively opposition from the priests\nattached to the ancient creeds (as Christ subsequently did). But he\ntriumphed over all his enemies after holding a discussion with them (as\nChrist did with the doctors in the Temple). He revised the existing code\nof morals and the social law. He reduced the main principles of morality\nto four, viz: _mercy, aversion to cruelty, unbounded sympathy for all\nanimated beings and the strictest adherence to the moral law._ He also\ngave a decalogue of commandments, viz.: 1. Not to kill. 2. Not to steal.\n3. To be chaste. 4. Not to testify falsely. 5. Not to lie. 6. Not to\nswear. 7. To avoid all impure words. 8. To be disinterested. 9. Not to\ntake revenge. 10. And not to be superstitious. This code of morals\nwas firmly established in the hearts of his followers.\" (Abridged from\nHardy's Manual of Budhism.)\n\n\"It was prophesied in olden times that a person would arise and redeem\nHindostan from 'the yoke of bondage.' At midnight, when the birth of\nChrishna was taking place, the clouds emitted low music, and poured\ndown a rain of flowers. The celestial child was greeted with hymns by\nattending spirits.\n\n\"The room was illuminated by his light, and the countenances of his\nfather and mother emitted rays of glory, and they bowed in worship.'\n'The people believed he was a God.' They eagerly caught the words which\nfell from his lips, which taught his divine mission, and they called him\nthe 'Holy One,' and finally the 'Living God.' He performed miraculous\ncures. At his birth a marvelous light illumined the earth. His followers\nbaptised, and performed miraculous cures. And he, when a child,\nattracted attention by his miracles. While attending the herds with his\nfoster-father a great serpent poisoned the river, which caused the death\nof cows and shepherd-boys when they drank of it, whom Chrishna restored\nto life by a look of divine power. His life was devoted to mercy and\ncharity. He left paradise from pure compassion, to die for suffering\nsinners. He sought to lead men to better paths and lives of virtue\nand rectitude. He suffered to atone for the sins of the world; and the\nsinner, through faith in him, can be saved. Christ and Chrishna both\ntaught the equality of man. Prayers addressed to Chrishna were after\nthis fashion: 'O thou Supreme One! thy essence is inscrutable. Thou art\nall in all. The understanding of man cannot reach thy Almighty Power.\nI, who know nothing, fly to thee for protection. Show mercy unto me, and\nenable me to see and know thee.' Chrishna replies, 'Have faith in me.\nNo one who worships me can perish. Address thyself to me as the\nonly asylum. I will deliver thee from sin. I am animated with equal\nbenevolence toward all beings. I know neither hatred nor partiality.\nThose who adore me devoutly are in me and I in them'\"--\"Christ within\nyou the hope of glory.\" (Abridged from Mr. Tuttle.)\n\n\"If we consider that Budhism proclaimed the equality of all men and\nwomen in the sight of God, that it denounced the impious pretensions\nof the most mischievous priesthood the world ever saw, and that it\ninculcated a pure system of practical morality, we must admit that\nthe innovation was as advantageous as it was extensively spread and\nadopted.\" (Hue's Journey through China, chap. v.)\n\n\"To Chrishna the Hindoos were indebted for a code of pure and practical\nmorality, which inculcated charity and chastity, performance of good\nworks, abstinence from evil, and general kindness to all living things.\"\n(Cunningham.)\n\n\"Budhism never confounds right or wrong, and never excuses any sin\"\n(Catharine Beecher.)\n\n\"He (Chrishna) honored humanity by his virtues.\" (St Hilaire.)\n\n\"It is probable that every incident in his (Chrisna's) life is founded\nin fact, which, if separated from surrounding fable, would afford\na history that would scarce have any equal in the importance of the\nlessons it would teach.\" (Hardy's Manual of Budhism.)\n\n\"He (Chrishna) undertakes and counsels a constant struggle against the\nbody. In his eyes the body is the enemy of man's soul (as Paul thought\nwhen he spoke of 'our vile bodies.') He aims to subdue the body and the\nburning passions which consume it.... He requires humility, disregard of\nwordly wealth, patience and resignation in adversity, love to enemies,\nreligious tolerance, horror at falsehood, avoidance of frivolous\nconversation, consideration and esteem for women, sanctity of the\nmarriage relation, non-resistance to evil, confession of sins, and\nconversion.\" (St. Hilaire.)\n\n\"Budhism has been called the Christianity of the East.\" (Abel Remuset.)\n\n\"The doctrine and practical piety of their bible (the Baghavat Gita)\nbear a strong resemblance to those of the Holy Scriptures. It has\nscarcely a precept or principle that is not found in the (Christian)\nbible. And were the people to live up to its principles of peace\nand love, oppression and injury would be known no more within their\nborders... It has no mythology of obscene and ferocious deities, no\nsanguinary or impure observances, no self-inflicting tortures, no\ntyrannizing priesthood, no confounding of right and wrong by making\ncertain iniquities laudable in worship. In its moral code, its\ndescription of the purity and peace of the first ages, and the\nshortening of man's life by sin, it seems to follow genuine traditions.\nIn almost every respect it seems to be the best religion ever invented\nby man.\" (Rev. H. Malcom's Travels in Asia.)\n\n\"If the morality of Budhism be examined, its exhortations to guard the\nwill, to curb the thoughts, to exercise kindness towards others,\nto abstain from wrong to all, it propounds a very high standard of\npractice.\" (Upham's Doctrines and History of Budhism.)\n\n\"It seeks the highest triumphants of humanity in the exercise of\ndevotion, self-contemplation, and self-denial.\" (Theogony of the Hindoos,\nby Bjornsjerma.)\n\n\"And the doctrines of Budhism are not alone in the beauty of their\nsentiments and the excellence of much of their morality. 'It is not\npermitted to you to return evil for evil' is one of the sentiments of\nSocrates.\" (Rev. H. S. Hardy's Eastern Monachism.)\n\n\"Budhism insists on the necessity of taking the intellectual faculties\nfor guides in philosophical researches.\" (Tiberghien.)\n\n\"It sought to wean mankind from the pleasures and vanities of life\nby pointing to the transitoriness of all human enjoyment.\" (Smith's\nMongolia.)\n\n\"The principal characteristics of Budhism are the doctrines of mildness\nand the universal brotherhood of man.\" (Ibid.)\n\n\"Life is a state of probation and misery, according to Budhism.\"\n(Upham, chap. vi.)\n\n\"The Brahmins found fault with him (Chrishna) for receiving as\ndisciples the outcasts of Hindoo society (as the Jews did Christ for\nfellowshipping publicans and sinners). But he (Chrishna) replied, 'My\nlaw is a law of mercy to all.'\" (Hue's Voyages through China.)\n\n\"Budhism attracted and furnished consolation for the poor and\nunfortunate.\" (Ibid.)\n\n\"Budhism is a rationalistic and reform system as compared with\nBrahminism. Landresse expresses his high admiration of the heroism with\nwhich the Budhist missionaries before Christ crossed streams and seas\nwhich had arrested armies, and traversed deserts and mountains upon\nwhich no caravans dared to venture, and braved dangers and surmounted\nobstacles which had defied the omnipotence of the emperors.\" (A note on\nLandresse's _Foe Koui Ki._)\n\n\"If we addressed a Mogul or Thibetan this question, Who is Chrishna?\nthe reply was, instantly, 'The Savior of men.'\" (Hue's Journey through\nChina.)\n\n\"Chrishna, the incarnate Deity of the Sanscrit romance continues to this\nhour the darling God of the women of India.... Chrishna was the person\nof Vishnu (God) himself in the human form.\" (Asiat. Researches, 260).\n\n\"Respectable natives told me that some of the missionaries had told them\nthat they were even now almost Christians\" (owing to the two religions\nbeing so nearly alike). (Ibid).\n\n\"All that converting the Hindoos to Christianity does for them is to\nchange the object of their worship from Chrishna to Christ.\" (Robert\nCheyne.)\n\n\"Brahminism or Budhism in some of its forms is said to constitute the\nreligion of considerably more than half the human race. It teaches the\nexistence of one supreme eternal, and uncreated God, called Brahma, who\ncreated the world through Chrishna, the second member of the Trinity.\"\nPaul says, God created the world through Jesus Christ, the second member\nof the Christian Trinity. (Eph. iii. 9.) How striking the resemblance!\n\"The doctrine of the incarnation, the descent of the Deity upon earth,\nand his manifestation in a human form for the redemption of mankind,\nseems to have existed in the shape of prophecy or fact in all ages of\nthe world. Hindooism teaches nine of these incarnations. Furthermore, it\nteaches the doctrine of the Trinity, the fall and redemption of man,\nand a state of future rewards and punishments in a future life.... This\nreligion in chief of Asia is traceable to remote ages. The doctrine of\nthe Trinity is represented in the Elephantine cavern, and taught in\nthe Mahabarat, which goes back for its origin nearly two thousand years\nbefore Christ.\" (New York Sunday Despatch, 1855.)\n\n\"In the year 3600, Chrishna descended to the earth for the purpose of\ndefeating the evil machinations of Chivan (the devil), as Christ 'came\nto destroy the devil and his works.' (See John iii. 8.) After a fierce\ncombat with the devil, or serpent, he defeated him by bruising his\nhead--he receiving, during the contest, a wound in the heel. ('It [the\nserpent] shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.'--Gen.\niii. 15.) He died at last between two thieves.... He lead a pure and\nholy life, and was a meek, tender, and benevolent being, and enjoined\ncharity, hospitality, and mercy, and forbade lying, prevarication,\nhypocrisy, and overreaching in dealing, and pilfering, and theft, and\nviolence toward any being.\" (Lecture before the Free Press Association\nin 1827.)\n\n\"The birthplace of the Hindoo hero (Chrishna) is called Mathura, which\nis easily changed, and by correct translation becomes Maturea, the place\nwhere Christ is said to have stopped, between Nazareth and Egypt... To\nshow his humility he washed the feet of the Brahmins (as Christ is said\nto have washed the feet of the Jews--see John xiii. 14). One day a\nwoman came to him and anointed his hair with oil, in return for which\nhe healed her maladies. One of his first miracles was that of healing\na leper, like Christ (See Mark i. 4). Finally, he was crucified, then\ndescended to Hades. (It is said of Christ, 'his soul was not left in\nhell.'--Acts ii. 31.) He (Chrishna) rose from the dead and ascended to\nVoicontha (heaven.)\" (Higgin's Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 239).\n\nNow, we ask, is it any wonder, in view of the foregoing historical\nexposition, that Eusebius should exclaim, \"The religion of Jesus\nChrist is neither new nor strange?\" (Eccl. Hist. ch. iv.) Truly did\nSt. Augustine say, \"This, in our day, is the Christian religion, not\nas having been unknown in former times, but as having recently received\nthat name.\"\n\nHere, then, we pause to ask our good Christian reader, _Where is your\noriginal Christianity now?_ or what constitutes the revealed religion\nof Jesus Christ? or where is the evidence that any new religion was\nrevealed by him or preached by him, seeing we have all his religion, as\nshown by the foregoing historical citations, included in an old heathen\nsystem more than a thousand years old when Jesus Christ was born?\nWe find it all here in this old oriental system of Budhism--_every\nessential part, particle and principle_ of it. We find Christianity all\nhere--its Alpha and Omega, its beginning and end. We find it here in\nall its details,--its root, essence, and entity,--all its \"revealed\ndoctrines,\" religious ideas, beautiful truths, senseless dogmas and\noriental phantoms. Not, a doctrine, principle, or precept of the\nChristian system, but that is here proclaimed to the world ages before\n\"the angels announced the birth of a divine babe in Bethlehem.\" Will\nyou, then, persist in claiming that \"truth, life, and immortality came\nby Jesus Christ,\" and that \"Christ came to preach a new gospel to the\nworld, and to set forth a new religion never before heard amongst men\"\n(to use the language of Archbishop Tillotson), when the historical facts\ncited in this work demonstrate a hundred times over that such a position\nis palpably erroneous? Will you still persist, with all those undeniable\nfacts staring you in the face (proving and reproving, with overwhelming\ndemonstration, that the statement is untrue), in declaring that \"the\nreligion of Jesus Christ is the only true and soul-saving religion, and\nall other systems are mere straw, stubble, tradition, and superstition\"\n(as asserted by a popular Christian writer), when no mathematician ever\ndemonstrated a scientific problem more clearly than we have proved in\nthese pages that all the principle systems of the past, by no means\nexcepting Christianity, are essentially alike in every important\nparticular--all of their cardinal doctrines being the same, differing\nonly in unimportant details?\n\nSeeing, then, that all systems of religion have been found to be\nessentially alike in spirit and in practice, the all-important question\narises here, What is the true cause assignable for this striking\nresemblance? How is it to be accounted for? Perhaps some of our good\nChristian readers, unacquainted with history, may cherish the thought\nthat all the oriental systems brought to notice are but imitations of\nChristianity; that they were reconstructed out of materials obtained\nfrom that source; that Christianity is the parent, and they the\noff-spring. But, alas for their long-cherished idol, those who\nentertain such forlorn hopes are \"sowing to the wind, and are doomed to\ndisappointment.\" With the exception of Mahomedanism alone, Christianity\nis the youngest system in the whole catalogue. The historical facts to\nprove this statement are voluminous. But as it needs no proof to those\nwho have read religious history, but little space will be occupied\nwith citations for this purpose. With respect to the antiquity of the\nprincipal oriental system, we need only to quote the testimony of Sir\nWilliam Jones, a devout Christian writer, who spent years in India,\nand whose testimony will be accepted by any person acquainted with his\nhistory. He makes the emphatic declaration, \"That the name of Chrishna,\nand the general outline of his history, were long anterior to the birth\nof our Savior, and probably to the time of Homer (900 b. C.) we know\nvery certainly.\" (Asiat. Res. vol. i. p. 254.) No guess-work about it.\n\"_We know very certainly_.\"\n\nAnd being a scholar, a traveler, and a sojourner among the Hindoos, and\nwell versed in their history, no person ever had a better opportunity\nto know than he. We will hear this renowned author further. \"In the\nSanscrit dictionary, compiled more than two thousand years ago, we have\nthe whole history of the incarnate deity (Chrishna), born of a virgin,\nand miraculously escaping in his infancy from the reigning tyrant of\nhis country (Cansa). He passed a life of the most extraordinary and\nincomprehensible devotion. His birth was concealed from the tyrant\nCansa, to whom it had been predicted that one born at that time, and in\nthat family, would destroy him;\" i. e., destroy his power. (Asiat.\nRes. vol. i. p. 273.) This writer also states that the first Christian\nmissionaries who entered India were astonished to find there a religion\nso near like their own, and could only account for it by supposing\nthat the devil, foreseeing the advent of Christ, originated a system of\nreligion in advance of his, and \"just like it.\" Stated in other words,\nhe got out the second edition of the gospel plan of salvation before the\nfirst edition was published or had an existence. Rather a smart trick\nthis, thus to outwit God Almighty.\n\nWith respect to the vast antiquity of the Hindoo oriental religion,\nwhich indicates it as being not only the source from which the materials\nof the Christian religion were drawn, but as being the parent of all the\nleading systems, with their three thousand subordinate branches which\nexisted at a much earlier period than Christianity, we need only point\nto the deep chiseled sculptures and imperishable monuments enstamped\non their time-honored temples, tombs, altars, vases, columns, pagodas,\nruined towers, &c., which, with contemporary inscriptions, warrant us\nin antedating the religion of the Himmalehas far beyond the authentic\nrecords of any other religion that has floated down to us on the stream\nof time. The numerous images of their crucified Gods, Chrishna and Saki,\nemblazoned on their old rock temples in various parts of the country,\nsome of which are constructed of clay porphyry, now the very hardest\nspecies of rock, with their attendant inscriptions in a language so very\nancient as to be lost to the memory of man, vie with the Sanscrit in\nage, the oldest deciphered language in the world.\n\nAll these and a hundred corroboratory historical facts fix on India as\nbeing the birthplace of the mother of all religions now existing, or\nthat ever had an existence, while the great workshop in which they were\nsubsequently remodeled was in Alexandria in Egypt, whose theological\nschools furnished the model for nearly every system now found noticed\non the page of history--Christianity of course included. So much for\nthe unrivaled antiquity of the Hindoo religion. Now, the more important\nquery arises, What relationship does ancient heathen or Hindoo Budhism\nbear to Christianity? What is the evidence that the latter is an\noutgrowth of the former? As an answer to this question, the reader will\nplease note the following facts of history:--\n\n1. Alexandria, the home of the world's great conqueror, was at one\nperiod of time the great focal center for religious speculation and\npropagandism, the great emporium for religious dogmas throughout the\nEast, and a place of resort for the disciples of nearly every system of\nreligious faith then existing.\n\n2. In this capital city, comprising about five hundred thousand\ninhabitants, were established a voluminous library, and vast theological\nschools, in which men of every religious order, and of every phase of\nfaith, met and exchanged religious ideas, and borrowed new doctrines,\nwith which they remodeled their former systems of faith, amounting in\nsome cases to an entire change of their long-established creeds.\n\n3. In these theological schools the Jewish sect, which afterward became\nthe founders of Christianity, were extensively represented; for, let it\nbe noted, its first disciples and founders had all been Jews, probably\nof the Essene sect. \"For a long time the Christians were but a Jewish\nsect,\" says M. Reuss' \"History of Christian Theology.\" Alexander had,\nprevious to this time (that is, about 330 b. c.), subjected the whole\nof Western Asia to his dominions, including, of course, \"The Holy\nLand\"--Judea.\n\n4. By this act a large portion of the Jewish nation were transferred\nfrom their own country to Alexandria. And this number was afterward\nvastly increased by Alexander's successor, Ptolemy Sotor, who carried off\nand settled in that credal city one hundred thousand more Jews.\n\n5. As the result, in part, of these repeated calamities, \"the Lord's\nchosen people\" were literally broken up. They lost their law, lost their\nleader and lawgiver, lost their language, lost the control of their\ncountry, the \"_Promised Land\"_ which (they verily believed) the Lord\nhad deeded to them _in fee simple_, and ratified in the high court\nof heaven, and had declared they should hold and possess forever. And\nfinally they partially lost their nationality, being literally dissolved\nand broken up; and were finally almost lost to history--the ten tribes\ndisappearing entirely.\n\n6. The Jews had ever manifested a proneness for copying after the\nreligious customs of their heathen neighbors, and engrafting their\ndoctrines into their own creeds, as their bible history furnishes ample\nproof.\n\n7. In Alexandria a very superior opportunity was afforded for doing\nthis, excelling in this respect any previous period of their history.\n\n8. The shattered condition of their own religion, with all its\nconventional creeds, customs, and ceremonies, now suspended and\nliterally prostrated, as above shown, vastly augmented the temptation\never rife with them to make another change in their religion, and\nsubject their creed to another installment of new doctrines, by which it\nbecame Christianity.\n\n9. The liberal character and tolerant spirit of the political and\nreligious institutions of the kingdom of Alexandria, with its vast\nand attractive library of two hundred thousand volumes, established\nprincipally by Ptolemy Phila-delphus, with other attractive features\nalready pointed out, furnished great facilities, as well as increased\ntemptations to religious propagandists to absorb new theories, and make\nnew creeds out of the vast medley of religious doctrines and speculative\ndogmas preached and propagated in that royal city by the disciples and\nrepresentatives of nearly every religious system then in existence,\nbrought together by the attractions above specified.\n\n10. Hence every consideration would lead us to conclude, taken in\nconnection with the facts above stated, and the well-known borrowing\nproclivity and imitative propensity of the Jews, that they would not,\nand could not, withstand the overweening and overpowering temptation to\nmake another radical change in their religion by a new draught on the\nboundless reservoir of speculative ideas, religious tenets, and specious\ntheories then glowing in the popular schools of Alexandria.\n\n11. All the facts above enumerated would impel us to the conclusion that\nthe Jews would--and every page of history touching the matter proves\nthey did--make important changes in their religion by this contact with\nthe oriental systems, as they had repeatedly done before. Some of this\nproof we will here present, to show how they originated Christianity.\n\n12. \"The schools of Alexandria\" says Mr. Enfield, a Christian writer,\n\"by pretending to teach sublime doctrines concerning God and divine\nthings, enticed men of different countries and religions, and among the\nrest the Jews, to study its mysteries, and incorporate them with their\nown.... The Jewish faith mixed with the Pythagorean, and afterward with\nthe Egyptian oriental theology\" (that is, they became Essenes in the\nGrecian school of Pythagoras, who taught the doctrines of that religious\norder, then Bud-hists in the Egyptian schools of Alexandria). And\nfinally, with Christ as their leader, who taught the doctrines of\nboth schools (they being essentially alike), they assumed the name of\nChristian in honor of him, and thus is Christianity from Essene Budhism.\n\n13. Beers in his \"History of the Jews,\" sustains the above statement by\nthe declaration that the Essenian Jews \"fled to Egypt at the time of the\nBabylonian captivity, and there became acquainted with the Pythagorean\nphilosophy, and ingrafted it upon the religion of Moses,\" which would\nmake them Essenian Budhists--for Cunningham assures us that \"the\ndoctrine of Pythagoras were intensely Budhistic.\" (Philsa. Topus, chap.\nx.)\n\n14. We will condense a few more historical testimonies relative to the\nentire change of the Jewish faith, while in Alexandria, as well as on\nother occasions, to show how easy and natural it was for that portion of\nthe Jews who afterward became the founders of Christianity to slide into\nand adopt Essenian Budhism, whose doctrines they took to constitute the\nChristian religion.\n\n15. Mr. Gibbon (chap. xxi.) declares that the theological opinions\nof the Jews underwent great changes by their contact with the various\nforeigners they found in Alexandria. Mr. Tytler likewise, in his\n\"Universal History,\" assures us that the Jewish religion \"became\n_totally changed by the intermixture of heathen doctrines_.\" Dr.\nCampbell also testifies that \"their views came pretty much to coincide\nwith those of the pagans.\" (See his Dissertation, vi.) And the author of\n\"_The Expositor_ for 1854\" complains that the pagan \"theology stole upon\nthem from every quarter, and mingled in all the views of the then known\ntribes, so that by the year 150 b. c., it had wrought visible changes in\ntheir notions and habits of thought.\" (P. 423.) Here we have the proof\nthat the whole Jewish religion underwent a change in Alexandria.\n\n16. Now, most, certainly a nation or sect professing a religion so\neasily changed, and possessing a character so fickle, or so\nirrepressible as to yield on every slight occasion, and embrace every\nopportunity to imbibe new religious ideas and doctrines, would easily,\nif not naturally, slide into the adoption of the religious system then\npromulgated in Alexandria under the name of Budhism, and afterward\nremodeled or transformed, and called Christianity.\n\n17. The Jews of the Essenian order, as we have in part shown in a\nprevious chapter, set forth in their creed all the leading doctrines now\ncomprised in the Christian religion hundreds of years before the advent\nof Christ, not excepting the doctrine of the divine incarnation and its\nadjuncts, as these concomitants of the present popular faith, we will\nnow prove, were not unknown to the Jewish theology, but constituted\na part of the religion of some of the principal Jewish sects. That\nstandard Christian author, Mr. Milman, in his \"History of Christianity,\"\ntells us that \"the doctrine of the incarnation ('God manifest in the\nflesh') was the doctrine from the Ganges, and even the shores of the\nYellow Sea to the Ilissus. It was the fundamental principle of\nthe Indian Budhist religion and philosophy. It was the basis of\nZoroasterism. It was pure Platonism. It was Platonic Judaism in the\nAlexandrian school.\" Here it is positively declared, by a popular\nChristian writer, whose work is a part of nearly every popular library\nin Christiandom as a standard authority, that the appearance of God\namongst men in the human form, by human birth, was a doctrine of\nthe Jewish religion in some of its branches, especially the Essenian\nbranch--further proof that Christianity originated nothing, and gave\nutterance to no new doctrine or precepts, and performed no new miracles.\nWhere, then, is the claim for its originality? On what ground is it\npredicated? Please answer us, good Christian brother.\n\n18. It is a question of no importance, if it could be settled, whether\nChristianity is a direct outgrowth from one of the new-fangled sects\nof Judaism, or whether it derived a portion of its doctrines from this\nsource and the balance from ascetic Budhism. Yet we regard it as an\nincontrovertible proposition that it all grew out of Budhism originally,\neither directly or indirectly.\n\n19. Christ may have received his doctrines secondhanded, all or a\nportion from the Essenian Jews; for that sect held all the leading\ndoctrines of Budhism (as we have shown in a previous chapter), which now\ngoes under the name of the religion of Jesus Christ.\n\n20. Or we may indulge the not unreasonable hypothesis that the founders\nof Christianity, who republished the doctrines of Budhism and adopted\nthem as their own, received them all direct from the disciples of that\nreligious order; for \"they were everywhere,\" as one writer (Mr. Taylor)\ndeclares, speaking of their extensive travels to propagate their\ndoctrines through the world. And it was about that period, as Mr.\nGoodrich informs us, they sent out nine hundred missionaries, who made\nsix millions of converts,--a small fraction of their present\nnumber (three hundred and eighty millions, as given by some of our\ngeographies),--one third more than the entire census of Christendom, and\nsix times the number of believers in the Christian religion, if we omit\nGreeks and Catholics. \"It is.\" as a writer remarks, \"the oldest and\nmost widely spread religion in the world.\" And, whatever hypothesis may\nbe adduced to account for the fact, Christianity is now all Budhism.\n\n21. It is impossible, with the historic darkness which at present\nenvirons and beclouds our pathway, to determine at what period or in\nwhat manner Christ became an Essene,--whether he was born of Essenian\nparents, or became a convert to the faith,--because the whole period of\nhis life, with the exception of about three years, is a total blank in\nhistory. There is but one incident related of his movements by his\nbible biographers prior to his twenty-seventh year, leaving more than\na quarter of a century of his probably active life unreported--a period\nthat may have witnessed several important changes in his religion. We\nhave not even his ancestry reported in his scriptural biography, in\neither parental line, unless we assume Joseph to have been his father.\nThe parental lineage of his mother is entirely omitted Had we his\nline of ancestry, or could we trace him back to his national or family\norigin, we doubt not but we should there find a clue to the origin of\nhis religion. We should find his ancestors were Essenian Jews.\n\n22. Nor can we fix the date when Essenian Budhism among the Jews\nreceived the name of Christianity for a similar reason. There is a\nlink--a chain of events of four hundred years left out of the bible\nbetween Judaism and Christianity--thus lacking four hundred years of\nconnecting the two religions together, or of showing how the latter\ngrew out of the former. Malachi, the last book of the Old Testament,\nantedates the first events of Christian history four centuries, or\ntwelve generations, thus leaving a wide and dark gap between them. And\nbesides, we cannot find the name of Christ or Christianity mentioned in\nany of the contemporary histories of that era till one hundred and four\nyears after the time fixed for Christ's birth by Christendom; Tacitus\nbeing the first writer who names either, and this was at that date.\n\n23. These facts disclose the whole secret with respect to the mystery\nand darkness thrown around the origin of the Christian religion--the\nhow, the when, and the where of its origin. That chapter of Christian\nhistory is left out of the record. The bible account itself is\nbut fragmentary, as it leaves nine tenths of Christ's history a\nblank,--twenty-seven years out of the thirty,--and omits all mention of\nhis ancestors beyond his grandmother, and leaves even the time of his\nbirth a blank. \"The researches of the learned,\" says Mr. Mosheim (a\nstandard Christian author), \"though long and ably conducted, have been\nunable to fix the time of Christ's birth with certainty.\" (Eccl. Hist.\np. 23.) Wonderful admission, truly, as it is an evidence that nothing\nelse can be fixed \"with certainty,\" with respect to the history of\n\"the man Christ Jesus,\" only that his doctrines and precepts were all\nborrowed perhaps during the twenty-seven dark and mysteries years of his\nlife, if not an Essene by birth.\n\n24. There is no escaping the conclusion that Christianity is a _borrowed\nsystem_--an outgrowth and remodeling of Budhism, with a change of name\nonly. A thousand facts of history prove and proclaim it, and the verdict\nof posterity will be unanimous in affirming it.\n\n25. From the almost endless chain of analogies, exhibiting a striking\nresemblance even in their minute details of Christianity and Budhism,\nwe are compelled to conclude that one furnished the materials for the\nother; that one is the offspring--the legitimate child--of the other.\nAnd as it is a settled historical fact that Budhism is much the older\nsystem, there is hence no difficulty in determining which is the parent\nand which is the child.\n\n26. In the Hindoo story of the creation of the human race, we find Adimo\nand Heva given as the names of the first man and woman answering to\nour Adam and Eve. And our Shem, Ham, and Japheth are traceable to their\nSherma, Hama, and Jiapheta; the difference in the mode of spelling is\nprobably owing to the difference in the languages. And under the new era\nwe have Christ Jesus answering to their Chrishna Zeus, as some writers\ngive the name of the eighth Avatar. And for Maia, a godmother, we have\nMary. And other similar analogies might be pointed out besides the long\nstring of strikingly similar events previously presented in the history\nof the two Saviors (Christ and Chrishna), amounting to hundreds.\n\n27. Such an almost countless list of similar and nearly identical\nincidents bids defiance, and absolutely sets at naught all attempts\nto account for it as a mere fortuitous accident. There is no\nother explanation possible but that Christianity is a re-vamp or\nre-establishment of Budhism.\n\n28. Here let it be noted that Christianity was not the only religion\nwhich was rehabilitated in the Alexandrian schools. On the contrary, all\nthe popular oriental systems then in active being had long previously\npassed through the same representative theological schools and\ncreed-making institutions of that royal and commercial city. All were\nremodeled in its theological workshops--a fact which accounts most\nconclusively for the same train of religions ideas and historical\nincidents being found in the later sacred books of each. And besides,\nSir William Jones says, \"The disciples of these various systems of\nreligion had intercourse with each other long before the time of Christ,\nwhich would necessarily bring about a uniformity in the doctrines and\ngeneral character of each system.\"\n\n29. The disciples of all the religious systems cited their initiatory\nmiracles as a proof of being on familiar terms with God Almighty. They\nall (as is claimed) healed the sick; all restored the deaf, the dumb,\nand the blind; all cast out devils, and all raised the dead. (See\nchapter on Parallels.) In fact, all their miracles and legendary marvels\nrun in parallel lines, because all were recast in the same creed-mold\nin Alexandria. A coincidence is thus beautifully explained, which would\notherwise be hard to account for.\n\n30. Mr. Gibbon says, \"It was in the school of Alexandria that the\nChristian theology appears to have assumed a regular and scientific\nform\" (Decline, &c., chap. xv.); that is, the regular and scientific\nform of Budhism or Essenism.\n\n31. Pregnant with meaning is the text, \"It was in the city of Antioch\nthe disciples were first called Christians.\" (Acts xi. 36.) Here is\nconclusive proof that the disciples of the Christian faith were not\nalways known by the same name, and were not at first called Christians.\nThen what were they called during the earlier years of their history?\n\nHere is a great and important query, and one involving a momentous\nproblem. Couple the two facts together, that the disciples were first\nknown as Christians at Antioch, and that the Essenian order of believers\nexpired and went out of history about that period, and the question is\nat once and forever satisfactorily settled. It was not an infrequent act\non making important changes in a religion, and adopting some new items\nof faith to change the title of the system, and give it a new name.\n\nAfter Alexander Campbell had made some modifications in his previous\nreligious faith, and started a new church, his followers were popularly\ncalled Campbellites. Elias Hicks ingrafted some reform ideas into the\nQuaker faith, and instituted a new society of that order. Hence, and\nhenceforth, his disciples were known as Hicksites. In like manner Jesus\nChrist having made some innovations in his inherited Jewish faith (which\nwas of the Essene stamp) by ingrafting more of the Budhist doctrine into\nit, his followers were henceforth called Christians. How complete the\nanalogy! Here let it be borne in mind, as powerfully confirmatory of\nthis conclusion, that the first Christians were (as history affirms)\n\"merely reformatory Jews.\" The twelve chosen were all Jews, probably of\nthe Essene order. According to the Rev. Mr. Prideaux (Jewish History),\nthe Jews of this order were first called Israelites, in common with the\nother tribes; then Chassidim; and thirdly Essenes. And finally, after\nthe Essenian Jesus Christ, with some new radical ideas, proclaimed, \"Ye\nhave heard it hath been said by them of old time\" thus and so, \"but I\nsay unto you\" differently. The title was again changed, and they adopted\nor received the name of Christians--the Essenes going out of history\nat the very date Christians first appear in history. Put this and that\ntogether, and the chain is welded. Thus we can as easily trace the\norigin of Christianity as we can trace the origin of a root running\nbeneath the soil in the direction of a certain tree. History, then,\nproclaims that to the honest, pious, deeply-devout, self-denying, yet\nignorant, slothful, and filthy Budhistic Essenes must be awarded the\nhonor or dishonor of giving birth to that system of religion now known\nas Christianity.\n\n\nCHRISHNA AS A GOD--ADDITIONAL FACTS.\n\nThe following additional facts relative to the history, character, life,\nand teachings of Zeus Chrishna, or Jeseus Christna (as styled by one\nwriter) are drawn mostly from the Vedas, Baghavat, Gita (Bible in\nIndia).\n\n1. _His Virgin Mother, her Character_.--The holy book declares, that\n\"through her the designs of God were accomplished. She was pure and\nchaste; no animal food ever touched her lips; honey and milk were her\nsustenance; her time was spent in solitude, lost in the contemplation of\nGod who showered upon her innumerable blessings; she looked upon death\nas the birth to a new and better life; when she traveled, a column of\nfire in the heavens went before her to guide her. One evening, as\nshe was praying, she heard celestial music, and fell into a profound\necstasy, and being overshadowed by the spirit of God, she conceived the\nGod Chrishna.\" (Baghavat, Gita).\n\n2. _Chrishna, his Life and Mission_.--This sin-atoning God was about\nsixteen when he commenced active life. Like Christ, he chose twelve\ndisciples to aid him in propagating his doctrines. \"He spent his time\nworking miracles, resuscitating the dead, healing lepers, restoring\nthe deaf and the blind, defending the weak against the strong, and the\noppressed against the oppressor, and in proclaiming his divine mission\nto redeem man from original sin, and banish evil, and restore the reign\nof good.\" (Baghavat, Gita.) It is declared that he came to teach peace,\ncharity, love to man, self-respect, the practice of good for its own\nsake, and faith in the inexhaustible goodness of the Creator; also to\npreach the immortality of the soul, and the doctrine of future rewards\nand punishments, and to vanquish the prince of darkness, Rakshas. It is\nfurther declared that \"Brahma sent his son (Chrishna) upon the earth to\ndie for the salvation of man.\" \"His lofty precepts and the purity of his\nlife spread his fame throughout all India, and finally won for him\nmore than three millions of followers.\" \"He inculcated the sublimest\ndoctrines, and the purest morals, and the grand principles of charity\nand self-denial.\" \"He forbade revenge, and commanded to return good\nfor evil, and consoled the feeble and the unhappy.\" \"He lived poor, and\nloved the poor.\" \"He lived chaste, and enjoined chastity.\" \"Problems the\nmost lofty, and morals the most pure and sublime, and the future destiny\nof man, were themes which engaged his most profound attention.\"\n\n\"Chrishna, we will venture to say (says the Bible in India) was the\ngreatest of philosophers, not only of India, but of the entire world.\"\n\"He was the grandest moral figure of ancient times.\" (Bible in India.)\n\"Chrishna was a moralist and a philosopher.\" \"We should admire his moral\nlessons, so sublime and so pure.\" \"He was recognized as the 'Divine\nWord.'\" \"He received the title of Jeseus, which means pure Essense.\"\nChrishna signifies the \"Promised of God,\" the \"Messiah.\" \"When he\npreached, he often spoke from a mount. He also spoke in parables.\n'Parable plays a great part in the familiar instructions of this Hindoo\nRedeemer.'\" He relates a very interesting parable of a fisherman who\nwas much persecuted by his neighbors, but who in the time of a severe\nfamine, when the people were suffering and dying for the want of food,\nbeing so noble as to return good for evil, he carried food to these same\npersecuting enemies, and thus saved them from starvation. \"Therefore,\"\nsaid he \"do good to all, both the evil and the good, even your enemies.\"\n\nHis addresses to the people were simple, but to his disciples they were\nelevated and philosophical. Such was the wisdom of his sermons and his\nparables, that the people crowded around him, eager to behold and hear\nhim, \"saying, This is indeed the Redeemer promised to our Fathers.\"\nGreat multitudes followed him, exclaiming, \"This is he who resuscitates\nthe dead, and heals the lame, and the deaf, and the blind.\" On one\noccasion, as he entered Madura (as Christ once entered Jerusalem), \"the\npeople came out in flocks to meet him, and strewed branches in his way.\"\nOn another occasion two women approached him, anointed him with oil,\nand worshiped him. When the people murmured at this waste, he replied,\n\"Better is a little given with an humble heart than much given with\nostentation.\" Such was his sense of decorum, that he admonished some\ngirls he once observed playing in a state of nudity on the bank of a\nriver after bathing. They repented, asked his forgiveness, and reformed.\n\"The followers of Chrishna practiced all the virtues, and observed a\ncomplete abnegation of self (self-denial), and lived poor, hoping for a\nreward in the future life. They occupied all their time in the service\nof their Divine Master. Pure and majestic was their worship.\" Chrishna\nhad a favorite disciple _Adjaurna_, who sustained to him the relation of\nJohn to Christ, while Angada acted the part of Judas by following him to\nthe Ganges and betraying him.\n\n3. _His last Hours_.--\"When Chrishna knew his hour had come, forbidding\nhis disciples to follow him, he repaired to the bank of the River\nGanges; and having performed three ablutions, he knelt down, and looking\nup to heaven, he prayed to Brahma.\" While nailed to the cross, the\ntree on which he was suspended became suddenly covered with great red\nflowers, which diffused their fragrance all around. And it is said\nhe often appeared to his disciples after his death \"in all his divine\nmajesty.\"\n\n4. _The second Advent of Chrishna_.--\"There is not a Hindoo or a Brahmin\nwho does not look upon the second coming of Chrishna as an established\narticle of faith.\" Their holy bibles (the Vedas and Gita) prophesy of\nhim thus: \"He shall come crowned with lights; he shall come, and the\nheavens and the earth shall be joyous; the stars shall pale before\nhis splendor; the earth will be too small to contain him, for he is\ninfinite, he is Almighty, he is Wisdom, he is Beauty, he is all and in\nall; and all men, all animated beings, beasts, birds, trees, and plants,\nwill chant his praises; he will regenerate all bodies, and purify all\nsouls.\" \"He will be as sweet as honey and ambrosia, and as pure as\nthe lamb without spot, or as the lips of a virgin. All hearts will be\ntransported with joy. From the rising to the setting of the sun it will\nbe a day of joy and exultation, when this God shall manifest his power\nand his glory, and reconcile the world unto himself.\" Such are a few of\nthe prophetic utterances of his devout and prayerful disciples.\n\n\"We find,\" says a writer, \"in all the theogonies of different countries\nthe hope of the advent of a God (either his first or his second\ncoming)--a hope which sprang from a sense of their own imperfections and\nsufferings, which naturally induced them to look for a divine Redeemer.\"\n\n5. _Precepts of Chrishna_.--Numerous are the prescriptive admonitions\nfound in the holy books which set forth the religion of \"this heathen\ndemigod\" (so called by Christian professors). They appertain to all\nthe duties of life, but are too numerous to be quoted here. Those\nappertaining to woman enjoin the most sacred regard for her rights,\nsuch as \"woman should be protected with tenderness, and shielded with\nfostering solicitude.\" \"There is no crime more odious than to persecute\nwoman, or take advantage of her weakness.\" \"Degrade woman and you\ndegrade man.\" For other similar precepts, see Chapter XXXII. The\ninjunctions to read their holy bible (the Vedas, &c.) are quite\nnumerous, such as, \"Let him study the holy Scriptures unceasingly\"\n\"Pray night and morning, and read the holy Scriptures in the attitude\nof devotion.\" And many of them read it through upon their knees. (See\nChap. XLIV.) We have not space for a further exposition of this subject\nhere; but it will be found more fully set forth in the pamphlet, \"Christ\nand Chrishna Compared,\" which will, perhaps, become an Appendix to this\nwork.\n\nIt may be objected that there are precepts and stories to be found in\nthe religion of this Hindoo God (Chrishna), which reflect but\nlittle credit or honor upon that religion. This is true. And similar\nreflections would materially damage the religion of Christianity also.\nThe story of Christ beating and maltreating the money-changers in the\ntemple, his cursing an innocent, unoffending, and unconscious fig tree,\nand his indulgence in profane swearing at his enemies,--\"O ye fools\nand blind, ye generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation\nof hell!\"--does not reflect any credit upon his religion, viewed as\na system. Defects, then, may be found in both systems. In viewing the\nanalogies of the two religions, it should be noted that the Hindoos\nclaim, with a forcible show of facts and logic, that the religion of\nChristianity grew out of theirs. It has not been long since a learned\nHindoo maintained this position in a public debate with a missionary.\nIf all these facts effect nothing in the way of inducing the Christian\nclergy to confess the falsity of their position in claiming their\nreligion to be a direct emanation from God, it will be a sad commentary\nupon either their intelligence or their honesty.\n\nThese historical facts, with those set forth in the preceding chapters,\nprove that the religion called Christianity, instead of being, as\nChristians claim, \"the product of the Divine Mind,\" is the product\nof \"heathen\" minds; i. e., a spontaneous outgrowth of the moral and\nreligious elements of the human mind. And therefore, for God to have\nrevealed it over again to the founders of Christianity would have been\nsuperfluous, and a proof of his ignorance of history.\n\nNote.--The author deems it proper to state here, with respect to the\ncomparison between Christ and Chrishna, that some of the doctrines which\nhe has selected as constituting a part of the religion of the Hindoo\nSavior, are not found in the reported teachings of that deified\nmoralist. But as they appear to breathe forth the same spirit, it is\npresumed he would have indorsed them, had they come under his notice. As\nChristians assume the liberty to arrange the doctrines of Paul and Peter\nunder the head of Christianity because claimed to be in consonance with\nthe religion of Christ, though not all taught by him, the author, in\nlike manner, has assumed, that some doctrines taught by other systems\nand religious teachers of India accord with those taught by Chrishna,\nand hence has arranged them with his. The author's purpose is not to set\nforth the doctrines of any sect, any system, or any religious teacher,\nbut to show that all the doctrines of Christianity are traceable to\nancient India. But whether taught by this sect or that sect, it is\nforeign to our purpose to inquire; and hence, for convenience, he has\narranged them all into one system, and designated them Chrishnianity\n(borrowing a new term). There can be no more impropriety, he presumes,\nin arranging the doctrines of the various conflicting sects of India\ninto one system (including even Brahminism and Budhism), than to\narrange, as Christians do, the doctrines taught by the antagnostic\nsystem of Catholicism and Protestantism, and their six hundred\nconflicting sects, under the head of Christianity. Hence, Christians, of\ncourse, will not fault the arrangement. The classification above alluded\nto comprises, in part, the religion of many of the Hindoo sects,\nbut does not set forth all their doctrines, only those analogous to\nChristianity. Chrishna was a Vishnuite, and not a Brahmin, as some\nwriters assume. He and Christ were both reformers, and departed from the\nancient faith. Vishnuism appears to have finally centered in Budhism.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXXIII. APOLLONIUS, OSIRIS, MAGUS, ETC.--GODS\n\n\nMIRACULOUS ACHIEVEMENTS OF OTHER GODS AND DEMI-GODS OF ANTIQUITY.\n\nTHE age in which Christ flourished, as before remarked, was\npre-eminently an age of miracle. The practice of thaumaturgy, and the\nlegends invested with the display of the miracle-working power, both\npreceding and subsequent to that era, rose to a great height. \"All\nnations of that time,\" says a writer, \"were mightily bent on working\nmiracles.\" And the disciples who acted the part of biographers for the\nvarious crucified Gods and sin-atoning Saviors, throughout the East,\nseemed to vie with each other in setting off the lives and histories of\ntheir favorite objects of worship respectively, with marvelous exploits\nand the pageantry of the most astounding prodigies. And the miracles\nin each case were pretty much of the same character, thus indicating a\ncommon course for their origin,--all probably having been cast in the\nsame mold--in the theological schools of the once famous, world-renowned\ncity of Alexandria, the capital of Egypt. Having, in the preceding\nchapters, presented the miraculous achievements of the Hindoo Gods,\nChrishna and Saki, we will here bring to notice those of other Gods.\n\n\nTHE MIRACLES RECORDED OF ALCIDES, OSIRIS, AND OTHER GODS OF EGYPT.\n\n1. We have the miraculous birth by a virgin in the case of Alcides.\n\n2. Osiris, while a sucking infant in his cradle, killed two serpents\nwhich came to destroy him.\n\n3. Alcides performed many miraculous cures.\n\n4. According to Ovid he cured by a miracle the daughter of Archiades.\n\n5. Also the wife of Theogenes, after the doctors had given her up.\n\n6. And both these Gods converted water into wine.\n\n7. Both of them frequently cast out devils.\n\n8. Julius declares Alcides raised Tyndarus and Hippo-litus from the\ndead.\n\n9. When Zulis was crucified, the sun became dark and the moon refused to\nshine.\n\n10. Both he and Osiris were resurrected by a miracle.\n\n12. Both ascend to heaven in sight of many witnesses.\n\n12. And finally we are told that from Alexandria the whole empire became\nfilled with the fame of these miracle-workers, who restored the blind to\nsight, cured the paralytic, caused the dumb to speak, the lame to walk,\n&c. All these miracles were as credibly related of these Gods as similar\nmiracles of Jesus Christ.\n\n\nMIRACLES PERFORMED BY PYTHAGORAS AND OTHER GODS OF GREECE.\n\n1. Pythagoras was a spirit in heaven before he was born on earth.\n\n2. His birth was miraculously foretold.\n\n3. His mother conceived him by a specter (the Holy Ghost).\n\n4. His mother (Pytheas) was a holy virgin of great moral purity.\n\n5. Plato's mother, Paretonia (says Olympiodorus), conceived him by the\nGod Apollo.\n\n6. Pythagoras in his youth astonishes the doctors by his wisdom.\n\n7. Was worshiped as the \"Son of God,\" \"Paraclete,\" \"Child of Divinity,\"\n&c.\n\n8. Coaid see events many ages in the future (says Richardson, his\nbiographer).\n\n9. Could bring down the eagle from his lofty height by command.\n\n10. Could approach and subdue the wild, ferocious Daunian bear.\n\n11. Could, like Christ, appear at two places at once.\n\n12. Could walk on the water and travel on the air.\n\n13. Could discern and read the thoughts of his disciples.\n\n14. Could handle poisonous reptiles with impunity.\n\n15. Cured all manner of diseases.\n\n16. Restored sight to the blind.\n\n17. He \"cast out devils.\"\n\n18. Jamblicus says he could allay storms on the sea.\n\n19. Raised several persons from the dead.\n\n20. And, finally, \"a thousand other wonderful things are told of him,\"\nsays Jamblicus.\n\nWith respect to his character, it is said that \"for humility, and\npractical goodness, and the wisdom of his moral precepts, he stood\nwithout a rival.\" He discarded bloody sacrifices, discouraged wars,\nforbade the use of wine and other intoxicating drinks, enjoined the\nforgiveness of enemies and their kind treatment, and also respect to\nparents. He was a special friend to the poor, and taught that they\nwere the favorites of God. \"Blessed are ye poor.\" He practiced and\nrecommended the silent worship of God. He retired from the world, and\noften fasted, and was a great enemy to riches (like Jesus Christ). He\nconsidered poverty a virtue, and despised the pomp of the world. He\nrecommended (like Christ) the abandonment of parents, relations, and\nfriends, houses and lands, &c., for religion's sake. His disciples, like\nthose of Christ, had a common treasury and a general community of goods,\nto which all had free access, so that there was no poverty or suffering\namongst them while the supply lasted. All shared alike. In fact, with\nrespect to the spirit of his precepts, his moral lessons, and nearly his\nwhole practical life, he bore a striking resemblance to Jesus Christ,\nand presented the same kind of evidence, and equally convincing\nevidence, of being a God. And as he was born into the world five hundred\nand fifty-four years before Christ, the latter probably obtained the\nmaterials of his moral system from that Grecian teacher, or in the same\nschool of the Essenian Budhists, in which both Pythagoras and Christ\nappear to have taken lessons.\n\n\nMIRACLES OF THE ROMAN GODS QUIRINUS AND PROMETHEUS.\n\n1. Prometheus was honored with a miraculous birth.\n\n2. Quirinus was miraculously preserved in infancy, when threatened with\ndestruction by the tyrant ruler Amulius.\n\n3. He performed the miracles, according to Seneca and Hesiod, of curing\nthe sick, restoring the blind, raising the dead, and casting out devils.\n\n4. Both these Gods were crucified amid signs, and wonders, and miracles.\n\n5. All nature was convulsed, and the saints arose when they were\ncrucified.\n\n6. The sun was also darkened, and refused to shine.\n\n7. Both descended to hell, and rose from it by divine power.\n\n8. And Prometheus was seen to ascend to heaven.\n\nWe cite these lists of miraculous events as if real facts, not because\nwe believe they were such, but as possessing the same degree of\ncredibility as those related of Jesus Christ.\n\n\nMIRACLES AND RELIGION OF APOLLONIUS OF TYANA.\n\n1. Everything was subject to his miraculous power.\n\n2. He performed many miraculous cures.\n\n3. He restored sight to the blind.\n\n4. He cast out devils, which sometimes \"cut up\" like those of Christ\n\n5. He enabled the lame to walk.\n\n6. He re-animated the dead.\n\n7. He could read the thoughts of bystanders.\n\n8. Sometimes disappeared in a miraculous manner.\n\n9. Caused a tree to bloom, while Christ made another tree to wither\naway.\n\n10. The laws of nature obeyed him.\n\n11. Could speak in many languages he had never learned.\n\n12. Was at one time transfigured, like Christ\n\n13. His birth was miraculously foretold by an angel.\n\n14. Was born of a spotless virgin.\n\n15. There were demonstrations of joy and singing at his birth.\n\n16. Exhibited proofs in infancy of being a God.\n\n17. Manifested extraordinary wisdom in childhood.\n\n18. He was called \"the Son of God.\"\n\n19. Also \"the image of the Eternal Father manifested in the flesh.\"\n\n20. He was also styled \"a prophet.\"\n\n21. Like Christ, he retired into mystic silence.\n\n22. His religion was one of exalted spirituality.\n\n23. He taught the doctrine of \"the Inner Life.\"\n\n24. He possessed exalted views of purity and holiness.\n\n25. Like Christ, he was a religious ascetic.\n\n26. His religion, as in the case of Christ, forbade him to marry.\n\n27. He ate no animal food, and would wear no woolen garments.\n\n28. Gave his substance to the poor.\n\n29. Eschewed love for wine and women.\n\n30. Refrained from artificial ornaments and sumptuous living.\n\n31. He was a high-toned moral reformer.\n\n32. He condemned external sacrifices.\n\n33. Also condemned gladiatorial shows.\n\n34. He religiously opposed dancing and sexual pleasures.\n\n35. He recommended the pursuit of wisdom.\n\n36. Was of a serene temper, and never got angry.\n\n37. Was a true prophet, foresaw and foretold many future events.\n\n38. Foresaw a plague, and stopped it after it had commenced.\n\n39. Crowds were attracted by his great miracles and his wisdom.\n\n40. He disputed with and vanquished the wise men of Greece and Asia, as\nChrist did the learned doctors in the temple.\n\n41. When imprisoned by Domitian and loaded with chains, he disinthralled\nhimself by divine power.\n\n42. He was followed by crowds when entering Alexandria, like Christ when\nentering Jerusalem.\n\n43. Was crucified amidst a display of divine power.\n\n44. He rose from the dead.\n\n45. Appeared to his disciples after his resurrection.\n\n46. Like Christ, he convinced a Tommy Didymus by getting him to feel the\nprint of the nails in his hands and feet.\n\n47. Was seen by many witnesses after his resurrection, and was hailed by\nthem as the \"God Incarnate,\" \"the Lord from Heaven.\"\n\n48. He finally ascended back to heaven, and now \"sits at the right hand\nof the Father,\" pleading for a sinful world.\n\n49. When he entered the temple of Diana, \"a voice from above was heard\nsaying, 'Come to heaven.\"\n\n50. Accordingly he was seen no more on earth only as a spirit\n\nThe reader will observe that the foregoing list of analogies, drawn from\nthe history of Apollonius, as furnished us by his disciple Damos and his\nbiographer Philostratus, are found also, in almost every particular, in\nthe history of Jesus Christ. And the list might have been extended.\nIt is declared, \"A beauty shone in his countenance, and the words he\nuttered were divine,\" which reminds us of Christ's transfiguration. And\nhis \"staying a plague at Ephesus\" revives the case of Christ stilling\nthe tempest on the waters. Now, the question very naturally arises here,\nHow came the histories of Apollonius and Christ to be so strikingly\nalike? Was one plagiarized from the other? As for the miraculous history\nof Apollonius being reconstructed from that of Jesus Christ, as some\nChristians have assumed, there is not the slightest foundation for such\na conclusion, as the following facts will show, viz.:--\n\n1. The Cappadocian Savior (Apollonius) was born several years anterior\nto the advent of the Christian Savior, and appeared at an earlier date\nupon the stage of active life, and thus got the start of Christ in\nthe promulgations of his doctrines and the exhibition of his miracles.\nChrist's active life, Christians concede and the bible proves, did not\ncommence till about his twenty-eighth or thirtieth year, which was long\nafter Apollonius had inaugurated his religion, and long after he had\ncommenced the promulgation of his doctrines, and attested them by\nwonderful miracles, according to his biographer Philostratus.\n\n2. The New American Cyclopedia tells us, \"Apollonius labored for the\npurity of Paganism, and to sustain its tottering edifice against the\nassaults of the Christians.\" So that, being placed in a hostile attitude\ntoward the representatives of the Christian faith, it is not likely he\nwould condescend to borrow their doctrines and the miraculous history of\ntheir incarnate God, to invest his own life with. He was probably one of\nthe \"anti-Christs\" spoken of in the New Testament; but this circumstance\nreflects nothing dishonorable upon his character; for some of those\ndistinguished personages denounced as \"anti-Christ,\" by Christ's gospel\nbiographers, were, according to impartial history, noble, honest, and\nrighteous men. Their only offense consisted in robbing Christ of his\ndivine laurels, by claiming similar titles, and claiming to perform the\nsame kind of miracles; and there is as much proof that they did achieve\nthese prodigies as that Christ did.\n\n3. The early Christian writers conceded that Apollonius and the other\noriental Gods did perform the miracles which are ascribed to them\nby their respective disciples, but accounted for it by the childish\nexpedient of obsession. Christ was assumed to perform miracles by\ndivine power, they by the power of the devil--a childish and senseless\ndistinction truly, and one which can have no logical force in this\nenlightened age.\n\n\nMIRACLES AND CLAIMS FOR SIMON MAGUS. B. C.\n\n1. It is declared, \"he was in the beginning with God.\"\n\n2. That \"he existed with God from all eternity.\"\n\n3. That \"he took upon himself the form of a man.\"\n\n4. That \"he was the Son of God,\" \"the Word,\" &c.\n\n5. That \"he was the second person in the godhead.\"\n\n6. That \"he came down to destroy the devil and his works.\"\n\n7. That \"he was the image of the Eternal Father.\"\n\n8. That \"he was the first-born Son of God.\"\n\n9. That he could control the elements.\n\n10. That he could walk on the air as Christ did on the water.\n\n11. Could move anything by the command, \"Be thou removed.\"\n\n12. That he could raise the dead.\n\n13. That he could transform himself into the image of any man.\n\n14. That he was \"the Paraclete, or Comforter.\"\n\n15. That he came to \"redeem the world from sin.\"\n\n16. Finally, he was the world's \"Savior,\" \"Redeemer,\" \"the Only Begotten\nof the Father,\" and \"through his name men are to be saved.\"\n\nThe reader will call to mind that this Simon Magus is mentioned and\ncondemned in the Acts of the Apostles, for offering to pay Peter for a\nbestowment of the gift of the Holy Ghost. And yet every philosopher\nin this age must concede that Magus' assumption in the case is more\nsensible and philosophical than that of Peter's. For the latter calls it\n\"a gift from God,\" whereas every person now acquainted with the\nnature, principles, and science of animal magnetism, knows that such\nmanifestation as that which Peter ascribes to God and the Holy Ghost, is\na simple natural phenomenon; and that, consequently, it can be no more a\nviolation of the rules of propriety to pay for the labor of making such\ndevelopments than it is to pay a teacher for developing the mind of a\nchild. It was certainly a greater act of courtesy to offer to pay for\nit than to demand it as a gratuitous favor. Hence we infer he excelled\nPeter in his demeanor as a gentleman, especially as he bore Peter's\nsevere reprimand with patience, and apparently with a better spirit\nthan that which dictated it. And we may remark here, also, that\nnotwithstanding this Samaritan Jew is so unsparingly denounced by the\ngodly Peter, and by the early Christian fathers also, yet we have the\nhistorical proof that he was an Honest, pious, and ardently devout man.\nHis whole life was absorbed in the cause of religion, and his whole soul\ndevoted to his religious duties and the worship of his God. Hence we\nthink Peter's rebuke was uncalled for.\n\nLet the reader note the fact here that there are three circumstances\namply sufficient to account for bibles and religious books being\nprofusely supplied with the reports of groundless miracles.\n\n1. As everybody then believed in miracles (at least everybody who dared\nspeak) there was nobody to investigate the reports of such occurrences,\nto learn whether they were true or false.\n\n2. The few who attempted to disprove the truth of those miraculous\noccurrences now found reported in sacred history, had their books\nburned, as in the case of Porphyry and Celsus, in the early history of\nChristianity, who called in question the truth of bible miracles.\n\n3. These marvelous facts were not usually recorded till long after the\nperiod in which they are said to have occurred, when the witnesses had\nleft the stage of time, and every event exciting ay attention had grown\nto a monstrous prodigy. These circumstances, in an age of boundless\ncredulity and scientific ignorance, which magnified every phenomenon,\nand looked upon every natural event as a direct display of divine power,\naccounts most fully and satisfactorily for the burdensome repetition of\ngroundless miraculous stories found upon nearly every page of the sacred\nhistory of every religious nation, without driving us to the necessity\nof challenging the veracity of the writers who recorded them. They may\nall have been honest men.\n\n\nCONFUCIUS OF CHINA, BORN 551 B. C.\n\nThis moral teacher, religious chieftain, and philosopher, though not\nsubjected to the ignominious death of the cross, deserves a passing\nnotice for the excellency of his morals and the acquisition of a\nworld-wide fame. In the following particulars his history bears a strong\nanalogy to that of Jesus Christ.\n\n1. He commenced as a religious teacher when about thirty years of age.\n\n2. The Golden Rule (see Chap. XXXIV.) was his favorite maxim.\n\n3. Most of his moral maxims were sound and of a high order. The New\nAmerican Cyclopedia says (vol. v. p. 604), \"His writings approach the\nChristian standard of morality;\" and in some respects they excel.\n\n4. He traveled in different countries, preaching and teaching his\ndoctrines.\n\n5. He made a host of converts, amounting now to one hundred and fifty\nmillions.\n\n6. His religion and morals have been propagated by apostles and\nmissionaries, some of whom are now traveling in this country, laboring\nto convert Christians to their superior religion and morals. \"There was\na time,\" says the work above quoted, \"when European philosophers vied\nwith each other in extolling Confucius as one of the sublimest teachers\nof truth among mankind.\"\n\nIn the following respects his teachings were superior to those of\nChrist:--\n\n1. He taught that \"the knowledge of one's self is the basis of all real\nadvances in morals and manners.\" A lesson Christ neglected to teach.\n\n2. \"The duties man owes to society and himself are minutely defined by\nConfucius,\" says the Cyclopedia. Another important work Christ partially\nomitted.\n\nHe constructed several hundred beautiful and instructive moral maxims,\nwhich we have not space for here, and which amply prove that \"the\nholiest truths were inculcated by pagan philosophers.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXXIV. THE THREE PILLARS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH--MIRACLES,\nPROPHECIES, AND PRECEPTS\n\nWHEN Christians are asked for the proof of the divinity of Jesus Christ,\nthey point to his miracles and precepts, and the Messianic prophecies,\nsaid to have been fulfilled by his coming. And the same kind of evidence\nis adduced to prove the divine claims of their bible and its religion,\nincluding the Old Testament, which contains the prophecies. Their\ndivine origin and supernatural character are claimed to be proved by the\nmiracles, prophecies, and precepts found recorded in the Holy Book. All,\nthen, stand or fall together--the divinity of Christ, and the divinity\nof the bible and its religion, all, rest on this threefold argument.\nAll, it is claimed, are attested and proved by a threefold display of\ndivine power, manifested,--\n\n1. By the performance of various acts, transcending human power and the\nlaws of nature, called Miracles.\n\n2. By the discernment of events lying in the future which no human\nsagacity or prescience could have foreseen, unless aided by Omniscience;\nthe display of such power being called Prophecy.\n\n3. By the enunciation of Moral Precepts beyond the mental capacity of\nhuman beings to originate.\n\nThese three propositions cover the whole ground. They constitute the\nthree grand pillars of the Christian faith, which, if shown to be\nuntenable, must prostrate the whole superstructure to the ground. We\nwill examine each separately, commencing with miracles.\n\nI. Miracles the first Pillar of the Christian Faith.\n\nWe will not occupy space in discussing the various meanings assigned to\nthe word miracle by different writers, but take the popular definition\nas given above, and proceed to inquire how much evidence can be deduced\nfrom the miracles represented as having been performed by Jesus Christ,\ntoward proving his divinity and the truth of his religion. In the first\nplace, it should be borne in mind that Christianity is not the only\nreligion which appeals to miracles as a proof of its divine authorship.\nMore than three hundred systems and sects are reported in history, most\nof which have, from time immemorial, gloried in being able to wield this\nknock-down argument as they claim it to be, in support of the truth and\ndivine authenticity of their various systems of faith. We have briefly\nnoticed some of the miraculous achievements reported in their sacred\nbooks, and ascribed to their Gods and sin-atoning Saviors, and compare\nthem with similar ones related of Jesus Christ, commencing with Pagan\nMiracles.\n\nAs the whole pathway of religious history is thickly be-studded with\nmiracles wrought in all ages and countries, and every page of the\noriental bibles and religious books is literally loaded down with the\nrelation of these marvelous prodigies said to have been wrought by their\nGods, Demigods, and crucified Saviors, it places a writer in a quandary\nto know where to begin to make a selection. We will express no opinion\nhere as to whether these astounding feats were ever witnessed or not;\nbut will merely state that they come to us as well authenticated as\nthose reported in the Christian bible. There is as much evidence that\nZoroaster, at the request of King Gustaph, caused a tree to spring up\nin a man's yard forthwith, of such magnificent proportions that no rope\ncould be found large enough to reach around it, as that Jesus Christ\ncaused a fig tree to wither away by merely cursing it. And we have\nthe same kind of evidence that the Hindoo Messiah, Chrishna, of\nIndia, restored two boys to life who had been killed by the bites of\nserpents, as that Jesus Christ resurrected Lazarus and the widow's son\nof Nain; and as much proof that Bacchus turned water into wine, as that\nJesus performed this act six hundred years after. And a hundred other\nsimilar comparisons might be drawn. The evidence of the truth of these\nperformances in both cases, pagan and Christian, is simply the report\nof the writer. If there are any exceptions to be made in either case of\nbetter evidence, it will be found in favor of pagan religion; for its\nadherents are able in many cases to point to imperishable monuments of\nstone erected in commemoration of their miracles. And Mr. Goodrich tells\nus this is the highest species of evidence that can be offered to prove\nthe truth of any ancient event. But as Christians, on the other hand,\ncan find no such evidence to prove the performance of any miracles\nreported in their bible, it will be seen at once that the pagan miracles\nare the best authenticated. The famous historian Pausanias states upon\ncurrent authority that Esculapius raised several persons from the\ndead, and names Hippolytus among the number, and then points to a\nstone monument erected as a proof of the occurrence--thus furnishing,\naccording to Christian logic, the most conclusive proof of one of the\nmost astounding miracles ever wrought. And yet no philosopher or man\nof science in this age can credit the literal truth of the story. But a\nspiritualist can easily conceive that he and others might have mistaken\nthe risen spirits of those resurrected persons for their physical\nbodies, because they know that many mistakes of this kind have occurred\nin modern times.\n\nWe might refer to many other cases of pagan miracles attested by\nmonumental evidence if our space would permit--such as the names of many\npersons engraven upon the walls of the Temple of Serapis, miraculously\ncarved by the God Esculapius. Strabo tells us the ancient temples are\nfull of tablets describing miraculous cures performed by virgin-born\nGods of those times, and names a case of two blind men being restored to\nsight by the son of God Alcides in the presence of a large multitude\nof people, \"who acknowledged the miraculous power of the God with\nloud acclaim.\" Many spiritualists at the present day know by practical\nexperience how these \"miraculous cures\" were performed. Without\ncontinuing the citation of cases, suffice it to say, the sin-atoning\nGods of the orientals are reported as performing the same train of\nmiracles assigned to Jesus Christ, such as performing astonishing cures,\ncasting out devils, raising the dead, &c. Now, sadly warped indeed by\neducation must be that mind which cannot see that if the account of\nsuch prodigies, reported in the history of Jesus Christ, can do anything\ntowards proving him to have been a God, then the world must have been\nfull of Gods long before his time. It is impossible to dodge or evade\nsuch a conclusion.\n\nChristians are in the habit of assuming that all the miraculous reports\nin the bible are unquestionably true, while those reported in pagan\nbibles are mere fables and fiction. But if they will reverse this\nproposition, it can be easier supported, because we have shown their\nmiracles are better attested and authenticated. Their own bible admits\nthat the heathen not only could and did perform miracles, but miraculous\nprodigies of the most astonishing character, equal to anything reported\nin their own religious history--such as transmuting water into blood,\nsticks into serpents, and stones into frogs. In a word, it is admitted\nthey performed all the miraculous feats of Moses with the single\nexception of turning dust into lice. But certainly making lice was not\na more difficult achievement than that of making frogs, and this is\nadmitted they did do successfully.\n\nHence it will be seen that the Egyptian pagans made as great a display\nof divine or miraculous power as \"God's Holy People,\" according to the\nadmission of the bible itself. And there is no intimation that the mode\nof performing the miracles was not the same in both cases, but a strong\nprobability exists that it was, a conclusion confirmed by the bible\nreport of the case which leads us to infer that they performed the\nmiracles in the same way Moses did. For it is said, \"The Egyptians did\nso with their enchantments\"--that is, with the \"enchanting rod\" used\non such occasions by the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, and other\nnations, including also the Jews. Now, as Moses always used the\n\"enchanting rod\" in performing miracles, called by him \"the rod of God,\nthe rod of divination,\" &c. (see Ex. iv. ), there is thus furnished the\nmost satisfactory proof that he performed his miracles on this occasion,\nas well as all other occasions, by the same stratagem as the Egyptians\nand other nations did. And even if the mode adopted by the Egyptians had\nbeen different, it is still admitted they performed the miracles. In\nthe name of reason and common sense, then, we ask if such facts as here\npresented with the case just referred to do not forever prostrate and\nannihilate all arguments based on miracles toward proving the divine\ncharacter or divine origin of the religion of the bible, or towards\nproving\n\nJesus Christ, or any other being reported to have performed miracles, as\npossessing divine attributes?\n\n\nCATHOLIC MIRACLES.\n\nSome of the most astonishing and best authenticated miracles ever\nperformed by any religious sect we find reported in the history of the\nRoman Catholic church, looked upon and styled by the Protestants \"the\nmother of Harlots and Abomination.\" And yet there is much stronger proof\nthat the Catholic religion has the divine sanction, if miracles can\nfurnish such proof. The editor of \"The Official Memoirs\" declares that\nduring the Italian war in 1797, several pictures of the virgin Mary,\nsituated in different parts of the country, were seen to open and shut\ntheir eyes for the space of six or seven months, and that no less than\nsixty thousand people actually saw this miracle performed, including\nmany bishops, deacons, cardinals, and other officers of the church,\nwhose names are given. And Forsyth's Italy (p. 344), written by a highly\naccredited author, tells us that a withered elm tree was suddenly\nrestored to full life and vigor by coming in contact with the body of\nSt. Zenobis, and that this miracle took place in the most public part\nof the town, in the presence of many thousands of people; that \"it is\nrecorded by contemporary historians, and inscribed upon a marble column\nnow standing where the tree stood.\"\n\nNow, the question may be asked here, Would the people have allowed such\nan impudent trick to insult them as the erection of a monument for an\nevent that never took place? If not, how is the matter to be explained?\nThese are only specimens of a hundred more Catholic miracles of an\nastonishing character at our command. Several queries may be entertained\nin the solution of these stories. 1st, Were some phenomena really\nwitnessed on which these stories were constructed, but which got\nmagnified from a molehill to a mountain before they found their way\ninto history? or, 2d, Were they manufactured as a pious fraud, which was\nrather a fashionable business with the early disciples of the Christian\nfaith, according to Mr. Mosheim? Whatever answer may be given to these\nquestions will explain the miracles of the Christian bible, excepting\nthose which can be accounted for on natural principles.\n\n\nSATANIC MIRACLES.\n\nAmong all the workers of miracles reported in the bible the devil seems\nto have been pre-eminent, and hence must come in for the better end of\nthe argument toward proving him to have been a God. No miracle could\nexcel the act of his \"transforming himself into an angel of light,\" as\nstated in 2 Cor. xi. 14. It is not transcended by any other case, not\neven by Christ's transfiguration. And according to Paul he was endowed\n\"with all power, and signs, and lying wonders.\" (Thess. ii. 9.) If,\nthen, he possessed \"all power,\" Christ, and no other God, could have\npossessed a miraculous power superior to his, for \"all\" comprehends the\nwhole, beyond which nothing can reach. Where, then, is the evidence\nto come from to prove that Christ was a God, because he was\na miracle-worker, or his religion divine, because attested by\nmiracles--seeing the devil performed some of the most difficult miracles\never wrought? Should we not then change his title from that of a demon\nto a God, and place his religion amongst the divinely endowed systems?\nSt. John represents the \"Evil One\" as having power to make \"fire come\ndown from heaven in the sight of men,\" and \"to deceive those that dwell\non the earth by means of those miracles which he hath power to do.\"\n(Rev. xiii.)\n\nHere the question arises, What can a miracle prove, what end can\nit serve, or what good can possibly arise from the display of the\nmiracle-working power, when it is liable \"to deceive those that\ndwell upon the earth?\" Certainly, therefore, it proves nothing, and\naccomplishes nothing. And may not the apostles themselves have been\ndeceived in ascribing some of the miracles they record to Jesus\ninstead of the devil? Certainly we are drifted upon the quicksands of\nuncertainty by such a display of the miracle-working power, and are\nobnoxious to most fatal deception, which proves the total inutility and\nfutility of such prodigies.\n\n\nCHRIST'S MIRACLES NOT HIS OWN, BUT WROUGHT THROUGH HIM AND NOT BY HIM.\n\nHow could Christ's miracles, assuming they were wrought, do anything\ntoward proving his divinity, when he did not claim to be their author,\nbut merely the agent or instrument in the hands of the Father, like the\napostles, who are reported to have performed the same miracles? \"The\nFather he doeth the work,\" is his own declaration. And the Apostles seem\nto have accepted his word, and his view of the matter. For proof listen\nto Peter: \"Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man\napproved of God among you by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which\nGod did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves do know.\" (Acts ii.\n22.) Let it be noted, then, the Christ's miracles were not performed by\nhim as a God, but as \"a man approved of God;\" he was the mere medium or\ninstrument in the case--a fact which banishes at once all grounds for\ncontroversy relative to his miracles serving the purpose of attesting\nhis divinity, especially when it is conceded that men, magicians, and\ndevils could achieve the same feats.\n\n\nCHRIST'S MIRACLES DID NOT CONVINCE THE PEOPLE.\n\nAs the miracles of Christ seem to have had little effect toward\nconvincing the people of his claims to the godhead, it is evident they\ncould have been but little superior to those performed by others, and\ntherefore not designed, at least not calculated, to convince them that\nhe was a God. The frequent instances in which he upbraids the people for\ntheir unbelief, and calls them fools, \"slow of heart,\" &c., is a proof\nof this statement.\n\n\nCHRIST'S MIRACLES NOT DESIGNED TO CONVINCE THE PEOPLE.\n\nA circumstance involving pretty strong proof that Christ's miraculous\nachievements were not considered as evidence of his divinity, is the\nfact that they were frequently performed in private, sometimes in the\nnight, and often under the injunction of secrecy. \"See thou tell no\nman,\" was the injunction, after the feat was performed, perhaps, in a\nprivate room. How can such facts be reconciled with the assumption that\nhis miracles were designed to convince the people of his claims to the\nDivine Entity, as Christians frequently assert, when the people were not\nallowed to witness them, nor his disciples even to report them? Who\ncan believe that he was a Divine Being, or Messiah, when he charged his\ndisciples to \"tell no man\" that he was such a Being? Such incongruities\nverge to a contradiction. It is a logical contradiction to say that\nprivate miracles were designed to dissolve public skepticism. And yet\nmany, if not most, of his reputed miraculous achievements were of this\ncharacter. When he cured a blind man, he not only \"led him out of the\ntown\" (Mark viii. 23), but forbid him, when his sight was restored,\nreturning to the city, for fear he would publish it. When he resurrected\nLazarus, he did not call the whole country around to witness it, but\nperformed the act before a private party. The reanimation of Jairus's\ndaughter was in the same concealed manner, in a private room, where\nnobody was admitted but his three confidential disciples (Peter, James,\nand John) and the parents, none of whom make any report of the case.\nHow, therefore, the reporter (Mark) found it out, when he was not\npresent, and none of the party were allowed to tell it to anybody, or\nwhy he should betray his trust by publishing it, if he was informed of\nit, is a \"mystery of Godliness\" not easily divined.\n\nWhen Christ cleansed the leper, he sent him to the priest, enjoining him\nto \"say nothing to any man.\" The dumb, when restored to speech, was not\nallowed to exhibit any practical proof of the fact by using his tongue.\nHis miraculous perambulation on the surface of the sea (walking on\nthe water) was not only alone, but in the dark. His transfiguration,\nlikewise, according to Dr. Barnes, took place in the night, his three\nfavorite companions being the only witnesses, and they \"heavy with\nsleep.\" And finally, the crowning miracle of all, the resurrection,\nis not only represented as taking place in the night, but without one\nsubstantial or terrestrial witness to report it. Verily such facts as\nthese are not calculated to augment the faith jr work the conviction\nof a skeptic that these miracles were ever performed, seeing so few are\nreported as witnessing them, and even their testimony is not given. We\nhave not the testimony of one person who claims to have been present and\nseen these wonders performed. Such facts are calculated to cast distrust\nupon the whole matter, especially when taken in connection with the\nfact that nine tenths of his life form a perfect blank in history. Is\nit possible, we ask, to reconcile such a fact with the belief of his\ndivinity? Is it possible a God could lead a private life, or live\ntwenty-seven years on earth, and do nothing worthy of note--a God known\nto nobody and noticed by nobody? Most transcendingly absurd is such a\nthought. Had Christ possessed the character that is claimed for him, not\nan hour of his life could have passed unaccompanied by some remarkable\nincident that would have been heralded abroad, and its record indelibly\nengraven upon the page of history; but instead of this, his acts were\ntoo commonplace to be noticed.\n\n\nALL HISTORY IGNORES HIM.\n\nThe fact that no history, sacred or profane,--that not one of the three\nhundred histories of that age,--makes the slightest allusion to Christ,\nor any of the miraculous incidents ingrafted into his life, certainly\nproves, with a cogency that no logic can overthrow, no sophistry can\ncontradict, and no honest skepticism can resist, that there never was\nsuch a miraculously endowed being as his many orthodox disciples claim\nhim to have been. The fact that Christ finds no place in the history of\nthe era in which he lived,--that not one event of his life is recorded\nby anybody but his own interested and prejudiced biographers,--settles\nthe conclusion, beyond cavil or criticism, that the godlike achievements\nascribed to him are naught but fable or fiction. It not only proves\nhe was not miraculously endowed, but proves he was not even naturally\nendowed to such an extraordinary degree as to make him an object of\ngeneral attention. It would be a historical anomaly without a precedent,\nthat Christ should have performed any of the extraordinary acts\nattributed to him in the Gospels, and no Roman or Grecian historian, and\nneither Philo nor Josephus, both writing in that age, and both living\nalmost on the spot where they are said to have been witnessed, and both\nrecording minutely all the religious events of that age and country,\nmake the slightest mention of one of them, nor their reputed authors.\nSuch a historical fact banishes the last shadow of faith in their\nreality.\n\nIt is true a few lines are found in one of Josephus's large works\nalluding to Christ. But it is so manifestly a forgery, that we believe\nall modern critics of any note, even of the orthodox school, reject it\nas a base interpolation. Even Dr. Lardner, one of the ablest defenders\nof the Christian faith that ever wielded a pen in its support, and who\nhas written ten large volumes to bolster it up, assigns nine cogent\nreasons (which we would insert here if we had space) for the conclusion\nthat Josephus could not have penned those few lines found in his\n\"Jewish Antiquities\" referring to Christ. No Jew could possibly use such\nlanguage. It would be a glaring absurdity to suppose a leading Jew\ncould call Jesus \"The Christ,\" when the whole Jewish nation have ever\ncontested the claim with the sternest logic, and fought it to the bitter\nend. \"It ought, therefore\" (says Dr. Lardner, for the nine reasons which\nhe assigns), \"to be forever discarded from any place among the evidences\nof Christianity.\" (Life of Lardner by Dr. Kippis, p. 23.)\n\nAs the passage is not found in any edition of Josephus prior to the era\nof Eusebius, the suspicion has fastened upon that Christian writer as\nbeing its author, who argued that falsehood might be used as a medicine\nfor the benefit of the churches. (See his Eccles. Hist.) Origen, who\nlived before Eusebius, admitted Josephus makes no allusion to Christ. Of\ncourse the passage was not, then, in Josephus. One or two other similar\npassages have been found, in other authors of that era, which it is not\nnecessary to notice here, as they are rejected by Christian writers. It\nmust be conceded, therefore, that the numerous histories covering the\nepoch of the birth of Christ chronicle none of the astounding feats\nincorporated in his Gospel biographies as signalizing his earthly\ncareer, and make no mention of the reputed hero of these achievements,\neither by name or character. The conclusion is thus irresistibly forced\nupon us, not only that he was not a miracle-worker, but that he must\nhave led rather an obscure life, entirely incompatible with his being\na God or a Messiah, who came \"to draw all men unto him.\" And it should\nalso be noted here that none of Christ's famous biographers, Matthew,\nMark, Luke, or John, are honored with a notice in history till one\nhundred and ninety years after the birth of Christ. And then the notice\nwas by a Christian writer (Ireneus).\n\n\"We look in vain,\" says a writer, \"for any cotemporary notice of the\nGospels, or Christ the subject of the Gospels, outside of the New\nTestament. So little was this 'king of the Jews' known, that the Romans\nwere compelled to pay one of his apostles to turn traitor and act as\nguide before they could find him. It is impossible to observe this\nnegative testimony of all history against Christ and his miracles, and\nnot be struck with amazement, and seized with the conviction that he\nwas not a God, and not a very extraordinary man.\" Who can believe that a\nGod, from off the throne of heaven, could make his appearance on earth,\nand while performing the most astounding miracles ever recorded in\nany history, or that ever excited the credulity of any people, and be\nfinally publicly crucified in the vicinity of a great city, and yet all\nthe histories written in those times, both sacred and profane, pass over\nwith entire silence the slightest notice of any of these extraordinary\nevents. Impossible--most self-evidently impossible!! And when we find\nthat this omission was so absolute that no record was made of the day or\nyear of his birth by any person in the era in which he lived, and that\nthey were finally forgotten, and hence that there are, as a writer\ninforms us, no less then one hundred and thirty-three different opinions\nabout the matter, the question assumes a still more serious aspect. From\nthe logical potency of these facts we are driven to the conclusion that\nChrist received but little attention outside of the circle of his own\ncredulous and interested followers, and consequently stands on a level\nwith Chrishna of India, Mithra of Persia, Osiris of Egypt, and other\ndemigods of antiquity, all whose miraculous legends were ingrafted in\ntheir histories long after their death. This leads us to consider\n\n\nHOW CHRIST'S INCREDIBLE LEGENDS GOT INTO HIS HISTORY.\n\nThere is a remarkably easy and satisfactory way of accounting for\nall the marvelous feats and incredible stories found in the Gospel\nnarratives of Jesus Christ, without assuming their reality or any\nintentional fraud or falsehood by the writers. When we learn that none\nof his evangelical biographies were penned (as Dr. Lardner affirms)\ntill long after his death, we are no longer puzzled for a moment to\nunderstand exactly how many statements wholly incredible and morally\nimpossible crept into his history, without challenging or calling\nin question the veracity or honesty of the writer. Perhaps the most\npowerful cord of moral conviction which holds the Christian professor to\na belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ, is the difficulty of bringing\nhimself to believe that the numerous miracles ascribed to him in the\nGospels are merely the work of fiction, fabricated without a basis of\ntruth, when they were evidently penned by men of the deepest piety and\nthe strictest moral integrity. We ourselves were once environed\nwith this difficulty. But it stands in our way no longer. We are\ndisenthralled. We have solved the problem. We have found the true\nexplanation. The key and clew to the whole secret is found in the simple\nfact, admitted by Christian writers and evidenced by the bible itself,\nthat _no history of Christ's practical life was written out by a person\nclaim-ing to have been an eyewitness_ of the events reported, nor until\nevery incident and act of the noble-minded Nazarene had had ample\ntime to become enormously magnified and distorted by rumor, fable, and\nfiction; so that it was impossible to discriminate or separate the real\nfrom the unreal, the true from the false, in his partly-forgotten life.\nIt could not be done. A true history could not then be, nor have been\nwritten under such circumstances. It is manifestly impossible. The\ntime for writing each Gospel is fixed by Dr. Lardner as follows, viz.:\nMatthew 62 A. D., Mark 64 A. D., Luke 63 or 64 A. D., and John 68 A. D.;\nthus allowing ample time for every noteworthy incident of his life to\ngrow from molehills to mountains, and to swell into fiction, fable, and\nprodigy, a tendency to which was then very rife and very prevalent in\nall religious countries. Having made a note of this fact, let the\nreader treasure in memory, as another equally important fact, that the\nbiography of no man of note who figured in that era, or who lived prior\nto the dawn of letters (if penned many years after his death, as was\nfrequently the case), is free from a large percentage of extravagant\ndetail, and simple incidents magnified into miracles. This was the\nuncurbed tendency of the age which ultimated into universal custom.\n\nThe simplest incident in every man's life, who exhibited mind enough to\nattract attention, by rolling from year to year, and passing from mouth\nto mouth, invariably got to be finally swelled into such undue and\nenormous proportions, that it could only be accounted for by assuming\nthe actor to have been a God. In this way many men of different\ncountries, who had made a mark in the world, received divine honors\nand divine attributes, including such characters as Chrishna of India,\nMithra of Persia, Quirinus of Rome, Eras of the Druids, Quexalcote of\nMexico, Jesus Christ of Judea, and many others who might be mentioned.\nThis circumstance deified them. The evidence of history to prove this\ndeclaration is abundant and irresistible.\n\n\nPOSTHUMOUS HISTORIES ALONE DEIFIED MEN.\n\nTo the two important facts above cited, viz., that Jesus Christ's\nevangelical histories were all written long after his death, and that\nunwritten histories of great men always become swollen and distorted\nwith the lapse of time, let the reader add the equally significant\nfact that there is in all cases a vast difference in the biographies of\nfamous men, penned during their actual lives, or immediately subsequent\nto their death, while every act and incident of their career was fresh\nand vigorous in the minds and memories of the cotemporaneous people,\nand before the ball of exaggerated rumor was set rolling, compared\nwith those written at a later date, after molehills of fact had become\nmountains of fiction. The former are natural and reasonable, the latter\nunnatural and extravagant, and often fabulous. We will cite a few cases\nin proof. Let the reader compare the biographical sketches of Alexander\nthe Great written near the epoch of his practical life, and those\ncomposed since the dawn of the Christian era, and he will find that the\nposthumous notices of him alone contain the story of the sun becoming\nobscured, and the earth developed in darkness, at the time of his mortal\nexit. It will be found, also, that Virgil's account of \"the sheeted\ndead,\" rising from their graves at the time of Caesar's death, and which\nwas written long after that famous hero left the stage of action, is\nomitted in all the cotemporary notices of that monarch, having crept in\nsubsequently.\n\nIn like manner, the various miracles recorded of Pythagoras by his\nbiographer Jamblicus,--such as his walking on the air, stilling\nthe tempest, raising the dead, &c.,--are not related of him by any\ncotemporaneous writers who lived in the era of his practical life. And\nlet the reader compare, also, Damos' life of Apollonius with that of\nhis later biography by Philostratus, as an illustration of the same\nhistorical fact. Mahomet and his biograhers might be included in the\nsame category. It is a remarkable circumstance that neither Mahomet\nhimself nor any of his immediate followers claim for him more than\nthe humble title of prophet, or \"God's holy prophet,\" while his later\nadmirers and devout disciples have elevated him to the throne of heaven,\nand given him a seat among the Gods.\n\nAnd this historical analysis might be extended much farther if\nnecessary. But cases enough have been cited to prove the principle and\nestablish the proposition. And what is the lesson taught by these\nfacts? A deeply-instructive and all-important one. From the foregoing\nhistorical illustrations we are impelled to the important conclusion,\nthat the tissue of extravagant and incredible stories of demigod\nperformances which run as a vein of fiction through the Gospel\nnarrations of Jesus Christ, all grow out of long-continued rumor, in\nan age when the imagination was untamed and unbounded, and credulity\nuncurbed by a practical knowledge of the principles of science, and\nconsequently the pen of the historian had lawless scope. All difficulty\nthen vanishes, and the question is put forever at rest by assuming that\nif the Gospel histories of Jesus had been written by men who claimed to\nrecord only what they saw and heard themselves, we should have a more\ncredible and instructive history of the great Judean reformer, freed\nfrom those Munchausen prodigies and that wild romance which mar the\nbeauty and credibility of those now in popular use. This conclusion is\nnot only natural, but irresistible, to a mind untrammeled by education\nand unbefogged by priestcraft. All that is wanting to convince us\nthat miracles constitute no part of the real history of Christ, is a\ncotemporary instead of a posthumous biography--a history written in the\nage which knew him, and by an unprejudiced writer who witnessed all his\nmovements. And we are perfectly willing to risk our reputation in this\nlife, and our salvation in the next, by stating our conviction that this\nwill be the unanimous verdict of posterity before fifty generations pass\naway.\n\n\nCHRIST'S MIRACLES RECONSTRUCTED FROM FORMER MIRACLES.\n\nThere are other circumstances than those noticed in the preceding\nchapter, which can aid us very materially in solving the problem\nof Christ's divinity; or, in other words, can aid us in tracing his\nmiracles to their origin, and thus confirm the truth of the preceding\nproposition. Moses and the prophets were considered by the evangelists\nantetypes or archetypes of the coming Savior. Hence some of the more\nimportant incidents of their lives were hunted up and worked over again,\nto make them fit the life of Christ as the Messiah, reconstructed and\napplied to him as the second Moses, and a new prophet; for Moses is\nrepresented as saying, \"A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up\nlike unto me.\" Hence Moses comes in with the prophets as an antetype of\nChrist. The transfiguration of Christ is therefore constituted after\nthe model of the transfiguration of Moses on Mount Sinai. And Christ is\nrepresented as raising the dead, not only because Elijah and Elisha had\nperformed such miracles, but did it under circumstances which prove,\nas they suppose, he possessed superior power. For while they could only\nreanimate the body immediately after the breath had left it, Christ\ncould raise a man after he had been dead four days (the case of\nLazarus). Hence the New Prophet was superior to the old, and more like\na God--the thing they desired to prove. Both Elijah and Christ are\nrepresented as raising a widows son,--Elijah being considered the\nspecial prototype of Christ, who, many believed, had re-appeared under\nthe changed name of Elias. (See John v. 17.) And then we observe that\nwhile Elisha exhausted his skill in making three gallons of oil, Christ\ncould make thirty gallons of wine--another proof of the superiority of\nthe New Prophet. Then, again, the miracle of feeding one hundred\nmen with twenty loaves is far excelled by the latter, who feeds five\nthousand men with five loaves. And both prophets, Elisha and Christ,\nencountered unfordable streams in their travels; the expedient of the\nformer is to make a passage, but Christ performed the greater miracle\nof walking on the surface. And while Moses had to send the leper without\nthe camp before he could heal him, Christ could heal him instantly with\na single touch. The same slaughter of the infants is commanded by Herod,\nin order to destroy Christ, that Pharaoh had ordered to effect the\ndestruction of Moses. And thus many of the miracles of Jesus can be\naccounted for as reconstructions of former miracles. It was simply a\ncompetition or rivalry between the New Messianic prophet and the old\nprophets. The New Prophet excels and comes off victorious in every case,\nand is thus considered to be a God. The object of the competition is to\nshow that while the prophets, assisted by God, could perform marvelous\ndeeds, Christ, being God himself, could perform greater. This was to be\nthe proof of his being a God, that he could outvie the servants of God\nin every miraculous thing ascribed to them. This was one way adopted to\nprove his divinity.\n\n\nCHRIST'S MIRACLES MANUFACTURED FROM PROPHECIES.\n\nSeveral of Christs miracles seem to have grown out of the Messianic\nprophecies; that is, were manufactured in order to fulfill the\nprophecies. There was, as we learn by the Gospels, an impression deep\nand wide-spread among the disciples of Christ, that the Old Testament\nwas full of texts foretelling the advent of their Messiah, and\nforeshadowing his practical life. Under this conviction, a number of\npassages are quoted in the Gospels from the prophets as referring to\nChrist, but which, however, the context shows could not possibly have\nbeen written with any such thought or intention. Matthew has five\nmiracles appertaining to Christ, built on prophecies, in his first two\nchapters. And they are represented as taking place \"in order that the\nprophecy might be fulfilled,\" that is, Matthew, writing sixty-four years\nafter Christ's advent, assumes those miracles had taken place because\nthe prophecy required their performance, and hence recorded it as a fact\nwithout knowing it to be such. A great deal of that kind of license was\nassumed in that and subsequent ages, as the facts of history are ample\nto prove. It was done under the religious conviction that the cause of\nGod and the church required it to be done, and that therefore it was\njustifiable.\n\n\nSTRICT VERACITY NOT REQUIRED OR OBSERVED.\n\nIt is by no means necessary to assume that the recorders of the New\nTestament miracles knew they had been performed, or that they would\nhesitate to record them as facts because they did not know them to be\nsuch. We are under no moral obligation to suppose they knew anything\nabout it. People in that age were not so nice or so morally exact, as\nto require proof of a thing before they stated it, or never to state it\nunless they had the proof for its being true. We would be Very far\nfrom accusing the apostolic writers of malicious falsehood, or criminal\nmisrepresentation. But we find that the disciples of all religions, in\nthat age of the world, considered it not only allowable, but a religious\nduty, in the absence of knowledge, to supply omissions by guess-work\nor conjecture; that is, to use assumption in the place of proof, and to\nstate that a thing was so when there was no proof of it whatever, and\neven when the proof was against it. All religious history is full of the\nexhibition of this kind of elasticity of conscience. Even a species of\npious lying was considered justifiable in many cases. Paul furnishes\nevidence of this, when he says, \"If the truth of God hath more abounded\nthrough my lie unto his glory, why am I judged a sinner?\" (Rom. iii.\n16.) \"No sin to lie for the glory of God,\" seems to be the teaching of\nthis text. Although Paul does not clearly disclose for what purpose\nthis policy was employed, yet it can easily be inferred. A part of\nthe important business of the New Testament writers was to build a\nreputation for Christ and his inspired band of disciples for working\nmiracles. A fame for achieving \"signs and wonders\" was the great set\noff of the age. There seems to have been an almost boundless competition\namongst the disciples of the various religious orders, including Jews,\nPagans, and Christians, as to who could, or whose God could outstrip all\ncompetitors in achieving astonishing prodigies that should set the laws\nof nature at defiance. And no devout disciple, who had good inventive\npowers, would allow any rival to outdo him. Nothing could authenticate\nthe claim of the adopted Messiah to the throne or heaven, or a\nparticipation in the Divine Essence, like a miraculous display of divine\npower. Hence the history of all the Gods and demi-gods of the illiterate\nages, including that of Christ, is loaded down with miraculous feats.\nThere is the clearest proof that Christ's disciples were in this general\nrivalry--this universal miracle-working _m\u00eal\u00e9e_.\n\nTwo things very necessary to be accomplished, in the estimation of the\napostles, were, first, to show that Christ outdid the heathen Gods,\nand even the prophets, in the display of the wonder-exciting miraculous\npower, and thus proved his divinity; and second, that the prophecies had\nbeen fulfilled in his coming and his practical life. And there is reason\nto believe all the New Testament miracles are founded on and grew out of\nprophecy. For, although we do not find prophecies in the Old Testament\nfor every miracle related of Christ, yet it is probable, if we had the\nBook of God, \"the Book of Jehu,\" \"the Like of Hezekiah,\" and other\nlost books mentioned in the Old Testament, we should find the supposed\nprophecy for every miracle of the New Testament. We should there find\nthe key to every miracle. The true explanation of the matter seems to\nbe, that the apostolic writers, looking through the Old Testament, and\nfinding texts therein which they believed to be prophetic of the display\nof the miraculous power of Jesus, and passages which they religiously\nbelieved foreshadowed his coming and mission, or some important event\nin his history, they were impressed with the deepest conviction that God\nwould not suffer any prophecy to go unfulfilled. But when they sat down\nto write the history of their Messiah, long after his death, they found\nthey had not the evidence before them that the prophecies had been\nfulfilled. A third of a century had rolled away since his history had\nbeen practically before the people. The subject of their narrative had\nlong since gone to \"the house of many mansions,\" and left not a note, or\nscratch of a pen, of any act of his life behind him. And the current of\ntime had washed away, or partially obliterated, nearly every event\nof his earthly career. The witnesses had nearly all left the stage of\naction, and their voices were forever hushed in the silent tomb. What\nwas to be done in such an emergency? It was all-important to show that\nthe prophecies had been fulfilled to the letter in his practical life.\nThis quandary, however, did not beset them long. The difficulty was\neasily surmounted. Every religious country, including Judea, was full\nof miraculous legends and astonishing prodigies appertaining to the\nterrestrial movements of their Gods and demigods, some of which had\nfloated down on the stream of tradition from time immemorial. And all\nhad become blended, confounded, and mixed up together, until it was\nimpossible to know whence they originated, where they belonged, or to\nwhat God they appertained. These miraculous stories were so numerous,\nand so varied in character, that there was no little difficulty in\nfinding which seemed to be the fulfillment of any Messianic prophecy\nthat had been or might be found in the Old Testament; and thus of the\nhundreds of miraculous stories afloat, one was picked out and assumed\nto be the fulfillment of the prophecy. With the countless number of such\nstories before them, which had been for half a century current in the\ncommunity, they set themselves to work to select and reject, prune and\nremodel, honestly believing that this miracle was intended to fulfill\nthis prophecy, and that miracle that prophecy, &c. And accordingly we\nnow find it so stated in the New Testament. As, for example, a story had\nlong been going the rounds that the parents of a young God had to flee\nwith him out of the country, to save his life from being destroyed by\nits jealous ruler. This they supposed must of course refer to Jesus,\nbecause they had found a supposed prophecy of such an event in the\nJewish bible, when a more thorough acquaintance with history would have\ntaught them that the story did not refer to the ruler of Judea (Herod),\nbut to Cansa, an ancient, jealous, despotic king, who ruled India at a\nmuch earlier period. And the story of the darkness at the crucifixion\nthey incorporated as a part of the history of Jesus, because they had\nseen a text in Joel which they supposed presaged such an event, while,\nif they had been well versed in oriental history, they would have known\nthat it had long been recorded as the last chapter in the earthly drama\nof the Hindoo God Chrishna. And so of the other miracles now found\nrelated as a part of the history of Jesus. A historical investigation of\nthe matter would have shown the Gospel writers that they were a part of\nthe written history of other and more ancient Gods, and had never\nformed a part of the practical life of Jesus, or been realized in his\nexperience. This is a more charitable and honorable explanation of the\nmatter than that found in the assumption of some other writers, that\nevery miracle was constructed for the occasion--that it is a sheer\nfabrication; and yet there are some plausible grounds for this solution\nof the case.\n\nThese critical writers tell us there was a religious persuasion deeply\nenstamped upon the minds of all religious countries, that God often\njustified a departure from the truth--the conscientious or veracious\nfaculty being in that age but feebly developed. And the bible itself\nis full of evidence to establish the allegation. The prophets often\ndisclose it, and the apostles were their strict imitators. Ezekiel\nrepresents God as saying, \"If a prophet is deceived, I the Lord deceived\nthat prophet.\" (Ezek. xiv. 9.) And Jeremiah asks God, \"Wilt thou be to\nme as a liar?\" (Jer. xv. 8.) While the writer of Kings represents God\nas putting a lying spirit into the mouth of his own prophets, (i Kings\nxxii. 23.) And most certainly if God himself might thus habitually\ndepart from the truth, it was an ample warrant for his apostles, as well\nas the prophets, to adopt the same expedient. The case of Paul lying for\nthe glory of God, which we have cited from Romans iii. 4, proves they\nwere morally capable of doing this. Mosheim tells us that among the\nearly Christians, \"it was an almost universally adopted maxim, that it\nwas an act of virtue to deceive and lie, when by so doing they could\npromote the interest of the church.\" (Mosh. vol. i. p. 198.) And Mr.\nHiggins informs us that \"great numbers, of every age and of every\nreligion, have been guilty of systematic frauds and falsehoods\nto support their religions, to an extent of which we can have no\nconception. They not only practiced it, but they reduced it to system.\nThey avowed it, and they justified it by declaring it to be meritorious\nto lie in a good cause.\" (Ana. vol. i. p. 143.) The reader who can\nhesitate to credit these statements only betrays his ignorance of the\nmoral weakness of human nature, and the imperfect growth in that era of\nthe veracious faculty, which consequently had but a feeble voice in\nthe councils of the mind. Even the most pious and devout professors\nof religion did not consider a rigid conformity to truth necessary, or\nmorally obligatory, in their labors to promote the glory of God and the\nsalvation of souls. And when direct falsehood was not resorted to, the\nwriter still allowed himself to color, magnify, and invent largely; that\nis, to draw copiously upon the resources of his imagination, in the way\nof supplying omissions and defects, and filling out missing links in the\nchain of history. And hence it is that all ancient sacred history is so\nprofusely inlaid with stories and statements manifestly fabricated\nfor the occasion, without any historical support, and therefore wholly\nincredible. Let the Christian reader not, however, misapprehend us by\nsupposing we wish to drive him to the extreme alternative of accepting\nthis as the true explanation, or as indicating the real origin of the\nincredible stories and senseless miraculous feats interwoven into the\nGospel life of Jesus. We only offer it as a plausible, but not as the\nprobable explanation. The above citations from the Scriptures and other\nhistory prove most clearly that sacred writers were morally capable of\nfabricating or manufacturing history to supply assumed omissions. And\nthis explanation is twofold more reasonable than to accept the miracles\nas real occurrences, for such a belief would be at war with common\nsense, and prostrate our reason beneath our feet. But there is no\nnecessity of adopting lying hypotheses, while the borrowing theory\nis amply adequate to account for every Gospel miracle. There is not a\nmiraculous story or incredible legend incorporated in the New Testament\nas a part of the history of Jesus, that was not afloat in some shape or\nform, on the wings of tradition in nearly every religious country,\nages before his birth. The model for each and every miracle was already\nconstructed, was already in the market, and already a part of the\nhistory or tradition of other and older Gods. And all that was wanted\nto make it appear as a part of the history of the Christian's deified\nJesus, was to fill in names and dates. Yes, history with a hundred\ntongues proclaims it as the real explanation of the incredible and\nthe impossible in the history of Jesus Christ. And the evidence is so\nvoluminous and so overwhelming to disprove the common Christian dogma\nwhich makes the son of Joseph and Mary a miracle-working God (a portion\nof which we have presented under the several propositions of this\nchapter), that it really demolishes the last timber in the Christian\nfabric, and leaves it a heap of ruins. And we are certain that if we\ncould divest the Christian reader's mind, for a few moments, of an\ninherited and fostered prejudice, he would see that our explanation\nis much more rational, more probable, more beautiful than the popular\nbelief, which degrades the illustrious Judean reformer to a level with\nthe heathen thaumaturgist, and gives him the same undignified reputation\nas a miracle-worker.\n\nBut we are sometimes told we are under as much moral obligation to\nbelieve in the miracles reported of Jesus, as to believe in any other\nportion of his history; that we must accept his Gospel history as a\nwhole, or reject it in toto. But this is manifestly a false assumption,\nand one easily exploded. No person who is acquainted with Grecian\nhistory doubts that Alexander the Great was born in Macedonia, and\nfounded a city in Egypt bearing his own name. Yet not one of those\nreaders will credit for a moment what one of his biographers relates\nof him, that he stopped the sun in its course, or that he had no human\nfather. We all accept Pythagoras as a real entity, while we reject the\nstory of his walking on the air. Are we morally bound to accept Romulus\nand Remus, founders of Rome, as mere fabulous beings, because their\nbiographers relate the incredible story of their being suckled by a\nwolf? Many other illustrations might be given in proof of the falsity of\nthe assumption that, because a portion of a man's biography is found\nto be incredible, the whole must be rejected as false, as unworthy of\ncredence. This would be to annihilate history. For no biography of any\nperson, and no history of any nation, can be accepted as plenarily pure,\nunmixed truth. There is always more or less chaff with the grain, and it\nis our privilege and our duty to separate them. And by so doing we not\nonly confer a favor on the cause of truth, but add to the luster and\nhonor of the name of the deceased reformer; and especially is this true\nof the renowned Judean philanthropist and reformer. Much more lovely\nand beautiful would his evangelical history stand before the world\nif stripped of the wild, the weird, and the miraculous. Much more\ninteresting is he when viewed and venerated as a man than when\nworshipped as a God, guilty of the frequent violation of his own laws,\nby the display of the miracle-working power.\n\nAnd much more beautiful and much more rational is the doctrine which\naccepts every event that ever occurred as the legitimate and harmonious\noperation of the great machinery of nature, than as the smart trick,\nthe lawless caprice or wild feat, of an arbitrary, wonder-exciting God,\nperformed not to make the people better, more moral or more righteous\n(for miracles cannot do this), but merely to make them gape and stare,\nand shout, What a smart God we have got!\n\nAnd then the belief in miracles involves an utter repudiation of all\nlaw, all order, and all system, and introduces in their stead chaos,\nanarchy, and universal confusion. It is simply \"the doctrine of\nchance.\" which all orthodox Christendom professes to deprecate and\nexecrate as the quintessence of atheism. But they make a mistake;\n\"chance\" is more legitimately the fruit of miracle than of atheism; an\nassertion which we will here briefly prove.\n\nIf the sun may be arrested in his course through the heavens, \"the moon\nturned into blood,\" and \"the stars fall from the heaven,\"--sticks turned\ninto serpents, water into blood, and dust into lice,--all of which\northodox Christians profess to believe were witnessed in the days of\nMoses and Christ, then everything is thrown upon the wheel of chance;\neverything is involved in uncertainty. If the course of nature could be\narrested, or the natural qualities of objects changed by the prayer of\na prophet, patriarch, or apostle, then the food set before us to eat may\nsuddenly, in compliance with the prayers of some absent saint, become\na deadly poison; the clothes we wear may be instantly transformed into\nvirulent adders, which may inflict the fatal sting before we suspect it;\nsome favorite servant of God (a Moses or an Elijah) might be this\nmoment praying to God to stop the dews from falling, or the rain from\ndescending for the next three months, or three years, as the latter is\nreported as doing (see James v. 17), so that we could not plant with any\ncertainty that the seed would grow, or that we should be rewarded by\na crop. Such would be the incertitude, such the \"chance\" against us\nin everything in which we might engage, if it were true that God ever\nintercepts the action of his laws by working a miracle, that we should\neventually become discouraged by this chaos of \"chance,\" the wheels of\nindustry would stop, and the car of civilization go backward. If it were\ntrue, as taught by orthodox Christians, that \"God in his providence,\" or\n\"God in the dispensation of his providence,\" often \"visits people with\nsickness,\" then it would be useless to study the laws of health with a\nview of complying with them. For we could not know in any case whether\nour sickness had been brought upon us by, an \"overruling providence,\"\nor by our own imprudence. Our inventives to study and comply with these\nlaws, if there could be any, would consequently be very weak indeed,\nfor we might comply with every physiological requisition, and yet\nthere would be several \"chances,\" against us that to-morrow we may be\nstretched upon a \"sick bed and rolling pillow by the visitation of God.\"\nThus the doctrine of miracles is shown to be pre-eminently the doctrine\nof \"chance.\"\n\nThe doctrine of miraculous agency makes God an imperfect being, by\nimplying that his laws were defective in their original construction,\nthat by mistake he left some emergency unprovided for, and now has to\nsupply the omission by an afterclap exercise of power. Or if his laws\nwere originally perfect, then the working of a miracle would disturb\nthem, and make them imperfect; if originally imperfect, then God\nhimself must have been imperfect, and hence no God at all. Think of a\nwonderworking God violating, suspending, or intercepting his own laws.\nSuch a God would be a puerile, short-sighted being, that only ignorant\nand uncultivated minds could admire and adore.\n\nThe age of miracles, however, is gone. The belief in divine prodigies\nhas receded before the advancing genius of civilization. It has\ndied away in the exact ratio of the progress of science and general\nintelligence. And a thorough acquaintance with nature's laws will banish\nthe last vestige of such a belief. Hence it is that the most illiterate\nand ignorant nations and tribes have always been able to recount the\nlongest list of miraculous prodigies achieved by a disorderly God, who\nseems to have taken pleasure in violating his own laws, or suspending\nthem, for the most trivial purposes.\n\nYes, the time is approaching when the belief in a \"miraculous\ninterposition\" or \"special providences\" must pass away under the lights\nof science and civilization, and be numbered amongst the things which\nhave been and can be no more, and men will cherish more noble and\nelevated ideas of the great Ruler of the universe, who is infinite\nin order, infinite in wisdom, ay, infinite in all his attributes and\nvirtues, ever unchangeably the same.\n\n\nII. Prophecy, the second Pillar of the Christian Faith, proves as much\nfor Heathenism and Spiritualism.\n\nTruthful prophecy, attested to be such by its fulfillment, is assumed to\nbe one of the basic pillars and one of the main proofs of the truth of\nthe Christian religion. But the following consideration will show that\nthis assumption has no logical force, or real, tangible foundation.\n\nFirst. Every ancient system of religion had its prophets and seers, who\nprofessed to be able to foresee events of the future. And we find but\nlittle difference in the proofs each one has left to the world that they\npossessed this power, if we except the Greeks and Romans, some of whom\nevidently excelled all the Jewish prophets in their ability to take\ncognizance of events lying behind the curtain of time. Tacitus, the\nLatin historian, prophesied the downfall of the Roman empire and its\nattendant calamities more than five hundred years before its occurrence,\nwhich was fulfilled to the letter. And Solon, one of the seven wise men\nof Greece, foresaw and foretold a series of calamities which befell\nthe Athenians two hundred years before they were realized. A still more\nremarkable example is furnished in the history of Marcus Tullius Cicero,\nwho, writing of the future, with his mind fixed on the west, about 50 B.\nC., exclaimed, \"There will arise after many ages (if we may credit the\nSibylline oracles), a hero who will deliver his oppressed countrymen\nfrom bondage\"--a prophecy most signally fulfilled in the life of\nGeneral Washington. Many other examples of heathen prophecy and their\nfulfillment might be cited, if we had space for them.\n\nSecond. The history of modern spiritualism furnishes many cases of\nfuture events being predicted long before they took place. In fact, many\nof the most important events of modern times which have occurred in this\nand other countries, were foreseen and foretold by spiritual seers known\nas \"seeing mediums,\" when there was not the slightest probability that\nsuch events would ever occur. We will cite one or two cases, by way\nof proof and illustration. A few years ago John P. Coles, of New York,\nknown as a spiritual medium, prophesied, when under spirit control,\nthat Nicholas of Russia would shortly have difficulty with his secretary\nMenzicoff, and just three months from that time would die--a prediction\nthat was fulfilled to the very letter and to the very hour. And yet\nthere was not the slightest probability, externally indicated, at the\ntime the prophecy was uttered, that either of these events would ever be\nrealized. And this prophecy, let it be noted, was published in the New\nYork Times at least two months before it was verified, thus proving that\nthe prediction was not an \"afterclap\" affair, but preceded the event.\nTake another example. The serious calamity which befell the ill-fated\nsteamer known as the Arctic, which was lost at sea a number of years\nago, with all on board, was prophetically described in minute detail,\nby a spirit medium, several months before it occurred; and was seen and\ndescribed by another medium, while taking place more than a thousand\nmiles distant. The proof is at our command. And the late disastrous\nwar was foreseen and described by Cora Tappan, of New York, and other\nmediums, and its principal events pointed out long before the war broke\nout--a fact which is now a matter of history. These are only a few cases\nout of hundreds that might be cited of a similar character, drawn from\nthe practical history of modern spiritualism. If, then, prophecy can do\nanything toward the truth or divine emanation of the Christian religion,\nit must do the same for the heathen and spiritual systems. And thus\nproving too much, it proves nothing at all.\n\nThird. The Jewish prophecies not fulfilled. We have examined critically\nthe various texts of the Christian bible called prophecies, and find\nthat, if claimed as predictions of the future events beyond the powers\nof the natural mind to foresee, they have all failed. But few of them\nhave been fulfilled in any sense, and those few required no divine\nprescience to foresee the result. Many events have transpired in every\ncountry, which the natural sagacity of the most observant minds in that\ncountry had anticipated as the result of natural causes, such as the\nravages and downfall of cities and the overthrow of empires by the\nmerciless hand of war. The Jewish prophet, fostering a spirit of envy\nand enmity towards Egypt, Babylon, and other superior kingdoms, because\nthey had been overpowered by them and long held in subjection to\ntheir superior sway, were always prophesying evil things of these\nprincipalities. And though some of the evils which constituted the\nburden of prophecy might have been reasonably anticipated as natural\noccurrences, it is a signal fact they never transpired at all,--such\nas the total destruction of Babylon, Tyre, Damascus, and other cities\nbelonging to those hostile kingdoms the Jews so much envied and\nexecrated. Look, for proof, at the case of Damascus. The prophets\nIsaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, all poured out their fulminatory thunders\nupon this city. Isaiah declared it should be a \"ruinous heap.\" (Isa.\nxvii. I.) And Jeremiah predicted its destruction by fire. (Jer. xlix.\n27.) And yet, notwithstanding these predictions of ruin, Damascus still\nstands as \"one of the paradises of the earth,\" as one writer styles it,\nwith a population, according to Burckhart, of not less than two hundred\nand fifty thousand, being one of the most magnificent and prosperous\ncommercial cities on the globe. Instead of being blotted out of\nexistence, as the Jewish prophets prayed and predicted, it has suffered\nless by ravages of war and the scythe of time than almost any other city\nof the east. It has stood nearly three thousand years without becoming\na \"ruinous heap,\" or being consumed by fire or destroyed by war. (Jer.\nxlix. 26.) And the prophecy against Tyre has most signally failed also.\nEzekiel declared it should be destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, and never be\nfound again. (Ezek. xxvi.-xxix.) But two hundred and fifty years after\nNebuchadnezzar's time Alexander found it a strong commercial city. And\nit still contains a population of five thousand or more. St. Jerome, of\nthe fourth century, declared it to be then the finest city of Phoenicia,\nand was astonished that Ezekiel's prophecy had so utterly failed.\n\nAnd Isaiah's famous prediction against Babylon furnishes another proof\nof the utter failure of Jewish prophecy. He declared, after predicting\nits destruction, \"It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt\nin from generation to generation, neither shall the Arabian pitch tent\nthere.\" (Isa. xiii. 20.) Of course he desired it should be so. But,\nunfortunately for his credit as a prophet, it never suffered such a\ncalamity. On the contrary, according to Layard and Rawlinson, British\ncommissioners who recently visited the place, it now presents \"all the\nactivity of a hive of bees\" (to use Layard's language), and contains\nseveral thousand inhabitants, though its name is, since rebuilt, called\nHillah. And thus the prophecy is falsified. \"No,\" exclaims a good\nChristian brother, in forlorn hope, it may be fulfilled yet. But if he\nwill examine the language of the prophecy, he will find he is entirely\ncut off from this \"saving clause.\" The prophet says, \"Her time is near\nto come, and her days shall not be prolonged.\" (Isa. xiii. 22.) Thus it\nis evident the prophecy was to be fulfilled in that age and generation.\nThe failure, then, is absolute and indisputable. And these are but mere\nsamples of the complete failure of every text called a prophecy, when\napplied to the prognostication of future events. Numerous texts can\nbe found in the prophets auguring evil for Egypt, which have made\nno approximation toward fulfillment. Ezekiel prophesied \"the fall of\nEgypt,\" \"the desolation of Egypt,\" \"the destruction of Egypt,\" &c.,\nnot one of which calamities has ever been realized in her experience.\nProphecies respecting the restoration of the lost tribes and the\nperpetuity of the Israelitish throne are complete failures; also all\n\"the Messianic prophecies,\" so called. (See Chap. II.) With respect\nto the prophecy on Babylon, it may be further observed that while the\nprophet declares, \"Neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there\" (Isa.\nxiii. 22), Layard declares that is the very thing they did do while\nhe was there. He says he saw a number of Arabian tents pitched on\nthe ground; thus proving a failure of the prophecy all round in every\nparticular. (See note page Fourth). The bible itself is a witness that\ntruthful prophecy can do nothing toward authenticating a religion,\nor toward proving the prophet divinely inspired. The same damaging\nconcession is made here as in the case of miracles, that a heathen and\nan unbeliever could and did succeed as well as the true disciples of the\nfaith. The proof of this statement is found in the history of Balaam.\nHis figurative representation of a star coming out of Jacob and\na scepter out of Judah (see Numb. chap. xxiv.) is often quoted\nby Christian writers as presaging or prefiguring the coming of\nChrist,--thus making a heathen and an unbeliever the oracle of a\nMessianic prophecy, and a heathen, too, of sinful and ungodly habits.\nSo that the Christian subterfuge is not available here, that \"God might\nmake a righteous man of any nation the vehicle of prophecy.\" For we have\nthe express declaration of the bible itself that he was not a righteous\nman, but the very reverse. Peter tells us, \"He loved the wages of\nunrighteousness,\" at the very time this prophecy so called was uttered\n( see 2 Peter ii. 13 ), which prostrates forever the Christian plea the\n\"he might have possessed the true spirit of prophecy by virtue of being\na righteous man,\" and drives us to the admission that an unconverted\nsavage and ungodly heathen unbeliever could make a true prophecy. It not\nbeing necessary, then, to be a Jew, or a Christian, or a believer, or\neven a moral man, to foresee or foretell the far-off important events\nof the future, the argument falls forever to the ground that the\nfulfillment of the Jewish prophecies, if admitted to have been\nfulfilled, could do anything toward proving the truth or divine\nacceptance of the religion of the bible, or its superiority over any\nheathen or oriental religion then or subsequently known to history, as\nthey all present the same evidence of being endowed with the true spirit\nof prophecy. All argument for Christianity based on the prophecies,\nor \"the gift of prophecy,\" is, then, forever at an end, as it has been\nshown that the power to foretell future events is not restricted by\nthe bible itself to any nation, to any religion, to any faith, to any\nbelief, or to any moral or religious qualification. What, then, is\nprophecy worth, or what does it prove? Another case, and one similar to\nthat of Balaam in its essential points, is found in the New Testament.\nCaiaphas, though not claiming to be any part of a believer, utters a\nprophecy in the interest of the Christian religion for which the bible\nitself gives him full credit as a prophet. Here, then, is another case\nof a heathen stealing the Christian's thunder, and another proof that\nthe spirit of true prophecy has never been confined to any nation or\nany religion; and hence, according to the teachings of the bible\nitself, does nothing at all toward establishing the exalted claims of\nChristianity, or toward proving its superiority over other systems of\nreligion.\n\n\nIII. Moral Precepts the third Pillar of the Christian Faith.\n\nIt is declared, in view of the many wise precepts which issued from the\nmouth of Jesus Christ, that \"he spake as never man spake.\" (John vii.\n46.) If this were true, then Gods must have been very numerous prior to\nthe Christian era. For there is not one of the moral maxims or preceptive\ncommands which he gave utterance to that cannot be found literally or\nsubstantially in the older bibles of other nations, or the writings\nof the Greek philosophers, and the religious dissertations of heathen\nmoralists, who gave out moral and religious lessons for the instruction\nof the world long prior to the birth of Christ. Even the Golden Rule,\nwhich Christian writers, ignorant or oriental history, have erroneously\nascribed to Jesus Christ, and lauded him as being the author of, is\nfound variously expressed in the writings of several heathen or oriental\nnations. We find it in the Chinese bible at least live hundred years\nolder than ours, almost word for word as Jesus uttered it. We will here\npresent it as expressed by different writers.\n\n1. Golden Rule by Confucius, 500 B. C.\n\n\"Do unto another what you would have him do unto you, and do not to\nanother what you would not have him do unto you. Thou needest this law\nalone. It is the foundation of all the rest.\"\n\n2. Golden Rule by Aristotle, 385 B. C.\n\n\"We should conduct ourselves toward others as we would have them act\ntoward us.\"\n\n3. Golden Rule by Pittacus, 650 B. C.\n\n\"Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him.\"\n\n4. Golden Rule by Thales, 464 B. C.\n\n\"Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing.\"\n\n5. Golden Rule by Isocrates, 338 B. C.\n\n\"Act toward others as you desire them to act toward you.\"\n\n6. Golden Rule by Aristippus, 365 B. C.\n\n\"Cherish reciprocal benevolence, which will make you as anxious for\nanother's welfare as your own.\"\n\n7. Golden Rule by Sextus, a Pythagorean, 406 B. C.\n\n\"What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them.\"\n\n8. Golden Rule by Hillel, 50 B. C.\n\n\"Do not to others what you would not like others to do to you.\"\n\nHere is the Golden Rule proclaimed by seven heathen moralists and a\nJew long before it was republished by the founder of Christianity;\nthus proving it to be of heathen origin, and proving that it does not\ntranscend the natural capacity of the human brain to originate, and\nhence needs no God to reveal it. Indeed, it is one of the most natural\nsentiments of the human mind. \"Would I like to be treated thus?\" is\nthe first thought which naturally arises in the mind of a person\nwhen maltreating a neighbor; thus showing that the Golden Rule is a\nspontaneous utterance of the moral feelings of the human mind.\n\n\nLOVE AND KIND TREATMENT OF ENEMIES.\n\nLove to enemies is considered to be another praiseworthy precept, which\nChrist has erroneously the credit of being the author of. We have heard\nthe declaration made in the Christian pulpit, that Jesus Christ was the\nfirst moral teacher who inculcated love to enemies; a most transcendent\nerror, as the following historical citations will show. Most of the\nreligious books and religious teachers of the ancient oriental heathen\nbreathe forth a spirit of love and kindness toward enemies.\n\nThe following is from the old Persian bible, the Sadder:--\n\n1.\n\n     \"Forgive thy foes, nor that alone;\n     Their evil deeds with good repay;\n     Fill those with joy who leave thee none,\n     And kiss the hand upraised to slay.\"\n\nThe Christian bible would be searched in vain to find a moral sentiment\nor precept superior to this. Certainly it is the loftiest sentiment of\nkindness toward enemies that ever issued from human lips, or was ever\npenned by mortal man. And yet it is found in an old heathen bible. Think\nof \"kissing the hand upraised to slay.\" Never was love, and kindness,\nand forbearance toward enemies more sublimely expressed than in the old\nPersian ballad.\n\n2. \"Treat thine enemy as though a friend, and he will become thy\nfriend,\" was expressed by Publius Syrus, a Roman slave, which is a wiser\nadmonition than that of Christ, \"Love thine enemy,\" as it is a moral\nimpossibility.\n\n3. \"All nature cries aloud, 'Shall man do less than heal the smiter, and\nthe railer bless?'\" (Hafiz, a Mahomedan.)\n\n4. \"Bridle thine anger, and forgive thine enemy; give unto him who takes\nfrom thee.\" (Koran, Mahomedan bible. )\n\n5. \"Let no man be offended with those who are angry at him, but reply\ngently to those who curse him.\" (Code of Menu.)\n\n6. \"Let him endure injuries, and despise no one.\" (Ibid.)\n\n7. \"Commit no hostile action for your own preservation.\" (Ibid.)\n\n8. \"To be revenged on enemies, become more virtuous.\" (Diogenes.)\n\n9. \"To strike a man, or vex him with words, is a sin.\" (Zend-Avesta,\nPersian bible.)\n\n10. \"Even the intention to strike is a sin.\" (Ibid.)\n\n11. \"Desire not the death of thine enemy.\" (Confucius.)\n\n12. \"Acknowledge benefits, but never revenge injuries.\" (Ibid.)\n\n13. \"We may dislike an enemy without desiring revenge.\" (Ibid.)\n\n14. \"Pardon the offenses of others, but never your own.\" (Publius\nSyrus.)\n\n15. \"The noble spirit cures injustice by forgiving it.\" (Ibid.)\n\n16. \"It is much better to be injured than to kill a man.\" (Pythagoras.)\n\n17. \"You can accomplish by kindness what you cannot by force.\" (Publius\nSyrus.)\n\n18. \"Better overlook an injury than avenge it.\" (Publius Syrus.)\n\n19. \"It is enough to think ill of an enemy without avenging it.\"\n(Publius Syrus.)\n\n20. \"It is a kingly spirit to return good deeds for evil ones.\" (Ibid.)\n\n21.\n\n     \"Learn for yon orient shell to love thy foe,\n     And store with pearls the hand that brings thee woe;\n     Flee, like yon rock, from base, vindictive pride,\n     Emblaze with gems the wrist that rends thy side.\"\n\n     (Hafiz.)\n\n22. \"To revenge yourself on an enemy, make him your friend.\"\n(Pythagoras.)\n\n23. \"It is not permitted to a man who has received an injury to revenge\nit by doing another.\" (Socrates, in his Crito.)\n\n24. \"Seek him who turns thee out, and pardon him who injures thee.\"\n(Koran.)\n\n25. \"Return not evil for evil.\" (Socrates.)\n\n26. \"Endure all things if you would serve God.\" (Sextus.)\n\n27. \"Desire to be able to benefit your enemies.\" (Ibid.)\n\n28. \"Receive an injury rather than do one.\" (Publius Syrus.)\n\n29. \"Be at war with men's vices, but at peace with their persons.\"\n(Ibid.)\n\n30. \"Cultivate friendship for an enemy.\" (Pittacus.)\n\n31. \"Be kind to your friends that they may continue so, and to your\nenemies that they may become so.\" (Ibid.)\n\n32. \"Prevent injuries if possible; if not, do not revenge them.\" (Ibid.)\n\n33. \"An enemy should not be hated, but cured.\" (Seneca.)\n\n34. \"To act unkindly toward an enemy will increase his hate.\"\n(Antonius.)\n\n35. \"Be to everybody kind and friendly.\" (Ibid.)\n\n36. \"Speak evil of no one, not even your enemies.\" (Pittacus.)\n\nThus it will be observed that love and kindness toward all mankind, both\nfriends and enemies, is not confined to the teachings of Christ or\nto the Christian religion, as many have erroneously supposed, but\nis unquestionably a natural sentiment of the moral instinct or moral\nimpulses of the human mind, and hence is no proof that their teacher is\neither a God or divinely inspired.\n\nAnd we have in our possession nearly eight hundred more precepts (see\nvol. ii.) from the pens or mouths of the ancient heathen, enjoining just\nand kind treatment of women, and setting forth nearly all the duties of\nlife, and teaching the immortality of the soul, &c. And these precepts\nbreathe the same lofty moral sentiment and moral feeling as those quoted\nabove. How ignorant and how conceited must be the Christian professor\nwho supposes all goodness is confined to Christianity, or that it even\npossesses any great superiority over other religious systems! And\nhow completely the three foregoing parts of this chapter, \"Miracles,\"\n\"Prophecies,\" and \"Precepts,\" prostrate the divine claims of\nChristianity, and leave not an inch of ground for them to rest upon!\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXXV. LOGICAL OR COMMON SENSE VIEW OF THE DOCTRINE OF DIVINE\nINCARNATION\n\nTHE incarnation of an infinite God is a shocking absurdity, and an\ninfinite impossibility. We ask in all solemn earnestness, and in the\nname of the intuitive monitions of an unshackled reason and an unbiased\nconscience, can any man in his sober senses, who has been in the habit\nof reflecting before he believes, entertain for a moment the monstrous\nabsurdity that the Almighty and Infinite Maker of the universe was once\nreduced to a little wailing infant, lying in senseless and helpless\nweakness on the lap of its mother, unable to walk a step, or lisp a\nword, or do aught but cry with pain or for nourishment stored in the\nmother's breast? What! Almighty God fallen from his burnished, dazzling\nthrone in the lofty heavens, and reduced to helpless, senseless\nbabyhood! Omnipotence shorn of all power but to breathe, and cry, and\nsmile! What! that Omniscient Being, who \"leads one world by day, and\nten thousand more by night,\" becoming suddenly transformed into a human\nbantling, which knows no higher enjoyment that that of being \"pleased\nwith a rattle, and tickled with a straw!\" Who can believe it? Ay, who\ndare believe it, if he would escape the charge of blasphemy? Then say\nnot that \"the man Christ Jesus,\" though standing at the top of the\nladder of moral manhood, and high above the common plane of humanity,\nwas yet a God--\"the Infinite Ruler of the infinite universe.\" Who can\nbelieve that that Being, whose existence stretches to an eternity beyond\nhuman conception, yea, whom \"the heaven of heavens cannot contain,\" was\never cooped up in a human body, reduced so near to nothing in dimensions\nas to be susceptible (as was Jesus) of being weighed in scales, and\nmeasured with a yardstick?\n\nWe ask again, Who, from the deepest depths of his inmost, enlightened\nconsciousness, can believe such revolting, such atheistical doctrine\nas this? Or who will venture to descend still lower, and conceive of\nan Almighty, Omnipresent Being, who fills all space above, around, and\nbeneath, \"from infinity below to yon fixed star above,\" and millions\nupon millions of miles beyond it, sinking and dwindling to that mere\nmite, speck, or monad state and condition comprehended in the initiatory\nstep of embryonic existence? And then think of the Almighty, Omnipotent\nCreator of the universe lying in a manger with four-footed beasts and\ncreeping things, sleeping with oxen and asses in a stable. Next he\nis seen an urchin on the street playing with marbles and jack-knives,\nabsorbed and forgetful of the world around him. Who can believe that\nawfully majestic Being, who is represented by his own inspired book as\nbeing so transcendently grand and awe-inspiring that \"no man san see\nhim and live\" (Ex. xxxiii. 20), was not only daily seen by hundreds and\nthousands, but was on such familiar terms with men, that they regarded\nhim as their companion, and equal, and even sometimes coolly reprimanded\nhim for supposed misdemeanors and errors? Could they believe this to be\nAlmighty God? Impossible! Impossible! And then who can believe that that\ninfinite Being, whom we have been taught to regard as absolutely and\neternally unchangeable, could become subject to hunger and thirst\n(as did Jesus)? Or who can believe that the eternally and unceasingly\nwatchful Omnipotent Deity, whose eye, we are told, \"never slumbers,\"\ncould sink into unconscious sleep, become \"to dumb forgetfulness a\nprey,\" night after night, for thirty years, oblivious, and unconscious\nof the world around him? Think of a being of incomprehensible majesty,\ndignity, and power, able to \"shake the heavens and the earth also,\"\nbeing unable to protect himself from insult, and was therefore derided\nand \"spit upon,\" and finally overcome by his enemies, as is related of\nJesus. Can any man believe, who has not made shipwreck of his senses, or\nbanished Reason from her courts, that God 'Almighty, who comprehends\nin himself the most absolute and boundless perfection of goodness and\nwisdom, was tempted by demons, devils, and crawling serpents? Who can\nbelieve that the Lord, who owns \"the cattle upon a thousand hills\"\n(Psalm 1. io), and the countless host of worlds besides, that wheel\ntheir course through infinite space, had not \"where to lay his head\"?\nWho can believe that that was the all-wise, omnipotent, and omnipresent\nGod, possessing all power in heaven above and the earth beneath, who was\nbetrayed by weak, finite mortals? What! the Almighty Creator betrayed by\na puny being of his own creation into the hands of his disobedient and\nrebellious children? Why could he not, if possessing \"power to lay\ndown his life, and take it up again\" (John x. 17), cause that all these\nchildren of his (as we must assume they were, if he was Almighty God,\nand hence the Father of all) should love him, instead of hating him?\nCan any man believe that Jesus was possessed with omnipotent power\nwhile standing to be whipped (scourged) by Pontius Pilate, or that\nhe possessed a power above that of finite mortals while in the act of\npraying, with such extreme ardor that the sweat dropped from his face,\nthat the cup of death might pass from his lips, or while calling for an\nangel to support him in the hour of his mortal dissolution? or that He,\n\"by whom all things exist,\" could cease himself to exist, by dying upon\nthe cross between malefactors? Think of this, reader! and think of the\neternal Creator, the infinite Deity, the omnipotent Jehovah, the Maker\nof worlds as numberless as the sands upon the sea-shore for multitude,\nfainting, bleeding, dying, and pouring out his own blood to appease his\nown wrath; dying an ignominious death to satisfy an implacable revenge!\nAway with such insulting mockery, such blasphemous flummery! It can\nonly find place in the dark chambers of an unenlightened mind.\n\nWell has Watts said of Locke's skepticism,--\n\n     \"Reason could scarcely sustain to see,\n     Or bear the infant Deity:\n     A ransomed world, a bleeding God,\n     And heaven appeased by flowing blood,\n     Were themes too painful to be understood.\"\n\nYes, and too painful to be believed, too, Mr. Watts! Here we have a\n\"bleeding God,\" an \"infant Deity,\" and a vengeful God, appeased by\nmurder and streams of \"flowing blood.\" Gracious heavens! Whose reason\ndoes not revolt at such a picture? Whose soul does not sicken at\nthe thought, and who would not prefer, infinitely prefer, to sink\nto annihilation, if not to perdition itself, to being thus saved by\nnavigating a river of blood?? Dr. South hits off some of the absurdities\ninvolved in the Christian doctrine of the incarnation so forcibly and so\nlucidly, that we cannot resist the temptation to subjoin---here a few\nextracts from his sermon on the subject' \"But now,\" says this Christian\nclergyman, \"was there ever any wonder comparable to this, to behold the\nLord (Jesus Christ) thus clothed in flesh, the Creator of all things,\nhumbled, not only to the company, but also to the cognation, of his\ncreatures? It is as if one should imagine the whole world not only\nrepresented upon, but also contained in, one of our own artificial\nglobes, or the body of the sun enveloped in a cloud as big as a man's\nhand, all of which would be looked upon as astonishing impossibilities,\nand yet is as short of the other as the finite is of the infinite,\nbetween which the disparity is immeasurable. It is, as it were, to\ncancel the essential distances of things, to remove the bounds of\nnature, to bring heaven and earth, and what is more, both ends of the\ncontradiction, together. Men cannot persuade themselves that a Deity and\ninfinity should lie within so narrow a compass as the dimensions of\na human body; that omnipotence, omnipresence should ever be wrapped in\nswaddling clothes, and debased to the homely usages of a stable and a\nmanger; that the glorious Artificer of the whole universe, who spread\nout the heaven like a curtain, and laid the foundations of the earth,\ncould ever turn carpenter, and exercise an inglorious trade in a little\ncell. They cannot imagine that He who once created and at present\ngoverns the world, and shall hereafter judge the world, should be abased\nin all his concerns and relations, be scourged, spit upon, mocked and at\nlast crucified. All which are passages which lie extremely close to the\nnotions of conceptions which reason has made to itself of that high\nand impossible perfection that resided in the divine Creator.\" (Sermon,\n1665.) Dr. South, it will be observed, admits that the doctrine of\nthe divine incarnation involves many palpable absurdities and\ncontradictions, and lies directly across the path of reason. Fatal\nadmission to the doctrine of the deityship of Christ, but true, as his\nown elucidation of the subject demonstrates. To the author, since he\nfirst subjected the question to a logical scrutiny, and looked at it\nwith an unbiased mind, it presents difficulties insurmountable, and\nabsurdities innumerable. He can imagine nothing more transcendently\nshocking, revolting, and dwarfing to the mind, both morally and\nintellectually, than the thought of believing that a being born of and\nsuckled by a woman, and possessing the mere form and dimensions of\na man, can be regarded as the great Almighty and Omnipotent God, the\nCreator of unnumbered worlds, millions of which are larger than this\nplanet, on which Jesus was born.\n\nAnd then, reader, look for a moment at some of the many childish\nincongruities and logical difficulties this giant absurdity drags with\nit. It represents Almighty God as coming into the world through the\nhands of a midwife, as passing through the process of gestation and\nparturition. It insults our reason with the idea that the great,\ninfinite Jehovah could be molded into the human form--a thought that is\nshocking to the moral sense, and withering, cramping, and dwarfing to\nthe intellectual mind, imposing upon it a heavy drag-chain which checks\nits expansion, and forbids its onward progress. Christians tell us that\nthe human and the divine were united in \"the man Christ Jesus.\" But this\nis a monstrous absurdity, which no truly rational and unbiased mind can\naccept for an instant--that of hitching, splicing, tying, or dovetailing\ntogether finite man with the infinite Jehovah, that of amalgamating\nand commingling human foibles with divine perfection. Think of wedding\nmortal weakness to omnipotent power, local man with the omnipresent\nDeity! Think of compounding the creature and the Creator in one and the\nsame being! Think of the omnipresent \"I AM,\" whose illimitable existence\nstretches far away throughout the expansive arena of a boundless\nuniverse, occupying a dwelling within the narrow confines of the human\ntemple! As well essay to crowd the universe into your pocket, or the\nHimalayas Mountains into a thimble. On the other hand, think of a small\ncompound of flesh, blood, and bones, a few feet in dimensions, and\nweighing perhaps not more than one hundred and fifty pounds avoirdupois,\ncontaining that infinite, omnipresent Being, whom, we are told (we\nrepeat the quotation), \"the heaven of heavens cannot contain\"! And more\nthan all, kind reader, I ask you if you can accept for a moment, without\nthe immolation of your common sense, and the trampling of your reason\nbeneath you feet, the monstrous thought that that mighty and almighty\nArchitect who who created the countless myriads upon myriads of\nponderous worlds, which now roll in majestic order, and eternal rotation\nalong the great cerulean causeway of heaven, that mighty Architect who,\nfrom time beyond human computation, has been rolling out orb after orb,\nworld after world, if not myriads at a time, ten thousand times, ten\nthousand of which would dwindle our little pygmy, Lilliputian planet\ninto insignificance, if compared with it in size.\n\nI ask, and drive home the query to your inward consciousness, and the\ninmost temples of your sacred reason:\n\nCan you believe, after a moment's reflection, that a Being who is too\nvast, infinitely too vast in power and ubiquity to be grasped by the\nhuman understanding, did become (as did the finite and humble Jesus)\na helpless, senseless, unconscious, human infant; a suckling, crying,\nsqualling babe, powerless of speech, and unable to walk? Ay, worse,\nmore startling still, we are shocked with the thought that this mighty\nWorld-builder, this infinite, omnipotent Creator, was reduced so near to\nthe verge of nonenity, so near to the last glimmering spark or speck\nof existence, and the world so near without a God, as to become an\ninanimate foetus--a monad in the matrix of a human virgin? Shocking the\nthought! Blasphemous the doctrine! Believe it who will; believe it who\ncan! We cannot; we would not; we are infinitely beyond it. Such a belief\nmay be deposited by educational tradition in the affections, but to\nenter the temple of Reason, it never did, it never can. She never\nunbarred her doors to admit such monstrous, such enormous incongruities.\nand all these logical absurdities, and a thousand more, grow\nlegitimately out of the doctrine of the divine incarnation,--out of\nthe postulate which would (following in the line of the pagan\nsuperstitutions) elevate the finite, humble, mortal Jesus to the throne\nof heaven, the exclusive prerogative of Almighty God. Come away, my\nChristian friends, from such disparaging, such dishonorable views of the\nDeity, such blasphemous caricatures of Almighty God. Come away from such\nmorally darkening and such intellectually dwarfing superstitutions, the\nmoldering relics of oriental mythology, the expiring embers of childish\ncredulity and tradition, which originated far back in the dark cradle\nof human existence, in the infancy of an undeveloped age, ruled by\nignorance, superstition, and priestcraft. Yet millions of people laying\nclaim to sense and intelligence, even now profess to believe it. Talk\nnot to me of infidelity or blasphemy for denying the divinity or\nGodhead of Jesus Christ. The blasphemy lies in the other direction. The\ninfidelity is with the opposite party. It is with those who thus make\nthe dignity and character of Deity the sport of childish I baubles, the\ngame of priestly tawdryism. And be assured, dear friends, one and\nall, that coming generations will mark the man who now worships \"the\nman Christ Jesus\" as being \"very God\" as an idolater, if not a\nblasphemer--for worshipping a finite man for an infinite God, even\nthough the motives for such worship may be as pure as the pearly stream\nthat issues forth from the golden fount which rolls and sparkles beneath\nthe throne of Almighty God.\n\n     Note. The words Creator, Maker, &c., are used from a\n     Christian standpoint Science knows no Creator.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXXVI. PHILOSOPHICAL ABSURDITIES OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE DIVINE\nINCARNATION\n\nTHERE is a philosophical principle underlying the doctrine of the Divine\nIncarnation, whose logical deductions completely overthrow the claim of\nJesus of Nazareth to the Godhead, and which we regard as settling the\nquestion as conclusively as any demonstrated problem in mathematics.\nThis argument is predicated upon the philosophical axiom, that two\ninfinite beings of any description of conception, cannot exist, either\nin whole or in part, at the same time; and per consequence, it is\nimpossible that the Father and Son should both be God in a divine sense,\neither conjointly or separately. The word infinite comprehends all; it\ncovers the whole ground; it fills the immensity of the universe, and\nfills it to repletion! so that there is no room left for any other being\nto exist. And whoever and whatever does exist must constitute a part of\nthis infinite whole.\n\nNow, the Christian world concedes ( for it is the teaching of their\nScriptures), that the Father is God, always and truly, perfect,\ncomplete, and absolute; that there is nothing wanting in him to\nconstitute him God in the most comprehensive and absolute sense of the\nterm; that he is all we can conceive of as constituting God, \"the one\nonly true God\" (John xvii. 3), and was such from all eternity, before\nJesus Christ was born into the world; and Paul puts the keystone into\nthe arch by proclaiming, \"To us there is but one God, the Father.\" (\n1 Cor. viii. 6.) Hence we have here a logical proposition (despite the\nsophistry of Christendom) as impregnable as the rocks of Gibraltar, that\nthe Father alone is or can be God, which effectually shuts out every\nother and all other beings in the universe from any participation in the\nGodhead with the Father. And thus this parity of reasoning demonstrates\nthat the very moment you attempt to make Christ God, or any part of the\nGodhead, you attempt a philosophical impossibility. You cannot introduce\nanother being as God in the infinite sense until the first-named\ninfinite God is dethroned and put out of existence, and this, of course,\nis a self-evident impossibility. It it were not such, then we should\nhave two Gods, both absolute and infinite. On the other hand, if that\nother being (who with the Christians is Jesus Christ, with the Hindoos\nChrishna, with the Budhists Sakia, &c. ) is introduced as only a part of\nthe infinite and perfect God, then it is evident to every mind with the\nleast philosophical perception, that some change or alteration must\ntake place in the latter before such a union can be effected. But such\na change, or any alteration, in a perfect infinite being would at once\nreduce him to a changeable and finite being, and thus he would cease to\nbe God. For it is a clear philosophical and mathematical axiom, that a\nperfect and infinite being cannot become more than infinite. And if\nhe could and should become less than infinite, he would at once become\nfinite, and thus lose all the attributes of the Godhead. To say or\nassume, then, that Christ was God in the absolute or divine sense, and\nthe Father also God absolute, and yet that there is but one God, or that\nthe two could in any manner be united, so as to constitute but one God,\nis not only a glaring solecism, but a positive contradiction in terms,\nand an utter violation of the first axiomatic principles of philosophy\nand mathematics. It also asserts the illogical hypothesis, that a part\ncan be equal to the whole; it first assumes the Father to be absolutely\nGod, then assumes the Son also to be absolutely God, and finally\nassumes each to be only a part, and has to unite them to make whole and\nculminates the theological farce. Such is Christian ratiocination.\n\nAgain, it is conceded by Christians, that the Father is an omnipresent\nbeing; and we have shown that it is a mathematical impossibility for two\nomnipresent beings, or two beings possessing any infinite attributes, to\nexist at one and the same time. Hence the clear logical deducsequence,\nnot God. Again, we have another philosophical maxim or axiom familiar\nto every schoolboy, that no two substances or beings can occupy the same\nplace at the same time; the first must be removed before the second can\nby any possibility be introduced, in order thus to make room for the\nlatter. But as omnipresent means existing everywhere, there can be no\nplace to remove on omnipresent being to, or rather there can be no place\nor space he can be withdrawn from in order to make room for another\nbeing, without his ceasing to be omnipresent himself, and thereby\nceasing to be God.\n\nIt is thus shown to be a demonstrable truth that the omnipresence of\nthe Father does and must exclude that of the Son, and thus exclude the\npossibility of his apatheosis or incarnated deityship. In other words,\nit is established as a scientific principle upon a philosophical and\nmathematical basis, that Jesus Christ was not and could not be \"the\ngreat I AM,\" \"the only true God.\"\n\nWe will notice one other philosophical absurdity involved in the\ndoctrine of the divine incarnation--one other solecism comprehended\nin the childish notion which invests the infinite God with finite\nattributes. It is a well-established and well-understood axiom in\nphilosocomplete God; and thereby that the Son could not be\nomnipresent, and that \"the less cannot be made to contain the\ngreater.\" A pint bottle cannot be made to contain a quart of wine. For\nthe same reason a finite body cannot contain an infinite spirit. Hence\nphilosophy presses the conclusion that \"the man Christ Jesus\" could not\nhave comprehended in himself \"the Godhead bodily,\" inasmuch as it would\nhave required the infinite God to be incorporated in a finite human\nbody. We are therefore compelled to reject the doctrine of the incarnate\ndivinity, the belief in the deityship of Jesus Christ, because (with\nmany other reasons enumerated elsewhere) it involves a direct tilt\nagainst some of the plainest principles of science, and challenges, ay,\nvirtually overthrows, some of the fundamental laws of both natural and\nmoral philosophy. No philosopher, therefore, does, or can believe in\nthe absolute divinity of Jesus Christ.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXXVII. PHYSIOLOGICAL ABSURDITIES OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE DIVINE\nINCARNATION\n\nTHERE is also a physiological principle (discovered by the author)\ncomprised in the doctrine of the Divine Incarnation fatal in its\npractical and logical application to the divinity of Jesus Christ,\nand all the other incarnate or flesh-invested Gods of antiquity. It is\nevidently fraught with much logical force. It is based upon the law of\nmental and physical correspondence. As is the physical conformation, so\nis the mentality, is a law of analogy which pilots us to nearly all our\npractical knowledge of the natural world. A knowledge of either serves\nas an index to the other.\n\nWhen we observe an animal possessing that physical form and construction\npeculiar to its species, we expect to find it practically exhibiting\nthe nature, character, disposition, and habits peculiar to that class of\nanimals. If it possesses, for example, the conformation of a sheep, we\ninfer at once that it has the disposition of a sheep, and we are never\ndisappointed in this conclusion. And when we encounter an animal with\nthe tiger form, we expect to see exhibited the tiger spirit. If it\npossesses the well-known physical conformation of the tiger, we are\nnever deceived or misled when we assign it a predatory disposition. If\nit is a tiger form, it is sure to be a tiger in character and habits.\nAnd so of all the genera and species of animals that range upon the face\nof the globe. We may travel through the whole field of animated\nnature, and observe the infallible operation of this beautiful law\nof correspondence till we come, however, to the crowning work of God,\ncalled Man. Here we find this law, this beautiful chain of analogy,\nbroken by the doctrine of the \"divine incarnation.\" God becomes a man,\nat least is made to exhibit every external appearance of a man. All\nexternal distinction between God and man is thus obliterated. So that\nthe very first being we meet in the street or on the highway possessing\nthe form, size, and physical conformation of a man, and presenting every\nother external appearance of being a man, may nevertheless be a God. And\nno less is this objection practically exemplified, and not less is the\ninfraction of this beautiful law of analogy observable in the case of\nJesus Christ, than in the numerous other incarnate Gods and demigods of\nantiquity. Being in appearance a man, how was he to be, or how could he\nbe, visually distinguished from a man? Or how could those men who\nwere cotemporary with him, know, as they approached him, or as they\napproached each other, whether they were meeting a man or a God? Seeing\nthat \"he was found in fashion as a man\" (Phil. ii. 8), either he might\nbe mistaken for a man, or they for a God. They were constantly liable to\nbe confounded. If, then, the infinite deityship was lodged in the person\nof Jesus Christ, it is evident that that important fundamental law of\nnature--\"as is the form, so is the character\"--was utterly annulled,\nprostrated, annihilated, and banished from the world by the act. So\nthat all was, and is henceforth and forever, chaos, confusion, and\nuncertainty. For if the principle can be violated in one instance, it\nmay be in another, and in thousands of cases, ad infinitum. If one case\ncould be allowed to occur, the principle is established, and nature's\nuniversal chain of analogy is broken and destroyed; for to intercept the\nlaw is to \"break the tenth and ten thousandth link alike.\"\n\nHence it is evident that if a being resembling a man may be a God, an\nanimal resembling a cow may be a horse, and yonder stick a poisonous\nadder; and fatal may be the consequences, in thousands of instances, in\njudging or inferring the nature and character of an animal by its form\nand size. A supposed innocent animal might be a deadly enemy, or\nvice versa. Can we then believe, or dare we believe, a doctrine\nso atheistical in its tendencies as that the Infinite Diety was\nincorporated in the person of the meek and lowly Jesus, when it would\nthus set at naught, violate, prostrate, and utterly cancel from the\nworld one of God's own fundamental laws, and one of the essential\nprinciples of natural science, and banish forever the co-ordinate\nharmony of the universe, and thus inaugurate a state of universal\ndisorder, incertitude, anarchy, and misrule into the otherwise\nbeautifully law-governed, well-regulated domain of nature? Certainly,\nmost certainly not! If the incarnation of the Deity, should or\ncould take place, there should be something strikingly peculiar, ay,\ninfinitely peculiar, in his figure, size, and general appearance, in\norder to make him susceptible of being distinguished from the human.\nOtherwise, men would be liable to be constantly mistaking and worshiping\neach other for the Great Almighty and Ubiquitous God, and thus\nconstantly blundering into idolatry. And we actually find several cases\nreported in the Scriptures (mark the fact well) of men, ay, the\nsaints themselves, being led into this error; being led to commit \"the\nhigh-handed sin of idolatry\" in consequence of their previous acceptance\nof the belief in a man-God--that is, a God of human size and type. St.\nJohn, in two instances, was in the act of worshipping a being possessing\nthe human form, whom he mistook for the omnipotent and omnipresent God.\n(See Rev. xix. 10, and xxii. 4.) Having, perhaps, been taught that\n\"the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily in Christ Jesus,\" he probably\nmistook the being he met for Him, and hence offered to worship him. If,\nthen, Christ's own \"inspired disciples\" could thus be betrayed into \"the\nsin of idolatry\" by having abolished the infinite distinction between\nthe divine and the human, we surely find here a very weighty argument\nagainst such a leveling and equalizing doctrine. And certainly nothing\ncould be better calculated to promote \"the sin of idolatry\" than thus to\nobliterate the broad, the infinitely grand line of demarkation between\nthe infinite God and his finite creature man. Indeed, may we not here\nfind the very origin and the cause of the now general prevalence\nof idolatry in pagan countries? Is it not directly traceable to the\ndemolition of the broad, high, and insurmountable wall of distinction\nwhich ought forever to stand between a God of infinite attributes, and a\nbeing caged up in the human form? Certainly, most certainly it is. Hence\nhere I would ask, How can Christians, after subscribing to the doctrine,\n\"that the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily in the man Christ Jesus\"\n(as Paul very appropriately calls him), condemn the people of any age or\nnation for worshipping as God their fellow-beings--that is, beings with\nthe human form? Certainly the man who could believe that the infinite\nGod could be comprehended or incorporated in the person of Jesus, could\neasily be brought to believe that the Grand Lama of Thibet is a proper\nobject of divine worship. He only lacks the substitution of names.\nSubstitute the Grand Lama for that of Jesus Christ, and the thing is\ndone. And idolatry thus becomes an easily established institution, and\nits abolition in any country an absolute moral impossibility.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXXVIII. A HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.\n\nA MOST fatal distrust is thrown upon the miraculous portions of the\nhistory of Jesus Christ, as found in his Gospel narratives, by the\ndiscovery of the fact (brought to light through recent archaeological\nresearches), that the same marvelous feats, the same miraculous\nincidents, which were recorded in his life, were long previously\ningrafted into the sacred biographies of Gods and demigods no less\nadored and worshipped as beings possessing divine attributes. We\nshall leave the reader to account for the long list of astonishing\ncoincidences, as we proceed to recapitulate and abridge from previous\nchapters, the almost innumerable parallel incidents running through\nthe legendary history of the many demigods and sin-atoning saviors of\nantiquity. The historical vouchers are given. We shall first direct\nattention to the long string of corresponding events recorded in the\nsacred histories of ancient Hindoo Gods, as compared with those of Jesus\nChrist at a much later period.\n\nAs far back as 1200 B. C., sacred records were extant and traditions\nwere current, in the East, which taught that the heathen Savior\n(Chrishna) was, 1st, Immaculately conceived and born of a spotless\nvirgin, \"who had never known man.\" 2d, That the author of, or agent in,\nthe conception, was a spirit or ghost (of course a Holy Ghost). 3d,\nThat he was threatened in early infancy with death by the ruling tyrant,\nCansa. 4th, That his parents had, consequently, to flee with him to\nGokul for safety. 5th, That all the young male children under two years\nof age were slain by an order issued by Cansa, similar to that of Herod\nin Judea. 6th, That angels and shepherds attended his birth. 7th, That\nhis birth and advent occurred on the 25th of December. 8th, That it\noccurred in accordance with previous prophecy. 9th, That he was presented\nat birth with frankincense, myrrh, &c. 10th, That he was saluted and\nworshipped as \"the Savior of men,\" according to the report of the late\nChristian Missionary Huelith, That he led a life of humility and\npractical moral usefulness. 12th, That he wrought various astounding\nmiracles, such as healing the sick, restoring sight to the blind,\ncasting out devils, raising the dead to life, &c. 13th, That he was\nfinally put to death upon the cross (i. e., crucified) between two\nthieves. 14th. After which he descended to hell, rose from the dead,\nand ascended back to heaven \"in the sight of all men,\" as his biblical\nhistory declares. For hundreds of other similar parallels, including his\ndoctrines and precepts, see Chapter XXXII.\n\nNow, all these were matters of the firmest belief, more than three\nthousand years ago, in the minds of millions of the most devout\nworshippers that ever bowed the knee in humble prayer to the Father of\nMercies. The reader can draw his own deduction.\n\nAnd then we have presented similar brief lists of parallels in Chapter\nXXIII., comprised in a comparative view of the miraculous lives of the\nJudean and Egyptian Saviors, Christ, Alcides, Osiris, Tulis, &c. In\nthis analogous exhibition, it will be observed the Egyptian Gods are\nreported, as remotely as 900 B. C, as performing, besides several of\nthe miraculous achievements enumerated above, other miracles equally\nindicative of divine power, such as converting water into wine,\ncausing \"rain to descend from heaven,\" &c. And on the occasion of the\ncrucifixion of Tulis we are told \"the sun became darkened and the moon\nrefused to shine.\"\n\nWe find, also, several well-authenticated instances of raising the dead\nto life, in works portraying the miraculous achievements of the Egyptian\nGods, the relation being given in such specific detail in some cases\nthat the names of the reanimated dead are furnished. Tyndarus and\nHypolitus were instances of this kind, both (according to Julius) having\nbeen raised from the dead. Descending the line of history, until we\narrive at the confines of Grecian theology, we find here the same train\nof marvelous events recorded in the histories of their virgin-born Gods,\nas we have shown in Chapter XXXIII., such as their healing the sick and\nthe cripples, causing the blind to see, the lame to walk, the dead to be\nresuscitated to life, &c. And cases, as we have shown, are reported of\ntheir reading the thoughts of their disciples, as Jesus did those of\nthe woman of Samaria. Apollonius declares he knew many Hindoo saints to\nperform this achievement with entire strangers.\n\nLikewise Apollonius of Tyana and Simon Magus, both cotemporary with\nJesus Christ, we have arranged in the historic parallel (see Chapter\nXXXIII.), with their long train of miracles, constituting an exact\ncounterpart with those related in the Gospel history of Christ, and\nincluding in Apollonius's case, besides those specified in the\nhistories of the Gods above named, the miracle of transfiguration, the\nresurrection from the dead, his visible ascent to heaven, &c., while\nSimon Magus was very expert in casting out devils, raising the dead,\nallaying storms, walking on the sea, &c.\n\nBut without recapitulating further, we will recite some new historic\nfacts not embraced in any of the preceding chapters of this work,\nand tending to demonstrate still further the universal analogy of all\nreligions, past and present, in their claims for a miraculous power\nfor their Gods and incarnate Saviors. The \"New York Correspondent,\"\npublished in 1828, furnishes us the following brief history of an\nancient Chinese God, known as Beddou:--\n\n\"All the Eastern writers agree in placing the birth of Beddou 1027 B.\nC. The doctrines of this Deity prevailed over Japan, China, and Ceylon.\nAccording to the sacred tenets of his religion, 'God is incessantly\nrendering himself incarnate,' but his greatest and most solemn\nincarnation was three thousand years ago, in the province of Cashmere,\nunder the name of Fot, or Beddou. He was believed to have sprung from\nthe right intercostal of a virgin of the royal blood, who, when she\nbecame a mother, did not the less continue to be a virgin; that the king\nof the country, uneasy at his birth, was desirous to put him to death,\nand hence caused all the males that were born at the same period to be\nput to death, and also that, being saved by shepherds, he lived in\nthe desert to the age of thirty years, at which time he opened his\ncommission, preaching the doctrines of truth, and casting out devils;\nthat he performed a multitude of the most astonishing miracles, spent\nhis life fasting, and in the severest mortifications, and at his death\nbequeathed to his disciples the volume in which the principles of his\nreligion are contained.\"\n\nHere, it will be observed, are some very striking counterparts to\nthe miraculous incidents found related in the Gospel history of Jesus\nChrist. And no less analogous is the no less well-authenticated story\nof Quexalcote of Mexico, which the Rev. Mr. Maurice concedes to be, and\nLord Kingsborough and Niebuhr (in his history of Rome) prove to be much\nolder than the Gospel account of Jesus Christ According to Maurice's\n\"Ind. Ant.,\" Humboldt's \"Researches in Mexico,\" Lord Kingsbor-ough's\n\"Mexican Ant.,\" and other works, the incarnate God Quexalcote was born\n(about 300 B. C.) of a spotless virgin, by the name Chimalman, and led a\nlife of the deepest humility and piety; retired to a wilderness, fasted\nforty days, was worshipped as a God, and was finally crucified between\ntwo thieves; after which he was buried and descended into hell, but\nrose again the third day. The following is a part of Lord Kingsborough's\ntestimony in the case: \"The temptation of Quexalcote, the fast of forty\ndays ordained by the Mexican ritual, the cup with which he was presented\nto drink (on the cross), the reed which was his sign, the 'Morning\nStar,' which he is designated, the 'Teoteepall, or Divine Stone,'\nwhich was laid on his altar, and which was likewise an object of\nadoration,--all these circumstances, connected with many others relating\nto Quexalcote of Mexico, but which are here omitted, are very curious\nand mysterious.\" (Vol. vi. p. 237, Mexican Ant.)\n\nAgain \"Quexalcote is represented, in the painting of Codex Borgianus, as\nnailed to the cross.\" (See Mex. Ant. vol. vi. p. 166.) One plate in\nthis work represents him as being crucified in the heavens, one as being\ncrucified between two thieves. Sometimes he is represented as being\nnailed to the cross, and sometimes as hanging with the cross in his\nhands. The same work speaks of his burial, descent into hell, and\nhis resurrection; while the account of his immaculate conception and\nmiraculous birth are found in a work called \"Codex Vaticanus.\"\n\nOther parallel incidents could be cited, if we had space for them,\nappertaining to the history of this Mexican God. And parallels might\nalso be constructed upon the histories of other ancient Gods,--as that\nof Sakia of India, Salivahana of Bermuda, Hesus, or Eros, of the Celtic\nDruids, Mithra of Persia, Hil and Feta of the Mandaites, &c.\n\nBut we will close with the testimony of a French philosopher (Bagin) on\nthe subject of deific incarnations. This writer says, \"The most ancient\nhistories are those of Gods who became incarnate in order to govern\nmankind. All those fables are the same in spirit, and sprang up\neverywhere from confused ideas, which have universally prevailed among\nmankind,--that Gods formerly descended upon earth.\"\n\nNow, we ask the Christian reader,--and it will be the first query\nof every man whose religious faith has not made shipwreck of his\nreason,--\"What does all this mean? How are you going to sustain the\ndeclaration that Jesus Christ was the only son and sent of God, in\nview of these historic facts? Where are the superior credentials of his\nclaim? How will you prove his apparently legendary history (that is, the\nmiraculous portion of his history) to be real, and the others false?\"\nWe boldly aver it cannot be done. Please answer these questions, or\nrelinquish your doctrine of the divinity of Jesus Christ.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XXXIX. THE SCRIPTURAL VIEW OF CHRIST'S DIVINITY.\n\nTHE monstrous scientific paradox (as coming ages will regard it)\ncomprehended in the conception of an almighty, omnipresent, and infinite\nBeing, \"the Creator of innumerable worlds,\" (\"by him [Christ] were all\nthings made that were made,\" John i. 3-10), being born of a frail and\nfinite woman, as taught by both the oriental and Christian religion, is\nso exceedingly shocking to every rational mind, which has not been sadly\nwarped, perverted, and coerced into the belief by early psychological\ninfluence, that we would naturally presume that those who, on the\nassumption of the remotest possibility of its truth, should venture\nto put forth a doctrine so glaringly unreasonable and so obviously\nuntenable, would of course vindicate it and establish it by the\nstrongest arguments and by the most unassailable and most irrefragable\nproofs; and that in setting forth a doctrine so manifestly at war with\nevery law and analogy of nature and every principle of science, no\nlanguage should have been used, nor the slightest admission made,\nthat could possibly lead to the slightest degree of suspicion that the\noriginal authors and propagators of this doctrine had either any doubt\nof the truth of the doctrine themselves, or were wanting in the most\nample, the most abundant proof to sustain it. No language, no text,\nnot a word, not a syllable should have been used making the most remote\nconcession damaging to the validity of the doctrine, so that not \"the\nshadow of a shade of doubt\" could be left on any mind of its truth.\nOmnipotent indeed should be the logic, and irresistible the proof,\nin support of a thesis or a doctrine which so squarely confronts and\ncontradicts all the observation, all the experience, the whole range\nof scientific knowledge, and the common sense of mankind. How startling\nthen, to every devout and honest professor of the Christian faith ought\nto be the recent discovery of the fact, that the great majority of the\ntexts having any bearing upon the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus\nChrist,--a large majority of the passages in the very book on which the\ndoctrine is predicated, and which is acknowledged as the sole warranty\nfor such a belief,--are actually at variance with the doctrine, and\nactually amount to its virtual denial and overthrow. For we find, upon\na critical examination of the matter, that at least three-fourths of the\ntexts, both in the Gospels and Epistles, which relate to the divinity\nof Christ, specifically or by implication either teach a different and\na contrary doctrine, or make concessions entirely fatal to it, by\ninvesting him with finite human qualities utterly incompatible with the\ncharacter and attributes of a divine or infinite Being. How strange,\nthen, how superlatively strange, that millions should yet hold to such\na strange \"freak of nature,\" such a dark relic of oriental heathenism,\nsuch a monstrously foolish and childish superstition, as that which\nteaches the infinite Creator and \"Upholder of the universe\" could\nbe reduced so near to nonentity, as was required to pass through the\nordinary stages of human generation, human birth, and human parturition,\n--a puerile notion which reason, science, nature, philosophy, and common\nsense, proclaim to be supremely absurd and self-evidently impossible,\nand which even the Scriptures fail to sustain,--a logical, scriptural\nexposition, of which we will here present a brief summary:--\n\n1. The essential attributes of a self-existing God and Creator, and\n\"Upholder of all things.\" are infinitude, omnipotence, omniscience,\nand omnipresence, and any being not possessing all these attributes to\nrepletion, or possessing any quality or characteristic in the slightest\ndegree incompatible with any one of these attributes, cannot be a God\nin a divine sense, but must of necessity be a frail, fallible, finite\nbeing.\n\n2. Jesus Christ disclaims, hundreds of times over, directly or\nimpliedly, the inherent possession of any one of these divine\nattributes.\n\n3. His evangelical biographers have invested him with the entire\ncategory of human qualities and characteristics, each one of which\nis entirely unbefitting a God, and taken together are the only\ndistinguishing characteristics by which we can know a man from a God.\n\n4. Furthermore, there issued from his own mouth various sayings and\nconcessions most fatal to the conception of his being a God.\n\n5. His devout biographers have reported various actions and movements\nin his practical life which we are compelled to regard as absolutely\nirreconcilable with the infinite majesty, lofty character, and supreme\nattributes of an almighty Being.\n\n6. These human qualities were so obvious to all who saw him and all\nwho became acquainted with him, that doubts sprang up among his own\nimmediate followers, which ultimately matured into an open avowal of\ndisbelief in his divinity in that early age.\n\n7. Upon the axiomatical principles of philosophy it is an utter and\nabsolute impossibility to unite in repletion the divine and the human in\nthe same being.\n\n8. And then Christ had a human birth.\n\n9. He was constituted in part, like human beings, of flesh and blood.\n\n10. He became, on certain occasions, \"an hungered,\" like finite beings.\n\n11. He also became thirsty (John xix. 28), like perishable mortals.\n\n12. He often slept, like mortals, and thus became \"to dumb forgetfulness\na prey.\"\n\n13. He sometimes became weary, like human beings. (See John iv. 6.)\n\n14. He was occasionally tempted, like fallible mortals. (Matt. iv. 1.)\n\n15. His \"soul became exceeding sorrowful,\" as a frail, finite being.\n(Matt. xxvi. 38.)\n\n16. He disclosed the weakness of human passion by weeping. (John xi.\n35.)\n\n17. He was originally an imperfect being, \"made perfect through\nsuffering.\" (Heb. ii. 10.)\n\n18. He \"increased in wisdom and stature\" (Luke ii. 52); therefore he\nmust have possessed finite, changeable, mortal attributes.\n\n19. And he finally died and was buried, like all perishable mortals. He\ncould not possibly, from these considerations, have been a God. It\nis utterly impracticable to associate with or comprehend, in a God of\ninfinite powers and infinite attributes, all or any of these finite\nhuman qualities.\n\n20. Dark, intellectually dark, indeed, must be that mind, and sunk,\nsorrowfully sunk in superstition, that can worship a being as the great\nomniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent \"I AM,\" who possessed all those\nqualities which were constitutionally characteristic of the pious, the\nnoble, the devout, the Godlike, yet finite and fallible Jesus, according\nto his own admissions and the representations of his own interested\nbiographers.\n\n21. The only step which the disciples of the Christian faith have made\ntoward disproving or setting aside these arguments, objections, and\ndifficulties, is that of assigning the incarnate Jesus a double or\ntwofold nature--the amalgamation of the human and divine; a postulate\nand a groundless assumption, which we have proved and demonstrated by\nthirteen arguments, which we believe to be unanswerable, is not only\nabsurd, illogical, and impossible, but foolish and ludicrous in the\nhighest degree. (See vol. ii.)\n\n22. This senseless hypothesis, and every other assumption and argument\nmade use of by the professors of the Christian faith to vindicate their\nfavorite dogma of the divinity of Jesus, we have shown to be equally\napplicable to the demigods of the ancient heathen, more than twenty\nof whom were invested with the same combination of human and divine\nqualities which the followers and worshippers of Jesus claim for him.\n\n23. Testimony of the Father against the divinity of the Son. The Father\nutterly precludes the Son from any participation in the divine essence,\nor any claim in the Godhead, by such declarations as the following: \"I\nam Jehovah, and beside me there is no Savior.\" (Isaiah xliii. 11.) How,\nthen, we would ask, can Jesus Christ be the Savior? \"I, Jehovah, am thy\nSavior and thy Redeemer.\" Then Christ can be neither the Savior nor\nRedeemer. \"There is no God else beside me, a just God and a Savior;\nthere is none beside me.\" (Isaiah xiv. 21.) So the Father virtually\ndeclares, according to \"the inspired prophet Isaiah,\" that the Son, in a\ndivine sense, cannot be either God, Savior, or Redeemer. Again, \"I am\nJehovah, thy God, and thou shalt not acknowledge a God beside me.\"\n(Hosea xiii. 4.) Here Christ is not only by implication cut off from the\nGodhead, but positively prohibited from being worshipped as God. And\nthus the testimony of the Father disproves and sets aside the divinity\nof the Son.\n\n24. Testimony of the mother. When Mary found, after a long search,\nher son Jesus in the temple, disputing with the doctors, and chided or\nreproved him for staying from home without the consent of his parents,\nand declared, \"thy father and I sought thee, sorrowing\" (Luke ii. 48),\nshe proclaimed a twofold denial of his divinity. In the first place it\ncannot be possible that she regarded her son Jesus as \"that awful Being,\nbefore whom e'en the devout saints bow in trembling fear,\" when she used\nsuch language and evinced such a spirit as she did. \"Why hast thou thus\ndealt with us?\" (Luke ii. 48) is her chiding language. And then, when\nshe speaks of Joseph as his father, \"thy father and I,\" she issues a\ndeclaration against his divinity which ought to be regarded as settling\nthe question forever. For who could know better than the mother, or\nrather, who could know but the mother, who the father of the child Jesus\nwas? And as she acknowledges it was Joseph, she thus repudiates the\nstory of the immaculate conception, which constitutes the whole basis\nfor the claim of his divinity. Hence the testimony of the mother, also,\ndisproves his title to the Godhead.\n\n25. Testimony or disclaimer of the Son. We will show by a specific\ncitation of twenty-five texts that there is not one attribute\ncomprehended in or peculiar to a divine and infinite Being, but that\nChrist rejects as applicable to himself--that he most conclusively\ndisclaims every attribute of a divine Being, both by precept and\npractice, and often in the most explicit language.\n\n26. By declaring, \"The Son can do nothing of himself\" (John v. 19),\nhe most emphatically disclaims the attribute of omnipotence. For an\nomnipotent Being can need no aid, and can accept of none.\n\n27. When he acknowledged and avowed his ignorance of the day of\njudgment, which must be presumed to be the most important event in the\nworld's history, he disclaimed the attribute of omniscience. \"Of that\nday and hour knoweth no man, neither the Son, but the Father only.\"\n(Matt. xxiv. 36.) Now, as an omniscient Being must possess all\nknowledge, his avowed ignorance in this case is a confession he was not\nomniscient, and hence not a God.\n\n28. And when he declares, \"I am glad for your sakes I was not there\" (at\nthe grave of Lazarus), he most distinctly disavows being omnipresent,\nand thus denies to himself another essential attribute of an infinite\nGod.\n\n29. And the emphatic declaration, \"I live by the Father\" (John vi. 57),\nis a direct disclaimer of the attributes of self-existence; as a being\nwho lives by another cannot be self-existent, and, per consequence, not\nthe infinite God.\n\n30 He disclaims possessing infinite goodness, another essential\nattribute of a supreme divine Being. \"Why callest thou me good? there is\nnone good but one, that is God.\" (Mark x. 18.)\n\n31. He disclaim divine honors, and directed them to the father. \"I honor\nmy Father.\" (John viii. 49.) \"I receive not honor from men.\" (John v.\n41.)\n\n32. He recommended supreme worship to the Father, and not to himself.\n\"The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth.\"\n(John iv. 21.)\n\n33. He ascribed supreme dominion to the Father. \"Thine is the kingdom,\nand the power, and the glory forever.\" (Matt. vi. 13.)\n\n34. It will be seen, from the foregoing text, that Christ also\nacknowledges that the kingdom is the Father's. A God without a kingdom\nwould be a ludicrous state of things.\n\n35. He conceded supreme authority to the Father.\n\n\"My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.\" (John vii. 16.)\n\n36. He considered the Father as the supreme protector and preserver of\neven his own disciples. \"I pray that thou shouldst keep them from the\nevil.\" (John xvii. 15.) What, omnipotence not able to protect his own\ndisciples?\n\n37. In fine, he humbly acknowledged that his power, his will, his\nministry, his mission, his authority, his works, his knowledge, and his\nvery life, were all from, and belonged to and were under the control of,\nthe Father. \"I can do nothing of myself;\" \"I came to do the will of him\nthat sent me.\" \"The Father that dwelleth within me, he doeth the work,\"\n&c. \"A God within a God,\" is an old pagan Otaheitan doctrine.\n\n38. He declared that even spiritual communion was the work of the\nFather. (See John vi. 45.)\n\n39. He acknowledged himself controlled by the Father. (See John v. 30.)\n\n40. He acknowledged his entire helplessness and dependence on the\nFather. \"The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father\ndo.\" (John v. 19.)\n\n41. He acknowledged that even his body was the work of his Father; in\nother words, that he was dependent on his Father for his physical life.\n(See Heb. xvi. 5.)\n\n42. And more than all, he not only called the Father \"the only true God\"\n(John xvii. 3), but calls him \"my Father and my God.\" (John xx. 17.)\nNow, it would be superlative nonsense to consider a being himself a\nGod, or the God, who could use such language as is here ascribed to the\nhumble Jesus. This text, this language, is sufficient of itself to\nshow that Christ could not have laid any claim to the Godhead on any\noccasion, unless we degrade him to the charge of the most palpable and\nshameful contradiction.\n\n43. He uniformly directed his disciples to pray, not to him, but the\nFather. (See Matt. vi. 6.)\n\n44. On one occasion, as we have cited the proof (in Matt. xi. 11), he\neven acknowledged John the Baptist to be greater than he; while it\nmust be patent to every reader that no man could be greater than the\nalmighty, supreme Potentate of heaven and earth, in any sense whatever.\n\n45. Testimony of the disciples. Another remarkable proof of the human\nsireship of Jesus is, that one of his own disciples--ay, one of the\nchosen twelve, selected by him as being endowed with a perfect knowledge\nof his character, mission, and origin--this witness, thus posted and\nthus authorized, proclaims, in unequivocal language, that Jesus was the\nson of Joseph. Hear the language of Philip addressed to Nathanael.\n\"We have found him of whom Moses, in the law and the prophets, did\nwrite--Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.\" (John i. 45.) No language\ncould be more explicit, no declaration more positive, that Jesus was the\nson of Joseph. And no higher authority could be adduced to settle the\nquestion, coming as it does from \"headquarters.\" And what will, or\nwhat can, the devout stickler for the divinely paternal origin of Jesus\nChrist do with such testimony? It is a clincher which no sophistry can\nset aside, no reasoning can grapple with, and no logic overthrow.\n\n46. His disciples, instead of representing him as being \"the only true\nGod,\" often speak of him in contradistinction to God.\n\n47. They never speak of him as the God Christ Jesus, but as \"the man\nChrist Jesus.\" ( 1 Tim. ii. 5.) \"Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of\nGod.\" (Acts ii. 23.) It would certainly be blasphemy to speak of the\nSupreme Being as \"a man approved of God.\" Christian reader, reflect upon\nthis text. \"By that man whom he (die Father) hath ordained\" (Acts xvii.\n3), by the assumption of the Godhead of Christ, we would be presented\nwith the double or twofold solecism, 1st. Of God being \"ordained\" by\nanother God; and 2d. That of his being blasphemously called a \"man.\"\n\n48. Paul's declaration has been cited, that \"unto us there is but one\nGod--the Father.\" ( 1 Cor. iv. 8. ) Now, it is plain to common sense,\nthat if there is but one God, and that God is comprehended in the\nFather, then Christ is entirely excluded from the Godhead.\n\n49. If John's declaration be true, that \"no man hath seen God at any\ntime\" (John iv. 12), then the important question arises, How could\nChrist be God, as he was seen by thousands of men, and seen hundreds of\ntimes?\n\n50. God the Father is declared to be the \"One,\" \"the Holy One,\" \"the\nonly One,\" &c., more than one hundred times, as if purposely to exclude\nthe participation of any other being in the Godhead.\n\n51. This one, this only God, is shown to be the Father alone in more\nthan four thousand texts, thirteen hundred and twenty-six of which are\nfound in the New Testament.\n\n52. More than fifty texts have been found which declare, either\nexplicitly or by implication, that God the Father has no equal, which\neffectually denies or shuts out the divine equality of the Son. \"To whom\nwill ye liken me, or shall I be equal with, saith the holy One.\" (Isaiah\nxl. 25.)\n\n53. Christ in the New Testament is called \"man,\" and \"the Son of\nman,\" eighty-four times,--egregious and dishonorable misnomers, most\ncertainly, to apply to a supreme and infinite Deity. On the other hand,\nhe is called God but three times, and denominates himself \"the Son of\nGod\" but once, and that rather obscurely.\n\n54. The Father is spoken of, in several instances, as standing in the\nrelation of God to the Son, as \"the God of our Lord Jesus Christ\" (Acts\niii. 2.) \"Ye are Christ's, and Christ is Gods.\" (i Cor. xi. 3.) Now,\nthe God of a God is a polytheistic, heathen conception; and 1 no\nmeaning or interpretation, as we have shown, can be I forced upon such\ntexts as these, that will not admit a plurality of Gods, if we admit\nthe titles as applicable to Christ, or that his scriptural biographers\nintend to apply such a title in a superior or supreme sense.\n\n55. Many texts make Christ the mere tool, agent, image, servant, or\nrepresentative of God, as Christ, \"the image of God\" (Heb. i. 3),\nChrist, the appointed of God (Heb. iii. 1), Christ, \"the servant of God\"\n(Matt. xii. | 18), &c. To consider a being thus spoken of as himself the\nsupreme God, is, as we have demonstrated, the very climax of absurdity\nand nonsense. To believe \"the servant of God\" is God himself,--that is,\nthe servant of himself,--and that God and his \"image\" are the same, is\nto descend within one step of buffoonery.\n\n56. And then it has been ascertained that there are more than three\nhundred texts which declare, either expressly or by implication,\nChrist's subordination to and dependence on the Father, as, \"I can do\nnothing of myself;\" \"Not mine, but his that sent me;\" \"I came to do the\nwill of him that sent me\" (John iv. 34); \"I seek the will of my Father,\"\n&c.\n\n57. And more than one hundred and fifty texts make the Son inferior to\nthe Father, as \"the Son knoweth not, but the Father does\" (Mark viii.\n32); \"My Father is greater than I;\" \"The Son can do nothing of himself\"\n(John v. 19), &c.\n\n58. There are many divine titles applied to the Father which are never\nused in reference to the Son, as \"Jehovah,\" \"The Most High,\" \"God\nAlmighty,\" \"The Almighty,\" &c.\n\nOn the other hand, those few divine epithets or titles which are used in\napplication to Jesus Christ, as Lord, God, Savior, Redeemer,\nIntercessor, &c., it has been shown were all used prior to the birth of\nChrist, in application to beings known and acknowledged to be men, and\nsome of them are found so applied in the bible itself; as, for example,\nMoses is called a God in two instances, as we have shown, and cited the\nproof (in Ex. iv. 16, vii. 1), while the title of Lord is applied to men\nat this day, even in Christian countries. And instances have been cited\nin the bible of the term Savior being applied to men, both in the\nsingular and plural numbers. (See 2 Kings xiii. 5, and Neh. ix. 27.)\nSeeing, then, that the most important divine titles which the writers of\nthe New Testament have applied to Jesus were previously used in\napplication to men, known and admitted to be such, it is therefore at\nonce evident that those titles do nothing toward proving him to be the\nGreat Divine Being, as the modern Christian world assume him to be, even\nif we base the argument wholly on scriptural grounds. While, on the\nother hand, we have demonstrated it to be an absolute impossibility to\napply with any propriety or any sense to a divine infinite omnipotent\nBeing those finite human qualities which are so frequently used with\nreference to Jesus throughout the New Testament. And hence, even if we\nshould suppose or concede that the writers of the New Testament did\nreally believe him to be the great Infinite Spirit, or the almighty,\nomnipotent God,'we must conclude they were mistaken, from their own\nlanguage, from their own description of him, as well as his own virtual\ndenial and rejection of such a claim, when he applied to himself, as he\ndid in nine cases out of ten, strictly finite human qualities and human\ntitles (as we have shown), wholly incompatible with the character of an\ninfinite divine Being. We say, from the foregoing considerations, if the\nprimitive disciples of Jesus did really believe him to be the great\nInfinite, both their descriptions of him and his description or\nrepresentation of himself, would amply and most conclusively prove that\nthey were mistaken. At least we are compelled to admit that there is\neither an error in applying divine titles to Jesus, or often an error in\ndescribing his qualities and powers, by himself and his original\nfollowers, as there is no compatibility or agreement between the two.\nDivine titles to such a being as they represent him to be, would be an\negregious misnomer. We say, then, that it must be clearly and\nconclusively evident to every unbiased mind, from evidence furnished by\nthe bible itself, that if the divine titles applied to Jesus were\nintended to have a divine significance, then they are misapplied. Yet we\nwould not here conclude an intentional misrepresentation in the case,\nbut simply a mistake growing out of a misconception, and the very\nlimited childish conception, of the nature, character, and attributes\nof the \"great positive Mind,\" so universally prevalent in that\nsemi-barbarous age, and the apparently total ignorance of the\ndistinguishing characteristics which separate the divine and the human.\nWe will illustrate: some children, on passing through a wild portion of\nthe State of Maine recently, reported they encountered a bear; and to\nprove they could not be mistaken in the animal, they described it as\nbeing a tall, slight-built animal, with long slender legs, of yellowish\nauburn hue, a short, white, bushy tail, cloven feet, large branchy\nhorns, &c. Now, it will be seen at once that, while their description of\nthe animal is evidently in the main correct, they had simply mistaken a\ndeer for a bear, and hence misnamed the animal.\n\nIn like manner we must conclude, from the repeated instances in which\nChrist's biographers have ascribed to him all the foibles, frailties,\nand finite qualities and characteristics of a human being, that if they\nhave in any instance called him a God in a divine sense, it is an\negregious misnomer. Their description of him makes him a man, and but a\nman, whatever may have been their opinion with respect to the propriety\nof calling him a God. And if the two do not harmonize, the former must\nrule the judgment in all cases. The truth is, the Jewish founders of\nChristianity entertained such a low, narrow, contracted, and mean\nopinion of Deity and the infinite distinction and distance between the\ndivine and the human, that their theology reduced him to a level with\nman; and hence they usually described him as a man.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XL. A METONYMIC VIEW OF THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST\n\nIF Jesus Christ were truly God, or if there existed such a co-equal\nand co-essential oneness between the Father and the Son that they\nconstituted but one being or divine essence, then what is true of one\nis true of the other, and a change of names and titles from one to the\nother cannot alter the sense of the text. Let us, then, substitute the\ntitles found applied to the Son in the New Testament, to the Father, and\nobserve the effect:--\n\n\"My Son is greater than I.\" (John vii. 28.)\n\n\"God can do nothing of himself.\" (John v. 19.)\n\n\"I must be about my Son's business.\" (Luke ii. 49.)\n\n\"The kingdom of heaven is not mine to give, but the Son's.\" (Matt. xx.\n23.)\n\n\"I am come in my Son's name, and ye receive me not\" (John v. 43.)\n\n\"God cried, Jesus, why hast thou forsaken me?\" (Matt. xiii. 28.)\n\n\"No man hath seen Jesus at any time.\" (1 John i. 5-)\n\n\"Jesus created all things by his Son.\" (Eph. iii. 9.)\n\n\"God sat down (in heaven) at the right hand of Jesus.\" (Luke xxii. 69.)\n\n\"There is one Jesus, one mediator between Jesus and men.\" (Gal. iii.\n20.)\n\n\"Jesus gave his only begotten Father.\" (1 John iv. 9)\n\n\"God knows not the hour, but Jesus does.\" (Mark viii. 32.)\n\n\"God is the servant of Jesus.\" (Mark xii. 18.)\n\n\"God is ordained by Jesus.\" (Acts xvii. 31.)\n\n\"The head of God is Christ.\" (Eph. i. 3.)\n\n\"We have an advocate with Jesus, God the righteous.\" (1 John ii. 1.)\n\n\"Jesus gave all power to God.\" (Matt, xxviii. 18.)\n\n\"God abode all night in prayer to Jesus.\" (Luke vi. 12.)\n\n\"God came down from heaven to do the will of Jesus.\" (John vi. 38.)\n\n\"Jesus has made the Father his high priest.\" (Heb. x. 24.)\n\n\"Last of all, the Son sent the Father.\" (Matt. xxi. 39.)\n\n\"Jesus will save the world by that God whom he hath ordained.\"\n\n\"Jesus is God of the Father.\" (John xx. 17.)\n\n\"Jesus hath exalted God, and given him a more excellent name.\" (Phil.\nii. 9.)\n\n\"Jesus hath made God a little lower than the angels.\" (Heb. ii. 9.)\n\n\"God can do nothing except what he seeth Jesus do.\" (John v. 19.)\n\nNow, the question arises, Is the above representation a true one? Most\ncertainly it must be, if Jesus and the Father are but one almighty\nBeing. A change of names and titles cannot alter the truth nor the\nsense.\n\nTo say that Chief Justice Chase has gone south; Secretary Chase has gone\nsouth; Governor Chase has gone south; Ex-Senator Chase has gone south,\nor Salmon P. Chase has gone south, are affirmations equally true and\nequally sensible, because they all have reference to the same being; the\ncase is to plain to need argument.\n\nThe above reversal of names and titles of Jesus and the Father may sound\nvery unpleasant and rather grating to Christ-adoring Christians, simply\nbecause it is the transposition of the tides of two very scripturally\ndissimilar beings, instead of being, as generally taught by orthodox\nChristians, \"one in essence, one in mind, one in body or being, and one\nin name,\" as the Rev. Mr. Barnes affirms. Most self-evidently false\nis his statement, based solely on scriptural ground. If Jesus is \"very\nGod,\" and there is but one God, then the foregoing transposition cannot\nmar the sense nor altar the truth of one text quoted.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XLI. THE PRECEPTS AND PRACTICAL LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST; HIS TWO\nHUNDRED ERRORS\n\nTHE exaltation of men to the character and homage of divine beings\nhas always had the effect to draw a vail over their errors and\nimperfections, so as to render them imperceptible to those who worship\nthem as Gods. This is true of nearly all the deified men of antiquity,\nwho were adored as incarnate divinities, among which may be included\nthe Christian's man-God, Jesus Christ. The practice of the followers of\nthese Gods has been, when an error was pointed out in their teachings,\nbrought to light by the progress of science and general intelligence,\nto bestow upon the text some new and unwarranted meaning, entirely\nincompatible with its literal reading, or else to insist with a godly\nzeal on the correctness of the sentiment inculcated by the text, and\nthus essay to make error pass for truth. In this way millions of the\ndisciples of' these Gods have been misled and blinded, and made to\nbelieve by their religious teachers and their religious education, that\neverything taught by their assumed-to-be divine exemplars is perfect\ntruth, in perfect harmony with science, sense, and true morals. Indeed,\nthe perversion of the mind and judgment by a religious education has\nbeen in many cases carried to such an extreme as to cause their devout\nand prejudiced followers either to entirely overlook and ignore their\nerroneous teachings, or to magnify them into God-given truths, and thus,\nas before stated, clothe error with the livery of truth. This state of\nthings, it has long been noticed by unprejudiced minds, exists amongst\nthe millions of professed believers in the divinity of Jesus Christ.\nHence the errors, both in his moral lessons and his practical life, have\npassed from age to age unnoticed, because his pious and awe-stricken\nfollowers, having been taught that he was a divine teacher, have assumed\nthat his teachings must all be true; and hence, too, have instituted no\nscrutiny to determine their truth or falsity. But we will now proceed to\nshow that the progress of' science and general intelligence has brought\nto light many errors, not only in his teachings, but in his practical\nlife also. In enumerating them, we will arrange them under the head\n\n\nMORAL AND RELIGIOUS ERRORS.\n\n1. The first moral precept in the teachings of Christ, which we will\nbring to notice, is one of a numerous class, which may very properly\nbe arranged under the head of Moral Extremism. We find many of his\nadmonitions of this character. Nearly everything that is said is\noversaid, carried to extremes--thus constituting an overwrought,\nextravagant system of morality, impracticable in its requisitions; as,\nfor example, \"Take no thought for the morrow.\" (Matt, v.) If the spirit\nof this injunction were carried out in practical life, there would be\nno grain sown and no seed planted in spring, no reaping done in harvest,\nand no crop garnered in autumn; and the result would be universal\nstarvation in less than twelve months. But, fortunately for society, the\nChristian world have laid this positive injunction upon the table under\nthe rule of \"indefinite postponement.\"\n\n2. Christ's assumed-to-be most important requisition is found in the\ninjunction, \"Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and his righteousness,\nand all else shall be added unto you.\" (Matt. vi. 33.) His early\nfollowers understood by this injunction, and doubtless understood it\ncorrectly, that they were to spend their lives in religious devotion,\nand neglect the practical duties of life, leaving \"Providence\" to take\ncare of their families--a course of life which reduced many of them to\nthe point of starvation.\n\n3. The disciple of Christ is required, \"when smitten on one cheek,\" to\nturn the other also that is, when one cheek is pommeled into a jelly by\nsome vile miscreant or drunken wretch, turn the other, to be smashed up\nin like manner. This is an extravagant requisition, which none of his\nmodern disciples even attempt to observe.\n\n4. \"Resist not evil\" (Matt. v. 34) breathes forth a kindred spirit. This\ninjunction requires you to stand with your hands in your pocket while\nbeing maltreated so cruelly and unmercifully that the forfeiture of\nyour life may be the consequence--at least Christ's early followers so\nunderstood it.\n\n5. The disciple of Christ is required, when his cloak is formally\nwrested from him, to give up his coat also. (See Matt, v.) And to carry\nout the principle, if the marauder demands it, he must next give up his\nboots, then his shirt, and thus strip himself of all his garments, and\ngo naked. This looks like an invitation and bribe to robbery.\n\n6. \"Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth.\" (Matt. vi. 19.) This\nis another positive command of Christ, which the modern Christian world,\nby common consent, have laid on the table under the rule of \"indefinite\npostponement,\" under the conviction that the wants of their families and\nthe exigencies of sickness and old age cannot be served if they should\nlive up to such an injunction.\n\n7. \"Sell all that thou hast,... and come and follow me,\" is another\ncommand which bespeaks more piety than wisdom, as all who have attempted\nto comply with it have reduced their families to beggary and want.\n\n8. \"If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.\"\nThen he must hate it, as there are but the two principles, and \"from\nhate proceed envy, strife, evil surmisings, and persecution.\" Evidently\nthe remedy in this case for \"worldly-mindedness\" is worse than the\ndisease.\n\n9. \"He that cometh to me, and hateth not father, mother, brother, and\nsister, &c., cannot be my disciple.\" (Luke xiv. 26). This breathes forth\nthe same spirit as the last text quoted above. Many learned expositions\nhave been penned by Christian writers to make it appear, that hate in\nthis case does not mean hate. But certainly it would be a slander upon\ninfinite wisdom to leave it to be inferred that he could not say or\n\"inspire\" his disciples to say exactly what he meant, and to say it so\nplainly as to leave no possibility of being misunderstood, or leave any\nground for dispute about the meaning.\n\n10. \"Rejoice and be exceeding glad\" when persecuted. (Matt. v. 4.) Now,\nas a state of rejoicing is the highest condition of happiness that can\nbe realized, such advice must naturally prompt the religious zealot\nto court persecution, in order to obtain complete happiness, and\nconsequently to pursue a dare-devil life to provoke persecution.\n\n11. \"Whosoever shall seek to save his life, shall lose it,\" &c. (Luke\nxvii. 33.) Here is displayed the spirit of martyrdom which has made\nmillions reckless of life, and goaded on the frenzied bigot to seek the\nfiery fagot and the halter. We regard it as another display of religious\nfanaticism.\n\n12. \"Ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.\" (Matt. x. 12.)\nHow repulsive must have been their doctrines or their conduct! No\nsensible religion could excite the universal hatred of mankind. For it\nwould contain something adapted to the moral, religious, or spiritual\ntaste of some class or portion of society, and hence make it and its\ndisciples loved instead of hated. And then how could they be \"hated of\nall men,\" when not one man in a thousand ever heard of them? Here is\nmore of the extravagance of religious enthusiasm.\n\n13. \"Shake off the dust of your feet\" against those who cannot see\nthe truth or utility of your doctrines. (Matt. x. 14.) Here Christ\nencourages in his disciples a spirit of contempt for the opinions of\nothers calculated to make them \"hated.\" A proper regard for the rules of\ngood-breeding would have forbidden such rudeness toward strangers for a\nmere honest difference of opinion.\n\n14. \"Take nothing for your journey, neither staff, nor scrip, nor purse\"\n(Mark vi. 8); that is \"sponge on your friends, and force yourselves on\nyour enemies,\" the latter class of which seem to have been much the most\nnumerous. A preacher who should attempt to carry out this advice at the\npresent day would be stopped at the first toll-gate, and compelled to\nreturn. Here is more violation of the rules of good-breeding, and the\ncommon courtesies of civilized life.\n\n15. \"Go and teach all nations,\" &c. Why issue an injunction that could\nnot possibly be carried out? It never has been, and never will be,\nexecuted, for three-fourths of the human race have never yet heard of\nChristianity. It was not, therefore, a mark of wisdom, or a superior\nmind, to issue such an injunction.\n\n16. \"And he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that\nbelieveth not shall be damned.\" What intolerance, bigotry, relentless\ncruelty, and ignorance of the science of mind are here displayed! No\nphilosopher would give utterance to, or indorse such a sentiment.\nIt assumes that belief is a creature of the will, and that a man\ncan believe anything he chooses, which is wide of the truth. And the\nassumption has been followed by persecution, misery, and bloodshed.\n\n17. \"All things whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall\nreceive.\" (Matt. xxi. 22.) Here is an entire negation of natural law in\nthe necessity of physical labor as a means to procure the comforts of\nlife. When anything is wanted in the shape of food or raiment, it is\nto be obtained, according to this text, by going down on your knees\nand asking God to bestow it. But no Christian ever realized \"all things\nwhatsoever asked for in prayer,\" thought \"believing with all his heart\"\nhe should obtain it. The author knows, by his own practical experience,\nthat this declaration is not true. This promise has been falsified\nthousands of times by thousands of praying Christians.\n\n18. \"Be not called rabbi.\" \"Call no man your father.\" (Matt, xxiii.)\nThe Christian world assume that much of what Christ taught is mere idle\nnonsense, or the incoherent utterings of a religious fanatic; for\nthey pay no more practical attention to it than the barking of a dog.\nAnd here is one command treated in this manner: \"Call no man father.\"\nWhere is the Christian who refuses to call his earthly sire a father?\n\n19. \"Call no man master.\" (Matt, xxiii.) And yet mister, which is the\nsame thing, is the most common title in Christendom.\n\n20. He who enunciates the two words, \"'Thou fool.' shall be in danger of\nhell fire.\" (Matt, xxii.) Mercy! Who, then, can be saved? For there is\nprobably not a live Christian in the world who has not called somebody a\n\"fool,\" when he knew him to be such, and could not with truthfulness be\ncalled anything else. Here, then, is another command universally ignored\nand \"indefinitely postponed.\"\n\n21. \"Swear not at all, neither by heaven nor earth.\" (Matt, v.) And yet\nno Christian refuses to indulge in legal, if not profane, swearing which\nthe text evidently forbids.\n\n22. \"Men ought always to pray.\" (Luke xviii.) No time to be allowed for\neating or sleeping. More religious fanaticism.\n\n23. \"Whosoever will be chief among you let him be your servant\" (Matt.\nxx. 27); that is, no Christian professor shall be a president, governor,\nmajor-general, deacon, or priest. Another command laid on the table.\n\n24. \"Love your enemies.\" (Matt. v. 44.) Then what kind of feeling should\nwe cultivate toward friends? And how much did he love his enemies when\nhe called them \"fools,\" \"liars,\" \"hypocrites,\" \"generation of vipers,\"\n&c.? And yet he is held up as \"our\" example in love, meekness,\nand forbearance. But no man ever did love an enemy. It is a moral\nimpossibility, as much so as to love bitter or nauseating food.\nThe advice of the Roman slave Syrus is indicative of more sense and\nwisdom--\"Treat your enemy kindly, and thus make him a friend.\"\n\n25. We are required to forgive an enemy four hundred and ninety times;\nthat is, \"seventy times seven.\" (Matt, vii.) Another outburst of\nreligious enthusiasm; another proof of an overheated imagination.\n\n26. \"Be ye perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.\" (Matt. v.\n48.) Here is more of the religious extravagance of a mind uncultured\nby science. For it is self-evident that human beings can make no\napproximation to divine perfection. The distance between human\nimperfection and a perfect God is, and ever must be, infinite.\n\n27. Christ commended those who \"became eunuchs for the kingdom of\nheaven's sake\" (Matt. xix. 12)--a custom requiring a murderous,\nself-butchering process; destructive of the energies of life and the\nvigor of manhood, and rendering the subject weak, effeminate, and\nmopish, and unfit for the business of life. It is a low species of\npiety, and discloses a lamentable lack of a scientific knowledge of the\ntrue functions of the sexual organs on the part of Jesus.\n\n28. Christ also encouraged his disciples to \"pluck out the eye,\" and\n\"cut off the hand,\" as a means of rendering it impossible to perpetrate\nevil with those members. And we would suggest, if such advice is\nconsistent with sound reasoning, the head also should be cut off, as a\nmeans of more effectually carrying out the same principle. Such advice\nnever came from the mouth of a philosopher. It is a part of Christ's\nsystem of extravagant piety.\n\n29. He also taught the senseless, oriental tradition of \"the\nunpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost\"--a fabulous being who figured\nmore anciently in the history of various countries. (See Chapter\nXXII.) No philosopher or man of science could harbor such childish\nmisconceptions as are embodied in this tradition, which neither\ndescribes the being nor explains the nature of the sin.\n\n30. We find many proofs, in Christ's Gospel history, that he believed\nin the ancient heathen tradition which taught that disease is caused by\ndemons and evil spirits. (See Luke vii. 21, and viii. 2.)\n\n31. Many cases are reported of his relieving the obsessed by casting out\nthe diabolical intruders, in imitation of the oriental custom long in\nvogue in various countries, by which he evinced a profound ignorance of\nthe natural causes of disease.\n\n32. Christ also taught the old pagan superstition that \"God is a God of\nanger,\" while modern science teaches that it would be as impossible for\na God of perfect and infinite attributes to experience the feeling of\nanger as to commit suicide; and recent discoveries in physiology prove\nthat anger is a species of suicide, and that it is also a species of\ninsanity. Hence an angry God would be an insane God--an omnipotent\nlunatic, \"ruling the kingdom of heaven,\" which would make heaven a\nlunatic asylum, and rather a dangerous place to live.\n\n33. And Christ's injunction to \"fear God\" also implies that he is an\nangry being. (See Luke xxiii. 40.) But y past history proves that \"the\nfear of God\" has always been the great lever of priestcraft, and the\nmost paltry and pitiful motive that ever moved the human mind. It has\nparalyzed the noblest intellects, crushed the elasticity of youth, and\naugmented the hesitating indecision of old age, and finally filled the\nworld with cowardly, trembling slaves. No philosopher will either love\nor worship a God he fears. \"The fear of the Lord\" is a very ancient\nheathen superstition.\n\n34. The inducement Christ holds out for leading a virtuous life by\nthe promise of \"Well done, thou good and faithful servant,\" bespeaks a\nchildish ignorance of the nature of the human mind and the true science\nof life. It ranks with the promise of the nurse of sugar-plums to the\nboy if he would keep his garments unsoiled. (For the remainder of the\ntwo hundred errors of Christ, see Vol. II.)\n\nThere are many other errors found in the precepts and practical life\nof Jesus Christ (which we are compelled to omit an exposition of\nhere), such as his losing his temper, and abusing the money-changers by\noverthrowing their counting-table, and expelling them from the temple\nwith a whip of cords when engaged in a lawful' and laudable business;\nhis getting mad at and cursing the fig tree; his dooming Capernaum\nto hell in a fit of anger; his being deceived by two of his disciples\n(Peter and Judas), which prompted him to call them devils; his implied\napproval of David, with his fourteen crimes and penitentiary deeds, and\nalso Abraham, with his falsehoods, polygamy, and incest, and his implied\nsanction of the Old Testament, with all its errors and numerous crimes;\nhis promise to his twelve apostles to \"sit upon the twelve thrones of\nIsrael\" in heaven, thus evincing a very limited and childish conception\nof the enjoyments of the future life; his puerile idea of sin,\nconsisting in a personal affront to a personal God; his omission to say\nanything about human freedom, the inalienable rights of man, &c.\n\n\nTHE SCIENTIFIC ERRORS OF CHRIST.\n\nThat Jesus Christ was neither a natural or moral philosopher is evident\nfrom the following facts:--\n\n1. He never made any use of the word \"philosophy.\"\n\n2. Never gave utterance to the word \"science.\"\n\n3. Never spoke of a natural law, or assigned a natural cause for\nanything. The fact that he never made use of these words now so current\nin all civilized countries, is evidence that he was totally ignorant of\nthese important branches of knowledge, the cultivation of which is now\nknown to be essential to the progress of civilization. And yet it\nis claimed his religion has been a great lever in the advancement of\ncivilization. But this is a mistake--a solemn mistake, as elsewhere\nshown. (See Chap. XLV.)\n\n4. Everything to Christ was miracle; everything was produced and\ncontrolled by the arbitrary power of an angry or irascible God.\nHe evidently had no idea of a ruling principle in nature or of the\nexistence of natural law, as controlling any event he witnessed. Hence\nhe set no bounds to anything, and recognized no limits to the possible.\nHe believed God to be a supernatural personal being, who possessed\nunlimited power, and who ruled and controlled everything by his\narbitrary will, without any law or any limitation to its exercises.\nHence he told his disciples they would have anything they prayed for in\nfaith; that by faith they could roll mountains into the sea, or bring\nto a halt the rolling billows of the mighty deep. He evidently believed\nthat the forked lightning, the out-bursting earth-shaking thunder,\nand the roaring, heaving volcano were but pliant tools or obsequious\nservants to the man of faith. And he displays no less ignorance of the\nlaws of mind than the laws of nature; thus proving him to have been\nneither a natural, moral, nor mental philosopher. He omitted to teach\nthe great moral lessons learned by human experience, of which he was\nevidently totally ignorant.\n\n5. He never taught that the practice of virtue contains its own reward.\n\n6. That the question of right and wrong of any action is to be decided\nby its effect upon the individual, or upon society.\n\n7. That no life can be displeasing to God which is useful to man.\n\n8. And he omitted to teach the most important lesson that can engage\nthe attention of man, viz.: that the great purpose of life is\nself-development.\n\n9. That no person can attain or approximate to real happiness without\nbestowing a special attention to the cultivation and exercise of all\nthe mental and physical faculties, so far as to keep them in a healthy\ncondition. None of the important lessons above named are hinted at in\nhis teachings, which, if punctually observed, would do more to advance\nthe happiness of the human race than all the sermons Christ or Chrishna\never preached, or ever taught.\n\n10. And then he taught many doctrines which are plainly contradicted by\nthe established principle of modern science, such as,--\n\n11. Diseases being produced by demons, devils, or wicked spirits. (See\nMark ix. 20.)\n\nChrist nowhere assigns a natural cause for disease, or a scientific\nexplanation for its cure.\n\n12. His rebuking a fever discloses a similar lack of scientific\nknowledge. ( See Luke iv. 39.)\n\n13. His belief in a literal hell and a lake of fire and brimstone (see\nMatt, xviii. 8) is an ancient heathen superstition science knows nothing\nabout, and has no use for.\n\n14. His belief in a personal devil also (see Matt. xvii. 88), which is\nanother oriental tradition, furnishes more sad proof of an utter want of\nscientific knowledge, as science has no place for and no use for such a\nbeing.\n\n15. Christ taught the unphilosophical doctrine of repentance, as he\ndeclared he \"came to call sinners to repentance\" (Matt. ix. 13)--a\nmental process, which consists merely in a revival of early impressions,\nand often leads a person to condemn that which is right, as well as that\nwhich is wrong. (For proof, see Chapter XLIII.)\n\n16. The doctrine of \"forgiveness,\" which Christ so often inculcated,\nis also at variance with the teachings of science, as it can do nothing\ntoward changing the nature of the act forgiven, or toward cancelling its\nprevious effects upon society. Science teaches that every crime has its\npenalty attached to it, which no act of forgiveness, by God or man, can\narrest or set aside.\n\n17. But nothing evinces, perhaps, more clearly Christ's total lack of\nscientific knowledge than his holding a man responsible for his belief,\nand condemning for disbelief, as he does in numerous instances (see Mark\nxvi. 16), for a man could as easily control the circulation of the blood\nin his veins as control his belief. Science teaches that belief depends\nupon evidence, and without it, it is impossible to believe, and with\nit, it is impossible to disbelieve. How foolish and unphilosophical,\ntherefore, to condemn for either belief or disbelief!\n\n18. The numerous cases in which Christ speaks of the heart as being\nthe seat of consciousness, instead of the brain, evinces a remarkable\nignorance of the science of mental philosophy. He speaks of an \"upright\nheart,\" \"a pure heart,\" &'c., when \"an upright liver,\" \"a pure liver,\"\nwould be as sensible, as the latter has as much to do with the character\nas the former.\n\n19. And the many cases in which he makes it meritorious to have a right\n\"faith,\" and places it above reason, and assumes it to be a voluntary\nact, shows his utter ignorance of the nature of the human mind.\n\n20. And Christ evinced a remarkable ignorance of the cause of physical\ndefects, when he told his hearers a certain man was born blind, in order\nthat he might cure him. (Matt. vii. 22.)\n\n21. And Christ's declaration, that those who marry are not worthy of\nbeing saved (see Luke xx. 34), shows that he was very ignorant of the\nnature of the sexual functions of the human system.\n\n22. Nothing could more completely demonstrate a total ignorance of the\ngrand science of astronomy than Christ's prediction of the stars falling\nto the earth. (See Luke xxi. 25.)\n\n23. And the conflagration of the world, \"the gathering of the elect,\"\nand the realization of a fancied millennium, which he several times\npredicted would take place in his time, \"before this generation pass\naway\" (Matt, xxiv. 34), proves a like ignorance, both of astronomy and\nphilosophy.\n\n24. And his cursing of the fig tree for not bearing fruit in the winter\nseason (see Matt. xxi. 20), not only proves his ignorance of the laws of\nnature, but evinces a bad temper.\n\n25. Christ indorses the truth of Noah's flood story (see Luke xvii. 27),\nwhich every person at the present day, versed in science and natural\nlaw, knows is mere fiction, and never took place.\n\nAnd numerous other errors, evincing the most profound ignorance of\nscience and natural law, might be pointed out in Christ's teachings,\nif we had space for them. It has always been alleged by orthodox\nChristendom, that Christ's teaching and moral system are so faultless as\nto challenge criticism, and so perfect as to defy improvement. But this\nis a serious mistake. For most of his precepts and moral inculcations\nwhich are not directly at war with the principles of science, or do not\ninvolve a flagrant violation of the laws of nature, are, nevertheless,\ncharacterized by a lawless and extravagant mode of expression peculiar\nto semi-savage life, and which, as it renders it impossible to reduce\nthem to practice, shows they could not have emanated from a philosopher,\nor man of science, or a man of evenly-balanced mind. They impose upon\nthe world a system of morality, pushed to such extremes that its own\nprofessed admirers do not live it out, or even attempt to do so. They\nlong ago abandoned it as an impracticable duty. We will prove this by\nenumerating most of its requisitions, and showing that they are daily\nviolated and trampled under foot by all Christendom. Where can the\nChristian professor be found who, 1. \"takes no thought for the morrow\"\nor, 2. who \"lays not up treasure on earth,\" or, at least, tries to do\nit; or, 3. who \"gives up all his property to the poor;\" or who, \"when\nhis cloak is wrested from him by a robber,\" gives up his coat also;\nor who calls no man master or mister (the most common title in\nChristendom); or who calls no man father (if he has a father); or who\ncalls no man a fool (when he knows he is a fool); or who, when one cheek\nis pommeled into a jelly by some vile miscreant or drunken wretch,\nturns the other to be battered up in the same way; or who prays without\nceasing; or who rejoices when persecuted; or who forgives an enemy four\nhundred and ninety times (70 times 7); or who manifests by his practical\nlife that he loves his enemies (the way he loves him is to report him to\nthe grand jury, or hand him over to the sheriff); or who forsakes\nhouses and land, and everything, \"for the kingdom of heaven's sake.\" No\nChristian professor lives up to these precepts, or any of them, or even\ntries to do so. To talk, therefore, of finding a practical Christian,\nwhile nearly the whole moral code of Christ is thus daily and habitually\noutraged and trampled under foot by all the churches and every one of\nthe two hundred millions of Christian professors, is bitter irony and\nsupreme solecism. We would go five hundred miles, or pay five hundred\ndollars, to see a Christian. If a man can be a Christian while openly\nand habitually violating every precept of Christ, then the word has no\nmeaning. These precepts, the Christian world finding to be impossible\nto practice, have unanimously laid upon the table under the rule of\n\"indefinite postponement.\" They are the product of a mind with an\nardent temperament, and the religious faculties developed to excess, and\nunrestrained by scientific or intellectual culture. A similar vein\nof extravagant religious duty is found in the Essenian, Budhist, and\nPythagorean systems. As Zera Colburn possessed the mathematical faculty\nto excess, and Jenny Lind the musical talent, Christ in like manner was\nall religion. And from the extreme ardor of his religious feeling, thus\nderived, sprang his extravagant notions of the duties of life. This\npeculiarity of his organization explains the whole mystery.\n\n\nCHRIST AS A MAN, AND CHRIST AS A SECTARIAN.\n\nTo every observant and unbiased mind a strange contrast must be visible\nin the practical life of Jesus Christ when viewed in his twofold\ncapacity of a man and a priest. While standing upon the broad plane of\nhumanity, with his deep sympathetic nature directed toward the poor,\nthe unfortunate, and the downtrodden, there often gushed forth from\nhis impassioned bosom the most sublime expressions of pity, and the\nstrongest outburst of commiseration for wrongs and sufferings, and\nhis noble goodness and tender love yearned with a throbbing heart to\nrelieve them. But the moment he put on the sacerdotal robe, and assumed\nthe character of a priest, that moment, if any one crossed his path by\nrefusing to yield to his requisitions of faith, or dissented from his\nreligious creed, his whole nature was seemingly changed. It was no\nlonger, \"Blessed are ye,\" but \"Cursed are ye,\" or \"Woe unto you.\" Like\nthe founders of other religious systems, he was ardent toward friends\nand bitter toward enemies, and extolled his own religion, while he\ndenounced all others. His way was the only way, and all who did not walk\nthrein, or conform thereto, were loaded with curses and imprecations,\nand all who could not accomplish the impossible mental achievement of\nbelieving everything he set forth or urged upon their credence, and\nthat, too, without evidence, were to be eternally damned. All who\nclimbed up any other way were thieves and robbers. All who professed\nfaith in any other religion than his were on the road to hell. Like the\noriental Gods, he taught that the world was to be saved through faith in\nhim and his religion. All who did not honor him were to be dishonored\nby the Father. And \"without faith (in him and his religion), it is\nimpossible to please God.\" He declared that all who were not for him\nwere against him; and all who were not on the same road are \"heathens\nand publicans.\" His disciples were enjoined to shake off the dust from\ntheir feet as a manifestation of displeasure toward those who could not\nconscientiously subscribe to their creeds and dogmas. Thus we discover\na strong vein of intolerance and sectarianism in the religion of the\notherwise, and in other respects, the kind and loving Jesus. Though\nmost benignantly kind and affectionate while moving and acting under the\ncontrolling impulses of his lofty manhood, yet when his ardent religious\nfeelings were touched, he became chafed, irritated, and sometimes\nintolerant. He then could tolerate no such thing as liberty of\nconscience, or freedom of thought, or the right to differ with him in\nreligious belief. His extremely ardent devotional nature, when roused\ninto action in defense of a stereotyped faith, eclipsed his more noble,\nlofty, and lovely traits, and often dimmed his mental vision, thus\npresenting in the same individual a strange medley, and a strange\ncontrast of the most opposite traits of character. That such a being\nshould have been considered and worshipped as a God, and for the\nvery reason that he possessed such strange, contradictory traits of\ncharacter, and often let his religion run riot with his reason, will be\nlooked upon by posterity as one of the strangest chapters in the history\nof the human race. But so it is. Extraordinary good qualities, though\nintermingled with many errors and human foibles, have deified many men.\n\nNote. One Christian writer alleges, in defense of the objectionable\nprecepts of Jesus Christ, that \"He taught some errors in condescension\nto the ignorance of the people.\" If this be true, that he taught both\ntruth and falsehood, then the question arises, How can we know which is\nwhich? By what rule can we discriminate them, as he himself furnishes\nnone? Or how are we to determine that he taught truth at all? And then\nthis plea would account for and excuse all the errors found in the\nteachings of the oriental Gods. If it will apply in one case, it will in\nthe other. And thus it proves too much.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XLII. CHRIST AS A SPIRITUAL MEDIUM\n\nTHERE are many incidents related in the life of Christ, which, when\ncritically examined, furnish abundant evidence that he was what is now\nknown as a spiritual medium. He unquestionably represented, and often\npractically exhibited, several important phases of modern mediumship.\n\n1. The many instantaneous cures which he wrought, as reported in his\nGospel narrative, performed in the same manner that \"spirit doctors\" now\nheal the sick, prove that he was an excellent \"healing medium.\"\n\n2. His declaration to Nathanael, \"When thou wast under the fig tree, I\nsaw thee,\" and his recounting to the woman of Samaria the deeds of\nher past life (acts similar to which are now performed every day by\nspiritualists), are evidence that he was also a \"clairvoyant medium.\"\n\n3. His walking on the water (if the story is true), as D. D. Home has\nfrequently, within the past few years, walked or floated on the air\nin the presence of many witnesses (including men of science, royal\npersonages, and members of parliament), entitles him to the appellation\nof a \"physical medium.\"\n\n4. And the circumstance of his pointing his disciples to the mark of\nthe spear in his side, and the print of the nails in his hands, while\namongst them as a spirit, has led many spiritualists to conclude he was\nalso a \"medium for materialization.\" His spirit was made to present the\npeculiar marks which had been inflicted upon his physical body, cases\nparallel to which are now witnessed every day by modern spiritualists.\nHundreds of cases have occurred of departed spirits presenting\nthemselves to their friends with all the peculiar marks which their\nphysical bodies had long worn while in the earth life. And the former\nphysical wounds have often been exhibited by the spirit in the same\nmanner Christ exhibited his. And thus spiritualism explains the\nphenomenon which otherwise would be entirely incredible.\n\n5. And there is yet another phase of mediumship which Christ often\nexhibited in his practical life. He claimed to have frequent intercourse\nwith some invisible being, whom he called \"the Father.\" But as modern\nscience has settled the question of the personality of God in the\nnegative, we are led to conclude that Christ, like many eminent persons\nsince his time, mistook some finite spirit for the great infinite but\nimpersonal Father spirit--though his attendant invisible companion\nwas probably a spirit of a very high order. And the great beauty and\ngrandeur of his life are exhibited by his frequent intercourse with and\ndependence upon this his \"guardian spirit.\" He declared he did nothing\nof himself, so dependent was he upon his invisible guide. And the\nstrongest proof that he had a spirit companion, which he often looked to\nfor counsel and aid, and that this was the being he called the Father,\nis furnished by the fact, that when he prayed to the Father, his\npetition was answered by an angel spirit. (See Luke xxii. 44.) And there\nis no account and no evidence of any invisible or spiritual being ever\npresenting itself to him but an angel or spirit. That he should have\nsupposed this spirit to be the great infinite Father God was very\nnatural. Thousands since, and some before his time, committed a\nsimilar mistake. The author has known several persons who had long had\nintercourse with some invisible being they supposed to be God, who have\nrecently, by the light afforded by modern spiritualism, become entirely\nconvinced that they had simply mistaken a finite spirit for the great\nInfinite Spirit. And did Christ live in our day, he would probably be\nrescued from a similar error in the same way. In conclusion, we will\nremark that it was doubtless his frequent displays of several very\nremarkable phases of spiritual mediumship that contributed much to lead\nthe people into the error of supposing him to be God. And this fact will\nyet be known.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XLIII. CONVERSION, REPENTANCE, AND \"GETTING RELIGION\" OF HEATHEN\nORIGIN\n\n\nTHEIR NUMEROUS EVILS AND ABSURDITIES.\n\nOF all the follies ever enacted or exhibited under the sun, and of all\nthe ignorance of history, science, and human nature ever displayed in\nthe history of the human race, that which stands out in bold relief,\nas pre-eminent, is the fashionable custom of conversion, or \"getting\nreligion.\" When the evidence lies all around us as thick as the fallen\nleaves of autumn, clustering on the pages of history, and proclaimed\nby every principle of mental science, that what is called conversion\nis nothing but a mental and temperamental or nervous phenomenon--a\npsychological process--how can we rank those amongst intelligent people\nwho still claim it to be \"the power of God operating upon the soul of\nthe sinner\"? Ignorance is the only plea that can acquit them of the\ncharge of imbecility. The number who daily fall victims to this priestly\ndelusion in various parts of the country may be reckoned by thousands.\nWe propose in this chapter to exhibit some of the evils and absurdities\nof this widespread delusion and religious mono-mania. To do so the more\neffectually, we will arrange the presentation of the subject under four\nseparate heads. We will attempt to show,--\n\n1. Its historical errors.\n\n2. Its logical errors.\n\n3. Its philosophical or scientific errors.\n\n4. Its moral evils.\n\n1st. _Its Historical Errors_.--Can we conceive it possible that the\nthousands of priests who are now employed in \"converting souls to\nGod\" are so ignorant of history as not to know that it is an old pagan\ncustom? that it was prevalent in heathen countries long before a single\nsoul was converted to Christianity, and is carried on to some extent\nnow, both among pagans and Mahomedans? From such facts it would\nappear (viewing the matter from the Christian stand-point) that God\nis indifferent as to what kind of religion, or what sort of religious\nnonsense, people are converted to, or whether it is truth or error they\nembrace, or whether it is a true religion or a false one they imbibe,\nso he gets them converted. According to Mr. Higgins, the practice of\nconverting people from one sect to another by the popular priesthood\nwas prevalent under the ancient Persian system, and was carried on there\nquite extensively more than three thousand years ago; and the process\nwas essentially the same as that now in vogue amongst modem Methodists,\nand the effect the same. At their large revival meetings the whole\ncongregation would sometimes become so affected under the eloquent\nministrations of the officiating priest, as to cry, and shout, and\nprostrate themselves upon the ground, which was afterward found to be\ndrenched with their tears; and on these occasions they would confess\ntheir sins to each other, and to their priests; and yet those very sins\nthey condemned were, perhaps, amongst the best acts of their lives,\nwhile their real crimes were overlooked and justified, instead of being\ncondemned, thus showing that an honest, just, and sensible God could\nhave had nothing to do with it. And we have reports of similar scenes\nwitnessed more recently among the Mahomedans. Major Denham furnishes us\nan account of some \"revival meetings\" he attended a few years since in\nArabia, carried on by one of the Mahomedan sects. On one occasion the\neffect of the discourse of the preacher upon the audience in the way of\n\"converting souls to God\" was so powerful, that he could only convince\nhimself that he was not in a Methodist revival meeting by a knowledge\nof his geographical position. The preacher's name was Malem Chadily, and\nhere is a specimen of some of his language. \"Turn, turn, sinner, unto\nGod; confess he is good, and that Mahomet is his prophet; wash, and\nbecome clean of your sins, and paradise is open before you: without\nthis nothing can save you from eternal fire.\" During this earnest appeal\n(says the major), tears flowed plentifully, and everybody appeared to be\naffected. One of his hearers, becoming converted, shouted, \"Your words\npierce my soul,\" and fell upon the floor. Now let it be borne in mind,\nthat Mahomet is stigmatized and condemned by the Christian churches as\n\"a false prophet,\" and his religion denounced as \"a system of fraud,\"\n\"a false religion,\" &c. Of course, then, Christians will not argue, nor\nadmit, that conversion, and \"getting religion,\" in this case, is the\nwork of God. A just God would have nothing to do in converting people\nto \"a false religion.\" What explanation shall we adopt for it then?\nTo assume it to be the work of the devil (the dernier resort for all\nreligious difficulties), and conversions among Christians the work of\nGod, when both are so clearly and obviously alike, is to insult common\nsense. To assume that two things, exactly alike in character, can be\nexactly and diametrically unlike in origin, is a scientific paradox\nwhich no person of common intelligence can swallow, or accept for a\nmoment. Both, then, we must admit, have the same origin. This train of\nargument leads us to speak of--\n\n2d. _The Logical Absurdities of the Doctrine of Conversion_.--There\nare several circumstances which point, unmistakably as the needle to the\npole, to the mundane origin of the phenomenon of conversion.\n\nThe character of many of the priestly conductors who \"run the battery,\"\nis sufficient of itself to preclude the hypothesis of any divine agency\nin the matter. The most powerful revivalist we ever knew, the priest who\ncould convert an audience the quickest, and bring down sinners to the\nmourners' bench faster than any other clergyman we ever heard \"dealing\nout damnation\" to the people, was a broad-shouldered, muscular,\nstentorian-voiced circuit rider of the \"Buckeye State,\" who, as was\nafterward learned, was guilty of perpetrating some of the blackest\ncrimes that ever blotted the page of human history, at the very time of\nhis most successful career in the way of \"convicting souls of sin, and\nconverting them to God.\" He was apprehended by the officers of the law\nin the midst of one of his most flourishing revivals, under the twofold\ncharge, i. Of being the father of an illegitimate child, the young\nmother of which was a member of his church; 2. Of defrauding one of his\nneighbors in a trade, to the amount of nearly a thousand dollars--both\nof which charges he was convicted of. A similar case, but possessing\nsome worse features, occurred a few years since in the county in which\nthe author now resides. A preacher, who had had criminal connection with\na young woman of his church, in order to conceal his guilt resorted to\nthe damnable expedient of administering poison to his victim shortly\nbefore his illicit intercourse with her would have been made manifest\nby the birth of a child, thus committing a double murder. He was\napprehended for the crime while carrying on \"a most glorious revival,\"\nas it was styled by some of the deluded congregation. Now to ascribe the\nirresistible power which these two preachers exerted over their audience\n(in the way of \"converting them to God\") to a divine source, as they\nclaimed for it, would be to trifle with common sense, common decency,\nand all honorable conceptions of a God. These reverend scamps often\ninstituted the high claim of being \"called of God\" to their ministerial\nlabors. But if we concede the claim, we should have to conclude that God\nknew but little about them, for he certainly would not knowingly employ\nsuch moral outlaws upon such an important mission.\n\nHaving thus briefly spoken of the character of some of the actors and\nagents in the work of conversion, we will now glance at the character of\nsome of the religions and religious ideas, and moral course of conduct,\nto which the sinner is converted. It is evident that if an All-wise God\nhad anything to do in the process of converting people to any system\nof religion, he would also convert them to correct moral habits. But in\nmany cases, after conversion they are no nearer right in this respect,\nand in some cases further from it than before being thus sanctified.\nIn some cases their religion becomes worse, their religious ideas less\nsensible, and their moral conduct more objectionable, by \"the change of\nheart\" in \"getting religion.\" Mr. Spencer informs us that the Vewas, a\nsect or tribe of the Feegees, often cry for hours under conviction for\nsin. And what is that sin? Why, the neglect to offer sacrifices to their\nGod. And those sacrifices consist in human beings, sometimes their own\nchildren. And their conviction, conversion, and repentance only make\nthem more diligent in practicing this crime. It is evident, then, that\ntheir religion is at war with their humanity, and the former always\ntriumphs in the contest. They are addicted to cannibalism, infanticide,\nand polygamy. But as the process of \"getting religion\" never makes\nanybody more intelligent, the \"change of heart,\" with the Vewas, never\nchanges their views, or opens their eyes to see the enormity of their\ncrimes. In \"getting religion\" people get neither sense, knowledge, nor\nmorality. They get neither a larger stock, nor an improved quality, of\neither. Their moral conduct is not often sensibly improved, materially\nor permanently.\n\n3d. _Scientific Errors, and Scientific Explanations of Conversion_.--The\nphenomena of conversion and \"getting religion\" are so easily explained\nin the light of science and philosophy, and that explanation is\nsusceptible of so many proofs and demonstrations, that it seems\nremarkably strange that any persons claiming to be intelligent, and\nsituated in the focal, scientific light of the nineteenth century,\nshould still be hampered with the delusion that such phenomena are the\ndirect display of the power of God. It requires but little investigation\nand reflection to convince any person that what is called conversion,\nand \"repentance for sin,\" is nothing but the revival of early\neducational impressions resuscitated by the influence of mind on mind.\nNo person has ever been known to get or embrace a religion he was not\nbiased in favor of prior to the time of his conversion, unless we except\na few weak-minded persons negative to any influence, and convertible\nto any religion the priest may urge upon their attention. A very strong\nproof of this statement is furnished by the history of the Christian\nmissionary enterprise. The reports of travelers and sojourners in India\nshow, that with two hundred years' labor, and two hundred missionaries\nin the field during a part of that period, the churches have not\nsucceeded in converting one in ten thousand of the Hindoos to the\nChristian religion--unless we except those who, while children, were\nsent to Christian schools instituted by the missionaries for the special\npurpose of converting and warping the young mind, and welding it to the\nChristian faith before It should receive an unchangeable and unyielding\nbias in favor of another religion. So fruitless has been the effort\nto convert to Christianity those who were already established in the\nreligion of the country, that, according to the estimate of Colonel Dow,\neach convert, on an average, has cost the missionary enterprise not\nless than ten thousand dollars. An intelligent Hindoo, while lecturing\nrecently in London, made the remarkable statement, that conversions\nwhich are made to the Christian religion are not amongst the intelligent\nor learned classes, but are confined to the low, ignorant, and\nsuperstitious classes, \"who have not sense or intelligence enough to\nperceive the difference between the _religion they are converted to,\nand that which they are converted from._\" And the effort to convert the\nMahomedans, Chinese, Persians, and the disciples of other religions has\nbeen attended with the same fruitless results--all seeming to warrant\nthe conclusion that God can do but little toward converting any nation\nto Christianity which has always been biased in favor of another\nreligion. The reason why people are so easily converted from one sect to\nanother in Christian countries is owing to the fact that their religious\nconvictions are unsettled. The members of the different Christian sects\nare all mixed up together in the various settlements throughout the\ncountry, and are brought in daily contact with each other in the busy\nscenes of life.\n\nHence the children have the seeds of Methodism, Presbyterianism,\nBaptistism, Quakerism, and various other isms implanted in their minds\nin very early life. And which one of these will ultimately predominate\ndepends upon what priest they fall victims to first. Having thus the\ngerms of so many religious isms implanted in their minds, they are\neasily shifted about, and converted from one sect to another. And this\nshuttlecock process is called \"getting religion,\" while, if they had\nlived in a country where only one form of religion exists, they would be\nas hard to convert as Mahomedans and Hindoos.\n\n_Repentance_.--Much importance is attached by the orthodox churches\nto the act of getting religion in the dying hour,--called \"death-bed\nrepentance,\"--as if the person were better capable of discriminating\nbetween right and wrong when his brain is deranged with fever, and his\nwhole system racked with disease and pain, than when in health. Such\nrepentance can do nothing more than prove the honesty of the dying man\nor woman. For very often their doctrines, or religious belief, will be\nfound no nearer right, and sometimes more erroneous after repentance\nthan before, as repentance merely consists in the return to early\nimpressions--the revival of former convictions, which may be either\nright or wrong, and are about as likely to be the latter as the former.\nNo instance can be found of a person condemning a wrong act, or a wrong\ncourse of life, in his dying moments, unless he had previously believed\nit to be wrong, or if he had always believed it to be right. How much,\nthen, does repentance do toward deciding what is right and what is\nwrong? Mahomedanism we know to be deeply fraught with error, but we\nnever read nor heard of an instance of the many millions who had been\neducated to believe it is right, condemning it on their death-beds, or\nrepenting for not having embraced Christianity, and led the life of\na Christian, or for adoring Mahomet instead of Jesus Christ. On the\ncontrary we have a well-authenticated instance of a Mahomedan (a Mr.\nMerton) who had embraced Christianity, and lived the life of a Christian\nfor many years, renouncing it all, and returning to his primitive faith,\nwhen he was taken sick and became apprehensive he was going to die:\nhis early religious impressions, returning involuntarily, wiped out\nhis Christianity, and he died glorying in Mahomedanism. And we have an\nequally well authenticated case of an Indian of the Choctaw tribe, who\nhad been taught to believe from early life that the white man was his\nnatural enemy, and that it was his right and duty to kill him, repenting\non his death-bed for having a short time previously neglected, when the\nopportunity presented, to despatch a \"pale face\" he met in his travels.\nInstead of killing him, he yielded for the moment to the impulse of his\nbetter feelings, and passed him by. But on reviewing his past life\nat the approach of death, he came to the conclusion he had sinned in\nomitting to kill this man, and he grieved and lamented sorely over\nthis dereliction of apprehended duty. Here we have a case of repentance\nsanctioning murder. Must we, therefore, conclude that murder is morally\nright, or a righteous act? Certainly, according to orthodox logic.\n\nTheir religious tracts assume that repentance is always for the right,\nand is _prima facie_ evidence of being right. If not, what does it\nprove, or what moral value is it? According to orthodox teaching, being\n\"a murderer at heart,\" he was as consignable to perdition as if he had\ncommitted the act. There is no escaping the conclusion, therefore, that\nhis repentance landed him in hell, or else proves murder to be right\naccording to orthodox logic.\n\nWe have known Quakers to leave their dying testimony against water\nbaptism; and Baptists, with their last breath, declare it is right, and\na sin to neglect it. Which is right? Who can tell? We have also known\nQuakers to condemn dancing in their dying hours, but Shakers never;\nbecause one had been taught that it is wrong, and the other that it\nis right. And which testimony must we accept? Mahomedans often, when\napproaching the confines of time, repent (sometimes in tears) for not\nhaving lived out more rigidly the injunctions of the Koran, but never\nregret not having been Christians. They often call upon Mohamet to aid\nthem through the gates of death: but not one of the million who die\nevery year ever calls upon Jesus Christ. What, then, does such a\nconflicting jargon of death-bed repentance prove? What good can grow\nout of it, or what moral value can possibly attach to it? It establishes\nsimply two principles,--\n\n1st. That repentance grows out of education.\n\n2d. That it depends entirely upon previous convictions as to what it may\nsanction, and what it may condemn.\n\nNo Christian ever repents in favor of Mahomedan-ism; and no Mahomedan\never lifts up his dying voice in favor of Christianity as being superior\nto his own religion; and no Hindoo has ever been known to indulge\nin death-bed lamentation for not having previously embraced either\nChristianity or Mahomedanism; because their earlier education never\nturned their minds in that direction. The mind has to be educated over\nagain before it can embrace a new religion, or even condemn a wrong act,\nwhich, up to that period, it had always believed to be right.\n\nHence it is evident repentance may lead a person to condemn what is\nright and sanction what is wrong. How profoundly ignorant of religious\nhistory and mental science must those persons therefore be who attach\nany importance to those diseased and often incoherent utterances, called\n\"death-bed recantations,\" or who believe a thing the sooner because\nsanctioned by a dying man or woman, or that they do anything toward\nproving what is right or what is wrong with respect to either our belief\nor our moral conduct! And yet we find the orthodox churches printing\nevery year, through their tract societies, stories of death-bed\nrepentance in tract form, and scattering them over the country by the\nmillion. As they prove nothing but the honesty of the dying man or\nwoman, they are not worth the paper on which they are printed.\n\nThe phenomenon of repentance is simply the operation of a natural law,\nby which the last impressions made upon the mind are generally cancelled\nfrom the memory first, by the progress of fever and disease, thus\nleaving the earlier impressions to rule the judgment. The person is then\nvirtually a child, controlled by his early youthful convictions, with\nwhich, if his late belief and conduct disagree, it causes a mental\nconflict, called repentance. Thus, instead of being the visitation\nof God, as Christians claim, repentance is shown to be the product of\nnatural causes. The conclusion is thus established beyond disproof,\nthat the mental processes called conversion, repentance, and \"getting\nreligion\" are simply natural psychological operations, depending\nupon education, organization, and intelligence. They depend also upon\nintellect and scientific knowledge. For persons of large intellectual\nbrains, or extensive scientific culture, never fall victims to these\nmental derangements. Hence those priests who claim God as their author\nare either deplorably and inexcusably ignorant, or lacking in moral\nhonesty.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XLIV. THE MORAL LESSONS OF RELIGIOUS HISTORY.\n\n1. The most important lesson deducible from all the religious systems,\ncommemorated in history, and noticed in this work, is, that all\nreligious conceptions, whether in the shape of doctrine, precept,\nprophecy, prayer, religious devotion, or a belief in miracles, are a\nspontaneous outgrowth of the moral and religious elements of the human\nmind. And to assign them a higher origin is to ignore the developments\nof modern science, and insult the highest intelligence of the age.\n\n2. From the elevated scientific plane occupied by the most enlightened\nportion of the present age, there is no difficulty in finding a\nsatisfactory solution for every event, every occurrence, and every\nperformance recorded in any of the numerous bibles which have long been\nafloat in the world, and which have always constituted the sole basis\nfor the claim to a divine origin of all the religious systems of the\npast; so that such a claim can be no longer vindicated by historically\nintelligent people.\n\n3. We have shown in this work that all the miraculous incidents related\nin the history of Jesus Christ as a proof of his divinity can find a\nmore rational explanation than that which assigns them to divine agency.\nSome of them are now known to lie within the natural capacity of the\nhuman mind to achieve, others are explained by recently discovered\nnatural laws. Another class are now well understood mental or nervous\nphenomena. Other stories, now regarded by the Christian world as\nreferring to miraculous achievements, were probably designed by the\nwriter as mere fable or metaphor. All the events in Christ's history, we\nhave shown, are susceptible of a hundred fold more rational explanation\nthan that which regards them as the feats of a God in violation of his\nown laws.\n\n4. We have also shown that the same marvelous incidents now found\nincorporated in the Gospel history of Jesus Christ were related long\npreviously as a part of the sacred history of other Gods; such as\nbeing miraculously conceived and born of a virgin; born on the 25th of\nDecember; visited in infancy by angels and shepherds;' threatened by the\nruler of the country; being of royal lineage; receiving the same divine\ntitles; performing the same miracles, &c.\n\nIn a word, we have shown that various heathen Gods and Demigods had,\nlong before Christ's advent, filled the same chapter in history now\nreported of him in the Christian New Testament. All these stories of\nthe heathen Gods prove as conclusively as any scientific problem can be\ndemonstrated by figures, that the same stories related of Jesus Christ\nhave no other foundation than that of heathen tradition. And will the\nChristian world, then, hereafter stultify their common sense by ignoring\nthese facts of history so fatal to their claims? Past history points to\nan affirmative answer to this question, as we will illustrate.\n\nIn the early history of this country, several reports were published\nof showers of blood being seen to fall in some of the sea-coast states,\nwhich were regarded as a divine judgment. But the use of the telescope\nrevealed the fact that it was the ordure of butterflies, as those\ninsects were seen at the time in vast swarms. But the devout Christian,\nwhose faith in his religion has always been proof against the\ndemonstrations of science, would give it up. He would not accept the\nbutterfly explanation, but continued to teach his children that it came\nfrom God out of heaven as a manifestation of displeasure toward the\nsins of the people. And it now remains to be seen whether Christian\nprofessors at the present day will manifest a similar folly by standing\nout against the demonstrated truths and facts of this work.\n\n5. We here cite it as the last and most sorrowful lesson of history,\nthat no facts, no proofs, no demonstrations of science can eradicate\nreligious errors from the human mind, if instilled in early life, and\nnever disturbed till the possessor arrives at mature age or middle life.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XLV. CONCLUSION AND REVIEW.\n\nIN writing the concluding chapter of this work, the author deems it\nproper to re-state some points, and elaborate others, and anticipate\nsome objections to some of the positions advanced. Each division of the\nsubject will be marked by a separate figure, and treated in a brief and\nsuccinct manner, as follows:--\n\n1. Several persons, who examined this work before it went to press, have\nexpressed the opinion that it must exert a powerful influence in the\nway of producing an entire revolution in the religion of orthodox\nChristendom sooner or later. But this must of course be the work of\ntime, as moral revolutions are not the work of a day. When the human\nsystem has been long prostrated with chronic disease, no system\nof medication can restore it at once to health. The same principle\ngoverning the mind makes it morally impossible to eradicate its\ndeeply-seated moral and religious errors in a day by even the\npresentation of the most powerful and convincing truths and\ndemonstrations that can be brought to bear or operate upon the human\njudgment. The mind instinctively repels everything (no difference how\ntrue or how beautiful) that conflicts with its long-established opinions\nand convictions. The fires of truth usually require much time to burn\ntheir way through those incrustations of moral and religious error which\noften environ the human mind as the products of a false education. But\nwhen they once enter, the work of convincement is complete.\n\n2. It has been stated that the resemblance between Christianity and the\nmore ancient heathen systems is complete and absolute throughout in all\ntheir essential doctrines, and principles, and precepts. And if it shall\nbe found, on a critical reading of this work after it comes from the\npress, that there is one feature of Christianity which has not been\ntraced to pagan origin, or that any points of resemblance have been\nomitted, they will be supplied in an appendix.\n\n3. It has been stated that a transfiguration is related of Chrishna of\nIndia (1200 B. C.) in the Hindoo bible (the Baghavat Gita), which is\nstrikingly similar to that of Christ. We will here present the proof.\n\"Abandoning the mortal form, he (Chrishna) appeared to his disciples in\nall the divine eclat of his Divine Majesty, his brow encircled with such\na brilliant light that Adjouma and the other disciples, unable to bear\nit, fell with their faces in the dust, and prayed the Lord (Chrishna) to\npardon their unworthiness. He replied, 'Have you not faith in me? Know\nye not, that whether present or absent in body, I will be ever present\nwith you to guard and protect you?'\" (Gaghavat Gita.) How remarkable\nthis to the story of Christ's transfiguration!\n\n4. Some readers, perhaps, will be surprised to observe that we have\nnamed so many crucified gods to whom some writers assign a different\ndeath. But we have followed, as we believe, the best authorities in\ndoing so.\n\n5. In our work, \"The Bibles of Bibles,\" we have shown that the score of\nbibles which have been extant in the world teach essentially the same\ndoctrines, principles, and precepts. There are to be found in the old\npagan bibles the same grand and beautiful truths mixed up with the same\nmind-enslaving errors and deleterious superstitions as those contained\nin the Christian bible. And the same exalted claim is set up by the\ndisciples of each for their respective holy books--that of being a\ndirect revelation from God, and inspired at the fountain of infinite\nwisdom. And all were exalted, adored, and idolized by their respective\nadmirers, as containing a perfect embodiment of truth, without any\nadmixture of error. The ancient Persians carried their bibles in their\nbosoms, and read them and prayed over them daily. The Hindoos often read\ntheir bible through on their bended knees, and sometimes committed it\nall to memory. The Baghavat has the following text: \"The most important\nof all duties is to study the Holy Scriptures, which is the word of\nBrahma and Chrishna, revealed to the world.\" Some of the Mahomedans\nclaim that immortal life can only be obtained by reading the Koran, and\nthat the reading of it is essential to the progress and practice of good\nmorals, and the advancement of civilization; and that it will ultimately\nreform and civilize the world. Both they and the Hindoos, like the\nChristian world, have numerous commentaries, explaining the obscure\ntexts of their bibles, and aiming to reconcile their teachings with\nreason and science. And the disciples of all bibles had a mode of doing\naway with the immoral teachings, and concealing the worst features\nof their sacred books by bestowing on them a spiritual meaning, as\nChristians do theirs, thus dressing up error in the guise of truth. The\nHindoo bible, the Mahomedan bible, and other holy books, consign those\nwho disbelieve in their teachings to eternal damnation, denouncing them\nas infidels. In this respect, also, they are like the Christian's bible.\n\n6. \"But then, after all (as some good pious Christian will probably\nexclaim after reading this work), the bible and Christianity are\nessential to the progress of good morals, and the advancement of the\ncause of civilization, and the civilized world would sink into a state\nof heathen darkness, demoralization, and savagism without them; for\nevery enlightened nation owes its present moral and intellectual\ngreatness to the Christian bible and the Christian religion, and\nwould relapse into barbarism without them.\" This is a mistake, a most\negregious mistake, my good brother Christian, as the following facts of\nhistory will show:--\n\n1. There are heathen nations now existing who never saw a bible, and\nothers which flourished in the past, before our bible was written, who\nnevertheless attained to a higher state of morals, and a higher state\nof civilization in some respects, than any Christian nation known to\nhistory. A whole volume of facts might be adduced, if we had space for\nthem, drawn from the ablest and most reliable authorities, to prove that\nIndia, Egypt, Greece, and other countries had reached a high state of\ncivilization centuries before Christianity or any of its founders\nwere even heat'd of, or made their appearance in the world. India was\ndistinguished for her teaming, her laws, her legislation, her civil\ncourts, her judicial tribunals, her astronomers, her poets, her\nphilosophers, her writers, her moralists, her libraries, her men of\nliterature, and her good morals before Moses was found in the bulrushes.\n\nJacolliot says, \"India gave civilization to the world.\" Egypt borrowed\nof India, the Greeks of the Egyptians, and the Jews and Christians are\nindebted to the Greeks for both their morals and their civilization.\nDubois, a Christian missionary, in his \"Memoirs of India,\"\ntestifies that \"kindness, justice, humanity, good faith, compassion,\ndisinterestedness, and in fact nearly all the moral virtues, were\nfamiliar to the ancient Brahmans and Hindoos, and they taught them both\nby precept and example.\" Can as much be said of any Christian nation?\nCertainly not. And the Rev. D. O. Allen says they were distinguished for\nall the arts and refinement of civilized life--thus placing them on the\nhighest plane of civilization and moral elevation. And other nations\nmight be referred to. Egypt had her vast temples of science, Chaldea her\nastronomical observatories, and Greece her distinguished academies of\nlearning, her profound philosophers, and her high-toned moral writers\nand moral teachers, while the Jews, \"God's holy people.\" were in a\nstate of semibarbarism. So affirms the Rev. Albert Barnes.\n\n2. No advancement has often been made in morals or civilization in any\ncountry by the introduction of the Christian bible or the Christian\nreligion. It is the arts and sciences which accompany or follow the\nbible which do the work. A proof of this statement is found in the\nfact, that no improvement takes place in the morals of the people by\nthe introduction of the bible till the arts and sciences are also\nintroduced amongst them. On the contrary, the morals of many\ndeteriorate by reading the bible alone, because it sanctions as well as\ncondemns every species of crime then known to society. (For proof see\nChap. XXXIX. of this work.) That India has become corrupted and sunk in\nmorals since the introduction of the Christian bible, is admitted by the\nRev. D. O. Allen, for twenty-five years a missionary in that country.\nBut science, especially moral science, imparts a different influence. It\nexplains the nature of crimes, and teaches and demonstrates that a life\nof honesty and virtue can alone produce true and real happiness, while\nthe bible augments the temptation to commit sin by teaching that \"it\nis a sweet morsel to be rolled under the tongue,\" and that its punitive\neffects may be entirely escaped by an act of divine forgiveness. But\nscience, either directly or by the enlightening of the mind, teaches and\nconvinces the wrong-doer that there is no escape from the evil effects\nof a wrong or wicked act, and that sin is not a \"sweet morsel,\" but\nultimately a _bitter pill_. And thus it arrests the demoralizing effects\nof this pernicious doctrine of the Christian bible.\n\n3. It may startle some of the bible devotees to be told that their\nsacred book, instead of being a prompter to civilization and good\nmorals, is really a hindrance to those ends; and that consequently\nnations without bibles advance faster in these respects than those\nwho are well supplied with this book. But the facts of history seem\nto establish this as a fact. As a proof we will contrast the present\ncondition of heathen Japan with that of Christian Abyssinia. Colonel\nHall and Dr. Oliphant both testify that no drunkenness, no fighting,\nno quarreling, no thefts, no robberies, no rapes, no fornication, no\ndomestic feuds or broils, and no fraudulent dealing take place in Japan.\nNo locks or keys are used, for none are needed. There is no disposition\nto steal, or even to cheat, or overreach in dealing. But in Christian\nAbyssinia, on the other hand, according to Mr. Goodrich, where bibles\nand churches are numerous, and preaching and praying are heard every\nday, nearly all the crimes above enumerated are daily committed. The\npeople go naked, eat raw flesh, cheat, lie, and murder, and practice\npolygamy. Such a thing as a legitimate child, he tells us, is not known.\nAnd thus it has been for fifteen hundred years, while in the daily\npractice of reading their bible. The arts and sciences have never been\nintroduced amongst them. And this fact explains the cause of their\ncontinued moral degradation.\n\n4. According to Noah Webster, the cultivation of the arts and sciences\nis essential to the progress of civilization and good morals. But bible\nreligion knows nothing about the arts and sciences. It don't even use\nthe words. Paul uses the word science only once, and then to condemn it.\nBut Jesus omits any allusion to science, philosophy, or natural law.\nSo thoroughly convinced were the early disciples of the Christian faith\nthat the teachings of their bible are inimical to the arts and sciences,\nthat they destroyed works of art wherever they could find them, and\nopposed with a deadly aim every new discovery in the sciences.\n\n5. As bibles represent only the morals and state of society in the\nage in which they are written, and are not allowed to be altered or\ntranscended, they thus hold their disciples back in all coming time, and\ncompel them to teach and practice the morals of that semi-barbarous\nage as found taught in their bibles. And thus bibles prevent the moral\ngrowth of the people as effectually as the Chinese wooden shoes prevent\nthe growth of the feet. For a fuller exposition of this matter, see The\nBible of Bibles, Chap. XIV.\n\n\n\n\nNOTES\n\n\nNOTE OF EXPLANATION.\n\nIn Chapter XXXI. we have traced Christianity to Essenism. This may need\na fuller explanation than we have yet devoted to this point, though we\nhave stated several times we consider them essentially one. The Essenes\nhad their \"Exoteric\" and their \"Esoteric\" doctrines. The latter, which\nseems to have included the incarnation atonement, trinity, and all the\nother Budhist doctrines as set forth in Chapter XXXII. (and now included\nin the term Christianity), they never published to the world. Hence\nChapter XXXI. sets forth only their Exoteric doctrines. But as Philo,\nMilman, Tytler, and other eminent authors show they held all the\ndoctrines of Budhism, we assume they were a Budhist sect Hence, when we\nspeak of Christianity growing out of Budhism, in Chapter XXXII., we\nmean Budhism under the name of Essenism. We believe Christianity is from\nEssenism and Budhism both, because they are essentially one; and that\nChristianity is merely a continuation of Budhism as taught by the\nEssenian sect of Budhists. Hence we have sometimes used the term\nEssenism, and sometimes the term Budhism, as being the fountain head of\nChristianity. We have stated Christ may have been an Essene either by\nbirth or by conversion. But our conviction now is, that he was one by\nbirth. And we now think it probable that that portion of the Jewish\nnation which became known as Essenes sprang up in the Budhist school of\nPythagoras, in Alexandria, in the second or third century before Christ,\nand thus became Essenian Budhists; i. e., a sect of Jewish Budhists\nwho called themselves Essenes. And consequently, neither Christ nor his\ndisciples made any changes in the Essenian religion, when they changed\nits name to Christianity, except to ingraft a few unimportant tenets\nborrowed from the principal Budhist sect We are now convinced that\nEssenism was complete Budhism, that Christ was born of Essene parents,\nand that no important changes were made by dropping the term Essenism,\nand adopting the term Christianity in its place.\n\n\nNOTE TO PAGE 178.\n\nIt may not be improper to explain more fully the reason for the opinion\nexpressed on page 178, that the Gospel writer John did not believe that\nChrist first came into existence through human birth, but believed that\nhe, like some of the oriental Gods, was \"The Word\" personified, without\nthe process of birth; though he may, like the heathen orientalists,\nhave cherished the tradition that the second God in the trinity (as he\nrepresents Christ to be), after having sprung into existence as \"The\nWord\" was subsequently subjected to human birth. Either so, or else\nhis allusion to \"the mother of Christ\" was done in condescension to the\ngeneral belief among the people, that he had a human mother. Be that as\nit may, he declares, '\"His Word was made flesh\" (John i. 14); nearly the\nsame language used by the orientalists,--which with them did not imply\nhuman birth. And the declaration, \"All things were made by him\" (John i.\n3), is proof positive he believed in Christ's existence as the creator,\nbefore his human birth. Much of John's language is so strikingly similar\nto that employed by the disciples of some of the oriental religions, who\nbelieved that a second God emanated from the mouth of the Supreme, to\nperform the act of creation, that we cannot resist the conviction that\nthis was John's belief; especially as many of them believed, like him,\nthat this creative \"Word\" became afterward a subject of human birth.\nThus, as we conceive, the proposition is established.\n\n\nNOTE TO PAGE 346.\n\nOur most reliable authorities testify that Babylon never was destroyed,\nbut successfully resisted, for one hundred and fifty years after\nIsaiah's time, many of the most powerful sieges, and \"the mightiest\nmunitions of war,\" conducted by seven of the most skilful generals that\never wielded the sword--Cyrus, Darius, Alexander the Great, Antigonus,\nDemetrius, Poliorcetes, and Antiochus. She then gradually declined\nby the removal of her inhabitants to other and newer cities; thus\nfalsifying the prediction of Jeremiah (li. 8), \"Her end has come,\"\nand of Isaiah (xiii. 22), \"Her days shall not be prolonged,\" and that\n\"desolation shall come upon her in a day,\" and her destruction shall\nbe effected suddenly--all of which are falsified by the facts just\npresented. And even if Babylon had been destroyed, the present existence\nof Hillah, built in 1101 upon the same spot, with a population,\naccording to Wellstead, of twenty-five thousand, is a signal overthrow\nof Jeremiah's prophecy, that it \"shall become a wilderness, wherein no\nman dwelleth\" (li. 43), and of Isaiah, also, that it should not be dwelt\nin from generation to generation. Jeremiah first predicted that her sea\nand springs should dry up (li. 38), and then declared the waves of the\nsea should come upon her (li. 42); and finally, that she should sink to\nrise no more (li. 64). And Isaiah's prediction of ruin and destruction\nincluded with Babylon, \"the land of the Chaldeans\" (l. 39), which was\nthen, and is yet, a great commercial country, with an annual revenue at\nthis time, according to Harvey Brydges, of a million pounds sterling.\nHere, then, is a long series of prophecies falsified. Our authority for\nsaying that Hillah occupies the site of ancient Babylon is Malte-Brun's\nGeography (page 655), which declares, \"Hillah is situated within the\nprecincts of Babylon;\" thus proving it is not \"a wilderness, wherein no\nman dwelleth.\" Had we space, we should present an extended view of the\nprophecies.","title":"The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors; Or, Christianity Before Christ","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":123173}