DEBATE 
 
 ON THE 
 
 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY; 
 
 CONTAINING , 
 
 AN EXAMINATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 AND OF 
 
 ALL THE SYSTEMS OF SCEPTICISM OF ANCIENT AND 
 
 MODERN TIMES. 
 
 a * * 
 
 HELD IN {THE CITY OF)CINCINNATI, OHIO, FROM THE 10th 
 TO THE 21st OF APRIL, 1829; BETWEEN 
 
 ROBERT OWEN, 
 
 ( OF NEW LANARK, SCOTLAND, AND 
 
 ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, f 
 
 OF BETHANY, VIRGINIA. 
 
 Reported by CHARLES II. SIMS, Stenographer. . r 7 
 
 WITH 
 
 AM AlPlPffiSriMKb 
 
 WRITTEN BY THE PARTIES. 
 
 What then is unbelief?—’Tis an exploit, 
 
 A strenuous enterprize. To gain it man 
 Must burst through every bar of common sense, 
 
 Of common shame—magnanimously wrong! 
 
 -Who most examine, most believe; 
 
 Parts, like half sentences, confound. 
 
 Kead his whole volume, Sceptic, then reply! 
 
 YOUNG. 
 
 O Lord of Hosts! blessed is the man that tiusteth in thee! 
 
 DAVIT), 
 
 BETHANY, VA. 
 
 PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY ALEXANDER CAMPBELL. 
 
 1829a 
 
 BOSTON COLLEGE LIBRARY 
 CHESTNUT HILL, MASS. 
 
Western District or Virginia, to wit:— 
 
 BE IT REMEMBERED, That on this eighteenth day of June, 
 Anno Domini 1829, and in the fifty-third year of the Independence 
 of the United States of America, Alexander Campbell , of the said 
 District, hath deposited in my office the title of a book, the right 
 whereof he claims as proprietor, in the words and figures follow¬ 
 ing, to wit:— 
 
 “Debate on the Evidences of Christianity ; containing an Examina¬ 
 tion of the “Social System ,” and of all the systems of Scepticism of 
 ancient and modern times: held in the city of Cincinnati , Ohio, from the 
 13 tk to the 21st of April, 1829, between Robert O.wen, of Nero Lanark, 
 Scotland, and Alexander Campbell, of Bethany, Virginia. Reported 
 by Charles H. Sims, Stenographer. With an Appendix , written by the 
 parties .” 
 
 “What then is unbelief?—’Tis an exploit, 
 
 A strenuous enterprise. To gain it man 
 Must burst through every bar of common sense. 
 
 Of common shame—magnanimously wrong! 
 
 --Who most examine, most believe; 
 
 Parts, like half sentences, confound. 
 
 Head his whole volume. Sceptic, then reply!”- yocho. 
 
 if O Lord of Hosts! blessed is the man who trusteth in the**!”— payie. 
 
 “Bethany, Va. Printed and published by Alexander Campbell. 1829 ,,> 
 
 In conformity to an Act of the Congress of the United States of 
 America, entitled “An Act for the encouragement of learning, by 
 securing the copies of n?aps, charts, and books, to the authors and 
 proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned:” 
 And also, to an Act, entitled, “An act supplementary to an Act, 
 entitled, “An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing 
 the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the authors and proprietors 
 of such copies, during the times therein mentioned; and extending 
 the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving, and etching 
 historical and other prints.” 
 
 JASPER YEATES DODDRIDGE, 
 
 Clerk of the Western District of Virginia 
 
 y O 
 
 /tiOjCjq 
 
THERE is a charm in the number three, to which authors, phi¬ 
 losophers, poets, and divines , are not insensible. Every sentence 
 of a rhetorical cast must have three members, and every noun sub¬ 
 stantive requires three adjectives to make it expressive, elegant, and 
 sonorous. Hence the good old style of having a preface , introduce 
 tion, and dedication prefixed to every volume. With the first and 
 second of these wc may dispense, as the first speech of each dispu¬ 
 tant is a sort of preface and introduction for himself. And were I 
 to think of a dedication of this volume, I would be constrained to 
 dedicate it to the whole human family, if I were to be guided by the 
 grand principles of that diffusive benevolence which the side of the 
 question on which I stand suggests. But were I to imitate the in¬ 
 ventors of dedications, and select some person to whose auspices I 
 could consign this book, I should be unable to find any one indi¬ 
 vidual to whose pre-eminent virtues I could exclusively inscribe it. 
 But if either the urbanity, hospitality, and public spirit of a particular 
 city; or if the orderly behavior, and Christian deportment of any one 
 congregation, made it necessary for a publisher, such as I am, to 
 inscribe a volume in commendation of one, or other, or both, the city 
 of Cincinnati, and that congregation which for eight days patiently 
 attended upon the discussion, would present claims which neither 
 logic with all rCs rules of reason, nor rhetoric with all its arts of per¬ 
 suasion, cou^d set aside. But again something whispers in my ear 
 if any seven reasons would justify the inscription of this work to any 
 seven gentlemen, to the exclusion of all other persons, for any 
 special attentions paid to the cause, the parties, and the public, 
 the Honorable Judge Burnet , Major Daniel Gano, Col. Francis Carr , 
 Rev. Timothy Flint , Rev. Oliver Spencer, Henry Starr, Esq. and Col 
 Samuel W. Davis , are entitled to it for the attentive and dignified 
 manner in which they presided over this discussion. But as there 
 are so many considerations presenting rival calls upon my pen for a 
 special dedication, I must either depart from old usage or take some 
 comprehensive, all-embracing sweep, and dedicate it to every saint 
 and sinner into whose hands it may fall. 
 
 But I cannot so easily dispense with apo!ogies*as with dedications: 
 for the loose and diffuse style of my speeches requires an apology 
 from myself, as well as a liberal share of indulgence from the learned 
 reader. Being always an extemporaneous speaker, and, on this 
 occasion, every speech of mine, with the exception of the first one, 
 being unpremeditated, many redundancies, expletives, and other 
 inaccuracies in arrangement may be expected, and, I hope, pardoned, 
 Extemporaneous speakers are generally diffuse in their style, and 
 defective in their arrangement. This is, for the most part, unavoid-* 
 able; and more especially when a very promiscuous assembly is 
 
4 
 
 PREFACE, 
 
 addressed, and cn a subject which ought io be levelled to the appre¬ 
 hension of all. We aimed at being understood; and this required 
 great plainness of speech. It is better to have to claim indulgence 
 from the learned, than to have to incur the censures of the illiterate. 
 
 In point of arrangement and style, Mr. Owen had a very great 
 advantage in having the whole of his argument written down. It 
 is true he frequently spoke extemporaneously, but generally his 
 written argument was the text. His written argument was his bible , 
 and his speeches were sermons upon the essential doctrines ol his 
 twelve apostles. 
 
 Considering the rapidity Of my pronunciation, which is said to be 
 Surpassed by very few, Mr. Sims , the stenographer, has certainly 
 done himself great honor in the accuracy with which he has taken 
 down my speeches. I have not, it is true, yet read them all; but those 
 I have read have far surpassed my anticipations. I did not think 
 that any stenographer could take down my speeches verbatim , and 
 especially one who was out of the practice for any length of time. 
 
 Mr. Sims having been for some time a citizen of New Harmon^, 
 was well acquainted with Mr. Owen’s style; and Mr. Owen being 
 rather a slow speaker it was comparatively easy for Mr. Sims to 
 report his speeches to a word. Mr. Sims did not promise to do this 
 for me; but he promised to give every idea, if not in ipsissimis verbis , 
 in terms fully expressive of them. 
 
 His fidelity I cannot but admire; for although somewhat sceptical 
 himfcelf, and once almost persuaded to be an Owenite, and, upon the 
 whole, on Mr. Owen’s side of the question, I cannot complain of the 
 least partiality in any one instance. When he failed to report any 
 sentence, he was careful to note it, and thus has given jpe full satis¬ 
 faction. 
 
 It will afford the reader some satisfaction to know that Mr. Owen 
 has had the opportunity of revising all his speeches. This liber¬ 
 ty I cheerfully conceded to him, and he has availed himself of it. He 
 continued in Cincinnati till Mr. Sims got through with his speeches, 
 and he had my assent to improve the style as much as he pleased. 
 
 The original copy of Mr. Sims’ report, by a stipulation of the 
 parties, is to be deposited with the public records of the county in 
 which it is published; and in case of any cayil by either of the parties 
 or their friends, it is to be forthcoming. 
 
 Every thing on my part has been done to give to the public 
 the most faithful and credible report of this discussion. That it 
 might appear in the most impartial form, I offered, with Mr. Owen’s 
 concurrence, the right of publishing to the Reporter. I first agreed 
 with Mr. Gould of Philadelphia; had written, signed, and forward¬ 
 ed for his signature, articles of agreement, authorizing him to pub¬ 
 lish 20 or 30,000 copies, if he pleased, as a remuneration for his 
 reporting faithfully and fully the discussion. Learning from the news¬ 
 papers, that Mr. Owen had been in Jamaica or Vera Cruz some time in 
 .March, he despaired of his arrival at the time appointed, and declined 
 coming on. I made a similar proposition to Mr. Sims of Cincinnati. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 $ 
 
 He declined, and preferred a remuneration in money, Mr. Owen 
 and myself then were compelled to publish the work, and agreed to 
 pay Mr. Sims 500 dollars for his report. 
 
 After the debate terminated, Mr. Owen, about to return to Europe, 
 and not able to attend to the work, proposed to sell his interest in the 
 work. He did so. I became the sole proprietor, and thus the publi¬ 
 cation ultimately devolved upon me. 
 
 After my return home, and my having made some contracts relative 
 to the materials, type, press, &c. Mr. Owen wrote me that by some 
 means he understood that the city of Cincinnati would have liked that 
 the work had been offered to them for benevolent purposes. He pro¬ 
 posed my relinquishment of it to the city corporation. To this I ac¬ 
 ceded on condition that the materials I had purchased for the work 
 should be taken along with the copy right; or if not, 1 would hand over 
 to them the first edition, when out of press; they remunerating me 
 for the composition, press work, and paper, on the same terms for 
 which the printers in Cincinnati would have done it. I waited for 
 three weeks for an answer from Mr. Owen, through whom I wished the 
 proposition to be made, I am now informed by Mr. Owen that the 
 proposition w’as declined by the city council, and therefore I proceed 
 with the publication. 
 
 All these arrangements and propositions were made that the work 
 might be more useful, or less liable to objection. For, from my first 
 determination to meet Mr. Owen in argument, I had purposed to pre¬ 
 sent the result of our interview to the public, for whose benefit it 
 wa^ undertaken, in the most unexceptionable form. And now, when 
 the publication has devolved upon me, I proposed the depositing of 
 the original copy for comparison with the publication as aforesaid. 
 For experience has taught me how usual it is for the vanquished to 
 exclaim against the report. 
 
 As arrangements are now made, I trust that all objections will be 
 removed, for I am cOtiscious that there is no ground for them. The 
 arguments on both sides will appear as fair and as forcible to the 
 reader, as they did to the hearer of this discussion. 
 
 The discussion sufficiently explains itself as it proceeds. We will 
 neither anticipate nor prejudge for the reader. Let him reason, ex¬ 
 amine, and judge, like a rational being, for himself. 
 
 To the vast and incomparable importance of the question at issue, 
 we can add nothing. It speaks for itself: and the man who has any 
 doubt or hesitancy in his mind upon the subjects discussed in the 
 following pages, and who will not deign them a patient and faithful 
 examination, is unworthy of the rank and dignity of a man. So I 
 decree, and let him that is of a contrary opinion seek to justify him¬ 
 self to his own conscience. 
 
 A. CAMPBELL. 
 
THE LAWS OF THE DISCUSSION* 
 
 Preliminary Arrangements respecting the management and publication 
 
 of a Debate upon the Evidences of Christianity , between Robert 
 
 Owen and Alexander Campbell , to be held at Cincinnati , Okio } 
 
 commencing on Monday , the 13 th April , 1829:— 
 
 1. That the parties upon the day aforesaid, and during the con¬ 
 tinuance of the said investigation, commence each day at 9 o’clock, 
 A. M. intermit at 12, recommence at 3 P. M. and continue until the 
 parties agree to adjourn. 
 
 2. That the propositions proposed to be defended by the former, 
 and refuted by the latter, be fairly and fully discussed, as stated in 
 Mr. Owen’s challenge to the clergy in New Orleans, as already 
 before the public, till each of the parties be satisfied that he has 
 nothing new to offer. 
 
 3. That R. Owen opens the discussion and A. Campbell closes it 
 
 4. That each of the parties shall speak alternately half an hour, 
 without interruption, if he choose to occupy so much time; but it 
 shall be quite optional with him whether he occupy so much time in 
 each address, and that neither party be at libertydo transcend this 
 space without permission of the Moderators. 
 
 5. That the aforesaid debate be conducted throughout with the 
 usual decorum and fairness of investigation necessary to the discovery 
 of truth, under the superintendance of a board of Moderators, seven 
 in number, of which each of the parties shall choose three, and these 
 jointly shall choose a seventh. Any three of these, one on each 
 tide, being present, shall constitute a quorum. 
 
 6. That Charles II. Sims be appointed to engross and report said 
 debate, and to furnish the parties with one fair copy in the space 
 or three months after the close of said debate. For which the pai ties 
 agree to remunerate him on the delivery of said copy for publica¬ 
 tion. 
 
 7. With regard to the publication of this discussion, it is agreed 
 bet ween the parties that the report made by Mr. Sims, stenographer, 
 shall be published jointly by the parties, they being at equal ex¬ 
 pense in obtaining said report, and for all the materials, workman¬ 
 ship, and labor necessary to the publication, distribution, and sale 
 of said debate; and that, as Robert Owen cannot superintend the 
 publication of'the work, the correcting of the press, binding, and 
 delivery of the work, owing to his public arrangements for the en¬ 
 suing year, it is agreed that A. Campbell shall superintend the 
 •publication of the work, the correcting of the press, binding, and 
 
LAWS OF THE DISCUSSION. 
 
 7 
 
 delivering of the work, being held responsible to Robert Owen and 
 the public for the correctness and exactitude with which he shall 
 conform to the report furnished by the aforesaid Charles H. Sims. 
 Which report, when submitted to the revision of the parties, shall 
 be lodged for safe-keeping and for comparison, with the publication 
 in the hands of the clerk of the county wherein the publication from 
 the press shall be issued. It is also agreed that the profits and losses 
 accruing from the publication and sale of the first edition shall be 
 equally divided between the parties. 
 
 It is agreed between the parties, that after the sale of the (first 
 edition, if it should appeal* eligible to the parties to publish a second 
 edition, or a third edition, it shall be proposed by Robert Owen or his 
 agent to A. Campbell, or by A. Campbell to Robert Owen, or his 
 agent, for his concurrence; and that if there should be a concurrence 
 in their views relative to the expediency of such editions, then they 
 shall be undertaken upon the same terms and conditions proposed 
 for the first; but if there should not be a concurrence in the expedi¬ 
 ency of such republications, then either of the parties, as the case may 
 be, shall be at liberty, at his own risk, and upon his own responsibili¬ 
 ty, to publish any edition or editions of. the work he may deem 
 expedient; the copy right for the work being so secured as to secure 
 to the parties such an arrangement. 
 
 The parties to this engagement, in the true intent and meaning 
 thereof, and for the true and full performance of its obligations, 
 have, this eleventh day of April, 1829, hereunto set their hands and 
 affixed their seals. 
 
 ROB. OWEN, }T.b3 
 
 •o •<»• 
 
 A. CAMPBELL. 
 
 xar FBE3XKCE ov 
 
 John Smith, 
 
 Thomas Campbell. 
 
 fcj^T'hc last article has been annulled by a subsequent stipulation 
 between the parties. 
 

ON THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY, &c. 
 
 Cincinnati, Monday , April 13 th, 1829, 
 
 MR. OWEN rose and said— 
 
 Gentlertien Moderators , 
 
 IT is necessary on my part to explain the cause of the 
 present meeting. 
 
 After much reading and calm reflection, early in life, and after 
 extensive personal, and, in many instances, confidential communi¬ 
 cations with the leading characters of the present times, I was 
 deeply impressed with the conviction that all societies of men have 
 been formed on a misapprehension of the primary laws of human 
 nature, and that this error has produced disappointment and almost 
 every kind of misery. 
 
 I was also equally convinced that the real nature of man is 
 adapted, when rightly directed, to attain high physical, intellectual, 
 and moral excellence, and to derive from each of these faculties, a 
 large share of happiness, or of varied enjoyment. 
 
 I was, in consequence, impressed with the belief, that I could not 
 perform a greater service to mankind, than to endeavor to relieve 
 them from this grievous error and evil. I made arrangements to ap¬ 
 ply all my faculties to discover the means by which it could be 
 effected. For this purpose I instituted experiments in England and 
 Scotland, to try the effects of some of these new principles in 
 practice. I published preliminary remarks on the subject, and sub¬ 
 mitted them to the civilized governments of Europe and America. 
 I visited various foreign countries, that I might communicate, per¬ 
 sonally, with the leading minds in each; and I presented an explana¬ 
 tory memorial to the congress of sovereigns and their ministers at 
 Aix la Chapel, in 1818. 
 
 I held public meetings in Great Britain, Ireland, and the United 
 States; and I widely circulated these proceedings in every part of 
 the world where the English language is known. 
 
 Finding that these practical experiments exceeded my most 
 sanguine expectations, and that the most experienced, enlightened, 
 and comprehensive minds, when confidentially applied to, admitted 
 the truth of the principles which I placed before them; and doubted, 
 only, if the period had arrived when ignorance could be so far re¬ 
 moved as to admit of their immediate introduction into practice; I 
 
10 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 applied myself to discover the best means by which these all-impor¬ 
 tant truths might be taught, and all prejudices removed without pro¬ 
 ducing the evils arising from sudden and extensive revolutions. 
 
 To effect these objects, I felt it was necessary to be governed 
 through my whole course, as far as times and circumstances would 
 admit, by the laws of nature, which appeared to me correctly true 
 in principle, and beautiful and beneficial for practice. 
 
 I, therefore, placed these truths gradually before the public, some¬ 
 times in one form, and sometimes in another; but always in the 
 least offensive manner I could devise. 
 
 When parties, whose prejudices were by these means aroused, 
 became angry, and reviled, as it was natural for them to do, not un¬ 
 derstanding my object; I could not be angry and displeased with 
 them, and, therefore, reviled not again; but I calmly put forth more 
 and more of these truths, that ultimately all of them might be under¬ 
 stood. ' ' . 
 
 When the partisans of political parties fully expected I would unite 
 with them in opposition to some part of the existing order of things, 
 I could not join in their measures, knowing that they saw but a small 
 part of the evil, which they fruitlessly, yet often honestly, endeavor¬ 
 ed to remove, and consequently erred in the means of attaining their 
 object. , 
 
 With my views I could belong to no party, because, in many 
 things, I was opposed to all. Yet I freely conversed and associated 
 with all classes, sects, and characters; and it was interesting and 
 instructive to discover the various impressions which were made on 
 individuals belonging to all parties by the principles which I advo¬ 
 cated. To many, according to their prejudices, I appeared a demop 
 of darkness, or, as some of them said, I “was worse than the Devil 
 while to others I seemed an angel of light, or “the best man the 
 world ever saw v and, of course, of every gradation between these 
 extremes. 
 
 Amidst these conflicting feelings, I pursued the “even tenor of myj 
 way,” and turned not from the great object I had in view, either to 
 the right hand or to the left. 
 
 I thus proceeded, step by step, until the most important laws of 
 our nature were unfolded; for X early perceived that a knowledge of 
 th ese laws would soon unveil the three most formidable prejudices, 
 that ignorance of these laws had made almost universal, 
 r These prejudices, arising from early education, are district reli- 
 ( gions in opposition to these divine laws, indissoluble marriages, and, 
 \ unnecessary private property. 
 
 Yet the prejudices produced by education, on each of these subjects, 
 are very different in various countries. Among most people, however, 
 these prejudices, whatever form they may have taken, have been 
 deeply rooted, through a long succession of ages, and have uniformly 
 produced the greatest crimes, suffering and misery; indeed almost 
 all to which human nature is liable: for the natural evils of life are. 
 
 few, they scarcely deserve consideration. 
 
1 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 n 
 
 it , therefore, appeared to me to be the time when these artificial 
 evils might be removed, and when an entire new order of things 
 might be established. 
 
 Many well intentioned and partly enlightened individuals, who 
 have not had an opportunity to reflect deeply on these subjects, 
 imagine that it will be more easy to remove one of these evils at a 
 time, not perceiving that they are three links, forming one chain; 
 each link being absolutely necessary to support the other two, and, 
 therefore, that they must be all retained or go together. 
 
 Instead of these links becoming a band to keep society in good 
 order, and unite men in a bond of charity, justice, and affection, they 
 form a chain of triple strength to retain the human mind in ignorance 
 and vice, and to inflict every species of misery, from artificial causes, 
 on the human race. 
 
 Seeing this, I was induced to develope other arrangements, all 
 in accordance with the divine laws of our nature, and thus attempt 
 to break each link of this magic chain, and thereby remove the only 
 obstacles which prevent men from becoming rational and truly 
 virtuous beings. 
 
 In these new arrangements, the countless evils which have been 
 engendered by conflicting religions, by various forms of marriages, 
 and by unnecessary private property, will not exist: but, instead 
 thereof, real charity, pure chastity, sincere affections, and upright 
 dealing between man and man, producing abundance for all, will 
 every where prevail. 
 
 By pursuing this course I was, from the beginning, conscious that 
 the worst feelings of those who have been trained in old prejudice© 
 must be more or less excited, and I would willingly have avoided 
 creating even this temporary evil, if it had been practicable, but it 
 was not.—I endeavored, however, by calmness and kindness to turn 
 aside these irrational feelings, well knowing that the parties were net 
 the authors of the impressions made upon their respective organiza¬ 
 tions, and I strove to prevent any unnecessary pain in performing a. 
 duty which, to me, appears the highest that man can perform, and 
 which I execute solely under the expectation of relieving future 
 generations from the misery which the past and present have experi¬ 
 enced. 
 
 In pursuance of these measures I last year delivered a course of 
 lectures in New Orleans, explanatory of the principles and many 
 details of the practice of the proposed system. 
 
 During the progress of these lectures many paragraphs appeared 
 m the New Orleans newspapers giving a very mistaken view of the 
 principles and plans which I advocated. Discovering that these 
 paragraphs proceeded from some of the city clergymen, I put an ad¬ 
 vertisement in the newspapers, offering to meet all the ministers of 
 religion in the city, either in public or private, to discuss the subjects 
 of difference between us, in order that the population of New Orleans 
 might know' the real foundation on which the old systems of the 
 world were erected, and the principles on which the new system was 
 
HI DEBATE. 
 
 advocated, These gentlemen, however, were unwilling to enter upon 
 the discussion. 
 
 About the same period Mr. Alexander Campbell, of Bethany in 
 Virginia, was solicited by a brother minister, in the state of Ohio, 
 to meet Dr. Underhill, who was publicly teaching, with success, the 
 principles of the new system in the upper part of that state. 
 
 Mr. Campbell declined the call thus made upon him; but he 
 offered as a shorter mode, in his opinion, of terminating the differ¬ 
 ence, to meet me and discuss the merits of the old and new systems 
 in public, at any time and place convenient to both. 
 
 He afterwards, on seeing my proposals in the newspapers to meet 
 the clergy of New Orleans on specific grounds, publicly offered to 
 discuss those subjects with me at Cincinnati any time within twelve 
 months from the date of his proposal. 
 
 Having occasion, about that period, to pass, on my way to Europe, 
 within twenty miles of Mr. Campbell’s residence, I went to see 
 him to ascertain whether his proposal to meet me in public emanated 
 from a conscientious desire to discover valuable truths for the benefit 
 of the human race, or from a wish to attain a useless notoriety by a 
 vain and futile contest of words without any definite meaning. 
 
 By my intercourse with Mr. Campbell I concluded he was con- 
 scienciously desirous of ascertaining truth from error on these momen¬ 
 tous subjects, that he was much experienced in public discussions, 
 and well educated for the ministry. His superior talents were general¬ 
 ly admitted. Under these circumstances, I did not feel myself at liberty 
 to decline the call he had publicly made upon me—I, therefore, agreed 
 to meet him in this city, at this time, that we might, by a fair and open 
 discussion of principles never yet publicly advocated, discover, if 
 possible, the foundation of human errors respecting vice and virtue, 
 and the real cause of the continuance, at this day over the world, 
 of ignorance, poverty, disunion, crime, and misery: and, if practi¬ 
 cable, lay a broad and solid foundation for a union of all tribes and 
 people, that peace, good will, and intelligence, may every where 
 prevail, and contention and strife cease from the earth. 
 
 Such is the origin and progress of the events and circumstances 
 which have produced the present assemblage at this place, and my 
 sole wish is that it may terminate beneficially for mankind. 
 
 I wait Mr. Campbell’s confirmation of this statement as far as he is 
 personally concerned in it. 
 
 MR. CAMPBELL rose and said— 
 
 My Christian friends and fellow-citizens!—In rising to address 
 you on this occasion, I feel that I ewe you an apology. Do you 
 inquire, For what? I answer, For bringing into public discussion 
 the evidences of the Christian religion. Not, indeed, as if either the 
 religion itself, or the evidences of its truth and divine authority, had 
 any thing to fear from an examination, however public or how ever 
 severe. Why, then, do you say, apologize for bringing this subject 
 into public debate? Because, in so doing, we may appear to com 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 t lb 
 
 cede that it is yet an undecided question subjudiee; or, at least, that 
 its opponents have some good reason for withholding their assent to its 
 truth, and their consent to its requirements. Neither of which we 
 are, at this time, prepared to admit. 
 
 It is true, indeed, that we Christians are oommanded bv an au¬ 
 thority which we deem paramount to every other, to be prepared, 
 at all times, to give a reason of the hope which we entertain; and not. 
 only so, but in meekness, and with firmness, to contend for the 
 faith once delivered to the saints. If, then, it be our duty, either as 
 teachers of the Christian religion, or as private disciples, to be govern¬ 
 ed by these precepts, not only we can fmd an excuse for ourselves, 
 but we hope that you also will find an excuse for us in the present 
 undertaking. Excuse , did I say? Not excuse only, but more than 
 excuse, both authority and encouragement. 
 
 Some Christians, we know, think it enough simply to inveigh 
 against sceptics and scepticism in their weekly harangues: while 
 they are protected by custom and law from the retorts and replies of 
 such as do not believe. This is not enough. If, indeed, all the 
 .sceptics in the vicinities of Christian congregations made it a point 
 to attend these weekly discourses, and if their objections and doubts 
 were fairly met, canvassed, and refuted, then this course might 
 suffice. But neither of these is precisely the case. The sceptics 
 do not generally attend the places of worship; and few of the teachers 
 of religion pay adequate attention to this description of character, 
 in some Christian countries, also, too much reliance is placed upon 
 the strong arm of the law ; and in this country, perhaps-, too much 
 confidence is reposed in the moral force of public opinion. 
 
 Scepticism and infidelity are certainly on the increase in this and 
 other countries. Not, indeed, because of the mildness of our laws, 
 but because of the lives of our professors, and a very general inat¬ 
 tention to the evidences of our religion. The sectarian spirit, the 
 rage of rivalry in the various denominations, together with many 
 absurd tenets and opinions propagated, afford more relevant reasons 
 for the prevalence of scepticism than most of our professors are able 
 to offer for their faith. 
 
 Kingcraft and priestcraft, always german-cousins at least, have 
 so disfigured, or as they suppose, ornamented Christianity, so com¬ 
 pletely disguised it, that many having no taste nor inclination for 
 examining the inspired books, have hastily and peremptorily decided 
 that all religion is the offspring of fraud or fiction. The ignorance 
 of the multitude, and the knavery of the few, are the most puissant 
 auxiliaries of those daring and rash spirits who undertake to make 
 it appear that the religious institutions of this country are founded 
 on kingcraft or priestcraft. 
 
 I have sometimes been ready to conclude with Bishop Newton in 
 his illustrations of the prophecies, that the unhallowed alliance be¬ 
 tween kings and priests, of church and state, is destined to be finally 
 destroyed by a momentary triumph of infidelity: or, to corne nearer 
 to bis own language, that before the millennial order of society can 
 
 2 
 
DEBATE.. 
 
 14 
 
 be introduced, there will be a very general spread of* infidelity. 
 However this may be, for here we would not be dogmatical, we are 
 assured that the progress of scepticism is neither ow ing to the weak¬ 
 ness nor the paucity of the evidences of Christianity; but to a pro¬ 
 fession of it unauthorized by, and incompatible with, the Christian 
 scriptures. These concessions we are compelled to make from a sense 
 of justice to our cause; but in conceding so much, we give nothing 
 away but what every Christian would wish to see done away, viz. the 
 abuses of the Christian religion. Nor will we allow that there is 
 even in the abuses of Christianity any argument against its excel¬ 
 lency, nor any just reason for the infidelity of any one who has 
 access to the oracles of God. 
 
 When we agreed to meet Mr. Owen in public debate upon the 
 questions to be discussed on this occasion, it w as not with any ex¬ 
 pectation that he w T as to be convinced of the errors of his system 
 on the subject of religion; nor w ith any expectation that I was in the 
 least to be shaken in my faith in the sacred writings. It is to be pre¬ 
 sumed that Mr. Chven feels himself bevond the reach of conviction: 
 
 7 
 
 and I most sincerely declare that I have every assurance of 
 the truth and authority of the Christian religion. I know, indeed, 
 that there is no circumstance in which any person can he placed 
 more unfavorable to his conviction, than that which puts him in a 
 public assembly upon the proof of his principles. The mind is then 
 on the alert to find proofs for the system which has been already 
 adopted, and is not disposed to such an investigation as might issue 
 i n conviction. Arguments and proofs afe rather parried than weighed 
 and triumph rather than conviction is anxiously sought for. At the 
 same time I own I am, on all subjects, open to conviction, and even 
 desirous to receive larger measures of light; and more than once, 
 even when in debate, I have been convicted of the truth and force 
 of the argument of an opponent. Nor would I say that it is impossi¬ 
 ble that even my opponent might yet preach the faith which he has 
 all his life labored to destroy. But the public, the wavering, doubt¬ 
 ing, and unsettled public, who are endangered to be carried off, as 
 an apostle says, by the flood which the dragon has poured out of 
 his mouth, are those for whose benefit this discussion has, on my 
 part, been undertaken. They are not beyond the reach of convic¬ 
 tion, correction, and reformation. For the present generation and 
 the succeeding I have been made willing to undertake to show that 
 there is no good reason for rejecting the testimony of the apostles 
 and prophets; but all the reason which rational beings can demand 
 for the sincere belief and cordial reception of the Christian religion. 
 
 You must not think, my friends, that Christianity has come down 
 to our times without a struggle; nay, indeed, it took the nations at 
 first by the irresistible force of its evidence. It was opposed b > ! 
 consolidated ranks of well disciplined foes. Learned, cunning, bold, 
 and powerful were its enemies. But experience taught them it was 
 not only foolish, but hurtful to kick against the goads. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 15 
 
 Never was there such a moral phenomenon exhibited upon this 
 earth as the first establishment and progress of Christianity. The 
 instruments by which it was established, the opposition with which 
 it was met, and the success which attended its career, were all of 
 the most extraordinary character. The era of Christianity itself 
 ^ presents a very sublime spectacle: the whole world reposing in 
 security under the protecting wings of the most august of all 
 the Cesars; peace, universal peace, with, her healthful arms en¬ 
 circling all the nations composing the greed empire, which was 
 itself the consummation of all the empires of the ancient world. 
 —Polytheism, with her myriads of temples and her myriads of 
 myriads of priests, triumphantly seated in the affections of a super¬ 
 stitious people, and swaying a magic sceptre from the Tyber to the 
 "ends of the earth. Legislators, magistrates, philosophers, orators, and 
 poets, all combined to plead her cause, and to protect her from insult 
 and injury. Rivers of sacrificial blood crimsoned all the rites of 
 pagan worship; and clouds of incense arose from every city, town, 
 and hamlet, in honor of the gods of Roman superstition. Just in 
 this singular and unrivalled crisis, when the Jews’ religion, though cor¬ 
 rupted by tradition and distracted with faction, was venerated for its 
 antiquity, and admired for its divinity; when idolatry was at its 
 zenith in the Pagan world, the Star of Bethlehem appears. The 
 marvellous scene opens in a stable. What a fearful odds! What a 
 strange contrast! Idolatry on the throne, and the founder of a new’ 
 religion and a new empire lying in a manger! 
 
 Unattended in his birth, and unsecond.ed in his outset, he begins his 
 career. Prodigies of extraordinary sublimity announce that the 
 desire of all nations is bom. But the love of empire and the jealousy 
 of a rival stimulate the bloody Herod to unsheath his sword. Many 
 innocents were slaughtered, but Heaven shielded the new born king of 
 the world. For the present we pass over his wonderful history. After 
 thirty years of obscurity-we find him surrounded with what the wise, 
 the wealthy, and the proud, would call a contemptible group; telling 
 them that one of them, an uncouth and untutored fisherman too, had 
 discovered a truth which would new-modify the whole world. In the 
 midst of them he uttered the most incredible oracle ever heard. I am 
 about, says he, to found a new empire on the acknowledgment of a 
 single truth, a truth too, which one of you has discovered, and all the 
 powers and malice of worlds seen and unseen shall never prevail 
 against it. This is our helmet, breast plate, and shield, in this*con¬ 
 troversy. What a scene presents itself here! A pusillanimous, 
 wavering, ignorant, and timid, dozen of individuals, without a penny 
 apiece, assured that to them it pleased the Ruler of the Universe to 
 give the empire of the world: that to each of them would be given a 
 throne from which would be promulged laws never to be repealed while 
 sun and moon endure. 
 
 Such were the army of the faith. They begin their career. Und£r 
 the jealous and invidious eyes of a haughty sanhedrim at home, and 
 under the strict cognizance of a Roman emperor abroad, with a watch* 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 
 ilil procurator stationed over them. They commenced their opera¬ 
 tions. One while charged with idolatry; at another with treason, 
 Reviled and persecuted until their chief is rewarded with a cross* and 
 themselves with threats and imprisonment. A throne in a future world 
 animated him, and a crown of glory after martyrdom stimulated them. 
 On they march from conquest to Conquest, till not only a multitude of 
 die Jewish priests and people, but Cesar’s household in imperial Rome 
 became obedient to the faith. Such was the commencement. 
 
 The land of Judea is smitten with the sword of the Spirit. Jerusa¬ 
 lem falls, and Samaria is taken. The coasts of Asia, maritime cities, 
 islands, and provinces, vow allegiance to a crucified King. Mighty 
 Rome is roused, and shaken, and affrighted. Sacrifices are un- 
 bought, altars moulder, and temples decay. Her pontiffs, her sen¬ 
 ate, and her emperor stand aghast. Persecution, the adjunct of a 
 weak and wicked cause, unsheaths her sword and kindles her fires. 
 A Nero and a Caligula prepare the faggots and illuminate Rome with 
 burning Christians. But the scheme soon defeats itself.* for anon ’tis 
 found that the blood and the ashes of martyrs are the seed of the church. 
 So the battle is fought till every town of note from the Tyber to the 
 Thames, from the Euphrates to the Ganges, bows to the cross. On the 
 one side superstition and the sword, the mitred head and the sceptred 
 arm combine: on the other, almighty truth alone pushes on the com¬ 
 bat. Under these fearful odds the truth triumphs, and shall the ad¬ 
 vocates of such a cause fear the contest now! 
 
 Yes, my fellow citizens, not a king nor priest smiled upon our 
 faith, until it won the day. It offered no lure to the ambitious; no 
 reward to the avaricious. It formed no alliance with the lusts of the 
 flesh, the lusts of the eye, nor the pride of life. It disdained such 
 auxiliaries. It aimed not so low. It called for self-denial, humility, 
 patience, and courage, on the part of all its advocates; and pro¬ 
 mised spiritual joys as an earnest of eternal bliss. By the exeellency 
 of its doctrine, the purity of its morals, the rationality of its argu¬ 
 ments, the demonstrations of the Holy Spirit, and the good example 
 of its subjects, it triumphed on the ruins of Judaism and Idolatry, 
 'i he Christian volunteers found the yoke of Christ was easy and his 
 burthen light. Peace of mind, a heaven-born equanimity, a good 
 conscience, a pure heart, universal love, a triumphant joy, and a 
 glorious hope of immortal bliss, were its reward in hand. An incor¬ 
 ruptible, undefiled, and unfading inheritance in the presence of God, 
 with the society of angels, principalities, and powers, of the loftiest 
 intelligence and most comprehensive knowledge, brighter than the 
 sun, in the glories of light and love eternal, arc its reward in future, 
 
 But now let us ask, What boon, what honor, what reward, have our 
 opponents to offer for its renunciation? Yes, this is the question 
 which the sequel must develope. To what would they convert us! 
 What heaven have they to propose! What immortality to reveal! 
 What sublime views of a creation and a creator! What authentic re¬ 
 cord of the past! What prophetic hope of the future! Wha 
 account of our origin! What high ultimatum of our destiny! What 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 17 
 
 terrors have they to offer to stem the torrent of corruption! What 
 balm and consolation to the sons and daughters of anguish! To 
 these and a thousand kindred questions they must,and they will answer, 
 None; none at all. They promise to him that disbelieved* the Founder 
 of the Christian religion; to him that neglects and disdains the salva¬ 
 tion of the gospel; to him who tramples under foot the blood of, the 
 New Institution, and insults the Spirit of favor; to him who traduces 
 Moses, Daniel, and Job; to him who vilifies Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, 
 and John; to him who devotes his soul to the lusts of the flesh; who 
 disdains heaven; who deifies his appetites; who degrades himself to 
 a mere animal, and eulogizes philosophy; to this man they promise 
 eternal sleep, an everlasting death. This is the faith, the hope, anu 
 joy, for which they labor with so much zeal, and care, and pain. 
 
 Divesting man of all that renders life a blessing and death support¬ 
 able, denuding him of all the dignity and honor which have ever been 
 the admiration of the wise and good, and reducing him wholly to the 
 earth, is by our opponents the true philosophy, the just science, the 
 valuable knowledge. In their estimation a colony of bees co-opera¬ 
 ting in the building of store-houses and cells, and afterwards stowing 
 them full of the necessaries of animal life, humming from flower to 
 flower, while the sun shines; and in its absence, sucking the juices 
 which they have collected, is the grand model of what man would 
 be, and what he would do, were he under the benign influence of just 
 knowledge and sound philosophy. 
 
 To accomplish this high and glorious end of our being is the suv 
 preme wish of my benevolent opponent. In the prosecution of which 
 he labors, to show us that matter—solid, liquid, gaseous matter—is 
 the height and depth, the length and breadth of all that deserves the 
 name of just knowledge. As for souls , and their appurtenances, they 
 are mere nonentities, creatures of mere fancy, having neither figure, 
 extension, nor gravity; old wives’ fables, and ought to be all embarked 
 in company with ghosts and witches, and colonized on the point of a 
 needle on some lofty peak in the regions of imagination. 
 
 When by a philosophic exorcism he has cast out these indescribable 
 spirits which haunt the cells of our crania , and emptied our heads of 
 all their intellectual contents, we are then to make the body, and espe¬ 
 cially the abdominal viscera , the all-engrcssing topic of life and death, 
 and the capital item in our last will and testament. 
 
 Now let us glance at the method of argument by which this point 
 is to be proved. 
 
 1. Man is to be detached from any relation to a Supreme or su¬ 
 perior being. All debts of gratitude or obligation of any sort to an 
 unseen or intangible agent are to be cancelled by a single act of oblivi¬ 
 on ; and when he is taught to annihilate the Creator, he is next to be 
 taught that he is himself neither Creator nor creature , but a sort of 
 self-existent particle of a self-existent whole. 
 
 2. Lest he should be too uplifted in his own imagination, he is to be 
 taught that he is no more than a two-legged animal , as circumscri¬ 
 bed by sense as a mole or a lobster. 
 
 2* 
 
DEBAT]?. 
 
 i8 
 
 3. That having bu tfive senses, it is necessary that these should be 
 analysed in order that he may be convinced that nothing can be known 
 of which they are not the informers. Thus man, when perfectly redu¬ 
 ced to a mere sentient being, is prepared to become a sensualist . 
 
 4. To complete the process of degradation, man is to be taught that 
 he has no faculty, or power of learning or knowing any thing but by 
 his senses, or that he can receive no certain information from the tes¬ 
 timony of his a ncestors. 
 
 5. That all the information which is traditional or handed down, is 
 false and incredible. 
 
 6. As to morality, it is just a due regard to utility. Bees are moral 
 as well as men; and he is the most moral bee which creates the most 
 honey and consumes the least of it. 
 
 We do not say that these are vei'batim , or in propria forma , the iden¬ 
 tical positions of my opponent—They belong, perhaps, more justly ta 
 some of the fraternity, for you will remember that he confines himself 
 to the following four grand points: 
 
 1. That all the religions in the world have been founded on the ig¬ 
 norance of mankind. 
 
 2. That they are directly opposed to the never-changing laws of our 
 
 nature. 
 
 3. That they have been and are the real source of vice, disunion, 
 and misery of every description. 
 
 4. That they are now the only real bar to the formation of a society 
 m’virtue, of intelligence, of charity in its most extended sense, and of 
 
 incerity and kindness among the whole human family.—'We shall be 
 somewhat disappointed, however, if in the developement they do not 
 engross the preceding positions. 
 
 Were I at liberty to choose a method eo-extensive with the whole 
 range of scepticism, it would be such as the following: 
 
 1. I would propose to present some philosophic arguments demon- 
 strati ve of the truth of revealed religion. 
 
 2. I would attempt to illustrate and press upon my opponent the 
 mature and weight of the historic evidence* 
 
 3. I would then endeavor to show, from the Christian religion itself 
 i - s c ertain d i vine origi n . 
 
 4. And in the last place, I w T ould undertake to prove, from the acti> 
 t*] condition of the world, and the prophetic annunciations, the absolute 
 ■certainty that this religion came from the Creator of the world. 
 
 Under these very general heads or chapters, I would not fear to in? 
 traduce such a number and variety of distinct arguments and eviden¬ 
 ces, as I should think ought to silence the captious, convert the honest 
 inquirer, and confirm the weak and wavering disciple. But in a dis¬ 
 cussion such as the present, it would be almost, if not altogether, inv 
 possible to pursue such a method; and as it devolves upon my oppo¬ 
 nent to lead the way, and upon me to follow, I can only promise that 
 \ will endeavor in the most methodical way, to bring forward the 
 arguments which are couched in this arrangement; of which indeed 
 a very inadequate idea can be communicated in any schedule. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 10 
 
 The preceding synopsis is more general than necessary; hut it is> 
 adapted to the vague and diversified attacks upon the Christian fortress 
 by the sceptics of the present school. In the natural order of things 
 we would confine ourselves to the following method. 
 
 1. State as a postulatum the following unquestionable fact : 
 
 That there is now in the world a book called the Old and New Tes-> 
 laments, purporting to contain a Revelation from the Creator of the 
 universe. Then inquire— 
 
 2. By what agency or means this work came into existence. In 
 the analysis of this question we would 
 
 1. Demonstrate that the religion contained in this book is predica¬ 
 ted upon certain matters of fact. 
 
 2. That our senses, and testimony or history are the only means 
 by which we can arrive at certain information in any question of 
 fact. 
 
 3. That there are certain infallible criteria by which some historic 
 matters of fact may be proved true or false. 
 
 4. We would then specify these criteria, and 
 
 5th. Show that we have all these criteria in deciding this question. 
 This proved, and all that Christians contend for must be conceded. 
 IVe say that were we to be governed by the natural order, we would con¬ 
 fine all our debate to this one question as detailed in these five items. 
 All this indeed will come in course under the 2d and 4th items in 
 the synopsis proposed. But we cannot refrain from expressing our 
 opinion, that all the rest is superfluous labor bestowed upon us, by the 
 obliquity of the sceptical scheme. And moreover we must add our 
 conviction that, supposing we should fail in affording satisfactory data 
 on the other topics, it is impossible to fail in the point upon which the 
 strength and stress of the argument must rest. 
 
 In this candid and unreserved way, my fellow-citizens, we have 
 laid before you our views and prospects in the opening of this discus¬ 
 sion, which may give you some idea cf what may be expected from 
 this meeting. Your patience and indulgence may have to be solicited 
 and displayed, and should v/e be compelled to roam at large over vast 
 and trackless fields of speculation, and oftentimes to return by the same 
 . track, you will have the goodness to grant us all that indulgence which 
 the nature of the case demands. 
 
 But we cannot sit down without admonishing you to bear constant- 
 Jy in mind the inconceivable and ineffable importance attached to 
 the investigation. It is not the ordinary affairs of this life, the fleeting 
 and transitory concerns of to-day or to-morrow; it is not whether we 
 shall live all freemen, or die all slaves: it is not. the momentary affairs 
 or empire, or the evanescent charms of dominion—Nay, indeed, all 
 these are but the toys of childhood, the sportive excursions of youthful 
 fancy, contrasted with the questions, What is man? Whence came he? 
 
 Whither does he go ? Is he a mortal or an immortal being ? Is he doom¬ 
 ed to spring up like the grass, bloom like a flower, drop his seed into 
 the earth, and die forever ? Is there no object of future hope? No 
 God— i\q heaven—no exalted society to he known or enjoyed? Axe 
 
20 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 all the great and illustrious men and women who have lived before 
 we were born wasted and gone forever? After a few short days are 
 fled, when the enjoyments and toils of life are over, when our relish 
 for social enjoyment, and our desires for returning to the fountain of 
 life are most acute, must we hang our heads and close our eyes in the 
 desolating and appalling prospect of never opening them again, of nev¬ 
 er tasting the sweets for which a state of discipline and trial has so 
 well fitted us.—These are the awful and sublime merits of the question 
 at issue. It is not what we shall eat, nor what we shall drink, unless 
 we shall be proved to be mere animals; but it is, shall we live or die 
 forever? It is as beautifully expressed by a Christian poet— 
 
 Shall spring ever visit the mouldering urn? 
 
 Shall day ever dawn on the night of the grave? 
 
 Here Mb. Owen rose and said— 
 
 Before I commence the opening of this discussion I will state two 
 axioms, and then proceed. 
 
 First Axiom .—Truth is always consistent with itself, consequently, 
 each separate truth is in strict accordance with every other truth in 
 the universe. Or in other words— 
 
 No two truths, upon subjects, differing the most widely from each 
 ether, can ever be in opposition or contradiction to each other. 
 
 Second Axiom .—No name or authority, whatever may be its nature, 
 can change truth into falsehood or falsehood into truth, or can, in any 
 way, make that which is true to be false, or that which is false to be 
 true. • x 
 
 For truth is a law of nature, existing independent of all authority. 
 Thus it is a law of nature, that one and one make two, and equally 
 so that as one and one make two, two and two make four, and so on 
 ©fall the combinations of numbers. 
 
 Now the united authorities of the universe could not, by their flat* 
 change these laws of nature and determine that one and one shall 
 not make two, but three or any other number. 
 
 Here Mr. Omen begins to read the first part of his address. 
 
 My friends, for I trust we are all friends, we meet here to¬ 
 day for no personal consideration; our sole object is to ascertain 
 facts, from which true principles may be obtained and introduced 
 into practice for the benefit of the human race. 
 
 The discussion which I am about to open between Mr. Campbell 
 and myself, is one more important in its consequences to all descrip¬ 
 tions of men, than any, perhaps, which has hitherto occurred in the 
 annals of history. 
 
 It is a discussion entered upon solely w r ith a view, as I believe, to 
 edicit truth, if it be now practicable, on subjects the most interesting 
 to the whole family of mankind; on subjects which involve the hap¬ 
 piness or misery of the present and all future generations. 
 
 And our intention is to begin, to continue, and to terminate these 
 proceedings with the good feelings, which ought always to govern 
 the conduct of those vdio seek truth in singleness of beast, and with 
 a sincere desire to find it. 
 
DEBATE. 21 
 
 Hitherto assuredly all mankind have been trained to be children 
 of some national or local district, and, in consequence they have* 
 been made to acquire errors which create, over the world, confusion 
 of Intellect and a necessary fatal division in practice. 
 
 We now, however, propose to develope facts, and truths deduced 
 from them, through the knowledge of which these local prejudices 
 shall gradually disappear, and be finally removed. 
 
 We propose further that, through a knowledge of these facts and 
 truths, a practice shall he introduced which shall enable all to become 
 affectionate and intelligent members of one family, having new 
 hearts and new minds, and whose single object, through life, will 
 be, to promote each others’ happiness and thereby their own. 
 
 To attain this great end, we shall not now attack the errors of any 
 particular local district, for, by so doing, the evil passions and bad feel¬ 
 ings which local errors engender, are aroused and brought into injuri¬ 
 ous action; but universal truths shall be unfolded, which shall destroy 
 the seeds of those pernicious passions and feelings, and, instead thereof, 
 produce knowledge, peace, and good will among the human race. 
 
 In furtherance of this mighty change in the destinies of mankind, I 
 am now to prove “that all the religions of the world have originated in 
 error; that they are directly opposed to the divine unchanging laws of 
 human nature; that they are necessarily the source of vice, disunion, f 
 and misery; that they are now the only obstacle to the formation of a 
 society, over the earth, of intelligence, of charity in its most extended 
 sense, and of sincerity and affection. And that these district religions 
 can be no longer maintained in any part of the world, except by keep¬ 
 ing the mass of the people in ignorance of their own nature, by an in¬ 
 crease of the tyranny of the few over the many.” 
 
 It is my intention to prove these all-important truths, not by exposing 
 the fallacies of the sources from whence each of these local religions 
 has originated; but by bringing forth, for public examination, the facts 
 which determine by what unchanging laws man is produced and his 
 character formed; and by showing how utterly inapplicable all there* 
 ligions, which have been hitherto invented and instilled into the human 
 mind, are to a being so created and matured. 
 
 It will be Mr. Campbell’s duty to endeavor to discover error in this 
 developement, and, if he shall find any, to make the error known to 
 me, and to the public, in a kind and friendly manner. 
 
 If, however, Mr. Campbell shall not detect any error in this state¬ 
 ment, but, on the contrary, shall find that it is a plain developement 
 of facts, and just deductions therefrom, and in strict accordance with 
 ail other known facts, and well ascertained truths, as I most conscien¬ 
 tiously believe it to be; then will it be equally his duty to declare, to 
 the public, this truth for the benefit ofmankind. 
 
 After this shall be done, it will become the duty and interest of men ? 
 of all other local districts, to ascertain the truth or error of these facts, 
 
*x» 
 
 ^w-sy 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 and of the consequences to which it is stated they will lead in prac* 
 tice, and then, in the same kind and temperate manner, to publish in 
 the shortest period, after such examination, the result, in order to re^ 
 move error and establish truth. 
 
 It is only by this just and equitable mode of proceeding that truth 
 can be elicited,and made manifest for the good of mankind; that the 
 real cause of disunion and misery can be detected and withdrawn 
 from society, and that, in place thereof, a deep and lasting foundation 
 can be laid, to establish, forever, among all people,union, peace, char¬ 
 ity, and affection. 
 
 The facts from which I am compelled to believe that these all- 
 important consequences are to arise, are: 
 
 1st. That man, at his birth, is ignorant of every thing relative to 
 his own organization, and that he has not been permitted to create 
 the slightest part of his natural propensities, faculties, or qualities, 
 physical or mental. 
 
 2. That no two infants, at birth, have yet been known to possess pre¬ 
 cisely the same organization, while the physical, mental, and moral 
 differences, between all infants, are formed without their knowledge 
 or will. 
 
 3. That each individual is placed, at birth, without his knowledge 
 or consent, within circumstances, which, acting upon his peculiar or¬ 
 ganization, impress the general character of those circumstances upon 
 the infant, child, and man. Yet that the influence of those circumstan¬ 
 ces is to a certain degree modified by the peculiar natural organiza¬ 
 tion of each individual. 
 
 4. That no infant has the power of deciding at what period of time 
 or in what part of the world he shall come into existence; of whom he 
 shall be born, in what distinct religion he shall be trained to believe, 
 or by what other circumstances he shall be surrounded trom birth to 
 death. 
 
 5. That each individual is so created, that when young, he may be 
 made to receive impressions, to produce either true ideas or false no¬ 
 tions, and beneficial or injurious habits and to retain them with great 
 tenacity. 
 
 j6. That each individual is so created that he must believe according 
 to the strongest impressions that are made on his feelings and other 
 faculties, while his belief in no case depends upon his will. 
 
 7. That each individual is so created that he must like that which 
 is pleasant to him, or that which produces agreeable sensations on his 
 individual organization, and he must dislike that which creates^in him 
 unpleasant and disagreeable sensations; while he cannot discover, 
 previous to experience, what those sensations should be. 
 
 8. That each individual is so created that, the sensations made upon 
 his organization, although pleasant and delightful at their commence¬ 
 ment and for some duration, generally become,when continued beyond 
 a certain period, without change, disagreeable and painful. While* 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 23 
 
 on the contrary, when a too rapid change of sensations is made on his 
 organization, it dissipates, weakens, and otherwise injures his physical, 
 intellectual and moral powers and enjoyments. 
 
 9. That Ihe highest health, the greatest progressive improvements, 
 and the most permanent happiness of each individual depend in a great 
 degree upon the proper cultivation of all his physical, intellectual, 
 and moral faculties and powers from infancy to maturity, and upon all 
 these parts of his nature being duly called into action, at their proper 
 period, and temperately exercised according to the strength and capa¬ 
 city of the individual. 
 
 10. Tnatthe individual is made to possess and to acquire the irorst 
 character, when his organization at birth has been compounded of the 
 most inferior propensities, faculties, and qualities of our common na¬ 
 ture, and when so organized, he has been placed, from birth to death, 
 amidst the most vicious or worst circumstances. 
 
 11. That the individual is made to possess and to acquire a medium 
 character, when his original organization has been created superior 9 
 and when the circumstances which surround him from birth to death 
 produce continued vicious or unfavorable impressions. Or when his 
 organization has been formed of inferior materials, and the circumstan¬ 
 ces in which he has been placed 1 from birth to death are of a character 
 to produce superior impressions only. Or when there has been some 
 mixture of good and bad qualities, in the original organization, and 
 when it had also been placed, through life, in various circumstances of 
 good and evil. This last compound has been hitherto the common lot 
 of mankind. 
 
 12. That the individual is made the most superior of bis species when 
 his original organization has been compounded of the best proportions 
 of the best ingredients of which human nature is formed, and when the 
 circumstances which surround him from birth to death are of a char¬ 
 acter to produce only superior impressions; or, in other words, when 
 the circumstances, or laws, institutions, and customs, in which he is 
 placed, are all in unison with his nature. 
 
 These facts,remaining the same, at all times in all countries, are the 
 divine revelations to the whole human race. They constitute laws of 
 nature not of man’s invention; they exist without his knowledge or 
 consent; they change not by any effort he can make, and as they pro¬ 
 ceed, solely from a power or a cause unknown and mysterious to. 
 him, they are then a divine revelation, in the only correct sense in 
 which the term can be applied. 
 
 Considered separately and united, and viewed in all their bearings 
 and consequences, these divine laws of human nature fain the most 
 perfect foundation for a divine moral code —-if code abundantly suffi¬ 
 cient to produce, in practice, al! virtue in the individual and in society, 
 sufficient to enable man, through a correct knowledge thereof, to 
 “work out his own salvation” from sin or ignorance and misery, and 
 to secure the happiness of his whole race. 
 
 For as the first law teaches that, as all men are created by a power 
 mysterious and unknown to themselves, they can have no merit or 
 
24 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 demerit for their original formation or individual organization; that, 
 consequently, the pride of birth or superior physical form or of intel¬ 
 lectual capacity, are feelings proceeding, alone, from an aberration 
 of intellect produced by ignorance and therefore irrational. And the 
 second law teaches us that, as no two infants are born alike, and as 
 they have no knowledge how the difference is produced, we ought 
 not to be displeased or to blame any individuals, tribes, or people; or 
 to be less f riendly to them because they have been made to differ from 
 us in color,form, ox features. 
 
 The third law teaches us, that as each individual, nt birth, may be 
 placed, without his knowledge or consent, within circumstances, to 
 force him to become any of the general characters now known to exist 
 in any part of the world, we ought not to be displeased with the$e who 
 have been made to differ from ourselves in birth, in language, in reli¬ 
 gion, in manners, in customs, in conditions, in thinking, in feeling, or 
 in conduct. On the contrary, w r e are taught to know that this differ¬ 
 ence, to whatever extent it may proceed, is no more than a necessary 
 effect arising from the general, national, and district circumstances 
 in which the) 7 have been placed, modified by the peculiar organization 
 of each individual, and that, as neither the organization or these cir¬ 
 cumstances were formed by them, to be surprised or displeased, in 
 consequence of their existence, is a certain proof, that we, ourselves, 
 are in an irrational state, and influenced, alone, by ignorance of our 
 nature. By this law we are further taught, that all feelings of anger 
 and irritation will entirely cease, as soon as we shall acquire a real 
 knowledge of our nature; that these feelings belong to man only du¬ 
 ring his irrational state of existence, and that when he becomes en¬ 
 lightened, and shall be made a rational being, they will no longer be 
 found in human society. Instead of-these irrational feeling, engem 
 uered solely by ignorance of this law of our common nature, we 
 shall, through a knowledge of it, acquire a never-ceasing, never-tiring 
 practical charity for the whole human race; a charity so efficient, so 
 s incere, and so pure, that it will be impossible for any one, thus taught 
 from infancy, to think ill of, or to desire the slightest injury to, any 
 one of his fellow beings,. 
 
 ! 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 : : 
 
 i 
 
 
 By the fourth, fifth,and sixth laws, we are taught that a knowledge 
 of the principles contained in the preceding laws, is so essential to the 
 well being of the human race, that it is again and again reiterated, 
 through each of these laws, in every form the most likely to make the 
 deepest impressions on our minds. They express, in language which 
 no one can misunderstand, the ignorance and folly'of individual pride 
 and assumed consequences on account of birth, religion, learning, 
 manners, habits, or any other acquirement or qualification, physical, 
 intellectual, or moral; and give an entire new and different direction 
 to all our thoughts, feelings, and actions, and v. e shall no longer con* 
 skier man f >rmed to be the ignorant, vicious, and degraded being, that, 
 heretofore, he has been compelled to appear, whether covered by the 
 garb of savage or civilized life. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 The seventh law teaches us, that there is no power, and pf course 
 no right in one man to attempt to compel another to like or dislike any 
 thing or any person at his bidding or command; for this law shows, 
 / that liking or disliking, as well as believing or disbelieving, are invo¬ 
 luntary acts of our nature, and are the necessary, and therefore, the 
 right impressions made upon our senses. Merit and demerit, therefore, 
 for liking or disliking, for believing or disbelieving, will be no long¬ 
 er attributed to man, than while the human race remains in an irra- 
 tiondjtafe. Marriage, prostitution, jeafeusy, and the endless sexual 
 ciTmes and diseases, which these have engendered, have arisen solely 
 from ignorance of this fundamental or divine law of our nature; and, 
 in consequence, real chastity is unknowm among the greater part of 
 the human race; but, in place thereof, a spurious chastity exists, pro¬ 
 ducing insincerity, falsehood, deception, and dissimulation. 
 
 The eighth and ninth laws teach us the necessity for, and the ad¬ 
 vantages to be derived from, cultivating and duly exercising all the 
 propensities, faculties, and powers with which nature has supplied us, 
 and the folly of permitting any one of them to lie dormant, unused, 
 or unenjoyed, or to be over-exerted and injured. These laws thus 
 teach us the benefit of well directed industry, the evil of idleness, and 
 the all-importnnce of temperance in the use of each of our faculties, 
 physical, intellectual, and moral, and the lamentable error man has 
 committed, through ignorance, in every department of human society. 
 He has divided and subdivided the physical and intellectual faculties 
 among various classes of individuals, while the laws of our nature have 
 determined that the highest happiness human nature is formed to ex¬ 
 perience must be derived from a temperate exercise of all its pow r ers 
 of enjoyment, 
 
 The tenth, eleventh, and twelfth laAvs teach us by unfolding, in the 
 most plain and obvious manner, how the varied character of man has 
 been formed, what practical measures must be adopted before man 
 can become an intelligent and rational being; that he must be trained 
 and educated from infancy to maturity, altogether different from what 
 he has been, in order that he may be taught to acquire, without excep¬ 
 tion, kind feelings, superior dispositions, habits, manners, knowledge, 
 and conduct; the difference between them being in variety and de¬ 
 gree, but never in kind and quality. The character w ill be thus ol- 
 ways formed to be good to the extent that the natural powers will per¬ 
 mit it to be carried; but as we have been taught, by all the preceding 
 laws, that no individual can form any part of his natural powders, none 
 will be blamed or will suffer in consequence of possessing incurable 
 natural defects, but, on the contrary, all will have pleasure in devis¬ 
 ing and applying means to diminish their inconvenience. By these 
 law T s, we are taught, that the proper training and education of the 
 young of the rising generation, is, by far, the most important ofallthe 
 departments of the society, and will receive the first consideration, as 
 soon as men can be .found to be rational. That there is but one sim¬ 
 ple principle applicable to this practice, and it is, o remove all the 
 vicious circumstances now existing in the laws, institutions, and cus- 
 
 3 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 26 
 
 terns which man, through ignorance, has introduced, in opposition to 
 the laws of human nature, and, in their place, establish virtuous cir¬ 
 cumstances, that is laws, institutions, and customs, in unison with the 
 divine or natural law r s of human nature. These laws teach that all 
 human w isdom consists alone in this mode of acting, and that, w hat¬ 
 ever conduct man may adopt w hich differs from it, emanates from ig¬ 
 norance, and must be irrational. 
 
 And from these divine laws we learn generally, that man is now, 
 and ever has been, a being essentially formed according to the nature, 
 hind, and qualities of the circumstances in which he is permitted to 
 live by his immediate predecessors. That when these circumstances 
 are of an inferior and vicious character, man, of necessity, while under 
 fh^ir influence, must become inferior and vicious; an'<J when these cir¬ 
 cumstances are of a superior and virtuous character, in like manner, 
 while under their influence, he must become superior and virtuous. 
 
 The great business of human life, in a rational state of society, 
 will be, therefore, to acquire an accurate knowledge of the science of 
 the influence of circumstances over human nature, both previous and 
 subsequent to birth; to prepare the means by w hich all shall be taught 
 to understand the principles and practices by w hich each of the infe¬ 
 rior or vicious circumstances, surrounding human life, may be with¬ 
 drawn, in the shortest time, with the least inconvenience, to all, and 
 replaced by others which shall benefit everyone. 
 
 The knowledge of this new code will thus speedily lead to a new 
 life, in which all men will be regularly trained from infancy, to ac¬ 
 quire the most valuable knowledge with the best dispositions, habits, 
 manners, and conduct. 
 
 Under tins new dispensation, their characters w ill be so completely 
 changed or new-formed, that, in comparison of what they have been 
 and arc, they will become beings of a superior order; they will be ra¬ 
 tional in all their thoughts, words, and actions. 
 
 They will be indeed regenerated, for “their minds will be born 
 again” and old things will be made to “pass aw r ay and all to become 
 new.” 
 
 This in our day, in part, but more fully and completely in the next 
 succeeding generation, shall the prophecies of the partial knowledge of 
 the post times he fulfilled, not, indeed, by disturbing the whole system 
 of the universe, by any supposed fanciful miracles, effected in oppo¬ 
 sition to the unchanging law r s of nature, but they will be accomplish¬ 
 ed by the regular progress of those laws, which from the beginning, 
 were abundantly sufficient to execute in due time all the purposes of 
 that power from which these laws proceed. 
 
 The principles and practice thus developed of the new r moral code, 
 is a mere outline of the mighty change which it will effect; imperfect 
 however, as it is, it is yet sufficient to afford some idea of the advanta¬ 
 ges which a progress in real knowledge, derived from simple facts and 
 almost self-evident truths, can give to the world. 
 
 These tw elve primary law s of human nature also form a standard, 
 by which moral and religious truth or falsehood can be unerringly 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 known; for as truth must be one throughout the universe* no two truths 
 can ever be, at any tuns or in any place, in opposition to each other, 
 and therefore, all that shall be found, under every varied comparison, 
 to be in unison with these divine laws, must be true, while all that is 
 in discordance with them must be false. By the application, there™ 
 fore, of this standard, the truth or falsehood of all religious and moral 
 codes will be discovered, and the utility or injury of all institutions 
 will be easily ascertained. 
 
 Were we now, in detail, to apply this divine standard of truth to 
 all the past and present civil and religious codes, it would soon be ¬ 
 come manifest that they have, one and all, originated in times of 
 great darkness, when men were too ignorant of their own nature, 
 and of the most simple laws of nature, generally, to detect imposi¬ 
 tion or error, however incongruous or contradictory one part of it 
 might be to another. 
 
 That these religious and moral codes were produced at a period 
 when men were without sufficient experience to “understand what 
 manner of beings they were,” and when the wildest and most in™ 
 Coherent flights of the imagination, of some deluded individuals, 
 were received as the inspirations of some single or compound divini¬ 
 ty. That these imaginary inspired individuals, themselves deluded 
 by an overheated imagination, or intending to delude their followers, 
 succeeded, at different times, in various parts of the earth, in pro¬ 
 mulgating, by force, fraud, or ignorance, the most unnatural fables 
 and the most obscure and contradictory doctrines. 
 
 And as such doctrines and fables could not, at first, be received, 
 except through force, fraud, or ignorance, they have been the cause 
 of shedding the blood of the most conscientious and best men in all 
 countries, of deluging the world with all manner of crime, and in 
 producing all kinds of suffering and misery. 
 
 But to apply this standard to these systems, fables, and doctrines, 
 in detail, would be to proceed contrary to the plan laid down at the 
 commencement. It .would be, to arouse all the ignorant prejudices 
 and bad feelings which these institutions have implanted in the 
 human constitution, at so early an age as to induce many to believe 
 that they really form part of our original organization. 
 
 Suffice it, however, to say, that these fables and doctrines, one and 
 all, are in direct opposition to the twelve primary Jaws of human 
 nature; that, consequently, they run counter to nature, and gener¬ 
 ally make virtue to consist in thinking and acting contrary to nature; 
 and vice, in thinking and acting in unison with nature. Through 
 these irrational conceptions of right and wrong, these religious laws 
 and institutions have filled the world with innumerable useless, 
 absurd, or horrible forms and ceremonies, instead of the simple prac¬ 
 tice of virtue in accordance with our nature. They have created 
 such a multiplicity of folly, confusion, and irrationality, that there 
 is no one “that knoweth or doeth what is right: po, not one.” 
 
 For instead of producing real knowledge, they perpetuate ignor¬ 
 ance; instead of creating abundance, without an}' fear of want, they 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 2‘S 
 
 produce poverty, or the perpetual fear of it* Instead of permitting 
 the regular exercise of the propensities, formed by nature to promote 
 health and happiness, they force them, by unnatural restraints, to 
 become violent passions, which interfere with, and disturb every 
 beneficial arrangement that can be devised for the amelioration of 
 society. Thus engendering the worst feelings that Can be implanted 
 in human nature, instead of the best. They produce hypocrisy and 
 every coneeiveabie deception, instead of sincerity and truth without j 
 any guile ; anger and irritation, instead of commiseration and kindness*; 
 war, instead of peace; religious massacred, instead of universal chari¬ 
 ty; hatred, suspicions, opposition, and disunion, instead of confidence, 
 mutual aid, union, and affection, among the w hole fftmily of mankind. 
 
 And thus, by these contradictory fables and doctrines, with their in¬ 
 numerable useless and deteriorating forms and ceremonies, the earth 
 has been filled with all manner o istrife and confusion , even to the mad 
 destruction of whole nations and tribes, creating miseries which it 
 would exhaust language to describe. 
 
 And so long as any of these fables and doctrines shall be taught, as 
 divine truths, by men who have a supposed interest in their promulga¬ 
 tion, and in their reception by the ignorant multitude; so long, we are 
 compelled to believe, will all these vicious evils prevail and increase; 
 
 It is now evident to me, that all codes or laws, to be beneficial to 
 mankind, and to be permanent, must be, without exception, in accor¬ 
 dance with all the divine laws of human nature. 
 
 For when human laws are opposed to divine laws, confusion, crimes, 
 and misery are sure to be produced. We have seen that all past and 
 present human laws and institutions, are in opposition to those laws, 
 which experience has now ascertained to be the divine law’s of human 
 nature, and they have, therefore, undergone continual change and pro¬ 
 duced continual disappointment. 
 
 When men shall acquire sufficient wisdom or experience to induce 
 them to abrogate all existing laws and institutions which are unnatu¬ 
 ral, and to contend no longer against the divine laws of human na¬ 
 ture, but shall agree to adjust their governments and institutions sole¬ 
 ly by those law r s; then, and not before, will peace be established on 
 earth and good will among mankind. 
 
 It is the popular belief which prevails in all countries in the suppo¬ 
 sed divine authority for these fables and doctrines, that alone keeps 
 men now in ignorance of their nature, of the divine law’s of which it 
 is organized at birth and conducted to maturity and death. And this 
 popular belief is produced in each of these countries, solely by the 
 early and long continued impressions, forced on the minds ol the pop¬ 
 ulation by the most unnatural and artificial means. 
 
 For these impressions are forced into the young mind before the 
 intellectual faculties are matured, when they are wholly incompetent 
 to know good from evil, right from wrong, or truth from error. 
 
 It is thus that children are compelled to receive as divine truths -the . 
 fables and doctrines prevalent in the country in which they happen 
 to be born and live. It is thus that men are made to deride and vilify? 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 29 
 
 those fables and doctrines, in opposition to their own, which are also 
 taught in other countries as divine truths, of which it is the most hem- 
 ous crime even to doubt. It is thus that men are compelled to dislike ■ 
 and hate and contend against each other even to death, for a difference 
 of opinion respecting some of these fanciful fables or doctrines which 
 were formed in them, without their knowledge, will, or consent. And 
 all this evil and misery has been created, solely, for the supposed ben¬ 
 efit of the governing few, and of the priesthood. And it is thus that 
 Pagans, Gentoos, and Cannibals, that Hindoos, Chinese, Jews, and 
 Mahometans are made at this day; and, my friends, it is,thus,and thus 
 alone , that you have been made, and that you are making your chil¬ 
 dren Christians. 
 
 Mr. Owen read at this time 50 minutes 9 and required a few minutes 
 more to finish this part of his manuscript. 
 
 Mr. Chairman states , that , conformably to the preliminaries of the 
 discussion , the addresses of the disputants must be co-extensive in dura¬ 
 tion. Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—At this stage of the discussion I do not wish to occupy 
 mmy minutes in descanting upon the method of debate; but I must beg 
 to be indulged in a few general remarks on the matter or the allegata oi 
 this discussion, and the method adopted by my opponent. I do cherish 
 the most kind feelings towards Mr. Owen. I am sorry that controver¬ 
 sial rules require me to call him my opponent. This term I use with 
 perfect good will towards him. I am satisfied that Mr. Owen is doing 
 that which he conceives to be just and right. I take this occasion ex¬ 
 plicitly to declare that such is my conviction. At the same time I am 
 just as fully persuaded that the aberrations and mistakes into which he 
 has fallen are properly referrable, not so much to any want of verity 
 in his documents, as to his looqe and illogical reasonings upon what he 
 is pleased to call “facts” and “laws of nature .” 
 
 My friend and opponent has stated some facts accordant with the 
 experience of all mankind. To discriminate his real from his imagi¬ 
 nary facts is not now my object, so much as it is to advert to the method 
 he adopts. His manner , rather than his matter , now clairfis my atten¬ 
 tion. His manner is certainly loose and declamatory; and as he does 
 not exhibit any bearing or connexion existing between his allegata 
 and the affirmative propositions which he intends to prove by them, 
 he necessarily imposes upon himself as well as the audience. There¬ 
 fore, in order to bring the allegata and probata of our logical disputa¬ 
 tion (for I trust this is to be a logical disputation) in a more orderly 
 way before us, it will be necessary for me to advert to the original 
 propositions which have been mutually acceded to, as constituting the 
 topics of the discussion at present before us. 
 
 Here Mr. Campbell reads the propositions which Mr. Owen stood 
 pledged to prove :— 
 
 “TO THE CLERGY OF NEW ORLEANS. 
 
 “Gentlemen —I have now finished a course of lectures in this city, 
 the principles of which are in direct opposition to those which you have 
 been taught it your duty to preach. It is of immense importance to’ 
 
 3* 
 
m 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 the world that truth Upon these momentous subjects should be now 
 established upon a certain and sure foundation* You and I, and all 
 our fellow-men, are deeply interested that there should be no further 
 delay. With this view, without one hostile or unpleasant feeling on 
 my part, I propose a friendly public discussion, the most open that the 
 city of New Orleans will afford, or, if you prefer it, a more private 
 meeting; when half a dozen friends of each party shall be present, 
 in addition to half a dozen gentlemen whom you may associate with 
 you in the discussion. The time and place of meeting to be of your 
 own appointment.” 
 
 “I propose to prove, as I have already attempted to do in my lec- 
 I tures, that all the religions of the world have been founded on the 
 ! ignorance of mankind; that they are directly opposed to the never- 
 changing laws of our nature; that they have been, and are, the real 
 source of vice, disunion, and misery of every description; that they 
 are now the only real bar to the formation of a society of virtue, of 
 intelligence, of charity in its most extended sense, and of sincerity 
 and kindness among the whole human family; and that they can be 
 no longer maintained except through the ignorance of the mass of 
 the people, and the tyranny of the few over that mass.” 
 
 “With feelings of perfect good will to you, which extend also in 
 perfect sincerity to all mankind, I subscribe myself your friend in a 
 just cause.” 
 
 “ROBERT OWEN.” 
 
 “Mrs. Herries , Chartres st. New Orleans, Jan. 28,1828.” 
 
 Now, said Mr. Campbell, it is surely illogical to say that what will 
 logically prove the first position, will logically prove the second. If 
 each of these positions is to be distinctively asserted, the facts and 
 reasonings supporting each must be as distinctively adduced. Each 
 position requires a regular induction of facts and documents to sustain 
 it. There can be no separation, of argument from fallacy by the 
 clear simple rules of pure unsophisticated logic, if we deal in such 
 loose and general declamations. Our argumentation might thus be 
 drawn out ad infinitum , without the remotest probability of ever ar¬ 
 riving at any logical conclusion. If truth is to be elicited, for the 
 love of truth let us close the door against the admission of all extrane^ 
 oas and irrelevant matter. 
 
 We have hoard some positions, called “twelve facts,” or “twelve 
 fundamental laws,” stated; but the question ( 'logi.ee ) is, What are 
 these “twelve facts” to prove? How are they logically to be applied? 
 To the first, second, or to all these five positions? I must reiterate 
 that what may logically prove the first position, cannot, ex necessitate , 
 prove the last; and that such facts and reasonings as may prove the 
 last, cannot prove the first. We must have a regular logical connexion, 
 and dependence between the allegata and probata. Without this, 
 how can our hearers or readers learn (for this is matter for the press) 
 how much logical argument,how much fact, how much demonstration 
 has been elicited in this discussion? 
 
• DEBATE, 
 
 31' 
 
 I now state another preliminary difficulty or objection to our modus 
 operands which a feeling of self-respect requires me to have removed . 
 It is not improbable, from the turn that things have taken, that there 
 are numbers who at this moment misapprehend the true object of this 
 ‘controversy. From a letter which appeared in the London Times last 
 October, it had been stated in the public prints in this city, that I had 
 agreed to meet Mr. Owen for an object, toto e&lo , different from that 
 contemplated in my acceptance of Mr. Owen’s challenge. 
 
 In that communication I was represented as being about to co¬ 
 operate with Mr. Owen in an attempt to expunge the abuses of all 
 religions, and to form out of *hem all a consistent and rational religion 
 adapted to all ages and nations. But we shall permit this letter to 
 speak for itself:— 
 
 “LETTER IN THE LONDON TIMES. 
 
 “Sir —I authorise you to state that the paragraph which appeared, in 
 the Times and some other London papers, a few days since, purporting 
 to give a detail of my intended, proceedings, and which was copicdfrom 
 the Scotsman newspaper, published in Edinburgh, was given to the 
 public without my knowledge, and that it is incorrect in some important 
 particulars . The object of the meeting between the clergy and myself \ 
 in April next, in the city of Cincinnati, state of Ohio, in the United 
 States, is not to discuss the truth or falsehood of the Christian religion, 
 as stated in the Scotsman, but to ascertain the errors in all religions 
 which prevent them from being efficacious in practice, and, to bring out 
 all that is really valuable in each, leaving out their errors, and thus to 
 form from them collectively a religion wholly true and consistent, that it 
 may become universal, and he acted upon conscientiously by all? 
 
 “Neither is it my intention to remove finally from this country , as 
 stated in the Scotsman. On the contrary, I have purposely made ar¬ 
 rangements to be, without inconvenience, in any part of the world in 
 which my earnest endeavors to ameliorate the present condition of society 
 shall appear to be the most useful , as I do not entertain the least doubt of 
 an entire change being near at hand, in the commercial, political, and 
 religious polity of all nations .” 
 
 u The very small amount of benefits that is effected for the great mass 
 of mankind, with the extraordinary powers for ensuring general pros¬ 
 perity, now possessed by society, united with the daily grow?g intelli¬ 
 gence of the population in civilized countries, render, 1 think, this change 
 not only unavoidable, but not very distant .” 
 
 “ROBERT OWEN.” 
 
 You will perceive that this representation of this discussion is very 
 different from Mr. Owen’s challenge, published in New Orleans, upon 
 which the debate is based. I now put the question to my friend Mr. 
 Owen categorically, whether I ever did, directly, or indirectly, ac¬ 
 cede to, or propose, a scheme of the character portrayed in this letter? 
 This is a question which Mr. Owen will soon have an opportunity to 
 meet and answer. Mr..Owen’s simple affirmation or negation ee this 
 porftf will clear up the whole of this preliminary difficulty, and exoner- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 52 
 
 ate me from the calumnies of one of the editors of this city. And 
 while on the subject of preliminary difficulties, it is necessary for me 
 to remark, that there can be no developement of logical truth without 
 the nicest precision and co-intelligence in the use of our terms. It .is 
 a rule of logical interpretation, that all words are to be received and 
 understood according to their most usual and known acceptation; and 
 if there is to be any co-intelligence in the use of terms between Mr, 
 Owen and myself, he must not establish a peculiar vocabulary of his 
 own, but permit me to understand his terms according to their usual 
 arid most ordinary acceptation. Let me not be supposed destitute of a 
 just contempt for mere verbal criticism or hypercriticism. I am not 
 contending that if the law of the state of Ohio should say that whoever 
 drew blood in Cincinnati should suffer death, that this law should be 
 interpreted to apply to the case of a surgeon who opened the vein of a 
 man who fell down in Main street with a fit. But I do contend that 
 between Mr. Owen and myself, there must be, in the course of this 
 discussion, (if it is to be governed by polemic laws) a co-intelligence, 
 co-application, and co-acceptation of such terms as are of cardinal 
 importance in the questions at issue. For example, the terms, divine , 
 divinity, religion , virtue , moral law , created , Creator , <fec. &c. are to 
 be found in the Christian vocabulary. These terms Mr. Owen uses; 
 but in what sense ? In the Christian acceptation, or in a private inter¬ 
 pretation of his own? 1 may very appositely inquire of Mr. Owen 
 whether he has not a peculiar phraseology of his own, and whether he 
 does not annex a very different meaning to these terms, divine , divinity , 
 religion , intellectual , moral , virtue , vice , <fec. from what he may ration¬ 
 ally suppose is my acceptation of them and that of all other Christians ? 
 Is it candid or honest to use our terms in a sense different from that 
 we have stipulated ? I hold myself bound to render the most precise 
 definition of any term which I may use, when called upon by my op¬ 
 ponent; wherefore I apprehend that he cannot complain that I should 
 mete out the same measure to him, and insist on the like precision 
 and perspicuity on his part. If Mr. Owen will use Bible terms, let 
 him use them in the Bible sense, or tell us honestly what mean- 
 inghe attaches to them. He must either believe in the Bible, or he 
 conceives its language superior to all other language, or he would not 
 •impose upon our understanding by a parade of words, well approved 
 in the vulgar sense, but rejected in his acceptation. But I confine 
 not this inquiry nor these remarks to Bible terms only, but to all the 
 current terms in religious discussion, morality and philosophy. Every 
 thing depends upon precision and co-intelligence in the use of terms. 
 
 I apprehend it is altogether unnecessary to elaborate this matter any 
 further. Will Mr, O wen have the goodness to explain himself in this 
 particular? The simple naked question is, Does Mr. Owen use cer¬ 
 tain very significant terms, such as those specified, in th£ commonly 
 recei' ed significance ? 
 
 I would appeal to the gentlemen who moderate this discussion whe¬ 
 ther the exceptions I have taken to the course pursued by Mr. Owen, 
 are not reasonable; whether the queries I have proposed to him for 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 as 
 
 ^oluiioiij are not pertinent and necessary; and, especially, I would 
 request them to decide one important question of order, viz. Whether 
 Mr. Owen is not logically bound to show some logical connexion be¬ 
 tween the matter he reads and some one of the positions he has under¬ 
 taken to prove. The same matter cannot be received in evidence of 
 each position; it must apply to some one in particular; it cannot to all $ 
 unless they be identical positions. 
 
 ♦ Here it was suggested to Mr, Owen , (whether by the Board or by Mr. 
 
 Campbell the Reporter cannot recollect ,) that all the arguments which 
 he might be about to introduce in support of any one of his positions 
 might have exclusive relevance , and pertinence , and logical connexion , 
 with that single position. The Board thought that Mr. Owen was , logi- 
 ee, bound to exhibit the logical connexion and dependance between his 
 proofs and positions. ( The Reporter believes that Mr. Campbell uttered 
 the last sentence , and not the honorable Chairman .)* 
 
 Mr. Campbell proceeded— As matters now stand, every thing is 
 perfectly intangible. There has been nothing presented that mortal 
 man can logically prove or disprove—-no matter whether he espouses 
 the affirmative or negative of the proposition. And why ? The why 
 is as plain as the way to the parish church. The why is, that there is 
 not a single quod erat demonstrandumlogicaWy before Mr. Owen, myself, 
 or the audience. It must, I repeat, be obvious to men of the plainest 
 understanding that the clear and simple rules of unsophisticated logic, 
 (indispensable to the elicitation of truth in all literary questions,) can 
 never be brought to bear, or to apply in the present vascillating 
 state of the premises. In this chaotic state of the premises, what can 
 Mr. Owen’s twelve fundamental laws, or, as he calls them facts, prove, 
 even admitting that they carried along with them internal evidence of 
 their own absolute verity. 
 
 Now were I to admit that Mr. Owen’s laws contained a great many 
 facts, and this I am by no means unwilling to admit, yet how can I 
 save any one of these facts from the general wreck which must await 
 his deductions, if he will not place himself logically in my power. 
 .Must I deny all Mr. Owen’s philosophical and mathematical, or other 
 scientific facts, in order that I may place myself in a logical predica¬ 
 ment to take exceptions to any two out of the whole twelve? 
 
 If Mr. Owen attempt to prove a metaphysical position by those 
 arguments which, in the nature of things, can only elucidate a truth 
 in physics, how can I join issue with him? How can this be expect¬ 
 ed from me ? The corollary of the whole matter is this, that if this 
 matter be not logically discussed, it cannot be discussed at all in the 
 manner its own intrinsic dignity requires, or in the manner which 
 public expectation and the deference the disputants owe to the public 
 would seem to require. And if Mr. Owen will not acknowledge 
 himself amenable and conformable to those equitable laws which 
 govern and control all argumentative discussions, ’tis impossible for 
 me to dispute with him. It is impossible for me to reply to any thing 
 he may advance in a shape so loose, so desultory, and so intangible. 
 
 * Tae honorable chairman so decided.- Ed. 
 
34 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 There is no man, and perhaps never was there a man, more dis¬ 
 tinguished for moral courage than Robert Owen. Let this moral 
 courage now support him; and let him boldly, frankly, explicitly, and 
 logical^, come out with those premises, if any he have, which I 
 stand here prepared to combat. But if Mr. Owen will not take an 
 affirmative logical position, nor sustain those which he promised 
 to sustain, let him avow it, and then I will abandon my vantage 
 ground, and take affirmative positions, subversive of his whole scheme, 
 which I think are as logically immoveable as the rock of Gibraltar. 
 
 Mr. Owen well knows if he were to take lip a mathematical posi¬ 
 tion and fortify it, he would laugh at and contemn every other weapon, 
 but mathematical weapons. He would exclaim against all other 
 proofs, illustrations, or reasonings, save mathematical axioms, de¬ 
 ductions, and demonstrations. He would tell me that I might as 
 reasonably expect to ba tter down mud or stone walls with roses, as to 
 adduce Doctor Darwin’s “Loves of the Plants” in refutation of a 
 mathematical hypothesis. 
 
 Mr. Owen well knows that a mathematical discussion must be ar¬ 
 gued mathematically—so of botanical, geological, and astronomical 
 questions, and so on throughout the whoffi circle of the sciences. 
 
 Mr. Owen, in his essay and in his comments upon his fundamental 
 laws of human nature, has brought forward mathematical illustrations; 
 but does he expect to prove to your minds, the fallacy of Christianity 
 by mathematical demonstrations, by the verity of those laws which 
 establish the mathematical properties of triangles? I contend that the 
 grand question at issue is a question of fact, chiefly dependant upon 
 historic evidence. Now can we take a pair of brass compasses and 
 measure that evidence as we would measure the degrees of any given 
 angle in mathematics; or by addition and subtraction prove it, as we 
 would a question in arithmetic ? We cannot measure historic evi¬ 
 dences as if they w r ere so many mathematical lines. If this be a ma¬ 
 thematical, anatomical, or botanical question, let Mr. Owen, with that 
 candor which he claims as so peculiarly and almost exclusively his 
 own—I say, let him at once openly avow which of these it is, and 
 then , perhaps, we may be able to discuss its merits, either mathema¬ 
 tically, botanically, or physiologically. I aver that the Christian 
 religion is founded upon facts, upon veritable, historical, incontro¬ 
 vertible facts—facts triable by all the criteria known to the courts of 
 law in the ascertainment of what is or is not established in evidence— 
 facts triable by all the historic criteria which any respectable histori¬ 
 an of ancient or modern times has ever had for his pilots. These 
 facts on which the Christian religion is predicated, either are or are 
 not susceptible of proof. Let Mr. Owen impugn them, or put me to 
 the proof. I say again, rather let him do this, than read irrelevant 
 matter, or loosely declaim against every thing in the general, and 
 disprove nothing in the detail. If this be a simple question of fact, 
 it must be tried and examined as such. It would be unjust to try it 
 before any other tribunal. Mr. Owen would not expect me to as¬ 
 certain the number of cubic inches in any given tub of water, ii he 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 35 
 
 require me to measure it by a pedlar’s ell—nor could he expect me 
 to measure the length of a given web by a gallon. Were he to require 
 me to prove his axiomatic mathematical truth that 2 and 2 make 4, 
 
 I might reply that this was axiomatic or self-evident, and there¬ 
 fore incapable of proof, unless he was prepared to deny that this 
 whole is made up of the sum of all its parts. But suppose he 
 could so manoeuvre as to put me on the proof, would I go about 
 it in like manner as 1 would essay to prove the locale of Washington’s 
 nativity, or as I would essay to analyze the moral qualities of 
 that moral hero? Would I essay to prove an axiomatic truth in math¬ 
 ematics by the same process of reasoning which I would adopt to 
 prove a topical fact, or a moral truth. My caveat is that this is purely 
 a question of fact, subject to all the common sense criteria by which 
 all facts ever have been and ever must be tried, and that it is not tria¬ 
 ble by those criteria which we could rationally institute and recognize 
 as the fair, true, and legitimate criteria of the verity of mathematical, 
 botanical, geological, or even moral facts, if you please. ’Tis a 
 naked, simple, historic question, and, ex necessitate rei , can only be 
 passed through the historical , logical, and philosophical crucibles. 
 Mr. Owen, I think, cannot deny this. As a lover of truth he is bound 
 to declare whether he conceives me obliged to defend my cause by his¬ 
 toric and veritable evidence , or by mathematical demonstrations. 
 Only let him tell me what are his rules of evidence; what species 
 of evidence he conceives admissible and what inadmissible; and 
 then we may happen to light upon tangible and pertinent premises. 
 But as matters now stand, all must necessarily be air-built; for this 
 plain reason, that there is not one hair’s breadth of foundation for 
 either of us to erect any other kind of superstructure upon. 
 
 My friend, Mr. Owen, must perceive that here is neither time, 
 place, nor subject, for vain empty declamation. His ow n tact, dis¬ 
 crimination, and knowledge of the world and its concerns, must indi¬ 
 cate to him the necessity of our mutually confining this discussion 
 within its legitimate and logical bounds and precincts. 
 
 Perhaps I have elaborated this matter to tediousness; but I claim a 
 fair start in this race, and in conclusion, as my half hour is out, I 
 call on Mr. Owen for a precise and technical definition of his terms— 
 and for an explanation of the misrepresentations, in his letter to the 
 editor of the London Times, if, indeed, that was his letter. 
 
 Here Mr. Owen rises to meet and answer Mr. Campbell. 
 
 Mr. Owen said —l see no necessity of replying at present to any 
 part pf my friend’s last address, save so much as relates to the com¬ 
 munication which appeared in the London Times newspaper. In re¬ 
 gard to that letter, I have only to say, it is my letter, I wrote if, and 
 sent it to the press. When that letter was written, it did not, nor does 
 it now, appear to me that I stand pledged to prove the fallacy of the 
 Christian religion, separated from all other religions. To me they 
 all appear one and the same in principle and in general practice, ex¬ 
 cept the difference in the rites and ceremonies, which. 1 deem mere 
 forms. I believe that my wdrdy are that all religions of the world are 
 
36 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 founded in error—the Christian religion is embraced in the word alp 
 Mr. Campbell should not presume that I have already stated all that 
 may be brought forward, if more shall be required. I think Mr. 
 Campbell will be satisfied after a little while, that I have adhered 
 closely to the spirit of the engagement. When I shall have presented 
 the whole of my views, Mr. Campbell will have an opportunity of 
 discovering the connexion of each part with the whole, and of making 
 a reply accordingly. I have no wish that any thing abstract or met¬ 
 aphysical should make its way into this discussion, to render it too 
 complex for plain men to understand. Let us have nothing to dis¬ 
 tract our attention from plain simple truth, and if possible, from facts 
 and just reasoning from them. In the course of this discussion lean 
 assure Mr. Campbell that I have not the least desire to avail myself 
 of any advantage which might possibiy accrue to me by reason 
 of our having different vocabularies, or of our discordant acceptation 
 of terms; but I shall pursue a straight forward path to endeavor to eli¬ 
 cit truth, and shall explain, where necessary, the meaning which I 
 annex to my letters. As it would be, however, unfair to expect Mr. 
 Campbell, or any other person, to reply off-hand to the mass of 
 matter that will be presented, X wish him to take home my manu¬ 
 script, and to have time allowed him to consider them at his leisure. 
 I do not desire to take any advantage in the present discussion; my 
 sole object is, if possible to discover truth for the benefit of all. 
 
 Here Mr . Owen read the letter to the editor of the Lpndon Times , or a 
 part of it. 
 
 Now, said Mr. Owen, I believe I have to show that not only the 
 Christian religion but also all other religions are founded in ignorance, 
 &c. if such be the case, I hope to make the truth so plain that all may 
 understand it and derive the practical benefit from it which it is my 
 sole object to produce. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rose and said—that the object stated in that letter 
 was to elicit all that is valuable in each religion and to reject all 
 that is false. Now, if it be Mr. Owen’s object, by this meeting, to 
 form a new religion extracted from all religions, and partaking of the 
 excellencies of each, and rejecting al that is erroneous in each of them, 
 I can only say that this is a very different meeting from any that I have 
 ever contemplated. But I ask Mr. Owen, continued he, did I agree 
 to such an undertaking? 
 
 Mr. Owen said—Mr. Campbell agreed to this meeting in the exact 
 terms of my challenge to the clergy in New Orleans and to no other. 
 But this must elicit all that is true in the principles of all religions, 
 and thus bring out all that is perfect in each. 
 
 Mr. Campbell adds—-1 only wish it to be distinctly understood that I 
 /have never even connived at a convention having such an object in 
 view as stated in the London Times. 
 
 Here the Hon. Chairman rose and stated:—That it was the unani¬ 
 mous opinion of the Board that the disputant holding the affirmative 
 of any proposition, should distinctively stajte that proposition; and when 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 37 
 
 stated, that then it should be discussed distinctively, and that all the 
 arguments Gr demonstrations adduced should be connected with that 
 single proposition, until nothing new could be offered—and when one 
 of the propositions was thus discussed, the second should be treated 
 in the same manner, and in the order stated. In the discussion of the 
 great proposition, whether all religions are not founded in error, the 
 ‘‘Board would suggest that the discussion might be shortened by nar¬ 
 rowing down the proposition, which could he done by substituting 
 the word Christian and Jewish religions for all religions in the world, 
 in this way, the party holding the negative, might bring all his argu¬ 
 ments to hear upon that particular religion, which he wished to advo¬ 
 cate. The Board have no idea of dictating in tins matter, but they 
 'merely wish to suggest that the discussion might be shortened by 
 narrowing the proposition as proposed . 
 
 To this suggestion of the Board , Mr. Owen replied—- That to alter 
 the nature of the discussion would be rather to increase the length of 
 it. If said he, I prove all religions to be erroneous, I prove the Chrisr 
 Han religion to be founded in error. 
 
 Here Mn. Owen commenced, reading Ids address . 
 
 
 You are not, however, to be blamed on this account, any more than, 
 the Cannibals, Centoos, or Pagans. You arid they have been placed, 
 from infancy, without your knowledge, will, or consent, within cir¬ 
 cumstances, not of your formation, which have ma de each what they 
 are, and ail are alike objects of deep commiseration to those who 
 have been permitted to discover the thick darkness of error, which, at 
 this day, veils the most valuable knowledge from men, and through ig¬ 
 norance thereof keeps them in sin and misery. And it is the uiiiver- 
 sal belief, in these fables and doctrines, thus forced into the infant 
 mind, that is now the only real obstacle to the formation of a soci¬ 
 ety, over the earth, of intelligence, of charity in its most extended 
 sense, of unlimited sincerity, and of pure affection. 
 
 Hitherto, however, all governments, from the circumstances in which 
 they have existed, have had but two primary objects to attain and se¬ 
 cure. The first to keep the governed, or the great mass of the people 
 in .the greatest possible ignorance of human nature, and the second to 
 devise safe means by which the largest amount of their labor could be 
 obtained from them for .the use of the governing party. The first ofu 
 ject has been alw ays attained by the aid of the priesthood, who have 
 been appointed to instruct the people in some of these fables and doc¬ 
 trines, which, however they may differ from or be opposed to, tbo,- o 
 taught in other countries, all governments agree to call the true reli¬ 
 gion , derived immediately by some revelation or other, from their chief 
 divinity or divinities. 
 
 By these means the faculties of memory and imagination have been 
 highly cultivated in those countries, which are deemed the most civ¬ 
 ilized, while the superior intellectual faculties, when applied to ac¬ 
 quire a correct knowledge of human nature, have been held in no 
 >est*i»atsori; but, on the contrary, their cultivation for this purpose, has 
 
 \ 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 m 
 
 been discoufaged by every unfair means that cunning could invent 
 and power apply. 
 
 And die success of these measures has been so complete, that in 
 all countries, at this day, man is more ignorant of himself than of al¬ 
 most any thing else by which he is surrounded. 
 
 Up to this period, however, no government could pursue any other 
 course with safety or with the least prospect of being permanent.-r— 
 The circumstances did not exist to permit them to do it. For the 
 population of the world must be governed by force, through their ig¬ 
 norance, or by great justice, intelligence, and good feelings. 
 
 There is no permanent stopping place between these two extremes, 
 and the best disposed governments have often felt this truth. Until 
 now the knowledge and the means to govern a numerous population 
 through intelligence and affection did not exist. 
 
 Previous to any successful attempt, it was necessary that experi¬ 
 ence should develope two sciences, first; the science of the influence 
 of circumstances over human nature; the second, the science of the 
 means of creating unlimited wealth, and of its equal distribution. 
 
 By the knowledge of these two sciences,properly applied to prac¬ 
 tice, all men may be easily taught and trained from infancy to be¬ 
 come intelligent, independent, and happy, and to be governed without 
 any difficulty, through their affections. 
 
 These two sciences are now known, sufficiently, to be applied, with 
 success, to the population of all countries; and upon investigation, it. 
 will be found to be the interest of ail governments to prepare the 
 means, without delay, by which the people in their respective coun¬ 
 tries, may be taught this knowledge, in such a manner that all shall 
 be benefited and none shall be injured. 
 
 By these measures being adopted, and openly and honestly made 
 known to the public, all collision between the governments and peo¬ 
 ple will be avoided; all attempts at future revolutions will cease; the 
 governors and governed will be actively engaged in this good and 
 great work; mutual confidence will be acquired, and peace and good 
 will will every where prevail. 
 
 Were any parties so ignorant of their own interest or happiness, as 
 to desire to withhold this happy change from their fellow-beings, they 
 could not now effect it, except by an increase of the tyranny of the 
 few over the many. 
 
 For the knowledge of these sciences have gone forth, never again 
 to be recalled, or to become unknown, by any efforts, man can make. 
 They are now r actively passing from mmd to mind, and from country 
 to country; and no human power can stay their course, until they 
 shall pervade all countries and every mind. 
 
 Thus, as it appears to me, have 1 proved that all the religions o v f 
 the world have originated in error; that they are directly opposed tp 
 the divine unchanging laws of human nature; that they are necessa¬ 
 rily the source of vice, disunion, and misery; that they arc now the 
 only obstacle to the formation of a society, over the earth, of intelli¬ 
 gence, of charity in its most extended sense, and of sincerity and kind- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 hess among the whole human race. And, also, that these district 
 religions can be no .longer maintained in any part of the world, ex¬ 
 cept by the perpetuation of the ignorance of the mass of the people, 
 and of the continued tyranny of the few over the many. 
 
 Mr. Owen having finished reading, he remarked , that —~ 
 
 In consequence of the remarks which had fallen from Mr. Camp¬ 
 bell, it becomes necessary to state, generally, that, in my opinion, it 
 is perfectly useless to go into the examination of the verity of any or 
 all the religions against which I am contending; for if I can show 
 that man is a being entirely different from what all those religions 
 assume him to be, I apprehend that I shall thereby prove all that is 
 incumbent on me to establish. And I trust that I shall be able to 
 show to this assembly, that man is a being to whom no religion, ever 
 yet invented, can apply. 
 
 Mu. Campbell rose and said—- 
 
 Before the discussion intermits, I should like to make a few re* 
 marks. I feel much interested in having this discussion brought to a 
 ' satisfactory issue. Mr. Owen and myself have given birth to large 
 and liberal expectations from this discussion. There are a great 
 many persons who honestly doubt the truths of religion—and these 
 .honest sceptics, who are without sufficient evidence to determine their 
 minds, have come hither with a view to be edified by the discussion. 
 Surely then we have an object of great importance before us.—-What 
 now is our progress towards this great object? Mr. Owen read us an 
 essay upon what he calls twelve matters of fact or divine laws of hu* 
 man nature—suppose now we were to admit all these twelve facts, 
 does this admission oblige us to accede to all the lav/s and deduc¬ 
 tions he may superinduce on these facts?—by no means. Is Mr. 
 Owen’s loose declamation to settle or unsettle the faith of any one? 
 Has he introduced either argument or proof? Who can say that he 
 has? Nevertheless, it appears to me, that Mr. Owen really thinks he 
 has established, in evidence, every thing which he has undertaken to 
 prove. I have a strong misgiving that Mr. Owen is about to give us 
 a view or theory of the world, as foreign to the appropriate subject 
 now before this meeting, as would be the history of a tour up the 
 Ganges. I repeat, that there arc in this assembly some doubting 
 Christians, that require to be confirmed, and some sceptics to bo cor¬ 
 rected. To the confirmation and conviction of such auditors, all our 
 reasonings should tend. All this time I should have been proving or 
 disproving some position bearing upon the great question at issue— 
 Instead of this I must hear Mr. Owen reading upon a variety of topics 
 having no legitimate bearing upon the subject matter before us. 
 
 During the recess before us, I could wish that the gentlemen mod¬ 
 erators would agree upon some course, and compel us to pursue it.— 
 Shall I be permitted to speculate abstractly upon the possibility or 
 impossibility of any human being in any age, having the power to 
 invent any religion? Will it be in order, for me to introduce some 
 affirmative propositions in case Mr. Owen proceeds to read as he has 
 
40 
 
 DYjBATK 
 
 done, essays upon human nature, civil government, or a new order o£ 
 political society. I think I am able to prove that man cannot invent 
 any, even the most extravagant religion in the world. In all reli¬ 
 gions I conceive that there are certain ideas, for the invention of 
 which man, viewed philosiphically, cannot be supposed to possess 
 any powers. Shall I be at liberty to prove this by facts equal in 
 strength, to say the least of them, to any one of those on which 
 Mr. Owen predicates his theory of human nature. I merely ask for 
 permission to take this course on condition that Mr. Owen refuses to 
 ie confined to the discussion of his own propositions. Ifl am permit¬ 
 ted to take this course, I will attempt, to demonstrate that man is in 
 possession of powers never developed—never even glanced at, in 
 any one ofMr. Owen’s twelve divine laws. I will endeavor to show 
 that in all religions there are ideas, terms, and phrases so supernatu¬ 
 ral that no human mind could originate them, according to any sys¬ 
 tem of philosophy taught in the world. If tins permission cannot 
 logically be granted, according to the stipulated rules ofthe discussion, 
 1 ask what part of Mr. Owen’s address am I to reply to? For I do 
 confess that Mr. Owen has not presented to my mind any thing for 
 it to take hold of, having any argumentative bearing upon any one of 
 his five positions. I confess myself too obtuse to discover the logical 
 bearing of what he has read. I hope upon his first position we shall 
 be able in the afternoon to take up the subject in a more logical form. 
 For I am now determined to present, with your permission, to this au*. 
 dience such a body of evidence as shall put it out of the power of any 
 honest inquirer to doubt the truth and divine origin ofChristianity. 
 
 Here Mr. Campbell stated that the time had expired, and moved an 
 adjournment, which was carried . 
 
 Monday , April 13/ft, 1829. 
 
 Afternoon -™^The Hon. Chairman rose and stated, that the Modera¬ 
 tors had felt it their duty to re-examine the challenge given, and the 
 acceptance.—-We find, said he, that the challenge contains five dis¬ 
 tinct propositions, separately stated. The first is, that all religions 
 have been founded in ignorance. It is the opinion of tho Moderators 
 ibat the discussion this afternoon ought to be confined to that propo¬ 
 sition, until the subject is exhausted. Then the second proposition 
 -hould be taken up. It is therefore expected that the discussion this 
 afternoon will be founded on, and confined to this first proposition, 
 viz. “that all religions are founded in ignorance.” 
 
 Mr. Campbell stated, to the Chairman that Air. Owen wished to be 
 informed when his half hour expired. 
 
 Air. Owen rises with the Christian Baptist in his hand containing the 
 particulars of the challenge and acceptance. 
 
 Mr. Owen said— 
 
 My friends, I am now liere toprove that all Ihe religions ever known 
 from the beginning of time till the present hour, have originated in 
 the general and universal ignorance of mankind. I conclude that, to 
 do lias'at this period would be unnecessary, if men had been taught 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 41 
 
 to Imcw what manner of beings they were, how they were formed at 
 birth, and how their characters were afterwards produced for them. 
 Had this knowledge been born with man, it would have been impossi¬ 
 ble that any one of these religions could have, existed for one hour. I 
 shall endeavor to show that man is a being entirely different from 
 what he has been supposed to be by any religion ever invented, and 
 that none of these religions apply in any degree to a being formed as 
 man is. And to prove this we require the aid of no authority derived 
 from testimony from the darkest ages of ignorance, from a period 
 of the world when no reliance can be placed upon any doubtful testi¬ 
 mony. We have on the contrary, only to appeal to ourselves and the 
 facts which exist here at this moment, which exist wherever human 
 beings can be found. I have stated as a fundamental law of human 
 nature that man, at birth, is ignorant of every thing relative to his 
 own organization—that he has not been permitted to create any part 
 of his faculties, qualities or powers, physical or mental. Now if we 
 are so formed that we have not any kind of will or control in the for- 
 mation of ourselves; of our physical propensities; of our intellectual 
 faculties and qualities; surely we cannot be held responsible for what 
 they have been made for us. How can an infant be made responsible 
 for that of which it was entirely ignorant? Any religion, therefore, 
 which pre-supposes man bad by nature, mdst surely be founded in 
 utter ignorance of human nature. 1 do not imagine it to be necessa¬ 
 ry to take up much of your time in proving that an infant at birth is 
 quite incapable of knowing any thing about his organization or natu¬ 
 ral capabilities. And yet his character and conduct proceed essentially 
 from them; they are the only foundation of his virtues and vices.— 
 Over the formation of these, however, he has had no control, nor in 
 the forming of any thing that belongs to himself No being, therefore, 
 so created can ever be made to become responsible for his nature. It 
 is said that there is a difference between men—and this is true; for 
 some are evidently created superior and some inferior in certain 
 natural qualities; but whether inferior or superior, they were not de¬ 
 signed or executed by the individuals possessing them, and they cannot 
 therefore, deserve merit or demerit for having them, or be made, with¬ 
 out great injustice, responsible for them. Every parent, and every 
 individual who has the power of observation, know that there are no 
 two persons born precisely alike; that there is almost every kind of 
 variety in the formation of the human being at birth. They know also 
 that the individuals themselves could not make the smallest part of 
 this difference, that the children could have no influence whatever in 
 giving to themselves Avhatare called good or bad, or superior or infe¬ 
 rior qualities. Let us suppose two infants, one the best, and one the 
 worst, in nature. As neither could make himself, what are we to say 
 respecting each? shall we praise the one and blame the other? shall 
 we make each responsible for the conduct that must flow from these 
 two different organizations, if left to themselves without culture? I 
 repeat, did either infant make his propensities weak or strong, supe¬ 
 rior or inferior? If not, if there ought to be any difference in our 
 
 4* 
 

 DEBATE. 
 
 conduct towards these infants as they grow to maturity, it ought to be 
 shown in our greater commiseration for the inferior; this ought to be 
 the feeling which all should possess, and which all will possess when 
 they shall understand what manner of beings they are. If one of our 
 species be made inferior to the other, it is our duty and our interest 
 not only to commiserate him, but to endeavor to remedy the defect of 
 his nature; and when we shall know ourselves we shall so act, because 
 no other conduct will appear to us to be rational. Well, then, if the 
 infant at birth did not make himself, and if the difference discovera¬ 
 ble between infants was not made by themselves, surely we cannot 
 say that the infant is responsible either for the one or the other. I 
 feel it unnecessary to take more time to prove the truth of these two 
 laws or the obvious deductions which evefy one who reflects must 
 draw from them. And if these things be as I have stated, all reli¬ 
 gions are founded in error, for their dogmas are in direct opposition 
 to these self-evident truths and the deductions made from them,— 
 These laws of our nature, then, must be erroneous or all religions are 
 untrue and founded in ignorance. The third divine law of our nature 
 is, that each individual is placed at birth; without his knowledge cr 
 consent, within the influence of circumstances which operate irresisti¬ 
 bly upon his peculiar organization; and these circumstances thus 
 stamp their own general character upon the infant and the man; yet 
 the influence of these circumstances is modified by the peculiar 
 organization of the individual subjected to them. Now I do not sup¬ 
 pose that it will be necessary to enter into any very elaborate argu¬ 
 ment to prove this law. 
 
 Is there, I ask, in this varied assembly, composed of individuals born 
 in so many different and distant countries, one individual who can 
 say that he determined the period when he should be born, of whom.+ 
 in what country., and who should be his instructor? Did any of you 
 determine which of all the religions of the world you should be taught 
 m believe, or whether you should be born a prince or a peasant?— 
 Whether you should be well or ill educated, according to our ideas of 
 education 1 Or is there any one here who can suppose it possible that 
 he has ever had the slightest control over any one of these circum¬ 
 stances? Many individuals of this audience have been born in very 
 coherent parts of Europe and America, anti have unavoidably received 
 ♦heir local impressions accordingly. But suppose we had all been 
 born amongst a tribe of thoroughgoing Cannibals, would we not, in 
 that case, have been sure to have experienced great delight in killing 
 and eating our enemies? But if we had been taken soon after our 
 birth to India, and been taught to become Gentoos, how many of ns 
 could have resisted acquiring a character that would have compelled 
 u? to shudder with horror even at the idea of injuring a fly ? Probably 
 net one in this assembly—I imagine no one will doubt it; and if true, 
 coos it not prove beyond all doubt that we are not the formers of our 
 own character; that we are beings irresponsible for what we are— 
 irresponsible for our feelings, opinions and conduct? Does it not 
 prove that we u?e tne effects o (causes irresistible in their influenced 
 
DEBATE 
 
 43 
 
 Who amongst us decided that he should be taught to speak English, 
 be instructed in the Christian religion and belong to his particular sect? 
 If we had happened to have been born in the great circle of Mahomed- 
 anism, what would have been our character compared with what it 
 now is? And it is not our fault or our merit that this was not our lot 
 in life. No, my friends, we are to all intents the effects of causes to 
 us irresistible; and when we shall be taught to know what manner 
 of beings we are, this will be to us the most inestimable of all know¬ 
 ledge ; it will enable us to open a road for the removal of all the poverty, 
 ignorance, disunion, vice, and crime which every where abound; it 
 will moreover open a direct road to enable us to act upon the risin g 
 generation in such a manner that there shall not be one individual 
 trained to remain inferior in society. We shall discover a math¬ 
 ematical mode of training the rising generation, by which ,iiey shall 
 be prevented from receiving one error, one bad habit, or acquiring one 
 injurious passion. Yes, this knowledge of ourselves will lead us to 
 know precisely how all this is to be accomplished, and speedily too. 
 But it will effect } T et more; it will render it utterly impossible for one 
 human being to become angry with another, or to feel any irritation 
 or displeasure towards any one. All our irritation against our fel¬ 
 low-men, arises from our entire ignorance of what manner of beings 
 we all are. Where is there any just cause for anger amongst men ?—- 
 Does my brother differ from me in language, color, religion, or man¬ 
 ners? Did he decide upon the formation of any one of these ? Does he, 
 in consequence, differ from me in habits, feelings, conduct? Was he 
 the framer or is he the controller of these feelings, habits and conduct?' 
 No, these have all been forced upon him in like manner as mine have 
 upon me. And whenever we shall become only slightly rational, 
 there will be no longer either anger or irritation, or opposition, or dis¬ 
 union, among the human family. Are not the principles which can 
 produce these results deserving our most serious investigation ? When 
 they shall be fully developed and well understood, there will be no 
 longer any doubt or uncertainty as to the proper conduct to pursue in 
 all the affairs of life. No fanciful notions under the name of any 
 religion will be permitted to divide man from man and render the 
 whole race irrational and miserable. In your commercial proceed¬ 
 ings an entire change wilktake place. A knowledge of the best inter¬ 
 ests of society will introduce a new practice and supercede all attempts 
 to buy cheap and sell dear. There will be no more covert enmity 
 amongst those who are now by their training and education endeavor¬ 
 ing to'grasp at, and monopolize all benefits to themselves. Then the 
 heart and the hand will be always open; then there will be no neces¬ 
 sity for any one to spend all his time and exert all his faculties to pro¬ 
 vide the means of existence for himself and family, while those who 
 do nothing, or worse than nothing, live upon his labor. This grievous 
 evil will altogether cease. The fundamental principle of human 
 nature stated this forenoon was, “that each individual at birth is so 
 organized that in infancy he is liable to imbibe false and injurious 
 fictions, &c. or their opposites, and to retain them With great tenacity. 
 
44 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 In proof of this we have only to notice the details of the measures by 
 which sects and parties and conditions of mankind are formed and pro¬ 
 duced. They are compelled to receive the impressions from the 
 persons and circumstances around them ; and after the mental and 
 physical habits have been some time formed, they then often cannot 
 part with them again, except by much labor and suffering. Man has 
 heretofore been a mere passive subject, obliged to receive any impres¬ 
 sions which have been made upon his senses; and whatever they may 
 be, whether good or bad, true or false, they are not the impressions, 
 correctly speaking, of the individual, but solely the influence of exter¬ 
 nal circumstances acting upon an organization which he had no hand 
 in framing and which he does not understand, and for w hich, therefore, 
 it would be an act of the greatest injustice to reward or punish. 
 
 We have been taught so much error, and have gone, in consequence, 
 so far astray that it will be a considerable time before our ideas can 
 be made consistent and rational; but wdien this shall be done it will 
 be discovered that there exists no cause in nature why any human 
 being should suppress the expression of sensations which he has been 
 compelled to receive. When we shall know ourselves truth only will 
 be the language of mankind. Neither young nor old, male nor female, 
 will then discover any reason why they should not speak their thoughts 
 and feelings as their nature compels them to receive them. 
 
 It is man’s ignorance of his nature that has alone produced false¬ 
 hood ; all the falsehood that has ever existed in the world emanates 
 directly and alone from this source. The religions of the world pre¬ 
 vent men from investigating ihe laws of nature, they give quite 5 a 
 different direction to men’s thoughts, and render them unfit to com¬ 
 mence a calm and unprejudiced investigation of themselves. “Know 
 thyself,” was the most valuable precept that ever ancient or modern 
 oracle has delivered. And when we shall all be taught to know our¬ 
 selves, then, and then only, can the world become intelligent, virtuous 
 and happy. There is nothing to prevent the immediate commence¬ 
 ment of a very superior and happy state of society but the present 
 universal ignorance of mankind of themselves. When you retire from 
 this meeting, you may be assured, there is no subject which can occu¬ 
 py your thoughts at all comparable in importance to the serious 
 investigation of’what you yourselves are; This is a subject that would 
 be fairly open to every one except for the early prepossessions which 
 have been imbibed. When you shall be released from the errors upon 
 this subject that all religions have been forced into the human mind 
 you will be relieved from a state ofdarkness ofwhichnow you have not 
 the means of forming any adequate conception. Now, indeed, you 
 see nothing as it is ; you see only as through a glass darkly, and a 
 glass so dark that no rays of pure light can pass through it .—[Half 
 hour out „] 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—We shall again indulge ourselves in a few general 
 strictures upon the data before us. With regard to the terms in which 
 Mr. Owen has couched his first position, we have a few remarks to 
 
DEBATE 
 
 4 ' 5 - 
 
 offer. Mr. Gwen distinctly asserts that all religions are founded in 
 ignorance. Whether this be a recommendation or disparagement of 
 all religions is a question of doubtful decision from the words of the 
 position. Let us try this position with a reference to our existing in¬ 
 stitutions: all schools and colleges have been founded and predicated 
 on the ignorance of man; all testimony has been predicated on the 
 ignorance of man; all the books that have ever been printed are pre* 
 dicated on the ignorance of man? Are not these facts? But does the 
 existence of these facts cast any opprobrium, obloquy, or disparage¬ 
 ment upon books, human testimony, or seminaries of instruction ?— 
 These terms, then, have nothing in their nature or import calculated 
 to engender a prejudice against religion. 
 
 I do believe that all religion is predicated upon ignorance, using 
 that term according to its legitimate import . And this very consider 
 ation proves the necessity of religion. If men were perfectly intelli¬ 
 gent with regard to the relations in which they stand to matter, spirit, 
 a future state, &.c. there would be no occasion for the institution of 
 any sort of religion. “If,” saiih a distinguished writer, “our reason 
 were always clear and perfect, unruffled by passion, unclouded by 
 prejudice, unimpaired by disease or intemperance, we should need 
 no other guide, in physics or in morals, but the light of nature. But 
 every man finds the contrary in his own experience; that his reason 
 is corrupt and his understanding full of ignorance and error; and 
 hence is derived to us the necessity of an immediate and direct reve¬ 
 lation. If, then, men need a religion at all, they need it because of 
 their ignorance. It was instituted to remove human ignorance, and 
 the necessity of supernatural revelation has ever been predicated on 
 that ignorance. The difficulties, my friend, Mr. Owen, presents on the 
 subject of human responsibility, are of no ordinary magnitude. The 
 most profound philosophers of ancient and modern times, have all 
 differed upon this knotty point, “How far does necessity affect human 
 character?” But Mr. Owen’s argument ascribes every thing to an 
 irresistible necessity; which necessity, after all, is the operation of a 
 blind and undesigning Nature. But let us admit, fer the sake of argu¬ 
 ment, that we could not trace how far we are the creatures of necessity, 
 suppose w r e were to fail in showing how far we are irresistibly 
 influenced by extrinsic causes, would this failure, I ask, be sufficient 
 to discredit the whole body of evidence which establishes the truth 
 of Christianity? How many necessarians are there who believe in 
 supernatural revelation? I know that we may fall so deeply in love 
 with a favorite idea, that our passion may transport us far beyond the 
 limits oi common sense and sober reason. But if we are to be governed 
 by common sense, in objects of sense, let us learn a lesson from the 
 experience we have of our liability to err, even when we have the 
 evidence of sense. Errors may exist on subjects of sensible de¬ 
 monstration, which, though discoverable by the senses, often elude 
 detection. It is an axiom in mathematics, that two parallel lines, 
 though projected ad infinitum , can never meet in one point. Now 
 this is certainly and evidently true. But where is the man living, who, 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 by his eye, or by the aid of the most perfect glasses, can, at one glance* 
 decide whether any seemingly parallels ore perfect mathematical 
 parallels? You might draw them out to a great length, and yet they 
 might not seem to approximate; but it is still possible that, if suffi¬ 
 ciently projected, they might, at some remote point, form an angle. 
 How hazardous, then, with onr imperfect vision, lo affirm that any 
 two lines are perfectly parallel. And yet this is a sensible object, 
 and an object of which we take cognizance by the most perfect and 
 delightful of all our senses. Now we all confess that there are inherent 
 difficulties in the ascertainment of abstract metaphysical truths, much- 
 more difficult to overcome than those difficulties which appertain to 
 sensible objects. As, then, our mental vision is still more imperfect 
 than our corporeal vision, does it become us at once to decide, with 
 an air of infallibility, a question purely abstract, or to affirm that, 
 in comparing two abstract ideas, they do, or do not agree? How much 
 more irrational to predicate a whole system of scepticism upon a 
 dogma of one metaphysical school, which is more difficult to appre¬ 
 hend than the parallelism of two given straight lines, seemingly run¬ 
 ning in the same direction? Now w hen tw T o lines, seemingly parallel, 
 are presented to my eye, and I cannot decide by a mere glance of the 
 eye, there are other means of deciding such a question, which cannot 
 be applied to a question purely metaphysical; for there are no scale 
 nor dividers by which we can actually measure the agreement or 
 disagreement of abstract ideas. If now, in sensible objects, such 
 difficulties may, and do ccccur, would it be common sense in me to 
 conclude that an abstract metaphysical position is at variance with 
 experience and common sense, because I cannot set about to prove or 
 disprove it as I would set about to prove or disprove the perfect paral¬ 
 lelism of tw r o mathematical lines? 
 
 If we are not able to draw the line of demarcation between necessity 
 and free agency, are we therefore to upset all the experience of man 
 in relation to the existence of a God, of a spiritual world, a future state* 
 and every thing connected with the Christian religion? 
 
 But we have facts and arguments to prove that, to a very consider¬ 
 able extent, we are not the pure creatures of circumstances. My 
 opponent is himself a living refutation of his own doctrine. He was 
 bom in Great Britain, consequently was bred in a state of society 
 very different from that which he is so anxious to induce. Now the 
 question is, Did his early circumstances make him such a man as he 
 is, or originate those ideas which he is now divulging through Europe 
 and America? lie ascribes every thing to circumstances. But he 
 talks of happiness. Now let me ask, Has he ever seen such a set of 
 circumstances as would make a man perfectly happy ? How did he 
 come by his peculiar ideas ? They are the creatures not of circum¬ 
 stances, but of a warm and overheated imagination. This he may 
 never see, owing to the obduracy of that hard-hearted necessity which 
 presides over his destiny. I am walling to make very ample con¬ 
 cessions to the doctrine of circumstances. It is a very specious and 
 plausible doctrine, and many honest minds have been deceived by its 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 Hr t 
 
 plausibility.. The curious and absurd intellectual aberrations, the 
 strange mental hallucinations of philosophy and system-mongers are 
 unaccountable. Hobbs reasoned himself into a perfect conviction 
 that there was no such thing as right or wrong—that there was no 
 moral difference in actions. Hume convinced himself that there was 
 nothing else in the world but ideas and impressions. Berkeley, Bishop 
 of Clovne, thoroughly persuaded himself that matter did not exist; 
 and he framed abeautiful and ingenious theory, of the fallacy of which 
 there was no convincing him. Reed, in his Essay on the Human 
 Mind , states that some of the old philosophers (philosophists I should 
 call them) went so far as to doubt of their own existence. Descartes 
 was one of these. He would not believe in his own existence until he 
 had proven it to his own satisfaction. And how think you did he 
 prove it? Why, said he, Cogito , ego sum. Now this was proof, just 
 as illogical as if he had said, ‘I have an eye or an ear, and therefore I 
 -am.’ Yet this proof satisfied his mind. It is said of Pyrrho, the 
 father of the Elean Philosophy, that so incredulous was he in the testi¬ 
 mony of his senses, that he would not get out of the way of any 
 danger, however imminent; that his friends had to take him out of the 
 way of danger; for he would not turn away from the brink of a pre¬ 
 cipice. But there is no stopping place to such philosophical reveries. 
 It is not strange that Mr. Owen should diverge so far from the beaten 
 track of common sense. Many philosophers have done so before him. 
 Some of them have gone still farther than he His case is by no 
 means singular. 
 
 i am quite willing to allow that there is great speciousness in 
 the doctrine of necessity. This we may yet find necessary to expose. 
 I am willing to concede many of Mr. Owen’s points; such as, We 
 cannot help being born black or white; we cannot choose the period 
 .or place of our birth, nor control the circumstances of our nurture 
 and education. But does it follow, as a logical ^conclusion, that, 
 because'all men did not create themselves, ergo, all religions are 
 . founded in ignorance. This would seem to be the logical tendency 
 of Mr. Owen’s ratiocinations. Godwin, a highly gifted writer, runs 
 at random pretty much after the same fashion; but he was constrained 
 to stop some miles on this side of materialism. An insuperable 
 difficulty occurred to him in the doctrine of causation. Godwin, in 
 his reasonings on causation, discovered that it was impossible for 
 him to ascertain what degree of power thought exercised over the 
 movements of matter. After exploring the whole area of materialism, 
 and the' popular doctrine of necessity, he discovered that it was most 
 philosophic to make the following confessions or concessions:— 
 
 ‘*0/ the origin of the faculty of thought, we are wholly uninformed. 
 It is far from certain 9 that the phenomenon of motion can any where 
 exist-where there is no thought. The motions of the animal and vegeta - 
 hie systems is the most inexplicable of all motions , simple or complex. 
 Thought appears to be the medium of operation in the mater ial system. 
 The materialists make thought the effect of matter or motion impressing 
 lid ctj'c not these effects again causes ? Consequently thought becomes 
 
 
,48 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 the cause of ike movements and changes of matter. We are universally 
 unable to discover the ground of necessary connexion. It is possible that 
 as a numerous class of motions have their constant origin in thought; 
 so there may he no thoughts altogether unattended icith motion. There 
 arc hut two ways in which thought can he excited in the mind — -1st. hy 
 external impressions; and , 2 dly. hy the property which one thought ex¬ 
 isting in the mind is found to have of introducing another hy some link 
 „ unknown y- 
 
 These cardinal points, dimly apprehended, saved him from the 
 vortex of materialism, and afford some wholesome admonitions to our 
 modern wise men who are dressing up anew the long exploded doc¬ 
 trines of fate and materialism. 
 
 But, to return to the doctrine of circumstances; we have proof, 
 deduced from the experience of every man, that we are not always 
 controlled by the circumstances around us. 
 
 Do we not originate new ideas giving birth to new systems? Carry 
 the influences of circumstances, according to Mr. Owen’s doctrine, 
 out to its legitimate consequences, and we must cease to be progres¬ 
 sive beings—there’s a stop put to our progressive improvability. But 
 it behoves Mr. Owen,before he can establish the truth of his positions, 
 to account for a variety of principles in human nature, in direct oppo¬ 
 sition to his whole theory. Of these we shall hereafter speak. 
 
 I have been very much pleased with the perusal of my friend’s 
 “twelve fundamental laws of human nature,” which he handed me 
 during the intermission. I have very little objection toanv of them, 
 Save that which undertakes to settle the amount of influence which 
 the will exercises over our belief. But this is a question which I am 
 not about to agitate at present. But the admission of Mr. Owen’s 
 “facts” does not involve an admission of all the reasonings and de¬ 
 ductions superinduced upon them. But'these very “facts” demon¬ 
 strate that Mr. Owen has lost sight of the creature man, and of the 
 relations in which he exists and acts. He never takes into view the 
 intellectual endowments of man. No analysis of the powers or ca¬ 
 pabilities of the human mind has been attempted. ’Tis the mere 
 animal, the external case, which is the mere habitation of the intelli¬ 
 gent principle, which engrosses his whole thought and theory. All 
 that Mr. Owen has said of man, might, with the same logical propriety, 
 be affirmed of a goat. There is scarcely one of these twelve laws 
 that is not as true of the irrational part of the animal creation as it 
 is of man. According to these “divine laws of human nature,” man 
 is as effectually deprived of all data whereon to form a judgment, or 
 even a conjecture concerning his primitive origin or future destiny, 
 ais is the horse or dog. Now in laying the foundation of any science 
 or theory regarding the nature of man, we must take into view the 
 whole premises, as well in relation to mind as matter—to things 
 future as to things present. Every rational theory on the nature of 
 man must be predicated, de rebus spiritualihus } as well as de rebus , 
 naturaUbus-^upon his spiritual, as well as his animal endowments; 
 
 * Godwin, vot. i. p. 404—420. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 49 
 
 otherwise a theory predicated on only a part of man, must be defec¬ 
 tive, and at variance with all experience. 
 
 Errors of this kind are very common among theorists. Each of 
 them has some favorite principle, by which he resolves every thing, 
 and to which all his reasonings tend. But every rational theory of 
 man must be predicated upon a strict analysis of the whole man, 
 moral and physical—upon an analysis of his mental endowments as 
 well as his physical faculties—upon an analysis of every thing per ¬ 
 taining to the man, soul, body, and spirit But these “twelve facts* 1 
 only prove that all our ideas are the result of mere sensation—that 
 they are acquired, accumulated, and imposed by the influence of 
 external circumstances. 
 
 We may yet examine whether such a theory can be predicated 
 upon the principles alleged. Locke, Hume, and all the mental philo¬ 
 sophers, have agreed upon certain premises. Mirabeau himself agrees 
 with Locke and Hume. They all agree that all our original ideas 
 are the result of sensation and reflection ; that is., that the five senses 
 inform us of the properties of bodies, that our five senses are the only 
 avenues through which ideas of material objects can be derived to us; 
 that we have an intellectual power of comparing these impressions 
 thus derived to us through the media of the senses; and this they cal! 
 reflection. Admitting this theory to be correct, (Mr. Owen has 
 doubted it;) but if it be correct that all our simple ideas are the result 
 of sensation and reflection, how can we have any idea, the archetype 
 Gf which does not exist in nature? 
 
 But the question is, Whence are the ideas, which we call religious, 
 derived to us? Neither our sensations, impressions, nor their combina¬ 
 tions, have ever been able to shadow out an archetype of a God or 
 Creator producing something out of nothing. All our ideas concern¬ 
 ing creative power have exclusive reference to changes v/rought upon 
 created matter. From the preceding sketch the idea of changing a 
 shapeless piece of wood into a chair, is easily derived to us—it is 
 simply an idea of a change wrought upon the raw material, that being 
 created to the hand of the maker. But we have an idea of God, of a 
 Creator, a being who has produced the whole material universe by the 
 bare exhibition of physical creative power. This idea we contend 
 can have no archetype in nature, because we have never seen any 
 thing produced out of nothing. But we have the idea of the existence 
 of this creative power. It is to be found in almost all religions. If 
 we appeal to traditionary or historic evidence, we shall find that all 
 nations had originally some ideas of the existence of a Great First 
 Cause. But the difficulty is—how did the idea originate? By what 
 process could it have been engendered ? Where was the archetype in 
 nature to suggest (consistently with the analysis of the human mind) 
 the remotest idea of a Creator, or any other idea concerning spiritual 
 things? Locke and Hume admit the almost unbounded power of the 
 imagination. It can abstract, compound, and combine the qualities 
 of objects already known, and thus form new creations ad infinitum . 
 But still it borrows all the original qualities from the other faculties 
 
 5 
 
60 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 pf the mind, and from the external senses. Imagination can roam 
 at large upon the properties of animals, and by abstracting from 
 one and adding to another, and thus combining their respective 
 qualities, it creates to itself images unlike any thing existing in 
 nature. Hence the Centaur, the Sphinx, and the Griffin. But our ideas 
 of all the constituents of these creatures of imagination are derived 
 from our senses and reflections. There is no limit to its vagaries ; for, 
 as the poet says, it can most easily convert a bush into a bear. But a 
 man, some say, may imagine the idea of a First Cause, and may 
 originate spiritual ideas. But this is impossible from any thing yet 
 known in experience or in philosophy. To form ideas concerning 
 spiritual things, imagination has to travel out of her province. To 
 form the very first idea of a God, she must transcend the visible ma¬ 
 terial world. Nothing so fantastic as the vagaries of imagination, and 
 yet nothing is more circumscribed. My imagination might picture 
 to me a tree, the roots of which are iron , the stem brass , the leaves 
 silver, and the apples gold; but if I had never seen a tree growing in 
 the earth, could I possibly have conceived, in the wildest vagaries of 
 my imagination, an idea of this wonderful metallic tree? I therefore 
 conceive that it devolves upon Mr. Owen (in deducing his proofs of the 
 iirst position, that “all religions are founded in the ignorance of 
 man’*) to show that we possess those powers which can enable us to 
 reason from sensible material objects up to spiritual, immaterial ex¬ 
 istences. It behoves him to show that ignorant men, or men in the 
 rudest ages of the world, were competent to invent and establish re¬ 
 ligion. If it be so that man is destitute of power to create something 
 out of nothing, or to originate the fundamental ideas and terms found 
 in all religions—if he cannot clear up this matter, how can he affirm 
 that all religion is founded upon the ignorance of men? But this is 
 not all: there are a few questions which I now r beg leave distinctively 
 to propose to my opponent for his consideration. I will furnish him 
 with a copy of them for his examination during the evening, that on 
 the morrow he may see the necessity of going more philosophically 
 to work, if he intend to debate the points at issue at all:— 
 
 1. Can man, by the exercise of his mental powers, originate lan¬ 
 guage? And even suppose he could invent names for external sensible 
 objects, could he also originate the terms peculiar to religion, for 
 which he has no types in the sensible creation? 
 
 2. Must not the object or idea exist prior to the name or term by 
 which it is designated? For example, the term “steam-boat,” a word 
 invented in our time—-was not the object in existence before this name 
 was found in our vocabulary ? 
 
 3. Must not the idea of the existence of any particular object, be 
 prior to the idea of any of its properties ? Or can we conceive of the 
 properties of a thing, before we have an idea of that thing’s existence? 
 
 4. How, then, do we become conscious of the idea of spirit, our 
 consciousness being limited to the objects of sensation, perception, 
 and memory; and consequently all our mental operations being ne¬ 
 cessarily confined to the same objects? 
 
DEBATE. 51 
 
 5, Docs not our belief, as well as our knowledge and experience, 
 depend upon our mental operations? 
 
 I choose to present the matter in this form in order to elicit from my 
 opponent something like an analysis of the powers of the human mind, 
 which we must have soon or late in this controversy, if either of us will 
 redeem the pledge we have given to this community. [Half hour out] 
 
 Here Mr. Owen rises and states that the period has expired for which 
 they can be permitted to occupy the building this afternoon. 
 
 Tuesday forenoon, April 14 th, 1829. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises— ' ' 
 
 Gentlemen Moderators—-You decided yosterday evening, that the 
 part of the subject to be continued by me, was to prove that all reli¬ 
 gions have been founded in ignorance. It was, I believe, so stated 
 by the Chairman. 
 
 I last night received some questions from my friend, Mr. Campbell; 
 but discovering that they are not applicable to the subject matter im¬ 
 mediately before us, we will postpone the consideration of them until 
 I have demonstrated the five propositions which I have engaged to 
 prove. Afterwards 1 will, if time permit, discuss any metaphysical 
 question, however subtle. But as you, gentlemen, have decided that 
 we shall proceed to investigate the points agreed upon between Mr. 
 Campbell and myself, I feel bound to abide by your decision. 
 
 My friends, I yesterday pursued this point through four of the fun¬ 
 damental laws, upon which I rely to prove all 1 have undertaken to do, 
 in this engagement with Mr. Campbell. I will now proceed to the 
 fflh , viz. “That each individual is so created, at birth, that he may he 
 compelled to receive true ideas or false notions, and beneficial or in¬ 
 jurious habits, and retain them with great tenacity.” This is one of 
 the fundamental laws of human nature, which may properly be called 
 a divine law; no man created it; no man knows how it was created; 
 it exists in man at all times, wherever he may be found; it is beyond 
 man’s control; and I conceive that that which is beyond human con¬ 
 trol, to be truly divine, if any thing can be so called. If then it be a 
 law of our nature, that infants may be so placed, that without the 
 possibility of resistance, on their parts, they may be compelled to re¬ 
 ceive rational ideas or false notions; they cannot be responsible for 
 what they are thus made to receive, without their consent. When w T e 
 look at the countenance of those who have been born and reared in 
 very inferior circumstances of life—of those wholly devoid of educa¬ 
 tion, we discover at once their ignorance, before they speak. The 
 expression of their countenances assures us, before a word is spoken, 
 that they are devoid of intelligence. We perceive that their training 
 and instruction have been entirely neglected. Are these men to bo 
 responsible for the neglect which they have experienced ? On the 
 other hand, let us observe the countenances of intelligent, well educa¬ 
 ted men, and we shall be compelled to draw the conclusion, that they 
 have been educated amidst circumstances comparatively favorable for 
 the developement of their mental faculties. But can these individu- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 $2 
 
 als deserve merit for being so placed? Surely man has always been 
 in error on these subjects. The character of the varied circumstances 
 ■in which they were placed, from infancy, is stamped upon the expres¬ 
 sion and features of both. They were made what they are, by mea¬ 
 sures adopted by persons, over whom they had no control, and by a 
 power of which they were ignorant. 
 
 My friends, whenever you shall consider these things, rationally, 
 _vou will discover that not one of the religions which has ever been 
 invented, or forced upon mankind, apply to a being who is thus or¬ 
 ganized. Fortunately, for our posterity, we have now discovered that 
 we are so created that the adults of this or any subsequent generation 
 .may form the character of their successors, to attain high physical 
 .and mental excellence; and through this knowledge we shall soon 
 learn to do justice to human nature. We shall not continue as we 
 have heretofore done, to find fault with human nature, because our 
 parents have allowed us to be trained in all kinds of ignorance and 
 bad feeling. No, we shall discover that we are the effects of causes 
 as certain and known, as any effects that ever man traced up to the 
 known and ascertained causes. 
 
 When we shall learn to know ourselves; when we shall no longer 
 remain in ignorance of what manner of beings we are; then, and then 
 only, shall we know how to estimate the value and importance of a 
 human being at birth; they will be no longer neglected in infancy. 
 Wc shall be conscious of the necessity which exists, to give the great¬ 
 est attention to the formation of their ideas, habits,,and characters, 
 from the commencement of their existence. Then we shall discover 
 the certain method whereby to make our infants the most superior of 
 human beings—superior in ideas, in habits, in manners, in disposition, 
 and in morals-—superior in every thing calculated to improve the 
 condition of society. If. however, these new, arrangements were now 
 i fi the full tide of successful experiment ; if they were now even actu¬ 
 ally consummated, and their happy effects experienced; I would not 
 conscientiously attribute one particle of praise or blame to the indi 
 viduais who had been the most prominent agents in bringing about 
 such a revolution. No, my friends, we might, with equal justice, at¬ 
 tribute merit to the coat which I now wear, because it is black, as to 
 the individval to whose lot it may fall to bring about this new order of 
 things. We can paint any infant black or white, in character, by our 
 care or neglect; but who shall blame or praise the infant for what 
 others perform for him * and not err? No; when once the full truth 
 upon this subject shall be understood and appreciated, all irrational 
 praise and blame, all those unkind feelings, which the present system 
 generates, will no longer exist; there will not be a single motive for 
 a harsh feeling amongst the whole race. Why, my friends, we have 
 been told (and that truly, too,) that the greatest of all virtues is charity. 
 But what kind of charity ? Is it a charity for those who happen to be 
 placed in like circumstances with ourselves? Is it a charity for our 
 own particular sect or party? No; the character which is required to 
 form this virtue, can be derived only from this knowledge of ourselves. 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 53 
 
 and through this knowledge it will become irresistible and universal ; 
 it will be a pure unalloyed charity, extending to the whole human race. 
 Compare now this charity, which excludes not one human being that 
 ever has been born, with the charity which now exists in the world. 
 And why has not this charity been coeval with our race? Why, sim¬ 
 ply, because, from the beginning of time, we have been kept in the 
 dark; because all manner of foul play has been employed to make and 
 to keep us irrational, and to prevent us from knowing any thing about 
 ourselves. 
 
 Whenever a spirit more ardent than that belonging to the ordinary 
 race of mortals, attempted an investigation of moral and social dis¬ 
 eases, there has ever been a government and a priesthood at hand to 
 say to them in a voice of thunder, “Trespass not upon our preroga¬ 
 tives ; advance not one step in that direction without our permission; 
 know you not that the people must be kept in the dark?’ 5 But, my 
 friends, how beautiful are the simple truths of nature! They require 
 j no preaching, Sunday after Sunday, year after year, generation after 
 generation, to prove that they are true. A half dozen sermons upon 
 h religion and morals would be quite sufficient to enlighten all who 
 ; might hear them. This plan of proceeding would certainly save a 
 great expense of time and money, and be a great gain in many 
 important points of view to the public. But do not suppose that I 
 wish to excite one angry feeling against the priesthood. They are a 
 class, formed like all other classes, by the circumstances of the soci¬ 
 eties in which they live, and are no more culpable than any other 
 portion of any other society. I have several friends, whom I highly 
 esteem, who are ministers, not of one but of all the sects generally 
 known in Europe—men whom I believe to be strictly conscientious; 
 and with some of these in particular I live on terms of great intimacy, \ 
 and feel a great regard and affection for them personally. I have 
 two brothers-in-law who are Christian ministers, and we have always, 
 had a sincere friendship for each other. I cannot blame them or other* 
 ministers of religion, for being made what they are. I feel the in¬ 
 justice of attributing to any of them individually the errors of their 
 sects, or the evils which they create. The responsibiliiy which I 
 have assumed in my continued earnest endeavors to subvert all the 
 religions of the world, and thereby deprive many individuals of their 
 present only mode of support, has been always one of serious con¬ 
 sideration. It has occupied much of my thoughts. I have been most 
 anxious to discover a safe and secure mode to prevent priests, lawyers, 
 physicians, or merchants being injured personally by the change, in 
 mind, body, or estate. I know that the time has now arrived when 
 this change (tremendous as it may and must appear to those who are 
 not prepared for it) must take place! and take place too rapidly, my 
 friends, unless we can beforehand infuse so much charity as to 
 prompt us to the adoption of the means by which the present indivi¬ 
 duals in these classes may be supported as long as they live. But 
 I am not without consolation even upon this subject. The peculiar 
 circumstances in which I have been placed, (circumstances which 
 
 5* 
 
54 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 I may hereafter explain if necessaiy,) enable me to state confidently 
 that the time has passed when it is necessary to have any contest about 
 the means of living in comfort, or about any pecuniary consideration. 
 The enormous scientific power obtained within the last half century 
 for the creation of wealth, with the increase of knowledge upon many 
 other important subjects, will change men’s minds on these matters 
 and introduce a principle of justice instead of the practice of gain. 
 The public may be expected to become rational upon these subjects, 
 and be enabled tp guide these two powers to produce a general benefit 
 forall classes. When these powers are developed,they will be found 
 amply sufficient to secure to every child, from birth to death, a full 
 supply of every thing really beneficial for his nature, or that can 
 contribute to his happiness. As we advance in real knowledge, and 
 thus become rational, we shall discover that there can be no cause 
 for anxiety, with regard to pecuniary matters, or rather the means of 
 living in comfort. We shall perceive that, with the ample means no w 
 posessed by society, arrangements the most simple and beautiful may 
 be created to produce a superfluity of real wealth for the whole soci¬ 
 ety, so abundant, indeed, that we may all freely use as much as we 
 desire—even then there will be a surplus, greatly exceeding the wants 
 of all. 
 
 My friends, do not suppose that these are chimerical notions, un¬ 
 warranted by fact. They may be easily explained and demonstrated 
 to be truths, by facts, the most valuable to mankind, and capable^ 
 when rightly applied, to make the most happy results for the genera¬ 
 tions to come. This beneficial change is as certain to arrive through 
 the necessary progress of improvement and advance of knowledge* 
 as that you now hear the sound of my voice. These must be the ne¬ 
 cessary results of this law of our nature, when understood and acted 
 upon in connexion with the other laws; and I think Mr. Campbell has 
 admitted the accuracy of them all, except the one that declares our 
 wills to have no power to change our convictions or to force any be¬ 
 lief on our minds, contrary to the strongest conviction already made 
 upon them. But, my friends, this law of our nature promulgates a 
 self-evident truth. If man is thus plastic, in childhood, shall we not 
 adopt the same method of moulding them into beings who shall be 
 virtuous, and consequently, happy themselves, and dispensers of hap¬ 
 piness to others. Why, with a knowledge of this law, shall one infe¬ 
 rior human being be hereafter formed ? There is surely no necessity 
 for it—not even that one discordant disposition should be formed, to 
 mar the general happines. My friends, do you not already perceive 
 how much we should all be benefited, if there were no inferior char¬ 
 acters amongst us. 
 
 ■ 
 
 We come now to the 6th fundamental* principle of human nature 
 which my friend Mr. Campbell, says he is not quite willing to sub¬ 
 scribe to. Now, my friends, I should he sorry to leave any thing even 
 doubtful or unsettled, either in your minds or my friend Mr. Camp- 
 jreiis. To establish the truth of this divine law of our n^ture^ it is only 
 
DEBATE, 55' 
 
 necessary to adduce facts which every one can comprehend, and 
 must assent to. 
 
 Therefore I trust, that before we separate, not only my friend Mr. 
 Campbell, but every reflecting person here will admit the truth of this 
 law. This 8th law then (which appears to be the present stumbling 
 block) is “ that each individual is so created, that he must believe ac¬ 
 cording to the strongest impressions made upon his feelings and fac¬ 
 ulties, and that his belief in no case depends upon his will.” If the 
 human race had not been involved in ignorance, the most gross, and 
 if that ignorance had not been continued up to the present hour, no 
 one could have imagined for a moment that he had the power of belief, 
 or disbelief at his control. t— 
 
 We are beings so formed by nature, that we are compelled often 
 strongly against our wills, to believe what we do not desire to believe; 
 to be convinced of that which we have not any inclination to believe, 
 and what we never expect to believe. If any of you now suppose, 
 that you have the power to believe or disbelieve, according to your vo¬ 
 litions, be so good as to believe fora few moments, that I am not here; 
 can any of you do this? But it may be said, that this is a fact, so 
 clear, that we cannot disbelieve it against the evidence of our senses. 
 Well then, will you have the goodness to control your wills, to believe 
 fully and unreservedly that Mahomet was a trpe prophet sent of God? 
 Now is there an individual here, who has been able so far to influence 
 his will, as to believe in the divinity of Mahomet’s mission. I know 
 that this is impossible. And so it is my friends in all the other de¬ 
 partments of human belief and opinions. When ever the human 
 mind shall be rescued from the thick darkness which has heretofore 
 enveloped it, no proposition will be more self-evident, than that our 
 will haS no control over our belief and opinions. Whether born in 
 China or Hindostan; amongst Christains or Jews—whether in India 
 or in Africa—all men are coerced by this and other laws of our na¬ 
 ture to believe according to the strongest impressions which the cir¬ 
 cumstances of birth, nurture, and education, have forced upon them.—- 
 And, my friends, are you aware that this error, taught us from infan¬ 
 cy, that our will has power over our belief, is the main pillar of all relig 
 ions ? They have indeed no other foundation; and you perceive it is 
 quicksand only. Be assured, there never has been a more injurious 
 idea, forced into the human mind than that which has forced it to be¬ 
 lieve that there is merit or demerit in any opinion whatsoever. We 
 can give to all children, true ideas or false notions; for in this res¬ 
 pect they are perfectly passive. And, indeed, in the universal ig¬ 
 norance, of this plain simple truth, is to be found the chief cause of 
 all the massacres, wars, dissentions and miseries which have afflicted 
 the human race, and the lamentable want of that pure and unrestrict¬ 
 ed charity, which ought to pervade the population of all countries.—• 
 When, however, we shall be taught to understand, and -hereby made 
 cordially to receive this truth, how delightfully shall we communi¬ 
 cate with each other; then, my friends, we shall no longer be angry 
 In the slightest degree, because our brother has been placed in cir- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 cumstances, which coerce him to think differently from ourselves. We 
 shall then perceive that there is quite as much rationality in being 
 angry with him, because his opinions do not accord with ours, as there 
 would be in being angry w ith him because his features are not ex-* 
 actly like ours. No, my friends, it is just as absurd for us to form 
 our brethern, to think as we do, without producing evidence sufficient 
 to create conviction in their minds, as it would be to force every one 
 of them, to be six feet high. We can establish a uniform standard for 
 men’s height, with as much color of rationality, as we can for their 
 opinions. No man can alter his opinions, by his own will. We 
 must, before such a change can be made, receive from some new 
 source reasons sufficient to create a conviction stronger than that by 
 which he has been previously influenced. It is true as my learned 
 friend will perhaps say, that men may be more inclined to open their 
 minds, to receive, or to be confirmed in one set of opinions, and to 
 neglect the means of acquiring, or close their minds against receiv¬ 
 ing some other opinions, which they have been taught to believe, are 
 erroneous, and injurious; but our motives for so doing, exist in our 
 minds independently of our wills. We have been in such cases pre¬ 
 viously prejudiced in favor of, or against these opinions. Some wills 
 were necessarily formed by these prejudices, and we could no more 
 avoid our feelings, in these respects, than our convictions, when they 
 have been made. Now I wish to put you all on your guard, relative 
 to this fundamental law of our nature, because as I have previously 
 stated, it. is one of the two chief pillars, on which the religions of the 
 world rest for support, and if this shall be now destroyed,^they must, 
 of necessity* fall. They have, as I most concientiously believe, no 
 other foundation of any sufficient strength to retain them in existence. 
 They rest but upon these two pillars, and we shall soon try the 
 strength of the other, wffiich will next come under our view. Let us 
 here pause, my friends, for a moment, to consider the depth of that 
 darkness, in which our ancestors must have been involved, not to 
 have discovered through so many ages, this, almost self evident truth. 
 [Half hour out] 
 
 Me. Campbell, rose— 
 
 Mr. Chairman—The questions which were yesterday proposed, to 
 Mr. Owen, very naturally presented themselves from his own prem¬ 
 ises. He proposed to prove all religions human, therefore he must 
 show that human beings could invent them. This I contend, he must 
 do, or give up his first position. But he supposes that I will not insist 
 upon his attending to them. In this he is doubtless mistaken y I do 
 insist upon it, and I think he wall feel himself compelled to attend to 
 them. But he has promised to take them under his consideration by 
 and by. I wall just remark here, that his last address is but a 
 repetition of the preceding one. Both amount to this, that man did 
 not make himself, and consequently is irresponsible; ergo , all relig* 
 ions must be false. This appears to be his darling corollary.. As to 
 my admission of the twelve “facts,” which 1 did for the sake of argu¬ 
 ment, I say again I am ready to admit them ail 3 with the exception 
 
-Debate. 
 
 *»' <*&> 
 [$/ 
 
 already stated. But what of this ? Mr. Owen may state twelve facts'^ 
 as he calls them, more about man, and I may admit them all, and 
 yet the original question be just as it. was. If Mr. Owen had said, that 
 a man has two eyes, two ears, two hands, two feet&c. &c. and such 
 and such mental faculties; I would admit it. But when admitted, 
 will it follow from these truths, accidents or properties, affirmed of 
 man, that all religions are false? I admitted at first hearing, most 
 of his facts, because, my great object is to admit every thing in any de¬ 
 gree relevant or pertinent to the argument, that we may save time, and 
 put the controversy upon the proper issue. But my friend has said 
 that the whole pith of the argument is concentrated in the corollary, 
 that man did not make himself, ergo, is irresponsible. Now this dogma 
 puts out of the world, and out of human language, every idea of re¬ 
 sponsibility of any kind, or to any being whatever. Is this the con¬ 
 summation devoutly to be wished by all necessarians! According 
 tt> ibis argument, no responsibility of any sort can be predicated of 
 man any more than of a stone. This is the legitimate stopping place 
 of the emancipating principle, of the system of unconquerable circum¬ 
 stances. What mighty results! No blame, no praise, no virtue, no 
 vice, no thanks, no gratitude. All our social, moral, natural, and re¬ 
 ligious relations, obligations, and dependences are at once annihila¬ 
 ted by the besom of this sweeping corollary. 
 
 Mr. Owen has dwelt with much pleasure upon the loveliness of 
 those kind feelings which his system is to generate. How short sight¬ 
 ed the philosopher! Will not this principle of necessity inevitably 
 exterminate all good, kind, and generous feelings! Does he lay any 
 basis for benevolent feelings! He inveighs against the bad feelings 
 of society. His system condemns him here. He might as rationally 
 inveigh against benevolent, as malevolent feelings. And I repeat, 
 what basis does he lay for the former, rather than the latter! Do 
 not these principles assume man to be as much a particle of matter 
 as my friend’s coat, which he says cannot help being black. Who 
 would think of praising a coat because it is white, or of blaming a 
 coat because it is black? As little commendable is virtue—as little 
 condemnable is vice!! 
 
 Mr. Owen views man as just so many pounds of matter subject to 
 all the laws of matter, and in this view his laws of human nature are 
 no more than the laws of a stone. And it is plain that no man compos 
 mentis can attribute praise or blame, merit or demerit, virtue or vice 
 to a stone. It is quite natural for me to like good water, but can I feel 
 grateful to the fountain or rivulet which slakes my thirst ? Can I 
 thank the earth which sustains me with its harvests, or the tree which 
 refreshes me with its fruit and its shade? No, because there is 
 nothing voluntary, nothing moral, in these contributions of na ture.— 
 This beneficence of the fountain, the earth, and the tree is purely ne¬ 
 cessary or involuntary. I know that they cannot refuse to render me 
 their tributes. I know that it is a necessary and inseparable incident 
 to the law of their nature that they should be tributary to man. I,, 
 repeat it, that Mr. Owen’s doctrine of irresponsibility lays the axe to 
 
58 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 the root of that tree from whence spring all our feelings, good as welt 
 as evil. Like a rash and unskilful physician, he kills the patient 
 while he kills the fever. All the kind feelings, complacency, affec¬ 
 tion, and social delights are murdered by the same sword which is 
 unsheathed to stab religion to the heart. 
 
 If I could be brought to admit that man is altogether a material be¬ 
 ing, a pure animal, I could have little difficulty in admitting the whole 
 of Mr. Owen’s theory. I could then be brought to believe that all our 
 ideas of our natural, moral, social and religious relations, obligations 
 and dependencies were absurd. I earnestly wish that my friend was 
 more fully aware, than he seems to be, that while he is thus aiming at 
 the extermination of all bad feelings, he is in reality sapping the foun¬ 
 dations of society. 
 
 But Mr. Owen tells us that the infant man could not help being sur¬ 
 rounded with his individual set of circumstances. Well, admit it;but 
 is man ever to remain an infant ? If he were always to remain in a 
 state of infantile imbecility, then he might be likened to the tree or 
 to the stone located to the soil, subject only to the laws of mere organic 
 matter. But how few of the human family are controlled by the pecu¬ 
 liar circumstances which surrounded their infancy ? That they are 
 in some measure affected by them is admitted; but ninety-nine in 
 ©very hundred rise superior, or fall inferior to their circumstances.—** 
 I apprehend it to be a capital fallacy in Mr. Owen’s theory that while 
 he originates man in a certain set of circumstances he leaves him 
 there, and never considers that the adult man is continually changing 
 his circumstances, and that there is not a more common incident in 
 human life, nor a more common phrase in human language than to 
 change one’s circumstances. We change our circumstances, and our 
 circumstances change us. And while, in one sense, man is as de¬ 
 pendent for his future developement as for his origination on circum¬ 
 stances, it is just as true that he controls his circumstances with as 
 much ease as Mr. Owen changes his coat, his climate, his food, or his 
 country. 
 
 We say that infants, idiots, lunatics, and the non compos mentes, are 
 irresponsible and we have guardians assigned them. All societies 
 agree that these are irresponsible because they are either untaught, 
 or unteachable. But carry out Mr Owen’s principles to their legiti¬ 
 mate length, and the conclusion irresistably follows that all men are 
 reduced to the state of non compos mentis —the sage is as irresponsible 
 as the idiot. Irrational animals and vegetables are to be loved or hated, 
 praised or dispraised—are as sociable, as responsible and as irrespon¬ 
 sible as philosophers. There can be no responsibility exacted from 
 any human being on these principles more than from a stone, a tree, 
 a horse, or a dog. 
 
 What is involved and pre-supposed in the idea of responsibility?—- 
 Certainly rationality. We never think of praising or blaming, of re¬ 
 warding or punishing an infant until its rational faculties are in some 
 degree developed. When he nas been trained to acquire a rational 
 discrimination between right and wrong, then we begin to connect the 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 m 
 
 idea of responsibility with that infant. Common sense, then, teaches us 
 that rationality and responsibility are terms nearly allied, and that the 
 developement of the one is inseparably connected with the develope- 
 ment of the other. All but philqsophists agree that reason can control 
 that which is irrational; that reason is stronger than the laws of attrac¬ 
 tion or cohesion, and therefore all men who have not philosophised 
 themselves beyond the regions of common sense, are agreed that every 
 being whose reason is developed is responsible for his actions, and 
 that where reason does not exist, or is not developed, praise or blame, 
 or responsibility cannot be attributed. Now Mr. Owen makes all 
 men everlasting infants, or predicates his whole philosophy upon the 
 assumption that the infant, the idiot, and the philosopher are equally 
 irresponsible and equally controlled by circumstances, both of which 
 are as far removed from the regions of common sense and all human 
 experience, as the reveries of Baron Swedenborg. This far right 
 reason and common sense go with us. But when we transcend these 
 limits both reason and common sense bid us adieu. It is obvious that 
 man in the first instance comes upon the stage under a great variety of 
 circumstances, but it does not follow that he is riveted to those circum¬ 
 stances, or that he may not exalt or degrade himself by rising superior 
 Or falling inferior to these circumstances. 
 
 But not only are sages and idiots reduced to the same level of irres¬ 
 ponsibility by Mr. Owen’s system; but it reaches still further. It 
 saps the foundations not only of all human responsibility, ofall morali¬ 
 ty, but also of all obligation to any being in the universe. In the first 
 instance it involves us in impenetrable darkness with respect to our 
 origin. Mr. Owen’s system gives us no idea of any origin of our being, 
 or of any relation in which as creatures we stand to our Creator. The 
 system not only goes to revolutionize the moral, civil and municipal 
 policy of all the civilized world, but it proscribes all dependence upon 
 any unknown, unseen cause whatever. This led me yesterday to 
 show that Mr. Owen could not demonstrate his first proposition with¬ 
 out accounting for the relation in which we stand to a superior being, 
 Or discarding it altogether. This led me to call on him for an analysis 
 of our mental powers. This too, induced me to present those five 
 questions to him at our adjournment yesterday evening. This is just 
 the point on which so much depends, and to which we anxiously solicit 
 the attention of my opponent and this audience. But Mr. Owen de¬ 
 clines this investigation for the time being, but promises it hereafter. 
 
 In the meantime, then, as I conceive, I have glanced at the items in 
 his la&t address, which have any direct bearings on the proposition 
 before us, I will occupy my time yet remaining with some strictures 
 on the different systems of scepticism. And I think it will be seen 
 from the brief notices which we are about to take of them that, so soon 
 as we abandon the Bible there is not a speck of terra fmna accessible 
 to human ingenuity, on which any thing worthy of the name of system 
 can be built. No system of nature, nor of human nature can be pre¬ 
 sented from the annals of the world, nor from the improvements of 
 mod era science* which is not confessedly conjectural, doubtful, and 
 
60 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 unworthy of any sort of confidence; which is not based purely upon 
 imagination; and which only allures from the haven of safety, to the 
 wide and tempestuous ocean of absolute uncertainty, without even 
 promising us compass, helm, or pilot to conduct us to a safe anchorage 
 again. I hawe rummaged antiquity, and the systems of philosophy, 
 ancient and modern. I have explored these systems, and find them 
 all rich in promise, but bankrupt in accomplishment. They begin 
 with a perhaps, proceed with a may be , and end with a perchance*— 
 But let us take a peep into these treasures. 
 
 Scepticism embraces as great & variety of sects as any other of the 
 isms of ancient or modern times. The sceptics generally range 
 themselves under one or other of the following general denominations: 
 
 *“The philosophers admitted their own ignorance, and the necessity there was 
 for further instruction. Socrates meeting Alcibiades going to the temple to 
 pray, dissuaded him from it, because he knew not how to do it till one should 
 gome to teach him. “It is altogether necessary,” says he, “that you should 
 wait for some person to teach you how you ought to behave yourself, both to 
 the gods and men.” Plato tells the Athenians, that they would remain in a 
 state of sleep forever, if God did not out of pity send them an instructor. Cicero 
 says, “I do not suppose that Arcesilaus engaged in dispute with Zeno out of ob¬ 
 stinacy, or a desire of superiority, but to show that obscurity, under which all 
 things lie, and which forced Socrates to a confession of his ignorance. And all 
 those who in a manner were enamoured with Socrates; such also as Democritus, 
 Anaxagoras, Empedocles, and almost all the ancients, were reduced to the same 
 confession. They all maintained that no true insight could be acquired; nothing 
 clearly perceived or known-; that our senses were limited, our intellect weak, 
 and the course of man’s life short. ” According to Democritus, truth lay buried 
 in the depths of the sea, or in a well without a bottom. Such was the utter un¬ 
 certainty into which these philosophers had reasoned themselves respecting the 
 nature of God, the immortality of the soul, and a future state, the most impor¬ 
 tant of all subjects, of which barbarians, keeping closer to early tradition, were 
 not so grossly ignorant. Here we may adopt the words of Gibbon, which we 
 should scarcely have expected from such a quarter. 4 
 
 “Since, therefore, the most sublime efforts of philosophy can extend no far- 
 ther than feebly to point out the desire; the hope, or, at most, the probability, 
 of a future state, there is nothing except a divine revelation that can ascertain the 
 existence, and describe the condition, of the invisible country which is destined 
 to receive the souls gf men after the seperation from the body. But we may 
 perceive several defects inherent to the popular religions of Greece and Rome, 
 which rendered them very unequal to so arduous a task. 1. The general sys¬ 
 tem of mythology was unsupported by any solid proofs; and the wisest among 
 the Pagans had already disclaimed its usurped authority. 2. The description 
 of the infernal regions had been abandoned to the fancy of painters and of poets, 
 who peopled them with many phantoms and monsters, who dispensed their re¬ 
 wards and punishments with so little equity, that a solemn truth, the most con¬ 
 genial to the human heart, was oppressed and disgraced by the absurd mixture 
 of the wildest fictions. 3. The doctrine of a future state was scarcely consider¬ 
 ed among the devout Polytheists of Greece and Rome as a fundamental article 
 of faith. The providence of the gods, as it related to public communities rather 
 than to private individuals, was principally displayed on the visible theatre of' 
 the present world. The petitions which were offered on the altars of Jupiter 
 or Anollo, expressed the anxiety of their worshippess for temporal happiness 
 and their ignorance or indifference concerning a future life. The important 
 truth of the immortality of the soul was inculcated with more diligence, as well 
 as-sue cess, iu India, in Assyria, in Egypt, and in Gau V J ~-Hald's, Ev.y. 1, p. 23 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 01 
 
 Deists, Theists, Atheists, Pantheists. The subdivisions a*e too nu¬ 
 merous to mention in this place. It comes with a very ill grace from 
 sceptics to object to Christianity because of the various sects into 
 which the Christian community is torn, seeing they cannot exhibit 
 any thing like a visible unity among themselves, except in opposing 
 Christianity. I presume there are not to be found upon earth so many 
 writers on any one subject, differing so much from one another, as 
 the sceptical writers. I do not know that there can be found two 
 works extant, under any respectable name, on any one system of 
 scepticism, which do not differ from each other as much, at least, as . 
 flic Calvinists differ from the Arminians. While they boast so much 
 (especially such of them as believe with Mr. Paine) of the easy in¬ 
 telligibility of the volume of Nature, which he sometimes calls the 
 “Word of God (that speaks the same thing in all languages;) one 
 would expect to find a remarkable conformity and coincidence of 
 sentiment amongst the students of this one volume, which needs 
 neither translation nor commentary. Yet none are more unsociable 
 in their sentiments, nor more diverse in their conclusions, than they. 
 The Persian, the Indian, the Hindoo, and the Philosopher, all read 
 and understand this volume of Nature very differently. There are 
 more versions of the volume of Nature, than of the volume of Reve¬ 
 lation. Though, they say, it wants no written commentary, it cer¬ 
 tainly requires some prophet or interpreter to explain it. IIow else 
 came it to pass that all the ancient nations, and all the modern, 
 without revelation, have, from the same premises, come to so many 
 different conclusions ! Rome had one hundred and seventeen opinions 
 about the summum bonum in its Augustan age; the Grecian states huff 
 almost as many gods as soldiers; and a wit once said, “It is more 
 easy to find a god than a man in Athens!"’ But not only did the mul¬ 
 tiplication of gods and goddesses exhibit the fooleries of the readers 
 of the volume of Nature, but the infamous characters they gave 
 their gods and the crimes they laid to their charge. Their gods were 
 monsters of cruelty, lewdness, and profligacy. The morality learned 
 from this volume was as various and as imperfect as its theology. 
 Human sacrifices were offered upon their altars; their teipplcs were 
 places of prostitution; fornication and drunkenness formed the reli¬ 
 gious worship of Venus and Bacchus. Plutarch, in some particular 
 instances, recommended as a virtue, that which, in many places, 
 was a common usage, viz. to expose infants to death by cold anti 
 hunger, or to be devoured by wild beasts. The Grecian sages gave 
 parents permission to kill their children—and suicide was recom¬ 
 mended as a virtue. So teaches the volume of Nature! 
 
 But I only intend here to notice the divisions amongst sceptics as 
 respects the systems extant. 
 
 Some Italian and French sceptics, shortly after the Reformation, 
 >>r about the time of the Reformation, assumed the honorable desig¬ 
 nation of Deists. These agreed in three things, viz. 1 . To profess 
 no system of religion, and to oppose Christianity. 2, To contend 
 -Or the existence of one God. And 3. To follow what they called 
 
 fi 
 
 •- V ’ •' ' ; ‘ 
 
 i My - i ■ .’Ccitttr • ■ . A 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 “the light cf naturef Bat about this “one God” and this flight of 
 nature,” they were any thing hut agreed. Deistical writers sub¬ 
 divide themselves into Mortal and Immortal Deists; the former de¬ 
 nying, and the latter affirming a future state. Dr. Clarke enumerated 
 four grand classes of Deists or of deistical writers, all agreeing in 
 acknowledging one Supreme God, but differing in almost every thing 
 else. Lord Herbert stands at the head of the list of the English 
 fraternity, and seems to have aimed in his book, “De Veritate at 
 giving some sort of a system to scepticism. Ilis five points are the 
 following:— 
 
 1. That there is one Supreme God. 
 
 2. That he is chiefly to be worshipped. 
 
 3. That piety and virtue are the principal parts of his worship. 
 
 4. That we must repent of our sins; and if we do so, God will 
 pardon them. 
 
 5. That there are rewards for good men, and punishments for 
 bad men, both here and hereafter. 
 
 This English Baron wished to form a universal religion for all 
 mankind, predicated upon what he calls “reason and the light of 
 nature.” lie was emboldened to publish it in the seventeenth cen¬ 
 tury by a miracle, as he represents it! 
 
 Concerning the Theists wc shall only observe that they are cen¬ 
 sured more than the Deists by Monsieur Mirabaud for approximating 
 more to the superstition of Christians than the pure Deists. They 
 humanize their God too much; give him too much the character of a 
 governor, and too many of the attributes which are supposed essen¬ 
 tial to a good governor; whereas the pure Deists make their Gcd 
 rather an indifferent spectator, an uninterested observer of the affairs 
 of this life. Among these natural religionists, or Theists, there is a 
 great variety. They are as discordant • as the Speculative Deists. 
 The celebrated Atheist Mirabaud thus castigates them, vol. 2.p. 208: 
 
 “The Theists , one after another, to explain the conduct of his 
 God, finds himself in continual embarrassment, from which he will 
 not know how to withdraw himself, but in admitting all the theolo¬ 
 gical reveries, without excepting even those absurd fables, which 
 were imagined to render an account of the strange economy of this 
 being, so good, so wise, so full of equity; it will be needful from sup¬ 
 position to supposition, to recur to the sin of Adam, or to the fall cf 
 the rebel angels, or to the crime of Prometheus and the box of Pan¬ 
 dora, to find in what manner evil has crept into the world, subjected 
 to a benevolent intelligence. It will be necessary to suppose the 
 free agency of man; if will be necessary to acknowledge that thq 
 creature can offend his God; provoke his anger, move his passions, 
 and calm them afterwards by superstitious ceremonies and expia¬ 
 tions.” All these and many more faults does lie find to the Theists. 
 
 Thomas Paine, in bis Age of Reason, page 3, gives his creed in one 
 period—“I believe in one God,and no more; and I hope f>rhappiness 
 beyond this lift 1 .” In another period he gives Lis creed in morality 
 —BI believe the eguality of map A and 1 believe that religious duties 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 68 
 
 consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our 
 fello\V‘Creatures happy. 1 ’ In speaking of the perfection of the b.ook of 
 creation , as a word of God , or as a revelation, he thus eulogizes it 
 * —“Do we want to contemplate his power ? We see it in the immensi¬ 
 ty of creation. Do we want to contemplate his wisdom? We see it 
 m"*he unchangeable order, by which the incomprehensible whole ia 
 governed. Do we want to contemplate his munificence? We see it 
 in the abundance with which he tills the earth? Do we w 7 ant to con¬ 
 template his mercy? We see it in his not withholding that abundance 
 even from the unthankful. In short, do we want to know what God 
 is? Search not the scripture other than that called the creation.” 
 
 Mr, Paine did not want to see his justice; and therefore, he failed 
 in telling us what to contemplate in order to discover this. Deists 
 have not so much curiosity on this point. The sceptics of the ctfAo 
 istical school are not more unanimous than they of the Deistical. It 
 is amusing, if not instructive to hear or see how 7 these sceptics of the 
 two schools handle one another. Let us take a sample from tw 7 o of 
 the most notable—viz, Mr. Paine the Deist and. M. Mimbcaud the 
 atheist . The atheist says—vol. 2, 211. Is there in any one reli¬ 
 gion in the world a miracle, more impossible to be believed, than that 
 of the creation , or Gf the eduction from nothing? Is there a mystery 
 more difficult to be comprehended than a God impossible to be con-., 
 ceived; and whom, however, it is necessary to admit.*’ “Betwixt 
 the Deist and the superstitious (christians) it is impossible to fix the 
 line of demarcation, which separates them from the most credulous 
 men; or from those w ho reason the least upon the article of religion. 
 Indeed, it is difficult to decide w r ith precision the true dose of folly 
 which may be permitted them.” After this denunciation let us hear 
 Mr. Paine, page 57. “The only idea man can affix to the name of 
 God, is that of a first cause, the cause of all things. And incompre- 
 hensively difficult as it is for rnan to conceive what a first cause is, 
 he arrives at the belief of it, from the tenfold greater difficulty of dis<- 
 believingit. It is difficult beyond description to conceive that space 
 can have no end* but it is more difficult to conceive an end. It is 
 difficult beyond the power of man to conceive an eternal duration of 
 what we call time; but it is more impossible to conceive a time when 
 there shall be no time. In like manner of reasoning every tiling we 
 behold carries in itself the internal evidence that it did not make 
 itself. Every man is an evidence to himself that he did not 
 make himself; neither could his father, nor his grandfather, nor any 
 of his' race; neither could any tree, plant, or animal make itself: 
 and it is the conviction, arising from this evidence, that carries us on, 
 as it were by necessity, to the belief of .a First Cause eternally exist¬ 
 ing, of a nature totally different from any material existence w e know 
 of, and by the pow r er of which all things exist, and this first cause man 
 calls God.” Then he sings Addison’s versification of the 19 th psalm. 
 These distinguished sceptics arc as opposite here, though not so pal¬ 
 pably so, as when the former says,- All theology is false;” and the latter- 
 affirms there is one true theology— and cue unadulterated revelation 
 
til DEBATE. 
 
 «f God—viz. the Universe—The Deist even puts these words into 
 the mouth of his Deity/’ I have made an earth for man to dwell 
 lipon, and I have rendered the starry heavens visible, to teach him 
 science and the arts. He can now provide for his own comfort, and 
 learn from my munificence to all, to be kind to each other/’ page 35. 
 But more contradictory yet—Mirabaud asks, “Can there be a mys¬ 
 tery more difficult to be comprehended than a God ?*’ and Paine 
 asserts, page 54; “The belief of a God so far from having any thing of 
 a mystery in it, is of all beliefs the most easy: because it arises to us 
 jjut of necessity. 5 ’ But the French sage though he so frequently as¬ 
 serts the belief of a God to be the climax of absurdity is contradicted 
 flatly and boldly bv his brother sceptics of the great assembly at 
 Bordeaux who in their twenty-five precepts of reason, placed the 
 following at the head of the list:— 
 
 ^All nature announces to thee a Creator: adore him. He is every 
 inhere: Every where lie will hear thee .” 
 
 But going no farther into the detail—let us just notice the varieties 
 existing amongst Atheists —Amongst the ancients Dr. Cudworth reck¬ 
 ons fbup distinct sects of Atheists—1. The Disciples of Anaxamanr 
 tier, called Hylopathians, who attributed the formation of every thing 
 to matter destitute of feeling—2. Atomists, or the Disciples of Demo- 
 v coitus, who attributed every thing to the concurrence of atoms—3. 
 The stoical atheists, who admitted a blind nature, but acting after 
 certain laws—4, The Hylozoists or the disciples of Strato—who 
 attributed life to matter; Dr. Cudworth’s Sy sterna Intellectuale , chap. 2, 
 mir. vol. 2. page 300. 
 
 Other diversities have occasioned various sects amongst atheists. 
 They have differed as much upon morality, virtue, and vice, as about 
 the origin of all things. Aristippus, Theodoras the atheist, Bion and 
 Pyrrho, denied anv distinction between virtue and vice. In modern 
 times, the author of the fable of the Bees, and the Man Automaton 
 have reasoned away all difference between virtue and vice. Mi¬ 
 rabaud, vol. 2. page, 819. 
 
 Indeed, Mirabeaud, though one of the oldest advocates of atheism, 
 declares, vol. 2, page 318, “that athkism will not make a wicked 
 
 MAN GOOD.” 
 
 Bayle, when speaking of the Epicureans, says, “Those who em¬ 
 braced the sect of ‘Epicurus the atheist' 1 did not become debauchees, 
 because they had embraced the doctrine of Epicurus; they only em¬ 
 braced the doctrine ofEpicurus, then badly understood, because they 
 were debauchees /” High encomiums on atheism !1 
 
 Amongst the moderns we have had several sects of atheists, or athe¬ 
 istical writers, such as Spinoza, Hobbes, Vanini. 
 
 Spinosism, so called from Spinoza, the Jew, born in Amsterdam, 
 1632, teaches but one substance in nature—all the bodies of the uni 
 verse are various modifications of this one substance—all the souls 
 of men are modifications of this one substance-—that there is but 
 one being and quc nature; and that this nature by an imminent act 
 produces all those which we cull creatures^ Thus Iiis Deity ‘is both 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 65 
 
 agent and patient, creator and creature, No two atheists now living, 
 or who have published any thing to the world agree in their specula¬ 
 tions, Indeed how can they ? There is no fixed principle. The ma¬ 
 terialists of Mr. Owen’s scheme differ in some respect from the materi¬ 
 alist of the French school. But indeed they differ from themselves. 
 The v are not the same theorists in June and January. A change 
 m the thermometer often produces a change in the whole system! 
 An attack of bilious fever, a single kinetic, or a cathartic, has been 
 known essentially to change a whole system. - 
 
 Pantheism is of early, but unknown origin. Some of the Panthe¬ 
 ists, held the universe to be one immense animal, of which the uncor- 
 poreal soul was properly the god, and the heavens and the earth the 
 body of that god. Orpheus one of the most ancient pantheists of 
 whom we read, called the world the body of God, and its several parts 
 his members, making the whole universe one divine animal. Aristotle 
 was pretty much of the same opinion: he held that God and matter 
 were co-eternal, and that there is some such union amongst them as 
 exists between the soul and body. 
 
 Polytheists have deified dead men, animals, and even vegetables, 
 and have ascribed to them honors and attributes which belong to the 
 Creator alone. But there is no boundary to he set to the vagaries of 
 the human mind. . At , one time, and in some circumstances, it sees a 
 god in every thing , at another time, and in other circumstances, it 
 sees a god in nothing. So true is yet found the saving of the unpopu¬ 
 lar Paul of Tarsus, “Professing themselves to be philosophers they be¬ 
 came foots r 
 
 Sly friend and opponent lias contributed his mite to the mass of 
 bewilderment which has been read. lie has given us a new system 
 of scepticism perfectly mitangible. “Twelve facts” have been assert¬ 
 ed, concerning the materiality of man. And these facts have been 
 p resented to us in such a shape as to strike at the root of all our ideas 
 concerning our spiritual relations. 
 
 We are unable to conceive of the immense revolution which must 
 be produced in the mindof one who has been put in possession of all 
 idle biblical ideas and terms, by the annihilation of all ideas of God, 
 and the relations to which they give birth. The idea of the existence 
 of a God and his perfections once annihilated, and what have 5 011 
 left? On the principles of philosophy it is just as hard to destroy as 
 to create a single idea. In philosophy these two ideas concerning 
 the power of creating and the power of destroying are intimately con¬ 
 nected and inseparably interwoven. If I could forget that I ever had 
 heard the name of God, and could erase from the tablet of my mind all 
 my ideas of spiritual things, I am at a loss to conceive what views I 
 could entertain of any object around me. Every thing would be to me 
 r most inexplicable puzzle. But the question which must forever con¬ 
 found the materialists of all schools is, 7 low dvoj these ideas get into the 
 zrorld? There must be some way of disposing .of them. It devolves 
 cm my friend and opponent to explain the orinincf these ideas, which 
 
have universally obtained amongst mankind, on spirtliuiL subjects, 
 js incumbent on him to avow explicitly, whether he conceives us to 
 be indebted to a supreme or superior being for any thing we possess, 
 Man does not owe his existence to any human being; from whence 
 then does he derive it? The unde derivatur of man, or the whence 
 came he, must be determined before he can ascertain the nature of 
 any of his relations. 
 
 The basis of all obligation or responsibility, 1 hold to he dependence, 
 A being, independent of any other, has no rule to obey, but that which 
 his own leason or will prescribes. But a state of dependance will, 
 inevitably, oblige the inferior to take the will of him on whom he de¬ 
 pends, as the rule of his conduct, at least, in all those points wherein 
 his dependance consists; consequently, as man depends absolutely 
 upon his Creator for every thing, it is necessary that lie should, in all 
 points, submit to his will. This I do hold to be the true and immovea¬ 
 ble basis of natural, social, and religious obligation, and responsibility., 
 sow, if Mr. Owen can prove that we are all independent beings, and 
 .-how wherein wc arc all independent, he carries out his system to a 
 triumphant issue at once. Only let him prove that we are not depen¬ 
 dant beings, and then the conclusion must follow out that we owe Ho¬ 
 ming to our Creator, to our parents, our benefactors, or any other cred¬ 
 itors. I say, in holding the affirmative that we are irresponsible, he 
 must prove that we are independent. But this will be to wage war 
 with common sense, with universal-experience—I will not consume 
 time in proving a point which is itself as plain as the proof could be, 
 viz. that, mankind are dependant, and therefore responsible. 
 
 Mr. Owen supposes the capital error of all religions to be that they 
 teach that belief is under the control of the will—whereas he suppo¬ 
 ses the contrary. But it would seem that he attaches no very definite 
 meaning to the word belief; when lie asked you to be so good as to be¬ 
 lieve for only five minutes that lie did not'stand in propria persona 
 .before you, or that Mahomet was a prophet, sent from God. 
 
 Mr. Owen certainly errs in his views of faith, or supposes you have 
 hi uncontrolled power over your belief, when he asked you to believe 
 without, evidence , that Mahomet was a true prophet. If I, or any Chris¬ 
 tian, had affirmed that a person could believe withou t evidence, then he 
 might have made such a demand upon you; otherwise he could not 
 rationally have made such an appeal. We contend that testimony is 
 essential to faith; and that whether we shall possess the testimony 
 sufficient to constrain belief, very generally depends upon our deter¬ 
 mination or volition. 
 
 But 1 would ask what idea he attaches to the word belief. I am 
 apprehensive that lie confounds, or uses interchangeably, the terms 
 belief, knowledge , and opinion. Belief always depends upon the tes¬ 
 timony of others; knowledge upon the evidence of our senses; opin¬ 
 ion upon our own reasonings. I do not, in strict propriety of language, 
 believe by my eyes,'any more than 1 hear hv my fingers. I know 
 i his desk is before me, I do not believe it—We know that Mr. Owen is 
 Here, but cannot hdiece it. Therefore, for Mr. Qwea toaskth^ 
 
auoicnee to believe that, he is not now before them, is entirely unwar¬ 
 rantable. I know that which is communicated to my sensorium through 
 the avenues of my senses; and all that is thus communicated, we ae-> 
 nominate knowledge. On the other hand, belief has exclusive refer 
 ence to testimony; and opinion merely expresses different degrees of 
 probability; and after weighing these probabilities, we say that we are 
 of this, that, or the other opinion, I may be of opinion that there is a 
 navigable passage round the north pole—that all infants who die go' 
 to heaven, &c, Opinions result from premises not certain, or are the 
 conclusions to which we are led from all the data before us. But 
 wherever we bel ieve, it must be upon sufficient testimony. In a word, 
 I know this desk is before me; 1 believe that Thomas Jefferson is dead; 
 and I am of opinion that Sy mines’ theory is all a, mere fancy. ■ I think 
 Mr. Owen will accede to this. 
 
 I must just remark, in passing, that it is not difficult to prove the 
 contrary of Mr. Owen’s sixth position. That our volitions do, in many 
 instances, determine our belief, or have some influence upon it, I 
 doubt not can be made apparent to all. Suppose, for example, that 
 lam told that some important event has transpired, which, in a pecu¬ 
 niary point of view, is very important to me—my informant, we will 
 farther suppose, is a man of suspected veracity. Now, I cannot believe 
 nor disbelive on the evidence offered. But in consequence of the in¬ 
 terest I feel, I determine to examine the evidence, and finally I collect 
 such a body of evidence, as convinces me of the truth of the first report. 
 But, if I had not willed or determined on eviscerating or searching 
 out the truth of my first informant’s narrative, could I have arrived at a 
 full belief of the report? Now, the question is, was not my belief of 
 1 his fact, some way dependent on my volition ?—[Half hour out,\ 
 
 Mr. Owen rose— 
 
 Mr. Chairman—I perfectly agree with my friend in his discrimina¬ 
 tions between knowledge, belief, and opinion; but all I have to say is, 
 that in the case to which he has referred, it was his interest that, gen¬ 
 erated his will, and therefore it was his interest that compelled him to 
 investigate. I am also much indebted to my friend, Mr. Campbell, for 
 his learned dissertation upon the opinions of others, for I did not trou¬ 
 ble myself very much about a knowledge, in detail, of these opinions 
 before. My researches were not in that direction, after! ascertained 
 they contained so little really useful practical information. The ob¬ 
 ject I had in view compelled me to become a practical man, ‘ho study 
 from the life, and in the original peruse mankind.” I have totally 
 avoided metaphysical reading, because 1 discovered it was not calcu¬ 
 lated to relieve society from its errors and difficulties: it lias too many 
 words and too few facts. 
 
 Much have 1 read formerly of'this character, that was unsatisfacto¬ 
 ry, and muck have I seen and observed since. In consequence, met¬ 
 aphysical disquisitions which have interested me in my youth have 
 long since given place to the investigation of facts, and legitimate de¬ 
 duction? from them that; I might acquire a knowledge of their best a]* 
 
08 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 plication to practice. Many of these $)Qjp.physicai disquisitions have 
 already continued for thousands of years, and may continue to pro¬ 
 ceed for millions more, without producing any practical benefit, or 
 bringing us nearer to our object: It is now full time that we direct 
 our attention to facts, and to a just practice founded on those facts.— 
 It does appear to me from ail the facts 1 know, that not only our be¬ 
 lief but our knowledge and opinions are determined for us by the 
 strongest impressions which external circumstances make upon our 
 individual organizations. That no man lias, of his own will, by the 
 exercise of his own volition, formed his own knowledge, belief, or 
 opinion. 1 have never heard a single argument or seen any fact to 
 prove that man ever forms his opinions by the decision of his will, 
 contrary to the convictions made upon his mind by the impressions 
 which he has received from external circumstances, or subsequent 
 intimate reflection, the individual not knowing what would be the 
 result of those reflections until they were completed. 
 
 My friends, the next great law of human nature which goes to prove 
 the gross ignorance in which human nature has been kept, and the in¬ 
 jurious effects of all religions, is the seventh in my arrangement. It 
 is— << That each individual must like that which creates agreeable, and 
 dislike that which produces unpleasant sensations upon his nature, 
 while at th3 same time he cannot discover previously to experience, 
 what these sensations shall be.” . When our minds shall have been 
 relieved from the prejudices of a vicious education, when we shall be 
 permitted, without prejudice, to examine facts as they really are, and 
 to infer the rational deductions from those facts, we shall discover, 
 that all the governments of the world, all the religions, all the codes 
 of laws, and. all the social and other institutions of mankind have 
 been founded in the false notion, that human nature w as so organized, 
 that it had the power by its own mere volitions, to believe conforma¬ 
 bly to its inclinations, and to love or hate according to its will. Now 
 I contend that no human being has the power of his own will to like, 
 be indifferent to, or dislike any person, or anv thing contrary to the 
 sensations which they produce upon him. Who, in this assembly, 
 when any new food is brought before him can determine before tasting 
 it, whether it is insipid, grateful, or distasteful to his palate? Will not 
 his determination upon this point depend entirely upon the sensations 
 {deduced by this food upon his palate after tasting it? If*a stranger 
 were announced as being about to come intp this assembly, where is 
 the individual amongst von, who is prepared to determine before he 
 has seen this stranger, whether he shall like, be indifferent to, cr dis¬ 
 like him. Would not one and all of you be compelled to receive the 
 impressions which the countenance, the figure, the manner, and the 
 address of this stranger, would enforce upon your individual organiza¬ 
 tions? 
 
 Now,those who think they are doing good service to the world by 
 attempting to disprove the doctrine which 1 advocate, should consid¬ 
 er well these two fundamental laws of our nature. I rest a very large 
 portion of my argument t o prove the errors of all religions, and of the 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 truth of the principles which I advocate, on a thorough conviction from 
 the evidence of innumerable facts, that human nature is so organized 
 by the laws of its creation, as to be passive in the reception of its sen¬ 
 sations, except so far as it may be influenced by previous sensations 
 of liking, or disliking. You have been taught some fanciful notions 
 of what you have heard termed God, Deity, or First Cause ; and you 
 have been taught other fanciful notions of a being who has been intro¬ 
 duced to you by the name of the Devil , who was created by an infi¬ 
 nitely wise and good power. Then, my friends, if you have a control 
 over your likings and dislikings, just for the sake of the experiment, 
 endeavor to hate the first, and to love the second, £an any one of 
 you so far control his will as to do this? In common candor, my 
 friends, you must be compelled to acknowledge that you cannot. But 
 you will be pleased to observe, that I, by^o means, admit by any thing 
 I may have said, that any intelligence infinitely wise, good, and pow¬ 
 erful, ever did make (knowing what it was about) a devil, to torment 
 us. No, indeed, I cannot believe any absurdity so monstrous as this^ 
 But to return to our subject. We are, fortunately for us, compelled to 
 like that which produces pleasant sensations, and to dislike that which 
 produces their opposites. Then if there be wisdom in the command, 
 that we should love one another, there is but one practical course 
 whereby to obey it. It is to act consistently with the principle i have 
 now developed, which will lead you to train your children to acquire 
 such qualities as are universally lovely, and then they must be be* 
 loved for possessing those qualities. Our nature is such, that when 
 they are so formed, we cannot help loving them; and until they are so 
 formed, it is not in human nature to love them. But we shall soon be= 
 come acquainted with the method whereby to train our infants, step 
 by step, in such a manner that they shall command our love. And 
 when this shall be the case, the command to do so will become use¬ 
 less. What utility is there ill commanding me to love that which 
 possesses qualities which are disagreeable to me? And what neces¬ 
 sity is there for such a command, when we know that we have the 
 ] power to create the best dispositions, manners and habits in the whole 
 human race, and thus give such qualities as will always insure love 
 or affection from every one ? How often have uninstructed, unenlight¬ 
 ened men told you that these principles lead to vice? But if ever 
 virtue shall be known and practised amongst mankind, it will only bo 
 through the knowledge of these principles, and through the universality 
 of the practice which they demonstrate to be the best for man to adopt. 
 There never was, in the imagination of any human being, a collec¬ 
 tion of facts so truly valuable to the whole of mankind as those which 
 are contained in these twelve laws; each one of them is of inyaluablo 
 truth. But when united and formed into a system for reforming the 
 character of men and governing them, w hat a glorious change will 
 be effected for the w'ell being and happiness of the human race ? When, 
 this shall be accomplished, as I anticipate will be the case in a few 
 Vears, how very different will our residence in this world become ?-- 
 How different from any state or condition ever yet witnessed in any 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 70 
 
 former period, or in the present times? Th6re will be then no strife 
 nor contention. Then all will savq^ifanyofmy fellow-beings do not love 
 or respect me, I know the cause is in myself; and therefore, I will,thus 
 informed, endeavor to remove the disagreeable parts of my chara cter, 
 and set about the correction of all my faults and failings, if the superior 
 knowledge of those who educated me have left any of them to be now 
 corrected; but I could not be displeased with my fellow being for ex¬ 
 pressing a sensation which I had caused him to feel; this will neces¬ 
 sarily remove an error too palpable to be entertained. 5 ’ That we 
 should have acted so long upon any other principle, is a proof of the 
 ignorance and darkness in which the errors of religion have surround¬ 
 ed us. But fortunately, my friends, a steady attention in the investi¬ 
 gation of facts, will now enable us to discover the road which leads un¬ 
 erringly to certain happiness; and the means by which to secure it 
 permanently, without the horrible notion, that some of our fellow-be¬ 
 ings must suffer eternal torments. 
 
 My friends, I do not know what your ideas of Deity may be; but 
 having attended to the realises of human life and human nature, I 
 am compelled to believe that if I knew that one sentient being existed 
 in eternal torment, that knowledge alone would prevent me from 
 being perfectly happy. How, therefore, an all-wise, all-good, and 
 perfect being, should make human beings thus to suffer, knowing 
 what he was doing when he made them, is too inconsistent to make 
 any conviction cf its truth in my mind. To me it appears an extra- \ 
 ordinary and unaccountable notion of error—one really too absurd to 
 be longer taught to man, woman, or child. 
 
 We now come to the 8th fundamental law of human nature, viz. 
 f‘that each person is so created, that the impressions made on his 
 organization, although pleasant at first, yet, if continued beyond a 
 certain period, without change, will become disagreeable ; and when 
 this change is too rapid it impairs our physical, intellectual, and 
 moral powers and enjoyments.” 
 
 ft isx>f no use for the human mind to waste its powers and facul¬ 
 ties in imagining what human nature ought to be according to the 
 whims and fancies of some men. True knowledge will direct us at 
 once to inquire what it is. Of no use is it to imagine that it ought 
 to be, according to our ignorant notions, something else than what 
 it is. We have nothing to do but to inquire, what human nature is, 
 what arc its organic laws, and how it is formed from infancy to 
 maturity? 
 
 We shall discover it to be a universal law that human nature 
 requires for its happiness, health, well-being, and a change of 
 sensations. If any one sensation were to be continued without 
 change, it would, after a certain time, become as painful as at first 
 it was agreeable. We are, therefore, beings so organized as to re¬ 
 quire a certain change of our sensations. But when we proceed 
 beyond a certain number in a given period, these sensations will 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 71 
 
 gradually become disagreeable, and ultimately produce misery in¬ 
 stead of happiness. This is another admirable law of our organiza¬ 
 tion. It teaches us, in the most emphatic manner, that to preserve 
 health, spirits, and happiness, we must proceed in all our exercises, 
 in all our enjoyments, to the point of temperance, and not beyond it; 
 or, in other words, that the highest enjoyment of human life is to be 
 attained by a due exercise of all our propensities and capacities at 
 the point of temperance. I will endeavor to develope to you some of 
 the miseries arising from the infraction of this law. Men and women, 
 by the laws of many countries, are made solemnly to promise that: 
 they will love each other to the termination of their lives; and yet 
 neither the one nor the other can know that it will be in their power to 
 perform the promise for one day. They commit this error by not 
 attending to this and other unchanging laws of our nature. Where 
 is now the man or woman who has committed this moral perjury, 
 who knew certainly at the time of making the vow, whether they 
 would be able to love each other for an hour? And how much misery 
 has this error produced? How much happiness has it destroyed? 
 Your ignorance on the subject of belief, and of liking and disliking, 
 have produced almost all the evils of domestic life, as well as almost 
 all the dissections between nations. Ignorance of this law of our 
 nature has divided and subdivided the world into various classes 
 greatly to the injury of all. One class, which may be called pro¬ 
 ducers, have their physical powers called into action far beyond the 
 point of temperance. Another class, which may be called non- 
 produeers, have their memory and imagination overstrained far 
 beyond the natural limits. The former class are subject to innumera¬ 
 ble evils in consequence cf their physical powers being over-exerted 
 and their mental powers being unexercised. The latter class has 
 been, perhaps, still more unfortunate in having their physical powers 
 neglected and their memory and imagination too much exercised. 
 And the world is generally divided into these two classes and their 
 subdivisions. When we shall come to the knowledge of what man¬ 
 ner of beings we are, these errors must cease; society will be differ¬ 
 ently arranged, and there will be but one class trained and educated, 
 and placed under new 7 circumstances that will enable all to enjoy the 
 full extent of their respective capacities at the point of experience; and 
 that class will have their physical, intellectual, and moral faculties 
 equally cultivated, and duly and temperately exercised. We shall, 
 by acquiring an accurate knowledge of these law s of our nature, be¬ 
 gin to discover what real knowledge is, and what is necessary to 
 constitute our true and substantial happiness. At present we do not 
 know what plan, system, #r practice is necessary to constitute our 
 happiness, and therefore we do not know what to adopt to promote it. 
 
 Before our meeting in this place shall terminate, I will endeavor to 
 explain what are those things which are necessary for our happiness—- 
 that all may know 7 what it is that we should endeavor to attain - 
 [Half hour cut .] 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises— 
 
 Mr. Chairman—It seems a very hard matter, Indeed, to reason 
 logically when we have nothing to reason against. We require not 
 only to have premises established from which to reason, but we must 
 have a definite object for which to reason. There is scarcely any 
 tiling tangible or pertinent in Mr. Owen’s last address, any more 
 than in his preceding ones. He ha3 not put himself to the trouble 
 to investigate or to discriminate with regard to the difficulties in- 
 volved in our argumentation, if such it may be called. My friend 
 might naturally have anticipated to have been met in the course of this 
 discussion, with “How did man come into existence?” Arc* we going 
 to extinguish all the lights we have upon this momentous question 
 without presenting a single spark in lieu thereof? If man did not 
 make himself, then, I ask, how came lie into existence? Again, we. 
 have presented some (as we conceive) insuperable difficulties in the 
 way of Mr. Owen’s views of irresponsibility. We have urged upon 
 him this difficulty. We have proved that his theory reduces the idiot 
 and the sage to the same level of irresponsibility. And we did expect 
 (reasonably we think) that he would have adverted to, and at least 
 attempted to remove this stumbling block. But Mr. Owen, it seems, 
 has found it convenient to pretermit all notice of this part of our re* 
 marks. He has favored ue, gratuitously too, with some very good 
 remarks upon temperance. Assuredly Mr. Owen knows that there is 
 no controversy about temperance between us; that 1 have no objection 
 to men’s enjoying the blessings of temperance, and of a sound and 
 healthy action of mind and body. But what has this to do with the 
 argument before us? 
 
 I presented another difficulty in the way of my unreserved admis¬ 
 sion of the proposition that “our will has, in no ca.sc, any power over 
 our belief.” I have contended that our will has power over our assent 
 to the verity of a matter submitted to our understandings as a matter 
 of belief. To this he has paid no regard, in his last speech. Volition 
 cannot create the evidence oh which belief must be founded, but it 
 can give stimulus and impulse sufficient to put us upon the investiga¬ 
 tion of the character of that evidence. Suppose, as Mr. Owen states, 
 that it was my interest that did excite me to investigate the testimony 
 offered, am I not at liberty to act according to what I conceive to be 
 my true interest ? And if I so act, do I not act rationally and volun¬ 
 tarily ? Seeing my interest, havel not liberty to make a start in pursuit 
 of it? Consequently our volitions have power in influencing and 
 ^nducjng our belief. In some instances we are compelled to believe. 
 
 I might not wish a fact to be true, and yet might be unable to resist 
 ihe force of the evidence; and, on the other hand, I might wish it to 
 be true, and yet be unabla to believe it for want of satisfactory evi¬ 
 dence. Thus contradictory to our volitions, such is the sovereignty 
 of evidence to compel belief. This wc admit most cheerfully; but 
 from such particular instances to infer a general and universal 
 .'onelusion, is a sophism of the most palpable detection, I worth! 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 *• * > 
 i O 
 
 not sacrifice a single truth that might appear to combat a favorite 
 point for any momentary triumph. 
 
 Philosophers run as much into extremes as any other persons. 
 Because Mr. Owen finds instances where belief is involuntary, or, at 
 least, not dependent upon any previous determination, he asserts uni¬ 
 versally, that, in no case whatever , does our belief depend upon our 
 will. But this we shall, in its own place, still farther develope. 
 
 Instead of adverting to the difficulties proposed in my last speech, 
 Mr. Owen told us he could never believe that a good and wise being 
 could create a Devil; yet he could believe that the Devil created him¬ 
 self, or that a wise and kind Nature created evil. Natural evils and 
 moral evils do exist from some cause; there are poisons, pains, and 
 death. Yet, with Mr. Owen, there is neither a God nor a Devil 1 Every 
 thing made itself, or all things together made each separate agent’! 
 
 Nor can he endure the idea of misery existing any where. The 
 thought of any sentient being suffering hereafter, would convert his 
 heaven into a place of torment. He has high conceptions of his future 
 sensibilities! They must be much more perfect than at present: for 
 he can sleep sound and enjoy all animal and social comforts, day and 
 night, without ever thinking or feeling unhappy at the thought- — 
 
 “How many feel, this very moment;; death 
 And all the sad variety of pain. 
 
 How many sink in the devouring flood, 
 
 Or more devouring flame. How many bleed. 
 
 By shameful variance betwixt man and man. 
 
 IIow many pine in want, and dungeon glooms. 
 
 Shut from the common air, and common use 
 Of their own limbs. How many drink the cup 
 Of baleful grief, or eat the bitter bread 
 Of misery. Sore pierc’d by wintry winds. 
 
 How many shrink into the sordid hut 
 Of cheerless poverty. How many shake 
 With all the fiercer tortures of the mind, 
 
 Unbounded passion, madness, guilt, remorse; 
 
 Whence tumbled headlong from the height of life., 
 
 They furnish matter for the tragic Muse.” 
 
 He seems now to enjoy himself, unconscious that there are myriads 
 suffering all the fiercer tortures of mind and body, but yet fancies 
 that the thought of any human being suffering hereafter, would make 
 him most wretchedly unhappy ! His sensibilities are very fantastic. 
 
 I will now, for the sake of eliciting investigation, submit an outline 
 cT what I conceive to be the constituents of the human being. Taking 
 myself for one of the species, and as a sample of the race, I proceed 
 to examine myself with a view to discriminate accurately what man¬ 
 ner of being I am; I look at my exterior, my corporeal powers, and 
 senses. Of the latter I perceive that I have five. Through these 
 communications are made to some internal power or principle called 
 the mind. The mind through the senses, by what is called sensation, 
 has the power of perception , by which I become acquainted with all 
 ‘kings external. By memory I become acquainted with all things 
 
 7 
 
oast; by consciousness I become acquainted with all things internal. 
 All philosophers agree that we have the powers of perception, memo¬ 
 ry, and consciousness. Now sensation, perception, memory, and 
 consciousness are just as distinct from each other as the ear, eye, or 
 hand. But these constitute the mind as our different members con¬ 
 stitute the body. These faculties are as distinct in their operations 
 as are the different members and organs in the animal part of man.— 
 
 I repeat for the sake of perspicuity and emphasis, that by perception 
 we become acquainted with all things external. By memory we take 
 cognizance of all things past. By consciousness we become acquaint¬ 
 ed with things internal. Such of these as are active powers act inde¬ 
 pendently of volition. But I ask, Have we any other powers or facul¬ 
 ties capable of acting independently of volition ? I say No. We have, 
 however, the powers of recollecting, reflecting, imagining, reasoning, 
 ind judging. These operations of the human mind are dependen t up¬ 
 on volition; or, in other words, it depends upon volition, whether I 
 shall or shall not exercise my powers of recollecting, reflecting, im¬ 
 agining, reasoning, or judging. Mr. Owen, it appears to me, con¬ 
 founds our appetites with our higher powers. These I would desig¬ 
 nate by the term instincts , But our appetites, affections, passions, and 
 judgment affect the will, and determine to action. I hope Mr. Owen 
 will either affirm or deny, that we May examine our mental powers, 
 for he seems to overlook them in his system. I beg leave to submit 
 this analysis of our mental powers, in order to ascertain what is the 
 primitive character of the mind. At present we are utterly unable to 
 discover whether Mr. Owen recognizes any distinction between our 
 perception, memory, and consciousness, and our appetites, affections, 
 and passions. 
 
 But Mr. Owen has gone so far as to inform us that our ideas of a 
 Deity, Devil, &c. are fanciful. I am glad to hear the assertion, be¬ 
 cause it may present something tangible. Are we to admit the as¬ 
 sertion that the idea of a God is fanciful, or shall we join issue upon 
 this assertion? I have no objections to rest the whole merits of the 
 discussion upon this assertion. This is a tangible position taken by 
 my opponent. 
 
 I repeat, that if my opponent can make that assertion good, I will 
 give up the cause I advocate. If he will join issue with me upon this, 
 assertion, the scope and compass of this discussion will be much con¬ 
 tracted. I conceive that the whole of my opponent’s declamation has 
 been entirely irrelevant to the premises before us, and that it has no 
 connexion with the real merits of the questions we are to debate. The 
 question whether all religions are founded in ignorance is a question 
 of fact—of plain, simple, tangible, veritable, demonstrable fact. A 
 man need not to be a sage before he can become a Christian. The 
 truth of religion depends altogether upon facts-—facts which can be 
 apprehended as easily by the unlearned as by the wise. I well know, 
 my friends, that the real merits of this question do not rest where, for 
 the sake of an issue, I have proposed to rest them; but I repeat, that I 
 will rest the whole merits of this controversy upon my opponent’s be- 
 
DEBATE 
 
 7i> 
 
 mg able to establish the assertion, that the idea of God is a fancy. I 
 know very well that it is very difficult to render a clear and perspicu¬ 
 ous demonstration of an abstract and metaphysical hy pothesis. W ei e 
 we as well acquainted with the extent and measure of our intellectual 
 as we are of our physical powers, we could soon settle this controver. 
 s v. Were I to tell vou that I had seen a man take up the Andes in his 
 hand and cast them into the ocean, you would unhesitatingly say that 
 it was false; because you know, by experience, and the most extern 
 sive observation, that this is far beyond the measure of any human 
 strength. But when I say that a man could as easily, by the exercise 
 of his own native, inherent, unaided human strength, take up tho 
 mountains and cast them into the sea, as he could originate the idea of 
 a God, you would feel a great deal more hesitancy in giving a plump 
 negative to the assertion—you would immediately say this is a ques¬ 
 tion of much more difficult solution than the former—it is abstract and 
 metaphysical: it is de rebus spiritualibus , and not dc rebus naturalibics 
 
 1 did not propose those questions yesterday with a view to puzzle 
 my opponent. As far as I have been able to penetrate these subjects 
 { am conscious that no man can solve these questions, but by an ad¬ 
 mission of the principle for which I contend. These questions were, 
 therefore, tendered to my friend in order to bring his own mind to 
 reason upon them, and thereby enable it to arrive at logical conclu¬ 
 sions, But I cannot consent to go on with tire discussion in this wav, 
 ham willing to receive and examine Mr. Owen's ablest arguments in 
 support of his cause. And I do wish for his own sake, and for the sake 
 of truth, that he would come out in his whole argumentative strength 
 in advocacy of his proposition. More good than Mr. Owen has ever 
 dreamed of may result from a correct and fair investigation of this sub¬ 
 ject. I should like to be told why we should not, on Mr. Owen’s prin¬ 
 ciples, love stones and trees as well as men. 
 
 Mr. Owen has told us, moreover, that the Millennium is coming, when 
 •we shall all be independent; that is, in his acceptation, we shail have 
 like sympathy for trees and stones as for each other Am I not war¬ 
 ranted in calling all this impertinent declamation? But, I must re¬ 
 sume my disquisition upon the old sceptics, as I have nothing before 
 me in Mr. Owen’s last speech, pertinent to our discussion. When 
 my last half hour expired I was going on to show how the sceptics in¬ 
 volve every thing in mysticism. No sceptics ever could agree 
 upon any system of human nature. 
 
 “Man is the work of Nature,” says the philosopher. But who, or 
 what, is nature? Of her he appears as ignorant as the deist of his 
 “God of Nature.” lie attempts to define nature* “Nature in its most 
 extended signification, is the great whole that results from the assem¬ 
 blage of diderent matter, of its different combinations, and of their 
 different motion which the Universe presents to view V But Nature, 
 the mother of us all, is here said to be a child of matter and motion. The 
 sage defines her again:— 1 “Nature, in a less extended sense, or con* 
 siclered in each being, is the whole that results from its essence;?, e. 
 n l the properties, combinations, motions, or different modifications by 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 7ij 
 
 which it is distinguished from other beings/*’ This makes th&nature 
 of each being the result of its own essence!! But we shall hear his 
 definition of one being, viz. man :—“Man is, in the whole, the result 
 of the combination of certain matter, endowed with peculiar proper¬ 
 ties, of which the arrangement is called organization, and of which 
 the essence is to feel, to think, to act, and, in short, to mofe after a 
 manner distinguished from other beings with which he can be com¬ 
 pared/’ Now if nature be something different from matter, motion, 
 or the essence of particular bodies, can these be called nature, or can 
 she be called the author of them!! But the sage feeling the darkness 
 and confusion of his former definitions, gives an extra definition in 
 the way of an admonition:—Whenever I make use of the expression 
 “nature produces an effect,” I have no intention of personifying that 
 nature which is purely an abstract being.” 
 
 But he talks of the laws of nature. Is she a lawgiver ? The 
 laws of a stone are just as puissant as the laws of Nature. Is Nature 
 the governor, and the governed—the agent and the patient -—or is the 
 term law equivalent to the term natureV 
 
 There are some who glory in being rational . and contemn others as 
 irrational. The rationals censure the irrationals for their ignorance 
 of the system of religion which they embrace, or rather for having 
 any system which they do not fully comprehend. After this, who 
 would expect to hear a person professing to teach and to admire what 
 he calls the system of nature, confessing in piece-meal his ignor¬ 
 ance of the whole of it? Yet such is the author of the System of Na¬ 
 ture. ' 
 
 We shall now state the dogmas and mysteries of atheism:—- 
 
 . 'First . Of the dogmas. 
 
 1. “The Universe presents but matter and motion.” 
 
 2. “From the action and reaction of the beings which the Universe 
 contains, result a series of causes and effects /’ 
 
 ft. “Man is the work of Nature.” 
 
 4. “Motion is guided by constantymd invariable law's.” 
 
 Now for a confession of ignorance on those dogmas and topics con¬ 
 nected with them—- 
 
 CONFESSED IGNORANCE OF ATHEISTS. 
 
 1. “The different principles of each of these motions are unknown 
 to us, because we are ignorant of what originally constitutes the es¬ 
 sence of these beings. We know bodies only in the mass; we are ig¬ 
 norant of their intimate combinations, and the proportions of those 
 combinations.” 
 
 2. “If we have a mind to find the principle of action in matter and 
 the origin of things; it is forever to fall back into difficulties, and to 
 absolutely abridge the examination of our senses which only can 
 make us know and judge of the causes capable of acting "upon them, 
 or impressing on them motion.” 
 
 ft. “W? know nothing of the elements of bodies” 
 
DEBATE 
 
 77 
 
 4: “The mind most practised in philosophical observations, has fre- 
 qifently the chagrin to find that the most simple and most common 
 effects escape all his researches and remain inexplicable to him” 
 
 5. “We are ignorant of the ways of nature, or of the essence of be* 
 ino’s”-—“Let us therefore content ourselves with avowing that nature 
 has resources which w'E know not of.” 
 
 6. If they ask from whence man has come, we reply, that experi¬ 
 ence does not enable us to resolve this question, and that it cannot 
 really interest us. It suffices for us to know, that man exists, 
 and that he is constituted in a manner to produce the effects of which 
 we see him capable.” 
 
 7. “Perhaps this earth is a mass, detatched in the course of time, 
 from some other celestial body —perhaps it is the result of those spots, 
 or those incrustations which astronomers perceive on the sun’s disk; 
 which from thence have been able to diffuse themselves into our plan¬ 
 etary’system —perhaps this globe is an extinguished, or displaced 
 comet, which heretofore occupied some other place in the regions of 
 space; and which, consequently, was then in a state to produce be¬ 
 ings very different from those which we find in it now.” 
 
 8. “We co?ljecture that the human species is a production pecu¬ 
 liar to our globe, in the position in which it is found, and when this 
 position shall happen to be changed, the human species will change, 
 or will be obliged to disappear.” 
 
 9. “It is probable that man was a necessary consequence of the 
 disentangling ofour globe, or one of the results of the qualities or pro¬ 
 perties of the energies of which it was susceptible—that he was bom 
 male and female—that his existence is co-ordinate with that of the 
 globe.” 
 
 10. “The primitive man did perhaps differ more from the actual 
 man, than the quadrupeds differ from the insects.” 
 
 11. “It is impossible for us to know what they will become, as to 
 know what they have been.” 
 
 12. “It is not given to man to know his origin; to know the essence 
 of things, nor to know their first principles; but we may conclude 
 that he has no just reason to believe himself a privileged being in na¬ 
 ture.” 
 
 13. “We know not the nature of magnetism, of electricity, of elas,- 
 licity, of attraction, of cohesion.” 
 
 14. “The most simple motions, the most ordinary phenomena, the 
 most common modes of action, are inexplicable mysteries , of which 
 we shall never know the first principles.” 
 
 This, which is but a sample, we must give as a specimen of the ig¬ 
 norance confessed by those who pretend to believe that Christianity 
 is predicated upon the ignorance of mankind, I have extracted these 
 fourteen assertions in their own v r ords. 
 
 natural mysteries of atheism, 
 
 1. The origin of Matter. 
 
 2. The principle S motion in Matter. 
 
 3. - The specific origin of the Earth. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 78 
 
 4. The origin of man. 
 
 5. The elements of bodies. 
 
 G. The nature of Magnetism. 
 
 7. The nature of Attraction. 
 
 8. The nature of Repulsion. 
 
 9. The nature of Cohesion. 
 
 10. The nature of Elasticity. 
 
 11. The nature of Electricity. 
 
 12. The destiny of the whole or any part of the Universe. 
 
 13. Our belief, in no case, depends upon our will, therefore, f&itb^ 
 or belief, is necessary; consequently, original and divine. 
 
 14. Knowledge, belief, and opinion, are ail involuntary. The de¬ 
 sire to know, a natural principle, has no effect upon our will; out* 
 consequent volition has no influence upon our knowledge. 
 
 The materialist has to confess as much ignorance and to believe 
 hiore mysteries than the Christian. And this is neither the half nor the 
 worst of it; he has to teach, admit, and contend for a number of ab¬ 
 surd mysteries, besides those which he acknowledges, w hich, in fact, 
 are much greater than any taught in the most corrupt schools of Chris¬ 
 tian priests. But they are of another kind, and therefore are not to be 
 compared, 
 
 1. The materialist asserts, “That it cannot really interest man it) 
 'mow his origin This is contrary to universal experience, and to the 
 ardent desires of rational nature. 
 
 2. The materialist asserts that “man has no just reason to believe 
 himself a privileged being in nature.’ 5 ’ This is also contrary to expe- 
 dence, and the most common observation. 
 
 3. He has, in any attempt to account for the origin of man, to sup¬ 
 pose an absurdity; namely, that there were an infant male and female 
 born or produced co-ordinate with the existence of the earth, and that 
 these had no parent; consequently, could not possibly arrive at ma¬ 
 turity. Experience has taught us that the first pair must have been 
 adults when first ushered into being. 
 
 4. He has to suppose, contrary to all experience, and to all history, 
 batman was not originally like the species now. 
 
 5. That there w as first an acorn or a seed before there was a tree 
 to produce it. Doubtless all the vegetable, as well as the animal king¬ 
 dom was first in its prime before there >vas a seed fell into the 
 earth. 
 
 6. He is also compelled to suppose matter and motion originally 
 possessed ofpow ? ers of which they are now r totally divested, and, there¬ 
 fore, has to reason against all experience. Nature cannot now pro¬ 
 duce a new genus or species in the animal or vegetable kingdom. 
 By what rational evidence can it then be shown that ever she posses¬ 
 sed such a power? 
 
 7. He cannot give any rational account of how r the idea of God or 
 a Creator so universally obtained amongst mankind, 
 
 8. He carmot show one single instance of either contingency or the 
 blind laws of pature operating to produce a poem like Homer's 11 had* 
 
Debate 79' 
 
 Q v t- Milton’s Paradise Lost; to produce a house like this one* a steam¬ 
 boat; a ship; a watch; a human eye; a hand; or a picture. Why 
 then assert contrary to all experience and observation, that nature pro¬ 
 duces the power of creating any thing? 
 
 The capital sins of ignorance confessed by the materialist, amount 
 to twice seven. The natural mysteries of their creed are also at least 
 twice seven. And the artificial mysteries which they have recently 
 superadded amount to seven. In this enumeration, we have followed 
 their methodi we have not gone into the detail. The prominent items 
 1 have given in their own words. Bat there is one mystery that ought 
 Co be added, which is more than equal to that of transubstantiation in its 
 worst aspect. It is this: Motion , say they, is a property of matter, 
 But what gives regularity to motion? Why docs it choose to move in 
 order, or in any uniform course? 
 
 Motion was so irregular at one time, as to form out of two vegetables 
 a man and a woman—They sprang up on the bank of a river in Asia. 
 They grew with their faces towards each other, and when they were 
 fully ripe, a gentle breeze broke them off the stem, and so put them in 
 motion; and thus they formed an early attachment for each other, 
 and have kept in motion ever since. But why motion should have 
 acted so irregularly at that time, and kept so regular ever since, is 
 the great mystery of mysteries of atheism. 
 
 Before I sit down, I will give you the testimony of Lord Chesterfield, 
 on this creed of the materialists. No man can suppose him either a 
 Ihgot or an enthusiast in rel igion. He says— 
 
 “I have read some of Leed’s sermons, and like them very well. But 
 I have neither read nor intend to read those which are meant to prove 
 the existence of God; because it seems to me too great a disparage¬ 
 ment of that reason which he has given us, to require any other proof 
 of his existence than those which the whole, and every part, of the 
 creation afford us. If 1 believe my own existence, I must believe his. 
 It cannot be proved a 'priori , as some have idly attempted to do, and 
 cannot be doubted of a posteriori —Cato very justly says,—‘And that 
 he is, all mature cries aloud.’ ”—Elegant epistle.— [Half hour outi\ 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—1 expressed, in the previous part of the debate, my 
 total disbelief in the notion that a supreme intelligence would create 
 a devil, knowing what it was about. I asserted nothing about the 
 existence or non-existence of Deity, <fcc. Now, my friends, 1 am 
 very desirous to conform to the suggestion of the board of Modera¬ 
 tors, and not to digress from the point of discussion immediately be¬ 
 fore us, except for the purpose cf more ample illustration. We are 
 now endeavoring to prove that, all religions are founded in ignorance. 
 Mr. Ci impbell has stated a strong practical iact concerning the sec¬ 
 tarianism of the sceptics. But I do not conceive myself in the 
 least bound to depend upon any arguments except those which I bring 
 forward myself. I have not once quoted a Sceptic, Deist, or Atheist 
 tvproye one of my positions. I derive my information from a close 
 
80 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 observation of human nature, and from facts which every one can ex ¬ 
 amine for himself. I have no occasion for any other authority, nor 
 do I wish to resort to any other. For, in my opinion, authority is but 
 of* little use, unless it be to give sanction to falsehood and error. It 
 seems that the sceptical opinions of Mirabaud and Paine were at war 
 with each other. Well be it so; for my part, I know not what scepti¬ 
 cism means, unless it signifies a difference of opinion from the speaker. 
 I am simply a searcher after , and a lover of truth. Mirabaud, it 
 seems, has stated that atheism could not make a wicked man good; 
 right enough, according to his notions of human nature and society.— 
 But the system which I advocate, is derived from the laws of natnre, 
 which will prevent bad men from being formed. Are there not now 
 bad men and women of all religions in the world. Now, I propose to 
 you a principle which shall prevent the formation in future of any 
 bad men and women, and surely this is a superior principle to apply 
 to practice than either religion or atheism, both of which are mere 
 words. 
 
 The ninth great law of our nature is, “that the highest health, 
 depends upon the cultivation of our intellectual and other faculties, 
 npon their equal and full developement, and upon their temperate ex¬ 
 ercise.' 5 ’ It is this law of our nature, that demonstrates that temper¬ 
 ance in all things, must be the highest point of human enjoyment.— 
 Consequently, the education of youth ought to be directed to give 
 every being the habit of temperance. We all know that we are com¬ 
 posed of physical propensities, of intellectual faculties, and of moral 
 feelings, and no human being can enjoy the happiness that of right 
 belongs to his nature, until all these are properly cultivated from in¬ 
 fancy to maturity. We have, therefore, my friends, not a metaphysi¬ 
 cal discussion to attend to; but an invaluable law of nature directing 
 us to the most beneficial practical result, and declaring to us in the 
 plainest language, that we ought to alter our whole system of society 
 as it is carried on in all countries. In our present system we have, 
 as formerly stated, but two divisions of society, the producer, and the 
 non-producer; the one continually attempting to deceive and to prey 
 upon the other, and both having their faculties partially and unnatu¬ 
 rally developed. The whole system of the world is, therefore, bad 
 from its foundation. Had we been all trained in the best manner 
 physically and intellectually, what different beings we would have 
 been from what we now are. Why, my friends, under a rational state 
 of society, the expression of every one of our features will be greatly 
 superior to what they now are. I should be sorry to say any thing 
 offensive, or unnecessarily to wound the feelings of any one; but it is 
 my duty upon this occasion, to speak the truth for the benefit of socie¬ 
 ty at large, who will either read or hear of these discussions, and to 
 make known the genuine impressions which facts have made upon me ; 
 and, therefore, my friends, I tell you plainly, and I hope without of¬ 
 fence to any, that I have never yet seen, since I had the. power of 
 observing, with my present knowledge upon die subject, any feature 
 in the countenance of any human being, that appeared to express the 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 81 
 
 fall character of rationality. And my expectation is,that the genera- 
 tion that, shall be trained to be rational, will be in all respects differ¬ 
 ent, and greatly superior in aspect and general character, from the 
 present. More different, indeed, than in your present state of mind, 
 it is possible lor you to conceive. When we shall become rational, 
 j f I am not greatly deceived, we shall see no feature expressive of dis¬ 
 like, anger, or irritation; no eye that will express want of confidence, 
 or a consciousness that we are attempting to deceive our neighbor.— 
 Our faces will become so open that all our real feelings will be ex¬ 
 pressed in them without the slightest shadow of disguise. Every inter¬ 
 nal movement of the mind will be distinctly exhibited in the finer move¬ 
 ments of the countenance; no uncharitable expression will be felt 
 to leave its impression upon any feature, not one unamiable look, 
 or constrained action, or, consequently, one unamiable gesture 
 in our deportment, that will appear ungraceful, will then be discover¬ 
 able. How will this change beautify our race in the next and suc¬ 
 ceeding generations! And all this, my friends, is neither visionary 
 or very difficult of practice. All that is necessary in order to bring 
 about these desirable results, is to discover and understand what man¬ 
 ner of beings we are. Our nature, at birth, is a beautiful compound., 
 which can be moulded into the most elegant or misshapen form; but 
 which of these it shall be, depends entirely upon the knowledge that 
 may be speedily acquired by the respective American and European 
 governments. Heretofore, governments and priesthoods have had the 
 forming of you, and how very inferior in person and mind have your 
 priests and rulers made you! Nevertheless, we cannot be rational, 
 and complain of those who have thus formed us, because they were 
 made to be as ignorant of the right method of training human nature to 
 become rational, as you are now, without additional knowledge upon 
 the subject. This law, my friends, like the other laws, points out to 
 us the importance of infant schools. I do not know whether any of 
 the parties present, have ever seen any of those in practice in the 
 eastern cities, imperfect as they yet are. There are some, I believe, 
 in New York, Philadelphia, and Boston. But these infant schools 
 have not been introduced into this country, or latterly into Great 
 Britain, on the principles on which they were originally founded.-!— 
 These infant schools, as first introduced by myself at New Lanark, 
 -five years before they were introduced elsewhere, I believe to be the 
 first practical step that has been taken towards forming the human 
 race to become rational. But the priesthood, through their influence, 
 have been enabled to lay hold upon these institutions, and are now 
 moulding the children within them, to their own purposes. But this 
 mode of proceeding will not do much longer. The spread of know¬ 
 ledge is opposed to it, and too much light will speedily appear upon 
 the subject of education, to permit of so much injury being inflicted 
 upon the rising generation. My friends, when these infant schools 
 shall be properly directed, they are capable of forming, by comparison 
 with the poor neglected infants of the present day, little angels; for, 
 in these schools, under a rational management, they may be trained 
 
debate. 
 
 82 
 
 to acquire, without any failure* the best dispositions, liabits, and man¬ 
 ners, and the most useful and valuable knowledge. Such qualifica¬ 
 tions as these, will make angels of any children, except their wings; 
 but these I cannot promise, for they have not yet been invented for 
 them. But to be again serious, it is certainly most true, that hereto¬ 
 fore, men have been quite unconscious of the extent of the infantile 
 powers, and of the effect which, when human nature comes to be 
 known, and well understood, may be produced at a very early period. 
 1 have seen several hundred little children assembled together, who 
 were angels in every thing except the wings; there was no fighting, 
 no quarrelling, no crying; all was peaceful; so that cue young female; 
 not more than eighteen years of age, of ordinary acquirements, but 
 having a good disposition, and being fond of children, could with plea¬ 
 sure superintend for several hours through every day, almost from 
 morning to night, 130 of them, from the age of eighteen months up 
 to six years. The infant schools, when well understood, will be disv 
 covered to be a moral improvement of far greater value to society than 
 the steam engine, or any other ancient or modern physical improve¬ 
 ment. But, my friends, I would not have you to introduce these 
 schools until you understand the principles on which they were found¬ 
 ed, and upon which only they ought to be established and managed. 
 Had you commenced before this time, you would ha ve commenced in 
 terror. But I hope the time is rapidly approaching, when you shall 
 have no error to contend against; when no part of the population will 
 be longer taught to contend against its own happiness. If, as Mr. 
 Campbell, admits, human beings are influenced by the circumstances 
 surrounding them, ought we not to begin at once to study the quality 
 of circumsta nces around us, in order to ascertain if it be possible to 
 withdraw those which produce a bad effect, and to replace them with 
 others of a superior description. Is there any other practical wisdom 
 in the world? If we be in all cases, to a very great degree, the 
 creatures of circumstances, does it not behove those who undertake 
 to govern and instruct us, to make themselves well acquainted with 
 the nature and character of those circumstances? I have read much 
 of history, I have travelled in many countries, I have endeavored to 
 bring before me all the present and past transactions of mankind; but 
 I cannot bring to my recollection the government, or the priesthood, 
 which has not entirely neglected this high duty—while this is by far 
 the most important duty of both, it is, in all cases, the first business 
 to which they ought to attend. While they remain ignorant of this 
 department, every active measure they adopt will tend only to increase 
 the evils of society; for society is very different now from what it was 
 only a few years ago. It could be governed by ignorance, in igno¬ 
 rance; it must be now governed by intelligence, and made to be in¬ 
 telligent. 
 
 It is of no use for different parties to contend any longer against 
 each in the field of ignorance, opposing one erroneous system against 
 another. A large mass of the people in many count ries has becom^ 
 too well informed to admit much longer of a continuance of these 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 83> 
 
 measures. They have discovered the true sources of knowledge and 
 of wealth, and (hat they are sufficient, under a good and intelligent 
 direction, amply to supply the human race. 
 
 As men receive all their knowledge from without, they can be 
 made intelligent and well disposed to all their fellows, by a rational 
 education from infancy to maturity. They can be made wealthy 
 through the knowledge and habits which they may be taught by a 
 rational education directing them to what they require for their hap¬ 
 piness, and hew to obtain it in the best and most easy manner by a 
 right application of the enormous mechanical and chemical power 
 for the creation of wealth, now at the disposal of society, and which 
 admits of unlimited increase. 
 
 But these invaluable sources of knowledge and wealth cannot be 
 applied with advantage for the general benefit of society under the 
 influence of any known religion. Useful, valuable, practical knowl¬ 
 edge can proceed only from an accurate knowledge of human nature; 
 and to me it appears that these religions and that knowledge are at 
 variance with each other; that all religions are founded in mys¬ 
 teries beyond human comprehension; that all knowledge is derived 
 from an accurate observation of facts, and just deductions from them, 
 and proved to be so by their unvarying consistency. It may be also 
 taught by proper methods to be understood by all men. 
 
 The twelve fundamental laws of human nature, explain what hu¬ 
 man nature really is, and the principal by which it ought to be train¬ 
 ed and instructed from infancy to maturity, to secure, to every one., 
 superior dispositions, habits and knowledge. 
 
 But each of these laws, when followed out to all their legitimate 
 consequences, is sufficient to prove that all the religions of the world 
 have been founded in ignorance of human nature, and therefore they 
 never have or can make man intelligent, good and happy. They 
 all continually endeavor to pursue a course opposite to the nature of 
 man, and, in consequence, both are perpetually violently opposed to 
 each other. And as these religions give an erroneous direction to 
 men’s thoughts and feelings, I have been long deeply impressed with 
 the conviction, which has been more confirmed by all I have heard 
 in this debate, “that all religions are not only founded in ignorance 
 of human nature, but they have been and are the real source, through 
 that error, of vice, disunion and misery of every description; that 
 they are now the only real bar to the formation of a society of virtue., 
 of intelligence, of charity in its most extended sense and of sincerity 4 
 and kindness among the whole human family: and that they can be 
 no longer maintained except through the ignorance of the mass of 
 the people, and the tyranny of the few over that mass.” 
 
 The world cannot be benefited by the continuance of errors which, 
 affect the well being and happiness of every individual, whatever may 
 be his rank or condition. All are therefore deeply interested in tins 
 question between Mr. Campbell and myself. One or both of us must 
 be in error, and the intelligent of all parties, ought, for their own 
 sakes, and for the benefit of their less informed fellow-beings, to in* 
 
84 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 vestigate, without partizan feelings, calmly and patiently the princi 
 pies which each conscientiously believes to be so true that he is lost 
 in conjectures how the other can believe as he says he does believe, 
 and wonders that he has not by his arguments already convinced his 
 opponent of his errors. 
 
 To me it apears that there are two most important measures which 
 require the whole attention, and the application of all the best facul¬ 
 ties of those who attempt to govern and to instruct the populations of 
 different countries. 
 
 The one is to introduce a rational system of education by which 
 the character of every one shall be well formed, physically and men¬ 
 tally, from infancy to maturity. The other to give aright direction to 
 tire new scientific powers of production; that an independence, relative 
 to the means of a comfortable and happy existence, may be secured 
 to every individual. 
 
 Upon every view that I can give to the subject, it seems to me that 
 the condition of the population of most countries now calls loudly for 
 the adoption of these measures; that they may be immediately intro¬ 
 duced info practice w ith great benefit to the governors and governed, 
 to the instructers and instructed, and that to secure success both mea¬ 
 sures should be intimately united and one made to aid the other—in¬ 
 deed it is only by their union; by being so blended together that they 
 shall mutually act and re-act upon each other, that either of them can 
 become practicable. For it is useless and dangerous to enlighten 
 men before they attain the means of securing a happy existence; and 
 it is equally useless and dangerous to give them the means of super¬ 
 fluous abundance without forming them at the same time to become 
 intelligent and virtuous in the proper sense of the term, or, in other 
 words, well disposed in all sincerity to promote the real happiness of 
 all their fellow-beings, not merely in words but in their daily conduct. 
 
 Happy w ill it be for the government and people that shall first in¬ 
 troduce this change into practice! 
 
 By such examples they will shew the means, most delightful too in 
 practice, by which “peace on earth and good will to men 51 may be es¬ 
 tablished probably in less than one generation. X could enter into ex¬ 
 tensive detail upon these very interesting subjects. 
 
 [Here the honorable Chairman remarked (without wishing to inter* 
 nipt Mr. Owen) that, in the opinion of the Moderators, Mr.. Owen, in 
 his last address, had wandered from the point of discussion immedi¬ 
 ately before the disputants and the public. The Board of Moderators 
 suppose that you ought to prove the falsehood of the existing religions 
 before you proceed to the discussion and explanation of your substi¬ 
 tute] 
 
 Mr. Owen replies-—That he has intimately studied man, and finds 
 him entirely different in his nature from what all religions suppose 
 him to be. if X prove this to the satisfaction of the audience, I 
 apprehend it. is entirely unnecessary to inyolve myself in all the 
 subtleties of the unlimited amount of fables and metaphysics with 
 which the world has been inundated If I. am oermitted tp prove 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 m 
 
 these five positions in the way I conceive to be consistent with right 
 reason, then I shall be ready to enter into any metaphysical disqui¬ 
 sitions that may be necessary to elucidate any other truth. 
 
 Mr. Chairman said in reply to Mr. Owen—It is not the wish of the 
 Moderators to dictate to you the course which you ought to pursue. 
 The Moderators are perfectly willing that you should rely upon any 
 course of argument which you may think best calculated to sustain 
 your proposition, viz. *‘that all religions in the world are inconsistent 
 with human nature, as you find it.” The Moderators only meant to 
 say,, that while you are discussing the proposition that all religions 
 are false, it would be improper to introduce the substitute which you 
 propose. 
 
 Here Mr. Owen remarked that he had touched upon the subject 
 of infant schools, and the creation of wealth, simply to illustrate that 
 the population of the world were yet ignorant; that they had not even 
 taken the first step towards training their children to become rational 
 from infancy, or independent in their condition. 
 
 Mr. Campbell then said-— 
 
 Not having heard any argument whatever adduced in the last ad¬ 
 dress, pertinent to the subject at issue, and Mr. Owen having dealt 
 •only in general assertions concerning human nature; having rejected 
 "the validity of all authority, and having admitted that his system is 
 so different from the existing state of tilings, that we cannot reason 
 from the one to the other-—-I now feci nay self com pelled to adopt some 
 other course, 
 
 Mr. Owen places me in a very singular predicament. Had I 
 selected a certain proposition and pledged myself to prove it, 1 
 should have felt myself bound, by all controversial rules, to keep to 
 that proposition, until 1 had either established it, or failed in the at¬ 
 tempt. And if, on the other hand, my opponent had taken up an af¬ 
 firmative proposition, and confined himself to the proof of it, I should 
 have felt myself bound to attend to every fact, argument, and demon¬ 
 stration adduced in its support, and either have rebutted them, c-r ac¬ 
 knowledged my inability so to do. But in the singular predicament in 
 which I am placed by Mr. Owen’s course, unless I were to speak of 
 angelic infants, with, or without wings; unless I should speak of sub¬ 
 jects derogatory to the dignity of this discussion, I see not how I can 
 take any notice of my opponent’s last address. It is necessary that 
 we should reciprocally reach some tangible point of disputation, I 
 trust that Mr. Owen is only keeping back his strong arguments all 
 this while. But if any stronger argument is yet to be offered, for the 
 sake of the audience', as well as for my own sake, I should really be 
 obliged to Mr. Owen if he would soon adduce it. 
 
 If Mr. Owen possesses that moral courage or boldness for which his 
 friends so much admire him, he ought to avow at once that all 
 ideas of Deity, and all other spiritual existences, are entirely at 
 variance with the beneficent objects which he has in contemplation to 
 consummate. Let us suppose that Mr Owen thinks and assumes 
 
 8 
 
&(i 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 that the idea of the providence of God, and all the ideas inseparably 
 connected with a belief in the Christian religion, are diametrically 
 opposed to the consummation of his beneficent objects. Assuming 
 this to be Mr. Owen’s real opinion, then it behoves him to give us 
 some sort of argument, proof, or illustration, calculated to eradicate 
 such ideas from our minds. If Mr. Owen thinks that our religious 
 (superstitious) ideas, and his social ideas can never exist together in 
 the same mind, this ought to he his course. If he has no objection 
 to the ideas which v/e entertain of spiritual existences, and of our 
 relation to a spiritual world, he ought to concede to us the right of 
 making deductions from them. But if, on the other hand, he con¬ 
 ceives mat these ideas interpose an impassable barrier to the admis¬ 
 sion of his principles into our minds, he ought to use his best exertions 
 to banish these hostile ideas. But Mr. Owen not only eludes the 
 onus probemdi, which every advocate of an affirmative proposition 
 tacitly and impliedly undertakes, but he cautiously avoids advancing 
 any thing for his opponent to disprove. 
 
 Now I am at a loss to reconcile this- equivocal course with what I 
 must think is the honesty, frankness, and candor of my friend’s 
 character and disposition. I have advanced certain propositions 
 predicated on all the popular systems of philosophy. I have inquired 
 of my opponent whether he would admit the philosophy of Locke, 
 or Hume, or of any of the philosophers of ancient or modern times, 
 on the subject of man’s intellectual and moral powers. To these 
 requests I have not been able to elicit either assent or negation. 1 
 am still willing on these topics to join issue with Mr. Owen upon the 
 doctrines, of any sceptical philosopher of any school. But as yet he 
 lias not asserted one single first principle, except that “we are the 
 creatures of circumstances.” I reasonably expected that he would 
 admit, or except to my analysis of the powers of the human mind; 
 but Mr. Owen, according to his modus cperar.di , pretermits all notice 
 of that analysis. Does my opponent approbate my analysis? Does he 
 assent to its correctness? If so, his conclusions are at variance with 
 his premises. I am apprehensive that it will be necessary for me to 
 do one of two things—either, to institute a regular argument de¬ 
 monstrative cf this position, viz, -‘that it is impossible for man to 
 originate any of those supernatural ideas which arc developed in the 
 Christian religion that is to say, I shall have to undertake to prove 
 ‘philosophically that man could not invent, or originate the idea of a 
 God, a Spirit, a future state, or any of the positive institutions of 
 religion; that he never could have invented or originated the ideas 
 inseparably connected with the word priest , altar, sacrifice , &c. 
 ergo, that these ideas and the words used to express them, are de¬ 
 rivable only from an immediate and direct revelation; man having 
 no power, according to any philosophic analysis of his intellectual 
 powers, to originate any such ideas. This I must do, or take up the 
 great question, “ Whether we have reasonable grounds to believe the 
 truth and certainty of the apostolic testimony .” To one or other of 
 those tsnics I shall be compelled local! your attention, ifmy opponent 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 will hat adopt some systematic logical course sf argumentation, bear* 
 mg directly upon the points at issue. One or other of these topics, if 
 permitted, I intend to take up in the afternoon. 
 
 We have taken a. peep into the different systems of the Free 
 Thinkers (as they glory in the name) of the ancient and modern 
 schools. And now let me ask, What have the sceptics to propose us 
 in room of the Bible? Can they concur in any substitute? Can they 
 offer any system of Nature, or of human nature? If they recommend 
 theism , they cannot find any two of themselves to concur in defining 
 that system. If they would have us become atheists , they cannot 
 harmonize in any one scheme, on which men can .reason. Indeed, 
 Mr. Owen seems to think that all that is necessary is to pull down 
 Christianity by reiterated assertions, that it is .predicated on principles 
 at variance with the nature of man. And having demolished this 
 palladium of all refined social enjoyment, and having extinguished 
 all the lights of immortality, man rrfhst not dare to think of his 
 origin, because it does not “interest him to "know any thing about it f’ 
 nor must he think of his destiny , as that cannot afford him any relish 
 for the animal en joyments of his system. He must not act either the 
 philosopher, or the Christian. If he were to reason from effect to 
 eause, he might be confounded with some insoluble difficulty upon 
 such a question as, Whether the first man was an infant or an adult; 
 or, Whether there was an acorn or an oak first. Such questions as 
 these might lead him to others more unanswerable still; as, Whether 
 the first man invented language himself, and taught it to his offspring; 
 or whether there was a convention of men-co-existent, who agreed 
 upon names for every thing, before any of them could speak? But it 
 will be best, under the new economy, to teach, that it is a sin, or some¬ 
 thing worse, for persons to have, or to indulge, any curiosity upon 
 such topics. 
 
 Although the sceptic may, in argument, be constrained to admit 
 that no innate appetite or desire in man is so strong as the desire of 
 knowledge; yet under the new system, he must be taught to view 
 the gratification of this desire as a sin against Ills own happiness if 
 ever it transcends the properties of matter. Every thing about spirit 
 and a spiritual system must be the forbidden fruit in the gardens of 
 sensual pleasure, which are to be cultivated under the new social 
 system. 
 
 i 
 
 These systems of Nature and human nature, framed by physical 
 men, who have just their five senses to guide them, teach man to 
 consider himself by no means a privileged being amidst the animals 
 around him. He must not consider himself superior to the horse on 
 which he rides; for if he should think about superiority, this might 
 involve him in great difficulties, and cause him to inquire to whom he 
 might be indebted for the high rank he occupies in the scale of being. 
 And whether he be superior or inferior, is a problem with them which 
 has not yet been satisfactorily solved. And should it ever occur to 
 him that there is a real difference in animals, not only in figure and 
 size, but also in sagacity, in genius, taste, imagination, reason, <&c. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 8& 
 
 he must never inquire why or how the earth once threw up a small 
 crop of each, and never attempted to do it a second time: and by what 
 peculiar concourse of chemical agents and atoms, the first crop were 
 men; and the last, apes or insects. 
 
 Nothing astonishes me more than the impotcncy of philosophy in 
 all matters and things pertaining to a spiritual system: to the origin 
 and nature of all those relations in which mankind stand to.the Creator, 
 and towards one' another as immortal beings. And how men, reared 
 -and educated within the precincts of revelation, can exhibit so many 
 raw and undisciplined ideas of human nature, to say nothing of the 
 future and unseen world, is still more astonishing. To hear all the 
 sceptics, too, in one conclave assembled, declare their perfect igno¬ 
 rance of the fundamental springs and principles of all their own laws 
 of nature} and, indeed, of the origin of all things and their destiny : 
 to see them predicate all their systems of infidelity upon such acknow¬ 
 ledged ignorance—-and then 'upbraid Christianity, as if predicated 
 upon ignorance of God and man, is a contradiction, or inconsistency, 
 for which lean find no parallel ir. the whole range of my acquaintance 
 with men and things. If, as they confess, they neither know, nor 
 can know, the origin of this earth and all things upon it, how or 
 why do they presume to deny the Mosaic account of it!! They pro¬ 
 fess not to know any thing about it; why, iher ,, attempt to deny, or 
 oppose the only account of it in the world, which, without philosophy, 
 but with the authority of a sacred historian, presents a-credible histo¬ 
 ry of it. 
 
 And here it is not unworthy of remark, that all the traditionary 
 accounts of the origin of the universe extant in all nations, evi¬ 
 dently, however, stolen from the Mosaic, pretend not to offer their 
 account as a theory, but as a narrative derived from the original 
 inhabitants of the world, who had it first of all from the Creator 
 himself. I presume the world was more than three thousand 
 years old before there was a single theory offered, or a specula¬ 
 tion upon its origin. All the ancient accounts are narratives , either 
 in prose or verse. No explanations are offered—no speculations 
 presented. • They were not the conclusions of reasoners, or philoso¬ 
 phers, but the declarations of a witness, and of a super-human 
 one—not a single traditionary account v. b.ich does not presuppose an 
 original witness of the creation, and imply the necessity of a superna¬ 
 tural revelation upon the origin of things. The first philosophers who 
 presumed to theorize upon this subject, if they demonstrated any thing, 
 clearly demonstrated this, that their conclusions were iriscr than their 
 premises. In ether words, that they were in possession of previous 
 information upon the subject which they did not derive from reason; 
 and, in defiance of the rules of logic, they had more truth in the de¬ 
 ductions than in the data which they assumed. They always remind 
 me of a lad at school who had stolen a penknife, and when pushed by 
 his examiners to account for the knife found in his pocket, in answer 
 to the question How he came by the knife, answered, that lie “ found it 
 growing on a treed' 1 As just mid logical is the reason giv en fbr many 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 8# 
 
 ef those ideas declared by philosophers to have been derived from 
 their own reasonings, but evidently stolen from other sources, either 
 from the volume of Revelation itself, or from streams flowing from it. 
 
 What an honor does the philosopher Mirabaud bestow on the 
 savages, who, he says, invented all the religions in the world 1 vol. 2. 
 p. 13.14. “In short, it is upon these rude foundations, that are built 
 all the religious systems of the world: although invented originally 
 by savages, they have yet the power of regulating the fate of the 
 most civilized nations. These systems, so ruinous in their principles, 
 have been variously modified by the human'mind, of which the es¬ 
 sence is to labor incessantly upon unknown objects; it always 
 commences by attaching to them a very great importance, which 
 afterwards it never dares examine coolly.” 
 
 Priests and savages , with him, are the most puissant characters. 
 In spite of all the philosophers, from Epicurus down to Mr. Owen, 
 the priests and the savages give laws and customs, religious and 
 moral, to the most civilized nations of the globe. One would ex¬ 
 pect, upon this theory, to find that the nearer man approached the 
 savage state the more exact his views of all religious relations, duties, 
 and obligations! And if this be true, the converse must; the greater 
 the philosopher, the less the saint; the more civilized, the less religi¬ 
 ous is man. I must here give Hobbes credit for one truism* “If men,” 
 says he, “found their interest in it, they would doubt the truth of 
 Euclid’s Elements.” I would add, they will, for the same reason too, 
 believe almost anv thing —even that savages civilized the ivorldl 
 
 • T O 
 
 As the hour of adjournment has almost arrived, I will only add 
 another proof of Bacon’s maxim, viz. u lhat the worst of all things is 
 deified error f taken from the materialist Mirabaud. It is his deifi¬ 
 cation of Nature:— 
 
 “We cannot doubt the power of nature; she produces all the animals 
 we see, by the aid of the combination of matter which is in continual 
 action; the harmony that subsists between the parts of these animals 
 is a consequence of the necessary laws of their nature and of their 
 combination; as soon as this accord ceases, the animal is necessarily 
 destroyed. What becomes then of the wisdom, of the intelligence, or 
 the goodness of the pretended cause to whom they ascribe the honor 
 of this so much boasted harmony? These animals, so marvellous, 
 which are said to be the work of an immutable God, are they not con¬ 
 tinually changing, and do they not always finish by decaying? Where 
 is the wisdom, the goodness, the foresight, and the immutability of a 
 workman who appears only to be occupied with deranging and break¬ 
 ing the springs of those machines which are announced to us as the 
 chefs d?mtvres of his power and of his ability? If this God cannot do 
 otherwise, he is neither free nor omnipotent. If lie changes his w ill, 
 he is not immutable. If he permits those machines, w hich he has 
 rendered sensible, to experience pain, he wants goodness. If lie has 
 not been able to render iiis works more solid, it is that he wants the 
 ability. In seeing that animals, as well as all the other works of the 
 divinity decay, we cannot prevent ourselves from concluding there 
 
 8* 
 
DEBATE 
 
 00 
 
 from, either that every tiling Nature does is necessary, and is only a 
 consequence of its laws, or that the workman who made it is destitute 
 of plan, of power, of stability, of ability, of goodness.”—p. 144. v, 2. 
 
 “Nature is the cause of every thing; she is self existent; she will 
 always exist: she is her own cause; her motion is a necessary conse¬ 
 quence of her necessary existence; without motion, we could have no 
 conception of nature; under this collective name we designate the 
 assemblage of matter acting in virtue-of its own peculiar energies ” 
 —-p„ 176. vol, 2. 
 
 “Let us keep ourselves to the nature which we see, which we feel, 
 which acts upon us, of which, at. least, we know the general laws, 
 if we are ignorant of her detail, and the secret principles winch she 
 employs in her complicated works, nevertheless, let us be certain' hat 
 site acts in a permanent, uniform, analogous, and necessary manner. 
 Let us, then, observe this nature; let us never quit the routine which 
 she describes for us; if we do, wo shall infallibly be punished with 
 numberless errors, with which our mind would find itself blinded, 
 and of which numberless sorrows would be the necessary conse¬ 
 quence. Let us not adore, let us not flatter after the manner of men, 
 a Nature who is deaf, and who acts necessarily, and of which nothing 
 can derange the course. Do not let us implore a whole which can 
 only maintain itself by the discord of elements, from whence the 
 universal harmony and the stability of the whole has birth. Let us 
 consider that we are sensible parts of a whole destitute of feeling, in 
 which all the forms and the combinations are destroyed after they are 
 born, and have subsisted for a longer or shorter time. Let us look 
 upon nature as an immense elaboratory which contains every thing 
 necessary for her to act, and to produce all those works which are 
 displayed to our eyes. Let us acknowledge her power to be inherent 
 m her essence. Do not let us attribute her works to an imaginary 
 cause, which has no other existence than in our brain. Rather let us 
 forever banish from our mind a phantom calculated to disturb it, and 
 to prevent our pursuing the simple, natural, and certain means which 
 can conduct us to happiness. Let us, then, re-establish this nature, 
 so long mistaken in her legitimate rights; let us listen to her voice, 
 of which reason is the faithful interpreter; let us impose silence on 
 that enthusiasm and imposture which, to our misfortune, have drawn 
 us aside from the only worship suitable to intelligent beings.”—Page 
 178. vol. 2. 
 
 Who preaches implicit faith and blind adoration now ? The infatu¬ 
 ated sage tells you that you must believe without evidence; that 
 Nature never errs—even when mysteries impenetrable hide her 
 operations! And you must worship and adore his goddess, just be¬ 
 cause she is blind and cannot see you—because she is deaf, and can¬ 
 not hear you! But to suppose that Nature is either rational, good, or 
 kind, would he most abhorrent to all his philosophy. Blind Fate and 
 inexorable Necessity is all that is to be feared, loved, adored, hated, or 
 what you please. You owe her nothing; and, after ail, she is a U purc 
 xhsiro.ci being f who has no existence save in the brain of such crazed 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 01' 
 
 philosophers l Sic transit gloria philosophies ! But, if permitted, this 
 afternoon, we will see what right reason or true philosophy teaches on 
 this subject. [Adjourned till 3 o'clock.] 
 
 Tuesday , 14it/t April, 3 o'’clock, P. M. 
 
 Mr. Ow'en rises. 
 
 My Friends—In furtherance of our object, which is to prove that ah 
 religions have been founded in error, I proceed to expound the tenth 
 law of our nature, which is, “That the individual is made to possess 
 and acquire the worst character, when his organization at birth has 
 been compounded of the most inferior propensities, faculties, and 
 qualities of our common nature, and when so organized, he has been 
 placed from birth to death, amidst the most vicious or worst circum¬ 
 stances.” This, my friends, is the law of nature that teaches the origin of 
 evil in man. Man becomes an evil being when his original organiza¬ 
 tion is imperfect; and when, in addition thereto, he is placed amidst 
 vicious or unfavorable circumstances? But can the individual justly 
 or rationally be blamed, because his, organization has been thus im¬ 
 perfectly formed? Can he be rationally censured because, with this 
 imperfect organization, he has been so unfortunate as to be cast into 
 the vortex of the most vicious and deteriorating circumstances? And 
 against poor human nature thus unfortunately organized, and thus 
 unhappily circumstanced, what has the ignorance ofihe world done ? 
 Why, it has called these objects of a just and rational commiseration 
 and sympathy, all manner of hard names, and inflicted upon them 
 all manner of injustice. In addition to the disadvantage of their mal- 
 organhation ; in addition to the utter impossibility of their resisting 
 the vicious impressions which these unfortunate circumstances have 
 imposed, the laws and the ignorance of all countries heap upon these 
 poor unfortunates, pains, penalties, and every kind of evil. Whereas, 
 had we but known what manner of beings we are, immediately on dis¬ 
 covering a fellow-being thus unfortunate in his organization, instead 
 of visiting him with penalties and persecution, we should become four¬ 
 fold more kind and attentive to him*endeavoring to make amends bv 
 our experience and knowledge for his mal-organization. But instead 
 of this rational course of conduct, the ignorance of man has done every¬ 
 thing in its power to make bad worse. There has been no eye to 
 pity, there has been none to say, We know that you had no control 
 over the formation of this inferior organization; we will therefore, not 
 call you hard names, but will endeavor to remove from you every de¬ 
 teriorating circumstance. W"e will place you in circumstances cal¬ 
 culated to remedy the evils of mal-organization. Had we been wise 
 and enlightened, had we possessed a true knowledge of the constitu¬ 
 tion of human nature, this would ever have been the only practice of 
 the world in these cases. But, do any of the religions of the world 
 speak in this language, or spirit, to such unfortunates? Do they not, 
 On the other hand, denounce the punishment cfhell-fire upon them? 
 
 My friends, if there had existed a spark of true light in the world, 
 such premises, such conclusions, and such practices would neverhave 
 
92 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 been dreamed of. Now, where is their demoralizing influence to be 
 found? How, or wherein, do these laws of our nature lead to one in- 
 convenienc in practice? On the contrary, might I not boldly ask, 
 Where is the code of laws, ever invented by ignorant man to be found, 
 that is at all comparable to them? I call these Divine laws. And 
 whenever we shall have the wisdom to form our municipal codes of 
 law upon them, they will be framed not for the punishment, but for the 
 prevention of crime. They will not be written in blood, as all laws 
 now are. And how much easier and how much better is prevention 
 than cure? Under all the religions of the world, all the bad passions, 
 and all the inferior feelings of our nature, have been arrayed in arms 
 against that portion of our fellow-beings who are the most legitimate 
 and rational objects of extraordinary care and tenderness, sympathy 
 and compassion. Under every rational subject, it is plain that these 
 badly organized and unhappily circumstanced individuals, instead of 
 being persecuted and tortured, ought to have been most commiserated 
 and attended to. Whether would it bo better, think you, to nip bad 
 habits, propensities and dispositions in the bud, or allow them uncheck¬ 
 ed to grow up into full vigor and maturity, and then employ a legion 
 of officers of justice,so called, (I call them officers of injustice) to im¬ 
 prison, scourge, and sacrifice these unfortunates. I say unhesitating¬ 
 ly, that there is not a particle of justice, rationality, or common sense, 
 in such proceedings. ' 
 
 We will proceed now to the eleventh law of our nature, “That an 
 individual is made to possess and to acquire a medium character when 
 his individual organization has been created superior , and when the 
 circumstances which surround him from birth to death produce con¬ 
 tinued vicious or unfavorable impressions. Or when his organization 
 has been formed of inferior materials, and the circumstances in which 
 he has been placed from birth to death, are of a character to produce 
 superior impressions only. Or when there has been some mixture of 
 g'oodand bad qualities in the original organization, and when it has 
 also been placed through life, in varied circumstances of good and evil. 
 This last compound has been hitherto the common lot of mankind.”— 
 Now, my friends, when we look calmly and without prejudice at all 
 the past proceedings of our race, and investigate the practical results 
 produced by all the religionsof the world, we find that the utmost they 
 have ever attained to in practice, is to form a very mixed, and very 
 inferior character. And why? Because the authors of thesoreligions 
 were totally unacquainted with human nature; they knew not what it 
 was, nor how to act upon or influence it, except by and through its 
 most inferior qualities. 
 
 If the inventors of these religions had possessed any true knowledge 
 they would have devised a very different combination of circumstan¬ 
 ces from those now found to exist in any part of the world. Having 
 been born in a Christian country you must necessarily believe the 
 Christian system is superior to any other. But the circumstances which 
 the Christian system has permitted to grow up for two thousand years, 
 have been in nine cases out of ten, only vicious and deteriorating cir- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 93 
 
 cumstances for human nature. Those, whose leading you have Ijollow- 
 ed,have been blind; they have not known one step of the way to true 
 knowledge and happiness. And you are ail at this moment in conse¬ 
 quence, surrounded with a large portion of the most vicious circum¬ 
 stances. But I rejoice to say, that no very formidable obstacle new 
 interposes to prevent these degrading circumstances from being with¬ 
 drawn, and replaced by others of the most delightful and beneficial 
 character. I trust, therefore, that another generation will not be al¬ 
 lowed to pass away in the midst of such circumstances as those in 
 which we have been trained, and in which we all now live. As 
 soon as this knowledge which we are now endeavoring to develope 
 shall be received into enlightened minds, they must discover the errors 
 in which they have been trained. 
 
 And that discovery will operate upon them so powerfully that they 
 will he unable to submit a ny longer to the degradation of their present 
 circumstances. If indeed we can discover the means of disseminating 
 this light rapidly and extensively over the world, these changes must 
 happen in a much shorter time than you suppose. But I cannot pro¬ 
 mise the adults of this generation, that it will be practicable for them 
 so far as to unlearn that which they have been taught, or to unassc- 
 ciate preconceived ideas, as to enable them to enjoy the full benefit of 
 this change. But if circumstances shall prove favorable to my plans, 
 I do think our children, whose characters are yet to be formed, may 
 be placed in circumstances which cannot fail to make them happy, 
 and compel them to receive the best dispositions, manners, and hab¬ 
 its. But to effect this important change, you must learn to know what 
 manner of beings you are—to know yourselves, and that thoroughly 
 too. Then all that is false in all religions will vanish ; wars will 
 cease all over the world; commerce, for a profit, or individual gain* 
 from others, will no longer exist; disunion, on account of opinions, or 
 of any thing else , will no longer be known, 'then every child bom 
 into the world, will be so educated that, wherever we go, we shall be 
 sure to find a good and intelligent being. Who would not desire to 
 witness this delightful change? Do I propose by the introduction 
 of these principles to rob you of any thing you have a value for?— 
 Surely the state of society, which I have described, will be of far 
 greater practical benefit and utility than any of you or your ancestors 
 ever enjoyed. Who has any interest in opposing this change ? Have 
 the governors, have the clergy, the lawyers, physicians, merchants, 
 the army, or the navy? I say No. As men , they have a hundred 
 fold greater interest in promoting this change, than as members ofany 
 class, sect, or party, they can have in opposing it. I, therefore, do not 
 come among you for the purpose of injuring or robbing any one.—- 
 All I desire is that you should adopt arrangements through which ev¬ 
 ery individual rnay be placed in a situation greatly to be envied by 
 the most prosperous individual under the present system of things. 
 When we shall thus acquire an accurate knowledge of ourselves, where 
 will there be any foundation for dsunion or difference of any kind? 
 Who, or what can then prevent us all from becoming members of one 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 1*4 
 
 and the same harmonious, enlightened, happy family? Then we 
 shall not require any of those artificial and inequitable distinctions 
 which now exist to keep man apart from his fellow. Then we shall 
 have millions of friends in whom there is no guile, instead of a few 
 in whom w© can place but a partial confidence. When this change 
 shall be consummated, we shall be at home, and have friends in every 
 part of the world. And what is to prevent this change from taking 
 place almost immediately? You have all the necessary materials for 
 it this moment in your possession—you have every tiling that can be 
 desired to enable you to effect this change—you have powers of pro¬ 
 duction at your control, a hundred fold beyond your utmost wants for 
 this purpose; and yet, in consequence of our ignorance of ourselves, 
 and every thing around us, we are contending against each other for 
 our daily bread. All our best faculties are at this moment employed 
 in all the professions and businesses of life in vain attempts to buy 
 cheap and sell dear. What an employment for such beings as we are! 
 Beings who are taught to look forward to an immortality in heaven. 
 And yet how many now desirious to attend this discussion, cannot 
 leave their occupations, for the fear of losing the means by which to 
 obtain a subsistence for themselves and families! 
 
 My friend, Mr. Campbell, does not at present perceive how these 
 arguments apply to the subject before us, but to me they appear to 
 bear directly upon it; and moreover that there is no other way to un¬ 
 derstand the argument, except in this mode of treating it. And Mr. 
 Campbell will discover in the sequel, that I have not deviated at all 
 from the object before us, but he (doubtless from the purest motives, 
 and unconsciously to himself) has endeavored to lead me astray from 
 the main object, and to induce me to embark with him into the ocean 
 of metaphorical disquisitions, where we might be tossed about for ten 
 thousand years, and then be no nearer the port than we are now. 
 
 I wish to keep your attention to facts, and not to advance one step 
 beyond their plain and obvious or legitimate conclusions. While we 
 thus act, certain knowledge lies directly in our path, and the best 
 practical results must follow. I have directed my mind day by day, 
 and hour by hour, to unravel the mysteries of ignorance in such a 
 manner as to present the lights of true knowledge plainly before my 
 fellow-beings. I have endeavored to sift and re-sift all these princi¬ 
 ples for which I now contend; I have brought them before the most 
 acute and comprehensive minds; 1 have urged them to.try them through 
 the fire, and to detect, if they possibly could, any error which they 
 contained. For 1 well know that if they contained one error or one 
 inconsistency, they must fall to the ground. My friends, you should 
 always bear in mind, that truth and inconsistency cannot exist togeth¬ 
 er. But I have travelled many countries, and have come into collision 
 with minds of the first calibre in the world, but never yet met with 
 that mind which coukl detect error, fallacy, or inconsistency, in one 
 of these principles. If my friend, Mr. Campbell, can detect error in 
 them, and demonstrate that error to me, I will frankly acknowledge 
 that I have been deceived, and I will most willingly pledge myself 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 both to Mr. Campbell, and to you, my friends, that from the moment 
 I am convinced of the existence of a single error or inconsistency in 
 these principles, I will do as much to promulgate the truth which shall 
 be demonstrated to me, and to expose the error into which I have fal¬ 
 len, as I have done to bring forward the system containing that er¬ 
 ror. And Mr. Campbell need not fear that there remains on my mind 
 any early impression which can operate to prevent iny declaring the 
 whole truth to any assembly in the world. 
 
 After proceeding with this subject in the manner I have proposed 
 it, Mr. Campbell will discover that f he points which he wishes to seize 
 upon, will be presented in a manner well suited to his own objects and 
 purposes; but I wish to bring forward my subject in such a connex¬ 
 ion, that all who are capable of reasoning accurately may compre* 
 bend it .—[Half hour out.'] 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—We have heard a great deal on the subject of Mr, 
 Owen’s experience, and the pains he has taken to test the soundness 
 and practical utility of his principles. But, as he will not admit the 
 legitimacy of any authority, wc cannot admit the experience of Mr. 
 Owen as authority. We must examine the question on its own merits. 
 If Mr. Owen had travelled all over the world, fraught with the com¬ 
 bined intelligence of the four quarters of the globe, this ought not to in¬ 
 fluence our minds in the least. We are here assembled, to examine 
 truth coolly and deliberately on its own evidences. Mr. Owen thinks 
 that I desire to lead him from his object, into the mazes of metaphysics ; 
 but a single retrospective glance, at the course this discussion has ta¬ 
 ken, is sufficient to show us that the first metaphysical proposition 
 was introduced by Mr. Owen himself. There cannot be a more meta¬ 
 physical question than “whether volition lias power over belief.” I 
 have no penchant for metaphysics in the discussion of questions of this 
 sort; nor have I introduced metaphysics into this discussion any fur¬ 
 ther than the nature of the argument itself requires. He lias inform 
 cd us, that the origin, of natural evil is to be found in the elements of 
 the human constitution. Now if this be true, every plan of ameliora¬ 
 tion must be impracticable, unless it be a plan to make man over 
 again. Perhaps Mr. Owen has discovered some new elements, or 
 some way of effecting a new combination of elements, in the human 
 constitution. Perhaps he means the four elements of the old school, 
 and that it is the exact apportionment of these which makes man 
 good or evil. If this be the meaning of Mr. Owen, it is obviously 
 impossible to ameliorate the condition of man, unless we can change 
 the elements of his nature. Unless he can apportion the elements of 
 fire, air, earth, and water, he cannot improve our race. If lhave mis¬ 
 taken Mr. Owen, I shall he glad to be corrected. But I affirm that if 
 natural evil is to be referred to the quantum of the four elements of 
 the old, or the forty elements of the new school, or to the modification 
 of these elements in the human system, all improvements are impractU 
 
96 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 chble; unless perhaps, a change of circumstances might have the 
 effect of graduating these elements in other proportions, in the human 
 constitution. 
 
 We have been tokl of the mal-adaptation of Christianity to the 
 happiness of man; but I hope to be able to show that religion is as 
 admirably adapted to the constitution of human nature, as the eye is 
 to light, or the ear to sound, And I will further attempt to prove that 
 the Author of the Universe must also be the author of religion, because 
 both are predicated on the same fundamental principles; or, in other 
 words, that the Almighty predicated religion and the universe on the 
 same principles. I presume that if Mr. Owen did understand the 
 Christian religion, he would not have a solitary objection to it. He 
 may have called popery Christianity , and identified the Christian re¬ 
 ligion with papal enormities.* But let the Christian religion be taught 
 in its purity, and cordially embraced, and it will exalt man higher, 
 and render him incomparably more happy than Mr. Owen has ever 
 conceived of. 
 
 The gnothe seauton of Solon, or “Know thyself j” is what I de¬ 
 sire as cordially as Mr. Owen. I am desirous to analyse the mind 
 and the senses, and thus to develope man. Has Mr. Owen exhibited 
 in his plan any thing like a design, or desire, to investigate the physi¬ 
 cal and intellectual man? Has he taken hold of my analysis of his 
 powers, submitted with the hope of eliciting such investigation? I am 
 willing, yea, desirous to take up the creature man, and analyse him 
 corporeally and mentally; and thus obey the mandate of the philoso¬ 
 pher and the apostle —‘‘Know thyself, 1” 
 
 * The following note from Mirabaud will prove, if proof be wanted, that the 
 atheists or materialists are most grossly ignorant of what Christianity is. They 
 have called antichrist and the papal apostacy by the name of Christianity; and 
 suppose that, in attacking and opposing this, they prove Christianity a fable. 
 As well might they ascribe darkness to the sun, or death to life. This material¬ 
 ist says.-—“The religion of Abraham appears to have originally been a theism 
 imagined to reform the superstition of the Chaldeans; the theism of Abraham 
 was corrupted by Moses, who availed himself of it to form the judaical super¬ 
 stition. Socrates was a theist, who, like Abraham, believed in divine inspira¬ 
 tions; his disciple, Plato, embellished the theism of his master with the mystical 
 colors which he borrowed from the Egyptian and Chaldean priests, and which 
 he modified himself in his poetical brain. 1 he disciples of Plato, such as 
 Proclus, Jamb fichus, Plotinus, Porphyrius, &c. were true fanatics, plunged 
 in the motifr gross superstitution. In short, the first doctors of the Christians 
 were Platonists; who combined the Judaical superstition, reformed by the 
 Apostles or by Jesus, with Platonism. Many people have looked upon Jesus 
 as a true theist, of whom the religion has been by degrees corrupted. Indeed, 
 in the books which contain the law which is attributed to him, there is no men¬ 
 tion either of worship, or of priests, nor of sacrifices, nor of offerings, nor of the 
 greater part of the doctrines of actual Christianity, become the most prejudicial 
 of all the superstitions of the earth. Mahomet, in combatting the polytheism 
 of his country, was only desirous of bringing back the Arabs to the primitive 
 theism of Abraham and of his son Ishmael, and nevertheless Mahometanism is ’ 
 divided into seventy-tiue sects. All this proves to us that theism is always 
 more or lest mingled with fanaticism, which sooner or later finishes by pro¬ 
 ducing ravages. 
 
DEBATE 
 
 He has asked you, my friends, of what he would rob you ! His 
 motives are doubtless pure. But of what would he rob you? Why, 
 my friends, all the attacks that were ever made upon man’s dearest 
 rights, and most valued treasures, are mere petty larcenies, compared 
 to the robbery he would commit? OP what would he rob ps? Why, 
 of the hope of immortality!-—of that alone, 
 
 “Amid life’s pains, abasements, emptiness, 
 
 “The soul can comfort, elevate, and fill!” 
 
 Now, are thrones, principalities, and powers—is the empire of the 
 world, and the fame of all ages—equivalent to the mere hope of living 
 forever? The materialist takes us out of the earth, and thither he 
 consigns us back again. But where is the man of unperverted, un¬ 
 sophisticated rationality, who would not give up all the world tor the 
 hope of an immortality in heaven? 
 
 —-““Rich hope of boundless bliss! 
 
 Bliss past man’s power to paint it, Time’s to close ! 
 
 —This hope is earth’s most estimable prize; 
 
 This is man’s portion, while no more than man a 
 H ope, of all passions, most befriends us here; 
 
 Passions of prouder name befriend us less. 
 
 Joy has her tears, and transport has her death a 
 H ope, like a cordial, innocent though strong, 
 
 Man’s heart, at once, inspirits and serenes. 
 
 Nor makes him pay his wisdom for his joys; 
 
 ’Tis all our present state can safely bear, 
 
 Health to the frame! and vigor to the mind! 
 
 A joy attemper’d! a chastised delight! 
 
 Like the fair summer evening, mild and sweet? 
 
 8 1'is man’s full cup, his paradise below! 
 
 —A bless’d hereafter, then, or hoped or gain’d. 
 
 Is all,—our hope of happiness!” 
 
 1 have now adverted to all the matter offered by Mr. Owen, that, 
 ■$t this time, appears to require my notice. I should now proceed a-s 
 proposed this forenoon, but from some hints I fmd it expedient not 
 yet to dismiss the mysteries of atheism, particularly with a reference 
 to one point on which sceptics of all schools declaim so much. They 
 will make experience the standard, law 7 , and measure of their belief. 
 I will, in part, traverse the area of mysteries a second time. 
 
 We have been discussing the mysteries of atheism. They are 
 either natural or artificial. In the original the term [mysierion] means 
 nothing but a secret , and when divulged it loses the name of mystery. 
 By natural mysteries we mean natural secrets. These mysteries are 
 not of my creation; they have been collated from the speculations of 
 the atheists, from their own confessions. The secrets, atheists are 
 ignorant of, are;—the origin of matter. This they declare to be in 
 explicable. The natural principle of mobility with which they ac¬ 
 knowledge matter to be endowed; the specific origin of the earth;—- 
 here they acknowledge themselves at fault. I have given you already 
 three perhapses of Mirabaud, They say they “cannot comprehend 
 ihe natural mysteries of any bodies.’ 5 While they acknowledge the 
 of the magnetic power, they confess ignorance of the nature 
 
98 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 of it. The principle of attraction, the most pervading law of matter, 
 they say they know not. They know nothing of the great law of 
 repulsion, nqr of the law of cohesion, by which particles of matter 
 adhere in defiance of the general law of attraction. They confess 
 their ignorance of the nature of the law of elasticity, and so of the 
 law of electricity. The destiny of the whole, or any part of the 
 universe, is to them unknown. Atheists make all these concessions. 
 
 When we take a view of these items, we discover that all the opera¬ 
 tions of nature are embraced by these physical principles, and athe¬ 
 ists declare that they know nothing about it. Now to these Mr. 
 Owen has added that our belief in no case depends upon our will— 
 the consequence of 'which law is, that faith is as necessary as the law 
 of attraction, and must therefore be divine; faith must be with him a 
 divine law of nature. Does not this truth follow out most legitimately ? 
 He affirms that faith is as necessary as the action of a mill-wheel; 
 therefore it is a “ divine principle,” and on the same principle the 
 * ‘violences on which faith is founded, must be divine. But knowledge, 
 •belief, and opinion are all involuntary! 
 
 Now is this desire of knowledge a natural principle, and has it no 
 effect upon the will?-—And has our consent or volition no influence 
 upon our knowledge ? These are two artificial mysteries. 
 
 Now what is the conclusion from these premises? Is it not that 
 ihe materialist has to confess as much ignorance of his own system, 
 and believe more mysteries than the Christian? He has also to con¬ 
 tend for artificial mysteries, each of w hich is absurd—artificial mys¬ 
 teries w 7 hieh are greater than any that ever have been taught in the 
 most corrupt schools of Christianity, 
 
 The materialist affirms that “it cannot really interest man to discover 
 bis specific origin I have no doubt that this dogma was adopted to 
 avoid a difficulty which they knew was invincible. It is conceded 
 i hat if the materialist’s system be true, it is impossible for us to account 
 for our origin—that it is a question beyond the utmost reach of human 
 intellect. Therefore to suit the exigency of their speculative scheme. 
 :hey have had the temerity to assume that it cannot rationally inter¬ 
 est mankind to know aught about their specific origin—that the stream 
 of human vitality was not worth tracing to its source. Now w r e are 
 often obliged to appeal to the experience of man; it is the grand argu>- 
 mention ad hominem. I will, therefore ask the w hole world, every 
 man, woman, and child in it, if the principle of curiosity he so intensely 
 active upon any other point of human inquiry, or human investigation, 
 as it is in tracing up this stream of vitality to its fountain, in order to 
 ascertain the specific origin of the species? It is a point which elicits 
 some of the earliest developements of infantile curiosity, or love of 
 knowledge. “Who made me?” “Whence came I?' 1 are amongst the 
 first questions put by the infant catechist to his seniors. This mon ¬ 
 strous atheistical assumption opposes itself to the most ardent passions 
 of the rational man. There is no animal appetite in man more opera¬ 
 tive than his moral eagerness in pursuit of knowledge. It make* 
 
debate; 
 
 99 
 
 man a keen hunter—it causes him to neglect his food, his sleep, his 
 case, and even to forget fatigue, in pursuit of his object. “Mens agi- 
 tat molem—et toto sccorpore miscet A If my opponent so ardently de^ 
 sire that we should know ourselves, let him come out from a school 
 which declares that the unde derivator of man, or the whence came Ij, 
 is matter of no concernment to him. Let him set his face like a flint 
 against a dictum like this, “In pursuit of self knowledge you must not 
 begin at the beginning/’ Let Mr. Owen’s principles be admitted, and 
 there is a total blank in this first and most intensely interesting chapi¬ 
 ter of man’s history. It is all obliterated as unworthy of a place in 
 the volume. “It cannot really interest man to know any thing eon, 
 cerning his primitive specific origin,*'’ is the first artificial mystery; 
 and this is the way that the school to which Mr. Owen belongs, eu¬ 
 logizes the oracular precept of “Gnothi scauton. r> This, I say, is the 
 first, artificial mystery, and this has been invented after the manner of 
 mysteries of the church of Rome. The second artificial mystery is, 
 that man has no just reason to believe himself a privileged being in 
 the scale of creation, over the bee* the bat , the beaver, the butterfly, 
 or the elephant. Does this compoit with your experience? Let the 
 word experience be received and interpreted according to its usual, 
 most known, and legitimate acceptation; and I am not afraid to abide 
 by its test. Well, then, I ask you, if it comports with your experi¬ 
 ence to admit that man has no reason to imagine himself a superior 
 being to a butterfly? But why was this asserted by the atheists?— 
 Merely from the necessity of the case. The materialists would never 
 have agitated these mysteries, but for the hard fate which attends their 
 system. They discovered that unsophisticated reason would lead 
 man to discover that he was at the head of creation; that - here he 
 stands pre-eminently chief; that he is lord paramount over all the irra¬ 
 tional papt of creation; that all was made for him. and subordinate to 
 him. But of this noted dignity we must be divested to make room for a. 
 speculative phantom, which exterminates the germ of all feeling, save 
 that ofj pity; if indeed it leaves that branch of human sympathy unscath¬ 
 ed. For in the doctri ne of materialism, where ca n pity find an object ? 
 Can I pity a tree when I see it growing crooked, or a stone for the 
 angularities of its shape, or a house for its rude architecture ? 
 
 But there is a third artificial mystery of the materialists: In any 
 attempt to account for man’s origin he has to suppose that there were an 
 infant male and female produced without parents, who consequently 
 must have perished in infancy. Some materialists have actually 
 supposed that the first pair grew up like two plants, as I have before- 
 stated. And when these were developed and began to expand, the 
 leaves became arms, Ac. Ac. until at length some favorable zephyrs 
 wafted them into each other’s arms. They mutually embraced, and 
 thus originated the human family. But in any attempt to account for 
 the origin ot man, the modern materialist has to suppose his first ances¬ 
 tors to have been an infant male and female; and if so, incapable of 
 arriving at maturity !—[Half hour out,] 
 

 Mr, Owen rises,- 
 
 My friends, 1 perceived, during my friend, Mr. Campbells last ad* 
 dress, that none of you would like to be deprived of heaven. I do not 
 recollect that I expressed any intention of taking away any well foun¬ 
 ded hopes of heaven from you* Nor do I know that my assertion de 
 nying the existence of, or my opinion that there was a heaven, would 
 make the least difference in the fact. You have therefore, notwith¬ 
 standing ail I may have said on the subject, just as good a chance for 
 enjoying heaven as you ever had. 
 
 We come now, my friends, to the twelfth and last fundamental law of 
 human nature, viz. “That the individual is made most superior of his 
 species, when his original organization has been compounded of-the 
 best properties, of the best ingredients of which human nature is form¬ 
 ed, and when the circumstances which surround him from birth to 
 death are of a character to produce only superior impressions; or in 
 other words, when the circumstances or laws, institutions, and cus¬ 
 toms in which he is placed, are all in unison with his nature.” Now 
 Mr. Campbell misunderstood me about the ingredients of human na¬ 
 ture being the origin of natural evil. I stated that some of the peculi¬ 
 ar errors of some men arose from their individual organization. And 
 i only applied the remark to human nature. And surely we cannot 
 derive the natural evil of human nature from any other source than its 
 defective organization. 
 
 It is common to say, that such a one is bad by nature; this only 
 means that the individual has not the same compound as others. But 
 whenever we shall understand this subject fully, and discover that the 
 most superior character is produced by a combination of the best or¬ 
 ganization and circumstances, we then have a very important practi¬ 
 cal object presented for our attainment. The inquiry then becomes, 
 Mo we possess, or can we obtain through this knowledge any influ¬ 
 ence over the future formation of individuals? I say that we can; and 
 I speak from a knowledge of facts with which all who are in any de¬ 
 cree connected with agricultural pursuits are familiar. It is known 
 to such, that there have been vast improvements in the breed of various 
 kinds cf animals; that there is a science by which any animal whether 
 human or irrational, is capable of receiving great improvement at 
 birth. But most unfortunately, in consequence of the general pre¬ 
 valence of ignorance on the subject of the animal man, almost every 
 thing that has been done in this matter has had an immediate and di¬ 
 rect tendency to deteriorate the infant man at birth. But the know¬ 
 ledge of this science, as soon as we acquire it, will instruct us in the 
 unerring method of obtaining the best raw material for the manu¬ 
 facture of man. It is an object of the highest importance to the 
 welfare and happiness of man, that every child should be born 
 with the best physical, intellectual, and moral organization of 
 which his'nature is susceptible. There is a science by which all 
 these may be improved before birth. But. the time is coming when 
 we shall have very distinct and accurate knowledge upon these 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 10 i 
 
 particulars; when we shall know how to cultivate the human being in 
 such manner as to present him greatly improved in his organization 
 at birth. But be this as it may, we have at present the power of with- 
 drawing the most unfavorable circumstances from around all human 
 
 o 
 
 beings from birth, and these circumstances acting upon our infinitely 
 diversified organizations create nine-tenths of the whole character of 
 individuals. 
 
 My'friends, you have seen many of the society of Friends in this 
 country; you have seen Jews, and you have seen Indians. Now the 
 difference observable between the Quaker, Jew, and Indian arises 
 solely from the difference of their external circumstances, in their 
 mode of_acting, or their respective original organizations. For were 
 we to take the infants of the Quakers and give them to be brought up 
 by the Jews, they would unquestionably make good Jews, and vice 
 versa. We shall, therefore, I repeat, have the power as soon as we 
 acquire the requisite knowledge, to influence the character of every 
 child that is born to a greater extent than nine-tenths of its whole char¬ 
 acter. 
 
 And if we of the present generation will not exert ourselves to rt> 
 move the unfavorable circumstances "which now exist, the corning 
 generation ought not to be blamed for their characters being ill-form¬ 
 ed. If we love our offspring, if we have any regard for the welfare of 
 future generations, we can no longer remain indifferent about ascer¬ 
 taining the true method of forming and educating them; we can no 
 longer supinely leave them to be the sport of such circumstances, as 
 now pervade the world. No! we shall rather devote our whole heart 
 rind soul to the investigating and maturing of this all important sub¬ 
 ject, which embraces within its scope, all that can be done by man 
 for the improvement of his fellow-beings. My friends, I never con¬ 
 sider this subject without feeling that any language which I can com¬ 
 mand is too feeble to convey an adequate idea of its importance.— 
 Nothing can be plainer than the path you have to pursue; you have no¬ 
 thing to do but to make yourselves acquainted with the influence of the 
 circumstances, beneficial or injurious around you, and to withdraw 
 all those which experience shall prove to be detrimental to our nature. 
 This is the whole duty of man; let him perform this duty well, with 
 knowledge and with judgment, and every beneficial result will follow, 
 of course. The performance of this duty is plain and simple; there is 
 no complexity about it, and it will soon be understood by everyone. 
 But what has been done for the species upon these rational principles? 
 Why scarcely any thing; and nothing at all has been done with a cor¬ 
 rect understanding of the subject. And yet can we advance a single 
 step toward the attainment of this grand object, until we have acqui¬ 
 red an accurate knowledge of ourselves? 
 
 Now, my friends, you have heard from me very different doctrines 
 from those which are taught by all the religions of the world. You 
 Will, of course, institute a comparison between my developements 
 and those which you have received from your public and appointed 
 instructers—from your spiritual pastors. Well, compare them in 
 
10.2 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 their practice. You have already seen and experienced wliat a state 
 of society the different religions of the world have produced. A little 
 trial will convince you of what can be effected for the good of man¬ 
 kind by the course which I recommend, by attending to facts instead 
 of imagination. Bely upon it, my friends, that if we allow ourselves 
 to be governed by any thing but experience, we shall inevitably be 
 led into the mazes of error. When once we diverge from the straight 
 forward path which facts point out, we launch into the wilds of imagi¬ 
 nation and every thing becomes a labyrinth of obscurity, which be* 
 wilder the human faculties. Under the old arrangements of society 
 1 have never yet met with an individual whose mind was not confu¬ 
 sed, and whose ideas were not in contradiction with each other.— 
 But ever since I was compelled by circumstancos to unassociate my 
 early erroneous ideas, since my mind has been regenerated by the re¬ 
 moval of these first impressions to their very foundations, and filled 
 with ideas only consistent with these twelve laws of our nature, I have 
 experienced no jarring elements within me; all has been tranquil and 
 harmonious; there has been nothing to wear out my constitution, or 
 create feelings in my bosom except those unavoidably created by be- 
 holding my fellow-beings around me existing in a state of misery, for 
 which I know there exists no other cause but the lamentable ignorance 
 in which they have been trained. Now, my friends, I have endeav¬ 
 ored to show you how those twelve fundamental laws of human nature 
 are in direct opposition to the doctrines inculcated and always impli¬ 
 ed by all the religions of the world. My object is to ‘show you that 
 the two systems are perfect antipodes to each other, that they cannot 
 exist together; that either these twelve fundamental laws of human 
 nature are utterly false, or that all the religions of the world are 
 founded in ignorance and error. It is just as impossible to effect & 
 union between these twelve laws and any system of religion extant, 
 as it is to effect an amalgamation between oil and water; there is as 
 little of moral affinity in the one case ns there is of chemical affinity 
 in the other. The one is all fact derived from what human nature was 
 yesterday, is to-day, and is likely ever to be. The systems of religion* 
 on the other hand are derived from the wildest vagaries of fancy; they 
 are but the air-built fabrics of imagination. I call them air-built, for 
 they have nothing but imagination opposed to natural laws to res$ 
 Xipon, and they have been, in consequence, in a perpetual state of 
 change, and they are still hourly changing in men’s minds. And 
 jnost fortunate it is for you, my friends, that they have no other foun¬ 
 dation; for neither in their origin, their tendency, their errors, contra¬ 
 dictions, or absurdities, are they at all calculated to produce good 
 conduct in man, or happiness for his race. The greatest blessing that- 
 can accrue to man is to demonstrate the ignorance on which all these 
 systems have been predicated, so palpably, that with one accord, 
 mankind should agree to dismiss them from their consideration, as 
 unworthy of the attention of rational beings. But in doing this X 
 would gu&t'd you against one danger which may and must a ruse from ' 
 
DEBATE. m 
 
 fiie coarse which must be taken to relieve yourselves from error. My 
 friends, there are three distinct states of society. The first is the com¬ 
 mon one all over the world, in which human nature has been compel- 
 led to believe or profess a belief in some district religion or other, and 
 in this state of society, the characters of individuals have been form* 
 cd upon the principles of this district religion. Knowing these prim 
 ciples, we can, to a certain extent, judge what the characters of the 
 individuals composing this society are. But when we advance one 
 step toward real knowledge and we can no longer believe these prin¬ 
 ciples, we at the same time withdraw all foundation from the former 
 character formed for usfby religious belief; we become like vessels 
 on the ocean without a helm, chart, or compass to steer by, and this 
 is the worst state in which human nature can be placed. But this is 
 the gulph through which we must pass, if the condition of society is 
 to be improved. All we can do is to adopt measures to shorten this 
 Critical period as much as possible. And whilst we are doing this, 
 we are in the second state of society. The third and the superior 
 state of existence will be that in which the individual having been 
 disabused of the errors implanted by his former religious and other 
 vicious external circumstances, has been taught the correct princi¬ 
 ples of his nature, when he has been fully and fairly taught what man¬ 
 ner of being he is, and his relation to his fellows; then, instead of be¬ 
 ing worse than the present religious characters of the day, he will 
 rise incomparably above them all; they cannot help sinking almost 
 below estimate in the comparison. In the two first states we shall be 
 irrational. In the third state, every thing that savors of irrationality 
 will he withdrawn; in this state there will be, there can be, none who 
 are irrational in their thoughts, feelings, and conduct. Fear not, my 
 friends, that this change in your minds will produce vice instead of 
 virtub. 
 
 This change is absolutely necessary, before you can be bornagaiih 
 This is the regeneration which you and past generations have been 
 looking for; and this change can be wrought simply by acquiring a 
 knowledge'of these eternal and immutable facts. These twelve fun¬ 
 damental laws of human nature (divine in every sense of the word)r 
 demonstrate that all the religions of the world have been founded in 
 ignorance^ and are opposed to our nature, when that nature shall be 
 fully understood. Now, my friends, I think I may proceed one step 
 further, and.state that these religions are now the only obstacles in the 
 way of forming a society over the earth, of kindness, intelligence, 
 sincerity, and prosperity in the fullest sense of the term; and now' I 
 think I may advance another step, and declare that the light is come 
 among us, and that this knowledge can no longer be withheld from 
 the great mass of the people but by the increased tyranny of the few 
 over the many. But the few can no longer tyrannize over the many,/ 
 Knowledge is power; and knowledge is passing from mind to mind, 
 from country to country like a flood. And this knowledge shall 
 spread from one point as from a centre over every portion of the world, 
 Unjil the knowledge of the truth or, in scripture language, ofthe Lord,- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 104 
 
 shall cove* the earth as the waters cover the seas. This is the know* 
 ledge of the Lord, for truth alone is the knowledge of the Lord. It is 
 a knowledge derived from those facts which ever have existed and 
 which exist to this day, as the universal word of the universal cause 
 from whence ail effects proceed. When we use the terms Lord, God, 
 or Deity, we use a term without annexing to it any definite idea.—* 
 Whenever we use this term we annex to it our own peculiar notions-, 
 and in many cases they are strange and wild in the extreme. But, 
 my friends, we do know that it is a law of our nature that we have 
 been so formed that we must acquire all our real knowledge by expe¬ 
 rience: and all experience declares that man is what he has been de¬ 
 monstrated to be by the twelve fundamental laws of his nature.— 
 '[Half hour owL] 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises, 
 
 Mr. Chairman—I should be led to conclude from the argument, (if 
 such it maybe called) that the error into which my friend has fallen 
 xn his whole process of deduction, is exhibited in one assertion in his 
 last address. His mind has dwelt so long on the influence of circum¬ 
 stances that he supposes that if a child of a Quaker were to be removed 
 into the family of a Jew, and vice versa , that in process of time, the 
 two children must inevitably imbibe the faith of the families in which 
 they were respectively reared. Now, I have no doubt this would be 
 the case in very many instances, but not universally. And so it is 
 with most of his facts. They are true in very many instances, but 
 are false in his universal application of them. It is illogical to argue 
 from particulars, how r ever comprehensive, to such general and univer¬ 
 sal conclusions. This proposition of my friend’s is not a mathemati¬ 
 cal proposition, which, if true in itself, must be true in its most exten¬ 
 ded or contracted sense. That children may be powerfully impressed 
 by circumstances, is true; but must we therefore conclude this to 
 be an invariable law of our nature, that they are forever doomed to the 
 control of the circumstances which surround them at birth ? Mr. 
 Owen was himself educated in a family of Episcopalians; is he now 
 tin Episcopalian? We see that the circumstances of his education 
 could not shackle his active mind. We see that he has broken 
 his chains, and that his emancipated mind now w r alks abroad, as if 
 it had never known a fetter. 'This shows that there are some geniuses 
 formed to overcome all disadvantages, to grasp a whole system, as it 
 were, by intuition; that in some minds there is a renovating and 
 regenerating power, paramount even to the influence of circum¬ 
 stances, omnipotent as my friend represents them to be. Now if this 
 be true, in Mr. Owen’s regard, why may it not be equally so wfith 
 respect to countless other persons? 
 
 Mr. Owen has attained to the knowledge of certain facts. But orf 
 the foundation of a few facts, he has proceeded to erect the superstruc¬ 
 ture of a whole code of* fundamental laws of nature; a divine system 
 of legislation. In fact to place mankind under a modern Theocracy.- 
 
DEBATE, 10& 
 
 But none of his laws is more immutable, than the one to which we 
 have just referred. 
 
 At one time, I would think he was preaching to us concerning the 
 millennium; that he was the herald of a better day. Sceptical as my 
 friend is, I must infer that he is a believer in the millennium; and, for 
 aught I know, he may be doing as much as a thousand missionaries 
 to induce it. Cyrus knew not the God of Jacob; he had no desire to 
 emancipate the Jews. In like manner, Mr. Owen may possibly be an 
 unconscious instrument in the hands of Providence. He is consoling 
 himself with the anticipation of a better day, and earnestly persua¬ 
 ding us to cherish the same anticipation. And from his own premi¬ 
 ses, I would undertake to prove the certainty of the fulfilment of the 
 prophecies of the New Testament, even, I was about to say, by a math¬ 
 ematical demonstration. Mr. Owen tells us, that wars shall cease; 
 (hat plenty shall follow us superabundantly as the waters of the Ohio; 
 that there shall be no more need for accumulating property to answer 
 our future exigencies, than there now exists for bottling up the waters 
 of the Ohio? Now all this tends to encourage bright anticipations of 
 future glory and happiness to man. Mr. Owen’s millennium , we will 
 suppose, has arrived; how long is it to continue? A millennium is a 
 thousand years:— 
 
 What now if we should attempt to prove arithmetically , the certainty 
 of the prophecies concerning the final consummation of all things? 
 The expectation of Christendom is notorious. It is this: that sometime 
 soon, perhaps in the present century, a new order of things, in the 
 political and religious relations of society will commence. That it 
 will pervade the whole human family; that after its full introduction* 
 it will continue a thousand years ; and that soon after its completion, 
 the present state of things will terminate, and the multiplication of 
 human beings cease forever. 
 
 Without going minutely into the detail, such is the general expec¬ 
 tation of Christendom built upon those writings called prophecies.— 
 Well now should we prove by an arithmetical calculation, the cer¬ 
 tainty of such conclusions relative to the final consummation, what will 
 the sceptics say ? I do not know, whether ever they have been tested 
 upon this point. We shall hear Mr. Ow’en, when I submit the prob¬ 
 lem. The premises or data are these: The present population of the 
 earth is estimated say, at one ikotisand millions. Now I will leave it 
 to them, to furnish the data, or to state what the population was two, 
 three, or four thousand years ago. They may even furnish me data 
 from the census of any nation of Europe for two, three, four or five 
 hundred years back. It will give the same result. We shall take 
 the Bible data until they furnish another. But I again repeat, the 
 population of any country, or of the earth, two* three or five hundred 
 years ago, will give the same result. According to the Bible data., 
 the whole human family, about four thousand years ago, was compo¬ 
 sed of eight individuals , four males and four females. And to keep our 
 calculation in whole numbers, we shall evacuate Europe and Amerh 
 /:a of all their population, and place thenvin Asia and Africa,on the pop- 
 
106 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 ulation there, which will fill that hulf of the earth as full of human 
 beings as can subsist upon its surface. We have now got, sav, the 
 half of our globe empty and the other half full. Now the question is, 
 If eight persons in four thousand years fill the one half of the earth 
 as full as it can subsist; how long Will one thousand millions be in 
 filling the other half? If in despite of ivars, famines, pestilences, and 
 all the waste of human life, under the corruptions of the last four thous¬ 
 and years, such has been the increase of human beings * what would 
 be the ratio of increase were all these to cease, and peace, health and 
 competence to be the order of the day for one thousand years? Why* 
 my friends, there would not be one half acre of land and water upon 
 the face of the globe for every human being which would live at the 
 completion of the millennium, or the seven-thousandth year from the 
 creation; what I contemplate, from these oracles to be about the 
 end of the present state of human existence. Either, then, some des¬ 
 olation must empty the earth of its inhabitants, or the human race 
 must be extinguished. Logic and arithmetic, compels us to the form¬ 
 er conclusion; but when we add to logic and arithmetic, the proph¬ 
 ecies of holy scripture, we are compelled to embrace the latter. I 
 think no prophecy ever admitted of so certain a calculation, or 
 exact and definite a computaton; in fact, no other oracle in the annals 
 of the world is proved by arithmetic so inevitably and unanswerably 
 as I conceive this to be. If an)/ flaw be in my data, or statement of 
 this question, I hope Mr. Owen will detect it, and give me the oppor¬ 
 tunity to illustrate and corroborate it still more fully. 
 
 Mr. Owen’s notion seems to be this: that his twelve laws once pro¬ 
 ved, the Christian scriptures must tumble to the ground! I have very 
 little scruple or hesitancy in admitting all his facts save one, so far 
 as they apply to the physical constitution of the animal man; and yet 
 I cannot percei v e how they contravene any part of Christianity. How 
 are we to account for his hallucinations! He supposes that the ad¬ 
 mission of his twelve facts would prove his five propositions. This is 
 most manifestly a logical error, unless these are identical propositions. 
 Suppose that by the aid of his fact he had made out the proof of his 
 first proposition, will he repeat, the same fact to prove the second pro¬ 
 position. Without the most perfect paralellism and identity in the 
 whole five propositions, how can he expect the same facts which prove 
 one of the five propositions, to prove them all ? 
 
 There is more couched in this speculation concerning the adoles-’- 
 cence or infancy of the primitive stock from which man is derived, 
 than a superficial thinker is perhaps aware of. On the hypothesis 
 that the first pair came into existence in a state of adolescence, when 
 they first saw light they must have had some information concerning 
 their origin. Infants or adults they must have been. If infants, they 
 could never have reached maturity; they roust have perished for lack 
 of nurture ? They must, therefore, have been adults. And when they, 
 saw the creation around them, they must have had some knowledge, 
 of their origin, of the source from whence they derived their principle 
 c>f vitali ty, and their control of the animal tribes around them. 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 m 
 
 lam now pretermitting the biblical narrative of the primitive origin 
 of man, altogether; and assuming for the sake of argument a hypo¬ 
 thesis. Isay then, that on the hypothesis of adolescence, the prime¬ 
 val pair must have possessed a consciousness of their origin. They 
 must have remembered when they first saw the sun and inhaled the 
 air, and the first time they ate. 
 
 Upon the atheistical premises before us, it would be difficult to prove 
 that our first ancestors would have known what or how to eat. The 
 philosopher is not aware of the consequences attendant upon the ex¬ 
 tinction of the lights of revelation. To these he owes many an idea 
 Which, without them, he would never have conceived. Without the 
 light of revelation I do not see how the first pair of human beings 
 would have known how, or what, to eat. Upon what principles would 
 they have set about the process? They might have felt the pain of 
 hunger without knowing either the cause or the cure. And if they 
 could have learned to eat from observation, or from feeling, they might 
 not have Known what to eat. The scriptures without speculating 
 upon any of the causes of things, state facts which lead us to think 
 correctly, if we think at all. Hence we find the revelation was imme¬ 
 diate and direct upon this point. God said, “of the fruit of these trees 
 you may eat/' There is no system of philosophy except the Chris¬ 
 tian which, without professing to philosophize, inducts us into the rea¬ 
 son of things, and that generally by telling us only what was done or 
 said. 
 
 But we have now before us this proposition that the first manmust hare 
 remembered the first time he saw the sun , ate, drank , and slept . This 
 lie could narrate, and would be most apt to relate to his own off¬ 
 spring,' for no information is more gratefully tendered, nor more ardent¬ 
 ly received, than that which respects the beginning of things. Hence 
 we infer that nothing is more reasonable than that the origin of things 
 would be the first and most important of all traditions; and so we do 
 not find an ancient nation whose history has come down to us that, 
 has not some account of its <pw n origin, and most of them some account 
 of the origin of all things. But it is scarcely conceivable, that the 
 first pair remembering and being conscious of the first time they saw 
 the sun, could be ignorant of the author of their existence. 
 
 That man was, in his first estate, designed to converse familiarly 
 with his Creator, the scriptures teach us; and not until he became a 
 transgressor, was this familiarity interrupted. Man is inferior to ail 
 other animals in instinctive powers—and this truth goes far to con-, 
 vince us that he was not constituted to be governed by instinct but by 
 reason. His being now more imbecile and helpless in his infancy 
 lhan other creatures, only corroborates the account of his fall. For 
 had he been designed to be governed by instinct, he would have ex¬ 
 hibited it, in, at least, as much perfection as other animals.. Hence if; 
 is, that, until reason is developed, the infant man is worse calculated 
 to provide for himself than any other creature. 
 
 None of the steps in this argument are long. The first man was a a 
 acjiilt. \V hen first he opened his eyes, hil reason and his senses were 
 -i -A . 
 
 ■ .-ff 7 v 
 
 mA :. - ■ . my ' .-..a . 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 “both in meridian strength. He could not but be sensible of his Maker, 
 He must always remember the first time he saw the sun, ate, drank, 
 slept and awoke. He must have often reflected upon these first acts 
 | of his existence. He would delight to tell them, and his offspring 
 would be most curious to hpar them. Traditionary information upon 
 these subjects is as natural as walking, talking, eating, or the most 
 | ordinary acts of any animal. Man is, therefore, so created and cir¬ 
 cumstanced now as to be naturally and necessarily credulous . Credu¬ 
 lity , for I know no term more expressive of the native bias to receive 
 truth upon testimony—I say, credulity is as natural to man as breath¬ 
 ing. This is a wise provision in the constitution of the human mind, 
 that it must, and, with the utmost ease, does, assent to testimony: for, 
 without it, there could be no improveability in man. He would cease 
 to be a progressive being. No child could be educated without it. 
 Without it, the art of the linguist, the logician, the rhetorician would 
 be unavailing. Human nature would be a metal , (if I may be allowed 
 the figure) that would not polish. But it is a law of human nature, as 
 self-evident, and as interesting, as any one of Mr. Owen’s code, and 
 much more worthy of being called a “law of human nature” than any 
 one of the twelve, that it is natural to man to be assured of truth, or 
 to believe upon testimony. This, more than any one of his twelve 
 laws, distinguishes and elevates man above tho brutes. If I did not 
 think it more worthy of being one of the first, I would adopt the lofty 
 style of my opponent, and call it the thirteenth fundamental law of 
 human nature. Being first infants, and dependent on our parents and 
 seniors for information, we are, from a necessity of nature, suscepti¬ 
 ble of progressive improvement—-but almost exclusively through 
 l faith. 
 
 Mr. Owen himself walks by faith in human testimony. And 
 -although he may not bo conscious of it, he has believed as firmly, 
 and acted as implicitly , as any Christian ever was required to dp. 
 While in Scotland he heard that there was one quarter of the world 
 called America, and he heard a great many reports concerning it. 
 Now, although there are many falsehoods told, and many impositions 
 practised, and thereby faith rendered more precarious and fallible^ 
 yet Mr. Owen was able to discriminate the truth, and to rely upon the 
 credible evidence which was presented to him. He had no experi¬ 
 ence of the climate, soil, products, government, and all the circum¬ 
 stances of the country. But so strong was his faith in testimony*, 
 and even on that sort of testimony which is often fallacious, that he 
 is moved by his faith to leave his country, friends, relatives, and ac¬ 
 quaintance, and trust his property and person upon the mighty ocean— 
 encounter all the dangers of the sea, and deny himself of many 
 comforts for the time being, in quest of that in which he believed. 
 This is as much faith as ever was required of a Christian to translate 
 him out of the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of God’s own 
 Son. As much faith, as much self-denial, as much perseverance, 
 would have led Mr, Owen into a kingdom and country imcomparably 
 pxyte desirable than Edeu was in all its virgin beauties, in all .its 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 primitive excellence, had that faith reposed upon truth supernatural- 
 truth as certain, and better documented, than was the testimony of 
 those upon whose credibility Mr. Owen started from Lanark for New 
 Harmony.. 
 
 Before 1 sit down, may I ask my opponent, tor the sake ofliis owe 
 reputation as a logician, and a challenger of the world, , to pay some 
 attention to these arguments and topics; that the public may not rear! 
 them without the form of a reply, or the semblance of a refutation: 
 £Half hour outi] 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 1 shall now proceed, my friends, to another view of this subject 
 in order to prove all these facts in another direction—to show that 
 there is no kind of inconsistency or contradiction between one purr 
 of the system and a nother. In the developement of one entire nex 
 state of things, it will appear that my arguments will apply with still 
 greater force and minuteness. 
 
 O 
 
 [Here Mr. Oxen commences reading “an attempt to derelope the out¬ 
 lines of an entire new state of existence, founded solely on the di-due 
 laws of human nature :”] 
 
 All past and present societies of men have been founded in direct 
 opposition to these divine laws, and, in consequence, virtue has geu 
 .erally been made to consist in acting contrary to them, and vice in 
 being obedient to them. 
 
 We now propose for universal adoption, another state of society, 
 in which virtue shall consist in being obedient to these laws, and vice 
 in opposing them. 
 
 These divine laws are— 
 
 1. 'iliat man, at his birth, has been made ignorant of every thing 
 relative to his own organization, and lie has not been permitted to 
 create any part of the propensities, faculties, and qualities, physical 
 or mental, which have been given to him, or which he possesses. 
 
 2. That no two infants have yet been known to possess precisely 
 the same organization at birth, and the differences between all infant's 
 are formed by a power unknown to them. 
 
 2. That each individual is placed, at birth, without his consent or 
 knowledge, within circumstances, which, acting upon his peculiar 
 organization, impress the general character of those circumstances 
 upon the infant, child, and man; tho influence of those circumstances, 
 .being modified, in some degree, by the peculiar natural organization 
 of each individual. 
 
 4. That no individual has had the power of deciding at what peri¬ 
 od of time, or in what part of the world, he shall come into existence; 
 of whom he shall be born, what district religion he shall be trained to 
 believe, or by what other circumstances he shall be surrrounded from 
 birth to death. 
 
 5. That each individual is so organized, that, w hen young, he may 
 be made to receive impressions from those around him, which dhorll 
 
 10 
 
no 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 produce either true ideas or false notions, and beneficial or injurious 
 habits, and to retain them with great tenacity. 
 
 6. That each individual is so organized, that he must believe ac¬ 
 cording to the strongest impressions that shall be made on his feelings; 
 while his belief in no case depends upon his will. 
 
 7. That each individual is so created, that he must like that which 
 is pleasant to him, or that which produces agreeable sensations on his 
 individual organization; and he must dislike that which creates in. 
 him unpleasant or disagreeable sensations; while he cannot discover 
 previous to experience what these sensations shall be. 
 
 8. That each individual is so created, that, the sensations made 
 upon his organization, although pleasant or delightful at their com¬ 
 mencement, become, when continued without intermission beyond a 
 certain period, disagreeable and painful; w r hile, on the contrary, when 
 a too rapid change of sensations is made on his organization, it dissi¬ 
 pates, weakens, and otherwise injures his physical, intellectual, and 
 moral powers and enjoyments. 
 
 9. That the highest health, the greatest progressive improvement, 
 and most permanent happiness of each individual depend, in a great 
 degree, upon the proper cultivation of all his faculties, physical and 
 mental, from infancy to maturity, and upon all these parts of his na¬ 
 ture being duly called into action, at their proper period, and temper¬ 
 ately exercised according to the strength and capacity of the individ ¬ 
 ual. 
 
 10. That the individual is made to possess and acquire the worst 
 character, when his organization at birth has been composed of the 
 most inferior ingredients, or natural qualities of our common nature, 
 and, when he has been so organized, that he has been placed from 
 birth to death amidst the most vicious or tcorst circumstances. 
 
 11. That the individual is made to possess and acquire a medium 
 character, when his original organization has been created supe¬ 
 rior, but the circumstances which surround him from birth to death 
 produce continued unfavorable impressions. Or when his organi¬ 
 zation has been formed of inferior propensities, faculties, and qualities, 
 and the circumstances in which he has been placed from birth to 
 death are of a character to produce superior impressions only. Or 
 when there has been some mixture pf superior and inferior qualities 
 in the original organization, when it has been placed through life in 
 various circumstances of good and evil. Hitherto this has been the 
 common lot, of mankind. 
 
 12. That the individual is made the most superior of his species 
 when his original organization has been compounded of the best pro¬ 
 portions, of the best ingredients of which human nature is formed, and 
 when the circumstances which surround him during life produce only 
 superior impressions. In other words, whan his organization is the 
 most perfect, and the laws, institutions, and practices which surround 
 him are all in unison with his nature. 
 
 These twelve fundamental laws will be found, on examination, to * 
 be m strict accordance with all existing facts, and in a rational state 
 
DEBATE. Hi 
 
 orsociety, all the laws and institutions will be founded upon them 
 and they will govern the actions of all men. 
 
 These laws, in the aggregate, demonstrate, that man does not form 
 his own physical, intellectual, or moral nature; that, consequently, 
 he can have no merit or demerit for his particular organization in 
 his person, and that all pride or assumed distinction, arising from 
 the possession of them, under the most favored combinations in which 
 they may exist, are irrational feelings arising solely from ignorance. 
 
 These laws also demonstrate that man is compelled to believe ac¬ 
 cording to the strongest conviction that can be made upon his mind, 
 and to fed according to the most powerful impressions of pain or 
 pleasure which can be made upon his organization. Consequently 
 that he is a being irresponsible for his thoughts raid feelings—irre¬ 
 sponsible, whether he has been compelled by the circumstances around 
 him, to believe in accordance with facts, or in opposition to them, or, 
 whether he has been formed to love what others hate, or dislike what 
 others approve. All institutions, therefore, formed in opposition to 
 these divine laws of human nature must he irrational. All the insti¬ 
 tutions of men have, been formed in opposition to them. 
 
 These laws also demonstrate that man is a two-fold being, whose 
 character and conduct are formed, in part, by the peculiar organiza¬ 
 tion which he possesses at birth,* and in part, by the impressions 
 which influence that organization through life. 
 
 That the organization ofeach individual at birth and the circumstan¬ 
 ces which influence it afterwards, although generally similar, are in 
 many particulars dissimilar; yet that the difference, whatever may 
 be the extent, dees not proceed from the will of the individuals. Con¬ 
 sequently all uncharitableness, all anger and irritation, and all pride, 
 for possessing particular feelings, proceed solely from ignorance of 
 the divine laws of human nature, and are therefore irrational. 
 
 Again, these laws demonstrate that the character! and conduct of 
 every human being, are essentially formed by tire external circum¬ 
 stances which are allowed to exist around them from birth to death, 
 although their character and conduct are in some degree modified by 
 the particular organization given to each individual at birth. 
 
 Consequently no man can be justly made responsible for what he 
 is, or for any thing he may say or do, he cannot possess merit or de¬ 
 merit for his thoughts or feelings, for he is a being wholly formed by 
 circumstances, all of which, when traced to their source, are, in real¬ 
 ity, beyond his control. 
 
 He is a being, however, who is evidently organized to desire happi¬ 
 ness above all things, and that desire, united with a knowledge of the 
 divine laws of human nature, will form a new train of circumstances, 
 which will enable the men of one generation to adopt practical meas¬ 
 ures to insure the happiness of their successors. 
 
 For these divine laws direct the certain way to happiness, “such 
 as it has not yet entered into the heart of man to conceive. 15 For a 
 knowledge of ^iese laws will create the inclination and power to live 
 
* 
 
 1 ll 
 
 u*. *..•*/ 
 
 DEBATE 
 
 in obedience to them, and “perfect obedience” will produce the highr 
 est happiness that man can enjoy. 
 
 religion. 
 
 In this new state of existence, all that is contrary to these divine 
 laws of human nature, in all the religions in the world, will be with - 
 drawn, and then true religion, or truth, pure and undefiled, without 
 useless and senseless rites, forms, or ceremonies, will alone remain-r 
 For many of these rites and ceremonies in all countries, are in direct 
 opposition to the divine-laws of human nature. 
 
 Some of these rites and ceremonies are weak and childish, others j 
 are absurd and cruel, and some are horrid and monstrous. These 1 
 errors were engendered in the imaginations of men, when they “knew j 
 not what manner of beings they were,’' when they were “babes and I 
 sucklings” in real knowledge, when “they did those things which^x 
 they ought not to have done for their happiness.” 
 
 The time is now near at hand, when these worse than childish pnv 
 feedings must give place to the plain and simple “law of obedience,” 
 ro one uniform practice in accordance to the divine will or to the dir 
 vine laws of human nature, and thus shall the “knowledge of the 
 ihorci” or of divine trutli “cover the earth as the waters cover the 
 *eas,” and therefore mythology, fables, dogmas, forms, and mysteries, 
 founded in ignorance of these divine laws, will soon be banished from 
 the earth. Then men will no longer look through these for better 
 ■things as “through a glass darkly,” but they will know themselves, 
 and all motive to deception of every kind being removed “they will 
 know each other even as they are known.” And when these false 
 dogmas, fables, and mysteries, and the fundamental errors from which 
 they spring, shall be removed from society, and when they shall be 
 replaced by a knowledge of the simple and beautiful divine laws of 
 human nature, then, and not till then, “shall the mind be born again.” 
 And when this change shall take place there shall be no perplexity 
 or confusion of ideas; but, on the contrary, the feelings, thoughts, lan¬ 
 guage, and conduct of all men shall be consistent, and they will al¬ 
 ways harmonize together. 
 
 What is the amount of man’s knowledge, at this day, of those sub' 
 iects, which he has been trained to call divine? 
 
 He knows, through the medium of his senses, that the Universe'ex- 
 ists, and that those parts of it which he can perceive and understand, 
 appear to him to be in constant motion. That decompositions, of the 
 materials of the universe, continually take place, and new composi¬ 
 tions with or without life, are again formed. That these composi- 
 rions, decompositions, and recompositions, in endless succession, pro¬ 
 ceed from a power to him unknown and therefore mysterious. And 
 of those things which man has called divine this is the whole amount 
 of the knowledge which he has yet acquired. He may, perhaps, learn 
 more when lie shall be taught to “know himself” and obey* the laws of. 
 his nature, by investigating fact after fact*to the extent that the facul¬ 
 ties with which he has been furnished will permit. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 na 
 
 At ait events tie will be thus trained to acquire a manly and cheer¬ 
 ful confidence in the unknown power that every where surrounds him, : 
 and in which he lives, moves, and has his being. 
 
 , But he will discover no motive to be afraid of its extent, or to dis* ) 
 f trust its ultimate results, and much less to flatter it by ceremonies and 
 forms which are degrading to created beings. 
 
 Instead of errors like these being made to engage ths attention of 
 our offspring, let us henceforward direct them to contemplate the beau¬ 
 tiful expanse around us; to observe the mighty movements within it, 
 to study those unchanging laws by which the germs of organization 
 exist upon the earth and become gradually perfected, each according 
 to its kind, and again slowly or more rapidly declining, until they 
 are redissolved into the original elements of the universe; commencing 
 again their ceaseless round of new compositions; then let them be 
 taught to reflect how all these movements and laws harmonise to- 
 gether. They will be delighted with the knowledge they will thus ac¬ 
 quire; and the more they know, the more they.will desire to act in 
 obedience to these divine law’s. 
 
 Let us therefore, now, remove, far away, from succeeding genera¬ 
 tions, all these useless and degrading abominations, which serve only 
 to debase the great mass of mankind, and to lay their intellectual fac¬ 
 ulties prostrate before a few of their fellow’s, who in no respect are 
 made superior to themselves, except by a peculiar education. And 
 a much better education, than any of them have yet received, may 
 now be given to every individual of the human race. 
 
 But with the knowledge now acquired of these divine law’s we can* 
 not be angry or displeased with any of them, even with those w’ho Iikve 
 been thus trained to be the most irrational and crue’, no not to those 
 w’ho have tortured their fellow’s, or sacrificed them on the altar of their 
 
 
 gods. 
 
 Do any of these yet remain on the earth, we must pity them, have 
 charity for them; speak kindly to them, and endeavor by all the means 
 in our power to do them good. 
 
 ARTIFICIAL LAWS. 
 
 All human laws as they now exist, are as we have stated, in oppq- 
 sition to the divine laws of human nature ; they presuppose that man 
 has been so organized as to possess the power to compel himself to 
 think as he pleases, and to feel as he likes. All human governments 
 are founded on these notions, and they must lead men altogether 
 astray from truth and happiness; they are therefore, not only useless, 
 but highly injurious in every light in which they can be viewed. 
 
 Written laws of human invention are necessary, only, while at- 
 tempts shall be made to govern men in opposition to. their nature and 
 
 contrary to reason. 7 - 
 
 Ali the artificial laws and institutions of man Is devising, in opposi¬ 
 tion to his nature, have ever been a curse to <he human race, and they 
 rnav be safely superceded as soon as the rising generation shall be¬ 
 come familiar with the laws of their nature, and shall be placed within 
 circumstances m which they may act in obedience to them. 
 
 10* 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 114 
 
 When this shall be done, all motive to disunion, or to create any un¬ 
 pleasant difference of opinion or feeling will cease, and whatever may 
 require adjustment between individuals or communities, will be speed - 
 liy and satisfactorily arranged by the persons appointed to govern the 
 interests of all equally 
 
 PRIVATE PROPERTY. 
 
 In this new state of existence all private property in persons and 
 things, that is in opposition to the fixed laws of human nature will 
 cease, and in consequence, selfishness, poverty and jealousy will ter¬ 
 minate. 
 
 Instead of submitting to the innumerable evils arising from private 
 property,arrangements will be formed to secure, for every one, from 
 birth to dea th, a full supply of every thing that is the best for human 
 nature, taking also into consideration the minor differences formed by 
 nature, in the organization of each individual. 
 
 As soon as all unnecessary private property shall be abolished, it 
 will no longer be or appear to be, for the interest ofany one, that any 
 thing inferior in quality shall be produced for the use of man. 
 
 There will be no inferior cultivation; no inferior houses or buildings 
 ofany kind; no inferior roads, bridges, canals, aqueducts, vessels lor 
 navigation or machinery for any purpose; all of them will be con¬ 
 structed of the best materials that can be procured, and they will be 
 planned and executed under the direction of those who shall be found 
 to possess the best knowledge and the most valuable experience upon 
 each subject respectively. In short whatever is to be done will be ex¬ 
 ecuted in the neatest manner known at the time, in any part of socie¬ 
 ty; for the talents of each will be applied the most advantageously 
 for the benefit of all. 
 
 WAR. 
 
 Ill this new state of existence wars will terminate, as rapidly, as 
 a knowledge of the laws of human nature shall be made to extend 
 over the earth. 
 
 For war is opposed to the happiness of the human race. It is ben¬ 
 eficial for all that there should be a full supply of the best of every 
 thing for every human being, and that all should be more or less en¬ 
 gaged in its production, preservation or distribution. 
 
 But war withdraws the efficient part of the population from produ¬ 
 cing, preserving or distributing, and forms it into a most effective 
 power to consume wastefully; to destroy upon a large scale and to 
 prevent production. 
 
 It is the interest of all men, without any exception, that all their 
 powers should be applied to aid in producing the best of every thing 
 tor every one, or to be employed in some way that shall promote the 
 greatest benefit. 
 
 In the preseat irrational state of existence, it is often, amongjhe 
 wealthy indeed, generally deemed more honorable to be employed 
 inoccupations useless or injurious, rather than to be seen making or 
 producing any thing useful or ngCQsaary for the existence or enjoy- • 
 ment of rational beings, 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 U5 
 
 This war, through all its ramifications, is destructive of happiness, 
 and of the rational faculties of the human race, and yet it has been 
 deemed the most honorable of all employments. 
 
 For those men who have been the most successful in destroying 
 the productions of their fellow men; in. killing and wounding ths 
 greatest number of them; in burning their habitations and property; 
 in creating thereby the greatest extent of famine, and the largest 
 amount of individual suffering and misery with the most wide spread 
 destruction of human industry and comfort, have been through all. 
 past ages the most honored and rewarded. 
 
 In the new state of existence, all these proceedings will be deemed 
 irrational, and will never be practised except by those w ho are insane. 
 
 As soon, therefore, as a generation shall be trained from infancy 
 in a knowledge of the divine laws of human nature, all contention 
 will cease, and charity and peace will every where prevail. [Half 
 JiGiir out.] 
 
 ■ ", . V , - •* 
 
 Me. Campbell rises— 
 
 Mr. Chairman—It is surely a novel species of logic to argue, that, 
 because we shall have better houses, and better schools, and must 
 have new bridges, &c. therefore the Christian religion must be false„ 
 To resume the subject of materialism, which is the system of mv 
 friend, Mr. Owen, it will be necessary to observo, that all the artifi¬ 
 cial mysteries of atheism have not emanated from the same brain, 
 but from different intellects. In order to make out a system contrary 
 to all experience and history , some materialists have been constrained 
 to suppose, (finding themselves perplexed to account for man’s origin, 
 either on the hypothesis of his coming into existence as an adult or an 
 infant) that man w r as originally a being very different from what he 
 now is. But whether he has degenerated, or improved, they do not 
 testify. They also suppose another absurdity—viz. that there must 
 have been an oak before an acorn; or, in other words, that vegetables 
 must have existed before their seeds. This w 7 ould be no absurdity, 
 if we admit a Creator who produced by one almighty fiat, eveiy 
 vegetable in full vigor, But, .on any other hypothesis, it is an ab¬ 
 surdity. This necessarily follow’s from their own premises. They 
 also suppose that matter and motion originally possessed powers 
 w hich they do not now. That because matter and motion cannot now 
 produce new genera and species , therefore they have not all the 
 powers they once had. This is first to assume a fact, and then to. 
 invent, or bribe, or suborn the testimony to prove it. That once they 
 had the power of detaching themselves from other parts of the uni¬ 
 verse, and forming themselves into organized bedies, but that now 
 they have grown old and feeble, and lost their power. 
 
 When they asserted that the material universe had no relation to 
 •an intelligent First Cause , but w as the production of blind chance, 
 or nature operating according to the laws of matter and motion, they 
 were impelled to the above conclusion. Inasmuch as they do not 
 Ihid nature competent to the production of a now species or genus nf 
 
116 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 vegetable or animal matter, they endeavor to excuse their system by 
 asserting that she once possessed powers which she does‘not now 
 possess. But this monstrous assumption must be taken for fact to 
 account for any thing on their premises. Yet these persons tell us 
 they cannot believe a miracle because it is contrary to all experi¬ 
 ence.. But they can believe their own mysteries contrary to all the- 
 experience and information of mankind!_ 
 
 f5 Deny God—all is mystery besides; 
 
 Millions of mysteries! each darker far 
 
 I han that thy wisdom would unwisely shun. 
 
 If weak thy faith, why choose the harder side! 
 
 We nothing know but what is marvellous; 
 
 Yet wliat is marvellous we can’t believe!” * 
 
 But the system is liable to another exception. It can give n<5 
 account of the manner in which the idea of a God became so univer- 
 sady prevalent, while they admit that the idea did obtain universality 
 I recoHect that I once pressed this difficulty upon the infidel editors 
 Gi the New Harmony Gazette. 
 
 [Here Mr Campbell reads from the “Christian Baptist ” a problem 
 addressed to the editors of the u ]Yew Harmony Gazette 
 
 “a proslem 
 
 “To the Editors of the New Harmonv Gazette 
 ou think that reason cannot originate the idea of an Eternal First 
 Cause, or that no man could acquire such an idea by the employment of 
 ;f S £'?? S a . nd ™a S on—and you think correctly . You think also that 
 the Bible is not a supernatural revelation—not a revelation from <z 
 Dei y m any sense . These things premised, genileinen, I present my 
 problem in the form of a query again” * 
 
 . “ The Christian idea of an Eternal First Cause uncaused or of a God , 
 ts now m the world, and has been for ages immemorial . You say it 
 could not enter into the world by reason, and it did not enter by revela¬ 
 tion. Note, as you are philosophers and historians, and have all the 
 meaas of knowing , How did it come into the world V' 
 
 [Mr. Owen asserts, after hearing this problem read, “By imasina- 
 tionri J * ? v & 
 
 } am J’ 1st now told by Mr. Owen, that the idea of a God obtained 
 tnis universality through imagination. Now, let us try the merits of 
 this solution. Imagination, all writers agree, has not the power of 
 dealing any new idea. It lias the power of analysing, combining, 
 compounding, and new-modifying all the different ideas Dresented to 
 ltj but imagination has no creative power. 
 
 No system oi philosophy that is now taught in any school, will 
 warrant us to attribute to imagination any such power. Neither Locke 
 nor Hume will aLow it,: arid these are the most respectable in die 
 Christian and infidel schools. We shall hear what each of them ha* 
 to say upon the power of imagination•— 
 
 “Although nothing is so unbounded in its operations as the rowers 
 ol the mind, and the imagination of man—to farm monsters, an! 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 m 
 
 join incongruous shapes, and appearances, costs the imagination no 
 more trouble, than to conceive of the most natural and familiar ob¬ 
 jects; and whilst the body is confined to one planet, along 'which it 
 creeps with pain and difficulty, the imagination and thought can 
 transport us in an instant into the most distant regions of the universe. 
 But although our thought seems to possess this unbounded liberty, we 
 shall find, upon a nearer examination, that it is really confined within 
 very narrow limits, and that all this creative power of the mind amounts 
 to nothing more than the faculty of combining , transposing , augment ~ 
 ing, and, diminishing the materials afforded us by sense and expert 
 ence —-Hume. . 
 
 “The simple ideas are the materials of all our knowledge, which 
 Mre suggested and furnished to the mind only by sensation and re^ 
 flection. When the understanding is once stored with these simple 
 ideas, it has the power to repeat, compare, and unite them, even to 
 an almost infinite variety, and so can make, at pleasure, new com¬ 
 plex ideas. But it is not in the power of the most exalted wit, or 
 enlarged understanding, by any quickness or variety of thoughts, to 
 invent or frame one new simple idea in the mind, not taken in by th® 
 ways before mentioned; nor can any force of the understanding de^ 
 stroy those that are there/’—“The dominion of man in this little 
 * world of his understanding, being muchwhat the same as it is in the 
 great world of visible things; wherein his power, however managed 
 by art and skill, reaches no farther than to compound and divide, or 
 decompose the materials that are made to his hand, but can do nothing 
 towards making the least particle of new matter, or destroying an 
 atom of what is already in being. The same inability will every one 
 und in himself who should go about to fashion in his understanding 
 any simple idea not received by his senses from external objects, or 
 by reflection from the operations of his own mind about them. I 
 would have any one try to fancy any taste, which had never affected 
 his palate; or frame the idea of a scent he had never felt; and when 
 he can do this, I will also conclude thaba deaf man has distinct notions 
 ©f sounds/’—“It is impossible for any one to imagine any other quali¬ 
 ties in bodies, however constituted, whereby they can be taken notice 
 ..of besides sounds, tastes, smells, visible, and tangible qualities. Had 
 mankind been made with but four senses, the qualities, then, which 
 are the objects of the fifth sense, had been as far from our notice, 
 imagination, and conception, as now any belonging to a sixth, a 
 seventh, or an eighth sense, can possibly be; which, whether yes 
 some other creatures in some other parts of this “vast and stupendous 
 universe, may not have, will be a great presumption to denv.”— Locke, 
 Such is Mr. Hume’s doctrine, and it agrees with Mr. Locke’s and 
 other philosophers’. Now, if this he true, and founded on a strict 
 analysis of the human mind, and predicated on universal experi¬ 
 ence—how could man have imagined a God? Let us try the faculty 
 ol imagination, and prove, by our own experience, its creative power . 
 We have but five senses: I would therefore ask Mr. Owen, and every 
 one present, if you can, by any exertion of your faculties, imagine 
 
118' 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 a sixth sense? What would it be? If you were to imaging any other 
 sense, it must be analogous to those you already possess. You might 
 imagine a being like the fabulous Argus, with a hundred eyes; bwft 
 you got your idea of eyes from your own sense of vision. You might 
 fancy that you possessed an organ, like that of Fame, that would 
 enable you to hear from a greater distance than the eye could reach 
 to; but could you have imagined this unless you had derived the 
 simple idea of hearing from your organ of hearing. But a sixth 
 sense, unlike those possessed, cannot be imagined. Now, if Mr. Owen 
 cannot, from his five senses, imagine a sixth, how can he assert that 
 a savage or philosopher could imagine a God? But I call upon Mr. 
 Owen to imagine and report to us a sixth sense. 
 
 In the system ct causation, natural religionists go upon the ladder 
 of effect and cause, up to the first cause; but to reason a posteriori 
 on this subject, is, in my opinion, fallacious. It is predicated upon a 
 petitio principii, inasmuch as it assumes that the material universe is 
 an effect. Quod erat demonstrandum —the very thing to be proved. 
 I do hope that this debate will put the question between Deists and 
 Christians to repose, Deism is all founded upon a petitio principii ,— 
 a begging of the question to be proved. Atheism or Christianity 
 must obtain the dominion over every inquisitive mind. When I hear 
 a Deist talking about “the light of nature” and “the great God of 
 nature,” I am reminded of the school-bov, who stole a penknife; 
 and when charged with the fact, said, he found it growing upon an 
 apple-tree. This was equivalent to a confession of the theft, since 
 we all know penknives do not grow upon apple-trees. In like manner 
 the reasonings of the Deists, upon their own premises, show that their 
 conclusions do not logically follow. You might as well look for 
 penknives growing upon apple-trees as for Lord Herbert’s doctrine in 
 the mind of a savage. There is no stopping place between Atheism 
 and Christianity. 
 
 As we have, perhaps, sufficiently gone into the detail in demon¬ 
 strating, from the mysteries of Atheism, that the materialist acts upon 
 the very principle which he condemns in Christians; that is, in be¬ 
 lieving what he cannot comprehend, and contrary to his own experi¬ 
 ence; and not only this, but in giving to imagination a power which 
 it does not possess, and afterwards acting according to the mere 
 vagaries of fancy, more than the most enthusiastic Christians; I say, 
 having shown that the materialists assent to, and teach mysteries 
 which they cannot ever explain; believe, and reason contrary to 
 universal experience, and follow imagination, while they ascribe 
 these as foibles to others; I will finish my readings and comments 
 upon this system by giving the moral consummation from one of their 
 ablest writers. 
 
 You- have heard a great deal about necessity. All Mr. Owen’s 
 iacts have been adduced to prove that we are locked up in the chains 
 of an inexorable fatality. That you may see the moral tendency of 
 this doctrine, I shall read you a few sentences from Mirabaud’s system 
 of natures-*- 
 
DEBAtE. 
 
 119 
 
 “Life being commonly for man the greatest of all benefits, it is to be 
 presumed, that he who deprives himself of it is impelled by an invin¬ 
 cible force. It is the excess of misery v despair, derangement of the 
 machine, caused by melancholy, which carries man on to destroy 
 himself. Agitated then by contrary impulses he is, as w r e have be¬ 
 fore said, obliged to follow a middle course that conducts him to his 
 death,* if man is not free in any one instant of his life, he is again 
 much less so in the act by which it is terminated. 
 
 “We see then, that, he who kills himself docs not commit, as they 
 pretend, an outrage on nature, or, if they will, on its author. He 
 follows an impulse of nature, in taking the only means that she 
 leaves him to quit his pains; he goes out of existence by a door that 
 she leaves open to him; he cannot offend her in accomplishing the 
 law of necessity; the iron hand of which having broken the spring 
 that rendered life desirable to him, and urged him to conserve him¬ 
 self, shows that he ought to quit a rank, or system, which he finds 
 too had to be willing to remain in. His country, or his family, have 
 no right to complain of a member that it cannot render happy, and 
 from whom it has nothing more to hope for itself. To be useful to 
 his country, or to his family, it is necessary that man should cherish 
 his own peculiar existence, that he has an interest in conserving 
 himself, loves the bonds which unite him to others, and is capable of 
 occupying himself with their felicity. In short, that the suicide 
 should be punished in the other life, and repent of his precipitate 
 steps, it were needful that he should outlive himself, and that in con¬ 
 sequence he should carry with him, into his future residence, his 
 organs, his senses, his memory, his ideas, and his actual mode of 
 existing and of thinking. 
 
 In short, nothing is more useful tnan to inspire men with a con¬ 
 tempt for death, and to banish from their minds the false ideas which 
 are given them of its consequences. The fear of death will never 
 make any thing but cowards; the fear of its pretended consequences 
 will make nothing but fanatics, or pious melancholy beings, useless 
 to themselves and to others. Death is a resource that we must not 
 by any means take away from oppressed virtue, which the injustice 
 of men frequently reduces to despair. If men feared death less, they 
 w T ould neither be slaves nor superstitious. Truth w r ould find defen¬ 
 der's more zealous; the rights of man would be more hardily sustain¬ 
 ed ; error would be more powerfully combated, and tyranny would lx? 
 forever banished from nations. Cowardice nourishes it, and fear per¬ 
 petuates it. In short, men can neither be contented nor happy whilst 
 their opinions shall oblige them to tremble!!!” 
 
 Such, my friends, is the necessary consequence of the doctrine 
 of necessity. I propose, to-momnv, all things concurring, to present 
 you systematically with the argument already introduced demonstra¬ 
 tive of the last position; and after that, to adduce the direct and 
 positive evidences of the truth and certainty of the Christian religion. 
 [Half hour out.] 
 
“Here Mr. Owen requested the audience not to return home with their 
 heads full of swords and pistols. “Mr. Campbellsaid he, “has given 
 you a lease of a thousand years of happiness?’ 1 ] 
 
 Wednesday forenoon, 15 th April. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 My friends, the subject in which we finished reading yesterday 
 evening was tear. The next subject is one of great interest to all of 
 ns. It is marriage. 
 
 MARRIAGE. 
 
 As w 7 e have seen that man is so organized by nature, that he must 
 like that which is agreeable to him, and dislike that which nature has 
 made disagreeable, all engagements between men and women, pro¬ 
 fessing to like or love each other, through fixture unknown changes 
 in both, w ill altogether terminate. Other, and much better arrange¬ 
 ments will be formed for their union, agreeable to the divine laws of 
 their nature., and which will put an end to the present prostitution of 
 both body and mind, to jealousy and to all sexual crimes. The in¬ 
 vention of unnatural marriages has been the sole origin of all sexual 
 crimes. They have rendered prostitution unavoidable. They have 
 erected a spurious chastity and destroyed all knowledge of pure clias- 
 ty. For real chastity consists, in connexion with affection, and pros¬ 
 titution, m connexion wuthout affection. 
 
 The aiffeial bonds of indissoluable marriage, and the single fam¬ 
 ily arrangements to which marriage leads, are much more calculated 
 to destroy than to promote affection, and, in consequence, the parties 
 frequently live together in a state of real prostitution, both of body 
 and mind, and by the customs, established in various countries, they 
 are obliged to be satisfied with this spurious chastity which is real 
 prostitution. 
 
 In the new state of existence that which experience has proved to 
 be really beneficial in marriage, or single family arrangements, will 
 be retained, while all that is injurious and contrary to nature, will be 
 dismissed. 
 
 By these arrangements, men and women will be equally well edr 
 ucated, they will have the same rights and privileges, and they will 
 associate on terms of intimacy through their lives, with these only 
 -for whom they cannot avoid feeling the most regard and greatest af¬ 
 fection. 
 
 COMMERCE 
 
 Now consists in buying and selling for a monied profit, and neces¬ 
 sarily engenders every kind “of deception and injustice under the 
 specious term of fair trading. This kind of traffic will not be known 
 in our new state of existence. The fewest in number, and those 
 especially appointed for the purpose, will make such exchange of com¬ 
 modities, between the different associations as experience shall prove 
 to be the best for all, and every commodity will be exchanged in cases, 
 for the same, amount of labor which it contains according to genera] 
 
 * 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 12 1 
 
 estimates, accurately made, and applicable alike to all parties.— 
 Those who convey the articles from one place to another and make 
 the exchange will have their labor added to the previous estimate of 
 labor in them. 
 
 The equitable exchange of surplus productions upon this system 
 will be much better effected, than they are now, by less than ore per 
 cent, of the present cost to the producers, all of v.-hich is deducted 
 from the real value of their labor; and all the degradation and im¬ 
 morality of bargaining will be withdrawn from society. 
 
 TRAVELLING 
 
 Will be arranged in the new state of existence to give every ad = 
 vantage which can arise from it, while almost all its real inconveni¬ 
 ences will be greatly diminished. And all who desire will have the 
 privilege of removing from one association, and from one district to 
 another, under such regulations as will be for the benefit of all the 
 members of the communities.. 
 
 The accommodations for travelling by land or water,‘will be the best 
 that can be devised for health and comfort, and for promoting the 
 means of improvement. These objects, by foresight under a proper 
 system maybe obtained without difficulty. 
 
 EDUCATION. 
 
 All the advantages which old society has endeavored to gain from 
 governments,religions, laws, wars, marriages and commerce; in all of 
 which it has grievously failed, will be attained and secured in the new 
 state of existence by an entire change of the circumstances by which, 
 the whole character of man will be formed by education from infancy 
 to maturity. • 
 
 He will be trained and educated from birth within circumstances all 
 in unison with the known laws of his nature; he will be early taught 
 to discover and understand them by the exercise of his intellectual 
 faculties and to act in obedience to them by a conviction, that they 
 alone, can lead to happiness, and by observing the advantages derived 
 from obeying these laws by those of mature age and experience. 
 
 All will thus acquire an accurate knowledge of the science of the 
 influence of circumstances over human nature and know Tow to act 
 upon that knowledge in all the business of life. They will speedily 
 learn to know what is essential to the well-being, the well-doing and 
 the happiness ofsociety. They will soon discover that the great busi¬ 
 ness of life will consist in educating, producing, preserving, distribu¬ 
 ting, and preparing the means for enjoying. And to do these, in the 
 best manner, for the young, middle aged and old, the three classes into 
 which society will be divided will occupy the attention of every one* 
 and be a constant source of exercise, interest, and pleasure to all . 
 
 The sacrifice to which men of the present generation must submit, 
 before they can secure the benefit of this new state of existence, is* 
 that they must enjoy their happiness upon principles of perfect equal; 
 fy with all of the human race, 
 
 u 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 For these enjoyments cannot be obtained under any system of ar¬ 
 tificial inequality or separation into distinct classes. The new state 
 of existence will admit of those differences only which nature makes 
 unavoidable, that is, age and knowledge^ 
 
 This new mode of education will call into full action the physical;, 
 intellectual and moral powers of all individuals, and will form them to 
 .. be, in consequence, much more competent to the whole business of 
 fife than their predecessors in old society, 
 
 GOVERNMENTS. 
 
 Artificial governments will be required only so long as men shall 
 be retained in ignorance of the divine laws of their nature, and trained 
 to be vicious. A preliminary government will be therefore necessary, 
 while the change is progressing from the old to the new state. 
 
 After the change shall have been effected, by the education of an 
 entire generation in the knowledge and practice of the divine laws, a 
 natural government will be formed in unison with them. 
 
 It is now evident, that no people can be virtuous, intelligent and 
 -nappy under any despotic or elective government, or under any modi¬ 
 fication of them. They must necessarity produce evil continually. 
 
 Monarchy is defective in principle, on account of the uncertain 
 haracterof the sovereign, as well as the extreme inequality it produ¬ 
 ces in the condition of the governed. 
 
 The elective principle is equally defective, under*the old arrange¬ 
 ment of society, on account of the corruption of morals, and the un~ 
 'easing bad feelings which it engenders. 
 
 And any combination of these two modes of government will ne- 
 essarily partake of the evils of both. But no government, even the 
 nest ever known in old society, can do more than mitigate, for a short 
 period, some of the innumerable evils which an opposition to the laws 
 of nature unavoidably produces. 
 
 The existing generation however is not prepared for a government 
 in accordance with all the Iaw 7 s of nature; we have been so much inju¬ 
 red by the erroneous impressions w hich have been made on our minds, 
 and by the vicious character which has been formed for us, that the 
 utmost that can be expected in our case is an approximation in some 
 degree towards that which is right in principle and correct in practice. 
 
 A preliminary government must, therefore, be framed for the pres¬ 
 ent generation to lead it onward, gradually as the mind expands, and 
 the practice improves until our children shall be fully prepared fon 
 one in accordance w r ith all the divine laws of human nature. 
 
 And this preliminary government must be made to approximate 
 more or less to the laws of nature, as the part ies preparing to act upon 
 the social system shall have acquired more or less knowledge of it. 
 
 In this preliminary government, therefore, there must be a modifi¬ 
 cation of the existing law 7 s and customs relative to religion, marriage, 
 private property, responsibility, or rewards or punishments, and of 
 t]ie modes of producing, distributing and enjoying, as w 7 ell as of edu¬ 
 cating those who have been already partially instructed in the fates 
 notions and injurious practices of the present systetps. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 m 
 
 Tiie extent to which these approximations shall proceed towards 
 the perfect laws of nature, must be left to the decision of the united 
 will of the parties, who associate, to commence the social or natural 
 system; or to the, perhaps, more calm determination of the person 
 whom they may appoint to administer the new government, until 
 they shall become sufficiently experienced to govern themselves ac** 
 cording to the laws of their nature. • 
 
 It is probable these modifications will be at first, various, depending 
 in some degree, upon the climate, soil, and previous habits and cus¬ 
 tom, but most essentially, upon the progress the whole party uniting 
 may have acquired of the law's of their nature. 
 
 It will be readily conceived that in the new state of existence, sla¬ 
 very will be unknown. It will, of course, die a natural death under 
 the preliminary government of the present generation, and in the sp* 
 cond generation, servitude also will cease. 
 
 After that period all the domestic operations of the world will \>a 
 performed by mechanical inventions and chemical discoveries, under 
 the direction of the youth of both sexes, a knowledge of which they 
 will acquire theoretically and practically, as a necessary and impor¬ 
 tant part of their education, and in this respect all will pass through 
 the same training and exercise. It is probable that this part of the 
 business of life will be easily completed, ina manner greatly superior 
 to any thing hitherto known, before these young persons shall be 
 twenty years of age, perhaps at eighteen, and the arrangements may 
 be so formed as to make that which is now considered a task of slavery 
 by the most ignorant, to become a delightful occupation; in fact a 
 pleasure and a pastime to the most intelligent in principle, and the 
 most expert in practice. 
 
 In this new state of existence, physical and intellectual employ¬ 
 ments will be held in estimation in proportion as they are necessary 
 and useful, and all useless occupations as long as there shall be any 
 thing useful to perform, or new knowledge to acquire, will be deemed 
 a waste of time and faculties, to be practised, only, by the irrational 
 or insane. 
 
 Idleness, the bane of human happiness, will be unknown; it will be 
 wholly prevented by the new mode of education as it will be applied 
 in infancy, childhood, and youth; while on the contrary, over-exer¬ 
 tion of body or mind, will not be practised, because all will know that 
 temperance in the exercise and use of ail our faculties will give the 
 greatest amount of happiness, that human nature can enjoy. 
 
 OF A NATURAL GOVERNMENT OR OF ONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 
 
 THE LAWS OF NATURE. 
 
 A government founded on these principles, will attend solely to the 
 improvement and happiness of the governed. 
 
 Its first inquiries will be to ascertain, what human nature 13, what 
 jare the laws of its organization and of its existence from birth to death. 
 
 The second, What is necessary for the happiness of a being so 
 formed and matured. 
 
 Ami the third, What are the best means by which to attain these 
 
DEBA'PK. 
 
 I ' 1 * 
 
 requisites, and to secure them permanently for all the'governed. 
 
 We have developed the divine laws of human nature in sufficient de¬ 
 tail for the present purpose. 
 
 Those things which are necessary for the happiness of a being so 
 formed and matured, are comprised,perhaps, in the following enu¬ 
 meration. 
 
 OF THINGS NECESSARY FOR HUMAN HAPPINESS. 
 
 1. The possession of a good organization, physical, mental, and 
 moral. 
 
 2. Having the power to procure, at pleasure, whatever is necessa¬ 
 ry to keep that organization in the best state of health. 
 
 3. An education which shall cultivate, in the best manner, from 
 infancy to maturity, the physical, intellectual^ and moral powers of 
 all the population. 
 
 4. The means and inclination to promote the happiness of our 
 
 fellow-beings. 
 
 5. The means and inclination to increase continually our stock of 
 knowledge. 
 
 - G. The means of enjoying the best society we know, and more par- 
 ocularly, the power of associating, at pleasure with those, for whom 
 we cannot avoid feeling the most regard and greatest affection. 
 
 7. The means of travelling at pleasure. 
 
 $. A release from superstition, from supernatural fears, and from 
 the fear of death. 
 
 And lastly, to live in a society in which all its laws, institutions, 
 and arrangements, shall be in accordance with the divine laws of 
 human nature, w r eil organized, and well governed. A more detailed 
 examination of these nine general conditions will be found in the ap¬ 
 pendix. 
 
 The third great object of a natural government will be to devise 
 rind execute the arrangements, by which these conditions shall be ob¬ 
 tained for, and secured to all the governed. 
 
 Its laws will be few, easily to be understood by all the governed, 
 and in every instance in unison with the laws of human nature.— 
 They may be perhaps contained in the following 
 
 CODE OF NATURAL LAWS. 
 
 1 . As all men have equal rights by nature, all will have equal 
 rights in the new state of existence; and, therefore, all men shall be 
 upon a perfect equality from birth to death in their conditions of life. 
 
 2. As all men are composed of their own peculiar organization at 
 uirfch, and of the influence which the circumstances around them from 
 birth made upon that particular organization, and as no man creates 
 his'own organization, or the circumstances w hich surround him, in 
 infancy, childhood, and youth, or at any subsequent period of life, 
 except in so far as he is influenced thereto by the impressions pre¬ 
 viously made on his organization by those early circumstances,there¬ 
 fore, no man shall be held responsible for his physical composition, 
 fjf his intellectual faculties, or for his moral feelings, and conse¬ 
 quently for his character and conduct. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 125 
 
 As the society however in which he shall be born and shall live will 
 derive all the benefit of his good actions, and experience all the incoit* 
 veniences of his bad qualities, and as the society will have have in a 
 very great degree the formation of the character and direction of the 
 conduct of ail individualls under its education and government; it 
 will be alone entitled to all the praise or blame which the actions of 
 the individual may deserve. Beings formed as man is, cannot justly 
 be entitled to individual reward or punishment in this life or the next... 
 
 3. As no individual can believe or disbelieve contrary to the strong¬ 
 est impressions made upon his mind, no merit or reward, no blame or 
 punishment shall be awarded to any individual for any opinions, no¬ 
 tions, or faith whatever. 
 
 4. As man is organized to receive impressions from external objects 
 and internal reflections, according to the unchanging or divine laws 
 of his nature, no man shall be made, in any degree, responsible for his 
 sensations, whether of liking, or disliking, loving, indifference, or ha¬ 
 ting, of pleasure or of pain, or of whatever character or description 
 they may be. 
 
 But all shall be educated from infancy in perfect sincerity, that 
 they may give a faithful expression of their sensations, in order that 
 society may acquire the most accurate knowledge of human nature, 
 and consequently of the means by which all may be the most impro¬ 
 ved and rendered the most happy. 
 
 5. Each individual shall have his physical, intellectual and moral 
 nature, cultivated from infancy to maturity, in the best manner known 
 to the society in which he shall be born and shall live. 
 
 6 . Every individual, shall pass from infancy through the same gen¬ 
 eral routine of education and domestic teaching and employments, in or¬ 
 der, that the highest happiness may be permanently secured for society, 
 and that everyone of its members may have, with the least inconve¬ 
 nience, his full share of the best of every thing for his individual 
 nature. 
 
 7. The best only of every thing shall be produced by society for 
 all its members. 
 
 Because to do so will be the most perfect economy, consequently 
 the best cultivation, the best buildings, the best dress, the best vessels; 
 machinery, and manufactures, the best education, and the best amuse* 
 ments and recreation, known at the time, will be always provided 
 for the use and enjoyment of every member of the society. 
 
 8 . As loving and hating, liking, indifference, or disliking, depend 
 not upon the will but upon the impressions which external objects' 
 compel each individual to receive by reason ofhis particular organ!' 
 nation— 
 
 There shall be no artificial or unnatural bonds or engagements bo 
 tween the sexes, compelling them to commit perjury under the name 
 of marriage, by promising to love when they may be compelled t£>. 
 hate. 
 
 9* As pure chastity consists in co-habitation with mutual affection 
 •and prostitution in connexion without mutual affection, all children 
 
 11 * 
 
DEBATE 
 
 126 
 
 in the new state of existence will be naturally produced, according;, 
 to the divine laws of human nature, and none will be produced unnatf 
 urally as at present without affection. 
 
 10. All children born in the new state of existence shall be from, 
 their birth, under the special care of the society to which they belong. 
 
 11 . The children of all parents shall be trained and educated togeth¬ 
 er, by the society, as the children of one family, and all of them shall 
 be early taught the divine laws of their nature, in order that they 
 may acquire a real affection for each other, a,nd a pure charity, ari¬ 
 sing from a knowledge of the cause of every difference in person, 
 mind, and feelings, which may exist among themselves, or between 
 them and any of their fellow-beings. 
 
 12. All parents shall have free intercourse to and with their chil¬ 
 dren, during the whole period of the formation of their character, 
 which, a short experience wiil convince them, can never be well form-* 
 ed under any single family arrangement. 
 
 13. There shall be no unnecessary private property possessed by 
 any one in this new state of existencfe. But each adult shall have the 
 full use of two private apartments as long as the party to whom they 
 shall be allotted by the society shall desire to retain them. They 
 shall also retain all clothes and other things which they may receive 
 from the society according to its rules, for their exclusive use and con T 
 sumption. 
 
 14. As it is necessary for the attainment of all the conditions requi- 
 c ite to give happiness to mankind, that some certain number of indi¬ 
 viduals shall be associated as one family, to give the greatest amount 
 of advantages with the few r est inconveniencies, and as it is probable 
 that experience will prove that number to be about one thousand in- 
 Jividuals, composed of men, women, and children in the usual pro¬ 
 portions ; all the arrangements in the new state of existence shall 
 be devised to admit the formation of associations and communities to 
 consist of three hundred, as a minimum, and two thousand as a maxi¬ 
 mum, to form, instead of single families, the nucleus society, or the 
 natural congregation of men in one place, the beet calculated to pro¬ 
 mote each other’s happiness. 
 
 15. That the aggregate of society, in this new state of existence*, 
 shall be composed of the union of these communities into such num¬ 
 bers or circles, as shall be found in practice, the most convenient for 
 their general government. 
 
 It is probable, that very generally, they may be united into cir¬ 
 cles of tens for more local purposes, into hundreds, for smaller dis¬ 
 tricts, into thousands, for larger districts, into millions, for the most 
 extended purposes, until there shall be no artificial separation be¬ 
 tween any portion of mankind, to be an obstacle to prevent a union 
 of language, of interest, and of feelings.. Every obstacle to the unioa) 
 of mankind,being an evil. 
 
 16. Each of these communities, to secure their independence shall 
 possess around it, land sufficient for the full support of all its members, 
 ••when they shall be at the maximum in number. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 5 
 
 i 
 
 17. Each of these communities shall be arranged to give, as' near¬ 
 ly as possible, the same advantages to all its members, and to afford 
 easy communication with all other communities,- 
 
 18. Each community shall be governed in all its general proceed¬ 
 ings, by the council composed of all its members, between the ages 
 of thirty five and forty five. And each department shall be under 
 the immediate direction of a committee formed of the members of this 
 council. And these members shall be chosen in the order to be de¬ 
 termined upon by each council 4 
 
 There will be, therefore, no selection or election of any individuals 
 to office, after a period when all shall be trained to be more than 
 equal to take his full share of the duties of management at the age 
 fixed upon. 
 
 19. At thirty five years of age, all who shall have been trained 
 from infancy in the communities, shall be officially called upon to 
 undertake their full share of the duties of management, and at forty 
 live they shall be excused from officially performing them. 
 
 20. The business of the council shall be to govern all the circum 
 stances within the boundaries of its own community. To endeavor 
 to improve them, by removing continually the most unfavorable cir¬ 
 cumstances to happiness and by replacing them, by the best that can 
 be devised among themselves, or, that they can obtain a knowledge 
 of, from all the ether communities. 
 
 21. The council shall have full power of government in all things 
 as long as they do not act contrary to the divine laws of human 
 nature. These laws shall be their guide upon all occasions, because, 
 when understood, they will prevent one unjust or erroneous decision 
 or proceeding. 
 
 22. If, however, which is deemed scarcely possible, this natural 
 council of government shall ever attempt to contravene the laws of 
 human nature, the elders of the community, who have passed the 
 council, shall call a general meeting of all its members, above six¬ 
 teen years of age, who have been trained from infancy within the 
 communities. At this meeting, the conduct of the council, shall be 
 calmly and patiently investigated, and if a majority of its members", 
 shall afterwards determine that the council has acted, or attempted to 
 act, in opposition to the spirit of these divine laws; the government 
 shall devolve upon the members of the community w f ho have passed 
 the council, and who are under fifty years of age, united with these 
 members, w'ho have not entered the council who shall be above 
 thirty years of age. 
 
 23. All other differences of every description, if indeed it be possi¬ 
 ble for any to exist in such communities, shall be immediately deter¬ 
 mined andamicably adjusted between the-parties, by the decision of 
 a majority of the three oldest members of the council. Except wffien 
 the difference shall exist between members of the council, when it 
 shall be in like manner decided by the three Members, who have 
 lost passed through the council. 
 
128 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 24. As soon as the members of these communities shall be educated 
 from infancy in a knowledge of the divine laws of their nature,- 
 trained to act in obedience to them, and they shall be surrounded by 
 circumstances all in unison with these laws, there shall be no indi ' 
 vidual punishment or reward. 
 
 All these educated, trained, and placed must, of necessity, at alt 
 times, think and act rationally, except they shall become, physically* 
 intellectually, or morally diseased, and in this case the council 
 shall direct to the best mode of cure, by removing them into the 
 hospital for bodily or mental invalids until they shall be recovered 
 by the mildest treatment that can effect their cure. 
 
 25. The council, whenever it shall be necessary, shall call to its 
 aid, the practical abilities of any of the members, under thirty five 
 years of age, and the advice of any of the members who shall have 
 passed the council. 
 
 The individual Spartans were not the legitimate subjects of 
 praise or blame, they were not, any more than any other people* 
 the formers of their own character, but their characters were formed 
 for them by the circumstances introduced by Lycurgus. [Half hour 
 
 QUt.] 
 
 Wednesday forenoon, 15 ih April, lS2£b 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 Gentlemen Moderators—I am perfectly aware of the difficult cir¬ 
 cumstances in which my friend’s course has placed you. You have 
 been selected by Mr. Owen and myself for the express purpose of 
 moderating this discussion, with the fullest confidence, on both our 
 parts, in your ability and impartiality. To insure the most perfect 
 impartiality, you were mutually selected. I am well aware, there¬ 
 fore, that you must feel yourselves responsible to us and to the com¬ 
 munity for your course in the management of this discussion. I have 
 not the slightest reflection to make upon your mode of procedure—it 
 is reasonable and consistent. You have entered your protest against 
 Mr. Owen’s course in this debate; for that, it has been irrelevant, 
 impertinent, and out of the purview of the discussion contemplated; 
 and to which the public have been invited. You also perceive my 
 difficulties. I came here to reply to my friend’s arguments in sup¬ 
 port of his own theses; the obvious scope of which was the subversion 
 of all religion. I came here prepared to show that my opponent was' 
 not able to make good a single point which he had assumed; that h£ 
 could not adduce a single logical proof in corroboration of his posi¬ 
 tions—therefore, I could not expect to have to open this discussion: > 
 Tiiis was not a supposeable case. Had I known that I was to havd 
 taken the affirmative, I should have come forward prepared with !) 
 some plan of argument in which my opponent might have joined issue 
 with me; and 1 would have led the discussion in such manner as. { 
 would soon, in my opinion, have led us to rational conclusions. 
 Surrounded with these difficulties, gentlemen, it appears necessarj^ : 
 that some decision should be made on the course of investigation. 
 
DEBATE 
 
 120 
 
 Yesterday I introduced a series of arguments, calculated, in my 
 opinion, and in that of the public at large, to subvert Mr. Owen's 
 propositions. He would not argue the merits of one of my positions-. 
 For two days Mr. Owen has been presenting a great variety of topics 
 which he might have introduced as pertinently in any other discus¬ 
 sion as the present. I have taken up his own positions in his own 
 terms, and agreed to rest the merits of the controversy upon his own 
 allegata. But as I stand pledged to subvert Mr* Owen’s whole theo¬ 
 ry, I proposed yesterday to introduce a regular and connected argu¬ 
 ment, without paying any respect to any thing which might be offered 
 by him, unless it were pertinent to the subject matter in debate. 
 This morning we have had a disquisition upon marriage, commerce, 
 and a code of natural laws, none of which has any bearing upon, 
 or logical connexion with, the question at issue. 1 therefore ask you, 
 gentlemen, to allow me to pursue what I deem the only correct course 
 under present circumstances, and to declare your opinion of Mr. 
 Owen’s ‘'course in the management of his part of this discussion. 
 Perhaps this will be equally necessary for your vindication as for my 
 own, inasmuch as the whole proceedings may become matter of re¬ 
 cord. It was part of my original plan, that every morning a brief 
 condensed view, or recapitulation, should be presented of the argu¬ 
 ments and positions of the preceding day. On reviewing the outline 
 of the course already pursued, I have made up the following abstract: 
 
 REC A PITTJLATION. 
 
 Mr. Owen’s capital position, on which he has laid so much stress, 
 is, that man, because he does not make himself or his circumstances, 
 is an irresponsible being. In opposition to which we have urged this 
 consideration—that, admitting its truth, it follows that infants, idiots, 
 and madmen, philosophers, and the common-sense part of the commu • 
 nity, are all alike capable or incapable of society and moral govern¬ 
 ment, because man has no more control over his own actions, than 
 a mill-wheel has over its own revolutions. This was, as I conceive, 
 reducing his argument to an absurdity. 
 
 His next capital position is, that all religious institutions and all 
 civil governments are erroneous, because they are predicated on 
 human responsibility; they require man to have more control over 
 his own actions than a mill-wheel has over its own revolutions. In 
 opposition to both these positions, we have urged that man is consti¬ 
 tutionally responsible, because rational; that all the circumstances 
 which can surround any human being, the savage and the citizen, 
 concur in suggesting to his mind in the very first dawnings of hi§ 
 reason, his dependence and consequent responsibility. No human 
 being can possibly be placed in any circumstances which do not im¬ 
 press upon his whole intellectual nature a sense of dependence and 
 responsibility. Suppose a child born in a palace or a wigwam—in 
 either case, the circumstances around him must, as soon as reason 
 dawns, suggest to him a sense of dependence upon his protectors., 
 y'-is sense of dependence begets the idea of responsibility; and this*-. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 !&)' 
 
 principle of human nature is the foundation of all moral obligation, 
 of every social compact, of all civil and political security, 
 
 A favorite corollary which Mr. Owen deduces from his views of 
 necessity, or the fact that man did not create himself, nor his circurm 
 stances, is, that neither praise nor blame, merit nor demerit, can be 
 ascribed to man. We have shown that also there can be no such thing 
 as gratitude nor kind feeling, charity nor benevolence due to any 
 human being, more than to the fountain or rivulet which slakes our 
 thirst, or to the tree which yields us its fruit. This I yesterday 
 illustrated by showing that Mr. Owen’s plan of cultivating the kind 
 feelings, would extirpate all feeling—and that, as to sympathies, we, 
 should stand towards each other like trees in the forest. 
 
 In preparing an amelioration of the condition of society, and corn* 
 sequently society itself, Mr. Owen asserts that the circumstances 
 which now surround us, arc of a vitiating, or of an irrational and anti¬ 
 natural character; on which we remark, that, as the circumstances 
 which surround us are either topical , arising from our location, or 
 social , the vitiocity must be in the one or the other; not in the former, 
 because it is natural; consequently it must be in our social circum¬ 
 stances. Now the question which he has not answered, and which 
 we know he cannot answer, is, How came the social circumstances to he 
 irrational and antinatural , seeing necessity , or what he calls nature , 
 has introduced them? 
 
 The scriptures explain to us both the cause and character of these 
 preternataral circumstances. Mr. Owen does not—cannot. The 
 scriptures too adapt themselves to these preternatural circumstances, 
 and bring men out of them. Mr. Owen’s scheme is not adapted to 
 them, neither can it educe man from these preternatural circumstan¬ 
 ces. Because predicated upon an entire subversion of the laws of 
 our nature, dependence, obligation, religion, individuality, matri¬ 
 mony, and the whole influence of natural relations, arising from these 
 things; consequently unable to educe us from these preternatural 
 , circumstances. 
 
 Another rallying point to which Mr. Owen often resorts, is, that it 
 is impossible for rational beings to be virtuously happy under a go¬ 
 vernment which involves perpetual partial pain and misery. {The 
 illustration of Mr. Owen was, that if he could believe one sentient 
 being was suffering eternal torment, it would mar his peace of mind.) 
 On this hypothesis, no man ever was, and no man ever can be happy; 
 for the more virtuous the more unhappy! That is, if virtuous happi¬ 
 ness is to be made to depend upon our feeling ourselves existing in 
 such circumstances as to preclude all possible pain in any sentient 
 being whatever; or if sympathy and virtue must make us miserable 
 on beholding any kind of sentient suffering, the inseparable connexion 
 between virtue and happiness must thereby be destroyed. If 1 were 
 afflicted with that morbid sympathy which the theory of Mr. Owen 
 contemplates, the sight of a broken finger or a dislocated joint would , 
 make me miserable. On his hypothesis I could not be happy if g 
 single instance of pain existed in the world. On the hypothesis that, 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 in 
 
 v ihe more virtuous we are, the more acute and morbid our sensibilities, 
 there can be no happiness or enjoyment in the practice of virtue. 
 
 From some people with whom I have reasoned on the subject of 
 future happiness, I have heard whole theories of religion, predicated 
 ■upon the idea that the mercy of God is not reconcileable with the idea 
 of punishment, present or future. This system has been predicated 
 upon their view of God’s mercy. I have hinted to them the danger of 
 founding a theory of religion upon their imperfect, and, perhaps, in¬ 
 accurate ideas of the character of God,* and that however correct 
 their views of divine justice or mercy contemplated apart from all 
 other perfections, yet the compound attributes of the divine character 
 were beyond human comprehension. We must judge of the divine 
 attributes from what exists in nature before our eyes, as well as from 
 what is said in scripture. We have frequently requested such reason- 
 ers to reflect that animal and mental pain existed to a very great 
 extent. We have asked them to imagine a great field, an immense 
 area , in which all the animals of the various genera and species in 
 the universe, that were suffering pain and disease, were congregated^ 
 what millions of suffering creatures, grouped together, each according"; 
 to its kind, do we see in this immense.area. To a man of morbid, or \ 
 even of well-regulated sensibilities, what a sight is here presented! f, 
 What painful sympathetic feelings are excited! If the very idea that j 
 the saddle on which I ride injures my horse’s back, makes me feel 
 excessively uncomfortable—how would the actual sight of all these 
 millions of suffering animals, congregated within the limits of an 
 -undivided area, affect me! 1 shudder at the thought. And yet the 
 beneficent Creator of the Universe has this sight before his eyes 
 continually. They stand, in all their agonies, night and day, before 
 him; and not a painful throb of their hearts, not a single spasm of 
 nerve or muscle, that his all-seeing eye does not observe. The argu¬ 
 ment deduced is, that if it be compatible with the diuine government 
 and attributes to tolerate such a scene of animal suffering perpetually 
 before him; how can we infer from these premises, that the future 
 punishment of man would mar the felicity of his Creator, or be in¬ 
 compatible with his character. This will be received as a logical 
 argument by all those who believe in future punishments. But the 
 Divine Author of our nature has so constituted us that we are not to 
 be made miserable by the contemplation of temporary or perpetual 
 partial pain and misery. He has most beneficently established an 
 inseparable connexion between personal virtue and personal happi¬ 
 ness, between personal vice and personal misery; and this may well 
 be called a divine law of human nature. But, my friend’s hypothesis 
 would lead us to conclude that, just in proportion as we become virtu- 
 ous, we must become unhappy. 
 
 If there have been any argument offered by my opponent, in sup-~. 
 port ofhis premises, it amounts to this, Because religion is not predi¬ 
 cated upon the sciences of botany, agriculture, chemistry, geology, 
 &c. because it does not make provision for the improvement of the 
 breed of animals, i. c„ of men. as well as dogs and horses; because it 
 
YA2 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 does not assimilate social man to the savage in a state of nature, with¬ 
 out property, save his bow and arrow; because it did institute matri¬ 
 mony, and does not absolve men from the obligation of the marriage 
 contract, and all other moral and civil contracts— ergo , it is not divine, 
 not true, not worthy of universal reception. I affirm that from the 
 reasonings before us, this is the logical force of the argument. 
 
 [Here the Chairman rose and stated , that, Mr, Campbell had made 
 an appeal to the Board of Moderators , and the Board desire to know if 
 you wish the point to be now decided before the argument progresses . 
 This decision seems now to be necessary , after advancing whatever you 
 may wish to offer on this point. 
 
 Mr. Owen rose and said—This meeting was called in consequence 
 of my undertaking to prove certain positions, and Mr. Campbell 
 engaging to disprove them. At our first interview at Cincinnati, 1 
 proposed to Mr. Campbell that I should state the whole of my argu¬ 
 ments first, and having gone through with them, that Mr. Campbell 
 should reply at full length; but Mr. Campbell wished that each party 
 should speak but half an hour at a time. Knowing that the truths J 
 had to advocate were plain and incontrovertible, I could have no ob¬ 
 jection to Mr. Campbell’s taking the course he suggested; but in con¬ 
 sequence of our having to speak for half an hour, Mr. Campbell has 
 been replying to he does not know what. Most probably Mr. Camp¬ 
 bell expected that X would have taken up the arguments which he 
 anticipated, and which he had prepared himself to refute. Had we 
 proceeded as I suggested, Mr. Campbell would now have been in posses¬ 
 sion of the whole of my arguments, and X think by this he would have 
 also been convinced of their incontrovertible truth. When I have got 
 through with my arguments and illustrations, I will place my manu 
 script in Mr. Campbell’s hands, and allow him his own time fully to 
 consider them. This is the first morning that Mr. Campbell has at¬ 
 tempted any answer to my arguments; and this shows that I was 
 perfectly correct in my view of the order of this debate which 1 open¬ 
 ed to Mr. Campbell at our first interview.. Mr. Campbell is now 
 beginning to come to the point. 
 
 [The Hon, Chairman rose and said—I can only observe , that the 
 Moderators are of their former opinion , that they consider the subject 
 now under discussion to be the first proposition in Mr. Owen's challenge 
 viz. an offer to prove that all religions were founded in ignorance from 
 whence the implication arises that they are all false. From the begin¬ 
 ning we have been of opinion that the rules of fair discussion required 
 that each party should confine himself strictly to that single isolated pro¬ 
 position; and of this opinion we still remain, viz. that it is incorrect 
 and, illogical to deviate from the course just, designated. The Board 
 are unanimously of opinion that Mr. Owen's first proposition is the orr 
 iy one in controversy, and that each party should confine himself to math 
 ter strictly relevant and pertinent to that proposition. That in order to 
 observe the established controversial rules , the party holding the affirm¬ 
 ative of this preposition should pi'oceed to demonstrate\ that all the reli- 
 £ioas f now existing in the world ,, originated in ignorance , and are 
 
 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 133 
 
 %» 
 
 jminded in error. And after he shall have demolished all the religions 
 the Board consider that it would he proper for the party holding the 
 affirmative of the proposition, to offer a substitute for the system abol¬ 
 ished, to state what the new system is, and the consequences resulting 
 from it; because, until the f allacy of all existing systems be detected 
 and demonstratedit does not follow that all the anticipated, advantages 
 of the new system may not be the legitimate results cf the existing 
 systems .] 
 
 Mr. Owen remarked—-Having heard your wish on this point, I have 
 strictly conformed to it: all I have been saying goes to prove the 
 past and present ignorance of man; when I shall have exhausted this 
 part of the discussion,, I shall then adopt any course which the Board 
 may suggest 
 
 Mr. Campbell rose-—Gentlemen Moderators, I agree perfectly with 
 you in the sentiment that it would be incompatible with your feelings 
 and the dignity of this controversy, to dictate to the disputants what 
 course they shall pursue. I am perfectly aware of the delicacy which 
 you must feel in exercising any thing like dictation in the course of 
 this controversy; all that I washed, was, that you would express your 
 views relative to the manner in winch the controversy has been <-on- 
 ducted, so that they might be recorded ; and that 1 might be author¬ 
 ized in adopting the course which I have suggested. 
 
 I conceive, Mr. Chairman, that I am entitled to so much of rny time 
 as has been occupied by the Board and disputants in the discussion 
 of interlocutory topics. 
 
 [Mr. Campbell is allowed ffteen minutes to make up his half hour.] 
 
 Mr. Campbell then rose and said—‘Yielding to the circumstances in 
 which I am placed, I now propose to submit to your consideration an 
 analysis of the infant man : It is certainly true, as Lord Bacon ob¬ 
 serves, that “all our valuable knowledge of the world has been gleaned 
 from minute observation f therefore, an analysis of our corporeal 
 and mental endowments, is indispensable in arriving at any thing like 
 a correct view of the creature man. I intend not to elaborate this 
 matter, but merely to glance at the five senses of man, regarding 
 them as the only means to the soul or mind of man through which we 
 ^acquire all our simple and original ideas of the universe around us. 
 My object is, to demonstrate from a brief analysis of human capacity 
 the utter impossibility of man^s originating those supernatural ideas 
 .which are necessarily involved in the frame and institution of every 
 system of religion. I know that the system of natural religion is pre¬ 
 dicated upon the hypothesis, that man, by the exercise of his natural 
 reason, is capable of arriving at the knowledge of God and the rela ¬ 
 tions to him and one another, In order to establish the true iinc of 
 demarcation in this matter, I affirm, first, that there is a God, all nature 
 cries aloud through all her works. But we must have ears to hear 
 this voice. In other words, all things around us and w ithin us provft 
 tho existence of God when that idea is originated. 2. I affirm that all 
 nations have derived their ideas of Deity, (and there is no nation with¬ 
 out these ideas,) from tradition and not from the light of nature , 3’. 
 
 12 
 
134 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 I deny that man, in possession of but live senses, and with no other 
 guide but the light of nature, could ever have originated the idea of 
 Deity. But it is more than probable that no human being having but 
 five senses would be a fit subject for an experiment whereby to ascer¬ 
 tain whether it were in human nature, unaided by the light of ievela- 
 tion or tradition, to originate the idea of a God; because all who have 
 a full organization have heard ol a Creator. Therefore, the matter is 
 
 O ' 
 
 to be demonstrated on purely philosophic principles. Now the ad¬ 
 missions are, that all nature vouches the existence of God—that the tra¬ 
 dition concermmg God is the common moral property of all nations. 
 And the negative is, that man cannot originate theidea of God, 
 
 Now it is conceded on all hands that we have but fee senses f and 
 that these five senses are the only avenues through which intelligence 
 concerning material things can reach us, These are the senses of 
 seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, feeling. For example, let us take 
 the sense of smelling , as the most simple of all our senses. Nov/ there 
 are in nature many substances possessing ordorous properties Upon 
 a chemical, analysis we discover that these odors are nothing but 
 small particles of matter, sometimes exceedingly minute. These par¬ 
 ticles falling off from tfie bodies, are pressed into the atmospheric air; 
 in the process of respiration they reach our sense of smelling. They 
 penetrate the nasal membrane, and strike upon the olfactory nerve, 
 and the impressions which the impulse of each of the odorous parti¬ 
 cles makes upon this nerve is communicated to the sensorium. Bring 
 a rose into a dark room, within the reach of this sense, and although 
 we cannot see it, we know it is there, because the odorous particles 
 flying off and commingling with the atmosphere of the room, we in¬ 
 hale them. This impression made upon the sensorium by means of 
 the impulse of each particle upon the sense, we call sensation.— 
 Though it be a digression, I would call upon the materialist to reflect 
 upon the wisdom and design manifested in placing this sense exactly 
 where it is.. Air is the real pabulum vita, but were it not for the loccile 
 of this sense, being in the very channel through which this fluid passes 
 into our lungs, how could we discriminate between the salubrious and 
 insalubrious qualities of the air we inhale. We know the extent to 
 which the most minute miasmata may affect our health; and al¬ 
 though many of the ordorous particles are so minute, or sc weak in 
 their impulse, as not to be sensibly felt, yet still all the grosser and 
 more common impurities are detected by this sense. Now had the 
 locale of this sense been in tlie hand, it would have been useless for 
 the preservation of health and life. Its position therefore proves 
 wisdom and design in its formation 
 
 But to return, odors are material things ; small particles of matter 
 flying off from bodies, so small as to be invisible. Now, had we not. 
 this organ \ye should be deprived of all those ideas-which.come by 
 that sense. We could not, without the sense of smelling, have any 
 more ideas of odors than a human hand could have of music. It would 
 be impossible to communicate to a man, born without the sense of • 
 smelling, any idea of odors, because he would be. without archetype 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 135- 
 
 or analogy for the conception of any such idea. The corollary then 
 \s, that all our ideas of this class are derived through the medium of 
 this sense. [Half hour out.] 
 
 Mr. Owen resumes reading. 
 
 Each of these nine conditions appear to be necessary for the happi¬ 
 ness of man, and it is almost useless to state that, they cannot be ob¬ 
 tained'under any of the governments, religions, laws, or institutions 
 by which the characters of men have been hitherto formed, or by which 
 they have been governed. 
 
 These conditions cannot be obtained in any society in which merit 
 or demerit are attributed for any belief, or faith whatever, or, for li¬ 
 king or disliking any person or any thing. 
 
 On the contrary, happiness can be obtained and secured, only, when 
 every member of society can freely express his thoughts and feelings, 
 and when all men shall understand the laws of human nature, so well, 
 that none shall be offended by thus acquiring an accurate knowledge 
 of the sensations which nature compels his fellow-beings to receive. 
 
 And these conditions can be enjoyed, only when a knowledge of 
 the laws of our nature shall remove all personal pride and individual 
 selfishness, with all desire to possess any unnecessary private pro¬ 
 perty. # 
 
 And also, when men and women shall not be required to perjure 
 themselves, and promise what they have not the power to perform, be¬ 
 fore they enter into the married state; but when, on the contrary, all 
 shall live and associate according to their affections, and shall be 
 trained, educated, and governed by reason, instead of force, fraud, and 
 cunning. 
 
 We will now consider each of these nine conditions, deemed requi¬ 
 site for human happiness more in detail. 
 
 FIRST CONDITION. 
 
 Of possessing a good organization , physical, intellectual , and moral. 
 
 It is evident, on reflection, that the happiness of every individual 
 is materially influenced by the faculties which he derives from nature 
 at birth. 
 
 When these are physically weak, or intellectually, or morally de¬ 
 fective, greater care and attention are required through infancy, 
 childhood, and youth, to strengthen the first, and improve the others, 
 than are necessary, when the organization, in these respects, is more 
 perfect at birth. 
 
 And as the application of the most favorable circumstances, after 
 the birth of the individual, cannot fully compensate for defective natu¬ 
 ral power, it becomes absolutely necessary for human happiness that, 
 measures shall be adopted to prevent the production of any inferior 
 organization in the human race. 
 
 There is a science which, when it shall be better understood, and 
 the ignorant prejudices of mankind will permit it to be properly &p- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 plied ; will, to a great extent, effect this ground work of human happi¬ 
 ness, for it is the only foundation on which it can be permanently 
 secured. 
 
 This science has been already partially applied with success to im¬ 
 prove the physical qualities of many animals, and there can be no 
 doubt of the extraordinary beneficial changes which may be made in 
 the human race, when their knowledge of this science shall be right¬ 
 ly 7 applied to improve their physical, intellectual, and moral powers. 
 
 The most valuable animal known by man, is man, and it is far 
 more important for his happiness that he should he produced, at hrs 
 birth, with all his varied powers in the best state, than that the breed 
 of horses, cattle, sheep, dogs, etc. should be improved. 
 
 It is not, however, intended that the breed of these latter animals 
 shall be neglected, for, in a rational state of society, no inferior ani¬ 
 mal, vegetable, or any other thing, will be produced when that which 
 is superior caji be obtained, 
 
 Consequently, the greatest attention wil be given to this science-, 
 in the new state of existence, that, as far as it is practicable by human 
 knowledge and industry, a good natural material may be obtained for 
 all purposes,but, more especially, that the most superior physical, in¬ 
 tellectual, and moral materials of the human race may be obtained at 
 birth. 
 
 Under the present irrational notion of the world, this science is of 
 little use any where, except, as it is applied partially, to improve tke 
 breed of some of the inferior animals, and the qualities of some vege¬ 
 tables. 
 
 For the existing laws and institutions, create only ignorant preju¬ 
 dices which, not only retard every natural improvement, but by their 
 exclusive tendencies deteriorate tha whole breed of man. 
 
 In a new state of society about to be formed in accordance with the 
 divine laws of our nature, arrangements will be made to give man the 
 full benefit of thi^ important science, for, without it, he cannot possess 
 the best of every thing for human nature. 
 
 SECOND CONDITION. 
 
 Of having the power io produce , at pleasure, whatever is necessary to 
 
 keep the natural organization of man in the best state of health , 
 
 which includes food, exercise , habitation , dress , occupation , rest , re- 
 ■ creation , cuid amusements. 
 
 All will admit that, the present laws, and institutions, and practices 
 of mankind, do not permit these requisites to health, and consequent¬ 
 ly to happiness, to be obtained, any where, by the great mass of the 
 population in tfie best manner. 
 
 The customs of the world are now such, that, nine-tenths of the peo - 
 pie, in all countries, can procure only the most common necessaries 
 to support life; while, if the governing powers of these countries, under¬ 
 stood their own interest, as individuals, they would know that, it is in¬ 
 jurious to each member of every community that, any thing whatever 
 should be produced inferior, while the power is possessed to have it * 
 superior., 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 137 
 
 Itis the interest, therefore, of the governing powers, as well as of 
 all others, that every man shall possess not only the best organization 
 at birth, but that he shall be supplied, through life, with the best food, 
 habitation, and dress for human nature; and that arrangements shall 
 exist to enable him to enjoy proper exercise, rest, recreation, and amuse¬ 
 ment, and that he shall be occupied, through life, in the best manner 
 to promote his health and happiness, and to benefit society. 
 
 Accordingly in the new state of existence, permanent arrangements 
 will be made to secure these objects, 
 
 THIRD CONDITION. 
 
 Of a n education to cultivate from infancy , the physical , intellectual , and 
 
 moral powers in the best manner. 
 
 So little has been effected, upon this subject, by the laws, institu¬ 
 tions, and customs of men, that nearly the whole of the human race 
 are, at this hour, more ignorant of themselves, than they are of most 
 objects around them, while it is the first interest of all, that they 
 should be early taught to know themselves—to learn what manner 
 of beings they are. 
 
 Hitherto none have had their physical, intellectual and moral 
 powers cultivated, from infancy, in the best manner, but every ob¬ 
 stacle, which cunning could devise or force apply, has been placed 
 in the way of the mass of the people, in all countries, to prevent 
 them from attaining knowledge. Consequently, the population of 
 the world, is now, in a most degraded condition, little better, indeed, 
 than beasts of burden, toiling uselessly, from morning tonight without 
 understanding for what object. It has acquired a very small part 
 only of the powers which it might be made to possess, probably, not 
 more than one out of a million or many millions, for 'when all the 
 best faculties of the human race shall be cultivated as they ought to 
 be, from infancy, the human mind trained as it has been is incompe¬ 
 tent, to estimate the extraordinary results that may be attained. A 
 statement greatly within the truth on this subject would now startle 
 the most sanguine. 
 
 Therefore in the new T state of existence, arrangements will be for¬ 
 med, not only to obtain for man the best organization at birth; a reg¬ 
 ular supply of the most w holesome food, the best habitation and dress, 
 with the best means to enjoy exercise, rest, recreation, and amuse¬ 
 ment; but arrangements will be also formed, to bring out, into full 
 action, these extraordinary new powers, by training and cultivating 
 from infancy to maturity, the physical, intellectual, and moral facul¬ 
 ties and qualities of all in the best manner. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—As this is so much of the evidence to be adduced 
 in support of my friend’s first proposition, I presume that I must sub¬ 
 mit to hear it read; but I shall protest against its being read five 
 times to prove the five positions. If it had the charm of being a 
 new theory-—if it had not been detailed to us before, and its practica¬ 
 bility and utility bad not been tested by experiment, we might with 
 
 12 * 
 
JUEBATIL 
 
 138 
 
 more patience and interest listen to the outline. But the experiment 
 made in the state of Indiana has gone much farther to dissipate the 
 influence of the illusions of my friend’s philosophy upon the public 
 mind than he is aware of. 
 
 I shall now proceed to our brief analysis of the five senses. Next 
 to the sense of smelling is that of tasting , as respects simplicity in its 
 use and operation. By this sense we become acquainted with the 
 qualities of aliment , so as to discriminate the qualities between what 
 is agreeable or disagreeable, conducive or prejudicial to health, 
 The Author of Nature has wisely ordered the locale of this sense also. 
 Located elsewhere than where it is, it would be valueless to the 
 animal man. When a material, vegetable, animal, and sometimes 
 mineral substance, is presented to the discrimination of this sense, 
 uie particles are solved by the saliva which is its adjunct. This 
 saliva, which always moistens the organs of taste, is one of the most 
 universal menstruums in nature, and possesses the power of solving 
 all the aliments necessary to animals; so as to enable the tongue to 
 discriminate the qualities of the object as pleasing or displeasing, 
 healthy or the contrary. The impressions made upon this organ are 
 immediately communicated to the brain, and an idea of the savors of 
 bodies necessary to life or health is thus acquired. Thus, after a 
 little experience, we are enabled to discriminate the nutricious and 
 unwholesome properties of all aliments. It is true that this sense 
 may be much obtunded, and that it has been grossly perverted; but 
 b is the safest criterion by which to ascertain the healthful and agree¬ 
 able properties of aliments. Whatever may be the extent of our ideas 
 of savors or tastes, they are all derived through the medium of this 
 sense. 
 
 Feeling being not so local in its design, but more local in its object, 
 is wisely and beneficently transfused through the whole animal 
 system; and through this avenue of intelligence we become acquaint¬ 
 ed with the tactile properties of bodies—their roughness, smoothness, 
 hardness, softness, &c. &c. All these sensations through this medium 
 find their way to the sensorium. The wisdom of transfusing this 
 sense generally is as obvious as the specific location of the smell and 
 taste. This sense, however, is not equally transfused, being most 
 uxquisite in the most useful organs, particularly in the organ of vision, 
 b is obvious that if we could conceive a man were born without this 
 avenue to intelligence, closed up he must ever remain in ignorance of 
 dl the tactile properties of bodies, and he could never originate the 
 ulea of material tangibility . The thing is physically impossible. 
 
 The sense of hearing is given to us that we may discriminate all 
 the vibrations and motions of the air. Every impression made upon 
 the outward ear reaches to the tympanum , and conformably to the im¬ 
 pulse given to it, it gives us the idea of the whole gamut of harmonious 
 or discordant sounds. We all know that a man born deaf can have 
 ao idea of the nature of sound, and therefore can never be taught the 
 art of speaking*, which is simply the art of making such an impres- ' 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 ■i&f 
 
 >Kion upon the auricular sense as to communicate our ideas to others 
 through the medium of that sense. 
 
 We come next to seeing. This most perfect and delightful of ak 
 our senses, is, in like manner, admirably adapted to its specific 
 object. It is the avenue of intelligence through which all our ideas 
 of color, magnitude, and distance are derived to us; and the impres¬ 
 sions made upon this sense reach the sensorium through the optic 
 nerves. 
 
 Now it is only necessary to name these five senses, and their 
 respective uses, in order to discover, in them all that beneficence, 
 wisdom, and design which suggest the idea of a supremely intelli¬ 
 gent First Cause, manifesting its wisdom and benevolence in the 
 animal Organization of man, to discover that man has been endowed 
 by his Creator with an organization which enables him to elicit every 
 valuable property of matter. We discover an admirable adaptation 
 of these senses to the conception of all ideas of colors, sounds, odors, 
 tastes, and tacts; and that all our intelligence on these subjects is de¬ 
 rived through these five channels. , 
 
 The conclusion, therefore, from these premises, is, that a man born 
 without any one of these senses, must ever remain destitute of all 
 ideas derivable through it; that a man born deaf, dumb, blind, and 
 without tactability, has all these avenues to intelligence closed up, 
 and must therefore remain an idiot all his lifetime. Is it not self- 
 evident that a blind-born man can never acquire any idea of colors, 
 nor a deaf-born man any idea of sounds? But if we would suppose 
 a man born destitute of all the five senses, he would not only be 
 idiotic, but he would be a lump of insensible matter. Well, if all 
 the ideas we have of sensible objects are derived through these media, 
 there must be a model or archetype of each of these ideas presented 
 to the appropriate sense. Before I can have an idea of the color or 
 shape of a rose, it must be brougfit within the jurisdiction or cog¬ 
 nizance of my occular and olfactory sense. Therefore, every writer 
 who has undertaken to analyse the senses, has come to the conclusion 
 that we cannot have an idea of material objects, or the qualities of 
 matter, that is not derived from the exercise of our senses upon the 
 material objects around us. Well now, this being the basis of ail cur 
 knowledge, the powers, which we call rational, or intellectual, are 
 necessarily circumscribed by the simple ideas thus acquired. The 
 senses put us in possession of all the materials which the intellect has 
 to work up—in like manner as the raw material must first be put 
 into the hands of the manufacturer before it can be manufactured for 
 the various uses of life. All mechanical or intellectual ingenuity is 
 unavailable without the material. There can be no ship without 
 timber—no penknife without metal. Thus a child, from the time its 
 powers of discriminating sensible objects begin to be developed, ac¬ 
 quires a fund of materials, or simple ideas, on. which its intellect 
 begins to operate. - 
 
 In consequence of inattention, we imagine that children are making 
 no advances in information during the first months of their existence. 
 
MO 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 But a superficial observer can form no idea of the important acqui¬ 
 sitions of knowledge made by an infant in the first few months,after 
 its- birth. It is employed most industriously in learning to use its 
 hands, to move its different members, to adjust its different senses 
 to their proper objects. The minute observer will notice its first 
 efforts to trim its eyes so as to have a discriminating vision; he will 
 remark how its soft pulpy fingers are in almost continual exercise in 
 order to acquire a discriminating tact. 
 
 There are many mysteries existing in our animal economy which 
 have never yet been developed. We well know that upon the first 
 presentation of a candle to the vision of an infant, there is one 
 distinct and separate impression made upon the retina of each eye, 
 precisely as if two candles were in the first instance presented to the 
 vision of the infant. How comes it then to pass that the infant mind 
 has such a power of minute attention, as very early to have a con¬ 
 sciousness of the presence of but one candle. There are many 
 secrets yet inexplicable in the operations of each of these senses. 
 
 1 will mention one which the wisest physiologists have not yet been 
 able to explain. It is well known that there is no anatomical con¬ 
 nexion between the nerves or muscular systems of either eye; that 
 the muscles which control the movements of either eye are as inde¬ 
 pendent as those which move either arm; yet we turn both eyes in¬ 
 voluntarily at the same moment to any particular object, giving 
 precisely the same turn to both our organs of vision. This is as per¬ 
 fect in the new-born infant as in the full-grown man. The mind 
 appears in its first acts to possess a sort of innate power over the 
 organs of vision. From the first dawn of rationality the mind ap¬ 
 pears conscious that illusion has been practised by the singular 
 phenomenon of two distinct impressions upon the retina of either 
 eye. No one has yet fathomed these physical mysteries of animal 
 economy, nor is it any part of my present business to attempt to fathom 
 them. It is enough for me to establish the position that all our 
 ideas of sensible objects are derived from, and only derivable through 
 khe five senses; that the mind begins to operate upon these materials 
 as soon as they are presented to the senses, and that this gives us 
 the first intimation of the existence of infantile intellect. Having 
 rather stated, than analysed, the power called sensation , let us turn 
 our thoughts a moment to 'perception. 
 
 The mind forms ideas in accordance with the sensations impressed 
 upon the brain. The mind is perfectly conscious of the existence of 
 these impressions; they are communicated directly to the sensorium; 
 and here begins the intellectual process of reflecting upon, compa 
 ring, and recalling them; then presenting them in different views, 
 separating, abstracting, combining, and generalizing them. All this 
 is in the natural operation of the intellect on the objects presented to 
 it by sensation. Thus it is that we derive our ideas of sensible objects, 
 and thus we begin to reason upon them. Therefore , we cannot 
 imagine a sixth sense—we cannot conceive what it would be. The 
 reason is, that we have never seen any animal possessed of it. Had 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 141 
 
 1v£ been endowed but with four senses it would have been equally 
 impossible to conceive of a fifth sense, with but three, of a fourth, &'c, ‘ 
 These are truths which I think must be palpable to the plainest un- j 
 derstanding and which require no philosophic subtlety in their eluci¬ 
 dation. Now to expect a man destitute of the light of revelation ? 
 to have ideas not derivable through any of his senses, would be as 
 absurd as to expect a man without the organs of vision to have ail the 
 ideas of color possessed by those who enjoy the very clearest vision. 
 You might as reasonably expect a person born deaf to have all the 
 -deas of harmony, as a man destitute of supernatural revelation to 
 have the ideas of God and a spiritual system—Without seeing or 
 hearing some supernatural personage, all natural objects would be 
 Inadequate to originate any spiritual ideas. Many experiments have 
 been made upon the deaf, who have been restored to hearing to as¬ 
 certain whether by the other senses, and all the reasonings which the 
 mental powers were capable 6f, they had acquired any idea of God* 1 
 and all have concurred in attesting the utter impossibility of acquiring 
 such without the aid of revelation. No, my friends, the man on whom 
 the light of revelation has never beamed, can no more conceive of 
 those ideas which in a system of spiritual religion are native, inherent, / 
 and discoverable, than the deaf-born man can be moved by the “eon- \ 
 cord of sweet sounds.” It would be as rational to talk of seeing by 
 the hand, or hearing by the tongue, as to talk of knowing God without 
 a communication from himself. We can by things already known be > 
 taught things not known; but there must be a teacher. 
 
 But I must tell you, while speaking of revelation, that perhaps I am 
 misunderstood; and certainly lam, if I am supposed to use this term in 
 flie vulgar sense. Far now it is usual to call the whole Bible areve-* 
 lation from God. I must explain myself here. There are a thousand 
 historic facts narrated in the Bible, which it would be absurd to regard 
 as immediate and direct revelation from the Almighty. Paine defines 
 revelation very accurately, although he did not believe we had any 
 properly so called. He says—Page 14. “Age of Reason.”—“Revela~ 
 uon cannot be applied to any thing done upon earth. It is a commu¬ 
 nication of something which the person to whom that thing is reveal¬ 
 ed <did not know before”—and I add, could not otherwise know.— 
 (That intelligence which could never have been derived to us through 
 the agency of our senses.)—“Consequently all the historical and an¬ 
 ecdotal part of the Bible is not within the compass and meaning of 
 the word revelation/ 5 Revelation , from the import of the term, must 
 be supernatural. But the historic parts of both testaments, present 
 a great variety of topographical and historic facts and incidents; col¬ 
 loquies between friends and enemies, of apostles, prophets, and patri¬ 
 archs, and of distingushed persons good and evil; wars, intrigues, am¬ 
 ours, and crimes, of every dye. Now it would be neither philosophi¬ 
 cal nor rational to dignify and designate these colloquies, narratives, 
 geographical and biograghical notices, &c. by the term revelation. 
 The term revelation, in its strict acceptation amongst intelligent 
 Christians, moans nothing more nor less than a Divine ccmmunicatioir 
 
DEBATE.- 
 
 142 
 
 concerning spiritual and eternal things, a knowledge of which rnjan 
 could never have attained by the exercise of his reason upon mate¬ 
 rial and sensible objects; for as Paul says, “Things which the eye 
 has not seen, nor ear heard, neither has it entered into the heart of 
 man to conceive, has God revealed to 11 s apostles, and we declare 
 them to you. 1 ’ Now the corollary is, that, to a man to whom this 
 divine revelation has never been made, it is impossible to acquire 
 ?deas of spiritual and eternal things, as for a blind man to admire the 
 play of colors in a prism. 
 
 In the Old Testament, to distinguish the ordinary information from 
 the divine communications, such intimations are made as u Thc word 
 of the Lordf or a A message from the Lord came to such a person. 
 Sometimes, “ The Lord said. ” Bat in the New Testament, the phrase 
 ‘''The Word,” ov “The word of the Lord or “The Truth f is almost 
 exclusively appropriated to the testimony ickich God gave concerning the 
 verson and mission of Jesus Christ. It may also be remarked, that in 
 a volume such as the Bible is, and having the.object which it profess¬ 
 es, it was necessary that the worst deeds and the best deeds of all sorts 
 of men, in all sorts of circumstances, should be detailed. It teaches 
 us man, it developes human nature, it reveals to us the character and 
 purpose of the Maker of the Universe. Moreover the persons who 
 are employed to make these communications are so supernaturally 
 guided as to make them infallible witnesses in all the facts they at¬ 
 test, as well as all the communications concerning supernatural things. 
 The ridicule which some ignorant sceptics have uttered against the 
 contents of the book, under the general title of a revelation from God, 
 as if it were all properly so called, is, if it have any point only direct¬ 
 ed against their own obtueity of intellect, and negligence in making 
 themselves acquainted with the most important of all books in the 
 world. 
 
 Our reasoning upon these premises must therefore necessarily be 
 'in the following order. Objects of sense are presented to the infant 
 mind, it perceives them, begins to reflect upon them, and after exerci¬ 
 sing its power of discrimination, it arrives at certain conclusions res¬ 
 pecting them. And this leads us to notice the intellectual powers of 
 man. 1. Perception, hy which we become acquainted with all things 
 external. 2. Memory by which we are enabled to recall things past. 
 3. Consciousness which acquaints us with ail things internal. Per¬ 
 ception has present sensibile objects for its province. Memory is the 
 record which we Have of the past. But consciousness has respect 
 only to things present. I perceive a numerous assemblage now be¬ 
 fore me, and I am conscious of my own thoughts at the time. I re¬ 
 member that there were such and such persons here yesterday.— 
 These three powers of perception, memory, and consciousness, are 
 the primary powers of the mind. Over these three we have shown 
 that the will has no power; that they are independent of volition. 
 For example, I often have perceptions contrary to my volitions; 
 ipeAters written upon the table of my memory, by singular associa¬ 
 tions, will involuntarily present themselves in a vivid manner before 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 143 
 
 me.; and it certainly is felt by all, that our being conscious 6^our 
 own thoughts depends not upon any act of the will, but upon the con¬ 
 stitution of mind itself. Butin exercising the faculties of recollecting, 
 reflecting, imagining, reasoning, and judging, I discover that all 
 these are subject to the control of my volition. For example, in 
 exercising the faculty of imagination, I can, at will, transfer the ex¬ 
 ternal peculiarities of one animal, to the body of another, and thereby 
 create any kind of imaginative monster; I can by imagination take 
 the head, trunk, and arms of a man, and put them on horseback and 
 thereby present to rny mind's eye, the fabulous Centaur. But this 
 license of imagination is entirely under the control of my volition, 
 
 I can recollect only by making an effort, and consequently must 
 determine to make that effort. I can reason only when I decide to 
 reason; and my placing myself in the attitude of a judge, is as much 
 in obedience to a previous determination, as the eating of my supper, 
 or my going to bed. These matters are so plain to those who do re¬ 
 flect, that to demonstrate them, appears something like an insult to 
 the understanding of such an audience as this. 
 
 I was about to state some facts in proof, that the deaf cannot form 
 an idea of God, a future state, or of a human spirit. But lam inform¬ 
 ed my half hour is out/* 
 
 *From some cause these facts were not given in the Debate. The next 
 speech failed to call them forth. 1 shall just state one case here, as a specimen 
 of the documents alluded to. I believe all experiments yet made upon such 
 persons,^iave proved that faith,*or the knowledge of God, and of a Creator, has 
 come by hearing. By faith Paul said, and not by reason , “we know that the 
 worlds were made by the word of Gcd.” This case is extracted from “The 
 Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences at Paris.— 
 
 “ The son of a tradesman in Chartres, who had been deaf from his birth, and 
 consequently dumb; when he was twenty three or twenty four years of age, 
 began on a sudden to speak, without its being known that he had ever heard . 
 This event drew the attention of every ope, and many believed it to be mirac 
 ulous.—The young man, however, gave a plain and rational account, by which 
 it appeared to proceed wholly from natural causes. He said that about four 
 months before he was surprised by a new, and pleasing sensation, which he 
 afterwards discovered to arise from the ringing of bells; that as yet he heard 
 with one ear, but afterwards a kind of water came from his left ear, and then he 
 could hear distinctly with both; and from this time he listened with the utmost 
 qurioeity, and attention to the sounds which accompany those motions of the 
 lips which he had before remarked to convey ideas or meaning from one person 
 to another. In short, he was able to understand them, by noting the thing to 
 which they related, and the action they produced. And after repeated at¬ 
 tempts to imitate them when alone, at the end of four months he thought 
 himself able to talk. He therefore, without having intimated what had hap¬ 
 pened, began at once to speak, and affected to join in conversation, though 
 with much more imperfection than he was aware. 
 
 “Many divines immediately visited him, and questioned him concerning 
 God, and the soul, moral good, and evil, and many other sub je cts of the same 
 kind; but of all this they found him ignorant, though he had been used to go 
 to mass, and had been instructed in all the externals of devotion, as making 
 the. sign of the cross, looking upwards, kneeling at proper seasons, and using 
 gestures of penitence, and prayer. Of death itself, which may be considered 
 as a sensible object, jhc had very confused, and imperfect ideas, nor did, it ap- 
 
DEBATE 
 
 £44 
 
 Mr. Owen again commences reading, 
 
 FOURTH CONDITION. 
 
 Of having the means and inclination to promote continually, the fiappU 
 ness of our fellow-beings, as far as our power can be made to extend f 
 and also to assist in increasing, as far as practicable, the enjoyments 
 of all that has life. 
 
 The governments, religions, laws, institutions, and practices ofthe 
 world, have not been yet devised to promote the happiness of man, or 
 the comfort of animals. They have been contrived, rather, to insure 
 the misery of man, and the discomfort of animal life. The very sup¬ 
 position that man was organized by nature to give him the power to 
 think and feel according to his own pleasure, was of itself, when car¬ 
 ried into practice, as it has been by all tribes and people, quite suffi¬ 
 cient to stay any progress towards the happiness of the human race. 
 
 This single mistake, respecting human nature is abundantly suffi¬ 
 cient to disunite all mankind, and to make them secret or open ene¬ 
 mies to each other. For while each man or woman is taught to be¬ 
 lieve, that every other man and woman, may, if they please, think 
 and feel as they do,it becomes natural for them to be angry with those, 
 who, they imagine, will not, from obstinacy or some worse motive, 
 believe what they believe, who do not like, or dislike, or love and hate, 
 according to their notions of right or wrong. 
 
 It is upon this error that all governments, religions, laws, institu¬ 
 tions, languages, and customs have been formed, and, by it, they have 
 been all made so complex and irrational. And it is solely owing 
 to this error that the world has been so long divided against itself, that 
 it has been always armed for its own destruction, and rendered wholly 
 blind to the natural, and therefore easily attained means of happiness. 
 
 •Instead of this confusion of intellect, and consequent division of feel¬ 
 ings among the human race, man will be trained “to know himself” 
 from infancy, and he will then acquire the inclination to promote the 
 happiness of his fellow-beings, and of the means by which to apply 
 the inclination to practice, 
 
 FIFTH CONDITION. 
 
 Of the means and inclination to increase, continually, our stock of 
 
 knowledge. 
 
 As men acquire experience they learn the value of real knowledge, 
 they discover that it is the only solid foundat ion for v irtue and happiness, 
 and that it is the true source of power. Hitherto the book of nature Gr 
 of real knowledge has been sealed,, in such a manner, that no man has 
 yet dared to open it honestly and fairly, for the benefit of the many. 
 Innumerable books, however, said to be of divine origin have been 
 
 pear that he had ever reflected upon it. His life was little more than animal, 
 and sensitive. He seemed to be contented with the simple perception os such 
 objects as ke could perceive, and did not compare his ideas with each other, 
 nor draw inferences, as might have been expected from him. It appeared* 
 however, that his understanding was vigorous, and his apprehension quick, so. 
 that his intellectual defects must have been caused, not by the barrenness of 
 the «oi?, but merely by the want of necessary cultivation.” 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 
 l4fi 
 
 tspread over the world, and palmed upon the public as books of real j 
 knowledge. 
 
 The fables which they contain have been made to fill the minds of ') 
 men with all manner of error, and to compel them to commit all kinds 
 of evil, as at this day, as is evident to all who can reflect without pre- 
 i judice. 
 
 All these spurious books of divine origin are full of high sounding 
 words in praise of virtue, and learning, and religion; but we now dis¬ 
 cover, by an unerring standard of truth, that, the authors of these 
 dogmas and mysteries, did not know any thing of real virtue, know¬ 
 ledge, or religion; or, if they did, that they purposely devised these 
 fables to deceive mankind, to keep them in ignorance, that they might 
 be more easily governed, and made to support the governing few in 
 luxury and idleness, to the injury of all parties. 
 
 It is now evident that the reign of these mysteries is rapidly passing 
 away; that it is about to be superceded by knowledge derived from 
 tangible facts, by the only kind of knowledge that ever can be of real 
 benefit to mankind. 
 
 Now when this description of knowledge shall be taught from infan¬ 
 cy to all men, they will have pleasure in acquiring it, and the farther 
 they proceed, the greater will be their gratification, ahd the more ar¬ 
 dently will they desire to pursue it. 
 
 The acquisition of the knowledge, founded on facts, in unison with 
 all other facts, and its truth proved by its accordance with the know¬ 
 ledge previously known and ascertained to be true, will create a con 
 tmually increasing desire to add, day by clay, to the stock acquired in 
 childhood and youth, and thus will the inclination be formed, and per ¬ 
 manently established to seek to progress in real knowledge through 
 life. 
 
 In the new state of existence effectual means will be devised to 
 satisfy the desires. Every individual will have the benefit of the best- 
 libraries, laboratories, instruments, and implements to assist him in 
 his studies. Men of the most experience, and best minds, and dis¬ 
 positions will be always ready to aid the younger in every branch of 
 knowledge, while all the means will surround the population to enable 
 them to prove the truth of their theories by practice. 
 
 The acquisition of real knowledge will accumulate enormous pow¬ 
 er to the human race, and to its extension, age after age, there can be 
 no assignable limit. It will be the legitimate means of agreeably 
 and beneficially changing men’s sensations; of opening new stores 
 of pleasure which will never satiate, and they will be led on, step by 
 step, in the path of real knowledge, and made more and more acquaint¬ 
 ed with that power which gives them an existence and hourly sup ¬ 
 port. 
 
 in fact the chief design in the new state of existence, will be to 
 ♦r un -lie young in the best manner, and to provide the means for all 
 to morese continually in. the most useful knowledge, and to create the 
 desfio to make the greatest attainment in the most valuable pursuit-'. 
 
 I Q 
 
146 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 SIXTH CONDITION. 
 
 Of the means of employing the best society , and more particularly of 
 
 associating at pleasure with those for whom we feel the highest regard 
 
 and greatest affection. 
 
 Without this power, whatever may be the other advantages accu¬ 
 mulated around any societ}~, their condition cannot be satisfactory. 
 
 All who have had extensive experience, know that by far the largest 
 •share of happiness arises, through life, from the society of those to 
 whom we are compelled, by nature, to feel the most regard and the 
 strongest affection. 
 
 With this privilege, few things, beyond the simple necessaries of 
 life, are requisite to insure a considerable degree of satisfaction of 
 mind, and a nearer approach to happiness than power, wealth, and 
 knowledge, combined, can give without it. 
 
 But as the world has hitherto been governed, how very few have 
 •possessed the privilege of associating at pleasure with those for whom 
 they were compelled to feel the greatest regard and strongest affec¬ 
 tion ! How few enjoy it at this moment over all the world! 
 
 All past institutions have been formed apparently with the inten- j J 
 uon of obstructing, as much as possible, the happiness that nature 
 designs man should enjoy from his social feelings by implanting 
 so deeply and widely the seeds of affection among the human race. 
 
 For all the artificial arrangements, by man, in all countries and at 
 all times, appear to be purposely calculated to destroy the pleasures | 
 arising from sincerity, confidence, and affection. 
 
 The division of society into governors and governed, rich and poor, | 
 .learned and unlearned, into single families, into sects and classes, J 
 and into numerous tribes and people taught to have opposing fbelings j| 
 lor each other, all tend to deteriorate society, and to give a wrong or ] 
 unnatural direction to all the kindlier feelings of our nature, and to 
 render it difficult or almost impossible, in most cases, for individuals -J 
 to associate at pleasure with those for whom they cannot avoid having ,1 
 the most regard and strongest affection. J 
 
 In the new state of existence this great evil will not be known— 
 .every obstacle to the free, open, honest communication between mind 4 
 and mind will be removed. In this state of society all intercourse 
 betw r een human beings of both sexes, and of all ages, w ill be, at all J 
 times, what is now termed confidential, that is, they will express, 
 under all circumstances, their genuine thoughts and feelings w ithout ' || 
 any reservation whatever. * 
 
 Not feeling the necessity for disguising their sensations, they will j 
 never acquire the habit of doing so. While, under the existing insti¬ 
 tutions, almost the whole communication between man and man, 
 and nation and nation, is a continued system of insincerity, by which r| 
 they endeavor to deceive each other; and when they* succeed, it is to j 
 their own injury. , i*> 
 
 The necessity which exists, under these institutions, to cover our 
 real thoughts and Toolings from others, is. of itself, sufficient to degrade 
 
DEBATE. 147 
 
 man below the inferior animals, and to inflict misery on his whole 
 
 race. 
 
 By attending to the feelings of children, we discover, that man is 
 most powerfully impelled by his nature, to be honest and sincere, 
 j and to hide or be ashamed of any of the sensations which, by his 
 j formation, he is compelled to receive. It requires constant watching 
 and great care, on the part of those who are around children, to pre- 
 j vent them from expressing all their sensations, and telling the whole 
 truth upon every subject, as far as they know it, and still more exer¬ 
 tion to force them to acquire as much practical deceit, as the irration¬ 
 al customs of the most civilized nations require. 
 
 All this degradation and subjugation of the very finest and best 
 feelings of human nature will altogether cease in the new state of ex¬ 
 istence. For all the practical arrangements, and all the institutions 
 in this state, will be in unison with the laws of nature, and, when the 
 results of this union of practice and principle shall bo enjoyed, it will 
 be felt to be an act of insanity, or a real aberration of the human fac¬ 
 ulties, whenever any individual in conversation with man, woman, 
 or child, shall not express the genuine sensations which the existing 
 circumstances make on his organization. These sensations are, 
 alone, to him, truth ; and as soon as men shall be trained to be ration¬ 
 al, and shall be under institutions and within circumstances in unison 
 with their training, truth alone will be known among them. 
 
 And, under these arrangements, all will know precisely the impres¬ 
 sions which their conduct makes upon others, and a stronger stimu¬ 
 lus to every kind of excellence, cannot be given; it will effectually 
 purify the thoughts and feelings of all, and produce a perfection of 
 conduct throughout society, of which the present ignorant, degraded, 
 and irrational race can form no adequate conception. 
 
 When sincerity and truth and consequently rationality shall bo 
 alone known among men, it will be soon ascertained, by experience, 
 whether nature intended to give man happiness, by limiting or extend¬ 
 ing his affections; whether she intends him to confine his most ex¬ 
 clusive feelings to one of the opposite sex, or to divide it with more 
 than one, and how many. 
 
 However this may prove by experience, we may be assured, when 
 no artificial obstructions shall exist, that the dictates of nature are 
 those which she intends shall, alone, influence to actions that shall 
 the most effectually promote real virtue and happiness. 
 
 Nature, which is now thwarted in every advance to urge the human 
 race to knowledge and happiness, will persevere, until her righteous 
 ..laws shall be alone obeved, and they will ultimately direct the inter¬ 
 course of society as wisely for the well doing, well being, and enjoy¬ 
 ment of the human race, as she has ever done among the whole of the 
 animal and vegetable existences, which are, in this respect, subject 
 to the same general laws. 
 
 One thing is most evident, that nature, by keeping the power of 
 making new impressions to herself, never intended that man or wo- 
 
.DEBATE. 
 
 t,4S 
 
 man should perjure themselves by promising) to each other, that their 
 sensations from and for each other, should continue, without change,, 
 until death, 
 
 In the new state of existence, this crime, also, of perjury, will be 
 unknown, for there will be “no indissoluble marriages, or giving in 
 marriage;-’ on the contrary, all will, at all times, possess the power 
 to associate with those only for whom nature compels them to feel 
 the most regard and strongest affection. 
 
 Seventh Condition, 
 
 Of travelling ivith convenience and advantage. 
 
 To have the means of travelling at pleasure, or of removing, with¬ 
 out inconvenience, from one district to another, is essential to the full 
 enjoyment of happiness, 
 
 This benefit will be provided, ifi a very effectual manner, in the 
 new state of existence, by arrangements which will be equally advan^ 
 fageous for the traveller and for society. 
 
 The arragements which wall be formed, under this new mode of 
 existence, will be so formed, that when any country shall be regular¬ 
 ly settled under its regulations, the traveller will have an opportunity 
 of resting in any direction in which he may proceed, within two miles 
 of the last association or station he mhy have left or passed, 
 
 lie will find, in all these places, whatever can be necessary to Iris 
 comfort; the same as he enjoyed in the association or society from 
 whence he commenced his travels. It will not be necessary for him 
 to encumber himself with luggage of any description; there will be 
 supplies of all he will require, ready for his use, in each society, and 
 these, as before stated, will be within two miles of each other in what¬ 
 ever direction he may travel. 
 
 These journies must be, of necessity, subject to general regulations, | 
 which will apply equally to all of the same age; for it is evident, all 
 , cannot travel at the same time. But it is probable that more than all 
 who wish to change their position atone time, may leave their station 
 without inconvenience. 
 
 As long as travellers do not go out of the territories occupied by the 
 associations w r ho have embraced the new mode of existence, they will 
 not require money or extra provisions of any description, beeause ] 
 they will be equally at home, wherever they may wish to stop, for a 
 longer or shorter period. 
 
 The only condition to which they will be liable, is, that they shall 
 occupy themselves, as long as they remain in their new situation, in 
 the same manner in which they were employed in their former asso- 1 
 ciatien. 
 
 When the change is in progress, from the old to the new state of 
 existence, money of the countries to which the traveller is about to 
 proceed will be supplied to him from the public treasury. 
 
 But rational,as all these reformed, or re-created beings will become,. • 
 under the new circumstances by which they can be surrounded, no 
 funds, or labor, of the societies’ will be uselessly expended. They 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 149 
 
 Will all distinctly perceive that a well arranged economy, in the whole 
 proceedings of these communities, is the true foundation of the high¬ 
 est and most permanent prosperity. 
 
 Whatever temporary difficulties may arise, at first, in bringing all 
 the requisite arrangements for travelling with ease, comfort, and 
 general benefit into practice, a little experience and perseverance, 
 in right principles, will soon overcome them .—[Half hour out .] 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises — 
 
 Mr. Chairman—There is a land in which there is no sickness, in 
 which, eating, drinking, and sleeping are unnecessary. 1 am well 
 aware that in an argument so abstract in its nature as the present, we 
 cannot go into such details as to make every topic perfectly apprehen¬ 
 sible to all. We have been attending to a brief analysis of our 
 external senses, and internal faculties. To aid the least accustomed 
 to this kind of reasoning, we shall present the substance in a new 
 form. Let us imagine that there are five worlds, and that we have a 
 distinct organ calculated exclusively for the use of each distinct 
 world—that there is a world of colors, cognizable by the eye; a 
 world of sounds, cognizable by the ear; a world of odors, cognizable 
 by the olfactory sense; a world of savors, cognizable by the taste; 
 and a world of tacts, that is, of the tactile properties of bodies, all 
 . the ideas belonging to which world are cognizable only by the sense 
 of feeling. Now these five worlds make up this one material world 
 and all the properties which belong to it. And he that lacks one of 
 these organs or senses,, is forever debarred from that world of which 
 it is the door. 
 
 Sensation is the name which philosophers have given to theexer- 
 else of these senses, or rather to the operation by them which makes 
 us acquainted with the material world. Perception is the name given 
 to those acts of the mind which discriminate the different sensations 
 or impressions made upon our senses. It is called the faculty of 
 perception to distinguish it from other faculties, such as memory of 
 imagination. By this faculty we become acquainted with all things 
 external; but to-morrow all the ideas of to-day derived through the 
 faculty of perception become the objects of memory, that having 
 respect exclusively to the past. Next comes consciousness , which is 
 like an internal eye, enabling me to take cognizance of my recollec¬ 
 tions, reasonings, and all the operations of my intellect—such as 
 reflecting, comparing, discriminating'', and judging. These are the 
 primqjfy intellectual operations, and they are all necessary in order 
 to arrive at certain conclusions on material things or the dominions of 
 these five worlds. But, then, there is the world of spirits, which no 
 man could imagine, and of which these five worlds do not afford 
 an archetype, or sensation, or perception. Of this world we have 
 manv ideas, thoughts, terms, and conversations, and the question 
 is, How did we come by them ? No window or-door has been opened 
 to us in the department of sense. Where are the organs, the senses^ 
 thd media , through which we have derived these ideas ? Not by the 
 
 13* 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 i50 
 
 eye, the ear, nor the taste; for these are our corporeal senses and 
 cannot take cognizance of spiritual existences. For all our ideas of 
 spiritual and eternal things we must, therefore, be indebted to some 
 other power. 
 
 The human intellect has no creative power. It can only reason 
 from the known to the unknown. We can augment almost ad infi¬ 
 nitumi 9 but we cannot create. And so it is in the material world—It 
 is a law of physics that one new particle of matter cannot be created . 
 We can change and modify; we can convert a fluid into a solid, a 
 shapeless piece of wood into a polished piece of furniture; but we can 
 neither create nor destroy one particle of matter. And just so it is 
 in the operations of our intellectual faculties upon sensible objects.— 
 Conceding to my friend that imagination ranges wildly through the 
 intellectual world, yet all philosophic sceptics and Christians have 
 admitted that although imagination may “body forth the forms of 
 things unknown,” it is only by analogy to things already known, 
 that they can be “turned to shapes,” and receive “a local habitation 
 and a name” Imagination is, to the intellectual world, what 
 mechanical ingenuity is to the natural world. In neither can any 
 result be elaborated without a stock to begin upon. Our position is 
 that imagination can do no more with ideas, than mechanical inge¬ 
 nuity can with metals, wood, and stone—that the intellectual as well 
 as the mechanical artificer must have his subject before him. Hence 
 it is utterly out of the power of imagination to originate the idea of 
 spiritual existences, or even to invent ajname expressive of a spiritual 
 idea. 
 
 But to give the argument its plain practical application, and great* 
 est force, we must contemplate another endowment of man, I mean 
 the faculty of speech. This topic is intimately connected with the 
 preceding. What is this faculty ? It is the power not only of giving 
 utterance to our feelings, but of giving names to things. How did 
 we come by the use of speech? is it natural to man to speak? oris 
 not language rather purely an imitative thing. I may show this 
 tumbler to an infant, and thus afford matter for its perception, mem¬ 
 ory, and consciousness to operate upon; but will its perception, 
 memory, or consciousness enable it to give a name to this vessel? 
 
 I may perhaps hazard the disapprobation of this audience, by assert¬ 
 ing that speech is not natural to man. Groans and inarticulate 
 enunciations, expressive of passion or feeling, are natural to almost all 
 animals. But man difTers from them all in the following respect: they 
 all have a systematic expression uniformly the same; but man, withs 
 out language, has such groans and sighs and expressions of feeling 
 without system. The speechless babes have no uniformity of this 
 sort. But the horse, the ass, the cow, the sheep, the goat, the swal¬ 
 low’, the sparrow r , have, wherever found, the same language o.lf 
 passion and feeling. The nightingale and the lark sing the same 
 song all the world over. But when we speak of language, we mean 
 not enunciations indicative of feeling, but names for ideas or senti¬ 
 ments, But let. us ask, How do infants learn to speak? Do they 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 151 
 
 speak as naturally as they see or smell ? Surely not. They sigh, 
 groan, cry, and laugh naturally, but imitatively they speak. Speech 
 is the result of education, of training, and of the imitative faculty 
 of man. It has been experimentally demonstrated that a man who 
 has never heard the articulations of the human voice can never speak* 
 A child may be born with the most perfect organs of speech, and 
 yet be born dumb and continue dumb through life, in consequence of 
 the imperfection of its auricularorgans. Dumbness is the necessary 
 consequence, the inseparable adjunct of deafness from birth. If 
 there be a language of nature it is a language of inarticulate sounds, 
 which all abandon so soon as they learn to speak. This is & fact of 
 vast consequence in this argument. Admitting that there is a natu¬ 
 ral enunciation of feeling, and a language of pains and joys, this 
 language is abandoned when what is now called human language is 
 taught. All philosophers have been baffled in their attempts to ac¬ 
 count for the origin of language, and all nations have concurred in 
 declaring that speech was the gift of the gods. The most ancient of 
 the Egyptian writers (and these are of higher antiquity than any 
 other extant,) concur in declaring that they are utterly unable to ac¬ 
 count for the origin of human speech without referring it to God. 
 The impossibility of inventing a universal language is very obvious. 
 Because in order to invent a new language common to all, all must 
 be congregated, and a conventional vocabulary must be adopted 
 *—for instance, they must agree unanimously that this glass shall be 
 called tumbler. But how could they be congregated or enter upon this 
 business without the possession of that identical universal language 
 which the scheme contemplates? There is no speculation on the 
 origin of language to be found in any of the schools, that warrants 
 the conclusion that man, by the unaided exercise of his native, inher¬ 
 ent powers, could have attained to the use of speech; or that language 
 could have been communicated to man, in the first instance, by any 
 but a divine instructer. Speech, like faith, comes by the ear; what¬ 
 ever comes by the ear is derived; therefore human language is derived. 
 Whatever is derived is not natural'; human language is derived; 
 therefore human language is not natural. In proof of the syllogism, 
 the deaf cannot speak. The idea of any thing must necessarily be 
 precedent and anterior to the invention of a name for it. All nations 
 must have had an idea of Deity before the word God , in their respect¬ 
 ive languages, could have been invented Fifty years ago there was 
 not to be found in all the books and all the vocabularies in the world, 
 such a word as steam-boat; and why? Because, at that period, the 
 idea of stemn-boats had not been conceived, consequently no name 
 could be annexed to an idea which had no existence. How then was 
 the ideas and names of God, Spirit, Altar, Priest, Sacrifice, derived 
 to man? The idea of these, and all positive acts of religious wor" 
 ship, must necessarily have existed antecedently to the invention of 
 names to express them. The conclusion, is irresistible, that the in¬ 
 vention of the terms by which spiritual ideas are expressed, must 
 have been posterior to the conception of the ideas themgelves—that 
 
152 DEBATE, 
 
 a& these ideas could not have been derived through the media of the ' 
 five senses, they must have been communicated in some other way—■- 
 and that both the ideas and names of spiritual things must have been 
 matter of divine revelation. By a reference to the Old Testament we 
 shall find these facts fully established in evidence. And if the Bible 
 facts did not Support our reasoning, we would nevertheless be con* 
 strained to regard it as logical and demonstrative as any that can be 
 brought to bear upon an abstract speculation. But I am not compelled 
 to rest the truth of this reasoning upon metaphysical deductions-. 
 We have matters of fact to go upon. The Bible tells us most em¬ 
 phatically that the first colloquies ever held upon this earth were 
 between the great Creator, and our first ancestors, viva vocc. The 
 book of Genesis tells us that the first pair talked with God—hence 
 the inference from the fact, that God first taught man to speak, is, that 
 the art of speaking is not native and inherent in the family of man, 
 Newton has sagely observed that God has given us both reason and 
 religion in the gift of speech} that the power of ratiocination is but 
 an adjunct of the faculty of speech. There is no logical objection to 
 the dictum of Newton, that God gave to man both reason and religion 
 tn the gift of speech. I presume that it would be very difficult to 
 prove, by any process of philosophical reasoning, that man could 
 Correctly reason or have spiritual ideas without the use of speech. In 
 truth, we think by words, and infants think by things; and let him 
 Who imagines he can think without terms make the experiment. 
 
 But for these purposes it is not necessary that man should have 
 an extensive vocabulary. He only requires two lessons—first, the 
 elementary ideas; and, secondly, the elementary words significant 
 of them-: and then who shall prescribe limits to the range of his in¬ 
 tellectual powers? He will soon multiply his conceptions and his 
 terms beyond the powers of numbers to express. But he must have 
 the data, or some stock, to trade upon. 
 
 Hoses tells us that God called the animals in Paradise around 
 Adam, and that he tried Adam’s skill in speech, by requiring him to 
 give names to them. He gave them names; and we are told that 
 Adam’s nomenclature was correct. But we can trace the phenomenon 
 of language up to the root, although we cannot, on philosophic prin¬ 
 ciples account for the origin of language. We find in Europe twenty- 
 seven languages; and by tracing them up, we find that they ard 
 kindred branches from three roots; that these three roots of European 
 languages are scions of one single stock is highly probable, and that 
 this root was Hebrew. Whether this root was Hebrew or some other 
 eastern language is more matter of philological curiosity than of 
 importance to our argument. But there can be no question that all 
 languages are traceable up to the same fountain.. 
 
 In the nomenclature of animals respect was had to the qualities oE 
 the animal, therefore the idea of the distinguishing characteristic of the 
 animal must necessarily have existed before the animal itself could 
 have been designated by any specific name. If the Hebrew was not 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 m 
 
 the first language ever spoken, it has, nevertheless, internal evidences 
 of having been predicated upon these primitive elementary princi¬ 
 ples as illustrated in the nomenclature of animals. 
 
 In Hebrew the zoological nomenclature is always analogous to the 
 v characteristic quality of the animal. “Thus the original Hebrew 
 names of many of the beasts and birds of that region are apparently 
 formed by onomatopoeia, or in imitation of their natural cries or notes ? 
 so the general name given to the tamer animals, sheep and kine, 
 was heme , in which sound the lowing of the one, and the bleating of 
 the other, seems to be imitated; so the name of the common ass , orud, 
 and of the wild ass era, resembles their braying. The name of the 
 k raven , oReb, was doubtless taken from its hoarse croaking; of the 
 
 sparrow , tsippor, from its chirping; of the partridge , quera, from 
 the note she uses in calling her young; and the murmur of the turtle¬ 
 dove , is exactly expressed by its Hebrew name tur, and evidently 
 gave rise to it. Many other instances of the kind might be produced; 
 but these are sufficient to show, at least the great probability, that 
 some of the first names given to the several tribes of animals were 
 i derived from their respective notes.’'’ 
 
 But the instances already adduced are sufficient to show, that, in 
 the primitive formation of language, respect was had in the nomen¬ 
 clature of animals, to the analogies and accordance of articulate and 
 inarticulate sounds. But this was not the only plan adopted in the 
 primitive nomenclature of animals. The primeval nomenclators not 
 only took cognizance of the vocal peculiarities of animals, but 
 also of their characteristics. Hence the camel was called girnel , be¬ 
 cause supposed to be of a vindictive temper. A sheep was called 
 rachel, because of its meekness; a ram was called agil , because of 
 its agility; in like manner a goat was called sair from its being 
 hairy. 
 
 Thus they took the vocal and other qualities of animals, and from 
 their observation of tir se they formed their zoological nomenclature. 
 Well, then, the analogical argument goes to prove, and, indeed,, 
 compels us to conclude, that the annexation of the names of God, 
 spirit, angel, altar, priest, sacrifice, &c. must have been posterior to 
 the conception of the spiritual ideas which these terms express. The 
 corollary to be derived from analysing the five senses and this super- 
 added gift of speech, is, that we can neither have ideas concerning 
 spiritual things, nor names, without the aid of immediate and direct 
 revelation; that, without revelation, we could no more conceive of 
 these ideas than we could invent names for them. The child born in 
 France we know, by experience, will acquire the language of that 
 country; the child born in Italy will speak Italian, because they are 
 artificially taught to speak the mother’s language; but if language was 
 natural to man, all children would speak the same language. On the 
 hypothesis that the first pair were created in a state of infancy, or of 
 adolescence, the difficulty concerning the origin of language remains 
 equally inexplicable. 
 
154 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 Children at birth, it is said, have been excluded by circumstances 
 from all access to the sound of the human voice; and after arriving at 
 maturity, it has been discovered that they have no more of the gift of 
 speech than brutes have; and from all the premises before us the con¬ 
 clusion follows out irresistibly that speech is as legitimately the sub¬ 
 ject of divine revelation as religion itself; or to express the conclusion 
 in other words, the inevitable inference is, the idea of God, altar, 
 priest, victim, &c. is older than the names. But two ways only can 
 ideas be communicated; first, by presenting the archetype, or that 
 which produces the idea to the external sense; or, secondly by speech , 
 describing the thing to be revealed or communicated by something 
 already known. Now as the language of a people is the only infalli¬ 
 ble test of their improvement and civilization, so the name of God, 
 altar, priest, victim, found among the most savage tribes of antiquity, 
 incapable of abstract reason or sentimental refinement, is a positive 
 proof that none of them did ever invent the idea. This would be as 
 decisive proof, were all the premises clearly understood, as the dis¬ 
 covery of a gold or silver coin or medal found amongst a people igno¬ 
 rant of metals and their natures, would be, that they w ere not the 
 makers, but the finders or borrowers of this coin. I boldly assert here, 
 and I court objection to the assertion, that every principle of sound 
 -easoning, and all facts and documents in the annals of time, compel 
 ■is to the conclusion that the idea and name of God first entered the 
 fiuman family by revelation. No man ever uttered a sentence more 
 imphilosophic, more contrary to human experience, observation, and 
 fight reason, than Mirabaud, when he declared that savages invented 
 he idea and name of God and spiritual existences. He might as well 
 tave averred that savages, without fire, without a mould, and without 
 metal, made the first gold coins, 
 
 ■/ ■ ■■ • 
 
 Wednesday , April 15, 3 o'clock P. M. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises— 
 
 My friends, I proceeded this forenoon as far as the eighth provision 
 necessary to human happiness: I have, therefore, only to read the 
 eighth and ninth in order to finish all I have before me; and then my 
 friend Mr. Campbell, and myself, may come, perhaps, to closer quar¬ 
 ters. 
 
 [Here Mr. Oicen reads to the end of the Appendix , and his half hour 
 is owf.] 
 
 EIGHTH CONDITION. 
 
 Of release from all superstitious fears , supernatural notions , and 
 
 from the fear of death. 
 
 In the new state of existence all children will be taught to perceive, 
 to investigate, and to compare facts, and to deduce accurate conclu¬ 
 sions, by comparing one fact carefully with another. The founda¬ 
 tion of the human mind will thus rest upon a knowledge of facts all 
 in unison one with another; and, its formation will proceed, day 
 by dav, by adding a clear perception of one law of nature to another, 
 until each mind will thus acquire for itself an increasing standard of 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 15iJ 
 
 truth, which will guard It from youth against the reception of errors 
 of the imagination. In minds thus cultivated superstitious or un¬ 
 natural fears w 7 ill never enter. They will never become so irrational 
 as to iin ne any laws of nature for which they can discover no {act, 
 but they will study to acquire an accurate knowledge of those laws to 
 the extent their minds can investigate them, and knowing, as they 
 will speedily learn, that truth is one throughout the who '3 universe, 
 and that there can be no opposition or contradiction bet /- sen any one 
 -truth and another, their minds will soon attain so much strength and 
 knowledge, that an error will not find admittance therein. 
 
 .Every error, presented to a mind so trained and formed, will be 
 immediately compared with the true ideas already received by the 
 study of facts—of facts the truth of which all are compelled to admit, 
 because they have been previously found, after ihe most severe inves¬ 
 tigation, to be in strict accordance with all the ascertained laws of 
 nature. This comparison wall soon detect its fallacy by showing its 
 opposition to those established facts, or to the unchanging laws of 
 nature; and, in consequence, it will be as impracticable for the mind 
 to give it reception among its true ideas, as for the stomach to receive 
 the most loathsome food, when attempted to be forced into it. 
 
 The human mind w r ill thus become, for the first time since its ex¬ 
 istence, sane and rational; for all the ideas with which it will be 
 filled, wdll be in unison wfith each other; there will be no complexity 
 or confusion among them—all will be harmony within. 
 
 There will be no jarring between natural feelings and imaginary 
 divine commands in direct opposition to those feelings; for it will be 
 known that the natural feelings of the human race are the divine 
 commands, and that whatever is opposed to them is error—is super¬ 
 stition—is an invention of ignorant men, whose class is opposed to 
 the well-being and happiness of mankind, who are trained from their 
 youth to deceive them, to fill them with fear and dread of nonentities, 
 which they describe according to the wildest fancies of the most 
 absurd imagination. 
 
 None of this ignorant and mischievous proceeding will be found 
 in the new state of existence. Nothing that is unknown, or that is 
 incomprehensible to the human faculties, will create any other feel¬ 
 ing than a cheerful confidence; that the best has been, is, and will 
 be done, that the materials of which the universe is composed permit 
 to be done. 
 
 Every aberration of the human intellects will be. at once, detected 
 by the standard of truth, formed in every mind, of a sufficient number 
 of facts, all in unison w ith each other. 
 
 This standard will guard the mind, in the new r state of existence, 
 against the reception of all incongruous notions.and absurd combi¬ 
 nation of ideas. Superstitious and supernatural fears will entirely 
 cease, and all will readily acquire correct ideas relative to the do* 
 composition of ail materials, compounds", and organizations. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 m 
 
 Were it not for the irrational, imaginary notions, which, for nuiu- 1 
 berless ages, the population of the world has been compelled to receive 
 as divine truths, there would be no fear of death among mankind. 
 
 It would become obvious that the materials of which the earth and 
 atmosphere are composed, modified, as they probably are, by the in- 
 fluence of the solar system in which they revolve, are continually 
 undergoing the changes of composition and decomposition according 
 to the fixed laws of nature, which alter not their eternal course, in the 
 Slightest iota, through any of the forms or ceremonies, or wordy 
 wanderings of the human race. 
 
 7 , Are we not justified in saying that it is a necessary law, of all other ; 
 laws of nature, that no change has ever been or can be made in the 
 eternal laws of the universe? That the least change in the laws by 
 which the universal mechanism and chemistry of nature perform 
 their united operations, would create a chaos and confusion that 
 would disturb and destroy its one universal movement that preserves 
 the harmony of all existences? 
 
 Can these laws be rendered variable and uncertain for man, an 
 insect upon an atom, as he exists upon the earth compared to the 
 eternity cf space, with its endless systems of suns and planets, 
 revolving, sphere beyond sphere, unchanged and probably unchange¬ 
 able? No! the composition and decomposition upon the earth, when 
 viewed without the vanity and presumption arising from ignorance of 
 the laws of nature, will be found to differ not in man from any other 
 vegetable or animal compound. He is composed of the self-same 
 materials, and he is again decomposed, and becomes part of the 
 general mass from which every earthly compound continues to be 
 termed. 
 
 And this is a law of impartiality a*nd justice, which, when it shall 
 be fully comprehended, w r ill lead, not only to universal charity in 
 practice from man to man throughout the globe; but it will fiil him 
 with benevolent and kind feelings for all that has life—it will give 
 him, in fact, a fellow-feeling for all that exists around him. 
 
 He will know that he is perpetually changing particles of his own 
 existence with all objects among which he moves, whether animate 
 or inanimate. He will, therefore, avoid giving unnecessary pain to 
 any thing that has life. The worm and the insect are his kinsfolk; 
 they are from the same original stock of materials, and in the next 
 decomposition will unite again as children of the same origin, pro¬ 
 ceeding from one common parent, who is aline interested in the 
 general happiness of every being formed from the universal mass 
 from whence all come, and into which all return. 
 
 No! man is not an exception to the general laws of nature; lie is 
 born and he dies, and “the place which knew him, knows him no 
 more” 
 
 There is not one single fact, except in a slight extension of some 
 of the same faculties, different in the formation and decomposition 
 
 man,, from any. other earthly compound and decompositionand 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 when men shall be disabused, on this subject, they will be great 
 gainers in practice. 
 
 They will no longer vainly expend their time and faculties upon 
 imaginary future existences which belong not to their nature; but 
 they will at once apply themselves, heart and soul, to make a para¬ 
 dise of their present abode, that each generation in succession may 
 enjoy it continually without any ignorant fears for the future, except 
 that of creating some permanent cause of misery during their lives; 
 such as slavery, cruel and unjust laws, or irrational institutions and 
 customs, to inflict punishment on their progeny; or, in other words, 
 on that which constituted part of themselves, and for which they 
 would have, if rightly instructed, a fellow-feeling. 
 
 This view of our existence is similar to the desire we hate been 
 taught to have to provide abundantly for our children and immediate 
 descendants. 
 
 The latter is now an ignorant and selfish desire, created by ay 
 artificial state of society, while the other will evince a true know¬ 
 ledge of human nature'and generate dispositions of unbounded love 
 and charity—not in words, but in practice, for the whole hitman 
 race, present and future. 
 
 This view of human nature will put an end to the pride, vanity, 
 and selfishness of individuals Mid families; it will destroy all notions 
 of superstition and of unknown supernatural agencies, until some 
 tangible and consistent facts respecting their existence, if they do 
 exist, shall be acquired. Anc. more especially of their interference 
 in human affairs in opposition to the unerring laws of nature. 
 
 It will also annul all the unreasonable fears of death, or of our\ 
 accidental or natural decomposition, which are now so unwisely in¬ 
 stilled into the minds of children, almost as soon as they can be made 
 to receive these injurious impressions. Man is thus made a mental 
 coward, and filled with all manner of fears of the imagination, against 
 which he knows not how to defend himself. lie is thus made so weak 
 and irrational, that he continually torments himself and others through 
 life, without producing any counteracting benefit. 
 
 Instead of being thus abused in childhood, he ought to be taught 
 from infancy the plain truth on this, as well as upon wery other 
 subject. 
 
 He would then know what to expect, and he would be always 
 without fear or dread of any kind, prepared for that change which 
 all nature undergoes; and his happiness, during life, would not be 
 disturbed with apprehensions and fears of what would become of 
 him after decomposition. 
 
 He would comprehend the truth, upon this subject, the whole truth, 
 and nothing but the truth, and in consequence, his mind would bo 
 firm and sane at all times; he would be free to act, without a selfish 
 motive, what the world now calls a noble and generous part to ail hs 
 fellow-beings, but which conduct would then become the common 
 practice of the human race. 
 
 r 
 
 n 
 
158 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 NINTH CONDITION. 
 
 Of a state of society, in which all its laics , institutions, and customs shall 
 
 be in accordance with the laws of human nature , or with the divine 
 
 laws by which man is formed and governed. 
 
 Any society in which the laws of man have been made to oppose 
 the divine laws of his nature, must, of necessity, exist in a state of 
 continued crime, disunion, and misery. 
 
 All societies of men have been so formed, that at this day they all 
 exist in crime, disunion and misery. In all of them the divine laws 
 of nature have been misunderstood, or disregarded, and men have 
 busied themselves in vain, in devising artificial laws to alter their un- 
 ohangeble nature, and improve the work of a power beyond their fac¬ 
 ulties to comprehend. 
 
 It is evidently the whole duty of man for his own sake, and for the 
 benefit of his race, to find out the laws of his nature, that he may 
 first know what manner of being he is, and then form all his institu¬ 
 tions to be in strict accordance with these divine laws. He will then 
 by the natural progress of knowledge, bring about a new state of ex¬ 
 istence, in which the duty, the interest, and inclination of all will 
 be, at all times, one and the same feeling. In which all will possess, 
 in security and without opposition from any quarter, a full supply, at 
 all times, of whatever is essential to the happiness of human life. 
 
 Under the supposition that these principles are as true, and their 
 practice as beneficial as I have stated, it becomes a question of per¬ 
 manent interest, to know how this change—a change greater than all 
 which have preceded it—can be accomplished, not only without in¬ 
 jury to any, but with permanent advantage to all. To me it appears 
 that this change can be effected, the most easily, by the union, in the 
 first instance, of some of the leading governments, and of the heads of 
 the chief sects of religion, in the adoption of general measures to di¬ 
 rect the new arrangements upon an extensive scale; but in a manner 
 so gradual, that no shock shall be given to the interests or feelings of 
 any portion of society. And, in forming these arrangements, no at¬ 
 tempt should be permitted to be made to displace the individuals who 
 are at the head, or who administer any of the existing governments. 
 
 No member of any church should he deprived, during his life, of 
 the support and emoluments which he now derives from it. No one 
 deriving his support from other professions should be in any degree 
 curtailed in the advantages which he derives from his present station 
 in them. No one employed in any business should be called upon 
 or expected to do more than his present occupation requires him to 
 perform. No one shall be required .to do any thing contrary to his 
 former habits. 
 
 It is unnecessary that any of these evils should arise or be allowed 
 to take place, because, there is power in society, which, when direct¬ 
 ed, will be found much more than sufficient to supply all the wants 
 and wishes of mankind, without it being necessary to adopt any of 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 160 
 
 those temporary evils, or in any degree to diminish the small portion 
 of happiness, which, under, the existing systems, had fallen to the lot 
 of any individual. 
 
 The unused and misdirected powers of society, are far more than 
 sufficient to satisfy the wishes of all mankind, as soon as they shall 
 learn what is requisite to make them happy; and shall know what 
 it is their interest to desire, and the best means to obtain and secure it. 
 
 Thus have I endeavored to sketch the outline of the causes of the 
 past and present errors, and evils among men; to deduce the princi¬ 
 ples of human nature from facts which change not, but which remain 
 the “same yesterday, to-day, and forever;” to show how those princi¬ 
 ples may be beneficially applied to practice, for the advantage of man¬ 
 kind, and how this change may be gradually effected throughout so¬ 
 ciety without injury to any individual of any class, sect, party, or 
 country .—[Half hour out .] 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—1 did not know that in undertaking to encounter 
 Mr. Owen with controversial weapons I was to combat with a divine 
 iy. I did not know that his twelve laws were to he received and inter¬ 
 preted as divine revelations. He has claimed the power of forgiving 
 us and himself all sins, originating; in his own singular and eccentric 
 course during the whole prosecution of this argument. He has laid 
 claim to the.high attribute of understanding the secrets of all hearts. 
 He says that his facts and premises are of a dignity and high import 
 that none of us are able to comprehend; and seems to insinuate that 
 there are as many mysteries and incomprehensibilities in the new 
 revelation which he promulgates, as in the old one, which we have 
 all been taught to receive. 
 
 But, with all due deference to Mr. Owen’s new light of revelation, 
 I must protest against the liberties which he takes with our oracles. 
 He seems to be very fond of quoting from them. This must proceed 
 either from a desire to mislead us by passing off these sentences as ex¬ 
 pressive of his meaning in the commonly received sense of them, or 
 from his conviction that there is no book so eloquent and sublime as 
 the Bible, and thus directly compliments the book which he opposes. 
 
 I did expect, in this contest, to have had to encounter the much 
 boasted reason of the sceptics. In their zealous adoration of reason, 
 sceptics have ridiculed us as mere dupes for revering the light of the 
 sacred volume. 1 did expect that argument, deduction, reason, proof, 
 the most exact and philosophic definitions, and. the most minute 
 analysis of the physical and intellectual man, would have been 
 adduced by my opponent in this discussion. I was expecting to meet 
 this formidable array of controversial forces; but, to my utter as¬ 
 tonishment, I have not yet been encountered by a single syllogism. 
 So far my opponent has offered us neither logical premises nor con¬ 
 clusions. Well, perhaps, we must overlook all this, and anticipate 
 a new order of things. I have regretted the necessity of introducing 
 the argument which I have nearly brought to a close, because it is 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 TOO 
 
 Neither adapted to the taste nor apprehension of a popular assembly--. 
 But I have been obliged to be somewhat abstract in these disquisitions 
 because the scope of the debate seems to require it, and the debate 
 itself is contemplated to be matter of record. It is only after the 
 whole premises are submitted to calm and dispassionate reading, that 
 you can form a correct estimate of the validity of each argument. 
 1 should, therefore, never have thought of introducing an argument 
 of this abstract character before this assembly, did I not expect the 
 whole to be published, and the grounds on which the cause of eter*- 
 nal truth is to be placed against the fancies and cavils of distempered 
 minds, fairly laid before the youth of this generation. 
 
 In introducing an argument like this in a popular assembly, we 
 have to imitate the pedagogue who first teaches the alphabet in order 
 to give his pupil the art of reading. We have to adduce the alphabet 
 of mental philosophy in order to lead you to relish and apprehend the 
 truth of our reasonings upon our external senses, and mental faculties. 
 Butin purely abstract and philosophic topics this course must be pur¬ 
 sued. I must, then, go over the ground which I have taken in this 
 •argument, so far as it has been prosecuted, with the hope that if Mr. 
 Owen will not take notice of any issue that may be tendered to him, 
 some other person may present me with some solid objections, in 
 order that these premises may be tested thoroughly by fair and logical 
 arguments. We have, then, endeavored to show, by a very brief an¬ 
 alysis of our senses, that we can have no simple ideas except those 
 derived through sensation and reflection; that the powers of the mind 
 in ail its operations are confined to ideas and impressions, acquired 
 ly perception and consciousness; that although we may compound 
 and remodify almost ad injimtum , we cannot originate an idea entirely 
 new, We have shown that speech is neither natural to man, nor the 
 invention bf man; that infants must be taught to speak by a slow and 
 regular process; that names are applied to things and ideas in conse¬ 
 quence of the pre-existence of the ideas in the mind; that the idea 
 must always necessarily precede the name, and that we have ex peri-, 
 mental proof from infants, from those born deaf and subsequently 
 restored to hearing. And here I will remark, for the sake of illustra¬ 
 tion, that no infant has ever been known to speak any language but 
 that which it has been taught, nor to attempt to give a name to 
 any thing till some mother, nurse, or other instructer, has desig¬ 
 nated that thing by its appropriate name to tbe child. I have stated 
 that it was universal!) known that a man bom deaf could never be 
 taught to speak until His deafness was removed, because the power of 
 speech can only be acquired by the ear, and not by any other organ; 
 that if it were natural to man to express himself in language, and 
 give names to ideas and sensible objects, all men would attempt this, 
 the untaught, as well as those who have been taught to speak. In 
 the philosophical transactions of several European and American 
 societies there are instances on record of persons born deaf, being 
 brought to hearing after they had attained the age of twenty-five or 
 thirty, and then taught the use of speech. These persons have been 
 
Qi 
 
 Interrogated whether, previously to their restoration to the faculty 
 
 of hearing and their acquisition of the power of speech, they had 
 
 ever, from their observations on the visible universe, derived any 
 
 idea of an invisible Creator; and, unavoce , they have declared that 
 
 V such an idea never entered their imaginations. This tangible fact 
 
 is to be found in the records of all the cases in which this cure has 
 
 been performed. 
 
 * 
 
 This is the only experiment that is possible to make in a case of 
 this kind; for we cannot find a human being possessed of a full or¬ 
 ganization, whose mind has not in some way or other been enlight¬ 
 ened on this subject by tradition. We cannot find a man perfectly 
 in a state of nature, who never heard the sound of any human voice 
 but his own. If we could, he might be a fit subject to experiment upon, 
 after teaching him the use of speech. This is all the proof that the 
 nature of the argument requires or directs, and it must be by this time 
 logically established in the minds of those who can appreciate the 
 argument. It has been presumed that we might arrive at the idea of 
 a first cause by a process of reasoning a posteriori; but there is a 
 palpable petitio principii in this argument, since it assumes that the 
 material world is an effect, and if an effect it must have a cause , which 
 is the very position to be proved. So far reason and experience cor¬ 
 respond with revelation. I rest a very important point of the argu¬ 
 ment here—for if this be argument and not fallacy, (and I wish to hear 
 all objections to the argument,) then Paul’s was an axiomatic truth; 
 “By faith we are assured that the universe was made by the word of 
 Ood.” lie does not say by reason , observe, but by faith. No Chris¬ 
 tian can demur to a mode of reasoning which has for its object the 
 establishing a conviction of the truth of what Paul says, when he af¬ 
 firms that by faith ire know the universe was made by the word of God , 
 when he affirms that the world by philosophy never knew God. Third¬ 
 ly, we have further proved from the analysis cf our intellectual 
 powers, that faith or belief is not more necessary or independent of 
 our volition than knowdedge and experience. This a very capital 
 point of the argument, and goes to subvert the whole of my opponent’s 
 theory of faith. Faith, then, I say, has been proved to be as depend- 
 ent on volition as knowledge or experience; because all the faculties 
 employed in examining evidence and acquiring knowledge are sub¬ 
 ject to .our volitions. The moment I determine to push my investi¬ 
 gation into any department ofknowledge of which I am ignorant, that 
 moment I summon my energies to the work. The moment testimony 
 is presented to me, I call all my faculties to the examination of that 
 testimony; and my volition is just as operative in my examination of 
 testimony, as it is in my researches into any favorite department of 
 science. Such then is the argument which I have submitted to you 
 as deduced from these premises. We may now naturally lead you as 
 we proposed, to the direct evidences of the positi ve truth of revelation, 
 a duty which I hoped to have been called to at the onset. 
 
 My friend and I have been sailing in company so long, and have 
 at last arrived where wc can bring our artillery to bear against each 
 
 14* 
 
 
 Jfc* 
 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 161 
 
102 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 other. I have just now arrived at the point upon which I did suppose all 
 the merits of this controversy were to rest. But while speaking on 
 the incapacity of the human mind to originate ideas entirely new, I 
 cannot pretermit this opportunity of illustrating a theory, common, I 
 believe, to both Christians and sceptics, by a reference to my friend’s 
 proceedings. We have, then, asserted that the human faculties have 
 not the power of originating any thing new, and Mr. Owen’s social 
 theory corroborates the assertion. I would, therefore, ask Mr. Owen 
 to answer this question, Did he, or did he not, some forty years ago, 
 originate this theory from his own observation of human nature; or 
 was it not suggested to him by the circumstances which Christi¬ 
 anity threw around him in Scotland? That his theory originated in 
 the religious circumstances at that time existing in Lanark, we have 
 ' good reason to believe. It was the Christian benevolence of Mr. Dale 
 which prompted him to invent a plan for the education of the children 
 of the poor. By instituting a system of co-operation, Mr. Dale was 
 enabled to sustain five hundred poor children at one time, who were 
 collected in the manufactories, which he controlled, and were there 
 maintained and educated by his philanthropy. And to these circum¬ 
 stances, instituted by Mr. Dale, is Mr. Owen indebted for the origina¬ 
 tion of his new views of society. And this is another proof that we 
 can only acquire the knowledge of new things from things already 
 known. 
 
 We come now, in the regular prosecution of this subject, to the 
 consideration of an innate power in human nature. I do not know 
 that i am able to designate thi*j power by its appropriate name; but 
 there is a native, inherent power in human nature of believing upon 
 testimony. This power is sometimes called credulity , which is as 
 inherent in the infant mind as any other faculty. Now, upon this 
 credulity, are predicated all systems of instruction. Were it not for 
 ibis innate principle of credulity in human nature, there could be 
 no docility in children. Were it not that they have the power of 
 receiving instruction upon testimony from their teachers, all intellec¬ 
 tual ‘improvability would be impracticable. And here commences the 
 line of demarcation between mere animal instinct and the intellectual 
 progressi. f :;ss of man. lie is by nature a progressive animal, and 
 there is no ne plus ultra in his intellectual progress. But all this 
 boundless improvalidity in man has its source in his credulity. If he 
 had not the power of believing what his parents and all others who 
 may stand in a didactic relation to him, instruct him in, it would be 
 as impossible to fructify his mind, as it would be to teach a goat to 
 speak. This power, by whatever name it may be called, is, in its 
 operations, ihe most gigantic moral power with which man has been 
 endowed. Now the theory of my opponent pretermits and keeps out 
 of view this important faculty of human nature;—he has not predi¬ 
 cated a single one of his facts upon it. Nay, lie has had the temerity 
 to affirm that the only use of authority was to give countenance and 
 support to that which was false and erroneous. I believe my friend 
 volunteered this eccentric affirmative proposition, because he was well 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 m 
 
 aware that the faculty of believing or disbelieving the verity of 
 facts as reported, is the principle germ of improvability in man. To 
 this diet are we indebted for almost all we know. If Mr. Owen could 
 erase from the tablet of his mind all that he has acquired upon the 
 testimony of others—if it were possible for him to be deprived of a 
 native inherent faculty, which is inalienable from his nature, and to 
 be made dependent for his acquisitions of knowledge exclusively upon 
 his own observation and experience, he would not have one idea for 
 ten thousand which he now has, and for which he is indebted to his 
 power of belief upon testimony. Here is no exaggeration. If the 
 difference could be computed, it is probable I should be found to have 
 fallen short, of the mark. There is not a savage “running wild in 
 the woods,” untutored and untamed, who does not owe more of his 
 information to the faculty of receiving truth upon testimony, than to 
 all the experience of his life multiplied by thousands. What is the 
 legitimate import of the term experience! Experience is neither more 
 nor less than another name for memory. 
 
 Suppose I should, by some accident, some concussion of th© brain, 
 be deprived of the faculty of memory , what would my experience be 
 worth after I had forgotten all that I had ever heard, seen,- read, or 
 acted? And yet this experience is the mighty engine by which my 
 friend expects to overturn every thing predicated on testimony!!*■—• 
 [Half hour out.] 
 
 * While reading over my debate with Mr. Owen, which I see is a 
 gooddeal in the style of my extemporaneous harangues—a good many 
 unnecessary repetitions and a too great diffuseness in the argument, 
 (though I hope this defect will be advantageous to the common reader 
 as it will keep the argument longer before his mind, and relieve him 
 from much abstract thinking.) I discover what I call a more forcible 
 proof of the argument against the dcistical notion of natural religion, 
 or the supposed power we have to originate the idea of God, spirit, 
 angels, heaven, a future state, &c. I gave one forcible proof, as I 
 think, in merely asking Mr. Owen to originate the idea of a sixth sense . 
 This, I think, is an irresistible proof, that the human mind, however 
 cultivated, has not the power of originating an idea entirely new. But 
 perhaps the following puzzle will carry conviction farther and deep¬ 
 er than any r argument yet adduced upon this subject. 
 
 We know three worlds—one by" sense, and two by faith—I say we 
 are in possession of ideas concerning three worlds: the present ma¬ 
 terial world, possessing, as we now think, various combinations of 
 forty elements. This is the mundane system. The other two worlds 
 are Heaven and Hell , or a state of future bliss, and future woe. Be¬ 
 sides these, from some expressions found in the scriptures, concerning 
 the intermediate state from death to the resurrection, some have fan¬ 
 cied a state called Purgatory. This is, however, onlv in part fanci- 
 f il, because there is a state of separation of spirit and body, which 
 was the data for this idea. But now I ask all the atheists and scep¬ 
 tics, of every name, to fancy any other'world—a fourth world—and 
 
184 
 
 DEBATE 
 
 Mr. Owen rises— 
 
 I wish to have the official copy of the points of debate, that I ira^ 
 adhere strictly to them. 
 
 [Mr. Campbell hands the document to Mr. Owen .] 
 
 My friends, I deem it the first duty of those who are contending 
 only for the truth, to concede every thing they possibly can to an 
 opponent. I therefore most readily concede to Mr. Campbell that 
 the Christian religion was the foundation of the social system.— 
 When I was very young I was very religious. At 7, 8, 9, and up to 
 10 years of age, I only read what are called good books. But at ten 
 years of age 1 became convinced, from these books, that there was 
 error somewhere. I discovered so much contradiction between dif¬ 
 ferent religions, and between the various sects of the same religion, 
 that I became convinced there was some great error pervading the 
 whole subject. I was very desirous to distinguish truth from error, 
 and studied, with great industry, for the three followingyears, that is, 
 until I was thirteen years old, with a determination, forced upon me 
 by my early impressions, to find, if possible, a religion that was true. 
 But the more I read and reflected, the more errors and mistakes I 
 discovered in religion, and, therefore, the more I differed from Chris¬ 
 tianity and all other religions; until, at length, I was compelled, sorely 
 against my will, to believe Christianity and all religions to be found¬ 
 ed in error. There was no relation, no congrukv between them and 
 facts—between what they taught, and what I knew and felt to be true. 
 
 to give us a single idea of it, not borrowed, in whole or in part, from 
 the three already known. If, with all the intellect, which science and 
 philosophy have given them, they cannot do this, how, in the name 
 of common sense, can they say that savages, when they had but this 
 globe, or a knowledge of one world, could originate two others? If but 
 two worlds, Earth and Heaven, had yet been known, without revelation, 
 it would have been just as difficult to have originated a third, as it is 
 now to originate a fourth. If then, any sceptic, deist, or atheist, in these 
 United States, will tell me what a sixth sense or a fourth world would 
 be, I will then concede that this philosophic argument is not con¬ 
 clusive; till then I must think that it is—-till then I must think that it 
 exterminates every system of scepticism in the world. Here I must 
 retort upon all atheists in away which their own system teaches me: 
 You, gentlemen, deny that there is what we call a Creator, and that 
 you are creatures. But, in truth, you give to man all the powers we 
 give to God; you believe and teach that we Christians have created 
 two worlds out of nothing and filled them with inhabitants. The athe¬ 
 ists, for their K bodies and souls, (ifthey have any} cannot get along with 
 their own system without a creator. They give to Christians all the 
 attributes which Christians give to God. They sav that we Christians 
 have created two worlds out of nothing, and have filled them with in¬ 
 habitants, by the mere strength of our omnipotent imaginations!! If 
 this be not good logic, on their premises, I will consent to go to school 
 again. Will some of the club show us that the conclusion is illogical ?* 
 
debate; 
 
 Therefore, Mr. Campbell’s surmise that the Christian religion was 
 the foundation of this system is perfectly correct: but it was not 
 founded in the truth of the Christian religion. 
 
 Finding that no religion was based upon facts, but that'all of then; 
 were in opposition to facts, and could not therefore be true; I began 
 to reflect upon what must be the condition of mankind, trained from 
 infancy to believe in these errors, and to make them the rule of their 
 conduct. I argued thus with myself: As I am very certain that re¬ 
 ligion is not true, therefore something else must be true, and it is 
 highly important to discover what it is. With a view to this disco¬ 
 very I read five hours per day for twenty-five years, until I believe I 
 collected all the facts which are of value on these subjects, in the 
 English language, during a great part of the latter period, exclusively 
 under the influence of an oarnest, honest, ardent desire to discover 
 and elicit the truth. I knew that there were certain facts and deduc¬ 
 tions from them, upon which all parties were agreed. I thought it. 
 therefore, highly probable that those points on which all parties had 
 agreed*were true; and these I recollected for the sake of reference 
 and comparison. But when I came to an idea that was riot in unison 
 or accordance with them, I felt myself, as a lover of truth, bound to 
 examine it carefully, because I very early discovered that truth was 
 always consistent with itself. If, therefore, I found, by close investi¬ 
 gation and extensive comparison, that the new idea to be examined 
 was in strict consistency and congruity with the other truths previ¬ 
 ously received into my mind, it was added to the original store. And 
 thus I went on with great diligence and perseverance, until I had 
 collected a great stock of ideas, all in unison with each other. And 
 it is from this stock of ideas, and from no other source, that I have 
 been enabled to discover the ignorance in which we and our ancestors 
 have been trained. I did not go into Scotland until seventeen years 
 after my mind had passed through the greater part of this process. 
 I was a thorough sceptic for seventeen years before my removal to 
 Scotland. In regard to Mr. Dale, there never was, perhaps, a man 
 of kinder or more benevolent feelings. After I was his son-in-law we 
 became very intimately acquainted with each other’s real views and 
 feelings. Our objects were precisely the same; but, by the differ¬ 
 ence of our organization and circumstances, we were compelled to 
 fake different roads to obtain them. I admired ins character and 
 conduct, and I believe he had a great regard and affection for me; 
 tor, in his last illness, he was desirous to receive his medicine and 
 chief attendance from me, although he well knew how much I differ¬ 
 ed from him on the subject of religion, and although he had a number 
 of religious friends about him. But this is a digression produced by 
 Mr. Campbell’s observations. 
 
 My organization, no doubt, differs in some degree from others; and 
 certainly the circumstances which have acted upon that organization 
 have been most peculiar. I do not know to what extent my organiza¬ 
 tion differs from others; but the circumstances in which I have been 
 placed, acting upon this organization, have been the causes which 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 166 
 
 have produced all the occurrences and proceedings of my life, and my 
 character and conduct, such as it has always been, before the world. 
 
 But to come to the point. I have stated that there are twelve 
 fundamental laws of nature not derived from any authority whatever, 
 but from facts which I defy all the world to disprove. Mr. Campbell 
 admits that these facts are true, but contends that they do not contra¬ 
 vene or oppose the faith and doctrine of Christianity. Well, if my 
 friend can convince me that there is no contradiction or discrepancy 
 between these twelve laws and Christianity, I shall then become a 
 Christian indeed.- But to me, with such ability as I possess—with all 
 the power of attention and discrimination which I can exercise on the 
 subject, no two things ever did appear more strongly contrasted and 
 opposed to each other than these twelve laws and Christianity—to me 
 they appear to be perfect antipodes to each other. If my friend Mr. 
 Campbell can reconcile them, it is more than I can do. I shall listen 
 with patience and great interest to the proofs which he may adduce 
 on this point; because if he can prove that there exists no discrepan¬ 
 cy between the two systems, he necessarily will make me achfristian. 
 My present conviction is, that these twelve la\ys of human nature 
 differ, toto ccdo , from Christianity—that these twelve laws demon¬ 
 strate, in the clearest manner, that all the religions of the world are 
 founded in the ignorance of man with regard to himself—that all the 
 religions of the world are therefore, Mr. Campbell, [turning round to 
 kiwi ] directly opposed to the never-changing laws of our nature—that 
 there is not the remotest connexion or affinity between these twelve 
 laws and any religion existing on the face of the globe—that, on the 
 contrary, all religions are in direct opposition to them—that these 
 laws, when rightly understood, and fully and fairly carried into 
 practice, will produce “p eace on earth and good will to man;” will 
 create a new state of society, in which every individual composing it 
 shall be simple and virtuous in his habits, highly intelligent, possess¬ 
 ing the best dispositions, and enjoying the highest degree of human 
 felicity. 
 
 I do say farther, that these religions are now the only obstacles 
 which oppose themselves to the formation of a society over the earth 
 of virtue, intelligence, and charity in its most extensive sense, and 
 of sincerity and kindness amongst the whole human family. These 
 are my general deductions from the premises before us. Were I to 
 go into all the detail, I fear I should occupy too much of your time; 
 for I have as much of these details to bring forward as would occupy 
 your time for a fortnight, were I alone to speak. These details all 
 go to show, step by step, throughout their whole progress, how in¬ 
 jurious all your religions are to yourselves—that they cause you and 
 your children to continue like your ancestors in total ignorance of 
 yourselves, and that they involve you in every kind of disunion which 
 generates the worst feelings and passions, and creates all those little 
 under currents of misery with which we are all but too familiar. 
 
 But we shall now bring this discussion within a narrower compass. 
 £ have stated these twelve laws as succinctly and distinctly as words 
 
DEBATE 
 
 16? 
 
 tor that purpose occur to me. Now, if Mr. Campbell will only show 
 me that one, or all, or any, or either of these laws are contrary to fact, 
 or in unison with Christianity—from that time forth he makes me a 
 Christian! 
 
 Now it will be Mr. Campbell’s duty to prove either that these twelve 
 laws of human nature are not derived from facts, and in unison there¬ 
 with, or he must prove that these laws and Christianity are one and 
 indivisible.. I take it for granted that Mr. Campbell gives up all other 
 religions except the Christian. But were I to go to any other country 
 with my challenge, I could find no champion willing to defend any 
 but his own; therefore, I can only be met formidably by the religion 
 of the region or district where they happen to be. I should be told in 
 one district, ‘We will not contend with you for the truth of the reli¬ 
 gion taught by Confucius, by Moses, or by Mahomet; but we will 
 contend with you to the death for the divine truth of that holy religion 
 which has been delivered to us of this district and to our fathers from 
 time immemorial.’ The attachment of the inhabitants of the different 
 regions of the earth to their respective religions seems to be but a 
 mere local kind of attachment. When asked why they believe their 
 peculiar religion to be the only true one, they reply, ‘Because we 
 have been born in this part of the world, and have been taught that 
 we ought so to believe.’ At present I shall say no more, having placed 
 the matter thus plainly before you. Mr. Campbell has now a fair 
 opportunity to prove that these twelve laws are not based upon facts, 
 or being founded in truth that they are in unison with Christianity. 
 I do think it would be unfair to ask Mr. Campbell to proceed forthwith 
 in reply to the mass of matter which has been presented; that I ought 
 to put my document into his hands and allow him ample time to digest 
 and refute it. Mr. Campbell has now either to lose his cause alto¬ 
 gether, or to make me a Christian. 
 
 In reply to a dictum ^rom the Chair , Mr. Owen said — 
 
 I willingly adopt the suggestion from the Chair, and shall proceed 
 to-morrow to demonstrate the opposition between Christianity and 
 these facts, although Mr. Campbell ought, as he engaged, to show 
 their accordance with each other, 
 
 Mb. Campbell rises. 
 
 I am glad there is now a probability of coming to close quarters 
 with my friend and opponent. 
 
 [Here the Honorable Chairman rose and staled , the impression of 
 the Board to be , that the affirmative of the proposition now in debate 
 rests with Mr. Owen. Unless he make out the affirmative that his facts 
 arc irreconcileablc to the Christian religion , he fails to establish fiis 
 proposition. The bare proof or admission of the twelve facts by no 
 means establish the proposition of Mr. Owen . It is one thing to lay 
 down facts and prove them to be true , and another thing to ascertain 
 the legitimate results from these facts. Mr. Owen succeeds but in part 
 when he proves his facts. If the argument were to be suspended , Mr. 
 Owen’s proposition would not be sustained Holding the affirmative of 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 tm 
 
 ifie proposition, Mr, Owen's onus probandi is not only to show that his 
 facts are true, but that they are irreconcileable to Christianity and all 
 other religions assumed to be veritable systems.] 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—I accord with this view of the Board, and shall 
 proceed to-morrow to demonstrate the discrepancies between Christi¬ 
 anity and these twelve facts. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises again. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—In the mean time I ask to be indulged with per¬ 
 mission to prosecute the argument which I have thus far introduced. 
 When I sat down I had got to the position that all the experience of 
 man amounted to no more than his memory; but to be under¬ 
 
 stood sub modo. When I defined experience thus, I meaht to exclude 
 every particle of knowledge derived from faith in testimony. I 
 meant personal experience in the strictest sense, and had reference 
 only to the precise quantum of information to be accquired by individ¬ 
 uality of experience. But as we have advanced thus far towards the 
 true point on which Christianity is predicated, I deem it important to 
 aid my opponent by adducing facts, additional to his twelve, in evi¬ 
 dence of the verity of the Christian religion. I require the concession 
 of only one postulatum in order to establish the verity of the Chris¬ 
 tian religion. That postulate I will couch in the following terms—- 
 The Christian religion, as well as the Jewish, is predicated upon 
 certain matters of fact—or rather these religions being predicated 
 upon certain matters of fact, it follows that, if these facts be true, 
 the whole system of the Christian religion must be true. Well, then, 
 my postulate is, that the Christian religion, as well as the Jewish, 
 being predicated upon matters of fact, it follows, logically, that, if 
 these facts are proved to be true, .the religions predicated upon them 
 are thereby demonstrated to be equally true. In producing our deduc¬ 
 tions concerning the truth of Christianity, it is necessary first of all 
 to have respect to the Jewish religon. This is not an inquiry into 
 any matter of abstract, or philosophical, or mathematical, or political 
 speculation. The seven sciences have nothing at all to do ■ with it. 
 The subject of inquiry is now, What is or is not matter of fact? We 
 are fully warranted in premising that the question concerning the 
 verity of Christianity is exclusively a question of fact, to be tried by 
 all the rules of evidence which govern our decision upon any question 
 ©f historical fact derived from times of equal antiquity. We contend 
 that every faculty of mind and every mode of reasoning that can he 
 brought to bear upon any question of fact, may be legitimately 
 exercised upon all Jthe facts connected with the Christian religion. 
 Let us then adduce these facts. 
 
 In the first place it is recorded that in the days of Moses the 
 children of Israel amounted to six hundred thousand fighting men 
 exclusive of the old men, the females, and the children; most pro¬ 
 bably the whole Jewish population at that period did not fall short 
 of two millions. At any rate we have the fact that six hundred 
 thousand fighting men passed out of Egypt and walked fhrough the 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 im 
 
 lied Sea; that they reached Mount Sinai; that there they saw a 
 visible manifestation of Deity; that they heard his voice proclaim 
 the decalogue; that they were fed with manna in the wilderness for 
 forty years; that they had a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire 
 by night, to guide them through the wilderness; that they were fed 
 with quails, and drank limpid water from a rock of flint, smitten by 
 the rod of Moses; and that they passed through the river Jordan as 
 over dry land. These are the matters of fact which constitute the 
 foundation of the Jewish religion. And these being proved to be 
 matters of fact, it follows that the religion predicated upon them is 
 true. I presume that my friend and opponent would admit that if it 
 were proved to him that these six hundred thousand men passed 
 through the Red Sea as over dry land—heard the voice of God, and 
 witnessed the awful symbols of his presence from Mount Sinai—that 
 they gathered manna in the wilderness—drank the living water which 
 issued from the rock smitten by the rod of Moses—passed through 
 the refluent waters of Jordan—I presume, I say, that all these things 
 being proved to my opponent to be facts, he would admit, without 
 scruple, that the religion built upon them is true . 
 
 Now I do assert that of the verity of these facts we have every 
 species of evidence that human reason requires, that the most scep¬ 
 tical mind could require upon any other subject of equal antiquity, 
 or that the nature of the case permits to be adduced in attestation of 
 the verity, of undent historic facts. I have asserted that we have 
 every species of evidence of the Verity of these facts, and of this 
 religion, that right reason requires. In order to prove these facts, 
 we must lay down certain criteria by which we are enabled to de¬ 
 cide with certainty upon all questions of historic fact. In the first 
 place, then, you will observe that we have certain criteria by which 
 we are enabled to discriminate between the truth and fallacy of 
 testimony; and it is our every day practice, in the ordinary concerns 
 of life, to avail ourselves of these criteria. . We do not believe every 
 thing without scruple. We are often glad of the opportunity of exa¬ 
 mining oral and written testimony, and we generally find some way to 
 elicit the truth or detect the fallacy of certain reported facts. These 
 criteria , when applied to any reported fact, force us to the conclusion 
 that it is either true or false. Were it not for these criteria^ by which 
 we are enabled to appreciate the value of testimony, we would, in the 
 ordinary intercourse of society, be liable to constant deceptions, in¬ 
 asmuch as the conscientious speaking of the truth is not the distin¬ 
 guishing virtue of the present age. These criteria are various; but 
 wherever there is a perfect consistency and accordance between the 
 fact reported and the testimony adduced to prove it, conviction of the 
 verity of that fact necessarily follows. In the-first place the consist¬ 
 ency of the testimony with our present experience in matters of this 
 r sort, is a safe criteria wdiereby to test the verity of all matters of 
 ordinary occurrence, i. e. taken in connexion with the character of 
 the reporter, and all the other media through which we receive the 
 testimony. All these are scrutinized in orderio ascertain the truth in 
 
 15 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 ordinary cases; but to Facts encrusted with the venerable rust of anti¬ 
 quity—a rust which has been accumulating for four thousand years— 
 the application of the ordinary criteria of more recent facts would be 
 futile. 
 
 The desideratum is to establish certain criteria which will satisfac¬ 
 torily demonstrate that facts reported to have occurred four thousand 
 years ago are true. And these criteria I now propose to present to 
 you—not the criteria of facts which oecurred yesterday, or to-day: 
 but of facts which transpired four thousand years ago. These criteria , 
 then, are resolvable into four particulars. (And, by the way, we wish 
 any defect or imperfection in these criteria to be designated by any 
 person who can discover it.) First, then, we allege, that, in order 
 to judge with certainty of the truth of facts which occurred so long 
 ago r the facts reported must have been what we call sensible facts; 
 such as the eyes of the spectators and all their other senses might 
 take cognizance of. Secondly, that these sensible alleged facts were 
 exhibited with every imaginable public and popular attestation , and 
 open to the severest scrutiny which their extraordinary character 
 might induce. The facts we are now testing by these two criteria , 
 were, I affirm, in the first place, sensible facts; and secondly^ they 
 were exhibited under circumstances of extraordinary publicity .— 
 Thirdly, that there have been certain momumental and cdmmeinora- 
 live institutions , continuing from that time to the present, as a per¬ 
 petual attestation of these facts-—that each of these observances 
 was instituted in pcrpetuam mShoriam rei. Fourthly^, that these 
 monumental proofs existed simultaneously with the transpiration of 
 the facts which they are intended to perpetuate—that they continue 
 in existence up to the present hour:— 
 
 1. The facts relied upon were sensible facts. 
 
 2. They were facts of remarkable notoriety. 
 
 3. There now exist standing monuments in perpetual commemora¬ 
 tion of these facts. 
 
 Lastly , These commemorative attestations have continued from the 
 very period in which the facts transpired, up to the present time. 
 The facts on which we rely have all these four criteria. I am willing 
 to submit them to all the tests which can be applied to arty other re¬ 
 corded facts of antiquity. And 1 repeat, with a confidence that fears , 
 no refutation, that no fact accompanied with these four criteria, ever 1 
 was proved to be false. Nay, we will demonstrate that no fact which 
 can abide these criteria can be false. 
 
 Let us now come to the prominent facts on which the Jewish 
 religion was first predicated. 1st. I have stated that six hundred 
 thousand men are said to have w T alked through the Red Sea as over 
 dry land, in consequence of Moses’ rod being extended over it; they 
 are said to have stood still upon the opposite shore, whilst the Egy r p- 
 tians their pursuers were drowned by the returning of the waters. 
 The question is, Was this a sensible fact? We will say nothing at 
 present concerning the ten plagues ot Egypt, but will now advert to 
 another fact intimately connected with this subject. On the night 
 
 
 i 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 171 
 
 immediately preceding the departure of the children of Israel out of 
 the land of Egypt, it became necessary, before the hard heart of 
 Pharaoh would relent so far as to let these people go, to send forth a 
 destroying angel, by whom the first-born of the land were slain. This 
 was, most certainly, a sensible fact, of such paramount and engross¬ 
 ing interest as to arouse every sense, and call forth every faculty in 
 the thorough investigation of it. These two facts, to pass over all 
 others, are of the character promised. They are not only sensible 
 facts, but they are facts of a character to take hold of, and to make 
 an indelible impression upon, every faculty and sense belonging to 
 mankind. Well, now, so far these facts correspond with our first 
 criterion.* The next question is, Were they publicly exhibited in 
 open day and in the face of witnesses ? I only propose this question 
 in order to fix your attention. Every man who has heard of these 
 facts, knows that they were exhibited in the face of the most enlight¬ 
 ened realm of antiquity—many of them in the very court of Pharaoh, 
 which was crowded with the greatest statesman and scholars that then 
 existed. The people to be delivered were themselves six hundred 
 thousand in number, each of them individually and deeply interested; 
 so that all the recollections connected with their state of vassalage; 
 all their national feelings of hostility towards their oppressors; in 
 short, every sort of feeling which belongs to man, was called into 
 exercise to the very highest degree of excitement ; and all these con¬ 
 curring to impress their minds indelibly with the marvellous and stu¬ 
 pendous character of the fact. Therefore, there is no matter of fact 
 cn record more notorious than these. In like manner, the eating of 
 the manna and drinking of the waters from the rock, are sensible facts, 
 and in their nature must have been most notorious. In them all there 
 is not a single matter of fact on which the Jewish religion is predicated, 
 that is not in its nature sensible and notorious. 
 
 We next ask, Are there any commemorative institutions now ex¬ 
 isting in attestation of these facts? Yes, for the whole Jewish nation 
 exists at this day. Notwithstanding all the mighty empires of antiqui¬ 
 ty, which once flourished in history, and in their turns controlled 
 the temporal destinies of the world, have sunk, one after another, 
 into• dust-r-have so crumbled to atoms, as to leave no trace behind 
 them—not even a living man, who can say one drop of Grecian or 
 Roman blood flows in his veins—one nation, one monumental nation 
 of antiquity, yet remains—a nation who can trace their lineage up 
 to its source—a monumental nation, with monumental institutions, 
 which prove them to be the legitimate seed of Abraham, and which 
 stamp the seal of verity upon the historic facts recorded of this people. 
 Do not their circumcision and their passover still exist ? 
 
 We have now applied three of our criteria in attestation of the facts 
 relied upon. The fourth is, that the commemorative monuments insti¬ 
 tuted simultaneously with the transpiration of the facts to be preserv¬ 
 ed and perpetuated, have never been out of existence from that period 
 up to the present hour? Moses tells them on the very night preceding 
 iheir departure from the land of E^ypi,, lamb, to be called 
 
 BOSTON COUX^' ua „ ■ ■ 
 
 wVNUT HIIUo 
 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 172 
 
 thePaschal Lamb, and to dress and eat it in a peculiar mating!^ 
 dnis festival was to be observed on that night, and under circum¬ 
 stances calculated on every return of its anniversary, to excite the 
 recollections and the feelings of the Jewish nation. He tells them 
 jhat they must, on every anniversary of this festival, eat the passove? 
 with a strict observance of all rites and circumstances; that they 
 must eat with their loins girded, and with such other adjuncts as 
 vhould remind them of the sorrows of their captivity in Egypt. 
 Vow we are able to show that there never has been an interval from 
 that period down to the present, in which the anniversary of the feast 
 of the passover has not been solemnly celebrated. This feast was 
 instituted on that memorable night, and has continued unchanged 
 down to the present period. But this is only an item of the monumen¬ 
 tal evidences of historic truth pervading the singular annals of this 
 most interesting people. This signal deliverance from the house of 
 bondage, is commemorated by institutions attended with such peculiar 
 ad juncts as entwine themselves round the hearts of men—adjuncts, 
 which, in the very act of commemorating, call into exercise all the 
 feelings incident to human nature. Of this character is the institution 
 which devotes the first born of the land to the Lord. 
 
 The Jews were not permitted to consider their first-born as their 
 own, but as belonging to the Lord, as given to him in memory of 
 their redemption from the house of bondage. It is now not simply 
 the passover which commemorates the fact of deliverance from the 
 'and of Egypt; but this separation and appropriation of the first-born 
 of the land to the Lord, perpetuates the fact. This devotion of the 
 hrst-born to the Lord, is calculated in its nature to engross the whole 
 heart of man. Men are not to be persuaded to part with their children, 
 or their substance, except by the most cogent reasons. These people, 
 proverbially avaricious, not only observed the passover, but resigned 
 all property in the first-born of the land to the Lord. In process of 
 time, when the nation was brought into a state of municipal order,, 
 and under a national covenant, it was then so ordered that one tribe 
 was selected to be given to the Lord in lieu of the first-born. And 
 here we see the whole nation agreeing to support that tribe for ever. 
 This selection was made from the tribe of Levi. To superficial ob¬ 
 servers the ingenuity displayed in the erection of this monument in 
 perpetuation of the memory of a leading .fact in Jewish history, may 
 not appear; but it is a monumental institution, eminently calculated 
 in its nature, to keep the recollection of the fact which it. commemo¬ 
 rates fresh and vivid in the hearts and minds of the Israelites. The 
 whole number at that time of the first-born of the whole twelve tribes, 
 was, twenty-two thousand two hundred and seventy-three. Moses 
 was commanded to calculate the number of the tribe of Levi, which 
 was twenty-two thousand. The whole tribe of Levi was taken head 
 for-head; and the two hundred and seventy-three of the first-born, over 
 and above, were redeemed at five shekels per head. Observe the 
 exactitude and particularity of this arrangement. First, the institu T 
 tion of the passover—next, the segregation of the first born of the land 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 ves the Lord’s; ami after this an arrangement to appropriate the whole 
 tribe of Levi—two hundred and seventy-three lacking in number 
 were to be redeemed at one hundred oboli a-piece. 
 
 Thus the avarice-, the gratitude, and every other passion of the 
 Jewish nation, were made to co-operate in attestation and perpetua 
 * tion of this leading fact. Here we may remark, that as these sensible 
 demonstrations, and the very manner of their exhibition, exclude the 
 possibility of imposition upon the minds and senses of the first actors 
 and original witnesses of these facts; so the criteria of these monument 
 tal and commemorative facts equally preclude the possibility of impo¬ 
 sition upon us. Let us dwell for a moment upon the influence of this 
 commemorative institution of the passover, and the conventional 
 segregation of an entire tribe to be supported for ever by the great 
 body of the people-—a tribe who were to have cities built for them— 
 who were made proprietors of all the circumjacent lands, and who 
 were exonerated by the new social compact of the nation from all 
 personal care and anxiety concerning their own support. The tribe 
 of Levi, and all their personal property, were segregated to the service 
 of the Lord. This was a concession demanded of this people as a con¬ 
 dition precedent to their enjoyment of the new national covenant. 
 And thus has divine wisdom perpetuated a standing monument in 
 commemoration of the miracles of Moses. To bring this matter 
 home to every man’s business and bosom, I would ask all of you if it 
 would be possible to induce you to sanctify and segregate one child of 
 your family, or one lamb of your fold, or to celebrate a certain annual 
 festival in commemoration of a fact which never occurred ? Does the 
 widest range of human experience warrant the supposition that any 
 people, under any circumstances, could be induced to do this ? 
 
 We are uow to try this matter by the tests of reason, and to examine 
 whether it were possible, in the first instance, to fabricate these monu¬ 
 mental evidences. Let us ask ourselves seriously if any nation under 
 heaven could be induced to celebrate a solemn annual festival in 
 commemoratiou of a false fact—a fact which never did occur? Could 
 all the magi, sorcerers, and wonder-mongers of eastern antiquity, if 
 they were now alive, compel the North American nation to observe the 
 first day of January in commemoration of their declaration of inde¬ 
 pendence, when the whole nation knew that its anniversary was the 
 fourth day of July? To suppose such an absurdity as this—to admit 
 for a moment the possibility of such a national extravagance—is to 
 suppose men to be very differently constituted now-a-days from what 
 all former experience has ever demonstrated them to be. 
 
 If these mighty miracles of Moses had been performed in a dark 
 corner of the earth, in the presence of only a few wandering tribes* 
 or of a rude, unlettered nation, without records, some sceptical scruples 
 might arise in our minds. But the Most High has so contrived it as 
 to leave no room for any cavil of this nature. 
 
 These facts transpired in an age when the human faculties were 
 highly cultivated—Moses himself was brought up in all the learning 
 of the Egyptians—a nation at that period pre-eminently distinguished 
 
 15* 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 w,' j 
 
 i M 
 
 for scientific acquirements. Who is not acquainted with the scientific 
 reputation of ancient Egypt? Who lias not heard of her proficiency in 
 the arts, particularly in the art of embalming, of which we are igno¬ 
 rant? Standing monuments of the scientific attainments and luxu¬ 
 rious refinement of this people abound at the present day. From 
 their own annals it appears that they were quite as sceptical as the 
 people of the present day. Here I will take occasion to remark that 
 the facts on which the Jewish and Christian religions have been pre¬ 
 dicated, have been wisely arranged so as to transpire in the presence 
 of nations as bold, daring, politic, ambitious, and intelligent as our¬ 
 selves. We are wont to think slightly, and to speak disparagingly of 
 the intellectual powers of the ancients. But there were a great many 
 highly polished and severely disciplined minds amongst them. And 
 it was in the presence of such a people, shrewd, keen, and sceptical— 
 in their metropolis, within the precincts of the court, in the face of 
 king, courtiers, sages, and statesmen, that these evidences were 
 adduced—these miracles were wrought, and these monumental com¬ 
 memorative institutions were erected. Every thing was so ordered 
 in relation to these facts, as to remove forever all rational ground of 
 doubt or scepticism. So far, then, I have proceeded to give a general 
 idea of the argument which I am now to submit in attestation of the 
 facts on which the Jewish religion is predicated. 
 
 In the further prosecution of the argument, we shall illustrate other 
 facts analogous to the preceding, embracing similar objects, and, like 
 them, perpetuated by monumental commemorative institutions. We 
 shall briefly analyse the institution of the Sabbath, the celebration of 
 the Passover, and other festivals of the Jewish ritual. To support 
 these monumental commemorative institutions a levy became neces¬ 
 sary to a greater amount than ever was exacted by the fiscal polity of 
 any other nation; and such was the veneration of this people for 
 their ritual, that this enormous taxation was submitted to without a 
 murmur. I have been calculating the amount of property necessary 
 to the support of the Jewish religion, and have elaborated this result : 
 that one half of the time and money—a full moiety of the whole 
 resources of the nation was exacted; and one chief object was to 
 keep these miracles, with their monumental attestations, in perpetual 
 remembrance. The cheerful relinquishment of one half of their 
 whole personal property, goes to repudiate the idea that this people 
 were cajoled by intrigue into submission to such an oppressive taxa¬ 
 tion. We shall further show that all the other facts on which religion* 
 is predicated, have been accompanied with the same commemorative 
 and perpetuating attestations from the moment of their transpiration 
 down to our present times .—[Half hour out.] 
 
 Adjourned to Thursday morning. 
 
 Note —We have found some difficulty in ascertaining exactly how much of 
 Mr. Owen’s manuscript was read at each time during this day. The Reporter 
 generally states the page on which Mr. Owen began and ended; but in one or 
 two cases this was omitted, or so ambiguously done, that we are not certain that ’ 
 we have, ia every instance, given tlie exact amount read. Another difficulty 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 175 
 
 jf&s that some remarks interspersed with these readings were difficult to place 
 in their proper places. None of these difficulties, however, in the least affect¬ 
 ed the argument. But as there were a few remarks which were not ushered in 
 their proper places, we shall give them here, that every word of the report of 
 Mr. Owen’s speeches may be published. These remarks were made some 
 w here while Mr. Owen was reading his code of laws. We put the numbers of' 
 the laws under which we suppose these remarks were made.- Ed . 
 
 Mr. Chairman—I do not discover any thing in my friend, Mr. 
 Campbell’s, last address, that requires an immediate reply. I shall, 
 therefore, proceed further to demonstrate, from my manuscript, the 
 ignorance which has pervaded the world up to the present time. I 
 had proceeded to the sixth law when my half hour expired. I now 
 come to the seventh. [Here Mr. Owen begins to read , commencing on 
 ilie subject cf the ascertainment of the standard number of individuals 
 to be congregated in social union , so as to give to each the greatest ad- 
 'vantages with the fewest inconveniencies.] 
 
 [Mr. Owen reads to the 15 th law , and here remarks: 
 
 And, therefore, there will be no selection or election to office, and 
 every one at an early age will discover that at the proper period of life 
 he will have an equal right with all, to be in possession of his full ana 
 fair share of the government of society; there will he no electioneer¬ 
 ing artifices; no detraction of private character; no jarring of inter¬ 
 ests, or collision about the distribution of office. 
 
 [Mr. Owen gets to the 23d law , and here he remarks ;]— 
 
 You will observe, my friends, that, by these arrangements, we shall 
 save the enormous waste of time and money to which religion now sub¬ 
 jects us, and we shall be relieved from the still more enormous expense 
 of all its vice and injustice. 
 
 [Mr. Owen reads to the 2bth law , and observes :]— 
 
 These, my friends, will make in our new state of existence, just 
 Jwenty-seven laws, very plain and easily to be understood, and most 
 effectual for all the purposes of society. You will presently learn 
 that truth is always simple; that there is so much harmony, unison, 
 and consistency in all its parts, that there can be no difficulty in 
 comprehending and acting upon it. 
 
 When we remove the priests, lawyers, warriors, merchants, &c. 
 what a happy state of society shall we enjoy! None of us shall have 
 ©ccasion to be employed more than two hours per day; yet we shall 
 all have an abundance of the best of every thing! I now. proceed to 
 the Appendix, which is the last part of the subject I have written out. 
 And this additional explanation is only for the sake of a more full 
 developement of the subject. I have merely glanced at the nine 
 requisites for happiness—it would require too much of your time to 
 proceed to its extent. Can any of you, my friends form an idea of 
 any thing necessary for human happiness beyond these nine condi¬ 
 tions. All I can say on this part of the subject, is, that my mind has 
 not been able to discover any thing for the heart of man to desire, 
 beyond what these arrangements provide, and for what, if consum- 
 
m 
 
 DEBATE 
 
 mated, they must secure—except your future fanciful ideas of happi¬ 
 ness, which I leave with each of you. 
 
 [Immediately before Mr. Owen’s rising this time, a man arose 
 and said, that he would suggest to the Moderators if those individuals 
 who had come (voluntarily he would admit) hundreds of miles to at¬ 
 tend this debate, had not a right to complain. They had been in 
 attendance on the debate for two days, and yet heard nothing about 
 religion, which was the only subject they came to hear discussed* 
 The Moderators took no notice of this individual’s suggestion.] 
 
 Thursday , 9 o'clock , A. M. April 16. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises.— 
 
 1 have now, my friends, to show you in detail that all the religions 
 of the world have been founded in ignorance. To those who have 
 been accustomed to reflect deeply on these subjects, the outline stated 
 in the twelve fundamental principles which have been advanced, is 
 amply sufficient to enable them to come, at once, to a conclusion upon 
 the subject. But as there are many who never had their minds direc¬ 
 ted to these subjects, it becomes necessary to proceed point by point 
 in order to show the discrepancy between these twelve laws and all 
 religions. It is, however, first requisite that I should state what the 
 religions of the world are, according to my views of them. If I 
 make a wrong statement, Mr. Campbell or the gentlemen Moderators, 
 will set me right. According to my views, then, all religions of the 
 civilized world are predicated upon the assumption that man has a 
 free will, forms his own character, and determines his own conduct; 
 has the power of believing or disbelieving w hether a God exists, and 
 of ascertaining his qualities, and is punished for not doing so. These 
 religions assume that man is accountable for his feelings, his thoughts, 
 his will, and his conduct; that if he believes according to the religious 
 dogmas in which he has been trained, and acts up to that belief, he 
 shall be eternally happy; but that if he do not believe in a God, he 
 shall be eternally tormented, notwithstanding the most virtuous and 
 and exemplary conduct through life. They assume that the favor of 
 God is to be obtained by the observance of forms and ceremonies, and 
 by contributions of ftioney; and that those w ho do not believe in these 
 things, are infidels, and worse than the Devil, because he believes and 
 trembles. It becomes necessary, Mr. Campbell, to ask you if this 
 be a true and fair outline of the Christian religion? [Mr. Campbell 
 ansivcrs^No.] Then, Mr. Chairman, before I can proceed systemati¬ 
 cally, it will be necessary for Mr. Campbell to explain what the Chris¬ 
 tian religion is. I cannot proceed without I have his Christian religion 
 before me. Each different sect will tell me that Mr. Campbell’s 
 religion is not theirs. At present I have nothing to combat; I am 
 fighting: against shadows. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rose and said—The Christian religion is contained 
 in the New Testament. Mr. Owen ought, to have made himself ac¬ 
 quainted with the New Testament bef re he challenged this contro¬ 
 versy, I have no other answer to Mr. Owen’s query but that the 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 m 
 
 Christian religion is fully developed in the books of the New Testa¬ 
 ment ; that its evidences are to be examined by all the rules by which- 
 we examine other historical facts; that the rules of interpretation 
 are the same which are to be adopted in the interpretation of other an¬ 
 cient writings. 
 
 Mr. Oicen rose and said—Gentlemen: If I take Mr. Campbell f s 
 account of Christianity to be correct, a great many Christians will op* 
 pose Mr. Campbell, and say he knows nothing about Christianity; 
 therefore it will not be sufficient for me to show that Mr. Campbeli’s 
 notions of Christianity cannot be reconciled with these fundamental 
 laws of human nature. But perhaps we may come at the matter in 
 another direction: Has man, according to Christianity, a free will-, 
 and the power to form his own character? I cannot proceed without 
 an answer to this question. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises—Gentlemen Moderators: If it be the order of 
 the day, that my opponent and I shall enter into a catechetical exam¬ 
 ination of each other, by way of question and answer, 1 shall make no 
 objection to such an arrangement. In engaging in this controversy, 
 the sole object I proposed to myself, was, the fair elicitation of truth. 
 But the immediate question is, whether interrogatories are to be mu¬ 
 tually and reciprocally proposed and replied to, or shall our interroga¬ 
 tories be propounded in our respective half hour addresses, and the 
 answers deferred until the respondent rises to address the audience ? 
 I make this point here simply as a question of order. 
 
 Mr. Omen rose and said—I do not see how the argument can be 
 Conducted on the original plan of alternate half hours. We must 
 come to close quarters; but unless I know what the Christian religion- 
 is, I cannot know what I am to disprove. I have n\pde fair tenders to 
 Mr. Campbell in order to find out what his Christian religion is. I 
 cannot conceive that the Christian religion consists in the whole of 
 the New Testament, but tha + :,L contained in some general princi¬ 
 ples, which might be stated in a very few words. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rose and said—As my opponent seems to be at a loss 
 how to proceed without documents, perhaps we may expedite our pro¬ 
 gress by presenting a recapitulation of our premises by way of posting 
 our books up to this morning. 
 
 The Hon. Chairman rose and said—The Moderators are prepared 
 to decide the question of order submitted by Mr. Campbell. They 
 are of opinion, from the nature cf Mr. Owen’s proposition, he is not 
 entitled to call on Mr. Campbell for any concession; he is only enti¬ 
 tled to call on Mr. Campbell for a definition of bis terms. We view 
 the matter in this light:—Mr. Owen states, by implication, that he 
 has examined all the religions cf the world; this implication results, 
 necessarily, from Mr. Owen’s affirmation that all religions in the 
 world are founded in ignorance. We cannot, for a moment, presume 
 that Mr. Owen has passed sentence of condemnation upon all reli¬ 
 gions, without having examined these religions, and ascertained what 
 t’qey are. Inasmuch as Mr. Owen holds the affirmative cf the pro¬ 
 position that all religions are false; the Moderators think that it would 
 
7 8 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 be exceedingly discourteous in them to suppose that Mr. Owen has 
 not studied all religions. The Moderators conceive that it would be 
 taking from Mr. Owen’s opponent an advantage to put him upon the 
 affirmative. We must take it for granted that there are many individ¬ 
 uals in this assembly who have full faith in the truth of the Chris¬ 
 tian religion, and yet would not agree perhaps w r ith any other in¬ 
 dividual of this congregation in every minute particular. Courtesy 
 to Mr. Owen compels us to suppose that he has ascertained the funda¬ 
 mental principles of ail religions, and has here proposed to demon¬ 
 strate that all are founded in ignorance and error. This is Mr. 
 Owen’s affirmative proposition, and according to all controversial 
 rules, he is therefore bound to establish it in evidence. The adoption 
 of any other course in the conducting of this argument by Mr. Owen, 
 we conceive, would, in another point of view, be imposing upon his 
 opponent an unfair difficulty. For, if it should be ascertained, at the 
 termination of this discussion, that Mr. Owen has formed erroneous 
 conceptions of the Christian religion, and has proceeded to condemn 
 it under these mistaken ideas of its real character, it would not be fair 
 to place Mr. Campbell in a logical predicament which might deprive 
 him of an opportunity to demonstrate that his opponent’s conceptions 
 of Christianity were erroneous, and thereby to disprove his conclu¬ 
 sions. This would he to throw Mr. Campbell off the vantage ground, 
 which, as the challengee , he now 7 legitimately holds. Courtesy to¬ 
 wards Mr. Owen, therefore, compels us to take for granted that he has 
 thoroughly examined every religion, which he has undertaken to 
 condemn: and that the reasons of his condemnation are applicable 
 to his peculiar conceptions of these religions. 
 
 The Board are/urfher of opinion, that Mr. Owen cannot be fairly 
 called upon to admit that religion is what Mr. Campbell supposes it 
 to be. It may be, that Mr. Owen may assent to Mr. Campbell’s view s 
 of religion, yet this assent w T ould not .prove Mr. Campbell’s views to 
 be correct. It would not be doing justice to Mr. Campbell to require 
 him to state his views of Christianity, and authorize Mr. Owen to ar¬ 
 gue from them as the only correct standard; because Mr. Owen would 
 thereby be deprived of all opportunity of demonstrating that Mr, 
 Campbell’s views of Christianity were not warranted by the Christian 
 scriptures. Therefore, the opinion of the Board is, that Mr. Owen’s 
 proper course is to state his views of religion, assign the reasons upon 
 which his opinions are predicated, and draw his conclusions from the 
 premises which he may establish, and if his opponent can show' that 
 religion is not the thing, which Mr. Owen has condemned, then the 
 cause of religion remains safe and uninjured by this argument. 
 
 Mr. Ouien again rises—Mr. Chairman: It appears then, from this 
 decision, that I must form my own notions of religion, from all that I 
 have read, seen, and heard—and I am quite willing so to do: 
 
 My belief then is, that in all religions of the world, it is a funda- . 
 mental principle, that man has a free will, forms his own character, ’ 
 and determines his own conduct; that he has the power of believing 
 ojr disbelieving in a God, of ascertaining his attributes and qualities, j 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 179 
 
 and that he shall be punished hereafter if he does not believe in a' 
 God, and ascertain these attributes and qualities,- that he is account¬ 
 able for his will, his conduct, his feelings, and his thoughts; and if he 
 believes according to the dogmas of his religion, and acts up to that 
 belief, he shall be happy after death; but that if he does not believe 
 in God, in his qualities and attributes, he shall after death be eternal¬ 
 ly tormented. I believe it is a fundamental principle in all religions, 
 that prayers, and forms, and ceremonies are necessary to enable the 
 individual to know God; and it is moreover necessary that he should 
 •contribute money for all godly purposes; that in all these religions, 
 whoever disbelieves is an infidel. Therefore, I am an infidel, for I 
 believe none of them. I have then to show, in detail, that man has not 
 a free will, that he does not form his own character, nor determine his 
 own conduct. I have to show, in detail, that no man has the power 
 of believing or disbelieving in a God; that he has no means of ascer- 
 taining the qualities and attributes of any being whose mode of exis¬ 
 tence cannot be cognizable by his senses. I shall, therefore, endeavor 
 to show, in detail, what a monstrous absurdity it is, to suppose that 
 man, constituted as he is, can be accountable for his feelings, thoughts, 
 will, or conduct. I mean also to prove that there cannot be one par¬ 
 ticle of merit or demerit in any man’s believing the doctrines of the 
 religion in which he has been trained. I intend also to demonstrate 
 the utter fallacy of the notion that man will go to heaven for his be¬ 
 lief, or to hell foi his disbelief. 1 intend further to show that religious 
 forms and ceremonies are most useless; and that if men were not 
 more ignorant than the beasts of the field, they would never pay money 
 to a priest for showing them the way to heaven. 
 
 I also mean to prove that the opprobrious meaning generally an¬ 
 nexed to the epithet infidel^ is most irrational and absurd: How can 
 an infidel, if any of you attach any definite meaning to the term, pre¬ 
 vent himself believing as he does, any more than he can help being 
 warmed by the sun, or cooled by the breeze. Now, my friends, these 
 are the points I mean to prove. I might indeed go much further. I 
 anight attack some of the details of the Christian system which are 
 not to be found in any other systems of religion. I might tell you 
 that it is a fundamental principle in the Christian religion to believe 
 bthat Christ is the son of God; that he came down from heaven to 
 .save sinners, or a certain portion of them, called the elect; that he 
 was crucified, rose and ascended to heaven; and that now he is cer¬ 
 tainly interceding for us there. But, my friends, after having been, 
 so long a faithful student of the laws of nature; and after the mental 
 collisions which I have encountered with the first minds in Europe 
 and America. I should feel ashamed seriously to attempt any opposi¬ 
 tion to such monstrous absurdities—such a ridiculous incongruity. 
 But I know that we are beings so organized as to receive our early 
 impressions, however absurd they maybe. We are compelled by an 
 unchanging law ol our nature, to receive our ea* ly impressions, how¬ 
 ever monstrous and absurd, from our parents, our nurses, and other 
 ,,early itistructer?. This is an indisputable truth, therefore there can* 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
180 . 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 act be a more simple process than to force into the mind of any child 
 doctrines, notions, and chimeras, the most wild, extravagant, and fan¬ 
 ciful, and at the same time, compel him to receive them as divine 
 truths. This being a law of our nature, I cannot be surprised at the 
 variety of absurd notions which I every where meet with. It was 
 only, I think about two months ago that I very unexpectedly found 
 myself in the middle of the great square of the city of Mexico. Sud¬ 
 denly I heard the tinkling of a little bell, which was in the hands of a 
 man preceding the host. My friend, who was with me, said to me, Mr. 
 Owen, you must kneel down till that bell passes, or you will endanger 
 your life. Hearing this, I looked out for the cleanest place I could 
 find, spread my handkerchief upon it, and knelt down. [The audience 
 here laughed heartily .] But why laugh at this, my friends ? these 
 Mexicans were as sincerely conscientious in performing and execu¬ 
 ting this act of adoration to their host as you are in going to any place 
 of worship. 
 
 The whole difference is this that you have been trained in one set 
 of religious notions, and they have been trained in another—and if 
 rationality could be estimated by numbers, it is very doubtful whether 
 those who believe in the importa nce and necessity of this act of pros¬ 
 tration do not outnumber you who disbelieve and laugh at it. But th^ 
 great stumbling block of the metaphysicians is, that man is formed to 
 have a free will; and, therefore, by his will can control his belief and 
 his conduct. Nov/ I have stated it to be one of the fundamental laws 
 of human nature that the infant, when born, has no knowledge of 
 his organization ; but he then comes into the world a highly compound¬ 
 ed being, made up of a great variety of propensities, faculties, and 
 qualities—and upon this foundation of his organization his intellect, 
 morals, and will, are formed for him. Now these propensities are 
 made either good or bad, these intellects and morals are made superior 
 or inferior; but whether the one or the other, how is it possible that 
 the infant can be held accountable for it in any degree whatever? 
 When we see a little child obeying the impulse of its nature, and there¬ 
 by acting contrary to our notions of right and wrong, we say that child 
 is bad by nature; we punish it, and call it hard names for acting in 
 opposition to our notions, when the real cause of all the evil is the 
 ignorance in which we have been trained. I dare say many' of you 
 have now in your eye the children of different families of your ac- 
 -quaintance, and the difference in the characters of these children;. 
 You know that these children have been trained very differently. 
 That the children of the one family have, according to your notions, 
 been well brought up, while those of the other have been badly train 
 ed, and you have witnessed the consequent difference of character in 
 these two families. Are not these inferior children unfortunate in 
 being under the direction of the ignorant and vicious? and is it not 
 fortunate for the superior children that they have been placed in the 
 care of the more virtuous and intelligent ? But who shall say r that 
 either merit or demerit attaches to either set of children on account of 
 •their difference of character. To illustrate how little depends upon 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 161 
 
 the power of the infant itself in the formation of its character, observe 
 the effects produced upon the children brought up by the people called 
 Quakers. I am not so competent to speak of this sect as it exists in 
 this country, but in England I am well acquainted with the first fami¬ 
 lies among them, and I have uniformly found the children of these 
 Quaker families brought up very differently from the children of other 
 families: but no merit or demerit can attach to these children for 
 having been thus fortunately born and educated. In my frequent 
 visits to London I have made a part of my business to go frequently to 
 that part of the city called St. Giles. This division of the city is 
 extensive, and the number of its inhabitants considerable. I have 
 there seen many children of parents reduced to the lowest depths of 
 poverty, and yet obliged to support themselves and their parents; 
 they nave no means to do this except by thieving; and, therefore, 
 from earliest infancy, they compel their children to believe that they 
 perform a most meritorious action when they can dexterously steal. 
 And when they succeed, and bring home their plunder, they are called 
 good children, and rewarded by their parents with something they 
 think will gratify them. But if they do not succeed in their day's 
 prowling, and come home empty-handed, their parents call them very 
 bad children, and punish them severely. Now these children are 
 compelled to believe that to steal is very meritorious, and not to steal 
 is very wicked. These children never hear any thing of what is 
 called good moral instruction. With what justice, then, can they be 
 condemned for their vices? It is with these unfortunate children as 
 with all others—some of them are born with organizations greatly 
 superior to others; but they are all equally compelled to imbibe the 
 same early lessons of depravity. 
 
 But the truth is, that no child can have the forming of himself, any 
 more than he can have the selection of his parents. When we reflect 
 upon this matter, we shall discover that the child has just as much 
 control in the one case as the other. How absurd, then, must be the 
 invention of a system which leaves the child at the mercy of chance, 
 and then exacts responsibility from him! 
 
 I do say, that nothing but the grossest ignorance could have led to 
 the introduction of a system which supposes this to be right! ft is 
 contrary to nature, and not in the least degree calculated to effect the 
 purposes which it contemplates! It is any thing but a rational method 
 of operating upon the human mind! 
 
 I conclude that there are intelligent medical gentlemen present 
 who have made it their business to study minutely the human frame. 
 They well know that all children are born with different degrees of 
 powers and feelings. They know also that, probably from the be¬ 
 ginning of time no two individuals ever had any two senses formed 
 alike; that there are no two who see, or feel, or taste, or hear, or 
 smell alike. Each individual has a distinct natural character at 
 birth, arising from the peculiar combination which has entered into 
 each of his senses. Those gentlemen well know that when the 
 organization is perfect the human being becomes superior; that 
 
 16 
 
182 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 when it is imperfect, the child must ever be, to a certain extent, an 
 inferior human being, if placed under similar circumstances with 
 the former. Now if we had the power to form our organization and 
 characters, can we suppose that beings possessing one particle of 
 reason would not make these perfect ? I ask you whether every male 
 and female would not make themselves perfect? The only reason 
 that we are not perfect beings, is, because we have no power over 
 the formation of our organization and circumstances. Yesterday 
 Mr. Campbell said a great deal upon the subject of language. Now 
 no child has the power of deciding what language it shall be taught, 
 and he can only derive oral instruction through that language which 
 he has learned to understand. No child can determine what religion 
 he shall be taught to believe, or whether he shall retain his belief. 
 No child can determine what shall be the character of his circum¬ 
 stances from birth to death, (except in the latter part of his life, and 
 xn that case he has been influenced to endeavor to effect some change 
 by the previous circumstances to which he was compelled to submit.) 
 
 We very well know (if we did not, we might all easily try the expe¬ 
 riment) that over the power of belief or disbelief no man ever has had, 
 or ever can have, any control. As Mr. Campbell has very well ex¬ 
 plained, we know that of which our senses take cognizance; but in 
 like manner, we are compelled to believe according to the strongest 
 ^repressions made upon us; and so, too, of opinions; we receive them 
 according to the evidence offered to us for their foundation, and we are 
 compelled to receive them. Our liking, indifference, or dislikings, 
 are also in like manner equally beyond our control. We must be 
 indifferent to that which makes no impression upon our senses, and 
 dislike that which offends our senses. It is futile, useless, and inju¬ 
 rious to contend against these laws of our nature. My half hour, I 
 perceive is out. I will, therefore, merely add, that if these ar e facts, 
 and I will prove them to be such, that nothing but the grossest igno¬ 
 rance could ever have permitted any such system as the Christian, or 
 any other religion, to have been introduced, and that nothing but this 
 
 ignorance causes it or them to be now tolerated, 
 
 ** 
 v »• 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises, book in hand. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—In the first place I beg leave to post up the argu¬ 
 ment so far as prosecuted. I therefore submit the following items by 
 way of recapitulation— Imprimis: We have shown that my friend’s 
 system of necessity renders men as incapable of society and of moral 
 and civil government, as if they were trees, stones, or machines. To 
 this refutation of his system, Mr. Owen has, as yet, paid no attention. 
 2d. We have shown that Mr Owen’s system is not predicated upon 
 any philosophic analysis of the physical, intellectual, or moral man. 
 3d. We have shown that, so far as religion is concerned, Mr. Owen’s 
 opposition to it has been principally predicated upon a palpable error 
 .—viz. that man’s volition has no power over his belief. To this ar¬ 
 gument he has not thought proper to reply. 4th. That his system is 
 radically defectivo in this- — that it leaves entirely out of view our 
 
DEBATE* 
 
 183 
 
 power of acquiring information through testimony. ^th 0 That his 
 system ascribes to imagination a creative power which it does not 
 possess. 6th. That, according to Mr. Owen’s views, it was impossi¬ 
 ble to account for the derivation or existence of the spiritual ideas and 
 language now prevalent in the world. 7th. That his twelve facts, 
 admitting them to be true, fall far short of presenting a view of the 
 whole man; and consequently, that every system predicated upon 
 them must fail to furnish objects commensurate with man’s capacity 
 of enjoyment, or the dignity of Iris intellectual nature. To not one 
 of these capital items has Mr, Gwen replied. As Mr. Owen has very 
 courteously presented me with a copy of his twelve facts, I now pre¬ 
 sent him with some notes in writing, in the shape of objections to 
 some of his fundamental points. 
 
 The objection that my friend has been urging this morning against 
 Christianity, reminds me of certain objections which I have heard to 
 the revolution of this globe round the centre of the planetary system. 
 In speaking of the sphericity of the earth, i have, in language adapted 
 to vulgar apprehension, informed the uninformed and illiterate, that 
 this earth was as round as a ball. They have replied that they were 
 very sure this statement was untrue, because they perceived hills, 
 mountains, valleys, and a very uneven surface, which, as they con¬ 
 ceived, were altogether irreconcileable with the rotundity of this globe. 
 In like manner they have objected to the immobility of the Sun. 
 They reply, ‘We see the Sun move; we see it rise in one place and 
 set in another; and if the earth moved round the Sun, the position of 
 our plantations and houses must necessarily be shifted: your theory 
 about the Earth and Sun, then, is contrary to our experience and 
 observation.’ Now it is just in a similar style of objection that my 
 friend attacks the Christian religion. Mr. Owen, it seems, wants to » 
 elicit my opinion on what constitutes the Christian religion. Does 
 he suppose that Christianity consists in matters of opinion? I am free 
 to declare that neither the Jewish nor the Christian religion was ever 
 designed by their Author to consist in any matter of opinion what¬ 
 ever. I hesitate not also to aver, that this error is the root from which 
 all sectarianism has sprung, and has given rise to all the scepticism 
 which now prevails. Mr. Owen informs us that he became a sceptic 
 from the jarring sectarianism and irreconcileable discrepancies in the 
 different dogmas of Christianity. This would, indeed, be an unprofita¬ 
 ble discussion were it to be confined to a mere war of words concern¬ 
 ing the opinions which constitute this, that, or the other system of 
 religion. This would suit iny friend’s scheme well enough; but 1 
 hardly think he will be able to seduce us into a discussion upon the 
 subject of free will , a topic on which he himself is so fond of ex¬ 
 pressing his opinions. But I was proceeding to observe, that if we 
 had no other proof of the scriptures being divine oracles than just the 
 contents of the book, ( Biblos that alone would warrant us in the con¬ 
 clusion, for we see the handwriting of the Almighty indelibly inscribed 
 in the pages of this volume. The same grand developements display¬ 
 ed in the “pillar’d firmament,” are to be found in the sacred volume; 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 kS4 
 
 and they both proclaim with equal emphasis, that “the hand which 
 made them is divine?” In the physical organization of the material 
 universe, we discover that the laws of attraction and repulsion are 
 r.he most operative. We see the Great God of Nature continually pro- 
 during most wonderful results by the simple operation of one single 
 law. What philosopher does not know the power of the centrifugal 
 and centripetal forces in balancing our globe ? Who does not know 
 fhat the successive change of the seasons results from one single un¬ 
 erring law laid down by the Great Creator himself? Now in expelling 
 from the human heart that darkness in which, without the light of 
 revelation it must ever have remained, in elevating the human mind 
 to the contemplation of spiritual things, the Almighty acts by a few 
 general laws. He raises man to heaven by the simple operation of 
 two or three fundamental principles. Were this point in argument 
 now, I would boldly hazard the assertion that the sacred volume 
 contains intrinsic evidences of being come from God—because the 
 same plan and consummate wisdom displayed in the construction of 
 the material universe, are equally developed in these holy oracles 
 in the renovation of man. But if the contents of the volume of reve* 
 lation and the constituent principles of religion therein inculcated are 
 10 become the subjects of investigation in this debate, they should be 
 taken only from the book which contains them. 
 
 In such an investigation I apprehend that Mr. Owen cannot be 
 permitted to travel out of the record. But we will take the book 
 (Biblos ) and examine what is written there by the same criteria 
 which we would apply in an analysis of the writings of Cicero, of 
 Demosthenes, of Sallust or of Xenophon. But the time has not yet 
 come for me to reply to my friend's religious opinions and social 
 * views in his own favorite style. 
 
 There was, however, one point on which my opponent had nearly 
 staggered upon the truth. He asked if Christianity consisted in the 
 whole of the New Testament, or primarily in a few general principles 
 and leading facts therein contained? He apprehended the latter, and 
 that these might be stated in a very few words. I presume he must have 
 had reference to the historic facts that Jesus Christ died for the salva¬ 
 tion of sinners, that he rose from the dead, and ascended to heaven, 
 *$£.c. Now this is the only legitimate mode of arguing this topic. 
 
 Yesterday we discussed the evidences of the Jewish religion. We 
 have been pursuing the very plan which our opponent suggests. Has 
 it not been repeatedly affirmed that both the Jewish and Christian 
 religion are predicated upon historic facts—facts triable by the same 
 criteria as all other historic facts? After proceeding a little farther 
 in the argument, I shall be perfectly willing to conform strictly to 
 Mr. Owen’s plan. I have asserted that the Christian religion, as well 
 as the Jewish, was predicated upon facts. And I will rest the whole 
 merits of this controversy upon my ability to prove the three leading- 
 facts on which Christianity is based, and the consequent inability of 
 mv opponent to disprove them. 1st. That Jesus Christ was crucified 
 upon Amount Calvary, as attested by the four Evangelists. 2d. That 
 
«• 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 185 
 
 Ins body was deposited in the tomb of Joseph of Arimatliea. And 3dly, 
 That he did actually rise from the dead, and appeared upon the earth 
 for forty days, having during that time repeated intercourse with his 
 disciples, ancHnsJ at the end of that period he did actually ascend to 
 heaven. Now this tender closes every avenue to the introduction of 
 metaph}"sical subtlety, or mere opinions about Christianity into this 
 argument. I am thoroughly convinced that it was the simple, sub¬ 
 lime, and majestic design of him “whose ways are not as man’s ways,” 
 to effect an entire moral revolution in mankind by the simple opera¬ 
 tion of the intrinsic weight, validity, and moral energy of these facts. 
 
 I am thoroughly convinced that all the principles necessary to make 
 man happy, and elevate his nature to its highest point of dignity, and 
 to enable him to meet death fearlessly, are native to, inherent in, and 
 inalienable from, these facts—I mean the facts that Jesus Christ was* 
 crucified, buried, and that he rose again on the third day. The influence 
 of these facts is irresistible. No man ever did honestly believe them 
 who did not in consequence thereof experience that all his powers 
 and faculties were exalted and refined. And thus, in the wonderful 
 wisdom of God, has the w hole moral and religious revolution which 
 he designed to effect over the world, been predicated upon the opera¬ 
 tive moral energy of these facts. 
 
 Mr. Owen speaks of the endless varieties of religion; but the world 
 has never had but three divine religious dispensations: the first adapt¬ 
 ed to the primitive state of man—the second adapted to the spirit and 
 genius of a people living under social and municipal institutions, and 
 prophetic and typical of the advent of Christ, the Son of God and 
 the founder of Christianity. And these three divine developements of 
 religion all concentrate themselves upon the fact that Jesus rose from 
 the dead, ascended to heaven, and was there received as the Son of 
 God. We do know that all the superstitions in the world have grown 
 out of these three developements of divine authority in matters of 
 religion. What is Mahometanism but a corruption of Christianity? 
 I would not call the Persian, the Roman, nor the Egyptian religions, 
 different religions, but different sects of the same religion, just as I 
 would call Mahometanism a corruption of Christianity. There is not 
 a single supernatural truth in the Koran, that is not borrowed from 
 the Testaments. Whatever may have been invented by the licenti¬ 
 ousness of human imagination, there never has been but one divinely 
 revealed religion. Hence in all these superstitions we find capital 
 ideas, sentiments, and terms which could not have been originated 
 by human imagination, or derived from any other source than an im¬ 
 mediate and direct divine revelation. We can show that all the 
 national records which have come down to us from times of the highest 
 antiquity, embrace the outlines of the Mosaic account in the hook of 
 Genesis. We can show 7 that, in the days of Abraham, with the 
 exception of the Chaldeans, there was not a circumjacent nation 
 that had not all the knowledge possessed by Abraham, save with 
 regard to his own posterity. It was in consequence of the defection 
 of the Chaldeans that Abraham was commanded to depart into a 
 
 16* 
 
186 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 strange land, because that people were apostatizing and falling off 
 from the knowledge of the true God to the worship of idols. So fa* 
 we have submitted the outlines of this matter with a reference to the 
 past and present. Yesterday I introduced an argument predicated 
 upon the historic evidences in support of Judaism and Christianity. 
 1 presented , in the first instance, certain criteria by which we are 
 enabled to decide whether historic facts are credible, and gave an- 
 anatysis of these evidences and their criteria. With a reference to 
 the true merits of this controversy, we have laid down four criteria 
 of the verity of historic facts:—1st. That the recorded facts on which 
 we may rely with safety, must be cognizable by the senses. 2d. Have' 
 been exhibited in the face of day. 3d. That, in perpetual commemo¬ 
 ration of these facts, monumental institutions were adopted simul¬ 
 taneously with their occurrence. And, 4th. Continued down to the 
 present day. We did affirm and adduce some proofs that no fact 
 possessing these four criteria of its verity, could possibly be false; 
 that it was entirely out of Mr. Owen’s power to select a single fact, 
 recorded in the annals of any nation of the world, which, possessing 
 these four criteria of verity, ever was proved to be false. But we 
 intend, before coming to the point more immediately at issue, to 
 show that these matters of fact were not (as sceptics affirm) greedily 
 believed by merely a few friends and partisans; but that these stu¬ 
 pendous facts were exhibited, not for the purpose of confirming the 
 belief of friends, but to overcome the disbelief of enemies. Moses 
 (for example) was sent to lead the children of Israel out of the land 
 of Egypt, but this people were as unwilling to leave the land, as 
 Pharaoh was to let them go. Hence the ten stupendous miracles 
 exhibited by Moses were as necessary to persuade the people to de¬ 
 part, as they were to coerce Pharaoh to permit them. The necessary 
 inference is, that the enactment of these ten wonders was as necessa¬ 
 ry for the conviction of the Israelites as their oppressors. Moses 
 himself demurred when the conduct of the Israelitish host was cast 
 upon him; the people were unwilling to quit the land of their captivity, 
 and Pharaoh strenuously opposed their departure; but by the resist¬ 
 less influence of these ten wonderful facts, all were made conform¬ 
 able to the divine will. These facts were designed to be of such high 
 import as to reconcile Moses to his responsible undertaking, to over- 
 ■'ome the pertinacity and avarice of Pharaoh, and inspire the Israelites 
 with a courage which enabled them to pass fearlessly through the 
 bed of the Bed Sea. You perceive, then, that all circumstances 
 concurred to preclude the possibility of any deception in regard to 
 he truth of the facts as well as the possibility of their reception upon 
 any slight and superficial evidence. They were in their nature cal¬ 
 culated to arouse every energy, and to take fast hold upon every 
 feeling of man. They must, therefore, bp; egarded as facts of the 
 sublimest character, the most momentous; import, and the most irre¬ 
 sistible influence. The course adopted by mv opponent in this debate 
 has compelled me to introduce at this stage of the argument the evi¬ 
 dences that not only the institutions of the passover* circumcision, 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 187 
 
 the redemption of the first-born, but that divers other commemorative 
 institutions and ritual observances of the Jewish law warrant us in 
 the conclusion that the whole system of the Jewish religion is an 
 antetypical symbolic attestation in proof of the divine mission of the 
 Messiah. And now, as I do not wish immediately to introduce another 
 part of the subject, I resign the floor to my opponent. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises.— 
 
 My friends—Our debate is to be published, and therefore the mat* 
 ter advanced by the disputants ought to be such as to command seri¬ 
 ous reflections, and to exercise the most discriminating powers of our 
 judgment; for this sole reason have I on divers and sundry occasions 
 in the course of this discussion, pretermitted all reply to my friend, 
 Mr. Campbell’s catechisms. Being quite familiar with the whole 
 range of my friend’s arguments and topics, I have been perfectly 
 aware that the further they were pursued, the more mazy, intangible, 
 and interminable the argument would become; and I have therefore 
 been most desirous to keep your attention riveted, if possible, to plain, 
 simple, tangible matters of fact, and to those things from which we 
 may derive the highest practical benefit and utility to ourselves and 
 to our posterity—I wanted to keep your judgment and discrimation 
 constantly in exercise, and your imagination out of play. But were 
 I to recognize, even indirectly, that a dissertation concerning Pharaoh 
 and his host—the God who created Pharaoh and hardened his heart, 
 so that he would not let the people go—who descended from heaven 
 to cover the earth with all sorts of loathsome and noxious vermin—- 
 were 1, I say, to recognize a dissertation of the flux and reflux of the 
 Red Sea, and the causing of the uncongealed water to stand up per¬ 
 pendicularly, on each side of its margin, like parallel stonewalls in a 
 lane; were I to recognize the narrative of these and other marvels, 
 with which we have been edified, as at all relevant or pertinent to the 
 point of debate at present before us, I should, upon reflection on my 
 conduct, certainly come to the conclusion, that, when I consented to 
 waste my time and yours, in this puerile w ay, I was out of my senses. 
 Once, for all, my friends, I wish to state distinctly that I cherish sin¬ 
 cere good feelings towards my friend, Mr. Campbell. I am sure hg 
 is entirely conscientious, and that he is with an honest zeal exerting 
 himself to maae you to believe what he thinks the truth; but I also { 
 discover that Mr. Campbell’s mind, (powerful as it is,) has from infan- j 
 cy been filled and vitiated with an accumulation of ancient and fab- ; 
 ulous legends concerning Pharaoh with his hardened heart; the im- J 
 mobility of the Red Sea, and a variety of other such novelties, which, \ 
 unfortunately for the true interest, happiness, and virtue of mankind, 
 has been delved out of the rubbish of antiquity, from which none but 
 the most ungoverned inclination would ever have thought of extract¬ 
 ing them. My friend, iw'r.Campbell, possesses a lively imagination; 
 an imagination which has been deeply involved in these, to him, high 
 mysteries; nature has been bountiful to him in his organization, end 
 many of his talents have been highly cultivated; but what have the 1 
 
188 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 circumstances of his learned education in the old seminaries of Em 
 rope done for him? why, simply this, they have placed, (if I may be ■? 
 allowed to use the figure.) a Chinese shoe upon a mind vigorous from - 
 its birth, and which nature formed capable of being expanded to the 
 largest and most capacious dimensions; but what mind can reach its 
 natural developement, when those who have the forming of it, rivet a 
 Chinese shoe upon it, believing all the while that they are improving 
 it so as to bring forth the most wholesome and abundant harvests of J 
 Utility and benefit to mankind ? Mr. Campbell possesses the power 
 of combining and generalizing with great rapidity; he brings his ideas 
 before you in a very imposing shape; but I have something more val¬ 
 uable to adduce than legends about Pharaoh and the Red Sea. It is 
 my high duty to place before the world that which may enable them 
 to think rationally, and consequently to adopt a wholesome and ben¬ 
 eficial practice. 1 have undertaken to prove that it is impossible 
 that any religion can be true, because all religions are diametrically 
 opposed to the immutable laws of nature as exhibited in man.—I 
 will further undertake to prove that the combined and aggregate 
 influence of all the religions of the world, have not, through all past 
 ages'up to the present hour, effected so much for the improvement 
 of mankind in virtue, and consequent happiness, as the general adop¬ 
 tion of these principles, when properly applied in practice, will effect 
 in five years. I have, therefore, something to lay before you highly 
 important to yourselves and posterity, and this causes me greatly to 
 deprecate any distraction or confusion of your minds by any useless 
 metaphysical disquisitions which are, in their nature, almost inter¬ 
 minable, and which never can lead to any beneficial practical result. 
 Five senses have been afforded us, and we know of a certainty no faets 
 beyond what these senses teach us; and these, my friends, are amply 
 sufficient to enable us to understand and appreciate the whole merits 
 of this discussion. Were I, my friends, sofar to forget myself and 
 the dignity of the subject which you have been convened to hear dis¬ 
 cussed, as to bestow the slightest degree of notice upon any of those 
 fanciful notions, miracles, marvels, and fabulous legends, with a crit¬ 
 ical dissertation upon which my friend has edified us, I should con¬ 
 ceive that my time and faculties were just as much wasted and misap- 
 pied as if I were to recognize the historic winders enacted by “Jack, 
 the Giant-Killer,' 5 as pertinent or relevant to the subject matter of 
 this debate. Indeed I conceive the narration of Jack's exploits to be 
 less s^per-natural, and therefore more instructive. 
 
 My friends, I well know that many of you have, from the earliest 
 infancy, been trained to cherish the utmost reverence for these absur¬ 
 dities; you reverence them, not only because they are encrusted with 
 the venerable rust of antiquity, but you pay still greater adoration 
 to them, because they have been handed down to you, claiming to 
 have the sanction of that fearful and mysterious, yet unmeaning, 
 phrase, “sacred and divine tradition. 5 ' But that same sense of duty 
 which prompted me to cross so many longitudes and latitudes, in or¬ 
 der to give my friend, Mr. Campbell, this meeting, compels me to 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 186 
 
 “cry aloud and spare not;” to speak out boldly and fearlessly the 
 truth. It is contrary to all my feelings, sentiments, and professions to 
 outrage where it is avoidable, on prejudice, or to cause the slightest de¬ 
 gree of pain or irritation to the feelings ol any of my fellow 7 -bemgs; and 
 had it not been for the irrelevancy to the subject before us of Mr, 
 Campbell’s dissertation upon the fables of antiquity, I should not have 
 been compelled to put your feelings, patience, and prejudices to so 
 severe a trial, as I much fear a just and conscientious performance of 
 my high duty will now compel me to do. Because if I had been per¬ 
 mitted to pursue my intended course in this matter, it would be like 
 proving that one and one made two, and consequently that in proving 
 this position, I at the same time demonstrated that one and one could 
 never make three. For if I prove man to be what I state him to be f 
 I thereby remove the entire foundation on which all religions have 
 been' erected. By thus simply stating facts in such a manner that 
 you, my friends, experience, feel, and recognize them to be such; 
 the falsehood of all religions necessarily becomes manifest. By this 
 course, had I been permitted to have adopted it, I should have avoid¬ 
 ed coming into immediate collision with your early and deep-rooted 
 prejudices. 
 
 I have said that man, at birth, is ignorant of every thing relative to 
 his own organization, and is not permitted to create any part of his 
 physical or intellectual organization; therefore that he cannot be bad 
 by nature. He is exactly what nature has made him; you may be 
 sure, therefore, that all religions which assume that man is bad bv 
 nature, are false, and founded in ignorance of human nature. And 
 secondly, that no two infants have ever yet been knoivn to possess 
 an identity of organization, and that all these organic differences 
 between individuals have been created without the knowledge or corn 
 sent of the individuals. Now 7 this is either true or false; Mr. Camp^ 
 bell, ifhe proceeds logically, will either admit or disprove this first 
 principle; which, if true, renders it impossible for any man to be bad 
 by nature. Again, Mr. Campbell, in order to proceed logically, must 
 admit or disprove the second position: that the organization of no 
 two children have ever been created precisely alike; which, if true^ 
 demonstrates that there can neither be merit nor demerit in either, on 
 account of this diversity of birth. After these two points have been 
 acceded to or disproved^ we may then logically proceed to the discus¬ 
 sion of the third. Now, I aver that all the religions of the world 
 presuppose that children are to be blamed and praised, punished 
 or rewarded, according to their characters, 1 maintain that this 
 supposition is a gross absurdity, and that nothing but the wander¬ 
 ings of the imagination could have led us into this error. I assume 
 that it is not in the power of man to disprove the two first positions. 
 3. VVeaffirm that each individual is placed without his knowledge or 
 consent, under circumstances which irresistibly influence and control 
 him; yet that the influence of these circumstances is somewhat mod¬ 
 ified by the peculiarities of the individual’s organization. Now we 
 perceive that the foundation of human character is in our organization^ 
 
190 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 and that in the creation of this organization* we have had no manner 
 of agency or control. The further developement of our character de¬ 
 pends upon our circumstances at birth. 
 
 If. we had been born among the Romans, we would necessarily have 
 had our religious faith built upon the mysteries and traditions of their 
 mythology, and should have thought, felt, and acted in all things as 
 they did. Had we been bom at the time it is said Jesus Christ lived, 
 we might have assisted to crucify him, or been among his disciples. 
 But it does not depend upon us when we shall come into the world 
 although our future character depends so materially upon it, as well 
 as upon the particular place or country in which we receive our im¬ 
 pressions. Did any of us prevent ourselves from being born in the 
 city of Constantinople? Could any of the Turks who have been born 
 in that city, have prevented it from being their birthplace? or could 
 they help being taught the Mahometan religion? Now is there a 
 man in this assembly who blames a native of the city of Constantinople 
 for having been born a Turk, and consequently educated a Mussel- 
 men ? It is absurd to suppose that merit or demerit can attach to the 
 individual on account of the place of his nativity or the peculiarity of 
 his education. It is too gross a folly to attempt to reason in contradic¬ 
 tion of such facts as these. Nothing but the overwhelming effects of 
 early and continued impressions could induce, or rather compel any 
 one to contend against such facts as these. No, my friends, ’tis an 
 immutable law of nature that man shall not decide when or where he 
 shall be born, or what religion he shall be taught. We well know 
 with what tenacity the great mass of ^mankind retain their early im¬ 
 pressions. There is no more merit in being a Christian than a cannibal; 
 both are what their organization and circumstances, over neither of 
 which they can be supposed to have had the least control, have com¬ 
 pelled them to be. Is not the whole matter as obvious as that two and 
 two make four ? 
 
 I may also remark that no child can be supposed to have the least 
 influence in deciding who shall be its parents. Now what an import¬ 
 ant circumstance in formingthe character of each individual is this! 
 Whether the child shall come into existence in the midst of a vicious 
 and degraded family; or whether he shall be born into a family of the 
 purest habits, the highest intelligence, and the most virtuous and ami¬ 
 able dispositions. The opposition between the circumstances of two 
 children thus differently ushered into the world is immense. But ought 
 the child that has been thus fortunate in its parentage to be praised for 
 the consequences which proceed from it? or is the offspring of vice 
 and iniquity to be blamed for the vicious impression received from its 
 parentage? This is a case in which it is easy to suppose the two ex¬ 
 tremes. But the child which has been most unfortunate in the circum¬ 
 stances of its birthplace and education, claims more of our care, 
 pity, and attention, than the child around whose cradle the most 
 propitious circumstances have shed their influence from the hour of * 
 its tprth. You see, therefore, that the individual has no choice as to 
 his country, his parentage, his language, or any of those things 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 191 
 
 which constitute the whole foundation of his character. And thus 
 his character is entirely formed for him, without his knowledge, will, 
 or consent; and we all know the influence which our early impres¬ 
 sions exercise over our future lives and conduct. Have I, my friends, 
 said enough to convince you of the errors of all religions which pre~ 
 suppose quite the reverse of all this, and give a very different tlirec- 
 tion to all our thoughts and feelings? If not, I will go on, for the 
 subject is inexhaustible. 
 
 The fifth fundamental law of human nature is—“That each 
 individual is so created that, when young, he may be made to 
 receive impressions, to produce either true ideas or false notions, 
 and beneficial or injurious habits; and to retain them with great 
 tenacity.” Suppose all the children in the world were placed under 
 circumstances to receive false notions, and the fact is so, for I 
 believe the minds of the present and all past generations have been 
 placed under circumstances in which, instead of receiving the truth, 
 they have been compelled to receive false notions upon every subject 
 in which their happiness is the most involved; and this has arisen 
 from our imagination having been much more cultivated on all reli¬ 
 gious and moral subjects, than any of our other faculties. The 
 whole world has been governed alone by imagination, on all these 
 subjects. We have been so much deceived in consequence that we 
 have called ourselves reasonable beings; but there never was a greater 
 misnomer* What is there that is reasonable now in the private and 
 public conduct of mankind? I have, for forty years, been trying to 
 discover what nation or people thought or acted in a rational manner. 
 Everywhere have I sought to find a reasonable population, but my 
 search has been fruitless. I have found them all governed up to this 
 hour by the most irrational notions, directly contrary to right reason 
 and their own interests and happiness. It is not for the interest or 
 happiness of any portion of mankind to act as they now do. By 
 their present mode of proceedings mankind are just as much opposing 
 their real interest, as the child who would spurn from him the most 
 strengthening food or the most salutary medicine. All your arrange¬ 
 ments denote the absence of reason. Look to those of government, 
 religion, law, commerce, war, and domestic purposes, and they all 
 partake of this character—they all tend to counteract your object, 
 which is to be as happy as the nature of your organization will per-* 
 mit. My friends, consider the nature of the duty which I have to 
 perform. Knowing that you have from infancy imbibed the most 
 erroneous notions derived from the wildest imaginations, what 
 measures can I, a stranger, take to enable you so far to unassociate 
 the ideas which have been forced into your minds as to enable you to 
 rc-create those minds, to be born again, and thus become rational 
 beings? This, my friends, is no light task. It requires a knowledge 
 of human nature, patience, and perseverance, and self-devotion to 
 the happiness and well being of my species alone, which can enable 
 me to disregard all that you may say or think of me, all that you 
 do to me, for the sake of doing you good. I can have no individual 
 
*92 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 •interest in removing your prejudices. What private emolument, 
 aggrandizement or remuneration could I ever have promised myself 
 from the beginning of my arduous course up to the present moment? 
 
 I was deeply affected by the degraded state in which I discovered all 
 nations to be, and interested for the happiness of my species, or I 
 never would have come forward to combat the darling prejudices of, 
 
 I may say, the whole world. But I well knew that unless somebody | 
 •would stand in the gap and expose himself to the risk of being sacri- \ 
 Seed, mankind must ever remain creatures influenced and governed \ 
 only by the errors of their early impressions which render them daily j 
 and hourly liable to every kind of suffering and misery, for which 
 there exist no other necessity than ignorance of our nature. Had I not 
 been thoroughly convinced that I could only influence you to direct 
 your attention to simple facts, and discard the illusions arising from 
 early impressions, made through the imagination, and that you 
 could all thereby attain to a high degree of virtue and happiness, I 
 would never have put my all to hazard by coming forward as I have 
 done. I only ask you, my friends, when your passions are calm and 
 your judgment cool, to take these twelve laws of our nature undef 
 your consideration; to examine them with the severest scrutiny, and 
 to read, learn, mark, and inwardly digest them until you fully com¬ 
 prehend them. For, my friends, it does require time to penetrate 
 into the subject so as to understand it fully. Not that the subject is 
 intricate in itself, but the excessive and extravagant cultivation of 
 your imaginations in opposition to existing facts, have almost destroyed 
 your judgments. This is the only reason why you cannot follow 
 me as rapidly as I wish to proceed with my deviopements and demon¬ 
 strations of these twelve laws, and of the highly beneficial practice 
 to which they will lead. No, my friends, before you can follow me 
 in my illustrations with that intensity of interest which the subject is 
 so pre-eminently calculated to inspire, these twelve laws must have 
 previously occupied your most serious and mature reflections. They 
 are adapted to secure your health, your comfort, your peace of mind, 
 and they will open human nature to your perusal in like manner as 
 you would unfold a topographical map. 
 
 After you once thoroughly understand these twelve laws, and shall 
 be informed to what country, class, sect, and party, any individual 
 belongs, you will know, to a very considerable extent, what that indi- _ 
 vidual is. His general thoughts, views, and feelings will be familiar 
 to you. It may appear, my friends, presumptuous and assuming 
 when I state the fact that the whole of human nature lies as palpably 
 open to my perusal as ever the map of any country was presented to 
 you. Therefore I cannot be snrprized at any thing I hear or see. I ; 
 can immediately trace the effect to its cause; and if you too, my \ 
 friends, only possessed this knowledge, so easily to be attained, it 
 would minister to you a joy, peace, and consolation,, that you would 
 cot exchange for all the world possesses. 
 
'DEBATE. 195 
 
 = * ~ /A 
 
 Air. Campbell rises— 
 
 Mr. Chairman—My friend, Mr. Owen, in his last address, has ad- 
 vanced a great many assertions, the bearing of which, upon the subject 
 before us, I cannot perceive, unless, indeed, Mr. Owen’s experience 
 is to be received as tantamount to incontrovertible proof. But my 
 opponent, numerous as his assertions are, advances nothing tangible; 
 he avers, indeed, that he has no attachment to metaphysics; that he 
 contemns metaphysical speculations;and seems plainly to insinuate 
 that I wished either in whole or in part to predicate my defence of 
 Christianity upon hair-breadth metaphysical subtleties. Now I con¬ 
 fidently appeal to every individual in this assembly, whether my 
 principal, my sole aim, lias not been to disentangle the evidences of 
 Christianity, and every point connected with this controversy, from 
 what was metaphysical or abstract. In the course of this discussion 
 have I not tendered an issue to my opponent upon several points? 
 So vague and indefinite is my opponent in the use of his terms that X 
 do not even know what he means by the word fact. [Here Mr. Owen% 
 defines a fact to be that which exists.] Well, now, we have my 
 friend’s definition of the word fact ; he tells us a fact is that which 
 exists; but I apprehend that no philologist will assent to this definition 
 of the word. At this time my opponent relies upon twelve facts, 
 which are to subvert all other historic facts and evidences, in the 
 world. These twelve facts, then, must be more puissant than Aaron’s 
 rod; than the ten categories of Aristotle; than the twelve tables 
 of the Decem-viri; than the precepts of the decalogue; or any code 
 of laws or system of legislation ever invented. For, by these twelve 
 facts, every religious impression is to be obliterated; every religious 
 idea is to be annihilated. Upon these twelve facts are predicated au 
 entirely new theory of man, and a universal moral renovation. Some¬ 
 times these are twelve divine laws of human nature; sometimes twelve 
 logical propositions to be demonstrated; and then twelve facts more 
 potent than the rod of Moses. But out of all these twelve wonderful 
 facts, where is the tangible fact before us? We have been told that 
 a fact is that which exists; but a stone exists, and so does a tree, an 
 idea, an opinion. But can we logically say that an opinion is a mat¬ 
 ter of fact? Definitions of this character are to be found in the wri¬ 
 tings of the commentators upon the Justinian code; definitions 
 which serve no other purpose but to obscure the text. We must have 
 a more logical definition than this: a fact is that which exists. Stones, 
 trees, and opinions exist, and are all these alike to be considered as 
 mattersjof fact? But my friend has conceived twelve imaginations; 
 he has had twelve pretty dreams about human nature; and on these 
 he has ventured to predicate every thing necessary to the happiness 
 of man. Now suppose Mr. Owen should attempt to prove that there 
 never was such a man as General Washington, and no such historic 
 fact as the American Revolution, and no such monumental commem¬ 
 orative institution as the annual celebration of the fourth of July ; 
 that there never existed an Emperor Augustus, or an Emperor Napo¬ 
 leon ; suppose, I repeat, that he should undertake to prove that Wash- 
 
 IT* ' 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 lU' 
 
 ington, the father of his country, the great moral hero, never existed, 
 and that the United States have never been emancipated from the 
 thraldom of the parent country; it would, I contend, be just as logi¬ 
 cal, as pertinent, and as rational in Mr. Owen to adduce these twelve 
 facts in evidence that all these matters of history were mere fictions 
 and fables, as to attempt to prove by the adduction of his twelve laws 
 of human nature, that the facts on which religion is predicated, never 
 had existence. There appears to me to be just as much logic, rea¬ 
 son. and good sense, in the one process of demonstration as in the 
 other. 
 
 All my anticipations have, in the course of this discussion, been 
 entirely disappointed. I did expect to have matters of fact plainly, 
 rationally, and logically presented. I did expect to witness a power¬ 
 ful display of that reason which sceptics so much adore. Now judge 
 of my mortification in finding nothing presented to me but intangible 
 yerbiage; in discovering that my friend uses terms and phrases in a 
 eense entirely at variance with their received interpretation and com¬ 
 mon acceptation; in a sense irreconcileable to what we call the com¬ 
 mon sense of mankind. I see plainly that there is nothing left for 
 me but to proceed to avail myself of this opportunity of presenting the 
 true grounds and solid reasons on which we Christians build our 
 faith. 
 
 Christianity is universally represented to be matter of belief—and 
 belief always requires testimony. Now, the question is, whether the 
 Christian belief is rationale Christianity does not pretend to be a treatise 
 on chemistry, or botany, or mathematics; but it makes a demand upon 
 our faith; and is, simply, belief predicated upon testimony. All that it 
 requires is, to examine its evidences; and the principal end and aim 
 proposed in this discussion to which the public has been invited, was 
 an examination into the evidences of Christianity. 
 
 It is conceded that our religion is built upon faith, and therefore all 
 that can be legitimately inquired into, on this topic, is, whether this 
 is a faith which a man, in possession of his intellectual powers, and 
 his five senses, can rationally entertain; whether a man of a sound 
 mind can reasonably be a Christian. I presume this to be the true 
 pridicament of this discussion in its present stage. The question is. 
 Whether to be Christians we must become dreaming enthusiasts, and 
 the mere creatures of wild imagination? or, on the other hand, Can 
 we be Christians on rational evidence and irrefutable testimony? I 
 think I should be almost willing to leave it to a jury of twelve scep¬ 
 tics to decide whether or not this is the legitimate question to be dis¬ 
 cussed here. The question before us is, whether or not testimony on 
 which Christianity is built, is of a character to carry conviction to 
 rational minds; if so, every rational man must believe Christianity; 
 if otherwise, he must reject it, I maintain that there is no other 
 question at present before us. Now, in the prosecution of this inqui¬ 
 ry, I have laid myself fairly open to the detection of any fallacy into 
 which I may chance to fall. I have invited any gentleman who may 
 ^e in possession of any historic, philosophic, or logical objection, to 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 195 
 
 my argumentlo adduce it either orally or in writing; and I now reiter¬ 
 ate the pledge to meet fairly, every fair and logical, objection. I con¬ 
 tend that I now stand upon the proper ground. I am not afraid that 
 if all the lights of science were radiated upon Christianity, that any 
 fallacy could be detected; but I contend this is no scientific question 
 for scientific men to differ and speculate upon. I contend that the 
 legitimate grounds on which Christianity is to be founded, are those 
 which have been stated. We yesterday progressed so far in the ar¬ 
 gument introduced, as to inquire at you, if there were an individual 
 nmong you who could be induced to set apart one hour of his time, 
 or one lamb of his flock, or to plant a single straw in the ground, i:i 
 perpetual commemoration of a fact which never did occur. 
 
 I will venture to assert that if the people of Cincinnati were to 
 erect twelve stone pillars upon the bank of the Ohio, commemorative 
 of the fact that the first founders of this city passed over the refluent 
 waters of the Ohio, as over dry land; took possession of this cite, and 
 here located themselves permanently; Isay, these twelve stones erect¬ 
 ed in perpetual attestation of this supposed matter of fact would not 
 be permitted to stand for one year. Such monuments would shock 
 the common sense of little boys, and they would prostrate them. I 
 do not believe they could keep their monuments standing even a sin¬ 
 gle day. But there is a nation now existing, which derives its origin 
 from a period of more remote antiquity than that in which the foun¬ 
 dation of the Chaldean, the Medo-Persian, the Grecian, Roman, or 
 any other empire of antiquity was laid. Every living vestige of these 
 once great and mighty empires of antiquity has disappeared; and 
 there does not now exist the man who can trace up his lineage to 
 any Greek or Roman progenitors, notwithstanding the ample means 
 possessed by these nations of perpetuating the memory of their national 
 existence and grandeur. 
 
 But the Jewish nation is still in existence, and we see them still 
 holding fast their venerable oracles, which were delivered to them 
 four thousand years ago, and able to trace up their ancestry to old 
 Abraham and Sarah. We discover them still devotedly attached 
 to a religion so admirably contrived that it does not contain a type 
 nor a symbol which was not designed for its perpetuation, and which 
 does not prove it to be divine. 
 
 The Jewish is, indeed, a nation suigeneris, the only nation we know 
 of, whose records are coetaneous with their primitive origin. These 
 records were most solemnly deposited in that sacred chest, under the 
 cherubim ot glory, which none but the consecrated high priest dare 
 approach. In this sacred chest were deposited the two tables of the 
 covenant in the hand-wri ring of Jehovah. These records not only con¬ 
 stituted all the religion of the country, but the whole of the civil and 
 municipal polity of their repository was that sacred chest, which was 
 awful and terrible, and calculated to inspire reverence in the minds 
 of the men and women who had witnessed every important fact that 
 was therein inserted; persons who had witnessed two millions of their 
 countrymen passing through the dry channel of the Red Sea; who 
 
1 ®, 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 had heard the voice of God and the sound of the trumpet '; who had 
 seen two millions sustained in the wilderness for forty years by £ 
 miracle; who had witnessed the miraculous passage over the Jordan. 
 These were facts which caused the hearts of the natives to quake be- 
 jfore the army of the Israelites, so that they gave up their possessions 
 ip them almost without resistance. The annals of this nation, coe- 
 taneous with their existence, have been wonderfully preserved; their 
 religion alone has preserved these records. Moreover the Jews have 
 been made to .hold these oracles in such a manner as to preclude 
 the possibility of any collusion between them and Christianity. 
 
 Never was there such a climax of evidence presented. I am now 
 looking back four thousand years; and am showing that from the re¬ 
 motest periods of antiquity there never has existed the possibility of 
 imposition in regard to these facts; in proof of this, I contend that it 
 is impossible to impose upon any people the solemn and perpetual ob¬ 
 servance of an institution commemorative of a circumstance that 
 never did occur. I defy Mr. Owen to produce the instance on record 
 which goes to refute this position; or the historic fact possessing the 
 |bur criteria which can be proved to be false.* But all the evidences 
 are not yet before you. 
 
 What is the philosophic character of this religion ? Previously to 
 the patriarchal revelations, it is presumable that there was not in the 
 whole vocabulary of human speech terms expressive of the character 
 and purposes of God or of spiritual ideas. In revealing religion to 
 5 nan it became necessary to give him also a new vocabulary. This 
 Yvas executed, as we teach children by signs, the arts of reading and 
 writing. We will take our illustration from the philosophy of a 
 child’iTprimer book. There we find the picture of a house, a tree, 
 lamb, &c. &c. Now what does this mean? Is it intended merely 
 to amuse the child? No: it is predicated upon the philosophy of his 
 nature—upon the supposition that the infant, in order to associate 
 ideas, must have the aid of sensible characters. There is much 
 philosophy implied in the invention of a child’s primer. The idea or 
 a house is presented to the child in a diagram ol an inch square. 
 
 •Mr. Dennison of Cincinnati, a learned and intelligent teacher of the Christian 
 religion, gave me the following statement— U A sceptical gentleman, in Scot¬ 
 land, spent twenty years in scrutinizing the history of all nations and all reli¬ 
 gions, to obtain the knowledge cf facts, or miracles, which might be tested by 
 the same criteria by which the advocates of Christianity test the facts adduced 
 to sustain the credibility of the scriptures composing the Old and New Testa¬ 
 ments. He imagined that he could subvert the whole system of Christianity, 
 by showing that the fictitious miracles, alleged by the Pagans, Mahometans 
 sod others, to have been performed in attestation of the truth of religions ac¬ 
 knowledged by Christians to be false, are as well entitled to credence as those 
 facts on which the truth of the Christian religion is predicated. But his labori¬ 
 ous researches and investigations, during this long period, resulted in an inge* 
 nious confession of his total inability to accomplish his design, in a complete 
 assurance of the truth and divine origin of the Christian religion, and in a pub¬ 
 lic profession of faith in Christ. Such is the force of truth on minds po^ 
 entirely blinded by prejudice, theory, or preconceived opinions.” 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 Yd 1 
 
 Thus the child discovers that a house can be represented artificially 
 in so small a compass; and thus the way is prepared for introducing 
 into its mind the use ofliteral characters; the letter A being as per¬ 
 fectly artificial as the picture of a house. In this way a child is 
 taught to discriminate the elementary artificial characters of written 
 language, and then we teach it the influence of these characters in 
 combination. The introduction of the pictured primer book was pre¬ 
 dicated upon such views of the philosophy of the infant mind. And 
 what was the picture presented by the Almighty in the gradual de- 
 velopement of those oracles of which the Jewish nation was designed 
 to be the repository? It was an altar—then a lamb—and then a 
 Mediator. The whole was developed by pictures and symbols. 
 What were the altar, sacrifice, lamb, and priest, but so many pictures 
 presented to the mind? It was therefore necessary that God should 
 proceed on this plan, and teach this people a new language, different 
 from that in which Adam was instructed. It now became necessary 
 that a language of symbols should be adopted; and for this purpose 
 God presented these pictures to their minds. Hence a house was 
 erected and filled with these symbols. There was not a pin in that 
 house, nor any article of furniture, nor any garment, nay, not a loop, 
 or a button, that was not prefigure J to Moses on Mount Sinai—and 
 all exhibited to him, as Paul says, as patterns of things in the heavens. 
 These their religion taught them to regard with the deepest rever¬ 
 ence. But the Jews did not understand the import of the symbols 
 which they thus reverenced; and this proves the absence of all fraud 
 and collusion. If they had understood the meaning of these symbols 
 and could have reasoned clearly from them to the things symbolized, 
 there might he some ground to suspect collusion. But the striking 
 fact is, that the nation which built the temple did not understand the 
 symbols which it contained; and nothing could open their under¬ 
 standings to the apprehension of their import until one stood in that 
 temple and took the veil which separated the visible from the invisible, 
 and rent it in twain; showing them afterwards what Moses and the 
 prophets did mean. If sceptics understood this, they could no longer 
 doubt the truth of Christianity. All plausible objections I am willing 
 to examine; but those reasonings and speculations of Mr. Owen upon 
 the social system are no more objections to the truth of Christianity 
 than are the Allegany protuberances to the theory cf the earth’s 
 sphericity. They are objections analogous in character to those of 
 the old woman who would not believe in the revolutions of our planet 
 because she never yet saw her garden round to the front of the house. 
 There can be no substantial argument urged against the verity of 
 these stupendous facts recorded in the annals of God’s chosen people. 
 The existing observance of the Jewish Sabbath is of i/self suiiicient 
 
 to silence all cavillers, and to convince every man capable of appre¬ 
 ciating the weight of historic evidence, that there could not have l ecu 
 fraud, or collusion, or imposition, in the recorded facts concerning 
 
 This evidence, in my cstima¬ 
 
 ths origin and roligi m of this nation 
 
 
 ion 
 
 5 
 
 is-invested with a solemn dignity, and 1 often regard it as the 
 
196 
 
 ©DEBATE, 
 
 focus into which all the divine light of revelation is concentrated. 
 Every part of the record conveys to my mind irresistible evidence that 
 Moses was commissioned by God, and that the Jewish religion is a 
 divine revelation. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 My Friends—-You see these two books which I hold in my hands; 
 here is one, and here is the other; do these two books added together 
 make three books or two? Now do you suppose that if, after such 
 demonstration as this, I were to preach to you for many years, I could 
 ever succeed in convincing you that one added to one made three? 
 Now this is a fair illustration of the difference between Mr. Camp¬ 
 bell’s arguments and my own. I place most distinctly and palpably 
 before you the fact that one and one make two—Mr. Campbell, in 
 conformity with his early impressions, is exerting all his rhetoric to 
 persuade you to believe that one and one make three; and this errone¬ 
 ous belief was forced into his mind by his early training and subsequent 
 education—he could not avoid receiving it, and how can he help 
 retaining it. He has truly, therefore, been using great ingenuity in 
 attempts to convince you that facts are not facts, as we see them; but 
 that one and one make three. 
 
 Let us, however, my friends, try and get back to the investigation 
 of facts, for these alone can give us real knowledge. We will there¬ 
 fore proceed to the investigation of the sixth law of our nature, 
 which is one of those divine laws that we are now to analyze, and 
 which is moreover one of those stumbling blocks, one of those diffi¬ 
 culties which Mr. Campbell cannot get over; one of those things 
 w hich he calls intangible , because he can make no impression upon 
 them. 
 
 This sixth law’ is, “That each individual is so created, that he must 
 believe according to the strongest impressions that can be made upon 
 his feelings, and other faculties, while his belief, in no case, depends 
 upon his will.’ 5 Now Mr. Campbell has very justly told you that reli¬ 
 gion is predicated entirely upon faith, and thus we come in direct 
 contact with each other. We cannot escape direct collision. When 
 I once have oeeular proof that one and one make two, there is no 
 |ower on earth that can convince me they make three. After our 
 eccular sense has become fully possessed of the truth of this simple 
 ■ferct, we may go farther, and say, that if all the divines and all the 
 religions in the world were to say that one and one make three, we 
 would find it impossible so far to control our will as to believe it. 
 Now when I know that [ have not one particle of power over my 
 belief; that what I shall be compelled to believe has never, in the 
 slightest degree, depended upon my will, how is it possible for me to 
 Relieve that the being who formed me and created my nature, and 
 subjected it to the resistless influence of this sixth law, can even 
 attribute either merit or demerit to any belief whatever? I could 
 bring this discussion just now to a very short point, but I think it 
 Would be a pity to have it closed so soon. Now the question is really 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 *99 
 
 this, Have we the power to believe or disbelieve at our will, or not? 
 If we have not the power to believe or disbelieve at our will, then 
 surely all religions are false and originate in ignorance. Now if we 
 have the power to will as we please, and if we have the power to 
 believe at will, should Mr. Campbell, to whom we are all already 
 so much indebted, only have the kindness, in addition to his former 
 good offices, to believe for five minutes that the whole of Christianity 
 is false, then I will admit that we have the power to believe at will. 
 If Mr. Campbell, with all the energy of will which he can com¬ 
 mand, will only force himself to believe for live minutes that Chris¬ 
 tianity is a fable and a falsehood, I will give up the contest, and 
 admit that I have not proved my point. But, perhaps, this would be 
 tasking his feelings and prejudices too severely; and therefore we 
 will only ask him to be so kind as to believe just for a quarter of an 
 hour that Mahomet was a true prophet sent of God. 
 
 But all jesting apart. Whenever we shall rightly understand this 
 subject, and shall know what manner of beings we are, we shall dis¬ 
 cover that the question of religion or no religion depends entirely 
 upon our power of belief or disbelief. It is not a metaphysical ques¬ 
 tion. Any one can ascertain the real merits of it for himself. If we 
 have the power of changing our belief at pleasure it is possible that 
 religion may be true; but if the Christian, like the Mahometan, is 
 compelled to believe in his district religion, then religion must be 
 false, and the first gleam of right reason which we shall acquire 
 will show us the extent of the errors in which, on these subjects, the 
 world has been involved. 
 
 I am willing to rest the merits of the whole controversy upon this 
 single affirmative proposition, “That no human being ever had the 
 power of belief or disbelief at his will, and therefore there cannot be 
 merit nor demerit in any belief.*’ This is now the isolated point of 
 controversy between me and my opponent. This is the real battle 
 ground, and the only arena in which my friend and myself’ can 
 engage in combat. Every discussion irrelevant to this point is a 
 mere vain and useless multiplication of words to amuse our fancy, 
 to darken our understanding, and to waste our time. 
 
 If any one in this assembly will come forward and adduce any fact 
 to prove that you can at all change your belief, some system of reli¬ 
 gion or other may be true—But if you cannot adduce a fact of this 
 character, your belief in religion proves you to be in the grossest 
 darkness. Until you can trace the consequence which the acquisition 
 of self-knowledge leads to, you can know nothing with regard to 
 yourselves. Do you suppose that this self-knowledge will be injuri¬ 
 ous to you? No, my friends, “Know iky selff was the most heavenly 
 precept the world has ever heard. It is the foundation, and the only 
 possible foundation for a pure and genuine charity. Tell me another 
 source from whence true charity can be derived. Where else will 
 you look for the principles of a charity that “thinketh no evilthat 
 finds an immediate, rational, and consolatory excuse for the opinions,, 
 manners, habits, and conduct, of all without one exception. 
 
200 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 If, therefore, you want to possess that which is truly divine, get this* 
 charity —a charity so pure that when you are trained in the full 
 knowledge of it, no motive to crime will exist; no feeling of anger, 
 irritation, or ill will on the part of any human being towards any 
 other of his race. When we shall be trained in a full knowledge of 
 the principles in which this beneficial, this admirable charity is 
 founded, we shall, in consequence, have rational countenances, and. 
 not until then. Owing to the lamentably mistaken manner in which 
 we have been trained, we are now filled with anger, and oftentimes 
 with malevolent feelings against those who have been taught to differ 
 from us in sentiment. What have I not heard the w r orld unjustly say 
 of me and of the motives which govern my conduct? But having 
 had the knowledge of those principles given to me, on which alone 
 true charity can ever be founded, I have listened to all these things 
 as I would to words upon any other subject. I cannot, except for a 
 moment, be angry with those who misconceive, misrepresent, or 
 revile me; knowing that all these things proceed from an organization, 
 and local circumstances acting upon it, which create irrational pre¬ 
 judices. Where, therefore, is the rational pretext for being angry? 
 From whence, then, under any circumstances, can arise the rational 
 pretext, after consideration, for being angry or displeased wfith any 
 of our fellow beings? They are coerced by a law which they cannot 
 resist, to feel, to think, to act, and to believe, independently of their 
 volitions. r _.. 
 
 These, my friends, are some of the practical results which I have 
 experienced and enjoyed as the natural fruits of a knowledge of these 
 divine laws of nature. The charity emanating directly from this 
 knowledge has given me a patience, an equanimity, and a self-pos¬ 
 session, under a concurrence of trying circumstances that I am con¬ 
 vinced no knowledge derived from any religious considerations could 
 have implanted within me. Therefore, my friends, do not suppose 
 that there is any thing pernicious in infidelity , so called; for you may 
 rest assured that the only practical moral or intellectual motives 
 capable of producing important and permanent ameliorations in soci¬ 
 ety, must be deri ved from what yon have been taught to call Infidelity \ 
 -—but most arbitrarily and irrationally taught. Not, my friends, 
 that infidels of modern times are much better than other folks, but 
 the Christian shoe has been unriveted from their minds, and thus 
 they become so circumstanced as to stand some chance of arriving at' 
 the knowledge of the truth*, whilst the true believes, on w hose minds 
 the shoe still remains fast riveted, are compelled to admit into them 
 many errors which give a false and in jurious direction to their best 
 feelings, while their noblest power, their faculty of judgment, is 
 suffered to lie latent, torpid, buried, or misguided. My friends, 
 would we not be better and happier beings if we could remove far 
 from us all anger and irritation?—and wdiat can do this so effectually 
 as the conviction that those who act in the most direct opposition to 
 our notions of right, are not the objects of blame, but of our charity, • 
 our sincerest pity and compassion? To me the present appears a 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 201 
 
 most singular era. The annals of the world do not afford a parallel 
 to the assembly this day congregated in this place^ Before me are 
 hundreds collected together from various quarters of the world, who 
 have all been trained in notions peculiar to themselves; and yet they 
 sit here quietly and decorously to hear discussed doctrines in direct 
 hostility to all their early-taught religious prejudices and opinions. 
 This is the first time such a thing has occurred in the annals of history. 
 If.I had attempted fifty years ago to have addressed a popular assem¬ 
 bly in the style that, prompted by a love of truth and by the deep 
 interest I feel in promoting the happiness of my species, I have 
 ventured to do on this occasion, it is most probable I should have been 
 torn to pieces; and yet I just as much deserve to be torn to pieces 
 to-day for speaking the truth without fear or favor as fifty years ago. 
 The ignorance and bigotry of our ancestors were so gross that if any 
 individual had come forward with the purest and most philanthropic 
 motives to promulgate the truths which you have heard from me in 
 this place, he would most certainly have been burnt alive or torn to 
 pieces. The advance of the human mind in certain branches of real 
 knowledge since that period, has produced this difference of feeling* 
 and convinces me that we are approximating to a greatly improved 
 period of human existence, call it, if you please, the Millennium. 
 What I mean to state is, that our minds are in a rapidly progressive^ 
 state of preparation for the admission, discussion, comparison, analy¬ 
 sis, and thorough comprehension of simple facts, a knowledge of 
 which can alone produce intelligence, virtue, good feelings and sin 
 cere affection among mankind. Indeed, I see very plainly every 
 step of the practice by which this state of general happiness is to be 
 attained. And the first preparatory step is that all men should be 
 disabused of the errors implanted by their early local circumstances 
 and instruction, in order that their knowledge should be all founded 
 in facts, and not derived, as now, from the imaginations of our 
 ignorant ancestors who were without the valuable experience acquired 
 since their day. If I could so far impress upon the people of Cincin- 
 atti the value of the knowledge to be derived from the twelve funda¬ 
 mental principles of human nature, derived from daily existing facts, 
 as to give them a sufficient degree of interest to examine whether 
 ihey are true or false; my conviction is that a large majority, if not 
 the whole population, would be convinced that they are true. It 
 would not then be difficult to direct to the means by which you might 
 all become virtuous, intelligent, independent and happy. I do not 
 sav that this change could be effected in you to the same extent that; 
 your adoption of these laws in practice would enable you to effect in 
 your children. The latter would have so little comparatively to un¬ 
 learn in habit, and to unassociate in their minds, that they would soon 
 exhibit to you a §tate of human happiness and enjoyment of which it 
 has never entered into the heart cf man to conceive^—and this happi¬ 
 ness of theirs, after a short time, would be so strongly reflected back 
 upon yourselves, that a large increase of happiness would accrue to 
 you. My friendst, this js chimera existing only in my imagine 
 
202 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 lion. No \ I have seen with my own eyes this beautiful effect pro¬ 
 duced upon a whole population. I have seen the children of some of 
 the most ignorant and deformed in their habits and conduct more 
 amiable, interesting, and happy, than the most sanguine could antici¬ 
 pate under the other injurious circumstances in which they were 
 placed, and have seen that happiness and the influence of the superior 
 characters which were formedybr these children, most strongly and 
 most beneficially reflected back upon their parents. 
 
 Mr. Campbell’s next address. 
 
 That my opponent labors under some sort of mental illusion is mos-t 
 apparent from his style of reasoning and argument. He has held 
 £avo books before your eyes, and asked you if he did not hold one 
 in either hand, and whether one plus one equal three? Now r , in 
 the name of common sense, what bearing had this occular appeal 
 upon the subject matter in controversy ? What is the extent of the 
 mental hallucination exhibited by Mr. Owen ? It seems to me to be 
 of a character with that of the herbalist who w r ould attempt to ascer¬ 
 tain the specific gravity of his simples by the use of a yard stick; or 
 like that of the vintner who should attempt to ascertain the number of 
 cubic inches in one of his casks by the use of pounds avoirdupois. 
 Of such a character is the illusion which perverts Mr. Chven’s un¬ 
 derstanding. Is it an arithmetical question that we have before us? 
 Or are we to test the verity of historic facts by the use of mathema¬ 
 tical demonstrations? Have we uttered any thing so absurd as the 
 proposition that one book plus one book equal three books? But what 
 Was the argument to which my opponent alluded, as involving this 
 absurdity ? So far from attempting any refutation of our arguments, 
 
 I cannot discover that he makes the slightest allusion to them in his 
 discourses. He does not deny that all religion is built upon faith. 
 Now, is this proposition as contrary to the evidence of our senses, as 
 that these two books make three books? I repeat that all religion 
 purports to be established upon testimony: and I ask again, Wherein 
 is this proposition repugnant to reason? Wherein is it assimilated to 
 the proposition that one book added to another makes three books? 
 Why this is equal ingenuity to the boy who tried to convince his father 
 by his logic that the two ducks on the table made three; and after the 
 old gentlemen had heard the demonstration, he said to the lad’s 
 mother, “Do you take one duck, and I will take the other, and Bob 
 may have the third for his logic!” I am willing to concede to my 
 opponent equal merit and reward for his logic” but 1 protest against 
 stas altogether impertinent to the subject matter of this debate. In¬ 
 deed, I apprehended from the confidence of my friend’s manner, w r hen 
 he held up the two books, that he was about to apply some touchstone, 
 cr test, whereby I might be discomfited; but w hat was mv surprize at 
 only finding myself opposed by this same old sixth fact! And w hat 
 is the mighty import of this sixth law'? It does not even purport to . 
 be any thing more than an assertion that our belief is independent of 
 one volitions. 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 •203 
 
 Bat my opponent seems to imagine that his bare assertion of this 
 Ihctis sufficient to carry conviction to every mind. Mr. Owen has 
 asked me to believe Christianity untrue for five minutes. Now look at 
 the illusion here. The question is not, Are we able to disbelieve, or 
 discard our pre-existing belief \ from our minds at will? In order to 
 see, it is as necessary to have rays of light as the organs of vision. 
 Now if my opponent had asked me to believe for a moment that 
 the Sun was not now shining, and afterwards triumphed at the 
 impossibility of the thing, what would it all amount to? Would 
 it prove that the fact of seeing was in all cases independent of 
 volition? But, I contend, that our volitions have as much control 
 over the mental as the corporeal eye. I admit that frequently our 
 eyesight is, perhaps, involuntarily exercised. But from these par¬ 
 ticular premises, am I to argue to the general conclusion, that in no 
 case whatever is my belief, or my vision, under the control of my 
 volition. Have I not documented with proof that my belief in testi¬ 
 mony is as much under the control of my volition, as are my ac¬ 
 quisitions in any department of science? I know, indeed, that if 
 I am sitting in a room, and a person open the door, and suddenly 
 present a mopkey before my eyes, I cannot help seeing it. In like 
 manner, a person may suddenly enter my room, and announce to me 
 an interesting fact. From the high character of the narrator, and 
 other adjuncts accompanying the fact, I may not be able to withhold 
 my belief in it; but is it a logical conclusion from these particular pre¬ 
 mises, that I must necessarily, in every instance , acquire a knowledge 
 of facts, and see monkej r s, without the least exercise of volition. It Ls 
 contrary to all correct principles of reasoning to argue thus from 
 particulars to generals. Who does not know that we may occasion¬ 
 ally acquire knowledge without the exercise of volition? But our 
 acquisitions of information, made in this way, do not constitute a 
 thousandth part of our stock of knowledge acquired in the ordinary 
 natural way; viz. by a voluntary exercise of our senses. Mr. Owea 
 cannot sustain his position, because, for one case which he may ad¬ 
 duce wherein belief is exercised independently of volition, we can 
 produce hundreds wherein it is exercised voluntarily. 
 
 But Mr. Owen affirms that this is not a metaphysical question: 
 nevertheless a metaphysical question it certainly is. And yet my 
 friend says he will rest the truth of his theory upon a metaphysical 
 discrimination. 
 
 [Mr. Owen said , “I contend that it is a question of fact^ and not * 
 metaphysical question.”] 
 
 [Mr. Campbell resumes]— 
 
 Then, Mr. Chairman, it will be necessary to have a new vocabula¬ 
 ry. But I am perfectly willing that the argument should be read by 
 the public as my opponent has presented it. It will be for the public 
 to decide whether it be metaphysical or not. 
 
 In the prosecution of my argument I had advanced so far as to de¬ 
 monstrate, 1 trust, that the Jewish religion Was divine, and that all its. 
 rites were in their nature symbolical and prophetic; that the sacrifice 
 
204 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 of a lamb, the building of an altar, the consecration of the priesthood, 
 and the whole ritual of Moses were symbolical and prophetic of Chris¬ 
 tianity; that this ritual was designed to have a two-fold operation— 
 first, upon the generation thei living; and secondly, upon posterity. 
 With the first to keep up the constant recollection of the divine insti- 
 tions of their religion. Your children, says Moses, will ask you what 
 is the meaning of your eating the paschal lamb; and then you must 
 tell them the circumstances by which you became a nation. And 
 such was the import of every one of the Jewish institutions. When 
 they paid their five shekels per head, for the redemption of the first¬ 
 born, their children were to be informed that these first-born were 
 the ransomed of the Lord; and this tribute was rendered in perpetual 
 commemoration of that event. This is implied in the rendition of this 
 tribute up to the present time. Their successors were also to be in# 
 informed that the| Pentecost was solemnly observed as commemo¬ 
 rative of the promulgation of the law from Mount Sinai; the feast of 
 the tabernacles for so many days, to commemorate that they once 
 dwelt in tents in the wilderness; that on the fiftieth day after their 
 redemption they heard the voice of God promulgating the law—had 
 seen all the accompaniments of the divine presence, and received 
 the autograph of their constitution from the Lord. 
 
 All these things the children of the Israelites were to be taught* 
 and they were so contrived as to be equally prospective and retro¬ 
 spective, so as to preserve and conduct forward the miraculous 
 evidences of their religion. Hence the deliverance of the children 
 of Israel out of the land of Egypt, their Pentecost, and every part 
 of their ritual, looked forward to, and anticipated a new state of 
 things, in which a certain system of existing realities was to corre¬ 
 spond with the past. Was there ever presented an exhibition of 
 wisdom and benevolence comparable to this? Every part of the 
 ritual operates as a commemoration of its divine institution, and to 
 produce faith in all future generations. It was designed to stand for 
 a perpetual monument of their miraculous history to the nations; and 
 its consummation in the developement of that order which enters into 
 the constitution of the Christian religion, was as natural as the pro¬ 
 duction of the bird from its shell. And thus the consummation of its 
 every type is portrayed in the life, death, resurrection, and ascension 
 of Christ. On these accounts we consider these memorials as of 
 high moral power and dignity, and the facts which they commemorate 
 as rational and demonstrably established. You have seen what all 
 the gatherings and gleanings of my opponent during a period of forty 
 years, have enabled him to bring forward against these evidences. 
 
 With regard to the means employed for the preservation and per¬ 
 petuation of these holy oracles, there were not only the temple and t 
 tabernacle, but men set apart to take care of the record. And the 
 necessity of their care emphatically impressed upon them. This was ' 
 the way to preserve it from interpolation. No man dare touch it at 
 -peril of his life; and this is the reason why Uzzah was struck dead 
 
debate. 
 
 2G5 
 
 for touching the chest, in which was the safcred deposite, to represent 
 the majesty of that power which guarded it. 
 
 Now, in process of time, the copy of this record began to be read in 
 every synagogue. Their land, like other countries, in time, became 
 too small for its population. In consequence, they emigrated, and 
 carried with them their religion, their history, and law, to the ends of 
 the earth. These migrations caused the Jewish scriptures to be trans¬ 
 lated into the Greek language, about 300 years before the birth 
 of Christ. By the order of Ptolemy Philadelphus, the whole writings 
 of Moses and the Prophets were translated by seventy-two Jews, for 
 the benefit of the foreign-born Jews, and of the proselytes made from 
 other nations. Thus by this singular wisdom were these oracles 
 handed to every nation under heaven; insomuch that the learned 
 cages of Greece beca me conversant with these oracles. 7'iie 
 traversing all parts of the earth, carried along with them their reli¬ 
 gious peculiarities; thus ail nations were called to bear witness to the 
 truth of these sacred scriptures. This singular people when contrast¬ 
 ed with the philosophic nations of Greece and Rome in their notions 
 of God, exhibit a phenomenon which can only bejexplainecl on the ad¬ 
 mission of a supernatural revelation being bestowed upon them. 1 
 
 The Greeks and Romans had cultivated philosophy very extensive¬ 
 ly. Their languages exhibit the rpost polished intellectual refinement, 
 and express every ramification of human thought; they not only in¬ 
 vented, but compounded and remodified words so that any idea 
 whatever could be forcibly expressed thereby. They had cultiva¬ 
 ted science to an extent far beyond any other nations; but they had, 
 nevertheless, a thousand foolish superstitions composing their my¬ 
 thology. But here were a people called Jews, ignorant, of, and con¬ 
 temning philosophy, who considered the Greeks absolutely stupid and 
 blind in matters of religion. Yes, the acute, the polished, and re¬ 
 fined Greeks were sots in theological matters; but the Jews, destitute 
 of philosophic taste and acquirements \yere nevertheless in possession 
 of a religion every way honorable to the character of the Creator and 
 Governor of the World. Now how is this to be accounted for? A 
 polished nation, like the Greeks, embracing a system full of theolo¬ 
 gical absurdities; and, on the other hand, the rude and unlettered 
 Jews holding the only rational views of the Creator, and contending 
 for the unity and spirituality of God I! 
 
 But this same people, being a travelling people, carried their ora¬ 
 cles with them every where; and by this universal promulgation of 
 them communicated to all nations tho confident expectation that some 
 wonderful person was to be born, through whose influence there was 
 to be brought about a universal revolution in society; through whom 
 a new order of things was to arise, and the world be blest thereby.— 
 For this universal promulgation of the Jewish record, all nations 
 £>ndlv cherished the idea, that at the very time of the actual birth of 
 .the Messiah, a person in that character should appear in the land ef 
 
 18 
 
206 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 Judea; the Roman Poet* - sings of it; all nations had arrived at au 
 uniformity and universality of anticipation in this matter, and in the 
 reign of Augustus, there was not a nation which was not as fully 
 prepared as the Jews to anticipate the advent of the Messiah. 
 
 Adjourned till afternoon. 
 
 Thursday , April 16, 3 o'clock i*, P. M. 
 
 Mr. Owen’s next address. 
 
 My friends—As 1 mentioned this forenoon, I might, with safety, 
 rest this portion of this discussion entirely upon the last law that I 
 have read. My friend, Mr. Campbell, deems it a metaphysical 
 question. I conceive it to be entirely a question of fact. And I 
 think the whole point was conceded when Mr. Campbell discovered 
 that he could not disbelieve Christianity, or believe Mahometanism 
 at will. However, it is necessary that the subject should be present¬ 
 ed in every varied point of view, in order to enable men to unasso¬ 
 ciate their early implanted ideas opposed to it. Mr. Campbell was a 
 little surprized to discover that this was one of the old laws of nature 
 for which I have been contending; but truth is immutable; it is the 
 same to-day that it ever has been, and will ever continue to be. 
 Therefore, in all future preachings, after the truth shall be clearly 
 and fully developed, there will be no occasion to have any more texts 
 of scripture than is contained in these twelve law’s; for they will ever 
 remain immutably true, and be a foundation for an ample code of 
 moral law, sufficient to lead us unerringly to every beneficial practi¬ 
 cal result. 
 
 There were a great number of statements in Mr. Campbell’s last 
 half hour’s discussion, which I might very easily refute; but as they 
 do not in the least concern the true merits of the argument, I deem it 
 an unjustifiable waste of time to do more than merely to mention 
 them. For example, when Mr. Campbell said he could not avoid 
 seeing the Sun, he committed a mistake; for he might shut his eyes, 
 and then he could not see it. 
 
 The last law on w’hich I commented, was that which declares that 
 our belief is involuntary, and therefore all religions are untrue, as they 
 pre-suppose our belief to be voluntary, or they are perfectly needless, 
 and mean nothing. The next law is, that each individual is so created, 
 
 *Note by the Reporter .— The harmonious genius of the Mantuan bard, has 
 taught us in all the charms of his exquisite muse, the expectations of the Roman 
 world, upon this subject. A few years before the birth of Christ, virgil sings 
 of him like one inspired: “The last age (saith he) is at length arrived, predic¬ 
 ted by the prophetess of Cumee. The great order of ages begins ,to circle 
 anew; justice returns to the earth, and the peaceful reign of Saturn; and from 
 heaven descends a new and divine offspring. He shall rule the tranquil world 
 with his father’s virtues. Soon the great months shall begin to roll on, and 
 every vestige of our former crimes shall be effaced. Enter on thy mighty 
 work, O Son of Supreme Jove, dear offspring of the gods.” 
 
 Late researches into the antiquities of Judea, Persia, and China, show that the 
 same traditions and hopes existed in the most distant eastern nations. Vide 
 Asiatic researches, Indian antiquities. Piere Hu Hold’s history of China. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 207 
 
 that he mast like that which is pleasant to him, or that which produces 
 agreeable sensations on Ins individual organization; and he must 
 dislike that which creates in him unpleasant or disagreeable sensa¬ 
 tions; while he cannot discover, previous to experience, what those 
 sensations shall be. A large portion of all the religions of which I 
 know any thing, presuppose that man is so created that he can love 
 .or hate at pleasure. Now the law of our nature is in direct contra¬ 
 diction to this notion. There are no individuals in this assembly who 
 can like, be indifferent to, or dislike ?ne , for instance, by any effort 
 of the will in opposition to the impressions which all m3 7 proceedings 
 have already made upon them. They are obliged to receive exactly 
 the impressions which my exterior, my manners, and my whole con¬ 
 duct make upon their individual organizations; and whether they 
 like, are indifferent to, or dislike me, I cannot in consequence blame 
 them. And when this principle of human nature shall be understood, 
 it will be discovered to be of the highest practical importance—it will 
 tend (concurrent^ with the one immediately preceding) to implant 
 and to root principles of kindness and knowledge so deeply in the 
 human heart and understanding, that we shall, indeed, have unlimited 
 charity for the whole family of man. Then, instead, of being angry 
 with our children when they have not affection for us, we shall scru¬ 
 tinize into the cause why they clo not feel as much love as we wish 
 them to entertain for us; and we shall look for that cause in ourselves. 
 Instead, therefore, of scolding; our children, or of quarrelling with 
 them, we shall devote our attention to self-examination, and be 
 patient, calm, kind, and affectionate to them. This is another of 
 those invaluable practical results which will be produced by our 
 obedience to these laws of our nature. Then, my friends, we shall 
 cease to blame our children for their feelings, their thoughts, or their 
 actions. On the contrary, we shall be taught to know that we have 
 efficacious means of correcting the defects of our children, whether 
 organic or superinduced upon their defective organization, and this 
 without the slightest emotion of anger or irritation. And a know¬ 
 ledge of these laws or principles will force the same rational practice 
 from us to all the rest of our fellow-beings as well as to our offspring. 
 There can be no error, no irrationality in any of our proceedings, 
 when we understand these laws, and that knowledge will compel us 
 to act upon them, 
 
 I have now, perhaps, proved sufficiently in detail, that all religions 
 are founded in direct opposition to the facts which now exist, ever 
 have existed, or can exist. I am, therefore, quite willing to rest this 
 part of the subject upon what has now been presented to you to prove 
 that all the religions of the world, in consequence of being altogether 
 irreconcileable to the laws of human nature, are founded in the igno¬ 
 rance of man. The next part of my duty is to demonstrate that these 
 religions are the true and only source of all the vice and misery which 
 have been experienced in the world. The latter clause of the pro¬ 
 position is so intimately connected, so inseparatety interwoven with 
 the former, that what proves the one must necessarily prove the other. 
 
:M DEBATE 
 
 Ffom the facts exhibited to you it has been derribnstpated that all 
 he* rdigions of* the world are directly opposed to the never-changing 
 laws of our nature* arid that which compels men to act unnaturally;, 
 must be a never-failing source of error, contradiction* vice* crime, and 
 misery. In the nature of things, as we find them actually existing, 
 tio other result could arise. It is, perhaps, sufficient to observe that 
 all the religions of the world are unnatural,or contrary to the nature 
 of man ; to demonstrate the truth of all which I have undertaken to 
 prove, when I show the facts, capable of hourly inspection, every 
 where, that man is not the being that all these religions presuppose 
 him to be. It is here, my friends, 1 take my stand upon all these 
 important questions. And it is my deep-rooted conviction, after forty* 
 years of the closest investigation of this subject, that it is not in the 
 power of any man living to prove any of these facts untrue, or any 
 of the deductions from them erroneous. But you will ask me, How 
 can religion be the source of vice? My friends, I have already told 
 you that that which opposes the immutable laws of our nature, will 
 be sure to be found, in its consequences, productive only of vice, 
 fleligion lays the foundation for hypocrisy, falsehood, and deception 
 of every description. Your spiritual pastors tell you that you must 
 believe according to their fanciful notions, and the laws of your 
 nature are continually impelling you to rise up in rebellion against 
 such instructions. No man likes to appear singular or disagreeable 
 hi the eyes of his fellows, and still less to have the means of his 
 subsistence withdrawn from himself and family for expressing his 
 houghts; and therefore men are under a strong necessity to say they 
 believe as their neighbors appear to believe, and to feel as their 
 neighbors and friends think they ought to feel, and from this begin¬ 
 ning a complicated system of falsehood and deception takes its rise. 
 And whenever falsehood is thus implanted in our nature, it soon per¬ 
 vades the whole man, making his whole life one continued lie to his 
 genuine thoughts and feelings; his conduct and conversation are one 
 continued lie against his nature ; and thus there is an end of all real 
 virtue among mankind. Virtue and falsehood, or deception can never 
 exist well together. The religions of the world have produced such 
 an accumulation of irrational habits, false notions, and bad feelings, 
 arising from this, as circumstances now are, unavoidable hypocrisy, 
 ihat we cannot be in the world without feeling the necessity to cover 
 our real thoughts and feelings—without, in fact, living in an atmos¬ 
 phere of perpetual falsehood and deception. Our words, looks, and 
 actions, are scarcely any thing else but falsehood and deception. 
 Who dares speak his real sentiments on the subject of religion and 
 affections, without being subjected to injury in his reputation and 
 property? Are not these fears sufficiently operative to deter men 
 and women from speaking their real thoughts and feelings? Talk not 
 to me of virtue so long as men and women are compelled, by the 
 absurdities of your institutions and erroneous conceptions of all things 
 around you, to be insincere in their language and deceptious in their 
 conduct. Falsehood and virtue can never exist together; and now your 
 
debate. 
 
 209 
 
 whole system is false from its foundation upwards. Every profession, 
 trade, or occupation, supports itself by its deceptions. Where are 
 the individuals now to be met with who speak the language of truth 
 and no other language to each other ? Almost the first thing you are 
 compelled to teach your children is falsehood and insincerity. Our 
 language to our little ones, when they are about to speak the truth, is, 
 a O my dears," you must not say this, that, or the other thing!” The 
 poor children cannot imagine why they should be inhibited from 
 speaking the truth; and it is a system of severe training to the infant 
 mind, before we can give children that degree of insincerity and de- 
 ception which is necessary to constitute them what is called “rational 
 in society.” But I trust the time is fast approaching when no child 
 shall be (as at present) systematically instructed in falsehood and 
 insincerity—when there will not exist a motive for deceptions conduct 
 or behavior. 
 
 Is it necessary for me to do more than to call your attention to the 
 extent of falsehood, deception, and hypocrisy which is every where 
 prevalent? .Do you not find yourselves surrounded with these crimes 
 •from morning till night, and wherever you go? I appeal to your 
 personal knowledge and experience of what is passing in every de¬ 
 partment of life, and even in all the little coteries of my female 
 friends. But when we discover that we cannot love or hate, believe 
 or disbelieve at our will, 1 shall act openly, honestly, and consistent¬ 
 ly from the knowledge, no rational being will discover any motive for 
 any kind of deception or insincerity. But at present we are not in a 
 situation to incur the hazard incident to the speaking of the truth. 
 What would be the consequences if all these young ladies now before 
 me were to begin to speak the truth and nothing but the whole truth 
 to-day ? What would the stayed and grave members of society say about 
 them? Why, that they were fit only for a lunatic hospital! So would 
 they say of every man or woman that dared to speak the truth; and 
 this derationalizing and corrupting effect has been produced by re¬ 
 ligion alone. It is by falsehood and deception of the grossest kind 
 that all the religions of the world have been established, and by these 
 arts they are now alone supported. Hypocrisy, deception, and false¬ 
 hoods arc the floodgates of every kind of vice. They destroy all con¬ 
 fidence between man and man, and between man and woman, and 
 they create a large portion of the most inferior and disagreeable feel¬ 
 ings that can be implanted in our nature. They force us to suppress 
 and disguise the expression of our feelings before the individual; but 
 the moment his back is turned, we launch out with great latitude upon 
 all his defects and peculiarities, not one word of which would we 
 ever utter to his face. Such we know to be almost the universal 
 practice of mankind. Now, simply because I have dared to speak 
 openly exactly what I feel and think, for the benefit and happiness of 
 my species, and thus to proclaim my convictions, and come forward 
 and act upon them, I have been called a fool, a madman, fit only for a 
 lunatic asylum. This has been my reward for having the moral 
 courage to speak the simple truth as nature compels me to compre- 
 
 18* 
 
m 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 head it; therefore, my young friends, you cannot, with safety, yet 
 venture to speak out the truth: for if you do, you will assuredly risk 
 confinement in a lunatic hospital! 
 
 It would require a great deal of time and reflection to trace and 
 deduce all the other vices which necessarily flow from deception, 
 hypocrisy, and falsehood. I leave this to your imagination, because 
 it has been well cultivated; but it would occupy too much time for 
 me to detail them, 
 
 The next evil is disunion. All religions are peculiarly well adapted 
 to disunite the human family. No device so effectual in its nature to 
 create disunion amongst mankind, as religion. At the same moment 
 when a system was introduced and adopted, ascribing merit or demerit 
 to any particular opinions, likings, or dislikings, was the foundation 
 laid few* all the dissentions amongst mankind, which have ever dis¬ 
 tracted the world. 1 need not, my friends, refer you to the religious 
 wars and massacres of former times, or to the angry controversies of 
 our forefathers, when they were debating what mysterious or absurd 
 creeds should be devised to be forced into the minds of human beings 
 from their birth; nor need I refer you to all the public calamities 
 which religious dissentions have caused amongst various nations of 
 *he earth. I need only to refer you to your own experience of the 
 divisions and jarrings, bad feelings and passions, which occur in 
 families and neighborhoods, solely because they cannot force them¬ 
 selves to think alike on the subject of religion. You find mankind 
 every where herding in sects and parties, excluding from their frater¬ 
 nal sympathies all who possess a different faith. These differing 
 creeds form an impassable barrier to keep asunder the various reli¬ 
 gious sects and parties. See how the Christians and Turks are now 
 contending against each other. Christianity arrayed on the one side 
 and Mahometanism on the other. Why, my friends, tigers could nqf 
 be more savage than they are, or exhibit conduct more irrational. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 I had hoped, Mr. Chairman, that the document which I presented 
 to Mr. Owen on the subject of his favorite position, would have 
 merited his consideration; that the objections which I there offered 
 to his favorite thesis would have commanded some attention; that 
 before repeating, and rehearsing, and then re-reciting his twelve 
 propositions, he would have made an effort to reply to these objections. 
 But, instead of such an attempt, my opponent has repeated, almost 
 verbatim, what he had antecedently told us at least three or four 
 times. I must again solicit an exposition of some of the important 
 terms which my opponent uses; for example, I solicit, and I have -a 
 right to claim from him, his definition of the term fact , the term 
 millennium , and the term heaven . These are terms of very frequent 
 recurrence in my opponent’s vocabulary; and I think it more than 
 probable that the ideas which we attach to these names differ, toto 
 codo, from those which are attached to them by my opponent. That 
 knowledge, sincerity, and candor, which my opponent so much 1 
 
debate. 
 
 2U 
 
 extols, would not appear disadvantageous!y in himself, on this occa* 
 sion. It is a disingenuous and unfair imposition upon us to use terms 
 except in their current application and according to their usual and 
 most known signification. My opponent has given us a terrific picture 
 of Christianity, To the triumphs of Christianity has he attributed 
 all the insincerity, malevolence, and other vices of society. From 
 the address which you have heard from Mr. Owen you would natu¬ 
 rally conclude on opening the sacred volume to find it filled with such 
 beatitudes as these, Blessed are the slanderers,blessed the hypocrites; 
 happy the liars, happy the miscreants, You would from Mr. Owen’s 
 account of the book, expect to find, at least, one section inculcating 
 such moral precepts as these, “Thou shall kill, thou shall commit 
 adultery, thou shall bear false witness, thou shalt hate thy neighbor, 
 and thou shalt live in discord and dissention with thy fellows, and in 
 the practice of every thing calculated to destroy human happiness.” 
 If you pay any attention to Mr. Owen’s libels on the scriptures, 
 what else could you expect to find in them but benedictions of such 
 import? He has, however, given us some idea of his standard of 
 morality. After speaking of the mischievousness and hypocrisy of 
 the priesthood, he tells us that he would not displace them. He 
 would have these priests supported in their lying and deceptious trade, 
 lest this projected revolution should deprive them of bread. He 
 has told you that you ought not, yet awhile, to tell the truth if you 
 expect to be tolerated in society. By his own showing, such are my 
 opponent’s views of morality and sincerity. So much in passing, 
 with regard to Mr. Owen’s last address. 
 
 - In the prosecution of the argument we have before us, we have 
 arrived at that period of Jewish history whichgave to the whole world 
 (Jews and Greeks) the oracles containing the religion which Moses 
 taught the children of Israel. We have alluded to the effect which 
 the dissemination of these oracles produced. We have noticed the 
 universal anticipation of a new order of society—insomuch that this 
 Messiah might be called, as he is in ancient prophecy, the “Desire of 
 ALL nations .” This is the very name which the ancient prophet 
 Haggai so significantly and so emphatically bestows upon him. But 
 it was now become necessary that these oracles should be universally 
 disseminated in order to produce such a desire as this. When wo 
 come to speak of the 'prophecies we shall more fully show' that such 
 was the universal desire and expectation, and that it sprang from 
 this source. Before concluding our remarks on the historic eviden¬ 
 ces of the Jewish religion, we asserted yesterday that these historic 
 records of the Old Testament were not only written and read to the 
 whole congregation ot Israel by Moses, that an exhortation predicated 
 upon them, was delivered, viva voce , and afterwards written by 
 Moses, during the last month of his life, called Deuteronomy, and 
 deposited in the sacred chest; but also that there are in the histories 
 of the world remotely as they penetrate so many allusions to these 
 records as to render it almost absolutely certain, even upon Pagan' 
 
212 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 testimony, that these writings are genuine, and were received and ' 
 venerated by the nation, from the earliest notices of them as a 
 people. 
 
 It is, however, enough for us to affirm that there is no counter tes 5 * 
 timony in the world. There is no way to set aside historic testimony 
 except by adducing counter testimony of greater validity. The 
 sceptics have been called upon for their counter* testimony. They 
 have been coolly and calmly requested to search the annals of the 
 world in order to produce it. They have been asked whether it was 
 possible that the Egyptians and Israelites could have existed together, 
 and such stupendous miracles falsely asserted concerning the mani¬ 
 festations of divine wrath against the Egyptians, and of divine favor 
 towards the Israelites; and yet no document can be found to contra¬ 
 dict them. The sceptics have been repeatedly challenged to this 
 investigation. But you may search all the sceptical books in the 
 world without finding even an attempt to produce such testimony. 
 But we are not only able to produce these documents and these 
 criteria as sufficiently attesting the truth of these historic facts; but 
 we can also show from all ancient history that there are many referen¬ 
 ces and allusions to facts mentioned in them which, in their direct 
 tendency, go to attest the verity of the Mosaic account. We shall 
 just take a peep into the most ancient Greek historians, and see 
 Whether they furnish any data confirmatory of the historical records 
 found in the book of Genesis. 
 
 It is universally admitted by Deists, Atheists, and all, that the 
 Bible is the oldest book in the world. No counter testimony can then 
 be brought against the facts related in the most ancient parts of the 
 Jewish history. But we will here attempt to show that all the 
 ancient historians which peep into the depths of remote antiquity do, 
 in all their allusions, confirm the sacred history. 
 
 1 . All the Greek writers acknowledge and represent Egypt as the 
 most ancient and best policied empire in the world. 
 
 This is confirmed by Moses. So early as Abraham’s time we find 
 a regular dynasty of the common name of Pharaoh. This kingdom 
 (Gen. xii. lb.) is represented as abounding in corn and having a 
 surplus. \ 
 
 It appears from the princes of Pharaoh’s court, his pripcely 
 presents to Abraham, and his retinue of state, that his court at that 
 time had attained to great splendor. ' , , / 
 
 From the caravans of Ishmaelitish merchants who traded in spices, 
 much used in embalming the illustribus dead, and the Slaves which 
 they carried down for sale, it would appear that -the Egyptians at 
 that time were refined in the arts of opulence and splendor. 
 
 From the standing militia, the chariots, and the cavalry, too, in 
 Egypt, the time the Hebrews were in bondage, in building treasure 
 cities, it appears that the Egyptians were very far exalted above 
 all the nations of the earth in the time of the Pharaohs. The Greeks 
 were entirely unskilled in cavalry until long after the Trojan war. 
 
 2 . But not only do the ancient Greek writers speak of the magni- 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 licence of the Egyptian empire in that early period, but also m 
 detailing the civil and religious institutions of that people they afford 
 additional evidence of their high advances in ail the arts of refine¬ 
 ment. 
 
 Of the 'priesthood Diodorus Siculus thus writes: “The whole country 
 being divided into three parts, the first belongs to the body of the 
 priests, an order in the highest reverence among their countrymen $ 
 for their piety towards the gods, and their consummate wisdom acquired 
 by the best education and the closest application to the improvements 
 of the mind. With their revenues they supply all Egypt with public 
 sacrifices. They support a number of inferior officers and maintain 
 their own families, for the Egyptians think it utterly unlawful to make 
 any change in the public worship, but that every thing should be 
 administered by their priests in the same constant and invariable 
 manner. Nor do they hold it at all decent that those to whose care 
 the public are so much indebted should want the common necessaries 
 of life. For the priests are constantly attached to the person of the 
 king as coadjutors, counsellors, and instructers, in the most weighty 
 matters. For it is not among them as among the Greeks where one 
 single man or woman exercises the office of the priesthood. Here a 
 number are employed in sacrificing and other rites of public worship 
 who transmit their profession to their children. This order, likewise* 
 is exempt from all charges and imposts, and holds the prime honors 
 under the king in the public administration.” 
 
 Herodotus, also, to the same effect testifies, he observes: “Of 
 all the colleges of the priesthood, that of Heliopolis was the most famed 
 for wisdom and learning.” Strabo also declares that in his time very 
 spacious buildings yet remained in Heliopolis, which, as the report 
 ran, was formerly the residence of the priests, who cultivated the stu¬ 
 dies of astronomy and philosophy.* 
 
 N. B. The Egyptian word chohen , which the Chaldaic paraphras^ 
 translates2?n/?cc/>s, and which seems to be the same as the Samothra~ 
 cian coes denotes both a prince and a priest ; this is explained by the 
 fact that the privy counsellors of the ancient kings of Egypt were 
 priests, and were therefore called princes; and as Pharaoh intended, 
 to place Jeseph at the head of the nation, he could not have allayed 
 the envy and prejudices of the priests and privy counsellors, better 
 than by causing Joseph to marry the daughter of the priest of Heliop¬ 
 olis, in Hebrew, On. 
 
 The priest of Heliopolis was the most illustrious of the order, for as 
 Diodorus Siculus, informs us, the sun and moon were the first gods 
 of Egypt, and this city of the sun was so called because he was prin¬ 
 cipally worshipped there; and as Strabo informs us, the priests studied 
 astronomy. The theology of the Egyptians made it peculiarly fitting 
 that the priests who resided at Heliopolis should direct their attention 
 to this subject naturally and religiously. The Egyptians taught either 
 out of reverence to their chief god the sun, or from astronomical 
 observation, that the sun was the centre of the whole system, Fronr; 
 
 *Warburton, vol. 2 . page 33 * 
 
£14 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 Egypt, Plutarch, in his history of Isis and Osiris, says that Pytha¬ 
 goras obtained this knowledge from CEnuphis, a priest of On, or of 
 Heliopolis, the city of the sun. 
 
 3. The religious rites of the Egyptians , as described by the Greek 
 historian, is another proof corroborative of the Mosaic account. He¬ 
 rodotus expressly tells us that the Egyptians held it a profanation to 
 sacrifice any kind of cattle, except swine and bulls, clean calves, and 
 geese, and that they hold heifers, rams, and goats sacred; for at this 
 time the Egyptians had not deified animals. This explains Moses’ 
 saying, “It is not meet so to do, for we shall sacrifice the abominations 
 ©f the Egyptians, to the Lord our God; so shall we sacrifice the abom¬ 
 inations of Egypt before their eyes.” Herodotus informs us that such 
 impiety was punished with deadly hatred by the Egyptians. 
 
 4. The civil rites of the Egyptians. Concerning the practice of phy¬ 
 sic, Herodotus says it was divided among the faculty thus: Every dis¬ 
 tinct distemper had its ow r n physician, wlio confined himself to the 
 study and cure of that, and meddled with no other; so that all places 
 are crowded with physicians; for one class had the care of the eyes., 
 another of the teeth, another of the belly, and another of the occult 
 distempers. From this account, it does not appear strange that Moses 
 represents the household of Joseph as well replenished with physicians. 
 “And Joseph commanded his servants the physicians to embalm his 
 father, and the physicians embalmed Israel.” 
 
 There is also a remarkable allusion to this practice of the Egyp¬ 
 tian skill in Jeremiah, when that prophet foretells the overthrow of 
 Pharaoh’s army at the Euphrates: “Go up into Gilead, and take balm, 
 O virgin, the daughter of Egypt! In vain thou shalt use many medi¬ 
 cines, for thou shalt not be cured.” The same prophet under the 
 same figure, alludes to the Egyptian superstition in his own time. He 
 says, “Egypt is like a fair heifer, but destruction comes from the 
 north, also her herdsmen are in the midst of her like fatted bullocks, 
 for they also are turned back and fled away together.” The allusion 
 here is most apparent to the worship of Isis and Osiris, under a cow 
 and a bull. The most celebrated of all the Egyptian ritual. 
 
 The medical profession, naturally and according to history, is divi¬ 
 ded into surgery and pharmacy and the diatetic practice. Surgery 
 was naturally the most ancient, pharmacy was next to it, and the dia¬ 
 tetic the last. Hence physic must have been far advanced in Egypt 
 at the time to which Diodorus alludes. 
 
 5. The funeral rites of the Egyptians are thus described by Hero¬ 
 dotus : “Their mourning and funeral rites of sepulture are of this kind: 
 when a principal person dies, all the females of that family besmear 
 their heads and faces with loam and mire, and so leaving the dead 
 body in the hands of the domestics, march in procession through the 
 city, with their garments close girt about them, their breasts laid open^ 
 beating themselves and all their relations attending. In an opposite 
 procession appear the males, close girt likewise, and undergoing the 
 same discipline. When this is over, they carry the body to he salted 
 
 '-there are men appointed for this business, who make it their trade. 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 2Vj 
 
 and employment; they first of all draw out the brain, with a hooked 
 iron, through the nostrils. After this they hide it in nitre for seventy 
 days, and longer it is not lawful to keep it salted. 
 
 Diodorus Siculus agrees with Herodotus in all the essential circum¬ 
 stances of mourning and embalming, except he varies in one particu¬ 
 lar: he says they anoint the whole body with gum or resin of cedar 
 and of other plants, with great cost and care, for above thirty days ; 
 and afterwards seasoning it with myrrh, cinnamon, and other costly 
 spices, not only to preserve the body for a long time, but to give it a 
 grateful odor; they then deliver it to the relations. 
 
 All this scripture-history confirms and explains, and does more, it 
 reconciles the two Greek historians concerning the number of days 
 during which the body was in the care of the embalmers. Moses says, 
 “And the physicians embalmed Israel—and forty days were fulfilled 
 for him; for so are fulfilled the days of those who are embalmed; and 
 the Egyptians mourned for him three score and ten days.” Now we 
 learn Irom the two Greek historians that the time of the mourning 
 was while the body remained with the embalmers, which Herodotus 
 tells us was seventy days. This explains why the Egyptians mourned 
 for Israel three score and ten days. During the time the body lay in 
 nitre, and when in the compass of thirty days, this was reasonably 
 well effected, the remaining forty of Diodorus were employed in 
 anointing it with gums and spices to preserve it, which was the pro¬ 
 per way to embalm it; and this explains the meaning of the forty 
 days, which were fulfilled for Israel, being the days of those which 
 were embalmed. Thus the two Greek writers are reconciled, and 
 they and scripture are mutually explained, and supported by each 
 other.* 
 
 By the way we may remark, that the infidel objection against Jo¬ 
 seph for making the free monarchy of Egypt despotic, is without foun¬ 
 dation. The law-giving power Pharaoh did not transfer, but reserved 
 it in his own hands, in these words: u Only on the throne i villi be greater 
 than thou ”—Joseph as prime minister, administers justice, but Pha¬ 
 raoh guards to himself the prerogative of giving law. In commanding 
 the people to give their money, cattle, and lands to Pharaoh, it is rea¬ 
 sonable to conclude that the law emanated from Pharaoh. 
 
 In one sentence, we may affirm that the farther we penetrate into 
 remote antiquity, the more reason we will have to place implicit con¬ 
 fidence in the divine mission of Moses. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises—- 
 
 My friends: Mr. Campbell has very correctly informed us that the 
 Christian scriptures do not indirect terms command us to tell lies, to 
 steal, and to commit all sorts of crimes. But if we are told to do one 
 thing, and circumstances of our nature irresistibly compel us to ano 
 ther thing directly opposed to the precept, we are by such precepts 
 compelled to speak falsehood continually. The fact can be easily 
 established, that throughout all Christendom there is very little truth 
 
 *Warburton , s Divine Legation vol. 2. pp. 46 & 47. 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 •spoken between man and man; and it is the Christian religion 
 which has created the Christian character. 1 am told that truth is 
 much more generally spoken among the Mussulmen than among the 
 Christians; but there can be very little truth spoken by either party. 
 
 1 recommend to my young female friends here not to speak the truth 
 upon many subjects most interesting to their happiness through life, 
 because, if they did, they might lay their account in meeting all man¬ 
 ner of persecution and inconvenience. Nor did I recommend in a 
 preceding address that the gospel ministers of the present day should 
 be paid for disseminating and perpetuating falsehood, which, to my 
 certain knowledge, many of the most learned and enlightened of the 
 cloth know and believe to be such. I meant simply to give utterance 
 to a great principle of justice; to state that those who had been train¬ 
 ed to the gospel ministry were compelled, by circumstances, to adopt 
 that course of life; and I have no doubt that a very large portion of 
 them adopted this course most conscientiously; therefore, I deemed 
 it unjufet that the great and overwhelming change in society antici¬ 
 pated and predicted by me should deprive any man of his livelihood. 
 But if, as I confidently expect, these principles shall rapidly pervade 
 society, another and a better employment will be assigned to the 
 reverend clergy. They will then become the most efficient and use¬ 
 ful oracles to promulgate and expound the divine laws of human na¬ 
 ture, and demonstrate their high importance in producing irresistible 
 motives to virtue from their pupils; and after much calm deliberation 
 I am qu ite sure that this will be the most economical and by far the 
 best mode of disposing of the whole body of the clergy. It will not 
 only be the most economical, equitable, but also the most beneficial 
 for themselves and all mankind, I have told you that it will not 
 be necessary to deprive any individual of his present support in order 
 to effect these anticipated changes; because there exists in society 
 an artificial producing power almost immeasurably beyond the wants 
 of man. Although still rapidly and annually increa sing, ttys artificial 
 producing power is even now, if it were well understood and rightly 
 directed, greatly beyond our wants—it is alread}- far more than equal 
 to the supplying of every child that shall be born into the world a 
 most ample store of every thing that is best for human nature. But 
 before this change can commence, we must discover the true principle 
 and the true bond of social union—for most true it is, that there can 
 be no real substantial happiness and improvement in the constitution 
 and frame of society, until men do really and strictly learn to love 
 one another. But have the different religions inculcated in the world 
 yet enabled you to love one another? In this very city are you not 
 calling yourselves the friends and acquaintances of each other, and 
 at the same tune striving and contending against each other as if you. 
 were avowed and professed enemies. 
 
 Where is the mercantile man to be found, who, if he learns by 
 pome private intelligence that certain articles of merchandize will 
 greatly enhance in value, will not go to his dearest fiend, and buy 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 217 
 
 ail that he has of those articles, at the lowest price lie can procure 
 them. Now this is very loving to be sure! 
 
 We are deceived by high sounding empty words, and the present 
 state of commercial society is any thing but rational; and all socie¬ 
 ty, from the highest to the lowest, in all countries, is becoming com¬ 
 mercial, and daily more and more ignorantly selfish. Our circum¬ 
 stances compel us to become covert enemies to each other. Instead of 
 endeavoring to promote each other’s happiness, we are straining every 
 nerve to take from others, in order to add superfluities which we can¬ 
 not enjoy, to ourselves. Does not the Christian religion in many other 
 ways create dissentions among men? What say ye to this,ye people 
 of Cincinnati? Are all the religions of this city united heart and soul 
 together? are there no divisions among them? are they always wil¬ 
 ling to accommodate each other? are there not divisions and dissen¬ 
 tions among those who are designated by the same name, and classi¬ 
 fied as belonging: to the same sect? Are there no dissentions among 
 the Baptists, the Quakers, Presbyterians, nor among the Episcopal¬ 
 ians? My friends, there is nothing but dissentions and divisions un¬ 
 der the present system, from one end of it to the other; dissention 
 pervades the whole mass of society—it leavens the whole lump; and 
 as the march of mind advances, these dissentions will increase, and 
 be the cause of their ultimate overthrow. They have increased alrea¬ 
 dy to that extent, that those who understand the signs of the times, 
 see plainly that, ere long, religion must receive its death-blow. In¬ 
 stead of a system which derationalizes the human race, other times 
 are approaching when we shall have our attention and our faculties 
 directed to what we can comprehend—to the acquisition of real know¬ 
 ledge, and to the investigation of the laws of matter; and, my friends, 
 for us to attempt the investigation of any other laws but material laws 
 is every whit as futile as an attempt to fly from the earth to the sun. 
 Depend upon it that you only waste your time in such searching after 
 immaterial things; such search can only lead you into the wildest 
 regions of the imagination, and then you will find it very difficult to 
 get back again into the paths of common sense. Therefore I strong¬ 
 ly recommend to those who wish to acquire real knowledge not t» 
 sacrifice their time in speculations upon subjects beyond the compre¬ 
 hension human faculties. 
 
 When we direct our attention to an investigation of the laws of na¬ 
 ture, no quarrels are originated; and why? because we can recur to 
 facts; we can re-examine and discriminate by the criteria of real 
 knowledge the truth from error. We may say, indeed, that the pres¬ 
 ent era is the commencement of a search into the real nature of exist¬ 
 ing facts which will bring about the Millennium , by which term I 
 simply mean a rational state of social existence, in which sincerity 
 and candor shall universally prevail—when, through a knowledge of 
 facts, human nature will be laid open to that extent that we shall 
 know ourselves and know our fellow-beings even as we are known. 
 J 3 at the only way to commence this rational state of existence, is, W 
 fov a solid foundation for genuine charity and social affection; anft 
 
 19 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 %18 
 
 there are no principles under heaven that can guide us to these desi¬ 
 rable results, unless it be the knowledge that we have no will, power, 
 ©r control in framing our belief on any speculative subjects and no 
 free agency or volition in the matter of our likings and dislikings. 
 These are the only sure foundations for a genuine love and universal 
 charity among mankind. When these admirable principles, old as 
 they are, shall begin to be comprehended, love and charity will be 
 sure to extend themselves even unto the uttermost parts of the earth. 
 Let but these twelve laws be once generally understood, and I Know 
 af no motive which could actuate any human being to enter into strife 
 and contention with, or to think or feel uncharitably towards, any of 
 bis species. Therefore, my friends, by discarding the practices of 
 the wild imagination of our easily deluded ancestors, in which all the 
 religions of the world have had their origin, and which they have for- 
 <ced into our minds by the means ©f the mutual laws which I have ex¬ 
 plained, you will in lieu thereof adopt the laws of nature for your 
 guides; and these w ill alw r ays lead you to the best and most rational 
 practice that can be adopted; a practice of those amiable virtues and 
 that genuine charity which will better prepare you for heaven, if you 
 are destined to go there, than any thing that has yet been taught you, 
 or than any thing that has yet been done for you; and I cannot con¬ 
 ceive it possible that a life approaching to what is represented by your 
 spiritual teachers to be a heavenly conduct here, can unfit those who 
 have had this foretaste of heaven in this life, for the enjoyment of a 
 superior existence hereafter. But, my friends, I have not the remotest 
 idea that in a future state of re-animation we shall retain the least 
 consciousness of our former state of vitality. My investigations on 
 this subjest have convinced me that it is a speculation in which no 
 man ever has or can arrive at any thing tangible. 1 believe that in 
 pne sense, we shall live forever, for I cannot suppose that the particles 
 aj f which we are compounded have ever been out of existence. It 
 seems reasonable that the material particles of which w r e are compo¬ 
 sed are uncreated, that is, that they belong to the original stock of 
 matter which f jrms the universe. In my judgment, there is nothing 
 so absurd as the supposition that a particle of matter could be created 
 6 >ut ofnothing. If you are prepared to swallow such an absurdity as 
 this, you may swallow a camel or any thing else. I have said that 
 to me it appears the greatest of all impossibilities, that one atom of 
 something could be created out ofnothing; but it also appears to me 
 an equal impossibility that one atom of matter consisting of something 
 can ever be reduced to nothing. I conceive, therefore, that the supreme 
 power consists in the indestructible vitality pervading the whole mate¬ 
 rial universe, and that each particle of this universe contains within it¬ 
 self everlasting and unchangeable laws; and it is by tfie action, the har¬ 
 mony, and the co-operation of these laws, that all composition, decom¬ 
 position, and recomposition i > the universe are effected. Let us not 
 therefore, waste our valuable time about spiritual nonentities which 
 cannot interest us—but let us r ither dilligentlv apply all our facul¬ 
 ties to discover the yet unknown laws of nature, by which we shall 
 

 DEBATE. 
 
 219 
 
 Ascertain the means to make onr species as happy and prosperous as 
 the materials of which we are organized will permit. If we will adopt 
 this course of practice, and strictly adhere to it, I can sec nothing 
 than can possibly prevent our attainment to a very high degree of phy¬ 
 sical and intellectual perfection and happiness. I have now perhaps 
 given sufficient details to prove that all religions tend directly to pro- 
 duce vice and disunion among mankind, 1 have now to show that 
 they produce the natural consequence of vice and dis-union; viz?-: 
 i misery . 
 
 The errors which the various religions of the world have, for ages 
 past,forced into the minds of the human race, have been the cause of 
 all the poverty which now exists in the world; and these religions 
 have generated this poverty in two ways: first, by creating universal 
 disunion among men, so as to prevent the possibility of any cordial 
 co-operation for their reciprocal benefit and advantage; and secondly, 
 by reason of the very large appropriations of the time and gains of the 
 people, which the clergy, like the Levites of old, have engrossed to 
 themselves and their mysterious, and therefore useless objects. 
 
 I discover from Mr. Campbell, that the Levites could not be con¬ 
 tented with less than one half of the property of the whole nation.—* 
 Now it really does appear to me that a society which could permit a 
 small select tribe to appropriate to their own use one half of the whole 
 revenue of the nation, and allow that tribe to form and keep the re 
 cords of their mysteries and even to make it a capital crime to approach 
 the sacred chest which contained them, must be in the extreme of ig¬ 
 norance and easily duped. I must also say that under such circum¬ 
 stances there never was a set of men who had a finer chance of manu¬ 
 facturing and perpetuating fables to suit their own purposes; and of 
 obtaining the means to degrade and enslave their fellow-beings, than 
 had this same tribe of Lem. There is nothing more true, my friends, 
 than that religion has been the primary cause of all the poverty that 
 has for ages past afflicted the world. You have all of you received 
 your religious notions at an age so early that your reasoning faculties 
 have been thereby not only injured, but in the majority of cases, de¬ 
 stroyed to an extent which cannot be estimated or understood by the 
 great mass of the present adult population. In consequence, the mind 
 of man instead of being rationally directed to discover what is best 
 for human nature, has been so perverted as to consider the acquisition 
 of wealth as the fgrand desideratum; and to appropriate millions to 
 themselves whilst their fellows were starving around them, as the 
 summum bonum of human felicity. Now it was my lot to commence the 
 world with no property at all; and since that time I have experienced 
 as gradual a change of fortune upwards as most individuals, but I 
 never found that I enjoyed happines as wealth increased, or in propor¬ 
 tion to any expenditure. I never found that I could eat, drink, or 
 sleep any more jn a state of affluence, than when through my own 
 industry I procured the simple necessaries of life in comfort. But I 
 Sound by experience that when I had the most wealth I had the most 
 £are and anxiety. I have lived on intimate terms with Some very 
 
DEBATE 
 
 220 
 
 wealthy men, some of them possessing a property estimated at sever*-, 
 al hundred thousand, and millions sterling—these men I have studied 
 closely, and I think them and their families less happy than many 
 Whom I have known with little more than barely sufficient to supply 
 the necessary wants of life. If it were not for the abberrations of the 
 human mind originating in the errors of religion, we should soon 
 discover the means of creating and enjoying an ample supply of the best 
 of every thing for human nature, and of cultivating our physical and 
 intellectual faculties to a compart ive high degree of perfection. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 if we be mere particles of matter, self-existing or derived from the 
 great whole, or entirely material, springingfrom the earth and return¬ 
 ing thereto again, and that the less of this world’s goods we have the 
 better—let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. 
 
 I must correct an allusion of my opponent to the Levitical priest¬ 
 hood. I observed that the consecration of this priesthood was 
 designated to be the most effectual commemorative monument, because 
 it was compelling the passions of the people to attest and perpetuate 
 the remembrance of the fact of their redemption from Egypt. The 
 destroying angel passed over the land and destroyed the first-born of 
 man and beast, belonging to the Egyptians, and the Israelites to a 
 man escaped. To perpetuate the memory of this, God claimed the 
 first-born of that nation in all time coming. Subsequently, in lieu of 
 the first born, one tribe of the twelve was set apart. This tribe was 
 t'o receive so much real estate, and be supported by the whole nation. 
 And I have asked, Would any nation, except under divine coercion, 
 have submitted to such an exaction as this upon their time and their 
 real and personal property ? [Mr. Often says, Yes , all nations have 
 done it!\ Mr Campbell resumes, I have asked if any nation would 
 have submitted to such a heavy taxation as this in support of their reli¬ 
 gion had they not been absolutely certain of its divine origin and 
 authority? Mr. Owen says, Yes, they have all done it. Well, now, 
 this assertion will not prove that the first nation did it without a divine 
 authority. They set the example-—And we can easily test the prin¬ 
 ciple whether nations will, without good reasons, submit to such 
 imports, by bringing the case within our own experience. Let, then, 
 such an experiment be attempted in this country, and it will soon be 
 discovered that it would be impossible to induce us to support a reli¬ 
 gion so onerous, without affording the most incontrovertible eviden¬ 
 ces of its divine authority. Mankind part with money and property 
 4 '6r religious uses only when conscientiously convicted of a divine 
 obligation. To exact it from them without presenting some plausible 
 grounds for such authority, requires compulsion. And however easy 
 it may be to perpetuate such a usage, it never could have commenced 
 without the strongest evidence of divine authority. But to test this 
 matter I appeal to universal experience, and to the impossibility of 
 instituting such a custom now. 
 
 I protest against Mr. Owen’s objecting to any part of these writings 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 003 
 
 rTa tact, •without acknowledging the whole of them as tact. Does he 
 believe that there was an Aaron or a tribe of Levi? If so, on the 
 same authority he must believe that there was a Moses and twelve 
 tribes, led by him through the Red Sea. It is unfair to garble the 
 document, admitting the truth of one part and objecting to the truth 
 of another. He must take it all or none. Does my opponent believe 
 that there were Levites; that there was a Moses, an Aaron, and a 
 Levitical priesthood; that the nation were convened at Sinai, received 
 the law there attested, and that there was a place of deposit, a sacred 
 chest, first in the tabernacle and then in the temple, containing a 
 copy of this law? Does he believe these things? And, if he does, 
 why not believe all the other facts? I repeat that it is neither a fair 
 nor a manly style of reasoning to take a part of these facts and pre¬ 
 dicate arguments upon them, without receiving the whole. 
 
 Mr. Owen has given us his definition of the term millennium , but 
 will give us no definition of fact , and says he knows nothing about 
 heaven—neither will he take any notice of the document which I 
 presented to him. I wish you to bear in mind that he pretermits all 
 notice of this document. 
 
 Fact is derived from factum. It means that which is done. Now 
 it is not a fact that I have two eyes. This is not a fact , but a truth , 
 It is a fact that I rose up or sat down. Any thing I may have done is a 
 fact. No speculation can be a fact. It may be a fact that a man 
 expressed such an opinion; but the opinion itself is no fact. It is a 
 2 act that Mr. Owen conceived these twelve positions, wrote them, ex-. 
 pressed, or read them; but the twelve opinions, assertions, or propo¬ 
 sitions are not facts. 
 
 Christianity is a positive institution. An institution built upon 
 facts. So was Judaism. The Christian facts are all matters of record. 
 The record or testimony is the object of faith. Hence faith requires 
 testimony, testimony concerns facts, and facts require a witness. 
 The historian records facts. The philosopher speculates upon opin¬ 
 ions or abstract truths. Mr. Owen’s system is the system of a phi¬ 
 losopher^ it is not the work of a historian. He confounds speculations, 
 assertions, laws of nature, and facts; and from a fondness for the 
 term fact he calls all his views facts. His propositions may, or may 
 not, be truths; but facts they cannot be. If I could correct Mr, 
 Owen’s misapplication and erroneous use of this single term, it might 
 tend to dissolve the charm, and dissipate the illusion which his 
 sportive fancy throws overall his lucubrations. 
 
 There are yet remaining a few documents which I desire to read, 
 In further support of the proposition that the Jewish scriptures are 
 corroborated by all ancient historic writers. There is not only no 
 counter testimony, but a strong concurrence of testimony in attesta¬ 
 tion of the facts recorded by Moses. We penetrated into very remote 
 antiquity in order to illustrate this accordance, and we proved that 
 Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus are reconciled by a reference to 
 M.*sps; and that these three writers mutually explain and support 
 each other. 
 
 19 * 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 There is one consideration which is worthy to be kept continually 
 before our minds in this investigation, and that is the advanced state 
 of civilization in the country when the Jewish religion was first, pro¬ 
 pounded. We must bear in mind that Moses was surrounded by 
 acute, learned, and sagacious enemies, when he led the children 
 of Israel out of Egypt. But we must go further back into antiquity 
 in order to show that the most ancient traditions confirm the Mosaic 
 account of the creation, deluge, <&c. 
 
 “As to the history of Berosus, the substance of it, as it is given us, 
 by Abidenus Apollodorus and Alexander Polyhister, is to this pur» 
 pose, that there were ten kings of Chaldea before the flood; Alorus*, 
 Aiasparus, Amelon, Amenon, Metalarus, Daorus, Aedorachus, Am* 
 phis, Oliartes, Xisuthrus. That Xisuthrus was warned in a dream 
 that mankind was to be destroyed by a flood on the 15th day of the 
 month Dsesius, and that he should build a sort of ship, and go into it 
 with his friends and kindred, and that he should make a provision of 
 meat and drink, and take into his vessel fouls and fourfooted beasts; 
 that Xisuthrns acted according to the admonition; built a ship, and 
 put into it all that he was commanded, and went into it with his wife 
 and children, and dearest friends. When the flood was come, and 
 began to abate, Xisuthrus let out some birds, which finding no food 
 nor place to rest upon, returned to the ship again; after some days he 
 let out the birds again, but they came back with their legs daubed 
 with mud. Some days after, he let them go the third time, but then 
 they came to the ship no more Xisuthrus understood hereby, that 
 the earth appeard above the waters, and taking down some of the 
 boards of the ship, he saw that it rested upon a mountain; some time 
 after, he, and his wife, and his pilot went out of the ship, to offer 
 sacrifices to the gods, and they were never seen by those in the ship 
 more. But the persons in the ship, after seeking him in vain, werpt 
 to Babylon. The Xisuthrus here mentioned was evidently Noah*. 
 And Berosus supposes from Alorus to Xisuthrus ten generations, and 
 so many Moses computes from Adam to Noah.”* 
 
 This is the Chaldean history concerning their own nation. They 
 wished to trace themselves up to the commencement of time—and 
 gave an account of the ten patriarchs before the flood, making Noah 
 one of their kings. 
 
 “The history of Sanchoniatho is to this effect. That the first mortals 
 were Protogonus and iEon * that by these were begotten Genus and 
 Genea; the children of these were Phos, Pur, and Phlox; and of 
 these were begot Cassius, Libanus, Antilibanus, and Brathys.*— 
 Memrumus and Efypsuranius were descended from these, and their 
 children were Agreus and Halieus; and of these were begotten two 
 brothers, one of them named Chrvsor and Haephsestus; the name of 
 the other is lost. From this generation came two brotliers, TeohniteS 
 <and Autochthon, and of them were begotten Agrus and Agrotug 
 .Arnynus and Magus were their children, and Misor and Sydec were 
 descended of Amynus and Magus. The son of Misor was Taaiftus 
 *Shuckford’s Connection, vo]. 1, p. 41. 
 
debate'; ms 
 
 cflf Tyoth. This is the Phoenician genealogy of the first ages of the 
 world, and it requires no great pains to show how far it agrees with 
 the accounts of Moses. The first mortals mentioned by Sanchonia- 
 tho, and called Protogonus and Alon, were undoubtedly Adam and 
 Eve; and his Misor, the father of Taautus, is evidently the Mizraim 
 of Moses. From Protogonus to Misor, Sanchoniatho computes eleven 
 generations, and from Adam to Mizraim, Moses makes twelve; so 
 that Sanchoniatho falls short of Moses only one generation, and this, 
 I conceive, happened by his not having recorded the flood.”* 
 
 These, now, are the two most ancient traditions in the world, and 
 belong to the Phoenicians and Chaldeans. 
 
 ' “The Chinese have been supposed to have records that reach higher 
 than the history of Moses; but we find by the best accounts of their 
 antiquities that this is false. Their antiquities reach no higher than 
 the times of Noah, for Fohi was their first king. They pretend to 
 no history or memoirs that reach up higher than his times; and by all 
 their accounts, the age of Fohi coincides with that of Moses’ Noah. 
 Their writers in the general agree, that Fohi lived about 2952 years 
 before Christ. The author of Mirandorum in Sina et Europa com* 
 putes him to reign but 2847 years before our Saviour; and Alvarez 
 Sevedo places his reign not so early, imagining it to be but 2060 years; 
 and all these computations agree well enough with the times of Noah; 
 for Noah was bom, according to Archbishop Usher, 2948 years, and 
 died 2016 years before Christ; so that all the several computations 
 about Fohi, fall pretty near within the compass of Noah’s life. But 
 we shall hereafter see many reasons to conclude Moses’ Noah, and 
 the Chinese Fohi, to be the same person.”! 
 
 “The first king of China was Fohi; and as 1 have before observed 
 that Fohi and Noah were contemporaries at least, for there are many 
 reasons, from the Chinese traditions concerning Fohi, to think him 
 and Noah the same person. First, they say Fohi had no father, i. e. 
 Noah was the first man in the post-deluvian world; his ancestors per¬ 
 ished in the flood, and no tradition hereof being preserved in the 
 Chinese annals, Noah, or Fohi, stands there as if he had no father 
 at all. Secondly, Fohi’s mother is said to have conceived him en¬ 
 compassed in a rainbow; a conceit very probably arising from the 
 rainbow’s first appearing to Noah, and the Chinese being Willing to 
 -give some account of his original. Thirdly, Fohi is said to have 
 carefully bred seven sorts of creatures, which he used to sacrifice to 
 the Supreme Spirit of heaven and earth: and Moses tells us that Noah 
 took into the ark> of every clean beast by sevens, and of the fowls 
 of the air by sevens; and after the flood Noah built an altar, and took 
 of every clean beast, and every clean fowl, and offered burnt offer¬ 
 ings. Fourthly, the Chinese derive the name of Fohi from his obla¬ 
 tion; and Moses gives Noah his name upon account of the grant of 
 the creatures for the use of men, which he obtained by his offering. 
 Lastly, the Chinese history supposes Fohi to have settled in the pro-- 
 vince of Xeusi, which is the northwest province of China, and near 
 to Ararat, where the ark rested 
 
 *3huckford, vol, 1, 42. flbich vol. 1 , p. 48,- *Ibid. vol. 1. p. 82,- 
 
224 DEBATE. 
 
 We would occupy (said Mr. Campbell) many hours in the produc¬ 
 tion of such documents as these, which are the most ancient in the 
 world, all corroborating the Mosaic account:— 
 
 , “Not only has it proved impossible to overthrow any of the numer¬ 
 ous facts which the scriptures record,* but, on the contrary, they are 
 confirmed, in a very striking manner, by the traditionary accounts of 
 all nations. 
 
 “In answer to Mr. Hume’s assertion, that the books of Moses are 
 “corroborated by no concurring testimony,” Dr. Campbell replies— 
 “As little, say I, invalidated by any contradictory testimony; and both 
 for this plain reason, because there is no human composition that can 
 be compared with this in respect of antiquity. But though this book 
 is not corroborated by the concurrent testimony of any coeval histo¬ 
 ries, because, if there ever were such histories, they are not now 
 extant; it is not therefore destitute of all collateral evidence. The 
 following examples of this kind of evidence deserve some notice. 
 The division of time into weeks, which hath obtained in many coum 
 tries, for instance, among the Egyptians, Chinese, Indians, and 
 northern barbarians—nations whereof some had little or no inter¬ 
 course with others, and were not even known by name to the He¬ 
 brews—the tradition which in several places prevailed concerning the 
 primeval chaos from which the world arose —the production of all 
 living creatures out of water and earth, by the efficacy of a Supreme 
 Mind—the formation of man last of all, in the image of God, and his 
 being vested with dominion over the other animals—the primitive 
 state of innocence and happiness—the subsequent degeneracy of 
 mankind—their destruction by a flood, and the preservation of one 
 family in a vessel. Nay, which is still stronger, I might plead the 
 vestiges of some such catastrophe as the Deluge, which the shells and 
 other marine bodies that are daily dug out of the bowels of the earth) 
 in places remote from the sea, do clearly exhibit to us. I might urge 
 the traces, which still remain in ancient histories, of the migrations of 
 people and of science from Asia, (which hath not improperly been 
 styled the cradle of the arts) into many parts both of Africa and 
 Europe. I might plead the coincidence of these migrations, and of 
 the origin of states and kingdoms, with the time of the dispersion of 
 the posterity of Noah.” 
 
 “Respecting the division of time into weeks, Dr. Campbell re¬ 
 marks, “The judicious reader will observe, that there is a great 
 difference between the concurrence of nations in the division of time 
 into weeks , and tkeir concurrence in Ihe other periodical divisions, 
 into years, months , and days. These divisions arise from such natural 
 causes, as are every where obvious; the annual and diurnal revolu¬ 
 tions of the Sun, and the revolution of the Moon. The division into 
 weeks , on the contrary, seems perfectly arbitrary; consequently, its 
 prevailing in distant countries, among nations which had no comnni* 
 nication with one another, affords a strong presumption that it must 
 have been derived from some tradition, (as that of the creation) which 
 hath been older than th£ dispersion of mankind into different regions ” 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 “To this last article may be added, that the whole of the fifteen 
 southern constellations yield their testimony to the ten first chapters 
 of Genesis. First, the constellation of the Ship: secondly, the Altar, 
 with its vast body of fire and smoke ascending near the triangle, the 
 remarkable Egyptian symbol of Deity: thirdly, the Sacrificer * fourth¬ 
 ly, the Beast about to be sacrificed: fifthly, the Raven t sixthly, the 
 Cup of libation: seventhly, eighthly, and ninthly, the greater and’ 
 lesser Dog, and the Hare, situated so near to Orion, the great and 
 iniquitous hunter both of men and beasts. The whole of the remain¬ 
 ing constellations of the southern hemisphere are composed of aquatic 
 objects or animals, and may be considered as pointedly allusive to a 
 general deluge. 
 
 “Traditions more or less distinct, which corroborate the facts re¬ 
 corded by Moses, and which prove the common origin of mankind, 
 are found, on the whole, to be iiniform in all parts of the world. They 
 have not only been verbally handed down, but have subsisted in the 
 religious observances and practices of all nations. These are not 
 confined to the old world, but extend also to the new. Thfe first dis¬ 
 coverers of America observed there a reverence for the Sabbath, and 
 an acquaintance with many of the appointments of the Mosaic institu¬ 
 tion, and of the early history of the world. “The contents of some of 
 their manuscripts are curious in a high degree. One is a cosmogony, 
 which contains a tradition of the mother of mankind having fallen 
 from her first state of happiness and innocence; and she is generally 
 represented as accompanied by a serpent. We find also the idea of a 
 great inundation overwhelming the earth, from which a single family 
 escaped on a raft. There is a history of a pyramidal edifice raised by 
 the pride of men, and destroyed by the anger of the gods. The cere¬ 
 mony of ablution is practised at the birth of children. All these cir¬ 
 cumstances, and many more, led the priests who accompanied the 
 Spanish army at the time of the conquest, to the belief, that at some 
 very distant epocha, Christianity, or at least Judaism, had been 
 preached in the new continent. I think, however, says Mr. Humboldt, 
 I may affirm, from the knowledge we have lately acquired of the 
 sacred books of the Hindoos, that, in order to explain the analogy of 
 these traditions, we have no need to recur to the western part of Asia, 
 since similar traditions, of high and venerable antiquity, are found 
 among the followers of Brama, and among the Shamans of the eastern 
 Steppes of Tartary.” 
 
 “The institution of sacrifice, which, to Mr. Hume appeared absurd, 
 and which certainly did not originate from what is called the light 6f 
 nature, has been found in every part of the world. 
 
 Whether we consult the religion of the Greeks, the Goths, or the 
 Hindoos, we every where meet with a mediatorial deity, engaged in 
 combat with an envenomed serpent. And a belief that the place of 
 punishment is full of serpents, equally pervades the Jurothic, the Per¬ 
 sian, and the Hindoo mythologies. Can any one imagine that such 
 unlikely combinations, unaccountable except on the ground of a 
 compon descent apd revelation from God, for instance, that of a Tri- 
 
220 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 unc God, could have accidentally found a place among men originally 
 separate, and remote from each other? 
 
 “Traditions have been traced over the globe of the creation—of th6 
 Sabbath day—of Paradise—of the fall of man—of the serpent-—of the 
 promised Messiah—of Cain and Abel—of the longevity of the Patri¬ 
 archs—of the number of generations between Adam and Noah—of 
 the Deluge—of the dove sent out by Noah—of the rainbow as a sign 
 —of the number of persons preserved in the ark—of Noah and hits 
 three sons—of the Tower of Babel—of Sodom and Gomorrah, with & 
 variety of circumstances respecting these particulars. 
 
 “The great tower in the temple of Belus at Babylon, is supposed to 
 have been the same which was built there at the confusion of tongues. 
 As described by Strabo, it was one of the most wonderful works in 
 the world. Although it fell short of the greatest of the Egyptian 
 pyramids, (which was a square of 700 feet on every side, while this 
 was but of 000,) yet it far exceeded it in the height ; the perpendicu¬ 
 lar measure of that pyramid being 481 feet, and that of the tower 000. 
 It is particularly attested by several authors to have been all built of 
 bricks and bitumen, as the scriptures tell us the tower of Babel was. 
 Herodotus says that the going up to it was by stairs on the outside, 
 round it. When Alexander took Babylon, Calisthenes the philoso¬ 
 pher, who accompanied him thither, found they had astronomical 
 observations for 1903 years backwards from that time; which carried 
 up the account as high as the 115th year after the flood, which was 
 within 15 years after the tower of Babel was built. 
 
 Concerning Sodom and Gomorrah, Tacitus, relates, that a tradition 
 ■still prevailed in his days, of certain powerful cities having been de¬ 
 stroyed by thunder and lightning; and of the plain in which they 
 were situated having been burnt up. He adds, that evident traces 
 of such a catastrophe remained. This historian concludes with ex¬ 
 pressing his own belief in this awful judgment, derived from an 
 attentive consideration of the country in which it was said to have 
 happened. In a similar manner Strabo, after describing the nature 
 of the lake Asplialtis, adds, that the whole of its appearance gives an 
 air of probability to the prevailing tradition , that thirteen cities, the 
 chief of which was Sodom, were once destroyed and swallowed up by 
 earthquakes, tire, and an inundation of boiling sulphureous water. 
 
 “The account which Lucian (a professed scoffer at all religions, 
 who lived in the second century,) has given of the tradition of the 
 flood, in his Dialogues, is as follows: Having visited the temple of 
 Hierapolis, he says, “The popular story is, that this temple was 
 founded by Deucalion, the Scythian, in whose time the great flood 
 is said to have happened. I was no stranger to the account of it by 
 the Greeks, which is as follows; “Notone of us now living is de¬ 
 scended from the original race of men, who all perished; and we, 
 numerous as we are, are no other than a second race, sprung from 
 Deucalion. The Aborigines, we are informed, were apt to be very 
 arrogant, full of mischief, and continually transgressing the la\vs, 
 inhogpitable to strangers, deaf U> supplications, and would say ©r 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 227 
 
 swear any thing; in which offences they Were overtaken by the 
 severity of justice. The earth on a sudden opened its sluices, heavy 
 showers of rain came down, the rivers swelled, the sea rose till the 
 waters every where prevailed, and every mortal was drowned except 
 Deucalion alone, whose discretion and piety were such, that he was 
 spared, and became the father of a new generation. Having a large 
 chest, he put his wives and children in it, and then went into it him¬ 
 self; which was no sooner done, than there came to him boars, and 
 horses, and lions, and serpents, and in short every species of land 
 animals, all in pairs. He took them all in; and Jupiter had ordered 
 it so, that they neither did him nor one another the least injury, but 
 lived and sailed together in perfect harmony, during the continuance 
 of the flood, all in the same chest. 1 ” This I was told by the Greeks. 
 In addition to which the Hierapolitans relate, that a large chasm was 
 provided in their country to absorb the water; and that Deucalion, 
 after seeing it thus disposed of, raised altars, and built a temple to 
 Juno, over the chasm. It was but a small hole in the earth when 1 
 saw it; but how much larger it might have been formerly, when it 
 held so much, I cannot take upon me to say. However, as a proof of 
 what they advance, water is brought twice in the year, from the sea 
 to the temple, not only by the priests, but from the whole country far 
 and near, by Syrians, Arabians, and great multitudes beyond the 
 Euphrates. It is emptied in the temple, and runs into the opening 
 below’, which, small as it is, takes in such a quantity as is truly 
 amazing. This it seems was a law of Deucalion, to perpetuate the 
 memory of his deliverance from the general calamity.” 
 
 “Various Pagan historians speak of Moses, the lawgiver of the 
 Jews: Diodorus Siculus calls him a man of most superior wdsdom 
 and courage. lie mentions the departure of Israel from Egypt; of 
 their advancing into Palestine, and seizing upon a number of cities, 
 particularly Jerusalem. He speaks of their worship, their tribes, their 
 code of laws, by which they were kept separate from every other 
 people; of the priesthood appointed in one family; of judges, instead 
 of kings, being appointed to decide all controversies among them, of 
 the superior authority being vested in the chief priest; and that Moses 
 concluded the volume of his laws, with claiming for them divine in¬ 
 spiration. Strabo also mentions various particulars respecting Moses. 
 Eupolimus likewise celebrates him as being the first w'ise man. and 
 the inventor of letters, which the Phoenicians received from the Jews, 
 *md the Greeks from the Phoenicians.” 
 
 Friday forenoon, 17 th April , 1829. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises.—- , 
 
 My friends—Mr. Campbell put to me yesterday one or two ques¬ 
 tions, to which he requested a reply. One of these questions was. 
 Whether 1 believed in the testimony of history? Now’ I believe the 
 historical fact recorded in Roman history, that Cesar conquered 
 Pompey, and that Cesar was assassinated in the senate house; and 
 l believe «a certain number of the prominent and leading facts cf all 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 228 
 
 histories which seem to be generally attested, and upon what id 
 deemed the best authority that can be obtained, when not opposed by 
 the divine laws of human nature. But I do not believe much of 
 the details of either profane or sacred history. I know how difficult 
 it is for individuals to go away from this meeting and relate facts 
 precisely as they occurred here. Then what degree of faith can we 
 have in narratives put upon record many years after the facts which 
 they relate are said to have happened, and every conceivable oppor¬ 
 tunity and motive to falsify them? I, therefore, believe but few of 
 the facts related in history, where the historian attempts to penetrate 
 into the motive of the actors; for almost all the proceedings of men 
 have been secret measures, of the real motives to the performance of 
 which the public knew nothing, or were grossly deceived. I know of 
 nothing more fallacious in its nature than history, sacred or profane; 
 and when opposed to the known laws of nature, their testimony, how¬ 
 ever testified, is of no value whatever. It is a sure sign, when these 
 are received with authority, that early erroneous impressions have 
 not been obliterated. 
 
 Mr. Campbell’s next question to me was, What is a fact? I re¬ 
 plied, that a fact was any thing which exists. Mr. Campbell says 
 that it is not a fact that he has two eyes; but it surely is a fact, that he 
 has two corporeal eyes. It may be a fact with regard to our mental 
 vision that we may not have two eyes; for, most unfortunately for 
 many of us, we have not yet been enabled to see with more than 
 half an eye. 
 
 Some gentleman, to me unknown, has handed me a note, which I 
 will read:— 
 
 “Mr. Owen—Was man originally created or uncreated 
 Now, my friends, when I can answer this question, I can answer 
 every other of a similar mysterious nature. I do not know whether 
 an original man was created or not. And 1 do not think it is of much 
 consequence to any of us that we should know the fact. As soon as 
 we shall have facts to enable us to form a rational conjecture upon 
 this topic, it will be time enough to discuss it. 
 
 Yesterday I was obliged to conclude my address in the midst of my 
 endeavors to explain to you the facte which compel me to believe that 
 the religions of the world are the causo of almost all its sufferings. 
 The sufferings produced by religion are all those which emanate from 
 falsehood, deceit, and hypocrisy, from poverty, and from disunion 
 arising from a difference of feelings, opinions, and interests. But 
 the sufferings arising from these causes, the genuine fruit of all re-* 
 ligions, are tolerable applicable to the common affairs of life. But 
 not so when compared w r ith the-miseries experienced by so many 
 human beings from a disappointment of the affections, or from a deep 
 conviction that they are not sound in the true faith; and that, from the 
 advanced state of their minds in a knowledge of some facts, it is 
 impossible to become so. And thus, with the fear of hell and eternal 
 punishment continually before their eyes, they are made as miserably 
 as human nature can endure this side of madness; or, until after mapy 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 220 
 
 years of suffering, insanity comes to the relief of their nature—for “a 
 wounded conscience who can bear?” All these sufferings are pro¬ 
 duced solely by religion; and if you wish details of the overwhelm¬ 
 ing afflictions arising from a system which exacts a compulsory 
 belief, L will refer you to the proceedings on the subject of religious 
 belief in the early ages—to the horrors of the Inquisition—to the 
 burnings which have taken place in Christendom, even in England— 
 and to the numerous receptacles for mad persons, to he found at this 
 day, in every part of the civilized world: to say nothing of the 
 annual murders perpetrated under the chariot wheels of Juggernaut , 
 or upon the funeral pile of the Suttee. In the course of my travels I 
 have uniformly taken occasion to inquire of the superintendents of 
 lunatic asylums what was the most fruitful source of insanity; and 
 they have invariably informed me that it was over-excitement of mind 
 on the subject of religion—that religious insanity constituted by far 
 the most numerous class of cases. In reply to the question, What 
 was the next most fruitful source of mental alienation? they have told 
 me that it was the disappointment of the affections. Such have been 
 the consequences of attempting to compel men to think that they 
 were culpable on account of their thoughts, belief, and opinions, 
 never yet under the control of their will, or for their likings or dis- 
 likings towards their fellow r -creatures, which were equally forced 
 upon them by the laws of their nature. Many in this assembly have, 
 I doubt not, experienced grievous suffering in consequence of having 
 been trained in these pernicious errors; whereas, had you been train¬ 
 ed to have rational views upon these subjects, you would just as soon 
 have thought of tormenting yourselves because you wei'e not six feet 
 high. There is just as much reason and common sense in attempting 
 to compel men and women to be of the same height., as to endeavor to 
 make them think and feel alike upon subjects not resting upon certain 
 and unchanging facts. 
 
 • I have only laid before you a few’, out of the innumerable reasons 
 which might be adduced to prove that the religions of the world have 
 been the real cause of the vice, disunion, and unhappiness which now 
 pervade society; and that it has been, mediately or immediately, di¬ 
 rectly or indirectly, the real cause of all the evils with which the 
 human race has been afflicted , We come now, my friends, to the 
 fourth division of our subject, w'hich is, if I recollect aright, that “the 
 errors in which all religions are founded, are the real cause which 
 now prevents the establishment over the earth of a society of virtue, 
 of intelligence, of charity in its most genuine sense, and of sincerity 
 and kindness among the whole human family.” And, my friends, if 
 religion be the only obstacle to such a happy consummation as this, it. 
 is surely high time that this obstacle were removed. “ What is virtueT* 
 is another question which Jias been put to me. Virtue, my friends, 
 according to the best idea I can form of it, is that course of conduct 
 which promotes most effectually the happiness cf man individually 
 and collectively; and vice is that course of conduct, which, by the 
 laws pf man's nature, tends tokeep him in ignorance and to render 
 
 ^0 
 
230 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 him, individually and collectively, unhappy. Now the whole course 
 of my reading, reflection, and observation—of my knowledge of man, 
 derived from extensive travel and observation of the animal man in 
 his various phases, and from intimate communication and interchange 
 of intelligence with the first blinds I have been able to meet with—all 
 these reasons concur to impress upon nay mind a resistless conviction 
 that the only barriers now existing in the way ofthe establishment of a 
 virtuous, happy, and rapidly progressive state of society, are the re¬ 
 ligions now taught in the world. To me it appears the essence of 
 filly to suppose that there can be real virtue among a people taught to 
 believe that they have the pow 7 er of controlling their belief, and of 
 liking and disliking at their will. These two errors, so long as they 
 remain the paramount circumstance in forming the mind and feelings 
 *>f the human race, must ever present an impassable barrier to our 
 progress jn the paths of virtue; nay, while these errors continue to be 
 impressed on the infant mind, real virtue must remain hidden from 
 man. These two pernicious errors engender all falsehood, deception, 
 and hypocrisy. These are, indeed, the natural and necessary fruit 
 of the tree—and where there is falsehood and deception, there can be 
 no virtue; and where these errors exist, truth cannot he known; and, 
 in consequence, your present state of society is built altogether upon 
 falsehood and deception. Where there is disunion of feeling and 
 sentiment there can be no more than the appearance of virtue; and 
 religion compels you to imbibe, at a very early age, the sole cause of 
 this disunion of sentiment and feeling, and to regard it as a virtue. 
 When and where has there ever been harmony and unison of opin¬ 
 ion on the subject of religion? So well is this understood amongst 
 the most enlightened and refined circles of society, that they have ta¬ 
 citly entered into a convention never to broach the subject of religion, 
 so well is it known to the intelligent and best educated part of the 
 European population, that the discussion of religious topics tends, for 
 the time, to render the parties beside themselves or partially insane. 
 They generally establish it as one of the rules in their learned socie¬ 
 ties, for the improvement of the human mind in real knowledge, that 
 religion shall not be introduced. In those minds in which there is not 
 a pure, a genuine or universal charity, derived from a clear and dis¬ 
 tinct knowledge of the laws of human nature; which excludes not a 
 singleindividual of the human family, from our kind feelings for their 
 happiness, there ean be no virtue. And where is the religion that does 
 not in its immediate, direct, and necessary tendency, steel the heart of 
 man against the admission of this universal charity ? I can command 
 no language sufficiently expressive of the strength of my conviction^ 
 that, religion locks up the heart of man and renders it impenetrable to 
 the reception of a single charitable feeling for those who are opposed 
 to their religion,or most ennobling sentiment are not materially injured 
 by it. To what country shall I betake myself, in order to find true chart- 
 ty, which is the most rational, amiable, and beneficial quality of human 
 nature? Has it ever been, even up to the present hour, allowed fair 
 play? Had it not been checked in the bud by religion, it would have 
 
DEBAtiE. 
 
 231 
 
 been the most natural and the most general attribute of human char¬ 
 acter. But as the character of man has been formed by the religions 
 of the world, is this pure charity, or even the semblance of it, to be 
 found in Europe, Africa or America? I have sought fjr it every 
 where as the pearl above all price, but no where can I find it, or even 
 trace a faint resemblance to it. I have long since abandoned tho, 
 search, for to find it where any religion prevailed, I discovered was 
 utterly hopeless. This divine charity, to be derived only from an 
 accurate knowledge of the laws of human nature, never has existed as 
 a virtue to any people from the beginning of time. How was it to be 
 produced? Can doctrines which teach that man can believe or dis¬ 
 believe, love or hate at pleasure, teach charity ? To expect the tree of 
 religion, my friends, to produce the fruit of cha rity, were just as irra¬ 
 tional as to expect “figs from thorns, or grapes from thistles.” There 
 can be no real virtue, where there is not kindness and affection exist¬ 
 ing amongst the population—but where shall we look for this? The 
 Society of Friends have made the nearest approximation to it that I 
 have yet seen—hut have they been able to attain to this indispensable 
 pre-requisite, for virtue and social happiness? No,,my friends, with 
 the most ardent desire on their parts, the Society of Friends have nut 
 been able to attain this happy state of individual and social feeling,, 
 They have failed entirely, and why ? Because there can be no real 
 affection, kindness or benevolence of feeling, amongst the members of 
 any class, sect or party, who are trained in the notion that they can 
 believe or disbelieve, like or dislike at will. No, to search after a 
 virtuous population, whilst these pernicious and fundamental errors 
 are taught to the people, will be only to waste our time. Then, my 
 friends, if you really wish to be virtuous, and to have kind and affec¬ 
 tionate feelings one towards another; to acquire the feelings of a pure 
 and genuine charity , that shall perpetually exclude from your bosoms 
 every unpleasant and unkind feeling towards any of your brethren 
 of the human family; the very first step that you must take is to 
 discard and to reject all the religions of the world, together with all 
 those errors which these religions have forced into your minds. When 
 you can effect an amalgamation between oil and water, you may ex¬ 
 pect to find real virtue and religion co-existed in the same people. A 
 population virtuous , and at the same time religious , never has existed; 
 and if I know any thing of the constitution of human nature, never will 
 exist. And as to our progress in improvement in intelligence in other 
 matters, it has been made unaided by system in opposition to the 
 established and prevalent systems of religion in the place where the 
 improvements were made. Religions m general set no value upon 
 real, or what they term worldly knowledge. 
 
 Amongst every population over the world, in which any religion has 
 acquired the full ascendency over the minds of the people, there, as a 
 necessary consequence, have young,old, and middle aged been plung¬ 
 ed in the darkest night of ignorance. How indeed is it possible, that 
 religion and intelligence ever can exist together? The one has its 
 source in the wildest fancies of a romantic and overstrained imagina- 
 

 DEBATE. 
 
 lion—the other is derived from fact, and is founded in real knowledge/ 
 and discoverable onlv by the clear light of natural revelation. If the 
 Christian religion had not induced and sustained and continued the 
 dark ages, as they are called, how different would have been the state 
 of the world, during that period, from what we learn from history it has 
 been and from our experience it is now ? Why, my friends, under a 
 national system, founded on the obvious laws of nature, it will be easy 
 in practice to give more knowledge requisite to happiness to a popula¬ 
 tion in ten years to come, than the world has been permitted to acquire 
 in the last two thousand years. If, therefore, we are ever to become 
 a people truly intelligent, our first preliminary step must be to discard 
 all religions and the incalculable errors of every description which 
 they have engendered. It is-religion, my friends, which destroys all 
 our reasoning faculties, and conjures up phantoms to affright and ecu - 
 found all the human faculties. Were it not for the degrading and de¬ 
 basing effects of the various religions of the world, bowing down the 
 minds of mankind to receive the te tellings of a few ignorant mortals, 
 w ho pretend to instruct them in, to them, inconceivable heavenly mys¬ 
 teries, children by the time they arrive at the age of ten years, 
 might with ease to their instructors,and great delight to themselves r bo 
 trained to the acquisition of more knowledge than is at present possess¬ 
 ed by any priest or all the priest^ in the world. Then, my friends, 
 we come next to that charity whihh it is necessary to possess in de¬ 
 vising a system for the education of children; and the only barrier 
 that 1 know of, to the introduction of the most necessary charity, is 
 religion. But so long as religion is tolerated, this charity also, can 
 find no resting place upon earth. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises— 
 
 “A copious history of the Jewish legislator is given by Antapanus, 
 in which the oppression of the Israelites; the night of Moses into 
 Arabia, and his subsequent marriage; a circumstance similar to that 
 of the burning bush; his divine commission to deliver his country¬ 
 men; the transformation of his rod into a serpent; the various 
 plagues of Egypt, the spoiling of the Egyptians; the passage through 
 the Red Sea; the destruction of Pharaoh and his host; and the sup¬ 
 port of the Israelites by manna in the wilderness, are all mentioned. 
 He is further said to have been the person whom the Greeks call 
 Museus, the preceptor of the celebrated Orpheus. The same author 
 asserts that the passage of the Israelites through the Red Sea was 
 not unknown to the Heliopolitans, who gave the following account of 
 that supernatural transaction. “The king of Egypt, as soon as the 
 Jews had departed from his country, pursued them wffth an immense 
 army, bearing along with him the consecrated animals. But Moses 
 having, by the divine command, struck the wqters with his rod, 
 they parted asunder, and afforded a free passage to the Israelites. 
 The Egytians attempted to follow them, when fire suddenly flashed 
 in their faces, and the sea, returning to its usual channel, brought a 
 universal destruction upon their whole army.” 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 233 
 
 *‘The circumstance of the Egyptians being struck with lightning, 
 fts well as being overwhelmed by the waves, is mentioned in the 77th 
 Psalm, although unnoticed in the Pentateuch. 
 
 “Diodorus Siculus relates, that the Ichthyophagi, who lived near 
 the Red Sea, had a tradition handed down to them through a long line 
 of ancestors, that the whole bay was once laid bare to the very 
 bottom, the waters retiring to the opposite shores; and that they 
 afterwards returned to their accustomed channel with a most tremen¬ 
 dous revulsion. 
 
 “Even to this day, the inhabitants of the neighborhood of Corondel 
 preserve the remembrance of a mighty army having been once 
 drowned in the bay which Ptolemy calls Clysma. 
 
 “The very country where the event is said to have happened, in 
 some degree bears testimony of the accuracy of the Mosaical narra¬ 
 tive. The scriptural Ethen is still called Etti. The wilderness of 
 Shur, the mountain of Sinai, and the country of Par an , are still 
 known by the same name; and Mar ah, Elath, and Midian are still 
 familiar to the ears of the Arabs. The grove of Elim yet remains, 
 and its twelve fountains have neither increased nor diminished since 
 the days of Moses. 
 
 “The names which are assigned by Moses to eastern countries and 
 cities, returned to them immediately from the patriarchs, their origin¬ 
 al founders are for the most part the very names by which they 
 were anciently known all over the East ; many of them were after¬ 
 wards translated, with little variation, by the Greeks, into their 
 systems of geography. Moses has traced in one short chapter, all 
 the inhabitants of the earth, from the Caspian and Persian seas to 
 extreme Gades, to their original, and recorded at once the period and 
 occasion of their dispersion. 
 
 “The late Sir William Jones has very satisfactorily traced the 
 origin of all the people of the earth to the three roots, Shem, Ham, 
 and Japheth; according to the account given in the 10th chapter of 
 Genesis. The fact mentioned by him is worthy of remark, that the 
 first dynasties of Peruvian kings are dignified exactly as those of 
 India are, by the name of the Sun and Moon. 
 
 “Sir William Jones has shown, that the traditions of the present 
 heathen nations of Asia are not of more ancient authority than the 
 traditions of the ancient nations of Asia and Europe.—“States and 
 empires,” he says, “could scarcely have assumed a regular form till 
 fifteen or sixteen hundred years before the Christian epoch; and for 
 the first thousand years of that period we have no history unmiked 
 with fable, except that of the turbulent and variable, but eminently 
 distinguished nation descended from Abraham. 
 
 “The Chinese themselves do not pretend that any historical monu¬ 
 ment existed among them, in the age of Confucius, more ancient 
 than 1100 years before the Christian epoch. 
 
 “The dawn of true Indian history appears only three or four centu¬ 
 ries before the Christian era; the preceding ages being clouded by 
 allegory or fable.” 
 
 20* 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 <)•> i 
 
 “Truth is always consistent with itself, and acquires an accession 
 of evidence from every thing with which it stands connected. It is 
 not only beyond the power of perverted ingenuity and learning to 
 invalidate the truth of the facts recorded in the earlier parts of the 
 scriptural history, but they are confirmed by the traditions of all 
 nations in a manner the most indubitable.”* 
 
 We have now, we presume, exhausted your patience on this dry 
 but still interesting part of the argument. We predicate nothing on 
 these documents further than this, that, so far as the antiquities of 
 nations have descended to us, there is corroborative evidence of the 
 Mosaic account, and not a single testimony against it. 
 
 There is more absurdity in my friend’s last address than could, 
 perhaps, be disproved in a week. I have enumerated fifty-four dis¬ 
 tinct assertions adduced in his last address, and in the same space of 
 time 1 could utter fifty-four entirely distinct from my opponent’s. 
 But what would be the results, what the convictions arising from 
 such a style of disputation. If this is to pass for argument, demon¬ 
 stration, or proof among the sceptics, I think their case is indeed 
 irremediable. Men do, indeed, talk of reason, and eulogize her, 
 and compare her with Christianity; but I have uniformly remarked 
 that sceptics, after a few compliments to their goddess at the thresh- 
 hold, afterwards treat her with great neglect. I had intended to-day 
 to present a recapitulation of my argument, and of my opponent’s 
 also; but. on examination I could not find that lie had advanced a 
 single new idea. I could discover nothing but what he has already 
 more than once present. He has only given us another revisal of 
 his divine code. In reiterating this code he did, I acknowledge, pass 
 a few compliments upon the general character of man. We have 
 been told, among other things, that we have not rational faces; that 
 Chore are few indices or proofs of any sort of reasoning powers ex¬ 
 hibited in any Christian community; and to Christian communities 
 ho ascribes ail the vices of the world. For what purpose should I 
 attend to such a style of argument? No good could result. By 
 recognizing it as worthy of notice 1 should be deprived of opportunity 
 to advance any good arguments in favor of Christianity. On Mr. 
 Owen’s principles he can commit no sin against decorum or any 
 tubing else. He cannot recognize any being taking cognizance of his 
 motives against whom he can sin. He acknowledges no responsi¬ 
 bility to any tribunal, none to the moderators, none to the audience* 
 Upon his own principles he cannot sin, and is, therefore, incapable 
 of conviction upon our premises. 
 
 Yesterday we were told that we were neither more nor less than 
 mere particles of matter, consequently that there is no such thing as 
 either virtue, religion, or morality, in the common acceptation of 
 those terms, I know that the terms heaven , divine law, religion * 
 virtue, an 1 morality, are occasionally used by Mr. Owen. But in 
 what sense or application he uses them are cot known. We have 
 ewied upon him repeatedly for a definition of these terms. Surely; 
 
 * Haldane's Evidences, vol. p. 179—194. ' 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 235 
 
 it must be known to Mr. Owen that in argument definitions must 
 be settled. Now I would ask this audience if they have any idea of 
 what Mr. Owen means by virtue ? What are his ideas of virtue? 
 What virtue can a being who is altogether material possess ? Why, 
 he tells us that it is to pay a just regard to our passions and feelings; 
 or, in other words, that a virtuous course is that which secures to us 
 the greatest amount of animal enjoyment. So that virtue, with Mr.' 
 Owen, is nothing more than a new name for appetite gratified, and 
 his morality is nothing more than the capacity to minister to animal 
 enjoyment. This is most unquestionably what Mr. Owen means by 
 virtue and morality. 
 
 In regard to the term fact Mr. Owen repeats that “any thing which 
 exists is fact .” Now I believe I hold mere verbal criticism in as 
 slight regard as most men, but by this loose method of defining terms 
 and using them, it is impossible ever to arrive at a logical conclusion. 
 We asserted yesterday that whatever is done is a fact; but that nothing 
 which is not done can be called a fact—this I affirm is the true im¬ 
 port of the term. In common parlance we use this and other terms 
 vaguely, but when we come to logical and philosophical discussion 
 this will never do. If it be necessary in mathematics to have a strict 
 definition of our terms, it is equally necessary here. What is the 
 difference between a fact, a truth, an opinion, and a belief? Why, 
 there is just as distinct a meaning annexed to these terms in my mind 
 as to the eye, the ear, or any other organ or member of the human 
 body. The term truth is the most general and comprehensive of alb 
 We have logical and mathematical truths, and so on through the whole 
 circle of the sciencs; and it means no more than a coexistence and 
 consentaneousness with the thing of which it is affirmed. When facts 
 are called stubborn things w hich are to revolutionize the w r orld, it is 
 surely necessary that we should understand the import of the term; 
 but here we are at issue—Mr. Owen says a fact is that which exists; 
 on the other hand, we affirm that a fact is tha.t which is done. Nowg 
 according to Mr. Owen’s definition every thing that has any existence 
 real or imaginary, is a fact. If a house is composed of fifty thousand 
 bricks, it is composed of fifty thousand facts! It is true that 1 have 
 two eyes; but, in the legitimate use of terms, it is not a fact. It is 
 a fact that Mr. Owen has addressed you; that he has exhibited his 
 twelve laws several times; expounded and applied them. But their 
 existence upon that paper is not a fact. It is a fact that they were 
 written, read, and explained; because all these things were done. 
 Historic facts are those which have been done in former times, and 
 put upon record. 
 
 After my opponent’s definition of the term fact, he w 7 as pleased fo 
 admit that he had some credulity; that he believed that Julius Cesar 
 was assassinated in the Capitol, and that this same Cesar conquered 
 Pompey. He also admitted that he believed some other facts in 
 Roman history. He believes in the existence of an inquisition, of 
 the cruel persecutions of the Puritans, and he believes in the prac¬ 
 ticability of instituting anew social system which is to revolutloHifce 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 236 
 
 the world: these ar e facts which he says he believes. Now take the 
 most notorious of these facts—viz. that Cesar was assassinated in 
 the senate house, and let him produce the evidence on which his 
 belief rests. I say, let him produce the historic evidence on which 
 he rests his belief in this fact; and I will produce a hundred fold 
 more historic evidence of every species to prove that Jesus Christ 
 rose from the dead. 
 
 My friend is himself a striking contradiction to his whole doctrine 
 of circumstances, because we see him before us such a being as it is 
 impossible his circumstances could ever have formed. His views, 
 sentiments, feelings, and whole course of conduct are antipodes to 
 those of men reared and trained under circumstances of the same 
 character with his own. What, I should like to be informed, has 
 differed Mr. Owen from his neighbors? lie has asserted that our 
 faith is entirely involuntary, and that our volitions have nothing to 
 do with our belief; but he has just shown you that he disbelieves his 
 own sixth law. He has the most voluntary kind of faith I ever knew* 
 He wills to believe all history that reflects any stigma upon nominal 
 Christians—the cruelties and persecutions practised by pretended 
 disciples of him who prohibited all violence, cruelty, and revenge; he 
 wills to believe certain matters of fact from Roman history. The 
 rest he wills to disbelieve. 
 
 The reason why I have not replied to the calumnies cast by 
 Mr. Owen upon the Christian religion, is, because we thought 
 them unworthy of a reply. But Mr. Owen ought to come to close 
 quarters, armed with the artillery of his twelve facts. In order to 
 bring Mr, Owen to close quarters, I presented him with a written 
 outline of my exceptions to some of his most important facts, or 
 laws of human nature, or whatever he may prefer to call them. This 
 paper Mr. Owen has not condescended to notice. I shall, therefore, 
 take the liberty to read it to you in order that you may judge for your¬ 
 selves whether it merits the contempt with which it has been treated. 
 You will then judge whether Mr. Owen, as a philosopher, is not 
 bound, and especially on the ground he has assumed, to discuss the 
 merits of the document presented:— 
 
 EXTRACT FROM OWEN’S LAWS OF OUR NATURE. 
 
 6. “That each individual is so created, that he must believe accord¬ 
 ing to the strongest i mpressions that can be made on his feelings and 
 other faculties.” 
 
 9. “That the highest health, the greatest progressive improvements, 
 and the most permanent happiness of each individual, depend, in a 
 great degree, upon the proper cultivation of all his physical, intel¬ 
 lectual, and moral faculties and powers, from infancy to maturity; 
 and upon all those parts of his nature being duly called into action 
 at their proper period, and temperately exercised according to the 
 strength and capacity of the individual” 
 
DEBATE.' 
 
 23* 
 
 NOTES UPON MR. OWEN’s SIXTH LAW, 
 
 The object of this law is to prove man a necessary, and, therefore, 
 an irresponsible agent. 
 
 {^Belief must, in all cases, be the effect of testimony, as knovv^ 
 ledge is of experience; which latter is always, and in all case?*, the 
 proper and necessary effect of sensation, perception, memory, and 
 consciousness; or, is the necessary result of one or more of these 
 faculties. Wherefore, unless we confound belief with knowledge, 
 it has nothing to do with our sensations or feelings, whether external 
 or internal feelings; but depends entirely upon testimony-—of the 
 validity of which reason is the sole and competent judge. But, sup- 
 pose with the said law, that “our belief has no dependence upon our 
 w ill”—What then? How does this effect our responsibility, to destroy 
 which is the obvious design of said law? Is jot trill ? or volitior , 
 the last practical act of the mind—the determination of the mind to 
 action, whether internal action or external? Is it not the effect of 
 appetite—of affection—of passion—of judgment ? And although it 
 may proceed from any one, or more, of these motives; yet, in rational 
 creatures, ought it not to be always under the control cf reason—of 
 judgment? And if we judge or reason rightly, according to the 
 documents within our power, we will necessarily trill to do what, 
 upon the whole, appears right, or preferable to do. And this we'will 
 most certainly do, if we possess the documents of Christianity, and 
 act accordingly. For it is axiomatically right for the rational creature 
 to love, adore, and obey its Creator, Preserver, Redeemer, and graci¬ 
 ous Benefactor; to whom it stands indebted for every thing enjoyed 
 or promised. These things being so, the only necessity the rational 
 creature is subject to, according to its nature, is to act right; that is* 
 {^according to the best documents which are within its power, or of 
 which it can avail itself. To act thus, would most certainly be to 
 act circumstantially right; than which, no rational creature can act 
 better: and, in the case supposed, would inevitably lead to piety, 
 temperance, justice, and charity;—Would infallibly secure benevo¬ 
 lence to all, according to our ability and their necessity, <fcc. Now, 
 if to these happy results of the just necessity of acting up to this 6th law 
 of our rational nature, as explained above, we add the requirements 
 of the 9th, in order to promote and secure our highest and most perma¬ 
 nenthappiness, by cultivating, in the best and highest manner, all our 
 powers and faculties, physical, intellectual, and moral, from infancy 
 to maturity, and in •calling them forth into action at the proper pe¬ 
 riods;—will we not especially cultivate and call into action, as fast, 
 and as far as possible, these powers; the improvement and exercise 
 of which, contribute most to this high and benevolent design of our 
 creation; namely, the knowledge and love of God; with all the bliss¬ 
 ful and glorious hopes and assurances of the gospel, both present and 
 , future: all of which are attainable by faith only ? Will we not, there- 
 f >re cultivate the faculty of believin'?, with which we are so liberally 
 endowed from our very infancy, that our progressive happiness, our 
 diversified gratification, may increase as fust as possible-—may gfoyr 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 with our grotvth, and strengthen with our strength. For who kndwa 
 not that O^the chief of our gratifications consist in the exercise of our J 
 
 minds upon the most lovely and interesting objects? And what can 
 equal for grandeur, for beauty, for variety, for interest, for permanen¬ 
 cy—the glorious, the wonderful, and lovely objects, presented to our 
 minds in the Holy Scriptures, to allure our souls to the love of piety 
 ^,nd benevolence—of all manner of virtue and goodness? Or what so * 
 terrible or dissuasive as the exhibitions Of the divine displeasure against li, 
 
 every species of impiety, of iniquity, and cruelty to our fellow- k 
 
 creatures? And are not these things addressed and adapted to our < 
 
 intellectual faculties? Have we not the faculty of believing upon 
 testimony—nf discerning its credibility—of loving and hating—of 
 hoping and fearing—of admiring, desiring, rejoicing—of gratitude 
 and resentment? And does not our intellectual happiness consist in 
 a duly apportioned succession of those exercises towards their proper 
 objects? Does not the 8th law of our nature demand variety in order i 
 to healthful enjoyment? And does not the law under consideration 
 call for the cultivation of our moral faculties? And are not the above h 
 objects adapted to the cultivation of these faculties? 
 
 But to proceed. We have farther proof of the designed or involun- 
 tary ambiguity of our opponent. He still persists in the use of the j 
 word created . What is the import of the word created? In reply to 
 this question, Mr. Owen says that he does not know whether he ever 
 W.as created. Therefore, for Mr. Owen to use the term created is an 
 imposition upon our language and feelings. What is the import of the 
 word feeling? What does Mr. Owen mean by applying the term 
 belief to the strongest imoressions made upon our feelings? If I put. 
 my finger into the fire l feel that I am burned; but, according to Mr. , 
 Owen’s use of terms, from this feeling results my belief that I am 
 burned; and I ought, to speak in his style, to say that I believe I am i 
 burned, and that this belief is involuntary. We have protested already 
 against this licentious use of terms. We have affirmed that the term 
 belief cannot have reference to our sensations, but can only be 
 applied legitimately to matters dependent upon testimony; that where 
 there is no testimony there can be no belief. It is common, w r e admit, 
 to say, that we have the testimony of our own eyes, or cars; but this 
 is language merely eulogistic of the utility and perfection of those 
 organs; but, in strict propriety of speech, we cannot use the term 
 belief where there is neither oral , written , nor traditional testimony 
 But, with Mr. Owen, the word belief is nomengeneralissimum —a word 
 of the most general and comprehensive signification-—almost equiva¬ 
 lent in the latitude in which he uses it to a universal language* If I 
 feel hot or cold, wet or dry, sick or well, weary or refreshed, accord¬ 
 ing to Mr. Owen’s latitudinous use of the word, I must say that I 
 believe that I feel all these varied sensations. 
 
 He says that each individual is so created that he must believe 
 according to the strongest impression made upon his eye, or ear, or 
 nose, or heart, or any appetite, passion, or power which he possesses; 
 er, in other words, fire will burn him, water will drown him,, ajid 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 239 
 
 the breeze will cool hioi whether he will it or not; and therefore this 
 belief is involuntary. From such confusion of terms we may infer 
 that there is a corresponding confusion of ideas; for confusion of 
 terms is the offspring either of confusion of ideas, or a mistake of 
 the meaning of terms. Whatever a person clearly conceives, he can 
 clearly express -—Verba sequntum res; or, in English, words follow 
 ideas is a true and instructive maxim. )VhoIe systems of error, when 
 analysed, have been found to proceed from a misapprehension and 
 misapplication of terms. And. indeed, 1 am not without very con¬ 
 siderable misgivings that this may be one radical cause of the illusion 
 which has captivated my friend and opponent Mr. Owen. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 My friends-—In this discussion I am to prove and establish certain 
 points. Mr. Campbcl*, on tlie other hand, has undertaken to disprove 
 them. The course I have pursued, plainly indicates how much I 
 wish to reply to Mr. Campbell’s observations, whenever he brings for¬ 
 ward any thing that to me appears rationally and legitimately enti¬ 
 tled to a grave reply ; but when Mr. Campbell endeavors to intro¬ 
 duce into this debate theological speculations which none but those 
 trained in them can perceive belong to the subjects, I really cannot 
 reconcile it to my notions of the propriety and decorum which the 
 dignity of this debate requires to be mutually and reciprocally obser -^ 
 ved; to indulge myself in any reply to what I conceive to be so im*^ 
 pertinently irrelevant to the real merits of the question; therefore 
 when I do not give Mr. Campbell a direct reply, you must do me the 
 justice to believe that I cannot recognize the matter propounded as 
 applicable to the questions before us. I now perceive that Mr. Camp¬ 
 bell’s associations of ideas, are, indeed very different on these subjects, 
 to those combinations which have been forpied in the most intelligent 
 minds in the most advanced societies in Europe and America. He 
 has been evidently always within religious circumstances and his 
 mind is overwhelmed with their influences. While I have fortunate¬ 
 ly escaped out of them, and freely examined and experienced the in¬ 
 fluences of almost all the other circumstances to be found in civilized 
 society. Mr. Campbell, therefore, thinks that important to the dis¬ 
 cussion of the subjects before us, which I know, in the present com¬ 
 paratively advanced state of knowledge, not to be deserving of any 
 record in our proceedings, and I therefore pass it over without further 
 notice. Mr. Campbell has informed you that it was not in the nature 
 of man to be compelled to support clerical institutions against their 
 will, and to pay .them money. In reply I request him to ask the 
 Catholics of Ireland if the large sums which they annually contribute 
 to support the established church of England, in Ireland, are not ren¬ 
 dered solely against their will; and in England large sums are ex¬ 
 tracted from the Jews and dissenters in support of their established 
 Religion, solely against their inclination. 
 
 But the most singular misconception of Mr. Campbell is in relation 
 fo the laws which govern our belief of facts. Now there is 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 '240 
 
 thing more familiar to the human mind than that when we read 
 history and find the facts stated to be in the regular order of nature, 
 to be well attested, and not contradicted, by other equal authority, for 
 us to believe such facts to be true. While, on the other hand, when we 
 -read of facts stated to exist, which are opposed to the well ascertain¬ 
 ed laws of our nature, and which require stronger evidence than any 
 history can afford; we, as rational beings, are compelled to withhold 
 our belief in such statements; and it does not depend upon our will, 
 fbr we cannot do otherwise. In the reading of history, it does not 
 depend upon me to believe or disbelieve the historic facts related— 
 one set of facts I can believe without effort, whilst another appears so 
 improbable, it becomes impossible to force myself to believe them. 
 
 I have been asked for my definition of the word fact. Now using the 
 word in its common acceptation it is considered to be a fact or no fact, 
 that man, at birth, is ignorant of his organization; and so on through¬ 
 out the whole twelve facts which I have stated. These are either 
 facts or no facts; and it is Mr. Campbell’s business and duty to show 
 to the contrary, if he does not believe them to be facts. But, w hat 
 perplexes Mr. Campbell is the exclusive attention he has paid to met¬ 
 aphysics—his attention has never been directed to the examination 
 •and ascertainment of facts. The difference between Mr. Campbell 
 and myself is this: I have for many years attended to nothing but 
 facts, and Mr. Campbell to nothing but imagination. For instance* 
 with regard to the fundamental law of our nature. It is either a fact 
 or no fact that we have the pownr of believing or disbelieving at will. 
 
 I have put the test to Mr. Campbell, and he has shown the fact t« 
 be so true that there is no opposing of it. In like manner I would 
 say that it is a fact that man’s will has or has not power over his be¬ 
 lief; in like manner, it is a fact that we know those things of which 
 w T e are informed by the evidence ofour senses, and we are compelled 
 to believe those things which are thus forced into our minds upon the 
 merits of the testimony which verifies them. In like manner it is or 
 is not a fact that all religions of the world have been founded in ignor- 
 ance. My affirmative is, that all the religions of the world have been 
 founded in ignorance; I offer proof and arguments in support of this 
 proposition ; and all Mr. Campbell might say for a thousand years 
 would be but idle words unless he can disprove this fact. 1 tell you 
 nothing but truths, my friends, and when you come to reflect coolly 
 Upon my statements, and to study facts for yourselvs, you may depend 
 upon it that you will find these much more true than the gospel; and i 
 it is now these very errors that prevent the establishment of a society 
 of charity in its most extensive sense aver the world. Mr. Campbell 
 and I take a great deal of pains not to be angry wfith each other, but 
 w'ere it not for the erroneous notions implanted by religion, we should 
 have no angry feelings on account of difference of opinion, and 
 our present discussion would only be a little pleasant excitement • 
 to us both. 
 
 But to be again serious upon these important subjects. The rcli 
 ,gipns of the world are the only cause why we cannot establish a s© 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 24 i 
 
 £lety that shall have sincerity for its foundation—for where religious 
 notions prevail there can be no real sincerity. All religions pre-sup- 
 pose that all men should think alike upon the fundamental principles 
 of each peculiar religion; and therefore many professors of it are 
 compelled by various considerations to conceal their real sentiments, 
 and to live in a state of continual deception. At present there is scarce¬ 
 ly any thing to be found in society that merits the name of truth— 
 Scarcely upon any occasion are you told the truth, except, perhaps, 
 when I come among you, and then I know how disagreeable it is to 
 you. But I hope the time will come when we shall all have the 
 happiness of speaking what we think and feel; and to do this, and to 
 experience all the beneficial results of a conduct so rational would be 
 to produce heaven upon earth. We have discovered by experience 
 in some few instances, what fine feelings are produced by such con¬ 
 duct. If we only knew each other as w r e are know n, as we should 
 do by speaking only what we really thought and felt, we could not 
 >avoid acquiring great kindness towards each other. Wherever you 
 find an open, honest character without deceit, that character gets 
 through the world without difficulty. It is a thorough knowledge of 
 ourselves and of each other, that can alone lay the foundation of love 
 and affection, inhuman society. Upon no other base can permanent 
 and extensive kindness and sincerity be established; and that not in a 
 little circle of a few hundred thousand, or a few millions, but among 
 the whole family of man. It is, therefore, true, as I have stated, that 
 religion is the only barrier in the way of forming a society of virtue, 
 intelligence, and kindness, and charity in its most extended sense, 
 among the w'hole human family; for as soon as we can get rid of the 
 errors of religion, there can be no obstacle in the way of our forming 
 a society with these qualifications. Then we shall have no local or 
 geographical prejudices—no district religions; but all will be so train¬ 
 ed as to recognize no line of demarcation between man and his fellow 
 —w r e shall all feel ourselves to be of one family, and act as if we really 
 were so. But to form a society of virtue, intelligence, and charity in 
 its most extended sense, and of sincerity and kindness, we must first 
 know what manner of beings we are; and when we discover how we 
 are organized, and how our character is subsequently produced, there 
 can be no difficulty in establishing a society of this kind as soon as 
 every thing in religion that is opposed to the laws of our nature, shall 
 be withdrawn from the world. We shall then know how to create 
 circumstances, which cannot fail to communicate to each individual, 
 the most superior character, of which his organization is susceptible. 
 jNo religion has ever yet formed any uniformly good character for 
 mankind; but understanding the laws of our nature, we learn to take 
 a mathematical course., to form a character greatly superior to any 
 that ever has existed. 
 
 We may think the invention of a ship, of a time-piece, of spinning 
 machines, or the steam engine, &c. of great importance; but what 
 are these, compared with the science which shall teach us the right 
 mode to form jnto excellence, every child that shall come into exist- 
 
 2i 
 
242 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 <ence. By this science, we shall be instructed how to train the phys¬ 
 ical, intellectual, and moral qualities of children, in the best manner, 
 and thereby enable them to attain a high point of perfection—and yet 
 their faculties will never be exercised beyond the point of temperance. 
 The constitution of our nature is such, that all our faculties must be 
 cultivated and exercised, or else we become but parts of human 
 beings, and therefore, but partially happy. Your existing modes of 
 training, cause you to be human beings but in part—not one part in 
 ten of your faculties have ever been developed, or called into action- 
 but, understanding the laws of our nature, we shall know mathematic ¬ 
 ally how to train every child that comes into existence. 
 
 I have not the least doubt, but each of us might have been trained 
 to be much superior to what we are. Individually, we are but mere 
 pigmies, compared to the ancient Greeks and Romans, although as 
 nations, the moderns are superior to them. These ancients cultivated 
 many more of the faculties of each individual, than is the practice in 
 modern times > and many of their powers were much better brought 
 out. But neither these ancients, highly as their physical and intel¬ 
 lectual powers have been cultivated, nor any of our immediate ances¬ 
 tors, will be at all comparable to men whose physical and intellectual 
 faculties shall be understood, experienced, and developed as they 
 ought to be. Our present views, my friends, arc very cheering; we 
 have the prospect of breaking the shell of ignorance and darkness, 
 which has so long imprisoned our faculties—-we are now like the 
 chicken picking at the shell, in order to set itself at liberty and see the 
 light. This will be a glorious era, and my friend Mr. Campbell, will 
 assist in hastening its arrival, for he has a strong yearning after an 
 improved state of society, which he calls the millennium. At present 
 it cannot be expected, that Mr. Campbell should think with me—he 
 has a powerful mind, but has experienced the natural result of early 
 prepossessions, and it has been hurt by too much learning—but when 
 he comes to compare, to investigate, and to ascertain facts, I do ex¬ 
 pect that he will become a powerful apostle in the cause I advocate. 
 1 have told you that these same twelve old laws, which Mr. Campbell 
 does not seem to like, will point out to us practical measures, for the 
 promoting and securing of our true interests and happiness. They 
 develope to us distinctly the mode in which the worst characters have 
 been formed; and also, how the medium character of man, (now the 
 only kind to be met with) has been produced. They further point 
 out to us the manner in which all may be made to possess the most 
 superior character. And I have very little doubt that it will be found 
 quite easy in practice, to make every individual of the second genera¬ 
 tion greatly superior to the present; and beyond all comparison, 
 superior to any human being, whose character has been formed under 
 the old systems of the world. 
 
 I have now gone through the four clauses of this part of the subject; 
 I have given you my reasons for being compelled to believe that alj 
 religions have been founded in the ignorance of man, that they are op ¬ 
 posed to the unchanging laws of our nature, and are the real, spurce of 
 
DEBASE. 
 
 24 3 
 
 vice, disunion, and misery of every description; and that they are 
 now the only bar to the formation of a society over the earth, of virtue, 
 intelligence and happiness. 
 
 We now come to the last clause of the subject, which is, that these 
 religions can no longer be maintained, except through the ignorance 
 of the mass of the people, and the tyranny of the few over that 
 mass. 
 
 Do you know, my friends, that the beginning of this week, in this 
 place was the first period in the history of man, when truths the most 
 simple in their nature, and the most important to the happiness and 
 well being of man, could be publicly spoken. There never has been 
 any antecedent time, in the history of any conntry, in which any indh 
 vidual has been permitted to speak as I have done. 
 
 Mix. Campbell's next address. 
 
 We would suppose from the various oracular predictions which nW 
 IHend delivers, that he was a prophet. He has been giving us pre¬ 
 diction upon prediction; but unfortunately his prophetic reputation 
 is not uniformly sustained by the accomplishment of former predic¬ 
 tions. The treachery of his former predictions forbids confidence 
 in the present. We waited past the time for the fulfilment of his 
 prophecy, three years ago uttered, that Cincinnati would become a 
 deserted or evacuated city before two years; that the citizens would 
 all migrate to New Harmony. But -we still find a few people living 
 here, and the sound of the workman is yet heard in the streets. 
 
 I concluded my last address by remarking that the document read 
 to you, and presented to my friend, was drawn up with a view to 
 elicit a discussion of Mr. Owen’s favorite position. I have done 
 every thing in my power to bring him to an issue on this point, but 
 with what success you all see. We have given you definitions of 
 the terms fact, faith , testimony , &c. but all that we can elicit from 
 Mr. Owen is a reiteration of the assertion that every thing which ex¬ 
 ists is a fact; that is, if his library contains ten thousand books, it 
 consists of exactly ten thousand facts. Now this is a language as 
 novel and strange as is the theory of Mr. Owen. 
 
 We have asserted that Judaism and Christianity were founded 
 upon matters of fact—upon things done by the divine power; that 
 these facts, in the first instance, were attested by the most competent 
 and credible witnesses; that their testimony was delivered to the 
 people orally, and that millions believed upon their oral testimony; 
 that this testimony was afterwards put into a written form, and that 
 in this shape it has come down to ns; and that upon this kind of 
 testimony our faith in Christianity chiefly rests. Now the question 
 before us is, Whether faith , thus built upon testimony , is , or is not , 
 influenced by our volitions? This is the. naked, simple question, which 
 we ought now to discuss. I therefore ask my friend, for the sake of 
 coming to an issue, Whether the term belief imports any thing more 
 than the cordial reception of testimony ? Is this belief in any degree 
 Influenced by our volitions? Is not volition the last dictate of the 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 ■m 
 
 understanding? But were he to define the term volition , we would 
 most probably discover that our opponent differs from ns in his accep¬ 
 tation of the term. But suppose, for example, I have a friend and an 
 Cnemy : I have conceived such a character of my enemy as to find it 
 difficult to believe a good report of him. As to my friend, I am well 
 disposed to believe all good of him. Suppose, then, that different 
 persons should testify to me something in favor of my enemy and of 
 my friend too—would the same amount of evidence in both cases 
 produce in my mind the same degree of assurance in regard to the 
 facts related ? This illustration does not come altogether up to the 
 point, but it comes near enough to elicit a fair investigation, if Mr„ 
 Qvven would meet the question upon its merits. It is an old adage, 
 that we too easily believe what we wish to be true; and what we do not 
 wish to be true, with difficulty we believe. 
 
 Mr. Owen says he tells the truth: that is enough; you must be¬ 
 lieve him. But when did I say that persons could not be compelled 
 to pay money against their wills to support any religion ? I perceive 
 that if I continue in this way, merely excepting to my opponent’s 
 premises, he will continue repeating them, as if a repetition of his 
 theory was sufficient to silence all objections, and carry conviction 
 to every heart. These twelve facts, in this way, might be brought to 
 prove or disprove any thing. Mr. Owen is like certain witnesses 
 which sometimes appear in our courts: when cross-questioned, they 
 imagine it to be indispensably necessary to go over the whole story 
 again; and if they are ten times cross-examined, they cannot be made 
 to understand that it is not necessary to begin at the beginning and 
 fell the whole story over again. But I will try if it is possible to get 
 on with the argument in some other way. I had intended a full re¬ 
 capitulation of my argument from the beginning, but circumstances 
 compel me to confine my recapitulation to my last argument finished 
 yesterday. The following were the outlines:— 
 
 1. We attempted yesterday to develope still farther the criteria by 
 which we distinguish the historic facts that are certainly true, from 
 those that are false or doubtful. 
 
 2. We showed that the facts on which the Jewish religion is predi¬ 
 cated have these criteria, 
 
 3. We next demonstrated that it would be impossible, according to 
 our experience, to institute monuments, or commemorative institutions, 
 of Alleged facts which never happened. 
 
 4. We showed that circumcision, the Sabbath, the passover, the 
 redemption of the firstborn, the selection of the tribe of Levi, and all 
 the Jewish festivals, were commemorative institutions to assure pos¬ 
 terity of the indubitable certainty of the facts on which their religion 
 was built, 
 
 5. We alleged that the types and symbols of the Jews’ religion 
 were most wisely designed to furnish the world with a supernatural 
 vocabulary; and not merely to establish the past institutions, but to 
 introduce the Christian religion. 
 
 r w 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 £45 
 
 6. We then asserted that there was no contradictory tefetihiony con¬ 
 temporaneous with the Jewish institution. 
 
 7. We next produced corroborating documents from the remotest 
 antiquities of the surrounding nations. 
 
 An ingenious opponent might have presented me with one or other 
 of the only two conceivable objections to my reasoning. As Mr. 
 Owen has not presented them, I will do it myself. Human ingenuity 
 can devise but two objections to this argument. The one is, that these 
 commemorative institutions were imposed upon the Jewish nation at.a 
 period long posterior to the times when the alleged facts were recorded 
 to have transpired: that is to say, that some five hundred years after 
 the happening of the events, it was required of the people to perform 
 certain actions commemorative of them. Now the question is, Is it 
 within the compass of our experience to conceive of the possibility of 
 any people being induced, at. a prescribed time, to begin solemnly and 
 scrupulously to observe all these religious customs, and conform to 
 all these commemorative institutions, if the reasons assigned were not 
 founded on demonstrated facts? The question is just this, Could we 
 of the present day now be induced, by any sort of influence, from this 
 time forth to celebrate the anniversary of an event said to have hap¬ 
 pened a hundred years ago, of which we have no satisfactory proof? 
 The universal experience of mankind proves that we could not—it 
 would be an imposition which it is not in human nature to submit to. 
 The second objection which might be urged to these premises, is, that 
 Moses found the Jews in the practice and observance of these in¬ 
 stitutions, and that from his own brain he manufactured the reasons 
 for them: that he found, for example, the rite of circumcision and the 
 institution of the Levitical priesthood held in great reverence by these 
 people; and that he told them these were commemorative of certain 
 matters of fact recorded in their history, written by himself, which 
 they had never heard before; but that he now reveals to them 
 the reason, and constrains them to say that these commemorative 
 actions have respect to events of which they never before heard. 
 On this hypothesis the difficulty is this : that at this very time he sug¬ 
 gested these things to the people, they must have inquired with deep 
 interest whether these reasons assigned by Moses were the true ones; 
 and moreover, this absurdity is implied in the objection that the 
 people had been long in the practice of these observances without 
 knowing any reason for them! Neither of these hypothesis are con¬ 
 ceivable upon any known principle of human nature, and these are 
 the only two objections which can be offered to the conclusion which 
 I have deduced from these premises. 
 
 I know that the reason why my opponent objects to receiving the 
 testimony of these holy men, is predicated upon a principle which he 
 has not avowed. That principle we wish now to expose; and, there¬ 
 fore, before we enter on the historic argument, we must present you 
 with a brief analysis of the reasonings and objections of David Hume, 
 
 David Hume affirms that “experience is our only guide in reason¬ 
 ing concerning matters of fact,” arid that “our belief, or assurance 
 
 21* 
 
246 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 of any fact from the report of eye-witnesses, is derived from no other 
 principle than experience; that is, our observation of the veracity 
 of human testimony, and of the usual conformity of facts to the 
 reports of witnesses.” 
 
 To detect the sophistry of Hume, we must give a true definition of 
 experience:— 
 
 Experience is either personal or derived. 
 
 u Personal experience is founded in memory, and consists solely of 
 the general maxims and conclusions that, each individual has formed 
 from the comparison of the particular facts he hath remembered.” 
 
 “Derived experience is founded in testimony , and consists not only 
 of all the experiences of others, which have, through that channel, 
 been communicated to us; but of all the general maxims or conclu¬ 
 sions we have formed, from the comparison of particnlar facts at* 
 tested.” 
 
 Our opponents, by the term experience , must mean personal ex¬ 
 perience, unless they make use of the sophism called by logicians, 
 “a circle in causes for derived experience is derived from testimony, 
 and cannot be contrasted with it; for it is the same with the assu¬ 
 rance attendant on, or is the result of faith. 
 
 Now if all testimony is to be judged by our personal experience, or 
 by our memory, or senses, we shall be reduced in the measure of our 
 information even below the savage himself. It will be impossible for 
 an inhabitant of the torrid zone to be assured that water can become 
 solid as a rock; or for an Icelander to believe in the existence of an 
 animal called a Negro. No number of witnesses, however credible , 
 could establish such facts in the minds of those who have no recollec¬ 
 tion of seeing them. 
 
 The sophistry of the whole reasoning of Hume on this subject rs 
 involved in this one period 
 
 “Testimony is not entitled to the least degree of faith, but as far as 
 it is supported by such an extensive experience , as if we had not a 
 previous and independent faith in testimony wC never could have ac¬ 
 quired .” 
 
 David Hume asserts—“Amiracle, supported by any htiman testimo¬ 
 ny, is more properly a subject of derision than of argument.” p. 194, 
 Again—“No testimony for any kind of miracle can ever possibly 
 amount to a probability, much less to a proof.” Yet, page 203, he 
 owns, “there may possibly be miracles or violations of the usual 
 course of nature of such a kind as to admit of proof from human testi¬ 
 mony ; though, perhaps , it will be impossible to find any such in all 
 the records of history.” “Suppose,” adds he, “all authors in all 
 languages agree that from the 1st of January, 1700, there was a total 
 darkness over the whole earth lor eight days. Suppose that the tra¬ 
 ditions of this extraordinary event is still strong and lively among the 
 people, that all travellers who return from foreign countries bring us 
 accounts of the same tradition, without the least variation or contra¬ 
 diction, it is evident that our present philosophers, instead of doubting 
 
DEBATE. 2*7 
 
 of that fact, ought to receive it for certain, and ought to search for the 
 causes whence it might be derived.'” 
 
 This same Mr. Hume asserts that “ testimony has no evidence but 
 what it derives from experience: these differ from each other only as 
 a species from the genus.” 
 
 “The love of the marvellous f and “ religious affection ,” are assign¬ 
 ed as the great causes of imposition in matters of testimony concerning 
 miracles and prodigies. Mr. Hume and other sceptics have in their 
 constitution a little of the love of the marvellous; but instead of the 
 religious affection , they have a strong religious antipathy . Hence 
 Mr. Hume says, “Should a miracle be ascribed to any new system of 
 religion, this very circumstance would be a full proof of a cheat, and 
 sufficient, with all men of sense, not only to make them reject the fact, 
 but even reject it without farther examination .” 
 
 “The violations of truth are more common,” says the same author 
 “in the testimony concerning religious miracles.” [ Gratuitous decla ¬ 
 ration /] This “should make us form a general resolution never to lend 
 attention to it, with whatever specious pretext it may be covered.” 
 
 Mr. Hume and other Free Thinkers preach implicit faith, and warn 
 their followers of the danger of consulting reason. “Beware,” says 
 Hume, “of inquiring into the strength of the plea; for those who 
 will be so silly as to examine the affair by that medium, and seek 
 particular flaws in the testimony , are almost sure to be confounded.* 
 
 Miracles are not aided in gaining credit by the religious affection; 
 for all the Bible miracles, at least those in support of Christianity, 
 are rather impaired by it. Miracles performed in proof of a religion 
 to be established, and in contradiction to opinions generally received; 
 and the evidence of miracles, performed in support of a religion 
 already established and in confirmation of opinions generally receiv¬ 
 ed, are in the former case not aided by the religious affection; and 
 in the latter case they are; but as is the advantage in the latter, so 
 is the disadvantage in the former. Let this be weighed. 
 
 If Mr. Hume’s dogmas can be believed, or if his positions on testi¬ 
 mony, evidence, and experience are to be admitted, then it follows* 
 {for this is his system in one sentence)—“It is impossible for the 
 Almighty to give a revelation attended with such evidence that it can 
 be reasonably believed in after ages, or even in the same age, by any 
 person who has not been an eye-witness of the miracles by which it is 
 supported.” 
 
 Dr. George Campbell, of Aberdeen, in his Essay upon Miracles, has 
 made these and other positions of the celebrated Hume appear subjects 
 of derision rather than of argument. I do not think there is to be 
 found in the English language a more complete and masterly refuta¬ 
 tion of any system of error, than is the Essay upon Miracles of the 
 system of Hume. Hume felt himself defeated—completely defeated.. 
 He never replied to it. And 1 have it from living testimony,. that, 
 when Hume’s friends jested him upon the complete defeat of his 
 system, ho acknowledged that “the Scotch theologue had beaten 
 him.* But such was his pride of understanding, that he did not 
 
248 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 publicly acknowledge his defeat in any other way tlian by never pre¬ 
 suming to answer the Essay. It is mortifying to hear the dog map of 
 Hume brought forward by his sceptical disciples, and attempted to be 
 passed current as oracular precepts, when their master dared not to 
 defend them himself. There is not, from so able a pen, a more vulner¬ 
 able position than that which is the corner stone of the temple of 
 scepticism. It is (hat on which Mr. Hume rears his fabric, viz. that 
 every man’s personal experience is to be the measure and standard of 
 his faith. He that has never seen a whale cannot believe that there 
 is one. 
 
 No man can have any experience of the future. Query —Ilow do 
 we learn that the future will resemble the past? 
 
 “Our belief of the continuance of the laws ot nature cannot be 
 founded either upon knowledge or probability,” and is not derived 
 from reason; and how comes it that Mr. Owen talks with so much 
 certainty about what will come to pass hereafter! No man can speak 
 of the future, pretending to any certain knowledge, but the Christian. 
 Here the infidel’s candle goes out; and except he obtains some oil from 
 the lamp of revelation, he must continue in perpetual darkness. 
 
 It was necessary, my triends to introduce this brief analysis of the 
 principle objections against the truth of the Christian miracles. You 
 will easily perceive, that sentiments contained in my extract from 
 Mr. Hume, are the reasons of Mr. Owen. Mr. Owen will not believe 
 a miracle, because it is contrary to his experience—and for precisely 
 the same reason, no people who had not travelled, could be made to 
 believe, that there existed on the face of the earth, any other nation or 
 country than their own. 
 
 Lord Bacon hirnselfbtys the foundation for correcting our reasonings 
 upon this, as well as upon other subjects—some of his aphorisms are; 
 
 Man is ignorant of every iking antecedent to observation. 
 
 There is not a single department of inquiry in which a man does not 
 err , the moment he abandons observation. 
 
 The greater part of all human knowledge is derived from testimony , 
 hut testimony does no more than hand down to us the observations of 
 others. 
 
 What is science but a record, o/ observed phenomena, grouped togeth¬ 
 er according to certain points of resemblance, wh ich have been suggest¬ 
 ed by an actual attention to the phenomena, themselves? 
 
 In none of the inductive sciences can the student verify every thing by 
 his own observation; he must rely upon testimony for the large majori¬ 
 ty of facts. This is especially true in the natural sciences of geography, 
 geology , and chemistry . 
 
 These principles are not, contrary to a single position we have ta¬ 
 ken in this discussion; indeed, our investigation has proceeded upon 
 these as the basis of the laws of investigation. 
 
 The great question, as Chalmer’s, I think, or some other very ar¬ 
 gumentative writer, states; the great question, on which the whole 
 argument rests, is this: Shall we admit the testimony of the apostles, 
 upon the application of principles founded upon observation , and as 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 249 
 
 c&rtaih as is our experience of human affairs; or shall we reject that 
 testimony upon the application • of principles that are altogether beyond 
 the range of observation , and as doubtful and imperfect in their na¬ 
 ture as is our experience of the counsels of Heaven*! 
 
 The former is founded upon experience, the latter upon assump¬ 
 tion; and here I make my stand, and say, Attack it who may—that 
 *>ur laith in Christianity is most certainly based upon experience —- 
 and infidelity upon assumption —upon assumpti6n throughout. If Mr, 
 Owen call rue not to account for this, I hope some person more phi¬ 
 losophic than he, may yet do it. I will make the principles of the in¬ 
 ductive philosophy, too, my rule and guide-in this investigation. 
 
 Mr. Owen has frequently told us of our extreme ignorance—but 
 how emphatically does experience contradict Mr Owen—only look 
 at the improvements which have taken place in the lapse of the last 
 300 years—and who have been their authors—who have laid the foun¬ 
 dations ? 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 My friends—Mr. Campbell tells you that I am a false prophet; that! 
 I prophesied some time ago, that in a few years Cincinnati would be 
 depopulated. But you know, my friends, that years do not mean, 
 the same thing in the language of prophecy, that they do in common 
 language. 
 
 Instead, however, of Cincinnati only being depopulated in a few 
 years, the fact is, that all large cities will cease to be such. Their 
 inhabitants will discover, that cities are combinations of circumstan¬ 
 ces extremely injurious to every individual, and therefore, they will 
 be compelled by a distinct knowledge of their own interest to remove 
 out of large cities, and to form smaller associations, to enable each to 
 enjoy all the advantage of a town and country residence. I have no 
 doubt that we shall discover, that all large cities are highly unfavor¬ 
 able to the happiness of individuals; so much for the prophecy of 
 small and large congregations of men into one society. Now, my 
 iriend supposes that there really exists a desire on my part, not to 
 believe the truth; but I can assure him, that my doubts of the truth of 
 Christianity originated against my will. I was most anxious to 
 swallow the camel. I exerted all the volition or which Mr. Camp¬ 
 bell speaks, in fighting against my disbelief. But the more I investi¬ 
 gated, the more strongly was I compelled to believe that Christianity 
 and all other religions were founded in the grossest error. With all 
 the energy of volition which I could summon to my aid, I found it 
 impossible to believe that which was contrary to nature. I cannot 
 believe that the power which fills immensity, which pervades all 
 space, and occupies the universe, contracted itself into a little bush, 
 in order to speak to a man. I am just as much able, by the exercise 
 of my volition, to fiy to the stars, as I am to believe this. Now I am 
 come to the last clause of this discussion, in which I state, “that the 
 religions of the world can he no longer maintained except through 
 4ie ignorance of the many, and the tyranny of the few over the many - 
 
£50 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 Now, my friends, what do you think is the most powerful engine, that 
 ever was contrived by human ingenuity, to impose the grossest igno¬ 
 rance upon mankind, and to keep them in that state? Why it is that 
 cunning contrivance which exists so generally, pervading every vil¬ 
 lage and hamlet, of preaching Sunday by Sunday to the people, and 
 most arbitrarily and irrationally withholding from them the right of 
 reply. Train up any population in such a system, and there is no 
 absurdity which they may not be made to believe implicitly; and by 
 this training their reasoning faculties are sure to be destroyed. So 
 long as society, shall tolerate such an abuse as this, ignorance must 
 continue to pervade the world. While a particular tribe of men, shall 
 be permitted, week after week, and year after year, to impress upon 
 your minds their own peculiar notions, without any right of reply on 
 your side, their is no belief however monstrous that may not be for¬ 
 ced into your minds. Thus it is that these religions contain the seeds, 
 and the germs of every evil that the human mind can conceive. And 
 unless this tremendous engine can be altered, or destroyed, it must, 
 my friends, continue as heretofore, to afflict our race with all kinds ot 
 suffering. So long as it is permitted to continue in operation, there 
 is neither health nor hope for you; you must forever be kept in the 
 lowest mental degradation; and so long as the governing powers and 
 that engine are united and co-operative, or the prejudices of the peo¬ 
 ple shall support such a system, their prospects are gloomy indeed.—- 
 This engine presses them down into the lowest depths of ignorance; 
 they are solemnly assembled to receive any impression their instruc- 
 ters may choose to give them. I speak not this, with any view to 
 hurt the feelings of those individuals, whom circumstances, and the 
 customs of society have placed in the station of spiritual teachers.—- 
 I know that some of the finest minds among them do not believe one 
 word of what the circumstances in which they are placed, compel 
 them to preach; for when their existence, and the support ot their 
 families, depend upon their perseverance in that course, they must go 
 forward in preaching that which they disbelieve, or they must starve. 
 Therefore, before we can calculate upon any valuable improvement 
 in society, we must secure to those, whom society has encouraged to 
 become preachers of error, the continuance of their former support, in 
 order that no preacher shall be made liable to poverty, or be deprived 
 of a comfortable subsistence, but be placed in an independent situa¬ 
 tion, to teach the truth; and this is the best practical mode, by which, 
 to effect the change without evil. I know, my friends how strongly 
 you must feel the first time you have your early pejudices thus oppo¬ 
 sed; but I do not come before you as a quack doctor, who promises 
 to do much for you, in order to obtain your money; but I come to 
 probe your wounds to the bottom, to ascertain the true cause of your 
 diseases. And I only give you this temporary pain, in order that 
 you may be placed in a condition to enjoy future permanent happi¬ 
 ness. If the few can be convinced, (as I trust they shortly will be,) 
 that the old systems of the world are entirely worn out; then I hope 
 and believe, that they will of their own accord, assent to the adoption 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 251 
 
 of rational measures, gradually to make the beneficial change I pro¬ 
 pose. But this change should not be effected by harsh measures* 
 which might inflict injury upon any one; I should regret exceedingly 
 that any individual should be a sufferer by the introduction of the 
 great improvements which I contemplate for the human race. The 
 great object I have had in view, has been to prepare the means by 
 Which this misrhty moral change may be developed and consummated 
 without disturbance, without shock, without anger or strife of any 
 kind. And I think I do see most distinctly, all the necessary steps 
 which may be taken to secure the attainment of these highly benefi¬ 
 cial objects. I am busily engaged in these measures at present. 
 When I leave you, I shall go to use my utmost exertions, to lay the 
 basis of a solid and permanent peace amongst nations, who are now 
 doing all they can to injure each other, although they are nominally 
 at peace. I have a great many arguments by which to prove, that it 
 is now the true interest of all nations to adopt this course; and I do 
 not know of any thing now existing in the condition of civilized na¬ 
 tions to prevent the introduction of a solid and permanent peace.—- 
 The peace which now exists amongst them, in which the nations are 
 undermining each other, whenever their interests come into collision , 
 is a peace much more nominal than real; a mere trifle would break 
 it: a whim or caprice upon the part of one or two individuals might 
 easily set Europe in a flame, and thence carry war and devastation 
 into the four quarters of the world, and for no good purpose produce 
 endless suffering and misery to individuals. Nations, like individu¬ 
 als, are now injuring each other without any benefit to themselves. 
 
 In pursuance of this object, I shall probably, before you see me 
 again, travel half round the world; and before 1 return from the 
 pursuit of public affairs, in most countries great changes may be ex¬ 
 pected. Having now got through the exposition of my views, I am 
 quite wiMing to leave the matter with the public, After Mr. CamP” 
 bell's reply, I shall have an opportunity to rejoin. 
 
 £ND OF VOk I. 
 
DEBATE 
 
 ON THE 
 
 OF CHRISTIANITY i. 
 
 CONTAINING 
 
 AN EXAMINATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 AND OF 
 
 A LL THE SYSTEMS OF SCEPTICISM OF ANCIENT AND 
 
 MODERN TIMES. 
 
 HELD IK THE CITS' OF CINCINNATI, OHIO, FROM TIIE 13th 
 TO TIIE 21st OF APRIL, 1829; BETWEEN 
 
 ROBERT OWEN, 
 
 OF NEW LANARK, SCOTLAND, AND 
 
 ALEXANDER CAMPBELL. 
 
 OF BETHANY, VIRGINIA, 
 
 Reported by CHARLES II. SIMS, Stenographer, 
 
 WITH 
 
 WRITTEN BY THE PARTIES„ 
 
 VOL. II. 
 
 What-then is unbelief ? —’Tis an exploit, 
 
 A strenuous enterprize. To gain it man 
 Must burst through every bar of common sense, 
 
 Of common shame—-magnanimously wrong! 
 
 --Who most examine, most believe; 
 
 iParts, like half sentences, confound. 
 
 Head his whole volume. Sceptic, then reply! 
 
 O Lord of Hosts! blessed is the man that trusteth in thee! 
 
 DAVIlf, 
 
 BETHANY, VA. 
 
 PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY ALEXANDER CAMFBELIr 
 
 1829 © 
 
ON THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY, &c. 
 
 Mr. OWEN rises, and observes that Mr. Campbell may reply tea 
 him, and prosecute his arguments without half hourly interruption* 
 that when Mr, C. gets through with his reply, he will be ready with 
 his rejoinder. 
 
 Mr. CAMPBELL rises— 
 
 It now appears that we are, at length, in full possession of all the 
 arguments and evidences Mr. O. has to offer in support of his posi¬ 
 tions. You will, no doubt, observe, that although his matter has been 
 exhausted, and his comments finished, he did not once advert to the 
 very important points submitted in my last speech; and submitted with 
 the intention of eliciting from him something like an issue. But this 
 he appears now, as formerly, studiously to avoid. One allusion, in 
 the form of an objection, was made to my iast speech. This was an 
 objection to the arguments and views offered on the nature of evidence'. 
 
 He said “ he could as soon fly to the stars as believe that God con - 
 traded himself into a little bush to speak to Moses.”—But who i3 it 
 that believes this? I do not. All that the intelligent have ever con¬ 
 tended for is, that the Omnipotent and Omnipresent Creator of this 
 vast universe, can assume any visible form in any particular place, andi 
 exhibit himself just where, and when, and as he pleases. Mr. O. cari¬ 
 catures, rather than quotes, or directly alludes to the circumstances of 
 this case. W hy is it that he cannot meet us on such ground as reason 
 presents, that he must present himself cn such ground, as ncrperson of 
 sentiment or sense ever pretended to stand upon? But what I have 
 particular reference to, at this time, is the reason he assigns for his disbe¬ 
 lief in miracles.—His reason for disbelieving miracles is because he 
 
 - O 
 
 never witnessed one. It is contrary to his own experience. But we 
 have already shewn, that for the same reason lie rejects this species of 
 evidence, or a miracle itself, he would be compelled to reject all testi¬ 
 mony upon any matter of fact that bad not come under his own perso-. 
 nal observation. It would be as impossible for Mr. Owen to convince 
 a native of the torrid zone, that water became in these United States aa 
 hard as a stone, or that hail stones sometimes fell from the clouds, as it 
 would be for me to convince him that Jesus Christ fed five thousand 
 
 i 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 & 
 
 persons on a few loaves and fishes, or cured the lame, the deaf, and the 
 blind, by a single word or a touch. The reason which a native of that 
 .region would assign for his unbelief, is just the same which Mr. Owen 
 assigns for Ms disbelief in the miracles of Moses and Christ. They 
 are contrary to his experience. —Mr. Owen, however, is not consistent 
 with his own theory in any case whatever—he seems to believe just 
 what he pleases. lie believes that meteoric stones, or stones compo¬ 
 sed of terrene substances, weighing from ten to one hundred pounds, 
 have fallen from the clouds in different parts of the earth. This is also 
 contrary to, or beyond the bounds of, his experience. In fine, Mr. 
 Owen’s faith, small as it is, would be very considerably reduced in 
 quantity and strength, were he to act consistently with his own expe¬ 
 rience. But we have already sufficiently exposed his inconsistency in 
 this particular. 
 
 As I have got the Arena to myself, I will now submit to yourconsid 
 eration, the course which I intend to pursue in conducting this argu - 
 ment, to something like a natural, and, as far as circumstances will 
 permit, to a logical termination. 
 
 1. I shall call your attention to the historic evidence of the Chris¬ 
 tian religion. 
 
 2. I shall then give a brief outline of the prophetic evidences, or ra¬ 
 ther the evidence arising from the prophecies, found in the inspired 
 
 volume. 
 
 3. We shall then draw some arguments from the genius and tenden¬ 
 cy of the Christian religion. 
 
 4. We shall then pay some attention to u the social system .” 
 
 This method, adopted now at the impulse of the moment, as best a- 
 Japtcd to this crisis and stage of the discussion, may not be the most 
 unexceptionable; but the singularity of the crisis to which we are come, 
 will, I hope, apologize for its defects. If any thing should be omitted, 
 because not coming within the logical purview of this division of the 
 subject, we shall rather endure the charge of being immethodical, than 
 to omit noticing it, whenever it presents itself to our view. 
 
 But as we are soon to adjourn, I will occupy a few minutes in fm-, 
 ishing some remarks, which were cut short by the expiration of my 
 last half hour. It was said, that we are indebted for all the great im¬ 
 provements in society to the philosophy of Christians, and not to th& 
 philosophy of sceptics. A free, a just and equitable government has 
 always developed the powers of the human mind. Political or civil li¬ 
 berty is essential to the expansion and developement of human intel¬ 
 lect. All history is appealed to in proof of tills. Just in proportion as- 
 civil liberty has been enjoyed, have mankind, in all ages, distinguished 
 themselves by the vigor and expansion of their minds. Let any man 
 contrast the ancient Greeks who were free, with their cotomporaries,- 
 the Persians, who were under a despotic government, and he will see 
 the influence of free institutions in the genius, eloquence, and daring 
 tinterprize of the former, compared with the latter. Should he ascribe ’ 
 the superiority to their being of a different, race, or to the influence of 
 clinititc, let him turn his attention to the Lacedaemonians and their.. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 helots or slaves .—When the Messenians were two centimes in slaves, 
 ry, one Lacedemonian possessed the mental vigor and valor of half a 
 score of them.—But only draw the contrast which our country pre¬ 
 sents, and mark the difference between the citizen and the slave. The 
 enjoyment of civil liberty is shewn from reason and experience, from 
 the faithful page of history, to give a new impetus to all the faculties 
 of man.-—To this liberty, then, we are constrained to ascribe the great 
 improvements in all the arts of civilized and social life. But to see the 
 connexion between this liberty and these free institutions, and Christi¬ 
 anity, we have only to ask, to whom are we most indebted for the im-\ 
 provementsin government? The Reformation from Popery gave the 
 first shock to the despotism of Europe. The labors of the Reformers— 
 and the more recent labors of Milton the poet, and Locke the philoso¬ 
 pher, have done more to issue in the free institutions of Europe and A* 
 merica, than the labors of all the sceptics from Celsus to my friend 
 Mr. Owen. 
 
 We ascribe much, to the intelligence, virtue and patriotism, of our 
 revolutionary heroes and statesmen. But there was one Christian 
 philosopher to whom we are more indebted than to any of them. Nay, 
 perhaps, than to all of them. The cause of civil and religious liberty 
 owes more to the labors of Mr. John Locke, than to all the sceptics in 
 Christendom. His essay on toleration, first burst the chains that held 
 England and Europe fast bound under a religious and civil despotism. 
 He had the honor, as Lord Verulam had, of originating a new era. As 
 Lord Verulam had the honor, by his Novum Organum , of originating a 
 new era in physics, so Locke, the philosopher, laid the foundation of a 
 new order of society by his Essay on Toleration. This Essay gave 
 the first impulse to the spirit of enquiry, and laid the foundation o£ 
 our present liberties. This Christian philosopher, drafted the first in- 
 strument called a constitution, imported into America. It was a form 
 of government for the Carolinas. While we are grateful to all, who 
 have labored in the cause of the emancipation of the human mind 
 from the shackles of King-craft and Priestcraft; and while we are 
 mindful of our more immediate benefactors, we are not to forget the 
 praises due to those who have long since died, and whose victories 
 Were more efficient, complete and salutary in their consequences, tho’ 
 less boisterous, and less noisy, than those achieved by the sword or the 
 cannon. Yet it should be known, and every where divulged, in all 
 lands and amongst all people, that Europe and America are more in¬ 
 debted to the elaborate discussions and profound reasonings of our 
 Christian philosopher, for the quantum of civil and religious liberty 
 now enjoyed, than to all the sceptics who have written from the days of 
 Pyrrhus to my friend Robert Owen. 
 
 The principles of investigation on which the inductive philosophy 
 of Lord Bacon is founded, and those adopted by the Christian philos¬ 
 opher, Sir Isaac Newton, are those which should govern us on tills 
 occasion. “ Every thing,” says this great teacher, u is to be submit¬ 
 ted to the most minute observation.—No conclusions are to he drawn 
 from guesses or conjectures. We are to keep within the certain iim- 
 Vol. 1* 
 
6 
 
 DEBATE 
 
 its of experimental truth. We first ascertain the tacts, then group 
 them together, and after the classification and comparison of them, 
 draw the conclusion. There are generic heads or chapters in every 
 department of physical or moral science. We are never to shrink from 
 the test of those principles.” Any arguments, therefore, which we 
 may oiler, we wish to be examined by the improved principles of the 
 inductive philosophy, by tiiose very principles which right reason and 
 sound experimental philosophy have sanctioned as their appropriate 
 tests. But questions of fact are not to be tried by mathematical evi¬ 
 dence. It has been well observed, that “ the sciences are of a social 
 disposition, and flourish best in the neighborhood of each other; nev¬ 
 ertheless each of them claims to be governed by laws which are per¬ 
 fectly sui generis; and none of them can be constrained to agree to an 
 intercommunity of jurisdiction with the rest: it is held essential to 
 the truth and dignity of each of them, that it is to be tried only by its 
 own laws.” When we enter into an examination of the testimony on 
 which religion is predicated, we have no other scientific rules to resort 
 to, than those which regulate and govern us in ascertaining the 
 weight of all historic evidence. 
 
 The first position, then, which we submit for examination, is one 
 which properly belongs to the more general head of historic evidence 
 It is in the following words: u the volume called the New Testament was 
 ■written by the persons whose names it bears , and at the time in which 
 it is said to have been written .” This is now an historic fact asser¬ 
 ted. It is not proved as yet by us—but we will, anon, proceed to the 
 proof of it. This is to be examined in its own court; that is, as all 
 matters or questions of fact are investigated—that we may, however, 
 feel the need, and appreciate the importance, of proving this fact, we 
 must premise a few things: The book called the New Testament now 
 exists. It existed in the days of our fathers, of our grand-fathers, of 
 our great grand-fathers. It came into existence some way, by some 
 means, at some particular time. Now we thank not Mr. Owen, nor 
 any person else, for admitting all this. They cannot deny one of these 
 assertions. But the question is, How came it into existence? Now 
 let us see how rigid and severe we must be, and generally are, in ex¬ 
 amining or deciding this question. 
 
 When we open any ordinary volume, and look upon its title page, 
 we there discover that it purports to be the production of A. B. or C., 
 and this mere inscription of the author’s name on the title page is, in 
 the absence of counter testimony , universally admitted to be rational 
 and conclusive evidence of authorship. There being no counter tes¬ 
 timony, we conclude from the title page, that the book is the production 
 of the author whose name it bears. If we have the general concurrence 
 of our cotemporaries in the belief that such a book was written by such 
 a person whose name it bears, we rationally rest satisfied on the ques¬ 
 tion of its authorship.—But in the examination of the authorship of 
 the New Testameqt, we feel it necessary to scrutinize more severely. 
 But men approach the examination of this question, not as they ap¬ 
 proach the examination of any other. The believer and the unbelie- 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 7 
 
 v&r approach it under great disadvantages. Religious men are afraid 
 to call its truth in question. This religious awe acts as a sort of illu- 
 fusion on their minds. The sceptics are prejudiced against it. This 
 prejudice disqualifies them to judge fairly and impartially upon the 
 .merits of the evidence. The religious awe of ilie Christian, and the 
 prejudices of the sceptic are real obstacles in the way of both, in jud¬ 
 ging impartially of the weight of evidence in favor of this or any oth¬ 
 er position, at the bottom of the Christian faith. Dr. Chalmers very 
 convincingly illustrates this matter in sec. 16, 17 &. 18, of the article 
 written by him in the EncycJoptedia on Christianity. We shall beg 
 the liberty to read it: 
 
 “ 16. To form a fair estimate of the strength and decisiveness of tlie 
 Christian argument, we should, if possible, divest ourselves of all ref¬ 
 erence to religion, and view the truth of the gospel history, purely as a 
 question of erudition. If at the outset of the investigation we have a 
 prejudice against the Christian religion, the effect is obvious; and 
 without any refinement of explanation, we see at once how such a pre¬ 
 judice must dispose us to annex suspicion and distrust to the testimo¬ 
 ny of the Christian writers. But even when the prejudice is on the 
 side of Christianity, the effect is unfavorable on a mind that is at all 
 scrupulous about the rectitude of its opinions. In these circumstan¬ 
 ces, the mind gets suspicious of itself. It feels a predilection, and be¬ 
 comes apprehensive lest this predilection may have disposed it to cher* 
 ish a particular conclusion, independently of the evidences by which 
 it is supported. Were it a mere speculative question, in which the in¬ 
 terests of man, and the attachments of his heart, had no share, he 
 would feel greater confidence in the result of his investigation. But it 
 is difficult to separate the moral impressions of piety, and it is no less 
 difficult to calculate their precise influence on the exercises of the un 
 derstanding. In the complex sentiment of attachment and convic¬ 
 tion, which he annexes to the Christian religion, he finds it difficult to 
 say, how much is due to the tendencies of the heart, and how much is 
 due to the pure and unmingled influence of argument. His very anx¬ 
 iety for the truth, disposes him to narrate the circumstances which give 
 a bias to his understanding, and through the whole process of the en¬ 
 quiry, he feels a suspicion and an embarrassment, which he would not 
 have felt, had it been a question of ordinary erudition. 
 
 “17. The same suspicion which he attaches to himself, he will be 
 ready to attach to all whom he conceives to be in similar circumstan¬ 
 ces. Now, every author who writes in defence of Christianity is sup¬ 
 posed to be a Christian; and this, in spite of every argument to the 
 contrary, has the actual effect of weakening the impression of his tes¬ 
 timony. This suspicion affects, in a more remarkable degree, the tes¬ 
 timony of the first writers'on the side of Christianity. In opposition to 
 it, you have, no doubt, to allege the circumstances under which the 
 testimony was given; the tone of sincerity which runs through the per¬ 
 formance of the author; the concurrence of other testime^ee^ the per¬ 
 secutions which he 4h4n4, l &iitf winch can be 
 
 accounted for on no otxrerpnucip^^baf ^ESB[efi/b&e^science and 
 
DEBATE; 
 
 ft 
 
 conviction; and the utter impossibility of imposing a false testimony 
 on the world, had they even been disposed to do it. Still there is a 
 lurking suspicion, which often survives all this strength of argument, 
 and which it is difficult to get rid of, even after it has been demon¬ 
 strated to be completely unreasonable. He is a Christian. He is one 
 of the party. Am I an infidel ? I persist in distrusting the testimo¬ 
 ny. Am I a Christian? I rejoice in the strength of it; but this very 
 joy becomes matter of suspicion to a scrupulous enquirer. He feels 
 something more than the concurrence of his belief in the testimony of 
 the writer. He catches the infection of his piety and his moral senti¬ 
 ments. In addition to the acquiescence of the understanding, there is 
 a con amove feeling, both in himself and his author, which he had rath¬ 
 er been without, because he finds it difficult to compute the precise 
 amount of its influence; and the consideration of this restrains him 
 from that clear and decided conclusion, which he would infallibly 
 have landed in, had it been purely a secular investigation. 
 
 “ 18. There is something in the very sacredness of the subject, 
 which intimidates the understanding, and restrains it from making the 
 same firm and confident application of its faculties, which it would 
 ?iave felt itself perfectly warranted to do, had it been a question of or¬ 
 dinary history- Had the apostles been the disciples of some eminent 
 philosopher, and the fathers of the church, their immediate successois 
 in the office of presiding over the discipline and instruction of the nu¬ 
 merous schools which they had established, this would have given a 
 secular complexion to the argument, which we think would have been 
 more satisfying to the mind, and have impressed upon it a closer and 
 more familiar conviction of the history in question. We should have 
 immediately brought it into comparison with the history of other phi¬ 
 losophers, and could not have failed to recognize, that, in minuteness 
 cf information, in weight and quantity, of evidence, in the concurrence 
 of numerous and independent testimonies, and in the total absence of 
 every circumstance that should dispose us to annex suspicion to the 
 account which lay before us, it far surpassed any thing that had come 
 down to us from antiquity. It so happens, however, that, instead of 
 being the history of a philosopher, it is the history of a prophet. The 
 veneration we apnex to the sacredness of such a character, mingles 
 with our belief in the truth of his history. From a question of simple 
 truth, it becomes a question in which the heart is interested; and the 
 subject from that moment assumes a certain holiness and mystery, 
 which veils the strength of the argument, and takes off from that fami¬ 
 liar and intimate conviction, which w r e annex to the far less authentica¬ 
 ted histories of profane authors.” 
 
 It is hard for any man to inspect this oracle with that degree of 
 impartiality and mental independence necessary to demonstrate, or 
 discriminate, its truth. Many have suspicions of its truth, which 
 arise solely from the awful import and inexpressible grandeur of the? 
 subjects on which it treats. The hundredth part of the evidence 
 would be sufficient to convince them of the real authorship of the 
 “ Annals of Tacitus ,” which they require to satisfy them of the an* 
 thorship of these sacred books. 
 
debate. 
 
 & 
 
 Making ail due allowance for these odds and disadvantages against 
 Us, and acknowledging that we claim no exemption from the influ 
 ence of these causes, we are disposed to approach this volume, as far 
 as in us lies, without being influenced by that awe, or those prejudi- 
 ees, of which we have been speaking. Divesting ourselves, there¬ 
 fore, of all partialities, pro , or con , let us, my friends, approach this 
 position, 
 
 I need scarcely inform this intelligent audience, that the volume 
 called the New Testament, is the production of eight different au 
 thors or writers—that it contains many different treatises in the form 
 «f Narratives and Epistles, written in different parts of the world, and 
 at sundry intervals, and afterwards collected into one volume. These 
 eight writers are, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James, 
 and Jude. Four of them wrote Memoirs or Narratives of Jesus 
 Christ; and four of them wrote letters to different congregations and 
 "individuals, iu Asia and Europe. 
 
 Each of these pieces was deemed by the writer perfectly sufficient 
 to accomplish the object which he designed by it. But when all is 
 collected into one volume, corroborating and illustrating each other,, 
 how irresistible the evidence, and how brilliant the light, which they 
 display! To him who contemplates the New Testament as the work 
 of one individual, all written atone time, and published in one coun¬ 
 try; and to him who views it as the work of eight authors, written in 
 different parts of the world, and at intervals in the extremes more than 
 half a century apart, how different the amount of evidence, intrinsic 
 and extrinsic, which it presents’. The writers themselves, though all 
 Jews, born in different provinces of the Roman empire, having each 
 a provincial dialect, a peculiarity of style, and some of them of differ-* 
 ent ranks and avocations of life, give great variety to the style, and 
 weight to the authority of this small volume. They are eight witnes¬ 
 ses, who depose not only to the original facts on which Christianity b 
 based, but to a thousand incidents which directly or indirectly bear 
 upon the pretensions of the Founder of this religion: and from the 
 variety of information, allusion, description, and reference to persons, 
 places, and events, which they present to us, they subject themselves 
 not only to cross examination among themselves, but to be compared 
 and tried by cotemporary historians, geographers, politicians, states¬ 
 men, and orators: in fact, they bring themselves into contact with all 
 the public documents of the age in which they lived and wrote. But 
 of this hereafter, in detail. 
 
 But to approach the position to be proved, still more closely. This, 
 volume purports to be the writings of these eight persons, and has. 
 been transmitted from generation to generation as such. We ascend 
 the stream up to its fountain. We find it ascribed to them in the 
 last, century. Millions believed it.-—In the century preceding that, 
 millions believed it: and so on, till we come up very nigh the times 
 in which the works were written. What would, let me ask—what 
 would be the quality and amount of evidence necessary to establish 
 the fact of authorship of any other work of antiquity ? We claim no. 
 
Debate. 
 
 to 
 
 iavors. We ask for no peculiar process, no new or untried form of 
 examination. We will constitute no new court, of enquiry. We will 
 Submit the question of authorship to be tried by all the canons, or 
 regulations, or rules, which the literary world, which the most rigid 
 critics, have instituted or appealed to, in settling any literary question 
 of this sort. Let me, then, ask: in such a court, would the fact of 
 these writings having J been universally received by all'the primitive 
 Christians, as the works of their reputed authors, be admitted as suffi¬ 
 cient proof? Would the fact of these writings having been quoted as 
 the genuine works of their reputed authors, by the earliest Christian 
 writers, by the cotemporaries and immediate successors of the origi¬ 
 nal witnesses, be admitted as proof? Would the testimony of neutrals, 
 would the testimony of apostates, would the testimony of the first op¬ 
 ponents of the Christian religion, be admitted as proof? Would the 
 concurrent and combined testimony of all these be admitted, to prove 
 the mere question of authorship? Most unquestionably these embrace 
 all the proofs which human reason can require, and all which the ar¬ 
 chives of human learning can furnish, in proof of the authorship of 
 any literary work in the world. Yes, manifold more than ever lias 
 been called for, and much more than can be adduced to prove the au¬ 
 thorship of any work of the same antiquity. The poems of Virgil and 
 Horace, the Annals of Tacit us, the orations of Cicero, the most popu • 
 lar works of antiquity, cannot afford half the proofs that they are the 
 genuine works of the persons whoso names they bear, as can be addu¬ 
 ced to prove the authorship of the Memoirs of Jesus. Christ, written 
 by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. 
 
 Although we might not be able to summon into one and the same 
 court, all the friends and all the enemies of Christianity, who wrote- 
 something upon the subject in the Apostolic and in the succeeding 
 age, to attest that all the writings now ascribed to those eight authors 
 were actually written by them; yet we do, in effect, the same, by 
 hearing them in piecemeal or in detail. For example: It is to quote 
 the words of Dr. Chalmers, a the unexcepted testimony of all subse¬ 
 quent writers, that two of the Gospels and several of the Epistles w T cre 
 written by the immediate disciples of our Saviour, and published in 
 their life-time.” Even Celsus, an enemy of the Christian faith, and 
 the first Gentile writer who publicly opposes Christianity, admits this,, 
 or refers to the a fairs of Jesus as written hy his disciples . From 
 the extracts which he makes in his book, there can be no doubt but 
 that he refers to one or other of the four Gospels. He w rote about 
 one hundred years after the first publication of the Narrative. a lie 
 takes it up upon the strength of its general notoriety, and the whole 
 history of that period, furnishes nothing that can attach any doubt or 
 suspicion to this circumstance. The distinct assertion, of Celsus be¬ 
 ing an enemy to Christianity, that the pieces in question were written 
 by the companions of Jesus, though even at the distance of a hundred 
 years, is an argument in favor, of their authenticity, which cannot be 
 ^Hedged for many of the most esteemed compositions of antiquity.” 
 
 But* although we give the testimony of Celsus first, it is not because 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 there is no more ancient witness, but because he is the first philosd - 
 phic adversary of the faith. There is a series of writers, in unbroken 
 succession, from the days of the Apostles, all attesting the truth of the 
 position before us. I have lying upon the table here before me, a vol¬ 
 ume of the writings-of the primitive disciples of Christ, and first teach¬ 
 ers of Christianity, the cotemporaries, and successors, of the Apos¬ 
 tles. Here (lifting up the volume Mr. C. said) here is the testimony 
 of Barnabas, of Clement, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp—Barnabas 
 the companion of Paul, Clement the bishop of the congregation in 
 Rome, whom all antiquity agrees to be the person mentioned by Paul f 
 Phil. 4, 3.—Hermas, whom Paul mentions tn his Epistle to the Ho¬ 
 mans—Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, who flourished there A. D. 75, 
 who took the oversight of that congregation 37 years after the ascen¬ 
 sion of Christ. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, who had seen, conver¬ 
 sed with, and was familiar with some of the Apostles—all these di¬ 
 rectly quote the historical or the epistolary books of the New Testa¬ 
 ment—and refer to these writings as of general notoriety. To these, 
 I need scarcely add the testimony of Papias, the hearer of John, of 
 Ireneus, Justin and others, their cotemporaries.—They either quote 
 them by saying, as it is written , or by name. Let us have an exam¬ 
 ple or two: Barnabas in his epistle says, “ Let us therefore beware 
 lest it come upon us as it is written . There are many called but few 
 chosen.” Now this mode of quoting Mathews’ testimony is more au¬ 
 thoritative than the naming of him: for this appeal to his writings 
 makes it evident that they were notorious, and of unexceptionable au¬ 
 thority, even so early as the time of Barnabas. In the letter writen by 
 Clement from Rome to Corinth, in the name of the whole congrega¬ 
 tion in Rome, to the whole congregation in Corinth, say from 500 
 Christians in Rome to 500 Christians in Corinth, the sermon on the 
 Mount is directly quoted, and other passages of the testimony of Ma¬ 
 thew & Luke.—But it would be tedious to be minute in furnishing' 
 examples of each sort of quotations here; more than forty clear allu¬ 
 sions to the books of the New Testament are to be found in the single 
 fragment of Polycarp, and there are more quotations in Tertullian of 
 the second century, from the New Testament, than are to be found of 
 the writings of Cicero, in all the writers of two or three centuries.—- 
 Indeed, from the very time in which these writings first appeared, they 
 were received according to their dates, and quoted and applied in the 
 decision of all controversies, by all the Commentators, as possessed of 
 an authority, and to be heard with a reverence, paramount to all other. 
 So scrupulous, too, were the ancient Christians of the authority 
 ■of these writings, that when collecting them into one volume (for many 
 years they were written and read in detached pieces) they would not 
 agree to bind in the same parchment with them, any other writings 
 not from the same authors. Some of them even objected to adding 
 'the Epistle to the Hebrews, because it wanted Paul’s name—and 
 ■some demurred to the Revelation, written by John, and to the Ep. of 
 James, to the 2d of Peter, the 2d &, 3d of John, and to that of Jude, 
 -’because they had not reached some places as soon as the others. But 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 12 
 
 after making themselves better acquainted with the claims of these 
 writings, they were added with the consent of all the Christians in the 
 Eastern as well as in the Western Roman empire. 
 
 There is not a writer on religion, which has come down to us from 
 the second century (and of such writers the 2d century was not 
 barren) who has not quoted these writings, less or more, as we do 
 at this day. But why occupy so much time in proving a matter which 
 we presume, neither Mr, Owen himself nor any sceptic of the present 
 day, will deny? The laborious Lardner has given most copious proofs 
 of the notoriety of these writings, and of the many quotations from 
 them by all the earliest Christian writers: and it is well observed by 
 Raley, that “ besides our Gospels and the acts of the Apostles, no 
 Christian history claiming to be written by an Apostle, or Apostolical 
 man, is quoted within 300 years after the birth of Christ, by any writer 
 now extant or known; or if quoted, is quoted with marks of censure &. 
 rejection.” It is also well remarked by another writer, “ that the agree¬ 
 ment of Christians respecting the Scriptures, when all the other dif 
 ferences are considered, is the more remarkable that it took place 
 without any public authority being interposed. The only interference 
 on record is that of the Council of Laodicea, A. D. 363. This Conn- 
 cil only declared, and did not regulate the public judgment of only a 
 few neighboring churches, the council only consisting of thirty 
 or forty Bishops of Lydia, and the adjoining country. The con¬ 
 gregations of Christians, all independent at first, received those wri¬ 
 tings universally, because of their irresistible claims upon their faith. 
 But I doubt not that as sceptics have the most faith in one another, 
 they will prefer the testimony of one Celsus, an infidel, to the testimo¬ 
 ny of six men who had seen, conversed with, and were familiar with, 
 the Apostles—These six are Barnabas, Clement, Hermas, Ignatius, Po- 
 lycarp and Papias.—Let them, however, remember, that their own 
 Celsus, who had much better opportunities of detecting any imposition 
 or fraud than they, appeals to the affairs of Jesus, as written by his 
 own companions, and quotes these histories as notorious documents 
 rn his own time. 
 
 Adjourned to meet at three, 
 
 Friday, 17tli April, 1 829 — Afternoon, 
 
 The Honorable Chairman rose and stated, that in consequence of 
 notice given by Mr. Owen, that he has offered all he has to say iu the 
 opening, we propose that Mr. Campbell will proceed until he finish hie 
 argument now begun; and that Mr. Owen may then reply, Mr. C. re- 
 ioin, and the discussion close. 
 
 \y ' 
 
 Mr, CAMPBELL rises— 
 
 Mr. Chairman—Before resuming my argument, I presume it will 
 not be amiss to state some facts relative to this discussion. Anterior, 
 to Mr. Owen’s last visit to Europe, I had the pleasure of an interview 
 yriih him, at which time we made our arrangements for this controvert 
 
 I 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 ze 
 
 sy. From the fluency with which Mr. Owen spoke of his system, an# 
 of the present state of society, and from his known labors and zeal in 
 the cause of scepticism, I did expect to find in him a very formidable 
 disputant, and concluded it would be necessary for me to provide a 
 great variety of documents for this discussion. The positions which 
 have been so often read, I expected Mr. Owen would logically defend, 
 one by one.—He affirmed, and I denied. The onus probandi he took 
 upon himself. Conscious of his inability to support these positions, 
 it seems he has now abandoned them, any farther than assertions 
 without proof, and declamation without argument, upon twelve other 
 positions, may be imagined to have some bearing upon them, I was 
 prepared to rebut his proofs and arguments, had he presumed to defend 
 his affirmations, but did not expect to have to assume propositions af¬ 
 firmative of the authenticity of Christianity, and prove them while I 
 must rebut him.—This failure of my friend, has very much embarras¬ 
 sed this discussion, and has obliged me to change my course, and to 
 new modify my defence of Christianity. Mr. Owen had not finished 
 his prefatory address, until I saw that he could not argue the verity of 
 his assertions. I was, however, so circumscribed by the rules of logic 
 and decorum, as not to feel myself authorized to pay no attention to 
 his propositions and heterogeneous matter, but to go on and argue pc 
 sitions of my own. I have stood in the centre of a circle cf embar¬ 
 rassments—embarrassed by the obliquity of Mr. Owen’s method, and 
 his disregard to the decisions of the presiding Moderators—at one time 
 reminded that the ladies do not hear me; at another, the stenogra¬ 
 pher groans under the rapidity of my pronunciation; anon, the appre¬ 
 hension that my half hour is almost fled, restrain my tongue and em¬ 
 bargo my thoughts; so that I am surrounded with very vicious circum¬ 
 stances, as Mr. Owen would say. But now I hope to be in some 
 .measure relieved from the influence of these embarrassing circum¬ 
 stances—although the singularity of this issue may oblige me to omit 
 a very large proportion of the documents which I had expected to of¬ 
 fer. 
 
 Authorized as I now am, by the decision of the bench, T proceed to 
 •the further confirmalion of the truth of the position under discussion 
 at the time of our adjournment. 
 
 Th^t the historical and epistolary books of the New Testament, 
 were written by the persons and at the times alleged by themselves, is, 
 perhaps, in tlfe estimation of some, already sufficiently established. It. 
 would be easy to swell the list of the original vouchers with many dis¬ 
 tinguished names of the primitive defenders of Christianity, against 
 the cavils and objections of Jews and Pagans.—But the real strength of 
 the evidence in favor of the authorship is in the cotemporary writers. 
 ^Vhen we descend the page of history no farther down than the times 
 ot Origin, \vho succeeded Tertullian only about 25 years, we find such 
 declarations as the follow ing: “The four Gospels (says he, and he 
 arranges them as we have them now arranged) alone, are received 
 without dispute by the whole church of God under Heaven.” That 
 is, Christians differed on other matters, and in this one noint atone 
 
 Vol f 2 • ' ■ 2 ' 
 
there was not a single dissentient. It would only savor of display 
 to add the names ol* Justin Martyr, Dionysius, Tatian, Hegessippus, 
 Athenagoras, Miltiades, and a hundred others, who quote these writings 
 as the works of the persons whose names they now bear. It \yas well 
 said by Origin, in his dispute with Celsus, the Epicurian philosopher, 
 and opposer of the faith, when quoting a passage from these inspired 
 books : 44 Thus it is written, not in any private book, or such as are 
 read by a few persons only, but in books read by every body. 1 ’ We 
 cannot proceed to another item intimately connected with this, without 
 reading from the argumentative Chalmers, the following remarks on 
 these testimonies: 
 
 44 In estimating the value of any testimony, there are two dis¬ 
 tinct subjects of consideration; the person who gives the testimony, 
 and the people to whom the testimony is addressed. It is quite need 
 less to enlarge on the resources which, in the present instance, we de¬ 
 rive from both tnese considerations, and how much each of them con¬ 
 tributes to the triumph and solidity of the- Christian argument. In as 
 far as the people who give the testimony are concerned, how could they 
 be mistaken in their account of the books of the New Testament, when 
 some of them lived in the same age with the original writers, and were 
 their intimate acquaintances, and when all of them had the benefit of an 
 uncontrolled series of evidence, reaching down from the date of the 
 earliest publications, to their own times? Or, how can we suspect 
 that they falsified, when there runs thro’ their writings the same tone of 
 plainness and sincerity, which is allowed to stamp the character of au¬ 
 thenticity on other productions; and, above all, when upon the 
 strength even of heathen testimony, we conclude, that many of them, 
 by their sufferings and death, gave the highest evidence that man can 
 give, of his speaking under the influence of a real and honest con¬ 
 viction?' In as far as the people who received the testimony arc 
 concerned, to what other circumstances can we ascribe their concur¬ 
 rence, but to the truth of that testimony? In what way was it possi¬ 
 ble to deceive them upon a point of general notoriety ? The books of 
 the New Testament are referred to by the ancient fathers, as writings 
 generally known and respected by the Christians of that period. If 
 they were obscure writings, or had no existence at the time, how can 
 we account for the credit and authority of those fathers who appealed 
 to them, and had the effrontery to insult their fellow Christians by a 
 f alsehood so palpable, and so easily detected ? Allow them to be ca * 
 oable of this treachery, wo have still to explain, how the people came 
 to be the dupes of so glaring an imposition; how they could be permit¬ 
 ted to give up every thing for a religion, whose teachers were so un¬ 
 principled as to deceive them, and so unwise as to commit themselves 
 upon ground where it was impossible to elude discovery. Could 
 Clement have dared to refer the people of Corinth to an epistle said 
 to be received by themselves, and which had no existence? or, could 
 he have referred the Christians at large to writings which they never 
 heard of? And it. was not enough to maintain the semblance of truth 
 with the people of thou* own party. Where were the Jews all the 
 
* DEBATE, K'. 
 
 time? and how was it possible to escape the correction of these keen 
 and vigilant observers? We mistake the matter much, if we think, 
 that Christianity at that time was making its insidious way in silence 
 and in secrecy, through a listless and unconcerned public. All his¬ 
 tory inves an opposite representation, * The passions and curiosity of 
 men were quite upon flic alert. The popular enthusiasm had been 
 i; excited on both sides of the question. It had drawn the attention of 
 the established authorities in different provinces of the empire, and 
 the merits of the Christian cause had become a matter of frequent and 
 moral discussion in courts of judicature. If, in these circumstances, 
 the Christian writers had the hardihood to venture upon a falsehood, it 
 would have been upon safer ground than what they naturally adop¬ 
 ted. They would never have hazarded to assert what was so open io 
 contradiction, as the existence of books held in reverence among 
 all the churches, and which yet nobody, either in or out of these 
 churches, ever heard of. They would never have been so unwise as to 
 commit in this way a cause, which had not a single circumstance to 
 recommend it but its truth and its evidences. 
 
 « The falsehood of the Christian testimony on this point, car¬ 
 ries along with it a concurrence of circumstances, each of which is 
 the strangest and most unprecedented that ever was heard of. First, 
 that men, Who sustained in their writings all the characters of sinceri¬ 
 ty, and many of whom submitted to martyrdom, as the highest pledge 
 of sincerity which can possibly be given, should have been capable of 
 falsehood at all. Second, That this tendency to falsehood should 
 have been exercised so unwisely, as to appear in an assertion perfectly 
 open to detection, and which could be so readily converted to the dis¬ 
 credit of that religion, which it was the favorite ambition of their lives 
 to promote and establish in the world. Third, That this testimony 
 could have gained the concurrence of the people to whom it was ad¬ 
 dressed, and that, with their eyes perfectly open to its falshood, they 
 should be ready to make the sacrifice of life and of fortune in suppor¬ 
 ting it. Fourth, That this testimony should never have been contra¬ 
 dicted by the Jews, and that they should have neglected so effectual an 
 opportunity of disgracing a religion, the progress of which they con¬ 
 templated with so much jealousy and alarm. Add to this, that, it is 
 not the testimony of one writer, which we are making to pass through 
 the ordeal of so many difficulties. It is the testimony of many wri¬ 
 ters, who lived at different times, and in different countries, and who 
 add the very singular circumstance of their entire agreement with cne 
 another, to the other circumstances equally unaccountable, which we 
 have just now enumerated. The falsehood of their united testimony 
 is not to be conceived. It is a supposition which we are warranted to 
 condemn, upon the strength of any one ofthe above improbabilities ta¬ 
 ken separately. But the fair way of estimating their effect upon the 
 argument, is to take them jointly, $nd, in the language of the doctrine 
 of chances, to take the product of all the improbabilities into one 
 another. The argument which this product furnishes for the truth of 
 the Christian testimony, has, in strength and conclusivencss, no paral¬ 
 lel in the whole compass of ancient literature.” 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 lb 
 
 To this we shall only add, that u the force of the above testimony iy 
 greatly strengthened by the consideration that it is the concurring evi¬ 
 dence of separate independent and well informed writers, who lived in 
 countries remote from one ano^ier, Clement lived at Home; Igna- 
 ■ius at Antioch; Polycarp in Smyrna; Justin Martyr in Syria; Iremeus 
 in France; Tertitllian at Carthage; Origin in Egypt;Eusebius at Ctesa- 
 ?ea, and Victoria in Germany. The dangers which they incurred, and. 
 the hardships and persecutions which they suffered, some of them 
 even unto death, on account of their adherence to tlie Christian faith, 
 give irresistable weight to their testimony 
 
 That the scriptures of the New Testament arc now read in language 
 communicating substantially all the same ideas, originally expressed 
 in them, appears from the quotations found in the works of these first 
 advocates of the Christian cause. To prevent the alteration or inter¬ 
 polation of these documents, the various sects which soon sprung up, 
 afforded every sort 4>f safeguard. Various sectaries arose under the in¬ 
 fluence of the Oriental philosophy, who rather engrafted Christianity 
 'upontheir own philosophy, than embraced Christianity as an entirely 
 new 7 system. The Platonic philosophy became the parent of many 
 sects. The Platonists began to expound the scriptures philosophical¬ 
 ly, and this led to many factions amongst the Christians. Each party 
 soon got into the practice of quoting the scriptures to prove its own 
 tenets. The opposing party narrowly scrutinized these quotations.*— 
 This prevented the corruption of the text. And thus, by that govern¬ 
 ment which from evil still educes good, the very heresies themselves 
 which disturbed the peace and retarded the progress of Christianity, 
 became the guardians of the integrity and purity of the text. 
 
 But I have not, as yet, to my own satisfaction at least, sufficiently 
 fixed upon your memory, what I have more than once asserted, viz. 
 That the testimony which the apostles and first Christians gave to the 
 facts composing the gospel narrative, was not opposed by any counter 
 testimony. Neither the authorship of the Apostolic writings, nor the 
 facts attested in them, were ever opposed by any contradictory state¬ 
 ments. All antiquity dees not afford a vestige , public or private , of 
 any contradictory testimony. The appearance and life of Jesus Christ, 
 the miracles which he performed, the lives, and labors, and mighty 
 deeds of his Apostles, his death and its accompaniments, are matters 
 of fact uneoniradictcd in the annals of Rome , and of the world. Nay, 
 they are universally admitted, both by Jews and Pagans. Though 
 die opposition was a most violent one, though ridicule, defamation 
 and persecution, were all employed and displayed against the Christian 
 cause, no one presumed to deny the facts. u What but truth almigh¬ 
 ty could have stood such an ordeal, or commanded such an acquies¬ 
 cence! Edicts were promulged against the Christians; and philoso¬ 
 phers employed to write against them, but the former never questioned 
 die facts, and ihe latter quoted the gospel history as authentic, and at¬ 
 tempted to explain it away. 
 
 Now the facts, many of them at least, were most easily disproved.— 
 "Such as Herod's summoning the scribes and chief priests on the appli- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 17 
 
 cation of the Magi, the slaughter of the infant in Bethlehem; that John 
 the Baptist proclaimed Jesus, and was beheaded by the intrigues of 
 Herodias; that Jesus fed many thousands on a few loaves and fishes; 
 that Lazarus was raised from the grave; that Jesus was crucified; that 
 the Apostles were gifted with foreign tongues on Pentecost ; that Peter 
 and John, by the name of Jesus, cured a cripple of the greatest, noto¬ 
 riety, at the beautiful gate of the temple; that Paul was det ained a pri¬ 
 soner by Felix; the conduct of the magistrates at Phillippi. Ilis ap¬ 
 pearance before Agrippa, and Gallic, the elder brother of the philoso¬ 
 pher Seneca; and a thousand others recorded, the most easy of detec¬ 
 tion and refutation, yet not one of all these, contradicted by any 
 writer of that age, Jew, Pagan, or apostate Christian! 
 
 But so far from being contradicted by any of the cotemporaries, all 
 the important facts are admitted by the adversaries themselves. We 
 shall examine a few of the first adversaries of the Christian religion.— 
 We shall begin with the celebrated Tryplio. This violent opposer of 
 the Christian religion was born before John the Apostle died. This 
 is quite probable, for he held a public debate or dialogue with Justin 
 Martyr, A. I). 140, in the city of Ephesus. During the debate, Jus¬ 
 tin Martyr mentions many of the gospel facts, and appeals to the mira¬ 
 cles. Tryplio and his four companions admit the facts, but ridicive 
 the idea of Jesus being born of a virgin, as absurd; and say “ it is 
 foolish to suppose that Christ is God, and became man.” He says it 
 is impossible to prove that any can be God, but the maker of the 
 world. He denies not the facts, which, as a Jew , he had every facility 
 to have done, had they been controvertible. 
 
 Justin cited the prophecy of Daniel, 7, 13, and argues from it.—■ 
 “ But,” replies Tryplio, “ these prophecies constrain us to expect the 
 Messiah to be great and illustrious; but he who is called your Christ, 
 was without reputation and glory, so that he fell under the greatest 
 curse of the law of God '.for he was crucified .” 
 
 Tryplio tells Justin that “ in the tables of the Greeks, it is said, that 
 Perseus was born of Danae, whilst a virgin, he who is by them called 
 J upiter, having fallen upon her in the form of gold; now, says lie, you 
 who affirm the same thing ought to be ashamed, and should rather say 
 that this Jesus was man of man.” 
 
 Again, Justin affirms that the Jews knew, that Jesus rose from the 
 dead. He adds, “ the other nations have not proceeded so far in 
 wickedness against Christ, as you, who are even to them the authors 
 of evil suspicions against that holy person, and against us, his disci¬ 
 ples ; for after you had crucified that only blameless and just person, by 
 whose stripes healing has come to all who approach the Father thro’ 
 him, when you knew that he was risen from the dead , and ascended 
 into Heaven , as the prophets foretold should happen, you not only did 
 not repent of the evil things you had committed, but choosing chief 
 men at Jerusalem, you sent them forth into all the earth to publish that 
 the sect of the Christians were Atheists.” 
 
 Justin having shewn, from the Jewish scriptures, that another bed¬ 
 sides the Father is called God* Tryplio replied — u You have, my 
 
 Yol p o~%- 
 
 ' \u, 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 friend, strongly and by many passages demonstrated this:—it remains 
 that you shew that this person, according to the will of the Father, 
 submitted to become man of a virgin , to be crucified , to die , to arise af¬ 
 terwards, and to return to Heaven .” Does not this prove that these 
 facts, though ridiculed and defamed, could not be contradicted? 
 
 Lucian, the Syrian, who was born about the year 120, gives the fol¬ 
 lowing account of one Peregrinus, who publicly burnt himself in 
 Greece soon after the Olympic games, about the year 165: 
 
 “ Lucian was a native of Samosata in Syria: he was born some time 
 in the reign of Adrian, which began in the year 117, and terminated 
 in 138. Although he did not expressly write in opposition to Christi¬ 
 anity, lie was strongly prejudiced against it. He gives the following 
 account of Peregrinus, who publicly burnt himself in Greece soon af¬ 
 ter the Olympic games, about the year 165. u Peregrinus, or Prote¬ 
 us, appears for awhile to have imposed on the Christians, and to have 
 joined himself to them. Lucian, after saying that “ Peregrinus learn¬ 
 ed the wonderful doctrine of the Christians by conversing with their 
 priests and scribes near Palestine,” and after going on to observe, that 
 they “ still worship that great man who was crucified in Palestine, 
 because he introduced into the world this new religion,” he adds—- 
 
 For this reason Proteus was taken up and put in prison, which very 
 thing was of no small service to him afterwards, for giving reputation 
 to his impostures, and gratifying his yanity. The Christians were 
 much grieved for his imprisonment, and tried all ways to procure his 
 liberty. Not being able to effect that, they did hint all sorts of kind of¬ 
 fices; and that not in a careless manner, but with the greatest assidui¬ 
 ty ; for even betimes in the morning, there would be at the prison old 
 women, some widows, and also little orphan children; and some of 
 Ihe chief of their men, by corrupting the keepers, would get into pris¬ 
 on, and stay the whole night there with him: there they had a good 
 supper together, and their sacred discourses. And this excellent Per¬ 
 egrinus (for so he was still called) was thought by them to be an ex¬ 
 traordinary person, no less than another Socrates. Even from the ci¬ 
 ties of Asia, some Christians came to him, by an order of the body, to 
 relieve, encourage^ and comfort him. For it is incredible what expe¬ 
 dition they use, when any of their friends arc known to be in trouble. 
 In a word, they spare nothing upon such an occasion; and Peregri- 
 nus’s chain brought him in a good sum of money from them. For 
 these miserable men have no doubt but they shall be immortal, and 
 live for ever; therefore they contemn death, and many surrender them¬ 
 selves to sufferings. Moreover, their first lawgiver has taught them, 
 that they are all brethren when once they have turned, and renounced 
 the gods of the Greeks, and worship that Master of t heirs who was 
 crucified, and engage to live according to his laws. They have also a 
 sovereign contempt for all the things of this world, and look upon them 
 as common, and trust one another with them without any particular 
 security; for which reason, any subtle fellow^, by good management, 
 may impose upon this simple people, and grow rich among them.”— 
 Lucian afterwards informs us, that Peregrinus was set at liberty by 
 
DEBATE, Y& 
 
 the governor of Syria, and that at length he parted from the Chris • 
 lians. 
 
 “ We have here an authentic testimony, from a Heathen writer, who 
 was well acquainted with mankind, to some of the main facts and prin¬ 
 ciples of Christianity. That the founder of the Christian religion 
 was crucified in Palestine; that he was the great Master of the Chris¬ 
 tians, and the first author of the principles received by them; that these 
 men called Christians had peculiarly strong hopes of immortal life, &l 
 a*great contempt for this world and its enjoyments; that they courage¬ 
 ously endured many afflictions upon account of their principles, and 
 sometimes surrendered themselves to sufferings. Honesty and probity 
 prevailed so much among them, that they trusted each other without 
 security. Their Master had earnestly recommended to all his follow¬ 
 ers mutual love, by which also they were much distinguished; and 
 their assiduity in relieving and comforting one another when under af¬ 
 fliction, was known to all men. It is no disparagement to them that 
 they were imposed upon by Peregrinus^ who was admired by many 
 others.” 
 
 “ Celsus, cotemporary with Lucian, was an Epicurean philoso¬ 
 pher, who lived in the reign of Adrian. He was one of the most viru¬ 
 lent adversaries the Christian religion ever had, and also a man of con¬ 
 siderable parts and learning The book which he wrote against the 
 Christians, in the year 176, was entitled, the “ True Word.” He 
 there introduces a Jew declaiming against Jesus Christ, and against 
 such Jews as Were converted to Christianity. Origen’s answer to 
 Celsus is not a general reply, but a minute examination of all his ob¬ 
 jections, even those which appeared the most frivolous. He states the 
 objections of Celsus in his own words; and, that nothing might escape 
 him, he takes them, he says, in the order in which Celsus placed 
 them. 
 
 “ Celsus used only the Gospels themselves, in search of evidence a- 
 gainst their truth. He never refers to any spurious Gospel, or to any 
 other accounts of the life of Christ. His attack is conducted not by 
 denying the facts contained in the Scriptures, of which he all along 
 admits the truth, but by reasoning from such as the following topics: 
 That it was absurd to esteem and worship one as God who was ac¬ 
 knowledged to have been a man, and to have suffered death: That 
 Christ invited sinners to enter into the kingdom of God: That it was 
 inconsistent with his supposed dignity, to come to save such low and 
 despicable creatures as the Jews and Christians: That he spake dishon.-' 
 orahly and impiously of God: That the doctrines and precepts of reli¬ 
 gion are better taught by the Greek philosophers, than in the Gospels; 
 and without the threatenings of God.” The following are specimens 
 of the objections he brings forward. 
 
 44 What need was there for carrying thee, while an infant, into E-' 
 gypt, that thou mightest not be slain? For it did not become God to 
 be afraid of death.”—“ How can we think him God, who, to omit oth¬ 
 er things, performed none of those matters which we are told he pro¬ 
 mised? And who, being condemned by us, when he was sought to 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 be punished, was caught basely lurking and flying, being betrayed b>* 
 those whom lie called his disciples?”—“If you tell them, that it is 
 not the Son of God, but he who is Father of all whfim men ought to 
 worship; they will not be satisfied unless you also worship him who is 
 the author of their sedition; not that they exceed in the worship of 
 God, but that they above measure worship this man.” “ Speaking of 
 the crucifixion, Celsus says, “ If not before, why did he not now, at 
 least, exert his divinity, and deliver himself from this ignominy, and 
 treat those as they deserved, who behaved ignominiously both towards 
 himself and his Father.”—“ If these men worshipped no other but the. 
 one God, they might justly inveigh against all other Gods. But now 
 they out of measure worship one who but lately appeared, and yet im¬ 
 agine they do not sin against God, though they also serve his minis¬ 
 ter.” He affirms that Jesus, being “ brought up obscurely, and obli¬ 
 ged to serve for hire in Egypt, learned there certain powerful arts, for 
 which the Egyptians are renowned; then returned greatly elated with 
 his power, on account of which he declared himself a God.” 
 
 “ Celsus represents Jesus to have lived but. a few years before. He 
 mentions its being said that Jesus was born of a virgin; that angels ap¬ 
 peared to Joseph. He speaks of the star that appeared at the birth of 
 Jesus; the wise men that came to worship him, when an infant, and 
 Herod’s massacreing the children; Joseph's fleeing with the child into 
 Egypt, by the admonition of an angel; the Holy Ghost descending on 
 Jesus like a dove, when he was baptized by John, and the voice from 
 Heaven declaring him to be the Son of God; his going about with his 
 disciples, whom he calls boatmen, publicans, and wicked sailors; his 
 healing the sick and lame, and raising the dead; his foretelling his 
 own sufferings and resurrection; his being betrayed, forsaken by his 
 own disciples; his sufferings; his praying “ Father, if it be possible, let 
 this cup pass from me;” the ignominious treatment he met with; the 
 robe that was put upon him; the crown of thorns; the reed put into his 
 hand; his drinking vinegar and gall; and his being scourged and cruci¬ 
 fied; his being seen after his resurrection, by a fanatical woman, (as he 
 calls her, meaning Mary Magdalene,) and by his own companions and 
 disciples; his shewing*them his hands that were pierced; the marks of 
 his punishment. He also mentions the angels being seen at his sepul¬ 
 chre, and that some said it was one angel, others that it was two; by 
 which he hints at the seeming variation in the accounts given of it by 
 the Evangelists. Upon the whole, there are in Celsus about eighty 
 quotations from the books of the New Testament, or references to 
 them, of which Origeil has taken notice. And whilst he argues 
 from them, sometimes in a very perverse manner, he still takes it for 
 granted, as the foundation of his argument, that whatever absurdities 
 could be fastened upon any words or actions of Christ, recorded in the 
 Gospels, it would be a valid objection against Christianity. 
 
 “ The reasoning then on both sides of this dispute proceeded on the 
 supposition of the truth of the Gospel history. Celsus also grants 
 that Christ wrought miracles. The difference between him and Ori 
 gen, on this subject , lies in the manner of accounting for them; the oiie j 
 ascribing them to magic, the other to the power of GodT 
 
Debate n 
 
 Porphyry the philosopher, was born at Tyre, in .Phentcia, about 
 the year,233. He wrote a large treatise against the Christian teli-> 
 gion, of which he was a very able and learned opponent. He endeav¬ 
 ors to overthrow the authority of the Scriptures, not by denying their 
 authenticity, but by endeavoring to point out in them contradictions &, 
 absurdities; but he opposes no contradicting statement. He does not 
 deny the miracles, but calls them “ the works of cunning demons,” 
 and refers to some who he asserts performed miracles as great. He 
 appears to have been well acquainted with the Scriptures, and refers 
 to numerous passages and circumstances in them, which lie perverts, 
 after the manner of Celsus, pointing out what he deems immoral and 
 absurd. “ If Christ,” he objects, “ be the way of salvation, the truth, 
 and the life, and they only who believe in him can be saved, what be¬ 
 came of the men who lived before bis coming ?”— :U Christ threatens ever¬ 
 lasting punishment to those who do not believe him, and yet in anoth¬ 
 er place he says, with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to 
 you again, which is absurd and contradictory; for all measure must be 
 limited to time.” He objects that Peter was reproved by Paul, for 
 that he did not proceed uprightly in preaching the Gospel. Hence he 
 argues the falsehood of the whole doctrine, as if it were a mere inven¬ 
 tion, since the heads cf the churches disagreed. Other passages of 
 Scripture he reasons upon in a similar manner. The cause why Aes¬ 
 culapius wrought no cures, as he says, in his time, and why the other 
 gods no longer gave responses, neither intermeddled in the affairs of 
 men, he ascribes wholly to thd honor that was given to Jesus;—» 
 M Since Jesus has been honored, none have received any public bene¬ 
 fit from the gods- ,T 
 
 u Notwithstanding what he says against the Christians, Porphyry 
 gives an honourable testimony to the character of Jesus Christ. In 
 his treatise, entitled “ Philosophy of Oracles,” the following passage, 
 preserved by Eusebius, occurs: 
 
 “ What we are going to say, may perhaps appear to some a para- 
 »dox, for the gods declared Christ to be a person most pious, and be¬ 
 come immortal. Moreover they speak of him honorably” And go¬ 
 ing on, lie adds; “ being asked concerning Christ, whether he is God. 
 he (Apollo) answered, ‘ That, he who is renowned for wisdom, knows 
 that the immortal soul continues after the body; but the pious soul of 
 that man is most excelling.’ He therefore affirmed him to be a most 
 pious person, and that his soul, which the foolish Christians worship, 
 like that of other good men, was after death made immortal; but being 
 asked why he was punished ? he answered, i That the body indeed is 
 ever liable to little torments; but. the soul of the pious rests in the plain 
 ot Heaven.” And, immediately after this oracle, he adds, u He was 
 therefore a pious person, and went to Heaven, as pious persons do, 
 for which cause you ought not to speak evil of him, but to pity the fol¬ 
 ly of the men,” (namely whi) worship him.)” 
 
 “ Hierocles the philosopher, was prefect at Alexandria, in the 
 year 303. Me composed two books in order to confute the Christian 
 religion. To these books Eusebius published an answer, which still-- 
 
Remains. Ilierocles endeavours to prove the falsehood of the Scrip¬ 
 tures, by attempting to shew that they contradict themselves, for which 
 purpose he makes observations on a great number of particular passa¬ 
 ges. The proof of Christianity, from the miracles of Jesus, lie tries to 
 invalidate, not by denying the facts themselves, but by Shewing that 
 one Appollonius had performed equal, if not greater miracles, which 
 were recorded,lie says, not by ignorant men like Peter and Paul; but 
 by Maximus of iEgis, and Damis a philosopher. “ Now,” says he, 
 “ we reckon him who did such wonderful things, hot a god, but only 
 a man, whereas they (the Christians) give the appellation of God to Je¬ 
 sus, because he performed a few miracles.” Laetantius, in remarking 
 bn this, affirms, that the difference between the miracles performed by 
 Jesus, and all impostors whatever, is evident from the manner in 
 which they were regarded by mankind.” 
 
 “ Julian, the Roman Emperor, succeeded to the throne of the Cee- 
 sars in the year 361- He had once made a profession of Christiani¬ 
 ty, but afterwards abandoned it. In the year 363, he wrote a treatise 
 in three books against the Christians, and to confute the Christian re¬ 
 ligion, against which he shews great inveteracy. Libanius the Soph¬ 
 ist, who was acquainted with Julian, says: “ He wrote a treatise to 
 shew that these books which make the Man of Palestine to be God, 
 contained nothing but silly and ridiculous matters.” Cyril wrote an 
 answer to this work, in which he transcribes many passages from it at 
 length. Julian, like the others whose works we have been consider- 
 ing, acknowledged the 'principal facts of the Gospel history. The na¬ 
 ture of Julian’s objections, as well as kis admission of the facts rela¬ 
 ted, will be seen from the following extracts: “ Jesus having persua¬ 
 ded a few among you, and those of the worst of men, has now been 
 celebrated about three hundred years, having done nothing in his life¬ 
 time worthy of remembrance, unless any one thinks it a mighty matter 
 to heal lame and blind people, and exorcise demoniacs in the villages 
 of Rethsaida and Bethany.”—“Jesus whom you preach was one of 
 Caesar’s subjects. If you refuse this, I will prove it by and by. But 
 the thing is acknowledged: For you say, that he, with his father and 
 mother, was enrolled under Cerenius. Now, after he was born, what 
 good did he do to his relations? For he says they would not obey 
 him.” 
 
 “ Alluding to the superstitious contentions of the Christians of that 
 time about the observance of Easter, he says, “ These things flow en¬ 
 tirely from yourselves, for no where has Jesus or Paul delivered you 
 these things, commanding you to do them. The reason is, they did 
 not expect that ever you would attain to this degree of power; for they 
 were content if they deceived servant-maids and slaves, and by their 
 means some wives and husbands, such as Cornelius and Sergius; of 
 whom, if the one is remembered among the noted men of that time, for 
 these things happened in the reign of Tiberius or Claudius, do you 
 think that I lie concerning the rest?” 
 
 “ You are so unfortunate that you do not continue in those things 
 which were delivered to you by the Apostles. For their successors 
 
DEBATE, 23 
 
 . i -Vtir 
 
 have dressed them up for the worse, and more impiously. For neith¬ 
 er Paul, nor Matthew, nor Luke, nor Mark, ventured to call Jesus, 
 God, But that good man John, perceiving that numbers qf the Gre¬ 
 cian and Italian cities were caught with that distemper, and hearing, 
 as I suppose, that tne sepulchres of Peter and Paul were privately wor¬ 
 shipped, was the first who had the boldness to pronounce it.” Fur¬ 
 ther, he objects what John says. “ No man hath seen God at any time j 
 the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath re¬ 
 vealed him. Whether then is this God word made flesh, the only be 
 gotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father? and if he is the same, as 
 i think, then certainly even you have seen God; for he dwelt among 
 you, and ve beheld his glory.” 
 
 “ Speaking of the Christians, he scoffingly says: “ Not only they of 
 his time, but that some of those who at the beginning received the 
 word from Paul, were such, is apparent from what Paul himself says, 
 writing to them. For I presume he was not so void of shame, as to 
 j?end them such reproaches in his letter to them, if he had not known 
 them to be just. These are the things which he writes of his disciples, 
 and to themselves. “Be not deceived; neither idolaters, nor adulter¬ 
 ers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves, with mankind, nor 
 thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, 
 shall inherit the kingdom of God. And you are not ignorant, breth¬ 
 ren, that such were you also. But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified 
 in the name of Jesus Christ,” 1 Cor. vi. 9—11. You see they were 
 such, but they h id been sanctified and washed, having been cleansed 
 and scoured with water, which penetrates even to the soul. And bap¬ 
 tism, which cannot.heal the leprosy, nor the gout, nor the dysentery, 
 nor any other distemper of the body, takes away adulteries, extortions, 
 and all other sins of the soul.” In the above passage, Julian says, “ I 
 presume he was not so void of shame as to send them such reproaches 
 in his letter to them, if he had not known them to be just.” This is 
 the very argument formerly insisted on respecting the testimony of the 
 nrst Christians, to whom the Epistles were addressed, which must have 
 been applicable to them, cr they would never have been received and 
 acknowledged by them. 
 
 “ In a letter to Arsacius, high priest of Galatia, referring to the impi¬ 
 ety of the Heathens, Julian recommends the example of the Chris¬ 
 tians: “Why do we not look to that which has been the principal 
 cause of the augmentation of impiety, humanity to strangers, care in bu¬ 
 rying the dead, and that sanctity of life of which they make such a show? 
 # all which things I will have to be really practised by our people It is 
 not sufficient that you are unblameable yourself, all the priests in Ga¬ 
 latia ought to be so likewise. I will, therefore, that you persuade, and 
 even compel, all the priests in Galatia to live soberly, otherwise do you 
 depose them from the priestly office, unless they, and their wives, and 
 children, and servants, do religiously worship the gods, and also for¬ 
 bear to converse with the servants, children, and wives of the Galilean^ 
 who are impious towards the gods, and prefer impiety to religion,—■ 
 You are likewise to order them not to frequent the theatre, nor to 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 QX 
 
 drink in taverns, nor to exercise any mean or sordid employments.*-- 
 Such as hearken to your directions, you are .to encourage; others you 
 are to reject. You are also to erect hospitals in every city, that stran¬ 
 gers also may share in our humanity; and not only those of our own re- 
 ligion, but others likewise, if they are necessitous.” He then tells him 
 what allowance he had made for that purpose. “ For,” says he, u it is 
 a shame when there are no beggars among the Jews, and the impious 
 Galileans relieve not only their own people, but ours also, that, our 
 poor should be neglected by us, and be left helpless and destitute.” 
 
 u After all,” says Julian, “ these (Galileans) have in some degree a 
 proper sense of religion, for they worship no abject and vulgar deity, 
 but that God who is truly all-powerful and all good, by whose direc¬ 
 tion the sensible world is conducted; the same I am persuaded that 
 we also worship, under different names. They therefore seem to me 
 to act very consistently, as they are not transgressors of the laws, but 
 only err in paying their worship to this one God, in neglect of all the 
 rest, and in thinking that we only, whom they style the Gentiles, are 
 precluded from his influence.” ” 
 
 These testimonies are as worthy of the attention of the Christian pub¬ 
 lic, as of the sceptics; for, while they prove that neither infidel J ewsj 
 nor Pagans, nor apostates from the Christian faith, in ail their spite and 
 •malice, and with all the opportunities which they had, ever attempted 
 to contradict one of the great facts on which Christianity is predica¬ 
 ted; they also give some striking attestations to the purity, excel¬ 
 lency, and value of Christianity, as received and practised by the pri¬ 
 mitive Christians. But the conclusion from these premises bearing 
 upon the position before us (now, I hope, established in every mind in 
 this assembly) which has led us so far into antiquity, is this—that the 
 Christian Scriptures, and the facts which they record, were admitted by 
 the enemies of Christianity, as we noyv contend for them. But these 
 infidels, like the modern, attempted to explain them away, to ridicule, 
 or reproach them, as you have heard upon the present occasion; but, 
 with what success, let the page of history, and our own experience, de¬ 
 clare.—I will only add, that 1 see, in my friend Mr. Owen, only a. 
 .second edition of Celsus, in some respects abridged, and in others en¬ 
 larged and improved. He dare not to deny the facts , but philosoph¬ 
 izes against them, because repugnant to his Epicurean notions of 
 matter, virtue and happiness. 
 
 These old sceptics reasoned against Jesus being Lord of the Uni- 'G 
 verse, and against his religion, just as a modern atheist reasons against 
 the proposition, that God made this globe. A benevolent beingcould ’" 
 not create a world like this. See how badly it is planned, arranged, G 
 and adapted to the subsistence of animals. One part of it parched 
 with a vertical sun; another bound in perpetual ice. One part of it G 
 dreary wastes, sandy deserts, and three fourths of the whole immense 
 oceans. They have formed, in their o\yn imagination, a standard of 
 benevolence, and that will not apply to the appearance of things—and . 
 it is more consistent with the pride of philosophy to annihilate a crea- qji 
 than to sacrifice their own imaginations to reason. So with 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 23 
 
 primitive sceptics; they opposed their own ideas, or their own supersti¬ 
 tion, to incontestible facts; and rather than abandon the former, they 
 thought good to attempt to explain away the latter. 
 
 Two facts are established from the preceding documents and proofs 
 —our adversaries, themselves, being judges: 
 
 1. All .Christian communities, from A. D. 33 to 101, whether pre¬ 
 viously Jews, or Pagans, or both, to whom these writings were addres¬ 
 sed, did receive and retain these writings, as the works of the persons 
 whose names they bear. 
 
 2. That all the opponents of Christianity whose works have come 
 down to us—or whose arguments have been preserved in the writings 
 of their opponents, did admit the Gospel Histories to have been written 
 by their reputed authors; did admit the facts recorded—and never 
 dared to question either the authorship of the inspired books, the time 
 or place of their publication, or the verity of the facts stated by the 
 eye and ear witnesses of the Word. 
 
 While on the subject of the authorship of these sacred writings, and 
 on the incontrovertible nature of the facts stated in these narratives, I 
 would think it not unsuitable, in this place, to take notice of the char* 
 acter of these writers, and the circumstantiality of their narrations. 
 
 The question now before us, is: Does the character of these writers* 
 as it presents itself to our view, from their own writings, or from any 
 records which have come down to us, afford any ground to suspect 
 either their sincerity , or any moral defect whatever ? There is a species 
 of evidence, sometimes called the internal evidence of Christianity.— 
 This is made up from the character of the writers, the peculiarities of 
 style and sentiment exhibited, and also from the nature, object, and 
 tendency of the doctrine taught, or the communications made. There 
 is what is sometimes called the critical internal evidence; and the mo¬ 
 ral internal evidence. I am not however going into this matter at pre¬ 
 sent. I only remark, that, although the internal evidence, found with¬ 
 in the volume, is not supposed the best calculated to arrest the atten¬ 
 tion of the bold, declaiming infidel, or the curious speculating sceptic; 
 yet this is the evidence which ever has made the deepest impression up¬ 
 on the mind of the honest enquirer; and affords a much greater assu¬ 
 rance to the believer of the certainty of the foundation of his faith, than 
 all the external proofs which have ever been adduced. The moral in¬ 
 ternal evidence of Christianity, is that which takes hold of the 
 great mass of mankind, because it seizes the soul of man; it adapts it¬ 
 self to the whole man. It speaks to the understanding, to the con¬ 
 science, to the affections, to the passions, to the circumstances, of man, 
 in a way which needs no translation, no comment.—It pierces the 
 soul of man, dividing even the animal life from our intellectual nature, 
 and developing the thoughts and intents of the heart. There is an 
 internal sense to which it addresses itself, which can feel, examine, 
 Weigh, and decide upon, its pretensions, without pronouncing a word. 
 
 In. silencing, confuting, confounding, and converting, the hold op- 
 poser with a hard hear' and a seared conscience, we do take hold of 
 those strong, stubborn, and prostrating arguments, drawn from what 
 ~VoL 2. 3 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 we sometimes call the extrinsic sources. But when we aim at Conver¬ 
 ting the great mass of mankind, we only think of laying open tire in- 
 ternal evidences. In the former case, we begin by proving that God 
 speaks; but, in the latter, w r e assume the fact, and prove it from what 
 is spoken. That God speaks, ten thousand vouchers in the volume 
 declare—none of which can be refuted. These are they which as¬ 
 sure the Christian that his faith will never make him ashamed. 
 
 But I will speak of the circumstantiality of the writers, that I may 
 illustrate their sincerity. When a person attempts to impose upon 
 us, he sometimes deals in generals, and avoids particulars. He keeps 
 out to sea. He takes care not to deal much in dates, times, persons, 
 and places of easy reference. He fears nothing more than specific 
 terms, and minute details. But as there is a peculiar air of design, in¬ 
 trigue, imposture, or fiction, so there is an air of * ankness, candor, 
 honesty, sincerity, which it is as diificult to counterfeit, as to change 
 the lineaments of the face. There is the physiognomy of truth.— 
 Sometimes it is mimicked. A labored minuteness, instead of the un¬ 
 affected details, an artificial particularity instead of the natural and 
 incidental relation of circumstances, frequently, in works of fiction, 
 assume much of the air of truth; but never so exact is the imitation as 
 to escape the detection of the well informed and accurate examiner.— 
 A secret consciousness of merited suspicion will always blush thro’ 
 the most labored concealment. But the consciousness of truth, will, 
 without a challenge, court investigation, and defy contradiction.— 
 There is an air of this sort which accompanies conscious truth, that 
 never can be perfectly counterfeited. This fearlessness of consequen¬ 
 ces, this eager desire of examination, this courting of contradiction, is 
 the most prominent feature in the character of all the original witnes¬ 
 ses who attest the evangelical story. They take a range in their nar¬ 
 ratives, quite unnecessary, and go into circumstantial details, allusions 
 to persons, places, and public events, which no necessity compelled, 
 were it not that they defied doubt, and solicited examination. When 
 they record a miracle, they go into a detail of circumstances, which ren¬ 
 ders rational doubt impossible. The witnesses of many of the miracles 
 were very numerous, and in recording them, they challenge, as it were, 
 and summon all the witnesses. Such, for example, was the fact in that 
 sublime miracle of feeding 5000 men upon five barley loaves and two 
 small fishes. The place where, the time of year when, and many cir¬ 
 cumstances connected wi tli this occurrence, put it in the power of each 
 one of the 5000, and, consequently, in the power of myriads of their 
 cotemporaries, to contradict and repel such a falsehood, if it had been 
 one. But the conversations of the enemies, the deeds and sayings of 
 the opponents, the objections and complaints of scribes and pharisees, 
 are frequently detailed along with the cause which elicited them. All 
 of which afforded the most ready means of detection. 
 
 No country more than Judea, and no age more than the era of Jesus 
 Christ and his apostles, made it difficult to pass off a forgery, if the im¬ 
 postors should be copious in their allusions to the events of the time 
 and place. Now the apostles and historians were most minute apd cc~ 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 6't 
 
 pious in their allusions. But whence did this difficulty arise? Be¬ 
 cause the Jews were the most captious people, and the most conver¬ 
 sant in all questions affecting their religious standing and character j 
 because at that time there was an expectation that the Messiah should 
 be born—and because the land of Judea experienced so many vicissi¬ 
 tudes in its political relations, during the time this scene of tilings was 
 exhibited. At the commencement of the period of the evangelical 
 story, it constituted apart of a kingdom under Herod the great.— 
 Then it came under the dominion of Archelaus, under new arrange¬ 
 ments,* then it passed under the direct administration of the Roman 
 government; the exaltation of Herod Agnppa to the sovereign power 
 of his grandfather, for a time interrupted this order of things: and fi¬ 
 nally it is left in the form of a province; when the history of the New 
 Testament closes.—The surrounding countries also partook of similar 
 changes in their forms of government. Now it would have been dan¬ 
 gerous in the extreme, for any impostors, living in any other country, 
 or even in the same country, forty years after the close of the New 
 Testament, story, to have attempted to forge such a story, and antedate 
 it even forty years; especially as the prominent characters of this sto¬ 
 ry had much to do in the Ecclesiastical Judicatories of these times; 
 and to appear before several of the magistrates and governors, then in 
 office under the Roman emperors. No man could now write the his¬ 
 tory of any prominent individual, living in New Jersey some forty” 
 years ago, full of incident and allusion to the families and individu¬ 
 als of the neighborhood, and now pass it off for a work of the period 
 which it pretended to describe. I ask, could such an attempt possi¬ 
 bly escape detection, especially if copious in allusions and references 
 to the manners, customs, and leading personages of the day? But 
 how much more difficult, if, in that period, four or five changes in the 
 government had taken place, and in the public management of its po¬ 
 litical concerns?—It would have been impossible for the writings of 
 Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John, to have survived their authors, had 
 they been either a record of false facts, ora disguised perverted repre¬ 
 sentation of facts which had occurred, it would exhaust your patience, 
 my friends, and our strength, to attempt, were we now 7 adequate to 
 the task, to detail the allusions, references, and appeals to the illustri¬ 
 ous personages, to the customs and institutions, Roman and Jewish, 
 which then existed in that land and circumjacent country; and which 
 are found in the historical books alone, of the New Testament. I 
 will just give you one example of the circumstantial minuteness of 
 these historians, which may suffice for a specimen of what might be 
 exhibited, were we to devote our attention to such a developemcnf — 
 
 I will only premise that, as the circumstance of having four historian*-, 
 gives us the opportunity of cross examination, so the allusions to 
 Jewish, Roman, and other usages, give us the opportunity of cross 
 examining the sacred with the profane historians and writers of that 
 day; of which we rejoice to state there w T cre not a few 7 . 
 
 The example to which I refer, is the trial, condemnation, and cruci- 
 *.2xion, of Jesus Christ. Seven or eight allusions to persons, customs; 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 and usages, which the sacred writers never explain, are found in the 
 accounts of this trial, which will bear a cross examination with all the 
 authentic records of those times.—Chalmers notices them in the fol¬ 
 lowing manner: 
 
 u The fact, that they are borne out. in their minute and incidental al¬ 
 lusions by the testimony of other historians, gives a strong weight of 
 what has been called circumstantial evidence in their favor, As a 
 specimen of the argument, let us confine our observations to the histo¬ 
 ry of our Saviour’s trial, and execution, and burial. They brought 
 him to Pontius Pilate. We know both from Tacitus and Josephus, 
 that he was at that time governor of Judea. A sentence from him 
 was necessary, before they could proceed to the execution of Jesus; 
 and we know that the power of life and death was usually vested in 
 the Roman governor. Our Saviour was treated with derision; and 
 this we know to have been a customary practice at that time, previous 
 to the execution of criminals, and during the time of it. Pilate scour¬ 
 ged Jesus, before he gave him up to be crucified. We know from an¬ 
 cient authors, that this was a very usual practice among the Romans. 
 The account of an execution generally run in this form:—He was 
 stripped, whipped, and beheaded, or executed. According to the evan¬ 
 gelists, his accusation was written on the top of the cross; and vve 
 learn from Suetonius and others, that the crime of the person to be ex¬ 
 ecuted was affixed to the instrument of his punishment. According 
 to the evangelists, this accusation was written in three different lan¬ 
 guages; and we know from Josephus, that it was quite common in Jer¬ 
 usalem to have all public advertisements written in this manner. Ac¬ 
 cording to the evangelists, Jesus had to bear his cross; and we know, 
 from other sources of information, that this was the constant practice 
 of these times. According to the evangelists, the body of Jesus was 
 given up to be buried at the requpst of friends. We know that, unless 
 the criminal was infamous, this was the law, or ti^e custom with all 
 Roman governors.'” 
 
 “ These, and a few more particulars of the same kind, occur within 
 the compass of a single page of the evangelical history. The circum¬ 
 stantial manner of the history affords a presumption in its favour, ante¬ 
 cedent to all examination into the truth of the circumstances them¬ 
 selves. But it makes a strong addition to the evidence, when we find, 
 that in all the subordinate parts of the main story, the evangelists 
 maintain so great a consistency, with the testimony of other authors, 
 and vvilh all that we can collect from other sources of information, as 
 to the manners and institutions of that period. It is difficult to con¬ 
 ceive, in the first instance, how the inventor of a fabricated story 
 would hazard such a number of circumstances, each of them supplying 
 a point of comparison with other authors, and giving to the enquire?an 
 additional chance of detecting the imposition. And it is still more 
 difficult to believe, that truth should have been so artfully blended with 
 falsehood in the composition of this narrative, particularly as we per¬ 
 ceive nothing like a forced introduction of any one circumstance — 
 There appears to be nothing out of place, nothing thrust in with the 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 29 
 
 view of imparting an air of probability to the history. The circum¬ 
 stance upon which we bring the evangelists into comparison with pro¬ 
 fane authors, is often not intimated in a direct form, but in the form of 
 a slight or distant allusion. There is not the most remote appearance 
 of its being fetched or sought for. It is brought in accidentally, and 
 flows in the most natural and undesigned manner out of the progress 
 of the narrative.” 
 
 But as from the extraordinary circumstantiality of these historians 
 and writers, so from every lineament of their character, from every ac¬ 
 tion of their lives, from all their labors and sufferings in the cause, we 
 may derive irrefragable proofs of their sincerity. To the whole phen¬ 
 omena of the characters of the original witnesses, it has been often ob¬ 
 jected, or rather insinuated, that men have been frequently moved by 
 pride of opinion, the hope of reward, by avarice or ambition, to feign 
 characters, and impose upon the credulity of the world: that it is nc£~ 
 improbable but that the original reporters and publishers of Christiani¬ 
 ty conspired together from some of these sinister motives to impose up¬ 
 on the credulity of posterity. Singular conspiracy indeed! A con¬ 
 spiracy to make mankind just, merciful, pure, forgiving and affection¬ 
 ate to one another; to teach them to live in accordance with human 
 nature, its origin and its destiny; to fix all their supreme hopes upon 
 objects unseen and future; and to deny themselves of all unhallowed 
 gratifications! Singular conspiracy, on the part of the conspirators, 
 to forsake all eartliborn interests, to expose themselves to shame, per¬ 
 secution, and death, for making mankind pure and happy; to court 
 infamy with those in power, and to render themselves obnoxious to 
 the indignation of all the reputed w 7 ise, religious, and honorable 
 among men! Astonishing conspiracy, which promises to the conspi¬ 
 rators the absence of all worldly good, and the presence of all tempo¬ 
 ral evils, in proportion as they would be successful in accomplishing 
 the objects for which they had conspired!! 
 
 Any suspicion or conjecture against the Founders of Christianity, 
 drawn from any document upon earth, Christian or infidel, is as unrea¬ 
 sonable as Atheism itself. 
 
 Viewed in whatever light we may, the Apostles, and first propaga¬ 
 tors of Christianity, are the most extraordinary men the world ever 
 saw. As historical writers and laborers in the establishment of 
 Christianity, they leave a character perfectly sui generis. They ap¬ 
 pear to have been selected, not only because they were obscure and il¬ 
 literate, but because they were men of the humblest capacity. I 
 have often admired the wisdom of the Founder in selecting such ad¬ 
 vocates of his cause. He wanted eyeivitnesses and ear witnesses , and 
 selected men from a calling which was more favorable to the produc¬ 
 tion of good eyes and ears than perhaps any other. Good eyes and 
 ears were bet^gr qualifications for the original Apostles, than all the 
 learning ana talents of the Archbishops of York and Canterbury— 
 Good eyes, good ears, and a good memory, were the only indispensa¬ 
 ble qualifications to constitute such witnesses as Jesus Christ requi* 
 red. The most important part of their office was to identify the person 
 Vol. 2. 3* 
 
30 
 
 DEBATE 
 
 of Jesus Christ, and to attest the fact of his resurrection frern the dead. 
 To know his voice, and to distinguish his person, were matters of more 
 consequence than most of us imagine. In truth, upon this depended 
 the proof of the very fact, upon which all Christianity rests: viz. the 
 resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. Now, I ask, what school 
 more favorable to qualify men for such an office, than the fisherman’s 
 life? Men whose ears, and whose eyes, arb accustomed to the open 
 air, by night and day; to the roaring of the billows, and who are con¬ 
 stantly observing the face of nature, are the most likely to possess those 
 senses in the greatest perfection. And, ridicule the idea who may, I 
 will contend, that good eyes, and good ears, were first rate qualifica¬ 
 tions in an Apostle —a defect in either would have made them perfectly 
 incompeten t to the duties of that office. 
 
 But this was not all. He wanted plain, unlettered men; men rath¬ 
 er approaching to dullness than to acuteness of intellect; that inge¬ 
 nuity itself might not be able to attach suspicion to their testimony.— 
 They were neither fluent nor intelligent. They had no personal 
 charms derived from learning or lalent. On the other hand, it ap¬ 
 pears, from their frequent colloquies with Jesus, that they were un¬ 
 commonly dull ofapprehension. Had the original witnesses, whose 
 first duty it was to identify the person of Jesus, and to prove his resur¬ 
 rection, been men so acute and learned as Paul, educated in the best 
 schools of that day, and possessed of such a knowledge of men and 
 tilings, some might have attributed their success more to natural than to 
 supernatural aids. 
 
 The duty of the original eye witnesses and ear witnesses who were 
 to identify the person, narrate the miracles, and repeat the discourses 
 of the Messiah, in all their first embassies, was to proclaim a few facts 
 without comment, and to enforce the necessity of Reformation , because 
 of the advent of the Messiah, and the approach of his reign. He did 
 not send them, as some suppose, to make orations or sermons upon 
 texts of Scripture, but to proclaim that the era of Reformation had ar¬ 
 rived, and to confirm their proclamation by miraculous benefits be¬ 
 stowed promiscuously upon all. 
 
 There never was such a model of finished human testimony, since 
 or before, as that which the New Testament exhibits; in which no hu¬ 
 man being, how ingenious or malicious soever, can find a flaw, or even a 
 weakness. 
 
 Let us for a moment glance at another of its grand characteristics. 
 First comes the rough, bold, and zealous Baptist, just dressed up to 
 the taste of the times. To understand this singular appearance of 
 John, you must recollect that the Jewish people were at this time di- 
 vided into two religious sects, the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The 
 Pharisees were the most numerous and decent religionists in their day. 
 The Sadducees were the most wealthy class of the Jewish nation, and 
 indulged themselves in all sensual pleasures.—Like the rich generally, 
 they wished for no future state, and fondly believed there was none.— 
 They had not much moral influence with the people on these ac¬ 
 counts, But the Pharisees had , Nov/ it was more necessary that the 
 
debate; 
 
 31 
 
 pretensions of John should be favorably regarded by the Pharisees 
 than the Sadducees: for if favorably received by the Pharisees, the 
 more general would be the reception of the Messiah by the whole na¬ 
 tion. Now the Pharisees placed the highest degree of sanctity, just in 
 such a demeanor, dress, and manner of life, as John the Baptist assu¬ 
 med. Thus he dressed himself to the taste of those who could give 
 the most influence to his message. Hence we find that so soon as Iris 
 preaching, dress, food, and manner of life, were known, the Jews in Je¬ 
 rusalem deputed very honorable characters, both Priests and Levites, 
 to wait upon him to hear his testimony, and to report it in the metrop¬ 
 olis. Thus the testimony of John in favor of the Messiah was favora¬ 
 bly announced through J udea, and to the nation. In all respects, the 
 testimony of the harbinger wonderfully accords with that of the testi¬ 
 mony of the twelve original Heralds, both in its general character and 
 accompaniments 
 
 But with regard to the testimony of the twelve original witnesses, 
 T have to remark, that not one of them understood for years either the 
 nature or design of the mission of Jesus. This fact, if correctly un¬ 
 derstood, and applied, is of immense importance to the Christian pub¬ 
 lic in correcting some mistakes into which they have fallen, and it 
 gives very great additional weight to the testimony of the Apostles, 
 respecting the capital item in the Record, viz. the resurrection of Jesus 
 from the dead. They all, without exception, expected the Messiah 
 would found an earthly kingdom, and reign over it forever. Their 
 imaginations pictured out to them the mighty conquests, and illustri¬ 
 ous victories, they would achieve under him. Even the most gifted 
 saints who departed not from the temple, when they first saw the won¬ 
 derful child, moved by the Holy Spirit, as it spake in the ancient pro¬ 
 phets (not always understood by them whose tongues uttered its sug¬ 
 gestions) expressed their joy and hopes in such strains as indicated ex¬ 
 pectations similar to those of his disciples—“ that we, said they, being 
 delivered from our enemies might worship him without fear all the 
 Jays of our lives.” They, one and all, expected an all-conquering 
 king, in the person of Jesus. Hence so much of the war spirit in some 
 of the Apostles, and so much worldly ambition in the mother of Zebi- 
 dee’s sons. Let my two sons, said she, sit, good master, one on your 
 right, and the other on your left, when you ascend the throne. A cru¬ 
 cified Messiah was as far from her thoughts, as the day of judgment is 
 now from the anticipations of Mr. Owen. Not a man or woman on 
 earth, till within a few days of the event, could understand or brook the 
 idea of the crucifixion of Jesus. 
 
 I do not say that the Apostles were quite disinterested in leaving 
 their occupations to follow Jesus. This diminishes nought from 
 their testimony. They expected he was able to reward them; and that 
 he would reward them. They looked for something in this world when 
 they first set out as volunteers in his cause. Peter says — u Now Lord, 
 what shall we have, who have forsaken all, and followed you?” He 
 made him a liberal promise which pleased him and his associates too. 
 But this promise, even then, they misapplied. When he told them, 
 
32 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 without a figure, that he would be crucified, they could not believe if; 
 so contrary was this issue of his life to their expectations. And when 
 the Roman soldiers and the chief priests came to take him before the 
 Sanhedrim, Peter was more disposed to fight than to surrender. In a 
 word, the whole company of the disciples of Jesus, male and female, 
 were disappointed when Jesus was crucified. Fear and consternation 
 seized them all. Peter acted the coward, and they all fled. Even on 
 the day of his resurrection, while two of them were going from Jeru¬ 
 salem to Emmaus, they spake of his demise as a complete frustration 
 of all their hopes. “ We expected ,” said they, “ that he would have 
 redeemed Israel” But, alas! we are disappointed. He has not re¬ 
 deemed Israel, was their conviction at that moment. A temporal re¬ 
 demption was their expectation. And as for his resurrection from the 
 dead, so far from plotting any story about it, it was the farthest thought 
 from their mind ; the female disciples were preparing to embalm the 
 body, when they found the grave empty; and when they told the disci¬ 
 ples that “ the Lord was risen indeed ,” their 16 words seemed to them 
 as idle tales, and they believed ihem not.” 
 
 Now this being the expectation of these witnesses, as every docu¬ 
 ment on earth proves—to suppose them capable of plotting and execu¬ 
 ting such a fraud, as the stealing of the body, betrays the grossest ig¬ 
 norance of the whole history of the times, of the nation, and of the 
 Apostles. Toothing can be more plain than that when Joseph the Sen¬ 
 ator petitioned the Governor for the body, and interred it, the hopes 
 and prospects of the disciples, as respected worldly objects, were buried 
 in the same grave with it. 
 
 Hence the incredulity of all the Apostles at first hearing of his resur¬ 
 rection, and the stubborn incredulity of Thomas who happened to be 
 absent when the Lord appeared to the others— I will not believe , said 
 he. I would not believe my own eyes: for unless I handled him and 
 felt the wounds made by the spear and the nails, I would not, I could 
 not, believe. But a single sight of Jesus overcame all his resolution, 
 and he is constrained to exclaim, My Lord and my God! 
 
 But as I am brought forward to this most wonderful of all events, 
 the resurrection of Jesus Christ , which is, too, the capital item in the 
 Apostolic testimony; and the fact on which the whole religion and 
 hopes of Christianity depend and terminate, I feel strongly disposed to 
 shew that it is the best attested fact in the annals of the world. For I 
 wish to have it placed upon record, and to be known as far as this work 
 ever shall extend, either in time or place, that, in our view, the shor¬ 
 test and best, because the most irrefragable way, to prove the whole 
 truth and absolute certainty of the Christian religion, is to prove the 
 resurrection of J esus Christ from the dead. This proved, and Deism, 
 Atheism, and Scepticism of every name, fall prostrate to the ground. 
 The Atheist will himself say, let this be proved, that Jesus Christ rose 
 from the dead, walked upon this earth, eat, drank, and talked with men 
 for forty days afterwards, and in the presence of many witnesses ascen¬ 
 ded up into Heaven, and after his ascent thither, sent down infallible 
 proofs that he was well received in the Heavenly world; and I will be¬ 
 lieve. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 4J 
 
 v 
 
 I beg the indulgence of this assembly here. I wish to be diffuse 
 this one point. I desire it for the sake of every saint and sinner 
 here—or who may read this discussion. I will aim at doing more 
 than proving the fact, though this shall be kept continually in view,— 
 This fact proved, and all is proved. This is not a conclusion to which 
 I have come from my own reasoning merely, nor from my own experi¬ 
 ence, though both lead to it. It is a conclusion to which the wisest of 
 Christians have been led. But that which gives the casting vote in 
 the court of my understanding, is the fact that Paul sets the exam¬ 
 ple. 
 
 Paul was not one of the original twelve. He was not chosen to be 
 a companion of Jesus, to be an eye and ear witness of what Jesus said 
 and did. He was called to attest and proclaim the truth of Christian¬ 
 ity to the world; to the Pagan world, savage and civilized.—-All gen¬ 
 tile nations were embraced in his commission. He saw Jesus , after he 
 had spent some months or years in persecuting him. Now the ques¬ 
 tion is, how did this astonishing man argue the truth of Christianity 
 against the philosophic Greek, Epicurean, or Stoic? How did he 
 plead its truth with Barbarian, Scythian, noble and ignoble. To as¬ 
 certain this, we must follow him from Jerusalem to Athens, from A- 
 thens to Rome, from city to city, from nation to nation; and after 
 mingling with his congregations in all places, we shall hear him rest all 
 upon the fact of Christ’s resurrection. Begin where, and with whom 
 he may, here always he makes his stand. 
 
 We shall just hear him in Athens.—“ Athenians,” says he, u you 
 are in all things teb much addicted to the worshipping of demons. I 
 see that you have Erected an altar to the unknown God. This being, 
 whom you worship without knowing him, I now declare to you: God 
 that made the world, and all things therein, seeing he is Lord of heav¬ 
 en and earth, dweHeth not in temples made with human hands, neither 
 is he served as though he needed any thing; seeing he gives to all life, 
 and breath, and all things, and has made of one blood all the nations 
 of men who inhabit the earth; now one of your own poets hath said— 
 u For we his offspring are —Now let me reason with you on your 
 own principles. If we are the offspring of the Deity, there must be 
 some similitude between him and us, as between parent and child.—- 
 We can walk, and speak, and act; but your Gods are dumb, and can¬ 
 not move. They have no seeing eye, nor hearing ear, else the spiders 
 would not spin their threads over their eyes, and weave their webs over 
 their ears. Yet, you say, “ We are the offspring of God.” Thus ’tis 
 easy to refute their superstition. But after pulling down their fine 
 air-built speculations, he appears in the majesty of the Gospel. He an 
 flounces the Divine proclamation. This ignorant superstition of yours, 
 God, says he, has hitherto overlooked; but now he commands all men 
 every where to reform. Reformation and remission of sins, he pro¬ 
 claims and enjoins. These he connects with the day of judgment:—for, 
 continues ho, he has appointed a day in which he will judge the 
 world, by that person whom he has constituted the judge of living and 
 dead, concerning which matters ho has given proof, faith, or assurance 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 to all the world, by raising him from the dead. Here he stands.: 
 this proves the whole mission of Jesus, and his appointment to be the 
 supreme judge. They had heard him talk about tiie anastasis in the 
 market place; but not knowing the resurrection of the dead, they sup¬ 
 posed this anastasis was a god or goddess which Paul had proclaimed. 
 But let it be remembered, that not only in the market place with the 
 Epicureans and Stoics, but when amidst the areopagus , or aldermen 
 of the city, he makes the all conquering proof of his doctrine, the res¬ 
 urrection of Jesus from the dead. 
 
 But that I may argue the truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ 
 from the dead, in your presence, with the greatest possible effect on 
 this promiscuous audience, let me take another argument from this A- 
 postleas my text. Permit me to open the New Testament: 
 
 1. Cor. 15. You will find Paul in argument with some disciple of 
 Epicurus, or some Sadducean dogmatist. We shall hear him 
 state the old Gospel which he so successfully proclaimed. This old 
 Gospel was not so full of dogmas and opinions as some of the modern. 
 We have become so spiritual that our religion is rather a religion of 
 opinions than of facts. Angels can live on opinions, or abstract 
 truths, for aught I know; but so soon as mortals begin to live on opin¬ 
 ions, they become lean. The primitive Christians believed facts, repo¬ 
 sed in them, and drew their joys from them. But let us hear Paul 
 state his Gospel —“ Moreover, brethren, I will declare that Gospel 
 to you, which 1 once proclaimed among you; which yon then recei¬ 
 ved as true, in which you now profess to stand; and by which you are 
 saved, provided you hold it in your memory, unless forsooth, ’tis all a 
 lie, and so in believing it, you have believed in vain.”—“ I delivered 
 to you when I first came to Corinth, this Gospel—1st. That Jesus 
 Christ died for our sins: 2d. That he was buried; and, in the third 
 place, that he rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures.— 
 This was the beginning, middle, and end, of Paul’s Gospel; whether it 
 suit or non suit the fastidious taste of the times.—He proceeds to 
 prove the third fact, not so much to prove it, as to argue from it, as an 
 established fact, one admitted by all the congregation of Corinth, and 
 by myriads of Christians throughout the world. 
 
 Old Plato reasoned about the immortality of the soul; but in the 
 genuine spirit of Christianity, Paul avers that Jesus Christ brought life 
 and immortality to our bodies. The dispute among the Jews was not 
 about the immortality of the soul; but, shall the generations of die 
 dead ever comeback again. This was the question which the Phari¬ 
 sees and the Sadducees argued. This is the grand point which must 
 be always kept in view. Only shew me the man, who, on the lestimo^ 
 ny of the Apostles a.nd prophets, believes that Jesus Christ rose from 
 the dead, and I will engage to shew you a Christian, not only in faith, 
 but in works. A belief in this fact is thejfon^ etprincipium of Chris¬ 
 tianity—the source from which the practice of all Christian virtues 
 must be derived. This is the principle which leavens the whole mass - 
 this is the balm ofGilead, the cordial which calms, and cheers, and 
 .comforts the he,art 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 kJO 
 
 A person may believe opinions (it is however a misapplication of 
 the term believe) until his soul freezes, or falls asleep (pardon die ex¬ 
 pression.) Facts, testimony, and faith, belong to the same chapter; 
 and the last can only be in company with the former two. But we 
 shall soon wander from the point before us. The old Gospel was sum¬ 
 marily comprehended in these three facts. The meaning of these 
 facts is, what is called, the doctrine of Christ. 
 
 Paul proceeds to state the evidence on which the third fact was pro¬ 
 claimed in Corinth. He stales a number of times, that Jesus was 
 seen alive; first by Cephas—then by all the Apostles—then by 500 
 disciples at one time—then by James—then by all tiie Apostles—and 
 last of all he was seen by himself. Tne number of times and witnes¬ 
 ses greatly transcend aii hat is ever required to prove any fact. He, 
 however, simply asserts the fact of his having been seen so often and 
 by so many witnesses, the majority of whom are appealed to as still 
 living. We have the fact of his resurrection here asserted, and the 
 evidence adduced. Now for he argument derived from the evidence 
 submitted. To estimate the weight of this, let'it be remembered that 
 Paul had some bitter enemies in Corinth. These were the old mate¬ 
 rialists, the Sadducees. Very like my triend Mr. Owen, the} held 
 to no spirit, resurrection, nor future state. Now, as opposers of the 
 Apostle, they would be disposed to detect, if possible,any error, weak¬ 
 ness, flaw, or falsehood, in the argument.—Mark how he challenges 
 them—“ How say some atnong you that there is no resurrection of the 
 dead ?” They had insulted him. He does not spare them. Surely 
 in the polished, shrewd, and captious city of Corinth, which Cicero 
 complements as the lumen totius Graecice , the eye of all Greece.— 
 Surely, I say, if Paul is vulnerable, if his facts are false, if his argument 
 be inconclusive, the u eye of all Greece' 1 ' 1 will see it; and the wounded 
 pride of his opponents will publish it to the world. 
 
 When I came to you first, did I not proclaim the resurrection of Je¬ 
 sus? Did I not prove it? Did you not believe it ? Why then deny 
 the resurrection of the dead saints; for both stand or fall together.— 
 If the dead saints are not raised, then why was Christ raised ? and you 
 know, if he was not raised, and we affirmed that he was, we are found 
 liars: our preaching and your faith are both vain. You are yet m your 
 sins. 
 
 Did I not tell you, he was seen by me also? Why did you believe 
 me? Were not the signs of an Apostle with me? Besides you knew 
 my history. The Jews all knew it; and some of you are acquainted 
 with it. I am proud to confess it was not my education, nor the cir¬ 
 cumstances which surrounded me from birth to manhood, which made 
 me what I am. I was born a Jew, and all my prospects were Jewish.— 
 My ancestors on both sides were Jews. My preceptor Gamaliel, was 
 a learned Doctor of the Jewish law; I was educated in the metropolis, 
 at his feet. I was intimate with the whole sanhedrim. I was brought 
 up in the greatest antipathy against Jesus and the Christians. I be* 
 came a persecutor as soon as I finished my education. I went even to 
 strange cities in pursuit of Christians, male and female. All this, my 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 >'£S 
 
 education and the circumstances which surrounded me from birth to 
 manhood, prompted me to. But contrary to the influence of both, by 
 the evidence which I have detailed to you, I was constrained to re¬ 
 nounce these vicious influences, and to proclaim the faith which you 
 have received.” 
 
 We shall now let Paul plead his own cause with the Corinthian mate¬ 
 rialists. 
 
 He opens the case—he asserts the fact —Jesus rose from the dead. 
 He summonses the witnesses. They depose that they saw the same 
 identical person who was crucified and buried, alive again. That they 
 had the most indubitable evidence of the fact of his resurrection.— 
 They saw him, handled him, eat with him, drank with him, and con¬ 
 versed with him, and saw him ascend into Heaven. 
 
 Paul’s first argument on the premises, is a reductio ad aksvrdum 
 You Sadducees, that are members of the congregation in Corinth, be¬ 
 lieved, and still declare your belief, of the above testimony, that Jesus 
 rose from the dead. Now if you deny the future resurrection of the 
 saints, you make the resurrection of Jesus of none account. For why 
 should Christ alone rise to die no more, as one of the sons of men 1— 
 If, then, you would prove that there is no resurrection of the dead, you 
 must deny a fact which all Christians admit, and which you yourselves 
 admit upon the aforesaid evidence, namely, the undeniable fact of the 
 resurrection of Jesus. To deny the resurrection of the dead, is, then ? 
 to deny your own acknowledged belief in the resurrection of Jesus. 
 
 2. Again, if Christ be not raised, our proclamation of that fact is 
 false, and your belief predicated thereupon, is also false. This is ano¬ 
 ther reductio ad absurdum. 
 
 3. 4 gain, we have been false witnesses concerning God—when we 
 said that he raised up Christ: if, indeed, your assertion is true, that the 
 dead are not to be raised, we are not merely deceivers of men, but re- 
 proachers of God. This is inadmissible, as all our deeds declare. 
 
 4. Again, on your hypothesis, faith is useless. You are still in your 
 sins. This is contrary to your own experience. 
 
 5. Also, all who have died for attesting their belief in Christ’s res¬ 
 urrection, have thrown their lives away, and have actually, on your prim 
 ciples, perished. 
 
 6. And we too, who are suffering shame, and hazarding our lives ev¬ 
 ery day, for proclaiming this fact, are of all men the most miserable: for 
 we gain nothing in this life, as you yourselves know, but stripes, reproa¬ 
 ches, and dangers, for publishing the fact of his resurrection. If we 
 should have to fight, with the wild beasts at Ephesus, for the amuse¬ 
 ment of our adversaries, what would be the avails, if there be no resuiv 
 rection, nor future state? 
 
 7. But, again, what is more reasonable upon your own principles, be¬ 
 lieving, as you do, the five books of Moses, than that all the saints by 
 one man should live again, seeing that, by a man they all die. 
 
 8. But, in the last place, if you will not admit the truth of the resur¬ 
 rection of the dead, your creed ought to be reduced to the standard 
 of the brute; and, like them, making eating, and drinking, and all am 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 37 
 
 rnal enjoyments, the all-engrossing concern of life. For death will 
 soon reduce us back, upon your principles, to senseless matter. So 
 reasons ihe AposJe Paul with the Sadducean materialists, who lived 
 too soon to deny the resurrection of Jesus, but not too soon to Question 
 the ultimate resurrection of ail the dead. 
 
 I ought, perhaps, to apologize to some present, for the manner in 
 which we connect the argument of the Apostle in this chapter. You 
 nous' know that we do not subscribe to that system of text preachin - 
 which authorizes a man to make as many sermons eis there are verses! 
 in a chapter—and often times these sermons on these texts, are as de¬ 
 tached from the scope in which they stand, as if the whole New Testa¬ 
 ment was a book of proverbs. Hence we cannot agree with him who 
 makes these words, “ if in t his life only we have hope by Christ we 
 are of all men the most miserable,* 5 , a text to prove, that all the rich and 
 
 honorable Christians in this day are of all men the most miserable_ 
 
 nor with him who makes these words —- u As by Adam all die, even 
 so by Christ shall all be made alive,' 5 a proof that all men, good an& 
 evil, shall be for ever happy. This text preaching, which has made the 
 Bible the most unmeaning book in the world, has contributed much to 
 make such men as Mr. Owen, sceptics. Indeed the sects and parties 
 which now exist, built, as they are, upon text talcing and sermon ma 
 king, are the most, formidable weapons with which the sceptics attack 
 the citadel of truth.—But yet they might as reasonably blame the Tnri 
 for all the darkness now on this globe, as charge Christianity with such 
 perversions as those to which we now allude. 
 
 Luther and Calvin began a great reformation, and ever since we 
 have been quarrelling about what Luther and Calvin meant;and thus 
 people get to hating one another on account of religious opinions.— 
 Whenever men will make the belief of Christian facts, and not an ar¬ 
 gument in abstruse opinions, or in the inferential ‘reasonings of some 
 orthodox commentator, the bond of Christian union, divisions, and 
 all their evil concomitants, will cease; but so long as Christians 
 demand unity of opinion, or a concurrence in the conclusion of some 
 philosophic or speculative mind, essential to Christian faith and Chris’ 
 tian character, so long will discords and divisions abound. 
 
 Sceptics sometimes boast, that they are more courteous to those who 
 differ from them than Christians. So well they may boast! But 
 there is not so much real cause of triumph in this matter, as we sup¬ 
 pose. They feel so little interest in all things pertaining to a future 
 
 state, that it gives them no concern what any person thinks about it.__ 
 
 But Christians feel so much at stake, so vast an interest, in all religious 
 matters, that I can excuse Them much more easily for being somewhat 
 warmed at times, than I can praise the stoical apathy of the sceptics. If 
 I were a materialist, I might be as courteous, and as indifferent to the 
 opinions of others, as my friend Mr. Owen. But should I ever appear 
 to feel any more in earnest than he, it must be attributed to the grea¬ 
 ter interest I feel in all matters which are connected with immortality 
 It rouses a Christian, to make him a bankrupt by a quibble, to rob him 
 of the hope of immortal glory. While I disclaim all sectarianism, and 
 Vol. 2, 4 
 
38h 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 till sectarian feeling, I would be the last to compliment away for a smile, 
 a single filing of*sacred truth. 
 
 But to return to the close of the Apostle’s most triumphant argu¬ 
 ment with the Sadducean materialist. 
 
 What could induce us to die every day, to rise every morning deter 
 mined to die, if called upon, rather than to deny the truth which wc 
 promulge? VVhat could induce us not only to hazard death, but, while 
 we live, to be accounted the off-scouring of the earth and the filth of all 
 things; to suffer hunger, nakedness, and stripes, for attesting and prc- 
 mulging falsehoods? Has ever the like occurred? If we be deceivers 
 knowingly, and in such a case as this, if deceivers, we must be design¬ 
 edly so—do we not bear false witness in the presence of (iod, and do 
 we not expose ourselves to the severest punishment? We must wil¬ 
 lingly prefer pain to happiness, ifw& are deceivers—for pain is our 
 present earthly gain, and pain must be our future reward. We are 
 then not only of all men the most miserable here, but must be'so here¬ 
 after 11—It cannot be; we must cease to be accounted human beings, 
 before we can be accounted deceivers. 
 
 But, says some sceptic (for Mr. Owen fails to make objections, and 
 we will make them for him,) How many thousands have suffered 
 death in attestation of false religions? How many have suffered them¬ 
 selves to be burned or crushed to pieces under the ponderous car of 
 J.^gernaut, in attestation of their religion? Will you, then, make the 
 martyrdom and sufferings of the ancient witnesses, a proof of the veri¬ 
 ty of their religion, and reject the same as proof of the truth of many 
 Bagan, and, what you would call, anti-Christian religions? This is 
 something like you Christians—but it is a good rule which works 
 both ways; and if you will prove Christianity to be divine, because 
 some of its votaries suffered, you will be able to prove all the religions 
 of the world divine, for the same reason; for some of their votariessuf 
 fered. 
 
 Not so fast with your conclusion.—All that we contend for is, that 
 martyrdom proves the sincerity of the witness. This is all we want.-— 
 Now we all admit that a man may be sincerely wrong in his opinions^ 
 and so misled as to die for them, rather than to retract. But if, rn 
 matters of fact, such as the assassination of Julius Caesar, such as the 
 death of Napoleon, or the battle of Bunker’s Hill, where the fact is 
 submitted to all the senses^ our senses could not be relied on, there 
 would be an end to all certainty in the world.—Now, when a person is 
 so fully persuaded of such facts as to die in attestation of them, the 
 death of such a person is not only a proof of his sincerity , but of the 
 fact , because it is an object of sensible proof in which there was no 
 possibility of deception. 
 
 The martyr to an opinion, in dying, says: I sincerely think . But 
 the martyr to a fact, in dying, says; I most assuredly saw, or I cer¬ 
 tainly heard. Now the possibility of thinking wrong, even after 
 having thought for years, is quite conceivable; but the possibility of 
 seeing or hearing wrong, or not seeing or hearing at all, when oppor, 
 tunities have been frequent, and every tvay favorable, is inconceivable. 
 
a nr; “• 
 
 ±/LjoA i i.. 
 
 A person who soes an object only once, or hears a narrative only once, 
 can with difficulty be deceived or misled: but where an object has been 
 repeatedly addressed to the eye, or to the ear, deception is not to be 
 supposed. Every man may test this principle, by enquiring how much 
 more certain he is that a friend is dead whom he saw expire, than he is 
 of the truth of any opinion derived from the mere comparison of ab¬ 
 stract propositions. 
 
 It was for publishing facts, sensible facts, and not for propagating 
 opinions, that all the original martyrs suffered and died. Martyrdom, 
 therefore, proves the sincerity of the martyr, who dies for an opinion; 
 but it proves the truth of the fact, when a person dies in attestation of 
 a sensible fact.* 
 
 But so soon as we have rebutted, and I hope refuted, the objection 
 made to the superior credibility of the original witnesses, from the fact 
 of their sufferings and martyrdom, I am assailed by another. Gran¬ 
 ted, for the moment, says some sceptic, that you have fairly made out the 
 fact of Christ’s resurrection, by the testimony of his friends; still, there 
 is a suspicion resting upon that testimony, just from the fact that all 
 the witnesses were Christians.—Let us have some sceptical Jew, or 
 some sceptical Greek, affirming the fact—produce seme respectable 
 Roman author, like Tacitus or Suetonius, who affirms the same fact, 
 and then you may claim our assent with more reason. 
 
 Strange illusion this, which compels a person to reject the better, 
 and to believe the worse testimony.—Now why prefer the testimony of 
 a man who will assert a great practical truth, and not accord with it in 
 his behaviour, to the testimony of another, who espouses the same 
 truth and lives conformably to it. Does the fact of a person’s living 
 conformably to what he testifies, discredit his testimony ? Yet this is 
 precisely the logic of this objection. The man who cries fire, and.sita 
 in the burning house, is more to be believed, than the man who cries 
 fire, and runs out of it! Now suppose Tacitus had said that Je¬ 
 sus Christ rose from the dead, and that he believed it, would he not 
 
 * Mr. Addison regards the courage and patience shewn by these wit¬ 
 nesses under their tortures as of itself supernatural and miraculous. “ I 
 cannot conceive (says he) a man placed in the burning chair at Lyons, 
 amid the insults and mockery of the crowded amphitheatre, and «till kee¬ 
 ping this seat; or stretched upon a grate over coals of fire, and breathing 
 out his soul among the exquisite sufferings of such a tedious execution 
 rather than renounce his religion and blaspheme his Saviour. Such tri¬ 
 als seem to me above the strength of human nature, and able to over¬ 
 bear reason, duty, faith, conviction, nay and the most absolute certainty 
 of a future state. Humanity, unassisted in an extraordinary manner, 
 must have shaken off the present pressure, and have delivered itself 
 out of such dreadful distress, by any means that could have been sug¬ 
 gested to it. We can easily imagine, that any person, in a good cause*, 
 might have laid down their lives at a gibbet, the stake, or the block-*- 
 but to expire leisurely, among the most exquisite tortures, when they 
 might have come out of them even by a mental reservation, or a hy¬ 
 pocrisy which was not without the possibility of being followed by 
 repentance and forgiveness, has something in it so far beyond the force 
 and natural strength of mortals, that we cannot but think, that there 
 was some miraculous power to support the sufferer.” Reporter. 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 4u 
 
 have been enrolled among the Christians? And so of ail others, Jews 
 and Pagans. Tlie instant they believod the fact, they would have cea¬ 
 sed to be Jews and Pagans—-they would have been embodied in the 
 ranks of Christians. So that a little common sensej or a little reflec¬ 
 tion, would have taught such a sceptic in Christianity, that in asking 
 for such evidence, he only asked for an impossibility—yes, an impossi¬ 
 bility as great as to place two substances in the same spot at the same 
 instant. If I could find a Pagan such as Tacitus, affirming that Jesus 
 Christ rose from the dead, and he still continuing a Pagan, I would 
 have said that he did not believe it himself, or else viewed at as an in¬ 
 operative opinion. Nay, indeed, we have infinitely better testimony 
 than that of Tacitus, or a thousand such—for we have the testimony 
 of Paul, and myriads of Jews and Greeks who lived in those times 
 and places, and had access to the evidences; who were as hostile to 
 Christians and Christianity, as any sceptics now can be; and yet, so 
 overpowering was the evidence, that from enemies they became friends* 
 Now, to a logician, every convert made to Christianity, in those days, 
 is a disinterested witness; and a most credible one too. For, if thou¬ 
 sands ofindividuals, and of all ranks and degrees, Niccdimis and Jo¬ 
 seph amongst the Jews, the Roman Proconsuls, the Athenian Mayor 
 Dionysius, down through all the ranks in Judea, Greece Rome, and to 
 the very slaves themselves, embraced at the peril of rank, fortune, and 
 good name, of life and limb, the testimony of the Apostles living in 
 their own times, with all the evidences triable by all the means which 
 we could wish to have had—surely we have disinterested witnesses by 
 the hundred, thousand and myriad. I would not rank him amongst, 
 the sane in intellect, who would not admit that the three thousand on 
 Pentecost, converted to the Christian faith; with all the cotemporary 
 converts, for twenty or thirty years, were disinterested witnesses.—- 
 They were so. Their conversion was a proof of the facts attested, and 
 their changing ranks made them only better witnesses, than had they 
 continued to admit the facts without being governed by them. I hope 
 we shall hear no more about disinterested witnesses, when we have my¬ 
 riads of them ready to obey the summons. 
 
 The hour of adjournment, I am admonished, has arrived. Perhaps 
 Mr. Owen wishes to be heard. Before I sit down, 1 would observe,, 
 that it is due to the community, to the importance of the subject, and 
 to ourselves, that we should bring this subject to a legitimate close.— 
 Circumstances to which I have before alluded, have deprived me of 
 bringing forward say two-thirds of the documentary evidence I expec¬ 
 ted to offer. I do wish my friend, Mr. Owen, to pay the greatest at¬ 
 tention, and to offer every objection be can frame to this argument.— 
 We entreat, any other person present, who hasuny objection, to make 
 ft known, either by word or writing. We do confidently believe, that 
 we are able to demonstrate, that we have not been following any cun¬ 
 ningly devised fable, but that we are compelled, by every rational con¬ 
 sideration, to admit the truth of the divine oracles; and to repose im¬ 
 plicit, faith on that grand fact on which the whole of Christianity is 
 predicated. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 42 
 
 Saturday, 1 Gtli April, 1829— Forenoon, 
 
 Mr. Chairman— 
 
 When interrupted, yesterday evening, by the arrival of the hour 
 of adjournment, we were engaged in demonstrating the truth and cer¬ 
 tainty of the historic fact, on which is predicated the Christian reli¬ 
 gion. I mean the great fact of the resurrection of the man , Christ Je¬ 
 ms, from the dead. We progressed so far in the proof of this fact, as 
 to shew not only the testimony of tiie original witnesses themselves, 
 but also the method in which tiiey argued upon the evidence, and the 
 reasons urged why their testimony should be accredited. The Apos¬ 
 tles, we Saw, presented themselves before the public as the most com¬ 
 petent and credible witnesses, that the world ever saw. They resem 
 bled, in no one point, persons carried away by enthusiasm, or attach¬ 
 ment to opinions; about which honest men might differ; but as men 
 whose sole business it was to proclaim facts , which had been submit¬ 
 ted to the cognizance of all their senses. They do not merely affirm, 
 that they only saw the Saviour after his resurrection. They urge tlid 
 matter, not only as affording ocular and audible, but every other kind 
 of sensible proof. They proclaim that he repeatedly and familiarly 
 conversed with them, for forty days; and that,during that time, he had, 
 by many infallible proofs , shewn himself to be the identical person 
 whom they had seen crucified, and concerning whose identity there 
 could not exist the shadow of a doubt. Their testimony differs, toto 
 celo , from any testimony on the subject of speculative opinions.— 
 Their sincerity is also a sincerity sui generis, of its own peculiar kind* 
 The difference between martyrdom for tenacity of opinion, and for at¬ 
 testation of fact, we have shewn to be immeasurable Martyrdom is, 
 in all cases, evidence of sincerity: in the former case, it only proves be^ 
 lief in, and tenacity of principles: in the latter case, inasmuch as it is 
 impossible for all the senses of man to be imposed upon, there cannot, 
 in the nature of things, be any st ronger proof of the verity of a sensible 
 fact, than to see men dying in attestation of it. 
 
 These men were never accused of any crime, except what grew out. 
 of the pernicious influence which a belief in this fact was supposed 1o 
 have upon mankind. We shall show, from all the annals of ecclesias¬ 
 tic history, that their persecutions originated in a dread of thcrinfluence 
 which the promulgation of these facts was supposed to possess. The 
 sole misdemeanor charged upon them, was their fearless dc^elopement 
 of this fact. 
 
 We have stated that, on the morning of the first day of the week, the 
 body was missing—we have shewn that His resurrection was not anti- 
 cipated by any of his disciples; that there was not an individual in the 
 whole Christian fraternity that had the remotes- expectation of his res¬ 
 urrection. On the contrary, their expectation was that he would have 
 redeemed Israel. This precludes ajl possibility of his friends stealing 
 the body, for they could have no temptation to steal it. 
 
 We must look at the state of parties, at this time, in Jerusalem.— 
 They were divided into the opponents and friends of Christianity.-— 
 Vol. 2. 4* 
 
*2 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 Th ere were no neutrals. The abduction of the body can be accoun¬ 
 ted for only in two ways—1st. His friends must have been the thieves; 
 but to give color to this suspicion, they must have anticipated such an 
 'influence upon society, as that which actually did result from the fact 
 oi the resurrection. But this, it lias been shewn, they never did anti • 
 cipate. If, 2dly, his enemies had stolen the body and had it in their 
 possession, they would have produced it, in order to confound the op 
 posite party. Suppose (hat, on the day of Pentecost, when the influ¬ 
 ence of the fact of the resurrection first began to be remarked, that they 
 .had tden die body in their possession, the bare production of it would 
 have silenced the Christians forever.—The fact of the non-production 
 of the body, by the enemies of Christ, proves, conclusively, that they 
 had not got it. 
 
 The historians say, that the Jewish authorities placed a guard over the 
 sepulchre. When the absence of the body was discovered, the senti¬ 
 nels, in their own exculpation, declared that his disciples stole him 
 away whilst they slept. The story itself was incredible, and the an- 
 thor could, therefore, be no better. 
 
 But, on analysing the natural feelings, both of his enemies and 
 friends, we can discover no motive which could prompt either of them 
 to such an abduction. The whole accumulation of evidence is of 
 such a character, that, in order to estimate the exact weight of it, we 
 must take into view all the circumstances of the case. We have not 
 merely their naked assertion that they had seen the Saviour. The 
 weight of the evidence does not rest merely upon this statement; nor 
 does it rest upon our inability to account for the absence of the body, 
 and its resuscitation; although all the witnesses concurred, yet the 
 proof rests not there. Though these testimonies all corroborate and 
 support each other, still the sequence and dependence of (he facts, are 
 so arranged in all the histories of these times, that the weight of the 
 testimony rests not upon these alone, but upon circumstances of still 
 greater moment, connected with these, viz. the personal sufferings of 
 -he disciples—the devotion of their whole lives to the attestation and 
 promulgation oftiiis fact. This is a very different kind of testimony 
 from that, of a man who should attest any particular fact, when the 
 truth ov falsehood of the fact, could, in no wise, interest him. The 
 concurrent testimony of a thousand persons in proof of any mar¬ 
 vellous nyent, would not be the strongest evidence, if it were not an 
 --event of sifoli a character, as ever afterwards to exercise a paramount 
 influence ovcv their whole lives, and give birth to an entire change of 
 conduct. But the naked assertion is but a small part of the evidence, 
 compared with thb^rinciples which the fact itself necessarily involves. 
 I he twelve Apostle\and many of their coadjutors, who were the earli¬ 
 est converts to Christianity, and some of whom had as fair a start in the 
 race for honor and distinction: these individuals, I say, all go forward 
 in attestation of a simple facty and thereby expose themselves to not on¬ 
 ly the persecutions of the Jews,hut also of the Romans; for they, also, 
 began to be jealous of the Christians. They suffered not only the 
 loss of popularity with their countrymen, but they endangered 
 
DEBATE 
 
 4J 
 
 themselves with the Sanhedrim, and with the Roman authori¬ 
 ties. The motives which influenced them, in declaring this truth, 
 could have been of no ordinary character, since t heir attestation invol¬ 
 ved the sacrifice of every worldly interest. And not only this, 
 but they were assured by the Saviour that, for this very cause, they 
 would be put to death. lie told Peter that this cause would one day 
 cost him his life. 
 
 Peter was not a brave man. He shews himself, in one instance, to 
 be under the influence of the greatest w eakness. He denied his Lord 
 to save himself from persecution. These men were, without any re¬ 
 markable exception, as great cowards as any that are to be found now- 
 a-davs. To be told, in the first instance, that their declaration of this 
 truth would procure their persecution and death, was presenting the 
 matter in such a light as would have overcome their resolution—but 
 when once they had received the knowledge that the Lord had risen, 
 they became as bold as lions. After this, we see Peter and John 
 standing up in the Temple, and proclaiming this truth in open defiance 
 of the whole sanhedrim. Here we see, that the influence of the belief 
 of this fact of the resurrection, made cowards brave. We see the tim¬ 
 id Peter standing up boldly with his associates, men of no address, and 
 with no arm of flesh to support them; yet they fearlessly proclaim the 
 fact. They are put into prison; when released, they go back to the 
 Temple and repeat the proclamation, and travel from place to place, in 
 order to disseminate it far and wide; until, at last, the opposite party 
 began to perceive, that if they did not put forth all their power, the ex¬ 
 isting order of things would be subverted by this sedition. To put a 
 stop to the further spread of it, the disciples were martyrized. 
 
 There is nothing like this, in the ancient or modern world. Herd 
 you see men acting contrary to all the ordinary principles of human 
 conduct—men naturally timid, shaking off their timidity and dying, 
 rather than recant their proclamation of a fact. They did not die for 
 their tenacious attachment, to any speculative opinion, but for asserting 
 that they had seen their crucified Saviour risen from the dead, &c.—* 
 Having received those proofs, they risqued and sacrificed life in order 
 to attest and to promulgate the fact. The weight of the testimony 
 does not consist in any of these circumstances alone, but in the whole 
 body of the evidence, taken in connexion with its inseparable ad¬ 
 juncts. 
 
 But we are not yet done with the proofs. There is no other histori¬ 
 cal fact of equal antiquity, that can be supported by one thousandth 
 part of the-testimony that this is. There is no principle or criterion of 
 evidence, but what is to be found in this attestation. Even experi¬ 
 ence contributes its share to make this matter of fact more clear, than 
 any other historic fact to be found in the annals of antiquity. 
 
 There now exists the institution of a day consecrated to the com¬ 
 memoration of the resurrection of Jesus. We are not aware of the 
 peculiar force of this institution. Had there been no weekly appro¬ 
 priation of time before the resurrection of Jesus, the commencement of 
 such an appropriation would be an irrefragable monument of the event. 
 
44 
 
 DEBATE 
 
 But still it is attended with more force than usually accompanies a new 
 institution. There was the abolition of the seventh day among the 
 first converts, as well as the appointment of the first. The seventh 
 day was observed from Abraham’s time, nay, from the creation. The 
 Jews identified their own history with the institution of the Sabbath 
 day. They loved and venerated it as a patriarchal usage. But it was 
 not primarily observed on that account—for it was given to them as a 
 part of their national compact. You will find the Lord enjoins the 
 Sabbath day upon them with this preface—“ I brought you out of the 
 land of bondage —therefore keep the Sabbath holy.” The observance 
 of this day, therefore, is not so much to be regarded as an usage deri¬ 
 ved from the patriarchs, as a divine national institution, intended to per¬ 
 petuate the memory of that -wonderful deliverance, which the Lord had 
 wrought out for them. Here, then, is a nation strongly attached to 
 this institution of the Sabbath day, because their forefathers had ob¬ 
 served it. We well know the powerful influence of ancient national 
 customs. Men love them, nay, venerate them, because their forefa¬ 
 thers .were attached to them. But taking into view the Te-enactment 
 ©f that day, and the making it a part of the national institution, and we 
 find the Sabbath existing in the most powerful force, and sanctioned 
 by the highest authority. Now to abandon the observance of that day, 
 as every Christian did, and to substitute anew day of the week having 
 a different object and view, was greatly more difficult than to originate 
 an institution entirely new—more difficult than to institute it co-ordi¬ 
 nately with the old Sabbath day, so as to perpetuate the observance of 
 the first and the seventh day also. I presume that even Christians 
 have not sufficiently appreciated the import of this evidence. It would 
 have been more easy to have superinduced the first day, and left the 
 seventh day standing, because of its antiquity, and as an important 
 part of the national covenant, than to change the day from the seventh 
 to -the first of the week. For these reasons, we perceive, that it must 
 have been much more difficult to abolish the old institution than to ori¬ 
 ginate a new one. 
 
 You will remember, that, our Saviour was frequently charged with 
 not keeping the Sabbath—how often was he accused of Sabbath brea¬ 
 king: there was no disrespect of the Jewish ritual, so frequently charged 
 upon him. flow did he refute the accusation? Why, says lie, the Son of 
 Man is Lord of the Sabbath day. After his resurrection, he explained 
 this (and other sayings)—and we find no difficulty in understanding a 
 dictum in which we recognize a principle entirely new, which 
 is not referrible to the decalogue, and which, in fact, abrogates that 
 precept of it which enjoins the observance of the seventh day. It was 
 not the seventh part of time, but the seventh day, which was claimed 
 by the Lord in the first instance. The commandment was this:—- 
 ic But the seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” The reason 
 assigned, must be changed, before the day of observance could be al¬ 
 tered. <£ The Lord rested on the seventh day and hallowed it.” We 
 could not substitute the observance of the fifth for the fourth of July, 
 because there exists no rational pretext for it. Net so with regard tc 
 
DEBATE 
 
 4o 
 
 the consecration of the seventh part of our time. But the substitution 
 of tii e first day for the Jewish Sabbath; was as positive an origination, 
 of a new religious institution, as the least of the passover, or Pente¬ 
 cost, or circumcision, or any other part of tire Jewish ritual.—But 
 what distinguished the first day of the week? And why was it set 
 apart ? Solely in commemoration of a new creation. The last Sabbath day 
 was kept by Jews in the tomb; and it was so ordered as exactly to coin¬ 
 cide with that symbolic representation of things which we find in the old 
 Testament. You shall not go out of your house on the sabbath day, you 
 shall rest within your house. Now the Saviour did, through this day * 
 lie in the grave. But the resurrection of Jesus, on the first day of the 
 week, was the commencement of anew creation. Sublime as were the 
 reasons which originally influenced the Patriarchs to keep the Sabbath 
 day, incomparably more sublime, are those which now influence Chris¬ 
 tians to observe it. lienee the institution and consecration of the first 
 day of the week, in Commemoration of the matter of fact that our Sa¬ 
 viour rose from the dead, on the morning of that day, is a positive com 
 memorative institution, in direct attestation of the truth of the matter 
 of fact and of the unspeakable importance of the occasion. This was 
 not an event to be engraven on pillars of marble in order to perpetuate 
 it, but upon the hearts of Christians—for all Christian hopes and joys, 
 must ever spring from it. It is a perpetual commemorative institution, 
 of the birth of immortal hope, of the dawn of life and immortality, up* 
 on the human race. 
 
 Whilst examining the Divine mission of Moses, we remarked that 
 the criteria of the verity of historic facts, were these : That the facts 
 should have been sensible ones; should have been witnessed by many 
 persons; should have some commemorative institutions; and that those 
 commemorative institutions should have been continuous from the in¬ 
 stant in which the facts took place, down to our own time. All these 
 strictly apply to this institution. For we read, in the New Testament 
 history, that, from the day of his resurrection, the Lord himself honor-* 
 ed its weekly return. This was the day in which he was wont to 
 have interviews with his disciples. And from that day until now, all 
 Christians, Jews and gentiles, have celebrated it. To feel the force 
 of the argument, let us place before our minds a Jew, zealous of the 
 law of Moses, standing before a Christian preacher* He is convinced 
 of the fact of the resurrection, is baptized, and thus becomes a Chris¬ 
 tian. In becoming a Christian, he not only rejects the whole of the 
 Jewish economy, but ceases to observe an institution as ancient as the 
 creation, and becomes an observer of the first day for new reasons, 
 and in obedience to a new Master. The revolution wrought in such 
 an individual, is a sample of the power of truth, and of the changes 
 which Christianity made upon whole communities at its first promul¬ 
 gation. 
 
 O # # 
 
 All histories declare, that the observance of the Lord's day has 
 been coni inuous, from the morning of the resurrection down to the 
 present day. All the criteria of infallible evidence, appear in this 
 instance. The resurrection was witnessed by many, the commemoro* 
 
ItEBATE, 
 
 4S 
 
 five institution takes place immediately, and lias been perpetuated 
 down to the present hour. The observance of the first day of the 
 week, has been opposed because the seventh was enjoined in the Jew¬ 
 ish ritual. But.they who argue thus, are not thoroughly converted 
 to Jesus Christ—they have not been divorced from the law—and seem 
 not to regard the first day in the light of a commemorative institution 
 at all. They seem to forget, or not to know, that the observance of 
 days must be necessarily commemorative or prospective: for all time, 
 abstract from this consideration, is alike holy and religious. They 
 certainly live in the smoke of the great city Babylon, who observe the 
 seventh day in commemoration of the work of Creation; rather than 
 the first day of the week in commemoration of the Resurrection of our 
 Lord. But we must proceed to another evidence of the Resurrection. 
 
 Before Jesus had ascended from Mount Olivet, he told them they 
 were not to leave the city of Jerusalem in order to promulgate the 
 resurrection, until they were clothed with new powers, every way ade¬ 
 quate to confirm their proclamation. u Tarry there, (said he) until 
 you be endued with power from on high.” The commemorative day 
 of pentecost had fully arrived. In the metropolis, at this time, tlier 
 was but one hundred and twenty disciples. They were all convened 
 in one place on the morning of that memorable day; that day on 
 which the first sheaf of wheat was to be waved in the air or carried over 
 their heads, as a thank offering for the new Harvest. Mark the coinci¬ 
 dence of time, and the accomplishment of the ancient symbol. On 
 that day, the earnest of the harvest, he commences the new economy;—- 
 that the converts of that day might indicate the immense in-gathering 
 of the nations to the fold of the Messiah. Now, when the day of pen¬ 
 tecost was fully come, that very day, in commemoration of the Saviour’s 
 resurrection, as “ the firstfruits of them that slept,” that first day of 
 the week—while the whole nation was assembled to celebrate this great 
 festival, and his disciples convened to commemorate his resurrection, be¬ 
 hold the sound of a mighty rushing wind is heard, and all eyes and ears 
 are turned to the place whence it proceeded. While they are flock¬ 
 ing from all quarters to this place, in an instant many tongues of fire 
 are seen encircling the persons of the apostles. These tongues of lam 
 bent flame, which covered the heads and faces of these apostles, Xvere 
 emblems of those foreign tongv.es which, in a moment of time, they 
 were able fluently to speak without ever having learned them. Not 
 only the inhabitants of Jerusalem saw and heard the wonders of that day , 
 
 , but persons assembled at this great festival from all the Roman em¬ 
 pire, heard and saw these tokens of the resurrection and ascension of the 
 Lord. There were present foreigners from Rome, Parthia, Media, 
 Persia, Mesopotamia, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia Minor, Phrygia, E- 
 gypt, Pamphilia, Crete, and all the African coasts of the Mediterrane¬ 
 an. There were, of all languages and nations, auditors and spectators 
 of this event. They heard the marvellous sound from Heaven, and 
 saw the tongues of fire. They, moreover, heard the Galileans, with 
 their Galilean brogue, pronouncing all the languages of the world; 
 Speaking to every man. in hrs vernacular tongue, the wonderful work? 
 
DEBATE-, 
 
 47 
 
 of God. Peter explained the matter to them all. He gave meaning 
 and emphasis to the whole scene. u The oracle of your prophet Joel 
 is this day fulfilled. Jesus has been received into the Heavens. He 
 promised us supernatural aid to attest Ins resurrection He nas now 
 accomplished it. Let all the house of Israel know, assuredly, that 
 God has made that Jesus whom you, with wicked hands, by the Ro¬ 
 man soldiers, slew, the anointed Lord or King of the Universe. He is 
 now in Heaven placed upon that throne which governs all, and has 
 received from his Father this gift, as a token of his love, and approba¬ 
 tion ofhis wonderful works on earth, which ho has now exhibited up-' 
 on us in the midst of you.” 
 
 In full conviction of all they saw and heard, as confirmatory of this 
 proclamation, and deeply convicted of tiieir guilt and danger, they ex¬ 
 claimed, “ Men and brethren , what shall we do?” Seeing them deep ¬ 
 ly penitent of their former course, Peter answers their question by an¬ 
 nouncing to them the gospel, or good news, which he was authorized 
 now, for the first time, to proclaim to the nation. He makes his proc¬ 
 lamation in language clear and forcible — u Reform (said he) and be 
 immersed, or as it is in Greek , be baptized every one of you in the name 
 of the Lord Jesus, for the remission of your sins; and you shall re¬ 
 ceive the gift of the Holy Spirit : for the promise you have heard from Jo¬ 
 el, is to you, and your children, and to all that are afar off, even to as ma¬ 
 ny as tiie Lord our God shall call.” They rejoiced that remission could be 
 so easily received under the reign of the Messiah, and forthwith were 
 h&ptized for the remission of their sins, and were filled with all joy, 
 and peace, and good hope; so that they eat their food with gladness, 
 and simplicity of heart, praising God. Now let me ask, what sort of 
 vouchers are these to the truth of the resurrection and ascension of Je¬ 
 sus? Will the wonders of that day, witnessed by thousands of the 
 mpst disinterested persons, nay, many of them embittered enemies to 
 the truth of Christianity; I say, will the testimony of three thousand 
 one hundred and twenty persons, in attestation of a fact happening on 
 the most public occasion, even on a national anniversary , in the me¬ 
 tropolis, frequented and crowded with strangers, from all nations un¬ 
 der Heaven, b© admitted in the courts of sceptics as good evidence! 
 
 I would now ask, what could be added to the cumulative evidences 
 of the resurrection of Jesus? The uncontradicted fact, that the ac 
 counts we now have of it, were written at the times and places alle ¬ 
 ged—the number and character of the witnesses; the sensible and fro 
 quent interviews which they had with him; the length of time lie con 
 tinued with them; his visible ascension into Heaven in the presence of 
 all of them; the descent of the holy spirit, just now mentioned in attes - 
 tation of his reception into Heaven; the appointment of one day in eve¬ 
 ry week to commemorate it; the effects it produced at home and 
 abroad; and the sufferings and reproaches attendant on the publication 
 of it, which terminated only with the martyrdom of most of the origi ¬ 
 nal witnesses. Isay, to all this, what could be added? And yet, 
 when all this is said, but a feeble representation of the amount of evL 
 den.ee and <J.oeumentarY proof, is presented. 
 
48 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 We shall follow the witnesses a iitti© farther. The Saviour rose on 
 the first day of the week. He skewed nimself alive, by many infallible 
 proofs, during forty days. He appointed ins disciples 10 meet vvicii 
 him on a specilied day, on a Mount which lie liad named: they did so. 
 He gave them orders concerning their future course. They asked him 
 a question concerning his kingdom, which he declined answering at 
 that time. He forthwith ascended up, gradually receding from their 
 sight, towards Heaven. They stood gazing after him, expecting him 
 to descend; and might have stood there till the sun descended, had 
 not two angels descended to console them, with the tidings that he was 
 gone to Heaven, never to return until lie came to judge the world.—- 
 They went to Jerusalem—waited for ten days. Pentecost arrived—• 
 the incidents of that day we have noticed. The facts of his resurrec¬ 
 tion and ascension, were then fully proved, to the conviction of thou¬ 
 sands, in one day. But we must accompany them a little farther, and 
 scrutinize their doctrine and their progress. 
 
 The next incident in Luke’s History of the labors of some of the 
 Apostles, presents another marvellous scene to our eyes. Peter and 
 John are going up into the Temple at three in the afternoon ; when 
 ■all the devout persons of Jerusalem assembled for prayer. A notable 
 cripple, more than forty years old, well known to many of the citizens 
 of Jerusalem, perhaps to all of them, because he was every day car¬ 
 ried and laid upon a couch, at the Beautiful gate of the Temple, was 
 in the act of asking alms from two of the Apostles, then ascending the 
 stairs. Peter and John told him to look on them. He did so, expec 
 ting to receive alms, Peter said, silver and gold I have none, but such 
 as I have I give you—“ In the name of Jesus ike Nazarene , rise up 
 and walk” He caught him by the hand. The cripple arose, stood, 
 walked, leaped, shouted, praised the Lord Messiah, The congrega¬ 
 tion arose, crowded out into Solomon’s portico, which held many 
 thousands. They looked with astonishment, first on the cripple, then 
 on Peter and John. Peter opened his mouth to explain this fact to 
 them. He declined all praise, as due to him, for this miracle of heal¬ 
 ing- the power passed through the name of Jesus. He then told 
 them how they had treated Jesus in the presence of Pontius Pilate, 
 how they renounced him and released a murderer. Then he asserts 
 his resurrection—and claims merely the honor of being a witness of 
 this fact. He explains how the cripple was cured; shews them their 
 error; excuses their infidelity, as arising from a misapprehension of the 
 prophets; appeals to their own prophets; shews that Moses had distinct¬ 
 ly pointed the nation to Jesus of Nazareth. In conclusion, he infor¬ 
 med them, that God, having raised up his son from the dead, authori¬ 
 zed them j#;vsZ to announce him to the seed of Abraham, with the assu¬ 
 rance that God would yet bless and pardon them, every one of them, 
 who turned from his iniquities. Here the number of the male disciples 
 is augmented to five thousand. 
 
 They were interrupted, at this time, by the priests and the captain 
 of the Temple guard. The Sadducees disliked this new way of pro¬ 
 claiming the resurrection of tire dead in the person of Jesus, for it 
 
m BATE. 
 
 was irresis table, and like to demolish their whole salt. They impris¬ 
 oned Peter and John. The next day, the whole sanhedrim in the ci 
 ty, many being present who had tried and condemned Jesus, assembled 
 to try and interrogate these two witnesses of the resurrection. Peter, 
 formerly a coward, and constitutionally a coward, rises above himself, 
 and with the utmost courage and confidence, addresses them on the 
 indictment, in the following wordsRulers of the people and sen¬ 
 ators of Israel—if we are this day examined about the benefit confer¬ 
 red upon the cripple, by what means he has been cured, be it know:, 
 to you, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus.of 
 Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God has raised from the dead— 
 yes, by him, this man stands before you sound. This is the stone 
 which was set at nought by you builders, that is become th° head 
 of the corner. Neither is there any other name under heaven 
 among men in which we can he saved.” 
 
 When they saw the boldness of Peter and John, perceived that they 
 were illiterate men, and in private stations of life, they were astonish¬ 
 ed; and recollected that they had seen them in company with Jesus, 
 about the time of his trial; and when they saw the cripple, standing 
 sound and active before them, they were every man silent and con¬ 
 founded. After sending them out of the council chamber for a lit 
 tie, they consulted on the measures next to be pursued. That a sig¬ 
 nal miracle was done by these men, they said, they could not de¬ 
 ny, for it. was manifest to all the citizens of Jerusalem; but to prevent 
 its spreading farther, they agreed to severely threaten them to speak no 
 more in that name. They did so. But Peter proposed them a ques¬ 
 tion which they did not answer to this day—■“ Whether, (said he) is it 
 righteous,in the sight of God, to obey you rather than God? Decide 
 this, if you please.' 5 ’ They threatened them and dismissed them - for 
 because of the veneration of the people, and the publicity of the good 
 deed done in the name of Jesus, they dare do no more than threaten 
 them. 
 
 Thus they proceeded in Jerusalem. Multitudes flocked to the me¬ 
 tropolis from the surrounding country and villages; and Peter became 
 ns famous for his miraculous powers in that city, as Jesus had been.— 
 They imprisoned him and some of his associates; but, the next morn¬ 
 ing, they found them in the Temple, declaring the resurrection and 
 proclaiming reformation. The angel of the Lord discharged their 
 from prison; and now the whole senate are alarmed, and begin to fear 
 that the blood of Jesus would come upon them. “ So mightily grew 
 the word of the Lord and prevailed.” They had Peter and bis asso¬ 
 ciates called before them again. They enquired, why they had disre 
 garded their threats? Peter, in his Christian boldness, replied to tlie 
 charge of having filled Jerusalem with their doctrine in defiance 
 of those threats, in these words— u It is necessary to obey God rather 
 ■^han you.” —his was his apology. But he must do more than apolo¬ 
 gize. He must attest the all-conquering fact. He adds: ‘ “ The 
 God of our Fathers has raised up Jesus whom you slew, hanging him 
 oi\ a tree. IIu» has God exalted at kis right hand, to be a 
 Vol 2. b 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 60 
 
 prince and a savjou^, t© give reformation to Israel and forgivaicg? 
 of sins. And we are witnesses of these things, and the holy spirit 
 also, whom God has given to them who submit to iiis government. 
 Had it not been for Gamaliel the Pharisee , who had some reason, as 
 well as a strong prepossession in favor of the Resurrection of the dead) 
 they would have attempted their martyrdom. They were released, 
 and home they went “ rejoicing that they were accounted worthy to 
 suffer shame for his named 3 
 
 So they progressed, till myriads, of the Jews became obedient to the 
 faith. Even many of the priests were baptized, and the crucified Je¬ 
 sus was worshipped by tens of thousands of those who had once con ¬ 
 sidered him an impostor, or as a doubtful character. The Sanhedrim 
 became more exasperated. The Sadducees are enraged. Stephen is 
 murdered, invoking the name of the Lord , and attesting, with his last 
 breath, that he saw jesus standing on the right hand of God .— 
 Saul of Tarsus, who, at that time, consented to the death of Stephen, 
 afterwards converted, saw jesus and attested it with his blood. How 
 increasing yet the evidence of the Resurrection and ascension of Jesus 
 Christ! 
 
 Persecution dispersed the disciples from the metropolis—the congre¬ 
 gation is broken up: all are dispersed through Judea and Samaria, 
 except the Apostles. They continue where the persecution rages- 
 most—and courageously hazard all in attesting the resurrection. The 
 land of Judea falls before these dispersed proclaimers—and Samaria 
 rejoices in the Lord. But to specify the conquests of this truth, would 
 be to narrate the whole Acts of the Apostles.—Let the sceptics exam¬ 
 ine Luke’s narrative through; his memoirs of Jesus Christ, and his 
 Acts of Apostles; and then reply. 
 
 Were we to follow these Apostles to Gentile cities, we should find 
 them proclaiming the same facts, and we should see the same results 
 attending. In the presence of magistrates, philosophers, and priests, 
 •they narrate the same facts, exhibit the same proofs—and all ranks amt 
 degrees submit to die government of the Messiah. The idols are hurl¬ 
 ed from their seats, the temples are deserted, and no price is offered 
 for victims. Rome itself, is now convulsed, and the Gallileans are 
 likely to fill the imperial city with their doctrine. The Roman wri¬ 
 ters now, we may expect, will notice them, as soon as the Gospel 
 makes inroads upon their superstitions. Here then we shall close the 
 testimony of the authors of the New Testament, and we will enquire 
 what the Pagans have to say about these w T onderful events. 
 
 But I must again remark, how much more attention is paid to the 
 testimony of infidel Jews and Pagans, than to believing Jews and Pa- 
 gansjby those who pretend to be so rational as to doubt the truth of 
 .Christianity. How often have we heard such persons say, “ Produce 
 some disinterested witness , some Pagan, or some Jew, who was never 
 converted to Christianity, who will attest the Gospel facts, and we 
 will believe.” We will believe an incredible witness, and reject the 
 cteJible! We would believe Tacitus, but we will not believe Paul.~ 
 fVet Tacitus assert the resurrection of Jesus, and we will contend r:o 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 51 
 
 longer. Well now, suppose Tacitus had unequivocally said, Jesvs 
 rose from the dead. What would have been our logical conclusion 
 Either that Tacitus was a Christian, or a hypocrite; and if either the 
 one or the other, he would be unworthy of credit amongst sceptics.— 
 For, if he were a Christian, he would be cts.objectionable as Paul or Pe- 
 ter: for these rationaU have no other objection to their testimony, 
 than because it was exparte , or because it was the testimony of friends. 
 Now if Tacitus had said that Jesus rose from the dead,-and continued 
 an idolater, he must have acted the part of a knave or a hypocrite. 
 He could not sincerely believe this fact and continue a worshipper of* 
 idols. His testimony, in that case, would beworth nothing. It is 
 much more forcible as it stands, for he goes just as far as he could 
 go, to continuo a Pagan, and be worthy of credit. The rationals 
 would have us to produce an impossibility as glaring, as to place two 
 substances in the same place at the same time. They would have us 
 to produce an unbelieving Pagan, speaking and acting as, and being, 
 in fact, a believing Pagan. They want a Jew or a Pagan who will 
 speak like a Christian, but who will not act like one. Now as far as I 
 can judge of testimony, I would incomparably prefer the testimony of 
 the person whose life conforms to his testimony, to the testimony of 
 the person whose life and whose testimony disagree. Now if I found 
 the words of Tacitus to differ from his character, I would not rely up-. 
 on them as I do: and taking into view the character of the man, I have 
 no hesitation in saying, that his testimony is altogether credible: and 
 I am sure proves every thing that we wish, and every thing that an in¬ 
 fidel can require.* 
 
 The same'may be said of other Pagan authorities. Taking into 
 view their times, circumstances, and general character, I presume 
 they are all worthy and credible witnesses. Josephus too, excepting that 
 interpolation found in some copies, is a good witness; net respecting Je 
 sus Christ, but many of the facts and circumstances recorded or alluded 
 to in the historical books of the New Testament. But it is more to 
 shame than to convince sceptics, that we trouble ourselves with the tes ¬ 
 timonies of either unbelieving Jews or Pagans. Those who will not 
 believe such witnesses as sacrificed all temporal enjoyments, and laid 
 down their lives in attesting tlie Christian facts, who were above all 
 temptation to deceive;-—so numerous, so well attested by their cotem¬ 
 poraries, for all moral excellence, will never be convinced by the testi¬ 
 mony of Pagans like themselves. 
 
 Perhaps I should place at the head of the list of infidel, Pagan, and 
 Jewish witnesses, the testimony of one Judas Iscariot, a traitor to J,e- 
 sus Christ. The testimony of a traitor is sometimes more worthy of 
 credit than the testimony of a friend. This Judas, as the case now 
 stands, is a better test imony than the combined testimony of the eleveir 
 friends, Judas had long been a familiar acquaintance, and ranked 
 
 * I find that I had given these ideas in my speech, on Friday even¬ 
 ing ; having forgotten this circumstance, I made the same remarks 
 on Saturday morning, and give them a second time as I find them in 
 the report* 
 
DEBATE 
 
 amongst the most intimate friends of Jesus. He wks enrolled among 
 .he twelve Apostles. He had been so impartially treated by Jesus ? 
 that, until the night he betrayed him, not one of the others could 
 suspect that ho would prove a traitor. Now, had there ever been the 
 least reserve shewn by Jesus to Judas, or had he been treated in any 
 way less confidentially than any of the other Apostles, so soon as Jesus 
 told them that one of them should betray him, all eyes would have tur* 
 ned to Judas. To him they would have all pointed. Instead of say 
 mg, one by one, 6i Lord , is it they would have said within them¬ 
 
 selves, it is Judas. He had been, during the whole ministry of Jesus, 
 most intimately acquainted with his speeches and his actions. If any 
 tiling insincere , political , or contrary to the ostensible object of the 
 mission of Jesus, had ever transpired in secret, or if ever there had been 
 njiy conspiracy amongst his followers, to delude or impose upon the 
 nation, Judas must have known it. This must be conceded by all' 
 who have ever read the Gospel histories. 
 
 Now that Judas was a designing, selfish, covetous- and insincere ad^c- 
 herent to the party, must also he conceded. Seeing things going con¬ 
 trary to his calculations, that no immediate gain, honor or advantage 
 was likely soon to accrue—in an evil hour, his passion for gain impel¬ 
 led him to seize the first opportunity of making as much as possible, by 
 way of reprizals, for his disappointment in attaching himself to the re- 
 ' inue of Jesus. He therefore covenanted for thirty pieces of silver, 
 the sum for which J oseph was sold into Egypt, to deliver into the cus¬ 
 tody of the sanhedrim, the person of Jesus. He did so. Now had he 
 keen able to impeach Jesus of aught amiss in word or deed, it is evident 
 he had the disposition and the opportunity; nay, to extenuate his own 
 conduct even in the eyes of the chief priests and elders, it was neces¬ 
 sary for him to make a disclosure; but he had nothing to disclose, 
 save, after a little reflection, the agonies of his own mind. I have, said 
 he, betrayed innocent blood. Heart rending thought! Here is the 
 money: release him. If you have done so, we care not, said the Priests; 
 'hat is your concern, not ours. Now the import of the testimony of 
 Judas is something like the following: 
 
 A. B. is accused of some base or unworthy action. Eleven ofhis 
 intimate friends and acquaintances, all of good character too, are sum¬ 
 moned to give testimony in favor of A. B. They all give him a'good 
 character and exculpate him from the charge. Their testimony, tho’ 
 not the same words, concurs in every grand point or fact. There is a 
 twelfth person summoned, who is known to the court and jury to be 
 at that instant a bitter enemy of the accused. He is interrogated* 
 and deposes—•“ That he has been intimately acquainted with A. B., 
 for years, and that never did he know him speak an unbecoming word, 
 or commit an unworthy action, in any one instance, either bearing up¬ 
 on the accused or any other human being. Nay, so far from that, he 
 has lived the most exemplary life, and his whole conduct has beon 
 nothing but a bright display of purity, piety, and benevolence; and, 
 moreover, adds he, I do not think him capable of an evil word or deed.**’ 
 Now such a testimony weighs as much, yes, weighs more, with the j** 
 
DEBA'm 
 
 S3 
 
 :y' tliait the testimony of many friends, however u^exceptionable their 
 character. Now just such a witness was Judas. I have betrayed in¬ 
 nocent blood,said lie; 1 have been instigated by the devil: my soul 
 has no rest; and peace lias departed from me. For so worthy a per ¬ 
 son as Jesus of Nazareth never lived—release him, or I die. He dies: 
 and though a felo dese , he is a martyr to the truth of the pretensions 
 and character of Jesus. 
 
 We shall now pr&sentto this audience a few extracts from the histo¬ 
 rians of those times, from the edicts of the Roman emperors, and other 
 public documents:— 
 
 « Josephus, the Jewish historian, was cot.emporary with the Apos¬ 
 tles, having been born in the year 37. From his situation and habits, 
 he had every access to know all that took place at the rise of the Chris¬ 
 tian religion. 
 
 “ Respecting the founder of this religion, Josephus has thought fit 
 to be silent in his history. The present copies of his work contain 
 one passage which speaks very respectfully of Jesus Christ, and as¬ 
 cribes to him the character of the Messiah. But as Josephus did not 
 embrace Christianity, and as this passage is not quoted or referred to 
 till the beginning of the fourth century, it is, for these and other rea 
 sons, generally accounted spurious. It is also according to the man¬ 
 ner of Josephus, in other parts of bis History, to pass over in silence 
 what appeared to make against his nation. When he wrote, the 
 Christian religion had made considerable progress, and every thing 
 respecting it must have been well known to him. He had therefore no 
 middle way. It was necessarry either to enter somewhat particularly 
 into the subject, or £o pass it over entirely. To have mentioned it, as is 
 done in the passage in question, would have been to condemn himself. 
 His testimony, then, to Christianity, is found in his silence; and espe¬ 
 cially as he was a priest, is abundantly string. Not having embraced 
 the Christian religion, and, at the same time, being unable to contra¬ 
 dict the facts on which it was founded, or to set them aside, he passes 
 it quietly by. The minute description he has given of the other reli¬ 
 gious sects in Judea, fully proves that his silence was that of design, to 
 which his circumstances compelled him, 
 
 “ His account, however, of the civil and religious affairs of Judea, of 
 the Princes and Rulers who governed the nation, of the situations of 
 places, of the customs of the country, and of the manners of the peo¬ 
 ple, is perfectly agreeable to the representation of these things which 
 we have in the Gospels. In addition to this, he lias given a decided 
 testimony to the appearance of John the Baptist, and also an account 
 of his being put to death by*Herod. The reason lie assigns for his 
 execution is different from that given by the sacred historian; but as to 
 the fact, there is an entire coincidence between them. Ilis words 
 are — u Some of the Jews thought Herod’s army was destroyed of God, 
 he being justly punished for the slaughter of John, who was surnamed 
 the Baptist. For Herod had put that good man to death, although he 
 exhorted the Jews, after having exercised virtue and righteousness to;* 
 wards one another, and having performed the duties of piety towards 
 Vol, 2 . 5* 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 •j 4 
 
 God, to come to baptism. For thus baptism would bo acceptable* te- 
 him, not if they abstained from some sins only, but if, to purity of' body, 
 they joined a soul first cleansed by righteousness. But when many 
 gathered round him, for they were much pleased with the hearing of 
 such discourses, Herod,, fearing lest the people, who were greatly un¬ 
 der the influence of his persuasion, might be carried to some insurrec¬ 
 tion (for they seemed to do nothing but by his counsel) judged that it 
 might, be better to seize him before any insurrection was made, and to 
 take him off, than, after affairs were disturbed, to repent of his negli¬ 
 gence. Thus he, by the jealousy of Herod, being sent bound to Mach- 
 ®rus, was there put to death; and the Jews thought, that, on account 
 of the punishment of this person, destruction had befallen the army, 
 God being displeased with HerodIn this passage, Josephus attests 
 John's preaching and baptism, and the general attention which his min¬ 
 istry attracted, as well as his being put to death by Herod, 
 
 “ Under the Homan government, it was customary for governors of 
 provinces to send to the Emperor an account of remarkable transac¬ 
 tions in the places where they resided. Referring to this custom, Eu¬ 
 sebius says— £i Our Saviours resurrection being much talked of 
 throughout Palestine, Pilate informed the Emperor of it, as likewise of 
 his miracles, which he had heard of, and that, being raised up after he 
 had been put to death, he was already believed by many to be a God.” 
 These accounts were never made public, nor were any similar ones 
 ikely to be published, as such accounts were intended for only the in¬ 
 formation of government Augustus forbade publishing the acts-of 
 the senate. But the above fact is attested by Justin Martyr in his first 
 apology, which, in the year 140, was presented to the Emperor Anto¬ 
 ninus Pius and the senate of Rome. Having mentioned the crucifixion 
 of Jesus, and some of the circumstances of it, he adds—“ And that 
 :hese things were so done, you may know from the acts made in the 
 time of Pontius Pilate.” Tertullian, in his Apology, about the year 
 1*98, having spoken of our Saviour’s crucifixion and resurrection, his 
 appearances to his. disciples, and his ascension to Heaven in the sight 
 of the same disciples, who were ordained by him to preach the Gospel 
 over the world, goes on—Of all these things relating to Christ, Pi¬ 
 late, in his conscience a Christian, sent an account to Tiberius, then 
 Emperor.” 
 
 “ In another part of the same Apology, he speaks to this purpose:— 
 £i There was an ancient decree, that no one should be received for a 
 deity unless he was first approved offy the senate. Tiberius, in whose 
 time the Christian religion had its rise,paving received from Pales¬ 
 tine in Syria an account of such thing as manifested our -Saviour’s di¬ 
 vinity, proposed to the senate, and giving his own vote as first in his 
 favour, that he should.be placed among the gods. The senate refused* 
 because he had himself declined that honor. Nevertheless, the Em¬ 
 peror persisted in his own opinion, and ordered, that if any accused 
 the Christians they should be punished.” 
 
 u These testimonies are taken from public Apologies for the Christ 
 Gan religion, presented, or proposed and recommended, to the Empe 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 56 
 
 ror and senate of Rome, or to magistrates of public authority and 
 great distinction in the Roman empire. 
 
 “Tacitus, the Roman historian, was bom in the year 61 or 62. He 
 was Pnetor of Rome under Domitian in 88, and Consul in the short 
 reimi of Nerva in 97. In giving an account of the great fire at Rome 
 in the 10th of Nero, about tairty years after our Lord*s aseension, he 
 
 says_•“ To suppress, therefore, this common rumour,” (viz. that the 
 
 Emperor himself had set fire to the city,) “ Nero procured others to 
 be accused, and inflicted exquisite punishments upon those people who 
 were in abhorrence for their crimes, and were commonly known by the 
 name of Christians, They had their denomination from Chnstus, 
 who, in the reign of Tiberius, was put to death as a criminal by the 
 procurator, Pontius Pilate. This pernicious superstition, though 
 checked for a while, broke out again, and spread not only over Judea, 
 the source of this evil, but reached the city also, whither flow from all 
 quarters all things vile and shameful, and where they find shelter and 
 encouragement. At first, they only were apprehended who confessed 
 themselves of that sect; afterwards avast multitude, discovered by 
 them: all which were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning 
 the city, as for their enmity to mankind. Their executions were so 
 contrived as to expose them to derision and contempt. Some were 
 covered over with the skins of wild beasts, and torn to pieces by dogs; 
 some were crucified; others, having been daubed over with combusti¬ 
 ble materials, were set up as lights in the night time, and thus burnt to 
 death. 'Nero made use of his own gardens as a theatre upon this oc* 
 casion, and also exhibited the diversions of the circus, sometimes 
 standing in the crowd as a spectator, in the habit of a charioteer; at 
 other times driving a chariot himself, till at length these men, though 
 really criminal, and deserving exemplary punishment, began to be 
 commiserated as people who were destroyed, not out of a regard to the 
 public welfare, but only to gratify the cruelty of one man.” 
 
 “ Such is the testimony of Tacitus, who lived in the same age with the- 
 Apostles, to the principal facts which relate to the origin of the Gos¬ 
 pel, as well as to its rapid progress. He here attests that Jesus Christ 
 was put to death as a malefactor, by Pontius Pilate, procurator under 
 Tiberius; that, from Christ, the people called Christians took their 
 name; that this religion had its rise in Judea; that thence it was prop 
 agated into other parts of the world, as far as Rome, where Christians 
 were very numerous; and that they were reproached and hated, and 
 underwent many and grievous sufferings. 
 
 “ Suetonius, another eminent Roman historian, was bom about the 
 year 70. He says, in his History of the Life of the Emperor Claudi¬ 
 us, who reigned from the year 41 to 54, that “ho banished the Jews 
 from Rome, who were continually making disturbances, Chrestus be¬ 
 ing their leader.” The first Christians being of the Jewish nation, 
 # were for a while confounded with the rest of that people, and shared 
 in the hardships that were imposed on them. This account, however, 
 attests what is said in the Acts of the Apostles, (xviii. 2,) that Claudi¬ 
 us had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome, when Aquiia and 
 
DEBATE 
 
 Priscilla, two Jewish Christians, were compelled to leave it. In the 
 life of Nero, whose reign began in 54, and ended in 68, Suetonius 
 says, ££ The Christians too were punished with death: a sort of people 
 addicted to a new and mischievous superstition.” 
 
 ££ On the foregoing passage of Tacitus, and in reference to the perse¬ 
 cution of the Christians under Nero, Gibbon remarks, “ T’he most scep¬ 
 tical criticism is obliged to respect the truth of this extraordinary fact, 
 and the integrity of this celebrated passage of Tacitus. The former 
 is confirmed by the diligent and accurate Suetonius, who mentions 
 the punishment which Nero inflicted on the Christians,” 
 
 ££ In this persecution Paul is said to have been beheaded. 
 
 “ The reign of the Emperor Domitian, under whom the second pejT= 
 secution of the Christians took place, began in the year 81, and termi¬ 
 nated in the year 96. Domitian made inquiry after tlie posterity of 
 David, and two men were brought before him of that family. u At 
 that time,” says Hegesippus, “ them were ye£ remaining of the kindred 
 of Christ the grandsons of Jude, who was e xiled his brother according 
 to the flesh. These some accused as beiitg of the race of David, and 
 Evocatus brought them before Domitianus Caesar; for he too was 
 afraid of the coming of the-vChrjSt, as well as ilerod.” Of these men, 
 Mr. Gibbon says, “ They frankly confessed their royal origin, and their 
 near relation to the Messiah; but they disclaimed any temporal views, 
 and professed that his kingdom, which they devoutly expected, was 
 purely of a spiritual and angelic nature. When they were examined 
 concerning their origin and occupation,they shewed their hands, har¬ 
 dened with daily labour, and declared that they derived their whole 
 subsistence from the cultivation of a farm near Cocaba, of the extent 
 of about 24 English acres, and of the, value of three hundred pounds 
 sterling. The grandsons of St. Jude were dismissed with compassion 
 and contempt. 
 
 ££ During the third persecution, which began in the year 100, in the 
 third year of the Emperor Trajan, the younger Pliny was appointed 
 pro-consul of Bithynia, a province of the Roman Empire, on the Eux- 
 ine Sea. In that distant country there were now vast numbers of 
 Christians, against whom the pro-consul, according to the Emperor^s 
 edict, used great severity. Being desirous of more full information 
 how to proceed against the Christians, and u being moved,” as Eusebius 
 says, ££ at the multitude of those who w r ere slain for the faith,” he wrote 
 thd following letter to Trajan, in the year 107, which was formerly no¬ 
 ticed, and in the same year received the limperor’s rescript. 
 
 ££ Pliny, to the Emperor Trajan, wisheth health and happiness. It 
 is my constant custom, sir, to refer myself to you, in all matters con¬ 
 cerning which I have any doubt. For who can better direct me where 
 I hesitate, or instruct me where I am ignorant? I have never been 
 present at any trials of Christians; so that I know not well what is the 
 subject-matter of punishment or ofinquiry, or what strictness ought to 
 be used in cither. Nor have I been a little perplexed to determine 
 whether anj difference ought to be made upon account of age, or whe 
 the* the young and tender# and the full grown and robust, ought to be 
 
DEBATE' 
 
 57 
 
 treated all alike; whether repentance should entitle to pardon, or whe* 
 ther all who have once been Christians ought to be punished, though 
 they are now no longer so; whether the name itself, although no crimed 
 be detected, or crimes only belonging to the name, ought to be punish¬ 
 ed. Concerning all these things I am in doubt. 
 
 «In the mean time I have taken this course with all who have been 
 brought before me, and have been accused as Christians. I have put 
 the question to them, Whether they were Christians? Upon their 
 confessing to me that they were, I repeated the question a second and 
 a third time, threatening also to punish them with death. Such a& 
 still persisted, I ordered away to be punished; for it was no doubt 
 with me, whatever might be the nature of their opinion, that contuma¬ 
 cy and inflexible obstinacy ought to be punished. There were others 
 of the same infatuation, whom, because they are Roman citizens, I 
 have noted down to be sent to the city. 
 
 “ In a short time, the crime spreading itself, even whilst under per* 
 secution, as is usual in such cases, divers sorts of people came in my 
 way. An information was presented to me, without mentioning the 
 author, containing the names of many persons, who, upon examina¬ 
 tion, denied that they were Christians, or had ever been so; who re¬ 
 peated after me an invocation of the gods, and with wine and frankin¬ 
 cense made supplication to your image, which, for that purpose, I had 
 caused to be brought and set before them, together with the statues of 
 the deities. Moreover they reviled the name of Christ, none of which 
 things, as is said, they who are really Christians can by any means be 
 compelled to do. These, therefore, I thought proper to discharge. 
 
 a Others were named by an informer, who at first confessed them¬ 
 selves Christians, and afterwards denied it; the rest said they had been 
 Christians, but had left them some three years ago, some longer, and 
 one or more above 20 years. They all worshipped your image, and the* 
 statues of the gods;—these also reviled Christ. They affirmed that 
 the whole of their fault or error lay in this, that they were wont to meet- 
 together, on a stated day, before it was light, and sing among themselves 
 alternately a hymn to Christ as God; and bind themselves by an oath, 
 not to the commission of any wickedness, but not to be guilty of theft, 
 or robbery, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor to deny a pledge 
 committed to them, when called upon to return it. When these things 
 were performed, it was their custom to separate, and then to come to¬ 
 gether again to a meal, which they ate in common, without any disor¬ 
 der; but this they had forborne since the publication of my edict, 
 by which, according to your commands, I prohibited assemblies. 
 
 i{ After receiving this account, I judged it the more necessary to ex¬ 
 amine, and that by torture, two maid-servants, which were called min¬ 
 isters. Rut I have discovered nothing beside a bad and excessive su¬ 
 perstition. 
 
 (i Suspending therefore all judicial proceedings, I have recourse to 
 you for advice; for it has appeared unto me a matter highly deserving 
 consideration, especially upon account of the great number of persons 
 
53 
 
 DEBATE 
 
 both sexes likewise, are accused, and will be accused. Nor has the 
 contagion of this superstition seized cities only, but the lesser towns ah 
 $o, and the open country. Nevertheless it seems to me that it may be 
 restrained and corrected. It is certain that the temples, which were 
 almost forsaken, begin to be more frequented. And the sacred solem¬ 
 nities, after a long intermission, are revived. Victims likewise are ev-' 
 ery where bought up, whereas for some time there were few purcha¬ 
 sers. Whence it is easy to imagine what numbers of men might be 
 reclaimed, if pardon were granted to those who shall repent.” 
 
 To the above letter, the Emperor Trajan sent the following answer s. 
 
 u Trajan to Pliny* wisheth health and happiness, 
 
 u You have taken the right method, my Pliny, in your proceedings 
 with those who have been brought before you as Christians; for it is 
 impossible to establish any one rule that shall held universally. They 
 are not to be sought for. If any are brought before you, and are con¬ 
 victed, they ought to be punished. However, he that denies his being 
 a Christian, and makes it evident in fact, that is, by supplicating to our 
 gods, though he be suspected to have been so formerly, let him be par¬ 
 doned upon repentance. But in no case, of any crime whatever, may* 
 a bill of information be received,without being signed by him who 
 presents it; for that would be a dangerous precedent, and unworthy of 
 my government.” 
 
 a In the above letters, w*e have a public and authentic attestation to 
 the amazing growth of the Christian religion, which had made such 
 progress in the remote country of Bithynia, that the pagan temples 
 were, according to Pliny, “ almost forsaken;” he also mentions that 
 there had been Christians in that country twenty years before. Theix 
 blameless lives, the purity of their religious worship, their obedience 
 to their civil rulers, in giving up what they did not consider to be en¬ 
 joined by Divine authority, and their fortitude in suffering, and steady 
 perseverance in the faith of Christ, are all unequivocally attested by 
 their persecutors. 
 
 “ The Emperor Adrian was born in the year 7G. He reigned 20 
 years from the death of Trajan, in 117. Trajan’s edict being still in 
 force against the Christians, they suffered persecution under Adrian’s 
 reign, although he published no new edict against them. Upon occa¬ 
 sion, however, of the apologies which Quadratus and Aristides presen¬ 
 ted to him at Athens in the year 126, that persecution was moderated. 
 Of Aristides, Jerome says, “ he was a most eloquent Athenian philos¬ 
 opher, and ih his former habit he presented to the Emperor Adrian, at 
 the same time with Quadratus, a book containing an account of our 
 sect, that is an apology for the Christians, which is still extant, a mon¬ 
 ument with the learned of his ingenuity,” This apology is now lost. 
 To Quadratus was ascribed the gift of prophecy, and he is said to have 
 been “ a disciple of the Apostles.” The follow ing is all that remains 
 of the Apology which he presented to Adrian. “ The works of our 
 Saviour were always conspicuous, for they were real, both they that 
 were healed, and they that were raised from the dead; who were seen 
 Dot only when they were healed or raised, but for a long time after- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 £$ 
 
 w£r<f 3 ; nor only whilst be dwelt on this earth, but also after his depar¬ 
 ture, and for a good while after it, in so much that some of them have 
 reached to our times.” 
 
 « We are informed by Eusebius, that <( Serenius Granianus,proconsul # 
 \yrote to the Emperor Adrian, that it seemed to him unjust that the 
 Christians should be put to death, only to gratify the elamours of th& 
 people, without trial.” The apologies of Aristides and Quadratus* 
 presented about the same time with the above letter, appear to have 
 contributed to procure tho following favourable rescript fronr the Em¬ 
 peror Adrian. a Adrian to Manucius Fundanus; I have received a 
 letter written to me by the illustrious Sorenius Granianus, whom you 
 have succeeded. It seems then to mo, that this is an affair which, 
 ought not to be passed over without being examined into, if it were 
 only to prevent disturbance being given to people, and that you may 
 not be left for informers to practise their wicked arts. If, therefore, 
 the people of the province will appear publicly, and in a legal way 
 charge the Christians, that they may answer for themselves in court, 
 let them take that course, and not proceed by importunate demands 
 and loud clamours only. For it is much the best method if any bring 
 accusations, that you should take cognizance of them. If, then, any 
 qne shall accuse and make out any thing contrary to the laws, do you 
 determine according to the nature of the crime; but, by Hercules, if 
 the charge be only a calumny, do you take care to punish the author 
 of it with the severity it deserves.” 
 
 u In the above rescript, Trajan^s edict is not repealed: according tp 
 which, if a man was accused and proved to be a Christian, a President 
 is required to punish him, unless he recant. But in a considerable 
 degree, this rescript was favorable to the Christians. And the perse¬ 
 cution, which before had been violent, was now restrained and mod¬ 
 erated. 
 
 u Besides the rescript, there is a letter of Adrian to Servianus, (hus¬ 
 band of Paulina, the Emperor’s sister,) who was consul in the year 134. 
 
 Adrian Augustus, to the consul Servianus, wisheth health. I have 
 found Egypt, my dear Servianus, which you commended ^o rne, all over 
 fickle and inconstant, and continually shaken by the slightest reports 
 of fame. The worshippers of Serapis are Christians, and they are de¬ 
 voted to Serapis, who call themselves Christ’s bishops. There is no 
 ruler of the Jewish synagogue, no Samaritan, no presbyter of the 
 Christians, no mathematician, no soothsayer, no anointer, even the pat-, 
 riarch, if he should come to Egypt, would be required by some to wor¬ 
 ship Serapis, by others Christ. A seditious and turbulent sort of men. 
 However, the city is rich and populous. Nor are any idle; some are 
 employed in making glass, others paper, others in weaving linen. They 
 have one God; him the Christians, him the Jews, him all the Gentile 
 people worship.” 
 
 66 ft is not surprising that in the above letter the Christians in Egypt, 
 as to their worship, and in other respects, are confounded with the 
 other Egyptians. But the inaccuracy of the representation in these' 
 things does not invalidate the general fact, which the Emperor here 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 authenticates, that the Christians, within a century after the resurrec¬ 
 tion of Jesus, were so numerous throughout Egypt. 
 
 “ Antoninus surnamed the Pious, succeeded Adrian in the year 138. 
 To this Emperor, Justin Martyr presented at Rome his first apology 
 in the year 140. It is inscribed in this manner. “To the Emperor 
 Titus ASlius Adrianus Antoninus the Pious, and to his son Verissimus 
 and Lucius, and the Senate, and all the people of the Romans, in be¬ 
 half of men gathered out of all nations, who are unjustly hated and ill 
 treated, I, Justin, son of Priscus, son of Bacchius, one of them of the 
 city of Flavia Neapolis, in that part of Syria which is caBeS., Palestine* 
 making this address and supplication.” The following 1 are the con¬ 
 cluding words of this apology: “On the day called Sunday wo all 
 meet together; on which day Jesus Christ our Saviour rose from the 
 dead; on the day before Saturday he was crucified; and on the day af¬ 
 ter Saturday, which is Sunday, he appeared to his x4.postles and disci¬ 
 ples, and taught them those things which we have set before you, and 
 refer to your consideration. If these things appear agreeable to rea¬ 
 son and truth, pay a regard to them; if they appear trifling, reject them 
 as such; but do not treat as enemies, nor appoint capital punishment 
 to those who have done no harm; for we foretel unto you that you 
 will not escape the future judgment of God if you persist in unright¬ 
 eousness : and we shall say, the will of the Lord be done.” 
 
 “ The copy of an edict said to be presented to the states in Asia, hi 
 consequence of the above and other representations from Christians, 
 
 still extant. Jt contains a strong testimony in favor of the Chris¬ 
 tians; but as its genuineness is doubted; by some, it is here omitted, as 
 well as every thing among these early testimonies, of whose genuine¬ 
 ness there is the smallest doubt. 
 
 Marcus Antoninus the philosopher, succeeded Antoninus Pius 
 as Emperor, in the year 161. There is still extant a book written 
 by him called his “ Meditations.” In the eleventh book, the follow¬ 
 ing passage occurs, in which he mentions the Christians. “ What a 
 soul is that vrhich is prepared, even now presently, if needful, to be 
 separated 1 from the body* whether it be to be extinguished, or to be* 
 dispersed, or to subsist still. But this readiness must proceed from a 
 well weighed judgment, not from mere obstinacy like the Christians. 
 And it should be done considerately, and with giavity, without tragical 
 exclamations, and so as to persuade another.” 
 
 “ The foregoing passage contains an attestation to the fortitude of 
 the Christians who lived in the age next to the Apostles, grounded on 
 the assured conviction of the truth of that religion for which they suf¬ 
 fered so much. The Emperor was a bigot in religion and in philoso-r 
 phy; and nothing but his prejudice against Christianity can account 
 for his condemning that fortitude which he ought to have approved. 
 
 “ He ascribes the willingness of the Christians to die to obstinacy, 
 and says, that “ a man ought to resign life only upon a well formed 
 judgment, and considerately.” But did not the Christians die in this 
 manner? He says, “it should be done with gravity, and without trag- 
 exclamations*” upon which it has been observed, that “ it is no 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 ft 
 
 a little strange that a Stoic, whose writings are full of affectation, and 
 are all over tragical, should blame the Christians for not dying with¬ 
 out tragical noise and exclamation. If they then called upon Gcd and 
 Christ -if’ they then exhorted their brethren to constancy and perseve¬ 
 rance; if they expressed a contempt of this world and its. fading enjoj - 
 merits; if they spake in sublime strains of the felicities of the world to 
 come; in a word, if they triumphed in death, as some of them did, there 
 is nothing in it absurd or unreasonable, nothing but what is truly ad mi 
 rable. The heathen people around them wanted nothing to make 
 them sensible of it but a better knowledge of the Christian principles; 
 such a persuasion of the boundless power and goodness of the One 
 God,.creator of all, and a well grounded expectation of eternal life.'’ 
 
 Tf, T Tl j 1 it i a! . * j j "? 1 •» 
 
 It will be recollected, that the great persecution against the churches 
 
 h at Lyons and Vienne in France, some account of which has been gir- 
 ' n already, took place under this Emperor, who therefore ought not to 
 
 1 • 11 • j! (Y* * p . -j /-vj -j • . * 
 
 - j , r*'----_- 1 —-- 
 
 have spoken in this manner of the sufferings of the Christians.. 
 
 Marcus’s expressions denote great, uncertainty concerninga future 
 state of existence. He is doubtful whet her the soul, when separated 
 from the body, shall be “ extinguished or dispersed, or shall still sub¬ 
 sist.” He says again , u To what purpose all this?.... You have mode 
 your voyage, and arrived at your port. Go ashore; if into another life, 
 the gods are there; if into a state of insensibility, you will be 210 longer 
 distracted by pains and pleasures, nor be in subjection to this mean 
 vessel.” 
 
 Such was the amount of the speculations of Heathen philosophers 
 respecting a future state; yet, with but few exceptions, they went hand 
 in hand in violently opposing that Gospel, which, presenting to all 
 who will take the trouble to examine it, the most indubitable evidence 
 of its divine original, has brought life and immortality to light. 
 
 To trace this chain of evidence any further, would besupeffluous.— 
 Nothing can be more fully authenticated than what has been brought 
 forward on this head; all of which so forcibly reminds us of what '"Paul 
 * said before King Agrippa —“This thing was not done in a corner” j 
 g From these documents, it is incontrovertibly evident that the estab • 
 Hshmentand progress of Christianity was a Matter of public and gene¬ 
 ral notoriety; that it arrested the attention of all ranks and degrees of 
 men, Jewish and Pagan; that all antiquity, Jewish and Christia?], ad¬ 
 mit the Gospel facts; namely, that Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew’ be¬ 
 came the author of a new religion in Judea, was of the most obscure 
 birth, was famous for supernatural powers; was crucified in, ot near 
 the metropolis, under Pontius Pilate, then procurator of Judea-Uthat 
 this suppressed the cause for a little time; that his resurrection, orWome 
 unexpected circumstance, caused it to revive and progress with uncon 
 trollable power;that immense multitudes in Judea and in all parts 
 the Roman empire embraced it; that the Christians were a virtues 
 patient, and religious people, only censured for their indexible ad 
 rence to the Gospel facts, and unequivocal reprobation of idolat 
 yvhich the Romans called “ obstinacy that they endured every kind 
 
 
 *•. -V 
 
 
‘v 2 . DEBATE. 
 
 ■ . > . f 
 
 >i indignity, persecution, torture and death, rathc-r than to renounce 
 their confidence in- Jesus, and their hopes of future happiness. 
 
 It is also unquestionably evident, that it spread with the utmost ra- ' 
 pidity overall the Roman empire; and in about two centuries after the 
 death of the Apostles, did, in despite of the power of circumstances, and 
 Mr. Owen’s, whole theory, establish itself upon the ruins of all the ’su¬ 
 perstitions of ancient Rome. In whatever fight we view the conver¬ 
 sion of Constantine, whetheras sincere or feigned—(the latter is the 
 more probable)—-it proves that Christianity had won the day in leaven* 
 the minds of a majority of the millions composing this immense em¬ 
 pire, before it had any favor shewn it by the civil magistrates, or had a 
 single legal provision in its favor. From the partial survey which we 
 are now able to take of all the documents before us, with others of a 
 kindred nature, it appears to me, at least, that he must believe a great¬ 
 er miracle than any which Christianity exhibits, because altogether 
 contrary to reason and experience, who can prevail upon himself to 
 think that Christianity is either the ollspring of fraud or fiction; or that 
 it is not, what it purports to be, a religion of supernatural and divine 
 origin. ' 
 
 All sorts of witnesses attest the truth of the pretensions of Jesus 
 Christ—friends, enemies, neutrals—Jews, Christians, Pagans—belie¬ 
 vers, unbelievers, and apostates. But still the pillars are the twelve 
 Apostles. There is admirably worked up in their testimony, more of 
 the constituents of demonstration , than are to be found in any testimony 
 ever exhibited on earth. It is a species of testimony, which, when 
 well understood and carefully weighed, produces a certainty in the 
 mind not inferior to the certainty derived from demonstration. sjjp 
 
 “It is a very singular circumstance,” as one observes,. “ in jbfsCieg- 
 simony, that it is such as no length of time can diminish. If is foun¬ 
 ded upon the universal principles of human nature, upon maxims 
 which are the same in all ages, and operate with equal strength in all 
 mankind, under all the varieties of temper and habit of constitution.—. 
 Sb long as it shall be contrary to the first principles of the human 
 mind to delight in falsehood for its own sake, so long as it shall be true 
 that, no man willingly propagates a lie to his own detriment and to no 
 purpose, so long it will be certain that the Apostles were serious 
 and sincere in the assertion of our Lord’s resurrection. So long as it 
 shall be absurd to suppose that twelve men could all be deceived.in the 
 person of a friend with whom they had lived three years, so long it 
 will be certain that the-Apostles were competent to judge of the truth 
 an 1 reality of the fact which they asserted. So long as it shall be in the 
 nature of man, for his own interest and ease to be dearer than that of 
 another to himself, so long it will be an absurdity to suppose that 
 twelve men should persevere for years in the joint attestation" of a lie, 
 to the great detriment of every individual of the conspiracy," and with- 
 but any joint or separate advantage; when any one of them had it in 
 his power, by a discovery of the fraud, to advance his own fame and 
 fortune, by the sacrifice of nothing more dear to himself, than the rep- 
 /Ration of the rest; and so long will it be incredible^ that the story of our 
 
ifeBATJi, 
 
 Lord’s resurrection was a fiction, which the twelve men (to mention no 
 greater number) with unparalleled fortitude, and with equal folly consi/1 
 red to support; so long, therefore, as the evangelical history shall be 
 preserved, so long as the books are extant, so long the credibility of' 
 the Apostle’s testimony will remain whole and unbroken.” 
 
 But still we cannot dismiss this topic, until we glance at the other 
 two commemorative institutions. For not only is there a commcmora - 
 rathe day, but two commemorative actions, instituted to speak forth 
 the certainty and importance of this event. These are the Lord's Sup - 
 per and Christian Immersion , or as it is often called Christian Bap¬ 
 tismi .—I place the Lord’s supper first; because first instituted, and be¬ 
 cause it commemorates an event prior to those which Baptism chiefly 
 contemplates. Before the Messiah was betrayed, on the night of the 
 Passover, he institutes th e breaking and eating of a loaf, and the 
 drinking of a cup of wine, jointly among his disciples*; as symbolically 
 commemorative of the wounding or breaking of his body even unto 
 death, and the shedding of his blood as the seal of the love of God to 
 man, as a sin offering, or a sacrifice for sift, indicative of the great pa¬ 
 cification; of the reconciliation of a sinful world to the character and 
 government of God . This wonderful scheme or plan of things for the 
 redemption of man, now consummated by the shedding of the blood of 
 the Son of God, was to be adumbrated or portrayed in a solemn com¬ 
 memorative institution, from that moment till the end of time. And 
 so in all the public meetings of the Christian communities on the com¬ 
 memorative day, this commemorative action, this Christian festival, is 
 to be, as it was from the beginning, observed. Not a single first day' 
 of the weak has since transpired, not one week since the first constitu¬ 
 tion pfthe Christian church, without the celebration of the Lord’s sup¬ 
 per. Till the days of Constantine, it was universal in every Christian 
 congregation on earth; and although some churches made the celebra¬ 
 tion of the Lord’s death an annual or semi-annual thing, yet the Ron 
 manists themselves, and some of those called dissenters, have never 
 pretermitted this observance. 
 
 The four grand criteria of Leslie in all their force, apply to this in¬ 
 stitution—the death of Jesus was a public and sensible fact—exhibited 
 in the face of open day, and before many witnesses—the supper insti¬ 
 tuted in anticipation of it, the night in which he was betrayed, has con¬ 
 tinued from that time till the present moment, now nearly 1800 years, 
 and in defianceof«scepticism, will continue till Jesus comes to judge 
 the world. J 6 
 
 After the resurrection of Jesus. and before his ascension into Heav¬ 
 en, his last act is the institution of Christian immersion into the name 
 eftue Fatner, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. He introduces 
 fins institution by avowing that “ all authority in Heaven earth 
 was delegated to him as the Son of man.’^ u Therefore,” adds lie , u go 
 you, my Apostles, into all the world, and convert the nations, bapti 
 zing them into the name," &c. I would not be thought, my friends, to 
 be influenced by any sectarian peculiarity in speaking of this institution 
 * f - rus * J kave given you evidence, at least, that I have no sectional, par -. 
 
DEBATE 
 
 or sect arian feelings in this common cause. I am sorry that the na ¬ 
 ming of this institution in English gives offence to some, 1 choose here to 
 use the Greek word baptizing instead of the English word immersing; and 
 I would not mention this institution at this time, if I could do justice to 
 this cahse without it. But we all agree, and know, and feel, that 
 this commemorative institution is one of the memorials , yes, one of the 
 most important monumental actions in the Christian religion, and 
 what is called the Christian world. For while the Lord’s day com- 
 memoratesWerely the time of the Resurrection, while the Lord’s Sup¬ 
 per commemorates merely the death of the Redeemer—this institution 
 commemorates his death , burial and resurrection —the former indirectly, 
 the latter two—directly, symbolically and explicitly. All Christians 
 know that this was the converting act , or, to speak less offensively, it 
 was the act en joined in the commission for converting the nations of 
 the world. Hence the very place which it occupies, and the relation 
 which it bears to the object and end of the mission, gives great empha¬ 
 sis to it. “ Disciple the nations, baptizing them into the name, or con¬ 
 vert the nations, baptizing,” &c. The active participle, shews its im¬ 
 portance, as much as the words of J esus to Nicodemus, “ Except a man 
 be born of water and of the Spirit , he cannot enter my kingdom” (that 
 was the kingdom which he was about to establish upon this earth.)—- 
 But all Christendom agree in this, that this is the first action , ne¬ 
 cessary to making or forming a disciple. Even some of our brethren 
 are so impatient for its influences, that they carry their new bom in¬ 
 fants to it. All this proves that all Christendom now, as they did from 
 the beginning, esteemed this as the first act , formative of a disciple of 
 Christ; as far, at least, as a profession, or public avowal of Christianity, 
 imports. And why has this been almost as universal as Christianity 
 itself? Because that it alludes to, and commemorates, the great Tacts 
 —the burial and resurrection of Christ. Jesus died, was buried, and 
 rose again. So we die unto all authority and hope, save that of our 
 Lord Jesus the Messiah, and consequently unto sin in this act. We, 
 as all dead persons are, are then buried with Christ for a short time; he 
 for a short time in the earth, and we for a short time in the water. We 
 also rise with'him; he rose from the dead, and we rise from our death 
 unto gin; to walk, and live, and rejoice in a new life. He died unto 
 sin once; but rose released, or “justified by the Spirit from all im¬ 
 putation; so we rise released from sin, pardoned, justified, believing in 
 him as “ having been delivered for our offences, and raised for our jus¬ 
 tification.” So admirably exact is this commemorative institution, 
 which is now, and has been almost incessantly observed, since the as¬ 
 cension of Jesus into Heaven. From the day of Pentecost till now, 
 not an hour, and for ages past, not a second has passed without the repe¬ 
 tition of this commemorative institution, in some way or other. Till 
 the council of Ravcnnah, till the reign of Queen Elizabeth in England, 
 this ordinance was significant of the burial and resurrection of Jesus 
 Christ. For every time that we see a person buried in the water and 
 raised out of it, by the power of another, we see Jesus emblematically 
 buried and raised again. And of the millions who profess Christianity 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 r 
 
 every one, (with the exception of a few Quakers, who understand not, 
 the use nor meaning of commemorative institutions) does actively or 
 passively submit to this monumental action, and publish, without ut¬ 
 tering a, word, to every spectator, the death, burial, and resurrection of 
 Jesus. 
 
 What a wonderfully contrived institution thisWhich by positive 
 acts , which no a priori principles, nor modes of reasoning could have 
 suggested, keeps itself forever standing before the eyes of men. Christ 
 crucified, pierced, wounded, dead, buried, quickened again, ascending, 
 exhibited in all its sacred acts of worship.—fn our prayers, we speak 
 to Him, in our praises we speak of Him, in our positive acts of Wor¬ 
 ship, commemorate Him, and in our moral actions, imitate liim. 
 
 We now proceed to the next chapter of evidence which we propo¬ 
 sed, viz. 
 
 PROPHECY, 
 
 Though both poetry and moral lessons extemporaneously expressed, 
 have been called prophecy in an enlarged sense of the term ; yet, in its 
 restricted and'most appropriate use and acceptation, .the term denoted 
 . the foretelling of things future and unknown. It is, therefore, in this 
 sense, the word is used in the following argumen t. 
 
 The foretelling of future events depends upon a knowledge of 
 them; or of the causes and connexions of things, which, from establish¬ 
 ed principles, necessarily issue in certain results. All men are posses¬ 
 sed of a certain species of this sort of knowledge. They have a data 
 which enables them not only to conjecture, but even to foreknow with 
 certainty what shall come to pass. This data is either the result of 
 experience, of reasoning upon well established principles, or upon tes¬ 
 timony. We know that all the living shall die; that the trees will bud 
 andbiossom in spring; that the moon will change; a comet appear; or 
 that an eclipse of the sym will happen on a certain day. Men of ex'v 
 traordinary sagacity can penetrate into futurity, and sometimes guess, 
 conjecture, and even foretell, upon a large accumulation of probabili¬ 
 ties, certain political events. But still the limitations and utmost 
 bounds of this knowledge, are very narrow; and comparatively few are 
 the events future of which any man can speak with certainty. 
 
 But although we admit that such foreknowledge is possessed by 
 mail y? yet the foundation on which it rests, is not what the sceptical 
 philosophers allow it to be. For if they were to be put to the test, 
 they could not prove any topics or data within the area of the premises 
 from which they reason, that the sun will rise to-morrow, or that the laws' 
 of nature will continue to operate as they have done a single day. Let 
 them, or let Mr. Owen, set about the proof of such a position. But 
 that knowledge of future events which we call prophecy, or which is 
 necessary to the foretelling of future events, is possessed by no mere 
 man, and therefore no man, unaided by some supernatural knowledge, 
 can foretell any future event, except such as we have already defined. 
 For example, no man could have foretold, 300 years ago—that in the 
 island of Corsica, from a particular person there living, would arise in 
 Vol. 2. 6* 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 v \ 
 
 Ou 
 
 three centimes, a man of extraordinary military prowess and political 
 skill, who, by a succession of the most brilliant exploits and victories, 
 should exile an old dynasty from Fiance, raise himself to imperial dig¬ 
 nity, affright the monarchs of Europe, and after having dazzled the world 
 with his success, should, by a more sudden descent and overthrow, die 
 an exile in a remote island of the ocean. No man could have told, in the 
 reign of Queen Elizabeth, that in the colony of Virginia, from an old 
 English family, there would, in less than two centuries, arise a man 
 who should be the firm and undaunted asserter of his country’s rights 
 —and by his counsel and heroic achievements, after a seven years’ 
 struggle, not only succeed in detaching thirteen colonies from the des¬ 
 potism of England, but in establishing a new world of republics, sur¬ 
 passing in the march of intellect, in advances towards national great¬ 
 ness, and in all the enjoyments of rational liberty, all nations upon 
 the earth. No mere man could have foretold such events. Now this 
 is precisely the species of prophecy of which we are to speak in this 
 branch of the argument. Such prophets and such prophecies do the 
 sacred oracles present. But before we open the sacred volume, it is 
 necessary to premise still farther. 
 
 It has been remarked that the existence of counterfeits and hypo¬ 
 crites. is a very stubborn and irrefragable proof that there is something 
 genuine and authentic. No man is wont to pretend to any thing 
 which has not somewhere a real existence. At least, we have never 
 -met with such a case. All pretences prove that something real ex¬ 
 ists. Now amongst all nations there have been false prophets. The 
 Pagans had their oracles, their auguries and their divinations. Mod¬ 
 ern idolaters have their diviners and necromancers. Jews and Chris- 
 —tians alone possessed, and gave the original of this idea. They alone 
 afforded the realities of which these are the pretences. 
 
 Great were the ends, and most important were the uses of prophecy, 
 in *the estimation of the author of the Christian religion. It is inter¬ 
 woven through the whole web. Scarce a leaf is turned in the sacred 
 volume without some prophetic annunciation. For giving to men just 
 views of God’s omnisciency, of his interest in the human family, and 
 of his government or Providence, and for inspiring them with the spir¬ 
 it of true devotion, the prophecies were promulged. 
 
 But all prophecies have one single end in view—Messiah and his 
 kingdom. Whether individuals, cities, tribes-, nations, empires, prox¬ 
 imate or remote ages, are the burthen of the particular prophecies, Je¬ 
 sus, the Messiah, is the spirit and object of them all. 
 
 Had we time, and the audience patience, to go into a methodical 
 detail of the evidences arising from prophecy, we should have taken the 
 following course: V "V- 
 
 1. We should have examined the direct, literal and express prophet¬ 
 ic annunciations of the fates of the great empires and cities of anti¬ 
 quity. Amongst these the fates of Egypt, Tyre, Nineveh, Babylon 
 and Jerusalem, would have merited particular attention. 
 
 2 . The symbolic or figurative prospective institutions of the Jews’ 
 religion... 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 3. The allusive and picturesque representations of double reference 
 first to persons and events immediately pressing upon the attention of 
 the speaker, but ultimately adumbrating and applying to the Messiah 
 and his kingdom, 
 
 4. The direct literal and express predictions of the Messiah and 
 his kingdom, found in the Jewish scriptures—And 
 
 5. In the fifth place, the literal and symbolic prophecies of the New 
 Testament, reaching down to our own times, and to the ultimate fates 
 of all the nations now on earth. 
 
 Such would have been the outlines, were we to go into a general 
 examination of this almost inexhaustible source of evidence, argu¬ 
 ment and proof of the authenticity of our religion. 
 
 Under the first head, we should have read the predictions of the fates 
 of Egypt; particularly the 29th and 30th chapters of the prophecy of 
 Ezekiel, delivered 589 years before the birth of the Messiah, and from 
 • the History of Rollin and the modem history of Egypt, shewn that 
 these predictions, literal and direct , have been fully accomplished ; 
 that, from the most renowned and powerful of the kingdoms of the 
 world, Egypt has become the “ basest of kingdoms and no more able 
 ''•' to rule over the nations’’according to the express declarations of the 
 Jewish prophets. See Rollin, vol. 1. page 213, et sequentes. 
 
 We should then have laid the oracles concerning Tyre before you, 
 as uttered by Ezekiel, chap. 28, 1—21. This great city, who boasted 
 in her strength, wealth, and beauty, and scoffed at Jerusalem, utterly 
 perished, according to the oracle delivered 588 years before Christ — 
 Rollin, vol. 2, pages 30-31. 
 
 Next we should have called your attention to the predictions con¬ 
 cerning Nineveh, as expressed by Nahum, chap. 2. 8, &. 3-1-9. by Ze~ 
 phaniah 2. 12—15.—In these predictions it was distinctly declared, 
 that the Lord would make Nineveh a desolation and dry like a wilder¬ 
 ness . This oracle was delivered by Nahum, 710 years before the Mes¬ 
 siah, and little more than 100 years afterwards it was literary fulfilled. 
 See also Rollin, vol. 2. 43, 44. 
 
 After this the fates of Babylon would have come in Review—con¬ 
 cerning this city we should have read Isaiah 13—1—22. This pre¬ 
 diction was delivered by Isaiah 739 years before Christ, and about 
 200 years before the destruction of Babylon. But on these fates of 
 Babylon, we should have read Isaiah 45-1. Jeremiah 50, 1—and then 
 Rollin’s description of its destruction, vol. 2, from page 102 to 116— 
 Philadelphia Ed. 1825. But these would require too much time. Con¬ 
 cerning Jerusalem we may yet be somewhat particular. 
 
 The predictions concerning the Jews, are so very minute, literal 
 and graphical, extending through the greatest lapse of time, and occu¬ 
 pying the largest number of prophets, living through many centuries, 
 that it is most astonishing that any rational being can examine these 
 and the history of this people, and doubt the inspiration of these 
 prophets. Even Moses, in the 32d chapter of Deuteronomy, gives the 
 whole prospective history, reaching down to times yet unborn. We 
 ■may, perhaps, call -yout attention to'this prophecy. -But at .present 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 Gfc 
 
 we shall pass on, with one or two brief notices, to other ma bds 
 more direct bearing. 
 
 Jeremiah chap. 31, 32, expressly declares that the national consti¬ 
 tution under which they then stood should be vacated, and a new one of 
 different provisions instituted. But, in connexion with this explicit 
 promise and prediction, the Lord declares, that—Sooner will the sun, 
 moon, and stars, cease to exist, than Israel cease to be a nation or peo-" 
 pie before him—Jer. 31, 35, 36. His words are, “Thus says the 
 Lord, who gives the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the 
 moon, and stars, for a light by night ;—If those ordinances depart from 
 my presence, says the Lord, then the seed of Israel shall cease from be¬ 
 ing a nation before me for ever.”—Thus adds the Lord—“ If heaven 
 above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth can be 
 searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel, for all 
 that they have done, says the Lord.”—This prediction is now nearly 
 2500 years old; and the children of Israel remain, even in their dis¬ 
 persion, a separate and distinct people. They have not amalgamated 
 with any nation, nor can they. *'Tis now nearly 4000 years since God 
 made promises to Abraham concerning his seed, which have been ac¬ 
 complished and are still accomplishing. They continue a separate 
 and distinct people; and although the great and mighty empires of the 
 Assyrians, Persians, Macedonians, and Remans, have wasted away, 
 still the seed of Abraham remains a people. 
 
 That the Jewish scriptures which contain these prophecies, read be-. 
 fore the Christian era as they now read, is susceptible of the fullest 
 proof. The version made by order of Ptolemy Philadelphus was com- ■ 
 pleted nearly 300 years before the birth of the Messiah; and thus the 
 Greeks were in possession of these oracles, as well as the Jews. The 
 version of the Seventy Jews was read in all the synagogues of the Jews, 
 where the Greek language was spoken; they Were public property ages 
 before Jesus Christ was born, John the Baptist, or any of the persons re* 
 corded in the New Testament history. No person could.have any mo¬ 
 tive to interpolate them in favor of these persons. They wanted mo¬ 
 tive "as well as opportunity. Admitting, then, that these oracles read 
 before the coming of the Messiah, only one hundred years before his 
 birth, as they read now, no man can with any pretension to rationality, 
 resist the claims and pretensions of Jesus Christ. For he is as ob¬ 
 viously the scope, drift, and termination of these prophecies, as ever 
 did a conclusion flow frorA any premises. Now that these oracles were 
 universally read, by Jews and Greeks, as they now read, ages before the 
 birth of Jesus, is as well established as any historic fact in the litera¬ 
 ture of the world. It was then read and known centuries before the 
 birth of the Messiah, that God had said, that the sun, moon and stars 
 would cease to shine in the heavens, sooner than this people cease to 
 be a nation. No conquest, nor dispersion, then, ever could annihilate 
 their national peculiarities. They yet continue, and if there was not 
 another prediction, this one alone is sufficient to convince them that 
 are not so blind as not to see the force of reason, nor to judge of the 
 weight gf testimony, beyond all rational objection. It would appear 
 
DEBATE 
 
 69 
 
 that nothing is Wanting to gather this people into their own land, but 
 the destruction of the Ottoman empire. This the prophecies seem to 
 indicate. They are ever prepared to return, for they wiil not hold any 
 v real estate in any country in the world. Their expectation is to re¬ 
 turn; and who can say that the evidence in favor of such an event is 
 at all doubtful, or the event itself improbable? “Blindness*’ says 
 Paul, “ has happened to them in part, till the times of the Gentiles be 
 fulfilled,” then all Israel shall be saved, then the Jews shall be con¬ 
 solidated and become the light of the whole world. And so all Israel 
 shall yet be saved. “ For if the casting of them away has been the 
 means of reconciling the nations to the love of God, what shall the 
 restoration of Israel to the favor of God be, but, as it were, life from 
 the dead 1” Then shall the funeral song of infidelity be sung. The 
 destruction of the Mahometan and anti-christian kingdoms, and the 
 restoration of the seed of Abraham to the favor of God, are all that is 
 necessary to the introduction of the Millennium. And that these 
 events are upon the eve of being born, no man acquainted with the 
 present history of the world, nor with the Christian prophecies, can 
 doubt. 
 
 . But that many errors have been committed in certain interpretations 
 of these oracles, we are willing to confess. But what sort of errors 
 have they been? Errors arising from dates rather than from a mis¬ 
 take of the symbols; or from localities rather than from a failure to un¬ 
 derstand the general drift of,them. Prophecy is more like a blank 
 map than a full history. The outlines of the countries and their re¬ 
 lative situation, are accurately defined, but only a few of the principal 
 places are named. It requires a very correct and minute knowledge 
 of the countries, such only as travellers possess, to qualify a person to 
 affix to every place its proper name. Now, in naming the places, there 
 may many mistakes be committed by them who know and understand 
 the outlines well. Such a knowledge of the prophecies all intelligent 
 Christians may acquire who study them: but few can, with perfect pre¬ 
 cision, fix all the dates and circumstances belonging to the accom¬ 
 plishment of many of these predictions—we must always consider 
 prophecy rather in the light of a general chart delineating the outlines 
 of a country, than as a topographical map fixing the locality of small 
 places. 
 
 But I should have observed, ere now, that if we had intended a min¬ 
 ute examination of all the grand items of prophetic importance, we 
 would have paid some attention to the symbolic representations of the 
 ' . Jewish worship and history, as very exactly portraying the advent, 
 mission, and work of the Messiah. This is a singular institution. Tha^ 
 a people should be nearly 1500 years attending to a symbolic worship, 
 not one of them clearly apprehending the import of it, in all its bearings; 
 
 > and that these symbols should, all at once, burst forth upon a nation 
 like so many witnesses rising from the dead, is as stupendous a display 
 of the Divine wisdom and goodness, as any other part of the whole econ¬ 
 omy. ‘ And such was the fact. A hundred incidents, never before un¬ 
 derstood, $1! coincide in their application to Jesus and his kingdom^ 
 
DEBATE 
 
 .sr 
 
 ind exactly concur in illustrating his person, mission, life, death, res¬ 
 urrection, and ascension, as so many commentators. It now appeared 
 that not only the prophecies, but the law itself, was full of the Messiah 
 and a witness for him with a hundred tongues. But all the evidenced 
 arising from this species of prophecy, we must dispense with at this cri 
 sis. 
 
 In like manner* all those symbolic personages and typical cccurren 
 ces which, though seeming to refer exclusively to persons and events 
 of their own times look forward. As the satirist, full of his object, glan¬ 
 ces at it in every person and incident he names—so these prophets, full 
 of the spirit respecting the Messiah, glance at him through every 
 person and event, as though he was the ultimate object continually in 
 their eyes. I say, that this double entendre, or as some improperly 
 call them, double meanings, apparent in many persons and events, must 
 be omitted at this time—and instead of dilating upon those symbolic 
 personages, events, and institutions, we will fix our attention upon one 
 vein of the prophetic mine, and work it with some degree of industry. 
 And here, perhaps, we have raised too much expectation; for so ample 
 are the direct and most explicit prophecies concerning the Messiah and 
 his kingdom, that to set these in order, and pay a slight attention to 
 each, w<nild be more than our present strength, opportunity, and cir¬ 
 cumstances, might permit. But, without further preamble, wc shall 
 begin. 
 
 A brief notice of the. direct literal and express predictions oT the 
 Messiah and his kingdom, found in the Jewish scriptures, is all that wc 
 shall now promise. 
 
 I ought, perhaps, to name seven of his most illustrious progenitor^, 
 who are signalized with oracles concerning him; all discriminating 
 him, and turning the eyes of an expecting world towards his more im¬ 
 mediate parentage, according to the flesh. 
 
 Shem, son of Noah, stands at the head of this list— u Blessed be the 
 Lord God of Shem ” 66 God shall persuade Japheth, and he shall dwell 
 in the tents of them, and Canaan shall be his servant,” But soon the 
 posterity of Shem branches out into numerous and powerful families, 
 each of which founds an ancient nation. Another discrimination be¬ 
 comes necessary. Abraham is marked out, and the God of Shem be¬ 
 comes the God of Abraham. In the seed of Abraham the blessing 
 is now promised. But Abraham has a son by Hagar—several sons by 
 Kiturah, and one by Sarah’ which of these shall be the honored prog¬ 
 enitor ? u In Isaac shall thy seed be called ,” directs our eyes to this 
 branch of Abraham’s descendants. But Isaac has two sons, Jacob and 
 Esau, which of these? u The elder shall serve the younger,” gives the 
 superiority to Jacob. Now Jacohrhas twelve sons—and which of these 
 shall have the honor of giving a Saviour to the world? 66 The sceptre 
 shall not depart from Judah, nor a law-giver from amongst his descen¬ 
 dants till shiloh come, and to him shall nations come” But again, 
 Judah becomes a numerous tribe, and still we desire another limita¬ 
 tion. David, then, the son of Jesse, becomes the King of Israel, and 
 David’s son is to become David’s Lord— but David sings more than 
 

 DEBATE, 7! 
 
 a hundred songs concerning him, which detail his history as if written 
 after u the root and offspring of David ” had finished all the wonders 
 of redemption. 
 
 But the indices that point our way to the Messiah, do not stop with 
 David, they multiply so long as a prophet visits Israel—hence his 
 mother is described as a virgin by Isaiah—-a virgin of the family of 
 David. —Singular prediction.—Behold the virgin shall conceive and 
 shall bring forth a son, and his name shall be Immanuel. The sneers 
 and impious scoffs of sceptics at the nativity of Jesus, had they noticed 
 this oracle, would have been prevented or confounded—let it then be 
 noticed, that 700 years before this child was born, it was foretold that 
 his mother should be a virgin. 
 
 But the place of his nativity, is also clearly and expressly named. So 
 clearly and unequivocally was the place of Messiah’s birth ascertained in 
 the Jewish scriptures, that all the priests and scribes in Jerusalem 
 could tell Herod the place, without a difficulty. “And thou Bethle¬ 
 hem art not the least among the cantons of Judah: for out of thee shall 
 come a Governor , that shall rule my people Israel.” 
 
 But tiie time of the birth and appearance of" the Messiah, was 
 most exactly pointed out. And as this is a matter of great moment, I 
 ^shall just notice the various descriptions of this time, found in the Jew- 
 fish prophets. It was defined by several remarkable characters—ffiSfe 
 chief are: 
 
 1. He was to come before the second temple decayed, or waste 
 appear in the second temple. 
 
 2. He was to come before Judah ceased to furnish a governor. 
 
 3. He was to come while the Roman emperors were in their glory. ’ 
 
 4. And he was to come at the end of a definite number of years, 
 from the permission given to rebuild the temple. 
 
 Concerning the first of these predictions, we have to remark that 
 when the second temple was building, the old men who had seen the 
 first, are said to have wept when they saw the second edifice progres¬ 
 sing, because it was so inferior to that which Solomon built; but, to 
 console them, it is foretold that the glory of the latter house shall great i 
 ■ly excel that of the former. So speaks Haggai, Chap/2. 7. “ I will 
 
 ^hake all nations,” says the Lord, “ and the desire of all nations 
 shall come, and I will fill this house with glory.” “ The glory of this 
 latter house shall be greater than that of the former” Arid why?— 
 Let Malachi declare—•*“ Behold 1 will send my messenger, and he 
 shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord whom you seek will sud 
 daily come fours temple, even the messenger of the covenant whom 
 you delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of Hosts.” So 
 that it is clearly and expressly stated that the Lord would come while 
 the second temple was yet standing—the first temple was destroyed by 
 Nebuchadnezzar on the tenth day of August, 583 years before Jesus was 
 born—and so the second was built about 500 years before the birth of 
 the Messiah, 
 
 [Here Mr. C. moved to adjourn till half past two o’clock P. M.J 
 
72 ' DEBATE. „ 
 
 Saturday Afternoon —April 18, 1829. 
 
 " 
 
 Mr. Chairman— 
 
 When we adjourned, we were shewing that the time of the coining 
 of the Messiah was marked out and defined by a variety of characters 
 that could not be mistaken. 
 
 The sceptre was not to depart from Judah till Shiloh came ; But g- 
 it was merely lingering in that tribe for some years before the birth of 
 the Messiah, for the land of J udea had become a Roman province, but 
 still the remains of the ancient regal power had not been wrested from 
 the hands of Judah. But so feebly did he grasp the sceptre, that it 
 seemed to fail at the crisis when the harbinger appeared. 
 
 The prophecy of Daniel, more circumstantially describes the time 
 in the wonderful vision which he explained for Nebuchadnezzar. In 
 this vision, there was a prospective view of the history of the world— 
 from the time of the Chaldean or Assy rian monarchy down to the end 
 of time. That this vision and prophecy might sufficiently attract the 
 attention, and interest the feelings of all the world, it was vouchsafed 
 to an Assyrian king, and explained by a Jewish prophet. The Jews 
 and Gentiles are both concerned in it. Nebuchadnezzar had the vision 
 and Daniel interpreted it. Thus Babylon and J erusalem attest its 
 truth. In this vision, and the interpretation of it, the four great pagan ^ 
 empires are most accurately defined. The golden head of the image 
 which the King saw, was avowed by Daifiel to be the Chaldean Dyn¬ 
 asty — the silver shoulder.% was the Medo—Persian dynasty — the bra¬ 
 zen body, the Macedonian empire—and the iron legs the Roman env j 
 pire. These were the only foi& empires of the Pagan world which at¬ 
 tained to universal dominion—-they all had it for a time—they were 
 all pagan empires, and exactly delineated in this image. These great 
 empires are represented in the interpretation, as the only empires that j 
 should have universal dominion. The Assyrian began 2233 years be- j 
 fore the birthof Christ, lasted 1400 years,and ended 770 years before 
 Christ, The Persian empire began 538 years before Christ, continued i 
 200 years, and fell 336 years before the Christian era—the Macedoni- 1 
 an or Grecian only continued ten years, it began 334 and ended 324 
 years before Christ. The Roman began 31 years before Christ, and 
 after continuing 500 years, ended A. Domini 476. . , 7 
 
 Now it was distinctly said, that in the days of the last empire, the 
 God of Heaven, would set up a kingdom in the world, which should 
 obtain the universal empire of the world, and that it would break and 
 bruise to atoms every particle of the Pagan governments; and most as ¬ 
 tonishing of all, it would begin without human aid, or it would resem¬ 
 ble a stone cut out of a mountain without hands, which, self-propelled, 
 should roll on, eiicrease, smite this wonderful image of Pagan govern- ^ j 
 ment, demolish it, and fill the whole earth. Such was the imagery of the 
 vision. And was not the Messiah born in the days of the C<esars whq j 
 first formed and governed the iron empire? 
 
 Two incidents in this prophecy, are worthy of notice. 1st- 
 The time fixed for the commencement of this new kingdom of God \a 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 73 
 
 the world: and 2d. That the Roman empire once subdued there should 
 never again be a universal empire upon the earth save that of the 
 crucified King. Now we do know what efforts have been made to 
 build up great empires, and how abortive they have all proved. The 
 most successful effort ever made since the downfal of the Romans, 
 was that made by Napoleon. In the year 1813 he controlled the tem¬ 
 poral destinies of sixty-four millions of human beings; but what was 
 this number to the whole population of Europe, to say nothing of 
 the other three quarters of the globe 1 . Nothing like a universal 
 empire has ever been established since the division of the Roman 
 into ten comparatively petty sovereignties. 
 
 But Gabriel informs Daniel more definitely of the date of Messiah’s 
 birth, and of the commencement of the last great empire. He says, 
 “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy 
 city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sin offerings, 
 and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in an everlast¬ 
 ing righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to 
 anoint the Most Holy. Know, therefore, and understand that from 
 the going forth of the decree to restore and build Jerusalem, unto 
 .the Messiah the Prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two 
 weeks. The street shall be built again, and the walls, even in troublous 
 times. And after three score and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but 
 not for himself; and the people of the Prince that shall come shall destroy 
 the city and the sanctuary, and the end thereof shall be with a flood, 
 and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he 
 shall confirm the covenant with many, for a week, and in the midst 
 of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, and 
 for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even 
 until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon 
 the desolate.” When I have made another extract from Daniel we 
 havfe all the data before us. Chapter viii. 13. The question there 
 proposed is, “How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sac¬ 
 rifice and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary 
 and the host to be trodden under foot ?” “And he said to me, Unto 
 two thousand and three hundred days ; then shall the sanctuary be 
 cleansed.” Now, as the Lord said to Ezekiel, Hi have appointed 
 one day for a year,” and as we find in symbolic language one day 
 stands for a year, we are at no loss in coming to the following con¬ 
 clusions :-r— 
 
 From the time of the going forth of the decree to rebuild Jerusalem 
 until the death of Messiah, would be three score and nine and a half 
 weeks; that is, a period of four hundred and eighty-five or eighty-six 
 years. Seven weeks make forty-nine years—sixty-two weeks make 
 four hundred and thirty-four years—and in the middle of the week he 
 was to establish the New Institution; that is three and a half or four 
 years more. From the going forth of the decree to rebuild Jerusalem 
 to the baptism of Jesus was four hundred and eighty-three years— 
 his ministry was three and a half years, or the middle of one week ; 
 ,;then he was cut off. And in half a week, that is, three and a half 
 VtfL. II. 7 
 
74 
 
 DEBATE * 
 
 years more Christianity was sent to all nations. This completes the 
 seventy weeks, or four hundred and ninety years of Daniel. Now, 
 from the birth of Jesus till the general proclamation of the gospel was 
 about thirty-seven years—which, subtracted from four hundred and 
 ninety, makes the nativity of Jesus four hundred and fifty-three years 
 from the commencement of the rebuilding of Jerusalem, which oc¬ 
 cupied seven weeks, that is, forty-nine years. Daniel then fixes tho 
 time of the nativity; the commencement of the kingdom, or confirm¬ 
 ation of the covenant ; and the ultimate cleansing of the sanctuary, 
 or purgation of the Christian church from antichristian abominations. 
 This last event was to be two thousand three hundred years from the 
 aforesaid date. That is, from the birth of Jesus about eighteen hun¬ 
 dred and forty-seven years. But all that lies before us now is the fact 
 that Daniel gives the whole time intervening from the rebuilding of 
 Jerusalem, after its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar, till the birth of 
 Jesus. 
 
 Now from these premises it is clearly established that the Messiah 
 should be born while the second temple was standing; before the scep¬ 
 tre and a lawgiver finally departed from Judah; in the reign of the 
 Homan Cesars; and four hundred and fifty-three years from the com¬ 
 mencement of the rebuilding of Jerusalem. And does not the event 
 exactly correspond with the predictions? 
 
 But so clearly was the event predicted, and so general was the 
 knowledge of it, through the Septuagint version of the Jewish scrip¬ 
 tures, then read through the Roman empire, that the expectation 
 became general, that at this time some wonderful personage was to be 
 born, who would put the world under a new government. This 
 singular fact show : s that the prophecies concerning the time in 
 which the Messiah should be born were so plain in the estimation of 
 all who read them, as to preclude all doubt as to the time of the ap¬ 
 pearance of the Messiah, But some w ill ask, Where is the proof of 
 the fact that such an expectation was general? I answer, The his¬ 
 tory. apd poetry of Rome prove it. We shall summon some of their 
 historians and the Mantuan bard, to give their evidence in the case — 
 
 Suetonius, in the life of Vespasian—“Percrebuerat oriente toto 
 vetus et constans opinio, esse in fatis, ut eo tempore, Judea profecti 
 rerum potirentur ” An ancient and constant tradition has obtained 
 throughout all the East, that in the fates it was decreed, that, about 
 that time, ^some who should come from Judea would obtain the do¬ 
 minion of the world.” 
 
 Cornelius Tacitus speak's to the same effect when speaking of the 
 prodigies which preceded the destruction of Jerusalem. He says, 
 ^Pluribus persuasio inerat, antiquis saCerdotum literis contineri, 
 eo ipso tempore fore, ut valescerct oriens, profectique Judate rerum 
 potirentur.” That ^many understood them as forerunners of that 
 extraordinary person, whom the ancient books of the priests did 
 foretell should come about that time from Judea and obtain th§ do¬ 
 minion.” 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 75 
 
 From the Jewish prophets, the Pagan Sibyls gave out their oracles, 
 so that the expectation was universal. The same year that Pompey 
 took Jerusalem one of the sybil oracles made a great noise* “that 
 Nature was about to bring forth a king to the Romans.” Suetonius 
 says this so terrified the Roman senate that they made a decree that 
 none born that year should be educated. And in his life of Augustus, 
 he says, that “those whose wives were pregnant that year did each 
 conceive great hopes applying the prophecy to themselves.” “Senat- 
 tum exterritum censuise, ne quis illo anno genitus, educaretur, eos 
 qui gravidas uxores haberent, quod ad se quisque spern traheret 
 curasse ne senatus consultum ad yErarium deferretur.” 
 
 Appian, Sallust, Plutarch, and Cicero, all say that this prophecy 
 of the Sibyls stirred up Cornelius Lentulus to think that he was the 
 man who should be king of the Romans. Some applied it to Cesar. 
 Cicero laughed at the application, and affirmed that this prophecy 
 should not be applied to any one born in Rome. 
 
 Even Virgil the Poet, who wrote his fourth Eclogue about the time 
 of Herod the Great, compliments the Consul Pollio with this prophecy. 
 Supposing it might refer to his son Salomons then born. Virgil sub¬ 
 stantially quotes and versifies the prophecies of Isaiah, and applies 
 them to this child Saloninus:— 
 
 Ultima Cumsel venit jam car minis aelas: 
 
 Magnus ab integro sxclorum nascitor ordo. 
 
 Jam nova progenies coelo demittitur alto. 
 
 Tu modo nascenti puero, quo ferrea primum 
 
 Desinet, ac toto surget gens aurea mundo. 
 
 The last age, decreed by Fate, is come? 
 
 And a new frame of all things does begin. 
 
 A holy progeny from Heaven descends. 
 
 Auspicious be his birth! which puts an end 
 To the iron age! and from whence shall rise 
 A golden state far glorious through the earth! 
 
 Then the poet alludes to Isaiah lxv. 17. “The wolf and the lamb 
 shall feed together, and the Lion shall eat straw like the o.x. They 
 shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain:— 
 
 -Nec magnos metuent armenta leones: 
 
 Occidet et serpens, et fallax herba veneni 
 
 Occidet. K 
 
 Nor shall the flocks fierce lions fear, 
 
 Nor serpent shall be there, nor herb of poisonous juice. 
 
 Then the expiation of Daniel is referred to: 
 
 Te duce, si qua manent sceleris vestigia nostri, 
 
 Irrita perpetua solvent formidine terras. 
 
 By thee what footsteps of our sins remain. 
 
 Are blotted out, and the whole world set free 
 From her perpetual bondage ai)4 her fear. 
 
Tt> DEBATE. 
 
 The very words of Haggai iast quoted are by the po<5t next reier, 
 red to:— 
 
 Aggredere, o magnOs (aderit jam tempus) honores, 
 
 Chara Deum soboles, magnum Jovis incrementum. 
 
 Aspice convexo nutantem pondere rnundum, 
 
 Terrasque, tractusqe maris, ccclumque profundum: 
 
 Aspice, veaturo hetentur ut omnia s«eclo. 
 
 Enter on thy honors! Now’s the time 
 
 Offspring of God! O thou great gift of Jove! 
 
 Behold the world!—heaven, earth, and seas do shake! 
 
 Behold how all rejoice to greet that glorious day l 
 
 Virgil,as if he were skilled in the Jewish scriptures goes on to state 
 that these glorious times should not immediately succeed the birth of 
 that wonderful child:— 
 
 Pauca tamen suberunt priseae vestigia fraudis; 
 
 — Erunt etiam altera bella. 
 
 Yet some remains shall still be left 
 
 Of ancient fraud} ami wars shall still go on. 
 
 Now the question is not, Whether Virgil applied this partly to 
 Augustus, Pollio, or Saloninus then born; but, Whether he did not 
 apply it to the general expectation every where prevalent that a won¬ 
 derful person was to be born, and a new age to commence? 
 
 The Jews have been so confounded with these prophecies and 
 events, that such of them as did not believe, have degraded Daniel 
 from the rank of a great prophet, to one of the inferior prophets ; 
 and others have said that there were two Messiahs to come—one a 
 suffering, and one a triumphant Messiah. But the excuses of man¬ 
 kind for their unbelief are so frivolous and irrational, that they de¬ 
 serve pity rather than argument. It is worthy of remark, however, 
 that not only the Gentiles, the proselytes to the Jews* religion, the 
 eastern magi; but myriads of the Jews themselves recognized these 
 evidences, and bowed to their authority. 
 
 But not only are the time and place of the birth of the Messiah 
 pointed out in plain and direct predictions, but many of the prominent 
 incidents in his life. I once attempted to enumerate the distinct an4 
 independent predictions concerning the Messiah and his kingdom, 
 but after progressing beyond a hundred, I desisted from the under¬ 
 taking, perceiving, as is said by John, that the testimony concerning 
 Jesus is the spirit of prophecy, I will just mention a few incidents in 
 the prophetic communications concerning him. That he should go 
 down into Egypt, and be called back to Nazareth; the appearance, 
 spirit, and mission of John the Harbinger; the slaughter of the 
 infants by the decree of Herod; his general character, meekness, 
 mildness, and unostentatious appearance. “A bruised reed ho 
 was not to break; a smoking taper he was not to quench;’* he was 
 to use no sword, spear, sceptre, nor torch, until he made his laws 
 victorious. He was to make his most august entry into Jerusalem, 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 • 77 
 
 mounted upon an ass; he was to be a man of sorrows and acquainted 
 with griefs; his zeal was to be so intense as to consume and waste his 
 corporeal vigor; he was to be betrayed bv a familiar friend; when 
 delivered up, his friends were to forsake him; his condemnation was 
 to be extorted in violation of law and precedent; he was to be sold 
 for thirty pieces of silver; the money was to be appropriated to the 
 purchase of the potter’s field; he was to be scourged, smitten on the 
 face,' wounded in the hands and feet, laughed to scorn, presented with 
 vinegar and gall; to be patient and silent under all these indignities 
 and trials; he was to be crucified in company with malefactors; his 
 garment was to be parted; and for his vesture they were to cast lots; 
 his side was to be pierced, and yet not a bone was to be broken, and 
 he was to buried in the grave of a wealthy nobleman. All these and 
 many more incidents were spokeii of, recorded, and anticipated from 
 five hundred to a thousand years before he was born. And mark it 
 well, the records which thus spoke of him were to be kept by the 
 lews and held sacred by the opponents of Christianity. So that the 
 documents could not be interpolated. So precise were the Jews in 
 the copies of their scriptures, that as some of the Rabbins assert, all 
 the words and even letters used in their sacred books were numbered. 
 
 I would here introduce a very rational argument, of the nature of 
 mathematical demonstration, showing the utter impossibility of su 
 many predicted incidents ever meeting in any individual by chance* 
 guess, or conjecture; in any other way, in brief, than in consequence 
 of divine prescience or arrangement, ft is extracted from a very 
 valuable work published by Gulian C. Vcrnlanck, Esq. in 1824, page 
 11—13. 
 
 “ Rosseau, in the eloquent and paradoxical confession of faith 
 which he puts in the mouth of his Savoyard Vicar in Emilius, has 
 said that no fulfilment of prophecy could be of any weight with him 
 to prove a divine interposition, unless it could be demonstrated that 
 the agreement between the prophecy and the event could not possibly 
 have been fortuitous. This proof is more than any fair objector has 
 a right to claim, since it is moral probability and not strict demonstra¬ 
 tion which we must act upon in the niost momentous concerns of life, 
 and as reasonable men we should rest on the same evidences in mat¬ 
 ters of faith. In both the wise man will be governed by common 
 sense, applied to the investigation of rational probability. 
 
 “In this case, however, we may accept the challenge of the scep ¬ 
 tic. Where the points of fulfilment of prediction are numerous, it 
 may-be literally ‘demonstrated’ that the probability of such accom¬ 
 plishment having occurred fortuitously is the most remote possible. 
 
 “This argument is put in a practical and striking point of view by 
 Dr. Gregory, of the Military Academy at Warwick, well knov> i for 
 many respectable and useful works, especially on mathematics and 
 scientific mechanics. 
 
 u ‘Suppose,’says he, ‘that instead of the spirit of prophecy breath 
 y more or less in every book of scripture, predicting events relativ* 
 to a great variety of general topics, and delivering besid es almost in 
 
 mg 
 
 th- 
 o 
 
 VOL. II, 
 
 7* 
 
78 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 numerable characteristics of the Messiah, all meeting in the person of 
 Jesus; there had been only ten men in ancient times who pretended 
 to be prophets, each of whom exhibited only five independent criteria 
 as to place, government, concomitant events, doctrine taught, effects 
 of doctrine, character, sufferings, or death—the meeting of all which 
 in one person should prove the reality of their calling as prophets, and 
 of his mission in the character they have assigned him. Suppose, 
 moreover, that all events were left to chance merely, and we were to 
 compute, from the principles employed by mathematicians in the in¬ 
 vestigations of such subjects, the probability of these fifty independent 
 circumstances happening at all. Assume that there is, according to 
 the technichal phrase, an equal chance for the happening or the failure 
 of any one of these specified particulars; then the probability against 
 the occurrence of all the particular^ in liny way is that of the 50th 
 power of 2 to unity; that is, the probability is greater than eleven hun¬ 
 dred and twenty-jive millions of millions to one that all of these cir¬ 
 cumstances do not turn up even at distinct periods. This com¬ 
 putation, however, is independent of the consideration of time. Let 
 it be recollected farther, that if any one of the specified circumstances 
 happen, it may be the day after the delivery of the prophecy, or at 
 any period from that time to the end of the world; this will so indefi¬ 
 nitely augment the probability against the cotemporaneous occurrence 
 ofmerely these fifty circumstances, that it surpasses the power of num¬ 
 bers to express correctly the immense improbability of its taking place.’ 
 
 “It is hardly necessary to draw the inference, which Dr. Gregory 
 goes on to establish, that all probability, and even possibility, of acci¬ 
 dental fulfilment, as well as of fraud, must be excluded. The sole 
 reasonable solution of the question is, that these predictions and their 
 fulfilments can only be ascribed to the intention of a being, whose 
 knowledge can foresee future events, unconnected with each other, 
 depending on various contingencies, and the will and acts of free 
 agents; or whose power is so omnipotent, as to bend to the accom¬ 
 plishment of his own purpose the passions of multitudes, the ambition 
 of princes, the studies of the wise, the craft of the wicked, the wars, 
 the revolutions, and the varied destinies of nations.” 
 
 I would here ask any rational sceptic how he will dispose of this 
 argument? how can he remove this stumbling-block out of the way 
 of his infidelity? bv what logic can he dispose of this document? 
 
 I will now introduce the sceptics to the character of the founder of 
 the Christian religion, as a logician, and give them a specimen of that 
 ratiocination which he exhibited in pleading his cause with those who 
 opposed his pretensions, in the metropolis of the Jewish nation. I 
 will first read the passage as correctly rendered by Dr. George 
 Campbell, of Aberdeen, for it is very much obscured in the common 
 version. It reads thus, John’s Testimony, chap. v. from verse 31 to 44. 
 
 “If I [alone] testify concerning myself my testimony is not to be 
 regarded; there is another who testifies concerning me; and I know 
 mat his testimony of me ought to be regarded. You yourselves sent 
 ro John, and he bore witness to the trudi. As for me, I need no human 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 79 
 
 testimony; I only urge this for your salvation. He was the lighted 
 and shining lamp; and for a while you were glad to enjoy his light. 
 
 “But I have greater testimony than John’s; for the works which the 
 Father has empowered me to perform, the works themselves which 
 I do, testify for me, that the Father has sent me. 
 
 “Nay, the Father who sent me, has himself attested me. Did you 
 never hear his voice; or see his form? Or have you forgotten his 
 declaration, that you believe not him whom he has commissioned? 
 
 “You search the scriptures, because you think to obtain, by them, 
 eternal life. Now these also are witnesses for me; yet you will not 
 come unto me that yoi>may obtain life. I desire not honor from men ; 
 but I know that you are strangers to the love of God. I am come in 
 my Father’s name, and you do not receive me; if another come in his 
 own name, you will receive him. How can you believe, while you 
 court honor one from another, regardless of the honor which comes 
 from God alone? Do not think that I am he who will accuse you to 
 the Father. Your accuser is Moses, in whom you confide. For if 
 you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote concerning 
 me. But if you believe not his writings, how shall you believe my 
 words ?” 
 
 To the captious Jews he thus addresses himself: 
 
 1. “If I alone bear testimony of myself my testimony ought not to be 
 regarded .” This is disclaiming any special regard as due him, above 
 others, on the mere ground of his own pretensions. It was equiva¬ 
 lent to saying: No person pretending to honors and relations, a mis¬ 
 sion and office, such as I pretend, ought to be accredited and received 
 upon his mere professions. No assertions, abstract from other docu¬ 
 ments in such a case, is worthy of credit. Is not this reasonable? 
 
 2. But, waving my own testimony, there is another person whose 
 testimony ought to be regarded . But let us hear the reason why—• 
 some reason must be assigned, on account of which more credit is due 
 to this testimony. The reason is: “ You yourselves sent to John” 
 But in what does the cogency of this declaration consist? You Jews 
 of this city, of your own accord, had formed such a high character of 
 the integrity, capacity, and piety of John the Baptist, as to depute 
 priests and Levitesto him to know what his errand, mission, or tess 
 timony was. His character had convinced you of the reality of his 
 pretensions, and he proved himself to your ow r n satisfaction, as being 
 far exalted above any earth-born motives ©f fraud or deceit. He was, 
 yourselves being judges, a competent and credible witness. Now 
 what did he testify ? Did he not tell you that he was not the Messiah; 
 that he was but his harbinger; and that his fame must decrease while 
 mine must increase; that he was from below, but I was from above? 
 "Why then did you not believe such a credible witness? Or why re¬ 
 ceive one part of his testimony and reject the other? I think , then, 
 said he, his testimony ought, in such circumstances, to be regarded. 
 Is not this also reasonable ? 
 
 3. But he proceeds: “J need not human testimony. I only urge this 
 for your salvation I would convict you upon your own principles; 
 
so 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 and show that your rejection of me is without excuse. John, indeed, 
 was a brilliant iight; and for a time you considered-him an oracle 
 'and rejoiced in his tight. “ But the works that I do” are superior to 
 any human testimony, and these u show that the Father has sent me.” 
 To these I appeal—they are public, sensible, notorious, benevolent, 
 supernatural. Could mortal man have performed them? Have not 
 the laws of nature been suspended by my word ? Have not the winds, 
 waves, demons, and diseases of every name, acknowledged my power? 
 To-these works, only, as proof of my mission, l appeal. They prove 
 not that I am the son of God, the Messiah. They only prove that 
 the Father has sent me. This is all I urge them for; but if they prove 
 that the Father has sent me, then all my pretensions are credible; for 
 the Father would not have sent a liar or deceiver, invested with such 
 powers. Now I ask, Is not all this reasonable and logical? 
 
 4. But again, The Father has himself attested me by his own voice; 
 and by a visible appearance— “Did you not hear iiis voice? Did 
 you not see his form ?” Were not some of you on the Jordan when he 
 attested me when I came up out of the water? Was there not a voice 
 then heard, saying, audibly, u This is my beloved son in whom I de¬ 
 light V You could not mistake the person of whom this‘was spoken; 
 for over my head the heavens opened and you saw the Spirit in the 
 form of a dove, coming down and lighting upon my head. You heard 
 his voice then, and saw his manifestation. But you have forgotten 
 this declaration concerning me! Is not this rational and pointed ? 
 
 5. Once more —“You do search the scriptures and why do you 
 search them? Because you thimi them to contain a revelation from 
 God; you think and acknowledge that eternal life is in them. This 
 is all true; and in doing this, you act rationally, but why stop here? 
 Now these very scriptures testify of me. To them I make my appeal. 
 They all speak of me; and now show me the oracle, prophecy, or 
 symbol in them, which respected him that was to come, which doe% 
 not suit my character and pretensions, and I will find an excuse for 
 you. Now I ask, Is not this conclusive? 
 
 If this be not argument and logic, I never heard any. So reasons 
 the Saviour. This grand climax of reason ends in the prophecies of 
 the Old Testament. But it is not yet finished. 
 
 (>. But adds he, You will not come to me. It is not the want of' 
 light and evidence. You are now unable to reply. Yet you will not 
 come to me that you might obtain that eternal life promised in the 
 scriptures. I know you well. You have not a spark of the love of God 
 in you. Had vou loved God you would have come to me. Your 
 hearts are full of the honors of this world—-these you seek more than 
 the honors which come from God only; yes, this is the secret. It is 
 not argument nor proof, but disposition that you want. You pretend 
 great veneration for Moses. But you do not really venerate him 
 you do not belieye him, for he wrote of me. Now if you do not, with 
 all vour professed veneration for Moses, believe him, how will you, or 
 can yon believe me? If, prejudiced in his favor, you do not receive* 
 lus testimony, how, prejudiced against me, y ill you receive minc 1 ?^- 
 
DEBATE: 
 
 81 ' 
 
 But I tell you, however, I will not become your accuser. Your own 
 Moses, in whom you trust, will one day convict you; for he said of 
 me, that whosoever would not hearken to me, should be cut off from 
 the centre nation of God. 
 
 Such is a specimen of the topics from which, and of the manner 
 how, the Saviour argued his pretensions, and plead his cause with the 
 people. A more cogent and unanswerable argument is not, if I am 
 any judge, to be found among all the fine models of ancient and mod¬ 
 em literature. And let it, I repeat, be borne in mind, that he makes 
 his last appeal to the scriptures and to Moses. Prophecy, then, in 
 his judgment, is among the highest species of evidence, and it is that 
 which, as a standing miracle^he has made to speak for him in every 
 age and to all people. 
 
 But I must notice, while on this topic, that Jesus pronounced pro 
 phoeies himself, which, to that generation, and, indeed, to subse¬ 
 quent generations, speak as convincingly as Moses spoke to the Jews 
 and his predictions have produced, and do produce, upon the minds 
 of a vast community, similar expectations to those produced among 
 file Jews. 
 
 Hume says that “prophecy could not be a proof that the person 
 who pretended to deliver oracles, spoke by inspiration; because the 
 prophet is absent at the time of its fulfilment; he is dead, and it could 
 not prove to bis contemporaries that he was inspired.” This would 
 be true in one case, but in no other; when the prediction had respect 
 to events at a distance; but this is only sometimes the case: for most 
 of the prophets foretold events soon to appear, as well as events to 
 happen after long intervals. We shall find, if we examine the New 
 Testament, that Jesus foretold many incidents immediately to happen, 
 which required as perfect an insight into futurity as events at tho 
 distance of a thousand years. Ilis telling Peter, that, on casting a 
 hook and line into the sea, he should draw out a fish with a stater in 
 its mouth; or his telling his disciples, that, at a certain place, they 
 should find an ass and his master so circumstanced, and that such 
 events would happen on their application for him, required as exact 
 and as perfect a prescience as could have, four thousand years ago, 
 foretold this discussion between Mr. Owen and me. How many events 
 of immediate occurrence did the Saviour foretel, with this additional 
 remark, “'Phis I have told you before it happen; that when it happens 
 you may believe.” Prophecy, indeed, seems designed to confirm faith 
 as the events occur, as well as to produce faith by contemplating 
 those which have been fulfilled. But we shall find that, besides the 
 predictions uttered by the Saviour concerning his own demise, and 
 all the circumstances attendant upon it, he foretold one event of such 
 notoriety and importance as to confirm the faith of one generation, 
 and to produce faith in ai! subsequent generations. This 1 specify as 
 one of great interest and notoriety. This was the destruction of 
 Jerusalem, the temple, and the dispersion of the nation with all the 
 tremendous adjuncts of this national catastrophe. 
 
 Upon one occasion, when the sun was teaming upon the beautiful 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 S3 
 
 gate of the temple, which radiated with all conceivable splendor, when 
 that edifice stood in all the glistening beauties of the precious metals, 
 Costly stones, and the finest specimens of architecture, the Saviour 
 took occasion to tell its fate, and that of the people who frequented it, 
 in such language as precluded the possibility of mistake in the inter¬ 
 pretation. No prediction was more minute or more circumstantial 
 than this one, and none could be more literal or direct. Both Matthew 
 and Luke give us this prediction; the former in the 24th, and the 
 latter in the 21st chapter of his testimony. The complete desolation 
 of the temple to the foundation, to the removing of every stone, is 
 foretold. The compassing the city with armies, the slaughter of the 
 inhabitants, and the captivity of those who escaped, are described. 
 The fortunes of his disciples at this time, with all the terrors of the 
 siege, and all the tremendous prodigies in the heavens and the earth 
 accompanying these desolations, are named. And in the conclu¬ 
 sion the audience is assured that all these things should happen 
 before fort) years—“before that generation should pass away.” 
 —Now this prophecy was written, published, and read through 
 .Tudea, and mentioned in the apostolic epistles for years before it 
 happened; and a general expectation of this event pervaded the 
 whole Christian communities from Jerusalem to Rome, and, indeed, 
 through all the Roman provinces. The allusions to these predictions 
 are frequent in the apostolic writings. It was necessary they should, 
 for this reason: the Jews, as long as they possessed the government 
 of Judea, the temple, and the metropolis; as long as they had any 
 particle of influence at home or abroad, they used it with relentless 
 cruelty against the Christians. The apostles had to succor the minds 
 of their persecuted brethren, and exhort them to patience and per¬ 
 severance by reminding them of the speedy dispersion of them among 
 the nations. So that all the Christians throughout the Roman empire 
 looked for this catastrophe; and so it came to pass that such of the 
 Christians as were in Jerusalem and Judea, about the time of the 
 siege of Titus, fled according to the directions given by the Saviour; 
 and thus not a believing Jew perished in the siege. 
 
 We lose many of the allusions to this event in the epistles from our 
 irrational modes of explanation, and neglect of the history of those 
 times. Of these allusions the following specimens may suffice:—To 
 the church of Rome Paul says, “God will bruise Satan , or the adver¬ 
 sary, under your feet soon”—not the Devil, as some ignorantly sup¬ 
 pose. Adversary in English is Satan in Hebrew. “Get thee behind 
 me Satan,” is a terrible translation of the Saviour’s address to Peter, 
 The synagogue of Satan was only a synagogue of unbelieving Jews 
 adverse to Christianity. “Brethren in Rome, God,” says Paul, “will 
 soon put down the adversary of your religion, he Jews, who persecute 
 you. Yes, their power to oppose you, will soon be past.” This 
 clearly alludes to the expectation predicated upon the prediction be¬ 
 fore us. 
 
 Paul more plainly intimates the destruction of the Jewish power in 
 his first letter to the Thessalonians, written eighteen years before the 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 f 
 
 83 
 
 siege. “Brethren in Thessalonica, you have suffered from your Gen¬ 
 tile brethren such persecution as the congregations in Judea have 
 suffered from their Jewish brethren, who both killed the Lord Jesus 
 and their own prophets, and have greatly persecuted us, and do not 
 please God, and are contrary to all men; hindering us to speak to the 
 Gentiles that they might be saved; so that they are always filling up 
 the measure of their iniquities. But the wrath of god is •coming 
 upon them at length .” 
 
 Indeed, so frequent were the allusions to this prophecy, both in 
 the public discourses and writings of the apostles, that their enemies 
 began to mock them, and treat them as if they had been imposing upon 
 the credulity of their cotemporaries. Hence such allusions as these; 
 “ Where is the promise of liis coming; for, from the times the fathers 
 have fallen asleep, all things continne as they were from the begin¬ 
 ning of the creation.” Thus was Peter upbraided six years before 
 the siege. The old apostle, however, is not discouraged, being assured 
 that he would make good his promise. “Yes,” says he, “they think 
 that we have too long talked of the coming of the Lord to avenge the 
 iniquities of these people. They think that we mock your fears, and 
 they say, ‘The Lord long delays his coming to execute his vengeance 
 upon this stubborn people.’ But, my brethren, the Lord does not 
 delay in the manner some account delaying; but he exercises long 
 suffering towards us, that all might be brought to reformation.” 
 
 In the letter to the Hebrews, written about six or seven years before 
 the siege, Paul speaks to the persecuted Jewish brethren in the same 
 style: “Yet a very little while, and he that is coming will come, and 
 will not tarry.” “Persevere, then, brethren, in doing the will of the 
 Lord, that you may obtain the promised reward.” James, too, in his 
 letter of the same date, addresses both the believing and unbelieving 
 Jews on the impending vengeance. The wealthy and infidel Jew lie 
 commands to “weep because of the miseries coming upon them;” 
 and the suffering Christians he animates with the hope that “the com¬ 
 ing of the Lord is nigh.” Thus do all the apostles speak of this 
 event with the same certainty as if it had actually happened. 
 
 I need not detail the awful accomplishment of this prediction. 
 Josephus has done this in awful colors. Tacitus, too, relates some of 
 the circumstances. Every word of the prediction was exactly fulfill¬ 
 ed, even to the ploughing up of the foundations of the temple. It is 
 remarkable that, on the tenth day of August, tfie very same day the 
 temple and city were laid waste by the Babylonians, the temple was 
 burned by Titus’ army.* 
 
 *1 have read somewhere, that, before the temple was burned, Titus entered 
 the temple, got out some of the sacred utensils, among which were the golden 
 Candlestick and the table of the showbread These he carried as trophies home 
 to Rome;, and on the triumphal arch which was raised for him in the city of 
 Rome, this candlestick and table were carved upon it. This triumphant arch 
 yet stands; and even yet the Jews who now visit Rome will not pass under it. 
 There is a side-walk and a gate through which the Jews pass. So deeply root¬ 
 ed is the remembrance of this indignity upon their religion and nation, that: 
 eighteen centuries have not obliterated it! 
 
$4 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 f 
 
 I shall only give you another specimen of the prophetic spirit of the 
 New Testament writers. Paul, in his letter to the Thessalonians, 
 intimates that some persons had suggested that the end of the world 
 was at hand. To counteract such an idea, which seemed to have 
 influenced some to abandon the ordinary besiness of this life, he gives 
 us a succinct view of the great series of events which were to come 
 to pass before the end of the world. He describes a tremendous 
 apostacy , in 2d Thessalonians, chap. ii. v. 1—10. 
 
 “Now we beseech you brethren, concerning the coming of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together around him; that you 
 be not soon shaken from your purpose, nor troubled, neither by spirit nor 
 by word, nor by letter from us, intimating that the day of Christ is 
 at hand. Let no man deceive you by any method; for that day shall 
 not come, unless there come the apostacy first, and there be revealed 
 that man of sin, that son of perdition; who opposes and exalts him¬ 
 self above every one who is called a god, or an object of worship. So 
 that he, in the temple of God, as a god sitteth openly showing him¬ 
 self that he is a god. Do you not remember, that when I was with 
 you, I told you these things? And you know what now restrains 
 him in order to his being revealed in his own season. For the secret, 
 of iniquity already inwardly works, only till he who now restrains be 
 taken out of the way. And then shall be revealed that lawless one; 
 him the Lord will consume by the breath of his mouth, and will 
 render ineffectual, by the brightness of his coming; of whom the 
 coming is after the strong working of Satan, with all power and signs, 
 and miracles of falsehood. And with all the deceit of unrighteous¬ 
 ness, among them who perish, because they embraced not the love of 
 the truth that they might be saved.” 
 
 On this obser ve that the apostle declares that, in the great drama of 
 human existence, the end of the world could not come until after the 
 apostacy. This apostacy he describes as beginning to work in the 
 first age of Christianity, but that it could not succeed in attaining its 
 full vio-or until Pagan Rome should yield to Christian Rome. Until 
 he that sat upon the throne and supported the Pagan superstition, 
 should be supplanted and succeeded by a Christian emperor, in plain 
 English. Then, says he, will come forth that lawless one, who will 
 usurp the honors of God alone, in his dominion over the faith and the 
 consciences of men. I will be interrogated here by the short-sighted 
 sceptics, how it came to pass that a scheme so benevolent as the Chris¬ 
 tian scheme, if designed by a benevolent and wise being, could so 
 far have missed its aim? How strange is it, say they, if Christianity 
 ©riginated in divine benevolence, that there should be such a scene 
 in the great drama as this long night of apostacy and darkness! And 
 I reply, how strange is it that this terraqueous globe, created by a wise 
 and benevolent being, should be three fourths covered with im¬ 
 mense oceans; ard of the remaining one fourth so large a portion of 
 mountains and fens, deserts asd morasses. One part of it parched 
 with an arid sky; and another locked up in relentless ice! Short 
 sighted mortal® that we axe! and yet we will scan the universe!— 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 f 
 
 8h 
 
 Could not the earth have been a thousand times more fruitful! nay ; 
 co ild it not have been a thousand times more comfortable to li. e in! 
 Xvlipht we not have had loaves growing upon the trees, and wine in 
 bottles hanging upon the vines, and thus have been exempted from so 
 much labor, and toil, and care!! In this way we might object to 
 every thing in the universe. 
 
 I have, for years., contended that the hand writing Gf God can be 
 proved. And can we not, even under oath, attest the hand writing 
 of some men? Men have their peculiarities which will always de¬ 
 signate them from the whole species. No two men write, speak, or walk 
 alike. They are as distinct in each as in the features of their counten¬ 
 ances, and the constitution of their minds. Each has an idiosyncrasy 
 of mind, an idiomatic style, as well as a peculiar chirography. 
 
 No man who has accurately analyzed the few general principles 
 which govern the universe, and examined the poisons and sweets 
 which are strewed with so much liberality over the face of the globe; 
 who has explored the regularities and incongruities which appear 
 above and beneath, Can doubt that the mind which originated the 
 harmonies, the beauties, the sweets, and all the blessings of nature, 
 originated also their contraries—and that it is the same wisdom and 
 benevolence working in the natural and moral empires of the uni¬ 
 verse. They both exhibit the impress of the same hand; 
 
 We cannot give a fair view of the next item on the genius and 
 spirit of Christianity, unless we enlarge a little more upon this. We 
 must glance at the design of the Jewish religion. In the logical 
 arrangement of all subjects much depends upon taking hold of a few 
 general principles. Generalizing is not only the most improving 
 exercise of the mind, but the best means of knowing things in the 
 detail. This is that power which, in a great degree, distinguishes 
 the vigorous and well disciplined mind, from that of inferior calibre 
 and cultivation. If it were possible to present a general synthetic 
 view, without a previous analysis, we would prefer it: for the only 
 utility of analysis is to put us in possession of synthetic views. 
 
 There is an error into which we are all apt to fall, in attempting to 
 scan the moral government of the world. We do not like to be kept 
 in suspense. Rather than remain in suspense we will be satisfied 
 with very incorrect or partial views of things. There is nothing 
 more uncomfortable than a state of suspense upon any subject which 
 interests us. Our views are alwa 3 "s partial at best, but much more 
 so when we have not put ourselves to the trouble to analyze, with 
 patience, the whole data presented. 
 
 When I hear persons cavilling at the present state of things, and 
 objacting to matters which they do not understand, I figure to myself 
 a nerson stationed in a small room, say ten feet square, before which 
 is passing continually a map ten thousand square miles in extent; ten 
 fact of which only, at a time, can be seen through an opening in one 
 « de. In this small room he sits and peruses this map for seventy 
 years. For many weeks at a time he sees nothing but immense 
 oceans of water; then apparently boundless forests; then prodigious 
 yoE. ii f 8 
 
80 
 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 chains of mountains; then deserts, flats, wastes, and wildernesses. 
 Here and there a succession of beautiful country passes before his 
 eyes. After contemplating this map for seventy years, he exclaims, 
 What an irrational, ill conducted, and incongruous looking thing is 
 this! I have seen forests, deserts, and oceans, interspersed here 
 and there with some small specks of beautiful country. I must con¬ 
 clude that the Creator of this planet was either unwise or not benevo¬ 
 lent. But, suppose, that on a sudden the walls of his cottage fell 
 down, and his vision was enlarged and strengthened so as to compre¬ 
 hend, in one glance, the whole sweep of ten thousand square miles; 
 what a wonderful revolution would he undergo! Infinite wisdom and 
 design now appear, where before he saw nothing but confusion and 
 deformity. So it is with him who sits judging on the moral govern¬ 
 ment of the world. 
 
 We have but a small part of the picture before us. Paul explains 
 the whole of it. He teaches us that this world is, in the moral empire, 
 what it is in the natural—a part of a great whoje. When speaking of 
 all the irregularities in human lot, and all the diversities in the divine 
 government in the different ages of the world, Patriarchal, Jewish, 
 and Christian, he teaches us that the whole of this arrangement is 
 subordinate to another state of things, having relation to the whole 
 rational universe. All this is done, said he, that now unto the 
 thrones, principalities, and powers, in the heavenly regions, might 
 be exhibited, by the Christian scheme, the manifold wisdom of God. 
 There are various grades of intelligent beings, who, in their differ- 
 eapacities, and according to their different situations and relations, 
 are contemplating this scene of things; and from these volumes of 
 human nature the divine character is continually developing itself to 
 their view. 
 
 Yes, my friends, your various lots, capacities, and opportunities; 
 and your respective behaviour under these varieties, with the divine 
 economy over you, are furnishing new essays to be read in other 
 worlds. You are all but different letters; some capital, some small 
 letters, some mere abbreviations, commas, semicolons, colons, peri¬ 
 ods, notes of admiration, notes of interrogation, and dashes; all 
 making sense when wisely combined—But when jumbled together, 
 or separated, you are unintelligible and uninstructive to yourselves 
 and all other intelligent beings. Angels read men, and by and by 
 men will read angels, to learn the Deity, In the rational delights and 
 entertainments of heaven you and they will read each other. Gabriel 
 will tell you what were his emotions when first he saw the sun open 
 his eyes and smile upon the new born earth; what he thought when 
 he shut up Noah in the ark and opened the windows of heaven and 
 the fountains of the deep. Yes, Raphael will tell you with what 
 astonishment he saw Eve put forth her hand to the tree of knowledge 
 of good and evil. Gabriel will relate his joy when he saw the rain¬ 
 bow of peace span the vault of heaven in token of no more deluge. 
 He will give you to know what were his emotions when sent to salute 
 the mother of our Lord; and all the multitude will rehearse the song 
 
DEBAT& 
 
 $7 
 
 they sung the night they visited the shepherds of Bethlehem. In 
 turn you will tell them your first thoughts of God and his love; your 
 own feelings as sinners; the agonies of sorrow and grief which once 
 you felt; and how you met the king of terrors. Then will all the 
 shades in the picture appear to proper advantage, and the seraphim 
 and cherubim with their wings no more will hide their faces from man. 
 All happiness, rational, human, or angelic happiness, springs from 
 the knowledge of God. As it is now eternal life, so it will then be 
 eternal happiness to know thee the only true God, and Jesus the Mes* 
 siah, thy Apostle. 
 
 A veil is yet on the face of Moses, and, indeed, on the face of 
 many of the conspicuous characters of antiquity, in the views of 
 many of our sectarian dogmatists. Some think that Abraham, Isaac, 
 and Jacob, were called, chosen, and elected, for their own sakes. 
 They seem not yet to have learned this important lesson, that there 
 never has as yet been one human being selected by the Almighty for 
 his own sake. If it were necessary that the Messiah should enter 
 our world, it was necessary that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, 
 Aaron, David, Daniel, and a thousand others, should have been 
 selected from the family of man, and discriminated by the Great 
 king as they were. On this one principle the religions of the Jews 
 and Christians are altogether reconcileable. They mutually explain 
 each other. They are but the portico and holy place, leading to the 
 holiest of all. 
 
 The calling and congregating of the Jews were for the same intent, 
 and as relative to the general good of all nations as was the calling of 
 Abraham, or the first promise of a Redeemer to the human race. 
 They must be put under a special arrangement for developing the 
 divine character and government, and for giving us a few lessons upon 
 human nature which never could have been taught by any other 
 means. 
 
 What does the Lord say concerning Pharaoh? “I have raised thee 
 up for this purpose that in your history and my government over you, 
 my nctme might be known through all the earth.” The localities and 
 symbols of the Jewish religion made it entirely subordinate to the 
 Christian; but the genius and spirit of the latter is universal, or adapt¬ 
 ed to the whole human family irrespective of all localities. But this 
 only by the way. My remarks upon the apostacy gave rise to this 
 disquisition, or rather an objection which we saw rising in the faces 
 ot some, constrained me to take this course, and to attempt to give 
 some general hints which I trust may repress that restive spirit of 
 scepticism, which, like the demoniac among the tombs, is cutting 
 *tself to pieces when pretending to forsake the haunts of the living 
 for its own safety. 
 
 In one sentence, it appears to be a law of human nature that man 
 can only be developed and brought into proper circumstances to please 
 friniself, by what we call experience. You may not be able to account 
 lor it, hut so it is, that man must be taught by experience. I think 
 we will all agree in this, that if Adam and Eve could have had, while 
 
ss 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 in Eden, the experience which they obtained after their exile, and 
 which the world now presents, they never conld have been induced to 
 taste the forbidden tree. Every revolution of the earth, and all the 
 incidents recorded in human history, are but so many preparations 
 for the introduction of that last and most perfect state of society on 
 earth called the Millennium. First we have the germ, then the blade, 
 then the stem, then the leaves, then the blossoms, and last of all the 
 fruit. Therefore, as Paul said, the apostacy came first. 
 
 The mystery of iniquity early began to work. She made mysteries 
 of plain facts, that she might work out her own delusions. She it was 
 that loved mysteries, that paralysed the energies of the Christian spir¬ 
 it, and inundated the world with all the superstitions, fables, coun¬ 
 terfeit gospels, and all the follies of Paganism in a new garb. These 
 found many admirers among the doating philosophists of Asia; and 
 thus, by degrees, the lights of heaven were extinguished, or put under 
 the bushel of these abominable, delusive mysteries, until a long, 
 dark, and dreary night of superstition besotted the world. These 
 dark ages have sent them down to our times, and bequeathed a legacy 
 which has impoverished rather than enriched the legatees. That 
 man does not breathe whose mind is purified from all the influences 
 of the night of superstition, which has so long obscured the light of 
 she Sun of Righteousness. 
 
 Great and noble efforts have been made; but they ended in specu¬ 
 lations; and sects and parties, built upon metaphysical hair-splittings, 
 have long been the order of the day. These speculations are turning 
 grey with age; and a religion pure and social, springing from the 
 meaning of gospel facts, will sjon triumph on all the speculations of 
 the day. 
 
 All the Bible critics, and even the commentators themselves, agree? 
 shat Babylon must soon fall, like a mill-stone into the sea, never to 
 emerge; and that her catastrophe will be'succeeded by the millennial 
 order of society. She shall be visited with the calamities of Egypt, 
 Sodom, and Jerusalem combined; for she has combined within her 
 dominions the enormities of the three: The filthiness of Sodom; the 
 tyranny of Egypt, and the persecuting spirit of ( Jerusalem. 
 
 Had not this defection been clearly arraigned before me, and pre¬ 
 dicted by the Apostle Paul himself—had he not told us that under the 
 form of godliness, all the vices of the world would be arraigned—that 
 •^self-lovers, money-lovers, proud, defamers, disobedient to parents, 
 ungrateful, unholy, without natural affection, covenant or bargain 
 breakers, slanderers, incontinent, fierce persons, without any love to 
 good men, betrayers, headstrong, puffed up, lovers of pleasure more 
 than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the pow- 
 er it.” I say, bad he not taught us to expect such characters to creep 
 into the church, I would have been prepared to join with Mr. Owen 
 in opposing the religions of the world. But when I began to reason, 1 
 was taught to distinguish a thing from the abuse of it: and never to 
 condemn any thing until I was fully acquainted with it. I see that 
 the apostacy which yet exists, is as clearly foretold as was the birth 
 
DEBATE. 69 
 
 of Christ f and why should the accomplishment of one prediction con¬ 
 firm my faith, and the accomplishment of afiother weaken it! 
 
 But this defection is not only foretold literally, but symbolized by 
 John in the Apocalypse , under such combinations, and under such fig ¬ 
 ures as are well calculated to inspire us with a horrible idea of it. Do 
 not be alarmed, my friends, at my naming the Apocalypse. This 
 book is not so unintelligible as you havp been taught to think. But 1 
 am not going into an analysis of it. I will only trace one idea which 
 runs thiough it; and then I will be done with the apostacy. 
 
 John, you remember, lived to be an old man—he survived the de¬ 
 struction of Jerusalem about thirty years. He saw antichrists begin¬ 
 ning to show their faces, and was alarmed at the sight. He was ex¬ 
 iled to Patmos for the testimony he gave of Jesus; and while there, 
 viewing with anguish, the apostacy beginning, it pleased the Lord, 
 who had, while on the earth, honored this disciple with so many tc 
 kens of his love, to confer upon him another signal pledge. He 
 cheered the heart of the old apostle by promising him a view of the 
 future fortunes of the church. After inditing seven letters to the sev¬ 
 en congregations in Asia, he presents him with this astonishing vis¬ 
 ion: A window, as it were, is opened in heaven, and a scroll, in the 
 hand-writing of an angel, arrests his attention. This parchment 
 written within and without, and sealed with seven seals, is raised aloft 
 in the hand of an angel; and a challenge is given to all the inhabit¬ 
 ants of heaven, earth, and sea, to take and open the book. All was 
 silent—John wept.—-Why did he weep ? Because be knew the future 
 fortunes of the church were written there, sealed up from all the liv ¬ 
 ing, and no one appeared able to open the seals and disclose the se¬ 
 crets. These he wished to know above every thing in the world— 
 therefore he wept bitterly. 
 
 At length the Lion of the tribe of. Judah comes forward and takes 
 the scroll, and prepares to open the seals—Universal joy is every 
 where diffused, and John dries up his tears. The first seal is broken,, 
 and the scroll once unrolled: “Com e and sec” a mighty angel pro¬ 
 claims. John heard; looked, and beheld u a white horse and on him 
 sat a king, wearing one crown, with a bow and a quiver full of ar¬ 
 rows.” He rides off. Instructive emblem of the Lord beginning to 
 subdue the nations to the obedience of faith. I will not detain you 
 with a notice of all the seals. They are all opened—seven trumpets 
 are blown when the seventh seal is opened, and seven vials are poured 
 out in judgments upon the inhabitants of the earth. The intermediate, 
 .seals, trumpets, and vials, symbolize the events of one thousand two 
 hundred and forty years; or more fully all the events since the Pa¬ 
 gan persecutions, down to our own times. 
 
 But at the close of the different acts of this great drama , John sees 
 the same person he formerly saw, mounted on a white horse 3 
 followed by ail the armies of heaven, mounted on white horses; he 
 had now upon his head many crowns , and he was clothed with a ves 
 iure dyed with blood , emblem of bis conquests; and he had now, from 
 the number of his conquests, obtained all the crowns of the kingdoms 
 VOL. I!. 8* 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 'cU 
 
 of the earth, and had a name written which no one understood but 
 himself, and upon his vesture and on his thigh was written in brilliant 
 capitals, “KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.” So that 
 the termination of the vision of the seals, trumpets, and vials, places 
 the Lord Jesus before us, as having subdued all the nations of the 
 world to the obedience of faith. This is the animating view which 
 the Lord gave John, and through him has communicated to all nations 
 of the earth, who consult these divine oracles. We rejoice to know 
 that this period is nigh at hand, when the knowledge of the Lord 
 shall cover the whole earth as the waters cover the channel of the sea. 
 
 The world, I mean, the Christian communities, are tired of sectarian¬ 
 ism; light is rapidly progressing; the true nature of the Christian in¬ 
 stitution is beginning to he understood, and all the signs of the times 
 indicate the approach, the near approach, of this happy era. 
 
 ^ouhave, my friends, in the preceding hints, a solution of all the 
 difficulties which can be proposed upon the past or present order of 
 society;—an explanation of all the dark specks which appear upon 
 the moral map of the world. My object was not to unfold the prophe¬ 
 cies, but to give you a few hints upon the grand outlines, and to afford 
 sufficient data evincive that the authors or writers of the New Testa¬ 
 ment were most certainly under the guidance of that omniscient one 
 to whom the end of all things is as open and manifest as the beginning. 
 To suppose that all these predictions found in both Testaments, first, 
 ••oncerning the fates of the mighty empires of the Pagan world; next, 
 concerning the character, coming, and kingdom of Jesus Christ; 
 ’hen, concerning the fates of his religion, and the fortunes of all the 
 superstitions in the world; I say, to suppose that all these pre¬ 
 dictions are mere guesses,or conjectures; or that they were written 
 after the events transpired, or never written at all, by the persons 
 whose names they bear, are suppositions, assertions, or what you please 
 to call them, at war with all the literature of the world, with universal 
 experience, with the common sense of mankind, and with the events 
 which are now transpiring in the world. Such a supposition no ra¬ 
 tional mind can entertain ; and we may say further, that neither Mr. 
 Owen, nor any other person, will venture to examine or attempt to 
 refute the argument derived from this source. It stands now, as it 
 stood two thousand years ago, a document which defied criticism, 
 which, with but half the light which New Testament prophecy has 
 accumulated, convinced every man who had the patience and the 
 honesty to examine it; and which, by the gradual and constant com¬ 
 pletion of the unfulfilled predictions, is designed one day to prostrate 
 all the infidelity upon the face of the earth. 
 
 We promised you some remarks upon the genius and tendency of 
 the Christian religion, and also some strictures upon the Social 
 System. These will require another day. Indeed, my respected 
 auditors, I have much reason to admire your patience and the deep 
 .interest you have taken in this discussion. It proves that you are 
 alive to the great importance of the subject. The good order and 
 decorum which have feen exhibited by this assembly, on this ecca> 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 91 
 
 >ion, have never been surpassed, I presume, by any congregation* 
 on anv occasion. I am unwilling to trespass upon your patience, or 
 farther to exhaust my own strength, already far spent; but when I 
 reflect upon the immense importance of the subject, I should think 
 that I was sinning against the best cause in the world, and was want¬ 
 ing in benevolence to my contemporaries, were I not to attend to the 
 subjects proposed. For although the evidence which has been de¬ 
 duced, from any one of the topics introduced, is sufficient to establish 
 the truth of our religion to the honest inquirer, as we judge; and yon 
 must see, I think, by this time, that it is more than my friend, Mr. 
 Owen, can refute; yet being conscious that each argument in the 
 series confirms all the rest, and that, without the topics proposed, the 
 evidence would be incomplete, I must therefore, my friends, beg 
 your attendance another day. Not, indeed, for the sake of carrying 
 a point, nor for the pride of victory; for well I know, that the evidences 
 of Christianity have been triumphantly established long ago. It was 
 my intention, from the commencement, that all the documents relied 
 on in conducting this controversy should go to the public in a perma¬ 
 nent form: such also has been the intention of my opponent. We are 
 constrained to think that he is actuated by a noble benevolence, 
 though sadly mistaken in his views. But that our cotemporaries may 
 have the advantage of all the lights that the present controversy can 
 elicit from a new exhibition of a part of the magazine in the Christian 
 treasury, we wish to be favored with your attendance another dav. 
 Will the Moderators please to signify whether they will honor us with 
 their presence on Monday next at the usual hour? 
 
 [Chairman rises and saith —The Moderators trill do so if circum¬ 
 stances permit .] 
 
 [Mr. Campbell cannot say whether he will be able to conclude in 
 the forenoon on Monday.] 
 
 [Mr. Campbell has agreed to deliver a discourse in this meeting 3 
 house to-morrow, at 11 o’clock.] 
 
 Adjourned till Monday morning. 
 
 Monday morning , April 20th, 9 o'clock, A . M, 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—I have just now found on my desk a few questions 
 irorn some unknown hand, which, I suppose', have been presented to 
 me from my own invitations given during the discussion. As these 
 questions bear upon our discussion, I beg leave to give a brief answer. 
 
 The first is, Are the hooks composing the Old and New Testaments 
 the only books o f divine authority in the world ? 
 
 I answer positively, Yes. I have already said,thatthe books com¬ 
 posing the two Testaments, contain more than what is properly called 
 a Divine Revelation. They contain much history which can, with no 
 propriety, be called a Divine Revelation; for example, the history of 
 the deluge—the confusion of human language—the dispersion of the 
 human family—the biography of the patriarchs, judges, and kings of 
 Israel—the chronicles of Judah and Israel. All the things recorded 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 09 
 
 in these sections were known before written, and therefore could not 
 be revelations. But it was necessary that these important facts, 
 because of their intimate connexion with the people to whom Divine 
 Revelations were made, should be recorded and divinely authenti¬ 
 cated. Hence the Pentateuch in addition to all the revelations which 
 it contains, presents us with a historic record of the lirst ages of the 
 world divinely authenticated. 
 
 The question concerning the nature of inspiration, whether (for 
 instance) original ideas were always suggested to the writer, or whe¬ 
 ther the ideas sometimes communicated were only a mere revives- 
 cence of former impressions, is one that has been ably discussed. 
 However this question may be decided, it affects not the question 
 before us. The Holy Spirit, promised to the apostles, was to do one 
 of two things—either to suggest things entirely new, or to bring all- 
 things to their remembrance which they had seen or heard. This 
 was done. The writings of the apostles and of the prophets are 
 authentic histories written under the guidance of the Spirit of God; 
 or they are immediate and direct revelations of matters inaccessible 
 to mortal man. 
 
 Query 2.— What credit is due to the hooks in the Old Testament , 
 called the apocrypha ? 
 
 Let it be observed that there were many other authentic and true 
 narratives and documents among the Jews, as there are among the 
 Christians, besides the sacred writings of the prophets and apostles. 
 But it it was not necessary to have under the divine patronage various 
 histories by various authors upon the same subjects. It would have 
 greatly increased the natural and necessary labors of life had all these 
 records been preserved and collected into a set of volumes, and the 
 reading of them all made necessary to understand either the scheme 
 of divine government or of man’s redemption. But to enable us to 
 acquire all that is necessary to be known, certain books have been 
 preserved by the divine authority. The Apocrypha, at least some 
 books of it, contain a true history; but it does not claim to be a 
 Divine Revelation. We receive the records of Philo and Josephus, 
 and many of the primitive Christian writers as credible narratives of 
 their own times; and as far as they treat of times immediately subse¬ 
 quent to the apostolic age, they may be called the Apocrypha of the 
 New Testament. All these writings may be, and most of them are, 
 certainly credible and authentic works; but they constitute no part 
 of either religion, and make no such claims upon us. 
 
 Query 3.— How are we to ascertain the authorship of Job , some 
 parts of the hook of Deuteronomy , such as the death and burial of 
 Moses , the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews ? <fyc. 
 
 It is not necessary that we should be able to prove the authorship 
 of every particular piece composing the Old and New Testament to 
 prove their authenticity A The book of Job, for instance, has no 
 
 *Bishop Watson, in his Apology for the Bible, in reply to Thomas Paine, on 
 the subject of these anonymous parts of the Old Testament, very pertinently 
 remarks as follows* p. 50, 51, 52:— 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 93 
 
 jiame attached to it, nor circumstances mentioned in it, which could 
 decide the author of it. Whether it was written by Ezra, Nehemiah, 
 or any Jewish prophet, perhaps, could not now be decided. My belief 
 in the authenticity and authority of this book, and all anonymous 
 parts of the Old Testament, is founded upon the following basis. 
 The Jewish scribes received them—the whole Jewish nation received 
 them—their own internal evidence attests their pretensions—and, 
 above ail, they were quoted as genuine, and approbated as parts of 
 the sacred records and revelations, by Jesus Christ, or his apostles, 
 concerning whose inspiration and certain knowledge of the character 
 of these works we cannot entertain a rational doubt. 
 
 Concerning the question about the burial of Moses, and other such 
 additions made to some books in the Old Testament, they proceed 
 from inattention to the contents of the volume. Joshua wrote some 
 additions to the books of Moses, called “thelaw of God and that he, 
 or Ezra, or some of the distinguished guardians of these sacred re¬ 
 cords, should have added the deaths or other posthumous circumstan¬ 
 ces belonging to the history of these great prophets, is inferrable from 
 this fact just now stated. Joshua says he wrote some additions to 
 
 “Having finished your objections to the genuineness of the books of Moses, 
 you proceed to your remarks on the book of Joshua; and from its internal evi¬ 
 dence, you endeavor to prove, that this book was not written by Joshua— 
 What then? What is your conclusion' 1 —“That it is anonymous, and without 
 authority.”—Stop a little; your conclusion is not connected with your premises; 
 your friend Euclid would have been ashamed of it. “Anonymous, and there¬ 
 fore without authority!” I have noticed this solecism before; but as you fre¬ 
 quently bring it forward, and, indeed, your book stands much in need of it, I 
 will submit to your consideration another observation on the subject. The book 
 called Fleta is anonymous; but it is not on that account without authority.— 
 Domesday book is anonymous, and was written above seven hundred years ago; 
 yet our courts of law do not hold it to be without authority, as to the facts related 
 in it. Yes, you will say, but this book has been preserved with singular care 
 among the reeords of the nation. And who told you that the Jews had no 
 records, or that they did not preserve them with singular care ? Josephus says 
 the contrary: and, in the Bible itself, an appeal is made to many books, which 
 have perished: such as the book of Jasher, the book of Nathan, of Abijah, 
 of Iddo, of Jehu, of natural history by Solomon, of the acts of Manasseh, 
 and others which might be mentioned. If any one, having access to the journals 
 of the Lords and Commons, to the books of the treasury, war office, privy 
 council, and other public documents, should at this day write a history of the 
 reigns of George the first and second, and should publish it without his name, 
 would any man, three or four hundreds or thousands of years hence, question 
 the authority of that book, when he knew that the whole British nation had re¬ 
 ceived it as an authentic book from the time of its first publication to the age in 
 which he lived ? This supposition is in point. The books of the Old Testament 
 were composed from the records of the Jewish nation, and they have been re¬ 
 ceived as true by that nation, from the time in which they were written to the 
 present day. Dodsley’s Annual Register is an anonymous book; we only know 
 the name of its editor; the New Annual Register is an anonymous book; the Re¬ 
 views are anonymous books; but do we, or will our posterity, esteem these 
 books of no authority? On the contrary, they are admitted at present, and 
 will be received in after ages, as authoritative records of the civil, military, and 
 literary history of England and of Europe, So little foundation is there for our 
 being startled by your assertion, “It is anonymous and without authority.” 
 
04 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 “the Booh of the. Law of Godf a name applied to the books of Moses/ 
 ft is in the style of Cesar’s commentaries expressed in the third per¬ 
 son—‘“So Joshua made a covenant with the people that day, arid set, 
 them a statute and an ordinance in Shechem; and Joshua wrote these 
 words in the booh of the law of God 
 
 Respecting the letter to the Hebrews, although not having directly 
 the authority of Paul’s name, it proves itself to be his work. It con¬ 
 tains certain direct allusions to Paul’s labors, and he speaks of himself 
 in such a style, and with such references to circumstances in which 1 
 
 he was a party, as to render it certain that he is the writer. A person * 
 
 may introduce himself by a periphrasis , or circumlocution, without! 
 directly naming himself. Thus Paul introduces himself to the He¬ 
 brews to avoid encountering a prejudice existing against him in the 
 minds of the unbelieving Jews, for whose benefit, as well as that of 
 the believing Jews, he designed this letter. 
 
 Touching the authorship of these writings, although I think we have 
 already sufficiently established this matter, I would remark, that, of 
 the apostles’ letters, the autographs themselves, as well as many ex¬ 
 trinsic circumstances, decided their pretensions. Paul’s name, written 
 by his oimi hand, after his amanuensis had written an epistle, was 
 added to such of them as were not wholly written by himself. • The 
 congregations or individuals to whom they were addressed, some of 
 whom were so addressed as to have provoked them to have rejected 
 the letters if they had dared, were the best judges of the authenticity 
 •of these writings; and the fact of their having been received as such, ! 
 by these congregations, alone, had we no other proof, amounts to the 
 whole evidence we have in proof of the authorship of the most popular 
 works of Greece and Rome. If these writings had not been the pro- 
 ductionsof their reputed authors, or if such of them as are anonymous 
 had not been known to have been the works of well attested authors 
 by their cotemporaries, many would have been proud to have claim¬ 
 ed them as their own. I do not know what human being would not 
 have been proud to have been the author of the book of Job, or the 
 letter o the Hebrews; and their being anonymous, yet received into 
 the sacred writings, is as valid proof of their authenticity as if they 
 had, like the greater part of both Testaments, been inscribed with the 
 names of their authors. 
 
 Query 4. But we are also asked, Are we sure that we have the 
 genuine works of these authors? Are there no interpolations? 
 
 When I hear of interpolations and contradictions, I think of the 
 Honorable Soame Jenyns, once a sceptic. He had concluded to pub¬ 
 lish a work against the Christian religion; but thinking that he ought 
 to be well acquainted v r ith its fables and absurdities before he ventured 
 to appear before the public, he determined to make himself well ac¬ 
 quainted with the contents of the book. But he soon found good 
 reasons to reform his plan; and, instead of furnishing a work against 
 the Christian religion, he gave the world a short and unanswerable * 
 treatise upon the truth and authenticity of it. This treatise on the 
 H Internal Evidences ” is written in a masterly style, and with a bold- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 95 
 
 ness which nothing but the assurance of faith could inspire. He 
 makes the following bold assertion which many would think is going 
 too far:— 
 
 “For I will venture to affirm, that if any one could prove, what is 
 impossible to be proved, because it is not true, that there are errors in 
 geography, chronology, and philosophy, in every page of the Bible; 
 that the prophecies therein delivered, are all but fortunate guesses, or 
 artful applications, and the miracles there recorded, no better than 
 legendary tales: if any one could show, that these books were never 
 written by their pretended authors, but were posterior impositions on 
 illiterate and credulous ages, all these wonderful discoveries would 
 prove no more than this, that God, for reasons to us unknown, had 
 thought proper to permit a revelation by him communicated to man- 
 kind, to be mixed with their ignorance, and corrupted by their frauds 
 from its earliest infancy, in the same manner in which he has visibly 
 permitted it to be mixed, and corrupted from tbat period to the present 
 hour. If in these books, a religion, superior to all human imagina¬ 
 tion, actually exists, it is of no consequence to the proof of its di¬ 
 vine origin, by what means it was there introduced, or with what 
 human errors and imperfections it is blended. A diamond, though 
 found in a bed of mud. is still a diamond, noi? can the dirt, which 
 surrounds it, depreciate its value or destroy its lustre.” 
 
 All the interpolations, and different readings, though numerous as 
 Michaelis , a very learned German professor, makes them, counting 
 all the minutia of letters and points, do not effect the character of a 
 single fact recorded in the whole New' Testament. Indeed, men have 
 been so much more concerned about the doctrines than the fads of 
 scripture, that they are much more alarmed about the omission, or 
 change of a term, affecting some favorite conclusion to which they 
 have come, than about the evidence on which the great salutary facts 
 arc established. Hence has arisen the great ado about interpolations. 
 And if there were ever any interpolations designedly introduced, it 
 was for carrying some doctrine or theorem, and not for proving a 
 fact. Hence sceptics have nothing to fear from interpolations. But 
 a notice of the dark ages here may not be out of place especially as 
 most of these different readings and interpolations occurred during 
 this drear}' period. 
 
 During this period all learning was locked up in the dark cloisters 
 and confined to the gloomy monasteries of papal superstition. The 
 scriptures, before the art of printing, were in the hands of ignorant 
 monks and nuns, who spent their lives in transcribing them. A ma¬ 
 jority of these copyists did not understand the language in which 
 they wrote them. VVe have seen some of these ancient manuscript 
 copies. Large margins for the purpose of notes and references were 
 usually left on these manuscripts. It frequently happened that some 
 of the copyists, not able to discriminate the marginal notes from the 
 text, transcribed some of the explanations into the text. This occa¬ 
 sioned various discrepancies between the copies. After the revival 
 of literature and the Reformation, careful and exact comparisons of 
 
06 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 these copies were made, and the text was purged of most, if not all, 
 these interpolations. In these numerous and careful revisals and 
 comparisons, not only of the copies, but of the most ancient manu¬ 
 scripts, and the quotations found in the works of the primitive fathers, 
 almost everything of a doubtful character, even to the very expletives, 
 were rejected. We have most unquestionably the most exact and 
 faithful representation of the prototype of this volume than we have 
 of any other book in the world. It would be impossible to interpolate 
 the sacred text now, because of the rival sects. The same difficulty 
 existed always, almost from the beginning; excepting that the inven¬ 
 tion of printing and the multiplication of copies consequent thereupon, 
 have imposed more insuperable barriers in the way of such liberties, 
 than existed before. But when we take into view the veneration of 
 even the most ignorant ages for these writings, and the tremendous 
 awe inspired from the sanctions found at the close of the volume, to¬ 
 gether with sectarian jealousy, no work has been so much guarded 
 against corruption. And a greater proof we cannot have of the truth 
 of these remarks than the fact that the church of Rome, in which 
 most of the copies now extant were found, the corruptions of which 
 are so clearly pointed out and condemned in the Epistles, have for 
 ages transcribed the predictions, expositions, and censures pronoun¬ 
 ced upon herself, and handed to the Reformers the sacred text to con¬ 
 demn and expose her own abuses. 
 
 Query 5 — How is it that St. Matthew says , in a certain place , It 
 was prophesied by the Prophet Jeremiah , and no such a prophecy is 
 found in Jeremiah , but in Zechariah? 
 
 To this we reply that the divisions which now obtain in both the 
 Old Testament and the New are of modern origin. Cardinal Cairo, 
 in the twelfth century, divided the scriptures of the New Testament ' 
 into chapters; and Robert Stephens, in the sixteenth century, divided 
 them into verses. These distributions were made to facilitate refer¬ 
 ences to these writings, but in thousands of instances they have ob¬ 
 scured the sense of them. 
 
 The Jews divided all the writings of the Law r , the Prophets, and , 
 the Psalms, into fifty-four sections, for the purpose of reading them 
 once in a year in their synagogues. Four of these sections were 
 shorter than the others; and whether designed for two of their greatest j 
 solemnities, to be read together, two on each occasion, we cannot say; ' 
 but so it was,that the whole volume was read once every year in their 
 public meetings. But in quoting these writings they sometimes 
 quoted them under the general running title of these sections; or more 
 loosely, under three heads—the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms. 
 At other times they were quoted with the most minute reference, as, 
 for instance, ‘It is so written in the second Psalm.’ Sometimes the 
 whole writings are called the Law. The Saviour once quotes the : 
 Psalms thus, “It is written .in the Law, They hated me without a 
 cause;” } r et this is found in the book of Psalms. The running title 
 to the sections of the prophetic writings is said by some to have been 
 Jeremiahj others have said thgt the Jews called Jeremiah the weeping 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 07 
 
 prophet , and used his name as an appellative , to denote all those pre¬ 
 dictions which had respect to the sufferings of the Messiah. But one 
 thing is obvious, that there was among all persons in that age'a loose 
 or general reference, as woll as a strict and accurate reference to 
 sayings in the prophets. If, then, Matthew did actually use the name 
 of Jeremiah instead of the name of Zecharlah, it may have proceeded 
 from some of those causes assigned. But whether or not, it affects v > 
 more the credibility of the testimony of Matthew concerning Jesus 
 Christ, than the fact of Paul’s forgetting how many lie had baptized 
 in Corinth, proves that he was not inspired with an infallible know¬ 
 ledge of the gospel. 
 
 Such objections as these exhibit a very strange state of mind, and 
 show that the objector is entirely ignorant of the real grounds on which 
 we assent to the divine authority of these records. 
 
 Having, then, very briefly attended to these questions, I proceed to 
 the topic proposed on Saturday evening. To form correct ideas of the 
 genius and tendency of Christianity, we must pay some attention to 
 the genius and design of the former dispensation. This we have 
 already glanced at in our remarks upon the Apostacy, Until the time 
 of Abraham all the nations upon the earth had the same general views 
 of the Divinity that created all things and presided over the world 
 This will appear from all the ancient documents which penetrate into 
 the most remote antiquity of the world. 
 
 In forming a correct view of the religious character of the ancient 
 nations, it is necessary here to inquire how lar the inhabitants of Per¬ 
 sia, Assyria, Arabia, Canaan, and Egypt, were affected or influen¬ 
 ced by the religious institutions of this period; for these were the 
 first nations whose institutions gave a character to all the nations of 
 the world. ■ 
 
 Abraham was the son of Shemby Arphaxad. The Persians were 
 the descendants ofShem by Elam . The common parentage of Abra¬ 
 ham and the Persians laid a foundation for some similarity in their re¬ 
 ligion. Abraham’s ancestors dwelt in Chaldea, and at the time that 
 God signalized Abraham the Chaldeans had begun to apostatize from 
 the service of the true God. Hence the separation of Abraham troru 
 among them. But Dr. Hyde and the most learned antiquarian? 
 present documental proof that the Persians retained the true histo¬ 
 ry of the Creation, of the Antediluvian Age; and so attached were the 
 Persians to the religion of Abraham, that the sacred book which con- 
 tained their religion is called Sohi Ibrahim , i. e. the Book of Abra¬ 
 ham. For a considerble time after Abraham’s day they worshipped 
 the God of Shein, for they did not know all the special communications 
 to Abraham.- 
 
 The Arabians, down to the time of Jethro, retained the knowledge 
 of the true God, llow long after, we are not informed; but their re¬ 
 ligious institutions, as far as we have account, differed little from 
 those practised by Abraham, with the exception of circumcision. 
 
 The Canaanites themselves, in Abraham’s time, had not apostati¬ 
 zed wholly from the religion of Shem. Thp king of Salem was priest 
 
 yoL. tu 9 
 
98 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 of the Most High God: and during Abraham's sojourning among them, 
 they treated him with all respect as a prophet of the true God. 
 
 Even among the Philistines at Gera, Abraham found a good and 
 virtuous king, favored with the admonitions of the Almighty. This 
 be little expected, for he was so prejudiced against those people, that, 
 on entering their metropolis, he said, “Surely the fear of God is not 
 r\ this place/’ But he was happily disappointed. For Abimelech, 
 j n his appeal to Heaven, says, “Lord wilt thou slay a virtuous nation ?V 
 And the Lord did not deny his plea, but heard and answered his re¬ 
 quest. There appears in the whole narrative no difference in the 
 religious views or practice between Abraham and Abimelech the 
 king of the nation. 
 
 The Egyptians, too, in the time of Abraham, were worshippers of 
 the true God. In Upper Egypt they refused, as Plutarch informs us, 
 to pay any taxes for the support of the idolatrous worship; asserting 
 that they owned wo mortal, dead or alive, to be a God; The incor¬ 
 ruptible and eternal God they called Cneph , who, they affirmed, had 
 no beginning, and never should have an end. In the first advances to 
 mythology in Egypt, they represented God by the figure of a serpent , 
 with the head of a hawk in the middle of a circle. We find no mis¬ 
 understandings nor dilference between Pharaoh and Abraham, when 
 the latter went down into Egypt. Indeed, with the exception of the 
 Chaldeans, who were the oldest nation, and the first to introduce idol 
 or image worship, we find a very general agreement in all the ancient 
 nations respecting religious views and practice. And the first defec¬ 
 tion from the religion of Noah and Shem which we meet with in all 
 antiquity, was that of the Chaldeans. 
 
 Now, to save the world from universal idolatry, Abraham is called; 
 and in four centuries his posterity were eroded into a nation for this 
 primary object, to teach the unity, spirituality, and providence of 
 God, as well as to introduce a new vocabulary by a symbolic wor¬ 
 ship, to prepare the world for understanding the Divine character and 
 government preparatory to the mission of his Son. 
 
 Abraham was called at a time when idolatry began to appear in 
 Chaldea, and when families began to have each a family god. When 
 bis descendants became numerous, and large enough to become a na¬ 
 tion, and the nations had each its own god, it pleased the Ruler of the 
 Universe to exhibit himself as the God of a nation. Hence originated 
 the theocracy/ Here it 13 necessary to suggest a few general princi¬ 
 ples of much importance in understanding the varieties which have 
 appeared in the divine government. From the fall of man the Gov¬ 
 ernor of the World withdrew from all personal intimacies with the 
 race. He no longer conversed with man, face to face, as he was wont 
 to do in Eden, The recollections of the Divinity became more and 
 more faint as Adam advanced in years; and the traditionary inform¬ 
 ation communicated to his descendants became less vivid and impres¬ 
 sive in every generation. All new communications from the Creator . 
 were through symbols, by messengers, or rather through things al- 
 readv known. Things entirely unknown can only be communicated to 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 09 
 
 the mind by things already known. This axiom is at the basis of aU 
 revelations, and explains many otherwise inexplicable incidents in 
 the divine communications to man. The natural symbols and the 
 artificial names of things became, from a necessity of nature, the only 
 means through which God could make himselfknown to man. This, 
 too, has been the invariable rule and measure of all the discoveries 
 which God has made of himself, his purposes, and will. Hence the 
 spangled heavens, all the elements of nature, the earth, and the sea, 
 with all their inhabitants; the relations, customs, and usages existing 
 among men, have all been so many types or letters in the great alpha¬ 
 bet which constitutes the vocabulary of divine revelation to man. He 
 has even personated himself by his own creatures, and spoken to man 
 through human institutions. Hence he has been called a Sun, Light, 
 Father, Husband, Man of War, General of Hosts, a Lord of Battles, 
 King, Prince, Master, &c.' &c. He has been spoken of as having 
 eyes, ears, mouth, hands, feet, &c. &,c. He has been represented as 
 sitting,standing, walking, hasting,' awaking. He lias been compared 
 to a unicorn, lion, rock, mountain, &e. &,c. He has made himself 
 known in his character, perfections, purposes, and will, by things al¬ 
 ready known to man. This is the grand secret, which, when disclos ¬ 
 ed, removes many difficulties and objections, and sets in a clear light 
 the genius of the Jewish age of the religious world. 
 
 Now when God became the king of one nation , it was only doing 
 what, on a more extensive scale, and with more various and powerful 
 effects, he had done in calling himself a Father. Both were designed 
 to make himself known through numan relations and insiitutions. 
 One type, symbol, or name, is altogether incompetent todevelope the 
 wonderful and incomprehensible God. But his wisdom and goodness 
 are most apparent in making himselfknown in those relations and to 
 those extents which are best adapted to human wants and imperfec¬ 
 tions. And the perfection of these discoveries consists in their being; 
 exactly suited to the different ages of the world and stages of human 
 improvement. At the time when he chose one nation and made him¬ 
 self known to all the earth as its King and God, no other name, type, 
 or symbol was so well adapted to the benevolent purpose, as those 
 selected. For when Israel was brought out of Egypt, all the nations 
 had their gods; and these gods were esteemed and admired according 
 to the strength, skill, prowess, and prosperity of the nation over which 
 they were supposed to preside. Hence that god was the most adora¬ 
 ble in human eyes whose people were most conspicuous. 
 
 Wars and battles were the offspring of the spirit of those ages con¬ 
 temporaneous with the first five hundred years of the Jewish history, 
 and with the ages immediately preceding. Hence the idea was, that 
 the nation most powerful in war had the greatest and most adorable 
 god. Now as the Most High (a name borrowed from this very age) 
 always took the world as it was in every period in which he chose to 
 develope himself anew, or his purposes, he chose to appear as the 
 Lord of Hosts, or God of Armies. And to make his name known 
 through all the errth, he took one nation under his auspices, and ap- 
 
iOO 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 pear's3 as their Sovereign and the Commander in Chibf of all their ar¬ 
 mies. Hence the splendid and easy bought victories of the Israelites. 
 One could chase a hundred, and ten put a thousand to flight. This 
 explains the deliverance out of Egypt, and how the Lord permitted 
 Pharaoh’s heart to be hardened—for the purpose of making his name 
 known through all the earth. Pharaoh and his court knew not the 
 God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and impiously asked, “Who is 
 the Lord, trial I should obey him ?” Bat Moses made him know, and 
 tremble, and bow. By the time when the Jews were settled in Ca¬ 
 naan, the world was taught to fear the God of Israel, the Lord of 
 H: )sts; and so it came to pass that all the true and consistent know¬ 
 ledge of God upon the earth, among all nations, was derived directly 
 <*>r indirectlv from the Jewish people. 
 
 Bit we nwst not think that only one purpose was gained, or one 
 object was exclusively in view in any of these great movements of the 
 Governor of the World. Trfis is contrary to the general analogy of 
 the material and spiritual systems. By the annual and diurnal revo¬ 
 lutions of the earth, although by the former the seasons of the year, 
 and by the latter, day and night seem to be the chief objects, there' 
 are a thousand ends gained in conjunction with one principal one. 
 Bo in this grand economy, many, very many illustrious ends wore 
 gained, besides the capital one just mentioned. For, a« in the vege¬ 
 table kingdom we have a succession of stages in the growth of plants; 
 t a , in the animal kingdom we have a succession of stages in the growth 
 pf animals; so in the kingdom of God there is a similar progression of 
 light, knowledge, life, and bliss. We have in the vegetable kingdom 
 the period of germinating, the period of blossoming, and the period of 
 ripening the fruit. So we have infancy, childoood, youth, and man¬ 
 hood, in our species. Each period calls for special influences and a 
 peculiar treatment. So it is in the kingdom of God. It had its in¬ 
 fancy, its childhood, and its manhood. In each stage it was diverse¬ 
 ly exhibited. The Patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian Ages were 
 adapted to these. 
 
 Again, vve are not to consider the special temporal favors bestowed 
 upon the Jews, as indicative that the divine benevolence was exclu-* 
 sively confined to one nation to the exclusion of all the earth besides. 
 As well might we say that the husbandman who cultivates his garden 
 despises or neglects his farm, or that he exclusively loved that part of 
 he soil which he encloses with a peculiar fence. Other circumstan¬ 
 ces and considerations require these specialties. The general good 
 of the human race, and the blessing of all nations in a son of Abra¬ 
 ham, were the ultimate and gracious ends in view in all these pecu¬ 
 liar arrangements. This promise and guarantee were made to Abra* 
 ham before the time of these ages or dispensations. So that the 
 calling ofthe Jews and their erection into a nation under the special 
 government of God, were but means necessary to that reign of favor 
 under which we now live. 
 
 But some will still say, Why wa3 not the Messiah born immediately 
 after the Fall, and why was not the Christian era the only era of 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 101 
 
 the world? Why did not the Universal Benevolence introduce the 
 best possible order of things first? Such cavillers remind me of the 
 child who asks, whether from curiosity or petulance: Why does not 
 the ripe ear of corn come up from the seed deposited in the earth ? 
 Why does not the full ripe ear first present itself to our eye? Would 
 not a kind and benevolent being have done this rather than have kept 
 us waiting for many months, for the tedious process of germinating 
 growing, shooting, blossoming? &c. &c. Could not an almighty, and 
 benevolent being, have produced the ripe ear without waiting for a 
 sprout, stalk, leaves,blossoms, and all the other preparations of nature 
 to form an ear of corn ? We are even in the common concerns of life 
 but poor judges of propriety; and it is extreme arrogance for us to 
 arraign Omniscience at the tribunal of our reason, when we cannot 
 tell the reason why the blossom precedes the fruit. Do we not see 
 that it is the order of the Universe, natural as well as moral, that there 
 should be a gradual developement. “In the fullness of time ” when 
 all things were fully ripe he sent forth his son. 
 
 One part of the human family is cultivated like a garden, and 
 another part is left like a wilderness, unfenced, and undressed. The 
 vineyard, however, after a while produces, through an unavoidable 
 degeneracy, no better grapes than the wild vines in the forest—and 
 the hedge is torn down. A new order of things is developed, and the 
 middle wall of partition crumbles to pieces. The Jew and Gentile 
 are alike degenerated, and the new order proceeds upon a levelling 
 principle. Now no human being could have known that a govern¬ 
 ment like the Theocracy, placing a people in such enviable circum¬ 
 stances as that system placed the seed of Abraham, would have se¬ 
 cured so little to itself, and so little to the people under it, had not 
 the experiment been made and continued as it was. 
 
 But all these matters will be much better understood when we 
 contemplate the constitution of the Jewish nation. This constitution 
 is in one point of view, very pertinently called by the Apostle Paul, 
 The Letter. No term could have been more appropriate to exhibit 
 the views which Paul taught, than this term letter. The Constitu¬ 
 tion under which this nation came into existence, as a nation, was 
 written by the Finger of God , upon two tables of stone. But here 
 let me explain myself. The instrument written upon these two tables 
 is sometimes called the moral law of the whole universe; sometimes 
 the ten commandments; sometimes the old covenant, and the old 
 testament. Now the terms testament and covenant in the Scotch 
 idiom, and in the English, are supposed equivalent to one and the 
 same Greek word, diatheke. For the King’s translators have many 
 a time rendered this Greek word by both of these English nouns.— 
 The term covenant in Scotland has been applied not only to individu¬ 
 al arguments but to national compacts. Institution , or even constitu¬ 
 tion, in our day, much more correctly represents to us in our mode9 
 of thinking the true import of this term. The writing upon the two 
 tables was in reality in its original promulgation, and in the use 
 made of it, precisely what we call a constitution. The nation recci - 
 \OL. u. 9 * ‘ 
 
102 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 ed it as such, and the two tables on which it was written were called, 
 “the two tables of the covenant and the chest or ark into which it 
 was deposited was called “the ark of the covenant .” The whole 
 covenant must have been on the two tables, else it must have been 
 an imposition to call th em ihe two tables of the covenant; and, again, 
 the whole covenant must have been in the ark or it w ould have been 
 a deception to call that ark u thc ark of the covenant” I need scarce¬ 
 ly add that the reason why the volume is called the old testament , con¬ 
 taining the writings of’ Moses, the prophets, and the devotional pieces 
 called the Hagiographa , is not because all these writings were the 
 covenant, or testament, or constitution of Israel, but by a figure of 
 speech the thing containing is often called from the thing contained , 
 Because these writings contain this covenant or constitution they 
 are all called by the name of the old covenant, testament or consti¬ 
 tution. In like manner we shall see that the New Testament has 
 received its name from the same figure and example. 
 
 There were many other laws given to the Jews from the King 
 besides this instrument, but these were not of the same high character 
 with those thus written on the two tables. They were only “leges 
 sub graviori lege,” laws under a supreme law; for the constitution of 
 every country is the supreme law of the land. But the proof lies 
 here: the Lord declared, if Israel would accede to the items to be 
 proposed, they would in consequence, become a peculiar nation, a 
 new sort of Kingdom; a community exalted above all the national 
 communities upon earth. They agreed to these preliminaries. 
 Then the Lord said, in their hearing, “I am the Lord pour God , 5 who 
 brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage ; 
 therefore ye shall,” &c. Such was the agreement, and such were 
 the items afterwards called, the Covenant or Constitution. 
 
 This constitution continued in one sense for about 1500 years. 
 It could not be broken, or made of none effect, by the transgression 
 of a few individuals. Bat as soon as the great majority of the peo¬ 
 ple departed from it, God ceased to reign over them as he had done. 
 He allowed their enemies to make prisoners of them; to invade and 
 devastate their land, and carry them into bondage again. Now so 
 long as this people lived up to the letter of this instrument, so long 
 they were under the special government of God; and under all the 
 miraculous displays which we see distinguished their history from 
 their eduction from Egypt till they were carried into Babylon by the 
 Assyrian monarch. This explains the reason why miracles con¬ 
 tinued in Israel so long—-and why they ceased at the period alluded 
 to. Miracles were the order of the day for many hundred years in 
 all the important epochs of their history. But after the Captivity, the 
 special providences ceased... 
 
 Now let us hear Jeremiah who lived about these times, speak of 
 this covenant and the intentions of the Lord concerning them.—Jei\ 
 xxxi. 31. 32. 33. 34. 
 
 “Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new 
 covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah; n6t 
 
DEBATI 
 
 108 
 
 according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day 
 that i took them by the hand, to bring them out of the land of Egypt; 
 (which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband to them, 
 saith the Lord;) but this shall he the covenant that I will make with 
 the house of Israel; after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my 
 law in their inward parts, and write it in their harts; and will be 
 their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no 
 more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, 
 Know' the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them 
 unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their 
 iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” 
 
 Jeremiah then predicts a time when this constitution would cease 
 to be the constitution of Israel—and a new one of a different char¬ 
 acter introduced. We do not, as some might think, speak of the 
 abrogation or disannulling of any thing moral. The laws of morali¬ 
 ty, like those of nature, are immutable; but the particular forms, 
 and arrangements, and modification, of these principles should he 
 changed, and the whole inscribed, not upon stone, but upon the 
 hearts of men. Now here is the essential difference between the old 
 and the new constitution. The former was not written upon the 
 heart, the latter is. The former was pure letter , the latter is pure 
 spirit. The first, pointed out to the eye, to the intellect of man, a 
 rule of life; the latter, infused it into the soul or gives a disposition 
 and bias to these principles of action: nay, it imparts to the heart 
 the principle which the letter or law only laid before the eyes. I 
 develops the matter no farther here. I only prepare the way for 
 this sweeping distinction that the Jewish covenant or institution 
 was a covenant or constitution of the letter or law. In one sentence, 
 tlie first was a constitution of law: the second, or Christian, is a 
 constitution of favor. 
 
 Let us hear Paul elaborate this matter 2 Cor. iii. G—18. 
 
 “Who indeed hath fitted us to be ministers of a new covenant; 
 not of the letter, but of the spirit: now the letter killeth, but the spirit 
 maketh alive. Besides, if the ministry of death, imprinted on stones 
 with letters, was done with glory, so that the children of Israel could 
 not look steadfastly on the face of Moses, because of the glory of 
 his face w r hich was to be abolished; how shall not the ministry of the 
 Spirit rather be with glory? And, if the ministry of condemnation 
 was honour, much more doth the ministry of righteousness, abound 
 in honour. And therefore, that which was glorified, was not glori¬ 
 fied in this respect, by reason of the excelling glory. Besides, if 
 that which is abolished, is abolished by glory, much more that which 
 remaineth. remaineth in glory. Wherefore, having such a persua¬ 
 sion, we use much plainness of speech; and not as Moses, who put 
 a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel might not steadfastly 
 book to the end of the thing to he abolished. Now their minds were 
 blinded: for until this day, the same veil remaineth in the reading 
 of the Old Covenant, it not being revealed, that it is abolished by 
 Christ. Moreover, until this day, when Moses is read, the veil lieth 
 
104 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 upon their heart. But, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall 
 be taken from around it. Now the Lord is the Spirit: and where 
 the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. For we all, with an 
 unveiled face, reflecting as mirrors the glory of the Lord, are trans¬ 
 formed into the same image from glory to glory, as from the Lord 
 of the spirit.” 
 
 Here is the contrast—letter and spirit. “The letter kills—the 
 spirit gives life. Ministration of death—ministration of spirit, that 
 which is done away, and that which remains.”—Glorious the former - 
 in its promulgation, more glorious the latter in its introduction;— 
 tending of the one is to bondage, of the other to liberty. All human 
 privileges are constitutional. Therefore as is the constitution, so 
 are the privileges of the people whose it is. 
 
 But here we must observe that there is some reason in Mr. Owen’s 
 remark, that men are not to be made happy by letter or law. Writ¬ 
 ten codes of laws however good are not adapted to augment human 
 happiness, much less to produce it. Laws are restraints—the more 
 numerous, the more are the restraints; to restrain a person is to di¬ 
 minish his t *joyments. It is therefore much more conducive to 
 human happiness to remove the cause which makes these restraints 
 necessary. To infuse into the mind such principles as will make 
 men happy is infinitely more rational than by good laws to curb evil 
 principles already implanted. To remove the disposition to steal, is 
 much more rational than to promulge laws against theft. That sys¬ 
 tem then is incomparably the most conducive to morality, good order, 
 and happiness, and is therefore by far the most rational, which 
 removes the evil principle, rather than attempts to curb it by legal 
 restraints. The law was not made for good men. In any state of 
 society the only happiness that good men derive from law is protec¬ 
 tion. In no other way can it conduce to their happiness. It is 
 made for evil doers. 
 
 So far, then, Mr. Owen is right; but had he known what follows, he 
 never would have adopted so ineffectual a scheme as that which he 
 has proposed. The Almighty gave us an excellent specimen of what 
 a good law could do: he made the experiment for us in the history 
 of the Jews. He gave them the best constitution, the finest country, 
 and a well arranged society—a very social system. The twelve tribes 
 were twelve communities. They supplied themselves and created a 
 large surplus; so that for two years, at least, in every seven, they 
 rested, and their land rested one. They were under the best govern¬ 
 ment, and enjoyed the greatest share of social privileges ever enjoyed 
 by any people; yet they became worse and worse. 
 
 Now he found fault with the whole economy, and introduced a new 
 one upon quite different principles. Instead of circumcising the flesh, 
 he circumcised the heart; and instead of giving a code of laws to 
 govern mbn’s outward actions, he gives them new hearts; or, in other 
 words, by a constitution of pure favor, or grace, he implants noble 
 principles, so efficient, as neither confiscation of goods, imprisonment, 
 nor death itself, could induce them to do a mean action. I admit that 
 
DEBATE: 
 
 iiinve meyn have corrupted Christianity by converting it into a new 
 £ode of la^vs, observances, and ceremonies, it has not been so produc¬ 
 tive of those happy influences as it once was almost universally; yet 
 still its direct influences upon all who believe and understand it, are 
 equal to what they ever were; and its indirect influences upon society 
 at large, have civilized and moralized it to an extent far beyond any 
 system ever exhibited on earth. 
 
 But what I now contend for is, that pure Christianity is predicated 
 upon the most philosophic view of human nature. It aims not at re¬ 
 forming or happifying the world by a system of legal restraints, how¬ 
 ever excellent; but its immediate object is to implant in the human 
 heart, through a discovery of the divine philanthropy, a principle of 
 love, which fulfils every moral precept ever promulged on earth. Here 
 is the grand secret. The religion of Jesus Christ melts the hearts of 
 men into pure philanthropy. It converts a lion into a lamb. It has 
 done this in our times in countless instances. Mr. Owen only dreams 
 of reformations. Christianity alone changes, regenerates, and re¬ 
 forms wicked men. The materialists declare their system “cannot 
 make a tricked man good” Scepticism never converted a wicked 
 man since the days of Celsus till now. Mr. Owen cannot produce 
 one instance. But Christianity taking hold of the heart of man, not 
 by law, but by love; not by letter, bnt by favor, has converted mil¬ 
 lions of the worst characters into the very host. Yes, the religion of 
 Jesus sheds abroad in the human heart the love of God; and that 
 love, purifying the heart, overflows in all good actions—kind, humane, 
 benevolent; not only to the good, but to the evil. This is the true 
 philosophy. Correct the spring—the fountain. “Make the tree good” 
 Engraft a new scion on the old stock. Infuse new life, Warm the 
 heart by the wonderful love of God, exhibited and sealed by the blood 
 of his Son. Let this love, this pure benevolence, this genuine phi¬ 
 lanthropy, but reach the soul of man, and then all is pure within and 
 moral without t— 
 
 ‘'Talk they of morals! O thou bleeding Love, 
 
 “The chief morality is love of thee!” 
 
 What law could never do, though as holy, just, and good as the con¬ 
 stitution of Israel, through the weakness of the flesh, God, sending his 
 own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, has done; helms condemned 
 sin, wounded it, and killed it by a most transcendantly glorious dis¬ 
 play of love. 
 
 Where are Mr. Owen’s weapons to reform the world ? He dare not— 
 in fact, he does not, pretend to reform the world. He owns he has 
 nothing to propose adequate to the task; and therefore only promises 
 to save the next generation by a whimsical arrangement of circum¬ 
 stances. He proposes to grow better men and women; not to improve 
 the present race. And w'hat is the pith of his philosophy? Why, it is 
 this: Transplant a crab tree and it becomes an apple tree. But the 
 Great Reformer’s philosophy was, Engraft a new sc\on. Such is thp 
 
106 DEBATE. 
 
 exact difference between the scheme of Mr. Owen and the Founder of 
 Christianity. 
 
 But let us have a word from Paul on the contrast between the Jew- 
 
 % 
 
 ish and Christian religion. I will, for the sake of despatch, para¬ 
 phrase a part of the fourth chapter to the Galatians, thus:—“Now I 
 say, the heir, as long as he is a minor, differs in no respect from a 
 slave, though he be lord of all; for he is kept under tutors and 
 stewards until he is of age, or until the time appointed in the will of 
 his father. Just so it was with us Jews, while in our minority, which 
 was during the dominion of the old constitution; we were kept in 
 bondage, restrained, and curbed by the elements, or leading princi¬ 
 ples of that institution of law. But when the fulness of time appoint¬ 
 ed by our father in his will had come, God sent forth his Son, born 
 of a woman, and born under the old constitution, that he might be a 
 fellow-subject (I cannot say fellow-citizen) with us under that constitu¬ 
 tion, that he might be constitutionally qualified to buy us off out of 
 the slavery of the letter; that we might be elevated from the rank of 
 trembling slaves, to the adoption of sons. And now, having been 
 raised to the rank of sons, God has, under a new constitution , given 
 us the spirit of his Son in our hearts; so that we confidently and 
 affectionately say, as little children speak, Abba, Father. Now, my 
 brethren of the Jews, once subjects of the old constitution, you are 
 no more bondmen but sons in feeling, hi spirit ; and, in truth, too, by 
 relation; and if sons, you know you are heirs of God through his Son, 
 the Messiah. Well, then, brethren, you will never, I hope, desire to 
 be under the old constitution again; but, I trust, you will stand firm 
 in the liberty which you enjoy of serving God under the new constitu¬ 
 tion, not in the oldness of the letter , but in a new spirit” 
 
 Often does Paul rally upon this point: You Christians are “ not under 
 law , but under favor;” sin shall not, then, have power to lord it over 
 you, seeing you are not under the condemning genius of law 7 , but 
 under the pardoning, reconciling, purifying, and ennobling genius of 
 fav r. 
 
 This is the genius of Christianity. By Moses came the age of law. 
 By Jesus the Messiah came the reign of favor. So sang the angels 
 when they announced his birth, “Glory to God in the highest heavens; 
 Peace on earth, and good will among men.” Letters only reach the 
 eyes, but favor can touch the heart. Laws expressed in words assail 
 the ears and aim at restraining actions; but love pierces to the heart, 
 and disarms the rising thought of mischievous intent. It is called the 
 Reign of Heaven, because down into the heart it draw 7 s the heavenly 
 feelings, desires, and aims. From heaven it came, and to heaven it 
 leads. I will shake the heavens and the earth, says the Lord. I 
 will revolutionize the world; and how, my friends, but by introducing 
 new principles of human actions? 
 
 Paul informs us that the new constitution is every way better than 
 the old one. The Mediator is superior to Moses—its provisions better 
 - —its seal and pledges better. It runs in a few sentences. It promises— 
 
Debate. 
 
 left 
 
 1. To write the law upon the heart. That is, to implant the prin¬ 
 ciple, which induces to all the good and pious works which the law 
 demanded, and which will exclude the necessity of law taking cog¬ 
 nizance only of the outward deeds. 
 
 2. It promises to all subjects the remission of all sins; and, conse¬ 
 quently, banishes all guilt and fear from the conscience. 
 
 3. It assures all the citizens of having a just knowledge of God; 
 and, 
 
 4. It promises that God himself shall be theirs, and they his. 
 
 Now let me ask, what is wanting in this New Constitution, (and this 
 
 is the whole of it,) to make men just what reason says they ought to 
 be—to make them good companions and happy in themselves? 
 
 How much happiness is there in doing good? All this happiness is 
 theirs, for it imparts the disposition. How much happiness is there 
 in having all fear of death, all guilt and shame removed from the soul 
 of man?—This happiness is theirs. How much happiness in seeing 
 all our fellow-citizens knowing the character of God, his will, and de¬ 
 signs with regard to the whole human race, and all rejoicing in God ? 
 This happiness is theirs. And how much real felicity is there in hav¬ 
 ing all the treasures of God, all the riches of the heavenly inherit¬ 
 ance in prospect; as well as all assurance given us that on earth we 
 shall never be deserted nor forsaken by the Lord ? Now all these are 
 constitutional privileges belonging to every citizen of this kingdom—to 
 every one under the New Constitution. There is not one citizen in 
 the kingdom, of which this is the constitution, who has not in his heart 
 the law of love written; not one who does not know God; not one 
 who has not all his sins forgiven; not one who has not a good hope of 
 the heavenly and eternal inheritance. Such is the unexaggerated 
 character, genius, and design of the New Constitution, or Christian 
 Religion. 
 
 We are not, my friends, to suppose that the Patriarchal, Jewish* 
 and Christian religions, as we call them, are three distinct religions. 
 They are but one religion. The seed was sown in the Patriarchal 
 age,* the plant sprang; up and put forth its leaves and blossoms under 
 the cultivation of the Jewish; it ripened and was matured under the* 
 Christian. Favor was promised under the Patriarchal, was symholi 
 zed and shadowed forth under the Jewish, and accomplished and re¬ 
 alized under the New Constitution. The first formed good individ’ 
 uals; the second, while held sacred, made a happy nation, and 
 comparatively a moral people; but the third fills men with heavenly 
 influenced; with peace, and joy, and righteousness; and can make, 
 and will terminate in, a pure and happy world. 
 
 Mahometnnism is only a corruption and perversion of Judaism and 
 Christianity—Idolatry is but a perversion and corruption of the patri¬ 
 archal and Jewish dispensations. The apostacy or anti-Christ is but 
 a corruption of Christianity, a heterogeneous commixture of Judaism, 
 Paganism, and Christianity. There has been but one religion ever 
 in the world. In other words, the fountain whence all superstitions 
 have originated was one and the same. Hence we find the prominent 
 
108 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 ideas of divine revelation in every superstition on earth. As we 
 trace languages to a common fountain and origin, so we trace reli¬ 
 gions. Idolatry and polytheism were the worst of all the corruptions 
 in degrading man. But as the sweetest wine will make the sourest 
 vinegar, Christianity when corrupted has exhibited the most cruelty 
 and tyranny. Hence the inquisition has been the most cruel and 
 wicked tribunal upon this earth. The fine, vigorous, plethoric con¬ 
 stitution when subdued by a malignant fever , exhibits the greatest 
 mass of corruption. But who argues hence that a tine, vigorous, and 
 healthy constitution is a curse, shocks all common sense. 
 
 But the root of all the corruptions of Christianity was the incorpo¬ 
 rating with it the opinions and speculations of Egyptian and Indian 
 philosophy. All the systems flourishing upon the earth when Jesus 
 was born were, with the exception of the Jewish, (and that, we all 
 know, was much corrupted,) mere systems of abstract opinions and 
 speculations. Grecian and Roman, as well as the Eastern philosophy 
 had filled ail the reasoning part of society with the most air-built and 
 visionary schemes about matter and mind, creation and providence. 
 Conversions from these ranks, from all the sects of philosophers, 
 polluted, finally polluted, the Christian sanctuary. So that Christian¬ 
 ity became, with them, a science, a fit subject of speculation as 
 much as any of the doctrines of Plato or Socrates. From these 
 unhallowed commixtures sprang the creed systems of ancient and 
 modern times, so that finally almost every vestige of the ancient 
 simplicity and the true genius of Christianity disappeared; and vari¬ 
 ous schemes of sectarian and philosophic Christianity succeded and 
 supplanted it. 
 
 This creed system has been the fruitful source of all the corruptions 
 in morals, as well as the parent of all the religious discords now in 
 Christendom. But for it Deism, Atheism, and Scepticism would 
 have found no resting place amongst us. Many of the sceptics, and 
 even Mr. Owen himself, have been attacking anti-christ and thought 
 they were opposing Christ. They have not the disposition to discrim¬ 
 inate between what Christianity is, and the abuses of it. It requires 
 but little logical acumen to detect the sophistry, and but moderate 
 powers of declamation to expose the fooleries of most of the systems 
 and exhibitions of Christianity. And he must be dull of apprehen¬ 
 sion who has not felt, in this discussion, that Mr. Owen has been 
 fighting against the perversions of Christianity, rather than against 
 the religion of facts, of morals, and of happiness which our Redeem¬ 
 er has established in the world. But matter and mind, body and 
 spirit, in their greatest supposed opposition to each other, are not 
 greater contrasts than a religion of opinions and a religion of facts. 
 
 And here I beg leave to illustrate this distinction very briefly.—It 
 seems to have been abundantly proved, before the Christian era, that 
 opinions are too feeble to stimulate to virtue and goodness, and too 
 impotent to restrain from vice and immorality. Correat opinions, 
 we see in our own times, will not purify the heart, nor reform the 
 life* Nothing that must be argued out by a long process of ratincinq.- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 10‘J 
 
 tion can be of much po“wer in regulating human conduct, its strength 
 is exhausted by the time the point is proved. And it must be evident 
 to all that a system which requires much reason to comprehend, 
 would be most unsuitable to the great mass of mankind. A thousand 
 persons can believe a fact, for every one that can comprehend a 
 logical process of reasoning. Opinions, too, are, after all, but pro¬ 
 babilities. They can never rise higher than a strong probability 
 but faith produces, in many instances, absolute certainty, and is, in 
 the very constitution of human nature, evidently intended to be a 
 common and a most powerful principle of action. But opinions are 
 not, in the constitution of human nature, ever intended to be a com¬ 
 mon, nor a powerful principle of action. They are Only to govern us, 
 or to teach us to move with caution, or sometimes not to move at all, 
 in the absence of faith and knowledge. Faith and knowledge are 
 the governing principles of action, and opinion is only to be consult¬ 
 ed in the absence of these two. 
 
 The Messiah, well knowing what was in man, adapted his religion 
 to the nature and wants of men, and hence made its reforming, puri¬ 
 fying, and saving efficacy to consist in the belief of naked facts.— 
 Facts which, when believed, have an intrinsic, inherent, and inalien¬ 
 able power to govern a man’s thoughts, wishes, motives, and conduct. 
 The Christian’s creed, then, runs in the following style:—I believe 
 that Jesus was the son of Mary and the son of God; that he cured all 
 sorts of human maladies by his power; was persecuted and rejected 
 by his own nation; crucified, buried, and rose again, and ascended 
 into heaven. Whatever was done or said by him, reported and 
 attested by his companions, who were his witnesses to the ends of the 
 earth and the end of time, constitutes a legitimate article of the 
 Christian’s creed. If there have been one hundred well attested facts, 
 there'are a hundred articles in the Christian’s creed. This is the only 
 way that a reasonable and an intelligent man can enumerate the 
 articles of his belief. But because all the facts, minor and major, 
 in the evangelical histories, are comprised or rather terminate in the 
 death, burial, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ—nay, 
 indeed, in one that he rose again by the power of the Father ; the 
 Apostle identified the belief of these with salvation; or, in other 
 %vords, he said, “If you confess with your lips the Lord Jesus, and 
 believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall 
 be saved.” This belief, as far as faith is concerned, brings a man 
 into the kingdom of Jesus Christ. 
 
 But how different this from creeds of human construction! They 
 begin and proceed with the mere assertion of abstract views—such 
 as the omnipresence and omnisciency of God; the purposes and 
 decrees of the Almighty; 'abstract views of the fall of man; his 
 physical and moral powers; various schemes of redemption; the 
 nature of faith, atonement, and righteousness, &c. &c. Moses did 
 not thus frame,a creed for the Jews. lie lays down no definition of 
 God, but launches off thus, “In. the beginning God created the heavens 
 and the earJi.” The apostles begin their creed in the same style, “In 
 
 vox. ii. 10 
 
no 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 those days came John the Immerser proclaiming and saying,’ 5 <fcc„ 
 Such is the difference between the creed of Christians and philoso¬ 
 phers. The Presbyterian, Baptist, Episcopalian, and Metliodistic 
 creeds are so many systems of religious philosophy, built, as they 
 suppose, upon the Bible; just as Sir Isaac’s system of nature is built 
 upon the material universe. But the old fashioned creed of the first 
 Christians ran in such sentences as these, “The Lord is risen, indeed, 
 and has appeared to Peter.”—“God has commanded reformation and 
 forgiveness of sins to be proclaimed to all nations under heaven,” &c. 
 
 But up comes a grave, religious, philosophic sectary, and says, in 
 a very serious mood, Why, Sir, thousands believe your gospel facts, 
 and they have no more influence upon them than the belief of the 
 Musselman in the mission of Mahomet. How will you account for 
 this? I tell you, Sir, you are the cause yourself. You have taught 
 them to think that such a belief is good for nothing, and in believing 
 you the facts are neutralized, just as acids and alkalies form new 
 substances, and neutralize each other. It is so in the minds of men. 
 A lie may be believed along with truth—and the particular lie and 
 particular truth taught in one sermon, equally believed, render one 
 or both inoperative. Hence it is that the most valuable truths are 
 inoperative. A person who has been taught all his life that nothing 
 but silver and gold can purchase food and raiment, might be present¬ 
 ed with a bank bill worth ten thousand dollars , and yet, under the 
 belief that it w’as not jnoney , might perish with hunger or cold in the 
 absence of gold and silver, thinking that he had no money to go to 
 market; but let some person teach him that this bank bill, by a new 
 agreement of society, was, by appointment or law, good for ten thou¬ 
 sand pieces of silver.; the moment he is persuaded of this, he feels 
 himself rich, and rejoices with exceeding joy. So let a person be 
 undeceived on this cardinal point, and be taught, that to believe that 
 Jesus Christ rose from the dead , to be assured of this fact, is all that 
 jsnecessary to constitute saving faith, or such a belief as will, if 
 obeyed, introduce a man into the kingdom of heaven, and a corre 
 epondentjoy and gladness must ensue. 
 
 Ah! my friends, the dogmas which represent the scriptures as a 
 sealed book, and that teach that new revelations must be given to open 
 the seals, or all that is written is useless; the dogmas which teach 
 that saving faith is a principle wrought in the heart independent of 
 the testimony of God, that faith is the consequence of regeneration; 
 that a man must be first saved then believe, and all their kindred 
 dogmas have put weapons into the hands of the adversary of our 
 faith, as well as have made the word of God of none effect in the 
 hearts and lives of all who believe them. Many sceptics mistake the 
 dross of mere human doctrines and dogmas for the pure gold of Chris¬ 
 tianity. 
 
 Men have, under the dominion of opinions, been made to love and 
 hate one another for the agreement or collision of their opinions.—- 
 But under the dominion of faith they ore taught to allow a difference 
 
 _ . O 
 
 of opinions. There is but “one faith f but no where is it written 
 
debate. 
 
 m 
 
 that there is but one opinion . All Christians are in reality of one 
 faith; for all believe the gospel facts, and he that does not behove the 
 gospel facts cannot be a Christian. But the Apostle Paul positively 
 commanded all Christians to maintain the “unity of the faith and to 
 ^receive one another without regard to differences of opinion.”— 
 There is only one faith, but many opinions, and many different de¬ 
 grees of knowledge; and Christianity makes allowances for these. 
 
 A sub and a supra prefixed to the word lapsarian , or the letter i in 
 the word omousios, or emoiousios, have made different communi¬ 
 ties under the banners of him who, in his own person and by his 
 apostles, condescended to all the weaknesses and dulness of intellect 
 found in man or woman who loved Ins person. Sectaries have for¬ 
 gotten that God is Zone, as manifested in Jesus Christ to the world; 
 that all Christianity is resolvable into this grand truth, that L 'God so 
 loved the world as to send his only begotten Son into the world , that 
 whosoever believeth in him might be saved .” Who, believing this, 
 can think that he would condemn a person that loved him because he 
 could not apprehend the metaphysical import of a prefixed sub or su¬ 
 pra, or an intermediate i ? 
 
 Little children can apprehend and believe the gospel facts, as well, 
 or as firmly as Sir Isaac Newton did. But. they cannot understand any 
 of the abstract dogmas of the various philosophic sects. Why then 
 exclude them from the fold of Christ? The Apostle John .addressed 
 the congregations of his time as composed of old men, young men, 
 and children. That they were literally such, appears from his ad¬ 
 dress to each. The old men had known Jesus Christ from the begin¬ 
 ning of the proclamation concerning him. The young men had over¬ 
 come the world, notwithstanding the strength of youthful passions. 
 And the little children had begun well, they had been baptized, they 
 had just received the remission of their sins. All these had, however, 
 one faith, believed the same facts; but of very different attainments 
 both in knowledge and in behaviour. How foolish those s}*sterns that 
 require all men to be of one standard height in religious opinion; 
 which will have the iron bedstead of Procrustes for fixing the stature to 
 
 which every man must grow, on peril of losing his head or his soui i 
 The genius of Christianity is love. Its tendency is peace on earth 
 and good will among men—and it will eventuate in glory to God 
 and man in the highest heaven. It contemplates the reformation of 
 the world upon a new principle. It aims at conquering men by 
 love. And he is a superficial philosopher, who cannot see that this 
 is the only rational way to promote purity and happiness—ibr these 
 are inseparable companions —Happy the pure in heart, for they shall 
 see God? And no system which leaves man notin the possession of a 
 quiet conscience can bestow him happiness. Love has a transfigur¬ 
 ing, or transforming efficacy upon the human mind. To impress the 
 image of God, upon the human heart, it is necessary that the love 
 of God should be exhibited to the human mind. Men cannot be 
 made to love by commands and threats—that would be most unphilo¬ 
 sophic, If we would have men to love, we must present an amiable 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 m 
 
 object, This is God’s method. To fill men with hove to him, he 
 shews them that he loves them. They say, u me love him because he 
 first loved as .” That system which promotes, or is calculated to 
 promote, the greatest decree of love among men is the most philo¬ 
 sophic plan for purifying and reforming the world. This Mr. Owen’s 
 system has lost sight of. There is nothing in it to produce love.— 
 It wants an object, amiable and magnificent, to arouse reflection, 
 admiration, and love in man. Eating and drinking and lodging in 
 the same apartments, are all the stimulus he has to present to the 
 human mind to promote love. And yet who does not know that the 
 fastings, and watchings, and hardships, and dangers, of a single 
 Campaign, or of a shipwreck, will produce more kind feelings and 
 solicitude for the welfare of'our companions than the feasting together 
 for 3 'ears at the same festive board is capable of producing? If men 
 were to wreck their ingenuity to eternity, to invent a scheme for 
 prornulging love and good will among men, they could find nothing 
 half comparable to the Christian scheme. It finds men hated and 
 hating one another, full of bitterness and wrath, yet all in the same 
 calamity. It teaches them that they are all shipwrecked, bankrupts, 
 miserable, and wretched. It makes them feel this'*; and then presents 
 them with the love of God, sealed by the death of his Son. 
 
 But as yet we have said nothing about doctrine. True, indeed, 
 ’.ye have not spoken of the doctrines of the gospel. This word is not 
 i'll the plural form when applied to the truths of Christianity, we 
 sometimes read of the doctrines of demons; but it is only the doctrine 
 of Christ. When this term does not mean teaching which it often 
 does, it simply denotes the meaning of the facts. Hence the mean¬ 
 ing of any fact, such as the death or burial of Jesus Christ, is the 
 doctrine of the death or burial of Christ. As is the moral to the tale, 
 so is the doctrine to the fact. Hence all who believe the facts and 
 understand the meaning of them, have the sound or wholesome doct¬ 
 rine of Christ. Some may, we admit, believe the facts and not 
 understand the meaning of them. In such a case, the facts believed 
 will either not operate at all, or have a morbid influence. The 
 apostolic epistles, so far as doctrinal , are expressive of the meaning of 
 the gospel facts. They taught the new converts the legitimate 
 hearing and results of the facts believed. The other parts of these 
 letters were exhortatory or deductions from the facts, calculated to 
 direct and comfort Christians. But all the doctrine of Christ grew 
 out of the facts, just as all Christian faith is predicated upon the 
 testimony concerning them. 
 
 Two sentences found in John’s writings explain the whole design 
 of both the historical and epistolary parts of the apostles writings: 
 The design of the historic*.! books is thus expressed by John;—- 
 •‘Many other signs, truly, did Jesus, in the presence of his disciples, 
 which are not written in this book; but these that are written, are 
 written that you might believe that Jesus is the Messiah the son of 
 God; and* that believing you niight have lifie through his name ”—- 
 The design of the epistolary part he has as clearly expressed: 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 113 
 
 “These things do we write to you, brethren, that.your joy may be 
 complete ,” or that you may know the things which have been gifted 
 to you from God. 
 
 Having so far glanced at the genius and design of the Christian 
 scriptures, and the Christian religion, and remotely at its tendencies, 
 we shall give place to Soame Jenyns again on the tendency of this 
 religion. The extract which I am about to read, not only shews the 
 natural tendency of this religion but constitutes a formidable argu¬ 
 ment in proof of its authenticity. For as 1 hinted to you before, 
 this erudite and acute statesman triumphantly proves the Divine 
 authority of this religion, from the religion itself\ or what is not 
 onfrequentiy termed, the interned evidence—concerning the object 
 of this religion, he says: page 13—16. 
 
 “First then, the object of this religion is entirely new, and is this: 
 to prepare us by a state of probation for the kingdom of heaven.— 
 This is every where professed by Christ and his Apostles to be the 
 chief end of the Christian’s life; the crown for which he is to con¬ 
 tend, the goal to which he is to run, the harvest which is to pay him 
 for all his labours. Yet previous to their preaching no such prize 
 was ever hung out to mankind, nor any means prescribed for the 
 attainment of it. 
 
 It is indeed true, that some of the philosophers of antiquity enter¬ 
 tained notions of a future state, but mixed with much doubt and 
 uncertainty. Their legislators also endeavored to infuse into the 
 minds of the people a belief of rewards and punishments after death; 
 but bv this they only intended to give a sanction to their laws, and to 
 enforce the practice of virtue for the benefit of mankind in the pres¬ 
 ent life. This alone seems to have been their end, and a meritorious 
 end it was; but Christianity not only operates more effectually to 
 this end, but has a nobler design in view; which is, by a proper 
 education here, to render us fit members of a celestial society here¬ 
 after. In all former religions, the good of the present life was the 
 first object; in the Christian, it is but the second. In those, men 
 were incited to promote that good by the hopes of a future reward; 
 in this, the practice of virtue is enjoyed in order to qualify them for 
 that reward. There is a great difference, I apprehend, in these two 
 plans; that is, in adhering to virtue from its present utility in expect¬ 
 ation of a future happiness, and living in such a manner as to qualify 
 us for the acceptance, and the enjoyment of that happiness; and the 
 conduct and disposition of those, who act on these different principles, 
 must be no less different. On the first, the constant practice of 
 justice, temperance, and sobriety, will be sufficient; but on the latter, 
 we must add to these an habitual piety, faith, resignation, and con¬ 
 tempt of the world. The first may make us very good citizens, but 
 will produce but a tolerable Christian. Hence it is that Christianity 
 insists more strongly, than any preceding institution, religious or 
 moral, on purity of heart and a benevolent disposition; because these 
 are absolutely necessary to its great end. But in those, whose 
 recommendations of virtue regard the present life only, and whose 
 VOL. II. 10* 
 
124 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 promised rewards in another, were low and sensual, no preparatory 
 qualifications were requisite to enable men to practice the one, or to 
 enjoy the other; and therefore we see this object is peculiar to this 
 religion, and with it, was entirely new. 
 
 But although this object, and the principles on which it is founded 
 were new, and perhaps undiscoverable by reason, yet when disco- 
 vered, they are so consonant to it, that we cannot but readily assent 
 to them. For the truth of this principle, that the present life is a 
 .State of probation, and education to prepare us fof another, is con¬ 
 firmed by every thing which we see around us. It is the only key 
 which can open to us the designs of Providence in the economy of 
 human affairs; the only clue, which can guide us through that path¬ 
 less wilderness, and the only plan on which this world could possibly 
 have been formed, or on which the history of it can be comprehended 
 or explained. It could never have been formed on a plan of happi¬ 
 ness, because it is every where overspread with innumerable miseries; 
 nor of misery, because it is interspersed with many enjoyments. 
 It could not have been constituted for a scene of wisdom and virtue, 
 because the history of mankind is little more than a detail of their 
 follies, and wickedness; nor of vice, because that is no plan at all, 
 being destructive of all existence, and consequently of its own. But 
 on this system all that we here meet with, may be easily accounted 
 for; for this mixture of happiness and misery, of virtue and vice, 
 necessarily results from a state of probation and education; as pro¬ 
 bation implies trials, sufferings, and a capacity of offending; and 
 education, a propriety of chastisement for those offences.”* 
 
 More has been read here than is necessary to our object, the 
 prominent idea on which we emphasise is, that the tendency of this 
 religion is to produce purity of heart as essential to present and future 
 happiness; not to obtain it as a reward, but to prepare ourselves for 
 the enjoyment of it. A person to sustain any character must have 
 a previous training. A plain unlettered man would feel himself but 
 ill at ease among the polished grandees of this world: his taste, edu¬ 
 cation and habits would disqualify him for all enjoyments in their 
 society. Now this is the prominent design of the Christian religion, 
 not only to reveal a future state, but to prepare us for the enjoyment 
 of it. A design so apparent in the volume as to make it a miracle , 
 to me at least, how any person could conceive the authors of it to be 
 bad men, deceivers, err impostors. 
 
 That the object or design of the Christian religion is not political, 
 needs scarcely to be proved; when speaking of the personal character 
 of this religion, Mr. Jenyns very forcibly remarks, page 90 —22. 
 
 “And here 1 cannot omit observing, that the personal character 
 of the author of this religion is no less new, and extraordinary, than 
 the religion itself, who '^spake as never man spake,” and lived as 
 never man lived. In proof of this, I do not mean to alledge, that he 
 
 *See the same train of thought ingeniously pursued in one of the Spectators 
 of Addison, in which he considers heaven, not so much the reward as the con¬ 
 sequence of virtuous actions, — Reporter. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 ire 
 
 fasted fofty days, that he performed a variety of miraclts, and after 
 being buried three days, that he arose from die dead; because these 
 accounts will have but little effect on the minds of unbelievers, who, 
 if they believe not the religion, will give no credit to the relation of 
 these facts; but I will prove it from facts, which cannot be disputed. 
 For instance, he is the only founder of a religion in the history of 
 mankind, which is totally unconnected with all human policy and 
 government, and therefore totally unconducive to any worldly pur 
 pose whatever. All others, Mahomet, Numa, and even Moses him¬ 
 self, blended their religious institutions with their civil, and by them 
 obtained dominion over their respective people; but Christ neither 
 aimed at, nor would accept of any such power, he rejected every 
 object, which all other men pursue, and made choice of all those 
 which others fly from, and are afraid of. He refused power, riches, 
 honors, and pleasure; and courted poverty, ignominy, tortures, and 
 death. Many have been the enthusiasts, and impostor’s, who have 
 endeavored to impose on the world pretended revelations, and some 
 of them from pride, obstinacy, or principle, have gone so far, as to 
 lay down their lives, rather than retract.—But I defy history to show 
 one, who ever made his own sufferings and death a necessary part 
 of his original plan, and essential to hi^mission; this Christ actually 
 did: he foresaw, foretold, declared their necessity, and voluntarily 
 endured them. If wc seriously contemplate the divine lessons, the 
 perfect precepts, the beautiful discourses, and the consistent conduct 
 of this wonderful person, we cannot possibly imagine, that he could 
 have been either an idiot or a madman; and yet, if he was not what 
 he pretended to be, he can be considered in no other light. And 
 even under this character he would deserve some attention, because 
 of so sublime and rational an insanity there is no other instance in 
 the history of mankind.” 
 
 In speaking of the moral character and tendency of the Christian 
 religion', the same very acute writer observes: “That every moral 
 precept founded on reason is carried to a higher degree of purity and 
 perfection than in any other system of the ancient philosophers of 
 preceding ages—every moral precept, founded on false principles is 
 entirely omitted, and many new precepts added, peculiarly corres-* 
 ponding with the new object of this religion.” From these peculiar¬ 
 ities he deduces a very powerful argument in proof of its Divine 
 origin. The first item has been frequently noticed by other writers! 
 But few have spoken more explicitly on the false virtues omitted i& 
 the Christian religion, though universally applauded in all other re¬ 
 ligions. These false virtues are valour , patriotism , and friendship, 
 Ilis remarks upoft these three being very brief, I beg leave to read 
 them. Page 31—3G. 
 
 “Valor, for instance, or active courage, is for the most part con* 
 srtitutional, and therefore can have no more claim to moral merit, 
 than wit, beauty, health, strength, or any other endowment of the 
 mind or body; and so far is it from producing any salutary effects by 
 introducing peace* order*, of happiness into society, that it is the 
 
116 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 usual perpetrator of all the violences, which from retaliated injuries, 
 distract the world with bloodshed and devastation. It is the engine 
 by which the strong are enabled to plunder the weak, the proud to 
 trample upon the humble, and the guilty to oppress the innocent, 
 it is the chief instrument which ambition employs in her unjust pur¬ 
 suits of wealth and power, and is therefore so much extolled by her 
 votaries. It was indeed congenial with the religion of pagans, whos& 
 gods were for the most part made out of deceased heroes, exalted to 
 heaven as a reward for the mischiefs which they had perpetrated 
 upon earth, and therefore, with them, this was the first of virtues, 
 and had even engrossed that denomination to itself; but whatever 
 merit it may have assumed among pagans, with Christians it can 
 pretend to none, and few or none are the occasions in which they are 
 permitted to exert it. They are so far from being allowed to inflict 
 evil, that they are forbid even to resist it; they are so far from being 
 encouraged to revenge injuries, that one of their first duties is to 
 forgive them; so far from being incited to destroy their enemies, that 
 they are commanded to love them, and to serve them to the utmost 
 of their power. If Christian nations therefore were nations of Chris¬ 
 tians, all war would be impossible and unknown among them, and 
 valour could be neither of use nor estimation, and therefore could 
 never have a place in the catalogue of Christian virtues, being 
 irreconcileable with all its precepts. I object not to the praise and 
 
 honors bestowed on the valiant, they are the least tribute which can 
 
 * 
 
 be paid them by those who enjoy safety and affluence by the inter¬ 
 vention of their dangers and sufferings; I assert only that active 
 courage can never be a Christian virtue, because a Christian can 
 have nothing to do with it. Passive courage is indeed frequently, 
 and properly inculcated hv this meek and suffering religion, under 
 the titles of patience and resignation: a real and substantial virtue 
 this, and a direct contrast to the former; for passive courage arises 
 from the noblest dispositions of the human mind, for a contempt of 
 misfortunes, pain, and death, and a confidence in the protection of the 
 Almighty; active, from the meanest; from passion, vanity, and self- 
 dependence. Passive courage is derived from a zeal for truth, and 
 a perseverance in duty; active is the offspring of pride and revenge, 
 ana the parent of cruelty and injustice. In short, passive courage is 
 the resolution of a philosopher; active, the ferocity of a savage; 
 Nor is this more incompatible with the precepts, than with the object 
 of this religion, which is the attainment of the kingdom of heaven; 
 for valor is not that sort of violence by which that kingdom is to 
 be taken; nor are the turbulent spirits of heroes and conquerors ad¬ 
 missible into those regions of peace, subordination, and tranquility. 
 
 “Patriotism also, that celebrated virtue, so much practised in 
 ancient, and so much professed in modern times; that virtue, which 
 so long preserved the liberties of Greece, and exalted Rome to the 
 empire of the world; this celebrated virtue, I say, must also be ex¬ 
 cluded; because it not only falls short of, but directly counteracts,' 
 the extensive benevolence of this religion. A Christian is of no 
 
DEBATE 
 
 117 
 
 country;.ho is a citizen of the world; and his neighbors and country¬ 
 men are the inhabitants of the remotest regions, whenever their 
 distresses demand his friendly assistance. Christianity commands 
 us to love all mankind, patriotism to oppress all other countries to 
 advance the imaginary prosperity of our own. Christianity enjoins 
 us to imitate the universal benevolence of our Creator, who pours 
 forth his blessings on every nation upon earth; patriotism, to copy 
 the mean partiality of an English parish officer, who thinks injustice 
 and cruelty meritorious, whenever they promote the interests of his 
 own inconsiderable village. This has ever been a favourite virtue 
 with mankind, because it conceals self-interest under the mask of 
 public spirit, not only from others, but even from themselves, and 
 gives a license to inflict wrongs and injuries, not only with impunity, 
 but with applause; but it is so diametrically opposite to the great 
 characteristic of this institution, that it never could have been ad¬ 
 mitted into the list of Christian virtues. 
 
 “Friendship likewise, although more congenial to the principles 
 of Christianity, arising from more tender and amiable dispositions, 
 could never gain admittance among her benevolent precepts for the 
 Same reason; because it is too narrow and confined,and appropriates 
 t#it benevolence to a single object, which is here commanded to be 
 extended to all. Where friendship arises from similarity of senti¬ 
 ments, and disinterested affections, they are advantageous, agreeable, 
 and innocent, but have little pretensions to merit; for it is justly 
 observed, “If ye love them, which love you, what thank have ye ? 
 for sinners also love those, that love them.” But if they are formed 
 from alliances in parties, factions, and interests, or from a participa¬ 
 tion of vices, the usual parents of what are called friendships among 
 mankind, they are then both mischievous and criminal, and conse¬ 
 quently forbidden, but in their utmost purity deserve no recommen¬ 
 dation from this religion.” 
 
 As Mr. Jenyns, though a very honorable member of the British 
 parliament, dared to avow that patriotism was not one of the Christian 
 virtues, we may add that even the policy which we so much appro¬ 
 bate in this community under the name of “The American system^ 
 though mo^t unquestionably good policy, is a very bright example of 
 the correctness of his remark upon patriotism. The patriotism of 
 Great Britain would not permit her to buy the products of our soil, 
 and our patriotism will not permit us to buy the products of her 
 mechanical labors; she will compel her own subjects to suffer rather 
 than purchase our corn and flour, and we will endeavor to deprive 
 the manufacturing classes in Great Britain of the means of subsist¬ 
 ence to hold up our own. All this is good policy and good patriotism, 
 hut no part of the Christian religion. To call this a virtue may be 
 correct in politics—or economics:—but in the Christian religion it 
 would pass for a false virtue, and very justly, according to the 
 genius of this religion which embraces all Christians in its affection, 
 and all mankind in its benevolence. 
 
 Same have rather censured than applauded some of the precepts 
 
118 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 found in the “sermon on the mount .” Pretty thing, indeed, say tliey, 
 to be commanded “to turn the other cheek to him that has already 
 smitten us once;” and to go “two miles with him that compels us to 
 go one.” Yes, indeed, a pretty thing for the proud and retaliating! 
 But the question is, Which is the speedier way to end the controversy? 
 Now take the precept literally, and doubt not the controversy will be 
 sooner terminated, and less danger will be incurred by turning the 
 ether cheek than by striking back;—and we will sooner get rid of an 
 unprofitable companion by going two miles with him, than to stop 
 and quarrel on the road. Now, taking them literally , which is not in 
 accordance with the genius of such maxims, nor the Saviour’s inten¬ 
 tion, 1 presume; but, I say, take them literally, and they are, in 
 their tendency, better than any other course which can be pursued to 
 terminate the quarrel. 
 
 But Christianity inculcates many virtues unknown and untaught 
 before, each of which demonstrates its divinity and excellent ten¬ 
 dency. I will prefer taking notice of them in the words of Mr. Jenyns 
 to my own desultory remarks. 
 
 On the beatitude which says, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for 
 theirs is the kingdom of heaven,” lie remarks— 
 
 “This was so new, and so opposite to the ideas of all Pagan moral¬ 
 ists, that they thought this temper of mind a criminal and contempti¬ 
 ble meanness, which must induce men to sacrifice the glory of their 
 country, and their own honor, to a shameful pusillanimity; and such 
 it appears to almost all who are called Christians even at this day ? 
 who not only reject it in practice, but disavow it in principle, not¬ 
 withstanding this explicit declaration of their Master. We see them 
 revenging the smallest affronts by premeditated murder, as indivi¬ 
 duals, on principles of honor; and, in their national capacities, 
 destroying each other with fire and sword, lor the low considerations 
 of commercial interests, the balance of rival powers, or the ambition 
 of princes. We see them with their last breath animating each other 
 io a savage revenge, and in the agonies of death, plunging with feeble 
 arms their daggers into the hearts of their opponents; and, what is still 
 worse, we hear all these barbarisms celebrated by historians, flattered 
 by poets, applauded in theatres, approved in senates, and even sanc¬ 
 tified in pulpits. Bat universal practice cannot alter the nature ot 
 things, nor universal error change the nature of truth. Pride was 
 not made for man, but humility, meekness, and resignation; that is, 
 poorness of spirit was made for man, and properly belongs to his 
 dependent and precarious situation; and is the only disposition of 
 mind which can enable him to enjoy ease and quiet here, and hap¬ 
 piness hereafter. Yet was this important precept entirely unknown 
 until it was promulgated hv him who said, “Suffer the little children 
 to come, unto me, and forbid them not \ for of such is the kingdom of 
 heaven; verily, I say unto you, whosoever shall not receive the king¬ 
 dom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.” 
 
 Another precept, equally new and no less excellent, is forgiveness 
 wf injuries. “You have heard,” says Christ to his disciples, “Thou 
 
 c 
 
 Is 
 
 ? 
 
 
 1 
 
 f 
 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 110 
 
 shalt love thy neighbor and hate thy enemy; but 1 say unto you, 
 love your enemies; bless them that curse you; do good to them that 
 hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and perse¬ 
 cute you.'” This was a lesson so new, and so utterly unknown, until 
 taught by his doctrine, and enforced by his example, that the wisest 
 moralists of the wisest nations and ages, represented the desire of 
 revenge as a mark of a noble mind, and the accomplishment of it as 
 one of the chief felicities attendant on a fortunate man. But how 
 much more magnanimous, how much more beneficial to mankind, is 
 forgiveness! It is more magnanimous, because every generous and 
 exalted disposition of the human mind is requisite to the practice of 
 it: for these alone can enable us to bear the wrongs and insults of 
 wickedness and folly with patience, and to look down on the perpe¬ 
 trators of them with pity rather than with indignation; these alone 
 can teach us, that such are but a part of those sufferings allotted to 
 us in this state of probation, and to know, that to overcome evil with 
 good, is the most glorious of all victories; it is the most beneficial, 
 because this amiable conduct alone cam put an end to an eternal suc¬ 
 cession of injuries and retaliations; for every retaliation becomes it 
 new injury, and requires another act of revenge for satisfaction. 
 But would we observe this salutary precept, to love our enemies, and 
 to do good ta those who despitefully use us; this obstinate benevolence 
 would at last conquer the most inveterate hearts, and we should have 
 no enemies to forgive. How much more exalted a character, there¬ 
 fore, is a Christian martyr, suffering with resignation, and praying for 
 the guilty, than a Pagan hero, breathing revenge, and destroying the 
 innocent! Yet noble and useful as this virtue is, before the appear¬ 
 ance of this religion it was not only unpractised, but decried in 
 principle as mean and ignominious, though so obvious a remedy for 
 most of the miseries of this life, and so necessary a qualification for 
 the happiness of another.”—p. 39—42. 
 
 After specifying other virtues never before promulged, such as what 
 he calls faith, repentance, humility, and universal benevolence, ho 
 concludes with these remarks, p. 51-—55:— 
 
 It cannot be denied that the Great Author of the Christian Institu¬ 
 tion, first and singly ventured to oppose all the chief principles of 
 Pagan virtue, and to introduce a religion directly opposite to those 
 erroneous, though long established opinions, both in its duties and 
 in its object. The most celebrated virtues of the ancients were, high 
 spirit, intrepid courage, and implacable resentment. 
 
 “Impiger , iracundus. inexoralibis , acer, was the portrait of the 
 most illustrious hero, drawn by one of the first poets of antiquity. 
 To all these admired qualities, those of a true Christian are an exact 
 contrast; for this religion constantly enjoins poorness of spirit, meek¬ 
 ness, patience, and forgiveness of injuries. “But I say unto you, 
 that ye resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on the right 
 cheek, turn to him the other also.” The favorite characters among 
 the Pagans, were the turbulent, ambitious, and intrepid, who, through 
 toils and dangers, acquired wealth, and spent it in luxury, magnii> 
 
120 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 eence, and corruption; but both these are equally adverse to the 
 Christian system, which forbids all extraordinary efforts to obtain 
 wealth, care to secure, or thought concerning the enjoyment of it. 
 “Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth,” &c. “Take no 
 thought, saying, What shall we eat, or what shall we drink, or where¬ 
 withal shall we clothed? for after all these things do the Gentiles 
 seek ” The chief object of the Pagans was immortal fame*: for this 
 their poets sang, their heroes fought, and ther patriots died; and this 
 was hung out by their philosophers and legislators, as the great incite¬ 
 ment to all noble and virtuous deeds. But what says the Christian 
 Legislator to his disciples on this subject? Blessed are ye, when 
 men shall revile you, and shall say all manner of evil against you 
 falsely for my sake; rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is 
 your reward in heaven.” So widely different is the genius of the 
 Pagan and Christian morality, that I will venture to affirm that the 
 most celebrated virtues of the former are more opposite to the spirit, 
 and more inconsistent with the end of the latter, than even their 
 most infamous vices; and that a Brutus wrenching vengeance out of 
 his hands to whom alone it belongs, by murdering the oppressor of his 
 country, or a Cato murdering himself from an impatience of control, 
 leaves the world more unqualified for, and more inadmissible into 
 the kingdom of heaven, than even a Messalina, or an Hsliogabalus, 
 with all their profligacy about them. 
 
 “Nothing, 1 believe, has so much contributed to corrupt the true 
 spirit of the-christian institution, as that partiality which we contract 
 from our earliest education for the manners of Pagan antiquity: from 
 whence we learn to adopt every moral idea, which is repugnant to it; 
 to applaud false virtues, which that disavows; to be guided by laws 
 of honor, which that abhors; to imitate characters, which that de¬ 
 tests; and to behold heroes, patriots, conquerors, and suicides with 
 admiration, whose conduct that utterly condemns. From a coalition 
 of these opposite principles was generated that monstrous system of 
 cruelty and benevolence, of barbarism and civility, of rapine and 
 justice, of fighting and devotion, of revenge and generosity, which 
 harassed the world for several centuries with crusades, holy wars, 
 knight-errantry, and single combats, and even still retains influence 
 Enough, under the name of honor, to defeat the most beneficent ends 
 of this holy institution. I mean not by this to pass any censure 
 on the principles of valor, patriotism, or honor: they may be useful, 
 and perhaps necessary, in the commerce and business of the present 
 turbulent and imperfect state; and those who are actuated by them 
 may be virtuous, honest, and even religious men: all that I assert is, 
 that they cannot be Christians. A profligate may be a Christian, 
 though a bad one, because he may be overpowered by passions and 
 temptations, and his actions may contradict his principles; but a man 
 whose ruling principle is honor, however virtuous he may be, cannot 
 be a Christian, because he erects a standard of duty, and deliberately . 
 adheres to it* diametrically opposite to the whole tenor of that re. ? 
 tigion.”* ' 
 
DEBATE 
 
 m 
 
 To conclude, the direct tendency of the Christian religion, is to 
 purify the heart, and to make men every thing which the perfect 
 happiness of society requires. After Paul had gone into a long de¬ 
 tail of Christian virtues, he concludes in this sweeping style, which 
 Suffers notone virtue to escape: “Finally, brethren, whatever things 
 are true, whatever things are venerable, whatever things are just, 
 whatever things are pure, whatever things are amiable, whatever 
 things are of good fame; if there be any virtue, and if any praise be 
 due, think on, and practise these things/’ 
 
 One miracle there is, which Mr. Owen must believe at all events, 
 on the whole premises before us. He must believe that a set of vi'c 
 impostors, deceivers of the basest stamp, the greatest cheats and liars 
 that ever lived, did give birth to the purest system of morality the 
 world ever saw, did recommend the practice of every virtue which 
 human reason in the most cultivated state of society can admire and 
 approve. He must believe that all the true religion and genuine 
 virtue now existing, depends upon the forgeries of a pack of Char¬ 
 latans, who went about from place to place declaring that they had 
 heard what they never did hear, and that they had seen what they 
 never saw. This miracle Mr. Owen must believe—which is a miracle 
 of a more incredible character than any one in the volume, especially 
 when we take into view the circumstances attendant on the progress 
 and sufferings of these wicked impostors. 
 
 “If weak thy faith, why choose the harder side F” 
 
 But still J have not made sufficiently emphatic the tendency of 
 Christianity upon every one who embraces it. This I will again la v- 
 before you. It becomes the more necessary to call this up again be¬ 
 cause our opponent execrates Christianity more because of its “idle 
 fears and terrors” than on any other account. To me, from child¬ 
 hood, it has seemed strange why mankind should more fear the threats, 
 than hope for the promises of Jesus Christ, If not to a conscious¬ 
 ness of the just desert of all that is threatened, perhaps anterior to 
 any notice of the threats, I know not to what other cause this is to 
 be attributed. For certain it is, that threats and promises are equally 
 credible or incredible. They both rest upon the same testimony. 
 Now Christianity, if rationally regarded, can never fill but one class 
 of mankind with fears. If it he regarded as a fraud or imposition, 
 its hopes and fears are equally disannulled. If it be regarded as 
 true, what is its truth save pardon and peace to every one who sub¬ 
 mits to the government of Jesus Christ? No person can, then, be 
 filled with any fears or terrors from the New Testament, but he that be ¬ 
 lieves and will not obey . The infidel cannot —the Christian cannot. To 
 " the infidel it is all a romance—to the Christian it is all peace, hope, and 
 joy, real as life itself. Who, then, does Christianity make unhappy ? 
 The very persons, and none but the persons, it ought to make unhapppv; 
 viz. those who believe, and will not obey Jesus Christ. And if it did 
 not make such unhappy, it would be unworthy of its Author and its 
 object. And the man who labors to divest the guilty of his fears is a 
 misanthrope, and not a philanthropist. 
 
 VOL, H.~ 11 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 1 *>-> 
 
 I/V/W 
 
 But there is a Species of corrupt Christianity, which has made sui¬ 
 cides through the false alarms which it creates about things un¬ 
 known and unknowable. I have nothing to do with it more than 
 with the Alcoran. It is enough for my purpose to show that Christi¬ 
 anity promises pardon to every human being who voluntarily submits 
 to the government of Jesus Christ; and this pardon is tendered to them 
 the very instant they bow to the authority of Jesus Christ or enter his 
 kingdom. Hence the first Christians always rejoiced, because the 
 moment they were baptized into Jesus Christ, they had put him on 
 as their Saviour; or in other words, had put themselves under the 
 constitution of favor, and sin could no longer lord it over them, for they 
 were not under law. Now all who, like Saul of Tarsus, believed ill 
 Jesus Christ and were baptized for the remission of their sins, as he 
 was, or as the three thousand on Pentecost, could, like the Eunuch, 
 after baptism , go on their way rejoicing. So that the first Christians 
 addressed one another as having their sins forgiven; and consequent¬ 
 ly all gui't and shame and fear were removed from their consciences. 
 They did not cense—they could not cease—always to rejoice, with 
 joy unspeakable and full of glory. ’Tis monks and friars and monas¬ 
 teries, that have invented the gloomy religion of the times. The first 
 Christians were commanded to rejoice always. So that the legitimate 
 tendency of the religion of Jesus Christ, is to fill all who submit to 
 his government, with peace, and joy, and good hope; and to cause 
 them finally to exclaim. “O Death, where now thy sting! O Hades, 
 where now thy victory!” • 
 
 That such are the inseparable results of a cordial reception *t)f the 
 gospel, or of a sincere submission to the authority of Jesus Christ, all 
 the New Testament might he appealed to in proof—I will only allude 
 to a few cases. Three thousand pierced to the heart by Peter’s dis¬ 
 course in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, so soon as he announ¬ 
 ced reformation and remission of sins, were baptized for the remission 
 of their sins —and straight-wav they were filled with joy and peace; 
 for they eat their food with gladness, praising God. When many of 
 the Samaritans honrd Philip proclaiming the Reign of Favor, i they 
 believed and were baptized, both men and women, and then, we learn 
 from Luke, “ there was much joy in that city?' 1 So it was in all the ci¬ 
 ties where Christianity was embraced. The apostles taught the Chris ¬ 
 tians that God “had forgiven them all trespasses.” Of their joy, Peter 
 says, “Whom having not seen yon love, but on whom not now look 
 ing, but believing, you rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory? 1 
 The forgiveness of sins, the removal of guilt, and the consequent ter¬ 
 mination of all fear that has torment, were, in all cases , simultaneous 
 plcssings enjoyed by all Christians on their putting themselves under the. 
 guidance of Jesus Christ. The same cause will produce the same 
 effect , and wherever the ancient gospel is proclaimed, believed, and 
 obeyed, the same effects will uniformly follow. 
 
 Now when we add to these blessings the well-founded hope of a • 
 glorious immortality, at the resurrection of the just, we have elevated 
 span to a rank worthy of himself, and made his existence worthy of 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 123 
 
 the great first cause. So that the direct tendency of Christianity 
 is to glorify God in the highest degree; to produce peace of mind, jov, 
 and hope in the believers; and to diffuse good will among men. The 
 golden paradoxes of Paul speak more in praise of Christianity than 
 all the encomiums ever pronounced upon it. To hear men perse¬ 
 cuted, reproached, and destitute of almost every earthly comfort, say, 
 “We are sorrowful , yet always rejoicing; we are poor, yet making many 
 rich; we have nothing yet possessing all things transcends all the 
 enconiums from all the orators of Greece, Rome, and England, pro 
 nounced upon virtue, the gods, and religion. 
 
 Fancy to yourselves, my friends, a society in which such characters 
 shall have the rule, and then you want no poet to describe the millen¬ 
 nium to you. Peace, harmony, love, and universal good will, must be 
 the order of the day. There wants nothing—believe me, my friends, 
 there wants nothing—but a restoration of ancient Christianity, and a 
 cordial reception of it, to till the world with all the happiness, phy¬ 
 sical, intellectual, and moral, which beings like us in this state of 
 trial, could endure—shall I say?—yes, endure, and enjov. 
 
 But even yet, were we to close our remarks upon the tendencies 
 of Christianity, upon the subject of it, and upon society at large, we 
 should fail in doing justice to this item. We must not only speak in 
 general terms of its influences upon the human family; we must look 
 at it in detail. We must ask, What has it done for woman ? Yes—for 
 woman—created to be the help meet of man ? In all Pagan lands, 
 and even among the Jews, she has been made little else than a slave 
 to the passion and to the tyranny of man. The Jews rather exile her 
 from the synagogue, as altogether animal in her nature; and the rude 
 savage makes her more a beast of burthen, than a companion for 
 man; doomed to incessant toils, to all the real drudgeries of life.— 
 Paganism, in its most improved forms, leaves her without a taste for 
 rational enjoyment, and without a taste of it. The Jews and Pagans 
 forages back have scarce recognized that she lias any claims upon 
 man more than for food and raiment, and these, indeed, are often 
 dispensed to her without a smile. But some half dozen of female 
 names have come down to us in the annals of Grecian and Roman 
 story, as having attracted much attention from their cotemporaries, 
 or as deserving much admiration from posterity. Natural affection, 
 in defiance of Pagan dan-mess, superstition, and cruelty, did, in 
 some few instances, snatch some individual females from the empire 
 of night, and gave them a place among the reputable characters of 
 antiquity. But the sex, as such , were almost universally neglected. 
 But from the time that Gabrael visited the cottage o [Mary, the mother 
 of our Lord, down to the present, wherever Christianity has found its 
 way, the lemale sex has been emancipated from ignorance, bondage, 
 and obscurity. It has been the aim and the glory of Christianity, my 
 female friends, to elevate your sex from the degradation of Paganism, 
 and to make you the rational, the useful, and the amiable companion 
 of man'. To it you are indebted for that influence which you now 
 possess, and ought to possess, in forming the character of man. While 
 
m 
 
 DEBATE; 
 
 Christianity Iixis made 3 r oti not the inferior but the companion and 
 the equal of man; it has taught you that you are to pay the impost 
 which, for this honor, it has laid you under. That is, that you are 
 to bring up your offspring in the discipline and education which the 
 Lord enjoins; that you are to use all your influence in casting the 
 minds of those, under your control, into the mould of the apostles’ 
 doctrine. This is the way you can perpetuate; the blessings which you 
 enjoy, and leave behind you sons and daughters who will feel them¬ 
 selves equals and mutually love, honor, and esteem one another. Let 
 me remind you that there are more individuals of your sex, honored in 
 the New Testament, more of them named, more of them applauded, 
 and more true courtesy shown them, than is to be found in all the other 
 works of the Augustan age; and let all the world know that in the New 
 Testament it is a. maxim that in Christ Jesus there is neither male 
 nor female, but that both sexes are one in all moral, religious, and 
 social privileges and enjoyments of which either sex is susceptible. 
 
 Christianity would not have commended itself to every man’s con¬ 
 science had it not paid a due respect to all the natural and unavoida¬ 
 ble relations existing in society. Hence there is not a natural relation 
 to which it does not allude. Husbands and wives, parents and chil¬ 
 dren, masters and servants, are all addressed in a way corresponding 
 with the nature of these relations, well designed to sanctify and ren¬ 
 der them all useful, comfortable, and happy. 
 
 Here I am informed, by a note, banded me, that I have omitted to 
 say any thing upon the subject of regeneration. Some persons think 
 as most preachers speak, if you Will observe, scarce a preacher 
 takes a text, or makes a sermon, but he must give you his whole sys¬ 
 tem of theology. No matter where the text be found, the system must 
 >;• .pin r,ut. {fence some of this audience think, that, in defending 
 hristianity, I must defend or exhibit all the tenets of a sect, or all the 
 essential points of some system; and so I am told that I have omitted 
 the article on regeneration. Strange,indeed! when I have been dis¬ 
 coursing at length upon the purifying influences of the Christian reli¬ 
 gion, and its tendencies upon the hearts and lives of men, 1 should be 
 told that I have neglected the article of regeneration / Perhaps my 
 informant expected to hear from me a disquisition upon the quaint 
 theories of modern systems. In not gratifying him with such a dis¬ 
 cussion, for the time being, I hope he will have the goodness to ex¬ 
 cuse me. 
 
 Having paid some attention to the genius, design,, and tendency of 
 Christianity, I will now approach the social system again. Mr. Owen 
 relies upon his twelve facts, and especially upon the sixth fact, or law, 
 to demolish all the religions in the world. Yes, indeed, if his sixth 
 law he a truism, he conceives that all the religions of the world are as 
 prostrate as Dagon before the ark. If it he so that we can neither 
 make ourselves nor our wills; that circumstances control us by a ne¬ 
 cessity, as unchangeable as fate itself, then he has proved, by merely . 
 asserting these laws, that all the religions of the world are founded upon 
 the ignorance of mankind. He does not seem to have noticed that 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 125 
 
 there is a very learned and respectable"body of Christians who attribute 
 as much to necessity , only under different names, as he does himself. 
 Every action of every human being, is, with them, foreknown, and 
 predetermined from all eternity; or in brief, “ that God has foreordain¬ 
 ed whatsoever comes to pass.” Yet these are all firm and rat ional and 
 argumentative believers in the Divine authority of these records. 
 How, then, in the name of reason, can Mr. Owen think, that, in prov¬ 
 ing his doctrine of fate or necessity, he has proved all the reli¬ 
 gions in the world to be predicated upon the ignorance of mankind, 
 when he will find myriads of Christians, philosophic or systematic 
 necessarians, admitting his premises in all the prominent items, and 
 yet dissenting from his conclusions. 
 
 It will not then follow 7 , as a necessary consequence, in the mind of a 
 thorough Calvinist, that if our volitions have no power over our belief, 
 that if all things are unchangeably fixed, there is no truth in religion. 
 Mr. Owen has taken for granted that which will not be granted by 
 myriads of learned, acute, and talented men, that his propositions 
 proved and Christianity is slain. I hope lie will yet turn his thoughts 
 thitherward. He may say that they are inconsistent, and self-condemn¬ 
 ed; but still it proves that his system may be true and Christianity 
 true—myriads being judges. 
 
 But this only on the way to another peep into his theory. 1 do think 
 as Mr. Owen has paid so little attention to the objections offered to 
 his system, that I am logically excused from paying any farther at¬ 
 tention to it. But as he still reiterates his fundamentals with undis¬ 
 mayed confidence that the repetition of them is, like a charm, to effect 
 a cure of our mental maladies; and as he has repeatedly affirmed that 
 if one of his principles can be proved erroneous, he will give up the 
 whole. I will call upon another witnesss in the case. 
 
 If consciousness be any sort of evidence of the powers with which 
 we are endowed, I make the following appeal to it on the subject of 
 his sixth law: 
 
 Objects are thrown in our way, or we go in quest of them.—- 
 These excite our reasoning powers, or call them into action. We 
 reason upon them and form judgments. These judgments or con¬ 
 clusions either call for some activity upon our part, or they do not. 
 If they do not, we do not act. But if they do, we act. Now what 
 is the cause of these actions? Not the mere presentation of the object, 
 but our reasonings upon it. From the first examination of the object 
 to the last, there is a continual determination of the mind to the object ; 
 or when we have finished the first examination of the object we will to 
 examine it a second time; and so on to the third, or fourth examina¬ 
 tion. Mr. Owen, for example, had heard that the Mexican gov¬ 
 ernment had much territory to dispose of—his previous desire for 
 territory to test his theory upon, prompts him to think upon some 
 plan for obtaining a part of it. He reasons upon the object, and 
 examines it in many independent points of view. On every separate 
 view of the subject, he decides to examine it again. There are as 
 many determinations as examinations. Finally, his ultimate coir- 
 YOL. II, 11* 
 
126 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 elusion is formed. Now every one of these examinations is begun* 
 prosecuted, and carried out from the consciousness which he possesses 
 of his power to accomplish the object so soon as it shall be decided 
 which is the better course. He would never examine the subject a 
 moment if he was not conscious that he has the power of examining 
 it, and the power of acting agreeably to his last decision. Now this 
 consciousness of the power of examination, deciding, and acting, 1 
 summon as proof that such a controlling power the mind possesses 
 over its own acts. It is the nearest witness which can be summoned 
 in this case, and its testimony is the most creditable. It knows most, 
 and is the best judge, of all our intellectual and moral powers—and 
 it avers, as every man can hear in the court of his own understand¬ 
 ing, that nothing could be examined, contemplated, or reasoned upon, 
 were we destitute of a controlling power, or a power of acting con¬ 
 formably to our own decisions. Consciousness is often the ultimate 
 arbiter in all questions concerning our intellectual and moral powers, 
 ilow often do we see persons either abandon, or refuse to undertake 
 a profession, or cause, because conscious their powers are not equal 
 to it. We make consciousness a witness in all cases within its 
 jurisdiction. 
 
 Again, in walking down street Mr. Owen hears that lhs cotton 
 factory at New Harmony is consumed by fire! he does not at first 
 know whether the report is credible. Tie goes to the river to inter¬ 
 rogate the passengers, or captain of a steam boat just arrived from 
 the vicinity. He interrogates them, and. from their unanimous 
 testimony he believes the fact, and doubts no more. Now would 
 Mr. Owen have gone one step in this examination if he had not 
 been conscious that he had the power of believing upon testimony, 
 and that there w T as a certain amount of evidence which would pro¬ 
 duce certainty? His ultimate belief is evidently a consequence 
 wf the existence of this controling power—and his determination to 
 examine the matter proves, that his volition had seine influence upon 
 his belief. For, had he not examined, he would not have believed; 
 and had he not determined or whiled to examine, he might not have 
 obtained the evidence; so that his belief is in this case dependent 
 upon his will. 
 
 Were I to ask him now to believe that his factory was not burned, 
 he could not do it—not because his will determined any thing about 
 it, but because he wants evidence. Pretty much the same power 
 which the will exercises over our eyes in examining objects of sense, 
 does it exercise over our mental eye; we open or shut the eye in 
 obedience to our wills. But we cannot will to see without light 
 An eve and light, and a will to see, are all necessary to vision, 
 lie that affirms, that a man believes bv necessity, may as well 
 say, that man sees by necessity. Theie is no person more blind than 
 the man who will not see. 
 
 But we have still greater objections to the social system, plead by 
 Mr. Owen. It is only in its best possible state, predicated upon 
 she half Of man, and only promises to make him a happy animal*, 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 127 
 
 For the sake of illustration we will admit that Mr. Owen has con¬ 
 summated all his plans, and all his wishes, in erecting his parallelo¬ 
 gram communities, and that he has got a whole territory, nay, the 
 whole earth covered with them; every thing just to his mind.— 
 Man at his zenith is a stall fed ox. Mr. Owen has mistaken the 
 capacity of man as much as the vintner did the capacity of a vessel, 
 who strove to fill it with two gallons when it held four. Nothing blit 
 experiment could convince him—He thought his measure of two 
 gallons was equal to the capacity of the vessel, until he poured 
 in its contents—He then saw that it was but half full. So with Mr. 
 Owen’s system. ?den would sigh, and groan, and long for greater 
 bliss, than Mr. Owen has to bestow. His wheat, his oil, and his 
 wine; his amusements, pastimes, and all his fanciful inventions 
 would not fill the immeasurable blank yet remaining in the true 
 enjoyment of rational beings, doomed by him only to riot like a 
 worm upon the damask cheek of a deceased stripping * 
 
 Man has taste, desires, aspirations after bliss higher than the earth 
 can minister to him. Now if Mr. Owen contemplates man as other 
 sceptics have done, not as a privileged being; if he would give him 
 that latitude of licentious intercourse which prevails among the 
 brutes in the gratification of evsry propensity, until his capacity 
 for sensual enjoyment is filled to overflowing;—if his artificial 
 wants have been multiplied to the utmost conceivable extent;—* 
 and if he have surrounded him with the most refined circunistan 
 ees imaginable, what does it all amount to? Has he made him 
 happy? Far from it. His capacity for happiness is as far from being 
 filled as ever it was. It is only like subtracting a few miles from 
 infinite space, the remainder is no less. So man’s desires are as 
 eager and as unsatisfied still. lake Alexander the Great, when he 
 had conquered the whole world he wept, forsooth, because his arm 
 was hampered and had not room enough to do it3 work. “What a 
 misfortune! Have l, indeed, no other world to conquer.” 
 
 Whence then, this insatiable desire for happiness; or whence, 
 as the poet says, “this longing after immortality?” Mr. Owen can 
 boast, he says, that he is free from the fear of death—and he may 
 boast that he is free from any hope in death. And so, like the well 
 led calf, he has neither hope nor fear from death. Is this the glorious 
 and rational end of this new philosophy? Let us eat and drink, for 
 to-morrow we die! But the time for adjournment has arrived. 
 Adjourned till 2 o’clock. 
 
 - — * “Relentless fate forbids that we, 
 
 Through gay voluptuous worlds should ever roam* 
 
 And were the fates more kind, 
 
 Our narrow luxuries would soon grow stale. 
 
 Were these exhaustless, nature would grow sick. 
 
 And tired of novelty, would squeamishly complain; 
 
 That all was vanity, and life a dream.” 
 
 Armstrong's Art of Health .— liepurfer. 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 158 ! 
 
 Monday Afternoon , 20th April , 1829. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—We concluded our remarks in the forenoon on the 
 subject of the perfect inadequacy and mal-adaptation of my friend’s 
 scheme to the constitution of human nature—to the extent of 
 our capacity of fruition. We admit that, were the human family 
 to be regarded as mere animals, whose enjoyments were all of a 
 sensual kind, that Mr. Owen’s scheme would not be liable to so 
 much objection. We might conclude with Paul, “If there be no resur¬ 
 rection, let us eat and drink for to-morrow we die.” The short tenure 
 of earthly enjoyments would compel us to make the best use of them 
 and to indulge in them to the greatest extent. We might then adopt 
 the Epicurean precept, “Carpe diem” and say with the Epicurian 
 poet, “ Vita summa brevis vetat span longarn incohare .” But inasmuch 
 as reason and experience prove the inadequacy of all earthly pleas¬ 
 ures to satisfy the human mind, we are obliged to declare that my 
 friend’s scheme fails infinitely short of providing for our capacity of 
 enjoyment. Who so dead to the charms of the material universe as 
 not to feel himself more refreshed and comforted by the sublime con¬ 
 templation of the great Creator through his works, than ever he felt 
 from mere sensual enjoyment? A small portion of material good 
 things is sufficient to satisfy all the wants of nature; but the appetite 
 for intellectual enjoyment is insatiable. 
 
 The construction of the material universe is admirably calculated 
 fo lead us to the contemplation of the great First Cause who created 
 the heavens and their hosts, and who sustains the immense universe 
 with more ease than we move a finger or an eye-lid. To contemplate 
 these things is, “To look through nature up to nature’s God.” Shall 
 this sublime pleasure be annihilated! Must we be forever doomed to 
 look downwards, and never raise our eyes to heaven! The splendors 
 of the starry firmament, the glories hung up to human view in the 
 majestic vault of heaven, are the natural types of the Divine Majesty; 
 while the earth presents, in all its magazines of goodness and mercy, 
 the plain drawn, characters which interpret all these sublime symbols. 
 Must we never read this volume, nor inquire into the moral character 
 of its great Author! And do we not, my friends, find our only con¬ 
 solation under the toils, anxieties, and vexations of this troubled sea 
 of life, in the anticipation of our one day reaching those mansions 
 of peace “where the wicked cease from troubling, and the weary are 
 at rest?” Will any man’s experience authorize him to say that when, 
 like an ox, he has eaten and drunk his fill, then he is happy ? Cer¬ 
 tainly this would be to degrade man below the dignity of which he is 
 now conscious. Who has been so successful and prosperous in the 
 voyage of life as to gain the object of his pursuit? Does not almost 
 every man die in the keen pursuit.of his favorite object? And does 
 not this teach us that all our acquisitions are but progressions towards 
 objects of distant fruition and hope? Experience teaches us that 
 our capacity of happiness is not to be filled by sublunary pleasures; 
 that earth and sea, with all their treasures, are far too small to fill 
 the soul of roan. 
 
DEBATE* 
 
 m 
 
 This social system robs the disconsolate of their only support— 
 drives them to the adoption of Mirabaud’s seductive cure; and when 
 “weary of conjecture” concerning futurity, to put an end to the 
 debate with a knife, a halter, or a pistol. Were it not for the cheering 
 consolation which the hope of immortality inspires, what numerous 
 suicides should we have to deplore? This hope is not only neces¬ 
 sary to fill the measure of our capacity of enjoyment, but it is neces¬ 
 sary that we should carefully cherish this bright hope that we may bo 
 enabled to sustain the vicissitudes, the disasters, the moral and 
 physical diseases, which attach to our bankrupt circumstances.— 
 Experience lias proved to us all, that we have derived more pleasure 
 from the pursuit of a favorite object, than we have enjoyed in the 
 attainmert of it; that we derive more pleasure from anticipating 
 future gains, than in realizing them. Cut ©ff anticipation from man, 
 and you sever him from the most fruitful source of his happiness. 
 The pursuit more than the acquisition, all experience says, contri¬ 
 butes to please, amuse, and gratify man. To place man, then, in 
 a situation where he has nothing to wish for, nothing to desire, nor to 
 pursue, is to cut him off from this most fruitful source ol intellectual 
 pleasure, which all men have found to be paramount to all sensual 
 gratifications. But not only in this instance is the theory contradicts 
 eel by the universal experience of mankind—but it also involves 
 another mistake in regard to the constitution of human nature. 
 
 Mr. Owen contends that a society can exist without an idea 
 of obligation or responsibility. This is contrary to all the past 
 records of time, and all present experience. A banditti of highway 
 robbers could not exist without the ligament of laws, and the tie of 
 moral obligation. Without them it would be impossible for them to 
 concert a scheme of co-operative plunder: ^ 
 
 “For not since Adam wore his verdant apron. 
 
 Has man with man in social union dwelt; 
 
 But laws were made to draw that union closer.”— Scott. 
 
 No society ever has existed, or ever can exist, without seme sense 
 of responsibility and obligation. We talk of a lawless banditti , bet 
 this is to be understood sub modo. They are not without laws, 
 and rigorous ones too, among themselvers; they well know that they 
 could not exist without them. 
 
 It is worthy of notice here, that among the rabble of superstitions 
 professed by the Pagan world, notone of them ever pretended to be 
 derived from the First Cause. They derived their religious systems 
 from subordinate persons, from inferior deities, who stood in some 
 special relation to the people that adored them. The ancients ascer¬ 
 tained that it was impossible to retain men in order without the influ¬ 
 ence of ieligious restraints. The popular religions of the Pagan 
 world wore all predicated upon this principle; and magistrates im¬ 
 posed religions upon the people which they did not believe themselves, 
 because experience had taught them that man was not to be governed 
 without religious restraints. The ancient philosophers saw through 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 130 
 
 the cheat, and were sufficiently inclined to expose it. Some of them 
 denied the existence of future rewards and punishments. They con¬ 
 tended that the body must return to the earth, and the spirit to the 
 Universal Spirit, of which it was but an emanation, and that therefore 
 future punishment was impossible. But the magistracy told the phi¬ 
 losophers, that, although all this might be very true, yet the people 
 were not to be kept in order without the restraints of religion; and the 
 philosophers were strictly enjoined not to propagate their free-thinking 
 notions among the vulgar. From this originated the Elueinian and 
 other mysteries of antiquity, the object of which was to preserve 
 among the initiated just views of the First Cause and of the gods 
 worshipped by the vulgar, which dare not be divulged among them. 
 If we examine the ancient superstitions of the Pagan world, we shall 
 find them all predicated upon this politic hypothesis. 
 
 No social compact has as yet existed without the doctrine of respon¬ 
 sibility, obligation, or accountability. Mr. Owen’s scheme is the 
 most Utopian project in the annals of society. He lays the axe at the 
 root of all obligation and accountability, and yet would have society 
 to hang together without a single attraction save animal magnetism, if 
 such a thing exists. The doctrine of no praise, no blame , is to be 
 taught from the cradle to the grave; and yet all are to live in accord¬ 
 ance with the most virtuous principles. They are to have no princi¬ 
 ple of responsibility suggested; and yet, under the charm of social 
 feeling alone, they are to be more firmly bound than any wedded pair! 
 Among the visions of the wildest enthusiasm, this one appears to be a 
 rarity. 
 
 Children are to be reared without a lesson upon obligation or duty, 
 and yet they are to be most orderly, neither selfish, querulous, peevish, 
 ambitious, nor any way vicious. All these evil propensities are to be 
 eradicated from their nature in consequence of being born in cham¬ 
 bers, ventilated, heated, or refrigerated, in the social way. They 
 are to be models of beauty and rationality too, by a mere change of 
 circumstances. No irrational faces, no deformed countenances, no 
 disfigured frames can grow in any of Mr. Owen’s parallelogram ar¬ 
 rangements. The romantic genius of Mr. Owen gives these babes 
 all angelic charms, excepting wings; and while there is to be a total 
 destitution of all evil disposition, they are to be perfect giants in litera¬ 
 ture, virtue, and benevolent enterprize—able, in two hours per diem, 
 to provide for all their own happiness and to perpetuate overflowing 
 streams of bliss to posterity! 
 
 I am yet at a loss to know what Mr. Owen means by society. A 
 society without a social compact, to me is unintelligible. Society is 
 not a number of persons covering a certain piece of ground like the 
 trees in our forests. They must congregate upon some stipulations 
 express or implied. These stipulations are to be performed, and 
 consequently responsibility and accountability forces itself upon Mr. 
 Owen in defiance of the powers of his imagination. In all other 
 societies, except Mr. Owen’s imaginary one, the people and the ma¬ 
 gistracy, whether elective or hereditary, are mutually accountable to 
 
131 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 each other. The people owe allegiance , which they promise in elect¬ 
 ing their rulers; and the magistracy owe protection which they pro¬ 
 mised in being elected. In entering into society man surrenders a 
 part of his natural liberty for other benefits, which he could not enjoy 
 as a hermit. This surrender he must never recall, nor those benefits 
 must they withhold: they are, therefore, under continual obligations 
 to each other. Whenever any person feels himself absolved from 
 these obligations, he is either dangerous to, or unfit for society. And 
 certainly Mr. Owen’s system of training children would naturally 
 load them to feel themselves absolved from all such obligations. His 
 system directly unfits them for society. 1 would ask you, my friends, 
 or I would ask him, In what light he could contemplate that society 
 which taught everv child that entered its schools, that the child which 
 
 CJ »•' ' # 
 
 would kill its own father, was not to be blamed Or disliked any more 
 than the child which loved, caressed, and reverenced its father? 
 
 But, to be a little more plain and pointed, I must again remind you 
 that Mr. Owen’s system, as far as it has any peculiar benevolence 
 proposed in it, or stamped upon it, is a plagiarism from Christian 
 society; in other words, all the benevolence about it was derived from 
 models*furnished by Christian enterprise and Christian sympathy, and 
 the crude notions of materialism and philosophic necessity have been 
 superadded from the atheistical schools of France and Epicurus. The 
 influence of parents over their offspring, and the influence of cir¬ 
 cumstances, were popular doctrines in the reigii of King Solomon; 
 nay, in the days of Moses. Moses laid as much emphasis upon the 
 necessity of bringing up children under the best moral influences as 
 any man in ancient or modem times. And so great an adept was 
 Solomon in this science, that he affirmed, “Train up a child in the 
 way it should live, and when old, it will not depart from it.” Mr, 
 Owen, indeed, has confessed that he was indebted to Christian society 
 for his first ideas of the co-oporative system in producing the greatest 
 amount of human enjoyment, as far as our temporal wants are con 
 cerned. Mr. Owen may have had the merit of amplifying somewhat 
 upon the data furnished by the excellent preacher, Mr. Dale. The 
 advantages accruing from the experiments of Mr. Dale were sufficient 
 to convince any person of Mr. Owen’s discernment, that much might 
 be done by benevolent co-operation in a population like that in Scot¬ 
 land, to diminish the evils under which a large cfoss groan from 
 Poverty and its handmaid Ignorance. This was the start of the 
 benevolent part of the scheme. 
 
 About forty years ago, when my friend was just about entering 
 manhood’s prime, the French Revolution broke out, and all the covert 
 deism, atheism, and scepticism, which the vices of popery had gener¬ 
 ated like worms in a putrid carcase, exhibited themselves. Kingcraft 
 and priestcraft became odioits all at once, and infidelity rising in the 
 greatness of its feebleness, or strength, shook itself clean cf both 
 crafts; and ignorantly and impiously attempted to deify matter, and 
 dethrone the legitimate Sovereign of the Universe. The ravages ot 
 infuriated main seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 132 
 
 liberty, began to appear in all their horrors. Priests were now every 
 where execrated, caricatured, and every printer’s shop was filled with 
 infidel and atheistical tracts. In this awful crisis, when atheism be¬ 
 come philosophy, and scepticism was called reason, every raw and 
 undisciplined mind who came into contact with these spirits or their 
 works, caught the contagion: and the desire of being reputed a phi¬ 
 losopher, or a man of reason, impelled them to laugh at religion, as if 
 it deserved no better treatment than the Puritans once thought was 
 due to witches and necromancers. The contagion spread into Eng¬ 
 land, and the woful circumstances which then surrounded my friend 
 furnished him with the first impulses or data for the infidel part of his 
 scheme. Since then he has been laboring to amalgamate the good 
 ideas received by the better part of his circumstances with the bad 
 ideas derived from the worse part of them; and it is owing to the 
 superiority of his natural organization that he has been so moral, or 
 that his atheism has not led him into the usual and legitimate results 
 which have, in ninety-nine instances in every hundred, been its attend¬ 
 ants. 
 
 But besides the models furnished him in Scotland, the Moravian and 
 other societies, either preaching or practising some sort of a religious 
 community of interests and feelings, either strengthened the convic¬ 
 tions or enlarged the views of my benevolent friend. But the mis¬ 
 fortune was, and is, (and I fear will be)’that he persists in attempting 
 to unite the lights of Christianity with .the darkness of scepticism. 
 But the greatest error which I have to attribute to Mr. Owen, is, his 
 not discriminating what Dr. Franklin failed to teach Thomas Paine. 
 This political philosopher, who was, like many other reasoners, sane 
 in ‘politics , but insane in religion , submitted his “Age of Reason,” 
 to the revision or inspection of the greatest American philosopher. 
 He read it, and agreeably to Mr. Paine’s request, he wrote him his 
 advice about its publication. After telling the sceptic what risks he 
 would incur, and how little good his work would do, lie gravely reminds 
 him how mueh he was indebted for those principles of morality and 
 benevolence which he possessed, to the influence and genius of the 
 religion he was about to attack. He tells him that he calculates too 
 largely upon the natural virtues of man. This advice of the American 
 sage applies with still additional force to Mr. Owen. He possesses a 
 most benevolent temperament ; in early life, too, he went regularly to 
 church; and from these sources, as from the “good books” which 
 he told you he had read, he imbibed all these moralities and benevo¬ 
 lent views which his scepticism has not in forty years been able to 
 obliterate. But his fault (for I believe that men may be guilty of 
 faults) has been not to discriminate, not to assign to its proper cause 
 the influences which he feels, and which he sees in himself and in 
 the world. 
 
 His ideas concerning matrimony, and many of his views detailed 
 in this discussion, were all detailed with much ^ihility by Godwin in 
 his Political Justice, though he feared some of those conclusions from 
 his own premises, which Mr. Owen lias had the moral courage to 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 m 
 
 avow. 1 do not say that Mr. Owen directly and literally borrowed 
 all his ideas from these fountains; but as these were not only the 
 fashionable books, but the common topics of the epoch of his social 
 system-; and as he has told us that he has read jive hours per day for 
 nearly thirty years of his life , it would be doing him injustice to sup’ 
 pose that these works had not occupied a due share of his attention. 
 
 I am not so sceptical in scepticism as Mr. Owen is in Christian¬ 
 ity, or, as to think that mankind may not be improved in then- 
 condition. Ci Fas est ab hoste discercF It is lawful to learn from an 
 enemy. I do not doubt but that Mr. Owen has asserted many 
 truths, and some useful truths. But not one good idea has he sub- 
 mitted, which has not been derived, or which is not derivable from 
 Christianity. There was a society in the New Testament which had 
 all things in common; but their happiness was not derived from a 
 community of goods, but from that principle which issued, in their 
 circumstances, in a community of goods. I most sanguineiy antici¬ 
 pate a restoration of the ancient order of things, and a state of 
 society far superior to any thing yet exhibited on earth. I believe 
 that there will be what is commonly believed by all Christians, a 
 Millennium; a period, a long period of general or universal peace, 
 happiness, and political and religious prosperity. And that some of 
 the views of Mr. Owen may then be realized as the legitimate fruits 
 of Christianity, I would not deny. 
 
 But I must speak plainly and say, taking the whole of Mr. Owen’s 
 theory in the mass it is the most visionary theory which has ever 
 been pronounced. It is too, all theory , for Mr. Owen has not made 
 a single proof of it. He can not point to any society, on earth, as 
 a practical proof of its practicability, or of its excellency. Tell 
 me nothing about New Lanark, for there it has never been tested; 
 and tell me nothing about New Harmony, for there, Mr. Owen will 
 not appeal himself. He has given us a beautiful theory of his social 
 system. But, Paul Brown’s “Twelve months residence in New Har¬ 
 mony” will shew the thing in practice: \^ti8 all a lie , says Mr. Owen.] 
 And although much has been said about New Lanark, I must, if 
 testimony be a proper source of information, believe that no social 
 system, no co-operative system was ever tried there. That many 
 persons may there have been improved in their circumstances is not 
 denied. But how has that come to pass?—not on the principles 
 which Mr. Owen now teaches. I will tell you how some of them 
 have been reformed and improved in their circumstances in that 
 establishment. If, for example, a drunkard was received into the 
 New Lanark manufactories, he was not permitted to draw any money 
 from this company for his work so long as he continued in the 
 employment of the company. All his necessary demands for food, 
 raiment, lodging, &c. were promptly paid in the articles wanted; and 
 the surplus, if any there was, was not paid him in money during 
 his continuance in the establishment; but when he removed the 
 last f- rthiug was paid him. Thus he became sober from necessity; 
 and temperate, because he could not get any thing to intoxicate him, 
 VOL. II. 12 
 
IM 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 The prodigal, and those destitute of economy were improved in their 
 finances by this same system—and there was a good school for edu¬ 
 cating the youth, for which I believe, Mr. Owen deserves some 
 praise. But this is about the nett proceeds of the social system in 
 New Lanark. The people of New Lanark, too, were in the aggre¬ 
 gate, a religious people. There is one Presbyterian church, in New 
 Lanark, well frequented; also for the benefit of the independents, 
 who dissented from the establishment, a meeting house was built, 
 to which Mr. Owen himself was the principal contribute!*. For, to 
 his credit, it must be told, that while he has been declaiming against 
 priests, and their impositions, he has been liberal in building meeting 
 houses. The people of New Lanark are a religious people. I have 
 learned from those who visited that place, that not only on the First 
 day of the week, but on Thursdays*, and other stated meetings during 
 the week, they meet for social worship in some of the large rooms 
 of the establishment. 
 
 Mr. Owen’s theory, then, is without proof unknown and incredi¬ 
 ble. Forty years reading, studying, travelling, and all the funds 
 expended, have produced nothing as yet visible, except the “Twelve 
 fundamental Divine laws of human nature .” “Like quicksilver, the 
 rhetoric he displays, shines as it runs, but grasped at slips away.” 
 New Harmony was once the land of promise. Bankrupt and brok - 
 on fortunes were to be repaired there. Thither came the lame, the 
 halt, the blind in fortune and in fame. The philosophers stone, or 
 the elixir of immortal youth were not more eagerly sought than the 
 city of Mental Independence. But soon the charm dissolved, and all 
 the awful realities of nature, reason, and religion, disbanded the 
 social builders, and like those in the plains of Shinar, when one 
 called for a brick, his attendant handed him a stone, or a blow, 
 and utter dispersion and confusion on their banners waited. As 
 many of these folks as had been brought to their senses, and had 
 ever read Horace, as they returned, admitted the truth of the old 
 maxim, and now and then lisped it out: 
 
 “Coelum non animum mutant, 
 
 Qui trans mare currant.”— Horace. 
 
 Their clime, and not their mind, they change, 
 
 Who sail across the sea. 
 
 The trinity of evils was the text for months at New Harmony. But 
 soon they found a treble trinity of other evils than artificial ones. 
 Next to religion, marriage was accursed. Marriage, the oldest in¬ 
 stitution in the world, founded in nature, reason, and religion, must 
 be banished the dominions of the social svstem. It enabled parents 
 to recognize their children, and children their parents; and natural 
 affection would run in these channels, and mine and thine in spite 
 of the twelve categories would be heard, and all this was perfect 
 discord in the music of New Harmony. Marriage, then, must for 
 these reasons be banished, that a thorough social system may 
 succceed. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 135 
 
 ThiB attempt to dissolve, violate or impugn the marriage contract, 
 I think, ruined the project on the Wabash. It is hard to fight against 
 *the trinity of nature, reason, and religion.” God said, it is not 
 good for man to he alone! He then created a help meet for him.— 
 Even in Paradise, man alone was but half blessed: 
 
 “The world was sad, the garden was a wild. 
 
 And man the hermit sigh’d, till woman smil’d.*?— Reporter. 
 
 Poligamy was denounced in the creation of but one woman for man ; 
 and the equal distribution of the sexes since has shewn, that every 
 man ought to have his own wife, and every woman her own husband 7 
 All that adorns, animates, and exalts, as respects the finer feelings 
 of human nature, spring from this institution in its primitive ap¬ 
 pointment. On the altar of matrimony are woven all the cords of 
 affection, all the ligaments and bands that cement society. All 
 natural relations are but the names of the silken cords which bind 
 society in all the social relations which give a zest to all enjoyments, 
 and extract the sting from the thousand griefs and sorrows of human 
 life. He that would abolish this institution, or violate its sacred 
 obligations, is any thing but a philanthropist. Destroy this insti¬ 
 tution, and not only the happiness of man, as a social being, but tire 
 safety of the race, would be endangered. Parental affection is the 
 strongest passion of the human sou 1 , which'not even the deformity 
 of person or mind, or filial ingratitude, disobedience, or impiety, 
 can wholly obliterate. Our greatest gratifications, on earth, arise from 
 this institution, and the relations to which it gives birth. And it is 
 * just as necessary for the safety, as for the happiness of the race.* 
 
 But to meet the exigencies ofthe new stale of existence, when marriage 
 is to be no more, a band of nurses are to be trained who are to have in 
 charge the infants of the communities. This is to save time and labor, 
 and to economize the productive energies of the communities. Mothers 
 are thus to be happily exempted from many of the toils incident to par¬ 
 turition; and in this arrangement Mr. Owen supposes he is promoting 
 the happiness of mothers. This is a lame and blind philosophy. A 
 mother feels incomparably more pleasure in having the care of her 
 own offspring, than in being exempt from it. The smiles of her in¬ 
 fant, the opening dawn of reason, the indications of future greatness 
 or goodness, as they exhibit themselves to her sanguine expectations, 
 open to her sources of enjoyment incomparably overpaying the solici¬ 
 tudes and gentle toils of nursing. In exempting her from the natural 
 concern and care due to her offspring, Mr. Owen debars her from the 
 largest portion of maternal enjoyments, for which he can substitute 
 nothing like an equivalent. But, perhaps, when marriage is abolish¬ 
 ed, all maternal solicitudes and enjoyments will expire with it.— 
 Indeed, all the finer and more tender sensibilities of our nature appear 
 to share the same fate in the desolating prospects of the new order of 
 
 *This is contended for, by Montesquieu, in bis spirit of laws; but he goes 
 farther; he contends that without the institution of marriage, children would 
 never reach maturity; and hence is derived the legal maxim. , 
 
 “Pater est quern muptiae demvnstrant.” —Reporter. J 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 things, for the luxury of eating and drinking. The most powerful* ox 
 all natural affections is to be waylaid in the cradle; and, if possible, 
 slaughtered as soon as born—the affection of parents for children 
 flowing from the sacred institution of marriage. In every point of 
 view in which we regard it, this system is at war with human nature, 
 as well as with religion, matrimony, and private property. It aims a 
 mortal blow at all our ideas of social order and social happiness. 
 But Mr. Owen has not yet found, and I am confident he will never 
 find, human nature and human passions so plastic as to be cast into 
 any artificial mould he may imagine; sooner will he cause the rivers 
 to flow backwards to their sources; sooner can he reverse the decrees 
 of gravitation, than abolish religion, marriage, or even private pro¬ 
 perty. I doubt not either that were men as religious as Christianity 
 is designed to make them, they could co-operate in societies greatly to 
 diminish the evils of life, to facilitate the education of their children, 
 and to augment their social enjoyments. But to attempt this without 
 the aids, the principles, motives, and inspirations of Christianity, 
 would be only to attempt to make a globe, a new earth, without the 
 principle of gravitation or attraction. Mr. Owen’s system always 
 appears to me to resemble the efforts of some pagan god to build a 
 world upon the single principle of repulsion. 
 
 But Mr. Owen is about to have the animal man improved as the 
 horses and sheep of this country have been improved, upon scientific 
 principles. He has told us of a science, in which he' is an adept, 
 and with which all shall be well acquainted in “the new state of 
 existence,” for improving man in his animal and mental endowments, 
 even from, if--not anterior to his birth. This is all in accordance with 
 the fine imagination of my friend. He is not, however, the inventor 
 of tliis part of his scheme: Dr. Graham was before him, and disrobed 
 him of the honor of originating even this part of the new sciences of 
 the social system. We shall give you some short account of this 
 matter. 
 
 James Graham, M. D. born at Edinburgh, 1745, a philanthropic 
 physician,"travelled over great part of England and America, admin¬ 
 istering relief in the most desperate cases, for the benefit of mankind. 
 After returning from America, where he had realized a considerable 
 fortune, he settled in London, about 1775. There, under the titles of 
 a Temple of Hymen and a Temple of Healih, he erected one of the 
 most superb institutions that ever was planned, for the gratification 
 of the votaries of pleasure; and, under the pretence of instructing all 
 persons of both sexes who put themselves under his tuition, and were 
 willing to sacrifice to Venus in these sacred domes, he engaged to 
 
 *So sensible was the old common law of England of this point, that it made 
 the workings of parental affection a palliation for the commission of murder. 
 For when a man’s son was severely beaten by anpther boy, and came home and 
 told his father, if his father went in pursuit of the other boy, and followed him 
 one mile before he overtook him, and beat him in return, so that he died; this 
 was held by all the judges to be only manslaughter, in consideration of the 
 strength of natural feelings.— Reporter . 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 137 
 
 teach “the art of preventing barrenness, and of propagating a much 
 more strong, beautiful, active, healthy, wise, and virtuous race of 
 human beings, than the present puny, insignificant, foolish, peevish, 
 vicious, and nonsensical race of Christians; who quarrel, fight, bite, 
 devour, and cut one another’s throats about they know not what,” 
 Such is a part of one of his many advertisements which then appear¬ 
 ed in the London papers. 
 
 About the end of 1787, he returned to Edinburgh in a new and 
 extraordinary character; viz.—that of a teacher sent from God, to 
 announce the Millennium, the second coming of Christ, and the final 
 consummation of all things. He styled himself the servant, of the 
 Lord, O. W. L. i. e. as he explained it. Oh Wonderful Love, lie 
 commenced a new era, dating his bills “1st, 2d, and 3d days of the 
 first month of the New Jerusalem.” But before the commencement 
 of the second month he was constrained to confess “he felt the devil, 
 the world, and the flesh too strong for him, and therefore he supposed 
 the Lord must look out for another forerunner of his second coming ” 
 
 During great part of this time his wife (for he had married in New 
 England) seems to have been neglected, and even forgotten: for, upon 
 becoming acquainted with the celebrated Mrs. Macauley, the histo¬ 
 rian, he offered her his hand, which she would have accepted had 
 she not accidentally discovered that he had a wife still living. Upon 
 this discovery, the Doctor, no wise discomfited, protested the ardor of 
 his passion for her had made him forget that circumstance. This 
 singular and benevolent being died in 1794. 
 
 The points of similarity between my friend and the Doctor are so 
 plain, that I need not be at the pains to point them out: your own 
 recollection of the first and second years of the era of Mental Inde¬ 
 pendence proclaimed at the Metropolis of Free-Thinkers, and at the 
 head of the army of the “March of Mind,” will, with what you have 
 -heard and seen on the present occasion, be sufficient data to trace the 
 lineaments of Dr. Graham in my good-natured and benevolent friend. 
 
 I forgot to mention that Dr. Graham was finally placed in a lunatic 
 asylum. Bat on this side of this extravagance, several miles on this 
 side of these enthusiastic flights, there have been schemes hatched up 
 under the canopy of a peculiar organization, as air-built it is true', 
 and as benevolent as that of Dr. Graham, and Mr. Owen, which have 
 fasted a little longer, but have finally proved as empty quite. 
 
 But, my friends, I should not have occupied a minute of your time 
 upon these visions, and dreams, and theories, called philosophic or 
 vulgar, had it not been for the wanton attack made by Mr. Owen on 
 the last, best hope of mortal man. I should have permitted any other 
 experiment to have found its quietus, as thousands such have already 
 done, without observation or regard. But when I see the last hope of 
 a dying world recklessly assaulted, I feel too much interest in the 
 "eternal welfare of my fellow-creaturos, to remain a mere passive 
 spectator. I feel myself called upon to put on the armor of reason, 
 true philosophy, and religion, and to stand to my post, lest in the midst 
 of such morbid excitements, in this age of extravagant theory and 
 VOL. II. 12* 
 
138 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 licentious philosophy, many over-ardent minds might be allured by 
 the speciousness and false glare of this tinselled philosophy, which, 
 
 I trust, we have shown to be any thing else but consentaneous with 
 the constitution, experience, and history of the world. 
 
 Dehold the cruelty of this scheme! (not that Mr. Owen is cruel,) the 
 hard-heartedness of the system! Think of all the labors and toils, t 
 the griefs and sorrows through which you have passed. How have 
 you wearied yourselves in pursuit of phantoms. Every thing you 
 have gained has only mocked and disappointed you. Like bubbles 
 they have bursted when you laid your hands upon the glistening 
 objects of your avarice or ambition. All has been fleeting and 
 evanescent. You know, for woful experience has taught you, that 
 you have been pursuing shadows. What pleased you at seven, you 
 disdained at fourteen; what charmed you at fourteen, was disgusting 
 at twenty; and what you almost adored at twenty, has been long 
 since contemned and despised; and what now fascinates you at forty, 
 will, should you reach seventy, appear as unworthy of your admira~ 
 lion as the toys of childhood now present themselves to you. But 
 when the curtain drops, and the last grand act of the drama of human 
 life closes, you will be mocked still; and, on Mr. Owen’s principle, 
 you have been mocked at last. There is nothing real. You desired 
 immortality; you sought it, each in his own way; but with him 
 none have found it. It is deceit and mockery all through. Riches, 
 popularity, wisdom, health, and life itself, have all been deceivers— 
 all was promise—all is disappointment. The promised bliss, the 
 real, substantial, and permanent good which religion has presented 
 to you, is torn from your eyes, and everlasting death, eternal sleep, 
 end utter annihilation, is the only reality he has offered you. Cruel 
 system! Bootless boast! 
 
 Religion—the Bible! What treasures untold reside in that heavenly 
 word! Religion has given meaning , design, to all that is past, and is, 
 as the moral to the fable, the good, the only good of the whole—the 
 earnest now of an abundant harvest of future and eternal good.— 
 New let me ask the living before me, for we cannot yet appeal to the 
 dead, whence has been derived your most rapturous delights on earth? 
 Have not the tears, the dew of religion in the soul, afforded you in¬ 
 comparably more joy than all the fleshly gaieties, than all the splendid 
 vanities, than the loud laugh and the festive song of the sons and 
 daughters of the flesh. Even the alternations of hope and fear, of 
 joy and sorrow, of which the Christian may be conscious, in his 
 arden trace after a glorious immortality, afford more true bliss than 
 ever did the sparkling gems, the radiant crown, or the triumphal arch, 
 bestowed by the gratitude or admiration of a nation, on some favorite 
 child of fortune and of fame. 
 
 Whatever comes from religion, comes from God. The greatest 
 joys derivable to mortal man comes from this source. I cannot speak 
 for all who wear the Christian name; but for myself I must say, that • 
 worlds piled on worlds to fill the universal scope of my imagination, 
 would be a miserable per contra, against the annihilation of the idea 
 
DEBATE 
 
 139 
 
 of God the Supreme. And the paradox of paradoxes, the miracle of 
 miracles, and the mystery of mysteries with me now, was, and evermore 
 shall be, is, how any good man could wish there was no God! With 
 the idea of God the Almighty, departs from this earth, not only the 
 idea of virtue, of moral excellence, but of all rational enjoyment* What 
 is height without top; depth without bottom; length, and breadth 
 without limitation? what is the sublimity of the universe, without the 
 idea of him who created, balances, sustains, and fills the whole with 
 goodness? The hope of one day seeing this Wonderful One, of be¬ 
 holding him that made my body and is the father of my spirit—the 
 anticipation of being introduced into the palace of the universe, the 
 sanctuary of the heavens, transcends all comparison with all sublu¬ 
 nary things. Our pbwers of conception, of imagination, and our 
 powers of computation, and expression, are alike baffled and pros¬ 
 trated in such an attempt. 
 
 Take away this hope from me, and teach me to think that I am 
 the creature of mere chance, and to it alone indebted for all that 1 
 am, was, and ever will be, and I see nothing in the universe but 
 mortification and disappointment; death is as desirable as life; and 
 no one creature or thing is more deserving of my attention or consi¬ 
 deration than another. But if so much pleasure is derived from 
 surveying the face of nature, from contemplating the heavens and th& 
 systems of astronomy; if there be so much exquisite enjoyment from 
 peeping into the great laboratory of nature, and in looking into the de¬ 
 licate touches, the great art, the wonderful design even in the smaller 
 works, in the kingdom which the microscope opens to our view, what 
 will be the pleasure, the exquisite joy in seeing and beholding 
 him who is the Fountain of Life , the Author and Artificer of the 
 whole Universe. But the natural and physical excellencies, and ma¬ 
 terial glories of this great fabric, are, but, as it were, the substratum* 
 from which shine all the moral glories of the Author of Eternal Life, 
 and of the august scheme which gives immortality to man! 
 
 No unrestrained freedom to explore the penetralia of voluptuous¬ 
 ness, to revel in all the luxury of worms, to bask in the ephemeral 
 glories of a sunbeam, can compensate for the immense robbery of 
 the idea of God and the hope of deathless bliss. Dreadful adventure !- 
 hazardous experiment! most ruinous project, to blast the idea of 
 God! The worst thing in such a scheme which could happen, or 
 even appear to happen, would be success. But as well might Mr. 
 Owen attempt to fetter the sea, to lock up the winds, to prevent the 
 rising of the sun, as to exile this idea from the human race.. For 
 although man has not, circumstanced as he now is, unaided by reve¬ 
 lation, the power to originate such an idea; yet when it is once 
 suggested to a child, it never can be forgotten. As soon could a 
 child annihilate the earth, as to annihilate the idea ol God once sug¬ 
 gested. The proofs of his existence become as numerous as the drops 
 of dew from the womb of ihe morning—as innumerable as the blades 
 of grass produced by the renovating influences of spring—every 
 thing within us and every thing without,, from the nails upon the 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 ends of our fingers, to the sun, moon, and stars, confirm the idea of 
 his existence and adorable excellencies. To call upon a rational 
 being to prove the being and perfections of God, is like asking a man 
 to prove that he exists himself. What! shall a man be called upon to • 
 prove, a priori , or a posteriori , that there is one great Fountain of 
 Life! a Universal Creator! If the millions of millions of witnesses 
 which speak for him in heaven, earth, and sea, will not be heard, the ij 
 feeble voice of man will be heard in vain. • if 
 
 Some questions have been handed me to-day, which do not come r 
 
 within the lawful purview of this discussion. They are of a sectarian 
 character, and therefore we cannot attend to them at this time, how¬ 
 ever agreeable it might be for us on some other occasion to attend to 
 them. 
 
 The question, What is the Word of God? has already been antici¬ 
 pated in my remarks upon what constitutes revelation. In the Bible, 
 we have seen, are the revelations of God; but, besides these, much of 
 the history of the world. The discriminations already laid, down on 
 this subject, a re, we presume, sufficiently plain to enable all to form a 
 a correct decision upon this subject . 
 
 That which is emphatically called the Word o^ God, the Word of 
 the Lord , or the Word, in the New Testament, is generally, if not 
 exclusively, the Gospel, or Good News concerning Jesus Christ., 
 
 Of the many proofs of this, I will give you but one at present, and 
 then conclude:—Peter had the honor of making the first clear, ex¬ 
 plicit, and correct confession of the faith, ever made upon earth. 
 When all the apostles were interrogated by the Lord in his own per¬ 
 son concerning their views of himself, Peter thus spoke, “We believe 
 and are sure that thou art the Messiah the sox of the living god.” 
 This drew the blessing of the Saviour upon the head of Peter, and 
 obtained him the honor of the keys of the kingdom of heaven. By 
 this figure was meant, that Peter should have the honor of opening the 
 gates of the kingdom of heaven, or the new reign announced by John 
 the Baptist, the Saviour, the twelve Apostles, and the seventy disci¬ 
 ples, as near at hand, or as approaching. These keys have been long 
 a bone of contention among the clergy. The Pope says he wears 
 them at his girdle; the Archbishops of York and Canterbury think 
 they have them in joint keeping; the good old Kirk of Scotland thinks 
 she has them in the archives of her General Assembly; and Indepen¬ 
 dents think each congregation, or an association of congregations 
 have them in charge. But, as we have no aceount of them in the last 
 will and testament of the Apostle Peter, we have no good reason to 
 conclude that he made any, or all, of these good ecclesiastics the 
 keepers of the keys. Besides I do not know that we have any use for 
 them. Peter opened that kingdom of which they were the keys to 
 the Jews and proselytes in Jerusalem upon the ever-memorable Pen¬ 
 tecost. And some years afterwards, when God designed to call the 
 Gentiles into the kingdom, much pains were taken to obtain Peter. 
 
 He was sent for to Joppa, and came to Cesarea, and opened the king¬ 
 dom to the Gentiles.- The •gates of this kingdom have never since 
 
DEBATE. Ul 
 
 been locked against Jew or Gentile—against none, but tbe impenitent 
 and unbelieving; and Peter declared once already, that he could not 
 open the kingdom to such. But having once opened the kingdom, 
 and never having locked it, he took the keys with him; and so it is 
 all an idle controversy about the keys—none of them, none of us, 
 have them. 
 
 But my special object in introducing this occurrence is to show 
 how Peter, when opening the reign of favor in Jerusalem and Cesa- 
 yea, defined the Word of God, 6r the word. In opening the king¬ 
 dom of heaven, or that new state of society and privilege, of which 
 the Saviour spoke to Nicodemus, when he told hirn, “Except a man 
 were born of water and the Spirit , into the kingdom of God he could not 
 enter” Peter narrated the deeds, and mission, and death, and resur¬ 
 rection of Jesus; and showed the Jews how they might be born of 
 water and the Spirit, and thus enter the kingdom. He did so also in 
 Cesarea. He defined the message, or proclamation, in this way, 
 *That word , or message, which God sent by Jesus Christ, you have, 
 no doubt, heard the report of; how it was proclaimed by John con¬ 
 cerning the mission of Jesus, who did so and so. To him,” said he. 
 *‘did all the prophets testify, that whosoever believeth in him might 
 obtain remission of sins.” They were born of the Spirit and of water 
 too; and, moreover, received the miraculous powers of the Holy Spirit. 
 Thus Peter defined the Word of God. And this is now emphatically 
 the Word of the Lord , or the Word of God , to which, my friends, we 
 ought, one and all, to pay supreme regard. 
 
 We rejoice that the Word of God is well defined in this volume, 
 and most easily distinguished, not only from all former communica¬ 
 tions of the Almighty, but from all other information found in the 
 .sacred records. They who presumed to make criticisms upon the 
 terms and phrases found in the Bible, ought first to ascertain well 
 whether they are biblical critics. 
 
 I should now proceed to give you a concentrated view of the whole 
 argument, but I must give place to my friend, that he may make his 
 objections to my long speech. 
 
 Monday evening , 4 o^clock. 
 
 [The above speech commenced on Friday at 3 oclock, and in all 
 occupied 12 hours.] 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 It is my wish to make the present meeting, which is a very singu ¬ 
 lar one in its nature, as extensively beneficial as possible. After 
 the full statement of my views, with which I opened this discussion, 
 it was not my intention to occupy much of your time in listening to 
 a rejoinder to Mr. Campbell. But not knowing what my friend 
 was going to say in answer to that statement, and finding that, in¬ 
 stead of replying to my arguments, he has given you a full and 
 elaborate developement of the Christian religion, it is necessaty to 
 detain you somewhat longer than 1 intended, 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 U2 
 
 
 I have listened to Mr. C. with profound attention; and have, 
 therefore, received the impressions which his elaborate exposition 
 of the Christian systejn, and his whole ©hath of evidence are capa¬ 
 ble of producing on a rnind long accustomed to severe and accurate 
 
 reasoning. I now owe it to you, who have attended here so patiently 
 
 through this discussion—I owe it to the present generation, and 
 to ail future generations, to declare without reserve what these 
 impressions are. 
 
 Mv friends, Mr. Campbell appears to me to have done his duty 
 manfully, and with a zeal that would have been creditable to any 
 of the primitive fathers of the church. Ilis own conviction of 
 the truth and divine origin of the system which he advocates, and 
 his ardent desire to impress that conviction upon my mind, and 
 upon yours, all here have witnessed. Ilis learning, his industry, 
 and some very extraordinary talents for supporting the cause which 
 he advocates, have been conspicuous; and for one trained in the 
 fiery notions produced by the tree-will doctrines, he has restrained 
 his temper beyond my most sanguine expectations. That, however, 
 which 1 admire in him above all, is his downright honesty and fair¬ 
 ness in what he believes to be the cause of truth. He says to his 
 opponent: “I am strong in the car.se l advocate. It is from heaven; 
 and I fear not what man can do against it. I am ready to meet you 
 at any time and place, provided I may reply to yon, and that our 
 arguments shall go together to the public, to pass its ordeal, and 
 await its ultimate cairn decision.” Now, this is a straight forward 
 proceeding in the investigation of truth, which I have long sought 
 tor, hut which, until now, I have sought for in vain. The friends 
 of truth, therefore, on whichever side of the question it may be 
 found, are now more indebted to Mr. Campbell than any other Chris¬ 
 tian minister of the present clay. 
 
 These are the impressions made upon my mind, with regard to my 
 friend, Mr. Campbell’s conduct m this delicate and difficult task 
 which he has volunteered to perform. It is now my duty to give you 
 the living impressions which Mr. Campbell’s learning, industry, and 
 "zeal have made upon my mind, through the long discussion we have 
 heard. And you will not, I trust, imagine that what I am about to 
 state proceeds from any other cause than the love o f truth , and a sin¬ 
 cere desire to benefit the present and future generations. 
 
 Then, my friends, my impressions are, that Christianity is not of 
 divine origin: that it is not true; and that its doctrines are now any 
 thing but beneficial to mankind. On the contrary, my impressions 
 are deeply confirmed, that its miracles and mysteries are of man’s 
 contrivance, to impose on the great mass of mankind, who have 
 never yet been taught to reason; to enable the few to govern the 
 many, through their interested hopes and fears for the future; and 
 to induce the many to prostrate their minds bofore an order of meq, 
 who, through these means, can easily keep them in subjection to the 
 powers that he. That its doctrines are now, by turning aside the 
 rpind from investigating its own powers, the cxnl/ obstacle in chris- 
 
 ■ 
 
 i 
 
 J 
 
 I 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 143 
 
 tendom to the most important improvements; and that the whole, 
 system, in its principles and practice, in despite of all we have heard in 
 advocating it, is the greatest bar to the progress of knowledge, that 
 now exists; and that, if my impressions are right, Christianity, as it 
 is now taught all over Christendom, by preventing man from acqui¬ 
 ring an accurate knowledge of himself, or of the only means by 
 which his character can be uniformly well formed, is the greatest 
 curse with which' our race is at this time afflicted. 
 
 My friends, do you .suppose that I could utter such a sentiment 
 as you have now heard lightly, and without due consideration? No! 
 it is the settled conviction of my mind, arising from forty years of 
 the greatest possible industry in tracing chrisiianity in all its influen¬ 
 ces and operations upon the whole of society. 
 
 There is no individual in this assembly, who regrets the necessity 
 of wounding your feelings more than I do. But, my friends, I am 
 not speaking for the hour, or the day, or the few hundreds that are 
 here. I speak tp you a truth, \vhich I expect, when once promul¬ 
 gated, will pass from mind to mind, until it shall pervade every part 
 of the world. I speak to you a truth, which, whatever may be your 
 present impressions, will one day prove to you the most valuable 
 truth vou ever heard. 
 
 My friends, would you not suppose, from what you have heard of 
 the practical advantages of Christianity, that ail is now right amongst 
 you; that you are very angels in condnct; that you have among you 
 the very perfection of virtue and of all excellence? But you all well 
 know this is not the case. You well know that Christian Society, all 
 over Christendom, abounds in vice and iniquity. [ Here there was 
 some stir among the audience.] My friends, if any of you are afraid 
 to hear the truth, it is time for you to depart. [ Here a little more 
 excitement , and some few left the church. 
 
 My friends, when the Jewish system was worn out, and the time 
 had arrived for another to be introduced, the excitement which took 
 place, when communications were publicly made that a new order 
 of things was about to commence, was much greater than the trifling 
 movement which we have just now witnessed. The time, however, 
 has arrived, when the corruptions of the Christian system, like the 
 corruptions of all preceding and existing old systems, call loudly for 
 a great and mighty moral change. Do not you all acknowledge 
 daily, and with great truth, that you are now dead in trespasses and 
 sins? If you really mean what you say, it is high time that you 
 should arise under new circumstances into new life. But unless 
 the truth, without any fear of man, shall be honestly spoken to you, 
 what help is therefor you? You have not, in this discussion, heard 
 from me one syllable that is not deeply fixed in mv mind as a valua^- 
 ble truth; nor, during the remainder of these proceedings, shall you 
 hear a word from me, that is not dictated by an ardent desire to place 
 without disguise the most valuable truths before you. 
 
 •Here a lady almost fainted, and another had her foot bruised in the crowd. 
 
144 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 The evidences which Mr. Campbell has brought to prove the truth 
 of Christianity, prove to me its falsehood. And all he has said about 
 the purity of its doctrines, and their efficacy for practice, is disproved 
 by the daily conduct of every Christian population in every quarter 
 of the world. 
 
 A Christian population is, emphatically, in practice, a population 
 preying upon each other, and living very generally in a state of 
 unnatural anxiety for useless and surplus property, in the midst of 
 hourly deception and hypocrisv^; having and disliking each other 
 because they cannot think and feel alike, having been taught the 
 notion that they may think and feel as they please. It is every 
 where a population of inequality of condition, and necessarily of 
 pride, poverty, envy and jealousy. It is a population, in which ten¬ 
 fold more of exertion and anxiety is required from each, to produce 
 the misery they experience, than is necessary to secure a full supply 
 of the best of every thing for all. In short, I find it to be, in prac¬ 
 tice, so full of ignorance, weakness, insincerity, and counteraction 
 of each other’s views and objects, and of weekly preaching to per¬ 
 petuate all these evils, that, did I not firmly believe that truth is om- i 
 nipotent to remove error, and that we are, in consequence, rapidly 
 approaching a new state of existence, in which, with regard to these 
 things, there will be a new birth and a new life, a regeneration that 
 will purge man from all these abominations, I could feel no interest 
 in the present irrational proceedings of the human race. And if I 
 had wanted any further proof of the Christian world being in this 
 wretched condition, Mr. Campbell’s sermon in this place, on Sunday 
 last, and the appearance of the state of mind of the congregation, 
 would have rendered more unnecessary. Never did I see so much 
 line talent so miserably misdirected. Never did I see human beings 
 30 ready to receive poison under the undoubting supposition that it 
 was good and wholesome food. 
 
 Mr. Campbell is, however, according to my conviction of right 1 
 and wrong, blameless. Like all other men, he has been made sub-1 
 ject to the fifth law contained in the casket; he has been compelled I 
 to receive the instructions which have been forced into bis mind, .which I 
 is by nature of that honest firmness and consistency, that he is com- I 
 pelled to retain them with great tenacity. I 
 
 My friends, I do say again, that so long as this weekly preaching, 1 
 without reply from the congregation, shall be allowed to proceed,you 1 
 and your posterity will be kept in the very depth of darkness, as you I 
 are at this hour. In consequence of this preaching, Mr. Campbell. 1 
 unconscious to himself, with all his energies and fine natural talents i 
 has fallen a complete victim to it. His mind has been closed by hbJ 
 early training and consequent prepossessions, and held in chains, b) I 
 which he is prevented from receiving one ray of natural and tria l 
 light. He is, at this time, I am compelled to believe, in the depth o I 
 mental darkness—blind as a mole. ' | 
 
 Thus from age to age do the blind lead the blind, until they all fall 
 into the ditch of error. And out of this ditch, I perceive, they eanno I 
 
DEBASE. 
 
 145 
 
 eome, until some one shall open the eyes of their mind, and enable 
 them to see the wretched condition in which tliey are. The present 
 and past generations have been rendered mentally blind from their 
 birth, and they truly require many physicians to make them whole. 
 Now I am persuaded, tha t neither Mr. Campbell nor the larger part of 
 his congregation, were in the least conscious, that throughout his 
 sermon on Sunday morning., he reasoned as falsely and spoke as much 
 error as could well be spoken in the same period. 
 
 And these false impressions were taken home by those present, 
 whose conduct would not be improved by it in the least; for they 
 would think worse of their neighbors who are compelled to differ from 
 them in opinions and feelings, and immediately begin to enter upon 
 the regular daily sins of life, such as I have described them to be— 
 the same, in fact, as they were engaged in the day before, and all 
 their lives^ This kind of preaching has no other effect—it can have 
 no other effect—-in practice, than to perpetuate the dark ages of ig¬ 
 norance and hypocrisy. 
 
 And before I leave this part of the subject, I wish to put it upon re¬ 
 cord, that the most despotic power in the world, at this day, is the week¬ 
 ly preachings in the churches, without the liberty of reply to the 
 preacher. And tiie United States, free and independent as they are 
 supposed to be, are more overrun with the blind thus leading the blind 
 than many other countries. Yes, my friends, by this cunningly de¬ 
 vised mechanism, which extends its ramifications far and wide, even 
 into the lands and territories the most distant, you are made to pay 
 for erecting the buildings and the cost of repairs; to pay the preach¬ 
 er, and bow your neck to him, that he may the most conveniently 
 rivet on you the chains of ignorance, and make you always subservi¬ 
 ent to his purposes. Until this evil shall be removed, there will be 
 no hope for the rising generation. You can never be free as long 
 as you have weekly or frequent unanswered preachings and pray¬ 
 ings. 
 
 Now, this is a different view of the subject from any anticipated by 
 Mr. Campbell. His mind, in consequence of his early instruction 
 and prepossession, has not been, in any degree, prepared for it,; nor 
 does 4*e now, as it appears to me, perceive or comprehend much of 
 my reasoning. I apprehend, also, there are but few in this assem¬ 
 bly, who, with their present impressions, can be prepared to under¬ 
 stand it. 
 
 The twelve old laws, which appear so much to puzzle Mr. Campbell, 
 may be fitly compared tq a casket in which are contained twelve of 
 the most valuable jewels that the imagination can conceive; but a 
 casket composed of steel so highly polished, that all who look upon it 
 see only the reflection of their own minds. You may also imagine 
 that the casket has been closed, by ingenious workmen employed for 
 that purpose, many thousand years, in order that no ordinary person 
 should open it to inspect its contents. Mr. Campbell has .looked upon 
 this casket; but with all his talents, owing to the tenacity of his early 
 
 VOL. IK 13 
 
146 DEBATE. 
 
 impressions, it has reflected the association only of Ins instructions 
 in the Christian mysteries. 
 
 A fortunate combination of circumstances, originating in certain 
 causes, over which I had no control, has enabled me to open this cas¬ 
 ket, and at leisure calmly to survey the precious deposit therein. 
 
 The jewels it contains have laid within it for unnumbered thou¬ 
 sands of years. They have not, therefore, that brilliant appearance, 
 which they would possess if they had been lately polished by profes¬ 
 sed and experienced jewellers. But this evening, after the meeting 
 adjourns, I will, although 1 am not an experienced working jeweller, 
 in the absence of those more expert in the trade, take the liberty to 
 burnish them up a little, and to-morrow endeavor to bring out some 
 of their beauties for your inspection, I shall not have time to perform 
 this burnishing as it ought to be done; but what the time will permit, 
 
 I will do. 
 
 Adjourned till to-morrow. 
 
 Tuesday , April 21, 10 o’clock A. M, 
 [Met agreeably to.adjournment.] 
 
 Mr. Owen proceeded— 
 
 Mr. Campbell has said that the Christian religion is divine, and 
 that the Supreme Power, who revealed it, is most anxious that men 
 should believe it. How came it, then, that Mahomet, after Christ 
 had preceded him six hundred years, and the Christians had all that 
 time to mature their plans, should have obtained more prosolytes, and 
 that the Musuiman should at this day nearly equal if not outnumber 
 the Christians? That which proves the truth of the Christian reli¬ 
 gion, as Mr. Campbell has attempted to prove it, will equally prove 
 the truth of the Mahometan and every other religion. The verity of 
 each depends upon the same kind of testimony—-they all have their 
 mysteries and their miracles, Whenever we become rational beings 
 we shall be assured that the Power which governs the universe, 
 whatever it may be, requires no mysteries or miracles to effect its 
 purposes. 
 
 If my plan was to arouse too much local irrational feelings, it would 
 not he difficult to make very short work of these proceedings. To en¬ 
 ter fully into an examination of the mysteries, miracles, and errors 
 which Christians have been taught from infancy to hear with rever¬ 
 ence, would bo productive of no practical benefit. I shall, therefore, 
 not go much into detail upon subjects, which so few are yet prepared 
 to hear freely discussed. 
 
 There may, however, be some utility in deviating a little from the 
 course to which originally I intended to adhere. For although I think 
 it right, for the reasons stated, not to enter minutely into what ap¬ 
 pears to me the glaring inconsistencies of any of the religions of the 
 world; yet as Mr. Campbell has taken so much pains to develope the 
 whole of the christiaq scheme, I will advert to some of his points of, 
 defence, and afterwards give a further developement of those twelve 
 fundamental laws, which Mr, Campbell calls old principles, and show 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 147 
 
 that these old principles, being all proved to be facts, it becomes utterly 
 impossible that any religion can be true. 
 
 Mr. Campbell has told you the Christian religion consists in faith, 
 and that faith depends upon testimony; that the faith necessary for you 
 to have, is an undoubting beliefin the miraculous birth, in the death 
 and burial, and in the ascension into heaven of the marr Jesus Christ, 
 who—it is the most essential, however* to believe—was really and 
 truly the Son of Cod, begotten by him of a virgin. 
 
 This is the position in which Mr* Campbell has placed the discus¬ 
 sion. He is, from the circumstances in which he has been placed 
 from his infancy, unprepared to discuss it upon any other grounds. 
 His mind is completely overwhelmed with the theological learning he 
 has been induced to acquire* Mr. Campbell has little or no practical 
 knowledge of the present state of the human mind, or of society, out 
 
 of the western districts of this country. 
 
 •/ 
 
 It was not my intention, as I have previously mentioned, to enter 
 at all into the endless details of the incomprehensible mysteries, which 
 have been contrived to confound the understandings of the ignorant, 
 in all the religions of the world, past and now existing. 
 
 The most intelligent of the population of Europe never thii k of 
 introducing religious subjects for argument. They are well aware 
 that all religious mysteries and miracles are opposed to reason, and 
 are useless for any good purpose. They abandon them, therefore, to 
 men who discard reason—to untaught women and children; and by 
 these means relieve their society from a subject, upon which they 
 tacitly acknowledge that all men, who devote their time to it, become 
 more or less insane. 
 
 I shall, there fore, not waste much of your time, and mine, by enter¬ 
 ing upon a discussion of subjects in wh : ~ l 
 ner of use, but quite the reverse. 
 
 van i jxd \ji IlO nid.II- 
 
 For reason would say, that if God made us, and could make us as 
 he liked, and he desired we should believe in his existence with any 
 nefinite qualities, and to obey any fixed laws for his advantage or 
 ours, that he would at once have made us so to believe, and so to act. 
 That he never could be angry or displeased with his own work; and 
 that, having the ordering and direction of all things, even, as they 
 say, of creating the very materials, all things must exist, be and act 
 as he intended ; and that nothing, by any possibility, and more par¬ 
 ticularly after the Creator saw and pronounced that “all was very 
 goody’ could go wrong, or remove out of the eternal order which he 
 foreknew or preordained. 
 
 Reason also would say, that if, by some mystery wholly incompre ¬ 
 hensible to reason, man, the last and most finished work of this all 
 wise, all good, and all powerful Creator, did actually disobey the 
 laws given to him by his Creator, almost as soon as man and woman 
 were created; and that the Creator really wished to have a good and 
 happy race of human beings; the better mode would have been to have 
 put Adam and Eve quietly asleep, and humanely put them out of ex- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 148 
 
 / 
 
 istence again, before they had begotten any children, if they, ateo, 
 were to be rendered unhappy for their parents’ acting naturally under 
 the circumstances in which they were placed. 
 
 And when Adam and Eve were thus, without experiencing pain or 
 knowing evil, put, without noise or disturbance, out of the way* rea-* 
 son would say, that the Creator, if such were his wishes, having ac¬ 
 quired the experience in which he proved himself to be deficient at 
 the creation of the first man and woman, might in this second attempt 
 have succeeded to his utfnost desire, and obtained men and women, 
 who would always think as he intended they should think, and aet as 
 he made them to act. 
 
 But again—if some other mysteries, quite incomprehensible for 
 human nature to divine, did stand in the way of God acting in this 
 reasonable manner; and that,for this one action of man and woman, 
 performed, no one knows how, contrary to the divine will, it became 
 the wish of God that innumerable myriads of human beings should 
 suffer, through thousands of generations in this world, and eternally 
 in another; reason capnot discover why God repented himself that 
 he had made man, or why he should suffer man to make him angry, 
 or to thwart all his good intentions for the benefit of the human raee. 
 
 But passing over these impassable matters to reason—it seems 
 Strange that God should relent in part of the horrid, cruel, and unjust 
 treatment to which, as it appears to reason, he had doomed mankind; 
 and wish to devise some expedient, by which man might have some 
 chance of relieving himself from that part of his punishment which 
 consigns hirn to eternal misery. 
 
 Again—it seems very extraordinary to our faculties, that he should 
 have created man without any power over his belief; and that God 
 should make the condition of his escape from hell and damnation to 
 consist in firmly believing what is opposed to his senses, and what he 
 cannot receive into his mind until he has been reduced from a rational 
 to an irratioual being. That is, he must believe that the Power which 
 pervades all space overshadowed a particular virgin of the human 
 race, and that thus the Son of God was procreated and produced; 
 that the Son of God was an infant man, and grew as other men grow; 
 that he was upwards of thirty years in making a few individual be¬ 
 lieve that he was the Son of God; that then he was crucified as an 
 impostor; that this, the only Son of God in the universe, was God 
 himself; that he died, although we are told God cannot die; that on 
 the third day he rose from the dead, and appeared, as in his life time, 
 with his natural material body: that he ate and drank with some 
 of his disciples for forty days, at divers times and places, and then-— 
 with all his materiality, for they saw him with their material eyes— 
 he ascended up to heaven, as they say, from whence he has never 
 returned. 
 
 Why were these strange tilings made of so doubtful a character to 
 man, that very few, compared with the number living at the time * 
 they were said to have occurred, could or did believe them? Reason 
 also Says, if God and the Son desired that all men should believe these 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 149 
 
 mysteries and miracles, how came it that Mahomet successfully oppo¬ 
 sed both Father and Son on this subject, and got the better of the 
 Christians, after they had had six hundred years to tix these divine 
 doctrines among mankind? 
 
 Reason also asks, how is it that, at this day, there are, as Christians 
 say, but few sincere believers in the story of Adam and Eve, and the 
 apple and serpent, and in the birth, death, resurrection, and ascension 
 of Jesus Christ? 
 
 But reason would ask ten thousand pertinent questions of this na¬ 
 ture, to not one of which could a rational answer be given, 
 
 I shall only offend my intelligent hearers, by pursuing such a 
 heterogenous mass of incomprehensible absurdities as these; and I 
 will, therefore, conclude this part of the subject, by asking Mr. 
 Campbell, what evidence, in these days, would now be sufficient to 
 induce him to believe that a virgin had conceived, and was delivered 
 of a male-child? Or that one rose from the dead, and appeared with 
 a material body,-—and with that body, or without it, was seen ascend¬ 
 ing up to heaven? I know that, as I am constituted, and as mil¬ 
 lions of my fellows are, no power, which we possess over our wills, 
 can prevent us having the most thorough conviction that the whole 
 is nothing but an invention, and a very inferior and inconsistent one, 
 to frighten ignorant men and weak women, and children out of their 
 sober senses, and to render them, for life, irrational beings, and bad 
 members of society. And if we cannot, avoid these impressions, 
 who is to blame? Man, who cannot, by his origination, command 
 his will contrary to his conviction, or the being who created the will 
 for man? 
 
 This part of the subject is to me, as it exhibits the degradation to 
 which the reasoning faculties of man has been reduced, most un¬ 
 pleasant, and more especially as all must become irrational on these 
 topics, before they can become sincere, i will, therefore, dismiss 
 it,—as I hope all mankind will, before a few years have expired,— 
 and proceed to subjects, which the human mind can reason upon 
 without feeling that it is degraded by the operation. 
 
 I shall, therefore, merely repeat, that to a sane mind, Mr. Camp* 
 bell’s evidences are no evidences at all, except to prove the errors of 
 the doctrines which, according to a known law of our nature, he has 
 been compelled to receive, and which, of his own power, he cannot 
 remove from his mind. 
 
 1 hope, that when he shall hereafter reflect upon this discussion, 
 the facts stated will be sufficient to overcome his present convictions, 
 and make aright impression on his mind, and enable him to see the 
 inestimable practical value of the twelve fundamental laws of our 
 nature; for then, with his talents, he would be a powerful advocate 
 in dispelling error from the minds of others. 
 
 After taking up a large portion of your time upon" these evidences, 
 none of which would be admitted into any of our courts of law to 
 prove to the value of one dollar, Mr. Campbell gave us many learned 
 documents as extracts from deists, atheists and sceptics; but fc&what 
 VOL. H. 13* 
 
150 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 purpose, in this discussion, I know not, except to prove that there 
 was no connexion between my views and those of many of these 
 writers. 
 
 The truth is, I cannot feel that high importance, that many do, for 
 writings which proceed from mere closet speculators in metaphysics, 
 who, perceiving some of the false notions derived from the doctrines 
 ot free-will, could not discover what human nature really is, so as to 
 be competent to recommend any practical improvement in relation to 
 t ie affairs of life. 
 
 They were, therefore, men in the second stage of the human mind. 
 They had discovered some of the errors of religion, and had lost its 
 influences, without acquiring any better, or any substitute at all for 
 them. I consider them, therefore, to have been in the state in which 
 almost all the learned and most enlightened men of Europe are at 
 this moment—without religion, and without knowledge of any other 
 principles which can produce a superior practice in the conduct of 
 the population of the world. This is the worst state in which society 
 can be; and from my extensive communications with the leading 
 minds of Europe and America, I know it to be the present condition 
 ©f the civilized world. And this is the true reason why this discus¬ 
 sion has been so necessary at this period. The world must have a 
 change, and it well merits a public contest to ascertain what that 
 change shall be; whether it shall return back to the superstition and 
 ignorance of the dark ages, or proceed forward, to bring into full 
 practice, physically, mentally and morally, the discoveries and im¬ 
 provements of the past ages, for the benefit of the human race. 
 
 It is from knowing the danger of this second stage of the human 
 mind, and the necessity of union to accomplish any great change 
 without evil, that you have heard of my progress from country to 
 country. I thus proceed from one country to another with the view 
 of laying a broad and solid foundation for a new mode of life and 
 enjoyment, and to prepare the means to prevent society from continu¬ 
 ing long in its present condition without a beneficial governing prin¬ 
 ciple. For, whatever you may think in this part of the world, the 
 governors and great men of all countries are at present, with few 
 exceptions, without religion, and without a knowledge of those princi¬ 
 ples which, alone can create real virtue in the world. They are 
 more at a loss to know how to govern their respective states now, 
 owing to the general progress of knowledge, than they have been for 
 centuries. They perceive that a great change is unavoidable; but 
 they are at a loss to know how it is to be effected without confusion. 
 
 The British government and nation, now while I speak, are at the 
 very height of civilization under the present irrational system of so¬ 
 ciety. They inhabit a beautiful island, and possess another imme¬ 
 diately adjoining, with a valuable population, capable of rendering 
 and receiving to and from each other every possible social service, 
 benefit and advantage; yet, at this moment, that government is greatly , 
 at a loss to determine what measures to adopt, to put that population 
 in a state of prosperity. The opposing parties were lately on tho 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 151 
 
 point of dissention; and if they had proceeded to hostilities, no one 
 could calculate the extent of the evil and misery that would have 
 followed. And what is the real obstacle to their union, prosperity 
 and happiness? It is religion. Ask the Irish, if, to their cost, they 
 have not found religion to be the greatest curse with which they have 
 ever been afflicted ? In Ireland, it has been the parent of every 
 crime and evil, of which the mind can conceive. Were that obstacle 
 removed, what a glorious opportunity would arise to make that coun¬ 
 try one of the most beautiful, and the inhabitants among the most 
 happy, in any part of the world! Yes! I know nothing, but religion, 
 and the consequent ignorance which it generates of our nature, 
 which now prevents Ireland from becoming one of the most desirable 
 places of abode in any of the four quarters of the globe,—little short, 
 indeed, of the paradise described by Mr. C. But all the members 
 who administer the government of Great Britain, as 'Well as the 
 population, are utterly at a loss to know what to do with their over¬ 
 abundant means of creating a surplus wealth, and a superior charac¬ 
 ter for the population of both islands. They are like sheep without 
 a shepherd—they know not whither to go, what new direction to 
 take, or how to overcome the difficulties in which they are involved. 
 I well know, and I have known for twenty years past, that meas¬ 
 ures w r ere in a steady progress to produce this state of things in both 
 islands. I have long known, that they were proceeding at a rapid 
 pace through all the necessary previous stages, until they should 
 come to a point, beyond which they could not advance without an 
 entire change of the principles by which they have been governed. 
 And they have now reached this point. Fortunately for them, and 
 the world, they, must now r adopt new principles and practices. 
 
 The circumstances which now exist every where, plainly indicate 
 to all who are engaged in the affairs of men, that the population of 
 the w r orld is gorged with the means of obtaining every good thing; 
 but that such is the ignorance which prevails, that instead of ration¬ 
 ally using the wealth so easily to be obtained, or properly applying 
 the newly acquired scientific means, by which the best things to 
 promote the happiness of society may be beneficially procured in 
 the greatest abundance, the wealth accumulates in a few hands, and 
 is missapplied; while the new producing pow ers obtained from 
 mechanical improvements and chemical discoveries are so misdi¬ 
 rected, as to be made the most powerful engines yet known, to 
 inflict poverty and distress on the largest portion of mankind. I 
 mean that portion of it, which, by their labour, produces all the 
 wealth which is consumed by those who create none for themselves. 
 
 But, my friends, although I foresaw distinctly, tw r enty years ago, 
 that these results would necessarily arise from the progress of new 
 improvements and inventions, and published my reasons for these 
 opinions; yet, so little is the world aware of these movements, the 
 inevitable consequences of this new state of things, that the change 
 is, even now, coming upon the most civilized nations “like a thief in 
 
152 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 the night,” unheeded and unprovided for. You know not, that the 
 vej*y circumstances in which you and the whole population of the 
 world at present exist, render it inevitable that this, the most mighty 
 change which the world has yet experienced, must take place within 
 a few years. There is no power on earth, that can resist its progress. 
 It is proceeding forward with a mighty impetus, such as your minds 
 are now inadequate to comprehend. This new scientific, mechani¬ 
 cal and chemical power is advancing, with the efficient force of an 
 army equal to many hundred millions of men, well disciplined, 
 equipped and provided, to accomplish its purpose. 
 
 Irresistible, however, as this force now is, it is daily upon the in¬ 
 crease. It is annually recruited in Europe and America, but chiefly 
 in Great Britain and the United States, by new inventions, and 
 extensions of the old, with new powers, such as appal the present 
 state of the human mind to contemplate, and far exceed the belief 
 of those w r ho are inexperienced upon these subjects. I believe I am 
 much within the real amount, when I state, that the increase of this 
 new power within the last ten years, over Europe and America, has 
 exceeded in its results, each year, upon the average of that period, 
 the well directed industry of twenty millions of laborers unaided by 
 machinery or other scientific aid. 
 
 This is the power which will force the nations who are now the 
 most advanced in arts and sciences to stand still, and inquire what is 
 to be done with this enormous force, daily increasing, in direct com¬ 
 petition with all the producing classes, having a continual tendency 
 to diminish, under the existing system of trade and commerce, the 
 value of their labour, and to reduce them and their families to poverty 
 and slavery. Modern governments know not what measures to adopt, 
 to give this enormous and continually increasing power a right di¬ 
 rection. Yes! as governments and nations, they will be speedily 
 overwhelmed by that worthless object, for which th£y have been all 
 taught to sacrifice their real happiness, and which they now worship 
 as their god. I mean wealth —what is called gold and silver and 
 bank notes, which, after all, but represent real wealth. 
 
 There will soon be so much real wealth produced, by the daily 
 multiplying labor-saving machines, that nations will be no longer 
 competent to prosecute any of their present measures with success. 
 This wealth will accumulate, and become as an impassable mountain 
 barrier to permanent prosperity. It has already, in your technical 
 phrase, overstocked many, and soon it will oversupply all markets; 
 and require, in consequence, more and more exertion from the work¬ 
 ing and middle classes, to enable them to live. 
 
 These are the signs of the times. I w T ish your eyes could be 
 opened, to enable you to perceive these things even a little w r ay off; 
 for they are, w hile I speak, but a short distance from us 1 see it in 
 the smoke of your new factories before me. I hear it in the strokes 
 of your heavy hammers, mechanically moved, which now din upon, 
 the ear. This is one reason why this discussion is so necessary at 
 this period. It w r ell igerits a public contest, to ascertain what that 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 153 
 
 change, wkieh all things indicate to be so near at hand, shall be;—* 
 whether it shall return back to the superstition and ignorance of the 
 dark ages; or proceed forward, to bring into full practice, physically, 
 mentally, and morally, the discoveries and improvements of the past 
 ages, for the benefit of the human race. 
 
 We may, therefore, dismiss these quotations of Mr. Campbell’s, 
 from the atheists, deists, sceptics, &c. as he calls them; for they do 
 not, in any degree, belong to the subject. I brought none of their v 
 forward to support my argument. He had supposed that I had none 
 but such broken reeds to depend upon, and he prepared his defence; 
 accordingly. I have derived little advantage from the past writings 
 of the human race, except as finger-posts, to inform me “that this is 
 not the right road to virtue and happiness.” 
 
 I iiave derived far more wisdom from ealmly and attentively 
 watching the minds and proceedings of children, from a very early 
 age, than I have acquired from all the writings, sacred and profane, 
 that I have read. 
 
 The authors of these works assumed facts which did not exist, 
 reasoned upon them as though they were true, and let their imagina¬ 
 tions run into every kind of error. Hence the mythologies of the 
 Pagans, and the mysteries and miracles of the Jews, Hindoos, 
 Christians, and Mahometans. All the sacred and theological wri 
 tings of the Pagans, Jews, Hindoos, Christians, and Mahometans, 
 are of no value. Nay, my friends, instead of any real value, they 
 are the greatest «vil existing among men; for they derange or destroy 
 all the superior faculties and feelings of the human race, and make 
 man, as he is at this day, more irrational than any of the animal 
 creation. 
 
 For the brute creation, as we call them, act agreeably to their 
 nature, and enjoy it; while man, governed by the caprice of his 
 imagination, acts contrary to it, and is miserable. 
 
 The millions of volumes of this kind of writing, with which the 
 world has been burthened, have had but one object—and that is, to 
 derange all the faculties of those who read them. It were happy for 
 mankind if they could all be collected in one heap—and an immense 
 one it would be—with fire placed under it, so that it might be con¬ 
 sumed until not a fragment was left. The conflagration would be 
 the greatest blessing that could now be conferred upon the human 
 .family. It is from these books that you have derived your present 
 irrational ideas. And until those ideas can be extracted from your 
 minds; until they can be unassociated even to their very foundations; 
 until your minds can be regenerated, and made to receive other and 
 wholly opposite ideas, founded on principles all true, and therefore 
 all consistent with each other, you will see nothing, except through a 
 glass so dark and obscure, that you cannot distinguish cne object as 
 it realiy exists in nature. 
 
 I have said that all the sacred and theological writings, of all re- 
 ligions, are of no value; for they have not taught us a practice that 
 is of any utility: they cannot teach one. 
 
DEBATE 
 
 154 
 
 
 To acquire true wisdom, the world must become again as little 'J 
 children, and observe with care the facts which every where abound 4 
 to give them true and valuable knowledge. For the world has almost * 
 every thing yet to acquire from these facts, relative to a superior 
 mode of existence, 4 
 
 The inhabitants of the earth have, indeed, eyes, but see not; ears 
 have they, but hear not; understandings, and understand not. For 
 all their natural senses are deceived by false instruction from infancy, 
 and thereby rendered highly injurious. 4 
 
 While every past and present fact demonstrates that your character, -s 
 from birth to death, is formed for you, you have been made, by a 
 legerdemain of which you are quite unconscious, to believe that you 
 form them yourselves, and that you have merit or demerit for what : 
 you are. Why, my friends, whether you have been made vessels of ! 
 honor or dishonor, you are no more than wax or clay in the hands of 
 the potter. ; 
 
 I hope the tihie is approaching, when I shall be permitted to dis¬ 
 charge an important duty to you and all mankind. Silver and gold n 
 have 1 not now to spare; and if I had, it could be of no real use to you. 
 But I trust that I shall give you that which is beyond all price, and 
 thereby render gold and silver unnecessary to you, to your children, i 
 and to all future generations. Instead of mankind being, as hereto- > 
 fore, as clay in the hands of the potter, I have the most thorough 
 conviction, that it is now practicable to make you potters yourselves 
 for your children; and I can show you the way to become good j 
 potters, so as to enable you to new-form them, to the extent that the 
 materials of which they are composed will admit; then shall I do for j 
 you, and them, and future generations, the greatest service that one 
 man has ever performed for his fellows. I do not despair, indeed, of 
 enabling many of the present generation, by certain inducements 
 derived from real knowledge, to place themselves in a new furnace, 
 as jt were, in which their hearts and minds shall be softened, and by 
 which operation they may be enabled in part even to amend some of 
 the numerous deformities and imperfections which, through the ignor- 
 ance of their instructors, they have been compelled to receive. 
 
 This many will be enabled to do for themselves; but their children, 
 through an early training and instruction in this invaluable know¬ 
 ledge, may be made to become greatly superior in this new art or 
 calling; while their children again, will greatly improve upon their 
 immediate predecessors. And thus shall an improved character be 
 given, through all future time, to every succeeding generation. 
 
 This happy result will arise, when all the jewels within the casket 
 shall be so burnished as to compel public attention to examine, not 
 only their external beauty, but also their intrinsic worth. 
 
 Now, my friends, can I give you any thing of more intrinsic value, 
 than to enable you to make your offspring superior, physically and 
 intellectually, to the most perfect human being that now exists ? I • 
 can do this; and this I will not cease to endeavor to do, while health 
 and the power of exertion shall be spared to me. There is nothing in 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 155 
 
 'the whole range of human society, that can be, in any degree, com¬ 
 pared with the value of this knowledge. Having this, you will have 
 every thing; and without it, you have comparatively nothing. 
 
 When you shall thus become expert potters, and be enabled to put 
 your children in superior moulds, there will be no occasion for week¬ 
 ly preachings—-no necessity for formal precepts of any kind, to adults. 
 The superior formation of the character of each individual will be 
 secured in childhood; and before the period of youth expires, it will 
 be matured in good habits and dispositions—in a correct knowledge 
 of human nature, through a close inspection of the laws within the 
 casket; and it will have attained the high intellectual acquirements 
 and fixed moral principles, which will make it evident to all, that 
 the present weekly preachings are most injurious to the best and 
 highest interests of the human race. 
 
 And unless this superior workmanship shall be applied at an early 
 period of life, it is useless to expect that it can ever be effectually well 
 done afterwards. When your children have been put into an ill- 
 formed mould from infancy, and thereby forced to acquire irrational 
 feelings for their fellows, erroneous ideas and notions respecting 
 their own powers, and bad habits, which tenaciously adhere to them, 
 it is in vain to expect that you can undo that, except by some acci¬ 
 dental occurrence, which has been so unfortunately done at the most 
 important period of the child’s life, for givij^ the best form to his 
 character, 
 
 You have heard much from my friend, Mr, Campbell, of the genius 
 and tendency of the Christian faith and religion. He has told you 
 what he has-been taught to believe of it from his youth upwards. And 
 he has informed you what his impressions are, with as much honesty 
 as a conscientious Musselman would tell yomoi the spirit and genius 
 of the Mahometan faith and religion. For the Mahometans and 
 Hindoos are as conscientious in their belief, and as tenacious of the 
 superiority of their religion, as Mr. Campbell, or any Christian ii* 
 Christendom, can be of theirs, And have they not as much faith as 
 the members of any other religion ? 
 
 But the conscientiousness or tenacity of the Fagan, Jew, Hindoo, 
 Christian, or Mahometan, do not add one grain to the argument in 
 favor of the divine origin or truth of either. They prove only the divine 
 origin and truth of the fifth law of human nature; and the value, 
 beyond price, which it will become to the world, when it shall be 
 regenerated and born again, and it shall cease to be dead in trespasses 
 and sins, as almost all Christendom, as the other portions of the worlds 
 are at present. 
 
 We shall presently see how these laws of nature harmonize and 
 explain each other, and their applicability to all the business and 
 duties of life. 
 
 Did Mr. Campbell explain to you the spirit and genius of the 
 phristian system? I listened to him with all the attention in my 
 power; and then I contrasted, in my mind r the real effects produced in 
 
156 debate; 
 
 Christendom by that spirit and genius. Because, soy friends, it is 
 “by the fruits that ye shall know them.” 
 
 The mode of judging of the tree by its fruit, is alone the one I' 
 adopt, when I examine the spirit and genius of any religion, of any 
 government, of any code of laws, or any of the institutions which 
 flow from them. And by this guide 1 have, without prejudice or 
 favor, compared the spirit and genius of the Christian mysteries, 
 miracles, fables, and dogmas, with their fruits; and by their fruits, so 
 abundantly growing around me in every direction, 1 have become 
 intimately acquainted with the tree from the blossom to the root. 
 
 And what have I found this tree, of two thousand years’ growth, 
 to produce, in every soil in which it has been planted ? Abundance 
 of insincerity and deception; for the whole life of a Christian is a 
 continued striving in opposition to his nature, and therefore, of ne¬ 
 cessity he must be a hypocrite. It is notorious over Asia and Africa, 
 that there is so little truth in a Christian, that little or no faith is 
 placed in what, he may say or do. But to come nearer home—show 
 me a man or woman in the city of Cincinnati, whose daily life is 
 not a perpetual lie to his or her profession. It cannot be otherwise. 
 It is necessarily so; and no one can avoid this consequence, with¬ 
 out being so unnatural as not to partake of human nature. It is 
 the natural fruit of the tree. It is the spirit, the genius, the neces¬ 
 sary tendency of Christianity; and therefore the individuals, who 
 have been compelled to receive it, are objects of our greatest com¬ 
 passion. 
 
 Other fruits of this tree are, pride and spiritual pride, among many 
 other kinds of it, and envy and jealousy. 
 
 My friends, do you know any pride of wealth, of birth, of con¬ 
 nexions; any spiritual pride, any pride of learning, or personal pride, 
 in this city? Do you know any who envy the advantages possessed, 
 or which they suppose to be possessed, by others? Or do you know 
 any who are jealous of their neighbor’s superiority, or of their feel¬ 
 ings for others in preference to themselves ? If you do, these are the 
 genuine fruits of this tree; and you well know they superabound 
 every where. 
 
 Other fruits of this same tree are, ignorance and presumption, 
 most peculiarly combined. 
 
 Have you any ignorant among you, who know nothing of them¬ 
 selves, and very little of nature; who yet imagine themselves to be 
 God's elect; and who, in consequence, look down upon their fellow 
 beings as though they were not of the same species, and say, “Stand 
 aloof, for I am more holy than thou ?” 
 
 This again is the natural fruit of the tree. Religious wars, mas¬ 
 sacres, and persecutions for conscience sake, are also some of its 
 fruit; and these have been shed abundantly all over Christendom. 
 
 It is unnecessary to tell me what any system will do when carried 
 into practice, whilst I have its practical results before me; whilst I 
 see what it has produced in the past, and what it is producing in the 
 time—what it produces to-day* and what it ypust produce 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 15 V 
 
 during the continuance of the practice among men. From the facts 
 and reasonings thus obtained, it is most evident, that if the Christian 
 doctrines were to continue to form your characters for ten thousand 
 years, they would make you, at the eno of that period, worse than 
 you are to-day; for they are daily becoming more and more incon¬ 
 gruous, when compared with the knowledge derived from the grow¬ 
 ing experience of the world. In the very nature of the doctrines 
 which the gospel enforces upon the young and tender mind, every 
 generation, if it can be supposed possible that these doctrines, in 
 opposition to experience, could continue to influence them, must 
 become more and more irrational. For-as t^e world advances in 
 knowledge and experience, the professing Christian must necessa¬ 
 rily become either more hypocritical, or more ignorant. And from 
 this simple cause, I doubt whether, since the days of Christ’s first 
 appearing, there ever was a time of mere hypocrisy, over the whole 
 of Christendom, than at the present. 
 
 I know the world cannot help being what it is:—you cannot 
 help being what you are. And, in consequence of the overwhelming 
 circumstances which now exist, religious societies arc jiow every 
 where a cheat from beginning to end. Owing to the certain inform- 
 ation 1 have derived from the casket, I can easily discover that your 
 looks, your words, and your actions are continually opposed to each 
 other. 
 
 Do not be offended, my friends, nor suppose I speak in anger, or 
 with the intention to offend you. So far from being angry, I feel the 
 utmost, the most sincere compassion for you, and all who are, like 
 you, under the influence of any religious delusion. 
 
 I do not attach a particle of blame to one of you. Possessing 
 the knowledge contained in this casket, and the charity which it 
 necessarily compels me to have for every human being, how can I 
 blame you? Do I not know, with the greatest certainty, how the 
 character of each has been formed for him from infancy. 
 
 My friends, every one admits—-even your sacred books teach, that 
 there is no possibility of judging fairly of any tree, save by its fruits. 
 I, therefore, judge of Christianity by the bitter fruits which it has 
 produced wheresoever it has been planted. 
 
 My friends, 1 have had time only to polish some parts, and those 
 imperfectly, of the contents of this casket, as you have witnessed. 
 This afternoon, I shall be prepared with some more of it, and I will 
 endeavor to produce as much as will occupy our attention from 
 four to five o’clock. Seeing the course Mr. Campbell has adopted, 
 I wish to have time to do equal justice to the subject which I advo¬ 
 cate. 1 do not like to depend solely upon the accidental ideas which 
 may arise when I address you, without any preparation. For as 
 I enter more fully into this subject, its importance continually grows 
 upon me. Having proceeded thus far in attempts to open a new 
 light in this city, as it must be to many of you, I am the most desi¬ 
 rous .not to leave you partially informed respecting it. I w ish to do 
 justice, in this case, to the subject, to you, and to the millions to 
 
 VOL, .II. 14 
 
158 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 whom these records will be transmitted. I therefore trust, that it will 
 not be too inconvenient to the gentlemen who sit as moderators, to 
 allow time sufficient to do that which it would be most improper to 
 leave undone. I could not begin to reply to Mr. C. until he had 
 finished his elaborate argument and his long chain of documents, 
 which have occupied one half more time than I required to place 
 my views before you,—and he speaks, as you may notice, three 
 words for two of mine, I mean not, however, to occupy your 
 time with words without corresponding ideas, as must be done in 
 all cases in which much is spoken on the subject of any religion. 
 For the mysteries of religion can be made to pass current only when 
 many words are used to confound the understanding of the hearers, 
 by no definite meaning being attached to them. When the deepest 
 prejudices of mankind have to be uprooted, there must be substantial 
 ideas for each word to represent, and ideas, too, that are perfectly 
 consistent with each other, or I shall have no chance of making 
 the permanent impression I intend. 1 have promised, that when I 
 shall have finished this part of the discussion, if Mr. Campbell, or 
 any other individual, shall discover one error, or one inconsistency, 
 in the principles and system which I advocate, I w ill give up the 
 whole contest. For should one error be found, I shall be convinced 
 I have been deceived; for where there is inconsistency, there cannot 
 be truth. At present I say no more. 
 
 [Here some conversation took place between the chairman and Mr. 
 Campbell . Mr. Owen stated that lie would be prepared to proceed 
 with kis afternoon's address , after Mr. C. had replied , as he wished 
 io do, to what he had offered this morning.]* 
 
 Mr. Owen resumed. I am sure we are all greatly indebted to 
 the moderators, w'ho have attended here so punctually day by day. 
 They have given us already so much of their time, that I can readily 
 suppose it w ill be inconvenient for them to continue their attendance 
 much longer. I have done all that seemed to me desirable, to curtail 
 the duration of this discussion. My friend, Mr. Campbell, no doubt, 
 deemed it of great importance to place before the public all his 
 notions of the system in which he has been trained; and it has been 
 the extraordinary length of my friend’s erudite exposition, (during 
 the utterance of w r hich I was under the necessity to remain silent,) 
 that has taken up so much of the time. 
 
 But, my friends, there is another view of this subject. The sys¬ 
 tems which I have to oppose are of several thousand year’s standing. 
 
 •This conversation was to this effect.—Mr. C. asked Mr. Chairman whether 
 Mr. Owen had a right to change the times of adjournment, and whether his 
 having adjourned to 10 o’clock this morning was not contrary to our original 
 stipulations—Moreover, said Mr. C. I would ask whether Mr. Owen should be 
 allowed time to retire to write speeches as circumstances may require; and 
 whether we must wait here from day to day, so long as Mr. Owen can write 
 new essays upon the twelve “Divine laws of human nature;” adjourning from 
 time to time, as may suit his writing convenience? Mr. Owen’s recalling the 
 motion to adjourn till four o’clock and promising to be prepared at three, 
 prevented a reply from the board. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 159 
 
 They have been supported, during these thousand years, by millions 
 of ministers, who have been paid, in that time, enormous sums to 
 instruct the population m various countries,—and for more than a 
 hundred in this. 
 
 Can it be expected, then, that in a few days, or rather in little 
 mpre than one,—for, during this discussion, 1 have spoken but fifteen 
 
 hours,_I can unassociate in your minds all the ideas thus derived 
 
 from nast ages— ideas which have been instilled into your minds 
 with so much care, from your birth? Is it to be expected, I ask you, 
 my friends, that, in a few hours, I can combat and put to flight all 
 the host of errors which have been accumulating for thousands of 
 years, when, by the fundamental laws of human nature we are 
 compelled to retain early impressions with great tenacity? 
 
 Although such a result no one would anticipate, I have yet un¬ 
 bounded confidence in the omnipotence ot truth. I care not what 
 obstacles may be placed in its way: whatever they are, I expect that-, 
 sooner or later, they will be overcome. If, on the present occasion, 
 I shall not be allowed time for the full performance of the task I wish 
 to accomplish, I trust it shail he so executed, within whatever time 
 is now to be allowed before the discussion terminates, that what I put 
 upon record will be sufficient to induce those who have not yet been 
 taught to reflect upon these subjects, to begin to think for themselves. 
 I can hardly believe, that there can be any wish that this subject 
 should not be as fully heard on one side, as it has been on the other; 
 or that what remains to be said on my part should not be said in the 
 best manner. 
 
 But, my friends, I find that upon this, as upon all other occasions, 
 we must necessarily be governed by the circumstances which sur¬ 
 round us. To these circumstances I must yield, as we are all obliged 
 to do, when we'cannot change those in which we are involved. It 
 seems the circumstances which limit this debate cannot now be 
 easily changed. I must, therefore, submit to the audience the 
 remainder of what I intend to say, without having time to do all the 
 justice to the subject, which its high practical importance deserves. 
 
 These debates are familiar to Mr. C. and he has been in the prac¬ 
 tice of public speaking week after week, or rather day by day, for 
 many years. I am obliged to think well what I say, before I give it 
 utterance. It is always necessary, but now peculiarly so, for me, 
 after the engagement I have made, to take care that there shall be 
 no inconsistency in any thing I may say. I have only to regret, 
 that what I may speak is not likely to be so well digested, as that 
 which I should write at more leisure. But as I now must be gov¬ 
 erned in what I shall say, to the termination of this discussion, by 
 the impulse of the moment, I trust that the ideas and expressions 
 which may arise, when I address you in the afternoon, will be equal 
 to the emergency. 
 
 Adjourned to meet at three o’clock, when the discussion is to tfe 
 closed. 
 
160 DEBATE. 
 
 Tuesday afternoon , 21 st April, l&JD. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—-Public attention and curiosity have been much 
 excited from the first proposal of this discussion even up to the 
 present moment. On Mr. Owen’s first appearance in this country 
 our expectations were raised to an unusual degree. Corriing direct 
 from one of the most enlightened countries in the world; having 
 traversed the British Isles, and visited several places on the continent 
 of Europe; professing to have discovered very great errors in the 
 present order of society, and to have it in his power to new modify 
 the world, by some very rational changes, resulting from the march 
 of mind and the progress of science; our expectations were very 
 much raised, and we bade the benevolent visitant a hearty welcome 
 to our shores. Under these favorable circumstances Mr. Owen was 
 received by the good citizens of these United States. He was treated 
 with all the liberality of our republican institutions. 
 
 In his first addresses he was cautious and reserved on the subject 
 of religion. It is true, indeed, that from the first address which 1 
 «a\v in print from Mr. Owen, I observed the poison artfully infused 
 into the golden chalice which he presented to the American people. 
 But for some time he was a little cautious. He became bold; and 
 finally, as large as life, he appeared the advocate of irreligion, or no 
 religion—and, like all his brotherhood in France, he talked much of 
 reason, and common sense. Philosophy too, (most abused word,) 
 was adored as the patron goddess of the whole scheme. All this, too, 
 associated with a good moral exterior, uncommon mildness and sua¬ 
 vity of temper, procured for Mr. Owen, (to say nothing of the 
 charms of wealth,} a degree of respect and courtesy, which would 
 not have been shown to the system in the person of almost any other 
 advocate, and still less in the person of one who should have exhibi¬ 
 ted the more natural and the more usual tendency of the system in his 
 own conduct. 
 
 But added to all this, it was published fhr and wide that Mr. Owen 
 was a gentleman of the most extensive reading, great research, a first 
 rate political economist, and profoundly acquainted with every thing 
 connected with the political, religious, and economical systems, 
 practices, and relations of mankind. He seemed to understand 
 every thing relative to the subjects on which he declaimed and wrote, 
 more profoundly than any person else—and from the plenary confi¬ 
 dence, and the air of infallibility which decorated his ratiocinations, 
 deductions, and proofs, all were almost afraid to call any of his 
 dogmas in question. Progressing thus, specious in his philosophy, 
 and the perfect gentleman in his manners, it was not to be wondered 
 at that he found many disciples and admirers in all parts of the 
 country, whithersover he turned his course. He attempted to organ¬ 
 ize societies among us, and to set on foot a new order of things. But 
 religion impedes his progress, and finally it absorbs all his energies 
 and those of his friends. It is combatted on new principles, as it 
 did appear, and was threatened to be prostrated by reason and science , 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 161 
 
 The old artillery of little Deists and petty cavillers were all to be laid 
 aside, and nothing but the apparatus of good logic and genuine philo¬ 
 sophy were to be employed by Mr. Owen in pulling down ah the 
 religions of the world. And now our ears have heard, and our eyes 
 have seen the whole strength of this new armament against the faith. 
 This discussion will, I think, be a new and no ordinary confirma¬ 
 tion of the faith of Christians. Mr. Owen, the cool philosopher, the 
 great political economist, the universal reader, the extensive traveller, 
 the shrewd and logical thinker, after surveying the productions of 
 six thousand years, appears with the maturity of almost three score 
 years, laden with the spoils of time, standing upon the shoulders of 
 all the sceptics of Greece, Rome, England, and America, selects 
 the most puissant weapons, and chooses the best mode of attack, 
 which all his reading, observation, and experience could de¬ 
 vise. You have heard it, my friends, you have seen it ail in twelve 
 principles, all poised upon one metaphysical question. This is the 
 dos pou sto of Archimedes. Here Mr. Owen places the fulcrum 
 for his puissant lever which is to raise the human family from all the 
 superstitions good and bad, and from all political degradation, from 
 poverty, ignorance and suffering. This is the U summum bonum 
 “the philosophers stone”’—the old doctrine of Epicurus in modern 
 broad cloth. 
 
 Now it is lawfully to be presumed, that Mr. Owen has taken the 
 strongest ground which can be taken upon the sceptical hypotheses. 
 He has scon where all his predecessors have been foiled; and there¬ 
 fore selects the ark of safety, the impregnable fortress, the strongest 
 tower which his imagination and reason could grasp.-—Forth comes 
 the essay which you have heard. This is the cream of fifty years 
 reading, travelling, studying, conversing with minds of the “best 
 calibre.” Arrayed in the majesty of twelve propositions, which will 
 equally suit the horse and his rider. Mr. Owen appears brandishing 
 the sixth , the fatal sixth , which like a two edged sword is to cut off 
 all the heads of all the priests and kings in the world. 
 
 Upon the whole, we were glad, to see Mr. Owen take such high 
 ground. First, because he made Thomas Paine, Gibbon, cum multis 
 aliis , with all the old sceptics, a set of simpletons and drivelling 
 philosophers. And next, because he was all for reason and philoso¬ 
 phy, which no intelligent Christian ever feared—We met him on his 
 own five propositions on which he defied the world. You however 
 heard the contents of Mr. Owen’s logic upon these premises. And 
 you have seen what he has offered in defence of them. It would be only 
 a species of insult to the good sense of any hearer of this discussion 
 to state again that Mr. Owen has only repeated over and over the 
 same dogmas; and that he has in every instance refused joining issue 
 either upon his own propositions or mine. He has met all sorts of 
 argument by mere assertions, by mere declamation. 
 
 Regarding Mr. Owen as the present magnus Apollo of scepticism, 
 as a man of great reason and philosophy, we did most certainly ex¬ 
 pect that he would reason and not merely assert —that he would not 
 VOL. 11. 14* 
 
162 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 at last, when foiled in argument, descend into the ranks of those 
 little spirits, who strut about in the pomposity of two or three witi- 
 cisms or sneers, which they have heazxl and z’etail from some infidel 
 apostle. Nay, indeed, I did not expect to hear Mr. Owen talking in 
 the ribaldry of these little demagogues of infidelity, who talk about 
 Eve, and the apple, and the serpent; about the virgin Mary, and 
 Joseph, with a sort ot significant grin, expressing the great detesta¬ 
 tion of their great little souls against such fables! ; 
 
 There is nothing proof against these Parthian missiles, that the 
 vanquished Parthian throws behind him on his rerti*eat from the pui*- 
 suing conqueror. I could, without pretending to any genius in this 
 way, turn every virtue in the world to ridicule,and laugh out of coun¬ 
 tenance the gi'avest and best man that ever lived.—Only, as the 
 great Warburton said, “put a fool’s coat upon a philosopher or a saint, 
 and you may under this covering laugh him down.” Call bravery , 
 temerity; call generosity , prodigality; call wisdom , gravity; call 
 honesty , simplicity; and good manners , foppery; and the work is 
 done. So the atheist ridicules the idea of God. A pretty world 
 this, to come from a rational first cause! Talk not of wisdom 
 while yau see so much folly in the univei'se! Only see the waste 
 of water and the waste of land; only look, says he, how many half 
 begun operations, and how many unfinished enterprizes there are. 
 Look at the deformities and the irregularities, and the maladapta- 
 t ions every where. Talk not of goodness, says the ridiculing athe¬ 
 ist; dont } r ou see poisons lurking in your fields and gardens—pesti¬ 
 lence and death stealing upon you in the invisible miasmata? Talk 
 not of justice- see the good man punished for his virtue, and the 
 wicked rewarded for his vice, &c. &c. So the idea of God is 
 laughed out of the world by the atheists. Tell me the virtue I can¬ 
 not caricature and render ridiculous. I will call humility, mean¬ 
 ness; charity, pride or ostentation, and thez', under such a garb, laugh 
 them out of society. 
 
 Is there any way of proving in a court of law, that Queen Elizabeth 
 or Oliver Cromwell once lived ? If there be, the same sort of evidence 
 will prove in a court of law, that all the gospel facts are true. But 
 there is as much wit in a pedlar’s telling you to prove how many 
 yards are in a given web, by weighing it in scales, or by putting it 
 into a bushel, as there is in Mr. Owen’s telling you, you cannot prove 
 the gospel facts in a court oflaw.. 
 
 His Adam and Eve, the apple and serpent puns are very puissant 
 weapons in his armor; and his representing the imbecility, or folly, 
 or malevolence of the Deity, in giving birth to the present state of 
 things, are all in unison with the nice discernment, good taste, and 
 hue feelings, of the champion of scepticism. The human body, and 
 all its organs, internal and external, by the same logic could he 
 shown to be ridiculous. Call it an animal machine and then exam¬ 
 ine it in detail. You may then laugh at yourselves, as we might con- * 
 ceive an actor would, who had assumed a character which did not 
 suit him. 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 163 
 
 But, ray friends, I cannot but admire the influence which Chris¬ 
 tianity has now exhibited in you. In speaking of the Christian re- 
 iioionThis morn in as on other occasions, Mr. Owen has severely 
 tested the influence of Christianity upon us. He has tried our Chris¬ 
 tian patience and forbearance to the utmost. I feel a degree of pride 
 to see you bear these indignities with so much patience. These in¬ 
 sults were all gratuitous, and ill-timed, too, if there be anytime for 
 insults. When I was laying before you the historic evidences of 
 Christianity, if Mr. Owen had any objection to any of the historic 
 facts, testimonies ,or proofs adduced, then was the time to have made 
 his objections. But it is an easy method of refuting any argument, 
 to say it is impertinent, or inconclusive; to call any document a fable* 
 a legend; and to represent the most credible testimony in the world as 
 a story, & fiction. This is a wholesale way of rebutting all argument 
 and proof, and I am much disappointed to find the boasted reason of 
 the sceptical heroes, compelled to adopt this miserable subterfuge of 
 the poorest drivellers, who have not sense to know when a point is 
 proved, or when a conclusion is fairly drawn from just premises. Mr. 
 Owen arrogates too much for a philosopher. He puts himself in the 
 Pope’? chair, and makes his say so , his ipse dixit, go as far as the Ro 
 man Pontiff ever claimed for himself. I have never heard so few 
 wherefores, so few illative particles in as much reading as in Mr, 
 Owen’s speeches. 
 
 But after all Mr Owen’s great reading and research, there is one 
 book which he has not often read, and which above all others he ought 
 (even to attack it successfully) often to have read. I need not tell you 
 that this is the Bible. It is true, indeed, that he told me he read it 
 some two or three times when an infant at school—but what of that? 
 At this 1 am astonished. How dare any man attack a book, of such 
 high pretensions, from a school-boy-reading of it! But this is in 
 unison with the sceptical school. Thomas Paine wrote against the 
 Bible from recollections, and acknowledged that he had not much read 
 it. David Hume acknowledged, not long before his death, that he 
 had never seriously read the New Testament through. I have never, 
 to this hour, met with a sceptic, who was well acquainted with the 
 Holy Scriptures, or who had in his writings evinced that he had given 
 them a close or critical examination. If it were lawful thus to retort 
 upon Mr. Owen, [ would engage to prove that his opposition to Chris¬ 
 tianity is predicated upon his ignorance of it, instead of its being predi¬ 
 cated upon the ignorance of mankind, in his sense, or as he pre¬ 
 sumes. 
 
 Mr. Owen’s logic reads thus: I have read five hours per diem for 
 twenty-five years. I have explored all the systems of government, 
 political economy, and of religion for forty years. I have visited 
 many countries. I have early discovered the influence which the 
 doctrines o ffree-wiU have upon the advocates of this system. I have 
 come in contact with the greatest minds of the present day;— there¬ 
 fore, (pardon this one therefore,) all religions are false. Moses was.. 
 an astrologer, a sorcerer, or what you please; the passage of Israel 
 
164 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 through the Red Sea, and the miracles said to have been wrought in 
 Egypt, are mere legends; all the prophets and apostles were impos¬ 
 tors. Yes, from my experience and observation, all religions ought 
 to be proved by arithmetic, and when we come to add up the eviden- *> 
 ces, they are as absurd as one plus one, equal three. This is one half 
 ofhis logic; and the other is as follows. I say to a blind man, This is « 
 apieceof&Zwe cloth—1 don’t believe you, sir, he replies. Why ? I t 
 ask—He answers, it does not smell blue —I do not hear or taste it blue 
 —I cannot feel it blue. All this may be true; yet all this will not < 
 
 prove that it is not blue. But upon such logic does Mr. Owen rely - 
 
 for the proof of his live positions. ? 
 
 If Mr. Owen’s experience is to be relied upon by us, he claims the 
 very same sort of faith from us that the Apostle Paul claimed, 
 and without affording us any evidence. And surely we have infi¬ 
 nitely more reason to rely upon the testimony of Paul in attestation 
 of palpable facts , than upon the testimony of Mr. Owen in attestation 
 of his opinions—i think, and I saw, are very different sorts of 
 evidence upon matters of fact. 
 
 Mr. Owen might think, from his mode of reasoning, that the inhabi¬ 
 tant of the torrid zone, who w r ould not believe him thattvater became in 
 the Ohio river so hard and firm, that waggons and horses passed upon 
 its surface; or that the inhabitant of Iceland, who would not believe 
 him that there were men as black as jet in Virginia—I say, he might 
 think such persons very incredulous; and yet, upon his own princi¬ 
 ples, they could not believe him because they had no such experi¬ 
 ence.* I presume the absurdity of this species of reasoning has 
 already been made apparent to the dullest capacity. We do not sup 
 pose that Mr. Owen’s experience is equal to set aside any single fact 
 well attested, of an ordinary or extraordinary character, and still less 
 equal to disprove any fact which occurred two thousand years ago. 
 
 To ridicule your faith, my friends, upon such feeble arguments as 
 Mr. Owen has to offer in favor of infidelity, appears tome as impolitic 
 as it is profane. When men have reasoned very strongly, and carried 
 a point by a very powerful attack upon the human understanding, they 
 may be allowed to slacken the reins upon their passions, and to make 
 some appeal to the hearts or feelings of the audience. But this sup¬ 
 poses a case very unlike that before us. Mr. Owen commenced his 
 ridicule before he had weakened the faith of a single soul in the audi¬ 
 ence. And, indeed, I must tell you that I have never felt so much 
 disgusted at the spirit of infidelity, as in hearing this last speech 
 from Mr. Owen. The abuse was uncalled for, undeserved,and every 
 way mal-appropos. I could not but think of, I could not but remem- j 
 ber, while he was uttering those scoffs, an anecdote which I heard a 
 few days ago from a citizen of this city, concerning a Dr. Patterson 
 of England. This bold and impious sceptic riding out in harvest 
 
 *It is said that the king of Siam ordered the Dutch navigator, who asserted ■ 
 that water in Holland occasionally became passable for men and horses, to be 
 punished for lying. — Reporter. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 165 
 
 time in England, was overtaken with his companions in a violent 
 stunn of wind and rain, which prostrated the harvest fields arid seem¬ 
 ed to blast the hopes of the husbandmen of the vicinity. Coming 
 into contact with some Christians, who were probably talking of the 
 calamity, he remarked, “Only see what sort of a God you Christians 
 worship! Dont you think he ought to be tied up and whipped for send- 
 irur such a storm upon your fields in this important crisis!” But this 
 saucv sceptic was not permitted long to pass unpunished; [call it my 
 superstition if you please,] and by a shower of rain too, the God of 
 Christians called him to account. For not long after, while attending 
 a horse-race, a heavy shower of rain coming up, compelled him and 
 his companions to seek a shelter. While endeavoring to escape, his 
 horse stumbled, fell, and broke his master’s neck. So departed this 
 life the scoffing Doctor. But although I doubt not many thousand 
 such occurrences happen, 1 would not draw a general conclusion 
 from them, and say, that so it shall always happen. No, indeed, “the 
 Lord knows how to reserve the ungodly until the day of judgment to 
 he punished.” But to speak as philosophy authorizes, it is only in 
 the absence of argument, that recourse is had to ridicule; and the 
 chair of the scoffer is never filled until that of the logician is vacated. 
 
 But when Mr. Owen assails us, my friends, through the medium 
 of our sectarian divisions and discords, ’tis then he wounds us most 
 sensibly. He has told you very plainly, several times in this discus¬ 
 sion, that it was the wild and conflicting dogmas and rancors of 
 sectarian pride and jealousy that made him first of all a sceptic; and 
 you see this yet confirms him in his scepticism. Here we are vulner¬ 
 able. Were it not for the spirit and temper, as well as for the foolish 
 and absurd dogmas of the fashionable systems of religion, the at¬ 
 tacks of sceptics would avail no more than the barkings of a dog at 
 the full moon. Even here, however, his logic fails: for what good 
 thing under heaven has not been abused and perverted by the wicked¬ 
 ness of man! And is it not an axiom among all reasoners upon all 
 subjects, that no man can reasonably make the abuse of any thing an 
 argument either against the use of the thing, or the thing itself? 
 
 But as the matter has stood, and now stands, we should have been 
 discouraged long since in vindicating the divine authority of this re¬ 
 ligion, had not Paul and the other Apostles foretold these times— 
 these divisions; their rise, continuance, and termination. And although 
 it is a fact, and an evidence, which, in itself, and abstractly con¬ 
 sidered, is very discouraging; yet, when contemplated through the 
 da*a which the New Testament affords, it forms a very powerful evi¬ 
 dence of the divine authenticity of this religion. To this we have paid 
 sufficient attention while reasoning upon the Apostacy , and need not 
 now repeat what was then demonstrated; namely, that, from the be¬ 
 ginning, it was known, foreseen, and declared, that such an apostacy 
 should, for certain ends and purposes, take place. It has taken place, 
 and has fully corresponded with all the predictions of its rise and 
 progress, and the signs of its speedy destruction are among the most 
 impressive signs of the times. 
 
166 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 The necessity of the union of all the disciples of Christ, in order 
 to the triumphant and universal spread of the gospel throughout all 
 nations, was distinctly declared, and its influence fully depicted in 
 that admirable prayer of the Founder of our Religion, in the 17th 
 chapter of John: “Neither,'’ said he, “pray I for these alone, (who 
 now believe in ine and are my Apostles to the nations,) but for 
 all them who will hereafter believe on me through their testimony; that 
 thev all may he one; that the world may believe that thou hast sent 
 me .” The universal conviction of the world of the truth of the 
 divine mission of Jesus, is made dependent on the union and harmony 
 of the disciples of Jesus. And as this view of the matter came from 
 the fountain head of all wisdom and goodness, it is fairly to be pre¬ 
 sumed, that it is a sine qua non —a something indispensable to the 
 progress and all triumphant success of Christianity; that until Chris¬ 
 tians are united the world cannot he con verted to the belief of the mission 
 of Jesus. 
 
 I doubt not hut the ground, the true ground of Christian union, is 
 now discovered; and it has been declared in this discussion more 
 than once—indirectly it is true, but it is fairly inferrable from these 
 premises. It is this— that Christian faith is to he known and recog¬ 
 nized as a belief of the gospel facts , and not the assent of the human 
 understanding to certain matters of opinion —a belief of facts, and not 
 of doctnnes —of tacts resting upon the divine testimony —and not of 
 opinions dependent upon the acuteness of the human intellect or the 
 logical powers of inferential reasoners. A regard to men’s moral 
 actions, more than to the strength of their intellects, will soon sub¬ 
 vert the metaphysical systems of past ages; and place Christianity 
 upon a new footing in the eyes of the world. This is not the place, 
 nor the occasion, for minute expositions of these sentiments; but they 
 can be given, and they do now appear in the publications of the day : 
 but so far we deemed it expedient to call up this matter, alike to the* 
 consideration of sceptics and of Christians. 
 
 But still I am very far from agreeing with Mr. Owen that Christian¬ 
 ity, as it is now taught, is the greatest curse to mankind. Mr. Owen, 
 who never speaks any thing but the truth, will have to retract this 
 assertion. For most surely there are many greater curses in the 
 nations of this world, tiian is Christianity to the people of the United 
 States. Credat Judaeus Apella , non ego. Apella the Jew may be¬ 
 lieve it, not I. It will require more facts and documents than Mr. 
 Owen can command to makegood this assertion. 
 
 I did entertain some hopes that when Mr. Owen arose, he was about, 
 to concede that he had been mistaken; that Christianity is what it 
 purports to be—a revelation from God. I felt conscious that he could 
 not rebut the arguments in favor of Christianity; and did hope, as he 
 would doubtless find them too strong for him, that he would have the 
 candor to retract the rash positions he had taken. 
 
 It is true, indeed, that I thought Mr. Owen, of all men, the must un¬ 
 likely to be convinced. I knew that the circumstances created for 
 him and by him rendered his conviction almost impossible. He has 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 167 
 
 been so long the apostle of his own tenets, his whole soul has been 
 engrossed in these speculations. He is one of the most extraordinary 
 men; he cares not for praise; he knows, he says, he deserves it n U; 
 and, as for fame, he has no taste for it at all! To these causes is to 
 be attributed, perhaps, his insensibility to the force or power of argu¬ 
 ment. It is not reasonable that a person who has so far wand red 
 from the common sentiments, feelings, and, indeed, nature of the 
 species, could feel the force of arguments. For my par., when I 
 shall be insensible of praise or blame, of any difference other than 
 utility between virtue and vice, I shall then consider myself incapable 
 of distinguishing the truth or force of any argument. And, therefore, 
 taking all these things into view, I do not wonder that Mr. Owen 
 cannot be convinced. 
 
 There was, notwithstanding, one good omen —one symptom of re- 
 turning conviction in his last address. He qualified his denunciation 
 of Christianity with these remarkable words, “As it is note taught? 
 He did admit that I had given such an exhibition of the genius and 
 spirit of Christianity, as to make it appear most excellent. My oppo¬ 
 nent would not venture to attack the Bible Christianity, but “Christi¬ 
 anity as it is now taught .” But even with this reservation, I cannot 
 admit this sweeping denunciation. Mr. Owen’s social system has 
 never been tested; but his materialist or atheistical system has been 
 tested. France, revolutionary France, can tell the tale. Equality 
 and Liberty—no religion, no God, no hereafter. On the gates of the 
 grave yards were inscribed “Death an Everlasting Sleep!” The di¬ 
 vision of time into weeks of seven days, because it was of no human 
 origin, became obnoxious to the materialists; and nothing short of an 
 indiscriminate obliteration of every vestige of Christianity, even to 
 new-modifying the divisions of time, would satiate their deadly anti¬ 
 pathy against every thing like religion. Paris, in 1789, under the 
 domination of the infamous Robespiere and his brethren, is a pretty 
 good example of the tendency of the no praise , no blame system; and 
 an admirable per contra to the assertion that Christianity, in its present 
 form, is the greatest curse that can happen to any nation. I think 
 not so bad as atheism when it had the ascendant, Mr. Owen himself 
 being judge. 
 
 Christianity has its direct and its indirect influences upon society. 
 The direct or the reflex light of this holy religion affects almost every 
 man in the region where it shines. It shines into the hearts of some, 
 and in their lives it is reflected as from a mirror upon all around. And 
 thus some are christianized , more are moralized , and all are, in some 
 good degree civilized , by its light. A single pious, man in a village is 
 a restraint upon the wickedness and profanity of all the villagers. I 
 have known some instances, and have heard of others, where a general 
 deterioration of morals has followed the death or removal of a good 
 man out of a small town or neighborhood. There is a charm—there 
 is an indescribable influence in the genuine fruits of Christianity, 
 which, when exhibited in living Christians, the most abandoned are 
 constrained to respect Hence an increase of genuine Christians is 
 
168 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 one of the greatest national blessings—if, indeed, it be a truth tha 
 righteousness exalteth a nation. 
 
 But, says Mr. Owen, Where is the Christian now living whose 
 whole life is not in direct contradiction to his professions? Christi¬ 
 anity certainly is highiv encomiazed in this challenge: so excellent 
 that it condemns in every point the best man living?- By this appeal 
 to our modesty, Mr. Owen has prevented us from pointing to any one 
 present, and he would not believe upon any testimony any thing 
 favorable of the absent living. We shall then have to go to the dead. 
 I have, then, just lately heard that in this city two very aged Christi¬ 
 ans recently died, both members of the Methodist Church, in whose 
 house we now meet. The one had been sixty years, and the other 
 forty, professors of the Christian religion—both of the most unexcep¬ 
 tionable reputation; living proofs of the excellency of the religion 
 which they professed, and .conformed to it in temper and behaviour. 
 But after thus giving us a new sort of “argumentum ad hominem or 
 u ad modestiam ,” Mr. Owen is ready to claim all the men of large 
 souls, of great minds, as of his creed, while we have not one; no, not 
 one who lives up to the Christian religion. I fear Mr. Owen is in 
 this respect of that jaundiced or distempered eye to which every 
 thing appears discolored. There is a malady called hysteria ; corpo- 
 rial and mental too. Some of those laboring under a real mental 
 hysteria , cherish their hallucinations until at last they imagine that 
 demonstration itself is not half so clear as their wild conceptions. 
 In this state of mind all arguments are thrown away. It is much 
 more difficult to convince a man whose mind is in this morbid state, 
 than it is to convince the most confirmed hypochondriac, that his 
 legs are not made of glass, or that there is not some other peculiarity 
 in his composition. But Mr. Owen will have all the sons of science, 
 all the enlightened minds in the world on his side of the question. 
 Let him make out his list; we have ours ready; here it is, (Mr. C. 
 pointed to a manuscript.)—we are prepared to shew that all the 
 fathers of modern science, in fact that all the men of profound eru¬ 
 dition, and of mighty enterprize are of the Christian school. This, 
 however, is no argument; but when Mr. Owen gives his cloud of 
 witnesses, ours shall be forthcoming. 
 
 The most intelligent persons in Europe, Mr. Owen says, “are 
 well aware that all religious mysteries and miracles are opposed to 
 reason, and therefore abandon them to men who discard reason. 1 ” 
 Thus, by the authority of these “intelligent men’ 5 Mr. Owen would 
 rebut all argument and demonstration. But we must have faith in 
 Mr. Owen’s testimony about these intelligent men; and hence Mr. 
 Owen requires us to exercise faith in his mere assertion as the best 
 weapon he can wield against the Christian faith. I might tell Mr. 
 Owen in the same loose style that 1 believe that all the mysteries 
 and miracles, (meaning thereby' the pretended miracles, and artificial 
 mysteries of Popery) were all contrary to reason—But what of that? 
 Will my arguing, or my proving that certain bank bills are coun- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 109 
 
 terfeits, prove that all bank bills are counterfeits; and that there is 
 not a genuine bank note? No: nor ever was, nor ever will be! 
 
 We want, moreover, to hear the names of some of these “intelli¬ 
 gent men ;” perhaps they are the sceptics of France and Germany, 
 and not an intelligent man among them. We must first agree that 
 they are intelligent men, and then to refer this discussion to them 
 os arbitrators before their verdict will be of any consequence. Mr. 
 Owen may tell us we are “insane” “blind as moles” and that he 
 sees like Argus; is sane', a sage, a philosopher, a reasoner, a lo¬ 
 gician, a standard of reason; and with the powerful artillery of such 
 browbeating syllogisms, and with such egotistic demonstrations 
 amongst the vulgum pecus , the common mass of society, who think 
 that he who asserts most stoutly and arrogates most to himself is the 
 hero, the logician and the philosopher, he may obtain faith, con¬ 
 fidence, and admiration. But the really intelligent will always 
 discriminate between argument and assertion, between logic and 
 calumny, between philosophy and egotism. 
 
 Were I to talk about sanity of mind , 1 would undertake to prove, 
 tliat every atheist under heaven is insane. And that there can he 
 no greater proof of insanity, than to hear a person say that there is 
 no God. Such persons may, like other insane persons, be rational 
 upon many other subjects. But by all the arguments, counting them 
 one by one, by which any person is proved to be insane, I will en¬ 
 gage, logically, to prove, that all atheists are insane. By atheists, 
 here I mean those who oppose the being and government of God, 
 after having heard and understood the terms and phrases used in the 
 Holy Scriptures upon this subject. 
 
 Mr. Owen puts into the mouth of reason certain interrogatories, 
 which, of course, his obsequious reason answers, just to suit him. 
 This reason is more religious than Mr. Owen, for it acknowledges its 
 Creator; and unreservedly complies with all his requisitions.—- 
 “Reason would ask ten thousand questions of this nature^ says ho, 
 to not one of which could.a rational answer be given.” Yes, but 
 Sir Isaac Newton’s reason, and Mr. Owen’s reason are very different 
 sorts of matter. What would convince the former, would not convince 
 tihe latter—and what would convince the latter would appear ridicu¬ 
 lous in the eyes of the former. The secret is here, my friends, 
 there is no inconsistency at all in Mr. Owen’s system. For, vou 
 know, there can be nothing crooked unless there be something 
 straight. Now Mr. Owen has a vast advantage over us Christians; 
 there is something straight in our system to which he can compare, 
 and by which he can measure, and which will show, all our aberra¬ 
 tions; but there is nothing in his system by which we can measure, 
 .or to which we can compare any part of it. Every thing with Mr. 
 Owen is quite straight: if a child kill its mother, it is quite righ'; 
 for it is according'to nature; if it support and honor its mother, it 
 is quite right; for it is according to nature or necessity. All things 
 are straight; that is, exactly conformable to necessity. Mr. Owen, 
 then, has a system of straight lines, and nothing in it is crocked. 
 
 VOL. 11. 15 
 
170 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 There is no aberration from necessity, and therefore, aii is straight. 
 There is then no inconsistency in Mr. Owen’s scheme. I have but 
 one fault to it , and that, is, his measuring rod is crooked itself,* and 
 while he thinks it is straight, he must inevitably be in an error fo 
 every comparison or measurement which he makes. A person who 
 has a false standard, who calls a rule straight which is crooked , will 
 err in every measurement. And so all his conclusions are false. 
 If that be a straight line which makes every thing straight to which 
 is is applied, then is Mr. Owen’s standard correct. 
 
 Mr. Owen, this morning, deeply lamented this weekly preaching 
 institution; or rather that no person was permitted to reply. I should 
 not care, provided it did not disturb the wprship of a Christian con¬ 
 gregation, that every person would rise up in the midst of an assem¬ 
 bly, and in good order, make his objections to the Christian religion. 
 For my part I think, if we had a few such gentlemen as Mr. Owen, so 
 privileged as to rise in congregations, calmly to interrogate or to oppose, 
 it would tend much to confirm the Christians, and to confute the scep¬ 
 tics, provided they reason would as my friend, Mr. Owen, reasons, 
 Christianity, like its Founder, never loved darkness. Jt never shun¬ 
 ned light. But it would illy suit the peaceful worship of Christian 
 congregations to turn them into debating schools. There is a time 
 for every thing. But I think aft,er the results of the present discussion 
 n.re appreciated and known, Mr. Owen will think it safer for his cause, 
 that the preachers be permitted to proceed as usual in their weekly 
 sermons. 
 
 I never saw the superiority of the evidences of Christianity so fully 
 exhibited as Mr. Owen’s last speech has evinced. He presumed not 
 to attack a single position in my long speech, although he promised 
 to reply to it, «and come to ttciose quarters ” as soon as it should be 
 brought to a close. A few general assertions, such as,Christianity is 
 all foble, and every way pernicious, constitute the inventory of the 
 whole of tfie magazine of Mr. Owen's logic against it. This ecclair- 
 cisscment folly proves Dr. Chalmers’ position that there is nothing 
 left after the argument for Christianity is fairly stated, but a firm 
 belief of it, or atheism. 
 
 Mr. Owen has said that I have made my defence of Christianity to 
 rest upon testimony, alone, or that I have.made Christianity altogether 
 a matter of faith. This is true, but not as Mr. Owwi represents it. 
 $ do certainly contend that Christianity is legitimately predicated up¬ 
 on historic facts, and that it is properly a matter of belief. But I have 
 done more than was necessary to be done; I have by one philosophic 
 ^eries of reasonings shown that no man philosophically or rationally 
 r^n object to the Christian religion; and that upon principles of rea¬ 
 son lie is compelled to assent to the divine truth of Christianity. I 
 know Mr. Owen intends toeommunicate an idea something like this: 
 that I have conceded that a person cannot prove Christianity to be di¬ 
 vine, upon principles of reason, and must make it altogether a matter 
 ol belief through a fatal necessity, and faith passing for little else 
 ffian superstition among sceptics, he thinks his cause pretty safe with 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 171 
 
 the sceptics upon this representation of mv defence. This is, then, 
 not a correct statement in the meaning which he intends to convey. 
 
 [ have shown that if a person act rationally, upon principles of reason, 
 thev must assent to the truth and certainty of the Christian religion, 
 as supernatural and divine. I have called the argument based upon 
 these principles a philosophic argument in the singular number, 
 though comprising many distinct arguments, as the historic argument 
 is one. I must then call upon Mr. Owen to admit that 1 have produ 
 eed one philosophic argument which he has not in one instance at¬ 
 tempted to oppugn. He may call it by what name he pleases; 
 but 1 am thoroughly convinced neither he nor any sceptic on the 
 globe can shake it. 1 only have to regret that I was not opposed with 
 earnestness and ability on this topic, because, then, I would have il¬ 
 lustrated and confirmed it more fully. An attempt to refute it on the 
 part of Mr. Owen, would he more compatible with the character of a 
 truthdoving philosopher, than to hear such unfounded assertions ai 
 that u l am unprepared to discuss the evidences of Christianity upon 
 any other ground than that of testimony.” 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 Mr. Chairman—Mr. Campbell, as you heard, has just concluded, 
 by desiring me to retract my assertion that I have not heard from 
 him one philosophical argument in support of the Christian religion. 
 While he was speaking, I have again taxed my memory, and I can¬ 
 not recollect one. I have no doubt, that he has adduced many ar¬ 
 guments which he deems philosophic; but they do not appear so to 
 me. My conviction is, that no philosophic argument, derived from 
 facts to be understood by man, can be adduced in favor of any re¬ 
 ligion. And therefore, however acute Mr. Cfs mind may be; how¬ 
 ever much h(f may have read; yet, owing to the nature of the subject, 
 he has not, and, in my mind, he cannot, bring one philosophic 
 argument—one that is in accordance with facts—in support of 
 Christianity, or any other religion. I can only speak of arguments, 
 according to the impressions they have made upon my mind. 
 
 But there was another point adverted to, which it seems quite 
 necessary to explain. I did not, in the remotest degree, mean, by 
 any expression which might have fallen from me to impeach Mr. 
 C.’s disinterestedness. If I have done so, it would have been doing 
 violence to my own feelings; because I know, from various sources, 
 that both Mr. C. and his father have sufFered by their disinterested¬ 
 ness in supporting what they have been compelled to believe to be a 
 right view of Christianity. I have not the remotest idea that Mr. C. 
 has come forward, upon this occasion, with any interested motive. 
 
 When I terminated my part of the discussion, this morning, I was 
 proceeding to show in detail the number of vices and crimes which 
 were prevalent in Christian society, and which I mean to prove 
 emanate directly from religion. But as the period for this discussion 
 will not be very much limited, I shall avoid much of the detail 
 which it was my intention to develope, and shall apply the remain- 
 
VrZ 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 ing part of our time to effect the most important purposes/ I was 
 about to state the horrors of the inquisition, as well as of the religious 
 wars and massacres of many centuries, as emanating directly from 
 different sects of different religions. But I shall not now take up 
 your time with matters which many of you can readily bring to your 
 3 ’etspUeetion, but proceed to those which are more important in 
 practice. 
 
 As circumstances how render it necessary that this discussion 
 should be brought to a speedy termination, 1 must wave all minor 
 points, and give you as much of the essence of the subject as time 
 will permit, and come at once into the midst of it. 
 
 Air. C., by his defence and manner of reasoning, shows that his 
 mind has been formed altogether upon the notion that man is born 
 with a will to think and to act, free as he chooses, upon all occasions, 
 or that he possesses a free will,—and that he is responsible for his 
 thoughts and actions. All Christendom, and all the world, have 
 J>cen trained, educated and confirmed in these notions, and in the 
 practice which they necessarily engender. The Christian, and all 
 other religions, are founded on these notions. It was these notions-, 
 alone, that made any religion necessary. They become necessary, 
 as artificial means to check the enormous evils that the notions of 
 man’s free will and free agency wore sure to produce in practice. 
 But they have proved themselves incompetent to the task; and like 
 every other attempt to counteract nature, they greatly increase the 
 evil, and become, themselves, more injurious than the evil which 
 they were introduced to check. In fact, upon the theory of free will 
 and action in man, are founded not only all the religions of the earth, 
 but all the governments, codes of laws, and customs, with all phra¬ 
 seology of all languages, creating thereby feelings, thoughts and 
 actions of a peculiar cast, derived immediately from this origin, 
 which extend their ramifications through every portion of the indi¬ 
 vidual and through society, wherever man has yet been found. 
 
 It is, however, as we have proved by the twelve fundamental laws 
 of human nature, an error more obvious, upon reflection, than the 
 one universally received by all our ancestors, that the sun moved 
 round the earth. Both errors were derived from the first impressions 
 <Jf our senses; but facts, subsequently acquired, demonstrate both 
 impressions to be contrary to reason. 
 
 \Ve see, then, that the notion of free will and action has given 
 birth to all the religions, governments, laws, phraseology, customs 
 and practices of mankind; and that it has, through these agencies, 
 fanned the mind and character of the whole human race. The 
 existing ignorance, poverty, vice and suffering of mankind are all 
 directly chargeable upon the errors of free will doctrines, acting 
 through these mighty agencies. 
 
 It is the extraordinary deceptions produced on human nature, by 
 being subjected, every moment of its existence, to the influences of 
 this doctrine, that compel the most enlightened men of the age to 
 acknowledge the impossibility of denying the truth of all the grind- 
 
Debate. 
 
 173 
 
 pies on which the doctrines of the formation of character are predi¬ 
 cated; and yet to say, that they are, at the same time, conscious 
 that they must be governed, in their feelings, thoughts and actions, 
 by their pre-received notions of freewill. They cannot, of them¬ 
 selves, so thoroughly have they been imbued, through religion, 
 government, laws, language and practice, with all the physical and 
 mental influences arising from the notions of free will, ever after¬ 
 wards divest themselves of the feelings and habits which they 
 generate. It is this which makes these men say, Our judgments 
 are convinced; but in spite of ourselves, the feelings, which have by 
 some means or other been formed within us, are opposed to our judg¬ 
 ments. We are, therefore, constrained to think one way, and to act 
 another—to act contrary to our judgments. 
 
 . s Now, my friends, this doctrine, the origin of all religions, 
 governments, laws, institutions and practices, carries with it sin 
 and misery, through the whole extent of its ramifications. It is 
 destructive of sincerity, of affection, of confidence, of charity, and 
 of permanent prosperity and happiness, among the whole family of 
 mankind. It is the direct cause, operating through these influences, 
 that generates anger, irritation, and all the inferior passions and 
 jealousies which are now so prevalent in human society. And until 
 its influences shall he withdrawn, the world will be filled, as 
 heretofore, with contention and strife, and all evil, and peace and 
 good will can never enter among the habitations of men,—and that 
 charity which thinketh no ill, will be, as at present, unknown except 
 in name. 
 
 Instead of this doctrine, which directly emanates from the igno¬ 
 rance and experience of the least experienced, and therefore the most 
 ignorant, I place before you the laws of human life,—the same w hich 
 existed from the beginning, as they are tc-day, and as I believe 
 they will be for ever. 
 
 They are laws which require not to persuade you to consent to 
 act in obedience to them. Knowing them—understanding them in 
 all their connexions one with another, they will make so much real 
 knowledge present to your mind, upon all occasions, that you will 
 be compelled to act in obedience to their dictates, and you will 
 always act right. 
 
 These twelve fundamental laws of human nature, or laws of Ine, 
 are the only foundation for real virtue that man can discover. 
 
 They are complete in themselves, and need no aid from any 
 doubtful authority. They are divine decrees, if ever decrees were 
 divine; and they have now gone forth to the uttermost parts of the 
 earth. They will, my friends, produce in due time, “Peace on 
 earth, and good will to man.” 
 
 [Here Mr. Owen held up a copy of the twelve laws, which had just 
 come from the printer .] 
 
 If you could remember all I stated to you in the early part of this 
 discussion, it would be unnecessary for me to rise again, or say one 
 word more. But aware, as I am, that the subject is new to many: 
 
 VOL. 11. 15* 
 
m 
 
 DEBATE 
 
 th it very few, if any, can retain the remembrance of conclusions, 
 which are the condensed results of forty years reading, reflection and 
 experience; 1 will endeavour to make these fundamental laws still 
 more easy to be understood. 
 
 Mr. C. says, and I know he believes it, that I have not brought 
 forward one argument against the Christian religion. I Want no 
 
 C? c5 O 
 
 other proof, that Mr. C. has looked at this casket, and seen only his 
 own ideas reflected in it, being altogether unable to discover the 
 spring and to open it. 
 
 Mr. O, says I have advanced no argument to prove that religions 
 nr© founded in ignorance. Here are twelve arguments, each one 
 of which, when it shall be understood, is more than sufficient to lay 
 the axe to the root of every religion, and of all the codes of law, that 
 ever emanated from them. They do not send you to the dark ages, 
 to look for authority that deserves the consideration of the better 
 informed mind of the present day. These laws speak intelligibly 
 to the understanding of all who have been trained to think and 
 reflect.. When these shall be understood, and taught to the rising 
 generation, we need not telL them that they must be good boys and 
 girls, or,men and women; for they cannot possibly be otherwise. 
 
 They will be compelled by the strongest of all possible motives, a 
 clear and distinct knowledge of their own interests and happiness, 
 to act, at all times and upon all occasions, according to the perfect 
 law of obedience—according to that law, which they must perceive 
 and feel will secure their happiness. 
 
 It is, my friends, the full understanding of the twelve laws con¬ 
 tained in so small a compass, that can alone make you, and your 
 children, and your children’s children, through innumerable genera¬ 
 tions, potters of the very highest class, in the formation of the 
 characters of your descendants. You will, hence discover how to 
 mould human nature in a mariner so superior to what has yet been 
 done, as to become more perfect than the population of the world, in 
 its present ignorant state, is prepared to suppose practicable. 
 
 You will know how to impress the minds of all your descendants 
 with that pure charity of which I have spoken—that charity which 
 thinketh no evil. 
 
 We shall have our minds so purged from all those inferior passions, 
 jealousies and feelings which now distract the world, that we shall 
 go straight forward to our object, seeing most distinctly what it is 
 'v© all have to do. We shall then know how to form the most per¬ 
 fect mould, and to put the clay properly within if, and to finish it 
 in the best manner. And will not this be an acquisition of great 
 value? 
 
 A knowledge, however, of these laws, will not only lay the foun¬ 
 dation for this charity in the hearts of all, but it will speedily enable 
 ms to discover the beauty of an intelligent existence in unison with 
 all nature, when contrasted with the glare and fashion of an artificial 
 life. We shall then not contest with each, other who shall have the 
 
 
 il 
 
 
 ‘i 
 
 
 
 1 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 175 
 
 largest and most splendid house, the richest clothing, or the greatest 
 -variety of useless trappings of any kind. 
 
 We shall understand wherein the real, substantia], tangible hap-' 
 piness of life consists. We shall know that a nation trained in 
 simplicity of manners—taught to acquire high intelligence, with 
 regard to" what constitutes real knowledge, and to possess the most 
 charitable feelings toward the whole human race, will form that 
 combination of circumstances, from which alone any thing that de¬ 
 serves the name of happiness can be looked for. 
 
 Shall I now, in detail, unlock the casket for you ? Snail I again 
 go through the twelve laws, and enable you how to understand how 
 each sentence applies directly to the subject of this discussion? 
 There is not one sentence, or clause of a sentence, that does not ap¬ 
 ply to the questions intended to be solved at this meeting. 
 
 What.does the casket disclose to us at its commencement ? “That 
 man, at birth, is ignorant of every thing relative to his organiza¬ 
 tion.” And if this be true—and who doubts it?—surely for that 
 organization, and its qualities, no individual can be justly made re¬ 
 sponsible. I ask Mr. C., and all who are present, whether any other 
 conclusion can be adduced from this important fact? Whether any 
 other conclusion would be rational? What, then, becomes of the 
 imaginary notion, taught to our ancestors and to ourselves, that we 
 are bad fey nature? My friends, to say that man is culpably bad by 
 nature, is an assertion not less untrue and absurd, than if I were to 
 say that the sun is culpably bad by nature; for both have their origin 
 from the same Cause, whatever that Cause may be. And that we 
 are ignorant, at birth, of every thing relative to our organization, is 
 an eternal truth, depending solely upon facts obvious to every one,— 
 a iaw which came with us into existence, and which will remain 
 until man shall cease to exist. It is no law of man’s devising; but 
 a law emanating from the same Eternal Source from whence all 
 facts proceed. 
 
 The casket tells you, moreover on its first opening, that man has* 
 not been permitted to create the slightest part of any of his na tural 
 propensities, faculties or qualities, physical or mental. And do you 
 not know, ray friends, that the infant, at birth, is the foundation of 
 the man? Some will say that the infant, the original organization, 
 at birth, is the whole man; that he only requires time to grow; and 
 that what he is at birth, he will be till death. I know the contrary. 
 I know that it forms the foundation, but only the foundation, of 
 the character of man. But I also know, if any unchangeable 
 foundation be laid for a house, that whatever superstructure may be 
 subsequently raised upon it, the foundation itself ought not to be 
 blamed for any imperfection it may possess, butthe architect. And, 
 my friends, although I do not agree with those philosophers, who 
 take but a partial view of human nature, and Who do not investigate 
 y 11 the facts for themselves, being content to receive them from others, 
 and conclude that man is wholly formed by his education; 1 do not 
 »gree with those other philosophers, who hold that the organization. 
 
DEBATE 
 
 m 
 
 at birth, is every thing, and that education, or the circumstances 
 in which it is placed, is a mere covering and deceptious garb, in the 
 character of man. This organization is unquestionably a very im¬ 
 portant part of our nature; and if we are to be made responsible for 
 it, we ought to have had the forming of all its minute and general 
 qualities for ourselves. It is surely irrational for any one to assert, 
 that after we have been compelled to receive our organization, which 
 is the foundation and contains the germ of all our faculties, we 
 should be held responsible for it. This is a notion wholly irrecon- 
 cileable to common sense, and it is also exceedingly unfavorable to 
 the formation of a superior character by a right education; for it 
 destroys all correct ideas upon the subject. There never can be any 
 virtue in the world, so long as this error respecting the nature of man 
 shall continue—so long as men are made to believe that they ought to 
 be held responsible for that over which they have no control. If we 
 really desire to improve man, and to form a virtuous, intelligent and 
 happy state of society, we must make haste to discard notions so 
 directly opposed to common sense. 
 
 My friends, this first law gives us a distinct knowledge of what 
 we are, when we first come into the world. Here we are ushered 
 into existence, utterly unconscious of any thing appertaining to our¬ 
 selves. Then what follows? how is the remainder of our character 
 made up? Let us see. 
 
 I request your best attention to this part of the subject, for all our 
 subsequent reasoning will be erected on this foundation; fur this is 
 not the wordy wandering you have been accustomed to hear, week 
 after week, during your lives, and to which you may listen, or not* 
 and be as wise in the former case as the latter. No, this part of our 
 subject is fraught with consequences of deep import to every human 
 being. Every word of it, when understood, will be found invaluable 
 for future practice. 
 
 The second lav/ is, “That no two infants, at birth, have yet been 
 known to possess precisely the same organization; while the physi¬ 
 cal, mental and moral differences between all infants are formed 
 without their knowledge or will.” 
 
 No two infants have ever been known to be alike. This is a most 
 important conclusion. It lays the foundation for virtues in the 
 human character, which no other knowledge can ever form, or make 
 permanent and ever active. It is the only knowledge on which genu¬ 
 ine charity can be formed to apply to every individual of the human 
 race, and it is abundant to effect this object. A knowledge of this 
 single fact, when rightly understood, will so form our minds, as to 
 compel us to be charitable to all mankind without any exception. 
 
 [Here Mr. Campbell rose and remarked that lie would beg leave to 
 ’ suggest that these laws should not be commented on more than eleven 
 times .] 
 
 Mr. Owen resumed—I find the expounding of these laws, and 
 bringing them to bear on the practical conduct of mankind, is more 
 than my friend, Mr. Campbell, can bear. Well! you see, my friends, 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 177 
 
 this second law is quite sufficient to overset all the arguments of my 
 friend, Mr. Campbell, and it is evident he begins to feel its extensive 
 influence. 
 
 Assuredly, if no two infants are born alike, but receive from that 
 Power which gives them existence, qualities which differ in their 
 strength and combinations, there ought to be, in justice to these in¬ 
 dividuals, if they are to be considered responsible beings, a different 
 religion for every child that is born. Is not this true? If they are 
 organized differentlv, can we with one atom of rationalitv render them 
 amenable to the same laws. I do say, that to act justly by the hu¬ 
 man race, if a religion be necessary for any one individual, a differ* 
 ent religion is equally necessary for every other individual of the 
 human family; and that these religions must necessarily be as vari¬ 
 ous, and as multiform, as are the individual organizations of our 
 species; and, also, that these countless religions should be so modified, 
 as to adapt themselves precisely to the strength or weakness of the 
 faculties with which each individual has been endowed. 
 
 Now, my friends, I could touch Mr. Campbell again and again with 
 these simple, plain facts; but they are so decisive of the great ques¬ 
 tions before us, that I am afraid of exhausting his patience and good 
 feelings. I will take compassion oh him, therefore, and proceed to 
 the third law. It is, “That each individual, is placed, at birth, 
 without his knowledge or consent, within circumstances, which act¬ 
 ing upon his peculiar organization, impress the general character of 
 those circumstances upon the infant, child or man. Yet that the 
 influence of those circumstances is, to a certain degree, modified by 
 the peculiar organization of each individual.” 
 
 Now we come to another part of the subject, which is most 
 interesting to all, and which has not been explained sufficiently to 
 give those unacquainted with these facts in the formation of the 
 human character, a right understanding of its importance in the 
 every day practice of life. 
 
 It is not only that all infants are made, by the constitution of their 
 respective natures, to differ from each other, and probably to differ 
 in ev^ry one of their senses, as well as in their general organization; 
 but that these infants, after their birth, are placed in circumstance^ 
 so different, that their characters must be often formed on models 
 having little or no resemblance to each other,—-frequently, indeed, 
 the very opposite. For as there are no two infants born alike, 
 neither is it in the power of man to place two infants under the same 
 identical circumstances, even when they appear to be the most alike. 
 And, therefore, my friends, you not only require a different religion 
 for every individual, in consequence of their organic difference at 
 birth, but you also require a separate and distinct religion for each, 
 according to the various kinds of circumstances or temptations in 
 which each of these individuals may be placed, from their birth to 
 death. 
 
 My friends, there never were two infants, who for one day, el¬ 
 even for an hour, have been placed under precisely the same circum- 
 
m 
 
 Df)BAT£ 
 
 stances. Now only look at the cruelty and injustice, in this respect; 
 of the doctrines of rewards and pbuishments m all religions. A 
 moment’s reflection will convince any intelligent mind, that no two 
 can be placed under the same circumstances, after birth. To be so 
 placed, they must be born at the same moment—open their eyes and 
 see the light precisely the same direction; whatever impressions 
 are made upon the one, must be made upon the other, and in pre¬ 
 cisely the same order and sequence of strength. Now this is utterly 
 impracticable. And, therefore, the notion that any human being is 
 the legitimate object of reward or punishment, on account of the 
 circumstances in which he ha3 been placed without his control, 
 knowledge, or consent, is an error only to be accounted for from the" 
 irrational impressions made upon us by our ancestors, relative to the 
 real character of human nature. 
 
 We well know, from the general history of the world, that when 
 irnfants are born, they must become men according to the country 
 and district in which they are reared; that they must be influenced 
 by the circumstances existing in that particular country or dis¬ 
 trict. They cannot be influenced by that which they do not know 
 and cannot feel. Therefore, as infants and children have no power 
 whatever to direct or control these circumstances, no religion can be 
 made to apply to them without the greatest injustice. And as it is 
 demonstrated that children and men are the effects of their organ¬ 
 ization and external circumstances; that these combined operations 
 form them to be whatever they are, at every moment of their time; 
 no religion can be a 
 formed. 
 
 It is from this view of the subject, that I have said, again and again^ 
 that it is most irrational to treat children or men in the manner in 
 which we have heretofore done, and to consider them responsible, as 
 the cause of their own characters,—when, from their nature, they 
 have been, and must continue to be, the effects of combined causes 
 over which they have had no control. 
 
 But, my friends, although it were possible to impress children 
 with precisely the same circumstance, at and from their birth, the 
 variety of their original organization would make a material and very 
 Important difference. For the circumstances operating upon and 
 influencing the mind of one child, would create a very different im¬ 
 pression from those made upon another; and yet the child itself is in 
 no degree the cause of this diiference. And therefore, again, none 
 of the religions of the world can apply with justice to a being so 
 formed and matured. 
 
 Well, let us look at the next argument against all religions, con¬ 
 tained in the fourth law. I stated to you, that “no infant has the 
 power of deciding at what period of time, or in what part of the 
 world it shall come into existence, of whom it shall be born, in what 
 particular religion it shall be trained to believe, or by what other 
 circumstances, it shall be surrounded from birth to death,” 
 
 Now, ihy frie$d3 ? 1 wish you to remark, as I proceed, that each of 
 
 ppiicable to beings whose characters are so 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 m 
 
 these laws, by itself, even taken separately and distinctly from their 
 natural and necessary connexion and dependence one upon the other, 
 is much more than sufficient to refute all my friend’s fallacies. 
 
 This fourth law is so full of matter and meaning, that to do it ample 
 justice, and direct your attention fully to all its important physical, 
 intellectual, and moral considerations, many days would be necessa¬ 
 ry, instead of the hour or two now left for me to explain many other 
 parts of the subject equally important. But as the discussion, at 
 the request of the moderators, must terminate to night, and the 
 .evening is rapidly advancing upon us, I will endeavor, before it 
 becomes dark, to place before you as many facts as will hereafter 
 beneficially occupy your minds for reflection; and refer to the early 
 part of my statement for a more full explanation of this law, and 
 hasten to elucidate some of the remaining. 
 
 The next in order is the fifth law, viz. “That each individual is so 
 created, that, when young, he may,be made to receive impressions 
 to produce either true ideas or false notions, and beneficial or injuri¬ 
 ous habits, and to retain them with great tenacity.” 
 
 My friend, Mr. Campbell, is a most striking living example of the 
 overwhelming influence of this law of our nature. He has been 
 organized as we behold him; for which he has neither merit nor 
 demerit. He was afterwards trained and educated in a particular 
 part of Europe, and subsequently in this country, and placed under 
 circumstances by which he has been forced to believe in his particu¬ 
 lar views of the Christian religion, and by which we all perceive lie 
 is now influenced. He has been thus influenced to his peculiar con¬ 
 duct by the same general laws of our nature, that have compelled me 
 to act as I have done, and which govern the birth, life, and death of 
 every being that has yet been born. 
 
 You see, then, my friends, that, through this law of our nature-, 
 we may force any child to become a Mahometan, a Christian, or an 
 idolater, a Jew, a Quaker, or a cannibal. Xfie child is a perfectly 
 passive piece of clay, to be moulded by those around him into any 
 shape they please. And then the greater or less tenacity with which 
 the ideas given to it will be retained, depends upon a great many 
 circumstances, as much beyond the individual’s control, as was his 
 original organization. 
 
 This is that law of pur nature, which, when thoroughly understood, 
 will enable you to become potters, to enable you, through an accurate 
 knowledge of it, to place your children in any mould, more or less 
 perfect, according as you may have been better or worse informed 
 upon the subject, or more or less expert in the practice. None of 
 the religious in the world, however, can be applicable to a being* 
 whose character is thus formed necessarily by his nature and condi¬ 
 tion in life. 
 
 The sixth law states, that < c each individual is so created, that, 
 when young, he must believe according to the strongest conviction 
 that is made on his mind and other faculties; while his belief in r^o. 
 case depends upon his will.?* 
 
ISO 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 I 
 
 In commenting on this sixth law, Mr. Campbell entangles himself 
 and his audience in the mazes of metaphysical disquisition. I saw at 
 once, that his notions regarding this law were confused by the 
 notions early forced into his mind, relative to free will and action in 
 man; and became, therefore, merely metaphysical. But this law 
 promulgates facts which are either true or false. Now, it is a fact, 
 that man can believe according to his will, or that he cannot. Now, 
 let all of you endeavor to recollect something which you believe; 
 and then try if you have power sufficient over your will to disbelieve 
 it, even for a few minutes. Why, my friends, it is contrary to this 
 law of our nature, which cannot be made to change its character at 
 the bidding of any individual, however learned. I perceive you dis¬ 
 cover, that by your utmost efforts you cannot accomplish it. You 
 might, indeed, as well attempt, by the bare exercise of your volition, 
 to bring down the sun from the firmament, as to disbelieve what you 
 have been compelled to believe, until a more powerful conviction 
 shall be made upon your minds. Try again, then, and see if you 
 can believe, for ever so short a period, what former convictions now 
 compel you to disbelieve. You find the one as impracticable as the 
 other. 
 
 The same irresistible law of your nature governs and controls you 
 in your disbelief as well as your belief. We have no metaphysics 
 here; we discard them as useless for the real happiness of life, and 
 unworthy a discussion of this character; for we ought to proceed en¬ 
 tirely upon those facts which all can examine for themselves, and 
 which change not—facts which can be investigated with all their at¬ 
 tendant circumstances, at all times, by all men, who desire to acquire 
 a Knowledge of the truth for the love of truth. 
 
 From a hint I have just received from my friend, Mr. Campbell, l 
 perceive he is again becoming very impatient under this obvious ex¬ 
 position of a few plain facts; so plain indeed, and so essential for 
 present purposes, that he feels no reply, but a metaphysical one, can 
 be made to them. 
 
 I did not promise, as Mr. Campbell appears to suppose, that I would 
 conclude in an hour; but I stated to Mr. Campbell that I was willing 
 to rest all the points in controversy between us upon this single posi¬ 
 tion, as upon it the whole controversy depended: Is there an exception 
 to be found, throughout the whole human family, to the universal ap¬ 
 plication of this law? Is there a single individual who, by the fiat of 
 his own will, can believe or disbelieve contrary to previous conviction 
 made upon his mind? 
 
 But, my friends, we have all been trained from infancy in the op 
 posite notions. Mr. Campbell has been trained in them—and it is 
 therefore no wqjider that all our minds have been forced to become 
 irrational. 
 
 The notion that our will has power over our belief or. disbelief, is 
 the principal source from which emanate the mistaken notions, the in¬ 
 jurious feelings, the malignant passions, the want o' 
 and the vicious conduct of men. This subject, my 
 
 universal charity, 
 friends* to bn fully 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 181 
 
 developed, so as to make a proper impression upon your minds, would 
 also take many days to elucidate and trace to all its important prac¬ 
 tical results. It is this kind of knowledge, deeply affecting the well 
 being of each, and the happiness of all, that this little casket contains. 
 It is true, this knowledge, valuable as it is, has laid buried for several 
 thousand years, and no one suspected its intrinsic practical worth, to 
 induce a sufficient search for its discovery. It has been covered with 
 so much rubbish, that it required forty years daily exertion before I 
 could discover it and make it sufficiently known and attractive to draw 
 public attention to its real merits. The question 1 have put to you, 
 taken out of this casket, and which no one can answer, is decisive of 
 the result of the whole debate; of the futility and uselessness of ail re¬ 
 ligions, and whether or not they are derived from any other source 
 than the ignorance of mankind. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rose and said—The stipulation was, that Mr. 
 Owen, was to speak for one hour, and that I should have the conclu¬ 
 sion. 
 
 Mr. Owen rose—I did not understand that I was to be tied down to 
 an hour in making my reply. Mr. Campbell has spoken through¬ 
 out this debate nearly twice as long as I have done, and now he feels 
 that- 7 — 
 
 The Hon. Chairman said—You have spoken longer than Mr. 
 Campbell did the last time he was up. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises.— 
 
 Mr. Chairman—Mr. Owen has no good reason to complain of the 
 time fixed for bringing this discussion to a close. He first suggested 
 the idea that two hours would be sufficient for his reply to rny long 
 speech. He seems now to act with a little of that art of which I did 
 not think him capable. And what new matter has he now r to offer? 
 Since opening his casket nothing has appeared but the same old twelve 
 positions, facts, or laws, as you please to call them. If he have any 
 thing new to offer, why does he not now offer it. True, indeed, I 
 ought to except the abusive document, which he read this morning; 
 and some remarks made upon the Mahometan religion. This latter 
 I neglected, or forgot, to notice in my last speech. The establish¬ 
 ment and progress of this religion, all the world knows. No greater 
 contrast can he found in any book upon any subject than the contrast 
 between the establishment and progress of Mahometanism and Chris¬ 
 tianity. The ruffian exploits of a crew of pirates, or a banditti of 
 highwaymen, might as justly be contrasted with the peaceful march 
 of a missionary family, or of the almoners of a Christian community, 
 in distributing their charities among a suffering population, as to com¬ 
 pare the lustful, vengeful, avaricious exploits of Mahomet and the 
 Koran, with Jesus the Messiah, and his apostles. While the language 
 of the Christian teachers, was, “Glory to God in the highest—peace 
 on earth, and good will among men;”-—that of the marauding fa 1 st) 
 prophet, was, “Bogs, you know your option, the Koran, tribute, or the 
 sword Here lies the volume. [Mr. Campbell pointing to the Koran d, 
 YOL. 41, 16 
 
182 
 
 debate; 
 
 Here is the Mahometan Bible. I have examined it with at least a# 
 much care, as most sceptics do the Bible; and while it admits the mis¬ 
 sion of Moses, Jesus, and the apostles, and then directly proves the 
 truth of Christianity, as the institution of Jesus Christ, its doctrines, 
 and, as far as they have a supernatural idea in them, are evidently 
 stolen from the two testaments, as is the English word 'philanthropy 
 from the Greek philanthropia. 
 
 But the Koran proves the divine authorship of the NeW Testament 
 as clearly as ever did accomplishment prove the truth of prophecy; 
 for in the seven letters addressed by Jesus Christ to the seven con¬ 
 gregations in Asia, written by John while in Patmos, the setting of 
 the Sun of Righteousness, or the extinguishment of the light of Chris¬ 
 tianity, in that country, is threatened as consequent upon the progres¬ 
 sion of the dereliction of Christian principle and practice then appear¬ 
 ing among the dissolute Asiatics. All the world, Jewish, Christian, 
 and sceptical, know that the Mahometan superstition is a vile imposi- 
 tion, and notin any one feature comparable to Christianity. Counter 
 testimony, and every sort of testimony, can be adduced against the 
 pretensions of the Koran; and both literally-and symbolically is the 
 rise and progress of the imposture portrayed in the Apocalypse. 
 
 Mr. Owen has told us how lone the contents of his casket have lain 
 hid. For four thousand years anterior, and two thousand years subse¬ 
 quent to the Christian religion, have these jewells been buried. How 
 Mr. Owen happened to disinter them is the question. Was it never 
 known before the year of favor 1829, that no child chose its parent¬ 
 age, nor the place and circumstances of its nativity!! Was it never 
 known before Mr. Owen descried it, that children are much influenced 
 by the circumstances of their childhood and by the example of their pa¬ 
 rents!! These burnished gems now made brilliant by being changed 
 from manuscript to print [Mr Owen had them printed yesterday,] have 
 been like the twelve apostles; the. twelve lions on which the throne 
 of Solomon stood; the twelve foundations ofthe New Institution, now 
 read twelve times, destined to great honor and glory. As*Mr. Ov en 
 has read them so often, 1 hope I may be indulged to read them once; 
 and that I may make them more famous by my reading them, I will 
 show the whole extent of their latitude, and I think Mr. Owen himself 
 will be indebted to me for the liberal and extensive construction 
 which I am about to give them. I will show that they are so large 
 and so liberal as to engross almost every animal in the creation within 
 their lawful jurisdiction. But for the sake of trial and proof I will 
 only try how they will suit one species of quadrupeds. Mr. Owen 
 has told you twelve times that they will exactly suit for bipeds. 
 
 THE TWELVE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF BRUTAL NATURE, 
 
 On which Robert Owen predicates a change of society that will form 
 
 an entire new state of existence. 
 
 1. That a goat, at its birth, is ignoraiit of every thing relative to its 
 own organization, and that it has not been permitted to create the 
 slightest part of any of its natural propensities, faculties, or qualities! 
 physical or mental. 
 
debate. 
 
 183 
 
 2„ That no two kid?, at birth, have yet been known to possess pre¬ 
 cisely the same organization; while the physical, mental, and moral 
 differences, between all kids, are formed without their knowledge or 
 will. 
 
 3. That each individual kid is placed, at birth, without its know¬ 
 ledge or consent, within circumstances, which, acting upon its pecu¬ 
 liar organization, impress the general character of those circumstances 
 upon the infant kid and goat. Yet that the influence of those cir¬ 
 cumstances, is, to a certain degree, modified by the peculiar natural 
 organization of each individual goat. 
 
 4. That no kid has the power of deciding at what period of time, or 
 in what part of the world, it shall come into existence; of what goat 
 it shall be born, what particular tricks it shall be trained to, or by 
 what other circumstances it shall be surrounded from birth to death. 
 
 5. That each individual goat is so created, that, when young, it 
 may be made to receive impressions, to produce either true ideas or 
 false notions, and beneficial or injurious habits, and to retain them 
 with great tenacity. 
 
 6. That each individual goat is so created, that he must feel ac¬ 
 cording to the strongest impressions that can be made on its feelings, 
 and other faculties, while its feelings in no case depend upon its will. 
 
 7. That each individual is so created that it must like that which is 
 pleasant to it, or that which produces agreeable sensations on its indi¬ 
 vidual organization, and it must dislike that which creates in it 
 unpleasant or disagreeable sensations; while it cannot discover, pre¬ 
 vious to experience, what those sensations shall be. 
 
 6. That each individual goat is so created, that the sensations made 
 upon its organization, although pleasant and delightful at their com¬ 
 mencement and for some duration, generally become, when continu¬ 
 ed beyond a certain period, without change, disagreeable and painful. 
 While, on the contrary, when a too rapid change of sensations is made 
 on its organization, it dissipates, weakens, and otherwise injures its 
 physical, intellectual, and moral powers and enjoyments. 
 
 9. That the highest health, the greatest progressive improvements, 
 and the most permanent happiness of each individual goat, depend in 
 a. great degree upon the proper cultivation of all its physical, intel¬ 
 lectual, and moral faculties and powers from infancy to maturity, 
 and upon all these parts of its nature being duly called into action, at 
 their proper periods, and temperately exercised according to the 
 strength and capacity of the individual goat. 
 
 9. That the individual goat is made to possess and to acquire the 
 worst character, when its organization at birth has been compounded 
 of the most inferior propensities, faculties, and qualities of its com¬ 
 mon nature; and when so organized, it has been placed,from birth to 
 death, amidst the most vicious or worst circumstances. 
 
 10. That the individual goat is made to possess, and to acquire a 
 medium character, when its original organization has been created 
 superior , and when the circumstances which surround it from birth 
 to death produce continued vicious or unfavorable impressions. Or 
 
DEBATE* 
 
 ■m 
 
 v'hen its organization has been formed of inferior materials* and the 
 circumstances in which it has been placed from birth to death are of 
 a character to produce superior impressions only. Or when there 
 has been some mixture of good and bad qualities in the original or¬ 
 ganization, and when it has also been placed, through life, in varied 
 circumstances of good and evil. This last compound has been hither¬ 
 to the common lot of all goats. 
 
 12 . That each individual goat is made the most superior to its 
 species, when its original organization has been compounded of the u 
 best proportions, of the best ingredients of which goat nature is form¬ 
 ed, and when the circumstances which surround it from birth to death * 
 are of a character to produce only superior impressions; or, in other 
 
 ^words, when the circumstances, or laws, institutions and customs in 
 which it is placed, are all in unison with its nature. 
 
 Mr. Owen has told you that he believes not in a spiritual system, 
 consequently none of these laws are predicated upon any thing spir¬ 
 itual in man. Now as his laws are all built upon the hypothesis that 
 man is a pure animal, if it should ever appear to Mr. Owen that there 
 is a spiritual system, he must add a few laws to his code. I will, there¬ 
 fore, add a few laws to them, which will, indeed, exclude the goat 
 and every other animal from being a legitimate subject of them. The 
 four following laws are just as plain, as true, and as palpaple as the 
 first one. As these are the beginning of a new series for Mr. Owen, 
 i will call my first the thirteenth Maw of human nature.'’ 
 
 13. That man has aspirations after knowledge, which would not 
 cease, did he know and perfectly comprehend every particle of matter ! 
 in the globe, in the solar system, in the universe, with all its laws, 
 properties, and modifications; and never can he feel so well pleased 
 with his acquisitions of knowledge as to fix a period to his inquiries. ’| 
 
 14. That man has a taste for society which the largest and most 
 
 accomplished society which could exist contemporaneously with him- ilj 
 sel f ca nnot gratify. 4 
 
 15. That he has desires for happiness which no circumstances on L | 
 firth can satisfy; and that these desires are commensurate with infi¬ 
 nite objects which the present state of existence cannot present to him. I 
 
 1 ( 3 . That when he has formed the best conceptions of himself which (| 
 all earth-born opportunities present, he feels himself painfully ignor- ill 
 ; nt of every grand fact connected with the origin of his existence and ijj 
 of every grand result involving his own ultimate destiny. i] 
 
 These are a sample of the additions which I hope Mr. Owen will i 
 
 yet see necessary to append to his original twelve. No sheep or goat t| 
 can dispute its right or title to any of these four. || 
 
 I would also prefix two to his animal code as also prefatory to the i| 
 original twelve. These wmdd be, >| 
 
 1. That the first man was not born—and if 
 
 2 . That man, at his birth, is the child of some body, and by nature i 
 
 is dependent upon that some body for subsistence, for his language, | 
 
 modes of thinking, and for a majority of all the peculiarities of his . | 
 consitution. * : f«| 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 185 
 
 But before taking my final leave of the New Code of Twelve, I must 
 give Mr. Owen a critique upon the sixth, which he has so often thrown 
 in our way. He has often said, prove one of the twelve to be errone¬ 
 ous, and he will abandon all of them. That the sixth is so I hope the 
 following critique will show:— 
 
 1. The first and fundamental principles of our nature which excite 
 to action, arc our appetites and affections. These instinctive facul¬ 
 ties we have in common with all animals. A high excitement of 
 jdiese we call passion. 
 
 2. Next to these is that class of powers by which we obtain all our 
 simple original ideas; into which, as elementary principles, is ulti¬ 
 mately resolvable all our knowledge—viz. sensation, perception, 
 memory, reason, and consciousness. Now, although these faculties 
 are affected, or called into action, when their objects are presented; 
 yet, in many important cases, it is quite optional whether the objects 
 shall be presented or not. 
 
 3. In the next place, the use or operation of these faculties, for 
 the acquisition of knowledge, is dependent on our volition; viz, re¬ 
 collecting, reflecting, imagining, reasoning, judging. 
 
 4. Lastly, the combined or separate influence of our appetites, 
 affections, passions, and judgments, determine our wills, and pro¬ 
 duce those volitions which terminate in action. 
 
 Inferences .—Hence it follows that every action of our lives is 
 naturally subjected to our judgments; which are, or ought to be, 
 the combined and ultimate results of all our intellectual powers. We 
 say, our actions ought to be such; first, because we possess these 
 po wers—second, because we are instinctively impelled to desire and 
 will our own happiness or gratification—and third, because we are 
 accountable to our Creator and Benefactor for the use we make of our 
 powers for our own profit and his good pleasure, which is the happi¬ 
 ness of his rational creatures, for whose sakes he has created all 
 things. 
 
 Again, in classifying these powers in relation to their peculiar and 
 appropriate objects, we denominate them sensitive, intellectual, and 
 moral ; which last distinction does not mean a new class of powers, 
 not included in the two previous classes; but only those of thinking 
 and acting with respect to law, and of the law itself by which we are 
 to be governed. These are the powers of reasoning, judging, and 
 believing. Hence faith or belief is not the proper and immediate 
 effect of volition, but of our reason and judgment duly exercised 
 upon testimony. We, therefore, cannot believe at will, or by virtue 
 of an act of volition without evidence, any more than we can, by an 
 act of. our will, see without light—nevertheless it would be absurd to 
 affirm that we see by necessity; that our sight or perception of ob¬ 
 jects, in no case depended upon, or was influenced by our will. The 
 truth is, that although we can neither believe nor see what, or when 
 we please, yet both our believing and seeing are, in many very im- 
 portant cases, dependent upon our volition. 
 
 VOL. II. 16* 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 Then, it may be asked, What is it that determines our will to in¬ 
 vestigate? Answer, Duty, curiosity, or interest. But, whatever 
 may be the motive, still it is evident that being excited to will to 
 investigate, our will has a proper and rational influence upon our 
 belief, just as it has upon our power of seeing, or upon our sight. 
 
 Upon the whole, to suppose that a rational creature acts without 
 motive, is the same as to say that it acts irrationally, or without 
 reason. And to assert that because it acts rationally it acts necessa¬ 
 rily, and therefore is neither praise nor blame-worthy, is contrary 
 to reason itself; for every man’s reason condemns him when he acts 
 irrationally, and approves or acquits him when he acts rationally.— 
 Therefore Mr. Owen’s sixth law is manifestly erroneous, being in 
 direct contradiction to a fundamental law of rational nature. 
 
 Again, what is natural must be right; if not, what is the standard 
 of right? or, if nature be wrong, who or what shall correct it, seeing 
 it produces all things as they are? Shall the effect correct the cause? 
 or shall the cause, that is, nature, correct itself, and therefore be 
 wiser and better than itself? Therefore, if things be as nature pro¬ 
 duced them, are they not as they ought to be? But, if not, who 
 can better them, seeing that every thing is the effect of nature, and 
 that the effect cannot correct or rectify the cause ? 
 
 But, if it be supposed that things are in a disordered and preter¬ 
 natural state, how came they into such a state? For, seeing the 
 creature has no influence either upon its constitution or circumstan¬ 
 ces, according to law 1, 2, how could it change for the worse? Or, 
 being deteriorated in its nature and circumstances, having no power 
 over them, how can it change for the better; having no independent, 
 inherent, self determining power? 
 
 Nature, then, being equally the author both of our nature and cir¬ 
 cumstances, who can change either of them, but the author? But, 
 are we naturally constituted capable of improving both our nature 
 and circumstances? How can this be, if we came into existence, at 
 first, in an adult state? For, then, we were the creatures of circum¬ 
 stances; and, as every thing must necessarily act as it is; that is, 
 according to its nature and circumstances, therefore, we could never 
 better our conditions, being limited by our nature and circumstances. 
 But, if there be a principle in our nature, by which we can rise supe¬ 
 rior to our nature and circumstances; (and such there must be, if we 
 can ameliorate our condition in both these respects, as Mr. Owen’s 
 system pretends;) then surely his display of the fundamental laws of 
 our nature are essentially deficient, inasmuch as they no where de- 
 velope this principle. 
 
 Having now laid my objections fairly before Mr. Owen, and that 
 he may be induced not to pass them by as formerly, 1 will sit down 
 that he may attack and remove my objections if he can. 
 
 Mr. Owen rises. 
 
 My friends—Mr. Campbell very naturally wishes that I should, 
 fallow his lead in this discussion : thatis, that I should reply to his 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 metaphysical argument, and leave these facts, which can alone throw 
 any real light upon the subject, and which he ought to have prepared 
 himself to refute, and thus involve myself in a debate which would 
 only darken knowledge and confound your understandings. Now all 
 this is perfectly natural on the part of Mr. Campbell. But I wish to 
 set rnyself right with this assembly before we separate, in consequence 
 of some of Mr. Campbell’s observations upon ray supposed opinion on 
 the subject of Deity. I have never denied the existence of a Deity. 
 I distinctly and most pointedly gave my reasons for wdiat I believe on 
 this subject. 1 stated what I believe to be the whole amount of our 
 knowledge in regard to those things which are called Divine; but I 
 will not affirm or deny that for which we have not sufficient facts to 
 enable us to form correct or rational ideas. 
 
 Now, my friends, you may be sure that, in a discussion of this 
 character, the last expedient an opponent can resort to, is an attempt 
 to ridicule his antagonist’s argument. To this dernier resort my 
 friend, Mr. Campbell, has been driven. But the shafts of Mr. Camp¬ 
 bell’s ridicule have been very harmless: they struck pointless, and 
 without the least effect on the mark at which they were aimed; and 
 why?—Because the casket was too well tempered, and too highly 
 polished to be penetrable by such feeble missiles. But if ridicule 
 were to be recognized as a fair weapon in religious controversial 
 warfare, only consider the game that lies before me, only imagine 
 for a moment how the whole Christian scheme could be cut up and 
 rendered almost too ridiculous for ridicule itself. I have, however, 
 too much regard for your feelings, and for the importance of the sub¬ 
 ject under discussion, to pursue this course. On my side of the 
 question I defy ridicule; for, as you perceive, none can be successfully 
 made to bear upon even one of the fundamental laws of nature, on 
 the accuracy or truth of which, the real merits of this discussion 
 will be ultimately discovered to rest. And this is the true cause why 
 they have so grievously nonplussed Mr. Campbell. But could f so 
 far forget the magnitude of the cause I have undertaken to advocate, 
 as to resort for arguments to ridicule, and thereby unnecessarily 
 wound your feelings, every one knows how easy it would be to use 
 this weapon to expose the pretensions of any, and of all religion.— 
 But this is a proceeding to which I have no inclination to resort, 
 when the improvement of the human race, in the reformation of its 
 character and general practice, is the subject before me. My object 
 here, upon the present occasion, is not to obtain a personal victory 
 over any man or any portion of my fellows; to me such a victory 
 would be of the least possible estimation. But it is to promulgate 
 truth for its own value, and for the incalculable practical benefits 
 that must accrue to the race of man from its developement. This is 
 a consideration with me beyond all others. This, my friends, is my 
 only object. Were you to give me your whole state—nay, the whole 
 United States, I would consider the gift as valueless, compared with 
 the discovery of one truth of such a character as will penetrate the 
 understanding of all men; arrest their present irrational career, and 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 1SB 
 
 s 
 
 induoe them to adopt a practice which shall make themselves and their 
 posterity happy. 
 
 Mr. Campbell has given you his views and reasonings upon this 
 sixth law of our nature, but they amount to nothing. He did not 
 take up the position which is here laid down. This position is— 
 that each individual is so created, that he must believe according 
 to the strongest impression that is made upon his feelings and other 
 faculties, while his belief in no case depends upon his will. This 
 is a clear and distinct position, and leaves no room for a metaphysical 
 retreat. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rose and said—There is no metaphysical subterfuge 
 in me. I contend that I have met the position fairly. The clause i 
 objected to is this—‘‘that belief in no case depends upon will.” 
 
 Mr. Owen. —Well, gentlemen, I will bring this matter to a speedy 
 issue. If Mr. Campbell can adduce a single instance wherein his 
 belief depends upon his will, I will give up the whole question. 
 
 [Here Mr. Owen waited some time for Mr. CampbelVs reply. Mr. 
 Campbell coulel not then make any.] 
 
 My friends, there is no power that can coerce a man to believe con¬ 
 trary to the convictions upon his mind. The change can be effected 
 only by producing evidence that shall appear to him still stronger; 
 and then, often against his will, he is obliged to change his belief. 
 The cause of truth is thus gained. 
 
 We will, however, proceed to the seventh law of our nature, viz. 
 “That each individual is so created, that he must like that which is 
 pleasant to him, or that which produces agreeable sensations on his 
 individual organization; and he must dislike that which creates in 
 him unpleasant or disagreeable sensations; while he cannot discover, 
 previous to experience, what those sensations shall be.” 
 
 I have placed upon record the very important consequences of this 
 law of our nature. It wdl have a weighty influence on the future 
 destinies of man; it will change all the present family relations of 
 life; it will create a new order of existence, as much superior to the 
 present, as light is to darkness. But I will now trespass no longer on 
 your patience, except to remark, that Mr. Campbell, when speaking of 
 this very law, as applicable to marriage, gave quite a different color to 
 the argument from what he was justified in doing, from any thing I 
 have ever written or said. He endeavored to make it appear, no 
 doubt from previous misconceptions in his mind, that I intended to 
 encourage prostitution, as it is now understood and practised, in gene¬ 
 ral throughout society. 
 
 Why, my friends, it is the infraction of this very law of our nature, 
 that has produced all the vices and evils attendant upon prostitution. 
 It is the infraction of this law that has produced a vicious and most 
 degrading connexion between the sexes unavoidable over the world. 
 
 I wish to withdraw all the causes which render prostitution necessary 
 and unavoidable, and to propose the means by which a society may 
 be formed, in which chastity alone shall he known. Let me hear 
 no more, therefore, from any quarter, of the vulgar jargon that I ad- 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 189 
 
 Vacate this law of our nature from a desire to increase the vice and 
 misery which the infraction of this lavr has made every where to 
 abound; and when I well know there are already so many dreadful 
 evils created by prostitution, as threaten to overwhelm the health and 
 happiness of the population of all countries. 
 
 No, mv friends, 1 would not have travelled to and fro, sacrificing 
 my ease, expending mv substance, exposing my health and risking 
 my life, were it not with the intention of improving, and highly im¬ 
 proving too, the whole condition of man? What motive, short of 
 this, could have induced me to adopt the course which I have so long 
 pursued, or to persevere in that course? Therefore, my friends, 
 listen no more to such mistaken notions relative to my views and in¬ 
 tentions on this most important subject. Such misrepresentations, 
 derived from the ignorant multitude, are unworthy of repetition by 
 Mr. Campbell; unworthy of the cause he supports, and of the magni¬ 
 tude of the interests which we have met to discuss. This law of our 
 nature, when it shall be understood and properly applied to practice, 
 will put an end to the cause which renders prostitution, under your 
 present errors, unavoidable. 
 
 The eighth law of our nature is: “That each individual is so 
 created that the sensations made upon his organization, although 
 pleasant and delightful at their commencement, and for some dura¬ 
 tion, generally become, when continued beyond a certain period 
 without change, disagreeable and painful. And when a too rapid 
 change of sensations is made on his organization, it dissipates, 
 weakens and otherwise injures his physical, intellectual and moral 
 powers and enjoyments.” 
 
 In this law is to be found the foundation of all excellence in human 
 conduct. The desire of happiness is a principle coeval with life and 
 the most powerful feeling to stimulate to action in human nature. 
 And by this law and the one immediately succeeding it (the ninth) we 
 shall discover that temperance in the enjoyment and exercise of all 
 our faculties, according to their different degrees of strength, is that 
 habit by which alone the highest point of happiness is to be attained. 
 
 The tenth law is, that the individual is made to possess and acquire 
 the ii'orst character, when his organization at birth has been com¬ 
 pounded of the most inferior propensities and faculties of our com¬ 
 mon nature—and when so organized, he has been placed from birth 
 to death amidst the mogt vicious or worst circumstances. 
 
 My friends, this is one of these laws that will instruct you, in your 
 new art as fathers , as soon as you begin to undertake the task—it, 
 will show you what you have to do for your infants, your children, 
 and your youth. It will show you, that while you permit them to be 
 surrounded with vicious circumstances, they must receive vitiating 
 impressions from them; and that in the formation of the characters of 
 your children, such of them as have beon so unfortunate as to receive 
 a vicious organization ought to be the objects of your especial compass 
 sion and kindness; and that they have a just and rational claim upon 
 you, for fourfold more care and attention in forming them in the most 
 
190 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 perfect mould, that such of your children as have been blessed with a | 
 more perfect natural organization are entitled to receive at your 
 hands. This law, my friends, lays the foundation also for much good 
 feeling and genuine charity. In fact each of these laws speak peace 
 to you and all mankind—they all concur to lay the foundations of 
 charity deeper and still deeper within ns, and to exterminate every 
 germ of unkind feeling. They are, indeed, a perfect system of moral 
 laws—and all of them being derived from the constitution of man, as j 
 it has been ascertained to be, will, when once understood, recognized, 
 and adopted by society, irresistibly enforce their precepts upon the 
 hearts and the understandings, and direct all the actions of man, 
 Their effect will be as certain upon the individual, as are the effects 
 of physical laws in the progress of plants from the seed to the fruit, 
 and the full formed treer; or in any other branch of vital economy. 
 Now, my friends, under the wholesome and beneficent government of 
 these laws, you will not, as at present, have to grope your way in 
 perpetual and anxious uncertainty. When you begin to form the 
 character of a human being you may calculate upon the result, with 
 the same undoubting confidence which the mathematician feels 
 when he begins to calculate upon known and certain data. If the 
 work be correctly performod, there can be no mistake in the result. 
 
 It will be a sort of moral Rule of Three calculation, which might 
 perhaps be stated thus: As the organization of the individual is to 
 his circumstances, so will be the character compounded out of both. 
 
 This change in society will abrogate two thirds of our present 
 vocabulary—the hacknied phrases arising from our deceptive notions 
 of free tvill , will be exploded; they convey impressions only of error 
 to the mind—and in our new and rational state of existence, not a 
 single harsh epithet, or unkind or censorious expression, in which 
 all languages now abound, will receive admission. And why?— 
 Because there will be no harsh, malignant, uncharitable feelings to ; 
 be expressed. Hatred and anger will be unknown, for we shall have 
 peace within us, and all will be peace around us. 
 
 We come now, my friends, to the eleventh law of our nature, 
 “That the individual is made to possess and acquire a medium char¬ 
 acter, when his original organization has been created superior, and 
 when the circumstances which surround him from birth to death, - 
 produce continual vicious and unfavorable impressions. Or, when 
 his organization has been formed of inferior materials, and the cir¬ 
 cumstances in which he has been placed from birth to death, are of 
 a character to produce superior impressions only. Or, when there 
 has been some mixture of superior and inferior qualities in the 
 original organization, and when it has also been placed through life 
 in varied circumstances of good and evil. This last compound has 
 been hitherto the common lot of mankind.” 
 
 My friends, this eleventh law is a mirror to all of you. You have 
 all been forced to acquire this medium character. You are none of 
 you so bad, nor any of you so good, as you might have been formed . 
 to be. And why are all of you now’, as well as all Christendom, and 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 191 
 
 Indeed the inhabitants of every other portion of the globe, only of a 
 very ordinary medium character? It is because of the universal 
 first impressions forced upon mankind in favor of the doctrines of 
 free will? These impressions, which commenced in times beyond 
 our knowledge, and have always been the fruitful source of error 
 in the thoughts, feelings and actions of man, originated in the dark 
 ages, when science was unknown, when men knew but few facts, 
 and those few imperfectly. These false notions were, probably, 
 received into the human mind at the time it imbibed its undoubting 
 belief for ages, that the earth was flat and immoveable; the sun, 
 planets and stars all being formed to be attendants on this globe for 
 the use of man. 
 
 Time, however, advanced; science dawned upon the world in 
 defiance of monkish ignorance, and printing was discovered. Facts 
 began to be investigated, real knowledge in consequence to be intro¬ 
 duced, and to escape by little and little among the multitude. 
 
 Thus commenced an opposition to religious ignorance, and it ad¬ 
 vanced against the efforts of the Priesthood, aided even by the inqui¬ 
 sition. Within the last two or three hundred years, knowledge has 
 been disseminated in an extraordinary manner by the art of printing. 
 This inestimable art has preserved to us so many important facts* 
 derived from the experience of former times, that they serve in part 
 to counteract the vicious circumstances which have been generated 
 by the doctrine of free will, and all the religious notions founded on 
 it. It is the knowledge derived from recorded experience, and the 
 errors generated by the notion of free will, combatting and counter¬ 
 acting each pther, that has placed you in your present medium scale 
 of character. 
 
 It is the religions over the earth, emanating directly from the un¬ 
 substantial notions derived from the doctrines of free will, and their 
 necessary consequences in forming the feelings, thoughts and actions 
 of men, that has formed the present medium character of the inhabi¬ 
 tants of the civilized world. 
 
 And so long as these free will notions can be taught and received 
 in opposition to the daily increasing lights of experience, showing 
 how the character of every individual is formed for him, you win 
 remain in your present medium condition, and the inhabitants of the 
 world will receive the same inferior character that those errors have 
 hitherto impressed upon them. But I must proceed to the 12th and 
 last revealed law.of our nature; revealed by facts alike to all nations 
 and people, namely: “That the individual is made the most superior 
 of his species, when his original organization has been compounded 
 of the best proportions, of the best ingredients of which human 
 nature is formed, and when the circumstances which surround him 
 from his birth to death, are of a character to produce only superior 
 impressions, or in other words, when the circumstances or laws, 
 institutions and customs in which he is placed, are all in unison with 
 his nature.” 
 
 My friends, if in any past times as much had been done for human 
 
192 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 nature, as you have witnessed this day, in the free and open discus? 
 sion in which we have been engaged, we should not now have to 
 lament the ignorance in which we have all been kept by the accu¬ 
 mulation of vicious circumstances, by which we and all mankind 
 have been surrounded from birth ; but upon this part of the subject it 
 is now too late to enter into detail. Take, however, into your con¬ 
 sideration, for a moment, the importance of the three last laws, and 
 more particularly of this 12th law. In this you will discover the 
 ^certain, the infallible process by which the most is to be made of 
 human nature that can be made of it, by men of one generation 
 acting upon the children of the rising generation. 
 
 We cannot, as I have explained to you, make an immediate change 
 upon the existing organization of the infants of our race; though I 
 have no doubt that the time will come, when very great improve¬ 
 ments will be made in the organization at birth. In the present state 
 of ignorance, and consequent prejudice, in which we are upon this 
 subject, we must turn our attention only to those circumstances upon 
 which the knowledge of the influence of circumstances will enable 
 us to act. It has been well observed by one of our learned modera¬ 
 tors, upon another occasion, in writing upon my views, that he did 
 not well understand how human nature could be the creature of cir¬ 
 cumstances, and yet have the power to direct them. It was an in¬ 
 telligent view of the subject. The difficulty is to be explained, and 
 overcome like all other difficulties when they occur, by proceeding 
 in our investigations until the whole truth is discovered. By this 
 process it becomes evident, that until we ascertain the fact that we 
 are the creatures of circumstances, we are without the knowledge 
 requisite to give us power to remove, replace, re-arrange, and control 
 them. And as soon as the knowledge of this fact is fully developed, 
 it becomes itself a new circumstance, by which the existing adults 
 may do more for the rising generations, than has been yet done for 
 man through all past ages. This, my friends, is therefore the first, 
 pre-eminently the first of sciences; it is one of the very highest order 
 that the human mind can conceive. It is that science, by which, in 
 due time, the men of one generation shall be enabled so far to im¬ 
 prove the original organization at birth; the disposition, habits, 
 manners, thoughts, feelings, and conduct, after birth, of the succeed¬ 
 ing generation, that the former shall become to the latter as creators. 
 For they will be, through'this new knowledge, enabled to give to the 
 new man such superior faculties, thoughts, feelings, and dispositions, 
 that it will appear to be a re-creation; a regeneration; anew birth; 
 a new life; a resurrection from the corruptions and abominations of 
 the present, irrational existence, into a state of peace, knowledge and 
 joy unspeakable! It is therefore a science so deeply interesting to 
 all, that all, without delay, should be carefully taught it from the 
 first dawning of their reason. And it is moreover a science so con- 
 genial to all the principles of nature, and the facts which exist around 
 us, and through all nature, that little children may very easily and 
 very early be instructed in it. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 193 
 
 l perceive my hour is about to expire, and it is come when I have 
 just entered upon the most interesting part of the discussion ; but I 
 submit to the wishes and convenience of others, and therefore, after 
 I sit down, I shall not trespass on your time, unless it be for the 
 sake of some explanation. 
 
 But I cannot take leave of you without expressing a strong sense 
 of obligation to those gentlemen, who compose the Committee, for 
 making the preliminary arrangements for this discussion; also to 
 those gentlemen who have taken the trouble to attend to all the sub¬ 
 sequent arrangements, and especially to the Trustees of this build¬ 
 ing, who with great urbanity, after one church was refused to the 
 Committee who applied for it, conceded to them the use of this for our 
 purpose. And I am much indebted to all who have attended here 
 during the discussion, for the extreme good order which has prevailed, 
 and the remarkable good temper with which you have received those 
 strong, and, in many cases, highly exciting truths to Christians, 
 which I deem it my duty, with reference to future consequences, to 
 place before you, I do not believe that on this account I can ever 
 forget Cincinnati. It is true, I once prophesied her depopulation., 
 not because I considered her any worse than other populous places, 
 or a second Sodom and Gromorrah, for your ponduct on this occasion, 
 proves the reverse. I was, it seems, mistaken, as to the precise time; 
 having been misled at that period by the enthusiasm expressed by 
 so many of its inhabitants in favor of principles which, to my pecu¬ 
 niary loss, I afterwards discovered they so little understood. I was 
 so well aware then, as I am now, that the inhabitants of a new and 
 uneducated country, as this was at that time, were of necessity far 
 more powerfully, influenced by immediate impressions, that by ex¬ 
 tended and deep reflections. As surely, however, as these twelve 
 fundamental laws are derived from facts which change not, so sure¬ 
 ly will the dispersion of the inhabitants of all large cities take place. 
 You will through this new knowledge discover, ere long, that a large, 
 city is a collection of many injuries and vicious circumstances; too 
 unfavorable to the highest happiness that human nature is capable of 
 attaining, to be much longer allowed to remain. You cannot, under 
 any ^arrangement, in populous cities, enjoy, in any perfection, the 
 many important advantages, which are inseparable from the country, 
 properly cultivated and well laid out for convenience, beauty and 
 pleasure, and todiave at the same time, a full share of the best soci¬ 
 ety. These essential requisitions to the enjoyment of life, cannot 
 be obtained by a single human being within a large city, or in a 
 single family, or among a few families in the country, while it is 
 practicable to form an association of such numbers and character, 
 as when properly arranged and constituted, will possess and enjoy 
 all the advantages of city and country, without any of the numerous 
 inconveniencies, disadvantages or evils of either. It was a mistake 
 of my friend, Mr. C. for whom after all our hard and sharp wordy 
 battles* i am obliged to have the kindest feelings on account of his 
 honesty and liberality, to suppose that my ideas of a social svsteni 
 
 VOL, II* * If 
 
104 
 
 DEBATE, 
 
 were derived from the Shaking Quakers, Moravians, or any other 
 •existing prototype. My ideas upon this subject proceeded from a 
 different soufee. At the time the embryo of these ideas first pre¬ 
 sented itself to my mind, I was unconscious that there was a single 
 community living wholly upon public property, in existence. The 
 first mature thoughts upon this subject were suggested to me by a. 
 profound consideration of the laws of our nature, and the effects which 
 they were calculated to produce in practice, with the actual condition 
 of mankind; I perceived that man existed in all conditions from a state 
 single and detrimental solitude through all stages of increasing 
 numbers, up to a congregated mass, as in the capital of China, of 
 two millions of human beings of all ages; but I did not then know 
 that there was a number between these extremes, which, under proper 
 management, would give the greatest amount of happiness that man 
 could enjoy. The discovery of this happy number and arrangement* 
 is the first problem to be demonstrated in the science of political 
 economy; and until these points shall be established upon rational 
 principles, and derived from facts and experience, little of the science 
 of political economy, as a science, can be known. These points are 
 the data on which alone the science can take its rise, and without a 
 knowledge of which no such science can be formed. The difficulty 
 which presented itself to me at the outset of studying political econ¬ 
 omy, was to discover these data. Books written by speculative men 
 in their closets, I soon ascertained could give me no information 
 upon the subject 1 had afterwards an opportunity of .observing the 
 effects of a gradual increasing population, from a few families until 
 they amounted to about twenty-five hundred souls, and then I dis¬ 
 covered that the true minimum and maximum had been passed. It 
 was thus I was enabled by experience to ascertain what was the 
 extent of numbers, between which, a population could be arranged 
 and congregated together, to give to each individual the greatest 
 amount of advantages with the fewest inconveniencies. I am now 
 convinced from this experience and from a very extensive and care¬ 
 ful investigation of the business and concerns of human life, taking 
 also into consideration the ascertained fixed laws of human nature* 
 that the best medium number, ranges between eight hundred and 
 twelve hundred, and t/iat all associations of men* when they become 
 rational, will be composed of congregations never descending below 
 five hundred, nor ascending above two thousand. 
 
 These were the facts, principles and considerations whence my 
 ideas of the social communities originated, and these are the causes 
 which have impelled me so strongly to advocate them upon former 
 as well as upoa the present occasion—-they were not, therefore* 
 derived from any of the prototypes or contracted views and sources 
 whence Mr. C. apprehends them to have originated. And it is from 
 these sources, such as I have now explained them, that I predicated 
 the depopulation of Cincinnati, that I still confidently anticipate a . 
 change in society from large and populous, cities, and single families,. 
 to such associations, as will give to each individual the greatest 
 advantages, with the fewest inconveniencies. 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 195 
 
 I shall merely say, in conclusion, that the social system, as it ex¬ 
 ists in my mind, is an arrangement of society, founded on the most 
 opposite principles, except in unity of labour and property, to the 
 Shakers, Moravians, and ol*d Ilarmonites, that can well be imagined. 
 These are all founded on the ignorance and subjugation of the mass 
 under a few intelligent privileged leaders—but which, nevertheless, 
 produce much comfort, peace and quiet happiness among that mass. 
 They still, however, retain several of the practical errors, emanat¬ 
 ing from free-will doctrines, and frequently suffer changes and 
 evils in consequence; and while those errors are retained, evils will 
 continual!) 7 occur, and there will be no stability among them. The 
 social system which I contemplate, is founded upon other principles, 
 so different in character, that each child, will receive from infancy 
 to maturity the best training, education, a'nd instruction, that can be 
 given to it. There will be no inequality of lWik or condition, except 
 what age and experience necessarily produce; and these of course 
 in due time, all will equally enjoy. And the code of laws, founded 
 on the law r s of our nature, w ill, under the administration, explained 
 in the second part of this work, equally direct and govern all, from 
 the youngest to the most advanced in age and privileges attendant 
 thereon. 
 
 Time does not permit me to add more. I therefore take my 
 leave with the best feelings towards you all, wishing you health, 
 continued prosperity, and the benefit of these anticipated improve¬ 
 ments for your children.* 
 
 Mr. Campb»ll rises. 
 
 Mr. Owen, in his last address, has given in his own experience, 
 a refutation of his whole system. lie has affirmed, that the circum¬ 
 stances which surrounded him did not first originate the idea of the 
 social system. If so, then circumstances have not an absolute 
 control over men. If Mr. Owen, in defiance of the powder of circum¬ 
 stances, did, out of the rubbish of six thousand years, dig up th^ 
 twelve gems, and originate the social system, why may not millions 
 of as bright geniuses arise, superior to the circumstances that sur¬ 
 round them, and originate new ideas and discover new law r s, sub¬ 
 versive of all former lights, knowledge, and experience? But how 
 Mr. Owen may reconcile what he now 7 said concerning the origina¬ 
 tion of the social system, and that spoken on a former occasion, I 
 pause not now to inquire. 
 
 This assembly is now witness that I sat down, that Mr. Owen 
 might defend his sixth law, if he could; and that he did not make a 
 single effort. ’Tis true, indeed, he called upon me to produce some 
 case, as an example, where belief depended upon volition. He said 
 I could, not give any. He might, with a regard to truth, have said, 
 
 *Mr. Owen’s speeches, delivered on Monday and Tuesday, are not printed 
 from the Stenographer's Report, but from Mr. Owen’s own publication of them. 
 As they are somewhat improved in his publication, I preferred giving them in 
 the best possible form. This will explain the words enclosed in brackets^ 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 jOtS 
 
 I did not give any; but unless he knew my thoughts I cannot see on 
 what grounds he could say, I could not give any. We will, however* 
 try. 
 
 There was one Col. Sharp, of Frankfort, Kentucky, that was 
 some time since assassinated by one Jeremiah O, Beauchamp. For 
 some time no person knew who the perpetrator of this foulest of deeds 
 was. No person as yet believed that Jeremiah O. Beauchamp was 
 the assassin. But indignation, duty, interest, and curiosity, put all 
 upon the inquiry. Every one is resolved, determines, or, if you 
 please, puts forth a volition, or wills to search for evidences to pro¬ 
 duce faith. Every trace, every whisper, and every circumstance, 
 are explored, until a chain of evidence, so powerful, and so minute, 
 is accumulated as authorizes a jury, under the most soletnn sanc¬ 
 tions of law and religion, to bring in a verdict of guilty. Every 
 person, here, believed that Jeremiah O. Beauchamp was the assassin. 
 Now the question is, Had not the volition or determination of many 
 individuals, in this case, some infuence upon their beliefs; or, in 
 other words, did not the obtaining of the evidences, necessary to 
 conviction, depend upon the volitions of those concerned in tracing 
 up the matter? I hope Mr. Owen will no rrrore assert “That our 
 faith, in no case , depends upon our volitions.” 
 
 But am I not warranted in saying, that Mr. Owen has closed this 
 discussion without even an attempt to prove four of his positions? 
 He had five independent positions. Now to prove these fve, required 
 a special induction of reasons, arguments, and proofs, with a direct 
 bearing upon each of them; but this has not been attempted.— 
 He relied upon the repetition of his twelve laws, and upon his com¬ 
 ments upon the same twelve, to prove the whole five; as if identical 
 propositions, This may pass for logic, among sceptics; but cannot, 
 among Christians, 
 
 But, as night with its sable wings, is fast embracing us, I must 
 hasten. I had intended to have presented you with a correct and 
 concentrated -view of the whole of my arguments; but this would 
 occupy too much time, I can only, therefore, wuth any regard to 
 your patience, and circumstances, just state the principal topics 
 from which we argued the Divine authority of our holy religion. 
 
 Finding, as I soon did, after our commencement, that Mr. Owen 
 had no idea of adducing any logical proof of his propositions, but 
 that he was about to indulge in a latitude of declamation on his 
 social system, and other matters and things having no logical con¬ 
 nexion with the points at issue, and after various fruitless efforts, 
 on my part, and on that of the Board of Moderators, to draw his 
 attention to the real merits of the discussion. I proceeded to examine 
 the ancient and modern systems of sceptiscism, for the purpose of 
 proving this important point; that, so soon as men, called philoso¬ 
 phers, sages, or what you please, rejected revelation, and embarked on 
 board of their own reason^ they were, to a man, shipwrecked. Not 
 one of them ever reached a safe haven, and such of them as were 
 not wrecked upon some latent rock, foundered at sea 1-t Nothing 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 19? 
 
 but contradiction among themselves; new mysteries, and universal 
 doubt attended their progress. And in fact, the fnost irrational and 
 absurd opinions uniformly forced themselves into their minds, so 
 soon as they had emptied themselves of all biblical ideas. 
 
 Mr. Owen told us that we must have a separate religion for each 
 individual, because of the difference in human organization, not 
 seeing, that upon the same principles, he must have a different social 
 system for each individual, and that no two sceptics who had ever 
 written, agreed upon any one system of doubting. Even Mr. Owen 
 himself, has made a new system, or at least has new modified sev¬ 
 eral old ones, to please himself. Thus we have seen the intellec¬ 
 tual aberrations, and the moral tendencies of all the systems of 
 doubting. As I presume the new sects in Christendom, will, by 
 their rapid increase and geometrical progression, soon fritter them¬ 
 selves down to nothing; in other terms, the multiplication of isms, 
 will make them all of none effect, and teach all Christians the ne¬ 
 cessity of making facts , and not opinions, the basis of all church 
 union; so the impossibility of any two sceptics projecting any thing 
 like a system in which they can agree, has made it a forlorn hope 
 for sceptics ever to rise higher than to a system of doubting. 
 
 After carrying the war into the enemies country and exploring 
 the weakness of his fortresses, and the poverty of his resources, our 
 next object was to erect an impassable wall between his dominions 
 and ours, by showing, philosophically , that man could never have 
 invented any religion, not even the most rude; that all these were 
 mere corruptions , not inventions of the ancient nations. That in 
 truth, the most barbarous superstitions upon the earth, have in them 
 supernatural ideas , which no mere rla.an ever could have originated. 
 In one sentence, I think, we may say, it was proved, that it is 
 as far beyond our intellectual powers to originate a religion of any 
 sort, as it is beyond our physical powers to create out of nothing a 
 stone, or a tree. Our third item, or distinct chapter of arguments, 
 was the establishment of the Divine Legation of Moses, and the 
 certain Divine origin of the Jews religion, proved by all the criteria 
 of Leslie which establish the truth of ancient facts, from the sym¬ 
 bols of that religion, and the archives of all the ancient nations of 
 the world. Our Fourth chapter contained the historic evidences of 
 the Christian religion; our fifth the prophetic annunciations of both 
 testaments; the sixth the genius and tendency of the Christian 
 religion; and the seventh the social system. These were the great 
 chapters of this discussion; though much incommoded, disturbed, 
 arid broken in upon, by the obliquity of Mr. Owen’s course. Still, 
 I hatter myself, when the whole is comprized together in one volume 
 it will prove at least that no Christian has any reason to blush, or 
 be ashamed of the foundation of his hope, or of his religion. Nay, 
 more; that the Christian religion is most certainly the institution of 
 him who built the universe, and gave to man his dominion over the 
 animal, the vegetable, and mineral kingdoms. That it is as clearly 
 
 m. ii* 
 
 17 
 
 
I OS DEBATE, 
 
 the work of an infinite understanding as the sun is the work of an 
 almighty hand. 
 
 Before closing this my last address to you, my respected auditors, 
 I beg leave to read you two extracts from my Christian Baptist, 
 Vol. 5. page 257. These remarks though written a year ago, seem 
 to me every way suited to the present occasion. The first is titled 
 the Triumphs of Scepticism . The second the Triumphs of Christi¬ 
 anity. 
 
 THE TRIUMPHS OF SCEPTICISM. 
 
 When scepticism triumphs in any heart, the hope of immortality is 
 banished. It crowns the tyrant Death forever on his throne, and 
 seals the conquests of the grave over the whole human race. It 
 wraps the tomb in eternal darkness, and suffers not one particle of 
 the remains of the great, the wise, and the good of all ages, to see 
 the light of eternity; but consigns, by an irreversible doom, all that 
 was admired, loved, and revered in man, to perpetual annihilation. It 
 identifies human existence with the vilest reptile, and levels man to 
 the grade of the meanest weed, whose utility is yet undiscovered, 
 Man’s origin and his destiny are to its ken alike fortuitous, unimpor¬ 
 tant, and uninteresting. Having robbed him of every thing which 
 could make him dear to himself and proud of his existence, it murders 
 all his hopes of future being and future bliss. It cuts the cable and 
 casts away the golden anchor; it sets man adrift on the mighty, un¬ 
 fathomable, and unexplored ocean of uncertainty, to become the sport 
 of the wind and waves of animal passion and appetite; until, at last, 
 in some tremendous gust, “he sinks to everlasting ruin.” Say, then, 
 proud reasoner, of what utility is your philosophy ? What your boast? 
 
 You boast that vou have made man ignorant of his origin and a 
 stranger to himself. You boast that you have deprived him of any 
 real superiority over the bee, the bat, or the beaver; that you have 
 divested him of the highest inducements to a virtuous life by taking 
 away the knowledge of God and the hope of heaven. You boast 
 that you have made Death triumphant, not only over the body, but 
 the intellectual dignity of man: and that you have buried bis soul 
 and body in the grave of an eternal sleep, never to see the light of 
 life again! O Scepticism! is this thy philosophy—is this thy boasted 
 victory over the Bible! And for this extinguishment of light and 
 life eternal, what dost thou teach and what bestow! Thou teachest 
 ns to live according to our appetites, and dost promise us that in thy 
 Millennium man shall live in a Paradise of colonies, almost as indus 
 trious, as independent, and as social as the bees. Well then dost 
 thou preach with zeal, and exert thy energies; for thy heaven is 
 worthy of thy efforts, and the purity^ of thy life is just adapted to the 
 high hopes of eternal annihilation! 
 
 THE TRIUMPHS OF CIIRISTl’ANITY. 
 
 A true believer and practitioner of the Christian religion, is com¬ 
 pletely and perfectly divested of a guilty conscience, and the conse¬ 
 quent, fear of death. The very end ami intention of God’s being 
 manifest in the flesh, in the person of Jesus our Saviour, was to do- 
 
DEBATE, 
 
 190 
 
 Iiv r er them, “who, through fear of death, were all their lifetime subject 
 to slavery,” Jesus lias done this. He has abolished death, and brought 
 life and immortality*to light. He has given strength to his disciples 
 to vanquish death, and make them triumph over the grave; so that a 
 living ora dying Christian can with truth say, “O Death, where now 
 thy sting! 6 Grave, where now thy victory!” He conquered both, 
 and by faith in him we conquer both. This is the greatest victory 
 e ver was obtained. To see a Christian conquer him who had for ages 
 conquered all, is the sublimest scene ever witnessed by human eyes. 
 And this may be seen as often as we see a true Christian die. I know 
 that a perverted system of Christianity inspires its votaries with the 
 fear of death, because it makes doubts and fears Christian virtues. 
 But this religion is not of God. His Son died that we might not fear 
 to die; and he went down to the grave to show us the path up to life 
 again, and thus to make us victorious over the king of tyrants, and 
 fhe tyrant over kings. They understand not his religion, who are 
 "not triumphant over those guilty fears. The guilty only can fear, 
 and the guilty are not acquainted with the character, mission, and 
 achievements of Jesus our Life. No one taught of God can fear 
 these horrors of the wicked. Jesus Christ made no covenant with 
 Death; he signed no articles of capitulation with the horrible de¬ 
 stroyer. He took his armor away; he bound him in an invincible 
 chain, and taught him only to open the door of immortality to all his 
 friends. 
 
 A Christian, then, must triumph and always rejoice. Our gloomy 
 systems say, Rejoice not always, but afflict your souls: whereas the 
 Apostles say, Rejoice in the Lord always; and again we say, Rejoice, 
 The gospel as defined by the angels of God, is, glad tidings of 
 great joy; and who can believe glad tidings of great joy, and 
 not rejoice? Deists, Atheists, and the whole host of Sceptics may 
 doubt, for this is their whole system; the wicked, the guilty, and the 
 vile may fear, for this is the natural issue of their lives; but how a 
 a Christian, knowing the Lord, believing the promises, and confiding 
 in the achievements of the Saviour, can doubt or fear as respects 
 death or the grave, is inconceivable* Thanks be to God who gives 
 us the victory! 
 
 Some persons may doubt whether they are Christians; and some 
 may fear the pain of dying as they would the toothache, or a dislo¬ 
 cated joint; but that a Christian should fear either death or the grave, 
 is out of character altogether. For this is the very drift, scope, and 
 end of his religion. They who are under the influence of such fears 
 and doubts, have much reason to fear and doubt whether ever they 
 have known or believed the truth, the gospel of salvation. But a 
 Christian in fact, or one who deserves the name, is made to rejoice 
 and triumph in the prospects of death and the grave. And wh\ ? 
 Because his Lord has gone before him—because his rest, his home, 
 his eternal friends and associates, his heaven, his God, all his joys are 
 beyond the grave. Not to know this, is to be ignorant of the favor of 
 God; not to believe this, is to doubt the philanthropy of God; not to 
 
300 
 
 DEBATE. 
 
 rejoice in this, is to reject the gospel, and to judge ourselves unworthy 
 of eternal life. But the Christian religion is not to be reproached 
 because of the ignorance or unbelief of those who profess it. All 
 rivers do not more naturally run down the declivities and wind their 
 courses to the ocean, than the Christian religion leads its followers to 
 the sure, and certain, and triumphant hopes of immortality. 
 
 Before we dismiss this assembly I beg leave to express my sensi¬ 
 bility, my admiration of the marked and courteous attention which 
 has been paid by this community to this discussion. I must again 
 repeat that I have never seen any assembly convened upon any 
 occasion which has all through exhibited the same good order, the 
 same complaisant behaviour, and the same unremitted attention. 
 I feel indebted to, and will ever feel a high respect for, the citizens of 
 this city, for the favorable circumstances which they have created 
 for this debate, and especially to the gentlemen who have so politely 
 and so patiently presided over this meeting. 
 
 But 1 should be wanting to you, my friends, and the cause 
 which I plead, if I should dismiss you without making to you a very 
 important proposition. You know that this discussion is matter for 
 the press. You know that every encomium which has been pro¬ 
 nounced upon your exemplary behaviour will go with the Report of 
 this discussion. You will remember, too, that many indignities have 
 been offered to your faith, to your religion, and that these reproaches 
 and indignities have been only heard with pity and not marked with 
 the least resentment on your part. Now I must tell you that a prob¬ 
 lem will arise in the minds of those living five hundred or a thousand 
 miles distant who may read this discussion, whether it was owing to 
 a perfect apathy or indifference on your part , as to any interest you 
 felt in the Christian religion , that you bore all these insults without 
 seeming to hear them. In fine, the question will be, whether it was 
 owing to the stoical indifference of fatalism, to the prevalence of 
 in-fidelity; or , to the meekness and forbearance vjhich Christianity 
 teaches , that you bore all these indignities without a single expres¬ 
 sion of disgust. Now I desire no more than that this good and 
 Christian like deportment may be credited to the proper account.— 
 If it be owing to your concurrence in sentiment with Mr. Owen, let 
 scepticism have the honor of it. But if owing to your belief in, or 
 regard for the Christian religion, let the Christian religion have the 
 honor of it. These things premised, my proposition is that all the 
 persons in this assembly who believe in the Christian religion or who 
 feel so much interest in it, as to wish to see it pervade the world, will 
 please to signify it by standing up. [An almost universal rising up.] 
 
 Here Mr. Campbell says, you will have the goodness to be seated. 
 
 Now I would further propose, that all persons doubtful of the 
 truth of the Christian religion, or who do not believe it, and who arc 
 not friendly to its spread and prevalence over the world, will please 
 signify it by rising up. [three arise .] 
 
DEBATE. 
 
 201 
 
 Mr. Owen rise£. 
 
 Gentlemen moderators—It has just occurred to me that I had 
 forgotten to tender my thanks to you for your presence and superin¬ 
 tendence on this occasion, which I now beg leave to do. And I may 
 add, I am much plaased with Mr. Campbell’s little manoevre of the 
 test, because I discover it pleases him and his friends. Truth 
 requires no such support. [Candles called for.] 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises. 
 
 While we are waiting for light, I will move that the thanks of this 
 whole assembly be presented to the Board of Moderators, and put 
 upon record .—JSemine contradicente. 
 
 Adjournement sine die. 
 
 CHARLES HOWARD SYMMES. 
 
 Reporter . 
 

REVIEW OF MR. OWEN’S BOOK. 
 
 BEFORE publishing the appendix stipulated in our conditions, I 
 am, from the circumstances which Mr. Owen has thrown around me, 
 obliged to notice a work vaguely denominated on the outside, “ Owen's 
 View of Public Discussion but in the inside, “Robert Owen’s Open¬ 
 ing Speech and his Reply to the Rev. Alexander Campbell in the recent 
 Public Discussion in Cincinatti , to prove that all Religions in the 
 world are erroneous , fycP together with matters and things pertain¬ 
 ing to Mr. Owen’s tour to Mexico—“ sold by every book-seller in 
 Europe and America .” 
 
 Never was there depicted in the Face of any sinner the ruling 
 passion of his soul with more incontestible plainness, than is the ruling 
 spirit of this little book in its title page. It shows that the author is 
 not unacquainted with the existing deceptions practised in old society, 
 nor with those ingenious arts of circumvention which are the crying 
 sins of the commercial and trading world. ’Tis only one I have 
 stolen, says the little culprit $,t school, when detected in the first 
 buddings of his roguish passion, ’tis only one , sir—yes, but two or 
 three more are found in his pocket. So the title says, “Robert Owen’s 
 opening speech but before we have got half through the book we 
 come to “the Author’s concluding speech and before we have read to 
 the end of this concluding speech , we find four speeches, one spoken 
 on Monday evening, one occupying the forenoon of Tuesday, and 
 one or two in the afternoon: then we come to one called the “ conclu 
 ding address .” So while Mr. Owen’s book only promises to give the 
 opening speech , he gives that and all the speches he made on the last 
 two days of the debate. It also promises in the title a “Reply to the 
 Rev. Alexander Campbell,” in addition to the opening speech. But 
 never a reply is found in it, unless we call his concluding speeches 
 his reply. Instead of a reply to my arguments, the author gives, 
 after his “opening speech,” what he had written upon his “twelve 
 divine laws” before he arrived at Cincinnati; so that this book of the 
 opening speech contains Mr. Owen’s social system, and the cream of 
 all the speeches made during the discussion. A modest, blushing 
 title page truly! Bit why this faltering and timidity apparent in the 
 title? The secret is here: Mr. Owen sold all his speeches in selling 
 the right to publish the Debate; but, under the influence of the new 
 circumstances which surrounded him after the discussion closed, he 
 was, by that unalterable necessity which destroys all free agency, 
 all religion, morality, an d good faith, compelled a second time to sell 
 those very speeches which he had sold. Therefore, the title page, ex¬ 
 hibiting still some of the compunctions growing out of the old system 
 of society, says, “ His only one”—the opening speech. But, perhaps, 
 Mr. Owen thinks that, in a commercial world, it is all just and right to 
 soil an article first in the wholesale way, and then to sell it in retail,- 
 
204 
 
 REVIEW. 
 
 
 He first sells the web, and then cuts off a few coat patterns and sells 
 them in retail. I should not have grudged Mr. Owen one coat pattern 
 for himself if he had asked me for it. I know he felt his nakedness, 
 .and did not like to appear out of Cincinnati, until he had got a new 
 suit to obtain him respect among his disciples abroad. But, really, 
 
 1 demur at hi$ selling so many pieces off the same web for which I paid 
 so dear. 
 
 One of two conclusions we are compelled to adopt on reviewing 
 this “opening speech” book: either Mr. Owen intended to make it a 
 lucrative business; or he determined to save himself from what he then 
 knew, felt, and anticipated would be, the inevitable consequence of the 
 appearance of the Debate. That ^ was alarmed at the prospect of 
 the publication of our discussion, there cannot remain a doubt from 
 the contents of the book itself, as well as from many other circum 
 stances. A desire to discredit, or to disparage the report furnished by 
 Mr. Symms, is very apparent. It is true, indeed, he pretends not to 
 give any of my speeches or arguments; but he tells his readers that 
 I am about to give a “full history of the discussion” Now, as 1 
 observed to Mr. Owen after he presented me with a copy of his book 
 on his return from Cincinnati, the history of a battle and the battle 
 itself are two very different things; so the history of our debate and 
 the debate itself are just as different things. Why, then, said I, did 
 you call the report of Mr. Symms only a “ history of the discussion 
 when it is the discussion itself? Injustice to Mr. Owen, I must pub¬ 
 lish his reply: “By the word history ,” said he, “I mean the full ac¬ 
 count. I used the word history as it is used in England. I find many 
 words are not used in this country in the same acceptation which they 
 have in England.” So, then, the full history of a discussion and the 
 discussion itself are of the same import in England! 
 
 But again—“Independent,” says he, “of every other reason for the 
 emission in this book of the mere wordy part of the discussion, be¬ 
 tween the parties, it is believed that the facts herein stated, and the 
 deductions from them, and their application to practice, will render 
 all the speculations, on the subject of religion, nugatory.” In good 
 old English, this means that Mr. Owen’s opening speech hook gives all 
 his arguments except the wordy part of them; or he means the wordy 
 part is all mine. Even all his own speeches, except “the opening one” 
 are doomed to the character of “vox et prcetcrea nihil,” sound and no¬ 
 thing else, by Mr. Owen himself. Surely, then, this is a high enco¬ 
 mium on Mr. Owen’s book. Nothing but the clean wheat in it. In 
 mine the chaff and wheat combined! Now I cannot, in reason, con¬ 
 demn Mr. Owen for calling the majority of Ids speeches, the “ mere 
 wordy part or pronouncing any opinion of them which he pleases; 
 butT say it is not compatible with the Christian idea of justice to con¬ 
 demn without a hearing, or to prejudge for others, and to talk thus of 
 my speeches to disparage them before they appear. 
 
 But without being farther tedious, we must make great allowances . i 
 for Mr. Owen. He is almost the only rational man in the midst of an 
 insane world. Ileace says he, “The utmost ingenuity of the bureau 
 
REVIEW. 
 
 20a 
 
 mind, (of an insane world!) has been exerted, without success,for sev¬ 
 eral thousand years, to convince the reasonable part of mankind, of the 
 truth and value of religion.” No reasonable man can discover any 
 truth or value in religion!! 
 
 Such simpletons only as Ferguson, Euler, Pascal, Whiston, Adams, 
 Boyle, Bacon, Locke, Sir Isaac Newton, and Sir Humphrey Davy,* 
 among the philosophers; such simpletons only as Beattie, Rob- 
 ertson, Hawkesworth, Dr. Johnson, Steel, and Addison, among the 
 moralists; such simpletons only as Spencer, Waller, Cowley, Prior, 
 Gray, Thomson, Dr. Young, Milton, and Cowper, among the poets ; 
 such simpletons only as Arbuthnot, Cheyne, Brown, Boerhave, Prin¬ 
 gle, Hartley, Hervey, Haller, Mead, Fothergill, and Rush, among the 
 physicians; such simpletons only as Bentley, Henry, Pool, Owen of 
 Cambridge, Butler, Michaelis, Clark, Bonner, Campbell of Aberdeen, 
 Berkley, Sherlock, Scott, Cudworth, Doddridge, Lardner, Pearson, 
 Taylor, Usher, Watts, Macknighf, Moore, Mead, Vitringa, Luther, 
 Calvin, Melancthon; Zuinglius, Erasmus, Beza, Claude, Warburton, 
 Leslie, and Wesley, among the teachers of Christianity; such simple¬ 
 tons only as Sir John Barnum, Lord Harrington, Lord Cassel, Hyde, 
 Somers, Littleton, Barrington, King, Culler, Pultney, Soame Jenyns, 
 Charles Thompson, Sir John Mason, Gustav us Adolphus^ George 
 Washington, among statesmen; such simpletons only as Judge Hale, 
 Mel moth, Pratt, Hailes, Forbes, Jones, Blackstone, Lord Russel, Er- 
 skine, Seldon, and Grotius, among the counsellors and judges—I sa)’ 
 only such simpletons as these, and m} r riads of equal renown, of all 
 ages, are so unreasonable as to seejany truth or excellence in religion. 
 But such rational and moral men as Hobbes, Servin, V oltaire, Fran ¬ 
 cis Newport, Volney, Thomas Paine, Gibbon, Hume, Rousseau, Mira 
 baud, Chesterfield, Altamont, Emmerson, and my friend Robert Owen v 
 such distinguished rationalists as these have seen, and can see no truth 
 nor value in Religion. 
 
 Mr. Owen, if we could suppose him sincere and without guile, is 
 one of the most pliant and yielding of mankind, and all out of respect 
 for the feelings of an insane world. I owe him much for preferring, 
 m every instance, to gratify my feelings to his own. He yielded all the 
 preliminary arrangements to my wishes. Yes, indeed, because I 
 would insist that all public discussions required the disputants to speak 
 
 •Sir Humphrey Davy, lately deceased, gave the following testimony. He 
 was the greatest natural philosopher of this age:— 
 
 “I envy no quality of the mind or intellect in others; no genius, power, wit, 
 or fancy; but if l could choose what would be most delightful to me, 1 should 
 prefer a firm religious belief to every other blessing; for it makes life a discipline 
 of goodness—breathes new hopes when all earthly hopes vanish; and throws 
 over the decay, the destruction of existence, the most gorgeous of all light; 
 awakens life in death, and from corruption and decay calls up beauty and divin¬ 
 ity; makes an instrument of torture and of shame, the ladder of ascent to para¬ 
 dise; and far above all combinations of earthly hopes, calls up the most delight¬ 
 ful visions of palms and amaranths, the gardens of the blest, the security of ever¬ 
 lasting joys, where the sensualist and the sceptic only view gloom, decay, 
 annihilation, and despair!” 
 
 VOL. 11. 
 
 18 
 
206 
 
 REVIEW. 
 
 alternately in some reasonable periods, and not that one should speak 
 all and the other listen, or that one should read a written treatise for 
 two days, and the other reply to it in a speech of two days more, or 
 not at all, as he pleased—I say, because I would have it a debate, af 
 ter he had challenged the world for a debate, and would not consent 
 to Mr. Owen’s reading, without a reply, a written treatise of nearly 
 200 pages foolscap folio, until he should have worn out the patience 
 of the audience, I acted without reason; and he, out of condescen 
 sion to my weakness,“ yielded to my wishes .” just as a philosopher 
 would to a child. My wishes and Mr. Owen’s reason were, in this 
 case, only antipodes. But the insane world will have to decide who 
 acted most rationally in this case. But this complaisant yielding to 
 my wishes is told for the sake^of finding a pretext for the “Opening 
 speech” book—and for a new treatise on his Utopian projects in Mexi¬ 
 co; to call the attention of the public from the Cincinnati catastrophe; 
 to feed the hitherto deluded hopes of his rational free inquiring follow¬ 
 ers—This yielding to my wishes laid the foundation of Mr. Owen’s vi¬ 
 olating the obligations of a solemn engagement. I did not before know 
 that true politeness required a gentleman to violate the obligations of 
 justice and good faith. 
 
 But we shall here exhibit Mr. Owen’s reasons for this “Opening 
 speech” book—page 5. 
 
 “When Mr. Alexander Campbell and the author met, after their 
 arrival at Cincinnati, it became necessary to arrange the mode of 
 conducting the debate. 
 
 “The author proposed that, he should state the facts and argu¬ 
 ments in proof of the truth of the principles which he had undertaken 
 to establish ; that, after due time for consideration, Mr. Campbell 
 should answer this statement by agreeing or dissenting, according 
 to his conviction; and that the author should reply to Mr. Campbell’s 
 objections, if any were made. 
 
 “This was the regular and natural mode of proceeding; but Mr. 
 Campbell was not prepared for it, and said it was contrary to the plan 
 adopted in his former debates. He had been accustomed to speak 
 alternately, every thirty minutes, with his opponent, and he very 
 much wished to be allowed to pursue the same course in the present 
 case. 
 
 “The author, influenced by r the same principles which he advo¬ 
 cated in the debate, preferred the gratification of Mr. Campbell’s 
 feelings to his own, and acceeded to his wishes. 
 
 “He did so the more readily, because he felt confident of the truth 
 of the facts and deductions which he intended to make from them., 
 and equally so that Mr. Campbell had to defend popular notions, 
 founded solely in the errors of his education. 
 
 “But by yielding to Mr. Campbell’s wishes, the necessity, was 
 created for this publication, that the public might have a connected 
 view of the author’s reasons for rejecting all religions, as they are 
 now taught and practised by the world.” 
 
REVIEW. 
 
 207 
 
 -•This work contains no part of Mr. Alexander Campbell’s argu¬ 
 ments in opposition to the author’s statements, or in favor of the 
 Christian religion. 
 
 “These will be given at large in the work which Mr. Campbell is 
 editing, which will contain a full history of the discussion. After 
 the utmost ingenuity of the human mind has been exerted, without 
 success, for several thousand years, to convince the reasonable part 
 of mankind of the truth and value of religion, nothing new upon 
 the subject can be expected now, or at any subsequent period. It is 
 said, without success , for if it had been otherwise, the late public 
 discussion could not have taken place.” 
 
 “But independent of-every other reason for the omission in this 
 work of the mere wordy part of the discussion between the parties, 
 it is believed that the facts herein stated, with the deductions from 
 them, and their application to practice, will render all the specula¬ 
 tions on the subject of religion nugatory. 
 
 “The facts stated by the author relative to human nature, and 
 any religious speculations, cannot both be true. One must be in 
 error, for they are in direct opposition to each other. The facts 
 relative to human nature, are derived from the strongest of all evi¬ 
 dences—the immediate cvidcncees of our senses. All the religions of 
 the world are derived from the weakest of all evidences; the testimony 
 of ignorant and interested men , through the darkest and most bigoted 
 ages of the world. The former will, in due time, force their invalu¬ 
 able truths upon the human race, while the latter cannot be received 
 by any mind not previously made irrational upon the subject of 
 religion.” 
 
 This constitutes all I shall review of the “Opening speech” book, as 
 •every thing, until we come to Mr. Owen’s Appendix to the debate, is 
 already attended to in the regular course of the debate. 
 
 We have already expressed our views of Mr. Owen’s “ regular and 
 natural order of proceeding —Only, that we have not remarked, 
 how judicious it was in Mr. Owen, to allow me “due timef perhaps, 
 a week, for considering what he should have read in two days ; and 
 to think that the community had nothing else to do, than to come and 
 depart as we might have studied and written out answers for one 
 another! Insane world that we are, to think for ourselves at all! 
 How much better to let a few rational folks like Mr. Owen do all 
 the thinking, and we, the insane, mind our work. After deciding 
 “the regular and natural mode of proceeding,” my friend asserts 
 that “/ was not prepared for it .” This is Mr. Owen’s conclusion— 
 but where are his premises? Or is this an intuitive proposition? I 
 was prepared to speak alternately thirty minutes, but 1 was not pre¬ 
 pared to sit and hear Mr. Owen read for two days, and then to go 
 and study out, after due consideration , an answer for it!! I was 
 prepared for extemporaneous half hour replies, but not for sitting, 
 and hearing, then writing!! Wonderful logic! Yet, Mr. Owen, under 
 the advantage of his old fashioned materialism, may explain this by 
 representing me as a peculiar kind of machine , which gives out so 
 
REVIEW. 
 
 .308 
 
 many words hall hourly; and, to an instant, at the expiration of thirty 
 minutes, down falls the gate. So that I am not prepared for any 
 other kind of speaking but half hourly. Yet if Mr. Owen had trusted 
 more to his memory , and a little less to his fallacious reason , he would 
 have had his philosophy of me corrected by one fact; viz. that I 
 spoke twelve hours without any reply from Mr. Owen.—Just after 
 the time that his gate fell and his machinery got out of order. 
 
 But Mr. Owen acceeded to this peculiarity in my organization, 
 because he “felt confident of the truth of the facts and deductions 
 which he intended to make from them; and equally confident that I 
 had to defend popular notions, founded solely in the errors of my 
 education.” Profound logic! unanswerable argument! Mr. Owen’s 
 conscious confidence of his system, and his consciousness that I had 
 to defend popular notions , founded solely in the errors of my edu¬ 
 cation, influenced him to accede to any thing. I did not before know 
 that Mr. Owen viewed all the popular notions as founded on the 
 errors of my education. B.ut his consciousness of truth and error 
 is about as good an argument as he can offer for the one, or against 
 the other. 
 
 Mr. Owen was undoubtedly shaken in the late debate, notwith¬ 
 standing he may neither be conscious of it, nor would his vanity 
 permit him to acknowledge it. He never presumed to oppose the 
 Christianity of the New Testament, as I exhibited it in the discussion. 
 His objections and his system were built upon the presumption that 
 sectarian dogmas and practices constituted Christianity. At one 
 time Mr. Owen would not admit that there was any difficulty upon his 
 side of the question, but that all difficulty was on our side. After 
 the debate, he was willing to admit there were difficulties on both 
 sides. Before the debate, he w r as opposed to all religions, how¬ 
 ever taught. But nowyhe only pretends to oppose them u as they arc 
 now taught and practised in the world” In his cede of laws for the 
 government of his new societies he had no provision for religion, but 
 now he is willing to let them have any religion they please, and 
 only stipulates for toleration. These to me are good omens. And, 
 when Mr. Owen reads deliberately the preceding discussion, I am 
 not without hopes that it may rfiake deeper inroads upon his scepti- 
 scism: for, I discovered, in the recent discussion, that Mr. Owen is 
 a gentleman of such peculiar organization that his second 
 thought is better than his first, and his third is better than his 
 second;—that he needs reflection which I suppose his kindness 
 prompted him to extend so liberally to me, as to allow me two whole 
 days to listen and reflect. 
 
 But now I come to the words without success, which he has 
 italicised in the above reasons. All the efforts of all minds, ingeni¬ 
 ous and learned, for several thousand years directed to convince the 
 reasonable part of mankind of the truth and value of religion have 
 been without success. Yes, without success ; else the late discussion 
 could not have taken place. This is the most sapient logic: a perfect 
 sample, or standard measure, of the height and depth of Mr. Owen’s 
 
REVIEW. 
 
 209 
 
 mind. Yes; all the clothiers, cordwainers, house builders, bakers, 
 with all the mechanics that have ever lived, have labored in their 
 respective callings without success , else there would have been no 
 need now for new coats, new shoes, new houses, and fresh loaves, 
 <fcc. &.c. This would not pass for good logic in this insane world. 
 Yet it is a fair sample of the good logic in the rational world of these 
 wise philosophers. Mr. Owen does not take into view that every 
 age has produced a few rational men like himself, who supposed that 
 ali mankind had for thousands of years been fast asleep, in the em¬ 
 braces of ignorant and impotent priests, who like him have claimed 
 a patent right for reason, logic, and good sense. These few rationals 
 have looked upon the race of' mankind as mere enthusiastic block¬ 
 heads. Accordingly these wise and benevolent sages have set about 
 reforming mankind from the errors of religion, and aimed at giving 
 them a discharge from its fears and its hopes as alike unworthy 
 such high and exalted worms of the dust. But so completely have 
 they labored without svcccss that their opinions have never spread 
 over a whole farm much less over a province, island, or city, upon 
 the face of the earth. They cannot point to a single speck upon the 
 surface of land or sea and say, there have we succeeded in establish¬ 
 ing our irreligion, or our scepticism. Nay, indeed, so irrational is 
 their scheme, that no people on earth, the most rude or the most 
 accomplished, can be found prepared to adopt it. It shocks the 
 common sense of men, and it requires a degree of hardness and in¬ 
 sensibility of heart, to which few attain, to fit a man for denying the 
 existence of God and his moral government over mankind. A few 
 such characters like excrescences upon a tree, or tumors upon a 
 human body, may exist in Christian communities, and be as necessary 
 
 as shamble flies in a market house; but they could never exist in a 
 
 • «/ 
 
 community by themselves. Hence, with all the efforts of Mr. Owen, 
 and all the remains of the morals of the old society to help him, he 
 was unable to keep together the sceptics of New Harmony. The 
 sceptics themselves, who made it their asylum, and were master 
 builders in that city, have fled, a*d sought refuge in the midst of the 
 old cities of the world. 
 
 To say that Christianity has been plead without success is just as 
 far from fact, as to say that these United States have, without success , 
 attempted to form a government of their own. Christianity vanquish¬ 
 ed the superstitions of the Roman Empire, and has most unquestion¬ 
 ably subdued under its authority the most enlightened nations of the 
 earth; and, although they who have bowed to its authority and 
 acknowledged its divine origin, have corrupted it, and have not 
 yielded themselves wholly up to its guidance, yet still, their subjec¬ 
 tion to it is full proof of its paramount authority aud rationality. 
 Like captured cities, they have been compelled to submit to an 
 authority which they could not resist; and whether or not they like 
 the government of the conqueror, they must pay tribute and bow to 
 his supremacy. This is true of Christianity and of no other religion 
 in the world; because, in defiance of constant persecution and pro- 
 VOL. 11. 18* 
 
210 
 
 REVIEW. 
 
 scription, by its own evidences alone, it took possession of the throne 
 of the Cesars; and, without a sword or a lancet, it first conquered 
 the world. And now in our own country where there is nothing to 
 support it but its own paramount evidences and claims, how does it 
 swell the number of its subjects; and that, too, in defiance of the 
 treachery and misdeeds of many of its professed friends. Neither 
 internal feuds, neither the attacks of open enemies, nor the treason 
 and unfaithfulness of false friends, can impair its conquering power. 
 But were the intestine broils and animosities and bickerings to cease, 
 what would its progress be? Like an overflowing river it would 
 sweep from the earth every vestige of scepticism, and in a few 
 years revolutionise the whole human race. The sun rising to-morow 
 is not more certain to my mind than such an event. 
 
 But again—because a few individuals, who, without the knowledge 
 or consent of their cotemporaries, call themselves “rational and 
 ingenious,” wish to attract the attention of mankind by creating 
 doubts—because, I say, they oppose the Lord of Christians, and 
 boast, because they have shut their eyes, and closed their ears, that 
 thev are not conquered, that they have not bowed to the Governor of 
 the Universe—does it follow that Christianity has therefore been plead 
 without success? As rationally may we say, that, because there are 
 some republicans in England, and some monarchists in the United 
 States, the cause of republicanism has been plead without success 
 on this continent, and that of monarchy without success in the island 
 of Great Britain. 
 
 Every age has produced some black sheep , and some ring-streaked , 
 speckled , and spotted goats . So there have been some idealists , 
 like the Bishop of Clovne; some 'materialists, like Epicurus and Mr. 
 Owen; some deists , like Thomas Paine; and some profane wags , 
 like Voltaire, who laughed while they lived, and trembled when they 
 ?iied. But as well might the black sheep disown the white, or the 
 speckled goat the whole species, as these idealists, materialists, 
 visionaries, sceptics, and wits, claim reason as theirs, or arrogate 
 the name of pKilosophers to themselves. 
 
 Mr. Owen’s ^reasonable part of mankind,' 1 and his “without success,* 
 are expressions of equal truth, and of the same latitude of applica¬ 
 tion. If reason consists in making men mere worms, and in living 
 oopfarmably to that rank, I grant then are they the most reasonable 
 oart of mankind, who never think of their origin nor of their end; but 
 make themselves as much like the brutal creation as possible— 
 the slaves of appetite, of lust, of passion, or of instinct. All such, 
 if they can debase themselves thus, and eradicate from their bosom 
 every trace of a Divinity, every impression of a Creator, Ruler, or 
 Judge, may fancy themselves reasonable; but 1 must be so insane 
 as to think them mere deluded dreamers, talk as haughtily ns they 
 may. 
 
 But I come next to notice the concentrated light, logic, and reason, 
 of my friend Mr. Owen. His most puissant argument is, “His facts 
 relative .to human nature cannot but be true”—and, as they are op- 
 
REVIEW, 
 
 211 
 
 posed to Revelation, that cannot be true. This has been repeatedly 
 exploded, as we think, already; but Mr. Owen lays it down anew in 
 his reasons for this new book. Now, admitting for the sake of argu¬ 
 ment, that his twelve positions were all facts (which every philoso¬ 
 pher, grammarian, and logician upon earth knows they are not,) and 
 that they were all true; (but that they are not all true has been re¬ 
 peatedly shown:) now, I say, admit them all to be true facts, it yet 
 remains to show that they are, one and ail, contrary to the Christian 
 religionas taught in the New Testament. This Mr. Owen never has 
 yet attempted, save that he supposes the New Testament proceeds 
 upon the free-will principle , which, by the way, he never did show. 
 Now, as the free-will question is the only one at issue in the twelve, 
 and as that is not a question which can be decided by our five senses , 
 how comes Mr. Owen to say that these twelve facts are derived from 
 the strongest of all evidence—the immediate evidence of our senses2 
 If he now fails to prove this, he fails at the very foundation. Now I 
 appeal to the thinking world, sceptics and all, and ask, Who of you 
 gentlemen, will say, and attempt to prove, that, by our five senses we 
 know that our will has no power over our belief? And again, direct 
 me to any assertion or declaration in the New Testament which 
 asserts whether we are free or necessary agents. Unless both these 
 are exhibited, we must continue to admire the daring reason of the 
 philosopher who declaims without argument, and reasons without 
 premises. 
 
 His “facts*’ concerning human nature are not the half of the facts 
 concerning human nature. They have only to do w T ith man without a 
 spirit. Now, as Mr. Owen repeatedly acknowdedged, he does not 
 know wdiether man has a spirit or has not, how can he presume to 
 lay down any number of facts, and predicate upon them a theory of 
 man, and frame a code of laws for him! This always did, and yet 
 does appear, a most extravagant aberration both from reason and 
 philosophy. 
 
 ButasMr. Owen will have his views of human nature built entirely 
 upon u thc strongest of all evidence—the evidence of our sensesf so 
 he will have all the religions of the world, and,of course, Christianity, 
 derived from the weakest of all evidence—the testimony of men! To 
 degrade this testimony, he qualifies it the testimony of ignorant and 
 interested men , through the darkest and most bigoted ages of the 
 world. A more base and unfounded calumny never was printed! 
 There are three distinct assertions in this last sentence which never 
 can be proved:—i. It is not true that testimony is the weakest of all 
 evidences. It admits of many degrees; but is in its most perfect 
 character always capable of producing the highest certainty. Mil¬ 
 lions who never saw France, are just as certain that there is such 
 a country, as that they see or hear. I am as certain that there is a 
 city called Paris, as that there is a city called New York; though 
 the former I never visited, but have been in the latter. “The evidence 
 of testimony,” says one, “may arise to such a height as to be per- 
 
212 
 
 REVIEW. 
 
 fectly equivalent to sense or demonstration.” Testimony, I affirm, 
 is, in ten thousand instances, capable of producing a greater degree 
 of certainty than our reason, The testimony of one credible witness 
 will frequently discomfit a chain of syllogisms many yards long. 
 This may appear a vague way of talking, but it is a truth that testi¬ 
 mony is incomparably a much better or safer guide than reason, even 
 in the most ordinary employments of this life. Take the husbandman, 
 for example, and ask him whether he is certain, w r ith all his reasoq, 
 that such is a good plough, a good mode of agriculture, a good plan of 
 building, &c. and after reasoning upon all the premises, to his utmost 
 capacity, one credible witness, attesting that he has proved his con¬ 
 clusions to be fallacious, will upset all his logic, and produce more 
 certainty than all his reasonings. All men are so created that they 
 can be assured of many truths upon good testimony; but very few can 
 have the same degree of assurance in their best reasonings. Man¬ 
 kind, in general, are very imperfect reasoners—but all can believe 
 on good testimony. Faith is infinitely a safer guide than reason to 
 the great mass of mankind. Nothing is more common than to see all 
 theorists in agriculture, mechanic arts, and in the common business of 
 life, disappointed. So soon as men depart from tradition, they stand 
 upon unsafe ground. Hence the theorist in agriculture, or in any busi¬ 
 ness, nine times in every t&i, miscarries. And what is the theorist , 
 but the man guided by reason ? And what is the great mass of copyists, 
 but believers? And so it comes to pass, that, to the great aggregate of 
 the human family, faith is a much more certain guide than reason, 
 even in matters of daily labor. Few of the great reasoners have 
 made useful discoveries. What we call accident has thrown the most 
 useful inventions in the way of those who have not been reasoning 
 in pursuit of them. So distrustful are the best reasoners, even in the 
 common mechanic arts, that they confide doubtingly in all their con¬ 
 clusions until proved by experiment. Hence experiment is appealed 
 to by common consent, as the only infallible arbiter. Now, if, in the 
 common affairs of this life, faith is a better and surer guide than 
 reason, incomparably more to be relied on, where is the boast of 
 the sceptic and the triumphs of the philosopher? Often have I seen 
 the mechanic use his plummet his square, his straight edge, and con¬ 
 clude that all was just correct. But when he attempted to put his 
 work together, his tenants would not suit his mortices, nor did his 
 uprights stand perpendicular. Experiment alone corrected, tested, 
 and confirmed his reasonings. If, I say, in things pertaining to this 
 life, reason is so imperfect a guide, how can we claim so much for it 
 in reference; to the next! Those men who magnify reason are in 
 general the least to be trusted, and their decisions prove that reason 
 is very far from producing the same degree of certainty which com¬ 
 monly attends our faith in human testimony. I only conclude from 
 these general remarks, that, as testimony bestows upon us the largest 
 portion of our information, so, in general, it affords us the greatest 
 degree of certainty, and stands to us always in the place of experi¬ 
 ence, when experience is wanting. 
 
REVIEW, 
 
 213 
 
 How deplorably ignorant the human family would have been if left 
 to their reason as the only source of information in things natural 
 and supernatural, God has not left us without witness both among 
 philosophers and savages. Mr. Owen, with all his philosophy, cannot 
 explain one of the laws of nature, nor tell us whether there is any 
 spirit or spiritual system in the universe. He cannot, in truth, tell us 
 what man is, whence he came, nor whither he is destined. So com¬ 
 pletely blind is philosophy! The sight of such a man as Mr. Owen, 
 the knowledge of his theory, is sufficient to bring every Christian to 
 his knees, and to cause him to summon all his faculties to praise him 
 who has commanded light to arise and shine upon us. When I see a 
 man of his character and standing rise up to advocate reason and to 
 degrade testimony, my fancy presents before me an obstinate blind 
 man, who throws away his staff, and refuses the hand of a benevolent 
 friend. He says he can see, and appeals to those as blind as himself 
 in proof of it! 
 
 Reason can judge of testimony, and this is its province; and in 
 the absence of testimony and experience it is our sole guide. As 
 such we do not disparage it, but when it proudly invades the domin¬ 
 ions of testimony, and rejects its aids, we must strip it of its fancied 
 supremacy, and abase it by a recital of its miscarriages. Man is often 
 imposed on by false testimony, but more frequently and more fatally, 
 by false reasonings. For one lie that is credited, there are ten so¬ 
 phisms received or adopted; and the proportion between false logic 
 and false testimony is, at least, as ten to one—at least, so I judge; and 
 let any person keep an account of this sort per week, and if in the 
 business and bustle of life, he is not ten times mocked by false rea¬ 
 soning in himself, and by others, for once he is imposed on by false 
 testimony, I will agree to change the proportions. But I think that 
 lam under, rather than above, the ratio. 
 
 But some might ask, Is not the testimony of others as little to be 
 relied upon as the reasonings of the great mass of society, because 
 their testimony is often the result of their own reasonings ? This ob¬ 
 jection, in the form of a query, is based upon a mistake of the nature 
 of testimony, or of its legitimate jurisdiction. Testimony is not 
 the report of the conclusions and deductions of human reason, but the 
 recital of experience, a narration of things heard , seen , or felt. It has, 
 then, always the evidence of sense, or of consciousness, or of feeling, 
 as the grounds and basis of its assurance. The original witness says, 
 I saw, I heard , I think , J feel —not I reason , I conclude , I suppose , I con¬ 
 jecture, &c. Testimony, therefore, has to do with matters subject to 
 the evidences of sense and consciousness, which afford the greatest of 
 all certainty. I, therefore, I think, legitimately conclude, that next to 
 the evidence ol sense, to the aggregate of the human race, that of tes¬ 
 timony produces the greatest certainty. Mathematical evidence pro¬ 
 duces a certainty of another kind. It does not respect the subject 
 before us. Facts can be ascertained only three ways: 1. By the ev¬ 
 idence of sense; 2. By testimony; and 3. By reason. They stand 
 in the order of the certainty which they produce; and, indeed, it must 
 
214 
 
 REVIEW. 
 
 always be remembered that testimony of the first order* or of the high* 
 est. character, always produces certainty equal to the evidence of 
 sense, or even mathematical demonstration. I feel all the certainty 
 that there is a country called China, or a quarter of the globe called 
 Asia, which I do that I now write these remarks. So much with regard 
 to Mr. Owen’s first assertion. 
 
 His second, we call a downright calunmv: viz. That the testimony 
 on which Christians rely is the testimony of “ ignorant and interested 
 men .” Now I might destroy the reputation of the fairest character 
 diving, or blast the fame of the greatest man that ever died, if my as¬ 
 sertion that he was a knave, an idiot, or a debauchee, would be admit¬ 
 ted as proof. The reputation of Mr. Owen, himself, would stand upon 
 a very slender foundation, indeed, if any daring spirit might, by a 
 single assertion, establish him to be any thing or every thing his envi¬ 
 ous or malicious heart might insinuate. There is nothing more easy 
 than to assert, and nothing more unmanly than to calumniate the dead. 
 If some of the original witnesses were standing before Mr. Owen, they 
 
 would make him tremble as they did men more illustrious than he. 
 
 •/ 
 
 Greece and Rome will attest “ the ignorance ” of the Heralds of the 
 Cross. Shame on Epicurus and Zeno, if an ignorant babbler so de¬ 
 feated them! Shame on the philosophy and eloquence of Greece and 
 Rome, if ignorant and hireling witnesses put them to confusion! 
 Shame on the oracles, religion, and priests of the Pagan magistrates, if 
 a few ignoramuses put them all to silence! Shame on all the litera¬ 
 ry splendors of the Augustan age, if a set of such contemptible clowns, 
 interested as they were, in telling lies, robbed it of its glory, eclipsed 
 its splendor, and turned its light into darkness! Illiterate as they 
 were, most of them, in the learning of the world, they were far from 
 ignorant men; and as to being interested witnesses, in the usual ac¬ 
 ceptation of that term, a grosser libel never was penned; a more 
 unfounded accusation never saw the light of day. 
 
 This is the logic of our sage sceptical philosophers. ’Tis thus they 
 impose on the credulity of mankind. ’Tis thus they attract attention, 
 and on these grounds they claim the honor of being our instructers. 
 The preceding discussion shows what sort of witnesses they were 
 who attested the gospel facts; and now to reiterate this calumny when 
 Mr Owen dared not to impugn the character of one of them on the 
 stage, shows the reason why Christianity has been plead, u without 
 success , v in the presence of such judges, of such hearers, of such 
 reaonsers, who fear not to assert contrary to all evidence, and who 
 evince so perfect a destitution of that moral sense which alone can re¬ 
 strain the tongue of calumny, and close the lips of slander. To call 
 the apostles and martyrs of Jesus Christ, interested witnesses, in the 
 common acceptation of this term, is to make them the basest of all 
 men, who, in the name of God, assert the most injurious lies, and spend 
 theirlives in imposing on the credulity of mankind. To assert this, 
 without a single shadow of proof, without even the forms of demonstra¬ 
 tion, is, 1 hope, peculiar to only one class of the sceptics of the present • 
 day. 
 
REVIEW, 
 
 215 
 
 To oonsummate this climax of slander, we are, in the third place, 
 told that “this ignorant and interested testimony” originated in, and 
 came down through, “the darkest and most bigoted ages of the world. 
 That Mr. Owen has primary, if not exclusive, respect to the times 
 when the testimony was published, is to be presumed; because it 
 would give a latitude to the censure which would equally annul the 
 claims of every scrap of literature of ancient times. Every fragment 
 of Grecian and Roman history, eloquence, poetry, or miscellaneous 
 literature has come down to us through these “darkest and most 
 bigoted ages” of which Mr. Owen speaks. But as reasonably and as 
 credibly might Mr. Owen assert that men who could neither read nor 
 write were the authors of the Illiadof Homer, the JEneid of Virgil, or th.e 
 Orations of Cicero, as that either “ignorant and interested men” were 
 the authors of the Christian scriptures, or that Christianity was the 
 offspring of the “darkest and most bigoted ages.” Some thousand 
 years hence it may be said, that the age in which we live was a rude 
 and barbarous age, and that we who now live were incompetent judges- 
 of testimony—had no literature, were ignorant and bigoted witnesses 
 of the events, political and religious, of these times; and that no credit 
 is due the records of which we have been the authors, or the deposits. 
 Any thing may be said by those who have the use of their tongues; 
 and any thing may be written, even as incredible as that Mr. Owen’s 
 book is i( sold by every bookseller in Europe and America ,” although 
 he has not more than one for every score of them. Persons who thus 
 value the liberty of the press, are those who incur the censures of pos¬ 
 terity, and destroy the credibility of testimony among those reasoners 
 who deduce general conclusions from particular premises. Thus 
 some traducer of testimony may hereafter say, that all the writers of 
 the year 1829 are incredible; for one Robert Owen, Esq. the greatest 
 lover of truth then living, published 1000 books at a time when there 
 was more than 20,000 booksellers in Europe and America, and yet he 
 published on the title page of his book that it was “sold by all the 
 booksellers in Europe and America 1” Now, argues he, what credit 
 can be reposed in writers or speakers of an age in which the greatest 
 lover of truth and advocate of it thus writes. 
 
 So much for the reasons which induced Mr. Owen to write the open- 
 ing speech book . I now proceed to lay before my readers the Appem 
 dix which Mr. Owen furnished for this work., as he gave it in the 
 aforesaid work. 
 
MR. OWEN’S APPENDIX. 
 
 THE discussion between Mr. Campbell and myself having termi¬ 
 nated, and time for reflection having elapsed, it may be useful to 
 state to the public my impressions respecting its utility and conse¬ 
 quences. 
 
 It is the first public discussion the world has ever permitted, with 
 any degree of fairness, to take place between the orthodox faith of 
 any country and a well known, open, and decided opponent. The 
 credit of this first submission to truth and common sense is due to 
 the United States generally, and to the population of the city of Cin¬ 
 cinnati in particular. No audience could conduct themselves with 
 more order, decorum, and fairness than was exhibited on this occa¬ 
 sion. It is true, they were all taken by surprize at its termination, 
 and, in fact, deceived by Mr. Campbell’s manouvre, to express that 
 they were Christians, or not unfavorable to Christianity. It was to 
 be supposed, that no one present would like to express a contrary 
 opinion before such an audience, and particularly when it was well 
 known that the prosperity of the business or profession of most of 
 them depended upon not expressing a contrary opinion. With the 
 intelligent part of the audience, this movement, therefore, went for 
 nothing. It was irregular to call for it; and I am sure, after a little 
 reflection, Mr. Campbell became conscious of its inutility, as to any 
 opinion relative to the subject djscussed, and regretted that it was 
 resorted to for the purpose of creating a temporary effect on the pub¬ 
 lic mind. It was not even to think of any personal victory, but to 
 discover valuable truths, that 1 came to Cincinnati to hold a public 
 discussion. And, I trust, by that discussion truth may be elicited, 
 and mankind henefitted. But what impression has the discussion 
 made upon the audience, upon Mr. Campbell, and myself? It has, 
 I believe, induced many of the first to think upon religious subjects, 
 who, until then, had never been in a condition to think upon them 
 for themselves. Many were confirmed in their previous belief, and 
 many in their unbelief. Mr. A. Campbell will himself state, in the 
 publication which he is editing, what impressions have been made 
 upon his mind, as I shall now express those which have been made 
 upon mine. It is evident, however, that one happy effect has been 
 produced. All discovered, that by the constitution of human nature, 
 each individual is compelled to believe, and to feel in unison with 
 that belief, according to the strongest impressions that are made 
 upon his mind. Many, therefore, now feel much more charity for the 
 opinions of others, when honest!}" expressed, who are conscientiously 
 obliged to differ from them, than they could do before this debate 
 commenced. It was this feeling that induced Mr. Campbell and 
 myself to express our sentiments so openly, without reserve of each 
 other’s defects and errors, during the discussion; and yet that left, 
 us, at its termination, bettor friends, because more known to each! 
 
APPKTvHIX, 
 
 Ollier, than at ns commencement. I trust tills feeling, from this 
 knowledge, will spread wider and wider, from individual to individu¬ 
 al, from sect to sect, from Christian to Mahometan, from these to 
 the Jews and Hindoos, and to all tribes and people, until all unchari¬ 
 tableness and unkind feelings among men, seeing that they are 
 necessarily compelled to feci and to think as they do, shall be known 
 no more: and that these evil circumstances shall be gradually replaced 
 by that universal charity, and kindness, and union, and desire to 
 promote each other’s happiness, which are sure to be produced in 
 practice, as soon as the fundamental laws of human nature shall be ' 
 sufficiently developed to be understood in their full extent by the pop¬ 
 ulation of the world. If the discussion shall be found to hasten the 
 period of this happy change in men’s minds, and in their outward 
 circumstances, it will accomplish an essential part of the object which 
 ] had previously anticipated. 
 
 But to its effect upon my mind. After listening to Mr. Campbell 
 with a sincere desire to be convinced of error in my views of human 
 nature, if there were error in them, 1 felt, at the termination of the 
 disccussion, more confirmed in all my former sentiments—if it were, 
 possible further conviction could be added to what before appeared to 
 me self-evident truths—than when the debate commenced. Mr. CM 
 learned defence of the Christian scheme, after nearly a year’s appli¬ 
 cation to prepare himself for it, had the effect upon my mind, to 
 convince me that it had only the common -foundation of all other 
 religions to retst upon; and that its mysteries and miracles were of a 
 more inferior invention than many others which Christians., from 
 their infancy, were taught to contemn and hold in derision. Possi¬ 
 bly a similar result, relative to my opinions., was produced on Mr,' 
 Campbell’s mind, 
 
 A natural and most important question thence arises. IIow is it, 
 that these conflicting impressions have been made upon two minds, 
 both conscientiously desirous of discovering the truth ? 
 
 Being deeply impressed with the belief that an investigation of 
 this question, to its source, is one, at this peculiar crisis in the prog¬ 
 ress of knowledge, of more practical utility and importance to man- 
 kind, than perhaps any other that is now. before the public, I will 
 endeavor to pursue it to some satisfactory conclusion. 
 
 Bv comparing Mr. Campbell’s ideas with mine, as they rapidly 
 flowed from him, I perceived there was no connecting point between 
 cur minds. We were proceeding, as it were, in parallel lines which 
 could never meet. His associations of ideas were altogether differ¬ 
 ent from those in my mind. His associations had been formed upon 
 one base; mine upon another. There was, therefore, no chance of. 
 one convincing the other, until one of these associations could be 
 broken up, by its foundation being proved to be a fallacy. Until this 
 could be done, ws saw religion, and every thing connected with if, 
 through mediums in our mind so essentially different, that it. might 
 l e said, that what appeared to one white, produced a conviction on 
 the.other, that it was any other color, sometimes even black. Iks* 
 YOLc 1U 19 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 $18 
 
 covering early in the debate, that this was the true state of our 
 minds, and the real cause of the different convictions with which we 
 were both impressed,—I perceived it would be a loss of time, and 
 entirely useless, to discuss any minor points, while the very founda¬ 
 tion of the association of our ideas remained unexamined and 
 untouched. I therefore uniformly declined all Mr. Campbell’s meta¬ 
 physical questions, which I saw had no real bearing on the important 
 subjects before us; and wished to bring him to discuss first or fun¬ 
 damental principles, that we might from these proceed, step by step, 
 to some certain and beneficial conclusions. 
 
 Mr. Campbell, however, avoided this last mentioned proceeding, 
 as tenaciously as I did the former ; and, therefore, much less satisfac¬ 
 tion was given to many who attended the meeting, than they had 
 anticipated. Mr. Campbell and I must now endeavor, by our cool 
 and deliberate reflections, to remove these difficulties, which also 
 exist in the minds of millions, for the benefit of those who may read 
 the reports of this discussion, and of the public, who may hear these 
 principles canvassed in conversation, or read them in other publiea- 
 lions. To me, it early appeared by Mr. CampbelPs feelings, lan¬ 
 guage, and manner, that his character had been formed lor him. 
 under all the influences derived from the notions of man’s entire free 
 agency, which had been made upon his original organization from 
 infancy ; while I knew mine had been formed tor me by a conviction 
 arising from facts, and deductions from them, that those notions could 
 not be true, and that the feelings, thoughts, and conduct, were form¬ 
 ed to be as they are, by circumstances not under my control. And 
 . that it would be in vain for me to discuss with Mr. Campbell the 
 subjects before us, under the expectation of producing a conviction 
 on qne side or the other, until it shall be first decided whether the 
 character of man is formed by himself according to the notions 
 taught by the doctrines of free will, or that it, is formed for him by the 
 cause or causes, whatever they may be, which, without his knowledge, 
 produces his organization at birth, by the persons who surround him 
 from birth, and by the other circumstances in which he is placed. 
 And this view of the subject brings us, at once, to the most important 
 consideration that can engage the human mind. 
 
 Is man, as first impressions lead all to conclude, a free agent, and 
 accountable to some superior intelligence for his thoughts, feelings 
 and conduct? or are these inevitably formed For him by circumstan¬ 
 ces over which he has no control? This is the real question of 
 difference between Mr. Campell, and all other religionists, and 
 myself. It is the question, which the condition of mankind and 
 the well being of society require, at this juucture, to be set at rest for 
 ever, that man may iplopt a fixed and unchanging course. For 
 m practice, ignorance, or knowdedge—poverty or abundance —the 
 malignant passions, with disunion and all manner of strife and con¬ 
 tention as heretofore, or charity, union and peace—or perpetual 
 hopeless, but changing misery, or permanent happiness^ everlastingly 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 2W 
 
 increasing and improving—depend upon its right decision. It is 
 no metaphysical question. It is the most important practical ques¬ 
 tion, that can be presented, now or at any future period, for human 
 consideration. 
 
 And, my friends, if new circumstances can now be created or 
 combined, to induce the leading minds in the different countries 
 of the world to investigate this question, its intricacies, great as they 
 are, may be unravelled; its difficulties, formidable as they appear, 
 ,may be overcome; and the human mind may be unchained, freed 
 from its thraldom, and set at liberty, to acquire, without one fear 
 for futurity, ail knowledge, and enjoy all happiness attainable upon 
 this globe. 
 
 To the threshhold of this subject we have approached through 
 the late public discussion in this city. Let us now try to enter into 
 the sanctuary, and wrest victory from the ignorance, superstition 
 &nd bigotry of all the ages which are past. 
 
 It is victory the most worthy to contest to the utmost stretch of 
 the human faculties, that man has ever yet contended for. 
 
 Before we commence this encounter, it will be well to remove 
 one obstacle, without the removal of which, the parties cannot enter 
 fairly upon the subject. It is the almost universal impression, that 
 the doctrines of free will are favorable—-nay, absolutely necessary 
 to virtue and to happiness; while those who teach that the charac¬ 
 ter is formed for each individual, as necessarily lead to vice and to 
 misery. 
 
 These impressions show to what extent man is formed by the in¬ 
 fluence of external circumstances, producing early impressions before 
 they can be examined by reason, and corrected by experience. 
 
 For as we shall proceed in our investigations upon this subject, it 
 will be discovered, that ignorance, vice and misery, and free will 
 notions, are inseparably Connected: ignorance, the absence of know¬ 
 ledge, always produces the notions of free agency in man. The 
 necessary consequence of the irrationalizing doctrines of free agency’ 
 is, to generate malignant passions, disunion, contention, strife, and 
 all kinds of vice and misery,—in fact, to produce what may justly bs 
 termed “hell upon earth.” 
 
 While the knowledge derived through a close and clear train cf 
 reasoning, that the character of man is formed for him, will so en¬ 
 lighten the understanding, that the malignant feelings wilbnot germi¬ 
 nate-—the inferior pasvssions will have no pabulum to feed them; anger 
 and irritation will be insane movements; contention and strife will 
 appear as they are, to be folly; and war, too inhuman to be thought 
 ot without horror. And, in consequence of acquiring this knowledge 
 of ourselves, all motives to vice will cease; while in their place will 
 spring up, ol necessity, all the opposite virtues. It is true, faith and 
 belief in any notions contrary to nature, will have no place in the 
 human mind; for they will be detected to be vices, and vices, too, of 
 the most lamentable description. These are conclusions which fol¬ 
 low from an impartial investigation into the necessary practical re- 
 
0'hj 
 
 /V +*\J 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 salts of those two opposite systems for the foundation of the human 
 mind. 
 
 It becomes, therefore, unspeakably more to be desired, that it 
 should be proved that the character of man is formed for him, by 
 other powers than his own, than that it should appear that his charac¬ 
 ter is formed by himself. It is still more important, when we reflect 
 how inferior the character of all men has yet been formed' under 
 the latter notion. There is not, at this moment, a more grievous or 
 degrading error in the human mind, than that which leads it to sup¬ 
 pose that the notions of free agency in man are necessary to virtue 
 and happiness. For while this impression continues, no effort will 
 be evade to detect its fallacy. So far from this error being favorable 
 to virtue, it is itself a most powerful chain to keep humanity in 
 bondage to evil of every description, and to induce it to cling to that 
 chain as its greatest good. It prevents man from seeing any thing 
 i:i human nature, or in human actions, except through a medium 
 w hich falsifies whatever lie attempts to examine. It renders him, 
 from birth to death, a moral coward,—so weak in intellect, that he 
 dares not examine himself, or investigate what manner of feeing he 
 has been formed to be. It makes him much more base and irrational 
 than the brutes, by compelling him to become ashamed of his nature, 
 which, but for this very error, would be discovered to possess the 
 germ of every conceivable excellence. It makas him, through life, 
 the most inconsistent of all the animal creation. He follows not the 
 wise impulses of his nature, which would lead to excellence in con¬ 
 duct and to high enjoyment ; but he is perpetually occupied with 
 whims and fancies, which, having no foundation in nature, keep him 
 a wild, fantastic, visionary enthusiast, or a continued self tormentor.' 
 It contradicts the notion that he is now, or that he ever has been a 
 reasonable creature. He knows not what reason is. He looks 
 around him, out of his own circle of errors, and discovers, that 
 from one extremity of the earth to the other, all nations, and tribes, 
 and people, are acting the part of fools or madmen; but he knows 
 not, that the cause of this conduct is the error within himself and 
 ■all of his race. Man is thus deceived to his degradation and misery, 
 and he dares not probe the evil to its source. 
 
 He is now precisely under the same kind of moral delusion, that 
 he was of physical, previous to the discoveries of Copernicus and 
 Galileo. His senses, from the beginning of his knowledge, im.- 
 pre^sed him with the belief that the sun moved round the earth-. 
 Religion taught the same error. When facts were investigated, and 
 accurate deductions were made from those facts, they proved that the 
 sun was stationary. There w'as, therefore, an inconsistency between 
 the uninvestigated impressions from the senses, and the conclusions, 
 to which those facts and deductions led the inquiring mind. Where 
 was the error?—in the uninvestigated belief that the sun moved round 
 the earth, or in facts which wait for examination, and remain the 
 same yesterday, to-day, and for ever? But religion had taught the 
 physic?.! error through many previous ages, and religion is infallible: 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
 221 
 
 therefore, facts, and nature, and reason, however consistent these 
 may be, and however beneficial the practical results which they 
 disclose may be, must all yield to the control of this engine for 
 destroying the superior faculties of human nature; and the discoverers 
 must retract their newly acquired knowledge, or be sacrificed at the 
 shrine of religion. 
 
 So in this our day. The uninvestigated notions induce men, 
 through early impressions, to believe that they possess the power to 
 think, to feel, and to act according to their will; and, therefore, that 
 these powers originate with their will, and they are, in consequence, 
 responsible for their degree of inferiority and superiority, have merit 
 or demerit, deserve praise or blame, and reward or punishment here 
 ^ and hereafter, as these qualities of their nature may be estimated by 
 themselves and others. The religion of this day, and of past ages, 
 has taught this doctrine. It forms the foundation of the whole su¬ 
 perstructure of all the religions that have ever existed, and of all the 
 divisions and subdivisions of it which are at this day spread over the 
 earth. And although facts innumerable, and all the deductions which 
 the most accurate reasoning can draw from those facts, and the whole 
 process of human life, when traced step by step to its source, prove 
 that those first impressions respecting thought, feeling and conduct, 
 which give the appearance of free will to man, are as fallacious as 
 his. first impressions relative to the motion of the sun; yet, as religion 
 is believed to be as infallible today as it has always been in the esti¬ 
 mation of its devotees, the door of the most valuable knowledge is to 
 be closed for ever against man’s investigation. He must, solely to 
 retain all the irrational mysteries, miracles, and dogmas generated by 
 the most ignorant and distorted imaginations, be kept the ignorant, 
 base, irrational, weak, vicious, inconsistent, and miserable animal 
 which these deceptive impressions have ever formed him to be, and 
 which, until the acquisition of real knowledge derived from facts and 
 experience, shall prevail over these fallacies of the mind, he must ever 
 continue to be, to the utter destitution of reason and common sense. 
 
 But, say the supporters of these mental delusions, do we not feel 
 A. that we have a will, free to think, to feel, and to act as we like? not 
 ^ attending to the facts which, independent of their will, compel them 
 to think and feel, and consequently to act, by certain laws which 
 create the will itself, and force it to the decision it makes, and to the 
 actions which are consequent upon its determination. 
 
 So the supporters of the physical delusions of old said, “Bo we not 
 in the morning see the sun rising in the East, at mid-day in the- 
 zenith, and in the evening set in the West? Will you cunning men 
 and philosophers persuade us out of our senses? Cannot we see and 
 understand these things as well as you ? We see and feel, and there¬ 
 fore know, that the earth moves not, and that the sun ever performs 
 its regular task, to give us by its daily motions the change from day to 
 • night, and to give us light and heat. Do not, then, attempt to deceive 
 U3 by your pretensions to superior knowledge, and endeavor to make 
 •as think, contrary to the palpable evidence of our senses, that all our 
 
 VOL. 
 
 1 T 
 
 19 * 
 
222 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 forefathers were mistaken, and that our religion has taught us errors 
 instead of truths. No, you vile atheists! you want to rob us of all 
 our earthly consolations, and to lessen our belief in the infallibility 
 of our holy religion and its sacred ministers. Tempt us no more by 
 specious reasons about the great practical benefits of real knowledge 
 derived from fixed laws of nature: we know nothing about them. 
 And if you continue to attempt to enlighten us upon these subjects, 
 directly opposed to our senses and our holy religion and its divine 
 ministers, we will punish you by imprisonment and death. Retract 
 all you have said, or suffer the consequences of your scepticism and 
 blasphemous doctrines.'” And Galileo, to save his life, was obliged to 
 retract those truths upon which alone the glorious science of astronomy 
 is known to men. 
 
 But what is this science, grand, magnificent, noble, and useful as 
 it is, compared to the practical results to be. obtained from an accu¬ 
 rate knowledge of the science of the formation of the future chu- 
 racter of the human race? The former has given man an insight 
 into the movements of the planets within the sphere of the sun’s 
 attraction; it lias enabled him to calculate times and seasons, and 
 thereby to obtain much useful practical knowledge; and it has given a 
 certain portion of eternal happiness to his race, which can be experi¬ 
 enced only when, by an accurate knowledge of some new facts, the 
 human capacity has been expanded to encompass another combina¬ 
 tion, complete in itself, of extended causes and effects, which show 
 forth the unchanging consistency in all the works of nature, and 
 demonstrate her laws to be everlasting. 
 
 Great, however as this discovery has proved to man, it has not been 
 competent to disturb his general impressions relative to his long 
 established notions of his own free will and conduct, and all the 
 demoralizing consequences attendant upon that belief. It has not 
 enabled him to perceive this hourly increasing scourge of his race. 
 It has not given him sufficient vigor of understanding, and strength 
 of moral courage, to probe the true cause of human evil to its 
 source. But a knowledge of that science which shall direct most un¬ 
 erringly to form the character of his progeny to attain all excellence, 
 physical, mental, and moral, will effect all these things, and much 
 more. It will secure an unchanging and untiring progress ip the 
 most valuable knowledge, and fix the happiness of the human race 
 upon a rock, from whence the passions and vices resulting from the 
 notions of man’s independent free agency, will assail it in vain; their 
 strength will diminish, until it shall be entirely exhausted.. 
 
 Now this science—the overwhelming practical influence of which, 
 cannot he estimated' by a generation trained from infancy in the 
 reason-destroying doctrines of free will—is of such immense conse¬ 
 quence to the human race, that there is no other subject within the 
 present range of man’s knowledge, that can be compared with it. 
 For this science has a direct reference to the formation of man, be¬ 
 fore the gernl commences its process to produce a living organized 
 being. It accompanies him from that moment to his birth. It con 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
 tinues with the infant, child, adult, and old man, to death, without u 
 moment’s intermission. It is every thing to each individual, and to 
 all generations of mankind, for their good or evil; or it, is of no 
 moment to man, and utterly unworthy the consideration of a being 
 formed with powers to become rational. Which is it? Who is to 
 answer this question? Those who have not yet been taught to begin 
 • to think about it? or those who, from discovering the importance of 
 right knowledge on the subject, have devoted their lives to ascertain 
 the facts which man developes from his birth, and who have quietly 
 examined and re-examined those facts by extensive and long continu¬ 
 ed experiments upon infants and children, until their characters were 
 formed? It is after the latter mode of proceeding, to an extent of 
 which, in reality, few are aware, that I give a matured opinion upon 
 the subject of my fellow-beings. 
 
 There is no other mode of acquiring knowledge deserving the at- 
 tention of enlightened minds, than by an accurate observation of 
 all the facts known, connected with the subject, and by a careful 
 comparison of all these facts, one with another, until the subject 
 under consideration can be exhibited in all its parts in unison with 
 each other,—forming, by their combination, one complete whole, 
 from the first principles on which it is founded, to its unvarying prac¬ 
 tical result. 
 
 It is thus, and thus only, that the true nature of man is to be demon 
 strated, and that it can be ascertained whether he is a bein^ of inde¬ 
 pendent thoughts, feelings, and actions; or whether he is like the other 
 works of nature, a necessary effect produced bp all the preceding 
 causes , which have called him into existence, and formed him to be 
 what he is without his knowledge, will, or control. 
 
 It is by this course of proceeding, that I have prepared myself for 
 this investigation. It is through innumerable facts, calmly and pa¬ 
 tiently examined and compared continually through an active life of 
 extended experience of nearly the duration of half a century. 
 
 Then the question is, What is man, and how is he formed to be as 
 we find him physically, mentally, and morally, as he is in this and 
 every other country at this day? 
 
 The twelve fundamental laws of human nature, given twice to save 
 reference in the first parts of this work, are the results of the facts 
 examined and compared as I have mentioned above. To those who 
 have investigated the subject in the same manner, who have derived 
 their knowledge more from observation than from books, and who 
 have followed up their observations by extensive practice; these laws 
 of nature will be understood, and their direct applicability to explain 
 the formation of the human character, and the whole existence of man 
 from birth to death,-and with the general business of society, and the 
 government of nations, will be duly appreciated. 
 
 As the germ or seed of man’s existence, like the germ or seed of 
 all other animals and plants, is not of man’s contrivance, and as the 
 germ possesses the essential qualities of the plant or animal, and as 
 the culture of this germ docs not depend in any degree upon the will 
 
m 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 of the individual, no mistake can be more gross, than to attribute 
 the qualities of a free and independent notion to any thing thus 
 created and framed. When a child comes into existence, it is entirely 
 at the mercy of the persons around to give it language, ideas, and 
 any drection to its feelings which the knowledge and habits they pos¬ 
 sess may influence them to exert over it. And it must receive the 
 impression, which all external objects, natural and artificial, make 
 upon its senses. 
 
 The individual knows not when he comes into existence, his own 
 natural qualities in number, kind, or combination. He knows nothing 
 of the persons who surround him and acquire the guidance of his mind 
 and affections. He is equally ignorant of the nature, kind, and 
 qualities of all the natural and artificial circumstances within the 
 localities of his birth or place in which he receives his early training 
 and instruction, and from which all his first impressions are received. 
 And the thoughts, feelings, dispositions, mind, will, and conduct of all 
 men, are a compound of all these natural and artificutl circumstan¬ 
 ces united. As an individual existence, man, in his own person, 
 has no more to do in the formation or compounding of any of these 
 ingredients which make him what he is, than the bee, the dove, the 
 tiger, or the elephant, have in determining what qualities shall 
 belong to their respective natures—what propensities, dispositions, or 
 habits they shall possess and retain through life. Man can be no 
 more responsible for his nature, or the strength, or weakness of his 
 propensities, or intellectual or moral faculties, than these or any other 
 animal. And to hold man responsible for his nature, for his general 
 or individual propensities, faculties, and qualities, or for the direction 
 which his predecessors and the local circumstances in which he is . 
 involved may give to them, is a direct act of insanity, and proves that 
 man has not yet been formed, by his nature and circumstances, to 
 become a rational creature. The idea of merit or demerit, of praise 
 and biame, or of reward and punishment, to a being thus constituted 
 by nature, and thus compelled to be what he is, proves that man has 
 every thing to learn respecting himself and his race, and that he is 
 yet ignorant of all that is essential to his improvement and happiness, 
 lie must know himself before he can enjoy the faculties which nature 
 has given him. 
 
 By attending solely to facts, by an extensive comparison of these, 
 each with the other, by the imagination, not entering into any of our 
 deductions from these comparisons, it seems possible and practicable, 
 that man may in this age of his existence acquire sufficient knowledge 
 of himself, and of his fellow beings, to enable him to train and 
 educate his immediate descendants in such a manner, that they may 
 possess the dispositions, manners,, and intelligence, and be surround¬ 
 ed by those new circumstances, which shall give them the means and 
 inclination to form their children to become somewhat consistent an¬ 
 imals in their thoughts, feelings, and conduct, and in another genera¬ 
 tion or two, to become reasonable beings, who will know what is 
 necessary for their chief good through their existence, and who will 
 
APPENDIX, <m 
 
 fiH always in conformity to that knowledge, and thereby secure their 
 own perpetual well being, and - the happiness of their race. 
 
 It is the individual’s persuasion of his independence in originating 
 his thoughts or ideas, feelings or actions, that has made man, up 
 this present time, the most inconsistent and fantastic earthly animal, 
 and consequently the least reasonable in his conduct of any of them. 
 It is this notion that makes him proud, vain* jealous, malicious,. 
 Covetous,- sefish, ambitious, irritable, angry, uncharitable and religi¬ 
 ous. It is this notion that renders necessary the demoralizing sys¬ 
 tem of commerce, for a money profit, of law, of medicine, of war, 
 and of preaching. It is this notion, which necessarily pervades the 
 whole character of man from infancy to death, with insincerity, 
 deception and falsehood, and which thus engenders among the whole 
 race of mankind every conceivable vice and crime, and subjects them 
 in consequence to perpetual disease of body and mind, and to’every 
 kind of physical and mental suffering. Not any one of these nume¬ 
 rous evils will be experienced as soon as measures can be devised 
 and carried into practice, to enable man to know himself, and to 
 become a rational, in place of an irrational creature. 
 
 What nation or tribe or people, are acting like sane or reasonable 
 beings in the estimation of any nation, tribe or people, who are 
 without their localities? None, because all have been formed to be 
 what they now are by their localities, and these localities, to the 
 extent that man could influence them, have been combined and ar¬ 
 ranged under the notion of man's free agency; hence the inconsist¬ 
 ency, confiison and disorder) in all the artificial arrangements of the 
 human race; while system, order and beauty pervade all the other 
 operations of nature. It is a question of deep interest to all, to 
 ascertain to what extent man can be made to become conscious, in 
 the present generation, of the removeable evils which now sorely 
 afflict him on every side; to what extent he can be excited to anni¬ 
 hilate their cause of existence; and in their place substitute enjoy= 
 ment which shall contribute to promote health—increase good spirits, 
 and in their retrospect always satisfy the mind, and therefore extend 
 its gratification, and thus multiply the pleasures of each moment 
 by the recollections of our past existence. 
 
 All this is now in progress to be known, and one day enjoyed!, 
 by the whole huinan race. But what portion of it shall fall to the 
 lot of the present generation, will depend upon the extent of moral 
 courage that can be elicited to plead boldly against the errors of 
 tree will, and upon the well directed, active exertions of those who 
 directly perceive the cause of existing evils, the only mode by which 
 they can be removed, and also upon the amount of resistance, which 
 they may experience from the unavoidable prejndices which have 
 been forced upon the present generation. 
 
 For some thousands of years past, the most learned and acute 
 minds, have been more or less occupied in attempts to unravel the 
 mysteries of human notions, on the subject of free will and necessity; 
 and they have at length discovered, after deluging the world with 
 
226 ' 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 countless volumes, which involve rather than elucidate the mystery^, 
 that man had the power to act in obedience to his will when his 
 will was formed; but as the will was formed by the union of his 
 thoughts and feelings, and as his thoughts and feelings proceeded 
 from previous circumstances, over which he had no control, that man 
 appeared to be a free agent, but that he was not so in reality; that 
 instead of forming his own character and determining his own con¬ 
 duct, the germ of his existence, his entire organization, and all the 
 circumstances which formed him to be what he is, are created for him 
 without his knowledge or will, until he has been so far formed that 
 when he appears to have some powers of independent volition, they 
 always proceed from the combined organic and external circumstan¬ 
 ces, by which he has been previously and unavoidably influenced. 
 These are the fair deductions to be made from this mass of w r ritings; 
 but the authors of them, who were all literary or learned men, shut 
 up in their cloisters or closets, never conjectured the difference that 
 would arise in the thoughts, feelings, dispositions and general conduct 
 of mankind, between being trained from infancy under the loose, 
 uncertain and inconsistent notions of free will and independent con¬ 
 duct; and a clear understanding of the laws of human nature, and of 
 the circumstances which form the character of every individual. 
 They were not practical men acting extensively in the varied busi¬ 
 ness of life, and therefore as literary men, they knew little more 
 Chan literary ideas, and few things more unfit men for acquiring a 
 knowledge of mankind than literary habits, which generally give th£ 
 individuals possessing them incorrect notions of men,, and of the 
 practical affairs of life. These habits have been the chief cause, why 
 the extreme difference that the doctrines of free will and necessity 
 are calculated to effect upon the dispositions, thoughts, feelings, and 
 conduct of every individual of the human race, has been overlooked; 
 why human nature has been* for so many ages, afflicted with every 
 kind of evil which the erroneous notions of man ! s free agency are 
 certain to create; and why it has not enjoyed the happiness which 
 the doctrines of necessity, or of the true cause which form the 
 character of every individual is calculated to create. 
 
 Were these results known—were they ever imagined by mankind, 
 to a very small extent of their real importance, no one would rest 
 satisfied as he is, whatever may be his occupation, calling or profes¬ 
 sion. The magnitude of the prize w T ould appear to be such, that one 
 and all would exert the utmost of their faculties to comprehend the- 
 subject, gnd bring about the change. Nothing that the combined 
 powers of men could accomplish, would be left undone, to remove 
 their misery and secure their happiness. 
 
 How little do men of all ranks and conditions, of all nations and 
 climes, suspect, that the power is within their reach, if they had 
 knowledge, to relieve themselves of all the artificial evils known,— 
 ignorance, poverty, vice, passions, strife, and every kind of disunion, 
 with all its necessary sufferings attendant upon the infringement of 
 the laws of our nature,—and toliye perpetually in a society in which 
 
APPENDIX- 
 
 r>o<7 
 
 more knowledge would be acquired in one year, than has ever yet 
 been attained in a century, and in which improvements would be 
 made in the condition of all classes , in proportion to their advance in 
 knowledge. 
 
 No man has, I believe, ever yet investigated the subject of free 
 will and necessity, so early in life as myself; or so clearly ascertained, 
 from an observation of facts, and from practice, the science of the 
 formation of character, at an age sufficiently early to prevent the 
 influence of the doctrines of free will from forming his youthful 
 habits and .associations of ideas. This singular result was effected 
 in my character at an age when the first combinations of ideas could 
 be, and were, unassociated to their foundation. And, in conse¬ 
 quence, an entire new character was formed for me, and my conduct 
 and progress through the world has proceeded entirely on that foun¬ 
 dation. I, therefore, know from experience the dispositions that a 
 knowledge of the formation of character will implant, the habits it 
 will form, the knowledge it will give, the perseverance in the attain¬ 
 ment of an object to secure a great public benefit it will fix, the moral 
 courage it will create, the disinterestedness it will produce, the 
 personal sacrifices it will render delightful to make, to remove the 
 existing evils, and insure the future happiness of mankind; to remove 
 the veils, by destroying the errors and opposing principles and prac¬ 
 tice derived from the doctrines of free will, and introducing, in their 
 place, truths to be obtained from real knowledge. The most beautiful 
 moral harmony will then exist between the principles and practices 
 of the human race—between the looks, words, and actions of every 
 individual. 
 
 If this knowledge can produce these results, and if no other 
 knowledge can effect a similar moral change, or any other general 
 and permanent beneficial alteration in the condition of mankind,— 
 who would not make any personal sacrifice, to hasten its introduction 
 and universal adoption ? 
 
 I have the most full conviction, from the coincidence of all facts 
 connected with the subject, that this knowledge can effect this change. 
 I know, from experience, that this knowledge itself becomes a cir¬ 
 cumstance so irresistibly powerful in the formation of the thoughts, 
 feelings, mind, and conduct, that the character, of each individual 
 will be made by it superior to any character that has yet been 
 formed, under the demoralizing influences of the fallacious notion of 
 the doctrines of free will and free agency. 
 
 And here is the mystery developed: here is the true cause, why 
 Mr. Campbell’s learning and ingenuity seemed to me mere wordy 
 wanderings, without the foundation of a probable or possible single 
 fact, upon which to rest his incongruous, imaginary superstructure. 
 On the contrary, through a knowledge of the facts which 1 had 
 examined^ re-examined, compared, and fully canvassed, times innu¬ 
 merable, with the' most eminent men of the last thirty years, I could 
 not, however muefi I wished to think otherwise, prevent myself feel¬ 
 ing the baseless fabric of the whole of his fanciful vision. It also 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 seemed to me evident, in almost every sentence he uttered, that hk 
 superior natural talents had been overwhelmed and nearly destroyed 
 by the errors of his early instruction, which he had been compelled 
 to imbibe. And it was to me no less evident, that when he spoke 
 during the discussion, he was, from the same cause, riveting chains 
 of ignorance and folly upon those who by their previous instruction 
 had been prepared for such doctrines. Before Mr. Campbell, senior, 
 left the city, several new converts to baptism, chiefly, I believe,elderly 
 ladies, were plunged over head by him in the waters of the canal 
 and of the Ohio. The parties seriously believed that such a washing 
 was to open the way to heaven for them. These operations were on 
 two occasions—one in the canal basin, and the other in the Ohio 
 river—quite public exhibitions. Is it not melancholy to see some 
 of the finest faculties of human nature thus deranged? 
 
 I had, during the period of the public debate with his son, and for 
 nearly a fortnight afterwards, frequent friendly, open, and frank pri¬ 
 vate discussions, at the houses of our friends in and near the city, 
 with this reverend gentleman. There is something so kind and evi¬ 
 dently sincere in his manners, that I had great pleasure in all ray 
 communications with him. And I believe we each expected to make 
 some impression upon the mind of the other; or, if not, to discover 
 the real cause -which united us in feeling, and divided us in the foun¬ 
 dation of our sentiments on the subject of religion. When the time 
 of separation arrived, however, the impression left on my mind from 
 the whole of the intercourse between us was, that our feelings of 
 good will and friendship for each ofher had increased; but that not 
 the slightest progress had been made in the conversion of either party 
 to the religious or irreligious opinions of the other. 
 
 These were the impressions that the public and private discus¬ 
 sions with Mr. Alexander Campbell and his father left upon my 
 mind. I could not but lament the errors of their early instructions. 
 I have no doubt, this feeling is experienced with equal sincerity on 
 their parts, relative to what they are obliged to believe my obstinacy 
 in a course which they have not the means to fathom. While their 
 association of ideas resting upon, and proceeding from, the notions 
 of free agency in man, and developed through all the mazes and ex¬ 
 travagancies of the Christian scheme, remain unbroken, they must 
 conclude that I am either insane, or influenced by some superior 
 agency to promote, in some indirect manner, the decrees of Almighty 
 Power; or that, unknown to myself, I am an instrument to hasten 
 the period of the promised millennium. They are in a state of hourly 
 perplexity; their minds are full of confused associations of ideas, 
 owing to the direct opposition between the facts around them and 
 the notions they have imbibed from infancy. They can only con¬ 
 jecture these matters vaguely, with many incongruities continually 
 presenting themselves in every step of their progress. Tt is utterl} r 
 impossible there can be any consistency in the thoughts, feelings, or 
 conduct of any individual, who has been conscientiously trained in 
 the doctrines of free agency, and any of the numerous religions 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
 founded upon them. • While this mast be the state of their minds, 
 there can be no hope of a change to a consistent or sane state of 
 association of ideas—of a new birth, regeneration, and resurrection 
 from sin and misery. They must be convinced of the original or 
 fundamental errors which they imbibed unconsciously, when they 
 were infants and children, and which are the germ of all the associa¬ 
 tions of ideas they possess, before their “minds can be born again.*’ 
 
 To admit of this great change in their minds, they must become as 
 little children, and submit their instructions, not to a gospel in direct 
 opposition to nature, but to facts and reason, which are always con¬ 
 sistent with, and never in opposition to it. 
 
 But this change does not depend upon any thing that shall pro¬ 
 ceed from Mr, Alexander Campbell or his father, as free agents.— 
 Motives must be first placed before them by others, sufficiently pow¬ 
 erful to create in their minds a probability of doubt that they may 
 have been instructed, like the thousands of millions of their fellows 
 who have gone before them, in popular local errors from infancy,— 
 and that, like them, they were unable to detect their fallacies. This 
 is the most difficult task to perform on minds deeply read in, and ten¬ 
 aciously adhering to popular notions. But being once accomplished, 
 and a right direction given to their inquiries and investigations, the 
 change in sentiment, although perhaps slow at first, would soon be¬ 
 come rapid and extensive. Whether these results may ever be produ¬ 
 ced on these gentlemen, will depend upon circumstances over which 
 _ they have no control, 
 
 I have thus developed the cause why, during the late discussion, 
 Mr. Alexander Campbell and I made no impression on each other’s 
 mind. We pursued each his own chain or association of ideas, as 
 it were in parallel lines, without the slightest approximation. As was 
 to be expected, I never felt the weight or influence of one of those 
 arguments, which Mr. Campbell called philosophical; by which I 
 understand, an argument derived from, and consonant with, the 
 known laws of nature, devoid of hypothesis or immagination. There 
 was, there could be, nothing of the kind delivered by him. He at, 
 first, and after a slight verbal alteration in the sixth,,adtimately ad¬ 
 mitted the truth of the twelve fundamental laws of human nature, 
 on which I rely to disprove the possibility of any religion in the 
 world being true. And admitting these, if his mind had not been 
 formed on the irrational notions of free will, and its endless contra¬ 
 dictions to itself and all nature, he must have perceived the inutility 
 of any further discussion on this subject. For any one of the first 
 ,seVen fundamental laws being admitted and understood, all notions 
 of any free agency of man must forever cease. 
 
 That in his own person he has any free agency in forming his own 
 character, or of thinking, feeling, and acting, according to* ny inde¬ 
 pendent powers which he possesses to create a thought, a feeling, ora 
 will,becomes too absurd to dwell upon. What human being ever 
 originated one thought, one feeling, or a single volition that did not 
 proceed immediately from his organization, united with the influences 
 yol. 1C 20 
 
230 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 which external circumstances made upon that organization? And 
 what intelligent mind, does not know, that all the powers and quali¬ 
 ties of that organization, and all external circumstances, were brought 
 into existence without his consent? Seeing the discussion take this 
 course, and knowing it was to be put upon record, to await the ce’ib- 
 erate ordeal of public scrutiny and investigation, l could have no fear 
 for its tinal result, and therefore I yielded all minor matters to Mr 
 Campbell, and the moderators, who were unconscious, as it seemed to 
 me, of the real state to which the discussion had arrived early in the 
 debate. 
 
 It w*as well they did not, or their conscientious fears for the pop¬ 
 ular belief, in which all of them had been instructed, might have in¬ 
 duced a desire that some other course should he taken. As it was, 
 the public, prejudiced as it must be, will indue time, when the first 
 feelings of irritation shall subside, become the best judge between the 
 two systems, and truth trill ultimately prevail. 
 
 It may be inquired, why I have used such exertions, and made such 
 personal sacrifices, to destroy the influences of religion, over the world, 
 seeing that the population is ignorant, and requires some supernatu¬ 
 ral fears and hopes to keep it under government ? 
 
 I reply, because I discover that the population of the world is ipnor- 
 cut, and that these superstitious fears keep it so, and therefore, it can¬ 
 not be governed but through supernatural hopes and fears. History 
 informs us, that the governments and people, in former times, were 
 too inexperienced, the one to govern, and the other to be governed, 
 except through the hopes and fears of imaginary supernatural powers. 
 And it is these powers which now alone prevent the governed and 
 governors acquiring that knowledge which would place both under 
 circumstances greatly more to be desired than those which now* every 
 where exist. The population of the world is capable of being taught 
 knowledge, derived from facts upon and around the earth, all cogni¬ 
 sable by their senses, sufficient to induce feelings within them, that 
 will render it one of the most easy and delightful tasks to govern them 
 —equally easy and delightful to those who govern and those w ho are 
 governed. The religions of the world are now the only obstacle in 
 the way of this universal improvement in the condition of the human 
 race. It is a clear and distinct perception of this know ledge, derived 
 from the unchanging laws of human nature, that impel mo onw ard, 
 regardless of popular notions and feelings, to prepare the way, to en 
 able those who govern the world, to effect this glorious change, in the 
 physical, intellectual, and moral character and condition, of the 
 population of all countries. To effect it w ithout opposition from any 
 quarter; in peace,in good order, and with kind feelings, which shall 
 thenceforth continually increase. 
 
 It may he further asked, what information have I, unknown to oth¬ 
 ers, to enable me to form a decisive judgment in those matters, involv¬ 
 ing the w*ell being of all people and nations. 1 answer, that which has 
 been derived from a mind in which the first combinations of ideas, 
 founded on the notions of man's free agency, were very easily unasso- 
 
APPENDIX. 2^1 
 
 dated to their base or original germ, from the observation of facts; 
 of new data, by which new associations of ideas were formed, and 
 which enable me to perceive, that the character or qualities of all 
 that have material life, was given to it by the la ws of its organization* 
 That the whole character of all men was formed for them, and as all 
 their physical, intellectual, and moral qualities ircre formed for them,, 
 they were not and could not he rationally supposed to be accountable 
 beings, for what they were made. That with this knowledge, if it 
 were desirable to for ha the character of the population of the world, 
 individually and generally to be superior in all respects, and greatly 
 mare virtuous and happy than the present generation, there was a 
 lived and certain mode of proceeding—a science, by the adoption of 
 which, this change may be accomplished. And so beneficially may 
 the change he made to all, that n > indvidual, whatever may be his 
 present condition, would have any interest, whatever in opposing it 
 
 Should I ho further questioned, and asked what application 1 have 
 made of these new notions or principles, f answer, that I have folly 
 proved their benefits in all the afiairs of life. 
 
 That I applied them to education, to production, to distribution, to 
 exercise, amusement, and recreation, and to government, upon a mod¬ 
 el sufficiently large to demonstrate their great superiority, for all the 
 practical purposes of life over the wretched, inconsistent, and oppo¬ 
 sing nations, generated by the belief, engendered without thought or 
 reflection, in man’s individual free agency and responsibility. And 
 the beneficial effects of these general practices, were for years before 
 the public. They succeeded so far beyond all anticipations, that sev¬ 
 eral attempts, under the old nations of the world, were made to imi¬ 
 tate them. But these attempts were instituted by individuals who 
 knew not the source from whence they originated or by what princi¬ 
 ples they were, for a long period, successfully conducted. Many 
 were at a loss to divine by what secret springs, scf much happiness 
 and prosperity were produced, and, without apparent effort, continued 
 without change. 
 
 There was no other secret in my practical proceeding at New Lan¬ 
 ark than this. Rational infant schools were instituted, for the educa¬ 
 tion of all the children of the population, as one family, from the age 
 of eighteen months. Stores were established to supply the population 
 with the best food and clothes, at the lowest rates. The manage¬ 
 ment of the manufactories, was devised for the comfort of the people, 
 and the prosperity of the proprietors and conductors. Exercises, 
 amusements, and recreations, were conveniently arranged, for the 
 health and pleasure of the children and adult population—and the go¬ 
 vernment of the whole, uniting all as one community of friends, hav¬ 
 ing the paramount happiness of all for its common object. The 
 whole of the practices emanated from and were under the sole influ¬ 
 ence of the principles derived from the knowledge that the character 
 of man is formed for him—formed through the constant action of ex¬ 
 ternal circumstances upon the peculiar organization of each individual. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 433 
 
 Little does the world know that all that is truly permanently good 
 m practice in the present day, has emanated from the same know¬ 
 ledge. 
 
 Did any of the thousands of millions of the individuals who have 
 been trained in the selfish, demoralizing, and ever changing notions 
 of man’s free agency ever think of, or institute a rational infant 
 
 school ? 
 
 A rational infant school is the first Step requisite to the formation 
 of a virtuous and enlightened population, and without which, a popu- 
 Jation superior in dispositions, habits, and knowledge, will never be 
 
 created. 
 
 1 perceive, with such feelings of compassion as such knowledge 
 will always produce, the attempts to attribute the discovery and 
 introduction of rational infant schools, to the free agency system, or 
 to religion; to Pestalozzi, to Mr. Wilson of London, or to any one 
 belonging to the free agency system, connected with Christianity: 
 to any person or to any cause in preference to its true origin A To 
 the science of the formation of the human character, the world is alone 
 indebted for the discovery, introduction and successful practice of 
 rational infant schools. I mean successful, considering they had to 
 make their way in opposition to all the popular habits and notions 
 universally prevalent, derived from the notions of free agency and 
 the Christian religion.! So far is it from being true, that the rational 
 infant schools originated with the Christian religion, or any profes¬ 
 sing Christian, it was founded upon principles in direct opposition to 
 the fundamental doctrines of all religions. It proceeded from obser- 
 \ ation of facts, from calm reason, and from a real knowledge of human 
 nature thus derived. It was established to demonstrate to the world 
 the childish folly of Christianity, and of ail other religions founded 
 on the misconceived notions of man’s free agency. The public were 
 invited to see its practical effects in the village of New Lanark. The 
 invitation was accepted, and increasing crowds came annually, for 
 many years, until my private fortune ceased to be equal to the expense 
 of the daily growing curiosity of Europeans and Americans—of the 
 intelligent travellers from these two continents, who naturally wished 
 to learn something of the principles and practices by which little 
 children were formed to be intelligent; to enjoy themselves without 
 •acquiring vicious habits; and to gratify and delight their teachers, 
 their parents, and strangers, by their union, kind dispositions, and 
 comparatively superior manners and conduct. Having, there¬ 
 fore, satisfied myself of the great practical value of this science, 
 and having given abundant proof to the world of its immense superi¬ 
 ority over all similar proceedings founded on the notions of man’s free 
 agency, and having the attainment of much higher objects than the 
 partial improvement and happiness of a population of two or three 
 thousand persons,—I resigned the establishment to the management 
 
 *Sce American Journal of Education—Boston, No. 37. 
 
 j-For which opposition, see the correspondence between the Rev. Mr 
 Merries, minister of the parish of Lanark, and the author. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 233 
 
 of others, who, I thought, would do the population the least injury 
 that the notions of man’s free agency would admit. And ultimately, 
 not liking the condition to which large manufacturing establishments 
 were reduced, by competition arising from the general ignorance and 
 folly of society, I disposed of all my pecuniary interests in that beau¬ 
 tiful arrangement for progressive human improvement. I shall 
 never, I believe, cease to feel a deep interest in its success, and in the 
 happiness of a population- the juniors of which, in particular, seemed 
 to me as members of my own family. 
 
 The second attempt to form a rational infant school originated with 
 friends, Mr. Brougham, John Smith, M. P., Henry Hase, cashier 
 of the bank of England, John Walker of Arnos Grove, Southgate, 
 one of my partners in the New Lanark establishment, whose unas¬ 
 suming, but efficient good actions, his immediate friends only knew 
 how to appreciate fully and justly. These gentlemen united with 
 the marquis of Lansdown, Mr. Zachariah M’Cauley, Mr. James 
 Mills, of the India house, Mr. Benjamin Smith, and a few others, who, 
 from their repeated personal observations upon visits at the infant 
 school at New Lanark, or the testimony of those who had minutely 
 examined the effects which were produced there, were induced to 
 desire an extension cf these benefits. These gentlemen proposed to 
 raise a subscription among themselves to establish a similar school 
 in London, if I would supply them with a master from New Lanark; 
 to which I very readily agreed. The subscription was raised, and 
 the first infant school in England was erected in Westminster; and 
 I sent James Buchanan from the infant school at New Lanark to 
 superintend it. Buchanan instructed Mr. Wilderspin to superintend 
 the third infant school, which was established, if I mistake not, in 
 Quaker street, Spitalfields, London. And of this third school, some 
 years after its establishment, Mr. Thomas Wilson became the liberal 
 supporter, and active and zealous patron. His brother, the Rev. 
 Daniel Wilson, afterwards erected one at Welthamstrow, a few miles 
 from London; and in a year or two subsequent to this period, or 
 nearly ten years after the original school was opened in New Lanark, 
 they began to spread far and wide, until they now bid fair to become, 
 as they ought to be, universal. 
 
 I have been thus particular in giving the history of these schools, 
 because they are the first practical measure the world has witnessed, 
 flowing purely from a knowledge of the science of the formation of 
 character; and because the ministers and members of various religi¬ 
 ous sects have seized upon the plan, and are converting that which 
 its author designed as a first step to train man to become a reasonable 
 being, into an engine, and a most powerful one, too, by which they 
 may utterly destroy all semblances to rationality in the human mind. 
 For in the infant schools which they establish and superintend, they 
 teach the infant to speak of Deity, its attributes and its will, as though 
 their instructers had an accurate knowledge, and as if nothing was 
 more easy than for these children to acquire an accurate knowledge, 
 of these hidden mysteries, which it has not yet been given to man to 
 VOL. II. 20 * 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
 unveil or to comprehend. They teach these little innocents to bend 
 their faculties, when in the most pliable state, to their yoke, under 
 which all the natural vigor of thought, and the first exertions of reason, 
 are destroyed in the bud. The minds of these poor children are thus 
 prepared to receive ony illusion, however opposed it may be to all 
 existing facts, and to the best permanent interests of themselves and 
 of mankind. And they are thus admirably prepared to become the 
 mental slaves and tools of the priesthood of any wild fancy to which 
 they may give the present popular name of religion. 
 
 But such was not the intention of the founder of these schools. He 
 had no such immoral object in view; and he now enters his most 
 solemn protest against these schools being applied in future for any 
 such unhallowed, demoralizing and enslaving purposes. 
 
 The author of them witnessed the innumerable vicious and unfa¬ 
 vorable circumstances, with which the infants of the working classes 
 were hourly surrounded from their birth. He had daily before him 
 the demoralizing circumstances, in which the children of the popula¬ 
 tion of New Lanark were involved. He saw that these circumstan¬ 
 ces were continually making the most unfavorable impressions upon 
 the dispositions and habits of the children and parents, between whom 
 there was an unceasing action and reaction, having a most injurious 
 tendency. He had acquired a knowledge of the science of the for¬ 
 mation of the human character, and he became conscious of the evil 
 under which the whole population suffered. Being-thus informed, he 
 was influenced to apply the principles of the science to practice, for 
 the benefit of the population. He commenced by devising a new set 
 of circumstances for the children under his government, calculated 
 to effect as great a beneficial change for them, as the circumstances 
 in which he was himself placed, and the popular prejudices of the 
 district would permit. 
 
 He began to create these circumstances, and, in consequence, he 
 lost two-sets of rich partners, Who, having free will minds, could not 
 divine what he was about; and from the last set he experienced all 
 the opposition they knew how to unite against his measures. He 
 persevered; and with a new set of partners, whose notions were half 
 way between the doctrines of free agency in man, and the knowledge 
 of the science of the formation of the human, character, completed the 
 buildings and arrangements, at a considerable expense, to place these 
 children under circumstances congenial to their nature, and calculat¬ 
 ed to create a new and superior character directly in the infant and 
 elder children, and indirectly in their parents. 
 
 The new institution devised and erected for this purpose, wae 
 opened by a public address delivered in it by the author, on the first 
 of January, 1810. This address was delivered to about twelve hun¬ 
 dred of the principal inhabitants of the neighborhood, and of the adult 
 male and female population of New Lanark, At this meeting, he 
 first proposed to receive infants into his new arrangements, for the 
 purpose of forming their characters upon new principles,—to whiclv 
 afterwards, the name of “new system” was given. In this address* 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
 235 
 
 he stated, previous to any practice upon the subject, what' would be 
 the effect of the new circumstances in which he was going to place 
 the children and their parents; and in less than eight years from that 
 period, experience fully proved that statement to be correct; for the 
 results far exceeded the most sanguine anticipations of the founder. 
 By this experiment, the truth of the science of the formation of char¬ 
 acter was again confirmed by the operations of a single individual, 
 as it had been, ages ago, by Lycurgus, when he desired to form, for 
 the Spartans, a new, and the highest military character the world had 
 known. The experiment, thus tried upon a great variety of children, 
 within the altered circumstances in which they were placed in this 
 new institution, removed all doubt from the mind of the founder, as 
 to the power which one generation might acquire over the formation 
 of the character of its successors, provided that generation possessed 
 an accurate knowledge of the laws of human nature; a power, indeed, 
 many millions of times more important, for the great object of human 
 existence, than all the power previously acquired by man. It is in 
 consideration of its overwhelming magnitude, in the whole business- 
 of life—applicable, with equal overwhelming consequences, to each 
 individual,, and to the aggregate of society—that the author has 
 entered into so much detail of this experiment, to prove the ease with 
 which any government might now introduce this practice, to form tho 
 character of its population upon an entire new and greatly improved 
 model. 
 
 Calm reflection upon these facts, and upon those innumerable in¬ 
 stances which may be adduced from the whole history of man, will 
 convince all ere long, that there is no truth more certain than that 
 man is not a free agent, except in appearance to the superficial ob¬ 
 server and reasoner. That his character, without any exception, is 
 always formed for him, by circumstances previous and subsequent 
 to his birth, over which it is impossible for him to have any control. 
 That in those instances in advanced life, in which a sudden and great 
 change of character appears, it is, without one exception, the result 
 of the peculiar faculties of the original organization of the individual, 
 as it is acted upon by all the previous external circumstances, which, 
 by those circumstances, had produced the past character, until with 
 the new impression made by the circumstances which immediately 
 preceded the sudden and extensive change for better or worse; and for 
 which change, the individual is as harmless and irresponsible, as for 
 every previous alteration in his character. 
 
 And this invaluable knowledge will now open to the governments 
 and people of all nations, the means of relieving themselves from all 
 the artificial evils of life, and from all those which, heretofore, mart y 
 through ignorance, has inflicted upon man. 
 
 They will distinctly perceive, that the great business of the human 
 race will be to educate their successors aright . That having acquired 
 the power, through this new science, to arrange and combine superior 
 circumstances, they will create them in conformity with those dispo* 
 sitions, habits, and acquirements in theoretic and practical knowledge^ 
 
2 SG 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 that shall insure, at all times, a full supply of the best the earth* 
 with present experience, can be made to produce, for all; and thereby 
 insure perpetual progressive improvements and happiness to all the 
 generations to come. 
 
 These are the matured reflections and practical suggestions which 
 the public discussion, held in this city with Mr. Alexander Campbell, 
 have produced in my mind; and 1 await, with feelings of interest, 
 a similar genuine developement of the calm reflections of my con¬ 
 scientious opponent. For above all things, I now, as upon all former 
 occasions, desire that truth may be elicited, and immediately 
 applied to practice for the benefit of mankind., 
 
 ■ 
 
 "P 
 
A. CAMPBELL’S APPENDIX. 
 
 FROM the whole scope of Mr. Owen’s discussion, and most unequi¬ 
 vocally from his appendix, it appears that his whole scheme of things 
 is predicated upon one fundamental position. This position is: that 
 man is not a free AGENT. That no man forms his own character , 
 hut that every man's character is formed for him , is one of his conse¬ 
 quences from this position. Another is: That merit and demerit , 
 praise and blame, reward and punishment, belong not to man , nor, in 
 truth* to any being in the universe* Such is the soul or life of his 
 whole system. 
 
 He declaimed much against metaphysics in his speeches and in his 
 writings—But I now make my appeal to the learned world, and ask-: 
 Is there in the whole science of metaphysics more abstruse specula¬ 
 tions or questions than those constituting and proceeding from the 
 above positions ? If there be such a thing as the quintessence of met¬ 
 aphysics—I say, it is the question about free agency in all its sublima¬ 
 ted ramifications—But this only by the way. 
 
 Men of the most gigantic talents have fatigued themselves in wri¬ 
 ting octavos, quartos, and folios, upon the doctrines of liberty and ne¬ 
 cessity—From the learned folio of Peter Sterry, down to the unan¬ 
 swerable octavo of President Edwards, there has been written a 
 waggon load of learned lumber on this very question. Before a pop¬ 
 ular assembly, and to the great majority of readers, the plan of rcductio 
 ad absurdum appears to us the shortest way of settling these wordy 
 disputes,- and, therefore, we generally preferred this Eirgument while 
 on the stage of discussion, whenever Mr. Owen presented these met¬ 
 aphysical dogmas. That there is no moral difference on Mr. Owen’s 
 hypothesis between the actions of a machine and those of King Solo¬ 
 mon, Sir Isaac Newton, and the Apostle Paul; that a man, a fish, an 
 oyster, a tree, a watch, are equally voluntary agents, alike praisewor¬ 
 thy, blameworthy, virtuous, vicious, good, or evil, was repeatedly 
 shown during the discussion The tree that cools us with its shade, 
 that refreshes us with its fruit, and that kills us by its fall, is neither 
 praiseworthy nor blameworthy. So the patricide, the matricide, the 
 homicide, and the philanthropic, the affectionate, kind and benevolent 
 son, daughter, brother, neighbor, are alike praiseworthy, alike blame¬ 
 worthy—in truth, neither to be praised nor blamed at all. All the 
 feeling which Mr. Owen professes to have for such evil doers, is pity 
 —he may pity the child that kills his father, as he pities the widow 
 which the wickedness ofa son has made. He pities, too, the religious 
 man as a deluded being—and, indeed, I cannot sec why he may not 
 equally pity every thing that exists, and be as much grieved for the 
 virtues as the vices of men—I think his metaphysics which place the 
 idiot, the madman, the philosopher, and the sage, upon the same foot- 
 
238 APPENDIX. 
 
 ing with each other, and with all things animal, vegetable, and mineral, 
 excludes pity altogether, and divests man of all feelings as well as of 
 all free agency. 
 
 Whenever the idea of merit and demerit is exiled from earth, the 
 idea of pity must follow it. No body pities a tree because the wind 
 has torn a branch from it. No body pities the lion who kills himself 
 in pursuit of a lamb, nor the hawk that breaks its head in tlie pursuit 
 of a chicken* We pity suffering innocence—but take away the idea 
 of innocence and we destroy all pity. Destroy merit and demerit, 
 and we have no use for the word innocence; and then we can have no 
 suffering innocence, and so no pity. 
 
 But the idea of a philanthropist is just as itiadmissable upon Mr. 
 Owen’s principles as that of praise or blame. Now, Mr. Owen pro¬ 
 fesses to be a philanthropist, that is, a lover of men. But is love a 
 reasonable or an unreasonable thing ? If reasonable, Mr. Owen cannot, 
 upon his own principles, be truly a philanthropist. For what reason 
 Can induce him to soend his davs in benefiting men more than crows 
 or squirrels, more than in cultivating hellebore or hemloclc? A lump 
 of animated matter, of vegetable matter, whether in the form of a bi¬ 
 ped, a quadruped, or a tulip, is matter still, and as necessary in its 
 figure, properties, and powers as it is in being material. There is 
 nothing in man, upon his principles, amiable more than in a goose. 
 The goose which furnishes this quill, and on whose coat I slept last 
 night, and on whose carcase 1 feasted last Christmas, was a benefac¬ 
 tor of man, and a philanthropist, upon Mr. Owen’s theory, as worthy 
 of praise as himself, because as reasonable and as unreasonable. If 
 the size, figure, and animal qualities of man, prompt Mr. Owen to be 
 a philanthropist, he ought for as good reasons, to devote his life to 
 the care of horses and elephants. If longevity, an erect position, and 
 a peculiar organization, make man worthy of so much love tfomhiniy 
 the goose who lives longer, the tree which grows taller, and the croco¬ 
 dile which is as curiously organized as man, equally merit his labors 
 of love. To say that he is a philanthropist because he belongs to the 
 race of men, is to place philanthropy upon the same foundation with 
 those animal affections which pervade most species of the quadrupeds 
 and bipeds for their owji. This is an unreasonable philanthropy and 
 unworthy of the name. There cannot be a philosophic philanthropist 
 upon any principle which divests man of merit and demerit, of praise 
 and blame, of reward and punishment; upon any principle which 
 excludes from the human mind the idea of a God and a future state. 
 Men who deny these may call themselves philanthropists, they mfiy 
 labor for the good of men, but they are no more philanthropists than 
 the bee which makes honey, nor the sheep which yields its fleece. 
 They do not bestow their labors nor their coats on man through a love of 
 him. Other motives prompt their actions. So Mr. Owen may spend 
 time, money, and personal toils, on what appear to be philanthropic 
 objects; but these may he demonstrated to proceed from vanity, by a 
 much more convincing logic than can he employed to show that they 
 proceed from the love of man, properly so called. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 239 
 
 For my part, if I were compelled to give up the doctrine of immor¬ 
 tality, or could be induced to think that man differs from other ani- 
 mals, merely so far as he differs from them in the organization of 
 one hundred and fifty pounds of matter, I would think it just as reason¬ 
 able and philosophic that I should spend my life in raising and teach¬ 
 ing dogs and horses, and improving their condition, as in training men 
 and improving their circumstances. 
 
 The materialist, or philosophic necessarian, who says fliat the 
 earth is an immense prison, and the laws of nature so many jailors, 
 and all mankind prisoners bound in chains which cannot be dissolved; 
 or, to speak without a figure, who says that the actions of all men 
 are as unavoidable as the ebbing and flowing of the sea, or the waxing 
 and waning of the moon, can never rationally be a reformer. For 
 what could he reform! He could not pretend to ref >rm nature , nor 
 any of its laws. On Mr. Owen’s principles the present state of the 
 world is perfectly natural and unavoidable. Nature in the regular 
 operation of cause and effect has issued in his trinity of evils—Re¬ 
 ligion, matrimony, and private property. Now if nature has gone 
 wrong, and man without free agency has landed in religion, matri¬ 
 mony, and private property, how unphilosophic is the philosopher of 
 circumstances , who would preach up the necessity of a change in 
 society when he cannot change necessity!! 
 
 It is a climax in the eloquence of absurdity which Mr. Owen is 
 aspiring after. He preaches that all things are just as they must be. 
 The uncontrolable laws of nature have issued in the present system 
 of things; and yet he would have us to make things what they ought 
 not to be; that is, he would have us to abolish religion, matrimony, 
 and private property, which his own eternal and unchanging laws of 
 nature, in their necessary and uncontrolable operations have origina¬ 
 ted and established. On Mr. Owen’s theory all things are natural 
 and unavoidable. It is mother nature working by her own laws, and 
 yet he would make us all matricides!!! If Mr. Owen is not stranded 
 here, there is not a shoal in the universe. 
 
 From all eternity, according to Mr. Owen’s scheme, the particles 
 of matter have been in incessant agitation, working themselves up 
 into ten thousand times ten thousand forms. A few of them at one 
 time produced a Nimrod, a Pharaoh, a Moses, a Cyrus, a Nebuchad¬ 
 nezzar, an Alexander, a Julius Cresar, a Buonaparte, a Paul, a Robert 
 Owen, and a few such manufacturers of human character. Not one 
 of them could help being born, nor being such characters, nor pro¬ 
 ducing such effects on society. Blind and omnipotent Nature cast 
 them forth as she does so much lava from the crater of a volcano. 
 She tied them fast in adamantine chains of inexorable fate and gave 
 them no more liberty to act than the Peak of Teneriffe has to emi¬ 
 grate to New Harmony. Yet strange, surpassing strange, as it is, 
 this singular piece of animated matter called Robert Owen, which 
 required old Nature in her laboratory six thousand years to produce, 
 would now teach us to rebel and become seditious against, the queen 
 of fate; and would have us claim and take the liberty from nature of 
 
240 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 forming human beings to our own mind, and of changing tlie powers 
 of nature; in fact, of binding her fast in our own cords, so that we 
 shall abolish religion, matrimony, and private property; put the old 
 queen Nature into jail at New Harmony and never let her out upon a 
 parole of honor, as long as grass grows and water runs. 
 
 Mr. Owen is, without knowing it, or intending it, the greatest 
 advocate of free agency I have ever known; for he would have the 
 present generation to adopt such arrangements and so to new modify 
 the circumstances that surround them as to prevent the goddess Nature 
 from having it in her power ever to make another religious animal, 
 another wedding, or to use the words mine or thine. And yet the 
 chorus of his new music is, that we have no more liberty to act than 
 Gibraltar has to perch itself upon the cupola of the State House of 
 Ohio. Such a philosopher is my good natured friend Robert Owen. 
 
 Questions in arithmetic may be differently stated, and give the 
 same result. Error may be exposed from every point in the oompass, 
 but from some points more clearly than from others. We shall now 
 make the mechanics understand the sophistry of Mr. Owen. Suppose 
 a carpenter’s square or rule is not what it purports to be, will not every 
 measurement which he makes with it be erroneous, and all his con¬ 
 clusions be false? But how shall we test the pretensions of a square? 
 We may compare it with many others, but they may all be incorrect. 
 We may prove it by geometry; this is an infallible test; but there 
 are only a few geometricians; and none but they can understand the 
 proof. If the square is still disputed, how will its pretensions be 
 settled to the apprehensions of all the community who are interested 
 in this matter. We want some plain, palpable, common sense way of 
 deciding this matter. What shall it be? This way, perhaps: all will 
 agree that all the substances, all the superficies of things in the world 
 are not perfect squares, or straight-sided figures. All will agree that 
 there are some uneven, crooked, or irregular figures, surfaces, or sub¬ 
 stances in the world. Now if any instrument purporting to be a square, 
 or straight edge, should always give the same result, represent all 
 things alike, make every superficies a perfect square, every surface 
 a smooth surface, and every figure a straight sided figure; all would 
 agree that such a rule or square was a false test, too flexible, pliant, or 
 otherwise defective. Such results would condemn the instrument in 
 the estimation of every human being who could think at all. 
 
 Now for the application. Mr. Owen has invented a measure, 
 rule, or instrument, for deciding the qualities of human actions. This 
 rule, he says , is an infallible one. We compare it with all others; 
 but he says they are all incorrect. We, then, are compelled to test it 
 by the abstract science of mind; but few understand this science. 
 What, then, shall we do? The community must have some common 
 sense, palpable way of deciding this controversy. We shall give it 
 to them in the similitude before us. All will agree that all actions 
 are not alike moral, useful, worthy of admiration, of gratitude, and 
 of imitation; in a word, that all actions are not alike good and com 
 mendable. All will also agree that, whatever rule makes all actions 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 Ml 
 
 alike good, commendable, worthy of admiration, gratitude, and imita¬ 
 tion, is a false rule. So far the analogy is -perfect and unexception¬ 
 able. Mr. Owen’s rule makes every figure a perfect square, or every 
 action alike commendable, and, indeed, alike useful. His proof is 
 very short, and very simple too. It is this: Nature is always right. 
 She never errs. The laws, or acts of Nature, oblige all men to act 
 as they do. The laws of Nature are all necessary laws. The laws 
 of Nature brought Mr. Owen half round the globe to meet me on the 
 stage of debate at Cincinnati. They carried me down the Ohio. 
 Necessity Compelled Mr. Owen to plead the cause of Infidelity, and 
 me to plead the cause of Christianity. We both obeyed Nature, and 
 both our actions are perfect squares, are perfectly right, equally' 
 moral and commendable, when measured by the same rule-—that is, 
 by Mr. Owen’s rule. If Mr. Owen had made a hundred infidels, and 
 I a hundred Christians by our debate, it would have been equally 
 commendable, good, and useful. Every Christian is necessarily so, 
 and every infidel is necessarily an infidel. Nature cannot go wrong; 
 therefore, Mr. Owen’s rule is an infallible one. If she produce two 
 effects diametrically opposite, at war with each other, it is all right, 
 and moral, and useful, and good. He only is the sinner who counter¬ 
 acts Nature. But Mr. Owen’s rule makes himself and me equally 
 sinners. He wishes to prevent Nature from making Christians by 
 throwing circumstances in her way. She laughs at him, however, 
 and throws his circumstances back in his face; asking him, Whc* 
 made circumstances li But he has not discernment to feel her satire, 
 or her irony. He laughs too, and thinks not that he has been the 
 cause of all the mirth. He think* that Nature laughs with him, not 
 ert him. But to this conclusion the rational must come—that what 
 soever rule gives the same decision of two cases diametrically opposite, 
 must be as fallacious as a square which makes a .straight liqe and a 
 curve equally straight lines. 
 
 If Mr. Owen has any moral law it is the same as his natural law. 
 He uses the word moral as he does the word duty, and the word con¬ 
 science , in a sense of his own. Or, rather, he makes use of therm as 
 a disguise, as we shall illustrate more fully immediately. Every 
 action is natural that is necessary, and consequently every action is 
 moral; or Nature is immoral—that is, unnatural. Hence Mr. Owen’s 
 favorite maxim, u No praise , No blame? You cannot praise smoke 
 for ascending ; nor blame water for descending. These are as natural 
 as gratitude and ingratitude. His artificial law of utility will not 
 help out his moral code,; for one good reason, equal to a thousand— 
 evil actions are as useful as good dues. As the sickness of the patient 
 is useful to the physician, so the drunkenness of the sot is useful to 
 the vintner, and the injustice of the villain is useful to the lawyer and 
 the court. Hence, as his predecessor, Father Hobbes, says, there is no 
 moral difference between virtue and vice. No, says Mri Owen, for 
 all actions are ^either to be praised nor blamed. They are al! natural 
 or necessary. 
 
 VOL. IIo 21 
 
242 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Nature cannot err. This is the first axiom of the materialists. If 
 she did err, what child of her’s could reform or cure her? Can an 
 effect ever reform its own cause ? This would be equal to Mr, Owen’s 
 first law— the child chooses its own parent. No, says Mr. Owen, in 
 theory; but, in practice, he will have effects to correct their causes. 
 Men must change their circumstances. Apples must improve the 
 ♦ ;ees on which they grow; or they must plant a better sort of fruit. 
 This is the dilemma of dilemmas, of which Mr. Owen is the inventor, 
 Men must change their ow n circumstances and nature, or they must 
 make better circumstances and a better nature for others. If this 
 philosopher will only follow up his ow n circumstances and philosophy, 
 they will reform him. Whenever he attempts to show us on what 
 rational principles, he can persuade men to attempt to change their 
 circumstances, he will be constrained to admit that they have power 
 over circumstances; and this taught, he makes man a free agent in the 
 fullest sense that Christians contend for. 
 
 Some persons talk of free agency as I have heard some declaimers 
 talk of civil liberty. According to their logic, men have not civil 
 liberty if they are restrained bylaw at all. Because William Bedman 
 had not the liberty of entering every man’s house, of plundering his 
 property, of taking his wife, daughter, goods and chattels, he told 
 his own nation when he returned home, that John Whiteman had no 
 civil liberty at all. So if a child cannot be born where and when 
 he pleases; if he cannot control every thing according to his own 
 will, the philosophic declaimer upon liberty and necessity says, Men 
 have no liberty of action whatsoever. But, in direct contradiction 
 of his own theory, he would have him to change and control his cir¬ 
 cumstances, and thus to assume a power tantamount, if not para¬ 
 mount, to nature! 
 
 May I be permitted here to define a necessary , and a free agent?— 
 “A necessary agent,” as philosophers say, “is one, all of whose actions 
 are so determined'by the causes preceding each action, that not one 
 past action could possibly not have come to pass, nor have been other¬ 
 wise than it was: nor that any future action can possibly not come to 
 pass, or be otherwise than it shall be.” “A free agentf as they say, 
 “is one who is able, at any time, under the causes and circumstances 
 under which he lives, to do different things; or he is one who is not 
 unavoidably determined in every point of time by the circumstances 
 he is in, and the causes he is under, to do that one thing he does, and 
 not possibly to do any other thing.” Such are the wordy definitions 
 of the philosophers. But for my part, I am no admirer of such defi¬ 
 nitions. I .c'hpose rather to call man a rational agent. To act as a 
 rational agent is quite different from the running of water, the blowing 
 of the wind, or the revolutions of a mill wheel. It is to act sometimes 
 above, and sometimes according to, circumstances. It is to draw* 
 motives from matter and mind, from heaven and earth, from the past 
 and the future, as well as from the present. It is sometimes to go 
 with our feelings, and sometimes against them. It is to act conforma¬ 
 bly with the last and be&t dictate of our understanding upon all the 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 premises, and upon all their bearings. All rational beings feel con¬ 
 scious, and, therefore, act upon the presumption that the mind is a self* 
 moving principle; that it has the power of originating its own 
 volitions. To oppose this, is to argue against our own feelings, our 
 own consciousness; and, as was before said, the mind’s own consci¬ 
 ousness is the best and the only infallible evidence of its own powers. 
 To argue against our own consciousness, is the same as to argue 
 against our own feelings. No treatise upon feelings, no arguments, 
 however specious, will prove to a man that he has not the toothache 
 yrhen he feels its exquisite twinges. Consciousness is to the mind what 
 feeling is to the body—-it is as credible a witness of what passes with¬ 
 in, as our feelings are of what passes in the outward frame. 
 
 When we summon witnesses to depose to the character of a man, we 
 do not summon those who live a hundred miles from him. We summon 
 those who are his nearest neighbors. Now were we to try the charac¬ 
 ter of Mr. Human Will in the court of our own understanding, what 
 witness would be the most credible? Would we summon Mr. Exter¬ 
 nal Sensation, or Mr. Internal Consciousness! We may interrogate 
 Mr. External Sensation , and he will declare that he lives so far off 
 Mr. Human Will , that he does not know much about him. But when 
 Mr. Internal Consciousness is interrogated, he deposes that he has 
 known Mr. Human Will from his earliest recollections, and that he 
 has lived always under the same roof with him, been his most intimate 
 companion, and that he knows positively that Mr. Human Will is not 
 a chained prisoner, but has the liberty of going and coming according 
 as suits his pleasure and convenience; that he is a very rational gentle¬ 
 man, and is governed by Mr. Reason only; that although he has been 
 severely attacked by the Messrs. Passions and Appetites in confeder- 
 ation, he never acts without calling up his privy counsellor, Mr, 
 Reason. Sometimes Mr. Reason decides too hastily; but always 
 Mr. Will takes the course which he chooses, and holds himself re¬ 
 sponsible to no authority out of his own family. With regard to the 
 testimony of Mr. Internal Consciousness , it is enough to say, that he 
 has never been known to utter a falsehood, nor to be deceived. 
 
 We may learn a good lesson on this subject from our own creations. 
 We make men in our image, as exactly, perhaps, as man was origin¬ 
 ally created in God’s image. When we make a governor, or a magis¬ 
 trate, we create him in our own image. We give him a certain quan¬ 
 tity of liberty, because weknowitis necessary from our own experience 
 that he should have a certain degree of liberty. For the same reason 
 we restrain him in other respects by law. Now, in this we act ration¬ 
 ally, because from our own experience; and thus w^e create official 
 men in our own image after our own likeness. We never think of 
 making a governor absolutely free and irresponsible; nor do we 
 think of binding him unalterably by law, so that, in no instance, he 
 may be left to act from his own judgment. We leave some things 
 altogether in his own power. And thus create him a rational agent. 
 
 The foundation of this system is laid in the human constitution. 
 Some of our organs are put under the control of our volitions—ethers 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 244 
 
 are not. I can move my eye, my hand, my foot, by an act of tlie 
 will; but I cannot move my heart, my liver, or my lungs, by a mere 
 act of the will. One class of of our animal actions flow from neces¬ 
 sity; another class from our volition. Or, in other words, some of 
 our animal actions are voluntary, and some are involuntary. The 
 health, comfort, and happiness of the whole man, require such an 
 economy in his organization. And so every thing within us and 
 every thing without us, confirm the idea that man is so organized, so 
 constituted, as to be a rational agent, sometimes to act from the mere 
 self-determining power of his own mind, and sometimes from the in¬ 
 fluences of circumstances; always, however, under the dominion of 
 reason. Suph are the decisions of our observation, experience, and 
 cousteiousness. Hence proceed that approbation and disapprobation 
 which we feel with regard to some of our actions on reviewing them. 
 And also on this principle proceeds the divine government over the 
 human race, as the scriptures abundantly testify. 
 
 But Mr. Owen talks of duty. It is a fhvorite word with him. He 
 seems to feel a little like a man, though he reasons against almost 
 every thing human, which accords with duty. To discharge a duty 
 is certainly to pay a debt. Does not this imply responsibility, or obli¬ 
 gation? And yet he preaches that all responsibility is a dream, a 
 notion, an error. He teaches that man owes no obligation to Creator 
 .nor fellow-creature. Duty, then, belongs not to man. If Mr. Owen 
 feels himself in duty bound to do any thing for man, he proves to 
 himself that he is responsible, and tf> he blamed if he discharge pot 
 his duty. But on the principles Mr. Owen advocates, we might talk 
 of the duties of insects, trees, and brutes; we might talk of the 
 duties of the sun, moon, and stars—of the winds and rain—of time 
 and sphee, as rationally as the duties of men. 
 
 The term conscience , with him, too, of frequent occurrence, means 
 nothing superior to instinct in brutes. Conscience, without a moral 
 principle, without a judge who takes cognizance of the heart, is 
 something of which I am ignorant. To talk of the conscience of a 
 dog, a horse, a fly, would seem an abuse of speech i but no greater 
 than to talk of the conscience of a man who is all flesh and blood, and 
 who feels himself irresponsible to any being in the universe, 
 
 1 would advise the incorrigible materialist to get rid of all our terms 
 expressive of moral or religious feeling; and to make a language 
 adapted to beings who have nothing in common with us Christians, 
 more than we have in common with the brutal creation. 
 
 It will be admitted that it is sometimes as possible to discover that the 
 language of a speaker does not correspond with the feelings of his heart ; 
 as it is to discover that some assertions do not correspond with facts. 
 Some of Mr. Owen’s assertions in his appendix are of this charac 
 ter. Page 217.—“Mr. Campbell’s learned defence of the Christian 
 scheme, after nearly a year’s application to prepare himself for it, 
 had the effect upon my mind to convince me that it had only the com¬ 
 mon foundation of all other religions to rest upon; and that its mys¬ 
 teries and miracles were of a more inferior invention than many 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 245 
 
 others, which Christians, from their infancy, were taught to contemn 
 and hold in derision, Possibly a similar result, relative to my opin¬ 
 ions, was produced upon Mr. Campbell’s mind.” 
 
 Now it is reasonable and necessary that, if we make any subtraction 
 from one part of this declaration, we should subtract equally from 
 the other part of it. It consists of two parts. The first respects my 
 preparation for the debate; the second, the effect which the debate 
 had upon Mr. Owen’s mind. Certainly Mr. Owen is as credible a 
 witness of what passes within his mind, as he is of things without it. 
 The former does always depend upon one witness, but not so the 
 latter. With regard to the “year's preparation ” part of the declara¬ 
 tion, it must be received with great caution. Instead of nearly a 
 year , it was only about nine months , from the time of Mr. Owen’s call 
 on me, and our engagement to meet in Cinctnati, till the time of our 
 meeting there. And instead of nearly a year’s preparation for the 
 debate , during these nine months I superintended the printing, cor¬ 
 recting, binding and distribution of one edition of a new translation 
 of the New Testament, also a hymn book; besides the writing neces¬ 
 sary fbr my periodical paper, and a heavy correspondence, equal at 
 least to one duodecimo volume per annum. All this, besides my 
 public labors as a teacher of the Christian religion, and all my domes¬ 
 tic and agricultural attentions. This much subtracted out of nine 
 months,did not afford me more than one day per week for preparations. 
 Now make a similar subtraction from what Mr. Owen says about his 
 convictions that Christianity has only the common foundation of all 
 other religions to rest upon, and I think we will come full nigh the 
 truth. 
 
 But when he says that the mysteries and miracles of Christianity 
 are of a more inferior invention than those of other religions, he says 
 what, I presume, the sceptics as a body do not believe; and I think 
 more than Mr. Owen himself believes, if he knew his own mind. 
 It is a very daring calumny, without a single support but the dictum 
 of Mr. Owen. Why did he not, either in the debate or in his appen¬ 
 dix, expose or contrast these pretended miracles or papistical legends, 
 (for the Koran pretends to no miracles,) with the Christian or Jew¬ 
 ish!? Mr. Owen writes as if men could believe not only as they 
 please, but without any evidence. Or else he supposes that, as Ac 
 says he tells nothing but the truth, mankind will from necessity be¬ 
 lieve him. 
 
 In the same page Mr. Owen excuses his inability to disprove a 
 single position I assumed in the whole discussion. He says—“I per¬ 
 ceived it would be a loss of time, and entirely useless, to discuss any 
 minor points, while the very foundation of all the associations of our 
 ideas remained unexamined and untouched. I therefore uniformly 
 declined all Mr. Campbell’s metaphysical questions, which I saw 
 had no real bearing upon the important subjects before us; and wished 
 to bring him to discuss first or fundamental principles, that we might 
 from these proceed, step by step, to some certain and beneficial con¬ 
 clusion.” 
 
 VOL. IT. 
 
 21 * 
 
m 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 All my positions then, Mr, Owen being judge, are minor points, 
 and all my questions are metaphysical. This is as poor a “come off™ 
 ns I have ever seen; it does not need a denial nor refutation from me. 
 The preceding pages do it ample justice. 
 
 Mr. Owen affirms that “a Christian population is always from 
 necessity a population full of deception.” I suppose it was owing 
 to the unhappy circumstance of Mr. Owen being educated in such a 
 population that he became so conversant, so unavoidably conversant 
 with this art. 
 
 Mr. Owen will always have the better of me in nature, composi¬ 
 tion, organization, and circumstances. Hence, when my circum¬ 
 stances forced me to be a free agent, his “convictions” formed his 
 own character. Mr. Owords convictions formed his character; but 
 the character of every other man in the wo*-ld was formed for him ; 
 so at least he avers —page 2 IS. “To me it early appeared by Mr, 
 Campbell’s feelings, language,, and manner, that his character has 
 been formed for him under all the influences derived from the no- 
 lions of man’s free agency, which had been made upon his original 
 organization from infancy; while I knew mine had been formed for 
 me by a conviction arising from facts, and deductions from them, that 
 those notions could not but be true, and that the feelings, thoughts, 
 and conduct were formed to be as they are, by circumstances not 
 under my control.” 
 
 Mr. Owen was active in forming his character according to his 
 convictions; but I am passive in receiving the impressions given me; 
 or in putting on the character formed for me. I cannot but complain 
 that Mr. Owen should thus form his own character, and then make 
 himself the former of all the characters in the world, without permit ¬ 
 ting any other person to equal honor with himself!! 
 
 But next comes the powerful struggle. Mr. Owen resolves on 
 death or victory. To wrest victory from ignorance, superstition, 
 and bigotry, he is resolved. The giant Free Agency is to be led cap¬ 
 tive in chains to the dark and dreary dungeon of Absolute Necessity, 
 where Fate, the jailor, is to lock him down in everlasting chains. 
 Mr. Owen only got to the threshold of the temple, or rather to the 
 threshold of the fortress of this Hero, in forty years thinking, reading, 
 writing, and debating. But now comes the tug of war. Hear him 
 put on his armor. See him gird on his sword.—Page 219. 
 
 “To the threshold of this subject we have approached through the 
 late public discussion in this city. Let us now try to enter into the 
 sanctuary, and wrest victory from the ignorance, superstition and 
 bigotry of all the ages which are past. It is a victory the most 
 worthy to contest, to the utmost stretch of the human faculties,, that 
 man has ever yet contended for.” 
 
 After telling us the pedigree of Free Agency and her offspring, he 
 brandishes his sword. Free Agency, says he, thou art the child of 
 Ignorance, and thy offspring is Hell upon Earth.” Whereas he intro ¬ 
 duces Necessity as the daughter of Reason and Knowledge, and hex 
 
APPENDIX, 24$ 
 
 offspring is Earth upon Heaven and Hell! We shall minute down 
 his blows at free agency:— 
 
 First Blow. —“The idea,” says Mr. Owen, “that a man can volun¬ 
 tarily do good or evil, generates malignant passions, disunion, conten¬ 
 tion, strife, and all kinds of vice and misery.” This is good logic. 
 The strength of the argument is solely in the boldness of the assertion . 
 Free agency parries this blow by an assertion too. She asserts that 
 apathy, or immorality, licentiousness, and every vice, are the natu¬ 
 ral offspring of material necessity; and that all virtue and goodness 
 are the natural fruits of free agency. Where assertion is the order of 
 the day, ’tis lawful to assert always in whole numbers, without frae 
 tions. 
 
 Second Blow ,—The idea of necessity, or that every man’s charac¬ 
 ter is formed for him, is that which enlightens his understanding, 
 and extirpates all bad feelings. But says the giant, free agenc}y 
 your assertion is neutralized; for the believer in necessity can have 
 no feelings at all, benevolenfor the contrary. Free agency cherishes 
 all good feelings; and prepares a person to govern or repress all bad 
 feelings, if such should manifest themselves. Have these two blows 
 drawn one drop of the blood of this giant? If a man is as passive as 
 a tree, or as this sheet of paper which receives every letter my pen 
 inscribes upon it, he can have no motive to excite benevolent feelings; 
 nor, indeed, any feelings at all. AH the sages in the world could 
 not show, why any man is to be rationally loved, or why gratitude, 
 or any sort of good feeling should exist in a society which has no 
 more free agency in it than trees or stones. 
 
 Third Blow. —“Free agency,” says the philosopher, deludes a 
 man in morals, as the eyes of the ignorant swains before the age of 
 Copernicus and Galileo physically deluded them about the notions 
 of the sun and the repose of the earth. This blow requires no par¬ 
 rying, it does not reach the point at which it was aimed. 
 
 Fourth Blow. —As man is first an infant, and as such can have 
 no miild of his own; as any language, religion, or science, may 1 e 
 given this infant without any act of its own, so it is absurd to hold 
 it responsible for either language, science, or religion. The logic 
 of this blow, if logic be in it, is dethroned by asserting that man 
 does not always continue an infant; and what is true of the infant 
 is not true of the man. It is not conclusive to aver, that because the ' 
 egg cannet bite, neither can the serpent. Because a child cannot 
 choose the country in which it shall beborn,itwill not logically follow 
 that the man can never expatriate itself. The correctness of Mr, 
 Owen’s conclusion as it is equivalent to, so it may be tested by, the 
 following syllogism, which I formed on Mr. Owen's model: A 
 child born in Wales can never migrate to the United States. 
 
 Fifth Blow. —Men have confounded their power to act in obedi¬ 
 ence to their will, when their will is formed, with the idea of liberty. 
 But has man the power to form his will? Aye that is the question 
 which is to discomfit free agency. But what about this forming of 
 
9AS 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 the will? Some philosophers talk about forming man’s will as if ifc 
 was formed or manufactured like a horse shoe; and as if it was a 
 piece, or parcel, or a member of the soul, which a man can move as 
 he can his hand or finger. I doubt not but nine tenths of all the 
 volumes written upon the human will, have been a mere logomachy 
 arising from using terms without ideas, or attaching discordant ideas 
 to the same terms. To talk of a man’s forming his will, or of “hav¬ 
 ing his will formed for him,” is rather too much in the style of mate¬ 
 rialism. I do not know but in the progress of human knowledge, in 
 a few years, we may have some very learned dissertations about 
 growing wills, as we grow grain and cattle. Patents may yet be 
 granted for casting wills into particular moulds; of this there may 
 be some certain expectation, if the new science of bumpology should - 
 gain ground. The idea has been already suggested of having caps 
 of steel with cells of taste, patriotism, and wisdom, to cause the heads 
 of infants to put forth protuberances of proper degrees of latitude 
 and longitude, so as to give to the full grown man, these or any 
 other prominent traits of character which the taste or exigencies of 
 society may require, 
 
 Mr. Owen told us something about rational faces, and angelic 
 countenances, which are to grow out of his new system of moulding 
 men’s wills. All this he promises us in the course of a few years. 
 The time will soon come when men will have so much skill in 
 surrounding the heads and faces of infants with such propitious 
 circumstances, as to give them strong rational lineaments. If the 
 materialists ever can form a community, attempts may be made on 
 the science of bumpology to give one and the same will to every 
 child born in their precincts. Mr. Gweil seems to think that he has 
 some extraordinary sagacity in this matter; for, he says, page 227*, 
 “No man has, I believe, ever yet investigated the subject of free 
 will and necessity, so early in life as myself; or so clearly ascertained, 
 from an observation of facts, and from practice, the science of the 
 formation of character, at an age sufficiently eajly to prevent the 
 influence of the doctrines of free will from forming his youthful habits 
 and associations of ideas.” This new doctrine o £ forming wills and 
 associations of ideas , I am willing to give entirely to my friend Mr. 
 Owen. In his own judgment he is eminently qualified for such an 
 undertaking. 
 
 The science of forming wills may yet mean no more than the 
 ancients meant by forming conclusions. I will , 1 determine , and I 
 conclude , may, after all Mr. Owen’s lucubrations, mean the same 
 thing. The unsophisticated state of the case, the plain common 
 sense decision of the whole matter, is this: when we begin to reason, 
 it is for the sake of the conclusion. All our conclusions make new 
 premises for other conclusions, and just as effects become causes, in 
 long concatenation, so does one set of conclusions become premises 
 for other conclusions. But the mystery of the doctrines of liberty 
 and necessity is dissolved and dissipated when it is known that one 
 set is called determinations. The difference is this, as was just now 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 24$ 
 
 said, when we begin to reason, it is for the sake of the conclusion. If 
 the conclusion is of one kind, we call it a determination.; if of another 
 kind, we call it a judgment. If it be a conclusion calling us to ac¬ 
 tion, we call it the determination; but if it do not call us to action-, 
 we call it a judgment. For example, some circumstance, occasion, 
 or person calls up to my reflections the battle of Waterloo. I reason 
 upon all the incidents of this momentous engagement, and arrive at 
 many conclusions concerning the various rencounters of the belli¬ 
 gerents. These conclusions not having any bearing upon my ac¬ 
 tions, nor forming any inducements to action, we call judgments. But 
 a proposition is made to me to go to Washington, or to stay at home. 
 I reason upon this proposition, and finally arrive at a conclusion to 
 go. This conclusion I call my will, or determination. AU conclu¬ 
 sions/of the understanding upon abstract or remote subjects, not 
 beaiing upon our conduct, we call judgments* But all conclusions 
 calling for our energies, we call determinations. So we speak and 
 so we feel. Hence we say, it is my judgment that he ought to go, 
 but it is my determination to go. The same premises and arguments 
 led to both these conclusions, but owing to the aspect of those conclu¬ 
 sions as bearing upon myself, the former I call a judgment , the latter 
 a determination. The conclusion of the whole matter then is, that 
 the controversy about liberty and necessity is a mere war of word*;- 
 that we might as reasonably talk about free thought, free reason, or 
 free inquiry, as about free will. We might as reasonably say that 
 thought is necessary, that liberty is necessary, that reason is neces-^ 
 sary, that doing good is necessary and unavoidable, as to talk 
 about the will, determination, or judgment being necessary. The 
 whole is a jargon of both sense and nonsense; of meaning, and no 
 meaning; of words without ideas, and ideas without words. Man is 
 a rational being, and as such must act , and may act according to the 
 best comparisons he can make. And whenever he ceases to reason 
 before he acts, or will not act according to the dictates of his under¬ 
 standing, he then ceases to act as a man. He is insane. Whether 
 the insanity be constitutional, or superinduced it matters not; wheth¬ 
 er it was occasioned by a blow, a fever, strong passions, it matters 
 not, he is insane for the time being. 
 
 But the capital mistake of the whole scheme of Mr. Owen, even if 
 he had killed the giant free agency, as he attempted, (so much to his 
 own discomfiture,) is this: He builds his whole castle upon the ice. 
 He makes all happiness, all good feeling, all intelligence and virtue, 
 to depend upon the admission of the doctrine of necessary agency ; and 
 yet his brethren, the Mahometans, have held, taught, and believed this 
 doctrine for twelve centuries; and have made it the rallying word, or 
 countersign, in all their bloody wars. Those necessarian Mahomet¬ 
 ans are as far from social happiness as any people upon the face o£ 
 the earth; and when the conduct, passions, and feelings, of our own 
 acquaintance, who believe most certainly that every thing that comes 
 to pass is as fixed and as unalterable as the throne of the universe,, 
 are examined, it will appear that no greater vagary or figment ever 
 
12dO APPENDli. 
 
 entered the human imagination than thatjthere is any change for the 
 better, to be effected in society, by a universal admission of the doc¬ 
 trine of necessity. The whole history of the necessarians in Turkey 
 and Christendom is appealed to in proof that these metaphysics, are 
 not more puissant than the doctrine of free agency, in improving the 
 morals, or in augmenting the happiness'of society. To say that they 
 are not more efficacious is saying as much as can be said in their favor. 
 Many thousands are disposed to show that they are not so efficacious 
 ns the metaphysics of free agency. But no person has ever yet found 
 that either system, or any system of pure metaphysics, has contributed 
 to the reformation of the world, or to the increase of human happiness ; 
 and as Mr. Owen has made all his system rest upon this one point as 
 the corner-stone, he has showm himself to be as little «f the philosopher 
 as he is of the Christian, For whether true or false, ii matters not; it 
 is not adapted to human nature. Not one in one thousand can com¬ 
 prehend it; and, as Mirabaud said about atheism, a philosopher will 
 say of Owenism, that whatever use it may be to the philosopher, it 
 can be of none to the common mass of society. 
 
 Mr. Owen’s whole science of forming human character is shown to 
 foe erroneous in principle, and inefficient in practice; and all his fine 
 things said about it, are but mere phantoms of an over-heated, imagi¬ 
 nation. Taking if as a whole, it is the most perfect visionary scheme 
 which this or any other age has ever been called upon to examine. 
 Its novelty is only in the combination, not in the materials. It has, 
 in other forms, been often on the stage, and as often laughed ofit of 
 countenance, It never has succeeded; it never can succeed. There 
 must be some truth, like cement, in every system. But very little 
 practical, and no new truth, can be found in this one. Ten thou¬ 
 sand Christian writers have dilated upon the faults and failings of the, 
 so called, Christian world, with as much plainness as Mr. Owen, and 
 with much more force than he. We all see, and feel, and labor 
 against, these defects. 
 
 Because a person may or can find fault with any state of society, 
 or any system of operations, it is neither to be presumed that the sys¬ 
 tem is radically wrong, nor that he can reform it. A person may find 
 fault with every thing in the universe. The sun has its specks, the 
 moon changes too often, and the stars are too small. But who can 
 make them better? Christianity is just as perfect as the sun in th6 
 natural system. Jesus Christ is the Sun of Mercy. He is to the mor¬ 
 al world what the material sun is to the natural—the fountain of light 
 and life. His religion is just adapted to man—to the whole race of 
 men, whether Jew or Greek, Barbarian, bond or free, male or female. 
 None can find a flaw in it; none can find where it could be improved. 
 It has progressed for two thousand years; is fast progressing still; 
 and will, ere long, cover the whole earth. It fears no opposition; the 
 more opposition, if well managed, the better. Gibbon and Hume in¬ 
 sidiously attacked it; Voltaire and the French' wits laughed at it; rid¬ 
 iculed it; Thomas Paine and a few others pretended to reason against 
 it; the m^erns now assert and declaim against it; but, like the sun, 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
 251 
 
 the centre of our system, it shines still, and diffuses its light ajad com¬ 
 fort over the earth; while its opponents, one by one, perish in their 
 own deceivings, and leave behind them only short-lived memorials of 
 their lolly, 
 
 I do not see a single idea, upon reviewing Mr. Owen’s appendix, 
 which merits notice; and very few, whether they merit it or not, 
 which have not been already examined or otherwise attended to in 
 ihe preceding pages. But in conclusion of this article upong his 
 system, I will add a few well written remarks from the pen of the 
 Rev. Timothy Flint , in his Monthly Review, for this month, (August.) 
 These remarks are a part of a review of the “Opening Speech” book, 
 by Mr. Flint, one of the gentlemen who presided over the preceding 
 discussion. They may cover some of our omissions, or express the 
 same ideas in another dress:— 
 
 “This mischievous belief in free will, is, according to him, the Pan¬ 
 demonium, the source of all the e vils and miseries, which so abound in 
 the earth. All this he charges to the account of Christianity—as 
 though that system originated the dispute about free will, when not a 
 word, we believe, is said about the doctrine, from the commencement 
 to the close of the Bible, except, perhaps, to speak of,the dispute as 
 the babbligg of some philosophers, who know not what they speak, 
 nor whereof they affirm. Nor does he remember, that whole schools 
 of Christian believers, and, as they affirm, the great body of Christians 
 in all ages, virtually deny the system of free will still more strongly 
 than Mr. Owen himself. 
 
 4 <Man being, according to him, a passive creature of circumstances, 
 he is properly under no accountability, and cannot be justly subject 
 to a law, as such. No praise or blame ought to be predicated of his 
 conduct; and, of course, every thing in the present order of society 
 turning upon praise and blame, reward and punishment, as their grand 
 hinge, every thing is therefore radically wrong. To alter all this, 
 schools of infants must be established, and every human being must 
 be surrounded from his birth by circumstances, which wall as neces* 
 sarily make him good and happy, as th(fy have heretofore made him 
 wicked and miserable. That, he is able to do this, is his own naked 
 assertion. That he has done it, would go farther to produce convict 
 tion than a thousand volumes of arguments. Ho asserts that he has, 
 and refers to his grand experiment at New Lanark in proof. We are, 
 after all, obliged to take his word for it; and, unhappily for the sys¬ 
 tem, there are many, who have seen the children there, w ho represent 
 the fact diametrically opposite. 
 
 “It is most ridiculously absurd, to suppose that not only that part of 
 the character, that is generally held to be influenced by reason, can 
 be changed, but even that part, which is deemed matter of physical 
 and animal endowment. We know that some are naturally vicious,~ 
 and others naturally amiable. He is sure- that he can alter all' 
 this by the moulding power of his system. When we referred him to 
 the unchangeable differences of the low r er animals, the Cunning and 
 the love of poultry of the fox—the natural impulse to move into ithe 
 
252 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 •water of the web-footed animals, &c—he replies by a sagacious look 
 and an intimation that animals have been badly reared, and may be in 
 a great measure trained out of their instincts. But when cats change 
 nature with rabbits, and foxes with sloths, when barn fowls instinct¬ 
 ively swim, and ducks avoid the water, then we will believe that any 
 system of education, however early and efficient, will new-mould 
 human nature, so as to form all beings, that are born with all their 
 differences of temperament, so that they can live together in love and 
 peace, without law or restraint. 
 
 “It is necessary to take but a small and bird's eye view of a section 
 of this grand scheme, that is thus to new-mould the world, to see the 
 folly and futility of it. Men are to be thrown together over the whole 
 earth in small communities of not less than three hundred, and not 
 more than two thousand. The most delightful and romantic picture 
 is given of these parallelogram communities. They are to push their 
 gardens, as they lengthen their cords, till community touches commu- 
 ?y in a space of the most perfect cultivation, and the most delightful 
 scenic landscape gardening, and in the most ample abundance of “the 
 best of every thing foi human nature.” These parallelograms are to 
 be refrigerated in summer and warmed in winter to the requisite tem¬ 
 perature for the different habits of the occupants. An idea of Mr. 
 Owen’s, somewhat original, as far as we know, is this, that much of 
 of the strong liking and disliking, the loves and antipathies, that have 
 been differently attempted to be explained, by some on the principle of 
 animal magnetism, are reallyin a great measure caused by the parties 
 being placed in a temperature conformable or not conformable to their 
 requisite temperament and habit of body. All this is to be in this 
 way mechanically remedied; and love and good feeling to receive 
 infinite physical aid by housing in similar temperatures, males and 
 females that require to be so disposed in order to lijte each other. 
 |t is absolutely wonderful and refreshing to think how happy the 
 whole world is thus to become under the operation of these sagacious 
 contrivances. 
 
 “There is to be no legal marriage of course; marriage being really 
 the union of the opposite sexes from liking each other. It can, there¬ 
 fore, last no longer, than while that liking lasts. When it i$ gravely 
 proposed to the philosopher, whether he does not think there will be 
 a good number of divorces in the course of each month, he answers, 
 No; that he deems, that the parties being strongly cemented by 
 similarity of temperament and temperature, and having chosen by 
 the principle of elective attraction in full operation, will cling together 
 like pitch, and will require the operation of force, at least the concus¬ 
 sion of a new and stronger impulse to shake them apart. 
 
 “In the present order of society, it is deemed infinitely important 
 that the child should be wise enough to know its own parents.— 
 Whether this would be more difficult or not, or a better test of the 
 child’s discernment, under the social system, is a matter of no im¬ 
 portance, since all children are part of the common stock of the com¬ 
 munity, and are to be taken from the actual parents, and put into the 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 
 hands of these numerous godfathers soon after their birth. Travelling, 
 in this order of things, is to be infinitely pleasant—as in fact it always 
 has been. But it is in the new order of affairs to be wholly without 
 expense—a most manifest and manifold improvement. In short—for 
 it would be useless to prolong the detail, the universe is to be con¬ 
 verted into on<e grand heaven —every body is to become rational, 
 and at the same time keenly sensitive. Every contrivance that can 
 be imagined, is to be got up in a style far surpassing the most luxu¬ 
 rious dreams of Mahomet’s Paradise, and all this mighty preluding—■ 
 all this machinery—all this scaffolding—all this wonderful move¬ 
 ment—all this renovation of man—all this hope of an earthly heaven, 
 is to be prepared with so much philosophy for two-legged tadpoles, 
 who are to live together at farthest seventy or eighty years; to be 
 then blasted with the frost of eternal annihilation—leaving no issue of 
 these “thoughts that wander through eternity,” but maggots, grub¬ 
 worms, cabbages, and weeds. These are thy Gods, O Israel! 
 
 “Some affect to consider this atheism of Mr. Gwen as harmless, 
 and without probable result. We do not so consider it. Most of the 
 former atheists have been men of violent passions, or bad character. 
 Mr. Owen has that same invincible and imperturbable mildness, which 
 Christianity ought to inspire and foster and so seldom does produce. 
 He has nothing of the fierce reasoning and windy declamation of 
 former atheists. He is so calm, cool, self-possessed, and apparently 
 so deep in his convictions of the truth and utility of his doctrine, that 
 kis positive assertions upon the subject, have very different influences 
 from the flippant and angry reasoningof the common herd of atheists. 
 He talks, too, of a power of sufficient energy and wisdom to have pro¬ 
 duced this visible universe with its unchanging order. But, whether 
 that power is wise and good in the abstract, whether it be intellectual 
 and self-moving, or the brute nature and the blind chance of the* 
 ancients, he declares there are no data or facts to determine. Hence 
 this power, in the book before us, and in his conversations upon the 
 subject, he uniformly denominates it 9 and when asked why he used 
 that term, he replied that it was done of design. We think the im¬ 
 posing and philosophic calmness, the mischievous simplicity, and the 
 undoubting positiveness of his system calculated to exercise a very 
 dangerous influence upon the numerous minds, inclined by tempera¬ 
 ment to be wrought upon by such a combination. 
 
 “There can be no doubt that man is constituted by his Maker, a 
 religious animal by the unchanging organization of his physical as 
 well as moral nature., as much so as web-footed fowls are formed for 
 swimming in the water. Atheists, therefore, are monsters in the 
 rational universe. Instead of attributing the universal propensity of 
 man in every country, clime, and age, to manifest this instinctive 
 impulse of his organization in some form of homage to a first cause, 
 they usually impute it to such a limited and partial cause as priest¬ 
 craft. Man has been found without priests or altars; but we affirm, 
 no where on our globe without some demonstration of the sentiment 
 of a divinity. 
 
 Y0JL o II 
 
 22 
 
 ( 
 
254 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 “We do not say that an atheist ought to be persecuted, or in any 
 way molested. Neither do we say that a man may not be so defec¬ 
 tively or monstrously constituted, as to be honest in his convictions 
 of atheism. But we do say, that an atheist is to be pitied, deeply and 
 sincerely pitied. What, rob the wide system of nature of its Maker? 
 —rob the infinite space of its vivifying, pervading, cheering, and 
 and if we may so say, socializing principle?—rob the firmament of 
 its cerulean, the stars of their lustre, the natural universe of its order 
 and design, the intellectual universe of wisdom, goodness, and mercy 
 —our beautiful world of its beauty—the imagination of its glorious 
 forms, the heart of friendship and hope? Suppose God absent from 
 his universe, and what have we left? If any thing in our opinion 
 ought to inspire indignation, surely it ought to be, to hear bipeds 
 lecturing us to assume our true dignity, by attempting to dethrone 
 God—forswear consanguinity with another existence, and a higher 
 order of beings—proving our dignity, by proving that we are worms, 
 and no more, and that they are really, and in truth, our brother and 
 sister—exalting us to our rational nature, by proving to us, that all 
 we can hope must be snatched between the cradle and the grave— 
 that our consciousness shall there terminate, as though we had not 
 been; that all thoughts, hopes, fears, all the ardent aspirations of 
 minds cemented by the ties and friendships of this life must be then 
 and there for ever severed. Such is the dignity and rationality, and 
 better hopes, and higher thoughts, and more intellectual character, to 
 which the social system would raise us. Such are the motives under 
 which the future Curtii are to leap down the gulf, the future Washing¬ 
 tons to become emancipators, and the future Miltoids to sing. Shall 
 we be told, that these are the poor attempts to flay the Marsyas, that 
 had been flayed already? Shall we be told, that no one thinks of 
 the system, except in ridicule, that the very self-same great men, 
 whom Mr. Owen counts as his converts, shrug their shoulders, and 
 ridicule him the moment he has passed the threshold? All this may 
 be. But the man, so calm, 90 self-possesssd, so mild, so capable of 
 meeting every form of hatred, ridicule, contempt, and vilification, 
 without the excitement of apparent ill will or disposition to vilify and 
 ridicule in retaliation, is not a man -whose influence is to be slighted. 
 Look at the extent to which the papers, that inculcate these senti¬ 
 ments, circulate. ^Look at the eagerness to read this very book 
 before us, and see if the doctrines contained in it are harmless, 
 carrying their own refutation with them. We say again, let us be 
 taught by an enemy. Let us be led by his bold and bitter exposition 
 of the facts, as we have them in the book before us, to look into that 
 miserable war of bigotry, and denunciation, which the thousand 
 Christian sects are waging in the blindness of their ignorance, and 
 the positiveness, pride, and cruelty of their unsanctified natures 
 against each other, reminding us of the horrible and murderous 
 factions in the holy city, while the strength and power of the Roman 
 legions were driving their battering rams against the tottering walls 
 without. 
 
APPENDIX. 255 
 
 1 y\Ve remark a curious inconsistency in the book before us, and 
 which we have more strongly remarked in the conversations of its 
 author upon the subject. All the evils, and all %c miseries of that 
 depraved and vicious state of society, which we have too much 
 reason to admit, exists in the present order of things, he attributes to 
 Christianity an 1 the free-will systems, and sometimes to religion in 
 general—-giving this principle an efficiency for evil, which, unhappily, 
 it has not either for evil or good. Perhaps in the very next paragraph, 
 or conversation, he informs you that the present system of religion and 
 society is worn out; that ministers are every where ceasing to be of 
 any account; that polite and well informed people never talk religion; 
 that it is a system falling of itself, and of its own age, weakness and 
 imbecility. One or the other of these views of things must be false. 
 Religion cannot be the main spring of society, the omnipotent mani- 
 chean principle of evil, and at the same time a weak, inefficient, worn 
 out and exploded error. 
 
 '‘There is at least originality and amusement in hearing a man dis¬ 
 cussing with apparent and philosophic calmness, and conviction, the 
 possibility of so training children, that they shall have no irascibility, 
 no selfishness, no sense o iincum and tuum; no ambition, no rivalry—- 
 and in fact, nothing about them, physically or morally, ugly or vici¬ 
 ous. According to him, the children born under the social system, 
 should have nothing of the internal or external structure of the ex- 
 isting race, but merely the same organs; being as unlike them as 
 as angels are to Yahoos- All tills change is to be the result of new 
 circumstances placed about them, which are to blot out all bad pas¬ 
 sions, erase all ambition and selfishness, and make them rational, 
 handsome, and amiable universally. One would think that these 
 dear, beautiful, and angelic worms, thus divested of all internal causes 
 of whirlwind and volcanic explosion, would become quietists—sing¬ 
 ing an eternal lullaby on their beds of roses, and requiring flappers to, 
 arouse them to eat and drink “the best of everv thing for human 
 nature,* 5 and with scarcely enough of the dreggy influence of the 
 old system in them, to bethink themselves of the necessity of perpe¬ 
 tuating the future generations of these happy entities. No such a thing. 
 While the dreamy influence of the social system is upon them, instead 
 of reducing them to slothful quietists, they are to become the most 
 vigorous, warm-hearted, Epicureans imaginable. They are only to 
 be passive and querists to evil—but ardent, energetic, and ever 
 active to good, and love, and happiness. And is it for the advocates 
 of this system to charge us, while we give these views of their doc¬ 
 trine, with drawing from our own imagination, and distorting or 
 miscoloring facts? What age or country ever invented such a mon¬ 
 strous romance as the social system? Mr. Owen declaims against 
 cultivating the imagination; and we hold the history of the Seven 
 Sleepers, Cinderilla, or any tale in the Arabian Nights to be mathe¬ 
 matics, and sobriety itself, compared with Mr. Owen’s inhabitants of 
 his parallelograms; compared with the beautiful men and women, who 
 will swear constancy, till death, without legal marriage or alimony, 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 256 
 
 and who will have neither lust nor inconstancy, wTien they woo and 
 wed after the fashion of the vernal robins and sparrows. What shall 
 we predicate of a system which proposes to govern the world by a code 
 ofiaws, which can be comprised in about a hundred lines? (Vide 
 pages 49^ 50, 51, 52.) 
 
 “Sure enough, there is no imagination in burning the Alexandrian 
 library and the pandects and rescripts and the tomes of common law’, 
 and civil law, and “crown quest law,” and the five hundred folios of 
 the abridgement of the abridged cases and reports, of the codes of the 
 Grecian legislators, and the Roman legislators, and the Lockes and 
 Montesquieus even in our present congress: like them of the Grecian 
 fable, sowing dragon’s teeth, and seeing a generation forthwith 
 springing up from the seed, at once quietists, and as active as flame, 
 led full with the “best of every thing for human nature,” and having 
 no labor, but what is made a pleasure; nothing, in fact to do, but to 
 sing, love, dance, and promenade, and who yet, without a God, with¬ 
 out religion, restraint, praise or blame, reward or punishment, can be 
 kept in the most harmonious and angelic order, by a code of laws com¬ 
 prised by Mr. Philosopher Owen, in a hundred lines! Surely there 
 is no imagination, no poetry, no fiction, no loans from the fancy in all 
 this. We have Mr, Owen’s word for it—that all this can be done—is 
 just on the eve of being done, and will assuredly be done. When it is 
 done—and there is actually such a sight—“may 1 be there to see.” 
 But till that time, we throw back the charge of drawing from the 
 imagination, upon the founder of this system.” 
 
 Dismissing this branch of the metaphysics and of the speculations 
 of Mr. Owen, 1 have something to say to the “ materialists ” upon 
 other parts of their system. These gentlemen, so fond of matter, 
 give to it what they refuse to mind. They say that every particle ot 
 matter has a self-determining power. It always existed, and will 
 always exist. Every particle of matter is self-existent, and eternal. 
 Their philosophy is a chain of causes and effects reaching back 
 without beginning, and lorvvard without end. No first cause and no 
 last cause in their system. Yet it seems to come to this dilemma at 
 last:— Nothing caused something , or Something caused itself. Some- 
 thing struck rae, but something moved that something; and so Lack 
 we go for ten thousand somethings; still w r e find need of something to 
 move tjie last in the series, else it moved itself. If it did not move 
 itself, then something or nothing moved it. The latter is absurd. 
 Something, then, moved the first something—and that is what the 
 Christians call God. If the progression of cause and effect was finite, 
 says the philosopher, then you have proved the point. “But we never 
 c n get back to the first something because the progression is infi¬ 
 nite.’’ This will not. help, you, gentlemen. For if you cannot travel 
 back to the first something, you may rest assured the first something 
 never could have travelled down to you. If the first link of your 
 chain is at an infinite distance back, so that you corvid never travel 
 back to it, no part of it could have reached down to you. 
 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 267 
 
 To suppose that any thing made itself, is to suppose that it existed 
 before it made itself, which is what we call absurd: for if it existed 
 before it made itself, it could net give itself existence, which is all 
 that is implied in creating. 
 
 [f the whole universe exists by a necessary self-existent power, 
 then all the parts of it possess this self-existent power; but this is 
 contrary to all our experience; for not one creature possesses it—all, 
 we see, are dependent. Neither of these hypotheses will bear the 
 test. We shall, then, try whether the universe could have existed 
 from eternity upon other principles. 
 
 We have two ideas of eternity: the one is an eternity composed of 
 successive periods—the other, an eternity without succession. The 
 latter is the Christian idea—the former is the materialist idea. Now 
 as their eternity of successive periods is the only idea which the 
 material universe suggests, then it follows, that, when we contem¬ 
 plate the earth at any one period of its existence, it had then some 
 relation to past periods; that is, it had finished so many periods at 
 that time, its past existence is now completed. If, then, at any 
 past period,of its existence, it began to be related to past duration, 
 that period w r as the commencement of its existence. But if it did 
 not, at any past period, stand related to any past duration, it does 
 not now ; but that it does now stand related to past duration, must be 
 admitted; it must therefore always have stood in such a relation, which 
 precludes the idea of its being eternal. Those who are fond of me¬ 
 taphysics may try themselves upon the following demonstration. It 
 will prove, at least, that time had a beginning. And w hat was prior, 
 the niateri ilists will have to tell, I give you a condensed view of the 
 argument of the schools, from the pen of James Duncan of Indiana, 
 published in 1826:— 
 
 “Unbounded space and eternity are ideas so analogous to each 
 other, that any thing that tends to illustrate the one, equally tends to 
 elucidate the other. 
 
 “Both are infinite. Unbounded space cannot be all divided into 
 pir.s; neither can eternity. If a body of any definite extension 
 were to occupy a part of unbounded space, unbounded space would 
 bo no less; and if any definite period were taken out of eternity, 
 et unity would be no shorter. If two bodies were placed at any 
 supposed distance from each other, the distance could not be infinite-, 
 because they would admit ©f space beyond them, and also would 
 admit of being brought together, both of which would be impossible, 
 if they were infinitely distant from each other. The same may be 
 said of tw r o imaginary points in eternity, however distant from each 
 other we might suppose them to be, they would admit of durati. n 
 beyond them and might be brought together; therefore, could not 
 have been infinitely distant. Unbounded space has no circumfer¬ 
 ence, nor no centre; neither has eternity. Unbounded space has 
 no zenith, no nadir; that is, no extreme point above, no extreme 
 point below; so eternity, considered and abstracted from time, has 
 no past duration nor future. 
 
 VOL. II. 
 
 22 * 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 25S 
 
 “It would imply a contradiction to say, that even God himself 
 could place two globes in unbounded space at an infinite distance 
 apart, because, if they were fixed in a space at all, they would have 
 space beyond them, and would admit of being brought together, which 
 c >uld not be, if their distances were infinite. If it were possible for 
 two globes to be placed at an infinite distance from each other, it 
 would imply a contradiction in terms to say they could be brought 
 together; it would be the same as to say they had passed through, 
 and ended a course that was endless. 
 
 “It would be a contradiction in terms to say, a ball could be 
 placed at an infinite distance from our earth, because, however dis¬ 
 tant it might be placed, it would admit of space beyond it, and could 
 be ma.de to pass over the whoM intermediate space and reach our 
 earth. 
 
 “But suppose it possible for a ball to be placed at an infinite dis¬ 
 tance from our earth, and in motion towards the earth when at its 
 .greatest distance, it could never reach the earth, because the distance 
 is supposed to be endless; that which is endless cannot be ended. 
 If it were placed at the greatest possible distance from the earth at the 
 same time in motion towards the earth, its very motion towards the 
 earth would leave space behind it, which suppose its distance could 
 not be infinite. Its most early motion towards the earth would 
 shorten the distance; but infinite distance cannot be shortened.— 
 If its motion were to be continued, it would actually reach the earth, 
 so that the distance could not have been infinite. Suppose the ball 
 to actually reach the earth, and made to travel back the whole route 
 it had passed, in coming to the earth; the query is, Would it ever 
 finish its retrograde journey ? All will admit, that if the distance was 
 finite it might, but if infinite, it would be impossible. The conclusion 
 then, from these premises is, that no created being could be made to 
 occupy a place or station at an infinite distance from our earth, and 
 to assert such a thing, would be a contradiction in terms. 
 
 “If we apply these principles relative to unbounded space to un¬ 
 bounded duration, they will go to show that our world could not have 
 existed from eternity. 
 
 “If it had been possible for the world to have existed from eternity, 
 it would not have passed down through infinite duration to the pres¬ 
 ent time. That which is endless cannot be ended. But whatever 
 the past age of the world has been, it is now measured, and the entire 
 round of its past existence is now ended; therefore, it could not have 
 existed from eternity. 
 
 “Wherever we date the primitive existence of the world, its 
 most early existence, and its successive progress in duration towards 
 the present time, must have been coincident and jwst as early as 
 the world existed; duration was then changing from the present to 
 the past tense, so that in its most early existence it was related to 
 past time, therefore ©ould pot have existed from eternity. 
 
APPENDIX* 
 
 259 
 
 “The very first moment of time that elapsed, made the succeed¬ 
 ing time shorter. Duration that is capable of being shortened cannot 
 be infinite. This supposes the world has had a beginning, and has 
 not stood from eternity because, in its earliest existence, it was 
 related to past time, and the period between that and the present 
 time, was capable of being shortened, was actually shortened and at 
 length came to an end. 
 
 “If for the sake of illustration, we suppose the world to take a 
 retrograde'.journey through ail the past period of its duration, all will 
 admit, that if its past duration had been from eternity, it could never 
 finish its journey back, because, the length is supposed to be infinite, 
 But. if its past duration were finite, it might without implying any 
 inconsistency travel the whole of it again. . 
 
 “The above demonstration concludes with absolute certainty, that 
 the world has not existed from eternity, but must have been created. 
 The collective evidence from the whole may be comprised in two 
 arguments. Whatever the past age of the world has been, its 
 past age has now completely transpired, so that nothing of it remains, 
 therefore, it could not have been infinite. If the world was made 
 to travel back the entire period of its past existence, it could never 
 finish it if it had existed from all eternity. 
 
 “Orj. We can have some idea of a body travelling through space, 
 •and returning, but we can have none of a body passing through 
 duration, and returning. 
 
 “Avs. The validity of this objection, as it may relate to the power 
 of God, cannot he admitted, but should it be persisted in, the transi¬ 
 tion is easy in this case from the past time to the future,* eternity 
 past is no longer than eternity future. The world has travelled, and 
 actually finished its past duration, whether finite or infinite. If the 
 past duration of the world is said to be from eternity, the query now 
 is, eould the world ever travel entirely through an eternal future du- 
 lation, so that it might in truth be affirmed, as in the former case, 
 that its future existence is entirely finished? Every candid person 
 will say that it would he impossible. As then, it never can be true 
 to affirm, that the world has existed to eternity, or that it has finished 
 an eternal future existence, it cannot be true to say, it has existed 
 from eternity, or finished an eternal past existence. 
 
 “If the above premises are fair, and the conclusion just, the only 
 and last refugeof modern atheists is not only destroyed, but entirely 
 annihilated, so that it never can with confidence be resumed. If 
 then, this last fortress is demolished, we are conscious of no other to 
 which they can have recourse, but must be shut up to believe in a 
 God, and also that he has created the universe of nature.” 
 
 Before time matter was then asleep, and Who awaked it is the 
 question. If there be an active principle in matter, this principle 
 must be distinct from it, and then the next question, What is the 
 active principle—matter or spirit? Here the materialist’s candle 
 goeth out again, and so ends his philosophy. 
 
2 60 
 
 appendix; 
 
 Dr. George Campbell of Aberdeen, obliged the sceptic Ilume to be¬ 
 lieve in miracles in spite of him. And we call upon the sceptics, one 
 and all, to show how they can avoid it. We shall, therefore, let them 
 hear the Doctor:— 
 
 “Abstractingfrom the evidence for particular facts, we have irrefraga¬ 
 ble evidence , that there have been miracles in former times; of suck 
 events as, when compared with the present constitution of the world 
 would, by Mr . Hume, be denominated miraculous. 
 
 a I readily concur with Mr. Hume in maintaining, that when, merely 
 by the force of reason, we attempt to investigate the origin of worlds, 
 we get beyond our sphere, and must infallibly bewilder ourselves in 
 hypothesis and conjecture. Reason indeed (which vainly boasts her 
 all-sufficiency ) has sometimes pretended to carry men to this amazing 
 height. But there is ground to suspect, that, in such instances, the 
 ascent of reason, as the author elegantly expresses it, has been aided 
 by the wings of imagination. If we will not be indebted to revela¬ 
 tion, for our knowledge of this article, we must, for aught I can per¬ 
 ceive, be satisfied to live in ignorance. There is, however, one ques¬ 
 tion distinct from the former, though akin to it, which, even from the 
 principles of reason, v/e may with great probability determine. The 
 question I mean is, whether the world had an origin or not? 
 
 “That there has been an infinite, eternal, and independent series of 
 finite, successive, and dependant beings, such as men, and consequent¬ 
 ly that the world had no beginning, appears from the bare considera¬ 
 tion of the thing, extremely incredible, if not altogether absurd. The 
 abstract argument used on this head, might appear too metaphysical 
 arid refined; I shall not therefore introduce it; but shall recur to to¬ 
 pics which are more familiar, and which, though they do not demon¬ 
 strate, that it is absolutely impossible that the world has existed from 
 eternity, clearly evince that it is highly improbable, or rather, certainly 
 false. These topics [ shall only mention, as they are pretty obvious, 
 and have been often urged with great energy by the learned, both 
 ancient and modern. Such are the late invention of letters, and of all 
 the sciences arid arts by which human life is civilized; the known 
 origin of most nations, states, and kingdoms; and the first peopling of 
 many countries. It is in our power at present to trace the history of 
 every people, backwards to times of the greatest barbarity and ignor¬ 
 ance. Europe, though not the largest of the four parts into which the 
 earth is divided, is, on many accounts, the most considerable. But 
 what a different face does Enrope wear at present, from what it wore 
 three thousand years ago? How immense the odds in knowledge, in 
 arts, in policy, in every thing? How easy is the intercourse, and 
 how extensive the acquaintance, which men can now enjoy with all, 
 evert the remotest regions of the globe, compared with what was, or 
 could have been, enjoyed, in shut time of darkness and simplicity? A 
 inan differs not more from a clidd, than file human race now, differs 
 from the human race then. Three thousand years ago, appear indeed 
 to mark a very distant epoch; and yet it is but us yesterday, compared 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 261 
 
 with eternity. This, when duly weighed, every thinking person will 
 acknowledge to be as strong moral evidence as the subject can admit, 
 {and that I imagine is very strong) that the world had a beginning. 
 
 “X shall make a supposition, which will perhaps appear whimsical, 
 but which will tend to elucidate the argument I am enforcing. In 
 antediluvian times, when the longevity of man was such as to include 
 some centuries, i shali suppose, that a few boys had been imported to 
 a desert island, and there left together, just old enough to make shift 
 to sustain themselves, as those in the golden age are fabled to have 
 done, on acorns, and other spontaneous productions of the soil. I shall 
 suppose, that they had lived there for some hundreds of years, had 
 remembered nothing of their coining into the island, nor of any other 
 person whatsoever—and that thus they had never had access to know, 
 or hear, of either birth or death. I shall suppose them to enter into 
 a serious disquisition concerning their own duration, the question 
 having been stated. Whether they had existed from eternity, or had 
 once begun to be? They recur to memory, but memory can furnish 
 them nothing certain or decisive. If it must be allowed that it con¬ 
 tains no trace of beginning of existence, it must be allowed, that it 
 reaches not beyond a few centuries at most. They observe besides, 
 concerning this faculty, that the further back it goes, it becomes the 
 more indistinct, terminating at last in confusion and darkness. Some 
 things however they distinctly recollect, and are assured of. They 
 remember they were once of much lower stature, and of smaller size; 
 they had less bodily strength; all their mental faculties were weaker. 
 They know that, in the powers both of body and of mind, they have 
 advanced, by imperceptible degrees, to the pitch they are now arrived 
 at. These considerations, especially when fortified by some anala- 
 gous observations they might have made on the growth of herbs and 
 trees, would have shown the probability to be entirely on the side of 
 those who asserted, that their existence had a beginning; and though, 
 on account of the narrow sphere of their knowledge and experience , 
 the argument could not have appeared to them in all its strength, we, 
 from our long acquaintance with nature, even abstracting from our 
 knowledge of man in particular, must be satisfied, thal it would have 
 been strictly analogical and just. Exactly similar, the very same, l 
 should rather say, is the argument I have been urging for the origin 
 of the species. Make but a few alterations in the phraseology—for 
 memory, substitute history and tradition; for hundreds of years, say 
 thousands; for the powers of body and mind, put the arts and sciences; 
 and, with these, and perhaps one or two more such variations, you will 
 find the argument as applicable in the one case, as in the other. Now, 
 if it be granted, that the human species must have had a beginning, ir 
 will hardly be questioned, that every other animal species, or even 
 
 the 
 
 Jim verse, 
 
 must have had a beginning. 
 
 that 
 
 “But in order to prove the proposition laid down in the title of this 
 section, it is not necessary to suppose that the world had a beginning. 
 Admit it had not, and observe the consequence. Thus much must 
 be admitted also, that not barely for a long continued, but for an eter- 
 
262 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 J?al succession of generations, mankind were in state little superior 
 to beasts; that, of a sudden, there came a most astonishing change 
 upon the species; that they exerted talents and capacities, of which 
 there-appeared not the smallest vestige, during the eternity preceding; 
 that they acquired such knowledge as procured them a kind of empire, 
 not only over the vegetable and animal worlds, but even, in some re¬ 
 spects, over the elements, and all the unwieldy powers of matter; that, 
 in consequence of this, they were quickly raised, much more above 
 the state they had been formerly and eternally in, than such their 
 former and eternal state was above that of the brute creation. If such 
 a revolution in nature, such a thorough, general, and sudden change 
 as this, would not be denominated miraculous, it is not in my power to 
 conceive what would. 1 could not esteem it a greater miracle, hardly 
 so great, that any species of beasts, which have hitherto been doomed 
 to tread the earth, should now get wings, and float about in the air. 
 
 “Nor will this plea be subverted by that trite objection, That man¬ 
 kind may have been as much enlightened, perhaps myriads of years 
 ago, asthey are at present; but that by some universal calamity, such 
 as deluge or conflagration, which, after the rotation of many centuries, 
 the earth possibly becomes liable to, all traces of erudition and of sci¬ 
 ence, all traces both of the elegant and of the useful arts, may have 
 been effaced, and the human race, springing from a few who had esca¬ 
 ped the common ruin, may have emerged, anew, out of barbarity' and 
 ignorance. This hypothesis does but substitute one miracle in the 
 place of another. Such general disorder is entirely unconformable to 
 our experience of the course of nature. Accordingly the destruction 
 *jf the world by a deluge, the author has numbered among those 
 prodigies, or miracles, which render the Pentateuch perfectly incred¬ 
 ible. 
 
 “If, on the contrary 7- * we admit that the world had a beginning, (and 
 will not every thinking person acknowledge that this position is much 
 more probable than the contrary?) the production of the world must 
 be ascribed either to chance , or to intelligence. 
 
 “Shall we derive all things, spiritual and corporeal, from a principle 
 so insignificant as blind chance? Shall we say 7 , with Epicurus, that 
 the fortuitous course of rambling atoms has reared this beautiful and 
 stupendous fabric? In that case, perhaps, we should give an account 
 of the origin of things, which, most people will think, could not proper¬ 
 ly be styled miraculous. But is it, because the formation of a grand 
 and regular system in this way, is conformable to the experienced or¬ 
 der of nature? Quite the reverse. Nothing can be more repugnant to 
 universal experience, than that the least organic body, not to mention 
 the glorious frame of nature, should be produced by such a casual 
 jumble, It has, therefore, in the highest degree possible, that particu¬ 
 lar quality of miracles, from which, according to the author’s theory 7 , 
 their incredibility results; and may doubtless, in this loose acceptation 
 of the word, be termed miraculous. But should we affirm that, to ac 
 count thus for the origin of the universe, is to recount for it by miracle; 
 we should be thought, I am afraid, to speak both weakly and impre- 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 2£3 
 
 pferly. There is something here, if I may so express myself, which 
 «is far beyond the miraculous; something, for which I know not whe- 
 ther any language can afford a proper appellation, unless it be the gen- 
 eral appellations of absurdity and nonsense. 
 
 “Shall we then at last recur to the common doctrine, that the world 
 was produced by an intelligent cause? On this supposition also, 
 though incomparably the most rational, it is evident, that, in the cre¬ 
 ation, formation, or first production of things, call it by what name 
 you please, a power must have been exerted, which, in respect of the 
 present course of nature, may be styled miraculous. I intend not to 
 dispute about a word, nor inquire, whether that term can, in strict pro¬ 
 priety, be used of any exertions before the establishment of the laws 
 of nature. I use the word in the same latitude in which the author 
 commonly uses it in his reasoning, for every event that is not con¬ 
 formable to that course of nature with which we are acquainted by 
 experience. 
 
 “Whether, therefore, the world had, or had not a beginning; whe¬ 
 ther, on the first supposition, the production of things be ascribed to 
 chance or to design; whether, on the second , in order to solve the 
 numberless objections that arise, we do , or do not , recur to universal 
 catastrophes; there is no possibility of accounting for the phenomena 
 that presently come under our notice, without having at last recourse 
 to miracles ; that is, to events altogether unconformable, or, if you 
 will, contrary to the present course of nature known to us by expe¬ 
 rience. I cannot conceive an hypothesis, which is not reducible to 
 one or other of those above mentioned. Whoever imagines that ano¬ 
 ther might be framed, which is not comprehended in any of those, 
 and which has not as yet been devised by any system-builder; let hipn 
 make the experiment, and I will venture to prognosticate, that he will 
 still find himself clogged with the same difficulty. The conclusjop 
 therefore above deduced, may be justly deemed, till the contrary is 
 shown, to be not only the result of one, but alike of every hypothesis, 
 of which the subject is susceptible. / 
 
 “Thus it has been evinced, as w r as proposed, that abstracting from 
 the evidence for particular facts, we have irrefragable evidence that 
 there have been, that there must have been, miracles in former times, 
 or such events, as when, compared with the present constitution of 
 the world, would by Mr. Hume be denominated miraculous/’ 
 
 And here we bid Mr. Owen farewel. He is, I believe, entitled to the 
 honor of having originated the first infant school. He is as zealous as 
 those who compassed sea and land to make a proselyte; and whether his 
 proselytes are likely to be as useful in this world, and as happy in the 
 next, as those of the old Sadducees, we shall all know long before his 
 visionary and Utopian projects are realized. 
 

 • 5 ' ", r ' , . 1 ' 
 
 
 
 ■ its 
 
 ■ ■ . , 5 
 
 ■ 
 
 , - ,, ,, . ,~. v 
 
 
 ■ ‘ ■ • ‘.v. ' .<■ 
 
 ' 
 
 . 
 
 ' 
 
 ■ 
 
 '(Hr 
 
 rV.it ' 
 
 ‘4 
 
 * 
 
 * 
 
 I 
 
 s 
 
 ' 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 ..... ' ' ' ' '• ” •<-. ■' / 
 
 ■ - '.y ; 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 ■1 i 
 
 JMW - • 
 
 *?.. ■ •.$ v i' . 
 
 T- Z'y’. ; , ■ , ■ ■ 
 
 , 1 , . (fa '4w • 
 
 . 
 
 " & 
 
 ^ \ ^'KpV {V* 
 
 !•*' ■ r'*j 
 
 r< & * 
 
 
 . V' ' ;•«{ • 
 
 ;• 'Mijii i 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 • 
 
 . 
 
 * • 
 
 0! \ 
 
 
 “A l.;W ! 
 
 . 
 
 » 
 
 
 . 
 
 ' 
 
 jV«^ »$} 
 
 
 i i+iil H. '--; *v&6i 
 
 ' 
 
 * '✓ V. 
 
 i i:*'v 
 
 
 tf ' 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 1 't'X." i*? l ;i 
 
 r : fv> ,.i i i- ■ ■ ' 
 
 ,' ■. ,iv 
 
 
 *■••# ■ 'i : iU 
 
 i. $}’*£$ ' 
 
 . ;■ . \ >/ * ■ • ,v j •• ■■ 
 
 .* »vv 
 
 r • ■ ' 
 
 
 
 '4 
 
 . 
 
 jr. jfe ■ 
 
 i' 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 V'' 
 
 ■ wm r , c 
 
 ■*v. 
 
 
 X- 
 
 ?¥ 
 
 »♦ 
 
 ...: , ■•" v> vf '* " ■ 
 
 
 
 ' j j 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 FACTS AND DOCUMENTS, 
 
 In corroboration of the arguments exhibited in the foregoing work, in 
 defence of the Divine Origin of Christianity. 
 
 HAVING a few evenings ago the pleasure of holding a conversation 
 in writing, with George W. Stcenrod, of Ohio county, Va. a young 
 man deaf and dumb, who has been a student in the Pennsylvania 
 Institution for the deaf and dumb; I proposed to him among others, 
 the following questions. These questions were proposed in writing, 
 with a view of corroborating my argument deduced from the impos¬ 
 sibility of originating the idea of God, of any spiritual existence, or 
 a future state independent of revelation. He is a young man of an 
 acute understanding and a very retentive memory, now in his seven¬ 
 teenth year. Iie gave me the following written answers:— 
 
 Query 1.—Before you went to the Pennsylvania institution for the 
 deaf and dumb, had you any idea of God, of the creation, or of the 
 beginning of all things? 
 
 Answer. —“As I was not acquainted with religion before I went to 
 that school, I had not any idea of God. I was there taught that there 
 was a God, I knew nothing of the creation or beginning of things. 
 
 I thought that the soil and the sun produced every thing; 1 thought 
 the sun created all the heavenly bodies and the storms. 
 
 Query 2. —Did you think any thing about the spirits of men, or 
 had you an idea that men possessed spirits? 
 
 Answer. —I do not recollect of ever having thought any thing about 
 men’s spirits. I saw that men were superior to other animals, and 
 also that they were superior to one another, but how they became so 
 I had no thought; I saw that other creatures could not read nor wrifb, 
 and I could not read nor write more than they. From this I saw 
 that some men were superior to some animals and to some men; but 
 even yet I know but little about men’s spirits. 
 
 Query 3.—What did you think became of men after death? 
 
 Answer. —I had not any thought nor idea of what became of men 
 after death. Some persons by signs taught me that there was a devil 
 in hell, who lived with wicked people; but of that I was always 
 doubtful. 
 
 Query 4.—What did you think of the sun, and moon, and stars ? 
 
 Answer. —I thought the sun was our most powerful king, who 
 governed over all things; all the creatures, and all mankind, I 
 thought the moon was his wife, and the stars their children; that they 
 ruled in alternate service; that the moon took care and governed by 
 night, and the sun by day. I thought the sun looked tyrannical and 
 was sometimes oppressive, in the heat of summer and in the cold of 
 winter. Sometimes he appeared unkind and would not give us pro¬ 
 duce for our labor, or allow us to preserve for our comfort what we 
 VOL. lie 23 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 2 m 
 
 had gathered. He seemed to announce the coming of the storms, 
 and to order us to take shelter from them. But if we did not take 
 shelter he would kindle into rage and threaten to kill us by strokes of 
 lightning. I am thankful that ever I was taught to read and write, 
 especially that I can read the Bible. It was naturally surprizing for 
 me to think about the things which it made me acquainted with, all 
 of which were strange and wonderful to me. 
 
 These questions were proposed tome on the 30th of August. 1829, 
 by the Rev. Alexander Campbell. 
 
 G. W. STEENROD 
 
 * 
 
 COMPARISON BETWEEN CHRIST AND MAIIOMET. 
 
 By Bishop Porteus, page 72—92. 
 
 “There is a religion in the world, called the Mahometan, which is 
 professed in one part of Europe, and most parts of Asia and Africa. 
 
 The founder of this religion, Mahomet, pretended to be a prophet sent 
 from God; but it is universally allowed, by all who are not Mahomet¬ 
 ans, and who have searched very carefully into the pretensions of this 
 teacher, that lie was an enthusiast and an impostor, and that his re¬ 
 ligion was a contrivance of his own. Even those who reject Christi¬ 
 anity, do not think Mahometanism to be true; nor do we ever hear of 
 a deist embracing it from conviction. 
 
 “Here, then, we have two religions co-existing together in the world, 
 and both pretending to be revelations from Heaven; one of these we 
 know to be. a fraud, the other we affirm and believe to be true. If this 
 be so, upon comparing them and their authors together, we may ex¬ 
 pect to find a most marked and essential difference between them, 
 such difference as may naturally be supposed to exist between an 
 impostor and a divine teacher, between truth and falsehood. And this, 
 
 I apprehend, will appear to be actually the case with respect to Christ 
 and Mahomet, and their respective religions. 
 
 “Mahomet was a man of considerable rank in his own country; he 
 was the grandson of a man of the most powerful and honorable family 
 in Mecca, and though not born to a great fortune, he soon acquired 
 one by marriage. These circumstances would of themselves, without 
 any supernatural assistance, greatly contribute to the success of his 
 religion. A person considerable by his wealth, of high descent, and 
 nearly allied to the chiefs of his country, taking upon himself the 
 character of a religious teacher, in an age of ignorance and barbarism, 
 could not fail of attracting attention and followers. 
 
 “Christ did not possess these advantages of rank and wealth, and 
 powerful connexions. He was born of parents in a very mean con¬ 
 dition of life, liis relations and friends were all in the same humble 
 situation; he was bred up in poverty and continued in it all his life, 
 having frequently no place where he could lay his head. A man so 
 circumstanced was not likely, by his own personal influence, to force 
 anew religion, much less a false one, upon the world. 
 
 “Mahomet indulged himself in the grossest pleasures, He perpetu¬ 
 ally transgressed eveq those licentious rules which he had prescribed 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 267 
 
 *o himself. He made use of the power which he had acquired, to grat ify 
 his passions without control, and laid claim to a special permission 
 from heaven to riot in the most unlimited sensuality. 
 
 ‘•Jesus, on the contrary, preserved through life the most unblemish¬ 
 ed purity and sanctity of manners. lie did no sin, but was perfectly 
 holy and undefiled. Not the least stain was ever thrown on his moral 
 
 character bv his bitterest enemies. 
 
 •/ 
 
 “Mahomet was violent, impetuous, and sanguinary. 
 
 “Christ was meek, gentle, benevolent, and merciful. 
 
 “Mahomet pretended to have secret communications with Cod, and 
 with the angel Gabriel, which no other person ever saw or heard. 
 
 “Jesus was repeatedly declared to be the Son ofGodTay voices from 
 heaven, which were plainly and distinctly heard and recorded by 
 others. 
 
 * “The appearance of Mahomet was not foretold by ancient prophe¬ 
 cies, nor was there at the time any expectation of such a person in that 
 part of the world. 
 
 “The appearance of Christ upon earth was clearly and repeatedly 
 •predicted by several ancient prophecies, which most evidently appli¬ 
 ed to him and to no other; and which were in the keeping of those 
 who were professed enemies to him and his religion. And there was 
 at the time of his birth a general expectation over all the east, that 
 some great and extraordinary personage would then manifest himself 
 to the world. 
 
 “Mahomet never presumed to foretel any future events, for this 
 plain reason,because he could not foresee them; and had he foretold 
 any thing which did not come to pass, it must have entirely ruined his 
 credit with his followers. 
 
 “Christ foretold many things which did actually come to pass, par¬ 
 ticularly his own death and resurrection, and the destruction of Jeru¬ 
 salem. 
 
 “Mahomet never pretended to work miracles; on the contrary, he 
 expressly disclaimed any such power, and makes several labored and 
 awkward apologies for not possessing it. 
 
 “Jesus, we all know, worked a great number of most astonishing 
 miracles in the open face of day, and in the sight of great multitudes 
 of people. He made the deaf to hear, the dumb to speak, the lame to 
 walk, the blind to see, and even the dead to rise from the grave. 
 
 “Mahomet, during the first twelve years of his mission, made use 
 only of argument and persuasion, and in consequence of that gained 
 very few converts. In three years he made only fourteen proselytes, 
 and in seven only eighty-three men and eighteen women. 
 
 “In the same space of time our Saviour and his apostles converted 
 thousands and tens of thousands, and spread the Christian religion over 
 a great part of Asia. 
 
 “Mahomet told the Jews, the Christians, and the Arabs, that he 
 taught no other religion than that which was originally taught to their 
 forefathers, by Abraham, Ishmael, Moses, and Jesus. This would 
 -naturally prejudice them in favor of his religion. 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 “Christ preached a religion which directly opposed the most favor 
 ite opinions and prejudices of the Jews, and subverted, from the foun¬ 
 dation, the whole system of Pagan superstition. 
 
 “Mahomet paid court to the peculiar weaknesses and propensities of 
 his disciples. In that warm climate, where all the passions are ardent 
 and violent, he allowed them a liberal indulgence in sensual gratifica¬ 
 tions; no less than four wives to each of his followers, with liberty of 
 divorcing them thrice. 
 
 “In the same climate, and among nlen of the same strong passions, 
 Jesus most peremptorily restrained all his followers from adultery, 
 fornication, every kind of impurity. He confined them to one wife, 
 and forbade divorce, except for adultery only. Bat what was stfU 
 more, he required them to govern their eyes and their thoughts, and 
 to check the very first rising of criminal desire in the soul. He told 
 mem, that whoever looked upon a woman, to lust after her, had com¬ 
 mitted adultery with her already in his heart; and he assured them 
 that none but the pure in heart should see God. He declared open 
 war, in short, against all the criminal passions, and evil inclinations of 
 mankind, and expressly required all his followers to renounce those 
 favorite sins that did most easily beset them; nay, even to leave father, 
 mother, brethren, sisters, houses, lands, and every thing that was most 
 dear to them, and take up their cross and follow him. 
 
 “With the same view above mentioned, of bribing men to embrace 
 his religion, Mahomet promised to reward his followers with the de¬ 
 lights of a most voluptuous paradise, where the objects of their affection 
 were to be almost innumerable, and all of them gifted with transcend- 
 ant beauty a nd eternal youth. 
 
 “Christ entirely precluded his disciples from all hopes of sensual 
 indulgences hereafter, assuring them that in heaven they should 
 neither marry nor be given in marriage, and promising them nothing 
 hut pure celestial spiritual joys, such as eye hath not seen, nor ear 
 heard, nor the heart of man conceived. 
 
 “Besides the powerful attractions of sensual delights, Mahomet had 
 .mother still more efficacious mode of producing conviction, and gain¬ 
 ing proselytes; and that was force, violence, and arms. He propa¬ 
 gated his religion by the sword; and, till lie made use of that instru¬ 
 ment of conversion, the number of his proselytes was a mere nothing. 
 He was at once a prophet, a warrior, a general, and a conqueror. It 
 was at the head of bis armies that he preached the Koran. His re¬ 
 ligion and his conquests went on together; and the former never 
 advanced one step without the latter. He commanded in person in 
 eight general engagements, and undertook, by himself and his lieu¬ 
 tenants, fifty military enterprises. Death or conversion was the only 
 choice offered to idolaters, and tribute or conversion to Jews and 
 Christians. 
 
 “Jesus employed no other means of converting men to his religion, 
 but persuasion, argument, exhortation, miracles, and prophecies. 
 He made use of no other force but the force of truth; no other sword 
 but the sword of the Spirit; that is, the word of God, He had no 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 2G9 
 
 arms, no legions to fight his cause. He was the Prince of Peace, and 
 preached peace to all the world. Without power, without support, 
 without any followers but twelve poor humble men, without one cir¬ 
 cumstance of attraction, influence, or compulsion, he triumphed over 
 the prejudices, the learning, the religion of his country; over the 
 ancient rites, idolatry and superstition, over the philosophy, wisdom, 
 and authority of the whole Roman empire. 
 
 “The great object of Mahomet was to make bis followers soldiers, 
 and to inspire them with a passion for violence, bloodshed, vengeance, 
 and persecution. He was continually exhorting them to fight for the 
 religion of God; and, to encourage them to do so, he promised them 
 the highest honors, and the richest rewards, in paradise: ‘They who 
 have suffered for my sake, and have been slain in battle, verily I will 
 expiate their evil deeds from them, and I will surely bring them into a 
 garden, watered by rivers, a reward from God, and with God is most 
 excellent reward 1 —Koran, chap. 3, p. 91, and chap. 9, p. 242. This 
 duty of warring against infidels is frequently inculcated in the Koran, 
 and highly magnified by the Mahometan divines, who call the sword 
 the key of heaven and hell, and persuade their people that the least 
 drop of blood spilt in the way of God, as it is called, is most acceptable 
 unto him; and that the defending the territories of the Moslems for 
 one night, is of more avail than a fast of two months. It is easy to see 
 to what degree of fierceness this must raise all the furious vindictive 
 passions of the soul, and what a horde of savages and barbarians it 
 must let loose upon mankind. 
 
 “The directions of Christ to his disciples were of a different tem¬ 
 per. He positively forbade them the use of any violence whatever. 
 The sword that was drawn by one of them in his defence, he ordered 
 to be sheathed: ‘Put up thy sword within the sheath; they that use 
 the sword shall perish by the sword 1 —Mat. xxvi. 52. He would not 
 consent to bring down fire from heaven on the Samaritans, who had 
 refused to receive him: ‘The Son of Man, 1 he told them, ‘came not to 
 destroy men’s lives but to save them. Peace I leave with with you; 
 mv peace I give unto yau. Do violence to no man; resist not evil. 
 Be ye merciful, even as your Father in heaven is merciful. Blessed 
 are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy 1 —Luke, ix. 55; John, 
 xiv. 27; Luke, iii. 14; Mat. v. 39; Luke vi. 35; Mat. v. 7. 
 
 “The consequence was, that the first followers of Mahomet were 
 men of cruelty and violence, living by rapine, murder, and plunder. 
 
 “The first followers of Jesus were men of meek, quiet, inoffensive, 
 peaceable manners, and in their morals irreproachable and exemplary. 
 
 “If now, after comparing together the authors of the two religions we 
 have been considering, we take a short view of the sacred books of 
 those religions, the Koran and the Gospel, we shall find a difference 
 no less striking between them; no less strongly marking the truth of 
 one, and the falsehood of the other. 
 
 “'Piie Koran is highly applauded, both by Mahomet himself and his 
 followers, for the exquisite beauty, purity, and elegance of the language 
 YOL. it. 23* 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 <*/ 
 
 70 
 
 which they represent as a standing miracle, greater than even th$t of 
 raising the dead. But admitting its excellence, (which yet has been 
 questioned by several learned men,) ifbeauty of style and composition 
 is to be considered as a proof of divine inspiration, the writings of 
 Plato and Xenophon, of Cicero, and Cesar, and a multitude of other 
 inimitable writers in various languages, will have as just a claim to a 
 miraculous origin as the Koran. But in truth, these graces of diction, 
 so far from being a circumstance favorable to the Koran, create 
 a strong suspicion of its being a human fabrication, calculated to charm 
 and captivate men by the arts of rhetoric and the fascination of words, 
 and thus draw off their attention from the futility of its matter, and the 
 weakness of its pretensions. These are the artifices of fraud and 
 falsehood. The gospel wants it not. It disdains the aid of human 
 eloquence, and depends solely on the force of truth and the power of 
 God for its success. ‘I came not,’ as St. Paul sublimely expresses 
 himself, ‘with excellency of speech, nor with the enticing words of 
 man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power, that your 
 faith might not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the wisdom of God.’ 
 —1 Cor. ii. 1,4, 5. 
 
 “But, whatever may be the purity of the language, the matter and 
 substance of the Koran cannot bear a moment’s comparison with that 
 of the Gospel. The narrative is dull, heavy, monotonous, uninterest¬ 
 ing; loaded with endless repetitions, witn senseless and preposterous 
 fables, with trivial disgusting, and even immoral precepts. Add to 
 this, that is has very little novelty or originality to recommend it, the 
 most material parts of it being borrowed from the Old Testament or 
 the New; and even these are so disguised or deformed by passing 
 through the hands of the impostor, (who vitiates and debases every 
 thing he touches) that you can hardly kuow them to be the same inci¬ 
 dents or transactions that you read with so much delight in the Bible. 
 
 “The gospel on the contrary, is every where concise, simple, origi¬ 
 nal, animated, interesting, dignified; its prcceptsdmportant, its moral¬ 
 ly perfect, its sentiments sublime, its views noble and comprehensive, 
 its sanctions awful. 
 
 “In the Koran, Mahomet is perpetually boasting of his own merits 
 and achievements, and the supreme excellence of his book. In the 
 Gospel^ no encomiums are bestowed by the evangelists, either on them¬ 
 selves, or their writings. Even the virtues of their divine Master are 
 not distinctly specified, or brought forward into a conspicuous point 
 of view. It is from his actions only, and his discourses, not from the 
 observations of his historians, that we can collect the various trans- 
 eendant excellencies of his character. Here we plainly see the so¬ 
 ber modest v of truth opposed to the ostentatious va nity of imposture, 
 “In the description of future rewards and punishments, the Koran 
 is minute, circumstantial, ahdextravagant, both in painting the hor¬ 
 rors of the one and the delights of the other. It describes things which 
 • cannot and ought nor to he described, and enters into details too lior* 
 r;hie. or too licentious to be presented to the Iranian mind. 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 271 
 
 •<*Jn the Gospel, the pains and the pleasures of a future life are re¬ 
 presented concisely, in strong, but general and indefinite terms, suffi¬ 
 cient to give them a powerful but not an overwhelming influence on 
 the mine. 
 
 “There is still another, and a very material mark of discrimination 
 between the Koran and the Gospel. Mahomet shows throughout 
 the utmost anxiety to guard against objections, to account for his 
 working no miracles, and to defend his conduct, in several instances, 
 against the charges which he suspects may be brought against him, 
 This is always the case with imposture. It is always suspicious, 
 afraid of being detected, alive to every appearance of hostility, soli- 
 citous to anticipate and eager to repel the accusations of enemies. 
 
 “Truth has no occasion for such precautions, and therefore never 
 uses them. We see nothing of this sort in the Gospel. The saerfed 
 historians show not the smallest solicitude, nor take the least nains to 
 
 _ ' 4 
 
 obviate cavils or remove difficulties. They relate plainly and simply 
 what they know to be true. They entertain no doubt of it themselves* 
 and seem to have no suspicion that any one else can doubt it; they 
 therefore leave the facts to speak f jr themselves, and send them unpro¬ 
 tected into the world, to make their way (as they have done) by their 
 own native force and incontrovertible truth. 
 
 “Such are the leading features of Mahomet and his religion on/ the 
 one hand, and of Christ and his religion on the other; and never was 
 there a stronger or more striking contrast seen than in this instance. 
 They are, in short, in every essential article, the direct opposites of 
 each other. And as it is on all hands acknowledged that ho was an 
 impostor, it is fair to conclude that Christ, who was the very reverse 
 of Mahomet, was the reverso of an impostor, that is, a real messenger 
 from heaven. In Mahomet we see every distinctive mark of fraud; 
 in Jesus, not one of these is to be found; but, on the contrary, every 
 possible indication and character of truth/’ 
 
 ON THE SUN’S STANDING STILL. 
 
 “You make jmurself merry with what you call the tale of the sun 
 standing still upon mount Gibeon, and the moon in the valley of Aja - 
 ion; and you say that “the story detects itself, because there is not a 
 nation in the world that knows any thing about if.” How can you 
 expect that there should, when there is not a nation in the world whose 
 annals reach this era by many hundred years? It happens, however, 
 that you are probably mistaken as to the fact: a confused tradition 
 concerning this miracle, and a similar one in/the time of Ahaz, when 
 the sun went hack ten degrees, has been preserved among one of the 
 most ancient nations, as we are informed by one of the most ancient 
 historians. Herodotus, in his Euterpe/ speaking of the Egyptian 
 priests, says,—“They told me that the sun had four times deviated 
 from his course, having twice risen where he uniformly goes down, 
 and twice gone down where he uniformly rises. This however hod 
 produced no alteration in the climate of Egypt; the fruits of the earth, 
 and the phenomena of the Nile had Always been the same. (Beloc's 
 
272 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 Transl.) The last part of this observation confirms the conjecture, 
 that this account of the Egyptian priests had a reference to the two 
 miracles respecting the sun mentioned in scripture; for they were 
 not of that kind, which could introduce any change in climate or sea¬ 
 sons. You would have been contented to admit the account of this 
 miracle as a fine piece of poetical imagery; you may have seen 
 some Jewish doctors, and some Christian commentators, who consider 
 it as such; but improperly, in my opinion. I think it idle, at least, 
 if not impious, to undertake to explain how the miracle was perform¬ 
 ed; but one who is not able to explain the mode of doing a thing, 
 argues ill if he thence infers that the thing was not done. We are 
 perfectly ignorant how the sun was formed, how the plar\ets were 
 projected at the creation, how they are still retained in their orbits 
 by the power of gravity; but we admit, notwithstanding, that the sun 
 was formed, that the planets were then projected, and that they are 
 still retained in their orbits. The machine of the universe is in the 
 hand of God; he can stop the motion of any part, or of the whole of 
 it, with less trouble and less danger of injuring it, than you can stop 
 your watch. In testimony of the reality of the miracle, the author 
 of the book says—“Is not this written in the book of Jasher?—“No 
 author in his senses would have appealed, in proof of his veracity, 
 to a book which did not exist, or in attestation of a fact which, though 
 it did exist, was not recorded in .it; we may safely therefore conclude, 
 that, at the time the book of Joshua was written, there was such a 
 book as the book of Jasher, and that the miracle of the sun’s standing 
 still w r as recorded in the book. But this observation, you will say, 
 docs not prove the fact of the sun’s having stood still: I have not 
 produced it as a proof of the fact; but it proves that the author of the 
 book of Joshua believed the fact, that the people of Israel admitted 
 the authority of the book of Jasher. An appeal to a fabulous book 
 would have been as senseless an insult upon their understanding, as 
 it would have been to our’s, had Rip in appealed to the Arabian 
 Night’s Entertainments, as a proof of the battle of Hastings.” 
 
 Watson's Apology . 
 
 THE TESTIMONY OF GIBBON, 
 
 In favor of the Independents on the subject of Toleration, and there¬ 
 by in favor of the Christian religion. 
 
 “In the History of England, in narrating the events of 1644, arid 
 speaking of the Independents of that country, Mr. Hume says, “Of 
 all the Christian sects, this was the first which, during its prosperity 
 as w T eil as its adversity, always adopted the principle of toleration. 
 A nd it is remarkable , that so reasonable a doctrine owed its origin , not 
 to reasoning , but to the height of extravagance and fanaticism ”—■ 
 Here, notwithstanding all he has said in his Essays on the tolerating 
 principle cf Polytheists, exalting, in this respect, Paganism at the 
 expense of the Christian religion, he now informs ns, that more than 
 a thousand years after Faganism had ceased to exist , the doctrine of 
 
ADDENDA, 
 
 273 
 
 toleration owed Us origin , not to the reasoning of philosophers or to 
 Polytheists, bat to a sect of Christians. Fanaticism and the Christian 
 religion are, with this writer, synonymus terms. 
 
 It is worthy of remark, that those Christians to whom Mr. Hume 
 ascribes the origin of toleration, had a clear understanding of the 
 meaning of regeneration , that fundamental doctrine of the Christian, 
 religion. Of their practical regard and adherence to that doctrine, 
 as well as of their sentiments on toleration..”— Haldane’s Evidences, 
 
 TESTIMONY OF PRINCIPAL BAILEY, 
 
 In favor of the Independents. He was bitterly opposed to them, 
 
 “Mr. Bailey, who was Principal of the college of Glasgow, and 
 who attended the Assembly of Westminster in 1643, writes, in one 
 of his letters to Scotland, as follows—“They will admit of none to 
 be members of their congregation, of whose true grace and regene¬ 
 ration they have no good evidence. By this means they would'keep 
 out of all the Christian churches forty for one of the members of the 
 best reformed churches.”—“Many of them preach, and some print 
 a liberty of conscience, at least the great equity of a toleration of 
 all religions; that every man should be permitted without any fear* 
 so much as of discountenance from the magistrate, to profess public¬ 
 ly his conscience, were he never so erroneous, and also live accord¬ 
 ing thereunto, if he trouble not the public peace by any seditious ox 
 wicked practice.”— Haldane's Evidences. 
 
 TESTIMONY OF GIBBON, 
 
 Concerning the early spread of Christianity. 
 
 “Let us take the account of the extent of the triumph of Christi¬ 
 anity in the world, from the pen of an opponent, wfeo will not be 
 suspected of exaggeration upon this point. “While (says Mr. Gib¬ 
 bon) that great body” (the Roman Empire) “was involved by open 
 violence, or undermined by slow decay, a pure and humble religion 
 gently insinuated itself into the minds of men; grew up in silence 
 and obscurity; derived new vigor from opposition; and finally erected 
 the triumphant banner of the cross on the ruins of the Capitol. Nor 
 was the influence of Christianity confined to the period or limits of 
 the Roman Empire. After a revolution of thirteen or fourteen cen¬ 
 turies, that religion is still professed by the nations of Europe, the 
 most distinguished portion of human kind in arts and learning, as 
 well as in arms. By the industry and zeal of the Europeans, it has 
 been widely diPvsed to the rr.esi distant shores of Asia and Africa; 
 
 V J 
 
 and by the means 
 Canada to Chili, in 
 
 their colonies, has been firmly established from 
 world unknown to the ancients.”'— Haldane’s 
 
 Evidences. 
 
 GIBBON’S CAUSES CF THE SUCCESS OF TIIE GOSPEL. 
 “In assigning the causes of the success of the Gospel, Mr. Gibbon 
 presents us with what follows;—“Our curiosity is naturally prompted 
 
274- 
 
 ADDENDA, 
 
 to inquire, by what means the Christian faith obtained so remarkable 
 a victory over the established religions of the earth? To this inquiry, 
 an obvious but satisfactory answer may be returned, that it was ow¬ 
 ing to the convincing evidence of the doctrine itself, and to the 
 ruling providence of its great Author. But as truth and reason 
 .seldom find so favorable a reception in the world, and as the wisdom 
 of Providence frequently condescends to use the passions of the hu¬ 
 man heart, and the general circumstances of mankind, as instruments 
 to execute its purposes, we may still be permitted, though with becom¬ 
 ing submission, to ask, not indeed what were the first, but what were 
 the secondary causes of the rapid growth of the Christian Church? 
 It will perhaps appear, that it was most effectually forwarded and 
 assisted by the five following causes: 1. The inflexible, and if we 
 
 may use the expression, the intolerant zeal of the Christians, derived, 
 it is true, from the Jewish religion, but purified from the narrow and 
 unsocial spirit, which, instead of inviting, had deterred the Gentiles 
 from embracing the law of Moses. 2. The doctrine of a future life, 
 improved by every additional circumstance which could give weight 
 and efficacy to that important truth. 3. The miraculous powers 
 ascribed to the primitive church. 4. The pure and austere mor¬ 
 als of the Christians. 5. The union and discipline of the Christian 
 republic, which gradually formed an independent and increasing 
 state in the heart of the Roman Empire/’— Haldane's Evidences. 
 
 GENERAL EXPECTATION OF THE MESSIAH. 
 
 I had collected many more documents than were adduced during the 
 discussion. During the discussion, Dr. William Smith, of Cincinnati, 
 handed me a work of which I had never before heard, on the Evi¬ 
 dences of Christianity, written by Robert Haldane, Esq. of Scotland. 
 I found in glancing over Us contents, on the third or fourth day of the 
 discusion, many of the documents 1 had gleaned, and some I had not 
 been able to collect were well arranged and interspersed with excel¬ 
 lent remarks. Instead of reading my own extracts from various 
 authors, I read them, with Mr. Haldane’s remarks, interspersed.— 
 Of all the works I have read on this subject, I think this work, taking 
 it all in all, is the best adapted to the great mass of readers to afford 
 imformation and to produce conviction. The following article, in 
 addition to what has been before adduced in the debate, will show 
 how general the expectation of the Messiah, with some of the 
 reasons why it was so. 
 
 “About a century before the Christian era, the first Sibylline books 
 were destroyed by a fire which broke out in the capitol, and consum¬ 
 ed the temple where these writings were deposited. The Roman 
 senate thought it of so much importance to repair the loss, that they 
 sent some of their number to make a new collection of them in dif¬ 
 ferent parts of Asia, in the islands of the Archipelago, in Africa, and 
 in Sicily. The deputies after some time returned, with about one 
 thousand verses in the Greek language, which thev had collected 
 from different individuals. These verses, when brought to JKomc^ 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 275 
 
 could not be entirely concealed as the ancient Sibylline books had 
 been, but were in the hands of many private individuals. The use 
 which the senate proposed to make of them as a state engine, as of 
 the former books, being thus in a good measure defeated, a law was 
 enacted that whoever had copies of these prophecies, should deliver 
 them to thePrce or of the city; and all were prohibited, under pain 
 of death, to retain them. Transcripts, however, continued to be 
 privately Kept, owing to which their contents were well known. At 
 length Augustus on taking upon himself the high-priesthood of 
 Rome, revived the law, when many volumes were brought in. That 
 this new collection of Sibylline verses contained a prediction of the 
 appearance of a great King, we have sufficient evidence from the 
 following- circumstances. 
 
 “When Julius Caesar had attained the height of his power, he was 
 very ambitious of having the title of King. In order to gain the 
 consent of the senate, one of his adherents produced a prophecy from 
 the Sibylline books, of a king who was to arise at this time, whose 
 monarchy was to be universal, and whose government would be ne¬ 
 cessary and essential to the happiness of the world. Cicero, and the 
 party to which he belonged, did all in their power in opposition to 
 this plea. But in opposing it, Cicer# brought no charge of falsifica¬ 
 tion against those who produced this prophecy. He granted that it 
 was fairly ailedged, from the Sibylline books , to which, from his 
 office, he had free access. But he affirmed Tint these oracles were 
 no prophecies; fbr that no marks were to be found in them of frenzy 
 and disorder, (which Heathens conceived to be the necessary state of 
 every prophet’s mind while he prophesied.) “Let us then’, says 
 Cicero, “adhere to the prudent practice of our ancestors ; let us keep 
 the Sibyl in religious privacy; these writings are indeed rather cal¬ 
 culated to extinguish than to propagate superstition 
 
 “Besides those predictions, which had been brought to Rome from 
 the East by the deputies from the senate, the contents of the Jewish 
 Scriptures were no secret at Rome. An intimate alliance had leng 
 subsisted between the Romans and the Jews, and the numbers of the 
 latter resident at Rome were very considerable. From ffie accounts 
 preserved so long after by Tacitus and Floras, of what Pompey saw 
 in the temple at Jerusalem, the particulars of the Jewish religion, 
 which is referred to by Cicero in writing to Leelius, must have been 
 well known at Rome. Under the patronage of Julius Caesar, the 
 free exercise of their religious rites, with all the privileges of their 
 priesthood, was not only confirmed to them by the decrees of the 
 senate, but they were exempted also from taxes on their Sabbatical 
 year. Hence, and from the public recital in their synagogues, every 
 Sabbath day, of the law and the prophets, and the translation of 
 them into a language universally read, their sacred books must have 
 been known both in the provinces and capital of the empire. The 
 singularities in their ritual, customs and history, with which their 
 
 *See Horsley’s Dissertation, Henley's Observations, and Prideaux’s Con¬ 
 nexion. ml. • v;>: -' ' ' • V , 
 
278 
 
 ADDENDA, 
 
 prophecies were inseparably, blended, could not la.il to attract some 
 attention; while their origin, and even existence as a distinct people, 
 all looked forward to one great object of communication,—the com¬ 
 ing of their predicted sovereign, under whom, notwithstanding their 
 present misfortunes, they expected a restoration, and the acquisition 
 of unbounded and eternal dominion. 
 
 “All this fully explains the cause of that general expectation which 
 now existed at Rome of the appearance of a great King who should 
 establish universal empire, and which according to Tacitus, was be¬ 
 lieved to have its origin in the Jewish Scriptures. Bv pretended 
 prodigies, and in various ways, much use was made of this expecta¬ 
 tion, and different applications of it appeared, according to the interest 
 or wishes of those who made them.-’— Haldane's Evidences. 
 
 HISTORY OF SOME OF THE PRIMITIVE MARTYRS TO 
 THE TRUTH OF 'CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 “The following accounts of the death of Polycarp at Smyrna, end 
 of the persecution of the churches at Lyons and Vienna in France, 
 will afford a specimen of what Christians, in the next age, had to 
 encounter in adhering to their religion. Polycarp, it will be re ol- 
 ieeted, was one of the Christian writers who were contemporaries 
 with the Apostles, who was himself acquainted with the Apostle John, 
 and had conversed with many who had seen Christ. He suffered 
 death for the Christian religion in the year 167 or 168, in the reign 
 of the Emperor Marcus Antoninus, the philosopher, in what is called 
 the fourth persecution. 
 
 “Some time after the death of Polycarp, the Christians at Smyrna 
 sent an account of it in a letter, from which the following is an ex¬ 
 tract, to the Christians at Philadelphia, Philomelium, and other places, 
 who had expressed a desire to have it from eye-witnesses. “The 
 church of God which is at Smyrna, to the church at Philomelium, 
 and to all the congregations of the holy universal church in every 
 place, the mercy, and peace, and love of God the Father, and our 
 Lord Jesus Christ be multiplied. We have written to you, brethren, 
 concerning those who have suffered martyrdom, and particularly 
 concerning the blessed Polycarp, who, by his martyrdom, as it were, 
 sealed up, and put an end to the prosecution.” After which, says 
 Eusebius, “before they speak of Polycarp, they relate the sufferings 
 of the other martyrs, describing their constancy under the torments 
 which they endured* and how all who stood round them were aston¬ 
 ished, seeing them scourged till their veins and arteries were laid 
 bare, and even their entrails became visible; after which they were 
 laid upon the shells of sea fish, and upon sharp spikes, fixed in the 
 ground, with many other kinds of tortures: In the end, they were 
 cast to wild beasts, to be devoured by them. They are particular 
 in the account of the generous Germanicus, who being corroborated 
 by the divine grace, overcame the fear of death implanted in the 
 nature of men. For when the proconsul advised him to think of his 
 youth, and to spare himself* and not throw away his life in his 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 977 
 
 flourishing age; he was not at all moved thereby, but, as they say, 
 he enticed and stimulated the wild beasts to approach him, that he 
 might be the sooner dismissed from this evil world. Presently after 
 that glorious exit, the whole multitude cried out, “Away with the 
 impi6us, let Polycarp be sought for.” There followed then a great 
 noise and tumult, and having in view the wild beasts, and other 
 tortures, Quintus, a Phrygian, was intimidated and gave way, as did 
 also some others with him, who, without a truly religious tear, had 
 rashly presented themselves before the tribunal. 
 
 “When the admirable Polycarp heard of the demand made for 
 him, he was not at all disturbed, but continued to be in a firm and 
 composed temper of mind; and he resolved to stay in the city.—• 
 Nevertheless, at length, he so far complied with the request of huf 
 friends, as to retire to a country house not far off, where he abode 
 
 t ' *■ s 
 
 with a small company, spending the time, night and day, in continual 
 prayer to God, offering up supplications for the peace of the churches 
 throughout the world, which, indeed, was his constant usage.—In a 
 short time, his pursuers, by information given them, were led to the 
 place where Polycarp was. Coming thither in the evening, they 
 found him resting in an upper room, whence it was not difficult for 
 him to remove to another house; but he would not, saying “the will 
 of the Lord be done.” He then went down to the men, and talked 
 to them in a free and cheerful manner, and ordered meat to be set 
 before them, begging that they would allow him the space of one 
 hour, in which he might pray without disturbance. Prayer being 
 ended, they set him upon an ass, to carry him into the city. As they 
 were going, he was met by Herod the Irenarch, and his father Nice¬ 
 tas, who took him up into their chariot. As they sat together, they 
 endeavored to persuade him, saying, “What harm is it to say Lord 
 Ca3sar, and to sacrifice, and so to be safe?” At first, he made no an¬ 
 swer, but when they were importunate, he said, “I will never do what 
 you advise.” They then began to reproach him, and they thrust 
 him out of the chariot so hastily, that, in getting dow r n, his leg was 
 bruised; but he got up, and went on cheerfully, as if he had suffered 
 no harm, till he came to the stadium. 
 
 “When he was brought before the tribunal, there was a great shout 
 of the multitude. As he came near, the proconsul asked him if he 
 was Polycarp. Upon his confessing that he was, he endeavored to 
 persuade him to deny Christ; and saying, “Reverence thy age,” and 
 other like things customary with them; “Swear by the fortune of 
 Caesar—repent—sav, Away with the impious.” The governor still 
 urging him, and saying, “Swear, and I will dismiss thee; reproach 
 Christ.” Polycarp then answered: “Fourscore and six years have 
 f served him, and he has never done me any injury. How can I 
 blaspheme my King and my Saviour?” The governor was still urg¬ 
 ent, saying, “Swear by the fortunes of Cassar.” Whereupon Polycarp 
 answered, “How can you desire this of me, as if you did not know 
 who I am. Here me then openly professing I am a Christian. And 
 if you have a mind to know the doctrine of Christianity, appoint me 
 VOL* IT. 24 
 
278 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 a day and I will inform you.” The proconsul said, I have wild beasts 
 and I will cast you to them, unless you change your mind.” But he 
 answered, Call for them, there can be no alteration from good to bad, 
 but it is good to change from vice to virtue.” He said again to him, 
 “Since you do not mind the beasts, I will order you to be consumed 
 by fire unless you repent.” Polycarp said, “You threaten me with 
 tire which burns for an hour, and then is extinguished; but you are 
 ignorant of the fire of the future judgment and everlasting punishment 
 reserved for the wicked. But why do you delay? Appoint which 
 you please.” 
 
 “The proconsul then sent the crier to make proclamation thrice in 
 the midst of the stadium, “Polycarp has confessed himself to be a 
 Christian.” That proclamation having been made by the crier, the 
 whole multitude of the Gentiles and Jews inhabiting Smyrna, with 
 furious rage, and in a loud voice cried out, “This is the teacher of 
 Asia, the father of the Christians, the destroyer of our gods, who 
 teacheth all men not to sacrifice nor to worship them.” Having 
 uttered these words, they cried out and requested Philip the Asiarch 
 to let the lion upon Polycarp. He said he could not do that, because 
 the amphitheatrical shows of wild beasts were over. They then 
 cried out, with one consent, that Polycarp should be burnt alive; 
 which was no sooner said than done; all immediately joining togeth¬ 
 er in bringing wood, and dried branches of trees, from the shops and 
 the baths. The Jews, also, according to their custom, assisting with 
 the greatest forwardness. 
 
 “Now all things being prepared and put in order for the pile, when 
 they were about to nail him to the stake, he said, “Let me be as I am. 
 He that enables me to bear the fire, will enable me also to remain 
 unmoved within the pile, without your fastening me with nails ”— 
 They therefore did not nail him, but only bound him. He then offered 
 up a prayer to God, which he concluded, saying aloud, Amen. Then 
 the officers who had the charge of it kindled the fire. But Polycarp’s 
 body not being so soon consumed as expected, the people desired that 
 the emfector should be called for, and run him through with a sword. 
 The faithful were now very desirous to have his body delivered to 
 them; but some there were who moved Nicetas, father to Herod, to go 
 to the governor to prevent his giving the body to the believers, lest, as 
 they said, they should leave him that was crucified to worship this 
 man. This they said at the suggestion of the Jews, who also dili¬ 
 gently watched us that we might not carry oft'the body; little con¬ 
 sidering that we can never forsake Christ, who has suffered for the 
 sake of all men. Him we worship as the Son of God. The martyrs 
 we love as the disciples and imitators of the Lord. The centurion, 
 therefore, perceiving the perverseness of the Jews, caused*the body 
 to be brought forth, and burnt it. We then gathered up his bones, 
 and deposited them in a proper place.” 5 
 
 “The persecution of the churches at Lyons and Vienna took place 
 also under Marcus Antoninus in the vear 177. “It was the seven- 
 
ADDENDA, 
 
 2X9 
 
 tee nth year,” says Eusebius, a of the Emperor Antoninus, in which 
 time the persecution against us raged with great violence in several 
 parts of the world, through the enmity of the people in the cities.— 
 What vast multitudes of martyrs there were throughout the whole 
 empire, may be concluded from what happened in one nation, which 
 also have been committed to writing, that they ntay be delivered to 
 others, and may he always remembered. The whole history of these 
 things has been inserted in our work of the collection of martyrs, of 
 which I here select a part, 
 
 “The country in which these things happened, of which lam now 
 speaking, is Gaul, in which are two great and famous cities, Lyons 
 and Vienna, both washed by the river Rhine, which traverseth that 
 country with a rapid stream. These famous churches sent in writing 
 an account of their martyrs to the churches in Asia and Phrygia.— 
 I shall insert their own words: “Tire servants of Jesus Christ dwelling 
 in Vienna and Lyons, to the brethren in Asia and Phrygia, who have 
 the same faith and hope of redemption with us, peace and grace, and 
 glory from God the Father, and Jesus Christ our Lord.” After a 
 few things said in the way of preface, they begin the narrative in 
 these words: “The greatness of the affliction in these places, and 
 the excessive rage of the people against the saints, and what the 
 blessed martyrs have endured, we are not able to describe in words, 
 nor put down in writing; for the enemy at the very first invaded us 
 with the greatest violence, showing from the beginning what sore 
 evils we were to expect. Every thing was done to exercise his min¬ 
 isters, and to train them to the practice of the utmost cruelty against 
 the servants of God. We were not only excluded from houses, (of 
 friends, as it seerfts,) “and from the baths and markets, but we were 
 forbidden to appear in any place whatever. However, the grace of 
 God fought for us against the enemy; delivering such as were weak, 
 and setting up the pillars, which were firm and stable, and able, by 
 their patience and fortitude, to withstand all the force of the enemy.— 
 They therefore came to a near combat with him, undergoing all man¬ 
 ner of reproach and suffering. Accounting the greatest afflictions to 
 be small, they hastened to Christ; thus showing, in fact, that the 
 sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the 
 glory which shall be revealed in us, Rom. viii. 18. First then, they 
 courageously endured the insults of the multitude gathered together 
 about them in crowds, their shouts and blows, and draggings about, 
 pillaging their goods, throwing of stones, confinement to their dwel¬ 
 lings, and all such things as an enraged multitude is wont to practise 
 against adversaries and enemies. Then, being brought into the 
 market by the tribune and the chief magistrates of the city, they 
 were examined before all the people; and, having ma.de their con¬ 
 fession, they were shut up in prison till the arrival of the president. 
 
 “Afterwards, when they were brought before the president, who 
 exercised all manner of cruelty against us, Vetius Epagathus, one of 
 the brethren, full of love towards God and his neighbour, whose 
 course of life also was so perfect, that, though a young man, he might 
 
ADDENDA, 
 
 2$0 
 
 Reserve the character of old Zacharias, Luke i. 6, that he walked iu 
 all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless, and 
 was unwearied in the performance of all good offices to his neighbor, 
 being full of zeal for God, and fervent in spirit, Rom. xii. xi; he being 
 such an one, was not able to bear these so unjustly proceedings 
 against us; but being moved with indignation, requested that he 
 might 4)e allowed to make a defence in behalf of the brethren, and 
 show that nothing impious and irreligious was done by us. But they 
 who were near the tribunal cried out against him, (for he was a per¬ 
 son well known.) and the president refused to grant his request, 
 though so reasonable, and asked him whether he was a Christian.— 
 He, answering with a loud voice that he was a Christian, was put into 
 the number of the martyrs, and was called the advocate of the Chris¬ 
 tians. And indeed he had within him the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, 
 in a greater measure than Zacharias, Luke i. 67, which he also 
 showed by the abundance of his love, being whiling to lay down his 
 own life in defence of the brethren, 1 John iii. 16. For he was and 
 is a'genuine disciple of Christ, following the Larnb whithersoever he 
 goeth. Rev. xiv. 4. 
 
 “After this, others w 7 ere chosen out, and they proved to be illustri¬ 
 ous and well-prepared proto-martyrs, who, with all alacrity of mind, 
 accomplished the solemn confession of martyrdom. They also were 
 ■manifest who were unprepared, and unexercised, and still weak, and 
 not able to bear the shock of so great a combat, of whom about ten 
 in number fell away, causing in us great grief, and unreasonable 
 concern, and damping the alaciity uf those who were not yet appre¬ 
 hended ; of whom, however, it must be acknowledged, that they kept 
 company with the martyrs, and did not forsake them, though they 
 suffered considerably in so doing. At that time we were all in great 
 consternation, being uncertain about the event of this confession; not 
 dreading the torments that might be indicted upon us, but apprehen¬ 
 sive of the issue, and that some might fall in the trial. However, 
 from day to day, such were taken up as were worthy to supply the 
 number of sfTch as had gone off, so that the most eminent men of the 
 two churches, and by whom good order had been settled among us, 
 were picked up and brought together. Moreover, some Gentile serv¬ 
 ants of our people were apprehended. For the governor had given 
 public orders for making strict inquiries after us. They, at the 
 instigation of Satan, and dreading the torments which they saw the 
 saints suffer, the soldiers also exciting them to it, falsely charged us, 
 with having the suppers of Thyestes, and the incestuous mixtures of 
 Oedipus, and other such like things, which it is not lawful for us to 
 mention nor to think of, nor to believe that they w r ere ever done 
 among men. These stories being spreaded)road, all men were in¬ 
 censed against us; insomuch that if any there were who before had 
 been civil to us upon account of affinity or friendship, they were then 
 much offended, and exclaimed against us. And then was fulfilled 
 what the Lord had said, John xvi. 2, “That the time would come 
 when every one i^io killeth you will think that i*e doth God service.’ 
 
ADDENDA, 
 
 “After that the holy martyrs underwent such torments as are above 
 all description, Satan doing his utmost to make them also to say such 
 impious things,” (or to confess what had been declared by the heathen 
 servants), “but the utmost excess of rage of the multitude, and of the 
 president, and of the soldiers, fell upon Sanctus, deacon at Vienna; 
 and upon Manturus, newly baptized indeed, yet a most valiant cham¬ 
 pion; and upon Attains, a native of Pergainos, who always was a 
 pillar and supporter of tire churches here; and upon Blandina, by 
 whom Christ showed that those things which among men seemed 
 mean, base, and contemptible, are by God acccounted worthy of 
 great honor for their love toward him, which is evidently manifested 
 in great power, and not in appearance only boasted of.”—It was a 
 refreshment and ease to her, and an abatement of the torments in¬ 
 flicted upon her, to say, “I am a Christian, nor is there any wicked¬ 
 ness practised among us.” 
 
 “Pothinus, who was entrusted with the administration of the 
 episcopal office at Lyons, being more than ninety years of age, and 
 very weak in body, and scarcely breathing by reason of his bodily 
 infirmity, but strengthened in mind with a desire of the martyrdom 
 now in view, even he also was dragged to the tribunal. His body 
 was worn out by age and distemper, but his soul yet remained in 
 him, that by it Christ might triumph. He being brought before the 
 tribunal by the soldiers, the city magistrate also attending, and the 
 multitude hooting him along with loud shouts, as if he had been 
 Christ himself, exhibiting a good testimony. Being asked by the 
 president, “Who was the God of the Christians? he answered, “If 
 you are worthy, you shall know.” After that he was dragged about 
 in an inhuman manner, and received many blows, they who were 
 near striking him with their hands and their feet, without any re¬ 
 spect to his age; they who stood farther off threw at him whatever 
 came to hand, every one thinking himself guilty of an offence a gainst 
 religion if they did not offer him some abuse, for hereby they thought 
 they should avenge their gods. And when there was scarcely any 
 breath left in him, he was cast into prison, where after two days he 
 expired. 
 
 “Maturus, then, and Tanctus, and Blandina, and Attalus, were 
 brought to the wild beasts in the amphitheatre, to be a public specta¬ 
 cle to the inhumanity of the Gentiles; a day for combat of wild 
 beasts having been purposely granted upon our account. And Ma¬ 
 turus and Sanctus did again undergo all sorts of torments in the 
 amphitheatre, as if they had before suffered nothing at all. Or 
 rather having already overcome the adversary in many encounters, 
 and being now to contend for the crown itself, they again endured 
 in the way to it the accustomsd blows of the place, and the tearings 
 of the w ild beasts, and whatever else the mad multitude from all 
 sides called for and demanded; and, after all these things, the iron 
 chair upon which when their bodies were broiled, they yielded the 
 offensive smell of burnt flesh. Nor were they yet satisfied, but were 
 still more enraged, being earnestly desirous to overcome the patience 
 
 vgl. ii. .24* 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 OiTi 
 
 Do* 
 
 of the sufferers. However, they could get nothing from Sanctus more 
 Rian the confession which he had made at the first. These two, there¬ 
 fore, (Marturus and Sanctus) having undergone a severe combat, 
 their life having continued a long while, they were at last slain, hav¬ 
 ing been made throughout that day a spectacle to the world, instead 
 of all that variety which is usually exhibit©*! in tho combats of gla- 1 
 diators, (1 Cor. iv. 9.) But Blandina, after she had been scourged, 
 after she had been exposed to wild beasts, and after the iron chair, 
 she was enclosed in a net, and thrown to a bull; having been tossed 
 by the beast, she also was run through with a sword. 
 
 “Now Attains was earnestly called for by the multitude, for indeed 
 he was an eminent person, and, by reason of the clearness of his 
 conscience, came forth as a champion prepared for the combat; for 
 he was well exercised in the Christian discipline, and was always a 
 witness of the truth among us. He was led round this amphitheatre, 
 with a board carried before him, upon which was inscribed in the; 
 Roman tongue, “This is Attalus the Christian,” the people all the 
 while expressing great indignation against him. The president, un¬ 
 derstanding that he was a Roman, commanded him to be taken away, 
 and to be carried to the rest who Were in prison, concerning whom 
 he had sent to Cesar, and was in expectation of an answer. The 
 rescript of Cesar was, that they who confessed Christ should be put 
 to death; but that, if any denied themselves to be Christians, they 
 might be set at liberty. 
 
 “The public assembly of this place being now begun, at which 
 there is a vast concourse of people from all parts, the president order¬ 
 ed the blessed martyrs to be brought before the tribunnl exposing* 
 them as a public show to the multitude. Having again interrogated 
 them, as many as he found to be Roman citizens, he ordered to eb 
 beheaded; the rest to be sent to the wild beasts. Rut Christ was 
 greatly glorified in those who before had denied the faith, but now, 
 contrary to the expectation of the Gentiles, confessed themselves to 
 be Christians. They were interrogated apart, as being now to be 
 dismissed, and set at liberty; but making confession, they were added 
 to the number of the martyrs. Attalus, when he was set in the iron 
 chair, and was scorched all over, and an offensive smell of burnt flesh 
 proceeded from his body, spoke to the multitude in the Roman tongue. 
 “This,” says he, “is to devour men, which is your practice. As 
 for us, we neither devour men, nor do we commit any other wicked¬ 
 ness whatever.” Being asked what is the name of God? he answered* 
 “God has not a name as men have.” 
 
 “Those who had been suffocated in prison, they cast to the dogs, 
 carefully watching them day and night, lest any of us should inter 
 them. Then they laid out the remainder of the bodies left uncon¬ 
 sumed by the fire, partly torn, and partly burnt, and the heads of the 
 rest, with the trunks of their bodies; all these they kept unburied, 
 with a guard of soldiers for many days. Some were filled with in¬ 
 dignation, and gnashed with their teeth at the dead, as if desirous 
 to be farther revenged upon them. Some insulted over them, and 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 283 
 
 derided them, at the same time extolling their idols, and attributing 
 to them the punishment that had been inflicted on the martyrs.—- 
 Some who were more mild, and seemed in some measure to sympa¬ 
 thise with us, nevertheless upbraided us, saying, “Where is their 
 God, and of what benefit has their religion been to them, which they 
 have preferred above their lives ?” In the mean time, we were greatly 
 concerned that we could not bury tWhudies in the earth, for neither 
 did the darkness of the night afford us any assistance, nor would 
 money persuade, nor entreaties prevail; but they continued to watch 
 the bodies very carefully, as if some great matter were to be gained 
 by their not being buried. The bodies, therefore, of the martyrs 
 having undergone all manner of ignominy, and having lain exposed to 
 the air six days., were burnt, and having been reduced to ashes by 
 these impious men, were by them thrown into the river Rhone, which 
 runs hard by, that no remains of them might be any longer visible on 
 this earth. Thus they acted as if they could be too hard for God, and 
 prevent their reviviscence, or, as themselves said, that they might have 
 no hope of a resurrection, trusting to which they have brought in among 
 us a strange and new religion, and despising the heaviest sufferings, 
 are ready to meet death with cheerfulness. Let us now see whether 
 they will rise again, and whether their God is able to help them, and 
 to deliver them out of our hands.” 
 
 “The above persecutions, it will be observed, happened under 
 Marcus Antoninus the philosopher, one of the most celebrated of the 
 Roman emperors. His rescript was, that they who confessed Christ 
 should he put to death , but that if any denied themselves to be Chris¬ 
 tians, they might be set at liberty. By the edict of Trajan, such Chris¬ 
 tians as were brought before a governor’s tribunal, and were convicted, 
 'were to be put to death; but they were not to be sought for. But the 
 President at Lyons issued public orders that strict searches should be 
 made for them. Attalus was a Roman citizen, and should have been 
 beheaded; but, being a Christian, this privilege was not allowed. The 
 multitude demanded that he should be tortured, and thrown to wild 
 beasts; and the President granted their request, relying undoubtedly 
 upon impunity, though he acted contrary to law. Such was the con¬ 
 dition of Christians at that time. 
 
 “We have here a melancholy exhibition of “the persecuting spirit 
 of Pagans,” and are reminded of Mr. Gibbon’s declaration, that, 
 “during the whole course of his reign, Marcus despised the Christians 
 as a philosopher, and punished them as a sovereign.” And we are 
 again brought to recollect Mr. Hume’s assertions respecting persecu¬ 
 tion, which, in connexion with the above facts, may prove a useful 
 warning to those who read his Essays, and convince them that no 
 dependence is fo be placed on his most confident assertions \yhen the 
 Christian religion is concerned. “The intolerance,” he says, “of 
 almost all religions which have maintained the unity of God, is as 
 remarkable as the contrary principle of Polytheists .” And again, 
 “The tolerating spirit of idolaters, both in ancient and modern times, 
 
284 ADDENDA, 
 
 is very obvious to any one who is the least conversant in the writings 
 of historians or travellers,” 
 
 “The testimony to the truth of the gospel by these sufferers, in that 
 early age, is very valuable. Ireneus, now an eider in the church at 
 Lyons, was in his younger days acquainted with Polycarp, the dis¬ 
 ciple of John the Apostle; and Pothinus, Bishop at Lyons, was older 
 than Ireneus. We have here, too, a proof of the great progress of the 
 <riixiatiau religion in a. eiroit time. I iie number ot Christians at 
 Lyons and Vienna must have been very considerable. There were 
 among them men of distinction for knowledge and understanding. 
 Attains, and several others, were Roman citizens. 
 
 “The testimony of the first Christians is the more valuable, as it is 
 given by men of all ranks in society, and of all the different countries 
 through which they were settled. It is the testimony of men who 
 were not guided by any civil authority or worldly consideration in the 
 religion they embraced, but by the force of truth and conviction alone; 
 and of men who had the deepest concern not to be deceived. It is 
 the testimony of competent judges of the evidence by which the}^ were 
 convinced, presented to them in facts of which they were eye¬ 
 witnesses, and in which they could not be mistaken, [t is testimony 
 transmitted to us from the most enlightened period of the Roman em¬ 
 pire,—from a multitude of men whose integrity is acknowledged by 
 their enemies, and from among whom individuals may be selected, 
 equally enlightened with any of their cotemporaries.” 
 
 Haldane's Evidences. 
 
 ANTIQUITY OF THE WORLD, CONFORMABLE TO THE 
 
 MOSAIC ACCOUNT. 
 
 “To prove that the world was formed at a much earlier period than 
 Moses assigns for its creation, the bowels of the earth have been ran¬ 
 sacked, and all the aids that can be derived from modern discoveries 
 resorted to, but in vain. One absurd theory has been exploded after 
 another, and no progress whatever has been made towards the detec¬ 
 tion of any mistake, on this point, in the sacred writers. 
 
 “In the Preface to an “Essay on the Theory of the Earth,” dated 
 1815, by M. Cuvier of Paris, who is styled one of the first philosophers 
 of the age, the publisher says, “Although the Mosaic account of the 
 creation of the world is an inspired writing, and consequently rests on 
 evidence totally independent of human observation and experience, 
 still it is interesting, and in many respects important, to know that it 
 coincides with the various phenomena observable in the mineral 
 kingdom. The structure of the earth, and the mode of distribution 
 of extraneous fossils or petrifactions, are so many direct evidences 
 of the truth of the scripture account of the formation of the earth; 
 ahd they might be used as proofs of its author having been inspired; 
 because the mineralogical facts discovered by modern naturalists 
 were unknown to the sacred historian. Even the periods of time, 
 the six days of the Mosaic description, ara not inconsistent with our 
 theories of the earth.”—“The deluge, one of the grandest natural 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 events described in the Bible, is equally confirmed, with regard to 
 its extent and the period of its occurrence, by a c a refit 1 study of the 
 various phenomena observed on and near the earth’s surface. The 
 age of the human race, also, a most important inquiry, is satisfacto¬ 
 rily determined by an appeal to natural appearances; and the pre¬ 
 tended great antiquity of some nations, So much insisted on by certain 
 philosophers, is thereby shown to be entirely unfounded.” 
 
 “On the other hand, how little progress has yet been made towards 
 bringing any irroof against the authenticity of the writings of Moses, 
 from the various theories of the earth that have been produced, may 
 be learned from the following declaration of M. Cuvier himself. “The 
 present period, with respect to the theory of the earth, hears som<£ 
 resemblance,” he observes, “to that in which some philosophers 
 thought that the heavens were formed of polished stone, and that the 
 moon was no larger than the Peloponnesus.” From this representa¬ 
 tion, we may learn how to estimate the opinions of those, who, from 
 their partial observations and fanciful theories, have concluded that,- 
 as the world has no appearance of having had a beginning, so there 
 is no probability that it will have an end. 
 
 “The following is an extract respecting the age of the world, from 
 Watson’s Letters to Gibbon, addressed, he says, “to a set of men who 
 have picked up in their travels, or the writings of the Deists, a few 
 flimsy objections against Christianity.”—“I cannot help,” he pro¬ 
 ceeds, “taking notice of an argument by which some philosophers 
 have of late endeavored to overturn the whole system of revelation; 
 and it is the more necessary to give an answer to their objection, as it 
 is become a common subject of philosophical conversation, especially 
 among those whehave visited the continent. The objection tends to 
 invalidate, as is supposed, the authority of Moses, by showing that the 
 earth is much olier than it can be proved to be from his account of 
 the creation, and the scripture chronology. We contend that six 
 thousand years have not elapsed since the creation. And these phi¬ 
 losophers contend that they have indubitable proof of the earth’s 
 being at the least fourteen thousand years old; and they complain 
 that Moses hangs as a dead weight upon them, and blunts all their 
 'zeal for inquiry. 
 
 “The Canonico Recupero, who, it seems, is engaged in writing 
 the history of Mount Etna, has discovered a stratum of lava which 
 flowed from that mountain, according to his opinion, in the time of 
 the second Punic War, or about two thousand years ago; this stratum 
 is not yet covered with soil sufficient for the production of either 
 corn or vines; it requires, then, says the Canon, two thousand years 
 at least, to convert a stratum of lava into a fertile field. In sinking a 
 pit near Jaci, in the neighborhood of Etna, they have discovered 
 evident marks of seven distinct lavas, one under the other; the sur¬ 
 faces of which are parallel, and most of them covered with a thick 
 bed of rich earth; now, the eruption which formed the lowest of 
 these lavas, (if we may be allowed to reason, says the Canon, from 
 analogy,) flowed from the mountain at least fourteen thousand years 
 
286 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 ft go.” To this it is replied: “In the first place, the Canon has not 
 satisfactorily established his main fact, that the lava in question is 
 the identical lava which Diodorus Siculus mentions to have flowed 
 from Etna in the second Carthaginian war; and, in the second place, 
 it may he observed, that the time necessary for converting lavas into 
 fertile fields, must be very different, according to the different con¬ 
 sistencies of the lavas, and their different situations, with respect to 
 elevation or depression, to their being exposed to winds, rains, and 
 to other circumstances; just as the time in which the heaps of iron 
 slag, (which resembles lava.) are covered with verdure, is different 
 at different furnaces, according to the nature of the slag, and situation 
 of the furnace; and something of this kind is deducible from the ac¬ 
 count of the Canon himself; since the crevices of this famous stratum 
 are really full of rich good soil, and have pretty large trees growing 
 in them. 
 
 “But if all this should be thought not sufficient to remove the 
 objection, I will produce the Canon an analog}- in opposition to his 
 analogy, and which is grounded on more certain facts. Etna and 
 Vesuvius resemble each other in the causes which produce their 
 eruptions, and in the nature of their lavas, arid in the time necessary 
 to mellow them into soil fit for vegetation; or if there be any slight 
 difference in this respect, it is probably not greater than what sub¬ 
 sists between different lavas of the same mountain. This bein'* 
 
 ij 
 
 admitted, which no philosopher will deny, the Canon’s analogy wiil 
 prove just nothing at all, if we can produce an instance of seven 
 different lavas, (with interjacent strata of vegetable earth,) which 
 flowed from Mount Vesuvius within the space, not of fourteen thou¬ 
 sand, but of somewhat less than seventeen hundred years: for then 
 according to our analogy, a stratum of lava may be covered with, 
 vegetable soil in about two hundred and fifty years, instead of re¬ 
 quiring two thousand for the purpose. The eruption of Vesuvius, 
 which destroyed Herculaneum and Pompeii, is rendered still more 
 famous by the death of Piinv, recorded by his nephew in his letter 
 to Tacitus; this event happened in the year 79; it is not yet then 
 quite seventeen hundred years since Herculaneum was swallowed up: 
 but we are informed, by unquestionable authority, that “the matter 
 which covers the ancient town of Herculaneum is not the produce of 
 one eruption only; for there are evident marks that the matter of six 
 eruptions has taken its course over that which lies immediately above 
 the town, and was the cause of its destruction. These strata are 
 cither lava or burnt matter, with veins of good soil between them .” I 
 will not add another word on this subject, except that the Bishop of 
 the Diocese was not much out in his advice to Canonico Recupero, to 
 take care not to make his mountain older than Moses; though it would 
 have been full as well to have shut his mouth with a reason, as to have 
 stopped it with the dread of an ecclesiastical censure.” 
 
 “In order to invalidate the truth of revelation, it has been earnestly 
 contended that the human race is not descended fnm one pair. This, 
 if it could be proved, would contradict the Mosaic account of the* 
 
 I 
 
 < 
 
 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 2S7 
 
 creation of man, amkofthe peopling of the earth, and the declaration 
 of the Apostle, that “God hath made of one blood all nations of men.” 
 It also strikes at the root of the whole account of the entrance of sin 
 and death through the first progenitor of mankind, and would equally 
 invalidate the universality of the commission of the Apostles to pro¬ 
 claim the way of recovery of all nations through the righteousness 
 of the second Adam. This attempt, however, like the other respect¬ 
 ing the age of the world, has proved abortive. Nothing that has been 
 observed or advanced on the subject, goes at all to establish such an 
 opinion. 
 
 “The arguments used against the unity of the human race have all 
 been shown to be unfounded, and many of them ridiculous. The first 
 and chief cause of its variety is proved by an appeal to facts in every 
 part of the world, to be climate; by which is meant, not so much the 
 latitude of a country from the equator, as the degree of heat or cold, 
 that depends on many connected circumstances. The next is the 
 state of society, which greatly augments or corrects the influence of 
 climate, and is itself the independent cause of many conspicuous dis¬ 
 tinctions among mankind. These causes, it has been shown, may 
 be infinitely varied in their degree, and in their combinations with 
 other principles; and, in the innumerable migrations of mankind, they 
 are modified by their own previous effects in a prior climate, and a 
 prior state of society. [See Dr. Smith’s Essay on the Causes o£ th^ 
 Variety of Complexion and Figure in the Human Species.] 
 
 “There is a colony of Jews at Cochin, upon the coast of Malabar, 
 who are now as black as the other Malabarians, who are hardly a 
 shade lighter than the people of Guinea, Benin, or Angola. 
 
 “In opposition to the Mosaic account of the creation, and of the 
 manner in which the earth was peopled, both at the beginning, and 
 after the flood, it is often argued, and, by writers of a certain class', 
 generally taken for granted, that “in the earliest periods of time, 
 mankind, in every part of the globe, were in a state of absolute 
 savageism.” 
 
 “This opinion forms the basis of a well known work, called 
 “Sketches of the History of Man.” To what is there advanced on 
 the above subject, an answer, soon after its publication, appeared in 
 “Two Letters on the Savage State,” to which no reply was made.—. 
 In the course of these letters, the following propositions are illustrated 
 by a great number of particulars collected fl’om ancient and modern 
 history. 
 
 “The more populous and extensive kingdoms and societies were 
 civilized at a period prior to the records of history: the presumption 
 therefore, is, that these were civilized from the beginning. 
 
 “No people who were once in a cultivated state, and, in process of 
 time, degenerated into the savage or barbarous state, have ever reco¬ 
 vered their pristine condition, without foreign aid. This furnishes a 
 presumptive argument that man, once a savage, would Lever have 
 raised himself from that hopeless state. 
 
288 
 
 ADDENDA. 
 
 “None of the nations which were savages or barbarians at the 
 period of their first appearance in histoiv, have ever been known to 
 move one step forward towards a civilized state, till impelled by some 
 external circumstance,* a phenomenon which does not seem to favor 
 the progressive motion of the human species towards a state of civili¬ 
 zation. 
 
 “There appears in savages a natural and rooted aversion to a civil¬ 
 ized state. This furnishes a strong presumption, that, by the efforts 
 of their natural genius alone, they never would have raised themselves 
 above their original character. 
 
 “The most judicious and the most enlightened sages of antiquity 
 entertained the most exalted notions of the piety, virtue, wisdom, and 
 justice of the primitive men. If we can depend upon their opinion, 
 there must always have existed, in some region of the globe, a society 
 of civilized people. 
 
 “The idea of a state of universal savageism seems to have sprung 
 from the chimerical cosmogonies of Mochus, Democritus, Epicurus. 
 &x. These cosmogonies, nor the consequences of them, were ever 
 admitted by the wise and sober sects of philosophers. 
 
 “The notion of a golden age , which at one time universally prevail¬ 
 ed, is inconsistent with the universal extent of the empire of savage¬ 
 ism. „ 
 
 “There seems to be in human nature an innate propensity towards 
 degeneracy, even in a state of the highest improvement. The conse¬ 
 quence is obvious, 
 
 “Civilization and improvements of every kind have always been 
 carried to the highest pitch of perfection in large and populous socie¬ 
 ties. In savages, the social appetite never reaches beyond their own 
 sept or horde, and consequently is too weak and too confined to dis¬ 
 pose them to unite into large communities; and, of course, had all 
 mankind been once in the savage state, they never could have arrived 
 at any considerable degree of civilization. 
 
 “In the earliest ages, all over the globe, we meet with names of 
 persons, places, offices, dignities, alluding to, or formed from, names, 
 epithets, attributes of the Deity, or, at least, from the objects of religi¬ 
 ous worship. This appearance indicates a devout turn of mind, and 
 consequently a state of things greatly superior to that which is con¬ 
 tended for by the gentlemen of your Lordship’s party.” 
 
 “At the end of the first letter, the following challenge is given on 
 the subject: “Upon the whole, I am persuaded your Lordship would 
 oblige not a few of your unlearned readers, as well as myself, would 
 you be condescending enough to point out some one state , nation , or 
 society , which was once confessedly composed of savages, and did 
 actually, without foreign assistance of any kind, by the gradual ex¬ 
 ertion of its internal powers, after passing successively through all 
 the steps and stages specified in your Sketches, at length arrive at a 
 •state of complete humanity and civilization.” 
 
 Haldane’s Evidences, 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 2m 
 
 in addition to the argument from prophecy, we present the three 
 following prophecies, yet fulfilling:— 
 
 NOAH’S PROPHECY. 
 
 “We have already considered the prophecy of Noah, as it refeis to 
 the Messiah ; we shall now observe that part of it which relates to the 
 sentence pronounced on 'Canaan. On account of the sin of which 
 Ham, his second son, had been guilty, Noah, not in order to gratify 
 any feeling of resentment, but under a divine impulse, delivered the 
 following prediction, which denounced a curse upon Canaan, one of 
 the sons of Ham, and a blessing on,Sherri and Japheth. 
 
 “And he said, 
 
 “Cursed be Canaan; 
 
 “A servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. 
 
 “And he said, 
 
 “Blessed be Jehovah, God of Shem; 
 
 “And Canaan shall be their servant. 
 
 “God shall enlarge Japheth; 
 
 “And shall dwell in the tents of Shem; 
 
 ‘‘And Canaan shall be their servant.” 
 
 “Although the above curse was not pronounced on Ham who had 
 been personally, the transgressor, yet it was a heavy punishment on 
 ]iim to hear of the evil that was to fall on his posterity. In this part 
 of the punishment, Noah also, perhaps on account of his own improper 
 conduct, was in a measure involved, in being employed to pronounce 
 this malediction on a large portion of his own descendants. 
 
 “The curse was directed particularly against the line of Canaan, 
 which must have tended greatly to encourage the Israelites, the de¬ 
 scendants of Shem, when sent to take possession of that land which 
 the posterity of Canaan inhabited; of whom those that were not de¬ 
 stroyed, were brought into bondage, as the Gibeonites, who became 
 hewers of wood and drawers of water. At the same time, this pun¬ 
 ishment was to be inflicted in perfect conformity with justice. The 
 descendants of Canaan were to suffer, for their own sins, by which 
 they recognized the guilt of their progenitor. The Israelites were 
 not permitted to go against them till their “iniquity was full,” and 
 till, on account of their wickedness, the land, in the emphatic lan¬ 
 guage of scripture, “spewed them out;” after which they were over¬ 
 come by the descendants of Shem. The posterity of Canaan in Tyre 
 and Carthage, were subdued by the descendants of Japheth. 
 
 “The accomplishment of this prophecy does not appear to have been 
 confined to the line of Canaan, but to have extended to the other chil¬ 
 dren of Ham. The whole continent of Africa was peopled principally 
 by the children of Ham, and for many ages the better pacts oi tk t 
 country lay under the dominion of the Romans, then of the Saracens, 
 and then of the Turks, Egypt is often called in scripture the lend of 
 Ham, and for many years it was a grea.t and flourishing kingdom. 
 But it was subdued by the Persians, who descended from J aphe/' 
 arid from that time to this it has constantly been in subjection to por 
 or other of the posterity of Shem or Japheth. The inha A tan ts e, 
 
 vol. n, ■’ 25 
 
 
 
290 
 
 ADDENDA, 
 
 Africa have been bought and sold for slaves from the earliest periods 
 of history, even to the present time. Thus, in the above words of 
 Noah, we have a remarkable prediction, uttered at the distance of 
 above 4000 years, which has been literally fulfilling from that time to 
 the present hour.” Haldane's Evidences. 
 
 ISHMAEL. 
 
 ‘■Another remarkable prophecy is that concerning Ishmael and his 
 descendants. When Hagar, the servant of Abraham, fled from the face 
 of her mistress, “the angel of the Lord found her in the wilderness-, 
 and said unto her, Return unto thy mistress, and submit thyself unto 
 herhands. And the angel of the Lord said unto her, I will muitiply 
 thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude. 
 Ahd the angel of the Lord said unto her, Behold thou art with child, 
 and shalt bear a son, and shall call his name Ishmael, because the 
 Lord has heard thy affliction. And he will be a wild man; his hand 
 will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him, and he 
 shall dwell in the presence of all his brethern.”—“Behold I have bles¬ 
 sed him,and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceeding- 
 lv; twelve princes shall he beget,and I will make him a great nation.” 
 All these prophecies respecting the posterity of Ishmael have been 
 remarkably verified. Strabo frequently mentions the Arabian Phy- 
 larchs, or rulers of tribes; and Meio, quoted by Eusebius, from Alex¬ 
 ander Polyhlstor, a heathen historian, relates that twelve sons of 
 Abraham departing into Arabia, divided the region between them, 
 and were the first kings of the inhabitants; “whence,” says he, “even 
 to our days, the Arabians have twelve kings of the same names as the 
 first.” Ever since, the people have been governed by Phylarchs, and 
 have lived in tribes. 
 
 “And “I will make him a great nation.” This is again and again 
 repeated. The Saracens, his descendants, made rapid and extensive 
 conquests, and erected one of the largest empires that ever was in 
 the world. “And he will be a wild man.” It is said of Ishmael^ 
 ^Genesis xxi. 20, that “he dwelt in the wilderness;” and his sons stili 
 inhabit the same wilderness, and many of them neither sow nor plant. 
 “And he became an archer.” Such the Arabs have been, and con¬ 
 tinue to this day. “His hand will be against every man, and every 
 man’s hand against him.” Ishmael lived by prey and rapine in the 
 wilderness; and his posterity have all along infested Arabia and the 
 neighboring countries with their robberies and incursions. They 
 five in a state of continual war with the rest of the world, and are both 
 robbers by land, and pirates by sea. They have been enemies to 
 mankind, and the rest of mankind have been enemies to them, and 
 several unsuccessful attempts have been made to extirpate them. 
 Even now r , as well as formerly, travellers are forced to go with arms, 
 and in caravans, or large companies, and to keep watch, and to de¬ 
 fend themselves from their assaults, as they go about in troops, and 
 rob and plunder all whom they can by any means subdue. These 
 robberies they also justify, “by alleging the hard usage of their father 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 2U 
 
 fehmae], who being turned out of doors by Abraham, had the open 
 plains and deserts given him by God for his patrimony, with permis¬ 
 sion to take whatever he could find there. And, on this account, they 
 think they may indemnify themselves as well as they can, not only 
 on the posterity of Isaac, but also on all besides.” 
 
 “Add he shall dwell” (tabernacle, or dwell in tents) “in the presence 
 ef all his brethren.” It appears that they dwelt in tents in the wilder¬ 
 ness so long ago as in Isaiah’s and Jerpmiah’s time; and they do the 
 same at this day. Their hand is against every man, and every man’s 
 hand against them; and yet they are able to dwell in the presence of 
 all their brethren. This has been fulfilled both in the person of Ish- 
 mael, and in his posterity. As for T shmae! himself, the sacred histo¬ 
 rian afterwards relates, (Gen. xxv. 47, 48.) that “the years of thd life 
 of Ishmael were a hundred and thirty and seven years,, and he died 
 in the presence of all his brethren. His posterity dwelt likewise in 
 the presence of all their brethren; Abraham’s sons by Keturah; the 
 Moabites and Ammonites, descendants of Lot; the Israelites, descend¬ 
 ants of Abraham, Isaac, and Esau. And they still subsist a distinct 
 people, and inhabit the country of their progenitors, notwithstanding 
 the perpetual enmity between them and the rest of mankind. They 
 have from first to last maintained their independence; and, notwith¬ 
 standing the most powerful efforts for their destruction, they still 
 dwell in the presence of all their brethren. 
 
 “They were never subjected by their powerful neighbors the Egyp¬ 
 tians or Assyrians, nor by Cyrus and the Persians, the next great 
 conquerors of the East. Neither he nor his successors ever reduced, 
 the whole body of the Arabs to subjection. They conquered some of 
 the exterior, but never reached the interior parts of the country.—- 
 Herodotus, who lived nearest to these times, says expressly, that the 
 Arabs were never reduced by the Persians to the condition of subjects, 
 but were considered by them as friends, and opened to them a passage 
 into Egypt, which, without the assistance and permission of the Arabs, 
 would have been utterly impracticable. In another place, he says, 
 that while Phoenicia, Palestine, Syria, and the neighboring countries, 
 were taxed, the Arabian territories continued free from paying any 
 tribute. 
 
 “Alexander the Great then overturned the Persian empire, and 
 conquered Asia. He was preparing an expedition against the Arabs, 
 when an inflammatory fever cut him off in the flower of his age. 
 Alexander’s successors attempted to subdue them, hut failed. Diodo¬ 
 rus says, that “neither the Assyrians formerly, nor the kings of the 
 Medes and Persians, nor yet of the Macedonians, were able to subdue 
 them; nav, though they led many and great forces against them, yet 
 they could not accomplish their attempts.” 
 
 “The Romans then invaded the East, and subdued the countries ad¬ 
 joining; but were never able to reduce Arabia into the form of a 
 Roman province. Pompey, though he triumphed over three parts of 
 the world, could not conquer Arabia. Elius Gallus, in the reign of 
 Augustus, penetrated far into the country; but at last escaped with a 
 
ADDENDA, 
 
 » J.-y 
 
 small remainder of his forces. Trajan reduced some part© of Arabia^ 
 but could never reduce it entirely. When he besieged the city of the 
 Hagarenes, lie was constantly repulsed, and at length was forced to' 
 Fuise the siege, and retired with disgrace into his own dominions. 
 About eighty years afterwards, the Emperor Severue twice besieged 
 the same city with a numerous army, and a train of military engines; 
 but he had no better success than Trajan; neither did any of the 
 following emperors prevail against them. The Arabs continued their 
 incursions and depredations in Syria, and other Roman provinces, 
 Tilth equal license and impunity. 
 
 “Sach was the state and condition of the Arabs to the time of Ma¬ 
 homet, who laid the foundations of a mighty empire; and then, for 
 sHvera! centuries, they were better known among the European nations 
 by the name of Saracens,—the Araceni of Pliny, and the Hagarenes 
 of Scripture. Their conquests were amazingly rapid. In a few 
 years the Saracens overran more countries, and subdued more people, 
 than the Romans did in several centuries. They were then not only 
 independent themselves, but masters of the most, considerable parts of 
 the world. After their empire was dissolved, and they were reduced 
 within the limits of their native country, .they still maintained their 
 liberty against the Tartars, Mamalucs, Turks,and all foreign enemies 
 whatever. Whoever conquered Asia, they were still unconquered, 
 and still continued their incursions, and preyed on all. The Turks 
 have now, for several centuries, been masters of the adjacent coun- 
 T.ries: but they have been so little able to restrain the depredations of 
 toe Arabs, that they have been obliged' to pay them a sort of annual 
 tribute. 
 
 “Thus has this single nation stood out against the enmity of the 
 w hole world for near 4000 years together. The great empires around 
 them have all in their turns fallen to ruin, while they have continued 
 the same from the beginning. This, in the common course of human 
 a flairs, was in the highest degree improbable. These are the only 
 people, besides the Jews, who have subsisted as a distinct peoplo 
 from the beginning. They, as well as the Jews, hoastof their descent 
 from Abraham, from whom also they profess to have derived circum¬ 
 cision/’ 
 
 THE JEWS. 
 
 “The kingdom of Israel vras separated from all other nations, in 
 order that, through it, the kingdom of heaven, which was to be uni¬ 
 versal, might be introduced. Inconsequence of this separation, the 
 Jews enjoyed uncommon privileges: but, as they abused these privi¬ 
 leges, their punishment has been as signal as their exaltation. Through- 
 O',it the whole of the Old Testament scriptures, from the time when 
 ihev were separated as a notion, there is a remarkable series of pro¬ 
 phecies concerning them, to which an important addition was after¬ 
 wards made by the Lord Jesus himself. To some of these prophecies 
 we shall now advert, especially such as were delivered by Moses. 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 203 
 
 “In the 30th chapter of Deuteronomy, Moses says to Israel, ‘If thine 
 heart turn away so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, 
 and worship other gods and serve them, I denounce unto you this day 
 that you shall surely perish, and that you shall not prolong your days 
 upon the land whither thou passest over Jordan to possess it.’ In the 
 28th chapter of the same book, a full detail is given of the calamities 
 that would overtake them if they should be disobedient. These pre¬ 
 dictions were all fulfilled, though not at once. Different enemies were 
 brought against them, and they sustained several sieges, all pointed 
 out in various predictions, which weie ultimately and fully accom¬ 
 plished in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, when ‘wrath 
 came upon them to the uttermost,’ and in their final and grand disper¬ 
 sion. 
 
 “We find it foretold, that an enemy was to be brought against 
 them for their punishment. Dent, xxxviii. 49. “The Lord shall 
 bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as 
 the eagle flieth; a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand.” 
 Again, “Lo I will bring a nation upon you from far, O house of Is¬ 
 rael, saith the Lord. It is a mighty nation; it is an ancient nation; 
 a nation whose language thou knowest not, neither understandest 
 what they say.”—A nation of fierce countenance, which shall not 
 regard the person of the old, nor show favor to the young.”—And 
 lie shall besiege thee in tiiy gates, until thy high and fenced walls 
 come down, wherein thou trustedst, throughout all the land.” Thus 
 the Romans, whose significant standard was an eagle were brought 
 against them. 
 
 “In the siege, they were to suffer much, especially from famine. 
 The man’s “eye shall be evil toward his his brother, and toward the 
 wife of his bosom, and toward his children; because he hath nothing 
 left him in the siege, and in the straitness wherewith thine enemies 
 shall distress thee in thy gates; and in like manner, the woman’s 
 “eye shall be evil towards the husband of her bosom, and toward 
 her son, and toward her daughter.” 
 
 “It was expressly foretold, that not on! v the men, but even the wo¬ 
 men, should eat their own children. “Ye shall eat the flesh of your 
 sons, and the flesh ofvour daughters shall ve eat.”—“And thou shalt 
 eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and thy daugh¬ 
 ters.” And more particularly, “The tender and delicate woman among 
 you, who would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the 
 ground, for delicateness and tenderness,—she shall eat her children, 
 for want of all things, secretly in the siege and straitness wherewith 
 thine enemies shall distress thee in thy gates.” This was fulfilled 
 about six hundred years after the time of Moses among the Israelites, 
 when Samaria was besieged by the King of Syria, and two women 
 agreed together, the one to give up her son to be boiled and eaten to¬ 
 day, and the other to deliver up her son to be dressed and eaten to¬ 
 morrow; and one of them was eaten accordingly. It was fulfilled 
 again, about nine hundred years after the time of Moses among the 
 Jews, in the siege of Jerusalem, before the Babylonish captivity.— 
 VOL. if. 25* 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 m 
 
 Jeremiah bewails this in his Lamentations: “The hands of the pitiful 
 women have sodden their own children; they were their meat in the 
 destruction of the daughter of my people.” And again it was ful¬ 
 filled, about fifteen hundred years after the time of Moses, in the last 
 siege of Jerusalem by Titus. And we read in Josephus, particularly, 
 of a noblewoman, illustrious for her family and riches, killing and 
 eating her own sucking child. Thus exactly were fulfilled the words 
 of Moses, concerning “the tender and delicate woman, who would 
 not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground, for delicate- 
 ness and tenderness.” 
 
 “Great numbers of the Jews were to be destroyed. “And ve shall 
 be left few r in number, whereas ye were as the stars of heaven for 
 multitude.” Josephus computes, that, during the whole siege, the- 
 number of those who were destroyed by it and by the war, amounted 
 to eleven hundred thousand, the people being assembled from all 
 parts to celebrate the passover. 
 
 “They were to be carried into Egypt, and sold for a very low price. 
 “And the Lord shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships,and there 
 ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, 
 and no man shall buy you.” This was literally fulfilled. The mark¬ 
 ets were quite overstocked with them; and Josephus says, they were 
 sold with their wives and children at the lowest price. 
 
 “They were to be rooted out of their own land. “And ve shall be 
 plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it.” 
 
 “They were also to be dispersed into all nations. “And thou 
 shalt be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth.” And again, 
 “The Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from one end of the 
 earth even unto the other.”—“I will scatter you among the Heathen, 
 and will draw out a sword after you, and your land shall be desolate, 
 and your cities waste.” All this has been literally fulfilled. 
 
 “They shall suffer much in their dispersion. “And among those 
 nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy feet have 
 rest.” They have been banished from city to city, from country to 
 country. In many places they have been banished, and recalled, 
 and banished again. In the latter end of the 13th century, they were 
 banished from England: in the latter pnd of the 14th century, they 
 were banished from France for the seventh time: in the latter end of 
 the 15th century, they were banished from Spain. Most of them 
 paid dearly for a refuge in Portugal; but ; within a few years, they 
 were expelled from thence also. 
 
 “They should be “oppressed and spoiled evermore;” and their 
 “houses” and “vineyards,” their “oxen” and “asses,” should be taken 
 from them, and “they should be only oppressed and crushed alway.” 
 Frequent seizures have been made of their effects, and they have been 
 fined and plundered in almost all countries; and in innumerable in¬ 
 stances,they have been forced to redeem their lives with their treasure. 
 
 “Thy sons and thy daughters shall he given unto another people.” 
 !n several countries, in Spain and Portugal particularly, their ohiL 
 
ADDENDA 
 
 295 
 
 chen have been taken from them by order of the government, to bn 
 educated in the Popish religion. When they were banished front 
 Portugal, the King ordered all their children under fourteen to be 
 taken from them and baptized. 
 
 “Thou shalt be mad for the sight of thine eyes which thou shall 
 see.” By cruel usage, extortions, and oppressions, which they have 
 undergone, they have often been driven to madness and desperation; 
 as, for instance, in the reign of Richard the First, when the people 
 were in arms to make a general massacre of them, fifteen hundred of 
 them seized on the citv of York to defend themselves; but, bein'; be- 
 sieged, they offered to capitulate, and to ransom their lives with 
 money. The offer being refused, one of them cried in despair, that 
 it was better to die courageously for the law, than to Fa II into the hands 
 of the Christians. Every one immediately stabbed his wife and 
 children. The men afterwards retired into the King’s palace, which 
 they set on fire, in which they consumed themselves with the palace 
 and furniture. 
 
 “And thou shalt become an astonishment,a proverb, and a by-word 
 among all nations whither the Lord shall lead thee.” This prophecy 
 we see and hear fulfilled almost every day. The word Jew is con¬ 
 tinually used as a proverb. They are generally hated. Mahome- 
 tans, heathens, and nominal Christians, however they may disagree 
 in other points, yet agree in vilifying, abusing, and persecuting the 
 Jews. 
 
 “And the Lord will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues 
 of thy seed, even great plagues, and o £ long continuance ^ Such are 
 the awful denunciations of prophecy against the Jews, which have 
 overtaken them on account of their many and aggravated transgres¬ 
 sions; but above all on account of the rejection of the Messiah. It 
 was then that the measure of their iniquity was filled up. 1 Thess. 
 ii. 15, “They both killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, 
 and have persecuted us, and they please not God, and are contrary 
 to all men. Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles, that they might 
 be saved, to fill up their sins always, for the wrath has come upon 
 them to the uttermost.” Thus their own imprecation has been 
 remarkably and awfully fulfilled, “His blood be upon us and our 
 children.” 
 
 “The foregoing prophecies were all delivered by Moses more than 
 300 years ago , and many others, to the like effect, are scattered 
 through the writings of all the subsequent prophets. 
 
 “The Lord Jesus himself has added a most minute and remarkable 
 prediction concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, 
 uttered nearly forty years before that event. A full and most striking 
 illustration of this prophecy, in a detail of all the circumstances 
 which took place, is given by Josephus, who was an eye witness on 
 the spot. The temple was burnt on the 10th day of the month of 
 August, of the year 70, the same day on which it had been burnt by 
 the king of Babylon. Tacitus, the Roman historian, confirms, by 
 his account of the siege, the testimony of Josephus. 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 296 
 
 “The destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem is an event of 
 great importance. It accomplished a great number of prophecies. 
 And by putting a visible and necessary end to the Jewish economy, 
 it made w'av for the dispensation of the Messiah. 
 
 “Titus, who commanded the Roman army, was exceedingly desirous 
 of saving the temple. But, contrary to his most earnest wish, cir¬ 
 cumstances led to its being set on fire. A dreadful massacre ensued, 
 in which thousands perished, and the whole city, with its fortifica¬ 
 tions, palaces, towers, and walls, were levelled to the ground.—» 
 Before the temple was consumed, Titus entered into the sanctuary 
 and most holy place, and was struck with its remaining grandeur 
 Out of the former he saved the golden candlestick, the table of the 
 siirw bread, the altar of incense, all of pure gold, and the book of the 
 law wrapped up in a rich golden tissue. After Vespasian’s triumph 
 at Rome,he built a Temple of Peace, in which he laid up these golden 
 vessels and instruments; but the law, and the purple veils of the 
 holy place, he ordered to be deposited in this place. These spoils 
 were carried off by Genseric, four hundred years afterwards, when 
 he pillaged Rome. On the triumphal arch of Titus, erected at Rome, 
 which remains a noble monument of antiquity, and which the writer 
 of this has seen, the representation of the table and candlestick is 
 still visible. There is a small passage at one side for the Jews, as 
 they cannot be prevailed on to go under the arch. 
 
 “To his prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, Jesus 
 added another strikingly descriptive of its condition since that event 
 to the present hour, which also contains an intimation that the Jews 
 shall at last be restored. “And they shall fall by the ed^e of the 
 sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations, and Jerusalem 
 shall he trodden down of the Gentiles, till the times o f the Gentiles shall 
 he fulfilled ,” or, as Paul expressed it, “till the fulness of the Gentiles 
 be come in. 
 
 “The present internal condition of the Jews is remarkably declar¬ 
 ed, in connexion with their future restoration, in the words of the 
 Prophet Ilosea. “The chifdren of Israel shall abide many days 
 without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and 
 without an image, (or altar,) and without an ephod, (or priest to wear 
 an ephod,) and without taraphim, (or Divine manifestations.) After¬ 
 wards shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, 
 and David their king, and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the 
 latter days.” According to the law of Moses, their solemn feasts and 
 sacrifices are limited to one certain place, and that has been now for 
 many ages in the hands of strangers and aliens, who will not suffer 
 them to go thither. Thus, in the most complete manner has the 
 prediction of Daniel, when speaking of the coming of the Messiah, 
 been fulfilled. He shall “make an end of sin offering;” and again, “he 
 shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.'' The Emperor 
 Julian, in order to falsify these predictions, and because the Lord had 
 said, Jerusalem “shall be trodden down of the Gentiles,” attempted 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem, and promised to restore the Jews 
 to their habitations. Ilis purpose, however, was frustrated, and his 
 death, on his Persian expedition, put an end to their hopes from that 
 quarter. 
 
 “The preservation of the Jews as a separate people, and their re¬ 
 storation at last, are as distinctly announced as their various calami¬ 
 ties and dispersions. 
 
 “Moses says, “The land also shall be left of them, and shall enjoy 
 her Sabbaths, while she lieth desolate without them; and they shall 
 accept of the punishment of their iniquity, because, even because 
 they despise my judgments, and because their soul abhorred my 
 statutes. And yet for all that, when they be in the land of their en¬ 
 emies, I will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them, to destrcPr 
 them utterly, and to break my covenant with them; for 1 am the 
 Lord their God. Put I will, for their sakes, remember the covenant 
 of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt, in 
 the sight of the Heathen, that I might be their God: I am the Lord.” 
 Jeremiah says, “Fear thou not, O Jacob, my servant, saith the Lord, 
 for I am with thee; for I will make a full end of all the nations whither 
 I have driven thee; but I will not make a full end of thee.” And 
 again the prophet Amos, “For, lo, 1 will command^ and I will sift the 
 house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet 
 fhail not the least grain fall upon the earth.” Accordingly although 
 the Jews are dispersed among all nations, they still continue a dis¬ 
 tinct people, and yet they no where live according to their own laws, 
 ^o where elect their own magistrates, and no where can enjoy the 
 full exercise of their religion. 
 
 “No people have continued unmixed so long as they have done, 
 not only of those who have sent forth colonies into foreign countries, 
 but even of those who have remained in their own country. The 
 northern nations have come in swarips into the more southern parts 
 of Europe; but where are they now to be discerned and distinguished? 
 The Gauls went forth in great bodies to seek their fortune in foreign 
 parts; but what traces or footsteps of them are now remaining any 
 where? In France, who can separate the race of the ancient Gauls 
 from the various people who from time to time have set tled there? In 
 Spain, who can distinguish exactly between the first possessors the 
 Spaniards, and the Goths, and the Moors, who conquered and kept 
 possession of the country for some ages? In England, who can pre¬ 
 tend to say with certainty which families are derived from the anci¬ 
 ent Britons, and which from the Romans, or Saxons, or Danes, ox* 
 Normans ? 
 
 “The most ancient and honorable pedigrees, can be traced up only 
 to a certain period; arid, beyond that, there is nothing but conjecture 
 and uncertainty, obscurity, and ignorance. But tire Jews can go up 
 higher than any nation; they can even deduce their pedigree from 
 the beginning of the world. They may not know from what particu¬ 
 lar tribe or family they are descended; but they know certainly that 
 they ail sprung from the stock of Abraham. And yet, the contempt 
 
298 
 
 ADDENDA, 
 
 with which they have been treated, and the hardships they have tm* 
 -tlergone, in almost all countries, should, it might be supposed, have 
 made them desirous to forget or renounce their original; but they 
 profess it, they glory in it; and after so many wars, massacres, and 
 persecutions, they still subsist, they still are very numerous. We 
 see them excluded from the only country to which they had any 
 attachment, vagabonds on the earth, and dispersed indifferently 
 through every quarter of it, the scorn and outcasts of all other nations. 
 On the other hand, although every where spurned, reviled, and op¬ 
 pressed, we see them yet continuing to hoM fast their offensive pro¬ 
 fession, and not worn out by this usage, nor induced by it to renounce 
 that' profession, and take refuge in the mass of the people among 
 *w!iom they live. But they still subsist, a numerous, a distinct, and 
 wretched people^ All this has something in it which the common 
 principles of human nature will not explain. 
 
 “The predictions concerning the restoration of the Jews, are also 
 express. “Behold I will take the children of Israel from among the 
 heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, 
 and bring them into their own land; And they shall dwell in the land 
 that I have given unto Jacob my servant, even they and their chil¬ 
 dren, and their children’s children for ever; and my servant David 
 shall be their prince for ever.” “Then shall they know that I am 
 the Lord their God, who caused them to be led into captivity among 
 the heathen; but I have gathered them into their own land, and have 
 left none of them any more there. Neither will I hide my face any 
 more from them; for I have poured out my spirit upon the house of 
 Israel, saith the Lord God.” These promises have already had a 
 subordinate and typical fulfilment; but their ultimate accomplishment, 
 after which the Lord will not hide his face any more from them, is 
 still future. 
 
 “In the Epistle to the Romans, the Apostle Paul ascribes the future 
 restoration of Israel to the favor of God. After informing his breth¬ 
 ren that the Jewish nation was broken off because of unbelief, and 
 warning them to be on their guard lest they too, as branches grafted 
 in, should be broken off on the same account, he says, “For I would 
 not, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, (lest you 
 should be wise in your own conceits,) that blindness in part has 
 happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in: and 
 so all Israel shall be saved,” 
 
 “The present situation of the Jews, and what it has been, especially 
 for the last 1700 years, is such, that when compared with the fore¬ 
 going prophecies, it is sufficient to strike infidelity dumb. Many 
 object to the miracles of the first ages of Christianity; and, in order 
 to discredit them, bring forward all the counterfeit miracles that can 
 be raked together. They insist, in like manner, that the prophecies 
 of Scripture are either so obscure that they cannot be understood, 
 and that they may mean any thing; or, that they were written after 
 the events which they are said to predict. Here then is a series of 
 prophecies concerning facts obvious to their senses, of which it cannot 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 299 
 
 be even alleged that it is either forged or obscure. M>r, although 
 they were to collect all the conjectures that ever camejto pass, which 
 have been dignined with the name of prophecies, can they pretend 
 to show any thing like these combined pre-intimations of a great, 
 extensive, and complex historical fact? 
 
 “If, admitting that there is something remarkable in these predic¬ 
 tions, they should assert that the event .itself may be accounted for 
 from natural causes; let them, in all the history of the world, point 
 out any thing similar to it. It is sometimes said, that the Jews be¬ 
 lieved themselves the favorites of heaven; and it is natural to cling 
 to such a flattering idea. If they believe themselves to be so, what 
 was it which, notwithstanding all the calamities they had suffered, 
 has indelibly impressed on them this belief? When men, in oppos¬ 
 ing evident truth, attempt to get rid of one difficulty, they only mil 
 into another Let all be upon their guard, lest the declaration applied 
 to the Jews by'Paul, be in them also verified. “Behold ye dcspiscrs 
 and wonder and perish , for I work a work in YOUR days , a work 
 which ye shall in no wise believe , though a man declare it unto you .” 
 
 SECOND PSALM. 
 
 “WHY did nations rage? And tribes meditate vain things? The 
 kings of the earth combined; and the chiefs assembled together, 
 against the Lord and against his Christ, [saying] 
 
 “ ‘Let us break their bands asunder and throw off from us their 
 yoke.’ 
 
 “He who dwells in heaven will laugh them to scorn—the Lord will 
 treat them with derision. Then will lie speak to them in his wrath 
 and trouble them with his sore displeasure. But as for me, by him I 
 am appointed king on Sion, his holy mountain. I proclaim the decree 
 of the Lord; to me the Lord said, 
 
 “ ‘Thou art my Son, this clay I have begotten thee, Ask of me, and 
 I will give thee nations for thine inheritance, and the utmost parts of 
 the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt rule them with a rod of iron. 
 Thou shalt break them to pieces like a potter''# vessel ’ 
 
 “Now therefore, O kings, be wise: Be instructed, all you, who judge 
 the earth. 
 
 “Serve the Lord with fear; and rejoice for him with trembling. 
 Keep fast hold of instruction; the Lord may be angry and you may 
 perish out of the right way. When his anger suddenly blazes forth, 
 happy are all they who have trusted in him.”— Thomson's version. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 IN the preceding pages there is not to he found that argument which 
 is, to millions^ the most convincing of all. 1 purposely omitted it 
 till now. I am aware that it is only in one way, addressed to all 
 mankind. All may test it, but all do not. It is an argument which 
 produces assurance. Nay, it is itself assurance. It is no more to be 
 resisted than consciousness or animal feeling. It is, indeed, the same 
 with experience. Every Christian knows, from his own experience* 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 200 
 
 Christianity is divine. Aavell taught and a well practised Christian— 
 un intelligent and obedient disciple of Jesus Christ,can no more doubt 
 the truth of Christianity, or the pretensions of Jesus Christ and the 
 holy Apostles, than he can doubt his own consciousness, or his own 
 feelings. The Christian first believes , and then knows Christianity to 
 be divine. But this can be no proof to a sceptic, nor to an opponent. 
 Why then urge it? True—I.cannot prove that I have the tooth-ache; 
 nor that I fear or love any person, by a mere declaration. To those 
 only who believe my testimony this will be proof. But I cannot prove 
 my assertion, if it can only be done by giving them my consciousness 
 or my feelings. They may say, after believing my testimony con¬ 
 cerning the tooth-ache, that I am deceived and mistaken, though they 
 win compliment my veracity. So they may say, when I tell them I 
 knoiv Christianity to be divine, that, no doubt, I think so, but they think 
 that I am mistaken. There is one advantage, however, which the 
 Christian can have, and does possess, above the sceptfb in this matter: 
 The sceptic never can disprove, even to his own satisfaction, much 
 less to any other person’s, that my experience, or any other person’s, 
 isjiot what it purports to be. He can never say, with any regard to 
 the meaning of words, that he has experienced Christianity to be false. 
 The Christian is in this, as well as in every other respect, greatly ex¬ 
 alted above him. He has proved that Christianity is true by his own 
 experience; and the sceptic can never, by his experience, prove it to 
 be false. 
 
 But still it will be asked, Why urge this argument, when it cannot 
 be a proof to sceptics ? This is only in part true; for Christianity sub - 
 mits itself to the test; it challenges every man to prove it true from 
 his own experience. This can be better illustrated by a refer¬ 
 ence to a single passage in the Nsw Testament than by any other 
 means. For example: Jesus once spoke, saying—“Come to me all 
 you that are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke 
 upon you, and learn efme; for I am meek and condescending, and 
 you shall find rest to your souls; for my yoke is easy and my burden 
 is light ” 
 
 Now, if a physician should say to his patient, after he had failed to 
 convince him by argument, Take this medicine, sir, and you will as ¬ 
 suredly find ease to your pain, and relief to your disease.—Does he not 
 submit all his pretensions to the test of experiment, or his veracity to 
 the experience of his patient? He puts it in the power of his patient to 
 prove, from his own experience, that all his pretensions are well or ill 
 founded. Thus the Saviour of the world submits his pretensions to all. 
 Some take his medicine and are cured; others ridicule his pretensions, 
 reject his medicine, and die. But the experience of one cured person, 
 who has submitted himself to his guidance, cannot be set aside by all 
 the objections, reasons, and arguments of all the sceptics and sophists 
 on earth. 
 
 Tims the true Christian can say, I know and am assured that Chris¬ 
 tianity is true and divine. Hence it comes to pass that millions .who 
 can barely read the holy scriptures,, who cannot debate or argue 
 
ADDENDA. 
 
 301 
 
 with the sceptic, are,nevertheless, unshaken in their confidence, when 
 the sceptic has shot the last arrow in his quiver at them. I believe, I 
 know, and am sure, says the genuine Christian, that Jesus is the Messi¬ 
 ah, the Son of the Living God, the Saviour of men. Let the sceptics 
 know, then, that Jesus, the Lord, has put in their power to prove, by 
 experience, the truth of all that he taught and all that he promised. 
 
 We, then, who submit to the government and guidance of Jesus 
 Christ, have all these advantages over the sceptics: We have reason, 
 true philosophy, and experience, all on our side. We enjoy this pres¬ 
 ent life much better than they can enjoy it—for, as Paul said, “Godli¬ 
 ness is profitable for all things, having promise of the life that now is, 
 and of the life which is to come.” Rich or poor, noble or ignoble, in 
 the world’s reckoning, we can always eat our food with gladness, sleep 
 sweetly, and contemplate nature with adoration. The consciousness 
 that we have the eye of God always upon us and his arms encircling 
 us, is worth infinitely more than all the promises of all the atheists, 
 deists, sceptics, and free thinkers upon earth. On their philosophy, 
 too, we have nothing to fear. We are happier while we live—if Chris¬ 
 tians, incomparably happier—and on their principles, cannot fail to 
 be as happy as they after death. But, on our principles they can pro¬ 
 mise themselves only the happiness of a stall-fed ox here, and everlast¬ 
 ing destruction hereafter. This is a fair contrast of the systems. We 
 have the present and the future. They have the present only in part, 
 and nothing in future, but utter darkness and everlasting night. If 
 immortality be worth any thing it is worth every thing which imagi¬ 
 nation can grasp. This is the boot between the two systems. Animal 
 gratifications and death. Jesus Christ and immortality. The mate¬ 
 rialist will choose the former. But the rational philosopher and the 
 man of common sense will choose the latter. 
 
 END OF VOL. II. 
 
 ERRATA-VOL. I. 
 
 Title page, line 17, for ‘Charles II Sims , Stenographer,* read Charles II. 
 Simms , Esquire; lie being, by profession, Barrister —not Stenographer. Page 
 26, line 35, for “this,’ read thus. Page 47, line 14, for ‘ego,’ read ergo.. 
 P.54, 1. 35, for ‘ man is,’ read men are. P. 64, 1. 34, for ‘oldest,’ read ablest. 
 Page 81, line 18, for ‘or,* read nor. P. 83, 1. 27, for ‘their ’ read its. P. 93, 
 line 20, for ‘far as to’ read far to. P. 106, line 34, before ‘fad,’ supply first. 
 P. 115, line 1, for ‘this -war,’ read thus tear. Page 139, line 31, for ‘shape,* 
 read odor. P. 147,1. 5 before ‘to hide,* supply not. P. 200, 1. 40, for ‘believes,* 
 read believers. Page 220, last line, for ‘ objecting ,’ read referring. P. 230, 1. 44, 
 after ‘feeling,’ read, or rational and ennobling sentiment; leaving out the rest of 
 the sentence, as an unmeaning interpolation of Mr. Simms* autograph. 
 
 ERRATA-VOL II. 
 
 Page 17, line 1, for ‘infant,’ read infants. Page 40, line 10, for ‘at’ read if. 
 Page 45, line 7, for ‘Jews,’ read Jesus. Page 100, line 39, for ‘he,’ read the . 
 Page 171, line 41, for ‘influenced,’ read influence. Page 101, line 45; 
 for ‘ arguments ,* read agreements. Page 113, line 35, for ‘enjoyed,’ read 
 enjoined. Page 132. line 4, for ‘become,* read became. Page 146, line 6, fpr 
 ‘laid,’ read lain. Page 171, line 4, for ‘they,’ read he. Ditto, line 47, for 
 ‘will not be * read will be. Page 181, line 5, for ‘laid,’ read lain. Page 201, 
 for ‘C. H. Symmes,* read Charles Howard Simms. Page 270, line 18, for 
 ‘ wisdom of God,’ read power of God. 
 
 vol, ii f 26 
 
PROPOSALS, 
 
 BT 
 
 ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, 
 
 FOR PUBLISHING BY SUBSCRIPTION. fl 
 
 A MONTHLY PAPER, 
 
 TO BE DENOMINATED 
 
 PROSPECTUS. 
 
 THIS work shall be devoted to the destruction of sectarianism, infidelity, 
 and antichristian doctrine and practice. It shall have for its object the develope- 
 ment and introduction of that political and religious order of society called the 
 millennium, which will be the consummation of that amelioration of society 
 proposed in the Christian scriptures. 
 
 Subservient to this most comprehensive object, the following subjects shall 
 be attended to:— 
 
 1. The incompatibility of any sectarian establishment, now known on earth, 
 with the genius of the glorious age to come. 
 
 2. The inadequacy of all the present systems of education, literary and moral, 
 to deveiope the powers of the human mind, and to prepare man for rational 
 and social happiness. 
 
 3. The disentanglement of the Holy Scriptures from the perplexities of the 
 commentators and system-makers of the dark ages. This will call for the 
 analysis of several books in the New Testament, and many disquisitions upon 
 the appropriated sense of the leading terms and phrases in the Holy Scriptures 
 and in religious systems. 
 
 4. The injustice which yet remains in many of the political regulations under 
 the best political governments, when contrasted with the justice which Christiani¬ 
 ty proposes, and which the millennial order of society promises. 
 
 5. Disquisitions upon the treatment of African slaves, as preparatory to their 
 emancipation, and exaltation from their present degraded condition. 
 
 6. General religious news, or regular details of the movements of the religious 
 combinations, acting under the influence of the proselyting spirit of the age. 
 
 7. Occasional notices of religious publications, including reviews of new 
 works, bearing upon any of the topics within our precincts. 
 
 8. Answers to interesting queries of general utility, and notices of all things 
 of universal interest to all engaged in the proclamation of the Ancient Gospel, 
 and the Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things. 
 
 9. Miscellanea, or religious, moral, and literary varieties. 
 
 Much of the useful learning which has been sanctified to the elucidation of 
 those interesting and sublime topics of Christian expectation, will, we intend, be 
 gleaned from the Christian labors of those distinguished men of liberal minds, 
 who are ranked among the most renowned fathers of Christian literature; and 
 much aid is expected from a few of the more enlightened brethren of our own 
 time, who are fellow-laborers and pioneers in hastening this wished-for period. 
 Xt is intended to give every family into which this work shall come, so much of 
 the religious nows of the day, and such a variety of information on all the topics 
 submitted, as to make it a work of much interest to the young and inquisitive. 
 
The indulgence and patronage which have been extended to me as editor of 
 the Christian Baptist , embolden me to attempt a work of still greater magnitude, 
 expecting that if that work, written, as the greater part of it was, under very- 
 disadvantageous circumstances, and while my attention was divided between 
 other works and a multiplicity of other business, obtained so general a circula¬ 
 tion, and was so well received—a work to which a much larger portion of my 
 energies shall be devoted, will not fail of obtaining, at least, an equal patronage, 
 and of proving proportionably more useful, as the range will be so much greater, 
 and the object one in which all Christians, of every name, must feel interested; 
 and, especially, as there is not perhaps, in the Christian world, any work publish¬ 
 ed with the same design, and embracing the same outlines. 
 
 CONDITIONS 
 
 ^Having purchased a large fount of beautiful new type, of a good medium size, 
 and a first-rate new printing press, we may promise a beautiful impression, on 
 good paper. 
 
 1. Each number shall contain 48 pages large duodecimo, equal to a medium 
 octavo, or equal in superficies to more than 63 pages of the Christian Baptist. 
 Being printed on super-royal paper, it will cost to the subscribers only twice as 
 much postage as the Christian Baptist, though containing more than twice and a 
 half times as much matter. With a good index, it will make a volume of 600 
 pages per annum. 
 
 2. It shall be published on the first Monday of every month—the first number 
 to be issued on the first Monday of January, 1830. Each number shall be stitch¬ 
 ed in a good cover; and all numbers failing to reach their destination shall be 
 made good at the expense of the editor. 
 
 3. It shall cost, exclusive of postage. Two Dollars and Fifty Cents per annum, 
 to all who do not pay until the close of the year, but to those who pay in ad¬ 
 vance, or within six months after subscribing. Two Dollars will be accepted. 
 
 4. Postmasters, who act as agents, shall have ten per cent, for obtaining 
 subscribers, and for collecting, and remitting the amouut of their subscriptions. 
 
 5. All other persons, who obtain and pay for five subscribers, within six 
 months from subscribing, shall have one copy gratis. But to those who do not 
 guarantee and pay within that period, ten per cent, on all the subscribers, for 
 whom the}'- make payment, shall be allowed. 
 
 6. Persons who subscribe at any time within the year, will be furnished with 
 the volume from the commencement. And no person, unless at the discretion 
 of the editor, shall be permitted to withdraw until arrearages are paid. 
 
 7. All who do not notify their discontinuance to our agents in such time that 
 we may be informed a month before the close of each volume, will be consider¬ 
 ed as subscribers for the next volume. 
 
 N. B. Let all subscribers be careful to name the post-office to which they 
 wish their papers sent. 
 
 Bethant, Brooke county, Va. 1829. 
 
Date Due 
 — 
 
3 
 
 (00)0 I 1 
 
 HX 
 
 (cU 
 ,0 ? 
 /Ml 
 
 Boston College Library 
 
 Chestnut Hill 67, Mass. 
 
 Books may be kept for two weeks unless a 
 shorter period is specified. 
 
 If you cannot find what you want, inquire at 
 the circulation desk for assistance.